Tuesday, March 01, 2016

NYT Room for Debate Series Excludes It

NYT Room for Debate Series Excludes It

by Stephen Lendman

Its series is an exercise in deception, presenting largely one-sided views, establishment ones. Pretending otherwise doesn’t wash.

Scandalous misinformation and Big Lies drown out vital truths, banished from so-called “newspaper of record” reports.

Its latest “room for debate” topic asks (with tongue in cheek) if “the age of regime change is over?” 

It failed to explain it remains core US imperial policy, the unstated reason for all its wars - planned well in advance before launched, premeditated lawless aggression by any standard.

Claims otherwise are Big Lies, exercises in deception. The Times’ current so-called “debate” discusses “pursuing regime change in the Middle East.”

Six establishment figures are featured - independent views excluded, as well as explaining core international law. Regime change is flagrantly illegal.

No nation may interfere in the internal affairs of others or attack them except in self-defense - and only if Security Council members authorize it. 

Acting otherwise constitutes naked aggression. What’s most important to explain, The Times and its contributors ignored.

All US post-WW II wars were, and for ones still ongoing, remain lawless acts of aggression - the highest of high crimes.

So-called debaters include Jeremy Shapiro, former State Department advisor, current European Council on Foreign Relations director.

Regime change isn’t enough, he argues, failing to explain US policy prioritizes endless wars and chaos. Peace and stability defeat its objectives.

Danielle Pletka is a neocon-infested American Enterprise Institute vice president for foreign and defense policy studies.

Regime change works, she maintains, falsely calling all US targeted leaders “dictators.”

Gaddafi led a model Libyan social society, providing important benefits to all Libyans most Americans can’t imagine. Redistributing the country’s oil wealth responsibly was one of many reasons for ousting and murdering him.

Assad is no despot. Syrians overwhelmingly support him, wanting no one else leading them.

Pletka’s argument for regime changed is rooted in her pax Americana thinking, American exceptionalism and its self-proclaimed right to operate by its own rules, international law be damned.

She ludicrously calls it “the moral choice of opposing dictatorship” - ideological extremism risking global war.

Haleh Esfandiari is a right-wing Woodrow Wilson International Center senior fellow, specializing in Middle East studies.

US regional interventionist policy “greatly diminished” America standing in the region, she lamented, expressing no concern for its lawless agenda and the millions of post-9/11 victims of US aggression.

Washington’s reputation alone matters. Regime change is OK as long as it’s not tarnished. She’s nonplussed about Russia’s effective intervention in Syria - calling Assad’s ability to regain sovereign territory “a messy and dangerous situation.”

She urges “new thinking” to accomplish America’s imperial objectives, their lawlessness not a “room for debate” topic.

Eran Lerman is a former Israeli deputy national security advisor, complicit in its high crimes. Unsurprisingly, he supports regime change. 

It’s longstanding Israeli policy, in flagrant violation of the UN Charter and other international law.

Lerman outrageously called Gaddafi a “madm(a)n,” claiming “forgo(ing) (intervention) offer(s) a crucial advantage to global rivals, such as Putin’s Russia…”

He signaled out Iran for special bashing, claiming a nonexistent “pattern of…aggression, from the…Gulf to the killing fields of Aleppo…cast(ing) (a long shadow over) regional stability.”

Ignoring longstanding US/Israeli axis of pure evil threatening world peace, he claims intervening against nonbelligerent independent states is the right thing to do - failing to justify the unjustifiable.

Elizabeth Cobbs is a right-wing Hoover Institution member. She reinvented America’s 1991 Gulf War, claiming intervention works.

Iraqis endured a generation of suffering, on top of the horrors of Jimmy Carter’s orchestrated 1980s war with Iran. 

Endless US aggression destroyed the cradle of civilization. Years of punitive sanctions inflicted unbearable suffering on millions of ordinary Iraqis.

Cobbs ignored how the GHW Bush administration entrapped Saddam into sending troops into Kuwait - a last resort after months of diplomacy failed to halt its lawless cross-drilling into Iraqi territory, stealing its oil at the behest of Washington, a scheme to launch US aggression, endless war continuing today.

According to Cobbs, the Gulf War was “a textbook case of successful military intervention,” urging more of the same. 

Millions of Iraqi corpses, along with a ravaged and destroyed nation reveal otherwise.

Times “debates” exclude alternative views mattering most. Establishment ones alone are considered acceptable. Readers are consistently lied to and betrayed.

A personal note. The only way a writer like myself, and numerous others I greatly respect, could be featured in a Times debate is if a publication by the same name exists on another planet.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. 

His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."


Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com. 

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.