[Jacques]

The Persian Gulf crisis does throw up a stunningly audacious opportunity to reorder the world. Never underestimate how quickly an overstretched, embattled army can turn the tables in a war zone. In the process, it can induce a reordering in the global power structure by simply exiting. Yes, the Persian Gulf crisis can indeed escalate into an extreme, maximalist scenario. The decisive factor - as always - depends on the energy reservoir of the protagonists. In this case the question of 'energy' takes a more literal interpretation.

Upon closer scrutiny, the United States has some startling weapons at its disposal.

Read how the global political economy can be reordered through the current chaos.

[julianj]

That link you posted is bonkers neo-con nonsense.

As for other nations (read dictatorships), the US can impose a simple universal dictum - adhere to the UN Charters on fundamental rights.

If the US/UK had adhered to UN laws the Middle East wouldn't be in such a mess. And the current US govt has a lamentable track record on human rights. All it can impose on other people is bombing and chaos.

[Peak_Plus]

Dito.

Besides, I would compare the US push into the Mid-East (offensive) more like the attack of the Germans.

[highlander]

Bonkers or not, this seems to be the "reality" of the current US administration. The boss tells you what he wants to do, asks what are the downsides, and you find a way to dismiss them. It won't be long before the last piece of the puzzle is in place and the US strikes Iran. As Earl Pitts says.....WAKE UP AMERICA>>>>>

[HonestPessimist]

This is interesting to note:

It is also significant that the 1,200-year-old tombs of two revered Shi'ite imams were not destroyed. The Golden Dome is only about a century-old and can be repaired, and the US government has pledged to do just that. It is quite telling of contemporary journalism that this significant detail was omitted in most commentaries. The extent of an Iraqi civil war or the possibility of de-escalation may depend on this one vital factor. Till today, the exact details are not known.

The golden dome has been destroyed but the tombs are untouched. If it would be reversed in fashion, the outcome would be hellish for Iraq and the rest of the Shia world. Make me wonder what type of insurance coverage costs the property holders of that mosque would collect?

[zoidberg]

That link you posted is bonkers neo-con nonsense.

As for other nations (read dictatorships), the US can impose a simple universal dictum - adhere to the UN Charters on fundamental rights.

If the US/UK had adhered to UN laws the Middle East wouldn't be in such a mess. And the current US govt has a lamentable track record on human rights. All it can impose on other people is bombing and chaos.

Human Rights is a codeword for doing what the US tells you to do. The context of the sentence was explaining how cutting ME oil actually gives the US an advantage vs the Asian powers. Note the words "impose", "dictum". Human rights are not compatible with imposing dictums because you have an unopposable advantage. Because after all as you pointed out the US leadership has zero regard for human rights, in the literal sense. Thats the only explanation I have for such an outlandish statement. I felt the rest of the article was actually quite sensible, being an exercise in the worst case possibilities.

There are other codewords like "democracy" and "freedom" which refer to the freedom to elect officials who obey foreign dictums. (Which is usually the opposite of freedom and democracy).

OTOH there also exists the possibility that the neo-cons simply have a distorted view of reality and may actually believe what they say. The cynic in me says no, but stranger things have happened. God help us if they do though! Idealogues with power who blind themselves to uncomfortable facts can be exceedingly dangerous and fanatical. Kinda like Bin Laden and his crew. (neo-con baiting)

[Free]

From the above linked article:

"It is thus probably no overstatement to say that the Russian campaign has been won in the space of two weeks." - German Chief of General Staff Franz Halder, July 3, 1941

"The whole situation makes it increasingly plain that we have underestimated the Russian colossus." - General Halder, Aug 11, 1941.

....

If fear or conscience bothers you, we shall return again to the diary entry of summer 1941.

Few realize that Hitler's top two army commanders had contemplated assassination against him at the height of Nazi power in 1939. One of them was Gen Franz Halder. After the deck became impossibly stacked, he proceeded to draw up plans for Operation Barbarossa, one month before Hitler turned his attention towards the Russian colossus. Those are the personal choices in a maximalist world of warfare. In such situations, duty, relativity and personal stance may supplant conscience, or they may co-exist, uneasily.

As Halder ultimately learnt, it's not just who dares who wins, but who has the energy to do so.

He was later implicated in the July 20 (Stauffenberg) plot against Hitler and was sent to the Dachau concentration camp. He survived it and received the Medal of Freedom from fellow WWII veteran John F. Kennedy.

Where will you be when the deck is stacked?

Call me stupid but I don't get it - what is he trying to say here? So is the US the equivalent of Germany or Russia?
And isn't he in some twisted way saying that one should do a Stauffenberg on Bush? Or is he adressing Iranian Generals? Is this some sick joke and the author is mocking the neocons?

As others said here the US-situation is indeed very reminiscent of Germany, even down to the warfare doctrines.

Expecting a Blitz and ending up in a war of attrition. That's what happened, and it will happen again to a fatal breaking point when the US decides to attack Iran.

[shakespear1]

In that infinite web of information offered by the Web I stumbled on the following which is really eye opening as it was written in 1972

Code: Select all

It is the contention of the writer that this is exactly what has happened over a period of time following World War II. The methods used to fool the American people, certainly since 1963 and to some extent also since the end of World War I, have varied slightly as administrations changed. The main thrust however has been a constant erosion of civil rights, and a swing of government away from the best interests of the people and toward big companies, banks, the military and rich individuals and families. The trend was slowed down only briefly between 1960 and 1963 when Jack Kennedy attempted to alter the situation. He was assassinated because he did so.

Book

I found the above after reading the following written by a member of the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity.

Who will blow ....

Amazing

[gg3]

Oh the Neocons mean it alright. Many of them after all were Marxists up to the point where they were Neocons. Switching allegiance from one ideology of questionable realism to another, they kept their idealistic belief in a better world, tempered by pragmatism for their careers in the dawning Reagan era, but untempered by empirical facts.

Of course a civilized democratic Middle East would be a good thing! So would nuclear fusion, and what both share in common is that they are perpetually about 40 years away. Realistically there is no way democracy or civilized values are going to arise in an increasingly overpopulated desert with a multi-millenium history of petty vendettas magnified to affairs of state, sitting atop a pot of gold that brings out some of the most unsavory traits in the human character.

And, realistically the United States has by this time lost all international legitimacy. No one can honestly claim that the Iraq war was not launched upon deliberate lies. We might have pulled it off and the world forgiven us, but for the fact that the war was so mightily mismanaged. Incompetence is hardly a strong enough word for that. How long has it been since "major combat operations (have been) over"...?

To this add the breathtakingly disgusting reality of torture as policy and the equally disgusting rationalizations of same, putting the word "Pariah" in large boldface type. To this add various other depredations of international treaties (disappearances of prisoners) and domestic Constitutional law (broad-spectrum surveillance). And finally, the most cynical step of all, an Administration that tells us that all of these immoral and illegal acts were necessary in order to "do anything to stop terrorism," was about to sell off terminals in our seaports to a company owned by a government (Dubai) that meets every defintion of a state sponsor of terrorism and even of nuclear proliferation.

We've blown it so bigtime, that there is practically zero probability of any good coming of it any time soon.

[Caswell]

gg3

I don't think you made any mention of British and American support for the regimes in the ME, nor of the action against democratic movements;Mossadeq's Iran, for example, in Aug 1953.

[gg3]

(sarcasm alert)

Caswell, I didn't need to mention those things, because I knew that you were going to mention them immediately following my posting.

Nor did I mention the 1929 depression or World War II, but someone's going to come along to mention those shortly.