This thread has covered so much ground that I'll just post a few of my thoughts, otherwise the site could be needing another server. And the only thing worse than a long boring post is a very long boring post.
I'll try and look at this as objectively as I can, but I'm aware that my observations will be coloured by my particular view of the world. I'll limit this post to some ideas on Iran and Syria.
We have here three forms of government; theocracy, monarchy and democracy. I say monarchy, because that means the rule of one person, be they king or dictator, and Assad fits the bill as an hereditory dictator. Syria has at present more similarities in its structure to Bahrain than to Iran, both being states which pay the merest lip service to democracy, and both actively oppressing their populations' will for change. The differences are Syria has the greater death toll using its own army,The Syrian government has killed more than 7,200 people since the uprising against Damascus began last March, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said. whilst Bahrain has brought in Saudi troops and British advisors on secondment from our armed forces. As an aside, Bahrain has provided new employment for Yates of the Yard, following his embarrassment over 'phone hacking. He's set on introducing kettling to the Middle East.
Those Gulf States do rely on the West...
It's been suggested that Iran is supporting Assad. I find this curious, and wonder whether this is in fact the case.
Assad is secular, and whilst maintaining the normal anti-Israeli rhetoric, seems to act more pragmatically. Furthermore, recent suicide bombings in Damascus claimed by Al Qaeda suggest that more fundamental religious extremists see an opportunity to duplicate events in Iraq, which would surely be more suited to Iran. I suggest their warships aren't there to support Assad, http://bikyamasr.com/57973/iran-wars...ts-suez-canal/ but to deter any possibility of the UN sanctioning an operation similar to Libya, whilst things work out perhaps to their advantage. And if Assad survives, they still look like they backed the winner.
Ahmadinejad is extensively quoted as calling for the destruction of Israel. He'll be glad of that; as a politician it plays well with the fundamentalists. It also sits well with the vocal right wing hawks in the West. The first translations of his speech in the Western press contain ambiguity about whether he referred to Israel itself or Israel's post 1967 occupation of East Jerusalem and the West Bank, et al. His subsequent failure to clarify which interpretation applies suggests to me the politician rather than the megolomaniac.
I was going to include some thoughts on relations between Iran and the West in this post, but they'll need to wait for when I've a bit more time.
i take everything i see on the news with a pinch of salt. Are these Nukes just like the ones Iraq had?
its all about Oil and Money!
Israel wants rid of Iran.
Jewish money has massive influence in the USA so they will back Israel.
We all know the USA are more than likely planning the invasion already.
The comment ref oil and money add in power and influence for both sides and I would agree.
I don't imagine that Israel would regard Iran as a good friend and neighbour, but I don't recall Israel calling for Iran to be wiped off the face of the Earth, I don't recall Israel issuing fatwahs like confetti whenever someone says something to upset the head honchos.
Influence is one thing going into a war is another.
Yes, the USA currently is more likely to back Israel, but don't kid yourself that Israel runs American forign policy and as for making active preparations to invade Iran, p-u-r-lease.
Many many countries will have plans to counter all manner of worst case scenarios, that is a far cry from actively planning to undertake these plans under the slightest pretext. Particularly after the fiasco of Iraq and the not much better situation in Afghanistan I think there will be very close thought before this action is taken.
Yes, I see your point Silver Fox but I'm pretty sure it is far from true that all terrorists at present are Muslim although I suspect they be the majority of perpertrators in the last few years? Does anyone have any figues - Sev is usually good at this point.
That's what I said, I merely repeated the words of an Imam, with the rider that I didn't think that to be strictly true.
The first translations of his speech in the Western press contain ambiguity about whether he referred to Israel itself or Israel's post 1967 occupation of East Jerusalem and the West Bank, et al. His subsequent failure to clarify which interpretation applies suggests to me the politician rather than the megolomaniac.
I'd forgotten about the translation controversy. There's one thing for sure, when quoting Khomeini, Ahmadinejad did not use the Persian word for "map". Neither did Khomeini.
For those who are not aware of the translation controversy, interesting reading below...... which brings us back to the power of the press to whip up frenzy with an (intentional?) translation error.
Yes, you did. Maybe I was mis-interpreting 'strictly true'. To me that means nearly true but I'm not sure of the degree of truth in the statement. And I notice Sev has not supplied any empirical stats for us to chew over!
It takes two to lie. One to lie and one to listen. ~ Homer Simpson
but I don't recall Israel calling for Iran to be wiped off the face of the Earth,
Nor did Iran call for Israel to be wiped off the face of the earth, or map. Ahmadinejad was quoting the late Ayatollah Khomeini. A word by word translation reads "Imam (Khomeini) ghoft (said) een (this) rezhim-e (regime) ishghalgar-e (occupying) qods (Jerusalem) bayad (must) az safheh-ye ruzgar (from page of time) mahv shavad (vanish from), i.e. "The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time".
Pre-Revolutionary Iran may appear preferable to western eyes, but we musn't forget that it was far from ideal. After all, there was a popular revolution, involving all sections of society. Any popular revolution runs the risk of being hijacked by a ruthless faction. But we must deal with what is, and not what was.
It wasn't long before the West and the nascent republic were doing business. The US was happy to sell them arms in order to continue its policy of financing right wing terrorists set on overthrowing democratically elected governments in Central and South America.
I don't know what happened to the arms the US supplied; I wonder if over the years, to this day, they've been passed on to the mujahideen in Afghanistan. Of course Iran supplies terrorists, but so does the West. And both parties are being hypocritical in condemning the other. A disinterested observer may also consider Britain's approach to Iran having nuclear weapons as hypocritical, as we spend billions ourselves on updating Trident. But I digress.
In the meantime, we have to consider whether Iran is a stable country. I would suggest that we can have more confidence in stability there than some other states who already have nuclear weapons.
Iran doesn't want a hot war with the West: if the events of 1991 and 2003 taught them anything it's that the comprehensive defeats of Iraq within weeks reveals the difference in capacity. For how many years was the Iran-Iraq war a stalemate? And would a state that wants to lead the Islamic world really consider nuking the location of the Dome of the Rock?
We can also learn from 2003. Many people asked why Saddam didn't state categorically that he didn't have WMD. The fact is that he couldn't, as it would affect his standing in that part of the world. Ahmadinejad also has to maintain his position, so he'll continue to talk the talk. Iran wants to be the predominant power in the region, and such posturing is de rigueur.
Yes, you do get the feeling that no one is any better than anyone else here. We do seel arms to mad dictatorships and Nomad's point re Central and South America brings in pretty much the rest of the world into those affected.
I guess countries pretending they have nukes when they perhaps don't really is the ultimate in making the deterent argument in favour of nuclear weapons - all the deterent - none of the expense!
It takes two to lie. One to lie and one to listen. ~ Homer Simpson
CC, I consider myself not too thick but I try and stay out of threads that are completely too much for me, so thankyou mate for trying to explain to me, I did get it but I think you guys are doing a pretty good job of whatever it is your doing on it.
Just giz a nod if I need to pack a bag thats all. Not being flippant but , you know. x
Sin lies only in hurting other people unnecessarily. All other "sins" are invented nonsense. (Hurting yourself is not a sin - just stupid.) ~Robert A. Heinlein
Yes, you did. Maybe I was mis-interpreting 'strictly true'. To me that means nearly true but I'm not sure of the degree of truth in the statement. And I notice Sev has not supplied any empirical stats for us to chew over!
Right, Chirps. I've found some empirical stats for you. The National Counter Terrorism Center publishes annual terrorism reports. I've used 2010 stats. The full report can be found here:
A couple of snippets from the report, and the chart below, would seem to prove that Muslim terrorist groups are responsible for the majority of attacks, and deaths.
"Perpetrators:
Sunni extremists committed almost 60 percent of all worldwide terrorist attacks. These attacks caused approximately 70 percent of terrorism-related deaths, a significant increase from the almost 62 percent in 2009.
Attacks Perpetrated by Other Groups:
Of the remaining attacks, secular, political, or anarchist groups accounted for almost 16 percent of the total, roughly the same proportion as in 2009. Christian extremist attacks fell sharply from 1,052 in 2009 to 321 in 2010."
Of course, there are those who would say that the US Government act like terrorists.
What would those figures look like if we included just the civilians killed by the American forces?
Of course, there are those who would say that the US Government act like terrorists.
