Tweet
Re: War in The Middle East
-
-
Comment
-
Re: War in The Middle East
Thing you don’t see in western medias;
Comment
-
Re: War in The Middle East
This one's funny
Comment
-
Re: War in The Middle East
Voice of the White House August 10, 2006TBR News.org – August 10, 2006
“Here, as promised, is an interesting conversation that somehow accidentally got intercepted and transcribed. There are lots more where this came from!”
Transcription of telephone conversation on August 3, 2006
From
Israeli Embassy, Washington D.C. Telephone Number (202) 364-5582.
to
unidentified individual at AIPAC, Washington D.C., Telephone Number (202) 639-5201
Commenced 1821 hrs, concluded 1826 hrs.
Speaker A Reuven Azar - Counselor for Political Affairs, Embassy of Israel
Speaker B Unidentified individual located at AIPAC headquarters
A. Well, things are going as well as expected, better perhaps than expected. There is military progress there (Lebanon) and we have wonderful cooperation here.
B. For sure, but don’t forget the dangers in having too much cooperation. All right for this moment but in the long run, this can certainly backfire on us. You know, we are seen as being too much influential with the Bush people.
A. I wouldn’t worry too much about that. The media is certainly not to worry about and most Americans really do not care about things there (Lebanon) The main point is that by the time the U.S. makes itself felt at the UN, we will have accomplished our goals and established the buffer we need.
B. Absolutely but…there is still the future to think about.
A. Who cares? Once we establish the buffer, the rest is just xxxx. It will all be hidden soon in the coming press reports of Arab ‘attacks’ on the U.S. This is for the voting in November. You know, ‘many Arab groups will for sure attack American targets.’ They (the U.S. Government) will choose so-called target areas where they need the most support. We don’t need to worry about Miami, Skokie or Beverly Hills after all. (Laughter) and this is a little crude but the public here is terribly stupid and the warning color days worked before, didn’t they?
B. Yes, but there are second thoughts on all of that. If you go to the well too often, there are problems. People lose interest.
A. The British are being such swine about this, aren’t they? They are causing trouble about the bombs these days.
B. Just a few troublemakers. The press here does not cover that and who reads the foreign media? Most Americans can’t read anyway. But there is danger that the U.N. might be motivated to move a peace keeping force into Lebanon and this might negate our purposes. Hesbollah must be utterly wiped out and Syria must be made to realize…with force if necessary…that it cannot supply the terrorists with more Iranian rockets. Maybe an accidental airstrike on Syrian military units could say to them to mind their own business. We have done this before.
A. It is too bad that we cannot teach Tehran a lesson. The ultimate goal would be to have America attack Iran but I am afraid the American military is dead set against this…
B. They are all xxx-haters up there.
A. For sure but we know that Americans can bomb the xxxx out of Tehran and hopefully kill off a number of the militants, probably disrupt their atomic program and teach all of the area that the U.S. means business. We support them, they support us. But they cannot send in ground troops and if we did that, our losses would not be borne at home. As it is, there are the usual malcontents bleating about the Lebanon business.
B. They are just afraid they will get a rocket on their house and there are the same ones here. The Lieberman business is not that good, after all. Yes, of course he is a liberal Democrat but his support of us is too obvious. He could be a little critical too. We see the Bush people doing this, just to keep the people quiet. Yes, they say, see, we too are actually critical of Israel….
A. But not too critical, right?
B. No, never that. Too many pictures of dead jerks for example. We need to see more pictures of grieving Israelis, mourning lost sons and children. Can’t we get more of those? xxxx the Arabs.
A. I feel sorry for the American mediA. Their instincts are to defend dead Arab children…
B. But nits make lice, don’t they? Who mourns dead Israeli children?
A. I’m sure there would be more on this but not enough children are dead.
B. Not yet, anyway. But if they rocket Tel Aviv…
A. Well, then, for sure.
B. We should have pictures all ready if that happens. Do you think it will?
A. Tehran directs that part of the business. We don’t have as much inside gen on them there…
B. The xxxxing Russians are on their side.
A. We have always had trouble with those Slavic pricks. First weapons…
B. The Chinese xxxxxxxs also do this, don’t forget.
A. No one around here will forget that, be assured. The time will come when we get them too. Say we cut off their oil from the Gulf? What then? They will dance to our tunes then, not Tehran’s.
B. If we had oil…
A. But we do not. The filthy Putin has the oil. They should get rid of him while they are at it. Our people almost had it but he forced them out.
B. They can always come back. The people here would really support this. We put our people back in after we get rid of Putin and then a guaranteed flow of oil to America.
