"As for supporters of Mandela in the general population, I suspect they were a small minority then."
Your suspicion is probably justified. Reagan and the right wing were hostile to Mandela and were voted into power by a majority. The Democratic Party oligarchs were most likely hostile to Mandela for his socialist and rebel credentials so many in that party most likely followed the leader. That just leaves a small minority.
" Ronald Reagan declared Nelson Mandela, then still in jail, a terrorist, and the US did not get around to removing him from the list until 2008!"
The word "terrorist" wasn't part of the English language during the time of the Revolutionary War in the colonies. If it had been it's a good bet members of parliament in London would have applied that term to George Washington and company when they were bloviating in that chamber given to so much folly.
" I see the author points to the Republican-controlled House, who cannot pass anything under the Democrat-controlled Senate. So if there are laws being passed that is actually doing these things, why don’t you blame the Senate also?"
To do the right thing, we should blame both parties, particularly their oligarchs. You are either naive or disingenuous about the attempts by the Republicans to disenfranchise voters, but if it will make you feel better, sling some deserved shots at the Democrats who really aren't putting up much opposition to this scam. People in the lower economic and social classes can also be a problem for the leaders of the Democratic (sic) Party even though they go along with the illusion of this being their base.
"We honor him by standing up for justice even in the face of enormous opposition from the rich and powerful, by taking risks for high ideals. We won’t meet his standards. But if all of us tried, we’d make the world better. As he did."
Unfortunately, he was co-opted at the end, by the global corporate world and ideologues from his own party so that many black South Africans are little better off under the ANC.
" In the early 1960s ... , the United States was a nakedly capitalist country engaged in an attempt to ensure that peasants and workers did not come to power."
The United States was a "nakedly capitalist country" long before the 1960s, still is, and will continue to be as long as the Democratic and Republican oligarchies maintain their complicity with Wall Street.
And South Africa, despite being governed by black leaders who suffered under apartheid, is another neoliberal nation in the global corporate world.
” The sad reality is that Rep. Broun’s views are not “radically out of whack with other Republicans on the House Science, Space and Technology Committee.”
Nor are they antithetical to the millions of people who vote these politicians into office.
"It is truly amazing that in technologically the most developed country of the world there are seemingly sane people in positions of power who still hold such nonsensical ideas that one hoped we had left behind a long time ago"
That illustrates one of the problems. They SEEM to be sane no matter how often their actions are contrary to what sane people would do. Vote for one war after the other against people who are not threat to us? Pour hundreds of billions into that five-sided black hole on the Potomac while cutting food stamps for desperate people? That's sane?
13. The military-industrial complex can wage illegal and immoral wars with impunity, and it is supported by a pro-war populace with the complicity of our "good Americans" who will also go along with the transfer of national funds from the well-being of its people to more government waste. Cuts to food stamps helping children who already go hungry to bed and to school.
State of the Union is not the only member of the fawning corporate media. Yesterday Face the Nation was stacked with anti-diplomacy-ratchet-up-the-sanctions advocates. No dissenting voices. Of course, Meet the Press is just as phony. The only point that justifies watching these shows (if you don't become nauseated) is that you know who the enemies and the termites within are.
"Senator Diane Feinstein and Rep. Mike Rogers took to the airwaves on Sunday to warn that Americans are less safe than two years ago and that al-Qaeda is growing and spreading and that the US is menaced by bombs that can’t be detected by metal detectors."
Americans are less safe today because of the likes of DiFi, Mike Rogers and the warmongers and protofascists in Congress.
"Feinstein and Rogers swore to uphold the US constitution, which contains that pesky 4th amendment. They’ve broken that vow. Voters, you know what to do."
Their votes to give Dubya authority to wage war on Iraq also violated their oaths to uphold the Constitution.
According to Benny Morris in his "Righteous Victims" the Zionists planned to "transfer" all of the non-Jews out of Palestine and Trans-jordan, so with the Likud Party and its accomplices now in charge, this latest example of ethnic cleansing should come as no surprise. When will Jordan's day come for "transfer"?.
This is another example why I have not bought into the one-percent-them-and-the-ninety-nine-percent-us scenario. There is the one percent, but among the other 99% percent there are the courtiers, sycophants and other enablers of the one percent as exemplified by the BBC agent in this piece and countless others in the British and US media who work against the interests of the remainder of the 99%.
We are a nation of laws, but that doesn't necessarily mean we are a nation where justice prevails. To the contrary, justice is raped on a daily basis by authoritarians with the power to wield those laws as they see fit.
"But despite the fear-mongering and hysteria of Israeli politicians [...], the general reaction in the region has been much more positive than the Likud government would have us believe."
"Why when it comes to Israel do we only get screeds like this from Juan.(?)"
More likely, the question you should be asking is why you ask such a question. Have you ever heard of Binyamin Netanyahu and listened to his obsessive expressions of belligerence towards Iran that could have dragged in the United States?
The Iranians were never a threat to the United States or to Europe, so the good news about this deal is that the bullies have let up to some degree and are less likely to trigger a war. The real threats remain, not necessarily in order of severity: Israel's right wing, the Israel lobby and its lackeys in Congress; our neocons who are synonymous with the lobby; and Wall Street and its latest abomination, the Trans Pacific Partnership.
Could Obama's push for diplomacy and an agreement with Iran have been influenced by the insults he had heaped on him by Netanyahu?
"The coal industry is even less moral than the oil industry."
I get your point, Charley, but it isn't possible to be less moral than anyone with zero morality. You have to go in the other direction. "The coal industry is more immoral than the oil industry." But that is debatable. Think the disaster in the Gulf, corruption in Nigeria, etc.
"The divestment movement on US college campuses against Big Carbon (coal, oil and gas) signals more than just the arrival of a new, determined and idealistic generation of students. It is a harbinger of danger for investors."
And an increased market for the propaganda branch of the Big Carbon-Advertising Media complex.
There should be no surprise that Tony Blair as British Prime Minister was indifferent to the rights of the British people. This authoritarian attitude has been part of British history from its genesis through King John of Magna Carta fame, Henry VIII, George III, General Haig, Margaret Thatcher, and now David Cameron. What's more, the consequences of British authoritarianism were worse throughout most parts of the British empire.
And, it is said, those who live by the sword shall die by the sword; although, in Israel's case several observers give decay and moral corruption odds for doing the job.
"The Palestinian Authority could, pursuant to its observer state status at the United Nations, go to initiate a process of bringing criminal proceedings in the ICC against Israeli leaders, but has chosen not to."
Because it is more inclined to be obsequious in the presence of Israel's leaders.
And the prime minister of Israel received 29 standing ovations from his puppets, our representatives and senators when he gave them a pep talk at one of his rallies in Congress. There were basically good people among those senators and representatives, and it is extremely difficult to believe they were sincere in their hand-clapping gestures, but it looks like they lacked the moral courage on this (and other occasions) to do the right thing and tell AIPAC and the rest of the Israel lobby to go to hell.
Why don't we see stories such as this on the front pages of the NY Time, WaPo, and other major papers? Why is a story such as this not a topic for corporate television channels? That's right. They are more interested in informing their readers and watchers about the Toronto mayor's smoking crack or some piece of forgettable nonsense about some celebrity enjoying too many minutes of fame.
It is difficult to come to any conclusion other than the US government and other players involved in the war on Iraq fear that facts in the Chilcot Report would at least be very embarrassing, and evidence beyond a reasonable doubt would be very embarrassing, indeed.
"If the U.S. gets its way, the world will never know the details of top-level discussions between George W. Bush and Tony Blair that paved the way for the invasion of Iraq in 2003."
