"In his remarks — Israel’s harshest criticism yet of the U.S. report — Avi Dichter said the assessment also cast doubt on American intelligence in general, including information about Palestinian security forces’ crackdown on militant groups. The Palestinian action is required as part of a U.S.-backed renewal of peace talks with Israel this month.
Dichter cautioned that a refusal to recognize Iran’s intentions to build weapons of mass destruction could lead to armed conflict in the Middle East.
He compared the possibility of such fighting to a surprise attack on Israel in 1973 by its Arab neighbors, which came to be known in Israel for the Yom Kippur Jewish holy day on which it began.
"The American misconception concerning Iran’s nuclear weapons is liable to lead to a regional Yom Kippur where Israel will be among the countries that are threatened," Dichter said in a speech in a suburb south of Tel Aviv, according to his spokesman, Mati Gil. "Something went wrong in the American blueprint for analyzing the severity of the Iranian nuclear threat."" Yahoo News
—————————————————————————
Yup. Tail wags dog. Mouse gives diving eagle the finger. Dog bites the hand, etc.
Israeli intelligence has been the foster child of American government for so long it is impossible to remember when anything was different. I suppose before ’56…. Maybe.
The reference to the "Yom Kippur War" is amusing since the surprise experienced by Israel was entirely the product of their own analytic failure.
In any event, now they have a satellite or two and they have arrived at their own theory of the state of mind of the Iranians. In that context, their officials speak grandly of "the American misconception of Iran’s nuclear weapons." My. My.
In fact what happened is that the US intelligence community punctured the balloon of illusion concerning Iran’s programs That balloon had been skilfully painted in gaudy colors that fit the Israeli "misconception" of the world. Now there is unbridled rage among the Jacobins, the Cheneyites and the Israeli government over an unexpected failure.
I hear that the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is going to make a visit to Israel. The Israelis actually say that they will make a maximum pitch to him for repudiation of the intelligence community’s work. That should be interesting since a lot of the intelligence community belongs to the Defense Department.
Then, there is the visit of the president, supposed to occur in January. Israelis have told me that he must be going there to coordinate the next moves in the Iran game. I told them that they should believe that his trip is connected to a renewed peace process.
They found that amusing. They do not believe there really is a peace process. pl
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071215/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_us_iran
Check the underside of our automobile any time you have cause to use it, for starters.
Our own UN Ambassador, Khalizad al Afghani, is simpatico w/ Dicther. Friday Lunch Club links to a 12.13.2007 Haaretz article which reports:
” The U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Zalmay Khalilzad, addressed the National Intelligence Estimate on the Iranian nuclear program on Thursday, saying that the United States “scored a [soccer] goal” against itself.
Khalilzad’s remarks were made during a speech Thursday morning at the Union of Reform Judaism’s biennial convention in San Diego, California. ”
In the same Haaretz article one cannot miss the irony of a politico injecting himself into intelligence while decrying such crap. Team B redux below:
“Republican Senator John Ensign plans to introduce legislation to create a bipartisan commission to produce an alternative report on the same intelligence.
“We just see politics injected into this,” said Tory Mazzola, Ensign’s spokesman. “When it comes to national security we really need to remove politics. We’re saying, let’s take a second look ”
Lincoln at one time quoted Jesus “a house divided against itself cannot stand.” Jesus used this to refute the charge that he was exorcising demons w/ satanic aid. Lincoln’s use was in a different context which certainly applies here. Civil War in the U.S. gov’t.
Well, here’s the WAPO chiming in with Joseph Weisberg letting the hoi-polloi know that basically, all spies are liars, probably double agents, so don’t believe any of it under “Why Is Spying So Hard?”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/14/AR2007121401519.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
I find a somewhat reliable measure of where things stand by the tenor of the slugs at Debkafile.
They are in full hysterical panic mode.
I am actually beginning to believe that the penny may have dropped, the emperor has no clothes, and that the tipping point of a gigantic pile of bs about to cascade down upon the pilers has, or soon will be, passed.
Who is the client state? We need to distance ourselves from these guys. There really appears to be a major push to get the US to precipitate another, even larger and more disastrous conflict. Under such conditions it is not hard to see why Iran would want a nuclear capability. Israel naturally wants us to pull the trigger and they know the Neocons would like to oblige. We have met the enemy and they are us if we let Israel maneuver us into this one.
Oy Vey. The apocalyptics are in charge of Israel. Shite is about to hit the fan, as we say over here.
Why in the lords name is it not possible for the US to keep a tighter grip on Israel, and force them to concessions.? They defy UN measures every day.
An additional factor to “bet” on is the likelihood that whomever gets elected as the 44th President come November 08, regardless if it be Democrat or Republican, will continue the “kowtow” tail-wags-dog foreign policy towards Israel as has been the bi-partisan accommodation since its birth.
The fat lady hasn’t finished singing, nor will she go away.
A seemingly permanent state of paranoia has subsumed “rational” Israeli foreign policy thought and politics.
Yes, even a paranoid has enemies, but that doesn’t make the paranoid any less paranoid.
The Neocon/Likud/Flathead dominance in both Israel and American foreign policy politics is not dead, but merely catching its breath. War with Iran is still very much on the table.
They (the Israelis) only have to win once, while we (the Americans) have to win every time.
All:
I would like to pose the following questions:
1- Why does US care so much about Israel [note the lobbying to get that state created in 1948, Nixon’s alert in 1973]?
2- Is this a religious issue for the American people – the Protestants I hasten to add?
3- Is there a formal defense treaty between US and Israel?
4- If there is no such treaty, would it be politically possible for US to offer such a treaty to Israel on the condition that she has well-defined borders that are internationally recognized?
5- If such a treaty exists, what is US committed to do in defense of Israel?
Pat,
I’m with you. Let’s have hearings – lots and lots of them. (I’m probably a thread or two late with this – please forgive!) Have never been prouder of the intelligence community. Let’s all hope they maintain their spine. Also think it reflects well on General Hayden who certainly could have quashed this (think Porter Goss here….). Makes earlier praise which Jim Bamford wrote about Hayden and his reputation at NSA (pre-Iraq war) and which I for one began to question a year or two ago, now ring perhaps very true indeed.
Money.
The Jewish community in the United States wields unbelievable financial power, and money wins elections…legally and illegally.
Money is the God in which the United States trusts.
The entire US has been brainwashed. We believe in the Mall.
