West Asia News and Discussions

[pentaiah]

We have learned to live L-e-t via aman ki Asha,
Israel is tiny and cant take blows like India, where we just ask score kay hai after terror attack and go on with life.
Oh we are going to play cricket with L-e-t, let the games begin one more time...
no problems any way I had hope you will see the light at the end of the tunnel
the optimist in me never quits but now I have to revise my self.... darn it...
Chalo seriously

[devesh]

^^^
ok...wonderful. thanks for the wisdom!

[Aditya_V]

^^^^^

Israel approached India in the 1980s and offered us support to do to Kahuta what the Israelis had done to Osirak. Due to fear of US retaliation (political / economic / more aid for Pakistan), Rajiv Gandhi backed out. Sad but true ....

It was Indira Gandhi who backed out with good reasons, unlike Iraq, most of Paki nukes of importing Parts in SKD form srew driving them together from Cheens, bombing Kahuta would not have made any difference.

[shyamd]

Special forces have arrived to deal with the Kuwaiti protesters. Police have been blocking the access to the protest site. People amassing in the protest site

[RamaY]

Quasi nuclear weapon states (when push comes to shove) {readers are requested to note that the sole world super power couldn't do a zilch when it's ambassador was dragged out of its embassy and beaten and raped to death just a month ago. Now imagine the chaos the host nation would create when it is try to steal/acquire the nukes from its own bases}

Under NATO nuclear weapons sharing, the United States has provided nuclear weapons for Belgium,[46] Germany,[46] Italy, the Netherlands,[46] and Turkey[46] to deploy and store.[47] This involves pilots and other staff of the "non-nuclear" NATO states practicing, handling, and delivering the U.S. nuclear bombs, and adapting non-U.S. warplanes to deliver U.S. nuclear bombs. U.S. nuclear weapons were also deployed in Canada until 1984, and in Greece until 2001 for nuclear sharing purposes.[48] Members of the Non-Aligned Movement have called on all countries to "refrain from nuclear sharing for military purposes under any kind of security arrangements."[49] The Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad (ISSI) has criticized the arrangement for allegedly violating Articles I and II of the NPT, arguing that "these Articles do not permit the NWS to delegate the control of their nuclear weapons directly or indirectly to others."[50] NATO has argued that the weapons' sharing is compliant with the NPT because "the U.S. nuclear weapons based in Europe are in the sole possession and under constant and complete custody and control of the United States."[51]

In addition to this we have the states that have the capability to build nukes as Pentaiah ji mentioned...

Countries that are claimed to cancel nuclear weapons programs are Taiwan, Libya, Argentina, Brazil, Switzerland and Sweden.

[Lisa]

Quasi nuclear weapon states (when push comes to shove) {readers are requested to note that the sole world super power couldn't do a zilch when it's ambassador was dragged out of its embassy and beaten and raped to death just a month ago. Now imagine the chaos the host nation would create when it is try to steal/acquire the nukes from its own bases}

Under NATO nuclear weapons sharing, the United States has provided nuclear weapons for Belgium,[46] Germany,[46] Italy, the Netherlands,[46] and Turkey[46] to deploy and store.[47] This involves pilots and other staff of the "non-nuclear" NATO states practicing, handling, and delivering the U.S. nuclear bombs, and adapting non-U.S. warplanes to deliver U.S. nuclear bombs. U.S. nuclear weapons were also deployed in Canada until 1984, and in Greece until 2001 for nuclear sharing purposes.[48] Members of the Non-Aligned Movement have called on all countries to "refrain from nuclear sharing for military purposes under any kind of security arrangements."[49] The Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad (ISSI) has criticized the arrangement for allegedly violating Articles I and II of the NPT, arguing that "these Articles do not permit the NWS to delegate the control of their nuclear weapons directly or indirectly to others."[50] NATO has argued that the weapons' sharing is compliant with the NPT because "the U.S. nuclear weapons based in Europe are in the sole possession and under constant and complete custody and control of the United States."[51]

The above is not true, nuclear 'keys', actual storage and deployment are strictly controlled by the US.

[ramana]

KS garu used to say these countries have US nukes with the launch authority still with US and are in effect crypto nuke powers.The PRC gave TSP the nukes and the launch authority.
------------

Remember the move Thunderball where the Italian pilot crashes an UK plane with weapons for the international gangsters to recover!

Well in TSP the gangsters are in uniform.

[Suppiah]

PrC did not just transfer nukes they also did other transfers of the telegraph green back variety so we have commies and their yellows trying to bury the truth in the sand...

Until we get out of that chakra vyugh by whatever means, superpower or even regional power status will elude us.

Working with Israel is but one option...

[Suppiah]

^^^^^

Israel approached India in the 1980s and offered us support to do to Kahuta what the Israelis had done to Osirak. Due to fear of US retaliation (political / economic / more aid for Pakistan), Rajiv Gandhi backed out. Sad but true ....

It was Indira Gandhi who backed out with good reasons, unlike Iraq, most of Paki nukes of importing Parts in SKD form srew driving them together from Cheens, bombing Kahuta would not have made any difference.

Most likely true....Amma would not have resisted the temptation of Israel's offer came close to election time...which I am sure the smart Jews would have ensured...

[shyamd]

Breaking News: Shooting spree outside Turkish PMO - 1 injured. PM was meeting ex PM of Syria - Riad Hijab at the time.

---------------
Bomb blasts reported in Bahrain - 5 per some people.

-------------
5/#Aleppo seems more reconciled to its war within. Shops have opened. Buildings crumbling by the day. People in for long haul #Syria
Expand
2h Martin Chulov ‏@martinchulov
4/ Rebels have held recent gains in Kurdish areas, but they're not meaningful. Frontlines barely shifted in past 2 months #Syria
Expand
2h Martin Chulov ‏@martinchulov
3/ Regime airforce flying higher, but still dominant. Our car targeted by cluster bomb dropped from a jet. Missed by 20 metres #Syria
Expand
2h Martin Chulov ‏@martinchulov
2/ In #Aleppo area, home-grown AQ group Jabhat al-Nasraf around 800-strong. Foreign AQ group, al-Muhajarim has 500+ members #Syria
Expand
2h Martin Chulov ‏@martinchulov
Some reflections from another week in #Aleppo. 1/ Rebels can't finish what they've started. AQ groups alone in offering help.

@WilliamsJon
Western diplomat in Damascus says Doha talks designed to bring #Syria's opposition together "falling apart"


---------------
Syria’s war spills into Lebanon
Text Size PrintE-mailReprints

By Editorial Board, Published: October 25

DURING A visit to Washington in late August, Gen. Wissam al-Hassan, the intelligence chief of Lebanon’s internal security forces, offered a grim assessment of the civil war raging in neighboring Syria and its likely impact on the region. Dictator Bashar al-Assad, he told us, still had a chance to outlast the rebellion against him, though “it will take a couple of years and more than 100,000 killed.” For the Assad regime, he added, “one of the solutions of the Syrian conflict is to move it outside Syria. He survives by making it a regional conflict.”

A little more than seven weeks later, Mr. Hassan was dead, killed in an Oct. 19 car bombing in Beirut that has taken Lebanon to the brink of its own sectarian war. Most Lebanese not allied with the Hezbollah movement agree with former prime minister Saad Hariri that “it is clear as day” who sponsored the assassination. In short, Mr. Assad is attempting to implement the very strategy that Mr. Hassan spoke of.

The intelligence chief was a key member of the pro-Western group that governed Lebanon for several years after the 2005 “Cedar Revolution” forced Syria to end 30 years of military occupation — and he had been fighting to prevent Mr. Assad from meddling in his country. In August, he exposed a plot by a former Lebanese cabinet minister with close ties to Mr. Assad who had conspired to smuggle explosives into the country for a series of bombings. He was pressing Lebanon’s weak prime minister, Najib Mikati, to order the disarmament of a pro-Syrian militia that had provoked clashes in northern Lebanon.

But Mr. Mikati is constrained by Hezbollah, a Syrian client that is the strongest force in the current government. “Mikati won’t move” against Syria’s provocations, Mr. Hassan told us, “unless Assad is dead or outside the country.”

Mr. Hassan proved all too prescient. Mr. Mikati has done little to respond to the bombing — the worst such attack in Lebanon in four years — other than to deploy the army to quell incipient sectarian clashes. He has refused to resign, a step that could open the way to the formation of a government that does not include Hezbollah. In this, remarkably, he had the support of the Obama administration, whose first response to the attack was to dispatch the U.S. ambassador in Lebanon to join her Russian and Chinese colleagues in meeting the president to appeal for “stability” in the country.

The State Department subsequently softened that stance, saying that it would support a “process leading to a new government.” But in Lebanon as well as Syria, the Obama administration is pursuing the shortsighted policy of seeking to restrain anti-Assad forces. That strategy has had no effect in either country other than to empower U.S. enemies and jihadist groups, whose foreign sponsors are showering them with weapons and cash.

Mr. Hassan warned us that the prolongation of the fighting in Syria would lead “to sectarian war and a destroyed civil society.” He added: “The [Syrian] Army will disintegrate, and after its collapse there will be chaos.” By refusing to arm or protect secular and liberal forces, the Obama administration is helping to ensure that outcome.

---------------------------
UAE: First-ever Shri Durga Laksha Kumkumarchane Puja Held in Dubai

[ramana]

X-post...
"shyamd"

Interesting article
Petraeus’s Quieter Style at C.I.A. Leaves Void on Libya Furor

By SCOTT SHANE
WASHINGTON — In 14 months as C.I.A. director, David H. Petraeus has shunned the spotlight he once courted as America’s most famous general. His low-profile style has won the loyalty of the White House, easing old tensions with President Obama, and he has overcome some of the skepticism he faced from the agency’s work force, which is always wary of the military brass.

But since an attack killed four Americans seven weeks ago in Benghazi, Libya, his deliberately low profile, and the C.I.A.’s penchant for secrecy, have left a void that has been filled by a news media and Congressional furor over whether it could have been prevented. Rather than acknowledge the C.I.A.’s presence in Benghazi, Mr. Petraeus and other agency officials fought a losing battle to keep it secret, even as the events there became a point of contention in the presidential campaign.

Finally, on Thursday, with Mr. Petraeus away on a visit to the Middle East, pressure from critics prompted intelligence officials to give their own account of the chaotic night when two security officers died along with the American ambassador, J. Christopher Stevens, and another diplomat. The officials acknowledged for the first time that the security officers, both former members of the Navy SEALs, worked on contract for the C.I.A., which occupied one of the buildings that were attacked.

The Benghazi crisis is the biggest challenge so far in the first civilian job held by Mr. Petraeus, who retired from the Army and dropped the “General” when he went to the C.I.A. He gets mostly high marks from government colleagues and outside experts for his overall performance. But the transition has meant learning a markedly different culture, at an agency famously resistant to outsiders.

“I think he’s a brilliant man, but he’s also a four-star general,” said Senator Dianne Feinstein, the chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. “Four-stars are saluted, not questioned. He’s now running an agency where everything is questioned, whether you’re a four-star or a senator. It’s a culture change.”

Mr. Petraeus, who turns 60 next week, has had to learn that C.I.A. officers will not automatically defer to his judgments, as military subordinates often did. “The attitude at the agency is, ‘You may be the director, but I’m the Thailand analyst,’ ” said one C.I.A. veteran.

Long a media star as the most prominent military leader of his generation, Mr. Petraeus abruptly abandoned that style at the C.I.A. Operating amid widespread complaints about leaks of classified information, he has stopped giving interviews, speaks to Congress in closed sessions and travels the globe to consult with foreign spy services with little news media notice.

“He thinks he has to be very discreet and let others in the government do the talking,” said Michael E. O’Hanlon, a Brookings Institution scholar who is a friend of Mr. Petraeus’s and a member of the C.I.A.’s advisory board.

Mr. Petraeus’s no-news, no-nonsense style stands out especially starkly against that of his effusive predecessor, Leon E. Panetta, who is now the defense secretary.

Mr. Panetta, a gregarious politician by profession, was unusually open with Congress and sometimes with the public — to a fault, some might say, when he spoke candidly after leaving the C.I.A. about a Pakistani doctor’s role in helping hunt for Osama bin Laden, or about the agency’s drone operations.

Mr. Petraeus’s discretion and relentless work ethic have had a positive side for him: old tensions with Mr. Obama, which grew out of differing views on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, appear to be gone. Mr. Petraeus is at the White House several times a week, attending National Security Council sessions and meeting weekly with James R. Clapper Jr., the director of national intelligence, and Thomas E. Donilon, Mr. Obama’s national security adviser. Mr. Donilon said recently that the C.I.A. director “has done an exceptional job,” bringing “deep experience, intellectual rigor and enthusiasm” to his work.

“When Obama came into office, they were very suspicious of one another,” said Bruce Riedel, a former C.I.A. officer and presidential adviser. “Clearly, over the course of the last four years, Obama has come to trust Petraeus.”

Mr. Petraeus has managed the delicate task of supporting rebels in Syria’s civil war while trying to prevent the arming of anti-American extremists. But when his C-17 Globemaster touched down in Turkey in September for consultations on Syria, the trip went all but unnoticed by the news media. He worked for months to address the complaints of Pakistani officials about drone strikes against militants, while keeping State Department officials abreast of likely future strikes, a policy called “pre-concurrence” that has prevented interagency squabbles. In his travels to the tumultuous post-Arab Spring Middle East this week, only a brief mention of his arrival in Cairo surfaced in local news reports.

Inside the agency, some subordinates say, he has largely defused the skepticism that initially greeted a celebrity general whose stated views of progress in the war in Afghanistan, among other things, were far rosier than those of C.I.A. analysts. But by comparison with Mr. Panetta, who wooed the work force and often did not question operational details, Mr. Petraeus is a demanding boss who does not hesitate to order substandard work redone or details of plans adjusted.

“I’ve never seen anyone with his drive — ever,” said Michael J. Morell, the agency’s deputy director. “He remembers what he asks for. Three weeks later he’ll say at a morning meeting: ‘Whatever happened to that? Is that done yet?’ ”

But the Benghazi crisis has posed an extraordinary test for Mr. Petraeus. After the killings, intelligence officials concerned about exposing the extent and methods of the large C.I.A. presence in the city would say little to reporters for publication. Conservative critics of Mr. Obama seized on a series of reports by Fox News and other outlets to make the incendiary charge shortly before the election that four Americans had died because of the administration’s negligence.

Mr. Petraeus said nothing publicly, but that did not keep him out of the story. Some news reports faulted his secret testimony to Congress days after the attack for supposedly supporting the view that it was not a planned strike but a spontaneous response to an offensive anti-Muslim video. Then, last week, Fox News reported that agency officials had refused desperate requests for help from operatives under fire in Libya, and the agency issued a flat denial. “No one at any level in the C.I.A. told anybody not to help those in need,” its statement said.

Far from ending the speculation, the statement added to it. William Kristol, the editor of The Weekly Standard, concluded that the agency was pointing its finger at the White House, which he suggested must have refused the requested intervention. “Petraeus Throws Obama Under the Bus” was the headline on the Weekly Standard’s blog.

