I have a friend in Beirut who reports to me on what al-Jazeerah and the Lebanese and Israeli media are reporting. Also, I heard a recent interview with Robert Fisk which says essentially the same thing. Israel is planning a new war against Lebanon and perhaps also Syria and Hamas at the same time in the coming months. I have heard December 2010 and January 2011 mentioned.
I have not noticed any coverage of this pending conflagration mentioned in the major media. Here is how I see the dangers. Israel was unable to defeat Hezbolleh in 2006 and Hamas in 2009, though tremendous loss of life and damage to buildings and infrastructure occurred in both invasions. Hezbolleh is certainly stronger now militarily than it was in 2006; reports say that Hezbolleh can launch 1,000 rockets a day for 6 months. Hezbolleh's leader, who is noted for doing what he says he will do, has said that if Israel destroys a building in Lebanon, he will destroy a building in Israel. If Israel destroys a town, he will destroy a town. Note also that Syria has Scud missiles.
Therefore, in such a war, Israel will face far more substantial deaths and damage than in any previous war. Israel cannot win such a war. The irony is that the insane leaders of Israel know all this, but they are planning to go ahead anyway.
A war along these lines will cause tremendous human suffering and is to be avoided for that reason alone. However, there is a greater risk. What will the US government do when Israel suffers tremendously damaging attacks? Since the US public is not being prepared in advance for the likelihood of this war, there exists the possibility that the Obama administration, already stretched to the limit by the unsuccessful wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, would nevertheless commit troops and other military resources to intervene on Israel's behalf saying there is no time for lengthy discussion. How would Iran react to that?
This scenario promises to up the ante considerably both now and in the future. Anger at the US government would likely escalate considerably with many unforeseen consequences.
The time to discuss this impending danger is now before it happens. Oppose the Israeli war on its neighbors. Oppose any US intervention in such a war.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Thursday, October 7, 2010
The Conundrum of Afghanistan
In contemporary Afghanistan, we have a government of religious fanatical warlords fighting the Taliban, which is fueled by a very similar religious fanaticism. No matter who wins, the Afghan people will be ruled by religious fanatics. So, there are two questions. Why is the US government engaged in such a war, especially when it appears that the two groups of religious fanatics are quite capable of uniting? The second question is how did things come to this pass?
Once upon a time, in 1979, Afghanistan had a secular government trying to introduce reforms which would free women from traditional oppression, spread education, etc. That government was far from perfect and probably pursued those objectives in a heavyhanded way which helped unite opposition. Threatened by that opposition, the secular government called on their neighbor, the Soviet Union, to help keep them in power. The Soviet Union came to their aid in an even more heavyhanded manner and found itself in a disastrous war. Meanwhile, the United States armed and trained religious fanatics to fight the government and its Soviet backers.
So, the US government helped eliminate the most prominent secular forces and greatly strengthened the forces of religious fanaticism which became the Taliban, al-Qaeda, and other groups. Then the US government selected a group of warlords and tried to impose them on a population which likely would prefer to live in a secular state, considering that that is who they elected long ago.
If any or all of this strikes you as insane, you are correct. Any serious analysis of the US war in Afghanistan leads to the conclusion that it was irrational to begin it and it is irrational to continue it. Even from the standpoint of US imperial and finance capital objectives, it is a lose-lose situation.
Such a war has a momentum of its own. Once it squanders lives, resources, money on such a misguided venture, a government has to be forced to abandon it. It will never do it simply by coming to its senses. Only a strong peace movement, like the one which helped the Vietnamese end that war, can do that.
Once upon a time, in 1979, Afghanistan had a secular government trying to introduce reforms which would free women from traditional oppression, spread education, etc. That government was far from perfect and probably pursued those objectives in a heavyhanded way which helped unite opposition. Threatened by that opposition, the secular government called on their neighbor, the Soviet Union, to help keep them in power. The Soviet Union came to their aid in an even more heavyhanded manner and found itself in a disastrous war. Meanwhile, the United States armed and trained religious fanatics to fight the government and its Soviet backers.
So, the US government helped eliminate the most prominent secular forces and greatly strengthened the forces of religious fanaticism which became the Taliban, al-Qaeda, and other groups. Then the US government selected a group of warlords and tried to impose them on a population which likely would prefer to live in a secular state, considering that that is who they elected long ago.
If any or all of this strikes you as insane, you are correct. Any serious analysis of the US war in Afghanistan leads to the conclusion that it was irrational to begin it and it is irrational to continue it. Even from the standpoint of US imperial and finance capital objectives, it is a lose-lose situation.
Such a war has a momentum of its own. Once it squanders lives, resources, money on such a misguided venture, a government has to be forced to abandon it. It will never do it simply by coming to its senses. Only a strong peace movement, like the one which helped the Vietnamese end that war, can do that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)