oaf@mit-vax.UUCP (Oded Feingold) (01/15/86)
The brave commandoes who heroically attacked filthy Israeli spies
(and their American running-dog lackeys) in Roma and Wien airports did
NOT owe allegiance to the glorious Libyan People's Republic (and its
illustrious research bureau) but to the great cause of the Palestinian
people in its historic struggle with the Zionist entity and its American
master, the great Shaitan, of which more later. [Translation: It was a
dark and stormy night.]
True, Libya may have helped with a leetle misdirection [passports
lifted from Tunisian spies last summer], but the point of departure was
Lebanon, and the guiding force and source of arms was SYRIA. It sorta
stands to reason, no? Nothing happens in Lebanon except at Syrian
sufferance. Also, the US and Israeli intelligence services report that
that's where the blame - er, credit - resides. Aint that what we pays
them for?
------------------------------
So why doesn't the US attack Syria? Two reasons:
1. We are scared to death of the USSR, because Reagan unwisely
chose to invest more in strategic weapons (of which there are already
plenty) and less in conventional deterrence. For this, the Soviet moles
in the cabinet and defense department can take well-deserved credit.
WITH GOOD REASON -- in anything short of nuclear confrontation, they can
crunch us, and they know we know it. Syria is closely allied with the
USSR, and an attack on her can be expected to call down a heavy Soviet
response.
2. The Syrians are playing Americans against themselves, on the one
hand supporting heroic Palestinians in their angelic defense of homeland
and dignity (coincidentally being the Soviet cat's paw), on the other
"trying to convince" armed factions in Lebanon to release some 6 or so
American citizens held in custody. Dimwit that he is, Reagan is utterly
incapable of finding his way out of that trap. Assad is a chess player,
and has hamstrung the entire US state department. The US doesn't stand
a chance, except maybe upsetting the chessboard. [Pass the fried
continent when you're finished with it.]
------------------------------
So why doesn't Israel attack Syria? Several reasons:
1. They are scared to death of the USSR, because Reagan unwisely
chose to invest more in ... (you know the rest), so the US can't
counterbalance a Soviet response to their moving on Syria. [chorus]
2. It's too late - since Israel invaded Lebanon and squooshed the
Syrian/Soviet SAM system the latter have rebuilt with a vengeance. But
the Lebanon invasion was such a pyrrhic victory militarily, and utter
defeat politically, that the Israelis been unwilling to try preventive
raids on Syria's growing air-defense system. Syria is now so strong
that the only way to hit them and make it vala la pena is a full-scale
invasion. Serious stuff - where's the excuse? Anyway, it won't happen.
The Soviets can't be bluffed again. Thanks, Ronnie!
3. As mentioned above, Assad is a chess player. He can be counted
on to keep a clear head. Israel has a chance of convincing him that
some form of coexistence is the way to go; if it does so, Assad will
cheerfully go for a de facto peace, even given a de jure state of
confrontation. Note that Assad is doesn't hesitate to kill off Islamic
fundamentalists (Hama 1981<?>) or Palestinians (Lebanon 1975-86). For
an example of similar "friendly" neighbors, check out King Hussein of
Jordan. For a more limited example, check out king Fahd of Saudi Arabia
- he knows how to kill Moslem fundamentalists too. Nice thing about
dictatorial governments: If they're well-managed, they make pretty
solid neighbors or even allies, something our bleeding-heart liberal
contributors don't understand. (Of course, it's a high-Q circuit - if
poorly managed they're prone to catastrophic failure, unlike
parliamentary demokrakies. Example: Iran.)
4. If you believe Noam Chomsky, Israel WANTS her opponents to be
fanatical terrorists - that buys political leverage for her [genocidal?
theocratic? terroristic? nuclear-crazy? foolish? cute? slave to
American dictates?] policies at home and abroad. Why cut off the flow
of wonderful homicidal maniacs and lose that great source of internal
public acquiescence, that great excuse for American military aid, that
terrific supply of popular sympathy in Europe and among the dirt farmers
of Tibet? After all, Israel is dedicated to world domination, being
ready to sacrifice every drop of its citizens' blood to re-establish old
testicle biblical dominance - what's a few civilians more or less, as
long as their deaths serve the murderous political programme? [I SAID
"if you believe Noam Chomsky." Sheesh!]
------------------------------
So what's gonna happen?
