I'm assuming that number would include the $206 million here being discussed... for it is certainly extremist preaching which causes terrorist actions, including attacks on mosques and individual Muslims.
Excellent article. The desire to get the contemporary social analysis right is welcome. The historical analogy carries its own content which would be difficult to capture any other way.
I think that Cast Lead, which was met with widespread repugnance throughout the Egyptian population, allowed a variety of social forces to gather together in the street long enough and with enough solidarity that it fused into a public and general movement to oust Mubarak. That moral outrage has been transformed by events and the oppositional forces to the state are again deeply fractured.
I think that's a key question. Arguably, the situation under Mubarak was 'politically diverse', as there were many parties. But everyone knew that there would not/ could not be a change of government through the 'democratic process', such as it was. Hence, Tahrir square, the uprising in all parts of Egypt, the coordinated strikes, etc., were all necessary to remove Mubarak. What has now replaced him is, again, only cosmetically diverse.
In the UN, Israel, the US and the island of Palau often vote together against reasonable initiatives from many regions throughout the globe. Consistently, over many decades now.
At the end of the day, the rest of the world has learned that the consequences of the ignorance of America must be contained to America, if at all possible.
You may object to that last sentence, but it would be understood in any language around the globe, and people are reorganizing themselves to act upon it.
I love it. Really. Mark Koroi that the per capita incomes of most Western European nations have already surpassed the US, but the conclusion is that Americans suffer from "overtaxation that has stifled economic growth". Is it worthwhile pointing out that the taxation in Western Europe is higher than that in the US?
The US misuses its resources, no doubt about that: it has a very effective scheme of corporate welfare with no corporate taxes, which is leading it nowhere.
Currently, the sanctions are intended to hurt the common people of Iran, and they are doing so. Lifting them is critical.
If sanctions aren't lifted, we can assume that US and Israeli military action is still part of the over-all plan, and the Iranians will assume the same.
The foolishness of the US spending almost one half (perhaps now it has achieved that lofty goal) of the globe's military spending is here interpreted as a subsidy to Europe's social programs.
This is quite beyond Alice in Wonderland reasoning. If you really do feel this way and carry those resentments, then take your troops out of Europe: start with those in Germany.
You will quickly discover that the American domestic economy, as currently structured, actually craves the military Keynesian strategy the US follows, and that the projection of US global military power is essential to maintain the fiat currency of a bankrupt nation.
But don't take my word for it. Openly support a policy of American non-intervention in European military affairs.
I confess I don't understand this comment. Are you saying that the administration that would give the orders for the military attack doesn't want to do it?
Why did Obama say Assad had to go two years ago, and then create a red line, and then insist that the red line had been passed, if he were not supportive of the military action?
I sincerely appreciate your efforts to lean against the usual anti-Russian tropes in American society. There is so little understanding of Russia, really.
Your quote, however, "Under Boris Yeltsin, Russia was neither inclined to nor able to challenge the United States" is a bit of a serious understatement. Better, "Under Boris Yeltsin Russia was giving away its state assets in fraudulent auctions largely overseen and directed in the United States."
The ignorance of such comments, Dan, is breath taking, although we hear it often enough. For a much more detailed look at the MB in "power", please read link to lrb.co.uk
I've read them both, Bill. I have no illusions about the Gulags.
You, however, may have some illusions about the nature of "arbitrary and unnecessary" within the American penal system.
You might also remember that the Gulags presented cheap labour for certain state projects. Have you looked into the role of cheap labour in the American penal system? Have you had the time to contrast that to other "developed" nations?
Why a cheap shot? The Gulags were created by largely arbitrary and unnecessary incarcerations of large segments of the population: is that not happening in the US? Is that not an equivalency worth considering?
You forget to add, to start with, that Canada has two official languages, and the Canadian government operates in both. In the north of Canada, six official languages are recognized.
Canada is the most decentralized of federal states, and pushing the power lower down has proven beneficial to the federation as a whole. Democracy is maintained in Canada by the provinces being able to create the context for federal priorities.