Just No.’s 1&3 for now
1. w/o the need for allies b/c of their wealth, position, % influence (but they have surplus allies), have already addressed the IQ shift (115 average for US Ashkenazi) which leads to one out of very four Americans w/ an IQ over 140 being a Jewish-American. Most appear blind and reflexive Israeli supporters.
3. An informal defense treaty is already there. Uri Avnery puts the matter in a better perspective, “the tail wags the dog, and the dog wags the tail.” Irak was invaded, in part, b/c of Israel and the Iran project is, in part, Israel driven.
Krauthammer, the wheelchair bound psychiatrist-lawyer pundit flathead, tells the truth for once:
” And what were Nixon’s outer acts vis-a-vis Jews? Well, in 1973, he saved Israel from possible destruction with his massive weapons airlift during the Yom Kippur[(October 73] War. He even put the U.S. military on worldwide alert to keep the Russians from intervening on Egypt’s behalf. ”
Nixon On the Couch
see the wiki on
Operation_Nickel_Grass
w/o that massive American resupply, some say, the IDF would have had to resort to their nukes.
This question was asked, “Is this a religious issue for the American people – the Protestants I hasten to add?”
Only those Protestants that tend to be modern day pre-millennial dispensationalists (rapture) in their theology. The best known is Pastor John Hagee out of San Antonio.
I should add that after their experience in Lebanon, the Israeli’s are looking harder than ever for shleppers to take over the dirty work in the Middle East.
Recall: Israel’s vaunted army is the best in the Middle East. Israel has nuclear weapons. And the Sunni dictatorships that fear Iran are in Israel’s pocket: Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc.
But, somehow, the Israeli’s just don’t want to do it themselves. It’s shlepping, and they don’t shlep.
So American boys and girls have to get killed for them, to keep them safe.
Many thanks to Babak for asking the right questions here…
As far as Question (2), this is definitely a religious issue for Americans, and especially those of the conservative Protestant variety. The dispensationalists are a good example of this emerging Protestant/Israeli coalition, with their associated beliefs regarding the need for a revival of a Jewish state in all of former Israel.
Non-denominational Protestants often embrace dispensationalist beliefs (as I discovered when I moved to the Bible Belt and learned from my Evangelical friends of my great talent for papist apostasy), so this affection for a greater Israel is quite common among Protestants. Many well-known Evangelical figures (e.g., Jerry Falwell) have advanced the goals of the dispensationalist movement.
And the whole Left-Behind school of literature (*cough*) is found along the edges of this larger religious subculture.
Avi Dichter’s response to the NIE report is like manna from heaven. It gives Americans hope. 07 is turning out to be a very grand year.
And Dichter’s response sure did bring a lot of laughter, as the news just gets better and better. When it comes to the art of statecraft, the GOI of late just doesn’t get it, if they ever did at all. It is like watching Michael Jordan play baseball — a misapplication of talent. Dichter, who looks like Mel Brooks to me, should write comedy. He has that kind of talent.
The more publicity that the NIE garners, the greater the odds that the most recent NIE report will assume historical significance, perhaps on the same magnitude as Kennan’s “X” article. It looks to represent the beginning of a paradigm shift that started within the US intel community.
Proximate causation in history, at least to me, is not linear. It works more like a stone thrown in a pond that creates waves moving outward. This NEI report may effect history in the same way, and all for the better. It is a gift to the American people and those who believe in the experience of E Pluribus Unum. I sure hope the people take note. Congressional hearings would help.
Perhaps one day — if the NIE report does send the neoconservatives hurtling deeper into their death throes — the American people should consider commissioning a sculptor to create a statue to commemorate the accomplishment of the US intel community in 07. Their work shredded the most dangerous manifesto to arise in the American experience in awhile — “Leo Strauss and the World of Intelligence (By Which we do not mean Nous).”
“By which we do not mean Nous”. You got that right…totally soulless.
Since the NIE report, one hopes, destroyed the neoconservative manifesto as it existed in the US intel community, perhaps the statue should be done in the style of neo-classical. Neo-classical triumphs over neo-conservative. In my opinion, the greatest neo-classical sculptor in American history was Moses Jacob Ezekiel. His work is an American treasure. One of his greatest is a tribute to “religious liberty”.
Doubtless, Moses Jacob Ezekiel would have created a work of art that would have vanquished Dichter. As his name certainly implies, Moses Jacob Ezekiel has soul and he would have created a stunning piece of work as a tribute to the men and women of the US intel community of 07 — a neo-classical work that, as a historical metaphor, perhaps should be called “Sons of Liberty — By which we mean Nous”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Jacob_Ezekiel
This post is the perfect sequel to Habakkuk’s. While the neocons may have learned theory from Leo Strauss et al., I believe that they perfected their art from the Israeli PR machine, which has been turning BS into fertilizer for 60 years. It started when ethnic cleansing was depicted as frightened Arabs fleeing. However, we know that even the revered Yitzak Rabin participated in ethnic cleansing (it was in his book).
Israeli public relations experts are real pros and have successfully convinced the world of their supposedly progressive, enlightened democracy while demonizing whomever they choose. Now they have set themselves the task of convincing the world (along with their neocon co-conspirators) that Iran must be attacked. Given their track record, it’s not a threat to be taken lightly.
Today over in the Mudline on the Doonesbury page at Slate.com John Bolton opines on the NIE analysts:
“Got Iraq wrong and now they’re overcompensating by underestimating the potential threat from Iran”
http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html
I believe his picture is found under the entry for Chutzpah in the English/Flathead dictionary.
Col., since the “N.I.E.” being made public, there seems to be a lot going on all of the time. It seems like you’re the cook and you put out the crock pot with a few ingredients for the soup with some heat. Then everybody else adds their bit to the soup. We have many opposing view points, but still have a basic respect for the people. Col. and to all of the commentors, GREAT JOB!
At the top, under the fold (line), You have a line that starts with “Yup. Tail wags dog. Mouse gives diving eagle the finger.” The last sentence, are you referring to a cartoon titled, “The Last Great Act of Defiance?” I first saw it as a line drawing.
Grumpy
Col: If Bush doesn’t isssue an order to de-conflict our forces in Iraq and the Gulf, what can Israel do? Could Israel even attack Iran without American complicity?
Grumpy,
I just want to point out that the NIE has not “been made public.” Rather, an unclassified version of the NIE’s key judgments was released. A small point, but an important one I think.
