we don't think about our actions until we face the price for them. Euros would follow Americans into every debacle as long as no price was attached. Italians, Poles, Ukrainians, though anti-war from the beginning, were invigorated in the anti-war sentiment when they lost soldiers in Iraq. Spaniards, hit by terrorists, directed the anger to those who got them into the debacle, - US and Aznar. Canadians are wavering in the support for the Afghan mission, each casualty adding to the support for withdrawal. The wars could not go unnoticed, and once they get noticed (and that requires funerals), it becomes clear that "this is not our war" everywhere. Hopefully a lesson has been learnt with regard to the new neocon thriller, war with Iran.

isolationist strain in the foundation of the US.  the US was an escape from an unjust vile sinful world into a new clean space. Disengagement from authority and tradition. It is this very same isolationist sentiment in the public that, counterlogically, led to military adventurism. Centrifugal moods (fleeing the central authority) enabled special groups to dictate foreign policy. With the exception of the War of Independence, the War of 1812, and Afghanistan 2001, all American wars were engineered by small groups against the public mood, although the public would eventually change it's mood to pro-war (and then back to anti-war, if the war goes bad). The wars with Mexico, with Spain, the WWI and WWII, Vietnam, the invasions in Lat America, Iraq, - all were unwanted by the public but pressed for by the lobbies. Now it is unfashionable to say that the war against Hitler was initially unwanted in the masses, and Roosevelt had to wait until Hitler himself declared war on the US.

Americans still have a good degree of the initial isolationism (GWB was recently an isolationist arguing to reduce military presence overseas, can u believe that now?), but are easily manipulated by groups into the messianic mood. That's an American paradox, co-existence of isolationism and messianism.


"last resort" would imply a clear indisputable danger, or some unacceptable consequences. Iraq was not a "last resort"; Americans were in the 9/11 mood, and Saddam looked passable for the enemy, whoever that was. The enemy was Muslim bad guys, anything that looked like that could be turned into a target. It is a scandal that many Americans, even the GIs in Iraq, saw the war as a direct response to the force behind 9/11. The pro-war groups STILL manipulate this sentiment. Did u see that pro-war ad on TV where a mother of a fallen soldier argues for the continuation of the war in Iraq and says "We already had one 9/11, we don't need another.." An example of how masses are manipulated by lobbies. Another manipulation tool is the term "Islamifascism". It works in a simple manner: there is already a strong negative connotation of  "fascism" in the masses, so add "Islamo", and u channel the energy of the old connotation against a new enemy.

the post is in the future tense..."WILL die". That "it never happened" does nothing to refute an allegation about future events.


by the time the UN began thinking about partitioning the <Mandate between the Arabs and the Jews, it included only Palestine. No one, except the Zios, ever thought that the Jewish national home would be established in Trans-Jordania which never was included in the historic Palestine. My idea pertained to the historic Palestine, not to the Mandate. I happily substitute "80% of historic Palestine" for the "80% of the Manate Palestine".

London and Madrid? Euros have been paying for taking part in other people's war. They pay for American crimes with blood and money, and still get bashed by Americans. It's true that Euros need to revive their atrophied balls, - not to go bombing from country to country, but to learn how to say "NO" to the daddy. The learning, I'm afraid, will come at a bloody price.

Israel makes up 80% of the Mandate. Your reference is to the Mandate of 1922, mine is to the Mandate of 1948. On the day the Mandate expired, it did not include Transjordania.


to locals. U find that wrong? Why not to the Scotish?

Jews forcefully ceased 80%, and occupied the rest, of the Palestinian homeland. Try to spin that. Palestine was the home land to the people who lived there. It was NOT the homeland of the Jews (except those who lived there as a minority among Arabs). Historic Palestine, the Mandate, but most importantly, the homeland of Palestinians.

what if the next czar happens to be a lunatic? Occasionally happens to monarchs. And u have already burried all ways of restraining his lunacy (except the coup de etat, but it might fail).


how about native populations? Tatars, Chechens, Yakuts, and so many other. They were where they are long before Russkies popped up there. Dagestan for the Russians? That's like Africa for the Boers.

