Reading more of the Chomsky Posted

[KrustyKidd]

Unlike Europe, China refuses to be intimidated by Washington, a primary reason for the growing fear of China on the part of US planners, which also poses a dilemma: steps toward confrontation are inhibited by US corporate reliance on China as an export platform and growing market, as well as China’s financial reserves, reported to be approaching Japan’s in scale. Much of Iran’s oil already goes to China, and China is providing Iran with weapons that both states presumably regard as a deterrent to US designs. Still more uncomfortable for Washington is the fact that "the Sino-Saudi relationship has developed dramatically," the Financial Times reports, including Chinese military aid to Saudi Arabia and gas exploration rights for China. By 2005, Saudi Arabia provided about 17 percent of China’s oil imports. Chinese and Saudi oil companies have signed deals for drilling and construction of a huge refinery (with Exxon Mobil as a partner). A January 2006 visit by Saudi King Abdullah to Beijing was expected to lead to a Sino-Saudi memorandum of understanding calling for "increased cooperation and investment between the two countries in oil, natural gas, and investment," the Wall Street Journal reported.

Indian analyst Aijaz Ahmad observes that Iran could "emerge as the virtual lynchpin in the making, over the next decade or so, of what China and Russia have come to regard as an absolutely indispensable Asian Energy Security Grid, for breaking Western control of the world's energy supplies and securing the great industrial revolution of Asia." South Korea and Southeast Asian countries are likely to join, possibly Japan as well. A crucial question is how India will react. It rejected US pressures to withdraw from an oil pipeline deal with Iran, though it is still vacillating on grounds of security within Pakistani Baluchistan. Meanwhile Pakistan has pledged to build the pipeline whatever India decides (and presumably against US wishes). On the other hand, India joined the US and EU in voting for an anti-Iranian resolution at the IAEA, joining also in their hypocrisy, since India rejects the NPT regime to which Iran, so far, appears to be largely conforming. Ahmad reports that India may have secretly reversed its stand at the IAEA after Iran briefly threatened to terminate a $20 billion gas deal.

Off the top of my head, the US does industry and deals better than anybody else. that's why they own a good part of the world. And, you can bet they would rather be developing rather than going to war. Furthermore, it does China no good whatsoever to go to war with the country they consider one of their best tading partners, very self defeating. India hates communism so is unlikely to be part of a Chinese/Russian conspiracy to thrwart the US. What is happening there is a complete signification of true sucess, the US no longer has to be the policeman of the world as the world is becomming a trading parner rather than a war enemy. And Chomsky doesn't get it.

Washington later "warned India that Delhi’s own nuclear deal with the US could be ditched if the Indian government did not vote to refer Tehran to the United Nations Security Council," the Financial Times reported, eliciting a sharp rejoinder from the Indian foreign ministry and an evasive tempering of the warning by the US Embassy.

Oh, econonmic and diplomatic plays? Gee, thought the US was war mongers. Well, nuclear war is somwhat disruptive to trading. Anything that can be slanted into an anti US edge - this is Chomsky's problem, it all has a predetermined ending. Tehran's fear of a revolution from an ever increasing cognisent society and their tribal mullah rule who have no way of coping with the mix of the world's influencing their people and them trying to hold a medival sway have no rrelevence in his view. Nor does India being caught between extremist Muslims, a hegemonic Russia and an encroaching China hold any merit at all. I mean, it's the USA that is to blame for everything for crying out loud.

Even in the best of circumstances, that means the rest of the world has sat on their hands so long that Mickey Mouse should be able to take over.

Damm, think I'll use this as the base for another essay for the Werewolf if you don't mind.

[margrace]

Do you think we are going down? I have a very uneasy feeling that the slope is pretty slippery. To be honest ,what we are buying from China or a lot of it, we could do without couldn't we?

How did we allow this dependance on oil to become so important to our lives? I am not a religious person but I always remember the part in the Bible that says "Everyman his (something) and fig tree, have to look that up. In other words how much do we need?

I listened to an interview with Jeremy Ripkin recently and he was extolling the Hydrogen something or other. It was 4 years ago, now we know that it too takes fossil fuel to maintain doesn't it?

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear Krusty Kid,

the US no longer has to be the policeman of the world

They never really were, they more resemble the Mafia, sending out 'heavies' when their turf is in jeopardy.

Off the top of my head, the US does industry and deals better than anybody else. that's why they own a good part of the world.

[insert Bob Dylan's "The times, they are a'changin" here]

Furthermore, it does China no good whatsoever to go to war with the country they consider one of their best tading partners, very self defeating.

