Wednesday, August 17, 2005

Cindy Sheehan...anti-semite?

Upon taking notice of Mrs. Sheehan as most people have in the last few weeks my initial reaction was one of sympathy. Nobody has sacrificed more than her for this cause, and nobody has more right to speak up and share her views. In the grand scheme, I too, dislike Bush, I dislike his policy, I was against the war, I'm against the continued occupation, but my views are balanced by a lot of considerations and subtle nuances that seem to have evaded her. I don't think Sheehan is more than halfway eloquent, but I do think she has positioned herself in a way that makes her appear to be handled.

All of this is fine.

I disagree with her because I was never convinced the war was about WMD. Like Friedman, it was obvious to me that it was about 911. It was about going into the heart of the mideast and smashing the most powerful arab nation there, because they made a target of themselves, and showing the arab regimes that their existence may well rest on their ability to control the fanatics they have sheltered and nurtured, or at least winked at. We are not soft, afraid, or devoid of strong beliefs. We will fight and die, crush armies and we will do it in their land the way they did it in our land. To show this mass totalitarian movement, this cult of suicide and death which niether liberals nor conservatives really understand, that they have awakened a sleeping giant. I have elaborated before, as have others, about prosecuting a clausewitz-style war against an enemy who lives in a fantasy world in which we are merely a prop, but that isn't the point here.

I think Sheehan is wrong, but I agree with what she wants. I want the US to withdraw because we already appear weak. Conservatives who argue that we need to stay to appear strong don't have a clue. Propping up a weak, prefabricated regime without legitimacy makes us look weak. We have already lost our chance to do it right, from the getgo. Which is why Rumsfeld and Rice will go down in history as some of the worst Presidential advisers in history.

But the real thing that caught my attention was this quote;
=========
Am I emotional? Yes, my first born was murdered. Am I angry? Yes, he was killed for lies and for a PNAC Neo-Con agenda to benefit Israel. My son joined the Army to protect America, not Israel.
=======================
I consider this at best borderline anti-semitic, the kind fed by the overtly anti-semitic European left and emulated here in the states. To say that this vast, selfish, and greedy nation run by old white men, oil companies and whatnot gives a rat's ass about Israel is in my mind anti-semitic. The Bushies would argue that Israel is a democracy, and we stand with democracy. It is a beachhead in the mideast and it is the threat of democracy that makes her hated and forces the failed Arab regimes to spend their cash vilifying "Zionists" (translation; Jews...Though I believe the Zionists and likudnicks richly deserve a measure of scorn) so that their populations have an outlet for their young male rage.

It would be fair to say that Israel is being used by the US. That classically anti-semitic conservatives have latched onto Israel as a cause celebre to get their hands on some oil and a convenient ally. What strange bedfellows...anti-semitic conservatives and liberal Jews...could it be that they both at varying levels now realize that the enemy they face doesn't differentiate between liberal and conservative? That there is one label..infidel dog? That after watching Israeli pizza parlors exploding in a spray of blood for years and saying "it's not our problem" they now realize that the main reason for homicidal attacks against Israel isn't the savage occupation of the West Bank any more than the reason for 911 was US intransigence in the mideast. That this movement, fed by the "shrewdest intellectual apologists" and the desperation of failed regimes, doesn't hate us because of what we have done, but because of who we are. Because we believe in a wall of separation between church and state. We allow women to have beauty contests. We don't insist upon total subservience to our version of god. I don't know if it was Tom Friedman or Paul Berman who said this first, but some things are true even if George Bush believes them.

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Finney right vintage for 'Good Year'
Crowe will play Max Skinner, the financier; Finney will play Henry Skinner, the uncle and one-time owner of the property.
Wow! You have a distinctive blog. I'll bookmark you for sure.

I have a free trial site. It pretty well covers free trial related stuff.

Please check us out.

12:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your comments are right on the button! Hey, Check this out... You're Going To LOVE This Site. Visit Free Software Site!

12:53 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home