While officially with two houses, in truth the system has worked primarily and overwhelmingly as a one house system. One of the reasons that works is because it is multi-party, allowing more than two official parties to speak to the public.
Pro-Republican conservatives (including the current government) have tried to remake the Prime Minister's Office into a Presidential Office, and to "resurrect" the Senate into an American variant - the intent being to concentrate power in the executive while allowing conservative forces to block popular outbursts of democracy in the "lower" house.
Autocrats like the US system, which is deeply conservative.
The idea that the White House could "save" Mubarak is simply wrong. It tried. It didn't succeed. The US was firm in its support of the detested regime until long past the point of no return. Why isn't that understood?
I think it odd that your dark cloud on the horizon is the potential for "unwise" decisions by the Iranians.
America has a four front war going against Iran: economic (sanctions), technical (Stuxnet), diplomatic (international non-recognition of Iran) black-ops (assassinations and explosions), and you see the threat as "unwise" Iranian response?
More to the point, where is your analysis of Saudi Arabia and its constant support of Salafi elements, especially in Egypt, Pakistan, and the Horn of Africa. As long as the US supports the expansion of Saudi Arabian fundamentalism and Israeli territorial expansion (both of which it currently covers) then expect the unexpected, but don't blame the Iranians for it.
It doesn't take long, does it, for the west to claim that any new popular leader who speaks Arabic must be Hitler-like.
It's just an unending misrepresentation, from Nasser forwards.
What most of these comments seems to miss is the simple fact that there is a dynamic, evolving and popular push for democracy in Egypt. It is both within the Brotherhood as well as outside it. It may not carry the day, or win every battle, but it is of historical importance and great vigour.
Where are the required pro-democracy movements in the US?
Mr. Cole writes: "The Hosni Mubarak regime was more or less complicit in the repression of the Palestinians."
That's an odd statement. Mubarak's regime was entirely complicit in the repression of the Palestinians. Frankly, it's the Mursi regime now which is "more or less" complicit.
We shouldn't be letting Australia off the hook, either. They should be defending the rights of their citizen. They should be calling loudly for Swedish representatives to come to the UK and interview him in the Ecuadorian Embassy, as has been offered.
You write that Obama might "be hard pressed to resist the political expediency of a response that will entail ramping up the US military presence in the Persian Gulf, and the implied, but increasingly overt, threat to Iran"
And then you hope that Iran "will step back".
Instead, why not ask Obama to start telling the truth to the electorate? Then Iran can move forward to work out a living arrangement, and the beginnings of democracy can be restored.
The President still refuses to acknowledge Israel has nuclear weapons, nuclear armed subs, is following an aggressive policy of enlargement, etc.
If the President would begin to tell the truth, then the electorate would support him in greater numbers. Its this hiding from the facts which has undermined American democracy.
I understand the sentiment and logic of the commentator... but such comments have been on-going for a very very long time.
What evidence is there that the US wants a different foreign policy than the one it is following? The American government, executive and congress, are very aware of its one-sided treatment of Israel, and they continue.
The rest of the world must move on, and deal with the situation as it is, not as they wish it to be.
A great example of people believing their own lies is to be found at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. If these people have sway, and they do, then insanity reigns: link to c-spanvideo.org
In short: the current Israeli-Palestinian negotiations are positive; the main problem in the Middle East is Iran; the Palestinian Authority has its act together and people in the West Bank are happy.
Is Juan comfortable writing: Obama is going to Delhi as salesman-in-chief to try to get as much of that sum spent on American-made materiel as possible.
Is Obama comfortable knowing that's what he's doing?
I would think yes to both questions: the American President is hired by the military industrial complex as salesman in chief. That's how it is.
This isn't a sane response to American economic woes, it just prolongs an industrial imbalance that has dug the US into a hole.
Given that it's seven months later and there is no government, why on earth blame Wikileaks?? Or is it just an unfortunate headline?