The world already knows the essential facts. The war on Iraq was greased with barrages of lies and fearmongering. The Chilcot report would most likely just have dotted the "i"s and crossed the "t"s.
"There are signs that the British government is poised to cave to U.S. pressure, in a bid to protect the 'special' relationship between the two countries."
Folding is what puppets do when the puppetmaster pulls the right cords.
One in six admit to self-censoring. On the other hand, if they are telling the truth the other five are showing the moral courage necessary to keep the candle of hope for liberty and freedom flickering. (In this statement, I am using liberty and freedom in their truest sense, not as it is used by the so-called conservatives.
"And civilians are clueless when it comes to unforeseen things that can happen when we go to war."
If they are clueless then that is a choice they have made. The slightest research and a few recent memories can reveal what horrors can happen in wars and how quickly rosy scenarios are shredded. There are other reasons people in Washington choose to go to war: Doing the bidding of others for whom the disastrous consequences of war for others are of no concern - military-industrial-security complex, the Israel Lobby and both of their puppets in Congress. Being of an authoritarian disposition and perhaps being psychopathic or sociopathic should be added to the rap sheet.
" I also don’t understand if you believe Iran should just be able to do whatever they want with their weapons."
What weapons? U.S. intelligence agencies have stated that Iran does not have nuclear weapons or plans to build them. There apparently were some rogue Iranian scientists who began work towards nukes, but now-President Rouhani reportedly squashed that activity. The only existing "Iranian nuclear weapons" are those created by the propaganda issuing forth from Netanyahu and his puppets in Congress.
"... hawks like Paul Wolfowitz were afraid the international sanctions would fall. He also argued that it was expensive to keep a no-fly zone over Iraqi Kurdistan."
And Wolfowitz argued the war on Iraq would only cost a few billion dollars, much less than the reality of two to three TRILLION dollars estimated by Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes. In one sense, it is fortunate we as a nation don't see a moral obligation to pay reparations to Iraq; otherwise, we would be in debt for another two, three or more TRILLION dollars.
And Wolfowitz was made president of the World Bank!!!!
"Carney may be right, but the logic is the logic of military aggression."
Perhaps that should be, "The Obama Administration may be right, but the logic is the logic of military aggression." Carney is just the administration's mouthpiece.
Many commentators have expressed the belief that Israel through the Likud party is destroying itself from within. Lieberman may just speed the process.
"...the thuggery that Smedley Butler acknowledge he took such vivid part in..."
Try searching the official Marine Corps website for "smedley" or "smedley butler" and you'll get zero responses. A search of "medal of honor" will get over 12,000 results, but I doubt if the two-time winner of that award will be among them.
"The lesson here is that it may well have been better for Germany to have been totally defeated in World War I, and that the Americans, British, and French may have been correct in wanting to continue into Germany."
It was the French who insisted on draconian punishment for the Germans at Versailles. Lloyd George was more inclined to be magnanimous. Clemenceau won the debate and set up the bitterness in Germany that led to the rise of Hitler and the Nazis. What the Allies didn't do on the various fields in France and Belgium, they did in the halls of Versailles. A humiliating defeat for Germany.
To quote the moral of Churchill's history of the Second World War: In War: Resolution; In Defeat: Defiance; In Victory: Magnanimity; In Peace: Goodwill.
Magnanimity doesn't appear to be a popular quality in American pathology compared with the upward pointing index finger and the rallying cry of, "We're Number One."
Estimates have the number of people killed during WWI as high as 20 million. How many more lives would have been squandered if the "warriors" had their way and insisted on conquering the German land?
E. D. Morel's book, "Ten Years of Secret Diplomacy" makes a case that French and British diplomats had a lot to do with contributing to the outbreak of hostilities. I believe Adam Hochschild's latest book, "To End All Wars" might have been influenced by Morel's story, but I haven't gotten around to reading it.
On November 11, 1918 at dawn high-ranking officials agreed to an armistice to end the fighting at the 11th hour on the 11th day of the 11th month. Despite that the French, British and American generals insisted on continuing the fighting until the last minute. That wasn't barbarous enough for Generals Jack Pershing, Douglas MacArthur and (Colonel?)George Patton who wanted to continue the war and invade Germany and who later returned to a heroes welcome.
"Then French foreign minister Laurent Fabius showed up and threw cold water on the whole process."
A guest on Fareed Zakaria's GPS program on CNN suggested a possibility of some commercial deal between France and Saudi Arabia might have been a factor.
If Lindsey Graham approved of France's action, that's a good bet it was terribly wrong.
"... hawks in Washington actively want a war with Iran,..."
We need to get more Nuremberg trials going to get these war criminals (Iraq) out of circulation.
And talking about accountability check this about one of the senate's leading warmongers:
John McCain says NSA chief Keith Alexander’ should resign or be fired’: Senator gives interview to Der Spiegel, saying general should 'be held accountable' for Edward Snowden leaks by Karen McVeigh - http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/10/john-mccain-nsa-keith-alexander-snowden ... "And now we have a contractor employee, not a government employee, who has access to information which is, when revealed, most damaging to the standing prestige of the United States and our relations with some of our best friends," (Since when did friends spy on friends?) … “It's outrageous, and someone ought to be held accountable." (And the warmongers who got us into the Iraq war should be held accountable.) The full Spiegel interview is here - http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/interview-with-john-mccain-on-nsa-spying-on-angela-merkel-a-932721.html
"The hawks your (sic) talking about are a minority."
But that minority is not a small one, and despite being a minority it managed to manipulate a majority of Congress and the American people into supporting the war on Iraq, one of the greatest crimes against humanity in this young century. Kind of like a cancer. It can only be a miniscule part of your body but enough to kill you.
"The American voters picked the candidate who promised Iraq withdrawal over the one who promised to continue the fight."
The promised withdrawal was only one of several reasons Obama was re-elected. Another was that he was seen as the lesser evil. As for that withdrawal, Obama didn't really want it when the time came, but the Iraqi government rejected Obama's terms and the unglorious departure followed.
"Americans’ sympathies lean heavily toward the Israelis over the Palestinians, 64% vs 12%. Support for Israel has increased over the last decade among Americans, according to Gallup."
"Sabotaging an Iran nuke deal: Israel’s leadership and America’s neocons are shifting into overdrive to block a plan that would put the brakes on Iran’s nuclear program, seeking confrontation, not conciliation, notes ex-CIA analyst Paul R. Pillar." - http://consortiumnews.com/2013/11/09/sabotaging-an-iran-nuke-deal/
"Knee jerk reactions? Look who’s talking John. Just mention the word “Israel” and you have script all written out."
And nowhere is that "knee-jerk reaction" more obvious than in Congress where Operation Cast Lead was approved by all but very few senators and representatives even though most people who could think for themselves, including the Goldstone Commission, saw that assault on Gaza as a major crime. There have been reports that some people in Congress are offended by some of Israel's actions, but their "knee jerks" in obeisance to the Israel lobby mean whatever moral courage they might have is reserved for some other event.
A few weeks after Operation Cast Lead, Israel's "commander-in-chief" addressed Congress whose denizens rose 29 times like trained seals in a circus to give him a standing ovation. Yeah. Knee jerk is right.
"In the meantime, American hawks who complain that the US is losing influence by having withdrawn militarily from Iraq and from declining to get involved militarily in Syria have it all wrong."
And American voters keep returning these hawks and warmongers to Congress. So what does that say about the "American people"?
"The problem with this one-percent/99-percent scenario is that it implies the 99 are the opposite of and on the other side of the fence from the 99 percent. "
Oops! That should have been, The problem with this one-percent/99-percent scenario is that it implies the 99 are the opposite of and on the other side of the fence from the One Percenters.
