Coming Catastrophe: Four Mysteries of America and Iran
by John Batchelor (More by this author)
Posted: 03/06/2007
As March winds blow, there are specific warnings of an imminent
catastrophe in the confrontation between America and Iran. There is
strong indication of this direction in several recent diplomatic surprises
and reversals, and assembled below are four mysteries that illustrate the
scale of the threat.
1.. Why did the Bush Administration announce suddenly, and contrary to
previous policy, that it would participate in upcoming meetings in Iraq
with the unrepentant adversarial states of Iran and Syria? Secretary of
State Condoleeza Rice did not provide an answer when she declared, "We are
recommitting ourselves to the security and stability of the Gulf region."
2.. Why did the Iranian ambassador to Saudi Arabia suddenly announce a
visit by the Islamic Republic of Iran's President Ahmadinejad to Riyadh
for a conference on the region with King Abdullah? Ahmadinejad, following
his audience with the House of Saud, did not provide an answer when he
declared, "Iran and Saudi Arabia oppose the dominance of enemies over the
region and their conspiracies. During this trip, we tried to devise some
measures to prevent the enemies from harming the Muslim world and to foil
their plots."
3.. Why did the Taliban military commander in Afghanistan, Mullah
Dadulah, suddenly announce in a European TV interview that the neo-Taliban
was launching a spring offensive against NATO forces supporting the Afghan
government? Dadulah did not provide an answer to this question when he
argued, "The Americans have sown a seed. They will reap the crop for quite
a long time," and, "We will get our revenge on them, whether in
Afghanistan or outside."
4.. Why has America suddenly decided to move toward bilateral talks with
North Korea over nuclear proliferation and also to unfreeze North Korean
funds associated with illicit money laundering and to remove North Korea
from the American terrorism list? China's chief envoy, Wu Dawei, did not
provide an answer when he declared the deal was "favorable for the peace
process in northeast Asia and for the improvement of ties between relevant
countries."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is possible that there are no answers to these mysteries, and that this
is the diplomatic cacophony of a stalemate that sounds significant only
because it breaks with past assumptions. Then again, my information from
trusted sources is that there are time-specific explanations. More, the
answers collectively speak to the fact that all these players realize that
America and Iran are on the brink of a battle that will be a catastrophe
for themselves, for the region, for the East and the West.
What will the catastrophe look like? It will look like a vortex, a
planetary vortex, that churns the Middle East and Central Asia, that
redraws the map, that pulls in major powers from East Asia, from Western
Europe, from North and South America and Africa. There is no fixed
timetable, though the general understanding is that it is many months
away, not many weeks, especially since the warmer months favor the
operational capabilities of the various incendiary factions from Kashmir
to the Mediterranean. The timing of the confrontation is informed
generally by Iran's belief, based on its revolution's successes in
1979-80, that America is most vulnerable, and most incoherent, in the
presidential election cycle over the next six to eighteen months.
The best historical comparison for this limbo before the storm is the
spring of 1914, long before Archduke Ferdinand's visit to Sarajevo, when
there was widespread anxiety among the military powers that the major
alliances, the Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance, were on a collision
course, yet no one could see what factors would trigger a general
mobilization. Everyone knew the peril, yet no one knew the solution. It
is astonishing to find in the London Times of March 1914 a report from
Berlin that the pan German press was widely demanding Germany not "shrink
from the test" about its claims against Russian power in Asia Minor, and
insisting Germany be "ready to risk war against Russia and France as well
as England." This was known then as the "Russophobe Chorus" and was a
surprising and confounding mystery to professional observers.
It was difficult, though not impossible, to read this report at the time
and then to sound a war warning that pointed to the immediate future. It
was possible to argue in the spring of 1914 that the brutal decisions that
would send Europe to war in the summer were already in rehearsal, were
certainly not condemned, by the major powers. A few analysts did look
ahead and did pass on their grim interpretations; and yet the worst-case
scenario of continental bloodshed and national collapse came on in any
event.
It is also difficult to read the four reports above from March 2007 and to
peer into the future as close as this summer if not as far away as next
summer. However, it is not impossible to look ahead, if first there is an
explanation of the background of the crisis from the point of view of the
potentially warring major powers, America, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Al Qaeda,
all of whom along with their allies are preparing for and not loudly
condemning a threatening global tragedy.
From America's point of view, the attack on September 11, 2001, loosed a
cascade of American offensive operations throughout the Middle East that
are no nearer to completion today than when they began, and which have
drawn America into briar patches that have no simple exits. The chief
threat to America at this moment is the briar patch of Iraq,
because Iraq was -- and may again become -- the chief threat to Iran. At
first, America's attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq benefited Iran, by
removing two of Tehran's major enemies in the region, the Taliban and
Saddam Hussein. However, once America was camped in Baghdad, the Islamic
Republic of Iran saw that an American success to create a secular,
capitalist democracy would be a mortal blow to the radical, apocalyptic
Iranian revolution.
From Iran's point of view, America must be defeated not only in Iraq and
Afghanistan but also across the region. Tehran is in the hands of a
non-rational cadre that is committed to an apocalyptic vision that
includes creating chaos in order to bring about, according to the Shia
sect known as the Twelvers, the return of the hidden Twelfth Imam, the
Mahdi, who vanished twelve centuries ago in Iraq. This unique, opaque
vision propels the strategic decisions of the Tehran regime.
Tehran sees its future in absolutes. Either it defeats America in the
region, and establishes its hegemony over the region's oil reserves, and
enforces a Persian Empire for the first time in 2500 years, or else it
loses everything. Tehran will not seek settlement. If America does not
attack pre-emptively, then Tehran will find a way to provoke the attack.
The current wrestling at the United Nations Security Council over Iran's
refusal to cease its nuclear enrichment program can be understood as a
ploy by Iran to draw in America to a military confrontation.
Tehran will not bend before words, sanctions, threats or an attack. Tehran
believes that it can answer an American attack with strikes on American
forces in Iraq, on the Persian Gulf oil structure and, through its
proxies, on the state of Israel. Tehran's radical cadre believes that it
will survive the American attack in its bunkers. In the meantime, Tehran
can close the Gulf and starve the West for oil. The day a ceasefire is
imposed by exhausted powers, Tehran emerges as the regional hegemon.
From Saudi Arabia's point of view, the coming catastrophe will threaten
its oil fields, its money, its existence. Reports over the past weeks
identify the House of Saud's national security adviser Prince Bandar in
constant strained conversation with Tehran's national security adviser Ali
Larijani in order to find an accommodation between two regimes that share
nothing in beliefs or goals. When the violence begins, the Saudi princes
will flee to well-prepared residences in Switzerland and Morocco.
Critically, Saudi Arabia's maneuvering is clouded by the fact that it
cannot solve the future only by negotiating with Tehran. Saudi Arabia
knows that it is targeted for destruction by the extremists whom we know
as Al Qaeda but who are better understood under the broader title used by
the best analysts, the "Islamist-jihadists."
From the Islamist-jihadists's point of view, the mission is to destroy the
superpower of America and to replace it with a global caliphate. The first
phase of this is described in the Al Qaeda master plan entitled "Working
Strategy Lasting Until 2020," which calls for the consolidation of the
historical regions of Islam stretching from Iraq to Gibraltar. In this
plan, the kingdom of Saudi Arabia and other secular Arab states vanish.
Tehran has sheltered the Islamist-jihadists's leadership for years,
because it makes common cause with the jihadist goal to destroy American
power. In Iraq, Al Qaeda throws its resources against America in order to
drain American political resolve and to construct a terrorist state within
a failed state. Anbar and Baghdad provinces are foundations to launch
operations to degrade Saudi Arabia and to take possession of the two
profound mosques at Mecca and Medina; and to degrade Jordan and Israel in
order to take possession of the third profound mosque at Jerusalem. For
Tehran, the Islamist-jihadists are a useful weapon to fragment the Sunni
majority that has abused the Shia for a millennium. For all powers, the
Islamist-jihadists known as Al Qaeda are truly an unpredictable and
sinister threat.
Later this week: Coming Catastrophe Part 2: Four Solutions of America and
Iran
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=19673
I know this'll give Wally a damn good hard-on, but he's already writhing
in WW3 orgasms most of the time, anyway.
Docrodile :))~
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Coming Catastrophe: Four Mysteries of America and Iran |
06 Mar 2007 03:19:10 PM |
|
|
On Mar 7, 12:03 am, "Docrodile" <swampth...@hellsbayou.net> wrote:
Coming Catastrophe: Four Mysteries of America and Iran
by John Batchelor (More by this author)
Posted: 03/06/2007
As March winds blow, there are specific warnings of an imminent
catastrophe in the confrontation between America and Iran. There is
strong indication of this direction in several recent diplomatic surprises
and reversals, and assembled below are four mysteries that illustrate the
scale of the threat.
1.. Why did the Bush Administration announce suddenly, and contrary to
previous policy, that it would participate in upcoming meetings in Iraq
with the unrepentant adversarial states of Iran and Syria? Secretary of
State Condoleeza Rice did not provide an answer when she declared, "We are
recommitting ourselves to the security and stability of the Gulf region."
2.. Why did the Iranian ambassador to Saudi Arabia suddenly announce a
visit by the Islamic Republic of Iran's President Ahmadinejad to Riyadh
for a conference on the region with King Abdullah? Ahmadinejad, following
his audience with the House of Saud, did not provide an answer when he
declared, "Iran and Saudi Arabia oppose the dominance of enemies over the
region and their conspiracies. During this trip, we tried to devise some
measures to prevent the enemies from harming the Muslim world and to foil
their plots."
3.. Why did the Taliban military commander in Afghanistan, Mullah
Dadulah, suddenly announce in a European TV interview that the neo-Taliban
was launching a spring offensive against NATO forces supporting the Afghan
government? Dadulah did not provide an answer to this question when he
argued, "The Americans have sown a seed. They will reap the crop for quite
a long time," and, "We will get our revenge on them, whether in
Afghanistan or outside."
4.. Why has America suddenly decided to move toward bilateral talks with
North Korea over nuclear proliferation and also to unfreeze North Korean
funds associated with illicit money laundering and to remove North Korea
from the American terrorism list? China's chief envoy, Wu Dawei, did not
provide an answer when he declared the deal was "favorable for the peace
process in northeast Asia and for the improvement of ties between relevant
countries."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
--=AD-----
It is possible that there are no answers to these mysteries, and that this
is the diplomatic cacophony of a stalemate that sounds significant only
because it breaks with past assumptions. Then again, my information from
trusted sources is that there are time-specific explanations. More, the
answers collectively speak to the fact that all these players realize that
America and Iran are on the brink of a battle that will be a catastrophe
for themselves, for the region, for the East and the West.
What will the catastrophe look like? It will look like a vortex, a
planetary vortex, that churns the Middle East and Central Asia, that
redraws the map, that pulls in major powers from East Asia, from Western
Europe, from North and South America and Africa. There is no fixed
timetable, though the general understanding is that it is many months
away, not many weeks, especially since the warmer months favor the
operational capabilities of the various incendiary factions from Kashmir
to the Mediterranean. The timing of the confrontation is informed
generally by Iran's belief, based on its revolution's successes in
1979-80, that America is most vulnerable, and most incoherent, in the
presidential election cycle over the next six to eighteen months.
The best historical comparison for this limbo before the storm is the
spring of 1914, long before Archduke Ferdinand's visit to Sarajevo, when
there was widespread anxiety among the military powers that the major
alliances, the Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance, were on a collision
course, yet no one could see what factors would trigger a general
mobilization. Everyone knew the peril, yet no one knew the solution. It
is astonishing to find in the London Times of March 1914 a report from
Berlin that the pan German press was widely demanding Germany not "shrink
from the test" about its claims against Russian power in Asia Minor, and
insisting Germany be "ready to risk war against Russia and France as well
as England." This was known then as the "Russophobe Chorus" and was a
surprising and confounding mystery to professional observers.
It was difficult, though not impossible, to read this report at the time
and then to sound a war warning that pointed to the immediate future. It
was possible to argue in the spring of 1914 that the brutal decisions that
would send Europe to war in the summer were already in rehearsal, were
certainly not condemned, by the major powers. A few analysts did look
ahead and did pass on their grim interpretations; and yet the worst-case
scenario of continental bloodshed and national collapse came on in any
event.
It is also difficult to read the four reports above from March 2007 and to
peer into the future as close as this summer if not as far away as next
summer. However, it is not impossible to look ahead, if first there is an
explanation of the background of the crisis from the point of view of the
potentially warring major powers, America, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Al Qaeda,
all of whom along with their allies are preparing for and not loudly
condemning a threatening global tragedy.
