Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Derailing thread but whateva...

and continue to prop up the 'deformed workers' state' of our Great Leader and Good Friend Kim Jong-il.

Inre: Monroe Doctrine, the US has intervened 'more than 100 times' this year alone methinks...
However, we should be mindful that such interventions are not, say, the imposition of the US' will on unwilling yet compliant States, rather interventions beneficial to bourgeois interests (the bourgeoisie as an international class with (generally) shared interests, even across the 'North'/'South' divide).
Hence, to clarify, user: bentheanarchist's post states:

to read it as 'the US's Operation Condor' is slightly problematic.

(As an aside: Operation Condor was more of a mechanism to smash resistance groups after the establishment of the various juntas in the Southern Cone of Latin America (and have been mutated and re-adapted for use in post-'dictatorship' countries, notably against the Mapuche in Chile & Argentina, and Indigenous ppls in Ecuador).)

Secondly, the US did actively oppose the election of Allende, implemented a policy of 'destabilisation' whilst he was in power, and actively support the coup and subsequent regime. However, the Coup was an expression of Chilean ruling class interests (with US backing), the 'Chicago Boys' were Chileans after all (not that its all their fault but...). We have seen similar failed attempts in Venezuela over the last few years (well, relatively speaking), largely driven by local ruling class interests, most notably the mass media and oil businesses. I guess my point is that the US supports and funds locally based groups with convergent class or geo-political interests; they don't create oppositional forces capable of regime change outta a void (well, without a US invasion that is).

Kinda connected, go watch 'The Chicago Conspiracy', the whole thing is streamed here

And here's the trailer:

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECfjBKmTg0Q[/video]

 

... and some more smartassing:

whot's about this:

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Curtis_LeMay

The soviets played a double game, stalin had promised 1943 at jalta to enter the war against japan 3 months after the war in europe ended and ol'jozif don't wanted to loose the opportunity to occupy manchuria and the kuriles and blocked the japanese attempts to peace-talk untill the red army entered the fray on the 8th of august 1945 - the day Hiroshima died.

Secuel of the "we love khmer rouge" story:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khmer_Rouge & http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rote_Khmer (too lazy to translate, use the google translator)

This project for freedom and democracy (for what else?) was called "project fubelt" - and btw: kissinger is still wanted in some countries that suffered from "operation condor" & but he got only the Nobel Peace Prize instead...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_FUBELT

 

Much like Berlin, Tokyo was practically razed by allied bombings during the war (about 84% of the city was levelled I believe), ie wasn't only nukes wot decimated the Japanese populace.
Anywayz, inre: the decision to drop the nukes, at the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum they have a large collection of internal US cables which preceded, and informed, the decision to drop the bombs. Anywayz, from my recollection of reading them (i was there in 2007, so memory is a bit sketchy) there were a number that acknowledged that a Japanese surrender was imminent and inevitable yet still advocated the use of nukes. The reasons given were kinda diplomatic speak (ie inferred callous decisions couched in nice terminology), but they kinda alluded to the preemptive deterrence against future State conflict and also to create conditions by which US terms of Japanese surrender could be better implemented.
Well, that's what I remember anywayz, mind you I tried to purge from my memory a lot of the stuff I saw there as they have a number of babies with fucked up deformities displayed in jars...

 

Made a mistake - it was the conference in Teheran 1943, Jalta was in february 1945...

