Re: [Marxism] Corporate media calling for deepening the war against Syria

[Clay Claiborne via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Just remember to quote people out of context and very selectively when you
want to attack rather than understand them. Its a typical
"anti-imperialist" way to respond. Just attack me and ignore the arguments
I make.

Clay Claiborne, Director
Vietnam: American Holocaust 
Linux Beach Productions
Venice, CA 90291
(310) 581-1536

Read my blogs at the Linux Beach 

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Corporate media calling for deepening the war against Syria

[Clay Claiborne via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Well said!

On 9/4/2015 1:01 AM, Michael Karadjis via Marxism wrote:


Oh, I thought I made quite clear when I sent the article that I didn't 
agree with a lot of it (check my post, not the piece of the article 
that Luko extracts and writes "Michael Karadjis wrote".


I


_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Corporate media calling for deepening the war against Syria

[Clay Claiborne via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On Friday, September 4, 2015 5:00 PM, A.R. G via Marxism wrote:
What makes you think that limited intervention along the lines of 
no-fly zones would create some sort of fundamentally different reality 
on the ground? Is there precedent for that working elsewhere? 

Duh! Libya!

I know Libya is the "anti-imperialist" poster child for a failed 
intervention but I consider it an example of a very successful NATO 
intervention that should be applauded and emulated. True Libya is a mess 
right now. That is often the case for the decade following a successful 
revolution. Besides, what was it before on the day when Qaddafi 
massacres 1200 prisoners in a yard or 700 protesters in Green Sq., or 
the daily terror that Libyans lived through for decades. The UN mandate 
was to save lives, not remake the Libyan state or Libyan society - that 
truly would have been imperialist intervention. Libya's problems today 
aren't the return of NATO intervention. Only those who think there was 
no Libyan uprising, just a NATO plot starting with the Tripoli housing 
protests in mid-January 2011, can think that. Libya's problems today are 
those of Libyans and I have no doubt that in time they will work them out.


So what do you think would be going on in Libya today had there been no 
no-fly zone? You think everything would be just peachy-keen? I think it 
would be like Syria. Libya is a mess right now, but with 1286 violent 
death so far in 2015 , it is a 
far, far safer place than Syria. Syrians are fleeing to Libya because it 
is safer. If not for the NATO intervention, Qaddafi would probably still 
have air supremacy today no matter how much territory he lost -  the 
thing about [regional] air supremacy - once you are "allowed" it by 
those who control global air supremacy, you need very little territory, 
just backers with deep pockets, to keep your side of the conflict going.


So to answer your question with a question: Why aren't barrel-bombs 
falling in Benghazi and Misrata and why are more people likely to die 
violently this week in Syria than this year in Libya?

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Corporate media calling for deepening the war against Syria

[Joseph Catron via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On Sun, Sep 6, 2015 at 11:44 PM, Clay Claiborne via Marxism <
marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:

I know Libya is the "anti-imperialist" poster child for a failed
> intervention but I consider it an example of a very successful NATO
> intervention that should be applauded and emulated.
>

Just remember this line if you're ever remotely tempted to take Clay's
opinions seriously, on grounds principled or pragmatic.

"Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen
lytlað."
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Corporate media calling for deepening the war against Syria (was: This is what it’s come to: Letting Syria die watching Syrians drown)

[Michael Karadjis via Marxism]

, those who have wavered the whole year, pretended there was no 
intervention, said, yeh, intervention is bad, but you know, ISIS and all 
that, those "against war" but never supported an anti-war movement, 
those who said, well, we have to help the Kurds (and stuff the Arabs??), 
etc etc, now have NO right to oppose an (imaginary) US intervention 
against Assad. It seems this is the thinking:


1. US Intervention against ISIS - OK. US Intervention against Assad, 
responsible for massively more violence than ISIS - oh no! imperialist 
intervention!


2. US Bombing from the sky ("with B-52s" or whatever they use, sorry 
haven't kept up) - OK. It kills civilians? Well, should be more careful. 
A US imposed no-fly zone that instead targets the warplanes in the sky 
and saves lives of civilians? Oh no! Imperialist intervention!


The irony being that the US is vigorously opposed to any no-fly zone! 
Anyone actually reading what has been going on with the US-Turkey 
agreement rather than relying on leftist sound-bites would know that the 
main reason for a two-month hold-up is the US-Turkish disagreement: 
Turkey wants the zone in the north, to be cleared of ISIS, to be a "safe 
zone" including being a "no-fly zone" while the US totally rejects such 
an idea, and only accepts it being an "ISIS-free zone." because if it 
was a safe zone/NFZ it might actually help the anti-Assad rebels, the 
last thing the US wants.


