This is fascinating as historically it breaks totally new ground. As such I'd say that the Chinese are very big on symbolism and it is telling the West that it will defend its economic interests abroad. Specifically, I believe it is telling the West that when push comes to shove it will defend its now largest economic interest: Russia.
From my perspective this all about playing in an unsustainable sandbox, or using another cliche, "rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic". The die was cast for the partition of Iraq when the Americans implemented a "representation at large" parliament and autonomy for the Kurds in the constitution.
In my mind Israel, like other religious states are just relics of the past enforcing Tribalism, the basis of racism. Rather than supporting some "higher order" it just reminds me we are just well dressed apes with the same war like proclivities of chimpanzees.
Perhaps an irrelevant thought: What would be the effect of suing Israel for the damages they wrought? The Amercans seem so capable of taking other's assets. At least it might be a good protest action.
Aside from destroying the little remaining standing the US has in the ME, this fiasco detracts from the self righteous positioning the US is striving for in Europe. How can the US criticize Russia for arming the rebels when our rockets and bombs fall on Palestinians.? Additionally, this crisis is taking up valuable media real estate in the propaganda war against our eternal Slavic enemies.
The rising seas will be the least of our worries. Humans can move and they have 100 years to do so. What they will have trouble doing will be feeding themselves. If my children live to their old age would please and surprise me.
While totally agree with your thesis in the article, I also the world is discovering the banking blackmail implemented by the Western powers. This is a tremendous leverage that allows the banking industry of the west undo power. In western Europe, despite defeat after defeat, the bankster policies continue to rule. The east, I believe, is waking up to this imbalance and will implement their own banks. Will we?
You make a very important point in pointing out Likud's inherent contradiction of a so called democracy. The tribalism enforced by the current regime is an example of an outmoded mindset that historically has been the basis of racism and war for millennia.
This is the result of the American Security State discovering the advantages of digital snooping running into the humanity that has experienced the result of absolute power. The problem is that the American populace hasn't yet experienced the consequences of such power, and thereby are pretty clueless. I expect the currency of the US to drop significantly unless it can directly address this dissonance instead of trying to sweep it under the rug.
I was watching MSNBC All In With Chris Hayes, and one of his "guests" made multiple attempts to discredit Greenwald's reporting as "sloppy". Watching Rachel Maddow a bit later, it was clear that she got the memo, as she pulled the party line in an effort to destroy Snowden's motives. It was pretty pathetic and a transparent sham. So much for the "Liberal" media.
One of the unstated goals of the Iraq War was to make a regional power into a semi-failed state. The reason for this was to assure that it did not rise back to regional power in the foreseeable future, and assure the ascendancy of America's clients, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Israel. "Mission Accomplished" was indeed done. The Syrian War is just another step in that process, allowing sectarian violence to overwhelm that state and send it back to the "Stone Age". Empires have done this throughout history, dividing all against each other, to make populations ineffective, even in the good 'ol USA.
I am shocked that there is gambling in this casino!
The rest of the world is quite aware of the charade the elites play. It is only the American public they seek to misinform, to keep us afraid, distracted, and dishing out trillions to our Govenment "stimulus" program.
There is much money to be made in fear mongering, from weapons sales to punditry. If they didn't have this tripe to report what would they talk about, Wall Street, the only XL hearing that will be held next week in a small town in Nebraska, away from prying eyes, or the Monsanto Law?
This is a very interesting report as it has seemed to me that Secretary of State Clinton's behavior on the world stage was consistent with her neoconservative history, such as her support of the Iraq War. As Secretary of State she helped foment civil war in Syria with the multiple millions of dollars funneled into propaganda for American media which helped militarize the protests. Doing this while decrying "terrorism" in other parts of the world, and supporting the generals in Myramar as democratic. She talks a good line for the media, is the perfect hypocrite, and doesn't get called out for it, which will make her a excellent Presidential candidate for 2016. "War is Peace! Freedom is Slavery! Long live Oceania"
As an outdoorsman and a lover of winters I've watched them disappear in Minnesota in the last 30 years. We in the bread basket of the world are in the depths of the most severe drought since the Dustbowl, but the difference this time it's much warmer and predicted by the climate models. Maple trees are dying and there is not enough ground moisture right now to plant next year's crop. The famous Minnesota lakes are also dropping as the aquifers are drained, and we are in one of "healthiest" places on the planet. I sincerely believe we are about to see much more of the "other" consequences of climate change, IE famine and war in very short order.
