Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Neoconservatism out of the closet | 79 comments (78 topical, 1 editorial, 0 hidden)
Re: Think tank =|= Echo chamber (none / 0)
And it is for certain that Iraq was on Israel's shit list way before the 2003 invasion. You may recall the scud attacks.

by shergald on Mon Jun 21st, 2010 at 03:15:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: Think tank =|= Echo chamber (none / 0)
Completely and utterly irrelevant for determining whether the neocons are Israeli puppets or Israel is a neocon puppet, since Iraq was also on the neocons' shit list since at least 1991.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Tue Jun 22nd, 2010 at 12:41:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: Think tank =|= Echo chamber (none / 1)
Iraq-Israel relations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The relationship between Iraq and Israel has been a challenging one since 1948, when Iraq declared war on the newly established Jewish state, since then relations between the two states have remained hostile at best. Iraqi forces took part in action against Israel in 1948, 1967, and 1973, as well as firing dozens of Scud ballistic missiles at Israel during the 1991 Persian Gulf War (despite Israel not being involved in that war). Israel bombed the Iraqi nuclear reactor at Osirak in 1981.
Does that answer the question at hand?

Iraq was best buddies of the US against Iran between the 1979 Tehran embassy hostage-taking until some time before the 1991 gulf war, while Israel and Iraq were on each other's shit lists throughout.

By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Jun 22nd, 2010 at 08:23:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: Think tank =|= Echo chamber (none / 1)
Iraq-Israel relations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Since 1948, Israel and Iraq have been implacable foes. Technically, Baghdad has been in a continuous state of war with Israel since 1948.[3] It sent armies to fight Israel in 1948 and 1967, and to back up Syria's defence of Damascus in the October 1973 war. Unlike Egypt, Jordan or Syria, Iraq has never been willing to discuss an armistice with Israel, let alone a peace accord like those Israel signed with Egypt and Jordan-despite some wishful mediation attempts by the United States and other Western countries with business interests in Iraq during Saddam Hussein's presidency.
The reference to Syria and Egypt is relevant because of the United Arab Republic that Iraq hoped to be part of. Also because Syria is not a US client but Egypt is.

By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Jun 22nd, 2010 at 08:26:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: Think tank =|= Echo chamber (none / 0)
Your reply should be addressed to Jake.

by shergald on Tue Jun 22nd, 2010 at 10:23:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: Think tank =|= Echo chamber (none / 0)
My reply is in the right subthread.

By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Jun 22nd, 2010 at 10:26:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: Think tank =|= Echo chamber (none / 0)
That does partly answer my question.

Clearly, the neocon-Israel relationship cannot be described as a simple client/suzerain relationship, since they held divergent opinions on a subject that was sort of important to both of them at the time.

Of course one should be careful about extrapolating from single data points, but it is a strike against the diarist's hypothesis.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Tue Jun 22nd, 2010 at 08:27:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Neoconservatism out of the closet | 79 comments (78 topical, 1 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: