Blimey, that's screwed the formatting
Just to keep things simmering, 3 US servicemen have been killed and 'dozens' injured by a drone strike in Jordan. Biden specifically called out Iran-backed militia. That's another fine line he needs to be treading in an election year.
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/01/28/politics/us-troops-drone-attack-jordan
That’s another fine line he needs to be treading in an election year.<br /><br />
Perhaps if he reined in Netanyahu then Iran/houthis wouldn’t have an excuse, call their bluff and put a stop to the indiscriminate bombing and executions in Gaza then see what happens, if the drone and missile attacks continue then it’s fair game for strikes.
I'm a year older than when I started scrolling down that post.😁
Right, yeah. Immense pressure on Biden to retaliate. Trump will be making vast capital out of these deaths.
I am starting to get a bit of an end of days vibe. Just like everyone else though, bugger all I can do so, just have to hope for the best.
Perhaps if he reined in Netanyahu
That is never going to happen, whether Biden wants to or not. Benji is clinging on to power for dear life in Israel and as soon as things cool off he is done for. He's going to see this out as long as he can.
dakuan
Free Member
yeah sorry i started editing it but tooooooo much.
And lo, as twas foretold, a super long post on an obscure biking forum would foreshadow the coming of the four horseman of the apocalypse.
Perhaps if he reined in Netanyahu then Iran/houthis wouldn’t have an excuse, call their bluff and put a stop to the indiscriminate bombing and executions in Gaza then see what happens, if the drone and missile attacks continue then it’s fair game for strikes.
It's the only way to start to unpick this mess. Israel has gone so far into war crime territory, the Houthis and everyone else are justifying random attacks in support of the Palestinians. Taking away the Israeli abuse of the Palestinians takes away the justification to escalate things, and we know where we truly are in terms of whether a Western retaliation serves any actual purpose.
I doubt it will happen, feels like we are spiralling to a major international conflict across the Middle East.
Iran Vs USA?
https://news.sky.com/story/three-us-troops-killed-and-25-injured-in-drone-attack-in-jordan-13058827
According to the link:
"a spokesman for Jordan's government, however, said the attack did not happen on their soil and insisted it was in Syria".
And:
"While US officials are still working to identify the precise group responsible for the attack"
But it was definitely Iran attacking the United States in Jordan. Apparently.
Edit: Btw the claim that Iran controls and directs the armed groups which it supplies is a simplistic exaggeration which serves the United States and its allies very well. Of course they say that, and of course it plays well with public opinion.
In reality Iran is probably no more likely to be able to control them than the United States is able to "control" Israel.
Dependency obviously provides powerful leverage but it should not be interpreted as an ability to dictate how recipients behave.
Iran knows that if it bungs money, arms, and training, to armed groups whose aims it broadly supports they can just get on with it without involving Tehran.
Iran knows that if it bungs money, arms, and training, to armed groups whose aims it broadly supports they can just get on with it without involving Tehran.
Are they not the same thing? it sounds like obfuscation to me.
Same with Hothi/Yemen?
Are they not the same thing?
As directly controlling them?
No, I wouldn't have thought so. Do think that the United States directly controls Israel and everything it does because they bung Israel money and arms? Although they do obviously have a lot of influence over them.
this denies history, agency and the organic reasons the groups came into existence, including shared religion and shared opposition to the US’s presence. The relationship, they argue, is more symbiotic than controlling. They are no more puppets than Israel is a puppet of the US, and make their own judgments as to how to proceed, they say.
Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, the largest of these groups, argued in a recent speech that Iran itself insisted that indigenous organisations needed to be able to manufacture their own military capability, and to network between themselves organically, and not to depend on a hierarchical Iran-proxy formula.
Dr Amal Saad, a lecturer in politics at Cardiff University, says: “What’s unparalleled about the resistance axis’s participation in this war is that it’s the first time a transnational alliance of non-state or hybrid actors have formed a military coalition against another state and its allies, as Hezbollah, Ansar Allah [in Yemen] and the Popular Mobilisation Units [in Iraq] have done.”
Despite the confluence of ideology, it is argued, each member of the axis also operates within its own national context.