From America's point of view, the attack on September 11, 2001, loosed a
cascade of American offensive operations throughout the Middle East that
are no nearer to completion today than when they began, and which have
drawn America into briar patches that have no simple exits. The chief
threat to America at this moment is the briar patch of Iraq,
because Iraq was -- and may again become -- the chief threat to Iran. At
first, America's attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq benefited Iran, by
removing two of Tehran's major enemies in the region, the Taliban and
Saddam Hussein. However, once America was camped in Baghdad, the Islamic
Republic of Iran saw that an American success to create a secular,
capitalist democracy would be a mortal blow to the radical, apocalyptic
Iranian revolution.
From Iran's point of view, America must be defeated not only in Iraq and
Afghanistan but also across the region. Tehran is in the hands of a
non-rational cadre that is committed to an apocalyptic vision that
includes creating chaos in order to bring about, according to the Shia
sect known as the Twelvers, the return of the hidden Twelfth Imam, the
Mahdi, who vanished twelve centuries ago in Iraq. This unique, opaque
vision propels the strategic decisions of the Tehran regime.
Tehran sees its future in absolutes. Either it defeats America in the
region, and establishes its hegemony over the region's oil reserves, and
enforces a Persian Empire for the first time in 2500 years, or else it
loses everything. Tehran will not seek settlement. If America does not
attack pre-emptively, then Tehran will find a way to provoke the attack.
The current wrestling at the United Nations Security Council over Iran's
refusal to cease its nuclear enrichment program can be understood as a
ploy by Iran to draw in America to a military confrontation.
Tehran will not bend before words, sanctions, threats or an attack. Tehran
believes that it can answer an American attack with strikes on American
forces in Iraq, on the Persian Gulf oil structure and, through its
proxies, on the state of Israel. Tehran's radical cadre believes that it
will survive the American attack in its bunkers. In the meantime, Tehran
can close the Gulf and starve the West for oil. The day a ceasefire is
imposed by exhausted powers, Tehran emerges as the regional hegemon.
From Saudi Arabia's point of view, the coming catastrophe will threaten
its oil fields, its money, its existence. Reports over the past weeks
identify the House of Saud's national security adviser Prince Bandar in
constant strained conversation with Tehran's national security adviser Ali
Larijani in order to find an accommodation between two regimes that share
nothing in beliefs or goals. When the violence begins, the Saudi princes
will flee to well-prepared residences in Switzerland and Morocco.
Critically, Saudi Arabia's maneuvering is clouded by the fact that it
cannot solve the future only by negotiating with Tehran. Saudi Arabia
knows that it is targeted for destruction by the extremists whom we know
as Al Qaeda but who are better understood under the broader title used by
the best analysts, the "Islamist-jihadists."
From the Islamist-jihadists's point of view, the mission is to destroy the
superpower of America and to replace it with a global caliphate. The first
phase of this is described in the Al Qaeda master plan entitled "Working
Strategy Lasting Until 2020," which calls for the consolidation of the
historical regions of Islam stretching from Iraq to Gibraltar. In this
plan, the kingdom of Saudi Arabia and other secular Arab states vanish.
Tehran has sheltered the Islamist-jihadists's leadership for years,
because it makes common cause with the jihadist goal to destroy American
power. In Iraq, Al Qaeda throws its resources against America in order to
drain American political resolve and to construct a terrorist state within
a failed state. Anbar and Baghdad provinces are foundations to launch
operations to degrade Saudi Arabia and to take possession of the two
profound mosques at Mecca and Medina; and to degrade Jordan and Israel in
order to take possession of the third profound mosque at Jerusalem. For
Tehran, the Islamist-jihadists are a useful weapon to fragment the Sunni
majority that has abused the Shia for a millennium. For all powers, the
Islamist-jihadists known as Al Qaeda are truly an unpredictable and
sinister threat.
Later this week: Coming Catastrophe Part 2: Four Solutions of America and
Iranhttp://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=3D19673
I know this'll give Wally a damn good hard-on, but he's already writhing
in WW3 orgasms most of the time, anyway.
Docrodile :))~
The answer to Questions 1-4 is Do as I say not as I do, besides it is
all part of the Exit strategy, no more axis of Evil, but now a
confederation of buddies.
Notice how Ahmindejad, looks and acts like Bush, or vice versa?
LB
.
|
|
|
| User: "Docrodile" |
|
| Title: Re: Coming Catastrophe: Four Mysteries of America and Iran |
06 Mar 2007 09:29:41 PM |
|
|
<leigh8bee@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:1173215950.474315.278230@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
On Mar 7, 12:03 am, "Docrodile" <swampth...@hellsbayou.net> wrote:
Coming Catastrophe: Four Mysteries of America and Iran
by John Batchelor (More by this author)
Posted: 03/06/2007
As March winds blow, there are specific warnings of an imminent
catastrophe in the confrontation between America and Iran. There is
strong indication of this direction in several recent diplomatic
surprises
and reversals, and assembled below are four mysteries that illustrate
the
scale of the threat.
1.. Why did the Bush Administration announce suddenly, and contrary to
previous policy, that it would participate in upcoming meetings in Iraq
with the unrepentant adversarial states of Iran and Syria? Secretary of
State Condoleeza Rice did not provide an answer when she declared, "We
are
recommitting ourselves to the security and stability of the Gulf
region."
2.. Why did the Iranian ambassador to Saudi Arabia suddenly announce a
visit by the Islamic Republic of Iran's President Ahmadinejad to Riyadh
for a conference on the region with King Abdullah? Ahmadinejad,
following
his audience with the House of Saud, did not provide an answer when he
declared, "Iran and Saudi Arabia oppose the dominance of enemies over
the
region and their conspiracies. During this trip, we tried to devise some
measures to prevent the enemies from harming the Muslim world and to
foil
their plots."
3.. Why did the Taliban military commander in Afghanistan, Mullah
Dadulah, suddenly announce in a European TV interview that the
neo-Taliban
was launching a spring offensive against NATO forces supporting the
Afghan
government? Dadulah did not provide an answer to this question when he
argued, "The Americans have sown a seed. They will reap the crop for
quite
a long time," and, "We will get our revenge on them, whether in
Afghanistan or outside."
4.. Why has America suddenly decided to move toward bilateral talks
with
North Korea over nuclear proliferation and also to unfreeze North Korean
funds associated with illicit money laundering and to remove North Korea
from the American terrorism list? China's chief envoy, Wu Dawei, did
not
provide an answer when he declared the deal was "favorable for the peace
process in northeast Asia and for the improvement of ties between
relevant
countries."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is possible that there are no answers to these mysteries, and that
this
is the diplomatic cacophony of a stalemate that sounds significant only
because it breaks with past assumptions. Then again, my information
from
trusted sources is that there are time-specific explanations. More, the
answers collectively speak to the fact that all these players realize
that
America and Iran are on the brink of a battle that will be a catastrophe
for themselves, for the region, for the East and the West.
