"We're in the early stages of what I would describe as the third World War and, frankly, our bureaucracy's not responding fast enough and we don't have the right attitude. And this is the 58th year of the war to destroy Israel and, frankly, the Israelis have every right to insist that every single missile leave south Lebanon, and the United States ought to be helping the Lebanese government have the strength to eliminate Hezbollah as a military force — not as a political force in the parliament — but as a military force in south Lebanon."
Even though the United States military is already engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan and stretched to the maximum, this crusty old neocon wants more war with more nations. He believes the Bush administration is being too soft concerning Islamic extremists and dictatorships that help them. He is the carnival barker for those neocons in Washington who are calling for a wider war in the Middle East, namely against Iran and Syria.
The warmongers main argument is that Iran and Syria are the Hezbollah puppet masters. They continually point to the fact that the Katusha rockets raining down on Israeli towns are developed in Iran and made in Syria.
I ask, "so what?"
Katushas have killed 30 people in Israel and U.S. made bombs and mortars have killed 300 Lebanese. I just don't understand the neocon logic here, except for the fact that they want a larger war and are trying to float out some reasons for it, like they did with the Iraq WMD argument.
Russia supplies arms to Iran. Should we go to war with Russia? The majority of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudi. Should we go to war with Saudi Arabia? The U.S. supplies billions of dollars worth of arms to Israel. American taxpayers have given about $3 billion every year to Israel in "foreign aid" for decades. What most people don't know is that the "humanitarian" portion of those aid dollars are, by policy, diminishing to zero -- while at the same time -- the "defense" portion of those billions grow to 100% of the aid package.
Newt Gingrich is not only selling his WW III neocon bullshit here in America, he is also selling a version of it in the United Kingdom. [BBC video clip] I imagine it didn't go over as well there as it does to the U.S. audience here hoping to push to the world toward Armageddon and their promised "rapture."
The Greengrinch may have more personal reasons for his talk show appearances, in my humble opinion. His last book "Winning the Future" just came out in paperback and he's simply seizing the moment to make a few more million dollars for himself. I can understand that motivation, but the upshot is that he has once again become a carnival barker for war at the expense of other people's lives.
This makes perfect Bush World sense. Although no one in the scientific community is advocating this fake political issue of fetus farming anywhere, he said:
This good law prohibits one of the most egregious abuses in biomedical research, the trafficking in human fetuses that are created with the sole intent of aborting them to harvest their parts. Human beings are not a raw material to be exploited, or a commodity to be bought or sold, and this bill will help ensure that we respect the fundamental ethical line. (emphasis mine)
Immediately following the Bush veto concerning federal funds for new stem cell medical research, California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich used executive orders to fund projects within their respective states. Despite this, one of the benefits of federal funding and using the National Institutes of Health (NIH) as opposed to individual state projects and private corporations doing this research is to coordinate efforts and not waste money on duplicate research.
President Bush's embryonic stem cell policy began with lies and has now ended with one. Bush reserved his first veto as president for one of the only valuable things this do-almost-nothing Congress has managed to actually get done.
It's a good read. I wonder though, how are Fetus Farmers in Kansas going to vote in November now?
See this sportscar above? It's called the Tesla Roadster and it's going to be available very soon in a city near you. This car does 0-60 mph in about 4 seconds, with a top speed of about 130 mph, and uses ZERO gasoline as a fuel to make it go.
Do you want tell big oil to piss off with their higher and higher gas prices? Do you want to get the U.S. military out of the Middle East protecting THEIR oil fields under the premises of national security interests? Maybe you don't like Hugo Chavez? Maybe you don't like the mullahs in Iran? Maybe you just don't like the huge influence any of these interests and lobbies have on our elected legislators in Congress?
In the United States, about two-thirds of all our oil consumption is used up in the transportation sector of industry. A vast majority of that amount basically equates to you driving to work everyday -- actually -- you and many millions of other people cussing at each other while they drink their coffee everyday.
This sportscar may not solve all the problems we face in the United States, but I have to say that it has the promise to plant the seed to solve some of the most pressing issues we are all talking about today. It's a start -- perhaps a role model and motivator.
I've got a total hard-on for this vehicle. It wasn't developed in my rustbelt hometown, Detroit, but in Silicon Valley. It's not a fuel hybrid -- I'll post why E-85 is not my first choice for alternative energy transportation another time.
The Tesla Roadster uses the newest battery technology, giving it the longest range of use between charging, about 200-250 miles. It takes less than four hours to fully re-charge overnight. Oh. And it's obviously not a ugly little battery box on wheels or your grampa's golf cart.
The "Holy Land" seems to be doing what it historically does best -- going up in smoke amid border clashes and tit-for-tat, eye-for-an-eye, Levitican retribution and hostilities. The only way to even write about the never-ending, mindless violence surrounding Israel is to start with the latest news and work backward a month, then a year, then a decade, then a century, then a millenium. Sometimes, I think the global community is simply going to ignore this whole area, allow these brothers of Abraham to kill each other off, have a quick funeral for the Middle East, and then get on with the daily job of being a human in the twenty first century.
This is probably why I normally avoid writing about Israel/Palestine. It's a no-win situation. If you speak critically of modern Israel, suddenly you're an anti-semite in the U.S. If you speak critically of Palestine, you get blamed for having no historical perspective of the situation.
Growing up in the Detroit area, I found this out very early in life. I remember getting angry rebukes from some in the Arab community for even mentioning the name Israel to them -- to them, it is Palestine and always has been -- until the Zionists invaded 60 years ago and called it Israel. If I referred to the country as Palestine to Jewish people, I'd get a reverse lesson in mindless history.
These history teachers were not poor, brainwashed, Palestinian teenagers who believe that becoming a suicide matyr is their best option for their lives -- nor was it some Orthodox Jewish settler on vacation. These people were well-educated professionals and business owners.
I was literally amazed one day speaking to a Lebanese business owner who seemed perplexed about the Jewish exodus from Hitler's Nazi Germany. I was trying to say that one cause for the formation of the state of Israel was WWII and Hitler. He had never heard of it. I guess they omit that holocaust lesson in schools in Beirut.
In the U.S. we seem to always get the news that Hamas or Hezbollah did some terrorist act -- and then, this is how Israel has reacted to it. This is what is happening now. Hamas took a hostage, Israel rolled into Gaza. Hezbollah took 2 hostages, Israel is now bombing Lebanon. Next, we can all start blaming Syria and Iran for supporting Hezbollah and the shit can really hit the fan.
By the way of a domestic note, Conneticut Senator Joe Lieberman explained his past and continuing support for Bush's Iraq war by saying that Saddam supported terrorists this very morning on the national syndicated radio show, "Imus in the Morning." I found it very intriguing that Senator Lieberman conspicuously never even mentioned Israel once in his carefully contrived explanations.
Didn't Saudia Arabia TV have suicide martyr telethons before September 11th to show support for Intifada groups (terrorists) to the Israeli occupation, too? I guess it's lucky that Bush is such good friends with the house of Saud, or we'd be mired down in their desert, too.
In the end, it's a matter of perspective. In 2004, the Israeli government did swap over 400 prisoners for a single businessman who had been taken hostage. Now, after some towns in the Gaza strip have been decimated for one IDF soldier and Lebanon has been bombed for two others, it's going to get much worse before it ever gets a little better again.