USA-Israel vs Iran. A deadlock

We see in many very credible sources that there is mobility in respect with Iran. The Israeli officials refer to the influence of Iran in Syria (and IRAQ) as "existential" threat. We see an ongoing project to influence the public opinion in the USA.
We know that the main victims of the brutality of ISIS were the Shia Muslims. Fighters of the Islamic Guard and the Hezbollah protected the Shia populations. So, we can argue that Iran was not provocative in the issue of Syria, but defensive. So, why Israel and USA consider Iran as a terrorist country?
The reason is that Iran is a democracy (more democracy that the other Islamic states in the region) and moreover a developing state with a great population (85 million plus about 10 million Shia in Iraq). That means they can develop technology (they have many universities).
Israel knows that no group (namely Hezbollah) can threaten its security if it is not being backed by a developed state. So, Israel is pressuring the USA for a preemptive attack against Iran. On the other hand, Iran knows that has not the ability to defend against an air strike of Israel+USA and the only way not to been humiliated in such case is via Hezbollah.
Here, we have a deadlock.
Another problem for Israel is that the public opinion in the USA is against any intervention in the Middle East. Moreover, you cannot have any effect in a State of 85 million population with a simple air strike. You need more massive intervention

bill3338 said:

We see in many very credible sources that there is mobility in respect with Iran. The Israeli officials refer to the influence of Iran in Syria (and IRAQ) as "existential" threat. We see an ongoing project to influence the public opinion in the USA.
We know that the main victims of the brutality of ISIS were the Shia Muslims. Fighters of the Islamic Guard and the Hezbollah protected the Shia populations. So, we can argue that Iran was not provocative in the issue of Syria, but defensive. So, why Israel and USA consider Iran as a terrorist country?
The reason is that Iran is a democracy (more democracy that the other Islamic states in the region) and moreover a developing state with a great population (85 million plus about 10 million Shia in Iraq). That means they can develop technology (they have many universities).
Israel knows that no group (namely Hezbollah) can threaten its security if it is not being backed by a developed state. So, Israel is pressuring the USA for a preemptive attack against Iran. On the other hand, Iran knows that has not the ability to defend against an air strike of Israel+USA and the only way not to been humiliated in such case is via Hezbollah.
Here, we have a deadlock.
Another problem for Israel is that the public opinion in the USA is against any intervention in the Middle East. Moreover, you cannot have any effect in a State of 85 million population with a simple air strike. You need more massive intervention

Click to expand...

For a first post that's a long post.

what do you mean?

bill3338 said:

We see in many very credible sources that there is mobility in respect with Iran. The Israeli officials refer to the influence of Iran in Syria (and IRAQ) as "existential" threat. We see an ongoing project to influence the public opinion in the USA.
We know that the main victims of the brutality of ISIS were the Shia Muslims. Fighters of the Islamic Guard and the Hezbollah protected the Shia populations. So, we can argue that Iran was not provocative in the issue of Syria, but defensive. So, why Israel and USA consider Iran as a terrorist country?
The reason is that Iran is a democracy (more democracy that the other Islamic states in the region) and moreover a developing state with a great population (85 million plus about 10 million Shia in Iraq). That means they can develop technology (they have many universities).
Israel knows that no group (namely Hezbollah) can threaten its security if it is not being backed by a developed state. So, Israel is pressuring the USA for a preemptive attack against Iran. On the other hand, Iran knows that has not the ability to defend against an air strike of Israel+USA and the only way not to been humiliated in such case is via Hezbollah.
Here, we have a deadlock.
Another problem for Israel is that the public opinion in the USA is against any intervention in the Middle East. Moreover, you cannot have any effect in a State of 85 million population with a simple air strike. You need more massive intervention

Click to expand...