Perhaps worse for a former military commander like Mr. Petraeus, the father of Tyrone S. Woods, one of the security officers killed, accused the Obama administration in interviews of essentially abandoning his son and others to their fate and not caring about their deaths. The Wall Street Journal reported Friday that some agency employees resented the fact that Mr. Petraeus did not attend the funerals of the two security contractors. Officials said he was concerned that his presence would confirm their agency connection, still officially secret at the time.

On Thursday, hoping to subdue the gathering public relations storm, intelligence officials invited reporters to a background briefing to, in their view, set the record straight. They offered a timeline of C.I.A. actions on the night of the attack, countering the idea that the besieged Americans were left alone under fire, and explaining why some would-be rescue efforts discussed in news reports were never feasible.

Notably, they also sought to rehabilitate Mr. Petraeus from some of the negative speculation that has surrounded him. The C.I.A. director, said one intelligence official, “has been fully engaged from the start of the agency’s response, particularly in the rescue mission that was swift and aggressive.”

“This idea that he is somehow not engaged is baseless,” the official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

For Mr. Petraeus — once pilloried in full-page newspaper ads as “General Betray Us” in the debate over the Iraq war — it is nothing new to be at the center of a political firestorm. “This is Washington, so naturally all controversies get caught up in the political jet stream,” an intelligence officer close to Mr. Petraeus said.

Whatever the challenges of his first year, said Mr. O’Hanlon, his friend, “I’m confident in saying that he loves this job.”

“He may miss the military at an emotional level,” he added, “but he loves this work.”

Mr. Petraeus’s future has inevitably been the subject of rumors: that he would be Mitt Romney’s running mate, or, more plausibly, that he was interested in the presidency of Princeton. In a statement in late September, he did not rule that out for the future, but said that for the time being he was “living the dream here at C.I.A.” That was before the recriminations this week over Benghazi.

No wonder the admin is reluctant to share details of the Benghazi incident as it has other aspects.

[pentaiah]

the problem is Petraeus and the culinary institute think they are brilliant in COIN, but the truth is they are brilliant but only in creating fostering and nourishing insurgency, after the monster is created they have no clue how to put the ginie back in the bottle.

more wonder will happen in ME and in Africa just you wait and see...

recall that as soon as the Benghazi incident happened "I said some thing doesnt jive here" about spontaneous events as a response to the Md Movie....


Now that stingers and other equipment is freely available in TSP, Libya, Syria

aage ka haal, Mahan comentrator Swargiya Shree Suresh Saraiya pesh karenge

[nachiket]

^^^^^

Israel approached India in the 1980s and offered us support to do to Kahuta what the Israelis had done to Osirak. Due to fear of US retaliation (political / economic / more aid for Pakistan), Rajiv Gandhi backed out. Sad but true ....

Lot of rumors and speculation about this, but nobody really knows if it happened. It is more likely to be someone's wild imagination. I remember some discussion on some BRF thread about a supposed revenge attack by the PAF on the nuclear power plant at Tarapur as well.

[ramana]

Bi, In early 2000 I made a ppt slide deck on Arab Nationalism vs Islamist Fundamentalism for a BRF meet in NoCA. Will try ot find it and upload to slideshare.

I had gone thru the history of these two movements and found that West supports the latter and rejects the former. It was a eye opener for some of us then.

A famous Indian origin scholar in West used the thought process for his own studies. He is now a noted expert on the subject.

Here is an update of that pitch now loaded into slideshare for all.

Modern Islamism

BTW there were 256 downloads in about three weeks!


Barry Rubin in Jerusalem Post recognizes that
Sunni Islamism is replacing Arab Nationalism!!!

Once upon a time, Arab nationalism ruled the Middle East. Its doctrine saw Arab identity as the key to political success. Some regarded Islam as important; others were secular. Yet there was no doubt that national identity was in charge.

All Arabs should unite, said the radical nationalists who ruled in Egypt, Libya, Syria, Iraq and elsewhere, to destroy Israel, expel Western influence, and create a utopian single state in the region.

Instead, of course, the period was characterized by battles among the radical Arab states for leadership. The less extreme ones sought survival through a combination of giving lip service to radical slogans, paying off the stronger regimes, and getting Western help.

That era is over. We are now in the era of Sunni Arab identity and especially of Sunni Arab Islamism. With the liberals so weak, except possibly in Tunisia, the three main choices are between the Muslim Brotherhood; the Salafists; and conservative-traditional forces (as in Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Jordan) that will have some Islamic flavor but not seek to be destabilizing and aggressive in the region.

Sunni Arab Islamist identity’s primacy has important implications for both national and regional politics.

First, tolerance for other groups is low to zero. The future of Christians in the Middle East is dim. Already, most have been driven out of Iraq and the Gaza Strip. If Christians in Syria and Egypt – comprising more than 10 percent of the population in each country – could find somewhere to go, it is quite possible that hundreds of thousands will be leaving in the coming years. Were the rebels to come to power in Syria, the Alawite minority – which has largely ruled the country for the past four decades – also faces serious threats to its existence.

Second, the regional ambitions of Turkey’s Islamist regime will come to nothing. There is a deep resentment against Turks among many Arabs and especially the Islamists. Hamas and Hezbollah will take Turkish aid but will give Ankara no influence over themselves. Any influence the Turkish regime has over the Syrian rebels would not survive a victory for the revolution.

Third, this situation is a severe setback for Iran. A few years ago it was possible to believe that Tehran had a shot at achieving regional hegemony. But the Sunni Arab Islamists generally despise Shias, and the new Arab leaders don’t feel warmly inclined toward Persians, either. In Iraq, circumstances – including a military defeat and minority status – have forced the Sunnis to accept a Shia-dominated government. That won’t happen anywhere else.

Iran is down to just three potential allies: the faltering Syrian regime; Hezbollah in Lebanon; and, on some issues but especially confronting Sunni hostility to Shias, Iraq. It is likely to lose Syria but that very outcome might push Iraq and Iran closer together against a hostile Sunni bloc. That doesn’t mean Baghdad will become a satellite of Iran, an active enemy of the United States, or an equally radical state, but the two will increasingly cooperate.

Within the Sunni Arab Islamist world, the groups that we call Salafist for convenience – smaller organizations that demand full revolution now – compete with the Muslim Brotherhood, but the two can also work together. Their goals are the same. It is their sense of timing, not to mention clashing personal and group ambitions for power, that is different. Even today, the Muslim Brotherhood rules only in Egypt and the Gaza Strip, as well as leading a coalition in Tunisia. Their prospects are good in Syria, but not in Jordan. We should not overstate the group’s power though, of course, Egypt is the single most important Arab state.

The Brotherhood leadership, in Egypt and potentially in Syria, will have an important decision to make. They will definitely not become moderate. There is no doubt that they will institute repressive regimes at home, harass Christians, and reduce the status of women. They will also daily trumpet their hatred of the United States and Israel.

But what will they do about that hatred? It is probable that they will, in practice, permit their territory to be used for cross-border attacks on Israel. They might well prefer, however, to avoid a direct conventional war.

On this point, however, they will constantly be goaded by the Salafists. To provide a parallel example, note that the Brotherhood generally does not launch violent attacks on Christians in Egypt, but doesn’t lift a finger to protect them.

A lot of their energy, though, will go into battling the Shia and after Syria is settled, however long that takes, the main battleground will be Lebanon. When Damascus sneezes, Beirut catches cold. A Muslim Brotherhood-dominated government in Syria would not back the current moderate Sunni leadership in Lebanon but instead promote radical Sunni Islamist groups there. The probability of a Sunni-Shia war in Lebanon would be high.

If one regards Iran as the main threat, the temptation would be for the West to back the Sunni side. I think this would be a tremendous mistake. Aside from the nuclear issue, the danger from Iran has been massively reduced by these changes.

Even if Tehran has nuclear weapons, the main danger in the Arabic-speaking world is going to come from the radical Sunni forces simply because they constitute a large majority there. After all, the battle on the ground for control of Arabic-speaking countries will go on every day whereas Iran can only decide to use nuclear weapons once (and of course might face an Israeli attack).

Further, and keep in mind that Iran’s regime is less irrational than many people think, the strategic value of attacking Israel has declined greatly. Nobody new would rally to Tehran’s side because of such an attack. The door to the Sunni world has been shut against Iran no matter how much its leaders scream about Palestine and make threats – or implement them – against Israel. Will the Sunni and Shia sides cooperate against Israel? No, not directly.

The Turkish regime will give some help to Hezbollah; Iran will give some help to Hamas. Yet there will be no broader alliance.

We are not just talking here about theological differences but a battle between individual leaders, organizations, and states for power and primacy. Of course, though, they will compete in proving that they are the true leaders in the anti-Israel struggle. And the same point applies regarding opposition to the United States.

This is a complex situation requiring a sophisticated and determined American leadership that never feels guilty or inferior in the face of radical hatred or subversion. Only one presidential candidate is capable of handling this difficult and threatening situation. It is not the incumbent.

[shyamd]

BREAKING: Israeli army: Israeli military vehicle hit by bullet coming from the Syrian side in the Golan Heights . #Syria #Lebanon #Israel

Subsequent statement says it was unlikely the vehicle was the target

-----------
Things in Syria will change after the elections per chacha Bandar Al bush

-----------
Mohammed bin Nayef moved up to interior minister.

-----------
PM Maliki has told the pentagon that he is going to ask the Iraqi Air Force to buy light aircraft to reinforce the Syrian border.
-----------
US is pushing the opposition to negotiate with Asad

[JE Menon]

>>US is pushing the opposition to negotiate with Asad

Where's this from? Or is it a private source? - Serious question.

[shyamd]

Some SNC guy was grumbling about it last week to a journalist. I am hearing about it again today from someone else - I don't know if any official statement has been made on the subject.

[ramana]

Cameron is pushing for safe passage for Assad.
7 Syrian generals defect to Turkey.

Must have read Snow white and ...

[JE Menon]

Shyamd, if there's anything solid on that, kindly let us know...

[RamaY]

I have a revelation

The Wahabism v1.0 (called AQ) did a series of Embassy bombings. The USA's response was absent until it is forced to act post 9/11. Then the US MIC used this momentum to go after Iraq & Afghanistan.

Now the Wahabism v2.0 is using a new strategy. Use mob-o-crisis to attack US embassies. We saw the first round in Bhengazhi, Egypt etc., My prediction is that we will see more of these in coming months. I wonder if this includes embassies of other western nations. As and when enough momentum is built it will be Iran+1's turn.