The Israelis will go home and lick their wounds - they can't do
anything. If you believe Noam Chomsky, they're happy. By the way, I
sell toll bridges, in case someone needs an investment opportunity.
Syria and the USSR will grow ever bolder, secure in the knowledge
that they can do whatever they want. The US is in full-scale retreat --
we will not interfere.
Khaddafi, if he doesn't die of laughter, will grow rich and happy in
the public attention, the renewed support from the Arab world (with his
hit squads, what Arab leader would dare oppose him?) and the increased
Soviet armamentation. Then one fine day the KGB will cut his head off
and install someone a bit more reliable instead. So he'll get his, but
you'll have to crawl to Gorbachev to get it done.
The US is going to scream and yell (at Libya -- that's safe: Not at
Syria or the USSR) and everybody except the terminally brain-softened
American public will realize we've been kicked in the butt and can't do
a thing to get revenge. Well, maybe not _direct_ revenge: See below.
==============================
REVENGE: we'll invade Nicaragua -- no way Reagan is going to let
that defeat stay at the top of the headlines. Count on its happening
within a month. Good thing too - it'll let the gummint declare yet
another state of emergency (Remember the one we called last time, when
the Nicaraguans were about to invade Dubuque and we forestalled them by
embargoing their bananas?) and this time go to war, clean all the
commies and faggots out of public life and throw them in preventive
detention where they belong. As Edwin Meese sez, you probably won't be
arrested if you're not guilty - why bother with that greasy
constitutional rights stuff?
Remember last time? 241 marines get creamed via an appalling
security failure, and suddenly we have the successful invasion of
Grenada to cheer about. Betcha forgot all about those kids in Beirut,
right? Betcha also understand exactly why they were there too.
==============================
Latitudinarian Lobster and the other pinkoes on the net, tell your
buddies to get their tails out of Managua NOW, before our brave boys in
green ship them home in pine boxes. I'd say your lead time can be
counted in days, weeks at the outside.
------------------------------
Aftermath
Israel loses, the US loses, the Syrians and Soviets win. _Totally_.
Next time, they'll be bolder. Better invest in pain-killers, kiddies -
our chins can expect a pounding over the next few months.
The Europeans are being trained to do exactly what the Soviets and
(certain) Arabs tell them to. In future, like well-behaved doggies,
they can be expected to show more and more facility at begging, shaking
hands, and rolling over and playing dead. (Between beatings - the
instructional methodology of choice.)
As go the Palestinians, does anyone dream they'd get a fair shake
from Syria? From the USSR? What do they care who wins the
countryconquering game? They'll always be the ones getting stomped, and
we will never be short of "terrorists." Mr. Aouriri, I hope you're
happy... By the way, you guys who scream about death to baby-killers
gotta be taught to suck eggs. The world is not that simple. But if
you're really up for getting your violent rocks off, enlist now (the
marines offer the most mobility in the shortest time, for my money
anyway) and kill a Central American Commie or two. Hope that helps...
Thanks for reading this far. Feel free to argue any of the points
above. Net.politics has been too damn quiet recently.
--
Oded Feingold MIT AI Lab. 545 Tech Square Cambridge, Mass. 02139
OAF%OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA {harvard, ihnp4!mit-eddie}!mitvax!oaf 617-253-8598tedrick@ernie.BERKELEY.EDU (Tom Tedrick) (01/16/86)
(OK, here is my solution to the problems in the Middle East :-)
What do the Russians want? Well, they have been trying to
get warm water ports in the middle east for centuries. Why
not a joint American/Israeli/Soviet alliance aiming at giving
the Soviets more territory in the middle east? Say encourage
them to take over Iran for a start. That way:
(1). The Soviets are happy
(2). The fools in the middle east who think the Soviets
are their friends may wake up.
(3). We get revenge on the Iranians.
(4). The Soviets spend the next 20 years trying to pacify
Iran and give us time to figure out what to do next.
(5). Islam gets a push towards the dustbin of history where
it belongs. Better that than letting Islamic fanatics
push us into world war 3.
(6). We can buy our oil just as well from the Soviets as from
lunatics like Khadafy.
(7). The middle east would probably be more stable with the Soviets
in control than it is now.
(8). In return the Jews are allowed to leave the USSR and we benefit
from their scientific knowledge so as to come out on top
if war ever comes, while without Jews Soviet culture
sinks into oblivion.
(9). We three countries monopolize star wars technology so as
to safeguard ourselves against nuclear attack by the
third world, and establish a "Pax Russo/Israeli/American",
dividing the rest of the world into spheres of influence.
I think that is a fine deal for our side.
This alliance is overdue and best made soon, before the nuclear
genie starts working for madmen like Khadafy. The Soviets are
smart enough to realize that their self interest is in avoiding
a conflict with us if they can achieve their goals of acquiring
more territory in the middle east without one.paturi@harvard.UUCP (Ramamohan Paturi) (01/16/86)
On Oded Feingold's mention of Noam Chomsky: An insinuation against Noam Chomsky would not be enough to put him down or to ignore him. He deserves a criticism with the same standards he sets forth for himself. It would be refreshing to have an honest criticism of his views. Ramamohan Paturi paturi@harvard.HARVARD.EDU.ARPA
mahoney@bach.DEC (01/18/86)
---------------------Reply to mail dated 15-JAN-1986 19:09--------------------- >Posted by: decwrl!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!mit-vax!oaf >Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA >Keywords: Coward, liar, genocide, scapegoat, idiot, Chomsky >Summary: Eduardo Krell wins > > > The brave commandoes who heroically attacked filthy Israeli spies >(and their American running-dog lackeys) in Roma and Wien airports did >NOT owe allegiance to the glorious Libyan People's Republic (and its >illustrious research bureau) but to the great cause of the Palestinian >people in its historic struggle with the Zionist entity and its American >master, the great Shaitan, of which more later. [Translation: It was a >dark and stormy night.] > True, Libya may have helped with a leetle misdirection [passports >lifted from Tunisian spies last summer], but the point of departure was >Lebanon, and the guiding force and source of arms was SYRIA. It sorta >stands to reason, no? Nothing happens in Lebanon except at Syrian >sufferance. Also, the US and Israeli intelligence services report that >that's where the blame - er, credit - resides. Aint that what we pays >them for? > ------------------------------ > > So why doesn't the US attack Syria? Two reasons: > 1. We are scared to death of the USSR, because Reagan unwisely >chose to invest more in strategic weapons (of which there are already >plenty) and less in conventional deterrence. For this, the Soviet moles >in the cabinet and defense department can take well-deserved credit. >WITH GOOD REASON -- in anything short of nuclear confrontation, they can >crunch us, and they know we know it. Syria is closely allied with the >USSR, and an attack on her can be expected to call down a heavy Soviet >response. > 2. The Syrians are playing Americans against themselves, on the one >hand supporting heroic Palestinians in their angelic defense of homeland >and dignity (coincidentally being the Soviet cat's paw), on the other >"trying to convince" armed factions in Lebanon to release some 6 or so >American citizens held in custody. Dimwit that he is, Reagan is utterly >incapable of finding his way out of that trap. Assad is a chess player, >and has hamstrung the entire US state department. The US doesn't stand >a chance, except maybe upsetting the chessboard. [Pass the fried >continent when you're finished with it.] > ------------------------------ > > So why doesn't Israel attack Syria? Several reasons: > 1. They are scared to death of the USSR, because Reagan unwisely >chose to invest more in ... (you know the rest), so the US can't >counterbalance a Soviet response to their moving on Syria. [chorus] > 2. It's too late - since Israel invaded Lebanon and squooshed the >Syrian/Soviet SAM system the latter have rebuilt with a vengeance. But >the Lebanon invasion was such a pyrrhic victory militarily, and utter >defeat politically, that the Israelis been unwilling to try preventive >raids on Syria's growing air-defense system. Syria is now so strong >that the only way to hit them and make it vala la pena is a full-scale >invasion. Serious stuff - where's the excuse? Anyway, it won't happen. >The Soviets can't be bluffed again. Thanks, Ronnie! > 3. As mentioned above, Assad is a chess player. He can be counted >on to keep a clear head. Israel has a chance of convincing him that >some form of coexistence is the way to go; if it does so, Assad will >cheerfully go for a de facto peace, even given a de jure state of >confrontation. Note that Assad is doesn't hesitate to kill off Islamic >fundamentalists (Hama 1981<?