[TheWastelander]

(02-04-2015 05:38 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  

About ISIS being the creation of the US and its allies:


http://forums.canadiancontent.net/intern...eated.html
(This link has a very good interview with Noam Chomsky, where he talks about these issues. It's worth watching for those really interested in the historical background).

Alright, so it's going to be easier for me to address each one of these in this format.

Quote:

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-te...ay-n208006
(Showing ISIS funneled money via Gulf proxies)

Everything in this link is well-known and not disputed.

Quote:

http://www.inquisitr.com/1796991/isis-co...rough-u-s/

ISIS was routing money through Western banks to get it to their guys. No proof they were not being funded by the United States.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/isis-funding-ro...an-1485622

http://www.breitbart.com/national-securi...h-the-u-s/

Quote:

http://rt.com/op-edge/168064-isis-terror...a-cia-war/

This is mere speculation by a guy who believes Obama and the Pentagon orchestrated the Egyptian Revolution. There's no proof of this and his claims in the article are just as dubious. He appears to believe that because a few guys in ISIS hold US passports they must be in league with the US government.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/1...FI20130310

Furthermore, we are/were training so-called 'moderate' Muslims (yeah, I know) to fight in Syria under the banner of the Free Syrian Army. As you can see, they kind of suck ass and prove that we're not good at this sort of thing and more incompetent than guys like Noam Chomsky would have you believe. Is it possible some of them later joined ISIS? Yep.

Then he goes on to say: "The CIA transported hundreds of Mujahideen Saudis and other foreign veterans of the 1980s Afghan war against the Soviets in Afghanistan into Chechnya to disrupt the struggling Russia in the early 1990s, particularly to sabotage the Russian oil pipeline running directly from Baku on the Caspian Sea into Russia. James Baker III and his friends in Anglo-American Big Oil had other plans."

Yeah, I'm going to require proof of this. This guy just doesn't seem credible, Quintus.

Quote:

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/01/29/...d-from-us/

Same as above. Money was routed through US banks to them, but no proof it was done with the consent, direction, or knowledge of the US government.

Quote:

http://topinfopost.com/2014/10/06/noam-c...eated-isis

Haven't had a chance to watch the full video yet.

Quote:

Anyone who knows how power works and how the game of power is played will recognize what I'm saying here. The US and its allies (Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey) want compliant Arab governments in the region that they can control. Governments that don't follow orders (like Saddam's) are removed.

This is assuming a lot. You give the United States way too much credit. Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

I would buy the argument that we're haphazardly waging a misguided proxy war against Syria because of 'freedom and democracy' or because they're an ally of Iran but the idea that KSA and Israel pretty much tell us what they want and we snap to (which you wrote a few posts before this one) is ridiculous.

Quote:

The ultimate project of the US and Israel is to remove the nationalist government of Syria that exists now, and turn the country into a Somalia-like bantustan that they can control. In this way, they will be able to isolate and knock off Hezbollah, which poses the only actual military deterrent to Israeli aggression in the region.

Possible.

Quote:

Then (or concurrent with this) they want to pursue regime change in Iran. Iran is a big danger to the US and Israel because it truly is on its own program. They don't follow orders and don't give a shit what the US and Israel say.

Iran's going to change in the next few generations. We already saw the beginnings of it in 2009 during the protests. The youth don't like their system of governance. And I'm sure Israel would like regime change in Iran but that's not going to happen as quickly as they like. Furthermore, I don't believe the US is pursuing it in any serious way and it looks to me like the Obama administration is actually open to the idea of negotiating with them on the nuclear issue.

Quote:

This is the way the game is played, and those who are informed about the history of the region are aware of it.

The game is being played, but speculation over what the major players are doing and their involvement in various schemes is just that: speculation.

[scorpion]

This is Greater Israel. Its a landmass based on what was promised to the Israelites in the Old Testament. In decades past, there was an aggressive, expansionist faction on the Israeli right-wing that favored openly expanding into this territory following the Six-Day War. However, their aggression proved unpalatable to most Israelis at the time, and the Greater Israel faction was roundly defeated at the polls. At that point, they went underground and merged into the Likud party, where they remain.

However, this faction did not give up their goal of expanding into Greater Israel. They simply adjusted their tactics. Rather than openly lobby for an expansion, they decided instead to begin de-stabilizing the entire region. This would serve not only to weaken the neighboring states and thus make Israel safer in the short term, but would provide Israel an opportunity at some point over the long term to expand into the surrounding territory.

Israel's plan of fracturing and weakening the surrounding states has had tremendous success over the past three decades, and now they've moved on to the next phase of the plan: ISIS. By supporting ISIS and ensuring they begin to expand through the weakened states, Israel is essentially creating the casus belli that will allow it to claim self-defense when it expands its territory into Greater Israel. Previously, with all of those states under separate leaders and officially recognized by the U.N., the political ramifications of expansion were simply unacceptable. However, with the states under the control of arch-fanatics like ISIS (who, we are constantly reminded via expertly produced propaganda videos, enjoy decapitation and burning people alive) who is going to protest if Israel (with the help of the U.S.) goes in and wipes them out?

And now you know why Israel would do something so apparently "stupid" as unleashing ISIS right next door. They created a monster they intend to destroy, a monster the world will demand be destroyed, and in the process Israel will gain the territorial expansion it has desired for decades.

[TheWastelander]

(02-04-2015 05:54 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  

^^^^
ISIS and other similar radicals have been used for this purpose. They are a virus injected into the region to cause harm. Most of these ISIS people are foreigners from Libya, Europe, Algeria, Pakistan, and other places. They are being bankrolled by the US and its allies. The US doesn't like to get directly involved, so it can preserve deniability.

Or, OR they're part of a continuing islamic imperialist movement that predates serious American involvement in the region and the founding of the nation of Israel. This all traces back to and starts with the Muslim Brotherhood. It was not a coincidence that many of Al-Qaeda's top figures were part of it at some point. ISIS itself was originally a smaller group called Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad led by Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi. When the War in Iraq entered its insurgency phase he joined Al-Qaeda, merged his group with their operations in the area and it eventually became Al-Qaeda in Iraq. Various mergers and changes since then have led to ISIL/ISIS or (whatever the media wants to call it this week) being formed. Without a strongman like Saddam or a continual US presence in Iraq to keep a lid on them, they flourished and got plenty of arms and money from supporters in KSA and the Gulf States.

Anyway, Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad was started by Zarqawi because he wanted to overthrow the Jordanian government. These religious fanatics do not like secular leaders.

That's just how they are. They take advantage of chaotic situations, establish true no-go zones and bases in lawless regions of countries, and thrive in power vacuums.

Saddam was facing the same sort of threat from Ansar al-Islam up in the north of the country, Jordan's had to deal with them, Syria's had to deal with them, Iran has to deal with the Al-Qaeda affiliated assholes known as Jundallah, etc. etc.

What is going on here is that there is a Sunni islamic supremacist movement with several groups, many of whom are affiliated, that are taking on Shiites and trying to topple secular dictators. It is my opinion that they're separate from Israel and the United States. They're another player in the game, not controlled by those two but funded by donors in our "allies" the KSA, Kuwait, Qatar, etc. who want to see an islamic caliphate established and can't get their own governments to overtly engage in pursuing that goal.

You have to assume a lot to believe that these groups are created and funded by the US and Israel. There's no doubt that in some instances we benefit from the things they do and occasionally our government has similar goals (like fucking over Assad) but that's where it ends.

They've attacked us in the form of Al-Qaeda and we've even worked with Iran to battle them in the past. It's a constantly shifting thing depending on the conditions and the goals at the time.

[HighSpeed_LowDrag]

(02-05-2015 10:14 AM)scorpion Wrote:  

In decades past, there was an aggressive, expansionist faction on the Israeli right-wing that favored openly expanding into this territory following the Six-Day War.

You are massively overstating the case here.

The Revisionist strain of Zionist (the "aggressively expansionist" movement that you mention) never came close to advocating the degree of territorial conquest that you mention above. At most, they desired that Israel should control the entirety of the former British Mandate of Palestine - which included what is now Jordan, and which they felt was unjustly severed from the Palestine Mandate by Britain.



The emblem of the extremist Irgun group. No "Nile to the Euphrates" here.

They were originally defeated by the Labour Zionists of Ben-Gurion who pragmatically sought to divide Palestine into Jewish and Arab states.

In the wake of the Six-Day War, the Revisionists sought to have Israel annex the Gaza Strip and West Bank. However you may view that ideal, that was the extent of it.

Do you seriously believe that a nation of less than six million people could militarily conquer - much less control - an area stretching for hundreds of kilometers with hundreds of millions of hostile Arabs?

And if the Likud is so full of unrepentant expansionist aggressors, why did Menachem Begin sign the Camp David Accords with Egypt that gave up the Sinai? Why did Ariel Sharon completely withdraw from the Gaza Strip, uprooting every single military outpost and Jewish settlement from the area?

It's disturbing that someone with such intellect could indulge themselves in such ridiculous conspiracy theories. I would point out that Yasser Arafat was a fan of your reasoning, which tells me exactly everything that needs to be said about it.

I dare you to point me to one Israeli politician or political party or military leader, with actual influence on the conduct of Israel's defence or foreign policies, who openly advocated for the degree of conquest that you outline in the above. You can't cause none have physically existed. End of story.

Next I bet you'll be telling us how Mossad was responsible for 9/11, the Arab Spring, and Hurricane Katrina to boot.

HSLD

[HighSpeed_LowDrag]

Getting back to the point of the thread, apparently Fox News has now made the unedited video of Kasasbeh's murder available on its website: BBC

Quote:

Fox News executives say they're carrying out their duties as journalists. Others, however, are appalled at their decision to air the video of a man who was burned alive.

The Jordanian fighter pilot First Lt Moaz al-Kasasbeh was in a cage when he died from immolation, set on fire by members of the Islamic State (IS). A 22-minute video captured the last moments of his life.

Journalists with Western media organisations reported on his death by describing the video. Many of them followed the lead of Shepard Smith, the chief news anchor of Fox News.

As Mr Smith recounted the grisly moments that were depicted in the video, he said he sensed most viewers would not want to watch.

But other hosts went further. On Tuesday night Bret Baier, an anchor on Fox News, showed graphic images from the video on the Fox programme "Special Report".

"We feel you need to see it," he said, saying the footage was necessary to understanding the full extent of IS's extremism.

Then Fox posted the video - in its entirely - on their website.

The video appeared with a banner: "WARNING, EXTREMELY GRAPHIC VIDEO: ISIS burns hostage alive".

One of the Fox News executives explained the rationale for their decision.