Iran knows that if it gives these groups funding/weapons that the resources will be used against US troops and interests in the region, in exactly the same way that when the US gives funding/resources to the Israeli government that it will be used against the Palestinians and Iranian interests in the region.
Neither side has the moral high ground in this one, it's a complete bloody mess.
A lot of Western funding of Israel helps develop Israels enormous weapons manufacturing industry of course. Weapons that are then used to murder and oppress people all round the world:<br /><br /> https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/11/17/israels-weapons-industry-is-the-gaza-war-its-latest-test-lab <br /><br />
And of course, people tend not to want to buy something they haven't seen demonstrated first. Hence billions of Western 'aid' pouring into Ukraine right now. And someone somewhere is probably very happy that the missiles used to shoot down Houthi weapons cost $1 million each. Our pension and investment funds kind of depend on the perpetuation of war. Whilst there is profit in war, there can never be peace.
And of course, people tend not to want to buy something they haven’t seen demonstrated first...snip
snip...Whilst there is profit in war, there can never be peace.
Absolutely. The problem with a war is that it tends to show the cracks in the supply chain, which Russia is discovering in the case of exporting weapons to India, for example. India has been waiting 12 months for some parts and is now moving toward the "west".
India is keeping Russia onside because there is the danger of allying them more with China, which India really doesn't want. India plans to achieve this by buying Russian oil and will need their weapon spares for a couple of decades yet https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-pivots-away-russian-arms-will-retain-strong-ties-2024-01-28/
It gets quite complicated and murky, when you see the overlaps:
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/india-israel-arms-trade-numbers
So Israel supplies India, India buys oil and weapons from Russia, Russia supplies ****stan with weapons, the USA supplies India with weapons, etc etc. Let's not forget that the USA and UK were supplying both sides in the Iran/Iraq war, and if we go even further back, US companies were supplying the Nazis with weapons and tech.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/mar/29/humanities.highereducation
Genocide is a very lucrative business.
Genocide is a very lucrative business.
And if we didnt have the US out meddling in these countries, its unlikely there would be so many 'terrorist' groups out there trying to combat them. The epitome of a vicious circle.
Weapons that are then used to murder and oppress people all round the world.
Iran is fully awake to "test labs" and the marketplace as well. Many explosive devices used to destroy "western" vehicles in Iraq and Afghanistan, killing and maiming their occupants used Iranian knowledge.
The rockets used around the middle-east by groups such as Houthi and Hamas militias also have a strong Iranian input.
While it's believed that Iran is six months off production, "International Atomic Energy Agency chief Rafael Grossi, (who) warned that Tehran has amassed enough material for “several nuclear weapons.”" https://edition.cnn.com/2023/01/25/middleeast/iran-nuclear-weapons-iaea-chief-intl/index.html
This can partially be blamed on ex-President Trump who withdrew from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in 2018 and Iran then stepped production up
Let’s not forget that the USA and UK were supplying both sides in the Iran/Iraq war
I don't think the UK were selling arms to Iran (either openly or clandestinely) during the war, but certainly supplied Iraq with chemical weapons, and most of the covert sales in the Iran-Contra affair were made through Israel Ironically.
Actually, I think I'm wrong. Did the UK supply tanks/tank parts to Iran?
but certainly supplied Iraq with chemical weapons,
Really?
Do you have a source?
I cannot believe this to be true!
Iran is fully awake to “test labs” and the marketplace as well. Many explosive devices used to destroy “western” vehicles in Iraq and Afghanistan, killing and maiming their occupants used Iranian knowledge.
The rockets used around the middle-east by groups such as Houthi and Hamas militias also have a strong Iranian input.
While it’s believed that Iran is six months off production, “International Atomic Energy Agency chief Rafael Grossi, (who) warned that Tehran has amassed enough material for “several nuclear weapons.”” https://edition.cnn.com/2023/01/25/middleeast/iran-nuclear-weapons-iaea-chief-intl/index.html
/a>This can partially be blamed on ex-President Trump who withdrew from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in 2018 and Iran then stepped production up
Iran is a tiny player by comparison to other nations. So why focus on them? In this chart, those peace loving nations Canada and Switzerland are above them in terms of global arms exports:
https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/arms_exports/
And if we didnt have the US out meddling in these countries, its unlikely there would be so many ‘terrorist’ groups out there trying to combat them. The epitome of a vicious circle.
