Discussion:
US May Attack Syria
(too old to reply)
Dave Simpson
2004-01-11 21:56:45 UTC
Permalink
This is somewhat hyped, but just enough to tickle the loony lefties
and their hysteria hair-triggers.

It's not implausible. After those Marines are done training for an
invasion and are to be sent to the Mediterranean, after all, as some
of us (ahem) have stated already, isn't it tempting to clean up
Lebanon or Syria itself?

Where are the Dim-O-Dwarves with this issue in their campaigns?
(Aside, that is, from Dean saying that Asad is a "statesman" or
something like that, or from his hard-core supporters, that Asad is
"misunderstood," or a "victim," such as from Israel ("who should give
back the Golan Heights" and whose ciitizens "ought to" go back to
living in bomb shelters nearly all the time).

...

[Knight-Ridder]

Bush's advisers debating military force against Syria


Senior aides to President Bush are vigorously debating what to do
about Syria as evidence mounts that the government in Damascus is
stepping up support for the terror group Hezbollah and allowing
anti-American insurgents to reach Iraq, according to U.S. officials.

Civilians in Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's office are pushing
for military action and have drawn up plans for punitive airstrikes
and cross-border incursions by U.S. forces, according to three
officials.

But Bush's White House advisers, backed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff
and the State Department, are arguing against a new military venture
with much of the U.S. military tied down in Iraq and a
presidential-election year under way.

That view appears to have prevailed, for now.

"We've got all we can handle, and then some, in Iraq, and our military
is either stretched to the breaking point or already broken," said a
senior administration official. He and others spoke on condition of
anonymity.

U.S. officials, including those who oppose military action, say the
government of Bashar Assad continues sponsoring anti-Israeli and
anti-American terror groups, despite U.S. demands that it cease.

Iran, using Syria as a conduit, has resumed deliveries of supplies to
Hezbollah, the radical Lebanese-based Shiite group responsible for
bombing the U.S. Embassy and Marine barracks in Beirut in the 1980s,
the senior official said. Hezbollah also clashes periodically with
Israeli border forces.

Israeli media claimed yesterday that Syrian planes carrying aid to
Iran's earthquake victims returned with weapons for Hezbollah. Iran
denied the report, and U.S. officials in two agencies said they had no
information to confirm it.

Nor has Assad made good on a promise to Secretary of State Colin
Powell last summer to close the Damascus offices of Palestinian
terrorist groups, numerous officials said. While electricity and phone
lines have been cut, the groups continue to operate using cellphones
and generators.

Damascus also is resisting returning about $1 billion in Iraqi assets
that Saddam had moved into Syrian banks, officials said.

The reassessment of Syria policy apparently began in late November,
officials said, when Rumsfeld distributed a memo — known in government
as a "snowflake" — complaining of Syrian behavior.

Rumsfeld charged that insurgents were continuing to cross unhindered
from Syria into Iraq to attack U.S. troops, according to a U.S.
official who has seen the document. He also suggested that Assad had
colluded with the senior Shiite cleric in Iraq, Grand Ayatollah Ali
Husseini al Sistani, who has issued edicts complicating U.S. plans to
organize a government.

"It came over like a brick through a window," the official said of the
Rumsfeld memo.

Some of Bush's hard-line advisers have argued for two years that
Syria's regime should be the next U.S. target after Iraq.

Assad recently told a visiting American delegation that he has bent
over backward to accommodate U.S. pressure to patrol the border and to
crack down on terrorist financing.

...

[Washington Post]

Syria Role On Iraqi Arms Is Studied


National security adviser Condoleezza Rice reeled off a list of White
House grievances against Syria yesterday and said the administration
is investigating a report that Iraq stashed weapons of mass
destruction across the border in Syria.

Rice, briefing reporters in advance of President Bush's trip to Mexico
next week, said the United States will "tie down every lead" about any
possible disposition of unconventional weapons by Iraq, including the
possibility that some were smuggled into Syria. U.S. forces have
searched for months without finding Iraqi weapons of mass destruction,
a failure that has bedeviled the White House.

Rice said the United States has "a number of issues that we'd like to
talk to . . . the Syrians about." These include "the borders with Iraq
and what may have happened in the past there and what may be
continuing to happen there; Syrian support for terrorism in Damascus,
particularly support for Hezbollah and Hamas, and their relationship
with Lebanon in that regard," she said.

As for the possibility that Syria hid chemical and biological weapons
for Iraq, Rice said: "I don't think we are at the point that we can
make a judgment on this issue. There hasn't been any hard evidence
that such a thing happened. But obviously we're going to follow up
every lead, and it would be a serious problem if that, in fact, did
happen."

Administration officials have been expressing increasing frustration
with Syria and have said the country "is on the wrong side in the war
on terror." U.S. officials believe some key leaders of Saddam
Hussein's Baath Party escaped into Syria, which has a Baathist Party
regime and remains on the State Department's list of state sponsors of
terrorism. The administration also has complained that Syria has let
foreign fighters cross the border with Iraq to attack U.S. troops;
Damascus has denied that.

Rice was asked about reports claiming that Hussein used ambulances to
smuggle chemical and biological weapons to three sites hidden in Syria
in the months before the U.S. invasion in March. News services said
the claim was made yesterday on Britain's independent Channel 5 News
by a Syrian dissident, Paris-based human rights campaigner Nizar
Nayyouf, who said he had been given the information by a senior source
inside Syrian military intelligence he had known for two years.

Rice said she "can't dismiss anything that we haven't had an
opportunity to fully assess," but she said the administration has no
"indications that I would consider credible and firm that that has
taken place."

The smuggling report followed an interview this week in which Syrian
President Bashar Assad told London's Daily Telegraph that he would not
abandon his country's suspected chemical and biological programs
unless Israel gives up its undeclared nuclear arsenal.

...

[Dar Al-Hayat]

Syria And Turkey Defy The United States

by Patrick Seale


This week's visit to Turkey by Syria's young leader, President Bashar
Al Assad, is of considerable geo-strategic significance. It has taken
place in close coordination with Syria's ally Iran, whose foreign
minister, Kamal Kharazzi, was in Damascus on the eve of the visit,
while Turkey's foreign minister Abdullah Gul is expected in Tehran on
Saturday.

The three countries are intent on sending a firm message to the United
States about its policy in Iraq. They are telling Washington that Iraq
must remain a unitary state and that they will strongly oppose any
attempt to break it up into three mini-states, Kurdish, Sunni and
Shiite, as several influential American commentators have recently
been recommending. Above all, they are warning the U.S. not to
encourage the Kurds to seek permanent autonomy, let alone
independence.

Saudi Arabia's foreign minister, Prince Saud Al Faisal, has also said
this week that the dismemberment of Iraq would be a threat to his
country's security.

This is the first time that the major states bordering Iraq have
publicly joined forces to check what they see as a dangerous American
temptation, strongly supported by Israel, to seek to weaken Iraq
permanently by rebuilding it on a federal basis, without a strong
center -- thereby dealing a blow to the entire Arab system.

No one in the region is seeking a confrontation with the United
States. The local states want to conciliate Washington, not to
threaten it. On receiving the new American ambassador to Syria this
week, Foreign Minister Farouq Al Sharaa went out of his way to stress
Syria's desire for dialogue and cooperation. President Assad has sent
a similar message in a recent interview with The New York Times. Iran,
in turn, has seized the occasion provided by the devastating
earthquake at Bam to signal that it is ready for friendlier relations
with the United States.

Every state in the region has had to recognize that America's armed
intervention in Iraq - and its declared intention to remain there for
several years - has profoundly altered the strategic environment. But
Syria and its neighbors want to remind Washington that hey, too, have
interests, which cannot be ignored. Syria, Turkey and Iran believe
they can help the United States to stabilize Iraq, but only if the
United States recognizes their security interests and concerns.


Fears about U.S. and Israeli policy

It is now widely recognized that the United States invaded and
occupied Iraq, following 13 years of punitive sanctions, not because
of the alleged danger from Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass
destruction, nor because of his gross abuses of human rights, but
because a strong and independent Iraq was seen as a threat both to the
Western-dominated political order in the Gulf and to Israel.