Compared with the victims of "little boy" and "fat man" (sum 170.000) the fire-bombing campaign planned and executed under LeMays command was much more vicious, claimed much more victims (tokio lost 100.000 people in a single night) and brought the japanese near to collapse when each and every important city was bombed - LeMay stated in later interviews that he was worried at this time about "how to continue the war, because there would have been no targets left by september 1945".
The McNamarra-documentary "Fog Of War" gives some very impressive insights by comparing the conventionally "burned" japanese cities with size and importance of us-cities - making "The Day After" looking like a bedtime story and even vietnam-war-criminal McNamarra felt visibly sorry for that...
(he served under lemays command evaluating the "success" of us-bomb raids statistically to give the best "improvements" to the higher ups).
The decision to drop the bombs couldn't be justified with the war situation or possible massacres like saipan, ivo jima or okinava in case of an us-landing in nippon - because the japanese were already finished - far more fucked up than the nutzi-germans at the time the of bombing of dresden or berlin - both in february 1945 - 10 weeks before the german capitulation.
So with the red army already close to dresden and later to berlin, moscow could have been the real "receiver" of the message:
"Just look what we are able to do" - if you don't behave well in future...
- especially after Jalta wasn't that harmonic anymore because truman replaced roosevelt as the us-president and the "polish" question enforced the growing tensions between the soviets (claiming their areas of interest in eastern europe/the balkan) and the western allies - high ranking military like patton or (again) lemay almost started planning to continue the war against the soviets, patton for example had to be discharged after the german capitulation when he stated in interviews that he might provoke some "incident" with the russians to start WW III and re-arm the german wehrmacht, because in his eyes washington was too weak to do it and he could make good use of the germun "experience".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yalta_Conference
Some of trumans advisors stated later, that he ignored their suggestions to re-formulate the terms of the japanese surrender, just & only by making it clear that nippon could keep the mikado/tenno and that he won't be charged as a war criminal - and further, that truman postponed the date of the potsdam conference after the appointed nuclear trinity-test at alamogordo - to see if the bomb could be used "diplomatic" in the conference:

Who said "War is the continuation of policy by other means"???
My current polish comrades won't forgive the soviet' stand-by during the polish uprising in warzaw in summer 1944...

 

My point is that terrorist groups are always funded by a stronger power, or else they could not afford weapons, and supplies.

 

The ruling class and the admins of the Nation State are the largest terrorist groups, they ain't funded by stronger powers...
They own the gun factories

 

George Bush helped defend Augusto Pinochet by making it illegal to prosecute him.
I heard that from Jello Biafra spoking word album, Machine Gun in the Clown's Hand.

 

so we can't stray off to the periphery of state-terrorism, comrade sir?

raised quite a number of questions...

 

Going off topix is da name of da crime... comrade ma'am!

But I found this one, almost back on track:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orde_Wingate

 

what a shame, tawarichsh commissar sir, my willingness to apply self-criticism is endless...

i counter crazy orde wingate with this one, less insane, a poet and almost adorable (my mom always fell for the valentino-version):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T._E._Lawrence

any links, quotes, something more than only this?
the PLO wasn't just one group you know, there have been several fractions and wings, competeting against each other, sometimes even fighting their own comrades.

 

Back on topic:

lots moar here

 

surrey, but where's the connection to Palestine here - them axtivists don't question the two-states-solution, or the inner-hebrew racism, not the criminal IDF and it's actions or at least the 3-year-draft for the army - according to german info they evade even contacts/joining forces with the local squatter groups...
maybe it's a start for something serious, but right now?

 

Much like other uprisings in the region, its not perfect, but so what?
The mass mobilisation of teh Israeli proles is a good thing, there are multiple reports of joint Israeli/Palestinian actions, and class solidarity does way more to challenge both the two-state solution and inner-hebrew racism than anything else I can think of.
To quote someone from LIbcom:

 

Tunesia and Egypt suffered quite a bit under the general lack of education - so it wasn't very surprising that revolutionary perspectives were missing in this 2. world situation.
israel is a first world nation - the social problems rising up there are the very same we have in europe, privatisation of public services, dissolution of the solidarity principle resulting in leaving individuals and families vulnerable to the slightest ripple of the corrupt and only profit orientated piggery and egoism - greece, france and england - far more conscious than the average hipster of tel aviv, flocking like everybody else right into the overcrowded area, now complaining about the high cost of living. (i lived in tel aviv for three years).
a war going on and on since 1967, constant threat of terror attacks, 3 million illegal minimum-pay slaves keeping the economy up, the most expensive high-tech-army of the world, birthrate benefits applied out of religious and racist reasons by powerbroking minorities like agudat israel and degel hatorah - still waiting for the maschiach and regarding the "modern israel" as a sacrileg, but always busily playing the kingmaker and demanding the rewards applied to the orthodox like automatic freedom from the draft, taxes and a more than healthy part of social funding for their war of the craddles, because todays babies are tomorrows voters.
with 900.000 immigrants from the former soviet union and ten thousands of northafrican jews difficult to integrate in the tough economic situation the orthodox now have to competete hard and react spreading their racist "belief" about who's a jew and who not - already blocking the family reunification if the relatives in question are "black" (african) and not jewish.
on the other hand: the emmigration rate exceedes the immigration because of the draft and the constant alamo-athmosphere everywhere, many people are just feed up to be with the "chosen people" and simply leave if they can afford it.
call the average citizen complaining about his small appartment a proletarian - and he will call the cops, because you're a communist...
class solidarity isn't enough in times of imperialist land theft, anti-guerilla-warfare, apartheid and racism, especially if one is still on the perpetrator's side and just complaining that neoliberalism took the privilege away. sorry for the rant...

