EDITORIAL: The next Mideast war

[Chiron]

The Obama administration is pressing a reset button to return the Middle East to the bad old days of open Arab-Israeli warfare. The White House is requiring participation of the Muslim Brotherhood in any prospective new Egyptian government, while the brothers themselves are telling their countrymen to “prepare for war.” The current crisis in Egypt and the Obama administration’s maladroit response are forcing strategists to consider conflict scenarios that had been mothballed since the 1970s.

The Camp David Accords have formed the bedrock of U.S. security policy in the Mideast region since they were signed in 1978. The strategic logic behind the accords was that no coalition of Arab states could have a chance of waging a successful conventional conflict against Israel without including powerful Egypt. Subtracting Cairo from the equation would mean no new Arab-Israeli wars.

Full story

[McD]

I find it bothersome and wonder what kind of message it sends to our other "Friends" that we will turn our back on you the way we have to Mubarak. Don't get me wrong, I think he needs to go but he has been a staunch allie of ours, I just don't think we needed to be so public about him going.

[Chiron]

I find it bothersome and wonder what kind of message it sends to our other "Friends" that we will turn our back on you the way we have to Mubarak. Don't get me wrong, I think he needs to go but he has been a staunch allie of ours, I just don't think we needed to be so public about him going.

Although I agree, the issue of what the people want, the majority of the people want him out now.

They have never had a real democracy. Before 1952 the British rule Egypt. Then three dictators, Nasser, Saddat and Mubarak. The hard part is by supporting Mubarak you go against democracy. Its worst than being stuck between a rock and a hard place….

The risk is that the next government goes against Israel. We support the peace process but… Does that mean we go against democracy? Worst case scenario would be that the Brotherhood of Islam wins the next elections, and they may have a majority if not a percentage that would require a coalition government that pleases the people. Question being: Will they support the Camp David Accord? If not then there would be eventual war in that Mubarak closed the tunnels into Gaza and this may re-open them. Allowing humanitarian aid into Gaza but weapons also.

Best case scenario would be the newly formed coalition government in Egypt would support the Camp David Accord and that means a plebiscite would confirm this. All would remain as is but without a dictator.

Fact is that Islam is becoming the majority in Egypt and other countries because Islam preaches No poverty and everyone eats. Saudi Arabia and Jordan among others are also in trouble as poverty exists in Jordan and the bulk of the people are Wahabi in Saudi Arabia. This has caused turmoil in the Arab world especially in Kingdoms and dictatorships.

What’s next? Time will tell.

That’s my $0.02 worth.

[Jim]

In the attachment, STRATFOR addresses the longer term:


http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20110207 ... t=readmore" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[MarineRanger]

The hard part is by supporting Mubarak you go against democracy.

Democracy is a red herring when not constrained by a strong framework that preserves individual rights and limits the authority of the government like the U.S. Constitution. Relative to Sharia law, supporting Mubarack is supporting freedom and liberty. Obviously, not to the degree that we have in the U.S..

It is said, that there is not a more democractic group of people than a lynch mob.

Democracies throughout history, have always failed. That's why the FFs gave us a Republic. Democracy is mob rule. The mob is stupid and greedy, and needs to be protected from itself.

The Camp David accord deal was struck to prevent Israel from wiping out it's surrounding Arab neighbors, and disrupting the oil supply. Israel will not fall without nuking the shit out of all their enemies. JMO

I know you old guys are familiar with this ....

Israeli territory after the united Arab surprise attack against them called the 6 day war ...



The Jews are commanded to obey the "stoning" laws of the Old Testament, but they don't anymore. Islam needs to go thru the same transformation to survive ... for the world to survive. That transformation has to come from within Islam. The Egyptian revolt is a 'status quo' check ... let's see what happens as Arab goes against Arab.

It will probably take a Miracle to fix Islam. Like an alien UFO visit, a new Prophet, or a natural or man-made catastrophe of Biblical scale.

[rgrokelley]

This is a democracy movement in the same way that Iran in 1979 was. This is a power grab by the same type of folks who grabbed it back then. You can look at that now and see how effective it was.

I think it is funny that there is a whole generation of Arabs who have not had their asses handed to them by Israel, thanks to the Peace Accords.

They might want to be careful what they wish for. They have been in peace for almost 40 years, while Israel has been on a constant war footing due to the Palestinians.

