how to pick up women the right way…

OF course re Mossadegh.(and Nasser) look better…but America will never wean itself from oil until the planet does. One reason I am pro-Venezuela is that Hugo is far preferable to Bandar, etc. All wars are resource wars, and many of the wars in Africa have to do with mining and battles between European, Chinese and American capital, using proxies.

I am not a dogmatic Marxist, but I highly suggest perusing Marxist theories of Imperialism (by which I do not mean Lenin, but Leo Panitch among others)

We should only care what’s good for America. America GIs deserve to be deployed only where our nation’s interests are served. American citizens deserve to have the 1/2 trillion dollars currently going down the drain in Iraq spent on improving America.

Iraq deserves a society that reflects their desires. Obviously, their desires were for a dictatorial, genocidal regime. If they wanted different, they could have done what every other people does when their government doesn’t reflect their desires. Revolt.

This isn’t our business. We were wrong to go there, it’s wrong to stay there … Let Iraqis deal with this. We deserve better.

http://yourcallradio.org/archive/archive.html

and then click on the program for 5 December. The program features a former CIA operative who has a record of opposing Gates and a military affairs correspondent for Washingtonpost.com. While the two of them disagree on many points, the program offers insights into Gates’ history and why he was not confirmed as CIA director in 1987.

Well let’s see J, the Arabs are not crazy. But because they talk crazy, behave crazy, and believe crazy, then one may logical deduce they’re crazy. In this case, they stll would not be crazy because…..well….the devil made them do.

I also was very surprised and impressed that the study group addressed the Israel/Palestine issues. No doubt the many Cold War pragmatists who have been frustrated by the jihadist neocons in the White House and Pentagon thought, “well, if we are going to get to causes here, let’s talk about real causes…”

I hate to call you on it- given that I agree with your analysis vix Israel/Palestine (though the folks they back in Palestine have very little legitimacy) – and because I’m sure its unintended, but that language is racist as well as innaccurate. I know you aren’t insulting Arabs per se so I” adress this – If the Middle East is crazy, which I don’t thinkit is, it is because of Imperial action and stunted, resource based development. It is also because of recent US and Israeli actions. It is beause of the death of the Left (not the US backed liberals, but the Left) as a viable political option, as of late – and a vacuum filled by Islamic movements that are often genuine in their desire for economic justice, while profoundly reactionary in other matters to say the least.

It is the hallmark of the problem with the way Americans respond to the Imperial dilemma, which is to oppose Imperialism because its bad for America (of course it is) but not also and more importantly, that it is bad for its victims. Too often you hear the number of Americans killed in various wars without hearing the far huger number of Imperial victims. The point of jsutice in Palestine is not to make the region less crazy, so the Empire doesn’t have to concern itself with the Wogs. The point of justice is….justice.

Did anyone here not think Gates would be appointed. As Russ Feingold has said a president gets to pick his cabinet. In this case he was told to pick his own Cark Clifford and that is what I suspect happened.

Now let us talk about the real news of the week. The long awaited report of the Iraq Study Group which represents the thinking of the DC Establishment. And their unanimous resposne is – we’re screwed! Above all they add that it may be too late for their recommendations to have any good and I was most impressed bytheir call for an international conference – including Syria and Iran – to discuss not only Iraq but the Israeli-Palestinian question which they see as central to a comprehensive Mid East settlement.

I consider this the most important element of the report. It suggests that the Great and the Good in Washington are getting fed up with Israel (and the Likud and its variants) wagging the dog. Combined with Jimmy Carter’s book it suggests that the Establishment has had it with the neocons and their “Israel first” policies and are going to create a real battle. In short they have had enough. Now combine this with a real energy program and we may finally be able to disentangle ourselves from that lousy sandpit and its crazy people.

Finally, anyone here really think either party wants to go into 2008 with substantial troops in Iraq? It is obvious to the rulers that Bush’s adventure is killing us and the only question now is how much pounding the boy-emperor will take to get that message into his thick skull!

It is probably unfair to expect a coherent Dem strategy for the lame duck session of Congress, still controlled by the Repubs. The next test on politics of the war is positioning vis a vis the ISG report. For serious people, it all comes down to answering the question: should the US maintain a force in Iraq in order to preserve some semblance of order, or at least to protect those who have been “loyal” to the American anti-Saddam, anti-Ba’athist forces? To answer that, once must first have concluded that our remaining does more good for those people than harm. If the answer is that we should not keep our forces in Iraq, then the only question is when to begin withdrawal/redeployment, and how long it will take. If we decide we are going to maintain some sort of a force, or are going to increase our pressure on whoever is the enemy this week, we need to decide (1) how many forces we need now [more or less than at present?], (2) what they will be doing, and (3) when the US troop levels will be reduced, whether the trigger be a date or an event.

The ISG report, apparently, calls for significant withdrawals of troops by [or is it beginning?] 1st Q, 2008. The issue for those who have opposed the war is whether that becomes the starting point for discussion, or whether opponents and those seeking an early end of American participation will continue to press for earlier withdrawal. I haven’t read the report, so I’m not sure if there is any rationale for supporting the delay until 2008. But I have to believe that it is important to continue to evaluate events in Iraq with independent eyes.

It is a tough call. It seems that much tougher to those who intend to run for President in 2008. No one wants to step out first…well, except for Joe Biden, whose motto seems to be, “What the hell…?”
Whichever candidate stakes out a position first will be subject to attack ffrom all sides, a situation to be avoided wherever possible this early in the game.

“Looking tough” is more valued than being tough.

I don’t think that rubber stamping Gates will work to the Democrats’ benefit unless he leads us on a drastically different path. How likely that is I will lead it to others to predict.

What if Rumsfeld were still SecDef? Wouldn’t that *also* be “business as usual”? More of the same?

Try making sense for a change, Balter.