Just Ignore That Rhinoceros in Your Living Room
The Middle East is at War.
Not just another skirmish.
At WAR.
I note that a week into that war, virtually all “integral” sites are ignoring that fact. Apparently, it is more important whether or not Wilber uses “simply” too often, a word I too love to use by the way, than if a new World War breaks out.
At least not on the blogs I scan daily. And if my “integral list” moles are to be believed, there is virtually no mention of the latest Israel/Gaza/Lebanon conflict on the integral lists either. Not even on Don Beck’s list, even though he apparently has a Middle East Peace Project under way, members of his list tell me he hasn’t said a word.
Only Newt Gingrich dares call it World War 3. And we all know Gingrich is a “neo-con wacko” anyway….
Oh, there is ONE brave Integral exception. Matthew Dallman dares to mention it. And he points out that it isn’t really WW3, it’s WW4.
And then he risks it all by linking to, not just a neo-con analysis, no, far worse than that. He links to a JEWISH neo-con analysis of what is going on. Matthew, I’d recommend you for a Congressional Medal of Honor, except that would further diminish your integral credentials. Bravery in the heat of battle, indeed.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
ARE WE IN WORLD WAR IV?
Over the weekend, watching Sunday politics shows before we painted our bedroom and stairwell, I heard "world war" for the first time, about current world tensions. Then I read NRO, and it was there, too, and with a link to World War IV: How It Started, What It Means, and Why We Have to Win, by Norman Podhoretz (written in 2004). In my view, it is an absolute must-read (though I'm not saying to take it as scripture; this is one view of the last 30 years and others are important as well).WWI Four? What happened to WW Three, you ask? Well, there is a growing sentiment that the Cold War was, in fact, WWIII. Here is one line of reasoning, from Jonah Goldberg:
When you say "World War Three" the average person conjures the image of World War II. But the Cold War is the more relevant episode. The Cold War certainly involved bloodshed (Korea, Vietnam, etc) but it also involved aggressive efforts across a wide variety of fronts including public diplomacy, intelligence, propaganda (the good kind) etc. We understood that we were in a battle of ideas and values as much as a battle of blood and territory. Indeed, the stakes during the Cold War were arguably higher than those of the second World War because nuclear annihilation was in the cards. That, it seems to me, is a better prism through which we should see the current predicament.
Domino theory and public diplomacy had fairly minor roles in World War II. But such considerations are central to our understanding of today's challenges. Of course, the Cold War analogy fails in some important respects as it was mostly a contest between states. But all analogies fail in important respects, that's why they're analogies.
Any way you cut it, this, as well as what is going on in the world right now, is sobering stuff. As Paglia has said, ours is the "Age of Terrorism".
http://www.matthewdallman.com/2006/07/are-we-in-world-war-iv.html
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Sorry for blowing your cover, Matthew, really I am. I just have to give credit where credit is due. Even if the MGM hates you for it….
I’ll wait until tomorrow to offer my analysis of why this is too taboo to mention in Integraland. For now, I’ll just quote part of Matthew’s link, to remind us all just what Hizbullah really is. As you see news reports in the next day about Hizbullah sending another 100 or so unguided missiles into Israel, remember this:
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
In April 1983, Hizbullah—an Islamic terrorist organization nourished by Iran and Syria—sent a suicide bomber to explode his truck in front of the American embassy in Beirut, Lebanon. Sixty-three employees, among them the Middle East CIA director, were killed and another 120 wounded. But Reagan sat still.
Six months later, in October 1983, another Hizbullah suicide bomber blew up an American barracks in the Beirut airport, killing 241 U.S. Marines in their sleep and wounding another 81. This time Reagan signed off on plans for a retaliatory blow, but he then allowed his Secretary of Defense, Caspar Weinberger, to cancel it (because it might damage our relations with the Arab world, of which Weinberger was always tenderly solicitous). Shortly thereafter, the President pulled the Marines out of Lebanon.
Having cut and run in Lebanon in October, Reagan again remained passive in December, when the American embassy in Kuwait was bombed. Nor did he hit back when, hard upon the withdrawal of the American Marines from Beirut, the CIA station chief there, William Buckley, was kidnapped by Hizbullah and then murdered. Buckley was the fourth American to be kidnapped in Beirut, and many more suffered the same fate between 1982 and 1992 (though not all died or were killed in captivity).
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
In 2000, the Israelis left Lebanon unilaterally, and the UN passed a resolution that called for Hizbullah to be disarmed. That was six years ago, yet nothing of the sort has been done. Now Hizbullah controls the Lebanese border with Israel, and has fired over a 1,000 missiles into Israel in the last few days.
One of those missiles hit a train station, killing 8, and maiming 12 more. Not on purpose, of course. Unlike the Israeli precision guided missiles, the Hizbullah missiles can't be aimed, they can only be sent in a certain direction. And hit whatever they hit... And kill, whomever they kill. Missiles they got from Iran, by way of Syria.
