arisbe | Hmm

Hmm

As Israeli agents flood Kurdistan with arms and ill intent, Professor Schroeder's thesis acquires another surprising element: it would be the first instance that I know of where a superpower, after fighting a proxy war on behalf of a pipsqueak client, is kicked directly in the teeth by its ingrate of an "ally."

– Justin Raimondo

Well at least somebody is taking the side of the Kurds, even if it's somebody Americans like Mr. Raimondo aren't all that thrilled with these days. And perhaps not without some reason.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

The Kurds have no doubt benefited from the war in Iraq, but their gains are fragile. We don't have a history of paying much more than lipservice to their cause, and they're surrounded by people who would love to see them disappear. If I were a Kurd, I'd look at my own people's history (immediate and distant) and do what I felt needed to be done. Even if it wasn't toeing the U.S. party line. And on the other side, why on earth would it surprise anyone if they do start biting the hand that feeds them, or maybe just not coming when called? We've only fed them when it's expedient to do so, and we've paid a lot of lip service and made commitments to helping them, but we've left them twisting in the wind when we've got other fish to fry (Anyone remember the First Gulf War? How 'bout those Kurds in Turkey? They're not even acknowledged by Turkey as Kurds, and what are we doing to help them?) Have we not learned from history that when people really are being oppressed systematically, eventually they will become a "problem"? It's pretty arrogant of us to expect them to continue to just be long-suffering in the face of continued oppression and empty promises.

Admittedly, this link is an opinion piece, and inflammatory, but the facts are pretty basic, right? I'm going to look for more info on this.

Yep, you're pretty much on the mark.

This is why all the lip service to the idea of invading Iraq for humanitarian reasons was just that.

It wasn't the Kurds that the man was suggesting should be more chary of offending America--it was Israel, the country for which we've sacrificed any semblance of being "even-handed" in the Arab-Israeli conflict. And, as for the popular sentiment of Israelis regarding America, the author seems right on target. I myself have been berated, in India, by extremely anti-American young Israeli tourists, infuriated by what they termed America's "betrayal" of Israel in the Oslo process. "Conspiracy theories" about Zionist influence on America's foreign policy seem to ring truer now than ever before, and I predict that, in the future, they'll have even greater credibility. The Zionist enterprise would naturally be a sinking ship at this point in its history--perched as it is, on a ticking demographic and environmental time bomb--if it weren't for America's continuous interventions on its behalf.

For 50 years palestine was sworn to the destruction of Israel, a free and democratic country. The only free and democratic country in the whole area. Yet people seem amazed that Israel treats them as an enemy. Just what is it you think the palestinians are owed that they have not been offered?

The homes they were illegally deprived of when they fled, as refugees, from advancing Israeli armies, and the perpetual custody of the Muslim holy places on Temple Mount. And because Islam is a religion that, unlike mainline Christianity or liberal Judaism, WILL NOT BE "CO-OPTED" BY THE CULTURE OR VALUES OF SO-CALLED "CONSUMERIST DEMOCRACY," you may be certain that, no matter how many martyrdoms it takes, and no matter how many decades of struggle are involved, the Palestinian Arabs WILL prevail in the end. THEY are the original possessors of the land, and they will take it back from the Jews, who were unwilling to compromise with them, and live among them in peace, as "guests"--which is what a large--and wiser--part of the original Zionist movement proposed. Israel is doomed.

There is one enormous difference between the terrorism of the founders of Israel and that of the Palestinians. The Brits had a home to go back to; the Israelis do not. Even if there is a moral equivalence, there is no strategic one.

And who are these so-called Palestinian Arabs anyway? Are they not largely descended from the Palestinian Jews of Roman times, who were permitted to remain on the land because they had been excluded from the Synagogue as Christians or suspected Christians?

Thankyou for showing your disregard for the actual facts, and true colors. So long as Arabs refuse to take responsibility for their barbaric actions, they will continue to be viewed as a small and silly people by Westerners. Your misery is entirely of your own making.

Christianity was once as stifling and oppressive as much of Islam is today. Hopefully Islam can change as Christianity did. The Free World is here to assist you.

"So long as Arabs refuse to take responsibility for their barbaric actions, they will continue to be viewed as a small and silly people by Westerners."

True. But so long as Israelis refuse to take responsibility for their own barbaric actions, they thenselves will continue to be viewed as a small and silly people by Westerners and Easterners alike.

There is enough barbarism to go around. There always is. But we always expect better of the Jews, God knows why.

God knows why, haha. But barbaric is going a little to far. It is true that Israel treats Palestinians in the occupied territories badly. As I said, is it amazing to see them treated by Israel as an enemy? Bombing of Israely school buses began after the '67 war. Now suicide bombings. All carried out by organizations who would act regardless of how Israelys treated those in the occupied territories. And does the Palestinian authority treat these Palestinians any better? A number of Israely Palestinian towns were given the option of being under PA control once a peace agreement was signed. Every one of those towns unanimously refused the offer.

I pretty much thought it was a given that Israel does as Israel pleases, whether for good or for ill, so why he's mustering such moral outrage about that is beyond me, as it's old, old news.

The fact that he's included the Kurds in his moral outrage (that Israel is "backstabbing" because they're arming Kurdish groups, and that the Kurds are starting to get mutinous after being handed mostly empty promises by us and pretty much everyone else) -- that WAS the point that got me.

Can't blame the Kurds. No good blaming Israel either, as you point out. Well why not blame our administration for lying us into this war of which Israel is the only beneficiary, and perhaps of Israel only the most deplorable faction, the one which dooms Israel if, as

digbydolben believes, it is in fact doomed?

Now there's a man who talks exclusively out his ass if ever I saw one. Left or right, extremists are certainly all mindless reactionaries.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Hmm

no subject

no subject

ignored the main point of the article

Re: ignored the main point of the article

Re: ignored the main point of the article

Re: ignored the main point of the article

Re: ignored the main point of the article

Re: ignored the main point of the article

always expect better of the Jews

Re: ignored the main point of the article

Re: ignored the main point of the article

Raimondo