I should have said "Mandate of Palestine as it existed in the late period". Jordan became independent in 1946 after which the Mandate was what it was. What I said was correct, but not clarified enough. The late period Mandate Palestine. Happy now? I was initially going to say "historic Palestine", but decided that the late Mandate was almost but not entirely overlapping with "historic Palestine".

or wasn't documented.  The USA has gotten a fairly poor record with blacks and native Indians. I find it entertaining that at the time when  "The Land of the Free" song, the future national anthem, was written, 20% of the population of "The Land of the Free" were slaves. Doesn't it bring a smile on your face? Che can hardly compete with the Land of the Free in terms of suffering inflicted on humans. He fought against rather repulsive types, and, alas, his methods were not Tolstoyan and Gandhian. But the folks like Batista and Mobutu and all that rightist dictators, they richly deserved to be deposed, didn't they? I mean, that's what the official American discourse calls "brutal dictators", eh?

as long as the present mood of the public lasts. How long will it? Don't u think another large-scale terror attack will renew the neocon mandate to "protect" Americans by "pre-emptive" actions? What if the Kasparov-Hodorkovsky-Gusinsky-Berezovsky (all four are Jewish, at least in part) people get power in the Kremlin? These folks are ready to let u bomb Iran and Syria any given day. If they assail to power in Russia, they'll change policy on the ME completely. No more arms trade (leaving Iran and Syria defenseless against air attacks), and quite probably, nor more uranium for Iran.

Can Iran rely on American lefties and Putin in issues of national security? The desire to trash Iran has been among the neosons forever. They just need a situation conducive to that, WMD or not. What u ask of Iran is to be totally dependent on the domestic politics in US and Russia. If anti-Iranian guys get enough influence in Russia and US, Iran faces military assault because of it's support for Hezbollah and Hamas.


u're overestimating the durability of the present world order. Remember how the USSR dissolved into eternity? Just 5 or 3 years before that, it was UNTHINKABLE that this would happen. There are large structural processes that are gradually bringing this world order down; they are mostly unnoticed because people pay little attention to hard-core structural things like economy and demography. And the war with Iran can well be the event catalyzing the processes of power-redistribution in the world.

hopeless is the opinion that refugees broke the summit. I cited Barak and Clinton (whom else do u want?) clearing attributing the failure of CD to the Jerusalem issue. Not enough authority for you?

as I understand, he was born and raised in Lithuania.


supposedly, sums up the Arab position. Israel negotiated with Palestinians, and every bloody time the talks stumbled over Israel's refusal to give back the 1967 land. Israel negotiated with Syria, and the talks hit the dead end of Israel's refusal to give back the Golan Heights (Barak insisted on keep a part of the area). Israel makes up 80% of the Mandate Palestine, the Occupied Palestinian territories make up 20%. Every single peace initiative broke over Israel's insistance on annexing parts of the REMNANTS of Palestine. Israel wants Maale Adumim, Gush Etzion, Gush Sharon, East Jerusalem, Golan Heights, other bits here and there, and air control over Palestine. When Palestinians refuse to concede another part of their homeland in addition to the 80% which they have already conceded, American media starts the screams about fundamentalism and inability to compromise and "Israel should just cease to be, and every jew move." Yeah right.


Israel bombed the biggest Gaza power plant last year. Whatever Palestinian can build in ten years, Israel can demolish in 10 minutes.

"""Flames rise out of a power plant after it was hit by an Israeli air strike in Gaza in this June 28, 2006 video grab."""