What would those figures look like if we included just the civilians killed by the American forces?
While I have never condoned the preemptive strike on Iraq, and never will, don't forget to include the innocent civilians killed by British forces. You were also complicit in the illegal war on Iraq.
Up to 30 surface-to-air missiles from Libya fall into hands of al-Qaeda linked al-Shabaab militants
There comes a point in your life when you realise who really matters, who never did and who always will.
"You can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time."
Attributed to Abraham Lincoln
CC, I consider myself not too thick but I try and stay out of threads that are completely too much for me, so thankyou mate for trying to explain to me, I did get it but I think you guys are doing a pretty good job of whatever it is your doing on it.
Just giz a nod if I need to pack a bag thats all. Not being flippant but , you know. x
Ha Topsy, I think there are some very intelligent people who post on this forum and whilst like you I don't think I'm thick I do rather foolishly seem to get myself involved in threads I don't know much about - why, I even start them sometimes! But still makes change from pizzas and parking I s'ppose and it means I learn a thing or two - talking of which:
Thanks for those stats Sev, so it seems a large proprotion of terrorist acts are Isalmist in nature. Xroads point re governments acting like terrorists might change those proportions I guess? But the figures do demonstrate what Silver Fox has been saying.
It takes two to lie. One to lie and one to listen. ~ Homer Simpson
Up to 30 surface-to-air missiles from Libya fall into hands of al-Qaeda linked al-Shabaab militants
Oh dear!
Negotium Perambulans in Tenebris
"And the cats nap in the slant corners or lope sly,streaking and needling, on the one cloud of the roofs." "That is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange aeons even death may die
Up to 30 surface-to-air missiles from Libya fall into hands of al-Qaeda linked al-Shabaab militants
There were around 20,000 surface to air missiles missing from Libyan arms depots after their Arab Spring. I'm not sure how many were ever tracked down, but I bet a lot of them were destined for terrorist groups.
[QUOTE=seivad;2338443]There were around 20,000 surface to air missiles missing from Libyan arms depots after their Arab Spring. I'm not sure how many were ever tracked down, but I bet a lot of them were destined for terrorist groups.[/QUOTE
Buy it now on Ebay.org.uk
Human beings make life so interesting. Do you know that in a universe so full of wonders they have managed to invent boredom?
Some interesting data from Sandy there. It's apparent that religious extremists caused over two thirds of all deaths, and for every christian extremist murder there were nearly thirty muslim extremist murders.
Of the 9413 deaths recorded, it would be useful to know how many of those victims were christian/muslim/hindu/sikh/buddist/other. I suspect that more than half of the victims were themselves muslim. If so, this is something that I think significant, and should not be overlooked. I base this supposition on the data in chart 1 of the 2010 report, "Victims and Attacks by Region".
Others have discussed the difference between our freedom fighter and their terrorist. I would mention that this may also skew the figures: if the contras were operating today, would the figures include Nicaraguan deaths? If the Russians were still occupying Afghanistan, would the mujahideen's actions be included?
I obviously don't know. But the recent car bombings of Israeli diplomats were reported as terrorist acts, whilst the earlier car bombing of an Iranian scientist in Tehran wasn't. Similarly, the shooting down of an Iranian airliner by the USS Vincennes was reported as an incident, whilst Iran's response over Lockerbie was terrorism. For the victims in both cases, the difference in semantics is, of course, irrelevent.
I mentioned earlier that both sides in this new cold war use covert operations and sabotage, resulting in the deaths of innocent victims. The West also uses overt military strength, launching tomahawk missiles and air strikes with impunity. Middle Eastern countries can't match this ability, so they are more likely to use the stragies that are open to them. And again, to the victim, it makes no difference whether they're killed by a suicide bomber or a bomb from a strike aircraft.
It's like 1940, when the French military failed to match the Germans', resulting in the development of the resistance movement. To anyone who would question my use of this comparison, I would stress that I do so simply as an example of military imbalance.
I'll close at this point, before this post gets too long. I was intending to write about Israel and the Palestinians, for no consideration of the Middle East can neglect them. But Sandy's data raised issues that I thought followed on naturally from my last spiel.