“It’s a very good bet that ptochosophobia is inherent in many more people than the One Percenters. Our resident neocons and other enablers of the One Percent are apparently afflicted with this malady.”
The problem with this one-percent/99-percent scenario is that it implies the 99 are the opposite of and on the other side of the fence from the 99 percent. At the opposite end of the spectrum from the featured One Percent there is another one percent (or maybe two percent) actively opposed to the ruling One Percent. Sort of allied with the opposition are maybe another 5% to 10% who are sympathetic but not enough to be active supporters. Back to the One Percenters' end there are probably another 10% to 20% (in and out of Congress) enabling the plutocracy and supporting its members anyway they can in exchange for some reward - a job, campaign donation, or whatever. In between, for the lack of a better term, are a silent majority. Add them to the enablers and courtiers and we have a vast majority that facilitates in one way or another actions counterproductive to improving the lot of the poor. Add to that factors such as the different ethnicity (latent and overt racism) and religions of the Palestinians and they have a majority of Americans who are hostile or indifferent to them. With American support or acquiescence the Palestinians have the deck really stacked against them.
" Arafat had many enemies within the Palestinian movement itself, and it is not beyond the pale to suggest that a rival, or rivals, poisoned him, if indeed he was poisoned."
But who among Arafat's non-Israeli enemies would have been capable of getting access to polonium?
"The American 1% has ptochosophobia, the irrational fear and hatred of the poor, especially of the poor made poor by being looted by the 1%."
It's a very good bet that ptochosophobia is inherent in many more people than the One Percenters. Our resident neocons and other enablers of the One Percent are apparently afflicted with this malady.
It is part of the human condition for people to migrate to other places when conditions become intolerable in their current domiciles. Eventually, they proceed to degrade their new lands and make them uninhabitable. Now we are looking at migrating to another planet after Earth is degraded beyond hope. How long will it take them to destroy their new planet?
You make a good point referring to the early developments of the European Union, but there is a difference between France and Germany then and the Israelis and the Palestinians now. There was a great impetus in France and Germany to move on from their old prejudices. Given recent polls in Israel, anti-Palestinian racism is as prevalent there as it was in America's Deep South prior to the civil rights revolution in the 1960s. As recent reports indicate, Israelis can overcome their anti-Arab prejudices when alliances with Saudi Arabia and Egypt are to their benefit.
Re an earlier thread that is no longer open. Your comment about Sweden's lurch to the right helps to explain why Julian Assange doesn't want to go anywhere near that country.
"True, the theft of land and water is illegal under international law, but I get the sense they steal only what they need. Sometimes a bit zealous!"
Among the Jews who moved into Palestine early in the 20th century there were many who were content to live in peace with their Palestinian neighbors. Not so a significant number who had the intention of transferring all Palestinians out of the Palestine Territories. Their descendants are now in charge and continuing the same mission.
" The Meged 5 oil field extends over a very large area, possibly 250 sq km, with much of the reserves believed to lie under Palestinian territory in the West Bank."
If so, then Israel will just expropriate this land also, and John Kerry will read from one of Hillary Clinton's cue cards that this action "is not helpful to the peace process."
The Republicans don't have a monopoly on being Scrooges and stuffers of the bloated department of war budget. There are many willing accomplices in the lesser-evil party, aka the Democratic (?) Party.
Democrat President Slick Willie, smiling and surrounded by some of Wall Street's most predatory vultures, signed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley act that set the United States on its path to the economic crash of 2008. Our current vice president was a leading player in rigging the bankruptcy bill that set credit card companies up to charge usurious rates while it tightened the screws every more on people in dire economic straits.
It would be one thing if our war department made some halfway plausible argument for the weapons Congress buys, but when the generals and admirals declare they don't want some of these multi-billion dollar wasteful purchases then we are looking at Congressional activity that should be considered criminal and the perpetrators should be charged with fraud and corruption.
By chance I read Walter Karp's "Liberty Under Siege" yesterday in which he described Ronald Reagan's campaign to stack the deck in favor of the rich and blow hundreds of billions of dollars on military and naval forces and pay for these costs by vindictive penalties against people in the lower income brackets. Karp also noted how Reagan increased the imperial power of the presidency with laws that constrained citizens and the press. All of this was achieved with the assistance of a craven Democratic Party oligarchy led by Tip O'Neill.
Then we had a variation on the same theme from the Bush/Cheney administration and another generation of Democratic Party oligarchs.
But wait, as they say in TV commercials. We have more of the same with the only differences being a Democratic Party president in the White House and an increased pace of waste and Big Brother tactics against whistleblowers for now with outspoken activists probably next. Obamacare has been set up to transfer enormous sums of money from the people to insurance companies and there is a duopoly vendetta in the works to turn Social Security over to private interests. To help pay for this there are to be cuts in welfare programs for the poor and needy. Just as in Reagan's Morning in America.
"The defense budget for this year, at least what they admit to, is somewhere around 680 billion dollars, four times that spent by China, the country with the next largest military budget. Couldn’t we reduce that to twice as much as China is spending and still be able to defend ourselves?"
Given the fact that the Pentagon's budgets were many times more than Hanoi's, Iraq's and the Taliban's but our department of war was still unable to prevail over them, we can only hope Obama doesn't become or is followed by a megalomaniacal lunatic who even contemplates a military conflict with China. The same goes for those perennial warmongers in Congress.
But we din "win" in Grenada.
Also bear in mind if we get into a shooting match with China we won't be able to count on them to sell us spare parts when our exorbitantly priced weaponry starts to break down.
You can give a thousand reasons why the US should stay out of Iraq and put conditions on arms sales, but if there is something in it for the military-industrial-security complex the US "government" will do what it is told to do and facilitate more business for the agents of death and destruction.
"In a major new report published this week, the most comprehensive study of the US drones programme conducted from a human rights perspective, Amnesty has reviewed the use of drones in Pakistan’s north-western tribal areas where most drone strikes have taken place. The report* condemns the almost complete absence of transparency around the US drone programme and concludes that the USA has carried out unlawful killings, some of which could amount to war crimes." by Kate Allen - http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/10/31/drones-the-moral-challenge-of-our-time/
" Congress has never been noted for moral courage."
In fairness it should be said that there have been and are exemplary senators and representatives in Congress. Unfortunately, they are in a distinct minority.
But, as Glenn Greenwald noted, Chancellor Merkel is just as hypocritical as Feinstein:
"First, note how leaders such as Chancellor Angela Merkel reacted with basic indifference when it was revealed months ago that the NSA was bulk-spying on all German citizens, but suddenly found her indignation only when it turned out that she personally was also targeted. That reaction gives potent insight into the true mindset of many western leaders" http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/25/europe-erupts-nsa-spying-chief-government
Apparently, Tom, you still believe in the quaint notion that no one is above the law and that we are all equal before it. After all, it's not like they were taking drugs to boost their pitching arms in a baseball game.
"The other questions Senator Ron Wyden wants answered on NSA surveillance by Kevin Gosztola - http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2013/09/27/the-other-questions-senator-ron-wyden-wants-answered-on-nsa-surveillance/ … Democratic Senator Ron Wyden, Democratic Senator Mark Udall and even Republican Senator Susan Collins had more questions to ask, but, instead of allowing more oversight to take place at an alleged oversight hearing, Feinstein suggested the committee get to the expert witnesses from the second panel. This effectively ensured Alexander, Clapper and Cole did not have to face Wyden or Udall again in the hearing."
