Author Topic: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran  (Read 13454 times)

brebis noire

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4707
    • View Profile
Re: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran
« Reply #30 on: August 03, 2010, 07:59:22 AM »
Don't all (Jewish) children in Israel have to do army duty? That doesn't make their society less racist and classist (based on race/religion), but it has made it even more militarized, segregated and violent than even the US.
If the draft ever was brought back, the US would make sure certain segments would have sure ways of avoiding it if they wanted to.
I don't see the draft as any kind of solution to the imperialist problems facing the US, in particular that of perpetual war.

skdadl

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32874
    • View Profile
    • http://www.pogge.ca
Re: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran
« Reply #31 on: August 03, 2010, 08:22:48 AM »
Well, I mentioned the differences in societies as a factor in whether militarization would happen or not. Israel has always been militarized; they claim to be a democracy, but from their foundation most Israelis have taken as axiomatic a number of anti-democratic principles and structures, so they really have survived as a warrior nation. Very poor nations also will become easily militarized.

Maybe one day that will be true of privileged Western countries, but it isn't yet. A majority of Americans, eg, still think that they believe in the Bill of Rights. They don't have to prove it much by standing up for it, so they are allowing vast encroachments on it. The only thing that would wake them up to what is happening would be a development that really got in their faces -- major economic collapse, conscription, etc.

Israelis at least know what they're standing up for, whether you agree with it or not; Canadians and Americans don't. Most don't stand up for anything -- see Alison's latest post at Creekside for an example of what Americans are allowing, so far mainly because it doesn't affect them personally in any way they can see.

Conscription usually allows for a category of conscientious objector. In some countries (Syria, eg) you'd go to jail for that, but in Britain or here (I think) you usually get alternative service -- as a medic, eg, or maybe even labour. Most Canadians aren't conscientious objectors in the true sense of having consciences -- they've never had to think about it so they don't. Let someone else do the dirty work. Many even think they support the war, even though they'd never volunteer themselves. That would change fast if they realized that they had to stand up for something -- either do the work or declare as a CO.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2010, 08:24:22 AM by skdadl »

brebis noire

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4707
    • View Profile
Re: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran
« Reply #32 on: August 03, 2010, 09:19:36 AM »
Well, of course being a CO is a noble thing, but I'm not convinced that creating COs through a draft will really make that much of a difference. Again, you'll have kids who'll avoid the draft by getting married, going to university, or claiming some kind of justified exemption. There'd be a temporary shakeup, and then the chips would fall back more or less into a privilege-based setup, with a system to allow parents to steer their kids toward avoiding it...(the parenting culture is nothing like it was in the 1960s, just for starters...)
 
Not all the kids (and adults) who volunteer for army service are necessarily underprivileged ones. The only kid I grew up with who went into the army was the son of a couple of doctors - he wasn't the brightest bulb in the box, but he had money and privilege, and he eventually saw the army as a good way to channel his energy and lack of focus. The many others I knew later on saw the army as their opportunity to get a mostly free education, not because they couldn't afford it otherwise, but because it offered a lifestyle (sports-wise, excitement, outdoor adventure) they enjoyed. And it's become just about the only employer out there on which you can base a traditional career - the kind where you can be there for life and count on a good pension. It's very odd to think about how things have changed in a generation.

skdadl

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32874
    • View Profile
    • http://www.pogge.ca
Re: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran
« Reply #33 on: August 03, 2010, 09:44:49 AM »
Well, if I were constructing the system ;) , there'd definitely be no deferrals, although the UK seemed to be able to work out a system where people could do their bachelor's degree and then do national service -- Rik had an MA before he did his service.

And something needs to be done about the class structure of the officer corps. In WWII and immediately following, if you had a degree, you were immediately an officer, even if you hadn't gone to a military college (and during the war, most hadn't). What that often meant was that the career NCOs were smarter than their commanders -- probably still does mean that. It's at least partly a wrong-headed class distinction, although I'm sure the military colleges do teach ... some useful things. (They produce some great historians.)

arborman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2298
    • View Profile
    • http://bohemiancoast.blogspot.com
Re: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran
« Reply #34 on: August 03, 2010, 09:08:34 PM »
Well, if I were constructing the system ;) , there'd definitely be no deferrals, although the UK seemed to be able to work out a system where people could do their bachelor's degree and then do national service -- Rik had an MA before he did his service.