The Washington hawks who pressed for war - several of them friends and
allies of Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon - made no secret of the
fact that, in their eyes, the overthrow of Saddam Hussein was only the
first move in an ambitious project to reshape the entire Middle East.
Their hope was that, once Arab nationalism, Islamic militancy and
Palestinian resistance had been defeated, the Arab world could be
remade on 'democratic' lines, under a sort of U.S.-Israeli
protectorate.

The local states are now rebelling against this geo-political fantasy,
which they see as fundamentally hostile to their interests and
aspirations. This is the sense of President Bashar Assad's to Turkey,
and it is also the reason why Iran and Egypt are considering resuming
diplomatic relations after a breach of nearly a quarter of a century.

Regional states share a profound apprehension about the future
intentions of the United States and Israel. Do these powers want peace
and stability or are they planning further aggressions? How will the
U.S. deal with the resistance it continues to face in Iraq? What will
happen next June when it plans to hand back authority to the Iraqis?
How long will it maintain its armies at the heart of the Arab world?
Can the U.S., now in the hands of dangerous ideologues, be counted on
to behave rationally?

The fate of the Palestinians under Israeli occupation, suffering
appalling hardship and daily killing in the face of apparent American
indifference, is another huge factor of uncertainty and instability,
not least because of the passions it arouses among the Arab and Muslim
public.


The future of Syrian-Turkish relations

The Middle East peace process was among the subjects discussed this
week by President Assad and his Turkish hosts, with the suggestion
that Turkey might play a mediating role between Syria and Israel.
Assad has recently called on the United States to revive the Syrian
track of the peace process, and has indicated he is ready to resume
negotiations at the point at which they were broken off in 1999-2000
between his father and the then Israeli prime minister, Ehud Barak.
But few observers believe Sharon is ready to return the Golan, which
is the price of a deal with Syria, or that the U.S., preoccupied with
Iraq, will put much energy into promoting an Israeli-Syrian
settlement.

Both Syria and Turkey have no love for the 'neo-cons' now in power in
Washington or for their policies of preventive war and 'regime
change'. Paul Wolfowitz, U.S. deputy defense secretary, is generally
thought to have offended Turkey by pressuring it - unsuccessfully as
it turned out - to allow American troops through its territory to
attack Iraq last March. Syria, in turn, believes that the 'neo-cons'
have no interest in a regional peace, but would rather see the Syrian
regime overthrown, as Richard Perle, a leading 'neo-con' and Arab
hater, has advocated in a recent book.

The fact that U.S. President George W. Bush is only ten months away
from a presidential election, while Sharon is facing increasing
opposition at home, only adds to the general apprehension and
uncertainty.

Such is the context for the current striking improvement in
Syrian-Turkish relations, cemented by Bashar Assad's visit to Ankara,
the first by a Syrian head of state since the Second World War. As it
follows a visit by the Syrian president to Athens last month, it
indicates that Syria is seeking to strike a balance in its relations
with Greece and Turkey. Syria had previously tilted strongly towards
Greece, largely because of Turkey's close ties with Israel.

The suggestion today is that the Turkish prime minister, Recep Tayyip
Erdogan, is in turn seeking to strike a balance in Turkey's relations
with Israel and the Arab states, as well as to distance himself from
Sharon's aggressive policies towards the Palestinians and Syria.
Turkish sources say that Erdogan has been angered by reports that
Israeli agents have been encouraging Kurdish separatism in northern
Iraq, as they have often done in the past during the long history of
conflict between the Kurds and the Baghdad government.

Two subjects were not raised in Ankara this week because they would
have spoiled the cordial atmosphere. The first concerns the Turkish
province of Hatay, formerly the Syrian sanjak of Alexandretta, which
France, then the mandatory power in Syria, ceded to Turkey on the eve
of the Second World War. The Syrians have not forgotten or forgiven
this flagrant act of political immorality, but few Syrians can hope
the territory will ever be recovered. The Turks have their own, even
older, grievance dating back to the First World War when, they would
claim, the Arabs, lured by false promises of independence by Britain,
'stabbed the Ottoman Empire in the back'.

