中東大戦（第三次世界大戦）を熱望するネオコンと宗教右派（カルト）たち World Watcher

中東大戦（第三次世界大戦）を熱望するネオコンと宗教右派（カルト）たち
http://www.asyura2.com/0601/war82/msg/818.html
投稿者 World Watcher 日時 2006 年 7 月 22 日 08:56:58: DdDUJ9jrxQIPs

アメリカのシオニスト機関PNACのウィリアム・クリストルが現在のイスラエルの戦争にアメリカもイスラエルと一緒になって戦えと提言している。
さらにシリアもイランを攻撃しろと(苦笑）
キチガイじみた提言ですがアメリカ国内では宗教右派（カルト）も同じような事を発言しておりワシントンのインサイダーたちがどういう判断を下すかで中東問題は深刻な状況になる。（最近、アメリカ議会では”イスラエルを支持する決議”（法的拘束力は無い）を圧倒的多数で可決しており、アメリカ国内ではこういう声を無視できない状況になっている）

アメリカが正真正銘の”シオニスト国家”である事を宣言したに等しい。

■US Hawks Smell Blood
Neocons favor escalation of Middle East War

by Jim Lobe

July 20, 2006
Inter Press Service - 2006-07-19

19 July 2006, IPS WASHINGTON -Seeing a major opportunity to regain influence lost as a result of setbacks in Iraq, prominent neo-conservatives are calling for unconditional US support for Israel's military offensives in Gaza and Lebanon and "regime change" in Syria and Iran, as well as possible US attacks on Tehran's nuclear facilities in retaliation for its support of Hezbollah.

In a Weekly Standard column titled "Our war", editor William Kristol called Iran "the prime mover behind the terrorist groups who have started this war", which, he argued, should be considered part of "the global struggle against radical Islamism".

He complained that Washington recently had done a "poor job of standing up and weakening Syria and Iran" and called on President George W Bush to fly directly from the "silly [Group of Eight] summit in St Petersburg ... to Jerusalem, the capital of a nation that stands with us, and is willing to fight with us, against our common enemies".

"This is our war, too," said Kristol, who was also a founder and co-chairman of the recently lapsed Project for the New American Century (PNAC).

Echoed Larry Kudlow, a neo-conservative commentator, at the Standard's right-wing competitor, the National Review: "All of us in the free world owe Israel an enormous thank-you for defending freedom, democracy and security against the Iranian cat's-paw wholly owned terrorist subsidiaries Hezbollah and Hamas.

"They are defending their own homeland and very existence, but they are also defending America's homeland as our frontline democratic ally in the Middle East," according to Kudlow, who, like Kristol and other like-minded polemicists, also named Syria, "which is also directed by Iran", as a promising target as the conflict expands.

The two columns are just the latest examples of a slew of commentaries that have appeared in US print and broadcast media since Israel began bombing targets in Lebanon in retaliation for Hezbollah's fatal cross-border attack last Wednesday.

They appear to be part of a deliberate campaign by neo-conservatives and some of their right-wing supporters to depict the current conflict as part of global struggle pitting Israel, as the forward base of Western civilization, against Islamist extremism organized and directed by Iran and its junior partner, Syria.

This view was perhaps most dramatically expressed by the former Republican Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, in an appearance on the National Broadcasting Co's Meet the Press on Sunday when he described the conflict as "the early stages of ... the Third World War".

The effort to frame the current round of violence as part of a much larger struggle - and Israel's role as Washington's most loyal front-line ally - recalls the neo-conservatives' early reaction to the terrorist attacks on New York and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.

Just nine days after September 11, Kristol and PNAC - whose charter members included Vice President Dick Cheney, Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld and half a dozen other senior Bush administration officials - released an open letter to Bush that called for the United States to retaliate not only against al-Qaeda and Afghanistan, but also against Israel's main regional foes, beginning with Iraqi president Saddam Hussein and Palestine Liberation Organization chairman Yasser Arafat.

In addition, the letter advised, "any war against terrorism must target Hezbollah. We believe that the administration should demand that Iran and Syria immediately cease all military, financial and political support for Hezbollah and its operations. Should Iran and Syria refuse to comply, the administration should consider appropriate measures of retaliation against these state sponsors of terrorism.

"Israel has been and remains America's staunchest ally against international terrorism, especially in the Middle East," the letter asserted. "The United States should fully support our fellow democracy in its fight against terrorism."

