Billmon:
Back to Main
September 6, 2006
WB: Strategery
Comments
So the less powerful the organization, the more violent and radical their rhetoric.
How’s that invasion of Iran coming along, Georgie?
Posted by: Rowan | Sep 6 2006 5:55 utc | 1
And more from http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-09-04-khatami-us-iran_x.htmthrough the looking glass:
NEW YORK — Former Iranian president Mohammad Khatami said Monday that U.S. forces should remain in Iraq until that country’s fragile government can assume greater control.
In an interview here during his first trip to the United States since leaving office a year ago, Khatami said, “We can’t leave this newly formed government at the mercy of terrorists and insurgents.”
Posted by: anna missed | Sep 6 2006 6:00 utc | 2
And to confuse matters more:
Several U.S. politicians and interest groups criticized the State Department for giving Khatami a visa. Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., called Khatami “one of the chief propagandists of the Islamic fascist regime.” State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said Khatami was eligible to visit as a private citizen.
So, is “one of the chief propagandists of the Islamic fascist regime” giving Bush his talking points? Apparently so.
Posted by: anna missed | Sep 6 2006 6:25 utc | 4
One more, Justin Raminondo has a piece indicating that (our faithful allies) the Kurds, have been operating as a “state within a state” with regards to being a platform, ala Hizbollah, for terrorism against both Turkey and Iran.
Posted by: anna missed | Sep 6 2006 8:18 utc | 5
The string of glorious American victories continues in a stunning sequence!
First we brought democracy to Iraq. A great victory! But we discovered that mere positive accomplishments were not enough–were but a beginning! Negative accomplishments beckoned, as a deeper challenge of resolve and spirit! And so we prevented an Iraqi civil war from breaking out. A great accomplishment the like of which the world had never seen!
But were we satisfied? Certainly not! And now, the greatest accomplishment of all–the prevention of the revival of the Baghdad Caliphate! Yes, this government and empire, centered in Iraq, which had been prominent in the history of the Middle East some ten centuries past, has actually been prevented–by us!–from reviving!
An accomplishment beyond history!
How does George do it?
Posted by: Gaianne | Sep 6 2006 8:49 utc | 6
The string of glorious American victories continues in a stunning sequence!
This reminds me of a story I read about a German man who lived through World War II. In an interview, he said he could tell even from the official government propaganda that Germany was losing the war. Asked how he knew, he said it was because the victories kept getting closer.
Posted by: billmon | Sep 6 2006 13:50 utc | 7
There it is, throughout the recorded history of our species — the perennial tale of kings plotting to seize their neighbor’s grain and cattle and gold, for which acts of premeditated piracy there must soon be some pretense created, some dire existential threat invented, else the yeomen will not beat their plowshares into swords and march forth.
And here is our King George in hot pursuit of dominance over the oil and gas bearing lands of the Near East, whipping on the dogs of war to seize whatever he can over there for the benefit of his noble backers, the Haves and the Havemores.
They’ll get the contracts, the cash and the connections to the levers of power. The American yeomen get the lurid tales of Islamic fascist supermen living in caves. And they get war.
There is no Islamic Bogeyman. There is only plunder to pursue. The pirate wars America now makes on the fractured nations of the Ellipse are not driven by existential threats to our nation or our way of life or our freedoms or the virtue of our womenfolk or the sapping of our precious bodily fluids — that is all folderol for the common fool, to get him to wear the uniform, to wave flags and yellow ribbons and go along with the crowd.
The only real threat is to American capitalists, who fear losing ground to rising capitalist nations like Russia, China, India, Brazil. And so the nobles of America, the Haves and the Havemores, back King George to the hilt in his petroleum piracy.
It’s all good for their bottom line. And it is their choice. After all, they have the money, they control the votes, and they own and operate both political parties. The only threat to American capital is competition, and so the need to defend American capital drives this and the coming resource wars Professor Juan Cole describes.
America’s nobles know that if we don’t seize those resources, other capitalists will. That won’t do, and what the wealthy want is what gets done around here.
For, as I.F. Stone put it, “The rich march on Washington every day.”
