Israel declares War - Destruction of Gaza / Growing conflict in Middle East

[DLF]

 

[DLF]

 

[rexanglorum]

 

[Brownstone]

Utter nonsense

 

[DLF]

Well said. Thanks for sharing.

The only counter is that you must first spend decades owning media and news and governments. Then you can do this openly.

 

[DLF]

 

[rexanglorum]

Utter nonsense

How so?

I know that Hedges’ rhetoric can be a bit dramatic, but I don’t see where he’s going wrong with the substance of his argument.

With rising political authoritarianism and destabilization from climate change, it seems like there will only be more situations where there’s millions of displaced people.

In that situation, states have a lot of options. In my view, the way Israel has approached Gaza is a horrible model for how a state deals with large populations of stateless people.

If Israel faces no serious repercussions, then the approach to Gaza will become the template in the future.

 

[me love nutella]

Revealed: Israeli spy chief ‘threatened’ ICC prosecutor over war crimes inquiry

Just because as a Western state spouts freedom and liberal rights, doesn't mean you're not the mafia. So-called liberal and democratic states wear the cloak of democracy and freedom to give you enough freedoms so that you do not revolt against them and so they can exploit you for your body and labour with the illusion you have rights. They also tend to be the countries that exploit and plunder others' resources via capitalism but are the ones that hoard the most, so they can run around profiteering from wars and world destruction, while you believe governments of "developed" nations care about human rights and justice.

So that is why they can go around threatening anyone and their families so they can continue to kill with impunity to not be held accountable.

 

[Belgium]

The Saudi's got away with 9/11?

There's a bunch of classified documents that have only been (partially) declassified in more recent years. Basically findings by US intelligence and investigatory agencies. While they're not conclusive, they state that high level officials (including Saudi intelligence officers) in the Saudi government provided Al-Qaeda with support for the attack during the planning and setting up of the attack.
There's nothing to suggest Al-Qaeda weren't the ones who came up with and carried out the idea in the first place, but the level of sophistication to properly plan and execute it out has always raised questions.

Either way regardless of what the investigations and intel agencies came up with, the Bush administration (especially Cheney and Rumsfeld) relegated all that to the classified dustbin and chose to exploit Al-Qaeda as a pretext for invading Iraq.

 

[smedroc]

I believe it. You need to read also into the commision and inquiries of the 9/11 survivors and their families that have been trying to invesitgate Saudi Arabia's role but the U.S. government has been denying it.

I will go look into that book again on the pipeline politics that had a chapter which mentioned this and the author insinuated Saudi Arabia was involved.

There's a bunch of classified documents that have only been (partially) declassified in more recent years. Basically findings by US intelligence and investigatory agencies. While they're not conclusive, they state that high level officials (including Saudi intelligence officers) in the Saudi government provided Al-Qaeda with support for the attack during the planning and setting up of the attack.
There's nothing to suggest Al-Qaeda weren't the ones who came up with and carried out the idea in the first place, but the level of sophistication to properly plan and execute it out has always raised questions.

Either way regardless of what the investigations and intel agencies came up with, the Bush administration (especially Cheney and Rumsfeld) relegated all that to the classified dustbin and chose to exploit Al-Qaeda as a pretext for invading Iraq.

That's interesting.

If there was covert Saudi involvement having your own countrymen on the hit squad seems somewhat ill advised.

 

[DLF]

 

[DLF]

 

[Brownstone]

How so?

I know that Hedges’ rhetoric can be a bit dramatic, but I don’t see where he’s going wrong with the substance of his argument.

With rising political authoritarianism and destabilization from climate change, it seems like there will only be more situations where there’s millions of displaced people.

In that situation, states have a lot of options. In my view, the way Israel has approached Gaza is a horrible model for how a state deals with large populations of stateless people.

If Israel faces no serious repercussions, then the approach to Gaza will become the template in the future.

