BBC has an incredibly scary interview with Mike Scheuer, who headed the CIA unit charged with capturing Osama Bin Laden in the late 1990s.
Without ever bothering to define what "win" means, Scheuer says that, "The United States will not win in Iraq unless it is prepared to accept heavy losses on both sides. We have to stop fighting as if we really truly believe the nonsense that we can fight wars without killing innocents and not losing many people ourselves." He goes on to state that, Notwithstanding the rhetoric that comes out of Washington, we're clearly losing." BBC explains that "he described insurgencies as 'the ugliest, dirtiest, bloodiest kind of war,' which made it particularly difficult to win without suffering casualties. "If you're not willing to kill civilians, or to assume that there is a likelihood that innocents are going to be killed, you have no business fighting an insurgency - because you can't win," he said.
Yet Scheuer apparently recognizes that even more death and carnage won't allow us to "win" in Iraq because he "also warned that the insurgency in Iraq could not be controlled only by taking more risks on the battlefield.
He said that American foreign policy had to be changed, because al-Qaeda's leadership could rely on support as long as the US was perceived as fighting wars against Islam.
'We're supporting Israel without qualification, which is a disastrous situation for America; we are supporting countries which are well known for oppressing Muslims around the world,' he said.
'This policy is detested at every level of Muslim society. As long as this is the case, we're going to be in this war.'
And he added that he felt engagement in this way was also dangerous to America's national interest.
'If Palestine, or Israel, or Bolivia, or Belgium, disappeared from the face of the Earth tomorrow, it would not make a lick of difference to any person in the United States,' he said. [WTF Bolivia and Belgium have to do with this whole mess is beyond me.]
'I think if we're going to be the ally of Israel, we should be the ones who call the tune, and not the ones who are led around by their nose.'"
So I've got an idea. How about we don't kill any more civilians nor any more American soldiers? Instead, how about we just get the fuck out of Iraq and get rid of Senators such as Joe Lieberman who are incapable of distinghishing between America's interests and Israel's interests? How would that be?
9 comments:
Well, the line about Israel explains why this will never be discussed in the US press.
As for the rest, what could "win" mean in Iraq, except the death of everyone who could possibly be, or become, an insurgent?
We either annex Iraq and settle it like we did the American frontier, or we leave. There's nothing else we can do.
I'd like to know where this notion that Israel is leading the US around by the nose comes from. How a client/satellite state of the US, dependent on a large share of its foreign aid, and simultaneously so intertwined with its economy that "if the US sneezes, Israel gets pneumonia," could lead the world's most powerful empire around by the nose is beyond me. The average Israeli on the street considers it to be a ludicrous claim, incidentally. Further to that point, I'd like to point out that Lieberman isn't actually acting in Israel's interests; he just thinks he is. Ditto the AIPAC people, who, safe in their Washington, DC haunts, don't have to live with the consequenses of their actions. See also Zionists comma Christian comma Dominionist.
I figure if Lieberman et al were really serious, they're all entitled to the Right of Return, and Lieberman could surely stand for the Knesset if he wanted to badly enough. (Just think of how far Joe's bank account would go when counted in NIS, at about three and a half NIS to the US$, and at the cheap cost of much of Israeli living.)
That said, I think getting those folks out of office anyhow would be a good idea, because anyone who implicitly or explicitly believes in the notion of 21st C. empires is not someone who should be in government, especially in ostensible democracies.
I'd like to know where this notion that Israel is leading the US around by the nose comes from.
Um, because it seems to be true?
Utter one word of complaint about anything Israel does (bomb Gaza because a soldier is kidnapped; Erect a wall) and be labeled "anti-semitic." Speak one word in support of the two-state solution, and be labeled someone who hates Israel.
And does the US government dare speak on any of those issues, except to support whatever the Israeli government seems to be doing? Not that I've noticed.
I think I heard this interview on BBC overnight. I literally stopped in my tracks and was nauseated when the interviewee actually said "Dead Iraqis are better than dead Americans." Yeah, we're going to 'win' with crap like that. The horrible thing is how damn many idiots here agree with such a horrid statement.
Scheuer says the things no one else dare states. This stuff may sound repugnant, but Scheuer has been a voice of sanity on terrorism, because he doesn't care about politics and will speak the truth as he see it.
A number of interesting and somehow worrying polls were presented lately. These suggest that many young men are losing their sex drive and are actually suffering from low libido. LNG Active Male Enhancement
We want something that feels better, but it's not clear what that is or if it's even possible for us -so we eat. We eat when we're hungry and when we're not hungry at all. Eliz Keto
The only reason why easy weight loss supplements have not caught on as well as the traditional fat loss strategies is because of people being unaware of this trend. Keto Jolt
Some diets forbid dairy products during a plan of weight loss because it is high in fat. But dairy products adequately nourish the body with calcium. Wonder Full Keto
Post a Comment