SHARON OPPOSED THE 2003 DISASTROUS WAR ON SADDAM – A BIG LESSON IN THIS 2014 ISRAELI ELECTION

The Bush/Blair/Aznar war on Iraq in 2003 was disastrous for Jews, Saddam was secular and his removal by Bush opened the door to present Iranian dominance and greatly endangers Israel in this very moment! Sharon opposed this horrific world episode!

A very big issue in this election is Israeli foreign policy and whether Israel is really an independent country especially in ideology as well as in physical reality? The premier example of this in recent times is when Sharon took a position of disagreement with Bush over the 2003 Iraq War. Not enough attention has been given to that, not by supporters of Israel who also happen to be like sheep following a particular line, and certainly not by Antisemites in Israel, the Arab world and the west who want the very opposite of the truth. The Israel haters like David Icke who are simply organs for the Iranian Antisemitic Press TV want to label “Zionism” as being reactionary. But Sharon did oppose the Bush 2003 war on Saddam!

 

Indeed, the truth is that a very big section of Israeli society were opposed to the Bush war on Saddam and this is most striking because the Jews of Israel on many scores had many accounts to settle with Saddam and indeed with the whole of the Iraq ruling elites, never mind the Baathists. There is a long history of Antisemitism in Iraq and among Iraqi Arabs against Jews and of course Israel. Yet a great section of Israeli Zionist society were very opposed to the Bush NeoCon war on Saddam in 2003. You also have to include Zionist opposition to the Tony Blair and Aznar role in that war as well. Although it is never talked about it is one of the most glorious episodes in Zionist history and is of immense importance today.

 

This historical record must be brought forward. It ties in as well with the reactionary role of the Israeli elites towards their position on Yugoslavia especially on Milosevic, also on their horrific and hopeless attitude towards all the events of the Arab Spring.

 

Although Sharon was utterly opposed to the 2003 war on Saddam and made his position well known to the American and other elites THE KEY THING IS Sharon did not publish this for the masses – neither the Israeli masses or the world masses. But the record states nevertheless that Sharon and a big section of the Israeli people opposed the war on Saddam

 

This article from the Jewish (historically socialist leaning) “Forward” magazine and website is the very proof that we need and this must be made as widely known as possible. The article is not an academic issue but relates very closely to every issue internationally today, and here I venture to suggest Mubarak, Gadhafi and now Assad – but also Putin

 

The silence in public of Sharon was the real problem and something of an historical tragedy. He was right but he needed to speak out boldly. That is the essence of real independence.

 

In all of the blogs and all of the leaders coming out of Israel today I see no sign that there is this necessary courage. We tell the truth here and we wait and see…

 

 

(start quote from Forward)

Publicly, Sharon played the silent ally; he neither criticized nor supported the Iraq adventure. One reason for his relative silence was Washington’s explicit request that Israel refrain from openly backing its invasion of an Arab country or in any way intervening, lest its blessing damn the United States in Arab eyes.

But sometime prior to March 2003, Sharon told Bush privately in no uncertain terms what he thought about the Iraq plan. Sharon’s words — revealed here for the first time — constituted a friendly but pointed warning to Bush. Sharon acknowledged that Saddam Hussein was an “acute threat” to the Middle East and that he believed Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction.

Yet according to one knowledgeable source, Sharon nevertheless advised Bush not to occupy Iraq. According to another source — Danny Ayalon, who was Israel’s ambassador to the United States at the time of the Iraq invasion, and who sat in on the Bush-Sharon meetings — Sharon told Bush that Israel would not “push one way or another” regarding the Iraq scheme.

According to both sources, Sharon warned Bush that if he insisted on occupying Iraq, he should at least abandon his plan to implant democracy in this part of the world. “In terms of culture and tradition, the Arab world is not built for democratization,” Ayalon recalls Sharon advising.

