As National Security Advisor, Dr. Condoleezza Rice spoke at the US Institute of Peace on August 19, 2004. Some of what she said was morally indefensible, realpolitik at its worst.
While she was delivering what has increasingly come to be her favorite words of wisdom regarding the necessity of creating a 22nd state for Arabs (and second, not first, in the original borders of the Palestine Mandate as Britain received it on April 25, 1920 - Jordan being created out of the lion's share in 1922) at the Institute of Peace, she totally shot down questions relating to Kurdish anxieties and national aspirations in Iraq. Keep in mind that before the imperial Arab conquests in the 7th century CE, the Kurds had lived in Mesopotamia for millennia.
Here's some of what Rice had to say, however, about her Arab buddies: "The President believes that the Palestinian people deserve not merely their own state, but a just and democratic state that serves their interests and fulfills their decent aspirations."
Regardless of the very likely murderous effects that this will have on the sole, miniscule state of the Jews, Condi -- now true to State Department form -- simply brushes aside the Jews' concerns as she does with the Kurds. Her latest "deal", for example, at the Gaza-Egyptian crossing after Israel's unilateral withdrawal typifies this. Her likely next squeeze will be to force the Jews to virtually cut their own microscopic state in half so that Arabs will have contiguity between Gaza terrorists and West Bank jihadists. What this will do to Israel's own contiguity is of no matter.
Any Israeli leadership which permits this is a disgrace. Take the cut off in American aid and support that will be threatened instead. Better poor than dead.
And that cutoff will backfire tremendously on any American administration that does it. The American people are fair and not stupid. While "Dubya" won't be running for office again, his pals will, including a brother with probable presidential aspirations of his own.
Back to Iraq and the Kurds.
Despite the non-stop bloodshed and turmoil in the Arab areas of Iraq (Arabs continue to blow each other apart by the hundreds); despite the fact that hundreds of thousands of Kurds have been killed, maimed, turned into refugees, and the like by Iraqi and Syrian Arabs over the decades; despite the fact that the Kurds have been marked as traitors because of their close ties to America; despite the fact that the most stable and democratic areas in Iraq are undoubtedly in the Kurdish areas; despite all of this and more - Dr. Rice simply brushed off a question regarding a Kurdish referendum on independence (which showed that at least 80% of the Kurds wanted this) with the following disdain: "It's the role of leadership to convince people that they really ought to stay in the same body."
A sickening disgrace. Compare this hypocrisy to her Arab derriere-kissing.
Did she tell Arabs that they already have the bulk of "Palestine" and that others besides themselves are also entitled to a reasonable share of justice in this multiethnic region? Did she tell them that more than mere lip service is required to obtain and maintain that justice?
Did she council a post-Tito Yugoslavia to remain as one? We led the pack in bringing about its dissolution, promoting a jihadist Dar Al-Islam agenda that had been knocking at the Balkans' gates for numerous centuries. The first Battle of Kosovo was fought to prevent this by the Serbs' Stephan Dusan in 1389. We aided the onslaught in the name of Kosovo just a while back. That's the other side of the story most haven't heard. But it won us some points when we next bombed other Muslims in Afghanistan and Iraq.
America can and should do better than this.
While it's true that the Kurdish leader, Jalal Talabani, is now the president of Iraq, and that, since America's recent wars, the no-fly zones (created as an afterthought in the wake of the massacre of thousands of Kurds who revolted at George Bush the First's call, but were then left holding the bag by him) have permitted the blossoming of Kurdish democracy, autonomy and such in the north, it is also true that this is all very tenuous.
Right now, the majority Shi'a need the Kurds to help offset determined Sunni opponents and suicide bombers.
Truth be told, the only source of stability America can count on in Iraq comes from the Kurds - the very folks our State Department has full intentions to betray yet again, as it has disgracefully done too often before. Condi's words of advice at the Institute of Peace were nothing new.
So, here's my question, Dr. Rice - and from someone whose work on this subject can be found on recommended reference lists of leading universities all around the world, including Paris' famed Institut d'Etudes Politiques, where you spoke on February 8, 2005:
With more and more pressure coming to bear for an American withdrawal from Iraq sooner rather than later, what will you, your fellow State Department Arabists, and Dubya himself demand as justice for some thirty million truly stateless Kurds? All of you have no qualms about forcing a rejectionist, Arafatian/Hamas, good cop/bad cop state down Israel's throat, even though the alleged PLO moderates have also openly proclaimed their intent to destroy Israel as a Jewish State and have called all dealings with the Jews merely a Trojan Horse. Again, Arabs already have some two dozen states on over six million square miles of territory -- lands they conquered and forcibly Arabized from scores of millions of non-Arabs in the region.
While I truly hope your plans for Iraq succeed, and I have supported the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, the odds of you succeeding in forging an Iraqi nationalism triumphant over an Arab nationalism in Iraq are (I'll be generous) less than good. I'm sure you and your experts are familiar with the history of the previous attempts at doing this, so you know this - or at least you should.
After America pulls out and the likely Shi'a Islamic Republic of Iraq is established, what then?
