Karzaj krytykuje USA za metody prowadzenia wojny

[tppiotr]

Prezydent zaznaczył, że ochrona afgańskiej ludności cywilnej musi być absolutna. Nie są obywatelami USA i żydami więc można strzelać do nich bezkarnie.

Karzaj krytykuje USA za metody prowadzenia wojny

[snow21]

New poll reveals how unrepresentative neocon Jewish groups are

By: atheo on: 25.04.2008 [15:09 ] (112 reads)

iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/162839
A new survey of American Jewish opinion, released by the American Jewish
Committee, demonstrates several important propositions: (1) right-wing neocons
(the Bill Kristol/Commentary/ AIPAC/Marty Peretz faction) who relentlessly
claim to speak for Israel and for Jews generally hold views that are shared
only by a small minority of American Jews; (2) viewpoints that are routinely
demonized as reflective of animus towards Israel or even anti-Semitism are
ones that are held by large majorities of American Jews; and (3) most American
Jews oppose U.S. military action in the Middle East — including both in Iraq
and against Iran.

It is beyond dispute that American Jews overwhelmingly oppose core
neoconservative foreign policy principles. Hence, in large numbers, they
disapprove of the way the U.S. is handling its "campaign against terrorism"
(59-31); overwhelmingly believe the U.S. should have stayed out of Iraq
(67-27); believe that things are going "somewhat badly" or "very badly" in
Iraq (76-23); and believe that the "surge" has either made things worse or has
had no impact (68-30).

When asked whether they would support or oppose the United States taking
military action against Iran, a large majority — 57-35% — say they would
oppose such action, even if it were being undertaken "to prevent Iran from
developing nuclear weapons." While Jews hold views on the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict which are quite pessimistic about the prospects for Israel's ability
to achieve a lasting peace with its "Arab neighbors," even there, a plurality
(46-43) supports the establishment of a Palestinian state.

In the realm of U.S. domestic politics, it is even clearer that right-wing
neoconservatives are a fringe segment of American Jewish public opinion. By a
large margin, American Jews identify as some shade of liberal rather than
conservative (43-25), and overwhelmingly identify themselves as Democrats
rather than Republicans (58-15). And, most strikingly, by a 3-1 margin
(61-21), they believe that Democrats, rather than Republicans, are "more
likely to make the right decision about the war in Iraq," and by a similarly
lopsided margin (53-30), believe that Democrats are "more likely to make the
right decision when it comes to dealing with terrorism." They have
overwhelmingly favorable views of the top 3 Democratic presidential
candidates, and overwhelmingly negative views of 3 out of the top 4 GOP
candidates (Giuliani being the sole exception, where opinion is split).

Contrary to the bottomless obssession which most neocon pundits and
office-holders have with All Matters Israel, the principal political concerns
of most American Jews have nothing to do with the Middle East. Thus, they
identify "economy/jobs" (22) and "health care" (19) — not Terrorism — as "the
most important problem facing the U.S. today." Still, most American Jews agree
that "caring about Israel is a very important part of their being a Jew" — a
common, innocuous and indisputable attribute that typically triggers noxious
charges of anti-Semitism if pointed out by those who oppose the
neoconservative agenda.

One of the defining traits of war-loving neoconservatives is that their
unrelenting and exclusive fixation on the Middle East places them loudly at
the center of any foreign policy debates. That tenacity — combined with their
reckless exploitation of "anti-Israel" and anti-Semitism accusations as
instruments in their political rhetoric and their corresponding, deceitful
equation of their own views with being "pro-Israel" — often casts the
appearance that they are some sort of spokespeople for the "pro-Israel" agenda
or the Jewish viewpoint.

Manifestly, they are nothing of the sort. Even among American Jews, they
comprise only a small minority, and their generally discredited militarism is
widely rejected by most Jews as well. It is always worth underscoring these
points, which are so frequently (and deliberately) obscured, and this
comprehensive poll provides potent — actually quite conclusive — evidence for
doing so.

UPDATE: Speaking of unrepresentative, fringe, war-loving right-wing neocons,
here is the latest installment — titled "Jeepers Creepers" — in the perversely
riveting and revealing melodrama chronicled in yesterday's updates

UPDATE: The drama concludes just as predictably and lamely as they all do: War
cheerleader beats chest ("Give War a Chance"). War cheerleader panics and
cries for help over a "threat" compelling great "security" to protect him from
scary things. Threat is exposed as completely non-existent, a by-product of
the neurosis and paralyzing fear of the war cheerleader. Repeat endlessly.

Do tego doszło, ze neokony stali się niepopularni

[snow21]

nawet wśród samych syjonistów, i teraz to środowisko jedynie czeka na nowe
wybory w USA , by zrzucić kłopot który wyrażnie ich przerósł, oraz
odpowiedzialność za niego, na barki nowej amerykańskiej ekipy rządzącej.

