Abu Muqawama: Post
Abu Muqawama retains its autonomy and the views and beliefs expressed within the blog do not reflect those of CNAS. Abu Muqawama retains the right to delete comments that include words that incite violence; are predatory, hateful, or intended to intimidate or harass; or degrade people on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, or disability. In summary, don't be a jerk.
On the Lebanese Armed Forces
Okay, I am not the pro's pro on the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) -- that would be, for my money, Aram Nerguizian -- but the rumblings in Congress about the long-standing U.S. train-and-equip mission to Lebanon are starting to gather some momentum and need to be addressed.
The debate on U.S. support for the LAF began when some idiot shot an Israeli officer as the IDF was attempting to trim some trees along the border. All sides, in my view, could have a lot been smarter. (Aside from UNIFIL, which for once, incredibly seemed to do everything right, from trying to get the Israelis to postpone the tree-trimming, to working to successfully de-escalate the violence when it started, to finally backing up Israel in terms of where the border was. Needless to say, it's not always the easiest thing to take Israel's side when all your peacekeeping forces live in southern Lebanon, but UNIFIL did just that.)
Now some members of the U.S. Congress are -- not without reason, considering we can hardly expect them to all be experts on southern Lebanon -- asking why U.S.-trained and equipped Lebanese soldiers are killing U.S.-equipped Israeli soldiers. The state of Israel, as you all know, is heavily subsidized by the U.S. tax-payer, and so too are Lebanon's security forces. So, members of Congress are asking, whiskey tango foxtrot: Why are my tax-payers subsidizing an army that is apparently killing my Israeli friends, whose state they also subsidize?
Dan Drezner has addressed some of the silliness about all of this, but in part because I think that last question is a reasonable one for the non-specialist to ask, I want to address another aspect: why we fund the LAF in the first place.
Incredibly, some congressmen still believe that we are building up the LAF so that it will eventually disarm Hizballah. This is fantasy land stuff. The idea of a (majority Shia) LAF forcibly disarming Hizballah is a) unlikely and b) if it did happen would mean a civil war that would be in no one's interests save, perhaps, Syria's. So give it up, already. Think, instead, another way:
The United States is always contrasted with Iran in Lebanon. The latter, the argument goes, has a coherent 30-year plan for protecting its interests in Lebanon while U.S. policy fluctuates depending on who happens to be in charge in Washington. This is only partly true, though: recognizing that Lebanon is a weak state, the United States has a long-running train-and-equip mission to build up key institutions within Lebanon, starting with the LAF. The idea is that as the security services of the nation grow stronger, the perceived need for violent non-state actors such as Hizballah will grow weaker. Now this is fundamentally a huge bet by successive U.S. administrations, both Democrat and Republican. But it's one that's grounded in a pretty basic understanding of nation-states and their ideal characteristics: Violent non-state actors are thriving because the state is too weak to control a monopoly of violence? Okay, well let's make the state stronger by strengthening institutions.
You can argue the U.S. project in Lebanon has failed, but I think it's too early to tell. In fact, paradoxically, if the LAF is seen by the Lebanese people as aggressively protecting Lebanon from the Zionist Entity, they might start to ask more loudly why it's necessary that Lebanon be home as well to a belligerent Iranian-backed militia that periodically precipitates billions of dollars in damages to the state through its adventurism.
More fundamentally, legislators are going to have to get used to the fact that we are arming two states that don't very much like each other. But as long as we maintain Israel's qualitative military edge, I don't think anyone in Israel will mind a stronger LAF. And a stronger LAF results in both a stronger Lebanese state and in a useful proxy in the fight against transnational terror groups.
So take the long view, Congress: remember what happened when we cut off all aid to the Pakistani military after a spat over that country's nuclear program and how we really wish we had not done that today? The LAF is a long-term investment, it will not reap immediate dividends, and the dividends it does reap might seem confusing -- such as a LAF crowing about its ability to defend Lebanon against Israel -- at first but will ultimately pay off in terms of U.S., Lebanese and Israeli interests.
More great stuff on the LAF:
1. Aram's seminal CSIS report on the LAF (.pdf).
2. Aram and another friend who knows a lot about the subject, David Schenker, talking about the LAF at MEI:
3. More good stuff, courtesy of Intern Steve.
Yo where's our cut? CNA$.
Yo where's our cut?
CNA$. Making war as a permanent govt program.
Insightful. You obviously
Insightful. You obviously know that non-partisan national security think tanks are cash cows. Everyone at CNAS was going to go into investment banking/drug smuggling, but the pay was better writing reports. Now pardon me while I go play in a bathtub of gold coins while sipping Veuve Cliquot and eating caviar.So, 1. "The idea of a
So,
1. "The idea of a (majority Shia) LAF forcibly disarming Hizballah is a) unlikely and b) if it did happen would mean a civil war that would be in no one's interests save, perhaps, Syria's. So give it up, already. "
-but-
2. "Violent non-state actors are thriving because the state is too weak to control a monopoly of violence? Okay, well let's make the state stronger by strengthening institutions."
Doesn't it seem to you that this "bet" is destined for failure if its two founding premises are contradictory?
So, 1. "The idea of a
So,
1. "The idea of a (majority Shia) LAF forcibly disarming Hizballah is a) unlikely and b) if it did happen would mean a civil war that would be in no one's interests save, perhaps, Syria's. So give it up, already. "
- but -
2. "Violent non-state actors are thriving because the state is too weak to control a monopoly of violence? Okay, well let's make the state stronger by strengthening institutions."
Doesn't this "bet" seem destined for failure when the two founding premises are contradictory?
And by your own admission are you not arguing for the training and development of a military which, for reasons that you yourself delineate, will have no outlet for the use of force other than Israel (or I, suppose, the occasional attack on Palestinian refugee camps, as if that's any better)?
However, when this strategy results in the obvious outcome, we are told that these are "confusing" dividends of the strategy. With all due respect they aren't confusing at all -- they are entirely predictable.
Let's fill in what is
Let's fill in what is between the lines here but not unsaid:
You can argue the U.S. project in Lebanon has failed, but I think it's too early to tell. In fact, paradoxically, if the LAF is seen by the Lebanese people as aggressively protecting Lebanon from the Zionist Entity, they might start to ask more loudly why it's necessary that Lebanon be home as well to a belligerent Iranian-backed militia that periodically precipitates billions of dollars in damages to the state through its adventurism.
Ah - Israel's assault on Lebanese infrastructure during the 2006 war - particularly the aerial bombardment of factories, bridges and oil tanks in northern Lebanon - was a war crime. Collective punishment aimed at the Lebanese people for not going after Hezbollah? Green-lighted by Rummy and Rice, wasn't it?
Not only ethically rotten, but stupid as hell, too. What's the response of the populace to aerial bombardment? I'd guess Hezbollah gained a great deal of popular support, despite their instigation - an instigation welcomed by certain Israeli elements, as it gave them a nice excuse for war. Provocation and retaliation, it's a very old game for the Machiavellian-minded. Hezbollah was kind of a sucker, and they apparently did learn their lesson, since the tree event may have been seen by some Israelis (or some Hezbollah members) as another opportunity for provocation and retaliation, but sanity has prevailed. Heartwarming, isn't it?
In any event, the Lebanese Army has done more to disrupt the various little plots of outside provocateurs in Lebanon than anyone else - they've kept the peace, prevented Hezbollah from fighting the Druze and so on, and generally served a key interstitial role, keeping potential combatants from direct conflict. Only a ranking idiot would drop support for them now. They appear to be the only institution in Lebanon that has credibility with all the various groups, right?
Come on - consider the situation in early May 2008
Lebanon's political stalemate turned violent on Wednesday after the government decided to try to move against a military communications network operated by Hezbollah, and sacked the head of security at Beirut airport, who is close to the group.
Who resolved that? The Lebanese Army, right?
Hezbollah seized much of west Beirut on Friday, then pulled back to let the army take control of areas they had captured after the army overturned the government's decisions.
A truly masterful balancing of opposing forces by the use of judicious military and policy interventions. Pissed off everyone who wanted a big war, too - aka, "more birth pangs." That's the best part, isn't it?
Stupid pet tricks by the covert ops department - financing Fatah al-Islam was hardly the end of it.
Simple solution is stop
Simple solution is stop subsidizing both entities and see who remains standing. After the dust settles then we can maybe start thinking about who gets our precious tax-payer dollars.
What you think Muqawama?
"Now some members of the
"Now some members of the U.S. Congress are -- not without reason, considering we can hardly expect them to all be experts on southern Lebanon"
Yes, we should expect some degree of competence. I know it is asking too much, they have a hard enough time remembering the talking points and officially approved party rhetoric, attending prayer luncheons, hobnobbing with special interests, and then they have to make sure their corporate masters get paid, but they could at least check out wikipedia for like five minutes. But knowing stuff ain't Congress' job. They are basically just a clearing house for cash in ongoing public-private partnerships, and choir/comic relief for the Executive Branch.
Seriously, Andrew, you and
Seriously, Andrew, you and Michael Totten should compare notes once in a while. You have a lot of common interests.
Abu M: "The LAF is a
Abu M:
"The LAF is a long-term investment, it will not reap immediate dividends, and the dividends it does reap might seem confusing...at first but will ultimately pay off in terms of U.S., Lebanese and Israeli interests."
I back arming the LAF, but not with the same degree of confidence with which you seem to. To me, the issue is (at a minimum) time horizons and shifting balances of power. It seems easily plausible for this to be a goal which is well-suited for the short term, but which creates blowback in the long(er) term. Don't ask me how or what that blowback would be, but surely some examples could be conjured up.
ADTS
@LHS, "But knowing stuff
@LHS,
"But knowing stuff ain't Congress' job. They are basically just a clearing house for cash in ongoing public-private partnerships, and choir/comic relief for the Executive Branch."
Classic! .
But take heart LHS. The Founders knew that, they expected it. They planned for it.
We've forgotten it, and expect a limited government of ordered Liberties to have unlimited abilities. We want our Liberties and the check from Leviathan too. Again take heart, the Founders thought of this as well.
System is working as designed.
Psst... check out the NYT
Psst... check out the NYT defending and referencing its Wikifraud collaboration:
The trove of military documents recently published in The Times showed, once again, why this is so hard: the weakness of the Afghan Army and the corruption of the Afghan government; the double game being played by Pakistan; the failure of the Bush administration, for seven years, to invest enough troops, money or attention in a war that it allowed to drag on until it has now become the longest in the nation’s history. The WikiLeaks documents, however, end in late 2009 and don’t show us how the war is going now. . .
No one knew that Bush & Cheney & Rummy screwed up in Afghanistan until the Wikileaks "trove" was published? WTF? Likewise, did they read the very recent UN report on civilian casualties? How about the earlier CNAS-'leaked' report on military intelligence (contractor) failures in Afghanistan? I bet they didn't read that either. Here's more from the governing board:
The most alarming parts of the WikiLeaks reports were the ones that described how Pakistan’s military intelligence service was cynically colluding with the Afghan Taliban, which it sees as a proxy force to ensure its influence in Afghanistan and keep India’s at bay.
Unsubstantiated allegations by private contractors who spend half their time blowing their own horns and the other half filling their pockets with taxpayer dollars? Or a general regional dynamic dating back to 1979, at least?
Not a word about being sorry for assisting in outing names of Afghanis mentioned in that low-level dump, either - and then they have the nerve to finish it off with this hypocritical horseshit:
Americans need regular, straight talk from President Obama about what is happening in Afghanistan, for good and ill, and the plan going forward. More ambiguity will only add to the anxiety and confusion.
Should one cry or laugh?
Ex, You ever thought of
Ex,
You ever thought of becoming a cop, or a nurse or a firefighter, do something worthwhile instead of peddling all this none sense. Maybe a volunteer at the Anacostia Boys and Girls club atleast. You're lucky there's still money in this none sense. But in the end, it's none sense. How about knife making?
U.S. State Department
U.S. State Department spokesman Philip Crowley: "Iran compromises Lebanese sovereignty", after it offers to support the LAF when the US witholds support!
Friday Lunch Club says: "NO COMMENT"
Boo Yah!
Actually the LAF was doing it's job for once.
"Actually the LAF was doing
"Actually the LAF was doing it's job for once."
what? attacking Israeli soldiers in Israeli territory and potentially causing a war?
"Actually the LAF was doing
"Actually the LAF was doing it's job for once."
What? attacking Israeli soldiers in Israeli territory and potentially causing a war?
Elf, these are the times
Elf,
these are the times that try men's souls, and stunning mendacities like Robert Byrd, Ted Kennedy, Chris Dodd, and John McCain are elder statesmen. Is it me or does it seem that the majority of congressmen are weasley, shifting little types; big, doughy toads, or Ken dolls? It's like Congress was drawn by an unimaginative cartoonist who had three stock characters that he just elaborated on.
"What? attacking Israeli
"What? attacking Israeli soldiers in Israeli territory"
Look at the photo. And who installed the fence. And how does Israel treat it's other fences, and anyone who comes near them?
And how many times has Israel violated Lebanese airspace, or whatever other line there is?
Israel has been allowed to set it's own rules. Not much longer.
The world is tired.
"...potentially causing a war?"
Which of course Israel would lose as it lost the last one. Just like Vietnam.
"We never lost a battle"
"It doesn't matter"
Remember? Sure you do you're a pro right? Educated and everything. Real smart.
Boo... Yah.
Funny how who the 'idiot' is
Funny how who the 'idiot' is is subject to interpretation. I think the IDF soldier who decided that they didn't need UNIFIL permission/mediation to trim trees on the Lebanese side of a hotly contested border was being the idiot, and an arrogant one at that. It's quite telling that many in the west are so quick to blame the LAF when the IDF was clearly in the wrong by not following the rules that are designed to keep the peace on a border where everyone is trigger-happy.
The town of Adayseh is one area where Lebanon had lodged offical reservations about the location of the Blue Line in relation to the actual border. According to the Lebanese government, the technical fence at Adayseh is several hundred meters north of the actual border. The UN when drawing the Blue Line initially gave large swathes of Lebanese land to Israel and the Lebanese government did not manage to get it all back and lodged offical reservations in response. That was not an impartial action by the UN. The fact that UNIFIL validated the Israeli claims is not brave or impartial as you state - it's just that in the west the Lebanese narrative is rarely listened to.
Fire bad, thank you.
Fire bad,
thank you.
Story from a friend of mine
Story from a friend of mine who recently went through Airborne school partnered with a Lebanese guy in his stick. Apparently he nearly got my buddy killed through inattention several times during jumps, but that's another story. Behind them in the stick was, apparently, a West Point grad of Jewish descent.
Friend: So, tell me about the Lebanese Armed Forces. Who are your main strategic adversaries?
Lebanese guy: Enemies? Israel.
West Pointer: _Wrong f---ing answer._
Senor Snarki, Thank you.
Senor Snarki,
Thank you.
The rules may be designed to
The rules may be designed to keep the peace but they're implemented in such a way that it makes unifil look like some kind of pathetic joke. When you hear about Hezbollah having the power to ban the un forces and even up until recently the local lebanese police and military from certain locations, it becomes apparent how pointless the entire endeavor really is.
I'm sick and tired of
I'm sick and tired of jacking off to free internet porn, do you think I can work for CNAS, I'll write all kinds of policy memos and recommendations, or any sort of opinions you guys want me to come up with, just something to do.
I'm sick and tired of jacking off to all this porn...
ROFL @ FireBad and his DL's,
ROFL @ FireBad and his DL's, trying to pin this one on the IDF by spreading lies.
Beyond getting UNIFIL permission, the IDF commander in that area, actually patrolled the border area with his UNIFIL counterpart THAT VERY MORNING, marking exactly which trees will be cut, getting UNIFIL permission for each and every tree. That info was passed on to the LAF by UNIFIL.
Yes, it's oh so believable the UN gave Israel various swaths of land, and marked the blue line according to ZOG dictations. Drop it already. No one believes you.
@Visitor on August 14, 2010
@Visitor on August 14, 2010 - 3:37am
1) UNIFIL did recommend the IDF to postpone the cutting, but the IDF as usual didn't care.
2) The area is an ENCLAVE. Normally an enclave is a place that shouldn't be there in the first place, but happens to be there for often dubious historical reasons. The DISPUTED areas in this region were basically already a matter of non violent dispute between Syria and Lebanon BEFORE Israel seized them as part of the Golan Heights area 1973. That's why they all of a sudden became "Israeli". And Firebad is right, the Blue Line isn't an international agreed border but only a demarcation line (limited in time) agreed by belligerents and UNs sole responsability. What is rightfull territory is another thing.
3) there are two narratives : the one is that the poor Jews descendents of David found at least a rightfull homeland after WWII and defended it against evil attacking Arabs. The second is that descendants of Jewish converts formed a national-messianic terrorist movement, very much inspired by German nationalism, and profiting of the weakness of the Brits stole a whole territory from the rightfull landowners, the Palestinians, themselves descendents from old Judea but with another religion. Then kept on expanding in name of religion.
The first narrative is of course pure fantasy but so "Biblical" that the West bought it for a while. Besides the evil Muslims were only pandering to the Soviets. So "@Visitor on August 14, 2010 - 3:37am" you can keep to your Exodus Hollywood version, very few people believe you, except in the US of course.
Actually the Friday Lush
Actually the Friday Lush Club makes a point in highlighting this:
"You can argue the U.S. project in Lebanon has failed, but I think it's too early to tell. In fact, paradoxically, if the LAF is seen by the Lebanese people as aggressively protecting Lebanon from the Zionist Entity, they might start to ask more loudly why it's necessary that Lebanon be home as well to a belligerent Iranian-backed militia that periodically precipitates billions of dollars in damages to the state through its adventurism."
But then again: "...some idiot shot an Israeli officer."
"No! Wait!... Maybe it's a good thing!"
Foghorn Leg-
Lebanese guy: Enemies? Israel.
West Pointer: _Wrong f---ing answer._
Actually it's the right f---king answer for Lebanon. The f---ing West Pointer seems to think the world revolves around his own
f---ing interests.
Typical.
Ze_Visitor- "The first
Ze_Visitor-
"The first narrative is of course pure fantasy but so "Biblical" that the West bought it for a while."
You miss something obvious here: the West's engagement and complicity in genocide.
The European right even now talks about defending "Christian" Europe, but somehow no one complains.
Not even Israel. Or especially Israel because without European racism they wouldn't have a claim for needing a Jewish state.
