West Asia News and Discussions

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by Philip »

So who will now bring the Syrian rebels (actually western funded and trained proxies) to justice now?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/o ... ns-latakia

Syrian rebels accused of killing hundreds of civilians
Human Rights Watch says militant groups slaughtered villagers and took others hostage in attacks on Latakia in August
Jonathan Steele and agency
theguardian.com, Friday 11 October 2013

WARNING: GRAPHIC IMAGES. Human Rights Watch video on the claims of civilian killings in Latakia.

Syrian rebels killed at least 190 civilians and took more than 200 hostage during an offensive in Latakia province in August, Human Rights Watch said on Friday, in what it calls the first evidence of crimes against humanity by opposition forces.

HRW said many of the dead had been executed by militant groups, some linked to al-Qaida, who overran army positions at dawn on 4 August and then moved into 10 villages nearby where members of President Bashar al-Assad's Alawite sect lived.

In its first government-sanctioned trip into Syria during the two-and-a-half year conflict, New York-based HRW has documented a series of sectarian mass killings by Assad's foes during a broader campaign in which Western-backed rebels took part.

In some cases, entire families were executed or gunned down as they fled, according to the HRW report You Can Still See Their Blood.

HRW identified five rebel groups instrumental to funding, organising, planning and carrying out the Latakia attacks, including the al-Qaida-linked Jabhat al-Nusra and Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant groups, as well as the Islamist group Ahrar al-Sham and another unit of foreign jihadi fighters.

These groups publicised their involvement through videos and statements, some of which were used to corroborate the HRW report. The operation appeared to have been largely financed by private Gulf-based donors, HRW said.

What is less clear is the role of fighters from the Free Syrian Army (FSA), the armed wing of the main opposition coalition which is openly supported by the United States, Britain, France and Sunni Muslim Gulf states.

In a video posted on 11 August and apparently filmed in Latakia, FSA chief Salim Idriss said the organisation was taking part in the offensive "to a great extent".


But HRW researcher Lama Fakih, who spent several days in Latakia province in September and spoke to residents, soldiers, militiamen, doctors and officials, said she could not confirm whehter the FSA were present on the day the atrocities took place.

Assad's forces are also accused by rights groups of committing atrocities and using incendiary and cluster bombs in populated areas. They have carried out sectarian attacks, including killing up to 450 civilians in two massacres in mainly Sunni Muslim areas in May, according to United Nations officials.

The opposition and rights groups accuse Damascus of a chemical weapons strike in a Damascus suburb on 21 August that killed hundreds of civilians. The government blames the attack on rebels.

Reuters was unable to get comment from all 20 rebel groups mentioned in the HRW report. Syrian National Coalition spokesman Khaled Saleh said the SNC condemned all human rights abuses and if any had been committed by rebels affiliated with the coalition, they would face justice.

In a written statement to Reuters, Saleh said: "We have previously committed ourselves to applying these rules on all the brigades that work for us and we will hold accountable, after investigation and fair trial, all those responsible for violations against human rights or international laws. The incidents in Latakia are not an exception and we will treat them as we treated previous cases."

A member of the Sunni Islamist Ahrar al-Sham said its fighters had killed no civilians in the offensive.

"If someone uses a weapon against you, you have to fight them. If they do not, you must not kill them," said Abu Muhammed al-Husseini, the 30-year-old head of Ahrar al-Sham's political office in Raqqa.

Lama Fakih, the Syria and Lebanon researcher in HRW's Middle East and North Africa division, told Reuters in reference to the Latakia operation by rebels: "Homes were destroyed and burned. Most villagers had not returned."

Fakih met Hassan Shebli, an Alawite man from the village of Barouda, who fled his village at 4.30am on 4 August as rebels approached. He left his wife, who was in her 60s and needed canes to walk, and his son, 23, who was paralysed, Fakih said.

Shebli said they were both killed and buried behind his house. Fakih visited the house and saw bullet holes in the son's bed frame. "I was able to see the blood splattered on the wall," she said, showing a picture of the room.

Rebel footage posted on the internet showed images of Shebli's son and wife with rebel fighters during the operation.

The scale and organisation of the attacks on civilians suggested premeditation and made them a crime against humanity, HRW said, rather than isolated war crimes reported during the Syrian civil war. The United Nations says the conflict has killed more than 100,000 people.

"These abuses were not the actions of rogue fighters," said Joe Stork, acting Middle East director at HRW. "This operation was a co-ordinated, planned attack on the civilian population in these Alawite villages."

Residents who returned to the villages said they found bodies of their neighbours on the streets and in their homes, as well as in piles of burnt corpses and in mass graves, Fakih said.

Syria's mainly Sunni Muslim rebels are battling to overthrow Assad, whose Alawite sect is an offshoot of Shia Islam and accounts for about 12% of Syria's 23 million people.

The Latakia offensive ended on 18 August, when the government regained control of the area. Rebels told Reuters in August that about 200 of Assad's men were killed at the start of the offensive.
rsingh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4451
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 01:05
Location: Pindi
Contact:

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by rsingh »

habal wrote:And *finally* the west wakes up to the continuous episodes of human rights violations by vermin who call themselves 'rebels' in Syria.

i.e. only when they have a gun named Russia pointed to their head.

Please note that children were in all probability kidnapped from this village after killing adults and then administered lethal injection in Ghouta, videotaped and uploaded on youtube later as Chemical weapons attack by Assad. All courtesy Prince Bandar Bin Sultan and his rabid monkey force.
Syrian rebels killed 190 civilians in August dawn raid - HRW
* 190 men, women and children killed in rebel offensive - HRW

* Mass graves seen by Human Rights Watch researcher

* Western-backed rebels were involved in broader campaign

By Oliver Holmes

BEIRUT, Oct 11 (Reuters) - Syrian rebels killed at least 190 civilians and took more than 200 hostage during an offensive in Latakia province in August, Human Rights Watch said on Friday, in what it calls the first evidence of crimes against humanity by opposition forces.

HRW said many of the dead had been executed by militant groups, some linked to al Qaeda, who overran army positions at dawn on Aug. 4 and then moved into 10 villages nearby where members of President Bashar al-Assad's Alawite sect lived.

In its first government-sanctioned trip into Syria during the 2-1/2-year conflict, New York-based HRW has documented a series of sectarian mass killings by Assad's foes during a broader campaign in which Western-backed rebels took part.

In some cases, entire families were executed or gunned down as they fled, according to a report titled "You Can Still See Their Blood".

HRW identified five rebel groups instrumental to funding, organising, planning and carrying out the Latakia attacks, including the al Qaeda-linked Jabhat al-Nusra and Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant groups, as well as the Islamist group Ahrar al-Sham and another unit of foreign jihadi fighters.

These groups publicised their involvement through videos and statements, some of which were used to corroborate the HRW report. The operation appeared to have been largely financed by private Gulf-based donors, HRW said.
Smoke and Mirror trick sir. This is how HRW works. You wont listen from these guys when Unkil & Aunty go on rampage in Iraq,Afganistan,Libya. HRW is to put pressure on 2nd world. The articles you read is to convince you that HRW is a fair,clean and credible organization. Within newt few weeks you see more articles about unhuman,unimaginable atrocities commited by SA.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by Austin »

habal wrote:Israelis meanwhile just being Israeli.

Israeli air force practice long-range missions, before talks on Iranian nuclear program

http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2013_10_1 ... ions-4738/

"Haaretz said the drill took place with the Greek air force.
Israel being a covert nuclear weapon state and according to FAS having around 200 Nuclear weapon has no intention of giving it up while Iran has to go out of the way to prove it does not have any Weapons program.

I think Nuclear weapons in West Asia would stabalise the situation , since Israels have them , Saudis too via Pak and Iran need to build their own which perhaps they must have done via NoKo.

Israel should grow up and stop acting like a pampered and spoilt child just because some powerful nation in UN keeps covering all its faults via Veto or political/military aid.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by Philip »

The problem for the Israelis is that they have so little strategic depth and rely heavily upon reservists to fight a conventional war,that the threat of using its WMDs,whose range now exceeds a few thousand of KMs beyond Israel's borders,along with its nuclear missiles aboard its German built Dolphin subs,is supposed to deter any attack from a coalition of Arab/Islamist states.The problem is that it hasn't been able to destroy both Hamas and the Hiz.Hamas has been seriously affected by the closure of the tunnels from Egypt by a cooperative Egyptian mil. govt.,adding to the misery of the Palestinians who are a captive people within the defence boundaries of Israel. The Hiz however are far stronger opposition,fanatic and backed by both Syria and Iran.Until Iran recognises the Israeli state the Israelis will continue to depend upon its WMD arsenal as insurance policy,and do everything in its capability to see that Iran never acquires N-weapons.

The real N-contest is between the Sunni Saudis,who possess say some,Paki built N-weapons carried by their Chinese BMs and the Shiite Iranians.The Iranian paranoia of a Saudi Sunni led coalition aided by the US and Israel to destroy the fruits of the Iranian Revolution,parallels that of the Israelis! This keeps them busy stoking the fire and support for Assad and Syria,the de-facto Iranian "frontline".The spate of terror attacks and car bombings in Iraq are meant to keep the Sunnis and Shiites at each others throats,perpetrated by firang vested interests,who do not want the Shiite majority effectively link up with Syria,and on the ground a sweeping Shiite belt stretching all the way from Iran ,the Persian Gulf to the Meditt.Sea.
habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6922
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by habal »

I had said before on this thread, that however close India's ties to Israel, and even my personal sympathies go to the people of Israel, sharing in part some jewish heritage from maternal side. But still Israel is an agent of instability in ME. And once they create instability they will stop this from crossing over their border via help from unkil and Saudis. But then this is directed to all over the place into ME, Caucasus, & China/India. So it is a very cleverly setup agent of deep disturbance in the region and in the wider world, who always is in position to attract sympathy and cries helplessly but causes nothing but instability. Israeli deep state and US/EU deep state are one and the same. So they are like an ME wing of destabilization, the oldest, most pliant and most acknowledged.

rsinghji, some acknowledgement is always better than no acknowledgement. So what if it has been directed against the Saudis. The pictures of those alawite kids keep racing across the mind.
habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6922
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by habal »

some rona dhona ..

If you read here you're one of the aware individuals that already knows Saudi Arabia has taken the wheel of the killing machine in Syria. FT makes it seem as if this is just happening now. It isn't.
This change started months ago. The ouster of Morsi. The selection of a pro Saudi leaders for the Syrian opposition.

There is also a good cop/bad cop routine being played out here, Obama now has lily white clean hands and it is the Saudis who are doing all dirty work.

A new alliance of Islamist rebels. Which really means these are the same hired killers. The same cutthroats. But instead of Qatar being in charge and unable to get the job done, the even more ruthless Saudi nation with Bandar at the helm has stepped into the lead role.

Bandar was deeply involved with US admin during 9/11 too, fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e4cc1f30-2b4e ... ab7de.html
Saudis fear tide of Syria war turning against their interests

Egypt’s army ousted the Islamist president, to plaudits and generous funding from Riyadh; the Syrian opposition elected a new pro-Saudi leadership; and the US seemed poised to launch military strikes on the regime in Damascus that Saudi Arabia has tried to dislodge.

The kingdom’s frustration over Washington’s Syria policy has been exacerbated by last month’s chemical weapons agreement, which the Saudis say does little to change the course of the war or hasten the removal of Mr Assad. Analysts say Riyadh believes the Syrian leader and his Lebanese ally, Hizbollah, are part of a plan by Iran to surround Saudi Arabia with loyal Shia allies, including Yemen, Bahrain and Iraq.

“Supporting the rebels is a strategic decision in Saudi foreign policy, like supporting the government in Egypt,’’ said Hussein Shobokshi, a Jeddah-based columnist. “On the ground there is a stepping up of support for the Syrian Free Army. This criminal regime [in Damascus] can export Hizbollah terrorism to us, so it is a matter of national security in the Gulf.’’

The Saudi strategy has been engineered in large part by head of the General Intelligence Directorate, and his brother Prince Salman, named deputy defense minister by Abdullah in August.
Bandar, Abdullah's nephew, was ambassador to the United States for 22 years (1983-2005).
He's a master of Middle Eastern intrigue and played a key role in several covert operations with the Americans, including arming Islamist mujahedin against the invading Soviets in Afghanistan throughout the 1980s.
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Special/201 ... 381256329/
Saudi Arabia is forging a new alliance of Islamist rebels in Syria under a pro-Saudi warlord to super cede the U.S.-backed Free Syrian Army
habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6922
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by habal »

From FSA website in twitter

https://twitter.com/RevolutionSyria

#Damascus #Syria | 119 have been killed by #Hezbollah and Iraqi fighters in Damascus suburbs; 15,000 of their fighters are in the city and the #FSA are unable to hold them back. Many #FSA fighters have surrendered.
JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7143
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by JE Menon »

>>Israel is an agent of instability in ME. And once they create instability they will stop this from crossing over their border via help from unkil and Saudis. But then this is directed to all over the place into ME, Caucasus, & China/India.

Which are the other agents of instability? Is any other ME country an agent of instability as well? If I understand you right, you are saying the Israelis create instability and then prevent it from spilling over into Israel with US and Saudi help, and at the same time redirecting it as far as the Caucasus, India and China. Major claims. Can you elaborate with a slightly more elaborate explanation?

>>So it is a very cleverly setup agent of deep disturbance in the region and in the wider world, who always is in position to attract sympathy and cries helplessly but causes nothing but instability. Israeli deep state and US/EU deep state are one and the same.

Cleverly "setup" by whom? And if all the "deep" states you mention are the same, why would they need to be set up?
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25382
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by SSridhar »

NightWatch For the night of 11 October 2013
Syria: Press reported that the so-called Emir of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) declared the opening of a new Sharia court and police station on Thursday in 'the new Islamic Emirate', Azaz, according to his twitter account. The announcement followed the capture of Azaz, which is border crossing town into Turkey, from the Free Syrian Army (FSA) rebel group known as the Northern Storm. ISIS is an al-Qaida affiliate. The border crossing at Azaz is reported to be closed now, but had been used to send supplies from Turkey to the Free Syrian Army fighting groups in the Azaz area, prior to the ISIS seizure. The FSA fighters have retreated, but no longer intend to try to retake Azaz. They hope to defend another border crossing a few miles from that town. The FSA rebels sought the ouster of President Bashar al-Assad and ISIS is among the groups who also want to erase Syria's borders and establish a transnational Islamic state.

Comment: This report contains two points. First, the FSA fighters in the border towns appear to be no match for the ISIS fighters. On the other hand, the Kurdish fighters have had success in repelling attempts by ISIS to seize control of border crossings in the Kurdish region of eastern Syria. Second, the report is a reminder that ISIS and other extreme Islamist groups almost immediately establish Islamic courts and police forces to enforce Sharia when they capture a town.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by Philip »

Great western hypocrisy.Churchill's WW2 plans to use chem warfare against the Germans despite secret agreement against the same.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/com ... 76357.html
Patrick Cockburn

Sunday 13 October 2013
Like Assad, Churchill liked to stockpile poison gas

World View: The prime minister meant to spray German troops if they landed on British beaches
Share

A hundred experts from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, which on Friday won the Nobel Peace Prize, and the United Nations are assembling to dismantle and destroy Syria's arsenal of chemical weapons including 1,000 tons of sarin and mustard gas as well as chemical mixing equipment. All are to be eliminated by 30 June 2014.

It is one of the extraordinary twists and turns of the war in Syria that the alleged use of sarin against civilians in rebel-held districts in Damascus on 21 August should turn out to be to the advantage rather than to the disadvantage of President Bashar al-Assad. The most immediate effect seemed likely to be foreign military intervention against Assad. In the event, the United States and Britain balked at the idea of another war in the Middle East, particularly one that might put in positions of power al-Qa'ida-linked groups such as the al-Nusra Front and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant .

States acquire chemical weapons in order to frighten or kill but, like the man in the fairy story who owns a bottle with a powerful genie inside, they often end up getting the opposite of what they wish for. Saddam Hussein used poison gas with typical ruthlessness against the Iranians and the Kurds, and may have congratulated himself on its effectiveness. But in the long term he found that possession of weapons of mass destruction, and his inability to prove that he had destroyed them, provided justification for ruinous UN sanctions against Iraq and the US-led invasion of 2003.