The second question not raised in Ankara this week has been a burning
issue for years. Syria's contention is that Turkey's large-scale
programme of dam-building and irrigation in south-east Anatolia is
starving it of a fair share of Euphrates water, vital to the life of
Syria's own Jazira province. In retaliation, Syria for many years gave
shelter to the Kurdish separatist leader Abdallah Occalan, and
provided his men with training camps in Lebanon's Bekaa valley. War
between Turkey and Syria was averted in 1998 only when Syria agreed to
expel Occalan, who now languishes in a Turkish prison.

Today, united in their joint defense of Iraq's territorial integrity,
the two neighbors have decided resolutely to put such disputes behind
them and look to their joint defenses in a dangerously unsettled
world.

...

[Socialist Worker]

Washington hawks' new plan for war


Seek "regime change" in Syria and Iran, risk a nuclear war on the
Korean peninsula--and punish France while you're at it. That's the
advice of two leading Washington "hawks" for how the Bush
administration should overcome the problems it faces occupying Iraq.

Richard Perle, a leading "neo-conservative" member of the Pentagon's
Defense Policy Advisory Board, and David Frum, the former White House
speechwriter who was fired after bragging that he came up with George
Bush's "axis of evil" slogan, claim that their book An End to Evil is
a "manual" for how to win the "war on terror."

The problem, they believe, is that the U.S. slowed down its military
machine--when it should have stepped on the accelerator. Perle and
Frum propose world domination in a few easy steps.

For starters, they say, the U.S. should cut off Syria's oil imports
from Iraq, raid the country to hunt "terrorists" and seize arms sold
by Iran. Next, Washington should give up on talks with Iran and equip
Iranian dissidents with arms and military supplies.

The Bush White House should also demand an immediate end to North
Korea's nuclear program--and impose an all-out blockade if its
government refuses. And just 15 years after the fall of the Berlin
Wall, Perle and Frum want Europe divided again. "We should force
European governments to choose between Paris and Washington," they
write.

Some of this bluster is an attempt to change the subject after the
failure of hawks' predictions of a post-war paradise in Iraq. The
daily misery and humiliation of living under the thumb of the U.S.
military has only strengthened the resistance to occupation in
Iraq--and mounting numbers of soldiers U.S. killed and maimed has made
a mockery of the neo-conservatives' claim that Iraqis would welcome
American troops.

This new neo-conservative manifesto for pre-emptive war will be used
by some to justify a vote for the Democrat candidate against George
Bush in the November elections. But in fact, Democratic frontrunner
Howard Dean isn't opposed to pre-emptive military strikes. He only
opposes bragging about them.

"Dr. Dean said he would strike all hard-edged references to
pre-emptive strikes in the United States national security
strategy--without actually abandoning pre-emption as an option," The
New York Times reported. Dean himself stated: "Of course we're going
to use our force at our discretion to protect the United States. To
say that we've never had a pre-emption policy would be foolish."

The neo-cons around Bush are among the nastiest and most brazen
proponents of U.S. imperialism. But the Democrats have their own
lineup of imperialist politicians waiting in the wings.
g***@internet.charitydays.co.uk
2004-01-11 22:35:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Simpson
This is somewhat hyped, but just enough to tickle the loony lefties
and their hysteria hair-triggers.
It's not implausible. After those Marines are done training for an
invasion and are to be sent to the Mediterranean, after all, as some
of us (ahem) have stated already, isn't it tempting to clean up
Lebanon or Syria itself?
Where are the Dim-O-Dwarves with this issue in their campaigns?
(Aside, that is, from Dean saying that Asad is a "statesman" or
something like that, or from his hard-core supporters, that Asad is
"misunderstood," or a "victim," such as from Israel
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Israel pops-up.