Overall, the USA/Israel want to eliminate Iran to consolidate Israel as the pre-eminent power in the MidEast. It would also interfere with China's energy supplies. Not least, it consolidates USA worldwide energy control, one of those things like the "hand that rocks the cradle," don't ya' know? Perhaps it is the security blanket for the USDollar/FiatCurrnecy? The MSM creates Iran as an enemy for MIC/WarHawk propaganda. The reality may be quite different. The USA/Saudis/Qatar support the Sunnis/alQeda/ISIS and arm and finance them but get an entirely different story in the MSM. You'd ger the impression that we were trying to kill them untill they talk about supporting Jabhat al Nusra/al Qeda. Great allies of ISIS, don't ya' know? Moderate "rebels" , more Sunnis. When it comes to business, any war is a good war. Profits from both sides. Peace is anathema to War Parties.
/

Re: USA-Israel vs Iran. A deadlock
→ bill3338, et al,

Interesting commentary.

bill3338 said:

We see in many very credible sources that there is mobility in respect with Iran. The Israeli officials refer to the influence of Iran in Syria (and IRAQ) as "existential" threat. We see an ongoing project to influence the public opinion in the USA.

Click to expand...

(COMMENT)

Well, the influence of the Iranians in Iraq and Syria is NOT direct threat to the existence and survival to the Jewish State of Israel. There is a threat connection, but not one that is existential.

bill3338 said:

We know that the main victims of the brutality of ISIS were the Shia Muslims. Fighters of the Islamic Guard and the Hezbollah protected the Shia populations. So, we can argue that Iran was not provocative in the issue of Syria, but defensive. So, why Israel and USA consider Iran as a terrorist country?

Click to expand...

(COMMENT)

Reference:


Let's clean-up the language here. Neither Iran or Syria (Assad Government) are a "terrorist country." In the counterintelligence world, that is what is called "bad notation." They are have been designated "State Sponsors of Terrorism" having been found to have, in their past history of criminal behaviors, repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism. While it sounds similar, there is a difference: See Technical assistance for implementing the international conventions and protocols related to counter-terrorism (A/RES/70/177).

Within the subset of Israel and the US, Syria and Iran provide material support.

bill3338 said:

The reason is that Iran is a democracy (more democracy that the other Islamic states in the region) and moreover a developing state with a great population (85 million plus about 10 million Shia in Iraq). That means they can develop technology (they have many universities).

Click to expand...

(COMMENT)

Iran is NOT a democracy by any stretch of imagination. Iran is a theocracy (a government by a religious leader and under by religious law). Make no mistake... Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has the final say in terms of political policy and military influence.

Iran ranks 69th in the 2016 Human Development Report, published by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP); where as Israel ranks 19th. This places Israel well above every member nation of the Arab League, and every nation between the Mediterranean Sea and the Persian Gulf.

bill3338 said:

Israel knows that no group (namely Hezbollah) can threaten its security if it is not being backed by a developed state. So, Israel is pressuring the USA for a preemptive attack against Iran. On the other hand, Iran knows that has not the ability to defend against an air strike of Israel+USA and the only way not to been humiliated in such case is via Hezbollah.

Click to expand...

(COMMENT)

In this statement, you make a direct connection between Hezbollah (the de facto government in the al-Bekkaa Valley) and Iran.

bill3338 said:

Here, we have a deadlock.
Another problem for Israel is that the public opinion in the USA is against any intervention in the Middle East. Moreover, you cannot have any effect in a State of 85 million population with a simple air strike. You need more massive intervention

Click to expand...

(COMMENT)

Military intervention is the last thing any reasonable persons wants. It is the solution of "last resort."

Most Respectfully,
R

Iran has become an implacable enemy of the West and freedom. They sponsor Hezbollah and Assad. They are trying to develop nuclear weapons in order to cow and ultimately destroy Israel. While the people that believe that they are accomplishing something with "diplomacy," i.e. going to receptions with other elites, getting along with and getting sick drunk with them, they are not. Diplomacy only works among countries that genuinely want to be at peace, i.e. the U.S. and Canada. Iran is waging a tribal battle that started eons ago and will never end.

JBG said:

Iran has become an implacable enemy of the West and freedom. They sponsor Hezbollah and Assad. They are trying to develop nuclear weapons in order to cow and ultimately destroy Israel. While the people that believe that they are accomplishing something with "diplomacy," i.e. going to receptions with other elites, getting along with and getting sick drunk with them, they are not. Diplomacy only works among countries that genuinely want to be at peace, i.e. the U.S. and Canada. Iran is waging a tribal battle that started eons ago and will never end.

