War in Middle East - part XXVVVII

[Southover Street Seagull]

Check this out

Neocons Heart Obama

Interesting but Robert Gates is regarded as an independent on Wiki. Have a look at this link and scroll down to see White House advisors and Cabinet and top advisors.

The only people I can find that are not Democrats are: Robert Gates (independent), Ray LaHood (Republican) and Timothy Geithner (unaffiliated). There are also one or two that don't have party political affiliation mentioned.

 

[coventrygull]

Interesting but Robert Gates is regarded as an independent on Wiki. Have a look at this link and scroll down to see White House advisors and Cabinet and top advisors.

The only people I can find that are not Democrats are: Robert Gates (independent), Ray LaHood (Republican) and Timothy Geithner (unaffiliated). There are also one or two that don't have party political affiliation mentioned.

Robert Gates a man with a Career in the CIA. Independent

 

[Southover Street Seagull]

Robert Gates a man with a Career in the CIA. Independent

Yes I did think that when i saw what he has done so far in his life!

 

[The Large One]

Interesting article on the BBC website...


Viewpoint: The end of the neocons

Jonathan Clarke, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs looks back at the rise and fall of the neocons, who encouraged George Bush to invade Iraq.

With the Bush Administration about to recede into history, a widely asked question is whether the neoconservative philosophy that underpinned its major foreign policy decisions will likewise vanish from the scene.

The answer seems likely to be Yes.

But the epitaph of neoconservatism has been written before - prematurely, as it turned out, in the 1980s. Having been apparently headed for extinction at the end of the Reagan Administration a second generation emerged in the mid-1990s. This was period of post-Cold War overwhelming US military dominance which the neocons anointed as the "unipolar moment". It acted as the incubator for the ideas of modern neoconservatism.

The main characteristics of neoconservatism are:

• a tendency to see the world in binary good/evil terms
• low tolerance for diplomacy
• readiness to use military force
• emphasis on US unilateral action
• disdain for multilateral organisations
• focus on the Middle East

Prominent neocons destined to play a major role in the Bush Administration included Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Elliott Abrams, David Addington and Richard Perle. Neocon advocates in the media included Bill Kristol and Norman Podhoretz, while in academia, Bernard Lewis and Victor Davis Hanson were among those who provided intellectual heft.

Many neocons are Jews, but it is wrong to suggest that neoconservatism is an exclusively Jewish phenomenon. In Washington DC, the favourite neocon think tank was the American Enterprise Institute. Here they authored a series of papers arguing for a more forceful US foreign policy, the centre-point of which was a rejection of conventional negotiations on the Palestine/Israel peace process.

Instead, they harboured the much bolder ambition of a US-instigated region-wide democratic transformation. The first phase was the overthrow of Saddam Hussein - which, they believed, would have a sort of "demonstrator effect" on the region. At the beginning of the Bush administration, the neocons' prospects looked dim. True, several - like Wolfowitz, Feith and Perle - obtained senior appointments, but Bush himself had promised a "humble" foreign policy, the diametric opposite of the neocon approach. Neither Secretary of State Colin Powell nor Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was a neocon.

The neocons did, however, find a crucial ally in Vice-President Dick Cheney. Although not one himself, Mr Cheney was a founding signatory of the Project for the New American Century, which became the preferred forum for neocon thinking. A critical crossover point with the neocons was Mr Cheney's commitment to the bold deployment of US military power. His alliance with the neocons proved critical for them.

Their opportunity came with the terrorist attacks of 9/11. More than anyone else they had a well-prepared strategy which matched the need of the day for a bold, decisive response.

No-one else came close to them in having a ready-to-go action plan. Suddenly, their ideas of democratic transformation looked like a reasonable policy option. Their proposals to attack Iraq rapidly moved to centre stage.

Clearly, the neocons were not the only - or even the main - actors in bringing about the Iraq war. But the key fact remains it was their ideas that ensured that the US response to 9/11 would go beyond Afghanistan. They were, without doubt, the intellectual godfathers of the war.

The first few weeks of the war represented the high-water mark for the neocons. On the battlefield, everything seemed to be going their way; politically, their protege Ahmed Chalabi seemed on track to accede to power. But as invasion turned into occupation and the insurgency intensified, the neocon ideas of region-wide democratic transformation were revealed for the fantastical pipedreams they always were.

With the Bush administration ratcheting back its definitions of success in Iraq, the neocons were in full retreat. They started to leave the administration, as elite and public opinion shifted decisively against the war.

