It was the last place in the world I expected to see Barbie's smiling face emblazoned on the front of a children's notebook.
It was a hot day in June, and as we traveled along a bumpy, dusty road in the south of Gaza, I thought how eerily quiet it was compared to the last time I had been here, when we were taunted by the whizzing sounds of small military drones following our every move.
Suddenly, our van arrived at a farmhouse where we were welcomed by a father and beekeeper wearing a flowing white robe. His name was Mohammed Shurrab. On his desk lay a stack of children's notebooks, each with an image of a Barbie doll on the cover.
Just months before, during Israel's attack on Gaza, Mohammed and his two sons waited for a lull in the fighting so they could flee to join the rest of their family. They weren't far from the farmhouse when they came under a hail of bullets from Israeli soldiers. All of them were shot.
Mohammed's 28-year-old son Kassab, an engineer, was killed immediately. Mohammed called various radio stations to ask for help from an ambulance while he held his other son, Ibrahim, while he shivered. It was nearly 24 hours before the Israeli military allowed an ambulance to come through. By then, Ibrahim, 18, had already bled to death in Mohammed's arms.
Mohammed Shurrab, who spoke like a poet and had Shakespeare and James Joyce on his bookshelf, explained how he came out to the farmhouse each day to be alone, to write in longhand in the notebooks about his sons-- how much he missed them, how much he loved them, and, I'd imagine, how angry he was about how they died.
He channeled that unspeakable sorrow into the only notebooks he could find while living under an extended blockade meant to punish 1.5 million Gazans for the election of Hamas. And he told his story to people like me who might then convey it to you in hopes that it would not happen again.
The bombing of Gaza started one year ago today. And every time I tuck my own son into bed, I think of Mohammed Shurrab, and the other parents like him who I met in Gaza, in Silwan in East Jerusalem, in South Hebron in the West Bank.
I think about the Israeli soldiers sent to Gaza and Hebron, some taught to hate, most simply armed and scared, the responsibility for enforcing occupation on their young shoulders; and the people in the south of Israel fleeing to shelters every time they hear the air raid sirens warning of Qassam rockets.
I think about the Gazan mothers who had nowhere else to go, who clutched their children in apartment hallways each night as bombs fell overhead-- and I remember the deliberate destruction of Gaza's factories, schools, hospitals and administrative buildings that I saw with my own eyes.In the next few days, in an effort to call the world's attention to the continuing disaster in Gaza, over thirteen hundred people from 42 countries, including many JVP supporters, will arrive in Egypt and Israel to participate in the Gaza Freedom March on December 31. The Egyptian government is threatening to pull the plug on the march. We've mobilized supporters to pressure them to let marchers through. But no matter what happens at the border -- like you, like everyone in the march, we at Jewish Voice for Peace won't forget, we won't deny, and we won't desert.
These are the reasons why my work with Jewish Voice for Peace is the most important work I have ever done in my life, why JVP's work is so unique, so powerful--and why your generous financial support today is so crucial. Right now is the best time to help - because a small group of dedicated JVP donors will double every dollar you give before midnight on December 31st-up to $36,000.
In just over a decade, JVP has gone from a small, all-volunteer group that met in members' living rooms to an organization with nearly 100,000 online activists; chapters in existence or starting in cities across the country; and an impressive board and advisory board of activists, thinkers and writers.
From the Shministim to the Toronto International Film Festival to the campaigns to free Mohammed Othman and Ezra Nawi, to supporting the Goldstone report, we've led or have been substantially involved in many of this year's major efforts to fight Israel's occupation; to counteract the silencing of dissent; and to resist the growing crackdown on the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement.
Jewish Voice for Peace is the only major American Jewish organization whose core principle is full equality between Palestinians and Israelis.And the need for a strong, Jewish organization that follows its principles and supports nonviolent activism here and in Israel/Palestine is more important than ever.
This is a critical moment: while the right-wing backlash against JVP and those we work with is more vicious than ever before, we know it's because we've never before seen such an opening for change. We must grow our organization and our reach now. And we cannot do it without you.
Please join us today and make a gift if you're able-every dollar counts. And your tax-deductible gift today will help us meet our $36,000 match.
We will not let you down. We will not let Israel and Palestine down-and we will not let the many Mohammed Shurrabs down.
In gratitude and solidarity,
Jewish Voice for Peace
zaterdag 26 december 2009
Truth / Правда / אמת / حقيقة
English website http://zope.gush-shalom.org/index_en.html
Статьи Ури Авнери http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/ru/avnery
http://zope.gush-shalom.org/index_he.html אתר בעברית
http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/ar/avnery اوري افنيري
Ad in Ha'aretz, Dec. 25, 2009
A year after
Hamas in Gaza
Stronger than before
Not yet home
Our standing in the world
The appalling Gaza blockade
No IDF incursions
And talk about
Cast Lead 2
Cheques to help us continue the ads - and the campaigns - to: Gush Shalom, P.O.Box 3322, Tel-Aviv 61033
weekly ads archive http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/weekly_ad
Israeli participation in the international Gaza campaign
# March from two sides of the Gaza Border, rally on the Israeli side - Thursday, Dec. 31 at 10.30 (initiated by the Monitoring Committee of the Arab population in Israel)
# Tel-Aviv Protest March, Saturday Jan. 2, 2010, starting at 6.30pm from the Rabin Square, corner Ben-Tzion/Frishman (Gush Shalom is among the organizing coalition of peace groups)
# A protest march was held today, Dec 26, called by the Jaffa Popular Committee
# Activists to receive transportation updates soon
Cast Lead 2
DID WE win? Tomorrow marks the first anniversary of the Gaza War, alias Operation Cast Lead, and this question ... Full English text in the end
Avnery columns' archive
This week on Adam's blog
…As we already talk to Hamas
Stop deportation of American Ryan Olander
for participating in a protest in Jerusalem, in solidarity with the evicted Sheikh Jarrah residents
Your action requested
Ronen Medzini wrote a report for Ynet on the Dec. 25 protest
See and hear it for yourself
מודעה ב"הארץ"26 בדצבםבר
שלטון החמאס בעזה
עדיין לא שוחרר.
הקסאמים הופסקו –
יחד עם התקפות צה"ל.
כבר מדברים על
"עופרת יצוקה 2".
עזרו לנו במימון הפעולות והמודעות. צ'קים לפקודת גוש שלום, ת"ד 3322, תל-אביב 61033
ארכיון מודעות: http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/he/channels/weekly_ad
אירועי שנה למתקפה על עזה
# מצעד משני צידי גבול עזה, עצרת מהצד הישראלי במחסום ארז – יום חמישי 31.12.09 בשעה 10.30 בבוקר (ביוזמת ועדת המעקב של האוכלוסייה הערבית בישראל)
# צעדת מחאה בתל אביב תתקיים במוצאי שבת 2 בינואר, 2010, מתחילה ב-6.30 בערב, בכיכר רבין (פינת בן ציון/פרישמן). גוש שלום הוא בין הקבוצות המארגנות בקואליציה נגד המצור
# צעדת מחאה התקיימה היום (26.12) ביוזמת הועדה העממית של יפו
# פרטים על תחבורה ישלחו בקרוב לפעילים
עופרת יצוקה 2
האם ניצחנו? מחר יחול יום-השנה הראשון למלחמת-עזה, הידועה בציבור כ"מבצע עופרת יצוקה", והשאלה הזאת מנסרת... טכסט מלא http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/he/channels/avnery/1261848304
ארכיון מאמרים http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/he/channels/avnery
השבוע בבלוג של אדם
אם כבר מדברים עם חמאס...
שייח ג`ראח, 25.12.09, דיווח וידאו
הפגנה בשייח ג'ראח: "די להתנחלויות במז' י-ם"
מאות מפגינים מחו על ההתיישבות היהודית בשכונה שבמזרח הבירה ועל מעצר עשרות מחבריהם בהפגנות הקודמות. "יש פה רצון להפוך את כל המקום לשכונת מתנחלים", אמרה ל-ynet תושבת השכונה שפונתה מביתה. לפחות ארבעה נעצרו
Cast Lead 2
DID WE win? Tomorrow marks the first anniversary of the Gaza War, alias Operation Cast Lead, and this question fills the public space.
Within the Israeli consensus, the answer has already been given: Certainly we won, the Qassams have stopped coming.
