| China-Japan-Koreas | |
| U.S.: no plans to redeploy tactical nukes to S. Korea | |
| 2011-03-01 | |
WASHINGTON, Feb. 28 -- The United States has no plans to redeploy tactical nuclear weapons to South Korea despite renewed threats from North Korea, the White House said Monday.
North Korea Monday renewed its threat to wage nuclear war and vowed to respond to an 11-day South Korean-U.S. military exercise called Key Resolve/Foal Eagle. Speaking to reporters, State Department spokesman Philip Crowley said the exercises are "defensive in nature." "The U.S. and Republic of Korea routinely conduct joint military exercises," Crowley said. "North Korea was notified about these exercises on February 14th, and its belligerent rhetoric is unwarranted." The U.S. pulled all of its tactical nuclear weapons out of South Korea in 1991 as the two Koreas signed an agreement calling for denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and inter-Korean rapprochement. Washington since then has committed to providing so-called "extended deterrence," using all of the U.S. military might, including the nuclear umbrella and ballistic missiles, in defense of South Korea. Some South Korean conservatives, however, have periodically called for the redeployment of U.S. tactical nuclear weapons or a nuclear-armed South Korea since North Korea conducted nuclear tests in 2006 and 2009 and test-fired ballistic missiles. Then-South Korean Defense Minister Kim Tae-young said in November that he would consider discussing with the U.S. redeploying U.S. tactical nuclear weapons back to South Korea, although his remarks were quickly withdrawn by the presidential office, Cheong Wa Dae, and the Defense Ministry. | |
| Link |
| Home Front: Culture Wars |
| No Thanks to Thanksgiving |
| 2005-11-23 |
| Okay! Let's play "Count the Lefty buzzwords and phrases!" Instead, we should atone for the genocide that was incited -- and condoned -- by the very men we idolize as our 'heroic' founding fathers. One indication of moral progress in the United States would be the replacement of Thanksgiving Day and its self-indulgent family feasting with a National Day of Atonement accompanied by a self-reflective collective fasting.In fact, indigenous people have offered such a model; since 1970 they have marked the fourth Thursday of November as a Day of Mourning in a spiritual/political ceremony on Coles Hill overlooking Plymouth Rock, Massachusetts, one of the early sites of the European invasion of the Americas. Always quite the Turkey Day freak show. Not only is the thought of such a change in this white-supremacist holiday impossible to imagine, but the very mention of the idea sends most Americans into apoplectic fits -- which speaks volumes about our historical hypocrisy and its relation to the contemporary politics of empire in the United States.That the world's great powers achieved "greatness" through criminal brutality on a grand scale is not news, of course. That those same societies are reluctant to highlight this history of barbarism also is predictable. So perfesser? You taking the day off? You giving back your holiday pay which is evidently covered in the blood of noble indigenous peoples? Suuuuuure you are... But in the United States, this reluctance to acknowledge our original sin -- the genocide of indigenous people-- is of special importance today. It's now routine -- even among conservative commentators -- to describe the United States as an empire, so long as everyone understands we are an inherently benevolent one. Because all our history contradicts that claim, history must be twisted and tortured to serve the purposes of the powerful. One vehicle for taming history is various patriotic holidays, with Thanksgiving at the heart of U.S. myth-building. From an early age, we Americans hear a story about the hearty Pilgrims, whose search for freedom took them from England to Massachusetts. There, aided by the friendly Wampanoag Indians, they survived in a new and harsh environment, leading to a harvest feast in 1621 following the Pilgrims first winter. Some aspects of the conventional story are true enough. But it's also true that by 1637 Massachusetts Gov. John Winthrop was proclaiming a thanksgiving for the successful massacre of hundreds of Pequot Indian men, women and children, part of the long and bloody process of opening up additional land to the English invaders. The pattern would repeat itself across the continent until between 95 and 99 percent of American Indians had been exterminated and the rest were left to assimilate into white society or die off on reservations, out of the view of polite society. Yeah, and they didn't even fight back. They just laid down and died, being the noble pacifists they were. Right, perfesser? Simply put: Thanksgiving is the day when the dominant white culture (and, sadly, most of the rest of the non-white but non-indigenous population) celebrates the beginning of a genocide that was, in fact, blessed by the men we hold up as our heroic founding fathers. Hmmmmm...interesting. Pass the turkey... The first president, George Washington, in 1783 said he preferred buying Indians' land rather than driving them off it because that was like driving "wild beasts" from the forest. He compared Indians to wolves, "both being beasts of prey, tho' they differ in shape." George Washington: The BushHitler of the 18th Century. Thomas Jefferson -- president #3 and author of the Declaration of Independence, which refers to Indians as the "merciless Indian Savages" -- was known to romanticize Indians and their culture, but that didn't stop him in 1807 from writing to his secretary of war that in a coming conflict with certain tribes, "[W]e shall destroy all of them." Damn. I hope Barbra Streisand know this when she quotes him next time? As the genocide was winding down in the early 20th century, Theodore Roosevelt (president #26) defended the expansion of whites across the continent as an inevitable process "due solely to the power of the mighty civilized races which have not lost the fighting instinct, and which by their expansion are gradually bringing peace into the red wastes where the barbarian peoples of the world hold sway." Roosevelt also once said, "I don't go so far as to think that the only good Indians are dead Indians, but I believe nine out of ten are, and I shouldn't like to inquire too closely into the case of the tenth." Couldn't get away with that today, Teddy. That'd get you made into a Big Giant Puppet. How does a country deal with the fact that some of its most revered historical figures had certain moral values and political views virtually identical to Nazis? Really? I thought that was just Bush and Chaney? Here's how "respectable" politicians, pundits, and professors play the game: When invoking a grand and glorious aspect of our past, then history is all-important. We are told how crucial it is for people to know history, and there is much hand wringing about the younger generations' lack of knowledge about, and respect for, that history. In the United States, we hear constantly about the deep wisdom of the founding fathers, the adventurous spirit of the early explorers, the gritty determination of those who "settled" the country -- and about how crucial it is for children to learn these things. But when one brings into historical discussions any facts and interpretations that contest the celebratory story and make people uncomfortable -- such as the genocide of indigenous people as the foundational act in the creation of the United States -- suddenly the value of history drops precipitously and one is asked, "Why do you insist on dwelling on the past?" This is the mark of a well-disciplined intellectual class -- one that can extol the importance of knowing history for contemporary citizenship and, at the same time, argue that we shouldn't spend too much time thinking about history. This off-and-on engagement with history isn't of mere academic interest; as the dominant imperial power of the moment, U.S. elites have a clear stake in the contemporary propaganda value of that history. Obscuring bitter truths about historical crimes helps perpetuate the fantasy of American benevolence, which makes it easier to sell contemporary imperial adventures -- such as the invasion and occupation of Iraq -- as another benevolent action. Good job, perfesser! I knew you'd get it in there! Any attempt to complicate this story guarantees hostility from mainstream culture. After raising the barbarism of America's much-revered founding fathers in a lecture, I was once accused of trying to "humble our proud nation" and "undermine young people's faith in our country." Yes, of course -- that is exactly what I would hope to achieve. We should practice the virtue of humility and avoid the excessive pride that can, when combined with great power, lead to great abuses of power. ...and it'll keep you tenured at UT. History does matter, which is why people in power put so much energy into controlling it. The United States is hardly the only society that has created such mythology. While some historians in Great Britain continue to talk about the benefits that the empire brought to India, political movements in India want to make the mythology of Hindutva into historical fact. Abuses of history go on in the former empire and the former colony. History can be one of the many ways we create and impose hierarchy, or it can be part of a process of liberation. The truth won't set us free, but the telling of truth at least opens the possibility of freedom. As Americans sit down on Thanksgiving Day to gorge themselves on the bounty of empire, many will worry about the expansive effects of overeating on their waistlines. We would be better to think about the constricting effects of the day's mythology on our minds. Mmmmmmmmmmm...bounty of empire! Robert Jensen is a journalism professor at the University of Texas at Austin, and the author of, most recently, The Heart of Whiteness: Confronting Race, Racism and White Privilege (City Lights, 2005). |
