Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
July 30, 2019

No, Israel Did Not Attack Iranian Targets In Iraq

Israeli newspaper repeat a report which claims that Israeli planes hit Iranian targets in Iraq.

From the last one:

The IAF used its F-35i stealth fighter jets to hit two Iraqi bases that were used by Iranian forces and proxies and for storing ballistic missiles, the London-based Saudi daily Asharq Al-Awsat reported on Tuesday.

Asharq Al-Awsat is owned by Faisal bin Salman, a member of the Saudi ruling clan. It is - like other Arab papers - often used to launder Israeli disinformation and propaganda that is then repeated in the Israeli press.

The original Asharq Al-Aswat report reads:

Israel has expanded the scope of its Iranian targets in Iraq and Syria, western diplomatic sources told Asharq Al-Awsat amid reports that Tel Aviv carried out an airstrike earlier this month against an Iranian rockets depot northeast of Baghdad.

The July 19 attack was carried out by an Israeli F-35 fighter jet, they added.

On Sunday, the Ashraf base in Iraq, a former base used by the Iranian opposition People's Mujahedin of Iran, was targeted by an air raid, said sources.

The base lies 80 kilometers from the border with Iran and 40 kilometers northeast of Baghdad.

The sources revealed that the strikes targeted Iranian “advisors” and a ballistic missile shipment that had recently arrived from Iran to Iraq.

Last week, Syria’s Tal al-Hara was struck by Israeli jets.

The diplomatic sources said the attack targeted Iran’s attempt to seize control of the strategic hill, located in Daraa countryside in southern Syria.

The above F-35 promotion then goes on to laud the Israeli Arrows-3 air defense missile the U.S. paid for.

Of the three incidents Asharq Al-Awsat mentions only one, in Syria, really happened.

On July 19 a fire broke out at a camp of the 16th Brigade of the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF). It set off some ammunition. The 16th is a light infantry brigade. It does not have ballistic missiles. While the incident was first reported as a missile attack, an investigation later said (Arabic) that the fire was caused by a defect of some equipment (machine translation)

The Central Commission of Inquiry sent by the People's Assembly on Sunday announced the results of the investigation into the bombing of the Martyrs' Camp of the Commission, which is located near the city of Ameri.

The report of the specialized committee confirmed that the investigations conducted have proved that the explosion was not a military target as a result of a plane or a guided missile, but was a fire of solid fuel due to an internal defect.

No one was killed in the incident.

The alleged attack on Sunday never happened:

TØM CΛT @TomtheBasedCat - 17:29 UTC · Jul 30, 2019

The Camp Ashraf incident was nothing more than a rumor that started on Facebook. It's not even called Ashraf anymore, the base is named after the Brigade 27 commander who was Martyred in Diyala battles.

Saudis hard at work creating Fake News.

It is not the Saudis that created this fake news but the "western diplomatic sources", aka the Israeli ambassador in London, who briefed the Asharq Al-Awsat writer.

The third incident, in Syria, did happen:

Syria's state media said on Wednesday an Israeli missile attack had targeted the country's southern province of Daraa, but did not report any casualties.

State news agency SANA and state TV added that the "Israeli aggression" struck Tal al-Hara hill that is home to Syrian army posts adding that it only caused material damage.
...
The Tal al-Hara hill, a strategic area overlooking the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, was for many years a major Russian military radar outpost until rebels took it over in 2014 before it was again recaptured by the Syrian army last year.

Israel did not hit any Iranian targets or anything else in Iraq. The Asharq Al-Awsat story is pure propaganda.

If the Israeli air force were stupid enough to bomb targets in Iraq, it would likely see consequences that it would not like:

TØM CΛT @TomtheBasedCat - 18:08 UTC · Jul 30, 2019

And besides

If Israel really wants to waste their time and resources striking sites in Iraq, by all means.

They'll only accelerate the decision as to whether or not to purchase the S-400 system.

There are plenty of Air Defense Officers who are already fluent in Russian.

Posted by b on July 30, 2019 at 17:16 UTC | Permalink

Comments
« previous page | next page »

....kill some of your kids and family members and the supposed cops do nothing....
That is what is happening in Syria.

Posted by: O | Jul 31 2019 4:41 utc | 63

Russia is NOT international sheriff. That place is reserved for USA.
Stop molding Russia into USA 2.0, it does not fit.
You seem to be in panic, seeing USA growing weaker and soon vacating "supposed cop" role - and no one around wanting to pick that job.
You seem to be in panic knowing not how to leave without some "international police" fighting your fights for you.
I may sympathise with your pain, but it won't change much.
Russia is not USA 2.0 and is not some international cop supposed-by-you.
You better learn how to live without Global Gendarme in 21st century.

Posted by: Arioch | Jul 31 2019 17:31 utc | 101

Arioch @104

What you suggest is something that most Americans can literally not imagine. It is a feature of the mental illness known as "American exceptionalism" that Americans must believe that if America isn't the one doing the bombing and the regime changes then some other country will. Naturally, exceptional Americans just know that any other country will do the killing in a more heartless manner than America ever would, perhaps even disrespecting the preferred gender-appropriate pronouns of the victims.

Do not underestimate the power of this delusion among Americans. If you claim that Russia doesn't want to be world cop, most Americans will automatically assume you are either lying or a lunatic as that claim is just not possible in the world as they understand it.

Posted by: William Gruff | Jul 31 2019 18:20 utc | 102

@ 10; Thanks for the bit of levity, I'm LMFAO.....

Posted by: ben | Jul 31 2019 18:41 utc | 103

Posted by: Arioch | Jul 31 2019 17:31 utc | 104

Totally off the mark about the topic of conversation or my point of view that I was expressing.

Go back and read my other postings on this thread before trying to lecture someone.

Posted by: O | Jul 31 2019 21:56 utc | 104

Posted by: Laguerre | Jul 31 2019 16:04 utc | 95

ok. let's take the UK

Austerity has led to a 25 percent child poverty rate and declining life expectancy. Brexit has split the country into London, Scotland and Northern Ireland versus England and Wales. Scotland is likely to gain independence and Northern Ireland will unite with the Republic of Ireland. Foreign manufacturers who need access to the EU market will leave. US democrats will side with Ireland, so England and Wales risk being completely isolated. Violent crime has risen by 19 percent from last year. There is a racist war on immigrants sending people back who have lived in the country as British subjects for close to 70 years. The issue who is or is not a British subject is far from resolved and Britain has still not come clear of its former commonwealth, a process that now extends to the Mother Country ....
If Israel is threatened in the Middle East, Britain is, too. They had a lot of blow back with terrorist attacks by the Jihadi forces they groomed for intervention. Someone demonstrated to them recently that they would not be safe from a chemical attack on the mainland.

Yep, for sure, Britain is in decline - like most countries.

Posted by: somebody | Jul 31 2019 22:01 utc | 105

Posted by: Yeah, Right | Jul 31 2019 9:44 utc | 76

You are still getting bitch slapped because the person keeps entering your home repeatedly (no matter the effeminate allusions you make, again are you projecting?) without any repercussions and in fact are supporting the other crazies killing your folks

Posted by: O | Jul 31 2019 22:05 utc | 106

@109 This is pretty simple: when your actions are inconsequential then there is little incentive to inflict "consequences" on you for those actions.

No, still don't get it?

Here, try this one: when someone is attempting to distract you with trivialities then the sensible response is to refuse to be distracted.

These Israeli raids are inconsequential distractions, and that remains true no matter how "repeated" they are (and I agree with b that their frequency is vastly exaggerated).

The response from Assad is the correct one i.e. he will not allow himself to be distracted into attempting to impose "consequences" for those incursions.

Not yet. Assad has more important things to deal with. He intends to deal with them.

Israel can wait. The Golan Heights is still there. There is time enough to deal with that issue when he can give it his full attention.

But *he* will decide when that time is right.

He won't have that decision forced upon him by the likes of Netanyahu. Or you.

Posted by: Yeah, Right | Jul 31 2019 22:45 utc | 107

Posted by: Yeah, Right | Jul 31 2019 22:45 utc | 110

"The response from Assad is the correct one i.e. he will not allow himself to be distracted into attempting to impose "consequences" for those incursions.

Not yet. Assad has more important things to deal with. He intends to deal with them."

Your logic: Treat the symptoms instead of the root cause of the disease.

"He won't have that decision forced upon him by the likes of Netanyahu. Or you."

Because the worlds watches idly by as Israel commits illegal incursions into the Syria's sovereignty(Assad's house). No one will back his moves to actually go after these obviously illegal acts. Not even their supposed good buddy Russia, I wonder why?

Posted by: O | Jul 31 2019 23:21 utc | 108

O @111:

... the worlds watches idly by as Israel commits illegal incursions into the Syria's sovereignty(Assad's house)... [including] their supposed good buddy Russia ...

If the world will just stand by then why doesn't Israel just go into Syria in full force?

The simple fact that they don't proves that Yeah, Right is correct.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jul 31 2019 23:37 utc | 109

"If the world will just stand by then why doesn't Israel just go into Syria in full force?
The simple fact that they don't proves that Yeah, Right is correct."
Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jul 31 2019 23:37 utc | 112

No it does not. Because even Israel knows a full on war can't be ignored. So death by thousand cuts(bitch slaps) is the m.o.

Posted by: O | Jul 31 2019 23:52 utc | 110

jr - yeah right - ditto... ain't worth discussing with a new improved version of zanon..

Posted by: james | Aug 1 2019 0:00 utc | 111

Posted by: james | Aug 1 2019 0:00 utc | 114

Aww what's the matter, did i disturb your poor little circle jerk, echo chamber? Not everyone who disagrees with the hive mind is a troll. Get over yourself thinkpol flying monkey.

Posted by: O | Aug 1 2019 0:05 utc | 112

Not everyone who disagrees with a "hive mind" is a troll, that's true. But those who quickly turn to ad-hominem attacks in the face of sustained rational counter-arguments are quite likely to be trolls.

On the topic of death by a thousand cuts, it's very hard to die from a million cuts if the cutting is being done with a feather duster.

Posted by: Cynica | Aug 1 2019 0:19 utc | 113

Why does anyone even respond to this "O" alias? It revealed itself for what it is several threads back.

Shun it and it will go away - but of course not before trying another flame war with the most despicable insults.

The trick is simply not to read them. No one else is.

Posted by: Grieved | Aug 1 2019 0:24 utc | 114

"to ad-hominem attacks in the face of sustained rational counter-arguments are quite likely to be trolls."
Posted by: Cynica | Aug 1 2019 0:19 utc | 116

1. I have been called a troll non stop since I made my first comment on this site.

2. "Sustain rational counter-arguments" Lol see number 1.

3. All these comments are nothing more than opinions, even yours. No one here on this site is the arbiter of absolute truth.

4. Just because I disagree with someone doesn't mean I would not agree with them tomorrow on something else.

5. You agree with Yeah right, fine, I think you are wrong.

Posted by: O | Aug 1 2019 0:35 utc | 115

Posted by: Grieved | Aug 1 2019 0:24 utc | 117

Thanks for proving my first point, thinkpol flying monkey.

Posted by: O | Aug 1 2019 0:37 utc | 116

Per Grieved @ 70, it seems much preferable to talk about suspected trolls than to engage them directly. With that in mind, it's interesting that O does not refute the accusations of them being a troll. Furthermore, whether O is a troll or not, their readiness to engage in ad-hominem attacks and other intellectually dishonest behavior isn't doing them any favors among the other (non-troll) commenters. Indeed, it points to O deliberately trying to verbally bully anyone who disagrees with them. Such behavior is unlikely to persuade anyone to change their mind, but it can persuade people to stop commenting. The answer, then, is for others to keep commenting, and maybe even more frequently.

Posted by: Cynica | Aug 1 2019 0:55 utc | 117

@Cynica 120

This is how a discussion about Israel and its crimes always ends up. With profanity and insults until the blogger, in this case b, decides to delete the whole comment section. And that happens by design. An ingenious way, if you think about it, to suffocate discussion and keep negative opinions about Israel out of comment sections of any blog.

Unfortunately, we fall for it every time, even though we know what is going to happen. I am guilty of it as well. Emotions are high and opinions strong. We want to express our frustrations in these blogs since we will end up possibly in jail if we voiced them any other way, for antisemitism.

The day that some genius finds a way to combat this label, will be the turning point in defeating this evil experiment called Zionism.

Posted by: Uncle Jon | Aug 1 2019 1:21 utc | 118

@ Cynica with the insightful observation about O

Thanks for that and I agree.

B treads a fine line that meanders over time regarding troll management. I am a bit surprised that O has not been banned before now with the ongoing ad hominem attacks against others instead of responding to the points they make.

This is SOP management style in many Western businesses and it gives truth to the reality that humanity responds better to not being bullied and provided inclusion into the business/management process....and it helps a great deal if profit is not in the business mission statement/goals

Socialism or barbarism will get you socialism anytime the public is given a choice

Posted by: psychohistorian | Aug 1 2019 1:29 utc | 119

120 Cybina - "..it can persuade people to stop commenting. The answer, then, is for others to keep commenting, and maybe even more frequently."

Thank you for putting this into words so well. I think you hit on an important point.

We have watched the empire lose ground with every aggressive move it makes, simply from quickening the resolve of its opponents to resist and to unite in resistance.

Just so with the trolls, or those who simply love the way of the troll, with the aggression that never lies far from the surface. They either push people away or concentrate wonderfully the minds of those who resist.

Perhaps, this is why I keep getting the impression that the lucidity of discourse in these threads has actually increased in recent months, exactly as the volume of trolling has increased. Trolling is an act of empire. Wonderful to suspect that it too may be creating the same opposite results as every other misbegotten act of the failing and increasingly naked emperor.

Posted by: Grieved | Aug 1 2019 1:30 utc | 120

"O deliberately trying to verbally bully anyone who disagrees with them. "
Posted by: Cynica | Aug 1 2019 0:55 utc | 120

Good grief, I don't use ad hominem unless someone starts using them on me first, like constantly calling me a troll. Have you read nothing in my response to you at 118?

Furthermore you could look at every thread i ever engaged in that I don't bully anyone and when folks engage me in a cordial manner I do the same. Like I am with you at this moment.

Unlike so many folks at this site I don't have a 'troll detector' so I never call anyone that because I am not one. My entire conversation with "Yeah Right" not once does it cross my mind that his opinions where not genuine. Sure it got testy there for a while in particular when he/she made some wry comment about me feeling "manly" about the IDF and zionist shill(which make no sense at all when reviewing my comment history) then alluding to effeminate comments about me.

But I don't take that garbage personally cause Yeah Right doesn't know anything about me. But I will return fire when fired uponed.

However it is quite annoying to come to this site where a few commenters have placed it upon themselves to be the 'troll detectors' when in fact all they are is thought police.

Posted by: O | Aug 1 2019 1:33 utc | 121

@Uncle Jon #121

In fairness, O doesn't seem to be taking Israel's side. This might be speculative, but the general idea that O seems to be promoting is "resistance is futile" - that the boot is already stamping on the human face, and will forever more. When persuaded of that idea, most people take an attitude of hopelessness and thereby passivity. Those who don't typically swing the other way to extreme yet premature resistance, which 1) is self-defeating (if not suicidal) due to its prematurity and 2) thereby engenders the notion that resistance really is futile. Who accordingly benefits from this idea? Those who want to remain in power. Thus they and their agents are the most likely to promote it.

Posted by: Cynica | Aug 1 2019 1:51 utc | 122

@ Uncle Jon who wrote
"
The day that some genius finds a way to combat this label, will be the turning point in defeating this evil experiment called Zionism.
"
I continue to posit that my focus on the structure of the social contract that has private finance instead of public is the perfect combat to identity politics played any which way.

I have yet to find anyone proving that those that own global private finance and all the rest of the world are all of one ethnic/identity politic group. People in power come and go whether we see them moving he levers or not. If we change the structure so whoever it is does not have control of the levers anymore, I suspect our evil experiment problems will diminish.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Aug 1 2019 1:52 utc | 123

"This might be speculative, but the general idea that O seems to be promoting is "resistance is futile" - that the boot is already stamping on the human face, and will forever more."
Posted by: Cynica | Aug 1 2019 1:51 utc | 125

Another mischaracterization of my point of view. My opinions are how I see the world as currently configured. I have never promoted that people should just give up in creating a more equitable and just world. Was Orwell telling people to just give up?

Posted by: O | Aug 1 2019 2:00 utc | 124

Grieved @123--

"Wonderful to suspect that it too may be creating the same opposite results as every other misbegotten act of the failing and increasingly naked emperor."

Yes, it's a way in which the agents of Empire--the System--even if just a lowly troll can be fought against without physical combat to burnish the psyche and increase self-efficacy. IMO, once they are recognized, trolls must be ignored so the discourse isn't impeded, which is one of a troll's goals. It doesn't matter if a troll posts 100 comments to itself as they can all be ignored and scrolled by, and troll activity can be seen by the main page's recent comment roster. If the troll's salaried, it will be difficult to oust; those that are paid by the piece/reply are easy to rid by ignoring.