I agree with your analysis, James. The American media, including NPR, reminds me of a parody of Pravda, prior to fall of the Soviet Union. We made fun of them, but I imagine the rest of the world is now doing the same regarding our resulting ignorance. You can also make a parallel to our self delusions, to that of American right wing in the presidential election due to Fox Noise.
I've heard a radio report that Hamas and Israel were in peace negotiations to stop the rocket attacks prior to the assassination, and that event occurred while Hamas was waiting for a reply from Israel. If this is true, Hamas may never agree to peace negotiations considering the consequences of the same.
In my mind the most damaging will be continuing to deny the existence of Climate Change attributable to humans, which if not acknowledged very soon will end human civilization on this planet. Sorry to sound grim, but at this point the rest is just rearranging furniture on our planet Titanic.
My sense is that they're feeling left out as tha Israelis and Saudis already have so much say in our press, or they maybe they're really scared about their upcoming cuts and feel a need to lubricate those pocketbooks with a little fear mongering. In any case according to a poll only 20% of the public believes the press, they'll need a lot more than money to make their case.
Who should we invade, er who will threaten us next?
Good piece! What all this does say is that Romney's support comes from the Military/Industrial Complex which desperately needs enemies to justify its existence and lavish ways. Additionally, me thinks his popular support is from the > 70 set, and still retains the Cold War mindset. Not to worry, however, as this election will come down to simplistic evaluations of the economy and to racism which appeals to the majority's reptilian mind.
To me the mere discussion of the "taqiyaya" without context is racist and conveys a double standard. In the US our beloved leaders refer to proclamations as "campaign promises", but are rarely suffer such denigration as the analysts provide. Our leaders merely have a "policy recaliibration".
A very good and hopeful article, but I would like to suggest that Iran's and the US's very similarities make them difficult bedfellows.
Writers often depict the Iranian government as an "opaque and complex labyrinth of conflicting interests". I would say given the various competing interests in the US such as the military/industrial complex, Israeli, xenophobes, social democrats, and oil/gas interests, the same can be said about the US.
Correspondingly, the attitude expressed by the author, "offering ... incentives to Iran would constitute appeasement of an implacably hostile regime" can also be applied in referring to the United States' historical relationship with Iran.
The US's longstanding hostility toward former "enemy" states such as Cuba, Viet Nam, and Russia, that have refused to become clients indicate the US's inability to make any significant changes in it's foreign policy and in the end will hurt it as the "empire" becomes financially untenable.
The contrast is worthwhile as it points put Clinton's hypocrisy in her self righteous comments about the importance of less imperial nations following America's example in the the rule of law. When I hear her speak of this amid the shredding of our Constitution I am brought to disgust.
I appreciate the timely article, but need to point out that while sea level rise is catastrophic for local populations, much more severe changes in the atmosphere will precede these alterations and are already occurring. We are already seeing much longer droughts and desertification throughout the world. Famine in Eastern Africa is a prime example of this as is the desertification of Texas. Top soil moisture in America's breadbasket is down severely and if continues will have serious repercussions in food prices worldwide. The planet's food production is just keeping abreast of population growth. Continued drought alternated with flood, both outcomes of increased CO2, are having disastrous results.
I totally agree with Oliver. His comments similar to the ones below by Ray regarding 'mark to market' suspension show how the bailout was in fact a rescue for the investor class at the cost to the rest of the economy. The alternative would have been to take the banks into receivership (aka nationalize) via the FDIC to keep their critical functions in tact. The pundits always offer critics a false choice of doing nothing vs giving the banks a pass to proceed as they have done. Bank failures have been managed properly and safely in the pass such as Sweden and others. It's merely the vested interests cloaked in ideology that has brought us here.
