|
|||||||||
Posted December 26, 2002
The Liability State
Regarding "Attack of the Neos" by Justin Raimondo:
Thanks for so courageously speaking the truth about the dangers of a foreign policy that sees no distinction between the interests of the US and Israel. ...
As in 1991, today we find Israel in the position, because of its universally despised status in the region (and the world) for its brutal treatment of the Palestinians, as strategically worthless to the US in any war against Iraq. ...
The argument for retaining this albatross of an alliance with Israel has lost any validity, although it was allegedly supposed to be prove beneficial in such events. The reasoning went, "We should put up with Israel's 99% negative baggage because in that 1% when a Mideast War happens all of the damage we've suffered as a result of our association will be worth it." Well, now we've had one war ,and are well on our way to a second, and what benefit can we extract out of our "ally"? Nada. They must sit on their hands for the legitimate fear of widening this conflict further. ...
Defending Lott
Regarding "Attack of the Neos" by Justin Raimondo:
As
an expatriate living in Peru since 1980, I found Justin Raimondo's recent
article almost incomprehensible. Perhaps I'm not up-to-date on the current
political terminology. The choice of the unfortunate Senator Lott as a
martyr to the paleocon cause seems hyperbolic and undeserved, and the
philosophical discussion about who really represents the right seems irrelevant
and exotic. Do not go the way of ideological purity – so far you
haven't, but these philosophical struggles worry me. From what I can see,
Senator Lott was the wrong man at the wrong time. That's a question of
timing as well as the state of current political culture (if one can call
it that). Defending an anachronism does not advance your cause at all.
~ Steve Goodman, Lima, Peru
Balkan Occupation
Regarding Yoshimi Huntanar's letter of December 19:
...In 1992, the Europeans brokered a peace deal (in Lisbon) that all three sides found acceptable and agreed to sign. The deal preserved a unitary state but with a Swiss-style cantonization allowing each to rule their own. This was what the Serbs had asked for: that the right to self-determination be applied equally to all parties. No matter what criticism of this plan one might have, it was still a better starting point for lasting peace than Dayton ever will be and certainly much, much better than the alternative of war.
The American government intervened and persuaded the war criminal Izmetbegovic to renege on the deal. They did this by promising him a bombardment of the Serbs if he held out long enough in what was guaranteed to be an increasingly bloody conflict. Their aim in all this was to get what the Yugoslavs had refused to give them when asked: permanent military bases all over the Balkans.
A secondary aim was to discredit EU foreign policy and insert themselves even more forcefully in European affairs by making NATO, not the EU, the ultimate European authority. When the Europeans realised what the Americans were up to they were furious but ultimately powerless to do anything about it (shades of Iraq?).
Once that mission was accomplished, the war moved into high gear. It was now clear to all three sides that control of territory had become the optimal strategy. The rest is history.
It makes me sick every time I hear an occupier (because ultimately that is what Yoshimi is) winge "why didn't anybody do something?" knowing full well what they did. But then again, it is only a matter of time before this occupation goes the way of Franz Ferdinand's. Enjoy your stay!
Milosevic
Regarding "Hindu-Nationalist Victory in Gujarat Spells Trouble for South Asia" by Praful Bidwai:
Mr. Bidwai's casual labeling of Narendra Modi as "India's own Milosevic" makes his article sound more like a piece of propaganda than a serious political analysis. If Mr. Bidway is so ready to accept simplistic labeling served by Western mainstream media, may it not be suspected that he is willing to simplify other issues that he has undertaken to tackle?
Without going into a defense of Milosevic, who has much to answer for – but not that of which the West's kangaroo court in The Hague accuses him, suffice it to say that he tried to broker a peace with Bosnia's moderate Muslims in 1991-2, but was sabotaged by Western diplomacy, which chose the fundamentalist side in Bosnia, headed by Alija Izetbegovic, to "represent all Muslims" in that unfortunate, artificial country.
What might also be added is that Milosevic's Yugoslavia remained the only truly "multiethnic" country in the Balkans during the wars of the 1990s, a fact the media propagandists consistently try to hide. ...
~ Aleksandar Pavic, Belgrade, Serbia
Foreign Aid
Regarding "On the Downlow" by Justin Raimondo:
The beleaguered American taxpayer is fed up with foreign aid, period. We are tired of high taxes. But since the government will not lower them, we would at least like to see our high taxes help Americans at home. Those unfortunate Americans who have lost their jobs when employers have relocated to other states or countries, the elderly who can't buy medicine, the families who can't pay for heat this winter.
No more foreign aid until every single American has enough food and medicine and heat. No more foreign aid until every single American school child can read and write and speak English fluently. No more foreign aid to countries which use it to buy bombs and kill and repress others.
Irritating Exclusivist Commentary
I love to read your website, although I do not agree with everything posted. But that's a fair trade.
Yet I must say that I find the "exclusivist" nature of your commentary more and more disturbing, if not plain irritating.
Specifically,
I find your crusade against the dreaded "Neo-cons" a very shallow
exercise. To give one example, I would like to bring to the readerships
attention a recent piece that went in full attack mode against the Cato
Institute as a partner of the "war party." Are you for real?
I have read enough of their publications to know better. As an example
for your readers, may I suggest reading their latest Policy Analysis (#459)
–
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-459es.html.
Why is your site so hungry to find enemies everywhere? Do you want to degenerate to the sad paranoid level of the old Ayn Rand cult?
~ J.W., Vancouver, BC, Canada