This was probably the intelligence (?)committee hearing that didn't require Alexander and Clapper to take an oath to tell the truth but required the next panel, more likely to tell the truth, to hold up their right hands and take the oath.
and
"Feinstein’s phony excuse for NSA spying: After 9/11, the excuse for missing clues was too much data – trying to sip from a fire hose – but with the priority now excusing NSA spying, the metaphor is for more data – you can’t find a needle in a haystack without a haystack – a shift ex-FBI agent Coleen Rowley dissects." - http://consortiumnews.com/2013/10/07/feinsteins-phony-excuse-for-nsa-spying/
"Couldn’t it also be that Obama has known all along about this wiretapping of Merkel’s phone but was forced by the report to deny this knowledge to avoid harming his relations with Merkel?"
It is unlikely we will ever know the truth other than political Washington is like life in a shark tank - and that may be an insult to sharks. The safest approach is to consider all involved guilty until proved innocent.
"But the NSA appears to be a secret kingdom that appropriates our money with no oversight or accountability. We didn’t elect it, and if it doesn’t let our chosen representatives know what it is up to, then it is taxing us without giving us any representation. It is a tyrant. It is an ominous homunculus within the body politic."
Not only the NSA. There are also the Wall Street bankers, the military-industrial-security-media complex, and the Israel lobby. But we still get to vote for the components of the fig leaf giving the illusion of a democracy.
There were reports in non-main stream media after 9/11 that the Taliban would have been willing to turn Usama bin Laden over to US authorities if the US could provide convincing evidence of bin Laden's involvement. The Bush administration didn't, preferring the macho approach of going in with blazing guns.
Thank you, Professor Cole, for this cost analysis. It would also be very illuminating to read an analysis of the projected costs of the future consequences and blowback from Afghanistan much as Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes did on the Iraq war that they estimated will eventually have a total cost of $2 to $3 TRILLION.
And when it comes to the 2014 elections for senators and representatives to Congress most of the politicians responsible for this and other disasters will be re-elected.
"Chinese GNP most definitely has not surpassed that of the Unites States. The figures for 2012 show the US GNP at $15 trillion, while China’s GNP was $6 trillion, less than half that of the US."
In the 1960s Vietnam's GNP was just a fraction the United States' GNP, but nobody with any sense would say the US won that war.
Iraq 2003 to the US exit - something similar.
And it looks like deja vu all over again in Afghanistan.
Given the potential for Pentagon budgets to bring the United States to bankruptcy, China's ascent to Numero Uno is plausible.
From Castellio above: "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."
Perhaps, that assessment makes a US decline and fall something to contemplate.
The images show soldiers, low level in rank, humanity and intelligence and who were punished. The generals and field officers who were also complicit went unpunished. General Geoffrey Miller who had the job of Gitmo-izing Abu Ghraib retired with a hefty pension. "At his retirement service, Miller was awarded the Distinguished Service Medal, and praised as an "innovator"." (Wikipedia)
The problem is not only one of a minority of the people shredding the Constitution, but the greater problem is of the majority of the people who don't know of this or don't care and, worse, approve of it.
Add to Professor Cole's commentary above and this article - No way out: As ye sow, so shall ye reap - http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/10/23/no-way-out-2/- by Paul Craig Roberts on America's economic decline and there is no conclusion other than dystopian prospects for our future.
"US Diplomat: Each US Drone Attack Creates '40 to 60' New Enemies: Former US deputy chief to US embassy in Yemen calculates 'blowback machine' theory of US counterterrorism is spot on" http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/10/24
Our president and others have stressed that if American and Israeli security is threatened we and the Israelis have a right to aggressive attacks against those perceived threats. We also need to stress that the right to retaliate does not apply to other nations whose security we and the Israelis have placed in jeopardy.
The singular article and noun are definitely in error.
And the way the US has conducted that war has contributed to the expansion of Al-Qaida from a little corner in Afghanistan across south Asia to the Middle East and northern Africa. You're doing a heck of a job, guys.
"Questions over US drone attacks that President Obama needs to resolve: The US cannot brush off charges of unlawful killings, claiming it is merely protecting US interests, without risking revenge attacks" by Simon Tisdall - http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/22/questions-drones-obama-resolve
"What disturbs me most is the general ignorance of history among U.S. citizens."
Not only that, but the indifference to immorality by people who are otherwise decent citizens is bizarre. If we applied the principles defined during the Nuremberg trials to the leaders who got the war on Iraq into the history books they would be candidates for banishment, exile, prison or worse. Instead, they are distinguished celebrities, some of whom are promoting more illegal and immoral wars.
My former understanding of the law was that if someone killed an innocent person that was a crime. Circumstances dictated how serious the charge would be: First degree murder, second degree murder, manslaughter or other. Now that the United States conforms to the concept of exceptionalism and its authoritarian followers agree, the law is some quaint anachronism to be ignored except when dissidents dissent. Then the Empire invokes its credo of "nobody is above the law." People who still adhere to the concept of what is right is right and what is wrong is wrong consider that shibboleth to be unadulterated BS.
Interesting news from El Mundo (Spain): Dina Rousseff and Raúl Castro will join Obama in speaking at the ceremony honoring Mandela. http://www.elmundo.es/internacional/2013/12/09/52a60488684341da638b4596.html
More brutal truths about Afghanistan: "They died for nothing: The long nightmare in Afghanistan" by Sheldon Richman - http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/12/06/they-died-for-nothing/
"As for supporters of Mandela in the general population, I suspect they were a small minority then."
Your suspicion is probably justified. Reagan and the right wing were hostile to Mandela and were voted into power by a majority. The Democratic Party oligarchs were most likely hostile to Mandela for his socialist and rebel credentials so many in that party most likely followed the leader. That just leaves a small minority.
" Ronald Reagan declared Nelson Mandela, then still in jail, a terrorist, and the US did not get around to removing him from the list until 2008!"
The word "terrorist" wasn't part of the English language during the time of the Revolutionary War in the colonies. If it had been it's a good bet members of parliament in London would have applied that term to George Washington and company when they were bloviating in that chamber given to so much folly.
" I see the author points to the Republican-controlled House, who cannot pass anything under the Democrat-controlled Senate. So if there are laws being passed that is actually doing these things, why don’t you blame the Senate also?"
To do the right thing, we should blame both parties, particularly their oligarchs. You are either naive or disingenuous about the attempts by the Republicans to disenfranchise voters, but if it will make you feel better, sling some deserved shots at the Democrats who really aren't putting up much opposition to this scam. People in the lower economic and social classes can also be a problem for the leaders of the Democratic (sic) Party even though they go along with the illusion of this being their base.
"We honor him by standing up for justice even in the face of enormous opposition from the rich and powerful, by taking risks for high ideals. We won’t meet his standards. But if all of us tried, we’d make the world better. As he did."
Unfortunately, he was co-opted at the end, by the global corporate world and ideologues from his own party so that many black South Africans are little better off under the ANC.
"Mandela’s tarnished legacy: From apartheid to neoliberalism in South Africa" by John Pilger - http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/07/11/mandelas-tarnished-legacy/
"The Mandela years in power: Did he jump or was he pushed?" by Patrick Bond - http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/12/06/the-mandela-years-in-power/
"Mandela: A dissenting opinion: Victorious over apartheid, defeated by neoliberalism" by Jonathan Cook - http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/12/06/mandela-a-dissenting-opinion/
" In the early 1960s ... , the United States was a nakedly capitalist country engaged in an attempt to ensure that peasants and workers did not come to power."
The United States was a "nakedly capitalist country" long before the 1960s, still is, and will continue to be as long as the Democratic and Republican oligarchies maintain their complicity with Wall Street.
And South Africa, despite being governed by black leaders who suffered under apartheid, is another neoliberal nation in the global corporate world.
” The sad reality is that Rep. Broun’s views are not “radically out of whack with other Republicans on the House Science, Space and Technology Committee.”
Nor are they antithetical to the millions of people who vote these politicians into office.
"It is truly amazing that in technologically the most developed country of the world there are seemingly sane people in positions of power who still hold such nonsensical ideas that one hoped we had left behind a long time ago"
That illustrates one of the problems. They SEEM to be sane no matter how often their actions are contrary to what sane people would do. Vote for one war after the other against people who are not threat to us? Pour hundreds of billions into that five-sided black hole on the Potomac while cutting food stamps for desperate people? That's sane?
13. The military-industrial complex can wage illegal and immoral wars with impunity, and it is supported by a pro-war populace with the complicity of our "good Americans" who will also go along with the transfer of national funds from the well-being of its people to more government waste. Cuts to food stamps helping children who already go hungry to bed and to school.
Not only prison guard unions but also prisons-for-profit corporations. That is another corruption of the already corrupt American soul.
State of the Union is not the only member of the fawning corporate media. Yesterday Face the Nation was stacked with anti-diplomacy-ratchet-up-the-sanctions advocates. No dissenting voices. Of course, Meet the Press is just as phony. The only point that justifies watching these shows (if you don't become nauseated) is that you know who the enemies and the termites within are.
I use Firefox and don't have any problems. Great redesign.
"Senator Diane Feinstein and Rep. Mike Rogers took to the airwaves on Sunday to warn that Americans are less safe than two years ago and that al-Qaeda is growing and spreading and that the US is menaced by bombs that can’t be detected by metal detectors."
Americans are less safe today because of the likes of DiFi, Mike Rogers and the warmongers and protofascists in Congress.
"Feinstein and Rogers swore to uphold the US constitution, which contains that pesky 4th amendment. They’ve broken that vow. Voters, you know what to do."
Their votes to give Dubya authority to wage war on Iraq also violated their oaths to uphold the Constitution.
According to Benny Morris in his "Righteous Victims" the Zionists planned to "transfer" all of the non-Jews out of Palestine and Trans-jordan, so with the Likud Party and its accomplices now in charge, this latest example of ethnic cleansing should come as no surprise. When will Jordan's day come for "transfer"?.
"Greenwald is both courageous and smart; ..."
And he is thoroughly principled which explains why he is able to handle himself so well when he encounters the likes of this BBC interrogator.
This is another example why I have not bought into the one-percent-them-and-the-ninety-nine-percent-us scenario. There is the one percent, but among the other 99% percent there are the courtiers, sycophants and other enablers of the one percent as exemplified by the BBC agent in this piece and countless others in the British and US media who work against the interests of the remainder of the 99%.
John Pilger has another example from 50 years ago demonstrating the preceding is nothing new: "Fear of the people’s history: England’s two countries" by John Pilger - http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/29/fear-of-the-peoples-history/
We are a nation of laws, but that doesn't necessarily mean we are a nation where justice prevails. To the contrary, justice is raped on a daily basis by authoritarians with the power to wield those laws as they see fit.
You may discover that our "good Americans" are not that much different from the "good Germans" of an earlier era.
"But despite the fear-mongering and hysteria of Israeli politicians [...], the general reaction in the region has been much more positive than the Likud government would have us believe."
But for a healthy note of caution consider "Tehran accord designed to fail?" By Gareth Porter - http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MID-02-261113.html
At this point it might be a good idea to ponder Aesop's fable of the Tortoise and the Hare - http://childhoodreading.com/?p=3
" The US Congress arranged legislation that threatened China with third party,..."
How much dumber can Congress be than that? Unfortunately, time will tell.
"Why when it comes to Israel do we only get screeds like this from Juan.(?)"
More likely, the question you should be asking is why you ask such a question. Have you ever heard of Binyamin Netanyahu and listened to his obsessive expressions of belligerence towards Iran that could have dragged in the United States?
The Iranians were never a threat to the United States or to Europe, so the good news about this deal is that the bullies have let up to some degree and are less likely to trigger a war. The real threats remain, not necessarily in order of severity: Israel's right wing, the Israel lobby and its lackeys in Congress; our neocons who are synonymous with the lobby; and Wall Street and its latest abomination, the Trans Pacific Partnership.
Could Obama's push for diplomacy and an agreement with Iran have been influenced by the insults he had heaped on him by Netanyahu?
"The coal industry is even less moral than the oil industry."
I get your point, Charley, but it isn't possible to be less moral than anyone with zero morality. You have to go in the other direction. "The coal industry is more immoral than the oil industry." But that is debatable. Think the disaster in the Gulf, corruption in Nigeria, etc.
"The divestment movement on US college campuses against Big Carbon (coal, oil and gas) signals more than just the arrival of a new, determined and idealistic generation of students. It is a harbinger of danger for investors."
And an increased market for the propaganda branch of the Big Carbon-Advertising Media complex.
There should be no surprise that Tony Blair as British Prime Minister was indifferent to the rights of the British people. This authoritarian attitude has been part of British history from its genesis through King John of Magna Carta fame, Henry VIII, George III, General Haig, Margaret Thatcher, and now David Cameron. What's more, the consequences of British authoritarianism were worse throughout most parts of the British empire.
Only if Tony Blair shows moral courage and honor along with some personal sacrifice will Blair watchers be surprised.
And, it is said, those who live by the sword shall die by the sword; although, in Israel's case several observers give decay and moral corruption odds for doing the job.
"The Palestinian Authority could, pursuant to its observer state status at the United Nations, go to initiate a process of bringing criminal proceedings in the ICC against Israeli leaders, but has chosen not to."
Because it is more inclined to be obsequious in the presence of Israel's leaders.
And the prime minister of Israel received 29 standing ovations from his puppets, our representatives and senators when he gave them a pep talk at one of his rallies in Congress. There were basically good people among those senators and representatives, and it is extremely difficult to believe they were sincere in their hand-clapping gestures, but it looks like they lacked the moral courage on this (and other occasions) to do the right thing and tell AIPAC and the rest of the Israel lobby to go to hell.
Why don't we see stories such as this on the front pages of the NY Time, WaPo, and other major papers? Why is a story such as this not a topic for corporate television channels? That's right. They are more interested in informing their readers and watchers about the Toronto mayor's smoking crack or some piece of forgettable nonsense about some celebrity enjoying too many minutes of fame.
It is difficult to come to any conclusion other than the US government and other players involved in the war on Iraq fear that facts in the Chilcot Report would at least be very embarrassing, and evidence beyond a reasonable doubt would be very embarrassing, indeed.
"If the U.S. gets its way, the world will never know the details of top-level discussions between George W. Bush and Tony Blair that paved the way for the invasion of Iraq in 2003."
The world already knows the essential facts. The war on Iraq was greased with barrages of lies and fearmongering. The Chilcot report would most likely just have dotted the "i"s and crossed the "t"s.
"There are signs that the British government is poised to cave to U.S. pressure, in a bid to protect the 'special' relationship between the two countries."
Folding is what puppets do when the puppetmaster pulls the right cords.
One in six admit to self-censoring. On the other hand, if they are telling the truth the other five are showing the moral courage necessary to keep the candle of hope for liberty and freedom flickering. (In this statement, I am using liberty and freedom in their truest sense, not as it is used by the so-called conservatives.
And the Jackboots take another step towards our Brave New World and Liberty gets crushed on the way.
These personal comments reveal how cruel and pervasive the sanctions against Iran are:
"Iran Diary: Four Iranians on life in the time of sanctions: For the third time, SPIEGEL asked residents of Tehran to compile a diary about everyday life in Iran. In this installment, some 100 days after President Hassan Rohani took office, four Iranians share their hopes, fears and daily woes." by Nasrin Bassiri and Dieter Bednarz - http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/iranians-share-hope-for-end-of-sanctions-in-spiegel-tehran-diary-a-933342.html
They also reveal how inhumane some people can be.
