Why Risk the World?


It has been apparent to all but the purblind - a defect in understanding assiduously cultivated by America's mass media - that the war United States is ready to wage against Iraq has almost nothing to do with its security.

In an age when the people believe that their voices must be heard, the United States must sell its wars the way corporations sell their products. In the past, the people were asked to lay down their lives for visions of glory; now, governments appeal to their self-interest. The first Gulf War had to be fought to protect American jobs. If Saddam Hussain stayed in Kuwait, he would raise the price of oil, and Americans would lose their jobs. 

The argument this time is different. It had to be weightier than any fear of losing jobs. This new war seeks regime-change; it involves greater risks. American forces must invade Iraq, defeat the Iraqi army, occupy Baghdad, and stay around, even indefinitely. Americans understand that "regime-change" is serious business. They would not back this war unless Iraq threatened American lives. That explains why the war against Iraq had to supersede the war against terrorism, and why Saddam replaced Osama as the new icon of America's loathing.

This substitution was quite easily executed. Most Americans take the President at his word when he talks about foreign enemies; this trust comes more easily when a Republican occupies the White House. George Bush told Americans that Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction, and he had to be stopped before he could transfer them to Al-Qaida. (Why hadn't he done this already?) For many Americans, it was an open and shut case. Saddam had to be removed.

The flaws in this argument did not matter. If Saddam hadn't used WMDs during the first Gulf War - when his army was being pummeled - why would he use them now? The CIA warned that a war, or the threat of it, would increase the risk of Iraq using WMDs. Others, like Scott Ritter, a former chief weapons inspector for the UN, pointed out that Iraq did not have any WMDs that mattered. More than 90 percent had been destroyed by inspectors; if any escaped, they would be past their shelf life. At least initially, few Americans gave any credence to these doubts, though that has been slowly changing.

Why then is United States straining to go to war against Iraq?

The most popular theory on the left is that this war is about oil. According to one version of this theory, the White House, a captive of oil interests, wants to corner Iraq's oil for American oil corporations. I do not find this credible. The power brokers in United States would not allow a single industry lobby, even a powerful one, to drag the country into a war which could hurt all of them, and perhaps badly, if the war plans went awry and produced a spike in oil prices.  At the least, it is doubtful if oil interests, on their own, can account for the unobstructed rush to a mad war. 

There is another oil theory. It argues that the American economy needs cheaper oil; this will save tens of billion dollars. Once Saddam has been removed, and Iraq's oil supply restored to levels that existed before the first Gulf War, the oil prices will come down substantially. It is hard to reconcile this theory with a US-imposed sanctions regime that has drastically curtailed Iraq's oil output for the past twelve years. If there were concerns that Saddam might use the oil revenues for a military build-up, that could be addressed by an inspections regime and selective economic sanctions.

There is also a third oil theory, one offered recently.[1] It maintains that this war preempts the Euro threat to the hegemony of the dollar. By pegging oil to the dollar, OPEC has been a key player in the arrangements that have maintained the dollar as the currency of international reserve. In October 2000, Saddam Hussein offered the first challenge to this system by switching Iraq's dollar reserves to Euro. If OPEC follows Iraq's lead it could spell trouble for the dollar. This can only be stopped by dismantling the OPEC, and this demands war against Iraq.

An OPEC challenge to the dollar sounds seems naive at best. This is hardly the kind of revolutionary action we can expect from an OPEC packed with client states like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, and UAE; the oil price hike of 1974 could only occur in the backdrop of the Cold War. A precipitate dethronement of the dollar could produce consequences for United States and the world economy which would make the East Asian financial crisis of 1997 look like a storm in a teacup. Not even the EU would push for such results. On the other hand, there is a small chance that the war itself might validate this theory - if it convinced OPEC that the war aims to dismantle the oil cartel.

If it isn't oil, then, is this civilizational war, a war of the Christian West against Islam? This conjecture flies in the face of some obvious facts. First, this is America's war. It is opposed by two key Western allies, France and Germany; and apart from Britain and Israel, the support of other Western countries lacks depth. More to the point, the overwhelming majority of Westerners outside the United States oppose this war. In United States itself, the anti-war sentiment has grown rapidly, and the most recent polls indicate a majority against the war if it happens without the support of the United Nations.

Is it then America's war against Islamists? Even that is doubtful. Apart from the right-wing Christian extremists, led by the likes of Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, nearly all Christian denominations have come out against the war. Everyone would agree that Al-Qaida constitutes the most serious Islamist threat to United States; they had proved it on September 11, 2001. And yet, we are ready to push this threat aside in order to wage war against one of the most decidedly secular of Arab states, one that spent ten years waging war against 'fundamentalist' Iran? Why not Wahhabi Saudi Arabia which supplied 16 of the 19 hijackers of September 11. Why not Shiite Iran? Their turn too will come, one hears neo-conservative voices, to be followed by Syria, Egypt and Pakistan. 

Why then is United States ready to wage this war against Iraq, ostensibly against its own best interests? Most sensible people agree that this is a war whose consequences cannot be controlled, or even foreseen. It may destabilize friendly regimes, bringing radical Islamists to power in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. It may disrupt oil supplies, causing a price hike at a time when the global economy already weak and vulnerable to shocks. It may force Saddam to use his chemical and biological weapons - if he has them - leading United States to nuke Baghdad or Basra. It may fuel global terrorism for years to come, leading to attacks on American interests globally.

These anomalies quickly melt away if we are willing to entertain a seldom-aired hypothesis. This may not be America's war at all, much less a war of the West against Islam or Islamists. Instead, could this be Israel's war against the Arabs fought through a proxy, the only proxy that can take on the Arabs? This will most likely provoke derisive skepticism. Could the world's only superpower be persuaded to fight Israel's war? Is it even possible? Could the tail wag this great dog?

Consider first Israel's motives. Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria and Pakistan do not threaten the United States; but they are a threat to Israel's hegemonic ambitions over the region. This conflict between Israel and her neighbors was written into the Zionist script. A Jewish state could only be inserted into Palestine by resort to a massive ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. After such inauspicious beginnings, Israel could only sustain itself by keeping its neighbors weak, divided, and disoriented. It has since waged wars against Egypt in 1956; against Egypt, Syria and Jordan in 1967; against Iraq in 1981; against Lebanon, since 1982; and against Palestinians continuously since 1948.

Israel's contradictions have deepened since the mounting of the second Intifada. When the Palestinians rejected the Bantustans offered at Oslo, Israel chose Ariel Sharon, a war criminal, to ratchet its war against Palestinian civilians. Faced with Apaches, F-16s, tanks and artillery, in desperation, the Palestinians turned increasingly to suicide bombings. Sharon's brutal war was not working, and Israel's losses began to catch up with Palestinian casualties. In April 2002, Israeli tanks reoccupied the Palestinian towns, destroyed Palestinian civilian infrastructure, increasingly placing Palestinians under curfews, sieges, destroying their workshops, stores, hospitals, orchards and farms. This was the new strategy of slow ethnic cleansing through starvation.

This slow ethnic cleansing is only a stopgap. The most serious threat which Palestinians pose is demographic: their growing population could soon turn the Jews into a minority inside greater Israel. Since the Palestinians won't live under an Israeli aparthied, the Likud, with growing popular support, is turning to Israel's second option. If the aparthied plan were to fail, Israel would engage in large-scale ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, more massive than the ones implemented in 1948 and 1967. 

But Israel cannot do this alone. This ethnic cleansing can only be implemented in the shadow of a major war against the Arabs, a war to Balkanize the region, a war to bring about regime-change in Iraq, Syria and Iran, a war that only United States can wage. Israel needs United States to wage a proxy war on behalf of Israel.

It should be clear that Israel has the motive; but does it also possess the capability to pull this off? Is it possible for a small power to use a great power - the only superpower, in this case - to wage its own wars. Historically, great powers have often waged wars through lesser proxies; but that does not mean that this relationship can never get inverted.

What makes this eminently possible is the way an indirect democracy - in particular, democracy in United States - works. The demos elect candidates picked by powerful lobbies, ethnic, industry and labor lobbies; once elected, the officials work for the lobbies. By far the most powerful political lobby in this country works for Israel, led by American Israel Public Action Committee (AIPAC). There is scarcely a member of the Congress whose election campaigns have not been funded by AIPAC; several are funded quite heavily.[2] The power of the pro-Israel lobby in United States, however, does not start or end with AIPAC. The result of this massive power is a Congress packed with Israeli yes-men. No member of the Congress has dared to contradict Israeli interests and remained in office. Just last year, two members of Congress, Earl Hilliard and Cynthia McKenny, were defeated by pro-Israeli money because they had stepped out of line.

Consider some of the achievements of the pro-Israeli lobby over the years. First, an estimate of the cost of Israel to US taxpayers. Since 1985, without debate or demurral, the Congress has sheepishly voted an annual foreign aid package of $3 billion to Israel, nearly two thirds of this in outright grants, and constituting one-third of all US foreign assistance. When estimated in 2001 constant dollars, the total foreign aid to Israel since 1967 adds up to $143 billion.[3] That amounts to a transfer of $28,600 for every Jewish citizen of Israel.

The official aid is only a small part of the cost of Israel to the US economy. We need to account for loan guarantees and write-offs, bribes paid to Egypt and Jordan in support of our Israeli policy, subsidies to Israel's military R&D, boost in oil prices (attributed to US support for Israel in the 1967 war), losses due to trade sanctions imposed on Israel's enemies, etc. When Thomas Stauffer, a consulting economist in Washington, added up all these costs, he concluded that since 1973 Israel has cost the United States about $1.6 trillion.[4] In per capita terms, this amounts to $320,000 for every Jewish citizen of Israel.

The US record on vetoes cast in UN Security Council constitutes another major achievement of the pro-Israel lobby. The US has cast 73 vetoes out of the 248 cast by all permanent members of the Security Council. On 38 occasions, these vetoes were cast to shield Israel from any criticism directed against its violation of human rights of Palestinians or the territorial rights of its neighbors. On another 25 occasions, US abstained from such a vote.[5] This does not include the votes cast by United States - along with Israel, Tuvalu and Nauru - against UN General Assembly resolutions criticizing Israeli violations of human rights or Security Council resolutions. It would be difficult to maintain that the strategic interests of United States always demanded such a consistent voting record on Palestine.

I am aware that the notion of an Israeli proxy war against Iraq will be greeted with skepticism by not a few. I hope to have established that Israel possess in abundance both the motive and capability for such a war. There is some evidence that it has demonstrated this capability in the past also. In the words of Lloyd George, then Prime Minister of Britain, the Zionist leaders promised that if the Allies supported the creation of "a national home for the Jews in Palestine, they would do their best to rally Jewish sentiment and support throughout the world to the Allied Cause. They kept their word."[6] It is doubtful if Zionist influence now is weaker than it was in 1917.

This is not to argue that the pro-Israeli lobby is the only reason for the projected US war against Iraq. At present, there are several forces in United States that are pushing for this war. Prominent among these indigenous forces are the oil corporations, the arms manufacturers, the aerospace industry, and the right-wing Christian evangelists. However, it is doubtful if these indigenous groups, on their own, could have pushed United States so decisively towards the present catastrophic confrontation with the Islamic world. Certainly, the intellectual justifications for this hazardous confrontation have come almost entirely from the pro-Israeli lobby. And their intellectual input may have been vital.

Notes:

[1]            http://www.sierratimes.com/03/02/07/arpubwc020703.htm
[2]           
http://www.wrmea.com/html/aipac.htm.
[3]           
http://www.counterpunch.org/rooij1116.html
[4]           
http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/1209/p16s01-wmgn.html
[5]           
http://middleeastinfo.org/print.php?sid=63
[6]           
Lilienthal, Alfred M., What price Israel (Chicago: Henry Regnery, 1953): 20-21.

M. Shahid Alam is Professor of Economics at Northeastern University. His last book, Poverty from the Wealth of Nations, was published by Palgrave in 2000. He may be reached at [email protected].

M. Shahid Alam


Related Suggestions

 
COMMENTS DISCLAIMER & RULES OF ENGAGEMENT
The opinions expressed herein, through this post or comments, contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. These are offered as a means for IslamiCity to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization. The IslamiCity site may occasionally contain copyrighted material the use of which may not always have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. IslamiCity is making such material available in its effort to advance understanding of humanitarian, education, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.


In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, and such (and all) material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.


Older Comments:
ANTI-ZIONIST FROM USA said:
Finally!
It comes from the horse's mouth! Perhaps he made mistake when Bush did mention the reason he wants to attack Iraq is to ensure no more support for Palestinians 'terror' from outside (i,e Iraq) and thus peace will presumably continue and that Palestinians will finally be able to choose a true leader! Put it differently, Bush want to attack Iraq to remove Sadam dan to destroy Iraq war machines so that Israel will be safe.

Yes friends! This is what Bush said in a conference called by a conservative group today!

In one go Bush revealed what others have suspected all this while:
1) He want to attack Iraq to ensure Israel safety
2) He does not recognize Arafat as a true leader
3) He sees Sharon who have butchered innocent people in the Sabra and Shatilla massacre, as a true and peace loving leader.

Congratulation George for being truthful today
2003-02-27

SOLOMON WEISKOP said:
To Mazinger: I was merely drawing attention to actual comments on this thread made by actual Muslims in support of David Duke, Grand Dragon of the KKK. You seem to have a problem with being confronted with truth.

I didn't mention Nazis, but since you raised the subject: There is an overwhelming historical connection between the Palestinians and the Nazis. During the 30's and 40's, the Palestinian leader, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, had close ties with Nazi Germany. He met Hitler personally and spent much of WWII in Berlin as Hitler's personal guest. The Grand Mufti's intention was to encourage the Nazis to extend their "Final Solution" to the Jews of the Middle East. He was an ardent vocal supporter of the "Final Solution" (mass extermination of millions of Jews) and even actively participated in encouraging cooperation of countries under Nazi control to "liquidate" their Jewish populations.
Throughout WWII, the Palestinian leadership maintained close relations with the Nazis, renouncing them only towards the end of the war, when it became evident that Hitler was going to lose.
What I am describing is well-established documented historical fact.
2003-02-26

MAZINGER FROM USA said:
Solomon Weiskop you're quite a piece of work. An allience between Neonazis and Muslims....talk about absolute pathetic desperation. Racist deceitfull charlatans like you show the true disgusting face of Zionism.
BUT speaking Nazi's....there was a healthy relationship between Nazi's and Zionists during world war 2.....Mr. Ishakh Shamir (Irgun terrorist and former Israeli prime minister) volunteering his services to Hitler in exchange for a zionist state in the middle east. All this while European Jewry were sent to camps for extermination. Zionists were not concerned for the plight of jews they would later use to extract Western sympathy and hell of a lot of cash.
As Shamir proclaimed "A cow in Palestine is worth more than all the Jews in Poland." So its painfully evident that not only did Zionists and Nazis worked together....but have a lot in common.
Amazing how much bottom feeders are alike.
2003-02-26

AMIN FROM USA said:
I reckon not, half of American muslims are black, a doubtful alliance (kind of like saddam and Ossama)
One thing some people have in common of course is letting emotion and opinion posed as religious belief by some religious leaders take hold in their minds over logic and analysis, and facts...

There is some truth that Americas support in foreign policy of Israel has something to do with the pending war, but it is too simple a solution, as I've mentioned 90% of Jews voted against Bush. Their opinion hardly holds sway over him.
2003-02-25

SOLOMON WEISKOP said:
Hopefully the revealing comments on this article will open some American eyes. Comments by Mohammad Yakoob, Adam Ibrahim Muhammad, and others express their enthusiasm for the ideas of David Duke (Grand Dragon of the KKK), and compare the author of the present article favorably to David Duke.
Are we witnessing the start of an "alliance" between Islam and the Ku Klux Klan?
2003-02-25

BASSAM HASBINI FROM LEBANON said:
Excellent analysis, answered many of my own questions !
2003-02-25

MOHAMMED YAKOOB FROM PAKISTAN said:
This is a Quote from an Article by David Duke.. to read more ...pls visit www.davidduke.com :

"The fact that the media could so unanimously cover up the real reason for the attack of September 11 is clear proof of the Jewish power over it.

And now this Jewish-controlled media is beating the drums for a massive war. This is the same Jewish media that for years has constantly criticized and ridiculed American patriotism. Right up until September 11, the media daily characterized George Bush as the village idiot who stumbled into the Presidency. Now that Bush may embrace Israel's Holy War against the Palestinians and their allies, he has suddenly become a great leader who will give us a wonderful victory in the glorious war ahead.

The same leftist Jewish bosses and media personnel who have subverted every true American patriotic interest to Israel's agenda over the past 50 years, have now put an American flag everywhere in sight, and solemnly tell us that George Bush's campaign to "rid the world of evil" is not in the least bit too ambitious."
2003-02-25

ADAM IBRAHIM MUHAMMAD FROM NIGERIA said:
I had dismised Mike Adam's advice to visit davidduke.com before, but on second thought I did and what a thrill I got. So America has all along being supporting and helping an evil friend or is it..?

This article and David Duke's have gone so many steps further to butress the point that this whole affair is against Islam and its roots. If not, why is Israel after Egypt, Syria (which is not an Arab enclave). Why is Israel sorry "America" after Iran.. The list goes on and on. Most of these countries have nothing to do with Arabism. Their only crime is that they say all authority is with Allah.