The American government is clearly desirous of blaming Wikileaks for terrible things... but the real causes are in the actions, not in the public knowledge of them, and for the leaders in Iraq, that knowledge has been long standing, just not footnoted through American documents.
I am appalled that rather than dealing with the current war crimes against Gaza, the reality of the ethnic cleansing in the West Bank and Jerusalem against Palestinians, as well as against Bedouins in the Negev... we magnify the 'problems' of Iran.
We have real and on-going crimes that need international intervention. They are in Israel.
But seriously, it is being used for such imperialist, neocon projects. The extremely generalised, polarized, Manichean view of good versus evil in Islamic society is precisely what drives much of "the west", whether or not Mr. Asadi approves.
What's important here is that Schumer "knows". His decisions are not of ignorance of the facts on the ground. He, and many others, not only endorse, they actively support.
I'm not so sure you are reading the US "acceptance" of Russia's right to deliver the S-300 correctly. Russia has not delivered them, and as long as Russia doesn't deliver them its easy enough to say one thing de jure while knowing it won't change de facto.
Monsieru Gonzo brings up an intersting point at 1.41 pm. "I daresay that because of this massacre all our efforts, the decade-long sacrifice of American blood and treasure, are now all in vain."
So, if you had an ally that was consistently scuppering all of your plans, voiding the significance of the the lives and wealth expended in those plans, would you continue to front for that ally at all costs? Send them more money?
Professor Cole writes: "The Israeli Right is being paranoid and inhumane in this belief."
But it's not only the Israeli right that believes that: it is most of Israeli society and many (perhaps most) of the Israeli left. Professor Cole's manichean use of left/right, both in Israel and in the US, undermines his critical approach to both Israeli and American society.
The left has not inherited all values of humanism and the right has not... the left/right terminology doesn't do justice to the circumstances.
The information about Ukraine is dated and wrong. The current government of Ukraine is not frightened of Russia. The support for the "western leader" in the last Ukrainian election was 5%.
The west, and the US, misplayed Ukraine very badly.
To think that the majority of Ukrainians are worried about the rise of Russia is just.... well, inaccurate. What both Russians and Ukrainians want is a strong economy, national sovereignty, reasonable freedoms. They think the US, working under the Washington Consensus and with the IMF, works against that.
© 2026 All Rights Reserved
How come the Russians haven't had this kind of "massive intel error"?
I'm assuming that number would include the $206 million here being discussed... for it is certainly extremist preaching which causes terrorist actions, including attacks on mosques and individual Muslims.
Why do you think the law matters in the US? I am not being 'grumpy'. Why would one think a list of broken laws will somehow curtail the actions? How?
She is a neocon.
Excellent article. The desire to get the contemporary social analysis right is welcome. The historical analogy carries its own content which would be difficult to capture any other way.
I think that Cast Lead, which was met with widespread repugnance throughout the Egyptian population, allowed a variety of social forces to gather together in the street long enough and with enough solidarity that it fused into a public and general movement to oust Mubarak. That moral outrage has been transformed by events and the oppositional forces to the state are again deeply fractured.
I think that's a key question. Arguably, the situation under Mubarak was 'politically diverse', as there were many parties. But everyone knew that there would not/ could not be a change of government through the 'democratic process', such as it was. Hence, Tahrir square, the uprising in all parts of Egypt, the coordinated strikes, etc., were all necessary to remove Mubarak. What has now replaced him is, again, only cosmetically diverse.
You're implying the British government has a program to spy on the American public. Any reference for that?
Or is your sole reference the fact that the US does so to all its allies, including the Brits?
In the UN, Israel, the US and the island of Palau often vote together against reasonable initiatives from many regions throughout the globe. Consistently, over many decades now.
At the end of the day, the rest of the world has learned that the consequences of the ignorance of America must be contained to America, if at all possible.
You may object to that last sentence, but it would be understood in any language around the globe, and people are reorganizing themselves to act upon it.
I love it. Really. Mark Koroi that the per capita incomes of most Western European nations have already surpassed the US, but the conclusion is that Americans suffer from "overtaxation that has stifled economic growth". Is it worthwhile pointing out that the taxation in Western Europe is higher than that in the US?
The US misuses its resources, no doubt about that: it has a very effective scheme of corporate welfare with no corporate taxes, which is leading it nowhere.
For the record, I am not so sure that Canada isn't being as rigorously spied upon as, for example, Brazil, also for commercial reasons.
But the spying would be redundant: the influence of the American government on the ruling Canadian political party being so entrenched and complete.
We actually have a Federal government that doesn't believe in the sovereignty of its own people.
Exactly so.
Or if there is a response from Iran (and Iran will respond) then the damage to Israel will become the reason for the American attack on Iran.
The US is very far from out of the woods on this.
Brian, can you recommend other sites and or publications from which you are drawing current information on Somalia?
That's a great post, Farhang.
Currently, the sanctions are intended to hurt the common people of Iran, and they are doing so. Lifting them is critical.
If sanctions aren't lifted, we can assume that US and Israeli military action is still part of the over-all plan, and the Iranians will assume the same.
The time for serious rapprochement is now.
You write: "if I understand correctly, the regime’s problem is that their worldview is very narrow and lacks an understanding of worldwide views."
Surely that's the US and Israel you are talking about.
The majority of the world's nations support the right of Iran to enrich uranium, and note that Iran is not the aggressor in the region.
I look forward to your vigorous support for military strikes against Israel when it next bombs or invades Gaza or Lebanon.
The foolishness of the US spending almost one half (perhaps now it has achieved that lofty goal) of the globe's military spending is here interpreted as a subsidy to Europe's social programs.
This is quite beyond Alice in Wonderland reasoning. If you really do feel this way and carry those resentments, then take your troops out of Europe: start with those in Germany.
You will quickly discover that the American domestic economy, as currently structured, actually craves the military Keynesian strategy the US follows, and that the projection of US global military power is essential to maintain the fiat currency of a bankrupt nation.
But don't take my word for it. Openly support a policy of American non-intervention in European military affairs.
I confess I don't understand this comment. Are you saying that the administration that would give the orders for the military attack doesn't want to do it?
Why did Obama say Assad had to go two years ago, and then create a red line, and then insist that the red line had been passed, if he were not supportive of the military action?
Yes, and that is the critical point.
Yes. We are there. Ignore it at our own peril. I am grateful for your persistence and clarity on this issue.
The fact that the Bnai Brith of Canada is using this "information" to promote its own sectarian prejudices is not comforting.
link to groups.google.com
What is the reference or support for the number of 50 police killed?
I sincerely appreciate your efforts to lean against the usual anti-Russian tropes in American society. There is so little understanding of Russia, really.
Your quote, however, "Under Boris Yeltsin, Russia was neither inclined to nor able to challenge the United States" is a bit of a serious understatement. Better, "Under Boris Yeltsin Russia was giving away its state assets in fraudulent auctions largely overseen and directed in the United States."
Thank you for carrying this article. It does take courage both to write it and to carry it.
For the record, I don't think it's a "blindspot" in the American media, it is much more an "understanding".
The ignorance of such comments, Dan, is breath taking, although we hear it often enough. For a much more detailed look at the MB in "power", please read link to lrb.co.uk
I've read them both, Bill. I have no illusions about the Gulags.
You, however, may have some illusions about the nature of "arbitrary and unnecessary" within the American penal system.
You might also remember that the Gulags presented cheap labour for certain state projects. Have you looked into the role of cheap labour in the American penal system? Have you had the time to contrast that to other "developed" nations?
Why a cheap shot? The Gulags were created by largely arbitrary and unnecessary incarcerations of large segments of the population: is that not happening in the US? Is that not an equivalency worth considering?