Chemical weapons are often described as "weapons of last resort", but a country that is already losing a war cannot use them without inviting calamitous retaliation by those about to win. This appears to be why Hitler did not use Germany's massive arsenal of chemical weapons when his armies were going down to defeat in 1943-45. The Germans also wrongly believed that the Western allies had developed nerve gases such as sarin and tabun, discovered in Germany in the late 1930s.

In fact, it was Britain that came closest to using poison gas on a mass scale during the Second World War. Had Germany launched an invasion in 1940, the British plan was to spray German troops with mustard gas from aircraft while they were still crowded together on the beaches. The idea was proposed first on 15 June 1940, just two days after Dunkirk, by the Chief of the Imperial General Staff Sir John Dill according to A Higher Form of Killing: The Secret Story of Chemical and Biological Warfare by Robert Harris and Jeremy Paxman. General Dill wrote with gusto that German troop concentrations "would present a splendid target. Gas spray by aircraft under such conditions would be likely to have a more widespread and wholesale effect than high explosives."

The plan was lethally dangerous, not least because Germany had 20 times as much mustard gas as Britain. The British would be breaching a secret agreement made with Hitler in the first hours of the war in 1939 that Britain and France would not use poison gas or germ warfare so long as Germany also refrained. The appalled Director of Home Defence rejected the plan to spray enemy troops: "We should be throwing away the incalculable moral advantage of keeping our pledges and for a minor tactical surprise; and the ultimate effects of retaliation by the enemy would be very serious in this overcrowded little island."

General Dill withdrew his memorandum in the face of fierce criticism, but it was then supported by Churchill who gave his full backing for the use of gas. A fleet of bombers fitted with spray tanks holding between 250lb and 1,000lb of mustard gas each was scraped together but Britain had only 450 tons of mustard gas. Stocks would have been exhausted after one or two days of RAF attacks.

Even in the desperate situation after Dunkirk, the plan seemed foolhardy. Spraying troops from a low level in the face of hostile air attack would have been very difficult, and regular troops with gas masks and other anti-gas equipment would not necessarily have been incapacitated. The English coast where the German army intended to land was between Folkestone and Newhaven on the south coast, a parachute division dropping near Folkestone. The main beachheads would have been the wide pebble shores on either side of Dungeness and the flat land of Romney Marsh.

Would Churchill really have ordered the use of poison gas when supplies of it were so meagre and German retaliation against London likely to be massive and immediate?

Churchill's determination to use it in the case of German invasion did not ebb, even as the chances of an attack receded. Because of his efforts, Britain had 20,000 tons of poison gas ready to use by 1942. Conventional wisdom and military war games suggest that a German invasion force could have got ashore but would have been cut off by the Royal Navy and, ultimately, wiped out. The Navy, in turn, could not have been eliminated without total German air superiority, which it failed to win in the Battle of Britain. This was most likely the case, but German defeat was not quite so certain in 1940.

I have always been fascinated by the non-use of poison gas in the Second World War, because it showed restraint even in a time of total war. Most probably its use against London and other British cities would have provoked mass flight. In 2003, the Kurds in northern Iraq, who had seen what poison gas could do, were convinced that Saddam still had stocks of it. I remember shops selling flimsy plastic sheeting for people to put over windows, which only advertised citizens' vulnerability. Most Kurds fled their cities.

Exotic terror weapons such as gas inspire revulsion in a way conventional weapons do not, though high explosive shells and bombs are as lethal. People from Eastern Ghouta in Damascus complain that nobody has objected strongly to the fact that they have been shelled and bombed. In considering what happened in Fallujah, Iraq in 2004, people are obsessed with the possible use of depleted uranium, but take it as a matter of course that the US Marines' artillery pumped a daily average of 379 155mm shells for two weeks into this not very large city. One evil effect of chemical weapons is making conventional weapons that kill people in their hundreds of thousands seem acceptable by comparison.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by Philip »

Arafat "likely poisoned",says the authoritative British medical journal,Lancet. (Deccan Chronicle news item)

The journal supports the possibility that he was poisoned using Polonium 210,a radioactive element.Experts found high levels of the substance in his urine,blood,saliva stains,on his clothes and toothbrush.

This is sensational if true as it also then throws a new light upon the mysterious death of low-level ex KGB Russian defector Litvinenko,who was found to have been poisoned also with Polonium.The Brits have blamed Russia for the same,rejected by the Russians as Litvinenko was of little importance to the Kremlin,and was moonlighting for a variety of western intel agencies and Russian oligarchs.Suspicion has also fallen upon anti-Putin Russian oligarchs residing in Britain like Berezovsky who was Jewish,who openly have been plotting regime change in Russia.The Palestinians have always blamed Israeli intel for assassinating Arafat .This finding is going to stir the pot a lot.

Here is a fascinating lengthy must-read detailed analysis of the entire Litvinenko event in the context of the past and present historical continuum of the conflict between the West and Russia and the Jewish-Islamic equation ,the thread that runs through the conflict.Incidentally,on his death bed,Litvinenko converted to Islam!

http://www.llc.manchester.ac.uk/researc ... 384,en.pdf

The Polonium Trail to Islam: Litvinenko, Liminality
and the Media’s
(Cold) War on Terror

Stephen Hutchings and Galina Miazhevich (University
of Manchester)

More essential reading:

http://rt.com/news/mi6-spain-agent-litv ... /comments/

Litvinenko worked for 'MI6 and gave Spain intel on Russian Mafia' – widow's lawyer
13.12.2012
Former FSB officer Aleksandr Litvinenko, who died in London of polonium poisoning in 2006, worked for the British foreign intelligence service as well aiding Spain in their fight against the Russian mafia, the UK inquest revealed Thursday.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/easterna ... dden-death

An oligarch's sudden death

Boris Berezovsky
Mar 25th 2013, 13:11 by A.O. | MOSCOW


Litvinenko - By Way Of Deception (3 part article)
http://www.sott.net/article/125018-Litv ... ion-Part-1
Andrei Kozlov was the first deputy chairman of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation from 1997 to 1999 and again in 2002 to 2006. On September 14th this year he was shot to death in his car by unknown gunmen. Before his death, Kozlov was busily shutting down Russian banks that had been accused of money laundering.

Boris Abramovich Berezovsky is a Russian Jewish billionaire who was head of Russian National Security under Boris Yeltsin. When Putin came to power he opened investigations into Berezovsky's business activities, including money laundering. Berezovsky responded by fleeing to the UK where he was granted political asylum.

Boris Abramovich Berezovsky

Berezovsky has been accused of money laundering by the French authorities.

Berezovsky either holds or has held, Israeli citizenship.

In its Dec. 30, 1996 issue, Forbes Magazine published an extensive article called "Godfather of the Kremlin?," in which it charged Berezovsky with responsibility for the 1995 killing of popular television journalist Vladimir Listev. The magazine also accused Berezovsky of having numerous mafia connections and embezzling $50 million collected by his company from thousands of Russians who purchased AVVA shares-allegedly to start producing a new passenger car.

Berezovsky happens to be good friends with Akhmed Zakayev, who was appointed culture minister in the new cabinet of the Chechen government in exile of Abdul-Khalim Sadulayev. Sadulayev's second in command is Shamil Basayev, the warlord behind the 2004 school siege in Beslan in which hundreds of school children were killed. Nice company for sure. If nothing else however, Brezovsky was generous with his billions, especially to his "friends". Berezovsky has also been described as "deliberately dishonest" and someone who "viewed truth as a transitory, flexible concept". The inability to understand the concept of a fact or the Truth, is something that has been noted about psychopaths.
habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6922
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by habal »

>>Which are the other agents of instability? Is any other ME country an agent of instability as well? If I understand you right, you are saying the Israelis create instability and then prevent it from spilling over into Israel with US and Saudi help, and at the same time redirecting it as far as the Caucasus, India and China. Major claims. Can you elaborate with a slightly more elaborate explanation?

because Israel lives from pin prick to hammer prick. First it is uncomfortable with Jordan & Egypt in the 50s and 60s. This was then resolved to it's satisfaction. Then it is uncomfortable with Iraq, then it is uncomfortable with Iran, then it is uncomfortable with Lebanon, discomfort with Palestinians is all around the year and part of legacy, then there was a short period of discomfort with Libya which was solved to their satisfaction, now they have issues with Syria. They also had a short period in 70s when they had war with Egypt in late 60s and early 70s which was resolved to their satisfaction with pro-western Sunni regimes + unkil's mediation. It is simply the way they are set up that is grievous for both Israel and it's neighbours. It is a very average military power which can be defeated by an inspired guerilla force, but at the same time it has WMD so it cannot be simply overwhelmed militarily. That doesn't lead to outright victory for Israel or it's adversaries in the region, it just gives Israel the right to 'defend its sovereignty' by destabilizing it's neighbours. So by it's very nature it becomes a permanent instrument of destabilization in the region. So this policy of pin pricks against its neighbours has been going on ever since it's establishment as a state.

Now there a lot of aspects to this which can be included in a full-fledged article, but my hesitation in putting out such an article arises from fact that Israel per se is a friendly country to India. So putting out such articles may introduce unnecessary negativity into such a relation. But what must be acknowledged though is that Israel presents a set of problems which come back to India in other ways though it necessarily doesn't actively participate in directing those to here.
Cleverly "setup" by whom?
It was established as an agreement between Euro elite & american elite.

The Balfour Declaration (dated 2 November 1917) was a letter from the United Kingdom's Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour to Baron Rothschild (Walter Rothschild, 2nd Baron Rothschild), a leader of the British Jewish community, for transmission to the Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland.
His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.
The "Balfour Declaration" was later incorporated into the Sèvres peace treaty with Turkey and the Mandate for Palestine. The original document is kept at the British Library.


http://www.rothschild.com/israel/
Rothschild has a long history in Israel and the Rothschild family has played a significant role in the development of the country.
"Israel's 34th Anniversary of Independence Coin
Baron Edmond James (Avrahim Binyamin) de Rothschild (1845-1934) is the known as the "Father of the Settlement" (Avi ha-Yishuv). The Independence Day coin 1982/5742 is dedicated to the memory of Edmond de Rothschild and marks the centenary of his first projects in Israel."
http://www.commem.com/prod02o.htm

>>And if all the "deep" states you mention are the same, why would they need to be set up?

Once you create instability, then it can also be resolved to your satisfaction if you are powerful. That was the logic behind this creation. This project was created in an already settled place on unnatural terms. So in all likelihood it would help create instability. Until the 90s there was constant issues with Palestinians acting as suicide bombers and terrorists on Israeli land. But after creation of fence, they were successfully repelled and a firewall was created around Israel but the core reasons for instability remain and a lot of radicalized Arab youth were created by the Israel excuse, it was then cleverly directed elsewhere and it ultimately translated into Arab Spring which was defacto Wahabbization of a clutch of Arab countries which were under benevolent or secular dictatorships or socialist one-party rule. It was sought to be replaced by pro-western Sunni theocratic rule through this venture. Bringing all Islamic countries under Sunni setup means that Western interests have to deal with only the Sunni's who are lead by Saudis. So they are part of a bloc that is covertly pro-western and walks the western walk and is in sync with their agenda but has anti-US/west jihadi pretensions just like Pakistan.
habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6922
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by habal »

Russian military comes closer to Iran & Syria

http://en.apa.az/xeber_russia_deploying ... 00739.html
Russia deploying offensive military vehicles in territories around Caspian Sea and Black Sea
OCTOBER 8, 2013
Source: APA

Russia is deploying new offensive military vehicles in the Southern Military District covering the territories around the Caspian Sea and Black Sea.

APA reports quoting Russia’s Defense Ministry that military units of the Southern Military District will acquire more than 450 modernized military vehicles including trucks, self-propelled artillery systems, armored vehicles and various missile complexes. 100 missile-artillery systems, including Iskander-M tactical ballistic missile systems, 120-caliber 2S9 Nona-C self-propelled howitzers, Chrysanthemum-S anti-tank missile complexes will be included in the inventory of regional military units.

Infantry and intelligence units of the military district will be equipped with more than 250 BTR-82A – new armored personnel carrier, “Tayfun” and “Tiger-M” armored vehicles.

Russia has been rapidly arming the Southern Military District since the war with Georgia in 2008. In this context, Armenia’s military unit #102 that falls under the Southern Military District is being supplied with new military equipments.
habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6922
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by habal »

two countries who work for western interests finally shedding cloak of ambivalance and fake opposition in face of combined Russo-Iranian pressure in Syrian theatre.

Israel and Saudi Arabia: Best frenemies forever?
Published time: October 10, 2013 02:13
Edited time: October 10, 2013 03:02 Get short URL
No doubt about it, rumors, reports about cooperation, secret meetings [between Israel and Saudi Arabia] started to appear before second Lebanon War in 2006 when it became clear that Iran is to become a major player here, in our immediate region, but also in the Gulf,” Eyal Zisser, Dean of Humanities at Tel-Aviv university, told RT.

There’s no unity in Israel on whether closer ties with Saudi Arabia are needed with many wondering if the Jewish state is “shooting itself in a foot by forming an alliance with a country that supports its enemies,” Slier reported.

But, despite their differences, Israel and Saudi Arabia share views on some of the most pressing regional issues as they both want regime change in Syria, with Saudi Arabia strongly backing the rebels; both see Iran as their main geopolitical rival and want to neutralize the Islamic state; and both stand united in their backing of the military government in Egypt, which has taken a strong stance against the Islamists.

Saudi Arabia has already signalled it is ready to go its own way if US policies continue to undermine the country’s interests in the region. Since US politicians began cutting off aid to Egypt after Islamist president Mohamed Morsi was deposed, Saudi Arabia has given Egypt three times the US annual contribution – some $5 billion, to make up for losses elsewhere.
http://rt.com/news/israel-saudi-alliance-us-950/
JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7143
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by JE Menon »

There is no mention of any of the other agents of instability in the Middle East. I suppose one can take this to mean that from the perspective provided, Israel is the only agent of instability (unless there is a clarification later). But moving on from there, let us take a look at the below positions:

>>because Israel lives from pin prick to hammer prick. First it is uncomfortable with Jordan & Egypt in the 40s and 50s.

How does one conclude that it is Israel uncomfortable with Jordan & Egypt, i.e. as a one-way thing? Were these two countries fully comfortable with Israel? Reading almost any of the literature and statements of the time, one would conclude that the discomfort was at least equally mutual. But nevertheless…

>>…This was then resolved to it's satisfaction with pro-western Sunni regimes + unkil's mediation and influence with Sunni regimes.

How is that segue executed? Were there no wars involved? Weren’t Sunni regimes involved in those wars? On what basis is all that being ignored? It appears that the fact of Israel’s victory, such as it was, in those wars is the result this issue is even raised. And it suggests that all the countries surrounding it were just sitting around like idiots waiting to be influenced.

>>Iraq, then it is uncomfortable with Iran, then it is uncomfortable with Lebanon, discomfort with Palestinians is all around the year and part of legacy, then there was a short period of discomfort with Libya which was solved to their satisfaction, now they have issues with Syria. They also had a short period in 70s when they had war with Egypt in late 60s and early 70s which was resolved to their satisfaction.

Reason must underpin every solid narrative. This one has so many holes, might as well not bother articulating it. Israel was uncomfortable with all these countries (except to some extent Iran) in the first four decades or so after it’s creation, and these countries were all uncomfortable with Israel as well. It was not sequential, nor is it irreversible. They went to war. So far Israel has prevailed. As per the narrative outlined above, is there some evidence that “Libya…was solved to their satisfaction” (something more solid than saying, for instance, “Libya was solved to India’s satisfaction”. No point linking to commentary because there’s commentary for all sides in Israel – which is more influential, the electorate decides for the most part. Then the notion that “they had war”… the 6-day war and Yom Kippur war is meant I suppose – suggest that the Israelis somehow decided let’s have an existence threatening war, and we’ll resolve it to our satisfaction. Weak. And the entire Cold War dynamic is of course marginalized in this narrative.

>>It is simply the way they are set up that is grievous for both Israel and it's neighbours.

In my opinion, it is correct that the way that the state of Israel is organized can be harmful for itself over the medium-term even (say from now on), but my reasons for thinking so are probably not convergent with yours. However, it’s neighbours have put themselves in a mess largely of their own making. The idea that these states exercise no responsibility for themselves is debatable on various levels, but not especially germane to this discussion.

>>It is a very average military power which can be defeated by an inspired guerilla force, but at the same time it has WMD so it cannot be simply overwhelmed militarily.

A sentence so far from reason, it suggests emotional investment in a narrative. But perhaps it’s simply insufficient research. If by defeat the destruction of Israel or the long-term reduction of its territorial boundaries is what is meant, then not much can be said for the above. BR readers are sufficiently well versed on military issues to take a competent view on “it is a very average military power which can be defeated by an inspired guerrilla force”. It’s not like the powers that seek its destruction are deterred by nuclear weapons either.

>>That doesn't lead to outright victory for Israel or it's adversaries in the region, it just gives Israel the right to 'defend its sovereignty' by destabilizing it's neighbours.

There is a problem here. The destruction of Israel would be welcomed victoriously even by those it now is officially in a state of peace with. What is victory for Israel, the destruction of its neighbours? I’m not aware of any such articulation. It’s existential position is that it would rather destroy its neighbours and everything else in sight before it is destroyed itself (the Samson option). That is not an insane posture. But it is not the first resort. That is why Israel broadly clamours for peace, even the hardliners – only the terms of settlement differ.

>>So by it's very nature it becomes a permanent instrument of destabilization in the region. So this policy of pin pricks against its neighbours has been going on ever since it's establishment as a state.

I don’t know if it is the “nature” of Israel to be a permanent instrument of destabilization, or the circumstances of its existence (namely it’s neighbours inclination to destroy it) that make it view a permanently destabilized neighbourhood as providing it a greater assurance of survival. Unless the narrative is that Israelis by “nature” prefer violence and death around them? Is it? Would that, for instance, be true of India if we prefer a permanently destabilized and internally messed up (and eventually dismembered) Pakistan so long as it is not willing to move towards reason-based co-existence as opposed to its apparent current belief that greater capability for violence generated by faith in Allah will prevail against India over time?

>>Now there a lot of aspects to this which can be included in a full-fledged article, but my hesitation in putting out such an article arises from fact that Israel per se is a friendly country to India. So putting out such articles may introduce unnecessary negativity into such a relation.

Not at all, I think. You must put out such article and thinking in public view, so that the matter can be discussed in the open light of reasonable discourse.

>>But what must be acknowledged though is that Israel presents a set of problems which come back to India in other ways though it necessarily doesn't actively participate in directing those to here.

This is another discussion altogether. For instance, I don’t know of any Middle Eastern country which makes its ties with India conditional on our ties with Israel, especially if they have ties with Europe/US/Russia/China at the same time. Further, it is probably safe to say that the attention paid the anti-Israeli Palestinian groups as well as by Al Qaida to India is much less than what they could actually do should they put their minds to adding a few more sentences to their usual rambling and largely nonsensical statements. So can you list just three of these problems that Israel presents to India? Let us examine them.
habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6922
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by habal »

What you should look at is that Israel doesn't allow the Middle-East to settle down into any level of normalcy. As soon as situation in Middle-East stabilizes with all forces comfortable in their own skin, Israel will bring in some new conflict or issue to stir up the pot and introduce instability. Now militarily weak is a qualitative term that can be defined at many levels. Israel is not weak for lack of technology-edge over it's adverseries, nor is it weak because of un-motivated force. It is weak because it lack depth to counter an adversarial force that uses all available options. Can Israel take a few nuclear bombs and still march on ? Maybe not. Can it be hit by a few chemical weapons and still move on as if nothing happened ? No. Even if it retaliates with unaccaptable damage, can it reverse what it has endured ? May be not. And that is again another issue, why Israel will never go to open war against a militarily accomplished neighbour in post-modern era but constantly revert to policy of pin pricks to internally weaken it's adversary. This is a self-sustaining cycle of destabilization.
Last edited by habal on 13 Oct 2013 15:49, edited 1 time in total.
JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7143
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by JE Menon »

Ah OK then.

Below added, after above post was re-edited and lengthened from only the underlined sentence below:

>>What you should look at is that Israel doesn't allow the Middle-East to settle down into any level of normalcy.

Keeping existential enemies in a state of imbalance is exactly what any sane country would do. India should do, and is doing, exactly the same thing. The difference is that Israel is explicit about it, much more than we are. We seem to prefer a more cerebral approach, because we can afford it – in lives lost. Harsh, but real. Now, what is meant by any level of “normalcy”? For many of these countries, and most of their people, normalcy is defined by having no infidels in their midst who are not ruled over by them, right? And many have explicitly called for Israel’s destruction over the past few decades. Sure, some Arab states have called for peaceful co-existence – but on their own terms. Is the suggestion that Israel should agree to those terms? And who will guarantee to them that those terms will not expand after such an agreement, with the same violence-based approach used to justify that expansion?

>>As soon as situation in Middle-East stabilizes with all forces comfortable in their own skin, Israel will bring in some new conflict or issue to stir up the pot and introduce instability.

Here the behavior of Israel is being predicted. I’m sure one has reasons for that level of confidence, but I don’t – especially if these forces are comfortable in their own skin while being at peace with Israel at the same time. If not, then why should Israel – or any other country – allow that “stability” (which is actually code for letting them get powerful enough to seriously threaten Israel).

>>Now militarily weak is a qualitative term that can be defined at many levels. Israel is not weak for lack of technology-edge over it's adverseries, nor is it weak because of un-motivated force.

OK that is clear, and whittles down the discussion on Israel’s weakness to something more reasonable.

>>It is weak because it lack depth to counter an adversarial force that uses all available options. Can Israel take a few nuclear bombs and still march on ? Maybe not. Can it be hit by a few chemical weapons and still move on as if nothing happened ? No. Even if it retaliates with unaccaptable damage, can it reverse what it has endured ? May be not.

Those are not weaknesses of its military. Those are weaknesses inherent in its geographic and demographic reality. In short, it is a tiny country with a tiny population (by the standards of its neighbours). And, therefore, the only reasonable option for Israel – given the above-mentioned weaknesses you speak of and the distinct threat that it faces – is to acquire a strength that will deter countries from considering a nuclear, chemical or biological attack; namely, acquire a robust NBC capability, while keeping those of its enemies at as low a level of technology as possible. And that is exactly what it has been doing, or trying to do. What is irrational about that?

In short, your above statement, precisely captures the problem Israel faces and explains why it has been manoeuvring the way it has. How long can it continue? That’s anybody’s guess. I don’t think much longer – perhaps another 3-5 decades, by which time if it does not achieve some sort of modus vivendi with its neighbours, it will face existential decisions.

>>And that is again another issue, why Israel will never go to open war against a militarily accomplished neighbour in post-modern era but constantly revert to policy of pin pricks to internally weaken it's adversary.

Why is it an issue? It is the most rational thing for a state in Israel’s position to do. If you were Israeli, what exactly would you recommend?

>>This is a self-sustaining cycle of destabilization.

Indeed, unless the conditions are created for a self-sustaining cycle of stability, and that can only begin with the acknowledgement that one side cannot, and does not want to, destroy the other.
habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6922
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by habal »

>>However, it’s neighbours have put themselves in a mess largely of their own making. The idea that these states exercise no responsibility for themselves is debatable on various levels, but not especially germane to this discussion.

If these states are not allowed to settle, through use of covert ops in financial, social, & military field then there is little acknowledgement of Israel's role but at the same time countries are blamed for being 'inherently unstable'.

Also I sense a flaw in Israel's strategy, which is why I always seperate Israeli people from Israeli ruling clique, because if ultimately destruction is Israel's fate and it is to ultimately endure a war by any one of it's neighbours and that war exacts a heavy toll from it, then you can even allow your enemy to grow to achieve such a level to attack Israel, which is not as fatalistic as it seems because of various examples. Mighty China still thinks twice before attacking tiny Taiwan. So how much more would marginal countries like Iran & Syria have to grow to attack Israel. Iran will take atleast 2 generations before it can grow to level of China, if at all it does and then too it will easily give people of Israel 10-20 years of complete peace before any such eventuality even comes to take up mindspace and even then there would be a long detente of 50 years and balance of power as that seen in China-Taiwan equation, which should be immensely preferable to an ordinary Israeli citizen who must by now be tired of the constant cries to war, but that also would have been possible if ordinary Israelis took independent decisions on their future. And they just let things take their course until they were faced with a direct threat from Iran. But instead what you get is a state that is itching for a fight with all and sundry and thereby exposing their citizenry to great unnecessary risks. So that is where role of a deep state is prominent.
habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6922
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by habal »

>> For many of these countries, and most of their people, normalcy is defined by having no infidels in their midst who are not ruled over by them, right? And many have explicitly called for Israel’s destruction over the past few decades. Sure, some Arab states have called for peaceful co-existence – but on their own terms. Is the suggestion that Israel should agree to those terms? And who will guarantee to them that those terms will not expand after such an agreement, with the same violence-based approach used to justify that expansion?

Dear Sir, a major flaw in this argument. Israel-Syria border has been the quietest during all conflicts Israel has had with it's neigbhours. Syrian regime has protected many infidels who live in their midst, like the Orthodox/Greek/Catholic Christians and Druze and Alawites. So why target Syria. Why give protection to radical Islamist wahabbis war criminals by giving them hospital care in Hebron. After all they come back to Israel after chopping limbs of some nameless Syrian who could be Christian, Alawite, or god forbid Secular compared to them. Syria was for a long time an inward looking country with no large budget set aside to torment Israel. Why then does Israel want to destroy Syria. Again the people of Israel need to be seperated from the ruling elite or deep state, whose motivations may not be entirely in sync with best interests of Israeli people.
JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7143
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by JE Menon »

Please read my post above. Now in the para in you have posted above "Also I sense a flaw in Israel's strategy...so that is where role of a deep state is prominent"... I am unable to decipher it. Is there is a special Israeli "ruling clique" which is opposed to the interests of the Israeli people, and this clique instead of making peace with the Arabs (who are apparently ready for it) is instead determined to expose the Israeli public to unnecessary risks? It is clear this does not make much sense right? The ruling clique will then be speeding up the destruction of the very "deep" state they rule over. Is the claim that the Israeli ruling clique is suicidal?

Unless I completely misuderstood the above, that is what it sounds like.
habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6922
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by habal »

Arab Spring has bought about many new states who are pliable to western manipulation and are more dispensible than Israel is. So value of Israel is going down in western geo-political calculus and new relations with Iran are being sought. Again this is where the Euro-American elite interests in Israel shows prominence. This is what is being referred to as deep-state. These individuals are physically not in Israel.
JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7143
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by JE Menon »

>>Dear Sir, a major flaw in this argument.

I don't see how a quiet Syrian-Israeli border represents a flaw in my argument. On the contrary, it shows exactly that once an Arab country agrees to the terms of a settlement, peace will prevail. Hafez did, and and so it was quiet. He did not attack across the Golan, and so there was no violence there.

>>Syrian regime has protected many infidels who live in their midst, like the Orthodox/Greek/Catholic Christians and Druze and Alawites. So why target Syria.

Are you saying the Israelis targeted Syria? There are enough comments from Israeli officials expressing concern at the turn of events there, precisely for the reason that they are concerned about what is likely to happen in Syria now. They will take advantage of the situation, and exploit any opportunities that arise, but why shouldn't they? The problem with the narrative that everything is being co-ordinated from Israel is that, if that is so, they've been doing a lot of stupid things lately... It looks more like the Arab spring has caught them as much in the headlights as everyone else, and they, like the others are scrambling for advantage - or what seems like advantage now.

>>Why give protection to radical Islamist wahabbis war criminals by giving them hospital care in Hebron. After all they come back to Israel after chopping limbs of some nameless Syrian who could be Christian, Alawite, or god forbid Secular compared to them.

Bit of a stretch no? I doubt Israel is uninvolved in Syria, but I equally doubt it is in any co-ordinating role any more than Turkey, Saudi, Qatar, the US, Iran, etc. it is one of the players, probably punching above its weight. What's the point being made?

>>Syria was for a long time an inward looking country with no large budget set aside to torment Israel. Why then does Israel want to destroy Syria.

Small budget maybe? Don't forget the Hizbollah was created from the Iranian embassy in Damascus. Does Israel want to destroy Syria? What, precisely, makes you think so? Going by possible interest, I would say Israel is not keen on Assad staying in power, but equally not keen on the Al Qaida types gaining power. It might prefer a disintegrating Syria which does not function as a launchpad for attacks against Israel; given the probability of any of these outcomes, it may actually prefer that Assad remains. I don't think Israel has made its feelings plain on Syria, as a government. Probably reflects the confusion over what the hell may happen in that unfortunate country.

>>Again the people of Israel need to be seperated from the ruling elite or deep state, whose motivations may not be entirely in sync with best interests of Israeli people.

Without referring to "deep" state and so on... It is pretty much an accepted reality that the ruling elite of almost no state has motivations totally in sync with the best interests of the people over whom they exercise authority. Nothing unusual about that. That is why the mechanism of elections exist, so that another clique can be brought to power who may be - albeit temporarily - somewhat more in sync; and then they too move away from that state of synchronicity... and so on.
JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7143
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by JE Menon »

>>Arab Spring has bought about many new states who are pliable to western manipulation and are more dispensible than Israel is.

Correct. Which is a good thing for the manipulating states and the dispensing states, but not for Israel necessarily.

>>So value of Israel is going down in western geo-political calculus and new relations with Iran are being sought.

This is debatable. There seems to be an implicit assumption that new relations with Iran means downgraded relations with Israel. That will only be true if Iran-Israel relations remain in the doldrums. Don't bet on it, i.e. don't bet that US-Iran relations will improve but simultaneously that US-Israel and Israel-Iran relationship will degrade.

>>Again this is where the Euro-American elite interests in Israel shows prominence. This is what is being referred to as deep-state. These individuals are physically not in Israel.

So it is the Euro-American elite who are not in Israel which is causing the problem, not the Israeli ruling clique which is. Thus the Euro-American elite, as you seem to be explaining it, are opposed to the people of Israel but not the ruling clique of Israel... Does this Euro-American elite have any special feeling for Israel or are they in cahoots with the ruling cliques of any country in the world?
habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6922
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by habal »

It's not a stretch at all.

& they are not taking in mainly civilians.
http://www.france24.com/en/20130918-syr ... ed-medical
"The [Syrian rebel] fighters take the patients without carrying weapons,” explained the wounded man. “They put us on a particular spot where the Israeli army can see us. Then the Israelis come and take us. To be honest, I was shocked that Israel took us in."
JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7143
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by JE Menon »

Seems you misunderstood the comment. I meant it is a bit of a stretch to go from the treatment of war wounded (including civilians) as the article says, to what you claimed. Definitely the Israelis are helping out the FSA, as are the rest of those involved on the rebel side. That is no secret. And may win some brownie points with KSA and so on. But everyone should read that article, to get a sense of the highly uncertain boundaries of state interest, moral concern, rebel interest and so on...

Definitely a far cry from the Israel is the sole agent of instability in the Middle East scenario initially suggested.
habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6922
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by habal »

Did I say 'sole agent', if so then please do forgive me because what I meant was 'chief agent' of instability. One who is doggedly and persistently 'at it'. And takes the crown due to being at it with consistent regularity.
JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7143
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by JE Menon »

The point is that even it was the soke agent of instability, it's actions are perfectly reasonable given the circumstances in the area. But of course it is not the sole agent. Is it the chief agent? Given the presence of the big powers and middling powers in the area one could say the chief agent varies from disaster to disaster... Plus there is the Euro American elite which you have mentioned. Wouldn't they be a more of an agent of instability than Israel?
devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5129
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by devesh »

most important question for habal ji,

stability in the ME will help India how? and what is the definition of "stability"? because you can be absolutely sure that your definition will not match the definition of the Islamic populace in ME.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by brihaspati »

Lets get one thing very very clear : there is absolutely no comparison in persistence/damage-potential ityadi between Israel and its neighbours, where Israel is at a permanent disadvantage.

(1) Isareli society has a very very strong component of split between "secular" Jews and non-secular Jews. The Israeli state has increasingly come under the same types of pressures even at the state level that India suffers from.

In comparison there is no such split in KSA, Iraq, Iran, Jordan, Bahrain, Sudan, Somalia. There is some shouting from a section of urban educated in Turkey and Egypt - but that is about it - without a strong military support behind such "seculars", they would be mincemeat in a day at the hands of the supposed non-persistent less-than-evil-yahudi momeen of the entire zone.

