# The Middle East and Western Asia: Bit of a hot spot?



## Sean K (7 January 2007)

Seems this region is going to be the source of conflict for many, many years to come.

I wonder how best the West should manage it? Control it, or let them fight it out, and then pick up the pieces? Is oil the only reason we are interested? 

*Israel has plans for nuclear strike on Iran: paper*
Sat Jan 6, 2007 6:22pm ET

LONDON (Reuters) - Israel has drawn up secret plans to destroy Iran's uranium enrichment facilities with tactical nuclear weapons, Britain's Sunday Times newspaper said.

Citing what it said were several Israeli military sources, the paper said two Israeli air force squadrons had been training to blow up an enrichment plant in Natanz using low-yield nuclear "bunker busters".

Two other sites, a heavy water plant at Arak and a uranium conversion plant at Isfahan, would be targeted with conventional bombs, the Sunday Times said.

The U.N. Security Council voted unanimously last month to slap sanctions on Iran to try to stop uranium enrichment that Western powers fear could lead to making bombs. Tehran insists its plans are peaceful and says it will continue enrichment.

Israel has refused to rule out pre-emptive military action against Iran along the lines of its 1981 air strike against an atomic reactor in Iraq, though many analysts believe Iran's nuclear facilities are too much for Israel to take on alone.

The newspaper said the Israeli plan envisaged conventional laser-guided bombs opening "tunnels" into the targets. Nuclear warheads would then be used fired into the plant at Natanz, exploding deep underground to reduce radioactive fallout.

Israeli pilots have flown to Gibraltar in recent weeks to train for the 2,000 mile round-trip to the Iranian targets, the Sunday Times said, and three possible routes to Iran have been mapped out including one over Turkey.

However it also quoted sources as saying a nuclear strike would only be used if a conventional attack was ruled out and if the United States declined to intervene. Disclosure of the plans could be intended to put pressure on Tehran to halt enrichment, the paper added.

Washington has said military force remains an option while insisting that its priority is to reach a diplomatic solution.

Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called for Israel to be "wiped off the map". Israel, widely believed to have the Middle East's only nuclear arsenal, has said it will not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons.


----------



## 2020hindsight (7 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Saw a great show on SBS recently - young Israeli and Palestinian kids trying to start a "peace movement" - trying to find common ground.  But they got bogged down in the same basic problems that keep stumping their parents (and politicians).   "Why does Israel strike at civilian targets" - "Hamas hide there - Why does Hamas claim it will not permit Israel to exist".

As Golda Mair said - "until they learn to love their kids more than they hate their enemies"... 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas  incidentally, this is Wikipedia's post on Hamas.  I'm fascinated how they "moderate" the various contributions.

You're right Kennas, the nuclear threat is getting nasty.  They dont even have to use a real bomb - they can use "dirty bombs".


----------



## Kauri (7 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Threatening to use nuclear weapons to stop the spread of nuclear weapons...  now that makes me feel safe.


----------



## kgee (7 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

A bit cynical but don't you hate how this news is leaked when oil prices fall to their lowest in 2 years?
+ it's been said that Israel will never let Iran become a nucleur power since day dot...so is it such a surprise Israel has these plans,if I'm not mistaken the US already does


----------



## 2020hindsight (7 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

five little questions spring to mind 
1. would you trust an israeli politician on this question?
2. would you trust an iranian politician on this question?
3. would you trust an american politician on this question?
4. would you trust an australian politician on this question?
5. are there other options besides
a) encouraging war, or 
b) encouraging trust and understanding
As my dorta says, it should be extremely simple to solve - if they thought like me


----------



## chops_a_must (7 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

I don't like Israel and I less like the fact that they are the only nation in the region that is allowed nuclear weapons. There's hardly a power balance.


----------



## insider (7 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

when will people learn that war only brings misery and suffering... why can't they sort out their differences with a soccer match or with a game of laser skirmish...


----------



## chops_a_must (7 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				insider said:
			
		

> when will people learn that war only brings misery and suffering... why can't they sort out their differences with a soccer match or with a game of laser skirmish...



Doesn't soccer actually create more violence?


----------



## Bobby (7 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Hello Kennas,

I'd like your deeper opinion  on this .

Cheers Bob.


----------



## Sean K (7 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				Bobby said:
			
		

> Hello Kennas,
> 
> I'd like your deeper opinion  on this .
> 
> Cheers Bob.



Hi Bob,
Not capable of that right now but I've obviously started this for a reason.   Will be back with you tomorrow. 
Kennas.


----------



## Julia (7 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				Bobby said:
			
		

> Hello Kennas,
> 
> I'd like your deeper opinion  on this .
> 
> Cheers Bob.



 Hi Bob,

I'm interested in your own views on this intractable situation.

Regards
Julia


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (7 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Just like Hitler ideology in this case remains the big threat.


----------



## Bobby (7 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				Julia said:
			
		

> Hi Bob,
> 
> I'm interested in your own views on this intractable situation.
> 
> ...




Greetings Julia,

I'll say this, Islamic Extremism is a tool to control & use large numbers of Idiots through fanatical zeal to do what   ~   Irrational murderous power players want.

Bob.


----------



## Buster (7 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Interesting thread..

Do yourselves a favour and buy/rent/borrow a copy of 'Why We Fight' by Eugene Jarecki.. (Think it was released in Aust in November last year) It goes a long way to explaining the reason why we are there and how actions of the past keep coming back to haunt us.. 

Check out the preview.. http://www.sonyclassics.com/whywefight/

Gives you goosebumps doesn't it.. 

Unfortunately the preview doesn't get into the background or history of why we are where we are at in the Middle East, but the Movie does and I think anyone interested enough to view/post here will certainly be interested in getting hold of a copy to view.. 

My simplistic view is that the British and Americans (which pretty much means us as thier allies) made a few blues during the 40 and 50's in the region, specifically the US going to the 'aid' of the Poms in Iran after the Poms had been screwing the Iranians for many many years (all about oil of course) and the establishment and support of Israel.. The US is all about looking for an angle, and they have been inserting ruling puppets sympathetic to the cause  only to deposing the very same puppets years later when they wake up and realise they are being duped.. as long as the US need to maintain the 'angle' in the region there will be unrest.. and the need for an angle in the past and indeed present today is oil, more so now than before as the President himself has a direct interest coming from the wealthy 'oil' family that benfits greatly when the price of oil skyrockets

This latest farce is the execution of Saddam, you know, the evil dicator that must be stopped, you've had it rammed down your throats every time you turn on the TV for some time now, not unlike the 'Weaons of Mass destruction' campaign of a few years ago.. Well, my question is where was that foriegn policy when Idi Amin (Full name Idi Amin Dada Oumee. AKA 'Big Daddy', AKA 'Butcher of Africa', AKA 'Conqueror of the British Empire') was top of the Joe, and what about Mugabe and the half a dozen other dictators lurking around the traps, why are we not interested in necking these guys???  The answer I fear is not in the deeds of the persons, but the value of the ground they walk upon..

Anyway I've ranted enough.. I guess it is fairly reasonable to assume that I'm quite disillusioned with the whole regime.. and tomorrow I've served in the Defence Force for Twenty Five years..      Time for something new perhaps..   

Regards,

Buster


----------



## Sean K (7 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				Bobby said:
			
		

> Hello Kennas,
> 
> I'd like your deeper opinion  on this .
> 
> Cheers Bob.



I'm really keen to expand on this, but I am thinking that the movie 'Syriana' went a little bit of the way to painting a decent picture of why the West is involved in the Middle East, and why the Middle East is waging 'war' against the West and it's allies. 

Impoverished people with no prospects against an economic colonialist military power raping their region of natural resources to fuel their own Western Christian fundamentalist consumerist idiologies.  

Strategically, the region is obviously important, so the powers of the globe will always want to contol it to some degree. (I'm surprised China hasn't started putting it's tenticles in there yet - but we will undoubtedly see that).

So, is it all about strategic military advantage and oil? Or, do we want to be there to make the world a better place? 

I'm thinking the former at the moment.


----------



## Sean K (7 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				Buster said:
			
		

> Anyway I've ranted enough.. I guess it is fairly reasonable to assume that I'm quite disillusioned with the whole regime.. and tomorrow I've served in the Defence Force for Twenty Five years..      Time for something new perhaps..
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Buster



25 years, well done Buster. You must have a few gongs there. Congrats, quite a contribution.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (8 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> I'm really keen to expand on this, but I am thinking that the movie 'Syriana' went a little bit of the way to painting a decent picture of why the West is involved in the Middle East, and why the Middle East is waging 'war' against the West and it's allies.
> 
> Impoverished people with no prospects against an economic colonialist military power raping their region of natural resources to fuel their own Western Christian fundamentalist consumerist idiologies.
> 
> ...




Actually the Chinese are in that movie - laying people off.


----------



## Sean K (8 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				It's Snake Pliskin said:
			
		

> Actually the Chinese are in that movie - laying people off.



Yeah, they are in the movie and the US manage to manipulate the Arabs to veto the contract to keep them out.

Apart from the movie, I'm not sure if they are physically in there yet. Certainly in parts of Africa.


Part of this discussion should of course be in regard to Israel and their right to exist, or not. My understanding is that the Palestinians actually had their land taken off them by the Allies after WWII (I think it was a British decision) and it was given to Israel in compensation for the holocost. Maybe the cynical view and very basic, but along those lines. They were also considering an Israeli State somewhere around Sth Africa too but decided to keep it in their original historical 'promised' land. 

Should Israel actually have been given this land as spoils of war, or was it theirs all along?


----------



## Rafa (8 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

you'll find china is right in there, don't worry about that...
as is Russia..

And Buster gave a good synopsis of Bristish and American invlovement.

religion is simply being used to control a lot of people, if it wasn't there, there would be other 'points of differentiation' that could be used..
1. Nationality
2. Race
3. Culture
4. Tribe

etc..

reality, its complex struggle for wealth and power... and as i said, don't underestimate the influence of China and Russia in the region, and their link to the recent increases in tensions...

Also don't underestimate the impact of decisions like selling oil in Euro's as opposed to USD can have...

This is serious stuff, that requires lot more serious thought


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (8 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

I think strategically central Europe is actually more important. Nato and America seem to have a strong foothold in Afganistan and a few other central European countries. I believe the US has deals with a few countries to set up bases etc. 

It has been said throughout history whoever controls central Europe has dominance over the whole landmass.

Iran, russia, US, Britan and China all seem to be trying to establish dominance in the area since their isn't any real strongly established political systems.


----------



## ironchef (8 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Firstly, watch this: http://www.ericblumrich.com/thanks.html

Secondly, Syriana was an excellent film. However it failed to highlight the Israeli Lobby's level of influence in the US's international involvements. 

Thirdly, the US/Israel are no more trust worthy than Iran. We are all exposed to the US/Israeli news and media, so our brains are being washed in the manner they see fit. We've never seen Iranian news to see their point of view. 

I see on WESTERN NEWS what the Israelis do to the stone-throwing palestinians in palestinian territories, imagine all the things they do that we AREN'T shown... These people have nuclear weapons, why aren't we worried about that?? So far the iranians have been all talk... with Israel, we have SEEN THE LEVEL OF THEIR MALLICE!! We all saw what they did to lebanon. Collective punishment at its most extreme!

George Galloway tells it straight:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNiNS8TnJnI


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (8 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

I agree with you about the level of what is broadcast in western news it is biased , but the freedom of information is far more restrictive in Palestine , Iran and China. But it could be said that having a certain level of control over a countries population could limit violence.

I mean you dont have militias roaming the streets of Israel or the US (I'm not saying that there are no problems or violence). And while i dont agree with what Israel did to Lebanon the fact is they still acted as one country and are not having armed conflicts between their own citizens.

The fact is their is no clear governing power in either Lebanon or Palestine. 

You say the US and Israel are no more trustworthy than Iran but i know what countries i would rather be allied with and living in.

And the awful truth is that if America weren't the dominant power in the world someone else would be and they would probably have project vastly different ideals upon the world.

Really the problems come down to the leaders of these countries, and at least we can elect our leaders and thus project the views of our whole population not just those of the few which may not reflect the views of the majority. 

A good example of this is the US elections people didn't like the way the war is going so they elect another party. 

And one last point would you protest against the goverment if you were living in Iran or China without fear of reprisal?


----------



## kgee (8 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> Yeah, they are in the movie and the US manage to manipulate the Arabs to veto the contract to keep them out.
> 
> Apart from the movie, I'm not sure if they are physically in there yet. Certainly in parts of Africa.



 I'm not sure what you mean when you say "physically" but my understanding was the chinese have big gas contracts with Iran...or were you suggesting a military presence?


----------



## Sean K (8 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				kgee said:
			
		

> I'm not sure what you mean when you say "physically" but my understanding was the chinese have big gas contracts with Iran...or were you suggesting a military presence?



Not necessarily military, but that would certainly be a majopr part in them having more influence in the region. The US has bases all over the place in the Middle East. China may be in there in the future, as I think energy security will be just as important to China in 20 years as it is to the US today. Unless someone discovers some elephant fields outside of the Middle East.....

At the moment, I mean having significant business interests where they might be controlling the flow of money or having economic influence, etc. Gas contracts would be a start.


----------



## toc_bat (8 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

funny how isreals potential use of nuclear weapons is not seen in the same horrible light of irans potential nucelar program which may potetnially give them weapons which isreal already has!!!

funny how we cant trust iran to have weapons beacause they are SURE to use them beacause they are bad people, yet america has already used them however they remain responsible and good, and isreal may use them and they so far remain justified in potentially using them because their use will be intelligent and well thought out, 

every time i see a debate in the western world about these issues it is flawed from the very beginning because the inital assumption is always that we are right and they are wrong, until this uderlying bias is removed there will never be any progress, talk to an irani, they are not difficult to find in australia, youll find they are pretty reasonable people on the whole, and this bias against them is not lost on them, they are not stupid, until we loose our rightousness we will never impress them,

iran has so far not breached any condition of the nuclear non proliferation traety they are a signatory to, the same treaty india has not signed yet has over 50 real warheads, the same treaty the USA is constantly undermining,

if we keep putting all this unfair and unreasonable pressure on iran, lets not forget the iranians have just witnessed their iraqi neighbours brutally destryed by US and the USA for fraudulent reasons, and the USA is constantly making noises about iran being next, gee imagine how we would see things if that happened in new zealand, well all i can say is IRAN get those nukes ASAP, cos that is the only thing that will save you, North Korea is only around because it has nukes so hurry up and build them fast.


----------



## kgee (8 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Well maybe there presence is been felt as it was my understanding that the UN have not set up trade sanctions against Iran as both China and Russia would vetoe it?
I know this might be going outside the boundaries of the thread but its my belief that Israels attacks against Hezzbolah was as much a show of aggresion to give Iran second thoughts about their nucleur programme as it was against hezzbolah or should I say it went part and parcel
but please my understanding on the middle east is very general and very limited


----------



## toc_bat (8 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

do people realise that hezbola apart from being a rampant and evil terrorist org which controls certain areas of southern lebanon actually takes care of basic municipal requirements in those areas such as schooling, health, fire fighting, roads, drainage, gees bit more than just terrorists i reckon, more like a little country of its own. a country with an army. isnt that the big difference between terorists and an official army? ie australian soldiers are not terrorists because they have the backing of a country a governement a parliament. thats really all there is to it, if uve got a country, if you have an offical uniform you are an army, any one else you are a terrorist.

all we ever get told is how bad they are we never EVER EVER get told what it is they want to achive, what their philosophies are, what their general message is,

i mean gee people who throw stones at tanks must be extremely bad, those poor tanks! why is it that when people who use the most advanced weaponry, tanks, jet fighters, computer controlled missles, air craft carriers, nuclear submarines, armies of highly skilled and higly supplied and supported men, well these are the good guys!!! ha, and noe of the above are weapons of mass destruction, no sir reeeee bob, they are all designed to keep the peace not destroy en mass.

remeber Yasser Arafat? what was he about? what was his message? did we ever get told that in the australian media? in england at least one newspaper i saw published one of his speeches, translated.

it is only when we stop mindless barracking for OUR side just because its OUR side will these problems even begin to get a look in at getting solved. And since we are constantly the ones sending troops to other peoples lands to sort out their problems than we are the ones who must make the first move. lets not forget all this stuff is rooted in 400 years of european colonialism, its our tradition we must address, we are the ones with the cash, with the shiniest warplanes, ships, tanks and bombs, its up to us to make the first move.


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (8 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Toc bat you point out that America has already used Nuclear weapons and that it is in effect hypocritical of them to call other people bad for having them but the fact is they were justified to use them.

The Japanese at that time were essentially imperialist extremeist and would have sacrificed every Japanese soul to inflict massive casulties against America (they didn't even start the war)

I dont believe it comes down to who's right or who's wrong but the fact of how they would use them. For instance this so called report comes out saying Israel is going to blow up nuclear facilities where as the president of Iran makes open comments of the destruction of Israel with almost direct implications of the use of nuclear weapons. His exact words were "wiped of the map" i believe. Countries have nuclear weapons to deter war


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (8 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

If Hezbollah is such a humanitarian organisation why do they need guns and rockets why not just join the Red crescent and help people that way. They are obviously a political group.

The help people to build support for their cause and their ideology. Hand out bread in one hand and an AK to a 15 year old in the other.


----------



## toc_bat (8 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

kiwikarlos,

the same goes for every single country in the world, why does australia and even anti nuclear new zealand need weapons and soldiers and ships and war planes? again all i see is bias, the tests we constantly apply to others are rarely applied to ourselves,

even the naked primitive peoples of the world carry weapons and use them against their neighbours, the idea that hezbolah should be angelic and weapon free is preposterous, even the vatican city has soldiers, granted they are swiss and are supplied with 16th century garb, just like beefeaters, but the symbology is there! even the catholic church, the pope wants symbols of war or agression in his backyard!


----------



## ironchef (8 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Back during the days of the cold war, there was always talk of "Destroying the Soviet Union". Is that not just as bad as saying "wiping israel off the map"? I'm sure the iranian presedent is talking about crippling the israeli governement, much like how the west was implying the removal of the communist reigime. 

15 year old boys in lebanon have sufferred and seen more violence and injustice than most of us here in Australia can imagine. Go look at PHOTOs of south lebanon after the israeli massacres and then think to yourself: what is there left for a 15 year old boy to do? People over there don't have the opportunities that we enjoy over here, ESPECIALLY children. 

Terrorism is farce to scare gullable westerners into submitting to the needs of the powerful. 

Thanks to the internet, more and more westerners are begining to be more objective in thier thinking. We are being more open minded and becoming less and less gullable.


----------



## toc_bat (8 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

the word terrorist was coined by the King of England to describe George Washington,

the germans could have easily - if they did, i dont know - described the actions of the heroic french resistance as terrorist, 

i was born in czechoslovakia, moved to australia at age 8, so have some insight into the thinking of at least the czechoslovaks when they were still behind the iron curtain, and according to all the personal research i have done, ie gasbaged into many wee hours, i have come to the conclusion that the ordinary people of that country whilst it was communist were not at all afraid or convinced that they will be attacked by the americans. 

but i beleive from my insight into american culture that there were many americans who during the cold war did beleive all the messages they got from school and culture, movies etc that the reds were under the bed and that attack was iminent. czechoslovak cinema for eg, although highly state controlled and censored was not even approaching the levels of hype american movies were at, at constantly pulling out the theme of russian invasion. attacking vietnam was all about the communist spread in the world right?

anyway why did the american power structures find it so neceseray to hype up the russian threat when counterparts in czechoslovakia at least did not.

i fear it is for that same reason that they are now hyping the arab/persian threat. and after all if they invade iran, then all that hype will naturally be justified, for the time being anyway.

have we all forgotten that back in the 80s Hussein was "Our man in the mid east".

I spent time in the defence forces, and beleive me, when america sold all that hardware to Husseins Iraq, it doesnt just get shipped in anonymous crates, it comes with many thousands of hours of military advisor instruction, showing those iraqi pilots exactly just how to drop those gas charges on those pesky Kurds.


----------



## kgee (8 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				toc_bat said:
			
		

> iran has so far not breached any condition of the nuclear non proliferation traety they are a signatory to, the same treaty india has not signed yet has over 50 real warheads, the same treaty the USA is constantly undermining,




Iran hasn't breached any rules but it would be naive to think that part of their nucleur ambitions is not to equip themselves with a nucleur arsenal.
So far Iran has rejected offers from Russia to do the enrichment their as well as rejecting proposals to use non enriched uranium...both these suggestions had they been accepted would see the west+israel back off
Personally I don't want to see Iran equiped with nucleur weapons (or any other nation)
We could argue all day as to their right to be armed but where will this stop and what countries will be next...I'm quite sure theres a handfull more countries  that would like them


----------



## johnno261 (8 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				kgee said:
			
		

> Iran hasn't breached any rules but it would be naive to think that part of their nucleur ambitions is not to equip themselves with a nucleur arsenal.
> So far Iran has rejected offers from Russia to do the enrichment their as well as rejecting proposals to use non enriched uranium...both these suggestions had they been accepted would see the west+israel back off
> Personally I don't want to see Iran equiped with nucleur weapons (or any other nation)
> We could argue all day as to their right to be armed but where will this stop and what countries will be next...I'm quite sure theres a handfull more countries  that would like them




Set for disaster, i dont think so, fighting is a part of their culture and has been for decades and will be for decades!!!!!


----------



## Sean K (8 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				johnno261 said:
			
		

> Set for disaster, i dont think so, fighting is a part of their culture and has been for decades and will be for decades!!!!!



Israel nuking Iran wouldn't be disaster? 

Although I personally believe this would be a very doubtful scenario, the region is capable of exploding at the drop of a hat and I think we were lucky that the Lebanon thingy did not get further out of hand. Israel could easily have started bombing logistics routes and potential support bases for Hezbollah right into Syria. That would have dragged in other players and galvanised Arabs throughout the region. Perhaps one of the reasons this didn't occur was Israel being aware of the consequences, or that the US were pulling the strings to such an extent that it was not permitted. 

I agree they will be fighting forever, until one party is annihilated, but that's unlikely with the current balance of power.


----------



## Buster (9 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

G'Day Kiwi,



			
				toc_bat said:
			
		

> kiwikarlos,
> 
> the same goes for every single country in the world, why does australia and even anti nuclear new zealand need weapons and soldiers and ships and war planes?




Our forces are in place as a deterrent to other forces and for self defence, simple as that.. There is no chance Aust and NZ (even together) could mount an offensive against another country with the numbers in our Defence Force.. You'd probably be surprised to find that our government actually requires our forces to be, and appear, quite passive, so as not to alienate our neighbours.. For Instance, the FFG has only one 'offensive' weapon, and that would be the Harpoon Missile, every other weapon system is for self defence (of the ship)..

Back on topic, I agree with a great deal of the opinions expressed on this thread, it good to see some free thinkers that have not had opinions formed for them by the majority of the media.  I was serving in the US just prior to the latest launch into Iraq, and as you can imagine my US counterparts were all quite excited about 'kicking some ass'.. I just couldn’t get through to them that because these people didn't eat KFC and Dunkin Donuts didn't make them 'the barbarians' that they were being portrayed in the US media..

As has been said, power plays and greed are mostly responsible the the mess we find ourselves in the ME..


Regards,

Buster


----------



## 2020hindsight (9 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				Buster said:
			
		

> ...I was serving in the US just prior to the latest launch into Iraq, and as you can imagine my US counterparts were all quite excited about 'kicking some ass'.. I just couldn’t get through to them that because these people didn't eat KFC and Dunkin Donuts didn't make them 'the barbarians' that they were being portrayed in the US media..



top post, buster.
I still think that Fahrenheit 9/11 should be compulsory viewing - multiple viewing by all aussies, until the message sinks in that the US military is not the answer.  If you want to win hearts and minds, keep them out of it !
imho, Aussies are better, (eg East Timor),  and UN peacekeeping forces are best.
Not that I'd like to trade places with a UN peacekeeper, whilst the world's extremists only want to stir up wasps nests all around you.


----------



## toc_bat (9 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



> Set for disaster, i dont think so, fighting is a part of their culture and has been for decades and will be for decades!!!!!




Johno, 

how can you be be so simple? Fighting is part of their culture?? Ha what a joke,

lets look at aussie culture shall we,

Australia took part in just about every conflict there was on the cards for the last 100 years, and none of these had virtually anything to do with Australia.

Lets see, aussie soldiers were in :

The Boer war, boxer uprising, World war One, World War two, The malaysian emergency, indonesian confrontation, the korean war, the vietnam war, Iraq one, Iraq two, Timor, PNG tribal conflicts including Bouganville, 

Many young aussie men went into WWI with a sense of adventure, to see the world! In fact there were many documented cases of under age soldiers who lied about their age just to get in. So not at all part of aussie culture to be involved in just about any fight going is it. Iran and co is this what they do? Attack just about anybody anywhere on the globe whenever england or the US blows the whistle?


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (9 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

everybody knows George Bush is dodgy and that it takes money and the backing of big players to be the president of America.

I hear alot of people here critisizing the American values and the way they do things but has anybody got a viable better alternative.

How did Saddam Hussien, the Iatolla (wrong spelling) of Iran, Taleban leader, Pakistani president all get to the head of power in their respective countries ? All by use of force.

In my opinion anyone who uses religeon as a reason for persecution and violence is wrong, there should be a clear seperation of religeon and state.

I know christian, jewish and many other religeous groups have alot of persuasive say in politics both in America and here in Australia but one thing that most western countries have in common is they are fairly tolerant and moderate of all religeons.

If everyone is so anti American you might be interested to know that each year America admits more legal imigrants in than all the other countries of the world put together. Its a fact that many of these people want to go there because they will have better opportunities than in most other countries.

They are by no way perfect but when compared to totallitarian governments like that of Iran they are much better. On a final note i believe the current Iranian government is holding the country back and i would honestly not have a problem with them having nukes if the leadership was a more moderate perhapes democratic government.


----------



## wayneL (9 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				KIWIKARLOS said:
			
		

> everybody knows George Bush is dodgy and that it takes money and the backing of big players to be the president of America.
> 
> I hear alot of people here critisizing the American values and the way they do things but has anybody got a viable better alternative.
> 
> ...




How quaint and old fashioned. The problem is that the US is no longer the country we knew and loved. It is now the most dangerous country on the planet, (perhaps except the nation of Israel)

Many of her people are truly magnificent and struggle to maintain many of the ideals you refer to.

Approximately half however, are diabolical bastids that are no better than the Ayotollahs et al. Unfortunately, these are the clowns in power.

Cheers
Wayne (ex Yank)


----------



## toc_bat (9 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Hussein was certainly helped by the americans to gain power, there is evidence he was a CIA operative in the 60's before gaining the leadership of the Bath party. After he did the CIA handed him a list of hundreds, 500-600 Iraqi communists which were promptly executed.

Hussei was one of the few secterian, non religious leaders, under his leadership Baghdad was one of the few if not only Arabic countries that had a Jewish population with its own mosque.

Bush may be a secterian leader of a secterian country but the constant references to God save America, and God is on our side makes me wonder just how secterian the current american leadership is.
Ayatolla Khomeini was helped to power by a popular revolution because the USA backed Shah of Iran was so opressive the situation arose whereby many Iranians willingly backed Khomeini. 

The Taliban was heavily backed by the USA, yet again and Pakistan. THe USA was very hopefull that the Taliban would unite Afghanistan and provide stability in the country so that their pipeline from Khazakstan could reach the sea. 

Just about every reperessive regime since WWII has had help or encouragment from the US. The CIA has had a hand in over 50 coup dÃ© tat, very democratic stuff indeed, there is still a lot of controversy surrounding the sacking of Whitlam, some of which is about whether the CIA or USA told John Kerr that if he sacks Whitlam, the USA will recognise this as a legal move. Post WWII greece was graced with a repressive fascist regime for about 25 yrs, fascists which were very active witht eh Nazis of WWII, these guys were supported by the USA because they were a better alternative for them - not the greeks necessarily, than the possible greek socialists. Remember Noriega? A CIA agent and president of Panama! What about Augusto Pinochet, supported by the US because Allende wanted to nationalise US owned mines in Chile, I think you will find the USA is the most destructive force on the planet, certainly we, england, most of europe and canada, NZ, benefit from that destructivness. Oh just on our doorstep, the USA and AUSTRALIA actively helped Suharto gain control of Indonesia and exterminate up to a Million 'communists'. Most of whom were primitive villagers living in commuist controlled areas. Basically we the powerfull play chess with the rest of the world, its about time they united and turned the tables on us and wiped us all out. Huauauahahahhaaa

ps WHAT ABOUT THE VIETNAM WAR!?!?!? 4 MILLION dead, mostly peasants, living in the jungle, 10s of 1000s of american and aussie soldiers suffering from agent orange exposure, man Hussain or any other bad guy doesn't even come close to such madness, yet we so readily forget and forgive such reprehensible stuff simply cos we did it, the only way any of this will stop is if individuals stop taking sides simply beacuse they were born into a culture.


----------



## Sean K (9 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				toc_bat said:
			
		

> Hussein was certainly helped by the americans to gain power, there is evidence he was a CIA operative in the 60's before gaining the leadership of the Bath party. After he did the CIA handed him a list of hundreds, 500-600 Iraqi communists which were promptly executed.
> 
> Hussei was one of the few secterian, non religious leaders, under his leadership Baghdad was one of the few if not only Arabic countries that had a Jewish population with its own mosque.
> 
> ...



The US also backed Indonesia invading East Timor in 75. The day before the invasion, Kissinger was in Jakarta......The reason they allowed it was that Fretilin was a Marxist based political organisation. They were happy that 'Communists' were not spreading any further, and there is talk that Australia supported it at the time as well for the same reasons.


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (9 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

it always comes down to a choice between the better of two evils, sure america flexes their power to the benefit of their economy but so does every other country.

My point here is that if you think the US is the only country with secret organisations running around killing people and funding coups then you are being nieve.

Every country in the world buts its own interests first. Sure America has gained alot out of its intervention and globalisation of world economies and politics but because of this most people in the world live in safe, secure societies with jobs and opportunities.

Before you critise America for killing 4 million people in Vietnam look at cambodia where Pol Pot murdered more than that of his own countrymen.

If you want to see a country flexing its economic power right now look at russia they doubled the price of Gas to Belarus , why?. Because they wouldn't go along with what the Russians want. Now Germany and Polland have no Oil flowing into the country.

It is also a well known fact that China has huge influence and dodgy dealings going on with Island nations of the south Pacific. Not to mention the thousands of missles pointed at Tiawan which they will use if they declare independance.

We can all sit here and critisize the roles America has played in many countries throughout History but does anyone really know what the alternative would have being like.

I for one do not want to live in a communist country ie china or even the non communist Russia now where people are poor, starving and get paid virtually nothing for working lives of hard labour


----------



## Sean K (9 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				KIWIKARLOS said:
			
		

> it always comes down to a choice between the better of two evils, sure america flexes their power to the benefit of their economy but so does every other country.
> 
> My point here is that if you think the US is the only country with secret organisations running around killing people and funding coups then you are being nieve.
> 
> ...



So Kiwi, overall, do you think Americas intervention in the Middle East is a positive or a negative or is it too complicated to be cut and dry?


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (9 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

I believe it can be a positive, at the moment it can go either way and we are at the fork in the road.

I think that it was unfortunatly necessary, even though i ackknowledge it is a disaster of there in Iraq right now. 
Honestly i think there are some issues within the muslim religeon itself between sectarian differences which needed to be sorted out by muslims and the countries they live in not by foreigners.

I believe that if America had not gone into Iraq then these issues could have spread further within the region and perhapes into other regions. I think they could have gone about it in a better way and I dislike George Bush because i think he like Putin have personal stakes in the situaton.

I see the three big powers of the world being China, Russia  (emerging as potential super powers in relation to energy and economies) and the US and all trying to establish their footholds in the regions which in this ever increasingly energy hungry world will become more important. 

Unfortunately I think the world is in for a big shock in this century with global warming, energy issues and the environment degradation on a worldwide scale. The middle east is only one piece of this puzzle. If all these aren't properly addressed I think we are in for troubled times.


----------



## OK2 (9 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Off the topic guys just for one moment,

A friend of mine who is a firefighter saved for his first overseas trip and adventure. He only ever wanted to go to the great USA, where else would anyone want to go. He was going to use the 12 week trip to coincide with the 9/11 Memorial March which is open to emergency workers from around the world. He arrived in Washington and was treated more like an illegal immigrant than a tourist from Australia. He found the food to be extremely poor and this is a guy who lives off the Big Mac. When travelling to his hotel the bus deviated 2 blocks from a straight line and when he asked the bus driver why the answer was "I do not like taking bullets!" To get a meal outside of the hotel the doorman insisted that it was hotel policy to hail a cab afterhours for guests, even though he was only travelling 200 meters the doorman went on to explain of what lurked in the shadows. At the restaurant he had a number of conversations which were dead beat until he came accross some Brit backpackers who were the life of the party and they went on to explain they were heading home early because the US was not for them. They left a few hours later and his last conversation that night was with an American who asked him what language we speak in Australia? The next morning he booked an early flight back home and lost all of his prepaid holiday money. He spent the rest of his holiday travelling the east coast of Australia as the Brit backpackers had recommended and he is now saving to visit Europe!


----------



## ironchef (9 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

toc_bat, you have excellent historical/contemprary knowledge of the world. Bravo.

Everyone, i'd recommend reading news from:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info 
It is a great source of news that you will not see from other sources.


----------



## Buster (12 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				ironchef said:
			
		

> toc_bat, you have excellent historical/contemprary knowledge of the world. Bravo.



Indeed, he certainly has a better grasp, and seemingly unbiased, than most..

Going back in time a little further though, like say the first time George became president.. and took the time (along with his mates/buddies) to create a couple of 'amendments'..  I'm talking about George Washington now, and a wide range of constitutional amendments that ensured that, specifically, no one man would hold too much power.  Hence the need for the 'congress' (power of the people) to keep the man in check.

Unfortunately, our Boy George (Dubya) has breeched pretty much all of them (illegally obviously e.g. http://www.schneier.com/essay-102.html) whilst in power, and amazingly (or sadly) congress has since handed over some of their power of veto to, what the old boys expressly feared, one man.. the president (aka The Dolt).  

So why are we in IRAQ at the moment??  Hmmm.. Dolt for President, surrounded by advisors and contractors hell bent on imperial expansion and/or chasing the big bucks (The Vice, Cheney, is both advisor AND contractor!!).. Seems simple enough, cull some of the white trash that are using our oxygen, increase our holdings and control in the ME, secure the second largest known oil rich environment on the planet & make bookoo dollars in the process..  lets go with 'Weapons of Mass Deception'.. 

Not too dissimilar to our own AWB.. 'Hey, we're sending our troops over your way to enforce sanctions.. Here’s a few bucks to buy bullets'..

regards,

Buster


----------



## toc_bat (12 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

a few months before the sacond Iraqi US war i met some very nice and friendly americans, i mean it they were nice and friendly, in their mid 20s at college, ie ought to be reasonably intelligent to be doing university degrees, anyway all their intelligence seemed to immediately dissipate when we started talking about the latest intended invasion of Iraq, 

 but wait for the punch line, 

their concern was not about WMDs or Husseins dictatorial evils, no they said something to the effect - (it was a few years ago so i cant give direct quotes)  so paraphrasing them would go something like this: 

 "we gotta that mad man [Hussein] out of there, he is sitting on _*OUR*_ oil"

oh my god, my jaw dropped through the crust all the way to china, how much would i prefer some ignorant fool to tell me about bad guys and WMDs and us and them, instead these guys see Iraqi oil as theirs, goes without saying I reckon that they see the whole planet, moon, solar system, all of godly creation as theirs. 

and if you listen critically to a lot of american commentators, esp right wing guys, white house spokespeople, some american retired general that jana wendt intervied pre war, then the same sentiments, although a bit more veiled keep coming through.

i have often heard things like, " ... we will attack Iraq when it suits us ... ", or " .... the world order has changed and it is now time for our investment in our military forces to be put into use and we intend to use those forces to further our economic interests ... ". These kinds of things now get said quite openly in interviews with prominent americans, you simply have to pay attention. The thing is i reckon these sentiments have been there for a long time in certain sections of society but they were not utterable, what has changed is all the brakes have been taken of, the conservatives are in power and flexing their muscles and have created an unbridled atmosphere where these previously unheard sentiments are now being the norm. 

PS there was a discussion on NPR, a community radio network in the USA - National Public Radio, it was on a news commentary and current affairs program that gets replayed in sydney by 2SER (a sydney community radio station) anyway the discussion was pre Iraq attack, at a time when many comentators and people in the US were saying the US will attack both Iraq and North Korea. The concesus within the discussion was that the US will not attack North Korea _because_ it can not *afford* the financial burden of fighting on two fronts!!!! AAARRRGGGGGGHHHHH - what are they saying between the lines??!?! Not we cant attack because diplomacy is not yet exhausted, we cant attack because war is immoral, we cant attack because North Korea has nukes - no, we cant attack because it will be to expensive!!!  

PPS 2SER and its national equivalents, i know there is a similar station Melbourne, are by far the best sources of info on the radio. Example, during the children over board scandal prior to the federal election, when every journo was swallowing the govt line with hook and sinker, 2SER decided to ring Christmas Island, they spoke to an alderman that told them: " ... the sailors from the naval vessel involved have been going to the local pub, and after some drinks have told the locals that the children overboard line was completely false, that in fact the vessel sunk and that is how the refugees got into the water ..." again paraphrased. The *TRUTH* had become common knowledge on Christmas Island! Wow that was 6 weeks prior to the election that was partly won due to this scandal, and months before the truth came out. So if the sailors knew, so did their officers on board, and so did the admirals back in Canberra and hence the politicians in the Govt who spun the lie. Listen to 2SER!


----------



## wayneL (12 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				toc_bat said:
			
		

> a few months before the sacond Iraqi US war i met some very nice and friendly americans, i mean it they were nice and friendly, in their mid 20s at college, ie ought to be reasonably intelligent to be doing university degrees, anyway all their intelligence seemed to immediately dissipate when we started talking about the latest intended invasion of Iraq,
> 
> but wait for the punch line,
> 
> ...



All too sickeningly true Toc Bat.

The moral bancruptcy in that place emits an unbearable stench.

Wayne (ex yank)


----------



## Sean K (13 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

More engineered media to prepare us for attacks against Syria and Iran.....

*U.S. denies military plans against Iran, Syria*
Fri Jan 12, 2007 3:36pm 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States denied on Friday it was preparing for military action against Iran and Syria, after President George W. Bush issued a stern warning to them, raising concerns of a spillover from the Iraq war.

Bush, in his speech on Wednesday unveiling his revised Iraq strategy, accused Tehran and Damascus of allowing use of their territory for launching attacks inside Iraq, and vowed "we will interrupt the flow of support."

U.S. lawmakers voiced concern on Thursday the Iraq war could spread to neighboring Iran and Syria if U.S. troops were to chase militants across the border. But U.S. officials insisted the plan was to disrupt supply lines from inside Iraq.

White House spokesman Tony Snow said he wanted to knock down an "urban legend" that Bush was "trying to prepare the way for war with either country and that there were war preparations under way."

"There are not," he told reporters. "What the president was talking about is defending American forces within Iraq."

"There's lots of war gaming," he added. "This notion that somehow the president was announcing as a precursor to planned military action, a planned war against Iran, that's just not the case."

Snow reiterated that Washington was focusing on diplomatic means against Iran over its nuclear program. Western powers say Tehran is trying to develop nuclear weapons. Iran says it wants nuclear technology for civilian power generation.

The United States has repeatedly accused Shi'ite Iran of meddling in Iraq, where the long-oppressed Shi'ite majority is now in power and sectarian violence is raging. Tehran denies U.S. charges that it supplies Shi'ite militias with weapons.

Bush also said he had ordered an additional aircraft carrier strike group to the region and would deploy Patriot missile defense systems to "reassure our friends and allies" -- steps widely seen as a warning to Iran and Syria.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph Biden bluntly told U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Thursday he did not think Bush had the authority to launch attacks against militant networks in Iran and Syria.


----------



## kgee (13 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Spin?


Terror cells in Bush's sights
Friday, January 12, 2007 
Greg Sheridan 


A US military strike against Iran must now be considered formally on the international agenda, following George W. Bush’s sombre, calm, but in substance extraordinarily bold address on Iraq. 

Bush accused Iran of providing material assistance for attacks on US troops in Iraq. 

It is hard to imagine a more serious accusation. 

What’s more, Bush promised to stop such Iranian actions. 

Whatever you think of Bush, he has a very high level of credibility when it comes to carrying out any threat he makes of military action.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (13 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Should journalists *spin* be believed?


----------



## Sean K (13 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				It's Snake Pliskin said:
			
		

> Should journalists *spin* be believed?



Good question Snake.

Is the media but the barometer of the public opinion, or do they create opinion?


----------



## billhill (13 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

I think the Americans will take a back seat on Iran so to speak. They will do alot behind the scenes while Israel takes the lead and attacks Iran. Israel will never let nuclear weapons be developed by other countries in the middle east but its most likely going to be a sustained missle and air war as a ground invasion will leave their home territories vulnerable to attacks from palastinian, syrian, lebanese and egyptian militia or military forces. So long as iran attempts to develop nuclear weapons the middle east will remain on a knife edge.


----------



## Sean K (13 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				billhill said:
			
		

> I think the Americans will take a back seat on Iran so to speak. They will do alot behind the scenes while Israel takes the lead and attacks Iran. Israel will never let nuclear weapons be developed by other countries in the middle east but its most likely going to be a sustained missle and air war as a ground invasion will leave their home territories vulnerable to attacks from palastinian, syrian, lebanese and egyptian militia or military forces. So long as iran attempts to develop nuclear weapons the middle east will remain on a knife edge.



I agree to some extent here Bill, but Israel don't have the arsenal for a protracted, sustained bombing campaign of Iran. They ran out of bombs just bombing Hezbolah. They will need the US's logiistic support, if not material forces to conduct a detailed campaign. I imagine strategic bombers will be required with Special Forces on the ground to be calling the bombs in. And you are right about the rest of the region, to some extent. I don't think Egypt, Jordan, Saudi, Lebanon, or especially Turkey would back Iran. The US is still too powerful for these countries to risk all out war in the region. The US could launch an all out attack on the region with just their submarines and a squadron of B2s! But, as you stated, Israel, and especially the US will NOT allow Iran to develop a nuclear capability. It changes the balance of power in the Middle East too much.


----------



## billhill (13 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> Israel don't have the arsenal for a protracted, sustained bombing campaign of Iran




Yes you are right, but who knows maybe the US will ship huge supplies of military hardware to israel or even launch a few missiles themselves letting the israelis claim them. They are after all made by the same companies.

An israeli attack on iran could be a perfect tactical move for the bush administration to legitamise a war using their own force. Hypothetically if israel were to strike iran likely relatitory attacks would occur not just against israel but also probably US forces in the area. This would mobilise the American public and bush would probably be given the go ahead to retaliate, all the while keeping the chinese and russians objections from being relavent.


----------



## Buster (13 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Hey Kennas,


			
				kennas said:
			
		

> Is the media but the barometer of the public opinion, or do they create opinion?



OR, are they simply banging out the claptrap from our political masters and the swags of professional spin doctors, in good faith??  We only get to see and hear what they (Politicians/Spinners) want us to see and hear, and having it spread by the media gives it some sort of credibility. I don't know why exactly, but people seem to accept information from an 'independent' source easier.. and there is a great deal that ‘we don’t know we don’t know.. [Had to get some Don in there..  ]

Ever heard of the Term 'Blowback'?? It's a CIA term created many, many  moons ago, Google it, you'll find some interesting articles..

Here’s one for starters..  http://www.thenation.com/doc/20011015/johnson

Regards,


Buster


----------



## Sean K (13 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				billhill said:
			
		

> Yes you are right, but who knows maybe the US will ship huge supplies of military hardware to israel or even launch a few missiles themselves letting the israelis claim them. They are after all made by the same companies.
> 
> An israeli attack on iran could be a perfect tactical move for the bush administration to legitamise a war using their own force. Hypothetically if israel were to strike iran likely relatitory attacks would occur not just against israel but also probably US forces in the area. This would mobilise the American public and bush would probably be given the go ahead to retaliate, all the while keeping the chinese and russians objections from being relavent.




Yes, in regard to US missile strike, we only heard about a fraction of what was launched in Iraq in the initial days if the war. They could do quite a bit clandestinely. 

I am not too sure about China and Russia though. They are becomming more and more powerful by the day. There will come a time when the US wants to do something and they say, 'NO, you are not in control of the world now!' It's not too far off......

And, in regard to the American public, they are so blindly insular and have no understanding of the rest of the world that I would not be surprised if they rally behind old Dubya, and be led to their inevitable doom.


----------



## billhill (13 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> I am not too sure about China and Russia though. They are becomming more and more powerful by the day. There will come a time when the US wants to do something and they say, 'NO, you are not in control of the world now!' It's not too far off......




Thats why i think an attack on iran will come sooner rather then later. The US knows if they can secure large energy supplies before russia or china can do anything about it they will remain at the top of the tree for many years to come.



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> And, in regard to the American public, they are so blindly insular and have no understanding of the rest of the world that I would not be surprised if they rally behind old Dubya, and be led to their inevitable doom.




Yes Kennas i too am guilty of bashing the yanks for their apparent ignorance, but the US is a great nation and come 2 years time i think it will be back to the good old clinton days literally. The US have had bad leadership which has quite frankly made them vunerable to critcisms they would have shaken off during the clinton era. They may have continued problems in the middle east but under new leadership i think they will return to their former glory.


----------



## Sean K (13 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				billhill said:
			
		

> Yes Kennas i too am guilty of bashing the yanks for their apparent ignorance, but the US is a great nation and come 2 years time i think it will be back to the good old clinton days literally. The US have had bad leadership which has quite frankly made them vunerable to critcisms they would have shaken off during the clinton era. They may have continued problems in the middle east but under new leadership i think they will return to their former glory.



I hope so Bill, but I think Obama might be the man to do it. I'm not to sure about Hillary. Can Bill come back for another term? I think he's more popular now than ever!

In regard to the US being a great nation, I am not too sure. I think that the western consumerist value ideal will be the end of the human race. Sure, this did not originate in the US (perhaps by the asteroid that wiped out the dinasour and allowed us the florrish) but they have certainly developed it to a state where no one is anyone unless they can be identified by what they possess, and not who they are. A sad state of affairs. We are a credit socienty now. Use now, pay back later, which is ultimately unsustainable. 

Back to the Middle East, I am actually very interested in the route cause of the long time strife there. Is it religion? Or, is it people not having jobs?? Or a football team to barrack for???


----------



## Buster (13 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				Kennas said:
			
		

> the American public are so blindly insular and have no understanding of the rest of the world that I would not be surprised if they rally behind old Dubya, and be led to their inevitable doom



True, Americans are generally quite ignorant when it come to the rest of the world, however it's far easier to whip the mob into a vengeful frenzy when they only know the information you want them to know.. Again, check out the term Blowback.. 



			
				Kennas said:
			
		

> I am not too sure about China and Russia though. They are becomming more and more powerful by the day. There will come a time when the US wants to do something and they say, 'NO, you are not in control of the world now!' It's not too far off.......






			
				billhill said:
			
		

> Thats why i think an attack on iran will come sooner rather then later. The US knows if they can secure large energy supplies before russia or china can do anything about it they will remain at the top of the tree for many years to come..



Correct, Bombers/Fighters/Tanks/Warships become terribly ineffective without Oil..  Make up whatever story you like to justify the action (and hope the general populace don't cotton on..), but secure the Oil at all cost..

No matter how you look at it, it seems the Oil has been the cause of conflict for some 80 years a least..

Cheers,

Buster.


----------



## kgee (13 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Definitely a hot topic 
Is it a case of now or never for the bush administration?They probably only have a 2 year window of opportunity b4 elections?
Will china and russia stay on the sidelines? Beijging olympics next year...china's first time on the world stage
In my mind if I was Ahamanjihindad (?) I wouldn't be pushing the issue untill after the next US elections
Haven't heard anything from chavez for a while I'd imagine he'll be putting his 2 cents in soon and stirring up the pot
its a crazy world
gotta go.... have a game of tennis to play


----------



## Sean K (13 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				kgee said:
			
		

> Definitely a hot topic
> Is it a case of now or never for the bush administration?They probably only have a 2 year window of opportunity b4 elections?
> Will china and russia stay on the sidelines? Beijging olympics next year...china's first time on the world stage
> In my mind if I was Ahamanjihindad (?) I wouldn't be pushing the issue untill after the next US elections
> ...



Interesting you mention Hugo, because he is leading a wave of anti Americanism in Latin America (especially in El Salvador and Equador) that will ultimately mean the US will be facing fronts all around them. I wouldn't be surprised if quite a few Latin American countries ditch capitilist free markets (maybe not Chile, Brazil and Argetina) and go more socialist/agrarian.  

I'm still not sure what long term strategic impact Hugo will have however. Not sure how critical Venezuela's oil is to the world (US) economy....


----------



## Smurf1976 (13 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> I'm still not sure what long term strategic impact Hugo will have however. Not sure how critical Venezuela's oil is to the world (US) economy....



I'll put it this way. Current Venezuelan production is more than the entire world surplus capacity. So demand can not be met without Venezuela in the medium term.

Long term, if the Orinoco belt bitumen is included (yes it is quite possible to upgrade this into conventional "oil" and indeed that is already done on a modest scale) then Venezuela holds more oil than any other country and more recoverable oil (after upgrading losses) than all but Saudi Arabia.

That's based on official Saudi claims which many dispute as being exaggerated (since they seem to represent total discovered rather than total remaining oil). Odds are Venezuela is the number one oil country in terms of remaining reserves. It is certainly number one in terms of undeveloped reserves.


----------



## billhill (14 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> In regard to the US being a great nation, I am not too sure. I think that the western consumerist value ideal will be the end of the human race.




mmm this has been in my conciousness for some time. Companies can't grow profits for ever. How long until overpopulation becomes a major issue.



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> Back to the Middle East, I am actually very interested in the route cause of the long time strife there. Is it religion? Or, is it people not having jobs?? Or a football team to barrack for???




Its probably due to their ingrained culture. For thousands of years they have live a tribal culture. Trying to westernise them is like fitting a triangle plug in a round hole. Imagine if they were the world powers and tried to get europeans to live like them, we wouldn't have a bar of it. When a culture is that ingrained its probably in the gene pool. Genes are very hard things to eliminate from a group of people.



			
				Buster said:
			
		

> No matter how you look at it, it seems the Oil has been the cause of conflict for some 80 years a least..




Maybe its running out will be a blessing in disguise. One can only hope.




			
				kennas said:
			
		

> Interesting you mention Hugo, because he is leading a wave of anti Americanism in Latin America (especially in El Salvador and Equador) that will ultimately mean the US will be facing fronts all around them. I wouldn't be surprised if quite a few Latin American countries ditch capitilist free markets (maybe not Chile, Brazil and Argetina) and go more socialist/agrarian.




Is a capatilist free market sustainable in venezuela. Unlike say cuba which has few natural resources, venezuelas resources may indeed bring down its capitalist free market. As great wealth enters the country, corruption will probably see the wealth very unevenly distributed and may eventually lead to an uprising by the people. Chavez will have to make sure the wealth is fairly distributed or rule with a military fist, with the later more likely.

Plus i think brazil is often overlooked as a rising power in the world and will have great influence in the region. Really apart from a wider wealth divide then most western countries they are not much different to us. As the global warming issue matures brazil will be in an enveable position. They own the worlds lungs which could be good leverage in a post carbon trading world.


----------



## 2020hindsight (14 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



> Originally Posted by kennas
> Back to the Middle East, I am actually very interested in the root cause of the long time strife there. Is it religion? jobs?? Or a football team to barrack for???



1. Probably all three - plus (as someone said once, Golda Mair?), Moses with all his wisdom decided to found Israel on the only part of the middle east without any oil.   
2. Religion has a lot to answer for doesn't it.  Whether Jewish, Moslem, or Christian.  I dont think the early Crusaders helped  - marching down there with their  weapons of mass seduction.  Killing perfectly innocent people. (Not that we've progressed much in last few years). 
3. Jobs - yep gotta be part of the problem ( and the part of the solution when we FINALLY start talking about a solution)
4. And I guess if they started playing soccer against each other, they'd need the UN to umpire the bludy thing.


----------



## 2020hindsight (14 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				billhill said:
			
		

> 1. Companies can't grow profits for ever. How long until overpopulation becomes a major issue.
> 2. Genes are very hard things to eliminate from a group of people.
> 3. Maybe (oil) its running out will be a blessing in disguise. One can only hope.
> 4. Chavez will have to make sure the wealth is fairly distributed or rule with a military fist, with the latter more likely.
> 5. Brazil - They own the worlds lungs which could be good leverage in a post carbon trading world.



Bill
1. 100% agree, Note how all the pollies and economists smile when they pronounce that they've ensured growth for a year or two - or for their lifetime - with very little thought / discussion of the next generation.  Still they can't vote yet so who cares.
2. Like trying to take jeans off a teenager
3. Oil runing out? in the middle east? - would I be cynical if I suggested that the west is encouraging the middle east supplies to be drawn down, whilst they lock up their reserves for "a rainy day"? - I'm no expert on relative supplies btw.
4. Venezualan politics sure gets promoted to a position of importance as you say.  They wouldn't want another long term Castro.  I thought there was a fair chance of them heading further left rather than right incidentally.  Unlike Bush he (Chavez) will still be running for president in 2012.  I also understood Chavez was getting extremely friendly with Iran.


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Chávez
> Hugo Rafael ChÃ¡vez FrÃ­as (born July 28, 1954) is the current President of Venezuela. As the leader of the "Bolivarian Revolution," ChÃ¡vez promotes his vision of democratic socialism, Latin American integration, and anti-imperialism. He is also an ardent critic of neoliberal globalization and U.S. foreign policy. etc
> .........
> ChÃ¡vez focused considerably on Venezuela's foreign relations in 2004 and 2005 via new bilateral and multilateral agreements, including humanitarian aid and construction projects. ChÃ¡vez has engaged, with varying degrees of success, numerous other foreign leaders, including Argentina's NÃ©stor Kirchner, China's Hu Jintao, Cuba's Fidel Castro and *Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad*
> ...



You can bet that he and Iranian President Ahmad.. agree that USA are the problem, not the answer.
5. Brazil - yep you can almost imagine a scenario in which the desperate west attack Brazil -wearing gas masks because the air is so full of CO2- not because of their oil (almost run out), but because of those green lungs of theirs. 
PS (make a change from the west attacking the brazilian lungs at the Mardi Gras- speaking of weapons of mass seduction)? 

PS Good idea to widen the topic to include Venezuala (kennas Smurf etc) - although strictly off thread, Latin America and Middle East appear to be linked yes?

PS It will be great when the USA realise that they are as much the problem as the answer.  - quite often it's 50-50, but that's on a good day.


----------



## chops_a_must (14 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				billhill said:
			
		

> Is a capatilist free market sustainable in venezuela. Unlike say cuba which has few natural resources, venezuelas resources may indeed bring down its capitalist free market. As great wealth enters the country, corruption will probably see the wealth very unevenly distributed and may eventually lead to an uprising by the people. Chavez will have to make sure the wealth is fairly distributed or rule with a military fist, with the later more likely.



I disagree most vehemently.

The reason why Chavez has smashed everyone else in elections is BECAUSE he has distributed wealth very evenly. Particularly to the 30% that once lived in poverty before he came to power, and also the large Indian minority. Just because the CIA backed candidates aren't popular, does not mean that the winner is corrupt.

And Venezuela's philanthropy does not stop at it's own borders. It supplies heating fuel to poverty stricken residents in the US that it deems to be worse off than its own residents. And don't the US officials love that!


----------



## Buster (14 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Olbermann tears strips off Bush after his speech sending more troops into IRAQ..

Goes for about ten minutes, worth watching, the last five are scathing..

Bush's legacy: The president who cried wolf.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRMdJY3ihQg

Cheers,

Buster


----------



## Sean K (14 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> Back to the Middle East, I am actually very interested in the route cause of the long time strife there. Is it religion? Or, is it people not having jobs?? Or a football team to barrack for???



One aspect of the Middle East question that I have been trying to get to the bottom of is the Shiite/Sunni sectarian conflict, which has been most prominate recently in Iraq. 

I am undecided if this is even a 'religious' conflict or a cultural one. I would like to add to this some more maybe tomorrow because I still need to do some more research to get my head around it. 

Any experts out there on this topic?


----------



## kgee (14 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				chops_a_must said:
			
		

> I disagree most vehemently.
> 
> And Venezuela's philanthropy does not stop at it's own borders. It supplies heating fuel to poverty stricken residents in the US that it deems to be worse off than its own residents. And don't the US officials love that!




Philanthrophy or taking the piss ???? 
I think he might have got that idea when he was chewing on those cocoa leaves


----------



## Smurf1976 (14 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				2020hindsight said:
			
		

> 3. Oil runing out? in the middle east? - would I be cynical if I suggested that the west is encouraging the middle east supplies to be drawn down, whilst they lock up their reserves for "a rainy day"? - I'm no expert on relative supplies btw.



Depends on which field you are talking about. There's quite a lot of water flowing from some of those wells...

But in general the West has pumped far harder than the Middle East, hence the US oil policy being commonly known as "strength through exhaustion". That is, maximise production today and leave nothing for tomorrow. No surprise then to find that US oil fields are, in total, nearly 90% depleted by most estimates. 

If you ignore Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico which were developed later, US oil production has crashed by close to 70% since 1970. That's depletion. Indeed even Alaska is now about 50% down from its peak.

Bottom line is that the Middle East's share of remaining reserves is trending upwards over the long term as reserves elsewhere are depleted more rapidly. Why? Because the flat earth economists insist that this makes sense for the West.


----------



## 2020hindsight (14 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				kgee said:
			
		

> Philanthrophy or taking the piss ????
> I think he might have got that idea when he was chewing on those cocoa leaves



careful kgee - you're taking on chops on his home turf, lol!.  

Smurf - thanks for the info there (oil reserves). As usual you are a wealth of info.  The hypothetical implications become a bit of a concern.   When the only oil left is in the middle east, or venezuala or nigeria - i.e. outside USA - mmm
Wouldn't you like to have been a fly on the White House wall as to the real reasons for invading Iraq.


----------



## wayneL (14 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				Buster said:
			
		

> Olbermann tears strips off Bush after his speech sending more troops into IRAQ..
> 
> Goes for about ten minutes, worth watching, the last five are scathing..
> 
> ...




Olberman for President!!  

It is comforting to know there are at least a few sane Americans.


----------



## kgee (14 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				2020hindsight said:
			
		

> careful kgee - you're taking on chops on his home turf, lol!.




is that taking the piss or chewing cocoa leaves


----------



## 2020hindsight (14 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				kgee said:
			
		

> is that taking the piss or chewing cocoa leaves



now you mention it - either or both


----------



## 2020hindsight (14 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Since I mentioned a third option for oil as Nigeria, I enclose the following stats on Muslem / Christian ratios in Africa:- Nigeria for instance is 50-50.
what choice but to become friends !!



> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Africa
> "Approximately 40% of all Africans are Muslims, in contrast to another 40% being Christians and 20% being non-religious or adherents to African religions. Despite all of the above religions having a long and rich history in the continent, they have provided sources of numerous conflicts, especially in countries where there is no clear majority, for example Sudan and Nigeria. Islam can be seen as spreading to Africa via passages through the Sinai Peninsula and Egypt and well as through Arab and Persian traders and sailors. Despite its large contribution to the make up of the continent, Islam is predominantly concentrated in North Africa and, to a lesser extent West Africa & East Africa. This has provided an increasing difference between the culture and laws of different parts of Africa.





> http://nickbrowne.coraider.com/2007/01/flash-point.html
> I'm getting a bad feeling in my water about developments in the horn of Africa. What I worry about is the correlation of conflicts there with Moslem/Christian tension as the whole continent grows ever more segragated along religious lines.
> 
> Whether or not it is strictly correct, it is certainly tempting to view Ethiopia's intervention in Somalia as a fight between an ancient Christian country and the Council of Islamic Courts.
> ...


----------



## Wysiwyg (14 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				2020hindsight said:
			
		

> Since I mentioned a third option for oil as Nigeria, I enclose the following stats on Muslem / Christian ratios in Africa:- Nigeria for instance is 50-50.
> what choice but to become friends !!




The split in interpretation of the`one` god  appears to be superficial to me.Surely life is not that desperate.But .... an INGRAINED belief is not rationalised o`night.Alas .... some people NEED something to cling to. And desperate they are.

For what?...Recognition,love,freedom or just vengeance?


----------



## Sean K (14 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				2020hindsight said:
			
		

> Since I mentioned a third option for oil as Nigeria, I enclose the following stats on Muslem / Christian ratios in Africa:- Nigeria for instance is 50-50.
> what choice but to become friends !!



Africa is an interesting beast as far as religion and culture is concerned.

I agree that they may be half/half, but only just 'nominally' Muslim or Christian. They have all been converted but still maintain their core traditional beliefs which are Animist and/or Ancestor Worship.

Indonesia is a classic example where a 'nominal' religious country gets lumped with all the others therefore giving a sence of power, or authority, due to their number. Only a VERY SMALL % of Indonesians are true followers of Islam. The majority are Animist because after the attepted Coup in the 60s by the 'Communists' everyone was forced to nominate a religion (one of the 5 approved - but not Animism), or they were classified as Communist. Up to 500,000 'Communists' were slaughtered at this time. Because the ruling class of the time were Muslim everyone else thought that they should choose Islam, or they would be killed.....Indonesia is not a truely  Muslim country but we have the perception of that because the minority Muslims there are fanatics and are the ones blowing up bars in Bali.....

The point is, that in most of Africa, it's not generally Islam or Christianity that is an issue, it's the people using Islam or Christianity as an excuse or basis to push their cause. Obviously there are certain countires that are more 'Muslim' that others, but they are mostly just subsects and not really following the Koran or New Testament. 

(very happy for people with more understanding of the region to question this!)


----------



## chops_a_must (14 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



> careful kgee - you're taking on chops on his home turf, lol! .






> is that taking the piss or chewing cocoa leaves







			
				2020hindsight said:
			
		

> now you mention it - either or both



Lol!


----------



## Smurf1976 (14 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				2020hindsight said:
			
		

> The hypothetical implications become a bit of a concern.   When the only oil left is in the middle east, or venezuala or nigeria - i.e. outside USA - mmm
> Wouldn't you like to have been a fly on the White House wall as to the real reasons for invading Iraq.




The real problem is production rate rather than oil reserves. That is, the ability (constrained by geology as opposed to investment etc) to get oil into the market.

In short, the Western world has no significant ability to increase production. That's right now. Apart from the tar sands in Canada, which realistically have a peak production potential of no more than 6 - 10 million barrels per day (and that's with total depletion over 50 - 30 years) there just isn't anything significant there to develop which isn't already being developed. Deepwater Gulf of Mexico etc is expected to peak (and then decline incredibly quickly) in less than a decade.

The rest is all either not in the West or we're talking about coal liquefaction, shale (which isn't known to have been successfully done on a large scale in an acceptable manner by anyone) or gas to liquids. 

As for the latter, Russia and the Middle East combined hold two thirds of the world's gas and once again, Western reserves are being depleted far more rapidly leading to an increasing concentration of the remaining resource. Indeed the UK, USA and New Zealand are already in trouble with gas depletion whilst Australia is doing all it can to get the stuff out of the ground as quickly as possible (a foolish policy IMO). So gas leads down the same track as oil except that Russia is the most important country (something the Europeans are already learning about the hard way) rather than Saudi Arabia. That said, Iran's big natural resource is gas rather than oil...


----------



## Julia (14 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> One aspect of the Middle East question that I have been trying to get to the bottom of is the Shiite/Sunni sectarian conflict, which has been most prominate recently in Iraq.
> 
> I am undecided if this is even a 'religious' conflict or a cultural one. I would like to add to this some more maybe tomorrow because I still need to do some more research to get my head around it.
> 
> Any experts out there on this topic?



Kennas, there was a programme on the background to this subject on the ABC's Radio National today.  I was only half listening so can't tell you the name of the programme.  It was on just after 1pm. If you go to the ABC's website you should be able to track it down.  They publish full programme lists.

Julia


----------



## Sean K (14 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				Julia said:
			
		

> Kennas, there was a programme on the background to this subject on the ABC's Radio National today.  I was only half listening so can't tell you the name of the programme.  It was on just after 1pm. If you go to the ABC's website you should be able to track it down.  They publish full programme lists.
> 
> Julia



Thanks Julia. Will look into it. 

One thing I'm wondering in regards to the Sunni/Shiiite/Jew/Christian thing is that perhaps the only way they can be kept apart is by ultimate force. Every time there is a window of opportunity for any of them to rise up, the region is aflame.....


----------



## mmmmining (16 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

How India and Parkstan ended their conflicts? I believe the Middle East experts should learn from it. The answer is obvious and logic, but none dare to speak it out. 

The current conflict in Middle East is rooted from no respect to each other's culture, religions, capabilities, power, and simply existence. Killing each other becomes the only solution. 

How you can earn such respect in a very short time? Magic, or something powerful?


----------



## Sean K (16 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				mmmmining said:
			
		

> How India and Parkstan ended their conflicts? I believe the Middle East experts should learn from it. The answer is obvious and logic, but none dare to speak it out.



They actually haven't ended it yet. Kashmir is disputed and they regularly exchange fire across the border.


----------



## mmmmining (16 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> They actually haven't ended it yet. Kashmir is disputed and they regularly exchange fire across the border.



Exchange fire is symbolic, but recognize each other's power is subtle.


----------



## wayneL (16 January 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Well it looks like the Yan.... errrr, I mean Iraqis have botched another hanging.

ewwwwww


----------



## Sean K (24 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Lots of chatter around the place about contingency plans to start bombing Iran's nuclear sites. A second carrier group has just recently deployed to the Persian Gulf....just a matter of time before the US war machine starts ticking over their arms economy a bit more.

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN2344821820070223?src=022307_1515_TOPSTORY_fighting_iran


----------



## wayneL (24 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> Lots of chatter around the place about contingency plans to start bombing Iran's nuclear sites. A second carrier group has just recently deployed to the Persian Gulf....just a matter of time before the US war machine starts ticking over their arms economy a bit more.
> 
> http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN2344821820070223?src=022307_1515_TOPSTORY_fighting_iran




Another "Gulf of Tonkin" incident in the offing perhaps?


----------



## sydneysider (24 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> Lots of chatter around the place about contingency plans to start bombing Iran's nuclear sites. A second carrier group has just recently deployed to the Persian Gulf....just a matter of time before the US war machine starts ticking over their arms economy a bit more.
> 
> http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN2344821820070223?src=022307_1515_TOPSTORY_fighting_iran




There have also been a number of "strikes" inside Iran along the Afghan border in the last two weeks, a bus was blown up with an IED and killed a number of Iranian Qod (highly trained military), followed by a blast on a gas pipeline in the same area. There has also been activity in Northern Iran along the border with Iraq in the Kurdish areas. Several weeks ago one of the Iranian U scientists died in mysterious circumstances. 

General Petreus who now heads U.S. forces is a master in counter-insurgency. Expect to see lots of interesting "events" from various proxy groups operating inside Iran. There is no need for the U.S. to directly attack Iran as there are enough Iranians who hate the regime and will start to cause trouble, their economy is in the tank and their oil production is only marginally higher than Iraq. The U.S. fleets and air support are there to make the Iranians paranoid. The proxy "strikes" inside Iran will make them look powerless and paranoid. I bought stacks of NWRO on Friday, all I could get at 16.5, great high quality leverage on a gold run over US$700. This game has just started. Expect more trouble in Lebanon. Lots of very interesting stuff going on in Iraq also with Sunnis turning away from Alqeda.


----------



## wayneL (24 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				sydneysider said:
			
		

> There have also been a number of "strikes" inside Iran along the Afghan border in the last two weeks, a bus was blown up with an IED and killed a number of Iranian Qod (highly trained military), followed by a blast on a gas pipeline in the same area. There has also been activity in Northern Iran along the border with Iraq in the Kurdish areas. Several weeks ago one of the Iranian U scientists died in mysterious circumstances.
> 
> General Petreus who now heads U.S. forces is a master in counter-insurgency. Expect to see lots of interesting "events" from various proxy groups operating inside Iran. There is no need for the U.S. to directly attack Iran as there are enough Iranians who hate the regime and will start to cause trouble, their economy is in the tank and their oil production is only marginally higher than Iraq. The U.S. fleets and air support are there to make the Iranians paranoid. The proxy "strikes" inside Iran will make them look powerless and paranoid. I bought stacks of NWRO on Friday, all I could get at 16.5, great high quality leverage on a gold run over US$700. This game has just started. Expect more trouble in Lebanon. Lots of very interesting stuff going on in Iraq also with Sunnis turning away from Alqeda.



Let's not forget Israel, who could let their maniacs loose at any time.


----------



## sydneysider (24 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> Let's not forget Israel, who could let their maniacs loose at any time.




Hezbullah has re-armed and are patrolling the Israeli border in contravention of UN resolutions. Do they count as maniacs?


----------



## Sean K (24 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				sydneysider said:
			
		

> Hezbullah has re-armed and are patrolling the Israeli border in contravention of UN resolutions. Do they count as maniacs?



Maniac enough I'd say (read fanatical) and more than obviously supported by Iran and Syria. The whole region is a powder keg, as it has been on and off for the past 3000 years.

Syd, like your notes on the Iran 'incidents'. The CIA operational arm is alive and well with a budget the size of a small european country. Like Germany.


----------



## billhill (24 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Start piling your money into oil again boys. However can the US afford to start another war.


----------



## happytown (24 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

re iran, seemore wrote an interesting (read lengthy) article published 04/06 in the new yorker re us planning:

"The Bush Administration, while publicly advocating diplomacy in order to stop Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon, has increased clandestine activities inside Iran and intensified planning for a possible major air attack. Current and former American military and intelligence officials said that Air Force planning groups are drawing up lists of targets, and teams of American combat troops have been ordered into Iran, under cover, to collect targeting data and to establish contact with anti-government ethnic-minority groups. The officials say that President Bush is determined to deny the Iranian regime the opportunity to begin a pilot program, planned for this spring, to enrich uranium. 

..."

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060417fa_fact

cheers


----------



## insider (24 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

OH THIS IS A CRACK UP YOU GOTTA CHECK THIS OUT... 

IT'S GEORGE BUSH JNR

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1z4Urk2DL_k&mode=related&search=


----------



## wayneL (24 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				sydneysider said:
			
		

> Hezbullah has re-armed and are patrolling the Israeli border in contravention of UN resolutions. Do they count as maniacs?



The word _de jour_ is "terrorist" for Hezbollah. Though the IDF qualifies in deed, they're buddies with the evil empire, so "maniacs" will have to do.


----------



## Sean K (26 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Oh dear..............

*US denies 24-hour bombing plan for Iran*
New York
February 26, 2007

Despite the Bush Administration insisting that it does not intend to go to war with Iran, a Pentagon panel has been created to plan a bombing attack that could be implemented within 24 hours of getting the go-ahead from President George Bush.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world...g-plan-for-iran/2007/02/25/1172338467912.html


----------



## wayneL (26 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

 Time to go long on these?

LOCKHEED MARTIN CP [LMT]	
HONEYWELL INTL INC [HON]	
GEN DYNAMICS CP [GD]	
NORTHROP GRUM HOL CO [NOC]	
ROCKWELL COLLINS INC [COL]


----------



## CanOz (26 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> Time to go long on these?
> 
> LOCKHEED MARTIN CP [LMT]
> HONEYWELL INTL INC [HON]
> ...




Whats the code for Haliburton?


----------



## wayneL (26 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				CanOz said:
			
		

> Whats the code for Haliburton?



Halliburton [SATAN] 





HAL actually


----------



## Bobby (26 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> Halliburton [SATAN]
> 
> 
> 
> ...



 That was funny    .

Stuff them humans you'll do me !

Bob.


----------



## kransky (26 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

what would be a good way to leverage on the price of oil?


----------



## Sean K (27 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Hhhhmmm. I think it's actually illegal to enter a sovereign nation and run around killing people....

*US boosts secret missions in Iran*
Correspondents in Washington 
February 27, 2007 

THE US is reportedly stepping up covert operations in Iran in a new strategy that risks sparking an "open confrontation" with the Islamic republic. 

US military and special-operations teams had increased their activities inside Iran, entering from Iraq to gather intelligence and to pursue Iranian operatives, reports said yesterday. 

Investigative reporter Seymour Hersh claimed in an article in The New Yorker that US clandestine operations in Iran, Syria and the wider region had been "guided by Vice-President Dick Cheney", relying heavily onSaudi Arabia and on the Saudi national security adviser, Prince Bandar. 

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21293243-601,00.html


----------



## Aussiejeff (27 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> Hhhhmmm. I think it's actually illegal to enter a sovereign nation and run around killing people....
> 
> *US boosts secret missions in Iran*
> Correspondents in Washington
> February 27, 2007




Unless of course, you consider yourself to be "above the law". Besides, the U.S. IS the ultimate "law enforcement agency" on the planet, isn't it?

In my 57 years on this planet I'm sure I've seen/read about this scenario occuring endlessly over the millenia somewhere before... eg: some megalomaniac emperor/dictator/head honcho/president etc thinks his popularity is waning and HEY PRESTO - "LET'S HAVE ANOTHER WAR! PUT THOSE PESKY ANTI ESTABLISHMENT TYPES IN THE FRONT LINE! MUHAHAHAAAAA...!!!"

There ya go - problem solvered. Err. at least for "him what's at the top of the pile", that is..... bound to get re-elected when you are a strong warrior in a time of war crisis. 

It's all very simple philosophy really.... 

Cheers?

AJ


----------



## imajica (27 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

The U.S. will manipulate the media and the public consciousness into believing that IRAN are a threat

why?

IRAN has billions of barrels of oil in the ground - The western world is a society built on a foundation of oil - Goerge Bush will lie and kill in order to secure the future of this urban suburbia



P.S. I haven't read the entire thread so if I'm rehashing comments - I apologise


----------



## noirua (27 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Only sabre rattling. The powers behind the scenes in Iran will cave in.


----------



## Nicks (27 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> All too sickeningly true Toc Bat.
> 
> The moral bancruptcy in that place emits an unbearable stench.
> 
> Wayne (ex yank)




Hi Toc Bat and Wayne, and evryone else.

I too am often amazed at the ignorance of many Americans. However, they are generally good people. My missus is American and her family is lovely. I have been to the US several times and met many dumb people and many bright people. Many pro war, pro fuel, pro pollution and many not. I also meet a lot of undesirables here in Australia, in Europe. I guess its anywhere. 

They are a big country and often do not have adequate world representation on their nightly news, not to mention the media is often controlled by powerful factions. Sounds a bit like Channel nine doesnt it?

Lets not pick on the yanks. In general they are a good country with fair values. Sometimes they have warped foreign policy, but so do many other countries. Just ask a West Papuan.

At least in Australia and the USA you can speak up, criticise your Government, even stand for election if you want, and by right as a free person you are free to do all of these things.

I think we need to understand that all Governments manipulate people. This includes the Hezbollah, the Likud Party, the Iranian leader's party, the Republican party, Berlusconi's Party, Indonesia's Govt, and my favourtie manipulator the Liberal Party. Even worse, some countries there is not even a choice...


----------



## CanOz (27 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				Nicks said:
			
		

> Hi Toc Bat and Wayne, and evryone else.
> 
> I too am often amazed at the ignorance of many Americans. However, they are generally good people. My missus is American and her family is lovely. I have been to the US several times and met many dumb people and many bright people. Many pro war, pro fuel, pro pollution and many not. I also meet a lot of undesirables here in Australia, in Europe. I guess its anywhere.
> 
> ...




Your absolutly right, its not the American people as such...just a few that have shaped Americas foriegn policy over the last four or six decades!

Talk about digging thier own grave!

Cheers,


----------



## wayneL (27 February 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				Nicks said:
			
		

> Hi Toc Bat and Wayne, and evryone else.
> 
> I too am often amazed at the ignorance of many Americans. However, they are generally good people. My missus is American and her family is lovely. I have been to the US several times and met many dumb people and many bright people. Many pro war, pro fuel, pro pollution and many not. I also meet a lot of undesirables here in Australia, in Europe. I guess its anywhere.
> 
> ...



Fair comment Nicks,

There are some truly magnificent people there, not many, but enough... and hats off to them.

I'm glad you found some of them.


----------



## Sean K (2 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Read a great article in the Fin today on the Shiite/Sunni situation in the Middle East. If you didn't get it, it will be in the Review section tomorrow.

In other news:

*Iran N-plans threat to world sharemarkets, says former White House adviser*
Vanessa Burrow
March 2, 2007

IRAN'S insistence on developing nuclear capabilities has more potential to destabilise than the plunge in Chinese stocks that set off a one-day dive on world markets this week, says a former White House economic adviser...............................

http://www.theage.com.au/news/busin...te-houseadviser/2007/03/01/1172338795596.html


----------



## Sean K (26 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Iran captures British sailers.....What if they were US??...hmmmmm

In other ongoing news from The Age:

*Iran vows to continue atomic work*
March 26, 2007 - 6:34AM

Iran says it will press ahead with its nuclear program despite an "illegal" UN resolution imposing new financial and arms sanctions.

"Iran will not stop its peaceful and legal nuclear trend even for one second because of such an illegal resolution," Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on his website www.president.ir.

The UN Security Council unanimously approved the sanctions against Tehran on Sunday for its refusal to suspend a nuclear program, but major powers also offered new talks and renewed an economic and technological incentive package offer.

"The Iranian nation will not..........................


----------



## zed327 (26 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Wouldn't be surprised if the Poms have set out to create this mess with their capture.

Don't know what George has got on Blair but it must be bloody good to make a Labour prime minister carry on like Maggie Thatcher.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (26 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



kennas said:


> Iran captures British sailers.....What if they were US??...hmmmmm




It would have been BYE BYE Iran,

That would have been the excuse they needed,

The Brits better get their men back ASAP, else THE WORLD WILL LOSE RESPECT FOR THEM!

Remember how nuts the Israelies went to get back 1 artillery man?


----------



## Sean K (26 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

This will probably end harmlessly, but wars have started on less.



			
				THE AGE said:
			
		

> Blair warns Iran over captured Brits
> London
> March 26, 2007 - 3:05PM
> 
> British Prime Minister Tony Blair has warned Iran the fate of 15 British sailors and marines seized off the Iraqi coast is a "fundamental" issue for his government, as Iran suggested the group may be put on trial for violating its waters.


----------



## greggy (26 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



kennas said:


> This will probably end harmlessly, but wars have started on less.




But were the British in violation or is the Iranian Govt just trying to pick another fight? Considering the Iranian leader is a bit on the loopy side I tend to believe he's just wanting another fight.


----------



## CanOz (26 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

What would the western world think if they held them two years or so without a trial? 

Not much we can say now is there?

Cheers,


----------



## greggy (26 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



CanOz said:


> What would the western world think if they held them two years or so without a trial?
> 
> Not much we can say now is there?
> 
> Cheers,




One wrong doesn't make another right.


----------



## Sean K (26 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



CanOz said:


> What would the western world think if they held them two years or so without a trial?
> 
> Not much we can say now is there?
> 
> Cheers,



LOL. Can't imagine it happening though can you? Different situations to Hicks I suppose. Is that what you're refferring to?

In regards to Iranian territory, Blair seems to be saying that their understanding was that they were NOT in Iranian waters. If that is the case, capturing foreign soldiers/sailors in international waters could be deemed an act of war in itself. 

Haven't seen the last of this one.


----------



## Kauri (26 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Deja vu ???



> *18 June 2004*: The UK, Germany and France draft a resolution for the UN nuclear watchdog, the IAEA, "deploring" Iran's lack of co-operation with inspections.
> *21 June 2004:* Eight British sailors are held in Iran after their vessel apparently strays into Iranian waters near the border with Iraq. They are released three days later following negotiations between British diplomats and Iranian officials.




   Might just be Iran showing that they will not be intimidated by all the rhetoric and threats coming from the West. Didn't they just put a nuclear symbol on their currency?? 
     I guess we can put trade sanctions in place against them, refuse to sell them *wheat* etc..


----------



## Atomic5 (26 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

What exactly is the 'punishment' in Iran for what the soldiers have allegedly done?


----------



## greggy (26 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



Atomic5 said:


> What exactly is the 'punishment' in Iran for what the soldiers have allegedly done?




Given that the Iranians are known for going overboard.  Who knows?? Public stoning? Lets just hope commonsense prevails at the end of the day.


----------



## CanOz (26 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



kennas said:


> LOL. Can't imagine it happening though can you? Different situations to Hicks I suppose. Is that what you're refferring to?
> 
> In regards to Iranian territory, Blair seems to be saying that their understanding was that they were NOT in Iranian waters. If that is the case, capturing foreign soldiers/sailors in international waters could be deemed an act of war in itself.
> 
> Haven't seen the last of this one.




Yeah i was referring to Hicks and other alleged terrorists held without trial. I can just see the Iranian president playing on that a bit. 

No doubt they are just a bargaining chip. Imagine thier familes.

Not good.


----------



## Buster (26 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



kennas said:


> In regards to Iranian territory, Blair seems to be saying that their understanding was that they were NOT in Iranian waters. If that is the case, capturing foreign soldiers/sailors in international waters could be deemed an act of war in itself.



This isn't the first time that British troops have been 'abducted' by the Iranians.. and in fact this occurred to Gold boarding party when I was on HMAS Adelaide a couple of years ago up there (thankfully, I was in Green Boarding Party).. the boys had inserted, and the RHIB's cut for it when the Iranian's turned up, leaving the boys stranded on the vessel, all Iranian guns trained on them..  Tense time for all involved.  The Americans kitted out a couple of S70's to chase them off, but got recalled half way there.  It all ended many hours later when our S70 extracted them..

Iran have always disputed the 'International' borders in those waters and like to press the point when they can..

Regards,

Buster


----------



## Bobby (26 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

This kidnap is just a diversion, pre-planned setup for sure.

Danger & peril will now manifest (those that play the cards )

Bob.


----------



## Sean K (28 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

DJ US Navy Spokesman: Received No Reports Of Gulf Conflict
28/03/2007 07:57AM AEST WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)--

The U.S. Navy has received no reports of military action in the Middle East, a spokesman said Tuesday. 

Cmdr. Dave Werner, a Navy spokesman, said: "We received no such reports." 

The Pentagon on Tuesday also said it was unaware of any military confrontation in the Persian Gulf, a spokesman said. 

Earlier Tuesday, rumors of a possible conflict in the region stemming from Iran's detention of 15 U.K. naval personnel circulated in the energy markets. The sailors and marines have been held since being seized in the Gulf on Friday. 

Crude oil futures jumped nearly 8% in a matter of minutes in after hours trading Tuesday, topping $68.00 a barrel, as rumors of a military confrontation in the Gulf involving Iran spurred panic buying.


----------



## CanOz (28 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



kennas said:


> DJ US Navy Spokesman: Received No Reports Of Gulf Conflict
> 28/03/2007 07:57AM AEST WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)--
> 
> The U.S. Navy has received no reports of military action in the Middle East, a spokesman said Tuesday.
> ...




Thanks Kennas, couldn't figure out why the sudden spike. Made a little bit on that one!

Cheers,


----------



## Sean K (28 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

*2nd update:*

DJ 2nd UPDATE: No Reports Of Persian Gulf Conflict -US Officials28/03/2007 08:55AM AEST  

(Adds U.K. government also saying none of its forces were attacked, in sixth paragraph) 

WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)--U.S. officials said Tuesday they had received no reports of a military confrontation in the Persian Gulf. 

Representatives from the National Security Council, the Pentagon and the U.S. Navy said they had no knowledge of military action in the Gulf involving Iran. 

"We have no indication at this time of any incident in the Gulf," National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe said. 

"It's just rumors, we have no reports of attacks on any naval vessels," said Cmdr. Dave Werner, a Navy spokesman. 

"No one is beating down the door," said Defense Dept. spokesman James Turner. 

The U.K. government, which is entering the sixth day of its standoff with Iran over 15 U.K. sailors and marines who Iran seized in disputed waters near the Persian Gulf, also said none of its forces had been attacked. 

Earlier Tuesday, rumors of a possible conflict in the region circulated in the energy markets. The sailors and marines have been held since being seized in the Gulf on Friday. 

Crude oil futures jumped $5 in a matter of minutes in after hours trading Tuesday, topping $68.00 a barrel, as rumors of a military confrontation in the Gulf involving Iran spurred panic buying. 

Meanwhile, the U.S. kicked off a military training operation in the Persian Gulf on Tuesday that commanders said was meant to send a warning to Iran. The operations are the largest show of U.S. force in the Gulf since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.


----------



## robert toms (28 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

One of the reasons for grabbing fifteen Brits was to exchange them for Iranians taken by Britain and the US in Iraq.
At least thats what some analysts are saying.


----------



## wayneL (28 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

OH-OH!

http://www.indiaenews.com/europe/20070327/44952.htm



> *US military build-up on Iran border: Russian Intelligence*
> From correspondents in Moscow, Russia, 10:32 PM IST
> 
> Moscow, March 27 (RIA Novosti) Russian military intelligence services are reporting a flurry of activity by US Armed Forces near Iran's borders, a high-ranking security source said Tuesday.
> ...


----------



## CanOz (28 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Hmmmm, do you think they would have the balls to do this twice without UN approval? I hope they are sable rattling. 

Cheers,


----------



## wayneL (28 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



CanOz said:


> Hmmmm, do you think they would have the balls to do this twice without UN approval? I hope they are sable rattling.
> 
> Cheers,



Personally. I have zero faith in the americans at present, nothing would surprise me.

The lunatics are in control.


----------



## Sean K (28 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



CanOz said:


> Hmmmm, do you think they would have the balls to do this twice without UN approval? I hope they are sable rattling.
> Cheers,



Sabre rattling. The only thing they can do at the moment is an extended air strike. They have no ground troops to commit. Would take months of logistic build up to support them. Iran is a different beast than Iraq. There is no chance of a US direct ground attack IMO. Not for maybe a year. However, they probably have enough 'precision' bombs to keep hitting for some time. I think they will leave it to the CIA and special forces for the time being.


----------



## Sean K (28 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



wayneL said:


> Personally. I have zero faith in the americans at present, nothing would surprise me.
> 
> The lunatics are in control.



Although, I am with you Wayne. Bush boy and the central southern bible bashing hick, must go.


----------



## wayneL (28 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

See image\/


----------



## billhill (28 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Maybe the real reason bush wanted more troops in iraq is so he can close down the iran border while they lauch air and missile attacks on the country. From what i hear iran is ecconomically about to fall in a hole. Strategic destruction of core infrastructure should push them over the edge leading to a lack of money with which to continue there nuclear program and maybe forcing a change of government.


----------



## mmmmining (28 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



CanOz said:


> Hmmmm, do you think they would have the balls to do this twice without UN approval? I hope they are sable rattling.
> 
> Cheers,




Israel will do the dirty job, or pretend to be Israeli. Preemptive strike for self-defense. US government can easily get away with it both in UN and in USA.

In UN, US just need to use the veto to steer away any UN resolution against Israel. 

In USA, US don't need to pay the bill for the war, and don't need to anger the voters for deeply involved in middle-east. Get ride of Iran's nuclear capability will help calming down the US voters anti-war, anti-Bush sentiment. The war could still sponsed by US Jews. They are rich and greedy.

Once it happens, the oil price might spike to $100+. This might be the major problem.


----------



## CanOz (28 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



wayneL said:


> See image\/




I mentioned that this morning in the oil thread. The rumour at the time was some sort of hostilities had begun. It said that only a few contracts were bought at the top. Obviously a nervous market at the moment.

Why, what are you thinking here?

Cheers,


----------



## Sean K (28 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



CanOz said:


> I mentioned that this morning in the oil thread. The rumour at the time was some sort of hostilities had begun. It said that only a few contracts were bought at the top. Obviously a nervous market at the moment.
> 
> Why, what are you thinking here?
> 
> Cheers,



Yep, was just the rumour of a battle in the gulf.


----------



## wayneL (28 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



CanOz said:


> I mentioned that this morning in the oil thread. The rumour at the time was some sort of hostilities had begun. It said that only a few contracts were bought at the top. Obviously a nervous market at the moment.
> 
> *Why, what are you thinking here?*
> 
> Cheers,



Just that looking at the price action here, it seems to be nothing more than rumour or a false alarm...

...at present. 

The situation would appear to be a tinderbox however.


----------



## Kauri (28 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

From action FX...




> U.S. crude oil futures spike $5.18 to $68.09 a barrel after-hours on rumors of increased hostilities between Iran and Britain. This can mean serious problems to global economies, because if things continue to get nasty between the UK and Iran it is mostly obvious that the US is going to intervene also. And this can revive the jitters of a new terrorist attack in US soil meaning a large capital flow from the US to other countries and currencies such as Switzerland, the Swiss Franc and gold. A rally in gold prices in nearly a fact right now, the only question here will be, can gold hold onto its gains?, if it does, well we are in the presence of the new savings instruments by excellence and people, traders and banks may dive into the market to buy gold, fuelling the rally even more, pushing gold prices to records highs. And I don't want to even imagine what will happen if a war is developed between Iran, the UK and the USA. Also a big problem will revive if oil prices continue to rise; this is the trade balance of the US. We already have an unsustainable trade balance but if oil prices continue to go in the rise, things can get out of hands. Traders are not paying the attention they need to regarding to the trade balance, mainly because now they are focused only in interest rates, but when things may be on the verge of going out of control they will do something. We all know that the best way to correct the trade deficit is to devaluate their currency and the US dollar needs to go down approximately 20% from here to start to narrow the trade balance to satisfactory levels, you do the math.


----------



## Wysiwyg (28 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

As in the school yard...PUSH comes to SHOVE.

Does this not prove that age DOES NOT bring wisdom...most thickheads are thick all their lives.


----------



## Bobby (28 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Wow,

It seems that some don't see Iran in a bad light on their kidnapping.

Why is that ?

Bob.


----------



## robert toms (29 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Why is that....the average punter,like myself,does not know the facts and motivations of what happened.
Anything that PM Blair says has to be regarded with scepticism after his performance trying to sell WMD's
Bush threatened any Iranian found in Iraq with dire consequences...pretty rich when foreign troops roam at will.
The Americans are holding Iranians in Iraq at the moment...without trial etc.
Are we to be manipulated by media reports ?
One thing that I do know is that we are all judged by our past actions and performances....the same judgements do not seem to be made in situations like this.
I do not know what happened,or what games are being played...so why get concerned ?


----------



## wayneL (30 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

 I'm stocking up on food.  

Israeli News Service:	

Likud members: Bomb Iran

Report: U.S. planning Iran strike


----------



## BradK (30 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

This from the respected journalist Sey Hersh (who broke the My Lai massacre in Vietnam, and the Abu Gharib prison scandal in Iraq). He is not often wrong, and for an up to date account, check out this link below from the March 2007 issue of New Yorker magazine. Its a long read but well worth it.

Hmmmm

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/03/05/070305fa_fact_hersh

Cheers
Brad


----------



## Sean K (30 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



wayneL said:


> I'm stocking up on food.
> 
> Israeli News Service:
> 
> ...



Looks like more than sabre rattling now doesn't it. The worst step would be Israel getting involved in this. It would bring in the rest of the Middle East, and possibly even unite the Sunni and Shiites to fight against the common enemy. Seems unlikely to me but a possibility. Perhaps it could just remain a US/Israel/NATO? v Shiite conflict. Whatever the case, if Israel get involved, disaster.


----------



## wayneL (30 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



kennas said:


> Looks like more than sabre rattling now doesn't it. The worst step would be Israel getting involved in this. It would bring in the rest of the Middle East, and possibly even unite the Sunni and Shiites to fight against the common enemy. Seems unlikely to me but a possibility. Perhaps it could just remain a US/Israel/NATO? v Shiite conflict. Whatever the case, if Israel get involved, disaster.



Something is up.

There was a rumour floating around about an April 6 strike (which makes it highly unlikely, but I wonder)

My nightmare scenario: A "terrorist" attack in USA or UK, immediate counter attack against Iran (though they will have nothing to do with it) and martial law installed in those countries... possibly Australia too.

I hope I'm waaaaay off.


----------



## 2020hindsight (30 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



BradK said:


> This from the respected journalist Sey Hersh . Hmmmm
> http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/03/05/070305fa_fact_hersh Cheers, Brad



intersting stuff thanks BradK, wayne, kennas
sheesh didnt read the lot, but .. confusion reigns supreme. 
Khamenei, now there's a voice from the past.
 As I recall Bush is a good mate of the Saudis, so that at least seems to be consistent (and probably a polarising influence / rallying cry for Khamenei followers).    But .. so much for the much touted diplomatic option in Iran.    It was never a goer, was it.   Bush probably knew that when he implied "we'll try the carrot, but if that doesn't work, we still have plenty of sticks")



> To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.
> 
> One contradictory aspect of the new strategy is that, in Iraq, most of the insurgent violence directed at the American military has come from Sunni forces, and not from Shiites. But, from the Administration’s perspective, the most profound—and unintended—strategic consequence of the Iraq war is the empowerment of Iran. Its President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has made defiant pronouncements about the destruction of Israel and his country’s right to pursue its nuclear program, and last week its supreme religious leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said on state television that “realities in the region show that the arrogant front, headed by the U.S. and its allies, will be the principal loser in the region.” ........
> 
> ...



PS If USA takes on Iran, they won't have any friends amongst the (non-terrorist) Iraqi Shiites either - and the terrorist Sunnis there win - like, they won't have any friends in that region period. (you wouldn't think).   What was that someone said ? - home before Xmas ?.    which Xmas?


----------



## Sean K (30 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Paper Tiger (UN) statement out:



> "Members of the Security Council expressed grave concern at the capture by the Revolutionary Guard and the continuing detention by the government of Iran of 15 United Kingdom naval personnel and appealed to the government of Iran to allow consular access in terms of the relevant international laws," the statement said.
> 
> "Members of the Security Council support calls including by the secretary-general in his March 29 meeting with the Iranian foreign minister for an early resolution of this problem including the release of the 15 U.K. personnel," it said.


----------



## happytown (30 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



kennas said:


> Paper Tiger (UN) statement out




Kennas,

arguably useful as a componont of the historical record leading up to any action showing global (?) disapproval of Iran and her behaviour (although it is only the security council with 15 member states, including several smaller countries susceptible to sway ... if their vote is needed  - or needed to be gained (report recently showed how when african states served on the council, for 2 year periods, the foreign aid they received per year during that 2 year period was more than other years)

and further useful as progressing the case for significant security council action (such as a security council resolution authorising amongst other things the use of force, which would legalise and therefore further legitimise the war - in an eye of the beholder way) 

cheers


----------



## numbercruncher (31 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

I think this has gone on far to long now, Iran is making the United kingdom look like fools, the problem is that life in a country like the UK is far more valuable than it is to Islamofascist controlled country Iran.

If these Sailors where Americans im almost certain that 1/ it wouldnt of happened in the first place 2/ We would be in the Midst of war right now.

The thing that worrys me is that Iran is too confident, its like they have a card up there sleeve(already developed ICBM or even something crude perhaps?)


----------



## Wysiwyg (31 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



numbercruncher said:


> I think this has gone on far to long now, Iran is making the United kingdom look like fools, the problem is that life in a country like the UK is far more valuable than it is to Islamofascist controlled country Iran.
> 
> If these Sailors where Americans im almost certain that 1/ it wouldnt of happened in the first place 2/ We would be in the Midst of war right now.
> 
> The thing that worrys me is that Iran is too confident, its like they have a card up there sleeve(already developed ICBM or even something crude perhaps?)




The leader might be smarter than S. Hussein.Maybe a well educated mule this one.


----------



## 2020hindsight (31 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



happytown said:


> arguably useful as a componont of the historical record leading up to any action showing global (?) disapproval of Iran and her behaviour (although it is only the security council with 15 member states, including several smaller countries susceptible to sway ... if their vote is needed  - or needed to be gained (report recently showed how when african states served on the council, for 2 year periods, the foreign aid they received per year during that 2 year period was more than other years)
> 
> and further useful as progressing the case for significant security council action (such as a security council resolution authorising amongst other things the use of force, which would legalise and therefore further legitimise the war - in an eye of the beholder way)




Happytown, really appreciate your knowledge of international law etc. 
On the subject of 
a) the impartiality of the UN, you make the point that delegates can be bought 
b) I posted elsewhere this quote
John Bolton (USA's UN delegate) : "there is no such thing as the United Nations, just a community that can be lead by the only real power that counts,  USA".
(not suggesting now that anyone listens to this - bludy long, 40 min, and slightly off topic for this thread - but I post it as a source of this quote nonetheless - found it on ABC Poetica )  http://www.abc.net.au/rn/poetica/stories/2007/1837933.htm  "What I Heard About Iraq' 
c) then Iran (and Palestine and Bin Laden and others) have the cheek to say we are trying to dominate the rules of the game ?

Would it be fair to say that the problems of the world would seem to start with "entrenched injustice" ??   I just wonder what the moral Presidents of the past (Lincoln etc) would have said.  

PS even with the doubtful independence of the votes in the UN, the US still couldn't get them to agree to go into Iraq


----------



## numbercruncher (31 March 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

The USS Nimitz aircraft carrier battle group will sail Monday for the Persian Gulf.

They says its to releive the carrier Dwight D. Eisenhower, but Three carrier groups in the gulf makes it look like game on is close to me.


----------



## Sean K (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Just some of the headlines this am:

Iran 'fears' US attack in summer 
Germany's Merkel Calls On Iran To Release UK Sailors 
Bush Calls On Iran To Release 15 UK Sailors, Marines 
Bush enters crisis over UK captives
Ahmadinejad:World Powers 'Arrogant' For Failing To Apologize
Iran Letter To IAEA: Withholding Nuclear Information

GWB putting his nose into this is concerning.
Merkel and the EU should bring some sence of reason.


----------



## 2020hindsight (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



kennas said:


> GWB putting his nose into this is concerning.
> Merkel and the EU should bring some sence of reason.



Heck us texans have this trigger finger thing, and when it gets itchy - watch out all you varmits out there ...


----------



## bel532 (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



kennas said:


> Just some of the headlines this am:
> 
> GWB putting his nose into this is concerning.
> Merkel and the EU should bring some sence of reason.




If Merkel and the EU 'pulled their weight' instead of letting the USA do all the 'heavy lifting' (aka the Balkans and Afghanistan etc) they might be able to 'bring some sense of reason', although I don't quite know how this can be achieved when you are dealing with fundamentalist fanatics. Reason and fanatics don't normally mix very well.


----------



## bel532 (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



kennas said:


> Just some of the headlines this am:
> 
> GWB putting his nose into this is concerning.
> Merkel and the EU should bring some sence of reason.




If Merkel and the EU 'pulled their wheight' instead of letting the USA do all the  'heavy lifting' (aka the Balkans and Afghanistan etc) they might be able to 'bring some sense of reason', although I don't quite know how this can be achieved when you are dealing with fundamentalist fanatics. Reason and fanatics don't normally mix very well.


----------



## robert toms (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

You see there are some people that resort to violence as a last resort....
as for the Balkans that proved a remote bombing experience for the US,not one US soldier was risked.
Theirs is a military culture..intimidating others with shock and awe....rather than go after the criminals after 9/11 they decided to change the middle east with their military actions.
When you spend more than the rest of the world combined on aggressive military weaponry...why keep your guns in the holsters,when you have paid that much for them ?


----------



## bel532 (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



robert toms said:


> You see there are some people that resort to violence as a last resort....
> as for the Balkans that proved a remote bombing experience for the US,not one US soldier was risked.
> Theirs is a military culture..intimidating others with shock and awe....rather than go after the criminals after 9/11 they decided to change the middle east with their military actions.
> When you spend more than the rest of the world combined on aggressive military weaponry...why keep your guns in the holsters,when you have paid that much for them ?




The real 'shock and awe' comes form those Islamist Fundamentalists who want  ALL people to revert back to their backward, narrow minded 'Middle Ages' concept of the world, where the rule of law is subsumed by the Rule of Religion.


----------



## numbercruncher (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



bel532 said:


> The real 'shock and awe' comes form those Islamist Fundamentalists who want  ALL people to revert back to their backward, narrow minded 'Middle Ages' concept of the world, where the rule of law is subsumed by the Rule of Religion.




Exactly!!


And there is literally 10's of Millions of them that chant " Death to America, Death to Britain"

Which for this HUGE minority ? Translates to Death to everything non islamic, it amazes me how successful this Islamofascist minority is at the Propaganda war.

Look at this Psychopath  President of Iran, he fully beleives the Mahdi the 12th Imam of End Times is on his way back and is preparing for it!

Hello this is the 21st centuary i thought we where over all this bull, but it seems people WANT to make this fairytale come true.


----------



## chops_a_must (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



bel532 said:


> The real 'shock and awe' comes form those Islamist Fundamentalists who want  ALL people to revert back to their backward, narrow minded 'Middle Ages' concept of the world, where the rule of law is subsumed by the Rule of Religion.




And the difference between that and the current US administration right now?... Lol.


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

There was a really interesting show on SBS the other night showing the lives of 3 people in Iran. A painter, a musician and a female athlete. Really gave a good perspective on how autocratic things are over there, the painter was arrested and jailed for over 6 months for painting female impressions and told next time he would be killed.

I say any American pretext for war in Iran over atomic weapons is bullcrap, the majority of Irainian people just like most other Muslims and Arabs are tolerant "good" people. 

There are extremists in all religions, look at the classical American evangelist. Their views on morality and ideologly can be percieved to be just as extreme and irrational as other Fundamentalists.

The fact is their should be no radical connection between church and state, sure I believe every country needs an underlying connection to religious values as Australia is clearly a Christian based county and should remain as such.

I personally believe there should be caps on the amount of Muslim and other  migration to Australia simply for the fact of preserving culture and limiting segregation amoungst communities. Also by slowly letting people migrate to Australia rather than allowing large numbers we allow time for people to adjust to our culture rather than form satilite communites based on their origins.

The most multicultural countries in the world are the Western countries eg. America , Australia, England , Denmark etc. and all have problems with multiculturalism.


----------



## numbercruncher (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



chops_a_must said:


> And the difference between that and the current US administration right now?... Lol.





Seems to me they are agressive towards people whom are agressive towards them. People make out like the US is out invading the world or something, they are the only ones with the balls enough to reign in Evil. Everyone takes freedom for granted because its all they've ever experienced. Without the USA your freedom is gone.

Its just a fact.

....... In the Last 1000 years theres only been like 3 years total where a war wasnt being raged somewhere on the planet. Perhaps mankinds natural state is war?


----------



## chops_a_must (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



numbercruncher said:


> Seems to me they are agressive towards people whom are agressive towards them. People make out like the US is out invading the world or something, they are the only ones with the balls enough to reign in Evil. Everyone takes freedom for granted because its all they've ever experienced. Without the USA your freedom is gone.
> 
> Its just a fact.



I give the credit for freedom to the French.

But what about Zimbabwe, what about Sudan, what about Chechnya? It's all well and good to say that the US are the protectors of the world, but the reality is they choose to intervene when it suits their interests, not for any overarching values.

In ancient Greece there was a big jump between sophistry and philosophy. It's amazing that 2600 years later, people still struggle when dealing with rhetoric.


----------



## numbercruncher (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



chops_a_must said:


> I give the credit for freedom to the French.
> 
> But what about Zimbabwe, what about Sudan, what about Chechnya? It's all well and good to say that the US are the protectors of the world, but the reality is they choose to intervene when it suits their interests, not for any overarching values.
> 
> In ancient Greece there was a big jump between sophistry and philosophy. It's amazing that 2600 years later, people still struggle when dealing with rhetoric.




Zimbabwe is a work in progress. They have had some intervention in Sudan and Chechnya is Russias pet. The UN is a useless good for nothing body that does nothing but play pass the veto and the US cant possibly be everywhere at once, priorities. If the Oil supply stops so does the economy. If places Like Iran devolp Nukes theyll pretty much dictate terms to the world or even worse use them.

Ok with the power of hindsight Iraq looks like a Mistake, would of unfortunatley been better to leave Saddam there Murdering Raping and torturing whomever he pleased (Mostly Shiates and Kurds).


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

They can't go around helping every country like sudan etc. There is an international community which has just as much of an obligation to step in where needed.

Look at the cost of Iraq and Afganistan to America, then think of what would happen if they put forces in Sudan , Dafur, Somalia etc.


----------



## chops_a_must (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



KIWIKARLOS said:


> Look at the cost of Iraq and Afganistan to America, then think of what would happen if they put forces in Sudan , Dafur, Somalia etc.



Well, they had the choice. And they wouldn't have had to doctor evidence to justify it either.



			
				numbercruncher said:
			
		

> If the Oil supply stops so does the economy.



Uh huh. Now we see the real issue at hand...



			
				numbercruncher said:
			
		

> The UN is a useless good for nothing body that does nothing but play pass the veto



You do realise that the US has used the veto in the UN more than anyone else don't you? They refuse to allow any resolutions that would force Israel to do anything, which is one of the reasons WHY nothing can be achieved in the middle east.


			
				numbercruncher said:
			
		

> If places Like Iran devolp Nukes theyll pretty much dictate terms to the world



Oh... like Israel? Gotcha! Lol!


----------



## ironchef (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



numbercruncher said:


> Exactly!!
> 
> 
> And there is literally 10's of Millions of them that chant " Death to America, Death to Britain"
> ...




bel532 and numbercruncher,

Islamist Fundimentalists don't want to change the culture in the west. They want the west OUT of the middle east. This is a repeated statement. 

Nobody wants to revert you _back to their backward, narrow minded 'Middle Ages' concept of the world_. Get your head out of the sand and stop repeating what you hear on CNN.


----------



## numbercruncher (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



ironchef said:


> bel532 and numbercruncher,
> 
> Islamist Fundimentalists don't want to change the culture in the west. They want the west OUT of the middle east. This is a repeated statement.
> 
> Nobody wants to revert you _back to their backward, narrow minded 'Middle Ages' concept of the world_. Get your head out of the sand and stop repeating what you hear on CNN.




I believe the Fundamentalists want the West out as well, to their peril, and that of the Majority, places Like Iran cant even produce enough Petroleum to satisfy their own needs despite the amount of Oil there... Hell they cant even get along within their own Religion, Sunnis and Shiates kill each other all day long, they'll make themselves extinct without any help.

Personally I say leave em be. They made their Bed, let em lay in it. Make oil obsolete, but they HAVE to be kept in check about WMDs.

You say "Nobody" wants us to revert to their Backward concept of the World, thats wrong. I believe that theres literally Millions of them that do, but they have Zero chance so we got nothing to fear there!


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Well the problem with that champ is that this world doesn't work these days with countries trying to close their doors to "outsiders". How the the world as a whole tackle issues which are "global" eg. Global Warming, Over population , environmental distruction etc without having interelating interests. 

You say they want us out, with out our consumers buying their S%it they would have nothing. Whats Irans largest export behind Oil?! Maybe Palm oil or olives.

By closes ones doors an alienating "westerners" saying don't come to our country but hang on accept a few thousand people from ours who don't really like what were doing. They are simply stroking our feeling of mistrust.

PS Is there a west and east anymore anyway, if so where is the boundary now we don't have the berlin wall?


----------



## chops_a_must (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



numbercruncher said:


> You say "Nobody" wants us to revert to their Backward concept of the World, thats wrong. I believe that theres literally Millions of them that do, but they have Zero chance so we got nothing to fear there!



Well yeah, lilterally millions would still be a tiny minority considering the world wide Islamic population is close to 1.5 billion, which was the point. It's not a majority view that wants death to all in the west, but I'd say a majority of people (islamic and western for that matter) want an end to interference in Islamic countries and regions.

Aside from that, it's a little bit early on a Monday to be drunk isn't it?


----------



## bel532 (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



chops_a_must said:


> I give the credit for freedom to the French.
> 
> But what about Zimbabwe, what about Sudan, what about Chechnya? It's all well and good to say that the USA are the protectors of the world, but the reality is they choose to intervene when it suits their interests, not for any overarching values.
> 
> In ancient Greece there was a big jump between sophistry and philosophy. It's amazing that 2600 years later, people still struggle when dealing with rhetoric.




Didn't the USA also try to help in Somalia (who can forget those soldiers being dragged through the dust?)and Serbia (whilst the Euros did nothing about the conflict on their doorstep). And who helped the Euros post WW11 that lead to  Europe's economic revival? It certainly wasn't the Soviet Union which plundered all of Eastern Europe till it became an economic 'basket case'. If you  want to criticise America do it with some degree of impartiality and only where it deserves criticism (no country is immune for some degree of criticism).

Why do people keep castigating the USA for not intervening 'here and there and everywhere' but don't have the same expectations of the Euros? Tell me who is doing the so called 'heavy lifting' in Afghanistan?

You talk about Chechyna. What has that got to do with the USA?


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

That is complete BS

The countries which have the greatest social injustices just happen to include quite a few muslim countries.

You say we should stop interferring with their politics but what about if the political system is screwed. Perhapes we should leave President Mugabi to run his fine political institution and go over there for a cricket match.

Look at Indonesia, Worlds biggest muslim nation and with out a doubt one of the most dodgy political systems in the world. How about all those immigrant workers in Saudi Arabia that get treated like slaves, they have a great government.

If they came to Australia or England etc they would be getting welfare payments before the end of the week.


----------



## bel532 (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



chops_a_must said:


> Well yeah, lilterally millions would still be a tiny minority considering the world wide Islamic population is close to 1.5 billion, which was the point. It's not a majority view that wants death to all in the west, but I'd say a majority of people (islamic and western for that matter) want an end to interference in Islamic countries and regions.
> 
> Aside from that, it's a little bit early on a Monday to be drunk isn't it?





I would say a majority of NON Islamic people want an end to Islamic leaders calling for a Jihad against the West, the reimposition of the Islamic Caliphate and the subjugation of women.


----------



## chops_a_must (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



KIWIKARLOS said:


> Look at Indonesia, Worlds biggest muslim nation and with out a doubt one of the most dodgy political systems in the world.



Lol. The IMF set that up.

Any more ill informed comments anyone?


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

As if its only "Western" Countries influencing Muslim politics. All the worlds big players have their hands in all parts of the pie.

eg. China and Pacific nations / Africa
     Russia in belarus / kosovo etc.


The funny thing is if all the middle east countries stuck together instead of cutting each others throats they would be a force to be reconed with, Personally i would like to see another ottaman empire or such, it might provide more security and peace.


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

The IMF set it up.... HAHAHAHAHA

I didn't relise you were such a scholar from reading biased articals from the information clearing house and other fine internet propaganda machines.

Tell me where exactly did you get this information, or was it an assumption you made...


----------



## chops_a_must (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



KIWIKARLOS said:


> The funny thing is if all the middle east countries stuck together instead of cutting each others throats they would be a force to be reconed with, Personally i would like to see another ottaman empire or such, it might provide more security and peace.



I've posted elsewhere on this site about that being a designated tactic of the US in the middle east. That's why they backed the baathists and SANCTIONED the killing of various islamic groups.

Divide and conquer, they will provide no challenge if they cannot unite.


----------



## numbercruncher (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



chops_a_must said:


> Well yeah, lilterally millions would still be a tiny minority considering the world wide Islamic population is close to 1.5 billion, which was the point. It's not a majority view that wants death to all in the west, but I'd say a majority of people (islamic and western for that matter) want an end to interference in Islamic countries and regions.
> 
> Aside from that, it's a little bit early on a Monday to be drunk isn't it?





Exactly what interferance are you referring to ? Iraq ? sure lets leave, I agree !! Lets go tomorrow!

Do you think that Westerners want out of the Middle East for the Same reasons that you do or the fundamentalists do ?

Those hostage taking nuclear bomb building Iranians? ah ah aint gonna happen anytime soon !

Who else ? Afghanistan, arnt we now there with Afghanistans Governments Belssing ?

Where else are "Westerners" Interferring ?

Oh i get it because i dont succumb to your train of thought of coarse i must be a Decadent (western?) Drunk ?


----------



## chops_a_must (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



KIWIKARLOS said:


> The IMF set it up.... HAHAHAHAHA
> 
> I didn't relise you were such a scholar from reading biased articals from the information clearing house and other fine internet propaganda machines.
> 
> Tell me where exactly did you get this information, or was it an assumption you made...




Dude. It's not up to me to educate you. There have been many authors on the subject. Stiglitz probably the best.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/events/indonesia/latest_news/119700.stm

The IMF tied funding to political reforms.

Next time, research something before you laugh at it. You just might find you are wrong.


----------



## ironchef (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



numbercruncher said:


> I believe the Fundamentalists want the West out as well, to their peril, and that of the Majority, places Like Iran cant even produce enough Petroleum to satisfy their own needs despite the amount of Oil there... Hell they cant even get along within their own Religion, Sunnis and Shiates kill each other all day long, they'll make themselves extinct without any help.




The West has obviously been a *GREAT* help in this department. Thanks. 

numbercruncher, I don't recommend the following link to you. Others with a more open mind look at these in order: 
1. Petroeuro
2. Recent news article
3. The Euro threat



numbercruncher said:


> Personally I say leave em be. They made their Bed, let em lay in it. Make oil obsolete, but they HAVE to be kept in check about WMDs.




Make oil obsolete? Have you drawn up the blue prints on how to achieve this yet or are you just rambling on like a mad man?



numbercruncher said:


> You say "Nobody" wants us to revert to their Backward concept of the World, thats wrong. I believe that theres literally Millions of them that do, but they have Zero chance so we got nothing to fear there!




You need to get out more.


----------



## chops_a_must (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



numbercruncher said:


> Oh i get it because i dont succumb to your train of thought of coarse i must be a Decadent (western?) Drunk ?



Nah. It was more the spelling and grammar.


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

WHERE ARE YOU GETTING THIS INFORMATION!!!!

How do you personally know they sanctioned killings? Again provide some sources champ.

In court they call it hearsay.

Of course America is sanctioning stuff like this, but who knows what exactly.
Do you think the Irainian's haven't sanctioned killings? 

Maybe if Irainians ruled the world we could all hold hands, dance around glowing fires singing cumbyare all day. If you think the west is so dodgy why don't you move to Iran, where websites like this and the things I say would probably have me shot.


----------



## numbercruncher (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



chops_a_must said:


> Nah. It was more the spelling and grammar.




lol of course it was.

may peace be with you.


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

I wasn't laughing because i didn't think that it was true.

Are you implying the IMF should hand out money without conditions for political reform be it openly or subversly. You think Chinas not handing out its big aid packets and deals without some strings attached in the back ground.

Nobodys denying behind the scenes influence, I just don't see why your upset with it. It's been happening for thousands of years and will continue to happen. 

It's called Influence be it political , economic or cultural. Silent wars are been fought accross the globe right now. When it comes down to it choose your view and fight for it.

Would you like to see Irainian cultural, political influence spread. I mean do you honestly think its a good system they have going?


----------



## numbercruncher (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



ironchef said:


> The West has obviously been a *GREAT* help in this department. Thanks.
> 
> 
> Make oil obsolete? Have you drawn up the blue prints on how to achieve this yet or are you just rambling on like a mad man?
> ...




Negative on the blue prints, but cutting the supply would force us to come up with one! We need a recession or worse, so we can grow again  This electric car with 1 cent per mile running costs sounds a good start http://www.teslamotors.com/index.php?js_enabled=1

So i need to get out more because there isnt Millions out of 1.5b whom want us to accept there backwards vision of the world or because you think they have more than the Zero chance of achieving this ?


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Iron Chef

You've pointed out the subject of Petrodollars and the Euro Boarse etc.

The Euro Bourse would make the American dollar weaker both economically and politically but it would also strengthen the European Union who are strong allies with America.

You think europe isn't rubbing its hands together thinking that the Euro bourse is going to make them more of a global player. Nato is basically an American army.


----------



## Bobby (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

What a wonderful world.

thankya God thankya...


----------



## chops_a_must (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



KIWIKARLOS said:


> WHERE ARE YOU GETTING THIS INFORMATION!!!!
> 
> How do you personally know they sanctioned killings?
> ...
> ...



Christ, I've lost a chromosome just reading this junk.

The US (amongst others) were providing Saddam with the technology and equipment needed to produce poison gas. They knew he was using it, what's worse is they knew he was using it on his own people, the kurds. Straight away after the gas attack in Halabja, the CIA were on the spot trying to pin it on Iran.

Support continued for Saddam for many years after this. Nothing was said, technology, equipment and chemicals continued to be provided.


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

No need to have a cry....

I'm not saying Americans are saints and i agree with everything you've said about their influence and activities.

You have said we should stop interfering in middle east politics and i would like to know why you think we should back off.

Why should we stop aiding criminals and dodgy governments to help achieve our goals?

Instead of telling us what America has done why don't you give some suggestions as to what they should do. Perhaps instead of cruise missiles we show rain flowers on Iran?


----------



## ironchef (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

I'm sure the Iranians view the Europeans as more favourable.

And to my dear numbercruncher: http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/ArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=19288&vf=12

http://www.gaiaguys.net/electriccar07.htm

lol


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

more favourable....

I do believe they have sanctions on Iran and they sound like they are the ones pushing the escalation over the british marines.

But then again Europe would love to diversify its energy needs from Russia into Iran, Maybe NAto will liberate Iran ;o)


----------



## numbercruncher (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



KIWIKARLOS said:


> No need to have a cry....
> 
> Instead of telling us what America has done why don't you give some suggestions as to what they should do. Perhaps instead of cruise missiles we show rain flowers on Iran?




LOL I reckon half the Problem of the Middle East is sexual Frustration, Punishment for adultry is severe as murder in some of these places, reward for being a Martyr is a one way ticket to heaven with 20 virgins, no wonder Suicide bombing is such a hit  

I say we conduct bombing raids that drop million of copies of Private or Evil angels lastest DvDs and various stick mags, might cool em down a bit.


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

hahahaha

provocative but funny, sounds like something you'ld see on ronnie jones


----------



## chops_a_must (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



KIWIKARLOS said:


> why should we stop aiding criminals and dodgy governments to help achieve our goals.



Because that's how we get people like Mugabe, Suharto or Saddam. (If I am reading that sentence correctly.)

In short, we shouldn't fund any criminals.


KIWIKARLOS said:


> instead of telling us what America has done why don;t you give some suggestions as to what they should do. Perhapes instead of cruise missiles we show rain flowers on Iran?



We need to stop dressing Israel up in cotton wool, and treat them as if they were an ordinary country. Not as if they were an emo kid or a pariah state like they are. That's a start. Longer term we really need to get western corporations out of the region and let each country organise the economy themself.


----------



## numbercruncher (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



ironchef said:


> I'm sure the Iranians view the Europeans as more favourable.
> 
> And to my dear numbercruncher: http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/ArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=19288&vf=12
> 
> ...




Thanks my dear Ironchef, awesome !! And Ironically the inventor is Iranian born !! What sweet justice, he decided to leave his opressive war mongering nuke building mother country and might be the inventor of the very thing that makes them less dangerous!! What a true blue Legend !!

The article says no one is interested in it ? hmm find that hard to beleive id buy one if he made them here at a competitive price !


----------



## ironchef (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

_war mongering nuke building mother country_? Are we talking about the US or Iran??

I can't remember the last war that the Iranians started or the last nuke they built. 

The freedom loving US of A on the other hand: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_history_of_the_United_States

and
http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Weapons/Wpngall.html

I'm tired of educating you. Quit being a one-dimensional CNN drone and open your eyes and ears.

Peace


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Good call on Israel but economically I don't see how your proposal would work.
To fund multi- billion dollar projects and develop the world globally toward future goals, small localised economies would not work.

In addition to that it would be a highly inefficient system, unlike free trade agreements now which in theory should see the best efficiency of resources worldwide particularily with an ever increasing population.

Global economies are here to stay, grow and develop.

If foreign investment from first world contries did not happen then 3rd world countries would never get off their feet.

Alot of 3rd world countries have money and income but it is squandered and not necessarily only by Americans.


----------



## numbercruncher (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



ironchef said:


> _war mongering nuke building mother country_? Are we talking about the US or Iran??
> 
> I can't remember the last war that the Iranians started or the last nuke they built.





Theyve been war mongers since before the US was even discovered http://www.zum.de/whkmla/military/centrasia/milxiran.html

And we all know they are Building nukes in preperation for the End times and to wipe the oppressed Israelis off the map. After all the Holocaust according to Iran never happened .....

And if the Sailors they kidnapped the other week where Americans theyd be at war again right now! Or atleast every one of those Revolutionary Guard gunboats would be rusting at the bottom of the gulf.

Im not picking on Iranian people they are nice folks im sure its there Government and institutions that make them mostly live poverty ridden lives and brain wash them into hating!

You think its bad in the West having the "choice" or not to watch cnn, try Iran where you got no choice but to suck up brainwashing state television and blocked IP addresses of anything they dont want tehre citizens to see!
Now that really makes one dimensional drones.

Peace.


Iran makes £55 million from hostage crisis as oil prices soar http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=506142007


----------



## ironchef (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Oppressed Israelis? LOL. No comment.

Even though the site lists no more information per event other than a few words and a year along side it, the last item on the list definately proves your point:

1988 - Iranian passenger plane shot down over Persian Gulf by U.S. warship 


Is that a listing of a war that Iran started? You really _should read_ websites before you paste their links my freind.


----------



## numbercruncher (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Maybe thats why Iran wants to build nukes and destroy America etc a grudge over that terrible accident?

hmmm, well the Iranians already Killed more people than died in that terrible accident by supplying weapons to terrorists in Iraq.


----------



## Bobby (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



numbercruncher said:


> LOL I reckon half the Problem of the Middle East is sexual Frustration, Punishment for adultry is severe as murder in some of these places, reward for being a Martyr is a one way ticket to heaven with 20 virgins, no wonder Suicide bombing is such a hit
> 
> I say we conduct bombing raids that drop million of copies of Private or Evil angels lastest DvDs and various stick mags, might cool em down a bit.




Yes what a great idea!  ~ Free holidays for potential bombers to the Philippines.
I used to deal with reproduction antiques from there back in the late 80's, remember the sex menu's displayed outside the bars, a sicko heaven __ eg:
headjobs $4AU.
Now if any islamist would prefer this alternative to blowing up others how about I offer my philanthropist help to blowing.     

Bobby.


----------



## bel532 (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



KIWIKARLOS said:


> There was a really interesting show on SBS the other night showing the lives of 3 people in Iran. A painter, a musician and a female athlete. Really gave a good perspective on how autocratic things are over there, the painter was arrested and jailed for over 6 months for painting female impressions and told next time he would be killed.
> 
> I say any American pretext for war in Iran over atomic weapons is bullcrap, the majority of Irainian people just like most other Muslims and Arabs are tolerant "good" people.
> 
> ...





Do countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan etc embrace Multiculturism like the West? Do they allow non-believers to dress in the "manner to which they are accustomed"?

I'd like to see that!


----------



## Wysiwyg (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



KIWIKARLOS said:


> I personally believe there should be caps on the amount  migration to Australia simply for the fact of preserving culture and limiting segregation amoungst communities. Also by slowly letting people migrate to Australia rather than allowing large numbers we allow time for people to adjust to our culture rather than form satilite communites based on their origins.
> 
> The most multicultural countries in the world are the Western countries eg. America , Australia, England , Denmark etc. and all have problems with multiculturalism.




Kiwikarlost mate....please forgive me for dissecting your post but I think those words are wise.It is also a modern phenomena that cultural antics are transfered via media , they being good or bad.  
Well done to the media (and communities) in Australia who expose the unsavoury characters before they develop critical mass , for it is followers that they need.


----------



## Bobby (2 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Whats needed is a plebiscite on - the question of islam immigrants.

I think any new citizen that places religion before loyalty to Australia, is a security risk, an example is the home grown Murders in the UK!

Bobby.


----------



## bel532 (3 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



Bobby said:


> Whats needed is a plebiscite on - the question of islam immigrants.
> 
> I think any new citizen that places religion before loyalty to Australia, is a security risk, an example is the home grown Murders in the UK!
> 
> Bobby.




We should remove Dual Citizenship. How can you be loyal to two countries? Look at all those Lebanese who were spending most of their time in Lebanon and then, when things got tough in that country, pleaded (and some complained) for help from the Australian Government to help them to leave the country. Where do their loyalties lie, to Australia or Lebanon, or do they just 'cherry pick' when it suits them??

It has become sillier now that Aussie Italians can vote at Italian elections. Where would their loyalty lie in the (unlikely) event of a war bewteen Italy and Australia?


----------



## bel532 (3 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



ironchef said:


> Oppressed Israelis? LOL. No comment.
> 
> Even though the site lists no more information per event other than a few words and a year along side it, the last item on the list definately proves your point:
> 
> ...




I certainly don't wish to justify this terrible mishap, but it pales into insignificance compared to the thousands of Iranians that have been murdered and tortured by the Mullahs in the name of religion. Why do people need religion? It's really only for those who can't think for thmeselves and those who have been brainwashed into believing in an 'after life' (and I won't even mention those virgins). 

Contemporary Islam reminds of the narrow mindset of the Ronman Catholic Church during the time of the Inquisition. But we have moved on since then, haven't we?


----------



## 2020hindsight (3 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



bel532 said:


> IContemporary Islam reminds of the narrow mindset of the Ronman Catholic Church during the time of the Inquisition. But we have moved on since then, haven't we?



yep - only recently though - IRA and Paisley are talking at last.  (was it this week?   )
I guess since the USA Irish stopped funding IRA terrorism - i.e. since terrorism became unfashionable. (but at least there's now a ray of hope there).
I was amused to hear that the bloke who invented Billings (?) method of contraception died.  - i.e. Vatican Roulette - 3 in 100 chance of getting pregnant etc.  "He is survived by wife and 8 of his 9 children" lol 
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200704/s1888225.htm

PS In the 80's it was possible for Britsh army to qualify for "overseas service" and "war service homes" etc - just by serving on home soil,  eg Northern Ireland  - not that I would have swapped em for quids.


----------



## 2020hindsight (3 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Troubles
In all 3000 killed in Nth Ireland - of them 500+300 = 800 army and police 

and including Lord Mountbatten - (British Royal - every chance he was blown up with american explosive )
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Mountbatten,_1st_Earl_Mountbatten_of_Burma
(big percentage of IRA funds from USA) 

PS Also known as Earl Mountbatten etc - good man, survived WWII - shame he didnt appreciate the threat from the terrorists who didn't like him. 


> acquired the courtesy style Lord Louis Mountbatten and was known as Lord Louis informally until his death notwithstanding his being granted a viscountcy in recognition of his wartime service in the Far East and an earldom for his role in the transition of India from British dependency to sovereign state




PS I posted elsewhere (Hicks thread) that article by Uni of NSW Prof on anti-terrorism laws - he points out how crucial it is that we cooperate with moderate muslims - otherwise the terrorists will have safe refuge in our society.


----------



## 2020hindsight (3 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



bel532 said:


> It has become sillier now that Aussie Italians can vote at Italian elections. Were would their loyalty lie in the (unlikely) event of  a war bewteen Italy and Australia?



you mean the ones where the tanks have 4 reverse gears and one forward ?
"and why the forward gear ?"
"in case they attack  from the rear"


----------



## chops_a_must (3 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



2020hindsight said:


> you mean the ones where the tanks have 4 reverse gears and one forward ?
> "and why the forward gear ?"
> "in case they attack  from the rear"




Hahaha! I was going to make a similar joke. I don't think you would have to worry about Italian-Australians fighting in a war. They would more than likely try to surrender to both sides. Lol!


----------



## bel532 (3 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



2020hindsight said:


> you mean the ones where the tanks have 4 reverse gears and one forward ?
> "and why the forward gear ?"
> "in case they attack  from the rear"




I like that, it has a certain appeal!


----------



## vishalt (3 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Italians are a great foe, you think you've killed them when they've actually dived!


----------



## 2020hindsight (3 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



vishalt said:


> Italians are a great foe, you think you've killed them when they've actually dived!



world cup soccer?   (sheesh are we gettin off the subject lol)

was that after we played that friendly against Kuwait - 

 ahh yes , the middle east !!


----------



## bel532 (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



2020hindsight said:


> yep - only recently though - IRA and Paisley are talking at last.  (was it this week?   )
> I guess since the USA Irish stopped funding IRA terrorism - i.e. since terrorism became unfashionable. (but at least there's now a ray of hope there).
> I was amused to hear that the bloke who invented Billings (?) method of contraception died.  - i.e. Vatican Roulette - 3 in 100 chance of getting pregnant etc.  "He is survived by wife and 8 of his 9 children" lol
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200704/s1888225.htm
> ...




It's not correct to state that 'the USA funded terrorists in Northern Ireland'. But it is probably true that certain elements in the USA, mainly Irish expatriats, funded these terrorists.


----------



## chops_a_must (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



bel532 said:


> It's not correct to state that 'the USA funded terrorists in Northern Ireland'. But it is probably true that certain elements in the USA, mainly Irish expatriats, funded these terrorists.






			
				2020hindsight said:
			
		

> I guess since the *USA Irish* stopped funding IRA terrorism



Ta.


----------



## 2020hindsight (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



bel532 said:


> It's not correct to state that 'the USA funded terrorists in Northern Ireland. But it is probably true that certain elements in the USA, mainly Irish expatriats, finded these terrorists.



don't recall saying it was from the USA govt -  - you're right,  not from them, 
but from the USA nonetheless.
either way, it went on under the administration's noses.

I am aware that the world is a different place since 9/11. Everyone is. 
But the risk of terrorism appears to be a new awareness for USA, whereas UK has known about it first-hand since the 60's. 

and a lot of English blood spilt using (probably) american sourced explosives. - many more victime than the recent London bombings for instance


----------



## bel532 (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



2020hindsight said:


> don't recall saying it was from the USA govt -  - you're right,  not from them,
> but from the USA nonetheless.
> either way, it went on under the administration's noses.
> 
> ...




It's probably true (I have no evidence) that the authorities in the USA turned a blind eye to the support for the IRA amongst some elements residing in the USA. Although the USA was subject to terrorists attacks before 9/11, this event certainly changed its mindset. However,we need to recognise that the only distinction drawn by the Islamic terrorists is between Believers and NON Believers.


----------



## 2020hindsight (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



bel532 said:


> However,we need to recognise that the only distinction drawn by the Islamic terrorists is between Believers and NON Believers.



 Not sure where this one is going, but surely, at least in Iraq, the sunnis are mainly blowing up shiites?


----------



## ironchef (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



bel532 said:


> However,we need to recognise that the only distinction drawn by the Islamic terrorists is between Believers and NON Believers.




_Believers and NON Believers_? Are the Swedish _believers_? What about the Canadians? The Scotish, Italians, Fijians, New Zealanders, Brazilians, Ukranians are all _believers_ too? No? Then, why aren't they having kittens over _Islamic terrorists_?? Why are the _Islamic terrorists_ not targetting them?? 

If the _Islamic terrorists_ hate freedom and justice why is it only a few countries that are being targetted? Are USA, Britain and Israel the ONLY countries that employ freedom and justice in thier societies? 

People like you are the root cause of this problem. Your whole agenda is to promote fear and separation. Shame.


----------



## billhill (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				ironchef said:
			
		

> If the Islamic terrorists hate freedom and justice why is it only a few countries that are being targetted?




My understanding is that "the terrorist" have a problem with western culture as it is inconpatible with their islamic values. They see the US, brittan, etc and being the sources of this and hence is why they have become targetted. Now however i think that the issues have become polarised within both western society and islamic society leading to a generalise hatred of each other. Unfortunately i can only see this polarisation strengthening further when the media's only goal is to sensationalise issues to make money.


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Ironchef your remarks are without basis Terrorism is effecting most of the countries you just listed. EG

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=ccb6233a-0467-4318-b3c0-70a31aba7662&k=20237

Another suspect arrested in Toronto terror investigation
Katie Rook , with files from Chris Wattie, CanWest News Service; National Post
Published: Friday, August 04, 2006
TORONTO - The number of suspects charged in connection with Canada's largest terror investigation grew to 18 Thursday with the arrest of a Mississauga, Ont., man.

How about Spain and the Madrid bombings.

How about Pakistan and the bombings there, the list goes on India, Japan and Bali (where New Zealanders were killed too)

Sure they might not all be linked directly to Osama Bin laden but they are still terrorist activities, and related or not they all encourage others to do similar things. On top of that most the the countries I just listed do not have troops in the middle east.

How about France where riots amoungst youth, particularily muslim youth has exploded. They were against the Iraq invasion.


----------



## chops_a_must (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



KIWIKARLOS said:


> How about France where riots amoungst youth, particularily muslim youth has exploded. They were against the Iraq invasion.



Nah, those were about crippling unemployment in disadvantaged areas.

And then there were riots in protest of the riots. As proposed reforms disadvantaged youth from wealthy areas..

Youth and student riots in France are a dime a dozen so you can't read much into that. It's almost like a right of passage for them over there...


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

There have also been attacks in Egypt, Iran, Turkey, Qatar, Somali etc.

How about Thailand? There have been countless bombings and they have nothing to do with the war on terror.

It seems as if these people are using violence as a means to get there political views and values incorporated into countries political systems. What ever happened to peacefull protests...

and in most cases these are minority communities who want a whole country to change for a small prportion of the population or to establish a seperate country for themselves.


----------



## chops_a_must (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



KIWIKARLOS said:


> What ever happened to peacefull protests...



You aren't allowed to have them.


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Youth riots? the facts were the majority of people rioting were muslim youth.
I agree they are disadvantaged and lets face it if your not of French background and living in france your a second class citizen. But that would be the case also for alot of minority groups in muslim countries.


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Well fortunately you are allowed to protest against the government in America, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, England etc.

The only places you can't would be ummm China, Iran, Zimbarbwi, Saudi Arabia, etc.

It just proves the fact that in these types of places peoples rights are nothing.

At least I can call George Bush a tosser, try goin to Iran and saying that about their president and see how long you last. How about holding a conference/internation discussion in Tehran about Mohammed being a fabrication, or does only work for topics such as the "fake" genocide in WW2?


----------



## billhill (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				chops_a_must said:
			
		

> You aren't allowed to have them.




Sad but true unfortunately


----------



## 2020hindsight (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



chops_a_must said:


> You aren't allowed to have them.



I would love to know the latest on the actual application of the new sedition laws.   Perhaps I could add, I'm not even sure we are allowed to talk about them lol.    I seem to recall that if you're imprisoned under them, you have damn-all rights, but I forget the details. 

I've already posted this on David Hicks thread.


> "Other (recent) changes cannot be justified because they disproportionately undermine democratic principles.  The new sedition laws are an example.  They imprison people for what they say rather than for what they do, arguably for little gain in preventing a terriorist attack......
> The laws we have today were unthinkable prior to Sept 11.  It is equally hard to imagine the laws that we will end up with in the event of future attacks"



Also 


> "By our own actions we may isolate and ostracise members of our community , who instead of assisting with intelligence gathering may be susceptible targets for terrorist recruitment. etc etc


----------



## bel532 (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



ironchef said:


> _Believers and NON Believers_? Are the Swedish _believers_? What about the Canadians? The Scotish, Italians, Fijians, New Zealanders, Brazilians, Ukranians are all _believers_ too? No? Then, why aren't they having kittens over _Islamic terrorists_?? Why are the _Islamic terrorists_ not targetting them??
> 
> If the _Islamic terrorists_ hate freedom and justice why is it only a few countries that are being targetted? Are USA, Britain and Israel the ONLY countries that employ freedom and justice in thier societies?
> 
> People like you are the root cause of this problem. Your whole agenda is to promote fear and separation. Shame.





Oh and don't forget:

The Spanish train massacre.

Bali where, in addition to the Aussies, quite a number of Nordic and Balinese (Hindu) people were killed and seriously injured.

Russia on many,many occassions.

India on many, many occassions.

Mogadishu in Somalia, which is being repeated right now.
Need I say more!


----------



## mmmmining (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



KIWIKARLOS said:


> The only places you can't would be ummm China, Iran, Zimbarbwi, Saudi Arabia, etc.




It is a false statement. Remember Tiananmen events. Students are allowed to protest at first, then it went too big, and out of control, widespread. The farmers are pretesting from time to time, it is allowed.

You can protest in Iran. Iran has the election, opposition party, etc. American movies and music are well enjoyed by the people. 

Saudi Arabia, I don't know much. But it is American's friend, at least President Bush's friend, should allow protest. I don't think American people like it if otherwise.

Zimbarbwi, Where is that country?


----------



## 2020hindsight (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

On the subject of terrorist threat to this (local) region (and possibly Aus or Aus tourists) , Let's not forget that Indonesia continues to arrest suspects. - which is the good news.   I think I heard that these blokes had 4 times the explosive used at Bali.  
oops - found full article ..
NB the bit about them acting on tip-offs .  That is what we MUST have in Aus as well !!!!  We must not isolate the moderate moslems. 
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200704/s1889147.htm


> Seized explosives 'four times bigger' than Bali bombs
> By Geoff Thompson
> 
> Indonesia's National Police Chief says explosives recovered during anti-terrorism raids last month were powerful enough to cause a blast four to five times bigger than the 2002 Bali bombings.
> ...


----------



## wayneL (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



bel532 said:


> Oh and don't forget:
> 
> The Spanish train massacre.
> 
> ...



Bel

What in your opinion should the west do about all this then?


----------



## 2020hindsight (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



mmmmining said:


> Remember Tiananmen events. Students are allowed to protest at first, then it went too big, and out of control, widespread.



mining, you recall Bob Hawke crying as he discussed what happened? - now,  I have always suspected that he (as PM with full access to intelligence briefings) saw footage that the rest of us (luckily) didn't see 
Either way, it was obviously super ugly.   These days China is slowly coming round to capitalism - probably we'll live to regret it lol (when they take our jobs) - but at least there is no more blood flowing in Tiananmen Sq.

PS I know we are getting off the subject - but the right to have a peaceful demonstration is pretty important yes?

lol I know PP&M are "old hat" - but this was the attitude in the 60's 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jgf2FeEe0sI


----------



## wayneL (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



2020hindsight said:


> lol I know PP&M are "old hat" - but this was the attitude in the 60's
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jgf2FeEe0sI



Yeah.... what happened to us?


----------



## 2020hindsight (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



wayneL said:


> Yeah.... what happened to us?



lol - personally m8 I find Easter the highlight of my year!!!  Can hide my own easter eggs lol. 
	

		
			
		

		
	







PS The missus loves Easter - goes to the Royal Easter show - just spends all day with the Clydesdales lol - she loves em 

You know how people are supposed to resemble their pets ?  ladies with flat noses like pugs, finicky people like poodles etc  
(I am I because you are you lol)  ....

Well I know this welder bloke does some steelwork for us at work  - 3 pickhandles across the shoulders  - his pets...
a team of Clydesdales lol.

which reminds me -----   the middle east at least has nice Arabian  horses yes ? lol  (notice how I stay on topic )

PS don't you love that line "a wrotten law stays on the books till folks with guts defy it !! -"
 these days they through away the key m8 


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabian_horse The Arabian horse is a breed of horse with a reputation for intelligence, high spirit, and outstanding stamina. With a distinctively chiseled head and high tail carriage, the Arabian is one of the most easily recognizable horse breeds in the world.
> 
> Arabians are one of the oldest horse breeds. There is archaeological evidence of horses that resemble modern Arabians dating back 4,500 years. Throughout history, Arabian horses from the Middle East spread around the world by both war and trade, used to improve other breeds by adding speed, refinement, endurance, and good bone. Today, Arabian bloodlines are found in almost every modern breed of riding horse.[1]
> 
> The Arabian developed in a desert climate and was prized by the nomadic Bedouin people, often being brought inside the family tent for shelter and protection.[2] This close relationship with humans created a horse breed with a good disposition, quick to learn, and willing to please. But the Arabian also developed the high spirit and alertness needed in a horse used for raiding and war. This combination of willingness and sensitivity requires modern Arabian horse owners to handle their horses with competence and respect.




PS you know why they call a camel the ship of the desert - becos its full of arab seamen . - ?? never could understand that one


----------



## 2020hindsight (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

hey Wayne !!!
how's this for a theory / proposition ....
 let's sit down with the Arab nations
and we'll have a beer and they can drink goats milk 
and we just talk horses all day 
" nobody mention the war" as they say !!  

Hell if the Aussies and the (moslem) Turks could break from warfare to play footy in no-man's land - there's hope for us all !!
(my daughter just corrected me - that should read "went to each others trenches and played cards "  - no difference to the bottom line or the conclusion as they say )

PS I notice that there's no booze or loud music at Gallipoli this year .  Anzac Day presents as a GREAT opportunity to try to understand each other yes ? - with all the benefit of the ghosts of our respective fathers on each of our shoulders.  Hell, it's almost as if we were allies, lol.  MAGIC. love it. mutual respect forever - built on the lives of the fallen from 90 years ago 

"In an old Australian homestead,  with its roses round the door
a girl receives a letter, tis a message from the law
with her mother's arms around her, she gives way to grief and sighs
and as she reads this letter, the tears roll from her eyes...

"Why do I weep , why do i pray
My love's asleep  so far away
he played his part that fateful day 
and now he lies on Suvla Bay. "


----------



## bel532 (4 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



wayneL said:


> Bel
> 
> What in your opinion should the west do about all this then?





I don't pretend to have an immediate answer to Islamic terorism, as it will take a very long time to combat and win against a foe that does NOT value life itself, but considers this life as simply a step towards the next, hence the 72 virgins myth. It is evident in some countries, even those in the West with a sizeable Muslim population, that there is a reversion to Fundamentalist Islam. I read recently that a significant propoprtion of Muslim youth living in the UK believe it should enshrine Sharia Law.

It will take as long to counter Fundamentalist Islam, if not longer, then it took to beat Communism, especially when you have a segment in the West (very prevalent amongst the so called 'intellectuals') who hate the West itself. There seems to be an autocratic trait amongst intellectuals against those who oppose their point of view. This was evident prior to WW11 when a number of intellectuals, especially in the UK, supported Facism


----------



## chops_a_must (5 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



bel532 said:


> There seems to be an autocratic trait amongst intellectuals against those who oppose their point of view. This was evident prior to WW11 when a number of intellectuals, especially in the UK, supported Facism



Oh... like... Bohr, Sartre, Einstein, Camus, Orwell, Husserl, Arendt, Moore, Wittgenstein, Hemingway and Bertrand Russell?


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200704/s1890186.htm


> Britain hails word of sailors' release in Iran
> Britain has hailed the unexpected announcement from Iran that its 15 sailors held in the country are to be released, while relieved relatives erupted in joy.
> 
> But Britain also says it is trying to find out exactly when and how they will be freed, amid anticipation it could be as soon as later in the day (local time).
> ...



Ripley's believe it or not


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

That's how my granpa sorted out problems with his neighbours too - just sat around with em and talked horses ..  they forgot what they were fighting over 
(maybe tat should be ...with his neeeigh- bours )


----------



## wayneL (5 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



2020hindsight said:


> That's how my granpa sorted out problems with his neighbours too - just sat around with em and talked horses ..  they forgot what they were fighting over
> (maybe tat should be ...with his neeeigh- bours )



Just don't let the ladies get involved... certain disaster.

I've never known such a diabolical and vicious sub-set of humanity as horsewomen. :run:

(with the exception of despots, mass murderers, politicians etc)


----------



## Sean K (5 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



wayneL said:


> Just don't let the ladies get involved... certain disaster.



 Some American Indian tribes had an interesting culture/policy about war. It was that only the men fought them, but it was only the women who could decide whether to go to war or not. No wonder they were always fighting each other! (I'm not sure if I'm meaning that as a joke, or not  )


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Kennas - fascinating lol 
 like the bloke who says I make the big decisions, the missus makes the small decisions - 
Like,  she decides when we'll get a new car, where we'll live,  little stuff like that ..
I decide the big decisions like, whether Hicks was really guilty, why the libs lost the state election etc  

Wayne- not really relevant, but the Chinese have a saying "sarm gaw nooyun, yut gaw hoi" ,  means "three women = one marketplace".


----------



## 2020hindsight (6 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



2020hindsight said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Troubles In all 3000 killed in Nth Ireland - of them 500+300 = 800 army and police   and including Lord Mountbatten - (British Royal - every chance he was blown up with american explosive )



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWER113g_2A  lest we forget (this one for British and Nth Ireland servicemen etc who died in Nth Ireland).

Of course the Irish had legitimate complaints.   But resorting to terrorism was an ugly period in their history, and (touch wood) hopefully in the past.  

As I mentioned before, active duty on home soil .   Must be difficult diplomatic matter to handle on Remembrance day, you'd think. 

We may have our disagreements in Aus, but at least we haven't reached that stage yet


----------



## 2020hindsight (9 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Tit for tat. ? 
Personally I'd believe both stories - the Iranians probably threatened the UK servicemen with jail if they didnt say nice things on TV, (2 weeks)

and the USA / CIA probably kidnapped that Iranian diplomat and did (at least) the same to him ( 2 months)


http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200704/s1892391.htm


> Families meet ICRC over Iranian detainees in Iraq
> The families of five Iranians held for three months in United States detention in Iraq have met an International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) representative to ask for news about them.
> The meeting comes after an Iranian diplomat kidnapped in Baghdad in February said after his release last week that he had been tortured "day and night" and interrogated by CIA officials.
> Washington denies the claims.
> ...




http://abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200704/s1892093.htm


> Newspaper coverage
> The sailors' accounts of psychological and emotional torture dominated Saturday's press and media in the UK.
> The coverage was mixed with that of four British troops, two of them women, killed in southern Iraq on Thursday, which tempered homecoming celebrations.
> Newspapers praised the sailors for the way they handled the situation, including not fighting back against the Iranians' superior firepower.


----------



## bel532 (9 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



2020hindsight said:


> Tit for tat. ?
> Personally I'd believe both stories - the Iranians probably threatened the UK servicemen with jail if they didnt say nice things on TV, (2 weeks)
> 
> and the USA / CIA probably kidnapped that Iranian diplomat and did (at least) the same to him ( 2 months)
> ...





Whatever happened to the instructions given to prisoners of war in times goneby, when, if captured, you only gave your"

Name,
Rank, and 
Number.

Where they really ourgunned and where was the Brits' marine escort? I hope the Aussies have got more guts if they get caught in a similar situation.

Footnote. And now these so called 'UK servicemen/woman' are going to make money out of their cowardice!


----------



## 2020hindsight (9 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



bel532 said:


> Whatever happened to the instructions given to prisoners of war in times goneby, when, if captured, you only gave your"
> 
> Name,
> Rank, and
> ...




?? bel you never cease to amaze me lol.
the brits are being championed by their superiors for this alleged cowardice (in the face of vastly superior force)  they avoided a major incident - no point in being blown up is there? 

and as for the name rank and serial number bit , lol.  Try that with a pack of dogs taking bits out of your naked legs, with sadists around itching to stitch you up again, or grin over your dead body. 

what do you think we've been on about on the hick's thread for the last 200 posts - sheesh.

Next war, you can be in the front line m8 - and btw , if you're captured, don't do what hundreds of US airforcemen did in Korea and change allegiances / sympathies.  Some even stayed in Korea after the war.   -  Amid screams of "Geneva Convention ignored" from USA. 

According to modern enlightened USA, the Geneva Convention is "old hat" and only applies to "others".


----------



## bel532 (9 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



2020hindsight said:


> ?? bel you never cease to amaze me lol.
> the brits are being championed by their superiors for this alleged cowardice (in the face of vastly superior force)  they avoided a major incident - no point in being blown up is there?
> 
> and as for the name rank and serial number bit , lol.  Try that with a pack of dogs taking bits out of your naked legs, with sadists around itching to stitch you up again, or grin over your dead body.
> ...





Were they really outgunned, or don't the Brits and their 'intellectual' supporters believe in Democracy anymore. Let the Mullahs have thier way 'at any price' is their motto!

Reminds me of Chamberlains' Peace in our Time' (read 'Peace at Any Price') whe he returned from his meeting with Hitler prior to the outbreak of WW11. Bullies never respect cowards!


----------



## 2020hindsight (9 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



bel532 said:


> Were they really outgunned, or don't the Brits and their 'intellectual' supporters believe in Democracy anymore. Let the Mullahs have thier way 'at any price' is their motto!
> 
> Reminds me of Chamberlains' Peace in our Time' (read 'Peace at Any Price') whe he returned from his meeting with Hitler prior to the outbreak of WW11. Bullies never respect cowards!



yeah, yeah , and "there are none so blind as those who will not see" as you also told us .

and that's why you refuse to watch Kerry Obrien etc .  sheesh


----------



## bel532 (9 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



2020hindsight said:


> yeah, yeah , and "there are none so blind as those who will not see" as you also told us .
> 
> and that's why you refuse to watch Kerry Obrien etc .  sheesh





If you had read my post carefully, instead of using your verbal sneering attitude to criticise it, you would have noticed that I consider Tony Jones to be a far superior interviewer. Why should I listen to an inferior product when a better one is avalaible? Maybe the time slot is too late for you, as it  maybe past your bed time. Well that's your choice!


----------



## 2020hindsight (9 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



bel532 said:


> If you had read my post carefully, instead of using your verbal sneering attitude to criticise it, you would have noticed that I consider Tony Jones to be a far superior interviewer. Why should I listen to an inferior product when a better one is avalaible? Maybe the time slot is too late for you, as it  maybe past your bed time. Well that's your choice!



 bel, I watch both when I can, not always of course.
That's how I can confidentaly say there is no bias with either.
but ABC bias is getting off fthe track - you proposed that the poms were lily livered cowards as I recall.  I suggest they had more intelligence than to aggrevate a delicate international incident 
a)  I notice their superiors agree with me, not you, and
b) shame USA didn't takes some notes 
USA is as much a part of the problem as of the solution - many would say the biggest part of the problem, including the likes of Nelson Mandela and many thinkers out there.
PS My guess is that you will find some reason to find a bias in Mandela as well


----------



## Happy (9 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

If Brits stood their ground, US could have good excuse to address Iran problem, now they have to wait for another opportunity.


----------



## wayneL (9 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

For those who seem to be advocating a war with Iran watch this movie => Threads Pt. 1 (subsequent parts available on the site). Made in the 80's, the theme is eerily familiar and topical today... just so there can be no mistake as to what the stakes are.


----------



## Kimosabi (9 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



wayneL said:


> For those who seem to be advocating a war with Iran watch this movie => Threads Pt. 1 (subsequent parts available on the site). Made in the 80's, the theme is eerily familiar and topical today... just so there can be no mistake as to what the stakes are.






> *Iran crisis still ready to blow … (by Larry Edelson)*
> 4/5/2007 8:00:00 AM
> 
> Yesterday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced he will free the 15 British sailors and marines captured on March 23. That's welcome news.
> ...




http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/press.asp?rls_id=742&cat_id=6&

This is some of the speculation I have read that the US is going to take a swipe at Iran. Some speculation has the US having a swipe at Iran  this month .

I don't know wether he is Scaremongering, trying to Ramp gold or knows something we don't.

Your guess is as good as mine, I don't know until whatever happens, happens...


----------



## billhill (9 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> For those who seem to be advocating a war with Iran watch this movie => Threads Pt. 1 (subsequent parts available on the site). Made in the 80's, the theme is eerily familiar and topical today... just so there can be no mistake as to what the stakes are.




Good find wayne. I guess what it really shows is there is nothing left to conquer after nuclear war. There are no winners. Just out of interest wayne are you implying by your statement that invading iran may provoke russia or alternatively that we should make sure iran cannot obtain nuclear weapons.


----------



## wayneL (9 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



billhill said:


> Good find wayne. I guess what it really shows is there is nothing left to conquer after nuclear war. There are no winners. Just out of interest wayne are you implying by your statement that invading iran may provoke russia or alternatively that we should make sure iran cannot obtain nuclear weapons.



*Well of immediate concern is that messing with Iran could escalate into a confrontation with Russia/China as they both have strategic objectives involved. Particularly as this US administration would probably have no hesitation in using nukes and in fact has threatened their use openly.

*If they did use them in Iran, we have to be cognizant of their effect on the civilian population of Iran (Just ordinary Jokers & Jokesses just like us)... not acceptable. 

*As far as Iran getting the bomb.... no, I don't want to see Iran with a bomb, but I don't see them unilaterally using it... and we don't know if they intend building one anyway. I am more concerned about the USA and/or Israel using them. (only one country HAS used them so far and we all know who that is)

*The scenario in the movie could only be possible if the big 3 get involved ie usa russia china. Those are the real stakes IMO. A course of action with that as even the remotest possibility is shear lunacy IMO.


----------



## Tim (9 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

I haven't been watching this forum much recently, but not much has changed.

Still full of arm-chair theorists who clearly have nothing better to do with their lives than rack up thousands of posts on any subject they _feel_ knowledgeable about.

I'll check back in 6 months or so. But I'd be surprised if the standard of posting improves even slightly.

Life is for living, not posting!

(Yes, and if I've upset you, you can delete this post. I'm won't be here to care.)


----------



## 2020hindsight (9 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



Tim said:


> I haven't been watching this forum much recently, but not much has changed.
> 
> Still full of arm-chair theorists who clearly have nothing better to do with their lives than rack up thousands of posts on any subject they _feel_ knowledgeable about.
> 
> ...



Galoop Galoop  THE KING IS A FINK  Galoop Galoop lol

You havent upset us Tim - but you sure qualify as the best "cyber hermit" around lol
PS do the personality test please - I for one would be fascinated 

PPS maybe the internet is most appreciated by E-sensual people - maybe you don't qualify


----------



## wayneL (9 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



Tim said:


> I haven't been watching this forum much recently, but not much has changed.
> 
> Still full of arm-chair theorists who clearly have nothing better to do with their lives than rack up thousands of posts on any subject they _feel_ knowledgeable about.
> 
> ...



I've decided to leave it as a testament to all condescending hypocrites everywhere... and I know you'll be here to read this  

Other mods may feel different and it may disappear nevertheless.


----------



## 2020hindsight (9 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



wayneL said:


> I've decided to leave it as a testament to all condescending hypocrites everywhere... and I know you'll be here to read this
> 
> Other mods may feel different and it may disappear nevertheless.




Hey Wayne, Lol reminds me of the sign whose sole message reads :-

DO NOT PAINT GRAFFITI ON THIS SIGN !!

o boy, some people are funny aren't they?  - specially when they don't even realise HOW funny


----------



## CanOz (9 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



wayneL said:


> I've decided to leave it as a testament to all condescending hypocrites everywhere... and I know you'll be here to read this
> 
> Other mods may feel different and it may disappear nevertheless.




Funny how his little green light is still on!

Cheers,


----------



## bel532 (9 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



2020hindsight said:


> bel, I watch both when I can, not always of course.
> That's how I can confidentaly say there is no bias with either.
> but ABC bias is getting off fthe track - you proposed that the poms were lily livered cowards as I recall.  I suggest they had more intelligence than to aggrevate a delicate international incident
> a)  I notice their superiors agree with me, not you, and
> ...




Are these the same superiors who allowed these sailors to sell 'their' story to the highest bidder? They have certainly degraded the high moral ground. I wonder who would be interested to see how cowardly and inept the British military has become, the Mullahs and Ben Laden perhaps?


----------



## Sean K (9 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



Tim said:


> I haven't been watching this forum much recently, but not much has changed.
> 
> Still full of arm-chair theorists who clearly have nothing better to do with their lives than rack up thousands of posts on any subject they _feel_ knowledgeable about.
> 
> ...



  This is absolute gold, and should go down in the 'ASF best post ever' hall of fame. Wonderful. Will keep a smile on my face for days. Thanks!


----------



## Bobby (9 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



kennas said:


> This is absolute gold, and should go down in the 'ASF best post ever' hall of fame. Wonderful. Will keep a smile on my face for days. Thanks!




*Thank You* kennas,

Yep it sure was a rip,,er wasn't it:  

Wayne liked your thoughts on the above post also.

Have Fun
Bob.


----------



## Wysiwyg (10 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Da boys in Iraq have found a new game of twister...


----------



## Kimosabi (10 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



Tim said:


> I haven't been watching this forum much recently, but not much has changed.
> 
> Still full of arm-chair theorists who clearly have nothing better to do with their lives than rack up thousands of posts on any subject they _feel_ knowledgeable about.
> 
> ...




Who let you on the Inturdnet???


----------



## Happy (10 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



> From ABC, April 10, 2007
> 
> IRAN'S NUCLEAR PROGRAM NOW 'INDUSTRIAL'
> 
> ...





And US is concerned:




> From ABC, April 10, 2007
> 
> 
> US 'VERY CONCERNED' AS IRAN NUKE PROGRAM 'GOES INDUSTRIAL'
> ...





UN has issued usual blah blah statement with paper weight properties.

I wander if there isn’t some of the Iraq WMD never found 5 years ago, just wander.


----------



## bel532 (10 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



Happy said:


> And US is concerned:
> 
> 
> 
> ...





The UN is a 'paper tiger'. Does anyone really take any notice of it eg Pakistan, The Iranian Mullahs, the Serbs (it had to rely on American air power to enforce its 'verbal' power), Darfur, North Korea etc etc.

The world is certainly a scary place when you have people who believe it is better to die and (hopefully)meet 72 virgins then try and improve life on this earth.


----------



## Sean K (28 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

I suppose having Harry captured might get some support from the rest of the country...and all the colonys perhaps....



			
				news.com said:
			
		

> Prince Harry 'targeted by Iraqi insurgents'
> Saturday Apr 28 10:26 AEST
> 
> Insurgents in Iraq will seek to kidnap Prince Harry when the army sends him there, a commander of Iraq's biggest Shiite Muslim militia, the Mahdi Army, said in remarks published today.
> ...


----------



## purple (28 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



bel532 said:


> The world is certainly a scary place when you have people who believe it is better to die and (hopefully)meet 72 virgins then try and improve life on this earth.




Yeah, until I started working in the Middle East, then I noticed that instead of negotiating around the table, the work flavour here is more of aggression and intimidation.

In the rich Middle East countries fueled by petro-dollars (no pun intended), they use aggression as their language in business; in the poor MidEast countries, they live by aggression.


----------



## wayneL (28 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



purple said:


> Yeah, until I started working in the Middle East, then I noticed that instead of negotiating around the table, the work flavour here is more of aggression and intimidation.
> 
> In the rich Middle East countries fueled by petro-dollars (no pun intended), they use aggression as their language in business; in the poor MidEast countries, they live by aggression.



My old man had some dealings with Arabs during  and after the war and explained this to me years ago.

You are right about this. But he explained it is about earning respect. If you stand up to their nonsense and give as good as you get, you will earn respect and friendship. It's just how their culture is, as opposed to ours where we naturally default to courtesy in most instances.


----------



## astroboydivx (29 April 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

More breaking news in the Middle East:

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/middle_east_conflict_intensifies


----------



## Sean K (22 May 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

It's all happening at the moment. 



			
				The Age said:
			
		

> *79 die as camp battle rages*
> May 22, 2007 - 7:20AM
> 
> Battles engulfed a Palestinian refugee camp in north Lebanon in the second day of fighting between the Lebanese army and al Qaeda-inspired militants that has killed 79 people.






			
				The Age said:
			
		

> *Israel extends Gaza bombardment*
> Gaza
> May 22, 2007
> 
> ISRAEL bombed a Hamas stronghold in the Gaza Strip yesterday in an escalating air campaign and a senior cabinet minister said all the group's leaders should be killed to try to end cross-border rocket fire.






			
				The Age said:
			
		

> *Syria or al-Qaeda at work?*
> Tim Butcher
> May 22, 2007
> 
> ...


----------



## Bobby (22 May 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Hello John Howard,

LIKE TO 
WIN THE NEXT ELECTION ?

How about stopping those  who think us as  infidels from comming here  

Bobby.


----------



## Sean K (23 May 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

I don't think this could really be on the cards but the fact it's been raised is concerning for two reasons. 

One, that some 'analyst' is so paranoid, or misguided, to truly believe that an isolated country such as Iran would even consider a self destroying tactic.

Or two, that Iran could actually really do this.  



			
				The Age said:
			
		

> *Iran planning strike on Europe: analyst*
> May 23, 2007 - 6:34AM
> 
> Iran is attempting to draw up plans to strike targets in Europe and has reconnoitered European nuclear power stations, a security analyst told a meeting at Britain's parliament.


----------



## wayneL (23 May 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



kennas said:


> I don't think this could really be on the cards but the fact it's been raised is concerning for two reasons.
> 
> One, that some 'analyst' is so paranoid, or misguided, to truly believe that an isolated country such as Iran would even consider a self destroying tactic.
> 
> Or two, that Iran could actually really do this.



Concerning indeed.

In view of the fabrications used to justify invading Iraq, excuse me if I lean towards extreme skepticism. 

Iran may have reconnoitered European sites, but does anyone seriously believe it would be for the purposes of a pre-emptive strike? (Which raises a striking hypocrisy as this is what the west IS in fact considering for Iran). 

Though a counterattack would be a natural response, no?


----------



## Sean K (23 May 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Could be more justification for the US to keep the war machine rolling. I doubt they have this 'analyst' on the books, but who knows. Maybe the recon work has been done in preparation for a retaliation once the US launch? Seems inevitable that Iran will get their hands on a nuke one day so they have their own deterrant against Israel. Interesting times. Good old human nature showing it's colours.


----------



## wayneL (23 May 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



kennas said:


> Could be more justification for the US to keep the war machine rolling. I doubt they have this 'analyst' on the books, but who knows. Maybe the recon work has been done in preparation for a retaliation once the US launch? Seems inevitable that Iran will get their hands on a nuke one day so they have their own deterrant against Israel. Interesting times. *Good old human nature showing it's colours.*



Yeah, I find it incredible that as a species with an (allegedly) big brain, we don't seem to have learned a bloody thing.


----------



## Sean K (23 May 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



wayneL said:


> Yeah, I find it incredible that as a species with an (allegedly) big brain, we don't seem to have learned a bloody thing.



Yep, but on the other hand I've considered that the only reason we have managed to survive as a species is because of our desire and ability to protect our space by either defence or pre emptive strike. We only have minor physical attributes that contribute to our survival. Like having a thumb, for example. Our desire to survive, and our cunning, has been the basis of our survival through some pretty tough periods in evolution. I just wonder when we're going to get over it and unite. Perhaps when there's a common enemy much more threatening, like an incredible plague, or aliens maybe.


----------



## Rafa (23 May 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

i think your right about the aliens....

But as for the rest... remember, a comfortable species, in an extinct one.
The Earth ain't no playground... its a battlefield. 


Wow... 
Sorry, I have livepool vs milan in ancient athens on my mind...
C'MON YOU RED MEN!


----------



## Sean K (24 May 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

In the Australian today

(am I being too pessimistic?  )



> *US warns Iran as armada enters Gulf*
> 
> May 24, 2007
> 
> ...


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (24 May 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

just a story for interest sake... 

A good friend of mine was born in iran and her and her family used to make regular visits there.

Two years ago they went back just before xmas, while there it was decided by this girl and some of her friend they would have a small xmas party with some friends.

After about half an hour two white vans turned up at this place and police seperated boys from girls dragged them to the vans and drove them to a police station (which was described as a dungeon)

She spent 3 nights there with the girls with no food or water in the middle of winter, the only contact she had with her folks was for 10mins during the 3rd day.

on the forth day the boys and girls were brought into a common room one boy one girl brought out in front of everyone and whipped !


then only after paying 300 dollars each were they let go.

This girl was 19 at the time she still loves the place but is afraid to go there.

My point is to show that in that situation the only thing that kept her going was knowing she was going back to aus. Imagine if there were no countries like Aus, uk or america to go back to.

That is why support this so called war on terror even though i know there is alot of BS that america spin but i can't imagine living with that ideology.

That same things happened in afganistan and Iraq and still do.

Scary stuff


----------



## drillinto (24 May 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

For your consideration

One opinion, not middle-of-the-road, on the Middle East

http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=9302


----------



## Sean K (24 May 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



drillinto said:


> For your consideration
> 
> One opinion, not middle-of-the-road, on the Middle East
> 
> http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=9302



drill, I read the intro and it lost me:



> Western analysts are forever bleating about the strategic importance of the middle east. But despite its oil, this backward region is less relevant than ever, and it would be better for everyone if the rest of the world learned to ignore it




There are 2 things still very relevant about the Middle East:

1. OIL.
2. Strategic logistic routes.

The rest is desert, and history. 

Even if the oil wasn't essential to the western world, the stategic nature of it as a cross roads between Africa, Asia and Europe will forever make it relevant.


----------



## 2020hindsight (24 May 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



drillinto said:


> For your consideration, One opinion, not middle-of-the-road, on the Middle East




thanks drill, interesting article.
I highlight a couple of sentences, not so much because I agree with them, but certainly a new way to look at things. 
Certainly to call terrorism "an irritant" is novel - maybe even innovative  (??) 
Certainly we would have done better to ignore Iraq (in hindsight) than to reap the harvest we have sown there.  


> It is true enough that if Iran's nuclear installations are bombed in some overnight raid, there is likely to be some retaliation, but we live in fortunate times in which we have *only the irritant of terrorism instead of world wars to worry about*—and Iran's added contribution is not likely to leave much of an impression. There may be good reasons for not attacking Iran's nuclear sites—including the very slow and uncertain progress of its uranium enrichment effort—but its ability to strike back is not one of them. Even the seemingly fragile tanker traffic down the Gulf and through the straits of Hormuz is not as vulnerable as it seems—Iran and Iraq have both tried to attack it many times without much success, and this time the US navy stands ready to destroy any airstrip or jetty from which attacks are launched.....



Possibly more here I could agree with ... (possibly because it is less dogmatic, more open to ongoing discussion ( which is what is needed with the people of the region surely)..



> The third and greatest error repeated by middle east experts of all persuasions, by Arabophiles and Arabophobes alike, by Turcologists and by Iranists, is also the simplest to define. It is the very odd belief that these ancient nations are highly malleable. Hardliners keep suggesting that with a bit of well-aimed violence ("the Arabs only understand force") compliance will be obtained. *But what happens every time is an increase in hostility; defeat is followed not by collaboration, but by sullen non-cooperation and active resistance too. It is not hard to defeat Arab countries, but it is mostly useless.* *Violence can work to destroy dangerous weapons but not to induce desired changes in behaviour*.
> 
> Softliners make exactly the same mistake in reverse. They keep arguing that if only this or that concession were made, if only their policies were followed through to the end and respect shown, or simulated, hostility would cease and a warm Mediterranean amity would emerge. *Yet even the most thinly qualified of middle east experts must know that Islam, as with any other civilisation, comprehends the sum total of human life, and that unlike some others it promises superiority in all things for its believers, so that the scientific and technological and cultural backwardness of the lands of Islam generates a constantly renewed sense of humiliation and of civilisational defeat. That fully explains the ubiquity of Muslim violence, and reveals the futility of the palliatives urged by the softliners*.
> 
> ...


----------



## drillinto (25 May 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



kennas said:


> drill, I read the intro and it lost me:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Yes, the Middle East "strategic logistic routes" are "still very relevant", but that will also change with time. New trans-Arctic shipping routes, to ferry loads between Asia and Europe, should be more than a third quicker for some shipments that now pass through the Suez or Panama canals.


----------



## Sean K (18 June 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

The West Bank is having its turn to put on a fire works display. This is practically a Palastinian civil war which could develop into a much longer drawn out internal conflict, creating even more instability in the region. Meanwhile southern Lebanon is turning once again into a Syrian/Iranian sponsored hang out for Hezbolah. Not long before Israel is fighting on two fronts again. What a mess! 

