The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Kurd sellout - latest addition > Comments

Kurd sellout - latest addition : Comments

By Jim Nolan, published 4/10/2006

Selling the Kurds down the river is a recurring phenomenon - the latest to do so are the Western Left.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. All
Trying to find an argument of substance in this article is quite difficult. Perhaps there isn't any. Nevertheless I'll try.

The implication seems to be that the "Western Left" supports "Islamofascists". However the Left has no truck with fundamentalists of any religion, and has a long history of supporting democratic self-determination for the people who live in Iraq - especially the Kurds.

The reality is the "Western Left" supports those who seek to remove occupying forces who engaged in an illegal invasion under false pretences. The "Western Left" supports the establishment of secular, democratic governments. The "Western Left" supports self-determination for the people of Iraq; including regional self-determination i.e., an independent nation for the Kurds - if that's what they want.

For years, the Left were condemned for supporting Kurdish "terrorists" who wanted their own country, whilst the right-wing media praised the "progressive" regime of Saddam Hussein. Examples of this can be found in the praise accorded to Hussein's regime in "The Australian" (see, 31 March 1984, p8) and their denial that the regime was using chemical weapons, quoting Harvard University biologist Professor Matthew Meselson's claims that the "yellow rain" was actually the result of swarms of South-East Asian honey bees engaging in a massive defecation flight (seriously! page 7, The Australian, 30 March, 1984)

It seems the assumption the rigid-minded author seems to make is that all insurgents are "Islamofascists".

Whilst on topic we may recall the extensive support that the right-wing governments of "the West" provided the Baathist regime, all of which was under strong condemnation by the left at the time.

(cf., http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51/040.html)
Posted by Lev, Saturday, 7 October 2006 12:07:51 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Some interesting points Lev. Regarding your Hartford link, you left out a couple of details, choosing to focus on the West's interaction with Saddam. For example, "Politics of Revenge" also notes that Iraq also bought a (less advanced) mobile telephone network from the USSR. This was part of Saddam's obsessive doubling up of everything to ensure that if one avenue dried up he would still have another. Hundreds of Arab and Iraqi ex-patriots were recruited from all over the world to work on the Iraqi WMD program. And it is curious that you include Jacques Chirac of France as an example of right-wing western government assistance to the Baathist regime.

Iraq obtained weapons from both sides of the iron curtain. A key reason western governments pursued weapons sales to Iraq was to diminish Soviet influence in the region. It is important to understand this in the context of the Cold War, despite the dodgy moral compass. (Unfortunately we're still dealing with the legacies of the amoral policies pursued during the Cold War.)

But when it came time to make amends for these policies and remove Saddam Hussein, France and Russia put their own national interests and economic interests over the plight of the Iraqi people. We should be under no illusion that they had humanitarian interests in mind when they opposed the US in the UNSC. I've already shown that Iraq had bought France's vote. Furthermore, Russia was very keen to be repaid $8 billion owed by Iraq for military equipment, and the Russian Foreign Minister Yevgeny Primakov was receiving bribes from the Iraqi government to get the sanctions lifted.
Posted by dozer, Tuesday, 10 October 2006 6:58:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It seems odd that you argue that the Left has no truck with fundamentalists of any kind. Consider that Ward Churchill, professor of ethnic studies at U of Colorado at Boulder, questioned the innocence of the 9/11 victims, referring them to 'little Eichmans." Do you think the 9/11 attacks were a legitimate act in defence of oppressed peoples?

Peter Singer has boasted that he hopes the "Bush Gang" is defeated in Iraq so that they lose their appetite for further aggressive action.

And don't get started on Chomsky. The left dominates the Humanities disciplines in both Australian and US universities, producing a steady stream of pro-jihadi propaganda.

Those who oppose the occupation in Iraq seem to assume that if the US leaves, the situation in Iraq will get better, with the assumption that the main reason for all the violence is the occupying forces. But most attacks are now by one Muslim group against another. There is already effectively a civil war going on in Iraq. Withdrawal would mean abandoning Iraq to Civil War.

Futhermore, (regardless of tenuous links to terrorism before the invasion,) the power vacuum created after the fall of Saddam means that Islamo-fascists will see it as a perfect opportunity to regain ground after the fall of the Taliban in Afghanistan. The fight in Iraq is so intense because the stakes are so high. It could mean the difference between a democratic Middle East or another Taliban in the heart of the Middle East. It may be difficult for many of you to believe, but GWB cares as much about democracy in the Middle East as you do.

So we return to the question. What are you on the left doing to help the democratic parties in Iraq. If you are, can I help, or do you only accept people with strong left-wing credentials.

P.S. What happened to Marilyn and Steve. They were so confident, so condescending, but they appear to have disappeared off the face of the earth.
Posted by dozer, Tuesday, 10 October 2006 6:59:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
@dozer

Ward Churchill's comments are certainly within the caveat of Hannah Arendt's remarks on Adolf Eichmann; that many American people who engage (indirectly) in the oppression of Arabs in the middle east take a disinterested moral perspective on the matter. It in no way indicates that he supports terrorist attacks.
Posted by Lev, Wednesday, 11 October 2006 2:50:54 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lev, before I respond, I must apologise to the distinguished Peter Singer, lover of animals, defender of Zoophilians, for besmirching his good name in my haste to sully the reputation of the left. Nothing so vile has left his mouth. It was John Pilger who stated:

“We cannot afford to be choosy. While we abhor and condemn the continuing loss of innocent life in Iraq, we have no choice now but to support the resistance, for if the resistance fails, the “Bush gang” will attack another country. If they succeed, a grievous blow will be suffered by the Bush gang.”

http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2004/568/568p10b.htm

In recompense for my sins against the modern-day St. Francis, I will henceforth only buy free-range. In the words of JFK, “I am a sausage.”

Regarding the W.C. (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/wc), have a read of a speech he gave justifying his “little Eichmann” statement http://www.counterpunch.org/churchill02212005.html. You really get the impression that deep down, he (and his audience) feels that a lot of the people who died that day really did deserve what they got. He exonerates “the food service workers, janitors, children, fire-fighters and random passers by,” and presumably those in the aircraft, but the rest are condemned as those who perpetuate, either consciously or unconsciously, the faceless machine which has killed the babies of the third world for as long as the West has been colonising it.

In this respect he represents the crux of the problem with respect to the Western Left. Through inability to deal with the overwhelming guilt over the sins the West has committed throughout the centuries, the left has rejected the good it has achieved. No good motive can be ascribed to anything our leaders do. Even an act of self-defence is seen as further oppression. Everything must be torn down. The most bizarre manifestation of this pathological self-hate is that the only truth, the only virtue, is perceived to lie outside the West. It is as though the civilizations outside the West never knew hunger, poverty, war or suffering until they came into contact with the West.
Posted by dozer, Wednesday, 11 October 2006 7:04:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Churchill makes it quite clear what he thinks of the current political system and all who represent it. He clearly shares with the 9/11 hijackers the same view of the West. Although he does not explicitly say ‘I support what the 9/11 hijackers did,’ he makes it quite clear that he felt it was deserved. He certainly does not condemn the actions of the 9/11 hijackers.

The scary thing is that in applying Hannah Arendt’s remarks on Adolf Eichmann to those in the WTC and the Pentagon, he endorses the ideology of the Islamo-fascists. The idea that the democratic process imbues us with a generalised complicity with, and thus collective guilt for, the sins of our governments past and present, and thus makes us legitimate targets, reflects the ideology of genocidal regimes such as those of Hitler, Stalin, and Pol-Pot.
Posted by dozer, Wednesday, 11 October 2006 7:06:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy