TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Tunisia, Egypt, yemen, Libya, Bahrain,Syria, Who is next?
Pages (3): « 1 2 [3]

And America officially enters a 4th military conflict

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/...n_n_873620.html

quote:

The Obama administration has intensified air strikes on suspected militants in Yemen in a bid to keep them from consolidating power as the government in Sanaa teeters, The New York Times reported Wednesday. A U.S. official confirmed to Reuters that a U.S. strike last Friday killed Abu Ali al-Harithi, a midlevel al Qaeda operative, which followed last month's attempted strike against Anwar al-Awlaki, the leader of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. Citing U.S. officials, the Times said a U.S. campaign using armed drones and fighter jets had accelerated in recent weeks as U.S. officials see the strikes as one of the few options to contain al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. With the country in violent conflict, Yemeni troops that had been battling militants linked to al Qaeda in the south have been pulled back to Sanaa, the newspaper said. Yemen's authoritarian president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, was wounded Friday and is being treated in the Saudi capital, Riyadh. He appears to have been wounded by a bombing at a mosque inside his palace, not a rocket attack as first thought, U.S. and Arab officials told Reuters. Story continues below There were conflicting reports about his condition -- ranging from fairly minor, to life-threatening 40 percent burns. There had been nearly a yearlong pause in U.S. airstrikes after concerns that poor intelligence had resulted in civilian deaths that undercut goals of the secret campaign. U.S. and Saudi spy services have been receiving more information from electronic eavesdropping and informants about possible locations of militants, the newspaper said, citing officials in Washington. But there were concerns that with the wider conflict in Yemen, factions might feed information to trigger air strikes against rival groups. The operations were further complicated by al Qaeda operatives' mingling with other rebel and anti-government militants, the newspaper said, citing a senior Pentagon official. The U.S. ambassador in Yemen met recently with opposition leaders, partly to make the case for continuing operations in case Saleh's government falls, the newspaper said. Opposition leaders have told the ambassador that operations against al Qaeda in Yemen should continue regardless of who wins the power struggle in the capital, the Times said, citing officials in Washington. Al Qaeda's affiliate in Yemen has been linked to the attempt to blow up a trans-Atlantic jetliner on Christmas Day 2009 and a plot last year to blow up cargo planes with bombs hidden in printer cartridges.

I guess Obummer thinks he can carpet bomb our way out of this recession. Never would have thought the guy would have us enter two other conflicts while keeping our troops engaged in the previous two Bush Jr started. Sad day for my country. Very sad day.

Win Nobel Peace Prize, start two new wars.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/...-_n_877459.html

quote:

WASHINGTON -- U.S. officials say the CIA has stepped up the schedule for building a Persian Gulf base for armed U.S. drones going after terrorists in Yemen. But the base is at least eight months away from completion and plagued with logistics difficulties, so the counterterror operation remains in the hands of the Pentagon's elite special operations forces. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters. Since 2009, Yemen has allowed those U.S. forces to employ a mixture of armed and unarmed drones, ship-fired missiles, small special operations teams working with Yemenis, and occasional war plane bombing runs, Yemeni and U.S. officials say. The recent unrest has driven al-Qaida targets into the open, presenting U.S. forces with new targets of opportunity.

I wonder how many more millions of dollars will get squandered trying to kill terrorists in yet another Middle Eastern country. They can't even find the 6.6 billion they lost while investing in Iraq. This whole country is run by idiots.

NATO's response: OOOPS sorry about that shit happens get over it.

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer NATO's response: OOOPS sorry about that shit happens get over it.

Yea, let's get out and let Qaddafi massacre his opposition, which asked NATO to intervene on their behalf.

quote:

Originally posted by Comrade Stalin Yea, let's get out and let Qaddafi massacre his opposition, which asked NATO to intervene on their behalf.

I always wondered who exactly these �Rebel fighters� are. How do we know that by supporting them life would be better for the people of Libya? Why is this war still going on and for how long is NATO planning to bomb this country? What are the true motives behind this war? There are lots of ideas going around and the whole going to war to save the Libyan people isn�t one of them.

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer I always wondered who exactly these �Rebel fighters� are. How do we know that by supporting them life would be better for the people of Libya? Why is this war still going on and for how long is NATO planning to bomb this country? What are the true motives behind this war? There are lots of ideas going around and the whole going to war to save the Libyan people isn�t one of them.

Of course NATO is there because of the oil. The rebel movement just provides an excuse to intervene. What I don't get is why you're apparently defending a dictator who is facing the wrath of his own people? Seriously, Qaddafi has to hire foreign mercenaries to fight his own people. Why are you defending this guy?

quote:

Originally posted by Comrade Stalin What I don't get is why you're apparently defending a dictator who is facing the wrath of his own people? Seriously, Qaddafi has to hire foreign mercenaries to fight his own people. Why are you defending this guy?

My point is why now? He had close ties with the Europe and the U.S. and did all sort of business with them. Was he not a dictator at the time? Now he is all evil and must be taken out? Qaddafi�s story is very identical to Saddam�s in Iraq. One day he is considered an ally the next day he is a dead man. It is yet another double standard game played by the west.