I think the point Chomsky is raising is that China is positioning itself to take over from the US, and the US had better heed the warning. I don't think he is implying that China would go to war with the US, but rather they are preparing for the US to go to war with China.

China is growing (economically) very fast, and is actively trying to secure the bulk of the world's resources for their own benefit, just as the US has done up until now. Will the US be happy being #2? I doubt it, and I expect China knows it too.

[lost&outofcontrol]

I think people on the right have to stop looking at the world in extremes, nothing is black or white just shades of grey.

Chomsky on nightline or in a marketing class

[KrustyKidd]

How did we allow this dependance on oil to become so important to our lives?

The entire world, Muslim extremist and communist China included. It provides leverage for man so that he can operate machines which produce far more than he could by hand. It has also allowed there to be more food and transport that food to areas where there is little or none. And this has allowed man to multiply in areas where he previously could not. Once started, there was no going back.

They never really were, they more resemble the Mafia, sending out 'heavies' when their turf is in jeopardy.

As any and every country that could has done. Then, act as policeman to keep those interests from being in jeapardy.

[insert Bob Dylan's "The times, they are a'changin" here]

If you knew anything about Bob and his politics, you wouldn't dare quote him. Anyhow, times a changing? Wow, stop the presses. If it means less agitation then it is good for business. The US strives to be number one but if somebody else is, then that means there is a better way which is good for the US as it allows them to trade and grow with them. Trade and industry does not grow unless conditions both political and economic grow with it. Hence, a CHina that is industrialized is less militarized and subsequently a threat to life.

I think the point Chomsky is raising is that China is positioning itself to take over from the US, and the US had better heed the warning. I don't think he is implying that China would go to war with the US, but rather they are preparing for the US to go to war with China.

Huh? Wow, Chomsky is not a nut and only a nut would say that. 'Heed the warning' - get real. A prosperous China is another trading partner to sell and buy from. Surely you must know about the intertwining of the economies that has already occured with the IT undustry and such - Bill Gates meeting with the president last month and all?

China is growing (economically) very fast, and is actively trying to secure the bulk of the world's resources for their own benefit, just as the US has done up until now.

Well gee wiz, imagine, a country trying to secure resources. Imagine! What insanity has gotten ahold of them? Wello, if they can make a better deal than the US then guess they are better at it. And as such, the US would have to adopt similar methods. Or, if they are failing, then they might consider adopting the methods used by the US in kind.

Will the US be happy being #2? I doubt it, and I expect China knows it too.

You talk of the US as if it is a person with a singular ego and no brains. They will do what they have to do in order to feed it's population and secure it's territory. If it is better to be number two in order to get this done than that will be what happens. If not, then they will maintain their hedgemony in whatever catagory best suits their needs. Happiness has squat to do with it on both sides - necessity and common sense does.

I think people on the right have to stop looking at the world in extremes, nothing is black or white just shades of grey.

Great cartoons BTW!

And not even as you say. There are shades of grey within swaths of bright white and brilliant black. And all people are trying to promote their own agenda - all people. Not just the US. Chess games within chess games and all hold power and have more indsght into what is going on than many give them credit for.

[lost&outofcontrol]

Great cartoons BTW!

And not even as you say. There are shades of grey within swaths of bright white and brilliant black. And all people are trying to promote their own agenda - all people. Not just the US. Chess games within chess games and all hold power and have more indsght into what is going on than many give them credit for.

But just because everybody does it doesn't mean we should be doing it as well. The US has been protecting it's interest since the end of the 19th century through invasions or other means. Nobody can deny that, the problem arises from the fact that the western world defends its interest at the expense of the periphery, whether it's Africa or Latin America.

More cartoons

**edit**

Damm, think I'll use this as the base for another essay for the Werewolf if you don't mind.

Wow, those forums are terrible(the software itself I mean)

It's my crappy internet connection.

[KrustyKidd]

But just because everybody does it doesn't mean we should be doing it as well.

The world is as it is not because we made it but because it was left to us this way. To change it requires a lot of changes from everybody, not just the US.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear Krusty Kid,

You talk of the US as if it is a person with a singular ego and no brains.

Amen, brother. They prove it time and time again.

Then, act as policeman to keep those interests from being in jeapardy.

(should read: "Then, act as crooked policemen to keep their interests from being in jeopardy".)

The US strives to be number one but if somebody else is, then that means there is a better way which is good for the US as it allows them to trade and grow with them.

Actually, under the US way of 'being number 1', there is only one or the other. The head office of Nike will either be over there or over here. The factories, the miserable human rights policies and pollution must be in the opposite place.