The Occupation has definitely effected the media narrative for the past month. It makes one wonder who would benefit from removing the movement from view. The coordination making it happen within days using similar tactics around the country is quite impressive and says something about the centicity of the power arrayed against the people.
I might recommend reading Gwynne Dyer's book "Climate Wars". Not only does he sketch out various future scenarios of calamity, based upon different amounts od CO2 content, but also how we will probably have to work our way out of this predicament.
What I find interesting is the media coverage, even by NPR, iin that there are daily breathless reports on this conflict with Assad's arguements dismissed, while the conflict in Bahrain is ignored and the same arguments used by Assad are to infer interference by Iran and subsequent destabilization of Saudi Arabia in that country.
I've learned after watching the media for years, whenever NPR is producing highly polished reports on foreign affairs on a daily basis, special interest propagandists are at work.
I believe to understand this one has to consider motive and fallout. What would Iran gain by a public assassination? Who would benefit from a botched plan? A negative benefit in the first and not Iran in the second. This has a ripe smell of
rotting fish.
Well said! As the remainder of their country vanishes, this does seem like the only card for the Palestinians to play.
The Israeli strategy of endless peace talks that never go anywhere has run it's course, and it is now obvious that it was always a ploy to stall as they colonized the West Bank.
Based upon Israeli control of the American Congress and American Foreign Policy, Obama has no other option but to veto the application or see his chances of re-election drop to zero.
I see the primary gain for the Palestinians is to create a new rallying point make obvious the contradictions and deceitfulness of the Israeli public talking points.
Americans, hopefully, may finally start to realize that their Israeli centric Foreign Policy is a contradiction from the "American Democracy Ideology" taught in our civic classes.
Overall this move will further isolate Israel from the civilized world and make them realize that the cost of their 60 year war of aggression against the Palestinians is an economic catastrophe, as countries can no longer afford to go it alone.
Gareth Porter has an interesting and related article on a times.com today. What I found fascinating was the News Hour's explanation last night. In their account the CIA brought him over to save him from being exposed in Iran, but didn't bring his family. Additionally, they made a big point that he would soon be disappeared by Iran's security services. If he were turned by the CIA and concerned about his safety, why make such a prediction? Porter's explanation sounds more plausible.
Thanks for putting this up as this needs to be discussed. A small nit: one of the speakers stated that global climate change will alter the course of the jet stream. I think he meant to say the Gulf Stream. The jet stream will be altered, but that will occur as a secondary affect of the change of the ocean current.
I watch the media fairly closely and the interesting thing that I've been observing the last 5 days is a concerted media campaign on the part of Israel and General Patraeus in an attempt to legitimize their positions. This video would fit into that realm.
It's cool, hip smart, emotionally positive and a distraction of what's really happening on the ground.
McCain's position is curious, considering the cost of the war, $300 billion so far, and $100 billion projected for 2010. At this point the entire endeavor of COIN seems to me to be military/industrial complex boondoggle, which McCain, given his history attacks on Pentagon expenditures, would rationally oppose.
The reason I consider COIN to be a boondoggle is the underlying assumption that the military do the internal development. Given the "valleyism" described by Matthew Hoh last year it would seem more logical to utilize this cultural uniqueness of Afghanistan to perform in country development with a very low profile such as done by Greg Mortenson.
The notion that one can defeat the Taliban with an external force is like saying a Muslim Army invading the US could defeat the Republican Party. The American military presence merely enhances its existence. Only the Afghans can rebel against Taliban totalitarianism, if they so choose.
At this point I don't believe we can extract ourselves from Afghanistan until the military/industrial complex recognizes that it is sucking the country dry, which may in fact be happening as per Michael Mullen's address yesterday where he stated the largest national security threat is the national debt. But then maybe I'm an eternal optimist.
I have to admit I'm a bit confused by the Afghanistan strategy. Yesterday the President stated the reason for being in Afghanistan was to assure that al-Qaeda could not launch an attack on the US from there and as you point out in your article, the are very few of this group in Afghanistan.
