And next, Syria?

[Casually Red]

In terms of realpolitik, the best interests of the USA would be served by supporting the Arabs, because the Arabs have the oil.

In terms of realpolitik, the USA makes all kinds of problems for itself by supporting Israel, most importantly (but by no means limited to) endangering its oil supply and putting itelf at risk from terrorism.

So we conclude that other factors than realpolitik determine US middle eastern policy.

The USA support plenty of Arabs . They went to war over Kuwait, and to support Saudi Arabia . Arabs arent some monoloithic bloc, as we can see in Syria . Were the USA supports one outfit and would have been quite happy to support them a lot more .

The USA is at little risk from terrorism, thats paranoia . Saudi, Qatar, UAE, Kuwait have zero inclination to turn off the USAs oil supply and have a perfectly fine relationship with the zionist entity . The zionist entity gives the USA a firm foothold in the region, its a western colony . A firm foothold in the region is an assurance to its Arab clients . Thats the real politik .

 

[phildwyer]

The USA support plenty of Arabs .

Not really.

They support the collaboraters and Quislings who they have managed to impose on the Arabs as their neocolonial surrogates. Given half a chance the Arab masses would murder all of them and reverse all of their policies.

 

[CNT36]

The USA support plenty of Arabs . They went to war over Kuwait, and to support Saudi Arabia . Arabs arent some monoloithic bloc, as we can see in Syria . Were the USA supports one outfit and would have been quite happy to support them a lot more .

The USA is at little risk from terrorism, thats paranoia . Saudi, Qatar, UAE, Kuwait have zero inclination to turn off the USAs oil supply and have a perfectly fine relationship with the zionist entity . The zionist entity gives the USA a firm foothold in the region, its a western colony . A firm foothold in the region is an assurance to its Arab clients . Thats the real politik .

More like it.

 

[Casually Red]

Not really.

They support the collaboraters and Quislings who they have managed to impose on the Arabs as their neocolonial surrogates. Given half a chance the Arab masses would murder all of them and reverse all of their policies.

your changing tack now, a minute ago you were referring to the ARabs who had the oil . The Arabs who have the oil are the collaborators and quislings, as you well know .

lets not be playing games now

 

[CNT36]

It's not really serious to suggest that the simultaneous implosion of all its traditional enemies is anything other than a boon to Israel.

Once again I am struck by how little Westerners are informed about the true situation in the middle east.

I didn't say that it couldn't benefit them. I said why take the risk when it could lead to serious disadvantages. If your so well informed please answer my questions instead of commenting on my ignorance and repeating the bloody obvious.

 

[phildwyer]

your changing tack now, a minute ago you were referring to the ARabs who had the oil . The Arabs who have the oil are the collaborators and quislings, as you well know .

I think the oil belongs by right to the people, not to the governments who have been imposed on the people by the West for the express purpose of stealing the people's oil.

 

[Casually Red]

I think the oil belongs by right to the people, not to the governments who have been imposed on the people by the West for the express purpose of stealing the people's oil.

USA policy is determined on who actually has the oil, not on who Phil Dwyer thinks should have it .

Did you not figure this out before you started arguing about it ?

 

[phildwyer]

I didn't say that it couldn't benefit them. I said why take the risk when it could lead to serious disadvantages. If your so well informed please answer my questions instead of commenting on my ignorance and repeating the bloody obvious.

Sorry, I didn't mean your ignorance, I meant the ignorance of Westerners in general.

It's nobody's fault, you just don't get the information there. I think the most important thing to grasp is that the Arab world is a seething cauldron of hatred for Israel, with the lid barely kept on by the very considerable combined weight of the US Army and the House of Saud. The idea that "Kuwait" or "Saudi Arabia" offer some kind of alternative, moderate body of Arab opinion is nonsense.

 

[phildwyer]

USA policy is determined on who actually has the oil, not on who Phil Dwyer thinks should have it .

Oh shit, back to the drawing board.

 

[Greebo]

I think the oil belongs by right to the people, not to the governments who have been imposed on the people by the West for the express purpose of stealing the people's oil.

And the meek will inherit the earth, if that's okay with everyone else.

 

[TomUS]

.
The zionist entity gives the USA a firm foothold in the region, its a western colony . A firm foothold in the region is an assurance to its Arab clients .

Amazing how this myth persists that the "zionist entity" is a colony/puppet/hired gun of America & the west. Israel is a far greater liability to the US than an asset. It's the Israel lobby in the US that causes such close relations between the US & Israel.

 

[CNT36]

Amazing how this myth persists that the "zionist entity" is a colony/puppet/hired gun of America & the west. Israel is a far greater liability to the US than an asset. It's the Israel lobby in the US that causes such close relations between the US & Israel.

Bollocks.

 

[Casually Red]

Amazing how this myth persists that the "zionist entity" is a colony/puppet/hired gun of America & the west. Israel is a far greater liability to the US than an asset. It's the Israel lobby in the US that causes such close relations between the US & Israel.

the second the USAs geo political interests are threatened by the zionist entity its goodnight Tel Aviv . Theres a massive difference between not doing something that pisses people off and having an outpost at the centre of the worlds biggest oil lake and essential trade routes thats 100 percent reliant upon you . The zionists naturally take advantage of this geopolitical necessity, and sometimes lose the run of themselves, but they most certainly do not tell a superpower what to do . The assumption behind this policy is that US policy is essentially decent and fair but its just a few lobbyists making it all go wrong .
Thats absolute bollocks . They were arming the zionists to the teeth and still not letting jews into their fucking golf clubs .

 

[co-op]

Contrast that to the Arabs who have a history of military failure after failure against Israel. I was on holiday in Egypt in 2010 and was shocked to hear our tour guide claim that Egypt won the 1973 War.

Some victory. But to be fair to your tour guide 1973 was the first time that Arab armies had inflicted any significant military defeat on Israel - during the first days of the invasion, the Israelis were caught totally on the hop and were thrown back far into the Sinai. In the end it was superior Israeli aircraft that won them their final victory, but not before they had a good shitting up. In the end the Israelis were only able to defeat the Egyptian army because Sadat agreed to move his armies out of Egypt's air defence umbrella in order to alleviate the pressure on Syria, which had buckled early.

Although the final Camp David deal had many causes, a major one was Israeli shock over the closeness of those early days of Yom Kippur, and their need to cut a deal with Egypt.

As late as the mid-1980s one of the Egyptian generals who led their forces in the October War, Saad El Shazly, wrote a book called The Arab Military Option, in which he argued that a military defeat of Israel was clearly possible by its neighbours, and was a policy that should be pursued. The book was very well-known in Egypt - El Shazly was sacked for slagging off the Camp David agreement but he was seen as a potential populist alternative to Mubarak.

 

[thriller]

He mentioned something interesting. He said that the Egyptians in the north were different culturally or something and used a different language in their radio communication other than Arabic-which the Israelis could not translate and that helped "us win the war". My recollection is rather hazy as the holiday was in 2007 and not 2010; but that was something he mentioned.

 

[phildwyer]

Amazing how this myth persists that the "zionist entity" is a colony/puppet/hired gun of America & the west. Israel is a far greater liability to the US than an asset. It's the Israel lobby in the US that causes such close relations between the US & Israel.

This is true.

 

[Casually Red]

He mentioned something interesting. He said that the Egyptians in the north were different culturally or something and used a different language in their radio communication other than Arabic-which the Israelis could not translate and that helped "us win the war". My recollection is rather hazy as the holiday was in 2007 and not 2010; but that was something he mentioned.

it was a combination of an air umbrella , very skilful use of man portable anti tank missiles, and some nifty intelligence bluffs that made Mossad think an invasion on that day was the very last thing that would happen . Along with no small measure of a puffed up zionist belief in their unshakable military supremacy . Something that was fatally punctured and didnt return again until relatively recently . And then got punctured again in southern lebanon .

The Syrians started well but had some serious bad luck . In all honesty they should have cleared the way right onto the west bank . But an attempt to ensure that everything went to plan by sticking too rigidly to a plan and not permitting more independence of action on the ground contributed to disaster . That and the undeniable fact the Israeli tanks were simply better than theirs, and in a tank battle that decides everything . No matter how good or determined the crews are . The zionists managed to muster their forces a few hours earlier than the Syrians estimated, and then shit happened .

 

[elbows]

Syrian opposition trying to reclaim the revolution from the Jihadis.



http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/03/syrian-opposition-attack-alqaida-affiliate-isis

I don't think I'd put it quite like that, because many of the groups that have started fighting ISIS are also Islamic in name and nature and consider their own actions to be part of Jihad. And there is another group besides ISIS that is in some way said to be 'Al-Quaeda linked', the al-Nusra front, which is apparently so far trying to keep out of the clash with ISIS.

But anyway, its certainly a development.

Over in Iraq the reporting about events in Falluja and the rest of Anbar province is somewhat confused. Sometimes it is painted as a clash between ISIS and tribesmen on the one-hand, vs the government forces. But I've also seen it claimed that the government is trying to or has already managed to do a deal with tribesmen to fight on their side against ISIS. Also seen events described as the locals turning against ISIS in the region and trying to drive them out, a version of reality which sits uncomfortably with the possibility that ISIS have very recently gained the upper hand in Falluja rather than the opposite. BBC reporting is a mess too, with articles that concentrate on Falluja painting a very simple picture of the government losing control to 'Al-Qaeda/ISIS' while at the very same time some analysis on whats happening with ISIS in both Iraq and Syria paints a different picture. I guess we will have to give it some time to see what reality emerges.

 

[happie chappie]

Look at Israel's traditional enemies.

Iraq: a heap of smoldering rubble
Libya: fractured chaos
Syria: civil war
Egypt: teetering on the brink of anarchy

Cui bono?

This must be one of the most simplistic analyses of the Middle East that I’ve seen for a long time.

Iraq and Libya were not real threat to Israel, unless you count the ravings of two unstable dictators as threatening. Militarily they were both paper tigers.

Syria wasn’t a credible threat either - and there are suggestions that Israel had, unofficially, reasonably good contacts with Damascus.

Neither was Egypt any threat. Indeed – one of the most vociferous complaints about Mubarak during the uprising that he was too close to Israel.

By the way, Afghanistan is now in tatters but was absolutely no threat to Israel at all.

Iran is by far the biggest threat and it’s certainly not in tatters.

How do the latter two fit in to your analysis?

The constantly shifting politics of the Middle East don’t simply revolve around Israel alone.

You only have to look at the current tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia, and its knock-on effects, to see that.

 

[Casually Red]

Syrian opposition trying to reclaim the revolution from the Jihadis.



http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/03/syrian-opposition-attack-alqaida-affiliate-isis

eejit, its one Al Qaeda faction fighting another Al Qaeda faction . ISIL are the Al Qaeda faction that have disobeyed Al Zawharis orders to merge with Al Nusra. While just the other week Al Nusra ran the FSAs top commander out of Syria, took over his headquarters and took all their gear . And hes still skulking abroad .

Dolt .

 

[Casually Red]

[quote="elbows, post: 12827301, member:

I don't think I'd put it quite like that, because many of the groups that have started fighting ISIS are also Islamic in name and nature and consider their own actions to be part of Jihad. And there is another group besides ISIS that is in some way said to be 'Al-Quaeda linked', the al-Nusra front, which is apparently so far trying to keep out of the clash with ISIS.

But anyway, its certainly a development.

wrong im afraid. Nusra has united with smaller Jihadist factions in order to fight them in a number districts . Now theyre calling for a ceasefire and mediation .

 

[phildwyer]

The constantly shifting politics of the Middle East don’t simply revolve around Israel alone.

Of course not.

Equally obviously however, Israel has an interest in making sure that no powerful states with hostile populations exist in its vicinity. Just like any other nation.

You say Libya, Egypt and so on were no threat to Israel. That was true, as things stood immediately before the revolutions. But they remained potential threats, because their populations are violently hostile to Israel. Therefore, if they ever get representative governments, that would endanger Israel.

If however such governments can preside only over heaps of smoldering rubble, then who gives a shit what they think?

You invoke Iran as a counter-example, noting that it is both hostile to Israel and a militarily strong state. Just watch.

 

[co-op]

He mentioned something interesting. He said that the Egyptians in the north were different culturally or something and used a different language in their radio communication other than Arabic-which the Israelis could not translate and that helped "us win the war". My recollection is rather hazy as the holiday was in 2007 and not 2010; but that was something he mentioned.

