You have to wonder whether the latest American policy of committing Israeli-style war crimes in Iraq isn't part of the greater neocon plan to take international pressure off Israel by putting it on the United States. Israel doesn't look so bad now that the Americans are doing the same thing.

"I like to remember what Viscount Slim said during the Burma Campaign. He said use a sledge hammer to crush a walnut, and that's exactly what we will do. We will use force overwhelming combat power when it's necessary."

mred:
i just saw a general or some such (i have no idea wot a 'general' does, or whether its a high rank(le) or not) - anyway - some he was some military guy on teeve who seemed to be sufficiently importantishthat it was a press-release kinda interview. anyway - so he says (seriously, proudly, steely jawed, zero ironing) 'yuo've heard about cracking walnuts with a sledgehammer, thats what our new initiative in baghdad is about. we will crush them'. u fukking idiot, the whole idea behind that metaphor is that some behaviours are inappropriate. u arent sposed to be fukking proud of it. its not sposed to be a good thing like 'we'll go the whole 9 yards' (an observation which still doesnt make sense the slightest bit of sense to me)

the parallels with palestine are too scary - collective punishment is particularly dumb in an asymetric war. not to mention the razorwire around tikrit. u know more about this shit than i do, but the 'security fence' is so disgusting. i dunno your opinion on israel, and separately your opinion on the whole neocon/israel thing, and i usually make sure that i dont rant about the whole thing, cos i havent the slightest idea or historical perspective or anything to comment, and the whole 'israelis rule the world' thing im reticent to subscribe to. but lemme go out on a limb and suggest that prima facie, it sometimes looks like the israelis and the usgovt are on the same page, and it sure doesnt look like that page is from the deliciously named 'roadmap for peace'. it *looks* like 'israel' has a serious case to answer. if the whole israel conspiracy thing is even close to reflecting reality, then its no wonder that 'selfhating jew' and 'jewish guilt' and all that are in the common lexicon. and the term 'anti-semitic' is almost the worst insult that anyone can throw. what an extraordinary feat of marketing/propoganda. *even my* language is littered with disclaimers about israel - i think most americans would probably rather be called unpatriotic than be called antisemitic. its an extraordinary pr achievement. a quick glimpse of the facts points to the US and israel being in bed together. careful israel, u might catch something communicable. israel preemptively bombed syria recently, and the shite house was immediately 'on message'. the recent synagogue bombings in The 'Bul smell a lot more like mossad or the cia than it does of alqaeda. as do the recent saud attacks. these latest mosque, oops synagogue attacks in turkey, whcih killed something like 20 people actually kept the Black Hawk Down, oops Two Black Hawks Down story off the front pages. 20 dead jews in turkey are more 'important' than 18 dead US soldiers. isnt that odd. (im not suggesting that these 'bul attacks were created to earn the prime media time slot - just pointing out possible discrepancies/cracks)- and the media makes the point that 'the israeli foreign minisitter was at the site even before the turkish pm'. i dont have a clue whether he was or not, or whether he was in the neighbourhood for another reason or whether it was some other accident that he was there. the only 'real' thing for me is that the 'israeli foreign minisitter was at the site even before the turkish pm' statement was a part of story. gwb has banned images of the returning dead US soldiers, and wont talk about any ded, and wont meet any phamilies of dead people, and wont go to any funerals (except for while he is in britain - its somehow ok to be seen with dead furroners - shared burden and all of that) - yet we are continually told that the israel minister was at the site of the bombings before the turk pm. i simply cant beleieve that this is all by accident. its not really surprising that in a country of about 1% jews that the israeli ambassodr would be there b4 the turkish pm. why does this factoid become a part of the story? not by accident, i conjecture. being at the scene first doesnt mean that your reasoning/argument is valid. it just means that u were there first.

and since when are 20 ded furreners more important than 17 dead american soldiers (plus the casualties)? im confortable in speculating that there is virtually no precedent in the media for this. none. this is the largest loss in the entire invasion for the ahem 'allies', and yet the story is relegated to like 2nd or third. behind turkey, and behind an ocean liner 'incident' in france. its not war-coverage fatigue coming from the audience i bet. some'one' is making these decisions. it doesnt happen by accident.


its also kinda amusing that the 'bul explosions came about the same time as turkey decided not to send troops. its hardly out of the question to think that the cia mite be involved. what do they specialise in if not destabilising 'regimes'? it scares me that they are now pointing at japan.


post closed in despair