A really interesting post Nomad. I guess that's why my Greatgrandmother and two of her daughters got involved in the Belgian resistance and why my Grandmother on my Dad's side was involved in the IRA - as you say people make use of the strategies that are open to them.
Here's Mark Steel's take on Iran, I love the way he makes serious points but uses humour to do so:
He concludes by pointing out the West 'might be better off invading Saudi Arabia. Instead of the rigmarole of trying to prove a dictator has Weapons of Mass Destruction, they can say: "We know they've got 84 warplanes worth $30bn, because we sold the things to them six weeks ago."
Oh Dear, OhDear !!!!! is that all, YOU !!, of all people can say..Hells bells Delzx, (ooow that rhymed) we shall now be sitting targets whilst flying in and out of airports...It was only a matter of time that these weapons would be on the "open market"..
What is the range of those surface to air missiles Delzx?
Think we shall have to start packing our parachutes in future..
Oh Dear, OhDear !!!!! is that all, YOU !!, of all people can say..Hells bells Delzx, (ooow that rhymed) we shall now be sitting targets whilst flying in and out of airports...It was only a matter of time that these weapons would be on the "open market"..
What is the range of those surface to air missiles Delzx?
Think we shall have to start packing our parachutes in future..
Shippy
Come on Shippy, you know very well what I meant by Oh Dear...I want being flippant. As to range, it depends on what missiles they are. I suspect they will be Stingers which depending on the model can get up to 15000 feet but lose accuracy quickly and can be defeated by flares and missile suckers. If they are larger missiles like the Grail or the Gammon the people are in danger St much higher altitudes. Whatever, this is really bad news for someone.
Negotium Perambulans in Tenebris
"And the cats nap in the slant corners or lope sly,streaking and needling, on the one cloud of the roofs." "That is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange aeons even death may die
Come on Shippy, you know very well what I meant by Oh Dear...I want being flippant.
I missed to add the wink Delzx. I know you were being flippant, I was expecting a huge bl***y H*ll or similar, cause I know you are very aware of the consequences..
As to range, it depends on what missiles they are. I suspect they will be Stingers which depending on the model can get up to 15000 feet but lose accuracy quickly and can be defeated by flares and missile suckers. If they are larger missiles like the Grail or the Gammon the people are in danger St much higher altitudes. Whatever, this is really bad news for someone.
I don't know how fresh this link is, but I thought you guys would like to read it?.. I did, now recollecting, remember reading that there has been a solution to those surface to air missiles...Will try and find an article later.
I don't know how fresh this link is, but I thought you guys would like to read it?.. I did, now recollecting, remember reading that there has been a solution to those surface to air missiles...Will try and find an article later.
Shippy.... Earlier on I mentioned that 20,000 Libyan surface to air missiles went missing during their Arab Spring. Israel didn't hang about, and is installing Israeli developed laser technology on all passenger aircraft. Read the Jerusalem Post link below.
In Israel the government is footing the bill, but that won't happen in other parts of the world. Nor will commercial airlines spend that kind of money for what will be deemed as a minimal risk.
37 Westbourne Road, Southport, PR8 2HYLocal chiropractor, in private practice since 1994. Over 10,000 patients seen, over 50,000 treatments performed. 95%+ referral rate from patients. A registered member of the British chiropractic associationWEBSITE TEL: 01704 569695
32 Botanic Road, Churchtown, Southport, PR9 7NGSpecialist christening, communion & special occasion wear. High quality toys & gifts for babies, toddlers, new mums & mums to beWEBSITE TEL: 01704 808474
19 Upper Aughton Road, Southport, PR8 5NAAmanda Janes Tanning Nail and Beauty Salon. Beauty, nails, facials, OPI, acrylic, pedicure, manicure, waxing , massaging and much more!WEBSITE TEL: 01704 560099
30 Virginia Street, Southport, PR8 6RUEstablished 17 years ago. MOT\'s, servicing, repairs. Free collection and delivery service.WEBSITE TEL: 01704 543808
southport
Originally Posted by Nomad
This thread has covered so much ground that I'll just post a few of my thoughts, otherwise the site could be needing another server. And the only thing worse than a long boring post is a very long boring post.
You are using an old version of Internet Explorer which may not able to use the website full feature. Click here to update your IE.
☒
Reply With Quote
