Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

Serious stuff happening.

Abu Dhabi Media website The National has disclosed some rather disturbing news about peace "prospects" in the middle east. It appears this past Friday saw a war council convene in Damascus, between Syrian president Bashar al Assad, Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Hizbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah to "devise counterattack plans and assign tasks in the event of an Israeli offensive on one or all parties, wrote Abdelbari Atwan, the editor-in-chief of the pan-Arab newspaper Al Quds al Arabi." And more troublingly, "the Iranian president said he expects war to break out somewhere between spring and summer of this year. Meanwhile, the Hizbollah chief vowed to strike the Israeli capital, its airports and power stations if Israel dared to attack Beirut’s critical infrastructure."Let's recall that Goldman's most recent 2010 and 2011 WTI estimates call for prices to rise to $90 and $110/bbl, respectively.

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/war-co ... pects-war-

Original: http://www.thenational.ae/apps/pbcs.dll ... 89930/1006

Some recent background information

Iran / Israel - Technologies - Potential War


Endgame scenario
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHtgYCS1 ... re=channel

Irani show of leverage in region - Yemen


Revolutionary guard now in control - Military provocative stance


I see more and more signs that things could escalate rapidly. A potential WWIII is upon us brothers. Critical juncture this year.

Truth or fiction? Make up your mind and act accordingly.

Well, it sure sounds like those war drums are being hit long and hard by Israel - so I wouldn't put it past them to launch yet another illegal invasion/bombing of another country - and possibly very soon.

The implications for Dubai/UAE are ominious!

Cheers,
Shafique

Did you take the time to watch that endgame scenario I recommended to you earlier?

No - not yet.

However I've finished the first 3 chapters of 'Failed States'.

My reaction is:

Geeeeezzzuss!! I mean, Jeez - how can they get away with all this!

Yep, the life of a superpower is very 'unilateral'.

Amazing indeed.

If Israel wants to strike, it needs to do it before Iran acquires S-300s. So the window of opportunity gets smaller and smaller.

Flying Dutchman wrote:If Israel wants to strike, it needs to do it before Iran acquires S-300s. So the window of opportunity gets smaller and smaller.

Israel made a mistake by screwing up the Dubai assassination. Israel now started a PR campaign by exposing the 'Son of Hamas' scheme, but Joe Biden is now visiting Netanyahu to reaffirm the bond with Israel and tell them that they should not attack Iran just yet.

Crucial point is this matter is that the Dubai assassination is blemeshing US/Israeli ties with the UAE, and Irans archilles heel is its dependance on refined gasoline imports from the UAE (75 percent), so you can imagine that the high hats now visiting in Israel are quite unhappy with that development and the short-term outlook of war with Iran. So they are pressing for severe sanctions now.

Duck and cover...fooks

RobbyG wrote:but Joe Biden is now visiting Netanyahu to reaffirm the bond with Israel and tell them that they should not attack Iran just yet.

So say the papers, but we will never know what is said to who will we??? Maybe Joe will tell Benny that the U.S. doesn't need to be dragged into another war (which it doesn't!). In reality, it wouldn't serve the U.S.'s interest to get involved in supporting Israel's war should it decides to take aggressive action. On the other hand, Israel is so arrogant that they would probably tell the U.S. that they don't need them and proceed as planned.

The fact that Israel cannot justifying attacking these countries (as shown in the past except for some veiled excuse), Israel should be left to fend for itself.

The day is going to come when Israel is going to unjustifiably attack an Arab country and find themselves up against more than one Arab country, including Iran.

Bora Bora wrote:

RobbyG wrote:but Joe Biden is now visiting Netanyahu to reaffirm the bond with Israel and tell them that they should not attack Iran just yet.

So say the papers, but we will never know what is said to who will we??? Maybe Joe will tell Benny that the U.S. doesn't need to be dragged into another war (which it doesn't!). In reality, it wouldn't serve the U.S.'s interest to get involved in supporting Israel's war should it decides to take aggressive action. On the other hand, Israel is so arrogant that they would probably tell the U.S. that they don't need them and proceed as planned.

The fact that Israel cannot justifying attacking these countries (as shown in the past except for some veiled excuse), Israel should be left to fend for itself.

The day is going to come when Israel is going to unjustifiably attack an Arab country and find themselves up against more than one Arab country, including Iran.

I agree that there is no immediate threat that Israel will attack Iran on its own. Israel would first of all need permission from the US to cross Iraqi airspace. Also Iran will retaliate, Hezbollah will be unleashed and probably Syria join the Iranian effort against Israel.

Israel always uses hard language only because they know they are the underdog without US military support. They have a friend to keep in them. But Israel surely has a policy of attacking with its US supplied nuclear bunkerbusters as soon as the Iranians are nearing completion of nuclear capability. Iran's stance is clear with regards to eliminating Israel. Israel would never allow that to happen and will attack just to safeguard its own existence in a very unstable region. The US is key to Israels existence and the Israelis surely have a minority complexion that leave them very dangerous and irrational in the region without US support.

So whether the US wants it or not, the Unites States is dragged into this war with Iran simply because it can't afford a nuclear war in the Middle East. It would have consequences the world over. Inconceivable.

The US tells Israel what to do, and if Israel is endangered by Irani developments, the US/Israeli's will attack in harmony. Its a given in my view.

Ofcourse the US will bend over and do what ever its little master Israel tells it to do. If not the jewish lobby will whip it into obedience. It may moan and whimper but in the end it has to obey its master.

RobbyG wrote:

Bora Bora wrote:

RobbyG wrote:but Joe Biden is now visiting Netanyahu to reaffirm the bond with Israel and tell them that they should not attack Iran just yet.

So say the papers, but we will never know what is said to who will we??? Maybe Joe will tell Benny that the U.S. doesn't need to be dragged into another war (which it doesn't!). In reality, it wouldn't serve the U.S.'s interest to get involved in supporting Israel's war should it decides to take aggressive action. On the other hand, Israel is so arrogant that they would probably tell the U.S. that they don't need them and proceed as planned.

The fact that Israel cannot justifying attacking these countries (as shown in the past except for some veiled excuse), Israel should be left to fend for itself.

The day is going to come when Israel is going to unjustifiably attack an Arab country and find themselves up against more than one Arab country, including Iran.

I agree that there is no immediate threat that Israel will attack Iran on its own. Israel would first of all need permission from the US to cross Iraqi airspace. Also Iran will retaliate, Hezbollah will be unleashed and probably Syria join the Iranian effort against Israel.

Israel always uses hard language only because they know they are the underdog without US military support. They have a friend to keep in them. But Israel surely has a policy of attacking with its US supplied nuclear bunkerbusters as soon as the Iranians are nearing completion of nuclear capability. Iran's stance is clear with regards to eliminating Israel. Israel would never allow that to happen and will attack just to safeguard its own existence in a very unstable region. The US is key to Israels existence and the Israelis surely have a minority complexion that leave them very dangerous and irrational in the region without US support.

So whether the US wants it or not, the Unites States is dragged into this war with Iran simply because it can't afford a nuclear war in the Middle East. It would have consequences the world over. Inconceivable.

The US tells Israel what to do, and if Israel is endangered by Irani developments, the US/Israeli's will attack in harmony. Its a given in my view.

I highly doubt that Biden's visit to Israel is a "goodwill trip".

The US may try to tell Israel what to do, but clearly Israel does what it wants to do. If Israel attacks Iran there is the possibility of US support - note: possibility. The US is stuck between a hard place and a rock (Israel and the Middle East). I don't think the US is very happy with Israel these days - as well as several countries as a result of the Israeli forgeries of their country's passports used in an assassination.

desertdudeshj wrote:Ofcourse the US will bend over and do what ever its little master Israel tells it to do. If not the jewish lobby will whip it into obedience. It may moan and whimper but in the end it has to obey its master.