 

Yeah, cos the Tunisians and Egyptians don't know whats best for themselves...
What a load of shit.
So, like, Egyptian yoof literally chasing the police force off the streets wasn't a revolutionary perspective?

and which side would that be?

*edit: And to clarify, surely class solidarity, self-organisation and struggle is the only way to solve the crises we face...

 

would you say that their actual political vision is sufficient to self-organize 21 million people in Cairo in a revolutionary way?
was there any idea how to stop the rural exodus/migration into the cities with 40 % youth unemployment - Egypt is importing food again... and Cairo growing with 10 000 new inhabitants per day.

they aren't indigenous people anymore, you can't compare the north africans with natives elsewhere, fighting for their cultural survival.
they already crossed the line to an industrial economy - and eurocentric or not - there is only one way to end capitalism.

obviously not enough - the military and the police are back on the streets.

the side of the people living there, regardless of religion, skin colour, social status, nationality or whatever else keeping up the status quo.
where are the 130 000 protesters against discrimination, imperialism and state terror?
class conscious german proletarians didn't stop the war 1914 - they gladly stormed into the trenches for the fatherland and as they finally woke up and took a stand... the nationalists and fascists were already waiting.

 

Yes, of course, anarchism is kinda based on the belief that ppl are capable of organising themselves.. but maybe i can change yr question and answer that instead... 'Was their political vision the creation of social self-organisation?'
in which case (whilst there is no homogenous postion) I'd say, hesitantly, no.
But that wasn't the point I was trying to make, rather my comment was a reaction to yr comment:

which I interpreted as being very condescending.

What are you talking about? What comparison? Which Indigenous people?

Of what relevance does 'crossing the line to an industrial economy' have to do with what we are talking about?

The failure (or to be more accurate, the current lack of success) of revolutionary movements is not the basis via which we decide whether perspectives are revolutionary or not. The CNT-FAI lost, they were still revolutionary.
In short, the problem is one of tactics, not perspective.

The chief of the IDF has noted that giving in to the demands of the protestors would adversely impact the IDF, so the ruling class realise that even the most minimal expression of a policy shift, like a de-escalation of the policies of Israeli State terror, would be mutually beneficial to teh proles. Such perspectives from persons involved in these mobilisations has, reportedly, been expressed, albeit in very, very limited and isolated instances, however, things develop, and more concrete examples are hardly out of the question. If you think the creation of spaces conducive to the development of such perspectives are little more than a continuation of the status quo, so be it. However, I think such spaces are potentially anything but.

 

Guess we got quite a bit uvver language problem here, to me it looks like Nike is going after ol'Marxens "being a class for itself" - self organizing collectively away from political parties and in last consequence away from the capitalist state, finally deciding the class struggle and changing the world. (where are the lumpens, comrade madame Mihailowna B.???! )
Personally I still dunno how much development of an industrial working class is necessary to allow this process to go on until da revolution is coming, if it's necessary at all - but given "the lack of education and respectively a political horizont" I would agree that the northafrican movement suffers from the fact that you get nothing but baffled silence if you ask somebody in Cairo/Tunis about self-organisation, not to mention an anarchist one.
So how to expect more than the social self-organisation we've seen, asking for Mubarak to leave, but not preventing the military guarding the door and the muslim brotherhoods slippin' in?
I wouldn't say that Tahir Square and Alexandria wasn't a beginning of something promising in the futures - but it was far from being a revolution.