The Outlaw US Empire's desperation is escalating. It's social intelligence media now openly censor where just a few years ago that would be unthinkable. The Narrative's a much harder sell. The election cycle's doing a good job so far in actually getting the fundamentally important questions of War, Peace, Welfare/Healthcare/Jobs talked and written about on a daily basis. Then there's the display of Media Arrogance. Lots of meat for a hungry polity to chew on.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 1 2019 2:04 utc | 125

One does not have to explicitly promote the idea that people should just give up in creating a more equitable and just world. One simply has to promote the idea that the world is ruled by a conspiracy of people with essentially god-like power. Those who buy into that idea will naturally draw the conclusions that 1) the conspiracy will rule the world indefinitely and 2) therefore it's pointless to resist.

Was Orwell telling people to just give up? Maybe. There doesn't seem to be a clear answer.

Posted by: Cynica | Aug 1 2019 2:12 utc | 126

O @124:

... quite annoying to come to this site where a few commenters have placed it upon themselves to be the 'troll detectors' when in fact all they are is thought police.

We've seen many variants of the Putin is a Zionist! Hasbara propaganda meme. It's quite annoying to refute that BS time and time again.

Each "troll" that pushes this dumbass meme insists that they have a unique insight and is really, really trying to be helpful by conveying that insight.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Aug 1 2019 2:17 utc | 127

"Those who buy into that idea will naturally draw the conclusions that 1) the conspiracy will rule the world indefinitely and 2) therefore it's pointless to resist."

Posted by: Cynica | Aug 1 2019 2:12 utc | 129


That is mere conjecture and actually the truth may be the complete opposite when many in this website talk about how the Anglo-Zionist empire is flailing and failing.


Orwell has a humanist, generally humanist tend to have a positive view on humanity getting better.

Posted by: O | Aug 1 2019 2:23 utc | 128

"Each "troll" that pushes this dumbass meme insists that they have a unique insight and is really, really trying to be helpful by conveying that insight."
Posted by: Jackrabbit | Aug 1 2019 2:17 utc | 130

Again that is just your opinion, you don't know for certain that he isn't.

Posted by: O | Aug 1 2019 2:26 utc | 129

When those who don't buy into the idea of the all-powerful cabal raise cogent objections to the person promoting that idea, and that person meets those objections by reasserting the idea with increasing force, it would seem that that person is treating the idea as more than mere conjecture.

Orwell may have been a humanist only in the sense that he held out hope (however small) that humanity wasn't utterly doomed. Again the answer does not seem clear.

Posted by: Cynica | Aug 1 2019 2:30 utc | 130

Posted by: Cynica | Aug 1 2019 2:30 utc | 133

"Orwell may have been a humanist only in the sense that he held out hope (however small) that humanity wasn't utterly doomed. Again the answer does not seem clear" LOl you answered it yourself in the first sentence, then say its not clear, OK.

"When those who don't buy into the idea of the all-powerful cabal raise cogent objections to the person promoting that idea, and that person meets those objections by reasserting the idea with increasing force, it would seem that that person(which person are we talking about here) is treating the idea as more than mere conjecture." I really have no clue what you are saying here.

Posted by: O | Aug 1 2019 2:39 utc | 131

Uncle Jon @121 made the great observation that this article and its thread were originally about Israel and its relations in its region.

Thinking about this, I'm curious how people see the eventual future of Israel?

It seems obvious to me that the entity as it currently exists cannot endure, and that there must come a point before the ultimate extinction of the Palestinians that a very severe push back has to happen.

I have the odd faith that Israel will never use its nuclear weapons, but don't ask me to explain why this is. Maybe it's easier to parse all the other elements without bringing that one into the equation. I'm not sure.

But looking at the other elements, I find it impossible to conceive that the entirety of Israel would disappear. There are old people and fixed people who simply live where they live. I suspect a large majority of Israelis will leave, and I think this will happen because Israel's borders will be forced to shrink. But at a certain point, a certain sense of indigenousness may be felt to belong to those who have nowhere else to go, or who, with no threat to anyone else, simply don't want to leave their place.

Needless to say, these "remainers", by the very condition of offering no threat to their neighbors, will have ceased to be the Israelis as we know them today.

In short, Zionism must depart the land. And whoever is left must decide to build a peace.

But the timetable for all this, and the forces that bring it about, are not clear to me. I remember what Sharmine Narwani said in that recent Renegade, Inc interview, something like: "You can never predict what will happen in this region, never."

Posted by: Grieved | Aug 1 2019 2:46 utc | 132

It appears that O is unable or unwilling to attempt a cogent refutation of this commenter's last post. O is likely not acting in good faith, given their baffling assertion that they really have no clue what this commenter was saying.

Posted by: Cynica | Aug 1 2019 2:47 utc | 133

Posted by: Cynica | Aug 1 2019 2:47 utc | 136
smh.... yawn...Whatever.

Posted by: O | Aug 1 2019 2:52 utc | 134

@Cynica 125

I wasn’t particularly talking about O but since you brought it up, O’s opinion is not based on historical facts. Exhibit A is the Soviet-Afghan war. The Soviets entered that war with full confidence and never mind bitch slap, they kick the shit out of the Afghan population. But in the end, resistance, similar to what Asad is doing prevailed. Of course with a little help from the moral and angelic US government, who is always on the side of the weak.

The Soviets had to leave, admitting defeat and see their empire collapse within a few years from the financial debacle.

O should know that exact same thing is happening with Asad and Syria. With a little help from Iran, Russia and Hezbollah, he is resisting and grinding the Israel/US war machine down and giving enough time to place strategic bases manned by Iran and Hezbollah in Israel’s Northern and eastern flank. And when the time comes, Israel does not have a choice but to negotiate. Otherwise, Adios Zionistan.

At this time, Asad is not only resisting but maybe prevailing. He is changing the strategic face of the ME.

I implore O to not be fooled by these random attacks by the IDF. Netanyahu and the ilk are trembling in their shorts. Iran is a thorn that is permanently implanted in their Tokhus. Furthermore, Morale among IDF rank and file is at an all time low. Many of these ex soldiers are in Kashmir high as a kite. Psychological scars are way too deep. And the financial burden of a permanent war will eventually take its toll, just like the Soviets.

Pay back is sweet, Putin is singing.

Posted by: Uncle Jon | Aug 1 2019 2:53 utc | 135

One can only wonder why O bothered to make that last post of theirs. If O is no longer willing to engage, then all O has to do is stop posting.

Posted by: Cynica | Aug 1 2019 3:01 utc | 136

@pschohistorian 126

....”If we change the structure so whoever it is does not have control of the levers anymore, I suspect our evil experiment problems will diminish.”.

Easier said than done.

I have to disagree with your identity politics analysis. There is overwhelming evidence that private finance and Zionism are intertwined to the point of no separation. Whether the ideology controls private finance or banking drives the experiment forward. The difference is unrecognizable and frankly academic.

But I do agree that it has to be diminished and/or destroyed at its core. We will not see it in our lifetime, though.

Posted by: Uncle Jon | Aug 1 2019 3:09 utc | 137

@Grieved 135

I think about the enduring hostilities often. And wonder that Israeli atrocities and their special status couldn’t possibly last. Not in this era. For they have abused it for far too long.

But the longer I think about it, the more I realize that they only understand the language of force. Forget about negotiations and talks. They have demonstrated that they are a belligerent and spoiled bunch and will not stop till they get what they want. And I think that is what will eventually happen. A full scale war.

What Jared of Arabia is trying to do is finish the Zionist project once and for all with his ridiculous plan and then, will come the push back that you spoke about and it will not end well for Israel. Whether Israel survives or win the war, it will be left in ruins with most of its population decimated. Because it is in an utterly a geographically vulnerable position.

I can’t fathom they will use their nukes or, more like, be allowed to go that far. That will bring global calamity.

I don't subscribe to prophecies, but Armageddon, according to Nostradamus, starts with a “prince” rising from Persia to stamp down the unjust countries to the west. Forgive me for this, but where we are, at this time in the world, it is not implausible and has got me thinking.

Posted by: Uncle Jon | Aug 1 2019 3:33 utc | 138

@111 "Your logic: Treat the symptoms instead of the root cause of the disease."

No, actually. Quite the opposite.

Deal with the infection of the Syrian body-politic first. Turn your attention to the skin-rash later.

You know, when the dangerous stuff is behind you.

Because that is the thing that you refuse to accept: these Israeli raids are simply annoying distractions. The word "pointless" best describes them.

They don't alter the strategic situation in the slightest.

Their import at the tactical level is... nil.

They are the dictionary-definition of virtue-politicking by Likud. Nothing more. No less.

Assad has been advised well: if an Israeli jet-jockey is stupid enough to stick his head up then, yeah, sure, take the shot. Otherwise just brush it off as the annoying little pointless-gesture that it is.

You want Syria to go to war over pointless gestures?

How very Zionist of you.

Posted by: Yeah, Right | Aug 1 2019 3:59 utc | 139

@135 grieved.. i mostly see it like you and @142 uncle jon.. i think however that the observations that laguerre made much earlier in the thread - see@75 and etc. etc are really bang on and worth reading again, if by chance you or others missed their comments.. i can't see israel surviving, especially not in the position they want to hold to which is one of constant war, or positioning for war.. it is unsustainable...

@141 donkey... i mostly agree with you... however @120 cynica makes an excellent observation that goes to the heart of why moa is valued by many here... "readiness to engage in ad-hominem attacks and other intellectually dishonest behavior isn't doing them any favors..." i disagree with you @144 with ''putin is an ally of israel''.. i see him as neutral as opposed to an ally.. in this regard i think putin is extremely diplomatic and even if he holds a position of favouritism, it is very hard to pick up.. i see him as the consumate chess player looking at the end game, as opposed to someone like erdogan and many other leaders who don't have the degree of long range vision to be able to play on the world stage in a way that would serve them and their country to the best of their interest.. i don't really care what anyone says about my view on putin - i am calling it as i see it..

Posted by: james | Aug 1 2019 4:17 utc | 140

donkey - okay,thanks.. i guess i was reading it wrong!!! all good!

Posted by: james | Aug 1 2019 4:45 utc | 141

elijah j magneir has a good article up today -

Why did the UK commander of HM Montrose refrain from firing on the IRGC? Who in Iran gave orders to capture the “Stena Impero”?

Posted by: james | Aug 1 2019 4:52 utc | 142

i think that is true too!

Posted by: james | Aug 1 2019 4:56 utc | 143

@ Uncle Jon who wrote
"
Whether the ideology controls private finance or banking drives the experiment forward. The difference is unrecognizable and frankly academic.
"
I disagree with the academic part STRONGLY

In one you are talking about an "ethnic/religious group of humans" and the other is a social organizational construct kept in place by the ongoing conflict referred to earlier.

There is a whole lot difference between folks like China and such getting together and agreeing that the social organization should have public finance instead of private at its core
AND
Any group or groups/individuals getting together to attack a specific "ethnic/religious group of humans".

To your easier said than done, please explain your trajectory of the China led Steamroller against fiat private finance.

I am almost 71 and expect to see the change in what is left of my lifetime.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Aug 1 2019 5:02 utc | 144

@140 Uncle Jon - "overwhelming evidence that private finance and Zionism are intertwined to the point of no separation. Whether the ideology controls private finance or banking drives the experiment forward. The difference is unrecognizable and frankly academic."

I'm completely with you except for deciding which is the cart and which the horse.

For my money - and really I should call it their money - it was the banker that created the Zionist. The Rothschild of the day was co-founder of the Zionist organization. Any history will show that (certainly Alison Weir). And I don't think the banker is recruited by anyone, ever. It has to be the other way around.

So I consider that the money-changers have been around since before Christ, and Zionism is by comparison a recent thing. In the same way that ISIS, for example is an even more recent thing.

And I think that the bankers always need their agents, their fixers and frighteners to go out and scare the world into the chaos of fear, and break a few legs at times, just to keep things agitated. Agitation is where the money is made - as Warren Buffet says, "Buy when there's blood in the streets."

Zionism, by this reckoning, is no more than a tool of bankers. Which means that under the right circumstances, Zionism could be abandoned as an agent, and thrown to the wolves. And Jewry, in this context, is nothing but cover - human shields.

All this means two things. One is that the Zionist operation (it is no more than that, I think) could be liquidated - and I suppose this means Israel could go. Two, is that the true enemy would still remain. But that would be a different war, in a different theater, in a time that is inevitable but which doesn't seem clear at present.

Posted by: Grieved | Aug 1 2019 5:22 utc | 145

@ Grieved

You are always such a joy to read! Thanks for your many posts recently!

Posted by: BM | Aug 1 2019 8:40 utc | 146

Totally off the mark about the topic of conversation or my point of view that I was expressing.

Go back and read my other postings on this thread before trying to lecture someone.

Posted by: O | Jul 31 2019 21:56 utc | 107

No it is not. Go back and read the particular line of yours I quoted and commented upon.

And do not lecture me which of your many claims I am allowed to comment and which I am not, you are not exceptional enough.

Posted by: Arioch | Aug 1 2019 9:33 utc | 147

Why does anyone even respond to this "O" alias? It revealed itself for what it is several threads back.

Posted by: Grieved | Aug 1 2019 0:24 utc | 117

Because this is public place.

Public debates are being held FOR PUBLIC not for opponent.
And, for future public who maybe will read this thread in a week, or month, or year - for them too.

Posted by: Arioch | Aug 1 2019 9:35 utc | 148

> I am a bit surprised that O has not been banned

Posted by: psychohistorian | Aug 1 2019 1:29 utc | 122


It would be rather hard to do technically, bordering with impossible: this forum does not require in-advance registration to post comments here.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Indeed, it points to O deliberately trying to verbally bully anyone who disagrees with them. Such behavior is unlikely to persuade anyone to change their mind, but it can persuade people to stop commenting.

Posted by: Cynica | Aug 1 2019 0:55 utc | 120

More importantly, it can persuade people from READING.
What is interesting in seeing few people throwing feces at one another online? We all saw it more than enough.

Degrading this thoughtful forum into mindless and boring bashing can be the aim.

Posted by: Arioch | Aug 1 2019 9:42 utc | 149

......kick the shit out of the Afghan population. But in the end, resistance, similar to what Asad is doing prevailed.

....The Soviets had to leave, admitting defeat and see their empire collapse within a few years from the financial debacle.

Posted by: Uncle Jon | Aug 1 2019 2:53 utc | 138

That is overly simplified.

First of all, there were different factions in Afghanistan government and population.
It can not be said USSR drove in to invade and "kick Afghani".
USSR was pulled in by one Afghani factions in their infighting against another one.
And, after a lot of Soviet deliberation. After all pre-"invasion" government was nominally pro-Soviet too, and to help Najibullah was to backstab Amin. Backstabbing is perhaps how you win one country, but also is how you alienate all their neighbors. It is often said Amin was slowly drifting towards USA and would soon become something like Yanukovich: American puppet waving Soviet flags and attributing all the problems of his pro-American policies on Kremlin's alleged "commands". So, USSR had to get rid of him. Maybe so, maybe not. However, Najibullah's faction to have their coup to succeed needed to secure Soviet military support, and after years of persuading they finally pocketed it.
But it was no more "beating Afghani" on Soviet parts that it was "beating Chinese" on Soviet and American parts after August 1945.

Second, while USSR was rotting since at least 1970s and collapsed in 1990s - it does not mean Afghanistan war was the cause of that process, rather one of many parts or even effects of it. Correlation is not causation.

Third, it was not "defeated" either. When USSR left Najibullah's government was economically sound, no less than Asad's was in 2011. Granted, Najibullah's government could not sustain itself economically amidst slow civil war, and when USSR collapsed and economic helps ceased ot flow - then Najibullah's state state shrinking and eventually collapsed too. However would USSR persist and keep economic support to Kabul - Najibullah would still rule most of Afghanistan. It was nothing like military defeat.

Posted by: Arioch | Aug 1 2019 9:59 utc | 150

> When USSR left Najibullah's government was economically sound, no less than Asad's was in 2011

oooops! they were militarily sound of course

Posted by: Arioch | Aug 1 2019 10:02 utc | 151

Posted by: somebody | Jul 31 2019 22:01 utc | 108

Bizarre comparison of Israel and Britain. The two situations are in no way comparable. And to make everything generic loses all meaning. The one is an island protected by the sea, and the other an alien colony on the edge of a continent, who have chosen to be in eternal war with their neighbours. Guess which is going to survive better.

