Zar

When someone's position is terminally weak, they often resort to insults like this.

No one is saying its the "damn jews", IMO. And paranoia is hardly a good way to describe what is clearly documented by those in power about their own intentions. You prebably have not read a single reference that I or anyone else have provided on the subject.

This Pax Americana is a bold dream hatched by certain right-wing supporters of Israel, made up of both jews and goyim, and some other goyim neocons who just like the idea. So, they are not all jews, least of all the President of the United States. But that a good number of those in this cabal are jews is absolutely incontrovertable. You can scream and holler all you want, and this reality will not be altered. Make of it what you will, but I'm sorry to say that you cannot do anything to change this basic fact.

EDIT:

No sources? You have been here long enough, Lamma, to know far better than that. I can't call you a liar, because I have to allow for the possibility that you are just being lazy, but this seems disingenuous at the very least.

emphryio

Zar
Look what is happening to the congressmen from Virginia, Jim Moran. He dared to mention that the Jewish lobby may be greatly influencing the war drive.

Rather than the media actually examining the question of whether or not lobbyists have influence, or examine the question of how relatively powerful the Jewish lobby is, Mr. Moran is branded an anti-semite exactly as Lamma is trying to do here to the OP and all the rest of us.

It's the same old dishonest tactics.

I should make a list of all these tried and true tactics. I've certainly seen enough by now to point out how quite a few pop up repeatedly.

JerryM

I don't disagree. I think the only way most of the public will support a war is if they believe it will fight terrorism. Even so, as I tried to say in my post, it's very troubling to justify a war on the basis of what someone may have the ability to do, without any firm evidence that they are actually doing it. But I'm willing to be a little charitable towards GWB. I think at some level he really believes that war with Iraq will prevent further terrorism. I think he's wrong--but maybe his advisors who have ulterior motives have convinced him of this.

Zar

JerryM,

Yes, I think you have a point. Whether Bush or his advisors are of one mind is not always easy to tell, so we could say with consistency that Bush is clinging to the pretext more than those around him are in their heart of hearts. Although we are able to trace the broad outlines, it is hard to know the details of how opinion is shaped in the White House on a case by case basis. But anyway, your hypothesis is an interesting possibility.

HaysooChreesto!

Still paranoia. Where's this idea of a dream of so called "Pax Americana" that's been hatched by supporters of Israel come from? This is wild extrapolation at best.
If you want to say that there are people in the current administration that are pro-Israel, I won't disagree with you. If you want to make the argument that these supporters could have a detrimental consequence to America's ME policy, I'll listen. But when it expands to conspiratorial hogwash, then I will dissent.

Zar

Go ahead and dissent, then. This has been discussed several times, and I don't want to repeat it all again here, especially not just to convince your arm-crossing resistance. That you claim to not have the slightest idea where "Pax Americana" comes from is really something for someone exhibiting such bold, derisive defiance. Try looking at the document, "Rebuilding America's Defenses" by the Project for the New American Century think tank, which now comprises a significant share of the supreme positions of power in the U.S. government. They themselves throw the phrase "Pax Americana" around in their own document. You can find it almost anywhere with ease, but here is one I just grabbed so you can't say you couldn't find a copy: Rebuilding America's Defenses

If you really care about references and reasons, take a look at this thread of mine again, and read the links I provided throughout, for starters. Maybe you can branch off from there, do some more of your own reasearch on these people, and come up with your own assesments instead of just closing your ears.

So, you insist America is not imperial in any meaningful way?

Also, look at this link:

NOW: With Bill Moyers on PBS with Ambassador Wilson

John Hancock

The heavy influence of jewish neoconservative thought is most certainly a factor in the United States Forgein Policy. It is not the only consideration in the unvarnished imperial nature of this country's policies. Global dominance of multi-national corporations are is the most driving force within these policies. I would contend that they are not mere dupes of an all perverting jewish force. It is more akin to a marriage of convenience.

Martin Buber

Zar

I really think you are on the right track, Martin. The only person I can see being a dupe is G. W. Bush, but then he has his own reasons and personality quirks that drive him independently of the others, IMHO.

HaysooChreesto!

I agree with the Statement of Principles re: Rebuilding America's Defenses.

See, that's the difference between you and I. I want America to continue to be the sole superpower. I want well regulated capitalism to spread to every corner of the globe.
I think the U.S. is great and I wouldn't live anywhere else. The world has to have a leader and the U.S. is by far the best nation to fulfill that role. We have free speech, a free press, right to assemble peaceably, and we have free elections. We also have the most industry, the best technology, etc.
Point to other nations that might do one or two things better than the U.S. but as a whole, no one really comes close.

I also accept that America has been involved in proxy wars, insurrections, coups, etc. and I'm fine with it. The vast majority of those events occurred during the Cold War. The USSR was a disastrous pig of a nation that needed to be contested at every turn. Back in those days the threat of nuclear annihilation loomed over the worlds collective head on a daily basis. There wasn't any room for niceties and fair play. Humanity was at stake. The whole kit and kaboodle. To pretend otherwise is pure fantasy. It was our way of life versus the poverty and gutter existence that Marx's followers were trying to sell.
I believe that communism is evil. If it weren't it would've bested the U.S. Remember that the Soviets did just as much, if not more dirty stuff than the U.S. They had every chance to undermine U.S. capitalism and they couldn't . They had an inferior system and history proves that. The Chinese haven't abandoned Mao's version of Marxism just for the hell of it.

Just because I don't buy into your version of how evil America is doesn't mean that I'm "crossing my arms in resistance". It just means that I think your very wrong. And I have no illusions that you don't feel the same way about me.
Oh well.

Zar

Lamma,

That was some fast reading. Did you cover it all?

Anyway, you didn't spend much time in your response on the specific issues at hand, but elected to treat us to an abstract and often-repeated statement of commitment to U.S. policies in general, apparently without much qualification. There is nothing particularly novel or new in this approach, so I won't bother to say more about it here. It has been discussed ad nauseum in other places.

Also, if you agree with it all and it presents no problems for you, there's nothing more to say. After all, I'm not arguing that the neocons themselves are repulsed by their own ideas, I'm saying that I am repulsed by them. If you count yourself as one of them, then so be it. But that hardly makes me paranoid, it just puts me in a position that is in fundamental opposition to yours. At least we all now acknowledge a few more of the same facts, even if our opinions and feelings about them differ greatly.