Global War on Terrorism as an excuse for waging war. Israel plans for war with Iran and Syria.

The conflict with Hezbollah has led to a strategic rethink in Israel. A key conclusion is that too much attention has been paid to Palestinian militants in Gaza and the West Bank instead of the two biggest state sponsors of terrorism in the region, who pose a far greater danger to Israel’s existence, defence insiders say.

I excluded the first paragraph of the article.

Source; www.timesonline.co.uk...

Unbelievable but true. Even while the people of Israel demand investigations into government corruption and calling for resignation of the Prime Minister, Israeli government is preparing for an outright war with the Arabs.

Unfortunately it's just another example of how manufactured "War on Terror" ideology is used to justify colonial ambitions.

The problem is that I see all these and Israel role as the sacrificed lamb before the US will become involve in full scale.

By then the war propaganda machine will have the minds and harts of the American people believing that it has been all Syrian and Iran fault even if they do not start a war, but rather defending themselves from an aggressor.

Funny but the scenarios of the next US involvement and culmination of the agenda in the Middle East are becoming very real.

Then the scary thing will be if the Arab nations united against another foreign aggression in the middle east.

We may have a real nuclear threat and It will not necessarily may come from the Iran or Syria.

Scary thought.

iskander , marg,



You seem to like to turn tables on reality. So just to get the record straight – here it goes.

Iran and Syria are two powers in the middle east who are not aligned with the US . Iran is a theocracy led by a Shia Muslim ideology and agenda to set shia as the leading Islamic power in the middle east. Hence the nuclear ambitions (lets put the BS aside and finally admit that Iran is seeking to have nuclear arms – I think it is obvious). Syria, in its regional power struggle, Lebanese occupation, assassination of Harriri (get off it I WAS Syria) and support of Hezbullah has left itself no choice but to align with Iran . The Syrian leadership comprises of an Alawi elite that rules over a Sunni majority. Alawis are closely related to Shiites therefore the Iranian philosophy is not too distant from their own.

Israel does not wish to expand it borders further that what it is today but rather withdraw from some lands it is currently 'occupying'. This of course under the pretext that those lands will not be used for offensive purposes against Israel. I think this too has been shown to be the truth.
This is in contrast to the 'Colonial ambitions' you where referring to.


Hizbullah built huge bunkers in south Lebanon and filled them with rockets, ammunition, artillery and weapons. The bunkers had command centers. Recently Israel started demolishing them (after they were empied out). The contents included high-tech electronic eavedropping devices, ECM, jamming devices and night vision monitoring systems which the Iranians obtained from the UK under the pretext of an international task force against drug trade.
One bunker currently demolished was 2 square kilometers in area. I know of these bunkers from first hand experience.
Why would Hezbullah need these bunkers if the war on terrorism was manufactured? The Hizbullah raison d'etre was the resistance against Israeli occupation. Israel withdrew from Lebanon completely (Shebaa Farms has been determined by the UN NOT to be Lebanese) HEzbullah had no reason to continue its agressions after the Israeli withdraw from Lebanon but continued by attacking both civilians and the Israeli military. Was this manufactured as well?
Iran supplies an immense cache of arms to Hizbullah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad . Was this manufactured?
The evidence is all there and all that needs to be done is to have your eyes open and see.

Marge,
Israel DID not attack Syria nor Iran. Syria and Iran attack Israel on a daily basis throught their Palestinian and Lebanese proxies so they are the true aggressors NOT Israel.

Iran as a nuclear power will be a threat to the 'head-up their ass' Left, the Sunnis as well as the rest of the world.

JudahMaccabbi

The Middle East has become an agenda the agenda that no only will benefit the Israel nation but also it will bring a bonus to the US interest in the area.

One is to eliminate what it seem a threat to Israel from undesirable regimes nations and the second is about natural resources in the area.

Something that you can not underestimate and has to be taken into consideration.

Now I am missing something here?

One of the struggles that Israel has is about its borders or that is a lie?

Syria is in conflict with Israel because of border problems, Iran problems with Israel is because it refuse to acknowledge their existence, something that historically has been in controversy in the area.

The middle east is and will always been majority Muslim regardless of supposedly good intentions of US trying to bring democracy it will never be able to kill the religious ideology.