You have to view things a little more in perspective.
The Israeli lobby might be strong in New York, but that doesn't mean a lobbygroup determines US foreign policy, let alone the US government. Thats delusional. It wouldn't be the first time that the US would sanction Israel for overstepping the authority of its imperial ruler, perhaps not overly public but thats another matter.

From a geostrategic perspective, Israel is an important nation for critical leverage in the ME region. And the US has many more accross the globe that the CIA eventually steers. Without US funding or 'aid', Israel would be a relatively easy target for a handful of determined Arab despots in the region. Another 'failed state' added onto the list of the US imperial ruler.

Bahh ...doesnt matter. Who was it who recently said ( Some vice pesident on trip here ?! can't remember excatly who, but very recent less than a week ago )

" The US is with Israel, make no doubt about it "

Like I said the little master will have its ways. Why do you think Israel go about things the way it does, it knows its big slave gorilla is in tow.

One reign the Jewish lobby has the other the Israel Lobby. Was also pretty scary ( but also made a lot of sense )to watch the doomsday documenty as why US and all its redneck leaders are with Israel, as its the part of the prophecy leading to rapture !

Crisis with Israel: US General Petraeus: Israeli Policy Endangers the Lives of American Soldiers

RobbyG wrote:From a geostrategic perspective, Israel is an important nation for critical leverage in the ME region.

Isn't oil the only geostrategic interest of the US in the ME? The US has always been very reluctant to support Israel during wars. I don't believe the US support Israel because its a democracy. Obama also bows for one of the worse despots of the region: the King of KSA. Support of the US for Israel is more emotional than rational IMO.

RobbyG wrote:Without US funding or 'aid', Israel would be a relatively easy target for a handful of determined Arab despots in the region. Another 'failed state' added onto the list of the US imperial ruler.

Compared to US support to other Arab countries or Pakistan, US aid for Israel is really not that big. Contrary to what all those conspiracy theories want you to believe. Israel will have no problem surviving as a strong nation without US aid. US aid for regional dictators is larger than US aid to Israel.

As for Israel attacking Iran. It is almost an impossible situation. Iran acquiring a nuclear bomb is absolutely unacceptable for Israel. An attack is a logistical nightmare, however. Next to that, complete success (destroying Irans nuclear capabilities) will be not be possible, only delaying it a few years.

Flying Dutchman wrote:Support of the US for Israel is more emotional than rational IMO.

I'd instinctively agree with this statement.

However, after reading 'Failed States' by Noam Chomsky there is a logical explanation for the US support of Israel. And Chomsky backs this up with examples.

But on the face of it - it is a bit bizare the support that Israel seems to have.

Flying Dutchman wrote:Compared to US support to other Arab countries or Pakistan, US aid for Israel is really not that big. Contrary to what all those conspiracy theories want you to believe.

Ok, I'm interested in finding out the truth on this point. I too currently believe that Israel gets more military and other aid than Pakistan etc - so some figures would help prove/disprove this point.

Dershowitz, for example, states that he thinks the aid to Israel is too much and does Israel a dis-service. He also makes the point that Israel is strong enough to go alone.

Flying Dutchman wrote: Israel will have no problem surviving as a strong nation without US aid. US aid for regional dictators is larger than US aid to Israel.

Well the argument that usually made about US support for Israel is military sales, aid and other types of aid. I'd be interested in reading the references for Israel getting less than the other regional dictators. I thought the Saudis, for example, bought their arms with the oil money they get.


As for Iran, I think it would be crazeee for Israel to attack her too. Let's hope that the crazy scenario doesn't develop!

Cheers,
Shafique

Wiki has a page on 'Foreign Military Financing' - but the stats are a bit out of date. The figures there show that Israel is in a league of its own - $2.4bn vs 1.3bn for Egypt 300m for Pakistan (in 2008). Perhaps this has changed in the past two years?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta ... _Financing

And this campaign website (from the US) states that the military aid will total $30bn, over 10 years:

How Much Military Aid to Israel...
...Do You Provide?