Click to expand...

Someone could say that Iran supports Hezbollah as the ONLY feasible defensive solution in a preemptive air strike of Israel-USA. The question is: Let's see the security problem of Iran from their perspective: What other solution do they have beyond Hezbollah?
The aim of foreign policy must be COLLECTIVE security.
As George F. Kennan and other theorists have taught us, the system of governance must NOT define the international relations. I referred to the system of governance of the Iran only to highlight the technological potential of Iran.

We all have seen videos of Sunni fighters to apply colossal brutality on Shia citizens. I think that when someone threatens to cut your head, you will defend yourself. I have not seen any tribal battle from Iran, but a defensive one.

bill3338 said:

Someone could say that Iran supports Hezbollah as the ONLY feasible defensive solution in a preemptive air strike of Israel-USA. The question is: Let's see the security problem of Iran from their perspective: What other solution do they have beyond Hezbollah?
The aim of foreign policy must be COLLECTIVE security.
As George F. Kennan and other theorists have taught us, the system of governance must NOT define the international relations. I referred to the system of governance of the Iran only to highlight the technological potential of Iran.

We all have seen videos of Sunni fighters to apply colossal brutality on Shia citizens. I think that when someone threatens to cut your head, you will defend yourself. I have not seen any tribal battle from Iran, but a defensive one.

Click to expand...

Not really, Iran uses Hezbollah to spread its Shiite terrorism throughout the region and engage in proxy wars, not only against Israel and the civilized world but also against those Syrians who oppose al-Assad, the Iranian puppet dictator.
The Iranian Islamist regime is a backwards regime with global aspirations to promote its evil everywhere; Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen and others.

bill3338 said:

Someone could say that Iran supports Hezbollah as the ONLY feasible defensive solution in a preemptive air strike of Israel-USA. The question is: Let's see the security problem of Iran from their perspective: What other solution do they have beyond Hezbollah?

Click to expand...

Maybe to stop stirring the pot and adopting a live and let live attitude towards other countries?

Re: USA-Israel vs Iran. A deadlock
→ JBG, bill3338, et al,

Some of this is reasonable. But...

bill3338 said:

Someone could say that Iran supports Hezbollah as the ONLY feasible defensive solution in a preemptive air strike of Israel-USA. The question is: Let's see the security problem of Iran from their perspective: What other solution do they have beyond Hezbollah?

Click to expand...

[COMMENT]

Iran does not have a security problem. It is the Regional Security Problem.

bill3338 said:

The aim of foreign policy must be COLLECTIVE security.

Click to expand...

[COMMENT]

There is no mandate set for "foreign Policy" at all. Foreign Policy is what the White House says it is.

US Foreign Policy is most often altered to fit the imperative-of-the-day. While the Congress has often abdicated the determination to "Declare War," it does issue, from time to time, an Authorization for Use of Military Force, leaving the actual decision up to the White House.

Collective Defense is a tricky subject. And such developments are usually discretionary in nature and very often adopted as a matter of political convenience. The primary cause for US Military Intervention has been and still commerce and trade.

bill3338 said:

As George F. Kennan and other theorists have taught us, the system of governance must NOT define the international relations. I referred to the system of governance of the Iran only to highlight the technological potential of Iran.

Click to expand...

[COMMENT]

With an exception or two, nearly ALL countries have the very same technological potential. What they choose to do with it is an entirely something different. Israel has several times the number of Nobel Prizes as does the entire Arab League. By the same token, Israel ranks higher on the UN Human Development Index that any nation in the Arab League.

bill3338 said:

We all have seen videos of Sunni fighters to apply colossal brutality on Shia citizens. I think that when someone threatens to cut your head, you will defend yourself. I have not seen any tribal battle from Iran, but a defensive one.

Click to expand...

[COMMENT]

The religious end-fighting between Sunni-Shia components of Islam, ultimately makes no positive contribution to humanity.

JBG said:

Maybe to stop stirring the pot and adopting a live and let live attitude towards other countries?

Click to expand...

[COMMENT]

This is a "non-interventionist" policy. It is a high moral ground vantage-point; but quick to dissipate in reality. This is especially true when you look at American as a world leader, and a member of the collective defense agreements with various nations. REMEMBER: The Law of Unintended (not necessarily unanticipated) consequences; as exemplified by the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances was co-signed by the US, Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Belarus and the UK. Russia annexed Crimea over Ukraine's vigorous protest. The entire world saw how much that collective defense agreement mattered.

QUICK REPLY
Most Respectfully,
R

I am from Greece. My first contact with the theory on the topic of International Relations was via the study of everything has been written by George F. Kennan. The brother of my grandfather was an infantry officer (and a pilot too) who when was in the Middle East he was chosen by OSS for one of the 1st missions (and very dangerous) of this agency. The mission was in the occupied Greece, and the aim was the monitoring fo the most important harbor of Greece (which was occupied by the Nazis). When I was a student at the University, I was a member of the pro-West (and pro-USA) Party of Greece (now I am apolitical). I refer to all these because I see that the USA is in a McCarthyism phase and when someone criticizes the USA policy, he is suspect as a troll of Russia agencies.
In next posts, I will try to present the perspective of a European citizen in respect the USA policy in the Middle East. The issue of Iran is very critical. It is obvious that USA foreign policy in the Middle East is a complete failure. Which are the roots of the failure? What are the danger for the USA in respect of the evolution of the Middle East crisis?

Re: USA-Israel vs Iran. A deadlock
※→ bill3338, et al,

You have to be very careful of placing any value (other than an historical picture) on anything from Ambassador George Kennan. Not because he was an anti-Nuclear proponent, but because he failed to understand the reality behind the relations of the US 'vs' Soviet Union. His ideas and theories are as out of date today, as they were when he was a Senior Foreign Service Officer (FSO).

bill3338 said:

I am from Greece. My first contact with the theory on the topic of International Relations was via the study of everything has been written by George F. Kennan. The brother of my grandfather was an infantry officer (and a pilot too) who when was in the Middle East he was chosen by OSS for one of the 1st missions (and very dangerous) of this agency. The mission was in the occupied Greece, and the aim was the monitoring fo the most important harbor of Greece (which was occupied by the Nazis). When I was a student at the University, I was a member of the pro-West (and pro-USA) Party of Greece (now I am apolitical). I refer to all these because I see that the USA is in a McCarthyism phase and when someone criticizes the USA policy, he is suspect as a troll of Russia agencies.
In next posts, I will try to present the perspective of a European citizen in respect the USA policy in the Middle East. The issue of Iran is very critical. It is obvious that USA foreign policy in the Middle East is a complete failure. Which are the roots of the failure? What are the danger for the USA in respect of the evolution of the Middle East crisis?

Click to expand...

(COMMENT)

You have to remember, that men like Ambassador Kennan developed their career in the formative years of World Ward II (WWII). He walked in the shadow of such me as the General of the Armies George C Marshall, and the Supreme Allied Commander (later President) Dwight Eisenhower; both of who made lasting impressions and heavily influenced the people in the Senior ranks of the military and foreign service. During WWII, the US was an essential element in the organization of the Principle Allied Powers; in both the European Theater and the Pacific Theater. The US emerged WWII as a very influential power (euphemistically) nicknamed a Super Power. (After a while, the US began to believe we were a "Super Power." I guess that depends on how you define "Super Power.) Every once in a great while, a man comes along which just emanates an aura of genius. They say that Albert Einstein had this, as well as Neils Bohr; but surely George C Marshall had it. The universe seems to allow a people and cultures to have at hand just so many of these men. The US seems to have used its allotment during WWII. Since that time, the US has not had an unconditional military or political victory. Ambassador Keenan was a prominent advocate opposing Nuclear Weapons. If the US had given-up its Nuclear Weapons at the end of WWII, you have to ask yourself: Would the US been known as a Super Power? (I think not. --- Just one-man's opinion.)

Relative to the question of US Middle East Policy → with the exception of the US - Israeli relationship, there is really no coherent US Middle East Policy. America's policy is to act in its own best interest at the point in time when a decision is to be made.