A simple, not to say primitive, answer. But that is how it looks to the superficial observer. There were the Qassams, we made war, no more Qassams. Sderot is thriving, the inhabitants of Beersheba go to the theater. Everything else is for philosophy professors.
But anyone who wishes to understand the results of this war has to pose some hard questions.
Was the real aim of the war to stop the Qassams? Could this have been achieved by other means? If there were other aims, what were they? Is the final balance sheet positive or negative, as far as the interests of Israel are concerned?
I PITY the historians. They have to scrutinize documents, peruse protocols, disentangle tortuous texts.
Documents are misleading. If Talleyrand (or whoever it was) was right in saying that words were invented in order to hide thoughts, this is even more true for documents. Documents falsify facts, hide facts, invent facts – all according to the interests of the writer. They disclose a little to hide the rest. Anyone who has been involved in public affairs knows this.
Therefore, let’s ignore the protocols. What were the real aims of those who started the war? I believe that they were as follows, in order of decreasing priority:
To overthrow the regime in Gaza, by turning the life of the inhabitants into such hell that they would rise up against Hamas.
To return to the Government and the army their self respect, which had been severely damaged in Lebanon War II.
To restore the deterrent power of the Israeli army.
To stop the Qassams.
To free the captive soldier, Gilad Shalit.
Let’s examine the results, one by one.
THIS WEEK, hundreds of thousands gathered in the Gaza Strip for a demonstration in support of Hamas. Judging from the photos, there were between 200 and 400 thousand. Considering that there are about 1.5 million inhabitants in the Strip, most of them children, that was quite an impressive turnout - especially in view of the misery caused by the Israeli blockade that has continued throughout the year and the ruined homes that could not be rebuilt. Those who believed that the pressure on the population would cause an uprising against the Hamas government have been proved wrong.
History buffs were not surprised. When attacked by a foreign foe, every people unites behind its leaders, whoever they are. Pity that our politicians and generals don’t read books.
Our commentators portray the inhabitants of Gaza as "looking with longing at the flourishing shops of Ramallah". These commentators also derive hope from public opinion polls that purport to show that the popularity of Hamas in the West Bank is declining. If so, why is Fatah afraid of conducting elections, even after all Hamas activists there have been thrown into prison?
It seems that most of the people in the Gaza Strip are more or less satisfied with the functioning of the Hamas government. In spite of the misery of their lives, they may also be proud of its steadfastness There is order in the streets, crime and drugs are decreasing. Hamas is trying cautiously to promote a religious agenda in daily life, and it seems that the public does not mind.
The main aim of the operation has failed completely.
THE SECOND aim, on the other hand, has been achieved. The Olmert government, which lost public confidence in Lebanon War II, won it back in the Gaza War. That did not help Olmert himself – he had to resign because of the cloud of corruption affairs hovering over his head.
The army has restored its self-confidence. It has proved that the military deficiencies, that came to light at every step in the Lebanon War, were superficial. The public believes that in Gaza the army functioned well. The fact that a total of six Israeli soldiers were killed by enemy fire, while over a thousand people died on the other side, has reinforced this belief. Only few people are bothered by moral scruples.
THE QUESTION whether the third aim – deterrence - has been achieved is closely connected with another question: Who won the war militarily?
In a war between a regular army and a guerrilla force, it is hard to decide what "victory" means. In a classic battle between armies, victory belongs to the side which remains in control of the battlefield once the fighting ends. Obviously that does not apply in an asymmetrical contest. The Israeli army did not want to stay in the Gaza Strip – on the contrary, it was very keen to avoid such a possibility.
Some argue that Hamas won the war: if a band of ill-armed guerrillas holds out for three whole weeks against one of the strongest armies in the world, that constitutes a victory. There is a lot of truth in that.
On the other hand, the deterrent force of the army has certainly been restored. All Palestinian factions and all Arab forces in general, now know that the Israeli army is prepared to kill and destroy without any restraint in any military confrontation. From now on, the Hamas leaders – as well as the Hizbullah chiefs – will think twice before provoking it.
THE QASSAMS have stopped almost completely. Hamas has even imposed its authority on the small, extreme factions, which wanted to continue.
No doubt the newly restored deterrent force of the army has had a bearing on that. But it is also true that the army is taking great care not to cause regular incidents, as was their wont before Cast Lead. At least for now, the deterrence in the Gaza theatre is mutual.
It can be asked whether a means could have been found to stop the Qassams short of war. If the Israeli government had recognized the Hamas authorities in the Gaza Strip – at least de facto – and maintained businesslike relations with them, and if it had not imposed the blockade – could the missiles have been stopped? I do believe so.
THE RELEASE of Shalit – a secondary but important aim in itself – has not been achieved. If Shalit is freed, it will happen only as part of a prisoner exchange, and that will look like a huge victory for Hamas.
TAKING INTO consideration all these results, one can draw the conclusion that the war has ended in a kind of draw.
Except for Goldstone.
This war has dealt a fatal blow to Israel’s standing in the world.
Is that important? David Ben-Gurion famously said that "it is not important what the Goyim say but what the Jews do." Thomas Jefferson, on the other hand, said that no nation can afford to behave without "a decent respect for the opinions of mankind". Jefferson was right. "What the Goyim say" has an immense impact on all the spheres of our life - from the political arena to security matters. The standing of our state in the world is a vital factor in our national security.
The Gaza War – from the decision to throw the army into a densely populated area to the use of white phosphorus and flechette munitions – has raised a dark cloud over Israel. The Goldstone report, coming as it did after the gruesome pictures broadcast throughout the war by all the world’s TV networks, has produced a terrible impression. Hundreds of millions of people saw and heard, and their attitude towards Israel has changed for the worse. This will have far-reaching impact on the decisions of governments, the attitude of the media and in thousands of big and small decisions concerning Israel.
Almost all our spokesmen and journalists, from the President down to the last TV talk-show host, keep parroting that the Goldstone report is "one-sided", "vile" and "lying". But people around the world know that it is as honest a report as could be expected after our government’s decision to boycott the investigation. The damage increases from day to day. Some of it is irreversible.
It is impossible to measure the results of the war without laying this fact on the scales. The upshot is that the damage done to us by the war outweighs any benefits.
Some people in our leadership silently accept this conclusion. But there is no lack of voices – both in the leadership and in the street - which talk openly about a "Cast Lead 2" as being just a matter of time.
A saying attributed to Bismarck goes: Fools learn from their own experience, clever people learn from the experience of others. Where does that leave us?
data & Daily updated occupation related reading
If instead of daily looking at websites you prefer to receive a weekly selection by email
subscribe to The Other Israel
by writing in the subject line
"Send me TOI" to: firstname.lastname@example.org
Most recent issue at http://toibillboard.info
Gush Shalom email address for correspondence, also if you want to (un)subscribe
correspondence @ gush - shalom . org
(without the spaces!)
Address for contributions:
GUSH SHALOM p.o.b. 3322 Tel Aviv 61033
Friday 25 December 2009
by: Jason Leopold, t r u t h o u t | Report
A controversial policy implemented last month by the Army general commanding soldiers in Northern Iraq that criminalized pregnancy was rescinded following an outcry from women’s groups and fierce criticism by four Democratic lawmakers.
According to a report published on ABC News’ website Friday, "Gen. Raymond Odierno [the top US commander in Iraq] has drafted a broad new policy for the US forces in Iraq that will take effect Jan. 1, but which does not include a provision issued last month by Maj. Gen. Anthony Cucolo that disciplined both soldiers who became pregnant and their military sex partners."
A spokesman for US Forces-Iraq told CNN that permission must now be obtained from Odierno before any policy restricting troop activity is instituted.
As Truthout reported earlier this week, the pregnancy policy, in effect since November 4, said "becoming pregnant, or impregnating a soldier, while assigned to the Task Force Marne (Area of Operations), resulting in the redeployment of the pregnant soldier" could result in a court-martial and jail time.
The rule applied to "all United States military personnel, and to all civilians, serving with, employed by, or accompanying" the Army in northern Iraq. Current military policy requires that a pregnant soldier be taken out of Iraq within 14 days. Married couples serving together are allowed to live together, but if the wife becomes pregnant that too is a prosecutable offense under the Army policy.
The policy was part of General Order No. 1, which also prohibited US troops from drinking alcohol, possessing pornographic material and engaging in sexual relations with Iraqis and third party nationals who were not afilliated with coalition forces.