Dan, it might be worthwhile asking yourself if the deeper issue is whether the owners of the mass media control the government
A bit of an odd list. No Muslims need be concerned?
And somehow, no white Catholics, Protestants or heterosexuals either. So, Assange himself can rest easy.
Interesting.
Agreed!
You forget to add, to start with, that Canada has two official languages, and the Canadian government operates in both. In the north of Canada, six official languages are recognized.
Canada is the most decentralized of federal states, and pushing the power lower down has proven beneficial to the federation as a whole. Democracy is maintained in Canada by the provinces being able to create the context for federal priorities.
While officially with two houses, in truth the system has worked primarily and overwhelmingly as a one house system. One of the reasons that works is because it is multi-party, allowing more than two official parties to speak to the public.
Pro-Republican conservatives (including the current government) have tried to remake the Prime Minister's Office into a Presidential Office, and to "resurrect" the Senate into an American variant - the intent being to concentrate power in the executive while allowing conservative forces to block popular outbursts of democracy in the "lower" house.
Autocrats like the US system, which is deeply conservative.
Dr. Cole really reaches with the line: " There is a sense in which capitalist Russia is seeking a superpower supremacy in parts of the Middle East."
What sense is that?
Or is this an unfounded sentence simply trying to tap into the ever enduring anti-Russian sentiment to warrant on-going US crimes in the Middle East?
An extremely important and revealing article. Thank you.
Is it a fact that the only people who have had their citizenship stripped are Muslim?
The idea that the White House could "save" Mubarak is simply wrong. It tried. It didn't succeed. The US was firm in its support of the detested regime until long past the point of no return. Why isn't that understood?
I think it odd that your dark cloud on the horizon is the potential for "unwise" decisions by the Iranians.
America has a four front war going against Iran: economic (sanctions), technical (Stuxnet), diplomatic (international non-recognition of Iran) black-ops (assassinations and explosions), and you see the threat as "unwise" Iranian response?
More to the point, where is your analysis of Saudi Arabia and its constant support of Salafi elements, especially in Egypt, Pakistan, and the Horn of Africa. As long as the US supports the expansion of Saudi Arabian fundamentalism and Israeli territorial expansion (both of which it currently covers) then expect the unexpected, but don't blame the Iranians for it.
The best and most informative part of this post is the reaction to it. Thank god for the comments section.
I love this post. Thank you for it.
It doesn't take long, does it, for the west to claim that any new popular leader who speaks Arabic must be Hitler-like.
It's just an unending misrepresentation, from Nasser forwards.
What most of these comments seems to miss is the simple fact that there is a dynamic, evolving and popular push for democracy in Egypt. It is both within the Brotherhood as well as outside it. It may not carry the day, or win every battle, but it is of historical importance and great vigour.
Where are the required pro-democracy movements in the US?
Mr. Cole writes: "The Hosni Mubarak regime was more or less complicit in the repression of the Palestinians."
That's an odd statement. Mubarak's regime was entirely complicit in the repression of the Palestinians. Frankly, it's the Mursi regime now which is "more or less" complicit.
We shouldn't be letting Australia off the hook, either. They should be defending the rights of their citizen. They should be calling loudly for Swedish representatives to come to the UK and interview him in the Ecuadorian Embassy, as has been offered.
You write that Obama might "be hard pressed to resist the political expediency of a response that will entail ramping up the US military presence in the Persian Gulf, and the implied, but increasingly overt, threat to Iran"
And then you hope that Iran "will step back".
Instead, why not ask Obama to start telling the truth to the electorate? Then Iran can move forward to work out a living arrangement, and the beginnings of democracy can be restored.
The President still refuses to acknowledge Israel has nuclear weapons, nuclear armed subs, is following an aggressive policy of enlargement, etc.
If the President would begin to tell the truth, then the electorate would support him in greater numbers. Its this hiding from the facts which has undermined American democracy.
"Thank you, South Carolina."
I understand the sentiment and logic of the commentator... but such comments have been on-going for a very very long time.