Didn’t the late, great Leo Rosten define “chutzpah” as the quality displayed by a man who shouts “Help! Help!” while he’s beating you up?
the part about “Americans” waking up is bullcrap. Jewish-Americans form the elite of American thought and power from print media, electronic media, the senate, you name it. And many more have Jewish roots such as Murdoch, Wesley Clark, John Kerry or spouses and children such as Howard Dean. The analytic basis for it is the IQ spread magnified by the Guassian curve at the elite range where it matters.
There has to be a fxcking end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict imposed by the U.S., Russia, the EU, China, & the surrounding countries (including Iran & Syria) that is balanced enough to stick.
Otherwise it’s going to be one war after another one. The elites will make sure of it.
Otherwise, it’s going to tear this country apart one day.
on a different laptop & don’t have my html template. goto google & enter
“rootless cosmopolitan uri”
it will take you to Tony Karon’s blog. He has a hilarious republishing of Uri Avnery’s take on the NIE
“How They Stole The Bomb From Us
By Uri Avnery
It was like an atom bomb falling on Israel.
The earth shook. Our political and military leaders were all in shock. The headlines screamed with rage.
What happened?
A real catastrophe: the American intelligence community, comprising 16 different agencies, reached a unanimous verdict: already in 2003, the Iranians terminated their efforts to produce a nuclear bomb, and they have not resumed them since. Even if they change their mind in the future, they will need at least five years to achieve their aim.
Shouldn’t we be overjoyed? Shouldn’t the masses in Israel be dancing in the streets, as they did on November 29, 1947, sixty years ago? After all, we have been saved! ”
Andy, you are quite right. This is an unclassified version of the N.I.E. I stand corrected, God forbid that the American citizenry should know the facts. The Administration and the Intel community have a responsibility. If these two say or agree about something, in the ACTUAL NIE, CLASSIFIED, there are questions which must be answered. YOU SAY, YOU BELIEVE CERTAIN THINGS, WHY, WHAT MATERIAL EVIDENCE DO YOU HAVE THAT SUPPORTS YOUR BELIEF? This last situation by the intel community rattled some cages. One more thing, POLICY MAKERS AND YOUR STAFF STAY THE [REDACTED] OUT OF IT! I’M SURE SOME OF THE OLD TIMERS OUT THERE CAN FILL IN THE REDACTED PORTION APPROPRIATELY!
Grumpy
“Otherwise, it’s going to tear this country apart one day.” posted by Will
Will, you may not have noticed because of the war-worshiping media blanket that has insidiously crept over America since Raygun, but the country is already tearing itself apart – between the reasonable and moral on one side and the self-absorbed and resentful on the other, with both being manipulated by those who malevolently control the levers of modern power through communication and finance.
I don’t know how many of the readers here are familiar with Kevin MacDonald’s work, (he’s a cultural anthropologist – a Professor of Psychology at California State University, Long Beach, who has written a trilogy on Jewish influence in the USA – describing both their benign AND their ominous black-as-nite influence over America). You might want to read his books, starting with #3, “The Culture of Critique”. It answers a lot of the questions I see being asked here.
Tellingly, in spite of years of concentrated efforts to have him removed from the faculty of his university by the usual suspects, he’s still there – his scientific methodology and opinions irrefutable. His enemies don’t have a leg to stand on when they label him an anti-Semite or he’d be long gone, wouldn’t he? (Think poor Norman Finklestein.)
Link: http://www.kevinmacdonald.net/books.htm
Lower down on the linked page is a connection to a fascinating and disturbing, (in the light of today’s goings-on), essay:
“Stalin’s Willing Executioners: Jews as a Hostile Elite in the USSR”.
http://www.kevinmacdonald.net/SlezkineRev.pdf
“Otherwise, it’s going to tear this country apart one day.” posted by Will
Will, you may not have noticed because of the war-worshiping media blanket that has insidiously crept over America since Raygun, but the country is already tearing itself apart – between the reasonable and moral on one side and the self-absorbed and resentful on the other, with both being manipulated by those who malevolently control the levers of modern power through communication and finance.
I don’t know how many of the readers here are familiar with Kevin MacDonald’s work, (he’s a cultural anthropologist – a Professor of Psychology at California State University, Long Beach, who has written a trilogy on Jewish influence in the USA – describing both their benign AND their ominous black-as-nite influence over America). You might want to read his books, starting with #3, “The Culture of Critique”. It answers a lot of the questions I see being asked here.
Tellingly, in spite of years of concentrated efforts to have him removed from the faculty of his university by the usual suspects, he’s still there – his scientific methodology and opinions irrefutable. His enemies don’t have a leg to stand on when they label him an anti-Semite or he’d be long gone, wouldn’t he? (Think poor Norman Finklestein.)
Link: http://www.kevinmacdonald.net/books.htm
Lower down on the linked page is a connection to a fascinating and disturbing, (in the light of today’s goings-on), essay:
“Stalin’s Willing Executioners: Jews as a Hostile Elite in the USSR”.
http://www.kevinmacdonald.net/SlezkineRev.pdf
With regard to Jewish-Americans how about some data instead of speculation:
Note that this poll was conducted before the NIE key judgments were released.
Polling for the US population in general shows opposition about 10 points higher, or in the mid-60’s.
“2- Is this a religious issue for the American people – the Protestants I hasten to add?”
Babak,
The analysis would require some specificity, as Visitor points out.
Israel is by definition, owing to eschatology, a religious issue to a percentage of the US population NOT for all Americans.
Mainline Protestant churches, the Roman Catholic church, the Orthodox church, and a number of small Protestant sects such as the Mennonites reject eschatology and so-called “prophetic” interpretation which asserts Israel is a fulfillment of prophecy. The traditional Christian churches in the Middle East share the same perspective and also reject such interpretation.
Muslim intellectuals whom I know are aware of these distinctions. I will be on an academic panel examining Christian Zionism this coming spring with an old friend who is an American of the Muslim faith.
The Protestant Fundamentalists who believe in “premillennial dispensationalism” (a 19th century eschatology invented in England and used by Palmerston for imperial purposes) would fall into the Israel as a religious issue camp. This
block is part of Karl Rove’s “base” for the Republican Party although Jimmy Carter mobilized them for his own campaign back in 1976. When President Carter became too “pro-Palestinian”, the Fundamentalists bolted to Reagan in 1980 for this and other reasons. President Carter has done considerable reflection on the state of the Southern Baptist Convention.