Hezbollah is part of the struggles that are clouding the area they are considered a terrorist group because US dictate who is terrorist and who is not in the middle east the same way that it dictate which countries are axils of evil and who are friends even when most countries in the middle east including the so called friends are part of the terrorism that is plaguing the area.

But we all know the struggles of Israel and the results of its actions when it comes to Lebanon.

The biggest mistake is to forget one side while supporting the other one.

I am going to tell you this, the new leader in Israel is going to bring nothing but destruction and sadness to the people of that nation in the Middle East and also the death of many from the surrounding nations that i.s trying to target.

Is that the right think to do? Do you think that the Iraeli common citizens will sit and do nothing, already Israel citizens are complaining about the leadership in Israel and he has not been in position for that long

He wants to follow the same agendas that the Bush administration is following and ts has more to do more with profiting from wars than saving the world.

Fair comments Judah.

Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 4-9-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

Originally posted by iskander
Unfortunately it's just another example of how manufactured "War on Terror" ideology is used to justify colonial ambitions.

Erm please tell what colonial ambitions Israel has ? Do you understand the meaning of the sentence you wrote, it doesn't seem so.

Thank you for the history lesson JudahMaccabbi. Let's look into it.

Iran and Syria are two powers in the middle east who are not aligned with the US . Iran is a theocracy led by a Shia Muslim ideology and agenda to set shia as the leading Islamic power in the middle east. Hence the nuclear ambitions (lets put the BS aside and finally admit that Iran is seeking to have nuclear arms – I think it is obvious). Syria, in its regional power struggle, Lebanese occupation, assassination of Harriri (get off it I WAS Syria) and support of Hezbullah has left itself no choice but to align with Iran . The Syrian leadership comprises of an Alawi elite that rules over a Sunni majority. Alawis are closely related to Shiites therefore the Iranian philosophy is not too distant from their own.

Iran and Syria are not the only two powers in the ME that are not allied with the West. Iran was a English/US puppet until the Islamic Revolution of 1979.

Brutal use of secret police (Savak) to by Shah Muhammad Reza Pahlavi to oppress the population fueled the popular support for the revolution. (Fedaiyan-e Islam)

Again we get the same old pattern of colonialism. In case of Iran English were simply replaced by US.

And don't forget the Iraq/Iran war which was yet another US/Israeli attempt to force its will on ME.

Lost on all that here - www.onwar.com...

Israel does not wish to expand it borders further that what it is today but rather withdraw from some lands it is currently 'occupying'. This of course under the pretext that those lands will not be used for offensive purposes against Israel. I think this too has been shown to be the truth.
This is in contrast to the 'Colonial ambitions' you where referring to.

Oh please. Only the history of the world disagrees with you and all kinds of sources with such propagandist views. If you wish to constructively debate the history of colonialism including ME, please feel free to invite me to the "Debate Forum". Being a good sport that I am, I recommend running a search for my previous posts on ATS forums before you do that though, you'll see a pattern there.

Hizbullah built huge bunkers in south Lebanon and filled them with rockets, ammunition, artillery and weapons. The bunkers had command centers. Recently Israel started demolishing them (after they were empied out). The contents included high-tech electronic eavedropping devices, ECM, jamming devices and night vision monitoring systems which the Iranians obtained from the UK under the pretext of an international task force against drug trade.

Good, you mentioned drug trade, would you care to elaborate on that? Facts like who's running the drugs and from where to where?

As to Hezbollahs arsenal, it simply pales in comparrison to Israel, so there's simply nothing to discuss there. Apples and oranges again, don't think so.

Why would Hezbullah need these bunkers if the war on terrorism was manufactured? The Hizbullah raison d'etre was the resistance against Israeli occupation. Israel withdrew from Lebanon completely (Shebaa Farms has been determined by the UN NOT to be Lebanese) HEzbullah had no reason to continue its agressions after the Israeli withdraw from Lebanon but continued by attacking both civilians and the Israeli military. Was this manufactured as well?

Hezbollah needed and used such bunkers against Israeli attack on Lebanon, and did so successfully.

Iran supplies an immense cache of arms to Hizbullah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad . Was this manufactured?
The evidence is all there and all that needs to be done is to have your eyes open and see.