"After careful consideration, we decided that giving readers of FoxNews.com the option to see for themselves the barbarity of ISIS outweighed legitimate concerns about the graphic nature of the video," said John Moody, the executive editor of Fox News:

"Online users can choose to view or not view this disturbing content."

Some agreed with Fox's decision. Glenn Beck initially decided against posting the video on his website The Blaze but changed his mind, saying it was important the world "wake up" to the "enemy of all mankind".

"Jews, gentiles, straight, gay, black, white, western, eastern, atheist, Christian or Muslim - it is time you recognize what you are up against, look it square in the eye and call it by its name: evil and a plague on mankind," said Beck, who used to host a show on Fox.

But executives at most media organisations have chosen not to show the video of Lt Kasasbeh's death. The BBC, for example, will not show the video, link to web pages or share links on social media carrying the video.

And most of the reaction on social media was critical of Fox News, saying it provided a platform for IS.

"I was a little surprised that Fox would show it," said University of Virginia's William Quandt, who has served on the National Security Council. "I don't think we need to show every gruesome detail.

"I think it kind of plays into the terrorists' hands."

Leigh Curtis, a writer for the Nottingham Post, tweeted that Fox's decision was "absolutely despicable".

Another Twitter user, William Cooper, describing himself as an "obnoxious lefty", wrote succinctly about Fox: "new devastating lows".

On Twitter people posted photos of Lt Kasasbeh that showed him smiling and spending time with his friends.
One Twitter user, Maajid Nawaz,, who describes himself as an author and a "parliamentary candidate in Hampstead & Kilburn", was outraged at the way images of the pilot's death was being used in the media.

"Want an image to tweet of burned-alive Jordanian hero Moaz al-Kasasbah?" he wrote. He posted a photo that was taken before he was held captive. "Use this one. Do not use ISIL propaganda."

The photo was retweeted more than 1,000 times, along with another image posted by a Twitter user, Joseph Willits. He wrote: "We should share his smile not #ISIS monstrosity."

HSLD

[Quintus Curtius]

The results of decades of indoctrination and obfuscation by the American media regarding Israel and its policies are clear when one tries to speak to most people in America about this subject.

There has always been a strong strain of "Christian Zionism" in the US and Britain as well, especially among the leadership elements (presidents, Congress, policymakers, etc). Christian Zionists are religious Christians who see the state of Israel as some sort of fulfillment of Biblical prophecy. The fact that Israel wages wars of aggression, practices ethnic cleansing, and operates an apartheid state matters little to them.

So, there is a confluence of interest, at some level, between Jewish Zionism and Christian Zionism. And both of these ideologies dovetail quite well with the imperatives of power politics. The US wants to control the region, and Israel has proven to be a useful tool. Almost all of these "neocons" are Zionists of one stripe or another.

But the reality is that the Israelis have their own agenda. The radical settler movement--the Gush Enunim--is pushing for more and more racialist, expansionist policies. And no one here reports it. In fact, Netanyahu himself openly laughed at how easy Americans were to manipulate. He let this slip in an unusually candid moment. "American can be easily moved, moved in the right direction." He said precisely this, and he meant it.

Take a good look at that map that Scorpion posted. It's pretty accurate. "From the Nile to the Euphrates" is the slogan of the Zionist expansionist movement. Those two blue stripes on the Israeli flag, it is said, stand for the Nile and the Euphrates. This is the region they consider "theirs." They intend to dominate the region. Does the US media report this? No.

The sad truth is that most people in America don't know anything about anything when it comes to the Middle East. In a way, I don't blame them, since the media here doesn't report it.

All they report is pro-Israel and pro-US cheerleading, where Israel is always the poor little victim and everyone else is an aggressor. The truth is something much different.

And make no mistake, they would throw the US under the bus in 5 seconds if needed. (Remember when Israel attacked this USS Liberty in 1968 and killed a number of Americans, and the US covered it up?)

No country in the world has ever benefited as much as Israel has from the US: we arm them to the teeth, underwrite their apartheid state, and encourage their expansionism. That's the reality.

If there is one thing I would encourage people here to do is to listen to foreign media. You're not going to get the full story by listening to the US media. You need to learn a foreign language and get exposure to the media of Europe, South America, or the Middle East. Those countries are less dominated by pro-Israeli mentalities.

[Sp5]

I'm somewhere in the middle of all of this, between your positions.

There is some great game being played out, with shadowy motives and goals.

ISIS is a creation of three things:

1. The internationalization of Salafi/Wahabi ideology and jihad, through Saudi money. This was initially condoned and assisted by the USA as an ideological and military spear against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. The Saudis have brought it far beyond Afghanistan by funding Wahabi mosques and imams around the world. The generation of Muslims influenced by this ideology are now adults. 9/11 was a direct product of this.

2. The blundered reaction to 9/11 by Bush and Cheney, particularly Iraq. The motives for the invasion of Iraq are shadowy, "weapons of mass destruction" was not the main reason or even a secondary reason. The main reasons were sustaining the petroleum economy through increased, sanctions-free Iraqi oil production, eliminating a threat to Israel, and an attempt to change the paradigm of Arab Muslim states by installing electoral democracy and a free market economy in Iraq. It did not work out very well for many reasons, creating the insurgent predecessors to ISIS in Iraq and leaving a politico-military power vacuum for ISIS to fill. Both the USA and the Maliki government take the blame for the latter.

3. The mysterious urgency about getting rid of Assad in Syria, and the botched and bloody attempts to replace him. Sure, he is a dictator, but his regime had been cooperative with the West and was making reform gestures. Hafez Assad sent the Syrian Army to be a part of the Kuwait War coalition- as a military ally of the USA, UK and France. The younger Assad's government was cooperating with the USA on intelligence matters after 9/11. Hell, the CIA was sending prisoners to be tortured in Syria.

So what is so bad about the Assad regime? Compared to the Saudi kings, Assad's Thomas Jefferson. People enjoyed far more personal and religious freedom in Syria, and as much political freedom (not much) as Saudi Arabia. Why was it so important to replace him?

It's all about Iran. Syria must be destroyed as an Iranian ally, and Hezbollah in Lebanon can be isolated and starved. This is protect Israel's northern flank from retaliation from what I think is being planned - an eventual regime change attack on Iran. The motives for Iran? Almost the same as for the Iraq invasion.

I don't think the Israelis have a plan to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates - the demographics of that are impossible. I do think they want to keep all of the West Bank and to create chaos in the surrounding states, something like the Oded Yanon plan

Between Syria and the Ukraine, when the history of this time is finally revealed, if ever, Obama will look pretty reckless and feckless. The problem is that the Republicans are even worse, because of Sheldon Adelson and the Christian Zionists. There haven't been any realists in US foreign policy for awhile - only neocons and R2P interventionists.

The former CIA analyst Michael Scheuer wrote a book which is looking more and more prophetic. He said the USA's obeisance to Israel and interventionism was creating a situation which would lead to catastrophe for the USA and the Muslim world. The book is titled Marching Toward Hell. That pretty much sums up the present course. I'd cut a deal with Assad and the Iranians tomorrow to get rid of ISIS.

Some remarks by Scheuer:

[TheWastelander]

(02-05-2015 12:47 PM)Sp5 Wrote:  

3. The mysterious urgency about getting rid of Assad in Syria, and the botched and bloody attempts to replace him. Sure, he is a dictator, but his regime had been cooperative with the West and was making reform gestures. Hafez Assad sent the Syrian Army to be a part of the Kuwait War coalition- as a military ally of the USA, UK and France. The younger Assad's government was cooperating with the USA on intelligence matters after 9/11. Hell, the CIA was sending prisoners to be tortured in Syria.

There's also our betrayal of Muammar Gaddafi, who turned over his country's chemical weapons and was well on the road to reconciliation with us. A week before we stabbed him in the back his son was touring the US.

America has been toppling the wrong people for the wrong reasons. I believe, like you, that there are multiple reasons for this but that Wilsonian "spread democracy and be the world police" foreign policy is at the root of it.

You're right in that there are few to no realists left in our government.

At the same time I am highly skeptical when people try to portray the US and Israeli governments as being full of evil geniuses. If people only knew how incompetent our government actually is they wouldn't believe such things.

[lskdfjldsf]

Quintus: If we assume for a second that your theory is correct and Israel is behind it all, what's the solution then? Cheer for the Islamists so our consciences are clear? Just stay out of it all and hope for a favorable outcome?

Regardless which side we choose (if any at all) this has an enormous impact on the fate of Europe and the U.S. and is not something we can simply ignore. An aggressive Islam is a political, social, and economic threat to the Western way of life and you are one of the most brutally honest people at RVF in admitting this (see Charlie Hebdo thread). It's been going on for 1400 years and won't stop until one side wins decisively. Unless you also believe the attackers in NYC, Boston, Canada, Australia, the UK, Spain, and France were all Mossad agents, I think it's completely fair to consider Israel the enemy of our own enemy.

Helping them, but at an arms distance with our weapon chambered and holstered, seems logical to me.

[Quintus Curtius]

(02-05-2015 01:37 PM)Blick Mang Wrote:  

Quintus: If we assume for a second that your theory is correct and Israel is behind it all, what's the solution then? Cheer for the Islamists so our consciences are clear? Just stay out of it all and hope for a favorable outcome?

Regardless which side we choose (if any at all) this has an enormous impact on the fate of Europe and the U.S. and is not something we can simply ignore. An aggressive Islam is a political, social, and economic threat to the Western way of life and you are one of the most brutally honest people at RVF in admitting this (see Charlie Hebdo thread). It's been going on for 1400 years and won't stop until one side wins decisively. Unless you also believe the attackers in NYC, Boston, Canada, Australia, the UK, Spain, and France were all Mossad agents, I think it's completely fair to consider Israel the enemy of our own enemy.

Helping them, but at an arms distance with our weapon chambered and holstered, seems logical to me.

Blick:

Please note that I did not say that Israel was the sole actor in this drama. My original post on the last page made this very clear:

http://www.rooshvforum.network/thread-44785-...#pid949121

What I said was that Israel is one of the key players. The others are Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the Gulf States, and to a lesser extent, England and France.

All of these countries has its own agenda, or confluence of agendas, for doing what they are doing.

Now, if you are asking me what my solution is? Very simple. We should:

1. Stop interfering with the development of Syria and Iraq.
2. Stop supporting terrorism in Syria by funding militants.
3. Stop financing Israeli colonization and expansion in the region.
4. Cut off funding for countries that refuse to subscribe to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (which is Israel).

Of course, none of this will happen. But that's what should happen, in my view.

.

[H1N1]

(02-05-2015 02:29 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  

(02-05-2015 01:37 PM)Blick Mang Wrote:  

Quintus: If we assume for a second that your theory is correct and Israel is behind it all, what's the solution then? Cheer for the Islamists so our consciences are clear? Just stay out of it all and hope for a favorable outcome?

Regardless which side we choose (if any at all) this has an enormous impact on the fate of Europe and the U.S. and is not something we can simply ignore. An aggressive Islam is a political, social, and economic threat to the Western way of life and you are one of the most brutally honest people at RVF in admitting this (see Charlie Hebdo thread). It's been going on for 1400 years and won't stop until one side wins decisively. Unless you also believe the attackers in NYC, Boston, Canada, Australia, the UK, Spain, and France were all Mossad agents, I think it's completely fair to consider Israel the enemy of our own enemy.

Helping them, but at an arms distance with our weapon chambered and holstered, seems logical to me.

Blick:

Please note that I did not say that Israel was the sole actor in this drama. My original post on the last page made this very clear:

http://www.rooshvforum.network/thread-44785-...#pid949121

What I said was that Israel is one of the key players. The others are Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the Gulf States, and to a lesser extent, England and France.

All of these countries has its own agenda, or confluence of agendas, for doing what they are doing.

Now, if you are asking me what my solution is? Very simple. We should:

1. Stop interfering with the development of Syria and Iraq.
2. Stop supporting terrorism in Syria by funding militants.
3. Stop financing Israeli colonization and expansion in the region.
4. Cut off funding for countries that refuse to subscribe to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (which is Israel).

Of course, none of this will happen. But that's what should happen, in my view.

.

I think actually we're all more or less on the same page, and the apparent divergence in opinion might not be as pronounced as it seems. The only real difference that I can detect fundamentally (on a second read through the recent pages) between your/Scorpion's posts, and Blick/Wastelander/my posts, is whether we feel it is total incompetence on the behalf of government in executing its strategic aims (Blick/Wastelander/me), or whether it is a rare example of hyper competence of all the players involved (you/Scorpion).

[lskdfjldsf]

I have to admit, I researched this pretty late last night and think there are some telling pieces of information available online. Scorpion's theory seems to be grounded in truth, based off of the information below. Whether this is realistic or feasible, or the plan is official policy, is a different matter; the dissolution of Arab countries into sectarian proxies would be a long-term goal for Western/Israeli hegemony regardless.

There's a very thin line between strategy and conspiracy here, and I think the text below illustrates the delusion of some Israeli expansionists. If Israel can hardly police the Gaza strip and West Bank without the international community lashing out, how are they to occupy or annex parts of Saudi Arabia or Iraq?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/greater-isr...st/5324815

Quote:

Why is it assumed that there is no special risk from the outside in the publication of such plans?

Such risks can come from two sources, so long as the principled opposition inside Israel is very weak (a situation which may change as a consequence of the war on Lebanon) : The Arab World, including the Palestinians, and the United States. The Arab World has shown itself so far quite incapable of a detailed and rational analysis of Israeli-Jewish society, and the Palestinians have been, on the average, no better than the rest. In such a situation, even those who are shouting about the dangers of Israeli expansionism (which are real enough) are doing this not because of factual and detailed knowledge, but because of belief in myth. A good example is the very persistent belief in the non-existent writing on the wall of the Knesset of the Biblical verse about the Nile and the Euphrates. Another example is the persistent, and completely false declarations, which were made by some of the most important Arab leaders, that the two blue stripes of the Israeli flag symbolize the Nile and the Euphrates, while in fact they are taken from the stripes of the Jewish praying shawl (Talit). The Israeli specialists assume that, on the whole, the Arabs will pay no attention to their serious discussions of the future, and the Lebanon war has proved them right. So why should they not continue with their old methods of persuading other Israelis?

In the United States a very similar situation exists, at least until now. The more or less serious commentators take their information about Israel, and much of their opinions about it, from two sources. The first is from articles in the “liberal” American press, written almost totally by Jewish admirers of Israel who, even if they are critical of some aspects of the Israeli state, practice loyally what Stalin used to call “the constructive criticism.” (In fact those among them who claim also to be “Anti-Stalinist” are in reality more Stalinist than Stalin, with Israel being their god which has not yet failed). In the framework of such critical worship it must be assumed that Israel has always “good intentions” and only “makes mistakes,” and therefore such a plan would not be a matter for discussion–exactly as the Biblical genocides committed by Jews are not mentioned. The other source of information, The Jerusalem Post, has similar policies. So long, therefore, as the situation exists in which Israel is really a “closed society” to the rest of the world, because the world wants to close its eyes, the publication and even the beginning of the realization of such a plan is realistic and feasible.

Israel Shahak

June 17, 1982 Jerusalem

[scorpion]

The Israelis know very well what they're doing. They're a ruthless and extremely cunning people, especially the leadership. You don't survive and thrive as a tiny Jewish state surrounded by millions of Muslims by being stupid and incompetent. The U.S. and Europe can afford to blunder around and make mistakes in the Middle East; Israel cannot. If Israel actually viewed ISIS as an existential threat then they would already be frantically beating the war drums, demanding U.S. assistance and flooding the press with stories about another impending Holocaust. The fact that none of this is happening is proof that Israel does not view ISIS as a serious threat now or in the foreseeable future, and instead is rather more concerned with Syria and Iran. Of course, this is exactly what one would expect if Israel was operating according to the playbook I suggested, and was engaged in a strategy to weaken the surrounding Arab states. Israel obviously wants weak and fractured neighbors. They can't do it themselves for political reasons, but ISIS can certainly do the dirty work for them. At the very least, even if ISIS is defeated they will serve to significantly weaken Israel's enemies in the process, which benefits Israel. And should ISIS prevail and begin to gain traction with establishment of the caliphate, Israel suddenly has casus belli for a defensive war of survival, which will give them the political leeway to unleash the full fury of their military might. That's when you'll see the papers going crazy about another imminent Holocaust if Israel and the U.S. don't go full bore against ISIS.