What evidence is there that the US wants a different foreign policy than the one it is following? The American government, executive and congress, are very aware of its one-sided treatment of Israel, and they continue.
The rest of the world must move on, and deal with the situation as it is, not as they wish it to be.
Maybe the writer could clarify what he means by "attempted cooption".
A great example of people believing their own lies is to be found at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. If these people have sway, and they do, then insanity reigns:
link to c-spanvideo.org
In short: the current Israeli-Palestinian negotiations are positive; the main problem in the Middle East is Iran; the Palestinian Authority has its act together and people in the West Bank are happy.
Is Juan comfortable writing: Obama is going to Delhi as salesman-in-chief to try to get as much of that sum spent on American-made materiel as possible.
Is Obama comfortable knowing that's what he's doing?
I would think yes to both questions: the American President is hired by the military industrial complex as salesman in chief. That's how it is.
This isn't a sane response to American economic woes, it just prolongs an industrial imbalance that has dug the US into a hole.
My God, why not just start by diverting the military budget into something useful?
Given that it's seven months later and there is no government, why on earth blame Wikileaks?? Or is it just an unfortunate headline?
The American government is clearly desirous of blaming Wikileaks for terrible things... but the real causes are in the actions, not in the public knowledge of them, and for the leaders in Iraq, that knowledge has been long standing, just not footnoted through American documents.
I am glad for the clarity of this article.
I am appalled that rather than dealing with the current war crimes against Gaza, the reality of the ethnic cleansing in the West Bank and Jerusalem against Palestinians, as well as against Bedouins in the Negev... we magnify the 'problems' of Iran.
We have real and on-going crimes that need international intervention. They are in Israel.
But seriously, it is being used for such imperialist, neocon projects. The extremely generalised, polarized, Manichean view of good versus evil in Islamic society is precisely what drives much of "the west", whether or not Mr. Asadi approves.
Bloody Friday in Iraq Leaves 27 Dead, over 80 Wounded
When people around the world look at Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, and now the Gulf of Mexico, they don't blame Iran, Brazil or Turkey.
What's important here is that Schumer "knows". His decisions are not of ignorance of the facts on the ground. He, and many others, not only endorse, they actively support.
I'm not so sure you are reading the US "acceptance" of Russia's right to deliver the S-300 correctly. Russia has not delivered them, and as long as Russia doesn't deliver them its easy enough to say one thing de jure while knowing it won't change de facto.
Will Joe Biden ever find the 30 seconds to watch it?
Well, another moment where Obama either shows some leadership and moral courage... or not.
wound over 50 as they Board, Capture Gaza Aid Flotilla
Monsieru Gonzo brings up an intersting point at 1.41 pm. "I daresay that because of this massacre all our efforts, the decade-long sacrifice of American blood and treasure, are now all in vain."
So, if you had an ally that was consistently scuppering all of your plans, voiding the significance of the the lives and wealth expended in those plans, would you continue to front for that ally at all costs? Send them more money?
Professor Cole writes: "The Israeli Right is being paranoid and inhumane in this belief."
But it's not only the Israeli right that believes that: it is most of Israeli society and many (perhaps most) of the Israeli left. Professor Cole's manichean use of left/right, both in Israel and in the US, undermines his critical approach to both Israeli and American society.
The left has not inherited all values of humanism and the right has not... the left/right terminology doesn't do justice to the circumstances.
Yes, well, the Americans are paying for this and will continue to pay and will pretend that it's all justice incarnate. The Long War...
The information about Ukraine is dated and wrong. The current government of Ukraine is not frightened of Russia. The support for the "western leader" in the last Ukrainian election was 5%.
The west, and the US, misplayed Ukraine very badly.
To think that the majority of Ukrainians are worried about the rise of Russia is just.... well, inaccurate. What both Russians and Ukrainians want is a strong economy, national sovereignty, reasonable freedoms. They think the US, working under the Washington Consensus and with the IMF, works against that.