Since the policy has been in place, Cucolo, who has 22,00 people, including 1,682 women, under his command, told ABC News, that four female soldiers had to be redeployed because they became pregnant.
According to ABC News:
The four women and two male soldiers received letters of reprimand that will not remain in their permanent military files.
A third male soldier, he said, was also punished for getting a female soldier pregnant. He was a noncommissioned officer who was committing adultery. He was also charged with fraternization and given a permanent letter of reprimand. In that case, the man was a sergeant and the female a junior soldier.
One of the pregnant women declined to identify the person who got her pregnant, Cucolo said.
Yochanan Visser is a Dutch-language analyst for the Israel Facts Group (www.israelfacts.eu), a European media watchdog organization, as well as manager of Israel Facts Monitorgroup and www. israelfacts. eu. He lives in Efrat, Israel.
U schrijft op zowel uw eigen weblog als op de website van Christenen voor Israel het volgende:
Vredesbesprekingen bij Bethlehem
|Geschreven door Yochanan Visser|
donderdag 24 december 2009
Terwijl in Nederland sommige media blijven volharden in een campagne om van het Midden-Oosten conflict een klassieke Western te maken. En een uitgerangeerde ex-VPRO journalist op zijn blog een journalistieke vorm van terrorisme tegen Israëli’s en Joden heeft geïntroduceerd, vinden in Israël menselijke en hoopgevende dingen plaats.
Mooi zo. Hieruit maak ik op dat uw mijn stukjes over de feiten met betrekking tot Israel en Palestina wel degelijk leest. Jammer is alleen dat u niet gebruik durft te maken van het volgende voorstel dat ik al een maand geleden aan u heb voorgelegd:
U en ik geven de komende tijd de feiten over Israel zoals die bij ons bekend zijn en die wij van doorslaggevend belang vinden voor een beter begrip van de 'Joodse staat'. Ik publiceer de mij bekende feiten op uw website: Israel Facts: http://www.israelfacts.eu/ en u publiceert de u bekende feiten op mijn weblog: http://stanvanhoucke.blogspot.com/ Het spreekt voor zich dat wij elkaar's feiten niet mogen censureren maar wel kunnen bekritiseren. Het doel ervan is simpel: de lezer krijgt zo de mogelijkheid om aan de hand van de feiten zich een volwaardiger beeld te vormen van Israel.'
U heeft ook geen gehoor gegeven aan mijn aangepaste voorstel:
U heeft tot nu toe geen enkele keer gereageerd, terwijl u nu zo'n maand bedenktijd heeft gehad. Ik ga er daarom vanuit dat u niets ziet in deze uitwisseling op elkaars websites. Omdat ik toch voor een democratische dialoog ben doe ik u een ander aanbod. Ik hoef niet op uw website, maar u mag wel op mijn weblog uw feiten geven. Daar reageer ik dan weer op met mijn feiten, zodat de lezers zelf kunnen bepalen welk beeld het dichtst bij de waarheid komt.
Ook daarop durfde u niet te reageren. Ik kan nu niet anders dan de conclusie trekken dat u geen weerwoord heeft op de feiten die ik aandraag. Hoe nu verder, nu u via een omweg, in bedekte termen, mij opvoert zonder dat u ook maar met 1 woord op mijn feiten ingaat? Wel, het antwoord is simpel: ik geef niet op, want uiteindelijk schrijf ik deze stukjes niet voor u en andere pro-Israel propagandisten, maar voor de lezers van mijn weblog. Laten we daarom de volgende bewering van u analyseren: 'Terwijl in Nederland sommige media blijven volharden in een campagne om van het Midden-Oosten conflict een klassieke Western te maken. En een uitgerangeerde ex-VPRO journalist op zijn blog een journalistieke vorm van terrorisme tegen Israëli’s en Joden heeft geïntroduceerd, vinden in Israël menselijke en hoopgevende dingen plaats.'
Hier zitten enkele ongefundeerde vooronderstellingen en beweringen in. Feit: als er iemand is die al twee decennialang bericht over 'menselijke en hoopgevende dingen' in Israel ben ik het wel. Er is geen enkele andere Nederlandse journalist die zoveel aandacht besteedt aan Joods-Israelische dissidenten. Sterker nog: dankzij joodse Nederlanders die de terreur van extremistische zionisten verafschuwen en Joods Israelische dissidenten kwam ik voor het eerst in aanraking met Palestijnen, en werd ik door de bezette gebieden geleid om te zien hoe de dagelijkse terreur van de 'Joodse staat' in de praktijk uitwerkt. Toen ik voor het eerst met twee joodse dames door Gaza reisde werden wij beschoten door Israelische militairen terwijl wij een groep Palestijnse lagere schoolkinderen op straat spraken. De joodse Nederlandse vrouw was de dappere Anneke Jos Mouthaan, later een van de oprichters van Een Ander Joods Geluid, het geluid dus van joden die niets moeten hebben van uw misdadige propaganda, en die feiten aandragen die u op uw weblog verzwijgt. Dat is 1 van de redenen waarom ik zoveel ruimte geef aan het dissidente geluid. U ziet dat uw suggestie dat mensen als ik geen aandacht besteden aan positieve ontwikkelingen niet op feiten is gebaseerd. Wat is positiever dan aandacht besteden aan de samenwerking tussen Joods-Israeli's en Palestijnen bij de strijd tegen het zionistische onrecht? Een zeer recent voorbeeld dat ik dit juist wel doe, is dit door u verzwegen bericht van deze Joods-Israelische vrouw:
De afgelopen dagen stond een groepje demonstraten bij de ingang van een luchtmachtbasis in Tel Aviv. De reden dat we hier staan is dat dit de plek is vanwaar de meeste luchtmachtpiloten naar hun bases in Israël vliegen.
We houden borden vast met en oproep om te weigeren burgers en kinderen te bombarderen. Dit is een van de vele dagelijkse demonstraties tegen de oorlog door Israëli's.
De stille wake lokt heftige reacties uit bij de voorbijgangers, militairen en de brandweer aan de overkant van de straat. De brandweerlieden gooiden eieren naar ons en toen we niet weggingen kwamen ze met hun brandweerslangen en probeerden ons weg te spuiten.
Ze scholden ons en maakten grove seksuele opmerkingen.
Er waren ook agenten in burger aanwezig. We vroegen hen de hele tijd om te helpen, maar ze deden niets.
Wij linkse actievoerders wisten altijd al dat we vogelvrij waren. Dat we - zoals sommigen zo leuk zeggen ‘nog eerder dan Hamas gedood zouden moeten worden'. Geweld was altijd onderdeel van de reactie op onze acties, maar geweld door brandweerlieden, terwijl de politie weigert in te grijpen is een nieuwe escalatie.
Media weigeren te berichten
Wij zullen doorgaan met onze demonstraties en we geloven in wat we doen. Maar we weten ook dat we niet effectief zijn. Wij zijn niet effectief omdat de media weigeren om over ons te berichten.
De media in Israël weigeren om over ons te berichten omdat het de moraal van de soldaten zou ondermijnen en omdat, in tijden van oorlog, we de democratie opschorten en onze ‘dappere' media voor dienst opgeroepen media worden.
Niet alles is zwart-wit
Maar geldt dat ook voor de media buiten Israël? Zij hebben toch zo'n belangstelling voor Israël? Waarom laten ze niets zien van onze acties? Is het te lastig om te laten zien dat niet alles zwart-wit is? Is het omdat het niet goed past bij de nogal openlijke anti-Israël gevoelens?
Ik weet het. Mijn gevoelens, mijn teleurstelling, mijn angst zijn niets vergeleken bij de angst van de bevolkingen, de gezinnen en de kinderen in Gaza. Ze zijn ook niets in vergelijking met die van de mensen in Sderot en het zuiden van Israël.
Maar ik ben bang vandaag.
Verrader of bezetter
In mijn land ben ik een verrader. Vogelvrij. Maar zodra ik naar het buitenland reis, ben ik Israëli. Niet een linkse actievoerder. Een Israëli, een bezetter, en opnieuw - vogelvrij.
Mijn laatste punt is dat er een miljoen demonstraties in de wereld tegen Israël kunnen worden gehouden. En nog zal Israël niet luisteren. Maar een miljoen demonstraties voor vrede en daarbij volledige berichtgeving over wat wij hier in Israël in, zal ons grotere veiligheid bieden en kan misschien verschil maken.