Posted by: Antifa | Sep 6 2006 13:50 utc | 8
@Antifa…
Don’t you see? This IS a threat to my way of life! Without all that oil, I’m not gonna be able to drive my Ford Extinction down to the Starbucks every morning. Oh…the HORROR!!! 🙂
Posted by: Dr. Wellington Yueh | Sep 6 2006 15:14 utc | 9
this wild rhetoric that is the bush regime is throwing around – fascism, hitler, totalitarian islamic empires – is it that they figure the public is so dumb that they can’t see through this & that the media is so owned that they won’t do anything but disseminate their words, or is it that the people actually making these claims are such idiots that they neither have a comprehension of history, nor realize how dangerous is to them to bring these descriptions – much more applicable to the accusers than the accusee – into the public discussion? if this is their new product, now that august is behind us, quality control sure missed the potential for damaging backfires.
Posted by: b real | Sep 6 2006 15:19 utc | 10
the fascism thing has a lot of saliency among persons groping to find a good excuse for support of bush. i see this more as a way to bring some of the gop back home who’ve wandered off the farm. the fascism devil term is an abstraction i’m surprised wasn’t used more directly and earlier. brooks and other conservative pundits tended to reserve the epithet for baathists. now, under the manichean gaze of bush et al., fascism encompasses all of islam.
i agree this is enormously dangerous turn of rhetoric given the ways in the past similarly sweeping vilification has been used to vindicate actually existing fascism.
Posted by: slothrop | Sep 6 2006 16:33 utc | 12
i agree this is enormously dangerous turn of rhetoric given the ways in the past similarly sweeping vilification has been used to vindicate actually existing fascism.
My first thoughts upon hearing Bush rail against new ‘Stalin’ and new ‘Hitler’ were of the psychological mirror effect. He looks into the mirror of the world and sees himself but does not recognize it as him. He is yelling into a mirror, “that’s STALIN! that’s HITLER!” When he sees this in the mirror it is indeed a dangerous turn of events.
When will he shift to a fulltime war economy and a draft? When will he attack more countries? When will he start his domestic pogroms? When will he start his domestic concentration camps?
It is coming: because he saw it in the mirror.
Posted by: gylangirl | Sep 6 2006 16:51 utc | 13
the fascism thing has a lot of saliency among persons groping to find a good excuse for support of bush. i see this more as a way to bring some of the gop back home who’ve wandered off the farm. the fascism devil term is an abstraction i’m surprised wasn’t used more directly and earlier. brooks and other conservative pundits tended to reserve the epithet for baathists. now, under the manichean gaze of bush et al., fascism encompasses all of islam.
i agree this is enormously dangerous turn of rhetoric given the ways in the past similarly sweeping vilification has been used to vindicate actually existing fascism.
Posted by: slothrop | Sep 6 2006 16:59 utc | 14
reminds me of a poem I once wrote:
Surprise
they trash you on the radio
but you don’t even hear it
they trash you in a movie
you’re paying them to smear it
[but they pay the actress less]
guess feminism’s over
now you’re equal dear
that’s what you want to hear
[reading your bible at night]
good girls don’t notice any male chauvenist
saying god gave him her rights
they trash you in a slow song
moving to the beat you
gaze into his eyes
forgetting he mistreats you
what a big surprise
what’s the big surprise
–gylangirl
Posted by: gylangirl | Sep 6 2006 17:25 utc | 15
@gylangirl…
sorry wrong thread
Chilling, nonetheless. The image in my head (after reading your poem) was of that LoTR scene where Eowyn finally blocks out Grima’s insideous ramblings. “Your words are poison…”
Posted by: Dr. Wellington Yueh | Sep 6 2006 18:36 utc | 17
Mentioning bin Laden so much couldn’t help but remind listeners of Bush’s failure to capture or kill him. But the risk was easily offset by the fact that bin Laden remains the most effective bogeyman out there, and job one for the White House in the run-up to a potentially crippling mid-term election is to scare the hell out of people.