Taktyka permanentnej rewolucji, w postaci permanen

[snow21]

permanentnej walki z terroryzmem (czym za młodu skorupka...), zrobiła klapę, i
założę się że po wyborach globalna centrala zmieni swoją taktyką, albo
przynajmniej nieco zmodyfikują obecnie będącą w użyciu.

Ale Niemcow krytykowano za zbyt pokojowa pomoc !

[arek47]

W tamtym roku Niemcy wydali na Afganistan ca. 980 mln Euro ! Ale to bylo
Amerykanom i ich " Giermkom " za malo, wiecej " bitnych komandosow " wiecej
"akcji specjalnych2 jak na poludniu kraju, jednym slowem "szabla w dlon "
szwolezerowie !!
Ale najlepiej wyjasni Wam zapewne Pani Eva Ypsilanti !

Albo jesteś z nami, albo przeciw nam

[snow21]

G W.Bush oficjalnie to ogłosił jako jedną z zasad swojej polityki zagranicznej.
po przetłumaczeniu ze obcego na łatwo zrozumiałe :

Albo będziesz naszym uległym wasalem, albo...dużo na tym stracisz.
W realiach środowiska Okrągłego Stołu, wszelki opór by oznaczał koniec grubej
kreski, a tego oni się boją jak : opętany boi się egzorcysty.

Karzaj krytykuje USA za metody prowadzenia wojny

[anna-888]

Ta wojna jest okropna! Nie mowiac juz o metodach i taktyce jej
prowadzenia. Tyle niewinnych ludzi ginie - w imie czego ? i nie ma
konca. Nadzieja, ze zmieni sie kandydat na prezydenta - madry i
uczciwy czlowiek !!
!

[kolorittan]

anna-888 napisała: > Ta wojna jest okropna! Nie mowiac juz o
> metodach i taktyce jej prowadzenia. Tyle niewinnych ludzi
> ginie - w imie czego ? i nie ma konca. Nadzieja, ze zmieni
> sie kandydat na prezydenta - madry i uczciwy czlowiek !!!

Jak amerykanin może byc mądry ?
Jak żyd może być uczciwy ?
Jak polak może nie być szakalem ?

Karzaj krytykuje USA - czy kogos to dziwi?

[bezportek]

Bezmyslne antyglobusiarstwo nawet nie zauwazylo, ze Karzaj, wedle
dogmatu lewactwa, "pacholek Ameryki", moze sobie pozwolic na
publiczna krytyke. I co? I nic. W tejze Ameryce wiele lewactwa tez
wypluwa z siebie jad i toczy piane, nie robiac niczego poza
opluwaniem wlasnego rzadu, wojska i cyklistow. I nic im sie nie
przydarza - to nie kacaplandia ani oboz koncentracyjny islam.
Cywilizacja Zachodu ma wiele do pokazania i przekazania ubogim
krewnym spod znaku wrzasku, pisku, pacyfizmu i globalnego ocipienia.
Choc szanse na zrozumienie sa niewielkie - poziom przecietnego
lewusa to miedzy nogawka a psim g.. na trotuarze.

Cienko w Afganie skoro pacynka krytykuje szefa

[jola_z_dywit_2006a]

The New Walls of Baghdad

[snow21]

iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/162945
How the U.S. is Reproducing Israel's Flawed Occupation Strategies in Iraq

The new "surge" strategy in Iraq, led by General David Petreaus, has been
heavily marketed as an example of the U.S. military's application of the
"lessons of history" from previous counterinsurgencies to Iraq, foremost among
them the need to win the population over from insurgents through cultivating
human relationships, addressing popular grievances and providing security.

Yet one glance at the realities on the ground in Iraq today reveal that the
cornerstone of current U.S. military strategy is less about cultivating human
relationships than about limiting them, primarily through concrete walls and
checkpoints. And it has been less about minimizing violence than containing
Iraq's population and redirecting the battlefield from the streets to the skies
above Iraq.

While the coffee klatches between Marine commanders and Sunni tribal sheikhs may
garner all the publicity, the real story on the ground in Iraq is that from
Baghdad to Mosul, the U.S. military has been busy constructing scores of
concrete walls and barriers between and around Iraqi neighborhoods, which it
terms "Gated Communities." In Baghdad alone, 12-foot-high walls now separate and
surround at least eleven Sunni and Shiite enclaves. Broken by narrow checkpoints
where soldiers monitor traffic via newly issued ID cards, these walls have
turned Baghdad into dozens of replica Green Zones, dividing neighbor from
neighbor and choking off normal commerce and communications. Similar walls are
being erected in other Iraqi cities, while the entire city of Falluja remains
surrounded by a razor-wire barrier, with only one point of entry into the city.
Moreover, the U.S. military has doubled its use of unmanned aerial drones and
increasingly relies upon aerial strikes to quell insurgent activities, often
through bombings and targeted assassinations.