Assuming that the President isn't lying or stupid, it seems to me that given these facts, the Biden strategy would be correct. The only explanation that I can determine is that the POTUS has been being "boxed in" by the military regarding the Afghanistan strategy and therefore his appointment of Patreaus makes good sense.
First, he is trusted by all actors.
Second, it takes Patreaus off the right wing lecture circuit, which has given him unusual leverage in foreign policy. Looking at Obama's attitude with outside influence and unauthorized leaks this would be a pressing issue for him. Additionally, this is especially helpful for the fall elections.
Finally, the appointment puts Patreaus in the hot seat with the execution of the war, where he is personally responsible for a failed strategy that he has so avidly advocated.
Not to cast aspersions, but Mr. Friedman seems to be taking a lead role in pressuring Turkey. His closing comment in his column warning the US/Turkey relationship is "heading off a cliff", reminded me a more public statement John Perkins might make in "Confessions of an Economic Hitman".
Considering Mr. Friedman's role in championing the invasion of Iraq, I'm not quite certain what his role might be in "loosening the jackals", as Mr. Perkins would put it.
My concern is that there is another possibility of a coup d'etat by the Turkish military. This would not be new, looking at American meddling in the past and the Iranian situation would rate right up there with Soviet containment.
Tribalism at it's peak. "if you aren't for my tribe, then I want you dead." This is what will destroy Israel, as the crazies in Israel and the US still haven't learned that there is "co" in "co-existence". There is no more room in the world for tribalism anymore, as there is no other place for the displaced to migrate.
The parallels to North Korea's sinking of the S. Korea patrol boat are striking. I'm waiting for a Security Council resolution and condemnation from Secretary Clinton, but won't hold my breath.
This is fascinating as historically it breaks totally new ground. As such I'd say that the Chinese are very big on symbolism and it is telling the West that it will defend its economic interests abroad. Specifically, I believe it is telling the West that when push comes to shove it will defend its now largest economic interest: Russia.
From my perspective this all about playing in an unsustainable sandbox, or using another cliche, "rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic". The die was cast for the partition of Iraq when the Americans implemented a "representation at large" parliament and autonomy for the Kurds in the constitution.
In my mind Israel, like other religious states are just relics of the past enforcing Tribalism, the basis of racism. Rather than supporting some "higher order" it just reminds me we are just well dressed apes with the same war like proclivities of chimpanzees.
Perhaps an irrelevant thought: What would be the effect of suing Israel for the damages they wrought? The Amercans seem so capable of taking other's assets. At least it might be a good protest action.
Aside from destroying the little remaining standing the US has in the ME, this fiasco detracts from the self righteous positioning the US is striving for in Europe. How can the US criticize Russia for arming the rebels when our rockets and bombs fall on Palestinians.? Additionally, this crisis is taking up valuable media real estate in the propaganda war against our eternal Slavic enemies.
The rising seas will be the least of our worries. Humans can move and they have 100 years to do so. What they will have trouble doing will be feeding themselves. If my children live to their old age would please and surprise me.
While totally agree with your thesis in the article, I also the world is discovering the banking blackmail implemented by the Western powers. This is a tremendous leverage that allows the banking industry of the west undo power. In western Europe, despite defeat after defeat, the bankster policies continue to rule. The east, I believe, is waking up to this imbalance and will implement their own banks. Will we?
You make a very important point in pointing out Likud's inherent contradiction of a so called democracy. The tribalism enforced by the current regime is an example of an outmoded mindset that historically has been the basis of racism and war for millennia.
This is the result of the American Security State discovering the advantages of digital snooping running into the humanity that has experienced the result of absolute power. The problem is that the American populace hasn't yet experienced the consequences of such power, and thereby are pretty clueless. I expect the currency of the US to drop significantly unless it can directly address this dissonance instead of trying to sweep it under the rug.
I was watching MSNBC All In With Chris Hayes, and one of his "guests" made multiple attempts to discredit Greenwald's reporting as "sloppy". Watching Rachel Maddow a bit later, it was clear that she got the memo, as she pulled the party line in an effort to destroy Snowden's motives. It was pretty pathetic and a transparent sham. So much for the "Liberal" media.
One of the unstated goals of the Iraq War was to make a regional power into a semi-failed state. The reason for this was to assure that it did not rise back to regional power in the foreseeable future, and assure the ascendancy of America's clients, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Israel. "Mission Accomplished" was indeed done. The Syrian War is just another step in that process, allowing sectarian violence to overwhelm that state and send it back to the "Stone Age". Empires have done this throughout history, dividing all against each other, to make populations ineffective, even in the good 'ol USA.
I am shocked that there is gambling in this casino!
The rest of the world is quite aware of the charade the elites play. It is only the American public they seek to misinform, to keep us afraid, distracted, and dishing out trillions to our Govenment "stimulus" program.
There is much money to be made in fear mongering, from weapons sales to punditry. If they didn't have this tripe to report what would they talk about, Wall Street, the only XL hearing that will be held next week in a small town in Nebraska, away from prying eyes, or the Monsanto Law?
This is a very interesting report as it has seemed to me that Secretary of State Clinton's behavior on the world stage was consistent with her neoconservative history, such as her support of the Iraq War. As Secretary of State she helped foment civil war in Syria with the multiple millions of dollars funneled into propaganda for American media which helped militarize the protests. Doing this while decrying "terrorism" in other parts of the world, and supporting the generals in Myramar as democratic. She talks a good line for the media, is the perfect hypocrite, and doesn't get called out for it, which will make her a excellent Presidential candidate for 2016. "War is Peace! Freedom is Slavery! Long live Oceania"
As an outdoorsman and a lover of winters I've watched them disappear in Minnesota in the last 30 years. We in the bread basket of the world are in the depths of the most severe drought since the Dustbowl, but the difference this time it's much warmer and predicted by the climate models. Maple trees are dying and there is not enough ground moisture right now to plant next year's crop. The famous Minnesota lakes are also dropping as the aquifers are drained, and we are in one of "healthiest" places on the planet. I sincerely believe we are about to see much more of the "other" consequences of climate change, IE famine and war in very short order.
I agree with your analysis, James. The American media, including NPR, reminds me of a parody of Pravda, prior to fall of the Soviet Union. We made fun of them, but I imagine the rest of the world is now doing the same regarding our resulting ignorance. You can also make a parallel to our self delusions, to that of American right wing in the presidential election due to Fox Noise.
I've heard a radio report that Hamas and Israel were in peace negotiations to stop the rocket attacks prior to the assassination, and that event occurred while Hamas was waiting for a reply from Israel. If this is true, Hamas may never agree to peace negotiations considering the consequences of the same.
Has anyone any more information on this report?
In my mind the most damaging will be continuing to deny the existence of Climate Change attributable to humans, which if not acknowledged very soon will end human civilization on this planet. Sorry to sound grim, but at this point the rest is just rearranging furniture on our planet Titanic.
How can this be true? If it were, Secretary of State Hilary Clinton would be on the radio and television denouncing such crimes. ;-)
Nailed it!
I am curious as to the probability of a rigged election. Is there any information about such an event?
My sense is that they're feeling left out as tha Israelis and Saudis already have so much say in our press, or they maybe they're really scared about their upcoming cuts and feel a need to lubricate those pocketbooks with a little fear mongering. In any case according to a poll only 20% of the public believes the press, they'll need a lot more than money to make their case.
Who should we invade, er who will threaten us next?
Good piece! What all this does say is that Romney's support comes from the Military/Industrial Complex which desperately needs enemies to justify its existence and lavish ways. Additionally, me thinks his popular support is from the > 70 set, and still retains the Cold War mindset. Not to worry, however, as this election will come down to simplistic evaluations of the economy and to racism which appeals to the majority's reptilian mind.
To me the mere discussion of the "taqiyaya" without context is racist and conveys a double standard. In the US our beloved leaders refer to proclamations as "campaign promises", but are rarely suffer such denigration as the analysts provide. Our leaders merely have a "policy recaliibration".
Walmart in Viet Nam? Egads! Opening their economy to the globalists does count as a client state.
