Printable View
Best marketing tool Israel has used up to this day, tying Israel to Judaism, forcing the fallacious logical argument, "If you're anti-Israel, you're anti-Semitic."Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoTheranthrope
Israel and Chemical Biological Weapons: History, Deterrence, and Arms Control; Avner Cohen
Obama is saying that we are 'tightening the noose' on Quadaffi.
Seriously? The Noose?
We're lynching him now?
Way to go, Barak, you're just ASKING for people to keep using lynching/nooses/lynch mobs as terms in political discourse.
Boo!
Bok has a very legitimate point here.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoTheranthrope
The racist, extremist conservative government in Israel is only nominally 'Jewish'. Israel is a very secular place on the average so you really shouldn't broadly refer to Israelis as Jews.
You don't have to take my word for it. You could just go over there, or read about it at least.
1000 Saudi troops, alongside troops from the UAE, have entered Bahrain at the behest of the King. (Saudi and Bahrain are connected by a long causeway) They are also acting on behalf of the GCC (Gulf Cooperative between the Arab countries of the Gulf).
This is potentially huge.
Remember: Bahrain is about 85% Shiite, while the Royal family and their cronies are Sunni --this imbalance has sparked the tension there that's been boiling over. Adding a greater complication: Saudi Arabia and the other Arab Gulf states are also predominantly Sunni. Saudi has the added concern of their Eastern regions which not only hold significant numbers of Shiites but most of their oil.
The potentially catastrophic problem is if the big Shiite nation, Iran, decides to take action. Iran and Saudi have been seeing some proxy fights elsewhere: both have funded sides in Iraq (where Iran has been more successful in influencing politics), Iran-backed Hezbollah has ousted the Saudi-backed regime in Lebanon, and Saudi's secular partner in the region, Egypt under Mubarak, is now out of the picture for the time being. If Iran opts to send troops to support the opposition parties, we have a grade-A international emergency because it will disrupt all the oil going through the Gulf --and a proxy fight between Iran and Saudi could create far-reaching chaos in world markets that would cause a major, major worldwide recession as oil prices would skyrocket. Also keep in mind the Bahrain has a major US Naval Base, though it would seem likely that any such escalation would see all sides avoiding the base.
There is speculation that Iran would not be willing to do something that drastic. At the same time, Iran hadn't seen a need to intervene in Bahrain before because the momentum of events seemed to be naturally favoring the Shiite population. Things are different now that the Sunni Royal family has called in the support of neighboring armies --a potential "occupying force" which history demonstrates is never popular among a population.
Interestingly, because of the US base, Bahrain is the one country where the US has taken a strong stand in favor of the ruling gov't.
Keep an eye on this one --if it escalates you will probably be telling your kids about what started the subsequent events.
Don't pretend for a second that Obama didn't detonate a bomb in the pacific specifically to distract attention from the crimes that he's condoning in the Middle East. Obama can't do shit except create weather catastrophes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobak
WORST PRESIDENT EVER.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa...ex.html?hpt=T1
No fly zone over Libya, a little too late. Hes allready just about taken the country back over. Next Iraq?
Meh.
I believe in self-determination.
dude, fuck off. UN declared that. Not Amerka. I wish they would just send your whole family there with a bunch to sporks to save the world so you could either have some real bragging rights or a taste of your fucking reality.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xavier
One or the other, dickshit.
Operation: Get That Oil III!Quote:
Originally Posted by Xavier
This is going to be a No Fly Zone run by the supporting cast of other such famous feature military conflicts such as Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Kosovo, Iraq I, and Iraq II: Toulon's Revenge.
I FUCKIN LOVED PUPPET MASTER!Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobak
What are you saying? Your not making any sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gannicus
Just say no... to being a smegma.
Ghadafi pointed out this isn't a mandate, five countires obstained from voting for various reasons. In many ways thats worse than Iraqi Freedom. Seems like less countries were involved in the process also.
This time keep the Arab League more involved and follow thier lead.
Whenever "electric boogaloo" is overused, you can't miss on good ol' Puppetmaster 3 (which was the first one I ever saw). The Nazi whore was hawt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gannicus
The Arab League nations would love to stomp all over Libya....
But all of their resources are tied down in Bahrain.
FINALLY!
Decisive action from the U.N. and the U.S.! I was beginning to worry that help would come too late:
French, British and American military forces unleashed cruise missiles and fighter jets. -CNN
Airstrikes begin on Libya targets -AlJazeera
Libya UN Resolution 1973: Text analysed -BBC World
Quote:
A coalition that includes Canada and Italy made good Saturday on international warnings to Gadhafi, hammering Libyan military positions in the first phase of an operation that will include enforcement of a no-fly zone.
