[Peace-discuss] Re: [Peace] Saturday's Flier

Thu Feb 5 10:53:20 CST 2009

also, once the operation was underway, the Bush Administration
supported it politically and diplomatically, including using its veto
at the Security Council to block Security Council action.

I agree that "permission" might understate the case. "Approval and
support" might be more appropriate.

On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 11:33 AM, Stuart Levy <slevy at ncsa.uiuc.edu> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 12:32:35AM -0600, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
>> You don't seriously think that Israel would have attacked Gaza against the
>> wishes of the USG or without its knowledge.  No one does.
>
> No, but it does make a difference whether Israel felt the need
> to seek specific US permission for the Gaza bombardment,
> or just assumed (correctly) that the US would not object
> (passive support).
>
> Re assembling specific evidence, see Bob Naiman's column
> from a month ago,
>   http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/calling-out-bushs-war-in_b_154825.html
>   "Calling Out Bush's War in Gaza"
>
> in which he points out a specific Israeli request last summer for
> 'bunker-buster' bombs which the US judged were intended for use against Iran.
> They refused, but soon after agreed to sell Israel another model of
> bunker-buster bomb, which ``Israeli military experts said
> "could provide a powerful new weapon" in Gaza''.  And those bombs were
> indeed used to destroy tunnels during the Gaza bombardment.
>
> That's real evidence for something like permission,
> or maybe better, "active support".
>
>
> Also: we should be having this discussion on peace-discuss,
> not on the peace announcement list.  Cc'ing peace-discuss instead.
>
> Finally: the apostrophe police have struck.  I've changed the Subject line.
>
>> Even John Mearsheimer (co-author of The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy,
>> which makes the best case for the untenable thesis that the Israel lobby
>> forces US policy against the US "national interest") points out that
>>
>> "The Bush administration backed Israel's creation of a major humanitarian
>> crisis in Gaza, first with a devastating blockade and then with a brutal
>> war."
>>
>> <http://www.lrb.co.uk/web/15/01/2009/mult04_.html>
>>
>>
>> Brussel Morton K. wrote:
>>> Comments follow.
>>> On Feb 4, 2009, at 6:51 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
>>>> There's no doubt that the attack on Gaza was done with US permission (and
>>>> would not have been done without it).
>>> What is your evidence (not inference)?
>>>> The Bush administration had withheld permission for an attack on Lebanon
>>>> until the summer of 2006, and they pointedly released the information
>>>> that they had withheld permission for an attack on Iran.
>>> Yes, the U.S could have stopped it (if it knew what was to happen and
>>> wanted to stop it), but this is not equivalent in my view to saying that
>>> it gave its permission. How do you know whether permission was asked? It
>>> may have simply informed the U.S. that it was going to act, and the U.S.
>>> could have indicated that  "It's your affair"? I don't believe that
>>> everything Israel does requires U.S. permission. In any case, I don't
>>> think the permission word strengthens the pamphlet for its intended
>>> audience.
>>>>
>>>> And the suppression of the Palestinians is a central part of the US war
>>>> in the ME. Some say it's the central point.  Al-Qaeda said that its
>>>> 9/11/2001 attacks in the US were reprisals for (1) US troops in Saudi
>>>> Arabia; (2) sanctions against Iraq; and (3) the suppression of the
>>>> Palestinians.
>>> So far as I know, the U.S. has not declared war on Gaza or the West Bank.
>>> That its policy is to weaken or destroy Hamas via its Israeli client is
>>> not quite the same thing. I simply found the statement is too imprecise,
>>> too blunderbuss.
>>>>
>>>> The US support for the suppression of the Palestinians -- i.e., US
>>>> rejection of the two-state solution -- is not just a favor to the
>>>> Israelis. A truly independent Palestinian state would surely be another
>>>> opponent to US domination of the region (one reason that right-wing Arab
>>>> governments are at best lukewarm supporters of the Palestinians).
>>>>
>>>> US support for Israel -- so strong that some think the control runs the
>>>> other way (cf. tail/dog) -- exists because of Israel's crucial aid in US
>>>> foreign policy, ever since their defeat of secular Arab nationalism in
>>>> 1967.  The "stationary aircraft carrier" as Chomsky says received weapons
>>>> shipments during the Gaza assault that were being positioned for use
>>>> elsewhere in the ME, as they regularly are.  --CGE
>>> Yes, but not relevant to my objections.
>>> I just think that the pamphlet would be more effective andno less true
>>> without those words. You are free to disagree.
>>> --mkb
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Brussel Morton K. wrote:
>>>>> My taste would be to omit the words in the heading:
>>>>> */Permission/ *
>>>>> and the phrase
>>>>> *as Part of the US War in the Middle East** *
>>>>> I don't know whether permission was actually requested, although the
>>>>> U.S. may have been informed and did nothing.
>>>>> The "U.S. war in the Middle East" arguably does not literally encompass
>>>>> the Palestinians or even Hamas, despite our government's antagonisms
>>>>> and/or unconcern, and despite what our client there does. Apologies for
>>>>> replying at this late date.
>>>>> --mkb
>>>>> On Feb 4, 2009, at 9:27 AM, David Harley wrote:
>>>>>> If this meets general approval I will have it printed.
>>>>>> <Gazaposter4.pdf>_______________________________________________
>>>>>> Peace mailing list
>>>>>> Peace at lists.chambana.net <mailto:Peace at lists.chambana.net>
>>>>>> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Peace mailing list
>>>>> Peace at lists.chambana.net
>>>>> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Peace mailing list
>>> Peace at lists.chambana.net
>>> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace
>> _______________________________________________
>> Peace mailing list
>> Peace at lists.chambana.net
>> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>

-- 
Robert Naiman
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org