[lost&outofcontrol]

Apparently it's my crappy connection, curse you Rogers High Speed.

[KrustyKidd]

Amen, brother. They prove it time and time again.

Like?

(should read: "Then, act as crooked policemen to keep their interests from being in jeopardy".)

Nearly spewed my coffee looking forward to your list of countries doing things the right proper way Lonius. Make sure China, Saudi Arabia, Russia, France, Germany and all the others who have a five hundred year history of ripping resources out of less advanced civilizations and giving nothing back but strife. Got to get this list from you. Don't forget Canada and Talisman as well as the Guyanan mines we have. Should be interesting reading when you done.

Actually, under the US way of 'being number 1', there is only one or the other. The head office of Nike will either be over there or over here. The factories, the miserable human rights policies and pollution must be in the opposite place.

Yes, and prior to Nike there was a paradise. People didn't have to work as they wore fruit for clothes and mated like apes between feasts. And look at what happened, jobs. Not great jobs but beats having to go to festival after festival.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear KrustyKidd,

Nearly spewed my coffee looking forward to your list of countries doing things the right proper way Lonius....Got to get this list from you.

I never claimed there was such a list. Merely pointed out that to compare the USA to 'the world's policeman' must account for the fact that they are crooked. Otherwise, your argument relies on the 'looter mentality', "hey, everyone else is stealing good stuff, I'm going to get me some too".

Like?

Well, a small example would be funding anti-american Muslim fanatics in Afghanistan to help overthrow a gov't (the Soviet occupation) and having them turn into the Taliban. Then, thinking it would be a good idea to fund a different group of anti-american Muslim fanatics to overthrow the Taliban.

[August1991]

This thread is filled with grotesque generalizations and no supporting evidence wahtsoever. Terms like China, America, Europe are thrown around as if they were markers on a gameboard, or teams in a sports league.

The world doesn't work that way at all. For starters, the nature of life is not a game at all and IME, the only people who think like that are young adolescent males.

As to Chomsky, anytime I've read him, I've come away with the impression that he's a pompous, self-promoting windbag. He knows his audience and he appeals to a group of Americans who like to blame America for everything, and like to believe they are right simply because they are iconoclasts who oppose conventional wisdom.

Among other things, Chomsky shares with Galbraith prolific writing skills and an uncanny ability to be wrong most of the time.

[KrustyKidd]

Well, a small example would be funding anti-american Muslim fanatics in Afghanistan to help overthrow a gov't (the Soviet occupation) and having them turn into the Taliban. Then, thinking it would be a good idea to fund a different group of anti-american Muslim fanatics to overthrow the Taliban.

How is that having an ego and no brains? At the time, faced with a Soviet move into Afganistan and the construction of fighter airbases in the western region of the country, the revolution in Iran, all indications were that the Soviets were going to make a play to open up the Gulf to their military influence.

So, given the geography and the inability to mount a force that could counter the Soviet forces, what would your solution be? Allow the Soviets to take over Iran and enter the Gulf? Or, prop up some local forces to make the situation untenuable for them?

So, given that this is an ego play with no brains, please give us an example of how it was. And while you are at it, explain how siding with Stalin against Hitler was also an ego with no brains operation please. And, while you are at it, please give me the larger examples as you said this one was only a small one.

I never claimed there was such a list. Merely pointed out that to compare the USA to 'the world's policeman' must account for the fact that they are crooked.

And which country is not? Russia? China? France? Canada? Who? Who in this world is not doing what they can for their own people and power Lonius? And, when you point one out, I'll show you a governemnt that is not looking after the interests of their people. I mentioned Talisman and the mines that are owned by us in Guyana, do you think for a moment that if we could, we would not produce more of these underhanded sort of affairs? Aid more despotic regimes that abuse human rights and such for a buck?

Let's see, Churchill certainly was crooked in your books with all the deception and sacrificing of human life in order to beat an enemy. Shacklton lied to his men over and over to ensure their suvival. Chirac was in bed with Saddam far more than the US yet none of these people inspire your ire. I smell bigotry.

And, while we are on this point, tell me what the world would look like if the USA had not countered the Soviets using proxy forces? Would there even be an internet to talk on? Would Canada be in an economic stranglehold from the Soviet dominated Europe and Far East? This is a lingthy assignment so I can wait a few days.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear KrustyKidd,

Allow the Soviets to take over Iran and enter the Gulf? Or, prop up some local forces to make the situation untenuable for them?