There is literally zero evidence of the Palestinian/Israel situation being applicable to any other conflict since or prior

And then to take another leap of imagination and then frame it as a northern vs southern, modern vs non ect...is asinine and inflammatory

 

[DLF]

Bidens 500 million dollar pier

 

[Belgium]

There is literally zero evidence of the Palestinian/Israel situation being applicable to any other conflict since or prior

And then to take another leap of imagination and then frame it as a northern vs southern, modern vs non ect...is asinine and inflammatory

Applicable in what sense? Saudi Arabia has been flattening Yemen with bombs for years, and especially their starvation campaign has racked the deathcount up to well past 100k, with estimates in the 300k range.
The amount of indiscriminate bombings and especially the starvation campaign has killed tens of thousands of civilians. Sounds familiar?

As far as the military and political strategy, I don't think there's a substantive difference between what Saudi Arabia are doing and what Israel is doing. For the most part they even rely on their political relationships with the very same allies aiding Israel's genocide.
In response to the Yemen government, the Houthis formed as an opposition movement and quickly devolved into a militarized insurgency. A surprisingly effective one as they were able to defeat Saudi Arabia's military's intervention despite its backing from the US and others. Hence why the Saudis changed strategy and now focus primarily on bombings and starvation.

Much like Hamas, it's fair to say the Houthis are a terrorist organization that isn't afraid of getting their hands dirty and targeting civilians. However Saudi Arabia has conducted an extremely disproportionate bombing and starvation campaign while using their political ties to both further their campaign and strengthening their ties with said allies.
The loop of buying ally's advanced military arms for their operations and strengthening their political ties can essentially be repeated infinitely until they face actual pushback.

I don't think Saudi Arabia has the genocidal intent that Israel does, nor the capacity to quickly exterminate thousands of people in a very short period of time, but how much does that really matter when the tactics and result are basically the same over an extended period of time?

As far as that last line, I do agree that the framing of a 'north vs south' in that clip is bad. It simply comes down to who has more political and military power. With the right allies and overall political ties, you can largely do what you want without much pushback. Especially if you stretch it out over an extended period of time like pre-October 7th Israel.

 

[DLF]

Omg. So shocked

 

[me love nutella]

I don't think Saudi Arabia has the genocidal intent that Israel does, nor the capacity to quickly exterminate thousands of people in a very short period of time, but how much does that really matter when the tactics and result are basically the same over an extended period of time?

It is because they have different aims and goals. I do not think Saudi Arabia sees Yemen as territory to confiscate or take to extend as part of greater Saudi Arabia. All they care about is the pipelines, the straits, as well as pretext to destroy the Houthis who are allied with their arch nemesis Iran (due to the Shia links). It is all about geopolitical power & resources.

Also, the point of the Western imperial powers, which is what also their Arab puppet regimes will support, is breaking off the control of territories in what they consider hostile states and threats to their position and power. i.e. Syria, Iraq, Yemen (the rule of these countries is now divided up and push them to become failed states). This was also done for Afghanistan and Libya (although not in Middle East, but also relevant to power in the region). This is the same aim to do in Gaza. It is to ethnically cleanse/genocide, and kill as many civilians, make it unlivable, and then when it comes to power to divide it up. It is all about redrawing the maps and power of the Middle East depending on shifting alliances and powers in the region.

Speaking on the ruthless depraved maniacal Saudi regime/leaders: Neom: Saudi forces 'told to kill' to clear land for eco-city.

 

[me love nutella]

Either way regardless of what the investigations and intel agencies came up with, the Bush administration (especially Cheney and Rumsfeld) relegated all that to the classified dustbin and chose to exploit Al-Qaeda as a pretext for invading Iraq.

In the book I read, the author straight up implicates Cheney, Rumsfeld and Bush not only as pretext to attack Iraq, but also Afghanistan, and basically 9/11 was the pretext. One very relevant justification and motivation had to do with pipeline business and politics.