[MarineRanger]

This is a democracy movement in the same way that Iran in 1979 was. This is a power grab by the same type of folks who grabbed it back then. You can look at that now and see how effective it was.

RgoKelley ... I agree, its not a 'democratic movement'. The way the term is tossed around, it could apply to any revolution that is supported by the people. But just like on Orwell's Animal Farm, they simply end up trading one dictatorship for another.

I think its a misnomer for the media to call it anything but "a Revolution".

Right now, I must give high praise to the Egyptian army for remaining a neutral, and stabilizing force. This could still work out in the favor of freedom and liberty ... because those are the true goals, not democracy. Democracies always fail.

I would not have labeled are own American Revolution as a 'democratic movement'. "The people" were ALL willing to install George Washington as king. Thank God, he was such a GREAT altruistic man.

We had a student led democratic movement ... and we ended up with Obama. We really need to raise the voting age back up to 21. Just another example of Lenin's "useful idiots".

Re:Iran ... I didn't own a TV in '79, so I did not have much of a chance to watch it unfold live. But I seem to recall the demonstrators being an obviously younger, and more well-to-do crowd, than what we are seeing in Egypt.

*******************************************************************

Now, you've got me researching Iran again. I think this bit from wiki may add to the discussion ...

"In January 1963, the Shah announced the "White Revolution", a six-point programme of reform calling for land reform, nationalization of the forests, the sale of state-owned enterprises to private interests, electoral changes to enfranchise women and allow non-Muslims to hold office, profit-sharing in industry, and a literacy campaign in the nation's schools. Some of these initiatives were regarded as dangerous, Westernizing trends by traditionalists, especially by the powerful and privileged Shi'a ulama (religious scholars).[34] Ayatollah Khomeini summoned a meeting of the other senior marjas of Qom and persuaded them to decree a boycott of the referendum on the White Revolution. On 22 January 1963 Khomeini issued a strongly worded declaration denouncing the Shah and his plans."


Shah Vs. Sharia ... maybe not so tough a choice after all.

And this ...

"Khomeini spent more than 14 years in exile, mostly in the holy Shia city of Najaf, Iraq. ... in October 1965 he was allowed to move to Najaf, Iraq, where he stayed until being forced to leave in 1978, after then-Vice President Saddam Hussein told him that it's better to leave (the two countries would fight a bitter eight year war 1980–1988 only a year after the two reached power in 1979) after which he went to Neauphle-le-Château , suburb of Paris, France on a tourist visa, apparently not seeking political asylum, where he stayed for four months."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruhollah_Khomeini" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[mortar_guy78]

Ok, I get what you are saying, but you do not think that brutal repression under our "allies" has anything to do with setting the conditions for these kinds of revolutions? If you look up the SAVAK (Iranian Intel/Secret Police under the Shah), you will find the following:

"Chief CIA Iran analyst Jesse Leaf in an interview on 6th Jan. 1979 stated that the CIA taught Nazi torture techniques to SAVAK."

After the Siahkal attack in February of 1971 "SAVAK interrogators were sent abroad for "scientific training to prevent unwanted deaths from 'brute force.' Brute force was supplemented with the bastinado; sleep deprivation; extensive solitary confinement; glaring searchlights; standing in one place for hours on end; nail extractions; snakes (favored for use with women); electrical shocks with cattle prods, often into the rectum; cigarette burns; sitting on hot grills; acid dripped into nostrils; near-drownings; mock executions; and an electric chair with a large metal mask to muffle screams while amplifying them for the victim. This latter contraption was dubbed the Apollo—an allusion to the American space capsules. Prisoners were also humiliated by being raped, urinated on, and forced to stand naked." (Bastinado is beating the soles of the feet with a cane)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAVAK

These techniques were used to silence political dissidents. These people were not necessarily crazy Shia fundamentalists, but often writers, professors, artists, etc.