Yes, as your Grandfather can tell you, the US Government virtually abandoned the F-1 and X-2 Units of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) in Europe. MG "Wild" Bill Donovan (US Army) was moved to the State Department and the OSS was dissolved. The Central Intelligence Group was merely a collator of information (no real field elements of its own). It took a considerable amount of time to rebuild resources necessary to conduct foreign intelligence services.

Relative to Iran (GCC - Persian Gulf Region) and 21st Century relations, the US is trying to salvage as much of the intent behind the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) as they can with what little leverage the US has. Between the Mediterranean Sea and the Strait of Hormuz, the Big Secret is that US Foreign Policy is handled via Crisis Management techniques.

Most Respectfully,
R

I will make an attempt to present the aspect of IRAN. Let see some facts:
1) In the decade IRAN was the victim of an attack with weapons of mass destruction produced in West.
2) The most credible specialist of the West security system, the military leader of NATO General Wesley. Clark revealed a secret project to invade IRAN. (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TY2DKzastu8 ). Be careful, what Clark admits in the video is undeniable. The only person who could deny the content of the video is Paul Wolfowitz who didn't venture to deny Clark. Everything said by Clark is the truth,
3) In the framework of the project of the seven war (which was revealed by Clark), USA invaded in IRAQ depending on complete lies. Everyone in the world knew that Sadam Husein was an enemy of the Al-Qaeda. Husein was Baathist, but Al-Qaeda is connected with Wahhabism and Shafi'ism (the ideology of Saudi Arabia).
In other words, USA manufactured a fraud to invade in IRAQ, supposed to confront Shafi'ism, an enemy of which was Hussein.
The unbelievable is that at 2015 David Petraeus proposed that the USA support Al Qaeda in the fight against ISIS (Former CIA Chief: US Should Support Al Qaeda to Defeat ISIS - Israel National News). Meanwhile, many have said that allies of USA were the backers of ISIS ( General Wesley Clark explains ISIS was created by U S and Allies to fight against Hezbollah ). And the main brutality of ISIS was against Shiites

What could be the conclusion of all these for the strategists of IRAN? That IRAN cannot trust the USA and the only solution for IRAN is to take preemptive measure. What could be these?

bill3338 said:

I will make an attempt to present the aspect of IRAN. Let see some facts:
1) In the decade IRAN was the victim of an attack with weapons of mass destruction produced in West.
2) The most credible specialist of the West security system, the military leader of NATO General Wesley. Clark revealed a secret project to invade IRAN. (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TY2DKzastu8 ). Be careful, what Clark admits in the video is undeniable. The only person who could deny the content of the video is Paul Wolfowitz who didn't venture to deny Clark. Everything said by Clark is the truth,
3) In the framework of the project of the seven war (which was revealed by Clark), USA invaded in IRAQ depending on complete lies. Everyone in the world knew that Sadam Husein was an enemy of the Al-Qaeda. Husein was Baathist, but Al-Qaeda is connected with Wahhabism and Shafi'ism (the ideology of Saudi Arabia).
In other words, USA manufactured a fraud to invade in IRAQ, supposed to confront Shafi'ism, an enemy of which was Hussein.
The unbelievable is that at 2015 David Petraeus proposed that the USA support Al Qaeda in the fight against ISIS (Former CIA Chief: US Should Support Al Qaeda to Defeat ISIS - Israel National News). Meanwhile, many have said that allies of USA were the backers of ISIS ( General Wesley Clark explains ISIS was created by U S and Allies to fight against Hezbollah ). And the main brutality of ISIS was against Shiites

What could be the conclusion of all these for the strategists of IRAN? That IRAN cannot trust the USA and the only solution for IRAN is to take preemptive measure. What could be these?

Click to expand...

