Re: Re: Realism and Socialism

Agreed. The reasons for US desire to invade, intervene, destroy and create 
chaos across the globe are all fundamentally linked to the 
never-ending global capitalist system. Whether it is for the simple desire to 
procure vacation real estate along the coast and provide beautiful oasis for 
pleasure (Croatia), or the tremendous, unbelievable profits to be made by 
controlling oil and multitudinous other natural resources and thereby the 
world's present & future wealth....the capitalists  have competing interests 
but share in one thing: the diseased, maniacal greed for more and more....and 
will destroy, kill, starve, bomb and mutilate cultures, peoples, nature in 
their sick quest. This system doesn't create man's darker side, but it 
nourishes & rewards those who are darkest.....Such a system is bound & 
determined BY ITS OWN NATURE to create chaos, hatred, division, and ultimately, 
its OWN DEATH. The question is not whether or not Capitalism is "really this 
bad".....It is "When can those who know the truth unite into the one
  necessary movement that will replace this totally irrational and anti-human 
system with democratic socialism?" I fault Noam for not saying this. I fault 
him for shielding the brutal reality of this very destructive system that he 
describes, lists, categaorizes and enumerates...... but will not name. After 
Noam is gone from the scene, let's hope someone or some group, can do that and 
be given a proper hearing. Will it be our Forum?  Lillia 

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: balmer_dave<mailto:balmer_dave@xxxxxxxxxxx> 
  To: WSM_Forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:WSM_Forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
  Sent: Sunday, July 23, 2006 2:29 PM
  Subject: [WSM_Forum] Re: Realism and Socialism


  Dear Pieter


   I was of much the same opinion as yourself until I read Chomsky's 
  take on it, love him or hate him I think we have to take his 
  opinions seriously.

  He deals with the Kosovo thing in chapter 3 of "Hegemony or 
  Survival"  which is worth reading for an alternative take on this. 
  That is, I think in summary, that the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) 
  was being sponsored and funded by the CIA in order to elicit a 
  reaction form the Serbs in order to provide a pretext for 
  intervention. An outrageous proposition but not without precedent in 
  US international politics.

  Chomsky in his inimitable style is never satisfied with mere 
  assertion and resorts to hostile witness statements to "prove" his 
  point.

  Pg 56 hardback edition;

  {On March 24, as the bombing began , British  defense minister 
  George Robertson (later NATO secretary general) testified before the 
  house of commons that until mid January 1999 "the Kosovo Liberation 
  Army (KLA) was responsible for more deaths in Kosovo than the 
  Serbian Authorities had been" He was referring to the Albanian 
  guerrillas, by then CIA backed- who had explained frankly that their 
  goal was to kill Serbs so as to elicit harsh reaction that would 
  lead to public support in the west for Nato intervention. A 
  subsequent parliamentary enquiry revealed that the Foreign Secretary 
  Robin Cook had told the House on January 18 that the KLA 
  had "committed more breaches of the ceasefire and until this weekend 
  was responsible for more deaths than the Yugoslav security forces"}


  On page 55

  {Kosovo was an ugly place before the Nato bombing with an estimated 
  2000 killed on all sides during the preceding year.}

  Taking this figure as read, on page 56;

  {Serious scholarship reaches similar conclusions. Nicholas Wheeler, 
  who does not invert chronology, estimates that Serbs had killed 500 
  Albanians before the NATO bombing, implying that 1500 had been kiled 
  by the KLA.}

  Chomsky's basic proposition is that the atrocities committed by the 
  Serbs that were used to justify intervention actually happened after 
  the intervention and not before.

  {Reviewing Clarke's (the NATO Commander)  book, Michael Ignatieff 
  recognises that according to the Nato commander "the really decisive 
  impulse" propelling the NATO bombing campaign "was not Milososevics 
  human rights violations in Kosovo before march 1999; nor was it his 
  wholesale eviction after the bombing began. What mattered most was 
  the need to impose  NATO's will on a leader whose defiance, first in 
  Bosnia and then in Kosovo, was undermining the credibility of 
  American and European diplomacy and of NATO's willpower"}

  Raising the issue elsewhere the NATO expected the Serbs to react to 
  the bombings by ethnically cleansing the Albanians etc.

  So an alternative take is that a group of capitalists were 
  engineering a situation to set worker against worker to break up 
  another capitalist state to weaken it and make it more "manageable" 
  in a manner that could elicit support from "Western" workers doing 
  the bombing.

  It looks to me as if somebody is playing the same game in Iraq at 
  the moment. 