The Southern Baptist Convention with about 16 million would be the largest block. You can refer to President Jimmy Carter’s analysis of the problems in this sect as it has officially adopted premillennial dispensationalism within the last 30 years. Some analysts add another 10 million in other sects who follow “premillennial dispensationalism.” Others add 15 or 20 million. The Fundamentalist leaders such as Hagee claim 50 to 100 million but that is an exaggeration, IMO. A reasonable estimate would be 25-45 million or about 10 to 15 percent of the US public.
[You might wish to make enquiries about such Fundamentalists in Canada, the UK, and Australia as the dispensationalist ideology spread widely.]
However, this block is part of the Religious Right political base. It is roughly estimated by some that Fundamentalists comprise about 40 percent of the Republican Party base these days. In the current primaries, some newspaper reports say that of the Republican activisits who are coming out perhaps 30-50 percent are Fundamentalists.
You should note that not all Evangelicals are Fundamentalists in the sense that they embrace premillennial dispensationalism.
See, Kevin Phillip’s book “American Theocracy” for an analysis of this issue in terms of US politics. It will be interesting to see how Rev. Huckabee (Southern Baptist) handles this issue.
President Bush forthrightly called his policy in the Middle East a “crusade.” I am convinced that he meant it the way he said it although the spin control folks at the White House danced around it. I do not believe that he “misspoke.” He simply said what he believed.
Bush’s speechwriter at the time was Michael Gerson who is a “Christian” Right activist. Hence, Bush’s speeches were laced with Biblical references to bolster his political base of Fundamentalists. Bush’s own parents (albeit old line Protestant Episcopalians) cleared the way for W through their high visibility association with Rev. Billy Graham, the leading Fundamentalist personality in the US. They also had strong links to the late Rev. Jerry Falwell. Good politics, no doubt, for the Bush dynasty.
For a recent piece on Gerson in The American Conservative see,
http://www.amconmag.com/200
7/2007_11_19/review.html
Kara Hopkins, the author, concludes:
“The rubble of our heroic mission to democratize the Middle East stands testament to the power of unintended consequences. But Gerson cannot see it as ruin. The same hubris that drove America to rid the world of evil now stalks this equally abstract drive to do good—and the best intentions don’t diminish the blowback inherent in any global scheme.”
My own book on the subject “Dark Crusade: Christian Zionism and US Foreign Policy” (London: IB Tauris) will be out late next year.
It is interesting that both Israel and Iran are doing what the rest of the world has learned. Play your cards with the U.S. closely and do all that you can to influence U.S. policy by lobbying Congress and the Executive Branch. Let’s face it the Saudi’s (who learned from Israel) and the Israelis are the best lobbyists in the U.S. One uses its co-religionists and one (lacking co-religionists) uses money. There are foreign nationals on Congressional staffs. These are directly influencing U.S. policy. Foreign money openly manipulates U.S. national elections. Since our democracy (what’s left) is wide-open to lobbying and sale perhaps some efforts at full disclosure would be helpful. Hey apparently even the Russians and S.Koreans have their own technique. They send beautiful and intelligent women here that may end up indirectly influencing policy with respect to their countries when they marry and become citizens. Washington is a world capitol and the rest of world long ago figured out that if Washington sneezes or does something even out of innocence a lot of people can be killed in a hurry. After all, most Americans despite the militarism of US society have started to figure out that war is revolution. The rest of the world long ago figured this out. This is so evidently the case that it is probably why only U.S. military action remains the last real bastion of non-selective force in the world. Our educational system totally failed to pick up on the changes in the Islamic world despite the Bernard Lewis types and the Samuel Huntington types. So now our cultural and language ignorance is the clear and present danger. And perhaps Texan as a Presidential language should be restricted in the future. The Johnson tapes and Bush posturing long ago indicate that ego not brains was driving decisions. The Eisenhower era decision to establish world-wide base structures should be revisited as we enter the world of 30 ballistic missile, nuclear capable states over the next 30 years. It isn’t just nuclear waste that should be examined as an issue for the nuclear power electric generation advocates, but the impact of seeding proliferation efforts. Basically, the tough issues are being avoided by the U.S. and most of the world is happy with that. The rest of the world gladly watches as we sag into our dotage as a state and are neutralized by our ignorance of other cultures and states and nations.
Andy, In response to your dissemination of this poll, I’d like to offer up the words of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a German theologian who died in 1945:
“Action springs not from thought but from a readiness for responsibility.”
So far I’ve seen no evidence of “a readiness for responsibility” from the greater Jewish American community, their meaningless, private, polled thoughts notwithstanding.
Clifford Kiracofe:
Thank you for your comments.
You mostly discussed the last 30 years.
Which leaves me wondering why US lobbied UN so hard in 1948 for the establishment of the State of Israel?
And Nixon was born into a Quaker family – if I am not mistaken.
Can you shed some light on these?
Too bad Eli Zeira was murdered before he could shine some light on war.
Correction on prior post…Too bad Ashraf Marwan was murdered after his name was leaked by Eli Ziera.
arthurdecco,
What is “readiness for responsibility” in real terms? What must Jewish Americans do to satisfy you on this point? Do you apply that same standard to all Americans?
Babak,
Any lobbying would have occurred in 1947. Here’s a good timeline and a money quote:
Read the whole thing. In light of Truman’s private correspondence, it’s difficult to see him as one who would lobby the UN hard on the issue.
You say Facts, don’t need to show no stinking facts (with apologies to the banditos de Sierra Madre)
stay current by reading the
http://friday-lunch-club.blogspot.com/
he catches English, French, and Arabic sources for MidEast News, concentrating on Lebanon.
I uses Babelfish for the French and Systrans for the Arabic
He also catches all of off the Col.’s Posts
here’s two pertinent posts:
“Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Zogby Poll: 52% of Americans Support U.S. Military Strike Against Iran
A Poll by ZogbyInternational shows that despite Bush’s 25% approval rate, … Americans remain “vulnerable” to Big Media … , here”
………..