Posted by: Laguerre | Aug 1 2019 10:20 utc | 152

Grieved says:

Thinking about this, I'm curious how people see the eventual future of Israel

i see exodus and dispersion for many Israeli jews(there really aren't that many of them), the subsuming of Israel into the greater Levant, and a life of relative harmony for the remainers...much like their coreligionists in places like Iran, where they even have a representative in parliament.

outside of the main cities and the illegal settlements, Israel is already an Arab country.

and i kinda doubt that any of those dual citizens inside the beltway will be retiring to the leafy suburbs of Tel Aviv.

Posted by: john | Aug 1 2019 10:37 utc | 153

#105

Its pretty ironic that the US is already sucking hard on the imperialism front: China's Belt and Road "imperialism" is much cheaper and works far better than the true blue militaristic version.

Posted by: Jonathan | Aug 1 2019 12:27 utc | 154

Posted by: Laguerre | Aug 1 2019 10:20 utc | 160

Some Scottish and Irish people seem to consider themselves colonized.

It is pretty generic. You will find very few "pure" "nation" states in the world.
The idea is derived from the French revolution which needed a new definition of souvereign. The French (as in the US) based it on territory. It did not take long before they crowned an emperor for expansion and before French occupied territories developed their own definition of nation based on language. This did not work very well either.

The concept never did and does not work in Europe and is completely alien to other parts of the world. Israel as a nation state is a failed European concept.

Posted by: somebody | Aug 1 2019 12:55 utc | 155

donkeytale @144:

... face the facts. Putin is an ally of Israel. This doesn't necessarily make him a zionist at all. he may or may not be. This makes him an expert practitioner of realpolitik ...

The "Putin is a Zionist" Hasbara propaganda meme has many forms. Most are not as stark as Putin being an actual Zionist. They all posit that Putin has a love or secret love for Israeli, or Chabad, or some political itch that he's gotta scratch. And they all end with the same conclusion: Putin favors Israel.

Your "Putin is an ally of Israel", is just another form of "Putin is a Zionist" BS as it posits Putin's personal favoritism toward Israel.

Russia has taken actions and positions that are directly opposed to Israel's stated interests: intervening in Syria to support Assad and backing Iran in its dispute with US+Israel. Hasbara propaganda ignores this instead plays up Israeli strikes on Iranian assets (mostly) in Syria and Putin-Netanyahu meetings.

"Real politik"? If Putin favors Israel or any country/group over Russia or Russian allies, then he's not practicing real politik, is he? But I would further argue that Putin's "real politik" is not as craven as that term implies - Russian foreign policy is much more principled.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Aug 1 2019 13:17 utc | 156

somebody @63

Apples and oranges. Israel is a theocracy led by a cult (Zionism).

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Aug 1 2019 13:27 utc | 157

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Aug 1 2019 13:27 utc | 165

Not really. Zionism is secular. Jewish religious orthodoxy is un-zionist.
There are some ideological mergers that are only partly functional.

Look here - Zionism is not Judaism

Posted by: somebody | Aug 1 2019 14:05 utc | 158

somebody

Cults are about power, not religion, so of course Zionism is secular and thus "Zionism is not Judism" becomes a truism.

Despite this, Israel is a theocracy that is led by the Zionist cult. They made it clear that it's a theocracy last year when they changed the "Basic Law", declaring that "the right to exercise national self-determination" in Israel is "unique to the Jewish people."

Apples and Oranges
Your attempt to normalize Israel by comparing it to Western pluralistic democracies fails because Israel's governance lies somewhere between a theocratic democracy (like Iran) and theocratic monarchy (like Saudi Arabia).

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Aug 1 2019 14:36 utc | 159

Posted by: Arioch | Aug 1 2019 9:33 utc | 155

You are just interpreting that when I said 'cops" I meant Russia, which I didn't, I was meaning the international community that supposedly abides by the rule of law, in particular section 5, and 6 of this document.
https://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/50/ares50-172.htm

Again you are wrong and way off base.

Posted by: O | Aug 1 2019 14:48 utc | 160

Posted by: donkeytale | Aug 1 2019 3:25 utc | 141
"Let's leave the judgment calls on who is actually trolling to b. If he thinks different ideas which might be intelligently expressed is a problem for his blog than I believe he will handle it on his own."

This is the most poignant thing said in regards to these thinkpol flying monkeys.

Posted by: O | Aug 1 2019 14:51 utc | 161

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Aug 1 2019 14:36 utc | 167

How about some logic?

so of course Zionism is secular

They made it clear that it's a theocracy last year when they changed the "Basic Law", declaring that "the right to exercise national self-determination" in Israel is "unique to the Jewish people."

"unique to the Jewish people" IS NOT "unique to Judaism"

Zionism has taken the definition who is Jewish from anti-semitism.
Religion has a role in it but it is not exclusive.

The 1970 amendment was induced by the debate on "Who is a Jew?". Until then the law did not refer to the question. There are several explanations for the decision to be so inclusive. One is that as the Nuremberg Laws did not use a halakhic definition in its definition of "Who is a Jew", the Law of Return definition for citizenship eligibility is not halakhic either. Another explanation is the 1968 wave of immigration from Poland, following an antisemitic campaign by the government. These immigrants were very assimilated and had many non-Jewish family members.[11]

A second explanation is that in order to increase immigration levels so as to offset the "demographic threat" posed by the growth of the Arab population, the law expanded the base group of those eligible to immigrate to Israel.[12]

A third explanation promoted by religious Jews is that the overwhelmingly secular leadership in Israel sought to undermine the influence of religious elements in Israeli politics and society by allowing more secular Jews and their non-Jewish spouses to immigrate.[13]

There are no valid definitions of people and nations. Neither language nor place of birth nor religion will do.

Posted by: somebody | Aug 1 2019 14:56 utc | 162

Posted by: donkeytale | Aug 1 2019 4:02 utc | 144
"...face the facts. Putin is an ally of Israel. This doesn't necessarily make him a zionist at all. he may or may not be. "

I would argue he is a zionist tool just by the evidence I have put out before.

Posted by: O | Aug 1 2019 14:58 utc | 163

Posted by: Yeah, Right | Aug 1 2019 3:59 utc | 143

Again the point isn't how effective Israel's strikes into Syria are, it is that they are allowed to do them in the first place.

Posted by: O | Aug 1 2019 15:04 utc | 164

"Not really. Zionism is secular. Jewish religious orthodoxy is un-zionist.
There are some ideological mergers that are only partly functional."
Posted by: somebody | Aug 1 2019 14:05 utc | 166

I would agree and would say that a subset of the orthodox community have incorporated zionist philosophy into their eschatology in particular the Chabad Lubavitch religious mafia.

Posted by: O | Aug 1 2019 15:10 utc | 165

add to 170

This here - in case you don't realize - is the definition of "Jewish" by the Nurenberg laws

The Nuremberg Laws, as they became known, did not define a "Jew" as someone with particular religious beliefs. Instead, anyone who had three or four Jewish grandparents was defined as a Jew, regardless of whether that individual identified himself or herself as a Jew or belonged to the Jewish religious community. Many Germans who had not practiced Judaism for years found themselves caught in the grip of Nazi terror. Even people with Jewish grandparents who had converted to Christianity were defined as Jews.

The Nurenberg laws were proclaimed in 1935, so grandparents would be born around 1850, depending on how old you were. There was no civil marriage then. Napoleon had introduced it but restauration stopped it. So the only valid proof could be found in church books. If your grandparents had converted to christianity (as for example the father of Karl Marx had done to be able to continue to practice as a lawyer) you were lucky. So the Nurenburg definition was religious for grandparents but stopped being religious for parents.

Posted by: somebody | Aug 1 2019 15:14 utc | 166

add to 174

You can go back to Theodor Herzl who clearly states the reason for there being a Jewish nation by their persecution. Religion has no part in it.

No one can deny the gravity of the situation of the Jews. Wherever they live in perceptible numbers, they are more or less persecuted. Their equality before the law, granted by statute, has become practically a dead letter. They are debarred from filling even moderately high positions, either in the army, or in any public or private capacity. And attempts are made to thrust them out of business also: "Don't buy from Jews!"

Attacks in Parliaments, in assemblies, in the press, in the pulpit, in the street, on journeys--for example, their exclusion from certain hotels--even in places of recreation, become daily more numerous. The forms of persecution varying according to the countries and social circles in which they occur. In Russia, imposts are levied on Jewish villages; in Rumania, a few persons are put to death; in Germany, they get a good beating occasionally; in Austria, Anti-Semites exercise terrorism over all public life; in Algeria, there are traveling agitators; in Paris, the Jews are shut out of the so-called best social circles and excluded from clubs. Shades of anti-Jewish feeling are innumerable. But this is not to be an attempt to make out a doleful category of Jewish hardships.

I do not intend to arouse sympathetic emotions on our behalf. That would be foolish, futile, and undignified proceeding. I shall content myself with putting the following questions to the Jews: Is it not true that, in countries where we live in perceptible numbers, the position of Jewish lawyers, doctors, technicians, teachers, and employees of all descriptions becomes daily more intolerable? Is it not true, that the Jewish middle classes are seriously threatened? Is it not true, that the passions of the mob are incited against our wealthy people? Is it not true, that our poor endure greater sufferings than any other proletariat? I think that this external pressure makes itself felt everywhere. In our economically upper classes it causes discomfort, in our middle classes continual and grave anxieties, in our lower classes absolute despair.

Everything tends, in fact, to one and the same conclusion, which is clearly enunciated in that classic Berlin phrase: "Juden Raus" (Out with the Jews !)...

This is from 1895 - before the Holocaust happened.

Posted by: somebody | Aug 1 2019 15:26 utc | 167

Somebody @ 175
I am against persecution of any kind ! And I am sure most commentators here would say the same.
Israel is beyound doubt directly persecuting Palestine, israel is indirectly persecuting UK’s Jeremy Corbyn and the left of the Labour Party for Israel’s own political reasons (interfering with another country’s democracy) not least by Israeli lobby groups and Israel’s vice like grip on all the media !
So for Israel to suggest it is being persecuted is total hypocrisy!
A self inflicted, self-fullfilling prophecy,
Israel is the abused (historacly) turned abuser, sadly not uncommon!

Posted by: Mark2 | Aug 1 2019 16:24 utc | 168

"Private finance" arose before the organizing of the Hebrew/Judaic religion, and of course well before Christianity and Islam. Mesopotamian Regal Debt Jubilee/Debt Forgiveness predate Mosaic Law--the Ten Commandments--from which it arose. Hudson and his team's work on the history of debt, money and finance--ancient political-economy--is vital to this entire debate. What happened chronologically is clear--Creditors came to have ever more power to the point where they were able to resist Regal Debt Forgiveness, and violate the Laws within at least one socio-cultural arrangement--The Hebrews dwelling in Palestine. The nature of Revolution within the Greek City-States was all related to Creditors and their power of Debt waged against commoners, and the same transited to Rome, where an Empire based on Tribute and Debt grew widely geographically. As it grew, it gained the new rising religion as an ally in its works, sanctifying usury, which was 100% antithetical to its radical revolutionary namesake Jesus the Christ whose fame and fate were tied to trying to resurrect Mosaic Law within Palestine--the biblical stories of his life can all be explained through the lens of debt forgiveness. Usury is theft and against the 8th Commandment. The hierarchy of Judaism followed by Christianity have had to spin that more than any other political-economic point in human history to justify its existence. If the 8th Commandment says usury is theft, how can the Vatican justify its wealth? How can any wealthy Jew? It's very simple; they cannot without resorting to some form of prevarication.

Usury is Theft. Therefore, private finance based on usury is an illegal under Judaic and Christian Law. And yes, it's also theft under Islamic Law, which essentially restates Mosaic Law as its own. Islamic Law is one of the last bastions holding usury is theft which is why it's attacked by the Private Finance Empire. China doesn't hold usury to be illegal; rather, it sees money as a tool to enhance the nature of humanity and thus its belonging to a public utility with any debt incurred seen as another tool to advance the human condition--not to enrich a small portion of society at the expense of the masses as was done under Feudal China. Russia with its values aimed at widely enriching the human condition is turning towards China's model after being violently raped by Western financial entities supported by the Outlaw US Empire and its vassals.

Debt forgiveness was born in polytheistic political-economies where usury wasn't considered illegal, although it was seen and known to be very damaging to the body-politic and the Regal structure--which at the time would be considered the state/nation. Usury made its way into religion as against God because the previous relief offered by debt forgiveness was being usurped by Creditors. If a creditor instituted usury, it could then be held as a heretic and exiled or put to death, and could thus be controlled. But Creditors were able to buy protection from the religious authorities, then became the religious authorities which enabled them to make edicts justifying usury. And that's where we are today.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 1 2019 16:28 utc | 169

somebody @170:

unique to the Jewish people" IS NOT "unique to Judaism"

somebody @174: Nuremberg Laws

somebody @175: Religion has no part in it.

You are wrong and your historical references are designed to mislead.

While the Law of Return allowed every Jew to immigrate to Israel, it did not define who is a Jew, which brought on some legal issues such as the case of Rufeisen v Minister of the Interior in 1962. Oswald Rufeisen was a Polish Jew who had converted to Catholicism and sought to immigrate to Israel. The Supreme Court ruled that by converting to another religion he had forfeited his right to return. This decision of the court would make its way into the second amendment of the Law of Return in 1970 in which "Jew" was defined:

4B. For the purposes of this Law, "Jew" means a person who was born of a Jewish mother or has become converted to Judaism and who is not a member of another religion.

This interpretation differs from traditional Jewish religious law (Halakha), in which a person born Jewish and a member of another religion would be considered a Jew.

In 1999, the Supreme Court of Israel ruled that Jews or the descendants of Jews that actively practice a religion other than Judaism are not entitled to immigrate to Israel as they would no longer be considered Jews under the Law of Return, irrespective of their status under Halakah.

<> <> <> <> <>

Israel is “the Jewish State” and under Israeli law, Judaism is paramount in determining who is a Jew.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Aug 1 2019 16:30 utc | 170

Houthis have raised the pot and put Trump's King in check yet again by launching a ballistic missile at Dammam on Saudi's East coast very near Ras Tanura over 1200km away from Houthi territory. No report yet as to damage. If Ras Tanura can be interdicted, then Saudi oil exports will plummet. So much for illegally sanctioning Zarif!

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 1 2019 16:43 utc | 171

What a swamp to wade through.
> > > > > >< < < < <
Maybe @ Grieved prior page: Try:
Zionist Terrorist, Zionist Thug, Zionist Thief Occupied Palestine - Being Jewish had precious little to do with it; Many Israelis have not had a hand in it; There may be Zionists that are innocent too, even living ones.

> > > > > >< < < < <
Soviet occupation of Afghanistan - done at the invitation of the elected government of Afghanistan to forestall an attempted coup. A well presented narrative of this may be found in Khaled Hosseini's "The Kite Runner" along with a great read. Seems the Afghani king was deposed in a palace coup by his brother who in turn got himself deposed. An election was held and a socialist government was installed and began a program improving Afghan lives - much to the disapproval of certain unnamed hegemonic powers who about that time lost their listening posts in Iran to the Soviet activities in central Asia and Afghanistan offered a similar capacity. This is in generally the unhappy history of an impoverished and honourable people with a dangerous reputation on doing in imperial pretensions. There may be a happy ending yet.

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Aug 1 2019 16:53 utc | 172

@176 karlof1 Yes, usury is a creation going back to the nation-states of Sumer and later Akkad. A province of their priestly castes, it (and ritualistic magic) was later shared and teached to the Exilarch during the Neo-Babylonian Empire and forced Jewish exile. Hence the common appellation of "Mystery School of Babylon" among mystic currents. Fast forward to the middle ages for the presence of the Court Jews, the main financing agents of the Christian Kings who who eventually became today's banksters. Has nothing to do with religion, but skills..

Posted by: Lozion | Aug 1 2019 17:02 utc | 173

Lozion @180--

Thanks for your reply! I find the topic rather stimulating, which is probably what got Hudson hooked into researching it. For me the question is why the need for financing communally-based subsistence agriculture in the first place? The labor of all was done to make settled subsistence agriculture a realistic mode of living instead of horticulture/hunting or nomadic hunting with fishing/foraging relegated to the immediate oceanside. What caused the erection of hierarchies? Was it tied to the local belief system and its shaman caste? The contrived need to erect temples to various deities and the evolution of rites/ceremonies related to fertility. As related by Campbell, many South and Southwest Asian societies performed such rites where being chosen as the sacrificial object was an honor, until the god demanded more blood and captives became the objects. The current prevailing hypotheses as to the construction of Egypt's monumental architecture is that it was done as corvee labor provided freely by the populace, not by slaves. It seems Egypt was able to avoid the issue of debt since its richness was uniquely due to the Nile's distribution of Nature's bounty, similar to that of the Vedic peoples along South Asia's Sarasvati River who predated Egypt.

