|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Titus
Joined: 19 May 2012
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 27, 2013 12:03 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
A racist, fine. But unintelligent? I'm hurt dude.
"We were there to document the event."
| Quote: |
| Why is it racist to say the Israelis did it, but not racist to say the Persians did it? |
Don't go down that rabbit hole. You'll never emerge.
| Quote: |
| The neo-cons reaction to this has been so predictable: |
Yes, here's an evenhanded reply:
http://20committee.com/2013/11/27/forever-munich/
| Quote: |
| I presume that you side with Walt and Mearsheimer on this. |
You presume correct. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 27, 2013 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Titus wrote: |
A racist, fine. But unintelligent? I'm hurt dude.
"We were there to document the event."
| Quote: |
| Why is it racist to say the Israelis did it, but not racist to say the Persians did it? |
Don't go down that rabbit hole. You'll never emerge. |
I'm pretty sure that I know the other guys answer, but its always nice to see if they are honest enough to admit what they think or if they will hedge.
I like Walt and Mearsheimer's other work. I read the article they wrote about Israel, but not the book. I felt pretty blase about it, that Israel plays a big role in American foreign policy is almost a given. It will be interesting to see how this will play out politically and if this will damage Obama or help him.
Small request, when you quote me include my name, so that my words aren't mixed with someone elses, because I disagree pretty strongly with the guy you are referring to, and whose quotes you included with mine. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Titus
Joined: 19 May 2012
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 27, 2013 1:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Walt and Mearsheimer's book is solid. It is tame compared with others who talk of the same subjects. As the Counterpunch article I posted suggested, we can count Netanyahu as being in agreement with their thesis.
BHO's selection of Hagel suggested that a meaningful shift away from AIPAC was happening in his office. Congress, not so much. Should HRC be the next POTUS the office will shift back. Obama has a very small amount of time to set the groundwork for long term peace with Iran.
http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Report-London-is-mediating-indirect-secret-talks-between-US-and-Hezbollah-333245
These are excellent developments. The USA is completed f'ked up in major ways and can not afford another major conflict.
Ok. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Titus
Joined: 19 May 2012
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 7:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Lobby continues:
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2013/12/the-canard-strategy-in-the-service-of-war-with-iran/
| Quote: |
The Israel Lobby, temporarily set back with the success of the Iran negotiations, has wasted no time in paving a new path to war via the Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act of 2013. This bill is now being considered by the Senate, led by Bob Menendez, Chuck Schumer, and Mark Kirk, all staunch supporters of the Israel Lobby.
The bill has two noteworthy aspects. First, it would bar Iran from enriching any new uranium whatsoever. As everyone knows, this is a non-starter with Iran, so adopting the bill would guarantee that even tougher sanctions provided by the bill would kick in, putting Iran in an impossible situation, thus virtually ensuring the much desired war.
Secondly it puts huge pressure on the U.S. to go to war if Israel sees fit to attack Iran. The bill
includes a non-binding provision that states that if Israel takes “military action in legitimate self-defense against Iran’s nuclear weapons program,” the U.S. “should stand with Israel and provide, in accordance with the law of the United States and the constitutional responsibility of Congress to authorize the use of military force, diplomatic, military, and economic support to the Government of Israel in its defense of its territory, people, and existence.”
“Should stand with Israel” is deliberately vague. But minimally, if it were to pass, it would constitute Congressional approval of U.S. involvement should Israel decide to go to war.
Advertisement
Huffpo ran an article originally titled “Saboteur Sen. Launching War Push” refuting the bogus claim that this legislation supports the goals of the Obama administration. The article notes that this argument “is undermined by the White House’s own vehement opposition to it. It is further undercut by the lead supporter of the Menendez bill, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which has pushed hard to derail the talks and encouraged Congress to undermine the president’s effort. Schumer and Menendez are close allies of AIPAC.”
...
|
What to say. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
