| |||||||||
Posted December 4, 2001
Republic Day
[Regarding Nebojsa Malic's column of November 29, "Republic Day":]
I would like to preface my remarks by stating that I was against Madeleine Albright's ultimatum and humanitarian bombing of Serbia in 1999.
Yugoslavia may have been viable if the more-developed ethnic groups had a larger share of the population, or if the Serbs were more developed. The reality of a large underdeveloped ethnic group trying to throw its weight around more-developed ethnic minorities gave Yugoslavia more in common in this sense with Zimbabwe or South Africa (Catalonia vis-à-vis Spain still being an open question) than Italy or Britain.
I guess Malic writes for Antiwar.com to counter the persistent anti-Serb bias in the other media, but not because he has any particular philosophic opposition to state aggrandizement with war as a pretext. Suppose the NWO types decide to ignore the Balkans for awhile and the Serbian government steps up a massive campaign of conscription and property expropriation in order to re-conquer Bosnia, Krajina, Kosovo, etc. I suspect Malic would be in favor of this bit of militarism, and recite something about the Field of Blackbirds and places being "historically Serb." Self-defense, perhaps, but what if twenty years have passed in the meantime? Suppose the NWO types inexplicably switched sides upon command from Soros et al. Suppose U.S. warplanes were bombing Tirana? How would Malic interpret such an event?
Nebojsa Malic replies:
If I really were a two-bit partisan militarist hiding behind libertarian rhetoric, I would have been arguing for the benevolent, enlightened and noble United States to see the grievous error of its ways and choose to intervene on behalf of innocent, victimized Serbs, bringing true democracy to the benighted savages of Southeastern Europe. Yet none of my 56 columns so far offers a mere inkling of such a proposition. That fact, I think, speaks for itself. The notion that my libertarianism is simply a device for advocating some hypothetical Serbian expansionism is particularly facetious coming from someone who casually wields racist notions of "development" (or perhaps you meant "evolution"?) to describe entire nations, and offers unsubstantiated allegations based entirely on my ethnic identity. I fail to see where exactly that disagreement with Madeleine Albright might be.
Macedonian Tragedy
In reading Christopher Deliso's previous articles on the situation in Macedonia, I always thought he had a good handle on what was really going on there. And now, after reading his most recent essay, "Selective Democracy Comes to Macedonia" [November 30], I know he truly understands the unfolding tragedy of the Macedonian people. Given the current war on terrorism, the West's continued support for Albanian terrorists in Macedonia and Kosovo begs the question: What does the KLA/NLA have to do before the US and EU finally withdraw support from a criminally-inspired group of terrorists that has murdered, tortured, raped and kidnapped innocent non-Albanians? I'm beginning to suspect that anything short of the NLA's head warlord in Macedonia, Ali Ahmeti, flying a 767 into Big Ben is preferable to the West having to admit it backed the wrong side.
Little Changes
War is fun for these guys when someone else fights it. As one who served in World War II, the most amazing phenomenon I have noticed since that war ended is seeing so many gung ho, bellicose, jingoistic war hawks . . . that . . . somehow never served in any military force themselves. But since our forces do not consist of the "rich and famous," but of the "poor expendable chumps" it proves very little changes except the calendar.
The Left
[Regarding Justin Raimondo's column of November 30, "The Oil Factor"
After a lengthy article articulating the position that the war in Afghanistan may be motivated in elite circles by the particular needs of the oil industry, he writes, "The anti-war Left, then, sees the oil factor in overly simplistic terms. In their anti-corporate, anti-capitalist demonology, all oil companies are evil, by definition, and in collusion with the US government to profit through war."
What more can the Left do, Mr. Raimondo, except agree with you? Must you spite them on why they agree with you -- especially when all you have to offer in that regard is not quotes from actual leftists but claims that they are reflexively, thoughtlessly anti-corporate? Maybe leftists hold such opinions because they read the business press just like you do! Don't fail to give your ideological opponents credit -- you're not the first to recognize divisions of interest among elites, and the conservative movement certainly didn't beat "the Left" to the punch in that regard. (One wishes my hero I.F. Stone were alive to write The Hidden History of the Afghan War.) Where I would expect you to celebrate a commonality of analysis, instead your prose attacks those who agree with you more bitterly than those who may be willing to shed blood for oil. A strange way to build an antiwar movement.
Criticism of Israel
[Regarding Justin Raimondo's column of November 28, "Israel and 9/11":]
I realize the ever-present threat attendant to any criticism of Israel, no matter how principled, is being smeared (often coast-to-coast and instantaneously, through the pundit pipeline) as a goose-stepping, Horst-Wesseling anti-Semite -- so special kudos are warranted for writing (and running) this column. After all, how can anyone provide a purportedly sober overview of 9/11, its precursors and its aftermath, without eventually working up the cojones to say the Unsayable? So, inevitably, columns like this are going to have to appear, and devil take the hindmost. Before September, our national phobia about noticing the bloody obvious as regards Israel was merely a troubling taboo. Now the stakes are far too high to continue tolerating any such self-administered motes in our collective vision. I have an idea what you'll be in for among the synd-column neocons for speaking these things aloud (if they don't continue trying to marginalize you by ignoring you altogether), but I wanted to offer a bit of reader gratitude before the sh*t-storm begins. For the record, sharply rebuking the Israeli government and her apologists is not denying the mass murder of Jews in World War II. Watch that fact get forgotten as your critics begin weighing in.
(Had the 9/11 fallout not . . . derailed my bank account -- I worked in the financial sector -- I'd be attaching a fifty to a print copy of this letter. My regrets.)
The Real Target
I have been opposed to the war for thirty-five years. I do not, for one minute, subscribe to the notion that the war is directed against the "terrorists," or even that it has anything to do with Afghanistan, although the people of Afghanistan are the targets of Bush's murderous bombing campaign. The real target of Bush's phony war is the Constitution of the United States, and, consequently, its people. While there is no evidence that Bush or his henchmen are implicated in the attacks on the World Trade Center and on the Pentagon, it is eminently clear that they have seized on it to gain enormous extra-constitutional power. I'm an old geezer now. I'll probably expire before this thing is done. But I truly pray that freedom will be restored for my grandchildren.
~ Jerry G.