Politics | War


Previous 10 | Next 10 
To: Thomas M. who wrote (8280)11/9/2001 7:44:09 PM
From: goldsnow   of 22126
 
Acknowledgement: Gus contributed very heavily to the outstanding research below...


biu.ac.il 

New evidence summarized in this article indicates that the Soviet intervention was not only planned but actually set in motion before being aborted. Soviet officials interviewed insist that such operations were meant only to deter Israel from overwhelming Egypt and, especially, Syria, as well as to stop the United States from intervening on Israel’s side. In order to achieve this outcome, however, the projected action had to be made known to these adversaries, and this was carefully avoided by the Soviets. Yet details of the operation were kept in total secrecy, have been denied to this day, and remained generally unknown to Israeli and American intelligence.

Thus, unless the Soviets grossly overestimated the other side’s intelligence capability, this indicates that the operation was to be implemented, not just threatened. Moreover, preparations for this operation began well before the Soviets even accused Israel of offensive designs, the supposed reason for the intervention.

Well before 1967, Israel had been targeted by the KGB's Foreign Intelligence (First) Directorate as a theater of operations during a larger East-West conflict. Preparations had been made there for parachuting at least diversionnye razvedyvatelnye gruppy (DRGs--sabotage-intelligence groups) to destroy Israeli targets. During 1964-66, according to documents supplied by the defecting KGB archivist Vasili Mitrokhin, Israel was one of the countries where caches of arms and radio equipment were prepositioned for such operations. Mitrokhin claims some of these were boobytrapped and may be in place to this day.(3) The direct involvement of Soviet personnel on Israeli soil, at least on a small scale, had thus already been considered and approved.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: no name chump who wrote (8291)11/9/2001 8:07:07 PM
From: Brumar89   of 22126
 
As the game is played, the Israelis want the Palestinians to rebell and then use it as a pretext for war stories and military action.
It is like taking candy from a baby; it is a human reaction to defend yourselves and Israel spins it for their purposes.
Without the violence, Palestinian rights would not even be an issue. Their uprising is a necessity.


I'm having trouble telling whether you really think the rebellion / intifada is a bad thing or not.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: no name chump who wrote (8330)11/9/2001 8:19:10 PM
From: Nadine Carroll   of 22126
 
I checked out the soap. It seems that this was not true although it was widely believed by the Holocaust survivors. The Nazis did, after all, use human hair for various purposes, extract dental gold, and make lampshades out of human skin. So when newsreels showed bars of soap next to the lampshades, soap stamped "RJF", immediately interpreted as "Reichs-Juden-Fett", State Jewish Soap, who would doubt it? (That's where I recalled it from) Hardly a big stretch considering the circumstances.

chgs.hispeed.com 

Now as to Masada: Josephus says that Masada was held by the Sicarii and he calls them "bandits". But who were these Sicarii? Josephus describes their mode of operation as going around festivals with little daggers (Latin sicarii) killing their opponents.

Ordinary bandits don't have opponents; they just have people they steal from. It's clear from the description that the Sicarii were motivated by ideology, not gain. You have to rememember that Josephus was a client of Vespasian and Titus when he wrote the Jewish Wars. The Zealots were the chief war-party in Jerusalem; at one point, Josephus refers to the followers of Menachem as Zealots and at another he calls them Sicarii. The Sicarii thus seem to be a Zealot splinter group favoring guerilla and terrorist tactics. Certainly ordinary bandits don't kill themselves en masse with their wives and children to avoid capture as these Sicarii did at Masada.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (3)

To: no name chump who wrote (8330)11/9/2001 8:35:01 PM
From: Brumar89   of 22126
 
Hmm. Sicarri as 1st century Hamas.

Course, due to technological limitations of the time, they didn't have bombs and had to settle for knives and swords. Similar violence for a political end with a religious rationale. The same willingness to commit suicide and sacrifice family members for the cause. The same bringing of disaster on their own people.

Now we need to find a 1st century Len Grasso (say, isn't that an Italian name?) to say the Romans "created" the Sicarri for their own imperial ends.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: GUSTAVE JAEGER who wrote (8282)11/9/2001 8:40:41 PM
From: goldsnow   of 22126
 
Would be intresting to watch an unfolding anti-arab Caspian oil coalition....No doubt "oil-gun" diplomacy and International Relations US/Russia/Iran/Turkey would dominate this decade...Arabs can only lose or lose big in the unfolding events that would hit them financially and politically with widening oil-glut...


biu.ac.il 

Iran's major regional conflict is with Azerbaijan over differences in the ownership of Caspian oil and on projected oil and gas pipeline routes from the Caspian basin to Western oil consumers. The cheapest pipeline route lies across Iranian territory but, under U.S. pressure, preference has been given to the Western "Baku-Cyhan" route through Turkey. These issues, though, have not been finally decided.

The possibility of a Southern Azerbaijan issue becoming an international problem should be taken very seriously. Iran's northwestern province bordering on Azerbaijan is populated mostly by Azeri Turks identical to those across the frontier. There have been semi-nationalist movements in the province during past decades and some of the Iranian Azeris seek unification with Azerbaijan. Iran and Azerbaijan have normal relations and are in continuous dialogue. The Azerbaijani government discourages pan-Azeri nationalism. Still, a heightening of this issue could cause considerable friction some day. (5)

As a result of Iran's interests and policies, Armenia sees Tehran as another power that can counter-balance Turkey's activity in the region. There are no territorial issues between Iran and Armenia, and religious questions play no role in disrupting relations between the Islamic Republic and Christian Armenia. For Iran, Armenia blocks Turkish influence along Iranian northern and western borders and also in Central Asia.

In contrast, Turkish interests in the South Caucasus directly collide with Russian and Iranian interests, a factor that also affects Turkey's relations with each of the South Caucasian states. Turkey's relations with Georgia and Azerbaijan may be defined as a strategic partnership, since they have a common interest in limiting Russian and Iranian influence.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: GUSTAVE JAEGER who wrote (8282)11/9/2001 8:53:38 PM
From: goldsnow   of 22126
 
Ouch! Ouch!

reuters.com 

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: no name chump who wrote (8334)11/9/2001 9:09:02 PM
From: goldsnow   of 22126
 
Len, this guy sounds just like you, almost identical, amazing ..<ggg>

reuters.com 

Ayman Zawahri, a top lieutenant in Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network, said in a statement aired on Saturday that jihad, or holy war, would not stop until all "American Jewish" troops had been expelled from Muslim states...

..."The official American ignorance in the speech of Bush and the statement of the foreign ministry about the Palestinian tragedy cannot wipe from the minds of Muslims the images of hundreds of thousands of Palestinian wounded, killed and crippled, and millions of fleeing people," Zawahri said.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (8340)11/9/2001 9:22:24 PM
From: alan w   of 22126
 
Hi Nadine. I have argued with you on the Bush/Clinton threads several times. I have come to respect and admire your thought processes while reading this thread. Even though you support the wrong politicians in this country(big grin), you have it right in the middle east.

Have a good weekend.

alan w

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: alan w who wrote (8345)11/9/2001 9:26:26 PM
From: Nadine Carroll   of 22126
 
alan w,

Thanks -- I think (g).

Looking forward to more arguments,
Nadine

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: no name chump who wrote (8331)11/9/2001 9:37:37 PM
From: chalu2   of 22126
 
England does not have a constitution....

On the other hand, Afghanistan does (adopted in 1964), and the Soviet Union had a constitution that was a model of civil rights (seldom observed).

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)
Previous 10 | Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2013 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.