Evidence? Care to elaborate? US support for Israel made it the most powerful, nuclear power in the region. I got the numbers, so feel free to share your evidence, and I'll be more then happy to share the facts.

Israel DID not attack Syria nor Iran. Syria and Iran attack Israel on a daily basis throught their Palestinian and Lebanese proxies so they are the true aggressors NOT Israel.

Israel has been attacking Palestine and Lebanon for DECADES. Missile strikes, assassinations, border incursions, mass arrests, HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH, get the stats.

Iran as a nuclear power will be a threat to the 'head-up their ass' Left, the Sunnis as well as the rest of the world.

There we go, neo-con talk. Well. let me put it this way, the PEOPLE of USA and Israel are FED UP with corrupt governments which force these wars.

Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons because Israel uses its own nuclear arsenal to FORCE its policies in the ME.

Israelis are demanding the resignation of the Prime Minister;

politics.abovetopsecret.com...'

Give it a try, it's something US media refuses to cover.

Cannot both Iran and Syria pose a threat to the state of Israel and be a part of the war on terror at the same time? The President of Iran has clearly stated his intentions regarding Israel, if I were Israel I would do some planning in regards to Iran. Just because these countries do "double duty", doesn't mean Israel can't take them as a threat. As for Israel planning to attack the Arab world, it's not like Israel's never been attacked by Arab countries or vice versa. Don't make it sound so shocking that people in that region of the world are planning to take on eachother. It's not like it's a peace loving region of the world lately.

There it is!

Buy Israeli goods!
Boycott Pan-Arabists and Islamofacists!

Islamofacist is a good one.

JudahMaccabbi, who about this, where did this new "term" came from?

It was "engineered" by some one, right?

So where did it come from? Don't say FOX, because they only repeat what they are told.

Let's do this thing.

P.S. Here's another attempt for such blatant propaganda;

politics.abovetopsecret.com...

So choose your words carefully, because I'll track them down like a hound dog.

Originally posted by iskander
Iran and Syria are not the only two powers in the ME that are not allied with the West.

Cough, Cough, Please name the other powers in the ME that are not allied or leaning to the West.

Cough, Cough,

In light of the recent US actions, the ENTIRE Muslim world is anti-American.

Putting aside geo-political and economical leverage, and focusing on actual public opinion polls instead of official government positions, Muslim communities of the entire world are taking a stand against American colonial agenda.

Google - www.iol.co.za

All the gulf countries hosting US troops - Kuwait, Oman, Bahrain, Qatar and Saudi Arabia - have seen anti-American incidents or attacks aimed at US troops and installations.

Cough, cough, pick up some ricola lozenges and get with the program.

edit; mistake


[edit on 3-9-2006 by iskander]
mod edit to shorten link

[edit on 4-9-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

So basically you can not name another major country or government in the Middle East that is not leaning toward the US or the West. You have not proved your statement.

Just can't help my self from posting more;

Mariem Abdel Rahman, a teacher in Qatar, says Arab leaders should not welcome US troops "while America is supporting Israel with modern weapons to kill Palestinian children".

In Bin Laden's native Saudi Arabia, prayer leader Mansour al-Hussein says US troops in the kingdom represent America's "greediness and effort to monopolise the wealth of the Muslim world".

"The United States wants to maintain its military presence in the region and attack Iraq to plunder its oil wealth," he said in an interview in Riyadh, the Saudi capital.

On October 8, two Muslim extremists opened fire on US Marines training in Kuwait, killing one and wounding another before other Americans shot them to death.

Many Kuwaitis were stunned, remembering that it was Americans who rid their country of Saddam's army. Fadhilla Sahar, a 29-year-old mother, talked about love of Americans as she fed her baby daughter on a Kuwait beach.

"On September 11, families in Kuwait were crying when they watched the attacks on TV. It was the same feeling as when Saddam came here," she said. "Americans and Kuwaitis are like brothers and sisters."

Still, about 50 anti-American extremists are believed to operate in Kuwait, and authorities said more than a dozen were involved in the attack on the Marines.

In May, after an American sailor's car accidentally hit a woman in Bahrain, a crowd of 500 chanted "Death to America". The sailor and his wife were roughed up and had to be admitted to hospital.