| Link |
| Fifth Column |
| Adams to Fifth Coloumnist: Keep Your Head Down and Don't Forget to Wear a Helmet. |
| 2004-12-17 |
| I posted the text to the whole thing. Robert Jensen (rjensen@uts.cc.utexas.edu ) is a journalism professor at the University of Texas at Austin. He is also the author of "Citizens of the Empire: The Struggle to Claim Our Humanity." In an article written for The Austin American Statesman, Jensen recently claimed that "The United States has lost the war in Iraq, and that's a good thing." While Jensen was careful to say that the loss of American lives is not to be celebrated, he insulted our soldiers deeply by saying that their deaths "haven't protected Americans or brought freedom to Iraqis." Instead, he brushed off their service to our country as merely part of "a quest to extend the American empire." Jensen is awash in 60s proto-Marxian rhetoric and it sounds 40 plus years old... In his article, Jensen proudly states, "I welcome the U.S. defeat." He also says "it's essential the American empire be defeated and dismantled." Why? Because, according to Jensen, "In Iraq, the Bush administration invaded not to liberate but to extend and deepen U.S. domination." He also says that the invasion of Iraq is "about control over the flow of oil and oil profits," though he concedes that it is not about outright ownership of Iraqi oil. According to Professor Jensen, "When we admit defeat and pull out - not if, but when - the fate of Iraqis depends in part on whether the United States (1) makes good on legal and moral obligations to pay reparations, and (2) allows international institutions to aid in creating a truly sovereign Iraq." According to Jensen, "we shouldn't expect politicians to do either without pressure. An anti-empire movement - the joining of antiwar forces with the movement to reject corporate globalization - must create that pressure." After reminding us that he is "glad for the U.S. military defeat in Iraq," Jensen says that we should pursue "the most courageous act of citizenship in the United States today: Pledging to dismantle the American empire." When I was first sent a copy of Jensen's article, I was flabbergasted. I immediately tried to think of ways I could oppose the professor in his efforts to demoralize our troops and defeat our nation in a time of war. But, now, I've had a change of heart. As of today, I hereby announce the establishment of the new Robert Jensen Deportation Fund. Once the fund has enough money to buy Jensen a one-way ticket to Iraq, we can contact Iraqi insurgents to let them know he is on his way to help defeat our troops. WTF? No email? No website? Let's get on the stick, Adams. The Marines need the target practice. Based upon my reading of Jensen's work, I can tell that he is a brave revolutionary warrior. There is no sense in keeping him here in the evil American Empire, seething with anger against our troops. We should do everything within our power to help him bravely face those troops in combat. After all, he is the one who says that we should be "courageous" and "dismantle the American empire." I look forward to seeing him face off against some of the Marines that he has tried to demoralize with his anti-American rhetoric. Good luck, Professor. One shot, one kill... Who knows what will happen after Professor Jensen is deported to engage his enemies (the Americans) in combat in Iraq? I don't want him to die because, as Jensen says, the loss of American lives is not to be celebrated. If our Marines capture him, perhaps they could just dress him in a pink Burqua and send him across enemy lines for a lesson on tolerance and diversity in the Middle East. It is no laughing matter when we imagine the outrage Jensen's diatribe must bring to the hearts of the brave men and women who serve in Iraq. They risk their lives to preserve our constitutional rights. Sadly, some will die preserving a coward's perceived right to commit treason. Maybe he will go overseas where the rules don't apply the same as in the USA. |
| Link |
| Fifth Column |
| Prof. Foley: Ultimate cause is US fascism |
| 2001-10-05 |
Prof. Robert Jensen of the University of Texas wrote that the suicide mission "was no more despicable than the massive acts of terrorism . . . that the U.S. government has committed during my lifetime." Prof. Barbara Foley of Rutgers University wrote of the terror attack that "whatever its proximate cause, its ultimate cause is the fascism of U.S. foreign policy over the past many decades." |
| Link |