Don't forget the Stern Gang and the contacts with the Nazis.
Elijah Mohammad of the Nation of Islam: "We are the black Fascists"
And there were attempts at working with the KKK as well. And what were the founders of Israel? Jewish Fascists.
On Israeli Saudi contacts. http://angryarab.blogspot.com/2010/08/origins-of-saudi-israeli-alliance....
European crimes, complicity in crime: racism and guilt. The N-rs of Europe become the White Men of the Middle East.
The West now feels less guilty for its crimes against those who were nominally[?] almost[?] its own; and those who are not,
full Semites in their own lands, still don't matter much. So we get Saudi Kings and Dictators on the Western tit and cheap oil.
Bet you didn't learn that at West Point or whatever Texas bible school you went to, Abu M.
And yet you wonder why adults are such cynics.
Oh good news AM, your POTUS
Oh good news AM, your POTUS agrees with you on the mosque at Gz - in the name of "tolerance" we are going to build a big sign that says "you are our bitches" and "Felch on this Amiriki" and the PIMP of the USA will sell us to them.
Can we build a 15 story Mosque at Arlington overlooking the wedge that got hit, too?
Don't forget to apologize.
Elf: Thats a stupid
Elf: Thats a stupid statement. its not a victory sign to AQ, its a fk you sign to them. Its part of the move to shift Hamas/Heb away from AQ, true, but thats part of the calculus of war. You surprise me with your stance on this one, given your association w terps. dont they get respect too from this mosque?
The war is w AQ and friends, not islam.
Elf, If faith was not an
Elf,
If faith was not an issue you'd be OBL's right hand man. The brain circuits are exactly the same pattern. It's fate you two were seperated by birth.
Elf singing for Newyork
Elf singing for Newyork city's glory
http://www.theonion.com/video/country-music-stars-challenge-alqaeda-with...
The patriots speak out (or
The patriots speak out (or should i say sing)
http://www.theonion.com/video/country-music-stars-challenge-alqaeda-with...
Good luck talking reason to
Good luck talking reason to these clowns on the Hill. Go ahead, cut off aid geniuses . That will only solidify the Lebanese anti Israel position. Anything to pander to AIPAC ect.. an agent of a foreign power thank you very much.
@Fnord, "Elf: Thats a stupid
@Fnord,
"Elf: Thats a stupid statement. its not a victory sign to AQ, its a fk you sign to them."
No Fnord, it's an Arch of Triumph, literally rubbing our noses in our own sacred ashes. We apologize for resisting.
You might want to look into the background of the mosques backers - they're Tabliq.
There are Muslims, and there are Takfiri. These are Takfiri with Lawyers. CAIR, IANA etc....they are just pursuing Dawa instead of terrorism.
My terps have NP with who I am. Mind you the Westernized, New Yorkerized almost killed muslim (married at WTC to a Jew no less - yes, only in America!!) thinks this is a good idea. I still love...and don't give shit.
@Visitor 133,
"If faith was not an issue you'd be OBL's right hand man. The brain circuits are exactly the same pattern. It's fate you two were seperated by birth."
Yes. You have me except on faith (agnostic). And if I found an American with power with his level of commitment
I'd be in the cave next to him now.
yep
yep
Elf, I am interested why do
Elf,
I am interested why do you think Cordoba initiative folks are Takfiri? If iam not wrong they have Jewish and Christian members on the board and there is going to be an interfaith chapel in that building.
Visitor 0557: Odds are Dr
Visitor 0557: Odds are Dr Josh is ready to get in that fight, leading from the front in the Tap my Ass for Peace Engagement Brigade.
when some idiot shot an
when some idiot shot an Israeli officer as the IDF was attempting to trim some trees along the border. All sides, in my view, could have a lot been smarter.
AM earns the small bronze medal for Truth by at least bothering to mention the cause of the incident, which most of our esteemed institutions of journalism have worked so hard to fit into their increasingly bulging wastebaskets of "random" or "inexplicable," ie acausal, violence.
There is also - as we see here - the popular gardening-induced violence. And indeed, the word "violence" itself implies acausality. Acausal history: Orwell's crimestop in a nutshell. Nothing to see here, folks, just move along!
Next time, he could step up to the large silver medal by saying something like:
The debate on US support for the LAF began when an LAF sniper, probably armed and trained by US taxpayers, perhaps also a Hezbollah commando, in a preplanned incident murdered an Israeli officer - a person just like myself if older, who had a wife and kids, with whom I could have chatted and had coffee any day of the week . But that's life, isn't it? God forbid my little brown brothers, who can be so foolish and hot-headed sometimes, should trouble themselves to avoid committing unprovoked international murders on my subjects' dime.
