Middle East War & Peace 2011 - Egypt back in play

lol...I guess so, but we'd miss so much.

Do you believe the activity itself can be more important than its results?

I enjoy playing and have lost many times. The point is not always to win, but I always try.

West 'pushing for new UN sanctions against Iran'


The US is circulating a discussion paper on possible further UN sanctions on Iran over its nuclear programme, says a Western diplomat at the UN.

The measures include expanding travel bans and asset freezes on people connected with the nuclear industry.

This comes despite the apparent acceptance by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of a deal.

This would allow Iran to send most of its low-enriched uranium abroad in return for research reactor fuel rods.

Washington has called on Iran to match its words with actions.

Last month, diplomats said Iran had informed the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that it did not accept the terms of the deal and had instead demanded a simultaneous exchange on its territory.

The US and its allies fear Iran is attempting to develop nuclear weapons. Iran insists its nuclear programme is entirely peaceful.

Preliminary discussions

On Wednesday, the Western diplomat confirmed reports by the Reuters news agency that the US paper talks about expanding travel bans and asset freezes on those connected to Iran's nuclear industry, as well as financial measures such as placing restrictions on its central bank.

Read more : [link to news.bbc.co.uk]

Last Edited by D. Bunker on 02/03/2010 11:35 PM

ISRAEL BEEFS UP ARMY, SECURITY MEASURES AT EMBASSIES ABROAD

NAM NEWS NETWORK Feb 2nd, 2010

GAZA, Feb 2 (NNN-KUNA) — The Israeli authorities have beefed up security measures within and around army installations as well as around missions and embassies abroad.

Radio Israeli reported that the tightened security is to prevent reprisal attacks after the assassination of Hamas Qassam leader Mahmoud Al-Mabhouh.

“Israeli Army forces have received orders to increase level of alert and to particularly watch out for attempts to kidnap soldiers,” according to the radio Monday.

[link to news.brunei.fm]

Hamas rockets hit Israel, Israel hits back

Palestinian terrorists operating out of the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip fired two rockets into southern Israel in two separate attacks on Tuesday and Wednesday. There were no injuries or damage in the attacks.

Israeli warplanes responded by bombing terrorist smuggling tunnels running under the Gaza-Egypt border.

The attacks came as Israel's military leadership announced that it had decided against permanently deploying a new anti-rocket system in southern Israel at this time.

The Iron Dome system is expected to be ready for action in May, but the army now says it will remain parked at an air force base in southern Israel and only deployed to the field in the event of a serious escalation in Palestinian rocket fire.

Residents of the south complained that the decision was a demonstration that the government had learned nothing from previous escalations in the area, and that it will refrain from taking any significant action until a high number of Israelis are either killed or wounded by the rockets.

As usual, the fear of international condemnation stands behind the Israeli government's hesitation to defend its own citizens before the situation turns deadly.

[link to www.israeltoday.co.il]

FM: Assad's regime will collapse if he provokes Israel

Lieberman says Syrian counterpart's claim that Israel's cities will be targeted if a war breaks out constitutes 'crossing of red line'; claims Syria must give up on its demand for Israeli withdrawal from Golan Heights

Attila Somfalvi
Published: 02.04.10, 10:50 / Israel News

(Syrian President Bashar) Assad must realize that if he "provokes" Israel his regime will collapse, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said Thursday.

[link to www.ynetnews.com]

Syria stokes the flames of war with Israel

The Syrian leadership on Wednesday of pushing the region toward full-scale war, and threatened to devastate Israel's cities if it dares to use military force against terrorist threats such as Lebanon's Hizballah.

In a meeting with visiting Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Moratinos, Syrian President Bashar Assad said, "All the facts point that Israel is driving the region toward war, not peace. Israel is not serious about wanting peace."

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem added at a press conference following the meeting that Israel knows "that war at this time will reach your cities. If such a war breaks out ... it will indeed be total war, whether it begins in south Lebanon or Syria."

