Occupy Israel
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Has a major ally of a small middle eastern country ever been known to invade such a country and install a regime of it's own preference before?
The history of Iran’s nuclear program offers evidence that can be used for several interpretations of Ayatollah Khamenei’s statements and behavior. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the Iranian revolution that overthrew the pro-Western Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi in 1979, originally believed that it was anti-Islamic to build nuclear weapons, and he ended the secret nuclear weapons program that the shah had begun.
But the brutal Iran-Iraq war that lasted from 1980 to 1988 changed the Iranian thinking about nuclear weapons. Iraqi forces under Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons against ill-prepared Iranian troops, and there was no outcry from the United States, which supported Iraq at the time.
In 2003, probably in response to the American invasion of Iraq, which was originally justified by the Bush administration on the grounds that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, Ayatollah Khamenei ordered a suspension of Iran’s nuclear weapons program, although he has allowed uranium enrichment efforts to continue.
Russia Is Massing Troops On Iran’s Northern Border And Waiting For A Western Attack
The Russian military anticipates that an attack will occur on Iran by the summer and has developed an action plan to move Russian troops through neighboring Georgia to stage in Armenia, which borders on the Islamic republic, according to informed Russian sources.
Russian Security Council head Viktor Ozerov said that Russian General Military Headquarters has prepared an action plan in the event of an attack on Iran.
http://www.pakalertpress.com/2012/0...hern-border-and-waiting-for-a-western-attack/
Is David Kilcullen resonsible for those night raids 2? He the founding intellect, no, its not an oxymoron, of the Clear Hold Build strategy, thrown in a liberal sprinkling of Hearts and Minds talking points
[youtube]0LPRwMDD47k[/youtube]
If you knew half of what you claim to know about military matters, you'd know Kilcullen's doctrinal work on COIN actually put a stop to the midnight door kicking BS that a US Army completely focussed on conventional warfighting was doing way too much of in in the first part of the Iraq and Afghan wars.
Just because you hold a particular bias doesn't mean you have carte blanche to make bullsh!t claims about someone who was actually trying to do some good.
But I guess he deserves it coz he's just another babykiller right?
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2011/s3320411.htmNight raids can radicalise Afghans
When a man's paycheck depends on his not understanding something, you can depend upon his not understanding it.
got me two sources for you Si B.
Afghanistan working to stop divisive NATO night raids: Karzai
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/22/us-afghanistan-agreement-idUSBRE82L0HS20120322
Tony Eastley on abc mornings radio, or mourning rayjo
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2011/s3320411.htm
plus, we hear that our special forces were going with the yanks to do assassinations in Waziristan cross Afpak border
seems Killkullen failed to stop that, and yes, he is now at Lowy I assume. And he has been out of theatre for nigh what, half dozen years. But the surge, that was PR for Petraeus looking at a tilte for the POTUS nomination in 2016, he was involved in all of that strategy.
This comes from out resident climater, where is Upton to weigh in on these FoPo debates
Now, when the Iraq and Afghan wars were wrong to begin with, and killed over a million by Pew estimates, then there IS NO good. You think you can do some good, or mitigate damage, when in fact you are prolonging it. This was the criticism of John Birmingham had, of Assange's Wikileak Manning dump. Now, if Assange had caused some precipitous withdrawals, yes a manifest ignorance (hubris) indeed, but if he had, when the public opened its eyes, he saves lives. And any Afghans who were collaborating, and got it in the neck from the Talibs, would be wrong and evil, but Assange might have caused untold lives and fatalities prevented no?
As if the west could solve the problems of Afghanistan, but they can be a problem, and just perhaps, there was an alternative, to halting Al Qaeda's free operations.
And Geoffrey Hypothetical Robertson, also got it a little wrong on Iran. they have been after weapons for 20 years now G Rob, if we believe the broadsheets. And lesser technological states has ascended to nuclear powers in that time. FAIL!
sorry Si, I lost a long post.
I might get back to it in the next days.
But Gordon's CobraII and Ricks were on my reading list. Were.
Had somthing to say on Junger, his film is showing on Sunday Best this Sunday on ABC2. He had Assanges video.
Post was longer, but I admit a bias, and went into the meta qestion we fail to ask.
Cancat: " Our humanity determines which questions we even ask"
Upton Sinclair's LAw: "When a man's paycheck depends on his not understanding something, you can depend upon his not understanding it."
http://original.antiwar.com/engelhardt/2012/04/15/what-the-laws-of-war-allow/
I might be able to reply later in depth to your position and criticism of me, which I might recognise may well be valid.
/damn computer ether
I quickly wish to respond to the cofirmed targets qualifier.
You know that is what the NSW dep Commish used to :find: Harrir's"killer" in the Lebanon bomb, the phone trees model. This is what has caused the drone targeting of weddings in afghanistan. Using phone signals to towers, and the phone trees model, they can use a Kevin Bacon degree of seperation, and blow the place sky high with a drone if one of their separation degrees, is at the wedding.
And it is clear that the informers and other tips and sources, will use the occupying forces, for their own advantage.
You obviously are interested in this sphere, so you will know this. So you will know the terminology of "confirmed targets" is just a weasel word of the highest order, and their intelligence is in no way accurate when taking the entire book. One may be. But would we appreciate it is someone kicks out door down at 2am on the basis of flawed intelligence.
But Petraeus was trying to bring in some intellectual chops to his operations.
McCHrystal confirms two things, the formula that one innocent (collareral?) = potentially 10 new enemies. I could use the terms the occupiers use, insurgents or terrorists, could, but wont. But will just extemporise on those terms
The other thing (2), is about the civilian innocents, or victims. We have killed a truckload of people, or something equivalent to that phrasing.
The question the guys like John Birmingham fail to ask in his op-ed pieces on Assange's intelligence wires dump, was just how many victims there are as is, and this dump, may well cause sources or US intelligence cooperators to be necked, but in consequentialist measures, could this realise of information into a public sphere cauced the precipated withdrawal, and saving of lives. Not saving the US collaborators, no, they cop it. I dont agree with anyone copping it. But as McChrystal says, we have been responsible for a $hitload of innocent victims. No doubt, that whatever remains of a centrali Talib command, have also been the bearers of innocent blood on their mullah dress.
So, can one do good. That was the question I was posing in the reply that went AWOL. Google Chrome ahhh. Is Kilkullen and his model and the surge in IRaq, really doing good. Can you mitigate or ameliorate bad circumstance by being their and inside the tent. Or should you not be there. To just assume one is helpless wrt political decisions made in DC and pentagon and the state dept and office of special plans, subscribes to a futility and defers all power to those who take a state to war for some nebulous concept of loyalty or military integrity.
Instructive question is, "how many resignations have their been in Iraq and Afghanistan?" in the higher echelons of the military?
The integrity has been atomised, and if everyone has one one-thousandth responsibility for Abu Ghraib it is easy to get a bottle of Dettol disenfectant and wash ones hands of the responsibility. But this ignores the military structure and chain of command. Bush Cheney Rumsfeld Yoo Addington Wollfowitz Feith, then the military staff. Who is gonna be accountable.
I still did not get into my question of "the question" post, but I think you can discern my position with the references to the mader and engelhardt article, and the other turgid prolix points I "attempted" to make. cheers
As convenient as it is to bind Afghanistan in with Iraq, they're not the same war. They're just not. One was a unilateral invasion, whereas the current ISAF mission in Afghanistan is a UN Security Council backed operation conducted at the specific behest of what passes for the Afghani government. As much as people may have moral, or even political or militarily strategic objections to Afghanistan, it's legal status is not under question by anyone who actually knows their international law.
That doesn't mean I'm advocating blindly supporting the ISAF mission to Afghanistan. It does mean I'm saying you can't class the two wars in the same way. They've run concurrently and were launched/sponsored by the same US administration, that's about all they have in common.
(source: antiwar.com)1) Sadr ordered his men to stand down, apparently sickened by the recent violence between his followers, and other Shi’ites and the government.
2) The Awakening (Sahwa) councils, Sunni groups who were revolting against al-Qaeda-in-Iraq’s senseless slaughters, began receiving large sums of money from the US to only fight AQI, and not US troops as well, as they had been doing. The verdict is yet out on what happens when the money stops and Maliki, or whoever is in power, decides to turn on this now-well-trained movement.
3) This is the big one: the ethnic cleansing of Baghdad was essentially complete. No more violence was necessary for many partisan sectarians. Juan Cole did some extra parsing of this in 2008.
I'm not saying the war in Iraq was justified, in fact I'm of the opinion it probably wasn't.
The question the guys like John Birmingham fail to ask in his op-ed pieces on Assange's intelligence wires dump, was just how many victims there are as is, and this dump, may well cause sources or US intelligence cooperators to be necked, but in consequentialist measures, could this realise of information into a public sphere cauced the precipated withdrawal, and saving of lives. Not saving the US collaborators, no, they cop it. I dont agree with anyone copping it. But as McChrystal says, we have been responsible for a $hitload of innocent victims. No doubt, that whatever remains of a centrali Talib command, have also been the bearers of innocent blood on their mullah dress.
You realise that there hasn't been a single confirmed death of anyone from the wikileaks dump, don't you BC?
The whole argument is a red herring, designed to distract from the fact that there have been, as you say, truckloads of civilian deaths from the other side of the fence. In many many instances, unjustifiable deaths, that on too few occasions wikileaks has exposed.
The argument about good intelligence vs bad intelligence is another red herring when we have no right be in these countries slaughtering people in the first place!
We are told the surge worked, but it just bought off. And great home spun PR.
Re: Afghanistan. Why was DC negotiating with the Taliban "government" for the pipelines in 2001. Was a military intervention the one and only solution to dealing with terrorist training camps? No one with a brain can believe this. The intervention/war, was a conflict waged for retribution and retaliation and vengeance. Sate the homeland.
OldBlueFan - Over 1,000,000 dead and way more than that displaced. A country in ruins, many places still without electricity for huge chunks of the day ... etc etc ... all simply to remove a man that was in the way of some oil barons ... but it was only "probably" not justified???
Are you taking your cues from Madeleine Albright?
An entire post of many many words made devoid of any credibility with the inclusion of one tiny word ...
How can you possibly claim to be making an honest assessment of the situation when you clearly have no respect for human life?