Indeed, when I was a preteen, I asked why did we need to earn money as previous societies and cultures didn't make it the be all and end all of their pursuits. What did those people know/do that we didn't? Why did they seem more at peace in a more equitable, sharing society, while we are all about competition and war? As you've seen, I still ask those same questions. There's gotta be a better way to make a living without dying trying or depriving/enslaving/killing others.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 1 2019 17:50 utc | 174

@ karlof1 | Aug 1 2019 16:28 utc | 176

Minority Report:
Few indeed are those these threads as well read as yourself and equally as rare with the ability to write as well as you. That a given, I find myself very uncomfortable with your reporting at said comment, there seems something ajar, amiss, in dislocation. Maybe it is because what you are writing is so (for a lack of better word) preordained, prearranged, predictable as if it were copied and pasted from the old testament directly. Reading David Graeber's Debt The First 5,000 Years, ISBN 978-1-61219-419-6 Melville House one leaves with differing conclusions than what you have given from Hudson's opus, conclusions sitting far more comfortably with other historical narratives such as Barry Cunliffe's Europe Between the Oceans,9,000 BC - AD 1,000 ISBN 978-0-300-17086-3 Yale University Press. Having only started reading "J is for Junk …", I am struck by a reliance on assertion and conjecture rather than rational arguments and facts, but then that may be how I read as well. I shall leave it go with I find your assertions somewhat flat, maybe hollow and misleading those not so well read as yourself.

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Aug 1 2019 17:55 utc | 175

Formerly T-Bear @182--

Thanks for your reply! I have Graeber's Debt awaiting the time for me to read it. What I wrote @176 & 181 are my current interpretations of that history and the narrative stemming from it which is always subject to revision based on new knowledge. Cunliffe I've never read. One problem the historian faces is knowing when to stop reading and write, which is difficult to assess when confronted with so many sources. More problematic is trying to provide historical roots to contemporary problems during a discourse about them. In this case, we're trying to come up with a credible solution to an age-old issue that might never have become an issue if history had taken a different course. Oh for a wayback machine and invisibility cloak!

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 1 2019 18:15 utc | 176

Top commander killed in the alleged attack:

A senior commander of Iran’s Quds Force, Abu Alfazl Sarabian, was killed in Iraq in an attack by “Israel and the United States” on July 19, according to Iran’s Young Journalists Club news agenc
https://www.jns.org/irgc-commander-killed-in-israeli-us-attack-on-iraqi-base/

Iranian source
https://www.yjc.ir/fa/news/7007741/%D8%AA%D8%B5%D8%A7%D9%88%DB%8C%D8%B1%DB%8C-%D8%A7%D8%B2-%D9%88%D8%B1%D9%88%D8%AF-%D9%BE%DB%8C%DA%A9%D8%B1-%D9%85%D8%B7%D9%87%D8%B1-%D8%B4%D9%87%DB%8C%D8%AF-%D8%A7%D8%A8%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%81%D8%B6%D9%84-%D8%B3%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%A8%DB%8C%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%A8%D9%87-%D9%85%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%AC-%D8%B4%D9%87%D8%AF%D8%A7

Seems there is alot of israeli disinformation going on here, that want to deny the attacks by Israel. Same attitude last summer when Israel attacked Syria repeatedly.
Ultimately one is a useful idiot for Israel to deny these 1000s of attacks.


Posted by: Zanon | Aug 1 2019 18:17 utc | 177

@ karlof1 | Aug 1 2019 18:15 utc | 183

So much to read, so little eternity left - I hear you loud and clear. And to be able to write as well … a surfeit of blessings. All I can look forward to is reincarnation to take effect quickly so I can continue reading.

I am having great difficulties with Hudson's "J Is for Junk …". I fear UMKC is right near the buckle of the bible belt and unrestrained opinion reigns socially. I am picking that reflection up from the book - mostly written opinion it seems. Maybe it will get better after the opening gambit attempt to command attention. Have much respect for Hudson but more for Black at UMKC.

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Aug 1 2019 18:36 utc | 178

Addendum @ 185

Highly recommended Cunliffe, historian emeritus at Cambridge if memory still serves. Just the title puts a light on a fairly unique spread of history; this spread he handled excellently. A Serendipitous find now a treasure in the library.

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Aug 1 2019 18:42 utc | 179

You are just interpreting that when I said 'cops" I meant Russia, which I didn't, I was meaning the international community that supposedly abides by the rule of law, in particular section 5, and 6 of this document.
https://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/50/ares50-172.htm

Posted by: O | Aug 1 2019 14:48 utc | 168

So his is international community" your personal cop, that is obliged to you to fight youtr fights with Israel ?

Also, how is "international community" being a cop standing within Syrian house? Except for USA and Iran - there is no one else inside Syria of the "international community"

The aforementioned sections indeed promise to AVOID misbehaviours, but do not promise to FIGHT other nation's fights. That is what UN SC resolutions are for. So blaming other countries for failing to attack Israel on your behals can not be based upon that document, quite the contrary. It is Israel who can quote that document demanding no one attacks them.

Posted by: Arioch | Aug 1 2019 20:49 utc | 180

Posted by: Arioch | Aug 1 2019 20:49 utc | 188
"It is Israel who can quote that document demanding no one attacks them."

LOl ok, now I see where you are coming from.

Posted by: O | Aug 1 2019 21:19 utc | 181

O

Apparently when US (or any other western state) do bad things you are free to condemn them here, which we should, however criticising Russia here when they do bad things, well...you are supposed not to expose that. That is why the analysis by the same people here gets flawed.

On S-300. S-300 seems useless since Syria is not allowed by Russia to use it against Israel to begin with.
Russia are simply too close to Israelis, just like the americans. Hopefully the guy that comes after Putin would change that relationship and focus in helping not Israel, but Iran, Syria, Palestine.

Posted by: Zanon | Aug 1 2019 21:29 utc | 182

"Seems there is alot of israeli disinformation going on here, that want to deny the attacks by Israel."
Posted by: Zanon | Aug 1 2019 18:17 utc | 185

I would agree, some are down playing Israel's strikes but also there assassination as just mere nuisances, try telling that to the families of the assassinated Iranian nuclear scientist. However there is something wonky about the dates from your 2 sources you posted.

Posted by: O | Aug 1 2019 21:32 utc | 183

Posted by: Zanon | Aug 1 2019 21:29 utc | 190

Yes the Putin loving fanboy fest here is a bit much.

Posted by: O | Aug 1 2019 21:34 utc | 184

O 191

Yes you might be right on that, unless there were attacks earlier in july that hasnt been reported yet.

Posted by: Zanon | Aug 1 2019 21:46 utc | 185

"Russia are simply too close to Israelis, just like the americans."
Posted by: Zanon | Aug 1 2019 21:29 utc | 190

And even more so that Russia is getting quite chummy to Saudi Arabia to the point that Iran is saying "hey! WTF". I am sure some Puting fanboy will chime in and say "hey they(Iran and Russia) not that upset look they are going to play some war games together real soon. Putin is the greatest person ever he is trying to make everyone his friend." I am not buying it because when Israel used Russians as human shields(IL 20 incident) Putin just shrugged it off as an unfortunate accident.

Posted by: O | Aug 1 2019 21:47 utc | 186

@172 "Again the point isn't how effective Israel's strikes into Syria are, it is that they are allowed to do them in the first place."

So you accept that these raids aren't a "bitch-slap" at all. Progress of sorts, I suppose.

You agree that they are ineffectual, and your objection to them is because of the poor optics that they present regarding the "allowance" of... someone... towards the Israelis.

Yeah, and.....?
So.… ?

To be fixated upon the pantomime theatre of the Israelis is to play their game.
Which, for you, appears to be the point.

Oh, yeah, and regarding the exchange @190 - @194. I take that as proof that O and Zanon are working from the same pre-prepared script and working from the same building, if not being one and the same person.

Posted by: Yeah, Right | Aug 1 2019 22:53 utc | 187

"So you accept that these raids aren't a "bitch-slap" at all. Progress of sorts, I suppose.

You agree that they are ineffectual, and your objection to them is because of the poor optics that they present regarding the "allowance" of... someone... towards the Israelis."
Posted by: Yeah, Right | Aug 1 2019 22:53 utc | 195

No I don't agree.

"Oh, yeah, and regarding the exchange @190 - @194. I take that as proof that O and Zanon are working from the same pre-prepared script and working from the same building, if not being one and the same person."

Posted by: Yeah, Right | Aug 1 2019 22:53 utc | 195


Oooh no you found out, although we are not the same person we do spend time in a lot of time in meetings with the top brass on how to handle your farts in a windstorm comments. Your delusions of grandeur have us all really scratching our heads over here. Got to go we are about have another meeting about you, it's called Operation : Inspector Clouseau.


