tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1043332942481206469.post293100537321552065..comments2024-03-04T15:23:07.880+00:00Comments on Northern Voices: Ukraine & Russia: Sanctions in our time!Blanco Posnethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11288856212231100137noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1043332942481206469.post-40295611963434792112014-03-25T14:48:47.516+00:002014-03-25T14:48:47.516+00:00And why is the USA so keen on backing Israel? Is i...And why is the USA so keen on backing Israel? Is it:-<br /><br />A) Long standing support for a perceived underdog?<br /><br />B) long standing guilt for the Holocaust?<br /><br />c) The strength of the Jewish/Zionist lobby in the USA?<br /><br />D) Fear of being called "anti-Semitic"?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1043332942481206469.post-41623860840688632032014-03-22T10:54:20.424+00:002014-03-22T10:54:20.424+00:00[I no Putin lover] but, how would the US react if ...[I no Putin lover] but, how would the US react if Russia decided to site missiles on America's borders? I think we all know the answer to that. <br /> <br />I didn't say solving the Israel/Palestinian conflict would be "easy". Of course it wouldn't. But the US pretends to be encouraging "peace talks" between them when it is openly pro-Israel and anti-Palestinian. And why doesn't the US raise the question of "international law" in this situation as well as the Ukraine? Because it knows damn well that Israel has broken scores of international laws over the past 60 years, stealing Palestinian land, and so it keeps quiet about the violations. That's what I meant by saying the US could start tomorrow, if it wished, in resolving the Middle East conflict ~ but it doesn't want to. It's perfectly happy to conduct endless pointless "peace talks" that don't go anywhere while Israel carries on stealing someone else's land and committing one international crime after another. The two-faced hypocrisy of Obama, Cameron and Wee Willie Hague is breath-taking.Trevornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1043332942481206469.post-83439508459652413412014-03-22T10:38:36.304+00:002014-03-22T10:38:36.304+00:00Dear Trevor,
You seem to have mistook my meani...Dear Trevor,<br /> <br /> You seem to have mistook my meaning in my email; I did say that I'm worried about the drone strikes that Obama is up to. But, I was talking of the prospects of a full frontal war when I refered to his lack of 'hawkish' military instincts and his difference from Bush. Bush was into direct engagement in the Middle East, and Obama is more deviously into spying and drone strikes on specific targets. This is not to suggest that Obama is a 'good guy', only to argue that he is different in his strategy and tactics to Bush. I wanted to draw attention to the socalled 'Asian pivot' of Obama which represents a strategic shift from the Middle East to Pakistan and Afghanistan. Perhaps it may be best the represent Obama as employing more of the charateristics of the fox; while Bush showed the insticts of the lion. Let me be clear here I'm not suggesting that Obama is better than Bush, or that the fox is a more decent creature to the lion, but only different in its habits. I'm not being judgemental here, I'm only trying to look at the methodology and statescraft of the different US administerations. The broad brush or cookbook approach to politics is to be avoided, as I'm sure you will agree.<br /> <br /> I'm not sure that the problem of Palestine and the Middle East can be resolved as easy as you suggest. When Lord Passfield (formerly the Fabian, Sidney Webb) was landed with the job of solving and smoothing the repatriation of the Jews in the 1930s, with all the all the well-meaning desire to be scrupulously impartial, he ended up being burnt in effigy together with his wife amid the shouts of angry Zionists. <br /> <br /> I don't see how we differ much over Obama and his drones, but I suspect that we may disagree over the Ukraine.Editornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1043332942481206469.post-52116265474515510632014-03-22T10:33:32.117+00:002014-03-22T10:33:32.117+00:00You say:
'I don't think Obama is a hawkish...You say:<br />'I don't think Obama is a hawkish president in the sense that Bush was.' <br /> <br />I goggled in disbelief when I read this. Obama not hawkish? When he increased the number of drone strikes killing innocent civilians in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen far above what Bush did? When he chairs a "kill" meeting every Tuesday in the White House to decide who next the drones should target ~ without giving any of those people the chance of a trial, a defence, nothing. As if the President of the US can just go round the world assassinating anybody he feels like? You've got to be kidding me. <br /> <br />Really I am truly astounded at what seems either naivety on your part or wilful blindness. Obama could solve a major Middle East problem tomorrow by giving justice to the Palesinians and not subsidising the nuclear state of Israel by giving it three billion dollars a year to spend on arms.<br /> <br /> Trevornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1043332942481206469.post-37741904236059687542014-03-22T10:30:00.088+00:002014-03-22T10:30:00.088+00:00Trevor,
Thanks for that! Can we publish this ...Trevor,<br /> <br /> Thanks for that! Can we publish this or some other reply in response to my piece? I think this whole thing needs debating more fully on the left. I may be wrong but I don't think Obama is a hawkish president in the sense that Bush was; I think he was glad to dodge involvement in Syria (the red-line promise didn't have to full-filled), and I think he wants to abandon the Middle East and concentrate on drones in Pakistan etc. This doesn't please me, but I think we should distinguish between Bush & Obama. Editornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1043332942481206469.post-17437838869166680352014-03-20T14:20:04.019+00:002014-03-20T14:20:04.019+00:00I usually agree with your sentiments and see eye t...I usually agree with your sentiments and see eye to eye on most things, but here I profoundly disagree. <br /> <br />It seems to me you have swallowed hook, line and sinker the Western corporate media's propaganda (eg BBC, Channel 4, ITV, all the UK press) which surprises me, knowing how thoughtful and astute you are. What you have totally missed out is the fact that for decades the US and NATO (which is the US's handmaiden) has been enclosing Russia and encroaching on its satellite countries with a ring of missiles and bases. And Russia is supposed to do nothing? Imagine how America would go completely ape-shit if Russia decided to site bases and missiles near the US ~ in Cuba say (!!!), or in South America. Yet we are supposed to think Putin should not react when we do the same.<br /> <br />And for the US to preach about "international law" is hypocrisy on steroids. Does no one remember Iraq, Afghanistan, Lybya, their attempt to bomb Syria back to the stone age? How anyone can listen to Obama and Hague and keep a straight face is beyond me.<br /> <br /> <br />I'm sending a link which I think gives a much more complete and fairer picture of what is happening in Crimea. Let me know what you think. And I have to say, finding you and Little Willie Hague on the same side comes as a shock! Hague is a warmonger of the first water, and I would automatically expect anything he says to be a pack of lies.Trevornoreply@blogger.com