This is JudeoChristian (Apology to some of my Christian brothers who are being drag without their consents) - Islam and not Israel -Arab conflict as must ignorants would have us believe, period.
2003-02-24

AHMED FROM MOROCCO said:
Assalmu alaikum Abdessalam,
yes brother in order for the west to delude the muslims and divide them,they coined the term Islamist so that they can claim they don't despise Islam as a deen and creed,but rather they despise the islamist and extremists.
the term does not exist in the Quran and hadiths in which there is only a mu'amin,and a muslim.this made it easy for them to dupe unfortunatally some of our so called intellectualls like the one who wrote this article as well as the muslim masses.
Dr Elmandjra ,may Allah give him a long life,did a study of the word islamist and he came up with these results :
islamist as was used by Elshafii or Elashari : is anyone who belongs to a school of litterature and thought in islam.
islamist in the British encyclopedia (7,18 century) is the one who study in a muslim country or as known by orientalist.
islamist those jews who became muslims in Morocco
(18,19 century)after being kicked out from Spain (to make a differnce between the born and the revert muslim).
2003-02-24

ABDESLAM ARGOUB FROM BORN IN MOROCCO/CANADA said:
Assalamu-Alykum
I think that the National Security Council is always/has been for many years + the Congress controlled by the Jews who are like double spy.They are americans, but they work for the State of Terror in Palestine. Again, the war is not against the islamists as you mention, but against the Muslims and the ISLAM. I don't understand why the Muslims talk and use the terminology of the white people (islamists, extremists, etc.... They succeeded to divide us by their terminology. Why not said this war is against the Arabs and the Islam. Why not quote from the Qu'ran.I don't know if you are Arab or non-Arab Muslim. Read the Hadeeths and the Qu'ran. Your analysis is meaningless. Controlling the oil or invading the Iraq is a war against the Muslims and the Islam.Speak directly and don't be coward. Don't fear them, unless your job will be in jeopardy.Therefore, keep silent and pray that Allah help our brothers in Iraq. And that is the weakest/lowest degree or level in the Islamic Faith.

Salamu-Alaykum
2003-02-24

MOHAMMED YAKOOB FROM PAKISTAN said:
Intresting to read the comments of one "dtyu" in Iraq and "Joshua Adams" in USA posted on 23 Feb only one minute apart. What beats me is how could two persons living worlds apart post two verbatum identical opinions ? This person whoever he is should come out from behind his mothers skirts and face the reality ! A spade is a spade ..by whatever name you want to be called !!!
2003-02-24

LAL BEGH FROM USA said:
This is a superb article. I see that "dtyu" and "Joshua Adams" are the person posting under different names. What a pathetic LOSER.
If cant handle the facts kid, return to Nickelodeon.
2003-02-23

DTYU FROM IRAQ said:
is the most ignorant statement I have ever had the displeasure of reading. And you are in Economics? Why in the hell do you even try to figure out what the problem is? I am a Financial Advisor, and I have my opinions, but I am not going to make an overwinded article, just to please my own thirst for my own POLITICAL views. If you dont like this Presidents Policy Ideals, then either LEAVE THIS GREAT COUNTRY, or shut the hell up. And you wonder why a Country like the US that has one tenth the natural "money" as does the Middle East, is dominating the world. Look at the root of YOUR problem, dont try and put it on us.

Again, IGNORANCE!!!!!!!!!!
2003-02-23

JOSHUA ADAMS FROM USA said:
THis is the most ignorant statement I have ever had the displeasure of reading. And you are in Economics? Why in the hell do you even try to figure out what the problem is? I am a Financial Advisor, and I have my opinions, but I am not going to make an overwinded article, just to please my own thirst for my own POLITICAL views. If you dont like this Presidents Policy Ideals, then either LEAVE THIS GREAT COUNTRY, or shut the hell up. And you wonder why a Country like the US that has one tenth the natural "money" as does the Middle East, is dominating the world. Look at the root of YOUR problem, dont try and put it on us.

Again, IGNORANCE!!!!!!!!!!
2003-02-23

JR FROM USAA said:
pathetic
2003-02-23

JLOVE FROM USA said:
It is refreshing to read a work from someone who speaks with an honest, objective truth about America's global situation. I have had many debates which tend to end in arguments about this topic. My point is that we must- ALL of us, not just Americans - strive for peaceful resolutions to our disagreements. I strive to find sources of information from all sides of our world's problems, and I found this article very informative. Perhaps a person of your intellect can answer these questions that burn a whole in my soul about the human condition-
1.Why must seperate cultures with seperate religious beliefs feel the need to enforce their beliefs on others?
2.Why must so much blood be shed to feed a world economy?
3.Why must ANY nation's leader be driven to make his nation and the rest of the world believe that he is much closer to God than any one else?
4.Why do people of nations such as Irac worship their Presidents as though they are Gods? ...after all they too are but men....
5. Finally, why do you feel Mankind is on a never ending quest to destroy himself over differences in religious beliefs?
Thank You for your time. I would really enjoy your insights on these questions.

-J-
2003-02-23

MOHAMMED YAKOOB FROM PAKISTAN said:
Robert Fowler I am glad that you feel the same way as most civilised people.. so why risk WAR ? Dont you think innocent people will be killed if USA insists on attacking Iraq dispite World Resistance. I agree that it is time to and stop the killings. But the key question is who will Bell the Cat ! The United Nations is only a Debating Society .. its total failure to resolve matters is evident from its inablity of Implement the Kashmir Resolution since 1947. So let us face facts nothing will be achieved till such time as nations like Turkey - a Muslim Nation - agree to let their Land be used for War against a brotherly Muslim country in return for Money ..
2003-02-23

ROBERT FOWLER FROM UNITED STATES said:
Mohammed, I feel that all killing of innocent people is terrible and terroristic. It is time to bring both sides together and stop the killings. You have the radical Pallestineans and the overeactive Isralie Government killing one another while at the same time average pallestinean and Isralie people work and shop together and call each other friend. What do you think?
2003-02-22

SOLOMON WEISKOP said:
To Muhammad: You are quite right that legitimate criticism of Israeli government policies doesn't equate to antisemitism. What you fail to grasp, however, is that not all criticism qualifies as legitimate criticism. Discredited irrational and intentionally misleading conspiracy theories where Israel is imagined as some "evil hidden force" has been a classic theme of antisemitic propaganda for centuries and constitutes illegitimate "criticism". Examples of such conspiracy theories abound: In this article Israel is accused (without any specific evidence) of single-handedly manipulating the US government. In other conspiracy theories Israel is ludicrously accused of being behind the 9/11 disaster, or exploiting the Columbia shuttle to spy on Muslims etc. Such theories are clearly the products not of objective rational analysis, but rather of myopic self-delusion and hatred.
2003-02-22

