Yesh Gvul
Courage To Refuse
Free The Five
New Profile
Refuser Solidarity Network

Name: Antony Loewenstein
Home: Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
Comment Rules
About Me:
See my complete profile

Sweat-Shop Productions
Sweat-Shop Productions
Sweat-Shop Productions



Previous Posts

Powered by Blogger


Monday, February 13, 2006

Targeting somebody, anybody

John Pike, a military analyst at GlobalSecurity.Org, argues that the Bush administration should rename its ideological struggle, The Forever War.

"'We're in the 17th year of The Long War,' he says, arguing the U.S. has been in perpetual combat since it intervened in Panama to remove Manuel Noriega from power in 1989.

"'Since then, we have been blowing somebody up, or getting ready to blow somebody up or coming back from blowing somebody up. It is so normal, people don't even notice any more.

"It's not about bin Laden any more. People aren't scared of him any more.

"My fear is that it is really the inauguration of the second Republic here because if you look closely at where this president is claiming his legal powers, it completely redefines the powers of the American government."


Blogger Wombat said...

Perpetual combat since 1989? Try since WWII.

Here is the on-line version of the award winnign documentary, Why We Fight. I highly recommend it.

Monday, February 13, 2006 11:15:00 am  
Blogger Antony Loewenstein said...

Er, yes, my thoughts too. God knows where he gets the year 1989 from...but the rest of his comments are priceless, and rather hilarious, I reckon.

Monday, February 13, 2006 11:25:00 am  
Blogger Ros said...

Salman Rushdie perhaps.

Now for all the reasons that he too is deserving of his fatwa. Perhaps some more from Mr Whippy about

"If you stand for Truth, then lies cannot be permitted to drown it out. Sacrificing the principal of unrestrained free speech in the name of Truth seems like a small price to pay as far as I'm concerned. "

Antony if you feel that Sullivan’s views are necessarily those of his commenters what do you think some of your supporters paint you as.

Tuesday, February 14, 2006 8:17:00 am  
Blogger Savvas Tzionis said...

The same can be said locally about the Abortion debate.

The debate will never end, therefore we have the neverending War on Abortion.

A distraction (from Industrial Relations, perhaps?) much like the War on Terror.

Tuesday, February 14, 2006 8:27:00 am  
Blogger orang said...

Hey how about that Liberal Ms Dana Vale, at a forum on the abortion pill saying we (white christian people in Oz) should realize that by aborting so many children, then in 50 years time there will be Muslims in the majority.

All youse Ozzie Sheilahs go and get pregnant quick!!!!

Tuesday, February 14, 2006 9:59:00 am  
Blogger Ros said...

I see there was some debate about who coined the phrase. I reckon it was Philip Bobbitt, author of The Shield of Achilles. Description of the idea of the First Long War of Bobbitt’s.

“he primary example used to explain this idea is “The Long War”. The Long War, which he states spanned most of the Twentieth Century, from 1914 to 1990, was fought over the legitimacy of three competing and incompatible forms of constitutional governments – Parliamentarianism, Communism and Fascism. After Fascism was defeated in WWII, the fight for legitimacy between Communism and Parliamentarianism continued during the Cold War, which included battles of the Korean and Vietnam wars, and the crises of the Berlin Blockade, Soviet expansion into Eastern Europe, and the Cuban Missile Crisis. According to Mr. Bobbitt, the Long War ended with the fall of the Soviet Union and the defeat of the Communist constitutional form of government.’

He is due to publish a new book “The War Against Terror, which will no doubt consider with his theme of a new long war. His first use of the term long that I am aware of is is
“Get Ready for the next Long War.” Time Sep 2002 and in an Essay, “Indian Summer” 2002

“The U.S. could help determine which kind of Long War comes. It could be characterized by aging nation-states trying to fight off rising market states, with a virtual state entering into an unofficial alliance with one side or another. More likely it will see clashes between competing forms of market states. It may be a chronic war of low-intensity interventions—police actions on humanitarian grounds, to undergird states in which law has collapsed, or against terrorism. Or this war could be a series of regional cataclysms, perhaps between nuclear powers on the Indian subcontinent or in Northeast Asia or the Middle East. The war could even come between regions, perhaps between great powers that launch disguised cyberattacks on one another's infrastructure—then see the hacking and disruption escalate into armed conflict. “

As most of you guys think that we are not at war then he is probably not one of your favourite authors.

Tuesday, February 14, 2006 2:32:00 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home