Or he could imagine how he'd word it if, in this exact scenario, Hezbollah were replaced by Manhigut Yehudit, the LAF by the Sayeret Matkal, and the LAF by the IDF. Of course, if such a thing happened, his television itself would shatter as every CNN reporter in the universe, male and female, experienced simultaneous volcanic journogasms. But still.
Honestly, I think Israel should shoot back randomly across the border. Don't they believe in the Old Testament? If every time a rocket landed on Sderot, an artillery shell landed five minutes later in Gaza City, there would be peace by 11am the next morning. And a lot of professional Arab-managers would find themselves with nothing at all to do. Just like his clients, the Middle East expert is craftier than he lets on.
Also, I simply have to
Also, I simply have to marvel at the way these accomplished Ringwraiths can mock the stupid hobbits for being so stupid as to think the sky might be blue.
American foreign policy looks stupid. But there's a fine line between clever and stupid. Often, a clever plan is one that looks stupid, but gets great results. Is our plan getting great results? Well, if you're stupid, you probably think it's getting stupid results. But that's because you're stupid. The clever people are patient - they know you often need to wait a while if you want great results. And so on...
One small point of fact.
One small point of fact. The LAF is not majority Shia. The Shia compose around 23% of its staff.
@visitor 932, Besides the
@visitor 932,
Besides the mysterious money for this? Besides the obvious demonstration of conquest? You do know this thing overlooks the Sacred Hole, right?
OK.
Feisal Rauf - the organizer of Cordoba House - comes from Muslim Brotherhood Blood (father) and has been around IANA, CAIR, Hizb ut Tahir, etc his entire life. He has associations - long ones, decades - with people who come to these "Islamic conferences" who always seem to be getting arrested or deported for links to HAMAS, or even AQ.
Rauf's book: "What's right with Islam " translates into Indonesian Bahasa as "The Call from the WTC Rubble".
=============================================
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/the-ground-zero-mosque-developer-muslim-bro...
Feisal first considered building a mosque across from Ground Zero, he had the idea firmly in mind by 2004, when he wrote What’s Right with Islam. The book was translated into many languages. In Indonesia’s Bahasa, its title translates as “The Call from the WTC Rubble.” Rauf promoted the book in December 2007 at a Kuala Lumpur gathering of Hizb ut Tahrir (20) — an organization banned in Germany since 2003, and also outlawed in Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Tunisia, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia, among other places — and ideologically akin to the MB. Both seek to replace the U.S. Constitution with Islamic law (sharia), and eventually impose Islam and sharia law worldwide. Most North American MB organizations avoid widely publicizing that aim. The HT however, at a July 2009 Khalifah conference at a suburban Chicago Hilton, openly promised to replace capitalism with Islam and sharia law (21).
Feisal Rauf supports sharia law, too.
Described in one Asian report as an Egyptian citizen living in the U.S., he has repeatedly stated, and writes in his 2004 book, that the U.S. Constitution is sharia-compliant. The “American Constitution and system of governance uphold the core principles of Islamic law,” Rauf wrote in his book. The “American political structure is Shariah-compliant,” he contends, since Muslim jurists over the centuries have “defined five areas of life” to be protected by Islamic law — life, mind, religion, property, and family. Only two further actions could render the U.S. more Islamic than it is already, Rauf contends:
[Inviting] voices of all religions to join the dialogue in shaping the nation’s practical life, [and allowing] religious communities more leeway to judge among themselves according to their own laws (22).
These assertions, however, merely fulfill the Muslim Brotherhood doctrine of flexibility — adapting to each and every environment in which the brothers eventually hope to force Islamic law upon the masses. Rauf’s claims starkly represent taqiyya, the Islamic practice of deception, to further theocratic and essentially fascist Islamic advances (23). And the additional “leeway” Rauf seeks for intra-community religious-law enforcement is a thinly veiled attempt to impose shariah more widely in the U.S., in direct contravention of the U.S. Constitution.
=================================
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Mischief+Manhattan/3370303/story.html
"The fact we Muslims know the idea behind the Ground Zero mosque is meant to be a deliberate provocation to thumb our noses at the infidel. The proposal has been made in bad faith and in Islamic parlance, such an act is referred to as "Fitna," meaning "mischief-making" that is clearly forbidden in the Koran.
The Koran commands Muslims to, "Be considerate when you debate with the People of the Book" -- i.e., Jews and Christians. Building an exclusive place of worship for Muslims at the place where Muslims killed thousands of New Yorkers is not being considerate or sensitive, it is undoubtedly an act of "fitna"
So what gives Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf of the "Cordoba Initiative" and his cohorts the misplaced idea that they will increase tolerance for Muslims by brazenly displaying their own intolerance in this case?
Do they not understand that building a mosque at Ground Zero is equivalent to permitting a Serbian Orthodox church near the killing fields of Srebrenica where 8,000 Muslim men and boys were slaughtered?
