43 Comments

How exactly does a sovereign state respond to the butchery of it's citizens at the hands of an enemy bent on extermination as its stated goal?

Hamas' murderous provocation was as clear a message as could be sent: it knew* what the response would be, what it had* to be.

This is no time to flinch away from what Hamas* intentionally started through weak sauce rhetoric.

To be honest, I don't hear wisdom in Scott Ritters words, or in Mearsheimer: I hear cowardice.

These Hamas villains understand one language: violence.

They understand only the law of tooth and claw.

Does anyone actually think that if Hamas lorded over Western Civilization they would rule any less barbaric than how they do "their own" people?

That's delusional at best: they enslave millions across the East and butcher innocents at will.

You cannot negotiate with people who will smile at you, then blow up the negotiating table.

Its existential because Hamas* made it existential.

Expand full comment

@Dave

This is not a debate either of us can *win*. I will not try to *win* it. Nevertheless, here goes:

I think it is also factually correct to say that Israel has, from time to time, before 7 Oct, 'butchered' Palestinians. We were recently reminded on these pages of the Qibya Massacre in October 1953 where Ariel Sharon's Israeli troops attacked the Palestinian village of Qibya in the West Bank, 'massacring' more than sixty-nine Palestinian villagers, two thirds of which were women and children. Forty-five houses, a school, and a mosque were destroyed. There are many more examples of Israeli violence, including violence today, as there are of Hamas violence.

I think it is also factually correct to say that removal of Palestinians from Greater Israel (extermination?) has been a stated goal of Israel. There is no question that a substantial number of Israelis intend to remove all Palestinians from Greater Israel. How Israel can ever accomplish this without resort to violence ('tooth and claw') leading inevitably to retribution is uncertain. I might say impossible.

I agree that 7 Oct was a murderous provocation by Hamas, although exactly how 'murderous' seems to still be in question. It appears that some Israeli deaths may have been the result of IDF crossfire. Nevertheless it was murderous. But was it more 'murderous', for example, than the US war in Iraq, where millions died? I suppose 'murderous' in the case of war is a relative term.

More importantly, it was in fact a 'provocation'. It was undoubtedly Hamas' intention to tell Israel and the world that it rejects Israeli territorial aggression and the Israeli and Western-brokered Abraham Accords, because they would result in the end of the Palestinian claim to statehood.

I don't think the question how Hamas would rule over Western Civ is relevant. The relevant question is how Israel and Hamas will actually solve the intractable problem of 'Palestine'.

I don't have the answer to this question and neither at the moment do you or anyone else, but it seems to me that there will be no solution until Israel recognizes the right of Palestinians to statehood, either independently (with territorial security), or as part of a democratic, non-apartheid Greater Israel. Since Israel rejects both these possible outcomes I predict on-going violence is inevitable, including, regrettably, murderous violence.

Expand full comment
author

So you're saying that Israel is justified in slaughtering thousands upon thousands of innocents, many of them children--right?

Expand full comment

Mearsheimer himself unconsciously suggests a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian problem. In 50 years 50% or more of Israelis won't join the armed forces and won't be working but will be parasites living on money from the Israeli state. This imbalance will weaken the IDF (unless they hire Palestinian mercenaries!) and bankrupt Israel and threaten its very viability as a state, and Israel will have to recognize Palestinian demands for an independent state. This will also happen because Israel will have to rely more and more on US aid to finance its own governmental operations, thus giving the US enough leverage to force or "firmly guide" Israel to follow through on the two-state solution. The virtual bankruptcy of future Israeli governments will mean that private business interests will become paramount and that Israelis who refuse to work will have less and less say in the economic life of Israel and Palestine. It may well be that Palestinian and Israeli businesspeople will be much more realistic in the future than BS-selling, mendacious, corrupt Israeli pols are in 2023. Business links based on realistic mutual benefits for both Israelis and Palestinians may well conquer all the divisive rhetoric and ideological barriers erected by present-day Israeli pols. Moreover, in 50 years Palestinians and Arabs as a whole will be much wealthier and more powerful than they are now, and it will be absolutely impossible for Israelis to continue to regard Palestinians as Untermenschen, as many Israelis do now. And if the IDF is half Palestinian in 50 years, how could Israel make war on itself? History works many ironic changes. The problem is how to get through the next 40-50 years without widespread conflict. I personally think one answer is for US presidents to put their actions where their words are and to make US aid to Israel strictly conditional on a ceasefire and the beginning of two-state negotiations between Israel and Palestine.