The author's theory is the motivation for going into Afghanistan was securing control over the oil and gas of the nearby Caspian Sea, to be shipped by pipeline from Turkmenistan, through Afghanistan, and on to Pakistan and India. The TAPI pipeline (named for the countries it would traverse) was envisioned long before 9/11 and is still awaiting completion. Key to its success is securing its passage through lands occupied by warlords. A US based corporation had to withdraw from the project in 1998 following US tensions with Taliban and Al-Qaeda bombing embassies in Kenya & Tanzania. But the US, Saudi and others know the fiercest warlords of all, once deemed most capable of protecting the pipeline, are the Taliban. As recently as February 2021, the Taliban promised, once again, to protect the TAPI pipeline. When did the U.S. pullout fully? By August 2021.

Check this: https://eurasianet.org/taliban-vows-to-guarantee-safety-of-trans-afghanistan-gas-pipeline
The meeting was brokered by the U.S. government which has always championed and pulled their weight behind the TAPI pipeline. The U.S. government interest does lie in the successful completion of the project as it would lessen Russia and China's influence in the region (US backed it to reduce influence of Russia in Turkemenistan) and lower reliance from the Middle East.

As for Saudi, supporting TAPI is a strategy to decrease Iran's regional role. So what is Saudi investing in TAPI? The ICIEC, which is a member of the Saudi-led investment fund, the Islamic Development Bank, or IDB, has offered as much as $1 billion in financing for TAPI pipeline. OBL and the Taliban prior to 9/11 were a huge threat and wildin' telling US to get out of Saudi bases and basically a threat to the Saudi royals for their US alliance. The rest is history.

 

[Brownstone]

Applicable in what sense? Saudi Arabia has been flattening Yemen with bombs for years, and especially their starvation campaign has racked the deathcount up to well past 100k, with estimates in the 300k range.
The amount of indiscriminate bombings and especially the starvation campaign has killed tens of thousands of civilians. Sounds familiar?

As far as the military and political strategy, I don't think there's a substantive difference between what Saudi Arabia are doing and what Israel is doing. For the most part they even rely on their political relationships with the very same allies aiding Israel's genocide.
In response to the Yemen government, the Houthis formed as an opposition movement and quickly devolved into a militarized insurgency. A surprisingly effective one as they were able to defeat Saudi Arabia's military's intervention despite its backing from the US and others. Hence why the Saudis changed strategy and now focus primarily on bombings and starvation.

Much like Hamas, it's fair to say the Houthis are a terrorist organization that isn't afraid of getting their hands dirty and targeting civilians. However Saudi Arabia has conducted an extremely disproportionate bombing and starvation campaign while using their political ties to both further their campaign and strengthening their ties with said allies.
The loop of buying ally's advanced military arms for their operations and strengthening their political ties can essentially be repeated infinitely until they face actual pushback.

I don't think Saudi Arabia has the genocidal intent that Israel does, nor the capacity to quickly exterminate thousands of people in a very short period of time, but how much does that really matter when the tactics and result are basically the same over an extended period of time?

As far as that last line, I do agree that the framing of a 'north vs south' in that clip is bad. It simply comes down to who has more political and military power. With the right allies and overall political ties, you can largely do what you want without much pushback. Especially if you stretch it out over an extended period of time like pre-October 7th Israel.

War has been going on since civilization, as you mention the haves usually beat the lesser haves or the have nots

The problem with the video and why I find it problematic is that the speaker uses the isreali conflict as an inflection point for other developing countries without saying why or how. Inaction by the U.S. has been happening cuontless times since the second world war, with very few exceptions. How this is different is the speakers burden, and one that viewers that come to that video with a certain view would tend to agree with his words based on nothing but his opinion, not facts.

 

[fluid hips]

Bidens 500 million dollar pier

Fitting metaphor of the amount of money we waste via the military

 

[DLF]

“Funny. I don’t hear anyone calling for Netanyahu to step down?”

