Conflicts in the Middle East & Northern Africa

[Phoenix]

@Phoenix
That's really good, Phoenix, that the USA/Israel could bomb the Iranians "back to the stone age". With the Iranians many long-range missiles, and threatening to use them on multiple countries, and with Israels standing position that if they were to 'go down for the count' they would use missiles they have aimed at even western countries, do you think any of your billionaire buddies will let you in their bunker - too bad for everyone else. Oh yeah, your in Australia - guess you can crack open a brewski and watch the fire-works. Maybe you could send them a memo to time it with New Year's Eve. You say you are not supporting a war, but you do sound exited enough for people to ask.

Do you honestly believe that Israel is going to sit back and watch Iran build a nuclear weapon...?

Whether I support such a war is not important, the important thing is that it will happen sooner rather than later.

Once the plans are signed off and the first shots are fired it will make the pevious 'shock and awe' campaign in Iraq look like one of your premature ejaculation moments Brian.

Irans ability to initiate any pre emptive strike will be removed and the ensuing bombardment of Iranian infrastructure will be akin to bombing them back to the stone age...

[Brian]

Do you honestly believe that Israel is going to sit back and watch Iran build a nuclear weapon...?

Whether I support such a war is not important, the important thing is that it will happen sooner rather than later.

Once the plans are signed off and the first shots are fired it will make the pevious 'shock and awe' campaign in Iraq look like one of your premature ejaculation moments Brian.

Irans ability to initiate any pre emptive strike will be removed and the ensuing bombardment of Iranian infrastructure will be akin to bombing them back to the stone age...

Let's hope the Pakistanis, or someone, doesn't join up with them. The Iranians have already demonstrated they have long range missiles, all they need is a bigger 'fire-cracker' to put on the top of them and the 'shock and awe' could be both ways. In any event, even with just conventional weapons, the world wide economic fall out will be huge.

But one needs to ask, are we going to have another Iraq - WMDs no where to be found - and all hell breaking loose?

[Brian]

Syria is going to be a big question for everyone, not just Turkey. With the Russian base there the USA/West have an obvious problem.

Analysis: Turkey confronted with possible Syrian civil war

23 Nov 2011
(Reuters) - Turkey appears to be preparing for some form of civil war in neighboring Syria, wary of any unilateral intervention but fearful fighting there could quickly escalate to a broader sectarian conflagration in the Arab world.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/23/us-syria-turkey-hazards-idUSTRE7AM26L20111123

Rest of article in Link

To further confound thing, Russia is arming Syria for any attack. I think this means sending a signal to USA/West back-off or you will be facing us, in which case, the West can only send in one of their lackeys from the Arab states, hence the arming of Syria.

Russia to sell arms to Syria, sales overall to rise

ZHUKOVSKY, Russia | Wed Aug 17, 2011 12:26pm EDT
(Reuters) - Russia's top arms exporter said on Wednesday it intended to continue selling weapons to Syria, despite calls from the United States for Moscow to halt its weapons trade with Damascus.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/17/us-russia-arms-idUSTRE77G41X20110817

Rest of article in Link

@MODS
Maybe we could have one separate thread for eg 'Middle East Conflicts' and move the non-Lybian posts to it so they are in order.

[Brian]

Looks like Bahrain could be coming up next.

"Islam Times"
Washington is looking for a Sunni Replacement of the King of Bahrain approved by Riyadh

http://www.islamtimes.org/vdcizwaz3t1azr2.ilct.txt

19 Nov 2011 13:13

Bahrain (Islam Times) – A number of websites posted news citing informed sources that the U.S. is looking for a replacement from the Sunni sect in Bahrain to be the successor to the King of Bahrain Hamad Bin Issa, adding that the new ruler must be approved by the ruling family in Saudi Arabia.

According to sources close to the decision-making department in the White House, the United States demanded from the King of Bahrain Hamad Al-Khalifa to impose stability in Bahrain before 2012, even if at the expense of his departure.

Sources explained that the United States no longer tolerates the delay in the process of resolving the ongoing events of anti-Khalifa regime in Bahrain.

They also revealed that the White House has begun searching for a substitute Sunni to replace Hamad in Bahrain, and demanded that the alternative should get the approval and blessing of Saudi Arabia.

[DirtyCodingHabitz]

Do you honestly believe that Israel is going to sit back and watch Iran build a nuclear weapon...?

Why shouldn't Iran make its own nukes? and there's no actual evidence that they are creating any nukes, even the CIA confirmed that.