"And civilians are clueless when it comes to unforeseen things that can happen when we go to war."
If they are clueless then that is a choice they have made. The slightest research and a few recent memories can reveal what horrors can happen in wars and how quickly rosy scenarios are shredded. There are other reasons people in Washington choose to go to war: Doing the bidding of others for whom the disastrous consequences of war for others are of no concern - military-industrial-security complex, the Israel Lobby and both of their puppets in Congress. Being of an authoritarian disposition and perhaps being psychopathic or sociopathic should be added to the rap sheet.
" I also don’t understand if you believe Iran should just be able to do whatever they want with their weapons."
What weapons? U.S. intelligence agencies have stated that Iran does not have nuclear weapons or plans to build them. There apparently were some rogue Iranian scientists who began work towards nukes, but now-President Rouhani reportedly squashed that activity. The only existing "Iranian nuclear weapons" are those created by the propaganda issuing forth from Netanyahu and his puppets in Congress.
"... hawks like Paul Wolfowitz were afraid the international sanctions would fall. He also argued that it was expensive to keep a no-fly zone over Iraqi Kurdistan."
And Wolfowitz argued the war on Iraq would only cost a few billion dollars, much less than the reality of two to three TRILLION dollars estimated by Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes. In one sense, it is fortunate we as a nation don't see a moral obligation to pay reparations to Iraq; otherwise, we would be in debt for another two, three or more TRILLION dollars.
And Wolfowitz was made president of the World Bank!!!!
Apropos the logic of military aggression:
"Incognito, Obama, and the dynamics of bullying: Spiritual brothers of abusive practice" by Norman Pollack - http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/13/incognito-obama-and-the-dynamics-of-bullying/
"Carney may be right, but the logic is the logic of military aggression."
Perhaps that should be, "The Obama Administration may be right, but the logic is the logic of military aggression." Carney is just the administration's mouthpiece.
Many commentators have expressed the belief that Israel through the Likud party is destroying itself from within. Lieberman may just speed the process.
It's a pleasure to agree with you on this one, Joe.
"...the thuggery that Smedley Butler acknowledge he took such vivid part in..."
Try searching the official Marine Corps website for "smedley" or "smedley butler" and you'll get zero responses. A search of "medal of honor" will get over 12,000 results, but I doubt if the two-time winner of that award will be among them.
"The lesson here is that it may well have been better for Germany to have been totally defeated in World War I, and that the Americans, British, and French may have been correct in wanting to continue into Germany."
It was the French who insisted on draconian punishment for the Germans at Versailles. Lloyd George was more inclined to be magnanimous. Clemenceau won the debate and set up the bitterness in Germany that led to the rise of Hitler and the Nazis. What the Allies didn't do on the various fields in France and Belgium, they did in the halls of Versailles. A humiliating defeat for Germany.
To quote the moral of Churchill's history of the Second World War: In War: Resolution; In Defeat: Defiance; In Victory: Magnanimity; In Peace: Goodwill.
Magnanimity doesn't appear to be a popular quality in American pathology compared with the upward pointing index finger and the rallying cry of, "We're Number One."
Estimates have the number of people killed during WWI as high as 20 million. How many more lives would have been squandered if the "warriors" had their way and insisted on conquering the German land?
E. D. Morel's book, "Ten Years of Secret Diplomacy" makes a case that French and British diplomats had a lot to do with contributing to the outbreak of hostilities. I believe Adam Hochschild's latest book, "To End All Wars" might have been influenced by Morel's story, but I haven't gotten around to reading it.
Meanwhile, a grateful nation has:
"76,000 soldiers ‘chaptered out’ of veterans’ benefits since 2006" - http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/america-tonight/america-tonight-blog/2013/11/11/exclusive-76-000soldierschapteredoutofmilitarybenefitssince06.html
On November 11, 1918 at dawn high-ranking officials agreed to an armistice to end the fighting at the 11th hour on the 11th day of the 11th month. Despite that the French, British and American generals insisted on continuing the fighting until the last minute. That wasn't barbarous enough for Generals Jack Pershing, Douglas MacArthur and (Colonel?)George Patton who wanted to continue the war and invade Germany and who later returned to a heroes welcome.
"Then French foreign minister Laurent Fabius showed up and threw cold water on the whole process."
A guest on Fareed Zakaria's GPS program on CNN suggested a possibility of some commercial deal between France and Saudi Arabia might have been a factor.
If Lindsey Graham approved of France's action, that's a good bet it was terribly wrong.
"... hawks in Washington actively want a war with Iran,..."
We need to get more Nuremberg trials going to get these war criminals (Iraq) out of circulation.
And talking about accountability check this about one of the senate's leading warmongers:
John McCain says NSA chief Keith Alexander’ should resign or be fired’: Senator gives interview to Der Spiegel, saying general should 'be held accountable' for Edward Snowden leaks by Karen McVeigh - http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/10/john-mccain-nsa-keith-alexander-snowden ... "And now we have a contractor employee, not a government employee, who has access to information which is, when revealed, most damaging to the standing prestige of the United States and our relations with some of our best friends," (Since when did friends spy on friends?) … “It's outrageous, and someone ought to be held accountable." (And the warmongers who got us into the Iraq war should be held accountable.) The full Spiegel interview is here - http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/interview-with-john-mccain-on-nsa-spying-on-angela-merkel-a-932721.html
"The hawks your (sic) talking about are a minority."
But that minority is not a small one, and despite being a minority it managed to manipulate a majority of Congress and the American people into supporting the war on Iraq, one of the greatest crimes against humanity in this young century. Kind of like a cancer. It can only be a miniscule part of your body but enough to kill you.
"The American voters picked the candidate who promised Iraq withdrawal over the one who promised to continue the fight."
The promised withdrawal was only one of several reasons Obama was re-elected. Another was that he was seen as the lesser evil. As for that withdrawal, Obama didn't really want it when the time came, but the Iraqi government rejected Obama's terms and the unglorious departure followed.
For what it's worth:
"White House adviser Susan Rice says Congress must regain US Unesco vote: National security adviser uses Twitter to call loss of vote over UN stance on Palestinian membership 'shameful'" - http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/09/susan-rice-twitter-us-palestine-unesco
"Americans’ sympathies lean heavily toward the Israelis over the Palestinians, 64% vs 12%. Support for Israel has increased over the last decade among Americans, according to Gallup."
Perhaps there is a connection to this:
"Paradise lost: Paranoia has undermined US democracy: While far from a dictatorship, the United States has employed a number of paranoid tactics that delegitimize its democracy. This phenomenon is on display in the fictional TV series "Homeland," which depicts hysterical CIA agents in a hysterical country." - http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/paranoia-has-undermined-united-states-claim-to-liberal-democracy-a-932326.html
And in another poll:
"German trust in the United States plummets: The NSA spying scandals have taken a toll on Germans' opinion of their longtime ally, according to a new survey. Mistrust in the United States has skyrocketed, and more Germans are viewing whistleblower Edward Snowden as a hero."- http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/nsa-spying-fallout-majority-of-germans-mistrust-united-states-a-932492.html
Another knee-jerk reaction:
"Sabotaging an Iran nuke deal: Israel’s leadership and America’s neocons are shifting into overdrive to block a plan that would put the brakes on Iran’s nuclear program, seeking confrontation, not conciliation, notes ex-CIA analyst Paul R. Pillar." - http://consortiumnews.com/2013/11/09/sabotaging-an-iran-nuke-deal/
"Knee jerk reactions? Look who’s talking John. Just mention the word “Israel” and you have script all written out."
And nowhere is that "knee-jerk reaction" more obvious than in Congress where Operation Cast Lead was approved by all but very few senators and representatives even though most people who could think for themselves, including the Goldstone Commission, saw that assault on Gaza as a major crime. There have been reports that some people in Congress are offended by some of Israel's actions, but their "knee jerks" in obeisance to the Israel lobby mean whatever moral courage they might have is reserved for some other event.
A few weeks after Operation Cast Lead, Israel's "commander-in-chief" addressed Congress whose denizens rose 29 times like trained seals in a circus to give him a standing ovation. Yeah. Knee jerk is right.
"In the meantime, American hawks who complain that the US is losing influence by having withdrawn militarily from Iraq and from declining to get involved militarily in Syria have it all wrong."
And American voters keep returning these hawks and warmongers to Congress. So what does that say about the "American people"?
"Israel murdered Arafat: Will the world take action?" By Stephen Lendman - http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/08/israel-murdered-arafat/
"The problem with this one-percent/99-percent scenario is that it implies the 99 are the opposite of and on the other side of the fence from the 99 percent. "
Oops! That should have been, The problem with this one-percent/99-percent scenario is that it implies the 99 are the opposite of and on the other side of the fence from the One Percenters.
“It’s a very good bet that ptochosophobia is inherent in many more people than the One Percenters. Our resident neocons and other enablers of the One Percent are apparently afflicted with this malady.”
The problem with this one-percent/99-percent scenario is that it implies the 99 are the opposite of and on the other side of the fence from the 99 percent. At the opposite end of the spectrum from the featured One Percent there is another one percent (or maybe two percent) actively opposed to the ruling One Percent. Sort of allied with the opposition are maybe another 5% to 10% who are sympathetic but not enough to be active supporters. Back to the One Percenters' end there are probably another 10% to 20% (in and out of Congress) enabling the plutocracy and supporting its members anyway they can in exchange for some reward - a job, campaign donation, or whatever. In between, for the lack of a better term, are a silent majority. Add them to the enablers and courtiers and we have a vast majority that facilitates in one way or another actions counterproductive to improving the lot of the poor. Add to that factors such as the different ethnicity (latent and overt racism) and religions of the Palestinians and they have a majority of Americans who are hostile or indifferent to them. With American support or acquiescence the Palestinians have the deck really stacked against them.
" Arafat had many enemies within the Palestinian movement itself, and it is not beyond the pale to suggest that a rival, or rivals, poisoned him, if indeed he was poisoned."
But who among Arafat's non-Israeli enemies would have been capable of getting access to polonium?
"The American 1% has ptochosophobia, the irrational fear and hatred of the poor, especially of the poor made poor by being looted by the 1%."
It's a very good bet that ptochosophobia is inherent in many more people than the One Percenters. Our resident neocons and other enablers of the One Percent are apparently afflicted with this malady.
It is part of the human condition for people to migrate to other places when conditions become intolerable in their current domiciles. Eventually, they proceed to degrade their new lands and make them uninhabitable. Now we are looking at migrating to another planet after Earth is degraded beyond hope. How long will it take them to destroy their new planet?
Bjorn:
You make a good point referring to the early developments of the European Union, but there is a difference between France and Germany then and the Israelis and the Palestinians now. There was a great impetus in France and Germany to move on from their old prejudices. Given recent polls in Israel, anti-Palestinian racism is as prevalent there as it was in America's Deep South prior to the civil rights revolution in the 1960s. As recent reports indicate, Israelis can overcome their anti-Arab prejudices when alliances with Saudi Arabia and Egypt are to their benefit.
Re an earlier thread that is no longer open. Your comment about Sweden's lurch to the right helps to explain why Julian Assange doesn't want to go anywhere near that country.
"The key to a lasting Israeli-Palestinian peace does not lie in the US."
It would be more accurate to say, "The key to a lasting Israeli-Palestinian peace does not lie ONLY in the US."
Given the Israel lobby and its agents in Congress and the media, the US is a factor, if not the only one.
"True, the theft of land and water is illegal under international law, but I get the sense they steal only what they need. Sometimes a bit zealous!"
Among the Jews who moved into Palestine early in the 20th century there were many who were content to live in peace with their Palestinian neighbors. Not so a significant number who had the intention of transferring all Palestinians out of the Palestine Territories. Their descendants are now in charge and continuing the same mission.
Stealing only what you need is still a crime.
"... creating a Arab-Israeli-Palestinian Union, AIP, ..."
Given the racism that is now so much embedded in Israel such a union could never work.
" The Meged 5 oil field extends over a very large area, possibly 250 sq km, with much of the reserves believed to lie under Palestinian territory in the West Bank."
If so, then Israel will just expropriate this land also, and John Kerry will read from one of Hillary Clinton's cue cards that this action "is not helpful to the peace process."
"What impressed me the most about her talk was how paradoxically expensive hunger, and especially childhood hunger is for all of us."
If you think that is expensive, how about these million-dollar weddings and birthday parties some dads have to pay for?
The Republicans don't have a monopoly on being Scrooges and stuffers of the bloated department of war budget. There are many willing accomplices in the lesser-evil party, aka the Democratic (?) Party.
Democrat President Slick Willie, smiling and surrounded by some of Wall Street's most predatory vultures, signed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley act that set the United States on its path to the economic crash of 2008. Our current vice president was a leading player in rigging the bankruptcy bill that set credit card companies up to charge usurious rates while it tightened the screws every more on people in dire economic straits.
It would be one thing if our war department made some halfway plausible argument for the weapons Congress buys, but when the generals and admirals declare they don't want some of these multi-billion dollar wasteful purchases then we are looking at Congressional activity that should be considered criminal and the perpetrators should be charged with fraud and corruption.
By chance I read Walter Karp's "Liberty Under Siege" yesterday in which he described Ronald Reagan's campaign to stack the deck in favor of the rich and blow hundreds of billions of dollars on military and naval forces and pay for these costs by vindictive penalties against people in the lower income brackets. Karp also noted how Reagan increased the imperial power of the presidency with laws that constrained citizens and the press. All of this was achieved with the assistance of a craven Democratic Party oligarchy led by Tip O'Neill.
Then we had a variation on the same theme from the Bush/Cheney administration and another generation of Democratic Party oligarchs.
But wait, as they say in TV commercials. We have more of the same with the only differences being a Democratic Party president in the White House and an increased pace of waste and Big Brother tactics against whistleblowers for now with outspoken activists probably next. Obamacare has been set up to transfer enormous sums of money from the people to insurance companies and there is a duopoly vendetta in the works to turn Social Security over to private interests. To help pay for this there are to be cuts in welfare programs for the poor and needy. Just as in Reagan's Morning in America.
"The defense budget for this year, at least what they admit to, is somewhere around 680 billion dollars, four times that spent by China, the country with the next largest military budget. Couldn’t we reduce that to twice as much as China is spending and still be able to defend ourselves?"
Given the fact that the Pentagon's budgets were many times more than Hanoi's, Iraq's and the Taliban's but our department of war was still unable to prevail over them, we can only hope Obama doesn't become or is followed by a megalomaniacal lunatic who even contemplates a military conflict with China. The same goes for those perennial warmongers in Congress.
But we din "win" in Grenada.
Also bear in mind if we get into a shooting match with China we won't be able to count on them to sell us spare parts when our exorbitantly priced weaponry starts to break down.
You can give a thousand reasons why the US should stay out of Iraq and put conditions on arms sales, but if there is something in it for the military-industrial-security complex the US "government" will do what it is told to do and facilitate more business for the agents of death and destruction.
