******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. *****************************************************************
thanks for your comments, Michael Karadjis. I have a few differences: I don't think Bolton is being played by Trump. If anything, the reverse. I think he convinced Trump that they could bully Rouhani/Khameini and that they would back down. I think that Bolton thought all along that Rouhani/Khameini could not back down. Or, put another way, that they would have to increase their nuclear refining, and that that would lead to war. But who really knows? In fact, how much does it really matter who is playing whom? As far as Netanyahu: I'll have to reread the article, but what I was trying to raise is "who wants a war between the *US* and Iran?" I do think that Netanyahu would be delighted with that, as would bin Salman. One possible scenario would be for the US to initiate the attack. Another would be for some sort of relatively minor attack between Israel and Iran, and then Trump & Co. would feel obligated to step in. (Note: David Walters has commented on the article that the Oman government is another possibility.) Overall, here is another example of a US president who is out of the control of the mainstream of the US capitalist class to an unprecedented degree. John On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 9:47 PM mkaradjis . <mkarad...@gmail.com> wrote: > Great article John. I fully agree - while it is obvious that both European > and Japanese imperialism are opposed to war with Iran, it is also clear > enough that the mainstream of US imperialism is on the same page as its > allies/rivals on this one. I get tired of simpleton analysis that points > out that capitalism is always on a "war drive", something that may be true > on a large historic scale but is a pretty embarrassing way for a "Marxist" > to try to analyse every event. Who is pushing confrontation? (1) Bolton - a > nutter from another, bygone, era, who Trump has employed as his attack-dog > to raise the pressure on Iran, until he serves his purpose and can be > dispensed with (2) Pompeo - back and forth, one day to the next - currently > trying to out-trump Trump in that role, (3) MBS/Saudi monarchy - wants to > see its key regional rival cut down to size, to employ the US more > decisively in Yemen, and to maintain its key role in the US arms market and > the oil/arms/dollars nexus. Who's not on board? Obviously European and > Japanese imperialism, but also (1) as you show very clearly, the mainstream > of the US capitalist class, (2) the Pentagon - all their statements have > been guarded and defensive, "we can defend ourselves if Iran attacks us", > which can obviously be interpreted in various ways, but none of their > statements or rhetoric concur with the Bolton/Pompeo line; the Pentagon > sees blowing things up with Iran as a clear danger to their strategy in > Iraq and their presence in the region. Who is in the middle? (1) Obviously > Trump. Trump does not want a war and to get bogged down in some stupid > neocon fantasy, he's good with war, but smarter than often assumed. he's > definitely smarter than Bolton, who is being played. Trump wants to emerge > the King-maker. I suspect Pompeo wants to end up by his side rather than > Bolton's in the long run. (2) Israel - here I somewhat disagree with your > article - all the statements coming from Israel have been highly muted on > this; and as I've long said, the Israeli-Saudi "alliance" is greatly > exaggerated, in practical terms. Israel doesn't need a bloody conflict with > Hezbollah just because MBS wants a Gulf conflict and Bolton wants to live > out superseded fantasies; not because Israel is scared of Hezbollah (a > breathtaking fantasy), Israel could wipe out all the military junk > Hezbollah has accumulated over the years in a few days, but Israel would > prefer to choose when it engages in conflict - not just now when it is > negotiating a demarcation agreement with Lebanon (where Hezbollah is part > of the government ...) over the gas fields in the Mediterranean Sea, (3) > Russia - I agree with your points about Russian-Iranian rivalry in Syria, > and also Russia has excellent relations with the Saudis and UAE; it does > not support a US-neocon attack on Iran, but would benefit from it as > king-maker. I slightly disagree with your explanation re Syria that Russia > was happy for Iran to come to Assad's aid until Israel objected, then > Russia changed course; more like, Russia was happy for Iran to supply > ground troops for Assad that Russia wouldn't, while it just employed its > airforce (and the US also had little objection, sometimes even worked > alongside Iranians in Syria); but once Assad's throne was safe, all that > Iran-led sectarian rabble was no longer necessary, so in the context of > Russian-Iranian rivalry over the spoils and "reconstruction" and Israel's > attacks on Iranian assets, Russia can now join the US and Israel in moving > Iran aside in Syria. Anyway, once again, great analysis > > On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 9:53 AM John Reimann via Marxism < > marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote: > >> ******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** >> #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. >> #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. >> #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. >> ***************************************************************** >> >> 'On Thursday, June 13, two Japanese-flagged oil tankers were attacked in >> the Gulf of Oman, off the coast of Iran. The Trump administration >> immediately claimed that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards were >> responsible. >> They based this claim on a video they released of a patrol boat of the >> Guards standing alongside one of the tankers, the Kokuta Courageous, >> apparently removing something attached to the side of the ship. Trump & >> Co. >> claimed the Guards were removing a limpet mine they had attached earlier, >> and that they were removing it to hide the evidence. >> >> *'N.Y. Times * >> *Article*On Friday, the NY Times published an extremely interesting >> article >> < >> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/14/opinion/iran-tanker-attacks.html?fbclid=IwAR3YuwSW8OsL1diDUW4sKgp1B3-n_mOrKEgK6nm9ZhLI5zSgdAG-WEM1j0E >> > >> . It was interesting both for the facts it recounted as well as for the >> fact that the NYT published it at all!.... >> >> '[The article writes:] “Yet what the videos and photographs published by >> the United States don’t show us is more important…. Nothing presented as >> evidence proves that the object was placed there by the Iranians. The >> video >> shows only that the Iranians chose to remove it for an as yet unknown >> reason.” >> >> 'What’s so significant about this is the fact that the Times would even >> bother to raise the point. The article refers to the Gulf of Tonkin >> incident....' >> >> The known facts plus simple political analysis would seem to indicate that >> most likely it was not the Iranian government that carried out these >> attacks. Who, then? Bin Salman? Netanyahu? The Houthis? And where does >> Putin stand in all of this? >> >> Read entire article here: >> >> https://oaklandsocialist.com/2019/06/15/new-crisis-in-gulf-of-oman-what-really-happened-where-is-it-headed/ >> >> -- >> *“In politics, abstract terms conceal treachery.” *from "The Black >> Jacobins" by C. L. R. James >> Check out:https:http://oaklandsocialist.com also on Facebook >> _________________________________________________________ >> Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm >> Set your options at: >> https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/mkaradjis%40gmail.com > > -- *“In politics, abstract terms conceal treachery.” *from "The Black Jacobins" by C. L. R. James Check out:https:http://oaklandsocialist.com also on Facebook _________________________________________________________ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