MOHAMMED YAKOOB FROM PAKISTAN said:
If Saddam is what Bobby Fowler comments .. what will he call the the Israilis Killing hundreds of innocent Paleistianians .... let us call a spaed a spade. Bush is a mad man driven by his evil intentions .. having no regard for the World Opiniion ......
2003-02-22

ANTI-ZIONISTS FROM USA said:
Anti-semitism? Let's be anti-semitic! Looking at how Zionists torture Palestinians for tens of years, give a damned to Anti-Semitism!! Let's be an anti-semitism!! Zionists and those who support their terrors deserves to get our curse. Let's launch a worldwide campaign of anti-Zionism. In my opinion, Jews does not deserved human sympathy anymore. Stop using the holocaust to gain our sympathy. You donot deserve it! You were tortured by Hitler before! Don't you learn anything from your damned history? You, the zionists are now the very hand that inflict neo-holocausts on Palestinians (both Muslims and Christians). Christians alike should also join forces to teach Zionists lesson of their lives. Why on earth the Christians join Zionists to torture Christians Palestinians? Why on earth Christians join the Zionists (Jews) which claims that Jesus is an illegimate son? Why on earth you support people that curse your own Lord? Really mind boggling!
2003-02-22

ZEENATH FROM INDIA said:
This is the first time that my views about this war have been corraborated and I feel much better that my views have been echoed by such an eminent person. Israel certainly is the driving force behind this war all other theories are academic in nature. The jews do have a history for creating trouble for others for their own conveinience. Recently i read an article about the "innocent americans" i guess we will soon be inundated with articles about the innocent Israelis. All english litraeture fiction and non fiction has a tendency to eulogise the jews and the americans, in the same breath belittling the Muslims and Arabs. The media in the form of Television serials and movies also has created a stereotype of Muslims in general and Arabs in particular of being headstrong,blood thirsty, vengeful and stupid. Jews and Americans are potrayed as being long suffering compassionate and intelligent. It is a real shame that with all the resources at their command the Arab nations have not been able to build a powerful lobby for themslves. The Muslims in US are not exactly of the same calibre as the Jews but at least attempts should be made to gain some ground against the devious motives of Israel.
2003-02-22

MUHAMMAD FROM USA said:
Solomon, legitimate criticism of Israeli government policies does not equate to anti-Semitism. Why do you guys always try to pull the race card whenever you are criticized?

2003-02-22

SOLOMON WEISKOP said:
This article is a transparent propaganda rant without even a pretense of objectivity or scholarship. Worse, it unashamedly stoops to the level of rank antisemitism: "explaining" the problems of the day by pointing at "those evil Jews", as was done by the Nazi publication "der Sturmer" during Hitler's rise to power.

A clear indication of the author's utter contempt for the truth is revealed by the following passage:
"When the Palestinians rejected the Bantustans offered at Oslo, Israel chose Ariel Sharon, a war criminal, to ratchet its war against Palestinian civilians. Faced with Apaches, F-16s, tanks and artillery, in desparation, the Palestinians turned increasingly to suicide bombings."

This cynical passage neatly turns the actual order of events entirely on its head. It implies that suicide bombings were a response to Sharon's election and to IDF incursions when precisely the opposite was the case. There is simply no way that the author can be unaware of the actual order of events (assuming, that is, that he reads newspapers). He expresses his utter contempt for truth and the intelligence of his reader by unashamedly reversing the actual order of events, to create an imaginary history better suited to his agenda.
Such is the complete lack of integrity underlying this article.
2003-02-22

RAGNAR HUNTER FROM USA said:
not all americans take bush at his word. I call him bush and not president because he was not elected by the people. supreme court gave him the election.stillpissed off at 2000 election.things might have been different.2000 election will be looked upon as a black day in american history. ( disalusioned)
2003-02-22

CITIZEN FROM EARTH said:
ATTENTION PEACE-LOVING CITIZENS OF THE WORLD!
Join us in challenging dangerous nations
that produce and conceal weapons of mass destruction. Rooting Out Evil is sending a weapons inspection team to the United States to inspect the chemical, biological, and nuclear
weapons produced and concealed by the Bush regime. And we want you to join us.
Become an Honorary Weapons Inspector
And Support Our Mission Into The USA!

Yes, we really are sending an international team of weapons inspectors into the USA - read
more about our plans here http://www.rootingoutevil.org/

But you don't have to join us in person to be a Rooting Out Evil weapons inspector.

Simply fill in the form below, and be counted as one of the thousands - no, make that millions - of world citizens who say NO to chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons.
2003-02-21

AMIN FROM USA said:
Jewish Lobby?
90% of Jews didn't vote for Bush, but 90% of apocolyptic zionists did...
The Jews are scared to death of the main reason Israel is supported, Christian extremism. They could turn at any second. Why does Israel have nuclear weapons that can reach the US? For Bi national air shows?
2003-02-21

BOBBY FOWLER FROM USA said:
Get real. Saddam is a mass murderer of his own people. He is capable of becoming a modern day Hitler. He is a discredit to Islam and he will stomp on whomever he choses if given the opportunity. While I believe all war is bad, sometimes one must choose between the lesser of two evils. The United States has a God given opportunity and obligation to use it's might to rid the world, once again of someone who will kill his own family to further himself. No this country and it's leaders do not always react in the best manner. We have, as all nations, fallen short at times. And I REALLY do hope we get the Isralie/Paleistianian situation right one day. But in the mean time, we all need to pray to our Heavenly Father for wisdom for our leaders and that HIS will be done.
2003-02-21

ASHRAF ASIF FROM PAKISTAN said:
A true picture of things is given here.the writing reveals deep and impartial study.the author has analysed the situation in a scholarly way,
2003-02-21

ANGELA WILLIAMS said:
Very interesting. By the way, I'm a white British citizen.
2003-02-21

FIROZALI S. MALIK FROM U.S.A. said:
Good article. Article of this nature should reach to as many people as possible specially non-muslims. Arab states of Middle East and North Africa are not yet united. To challange the problem they should be united strongly on one plateform. When they are strong and making progress other muslim countries with join hands but, they have to initiate first and set an example. Dis-unity is where their advantage is being taken. They should have learned their lesson by now.
If some arab countries help foreign countries to wage war on other arab or a muslim country what else can expect from .
Unity on common ground should be attained without ethnic differences.
Media specially T.V. is another big hurdle that constantly portrays muslims as bad people. Muslims should have their own public T.V. channel to educate the public.

May Allah help you in all your undertakings. Amen

2003-02-21

MOHAMMED YAKOOB FROM PAKISTAN said:
Kamal Gullet wants to know how Israel could have done that ! Has he not heard of the Strong Jewish Lobby in the United States and its hold on the US Economy etc... and the Power of Money ?
2003-02-21

JEANNE FROM USA said:
Very insightful and well detailed article. I hadn't thought about the whole notion before only parts of it. It is quite disheartening and sad, it's too bad more people don't have access to the full story on the issue. The news provide small bits of data which seems to have been rehashed several times, and the magazines are so commercialized. I try to read more intellectual material to be more broad minded such as Christian monitor , Atlantic Monthly and various newspapers. I don't know how we can create a more educated public so as to change the way things are. Most people do NOT like Bush believe me.
2003-02-21

AHTESHAM M FROM CANADA said:
Your article is right. The US presidents including the present one were motivated by pro Israeli policy makers. PBS on line showed a TV program in which one such key person was identified to be Paul Wolfowitz. This tiny nation along with its supporters and different allied groups has created this crisis between the US and Muslim nations. We have to do a lot of work to neutralize this situation which is getting worse by the day. God will help us inshallah if we are sincere and honest in our efforts. We must continue to work and strive hard to maintain good relations with the west and educate out ummah to stand together in these difficult times.

Regards,
AM
2003-02-21

M. BROCKMEYER FROM USA said:
Some of your economic arguments are sound, but the war by proxy is far fetched. The NRA has more pull than any pro-Israel lobby.
I also ask that people please not confuse American citizens with what the Bush administration is trying to accomplish. Many people are not supporting war except as a last resort. I can't imagine that there are many people who could approve of Saddam, the man who has the modern day record for slaughtering muslims. Repressive governments which are the norm for the Arabs states have produced a whole generation of angry young men full of hate, trying to blame someone for their problems. The problem is worldwide - in the USA we have skinheads, neo-nazis, etc. As far as I can see Muslims and Jews are equally on their list of who they hate.
Even though the peace protests may give Saddam some hope, I think it is good to see people from all over the world, (including the 2000 Palestinians and Israelis who marched together), protesting war except as a very last resort. Even though the Governments don't "get it" yet I can see that many people are fed up with killing for dollars.
I have spent the last 6 months studying Islam, Judaism, and my own religion, Christianity. From what I have learned so far, we all worship the God of Abraham, and we are all supposed to beleive killing is wrong, mercy and understanding is right. Maybe it is wishful thinking that the world could change, but I know it never will as long as we look for other people to blame for our problems, and hate and fear people we know very little about.
2003-02-21

KAMAL GULLET FROM DJIBOUTI, EAST AFRICA said:
I have a question about this argument that Israel and their American supporters are somehow pushing the US into war with Iraq or Arab states. And that the Jewish lobby dominates the US congress. I have no doubt that Israel has a huge influence over the US government. Yet, I have not seen any one talking about or proving how Israel, provided that its fifty years old only, could have done this? How could Israel achieved their domination over the US government and Media? That is my question. Thanks
2003-02-21

IBRAHIM FROM USA said:
Jazak Allahu Khair!!this article was very interesting
2003-02-20

LERNC FROM ENGLAND said:
this is not against the isreals it against saddam rember that we need 2 rid the world of him.America are write
2003-02-20

YAHYA BERGUM FROM USA said:
Jazak Allahu Khair! I found this article interesting. It also seemed, at least to me, to be well constructed.

While I myself continue to drift further away from the "Israel is wagging my dog" theory, Zionism would seem remain a important component of American policy for the Middle East. However, I'm beginning to think the Zionist protocol approach to American strategic planning sounds just a bit British to go the distance here in America - basically it sounds just too Byzantine to be reliable. Besides, the Zionists have a poor of a track record over the last couple of thousand years, as far as I can tell, in terms of lost lives, squandered advantages and misdirected talents for net gains in real estate controlled - especially since the 19th century (CE) - to remain on the trailing end of the leash for very much longer. To top it all off, the Zionists want to rebuild the Temple on the Mount - and presumably restoring the priest caste, animal sacrifices and the death penalty - basically reenacting the ONLY requirements prescribed in the Talmud that I (personally) consider to be less than profoundly beautiful. What can you say?

As for myself, I'm starting to lean towards the "let's expand American protector ship, for the greater good of the world" theory. I think it does a far better job of encompassing the quintessential American theme. Also, public demonstrations that protest our increased dependence on "colonially-fueled prosperity" sound a lot more plausible (and productive) than tens of thousands of Americans massing in the streets to protest an ageless and perpetual Global Zionist Conspiracy.

It might well, of course, be entirely possible to combine key elements of both theories that, when working in combination, do a better job than either theory by itself of explaining what's really going on. In any case, if either theory even comes close to reality, can "Har Megiddo (US) AFB" be far behind?

Assalamo Alaikum!
2003-02-20

ADAM IBRAHIM MUHAMMAD FROM NIGERIA said:
Thank you Sir, but I beg to disagree.
You see Allah has spoken the truth when He said it is always the "people of knowledge that do not understand.."

How dare you imply such a terrible conclusion. Yes the Israel don't like the Arabs, this is a fact which I don't bother much about. The reason is simply that Allah has asked me not to partake in any Ethnic sentimentalism in anyway wether it be against Arabs or Jews.

So What now? Allah has told me in the Quran in no uncertain terms that an attack on any MUSLIM any where is an attack on all MUSLIMS everywhere. Now Iraq is 99% muslims, never mind the secular Govt. they have in place, any reasonable, right thinking person, even if illiterate will agree that by implicative logic I have to conclude that Muslims are under attack if Iraq is attacked.