We all know where much of the Shi'a's support is coming from - the ayatollah big brothers to the east.
[Part 1 of 2]
While she was delivering what has increasingly come to be her favorite words of wisdom regarding the necessity of creating a 22nd state for Arabs (and second, not first, in the original borders of the Palestine Mandate as Britain received it on April 25, 1920 - Jordan being created out of the lion's share in 1922) at the Institute of Peace, she totally shot down questions relating to Kurdish anxieties and national aspirations in Iraq. Keep in mind that before the imperial Arab conquests in the 7th century CE, the Kurds had lived in Mesopotamia for millennia.
Here's some of what Rice had to say, however, about her Arab buddies: "The President believes that the Palestinian people deserve not merely their own state, but a just and democratic state that serves their interests and fulfills their decent aspirations."
Regardless of the very likely murderous effects that this will have on the sole, miniscule state of the Jews, Condi -- now true to State Department form -- simply brushes aside the Jews' concerns as she does with the Kurds. Her latest "deal", for example, at the Gaza-Egyptian crossing after Israel's unilateral withdrawal typifies this. Her likely next squeeze will be to force the Jews to virtually cut their own microscopic state in half so that Arabs will have contiguity between Gaza terrorists and West Bank jihadists. What this will do to Israel's own contiguity is of no matter.
Any Israeli leadership which permits this is a disgrace. Take the cut off in American aid and support that will be threatened instead. Better poor than dead.
And that cutoff will backfire tremendously on any American administration that does it. The American people are fair and not stupid. While "Dubya" won't be running for office again, his pals will, including a brother with probable presidential aspirations of his own.
Back to Iraq and the Kurds.
Despite the non-stop bloodshed and turmoil in the Arab areas of Iraq (Arabs continue to blow each other apart by the hundreds); despite the fact that hundreds of thousands of Kurds have been killed, maimed, turned into refugees, and the like by Iraqi and Syrian Arabs over the decades; despite the fact that the Kurds have been marked as traitors because of their close ties to America; despite the fact that the most stable and democratic areas in Iraq are undoubtedly in the Kurdish areas; despite all of this and more - Dr. Rice simply brushed off a question regarding a Kurdish referendum on independence (which showed that at least 80% of the Kurds wanted this) with the following disdain: "It's the role of leadership to convince people that they really ought to stay in the same body."
A sickening disgrace. Compare this hypocrisy to her Arab derriere-kissing.
Did she tell Arabs that they already have the bulk of "Palestine" and that others besides themselves are also entitled to a reasonable share of justice in this multiethnic region? Did she tell them that more than mere lip service is required to obtain and maintain that justice?
Did she council a post-Tito Yugoslavia to remain as one? We led the pack in bringing about its dissolution, promoting a jihadist Dar Al-Islam agenda that had been knocking at the Balkans' gates for numerous centuries. The first Battle of Kosovo was fought to prevent this by the Serbs' Stephan Dusan in 1389. We aided the onslaught in the name of Kosovo just a while back. That's the other side of the story most haven't heard. But it won us some points when we next bombed other Muslims in Afghanistan and Iraq.
America can and should do better than this.
While it's true that the Kurdish leader, Jalal Talabani, is now the president of Iraq, and that, since America's recent wars, the no-fly zones (created as an afterthought in the wake of the massacre of thousands of Kurds who revolted at George Bush the First's call, but were then left holding the bag by him) have permitted the blossoming of Kurdish democracy, autonomy and such in the north, it is also true that this is all very tenuous.
Right now, the majority Shi'a need the Kurds to help offset determined Sunni opponents and suicide bombers.
Truth be told, the only source of stability America can count on in Iraq comes from the Kurds - the very folks our State Department has full intentions to betray yet again, as it has disgracefully done too often before. Condi's words of advice at the Institute of Peace were nothing new.
So, here's my question, Dr. Rice - and from someone whose work on this subject can be found on recommended reference lists of leading universities all around the world, including Paris' famed Institut d'Etudes Politiques, where you spoke on February 8, 2005:
With more and more pressure coming to bear for an American withdrawal from Iraq sooner rather than later, what will you, your fellow State Department Arabists, and Dubya himself demand as justice for some thirty million truly stateless Kurds? All of you have no qualms about forcing a rejectionist, Arafatian/Hamas, good cop/bad cop state down Israel's throat, even though the alleged PLO moderates have also openly proclaimed their intent to destroy Israel as a Jewish State and have called all dealings with the Jews merely a Trojan Horse. Again, Arabs already have some two dozen states on over six million square miles of territory -- lands they conquered and forcibly Arabized from scores of millions of non-Arabs in the region.
While I truly hope your plans for Iraq succeed, and I have supported the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, the odds of you succeeding in forging an Iraqi nationalism triumphant over an Arab nationalism in Iraq are (I'll be generous) less than good. I'm sure you and your experts are familiar with the history of the previous attempts at doing this, so you know this - or at least you should.
After America pulls out and the likely Shi'a Islamic Republic of Iraq is established, what then?
We all know where much of the Shi'a's support is coming from - the ayatollah big brothers to the east.
[Part 1 of 2]