While the Iraqi and Palestinian components of PNAC's agenda were soon adopted as policy and in essence achieved, neo-conservative hopes that Bush would move on Hezbollah - as well as Syria and Iran - eventually stalled as US military forces became bogged down in an increasingly bloody and costly counter-insurgency war in Iraq.

As the situation in Iraq worsened, neo-conservative influence in and on the administration also declined to the benefit of "realists" based primarily in the State Department who favored a less aggressive policy designed to secure Damascus' and Tehran's cooperation in stabilizing Iraq and strengthen the elected Lebanese government of which Hezbollah was made a part.

In that context, the current conflict represents a golden opportunity for the neo-conservatives to reassert their influence and reactivate their Israel-centered agenda against Hezbollah and its two state sponsors.

"Iran's proxy war", blazed the cover of this week's Standard, which also featured no fewer than three other articles, besides Kristol's editorial, underlining Iran's sponsorship of Hezbollah and Hamas and the necessity of the US standing with Israel, if not taking independent action against Tehran and/or Damascus as recommended by Kristol himself.

A major theme of the new campaign is that the more conciliatory "realist" policies toward Syria and Iran pursued by the State Department have actually backfired by making Washington look weak.

"They are now testing us more boldly than one would have thought possible a few years ago," wrote Kristol. "Weakness is provocative. We have been too weak, and have allowed ourselves to be perceived as weak," he went on, adding that "the right response is renewed strength", notably "in pursuing regime change in Syria and Iran [and] consider[ing] countering this act of Iranian aggression with a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities".

The notion that US policy in the region has become far too flaccid and accommodating is echoed by a number of other neo-conservatives, particularly Michael Rubin, a prolific analyst at the hardline American Enterprise Institute and protege of Cheney confidant and former Defense Policy Board chairman Richard Perle.

In a companion Standard article, Rubin qualified recent State Department policy as "all talk and no strategy" that had emboldened enemies, especially Iran, to challenge Washington and its allies.

In another article for the National Review on Monday, bluntly titled "Eradication first", Rubin elaborated on that theme, arguing that diplomacy in the current crisis will only be successful "if it commences both after the eradication of Hezbollah and Hamas, and after their paymasters pay a terrible cost for their support. If ... peace is the aim, it is imperative to punish the Syrian and Iranian leadership," he wrote.

Above all, according to the neo-conservatives, the US position in the region is now inextricably tied to the success or failure of Israel's military campaign.

In yet another Standard article, titled "The rogues strike back: Iran, Syria, Hamas and Hezbollah vs Israel", Robert Satloff, executive director of the hawkish, pro-Israel Washington Institute for Near East Policy, argued that "defeat for Israel - either on the battlefield or via coerced compromises to achieve flawed ceasefires - is a defeat for US interests; it will inspire radicals of every stripe, release Iran and Syria to spread more mayhem inside Iraq, and make more likely our own eventual confrontation with this emboldened alliance of extremists."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

To become a Member of Global Research

The Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) at www.globalresearch.ca grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles in their entirety, or any portions thereof, on community internet sites, as long as the text & title are not modified. The source must be acknowledged and an active URL hyperlink address to the original CRG article must be indicated. The author's copyright note must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@yahoo.com

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com

The url address of this article is:http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=LOB20060720&articleId=2766

■イランとの戦争はキリスト再臨させるために必要だとキリスト教右派のカルト伝道師が語る（思想がオウムと同じである）
アメリカ国内ではこういうカルト教にシンパシーを抱いている輩が多くワシントンの政策にも反映されている（政治力を持っている）ので非常に危険。

Evangelical leader pushing 'End Times' war with Iran
Posted by Joshua Holland at 9:11 AM on July 20, 2006.

My friend Sarah Posner has been all over televangelist John Hagee in The American Prospect. In June, she wrote a lengthy exposé of Hagee, who preaches that an apocalyptic war with Iran "is foretold in the Bible as a necessary precondition for the Second Coming."

Hagee founded an outfit called Christians United for Israel (CUFI), and has been lobbying hard for a big Middle East conflagration in rightwing

Yesterday, Sarah shed some light on the recent wingnut debates over whether we're fighting World War III or IV or XII or whatever. She noted a possible connection between the ramblings of Newt Gingrich, William Kristol, John McCain and others, and Hagee's bloodthirsty ideology:

Hagee has spent the past six months mobilizing popular support for a war with Iran. Based on his end-times prophecy … and false claims that Iran is just months away from a viable nuclear weapon, Hagee maintains that confrontation with Iran is necessary to fulfill God's plan for the future of the world.