 

[Belgium]

In the book I read, the author straight up implicates Cheney, Rumsfeld and Bush not only as pretext to attack Iraq, but also Afghanistan, and basically 9/11 was the pretext. One very relevant justification and motivation had to do with pipeline business and politics.

The author's theory is the motivation for going into Afghanistan was securing control over the oil and gas of the nearby Caspian Sea, to be shipped by pipeline from Turkmenistan, through Afghanistan, and on to Pakistan and India. The TAPI pipeline (named for the countries it would traverse) was envisioned long before 9/11 and is still awaiting completion. Key to its success is securing its passage through lands occupied by warlords. The fiercest warlords of all, once deemed most capable of protecting the pipeline, are the Taliban. As recently as February 2021, the Taliban promised, once again, to protect the TAPI pipeline. When did the U.S. pullout fully? By August 2021.

So what is Saudi invested in TAPI? The ICIEC, which is a member of the Saudi-led investment fund, the Islamic Development Bank, or IDB, has offered as much as $1 billion in financing for TAPI pipeline. OBL and the Taliban prior to 9/11 were a huge threat and wildin' telling US to get out of Saudi bases and basically a threat to the Saudi royals for their US alliance. The rest is history.

NOTE: The following is largely separate from the primary topic of this thread. This brief discussion formed as a natural extension of the thread's topics.

me love nutella
I think an attempt to secure and stabilize regional oil production was at least a large part of the motivation but not the entirety. I think a large part of it is also the often nonsensical 'regime change' mentality that was very prevalent amongst top officials in the Bush administration.

By all accounts, Bush seems kind of a dumbass. A godawful malicious dumbass, sure, but from everything I've read I think Cheney and Rumsfeld would've been far far worse if either of them were the ones at the wheel. Both of them had long prior involvement in thinktanks preaching 'regime change' in various countries. Both were also close associates of the main person behind the WMD lie.

Cheney is by far the most powerful and influential VP to ever set foot in the White House and that's just based on the public details we know about his tenure. Aside from having a large staff of his own handpicked advisers and getting deeply involved in intelligence and legal theories, Cheney was also known to very frequently have long discussions with Bush alone.

None of what was discussed between the two was ever leaked and his advisers were either kept in the dark or also refused to leak about those discussions.
He basically conducted himself and ordered people around as if he was equal to the president, and Bush seemed very receptive to his influence.

Ahmed Chalabi, who ran the Iraqi National Congress (INC) organization, was the main individual responsible for the WMD claims. Who were Chalabi's close political associates? Cheney, Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz. Shocker.
Bush and Cheney never stopped laundering Chalabi's claims to justify the invasion despite being warned that Chalabi was a malicious liar.

It's unclear when the CIA explicitly informed the Bush administration that Chalabi was just fabricating everything for his personal gain but immediately after the invasion, the CIA informed Bush that Chalabi was feeding US intel to Iranian intelligence.

Chalabi was disputed as a liar inside the CIA and even by allied intelligence agencies, yet the Bush administration kept parading him around.
Some of Chalabi's closest aides/INC associates were under FBI investigation for feeding classified intel to Iran; the White House signed off on an Iraqi raid of Chalabi's properties for alleged embezzlement, ...
The list goes on and on.

It's borderline cartoonish how brazenly this dude kept lying while being on the US payroll through his INC (Iraqi National Congress) organization. Chalabi was very proud of it too. He later admitted to feeding intel to Iran and proudly 'joked' about being instrumental to the justification of the Iraq war. All because he was chased out of Iraq in the 90s and wanted revenge and control of Iraq for himself.

 

[fluid hips]

“Funny. I don’t hear anyone calling for Netanyahu to step down?”

Being labeled an "anti Semite" has also been weaponized

 

[degenerate423]

 

[DLF]

When Iraq war happened people in USA protested “not in our name”


In Israel, people protest THE ****ING AID TRUCKS