In many ways, the 2008 election represented a direct repudiation of the neocon style of foreign policy based on military-centred, unilateralist overreaching. At first sight, the incoming Obama administration appears to be the polar opposite of neoconservatism. Its instincts are multilateralist, being committed, for example, to adhering to the Kyoto Protocol and to international agreements like the Geneva Convention. It places a high priority on diplomacy, with President-elect Obama being open to direct talks with long-ignored countries like Iran and Cuba. Defense Secretary Gates, who is remaining in office, has made it clear that he regards military intervention as the genuinely last option.

Furthermore, the financial meltdown and the drains of the Iraq and Afghan wars have chipped away at the pre-eminence of US power. It is difficult to argue today that the US enjoys a unipolar advantage. The safest bet, therefore, is that we can bid adieu to the neocons and leave their role to be adjudicated by history.

The flipside of neoconservatism is neo-humanitarianism - the idea that US military power should be used to intervene on the ground in crises like the Rwandan genocide or in Darfur. They themselves argue that they form part of the mainstream of American history. It seems more likely that they will come to be seen as an aberration.

Two things may change this. First, the flipside of neoconservatism is what might be called neo-humanitarianism. This is the idea that US military power should be used to intervene on the ground in crises like the Rwandan genocide or in Darfur.

Some Obama officials, for example Susan Rice at the UN, will be making this case. All indications are that the Obama administration will be cautious but, if not, US unilateral military deployment may be back on the global agenda.

Secondly, the Obama administration faces unsettled business on Iran. The neocons are arguing that Iran is the defining issue for US foreign policy and that, short of an abandonment by Tehran of its apparent nuclear weapons program, the US must use force.

Once again, the early signs are that, for the Obama team, military force is well down the agenda and a new form of engagement is under consideration. Should this change - possibly on the back of intransigence from Tehran - the neocons will be back in business and will crow that they have survived yet another premature obituary.

Jonathan Clarke is co-author, with Stefan Halper, of America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the World Order

 

[looney]

Bloody hell that bbc article is so biased its unreal! Even the commentators invited on to the channel 4 news said that any policy change would be slight.

What a crock of shit.

 

[looney]

In many ways, the 2008 election represented a direct repudiation of the neocon style of foreign policy based on military-centred, unilateralist overreaching.

Eh? Most Americans wanted revenge on the Republicans for f***ing the economy up. The ones i spoke to were angry about the loss in their savings and job prospects.

Things have been improving in Iraq since the idiot and war criminal Rumsfeild was removed.


That article is the biggest load of socialist bollocks ive read in ages, it doesn't even corrrespond with the facts.

 

[London Calling]

Like he would

Barack Obama on Israel

i meant againgst this present war/ attack

 

[coventrygull]

i meant againgst this present war/ attack

So did I. I can't see American support for Israel changing even under Mr Obama

 

[London Calling]

So did I. I can't see American support for Israel changing even under Mr Obama

Nor can I, but doing it now, means that Obama "presence" in the world as the great liberal democrat will not be diminshed.

Watch him close a truce within a few days of getting into office.

But by then the Isralis will have acheieved most of their objectives.

 

[coventrygull]

Nor can I, but doing it now, means that Obama "presence" in the world as the great liberal democrat will not be diminshed.

Watch him close a truce within a few days of getting into office.

But by then the Isralis will have acheieved most of their objectives.

I think we are thinking on the same lines. It should set him up nicely. It will make the sheep happy

 

[The Large One]

In many ways, the 2008 election represented a direct repudiation of the neocon style of foreign policy based on military-centred, unilateralist overreaching.

Eh? Most Americans wanted revenge on the Republicans for f***ing the economy up. The ones i spoke to were angry about the loss in their savings and job prospects.

Things have been improving in Iraq since the idiot and war criminal Rumsfeild was removed.


That article is the biggest load of socialist bollocks ive read in ages, it doesn't even corrrespond with the facts.

I'll take the word of an academic in place whose job it is to monitor, understand and report on these things over an armchair ranter 3,000-odd miles away who has spoken to a few people any day.

The man is offering an opinion on Neo-Conservatives' foreign policies (without really touching on their domestic financial policies) and their triumphal march through political power, not whether they were any good or not. Bush was very unpopular before the credit crunch, mainly as a result of the Iraq war (though not necessarily international policy generally).

Where do you get the notion that this is a Socialist essay? Let me guess, it isn't flattering about NeoCons, therefore it must be lefty bullshit? Good one. It appears you are coming across as a NeoCon apologist in one way - you tend to see the world in binary terms.