While it hardly seems like a sound basis for foreign policy, as the violence between Israel and Hezbollah escalates at the Israel-Lebanon border and beyond, Hagee's view of Iran's central role in a world-altering showdown seems to be catching on.[…]

The Jerusalem Post reported this week that remarks by Newt Gingrich and John McCain that the Israel-Lebanon violence marks the beginning of World War III have their roots in Hagee's book. Knesset member Benny Elon told the Post that Gingrich and McCain "said this because they think it will lead to Iran getting involved, which they believe will set off World War III,'" adding that their "comments originated with American evangelist John Hagee." As Hagee and his minions from CUFI descend on Washington this week to lobby Congress, armed with Hagee talking points claiming that Iran will have a nuclear weapon in six months, could it be a coincidence? […]

It certainly could be. But think about Bush's No Child Left Behind legislation, a phrase with distinctly different meanings for those hanging around waiting impatiently for Armageddon and those of us who aren't all that keen on meeting our maker anytime soon.

Preachers like Hagee seem easy to ignore because we think their audiences, while vast, consists of rank-and-file religious extremists who have no real sway over American policy-makers. But Benny Elon's statement shows that Hagee does have such influence.

That's the important point. I couldn't care less about what people believe or what they worship -- it doesn't touch me at all -- but when people like Hagee, people who are trying to bring about the end of the world, get a seat at the table and can push for a war that any dolt can see would be disastrous, that's an imminent threat to the republic.

PS: See Jim Lobe's "From Beirut to Tehran" over at Tompaine.

Joshua Holland is a staff writer at Alternet and a regular contributor to The Gadflyer.

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/themix/39264/

■イスラエルに抗議するユダヤ人『パワーポリティックス非公式情報』
2006/07/21

イスラエルのガザ地区やレバノンへの侵攻が続いている。サンフランシスコのイスラエル領事館前では約300名が抗議活動をしているが、この活動を主催したのは「平和を求めるユダヤ人の声」や「自由なパレスチナを求めるユダヤ人」などのユダヤ系団体。その一方では、ワシントンにはキリスト教系カルト（福音書派、聖書根本主義派、原理主義者）が3400名以上を集め、イスラエルの行動を妨害するべきでないと主張、ロビー活動を展開している。

1970年代からイスラエルの軍事強硬派を支えているのはアメリカのキリスト教系カルトである。ユダヤ系アメリカ人、特にインテリはイスラエルに批判的な人が多いと言われている。

各国政府の動きを見ると、イスラエルから軍事侵攻を受けているレバノンの首相が「国際社会の介入」を求めているだけでなく、ロシアや中国、そしてフランスやイタリアなどがイスラエルの軍事作戦に批判的だ。

この「軍事衝突」に対応するために国連が動くべきだとフランスは主張している。決議だけでなく、イスラエルとレバノンの国境線沿いに緩衝地帯をもうけて国際部隊を投入するべきだとしている。この提案はロシアや中国も支持しているもようだ。

同じヨーロッパのイタリア政府もイスラエルに批判的で、同国のマッシモ・ダレマ外相はヒズボラによる攻撃の背後にシリアとイランがいるとするイスラエルの主張は根拠がないと発言、停戦が実現すればレバノンに国際部隊の一員として軍隊を派遣する用意があるともしている。

イギリスからは、イスラエルの「右派」が60年前に行った「テロ活動」を批判する声が聞こえてくる。エルサレムのダビデ王ホテルが爆破されて92名が死亡した事件を問題にしているのだが、1930年代からシオニスト（パレスチナでの「ユダヤ人国家」の建設を目指して活動していた人々）の内部に「テロ部隊」が編成されていたことは広く知られている話で、アラブ人だけでなく、パレスチナへの移住を促進するためにユダヤ人も攻撃のターゲットにされていたとするユダヤ人の告発もある。

イギリス議会の内部には、イスラエルが一方的に停戦を宣言するべきだとする声が高まっているのだが、トニー・ブレア首相はこうした主張を拒絶している。勿論、アメリカ政府はイスラエルの攻撃を邪魔するべきでないという態度を崩していない。

アメリカのジョージ・W・ブッシュ政権は「1週間」という期限つきでイスラエルの「ヒズボラ殲滅作戦」を容認すると伝えられているが、これに対してイスラエル政府は「無期限」を主張している。イスラエルは「チキン・レース」に持ち込もうとしているのかもしれない。少なくとも現イスラエル政府はアメリカのキリスト教原理主義者と同じようにカルト色が濃い。軍事力を信奉するカルトの扱いは難しい。

http://plaza.rakuten.co.jp/31sakura/diary/200607210000/