The Future Of The Middle East!

  • News
  • Thread starter Mattius_
  • Start date
  • #26
Zero
Originally posted by kat
*snip*Have you read his report, in FULL?
Have you? I haven't, and the reports I've been reading about it are contradictory. I'm sure there are specific things in it that support many views, but I don't have any idea what the overall judgment would be...likely, the report is honest enough not to draw a simple conclusion.
 
  • #27
kat
26
0
Originally posted by Zero
Have you? I haven't, and the reports I've been reading about it are contradictory. I'm sure there are specific things in it that support many views, but I don't have any idea what the overall judgment would be...
Actually, in order to not be misleading I should ask if he had read the transcript of David Kay'statement about his interim progress report. It can be found here http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/2003/david_kay_10022003.html

likely, the report is honest enough not to draw a simple conclusion.
I think it has not progressed enough to draw a "simple" conclusion. But to say that the U.S. government does not consider Saddam to have been developing nuclear and biological/chemical weapons programs is not very honest.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #28
Zero
Originally posted by kat
Actually, in order to not be misleading I should ask if he had read the transcript of David Kay'statement about his interim progress report. It can be found here http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/2003/david_kay_10022003.html



I think it has not progressed enough to draw a "simple" conclusion. But to say that the U.S. government does not consider Saddam to have been developing nuclear and biological/chemical weapons programs is not very honest.
My understanding is that the report says that Iraq wanted nukes, but they had no capacity to make nukes...there's a big difference.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #29
kat
26
0
Originally posted by Zero
My understanding is that the report says that Iraq wanted nukes, but they had no capacity to make nukes...there's a big difference.
I kinda thought that was why Ganshauk had said
in 2 years and 5 weeks to the Middle East
but, maybe I misread/misunderstood.
 
  • #30
Zero
Originally posted by kat
I kinda thought that was why Ganshauk had said but, maybe I misread/misunderstood.
You know something? I want a $600,000 Italian sportscar. I have repeatedly expressed desire to have one, and have even been to the website of the companies that sell $600,000 Italian sports cars. Do I have the ability to get one? Nope. If we wait '2 years and 5 weeks', will I have one? Possibly, but it is a one in a million chance. Desire isn't anything like ability. Iraq had desire and no ability.
 
  • #31
kat
26
0
Originally posted by Zero
You know something? I want a $600,000 Italian sportscar. I have repeatedly expressed desire to have one, and have even been to the website of the companies that sell $600,000 Italian sports cars. Do I have the ability to get one? Nope. If we wait '2 years and 5 weeks', will I have one? Possibly, but it is a one in a million chance. Desire isn't anything like ability. Iraq had desire and no ability.
Lol...rrriiiiggghhhttt, cheap drugs or experimental medication?:wink:
 
  • #32
Zero
Originally posted by kat
Lol...rrriiiiggghhhttt, cheap drugs or experimental medication?:wink:
Just calm, rational thinking. Iraq was never a threat to the U.S., and had little chance of ever becoming one.
 
  • #33
kat
26
0
Originally posted by Zero
Just calm, rational thinking. Iraq was never a threat to the U.S., and had little chance of ever becoming one.
[x=] Nuclear programs and eventual nuclear weapons. Nice attempt at making an omelet.
 
  • #34
Zero
Originally posted by kat
[x=] Nuclear programs and eventual nuclear weapons. Nice attempt at making an omelet.
Show me a link between wanting a nuke and actually being able to make a nuke within a time frame that made an unprepared invasion a necessity. Iraq wasn't a threat, terrorists obviously aren't much of a threat, but some folks like to play on irrational fear to push forward a political agenda.
 
  • #35
138
0
Originally posted by Zero
... to push forward a political agenda.
Correct.
Check a part of that agenda: http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=David_Wurmser . I really think Wurmser is one of the designers of the whole.

Interesting link inside:
"John Bolton was in Israel last week doing his job, fighting the spread of weapons of mass destruction(WMD). Bolton is the U.S. Undersecretary of State for Arms Control.... Bolton also stopped off to see Israel’s Foreign Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. Perhaps Bolton took along his special advisor, David Wurmser. It would have been a nice reunion, since Wurmser was once an advisor to Netanyahu. In 1996, Wurmser co-authored a report for Netanyahu: 'A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm.' The chief author, Richard Perle, and another co-author, Douglas Feith, are now high-ranking Pentagon officials.

"In that report, Perle, Wurmser and company laid out a truly messianic vision. Israel can gain political control of the entire Middle East, they said. The key is to contain 'and perhaps roll back' Syria, by surrounding it with an Israeli-led alliance including Turkey, Jordan, and Iraq. How to get Iraq into the alliance? Simple. Use 'the principle of preemption,' get rid of Saddam Hussein, and put a Hashemite king (from the family that rules Jordan) on the throne in Baghdad. Meanwhile, Israel would also use Iraq’s Shiites to weaken the power of Iran."
 
  • #36
kat
26
0
To do so, it called for ousting Saddam Hussein and installing a Hashemite leader in Baghdad. From that point, the strategy would be largely focused on Syria and, at the least, to reducing its influence in Lebanon.
It would be nice to end Syria's occupation of Lebanon.
Among other steps, the report called for Israeli sponsorship of attacks on Syrian territory by "Israeli proxy forces" based in Lebanon and "striking Syrian military targets in Lebanon, and should that prove insufficient, striking at select targets in Syria proper".
But really, Israel should attack from their own country and keep the hell out of lebanon. but, while they are at it,maybe they could send the palestinians back to Jordan.
 
Last edited:
  • #37
138
0
Originally posted by kat
It would be nice to end Syria's occupation of Lebanon.
Agree.
And it would be nice to end Israel's occupation of Palestine territories.
And it would be nice to end US occupation of Iraq.
And it would be nice to end China's occupation of Tibet.
And what about Kashmir?
... and some more of course.

Those are situations you can only handle internationally. That always takes time. But economic motives always cross politics (cfr. Tibet).
 
  • #38
kat
26
0
Originally posted by pelastration
Agree.
And it would be nice to end Israel's occupation of Palestine territories.
And it would be nice to end US occupation of Iraq.
And it would be nice to end China's occupation of Tibet.
And what about Kashmir?
... and some more of course.

Those are situations you can only handle internationally. That always takes time. But economic motives always cross politics (cfr. Tibet).
The history of Arafat makes things a little bit different, you do realize this don't you? He is..the agressor, from Jordan to Lebanon to the West bank...his entire history can be summed up with one word "terror". Maybe the West bank should be returned to Jordan to, although when the king decides to take the upper hand with Arafat a second time...I am sure Lebanon will not be so welcoming to the Palestinians as they were the first foolish time.
 
  • #39
Zero
Originally posted by kat
It would be nice to end Syria's occupation of Lebanon. But really, Israel should attack from their own country and keep the hell out of lebanon. but, while they are at it,maybe they could send the palestinians back to Jordan.
Hmmm...the truth comes out, huh? Israel should attack its neighbors, and drive out the Palestinians? Am I reading this right? Tell me, so I know whether or not to respond to this in the manner it deserves.
 
  • #40
kat
26
0
Originally posted by Zero
Hmmm...the truth comes out, huh? Israel should attack its neighbors, and drive out the Palestinians? Am I reading this right? Tell me, so I know whether or not to respond to this in the manner it deserves.
No Zero, with you the truth never F-in comes out. It's always a convaluted mess that ignores anything but your own little tunnel vision, that ignores any other possible victimized population in the region but your very own precious victim projects. IF ISRAEL IS GOING TO ATTACK SYRIA THEY SHOULD STAY OUT OF LEBANON WHILE DOING SO. Clear? BUT IF THERE IS A FOCUS ON GETTING SYRIA OUT OF LEBANON ...BECAUSE THEY HAVE OCCUPIED IT FOR YEARS AND USURPED THE RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS OF THE LEBANESE>>THEN THEY MIGHT ALSO CONSIDER TRANSFERING THE PALESTINIAN MILITANT TERRORIST 'REFUGEES' who have and DO terrorize the LEBANESE population. ...SO, respond to it however you like, ARAFAT and HIS palestinians have MURDERED/SLAUGHTERED over 100,000 LEBANESE..including my brother in law who they LEFT twitching in the street in front of my mother in laws home with his penis STUCK IN HIS MOUTH and EVERY SINGLE ONE OF HIS LIMBS CHOPPED OFF. ....GET IT? So screw you and your PC and your COMPASSION for terrorist who have the BLOOD of THOUSANDS of INNOCENT Lebanese on THEIR HANDS!
/end emotional rant
 
  • #41
Zero
Originally posted by kat
No Zero, with you the truth never F-in comes out. It's always a convaluted mess that ignores anything but your own little tunnel vision, that ignores any other possible victimized population in the region but your very own precious victim projects. IF ISRAEL IS GOING TO ATTACK SYRIA THEY SHOULD STAY OUT OF LEBANON WHILE DOING SO. Clear? BUT IF THERE IS A FOCUS ON GETTING SYRIA OUT OF LEBANON ...BECAUSE THEY HAVE OCCUPIED IT FOR YEARS AND USURPED THE RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS OF THE LEBANESE>>THEN THEY MIGHT ALSO CONSIDER TRANSFERING THE PALESTINIAN MILITANT TERRORIST 'REFUGEES' who have and DO terrorize the LEBANESE population. ...SO, respond to it however you like, ARAFAT and HIS palestinians have MURDERED/SLAUGHTERED over 100,000 LEBANESE..including my brother in law who they LEFT twitching in the street in front of my mother in laws home with his penis STUCK IN HIS MOUTH and EVERY SINGLE ONE OF HIS LIMBS CHOPPED OFF. ....GET IT? So screw you and your PC and your COMPASSION for terrorist who have the BLOOD of THOUSANDS of INNOCENT Lebanese on THEIR HANDS!
/end emotional rant
I'm sorry for your family's loss.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #42
138
0
Kat, I understand that personal experiences like that have more impact then reading about it. I feel with you and appreciate the moderate view you (still) expressed in your posts.

----
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3280435.stm
"Now we see in Europe also something moving:

The European Union has strongly criticised the Israeli Government's plans for a barrier in the West Bank.

In a strongly-worded written statement, the EU also raps other actions by Israel which, it says, make life intolerable for ordinary Palestinians.

The statement says the continued building of Israeli settlements in the West Bank was an obstacle to peace.

It came at the end of a two-day meeting of the EU-Israel Association Council in Brussels.

The EU statement has challenged the heart of the Israeli government's policies.

It calls for the dismantling of the barrier through the territories, which the Israeli Government says is needed to stop devastating suicide attacks.

The Europeans say that the barrier is already cutting thousands of Palestinians off from essential services.

They say that it could make a two-state solution physically impossible.

Suicide attacks condemned

The EU also condemns the intensification of suicide attacks by Palestinians.

This Brussels meeting, far from calming the policy dispute between the two sides, appears to have brought it to a head.

Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom said his country would ease its effective boycott of the EU's diplomatic representative in Israel, Marc Otte, imposed in protest against Brussels' determination to keep open its contacts with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat.

But the EU says it has not been assured that Israel will re-open normal contacts with other senior EU figures, such as the foreign policy chief Javier Solana."

Can it be that the very tough attitude of Sharon (to please fundamentalist voters) on local level ... brings up stronger anti-Israel (in fact anti-Sharon) emotions in the International world?
 
  • #43
russ_watters
Mentor
19,791
6,196
Yikes, kat, I had no idea. Sorry to hear about that.
 
  • #44
drag
Science Advisor
1,062
0
Greetings !
Originally posted by pelastration
Can it be that the very tough attitude of Sharon (to please fundamentalist voters) on local level ... brings up stronger anti-Israel (in fact anti-Sharon) emotions in the International world?
Hmm... Do you have any idea what you're talking about
or are you giving us another example of why all this
"international" court and other crap are totally
worthless and run by people who made drugs legal ?

Ariel Sharon's policies are "tough" and he's trying
to "please" the settlers ? Actually, just a bit of info
seeking will reveal to you that the settlers today
are amongst the worst opposition to Sharon and that
the Israeli public consensus on many issues regarding
the Palestinians is actually more "tough" - as you put it,
than Sharon's current policies.
________________________________________________


May the British counsul and all Turkish and UK citizens
killed in Istanbul rest in peace.

Terrorism is extreme Islam, extreme Islam has adresses,
we must pay them a visit.

Live long and prosper.
 
  • #45
138
0
Originally posted by drag
Hmm... Do you have any idea what you're talking about
I have a university degree on this. You also?

Originally posted by drag
or are you giving us another example of why all this "international" court and other crap are totally worthless and run by people who made drugs legal ?
You prefer a world without rules, don't you ....? And the strongest is the 'good guy', isn't it?
Originally posted by drag Terrorism is extreme Islam, extreme Islam has adresses, we must pay them a visit.
Drag,
I believe you express what you think ... your perception. But black and white thinking is more easy than also to include a scale of grey.

If you believe that terrorism is an exclusive of Islam I believe it's time to open your eyes. There are several kinds of terrorism.

What to think about this one: "In a world where terror tactics have become almost commonplace, it is easy to forget that the XXXXXX terrorists were responsible for some of the most shocking crimes. There was the blowing up of the King David Hotel, the murdering of British soldiers and police. Some were kidnapped, flogged and then hanged. The deadly letter bomb was used. The British Minister-Resident in Cairo, Lord Moyne, was murdered in cold blood.".
Please DRAG ... fill in .... the x's.

Maybe you should google on 'King David Hotel'.
I am sure you also are familiar with the 'irgun' before you wrote your post. Ever googled on IRGUN?

To make it more easy: You can also check the official website of Irgun: http://www.etzel.org.il/english/: [Broken] An extract:
"With the publication of the 1939 White Paper restricting Jewish immigration into Palestine, the Irgun had no choice but to direct their efforts against the British too. A truce was briefly declared after the outbreak of the Second World War. When the full extent of the Holocaust became known, and it was clear that Britain was continuing to implement the White Paper, the Irgun realized that there was no alternative but to renew the armed struggle against the British in Palestine.

