The old Persian Empire which once included large swaths of present
day Iraq and some of what are now ex-Soviet Republics, has since
shrunk very considerably, to what is now its present size. I don't
know to what extent the present Iranian regime adheres to the concept
of Dar-al Islam - that once Muslim (as Spain was during its Golden
Age) then Muslim forever - but it's certainly an insult to the great
Iranian nation to ever talk about its re-colonisation when they have
never been colonised before
On 30 Dec, 16:00, "Abdul Bangura" <th...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Most of our troops are sitting in Kuwait. Obama wants Kuwait to take even more, but the Kuwaitis, being weary of his "Drone Diplomacy," are refusing to take more US troops.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Ikhide
> To: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com
> Sent: 12/30/2011 9:12:51 AM
> Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Iran Regime Change, Invasion,Occupation & Re-colonization Is Imminent
>
> .In terms of foreign policy, I would say that President Barack Hussein Obama is gleefully championing a Bush-Cheney dynasty. From my perspective, his foreign policy is one of cowboy diplomacy deployed against brown people; his recall of troops from Iraq doesn't impress me. He is too eager to please the wrong people.
>
> Going by the definition of conventional wars, I would argue that there will never be another world war again, ever. I would also argue that to the extent that euro-centric world views were so insular, the first two "world wars" were really not world wars. Many brown nations had no dogs in their fight; they may have been conscripted. I would also argue that the real world war has been raging, reaching a near crescendo come 9-11. Advances in technology, the digital age have destroyed boundaries and brought friends and foes face to face nose to nose. It is frightening when you think of it; we are all involved in various types of hand-to-hand combat. The enemy is known and unknown. If you don't believe me, try to enter the US these days, the fear on all sides is palpable. So, if I was to write history, I would say we are in the 3rd world war or in the first ever world war, semantics is deadly.
>
> My version of history would be scoffed at of course, because as the East Africans say it, and as Achebe shares it, until the lion tells his own story, the hunt will be glorified by the hunter. Our lions and lionesses are busy muttering to themselves, objectifying Africa and us for crumbs, so do not look to them for relief.
>
> It is what it is and I am convinced that my mother is right; this is a mysterious relentless march to a destination we are not happy with, but one where we must end up. But it sure is fascinating to see who is written in and out of history. Every day young warriors of color swim mean seas, scale high peaks and ride on the roofs of trains into America ("illegal aliens" they are called) and they forcibly change the landscape. You don't see that in the history books of this country, because it is HISstory.
>
> While we are being frog-marched to Babylon, we can at least sing ourselves our songs. Upon the death of Dim Ojukwu, many of us donned the flag of Biafra. One young Nigerian reached out to me on chat and asked what the flag was about. I told him. He asked me to tell him more about Biafra. I asked him how old he was. 35 years old. A man born in Nigeria in the 70's told me that very very little of Biafra was taught him in school. How can that be, I asked? Then he told me about the horrors of life as a "student" in the pretend classrooms of Nigeria from primary to tertiary. I have the entire transcript and one day when I have the time I shall fictionalize it and share with the world the war that our intellectuals have wreaked on our children.
>
> The new war has been amplified by the fact that for many reasons we are now moving from a municipality of us to a municipality of ME. If you cannot afford to be a municipality of you, na you sabi. Well, I had some time to run my mouth, I am done. I wish everyone a prosperous New Year and do not let anyone. especially Ikhide, live rent-free in your head. Ikhide simply says his bit and moves on to the next wahala.
>
> - Ikhide
>
> From: "Emeagwali, Gloria (History)" <emeagw...@mail.ccsu.edu>
> To: "usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com" <usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 11:38 PM
> Subject: RE: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Iran Regime Change, Invasion, Occupation & Re-colonization Is Imminent
>
> I agree with Adujie. World War 3 may be unfolding in slow motion. The Bush-Cheney dynasty is alive and well.
>
> Ron Paul could well be the best anti-war President we may ever have. His anti -war and anti-imperial
>
> sentiments are soothing and encouraging- but it turns out that the man is also
>
> a card-carrying racist....... What a pity. We are stuck between a killer drone and a hangman's noose.
>
> GE
>
> ..........................................................................
>
> Ron Paul, the Soldier's Choice
>
> By Timothy Egan, The New York Times
>
> 23 December 11
>
> So this is Christmas, season of peace, time to reflect on the people coming home from a war that most Americans say was not worth it,
>
> and those still fighting in another war that raises new doubts by the day.
>
> Many of the service members returning from Iraq - where nearly 4,500 American lives were lost, 100,000 Iraqi civilians were killed
>
> and about 600,000 Christians were forced to flee the country with other refugees - are paying close attention to the campaign to decide who will be commander in chief.
>
> What would they think of a candidate who says:
>
> "Far from defeating the enemy, our current polices provide incentive for more people to take up arms against us."
>
> And, "We have an empire. We can't afford it."
>
> And, "Acting as the world's policeman and nation-building weakens our country, puts our troops in harm's way, and
>
> sends precious resources to other nations in the midst of an historic economic crisis."
>
> The men and women in uniform probably wouldn't support this proponent of limited engagement. So goes the conventional
>
> wisdom, which holds that those in the military support a leader itching for a fight.
>
> But in fact, Representative Ron Paul, the congressman who favors the most minimalist American combat role of any major
>
> presidential candidate and who said all of the above quotes, has more financial support from active duty members of the
>
> service than any other politician.
>
> As of the last reporting date, at the end of September, Paul leads all candidates by far in donations from service members.
>
> This trend has been in place since 2008, when Paul ran for president with a similar stance: calling nonsense at hawk squawk from both parties.
> Joe Raedle/Getty ImagesIn 2005, Ron Paul attended a news conference with Representatives Walter Jones and Dennis Kucinich
>
> calling on President George W. Bush to phase out U.S. troops in Iraq.
>
> This year, Paul has 10 times the individual donations - totaling $113,739 - from the military as does Mitt Romney. And he has a
>
> hundred times more than Newt Gingrich, who sat out the Vietnam War with college deferments and now promises he would strike
>
> foes at the slightest provocation.
>
> What seems, at first blush, counterintuitive makes more sense upon further review. There's a long tradition of military people being
>
> attracted to politicians with Paul's strict interpretation of the Constitution.
>
> Not even a full 1 percent of Americans are active-duty military. The troops have become props for politicians who shower them with
>
> fulsome praise, while dreaming up schemes to send them into harm's way.
>
> Yet, these soldiers, sailors, air men and women, and assorted boots on the ground know the cost - in trauma, in lives ruined, in friends
>
> lost, in good intentions gone bad - of going to war far more than the 99 percent not currently serving. Where they put their money in
>
> a campaign, paltry though it may be in comparison to the corporate lords who control a majority of our politicians, says a great deal.
>
> And if the overwhelming service support for Ron Paul is any indication, the grunts of American foreign policy are gun-shy about
>
> further engagement in "useless wars," to use Dr. Paul's term.
>
> "It's not a good sign when the people doing the fighting are saying, �Why are we here?'" said Glen Massie, a Marine Corps veteran
>
> who lives in Des Moines, Iowa, and is supporting Paul for president. "They realize they're being utilized for other purposes - nation
>
> building and being world's policeman - and it's not what they signed up for."
>
> With his mumbled, avuncular asides and aversion to snappy sound bites, the 76-year-old congressman from Texas is now the unlikely
>
> frontrunner in some polls in Iowa. He will not be the nominee; powerful Republicans have pledged to destroy him should he gain
>
> strength beyond the cornfields of Sioux City. His libertarian positions - on marriage, drug laws and monetary policy - are poison for
>
> too many GOP stalwarts.
>
> He has other problems, as well. His position on health care for the elderly and working poor - basically, to let people fend for themselves,
>
> at the mercy of charity and the free enterprise system - is chilling and unrealistic. And in recent days, he's had trouble explaining some
>
> deplorable racist statements that went out under the name of his newsletter 20 years ago. (He has disavowed them.)
>
> But, strictly considered, as the iconoclast among the toy warriors seeking to be the next president, Paul has performed an admirable service.
>
> His jabbing at Gingrich, now trying to get traction with an unconstitutional plan to arrest judges whose rulings he disagrees with, has been
>
> particularly productive. In Gingrich, we have the perfect combination of a blowhard who wants to play with real weapons, a chicken hawk
>
> and a politician who wears a rental sign to cover the empty space where principles should be.
>
> Gingrich and other Republicans sound eager to rush into combat with Iran, should that theocratic nightmare of a country develop a nuclear
>
> weapon. Paul shrugs at the thought. And he's consistently called the Iraq war an unnecessary disaster.
>
> Romney claimed, in November, that President Obama's decision to bring home all American troops from Iraq was premature and represented
>
> "an astonishing failure." True to his trademark elasticity, Romney has now changed his mind and is fine with bringing the troops home.
>
> Perhaps he's been reading the polls that show that nearly two-thirds of all Americans think the Iraq war was not worth the loss of lives
>
> and treasury.
>
> The young people who actually fought in Iraq know better. They can tell a phony warrior from a real one. And in Ron Paul, the veteran
>
> who served as a flight surgeon for the Air Force, the man some call crazy, they hear a voice of sanity - at least in the realm of war and peace.
>
> ________________________________
> From: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com [usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul I. Adujie [lawcar...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 12:53 PM
> To: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com
> Subject: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Iran Regime Change, Invasion, Occupation & Re-colonization Is Imminent
>
> Iran Regime Change, Invasion, Occupation & Re-colonization Is Imminent
> Written by Paul I. Adujie
>
> War drums are beating louder and louder in America against Iran. The din and decibel are rising and getting louder.
>
> Preparatory steps are being taken irreversibly as the onset of invasion and occupation of Iran is becoming more and more apparent and its imminence glaringly clear. It is rather unmistakable.
>
> Public pronouncements by political and military leaders in the United States have been elevated to a-no-going-back sorts of, no retreat, no surrender. A blockade in the name of continuing sanctions against Iran, is about to occur, and Iranian political and military leaders are declaring any such contemplated action, as an act of war, and, such a blockade by America against Iran, Is Act of War, under International Law
>
> The current high tempo and stridency on all sides, is just like history repeating itself, if past is prologue, I beseech everyone to harken back to the days of yore, with particular reference to the back and forth verbal altercations between America and Saddam Hussein in the lead-up to the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
>
> It will be recalled that in the lead up and before the onset of the invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003, the sorts of words and body language, which we are witnessing today, were similarly employed and it escalated to a crescendo or point of no-return... the shock and awe invasion and occupation of Iraq, based on sexed-up, embellished and flowered tall tales about Saddam and Weapons of Mass Destruction which Saddam Hussein supposedly possessed with which he would create mushroom clouds.
>
> There were airs of immediacy, portentous ominous nuclear catastrophes, holocaust and Armageddon, but, the world has since learned that the only WMD weapon, was Weapons for Mass Deceptions by those who wanted to effect Regime-Change in Iraq, and the Weapons for Mass Deception was possessed by the invaders and occupation force of the United States and few North Atlantic Treaty Organization members who participated in Regime-Change and usurpation of political power in Iraq.
>
> In recent times, the frequency and spate of public spat between America, Britain on the one hand, and Iran on the other have been increasing in their occurrences and intransigence. There has been recalcitrance. There have been bitingly pointed offensive pronouncements and bullying arrogance in high resolution displays.
> Here is a sample of the current public pronouncements. First, America proposes more sanctions, including a naval blockade to enforce the increased global sanctions against Iran
>
> Secondly and in response, Iran declares that any such action by America its allies or by western nations, would be considered a declaration of war or hostilities against Iran
>
> Thirdly, and importantly, all these are coming up, during America�s high octane political season. It is the case that 2012 is America�s general election and a contest for the American presidency. In contention, is the occupation of the White House post general elections in November, 2012.
>
> The Republican Party have vowed, and they are singularly dedicated to dislodging the Democrats and President Obama from the presidency in the 2012 presidential and general elections. And currently, it is elimination series in the Republican Party Presidential Primaries. Republican posturers for the presidency have been jostling for superior position, as the hustle for suzerainty and pride of place above the Republican presidential hopeful, all of whom are bustling boisterously to clinch the nomination, and the chance to facedown President Obama, in contest for the American presidency.
>
> It is against this background of cut-throat competition for Republican Presidential Primary or Nominating process, which has thrown the Iran issue front and center, as a key foreign policy issue.
>
> Republican Party candidates across the board, but for Ron Paul, are unanimous on how they would militarily invade and occupy Iran, as a demonstration of Republican Party zero tolerance for nuclear capable Iran.
>
> Some presidential contenders or hopeful in the Republican Party, are even full of more outrageous and quite outlandish blusters and rhetoric of escalations ... It is as if there are deliberate attempts to distract the American populace for the dire economic circumstance at home in America, by engaging in yet, another foreign war, this time, against Iran. And this, naturally, bring the film or movie, "Wag-The-Dog" to mind. All these, wrapped in "Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran" song by Republican Senator John McCain during the last election season. An intended coy reference by Senator McCain to a-would-be Republican Party policy war policy against Iran, albeit, a gaffe, no doubt, for which Senator McCain became subsequently contrite.