The end result of this would be to un-tie wahabism to claim the entire ME. This will coincide with US's energy independence and becoming net-energy exporter.

I also predict that such a Iran+1 (Allah doesn't show me who this +1 is) would unleash the next wave of nuclearization in certain geopolitical theaters.

At the end of the day, it is all good in Indian Interests only; because it will lead to some self-contemplation and self-awareness within Indian society.

[Austin]

So with Obama win one can expect that war with Iran will be the last option for the next 4 years ?

[shyamd]

UK shift on #Syria. @WilliamJHague authorised diplomats to have direct contact with armed rebels on ground thru secure communucations

British PM chaired NSC meeting on Syria for the first time. Probably timed for US shift

William Hague is the man that handles intel affairs in the UK.

[member_20292]

^^^ cant understand @wahabism @ ramaY

If the middle east is becoming more free and more democratic....why do the people there , long for strong, conservative Islamic rulers? Same thing is observed in Pakistan.

[shyamd]

Turkey is making an official request for NATO to base Patriot missile interceptors on the Turkish Syrian border to "protect the syrian people" per BBC quoting a turkish official.

NFZ on its way to protect "liberated territories"? Again lets wait and see what Obama does now... Ball is in his court.

Cameron on BBC says priority issue to be discussed with US pres Obama is Syria.

Larijani just hinted of US - Iran direct talks taking place recently to Mehr news agency.

Britain to organise armed Syrian rebels into efficient fighting force

Britain is to increase its involvement in Syria's bloody civil war by offering to organise the rebels fighting President Bashar Al Assad into a stronger force


By Christopher Hope, Amman and Ruth Sherlock6:00AM GMT 07 Nov 2012
In a significant departure MPs will be told today that the UK will directly deal with the armed opposition in Syria for the first time.
Previously Britain has only held talks with the political leaders outside the country over a conflict that has left tens of thousands civilians dead and over 1 million people displaced.
Britain yesterday vowed to step up its efforts to bring about an end to a regime that has presided over a civil war that has cost as many as 40,000 people lose their lives.
The first National Security Council meeting after the US presidential election which is likely to be chaired by Prime Minister David Cameron, will be dedicated to the crisis in Syria.
That meeting is likely to look at ways to bring America on board with a more direct strategy towards Syria now that the next US president has been elected for a four year term.

Britain is not allowed by a European Union arms embargo to supply weapons to Syria - a fact which Mr Cameron signalled was "frustrating" during a three day visit to the Middle East.
William Hague, the foreign secretary, will tell an opposition conference in Doha today that he "has authorised diplomats to have direct contact with military figures on the ground" through secure communication links with armed rebels.
The man favoured to win western backing for a new opposition front at the Qatar conference told The Daily Telegraph he planned to establish an interim government inside the 'liberated' parts of northern Syria.
It would seek international recognition, request a fund of "more than a billion dollars", and military support to "defend ourselves from the regime's war planes".
A written ministerial statement is due to be laid in Parliament outlining the new initiative, which will be coordinated by the team led by Jon Wilks, a senior official at the Foreign Office.
Downing Street said Britain wanted to also help the rebel fighters within Syria to work together to topple Assad, as happened in Libya to face Col Muammar Gaddafi's brutal regime.
A Number 10 source said: 'At the moment there are lots of different groups. They haven't come together and coalesced in the way in Libya all with the shared aim of toppling Gaddafi. This is all about helping them to do it.
"We are engaging with the opposition to try and encourage them come together much more on the ground.
"The point of it will be to talk to the leaders of the local armed groups. What we've concluded is that it's too hard to do this by only talking to people outside the country.
"The opposition have been very clear that they want help from the international community."
Britain will also stress to the rebels the need to respect the human rights of captured Government, the source added.
Britain is prevented from physically arming the rebels by a European Union arms embargo which prevents any military hardware being supplied to any Syrians.
But Mr Cameron signalled that he was frustrated by the embargo and the inactivity of the United Nations.
He told British newspaper reporters: "On Syria, I'm frustrated that we aren't able to do more, either at the UN where I'd like us to push harder for clearer resolutions calling on Syria for a clear political transition. But we'll keep pushing.
'Obviously we're part of an EU arms embargo so we're not able to take that step."
Asked what he would say if Assad said today he was ready to leave and wanted a safe exit, the Prime Minister said: "Done. Anything, anything to get that man out of the country and to have a safe transition in Syria.
"Of course I would favour him facing the full force of international law and justice for what he's done. I am certainly not offering him an exit plan to Britain but if wants to leave he could leave, that could be arranged."
The Prime Minister will pledge an extra £14 million to refugees in Jordan today as he visits a refugee camp which has been set up for Syrians.

[RajeshA]

Larijani just hinted of US - Iran direct talks taking place recently to Mehr news agency.

Mitt Romney in his campaign made Iran into a big issue. Basically he was saying that the next President would have to solve the Iran nuclear issue. Usually it is the case that the winner of an election has a talk with the loser, and the winner promises to look into some of the promises the loser made but now after losing cannot fulfill them. So Iran could come up in any discussions between Obama and Romney, and it could even be pushed to the head of the foreign policy agenda.