A. And Russia is off the chessboard too.
B. They all want that badly here, too. Cheney is the strongest supporter of cutting the nuts off of RussiA. The military here are against fishing in troubled waters.
A. They can’t be replaced, Bush can’t sack them all.
B. Set an example. Sack a few more of the xxxxxxxs and the rest will shut up. They always do. So, send me your latest list and I’ll see what I can do here.
A .Send someone to pick it up. The mail here is awful. It will take a week if some black doesn’t steal it, throw it away or wipe his ass with it.
B. Tomorrow for sure.
A. OK. And one other matter. We feel very strongly that if the current people get kicked out in November, as it looks like they might, we owe them to help them stay right where they are. It has taken a long time and much money to get all the ducks lined up and we don’t want to have to start in again. We can generally rely on sympathy from the Democrats but they will not support any more military ventures over there. That’s for sure.
B. Then what do you suggest?
A. The terrorism card works wonders. We were going to release a statement that Arabs were going to attack an El Al plane on takeoff, with rockets….
A. Probably leftovers from the CIA businesses in Afghanistan.
A. Let’s not get into that now. But this scare would only affect flights to Israel and we don’t think it would have any impact on the election.
B. Well then, why not have these attacks aimed at American aircraft? Where would they attack from?
A. Say at the perimeter fence lines at airports. Or better still, why not a plan cooked up to smuggle explosives on board transatlantic flights to or from America? Something clever that will catch the public imagination….
B. That stupid bomb in the shoe routine?
A. Don’t knock it. It worked, didn’t it? We can always find some suckers with a bent to this we can fill up with real enthusiasm and then turn them in, complete with plans. They actually believe they are going to paradise and xxxx virgins and we have another propaganda coup. Let’s give this some effort. You know, a terrified public will not want to change horses in mid stream. So far, the Rove people have a good line: If you’re against the Republicans, you’re encouraging the evil terrorists sthick.
B. Well, they did that with the alert warnings and it worked…more or less.
A. Face it, they aren’t too bright here. They ran it into the ground, had to fire Ridge and Ashcroft, one of our very best friends ever, and put those things on ice. They need to discover a huge plot but in America
A. You know, as you said, infiltrate a group of crazies, plant things on them, call the FBI…
B. Oh, they do that themselves. That business in Florida was pathetic…
A. But it worked, didn’t it?
B. For about ten minutes at six o’clock for about three days.
A. Well, think about it and get back to me.
B. Right.
A. What’s the situation with your two people? Are they going to be tried or not?
B. Probably not, as far as the Bush people are concerned. But it is up to the courts and we are very careful not to xxxx with them. They are expected to have the charges thrown out soon…
A. Well, I’ll pray for them. I have to go now so I’ll get back to you later. Don’t forget to send someone for the list
B. OK.
(Conversation terminated)
This is just the tip of a very large iceberg. Other inside information will be published in upcoming editions. On Monday, August 14, I will put up a complete listing of all members of Congress who have received money from AIPAC, state by state, amount by amount.
Dear old crazy, and defeated, Lieberman, shrieking with rage at seeing all his extra income flowing down the drain, has received over $227,758 so far from AIPAC. Tell me, children, what did he do for all that money? There are many more names and amounts to entertain you as well as to give you a concrete guide as to your voting in November next.
As far as the recent stories about “terrorist attacks” coming from England, don’t believe them. It is well known around the White House that this invented story is designed to offset the crushing defeat of the Administration’s darling liberal, Lieberman. This theme, by the way, according to position papers circulating here, is the main theme of the November elections. The thesis? Why the Iron Trio of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld have protected, and will continue to protect, innocent America from evil terrorist threats.
Of course, if you vote Democratic, all bets are off and armies of rabid Muslim (read non Christian) fascists will at once invade America, to rape, loot and pillage while setting off bombs in the Des Moines Public Library. Please note that in spite of all the xxxx the Bush people have spread around about “proctecting America” there has not been one proven incident of any real terrorist group caught or no attack thwarted. The WMD lies were the father and the “terrorist threats” and the illegitimate child of this corrupt and dangerous gang.”
-
-Comment
-
Re: War in The Middle East
This is related to Iraq. I really liked it:
Comment
-
Re: War in The Middle East
A very good and illuminating article by the always illustrious former Marine, William Lind.
Collapse of the Flanks
by William S. Lind
In Iraq and Afghanistan, the "coalition" defeats continue slowly to unroll. In Lebanon, it appears Hezbollah may win not only at the moral and mental, strategic and operational levels, but, astonishingly, at the physical and tactical levels as well. That outcome remains uncertain, but the fact that it is possible portends a revolutionary reassessment of what Fourth Generation forces can accomplish. If it actually happens, the walls of the temple that is the state system will be shaken world-wide.
One pointer to a shift in the tactical balance is the comparative casualty counts. According to the Associated Press, as of this writing Lebanese dead total at least 642, of whom 558 are civilians, 29 Lebanese soldiers (who, at least officially, are not in the fight) and only 55 Hezbollah fighters. So Israel, with its American-style hi-tech "precision weaponry," has killed ten times as many innocents as enemies. In contrast, of 97 Israeli dead, 61 are soldiers and only 36 civilians, despite the fact that Hezbollah’s rockets are anything but precise (think Congreves). Israel can hit anything it can target, but against a Fourth Generation enemy, it can target very little. The result not only points to a battlefield change of some significance, it also raises the question of who is the real "terrorist." Terror bombing by aircraft is still terror.
Understandably, these events keep Americans focused on the places where the fighting is taking place. But more important developments may be occurring on the flanks, largely unnoticed. An analysis piece in the Sunday Cleveland Plain Dealer by Sally Buzbee of AP notes:
Anger toward America is high, extremists are on the upswing, and hopes for democracy in the Middle East lie dashed….
"America, we hate you more than ever," Ammar Ali Hassan wrote in the independent Egyptian daily Al-Masry Al-Youm, in the kind of visceral, slap-in-the-face rhetoric boiling across the region…."
Even many Arab reformers now believe the United States cares more about supporting Israel than anything else, including democracy.
Egypt is one of the three centers of gravity of America’s position in the Middle East, the others being Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. An article by Michael Slackman in the Sunday New York Times suggests that Egyptians’ anger is turning on their own government:
For decades, the Arab-Israeli conflict provided presidents, kings, emirs and dictators of the region with a safety valve for public frustration….
That valve no longer appears to be working in Egypt….
"The regular man on the street is beginning to connect everything together, said Mr. (Kamal) Khalil, the director of the Center for Socialist Studies in Cairo. "The regime impairing his livelihood is the same regime that is oppressing his freedom and the same regime that is colluding with Zionism and American hegemony."
Today, in an interview with the BBC, Jordan’s King Abdullah warned that the map of the Middle East is becoming unrecognizable and its future appears "dim."
Washington, which in its hubris ignores both its friends and its enemies, refusing to talk to the latter or listen to the former, does not grasp that if the flanks collapse, it is the end of our adventures in both Iraq and Afghanistan. It is also, in a slightly longer time frame, the end of Israel. No Crusader state survives forever, and in the long term Israel’s existence depends on arriving at some sort of modus vivendi with the region. The replacement of Mubarak, King Abdullah and the House of Saud with the Moslem Brotherhood would make that possibility fade.
To the region, America’s apparently unconditional and unbounded support for Israel and its occupation of Iraq are part of the same picture. For a military historian, the question arises: will history see Iraq as America’s Stalingrad? If we kick the analogy up a couple of levels, to the strategic and grand strategic, there are parallels. Both the German and the American armies were able largely to take, but not hold, the objective. Both had too few troops. Both Berlin and Washington underestimated their enemy’s ability to counter-attack. Both committed resources they needed elsewhere and could not replace to a strategically unimportant objective. Finally, both entrusted their flanks to weak allies – and to luck.
Let us hope that, unlike von Paulus, our commanders know when to get out, regardless of orders from a leader who will not recognize reality.Achkerov kute.Comment
-
Re: War in The Middle East
Originally posted by Anonymouse
Profound analysis.Մեր ժողովուրդն արանց հայրենասիրութեան այն է, ինչ որ մի մարմին' առանց հոգու:
Նժդեհ
Please visit me at my Heralding the Rise of Russia blog: http://theriseofrussia.blogspot.com/Comment
-
Re: War in The Middle East
Here's another one:
WASHINGTON, DC, United States (UPI) -- The United Nations Security Council unanimously voted in favor of Resolution 1701 calling for the immediate cessation of hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah but left a cluster of unanswered questions. Javier Solana, the European Union`s envoy to the Middle East, summed up the situation at a news conference in Beirut Saturday when he said, 'All United Nations resolutions are not perfect.'
Solana then called upon both parties to implement the resolution 'in good faith.'
Indeed, good faith and a few prayers is what will be needed in order to get Israel and Hezbollah to implement and respect this new resolution. May it prosper better than the slew of previous U.N. resolutions that remain largely ignored. To cite just a few: 242, 338, and more recently, 1559.
Resolution 1701 was unanimously approved by the Lebanese cabinet -- including two Hezbollah ministers. It received a 24-0 vote of confidence from the Israeli government (plus one abstention), and got the green light from Hassan Nasrallah, Hezbollah`s secretary-general. Still, it contains gaping holes, some as wide as those left in the side of some buildings in Beirut`s southern suburbs.