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0629-07.htm

Fredledingue, I wonder that you identify with the upper side of the world order, though you come from a nation that long was on the down side. How did u enjoy when Lithuania was recognized by the West as a legitimate property of the USSR? And the Russians trampling all over you chest was "internal issue". There are some in East Europe who embrace the US global domination for the sheer joy of seeing the irreconcilable enemy, Russia, retreating. The UN Gen Assembly vote record shows that nations that experienced foreign domination are pro-Palestinian while imperial nations with colonial "glory" are pro-Israeli. Why did Palestinians vote for Hamas... like u don't know why. Because Fatah was talking to Israel for decades and delivered NOTHING, except thick wallets and bank accounts for it leaders. While Mazen and Qureia and Dahlan & CO were living in their luxury houses and top hotels in Paris and Washington and London, and having nice dinners at Sharm al Sheikh, Palestinians continued to be occupied, repressed, dispossessed, daily humiliated at the checkpoints, and all the good thing of life under occupation. Fatah could (and will) keep on "negotiating", without any hope of achieving a deal: the Fatah oldfarts already have everything they want. Good life. SO they will keep on the spectacle of "negotiations". Fatah is paid by the US, and it's security apparatus is a branch of IOF (Isr Occ Force). They each have multimillion accounts in the US, and they have dumbed the Palestinian case long ago. They just want to continue like it goes now. Life is good. And their subjects will keep on bearing the costs. Without future and hope, remembering their lost homes and property in what became Israel, for which they received no compensation. Perpetual refugees. Existential dead-end. Their homes were stolen in 1948 once, and NOW their NEW homes are demolished by bulldozers because they were built without a licence from the occupying authority. While Israeli settlements are growing without any licence wahtsoever. And u're asking why Palestinians vote for Hamas.

Gaza in an overcrowded refugee camp (population density comparable to HOng Kong) isolated from the world. It was occupied for decades. Palestinians flocked to Gaza fleeing Zionist forces (often enough ethnic cleansings), and were refused to be accepted by Egypt (Arab solidarity). For 37 years Gaza was a prison where people couldn't get to a neighbouring village, or neighbouring street, without passing Israeli controls. Not a good environment to pursue electrification programmes, etc. Now Gaza is isolated from the world by Israel and the Zionist regime of Mubarak in Egypt. People can't even sell vegetables in Egypt, and the only imports coming to Gaza enter through "illegal" underground tunnel under the Egyptian border. How do u expect them to generate electricity?

oh well. The Blogosphere blocking the neocon war urges...I would not vote for a politician who stages national security on the lefty chats and forums. Freddie, don't u get it? Iran cannot entrust her future to the American blogosphere. I mean, it freaking here, for everyone to see, the neosons openly threatening nations "You're Next!" (direct quote), and with NO connections to WMDs, - supporting terrorism is enough.

Today Americans "are done with wars", tomorrow a new 9/11 turns the tables in minds and domestic politics. Today Americans "are done with wars", tomorrow they rehabilitate from the war syndrome if Iraq and Afg are pacified. Should Iranians follow the US public opinion polls, anxiously expecting a new pro-war trend? Or maybe getting a strategic deterrent once and for all will be better?


why nuclear? wouldn't chemical and biological do? With Iraq it was about chemical and biological, and the rational was that Saddam would hardly attack the US himself but could secretly supply Qaeda with a few kilos of anthrax or sarin agent, and that would be enough to kill tens of thousands. Why isn't this rationale applicable to Iran, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Korea? Qaeda makes a come back, neosons arrange a flow of fake info pointing to Iran (as they did with Iraq). Or simply say: we can't take any risk of any possibility that Iran will pass chemical agents to Qaeda or whoever, so we're going in.

Statesmen must make decisions strategically, not relying on the current mood of the perpetually brainwashed Americans, or the "blogosphere". Iran needs a strategic deterrent to be able to continue its policies in Palestine and Lebanon, and elsewhere.   

individual responsibility, no universal health care, and stuff, all good. The problem is that Gaza was occupied for 37 years and is now a shut-off enclave totally separated from the world.