More than 110 Tomahawk missiles fired from American and British ships and submarines hit about 20 Libyan air and missile defense targets in western portions of the country, U.S. Vice Adm. William Gortney said at a Pentagon briefing.
Americans doing what American do best: blowing shit up! (expensively)
Seems like all hell is breaking loose in Syria, Bahrain, Libya and Jordon. Just outright shooting people in the face, sniping protestors.
Was that the leach woman?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobak
It is absolutely unbelievable that we're now involved in this shit too.
http://www.neo-geo.com/ubb/icons/icon14.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by lithy
The U.N. coalition codename is : "Operation Odyssey Dawn"
Interesting choice of names... Libya was the "Land of the Lotus Eaters" where Odysseus and his crew landed after the sacking of Troy during Homer's Epic Poem: the Odyssey.
Also, in Egypt: High turnout marks 'orderly' Egypt vote. -Al Jazeera
Wake me up when the gas prices come down.
And if they don't, then fuck this intervention.
Libyan oil goes to Europe, so it's shouldn't affect prices in the U.S. (...assuming the prices weren't the result of overt manipulation, as opposed to genuine market forces)Quote:
Originally Posted by Spoon
In other news:
Syrian mourners call for revolt
Yemen opposition activists clash with police
Bahrain tears down protest symbol
Also, an Al Jazeera reporter live on the scene in Tripoli is reporting AAA (Anti-Aircraft Artillery) and smallarms fire http://english.aljazeera.net/watch_now/
I know what you're trying to say, but honestly, is "unbelievable" a word you feel comfortable using for this?Quote:
Originally Posted by lithy
Probably not.Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthtownKid
Maybe I should say "It is sadly believeable..."
This is a kinda open-ended question; but what do think the conditions would be necessary to call this unprecedented wave of revolts and revolutions: World War III? (World War Wikileaks?)
Not that I'm calling it WWIII now, but I asking what would you think needs to happen before we could call it that? Revolution in Iran? In China? America?
Historical note: World War II wasn't called "World War II" until several months into 1942, after the declaration of war on Axis forces, and months after fighting in the Pacific had already taken place.
On a related note: World War I wasn't called "World War I" until the term "World War II" was coined, up to that point, it was called "The Great War."
We all expected WWIII to be a titanic (thermonuclear) battle of superpowers: namely the U.S. (and friends) vs. the U.S.S.R. (and friends), but the two stars respective power's has faded, and the two side's mechanisms and various proxy-wars in the decades since WWII resulted in much of the current mess we're in (supporting both dictators and terrorists). With the advent of the second decade of the 21st Century we may have to readjust our perceptions regarding American-centricness...
War?
Try outcry for freedom.
Calling this world war wikileaks totally undermines the fact that Egyptian youth tried THIS EXACT THING 2-3 years back, had facebook blocked, then regrouped and attacked again.
Tunisia sparked Egypt, but in reality that nation was sparked by a fruit vendor getting literally slapped in the face.
So I disagree. Wikileaks has as much to do with this as you or me talking about it here.
If I were to bet; I would have bet Egypt was going to revolt some time this year even if Tunisia hadn't led the charge.
Saying that Wikileaks isn't important in the genesis of the revolutions in the middle East and Northern Africa is, at best, disingenuous, but at this point saying that Wikileaks isn't involved AT ALL is pure fiction, bordering on complete denialism.
If the call for freedom for coming out of Tunisia or Egypt or Libya or Bahrain or Iran or Iraq or Syria or Yemen or Oman or Jordan or Algeria or Morocco or Saudi Arabia came separately, or staggered, that argument could be made...
However,
the respective peoples' of Tunisia and Egypt and Libya and Bahrain and Iran and Iraq and Syria and Yemen and Oman and Jordan and Algeria and Morocco and Saudi Arabia all started calling for freedom simultaneously.
The internal factors are largely the same (corrupt un-impeachable leaders, lack of personal freedom, lack of political freedom, lack of human rights, general inequality, Jew sharks, ect...) but, logically, there must ba an external cause. It's statistically impossible for all the revolts to happen simultaneously without a central origin point: Was it George W Bush's 8 years in office? Was it Obama's Nobel Peace Prize? Was it from the lunar eclipse that happened on the Winter Solstice? Was it fucking dumbass Lindsay Lohan leaving the Betty Ford Center?
No.
Fuck no!