Just because you don't agree with it (or rather, don't want to agree with it) does not make it bollocks.

 

[User removed 4]

Bloody hell that bbc article is so biased its unreal! Even the commentators invited on to the channel 4 news said that any policy change would be slight.

What a crock of shit.

Kidnappings, Beatings, Murders and Hangings
israeli's ??..................... f***ing hypocrites

 

[User removed 4]

The reality is that Iran/Persia has had, for far longer than Europe has ever had, some of the finest scientists, artists, craftsmen, poets and engineers the world has ever seen who embrace wisdom, love and respect (I'll stop there, I'm not a hippie).

then why the f*** are half of them still living in the stone age ?

 

[Common as Mook]

then why the f*** are half of them still living in the stone age ?

Because they aren't Westernised and that is there way of life. Just because we don't agree witha way of life, doesn't mean it's wrong.

 

[simmo]

As this is a Brighton football club web site I presume the majority of users are white (therefore non Jewish or non Arab) English people, reading some of the threads I do not understand why individuals get so polarised concerning Israel-Palestine and fail to see the other side at all.

Yes Israelis kill far more individuals concerning civilians than Hamas, but yes Hamas also hides their represenatives in residential buildings and also targets and launches bombs at Jewish settlements on the border. It truly is unbelievable why people in a country like our own get so polarised as to there opinions concerning Israel and Palestine you can argue until the cows come home as to whom has the divine right to the area of land that is now under dispute and you can argue until the cows come home as to who started and dispute and sadly in wars/conflicts people die, my personal opinion is that it is the cause celeb at the moment and everyone just has to come down on one side or the other and you must have your own polarised view. Left wing Palestine - right wing Israel.

As an example of this and the heat has raised on this thread I have read some shameful comments from people on here comparing the Israelis to the Nazis that is a truly disgraceful thing to say. It is so utterly, utterly incorrect it is unreal. It is comments like this that just show your own utter bias in your own information gathering process in making your own mind up as to your own opinion.

As an example of why this is so absurd I can remember Shimon Peres, Yitzhak Rabin and Yassir Arafat all shaking hands on the lawn of the White House around 1995 trying to make a peace deal, which eventually unravalled. I don't remember the Nazis doing that with any Jewish leaders of the 30's/40's, the way with dealing with them was to the gas chambers.

 

[DIFFBROOK]

Takne from link above

"Max Boot just adores Barack Obama’s proposed national security team, especially the retention of Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense and General Jim Jones over at the NSC"

What I want to know is what is General Jim Jones doing on NSC (North Stand Chat) and what is his username?

 

[coventrygull]

Takne from link above

"Max Boot just adores Barack Obama’s proposed national security team, especially the retention of Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense and General Jim Jones over at the NSC"

What I want to know is what is General Jim Jones doing on NSC (North Stand Chat) and what is his username?

Jim Jones! I thought he died at Jonestown Guyana. Unless he fled to Brighton and secretly has taken over NSC. Are we a cult

 

[London Calling]

As an example of why this is so absurd I can remember Shimon Peres, Yitzhak Rabin and Yassir Arafat all shaking hands on the lawn of the White House around 1995 trying to make a peace deal, which eventually unravalled. I don't remember the Nazis doing that with any Jewish leaders of the 30's/40's, the way with dealing with them was to the gas chambers.

Punters on here will be able to identify Jewish leader, who may have colloborated with the Germans for whatever reasons.
Nevertheless there are other fascists/ dictators Stalin, Mao etc who shook with the right hand and mass murdered with the left.

Some of the terrorist atrocities undertaken in the 40's and 50's by jewish zealots would never had been condoned if not for the work of the Nazi's, the massacre of innocents in the refugee camps in the early 80's whilst the Israeli army turned away was right out of Russian , German textbook work.

There are plenty of Jews in that country who want to live with other creeds, religions but there are also some very nasty people there, normally of the othodox right, who view Arabs on par with the way the Nazi's assessed Jews.

 

[User removed 4]

Because they aren't Westernised and that is there way of life. Just because we don't agree witha way of life, doesn't mean it's wrong.

nor did i say it was, just wondered why some live such primitive lives when TLO was singing the praises of their scientists etc.

 

[coventrygull]

Punters on here will be able to identify Jewish leader, who may have colloborated with the Germans for whatever reasons.
.

Nazi Support of Zionism