Sunday, January 15, 2006

The Greatest Threat Of All

Friday, President Bush made a statement refering to Iran as "the greatest threat to Israel", it's important to remember a couple of things. One, when Iranian president Ahmedhijhad said that Israel should be "wiped off the face of the Earth", he never suggested that Iran were to do this. he was merely responding to threats made against his country by Israel if Iran should continue it's nuclear power program. Two, Israel, which has not signed to NPT, has plenty of nukes of it's own, and could certainly nuke Iran should they try anything against them. It's that whole MAD (mutually assured destruction)thing that kept the USSR and the US from nuking each other in the Cold War. Israel has the biggest dick on the block and Iran is suffering from nuclear penis envy.
Of course, Bush never mentioned Iran as any threat to the United States. We certainly have enough nuclear weapons to keep any country in check and have proven time and time again that we're not bashful about using them. In fact, this past summer, Dick (head) Cheney even had STRATCOM draw up a contigency plan for nuking Iran should there be a terrorist attack on US soil, even if Iran was in no way linked to these attacks. If that's not a threat, then I don't know what is.
What President Ahmedhijhad is also doing is planning a conference to investigate the claims of the Holocaust. And being a Holocaust denier is rapidly becoming one of the greatest crimes in the world, next to opposing US imperialistic designs. While I may not be a student of the Holocaust, I do understand that there has been innummerable cases where one group of people has tried to wipe out another group of people. The US, for instance, has slaughtered millions of indigeonous people in order to build this great country of strip malls and strip clubs. Not to mention all the civilians we nuked in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Or in our participation in the firebombing of Dresden. Or, even the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians whose only crime was standing between the Bush regime and all that luscious oil in the ground they covet so.
In fact, I think it safe to say that the US has killed more civilians than the number of Jews that were ever were slaughtered in Nazi Germany. But the point is, why is the Holocaust more important than say, the ten million Slavs slaughtered under the brutal Communist governmentof the USSR? The millions slaughtered by Pol Pot in Cambodia? Are Jewish people more important than any other group on this planet? No. Of course not. We are just constantly reminded of their suffering everytime they commit an atrocity against the Palestinians.
Perhaps there can be a day when "Never Again!" applies to all people.

6 comments:

JEW said...