Yet another reason for Iranian discontent was the lavish lifestyle of the Shah, especially in contrast to the poverty of his people. Again, wiki:

"In October 1971, the Shah celebrated the twenty-five-hundredth anniversary of the Iranian monarchy. The New York Times reported that $100 million was spent. Next to the ruins of Persepolis, the Shah gave orders to build a tent city covering 160 acres, studded with three huge royal tents and fifty-nine lesser ones arranged in a star-shaped design. French chefs from Maxim’s of Paris prepared breast of peacock for royalty and dignitaries around the world, the buildings were decorated by Maison Jansen (the same firm that helped Jacqueline Kennedy redecorate the White House), the guests ate off Limoges porcelain china and drank from Baccarat crystal glasses. This became a major scandal as the contrast between the dazzling elegance of celebration and the misery of the nearby villages was so dramatic that no one could ignore it. Months before the festivities, university students struck in protest. Indeed, the cost was so sufficiently impressive that the Shah forbade his associates to discuss the actual figures."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Reza_Pahlavi

I am not supporting the current Islamic regime. I am not saying that we should abandon our allies and provide free hot cocoa for the world. What I am saying is that perhaps we should encourage our allies to be smart enough not brutalize their populations and create the conditions favorable for dickheads like the Ayatollah Khomeini to sieze power. People do not take to the streets when they are content. It is so easy to mollify the masses that at best the Shah, Mubarek, and guys like them could be accused of being stupid, incompetent boobs.

Given our history of having allies like the Shah, Mubarek, Saddam Hussein (removed fro the "Nations that sponser terrorism" list in 1982 by the Reagan Administration in order to provide military support), Noriega, Suharto, etc. maybe we should be a bit more circumspect and not act so surprised when their citizens get pissed off.

[MarineRanger]

What I am saying is that perhaps we should encourage our allies to be smart enough not brutalize their populations and create the conditions favorable for dickheads like the Ayatollah Khomeini to sieze power.

The evils of the Shah's regime are common knowledge. How much of it he personally endorsed, and how much was corrupt illegal activity, IDK. The good changes he brought are not well known.

When I look at the people of the Middleeast, I'm reminded of the difference between European Bees and Africanized Bees. Its just a more brutal, corrupt civilization. We have brutality in the U.S. too. Its just a matter of degree.

And I don't mean it in a racist way. More like a Raquel Welch One Million Years B.C. way. Where the harsh brutal terrain produced a harsh people. And a land of plenty, produced a kinder tribe.






Islam is the last major religion that, on a philosophical level, believes in Aztec-like human sacrifice ... if you don't count Progressive LIberalism as a religion.

Most historians place the blame for the Fall of the Shah on Jimmy Carter, as opposed to, directly on the corruption and brutality of his regime.

[RangerX]

Blah blah blah fucking blah blah Raquel Welch





Blah blah blah blah blah.

Say again?

[Chiron]

Some things to think about.

The Brotherhood of Islam declared last night they will not run for the Presidency of Egypt but will run for members in parliament. They want representation in the parliament.

Saudi Arabia is alleged to have miscalculated on the oil reserve. They stated 750 million barrels and officials in OPEC think they only have 250 million barrels.

CNN announced that the people in “Freedom Square” amount to thousands while foreign news states million.

From what I see from this side of the pond, Mubarak is out unless he is whiling to go to war, which I highly doubt.

We also see that a U.S. fleet has taken position in the Red Sea with the guise of “We are there to protect the Egyptians. The only protection the Egyptians need is from Mubarak and his murdering thugs. I would rather say that they are there to ensure the Suez Canal remains operational.

[Chiron]

I am not supporting the current Islamic regime. I am not saying that we should abandon our allies and provide free hot cocoa for the world. What I am saying is that perhaps we should encourage our allies to be smart enough not brutalize their populations and create the conditions favorable for dickheads like the Ayatollah Khomeini to sieze power. People do not take to the streets when they are content. It is so easy to mollify the masses that at best the Shah, Mubarek, and guys like them could be accused of being stupid, incompetent boobs.

Given our history of having allies like the Shah, Mubarek, Saddam Hussein (removed fro the "Nations that sponser terrorism" list in 1982 by the Reagan Administration in order to provide military support), Noriega, Suharto, etc. maybe we should be a bit more circumspect and not act so surprised when their citizens get pissed off.

Agree 100%

The King of Jordan appointed a new prime minister and cabinet with the mandate of pleasing the people. Jordanians are hungry and fed up. He may fix that in time but if Jordan falls then Lebanon will follow. That’s when it becomes too late for other Kings and dictators……. And as for democracy… well I don’t know of any Islamic country that has it and that religion doesn’t allow for it. In fact most of them would rather follow a Mullah then an elected government. Lebanon has a democratic government that shares power between Christians and Muslims however it is fragile. If Egypt succeeds in forming a government with all parties satisfied maybe there will be a chance. But they must satisfy the people.