Before the election, Obama was able to hold back Israel's pushing on Iran. Now that the election is over, Iran is now Obama's plate.

Also expect a more vigorous push on Syria.

[abhischekcc]

Predictions based on US election's ending:
1. Syrian conflict will become bloodier, as US wehrmacht will now be able to focus on bringing in more 'support' executives on ground. There are no more elections to bother about for the next 4 years. Whooppeee!!!
2. There will be a major action in the region sometime around New Year/Xmas - this is the time when most people are at home and watching TV - maximum impact. (IC 814 was hijacked in the same period).
3. Iran - well, no prediction on this front. Too fluid to tell.

[brihaspati]

Obama's win was expected - so no fundamental change in any of the foreign policy issues. But have to remember that the current "liberal" coalition that supported Obama - would not like to risk greater direct US involvement in foreign wars, for that will be a surefire way to lose Dem chances in 2016. Obama may feel free to do stuff on his own because he now has nothing to lose, and yet there is going to be substantial pressure on him to rein in the warhorse.

He is likely to go soft on Iran, but take the steam off on Assad - while at the same time pressurizing the "rebels" to come to terms with Assad. UK often takes an extra lead whenever it comes to protecting Saudi/Gulf interests - the same extra leap that Blair gave on Iraq. It does not necessarily reflect a hidden signal from across the pond to do so.

Long view : I would see advantages in the GCC sweeping Syria through its Islamists and jihadists. It is time that hedging and hawing by the leadership of nations - comes to an end, and that they are forced to reveal their inner agenda and take clear positions on the sides of divisions. The Syria conflict is one where all the players are forced to open their cards. If Assad goes, and the inevitable jihadist regime comes to power - with full MB and Saudi support [together seems so unlikely to the pundits - but there is a common connection and that is the theologian network that spans both], Turkey essentially goes Islamist and the stretch between Bosphorus and the Gulf becomes one unending jihadist houriland.

Europe will try to deflect the backlash towards soft pedallers like India - whose current regime will find it impossible to take any steps that appears to go against Sunni "interests", and trans-national interests at that. This has an impact on the Indian regime too having to take clear sides. To take the pressure off Israel, and avoid a confrontation with Iran that promises to get Russia involved, if not PRC - most of the Anglo-EU block will surreptitiously push the jihadists towards India. Its a hobsons choice for Indian regimes. If they go with GCC, territorial control will have to be compromised in the north. If they resist the jihadists, Saudi led theologian networks will be displeased and they lose power in electoral politics [either through funding drying up or withdrawal of electoral support]. If they take refuge with US, theyw ill be forced to compromise with pakis and displease Russia. If they go with russia, US washes its hands off, and the west+GCC combine happily munches on Indian territory too. Non-Islamic imperialist religions will first demand submission to their authority before promising any help - and even then they would like the non-Abrahamic to be first sufficiently bashed up - so that later on they can clear the harvest for themselves without resistance. So in all of these ways, a coordinated GCC+west removal of Assad implies Indian regime has to take a position clearly with respect to Islamism from the peninsula.

Which is what is needed.

[Rony]

The death of Arab secularism

[Virupaksha]

The death of Arab secularism

good riddance. If arab secularism meant Nasser, gaddafi, Saddam : we should prefer overt islamism anyday. Though even that in the case of Soudi ...

[ramana]

shyamD, I see the Syrian embroglio leading to a repeat of the Battle of Hattin that ended the Kingdom of Jerusalem but this time it will be Istanbul.

[RamaY]

shyamD, I see the Syrian embroglio leading to a repeat of the Battle of Hattin that ended the Kingdom of Jerusalem but this time it will be Istanbul.

I was reading about this battle and this caught my eye

"Saladin ordered that they should be beheaded, choosing to have them dead rather than in prison. With him was a whole band of scholars and sufis and a certain number of devout men and ascetics, each begged to be allowed to kill one of them, and drew his sword and rolled back his sleeve. Saladin, his face joyful, was sitting on his dais, the unbelievers showed black despair" – Imad ed-Din, Saladin's Secretary

[shyamd]

Lets see what happens.
-----------------
US Ambassador Francis Ricciardone said Turkey would be the country for Obama's first foreign visit after US elections http://t.co/1Iki3lV0

[Mahendra]

I would have imagined it would have been one of the powerful GCC countries but never mind as long as Hussein Obama visits a Sunni Islamist country we should all rejoice. I am told Salmonella Khurshit has congratulated Hussein Obama, I'm sure we can all have orgasms over this watershed event in the history of the world. I'm sure Hussein Obama will hand over the super-power baton to Khurshit.
Thank you GCC etc etc
Israel is Finished, so is India as we know it Jai Ho

[shyamd]

A revealing map of which world leaders Obama called back today

Assad says will live and die in Syria

Thu, Nov 08 14:33 PM EST
image
1 of 20

By Rania El Gamal and Andrew Hammond

DOHA (Reuters) - President Bashar al-Assad said he would "live and die" in Syria and warned that any Western invasion to topple him would have catastrophic consequences for the Middle East and beyond.

Assad's defiant remarks coincided with a landmark meeting in Qatar on Thursday of Syria's fractious opposition to hammer out an agreement on a new umbrella body uniting rebel groups inside and outside Syria, amid growing international pressure to put their house in order and prepare for a post-Assad transition.