"In a major new report published this week, the most comprehensive study of the US drones programme conducted from a human rights perspective, Amnesty has reviewed the use of drones in Pakistan’s north-western tribal areas where most drone strikes have taken place. The report* condemns the almost complete absence of transparency around the US drone programme and concludes that the USA has carried out unlawful killings, some of which could amount to war crimes." by Kate Allen - http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/10/31/drones-the-moral-challenge-of-our-time/
Amnesty report: USA must be held to account for drone killings in Pakistan - http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/usa-must-be-held-account-drone-killings-pakistan-2013-10-22
" Congress has never been noted for moral courage."
In fairness it should be said that there have been and are exemplary senators and representatives in Congress. Unfortunately, they are in a distinct minority.
"But only 4 congressmen showed up."
It would be tough to come face to face with the victims of your policies, and Congress has never been noted for moral courage.
With the likes of Dianne Feinstein and Nancy Pelosi in Congress how can anyone claim the San Francisco Bay Area is a liberal bastion?
But, as Glenn Greenwald noted, Chancellor Merkel is just as hypocritical as Feinstein:
"First, note how leaders such as Chancellor Angela Merkel reacted with basic indifference when it was revealed months ago that the NSA was bulk-spying on all German citizens, but suddenly found her indignation only when it turned out that she personally was also targeted. That reaction gives potent insight into the true mindset of many western leaders" http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/25/europe-erupts-nsa-spying-chief-government
I'll wholeheartedly second that.
Apparently, Tom, you still believe in the quaint notion that no one is above the law and that we are all equal before it. After all, it's not like they were taking drugs to boost their pitching arms in a baseball game.
Oversight or overlook?
"The other questions Senator Ron Wyden wants answered on NSA surveillance by Kevin Gosztola - http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2013/09/27/the-other-questions-senator-ron-wyden-wants-answered-on-nsa-surveillance/ … Democratic Senator Ron Wyden, Democratic Senator Mark Udall and even Republican Senator Susan Collins had more questions to ask, but, instead of allowing more oversight to take place at an alleged oversight hearing, Feinstein suggested the committee get to the expert witnesses from the second panel. This effectively ensured Alexander, Clapper and Cole did not have to face Wyden or Udall again in the hearing."
This was probably the intelligence (?)committee hearing that didn't require Alexander and Clapper to take an oath to tell the truth but required the next panel, more likely to tell the truth, to hold up their right hands and take the oath.
and
"Feinstein’s phony excuse for NSA spying: After 9/11, the excuse for missing clues was too much data – trying to sip from a fire hose – but with the priority now excusing NSA spying, the metaphor is for more data – you can’t find a needle in a haystack without a haystack – a shift ex-FBI agent Coleen Rowley dissects." - http://consortiumnews.com/2013/10/07/feinsteins-phony-excuse-for-nsa-spying/
"Couldn’t it also be that Obama has known all along about this wiretapping of Merkel’s phone but was forced by the report to deny this knowledge to avoid harming his relations with Merkel?"
It is unlikely we will ever know the truth other than political Washington is like life in a shark tank - and that may be an insult to sharks. The safest approach is to consider all involved guilty until proved innocent.
"But the NSA appears to be a secret kingdom that appropriates our money with no oversight or accountability. We didn’t elect it, and if it doesn’t let our chosen representatives know what it is up to, then it is taxing us without giving us any representation. It is a tyrant. It is an ominous homunculus within the body politic."
Not only the NSA. There are also the Wall Street bankers, the military-industrial-security-media complex, and the Israel lobby. But we still get to vote for the components of the fig leaf giving the illusion of a democracy.
There were reports in non-main stream media after 9/11 that the Taliban would have been willing to turn Usama bin Laden over to US authorities if the US could provide convincing evidence of bin Laden's involvement. The Bush administration didn't, preferring the macho approach of going in with blazing guns.
"He got promoted, lest anyone ask if maybe incompetence at the Brigade TOC was the reason men died needlessly."
The Peter Principle still applies: People rise to their level of incompetence. And sometimes beyond.
Correction: The true cost of the Iraq war: $3 trillion and beyond - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/03/AR2010090302200.html
Thank you, Professor Cole, for this cost analysis. It would also be very illuminating to read an analysis of the projected costs of the future consequences and blowback from Afghanistan much as Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes did on the Iraq war that they estimated will eventually have a total cost of $2 to $3 TRILLION.
And when it comes to the 2014 elections for senators and representatives to Congress most of the politicians responsible for this and other disasters will be re-elected.
"Chinese GNP most definitely has not surpassed that of the Unites States. The figures for 2012 show the US GNP at $15 trillion, while China’s GNP was $6 trillion, less than half that of the US."
In the 1960s Vietnam's GNP was just a fraction the United States' GNP, but nobody with any sense would say the US won that war.
Iraq 2003 to the US exit - something similar.
And it looks like deja vu all over again in Afghanistan.
Given the potential for Pentagon budgets to bring the United States to bankruptcy, China's ascent to Numero Uno is plausible.
From Castellio above: "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."
Perhaps, that assessment makes a US decline and fall something to contemplate.
To reverse an old shibboleth, you can fight city hall.
The images show soldiers, low level in rank, humanity and intelligence and who were punished. The generals and field officers who were also complicit went unpunished. General Geoffrey Miller who had the job of Gitmo-izing Abu Ghraib retired with a hefty pension. "At his retirement service, Miller was awarded the Distinguished Service Medal, and praised as an "innovator"." (Wikipedia)
The problem is not only one of a minority of the people shredding the Constitution, but the greater problem is of the majority of the people who don't know of this or don't care and, worse, approve of it.
Add to Professor Cole's commentary above and this article - No way out: As ye sow, so shall ye reap - http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/10/23/no-way-out-2/- by Paul Craig Roberts on America's economic decline and there is no conclusion other than dystopian prospects for our future.
More important than the "law" is the moral imperative that is just as absent in the Obama administration as it was in the Bush cabal.
"US Diplomat: Each US Drone Attack Creates '40 to 60' New Enemies: Former US deputy chief to US embassy in Yemen calculates 'blowback machine' theory of US counterterrorism is spot on" http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/10/24
Our president and others have stressed that if American and Israeli security is threatened we and the Israelis have a right to aggressive attacks against those perceived threats. We also need to stress that the right to retaliate does not apply to other nations whose security we and the Israelis have placed in jeopardy.
"... an unfortunate civilian casualty ..."
The singular article and noun are definitely in error.
And the way the US has conducted that war has contributed to the expansion of Al-Qaida from a little corner in Afghanistan across south Asia to the Middle East and northern Africa. You're doing a heck of a job, guys.
"Questions over US drone attacks that President Obama needs to resolve: The US cannot brush off charges of unlawful killings, claiming it is merely protecting US interests, without risking revenge attacks" by Simon Tisdall - http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/22/questions-drones-obama-resolve
"What disturbs me most is the general ignorance of history among U.S. citizens."
Not only that, but the indifference to immorality by people who are otherwise decent citizens is bizarre. If we applied the principles defined during the Nuremberg trials to the leaders who got the war on Iraq into the history books they would be candidates for banishment, exile, prison or worse. Instead, they are distinguished celebrities, some of whom are promoting more illegal and immoral wars.
My former understanding of the law was that if someone killed an innocent person that was a crime. Circumstances dictated how serious the charge would be: First degree murder, second degree murder, manslaughter or other. Now that the United States conforms to the concept of exceptionalism and its authoritarian followers agree, the law is some quaint anachronism to be ignored except when dissidents dissent. Then the Empire invokes its credo of "nobody is above the law." People who still adhere to the concept of what is right is right and what is wrong is wrong consider that shibboleth to be unadulterated BS.