Vraag verslaggevers, vraag mensen bij de media om Israëlische oppositie tegen de oorlog te laten zien. Het is tijd dat onze stem wordt gehoord.
En als je demonstreert, doe het alsjeblieft op een manier dat het helpt. Niet simpelweg anti-Israël, maar met borden die vragen om een wapenstilstand en de aanvaarding van de VN-resolutie 1860 door beide partijen.
Ook op uw volgende bewering is het nodige af te dingen: 'En een uitgerangeerde ex-VPRO journalist op zijn blog een journalistieke vorm van terrorisme tegen Israëli’s en Joden heeft geïntroduceerd.'
Allereerst het begrip 'uitgerangeerd', als u hiermee bedoelt: afgedankt dan zit u maar half goed. Iedere programmamaker voor de publieke omroepen wordt op zijn zestigste gepensioneerd. Ik ben 62. En als u met 'uitgerangeerd' bedoelt uitgeschakeld, ook dan zit u fout, want ik mag dan wel niet meer voor een omroep werken, het betekent geenszins dat ik niet meer gehoord wordt. Integendeel, zoals uit onder andere uw eigen reactie blijkt. Bovendien heb ik nu alle tijd om boeken te schrijven van bijna 400 pagina's over bijvoorbeeld de Israelische terreur tegen de Palestijnse bevolking.
Wat betreft 'een journalistieke vorm van terrorisme'. Ik begrijp hieruit dat het publiceren van voor iedereen verifieerbare feiten, in tegenstelling tot uw propaganda, voor u 'een journalistieke vorm van terrorisme is.' Ik kan niets aan deze krankzinnige opvatting veranderen. Het heeft alles te maken met uw eigen gekte, het feit dat u meent dat u land mag stelen van Palestijnen. Dus soit. Wat ik wel kan bestrijden is het feit dat mijn feitelijke informatie 'tegen Israeli's en Joden' zou zijn. Dat is aantoonbare nonsens. Eerst dit: hoe graag u dat ook zou willen, u spreekt niet namens 'Israeli's en Joden'. Geenszins zelfs. Zeker niet namens de bijna 20 procent Palestijnse Israeli's, maar ook niet namens de verlichte, humanitaire Israeli's die niets van uw propaganda moeten hebben en mij elke dag weer informeren over de terreur van extremistische zionisten. U bent een doodgewone ordinaire dief die op gestolen land leeft ten koste van uw Palestijnse buren. U terroriseert uw omgeving door met geweld onrecht in stand te houden, en op die manier schendt u elk uur van de dag en nacht het internationaal recht. Ik daarentegen huldig de burgerlijke opvatting dat niemand het recht ongestraft mag schenden. Dat is niet alleen een morele regel, maar ook een praktische, want zodra mensen denken gerechtigd te zijn anderen te terroriseren dan is het eind zoek.
De wereld wordt beheerst door de onwrikbare logica van oorzaak en gevolg. Geweld roept tegengeweld op. Onrecht roept verzet op. Hoe erger het onrecht des te feller het verzet hiertegen. En wie het zwaard trekt, zal door het zwaard vergaan. U roept krachten op die niemand zal kunnen beheersen en waarvan u in de verste verte niet beseft hoe vernietigend die uiteindelijk zullen zijn, zowel voor de Palestijnen als voor de Joden in Israel en de bezette gebieden. Niets gebeurt zomaar in de wereld, alles kent zijn eigen onvermijdelijkheid. Dat besef zou ons nederig moeten maken. Zeker joden en christenen die in een god geloven die rechtvaardig heet te zijn. Extremistische joden en extremistische christenen zouden rekening moeten houden met deze natuurwet. Ik weet niet tot welke groep u behoort, maar gezien het feit dat u ook voor de extremistische Christenen voor Israel schrijft neem ik aan dat u wel degelijk in deze joods-christelijke goddelijke logica gelooft. Ik zag vanmiddag met mijn familie en een oude vriend de indrukwekkende film Avatar waarin het volgende werd gezegd: All energy is borrowed, and someday you have to give it back. Yonathan Visser, dit is een diepe wijsheid. Of denkt u als klein mensje buiten de wet van oorzaak en gevolg te staan?
In afwachting van uw antwoord
Stan van Houcke
PS: (Part 1) Atras: Palestinian land destroyed (Pre-demolition) some of the trees in the village of Artas to make way for a sewer system, leading from the Illegal Israeli Settlement of Efrat... illegal Israeli settlers of Efrat will drain their sewage
vrijdag 25 december 2009
In afwachting van de kalkoen nog even deze informatie:
Staatsschuld VS kan verder stijgen
De Amerikaanse Senaat heeft ingestemd met een verhoging van het plafond voor de Amerikaanse staatsschuld met een bedrag van 290 miljard dollar. Daarmee komt de maximaal toegestane schuld op 12,4 biljoen dollar (12.400 miljard).
Het Huis van Afgevaardigden ging vorige week al akkoord met de verhoging. De regering kan nu weer nieuwe obligaties uitschrijven om geld binnen te halen. Daarmee zijn alle overheidsuitgaven tot medio februari veiliggesteld.
De VS heeft de grootste staatsschuld ter wereld. Door overheidssteun aan het bedrijfsleven loopt de schuld dit jaar met 1,4 biljoen dollar op.
Afrikander: Een Plesierige Kerfees
African/ Eritrean/ Tigrinja: Rehus-Beal-Ledeats
Arabic: Milad Majid
Argentine: Feliz Navidad
Armenian: Shenoraavor Nor Dari yev Pari Gaghand
Azeri: Tezze Iliniz Yahsi Olsun
Bahasa Malaysia: Selamat Hari Natal
Basque: Zorionak eta Urte Berri On!
Bohemian: Vesele Vanoce
Brazilian: Feliz Natal
Bengali: Shubho borodin
Breton: Nedeleg laouen na bloavezh mat
Bulgarian: Tchestita Koleda; Tchestito Rojdestvo Hristovo
Catalan: Bon Nadal i un Bon Any Nou!
Chile: Feliz Navidad
Chinese: (Cantonese) Gun Tso Sun Tan'Gung Haw Sun
Chinese: (Mandarin) Kung His Hsin Nien bing Chu Shen Tan (Catonese) Gun Tso Sun Tan'Gung Haw Sun
Choctaw: Yukpa, Nitak Hollo Chito
Columbia: Feliz Navidad y Próspero Año Nuevo
Cornish: Nadelik looan na looan blethen noweth
Corsian: Pace e salute
Crazanian: Rot Yikji Dol La Roo
Cree: Mitho Makosi Kesikansi
Croatian: Sretan Bozic
Czech: Prejeme Vam Vesele Vanoce a stastny Novy Rok
Danish: Glædelig Jul
Duri: Christmas-e- Shoma Mobarak
Dutch: Vrolijk Kerstfeest en een Gelukkig Nieuwjaar! or Zalig Kerstfeast
English: Merry Christmas
Eskimo: (inupik) Jutdlime pivdluarit ukiortame pivdluaritlo!
Esperanto: Gajan Kristnaskon
Estonian: Ruumsaid juulup|hi
Ethiopian: (Amharic) Melkin Yelidet Beaal
Eritfean/ Tigrinja: Rehus- Beal- Ledeats
Faeroese: Gledhilig jol og eydnurikt nyggjar!
Farsi: Cristmas-e-shoma mobarak bashad
Finnish: Hyvaa joulua
Flemish: Zalig Kerstfeest en Gelukkig nieuw jaar
French: Joyeux Noel
Frisian: Noflike Krystdagen en in protte Lok en Seine yn it Nije Jier!
Faeroese: Gledhilig jol og eydnurikt nyggjar!
Galician: Bo Nada
Gaelic: Nollaig chridheil agus Bliadhna mhath ùr!
German: Froehliche Weihnachten
Greek: Kala Christouyenna!
Greenlandic: Juullimi Pilluaritsi!
German: Froehliche Weihnachten
Haiti: (Creole) Jwaye Nowel or to Jesus Edo Bri'cho o Rish D'Shato Brichto
Hausa: Barka da Kirsimatikuma Barka da Sabuwar Shekara!
Hawaiian: Mele Kalikimaka
Hebrew: Mo'adim Lesimkha. Chena tova
Hindi: Baradin ki shubh kamnaaye
Hausa: Barka da Kirsimatikuma Barka da Sabuwar Shekara!
Hawaian: Mele Kalikimaka ame Hauoli Makahiki Hou!
Hungarian: Kellemes Karacsonyi unnepeket
Icelandic: Gledileg Jol
Indonesian: Selamat Hari Natal
Iraqi: Idah Saidan Wa Sanah Jadidah
Irish: Nollaig Shona Dhuit, or Nodlaig mhaith chugnat
Iroquois: Ojenyunyat Sungwiyadeson honungradon nagwutut. Ojenyunyat osrasay.
Italian: Buone Feste Natalizie
Japanese: Shinnen omedeto. Kurisumasu Omedeto
Jiberish: Mithag Crithagsigathmithags
Korean: Sung Tan Chuk Ha
Lao: souksan van Christmas
Latin: Natale hilare et Annum Faustum!
Latvian: Prieci'gus Ziemsve'tkus un Laimi'gu Jauno Gadu!
Lausitzian:Wjesole hody a strowe nowe leto
Lettish: Priecigus Ziemassvetkus
Lithuanian: Linksmu Kaledu
Low Saxon: Heughliche Winachten un 'n moi Nijaar
Macedonian: Sreken Bozhik
Maltese: IL-Milied It-tajjeb
Manx: Nollick ghennal as blein vie noa
Maori: Meri Kirihimete
Marathi: Shub Naya Varsh
Navajo: Merry Keshmish
Norwegian: God Jul, or Gledelig Jul
Occitan: Pulit nadal e bona annado
Papiamento: Bon Pasco
Papua New Guinea: Bikpela hamamas blong dispela Krismas na Nupela yia i go long yu
Pennsylvania German: En frehlicher Grischtdaag un en hallich Nei Yaahr!
Peru: Feliz Navidad y un Venturoso Año Nuevo
Philipines: Maligayan Pasko!
Polish: Wesolych Swiat Bozego Narodzenia or Boze Narodzenie
Pushto: Christmas Aao Ne-way Kaal Mo Mobarak Sha
Rapa-Nui (Easter Island): Mata-Ki-Te-Rangi. Te-Pito-O-Te-Henua
Rhetian: Bellas festas da nadal e bun onn
Romanche: (sursilvan dialect): Legreivlas fiastas da Nadal e bien niev onn!
Romanian: Craciun Fericit
Russian: Pozdrevlyayu s prazdnikom Rozhdestva is Novim Godom
Sami: Buorrit Juovllat
Samoan: La Maunia Le Kilisimasi Ma Le Tausaga Fou
Sardinian: Bonu nadale e prosperu annu nou
Serbian: Hristos se rodi
Slovakian: Sretan Bozic or Vesele vianoce
Samoan: La Maunia Le Kilisimasi Ma Le Tausaga Fou
Scots Gaelic: Nollaig chridheil huibh
Serbian: Hristos se rodi.
Singhalese: Subha nath thalak Vewa. Subha Aluth Awrudhak Vewa
Slovak: Vesele Vianoce. A stastlivy Novy Rok
Slovene: Vesele Bozicne Praznike Srecno Novo Leto or Vesel Bozic in srecno Novo leto
Spanish: Feliz Navidad
Swedish: God Jul and (Och) Ett Gott Nytt År
Tagalog: Maligayamg Pasko. Masaganang Bagong Taon
Tami: Nathar Puthu Varuda Valthukkal
Trukeese: (Micronesian) Neekiriisimas annim oo iyer seefe feyiyeech!
Thai: Sawadee Pee Mai or souksan wan Christmas
Turkish: Noeliniz Ve Yeni Yiliniz Kutlu Olsun
Ukrainian: Srozhdestvom Kristovym or Z RIZDVOM HRYSTOVYM
Urdu: Naya Saal Mubarak Ho
Vietnamese: Chuc Mung Giang Sinh
Welsh: Nadolig Llawen
Yoruba: E ku odun, e ku iye'dun!
Yugoslavian: Cestitamo Bozic
FROM WOUNDED KNEE TO IRAQ:
A CENTURY OF U.S. MILITARY INTERVENTIONS
by Dr. Zoltan Grossman
The following is a partial list of U.S. military interventions from 1890 to 2010.
Below the list is a Briefing on the History of U.S. Military Interventions.
The list and briefing are also available as a powerpoint presentation.
This guide does not include:
- mobilizations of the National Guard
- offshore shows of naval strength
- reinforcements of embassy personnel
- the use of non-Defense Department personnel (such as the Drug Enforcement Administration)
- military exercises
- non-combat mobilizations (such as replacing postal strikers)
- the permanent stationing of armed forces
- covert actions where the U.S. did not play a command and control role
- the use of small hostage rescue units
- most uses of proxy troops
- U.S. piloting of foreign warplanes
- foreign or domestic disaster assistance
- military training and advisory programs not involving direct combat
- civic action programs
- and many other military activities.
Among sources used, beside news reports, are the Congressional Record (23 June 1969), 180 Landings by the U.S. Marine Corp History Division, Ege & Makhijani in Counterspy (July-Aug, 1982), "Instances of Use of United States Forces Abroad, 1798-1993" by Ellen C. Collier of the Library of Congress Congressional Research Service, and Ellsberg in Protest & Survive.
Turkish newspaper urges that the United States be listed in Guinness Book of World Records as the Country with the Most Foreign Interventions.
|COUNTRY OR STATE||Dates of intervention||Forces||Comments|
|SOUTH DAKOTA||1890 (-?)||Troops||300 Lakota Indians massacred at Wounded Knee.|
|ARGENTINA||1890||Troops||Buenos Aires interests protected.|
|CHILE||1891||Troops||Marines clash with nationalist rebels.|
|HAITI||1891||Troops||Black revolt on Navassa defeated.|
|IDAHO||1892||Troops||Army suppresses silver miners' strike.|
|HAWAII||1893 (-?)||Naval, troops||Independent kingdom overthrown, annexed.|
|CHICAGO||1894||Troops||Breaking of rail strike, 34 killed.|
|NICARAGUA||1894||Troops||Month-long occupation of Bluefields.|
|CHINA||1894-95||Naval, troops||Marines land in Sino-Japanese War|
|KOREA||1894-96||Troops||Marines kept in Seoul during war.|
|PANAMA||1895||Troops, naval||Marines land in Colombian province.|
|NICARAGUA||1896||Troops||Marines land in port of Corinto.|
|CHINA||1898-1900||Troops||Boxer Rebellion fought by foreign armies.|
|PHILIPPINES||1898-1910 (-?)||Naval, troops||Seized from Spain, killed 600,000 Filipinos|
|CUBA||1898-1902 (-?)||Naval, troops||Seized from Spain, still hold Navy base.|
|PUERTO RICO||1898 (-?)||Naval, troops||Seized from Spain, occupation continues.|
|GUAM||1898 (-?)||Naval, troops||Seized from Spain, still use as base.|
|MINNESOTA||1898 (-?)||Troops||Army battles Chippewa at Leech Lake.|
|NICARAGUA||1898||Troops||Marines land at port of San Juan del Sur.|
|SAMOA||1899 (-?)||Troops||Battle over succession to throne.|
|NICARAGUA||1899||Troops||Marines land at port of Bluefields.|
|IDAHO||1899-1901||Troops||Army occupies Coeur d'Alene mining region.|
|OKLAHOMA||1901||Troops||Army battles Creek Indian revolt.|
|PANAMA||1901-14||Naval, troops||Broke off from Colombia 1903, annexed Canal Zone 1914.|
|HONDURAS||1903||Troops||Marines intervene in revolution.|
|DOMINICAN REPUBLIC||1903-04||Troops||U.S. interests protected in Revolution.|
|KOREA||1904-05||Troops||Marines land in Russo-Japanese War.|
|CUBA||1906-09||Troops||Marines land in democratic election.|
|NICARAGUA||1907||Troops||"Dollar Diplomacy" protectorate set up.|
|HONDURAS||1907||Troops||Marines land during war with Nicaragua|
|PANAMA||1908||Troops||Marines intervene in election contest.|
|NICARAGUA||1910||Troops||Marines land in Bluefields and Corinto.|
|HONDURAS||1911||Troops||U.S. interests protected in civil war.|
|CHINA||1911-41||Naval, troops||Continuous occupation with flare-ups.|
|CUBA||1912||Troops||U.S. interests protected in civil war.|
|PANAMA||1912||Troops||Marines land during heated election.|
|HONDURAS||1912||Troops||Marines protect U.S. economic interests.|
|NICARAGUA||1912-33||Troops, bombing||10-year occupation, fought guerillas|
|MEXICO||1913||Naval||Americans evacuated during revolution.|
|DOMINICAN REPUBLIC||1914||Naval||Fight with rebels over Santo Domingo.|
|COLORADO||1914||Troops||Breaking of miners' strike by Army.|
|MEXICO||1914-18||Naval, troops||Series of interventions against nationalists.|
|HAITI||1914-34||Troops, bombing||19-year occupation after revolts.|
|TEXAS||1915||Troops||Federal soldiers crush "Plan of San Diego" Mexican-American rebellion|
|DOMINICAN REPUBLIC||1916-24||Troops||8-year Marine occupation.|
|CUBA||1917-33||Troops||Military occupation, economic protectorate.|
|WORLD WAR I||1917-18||Naval, troops||Ships sunk, fought Germany for 1 1/2 years.|
|RUSSIA||1918-22||Naval, troops||Five landings to fight Bolsheviks|
|PANAMA||1918-20||Troops||"Police duty" during unrest after elections.|
|HONDURAS||1919||Troops||Marines land during election campaign.|
|YUGOSLAVIA||1919||Troops/Marines||intervene for Italy against Serbs in Dalmatia.|
|GUATEMALA||1920||Troops||2-week intervention against unionists.|
|WEST VIRGINIA||1920-21||Troops, bombing||Army intervenes against mineworkers.|
|TURKEY||1922||Troops||Fought nationalists in Smyrna.|
|CHINA||1922-27||Naval, troops||Deployment during nationalist revolt.|
|HONDURAS||1924-25||Troops||Landed twice during election strife.|
|PANAMA||1925||Troops||Marines suppress general strike.|
|CHINA||1927-34||Troops||Marines stationed throughout the country.|
|EL SALVADOR||1932||Naval||Warships send during Marti revolt.|
|WASHINGTON DC||1932||Troops||Army stops WWI vet bonus protest.|
|WORLD WAR II||1941-45||Naval, troops, bombing, nuclear||Hawaii bombed, fought Japan, Italy and Germay for 3 years; first nuclear war.|
|DETROIT||1943||Troops||Army put down Black rebellion.|
|IRAN||1946||Nuclear threat||Soviet troops told to leave north.|
|YUGOSLAVIA||1946||Nuclear threat, naval||Response to shoot-down of US plane.|
|URUGUAY||1947||Nuclear threat||Bombers deployed as show of strength.|
|GREECE||1947-49||Command operation||U.S. directs extreme-right in civil war.|
|GERMANY||1948||Nuclear Threat||Atomic-capable bombers guard Berlin Airlift.|
|CHINA||1948-49||Troops/Marines||evacuate Americans before Communist victory.|
|PHILIPPINES||1948-54||Command operation||CIA directs war against Huk Rebellion.|
|PUERTO RICO||1950||Command operation||Independence rebellion crushed in Ponce.|
|KOREA||1951-53 (-?)||Troops, naval, bombing , nuclear threats||U.S./So. Korea fights China/No. Korea to stalemate; A-bomb threat in 1950, and against China in 1953. Still have bases.|
|IRAN||1953||Command Operation||CIA overthrows democracy, installs Shah.|
|VIETNAM||1954||Nuclear threat||French offered bombs to use against seige.|
|GUATEMALA||1954||Command operation, bombing, nuclear threat||CIA directs exile invasion after new gov't nationalized U.S. company lands; bombers based in Nicaragua.|
|EGYPT||1956||Nuclear threat, troops||Soviets told to keep out of Suez crisis; Marines evacuate foreigners.|
|LEBANON||l958||Troops, naval||Marine occupation against rebels.|
|IRAQ||1958||Nuclear threat||Iraq warned against invading Kuwait.|
|CHINA||l958||Nuclear threat||China told not to move on Taiwan isles.|
|PANAMA||1958||Troops||Flag protests erupt into confrontation.|
|VIETNAM||l960-75||Troops, naval, bombing, nuclear threats||Fought South Vietnam revolt & North Vietnam; one million killed in longest U.S. war; atomic bomb threats in l968 and l969.|
|CUBA||l961||Command operation||CIA-directed exile invasion fails.|
|GERMANY||l961||Nuclear threat||Alert during Berlin Wall crisis.|
|LAOS||1962||Command operation||Military buildup during guerrilla war.|
|CUBA||l962||Nuclear threat, naval||Blockade during missile crisis; near-war with Soviet Union.|
|IRAQ||1963||Command operation||CIA organizes coup that killed president, brings Ba'ath Party to power, and Saddam Hussein back from exile to be head of the secret service.|
|PANAMA||l964||Troops||Panamanians shot for urging canal's return.|
|INDONESIA||l965||Command operation||Million killed in CIA-assisted army coup.|
|DOMINICAN REPUBLIC||1965-66||Troops, bombing||Marines land during election campaign.|
|GUATEMALA||l966-67||Command operation||Green Berets intervene against rebels.|
|DETROIT||l967||Troops||Army battles African Americans, 43 killed.|
|UNITED STATES||l968||Troops||After King is shot; over 21,000 soldiers in cities.|
|CAMBODIA||l969-75||Bombing, troops, naval||Up to 2 million killed in decade of bombing, starvation, and political chaos.|
|OMAN||l970||Command operation||U.S. directs Iranian marine invasion.|
|LAOS||l971-73||Command operation, bombing||U.S. directs South Vietnamese invasion; "carpet-bombs" countryside.|
|SOUTH DAKOTA||l973||Command operation||Army directs Wounded Knee siege of Lakotas.|
|MIDEAST||1973||Nuclear threat||World-wide alert during Mideast War.|
|CHILE||1973||Command operation||CIA-backed coup ousts elected marxist president.|
|CAMBODIA||l975||Troops, bombing||Gas captured ship, 28 die in copter crash.|
|ANGOLA||l976-92||Command operation||CIA assists South African-backed rebels.|
|IRAN||l980||Troops, nuclear threat, aborted bombing||Raid to rescue Embassy hostages; 8 troops die in copter-plane crash. Soviets warned not to get involved in revolution.|
|LIBYA||l981||Naval jets||Two Libyan jets shot down in maneuvers.|
|EL SALVADOR||l981-92||Command operation, troops||Advisors, overflights aid anti-rebel war, soldiers briefly involved in hostage clash.|
|NICARAGUA||l981-90||Command operation, naval||CIA directs exile (Contra) invasions, plants harbor mines against revolution.|
|LEBANON||l982-84||Naval, bombing, troops||Marines expel PLO and back Phalangists, Navy bombs and shells Muslim positions.|
|GRENADA||l983-84||Troops, bombing||Invasion four years after revolution.|
|HONDURAS||l983-89||Troops||Maneuvers help build bases near borders.|
|IRAN||l984||Jets||Two Iranian jets shot down over Persian Gulf.|
|LIBYA||l986||Bombing, naval||Air strikes to topple nationalist gov't.|
|BOLIVIA||1986||Troops||Army assists raids on cocaine region.|
|IRAN||l987-88||Naval, bombing||US intervenes on side of Iraq in war.|
|LIBYA||1989||Naval jets||Two Libyan jets shot down.|
|VIRGIN ISLANDS||1989||Troops||St. Croix Black unrest after storm.|
|PHILIPPINES||1989||Jets||Air cover provided for government against coup.|
|PANAMA||1989 (-?)||Troops, bombing||Nationalist government ousted by 27,000 soldiers, leaders arrested, 2000+ killed.|
|LIBERIA||1990||Troops||Foreigners evacuated during civil war.|
|SAUDI ARABIA||1990-91||Troops, jets||Iraq countered after invading Kuwait. 540,000 troops also stationed in Oman, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE, Israel.|
|IRAQ||1990-91||Bombing, troops, naval||Blockade of Iraqi and Jordanian ports, air strikes; 200,000+ killed in invasion of Iraq and Kuwait; large-scale destruction of Iraqi military.|
|KUWAIT||1991||Naval, bombing, troops||Kuwait royal family returned to throne.|
|IRAQ||1991-2003||Bombing, naval||No-fly zone over Kurdish north, Shiite south; constant air strikes and naval-enforced economic sanctions|
|LOS ANGELES||1992||Troops||Army, Marines deployed against anti-police uprising.|
|SOMALIA||1992-94||Troops, naval, bombing||U.S.-led United Nations occupation during civil war; raids against one Mogadishu faction.|
|YUGOSLAVIA||1992-94||Naval||NATO blockade of Serbia and Montenegro.|
|BOSNIA||1993-?||Jets, bombing||No-fly zone patrolled in civil war; downed jets, bombed Serbs.|
|HAITI||1994||Troops, naval||Blockade against military government; troops restore President Aristide to office three years after coup.|
|ZAIRE (CONGO)||1996-97||Troops||Marines at Rwandan Hutu refugee camps, in area where Congo revolution begins.|
|LIBERIA||1997||Troops||Soldiers under fire during evacuation of foreigners.|
|ALBANIA||1997||Troops||Soldiers under fire during evacuation of foreigners.|
|SUDAN||1998||Missiles||Attack on pharmaceutical plant alleged to be "terrorist" nerve gas plant.|
|AFGHANISTAN||1998||Missiles||Attack on former CIA training camps used by Islamic fundamentalist groups alleged to have attacked embassies.|
|IRAQ||1998||Bombing, Missiles||Four days of intensive air strikes after weapons inspectors allege Iraqi obstructions.|
|YUGOSLAVIA||1999||Bombing, Missiles||Heavy NATO air strikes after Serbia declines to withdraw from Kosovo. NATO occupation of Kosovo.|