This is why it's extremely ridiculous to attribute Israel's actions in the Middle East to stupidity or incompetence. They're playing chess, not checkers. Does that mean their plan has no holes? Absolutely not. It just means that if it doesn't work out the way they intended (perhaps ISIS grows more powerful than they anticipated) it won't be because they let ISIS sneak up on them while they twiddled their thumbs. It will be because they overestimated their ability to control the monster they created (think Dr. Frankenstein). Hubris has always historically been the undoing of the Jews, not stupidity. The danger is that they get too caught up in their planning and meddling and overextend themselves, not that they fail to plan at all.

[TheWastelander]

(02-06-2015 01:12 AM)scorpion Wrote:  

This is why it's extremely ridiculous to attribute Israel's actions in the Middle East to stupidity or incompetence. They're playing chess, not checkers. Does that mean their plan has no holes? Absolutely not. It just means that if it doesn't work out the way they intended (perhaps ISIS grows more powerful than they anticipated) it won't be because they let ISIS sneak up on them while they twiddled their thumbs. It will be because they overestimated their ability to control the monster they created (think Dr. Frankenstein). Hubris has always historically been the undoing of the Jews, not stupidity. The danger is that they get too caught up in their planning and meddling and overextend themselves, not that they fail to plan at all.

I don't want to misrepresent what you've written here, so I'm going to ask you this for clarification purposes.

Do you believe Israel created ISIS?

[Farmageddon]

@TheWastelander

With Scorpion, he writes well, but if you actually cut into the meat of the substance of literally anything he writes about regarding foreign policy, it is: all roads lead to Jerusalem.

There is nothing wrong with criticizing Israeli foreign or domestic policy. You will not find someone who is more anti-settlement than I. We all know that a two state solution and sharing Jerusalem is the answer. But tracing literally anything that happens in the world back to the Jews simply reeks of a conspiracy theory, and is blatantly anti-semetic. It's a tired canard. It's sad to see someone with such an otherwise sharp mind succumb to such nonsense. But he's been writing about this stuff for years, go look through his post history and tell me that the Jews don't always pop up. Frankly, it's disturbing and based literally on nothing but conjecture and speculation. But what do I know, I'm brainwashed by the Jewish controlled press and my Zionist puppetmasters are blinding me from "the truth".

I'm pretty sure he is a Christian and Christianity has preached hatred of Jews for almost 2,000 years. Anti-semitism was an official doctrine of the Catholic church until 1968, so it's not surprising that he buys into at least some of the sinister nonsense. Hell, if I thought a group was complicit in the murder of my God, I would probably hate them too.

He routinely asks if people are 'paid' by Israel to post here:

Quote:

Do did you get paid to post this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Inte...ense_Force

Says there is little to no evidence for the Holocaust:

Quote:

You couldn't convict a man for a single murder based on this evidence, much less six million murders. No bodies. No murder weapons. No pictures. No orders. No official documents. Nothing.

Literally the MOST documented atrocity in all of human history yet he buys into the 'miracles' of Jesus and says they were 'witnessed by thousands'. So much for contemporary reports of them, oh, yeah, but the reports were, according to Scorpion, all destroyed or suppressed by other Jewish sects at the time. <<Yet another Jewish conspiracy. Sheesh.

[Sp5]

There are also conspiracy theories that ISIS is a US creation, see here a cartoon from the state-owned Egyptian newspaper Al Ahram:



It's pretty clear that ISIS is derived and descended from the Iraqi insurgency, though. Before "the Surge" and "the Awakening" in 2007, the "Islamic State of Iraq" controlled a lot of territory in the Sunni areas of Iraq. They got money from the Gulf Arabs and also some support from Iran, which wanted to make the US involvement in Iraq painful. The US military mobilized the Iraqi Sunni tribes against ISI, and turned some insurgents to the pro-government side as "Concerned Local Citizens" or "Sons of Iraq." Through this, the US was able to reduce ISI's control and kill a lot of them. There were some great successes in clearing and holding areas of Iraq during 2007-10. Unfortunately, when it came time for the USA to hand off paying the Sons of Iraq to the Iraqi government, the Maliki government dropped the ball and continued to politically marginalize the Sunni regions.

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the "Caliph" of ISIS, is an Iraqi. He assumed the leadership of ISI at the end of this time period.

The protests which were suppressed by the Iraq government in Ramadi at the end of 2013, with many protesters killed and senior Sunni political leadership jailed or exiled, discredited the Iraqi government again in the Sunni provinces. That, along with the power vacuum and weaponry provided by the Syrian civil war, helped to create this monster. ISIS rolled into Fallujah first, then Mosul, displacing the rotten Iraqi army easily.

[Sonsowey]

those saying that non interventionists are pussies, and that to defeat ISIS we have to just be even more brutal than them, and that brutality works against insurgency, I would ask "why?"

Why do we even need to go there? Throughout history empires have fallen by overextending themselves. America has been involved in Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq where we acconplished nothing but killing a lot of people, wasting money, killing our own soldiers, and fostering ill will towards America.

We should not be so eager to get into wars with every savage group in the world, we simply do not need it. It helps us none and will likely provoke MORE terrorism just as wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have. It is simply a dumb move.

Do we need to go defeat Al Shabab and Boko Haram? Do we need to go to war against Muslims in every armed conflict in the world? Wgere do you draw the line?

It seems like some people just want to go to war any time there is a conflict. This simply i not our fght. Look what China is doing about the ISIS problem: nothing. Japan? Nothing. Brazil? Nothing.

A perfect response. You see a hellhole of violece and chaos, you stay away from it rather than getting sucked into it.

[Dr. Howard]

^ The israeli position written by scorpion is a pretty diabolical strategy. Its like puppet dictatorship 2.0. When you can't invade another country, let a weaker opponent do that for you and make sure they are unequivocally evil. Once they expand to the desired size you can swoop in and 'save' everyone.

The only problem I see is that despite Putin's "autism" (worst propaganda ever) I don't think they will let this happen. The same way that they backed Syria, I think they will wag their finger with caution when Israel and its allies attempt to ride in and save the day.

[Farmageddon]

HOW ISIS WAS CREATED

1989 - Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, Jordanian founding father of Islamic State, arrives in Pakistan to join the mujahideen, just as the Soviet army quits Afghanistan.

1992 - Zarqawi returns to Jordan and is placed immediately under surveillance.

1999 - Zarqawi leaves Jordan for Pakistan to pick up where he left off several years before.

2000 - Zarqawi is in charge of a training camp in Herat, Afghanistan’s third-largest city, on the border with Iran, a camp that carried a sign that read “al-tawhid wal-Jihad” (Monotheism and Jihad) which would later become the name of his group in Iraq.

7 August 2003 - Operatives from tawhid wal-Jihad bomb the Jordanian embassy in Baghdad and assassinate Ayatollah Mohammed Baqir al-Hakim, leader of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq.

2003-2005 - The Zarqawists are still a minority in Iraq’s insurgency landscape.

January 2006 - Zarqawi announces the creation of the Mujahideen Advisory Council of Iraq.

7 June 2006 - Zarqawi is killed in a US air attack, and the advisory council appoints Abu Ayyub al-Masri, an Egyptian national who used another nom de guerre, Abu Hamza al-Muhajir.

October 2006 - Muhajir declares that his franchise is part of Iraq’s homegrown Islamic resistance movements, which he named the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI), to be led by Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, a native Iraqi.

April 2010 - Both Abu Omar al-Baghdadi and Muhajir are killed.

May 2010 - Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is appointed leader of ISI.

In August 2011 - during Ramadan, Baghdadi dispatches half a dozen of his lieutenants to establish a franchise in Syria, which was formed in December under Jabhat al-Nusra li ahl al-Sham (the Support Front for the People of Syria).

April 2013 - Baghdadi unilaterally declares a merger between Jabhat al-Nusra and ISI and calls it the Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS).

28 June 2014 - On Ramadan’s first day, Baghdadi abrogates ISIS and heralds the birth of Islamic State.

source:

Quote:

Hassan Hassan is an analyst at the Delma Institute, a research centre in Abu Dhabi. He is the co-author, along with Michael Weiss, of Isis: Inside the Army of Terror, which will be published in February in New York by Regan Arts.

[Sp5]

Israeli Army veteran fighting ISIS with YPF Kurdish militia:



Gill Rosenberg, IDF veteran fighting with Kurds

It's no secret that the Israelis have been assisting the Kurds in Iraq for years. Obviously a hedge against hostile initiatives from the Baghdad, Damascus, Tehran and Ankara governments. Makes perfect sense. A Kurdish guy in Erbil once told me, "I love Israelis, they kill those camel-fuckers."

[Candlejack]

(02-06-2015 08:48 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

Israeli Army veteran fighting ISIS with YPF Kurdish militia:



Gill Rosenberg, IDF veteran fighting with Kurds

It's no secret that the Israelis have been assisting the Kurds in Iraq for years. Obviously a hedge against hostile initiatives from the Baghdad, Damascus, Tehran and Ankara governments. Makes perfect sense. A Kurdish guy in Erbil once told me, "I love Israelis, they kill those camel-fuckers."

2/10. WNB

[scorpion]

I think it's laughable to call me an anti-semite when I'm apparently the only one here who gives the Israelis credit for developing an actual strategy, and not being so incredibly stupid as to whistle past the graveyard while a fanatical, bloodthirsty group of Muslim terrorists takes over their backyard. I respect what the Jews have accomplished, I simply don't treat them differently from any other group of people. They aren't immune from criticism just because they're Jews. That's the difference between me and most other people here, who are neck deep in Holocaust propaganda and thus unable to objectively analyze anything the Jews or Israel do (which, by the way, is the exact purpose behind Holocaust propaganda). As I said in my previous post, the reality is that the Israeli leadership is ruthless and extremely cunning. Is this more "anti-semitic" rhetoric from me? Or simply a statement of fact? Let's look at a list of Israel's most illustrious Prime Ministers:

David Ben-Gurion - IDF founder
Yitzhak Rabin - Career soldier, commando
Menachem Begin - Paramilitary leader
Yitzhak Shamir - Paramilitary leader & Mossad
Shimon Peres - Director-General of Defense
Ehud Barak - Career soldier, commando
Ariel Sharon - Famed military commander
Benjamin Netanyahu - Special Forces soldier

These are the type of men that Israelis put in charge. Contrast the backgrounds of these men with Obama the community organizer, Bill Clinton and Dick Cheney the draft dodgers or George Bush the reserve pilot to get a sense of how much more seriously the Israelis take their defense than the U.S. For the Israelis, foreign policy in the Middle East is literally an existential issue. It is their number one priority by a mile. They do not take it lightly. This is why it's so incredibly idiotic for people to come in here and spout off about how Israel has absolutely nothing to do with ISIS, when it's completely obvious that if that were true, the Israelis would be utterly freaking out about ISIS already. Nobody wants a rabid dog running around their neighborhood, unless they loosed the rabid dog themselves to antagonize their rivals. I have demonstrated repeatedly that this tactic fits in perfectly with Israel's grand strategy of weakening the surrounding Arab states. I give them credit for developing and deploying this strategy, others, it seems, want to treat the Jews as either idiots or saints: they must be too stupid to recognize that ISIS is a threat, or somehow morally above every other group of people on the planet, all of whom routinely engage in secret plans and plots to advantage themselves. The reality is simply that the Israelis are masters of realpolitik, intelligence gathering and special operations. Those are the major reasons that Israel still exists as a Jewish state in the face of a sea of hostile Muslims. It's a really strange thing when simply recognizing these objective facts gets one labeled anti-Semitic.

And I have no idea who Farmageddon is, but apparently he is another one of my forum stalkers who likes to comb through my posts for reasons to take offense. I've noticed this only happens when I post anything remotely critical of Jews or Israel. Coincidence, I'm sure.

As for the origins of ISIS: no, I don't believe ISIS was directly "created" by Israel, any more than the mujahadeen was "created" by the CIA. In both cases I think that existing movements were provided financing and training that enabled them to achieve success they otherwise would have not.

[Aliblahba]

(02-06-2015 09:08 AM)Candlejack Wrote:  

(02-06-2015 08:48 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

Israeli Army veteran fighting ISIS with YPF Kurdish militia:



Gill Rosenberg, IDF veteran fighting with Kurds

It's no secret that the Israelis have been assisting the Kurds in Iraq for years. Obviously a hedge against hostile initiatives from the Baghdad, Damascus, Tehran and Ankara governments. Makes perfect sense. A Kurdish guy in Erbil once told me, "I love Israelis, they kill those camel-fuckers."

2/10. WNB

Don't be scared. Any chick that can handle an AK= 8/10 WB.

[TheWastelander]

(02-06-2015 05:57 AM)Farmageddon Wrote:  

@TheWastelander

With Scorpion, he writes well, but if you actually cut into the meat of the substance of literally anything he writes about regarding foreign policy, it is: all roads lead to Jerusalem.

There is nothing wrong with criticizing Israeli foreign or domestic policy. You will not find someone who is more anti-settlement than I. We all know that a two state solution and sharing Jerusalem is the answer. But tracing literally anything that happens in the world back to the Jews simply reeks of a conspiracy theory, and is blatantly anti-semetic. It's a tired canard. It's sad to see someone with such an otherwise sharp mind succumb to such nonsense. But he's been writing about this stuff for years, go look through his post history and tell me that the Jews don't always pop up. Frankly, it's disturbing and based literally on nothing but conjecture and speculation. But what do I know, I'm brainwashed by the Jewish controlled press and my Zionist puppetmasters are blinding me from "the truth".

I'm pretty sure he is a Christian and Christianity has preached hatred of Jews for almost 2,000 years. Anti-semitism was an official doctrine of the Catholic church until 1968, so it's not surprising that he buys into at least some of the sinister nonsense. Hell, if I thought a group was complicit in the murder of my God, I would probably hate them too.

He routinely asks if people are 'paid' by Israel to post here:

Quote:

Do did you get paid to post this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Inte...ense_Force

Says there is little to no evidence for the Holocaust:

Quote:

You couldn't convict a man for a single murder based on this evidence, much less six million murders. No bodies. No murder weapons. No pictures. No orders. No official documents. Nothing.

Literally the MOST documented atrocity in all of human history yet he buys into the 'miracles' of Jesus and says they were 'witnessed by thousands'. So much for contemporary reports of them, oh, yeah, but the reports were, according to Scorpion, all destroyed or suppressed by other Jewish sects at the time. <<Yet another Jewish conspiracy. Sheesh.

I'm a Christian too and I'm not anti-semitic. I also don't support Israel. I do, however, think it's kind of strange that there's a contingent of posters on this forum who seem obsessed with the Jews, Israel, and have a fascination with Hitler. I don't think it's a coincidence either, but it is what it is.

I learned a long time ago that I don't have to agree with everyone all the time about everything. There are far left users who post great stuff and far right ones that do too. You just kind of start anticipating what they're going to say on various issues and ignore it because convincing a person who embraces extreme politics to change their mind about something just isn't going to happen.

[TheWastelander]

(02-06-2015 10:29 AM)Aliblahba Wrote:  

Don't be scared. Any chick that can handle an AK= 8/10 WB.

Orly?

Would you bang this one?



How about this one?



This one?



This'un?



Really?



Even this one?