What will the catastrophe look like? It will look like a vortex, a
planetary vortex, that churns the Middle East and Central Asia, that
redraws the map, that pulls in major powers from East Asia, from Western
Europe, from North and South America and Africa. There is no fixed
timetable, though the general understanding is that it is many months
away, not many weeks, especially since the warmer months favor the
operational capabilities of the various incendiary factions from Kashmir
to the Mediterranean. The timing of the confrontation is informed
generally by Iran's belief, based on its revolution's successes in
1979-80, that America is most vulnerable, and most incoherent, in the
presidential election cycle over the next six to eighteen months.
The best historical comparison for this limbo before the storm is the
spring of 1914, long before Archduke Ferdinand's visit to Sarajevo, when
there was widespread anxiety among the military powers that the major
alliances, the Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance, were on a
collision
course, yet no one could see what factors would trigger a general
mobilization. Everyone knew the peril, yet no one knew the solution.
It
is astonishing to find in the London Times of March 1914 a report from
Berlin that the pan German press was widely demanding Germany not
"shrink
from the test" about its claims against Russian power in Asia Minor, and
insisting Germany be "ready to risk war against Russia and France as
well
as England." This was known then as the "Russophobe Chorus" and was a
surprising and confounding mystery to professional observers.
It was difficult, though not impossible, to read this report at the time
and then to sound a war warning that pointed to the immediate future. It
was possible to argue in the spring of 1914 that the brutal decisions
that
would send Europe to war in the summer were already in rehearsal, were
certainly not condemned, by the major powers. A few analysts did look
ahead and did pass on their grim interpretations; and yet the worst-case
scenario of continental bloodshed and national collapse came on in any
event.
It is also difficult to read the four reports above from March 2007 and
to
peer into the future as close as this summer if not as far away as next
summer. However, it is not impossible to look ahead, if first there is
an
explanation of the background of the crisis from the point of view of
the
potentially warring major powers, America, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Al Qaeda,
all of whom along with their allies are preparing for and not loudly
condemning a threatening global tragedy.
From America's point of view, the attack on September 11, 2001, loosed a
cascade of American offensive operations throughout the Middle East that
are no nearer to completion today than when they began, and which have
drawn America into briar patches that have no simple exits. The chief
threat to America at this moment is the briar patch of Iraq,
because Iraq was -- and may again become -- the chief threat to Iran.
At
first, America's attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq benefited Iran, by
removing two of Tehran's major enemies in the region, the Taliban and
Saddam Hussein. However, once America was camped in Baghdad, the Islamic
Republic of Iran saw that an American success to create a secular,
capitalist democracy would be a mortal blow to the radical, apocalyptic
Iranian revolution.
From Iran's point of view, America must be defeated not only in Iraq and
Afghanistan but also across the region. Tehran is in the hands of a
non-rational cadre that is committed to an apocalyptic vision that
includes creating chaos in order to bring about, according to the Shia
sect known as the Twelvers, the return of the hidden Twelfth Imam, the
Mahdi, who vanished twelve centuries ago in Iraq. This unique, opaque
vision propels the strategic decisions of the Tehran regime.
Tehran sees its future in absolutes. Either it defeats America in the
region, and establishes its hegemony over the region's oil reserves, and
enforces a Persian Empire for the first time in 2500 years, or else it
loses everything. Tehran will not seek settlement. If America does not
attack pre-emptively, then Tehran will find a way to provoke the attack.
The current wrestling at the United Nations Security Council over Iran's
refusal to cease its nuclear enrichment program can be understood as a
ploy by Iran to draw in America to a military confrontation.
Tehran will not bend before words, sanctions, threats or an attack.
Tehran
believes that it can answer an American attack with strikes on American
forces in Iraq, on the Persian Gulf oil structure and, through its
proxies, on the state of Israel. Tehran's radical cadre believes that
it
will survive the American attack in its bunkers. In the meantime,
Tehran
can close the Gulf and starve the West for oil. The day a ceasefire is
imposed by exhausted powers, Tehran emerges as the regional hegemon.
From Saudi Arabia's point of view, the coming catastrophe will threaten
its oil fields, its money, its existence. Reports over the past weeks
identify the House of Saud's national security adviser Prince Bandar in
constant strained conversation with Tehran's national security adviser
Ali
Larijani in order to find an accommodation between two regimes that
share
nothing in beliefs or goals. When the violence begins, the Saudi
princes
will flee to well-prepared residences in Switzerland and Morocco.
Critically, Saudi Arabia's maneuvering is clouded by the fact that it
cannot solve the future only by negotiating with Tehran. Saudi Arabia
knows that it is targeted for destruction by the extremists whom we know
as Al Qaeda but who are better understood under the broader title used
by
the best analysts, the "Islamist-jihadists."
From the Islamist-jihadists's point of view, the mission is to destroy
the
superpower of America and to replace it with a global caliphate. The
first
phase of this is described in the Al Qaeda master plan entitled "Working
Strategy Lasting Until 2020," which calls for the consolidation of the
historical regions of Islam stretching from Iraq to Gibraltar. In this
plan, the kingdom of Saudi Arabia and other secular Arab states vanish.
Tehran has sheltered the Islamist-jihadists's leadership for years,
because it makes common cause with the jihadist goal to destroy American
power. In Iraq, Al Qaeda throws its resources against America in order
to
drain American political resolve and to construct a terrorist state
within
a failed state. Anbar and Baghdad provinces are foundations to launch
operations to degrade Saudi Arabia and to take possession of the two
profound mosques at Mecca and Medina; and to degrade Jordan and Israel
in
order to take possession of the third profound mosque at Jerusalem. For
Tehran, the Islamist-jihadists are a useful weapon to fragment the Sunni
majority that has abused the Shia for a millennium. For all powers,
the
Islamist-jihadists known as Al Qaeda are truly an unpredictable and
sinister threat.
Later this week: Coming Catastrophe Part 2: Four Solutions of America
and
Iranhttp://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=19673
I know this'll give Wally a damn good hard-on, but he's already writhing
in WW3 orgasms most of the time, anyway.
Docrodile :))~
The answer to Questions 1-4 is Do as I say not as I do, besides it is
all part of the Exit strategy, no more axis of Evil, but now a
confederation of buddies.
Notice how Ahmindejad, looks and acts like Bush, or vice versa?
LB
Unusually well thought out, chillingly written article, almost like a fine
novel, that beckons me to read Part 2. I will pass it along when it comes
out.
Of course, it could be just another failed 'vision' of a war-expectant
America, nervous about its unstable leaders, but mysteriously immobile in
their efforts to thwart any further damage by them.
I feel something horrible working up on us, and this plays to my intuitive
anxieties. So far, my intuition has been a better guide for the
nightmarishness we're enveloped in, than my rationality. Rationality
appears to have come out the loser in our increasingly irrational times.
Docrodile
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: Coming Catastrophe: Four Mysteries of America and Iran |
07 Mar 2007 02:18:06 AM |
|
|
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"
<swampthing@hellsbayou.net> Spat the Words
Later this week: Coming Catastrophe Part 2: Four Solutions of America
and
Iranhttp://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=19673
Unusually well thought out, chillingly written article, almost like a
fine novel, that beckons me to read Part 2. I will pass it along when it
comes out.
Of course, it could be just another failed 'vision' of a war-expectant
America, nervous about its unstable leaders, but mysteriously immobile
in their efforts to thwart any further damage by them.
The reason the US continues to accept this administration
is that there is a slim element of truth to what they are
saying.. there are individuals and groups out there who would
do us horrible harm if they could.
In the meantime, the dirt continues to emerge about the
Bush administration and their specific activities (like
being financial backer to numerous militant groups in the
mideast, some of which are anti-US), and the increased use
of military intelligence which has far less congressional
oversight than the CIA does.
As long as the Bush monkeys can continue making Americans
believe the world is a dangerous place, they have a real
shot at continuing their war of agression. So doc, do you
think the world is a dangerous place ?
I feel something horrible working up on us, and this plays to my
intuitive anxieties. So far, my intuition has been a better guide for
the nightmarishness we're enveloped in, than my rationality. Rationality
appears to have come out the loser in our increasingly irrational times.
Docrodile
.
|
|
|
| User: "Docrodile" |
|
| Title: Re: Coming Catastrophe: Four Mysteries of America and Iran |
07 Mar 2007 03:02:16 AM |
|
|
"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns98ECD3E5C851rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"
<swampthing@hellsbayou.net> Spat the Words
Later this week: Coming Catastrophe Part 2: Four Solutions of America
and
Iranhttp://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=19673
Unusually well thought out, chillingly written article, almost like a
fine novel, that beckons me to read Part 2. I will pass it along when
it
comes out.
Of course, it could be just another failed 'vision' of a war-expectant
America, nervous about its unstable leaders, but mysteriously immobile
in their efforts to thwart any further damage by them.
The reason the US continues to accept this administration
is that there is a slim element of truth to what they are
saying.. there are individuals and groups out there who would
do us horrible harm if they could.
In the meantime, the dirt continues to emerge about the
Bush administration and their specific activities (like
being financial backer to numerous militant groups in the
mideast, some of which are anti-US), and the increased use
of military intelligence which has far less congressional
oversight than the CIA does.
As long as the Bush monkeys can continue making Americans
believe the world is a dangerous place, they have a real
shot at continuing their war of agression. So doc, do you
think the world is a dangerous place ?
I'll use part of your message as my partial reply:
"...there are individuals and groups out there who would
do us horrible harm if they could."
The 'danger' is only as deep as our fear. If our fear exceeds all
rationality, then, yes, the species, the world, becomes a most dangerous
place. If our fear is justified, our reality becomes less dangerous, but
still destructive and deadly.
WWII's fascist aggression was real and our response justified, but the
results were massively destructive and death-dealing. In the War On
Terror, our fears appear to exceed the reality of the threat, and
therefore our response may know no boundaries of cruelty, oppression,
torture, murder, and injury. It is a most dangerous time, Perseid, that
has an enemy largely unseen and a public that relies on the 'eyes' or
perception or words that've already proven to be those of exploiters,
sensationalists, fanatics, liars, and plainly irrational men and women.
How do we measure the extent of the threat we are told we face but to
largely trust the perception, or words, of those who've deceived,
overreacted, been negligent, or have vested commercial interests?
It is hard to measure the WOT's threat getting up in a pristine world
every day in America, as does much of the rest of the Western world, and
going off to work in an orderly way, and shopping, and recreating without
threats or damage from 'terrorists.' Our greatest threat remains our
corrupted, lying, fanatical, negligent, stupid, manipulative leaders in
the political and corporate world, who've so far taken away a good portion
of our right to privacy. Once privacy is no longer existent, freedom
cannot be fully exercised, and suspicions and paranoia set in, further
hurting our ability to enjoy a free existence. Our democracy suffers, as
well. If we lose our basic freedoms and our democracy is corrupted, what
then do we have to fight for?
There is no short answer, but I've made it as brief as I can. It is not
only those 'out there' who wish us harm, whether justified or not, but
those from within -- our own citizens, at all levels. We can only deal
with a time of increasing threat by sitting down and talking about our
fears, our hate, our differences, attempting to negotiate and compromise,
and reach a common ground, or else we continue to keep an age-old cycle of
violence and counter-violence going until, one day, some crazy leaders
decide to pull out all the stops and we end up a broken civilization.
Civilizations have come and gone, and we are fools to think that there is
some divine protection or guidance for the one we live in.
Docrodile
I feel something horrible working up on us, and this plays to my
intuitive anxieties. So far, my intuition has been a better guide for
the nightmarishness we're enveloped in, than my rationality.
Rationality
appears to have come out the loser in our increasingly irrational
times.
Docrodile
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: Coming Catastrophe: Four Mysteries of America and Iran |
08 Mar 2007 10:56:22 PM |
|
|
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"
<swampthing@hellsbayou.net> Spat the Words
"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns98ECD3E5C851rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"
<swampthing@hellsbayou.net> Spat the Words
Later this week: Coming Catastrophe Part 2: Four Solutions of America
and
Iranhttp://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=19673
Unusually well thought out, chillingly written article, almost like a
fine novel, that beckons me to read Part 2. I will pass it along when
it
comes out.
Of course, it could be just another failed 'vision' of a war-expectant
America, nervous about its unstable leaders, but mysteriously immobile
in their efforts to thwart any further damage by them.
The reason the US continues to accept this administration
is that there is a slim element of truth to what they are
saying.. there are individuals and groups out there who would
do us horrible harm if they could.
In the meantime, the dirt continues to emerge about the
Bush administration and their specific activities (like
being financial backer to numerous militant groups in the
mideast, some of which are anti-US), and the increased use
of military intelligence which has far less congressional
oversight than the CIA does.
As long as the Bush monkeys can continue making Americans
believe the world is a dangerous place, they have a real
shot at continuing their war of agression. So doc, do you
think the world is a dangerous place ?
I'll use part of your message as my partial reply:
"...there are individuals and groups out there who would
do us horrible harm if they could."
The 'danger' is only as deep as our fear. If our fear exceeds all
rationality, then, yes, the species, the world, becomes a most dangerous
place. If our fear is justified, our reality becomes less dangerous, but
still destructive and deadly.
WWII's fascist aggression was real and our response justified, but the
results were massively destructive and death-dealing. In the War On
Terror, our fears appear to exceed the reality of the threat, and
therefore our response may know no boundaries of cruelty, oppression,
torture, murder, and injury. It is a most dangerous time, Perseid, that
has an enemy largely unseen and a public that relies on the 'eyes' or
perception or words that've already proven to be those of exploiters,
sensationalists, fanatics, liars, and plainly irrational men and women.
How do we measure the extent of the threat we are told we face but to
largely trust the perception, or words, of those who've deceived,
overreacted, been negligent, or have vested commercial interests?
It is hard to measure the WOT's threat getting up in a pristine world
every day in America, as does much of the rest of the Western world, and
going off to work in an orderly way, and shopping, and recreating
without
threats or damage from 'terrorists.' Our greatest threat remains our
corrupted, lying, fanatical, negligent, stupid, manipulative leaders in
the political and corporate world, who've so far taken away a good
portion
of our right to privacy. Once privacy is no longer existent, freedom
cannot be fully exercised, and suspicions and paranoia set in, further
hurting our ability to enjoy a free existence. Our democracy suffers, as
well. If we lose our basic freedoms and our democracy is corrupted, what
then do we have to fight for?
There is no short answer, but I've made it as brief as I can. It is not
only those 'out there' who wish us harm, whether justified or not, but
those from within -- our own citizens,
No doubt about that doc. Look at how a bare majority have
empowered a war-monger like Bush to elevate some small group
of thugs, religious zealots, to the status they now hold.. that
of 'the most grievous peril of our time', and a fight which has
been dubbed 'the long war', indicating a struggle which could
last decades.
Soley through the efforts of of 2, maybe 3 or even 4 individuals,
this administration has created a self-perpetuating cycle of
violence starting with the creation of terrorists by the US
forces which professes to be fighting terrorism. The new US
General in Iraq, Petraeus, knows the military cannot 'win' this
thing, but the combined monkey-brains in the Bush monkey-camp
don't have the intelligence to win it any other way. GWB and
company are bereft of original thought. There is no better
characterization of this administration than 'Failure of Intelligence'.
at all levels. We can only deal
with a time of increasing threat by sitting down and talking about our
fears, our hate, our differences, attempting to negotiate and
compromise,
and reach a common ground, or else we continue to keep an age-old cycle
of
violence and counter-violence going until, one day, some crazy leaders
decide to pull out all the stops and we end up a broken civilization.
Civilizations have come and gone, and we are fools to think that there
is
some divine protection or guidance for the one we live in.
Docrodile
I feel something horrible working up on us, and this plays to my
intuitive anxieties. So far, my intuition has been a better guide for
the nightmarishness we're enveloped in, than my rationality.
Rationality
appears to have come out the loser in our increasingly irrational
times.
Docrodile
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "=?utf-8?B?4pi6IC7CtzoqwqjCqCo6wrcuwrc6KsKowqgqOsK3LiAg4pmlIFVuY2xlIFdhbGx5IFJ1bGV6ICEgRlJJQ0sgeWVhaCAhIOKZoy4uLkhPT1JPTyAh4pmm4pmg4peY4peL4peZ4pmC4pmA4pmq4pmr4pi84pa6LsK3OirCqMKoKjrCty4g4pml4pi6wqnCruKEog==?=" |
|
| Title: Re: Coming Catastrophe: Four Mysteries of America and Iran |
07 Mar 2007 01:49:45 AM |
|
|
WOWamundo iz all I can say, Gazza !
Very Impressive ! U've outdone yourself 2day, Gary !
Congratulations !
HOOROO
UNCLE WALLY
=3D=3D=3D0=3D=3D=3D
Yeppers, they seem to be itching for a confrontation with Syria & Iran
(& Russia incidentally).....
At least 40 Russian SS-N22 Sunburn SLBMs pointing fairly & squarely at
the Parasitic State
-- & Russia won't hesitate to use any of them if either Syria or Iran
are attacked.
China has quite a few of 'em too, I believe.
HOOROO
UNCLE WALLY
=3D=3D=3D=3D00=3D=3D=3D=3D
On Mar 7, 1:03=C2=A0am, "Docrodile" <swampth...@hellsbayou.net> wrote:
Coming Catastrophe: Four Mysteries of America and Iran
by John Batchelor =C2=A0(More by this author)
Posted: 03/06/2007
As March winds blow, there are specific warnings of an imminent
catastrophe in the confrontation between America and Iran. =C2=A0There is
strong indication of this direction in several recent diplomatic surprises
and reversals, and assembled below are four mysteries that illustrate the
scale of the threat.
=C2=A0 1.. Why did the Bush Administration announce suddenly, and contrar=
y to
previous policy, that it would participate in upcoming meetings in Iraq
with the unrepentant adversarial states of Iran and Syria? Secretary of
State Condoleeza Rice did not provide an answer when she declared, "We are
recommitting ourselves to the security and stability of the Gulf region."
=C2=A0 2.. Why did the Iranian ambassador to Saudi Arabia suddenly announ=
ce a
visit by the Islamic Republic of Iran's President Ahmadinejad to Riyadh
for a conference on the region with King Abdullah? =C2=A0Ahmadinejad, fol=
lowing
his audience with the House of Saud, did not provide an answer when he
declared, "Iran and Saudi Arabia oppose the dominance of enemies over the
region and their conspiracies. During this trip, we tried to devise some
measures to prevent the enemies from harming the Muslim world and to foil
their plots."