I rest my case.
2003-02-20

JAKOFFSKI FROM USA said:
David Duke ?! What are smoking man ? KKK thrash is more like Israeli terrorists in their racist ideology.
2003-02-20

AMIN FROM USA said:
Kelewar if I ever see you use such ridiculous and inaccurate translations of the Quran again I will declare you not Muslim.
How dare you put words in the mouth of Allah.
If you didn't know that the word Christian (messihi) and Jew (Yahhoodi) are not ever mentioned once in the Fatiha except in one hideous translation, from an Evil man than I apologize. I will not mention the name of this translator but anyone who has it will know from reading the Fatiha, for it speaks in the same way kelewar does.
Whoever suggested this awful, inaccurate translation of the Quran should be held suspect. Do not listen to them again for accurate information on religion, especially if they know Arabic and know better about what the fatiha really says "not the path of those who gone astray nor the path of those who have earned your anger"
Kelewar you would best choose another group of Muslims who doesn't suggest to you such hateful translations.
2003-02-20

AMIN FROM USA said:
David Duke!!? You idiot!! Don't listen to one word from David Duke, He hates blacks as much as Jews!!! What is your problem!
Hate for Jews isn't a reason to listen to someone critical analysis is. I swear some of you will listen to anything that says something bad about Jews or america just because it says bad regardless of its validity.
2003-02-20

MIKE ADAM FROM USA said:
Vist www.duke.net www.davidduke.com
Listen to David Duke and you will know more why is this war? http://www.davidduke.com
2003-02-20

RASHAD ABDUL-AZEEM FROM USA said:
Very good read. There is no question that this war is really about Israel and it's stated position to reshape the Middle East for it's benefit and profit. Oil and water. Iraq had a very modern water delivery system before the War. That system could be rebuilt and provide needed water to the Apartheid state. Also, with American muscle in the Mid East Israel will have a strong ally to bully Syria and Iran to toe it's line. Israel is blind. It does not learn from history. Their hearts are hardened and they have adopted Nazi-like tactics to oppress Palestine. One day they will get their bill and it will have to be paid in full. May Allah protect all of us from their fitnah.
2003-02-20

KELELAWAR FROM MALAYSIA said:
The Way of those on whom You have bestowed Your Grace, not (the way) of those who earned Your Anger (such as the Jews), nor of those who went astray (such as the Christians).

Al-Fatihah 1:7
2003-02-20

AHMED FROM MOROCCO said:
D
YOU SHOULD GET A MEDAL FROM SHARON.Oh!SORRY I MEAN FROM BERLUSCONNI.BY THE WAY, I REALLY LIKE THE CALSHIO.HOW DO YOU SPELL THAT IN HEBREW?
2003-02-20

JAWED MOHSEN FROM USA said:
Mr. Alam, it has been a resourceful & awakening
reading of your article "why Risk the World?".
Would you be able to reach a large number of people to read your article through an American
well-known media?
2003-02-19

RAUF FROM CANADA said:
Majority of the people I speak to have the same view - the right view it is indeed! Now Sharon is afraid that ,"Iran will attack his country"!
Is it Iran after Iraq?
Yes your article/message ought to reach the common man (don't expect CNN to do it)!
Thank you.
2003-02-19

KEMAL FROM USA said:
Alhamdu-lillah...

I want to thank the website Islamicity.com for its broad/vast array of articles and its existence.

Reading through the comment section in regards to this article, I came across one response by a hateful man who proclaimed his "Italian" heritage, (most obviously hiding his Jewish background). Even though he voiced his displeasure in 'such eloquent' fashion, he still took time to read the article. This, in itself, tells me that Islamicity.com is reaching more and more people across this world...


With the ability to GATHER so much information (just a click away), I am convinced, that NO ONE can hide the truth!!!

This person, insha-Allah, does not realize it now; however, one day, when the world is at its pinnacle of hatred and war, "these types" of people will recollect on articles, like the one published here, and remember the TRUTH that was knocking on their foreheads long ago.

Allah (swt), along with the world, has always looked down upon the Jews. Their self-indulgence will, once again, cause their demise.

Those who know Islam, and I don't mean from the media, rather, those who "FEEL" Islam, know the truth.

I am a "white" male born in Chicago, Illinois with European heritage, who, not too long ago, was once blinded from the Truth. I 'believed' what my politicians spoke - WITHOUT QUESTION! Now, I am a little older and wiser. I learned to question.

My dear brothers and sisters in Islam... I am not an anti-Semite...in fact, I respect the fact that they (Jewish people) do not allow themselves to be taken for granted. (ie. the Holocaust)...they will "Never Forget".

But what about us... is it so long ago that we forgot the Massacre in ex-Yugoslavia? Why do we "ACCEPT" what is dealt to us by our neighbors? We must never let this type of tragedy ever become us again!!!!!!!!!!

I hope that these comments are not in vain... Iraq, Iran, Palestine, etc. etc. ARE WE NOT ALL UNITED?!?!?!?!

2003-02-19

ABDULLAH FROM CANADA said:
Even among them (jews) are some good ones - Quran

It is not right to put all of them in one basket that they are cruel. Because Allah says that even among them there are some good ones.

2003-02-19

HAFIZ FROM USA said:
durf! all should wage war against usa for creating wars all over the world all the time. A is for america in 'w-a-r" no war without america. i know few r innocents in america but what the hell! it don't mean we can just sleep. may allah make all those lazy lives miserable who do not listen to ALLAH's call! no doubt america is always trying to finish muslims. but MUSLIMS CAN BEAT ALL IF THEY LIVED ACCORDING TO SUNNAH AND PRAYED TO ALLAH!!!!!

2003-02-19

SYED HUSAINY FROM CANADA said:
A thoroughly researched and thought provoking article!
This should be an eye-opener for all people and lends credence to others who fight for peace and justice to all irrespective of caste, creed and religion.
Well done Shahid Alam!
2003-02-19

DAVIDC FROM USA said:
The Author has nicked himself with Occam's razor. A
wide variety of facts and rumors, but not nearly enough
connection to substantiate his conclusion.
2003-02-19

AD;JAAA FROM U S A said:
THE CRUSADERS WERE RIGHT TO FIGHT
MOSLEMS-JIHAD

AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED WE HAVE TO START
PICKING OFF THE MOSLEM COUNTRIES ONE BY
ONE. WHY BECAUSE OF YOUR TERRORISTS AND
ALL THE HATE YOU TEACH IN YOUR SCHOOLS
AND YOUR KORAN WHICH IS EVIL IN ITS SELF!!!!!