Late last month, a pan-Arab newspaper reported that Syria and Hizballah were mobilizing their forces for war with Israel, while telling the rest of the Arab world that the Jewish state was about to attack.

Meanwhile, Israel's defense establishment is actually pushing for a renewal of peace talks with Syria, even if Damascus continues to push hardline preconditions.

Addressing senior Israeli army officers on Tuesday, Defense Minister Ehud Barak warned that if peace talks didn't resume soon, war could break out. In the aftermath of such a conflict, the peace talks will be about the same things they are today, insisted Barak, questioning the need for war and hostile rhetoric.

But Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu remained cool to the idea of restarting talks at this time, noting that Syria continues to place obstacle by demanding preconditions, like a guaranteed full Israeli withdrawal from the Golan Heights.

[link to www.israeltoday.co.il]

WHY ISRAEL Would decisively defeat IRAN and Syria completely- and Lora

THIS SAYS IT ALL

The war theater in the Middle east has yet to see Israel's missiles.

They were very merciful with Hezbollah and Lebanon last time

IRAN SHOULD BACK DOWN


WHY ISRAEL WILL decisively defeat IRAN if there is an all-out war.
1.Israel has more than 200 atomic devices vs Iran which may have 1 soon.Even if Iran bought nuclear devices from other rogue states, the retaliation from Israel would be the equivalent of 2,000 plus hiroshimas.
2.The 200 plus Israeli atomic devices are unstoppable by Iran i.e. up to 80 can be launched by submarines and the rest by ICBM or F-15s or F-16s
3.Israel has the world?s most advanced anti-ICBM missle umbrella which may be impenetrable by Iranian Shahib missles . Iran can only deliver their 1-2 atomic warheads by ICBMs with no other delivery capabilities.

Everyone continues to accept the fallacy Israel due to it’s size would suffer more destruction than Iran in any nuclear exchange.
This is totally inaccurate for several reasons. Israel’s arsenal of nuclear weapons contains thermonuclear weapons despite what French Strategy believes. The father of the H bomb Edward Teller, actually spent time in Israel assisting them with the beginning of their nuclear weapons program including the goal of having thermonuclear weapons.

In October 2003, the Los Angeles Times, citing Israeli and U.S. officials, reported that Israel had modified the American-supplied submarine-based Harpoon anti-ship missile to carry nuclear warheads.

Read about
The secrecy of Israel’s missile program parallels that of its nuclear weapons program. Even the name of the missile program is disputed. The “Jericho” designation is reported by some analysts to be the original name given to the contract signed between France and Israel.

at
[link to godssecret.wordpress.com]

Iran better back down and Syria if they know what’s good for them should stay out of any possible conflict.

This figure is so old that it should be drawing a pension. The real figure is probably in the region of 1,000+. Mostly in the very small sizes, which Israel can do because it has mastered the arcane art of tritium gas renewal. Small weapons have a relatively short shelf life without it.

I agree completely with you. We have yet to see the full capability of Israel's military. Other than a few skirmishes Israel has held back there power and might. I feel sorry for the people of the country that decides to provoke Israel to an all out war.

My personal opinion is that we are soon to see the beginning of the tribulation period that Jesus spoke of and that many other profits foretold of. I just hold my hands high and pray that his return is soon, because I truly believe that we are in the end times.

Russian engineers are building Busherh nuke plant right now.

I bet Israel will be wipped off the map by Russia if it attacks this nuclear plant.

Iran tells Gulf states not to buy US missiles

(AFP) – 2 hours ago

TEHRAN — A senior Iranian military official told Gulf states on Thursday not to squander money on US missiles, boasting that Iran can render them useless, the state news agency IRNA reported.

Tehran had on Wednesday slammed plans by the United States to beef up defences in the Gulf against potential Iranian missile attacks, with the Islamic republic insisting it posed no threat to its neighbours.

"Installing anti-missile Patriot missiles is a new trick to empty the pockets of rich Persian Gulf countries," said General Hassan Firuzabadi, the joint chief of staff of Iran's armed forces.

"Patriot missiles can be rendered ineffective by simple tactics, and I advise the regional countries, especially Islamic states, not to waste their money on these missiles which have not worked anywhere," he said.

US President Barack Obama's administration is reportedly placing ships with missile-targeting capabilities off Iran's coast, and anti-missile systems in at least four Gulf states -- Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.

US ally Bahrain acknowledged on Wednesday that Gulf military defences were being upgraded but urged Iran not to see them as plans for attack.

The moves come as Iran remains locked in a standoff with the West over its nuclear programme, which many world powers believe is masking a weapons drive. Iran has vehemently denied this.

Iran has carried out frequent war games in the Gulf and paraded an array of home-grown missiles over the past years.

It has threatened to hit Western targets if Iranian nuclear sites come under attack by the United States or Israel -- its two arch-foes which have never ruled out the military option to thwart the atomic drive.

An Iranian Revolutionary Guards official also said on Wednesday that Iran had developed anti-armor weapons which can combat US Apache helicopters and armored tanks.

"The enemy should not think their Apache helicopters can have the same power that they have in Iraq and Afghanistan in Iran," Naser Arab-beigi, who heads the self-sufficiency organization of the Revolutionary Guards, told Fars news agency.

"We will end Apache power by our measures. Their armored tanks will be met with the firm response of our weapons," he said.

[link to www.google.com]

Iran: US Patriots waging psychological warfare

Major General Hassan Firouzabadi, the chief of staff of Iran's armed forces, says the US is trying to wage psychological warfare against Iran by deploying missiles in the Persian Gulf.

Firouzabadi said on Thursday that the recently deployed Patriot missiles in the region will be rendered useless by simple countermeasures.

He said the administration of US President Barack Obama encourages Persian Gulf States to buy overpriced military hardware by spreading Iranophobia in the region.

He noted that the move is a "new plot" by the US to plunder the Arab countries' treasury.

Firouzabadi said that the US has been installing the missiles for years and "we know their locations."

Washington has expanded its missile systems in and around Persian Gulf, claiming that the measure is aimed at beefing up its defenses against possible Iranian missile attacks.

The US deployments include land-based Patriot missile installations in Kuwait, Qatar, the UAE and Bahrain. Washington is keeping two warships in the Persian Gulf supposedly capable of shooting down Iranian missiles.

Iran says the US is trying to drive a wedge between Iran and other Persian Gulf states by ramping up missile defense systems in the region.


[link to www.presstv.ir]

Netanyahu and Lieberman try to reassure Syria: We want peace

BY JPOST.COM STAFF
04/02/2010 13:18

Comes after FM says Assad regime will be toppled in next war; PM tells ministers to refrain from speaking to press on Syria; Syrian foreign affairs chief: Israel isn't interested in peace.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman had a reassuring message for Syria on Thursday afternoon after the war of words between the two countries threatened to escalate.

"We pursue peace and negotiations with Syria, without preconditions, while Israel will continue to act with force and determination against any threats," Netanyahu and Lieberman said in a joint statement after the two held talks following the latter's threat against the Syrian leadership earlier in the day.

The prime minister also instructed all his ministers to refrain from making remarks about the Syrian track to the press.

Read more: [link to www.jpost.com]

What I don't get is that the muslims gladly take our money for oil.

So what is the "threat" that Israel would save us from? What could they possibly do except drive up the price of oil? What possible benefit is there to the US?

No one can seem to answer these questions.

China warns Iran sanctions will derail diplomacy

(AFP) – 4 hours ago

PARIS — Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi warned Thursday that threatening more sanctions against Iran will derail diplomatic efforts to resolve the dispute over Tehran's nuclear programme.

"This talk of sanctions at this moment will complicate the situation and stand in the way of finding a diplomatic solution," Yang told a gathering at a French think-tank.

China, a member of the UN Security Council, has called for more dialogue with Tehran, clashing with France and the United States which are seeking to move toward sanctions.

Yang was due to meet President Nicolas Sarkozy later Thursday for talks that were expected to touch on calls for tightening sanctions on Iran for its refusal to stop enriching uranium.

The United States and its Western allies fear Iran is using an uranium enrichment drive to to secretly develop fissile material for nuclear weapons. Iran says it only wants to produce fuel for a peaceful nuclear energy programme.

Yang argued that Iran had not "totally shut the door" to efforts by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to negotiate a deal that would adress concerns about its enrichment programme.

French Prime Minister Francois Fillon said Wednesday he would ask the United Nations to adopt a new resolution against Iran that would include "strong sanctions".

US Defence Secretary Robert Gates also said Iran faces the prospect of "severe sanctions" from the UN Security Council and also directly from Western countries.

[link to www.google.com]

Israel is strategically located.

My ass is strategically located. That answered nothing.

Why not invade Saudi Arabia with US forces? Why not wipe out the entire muslim population in that country? Mecca would fall and a severe blow dealt to the fundamentals of Islam. Further, we would remove the corrupt Sauds and the funding of radical madrassahs would cease.

Even further, it is SO strategic that we would not have to rely on Israel to be "strategic" (whatever the fuck that means) to do some imaginary "strategic protection" over assets it does not control.

Lastly, we would have the oil.

My questions are still not answered. Is this a serious thread or not?

At play are the interests of the broader west, the EU and NATO powers. These three have a common interest in economics which requires the free flow of oil and open sea lanes feeding both the Atlantic and Mediterranean.

In 1956 and between 1967-1973, the value of the Suez canal was highlighted. At present Egypt is an Allie and thus dependence on Israel's geographical position is lessened. Mubarak is growing old and the likelihood of a smooth transition to his son unlikely. Israel could easily become the central strategy to maintaining the canal.

The key sea lane which stretches beyond the Suez is important for Asian goods as well. All points along this sea lane have gained greater interest and will continue to do so.

Next, is the greater geostrategic interests of power projection. As US Carriers become more obsolete as a function of time, the US requires other options to speedily effect not only the oil in the region and this sea lane, but such growing enemies as China and Russia. By securing the sea lane and maintaining assured Allies in the region, the US can maintain a world reach with an execution time of a few hours. Whether one believes this is to maintain a status quo or is part of Empire building is the debate, but rest assured Israel remains a player in the greater game.

Look at the map of the Mediterranean and trace NATO control/expansion and follow along the sea route to both the far east and the gulf. Pay attention to the nation states that threaten or can threaten this lane and their allegiences and much of the last 50 years of history may take on a new light for you.

If you feel that the benefits Israel provides the West do not outweigh the costs and we should create new alliances then you are not alone, but the strategic value of the real estate is not in question. How and with whom the west maintains control over it is.

The Palestinians are not able nor willing to provide the necessary security, Israel is. There is a great divide between Western and Islamic thinking in terms of the more militant. The Palestinians have proven to prefer the more militant view.

Has this been verbose enough?

Last Edited by D. Bunker on 02/04/2010 11:56 AM

Thank you, much better answer.

Still, I would ask what threat there is when the ragheads have been happily shipping us oil in exchange for dollars to fund murderous madrassahs?

I know of no muslim country threatening to turn off our oil. I know of no muslim country declaring war on American tankers.
I know of no muslim country blowing up their own oil reserves to spite us.

The only muslim country being typically muslim-stupid is Somalia and they have no oil and Israel doesn't give a shit about them

So what "strategic" value is Israel going to have?

By supporting zionist supremacism, we anger the idiot-muslims (who still sell us oil), and make our homeland a target because we want "strategic value."



I don't give a shit that Israel is in the middle of a bunch of raghead assholes. What threat is there to our "interests" when our only interests there is oil and the muslims will do anything to continue selling to us?

I don't see any logical sense in the "strategic" Israel position.

I am always willing to admit I'm wrong because that is the sooner I can be right. So I can be persuaded with logic and reason.

Right now, vigorously poking a stick into the middle eastern affairs hornet's nest doesn't seem to be the wisest move. In fact, our country should be nominated for the Darwin Award due to its total stupidity.

We shouldn't be there. We shouldn't support zionist supremacism. We shouldn't anger neanderthal muslims by cheerleading for their enemies.

I offered a solution to the "strategic" "problem" (of which there is no current problem). What solution does supporting Israel against our energy providers offer?

At risk of being over simplistic again, you are making your judgment of the regional security based on a fairly narrow historical view. The current governments all have their challenges. The region is very unstable primarily due to the radical element that seeks to topple the status quo. The flow of oil for instance can be disrupted at several choke points. The Straight, the horn and the canal. It can be done so by some specific nations, but also mere piracy. The point is a form of law and order that is simply not existent.

As Israel has proven a strategic asset in the past, why should we dispense with them given the instability? A regional sustainable peace is more to our advantage, but this will take time and patience as the region modernizes. In the meantime, we require a 'fire watch' as it were.

The region never has nor is likely to soon be easily controlled or predictable.

Okay, because I am being "simplistic," I will be simple and address each point.



Of course I am. We aren't trading spices with India and being attacked by arabic nomads. We trade oil with willing nations with which we have a secure, established route.

As a consequence of supporting the primary agitator for middle eastern war, we are now endangering our sources - though they are still very eager to sell us oil.




Supporting Israel agitates the radicals AND the "conservative" muslim governments. This damages our "strategic interests." Further, Wahhabism isn't the only radical element in the region. War-mongering zionist supremacists (not jews) create massive instability.



Quite true. We have bases in Saudi Arabia. You cannot get more strategically placed than that.



The Israelis ARE the instability. Jews and muslims get along just fine and have for centuries before this. But suddenly there are issues. They want to kill each other and every muslim will tell you that the cause is zionism. Zionism isn't just "pro-Israel." If you don't know what zionism is, I suggest you do some in-depth historical study.



Ignoring the primary cause of tension will not solve it. By supporting zionism, we create instability. Further, we have bases in Saudi Arabia already so the "fire watch" so-to-speak is already covered.



And for exactly that reason we shouldn't be meddling in their affairs. NEVER has America successfully meddled in the affairs of other states - we always lose.

How many people need to die for this stupid "strategic" idea? How many millions dead will make it "worth it." We can fist-pump the grim milestones all we want as we goose-step around the world projecting our "interests," but is the death toll worth it?

When has it ever been worth it?

You are not alone in desiring a paradigm shift in regional strategy. Bush attempted to force a solution and only created more chaos. The main goal has been to find a path to peace that provided the desired security. It has failed numerous times for a variety of reasons.

We could choose the path of severing our ties with Israel; however, this will assure war in the short term. It is possible we are assured war in either regard, but which provides the best containment at this time? Do we allow the dooming of Israel to resolve the issue or will this war merely create yet another super power to contend with?

The last argument I would suggest is that the US has a long record of very short term thinking and planning. In a real sense, we tend toward the tactical as opposed to a strategic view. By doing so, we continue to create issues attempting to resolve other ones. While I agree we are in a less than desirable situation, of our own making to a great extent, I am not sure there is an acceptable path that is not fraught with perplexity.

Sometimes it is best to simplify. "Better the devil you know" as it were.

There are other considerations beside economic D. Bunker. There are many people on both sides that see the region in spiritual and prophetic terms.

I am not saying they are right or wrong, only that these people will play a significant role in the coming war.

And I do believe it is coming.

Economics and religion are strange bedfellows.

Yes, so it begins. With the spiral.

"tauntage"

I think you've just created a new GLP vocab word...
I'm likin' it.

I thought SHR was throwing out Star Wars slang.

I agree, but this is the part that is inherently unstable. It is thus easier to deal with cultures more in tune with Western values.

the easiest path isn't always the correct one. Think of Chess. Sometimes you are being led astray for nefarious purposes when you think you are on the right path. Beware of what is seemed to be the easiest path.

And I hope you don't mind me saying that to you. I am not trying to offer unsolicited advice, I am just trying to figure it out myself.

Iran is being led by a man committed to his faith. This should not be overlooked by our military nor our politics.

South Lebanon residents brace for new Israel war

By Rana Moussaoui (AFP) – 11 hours ago

AITA SHAAB, Lebanon — More than three years after the last war between Israel and Hezbollah, south Lebanon residents are bracing for new conflict amid Israeli warnings against both Hezbollah and its backer Syria.

"If you come back, we'll be waiting for you," the Shiite militant group warns Israel on a billboard near the southern village of Aita Shaab.

It was across the border from Aita Shaab that Hezbollah fighters captured two Israeli soldiers in a deadly cross-border raid in July 2006, provoking a devastating month-long Israeli offensive against Hezbollah strongholds in south Lebanon and Beirut's southern suburub.

The war killed more than 1,200 people in Lebanon, mainly civilians, and 160 Israelis, most of them soldiers.

"We are afraid, of course," said Hayat, a resident of the southern village of Qana, which came under deadly bombardment in the 2006 war.

"Every day we hear news of a possible new war," she tells AFP from her terrace which overlooks the village cemetery.

She said she feared any renewed fighting would see even the heart of the capital Beirut bombed. "Where will we hide?" she asked.

Her neighbour Diba agreed that any new conflict risked being more devastating than 2006.

"If war erupts, Syria and Iran will participate too. Next time it will not be limited to Hezbollah."

Israeli officials have warned repeatedly in recent weeks that any attack by Hezbollah will meet with a tough response.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday accused Lebanon of allowing Hezbollah to develop its stockpile of weapons, which Israel estimates at some 40,000 rockets, a significant rise from the group's 14,000 rockets in 2006.

Last month, Yossi Peled, an Israeli minister without portfolio and a reserve army general, warned Israel was heading towards a new war with Hezbollah.

"We are heading toward a new confrontation in the north but I don't know when it will happen, just as we did not know when the second Lebanon war would erupt," Peled told Israeli radio.

In Aita Shaab, new houses and villas are under construction, visible to Israeli soldiers across the border.

But a third of the homes in village remain in ruins after the 2006 war. Farmer Hassan Srour's house was reduced to rubble.

"We are rebuilding, and if war breaks out again, then we will rebuild again," the 39-year-old said.

"We have got used to occupation, war and destruction. Where are we expected to go? This is our land," he said.

Unlike in northern Israel, villagers in Aita Shaab are not building bomb shelters as they reconstruct their homes.

"What for?" said Srour. "In 2006, two of our neighbours were buried alive in their bomb shelters."

Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri has voiced fear of another "Israeli intervention" and Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah said the next war would "change the face of the region."

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem warned Israel that war against his country would turn into a wider conflict.

"Israelis, do not test the power of Syria since you know the war will move into your cities," Muallem said on Wednesday.

His Israeli counterpart Avigdor Lieberman retorted on Thursday that any war would cost Syrian President Bashar al-Assad his grip on power.

In the village of Yarin, Khaled and his wife Dima, who run a shop near the border, carry on with their daily lives amid the mounting war of words.

"This time with the first explosion we're packing our bags," Dima said, adjusting her black veil.

Akel Hammoud, from the nearby village of Beit Leef, said Hezbollah's fighters were prepared for any Israeli move.

"Everything is ready," he said. "The weapons and equipment are there. All we need is anti-aircraft defence."

[link to www.google.com]