I'm trying hard to pin down the "flavor" of your post lew, and it is a hard one, as you lack specific direction in your writing. I can tell you how it makes you sound though, like a conspiracy buff, one who hates jews, and does not recognize the greatest human caused tragedy of all times, that being the holocaust. It is only fair that I tell you why I say this.
1)You wrote, "One, when Iranian president Ahmedhijhad said that Israel should be "wiped off the face of the Earth", he never suggested that Iran were to do this."
RESPONSE: So what does that matter. It appears you are reaching far for a reason that the United States and Israel should be at fault. Would it matter if I thought your child should be killed, voiced it in public and in the media, but then never did it myself. That would be ok because I never really intended to kill your kid, I only wanted to put the idea out there that if he/she was killed it would be ok, because they didn't belong on this map anyway.
2) "he was merely responding to threats made against his country by Israel if Iran should continue it's nuclear power program."
RESPONSE: Well you really cleared up a whole big misunderstanding Lew. The rest of the world thought Israel was just trying to exist as a nation. You clear things up so that we now realize that the jew's are the bad guys who hope to keep the rest of the Middle east from experimental energy sources. Is that right?? C'mon lew, you really sound like an person who believes EVERYTHING he reads on the internet. Write with the facts.
The facts are that Israel has threatened a missle strike on ++++-Iranian sites if the nuclear program continues. Why? Because Iran does not plan to develop a energy program, there sitting on top of 100,000 years worth of oil, a million years worth if they don't sell to much. Iran is lying, it wants a nuke program so they can build a bomb with which they could threaten Israel. Why do you support this??? I thought liberals were supposed to be pro-enviroment?? Last time I checked, nukes are not enviromentally friendly. If it is ok for the Iranians does that mean you will support the same efforts in the USA??? You write in disected half truths which make your anti-Israel opinion very obvious.
3) " Two, Israel, which has not signed to NPT, has plenty of nukes of it's own, and could certainly nuke Iran should they try anything against them. It's that whole MAD (mutually assured destruction)thing that kept the USSR and the US from nuking each other in the Cold War. Israel has the biggest dick on the block and Iran is suffering from nuclear penis envy."
RESPONSE: Israel is too small to benefit from nukes. It doesn't have enough landbase to assure that their nukes could not be taken out in one fell swoop along with all their major cities by a first strike against them. Also, Israel's enemies are too close in proxinity to Israel for Israel to consider nuking them. Israel would invariably suffer at least radioactive contamination if they attacked their neighbors. It may be even rendered uninhabitable.
It has never been proven that Israel has Nukes; the governments of the US and Israel both deny it. Israel does not have nukes, and you can't prove your point with any reliable facts.
3) " Of course, Bush never mentioned Iran as any threat to the United States. We certainly have enough nuclear weapons to keep any country in check and have proven time and time again that we're not bashful about using them."
RESPONSE: No, presently Iran is not a threat to the US. If they make the neccesary ingredients, then pass them along to some of there US hating buddies(yes, they hate you too)they will be a threat. It is best to dissolve them as a power. Sounds hardcore to you, but it might keep your kids from growing up with radiation poisoning because Chicago or New York got blown up. You care an awful lot about the soldiers getting exposed to undepleted Uranium, so try giving a shit about people getting exposed to it's sister at full strength in real time. It would suck(see Hiroshima and Nagasaki). What goes around does not need to come around if the proper implements are in place.
4) "Dick (head) Cheney even had STRATCOM draw up a contigency plan for nuking Iran should there be a terrorist attack on US soil, even if Iran was in no way linked to these attacks".
RESONSE: I am sure the plan, if it existed, was also in case Iran was involved. You are a spin master, in fact, as good as O'Reily, and about as fair and balanced.
5) " What President Ahmedhijhad is also doing is planning a conference to investigate the claims of the Holocaust. And being a Holocaust denier is rapidly becoming one of the greatest crimes in the world, next to opposing US imperialistic designs. While I may not be a student of the Holocaust, I do understand that there has been innummerable cases where one group of people has tried to wipe out another group of people."
RESPONSE: I am sure, and it almost sickly humors me, that you are indeed sure that it is an ok thing to think the holocaust did not happen. This does not surprise me, as you are very clearly not a person with any care for the jews. I ask you though, how much rationalization is healthy, and how much is unhealthy. To debate the existance of the greatest man made horror in modern times is not an exercise in intellectual freedom, it is in itself a horror. Is there anything(other then thinking differently then you) that is not fair game in your world??
Have other people done it(holocaust) in history, yes. In modern history, nothing to the scales of WWII. I truely hope you are not that far away from reality.
6) "The US, for instance, has slaughtered millions of indigeonous people in order to build this great country of strip malls and strip clubs. Not to mention all the civilians we nuked in Hiroshima and Nagasaki".
RESPONSE: Yes, we killed the Indian's, and they fought well trying to repell us. In return they have been compensated and the issue is for history, no longer a valid excuse for doing it again. Perhaps Hitler thought as you do, and the only reason he saw it fit to kill 8,000,000 jews was because the US got away with waring with the Indians. Who knows.
As far as Japan goes, it was a brutal fight, and we won. Sorry, I'm sure you hate to see the US win, but it happened. Last time I checked japan is one of our greatest allies.
7) "even the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians whose only crime was standing between the Bush regime and all that luscious oil in the ground they covet so."
RESPONSE: Hundreds of thousands?? So what, like 500,000, or 750,000?? War is war. People die. Find a way to blame the US for the bloodiest war, and that would be the Civil war.
8) " I think it safe to say that the US has killed more civilians than the number of Jews that were ever were slaughtered in Nazi Germany. But the point is, why is the Holocaust more important than say, the ten million Slavs slaughtered under the brutal Communist governmentof the USSR?"
RESONSE: It is not. The difference is the dead in the first instance were found in a much more dramatic fashion, so there actions were much more evident. They(the jews) were slaughtered for simply being Jewish. There was no politics involved, there was not the existance of two parties vying for power.
9) " We are just constantly reminded of their suffering everytime they commit an atrocity against the Palestinians."
RESPONSE: We covered this. They too have a right to there homeland. When people disagree people end up getting hurt, you know this.
10) "Perhaps there can be a day when "Never Again!" applies to all people."
RESPONSE: Then who would you hate?? Your as bad, if not worse, then those you appear to fight against. Ignorance is very, very dangerous.

Lew Scannon said...

Bullshit! If Israel doesn't have nukes, then why does it refuse to sign on the NPT? Why do they refuse inspection at their site in Dimona?Why did they steal all the US nuclear secrets? And, most importantly, why is the Holocaust more important than the slaughter of Cambodians under PolPot for one instance?
Why shouldn't Iran be allowed to build a nuclear power plant? When they can sell all that oil and make a ton of money from it, why use it themselves? Who the fuck is Israel to decide who should and shouldn't have nuclear power? Sure, nukes aren't environmentally friendly, but then again, neither is fossil fuel! As I said, they made threats against attacking Iran first.
And the last time I checked, the US does have nuclear power plants.
Sorry I'm not cowed by threats of passing nuclear technology to their "American hating buddies". We just placed all kinds of security measures in this country, and if they can get them in this country, it's because it serves the needs of the Bush administration, just like they allowed 9/11 to happen to serve their invasion of Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9/11 but was on the drawing table months prior to it's occurance.
The plans Dick Cheney had STRATCOM draw up DO EXIST.
If nuclear power and/or nuclear weapons are cause for invasion of a sovereign nation, we should have invaded North Korea a long time ago. luckily for them, they aren't sitting on "100,000 years of oil". (Which, by the way, there isn't that much oil left in the world, let alone in Iran)
I never said anything about the Holocaust never happening, it's just there has been hundreds of cases of government sponsored genocide over the last 200 years, what makes the Holocaust more special than say, the wiping out of native Americans in the US? What about the Palestinian slaughter at Sabra carried out by Lebanese militants while Sharon allowed it to happen? What about the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the US government?
If "Never Again" applied to all people, I would be a happy man. I am not as hate filled as you make me out to be. I hate that my country has become everyday like the fascists of Nazi Germany, true, that's why i'm here. I have a sense of right and wrong, and when I see something wrong (such as the US invading Iraq because of a lie) I vent in a healthy way. Every country has a right to defend itself, but a pre-emptive strike is A WAR CRIME.