>
> There seems to be pandering to Jewish voters and supporters of Israel, who in fact propelling presidential contenders to be effusive in their demonstration of support for Israel, a core American foreign policy position in the Middle East.
>
> The dictates of local American political situation, the Jewish factor, and the desire by Republicans versus Democrats to be seen as be more pro-Israel than Jewish in competing for the Jewish votes and support in 2012, has become a major driver and motivation for senseless stampedes in support for the invasion and occupation of Iran, in the name of supporting, protecting and preserving the nation of Israel.
>
> The Republicans as the "national security hawks" and Democrats not willing to be seen as wimps... President Obama recently, angrily rejected being tagged with the "Appeasement" appellation
>
> There are actually some commentators who are of the view that the war against Iran has already begun in earnest. One such commentator, simply known as Obugi stated as much in his comments which follows; �The war is already on. Iranian scientists assassinated, computer viruses [Stuxnet Weapon] inserted into their nuclear plants, isolating the Iranian Central Bank, cutting of refined fuel imports, cutting off many essential public goods, multiple cases of groups of US citizens accidentally crossing into Iran, US drones violating Iranian airspace, the US funding for Jundullah terrorists inside Iran.....�
>
> He further argues, rather adamantly, that �Obama has already started his phase of the war for Iranian oil that was launched in 1953 with the CIA and MI6 overthrow of Iranian democracy. Obama's promise of change didn't apply to foreign policy; he's no different from G W Bush.� Obugi concluded.
>
> Two other commentators reached similar conclusions, one known simply as Superego, wrote that �An � attack Iran and divert attention as is always done. They have no other method to quell dissent and unrest in Europe and the US other than engaging us in a serious war and conscription of the jobless youth. The youth jobless, mad with loans and no jobs� In plain English, the invasion and occupation of Iran would be used by American political leaders as a diversion and distractions from local debacles.
>
> Yet another commentator, DeepThought, concluded that American foreign policy, particularly in the Middle East in Persia and Arabia, are constant and never shifting or changing when he wrote that �What changes are the faces and the names of the individuals; The policy remains the same. The system remains the same. The goals and objectives remain the same.�
>
> Added to all this, may also add the loss of American predator drones or unmanned spy plane to Iran recently. Even though the Americans have assiduously denied any spying activities or reconnaissance flights over Iran�s airspace and territorial wars, Iran now have a physical proof of Iran�s dated spying charges against her by the United States.
>
> There rapid escalation of war of words and beating of war drums is have not been helped by the oft-repeated, but unconfirmed plans by Israel to bomb to smithereens, Iran's Nuclear facilities through military intervention as Israel had flagrantly done against Iraq and Syria respectively as a matter of recent history. If Israel was to engage in these sorts of outrageously dangerous behavior, the Americans will have to be directly involved or indirectly implicated, either as an actor, or rescuer or buffer for Israel, before or after the fact of any Israeli military action against Iran. America may provide the coordinates or protection in the aftermath of such an Israeli repeat bravado for the third time in my lifetime.
>
> Third World War is starting in slow-motion? I do think that a direct invasion and occupation of Iran will lead to a large conflagration and the inferno will spread beyond the Strait of Hormuz and beyond Persia and Arabia. Many unintended consequences and unforeseen events will ensue
>
> Too many citizens seem to think wars are video-games! And video games war is not. Wars are devastating undertakings, which causes depravity, deprivation, deaths and dislocations.
>
> The time is now for citizens of the world to oppose and speak out against the impending Regime-Change in Iran. The time is now to rally against the imminent invasion and occupation of Iran. I am not so sure about, nor do trust the collective memory or even the attention span of too many citizens, who seems to be more adept at detailing the minutiae of Kim Kardashian's 72 days marriage to Chris Humphreys than the clear and present danger of a Third World War. There is short attention span and voluntarily amnesia
>
> Just when you thought that some lessons in loss, were learnt in Iraq, the over trillion dollars in squandered money, the thousands of lives lost, maimed and displaced, including continuing trauma and post-traumatic stress syndrome etc, a stressed and overextended American military, a million Iraq deaths.
>
> Americans and Iranians are ratcheting up their war language in countervailing public pronouncements in Washington and Teheran respectively.
>
> This is looking as if events are rapidly spinning and spiraling out of control ...
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
> For current archives, visithttp://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
> For previous archives, visithttp://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
> To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
> unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
> For current archives, visithttp://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
> For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
> To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
> unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
> For current archives, visithttp://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
> For previous archives, visithttp://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
> To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
> unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
No comments:
Post a Comment