Friday, November 17, 2006

Neocon Krauthammer Blames Iraqi Victims

By Kurt Nimmo

"Charles Krauthammer, neocon columnist who is in fact a warmonger propagandist, and thus deserves a seat in the docket at the Hague, or preferably in a courtroom here in America, tells us that the Iraqi people only have themselves to blame for the violence in their country. Krauthammer refuses to handwring or place blame where it is deserved. “Americans flatter themselves that they are the root of all planetary evil. Nukes in North Korea? Poverty in Bolivia? Sectarian violence in Iraq? Breasts are beaten and fingers pointed as we try to somehow locate the root cause in America,” writes the neocon scribe. “Our discourse on Iraq has followed the same pattern. Where did we go wrong? Too few troops? Too arrogant an occupation? Or too soft? Take your pick.”

How about America had no right to invade a country that did not pose a threat. But then, as Bush insider Philip Zelikow declared, the invasion was not about America or weapons of mass destruction or even Osama colluding with Saddam, but the “security” of Israel, that is to say Israeli hegemony in the Middle East.

As for why “democracy” withered on the wine in Iraq, Krauthammer has his own theories. “In retrospect, I think we made several serious mistakes—not shooting looters, not installing an Iraqi exile government right away, and not taking out Moqtada al-Sadr and his Mahdi Army in its infancy in 2004—that greatly compromised the occupation. Nonetheless, the root problem lies with Iraqis and their political culture,” he writes.

In other words, the United States fumbled the ball, thanks to Bush and crew. Of course, this is nonsense, as the neocons accomplished and continue to accomplish their objective of reducing Iraq, a first world nation prior to Bush Senior’s invasion, to a sub-Saharan condition, a decimated nation replete with poverty and almost unimaginable human misery. Over the last year or so, the final goal of the neocon plan—the violent balkanization of Iraq along ethnic and religious lines—has clipped along swimmingly.

Krauthammer would have us believe the neocons, brimming with democratic idealism and love for the Iraqi people, simply goofed up, although we should credit them for trying. Rather, the “Arabs [are] intrinsically incapable of democracy” and “there are political, historical, even religious reasons why Arabs are less prepared for democracy than, say, East Asians and Latin Americans who successfully democratized over the past several decades,” essentially a racist conclusion, but then this is quite normal for Israel First neocons. As Krauthammer would have it, the “problem here is Iraq’s particular political culture, raped and ruined by 30 years of Hussein’s totalitarianism,” never mind the United States installed Saddam Hussein and fed him weapons when it served foreign policy objectives, for instance the continuation of a brutal war between Iraq and Iran. Krauthammer assumes we are idiots when it comes to history. But then, naturally, most of his readers are idiots, or at least struck with amnesia when it comes to the historical record.

Iraq is a “social desert,” according to Krauthammer, never mind the Ba’athists created a health care and educational system envied by the Arab world prior to Bush Senior’s invasion, a fact admitted by none other than the Los Angeles Times. In Krauthammer’s hermetically sealed world, where historical facts are not allowed entrance, Iraqis attach themselves to “the mosque or clan or militia,” a quite natural phenomenon, considering the utter decimation of the social framework, thanks to depleted uranium enhanced bunkerbusters and cruise missiles. For the racist Krauthammer, who again and again utilizes the racist neocon yardstick when measuring Iraqis, “Iraqi national consciousness is as yet too weak and the culture of compromise too undeveloped to produce an effective government enjoying broad allegiance,” never mind most Iraqis know a spade when they see it—the installed government is beholden to the United States and its neocon political objectives, not the Iraqi people.

Krauthammer tells us the “Maliki government is a failure” and “beholden to a coalition dominated by two Shiite religious parties, each armed and ambitious, at odds with each other and with the ultimate aim of a stable, modern, democratic regime.” However, Krauthammer and the neocons are not interested in a “modern, democratic regime,” as spelled out in the Clean Break document, subtitled “A New Strategy for Securing the Realm,” or maybe that should be eviscerating the realm. “Since Iraq’s future could affect the strategic balance in the Middle East profoundly, it would be understandable that Israel has an interest in supporting the Hashemites in their efforts to redefine Iraq,” the document states. According to the neocons, King Hussein of Jordan was a “direct descendant” of the Prophet Muhammad and thus should lead the Iraqis, an ideal situation for the Israelis as Hussein conducted peace negotiations directly with them and developed strong ties of friendship with Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin, who joined Haganah, specifically Palmach, responsible in part for the Deir Yassin massacre. In short, the Israelis and their neocon allies expect the Arabs of Iraq to bow down to corrupt and decadent royalty complicit in the slaughter of fellow Arabs, including more than 5,000 during Black September at the behest of Henry Kissinger, the heads of the Defense Department, CIA, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Israeli and Jordanian ambassadors.

Naturally, since Iraq is wholly artificial, a bastard son of the Sykes-Picot Agreement, or rather a secret agreement between Britain and France to carve up a large swath of the Arab world, it stands to reason the Shi’ites do not “have enough sense of nation,” or a nation now supposedly envisioned by the United States. In fact, for the neocons and Israelis, this “sense of nation” is anathema, as they desire a disserved and splintered Iraq along religious and ethnic lines, managed by the “moral and intellectual leadership” of the Israelis, as the Clean Break document arrogantly stipulates.

For Krauthammer, the murderous sectarian warfare currently underway in Iraq is a good thing. “There is a glimmer of hope in this breakdown of the Shiite front,” he writes. “The unitary Shiite government having been proved such a failure, we should be encouraging the full breakup of the Shiite front,” a breakup that will eventually result in the sort of balkanization envisioned by the Israelis and their neocon cognates. Of course, Krauthammer does not say as much, but rather sticks to the absurdly transparent Bushian line that the United States hold out a hope, however futile, for a democratic Iraq.

“One can tinker with American tactics or troop levels from today until doomsday,” writes Krauthammer. “But unless the Iraqis can put together a government of unitary purpose and resolute action, the simple objective of this war—to leave behind a self-sustaining democratic government—is not attainable.” Of course, such a “self-sustaining democratic government” will never come about, especially with P2OG and British SAS undertakings underway, making certain Krauthammer’s “social desert” remains a permanent feature of a disintegrated Iraq.

Charles Krauthammer is a transparent shill for the neocon plan to balkanize, and thus murder a countless number of innocents, the entire Arab and Islamic world, although he masquerades as a champion of a maudlin “democracy,” in essence a social and cultural desertification. In normal, non-Bushzarro times, Mr. Krauthammer would be arrested as a criminal endangering the peace, as an exponent of mass murder and misery beyond measure. Instead, he is allowed to write columns for newspapers, infecting the intellectual weaklings among us, as Joseph Goebbels seduced the German people before him, resulting in over 56 million dead people."

No comments: