|
Debating the Pro- Israel Lobby's Influence on US Mideast Policy by Evan Augustine Peterson III, J.D., April 09, 2006 Dear Editors and
Friends:
Just in case you'd
like to read, publish, forward, cite, or link to Joe American's
latest essay, "Debating The Pro- Israel Lobby's Influence On
U.S. Policy In The Mideast," CounterCurrents published it
earlier today at this URL:
Additionally, six new articles are
directly relevant to Joe's topic.
However, he didn't
cite them in his endnotes because they were published after he'd
submitted his essay. Hence, any editor who publishes Joe's essay
has his permission to insert the following articles at the top
of his endnotes,
and then re-number the original endnotes underneath them: [1] Agence France
Presse's 4-8-06 CD/AFP article, "US Considers Using Nuclear Weapons
On Iran" [A senior Pentagon adviser told journalist Seymour Hersh
that the Bush administration's war plan against Iran includes
the use of bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapons (i.e., so-called
"mini-nukes"). There is serious dissent against this war plan
from within the American military.
Links to Hersh's 4-17-06 New Yorker article.]: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0408-07.htm [2] Dave Eriqat's 4-8-06 CC essay, "Why The United States Will Attack Iran" [Examines the Bush administration's cynical political motives for ignoring world opinion and commencing another illegal war of aggression against Iran. Chief among their motives is feeding the USA's addiction to non-renewable fossil fuels: "It's the oil, stupid!"]: http://www.countercurrents.org/iran-eriqat080406.htm [3] Jay Bookman's 4-6-06 CD/AJC esssay, "Is Iran War Rhetoric A Bluff? Military Strike On Nuclear Sites A Dangerous Idea" [The Bush administration has been threatening to launch a military strike against Iran's civilian nuclear-program facilities. The Bushites' saber-rattling rhetoric might be a negotiating tactic, but then again, it's eerily similar to the statements they made before the Iraq War. If they really do strike, Tehran's retaliatory blowback will be far bloodier, and the war's escalation even more uncontrollable, than the current chaos in Iraq. Let us hope the neocrazies are just bluffing, and not really crazy.]: http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0406-20.htm [4] Dilip Hiro's 4-6-06 TP essay, "Cooling The Iran Crisis" [The Bush administration has a better alternative to war with Iran. It should start 6-party multilateral negotiations now. A US-led military strike against Iran would be dangerously counterproductive because: Iran is four times larger and three times more populous than Iraq; it has a large military with an air force, non-nuclear missiles, and high-speed torpedoes; it is OPEC's second-largest oil producer; it could easily send oil prices skyrocketing by blocking the Straits of Hormuz; it's a signatory to the NPT, which states that its members have an "inalienable right" to develop nuclear energy for peaceful civilian purposes; Iran does NOT have any nuclear weapons; and there is NO evidence that Iran developing nuclear weapons.]: http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/04/06/cooling_the_iran_crisis.php [5] Amitabh Pal's
4-6-06 CD/Progressive essay, "Israel Controversy Threatens Free
Speech" [A Harvard research paper by two distinguished and level-headed
scholars has drawn chillingly oppressive rhetorical fire from
the pro-Israel lobby which threatens our constitutionally-guaranteed
freedom of speech.
It also distracts
us from the real issues that arise from the pro-Israel lobby's
current project: (a) what causal factors are driving us into an
illegal war of aggression against Iran; and (b) is it really in
the USA's national interests to attack
Iran, or is it only in Israel's national interests?]: http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0406-26.htm
[6] Tom Regan's 4-6-06 CSM article, "More Debate Over Report On Israel's Influence in The US: Supporters Cite Freedom Of Speech, Need to Discuss Topic; Detractors Say It Promotes 'Crass Bigotry'" [This must-read article cogently summarizes the "state of the debate" about the pro-Israel lobby's disproportionately powerful influence on US policy in the Mideast. Helpfully contains links to the most recent articles on this subject. Perhaps the best conclusion is that the USA's Mideast policy should altogether cease to scapegoat people, and thus strive to be neither anti-Semitic nor Islamophobic.]: http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0406/dailyUpdate.html Finally, Joe thinks:
(a) U.S. foreign policy should altogether cease to scapegoat people,
and thus strive to be either antiSemitic nor Islamophobic; and
(b) Americans should be holding a fair-minded national debate
NOW to openly question their government's reasons
for starting yet another illegal war of aggression, this time
against Iran. If you agree, please publish his essay and forward
it to your friends, relatives and colleagues!
With Best Regards
In Progressive Solidarity,
Evan Augustine Peterson III, J.D. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ See also Study: U.S. Mideast policy
motivated by pro-Israel lobby
|