To begin with, much of the language included in 1701 is ambiguous, leaving both sides dissatisfied. For example, despite it calling for hostilities to stop, the resolution grants Israel the right to take 'defensive action.' Of course nothing in the text describes just what constitutes 'defensive action.'
And while the resolution does not grant Hezbollah the same rights, in a televised speech Saturday night Nasrallah reserved the right to resist the occupation, saying it was 'the legitimate right of the resistance to fight for its land.'
The resolution does not address the issue of the prisoners, neither the case of Israeli soldiers being held by Hezbollah nor the fate of Lebanese prisoners detained by Israel. It was, after all, the abduction of two Israeli soldiers a month ago that unleashed the demons of war over Lebanon.
It does not address the logistics of deploying the Lebanese army to the south, nor does it give details of how and when the international force that is to support the Lebanese army -- a beefed up UNIFIL -- will be deployed. Nor does it detail the withdrawal to the other side of the Blue Line of Israeli troops, as demanded by the resolution.
Still, in spite of its shortcomings, Resolution 1701 is very likely to be accepted because both Israel and Hezbollah find themselves at a point in the conflict where each can -- to some degree -- claim victory of sorts, yet risk clearly losing if they continue fighting.
In truth, neither side came out of this conflict really victorious, but then again, neither are they defeated.
Of the two protagonists, Hezbollah comes out of the fight looking better, having resisted the might of the Israeli army for an entire month. In June 1967 it took Israel six days to defeat the combined armies of Egypt, Syria and Jordan. And it took Israel 18 days to turn the tables on Egypt and Syria after the two Arab countries launched a surprise attack on the xxxish state on Yom Kippur in October 1973.
Hezbollah accepted the cease-fire because despite resisting the Israeli invasion and putting up a stiff fight for 31 days in a string of villages along the border -- Khiam, Bint Jbeil, Maroun el Ras and others -- and having fired close to 4,000 rockets into Israel, it is questionable just how much longer the Shiite militia, considered a terrorist group by Israel and the United States, could resist. Hezbollah has undoubtedly suffered heavy casualties among its fighters, though the group has not revealed exact numbers
Hezbollah can be blamed for the savage retaliation by Israel that caused much of the tatters in which Lebanon`s infrastructure lies today. The country`s bridges, roads, power plants have been destroyed, its economy set back some 20 years; a promising tourist season -- one of Lebanon`s primary sources of income -- lost.
Hezbollah undoubtedly must have felt the pressure from its own constituents, the Shiite community in Lebanon. They were the most affected by the war and the large percentage of the nearly one million refugees forced to leave their homes in the southern Lebanese villages and in Beirut`s southern suburbs are Shiites.
On the positive side for Israel, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert did manage to distance Hezbollah from Israel`s northern frontier, creating a buffer zone in which the Shiite militia should be absent, and in which 15,000 Lebanese army troops and 15,000 UNIFIL troops should act as a deterrent, preventing Hezbollah from returning to the proximity of Israel`s northern border. But at what price?
While Israel can also claim victory, overall, it`s a shallow one. Israel had intended to break Hezbollah`s back and humiliate the Shiite militia for having largely been responsible in bringing about Israel`s withdrawal from south Lebanon in 2000, something Israeli politicians and particularly its military were not about to quickly forget, or forgive.
Overall, Israel came short of achieving its intended goal, that of crushing Hezbollah. A war that was meant to last a few days dragged into more than four weeks with the military suffering a high rate of casualties and heavy loss of equipment. Not to mention that nearly 1 million Israelis had to be evacuated from the north of the country to escape Hezbollah`s daily deluge of rockets, incurring a huge economic drain on the country.
Finally, for Israel, it sets a dangerous precedent. The country that was once seen as the unbeatable Goliath in the Middle East has suddenly become mortal.
Of the two men who led their forces into this war -- Ehud Olmert and Hassan Nasrallah -- the one who comes out looking better is Nasrallah. His popularity has skyrocketed in the Arab world, and although he will be taken to task by his fellow Lebanese at a later date, for the moment, even the Christians in Lebanon look at him with greater respect. Whereas Olmert`s Lebanese adventure that claimed the lives of more than 100 Israeli soldiers and about 50 civilians may well end up costing him his job.
(Comments may be sent to [email protected].)
Comment
-
Re: War in The Middle East
I'm very happy that on my birthday a cease-fire was held!
Can we call this a victory for hezbollah? the two israli soldiers not freed and no disarmement of hezbollah!Comment
Comment