The Syrian leader, battling a 19-month old uprising against his rule, appeared to reject an idea floated by British Prime Minister David Cameron on Tuesday that a safe exit and foreign exile for the London-educated Assad could end the civil war.

"I am not a puppet. I was not made by the West to go to the West or to any other country," he told Russia Today television in an interview to be broadcast on Friday. "I am Syrian; I was made in Syria. I have to live in Syria and die in Syria."

Russia Today's web site, which published a transcript of the interview conducted in English, showed footage of Assad speaking to journalists and walking down stairs outside a white villa. It was not clear when he had made his comments.

The United States and its allies want the Syrian leader out, but have held back from arming his opponents or enforcing a no-fly zone, let alone invading. Russia has stood by Assad.

The president said he doubted the West would risk the global cost of intervening in Syria, whose conflict has already added to instability in the Middle East and killed some 38,000 people.

"I think that the price of this invasion, if it happened, is going to be bigger than the whole world can afford ... It will have a domino effect that will affect the world from the Atlantic to the Pacific," the 47-year-old president said.

"I do not think the West is going in this direction, but if they do so, nobody can tell what is next."

QATAR, TURKEY CHIDE OPPOSITION

Backed by Washington, the Doha talks underline Qatar's central role in the effort to end Assad's rule as the Gulf state, which funded the Libyan revolt to oust Muammar Gaddafi, tries to position itself as a player in a post-Assad Syria.

Qatari Prime Minister Hamad bin Jassim Al Thani urged the Syrian opposition to set its personal disputes aside and unite, according to a source inside the closed-door session.

"Come on, get a move on in order to win recognition from the international community," the source quoted him as saying.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmed Davutoglu delivered a similar message, saying, according to the source: "We want one spokesman not many. We need efficient counterparts, it is time to unite."

An official text of a speech by Qatari Foreign Minister Khalid Mohamed al-Attiyah showed he told the gathering: "The Syrian people awaits unity from you, not divisions ... Your agreement today will prove to the international community that there is a unity ... and this will reflect positively in the international community's stance towards your fair cause."

Across Syria, more than 90 people were killed in fighting on Thursday, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said.

In Turkey's Hatay border province, two civilians, a woman and a young man, were wounded by stray bullets fired from Syria, according to a Turkish official. Turkish forces increased their presence along the frontier, where officials have said they might seek NATO deployment of ground to air missiles.

Syria poses one of the toughest foreign policy challenges for U.S. President Barack Obama as he starts his second term.

November 8th, 2012
02:00 PM ET
FIRST ON CNN: Iranian jets fire on U.S. drone

By Barbara Starr

Two Iranian Su-25 fighter jets fired on an unarmed U.S. Air Force Predator drone in the Persian Gulf last week, CNN has learned.

The incident raises fresh concerns within the Obama administration about Iranian military aggression in crucial Gulf oil shipping lanes.

The drone was in international airspace east of Kuwait, U.S. officials said, adding it was engaged in routine maritime surveillance.

Although the drone was not hit, the Pentagon is concerned.

Two U.S. officials explained the jets were part of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps force, which has been more confrontational than regular Iranian military forces.

The Obama administration did not disclose the incident, which occurred just days before the presidential election on November 1, but three senior officials confirmed the details to CNN.

The officials declined to be identified because of sensitive intelligence matters surrounding the matter.

The drone's still and video cameras captured the incident showing two SU-25s approaching the Predator and firing its onboard guns.

The Iranian pilots continued to fire shots that went beneath the Predator but were never successful in hitting it, according to the officials.

U.S. military intelligence analysts are still not sure if the Iranian pilots simply were unable to hit the drone due to lack of combat skill, or whether they deliberately were missing and had no intention of bringing down the drone. But as one of the officials said, "it doesn't matter, they fired on us."

The official confirmed the United States protested the incident but has not heard back from Iran.

Iran has, at times, been confrontational in the region. In January, the U.S. military and coast guard had close encounters with Iranian Navy vessels which approached at high speeds and exhibited provocative behavior.

[shyamd]

@WashingtonPoint: Breaking: “@Shadaomar: #Syrian Opposition agrees on forming transitional government headed by Riyad Seif #SNC #Syria #Qatar”

[Virupaksha]

@WashingtonPoint: Breaking: “@Shadaomar: #Syrian Opposition agrees on forming transitional government headed by Riyad Seif #SNC #Syria #Qatar”

So the purge backed by the west and islamists is in the final stages.

[pentaiah]

I ma getting bored when will the dishum dishum start my popcorn is also getting old

[shyamd]

Did the Israeli military defy PM Netanyahu? A sensational story is rocking Israel: http://t.co/YW2Beteo

[RoyG]

I ma getting bored when will the dishum dishum start my popcorn is also getting old

Yeah, some of us recognized the hype generated by a few on this thread. Better idea would be to get a new batch of popcorn. It's probably rotting by now.

[shyamd]

@nytimes: In Syria, Missteps by Rebels Erode Their Support http://t.co/6UASr7ou

-------
Reports of UK intelligence have informed Bahrain qatar and Kuwait of a large terror cell planning attacks in these countries