I agree, Telly Avid's activism and some of the media reactions seems a bit odd - the "next" revolution...
There were indeed

and these expressions were as usual coming from the usual suspects - heavily suffering from state repression but mostly ignored since at least 20 years by the now complaining majority suffering from neolib modernisation and only asking the terror state they supported as long as there were bread and circuses to cover the

Again I wouldn't say it's not a beginning - but with benny "the prince gantz" already overdoing what he learned from his studies of political science and history (bachelor of arts, besides being a paratrooper general) - and (according to some people i know) already sending out the air force in recon-missions over Gaza - theres a hot september coming, ya know... and a place in the internment camps comes quite cheap, 3 shekels per day and prisoner.

 

It's bloody time consuming to constantly write 'the working/lumpen/oppressed class/es' or someting similar, i used 'teh proles' as cover all in this context, perhaps an explanation might have been useful, but i thought the use of slang and deliberate misspelling may have implied I wasn't some workerist Trot bastard. (whilst on the topic of trot bastards, how come they don't even understand Marx? Many tell me how they have no interest in the struggles of the unemployed cos they ain't workers, whereas Marx argues the opposite: "The condemnation of one part of the working class to enforced idleness by the overwork of the other part, and the converse, becomes a means of enriching the individual capitalists..."; "Every combination of employed and unemployed disturbs the “harmonious” action of this law [supply & demand]".)
Anywayz...
if anything, i kinda got a bit of a fetish for lumpen struggles, esp. the MST & MTST.
Maybe i should borrow autonomist terminology and use 'teh multitude' in future.

That sorta attitude got Lenin accused of being an Anarchist, cos we say, rightly, 'fuck waiting, now, motherfucker, now!'
Global anarchist communism is inevitable, but I'd like to be alive during it...

A few things.
1. The best way to learn is thru struggle, if such movements ain't recuperated completely, the marginal voices for self-organisation'll gain traction.
2. Give'em some credit, there was a reason why there wasn't some vanguard political party/-ies 'leading' the Egyptian uprising.
3. "I wouldn't say that Tahir Square and Alexandria wasn't a beginning of something promising in the futures - but it was far from being a revolution." Of course. The replacement of Mubarak with his Minister of Defence doesn't even constitute regime change. Ah the wonders of the Liberal Media Spectacle, they are some of the greatest fiction writers of our time, where, like, Egyptians discovered twitter, went to a big square, acted all Gandhi like for a few days ('look! peaceful protest is the best!'), then, bam! Revolution! Democracy! End story.
That fuck all has changed in Egypt is a fact that many of 'em know, that's why protests are continuing, why the union movement has split (in bits and pieces over a few years) from its previous function as State appendage, etc, etc.
No context of the precursors to this uprising are given, like say, Mahalla strikes and whatnot.
The 'peaceful protest' was, i reckon, mostly a pragmatic choice not to take on the military; there were riots in Suez, and no police in Alexandria for a while; and there are reports of attacks on police at their court hearings for police brutality charges, amongst others. Thus it can be argued that the 'non-violent' occupation of Tahir Square was actually made possible by the previous violence of uppity multidudes and multidudettes.

i know that you know this, I just get all heated about the bullshit Liberal triumphalism.

However, I guess I'll say that regardless of the fact that there was no revolution, that the revolutionary tendencies within this movement haven't won, nor look in a position to win out within the immediate future, they were nevertheless present and well articulated at certain points. Any expression of these tendencies should be celebrated and fostered; analogously, the potentiality for the development of prole/lumpen class solidarity across the race divide which extends beyond the usual suspects by the space created by these Israeli mobilisations is worth being hopefully for. It's certainly a better prospect than the bullshit that consists Palestinian solidarity in my town (trot bastards with martyr complexes and thinly veiled anti-Semitic politics), but that's a whole other story...
But yeah, it's gunna be a hot September. :/