I want to add another aspect. From the facts mentioned above, we can assume that the Iranian government has the support of the Iranian people. It is obvious that the Iranian people consider that the USA and Israel have plans for an unprovocative invasion of IRAN. This has as a result in the rallying of the people around the government. Iran has a population of 80 million plus 24 million Shiites in neighboring Iraq. Under these circumstances, no country has the resources (especially the political capital) to destabilize Iran. It would be a huge mistake if someone tried it.
Especially, the USA have not the political capital to attempt such an operation. The American people will not approve an invasion.

bill3338 said:

I want to add another aspect. From the facts mentioned above, we can assume that the Iranian government has the support of the Iranian people. It is obvious that the Iranian people consider that the USA and Israel have plans for an unprovocative invasion of IRAN. This has as a result in the rallying of the people around the government. Iran has a population of 80 million plus 24 million Shiites in neighboring Iraq. Under these circumstances, no country has the resources (especially the political capital) to destabilize Iran. It would be a huge mistake if someone tried it.
Especially, the USA have not the political capital to attempt such an operation. The American people will not approve an invasion.

Click to expand...

Are you saying we're a pitiful, helpless giant against a relatively primitive and disorganized country? Japan learned the hard way what can happen, as did the denizens of Dresden. One of the few things I like about Trump is that he doesn't feel constrained by the need to be liked at diplomatic gatherings.

Re: Comey Associate Says He Turned over Memos to the FBI
※→ bill3338, et al,

OH, for heavens sake.

bill3338 said:

It is obvious that the Iranian people consider that the USA and Israel have plans for an unprovocative invasion of IRAN.

Click to expand...

(COMMENT)

If the US is going to attack, it is not likely to be "unprovoked."

All the major powers, with interests and concerns in the Middle East and Persian Gulf Region (Iran, Oman, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait and Iraq) have contingency plans in response to events or regional critical need. The US has had a set of recommendations for a set of responses since (at least) 1979. But they are updated periodically relative to the security environment.

It is not likely that the US would invade Iran in any event. Moving North from the Straights of Hormuz is not mechanized infantry friendly ground. And the US uses (for some time now) a practical measured military response to most Opposing Force scenario, which includes cyber-attacks.

If anyone is in Iran is promoting propaganda, in whatsoever country, which is either designed or likely to provoke or encourage and threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression; is a war-like country that is operating counter to A/RES/2/110 (3 November 1947).

Iran is not a country which is trusted any more than any other state that supports Jihadism, Deadly Fedayeen Action, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence.* Iran is a Theocratic Republic --- ruled, essentially, by the Grand Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, Head of State of Iran and Commander-in-Chief → Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran (Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution).

bill3338 said:

I
The American people will not approve an invasion.

Click to expand...

(COMMENT)

I find it odd that you would know the future, and how the Regional Security situation would be next year, five years, a decade from now or more. As far as the commentary from General Wesley Clark (USA, Ret) goes, a former Supreme Allied Commander, that set of conditions is much more than a decade ago. A lot has changed since then. Attempting to forecast what the American people will or will not do is as mystic as a crystal-ball.

Most Respectfully,
R

for myself, I am just so ****ing sick & ****ing tired of the US picking & choosing which ever whore it wants to be in bed with at the particular time, just to advance its' own interests.

AFA Israel is concerned, they have been around for 69 YEARS; why the **** can't Israel put on their Goddamn 'big boy' pants and stop having the US be their 'date' to the ****ing prom?

when are these asshats gonna grow some balls and protect their own asses??????????????

cuban smokes said:

for myself, I am just so ****ing sick & ****ing tired of the US picking & choosing which ever whore it wants to be in bed with at the particular time, just to advance its' own interests.

AFA Israel is concerned, they have been around for 69 YEARS; why the **** can't Israel put on their Goddamn 'big boy' pants and stop having the US be their 'date' to the ****ing prom?

when are these asshats gonna grow some balls and protect their own asses??????????????

Click to expand...

As far as Israel goes be careful what you wish for. Israel has been restrained by the U.S from "put(ting) on their Goddamn 'big boy' pants and stop having the US be their 'date' to the ****ing prom." Israel for example was prevented from retaliating against Saddam Hussein in 1991 for Iraq's SCUD missile attacks.