Expand full comment
author

Konstantinos V. @KonstanVe

𝗪𝗔𝗧𝗖𝗛: Italian Prime Minister Georgia Meloni received a prank call from Vovan & Lexux.

When asked to comment on the conflict in Ukraine she replied:

- "I see there is a lot of fatigue, i have to say the truth."

***- "Everybody understands we need a way out."***

And Russia should provide that??

Expand full comment

"And Russia should provide that??"

We can rehash this, but don't we agree that Russia is not going to (ever) itself propose a 'way out' or agree to a 'freeze' or to concessions which allow for a NATO-ized Ukraine. The only 'way out' is for the US to propose that it stop funding the Ukraine military and for Ukraine (or what's left of it) to agree to neutrality.

Left open, I suppose, is whether Russia pushes on to Odessa and further control of the entire Black Sea coastline.

Expand full comment
author

Russia never closes the door to diplomacy. That's on the one hand. The other hand is that it made its minimal position very clear from the outset. There no doubt remain many other issues that could be discussed. However, to get that ball rolling I think you're right--the West (which Russia understands to be the US) will need to come to the table having already agreed to at least some major concessions to Russian demands. Russia will talk about just about anything, but certain of its demands--non-Nato Ukraine--are simply non-negotiable.

Expand full comment

One of the reasons my admiration for Russia has grown over the last 18 months includes what you say...Russia never closes the door to diplomacy. I wish I could say the same about us.

Expand full comment

I have no idea how V&L are STILL getting through to top people. Even discounting for this era of monumental incompetence, you'd think that world leaders would invest in SOME form of vetting before jumping on a recorded call...

The Z-man spoofs with various prominent people were classics, but Schiff getting all bunged up over the prospect of pics of "nyeeeeekid Trahhhmp" takes the cake.

Expand full comment

You can practically hear Schiff's slime ducts oozing, dripping as he salivated all over the phone.

He is an utterly vile swamp creature.

Expand full comment
author

Interesting video at the link:

Dan Cohen @dancohen3000

Zionist forces brutally assault Orthodox Jews in the streets of Jerusalem for opposing genocide in Gaza. Haven’t seen this kind of state violence against Jews since Nazi Germany. Images like this destroy the myth that the State of Israel is Jewish.

0:10 / 0:33

From Quds News Network

11:24 AM · Nov 1, 2023

Expand full comment

A more temperate Scott Ritter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFyRoGHWlnE&t=1s

Where is he wrong?

Expand full comment
author

Just finished. He's not wrong.

Expand full comment
Nov 1, 2023·edited Nov 1, 2023

Some good stuff from Mearsheimer, but some woolly points worthy of debate: "The Palestinians want their own nation state just as the Jews wanted their own nation state." Not quite. The Palestinians want their own nation state BACK. Certainly, it wasn't a bona fide sovereign nation back before 1948, but it was a land that clearly belonged to the Palestinians.

Expand full comment

"I’ll state up front that I don’t agree with too much of Mearsheimer’s ideas here. He keeps saying that China is a “threat”. Why can’t China, perhaps, be a competitor for markets, etc., without being “threat” that needs to be contained?"

Uh, yes?

What happened to 'Chimerica'? Where's our gratitude? We've been feasting on $200 flat screen tvs and $33 Nike sneakers and $25 Levi's and $100 cell phones for decades now. Working class Americans' wages may not have gone up much (in real terms) since Alan Greenspan and Robert Rubin and Lawrence (Larry) Summers sold the American worker out to Chinese manufacturing partnerships between their cronies and the CCP, but the relative price of all the sh*t Americans want to buy at Walmart went way way down. And we don't even have to work to make the stuff we consume anymore! One billion former peasants in China will make all the stuff for us and ship it over here and even accept our increasingly worthless fiat 'dollars' in return. And say thank you.

And now China is a 'threat' to us? What did Alan and Robert and Larry expect? That Chinese peasants would just work in sweatshops forever making stuff for us for 25¢ an hour and be grateful? And that the CCP, having built up trillions in foreign reserves underwriting our economy wouldn't wake up one day and decide to invest them abroad in order to increase their own people's wealth and security? In other words, to 'compete'? Isn't this what is otherwise known as capitalism?

And where does the notion that China is a 'threat' come from? Where is the history of Chinese militarism or Chinese expansionism? How many colonies has China had? How many do they have today? How many military bases does China have in foreign countries? Maybe 5? How many military bases does the US have in foreign countries? Maybe 500? Probably more. Nobody really knows...

How many extra-territorial military actions has China participated in since, say, 1950? Here's a list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_People's_Republic_of_China

How many extra-territorial military actions has the US participated in since, say, 1950? Here's a list (scroll down to 1950): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States

Its really rather hard to say who's a threat to whom, isn't it?

Expand full comment

I think China became a threat when they aggressively stole secrets, IP, and began ramping military expenditures and their excessive excessive spying and bribing Americans to steal secret information is all part of their plan. They have acquired 30 years or more of technological expertise which drastically reduced their time to catch up to the more advance economies.. Our government and Oligarchs likely enabled a lot of this plus shipping decent American jobs to China impoverishing millions of Americans as our middle class has been devastated. There are lot of ways to view China, but our leaders are willing to sell us out, but when their money is at risk they decide that we should go fight for their standard of living while pretending it's all for the greater good..

Expand full comment

Well put, Cosmo.

The spying and bribing was especially egregious.

They were dumping and currency manipulating, too.

However, everything you say was happening right before our eyes.

Cui bono? (Besides the Big Guy?)

I thought Trump's response to China was proportionate and fair.

Expand full comment

Thanks Cass! Yes, it was and I suspect there is more high level manipulation than we are aware of like, why are they fomenting war with a country that can have our ability (you and I and all the proles) to acquire the needed goods to sustain our life put in jeopardy by beligerance? Is it all just a big head fake? I agree that Trump had the right policies that expanded our economy, controlled the border better, and was keenly aware of all citizens and our needs for peace and calm, but our predator class needs chaos. Chinese rise has been as a mercantilism nation as such putting tariffs on their goods was traditionally the way to tame mercantilism and a benefit to our trade by leveling the field. As a free market guy for many years (my background is a graduate in economics and history) I am no longer a free market guy since there are no free markets, that's just theory and as you suggested above, manipulation of markets and currency has been done for the benefit of the already fabulously rich.

Have you ever heard of Helena, the Nationalist Voice? I found her blog recently and she has a very interesting take on current events and presents some interesting theories behind the current global turmoil. https://helenaglass.net/

Have a good day, Cass.

Expand full comment
author

Yeah, a lot of the free market yackety yack is gaslighting. Not that I'm an ideological free marketeer per se, but opposed to the rigging.

Expand full comment

Agreed. China is now very much a threat, and for one reason alone: the neocons made it a threat.

Expand full comment

I’m not a economist so I have no way to verify, but I have read several seemingly credible articles about how China’s “one child” policy has put them in a demographic (and economic) hole from which they can never escape. If that is true why do non “ChinaHawks” never mention this when stating what a threat they are?

Expand full comment

China has a lot of challenges.

Unfortunately lots of the U.S. elites have been bought off by China, so I’m very suspicious of any actions they take such as a pivot to Asia. I wonder what’s in it for them.

Expand full comment

I think the Chinese 'threat' is a talking point for votes, not a real build up to war. At least not until they need more votes.

Expand full comment

Votes, lobbying money / industry donations (defense industry), or potential graft off expenditures. Or May be money from Asian countries to influence U.S. government direction.

Such as Egypt did with Gold Bar Senator in N.J.

Or As the Biden Family got rich off him being a senator, including a lot from foreign influence agents / countries.

I’m a little bit bothered by my cynical view.

Expand full comment

Agreed. Votes +.

As to cynicism...I have it too and am still bothered by the cognitive dissonance. I think we need to get over it and see the world as it is. Not easy.

Expand full comment
author

Likewise, not an economist, but I'm in your school of thought. Of course, we're on the brink of a similar situation. Why would we start more wars? Fix things right here.

Expand full comment

We have a “rules” based order here at home too. Rules for them, and rules for us little people and other opponents of the regime. The rest of the world feels like we do here at home. That’s maybe why I find myself at times rooting against my own country’s actions. Doesn’t leave one feeling good about any of it.

