It seems a comment on a post from reader Metal-or-die about Ahmed Chalabi’s involvement in fueling the protests against Jordan might have a kernel of truth to it.
This from the Jordan Times [full article here]:
A top Iraqi Shiite leader Imam Mohammad Mahdi Khalisi joined the lawmakers in rejecting the allegations. Petra quoted a statement by Khalisi’s office in Baghdad as accusing Iraqi politician “Ahmed Chalabi and an intelligence agency in an Iraq neighboring country of attempting to harm Jordan-Iraq ties.”
A Jordanian court sentenced Chalabi to 22 years in prison for fraud and embezzling $288 million from Petra Bank, which he founded and ran until its collapse in 1989, and moving the funds into Swiss accounts.”
Interesting revelation, no?
Regarding my need to see the world: When I said that 83% of Americans don’t have a passport, it wasn’t my intent to suggest that I was among that number.
Regarding the phrase “Iraqi tesistance”: HAhahahaha. Zarqawi is Jordanian, OBL is a Yemeni/Saudi, and out-of-uniform Syrian and Iranian military personnel are being arrested every week. The Iraqis have bought into voting. They’re not resisting. Even the Sunnis admit they made a mistake in boycotting the vote. It’s just clueless radicals like yourself who can’t accept the truth: the invasion worked. Iraqis are better off, and will have a responsive government for the first time. Bush was right.
Regarding the oil question: North America has a lot of oil, too – more than Arabia – the problem is that it is more expensive to extract. But as the price per barrel climbs, suddenly Alaskan and Canadian oil sources look more attractive. I’m sure that’s true in other places, too, like Russia. So the price per barrel can only climb so high before additional oil sources are brought online and increase supply to establish a price plateau. I’m not sure OPEC is particularly relevant any longer, and I doubt the Bush administration worries too much about OPEC these days. It’s firing blanks.
Hmmm….next time someone says Saddam and 9/11 in the same breath.
Now you know why EVERY single day a pipeline is blown up in Iraq. It’s not terrorists. It’s Iraqi resistance who know full well what would happen to their oil and oil fields.
Man this guy is a work of art.
I told Rivda to get some but I think Sterling hasn’t had booty in ages. I suggest you leave the US for a while, travel around. Go to France. See what they think of you there. Or to a Pub in Scotland, maybe. Then go to Berlin. Try Moscow.
Belgrade would be hella place to visit. Libya, Algeria and Nigeria. Then go through Pakistan and Bangladesh. Wherever you go pass out pamphlets of what you’ve been regurgitating here.
Or, conversely, go to the Sinai. Hang out with the Beduins in Dahab. Smoke some hashish, have some excellent mint tea and some roast lamb for dinner. Watch a bellydancer melt your prejudices away.
Sit and talk with an Arab family. Break bread with them. Then go to a Cairo cultural festival. And then go back to the US.
We’ll see if you haven’t changed your mind by then.
Webster’s defines “imperialism” thusly:
1 : imperial government, authority, or system
2 : the policy, practice, or advocacy of extending the power and dominion of a nation especially by direct territorial acquisitions or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas; broadly : the extension or imposition of power, authority, or influence [union imperialism]
Imperialism is the practice of empire-building and -running. Imperial is the adjective form of “empire”. That is, as I have said, not what the United States is doing. And hegemony is hegemony – they are different things, which is why they are different words, and I don’t deny hegemony. I also don’t think hegemony is necessarily a willful thing – it just happens when one country wields a disproportionate amount of influence. The United States is the hegemon. And if you’re using that skewed definition of “imperialism” – probably written by some 60s radical English professor – then OK, we’re imperialists and I don’t have a problem with it. I’m not going to apologize for what we’ve done in Iraq – I’m proud of it.
aka Jeff: It is presumptive. It’s also factual. Do you remember that cover of the Economist from a few years back, which depicted America’s view of the world? North America was gigantic and all the rest of the world dwindled almost to nothing. We’re a large country, self-sufficient in all the cultural and entertainment “stuff” that most people ever need. Most Americans, something like 83%, don’t even have a passport. The United States is very nearly its own world and the people in it, by and large, don’t pay very much attention to what goes on beyond the borders. The most popular song about 9/11 had this line in the refrain: “I watch CNN, but I’m not sure I could tell you the difference in Iraq and Iran.”
When the tsunami hit, American private charity to the affected areas was enormous – everyone I know gave at least a few dollars – but most Americans would be hard pressed to point out on a globe where it happened. Americans don’t want bad things to happen to people in other countries and we want to help when they do, but we’re just not interested in the rest of the world most of the time. Some Americans actually relish the hatred the French feel for us, and use French opposition as a contrarian indicator.
From our perspective, other countries are forever suffering problems that they can’t handle on their own, and so we have to step in and clean it up. Sometimes it’s an act of God, like the tsunami, other times it’s just a screwed up political system, like the Middle East. Whenever something needs to be fixed, who does everyone look to? The United States.