If I were constructing the system I would bring back a medieval concept and require mandatory service for politicians, particularly members of a Cabinet that approves a particular war.  Let them lead the charge, like the old kings.  Then at least the strutting and pompous nonsense (of the surviving politicians) would be less ridiculous and appalling.


I suspect if Harper or Mmmmkay knew they would be the first up the beach they would discover an hitherto unknown dove deep in their hearts.
The pleasures of the table are for every man, of every land, and no matter what place in history or society; they can be a part of all his other pleasures, and they last the longest, to console him when he has outlived the rest.

arborman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2298
    • View Profile
    • http://bohemiancoast.blogspot.com
Re: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran
« Reply #35 on: August 03, 2010, 09:09:36 PM »
And something needs to be done about the class structure of the officer corps. In WWII and immediately following, if you had a degree, you were immediately an officer, even if you hadn't gone to a military college (and during the war, most hadn't). What that often meant was that the career NCOs were smarter than their commanders -- probably still does mean that. It's at least partly a wrong-headed class distinction, although I'm sure the military colleges do teach ... some useful things. (They produce some great historians.)


The process for becoming an officer could certainly be improved upon, though the division of responsibilities has a certain logic to it.
The pleasures of the table are for every man, of every land, and no matter what place in history or society; they can be a part of all his other pleasures, and they last the longest, to console him when he has outlived the rest.

Toedancer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13966
    • View Profile
Re: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran
« Reply #36 on: August 04, 2010, 11:22:04 PM »
Warning Letter sent to Obama from Steering Group, Veteran  Intelligence Professionals for Sanity

Quote
The  power of the Likud Lobby, especially in an election year, facilitates  Netanyahu’s attempts to convince those few of his colleagues who need  convincing that there may never be a more auspicious time to bring about  “regime change” in Tehran. And, as we hope your advisers have  told you, regime change, not Iranian nuclear weapons, is Israel’s  primary concern.
"Democracy is not the law of the majority, it's the protection of the minority." -Albert Camus 1913-1960

Antonia

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5009
    • View Profile
    • http://thestar.blogs.com/broadsides/
Re: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran
« Reply #37 on: August 05, 2010, 12:27:29 AM »
Okay, a confession.

I can't for the life of me figure out why the hell Israel wants to nuke Iran.

Is it because of WMDs? Is it because it allegedly backs Hezbollah and/or Hamas? Is it because of Ahmanwhatsisname? Seriously. I don't get it.

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/07/30

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/08/04-3

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/02/08/who_wants_to_bomb_iran
It is when we all play safe that we create a world of utmost insecurity. It is when we all play safe that fatality will lead us to our doom. It is in the "dark shade of courage" alone that the spell can be broken.
-- Dag Hammarskjöld

lagatta

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13093
    • View Profile
Re: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran
« Reply #38 on: August 05, 2010, 08:20:16 AM »
Antonia, perhaps it is another chapter in historian Barbara Tuchman's classic book, "The March of Folly", citing famous examples of ruling classes pursuing policies that were utterly counter to their own interests, from Troy to Vietname.

Israeli activist Michel Warschawski describes this march of folly as a drift "Towards an Open Tomb" (of Israelis as well as Palestinians and their neighbours). http://monthlyreview.org/books/towardopentomb.php
" Eure \'Ordnung\' ist auf Sand gebaut. Die Revolution wird sich morgen schon \'rasselnd wieder in die Höhe richten\' und zu eurem Schrecken mit Posaunenklang verkünden: \'Ich war, ich bin, ich werde sein!\' "
Rosa Luxemburg

skdadl

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32874
    • View Profile
    • http://www.pogge.ca
Re: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran
« Reply #39 on: August 05, 2010, 09:11:46 AM »
Antonia, I'm sure that WMD is almost always a fiction, a bone to toss to conservative bases both in Israel and here, as is any "religion"-based flutter. I doubt that Netanyahu gives a toss what Ahmadinejad says or thinks about anything (since N knows that A actually has very little power), but he knows that it's sensational copy for the base. They just keep shovelling the propaganda at us.