Israel has no right to attack other countries. Israel is just another version of greece, but 100 times worse.

Whether I support such a war is not important, the important thing is that it will happen sooner rather than later.

Why is it important for Iran to be attacked? did the media tell you so? Well, then I guess if Macedonia was creating its own nuclear weapon it too should be attacked because the media said so.

Once the plans are signed off and the first shots are fired it will make the pevious 'shock and awe' campaign in Iraq look like one of your premature ejaculation moments Brian.

Irans ability to initiate any pre emptive strike will be removed and the ensuing bombardment of Iranian infrastructure will be akin to bombing them back to the stone age...

Your jokes are horrible. Your views on Iran are extremely insane.

Watch this video and maybe it will change your mind about attacking other counties if they want to build a nuke (even if Iran isn't building any).
Ron Paul "Why shouldn't Iran have nukes?" - YouTube

[Phoenix]

Why shouldn't Iran make its own nukes? and there's no actual evidence that they are creating any nukes, even the CIA confirmed that.

I think the common sense approach would be to have less nuclear weapons available to the world community.
Ahmadinejad has never hidden his hatred for Israel or wiping their state off the face of the Earth.

Israel has no right to attack other countries. Israel is just another version of greece, but 100 times worse.

The Palestinians in Israel are still Palestinian, the Macedonians in greece are 'greeks', they're not allowed to be Macedonians...that alone hardly makes the 'greeks' 100 times better than Israel...maybe you want to reconsider your opinion on that one

Why is it important for Iran to be attacked? did the media tell you so? Well, then I guess if Macedonia was creating its own nuclear weapon it too should be attacked because the media said so.

What the fuck are you talking about, where did I say it was important for Iran to be attacked?

BTW, why's your media source about the CIA denying an Iranian weapons program more accurate than any media reports that you claim shape my views...?

Your jokes are horrible. Your views on Iran are extremely insane.

I think your comprehension skills are horrible or should that be infantile...?

[George S.]

well regarding the freing of the egyptian people from moubarak.I heard that the freedom fighters are for military rule.THe generals have said that they don't have a problem with that as long as they get the right support.

[Onur]

Does anyone know what version of Islam most Pakistanis are?
The USA seems not to be favouring them.

Pakistanis are sunni but not that strict unlike Saudi Wahhabis, more like Tunisians, Egyptians. But Pakistan is kinda free from USA`s grasp, so they are not like Arabic states. CIA wanna turn Pakistan to a 2nd Afghanistan but it`s a tricky situation because Pakistan has nuclear technology.

Onur, maybe it is time for you to invest in some under ground bunkers as it seems Turkey might get hit by Iran and even Russia.

Do you think your little Jewish and American friends will help you?

Erdogan`s government accepted NATO anti-missile radar to be planted in Turkey but thats just a principal acceptations atm. It has to be accepted in our parliament and it wont be easy to install it because people will resist any NATO/US involvement to our country.

Iranian officials are trying to get support from Turkish public and they are just warning us for possible actions in the future. They are right tough. I believe they have a right to destroy any NATO anti-missile system if Israel/USA attacks them. This is not an empty threat, Iranians can bomb NATO bases in Turkey but it`s not that easy to do. Neither Iran nor Turkey desires any conflict between them.

Iran can surely deal with NATO but they cannot deal with Turkey, not because of military power but because of the fact that ~30 million Azeri Turks living in northern Iran, bordering Turkey and Azerbaijan. These people are not Kurds, they would never support USA against Iran but if Iran attacks Turkey, they would surely revolt against Iranian authorities. Azerbaijan would be hostile against Iran too. So, Turkey has an ethnic card to play against Iran and Iran knows this very well. Do you know that most of the high ranked Iranian military officers are Azeri Turks, including their current chief of staff named Rahim Safavid??? This is a tradition in Iran since Safavid empire days. Azeri Turkish population controls the Iranian military.

A conflict between Turkey and Iran would be CIA`s wet dream because only then, they would be able to create a civil war in Iran. This is what NATO trying to do for years. They wanna create conflicts between Iran and Turkey to destabilize Iran by using ethnic problems and overwhelm them without using US soldiers, resources.

I reckon the Iranians will be just as 'effective' against any attack as the Iraqis were. Iran doesn't have the resources, logistical capability or the stamina to withstand a protracted assault from a fully committed and supported Israel, let alone the might and war experiences that the USA can bring to the fight.

Phoenix, you cannot compare Iran with Arabic states. Iran is one of the biggest forces in middle east in terms of military but psychologically Iran has the most advantages. I mean, you can easily find people to sellout his own states like Iraq because those are plastic, fake countries created by the west after WW-1 BUT you cannot do that in a country like Iran.

Read mine and Zarni`s posts in this thread`s earlier pages, you will find comparison of Iranian military power and economical consequences of a conflict in Iran. Did you know that due to the geographical position, Iran has capability to block 40% of total world oil trade&production???? Do you know what that means??? Sudden collapse of already weak western economy in crisis.

Let's hope the Pakistanis, or someone, doesn't join up with them. The Iranians have already demonstrated they have long range missiles, all they need is a bigger 'fire-cracker' to put on the top of them and the 'shock and awe' could be both ways. In any event, even with just conventional weapons, the world wide economic fall out will be huge.

Pakistanis joins to what? You mean nuclear tech?? Pakistan already has nuclear technology for years and yes Pakistan has 1000s of missiles with nuclear warheads.

[Phoenix]

Phoenix, you cannot compare Iran with Arabic states. Iran is one of the biggest forces in middle east in terms of military but psychologically Iran has the most advantages. I mean, you can easily find people to sellout his own states like Iraq because those are plastic, fake countries created by the west after WW-1 BUT you cannot do that in a country like Iran.

Onur, it won't be a ground war where the invading force has to be numerically superior and has to win the 'hearts and minds' of the locals.
This will be far different from Iraq and Afghanistan and different from the airwar against Serb forces in the YU conflict.
Any potential western and/or Israeli attack will have to be extremely precise and selective, the war planners have a difficult balancing act to contend with...the threat of nuclear contamination and world oil supplies.

Did you know that due to the geographical position, Iran has capability to block 40% of total world oil trade&production???? Do you know what that means??? Sudden collapse of already weak western economy in crisis.

Onur you're right, that's why this is such a difficult proposition for Israel and the West.

[DirtyCodingHabitz]

I think the common sense approach would be to have less nuclear weapons available to the world community.

So we have to start a war with Iran to have less nuclear weapons? I think you should write a letter to every country that has a nuclear weapon and tell them how you feel about them.

Ahmadinejad has never hidden his hatred for Israel or wiping their state off the face of the Earth.

You don't like doing your own research. Looks like your buddy DCH will do it for you because sheeple are too blind to see the truth.

Here's a group that you would much like to join Facebook.

The Facts

The firestorm started when Nazila Fathi, then the Tehran correspondent of The New York Times, reported a story almost six years ago that was headlined: “Wipe Israel ‘off the map’ Iranian says.” The article attributed newly elected Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s remarks to a report by the ISNA press agency.

The article sparked outrage around the globe, with then-President George W. Bush and other world leaders condemning Ahmadinejad’s statement. The original New York Times article noted that Ahmadinejad said he was quoting Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the Islamic revolution, but that aspect was largely overlooked.

Then, specialists such as Juan Cole of the University of Michigan and Arash Norouzi of the Mossadegh Project pointed out that the original statement in Persian did not say that Israel should be wiped from the map, but instead that it would collapse.

Cole said this week that in the 1980s Khomeini gave a speech in which he said in Persian “Een rezhim-i eshghalgar-i Quds bayad az sahneh-i ruzgar mahv shaved.” This means, “This occupation regime over Jerusalem must vanish from the arena of time.” But then anonymous wire service translators rendered Khomeini as saying that Israel “must be wiped off the face of the map,” which Cole and Nourouzi say is inaccurate.

Ahmadinejad slightly misquoted Khomeini, substituting “safheh-i ruzgar,” or “page of time" for "sahneh-i ruzgar" or “arena of time.” But in any case, the old translation was dug up and used again by the Iranian news agency, Cole says. In fact, that’s how it was presented for years on Ahmadinejad’s English-language Web site, as the Times noted in a somewhat defensive article on the translation debate.

But the story doesn’t end there. Karim Sadjadpour, an Iranian specialist at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, notes that Iranian government entities began to erect billboards and signs with the “wipe off” phrase in English. Joshua Teitelbaum of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs compiled an interesting collection of photographs of these banners, such as one on the building that houses reserve military forces of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. “Israel should be wiped out of the face of the world,” the sign reads in English.

Teitelbaum’s report, while written from a pro-Israel perspective, includes a number of threatening statements about Israel that are similar in tone to Ahmadinejad’s controversial statement.

In 2000, Khamenei stated, “Iran’s position, which was first expressed by the Imam [Khomeini] and stated several times by those responsible, is that the cancerous tumor called Israel must be uprooted from the region.” He went on to say in the same speech that “Palestinian refugees should return and Muslims, Christians and Jews could choose a government for themselves, excluding immigrant Jews.”

Sadjadpour, who has closely studied the statements of Khamenei, said that the supreme leader has spoken more on the question of Israel than any other issue, which is remarkable given that Iran shares no border with Israel and that the Jewish state has virtually no impact on the daily lives of Iranians. Sadjadpour said Khamenei has been consistent, stating repeatedly that the goal is not the military destruction of the Jewish state but “the defeat of Zionist ideology and the dissolution of Israel through a ‘popular referendum.’”

Of course, an Israeli might conclude that such an outcome would be the destruction of the Jewish state in any case.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/did-ahmadinejad-really-say-israel-should-be-wiped-off-the-map/2011/10/04/gIQABJIKML_blog.html

And that's from the WashingtonPost, your favorite dinner for the day every day.

Here's some more info: Iran's President Did Not Say "Israel must be wiped off the map"

The Palestinians in Israel are still Palestinian, the Macedonians in greece are 'greeks', they're not allowed to be Macedonians...that alone hardly makes the 'greeks' 100 times better than Israel...maybe you want to reconsider your opinion on that one

1. Palestinians get treated like animals by the Israeli government.
2. Palestinians were and are still getting ethnically cleansed by the Israeli government.
3. Greece can't make up their mind what to do with us. It's one time where we have rights in some places and then they take it away. This is mostly the problem from RoM if they stood up to greece we would have full rights by now... it's been 20 years.

I know what I say because I know the facts.

What the fuck are you talking about, where did I say it was important for Iran to be attacked?

Whether I support such a war is not important, the important thing is that it will happen sooner rather than later.

I think you know pretty well what you said.

BTW, why's your media source about the CIA denying an Iranian weapons program more accurate than any media reports that you claim shape my views...?

Because the media has its own agenda and spreads their own propaganda to brainwash and convince people (like you) to support invasions of countries.

Here's a good video for you, sheeple.
Iran Nukes (What They Feed You 109) - YouTube

[Onur]

Onur, it won't be a ground war where the invading force has to be numerically superior and has to win the 'hearts and minds' of the locals.
This will be far different from Iraq and Afghanistan and different from the airwar against Serb forces in the YU conflict.
Any potential western and/or Israeli attack will have to be extremely precise and selective, the war planners have a difficult balancing act to contend with...the threat of nuclear contamination and world oil supplies.

Both Israeli and US officials admitted that without ground conflict, it`s not possible to stop Iranian nuclear advancements because Iran created their facilities 100s of meter underground and with massive steel blocks for further protection. Their facilities will stay unharmed vs NATO bombing attacks.

Onur you're right, that's why this is such a difficult proposition for Israel and the West.

Yes. When NATO attacks them, Iran will surely send missiles to US petroleum facilities in Arabic states and they will also block all trade in Arabian gulf with their warships and submarines. It`s estimated that the oil prices will rise a lot as well as massive oil shortage. So, even you will be effected from that in Australia because your gas, oil prices will be 2-3 times more than now. 3 times more oil prices means sudden collapse of several EU states and oil shortage means sudden termination of German industry. We will probably have WW-3 then, nothing else.

[George S.]

in relation to lybia there seems to be vested interests rather than a push for real democracy.There may be a chance that military rule may take ove before democracy has a chance.

[Phoenix]

DCH, I'm getting pretty tired trying to explain to you that I'm not in favor of starting wars...whoever makes that final decision won't be consulting me nor a fuckin know it all like you.

So stop chasing shadows in my posts.

[DirtyCodingHabitz]

DCH, I'm getting pretty tired trying to explain to you that I'm not in favor of starting wars...whoever makes that final decision won't be consulting me nor a fuckin know it all like you.

So stop chasing shadows in my posts.

Can't prove my posts wrong? I don't even care if you support it or not. You just used that as an excuse because you can't respond to my last post.

[Phoenix]

DCH, what am I supposed to prove wrong about your posts...

That Iran needs a nuclear power industry?
That Iran has every right to develop nuclear weapons?
That the Iranian regime has never threatened Israel?
That Israel is 100x worse than Greece?
That certain statements made by the Iranian leadership are false?
That the media is plotting and scheming against Iran?