(2) The saudis and the entire Sunni and Shia camp has always been persistent both at the biological and the sadism level to an extent that the modern educated Indian mind perhaps simply goes into denial mode to face up to. Combined with the overarching guilt and manipulation from the Indian state - both directly as well as indirectly - to prevent consistent study and exposure to the ground records of the Islamic middle east, for the entire 20th century simply to appease the mullahcracy of India (and perhaps the latter's close connection to the Saudis too) this makes Israel always appear somehow more sinister and evil compared to its neighbours.

(3) The foundation of the Israeli state was at the hands of the Jewish left, albeit with a strong cultural/religious "nationalistic" rather than purely rabbinic oligarchical commitment. They suffer therefore from that hamstrung foundations.

In comparison, the momeen around have no qualms of foundation, no hesitation to their ultimate long term goals, how their societies should evolve and to where. They are all desperately seeking the "golden" era of caliphate, when supposedly 7th century desert paradise was recreated for the Islamic male.


People should be much more worried about Israel's neighbours than Israel for disruptive and other things. Isarel just happens to be a convenient excuse for the Islamist mind that dominates all these states around Israel. If this excuse is not available they will find another excuse to practice their sadism and perversion.

We should not participate in the Islamist tactic of blaming the victim of Islamism for justification to be made into a victim, rather than identify and target the real perpetrator.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by Philip »

In our analysis of the Syrian imbroglio,we seem to be forgetting two vital factors other than Sunni-Shiite rivalry and control of either faction.The oil pipeline transiting Syria from Iran and the discovery by the Norwegians that Syria and its offshore EEZ are sitting on massive reserves of oil and gas,far more than Kuwait.Regimen change in Syria and control of this black gold on Israel's borders is a prime target for "bounty hunters",especially the Saudis and their Gulf potentates,who will see competition in controlling global petroleum exports from Shiite Iran and its chum Syria.The subterranean raison d'etre of any conflict in the M-East is OIL.
habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6922
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by habal »

Giving a reasoning of oil for war crimes is another issue and not a solution. Because human beings are conditioned to accept whatever mai-baap or massa does for more power and wealth, we are so conditioned to this thought that no one even questions this logic. So oil makes perfect excuse for any amount of war crimes or brutality. When you have forced entire world to accept your currency, then does a few billion gallons of oil here or there really matter ? But every once in a while, a western analyst will come up the this great discovery he just made, that wars are about oil. Infact they are also about oil. Or oil is also a peripheral issue. Controlling nations through covert means is far more overpowering than just controlling one single resource. It may be the main deal for hitherto peripheral players like Russia or Iran though. Anglo and Euro power bloc aim much higher than just oil. At least that's my feeling.

>>most important question for habal ji,

stability in the ME will help India how? and what is the definition of "stability"? because you can be absolutely sure that your definition will not match the definition of the Islamic populace in ME.

devesh ji, the detente that existed in dilli when mughals paid tribute to marathas and sikhs, right through 1857 revolt and right upto freedom. Wasn't that period relatively stable, why can't such a stability be recreated in middle-east where the usual trouble-makers can lie low in presence of stronger powers. The chief difference here are the serial instigators working for transnational interests.

>>Plus there is the Euro American elite which you have mentioned. Wouldn't they be a more of an agent of instability than Israel?

that is not the agent. That is the principal. Agents keep changing time-to-time but one agent makes regular appearance on the show. Everybody wants to befriend that agent, yet that agent keeps constantly fighting, refusing to be befriended. yet, people keep making excuses for it. India is a strongly pro-Israeli country, so any stand in any manner countering that perception will meet stiff resistance. But one can let that perception be, just understand the consequences that arise through manipulation of such an imposed state. Question here before countries being, given the unnatural economic leverage bestowed on the principals of that state, should they be befriended or should one take the lower road of befriending the occupied or should one keep distance from both and treat them both with extreme prejudice. This will be a question in time to come.
Last edited by habal on 13 Oct 2013 21:15, edited 1 time in total.
devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5129
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by devesh »

devesh ji, the detente that existed in dilli when mughals paid tribute to marathas and sikhs, right through 1857 revolt and right upto freedom. Wasn't that period relatively stable, why can't such a stability be recreated in middle-east where the usual trouble-makers can lie low in presence of stronger powers. The chief difference here are the serial instigators working for transnational interests.

the Brits were poaching during that period. by the end of your highlighted period above, it was fini for Indic forces. all remaining centers of military resistance against the Brits, including Marathas, were wiped out.

that is most certainly not the kind of stability that we want!

and by your own admission, the "trouble makers" are simply "lying low". they have not been eradicated. meaning, they will show their fangs as soon the "stronger" power weakens. IOW, the "trouble makers" are the real problem. they persistently throw up memes of violent genocide on "kuffr" or "apostate" populations, and have the taqyia abilities to "lie low" when they know that they are going to get whipped.

the only way you can fight them off is to prepare the situation where they periodically step into well laid traps, thereby giving a genuine excuse to the "good" guys to wipe them off. this keeps the pressure on them. matches their violence with counter-violence. and keeps them off-balance. this, in turn, provides the "balance" that humanity needs. keeping the trouble makers off balance, is itself a form of balance for the kufr.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by brihaspati »

"India is a strongly pro-Israel country" -!!!!

Don;t think so - India has consistently supported the Palestinian cause, and been seen hand in glove with forces within the NAM and outside who have been more directly involved in supporting teh Palestinian cause. For Israel, no act of enmity can be greater than supporting the Palestinians - however small the gesture might be.

Officially the major and longest regime in Indian state power comes solidly from a pro-Palestinian official leaning. The entire secular-claiming lobby is anti-Israel. Now the majority of Indians are "secular", and who support the seculars who brought "freedom" to India and who has dominated the state since then. Unless one is "communal" and "fundamentalist" (which implies only one community) in India, you cannot be a supporter of Israel. Since absolute majority of Indians are not communal, India is not a pro-Israeli country.


For people like me, if we have to choose between Saudi islamism or even Ayatollahesque Iranian mullahcracy and Israeli "split" politics [where the state is engaged in a merry dance and domestic quarrel with its really orthodox component over military service and the nature of the Israeli state] in ME, every source of khujli to anything remotely connected to Islamism in ME - is most welcome. It keeps them busy and postpone the hurifying lubricated dreams of getting it off Indian women and land and "black-faced-hindoo" kufr male blood.

Some try to say that there are no permanent friends or enemies in politics or international policy games. Why do we need to make an exception for Israel that we have to be committed to looking at them as permanent enemies because they used [mutually] USA to revive their nationhood and look at the Islamist ME as permanent friends because they hold us hostage with their mullahcracy and substantial Muslim populations in India?
JwalaMukhi
BRFite
Posts: 1635
Joined: 28 Mar 2007 18:27

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by JwalaMukhi »

Well only strong arm dictators or mullahs with the backing of the dictators, can provide a sense of stability in ME. This is basically, a cover that masks the true and tested virtues of barbarians. Such stability is going to put to sleep the rest of the globe to think that they are dealing some sophisticated civilized people who are bent on living peacefully with others.

ME is a cauldron of Islamic empire. It needs no covering mechanism, for it to be reformed, in the interest of global peace and stability. All it needs is continuous external correcting mechanisms, it is different matter that India has neither interest nor gumption to deal being the provider of correcting mechanism. India can collect popcorn and watch the barbaric region being pulled into 21st century civilized living.
JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7143
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by JE Menon »

>>that is not the agent. That is the principal.

So in this case Israel is the tool of the Euro-American elite. In other words, Israel itself has little say in the direction of its strategy? And it implies the European elite and the American elite see eye to eye on this role of Israel in the Middle East. Sounds rather different from what their actions suggest, not to mention that the whole world thinks it is the Israelis who control the Americans!!! In any case, do you think this interpretation of the situation can withstand serious scrutiny?

>>Agents keep changing time-to-time but one agent makes regular appearance on the show. Everybody wants to befriend that agent, yet that agent keeps constantly fighting. yet, people keep making excuses for it.

These are just vague statements that don't really mean anything. Names need to be put to these "agents", "everybody", "one agent" and "constantly fighting agent" and "people" and so on... Once you do that, it will be much much harder to hold on to that view... because it is unlikely to stand the test of reason and fact. The above sounds more like a belief-system than any description of reality, let alone an analysis of it.