There are many questions that we would like to ask. Questions about where the funding is coming from? If this mosque is being funded by Saudi sources, then it is an even bigger slap in the face of Americans, as nine of the jihadis in the Twin Tower calamity were Saudis.
Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Mischief+Manhattan/3370303/story.html#...
===================================================
The organizer of Cordoba House is like the guy who is from a mob family, always eats in Mob restaurants, all his friends are wise guys, you can't quite explain his money, he's shifty behind lawyers and accountants, he's on the board of directors for Casino's - but AM - Ivy League Defense Lawyer asks why whatever do you mean? He's a fine upstanding member of the community. And a legitimate businessman. He goes to Church too...and he has Jewish Friends!!
And at least one Protestant...ahem....
MM, I would agree about the
MM,
I would agree about the benefits of appearing stupid or weak to one's opponents or critics. But my question about long-term American foreign policy, is who benefits? That said, Congress types might be savy in a sleazy, vicious way, particularly the elder statesmen, but for the most part they are not wise. The chicken and egg question of the day, are they responding to their environment or creating it? I think it a self-replicating process, that is picking up speed.
Don't forget the spy rings
Don't forget the spy rings in Lebanon. Imagine a situation in which multiple spy rings are operating, one running into the other, nobody knowing who is ally and who is enemy? Are there any other examples of that? Here's a strange piece of schizophrenic journalism - as if two editors are yanking the reporter around by different chains:
U.S. Is Still Using Private Spy Ring, Despite Doubts, May 15, 2010, NYT
A senior defense official said that the Pentagon decided just recently not to renew the contract, which expires at the end of May. While the Pentagon declined to discuss the program, it appears that commanders in the field are in no rush to shut it down because some of the information has been highly valuable, particularly in protecting troops against enemy attacks.
Which is it?
With the wars in Iraq and Afg hanistan, the expanded role of contractors on the battlefield — from interrogating prisoners to hunting terrorism suspects — has raised questions about whether the United States has outsourced some of its most secretive and important operations to a private army many fear is largely unaccountable.
And hugely wasteful.
The memo also said that Mr. Furlong had a history of delving into outlandish intelligence schemes, including an episode in 2008, when American officials expelled him from Prague for trying to clandestinely set up computer servers for propaganda operations.
What do these private-public spy rings spend 80% of their time doing: distributing disinformation and propaganda and blowing their own horn for more contracts?
It´s unlikely that the LAF
It´s unlikely that the LAF has a sniper who is skilled enough to identify the israeli battalion commander and his deputy, and then hit them both at a large distance .
But Hezbollah operatives do have that level of skill.
The Hezbollah plan probably was to provoke a massive israeli retaliation in order to deflect attention away from the UN tribunal that is expected to lay the blame on Hezbollah for the assassination of Lebanese politicianRafik al- Hariri.
P.S. Lebanon to complain to
P.S. Lebanon to complain to UN over Israeli spy rings July 21, 2010
The Lebanese Cabinet on Wednesday unanimously approved a proposal to file a complaint with the U.N. Security Council against Israel over the issue of spy rings. The Cabinet met today at the Baabda presidential palace. President Michel Suleiman and Prime Minister Saad Hariri attended the meeting. . .
Lebanon has arrested three suspects over the past month in an expanding probe into an alleged network of Israeli spies employed in the country’s telecom sector. Lebanon has arrested more than 70 people since last year on suspicion of spying for Israel, including members of the country’s security forces.
President Suleiman commenced the session by stressing “the importance of national solidarity and unity to face the dangers threatening Lebanon, especially those coming from Israel.”
It turns out Lockheed manages the private spy contract for the Pentagon in Afghanistan, which is a bit odd - shouldn't CNAS support the restructuring of intel efforts along lines suggested in that report on Fixing Afghan Intel?
That would require a redistribution of resources, something that Lockheed probably opposes, since it means the loss of a contract... but then, on any competitive contracting basis, ALL the private intel contractors in Afghanistan have flubbed it and should be fired.
The reason you fail and the
The reason you fail and the reason you keep on failing, Exum, is that you are trying to proselytize western-style democracy in MENA. Christianity evolved proselytization to increase reps over judaism, where one had to be born a jew for membership. Islam evolved immunity to proselytization as a counter-strat to Christianity.
The Caliphate had freedom of religion (jews and christians were citizens), it just never had freedom of proselytization.
and it never will.
As long as you let the christian right in this country define your efforts as a war on islam, you will keep loosing.
Islam is immune to proselytization in situ.
Here is an interesting take on American reaction to 911.
America's God is Dying.
Eventually we will be forced to take our broken teeth and empty purses and leave.