“Monday, November 19, 2007
“… we’re going to go into Iran and what do we have to do to get you guys to along with it”
Laura Rosen writes in MotherJones, here
“…The client paying for the focus group session, according to Sonnemark, was Freedom’s Watch, a high-powered, well-connected advocacy group that launched a $15 million ad campaign this summer in support of the surge of American troops in Iraq. Among the group’s leadership: former White House spokesman Ari Fleischer and Bradley A. Blakeman, a former deputy assistant to President Bush. The focus group session suggests that Freedom’s Watch may be looking beyond Iraq and expanding its mission to building support for military action against Iran…””
Also stay current w/
Prof. Landis blog
syriacomment.com
Andy:
Thank you for your URL.
What caused US policy to change between between September 17-th to 11-October of 1947?
In support of the US lobbying for the creation of Israel, a claim made by myself, I note the following sample of more extensive body of historical evidence:
Dean Rusk, head of the State Department’s UN desk in Washington, wrote, “when President Truman decided to support partition, I worked hard to implement it….The pressure and arm-twisting applied by American and Jewish representatives in capital after capital to get that affirmative vote are hard to describe.”
“arthurdecco, What is “readiness for responsibility” in real terms? What must Jewish Americans do to satisfy you on this point? Do you apply that same standard to all Americans?” posted by Andy
Andy, you strike me as an intelligent man, so I find your disingenuousness on this subject puzzling and a trifle insulting.
I’ll answer your second question first: I apply the same standards to all humans, no matter their claimed nationality. In terms of this discussion though, I expect the kinds of responses American Jews have been justifiably proud of in their struggles in defense of the marginalized and down-trodden throughout modern American history – at least until apparent hubris and smug self-satisfaction seeped in to infect their well of good will and moral accomplishments.
In response to your first question, “readiness for responsibility, in real terms”, should be self-explanatory to any sentient human.
It means having the moral courage to forcibly and loudly protest against evil and injustice – even when that evil is perpetrated by those who claim to lead you or protect you. It means publicly ridiculing the offensive garbage that passes for intellectual thought within the neo-con controlled think tanks and policy-making machinery designed to undermine the cornerstones of the American Constitution and democratic way of life instead of allowing it to be printed as gospel on the front pages and op ed pages of every leading newspaper in the country without ever raising a collective howl of protest in response. It means never attending a “talk” organized to allow moral monsters like Alan Dershowitz a venue to promote and advocate torture that “only uses sterilized needles” shoved under the nails of prisoners never charged with a single crime. It means refusing to turn on Fox News, or to buy any of the products advertised on any of the pro-war channels and always writing in to make their management aware of your boycotts. It means bringing tens of thousands out into the streets PROTESTING Israel’s illegal and never-ending military assaults on the civilian Palestinians in the outdoor prison we call Gaza. It means refusing to send money to Israel where those funds are used to financially subsidize the organized theft of Palestinian lands and the brutal suppression of their people in order to allow even more fanatical religious zealot Zionists to squat there, spewing their racist hate thereby enabling, and ironically, justifying, a world wide rise in anti-Semitism.
I could go on almost forever but I’m sure even a willfully ignorant man like you will have gotten the picture by now of what “readiness for responsibility” means in “real terms”. Unless, of course, you never had any intention of getting the picture.
<"Which leaves me wondering why US lobbied UN so hard in 1948 for the establishment of the State of Israel?">
Babak,
There are any number of of academic studies, books and scholarly articles, per the Truman Administration and its policy toward Israel. There is considerable archival material available and of particular note are the declassified US Government docs from State Department etal. bearing on the matter. The declassified official documents available in the FRUS (Foreign Relations of the United States, Office of the Historian, Dept. of State) series are the most essential.
http://www.state.gov/www/about_state/history/frus.html
Given the vast amount of relevant data available to scholars today, there is really no mystery in all this. It is quite clear from the historical record, IMO, that the Zionist Lobby prevailed on President Truman, not to mention Congress. Clark Clifford and David Niles (a Polish Jewish emigre) were the two primary advisors to Truman who, historians record, swung him to the recognition policy etc. Some scholars argue Truman’s religious beliefs played a role and that he felt he was a modern “Cyrus.” He is quoted as himself saying “I am Cyrus” with respect to his decision and policy on Israel. Some scholars also point out the 1948 Election Year as a spur to action to mobilize the “Jewish vote” for the Dems as Dewey and the Republicans had also been reaching out for it.
As you probably have read, State Department professionals and the Pentagon were opposed to this policy as dangerous to long range US interests in the region. General George Marshall was opposed reflecting the Pentagon view.
The power center of the international Zionist movement had, in effect, shifted from London to New York during World War II so as to be positioned to bring decisive pressure on the US. You will, I am sure, have noted the historic “Biltmore Conference” held in New York City in 1942. The “Biltmore Program” was that of the 1897 Basel Program. The politics of the American Jewish Community with respect to the Zionist movement from 1897 (or earlier) to 1942 were extremely complex and convoluted, and there are are many books and studies on this.
See, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biltmore_Conference
The role of Clifford and Niles (in particular) was, in effect, to bring the Truman White House/President Truman into line with the Biltmore Program.
You should also take a look at Atlee’s memoirs and other relevant British materials to understand the politics and diplomacy as well as the deep divisions the international Zionist movement produced between the US and the UK on this matter. Kenneth Harris in his “Atlee” (New York: Norton, 1982), which is sitting on my desk at the moment, has some revealing passages.
You should also be clear in your understanding of the Neoconservative Movement that it is rooted in what can be described as the Truman Administration’s “Cold War Zionism.” The core intellectual journal around which the movement was built is, of course, Commentary Magazine (1946-) which is published by the American Jewish Committee est. 1906 for which see their website,
http://www.ajc.org/
You can review President George W. Bush’s speeches to the AJC annual conventions via the official White House website. They are revealing and indicative.
Col. Lang, I would like to apologize to you and to your poster Andy for including a tasteless phrase in the final paragraph of my last submission. It verged on an ad Hominum attack. If you delete my post, I will understand.
It wasn’t until I re-read the piece before saving it to disc that I realized that I had not removed a remark that I had typed in the heat of the moment. I should never have allowed it to remain part of my post.
The phrase in question was,
“I could go on almost forever but I’m sure even a willfully ignorant man like you will have gotten the picture by now of what “readiness for responsibility” means in “real terms”. Unless, of course, you never had any intention of getting the picture.”
It should have read,
“I could go on almost forever, but I’m almost certain you will have gotten the picture by now of what “readiness for responsibility” means in “real terms”. Unless, of course, you never had any intention of getting the picture.”