Off-Topic Re: USA-Israel vs Iran. A deadlock
※→ cuban smokes, et al,

I was just reading a thumbnail overview of the Special Relationship exists between the US and Israel. I've seen various (Jewish) political truthsayers like Elizabeth Stephens (Author), William Kristol (Editor of the Weekly Standard), Charles Krauthammer (Columnist, frequent TV News Show Contributor), Ari Fleischer (Former White House Press Secretary, CNN Contributor) and , of course, Pamela Geller (Nationally Known Blogger, Activist, Executive Director of Stop Islamization of America), describe this relationship as both puzzling and curious in its complex nature.

cuban smokes said:

for myself, I am just so ****ing sick & ****ing tired of the US picking & choosing which ever whore it wants to be in bed with at the particular time, just to advance its' own interests.

AFA Israel is concerned, they have been around for 69 YEARS; why the **** can't Israel put on their Goddamn 'big boy' pants and stop having the US be their 'date' to the ****ing prom?

when are these asshats gonna grow some balls and protect their own asses??????????????

Click to expand...

(COMMENT)

Most Americans probably did no even know that there is a "American Family Association (AFA);" let alone - that they knew it is promoting fundamentalist Christian values. Just as most people do not know that there is a organization called the Friends of the Israeli Defense Force (FIDF).

The Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP), periodically remind us that they are not Friends of the United States. Periodically the HoAP like remind us that of how they appraise the US; men like Fatah terrorist Hussein Fayadh, who was a member of the HoAP Death Squad (DS) made a TV Appearance (2007) and recounted how the Leader of the HoAP DS [Dalal al-Mugrabi, former aid to President of the State of Palestine, and Palestinian Authority (PA) Chairman Mahmoud Abbas] gunned-down Gail Rubin, and the niece of Senator Abraham Ribicoff. If that was not enough, the HoAP had a ceremony (2010) commemorating Dalal Al-Mughrabi, and the attack by the DS. Then again, 2014 --- Case study: Dalal Mughrabi, from terrorist to hero, was made a Martyr. You cannot say that this event (1978) is old news when the comemoration is passing though each generation of Palestinians.

There are many constiuants in the US that have a great affinity for the people of Israel; and yes that is a political concern.

Yes, there are many poeple in the US that do not want to forget the lessons learned and the morals demonstrated by the Americans in 1939:
Since the Armistice Arrangements of 1949, only Egypt and Jordan have made peace with Israel; Lebanon and Syria have not.

The US tries to maintain a balance of power between the members of the Arab League (22 Countries) and Israel (1 Country alone). It is not just a matter of US Interests (but at the end of the day, all countires work in their best interest).

Most Respectfully,
R

JBG said:

Are you saying we're a pitiful, helpless giant against a relatively primitive and disorganized country? Japan learned the hard way what can happen, as did the denizens of Dresden. One of the few things I like about Trump is that he doesn't feel constrained by the need to be liked at diplomatic gatherings.

Click to expand...

The empire has its king.

I will discuss on Kennan in a later post because it is a profound issue.

RoccoR said:

Re: Comey Associate Says He Turned over Memos to the FBI
I find it odd that you would know the future, and how the Regional Security situation would be next year, five years, a decade from now or more. As far as the commentary from General Wesley Clark (USA, Ret) goes, a former Supreme Allied Commander, that set of conditions is much more than a decade ago. A lot has changed since then. Attempting to forecast what the American people will or will not do is as mystic as a crystal-ball.

Most Respectfully,
R

Click to expand...

I do not know if the American people will support an attack on IRAN, what I know is that the support will not last for long. There is not enough political capital for such venture. Let's see why:

1) In the last election, we saw the collapse of the establishment of the Republican party. We saw the political disappearance of the Bush family. We saw the phenomenon, Trump. The main cause for this was US involvement in the Middle East. The American people answered with an earthquake in the USA foreign policy of the Bush family. (Be careful, I am only referring to Trump's dominance inside the Republican party. )

2) In 2013 after the Snowden case, we saw the anxiety of the big technology companies of USA.Their anxiety was justified. Global competition is now unprecedented. US workers are working very hard. They can not tolerate the undermining of their efforts by lazy civil servants. Let's remember the Microsoft's stance on the issue. Microsoft threatened to leave the USA at least in relation to Azure (the cloud service of Microsoft).
The Korean and Taiwanese fabs are ten months behind Intel in the construction of chips.
There are no resources for more deep involvement in the Middle East
2017 is not 2003.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you find a grammatical or syntactical error, please correct me!!!