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer My point is why now? He had close ties with the Europe and the U.S. and did all sort of business with them. Was he not a dictator at the time? Now he is all evil and must be taken out? Qaddafi�s story is very identical to Saddam�s in Iraq. One day he is considered an ally the next day he is a dead man. It is yet another double standard game played by the west.

Why now? Because he is facing a massive popular uprising by his people. What other pretext would the West have before then? None. It was the perfect excuse. The rebels even asked for NATO help and sent representatives to Europe and Qatar asking for help and recognition. I would have been afraid of not doing something. Qaddafi forces were just outside Benghazi when NATO intervened. What do you think would have happened in Benghazi had NATO done nothing? Are there other motives behind the intervention? Hell yea. The rebellion is just an excuse to carry out Western interests in the region. I don't, however, think in this instance that such interests make this intervention wrong. Why else does a nation or alliance intervene if not for their own benefit some way? Such interventions cost hundreds of millions of dollars. It better be to our interest!

quote:

Originally posted by Comrade Stalin Why now? Because he is facing a massive popular uprising by his people. What other pretext would the West have before then? None. It was the perfect excuse. The rebels even asked for NATO help and sent representatives to Europe and Qatar asking for help and recognition. I would have been afraid of not doing something. Qaddafi forces were just outside Benghazi when NATO intervened. What do you think would have happened in Benghazi had NATO done nothing? Are there other motives behind the intervention? Hell yea. The rebellion is just an excuse to carry out Western interests in the region. I don't, however, think in this instance that such interests make this intervention wrong. Why else does a nation or alliance intervene if not for their own benefit some way? Such interventions cost hundreds of millions of dollars. It better be to our interest!

where you at on Syria then? their rebellion is worse, and Assad has had his military strait up massacre way more civilians than Qaddafi. If you're supporting the Libya mission, one must assume you're even more gung-ho to do something in Syria (who also has oil).

Like I said before this is yet another double standard game by the U.S. and NATO sadly. They are playing with people's lives and using the whole peace excuse to achieve their own agenda.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss where you at on Syria then? their rebellion is worse, and Assad has had his military strait up massacre way more civilians than Qaddafi. If you're supporting the Libya mission, one must assume you're even more gung-ho to do something in Syria (who also has oil).

If we're going to intervene in a popular uprising, we must be sure that uprising can win. The Syrian uprising is not anywhere close to being as armed and ready to fight as the Libyans. It's a different dynamic and we can't spend military assets on ventures which won't bear fruit.

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer Like I said before this is yet another double standard game by the U.S. and NATO sadly. They are playing with people's lives and using the whole peace excuse to achieve their own agenda.

If a situation presents itself, in which a dictator can be deposed by his own people who just need some help, with little cost to the intervening party, who would not take that opportunity? Especially given Libya's oil reserves? It's in anyone's interest who decides to intervene.

quote:

Originally posted by Comrade Stalin If a situation presents itself, in which a dictator can be deposed by his own people who just need some help, with little cost to the intervening party, who would not take that opportunity? Especially given Libya's oil reserves? It's in anyone's interest who decides to intervene.

unconventional warfare is almost always less expensive

time to bring this discussion back.

Curious to know what some of you think is happening in Syria. Is it a legitimate uprising? I personally think there is more happening then what meets the eye.
There may have been a legitimate uprising at first but I don't think that's the case anymore. I also don't believe that this conflict will end anytime soon since we have players like the Russians and China involved with the Syrian regime so I cant see them just giving up Assad. feel free to share your thoughts.

You present a pretty good point on this one, as with most middle eastern issues, we are fairly sheltered in the west as in that most of our news comes through the filters of the western media, ie there is more often than not a positioned spin on most of the coverage in support of one side or the other.

I dont see russia or china putting too up to much of a defense for Assad considering the tensions with Tehran at the moment. I dont think either nation wants to be seen as siding with both of those countries when it has been well known for years that the Assad regime was very closely tied with Tehran. If russia or china is going to pick one side in the fight with the west it will probably be Iran.

quote:

Originally posted by colonelcrisp You present a pretty good point on this one, as with most middle eastern issues, we are fairly sheltered in the west as in that most of our news comes through the filters of the western media, ie there is more often than not a positioned spin on most of the coverage in support of one side or the other.

I usually try my best to encourage people to do their own research before making up their mind about this conflict. For example there are numerous reports that suggests that there has been several thousand mercenaries infiltrated that country.

Recruited by agencies in Saudi Arabia and Qatar within the Sunni extremist community, They came to Syria to overthrow the "Alawite usurper" Bashar al-Assad and impose a Wahhabi-inspired dictatorship. They have at their disposal some of the most sophisticated military equipment, including night vision systems, communication centers for urban warfare.

Supported secretly by the NATO powers, they also have access to vital military information, including satellite images of Syrian troop movements, and telephone interceptions.

This conflict has been falsely portrayed to the Western public as a political revolution crushed in blood by a "ruthless dictatorship".

quote:

I dont see russia or china putting too up to much of a defense for Assad considering the tensions with Tehran at the moment. I dont think either nation wants to be seen as siding with both of those countries when it has been well known for years that the Assad regime was very closely tied with Tehran. If russia or china is going to pick one side in the fight with the west it will probably be Iran.

Hmm hard to tell at this point but I have a feeling that the Russians are very busy behind the scenes trying to end this before NATO or the U.S. decided to end this with the military option.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.