Again, I apologize for lowering the tone on what is for me a blog where people on opposing sides of the issues come together with both civility and unbridled passion to discuss their differences.
Colonel,
removing the pillars of cheney and the nut job’s (i.e. avi dichter) in israel’s intended war on iran.
russia has taken positive steps to thwart our errant vice prez cheney and his war on iran debacle, russia has delivered uranium enriched to 3.62% on dec 14. the russian atomstroiexport which is a member of the consortium building the nuclear power station at bushehr delivered ‘fuel assemblies’ that contained the ‘peaceful nuclear fuel’.
russian deliveries of the 3.62% will continue until feb 08 and after six months, the power plant will be commissioned.
containers of the ‘peaceful fuel’ with the iaea seals were delivered and placed in a special storage facility that is subject to international monitoring. the spent fuel will be returned to germany.
you know sometimes
people want to pee on your leg and tell you it’s warm tea
it’s not jewish-americans as a whole in the aggregate that determine policy, it’s the elites
and to see how the elites lead the people into war it has never been better explained better than by Hermann Goering. just google Goering + snopes and it will come up. you will see the link
“Did Hermann Goering proclaim that although ‘the people don’t want war,’ they ‘can always be brought to the bidding of their leaders’? ”
The best window on the “bomb bomb bomb-iran” (apologies to the beach boys) is how in the words of Pat Buchanan “we invaded [IRAK] a country that neither threatened us nor desired war with us.”
from two scholars Walt & Mearsheimer
the link to the short version of their work
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html
——
calling for Saddam’s removal from power. The signatories, many of whom had close ties to pro-Israel groups like JINSA or WINEP, and who included Elliot Abrams, John Bolton, Douglas Feith, William Kristol, Bernard Lewis, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz,
….
We don’t have the full story yet, but scholars like Bernard Lewis of Princeton and Fouad Ajami of Johns Hopkins reportedly played important roles in persuading Cheney that war was the best option, though neo-conservatives on his staff – Eric Edelman, John Hannah and Scooter Libby, Cheney’s chief of staff and one of the most powerful individuals in the administration – also played their part. By early 2002 Cheney had persuaded Bush
….
According to Philip Zelikow, …. the executive director of the 9/11 Commission, … the ‘real threat’ from Iraq was not a threat to the United States. The ‘unstated threat’ was the ‘threat against Israel’, … ‘The American government,’ he added, ‘doesn’t want to lean too hard on it rhetorically, because it is not a popular sell.’
…….
Although neo-conservatives and other Lobby leaders were eager to invade Iraq, the broader American Jewish community was not. …. opinion polls by the Pew Research Center shows that Jews are less supportive of the Iraq war than the population at large, 52 per cent to 62 per cent.’ Clearly, it would be wrong to blame the war in Iraq on ‘Jewish influence’. Rather, it was due in large part to the Lobby’s influence, especially that of the neo-conservatives within it.
—————-
It is the ELITES, my man- the elites.
Babak:
Re: Dean Rusk
You may have mischaracterized Dean Rusk stance on the creation of Israel. From what I have read, Dean Rusk in 1948 was wary that a newly created state of Israel would alienate traditional Arab friends. Here’s one quote I found:
In a New Yorker article (March 25, 1991) [Clark] Clifford recalled that: “Marshall firmly opposed American recognition of the new Jewish state; I did not. Marshall’s opposition was shared by almost every member of the brilliant…group of presidential advisers…who were…creating a post-war foreign policy that would endure for more than 40 years. The opposition, Under Secretary of State Robert Lovett; his predecessor, Dean Acheson; the No. 3 man in the State Department, Charles Bohlen; the brilliant chief of the Policy Planning Staff George Kennan; (Navy Secretary James V.) Forrestal; and…Dean Rusk, director of the Office of UN Affairs.
Dean Rusk gets a rap — perhaps with some justification — for being too much of a go along to get along guy. Nevertheless, he was a man of a diffrerent era. And it should be noted that Dean Rusk, perhaps more than anyone else in the Johnson administration, stood up to McNamara after the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty in 1967. From what I can piece together, McNamara deep sixed the NCOI investigation with the help of Sen. McCain’s father — Adm. McCain. Rusk, I believe, implicity refused to send McNamara the NCOI report when McNamara tangentially brought up the attack in a Congressional hearing (a hearing that was not a Liberty investigation). McNamara was going to rely on the truncated NCOI report to claim the attack was a mistake and not intentional.
Plus, years later, when Rusk, with his son’s help, wrote his autobiography “As I Saw It”, Rusk described the attack as “outrageous“.
Also, if I remember correctly, there is a Rusk cable to the GOI on June 8, 1967 basically telling the GOI not to initiate an offensive attack on the Golan Heights. The attack on the USS Liberty occurred, I believe, about 90 minutes later.
Dean Rusk was well liked within the State Department. For a few years, I dated a woman whose father was career State Department and a former Ambassador (he also was USMC Korean War vet). He spoke very highly of Dean Rusk. In fact, he had nothing but good things to say about him, (unlike Kissinger!). Said he always listened to the little guy.
Dean Rusk died almost penniless in Athens Ga. For years, any time he was paid for making a speech, he simply donated the money to UGA. Contrast that to the Bush crowd and all those that write memoirs today. And every Viet Vet grunt I know with a CIB who got to know him personally liked him very much.
Also, just for the record…from what I know…Dean Rusk wrote the autobiography with his son only because he thought it would bring about a father-son reconciliation before he died. The two became estranged during the Vn war when Rusk’s son took off from GA and lived in Alaska for awhile.
In my opinion, he was a good man during a difficult time. And he very well may have saved the world during the Cuban Missile Crisis because his approach was the exact opposite of what I see from the likes of David Welch today. He believed in diplomacy. I heard him say that one rule to follow is always give someone an honorable exit, as long as US national security interests are satsified.
it is well understood that any country that has mastered nuke power generation can enter nuke weapon development.
that goes for deutschland, japan, italia, brasil, argentina, canada, south africa, & probably on short notice south korea and taiwan.
there’s this big hullabaloo about Iran. i’d be worrying more about the Pak nukes, or about radiological bombs which are more compact, can be fitted on now available ballistic missiles and can make large portions of cities uninhabitable for decades.
But Iran is treated differently because it supposedly has weird religious beliefs. It believes in a Messiah in occultation that is coming back at the end of (ordinary) World with Jesus to establish justice. so what? they act rationally nevertheless. Then there’s the lies about what he said about Israel vanishing from the pages of time through historical processes as the Soviet Union did- likening it to “Cartago Delenda Est.”
Some Xtians believe in end of the world stuff and are perfecting the red heifer and some are helping certain like minded Jewish zealots plot to blow up the Dome of the Rock mosque, rebuild the Temple and reinstate animal sacrifices. I’d be more worried about them.
Mormons believe in the end of the world. Jesus will appear first at Jackson County, Mo. Each LD Saint is enjoined to stock up two years worth of food for the coming hard times and the church has granaries to help mankind make it thru the trying times. Unusual practice but frugal & salutary.
The Iran Arak heavy water facility is not a reactor. There are many kinds of reactors. Some are cooled with regular (light)water and some with heavy (containing deuterium hydrogen) water. A heavy water reactor attains greater neutron fluxes so it can use natural uranium. No need for enriched uranium and thus no need for pesky centrifuges. It can also create medicinal radioactive isotopes. It can also readily create PLUTONIUM. In fact Israel, Pakistan, & North Korea, all make their nukes with heavy water reactors.
Iran has a small research heavy water reactor on the drawing board. The country is a signatory to the U.N. treaties and the reactor would be heavily monitored.
from the wiki
Heavy Water
“There is no evidence that civilian heavy water power reactors, such as the CANDU or Atucha designs, have been used for military production of fissile materials. In states which do not already possess nuclear weapons, the nuclear material at these facilities is under IAEA safeguards to discourage any such diversion.
Due to its potential for use in nuclear weapons programs, the possession or import/export of large industrial quantities of heavy water are subject to government control in several countries. Suppliers of heavy water and heavy water production technology typically apply IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) administered safeguards and material accounting to heavy water. (In Australia, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation (Safeguards) Act 1987.) In the U.S. and Canada, non-industrial quantities of heavy water (i.e., in the gram to kg range) are routinely available through chemical supply dealers, and directly commercial companies such as the world’s former major producer Ontario Hydro, without special license. Current (2006) cost of a kilogram of 99.98% reactor-purity heavy water, is about $600 to $700. Smaller quantities of reasonable purity (99.9%) may be purchased from chemical supply houses at prices of roughly $1 per gram. ”
Thank you for your informative comments.
What I got from this thread has been that US – as state and polity – have an emotional attachment to the State of Israel.
Since this is an emotional attachment and not an strategic one, one has to surmise that that relationship is not prone to considerations of cost-benefit analysis.
This is almost the parallel of the Iran-Hizbuallah situation with the added historical dimensions – the modern Iranian state’s relationship with the Shia of Southern Lebanon goes back 400 years.
It seems to me that both US and Iran have emotional (and historical, in case of Iran) attachments to a religiously-defined vassal population outside of their own borders.
Moreover, both Iran and US have failed to articulate the nature and the extent of their security commitments to their respective vassals – thus leaving everyone in a fog as to what to expect in case of hostilities and further escalation thereof.
I think this is a recipe for endless strategic escalation to nowhere; especially considering the ability of each vassal to tap into the religious sentiments of its own population.
Sidney O. Smith III:
Thank you for your comments.
I quoted Dean Rusk in order to support my contention regarding intense lobbying effort of US at UN in 1948.
I imagine that D.R. was working at the pleasure of teh President of the United States and had to salute the flag and carry-out his orders.
that US – as state and polity – have an emotional attachment to the State of Israel.
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 18 December 2007 at 11:56 AM
—-
Babak, this is the part I don’t understand about Iran. Iran understand so LITTLE about US politics, despite having been in conflict for 20-30 yrs. This is as oppose to Iran understanding of european politics or middle eastern politics.
Here is a hint:
1. Just because you talk/want peace, does not mean people in DC actually cares even if you can prove it. You have to show the money and the gun.
that is to say, it’s active constant lobbying.
2. Washington DC is owned by lobbyist and Israel (AIPAC) is second largest lobbying group in the city. We are talking about campaign money, media support, political ground operation, etc.
3. Iran is a continuous political target. Because it is easy and the promise of return is very high. (terrorism equipments, oil, cheap campaign rhetoric)
Money talk. just like anywhere else in the world. You have to spend money to get what you want. cash talks. There is no democracy.
The Russian mafia or Turkish military have more sophisticated relationship with DC congress than Iran.
Babak:
Thank you for your response. Several years ago, I made a commitment to try to shine a different light on Dean Rusk, if the opportunity so arose. In all probability, my view does not represent a majority opinion and, instead, reflects a dissent.
I appreciate your valuable contributions to this website. Your comments offer a different perspective and most assuredly help us all.
“Sid”
Arthurdecco,
My apologies for my intent was not to offend but to respond to what you originally wrote:
I simply thought it strange you would single out the Jewish American community for no evidence of “a readiness for responsibility” when it appears the rest of America isn’t showing much of it either, their “meaningless, private, polled thoughts notwithstanding.”
Babak,
Looking at the entirety, there appears to be a lot of conflict and controversy about what to do within the administration. At several points, Marshall’s ideas and public statements directly conflict with Truman, which he complains about. To me at least, it appears Truman decided to punt to the UN in 1947 and follow its lead. Truman ended up supporting UNSCOP’s recommendations. Lobbying the UN in 1948 doesn’t make sense because the vote for partition took place in November 1947.
The real lobbying likely had more to do with US recognition once it became clear the UN plan would fail.
Curious:
I recall watching a conversation with Richard Nixon during which he observed that the reason these lobbyists are in DC is because “that’s where the action is”; i.e. money. And he continued on saying to rectify it USG has to be made smaller – to not take in so much of the wealth of the United States.
Andy:
My mistake; meant “1947” rather “1948”.
Andy:
My mistake; meant “1947” rather than “1948”.
It’s gone unmentioned here so far, but there are reports that Sen. Ensign from Nevada wants to set up a Rumsfeld-style commission to “reassess” the NIE. Hindsight shows us all the predictions made by the Rumsfeld Commission were false, so it’s hardly something one would want to emulate.
The details can be found here.