Between 2009-2018, the United States is scheduled to give Israel--the largest recipient of U.S. aid--$30 billion in military aid. Through its illegal 42-year military occupation of the Palestinian West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip, Israel misuses U.S. weapons in violation of U.S. law to kill and injure Palestinian civilians, destroy Palestinian civilian infrastructure, blockade the Gaza Strip, and build illegal settlements in West Bank and East Jerusalem.

http://www.aidtoisrael.org/

And there is a campaign to protest at the $3bn aid allocated for next year:

Take Action: Oppose $3 Billion in Military Aid to Israel in FY2011
February 22nd, 2010

Last month, President Obama sent his FY2011 budget request to Congress, which included a record-breaking request for $3 billion in military aid to Israel.

Take action now by sending your Members of Congress a letter opposing this request for more military aid to Israel, a country which misuses U.S. weapons to kill and injure Palestinian civilians in violation of U.S. law. Send you letter by clicking here.

http://www.endtheoccupation.org/article.php?id=2556


So, it appears the military aid to Israel is around $3bn per annum according to the above. Are Pakistan etc receiving more than this?

Well, I found a US (Congressional Research Service) report from December 2009, entitled 'US Foreign Aid to Israel'.

The introduction basically verifies that Israel is the largest benefactor of US foreign aid. (It also details the other forms of aid - Loan guarantees and other grants) :

Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign assistance since World War II. From
1976-2004, Israel was the largest annual recipient of U.S. foreign assistance, having been
supplanted by Iraq. Since 1985, the United States has provided nearly $3 billion in grants
annually to Israel.

Almost all U.S. bilateral aid to Israel is in the form of military assistance. In the past, Israel also
had received significant economic assistance. Strong congressional support for Israel has resulted
in Israel’s receiving benefits not available to other countries. For example, Israel can use some
U.S. military assistance both for research and development in the United States and for military
purchases from Israeli manufacturers. In addition, all U.S. foreign assistance earmarked for Israel
is delivered in the first 30 days of the fiscal year. Most other recipients normally receive aid in
installments. Congress also appropriates funds for joint U.S.-Israeli missile defense programs.
In August 2007, the Bush Administration announced that it would increase U.S. military
assistance to Israel by $6 billion over the next decade. The agreement calls for incremental annual
increases in Foreign Military Financing (FMF) to Israel, reaching $3 billion a year by FY2012.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33222.pdf

Well, over to you now FD.

Cheers,
Shafique

US aid to Israel: around 3 billion a year

US aid to Egypt: 2,3 billion a year
US aid to Pakistan: 1 billion a year
US aid to Jordan: 500 million a year
US aid to Lebanon and the PA: a few hundred million a year.

So while Israel is the largest single recipient of US AID, the US spends more on other countries in the region.

I'm glad you clarified.

When you said:

Compared to US support to other Arab countries or Pakistan, US aid for Israel is really not that big. Contrary to what all those conspiracy theories want you to believe.

I thought you were saying the 'conspiracy theories' were wrong when they stated the fact we now agree on - that Israel is the biggest recipient of aid in the region.

You must be quite rich to state that the aid to Israel 'is really not that big'! Isn't the per-capita aid off the scale (compared to the others 'in the region'?)


But hey, I guess 'not that much' is a personal opinion.

Cheers,
Shafique

In 2009 US aid to Israel and Egypt was almost equal (2,4 billion vs. 2,3 billion resp.). In that year US aid to Israel was around 1,5% of the Israeli GDP. So yes, combined US aid to Arab countries is larger than US aid for Israel.

And yes, conspiracy theories like to overstate the level and importance of US aid to Israel. Its another nice Jewish/Zionist conspiracy.

Flying Dutchman wrote:

RobbyG wrote:From a geostrategic perspective, Israel is an important nation for critical leverage in the ME region.

Isn't oil the only geostrategic interest of the US in the ME? The US has always been very reluctant to support Israel during wars. I don't believe the US support Israel because its a democracy. Obama also bows for one of the worse despots of the region: the King of KSA. Support of the US for Israel is more emotional than rational IMO.