I tell you what, if two things sickened me the last few days, it is the 
Fortress Europe drowning Syrian refugees in the sea, and the liberalism 
of all those who think it is ONLY a refugee issue, because, in agreement 
with imperialism, they can only see ISIS in Syria, and refuse to 
confront the fact that most people flee Syria to avoid being bombed into 
the stone age by the regime. To admit the political reality is "too 
difficult".


-Original Message- 
From: A.R. G via Marxism

Sent: Friday, September 4, 2015 5:00 PM
To: Michael Karadjis
Subject: Re: [Marxism]Corporate media calling for deepening the war 
against Syria (was: This is what it’s come to: Letting Syria die 
watching Syrians drown)


  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

I can't say I agree with Luko, but I don't agree with Michael either. Do
you guys really think that this kind of intervention is any sort of
guarantee against the bloodshed in Syria? US troops on the ground in 
Iraq

oversaw and participated in endless and ongoing bloodshed in Iraq.
Likewise, US-backed regime changes throughout the world have never been
successful, stable, etc. What makes you think that limited intervention
along the lines of no-fly zones would create some sort of fundamentally
different reality on the ground? Is there precedent for that working
elsewhere?

The issue of the boy drowning is quite obvious: Europe's failure to care
for those who die as a result of wars and regime operations that it has
variably backed, attempted to overthrow, etc. I do not see how his death
tells us what is to be done about Syria. In fact, I remember asking many
times both on this list and elsewhere what needs to be done. Short of
flag-waving and solidarity actions with anti-regime flags it seems like
nothing.

- Amith

On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 2:25 AM, Lüko Willms 
<marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu>

wrote:


  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

on Donnerstag, 3. September 2015 at 16:47, Michael Karadjis via 
Marxism

wrote:

>  The one thing the democratic
> opposition wanted from the world was a no-fly zone and air-patrolled
> humanitarian corridors. Even that was too much to ask. There is no 
> going

> home now.

> And so I have to say to them, this is the reality, this is the
> result of all your anti-war activism, and now the people are 
> drowning in

> the sea.”

  Another House Nigger found to bolster the war drive.

  The problem for the corporate media is not the war, but that the war 
is
not intense enough. They want a direct armed intervention by the USofA 
and

other colonialists to take over the country.


Cheers,
Lüko Willms

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at:
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/amithrgupta%40gmail.com

___

[Marxism] Corporate media calling for deepening the war against Syria (was: This is what it’s come to: Letting Syria die watching Syrians drown)

[Lüko Willms via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

on Donnerstag, 3. September 2015 at 16:47, Michael Karadjis via Marxism wrote:

>  The one thing the democratic 
> opposition wanted from the world was a no-fly zone and air-patrolled 
> humanitarian corridors. Even that was too much to ask. There is no going
> home now.

> And so I have to say to them, this is the reality, this is the
> result of all your anti-war activism, and now the people are drowning in
> the sea.”

  Another House Nigger found to bolster the war drive. 

  The problem for the corporate media is not the war, but that the war is not 
intense enough. They want a direct armed intervention by the USofA and other 
colonialists to take over the country. 

 
Cheers, 
Lüko Willms

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Corporate media calling for deepening the war against Syria (was: This is what it’s come to: Letting Syria die watching Syrians drown)

[A.R. G via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

I can't say I agree with Luko, but I don't agree with Michael either. Do
you guys really think that this kind of intervention is any sort of
guarantee against the bloodshed in Syria? US troops on the ground in Iraq
oversaw and participated in endless and ongoing bloodshed in Iraq.
Likewise, US-backed regime changes throughout the world have never been
successful, stable, etc. What makes you think that limited intervention
along the lines of no-fly zones would create some sort of fundamentally
different reality on the ground? Is there precedent for that working
elsewhere?

The issue of the boy drowning is quite obvious: Europe's failure to care
for those who die as a result of wars and regime operations that it has
variably backed, attempted to overthrow, etc. I do not see how his death
tells us what is to be done about Syria. In fact, I remember asking many
times both on this list and elsewhere what needs to be done. Short of
flag-waving and solidarity actions with anti-regime flags it seems like
nothing.

