Scott Horton Interviews Eric Margolis

Scott Horton, April 24, 2011

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Eric Margolis, foreign correspondent and author of War at the Top of the World and American Raj, discusses how a NATO defeat in Libya would be political disastrous for Obama and Sarkozy – meaning they’ll fight on til the bitter end; why the US spends trillions fighting little countries of no strategic value; the depth of interference in Syria’s demonstrations by the US, Saudi Arabia and Israel; why the next Syrian potentate probably lives in Virginia right now; fracturing the Arab world into its tribal components so Israel can rule the region; and why Iraq, for the most part, is not better now than under Saddam.

MP3 here. (23:40)

Eric S. Margolis is an award-winning, internationally syndicated columnist. His articles appear in the New York Times, the International Herald Tribune, the Los Angeles Times, Times of London, the Gulf Times, the Khaleej Times and Dawn. He is a regular contributor to The Huffington Post. He appears as an expert on foreign affairs on CNN, BBC, France 2, France 24, Fox News, CTV and CBC.

As a war correspondent Margolis has covered conflicts in Angola, Namibia, South Africa, Mozambique, Sinai, Afghanistan, Kashmir, India, Pakistan, El Salvador and Nicaragua. He was among the first journalists to ever interview Libya’s Muammar Khadaffi and was among the first to be allowed access to KGB headquarters in Moscow. A veteran of many conflicts in the Middle East, Margolis recently was featured in a special appearance on Britain’s Sky News TV as “the man who got it right” in his predictions about the dangerous risks and entanglements the US would face in Iraq.

Margolis is the author of War at the Top of the World: The Struggle for Afghanistan, Kashmir and Tibet and American Raj: Liberation or Domination?: Resolving the Conflict Between the West and the Muslim World.

9 Responses to “Eric Margolis”

  1. Scott, your knowledge of the Middle East is definitely lacking… "The last country in the Middle East where you can get a drink"? Are you serious? There are only a few countries in the Middle East that don't allow alcohol. Even in the supposedly conservative Gulf, of the six GCC states, only Kuwait and Saudi Arabia ban alcohol; you can drink in Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Oman. The only other country that may ban it – I'm not sure – is Iran. Otherwise, you can get a drink anywhere in Egypt, Syria, Jordan, the countries of North Africa… and all the rest.

  2. Non-Muslims (like Armenians) can drink in Iran.

  3. Eric Margolis is of one of the best and brightest of political commentators. He is a master of political analysis and articulation. In a perfect world, Margolis would serve future US Presidents and foreign policy makers and therefore prevent them the colossal mistakes of a legion of American Presidents past and present.

  4. Thanks – I wasn't sure about that.

  5. What about the Libya rebels slaughtering black Africans in Libya?

  6. The most important thing for a good muslim in Iran is to know areliable Armenian bootlegger! Or so I'm told.

  7. As revealed by William Arkin in early 2002, "The Bush administration, in a secret policy review… [had] ordered the Pentagon to draft contingency plans for the use of nuclear weapons [The 2001 Nuclear Posture Review approved by the Senate in late 2002] against at least seven countries, naming not only Russia and the "axis of evil"–Iraq, Iran, and North Korea–but also China, Libya and Syria. (See William Arkin, "Thinking the Unthinkable", Los Angeles Times, 9 March 2002)

    In addition, the U.S. Defense Department has been told to prepare for the possibility that nuclear weapons may be required in some future Arab-Israeli crisis. And, it is to develop plans for using nuclear weapons to retaliate against chemical or biological attacks, as well as "surprising military developments" of an unspecified nature. These and a host of other directives, including calls for developing bunker-busting mini-nukes and nuclear weapons that reduce collateral damage, are contained in a still-classified document called the Nuclear Posture Review (NPR), which was delivered to Congress on Jan. 8. (ibid)

    The preemptive nuclear doctrine (DJNO) –endorsed by the Obama Administration– allows for the preemptive use of thermonuclear weapons in conventional war theaters directed against "rogue states". While the "guidelines" do not exclude other (more deadly) categories of nukes in the US /NATO nuclear arsenal, Pentagon "scenarios" in the Middle East and North Africa are currently limited to the use of tactical nuclear weapons including the B61-11 bunker buster bomb.

    The fact that Libya had been singled out by the Pentagon for a possible 1997 mini-nuke "trial run" was a significant element in the formulation of the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR).
    ===============================================================

    From– 'US To Recoup Libya Oil From China'
    Interview with Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, former assistant secretary of US Treasury

    by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&amp


    Press TV: With regards to the expansionist agenda of the West, when the UN mandate on Libya was debated in the UN Security Council, Russia did not veto it. Surely Russia must see this expansionist policy of the US, France and Britain.

    Roberts: Yes they must see that; and the same for China. It's a greater threat to China because it has 50 major investment projects in eastern Libya. So the question is why did Russia and China abstain rather than veto and block? We don't know the answer.

    Possibly the countries are thinking to let the Americans get further over- extended, or they may not have wanted to confront the US with a military or diplomatic position and have an onslaught of Western propaganda against them. We don't know the reasons,
    Washington is trying to cripple its main rival, China, by denying China energy. That's what this is really about; a reaction by the US to China’s penetration of Africa.
    In my opinion, what is going on is comparable to what the US and Britain did to Japan in the 1930s. When they cut Japan off from oil, from rubber, from minerals; that was the origin of World War II in the pacific. And now the Americans and the British are doing the same thing to China.
    If the US was concerned about humanitarianism, it wouldn't be killing all these people in Afghanistan and Pakistan with their drones and military strikes. Almost always it's civilians that are killed. And the US is reluctant to issue apologies about any of it. They say we thought we were killing Taliban or some other made-up enemy.
    Washington wants to rule Russia, China, Iran, and Africa, all of South America. Washington wants hegemony over the world. That's what the word hegemony means. And Washington will pursue it at all costs.

  8. [...] Eric Margolis interviewed by Scott Horton. [...]

  9. "The Strategic Institute of Blowing Things Up" @ 16min

    Scott, you are at your best when you're channeling Bill Hicks!

    I also have to say that for a libertarian podcast I found myself sympathizing with all the Arab socialists who tried to create enduring state structures (much less modern nation-states) out of warring tribes. For Israel-US to play spoiler by always 'expediting the the collapse into chaos' makes them like rotten little rich kids. Hell, even the Communists hated the Arab socialists so there must have been something good to them.

    PAX

Leave a Reply