Oil is the main strategic asset. But I was talking about strategic allies in the region (critical leverage), supported by US 'aid' to keep despots and oppositions in the saddle that maintain the status quo so that the US is able to control them internally, by funding the side that has its interest.

As for Israel, the only 'democracy' in the ME, which has a wonderful booming economy. Needs little aid, but needs it to secure its costly security. The US has prime leverage over the region by controlling Israel, although Israel loves to build settlements and irritate the International community in the fragile peace process.

So its oil vs. peace. Whats more important do you think?

RobbyG wrote:Without US funding or 'aid', Israel would be a relatively easy target for a handful of determined Arab despots in the region. Another 'failed state' added onto the list of the US imperial ruler.

Compared to US support to other Arab countries or Pakistan, US aid for Israel is really not that big. Contrary to what all those conspiracy theories want you to believe. Israel will have no problem surviving as a strong nation without US aid. US aid for regional dictators is larger than US aid to Israel.

As for Israel attacking Iran. It is almost an impossible situation. Iran acquiring a nuclear bomb is absolutely unacceptable for Israel. An attack is a logistical nightmare, however. Next to that, complete success (destroying Irans nuclear capabilities) will be not be possible, only delaying it a few years.

Thats why I think that Israel will not attack first. Iran, Hezbollah and probably Syria would go crazy in the region. The United States will make it look like they start and control the attack, if Israel feels its end is near, so it will be a US led joint attack. This powerplay will be a detterent for Iran. Nothing else is viable for Israel on its own in my opinion.

Flying Dutchman wrote:In 2009 US aid to Israel and Egypt was almost equal (2,4 billion vs. 2,3 billion resp.). In that year US aid to Israel was around 1,5% of the Israeli GDP. So yes, combined US aid to Arab countries is larger than US aid for Israel.

Some fancy logic there FD.

Largest recipient of aid: Israel
Largest recipient of aid per capita: Israel (even if you combine all the other Arab countries together, this will still be 'off the scale')

This is per annum. Add up the aid paid say over the past 30 years, and the gap is even more vast.

Then add in the loan guarantees and other aid, and we are in the stratosphere.

But hey, if you view the universe as a whole, I guess the billions are 'not much at all'

Cheers,
Shafique

RobbyG wrote:funding the side that has its interest.

Which interests? Maintaining the status quo? Not supporting Israel, would make access to oil much easier for the US. As supported recetly by Petreus.

RobbyG wrote:As for Israel, the only 'democracy' in the ME, which has a wonderful booming economy. Needs little aid, but needs it to secure its costly security.

So?

RobbyG wrote:The US has prime leverage over the region by controlling Israel

Do you really think the US controls Israel? Is that what Chomsky says? The majority of the forum members will strongly disagree with you.

RobbyG wrote:So its oil vs. peace. Whats more important do you think?

Why is it oil vs peace?

RobbyG wrote:Thats why I think that Israel will not attack first. Iran, Hezbollah and probably Syria would go crazy in the region.

Hezbollahs behavior during the last Gaza war made me doubt very much the theory of a proxy war. Both Hezbollah and Syria know that if their missiles reach Tel Aviv, Israel will take off the gloves.

Flying Dutchman wrote:

RobbyG wrote:funding the side that has its interest.

Which interests? Maintaining the status quo? Not supporting Israel, would make access to oil much easier for the US. As supported recetly by Petreus.

US interests in the region, namely the countries it supports for leverage in the region. They don't fund Arab regimes just for the sake of it. Its throwing money in a black hole most of the time. It does do one thing, it keeps them quiet and alligned with US policy.

RobbyG wrote:As for Israel, the only 'democracy' in the ME, which has a wonderful booming economy. Needs little aid, but needs it to secure its costly security.

So?

Aid doesn't need to be that high. The Western capital model supplies the growth and prosperity for Israel booming economy. Israel only needs additional money to battle small recessions and security threats. Here the US comes in with a few drops in the bucket for security and armament technology. Not even mentioning aid money for roads from the international community.