And the conservative christofascists still wont be able to build churches in Mecca.
LHS, Cui bono? The people
LHS,
Cui bono? The people who run it, of course. US foreign policy is a machine that produces US foreign policy. Is it out of control? Christ, it's been out of control for 80 years at least. Arguably, the problem goes back to John Hay.
Directly, State delivers a paycheck to 20,000 Americans. And this is not just a welfare payment - it is also a distribution of status and importance. It's also just the tip of the iceberg. Indirectly, State feeds millions, because State sets the party line around which (a) the universities, (b) the legitimate press, and (c) the many tentacles of NGOcracy operate.
And that's just counting US persons. In other so-called countries, State is even more important. I feel the supposed governments of most "countries" in the world, North Korea (possibly) excepted, could be more sensibly defined as deep-cover FSNs. This is certainly the label that will be Scotch-taped on their backs when they are hung from hooks. What is Brussels, for instance? A giant wedding cake, baked by State. You'll note that in any story in the legitimate press, the phrase "international community" can be replaced with "State Department" without any change of meaning.
This gigantiferous organ, which governs the world almost entirely without serious critical scrutiny, is a product of the late 20th century. State in 1930 was certainly something quite different. Frankly, the whole organization should have just been taken out and shot after the China White Paper. McCarthy's mistake was his assumption that the curate's egg had to have some non-Communist, or at least non-New Dealer, parts. If he had attempted to simply destroy the whole organization, he might have succeeded, but the strategy of one-by-one Otto Otepka investigations was not in any sense administratively practical.
In reality the purges were a million times more complete and effective in the other direction. By 1960 the Roosevelt-Truman-Eisenhower administration had, if simply through attrition, purged State of all stuck-in-the-mud old-school striped-pants diplomats, especially after the merger with OWI, and replaced with wall-to-wall all-electric Alger Hiss. (Also, here's a question you could ask yourself: did Forrestal jump? Are you sure? Look into the matter - you might be surprised. The handwriting on the Sophocles poem does not match. A lot of important people, here and abroad, were jumping out of windows in the late 1940s...)
You will see more continuity in the British Empire - you'll note that as the Empire (on which the sun never set) evolved into the Commonwealth (on which it never rises), the number of clerks in the Foreign and even Colonial Offices did not in any way contract. Quite the opposite - as the Empire grew more dysfunctional, more bureaucrats were needed to manage its dysfunction. The principle that the number of cooks is inversely related to the quality of the broth seems quite predictive of results across the 20th-century Anglo-American experience. Thus, as a social scientist, I can recommend only one policy for improving the broth: shoot cooks. Shoot which cooks? If in doubt, shoot all.
Metaphorically speaking, of course. I myself grew up as a State dependent. Still, Comrade, I feel this agency has outlasted its purpose. As Dictator, I would (a) liquidate State; (b) release all internal files unconditionally; and (c) require personal statements of responsibility, much as in denazification, before any retirement benefits would be paid. This might not even be sufficient to terminate US foreign policy, but it would at least be a start.
I'd probably also want to seize the assets of the Carnegie Endowment and other great foundations, and exact a heavy, proscriptive capital levy from the fat cats who fund these groups. In short, I'd take a baseball bat to the American oligarchy. My approach could be described as "half Andrew Jackson, half Sarah Palin, half L. Cornelius Sulla." I feel this or a similar program could be very successful in bringing peace to the Middle East. I'm not sure what else could.
Wake up Andrew. its
Wake up Andrew.
its ovah.
Lebanon's Defence Minister, Elias Murr, has said he will reject US military aid if it comes with a condition that any weapons are not used against Israel.
"Those who want to help the army on the condition that it does not protect its territory, people and border... should keep their money," Mr Murr said.
He was responding after the US House of Representatives blocked $100m of aid.
It came a day before last week's clash on the Lebanon-Israel border which left three soldiers and a journalist dead.
Iran and Syria, supporters of the Lebanese Shia Islamist Hezbollah movement, have since reaffirmed their support for the Lebanese army.
all your base are belong to al-Islam.
In short, I'd take a
In short, I'd take a baseball bat to the American oligarchy. My approach could be described as "half Andrew Jackson, half Sarah Palin, half L. Cornelius Sulla."
Moldbug supports Palin.
wallah.
MM, I can't add anything to
MM,
I can't add anything to your comment, other than a firm second. I've always felt that America's greatest weakness, in terms of fighting real or perceived enemies (some of whom wear suits and ties and reside in Europe), is our predictability. A massive purge/reform would give a competitive edge by being so novel. Can you imagine the number of papers that would be published, the public statements, and the flurry of bureaucratic activity throughout the world? It would be gorgeous, Bono or Elton John might even feel the need to weigh in.
Add your comment