Be sure, Sharon added, not to go into Iraq without a viable exit strategy. And ready a counter-insurgency strategy if you expect to rule Iraq, which will eventually have to be partitioned into its component parts. Finally, Sharon told Bush, please remember that you will conquer, occupy and leave, but we have to remain in this part of the world. Israel, he reminded the American president, does not wish to see its vital interests hurt by regional radicalization and the spillover of violence beyond Iraq’s borders.

Sharon’s advice — reflecting a wealth of experience with Middle East issues that Bush lacked — was prescient. The American occupation of Iraq has ended up strengthening Iran, Israel’s number-one enemy, and enfranchising militant Shi’ite Islamists. A large part of Iraq is slipping into the Iranian orbit. Iraq’s western Anbar Province is increasingly dominated by militant jihadi Sunnis who could eventually threaten Syria and Jordan, the latter a strategic partner and geographic buffer for Israel.

All these developments harm vital Israeli interests. This past summer, Israel fought a war against two militant Islamist movements supported by Iran — Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza — that were enfranchised and legitimized in their anarchic countries thanks to Bush’s insistence on hasty and ill-advised democratic elections “in this part of the world.”

Had Sharon made his criticism public, citing the dangers posed to vital Israeli interests, might he have made a difference in the prewar debate in the United States and the world? Certainly he would have poured cold water on the postwar assertions of critics, like professors Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, who have fingered Israel, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and pro-Israelis in the administration for instigating the war. Ayalon, incidentally, was directed by Sharon to warn all Israelis visiting Washington not to encourage the American scheme for war in Iraq, lest Israel be blamed for its failure.

There were, of course, neoconservative types in Israel who did encourage the United States to occupy Iraq and advocated democratic elections wherever possible in the Middle East. But there were also many Israelis, this writer included, who spoke out openly and publicly against the American scheme.

http://forward.com/articles/9839/sharon-warned-bush/?#

VITAL FOR A UNITED FRONT IN ISRAELI ELECTION OF NETANYAHU, BENNETT, LIEBERMAN AND RELIGIOUS PATRIOTS TO KEEP TRAITORS OUT

These two pictures, the first is the Islamic State, the second above is the result of the “Palestinian” narrative are the same thing

The Israeli election in March by itself is not going to decide anything. Yet it is still of absolute importance. It is most important that the headline above is made reality (and we will explain why)

Israel is in a race against time.  These are some issues that are at play:

  1. The way that Christian Antisemitism is changing into a new force behind the lies in the narrative of the “Palestinians” and how this is joining with the deadly Antisemitism of the Muslim world which has its roots in Muslim ideology. This combined force is a great threat which must be understood theoretically as well as combatted in a practical way.
  2. The changing international situation which combines many factors, too numerous to cover here. Of great importance are these: The role of ideology in the world today. This takes many challenging forms. One is how the “Palestinian” narrative has been sold. Also the power of the modern Media in spreading all kinds of lies, seen very vividly in Yugoslavia, when the great Lie of Srebrenica “massacre” was sold most effectively by a Media, and followed on from many other lies such as the Racak “massacre” and where a whole people were successfully lied against over many years, lies very difficult to stand up against. Yes a people can today be hammered by the Media into the ground.
  3. The changing situation in America is partly a continuation of the Yugoslavia Big Lie. If the Media could sell lies like Racak and Srebrenica then it also could place into power Obama, and successfully cover the CIA roots of his family (His Father as a CIA asset under Tom Mboyo, his mother as a lifelong CIA asset or agent, his stepfather Soetoro as a very central Indonesian CIA asset involved in the massacre in the Indonesian countryside of at least a million Indonesian communist youth, mainly country youth, who had been systematically misled by the “peaceful road to socialism” of Stalinism. Bill Ayers proved by Jared Israel to be a CIA agent as was his wife, and their role in the student movement of the 60s acting as obvious agents provocateurs (Jared proved the links then between Obama and Ayers and raises the idea that they were all at that time being directed by the CIA)
  4. That is an important factor in this Israeli election although few may discuss it. The reality is this…from Reagan on, every one of them, especially Bush Snr. and Bush Jnr., all have been most dangerous towards the Jews , all are under the sway of the CIA and the US State Dept.
  5. There have been massive mistakes made by Israeli leaders and we must understand these mistakes and what are their roots. Sharon was right in opposing bitterly the Bush war on Saddam in 2003. Sharon travelled to America to argue against this war. His big mistake was that he did this in secret. This was fatal because the Antisemites of Right and Left convinced the world he was arguing for the war.
  6. The war against Saddam was the greatest blow against Israel, Jews and all of us progressives in the world. Not because Saddam was blameless. But because he was a secular politician as was Nasser. He was thus like a finger in the dyke holding back the forces of anti-rational Islam. If Sharon had opposed the war on Saddam and stated his correct reason very publicly…different ball game entirely. To understand the issue of the danger to Israel from Iran and its Nuclear Bomb plans then it is necessary to understand that single episode of Bush overthrowing Saddam. All has followed from that.
  7. That though was nothing to the silence of the Israeli rulers and elites when Obama and the Jihad were toppling Ben Ali, Gaghbo, Mubarak above all, and also Gadhafi. Sharon with his “privacy” was weak but this was total scandal for Jews! Many like Caroline Glick had joined the war on Saddam but by now had changed (having with difficulty learned) and were opposing Obama in say the overthrow of Mubarak. But the Israeli Government said not a word.
  8. This leads to the present because it is easy to take a position on past events. But what about in the present Assad, the promotion of Jihad morphing into Islamic State against Assad, and what about Ted Cruz. Ted Cruz travelled recently to a conference in America which was slated as defending the Christians of Syria and Iraq and proceeded by attacking Assad and calling for the destruction of Assad. Cruz said basically “I will not defend the Christians of Syria and Iraq” unless they shape up in relation to Jews and Israel. Bottom line Cruz did not and does not defend the Christians against the Jihad. Israel (at least its leaders) is part and parcel of that Cruz treachery towards the Christians which is contained within the Assad issue. We say defend Assad UNCONDITIONALLY against Obama and the Jihad, while do not forgive or lower your guard against Assad’s Antisemitism. That is a correct and principled position but nobody in Israel holds it.

 

SO THERE ARE MANY ISSUES IN THIS ELECTION AND ISRAELI LEADERS HAVE SHOWN THEY ARE NOT ADEQUATE TO THIS PERIOD OF INTENSE THEORETICAL AND PHYSICAL CHALLENGES.

 

So then to be super practical!…A new leadership is required. But what is it? What leadership can meet this period?

 

I say it will be a Trotskyist leadership! But the Israeli people know hardly a thing about this aspect of history. They see only Labour, revisionist left and Stalinist traitors. So that is the sad reality. We have to deal with things as they are.

 

The election will not deal with these vital issues. But the worst outcome is that traitors take power in Israel. I mean the open traitors like Herzog and Livni. The best is that Netanyahu, Bennett and Lieberman can join with some religious patriots and thereby form a government. This allows the discussion to take place. If the traitors like Lapid take power in any way they will open the door to the Obama CIA and you remember what happened to those hapless millions of communist cadres in the Indonesian massacre all those years ago, with Obamas step dad in the fore of the CIA Suharto major killing spree. Without leaders that can happen anywhere today.

 

So vital issue in this election…major really major effort to vote Netanyahu, especially vote Likud, vote especially for Bennett, vote for Lieberman because the Russian vote is vital too, and vote for religious patriots. To continue the discussion of the way forward in this difficult world. Against any kind of complacency! To allow Livni, Herzog or Lapid near power is to say “Here Jihadists place your rockets on the hills overlooking Ben Gurion Airport a few miles off”. Not advisable at all!