[Chiron]

In the attachment, STRATFOR addresses the longer term:


http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20110207 ... t=readmore" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There are those in Israel who would argue that any release in pressure on the Palestinians will be met with rejection. If that is true, then, in my view, that is catastrophic news for Israel. In due course, ideological shifts and recalculations of Israeli intentions will cause a change in Egyptian policy. This will take several decades to turn into effective military force, and the first conflicts may well end in Israeli victory. But, as I have said before, it must always be remembered that no matter how many times Israel wins, it need only lose once to be annihilated.

To some it means that Israel should remain as strong as possible. To me it means that Israel should avoid rolling the dice too often, regardless of how strong it thinks it is. The Mubarak affair might open a strategic reconsideration of the Israeli position.

Although I agree with the article and most of all the last part above. What they fail to consider is if Jordan falls then Lebanon falls and we have Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria to consider as a combined force against Israel. If that happens I’m sure Iran will take advantage of it. Nevertheless, the key now is Egypt and Jordan second. Lebanon although the Christian hold is fragile hold and will remain until the others fall. Then they would only act after Islam has rooted for a few years but it would be swift and for a total commitment to victory on the Arab side which will be bloody and Israel will be forced to use nukes on its neighbors…..

[MarineRanger]

Say again?

Allahu akbar means "More Porn"



" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;




****************************************************************************************

News Update - Mubarak tells Obama ... go fuck yourself.

* FEBRUARY 11, 2011

Crisis Puts White House in Disarray
Egyptian President Mubarak's Refusal to Step Down Signals a Loss of Western Influence; Sense of 'Disbelief' After Speech

" ... Egyptian officials said Mr. Mubarak gave the Obama administration much of what it wanted: the delegation of presidential powers to the vice president, Omar Suleiman. They said Mr. Mubarak had all but been rendered a figurehead leader, precisely the formulation set out by U.S. officials over the weekend.

But Mr. Mubarak's language and refusal to yield to what he called the intervention of foreigners left protesters furious, the scene in Cairo precarious, and the White House seemingly unable to influence events.

All day, as rumors swirled Mr. Mubarak would step down, administration officials struggled to understand what was happening, and even U.S. intelligence officials were flummoxed at one point. At a Capitol Hill hearing, Leon Panetta, director of the Central Intelligence Agency, told lawmakers there was "a strong likelihood that Mubarak may step down this evening."

Mr. Panetta clarified later in the hearing that the CIA had received reports that "possibly" Mr. Mubarak would resign. At that point, Mr. Panetta said he saw a scenario under which Mr. Mubarak would shift powers to Mr. Suleiman, something closer to what appears to have happened.

During a trip to Michigan, President Barack Obama told a crowd ahead of Mr. Mubarak's speech, "We are witnessing history unfold....It's a moment of transformation that's taking place because the people of Egypt are calling for change."

Protesters in Egypt interpreted Mr. Obama's comments as proof Mr. Mubarak would step down.

After Mr. Mubarak's speech, the White House was consumed with a sense of "disbelief," one U.S. official said.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... lenews_wsj" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


*************************

More News ... Head of the CIA, Leon Panetta ... get's his intel from TV like the rest of us. Why are we even paying this guy.

"Addressing a Congressional Committee, CIA director Leon Panetta said there was a strong likelihood that Mubarak may step down on Thursday. "I got the same information you did, that there's a strong likelihood that Mubarak may step down this evening," Panetta said, referring to speculation about the Egyptian president's exit. ...

.... The remarkable slip up by the most revered and feared intelligence agency in the world also led to rumors that Mubarak has already fled the country.

Iran's Press TV put out a report claiming that it had information that Mubarak has already fled the country and that his adders to the nation on Thursday evening was taped in advance.

"Presidential sources say Egypt's three-decade ruler Hosni Mubarak has left the country, noting an address he is scheduled to deliver in a few hours is taped."

Read more: http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/111423/ ... z1DewwJERl" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Read more: http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/111423/ ... z1Dew869DG" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Jim]

STRATFOR Update as Mubarak steps down.

http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/201102 ... 838cdac8e6" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;