Bit puzzled by this one as I don't think there are any important linguistic splits in Egypt - in fact northern, Mediterranean Egyptian arabic is often classed as the 'best' (ie most standardised) arabic, kind of like having an English accent in English. It could be there's some weird bedouin dialect in the Sinai but I'd have thought the Israelis would have been aware of that having occupied the area for a while.

 

[goldenecitrone]

First batch of chemical weapons taken off the Assad regime.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/07/syria-chemical-weapons-material

 

[co-op]

it was a combination of an air umbrella , very skilful use of man portable anti tank missiles, and some nifty intelligence bluffs that made Mossad think an invasion on that day was the very last thing that would happen . Along with no small measure of a puffed up zionist belief in their unshakable military supremacy .

There was also this very nifty trick of blasting the massive sand walls built by the Israelis on the Sinai edge of the Suez canal with high-pressure water canons from tugs (that appeared completely innocuous) which cleared paths for tanks to cross through in a matter of minutes when the Israelis thought it was impossible in less than many hours.

El Shazly says he got the idea watching his children playing with a water hose in his garden.

 

[manny-p]

[quote="elbows, post: 12827301, member:


wrong im afraid. Nusra has united with smaller Jihadist factions in order to fight them in a number districts . Now theyre calling for a ceasefire and mediation .

Yep part of a power struggle between groups. Also from mainstream accounts it seems that some of the residents living under ISIS rule were pissed of with their implementation of Sharia law.

 

[manny-p]

Interestingly the YPG (secular kurds) are gaining ground in the North East of the country. Will be interesting to see what happens to that area (which borders Iraqi kurdistan) once the war ends. Think they agreed a truce with Assad when it looked like the SAA were on the backfoot. But not the momentum in the war as changed somewhat.

 

[thriller]

Bit puzzled by this one as I don't think there are any important linguistic splits in Egypt - in fact northern, Mediterranean Egyptian arabic is often classed as the 'best' (ie most standardised) arabic, kind of like having an English accent in English. It could be there's some weird bedouin dialect in the Sinai but I'd have thought the Israelis would have been aware of that having occupied the area for a while.

Yeah. I found what he said rather interesting, but didn't ask him any questions as was too busy enjoying my nile cruise.

 

[laptop]

Bit puzzled by this one as I don't think there are any important linguistic splits in Egypt - in fact northern, Mediterranean Egyptian arabic is often classed as the 'best' (ie most standardised) arabic, kind of like having an English accent in English.

Not in Syria, it isn't Until the war people - including speakers of Arab dialects from elsewhere, I seem to recall - would go to Damascus to lern to speak proper.

It could be there's some weird bedouin dialect in the Sinai but I'd have thought the Israelis would have been aware of that having occupied the area for a while.

Could yer man have been referring to the South - where some people speak Nubian languages? In Egypt the South serves much the same function as "oop North" here...

There are also Berber speakers and I'm pleased to discover - indeed up north - "234,000 (2004) Dom speak[ing] the Domari language (an Indo-Aryan language related to Romany)".

On the other hand, if I were running Egyptian military communications I might hire Christian priests to speak Coptic, much as the US used Navaho in the Pacific.

 

[co-op]

Not in Syria, it isn't Until the war people - including speakers of Arab dialects from elsewhere, I seem to recall - would go to Damascus to lern to speak proper.

Depends who you ask - I thought the whole curve from the Nile Delta up through Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria was pretty much the same arabic (I remember this being called shams - i.e. sun - arabic but I just googled that and came up with nothing) - but I've only really spent time in Egypt. Egyptian tv soap operas have been pretty massive in the arab world so I thought this was now the standard (although things like the hard 'g' still sound a bit harsh to me).

Could yer man have been referring to the South - where some people speak Nubian languages? In Egypt the South serves much the same function as "oop North" here...

There are also Berber speakers and I'm pleased to discover - indeed up north - "234,000 (2004) Dom speak[ing] the Domari language (an Indo-Aryan language related to Romany)".

On the other hand, if I were running Egyptian military communications I might hire Christian priests to speak Coptic, much as the US used Navaho in the Pacific.

Might have known there'd be a few weird lingos hanging around. Berbers in Egypt? Who knew? And Domari??