RobbyG wrote:The US has prime leverage over the region by controlling Israel

Do you really think the US controls Israel? Is that what Chomsky says? The majority of the forum members will strongly disagree with you.

Without the US, Israel is nothing but a dwarf in the region.
Israel and its secret services have have a valuable role to play in the ME in support of the CIA. I think you are underestimating the role that Israel plays for the US in maintaining the status quo. You should remember that peace and democracy are nice words. But allowing peace in the Middle East is like forfeiting your control over despots and hostile regimes and their useful resources. At least thats what you can conclude from the US imperialist planners and their actions.

You can call the handover of 'aid' a democracy effort. You have to judge from the actions if that is really the case. I'll leave it up to your imagination to judge that.

RobbyG wrote:So its oil vs. peace. Whats more important do you think?

Why is it oil vs peace?

What else is the reason that the US sends aid to hostile regimes and has such huge presence in strategic country in the ME? I can assure you that its not for leisure purposes.

RobbyG wrote:Thats why I think that Israel will not attack first. Iran, Hezbollah and probably Syria would go crazy in the region.

Hezbollahs behavior during the last Gaza war made me doubt very much the theory of a proxy war. Both Hezbollah and Syria know that if their missiles reach Tel Aviv, Israel will take off the gloves.

I'm sure Israel will do everything to prevent annihilation. But I'm also sure that terrorist are willing to forfeit their lives for 70 virgins. But when Israel attacks, and when Iran retaliates, you don't think that Israel has hands, weapons and logistics in abundance to cover all sides do you?

Without the US military capability, Israel will probably not have much of a chance being attacked from all sides. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I'm not willing to bet against that.

RobbyG wrote:US interests in the region, namely the countries it supports for leverage in the region. They don't fund Arab regimes just for the sake of it. Its throwing money in a black hole most of the time. It does do one thing, it keeps them quiet and alligned with US policy.

Still a very poor reason why the US should support Israel the way it does.

RobbyG wrote:Aid doesn't need to be that high. The Western capital model supplies the growth and prosperity for Israel booming economy. Israel only needs additional money to battle small recessions and security threats. Here the US comes in with a few drops in the bucket for security and armament technology.

US aid for Israel isnot that high or big a deal as many want u to believe. Israel will survive without it.

RobbyG wrote:Without the US, Israel is nothing but a dwarf in the region.

Throughout its history Israel was always able to find an ally. Russia, France, Britain. If not the US, Israel will find someone else.

RobbyG wrote:Israel and its secret services have have a valuable role to play in the ME in support of the CIA.

The Mossad is overrated nowadays. The heroic days of Entebbe are gone. Look at the last Lebanon war. Hezbollah intelligence was better than Israeli intelligence.

But what is it? Is the US controlling Israel? Is Israel controlling the US? You seem to shift with every post. I don't think one is controlling the other.

RobbyG wrote:Without the US military capability, Israel will probably not have much of a chance being attacked from all sides.

Like 1967...

You can't have that much luck every day FD. 1973 was nearly a death sentence.

Next time they lose.

RobbyG wrote:Next time they lose.

MAD

Flying Dutchman wrote:

RobbyG wrote:Next time they lose.

MAD

Of course its mad, since the US would'nt leave them on their own.
However, If they did, try throwing a dice and calculate the odds of hitting the same outcome. I don't think the outcome of war will be the same as in 1967.

You get my point.

It will be fascinating to see how the balance of power shifts in a few years time when China starts throwing it's military weight around more explicitly.

Then we'll see whether the bravado/chutzpah and reality are in accordance. Israel seems schizophrenic to me - on the one hand complaining it is a weak beseiged nation surrounded by bloodthirsty mooslim nations bent on its destruction, on the other hand the fanbois think it is a nation protected by God and which will remain invincible.

When the tide goes out, we then see who has been swimming naked - as the saying goes.

Cheers,
Shafique