SYRIA WAR MEGATHREAD - Mod Note First Post

_sparkie_

Yahir Shaggy Peg wrote: »

Give neither side any aid.. Its a civil war, leave them to sort out their own affairs.

You wouldn't happen to have any sympathy for either side? Considering you are wearing a hezbollah shirt in your avatar.

donegal_road

Published on Jul 13, 2012
General Clark commanded Operation Allied Force in Kosovo War during his term as the Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) of NATO from 1997 to 2000.

During a 2007 interview with Democracy Now's Amy Goodman, General Wesley Clark (Retired) explains a story that began shortly after the 9/11 attacks. Clark reveals 2001 USA war plan to invade Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran. By now (2012) this plan is almost done. Only Syria and Iran are not bombed yet but those 2 are targets for US and Israel strikes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxWtq3rw-fw

Jonny7

donegal_road wrote: »

During a 2007 interview with Democracy Now's Amy Goodman, General Wesley Clark (Retired) explains a story that began shortly after the 9/11 attacks. Clark reveals 2001 USA war plan to invade Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran. By now (2012) this plan is almost done. Only Syria and Iran are not bombed yet but those 2 are targets for US and Israel strikes.

Actually not the plot of a Roland Emmerich film. This was a purported Neocon ideal to spread democracy through-out the Middle East.. by force. Iraq/Iran would have been the first target, when democracy was successfully "implemented" then the other countries would have "fallen like dominos".

Pretty far-out stuff, obviously any believers would have become quickly disillusioned after the opening years of the mess that was Iraq.

donegal_road

his refers to oil being America's sole reason for invading the Middle East, which is what the whole world knew all along, but was never publicly acknowledged by someone as senior as him.

DipStick McSwindler

This post has been deleted.

Renegade Mechanic

donegal_road wrote: »

his refers to oil being America's sole reason for invading the Middle East, which is what the whole world knew all along, but was never publicly acknowledged by someone as senior as him.

Not so much that they needed it. More so, I think, to nip a possible chain reaction of oil rich countries selling their reserves in Euro instead of U.S Dollars at the bud. Iraq started it in 2000 and, had it taken off (given how weak the Dollar was against the Euro at the time) it might have caused irreversible damage to the U.S currency value. As long as the worlds most valuable resource is traded in the worlds current reserve currency, America can stay on top.

Jonny7

donegal_road wrote: »

his refers to oil being America's sole reason for invading the Middle East, which is what the whole world knew all along, but was never publicly acknowledged by someone as senior as him.

In Feb this year the US got more oil from Canada than all OPEC nations combined, so maybe they should be ****-stirring Canada if that's how it works

Tssk

Well I don't think the chemical attacks can be doubted considering Medecins Sans Frontiers saw the carnage.
However I am sick to death of the Western Powers bludgeoning their way through the region,they are making a bad situation worse.
So it is hard to believe they are going to get this one right. The way they bang on about Syria crossing a red line, as if they now feel morally obligated to do something, makes me sick. Our international leaders know nothing of right and wrong

donegal_road

Renegade Mechanic wrote: »

Not so much that they needed it. More so, I think, to nip a possible chain reaction of oil rich countries selling their reserves in Euro instead of U.S Dollars at the bud. Iraq started it in 2000 and, had it taken off (given how weak the Dollar was against the Euro at the time) it might have caused irreversible damage to the U.S currency value. As long as the worlds most valuable resource is traded in the worlds current reserve currency, America can stay on top.

On that point, over a year ago, Turkey and India started to barter gold for oil with Iran Link to story

If this practice was allowed to take, the American dollar would be doomed.

donegal_road

Jonny7 wrote: »

In Feb this year the US got more oil from Canada than all OPEC nations combined, so maybe they should be ****-stirring Canada if that's how it works

Canada shares the same banking system as the US... Iran and Syria do not.

The Islamic banking system does not believe in charging interest per say...

The basic concept of Islam is that wealth should not be hoarded or wasted, it should be put to productive use so that the owner, the society and the less privileged may share the benefits. It follows that it is not permissible to leave money idle and charge interest or profit from the mere use of the money by another party without regard to risks, or profits, that may generate. Usurers only seek profit, or interest without risks. This is contrary to the foundation of Islamic economy which is based on equity and equilibrium.

From the aforesaid concept stems the principle of profit and risk sharing between the owner of the capital and the other party, i.e. the borrower. Thus, in contrast to the conventional banking, the capital owner cannot claim both a fixed interest as well as the guarantee of the return of his capital.

Also, Sharia does not consider money as such a commodity, but as a means of payment and as a neutral measure of valuation rather than a commodity by itself

Nevertheless, the owner of the capital may receive compensation on the basis of sharing profits and risks. The prohibition of trading with money plus interest aims at ensuring that money remains a stable value.

*The Rothschild business model, and Western banking system is the polar opposite to the Islamic banking system. And guess what countries do not have a Rothschild owned bank at the centre of their banking system? Iran and Syria..

Jonny7

donegal_road wrote: »

The Islamic banking system does not believe in charging interest per say...

Which would have baffled the many preceding civilisations, e.g. the Egyptians, whom have used interest since the year dot.

Islamic banks just use other methods for making money, i.e. offering a higher than market price to the customer and that profit is the risk the bank is taking.

In the "olden days", they just used Jews as money-lenders as the heathens were exempt.

*The Rothschild business model, and Western banking system is the polar opposite to the Islamic banking system. And guess what countries do not have a Rothschild owned bank at the centre of their banking system? Iran and Syria..

Not really, e.g. Lloyds and HSBC offer compatible accounts in the UK.

You know what else Iran and Syria don't have? Taytos. I smell a crisp corporation plot here somewhere.

Amerika

US military involvement in Syria would be a lesson in stupidity. Why in the would would we want to provide al Qaeda's with an air force? Then again, stupidity seems to be the norm over here in the states since 2009.

clairefontaine

Amerika wrote: »

US military involvement in Syria would be a lesson in stupidity. Why in the would would we want to provide al Qaeda's with an air force? Then again, stupidity seems to be the norm over here in the states since 2009.

Weve been stupid a lot longer than that. Still working on kinda sorta evidence, and here we go. This will piss off Putin no end, am scared to think what's next with Iran.

Leftist

IrishFeeney92 wrote: »

Everybody seems to be forgetting Irish Troops are due to be sent as part of a UN peacekeeping force to Syria in the coming weeks

forgetting or just not ar$ed?

Leftist

Amerika wrote: »

US military involvement in Syria would be a lesson in stupidity. Why in the would would we want to provide al Qaeda's with an air force? Then again, stupidity seems to be the norm over here in the states since 2009.

yep, since 2009. Was a bastion of intelligence and common sense prior to that.

f**king hell.

wendell borton

danniemcq wrote: »

Oh sure they supported the Taliban against the Russians, oh and Iraq in the Iran/Iraq war (although to be fair they also supported Iran at the same time)

The enemy of my enemy is my friend after all.

...and then used the profits from Iran to illegally fund a war in Nicaragua.:(

donegal_road

Jonny7 wrote: »

Which would have baffled the many preceding civilisations, e.g. the Egyptians, whom have used interest since the year dot.

Islamic banks just use other methods for making money, i.e. offering a higher than market price to the customer and that profit is the risk the bank is taking.

In the "olden days", they just used Jews as money-lenders as the heathens were exempt.



Not really, e.g. Lloyds and HSBC offer compatible accounts in the UK.

You know what else Iran and Syria don't have? Taytos. I smell a crisp corporation plot here somewhere.

here is a great book, if your interested in this sort of thing...

All the Shah's Men An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror

Amerika

Leftist wrote: »

yep, since 2009. Was a bastion of intelligence and common sense prior to that.

f**king hell.

No, stupidity ruled the day before 2009 also. It’s just been on steroids ever since.

donegal_road

Three questions for Obama before he pulls the trigger on Syria:


First, why does this particular heinous act rise to the level of justifying a military response? More specifically, why did a similarly heinous act by the Egyptian army elicit from Washington only the mildest response? Just weeks ago, Egyptian security forces slaughtered hundreds of Egyptians whose “crime” was to protest a military coup that overthrew a legitimately elected president. Why the double standard?


Second, once U.S. military action against Syria begins, when will it end?

Third, what is the legal basis for military action?

MadYaker

Looks like the yanks are going to get stuck in. That always ends well :rolleyes:

Amerika

MadYaker wrote: »

Looks like the yanks are going to get stuck in. That always ends well :rolleyes:

Sadly, you’re probably right.

US attacks Syria
Iran attacks Israel
US attacks Iran to protect Israel
Any guess as to what happens next?

(and all factions in Syria still hate the US)

clairefontaine

donegal_road wrote: »

Three questions for Obama before he pulls the trigger on Syria:


First, why does this particular heinous act rise to the level of justifying a military response? More specifically, why did a similarly heinous act by the Egyptian army elicit from Washington only the mildest response? Just weeks ago, Egyptian security forces slaughtered hundreds of Egyptians whose “crime” was to protest a military coup that overthrew a legitimately elected president. Why the double standard?


Second, once U.S. military action against Syria begins, when will it end?

Third, what is the legal basis for military action?

Because we are fighting the Saudis wars for them by proxy. I know US govt is stupid, but I can't believe they are that stupid they don't see this.

And yes, even though all our terrorism has been sourced out of Saudi.

Makes no sense.

clairefontaine

Amerika wrote: »

Sadly, you’re probably right.

US attacks Syria
Iran attacks Israel
US attacks Iran to protect Israel
Any guess as to what happens next?

(and all factions in Syria still hate the US)

I would put Russian involvement in there somewhere.

cd07

clairefontaine wrote: »

I would put Russian involvement in there somewhere.

North Korea to get brave again?

clairefontaine

cd07 wrote: »

North Korea to get brave again?

No doubt it.

Seaneh

Amerika wrote: »

Sadly, you’re probably right.

US attacks Syria
Iran attacks Israel
US attacks Iran to protect Israel
Any guess as to what happens next?

(and all factions in Syria still hate the US)

Iran and Israel will stay out of it as much as they can to be honest, they know it's a giant no-win cluster ****.

cd07

clairefontaine wrote: »

No doubt it.

Doubt it myself. I see Israel striking Irans nuclear facilities early on if there is conflict though as they will be the prime target when the s**t starts and then god knows what will happen. Id stay out of this one if I was Obama it will be like stirring a wasp nest.

Seaneh

cd07 wrote: »

Doubt it myself. I see Israel striking Irans nuclear facilities early on if there is conflict though as they will be the prime target when the s**t starts and then god knows what will happen. Id stay out of this one if I was Obama it will be like stirring a wasp nest.

Israel won't attack Iran because they know that doing so will just mean that Iran will spend the next week or so blanket bombing the north of Israel via Hezbollah, which would lead to another war in Lebanon and probably cause Hamas to go ape**** again and start firing rockets at Jerusalem. and Iran would also use their not unsubstantial air-force to bombard Tel Aviv and Haifa.

Attacking Iran right now would be a stupid move and just trigger an all out war in the area. Israel are crazy but they aren't stupid.

And while all this is going on Poor auld Abdullah II ibn Al-Hussein will be sitting there hoping everyone just stays the **** away from him.

Amerika

Seaneh wrote: »

Iran and Israel will stay out of it as much as they can to be honest, they know it's a giant no-win cluster ****.

You’d think, wouldn’t you?

But Hossein Sheikholeslam, the director general of the Iranian parliament’s International Affairs bureau, said Israel would be the first casualty of any U.S. led strike on Syria.

And today Israel ordered a special call-up of reserve troops.

Anyone here know if Samantha Power has cut her vacation to Ireland short (on vacation 19 days after being confirmed as US Ambassador to the UN and missing the emergency security council meeting while all hell breaks out regarding Syria)?

mrsoundie

Seaneh wrote: »

Iran and Israel will stay out of it as much as they can to be honest, they know it's a giant no-win cluster ****.

Israel is watching the north of their country all the time, Hezbollah is a good acquaintance of Irans I do believe.

Hezbollah did give the Israelis a bloody nose the two last time they tangled and they have made it quite clear what would happen if there was any strikes on Iran.