Expand full comment

Interesting JM was invited by the Aussies, thus his comments regarding China…As you mention, Mark, why can’t China be seen as a competitor economically instead of a “threat” that JM suggests needs dealing with. I’m ignorant of how much Aussies are aware of the series of Neocon-inspired catastrophes and the extent to which they (and those listening to JM) are wondering how far they can trust the US to have their back…Maybe that’s why JM refrains from using the words “hegemon” and “empire,” terms Alistair Crooke, a seasoned and experienced diplomat, uses regularly.

Expand full comment

The Aussies were secondly only to the Israelis in bowing down to the Covid fascism. They will do what they are told.

Expand full comment

Righto

Expand full comment

I would argue that the US and Israel are not joined at the hip, it's more of a joined at the wallet situation. Political contributions by dual US/Israeli citizens buys much undue influence. The satanic neocons love bribe supremacy, human sacrifice on battlefields and other bizarre rituals that I don't want to think about.

Dual nationality in the US ought to be limited to minors, when the age of majority is attained, make your choice, live with the consequences of that decision for life.

Meanwhile, the invading hordes continue crossing the borders unabated . . . nightmares tonight as usual.

Expand full comment

"Joined at the wallet" is such an astute observation, but I would submit that we are joined at the wallet in as much as they, Zionist Israel, has their hands on our wallets thus the joined (or contact point) is their greedy, sticky fingers.

Expand full comment

"joined at the wallet" deserves its own meme. Brilliant.

Expand full comment
author

Lord Bebo @MyLordBebo

Kirby says they’re in contact with Israel on reducing the civilians casualties.

2:57 PM · Oct 31, 2023

Says "we" are convinced that there are "many thousands" of civilian casualties.

Expand full comment
Removed (Banned)Nov 1, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment

But...but...Israel will never moderate its policies and it will always double down. This is the unfortunate but undeniable result of history. At the end of the day Israel will always conclude that its very existence is at stake and that its enemies will utterly destroy Israel and its people if given the chance. This is what history has taught.

So, its scorched earth?

I wouldn't want to bet against it.

Expand full comment
Removed (Banned)Nov 1, 2023
Expand full comment
author

Some I can agree with, other parts I would ... distinguish:

"Israel was established by the international authorities"

Wrong: Israel was established by the West, over the objections of the entire region.

The following is an outright lie--or rather several lies--and it's why I'm banning you:

"The Arab-Israeli war resulted in the capture of Gaza and the West-Bank from Israel. The ceasefire did not change Israel's border and reflected only the facts on the ground.

"A few years (1953 ?) later, Transjordan officially annexed the West-Bank, thereby ignoring Israel's internationally recognized border ..."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bank#Jordanian_West_Bank

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jericho_Conference

There are additional lies that I won't bother with.

I can agree that the ideal solution would have been a unified Palestine.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

"The US hegemon is dying. It can't work. It's run out of money and blood to expend. But like a cornered animal, it will fight tooth and nail until its ultimate demise. That's where we are now." That's the key to the whole problem. It's not Russia; it's not China, Ukraine or the ME. It's the dying US and what it is prepared to do in its death throes.

Expand full comment

Which puts me in mind of the wisdom of that sage philosopher, Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. I am in the bad habit of repeatedly asking Mark and his readers here to watch Oliver Stone's 4 hour interview series with Putin (widely available on amazon prime and other streaming services). There is much to be learned, but the relevant point here is when Putin instructs us that American foreign policy, and American demonization of him and of all of its enemies around the world, and the enormous propaganda effort which supports it, is largely for one purpose (which I would type in bold if I could), ***to preserve power at home***, which of course is the ultimate goal of our Elites who at the end of the day are only about ****money and power****.

Money and power. That's it.

Expand full comment

Boom! the hammer of power at home drives the nail into our coffins.

Expand full comment

Keep one thing in mind always, "It's always about the money".....theirs and ours that they steal. they must keep the citizens in turmoil hence the constant chaos. Chaos is how they profit.

Expand full comment

I disagree, Kat. I think it's all about the POWER. Power, as absolute and total as possible is the only game in town for these people.

Expand full comment

The type of power we see here does not come from might, but rather money. The money begets the power and power begets control and control begets absolute power. IMHO, but I totally understand your point.

Expand full comment