Exactly.
Do you have a source?
Yeah, its all in the Scott report. We (the UK a company called Uhde) built a chlorine plant in Iraq I think through a German (if memory serves) subsidiary in 1985 despite knowing - or at lest strongly suspecting, that it was going to be making mustard gas.
So why focus on them?
For balance. Israel isn't the only middle-eastern country developing weapons at the expense of real people, which was the focus of the story that you linked to.
For balance
Really? So you'll be happy to talk about Israel's 'non existent' nuclear weapons then, wont you?
https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/the-us-discovery-israels-secret-nuclear-project
https://armscontrolcenter.org/fact-sheet-israels-nuclear-arsenal/
For balance, of course.
no we took £350m off them and then never gave them anything -we had to give it back 2 (maybe 3) years ago for hostage swapping.
Do you have a source?
I cannot believe this to be true!
A quick google brings up this:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/mar/06/uk.iraq
Yeah, its all in the Scott report. We (the UK a company called Uhde) built a chlorine plant in Iraq I think through a German (if memory serves) subsidiary in 1985 despite knowing – or at lest strongly suspecting, that it was going to be making mustard gas.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/mar/06/uk.iraq/blockquote >That's all very confusing as Uhde are clearly a German company founded 100 years ago.
Why was the UK government involved at all?
From the posted link :
A chemical plant which the US says is a key component in Iraq's chemical warfare arsenal was secretly built by Britain in 1985 behind the backs of the Americans, the Guardian can disclose.
To be fair and to give context Iraq in 1985 under Saddam Hussein had been given "most favoured nation" by the United States.
Saddam Hussein at that time was killing all the right people with chemical weapons - Iranians and Kurds, and he wasn't yet considered a possible threat to Western oil supplies, plus he was publicly executing communists.
He was considered an all-round good guy by the United States and the UK so helping him to manufacture weapons of mass destruction seemed like a great idea.
The United States and the UK might be screwing things up in the Middle East right now but they have been doing it for decades - which is why they are such dab hands at it.
Great wealth and power invariably breeds greed, and greed always provides the opportunity for specularly stupid mistakes.
Btw I have no idea why the link says "behind the backs of the Americans".
"The U.S. knew Hussein was launching some of the worst chemical attacks in history -- and still gave him a hand."
One of the reasons that the United States was certain that Saddam Hussein head chemical weapons was because they still had their own copies of the invoices.
Really? So you’ll be happy to talk about Israel’s ‘non existent’ nuclear weapons then, wont you?
I'm not sure what we can talk about, both sides deny their possession. Rumour has it that Israel has nukes and rumour has it that Iran will have them in six months.
I can't see the point of having a deterrent and not advertising it, surely that misses the point of a deterrent?
I can see the point of being close to having a deterrent and not advertising it to avoid a re-run of the 2021 Natanz site explosion, including removing 27 IAEA cameras https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-61719196
I can’t see the point of having a deterrent and not advertising it, surely that misses the point of a deterrent?
Which is why Israel's undeniable possession of nuclear weapons, despite its unique policy of nuclear ambiguity, proves that Israel is not interested the deterrent aspect of nuclear weapons to guarantee no nuclear strike against it, but instead sees them as weapons of a last resort.
In others words unlike every other country in the world which possess nuclear weapons Israel's "Samson Option" strategy is not to guarantee "mutually assured destruction" but simply to provide them with very powerful weapons should they ever need them.
Israel does not treat nuclear as any different to conventional weapons, just very powerful weapons that it would not necessarily use straight away.
An extraordinarily dangerous and morally repugnant philosophy although luckily fairly unique. Israel should be treated as an international pariah, it certainly qualifies.
Or maybe it's that by openly stating they have nuclear weapons means an instant $2 billion drop in military funding from the US. I'd say politically expedient over morally repugnant.
I’m not sure what we can talk about, both sides deny their possession. Rumour has it that Israel has nukes and rumour has it that Iran will have them in six months.
