Battle of the Titans: China Haters versus Israel Firsters, as John V. Walsh sees it.

Today the NYT runs a front page article headlined “(Susan) Rice Offers A More Modest Strategy for the Middle East.” It should be headlined “Battle of the Titans: Israel Firsters versus China Haters.”

It tells of a policy review of the U.S. Empire’s bloody strategy in the Middle East. But it goes well beyond that. As Noam Chomsky tells us, the real story is usually buried away deep in a “news” article. Sure enough here the key paragraph is the penultimate, which goes thus:
“More than anything, the policy review was driven by Mr. Obama’s desire to turn his gaze elsewhere, notably Asia. Already, the government shutdown forced the president to cancel a trip to Southeast Asia — a decision that particularly irked Ms. Rice, who was planning to accompany Mr. Obama and plunge into a part of the world with which she did not have much experience.” For “notably Asia” in the first sentence substitute “notably China.”

The new policy is driven by a desire to confront and “contain” China. Right now the key to this U.S. strategy is to get Japan rearmed and poised to challenge China, as outlined here. and here This is very dangerous since it threatens us with World War III. And it is unlikely to succeed. Since Mao’s revolution in 1949, the U.S. and the Western neocolonial powers have tried to bring China back under Western domination. They failed when China was far weaker and there is no reason to believe that they can succeed now.

The second key paragraph also lies on the second web page of the article and quotes a “critic” of the new policy: ““You can have your agenda, but you can’t control what happens,” saidTamara Cofman Wittes, the director of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution. “The argument that we can’t make a decisive difference, so we’re not going to try, is wrongheaded.”” The Saban Center is a hotbed of pro-Israel sentiment, a key part of the Israeli Lobby.

The struggle shaping up is between those who want to continue the depredations of the US in the Middle East, among them the Israel firsters, and those who want to turn toward smashing China. Unwittingly perhaps, Israel and its Lobby may now be China’s best allies.

36 thoughts on “Battle of the Titans: China Haters versus Israel Firsters, as John V. Walsh sees it.”

  1. If the Chinese have any sense, they'll keep the Zionists as far away from their policy-making as possible. Sit back and watch AIPAC and its allies be a distorting and erosive weight on Obama's "Asian" efforts? – Certainly. Make policy decisions in conjunction with the Zionist lunatics? – Only a moron would do that.

  2. Before anyone jumps me for being an anti-semite, I'm not. What I am, (in the words of Secretary of defense Hagel) is an American first.

    Israel is not our 51st State, but we've allowed it to guide our policy making for over 50 years. Like a guy that crawls out of bed each morning with a case of sciatica, our only focus is this major irritation. It would be different after all these decades if Israel had been working to resolve their issues, but they don't. They let us run interference and take the brunt of the Muslim world's anger while they do what they can to rile them up. It is time that this stops!

    Further, China truly is a major issue in our future. We depend greatly on interaction with Asian countries, and we still have forces in South Korea and Japan. China is not only a growing military engine (which BTW has sent their subs undetected under our Asia based fleets to our West Coast), but they have plans to take over what they consider their sphere of influence. While we've been bleeding ourselves for decades (30% of our discretionary spending each year is 'Defense' ) to satisfy Israel, they have been buying influence everywhere from South America to Africa, Russia to the Middle East. If we keep allowing ourselves to be spread thin militarily and financially, we will follow the path that lead to the downfall of Rome and Germany.

    As an American, i say it's time to cut Israel's apron strings and focus on what is right for America.

  3. Personally, I don't think the US knows how to negotiate. First of all, it will take a massive attitude change from our arrogant/we're superior to treating people with respect. Secondly, in no way is China a military threat. To think China is a growing military threat is like thinking a two yr old is a threat to a six footer. US propaganda is working very hard to sell "China is a military threat" and it is succeeding in some quarters. The Chinese have been around for 2000 yrs vs our 200 and have learned a thing or two in that time. A blind man can see we are self destructing. All they have to do is wait. Why play belligerent when "Hi, let's talk" works extremely well against the guy that shows up with a gun in each hand treating you as though you're inferior.

    1. China is no military threat to the US. About 100 years before Columbus set sail China sent ships that were giants compared to the Nina, Pinta and Santa Maria to explore far and wide at least to the east coast of Africa. Unlike the Europeans they did not conquer or enslave but simply traded and eventually went home.
      Even Kissinger in his book On China agrees on this point. China has been invaded for millenia and it has a defensive posture and no religion that turns it in a missionary direction.
      Eugene above is right. China is not a military threat.
      And John Reagan above has drunk deeply of the brew of ignorance and paranoid imperialist thought. America should come home and stay here. We and the whole world will be happier for it.
      And let's get those troops out of South Korea and Japan.

  4. Guess who the Japanese are coming after China? Guess who nuked Japanese civilian centers twice? Im sure the japs want to hug the Americans and give them flowers. This is going to be a "shoot yourself in the foot" moment again, just like when American supplied Stingers ended up being used by the Taliban "resisters of Soviet conquest" against American "freedom supporting and liberty winning" helicopters/aircraft – or wait was there a difference?

    1. The Japanese have mostly gotten over World War II and support for the anti-war Article 9 remains strong. The only real international disputes Japan's involved in are over some islands and its own antics during the war – even Abe's dream of a massively influential military power would be best served by picking a fight with Uncle Sam.

  5. China is only a threat to Tibet, the Muslim regions in the West and to India. China has border disputes with India and is a close ally of Pakistan.

    1. the 1962 border clash is a fukus instigated proxy war against china.
      all the violence in tibet, xinjiang are cia orchestrated terrorism.

      so redwood u've just proven that fukus is a threat to china, not the other way around.
      thanks for clarifying.

  6. A lot of this happens to be about the most critical battle that the US military fights each and every year. That is the interservice battle between the branches about who gets how much budget money. The Terror Wars and the Israel-first-last-and-always policies have helped the Army and to less extent the special forces wings of the other services. The 'click-three-times-and-pivot-to-China' strategy helps the Navy and the Air Force justify their big expensive new ships and planes that are basically useless in fighting the Terror Wars.

    Of course, our current throw-money-at-the-problem conservatives in both parties are likely to compromise and spend your tax money on both at the same time.

  7. I doubt that Japan is much of a threat to anyone – the Japanese have seemed to have decided to quietly fade away, evidenced mainly by their desire to no longer reproduce themselves – their birth rate is abysmal. And China knows that it is destined to be the World's next CEO – why should it muddy its image by getting into a fistfight with America in the company parking lot? I agree with those who suggest that our strategic moves are just more elbowing of each other by the warpigs over how to cut up America's shrinking economic pie.

  8. I personally do not support the war, I see no threat China due to what the U.S. so I do not agree with the policy of the United States, I thank you because you gave me much more additional week useful

  9. I have been waiting for someone to share this post. This has actually made me think and I hope to read more. Thanks a lot for sharing with us.

  10. It should come as no surprise that Johnson is an outspoken advocate for the criminal prosecution of whistleblowers like Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden. He served as general counsel during the height of the WikiLeaks scandal

  11. I have been waiting for someone to share this post. This has actually made me think and I hope to read more. Thanks a lot for sharing with us.

  12. It should come as no surprise that Johnson is an outspoken advocate for the criminal prosecution of whistleblowers like Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden. He served as general counsel during the height of the WikiLeaks scandal. Thanks

  13. I think this is definitely an amazing project here. So much good will be coming from this project. The ideas and the work behind this will pay off so much.

Comments are closed.