Interesting.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Post by Dave Simpson
("who should give back the Golan Heights" and whose ciitizens "ought to" go back to
living in bomb shelters nearly all the time).
...
[Knight-Ridder]
Bush's advisers debating military force against Syria
Senior aides to President Bush are vigorously debating what to do
about Syria as evidence mounts that the government in Damascus is
stepping up support for the terror group Hezbollah and allowing
anti-American insurgents to reach Iraq, according to U.S. officials.
Civilians in Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's office are pushing
for military action and have drawn up plans for punitive airstrikes
and cross-border incursions by U.S. forces, according to three
officials.
But Bush's White House advisers, backed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff
and the State Department, are arguing against a new military venture
with much of the U.S. military tied down in Iraq and a
presidential-election year under way.
That view appears to have prevailed, for now.
"We've got all we can handle, and then some, in Iraq, and our military
is either stretched to the breaking point or already broken," said a
senior administration official. He and others spoke on condition of
anonymity.
U.S. officials, including those who oppose military action, say the
government of Bashar Assad continues sponsoring anti-Israeli and
anti-American terror groups, despite U.S. demands that it cease.
Iran, using Syria as a conduit, has resumed deliveries of supplies to
Hezbollah, the radical Lebanese-based Shiite group responsible for
bombing the U.S. Embassy and Marine barracks in Beirut in the 1980s,
the senior official said. Hezbollah also clashes periodically with
Israeli border forces.
Israeli media claimed yesterday that Syrian planes carrying aid to
Iran's earthquake victims returned with weapons for Hezbollah. Iran
denied the report, and U.S. officials in two agencies said they had no
information to confirm it.
Nor has Assad made good on a promise to Secretary of State Colin
Powell last summer to close the Damascus offices of Palestinian
terrorist groups, numerous officials said. While electricity and phone
lines have been cut, the groups continue to operate using cellphones
and generators.
Damascus also is resisting returning about $1 billion in Iraqi assets
that Saddam had moved into Syrian banks, officials said.
The reassessment of Syria policy apparently began in late November,
officials said, when Rumsfeld distributed a memo — known in government
as a "snowflake" — complaining of Syrian behavior.
Rumsfeld charged that insurgents were continuing to cross unhindered
from Syria into Iraq to attack U.S. troops, according to a U.S.
official who has seen the document. He also suggested that Assad had
colluded with the senior Shiite cleric in Iraq, Grand Ayatollah Ali
Husseini al Sistani, who has issued edicts complicating U.S. plans to
organize a government.
"It came over like a brick through a window," the official said of the
Rumsfeld memo.
Some of Bush's hard-line advisers have argued for two years that
Syria's regime should be the next U.S. target after Iraq.
Assad recently told a visiting American delegation that he has bent
over backward to accommodate U.S. pressure to patrol the border and to
crack down on terrorist financing.
...
[Washington Post]
Syria Role On Iraqi Arms Is Studied
National security adviser Condoleezza Rice reeled off a list of White
House grievances against Syria yesterday and said the administration
is investigating a report that Iraq stashed weapons of mass
destruction across the border in Syria.
Rice, briefing reporters in advance of President Bush's trip to Mexico
next week, said the United States will "tie down every lead" about any
possible disposition of unconventional weapons by Iraq, including the
possibility that some were smuggled into Syria. U.S. forces have
searched for months without finding Iraqi weapons of mass destruction,
a failure that has bedeviled the White House.
Rice said the United States has "a number of issues that we'd like to
talk to . . . the Syrians about." These include "the borders with Iraq
and what may have happened in the past there and what may be
continuing to happen there; Syrian support for terrorism in Damascus,
particularly support for Hezbollah and Hamas, and their relationship
with Lebanon in that regard," she said.
As for the possibility that Syria hid chemical and biological weapons
for Iraq, Rice said: "I don't think we are at the point that we can
make a judgment on this issue. There hasn't been any hard evidence
that such a thing happened. But obviously we're going to follow up
every lead, and it would be a serious problem if that, in fact, did
happen."
Administration officials have been expressing increasing frustration
with Syria and have said the country "is on the wrong side in the war
on terror." U.S. officials believe some key leaders of Saddam