Hardly 'rumours'; Israel's nuclear weapons have been known about for decades. And the 'Iran could have nukes within six months' thing is a line I remember being trotted out during the first Gulf War in 1991. There's a reason the US hasn't invaded Iran. Same reason it can't invade North Korea, China, Russia or ****stan.
The difference between Israel and Iran, is that Iran has actually allowed international inspectors in to examine its nuclear program. Israel's constant denial of possessing such weapons has meant it has gone unchecked.
Or maybe it’s that by openly stating they have nuclear weapons means an instant $2 billion drop in military funding from the US. I’d say politically expedient over morally repugnant.
TheUSA already know about Israel's nukes. I've linked two articles explaining it above.
Over twenty six thousand deaths in Gaza now. Over a third of them, children. Yes; 'politically expedient'.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-and-us-step-up-action-to-tackle-domestic-threat-from-iran
features this thing thta looks more like a YT thumbnail than a serious government thing
Which is why Israel’s undeniable possession of nuclear weapons, despite its unique policy of nuclear ambiguity, proves that Israel is not interested the deterrent aspect of nuclear weapons to guarantee no nuclear strike against it, but instead sees them as weapons of a last resort.
Every nation with nuclear weapon capability has tested their nukes, except Israel. Is it a weapon of last resort because they don't know if they'll actually work?
Israel does not treat nuclear as any different to conventional weapons...snip
FWIW I believe that Israel was heavily assisted by France in the 1950s and has been able to assemble a nuke since the 1967 Six-Day war. If that's correct, Israel has been invaded in 1967 and 1973 as well as having several conflicts with Hezbollah and Hamas, including two Lebanon wars, and has never used their nukes. I think that compares at least as well as other nuclear nations in the face of such provocation.
Your argument would suggest that US conventional weapon support is necessary to keep Israel's nuclear genie in its bottle
TheUSA already know about Israel’s nukes. I’ve linked two articles explaining it above.
I haven't read the articles, but I believe that they've known since the early 1960s. Henry Kissinger used the argument that unassembled components aren't a weapon and didn't cause a political problem
Over twenty six thousand deaths in Gaza now. Over a third of them, children. Yes; ‘politically expedient’.
That's not got a great deal to do with their policy of ambiguity re: nuclear weapons though, unless you're suggesting being 'politically expendient' means they have an extra $2 billion to spend on Gaza-bound conventional bombs and sniper rounds.
Whilst I have no enthusiasm for what's going on in Gaza - and I'm aware I'm probably sailing close to the Israel/Palestine discussion ban I remember being introduced after the original thread went wrong - I do wonder what those who so vociferously denounce Israel's actions would suggest as a solution to a neighbour absolutely hell-bent on eradicating every last Jew on earth.
Henry Kissinger used the argument that unassembled components aren’t a weapon and didn’t cause a political problem.
Nuclear latency. There's a fair old list of countries with the material, know-how, manufacturing capability and strategic incentive to develop nukes quickly if they wanted to.
Don’t forget Trump, the worlds most useful idiot will be in the Whitehouse this time next year – if anyone is going to help facilitate whoever wants to start WW3 it will be him
Trump is a massive egomaniac, but he never started any wars, if anything he was keen to keep peace with Russia, China and even North Korea.
Biden is just a husk of a man, he doesn't fill me with confidence.
Trump is a massive egomaniac, but he never started any wars
I don't know if you recall his extrajudicial killing of General Soleimani, but I seem to remember the only things keeping that from escalating into something more were Iran reigning in a bit after shooting down their own passenger jet, and Covid. And his actions re: Russia and Ukraine more likely than not fluffed Putin enough to think he was onto a winner when he annexed Crimea.
hell-bent on eradicating every last Jew on earth.
Have you actually ever met a Muslim or an Arab? Or do you base that comment on what you read in the Daily Mail, Daily Express, Daily Whatever?
Israel was not invaded in 1967 and 1973 as you falsely claim. Israel attacked her neighbours and captured land from them. Six years later those neighbours attempted regain their territory.
It didn't just happen in a vacuum though, did it?
What's it called when you label anyone that doesn't hold a 100% negative view of Israel an "apologist" whilst always presenting your opinions with a 100% bias against Israel?