*New Abbas cabinet outlaws Hamas*
June 18, 2007 - 6:34AM

Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas swore in a new cabinet today and outlawed Islamist Hamas fighters after their violent seizure of Gaza, as Israel came under rocket fire from Lebanon in a new front to the crisis.

Adding to the tensions, Israeli troops moved into the north of the Gaza Strip - now an Islamist enclave on the Jewish state's doorstep.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/new-abbas-cabinet-outlaws-hamas/2007/06/18/1182018967051.html


----------



## stockGURU (26 June 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Kill everybody!

American soldier exposes US policy in Iraq.


----------



## disarray (26 June 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Petrodollar Warfare: Dollars, Euros and the Upcoming Iranian Oil Bourse

Trading oil in euros, does it matter?

the US will fight tooth and nail to keep the $US the currency of oil. 



> A shift by OPEC to the euro would rapidly confront the US with an economic “nightmare scenario.” Major oil importers would need to transfer some of their funds from US dollars reserves””stocks, bonds and other assets””into euro reserves. This would see a sharp fall in the value of the dollar, possibly setting in motion a further withdrawal of funds as investors became nervous over the value of their dollar assets. Suddenly the burgeoning US debt, which at present plays little or no role in day-to-day financial calculations, would become a factor of considerable importance.




that quote was written before the iraqi campaign. with US national debt now running at close to 9 trillion dollars the US system does not look to be on steady ground.


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 July 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=66484
Nelson takes his telescope from his blind eye 
and admits oil a factor 

one day they might admit that it had nothing to do with terrrorism


----------



## disarray (5 July 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

** link contains pictures of dead people **

Al-Quada run around cutting the heads off women and children

oil aside, fundamentalists muslims are out of control and there is no peaceful resolution to this conflict. for want of a better term they are at war with us until we convert or they die. there is no middle ground.

ripped off another board -



> The reason for the beheading as a choice of death is symbolic in Islam. It goes back to the time of Muhammed and I'm sure predates the founding of Islam, but was cemented as one of the methods of death along with stoning, etc.
> 
> It is the correct way to deal with "Kafirs" who oppose the spread of Islam or fight against it. Muhammed and his followers did this with those who opposed him and the Arabic Jews who would not convert. There are a ton of Hadith that support it as how to deal with those who will NOT:
> 
> ...


----------



## Rafa (5 July 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

its fair to say, based on the above two posts... no side can take the moral high ground... there are no innocent parties in this except the thousands of 'collateral' victims 

what exactly is the solution?

how about give up our dependence on oil... that would a good start!


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 July 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

no question we (and moslems as well) are at war with AQ.
question is why did we stupidly make them so strong by invading Iraq. 

PS disarray - I  could post similar websites where Abs are scalped and hanging on a fence - granted old history, and "irrelevant" in the eyes of many .


----------



## disarray (5 July 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

i didn't post that link to score moral points hindsight, merely to highlight the nature of the enemy being fought in iraq. and you don't need to point out the barbarity of our own race, i am well aware that wanton butchery is part and parcel of the human condition. leave the aboriginal points in the aboriginal thread.

rafa makes an extremely sensible suggestion about giving up dependence on oil which, unfortunately, will never happen because of the interests involved - even with air powered cars available

that said transport is only a small part of overall oil consumption. we use it in plastics, for lubrication, even as a food preservative. we are utterly dependent upon it for so much and we are unlikely to change that any time soon. invest accordingly


----------



## Rafa (5 July 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

all technologies eventually get superseeded, but I fully understand you point dissarray, there is simply too much vested interest in the oil addiction for it to be disbanded overnight...

atleast nelson was brave (or foolish) enough to admit what most of us already knew... tho i doubt howard will ever admit that!

its why i have said all along, talking about getting out of iraq, and not fighting wars, etc is all well and good... but the fact is we all need oil.

and the fact is our goverments are voted by us and our fighting this war for us... i.e. to secure our oil supplies.


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 July 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

disarray - likewise I'm just saying those photos are around as well - I guess I was saying that one problem is that we all react to the daily news as if it's the only history out availble to learn from.   



Rafa said:


> and the fact is our goverments are voted by us and our fighting this war for us... i.e. to secure our oil supplies.




ahhhh ---yuuuuuklkk. 
imo rafa,  you're oiling a slippery slope there 

I heard an expert say the other day - "if we want oil? , then continue to do what we've always done, buy it" !!

BUT he went on ... "what USA REALLY wants is to control who gets oil, and keep the Chinese dragon under control " -  made sense at the time. .


----------



## Rafa (5 July 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

yes, this is a slippery slope...
i thought i throw it out there for discussion simply becuase there is a lot of self interest at play here... and lot of us try and take the moral high ground, blame this, blame that, blame the US, blame the muslims, blame the evil corporations, etc, etc...

i know a lot of people who justify to themselves that they are not directly responsible for Iraq... and hence absolved of any guilt.  but in the end, we all want our lifestyle, our cheap goods, etc, etc and oil is a vital part of all this, be it in plastics, or cheap imports, or indeed mobility.

so isn't trying to secure oil supplies for the 'allies' in our best interest? and indeed its in our best interest to be with the 'allies'.

PS: please bear with me on this one... just thinking out loud... but certainly most interested to hear peoples comments on this.


----------



## robert toms (5 July 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

I do not think governments are fighting in Iraq for us...they are fighting for their political future.They do not believe that any government would be voted back in if standards of living drop.
And after educating people to believe that they are entitled to ever increasing standards of living...greed is good....how could they sell lower standards of living to the electorate?
When too much is not enough !


----------



## chops_a_must (5 July 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



Rafa said:


> i know a lot of people who justify to themselves that they are not directly responsible for Iraq... and hence absolved of any guilt.  but in the end, we all want our lifestyle, our cheap goods, etc, etc and oil is a vital part of all this, be it in plastics, or cheap imports, or indeed mobility.



In a way, anyone who has voted liberal in oz, for GWB in the US, or Blair in the UK, is responsible for the war in Iraq. And all three were voted in again after the war had "ended". Thereby, those people voting for them again gave their moral support to the war, and support of the blood for oil policy. Now admitted by Coward.

I remember protesting the Iraq war, being beaten up, and at the time being branded as cynical for suggesting it was all about oil. It seems I am becoming increasingly vindicated for my stand, and the oldies that argued vehemently with me were wrong on all fronts.

It's a sad sad day in history when the cynics are actually correct.

So is the modern saying, "cynicism begets truth".

Chops.


----------



## disarray (5 July 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

its just overconsumption. the system needs people to keep spending credit to buy crappy goods with built in obsolesence dates and shrouded in masses of packaging. armed with huge marketing budgets, glitzy packaging and hype, advertisers dangle these trinkets in front of the sheeple who happily hammer away at their credit cards, thus perpetuating the (eventually unsustainable) cycle. 

watching thousands of people camp out in excited anticipation to buy an iphone, or barge down the doors knocking people over at grace brothers on boxing day in some psychotic consumerist frenzy, it just makes me want to punch people.

and chops, i think "In a way, anyone who has voted liberal in oz, for GWB in the US, or Blair in the UK, is responsible for the war in Iraq" is pushing it. looking at the iraq conflict as a whole, i think liberal voters are way way way down on this list of people at "fault" for the war. but i definately agree, cynicism begets truth.


----------



## chops_a_must (5 July 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Well we were in the coalition.

And at the end of the day, in democratic societies, the buck stops with the voters. We give our politicians mandates. Like in this instance.


----------



## Dukey (5 July 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



chops_a_must said:


> In a way, anyone who has voted liberal in oz, for GWB in the US, or Blair in the UK, is responsible for the war in Iraq. And all three were voted in again after the war had "ended". Thereby, those people voting for them again gave their moral support to the war, and support of the blood for oil policy. Now admitted by Coward.
> .....
> 
> Chops.




In a way I agree chops - though I guess it's not quite that simple. I'd like to think a labour government would've had the guts to tell GWB where to get off - at or near the start of this fiasco. BUT when it comes down to it - I'm really not sure they actually would have, or could have - cause our reliance on the US as an ally to ward off potential local threats - even distant future ones - is too great.



disarray said:


> its just overconsumption. the system needs people to keep spending credit to buy crappy goods with built in obsolesence dates and shrouded in masses of packaging. armed with huge marketing budgets, glitzy packaging and hype, advertisers dangle these trinkets in front of the sheeple who happily hammer away at their credit cards, thus perpetuating the (eventually unsustainable) cycle.
> 
> watching thousands of people camp out in excited anticipation to buy an iphone, or barge down the doors knocking people over at grace brothers on boxing day in some psychotic consumerist frenzy, it just makes me want to punch people.
> 
> ... .....




Agree with you too Disarray !    must be in an agreeable mood today....
Rampant consumerism is a HUGE problem for humanity and ultimately planet earth. >> The west leads the way and everyone else wants to follow. It seems everyone wants to be PERFECTLY comfortable 100% of the time - so we spend squillions to air-condition every space we occupy - burning precious fuels as we do.
Equally - so many folk simply MUST have the latest greatest gadgets/cars/whatever as soon as it appears and the old one is instantly valueless. Having spent time in Japan I'm sure you would've noticed how used cars are crazy cheap here and (sometimes) perfectly good appliances - fridges etc - get chucked onto the pavement in the rain essentially because no-one wants it. Only the newest will do. I was shocked by Japanese consumerism when I first came here. Still am regularly. 
Having said that - I'm equally shocked that Oz seems to be going the same way - at least in the city bred folks.


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 July 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



Dukey said:


> 1.  I'm really not sure they (Labour) actually would have, or could have - cause our reliance on the US as an ally to ward off potential local threats - even distant future ones - is too great.
> 
> 2. Equally - so many folk simply MUST have the latest greatest gadgets/cars/whatever as soon as it appears and the old one is instantly valueless. .....Only the newest will do. I was shocked by Japanese consumerism when I first came here.



hi dukey
1. heck, you could argue that Mad Mark (Latham) has been proven right to call GWB a dangerous man or whatever.    gotta feeling he went a bit further than that.  ( I wonder how he gets taxis these days? - probably under a pseudonym )

NZ seem to be getting by ok  - let's not forget USA needs us as well ( satellite comms etc) - by which I simply mean that our leaders shouldn't simply be "roll-over-yes-men", 

and maybe if we played a little harder to get, ...

why then I believe that USA would still respect us in the morning 

2. follows from Toffler's "Future Shock" a bit - he was saying men would move jobs between cities, and just get a new wife and family.   
I think the ability to work at home and use the web to communicate with the office would make him (Toffler) have a rethink there at least


----------



## 2020hindsight (6 July 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/07/05/1971263.htm  just more on Nelson, Howard, Rudd, and oil. 

http://abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/07/05/1970593.htm  this is a problem of "our own" (well "someone" 's own)  making.


----------



## Santob (6 July 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Its more about pilfering the public wealth into private hands before the forecoming US economic collapse.


----------



## Sean K (1 August 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

I once joked to a friend that the way to fix the Middle East problem was to put a big fence up around the region, throw in some guns, and the last left standing wins.

Seems I should be writing foreign policy for the Bush disaster.


----------



## Sean K (16 August 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Is this setting the grounds to justify directly attacking Iran's military?



			
				The Age said:
			
		

> *US to declare Iran guards terrorists*
> 
> Helene Cooper, Washington
> August 16, 2007
> ...


----------



## jonojpsg (16 August 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Kind of makes you wince doesn't it!  Doesn't look good for enduring peace and harmony


----------



## arminius (16 August 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

f117s will be flying around tehran, minus their payload, by march 08


----------



## toc_bat (16 August 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



kennas said:


> Is this setting the grounds to justify directly attacking Iran's military?




Thats insane, 

From everything I have been hearing, reading, digesting, it would seem that the republicans are unlikely to win the next US election, unless of course the US is embroiled in another war, history shows that electorates are very unwilling to change govt during a war. If those people start a war just to increase their chance of staying in power then they are worse than anyone they point the finger atm worse then bin laden, hitler, the 9/11 guys, worse than mindless murderers, worse than hussein, 

i heard an interview with gore vidal from 1993 or was it 1995 where he virtually predicts the current mess, not specifically but generealises about where the US was going at that time, even in the post WWII novel the naked and the dead mailer predicts the general course the US will take, Gore Vidal also mentioned that many of the religious right or christian fundamentalists in the US are so supportive of Israel, despite being anti semites on the whole, well they are so keen to have Isreal there is because apparetly they actually beleive that the biblical prophesy of christs second coming is about to occur (by about i think he and others mean within their lifetime or at least their childrens) now im no christian scholar but apparently christ will return when the people of israel are back in their homeland, what are these people on? dont they realis that if christ returns he will take one look at them and be sick and spew his guts out over his heavenly robes.

by the way i dont think the US or UK or australia went to Iraq to secure cheap oil, oil is still cheap, why is GM still making 5 litre V8 commodores? if people are willing to buy such idiotic gas guzzlers then by defenition oil is still cheap, thereare cars out there that use 4-5L/100km and still people ignore them, oil is still cheap, in slovakia most peoples hourly earnings enable them to buy about 1.5L of petrol! So after a days work they might be able to 15L odd, just enough to go to the city and back to the burbs in a stupid aussie V8.


----------



## Sean K (25 August 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



toc_bat said:


> Thats insane,



Yep, I'm not supporting it, just commentating...



> *US 'poised to strike Iran' *
> Geoff Elliott, Washington correspondent | August 25, 2007
> 
> BOB Baer, the former Middle East CIA operative whose first book about his life inspired the oil-and-espionage thriller Syriana, is working on a new book on Iran, but says he was told by senior intelligence officials that he had better get it published in the next couple of months because things could be about to change.
> ...




There may be a tipping point with this standoff. If Iran announce they have nukes then gloves are off as far as the US is concerned.


----------



## Sean K (25 August 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



toc_bat said:


> by the way i dont think the US or UK or australia went to Iraq to secure cheap oil, oil is still cheap, why is GM still making 5 litre V8 commodores?



Not sure if I agree with your premise here TB. People buy V8s for a reason beyond practicalities, IMO. The same reasons that people buy convertables and 4WDs that never go off the road. Oil 'cheap'?


----------



## toc_bat (27 August 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

hi kennas

as long as cars are being made which consume an unresonable amount of fuel to the point where its pretty obvious that the buyer is not considering consumpiton of fuel as decision driving option then i think petrol is obvioulsy still too cheap for that buyer, ok yes maybe most people are thinking about mileage now except for a few blockheads to whom the v8 is still marketed, 

also funny how irans power is creeping into the gulf at every level!!! how dare they! how rude and incosiderate for us!, goodness they only actually live in the gulf area what right do they have to asert their power inthir onw little area against the US and europe and everyone else who does not live there but wants their power to be asserted in the gulf instead, i dare say until this way of thinking disappears we have lot more political problems to come, not just in the gulf but everywhere else in the world,

ps "Yep, I'm not supporting it, just commentating..." yeh i know that kennas, you are a very reasonable and balanced guy by everything i have read from u so far, i reacted to the news not to you


----------



## numbercruncher (3 September 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



> "Syria has already received more than 1.5 million refugees and there could be no end in sight to what the Americans unleashed there. We simply can't cope anymore," a Syrian official told Reuters.




http://www.theage.com.au/news/World/Syria-to-restricts-Iraqi-refugee-influx/2007/09/03/1188783155869.html


It just gets worse by the day, the article gos on to say that 10pc of SYrias population are Iraqi refugees. How many refugees from Iraq has the US taken i wonder ? I remeber reading not many ....

Iraq has turned out as a disaster of epic proportions i beleive the US has now been in Iraq longer than they where in WW2.

As evil as Saddam was, if they left him there (killing whomever he wished) there would be alot more people alive now and Millions still in there homes, not to mention a functioning country.

Also not to mention the Trillions spent pursuing this could of probably converted the whole planet to elec/hydro or whatever powered cars, rendering obsolete the need for "oil" security.

The US now seem stuck in a moral delemma where they cant leave, but will they eventually be forced to because of among other things budget restraints ? If they leave will Iran or others? just fill the vacuum ..... Just a giant disaster it is.


----------



## Aussiejeff (4 September 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Well, of course George could cut and run from Iraq and start all over again in Iran with a "clean slate" couldn't he?

I'm sure all the US cannon fodder currently in Eye-raq would love the prospect of spending years trudging around deadly Iran.....



AJ


----------



## Sean K (23 September 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

I wouldn't have thought the French to be so vocal on this. It says to me that the ball is set in motion, and one side is going to have to roll over. I can't see Iran allowing inspections etc etc. This is much more serious than Iraq IMO. 



> *France accuses Iran of seeking nukes*
> Henry Samuel, Paris
> September 23, 2007
> 
> ...


----------



## Aussiejeff (23 September 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



kennas said:


> I wouldn't have thought the French to be so vocal on this. It says to me that the ball is set in motion, and one side is going to have to roll over. I can't see Iran allowing inspections etc etc. This is much more serious than Iraq IMO.




Oh well. Fanning the flames with hawkish rhetoric should at least help to push oil towards the $US100/barrel mark. When the first "official" shots are fired, $150+/barrel should be reached in no time. Great.


AJ


----------



## Wysiwyg (23 September 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

The great wars of last century won`t be repeated.Let`s face it,human beings hate each other.Always have and unless there is a massive change in consciousness,always will.What progress as a species we have made, from the rock and stick to the nuclear weapon?

Antagonists and warmongers , what is the purpose?


----------



## explod (23 September 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



Wysiwyg said:


> The great wars of last century won`t be repeated.Let`s face it,human beings hate each other.Always have and unless there is a massive change in consciousness,always will.What progress as a species we have made, from the rock and stick to the nuclear weapon?
> 
> Antagonists and warmongers , what is the purpose?





Maybe but interesting changes are taking place.  It revolves around the villiage.   One apon a time there were lots of villiages throughout the woods and they used to fight each other all the time.   They cut the woods down, started to graze cattle, became friendly and to trade cattle and other goods they formed a town.  The towns used to fight each other but a King came along and formed them all into a country and had the knights stop all the fighting because the King wanted greater trade and also build up an army to defend the country.   Then the country was at risk from a bigger country so the King formed an alliance with other countries and the different countires all formed different alliances depending on politics religion and where they could make the most money.  Then with approval of the leaders to do better business the internet was introduced and everyone in the whole world began to talk to each other and form all sorts of ideas, but above all everyone began to understand the other and everyone wanted to share the world evenly so they formed a world government and got rid of JWB and JWH.

My Grandaughter talks on the internet to girls her own age from all over and they do not understand the demarcation lines that we see.  Just maybe this new generation will bring about the last part of the story which is the dream at this time.  She votes for the first time this year.


----------



## wayneL (24 September 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



explod said:


> Maybe but interesting changes are taking place....
> 
> My Grandaughter talks on the internet to girls her own age from all over and they do not understand the demarcation lines that we see.  Just maybe this new generation will bring about the last part of the story which is the dream at this time.  She votes for the first time this year.



Interesting observation explod. My mrs. has great faith in the new generation and a lot of folks we know have made similar observations to you.

I'm a bit more cynical and think there are two opposing paths taken by the young. One that is selfish, uncultured, without hope and violent, and one that is extremely hopeful, spiritual, (and I don't mean religious by that) and activist. I'm not sure there are enough of the latter type to make a change.

But really hope I'm dead wrong and you and they are right... and I'll back them anyway.

Cheers


----------



## wayneL (24 September 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



kennas said:


> I wouldn't have thought the French to be so vocal on this. It says to me that the ball is set in motion, and one side is going to have to roll over. I can't see Iran allowing inspections etc etc. This is much more serious than Iraq IMO.



Were it not for Sarkozy, I strongly doubt France would be sabre rattling like this. I'm not really up on him, but believe he is of "neo-con" style ideology and I wonder if the frogs really knew what they were getting with him.


----------



## explod (24 September 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



wayneL said:


> Interesting observation explod. My mrs. has great faith in the new generation and a lot of folks we know have made similar observations to you.
> 
> I'm a bit more cynical and think there are two opposing paths taken by the young. One that is selfish, uncultured, without hope and violent, and one that is extremely hopeful, spiritual, (and I don't mean religious by that) and activist. I'm not sure there are enough of the latter type to make a change.
> 
> ...




I believe that we will go into a deep financial depression in the next few years so it will be interesting to see how the selfish uncultured part of society cope with this and what changes it will bring from that point.  A bit like an alcoholic, usually dont' wake up till they have lost everything and thier rise back up is from the gutter itself.

Like the markets, up and down or the pendulum swings.  Trouble is it always seems to be to the extremes, we are never satisfied with the middle ground.


----------



## disarray (24 September 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



wayneL said:


> Were it not for Sarkozy, I strongly doubt France would be sabre rattling like this. I'm not really up on him, but believe he is of "neo-con" style ideology and I wonder if the frogs really knew what they were getting with him.




sarkozy is a right wing nationalist (though we was born in hungary) and achieved a great deal of prominence for confronting the muslim problem after the various waves of french riots. it is interesting to see him take a stand against iran seeing as leftist french governments have supported it for so long, so it really is a telling shift in french politics.

the french knew exactly what they were getting with him - they were ditching their ineffectual appeasment oriented socialists and taking up someone with a backbone. france (and a great deal of europe for that matter) has a huge problem with incompatible muslim immigrants which will only get worse, so we can expect further shifts to the nationalist right as is happening in belgium and the netherlands.

i think socialism and liberalism will die off with the baby boomers while the next generations swing right to try and clean up the mess they made.


----------



## Aussiejeff (24 September 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



disarray said:


> i think socialism and liberalism will die off with the baby boomers while the next generations swing right to try and clean up the mess they made.




History has shown us over and over that when the pendulum swings hard right (ie: essentially to _neo fascism_), the purges that follow only create a differnet type of *mess*.... unfortunately it usually involves a lot of extreme pain & blood-letting for the masses. No different than when it swings hard left...

I'm not sure that's a good thing for the human race in general either. 

And sure, the internet might appear to be a tool for *good* but boy, it doesn't take much for *bad* elements to hijack it and spread their poisonous propaganda WORLD WIDE in a very short space of time (whether they are extremist right wingers or extremist left wingers, the undue influence they can now wield is frightening...).

The struggle for a conservative, somewhat peaceful *middle road* in politics these days seems to be getting swamped by many strident voices.

Sigh.

AJ


----------



## disarray (24 September 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



			
				Aussiejeff said:
			
		

> The struggle for a conservative, somewhat peaceful *middle road* in politics these days seems to be getting swamped by many strident voices.




globalisation has changed the rules. it's easy for a monocultural / monoreligious society to find a middle road as most people essentially fall into a similar cultural category with similar aims and ideals - example, japan or john howards vision 1950's australia. europe on the other hand, after coming close together after tearing themselves apart twice in 40 years have imported millions of uneducated, agitated arab muslims with a totally different religion, culture and mindset who do not want to assimilate. i do not see a peaceful solution.

as we're on the topic of global conflict, here's an interesting story about the man who saved the world from nuclear annihilation

http://maltastar.com/pages/msfullart.asp?an=15214



> The date is 1 September 1983 and the Cold War between the Soviet Union and USA is in full gear, when from the New York skies Korean Air Lines Flight 007 flies from JFK, destination Seoul, South Korea.
> 
> In the middle of the flight, while accidently passing through Soviet air space, Soviet fighter jets appear getting close the aircraft. The Soviets, who didn't know the plane contained civilians, warned the pilot that they will shoot down the aircraft if it doesn't identify itself, and the pilot, for some unknown reason, doesn't respond.
> 
> ...


----------



## robert toms (24 September 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

I thought it was decided that the airliner did not "accidentally" fly over Kumchatna peninsula...American military aircraft  tailed the South korean passenger plane for much of their journey across the Pacific.
As I remember it was a game of bluff and cold-war spying that went horribly wrong.
The reports that I read said that the Americans could not get their photos from satellite,and that the airliner was used instead...to stray over extremely sensitive military areas was stupid, incompetent and these were well-known to all concerned.
The airliner refused to comply with, or even recognise, instructions from the Soviet fighter pilots and was then shot down.
I remember the incident well..The responsible Soviet pilot got a medal.


----------



## wayneL (24 September 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



disarray said:


> sarkozy is a right wing nationalist (though we was born in hungary) and achieved a great deal of prominence for confronting the muslim problem after the various waves of french riots. it is interesting to see him take a stand against iran seeing as leftist french governments have supported it for so long, so it really is a telling shift in french politics.
> 
> the french knew exactly what they were getting with him - they were ditching their ineffectual appeasment oriented socialists and taking up someone with a backbone. france (and a great deal of europe for that matter) has a huge problem with incompatible muslim immigrants which will only get worse, so we can expect further shifts to the nationalist right as is happening in belgium and the netherlands.
> 
> i think socialism and liberalism will die off with the baby boomers while the next generations swing right to try and clean up the mess they made.



The move to the right in France and other parts of Europe has been because of the ludicrous immigration policies of the incumbents. With Sarkozy, the French believed that the immigration and multicultural situation would be addressed, but they didn't bargain for dubya style chauvinism.

Having a backbone does not mean antagonizing other nations. I'm not convinced the Iranians are a threat at all, sans interference from the west. (And no, I do not support their theocracy)

You make the connection with liberalism and socialism with inappropriate immigration policies, yet we have conservative governments indulging in the same practices, such as Oz and USA.

Socialism will not die out with the baby boomers, but it will have a new face. Liberalism will never die out, nor will conservatism.

Corporatism is the new socialism, we see that with the latest moves within The Fed... think about that.


----------



## Sean K (1 October 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Where there's smoke there's fire. 'Reports' like this are normally used to either soften up the electorate, or measure support.....



> *US 'planning surgical Iran strikes'*
> Anne Davies, Washington
> October 1, 2007 - 7:39AM
> 
> ...


----------



## Aussiejeff (1 October 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

*Surgical* strikes, huh? Like, they clinically eliminate the "nasty" bit using uber-hi-tec without affecting the rest of the "body"? Wow! Just like they did when they won the war in Iraq all those years back? 

Hooray for USA!!!! Go Unca SAM! Make our stock markets FLY!!!!!


----------



## Sean K (1 October 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



Aussiejeff said:


> *Surgical* strikes, huh? Like, they clinically eliminate the "nasty" bit using uber-hi-tec without affecting the rest of the "body"? Wow! Just like they did when they won the war in Iraq all those years back?
> 
> Hooray for USA!!!! Go Unca SAM! Make our stock markets FLY!!!!!



Defence stocks outperformed last quarter.


----------



## Sean K (5 October 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Ahmadinejad is playing with fire. When the French say 'prepare for war' you're pushing the boundries. With Germany heading more and more Right, they'll be next to blast them with some rhetoric....hooly dooly, the French and the Germans together! 

If Iran keep pushing towards nuclear enrichment, it will end in conflict. 

What scale is another thing...

Interesting times. Glad we're close to New Zealand...



> *Iran says will go ahead with atomic work*
> October 5, 2007 - 6:39AM
> 
> Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said the world could not stop the Islamic state's nuclear program, which the West fears is a cover to build a nuclear bomb, the official IRNA news agency said.
> ...


----------



## disarray (5 October 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



wayneL said:


> With Sarkozy, the French believed that the immigration and multicultural situation would be addressed, but they didn't bargain for dubya style chauvinism.




i don't think his iranian policy condemns him to dubya chauvinism status just yet.



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> Having a backbone does not mean antagonizing other nations. I'm not convinced the Iranians are a threat at all, sans interference from the west. (And no, I do not support their theocracy)




sometimes it does. chamberlain finally figured that one out in 1939. and iran weren't a threat until they voted in the hard right - now they are. yes it is the fault of american foreign policy.



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> You make the connection with liberalism and socialism with inappropriate immigration policies, yet we have conservative governments indulging in the same practices, such as Oz and USA.




early australian immigration under conservative governments was characterised by its eurocentricity. as society moved left so immigration policies were changed. now under a conservative government we have a halt put on sudanese refugees. you are right movements like socialism and liberalism will never die, but as the pendulum swings they will lose influence and the government policy they influence will shift with it.



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> Corporatism is the new socialism




how so? corporatism looks like government by cartel, and i suspect the redistribution of wealth will be rather top heavy.


----------



## wayneL (5 October 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



disarray said:


> how so? corporatism looks like government by cartel, and i suspect the redistribution of wealth will be rather top heavy.



You know what? I've discovered the futility of arguing with Bill O'Reillyesque right wingers is.... futile. As I'm in a "way of water" sort of mood, I'll leave you to your own opinion.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (5 October 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



kennas said:


> Ahmadinejad is playing with fire. When the French say 'prepare for war' you're pushing the boundries. With Germany heading more and more Right, they'll be next to blast them with some rhetoric....hooly dooly, the French and the Germans together!
> 
> If Iran keep pushing towards nuclear enrichment, it will end in conflict.
> 
> ...




I couldn't agree moree kennas. Living in a western democracy beats a theocracy any day and living in this part of the world beats anywhere else. At least we are free to express our opinions without petty fascists throwing us in prison and muffling our opinions. 

gg


----------



## Julia (5 October 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



kennas said:


> Ahmadinejad is playing with fire. When the French say 'prepare for war' you're pushing the boundries. With Germany heading more and more Right, they'll be next to blast them with some rhetoric....hooly dooly, the French and the Germans together!
> 
> If Iran keep pushing towards nuclear enrichment, it will end in conflict.
> 
> ...



Hi Kennas,

I'm a bit puzzled about how being close to NZ is going to make any difference to us?

(Other than, of course, being close to all those lovely Kiwi people and pretty woolly lambs.)


----------



## Sean K (6 October 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



Julia said:


> Hi Kennas,
> 
> I'm a bit puzzled about how being close to NZ is going to make any difference to us?
> 
> (Other than, of course, being close to all those lovely Kiwi people and pretty woolly lambs.)



Hi Julia, I'm half referring to Garpal's point and the fact that NZ will be one of the last places to be directly effected by international conflict. We've been lucky to see so little conflict down here, apart from participating in other people's. Plus, Kiwi's and their wooly lambs are OK. Well, the one's that are more like Australians anyway.


----------



## arminius (6 October 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

know exactly how u feel wayneL.

global warming is recognised by everyone (except andrew bolt and ian mcfarlane) as a real threat to our children's planet. as a result many are hailing nuclear power as a potential saviour, but the iranians arent allowed to develop their own? 
why not? the fear that they will drop a bomb on someone. fair dinkum. their pres may be a goose but he is not stupid. the retaliation would destroy iran, and they all know it. 
its all about protecting the big boys club. no-one else is allowed to join, and they would kill millions to make sure it never happens


----------



## disarray (6 October 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



arminius said:


> why not? the fear that they will drop a bomb on someone. fair dinkum. their pres may be a goose but he is not stupid. the retaliation would destroy iran, and they all know it.




http://www.iran-press-service.com/articles_2001/dec_2001/rafsanjani_nuke_threats_141201.htm



> TEHRAN 14 Dec. (IPS) One of Iran’s most influential ruling cleric called Friday on the Muslim states to use nuclear weapon against Israel, assuring them that while such an attack would annihilate Israel, it would cost them "damages only".
> 
> "If a day comes when the world of Islam is duly equipped with the arms Israel has in possession, the strategy of colonialism would face a stalemate because application of an atomic bomb would not leave any thing in Israel but the same thing would just produce damages in the Muslim world", Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani told the crowd at the traditional Friday prayers in Tehran.




martyrdom is prized arminius, they don't think like us.



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> You know what? I've discovered the futility of arguing with Bill O'Reillyesque right wingers is.... futile. As I'm in a "way of water" sort of mood, I'll leave you to your own opinion




i know its terrible when people disagree with your opinion, but blanket statements like "corporatism is the new socialism" do need some sort of substantiation. but suit yourself, internet discussions are only that.


----------



## Sean K (15 October 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Was anyone else even slightly surprised that Israel got away with launching an air raid in to a sovereign nation blowing up a building or two....

The world has just shrugged it's shoulders....



This was an act of war..... 



> *Syria raid 'aimed at nuclear site'*
> David Sanger and Mark Mazzetti
> October 15, 2007
> 
> ...


----------



## arminius (15 October 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

yep, israel gave the syrians a kick in the goolies last week.

the syrians are no doubt preparing retribution...might take a few months but its coming.

can u imagine if the roles were reversed..

usa/israel protecting the club.


----------



## Aussiejeff (16 October 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



kennas said:


> Was anyone else even slightly surprised that Israel got away with launching an air raid in to a sovereign nation blowing up a building or two....
> 
> The world has just shrugged it's shoulders....
> 
> ...




As will be the coming much bigger offensive by Turkey against the Iraqi Kurds in the next few days/weeks/months. 

I'm sure that will raise no more than a shrug by the "civilised" world too. Kurdish lives are cheap, so big casualties (as in Iraq) won't really count, will they? Anyway, if the Iraqi Kurds are against Turkey (an Ally of the US), by default wouldn't that make them the "enemy" in the "War On Terror"?


----------



## arminius (16 October 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

its gonna get messy jeff. 
US friend killing other US friend. 
the yanks are **** ting themselves
dont expect much in mainstream media about this...
dubya bush (and friends) opened the biggest can of worms years ago, and its effect will continue to wreak destruction and death for years to come. the man is indeed the worlds deadliest terrorist.


----------



## Aussiejeff (7 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*

Not exactly Middle East but only a short step to the right .... to Pakistan.

I wonder if GWB and his cronies are starting to get a tingle of dejavu with the collapse of Pakistan's "democracy" into a "rogue" state? The US has poured trillions of dollars into the Pakistan war machine over the years to prop up their puppet Musharraf and assist him to fight the "good fight against terrorists" only to see Musharraf going feral - a bit like Saddam did not long ago after being supplied by the bucket-load from the US to fight the Iranians.

What concerns me is the BIG problem with Pakistan is that they definitely DO have Weapons of Mass Destruction in the form of NUCLEAR BOMBS and missiles .... plus god knows how many other varieties of US supplied WMD munitions. This is always the problem when foreign policy is couched in terms of "black and white" or an it's US or THEM approach. GWB has been prepared to "dine with the devils he doesn't really know" as long as they mouth support for his "western democratization of the entire world" approach to foreign policy.  

Let us pray then, that Pakistan doesn't suddenly tip over into open anarchy in the coming weeks and months - where anybody might end up preparing to flick the nuclear trigger.... it's bad enough that Afghanistan seems to be collapsing (again) and becoming an increasing magnet for anti-western insurgents etc.

Maybe the thread title needs to change to "The Middle East & Western Asia - Set for Disaster - again".



AJ


----------



## Sean K (7 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East - Set for disaster - again*



Aussiejeff said:


> Maybe the thread title needs to change to "The Middle East & Western Asia - Set for Disaster - again".
> 
> 
> 
> AJ



Or, perhaps:

The Middle East and Western Asia: the origin of the next world war 

Done. 

Any other suggestions welcome....


----------



## Aussiejeff (8 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East and Western Asia: the origin of next world war*

Extract from Agency France-Presse today..

-----------------------------

"President Bush sought to dispel worries that he has different standards for allies like Pakistan and for other countries like Burma, which drew fierce US criticisms and new sanctions for its crackdown in September. _"Look, our objective is the same in Burma as it is in Pakistan, and that is to promote democracy,''_ Mr Bush said. _"There is a difference, however, Pakistan has been on the path to democracy. Burma hadn't been on the path to democracy. And it requires different tactics to achieve the common objective,''_ said the US leader. 

Nuclear weapons

Meanwhile, a top Pentagon official said the fate of Pakistan's military arsenal was a _"primary concern''_ after President Pervez Musharraf imposed a state of emergency in his country. Washington was keeping a close eye on Pakistan's nuclear arsenal following the recent upheaval, said Lieutenant General Carter Ham, Director of Operations with the US Joint Chiefs of Staff. _"We will watch that very closely,''_ he said. _"Any time there is a regime that has nuclear weapons and that experiences a situation like in Pakistan, of course there is a primary concern.''_ 

Former Pakistan prime minister Benazir Bhutto said in an interview with the German newspaper Bild that she was worried about what would happen if extremists managed to win hold of the country's nuclear arsenal." 

----------------------------

Well, at least GWB & Co. are "concerned...."



AJ


----------



## arminius (8 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East and Western Asia: origin of the next world war*

revenge, carnage, and war- things that happen when ordinary people are killed for being less ordinary than other ordinary people.


----------



## disarray (8 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East and Western Asia: origin of the next world war*

war is just the final expression of competition. capitalists like us should know that


----------



## Sean K (8 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East and Western Asia: origin of the next world war*



disarray said:


> war is just the final expression of competition. capitalists like us should know that



Ultimately it's about survival. Reduce your argument to the final 'why?'


----------



## disarray (8 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East and Western Asia: origin of the next world war*

survival depends on land, resources, water etc. when these resources are scarce then people must compete. when competition becomes fierce then competition escalates into conflict.

in early periods of human history access to resources really was a matter of survival for your tribe, now however it seems to be largely a matter of greed. for example the US is fighting in iraq to secure oil resources so it can continue to be a fat consumer wh0re nation where people drive SUV's and hummers instead of smaller, more efficient cars. in the middle east sunni and shi'a muslims fight over competition for the souls of the believers because the more followers you have, the more power and influence you wield. world war 1 was competition for empire territories, world war 2 was competition for lebensraum and resources, the cold war was competition for the supremacy of a particular political ideology. none of these were really based on survival but a greed for more power, more land, more resources. thats just the human condition.


----------



## Sean K (8 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East and Western Asia: origin of the next world war*



disarray said:


> survival depends on land, resources, water etc. when these resources are scarce then people must compete. when competition becomes fierce then competition escalates into conflict.



I think you just agreed with me. 

Survival comes before the competition.


----------



## disarray (8 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East and Western Asia: origin of the next world war*

yes it does, but we aren't fighting for survival any more as technology has met all our basic needs. we are fed, clothed and housed, survival is assured. now we are in conflict for resources like oil which are not essential to our survival (seeing as we got by just fine without it until recently), but are needed for economic and technological development, as well as for our comfort.

so yes, competition is a result of the struggle to survive, so what level of survival do you consider a minimum? food, clothing and shelter? 70" LCD and 2 SUV's in the driveway? we are fighting in iraq now for option #2, at what point do we say we are healthy and happy enough instead of the constant pursuit of more gadgets, more toys, more cheap crap imported from china?

anyway got to head off to see a client. hope your day isn't too red and you have cash to make some purchases


----------



## Rafa (8 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East and Western Asia: origin of the next world war*

good points disarry... capitalism has taken the notion of survival to a whole new level.


----------



## Sean K (8 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East and Western Asia: origin of the next world war*



Rafa said:


> good points disarry... capitalism has taken the notion of survival to a whole new level.



 I agree, but it's only by degrees. 

'Survival' for the modern day Jones' is just the same as 'survival' for the 3000 bc Cavejones....


Not sure how we got on to this. Sorry. I think it was something to do with the situation in W Asia...


I actually think the problems in W Asia/ Middle East are about unemployment.....


----------



## Rafa (8 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East and Western Asia: origin of the next world war*

true, capitalism is a civilised form of law of the jungle...
one of the reasons no matter what people try to do to get rid of capitalism (i.e socialism, marxism, etc, etc)... it will always bounce back, cause it is part of human nature and the whole survival/greed thing...


but back to the regional conflict...

the way i see it... there are 6billion people on the planet, at the very very best about 1bill live 'comfortable' lives...

frankly, i am surprised there isn't any more conflict...! I mean, if you look at most low socio-economic regions, even in the first world... the thing that is rampant is crime.

The way you get any sort of decorum is if people believe their lives have meaning, and not completely worthless.... even if in actual fact (depending on what you believe in)... it may well be worthless  The way to build worth is via 'gangs'... 
there are good gangs: following a sporting team, social group, charity group, moderate/secular religious group... 
and not so good gangs: crime gangs, bikie gangs, terrorist groups, fundamental religious groups.

The middle east and pakistan have the unusual combination of people being 'poor' and having a current interpretation of a religion that tells them their lives indeed are worthless and they are of more use dead!

i guess in conclusion, there is nothing that happens in this world that should surprise anyone... because we are capable of doing anything 

certainly, in the west, in the name of capitalism, we have pretty much done and continue to do whatever it takes… so why not those in the middle east???


----------



## Aussiejeff (12 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East and Western Asia: origin of the next world war*

Here's an interesting read regarding the possibility of the US opening Pandora's Box in Iran during GWB's watch.  

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSDAH71986920071107

One question the correspondents failed to mention (rather surpisingly I thought) was the COST to the US and Western economies of going to war with Iran, since this would open up a THIRD concurrent front (Afghanistan & Iraq already underway) in the so-called endless "War On Terror". Can the US in particular REALLY afford to go down this path, considering the state of their slumping economy right now? 

Then again, history clearly shows us over and over again that the usual rule of thumb for world dominating empires with declining economies (or for leaders whose popularity has plummeted) is to GO ON THE ATTACK and open up as many wars/conflicts/conquests as possible against declared "enemies", in order to boost flagging morale and business activity in the home economy. So from that point of view, maybe GWB is on a potential "winner" and really can't lose with that strategy?

On the other hand, history also shows us that in the end, this foreign policy strategy of "the best form of defence against economic and popularity decline is to attack" has also eventually failed to save most of those world dominating empires from eventual collapse and even ruin, due to the exorbitant cost of the campaigns draining the treasury coffers to the point of virtual or even actual bankruptcy.

So, I wonder how deep the US Treasury pockets really are at this point in time? Then there is the possibility of attacking Somalia? Venezuala? etc etc... 

Anyone care to guess what the price of a barrel of oil might reach if George pulls the trigger on Iran? Hitler and Hirohito both tried to take on multiple fronts and collapsed in the end. Can a "champion of democracy" like GWB succeed, where all others have eventually failed? How long can the US keep this foreign policy approach up (ie: creating military spending induced "dead cat" bounces in the US home economy) before the coffers are over-extended and the final economic point of collapse is reached?




AJ


----------



## kgee (12 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East and Western Asia: origin of the next world war*

I saw a news program about a year and a half ago where Iran displayed some of its arsenal designed to shut down the Strait of Hormuz and attack the US aircraft carriers
some were quite ingeneous ....they had made a bunch of wooden unmanned planes that carried bombs....basically theyre slow moving missilies that won't be detected by radar...and to counter them been seen they will create smoke screens from burning oil
don't know if it would work but seemed feasible


----------



## Sean K (12 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East and Western Asia: origin of the next world war*



Aussiejeff said:


> Here's an interesting read regarding the possibility of the US opening Pandora's Box in Iran during GWB's watch.
> 
> http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSDAH71986920071107
> 
> ...



I don' think the US is strong enough to open up another front, especially that is not supported by their people. (I saw a graph somewhere that said 25% supported ground troops in Iran) 

At this point, I think the only thing they could realistically do is bomb them from a distance and hope they submit. We know how well that tactic worked in the past, and Iran is not Iraq. They are a much more serious outfit. Plus, on any eventuation of conflict, there is a real possibility that Iran will launch missiles (that work) against Israel which will be the start of the end in the region IMO. I think the US will need NATO backing them for anything to be successful, and I can't see the Germans, Spanish and Italians jumping on board. The newly conservative France has obviously jumped into bed with GWB. Not sure about Gordon Brown, could go either way I think. Perhaps because he has just started his job he won't want to be too unpopular with the electorate and will say 'peace!' 

Interesting that the Iran sabre rattling has only really gone into full swing after N Korea went off the boil?


----------



## kgee (12 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East and Western Asia: origin of the next world war*



kennas said:


> I don' think the US is strong enough to open up another front, especially that is not supported by their people. (I saw a graph somewhere that said 25% supported ground troops in Iran)
> 
> At this point, I think the only thing they could realistically do is bomb them from a distance and hope they submit. We know how well that tactic worked in the past, and Iran is not Iraq. They are a much more serious outfit. Plus, on any eventuation of conflict, there is a real possibility that Iran will launch missiles (that work) against Israel which will be the start of the end in the region IMO. I think the US will need NATO backing them for anything to be successful, and I can't see the Germans, Spanish and Italians jumping on board. The newly conservative France has obviously jumped into bed with GWB. Not sure about Gordon Brown, could go either way I think. Perhaps because he has just started his job he won't want to be too unpopular with the electorate and will say 'peace!'
> 
> Interesting that the Iran sabre rattling has only really gone into full swing after N Korea went off the boil?




Hope your right Kennas but ... I hope Bush doesn't remember its successful airstrikes against Kaddaffi (?) in Lybia back in the 80's


----------



## patto190366 (12 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East and Western Asia: origin of the next world war*

The Israeli army is primarly funded by the US...They are one of the strongest armies in the world because of the US$$$$ and yes they do have Nuclear missiles that the US is fully aware of and funds and a lot of "secret" "stuff"..Israel is America's lap-dog....
Pity the value of dirt isn't worth much where Mugabe is then Bush could have bumped him off too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## arminius (12 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East and Western Asia: origin of the next world war*

the really scary thing is that america is getting backed into an economic corner. it is essentially broke, and its primary money earner is weapons export, and treasure raiding of course. 
even if 80% of americans dont want anything to do with attacking iran, the nutters in the white house might convince themselves that theres no other way out of their economic poo.
then theres the rise of china and its links to iran. 
a preemptive v iran? dent chinese domination? show russia whos the boss?
after all, the yanks nuked hiroshima and nagasaki to warn off Russia, and dont let anyone tell you otherwise.
btw, they also knew pearl was gonna get smashed but they wanted in on the war....


----------



## patto190366 (13 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East and Western Asia: origin of the next world war*

Yes!!  I agree with you Arminius....very scary times ahead....Bush is very trigger happy and at the moment we have our heads where the sun don't shine with America!!!  Attacking Iran would be insane...but nothing would surpise me!!


----------



## Wysiwyg (13 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East and Western Asia: origin of the next world war*



arminius said:


> the really scary thing is that america is getting backed into an economic corner. it is essentially broke, and its primary money earner is weapons export, and treasure raiding of course.
> even if 80% of americans dont want anything to do with attacking iran, the nutters in the white house might convince themselves that theres no other way out of their economic poo.
> then theres the rise of china and its links to iran.
> a preemptive v iran? dent chinese domination? show russia whos the boss?
> ...




Man, I respect your perception (it`s yours) but i think it`s bblllaaaahhhhh in a silly sort of way.


----------



## arminius (13 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East and Western Asia: origin of the next world war*

thats cool wysy.
we should remember though that these men sit around big tables and take these actions but tell their people completely misleading reasons for doing so. we've seen this as late as 2003.

just keep your mind open and dont believe what you read in the 'Daily Terrorist'


----------



## Rafa (20 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East and Western Asia: origin of the next world war*

Now this will start a war!
I posted this in the US Dollar thread as well...


http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2007/11/19/1195321650487.html?sssdmh=dm16.289727



> *OPEC members discuss ditching $US*
> 
> Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says OPEC's member countries have expressed interest in converting their cash reserves into a currency other than the depreciating US dollar, which he called a "worthless piece of paper."
> 
> ...


----------



## numbercruncher (20 November 2007)

*Re: The Middle East and Western Asia: origin of the next world war*

If I was the US gov Id be buying boat loads of foreign currencies, then say sure crash our dollar, pay out all the debt with the now high valued foreign notes, snap up all the cheap USDs and bobs your uncle.

The roll out electric cars removing need for foreign oil !


----------



## Sean K (10 January 2008)

*Re: The Middle East and Western Asia: origin of the next world war*

This could be just laying the foundations for the US to invade another country and keep the war machine ticking along. 

Hard to imagine Pakistan's nukes just walking out the door, but when their most dangerous crimals just walk away from custody most days of the week, who knows? 



> *UN fears for Pakistan nuke arsenal *
> 
> Bruce Loudon, South Asia correspondent | January 10, 2008
> 
> ...


----------



## Sean K (12 April 2008)

While Pakistan is shaping up to be a trigger for WWIII, Iran continues to proceed with what any sovereign nation would probably want to do. Protect it's borders, and when under threat, start to develop some pre-emptive capabilities. Exactly what the US, NATO, and us don't want to eventuate. 

It seems to be a chicken and egg thing to me, with the US still being the, um,  Well, the one's starting it! 



> Satellite exposes Iran rocket site
> Michael Evans, London | April 12, 2008
> 
> A SECRET site where Iran is suspected of developing long-range ballistic missiles capable of reaching targets in Europe has been uncovered by new satellite photographs.


----------



## Sean K (12 April 2008)

Golly, and this:



> US threat to 'protect troops' from Tehran
> 
> US President George W. Bush yesterday warned Iran that if it refused to stop arming and training Shia militia in Iraq then "America will act to protect our interests and our troops".
> 
> ...



I doubt the incoming US President will take a softer stand. 

Batten down the hatches!! 

And, move to the south island!!


----------



## metric (12 April 2008)

invading iran would be a big mistake. in the event of a US  attack, iran has already stated its intention of closing the oil strategic, strait of hormuz. which would see the price of oil go skywards like a mushroom cloud, and in current world financial conditions, send the world into a depression. but would bush do it? you bet!



> Bush Hypes Threat from Iran in Surge “Success” Speech
> By Matthew Rothschild, April 10, 2008
> 
> In his speech on Thursday, Bush wasted little time before getting to the ominous subject of Iran.
> ...




to continue...

http://www.progressive.org/mag_wx041008


----------



## mayk (12 April 2008)

nuclear pro-liferation is not a froeign term to US. Recently , A US jet "unknowingly" flew six nuclear warheads over US. God forbid if something would have happened who was to blame for that? 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...after-nuclear-bombs-flown-over-us-397456.html


Then last month they shipped nuclear warhead cones to Taiwan, instead of hellicopter batteries. To top it off it was traced after a year, when taiwanies notified the US that their batteries are of wrong size 

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...rts_to_Taiwan_in_2006/articleshow/2900244.cms


There are no suprises that it is not russia which has got rouge elements, every country does and if exploited badly, it can lead to a catastrophie.


----------



## Sean K (17 June 2008)

Crikey, there's no way Israel can attack Iran without the rest of the region putting up their hand.

What are they thinking?



Maybe it's just sabre rattling.



> DJ Israel Developing Consensus In Favor Of Iran Strike -Spiegel
> 
> 17/06/2008 12:00AM AEST
> 
> ...


----------



## Aussiejeff (17 June 2008)

Would I be right in thinking that "The Patriot Act" (adopted after 9/11) would allow Great Wally Bush to stay in office during "a declared war"?

Shirley, no-one in their right mind would invoke this option to retain P-O-Doubleya-E-R??



AJ


----------



## saiter (18 June 2008)

Aussiejeff said:


> Would I be right in thinking that "The Patriot Act" (adopted after 9/11) would allow Great Wally Bush to stay in office during "a declared war"?
> 
> Shirley, no-one in their right mind would invoke this option to retain P-O-Doubleya-E-R??
> 
> ...




If the US Army had a proper leader, then they'd storm DC and take bush into custody. The role of the army is to protect the US constitution.


----------



## haunting (20 June 2008)

Iraq takes a turn towards Tehran



> In addition to the 50 US bases, the deal calls for long-term American supervision of the Iraqi Ministry of Interior and Defense (no less than 10 years). It gives the Americans almost exclusive right to rebuild Iraq, train Iraqi forces and maintain personnel on Iraqi territory - with immunity from the Iraqi courts.
> 
> It gives the US the right to arrest or persecute any Iraqi working against its interests, within Iraq, and pledges to protect Iraq from any war, coup or revolution. It also gives the US control of Iraqi airspace. Barhan Saleh, the deputy prime minister, said that the Americans threatened to freeze no less than US$50 billion worth of Iraqi hard currency, and keep all of Iraq's monetary debts to the US, if an agreement is not signed before December (the date that the United Nations mandate for the American presence in Iraq expires).




Let me repeat what I know about the Iraq war back when Saddam was still alive - it was about WMD and the removal of a tyrant, and nothing else!

It's not about oil or American interest. Not at all. I voted for JH... twice, because I believe that was a "just" war. A war for the poor suffering Iraqi people living under a tyrant.

And now, with Saddam gone, all I want is to see every other foreign soldier out of that country and leave the yanks to fight their own war. It's only fair - they want the Iraqi oil then pay for it with their own soldiers' life.


----------



## Pommiegranite (20 June 2008)

haunting said:


> Iraq takes a turn towards Tehran
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Geee..that was so nice of the US

..and there was me thinking that they just wanted to put a dummy in charge just like they did with putting the Shah in charge in Iran.


----------



## wayneL (23 June 2008)

Looks as though Israel is about to attack Iran SOON. When that happens, our world will change.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ack-on-iran-with-100-jet-fighters-851614.html



> Israel's dry run 'attack on Iran' with 100 jet fighters
> 
> By Donald Macintyre in Jerusalem
> Saturday, 21 June 2008
> ...


----------



## Aussiejeff (23 June 2008)

wayneL said:


> Looks as though Israel is about to attack Iran SOON. When that happens, our world will change.
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ack-on-iran-with-100-jet-fighters-851614.html




Awe, golly gee.... will it be more *SHOCK-ING*  & *AWE-ING* than the last fiZZer? :hide:


----------



## Sean K (24 October 2008)

Cripes, the US is bombing and raiding inside Pakistan. How long will they put up with that I wonder?




> *US 'spy drone' strikes on Pakistan kill 11 *
> October 23, 2008
> 
> MIRANSHAH, Pakistan: Suspected US spy drones fired missiles today into a Pakistani tribal area seen as a safe haven for al-Qa'ida and Taliban militants, killing 11 people, security officials said.
> ...




And, I wonder what the Russians and Chinese are thinking about this?

Could get out of hand....


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (24 October 2008)

kennas said:


> Cripes, the US is bombing and raiding inside Pakistan. How long will they put up with that I wonder?
> 
> And, I wonder what the Russians and Chinese are thinking about this?
> 
> Could get out of hand....




Kennas,

Russia and China will always do what they want.


----------



## Sean K (24 October 2008)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Kennas,
> 
> Russia and China will always do what they want.



And while the paper tiger UN SC has it's hands tied.

A big front is opening up here from Israel/Palestine to Pakistan, and up to Georgia. 

Hard to see this finishing anytime in the next 50 years or so. Hopefully it's contained to that region.

Solutions?



US and it's industries pullback to home base? Impossible.


----------



## mayk (24 October 2008)

kennas said:


> Cripes, the US is bombing and raiding inside Pakistan. How long will they put up with that I wonder?





As long as the politicians can be corrupted, they can use -- or abuse-- Pakistan as they like. I think a revolution like Iranian revolution is on the cards in Pakistan. 

I am working on a formula which will hopefully win me a nobel peace prize . My aim is to equate the importance of a western life to that of a third world nation. So far it is only a factor of 100. 
1 Western life = 100 third world life. 

People are not learning their lessons. They ruined Afghanistan. Their whole generation X and Y has been fighting and ignorant because of super power's play. Now they want to do that in Pakistan, which thanks to its corrupt politicians, is already on a fast track to disaster. 

It is important for the US to have many flash points ready, in case some disaster (financial or otherwise) strike them. Make an easy case of a war. 

See "Wag the Dog" movie, a great master peace, showing how effect media propaganda is.

I bet most of you will not even remember the time line of attack on Afghanistan or Iraq. No one even mentions the fact that Taliban offered to prosecute Osama, if US can provide the evidence. Now here is a thought.

I know emotions must be running high after 9/11. Most countries would have done the same. But a proper accounting, fact-checking and analysis after the war was never carried out.  

From the point of view of running a strategy -- irrespective of its morality -- neo-con have done a phenomenal job. I give devil the credit where it is due. They realized that world was fast changing, and with the advancements in internet, the window of opportunity was diminishing. They successfully created an invisible -- non winnable -- enemy, by the name of Terror, now infamously embedded in the slogan "War on Terror". 

The biggest win for the neo-con apart from creating a ghost enemy is the control of justice system. The Patriotic act rushed to law shifted the paradigm of "innocent until proven guilty". I think it is a work of genius.

Sorry for getting on different tangents. /end rant


----------



## mayk (24 October 2008)

kennas said:


> And, I wonder what the Russians and Chinese are thinking about this?



Ironically here is what they are thinking. Sell them weapons...

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24542708-2703,00.html

Here is another interesting take on military operations.
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1852345,00.html


----------

