MIT Initiative for Peace in the Middle East hosts a week of anti-war activities on the MIT campus days before the deadline for Iraq's withdrawal from Kuwait. Just two days before the launch of Operation Desert Storm, the combat phase of the First Gulf War, MIT Institute Professor Noam Chomsy and political activist Michael Albert address a capacity crowd in Room 10-250, as part of a week of anti-war activities on campus organized by the MIT Initiative for Peace in the Middle East. Chomsky analyzes key stages and critical political influences over the months leading to the imminent military attack of Iraq. Michael Albert, founder of South End Press and the Z Magazine, and introduced as the "most notorious student organizer from MIT," offers a unique perspective on the MIT campus environment in the mid-late 1960s where as a physics undergraduate he experienced his first political awakenings.
The greatest need for our common humanity is to engage in conversations on how we can resolve our difficulties . Divisiveness , alienations and conflicts to bring about world peace , cooperation and unity to safeguard our species and all life in our world ! To bring this about we need coherent , enlightened and global visionaries whose worldviews are " Out of the Box " of their narrow tribal nationalistic worldviews ! We need to think , act and work WHOLISTICALLY as fellow human beings to bring about a unified world civilization !
Yet, however, whether Islam, or Christianity, both their extremes see a world unity as the power of the devil. They'll never allow it (mainly as it negates the need for religions, at all?)
"War is a racket", Smedley Butler. In other words, wars are very profitable. He knew because he worked on behalf of the American corporations in opening up countries for them in his military campaigns, going even as far as China.
Butler's case is kinda illustrative but so miniscule "in context" as to be almost superficial, Chomsky's work shows far deeper & more completely the way these things work, and is pretty chilling because of this IMO. "War is a racket" may be true but war is more than 'just' a racket.
If the Iraqis had seized the disputed Islands off Kuwait and an area around the Rumila oilfields on the Iraq-Kuwait border they would have achieved their goals, invading Kuwait totally was a bad error..
I am Kuwaiti, love Mr Naom approach. Actually, Saddam Husain was given the chance to withdraw from Iraq, and UN gave the permission to start the war for the world in case he didn't withdraw from Kuwait by 16 Jan 1991.
@@aarewethereyet We already know that Saddam was given every chance to wirhdraw from both Kuwait in 1990, and from Iraq in the early 2000's. The OP identified themselves as being Kuwaiti. Which means at most they have some knowledge of events in Kuwait. But even giving them the benefit of that doubt, they still provided no source for knowing the inner-workings in Iraq.
And we also know that Chomsky is just a Linguistics Professor who has NEVER actually worked in Foreign Policy, or any other field outside Linguistics! He just likes to act as if he knows what he is talking about! :-D
@@mck1972 so you need to work for a state to know about these topics? Similar to the way a person who hasn’t played sports can’t understand them on tv?
Lol. Seriously? Don't you think there are hundreds if not thousands of people specifically assigned to keep tabs on that and it isn't his job? Do you also realise how much work he does? You wouldn't even be able to compute... And everyone knew China was rising, that's why they tried to buddy up with them until China became 'too assertive' recently. How dare they. Just like any place in the middle east, how dare they seek their self interest? Do they not know this is simply just acceptable for the US and its allies?
Also, from my general observations, many others cover China, and China seems well equipped to look after itself, whereas Chomsky tends to focus on other countries, especially ones with little to no power. So calm down with your little paranoid conspiracies, no need for them, especially considering reality is so much stranger than fiction if you care to really look around.
He speaks of China often....where in this talk do you see the omission- and what would that omission be exactly? You cite "the 'rise'" of China-- China had been rising for a long while b4 he gave this talk...
@@djkhole So, as a follower of Chomsky’s talks, I have to make a correction to the “most important living intellectual” title bestowed upon him by the New York Times. The article which referred to him as the most important living intellectual is titled “The Chomsky Problem,” and it is a negative review of his work. The gist of the article, as Chomsky himself phrases it, is “Chomsky is an intellectual titan in his field of linguistics, and arguably the most important living intellectual today - so why is he so wrong on history and American foreign policy?” The thrust of the review is that while Chomsky has some good points, he’s out of his depth when describing American history and paints too simplistic a picture. I make the correction (which Chomsky frequently makes) not just to point out that the NYT wasn’t actually praising him, but because Chomsky himself finds the statement fascinating - he sees it as a perfect example of the American intelligentsia he so frequently condemns, forced to admit he’s right and intellectually rigorous in one breath but incapable of letting go the tautology that everything America does is with the best of intentions in the next. “Chomsky is arguably the most important intellectual alive today - how can he write such terrible things about American foreign policy?” It’s exactly the sort of critique Chomsky loves to pick apart.
@@sl123sl so he is popular because people get bamboozled easily? I think not, he is popular because he doesn't participate in mythmaking and gross obfuscation that most of modern society is based on. And this level of saying at as it is, despite being simple, is something alien to everything else people are programmed to experience, which is ignore facts and particularly implications, and accept what you are told so we can continue living parasitically whilst calling it progress. He states things as they are, which is contrary to the predominant message of exploit or be exploited. And this is very uncomfortable for many people.
You denied my medical right of decision making seems this was the second and i was not notifier in change of circumstances. Stand my ground lawsuit land dispute sence 1980 .upon return
Clap all you want and pat each other on the back and revel on how wonderful people y’all are. But the fact is TRUMP did more to advance “peace in the Middle East” than any POTUS in my lifetime… demonstrably
Name the things he did....and if you actually have any...compare them to how china has handled "peace" in the middle east just now. Americans have never had to be diplomatic...your rulers don't know what diplomacy is. They never have. Donald or anyone else. Granted he didn't drop as many bombs as some others...of your presidents. Sorry to say. Nothing against ordinary american public. Their consent for war is manufactured. Just like in many other nations now.
Chomsky cannot be serious. Saddam and his sons were animals. The atrocities they committed cannot be revealed on a forum where children might read. For Chomsky to treat Saddam as a civilized statesman is offensive. Unfortunately, Noam's hatred of America forces him into the arms of some very unpalatable despots.
I see, so the US is willing to negotiate with, and even be close allies with the christian/jew hating fascist Saudis, but it's crazy to suggest trying to negotiate with long term ally Saddam.
@@hb98678 , And so the Worse that Chomsky THINKS that U.S. Foreign Policy has been all these years vis a vis Saudi Arabia, then the Worse that this makes Chomsky himself look, for never seeking a Foreign Policy Position Himself, and-with his superior wisdom-Show he can do better than those he criticizes! Instead of spending his life merely criticizing everyone ELSE from the sidelines about yet another field that has never actually worked in himself!
No actually Foreign Policy means actually working IN Foreign Policy yourself! Chomsky merely complaining from the sidelines, about yet another field that he has never actually worked in himself, is not Foreign Policy! It is merely complaining from the sidelines about yet another field that Chomsky has never actually worked in himself!
Thank you for this informative video! 🙏
20+ years later and this is still heartbreaking, especially for those of us who could have done more.
Thank you.
Great man!
This was delivered a week before Dubya took office.
1991?
I thought so myself.
Hey infinity! I love your channel.
@@antimattv Thanks :)
It’s gotta be. I also subscribed to your Channel
MIT Initiative for Peace in the Middle East hosts a week of anti-war activities on the MIT campus days before the deadline for Iraq's withdrawal from Kuwait.
Just two days before the launch of Operation Desert Storm, the combat phase of the First Gulf War, MIT Institute Professor Noam Chomsy and political activist Michael Albert address a capacity crowd in Room 10-250, as part of a week of anti-war activities on campus organized by the MIT Initiative for Peace in the Middle East. Chomsky analyzes key stages and critical political influences over the months leading to the imminent military attack of Iraq.