>>India is a strongly pro-Israeli country, so any stand in any manner countering that perception will meet stiff resistance.

Well, I don't know that India is a strongly pro-Israeli country. But it certainly isn't an anti-Israel country. It simply does not treat Israel as an "abnormal" country. We have a lot of common interests with Israel, and there are issues we disagree on (like Iran), but not fundamentally - essentially because Israel, like India, does not want to rule anybody outside its territory. What it wants is for no one to attack its territory, and to engage in trade. That's it, basically. How we go about trying to acheive this varies, but then so do we as countries. The population of Israel, will fit in a Bombay suburb. All of the Jews in the world are probably less than the population of Calcutta.
habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6922
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by habal »

>>
and by your own admission, the "trouble makers" are simply "lying low". they have not been eradicated. meaning, they will show their fangs as soon the "stronger" power weakens. IOW, the "trouble makers" are the real problem. they persistently throw up memes of violent genocide on "kuffr" or "apostate" populations, and have the taqyia abilities to "lie low" when they know that they are going to get whipped.


Let's take an example. Most trouble created in Syria is by people who come from Libya, Saudi Arabia, the Caucasus, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Tunisia. You can see half of them are hard-core Sunni countries, they are merceneries who work for what terms only they know, the rest are newly Arab sprung. Yes, there is also a bit of what you are saying, but that isn't the immidiate cause. It becomes a cause in long run. Fact.

>>
Don;t think so - India has consistently supported the Palestinian cause, and been seen hand in glove with forces within the NAM and outside who have been more directly involved in supporting teh Palestinian cause. For Israel, no act of enmity can be greater than supporting the Palestinians - however small the gesture might be.

Yes, that was a phase. But it didn't last forever, did it. It died with Indira.

>>In any case, do you think this interpretation of the situation can withstand serious scrutiny?

Not only does it withstand serious scrutiny. All actions of Israel only make eminent sense only then.
devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5129
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by devesh »

Let's take an example. Most trouble created in Syria is by people who come from Libya, Saudi Arabia, the Caucasus, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Tunisia. You can see half of them are hard-core Sunni countries, they are merceneries who work for what terms only they know, the rest are newly Arab sprung. Yes, there is also a bit of what you are saying, but that isn't the immidiate cause. It becomes a cause in long run. Fact.
well, there is not yet any conclusive evidence of the numbers of fighters from various countries. we don't know for sure just what percent of "rebels" are Syrians, and who are outsiders. and neither is there any easy way to distinguish on battlefield, as is evidenced by the convoluted statements emerging from Western countries about "knowing who to support", yet it being "hard to make sure Jihadis don't get weapons", etc etc.

and are you sure you are picking the right example? we are talking about Israel supposedly "inciting chaos". in that case, you would be very hard pressed to link the existing chaos in Syria to Israel. the source of the current mess in not Israel. the source is Sunni Jihad. Israel is but a spectator making sure to guard its interests. and Israel here plays the role of playing off Sunnis against Shias to an extent, which is also advantageous for all non-muslim countries in the vicinity. Israel is a player that keeps the Islamic mind in ME always thinking about plan-B's b/c plan-A of total domination of ME-area won't materialize as long as Israel exists.
JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7143
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by JE Menon »

>>All actions of Israel only make eminent sense only then.

Maybe so, but you haven't laid it out with fact and reason so far, apart from saying Israel is an agent of instability controlled by a Euro-American elite, which is up to all sorts of nefarious activity.

Show us a concrete example. Every case you have brought up, Syria for instance has been demonstrated to be otherwise, even by the link you provided as a matter of fact.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21234
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by Prem »

XPo
http://iranian.com/posts/view/post/22524
Iran-India relations will remain constrained in the near future | The National
Oct 13, 2013 - As the diplomatic dance continues between Iran and the United States, the rest of the world is keen to work out the implications of a possible rapprochement between Tehran and Washington. One of the countries that is looking very closely at the possible realignment is India.Like many other states, India will not remain immune from the consequences of the trajectory of US-Iranian ties. New Delhi has long pursued a careful balancing act between its relationships with Tehran and Washington. A potential US-Iran rapprochement will likely ease a lot of the existing diplomatic and economic pressure on India.But while this will certainly open up new possibilities for Indo-Iranian ties, it is unlikely to resolve all the problems in the Delhi-Tehran relationship.
Despite all the hype surrounding India’s ties with Iran, they remain largely underdeveloped. Also, India’s significant stake in the Arabian Peninsula is often overlooked.The reality that faces New Delhi in the Middle East today is that India has far more significant strategic interests with the Arab Gulf states than with Tehran. And as tensions rise between the Sunni Arab states and Iran, India’s larger stake in the Arab world will continue to inhibit Indian-Iranian ties.At the same time, New Delhi’s outreach to Tehran will remain circumscribed by the internal power struggle within Iran, growing tensions between Iran and its Arab neighbours and Iran’s continued defiance of the global nuclear order.
Even with a possible decline in Iran-US tensions, a number of issues will continue to complicate the India-Iran relationship. This was exemplified this month when Iran released an Indian tanker – MT Desh Shanti, owned by the state-run Shipping Corporation of India – along with its 32 seafarers. The ship had been detained for 24 days at Bandar Abbas port on the allegation of pollution.Iran detained the ship carrying crude oil from Iraq to India on Aug 13, saying it was polluting Iranian water, discharging wastes and water mixed with crude near Iran’s Lavan island. India denied the allegation and underlined that the vessel was not in Iranian waters when it was detained. New Delhi took this incident very seriously and has filed an appeal with the Indian Ocean Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control – a 16-nation grouping of maritime nations – calling for a review of Iran’s action.India’s rapid growth and development have drastically heightened its need for energy resources and security, thus attaching urgent importance to relations with countries possessing and producing energy resources. It is largely in this context that India has moved closer to Iran, a country heavily sanctioned by the US throughout the last decade due to its lack of cooperation with international nuclear regulations. Wary of any international support for Iran, the US has pressured India to curb its relations with Tehran and significantly cut its level of oil imports from Iran.
Actions by the US and the European Union have noticeably complicated transactions between Iran and importing nations, particularly India, which has been one of the largest recipients of Iranian oil exports. These complications were well illustrated by the EU sanctions banning European companies from insuring tankers that carry Iranian energy resources anywhere in the world. With nearly all tanker insurance based in western nations, Indian shipping companies are reportedly left to turn to state insurance, which covers tankers for only $50 million (Dh183 million) as opposed to the estimated $1 billion coverage typically offered by European agencies, thus taking greater risk in transportation.
Additionally, western efforts to undermine financial institutions in Iran have complicated payments for Iranian oil exports. An executive order issued by the White House in November 2011 authorises the US secretary of state to impose financial sanctions on any entity failing to satisfactorily curb support of the Iranian market according to American terms. This has pressured countries such as India to reduce imports supporting the Iranian economy.In an attempt to avoid threatened US sanctions, countries such as India and China are believed to be bartering food products, consumer goods and local currencies for oil – a system that may prove insufficient in meeting the payments necessary to maintain current levels of oil imports. As a result of these pressures, Iran no longer figures among India’s top oil supplies.
The relationship between India and Iran will face challenges in coming years, notwithstanding what happens on the US-Iran front. The two nations have little to bind them together in the current circumstances.An Iranian-western rapprochement might allow India to expand its economic and energy ties with Tehran and to develop a more productive relationship on Afghanistan. But that is all in the long term. In the short-to-medium term, there are numerous challenges that the two nations will have to navigate.
Shanmukh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3042
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by Shanmukh »

This would be amusing, if it were not so tragic.
Ex-Israeli Soldier Denounced on US Campus for Not Raping Palestinian Women.
http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfiel ... nian-women

I was a bit skeptical about this bit of news, so I followed it to the Hebrew University site, and lo and behold, I find that the thesis is written by a leftist Jew, and actually won a prize for the best thesis.

The entire thesis is in Hebrew, and is available on the Hebrew University site. A longer dissection of the thesis can be found at
http://www.zionism-israel.com/log/archi ... 00471.html

And here we blame our leftists for being deracinated. You have to admit the sheer originality of the accusation.
Post Reply