  --- In WSM_Forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:WSM_Forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "alan 
johnstone" <ajsc21755@...> 
  wrote:
  >
  >  Pieter .
  > As i said i disagree with your reading of the situation and i 
  still stand by 
  > that claim . I certainly do not wish to act as an apologist for 
  Slobo 
  > Milosovic and his nationalist henchmen but simply from reading 
  your posting 
  > , you would not know that Kosovo was in the midst of a 
  particularly nasty 
  > civil war ,  with atrocities being actively carried out by both 
  sides 
  > against innocent non -participants  .
  > 
  > It was not a Serbian annexation of a foreign territory but was 
  similar to 
  > the Northern Ireland situation in a way .A substantial number of 
  Kosovans 
  > wished to remain part of Serbia and another section ( the 
  majority , in this 
  > case  ) wished to secede from the federation and have union with 
  Albania  to 
  > form a Greater Albania to rival Greater Serbia  .
  > 
  > Your description of what took place omits the earlier partial 
  withdrawal of 
  > the Serbian army and the fact that there was the possibility of a 
  diplomatic 
  > solution
  > "   In 1998 western interest increased and the Serbian authorities 
  was 
  > forced to sign a unilateral cease-fire and partial retreat. Under 
  an 
  > agreement led by Richard Holbrooke, OSCE observers moved into 
  Kosovo to 
  > monitor the ceasefire, while Yugoslav military forces partly 
  pulled out of 
  > Kosovo. However, the ceasefire was systematically broken shortly 
  thereafter 
  > by KLA forces, which again provoked harsh counterattacks by the 
  Serbs." -
  >  The Rambouillet conference- . After more than a month of 
  negotations 
  > Yugoslavia refused to sign the prepared agreement, primarily, it 
  has beeen 
  > argued, because of a clause giving NATO forces access rights to 
  not only 
  > Kosovo but to all of Yugoslavia (which the Yugoslav side saw as 
  tantamount 
  > to military occupation).
  > 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo#Kosovo_War<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo#Kosovo_War>
  > 
  > As you see , it was not at all as one sided as you appear to , or 
  prefer , 
  > to see things.
  > 
  > Your support for the use of terrorism against innocent civilians 
  to achieve 
  > a political outcome is not one that i would agree with . As a 
  postman , i 
  > certainly don't wish to be a target for anyones bombs or missiles 
  just 
  > because it may put pressure on  the alleged ( and with much 
  foundation ) 
  > war-criminal Blair  , whether these bombs come in the shape of 
  suicide 
  > bombers or B-2 Stealth bombers ( Post Offices were designated a 
  legitimate 
  > target for air attack by NATO ) .
  > 
  > For your accusation that i blame the NATO intervention as one of 
  the major 
  > causes for the brutal excesses of the war , i plead guilty . Whats 
  these old 
  > sayings ...we saved the leg but lost the patient  ...or... the 
  cure is worse 
  > than the disease .
  > 
  > "...General Wesley Clark informed the press that it was "entirely 
  > predictable" that Serb terror would intensify as a result. Shortly 
  after, 
  > Clark explained again that "The military authorities fully 
  anticipated the 
  > vicious approach that Milosevic would adopt, as well as the 
  terrible 
  > efficiency with which he would carry it out." Elaborating a few 
  weeks later, 
  > he observed that the NATO operation planned by "the political 
  > leadership...was not designed as a means of blocking Serb ethnic 
  cleansing. 
  > It was not designed as a means of waging war against the Serb and 
  MUP 
  > [internal police] forces in Kosovo. Not in any way. There was 
  never any 
  > intent to do that. That was not the idea." ..."
  > 
http://www.chomsky.info/articles/200005--.htm<http://www.chomsky.info/articles/200005--.htm>
  > 
  > Lets be clear about one thing , the NATO  bombing did not succeed 
  in 
  > deterring the forced removal of the Kosovan Albanians , it 
  accelerated it . 
  > And the NATO victory did not stop the subsequent expulsion of the 
  Kosovan 
  > Serb population , it facilitated it   .
  > 
  > I am sure it was unintended and i may have wrongly interpreted it 
  but i do 
  > resent the possible insinuation in your post that i hold the 
  beliefs of a 
  > "sectarian socialist " .
  > 
  > Suppose
  > > you were a  [SERB ] immigrant from Kosovo, you had become a 
  socialist, and 
  > > you had
  > > left behind parents, grandmother, uncles, aunties and cousins. 
  Knowing 
  > > that
  > > they had become vulnerable to [ KLA] death squads and were 
  trecking over 
  > > mountains
  > > having fled their homes, would you still remain "aloof to all 
  the non
  > > socialist solutions being presented?"  Or would you have welcome 
  the 
  > > actions
  > > of [ SERBIAN ARMY ]  that might bring their sufferings to an end?
  > 
  > See how appeals to emotional blackmail  can be so easily turned .
  > 
  > I think my answer would be that i have no quarrel with the working 
  class of 
  > any country and extend to my fellow workers of all lands the 
  expression of 
  > my goodwill and Socialist fraternity and pledge myself for the 
  overthrow of 
  > capitalism and the triumph of  Socialism .
  > 
  > Call it useless platitudes if you wish , but i have no desire to 
  take sides 
  > in any Capitalist war . Milosovic was wrong . Clinton and co were 
  wrong . 
  > The working class of both sides suffered as a result .  I won't 
  support the 
  > arguement  that the Kosovo War was a just war . It wasn't .
  > 
  > Alan johnstone , edinburgh br .
  > 
  > ----- Original Message ----- 
  > From: "Phyl and Piet" <phyl@...>
  > To: <WSM_Forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:WSM_Forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
  > Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2006 2:53 PM
  > Subject: Re: [WSM_Forum] Re: Realism and Socialism
  >






   
  Yahoo! Groups Links



   





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]