Obviously a case of smoke or kool-aid induced delirium, Dr. Yueh, speaking sibalantly, of course.
Posted by: Dr. Fu | Sep 6 2006 19:47 utc | 19
” But the risk was easily offset by the fact that bin Laden remains the most effective bogeyman out there, and job one for the White House in the run-up to a potentially crippling mid-term election is to scare the hell out of people.”
Problem is, this is actually the thing that Bush is good at.
Posted by: b | Sep 6, 2006 3:11:09 PM |
Posted by: anna missed | Sep 6 2006 20:12 utc | 20
Problem is, this is actually the thing that Bush is good at.
Especially, if you consider Osama bin Laden has been dead for several years.
Posted by: Uncle $cam | Sep 6 2006 20:26 utc | 21
@Dr. Fu (#19):
Actually, I found gylangirl’s words quite nourishing. The quote (“Your words are poison…”) is from the book/movie.
Definitely not kool-aid, maybe smoke… 🙂
Posted by: Dr. Wellington Yueh | Sep 6 2006 21:34 utc | 22
@Dr.Yeuh:
Could you please provide me a link to the movie you cited so I can study it further.
I don’t watch movies as a rule, so I am at an asymetrical dialectical disadvantage, as it were.
I hate it when that happens.
Posted by: Dr. Fu | Sep 6 2006 22:42 utc | 23
@Dr. Fu (#23):
The Two Towers – Second of three books, Lord Of The Rings trilogy.
The Two Towers – Second of three movies
Quotes from The Two Towers – About 2/3 down the page, search for the word “poison”
And, a little context for the quote:
Grima (AKA ‘Wormtongue’) was a treacherous spy for one of the stronger antagonists, Saruman, and had ill-considered designs on Eowyn. It is implied in the scene that Eowyn has already seen through Grima’s deception, and this was the last straw.
I don’t watch movies as a rule, so I am at an asymetrical dialectical disadvantage, as it were.
S’allright! I miss about 75% of all literary references ’cause I ain’t never been to no cow-ledge. 🙂
Posted by: Dr. Wellington Yueh | Sep 6 2006 23:18 utc | 24
Long winded little creatures, ain’t they just, Your Grace.
If someone had paid attention to logistics and kept their eye on the ball, I would not have had to leave my best mounts in Hatton.
Then we could have had a little fun bashing these hobbits, elves, trolls and such around a bit. They’re low profile, mallets much better than lances.
Great Game,Eh?
Posted by: Poisonby | Sep 7 2006 1:54 utc | 25
Antifa wrote: There is no Islamic Bogeyman. There is only plunder to pursue.
I agree on the whole, also with the rest of the post, as I am always going on about matters oily and old fashioned real-politik.
Seeing the US as the prime corporate ‘market’ state, though many western countries are close, leads to…:
a) Old state capitalism (e.g. ex-Yugo, Saddam’s Iraq) are systems to be smashed
b) Feudal countries, open to capitalism (e.g. Saudi) are acceptable
c) No-state places are to be obscured in discourse and exploited (e.g. Congo, Somalia, Nigeria – I realise the definiton of ‘no state’ is rough)
d) rich liberal ‘democracies’ are to be wooed and coerced. As both model and resistors, potential allies, they are also to be transformed, but through alliance and soft power
If only the ‘market’, business, corporations, can create wealth thru entrepreneurship, then Gvmt. must be subsumed to the ‘economic’ lobby. Only the making of money, perpetual ‘economic’ growth can solve social problems, can bring peace, can lift man above…well I don’t know what. Murderous chaos in Iraq and other places are symptoms of systemic change, the agonised ‘birth pangs’ of new society being born, or the death dirges of those who cannot adapt, willingly desire to remain backward, obcurantist, religious, undeveloped, unimaginative, unaware of the heady glee of personal liberty and the comfort consumerism brings.
So much for the unstated underlying (?) US policy, certainly many sincerely believe it. If the free market is all, then no post-war planning is required:
Scheid interview, Daily Press:
link
only part of the story of course…
Posted by: Noirette | Sep 9 2006 16:29 utc | 26