Michael Albert, founder of South End Press and the Z Magazine, and introduced as the "most notorious student organizer from MIT," offers a unique perspective on the MIT campus environment in the mid-late 1960s where as a physics undergraduate he experienced his first political awakenings.
Oui yes for humanity
M8 u've got Big Balls!.
See, now, she speaks well. That's all we need.
The greatest need for our common humanity is to engage in conversations on how we can resolve our difficulties . Divisiveness , alienations and conflicts to bring about world peace , cooperation and unity to safeguard our species and all life in our world ! To bring this about we need coherent , enlightened and global visionaries whose worldviews are " Out of the Box " of their narrow tribal nationalistic worldviews ! We need to think , act and work WHOLISTICALLY as fellow human beings to bring about a unified world civilization !
Unless Donal Trump was giving you it. Then you want war
Yet, however, whether Islam, or Christianity, both their extremes see a world unity as the power of the devil.
They'll never allow it (mainly as it negates the need for religions, at all?)
Where is Michael Albert today?
Still running Z Net
"War is a racket", Smedley Butler. In other words, wars are very profitable. He knew because he worked on behalf of the American corporations in opening up countries for them in his military campaigns, going even as far as China.
Butler's case is kinda illustrative but so miniscule "in context" as to be almost superficial, Chomsky's work shows far deeper & more completely the way these things work, and is pretty chilling because of this IMO.
"War is a racket" may be true but war is more than 'just' a racket.
If the Iraqis had seized the disputed Islands off Kuwait and an area around the Rumila oilfields on the Iraq-Kuwait border they would have achieved their goals, invading Kuwait totally was a bad error..
01:46:44
I am Kuwaiti, love Mr Naom approach. Actually, Saddam Husain was given the chance to withdraw from Iraq, and UN gave the permission to start the war for the world in case he didn't withdraw from Kuwait by 16 Jan 1991.
Your source for that claim?
Bahahaha. Your source? How about life and living there in the middle of it!
@@aarewethereyet
We already know that Saddam was given every chance to wirhdraw from both Kuwait in 1990, and from Iraq in the early 2000's.
The OP identified themselves as being Kuwaiti. Which means at most they have some knowledge of events in Kuwait.
But even giving them the benefit of that doubt, they still provided no source for knowing the inner-workings in Iraq.
And we also know that Chomsky is just a Linguistics Professor who has NEVER actually worked in Foreign Policy, or any other field outside Linguistics!
He just likes to act as if he knows what he is talking about! :-D
@@mck1972 so you need to work for a state to know about these topics? Similar to the way a person who hasn’t played sports can’t understand them on tv?
POSTED, 4 YEARS AGO...👉
He did real journalism for all the wack ass corporate media, y’all better tune in too because we not paying attention to you no more :)
1:54:35
Something I noticed in this presentation is that Chomsky hadn't foreseen the rise of China even at this time. That's quite curious.
Think he supports Donald Trump's Abraham Accords?
Lol. Seriously? Don't you think there are hundreds if not thousands of people specifically assigned to keep tabs on that and it isn't his job? Do you also realise how much work he does? You wouldn't even be able to compute...
And everyone knew China was rising, that's why they tried to buddy up with them until China became 'too assertive' recently. How dare they. Just like any place in the middle east, how dare they seek their self interest? Do they not know this is simply just acceptable for the US and its allies?
Also, from my general observations, many others cover China, and China seems well equipped to look after itself, whereas Chomsky tends to focus on other countries, especially ones with little to no power.
So calm down with your little paranoid conspiracies, no need for them, especially considering reality is so much stranger than fiction if you care to really look around.
He speaks of China often....where in this talk do you see the omission- and what would that omission be exactly? You cite "the 'rise'" of China-- China had been rising for a long while b4 he gave this talk...
2001
Uu
Why is he so popular ?
He is the father of modern linguistics and NYT has called him the most important intellectual alive
What Nick said and also because he is a rare type too in the sense he isn't afraid to say it as it is.
@@djkhole So, as a follower of Chomsky’s talks, I have to make a correction to the “most important living intellectual” title bestowed upon him by the New York Times.
The article which referred to him as the most important living intellectual is titled “The Chomsky Problem,” and it is a negative review of his work. The gist of the article, as Chomsky himself phrases it, is “Chomsky is an intellectual titan in his field of linguistics, and arguably the most important living intellectual today - so why is he so wrong on history and American foreign policy?” The thrust of the review is that while Chomsky has some good points, he’s out of his depth when describing American history and paints too simplistic a picture.
I make the correction (which Chomsky frequently makes) not just to point out that the NYT wasn’t actually praising him, but because Chomsky himself finds the statement fascinating - he sees it as a perfect example of the American intelligentsia he so frequently condemns, forced to admit he’s right and intellectually rigorous in one breath but incapable of letting go the tautology that everything America does is with the best of intentions in the next. “Chomsky is arguably the most important intellectual alive today - how can he write such terrible things about American foreign policy?” It’s exactly the sort of critique Chomsky loves to pick apart.
because people get bamboozled very easily
@@sl123sl so he is popular because people get bamboozled easily?
I think not, he is popular because he doesn't participate in mythmaking and gross obfuscation that most of modern society is based on. And this level of saying at as it is, despite being simple, is something alien to everything else people are programmed to experience, which is ignore facts and particularly implications, and accept what you are told so we can continue living parasitically whilst calling it progress. He states things as they are, which is contrary to the predominant message of exploit or be exploited. And this is very uncomfortable for many people.
You denied my medical right of decision making seems this was the second and i was not notifier in change of circumstances. Stand my ground lawsuit land dispute sence 1980 .upon return
Clap all you want and pat each other on the back and revel on how wonderful people y’all are. But the fact is TRUMP did more to advance “peace in the Middle East” than any POTUS in my lifetime… demonstrably
Lol by what? Making three countries who have never been at war sign a peace treaty?
You people fall for anything…
You miss him don't you?
Name the things he did....and if you actually have any...compare them to how china has handled "peace" in the middle east just now. Americans have never had to be diplomatic...your rulers don't know what diplomacy is. They never have. Donald or anyone else. Granted he didn't drop as many bombs as some others...of your presidents. Sorry to say. Nothing against ordinary american public. Their consent for war is manufactured. Just like in many other nations now.
By moving the Israeli embassy to occupied Jerusalem and assassinating Suleimani?
Chomsky cannot be serious.
Saddam and his sons were animals. The atrocities they committed cannot be
revealed on a forum where children might read.
For Chomsky to treat Saddam as a civilized statesman is offensive.
Unfortunately, Noam's hatred of America forces him into the arms
of some very unpalatable despots.
Well Stated!
I see, so the US is willing to negotiate with, and even be close allies with the christian/jew hating fascist Saudis, but it's crazy to suggest trying to negotiate with long term ally Saddam.
@@hb98678 ,
And so the Worse that Chomsky THINKS that U.S. Foreign Policy has been all these years vis a vis Saudi Arabia, then the Worse that this makes Chomsky himself look, for never seeking a Foreign Policy Position Himself, and-with his superior wisdom-Show he can do better than those he criticizes!
Instead of spending his life merely criticizing everyone ELSE from the sidelines about yet another field that has never actually worked in himself!
@@mck1972 His foreign policy includes not funding radical Islamist murderous anti-semites, that's a starter, you and the US govt obviously disagree.
No actually Foreign Policy means actually working IN Foreign Policy yourself!
Chomsky merely complaining from the sidelines, about yet another field that he has never actually worked in himself, is not Foreign Policy!
It is merely complaining from the sidelines about yet another field that Chomsky has never actually worked in himself!
1:33:48
no one cares man