A very good and hopeful article, but I would like to suggest that Iran's and the US's very similarities make them difficult bedfellows.
Writers often depict the Iranian government as an "opaque and complex labyrinth of conflicting interests". I would say given the various competing interests in the US such as the military/industrial complex, Israeli, xenophobes, social democrats, and oil/gas interests, the same can be said about the US.
Correspondingly, the attitude expressed by the author, "offering ... incentives to Iran would constitute appeasement of an implacably hostile regime" can also be applied in referring to the United States' historical relationship with Iran.
The US's longstanding hostility toward former "enemy" states such as Cuba, Viet Nam, and Russia, that have refused to become clients indicate the US's inability to make any significant changes in it's foreign policy and in the end will hurt it as the "empire" becomes financially untenable.
Well said! You have to be an English major! Man, do I enjoy people who can sling the language.
The contrast is worthwhile as it points put Clinton's hypocrisy in her self righteous comments about the importance of less imperial nations following America's example in the the rule of law. When I hear her speak of this amid the shredding of our Constitution I am brought to disgust.
I appreciate the timely article, but need to point out that while sea level rise is catastrophic for local populations, much more severe changes in the atmosphere will precede these alterations and are already occurring. We are already seeing much longer droughts and desertification throughout the world. Famine in Eastern Africa is a prime example of this as is the desertification of Texas. Top soil moisture in America's breadbasket is down severely and if continues will have serious repercussions in food prices worldwide. The planet's food production is just keeping abreast of population growth. Continued drought alternated with flood, both outcomes of increased CO2, are having disastrous results.
I totally agree with Oliver. His comments similar to the ones below by Ray regarding 'mark to market' suspension show how the bailout was in fact a rescue for the investor class at the cost to the rest of the economy. The alternative would have been to take the banks into receivership (aka nationalize) via the FDIC to keep their critical functions in tact. The pundits always offer critics a false choice of doing nothing vs giving the banks a pass to proceed as they have done. Bank failures have been managed properly and safely in the pass such as Sweden and others. It's merely the vested interests cloaked in ideology that has brought us here.
The Occupation has definitely effected the media narrative for the past month. It makes one wonder who would benefit from removing the movement from view. The coordination making it happen within days using similar tactics around the country is quite impressive and says something about the centicity of the power arrayed against the people.
I might recommend reading Gwynne Dyer's book "Climate Wars". Not only does he sketch out various future scenarios of calamity, based upon different amounts od CO2 content, but also how we will probably have to work our way out of this predicament.
What I find interesting is the media coverage, even by NPR, iin that there are daily breathless reports on this conflict with Assad's arguements dismissed, while the conflict in Bahrain is ignored and the same arguments used by Assad are to infer interference by Iran and subsequent destabilization of Saudi Arabia in that country.
I've learned after watching the media for years, whenever NPR is producing highly polished reports on foreign affairs on a daily basis, special interest propagandists are at work.
I believe to understand this one has to consider motive and fallout. What would Iran gain by a public assassination? Who would benefit from a botched plan? A negative benefit in the first and not Iran in the second. This has a ripe smell of
rotting fish.
Well said! As the remainder of their country vanishes, this does seem like the only card for the Palestinians to play.
The Israeli strategy of endless peace talks that never go anywhere has run it's course, and it is now obvious that it was always a ploy to stall as they colonized the West Bank.
Based upon Israeli control of the American Congress and American Foreign Policy, Obama has no other option but to veto the application or see his chances of re-election drop to zero.
I see the primary gain for the Palestinians is to create a new rallying point make obvious the contradictions and deceitfulness of the Israeli public talking points.
Americans, hopefully, may finally start to realize that their Israeli centric Foreign Policy is a contradiction from the "American Democracy Ideology" taught in our civic classes.
Overall this move will further isolate Israel from the civilized world and make them realize that the cost of their 60 year war of aggression against the Palestinians is an economic catastrophe, as countries can no longer afford to go it alone.
I'd say it's time to get moving on some national freedom of religion rallies!
Gareth Porter has an interesting and related article on a times.com today. What I found fascinating was the News Hour's explanation last night. In their account the CIA brought him over to save him from being exposed in Iran, but didn't bring his family. Additionally, they made a big point that he would soon be disappeared by Iran's security services. If he were turned by the CIA and concerned about his safety, why make such a prediction? Porter's explanation sounds more plausible.
Thanks for putting this up as this needs to be discussed. A small nit: one of the speakers stated that global climate change will alter the course of the jet stream. I think he meant to say the Gulf Stream. The jet stream will be altered, but that will occur as a secondary affect of the change of the ocean current.
I watch the media fairly closely and the interesting thing that I've been observing the last 5 days is a concerted media campaign on the part of Israel and General Patraeus in an attempt to legitimize their positions. This video would fit into that realm.
It's cool, hip smart, emotionally positive and a distraction of what's really happening on the ground.
As British, Poles, Dutch Plan Exit
McCain's position is curious, considering the cost of the war, $300 billion so far, and $100 billion projected for 2010. At this point the entire endeavor of COIN seems to me to be military/industrial complex boondoggle, which McCain, given his history attacks on Pentagon expenditures, would rationally oppose.
The reason I consider COIN to be a boondoggle is the underlying assumption that the military do the internal development. Given the "valleyism" described by Matthew Hoh last year it would seem more logical to utilize this cultural uniqueness of Afghanistan to perform in country development with a very low profile such as done by Greg Mortenson.
The notion that one can defeat the Taliban with an external force is like saying a Muslim Army invading the US could defeat the Republican Party. The American military presence merely enhances its existence. Only the Afghans can rebel against Taliban totalitarianism, if they so choose.
At this point I don't believe we can extract ourselves from Afghanistan until the military/industrial complex recognizes that it is sucking the country dry, which may in fact be happening as per Michael Mullen's address yesterday where he stated the largest national security threat is the national debt. But then maybe I'm an eternal optimist.
Can Obama define a realistic Goal?
I have to admit I'm a bit confused by the Afghanistan strategy. Yesterday the President stated the reason for being in Afghanistan was to assure that al-Qaeda could not launch an attack on the US from there and as you point out in your article, the are very few of this group in Afghanistan.
Assuming that the President isn't lying or stupid, it seems to me that given these facts, the Biden strategy would be correct. The only explanation that I can determine is that the POTUS has been being "boxed in" by the military regarding the Afghanistan strategy and therefore his appointment of Patreaus makes good sense.
First, he is trusted by all actors.
Second, it takes Patreaus off the right wing lecture circuit, which has given him unusual leverage in foreign policy. Looking at Obama's attitude with outside influence and unauthorized leaks this would be a pressing issue for him. Additionally, this is especially helpful for the fall elections.
Finally, the appointment puts Patreaus in the hot seat with the execution of the war, where he is personally responsible for a failed strategy that he has so avidly advocated.
Considers breaking off Ties;
Israel Lobbies in Congress denounce Ankara
Not to cast aspersions, but Mr. Friedman seems to be taking a lead role in pressuring Turkey. His closing comment in his column warning the US/Turkey relationship is "heading off a cliff", reminded me a more public statement John Perkins might make in "Confessions of an Economic Hitman".
Considering Mr. Friedman's role in championing the invasion of Iraq, I'm not quite certain what his role might be in "loosening the jackals", as Mr. Perkins would put it.
My concern is that there is another possibility of a coup d'etat by the Turkish military. This would not be new, looking at American meddling in the past and the Iranian situation would rate right up there with Soviet containment.
This is something worth watching.
Tribalism at it's peak. "if you aren't for my tribe, then I want you dead." This is what will destroy Israel, as the crazies in Israel and the US still haven't learned that there is "co" in "co-existence". There is no more room in the world for tribalism anymore, as there is no other place for the displaced to migrate.
wound over 50 as they Board, Capture Gaza Aid Flotilla
The parallels to North Korea's sinking of the S. Korea patrol boat are striking. I'm waiting for a Security Council resolution and condemnation from Secretary Clinton, but won't hold my breath.