|YEMEN||2000||Naval||USS Cole, docked in Aden, bombed.|
|MACEDONIA||2001||Troops||NATO forces deployed to move and disarm Albanian rebels.|
|UNITED STATES||2001||Jets, naval||Reaction to hijacker attacks on New York, DC|
|AFGHANISTAN||2001-?||Troops, bombing, missiles||Massive U.S. mobilization to overthrow Taliban, hunt Al Qaeda fighters, install Karzai regime, and battle Taliban insurgency. More than 30,000 U.S. troops and numerous private security contractors carry our occupation.|
|YEMEN||2002||Missiles||Predator drone missile attack on Al Qaeda, including a US citizen.|
|PHILIPPINES||2002-?||Troops, naval||Training mission for Philippine military fighting Abu Sayyaf rebels evolves into combat missions in Sulu Archipelago, west of Mindanao.|
|COLOMBIA||2003-?||Troops||US special forces sent to rebel zone to back up Colombian military protecting oil pipeline.|
|IRAQ||2003-?||Troops, naval, bombing, missiles||Saddam regime toppled in Baghdad. More than 250,000 U.S. personnel participate in invasion. US and UK forces occupy country and battle Sunni and Shi'ite insurgencies. More than 160,000 troops and numerous private contractors carry out occupation and build large permanent bases.|
|LIBERIA||2003||Troops||Brief involvement in peacekeeping force as rebels drove out leader.|
|HAITI||2004-05||Troops, naval||Marines land after right-wing rebels oust elected President Aristide, who was advised to leave by Washington.|
|PAKISTAN||2005-?||Missiles, bombing, covert operation||CIA missile and air strikes and Special Forces raids on alleged Al Qaeda and Taliban refuge villages kill multiple civilians. Drone attacks also on Pakistani Mehsud network.|
|SOMALIA||2006-?||Missiles, naval, covert operation||Special Forces advise Ethiopian invasion that topples Islamist government; AC-130 strikes and Cruise missile attacks against Islamist rebels; naval blockade against "pirates" and insurgents.|
|SYRIA||2008||Troops||Special Forces in helicopter raid 5 miles from Iraq kill 8 Syrian civilians|
|YEMEN||2009||Missiles||Cruise missile attack on Al Qaeda kills 49 civilians.|
OF U.S. MILITARY INTERVENTIONS
By Zoltán Grossman, October 2001
Since the September 11 attacks on the United States, most people in the world agree that the perpetrators need to be brought to justice, without killing many thousands of civilians in the process. But unfortunately, the U.S. military has always accepted massive civilian deaths as part of the cost of war. The military is now poised to kill thousands of foreign civilians, in order to prove that killing U.S. civilians is wrong.
The media has told us repeatedly that some Middle Easterners hate the U.S. only because of our "freedom" and "prosperity." Missing from this explanation is the historical context of the U.S. role in the Middle East, and for that matter in the rest of the world. This basic primer is an attempt to brief readers who have not closely followed the history of U.S. foreign or military affairs, and are perhaps unaware of the background of U.S. military interventions abroad, but are concerned about the direction of our country toward a new war in the name of "freedom" and "protecting civilians."
The United States military has been intervening in other countries for a long time. In 1898, it seized the Philippines, Cuba, and Puerto Rico from Spain, and in 1917-18 became embroiled in World War I in Europe. In the first half of the 20th century it repeatedly sent Marines to "protectorates" such as Nicaragua, Honduras, Panama, Haiti, and the Dominican Republic. All these interventions directly served corporate interests, and many resulted in massive losses of civilians, rebels, and soldiers. Many of the uses of U.S. combat forces are documented in A History of U.S. Military Interventions since 1890: http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz/interventions.html
U.S. involvement in World War II (1941-45) was sparked by the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, and fear of an Axis invasion of North America. Allied bombers attacked fascist military targets, but also fire-bombed German and Japanese cities such as Dresden and Tokyo, party under the assumption that destroying civilian neighborhoods would weaken the resolve of the survivors and turn them against their regimes. Many historians agree that fire- bombing's effect was precisely the opposite--increasing Axis civilian support for homeland defense, and discouraging potential coup attempts. The atomic bombing of Japan at the end of the war was carried out without any kind of advance demonstration or warning that may have prevented the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians.
The war in Korea (1950-53) was marked by widespread atrocities, both by North Korean/Chinese forces, and South Korean/U.S. forces. U.S. troops fired on civilian refugees headed into South Korea, apparently fearing they were northern infiltrators. Bombers attacked North Korean cities, and the U.S. twice threatened to use nuclear weapons. North Korea is under the same Communist government today as when the war began.
During the Middle East crisis of 1958, Marines were deployed to quell a rebellion in Lebanon, and Iraq was threatened with nuclear attack if it invaded Kuwait. This little-known crisis helped set U.S. foreign policy on a collision course with Arab nationalists, often in support of the region's monarchies.
In the early 1960s, the U.S. returned to its pre-World War II interventionary role in the Caribbean, directing the failed 1961 Bay of Pigs exile invasion of Cuba, and the 1965 bombing and Marine invasion of the Dominican Republic during an election campaign. The CIA trained and harbored Cuban exile groups in Miami, which launched terrorist attacks on Cuba, including the 1976 downing of a Cuban civilian jetliner near Barbados. During the Cold War, the CIA would also help to support or install pro-U.S. dictatorships in Iran, Chile, Guatemala, Indonesia, and many other countries around the world.
The U.S. war in Indochina (1960-75) pit U.S. forces against North Vietnam, and Communist rebels fighting to overthrow pro-U.S. dictatorships in South Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. U.S. war planners made little or no distinction between attacking civilians and guerrillas in rebel-held zones, and U.S. "carpet-bombing" of the countryside and cities swelled the ranks of the ultimately victorious revolutionaries. Over two million people were killed in the war, including 55,000 U.S. troops. Less than a dozen U.S. citizens were killed on U.S. soil, in National Guard shootings or antiwar bombings. In Cambodia, the bombings drove the Khmer Rouge rebels toward fanatical leaders, who launched a murderous rampage when they took power in 1975.
Echoes of Vietnam reverberated in Central America during the 1980s, when the Reagan administration strongly backed the pro-U.S. regime in El Salvador, and right-wing exile forces fighting the new leftist Sandinista government in Nicaragua. Rightist death squads slaughtered Salvadoran civilians who questioned the concentration of power and wealth in a few hands. CIA-trained Nicaraguan Contra rebels launched terrorist attacks against civilian clinics and schools run by the Sandinista government, and mined Nicaraguan harbors. U.S. troops also invaded the island nation of Grenada in 1983, to oust a new military regime, attacking Cuban civilian workers (even though Cuba had backed the leftist government deposed in the coup), and accidentally bombing a hospital.
The U.S. returned in force to the Middle East in 1980, after the Shi'ite Muslim revolution in Iran against Shah Pahlevi's pro-U.S. dictatorship. A troop and bombing raid to free U.S. Embassy hostages held in downtown Tehran had to be aborted in the Iranian desert. After the 1982 Israeli occupation of Lebanon, U.S. Marines were deployed in a neutral "peacekeeping" operation. They instead took the side of Lebanon's pro-Israel Christian government against Muslim rebels, and U.S. Navy ships rained enormous shells on Muslim civilian villages. Embittered Shi'ite Muslim rebels responded with a suicide bomb attack on Marine barracks, and for years seized U.S. hostages in the country. In retaliation, the CIA set off car bombs to assassinate Shi'ite Muslim leaders. Syria and the Muslim rebels emerged victorious in Lebanon.
Elsewhere in the Middle East, the U.S. launched a 1986 bombing raid on Libya, which it accused of sponsoring a terrorist bombing later tied to Syria. The bombing raid killed civilians, and may have led to the later revenge bombing of a U.S. jet over Scotland. Libya's Arab nationalist leader Muammar Qaddafi remained in power. The U.S. Navy also intervened against Iran during its war against Iraq in 1987-88, sinking Iranian ships and "accidentally" shooting down an Iranian civilian jetliner.
U.S. forces invaded Panama in 1989 to oust the nationalist regime of Manuel Noriega. The U.S. accused its former ally of allowing drug-running in the country, though the drug trade actually increased after his capture. U.S. bombing raids on Panama City ignited a conflagration in a civilian neighborhood, fed by stove gas tanks. Over 2,000 Panamanians were killed in the invasion to capture one leader.
The following year, the U.S. deployed forces in the Persian Gulf after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, which turned Washington against its former Iraqi ally Saddam Hussein. U.S. supported the Kuwaiti monarchy and the Muslim fundamentalist monarchy in neighboring Saudi Arabia against the secular nationalist Iraq regime. In January 1991, the U.S..and its allies unleashed a massive bombing assault against Iraqi government and military targets, in an intensity beyond the raids of World War II and Vietnam. Up to 200,000 Iraqis were killed in the war and its imemdiate aftermath of rebellion and disease, including many civilians who died in their villages, neighborhoods, and bomb shelters. The U.S. continued economic sanctions that denied health and energy to Iraqi civilians, who died by the hundreds of thousands, according to United Nations agencies. The U.S. also instituted "no-fly zones" and virtually continuous bombing raids, yet Saddam was politically bolstered as he was militarily weakened.
In the 1990s, the U.S. military led a series of what it termed "humanitarian interventions" it claimed would safeguard civilians. Foremost among them was the 1992 deployment in the African nation of Somalia, torn by famine and a civil war between clan warlords. Instead of remaining neutral, U.S. forces took the side of one faction against another faction, and bombed a Mogadishu neighborhood. Enraged crowds, backed by foreign Arab mercenaries, killed 18 U.S. soldiers, forcing a withdrawal from the country.
Other so-called "humanitarian interventions" were centered in the Balkan region of Europe, after the 1992 breakup of the multiethnic federation of Yugoslavia. The U.S. watched for three years as Serb forces killed Muslim civilians in Bosnia, before its launched decisive bombing raids in 1995. Even then, it never intervened to stop atrocities by Croatian forces against Muslim and Serb civilians, because those forces were aided by the U.S. In 1999, the U.S. bombed Serbia to force President Slobodan Milosevic to withdraw forces from the ethnic Albanian province of Kosovo, which was torn a brutal ethnic war. The bombing intensified Serbian expulsions and killings of Albanian civilians from Kosovo, and caused the deaths of thousands of Serbian civilians, even in cities that had voted strongly against Milosevic. When a NATO occupation force enabled Albanians to move back, U.S. forces did little or nothing to prevent similar atrocities against Serb and other non-Albanian civilians. The U.S. was viewed as a biased player, even by the Serbian democratic opposition that overthrew Milosevic the following year.
Even when the U.S. military had apparently defensive motives, it ended up attacking the wrong targets. After the 1998 bombings of two U.S. embassies in East Africa, the U.S. "retaliated" not only against Osama Bin Laden's training camps in Afghanistan, but a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan that was mistakenly said to be a chemical warfare installation. Bin Laden retaliated by attacking a U.S. Navy ship docked in Yemen in 2000. After the 2001 terror attacks on the United States, the U.S. military is poised to again bomb Afghanistan, and possibly move against other states it accuses of promoting anti-U.S. "terrorism," such as Iraq and Sudan. Such a campaign will certainly ratchet up the cycle of violence, in an escalating series of retaliations that is the hallmark of Middle East conflicts. Afghanistan, like Yugoslavia, is a multiethnic state that could easily break apart in a new catastrophic regional war. Almost certainly more civilians would lose their lives in this tit-for-tat war on "terrorism" than the 3,000 civilians who died on September 11.
Some common themes can be seen in many of these U.S. military interventions.
First, they were explained to the U.S. public as defending the lives and rights of civilian populations. Yet the military tactics employed often left behind massive civilian "collateral damage." War planners made little distinction between rebels and the civilians who lived in rebel zones of control, or between military assets and civilian infrastructure, such as train lines, water plants, agricultural factories, medicine supplies, etc. The U.S. public always believe that in the next war, new military technologies will avoid civilian casualties on the other side. Yet when the inevitable civilian deaths occur, they are always explained away as "accidental" or "unavoidable."
Second, although nearly all the post-World War II interventions were carried out in the name of "freedom" and "democracy," nearly all of them in fact defended dictatorships controlled by pro-U.S. elites. Whether in Vietnam, Central America, or the Persian Gulf, the U.S. was not defending "freedom" but an ideological agenda (such as defending capitalism) or an economic agenda (such as protecting oil company investments). In the few cases when U.S. military forces toppled a dictatorship--such as in Grenada or Panama--they did so in a way that prevented the country's people from overthrowing their own dictator first, and installing a new democratic government more to their liking.
Third, the U.S. always attacked violence by its opponents as "terrorism," "atrocities against civilians," or "ethnic cleansing," but minimized or defended the same actions by the U.S. or its allies. If a country has the right to "end" a state that trains or harbors terrorists, would Cuba or Nicaragua have had the right to launch defensive bombing raids on U.S. targets to take out exile terrorists? Washington's double standard maintains that an U.S. ally's action by definition "defensive," but that an enemy's retaliation is by definition "offensive."
Fourth, the U.S. often portrays itself as a neutral peacekeeper, with nothing but the purest humanitarian motives. After deploying forces in a country, however, it quickly divides the country or region into "friends" and "foes," and takes one side against another. This strategy tends to enflame rather than dampen a war or civil conflict, as shown in the cases of Somalia and Bosnia, and deepens resentment of the U.S. role.
Fifth, U.S. military intervention is often counterproductive even if one accepts U.S. goals and rationales. Rather than solving the root political or economic roots of the conflict, it tends to polarize factions and further destabilize the country. The same countries tend to reappear again and again on the list of 20th century interventions.
Sixth, U.S. demonization of an enemy leader, or military action against him, tends to strengthen rather than weaken his hold on power. Take the list of current regimes most singled out for U.S. attack, and put it alongside of the list of regimes that have had the longest hold on power, and you will find they have the same names. Qaddafi, Castro, Saddam, Kim, and others may have faced greater internal criticism if they could not portray themselves as Davids standing up to the American Goliath, and (accurately) blaming many of their countries' internal problems on U.S. economic sanctions.
One of the most dangerous ideas of the 20th century was that "people like us" could not commit atrocities against civilians.
- German and Japanese citizens believed it, but their militaries slaughtered millions of people.
- British and French citizens believed it, but their militaries fought brutal colonial wars in Africa and Asia.
- Russian citizens believed it, but their armies murdered civilians in Afghanistan, Chechnya, and elsewhere.
- Israeli citizens believed it, but their army mowed down Palestinians and Lebanese.
- Arabs believed it, but suicide bombers and hijackers targeted U.S. and Israeli civilians.
- U.S. citizens believed it, but their military killed hundreds of thousands in Vietnam, Iraq, and elsewhere.
Every country, every ethnicity, every religion, contains within it the capability for extreme violence. Every group contains a faction that is intolerant of other groups, and actively seeks to exclude or even kill them. War fever tends to encourage the intolerant faction, but the faction only succeeds in its goals if the rest of the group acquiesces or remains silent. The attacks of September 11 were not only a test for U.S. citizens attitudes' toward minority ethnic/racial groups in their own country, but a test for our relationship with the rest of the world. We must begin not by lashing out at civilians in Muslim countries, but by taking responsibility for our own history and our own actions, and how they have fed the cycle of violence.