JEW said...

You don't support what is good or right lew. You support, or oppose what makes your political platform seem correct.It is good that people like you will never be in charge. I am not sure I would trust your judgement with a simple dinner order. If YOU were vegatarian everyone's meal would be meatless.
You compare incidents in history as if they are game pieces, while all are important, each has its design and impact. Your interpretations are crude, and they clearly show your lack of formal or informal education. I am not saying that you are dumb, only foolish and not formally educated beyond any significant level.

Lew Scannon said...

Coming from one as narrow minded and elitist as yourself, I take that as a compliment.
Have a nice day!

lily said...

I am reading the exchange, but instead of commenting line by line, I wish to reflect on *process*.. I would like to express dissappointment about the way this dialogue deteriorated.
These conversations are important, and insults are not really necessary. Now I know Lew to be a man with a surprisingly open and agile mind. And you,'jew' seem to be capable, organized in presentation. Aren't you both, at the core, talking about some similar themes here? If you can get past the simplistic 'who sucks more' stuff?
Advanced education offers little when launched from a defensive, static stance. You've both shown you can rant, but can you apply the facts to a tangible course?
When will people see that win-lose postures help NO ONE? Truth is not distinct, objective.. it is an elusive muddle of what we think we understand coupled with our baggage of culture, context, and perspective.
But your antics reveal what is so inherent to the problem- the way the historical pissing contest trumps the ability to remain mindful of the real goal- for the killing-regardless of whose hand- to stop. For the machinery and supportive relationships that make peaceful resolutions more tangible.
Do you want to be right, justified, validated? Or do you want people to take something valuable from this insanity so that future generations (indeed, if we survive)may be spared the sick exercise of explaining their blind eye toward massive death?
I would like to have a better understanding of how you view *resolution*.
The depth or breadth of one's education set aside for a moment- I am beyond a graduate degree in policy analysis from NYU, with a background in NGO/UN studies, conflict resolution, and social sciences- not a stranger to these topics, but willing to read the perspectives of others. You can insult my credentials all you want, I am sufficiently covered in the manner you seemingly require.
Why not engage with some openness as to what you want?
So while I can't claim specific expertise on this particular exchange, I am looking for perspectives that move us beyond the traditional contests- that offer forward looking dialogue.
My reading invariably takes me to the 'understand the context' route. Comparing tragic events and disgraceful chapters is important, no question about that. But what next, guys?
What next? We need a tangible approach to peace.
We have provisions in the UN Charter regarding compulsory actions in light OF that history you both speak to that we still refuse to acknowledge. We did nothing in Rwanda, we are dragging our feet in Darfur. We have been intermittently both aggressor and 'protector' depending on our material interests at the time. This is factual, not revisionist or the rants of a conspiracist. Our express vision, AKA Wolfowitz Doctrine AKA Pax Americana is to protect the MATERIAL and STRATEGIC interests of the US.
Not to avenge history, not to embark on restitution or compensate culpability. We have no genuine concern for Israel or anybody else really-other than its strategic role, in keeping with the doctrine.
We did not initiate the Holocaust but we remained reticent. Even some of our 'leaders' have families with historical ties to Nazi Germany, and this seems to anger very few.
My point: there seems to be a need for concessions, and a real need to participate in these types of conversations with some more reflection and maturity.

Wadena said...

Interesting exchange. Reminds me of the Nelson Mandela quote: "If you name the beast, they call you anti-Semitic."

I tend to take a dark view of the situation in Palestine. I think the Zionists will be defeated and removed. I think that will take 50 to 100 years and many millions of lives destroyed.

The Jews coveted a homeland and took it by force--in blatant violation of their own holy laws.

Their treatment of the Palestinians? Again, blatant violation of their own holy Jewish laws.....they flushed their own sacred book down the toilet.

Any nation that is so fallen as to violate their own deepest and most holy values and principles will perish--because such violation tears the heart out of very people who make up that nation and leaves them morally bankrupt and weak.

In this, America and Israel are blood brothers.