>--- Michael Pugliese <michael.098762001 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>Re: Arnaud de Borchgrave
>>Now that is a vicious mofo. Agit-prop for the Contras and attacks
>>ala Robert Moss on the left Institute for Policy Studies. Attacks
>>on the neo-cons FROM THEIR RIGHT, like paleo-con Paul Craig Roberts
>>on Counterpunch or antiwar.com, that Chris got that column from,
>>have a few lefties been reduced to that? Better to 'er objectively
>>align with Rightists than fellow leftists, eh?
>
>I like to align myself with whoever is correct, regardless of where
>they fall on the political spectrum. I have no idea whether de
>Borchgrave is correct in this piece or not, but his being a rightest
>or whatever is irrelevant.
>
>What would you do if de Borchgrave came over to your house and said
>"Hey, your house is on fire! Better get out or your gonna die!" "No,
>I must stay here, I do not want to objectively align with the
>Rightists."
>
>Nu, zayats, pogodi!
Besides, posting an article to a mailing list doesn't imply any endorsement of its writer's action or opinion, past or present -- let alone "objective alignment." Suggesting that it always does is the sort of rhetorical trick that Michael Pugliese often uses and that drive most leftists nuts.
That said, the Arnaud de Borchgrave article is not uninteresting. I'm not sure if he is right about Washington's Iran policy, though.
Arnaud de Borchgrave claims that Washington "has gradually painted itself into a corner in its diplomatic campaign to get Iran to cough up its nuclear ambitions" ("TKO by Axis of Evil," World Peace Herald 20 May 2005). Is it rue?
If Washington is smart, it can pursue a two-track campaign with regard to Iran (indeed, it may be doing so already): (A) public pressures against Iran on nuclear weapons, including threats to use military force (such as bombings and special forces) and support for pro-Washington Iranians (there must be some) in Iran (ostensibly universal "democracy support," semi-open funding for political forces to its liking, and covert actions to win over key elements of the Iranian military and police); and (B) behind-the-scene negotiations with Teheran to get it to use its influence on Ayatollah Ali Sistani and other Shiite leaders for Washington's benefits. The idea is to use public pressures to motivate Teheran to help Washington in Iraq.
Cf. <http://montages.blogspot.com/2005/05/washington-painted-itself-into-corner.html> -- Yoshie
* Critical Montages: <http://montages.blogspot.com/> * Monthly Review: <http://monthlyreview.org/> * Greens for Nader: <http://greensfornader.net/> * Bring Them Home Now! <http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/> * Calendars of Events in Columbus: <http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/calendar.html>, <http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php>, & <http://www.cpanews.org/> * Student International Forum: <http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/> * Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osudivest.org/> * Al-Awda-Ohio: <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio> * Solidarity: <http://www.solidarity-us.org/>