- Amith

On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 2:25 AM, Lüko Willms 
wrote:

>   POSTING RULES & NOTES  
> #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
> #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
> *
>
> on Donnerstag, 3. September 2015 at 16:47, Michael Karadjis via Marxism
> wrote:
>
> >  The one thing the democratic
> > opposition wanted from the world was a no-fly zone and air-patrolled
> > humanitarian corridors. Even that was too much to ask. There is no going
> > home now.
>
> > And so I have to say to them, this is the reality, this is the
> > result of all your anti-war activism, and now the people are drowning in
> > the sea.”
>
>   Another House Nigger found to bolster the war drive.
>
>   The problem for the corporate media is not the war, but that the war is
> not intense enough. They want a direct armed intervention by the USofA and
> other colonialists to take over the country.
>
>
> Cheers,
> Lüko Willms
>
> _
> Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
> Set your options at:
> http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/amithrgupta%40gmail.com
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Corporate media calling for deepening the war against Syria (was: This is what it’s come to: Letting Syria die watching Syrians drown)

[A.R. G via Marxism]

te about 1/10 of the rate of
> the regime's warplanes), whereas those calling for some kind of
> intervention to stop Assad's genocide are calling for a no-fly zone, ie,
> something that shoots warplanes out of the sky, to protect civilians,
> rather than involving warplanes bombing below.
>
> Now, one who opposes the first, ongoing, US air war, has every right to be
> consistently anti-war and also oppose a no-fly zone (though if you don't
> then at least advocate a massive program of manpads, forget your crocodile
> tears for people being ripped to bits by "the war"). And those who oppose
> US bombing of ISIS have every right to be consistent and also oppose
> intervention against the regime.
>
> However, those who have wavered the whole year, pretended there was no
> intervention, said, yeh, intervention is bad, but you know, ISIS and all
> that, those "against war" but never supported an anti-war movement, those
> who said, well, we have to help the Kurds (and stuff the Arabs??), etc etc,
> now have NO right to oppose an (imaginary) US intervention against Assad.
> It seems this is the thinking:
>
> 1. US Intervention against ISIS - OK. US Intervention against Assad,
> responsible for massively more violence than ISIS - oh no! imperialist
> intervention!
>
> 2. US Bombing from the sky ("with B-52s" or whatever they use, sorry
> haven't kept up) - OK. It kills civilians? Well, should be more careful. A
> US imposed no-fly zone that instead targets the warplanes in the sky and
> saves lives of civilians? Oh no! Imperialist intervention!
>
> The irony being that the US is vigorously opposed to any no-fly zone!
> Anyone actually reading what has been going on with the US-Turkey agreement
> rather than relying on leftist sound-bites would know that the main reason
> for a two-month hold-up is the US-Turkish disagreement: Turkey wants the
> zone in the north, to be cleared of ISIS, to be a "safe zone" including
> being a "no-fly zone" while the US totally rejects such an idea, and only
> accepts it being an "ISIS-free zone." because if it was a safe zone/NFZ it
> might actually help the anti-Assad rebels, the last thing the US wants.
>
> I tell you what, if two things sickened me the last few days, it is the
> Fortress Europe drowning Syrian refugees in the sea, and the liberalism of
> all those who think it is ONLY a refugee issue, because, in agreement with
> imperialism, they can only see ISIS in Syria, and refuse to confront the
> fact that most people flee Syria to avoid being bombed into the stone age
> by the regime. To admit the political reality is "too difficult".
>
> -Original Message- From: A.R. G via Marxism
> Sent: Friday, September 4, 2015 5:00 PM
> To: Michael Karadjis
> Subject: Re: [Marxism]Corporate media calling for deepening the war
> against Syria (was: This is what it’s come to: Letting Syria die watching
> Syrians drown)
>
>
>   POSTING RULES & NOTES  
> #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
> #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
> *
>
> I can't say I agree with Luko, but I don't agree with Michael either. Do
> you guys really think that this kind of intervention is any sort of
> guarantee against the bloodshed in Syria? US troops on the ground in Iraq
> oversaw and participated in endless and ongoing bloodshed in Iraq.
> Likewise, US-backed regime changes throughout the world have never been
> successful, stable, etc. What makes you think that limited intervention
> along the lines of no-fly zones would create some sort of fundamentally
> different reality on the ground? Is there precedent for that working
> elsewhere?
>
> The issue of the boy drowning is quite obvious: Europe's failure to care
> for those who die as a result of wars and regime operations that it has
> variably backed, attempted to overthrow, etc. I do not see how his death
> tells us what is to be done about Syria. In fact, I remember asking many
> times both on this list and elsewhere what needs to be done. Short of
> flag-waving and solidarity actions with anti-regime flags it seems like
> nothing.
>
> - Amith
>
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 2:25 AM, Lüko Willms <marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu>
> wrote:
>
>   POSTING RULES & NOTES  
>> #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
>> #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
>> #3 Subscribe and post under an alias i