Iraq: It's Not Just "The Jews"
With excellent commentary on the "opposition" party's craven and cynical pose on the war, 2002-present (some excepted, but virtually none in the "leadership"). Vietnam all over again. See Pilger below on the RFK and the Kennedy Myth (now being reanimated by Gordon Brown).
The only thing that enrages me more than neocons are supposedly opposition Democrats (Kerry, Clinton, et al), and those that slavishly swallow their propaganda.
And I'm sick and tired of the obvious rightwing "pro-"Israeli neocons (or whatever) constituency for the Iraq (and now Iran) war from being fully outed without shrieks of "anti-Semite"!
However, this article, despite many good points, overplays its hand. Like most searches for One Big Cause, this one also must edit out huge pieces of evidence. For example, this article avoids the obvious role of oil interests of all kinds in the war, annoyingly lists only Jewish members of the administration, and even insinuates that Cheney and Rumsfeld had no clue what the goals were.
I think that last point shows up this analysis: you gotta be close to blind (from what cause, who knows?) to think that two of the most powerful, long-standing, and savvy political insiders in the past 40 years in DC didn't "get it." They hired all these yahoos: Feith, Wolfowitz, et al. They allowed in Kissinger, Perle, et al. They were both involved in the PNAC. Yes, Virginia, life is complex, and the answer is usually "both/and" not "either/or." Poor, helpless, non-Jewish Cheney and Rummy being steamrolled by a Jewish cabal? Please. Those poor, mostly non-Jewish, oh-so-weak oil companies and interests in Texas just got stabbed in the back? Give me a fucking break!
The real question is how did the convergence of interests -- "pro"-Israel, oil-resource-controlling, post-Cold-War hegemony, and others -- arise, congeal, and triumph over any opposition, principled or not?
Simply listing Jewish last names doesn't cut it, and, frankly, does open the lister up to potentially accurate accusations of anti-Semitism. And thus gives cover to AIPAC types. Irony of ironies.
The only thing that enrages me more than neocons are supposedly opposition Democrats (Kerry, Clinton, et al), and those that slavishly swallow their propaganda.
And I'm sick and tired of the obvious rightwing "pro-"Israeli neocons (or whatever) constituency for the Iraq (and now Iran) war from being fully outed without shrieks of "anti-Semite"!
However, this article, despite many good points, overplays its hand. Like most searches for One Big Cause, this one also must edit out huge pieces of evidence. For example, this article avoids the obvious role of oil interests of all kinds in the war, annoyingly lists only Jewish members of the administration, and even insinuates that Cheney and Rumsfeld had no clue what the goals were.
I think that last point shows up this analysis: you gotta be close to blind (from what cause, who knows?) to think that two of the most powerful, long-standing, and savvy political insiders in the past 40 years in DC didn't "get it." They hired all these yahoos: Feith, Wolfowitz, et al. They allowed in Kissinger, Perle, et al. They were both involved in the PNAC. Yes, Virginia, life is complex, and the answer is usually "both/and" not "either/or." Poor, helpless, non-Jewish Cheney and Rummy being steamrolled by a Jewish cabal? Please. Those poor, mostly non-Jewish, oh-so-weak oil companies and interests in Texas just got stabbed in the back? Give me a fucking break!
The real question is how did the convergence of interests -- "pro"-Israel, oil-resource-controlling, post-Cold-War hegemony, and others -- arise, congeal, and triumph over any opposition, principled or not?
Simply listing Jewish last names doesn't cut it, and, frankly, does open the lister up to potentially accurate accusations of anti-Semitism. And thus gives cover to AIPAC types. Irony of ironies.