=C2=A0 3.. Why did the Taliban military commander in Afghanistan, Mullah
Dadulah, suddenly announce in a European TV interview that the neo-Taliban
was launching a spring offensive against NATO forces supporting the Afghan
government? =C2=A0Dadulah did not provide an answer to this question when=
he
argued, "The Americans have sown a seed. They will reap the crop for quite
a long time," and, "We will get our revenge on them, whether in
Afghanistan or outside."
=C2=A0 4.. Why has America suddenly decided to move toward bilateral talk=
s with
North Korea over nuclear proliferation and also to unfreeze North Korean
funds associated with illicit money laundering and to remove North Korea
from the American terrorism list? =C2=A0China's chief envoy, Wu Dawei, di=
d not
provide an answer when he declared the deal was "favorable for the peace
process in northeast Asia and for the improvement of ties between relevant
countries."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
--=C2=AD-----
It is possible that there are no answers to these mysteries, and that this
is the diplomatic cacophony of a stalemate that sounds significant only
because it breaks with past assumptions. =C2=A0Then again, my information=
from
trusted sources is that there are time-specific explanations. =C2=A0More,=
the
answers collectively speak to the fact that all these players realize that
America and Iran are on the brink of a battle that will be a catastrophe
for themselves, for the region, for the East and the West.
What will the catastrophe look like? =C2=A0It will look like a vortex, a
planetary vortex, that churns the Middle East and Central Asia, that
redraws the map, that pulls in major powers from East Asia, from Western
Europe, from North and South America and Africa. There is no fixed
timetable, though the general understanding is that it is many months
away, not many weeks, especially since the warmer months favor the
operational capabilities of the various incendiary factions from Kashmir
to the Mediterranean. =C2=A0The timing of the confrontation is informed
generally by Iran's belief, based on its revolution's successes in
1979-80, that America is most vulnerable, and most incoherent, in the
presidential election cycle over the next six to eighteen months.
The best historical comparison for this limbo before the storm is the
spring of 1914, long before Archduke Ferdinand's visit to Sarajevo, when
there was widespread anxiety among the military powers that the major
alliances, the Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance, were on a collision
course, yet no one could see what factors would trigger a general
mobilization. =C2=A0 Everyone knew the peril, yet no one knew the solutio=
n=2E =C2=A0It
is astonishing to find in the London Times of March 1914 a report from
Berlin that the pan German press was widely demanding Germany not "shrink
from the test" about its claims against Russian power in Asia Minor, and
insisting Germany be "ready to risk war against Russia and France as well
as England." =C2=A0 This was known then as the "Russophobe Chorus" and wa=
s a
surprising and confounding mystery to professional observers.
It was difficult, though not impossible, to read this report at the time
and then to sound a war warning that pointed to the immediate future. It
was possible to argue in the spring of 1914 that the brutal decisions that
would send Europe to war in the summer were already in rehearsal, were
certainly not condemned, by the major powers. =C2=A0A few analysts did lo=
ok
ahead and did pass on their grim interpretations; and yet the worst-case
scenario of continental bloodshed and national collapse came on in any
event.
It is also difficult to read the four reports above from March 2007 and to
peer into the future as close as this summer if not as far away as next
summer. =C2=A0However, it is not impossible to look ahead, if first there=
is an
explanation of the background of the crisis from the point of view of the
potentially warring major powers, America, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Al Qaeda,
all of whom along with their allies are preparing for and not loudly
condemning a threatening global tragedy.
From America's point of view, the attack on September 11, 2001, loosed a
cascade of American offensive operations throughout the Middle East that
are no nearer to completion today than when they began, and which have
drawn America into briar patches that have no simple exits. =C2=A0The chi=
ef
threat to America at this moment is the briar patch of Iraq,
because Iraq was -- and may again become -- the chief threat to Iran. =C2=
=A0 At
first, America's attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq benefited Iran, by
removing two of Tehran's major enemies in the region, the Taliban and
Saddam Hussein. However, once America was camped in Baghdad, the Islamic
Republic of Iran saw that an American success to create a secular,
capitalist democracy would be a mortal blow to the radical, apocalyptic
Iranian revolution.
From Iran's point of view, America must be defeated not only in Iraq and
Afghanistan but also across the region. =C2=A0Tehran is in the hands of a
non-rational cadre that is committed to an apocalyptic vision that
includes creating chaos in order to bring about, according to the Shia
sect known as the Twelvers, the return of the hidden Twelfth Imam, the
Mahdi, who vanished twelve centuries ago in Iraq. =C2=A0This unique, opaq=
ue
vision propels the strategic decisions of the Tehran regime.
Tehran sees its future in absolutes. =C2=A0Either it defeats America in t=
he
region, and establishes its hegemony over the region's oil reserves, and
enforces a Persian Empire for the first time in 2500 years, or else it
loses everything. =C2=A0Tehran will not seek settlement. =C2=A0If America=
does not
attack pre-emptively, then Tehran will find a way to provoke the attack.
The current wrestling at the United Nations Security Council over Iran's
refusal to cease its nuclear enrichment program can be understood as a
ploy by Iran to draw in America to a military confrontation.
Tehran will not bend before words, sanctions, threats or an attack. Tehran
believes that it can answer an American attack with strikes on American
forces in Iraq, on the Persian Gulf oil structure and, through its
proxies, on the state of Israel. =C2=A0Tehran's radical cadre believes th=
at it
will survive the American attack in its bunkers. =C2=A0In the meantime, T=
ehran
can close the Gulf and starve the West for oil. The day a ceasefire is
imposed by exhausted powers, Tehran emerges as the regional hegemon.
From Saudi Arabia's point of view, the coming catastrophe will threaten
its oil fields, its money, its existence. =C2=A0Reports over the past wee=
ks
identify the House of Saud's national security adviser Prince Bandar in
constant strained conversation with Tehran's national security adviser Ali
Larijani in order to find an accommodation between two regimes that share
nothing in beliefs or goals. =C2=A0When the violence begins, the Saudi pr=
inces
will flee to well-prepared residences in Switzerland and Morocco.
Critically, Saudi Arabia's maneuvering is clouded by the fact that it
cannot solve the future only by negotiating with Tehran. =C2=A0Saudi Arab=
ia
knows that it is targeted for destruction by the extremists whom we know
as Al Qaeda but who are better understood under the broader title used by
the best analysts, the "Islamist-jihadists."
From the Islamist-jihadists's point of view, the mission is to destroy the
superpower of America and to replace it with a global caliphate. The first
phase of this is described in the Al Qaeda master plan entitled "Working
Strategy Lasting Until 2020," which calls for the consolidation of the
historical regions of Islam stretching from Iraq to Gibraltar. =C2=A0In t=
his
plan, the kingdom of Saudi Arabia and other secular Arab states vanish.