Colonel,
has anybody heard how mullen assessed the israeli snow job upon him they tried while he stopped over for one day in israel? mossad analysts are in conflict with their ‘politically correct’ mossad head-cheese dagan who is a poodle for his olmert. when olmert says jump, dagan says how hi. when olmert tells dagan to invent some intel that paints iran in a bad light, dagan responds with how much ‘kooking’ he should do to make the kooked-intel fit to olmert’s political landscape painting.
just wondering if you had heard any rumblings from mullen world.
looks like olmert is having a cow, and now is having a nuclear bunker built just for his personal carcass. isn’t it wunnderful how purported head-cheeses like olmert can build them a personal survival atmosphere while at the same time endangering their own citizenry with their doom and gloom hatefulness. harumpf
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1196847388801&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
nuclear bunker being built for olmert
Pat,
I know this post is not your latest, but I would appreciate your thoughts on this latest article today by Michael Hirsh in Newsweek – What Will Israel Do?.
Some highlights:
There is much more in the article.
Andy said: “My apologies for my intent was not to offend but to respond to what you originally wrote:
“So far I’ve seen no evidence of “a readiness for responsibility” from the greater Jewish American community, their meaningless, private, polled thoughts notwithstanding.”
I simply thought it strange you would single out the Jewish American community for no evidence of “a readiness for responsibility” when it appears the rest of America isn’t showing much of it either, their “meaningless, private, polled thoughts notwithstanding.””
You’re being disingenuous, Andy. I didn’t “single out” the Jewish American community – you did:
You said, (in an earlier post): “With regard to Jewish-Americans how about some data instead of speculation:…”
I pointed out that your “data’ was meaningless. I backed up my opinion with reasons why I considered the “data” meaningless – reasons you chose to ignore for your own reasons.
Please don’t “play” me – it’s a tiresome and childish strategy.
I thought we were all adults here.
Arthurdecco,
Well, I didn’t ignore your reasons – they didn’t make sense to me, so I asked you about them which prompted a rather mean-spirited response from you. But whatever!
Ok, then, since the “reasons” you provided (which you termed “readiness for responsibility”) by-and-large apply equally to the rest of the American population then I suppose you would agree that national polling showing solid opposition to an attack on Iran is equally meaningless as you claim the Jewish-American polling is, right? Or is the rest of America doing something different and showing a “readiness for responsibility?” Maybe you could educate me….
And, for the record, you referenced MacDonald in an earlier comment on the Jewish American community noting their “benign AND their ominous black-as-nite[SIC] influence over America.” If their influence is truly that great and a solid majority oppose war with Iran, then what conclusions are we to draw from that?
Andy said: “If their influence is truly that great and a solid majority oppose war with Iran, then what conclusions are we to draw from that?”
Sigh…
Andy, It has become apparent to me that you debate in bad faith and/or suffer from an extreme form of cognitive dissonance. I have no patience left for your brand of artless sophistry. My attempts to have a conversation with you on this subject are over.
<"...the balloon of illusion concerning Iran's programs That balloon had been skilfully painted in gaudy colors that fit the Israeli "misconception" of the world. Now there is unbridled rage among the Jacobins, the Cheneyites and the Israeli government over an unexpected failure.">
Time for an update on the regional situation. As I posted after my visit to the Gulf in June, locals I met were deeply concerned about US policy out there. No “plan” for Iraq and the US confrontational posture against Iran concerned officials I spoke with, including the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs of the UAE.
Here is an interesting commentary piece on Iran and the Gulf:
“…. The Gulf has moved away from American arguments for isolating Iran. American policymakers need to do the same.
“The states of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) are accommodating themselves to Iran’s growing weight in the region’s politics. ….That’s why America’s attempt to shore up containment against Iran increasingly seems to be yesterday’s battle. On Dec. 3, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the GCC in Doha, Qatar. It was the first time an Iranian leader had addressed the alliance, which was formed in 1981 against the Iranian challenge.
“Weeks later, Saudi King Abdullah invited Mr. Ahmadinejad to Saudi Arabia – the president’s third visit in a year – for the hajj, or Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca. The king used the occasion to hold cordial talks.
“Iran is even reaching out to Egypt. Ali Larijani, head of Iran’s National Security Council, visited Cairo recently for the highest level talks in 27 years. Afterward, Arab League chief Amr Moussa bluntly stated that there was no point in Arabs treating Iran as an enemy.
“Gulf Arabs have thus visibly discarded the central pillar of the past year of America’s Middle East strategy. Saudis and Egyptians had been the prime movers in anti-Iranian and anti-Shiite agitation. When they are inviting Ahmadinejad and Mr. Larijani to their capitals, America’s talk of isolating Iran sounds outdated….
“The emerging signs of a tentative thaw in the Gulf are not due solely to the release of the findings in last month’s National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that Iran was no longer pursuing a nuclear weapons program. The NIE helped trigger the thaw by convincing Arabs that a US-led war against Iran had become much less likely. But it has long been clear that most Gulf rulers have no appetite for a war that would disrupt their economic boom and put them at the most risk. …”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20080104/cm_csm/ylynch_1
In this context, the drivel from the “Zionist entity” and its US “agents of influence” would seem increasingly irrelevant.
Prof. K,
For those who do not necessarily view history as linear (with the greatest respect for the famous 1928 Palsgraf case!), the historical effect of the 2007 NIE appears much like a stone thrown into a pond. It’s historical effect is moving outward into the world much like concentric waves.
The same could be said for the Mearsheimer and Walt book on the Israeli lobby. I believe that Philip Weiss described their book as if a depth charge had exploded. This is a most apt metaphor because the work of the Israeli lobby for the most part was unseen.
To me, it is of the highest significance that, to use your words, “on Dec. 3, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the GCC in Doha, Qatar. It was the first time an Iranian leader had addressed the alliance, which was formed in 1981 against the Iranian challenge.”
The significance of this event cannot be overemphasized. It appears to suggest an answer to the questions raised by Dr. Helms in her essay posted here at sst. So what brought Shia and Sunni together? I suggest, at least at a certain level, hubris and the appearance of a nemesis.
It is becoming more and more difficult to find on the internet the 1994 Rand study by Ronfeldt (and, if memory serves me correctly, written for the CIA), titled “Beware the Hubris-Nemesis Complex: A Concept of Leadership Analysis”. But I cannot help but wonder if this study should be applied to the type of Zionism that has been promoted by the likes of Christian Zionists, such as Hagee, and Likud. A update of that article, arguably, could be titled, “Beware of the Hubris Nemesis Complex: A Concept of Hagee, Cheney, and Likud” Here is one link to that study:
http://www.well.com:70/0/Military/hnc