"DON'T WALK WITH CHRISTIANS AND JEWS""


ANY RELIGON THAT ENCOURAGES VIOLENCE IN
THE WORLD -ANY KIND SHOULD BE CONDEMNED.
HOW DARE YOU THINK THE LAND OF ISRAEL IS
YOURS-YOU WERE THE SECOND RELIGON AND AN
EVIL ONE.

THE ANGER AND JEALOUSY TOWARDS ISRAEL
AND THE US IS SO HATEFUL AND EVIL-I HOPE WE
ALL START SPITTING AND ATTACKING YOU -
(WHATS THE DIFFERENCE YOU BELIEVE IN
SUICIDE FOR THE CAUSE) IN THE U.S. I WISH THEY
WOULD BAN ALL MOSLEMS IN THIS COUNTRY
BACK TO WHERE YOU CAME FROM. I NEVER
HEARD ONE OF YOU CREEPS CONDEMNING THE 9/
11 ATTACK. YOU SHOW SO MUCH HATRED-WHAT
IS YOU RELIGON-ITS NOT A RELIGON-ITS A CULT
OF EVIL PEOPLE.

I DON'T LOOK AT YOU PEOPLE AS HAVING A
RELIGON-BUT LIKE EVIL CHILDREN THAT LOVES
TO HATE JEWS. BY THE WAY I'M ITALIAN-NOT
JEWISH. ISRAEL IS THE ONLY DEMOCRATIC
COUNTRY THAT DOESN'T STINK IN THE REGION
AND YOU LIVE LIKE BEGGARS. YOU'VE MADE ME
AND A LOT OF PEOPLE VERY PREJUDICE AGAINST
MOSLEMS. BLAME YOURSELVES-IN THE END YOU
WILL ALL COMMIT SUICIDE-WHY DO YOU THINK
GOD PUT YOU HERE-TO COMMIT SUICIDE, KILL
PEOPLE AND SPREAD THE WORD OF HATE? YOU
PEOPLE ARE NUTS-USELESS ON THIS EARTH-GO
TO YOUR OTHER LIFE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
SINCERELY YOURS YOU ALL SPEAK WITH FORK
TONGUE-liars not to be believed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2003-02-19

FEZA BAYDUR FROM USA said:
Well written article. Author talks about the real reason behind the war against Iraq. Thank you.
2003-02-19

YOUSEF FROM USA said:
M. Shahid Alam,

I found your article to be mixed. It provided a clear examinations of what (or what not) Bush is fighting for. Though I agree with you on several of the first points, (OPEC, etc.) I think you made a mistake by putting the blame on Israel. It is my belief that America is fighting this war because Saddam Hussein is a threat maybe not to us, but to his own people. The living conditions in Iraq are deplorable; he has done more damage to the Iraqis than anybody else is capable of. It's amazing how many Iraqi Opposition groups there are, just waiting to get their hands on Hussein. Just like in Afghanistan, most Afghanis hated the Taliban. The Taliban was awful, and we took them out because they did pose some threat, but mostly because of the Afghani plight. It has been my experience that many voices in the Arab world seek to shift the burden of their own problems onto Israel. Your argument against Israel is something I find historically offensive. In 1948 several Arab armies attacked Israel; they launched the offensive. Israel responded and won. And every time that the Arab armies have tried, they have lost. Jews and Israelis are not blood thirsty expansionist killers. What get's me about your article is that people who read it will think: Ah, no Israeli-Arab dialogue is possible; all Israelis are wealthy elitist killers. But the truth is, dialogue is possible. And dialogue is the road to peace. Former TERRORIST and Israeli Prime Minister, Menachim Begin met with Anwar Sadat and achieved peace through purely diplomatic means! Let us hope and pray that all terrorist may someday do as Begin did, and then there may be peace in the Middle East.
2003-02-19

YASIN AL DONIA FROM USA said:
Again, as I posted in response to Mr. Khodr's article, most readers of/on this website are very well educated and aware of these Pro-Israeli die-hard patriots in USA. As I said, GET ARTICLES LIKE THIS OUT IN THE HANDS OF NAIVE "WHITE" AMERICANS, the Americans not tainted by the Fascist Jewish Americans. MARKET, MARKET, MARKET articles like these in MASS American media because that's one of the keys. Do not keep venting amongst ourselves. Hand out flyers. Drop flyers from choppers. Do whatever it takes to awaken the American public. Make them see what "a chosen" few Israelis are doing to their American. Tell them how Jews are creating rifts between India and Pakistan, tell them how the Jews hate that Malayasia is rapidly advancing tecnologically and economically, tell them.......market your articles!
2003-02-19

MUZAMMIL FROM MALAYSIA said:
The Jews were historically the most wicked races on earth (as mentioned in Bible too!!). They've killed God's prophets, disobey Moses, trying to kill Jesus, and later during modern history, had carried out worse mischiefs on earth. Now they once again are holding the whole wide world as hostage to sponsor their most wicked mischief ever done by any human being. Maybe Hitler was right in the past!!
2003-02-19

AMIN FROM USA said:
While it goes on the same line
(I would like to see at least one article from a Muslim leader that supports war just for balance since there are some who do, and their arguments are little more flawed than arguments against war...)
I do like the article because it makes clear the cost Israel poses to the United states, in accurate and concise measures...
2003-02-19

AMIN FROM USA said:
Sometimes people say outlandish things. I have no reason to believe they are leing, so I listen, neither believing nor disbelieving.
I do the same now with the claim Saddam could give Chemical weapons to terrorists. The truth be known no averege person knows the truth nor can know whether this s a lie is something only certain members of the American inteligence community can tell...
They very often are pretty accurate at saying what happens, they know a lot. The issue with trusting the "NSA" is not in the lies, which may or not be lies. It is in what they choose not to dwell on or say, for example Pakistan, old supporter of the Taliban and Al Qaeda has done far more to provide WMD to terrorists than Saddam.
2003-02-19