Tehran has sheltered the Islamist-jihadists's leadership for years,
because it makes common cause with the jihadist goal to destroy American
power. =C2=A0In Iraq, Al Qaeda throws its resources against America in or=
der to
drain American political resolve and to construct a terrorist state within
a failed state. =C2=A0Anbar and Baghdad provinces are foundations to laun=
ch
operations to degrade Saudi Arabia and to take possession of the two
profound mosques at Mecca and Medina; and to degrade Jordan and Israel in
order to take possession of the third profound mosque at Jerusalem. For
Tehran, the Islamist-jihadists are a useful weapon to fragment the Sunni
majority that has abused the Shia for a millennium. =C2=A0 For all powers=
, the
Islamist-jihadists known as Al Qaeda are truly an unpredictable and
sinister threat.
Later this ...
read more =C2=BB
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Coming Catastrophe: Four Mysteries of America and Iran |
08 Mar 2007 03:01:50 AM |
|
|
<stargatedecember2...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
At least 40 Russian SS-N22 Sunburn SLBMs pointing fairly &
squarely at the Parasitic State -- & Russia won't hesitate
to use any of them if either Syria or Iran are attacked.
Here on our planet -- the one not ruled by total psychos --
the U.S. currently maintains a fleet of 14 Ohio class
nuclear submarines, each carrying 24 SLBMs (which are MERVed),
enough to destroy 192 cities.
That's EACH submarine. Just one -- given that each missile
carries up to eight warheads, each independently targeted.
Yes, one missile can destroy eight different cities. There's
24 missiles on board a single submarine.
At the same time, Russia has much to gain from a war against
Iran. Any war. Iran has the second largest proven reserves of
natural gas, and Russia has the largest. Take Iran down and
Russia completely owns the natural gas market, and soaks up
huge profits from the increase in prices.
It's far more likely that Iran will attack the United States
than the United States attacking Iran. Kurdistan will declare
it's independence eventually, and Iran will likely respond
with hostility. Oh, what is Kurdistan is what you may be
calling "Northern Iraq."
Even Syria is supposed to have its finger in the Kurdistan pie.
Here:
http://www.hagalil.com/archiv/images/kurdistan.jpg
That's Kurdistan. That's what we have to worry about. Any
one of those countries which currently claims Kurdish
lands might very well invade soon after independence. Or
trouble could strike a different way. Iran, Syria or
Turkey might violently squelch Kurdish independence movements
within their borders, inviting a response from an independent
Kurdish state with an independent Kurdish army.
That's what has us worried.
Remember how Saddam gassed his own people? Those people were
the Kurds. And the peace treaty after the first Gulf war
(with Poppy Bush, the first disaster) forced Saddam to play
nice. And, yeah, we also enforced this on him with the "no
fly" zones. U.S. & allied air power, in a sense, created
Kurdish independence. Clinton continued the policies, effectively
allowing the Kurds to get used to independence. And now, well,
now they'll never go back to being violently repressed
minorities within an artifical state created by the British.
Russia doesn;t want to get nuked.
Your malice aside, Russia isn't about to destroy their culture
(and hundreds of millions of people) just to appease your
malice.
As for north Korea: The issue was always the nuclear reactors
that Clinton promised them. Clinton never wanted to give them
to north Korea in the first place. Why would he?
"Give me reactors, OR ELSE!"
The "Best advice" Clinton got was that north Korea was on the
verge of collapse. It was. They simply didn't have enough food
to feed everybody, nor enough fuel to keep everything going.
The reactors were delayed... delayed... delayed again... all
waiting for the collapse to happen. It never happened.
The goal all along was a new deal, one that didn't involve any
reactors. This never required a war, but it always required
that war be an option.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Docrodile" |
|
| Title: Re: Coming Catastrophe: Four Mysteries of America and Iran |
07 Mar 2007 04:44:23 AM |
|
|
"☺ .·:*¨¨*:·.·:*¨¨*:·. ♥ Uncle Wally Rulez ! FRICK yeah ! ♣...HOOROO
!♦♠◘○◙♂♀♪♫☼►.·:*¨¨*:·. ♥☺©®™" <stargatedecember2012@yahoo.ca> wrote in
message news:1173253785.612288.185590@64g2000cwx.googlegroups.com...
WOWamundo iz all I can say, Gazza !
Very Impressive ! U've outdone yourself 2day, Gary !
Congratulations !
HOOROO
UNCLE WALLY
===0===
Yeppers, they seem to be itching for a confrontation with Syria & Iran
(& Russia incidentally).....
At least 40 Russian SS-N22 Sunburn SLBMs pointing fairly & squarely at
the Parasitic State
-- & Russia won't hesitate to use any of them if either Syria or Iran
are attacked.
China has quite a few of 'em too, I believe.
HOOROO
UNCLE WALLY
====00====
I thought you'd enjoy it. Part 2's on the way and I will post it, unless
you beat me to it! LOL!
The danger of the War On Terror appears to be exaggerated, but the battle
for dominance over the oil resources in the Mideast is likely not.
It is confusing, this WOT and the WFO (War For Oil). The two are usually
lumped together in the media without distinction, and the politicians, of
course, don't wish to make a distinction.
The WFO threatens to ignite a much larger conflict, as a conventional war,
while the WOT is more a guerilla-style threat, and usually relying on
opportunity, rather than large brute force.
The two, of course, can combine to make the aggregate global threat
greater than either one of these wars could independently.
It's complex, and perplexing, to be sure, and moving rapidly upward on the
scale of fear, hatred, and fierce hegemonic competition.
Actually, futurists had predicted this hegemonic head-banging of
civilizations decades ago, over the dwindling resources of fossil fuel and
water. Little is mentioned about the water rights struggle in the Middle
East/Mid-Asia/N.Africa region, which is likely to be more localized than
global in nature. But, it adds to the friction there, too.
And, of course, the ages-old racial/territorial Jew-Muslim conflict over
Palestine continues to boil. Sprinkle in the problems of the Sudan,
Somalia, and Ethiopia, and you've got quite a cauldron of troubles there.
And there sits huge Saudi Arabia, the oil *jewel* ready to be exploited.
Docrodile
On Mar 7, 1:03 am, "Docrodile" <swampth...@hellsbayou.net> wrote:
Coming Catastrophe: Four Mysteries of America and Iran
by John Batchelor (More by this author)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