Not just another skirmish.
At WAR.
I note that a week into that war, virtually all “integral” sites are ignoring that fact. Apparently, it is more important whether or not Wilber uses “simply” too often, a word I too love to use by the way, than if a new World War breaks out.
At least not on the blogs I scan daily. And if my “integral list” moles are to be believed, there is virtually no mention of the latest Israel/Gaza/Lebanon conflict on the integral lists either. Not even on Don Beck’s list, even though he apparently has a Middle East Peace Project under way, members of his list tell me he hasn’t said a word.
Only Newt Gingrich dares call it World War 3. And we all know Gingrich is a “neo-con wacko” anyway….
Oh, there is ONE brave Integral exception. Matthew Dallman dares to mention it. And he points out that it isn’t really WW3, it’s WW4.
And then he risks it all by linking to, not just a neo-con analysis, no, far worse than that. He links to a JEWISH neo-con analysis of what is going on. Matthew, I’d recommend you for a Congressional Medal of Honor, except that would further diminish your integral credentials. Bravery in the heat of battle, indeed.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
ARE WE IN WORLD WAR IV?
Over the weekend, watching Sunday politics shows before we painted our bedroom and stairwell, I heard "world war" for the first time, about current world tensions. Then I read NRO, and it was there, too, and with a link to World War IV: How It Started, What It Means, and Why We Have to Win, by Norman Podhoretz (written in 2004). In my view, it is an absolute must-read (though I'm not saying to take it as scripture; this is one view of the last 30 years and others are important as well).WWI Four? What happened to WW Three, you ask? Well, there is a growing sentiment that the Cold War was, in fact, WWIII. Here is one line of reasoning, from Jonah Goldberg:
When you say "World War Three" the average person conjures the image of World War II. But the Cold War is the more relevant episode. The Cold War certainly involved bloodshed (Korea, Vietnam, etc) but it also involved aggressive efforts across a wide variety of fronts including public diplomacy, intelligence, propaganda (the good kind) etc. We understood that we were in a battle of ideas and values as much as a battle of blood and territory. Indeed, the stakes during the Cold War were arguably higher than those of the second World War because nuclear annihilation was in the cards. That, it seems to me, is a better prism through which we should see the current predicament.
Domino theory and public diplomacy had fairly minor roles in World War II. But such considerations are central to our understanding of today's challenges. Of course, the Cold War analogy fails in some important respects as it was mostly a contest between states. But all analogies fail in important respects, that's why they're analogies.
Any way you cut it, this, as well as what is going on in the world right now, is sobering stuff. As Paglia has said, ours is the "Age of Terrorism".
http://www.matthewdallman.com/2006/07/are-we-in-world-war-iv.html
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Sorry for blowing your cover, Matthew, really I am. I just have to give credit where credit is due. Even if the MGM hates you for it….
I’ll wait until tomorrow to offer my analysis of why this is too taboo to mention in Integraland. For now, I’ll just quote part of Matthew’s link, to remind us all just what Hizbullah really is. As you see news reports in the next day about Hizbullah sending another 100 or so unguided missiles into Israel, remember this:
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
In April 1983, Hizbullah—an Islamic terrorist organization nourished by Iran and Syria—sent a suicide bomber to explode his truck in front of the American embassy in Beirut, Lebanon. Sixty-three employees, among them the Middle East CIA director, were killed and another 120 wounded. But Reagan sat still.
Six months later, in October 1983, another Hizbullah suicide bomber blew up an American barracks in the Beirut airport, killing 241 U.S. Marines in their sleep and wounding another 81. This time Reagan signed off on plans for a retaliatory blow, but he then allowed his Secretary of Defense, Caspar Weinberger, to cancel it (because it might damage our relations with the Arab world, of which Weinberger was always tenderly solicitous). Shortly thereafter, the President pulled the Marines out of Lebanon.
Having cut and run in Lebanon in October, Reagan again remained passive in December, when the American embassy in Kuwait was bombed. Nor did he hit back when, hard upon the withdrawal of the American Marines from Beirut, the CIA station chief there, William Buckley, was kidnapped by Hizbullah and then murdered. Buckley was the fourth American to be kidnapped in Beirut, and many more suffered the same fate between 1982 and 1992 (though not all died or were killed in captivity).
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
In 2000, the Israelis left Lebanon unilaterally, and the UN passed a resolution that called for Hizbullah to be disarmed. That was six years ago, yet nothing of the sort has been done. Now Hizbullah controls the Lebanese border with Israel, and has fired over a 1,000 missiles into Israel in the last few days.
One of those missiles hit a train station, killing 8, and maiming 12 more. Not on purpose, of course. Unlike the Israeli precision guided missiles, the Hizbullah missiles can't be aimed, they can only be sent in a certain direction. And hit whatever they hit... And kill, whomever they kill. Missiles they got from Iran, by way of Syria.
posted by Colmar at 1:07 AM
<< Home