The same month, Saudi authorities said a Sudanese and five Saudis tried to fire a missile at a US military aircraft taking off from a base where 4 500 US personnel are stationed. Security guards found a missile launcher nearby.

In most gulf countries these days, American soldiers aren't seen eating out or shopping, especially not in uniform. In Saudi Arabia, the low profile dates to 1996, after 19 US personnel died in the bombing of Khobar Towers, a military housing complex.

But Walid al-Bernawi, a Saudi banker, said he welcomed the American troops and was sure they would leave if his government so requested.

"I consider the Americans our friends until proven otherwise," he said. "When we asked them to send troops to liberate Kuwait, they did not hesitate, and if it wasn't for them, Saddam Hussein would have invaded Saudi Arabia as well."

Abdullah al-Kawwari, a Qatari civil servant, said the militarily weak gulf countries needed US help in 1990. But now, he said, it was time they built their own armies to "replace all foreign forces... the Americans in particular".

www.iol.co.za

mod edit to shorten link[/url]


[edit on 4-9-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

So basically you can not name another major country or government in the Middle East that is not leaning toward the US or the West. You have not proved your statement.

Was that good enough pavil?

Not really. You prove my contention more that your point. The stuff you quote are individuals talking about things, not the governments themselves. Even then your quotes of full of this stuff:

I consider the Americans our friends until proven otherwise," he said. "When we asked them to send troops to liberate Kuwait, they did not hesitate, and if it wasn't for them, Saddam Hussein would have invaded Saudi Arabia as well."

On October 8, two Muslim extremists opened fire on US Marines training in Kuwait, killing one and wounding another before other Americans shot them to death. Many Kuwaitis were stunned, remembering that it was Americans who rid their country of Saddam's army. Fadhilla Sahara 29-year-old mother, talked about love of Americans as she fed her baby daughter on a Kuwait beach.

Sure sounds like some extremist's talking there eh?

Heck there are attacks on US troops all around the world at times, does that mean a majority in those countries are opposed to the US. There will always be some lingering Anti-American sentiments in a small percentage of people around the world, to extrapolate that into

by iskander

Iran and Syria are not the only two powers in the ME that are not allied with the West.

Sorry, to me, you still have not proved that statement. You have submitted individuals statements and tried to make it look like the majority of a government's policy or the beliefs of a citizenry of a country.

pavil

Just because countries are called US friends in the Middle East like Pakistan, Egypt, Afghanistan and Saudi, it doesn't mean that they are not supporting terrorism behind US backs.

Terrorist organizations are very well funded and with plenty of supporters that spans from the entire Middle East, they are not all Iranians and Syrians.

They get monetary support from all the muslin word.

While our tax payer money goes to coercion of nations like Pakistan that happens to have a government holding to power by a string and with nuclear weapons that can easily go into the hands of extremist.

But the are our friends because they allow US to do attacks on their borders with Afghanistan.

I tell you what is all an illusion nothing more than an illusion of friends in the Middle East while alienating nations like Iran and Syria.

Nothing but illusion.

I don't think that Iran has Moskit and I don't think that it would make a good nuclear land-attack ruise missile either. In general though cruise missile technology is not all that advanced, epecially if you have a nuclear warhead because accuracy becomes less of a factor. And why not just use civilian GPS if it's specifically for a first strike - the GPS system is only shut down if the US knows it's under attack and that GPS is being used - i.e. after the fact.

pavil, I made my self very clear;

Putting aside geo-political and economical leverage, and focusing on actual public opinion polls instead of official government positions, Muslim communities of the entire world are taking a stand against American colonial agenda.

Yet you insist on pitting the debate on the "prove it" factor;

Sorry, to me, you still have not proved that statement. You have submitted individuals statements and tried to make it look like the majority of a government's policy or the beliefs of a citizenry of a country.

That's called diversion of the topic.

pavil, for the sake of the debate I'll Google common knowledge information for one last time, but this is the last time I'll be sent on the "prove it" errand.

If you doubt what is clearly a fact, do your own research and educate your self in stead of attempting to get others do to the work for you. I know exactly how that works, so try it on somebody else.

"The poll forcefully supported the finding of an earlier survey that a U.S. war with Iraq would fuel anti-American sentiment."

Poll Shows U.S. Isolation: In War's Wake, Hostility and Mistrust.

www.commondreams.org...

To make it even simpler;

The poll forcefully supported the finding of an earlier survey that a U.S. war with Iraq would fuel anti-American sentiment.

As could be expected, this feeling is strongest in the Muslim world, where negative attitudes toward the United States have soared since the war on Iraq began March 20 with a wave of American air attacks over Baghdad.

One of the most extreme shifts was seen in Turkey, where the government, heeding popular sentiment, decided not to allow United States to use its soil as a base for attacks on Iraq although Washington and Ankara are partners in NATO.

The poll found that 83 percent of Turks now have an unfavorable opinion of the United States, up from 55 percent last summer.

The swing was even sharper in Indonesia, where Islamic radicalism has been rising since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in New York and Washington.

While 75 percent had a favorable opinion of the United States in 2000, 83 percent now have an unfavorable view. Similar levels of animosity hold sway in the Palestinian Authority and Jordan.

In fact, feelings are so intense in the Islamic world that Osama bin Laden was chosen by five Muslim publics - in Indonesia, Jordan, Morocco, Pakistan and the Palestinian Authority - as one of the three political leaders they would most trust to "do the right thing" in world affairs.

Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center, said he had been surprised by the extent to which "the bottom has fallen out" in the Muslim world.

"Anti-Americanism has deepened, but it has also widened," he said. "You now find it in the far reaches of Africa - in Nigeria, among Muslims - and in Indonesia. People see America as a real threat. They think we're going to invade them."

Naturally there is an entire world of such common knowledge out there, so break a leg. Keeping my fingers crossed.

[edit on 4-9-2006 by iskander]

Marg,,

I tell you what is all an illusion nothing more than an illusion of friends in the Middle East while alienating nations like Iran and Syria.

In the USs current position in Iraq it is both Iran and Syria who are flaming insurgency in Iraq. Syria and Iran's involvement in Lebanese affair are a cause of much upset and instability and Iran's nuclear ambitions and ties to Syria are a threat to the entire middle east and I am not talking about Israel alone. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE, Yemen, Egypt, Jordan are all threatened by Iran and behind closed doors are hoping that either the US or Israel snags their nuclear ambition ASAP.

Regarding the above quote - The US has one VERY staunch ally in the middle east that, of course, is Israel.

In the USs current position in Iraq it is both Iran and Syria who are flaming insurgency in Iraq. Syria and Iran's involvement in Lebanese affair are a cause of much upset and instability and Iran's nuclear ambitions and ties to Syria are a threat to the entire middle east and I am not talking about Israel alone. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE, Yemen, Egypt, Jordan are all threatened by Iran and behind closed doors are hoping that either the US or Israel snags their nuclear ambition ASAP.

Regarding the above quote - The US has one VERY staunch ally in the middle east that, of course, is Israel.

JudahMaccabbi, are you a Zionist?

Just want to be clear on things like that instead of wasting cyber space.

Before you answer that, in order to remain neutral, I'll post some Canadian views on that;

According to the poll, 45 per cent of voters disagree with Mr. Harper's support of Israel's actions, while 32 per cent support it, and 23 per cent don't know or neither agree nor disagree. In Quebec, 61 per cent are against the Harper position, with only 17 per cent behind it.

The poll also found that 77 per cent of Canadians surveyed say Canada should be neutral in the current conflict, with 16 per cent voicing support for Israel and just 1 per cent backing Hezbollah. Fifty-one per cent say the position represents a move away from previous Canadian governments' views.

More here - www.thetruthseeker.co.uk...

So JudahMaccabbi, how goes it?

iskander,

I am an Israeli/American - Am I a Zionist? DAMN STRAIGHT.
What is Zionism though - I think there is a little bit of ignorance in the air as to its definition.

THe definition is simple - ZIONISM is the return of Jews to Zion meaning the land of Israel specifically Jerusalem. That is all.

Since Jews have returned and built a country in Israel all that remains is just to live here and develop the country - preferably in peace with our neighbors. There is no requirement to expand but just to live in peace.

Your reference to Canadian opinion is irrelevant - Canadians live on the other edge of the world and have NO CLUE as to what is going on in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Israel or in Mexico for that matter.

I am hiding nothing - I am an Israeli/American and I love both my countries. It makes it easy for me since both countries are such strong allies.