On February 1, 1944, the Irgun proclaimed a revolt against British rule over Palestine and demanded that the British leave the country forthwith and a Jewish state be established. The gradual intensification of military action against the Mandatory government undermined the basis of British rule. These operations, carried out with the Lehi (Fighters for the Freedom of Israel) and occasionally with the Haganah as well, ultimately forced the British government to bring the question of the future of Palestine before the United Nations.

On November 29, 1947, the UN Assembly decided to partition Palestine into two states: a Jewish state, the State of Israel, and a Palestinian-Arab state."

Now when you read the whole 'official site' you can ask yourself: Was Irgun a terrorist organization? For the British: sure, and for moderate Jews: sure, but the fighter saw themselves as national 'defenders'.
You can ask the same thing about the US independence fighters (against the British Queen): Terrorists?
You can ask the same thing about the US settlers (against the Indians): Terrorists? Where those settlers: invaders? Did the Indians had the right to defend their territories (even if they did had fixed locations) by all means: meaning kill also children and wives? :/

My point is that it's easy to point others to be terrorists, and these will call themselves: freedom fighters.

So what is a terrorist? What turns a simple man, or a freedom fighter into a 'terrorist'? Blind targeting like the 4 terrible blasts in Turkey? Religious fanatics, like you seems to state ? ... but you have on both sides such extremists. Is it a hopeless situation of living?

Maybe we should try to look to define all the elements involved.

But Drag ... it's no as simple as telling: there are good guys and there are bad guys!

Extreme standpoints and actions of both parties only create more actions and reactions.

Mahatma Gandhi said: An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind.

Drag, Live long and peaceful. Make love not war.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #46
drag
Science Advisor
1,062
0
Greetings !
Originally posted by pelastration
I have a university degree on this.
That is precisely your problem. You THINK, that
BECAUSE you have a university degree you know things
without actually witnessing and studying them firsthand.
*EDITED FOR BEING THE NORMAL "DRAG VIOLATION OF PF GUIDELINES"* YET AGAIN*
Then again, if you have a degree one would think
you'd know how to study things. :wink:

As for the rest of your posts, some links :
(They're as "relevant" as what you've wrote.)
http://europeanhistory.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geographia.com%2Fbelgium%2Fbxhis03.htm [Broken]

http://europeanhistory.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geographia.com%2Fbelgium%2Fbxhis03.htm [Broken]

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

Peace and long life.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #47
138
0
Originally posted by drag
Greetings !

That is precisely your problem. You THINK, that
BECAUSE you have a university degree you know things
without actually witnessing and studying them firsthand.
*EDITED FOR BEING THE NORMAL "DRAG VIOLATION OF PF GUIDELINES"* YET AGAIN*
Then again, if you have a degree one would think
you'd know how to study things. :wink:

As for the rest of your posts, some links :
(They're as "relevant" as what you've wrote.)
http://europeanhistory.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geographia.com%2Fbelgium%2Fbxhis03.htm [Broken]

http://europeanhistory.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geographia.com%2Fbelgium%2Fbxhis03.htm [Broken]

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

Peace and long life.
Is this an answer? Agressive.
You didn't respond even on one point.
Not able?

Mahatma Gandhi said: An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind.

Live long and peaceful. Boy, make peace not war.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #48
drag
Science Advisor
1,062
0
Greetings !
Originally posted by pelastration
Is this an answer?
*Edited because Drag still hasn't read the PF Guuidelines, and apparently wants to get banned*
Originally posted by pelastration
Agressive.
Not at all, as you can see.
Educating, in fact.
Originally posted by pelastration
You didn't respond even on one point.
Not able?
You had 2 points. As you can see I've provided more
than enough of a response to both, even though they
didn't even require much of a response due to their
irrelevancy.

Mahatma Gandhi was struggling for the independence
of the Indian people from the British Empire - a once
powerful and willful entity which was nevertheless not
devoid of humanity and rationale. The terrorists, and
those who cheer at the sight of their acts, are.

Live long and prosper.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #49
FZ+
1,561
3
Mahatma Gandhi was struggling for the independence
of the Indian people from the British Empire - a once
powerful and willful entity which was nevertheless not
devoid of humanity and rationale. The terrorists, and
those who cheer at the sight of their acts, are.
How do you know?
Have you ever talked to a terrorist?

In sort, how are you able to make the judgement that they are "inhuman" and have no rationale and cannot be dealt with, when you already assume so and thus refuse to attempt to understand them? Its a circular argument...
 
Last edited:
  • #50
Zero
Originally posted by kat
It would be nice to end Syria's occupation of Lebanon. But really, Israel should attack from their own country and keep the hell out of lebanon. but, while they are at it,maybe they could send the palestinians back to Jordan.
Been reading the PNAC website?
 

Related Threads on The Future Of The Middle East!

  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
5K
Replies
35
Views
4K
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
2K
Top