 |
|
Omar Barghouti - De facto partition of Iraq is a bipartisan project. Today, rightist Republicans and Democrats speak of the “threat” of civil war dividing Iraq, and a recent report in the Financial Times, probably planted by Brits or Americans, is a variation on that theme. In the usual fashion, the paper quotes an “unidentified diplomat” as saying: “The south has been desperately disappointed, and they see Baghdad as continuing to leave them without representation. So they are working on ways to organize themselves to have more clout with the center.” In reality, civil war is the second item on the neocolonial wish-list. Should occupation of the whole of Iraq become untenable, they will foment inter-Iraqi strife in hopes of holding on to the oil-rich parts of the country through agreements with potentates of mini-states – sectarian and ethnic warlords, much like in Afghanistan.
Guest Editorial by The Black Commentator - De facto partition of Iraq is a bipartisan project. Today, rightist Republicans and Democrats speak of the “threat” of civil war dividing Iraq, and a recent report in the Financial Times, probably planted by Brits or Americans, is a variation on that theme. In the usual fashion, the paper quotes an “unidentified diplomat” as saying: “The south has been desperately disappointed, and they see Baghdad as continuing to leave them without representation. So they are working on ways to organize themselves to have more clout with the center.” In reality, civil war is the second item on the neocolonial wish-list. Should occupation of the whole of Iraq become untenable, they will foment inter-Iraqi strife in hopes of holding on to the oil-rich parts of the country through agreements with potentates of mini-states – sectarian and ethnic warlords, much like in Afghanistan.
Sarah Whalen - Genies grant three wishes. But the moral of dealing with genies is that things never work out well. In last week’s debate against Sen. John Edwards, US Vice President Cheney rubbed his lamp and out popped three reasons for America’s invasion of Iraq: Saddam Hussein “had established relationships with Abu Nidal, who operated out of Baghdad; he paid $25,000 to the families of suicide bombers; and he had an established relationship with Al-Qaeda.” “Specifically,” Cheney challenged, “look at George Tenet, the CIA director’s testimony before the Committee on Foreign Relations two years ago when (Tenet) talked about a 10-year relationship.” Sounds good, right? Let’s take things one by one.
Walter A. Davis - The maximization of death under the reign of thanatos finds in Iraq one of its ghostliest embodiments. Hiroshima was the first pure and unrestrained expression of thanatos as global terror. Iraq now serves to advance that logic in a new, and qualitatively different, way. Thanks to DU, death is again released in a way that promises to bring about its omnipresence through its silent, unseen, inner working on all that lives. Death is everywhere now: in the air they breath, the food they eat, the water they drink, the shards radiating up at them from the DU debris that litters their cities, the sperm they transmit in the act of love, the cancers and birth defects, the violence to the DNA, in all the leukemias of body and of soul that will turn Iraq into one vast Thanatopolis, the city of the future, an oidos where all that lives will come to bear Death as its sole meaning, the visible and invisible sign that is present everywhere.
Jeff Berg - The mantra from both George Bush and Tony Blair remains that the world is a safer place with Saddam behind bars. But is it? When one examines the reality of the situation on the ground in Iraq today, it seems hard to draw any conclusion that postulates a scenario built around the notion of an improved environment of stability and security. Indeed, many Iraqis hold that life under Saddam was a better option than the life they are facing under an increasingly violent and destabilising US-led occupation. The ultimate condemnation of the failure and futility of the US-UK effort in Iraq is that if Saddam were released from his prison cell and participated in the elections scheduled for next January, there is a good chance he would emerge as the popular choice.
Scott Ritter - The mantra from both George Bush and Tony Blair remains that the world is a safer place with Saddam behind bars. But is it? When one examines the reality of the situation on the ground in Iraq today, it seems hard to draw any conclusion that postulates a scenario built around the notion of an improved environment of stability and security. Indeed, many Iraqis hold that life under Saddam was a better option than the life they are facing under an increasingly violent and destabilising US-led occupation. The ultimate condemnation of the failure and futility of the US-UK effort in Iraq is that if Saddam were released from his prison cell and participated in the elections scheduled for next January, there is a good chance he would emerge as the popular choice.
Mustafa Al-Barghouti - Sharon himself never used the word “withdrawal”, yet the word has spread like wildfire. The international media invented it, the Arab media picked it up, and Palestinian officials seem to have believed that he plans to “withdraw” from the Gaza Strip. Arab officialdom now acts as if “withdrawal” is just around the corner, but all Sharon ever wanted to do was to turn Gaza into one enormous big prison. Sharon seeks to surround the strip with Israeli forces on all sides and prevent its inhabitants from communicating with the outside world by air, sea or land. Sharon dreams of a Gaza he can invade and attack at will. This is his scheme. This is the alternative he offers to the roadmap and the assortment of other “peace plans”.
Liz Burbank - The elections/"debates” expose the real purpose of electoral charades as major political WMDs of deception, delusion, distraction and a draft into a deadly trap. Of course we liberals hate those unjust, undeclared wars without end, those fascist attacks on our multicultural values and also on our sisters and brothers, the ‘right-wing’ suppression of ‘civil rights’ - all that nasty shit those republicans do - but what else can we do but elect a democrat, even if he’s saying the same things, we’ll go along with the program just til we get rid of Bush then we can get back to capitalist ‘business as usual’. We can make Kerry keep his promises. Oops. Well, we’ll do something later-- so let’s just not talk about it, OK? Ever wonder “how could they let german fascism happen”? We better look hard in the mirror. It ain’t pretty.
Abid Ullah Jan - Referring to the report by the USA’s Iraq Survey Group, the New York Times came out with a very fine editorial this morning. “The Verdict Is In”, it proclaimed. Despite the editorial’s title, however, it came to no conclusion at all, except to merely continue with the same war infected, biased and brainwashed mentality that caused the war against Iraq in the first place. “Sanctions worked. Weapons inspectors worked”, it suggested. Yes, sanctions worked for wiping out 1.8 million Iraqis. Yes, weapons inspectors worked but when the damage was already done. The total facts are that the basic premise for imposing sanctions at all was wrong because there was no WMD program at all. The invasion and occupation was wrong because there were no weapons of mass destruction at all.
 |
 |
Get free membership of the World Crisis Web, entitling you to post your own views on the articles published here, and to receive email summaries of the best articles on the site, as well as analysis and comment from other key sites.
Your privacy will always be fully respected. No-one's details will ever be given, sold, or otherwise traded to anyone else.
The World Crisis Web gives you automatically updated RSS news feeds for desktop newsreaders, or to add to your web site.
Amnesty International - Global Justice Gap Condemns Millions to Abuse
The PA's Disingenuous Boycott Campaign
A Shameful War: Israel in the Dock
Somalia: Bad Policies of Strange Bedfellows
The End of Hypocrisy: Crime's Gleeful Abandon in Gaza
Contact the editor without having to bother with e-mail.