So, given that this is an ego play with no brains, please give us an example of how it was.

I knew I should have been more clear...the folly wasn't the action against the Soviets, the folly was to do it again...after seeing the results. Cozying up to Osama and their ilk was a move the US might have thought was risky, and it certainly proved to be harmful to the US in the long run. Then, they went to someone like Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, and others of his ilk, to overthrow the Taliban.

I mentioned Talisman and the mines that are owned by us in Guyana, do you think for a moment that if we could, we would not produce more of these underhanded sort of affairs?

As I understand it, (and I know a few people that work for Talisman) they pulled out of their Sudan interests after public pressure mounted for them to stop funding a hard-line military despotic regime from oppressing their own people for the profit of those 'in the west (Canada, mostly). Then, Talisman worked hard to 'clean up their act', and has become one of the most 'ethical' large companies around. I am afraid I am unfamiliar with the Guyana mines.

Chirac was in bed with Saddam far more than the US yet none of these people inspire your ire.

I have acknowledged in the past that France was in bed with Saddam, and TotalFinaElf lost a bundle when the US invaded, which is 'tough toenails' for Total, they didn't get France to send troops in to protect their investment and help fight off the US invasion.

[KrustyKidd]

they didn't get France to send troops in to protect their investment and help fight off the US invasion.

They got mega milage out of being the head of the political play to turn the EU into an Anti US entity headed by themselves. A risk that ultimately backfired. For that reason, they could not send troops to help or hinder as their position was that of 'peace' at all costs.

Cozying up to Osama and their ilk was a move the US might have thought was risky, and it certainly proved to be harmful to the US in the long run.

Far less risky than a Soviet expansion. And, at the time, there was no organized religious movement. There was individuals from all parts of the Muslim world. If you're going to tell me that in 1979 anybody could predict they would not only expell the Soviets, but become part of a civil war AND WIN I'll have to call it a lie.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear KrustyKidd,

If you're going to tell me that in 1979 anybody could predict they would not only expell the Soviets, but become part of a civil war AND WIN I'll have to call it a lie.

You may be right. However, in 1979 Vietnam was still a fairly recent lesson on 'o'erweening arrogance' to a major power, and no one had managed to conquer Afghanistan in a long, long time. I'm sure some people had put the Pathan's odds at 50-50, least of all the Pathans, etc. themselves.

They say patience is a virtue, but in guerrilla warfare it is a tactic.

[Montgomery Burns]

Got a goody that the MSM has refused to report--Noam Chomsky meeting with Hezbollah a few days ago. As reported by the invaluable Drudge Report, Chomsky told Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah that "the US is one of the leading terrorist states".

Oops. Looks like someone else has reported this meeting in Beirut; Al-Manar, the official Hezbollah propaganda channel, banned by the US State Dept.

Here is video of Chomsky, along with his Muslim wife, meeting with Hezbollah leaders.

Not anti-war. He's on the other side. No wonder he is a leftist icon.

Why doesn't the US arrest and try Chomsky for treason? Hezbollah is on the USA's terrorist list. I am getting sick and tired of Bush always playing Mr Nice Guy. He hasn't even done anything about the NY Times and WaPo reporters reporting classified information. These 5th columnists - and Chomsky - need to be tried for treason and thrown in jail--or executed (and the harshest penalty for treason is the death penalty).

[geoffrey]

Revoke his citizenship and kick him out. He's not an American, he wants to see Americans killed and their country destroyed. So be it, let them go become a real deal Arab type and live there.

[Black Dog]

Got a goody that the MSM has refused to report--Noam Chomsky meeting with Hezbollah a few days ago. As reported by the invaluable Drudge Report, Chomsky told Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah that "the US is one of the leading terrorist states".

That's been one of the pillars of Chomsky's foreign policy critriques for years. And when you actually, you know, read what he writes, it's logical:

"There is a meaning to the word terrorist, in fact you can read a definition of term terrorist is the U.S. code of laws. It gives a very clear, precise, adequate definition of the word terrorist. I have been writing about terrorism for 25 years, always using the official U.S. definition [of the word "terrorist"], but that definition is un-usable, and the reason is that when you use that definition it turns out, not surprisingly, that the U.S is one of the leading terrorist states, and the other states become terrorist or non-terrorist depending on how they are relating to U.S. goals."

But reason and logical consistency are the enemies of the radical right. Hang the traitor!!

Revoke his citizenship and kick him out. He's not an American, he wants to see Americans killed and their country destroyed. So be it, let them go become a real deal Arab type and live there.

G, can you support the conetention that Chomsky "wants to see Americans killed and their country destroyed"? Or, like Monty, are you just making stuff up?

[geoffrey]

Revoke his citizenship and kick him out. He's not an American, he wants to see Americans killed and their country destroyed. So be it, let them go become a real deal Arab type and live there.

G, can you support the conetention that Chomsky "wants to see Americans killed and their country destroyed"? Or, like Monty, are you just making stuff up?

Why else would he meet and encourage terrorist groups that love to kill Americans like Hezbollah?

If he doesn't want American's and other innocents killed, he's got a funny way of showing it.

Anyone that supports mindless slaughter of innocents for political and religious purposes is far too dangerous to have around preaching his word.

[KrustyKidd]

I am getting sick and tired of Bush always playing Mr Nice Guy.

Damm right! First thing that pussy should have done was to shut down the reporters and then simply carried out the war. Then, shut down Al Jazeera with a few well placed bombs. Instead, he fell into the peacnik saying 'you can't instill democracy at the end of a gun.'

I concur with the above but you sure as hell can create the conditions for it at the end of a gun though.

[Black Dog]

Why else would he meet and encourage terrorist groups that love to kill Americans like Hezbollah?

Decontextualize much? Has Hezbollah mounted any operations against Americans since the end of the Lebanese civil war? Rhetoric about terrorism aside, the reality is the Hezbollah is a legitimate force in Lebanese politics and society, whether or not its foes choose to recognize that. In that context, Chomsky's visist is a little less cut and dried as you say.

If he doesn't want American's and other innocents killed, he's got a funny way of showing it.

So you don't have any actual, you know, evidence to support your claim, just innuendo.

Anyone that supports mindless slaughter of innocents for political and religious purposes is far too dangerous to have around preaching his word.

Please. Not only does that include most western political leaders (what is "collateral damage" but the slaughter of innocents), it also includes some of our greatest historical heroes. Again, that's one of Chomsky's main theories: that the definition of terrorism depends entirely on who controls the doctrinal systems. One man's terrorism is another's "shock and awe".

Damm right! First thing that pussy should have done was to shut down the reporters and then simply carried out the war. Then, shut down Al Jazeera with a few well placed bombs. Instead, he fell into the peacnik saying 'you can't instill democracy at the end of a gun.'

I concur with the above but you sure as hell can create the conditions for it at the end of a gun though.

In otehr words we must destroy democracy in order to spread it. 'sfunny: the armchair warrior crowd is so prone to self-contradiction it's a wonder their heads don't explode. On the one hand, the rhetoric is all about spreading democracy, freeing opressed peoples and rebuilding their shattered, failed states. But on the other, the problem is we're not killing enough of them fast enough. But then maybe I'm wrong about these goals being contradictary: maybe, in the armchair warior's mind, a "free, peaceful Iraq" is code for an Iraq free of human life, peaceful but for the flapping wings of carrion birds feasting on the bodies.

[KrustyKidd]

In otehr words we must destroy democracy in order to spread it. 'sfunny: the armchair warrior crowd is so prone to self-contradiction it's a wonder their heads don't explode. On the one hand, the rhetoric is all about spreading democracy, freeing opressed peoples and rebuilding their shattered, failed states.

Are you referring to the democracy of Saddam or the democracy of Qatar's Emir?

But on the other, the problem is we're not killing enough of them fast enough. But then maybe I'm wrong about these goals being contradictary: maybe, in the armchair warior's mind, a "free, peaceful Iraq" is code for an Iraq free of human life, peaceful but for the flapping wings of carrion birds feasting on the bodies.

The US is killing a thousand less of them a month than Saddam was so it seems you are wrong about those gaols being contradictary.

[lost&outofcontrol]

These 5th columnists - and Chomsky - need to be tried for treason and thrown in jail--or executed (and the harshest penalty for treason is the death penalty).

Damn straight, and everyone that doesn't agree with .gov policies or vote democrat should be executed, that should teach them to (gasp) have a different opinion. Sieg Heil...

[geoffrey]

These 5th columnists - and Chomsky - need to be tried for treason and thrown in jail--or executed (and the harshest penalty for treason is the death penalty).

Damn straight, and everyone that doesn't agree with .gov policies or vote democrat should be executed, that should teach them to (gasp) have a different opinion. Sieg Heil...

An opinion and meeting with terrorists that have an anti-American agenda are two different things.

If Chomsky kept to his old self, just propagating maligned opinions without factual basis, I really wouldn't care. But when he visits terrorists and decries the US (nearly encouraging their behavior) that's a whole different issue.