While there is no question that overall levels of violence have temporarily
decreased, Iraq has become virtually caged in a carapace of concrete walls and
razor wire, reinforced by an aerial occupation from the sky. Reporting from a
recent visit to the Dora neighborhood of Baghdad, the seasoned journalist Nir
Rosen noted in Rolling Stone (March 6, 2008) that:

Looming over the homes are twelve-foot-high security walls built by the
Americans to separate warring factions and confine people to their own
neighborhood. Emptied and destroyed by civil war, walled off by President Bush's
much-heralded "surge," Dora feels more like a desolate, post-apocalyptic maze of
concrete tunnels than a living, inhabited neighborhood.

The Israeli Laboratory

The explosion of walls and enclaves reinforced by aerial violence across Iraq
suggest that the primary counterinsurgency lessons being followed by the U.S.
military in Iraq today derive less from the lessons of "Lawrence of Arabia" than
from Israel's experiences in the Occupied Palestinian Territories over the past
decade.

Over the past decade, Israel has developed a pacification strategy against
Palestinian resistance to its military occupation by erecting separation walls
and checkpoints across Palestinian territory that has enclosed Palestinians
within a proliferating archipelago of ethnic enclaves to separate them from each
other and from illegal Israeli settlements on Palestinian land. This wall and
enclave strategy is maintained under a blanket of aerial Israeli surveillance
and deadly unmanned drones, which target the frequent airborne assassinations
and strikes. This strategy reached its apotheosis in Gaza following Israel's
withdrawal of its soldiers and settlements in 2005. In Gaza, 1.5 million
Palestinians are now living within an enclosed cage, while Israel controls
access to the essentials of life through high-tech border terminals and
unleashes "penetration raids" and airborne "targeted killings" when resistance
is offered.

Iraq, it seems, is surging towards Gaza.

This fact is not missed by average Iraqis. Visiting the Sunni bastion of Amriya
in Baghdad, Nir Rosen in The Nation (April 3, 2008) recounts how his Iraqi
driver pointed to a gap in the concrete walls with which the U.S. occupation
forces have surrounded Amriya: "We call it the Rafah Crossing." He was referring
to the one gate from besieged Gaza to Egypt that the Israeli army occasionally
allows to open.

The U.S. military's virtual reproduction of distinctively Israeli
counterinsurgency tactics in Iraq reveals that claims about applying the
"lessons of history" of counterinsurgent warfare to Iraq are largely beside the
point. The actual application of counterinsurgency on the ground in Iraq has a
distinctly Israeli DNA, born of very recent lessons from Israel's own urban
warfare laboratory in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

This should not be surprising. The Israeli DNA in the new "surge" strategy is
only the latest manifestation of a widely overlooked but unmistakable American
predilection to increasingly draw from Israel's urban warfare laboratory and its
flawed efforts to devise fresh tactics in the service of rebooting its own
military occupation of Palestinian lands. What we are seeing in Iraq today has
much less to do with the declared shift in U.S. military doctrine than with a
deeper and more far-reaching "Israelization" of U.S. military strategy and
tactics over the past two decades that was only heightened by America's
misadventures in the Middle East after September 11, 2001. In the search for new
means to confront urban insurgencies in predominately Arab and Muslim lands,
there has been a complex institutional and cultural harmonization between these
two militaries under the banner of fighting "the war on terror," though the
traffic is mostly in one direction. In light of the real lessons of
counterinsurgency history, however, mimicking Israel is a recipe for failure.
The "Israelization" of U.S. Military Doctrine and Tactics

This "Israelization" of U.S. military doctrine and tactics can be traced back to
the early 1990's, especially the "Black-hawk down" debacle of 1993 in Somalia,
which led U.S. military strategists to rethink their approach to fighting urban
warfare in poor Third World "battle spaces." In the following years, according
to urban theorist Mike Davis in his 2004 article "The Pentagon as Global Slum
Lord," Israeli advisors were brought in to teach Marines, Rangers and Navy Seals
the state of the art tactics against urban insurgencies that Israel was using to
ruthlessly suppress Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza.

This tactical "Israelization" of U.S. combat doctrine was accompanied by what
Davis terms a deeper strategic "Sharonization" (referring to Israeli militarist
and later Prime Minister Ariel Sharon) of the Pentagon's worldview in which U.S.
military strategists began to envision the capacity of high-tech warfare to
contain and possibly defeat insurgencies rooted in third world urban
environments. Sharon is known to have kept by his bedside a well-thumbed Hebrew
edition of Alistair's Horne's A Savage War of Peace, an account of the failed
French effort to defeat the Algerian insurgency against French colonial
occupation. While many viewed the French defeat as proof of the futility of
military solutions to anti-colonial insurgencies, Sharon's belief was that
Israel could learn from Algeria to get right what the French did not. In 2001,
the journalist Robert Fisk reported, Sharon told French Prime Minister Jacques
Chirac in a phone conversation that the Israelis were "like you in Algeria," the
only difference being that "we the Israelis will stay.''

The "Israelization" of U.S. military doctrine and tactics since the attacks on
September 11, 2001, has gone so far as to create what the Palestinia

"Po to, by świat odniósł w Afganistanie sukces

[kolorittan]

ŚWIAT ???!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
raczej półświatek morderczy