>) or Palestinians (Lebanon 1975-86). For >an example of similar "friendly" neighbors, check out King Hussein of >Jordan. For a more limited example, check out king Fahd of Saudi Arabia >- he knows how to kill Moslem fundamentalists too. Nice thing about >dictatorial governments: If they're well-managed, they make pretty >solid neighbors or even allies, something our bleeding-heart liberal >contributors don't understand. (Of course, it's a high-Q circuit - if >poorly managed they're prone to catastrophic failure, unlike >parliamentary demokrakies. Example: Iran.) > 4. If you believe Noam Chomsky, Israel WANTS her opponents to be >fanatical terrorists - that buys political leverage for her [genocidal? >theocratic? terroristic? nuclear-crazy? foolish? cute? slave to >American dictates?] policies at home and abroad. Why cut off the flow >of wonderful homicidal maniacs and lose that great source of internal >public acquiescence, that great excuse for American military aid, that >terrific supply of popular sympathy in Europe and among the dirt farmers >of Tibet? After all, Israel is dedicated to world domination, being >ready to sacrifice every drop of its citizens' blood to re-establish old >testicle biblical dominance - what's a few civilians more or less, as >long as their deaths serve the murderous political programme? [I SAID >"if you believe Noam Chomsky." Sheesh!] > ------------------------------ > > So what's gonna happen? > The Israelis will go home and lick their wounds - they can't do >anything. If you believe Noam Chomsky, they're happy. By the way, I >sell toll bridges, in case someone needs an investment opportunity. > Syria and the USSR will grow ever bolder, secure in the knowledge >that they can do whatever they want. The US is in full-scale retreat -- >we will not interfere. > Khaddafi, if he doesn't die of laughter, will grow rich and happy in >the public attention, the renewed support from the Arab world (with his >hit squads, what Arab leader would dare oppose him?) and the increased >Soviet armamentation. Then one fine day the KGB will cut his head off >and install someone a bit more reliable instead. So he'll get his, but >you'll have to crawl to Gorbachev to get it done. > The US is going to scream and yell (at Libya -- that's safe: Not at >Syria or the USSR) and everybody except the terminally brain-softened >American public will realize we've been kicked in the butt and can't do >a thing to get revenge. Well, maybe not _direct_ revenge: See below. > ============================== > REVENGE: we'll invade Nicaragua -- no way Reagan is going to let >that defeat stay at the top of the headlines. Count on its happening >within a month. Good thing too - it'll let the gummint declare yet >another state of emergency (Remember the one we called last time, when >the Nicaraguans were about to invade Dubuque and we forestalled them by >embargoing their bananas?) and this time go to war, clean all the >commies and faggots out of public life and throw them in preventive >detention where they belong. As Edwin Meese sez, you probably won't be >arrested if you're not guilty - why bother with that greasy >constitutional rights stuff? > Remember last time? 241 marines get creamed via an appalling >security failure, and suddenly we have the successful invasion of >Grenada to cheer about. Betcha forgot all about those kids in Beirut, >right? Betcha also understand exactly why they were there too. > ============================== > > Latitudinarian Lobster and the other pinkoes on the net, tell your >buddies to get their tails out of Managua NOW, before our brave boys in >green ship them home in pine boxes. I'd say your lead time can be >counted in days, weeks at the outside. > ------------------------------ > > Aftermath > > Israel loses, the US loses, the Syrians and Soviets win. _Totally_. >Next time, they'll be bolder. Better invest in pain-killers, kiddies - >our chins can expect a pounding over the next few months. > The Europeans are being trained to do exactly what the Soviets and >(certain) Arabs tell them to. In future, like well-behaved doggies, >they can be expected to show more and more facility at begging, shaking >hands, and rolling over and playing dead. (Between beatings - the >instructional methodology of choice.) > As go the Palestinians, does anyone dream they'd get a fair shake >from Syria? From the USSR? What do they care who wins the >countryconquering game? They'll always be the ones getting stomped, and >we will never be short of "terrorists." Mr. Aouriri, I hope you're >happy... By the way, you guys who scream about death to baby-killers >gotta be taught to suck eggs. The world is not that simple. But if >you're really up for getting your violent rocks off, enlist now (the >marines offer the most mobility in the shortest time, for my money >anyway) and kill a Central American Commie or two. Hope that helps... > > Thanks for reading this far. Feel free to argue any of the points >above. Net.politics has been too damn quiet recently. >-- > >Oded Feingold MIT AI Lab. 545 Tech Square Cambridge, Mass. 02139 >OAF%OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA {harvard, ihnp4!mit-eddie}!mitvax!oaf 617-253-8598