I'll let you have the last word now since you have it all figured out now.

Posted by: O | Aug 2 2019 0:26 utc | 188

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Aug 1 2019 16:30 utc | 178

In 1999, the Supreme Court of Israel ruled that Jews or the descendants of Jews that actively practice a religion other than Judaism are not entitled to immigrate to Israel as they would no longer be considered Jews under the Law of Return, irrespective of their status under Halakah.

Sure. They did NOT rule that you cannot be secular. Israel's rulers would very much prefer that you are secular.


Posted by: Mark2 | Aug 1 2019 16:24 utc | 176

It is a co-dependency. No antisemitism = no reason for Israel. No Iranian threat ... So if one side stops doing what they are doing there might be a chance for peace. Problem is that there is a whole industry built on this now with vested interests. Similar to the Cold War industry. Gorbachev bet that all would end well if the Soviet Union stopped being a threat. Well .... Long term he will be right. Long term like half a century.

Posted by: somebody | Aug 2 2019 4:24 utc | 189

somebody @197

LOL. You're still spinning in a desperate attempt to reject the characterization of Israel as a theocratic state.

What the 1999 ruling means is that RELIGIOUS STATUS trumps ethnicity. Even if you qualify as a "Jew" by the traditional standard of having a Jewish mother (who herself was born of a Jewish mother and so on ...), you are NOT qualified to be a citizen of the State of Israel (the "Jewish State"!) if you have switched to a different religion.

Furthermore, while ethnic Jews that are "secular" might be allowed citizenship, Israel's theocratic nature is underscored by it's allowing anyone that has converted to Judaism to qualify for Israeli citizenship.

Note: I think its a safe assumption that the vast majority of 'secular Jews' have been raised in the Judaic tradition but are "nonpracticing". Israel's stance toward these Jews is very much like the Catholic church, which considers nonpracticing members to be Catholics unless they've taken steps to reject the faith.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Aug 2 2019 5:20 utc | 190

@ Grieved | Jul 31 2019 2:40 utc | 59

"The trolls are disgusting but since they have increased recently and so has the lucidity of your commentary, one wonders if there's a connection. What doesn't kill the conversation makes it stronger?"

Apt insight & appropriation of Twilight of the Idols: Epigrams & Arrows #8. If we complete the parallel aphorism it would read: From MoA academy.—What doesn't kill the conversation makes it stronger.

Posted by: Anacharsis | Aug 2 2019 8:40 utc | 191

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Aug 2 2019 5:20 utc | 198
Sorry, you have a problem with logic. There is no valid definition of "ethnicity", same as for "nation", you can try to use language, religion, territory it has all failed. Israel tries a mix of religion and common history of inequality and persecution.

Of course, Israel can not separate church from state as that would mean the end of its existence as a "Jewish state", but that does not mean it is a "theocracy" as you claim. Israelis have no legal problem to live the nightlife, the ruling parties are secular and in conflict with Haredi customs like not serving in the military or living the life of a scholar.

The problem Israel has defining its identity has its roots in European nationalism. It is not the only country with identity problems. Trumpism has opened the cracks.


Posted by: somebody | Aug 2 2019 8:54 utc | 192

somebody

The State of Israel is based on the belief that the Jewish God gave a certain speck of land to the Jewish people.

Now, most normal people will shrug and say that all of existence is a divine gift to all living things. But such an enlightened attitude is not shared by Zionist supremacist asshat manipulators who insist that occupying this God-given land is a religious duty.

It's logically consistent for Israel to make Judaism paramount in deciding who qualifies as an Israeli citizen because those who worship the Jewish God must, by definition, agree with the pronouncements of the Jewish God - no matter how wrong-headed they may be. And that's exactly what Israeli citizenship law does!

What's been missing - until last year's change to the Basic Law - is the explicit acknowledgement that Israel is not only a "Jewish homeland" but it is ruled (exclusively) by Jews. The Basic Law now says that "the right to exercise national self-determination" in Israel (the God-given place) is "unique to the Jewish people."

It follows, logically, that the "Jewish State" is really a Judaic State: a state that is established by and for worshipers of the Jewish God that gave them the land.

Lastly, those who criticize Israel can not logically be said to be "anti-Semitic" (racist) because Israel is a theocratic state.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Aug 2 2019 10:55 utc | 193

Regardless if it was an attack or not I found some articles which perhaps tell us that Israel will indeed start acting against Iran in Iraq (unless they have indeed already started?):

"Israel to conduct new offensives in Iraq soon: Newspaper"
https://www.iraqinews.com/iraq-war/israel-to-conduct-new-offensives-in-iraq-soon-newspaper/

"Israel Hints It May Target Alleged Iranian Ballistic Missiles Deployed in Iraq"
https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201809031067710460-israel-warns-could-strike-iranian-arms-in-iraq/

"Israel Obtained List of Iranian Targets in Iraq For Potential Strikes - Report"
https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201807211066560782-israel-iraq-iran-targets-list/

"Missiles Used in Iraq Attack Match Those Used by Israel in Syria Strikes, Kuwaiti Media Claims"
https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201907231076334767-missiles-used-in-iraq-attack-match-those-used-by-israel-in-syria-strikes-kuwaiti-media-claims/

Posted by: Zanon | Aug 2 2019 12:42 utc | 194

Another article on the alleged attack:

Iraq held secret meeting with Israel?

New Front or Secret Partner? Behind Iraq's Silence on Alleged Israeli Strikes

Even if there’s no clear answer, European diplomats say Israeli officials have been holding secret meetings with Iraqi government officials for some time now. Some of these meetings have even taken place in Israel.

https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/iraq/.premium-new-front-or-secret-partner-behind-iraq-s-silence-on-alleged-israeli-strikes-1.7615974

Posted by: Zanon | Aug 2 2019 17:17 utc | 195

Posted by: Zanon | Aug 2 2019 17:17 utc | 203

This is the Iranian article the Haaretz article is based on

It explains why Trump did his show of non-listening to a Iraqi Yezidi traumatized Nobel Peace Prize winner.

It was through IsraAID’s work with Yazidi refugees in the now-evacuated Petra camp in Greece that the organization’s Co-Chief Executive Officer Yotam Polizer came to realize that Israel could play an important role in the Yazidi cause.

“Unlike the Syrian refugees, who saw our logo with the Star of David and were maybe confused, the Yazidis greeted us with huge smiles. They said for them it was a natural connection,” Polizer says.

In the camps, he adds, it became clear the Yazidis wanted “not our financial support, but our mentorship.”

While in Israel, Nadia visited the Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial and Museum and the Museum of the History of the Jewish People, held meetings with Israeli lawmakers, and met with the President of Tel Aviv University together with Polizer in an effort to see Yazidi students brought to study in Israel.

“Like the Jews, the Yazidis have shown resilience in the face of oppression. Holding onto your identity can be a force of resistance. Every time we practice a traditional custom or stand up for one another we refuse to let our perpetrators be stronger than us,” Nadia says.

Posted by: somebody | Aug 2 2019 21:29 utc | 196

add to 204

The Yezidis are used to advocate for humanitarian intervention.

Frankly I don't know what Israel tries to achieve by claiming attacks on "Iranians" in Iraq. Yazidi areas are close to Kurdistan, so maybe the plan is to encourage Kurdish people to fight for independence (and Kirkuk).

Posted by: somebody | Aug 2 2019 22:09 utc | 197

Just a reminder that through it’s influence on U.K. and US politics, Israel created, armed, trained and funded ISIS. Leading to the mass killings of inocent people, the huge refugee crises (that no one talks about ) and the pitifully deluded state of the western public.

Posted by: Mark2 | Aug 3 2019 5:49 utc | 198

somebody

Frankly I don't know what Israel tries to achieve by claiming attacks on "Iranians" in Iraq

Perhaps Iraq is part of the multiple arab states and Israel increased meetings, I didnt thought Iraq would be one of those states that would do this though..

New article on the subject:
Is positive sentiment toward Israel on the rise in Iraq?
Read more: https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2019/08/iraq-israel-jewish-normalizing.html#ixzz5vXdmHfge

Posted by: Zanon | Aug 3 2019 12:45 utc | 199

Posted by: Zanon | Aug 3 2019 12:45 utc | 206

Israel has become irrelevant, maybe that is why they pretend they can do something.

Saudis are not going to make it against the Houthis and Russia has proposed a shared Gulf security architecture including Iran. Iran has offered talks to Saudi Arabia. At this stage they will have to accept.

Posted by: somebody | Aug 3 2019 13:21 utc | 200

« previous page | next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.