"Regime change" genuinely is their purpose, although again, that's a euphemism for something like "eternal destabilization." The Likudniks in both Israel and here do not want any other stable power in the region -- that's why they moved to destabilize Iraq, and that's why they're now after Iran.

That neocon purpose dovetails nicely with the utter cynicism of the MIC. Eternal destabilization is what the MIC runs on. Capitalism now depends on war, really depends on it, to keep going. Our neocons may or may not genuinely be Zionists, but they sure have figured out where the money is, and that is what is driving the politics.

ETA: MIC = military-industrial complex -- many are now adding "intelligence" to that abbreviation.
« Last Edit: August 05, 2010, 09:15:04 AM by skdadl »

Toedancer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13966
    • View Profile
Re: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran
« Reply #40 on: August 05, 2010, 12:03:56 PM »
Well put skdadl. I'm having some other thoughts as well, and as usual I wonder if it is just my deep cynicism. Talking up war with Iran could be part of a distraction. An attack on Iran could provide Israel with an opportunity to   attack Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Gaza, both of which will be   attacked massively and decisively followed up with a full invasion and   occupation of south Lebanon and a   full occupation of the West Bank. The msm will of course concentrate on the attack against Iran (with the U.S. doing the heavy lifting) once they are in to defend Israel.

Consider the right wing want Israel to become a A Greater Israel - one state solution

And of course this latest meeting Between Klein/Israeli Leaders
"Democracy is not the law of the majority, it's the protection of the minority." -Albert Camus 1913-1960

Mandos

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5759
    • View Profile
    • http://politblogo.typepad.com/
Re: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran
« Reply #41 on: August 05, 2010, 12:32:30 PM »
Yes, as proposed by the Israeli right, it's a blatantly silly idea (re: one-state solution), but one step further along the path to the logical conclusion of their own preferred policies.  The only viable two-state solution is the one along the 1967 borders, and since that's not acceptable to them...

Boom Boom

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9962
    • View Profile
Re: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran
« Reply #42 on: August 05, 2010, 12:53:49 PM »
If there's any candidate for 'regime change' in the ME, surely it is Israel, run by an unstable and totally wacko right wing coalition. I'm not saying Iran's gov't led by Ahmadinejad is any better, but at least Ahmadinejad isn't trying to destabilize the entire ME the way Israel's Netanyahu is. Israel is desperate for land expansion - the main destabilizing force in the ME as I see it - perhaps wrongly.
 
 

skdadl

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32874
    • View Profile
    • http://www.pogge.ca
Re: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran
« Reply #43 on: August 05, 2010, 01:17:07 PM »
It's very frightening and depressing to me. It's not that Iran has no problems, but like Turkey (another possible future target), it is a very old and rich and self-regenerative culture that should be given some space and time, just a bluidy chance, to pull itself back together after all the depredations of Western imperialism.

Under this kind of pressure, though, it will just regress. What an awful historical pattern, and it's our fault in the first place.

Antonia

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5009
    • View Profile
    • http://thestar.blogs.com/broadsides/
Re: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran
« Reply #44 on: August 05, 2010, 01:40:41 PM »
I understand about the MIC, and recognize that it's big business, half the US GDP or something, and a growing industry right here in Canada.

But all this strikes me as downright Biblical. It does not make any sense to me to destabilize such a volatile region, especially since that's where the oil is. That said, the is the most contested ground in human history. It was the passage from Africa.

And, of course, there are no WMDs.

I still don't get it.
It is when we all play safe that we create a world of utmost insecurity. It is when we all play safe that fatality will lead us to our doom. It is in the "dark shade of courage" alone that the spell can be broken.
-- Dag Hammarskjöld

 

Return To TAT