If the situation is right , and the tinder is dry, a single match can start a massive forest fire. The current, on-going, revolutions is the forest fire, the social inequality was the dry tinder, the wikileaks was the single fucking match.
People get the government they deserve.
Bad government is like the weather, everyone talks about it but no one actually does anything about it. Due to the nature of bad government, anyone who stands up to demand their freedoms loudly, and forcefully, enough to be heard, is probably going to be shot in face by agents of that bad government. It's serious business.
In order people to actually get their freedom, a lot of people have to stand up and demand their freedoms together. To get enough people together to mitigate the risk (but not eliminate) of getting shot in the face by agents of bad government (herd defense), you need a central issue to rally people around (politics in naturally divisive; you need simple slogans and simple goals to avoid factionalization and/or splintering): the leaks provided that.
It's not that hard to understand.
As much as I'd like to believe Bradley Manning isn't being tortured for nothing, I don't find your argument very compelling.
Wonk on, though.
Please take Iran off your list of simultaneous freedom callers. Iran has been protesting for years. It has been off and on because the state has cracked down violently on protesters and brought in broke ass foreigners from palestine to fight the citizens.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoTheranthrope
UPDATE: In Yemen, part of of the army has split from the government and joined the protesters, sending a detachment to protect protesters in Sanaa.
In Syria: Protesters have burned the headquarters of the ruling Ba'ath party, the main court's complex, and two Syrian telephone company branches.
He shoudl take simultaneousness out of his main argument and then I'd maybe read his long ass post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gannicus
Dominos dont fall over simultaneously.
These states believed revolution was possible thanks to prior examples of its success, by their neighbors. Did they all have the spirit and desire to revolt, simultaneously? Yes. But did they outcry for freedom all at the same point? Not at all.
Theranthrope also didnt read my post or address the fact that Egypt tried this exact thing 3 (I think.) years back. And that had what to do with wikileaks?
Also, what did wikileaks have to do with the Tunisian fruit market vendor getting literally slapped in the face then setting himself on fire? NOTHING.
You're only half-right, dominoes fall over sequentially:Quote:
Originally Posted by Popcorn Sutton
1, then 2, then 3, then 4, then 5...
That natural progression would be first Tunisia, the Egypt, then Yemen, then the UAE, then Saudi Arabia, then Quatar, then Bahrain... Each old government falling as a new revolution starts in the next neighboring country. Which isn't what's happening. (If it were, I would be suspicious of some kind of puppetmaster/mastermind, be it: America, the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda, or possibly China, but everything come up as a chaotic, uncontrollable, mess which destroys that theory.)
It's closer to this:
1, then 2, then 5 ,then 17 and 8, then 3, then 7 and 12 and 4...
However, lack of external central control does not preclude external influences, I.E. the wikileaks...
(btw, I already laid out what the wikileads did in the fucking OP. I'm not going to repost that, just as I'm not going to chew your food for you or change your diaper)
There is a tragic or heroic "Tunisian fruit vendor" or "Moroccan single mother" for EVERY country currently undergoing this wave of revolutions, each of which is each a separate "thread," which represents a symbol for the internal inequalities and injustices which are consistent across every country in the region (I expect to see to see flurry of books, scholarly papers, and maybe a PBS Frontline Special Report on these separate "threads" in the coming months). Wikileaks is the large external "thread" that weaves all these smaller, separate intra-national threads together into an amazing and evolving inter-national "tapestry" of change.Quote:
Originally Posted by Popcorn Sutton
Saying North Africa and the Middle East is on fire because a fruit vendor got slapped by some bureaucratic bitch over a fruit scale is like saying the American Civil war was a dispute over shoes because of circumstances that led up to the attack on Fort Sumter.
It's missing the forest for the popsicle stick.
The only person that can help you with your adult illiteracy problem is you. Can't help you man.Quote:
Originally Posted by Popcorn Sutton
...but if you can't read my posts, why reply? ("Keepin' it REAL!" ?) Seriously.
:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoTheranthrope
Omg its world war wikileaks!!
Now I totally understand.
I'd share a trench with you brother!
http://www.firehouse-fw.com/Images/F...upcake2009.jpg
Things are looking tense.
Neotheranthrope has bought into the wikileaks marketing machine hook, line and sinker. Iran isn't getting toppled. The revolts in Iran have nothing to do with wikileaks. Those revolts have been ongoing for years. But whatever. It's his thread and he owns it so he can spread misinformation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Popcorn Sutton
Last thing we needed was a third front. "All necessary means?" Who introduced that vague as fuck language into the resolution?
I don't see a good outcome for this so-called "No-Fly Zone."
Protesting mostly with their feet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gannicus
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...nd-or-foe.html
Kind of shows the difference between the invasion of Iraq and the missions in Libya at the moment.
EDIT:
http://www.channel4.com/news/third-n...mbing-in-libya
Never fucking mind.
I think you'd get something close if the intervention by the GCC, led by KSA in Bahrain led Iran to get into an open conflict across the Gulf. That would cause such a massive destabilization of the world energy market --and totally bizarre alliances*, that you could come close.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoTheranthrope
*If you go by the enemy of my enemy is my friend, then you'd see Israel and KSA working together to fight Iran and perhaps Syria with the Iraqis probably, desperately trying to stay the hell out and avoid its own three-way Sunni/Shiite/Kurd civil war. I could see Jordan, Lebanon, Qatar, Turkey and possibly Kuwait trying to stay neutral.
Yes, the millions they spend on marketing really shows...Quote:
Originally Posted by Gannicus
Good point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobak
Iraqis hate The Jews just like everyone else in the region, but they hate the Iranians MORE because of the bad blood from the Iran-Iraq war, even if they are both mostly Persian (at least in the northern and eastern half of Iraq).
Turkey I view more as a wild card: they have no great love for either Arabs or Persians (and would wipe out both the Jews and Kurds if given half a chance, like they did with the Armenians), but would side with whoever is most likely to help them regain their regional standing and territories that they lost to the British a century ago, or as you said; go neutral, if that better served their purposes.
The Kurds are also another wild card since basicly everyone hates them, but if they play their cards right they may end up creating their longed-for Kurdistan out of the coalition of states that emerge from the conflict (...which then can become the regional pariah and whipping-boy that Israel is now), assuming they don't get wiped out by the Turks or Arabs or Persians, first.
The Saudis are terrified of the Iranian mullahs (with good reason), but they absolutely can't be seen standing with Israel even if it's in their own self interest, and Bestest-best-friend America is having serious war-fatigue, preventing opening a third (or fourth) front, so they're already in a serious bind, as-is.
That kind of scenario could lead to all sorts of insanity: An U.S.-backed Israel protecting Saudi Arabia and a Pan-Arab Coalition of Secular-Democratic States from attacks by a Chinese-backed Iran and Central-Asian Fundamentalist-Islamic-Super-State. Real Tom Clancy shit.
don't flatter yourself. They don't need to invest more in winning you over.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoTheranthrope
Either way, you're wrong and sensationalist.
No.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gannicus
I should rephrase my previous statement: Wikileaks is shining out despite the millions being spent to silence, diminish, and discredit the organization by both major corporations and my own fucking government.
I can understand those astroturfers who are doing it to get a paycheck. A job's a job. However, I am sorely disappointed by those, like you, who are doing the same thing pro-fucking-bono. You could get paid to argue uselessly with me. Doing it for free is like double stupid. Do you know what a "useful idiot" is?
None of your statements on Iran have been accurate. I understand you have a very high opinion of yourself but when you're wrong on an issue, just be a man and admit it. That you would try to argue that iran's protests are linked to Egypt and everyone else in any way more than tenuous is both ignorant and disrespectful to those who have been active protesting for months before and after Egypt. Try to be more conscientious in your reporting.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoTheranthrope
...and yet, you haven't backed up anything you've said with anything other than your word, which, of course, I'm supposed take for the unvarnished truth?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gannicus
You're like stickmanloser, in that, the closest thing he could come up with approximating an argument was: "bu-bu-but it's the New Republic!" when I was giving links (not just my opinion) of when Reuter's got caught on one of their shameful fully-staged pro-Palestinian hit-pieces on Israel. And yet... I still link to Reuters newsfeed articles, full-well knowing that. Protip: if I stopped linking to any site which I had a personal difference of opinion on editorial direction, I wouldn't link to ANYONE. It's the message that matters, not the messenger.
So far, stick's half-assed attempt, is a one-up on what you've been posting. All of your responses to my arguments have been either "tl;dr" or longer, but not necessarily more articulated, variations of "Nuh-uh!" If you got links or an inside track: post em'. All else is butthurt.
Also, speaking of butthurt, what the hell's your beef with me and Iran? All I've said definitively was: that there were protests, they were put down, and not much else. There isn't much information to be had about this current wave of protests coming out of the county this time (at least, nothing I can link to, so far), so I haven't said much about Iran at all. A weird thing to get a hair up your ass about.