Hussein's Baath Party escaped into Syria, which has a Baathist Party
regime and remains on the State Department's list of state sponsors of
terrorism. The administration also has complained that Syria has let
foreign fighters cross the border with Iraq to attack U.S. troops;
Damascus has denied that.
Rice was asked about reports claiming that Hussein used ambulances to
smuggle chemical and biological weapons to three sites hidden in Syria
in the months before the U.S. invasion in March. News services said
the claim was made yesterday on Britain's independent Channel 5 News
by a Syrian dissident, Paris-based human rights campaigner Nizar
Nayyouf, who said he had been given the information by a senior source
inside Syrian military intelligence he had known for two years.
Rice said she "can't dismiss anything that we haven't had an
opportunity to fully assess," but she said the administration has no
"indications that I would consider credible and firm that that has
taken place."
The smuggling report followed an interview this week in which Syrian
President Bashar Assad told London's Daily Telegraph that he would not
abandon his country's suspected chemical and biological programs
unless Israel gives up its undeclared nuclear arsenal.
...
[Dar Al-Hayat]
Syria And Turkey Defy The United States
by Patrick Seale
This week's visit to Turkey by Syria's young leader, President Bashar
Al Assad, is of considerable geo-strategic significance. It has taken
place in close coordination with Syria's ally Iran, whose foreign
minister, Kamal Kharazzi, was in Damascus on the eve of the visit,
while Turkey's foreign minister Abdullah Gul is expected in Tehran on
Saturday.
The three countries are intent on sending a firm message to the United
States about its policy in Iraq. They are telling Washington that Iraq
must remain a unitary state and that they will strongly oppose any
attempt to break it up into three mini-states, Kurdish, Sunni and
Shiite, as several influential American commentators have recently
been recommending. Above all, they are warning the U.S. not to
encourage the Kurds to seek permanent autonomy, let alone
independence.
Saudi Arabia's foreign minister, Prince Saud Al Faisal, has also said
this week that the dismemberment of Iraq would be a threat to his
country's security.
This is the first time that the major states bordering Iraq have
publicly joined forces to check what they see as a dangerous American
temptation, strongly supported by Israel, to seek to weaken Iraq
permanently by rebuilding it on a federal basis, without a strong
center -- thereby dealing a blow to the entire Arab system.
No one in the region is seeking a confrontation with the United
States. The local states want to conciliate Washington, not to
threaten it. On receiving the new American ambassador to Syria this
week, Foreign Minister Farouq Al Sharaa went out of his way to stress
Syria's desire for dialogue and cooperation. President Assad has sent
a similar message in a recent interview with The New York Times. Iran,
in turn, has seized the occasion provided by the devastating
earthquake at Bam to signal that it is ready for friendlier relations
with the United States.
Every state in the region has had to recognize that America's armed
intervention in Iraq - and its declared intention to remain there for
several years - has profoundly alter d the strategic environment. But
Syria and its neighbors want to remind Washington that they, too, have
interests, which cannot be ignored. Syria, Turkey and Iran believe
they can help the United States to stabilize Iraq, but only if the
United States recognizes their security interests and concerns.
Fears about U.S. and Israeli policy
It is now widely recognized that the United States invaded and
occupied Iraq, following 13 years of punitive sanctions, not because
of the alleged danger from Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass
destruction, nor because of his gross abuses of human rights, but
because a strong and independent Iraq was seen as a threat both to the
Western-dominated political order in the Gulf and to Israel.
The Washington hawks who pressed for war - several of them friends and
allies of Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon - made no secret of the
fact that, in their eyes, the overthrow of Saddam Hussein was only the
first move in an ambitious project to reshape the entire Middle East.
Their hope was that, once Arab nationalism, Islamic militancy and
Palestinian resistance had been defeated, the Arab world could be
remade on 'democratic' lines, under a sort of U.S.-Israeli
protectorate.
The local states are now rebelling against this geo-political fantasy,
which they see as fundamentally hostile to their interests and
aspirations. This is the sense of President Bashar Assad's to Turkey,
and it is also the reason why Iran and Egypt are considering resuming
diplomatic relations after a breach of nearly a quarter of a century.
Regional states share a profound apprehension about the future
intentions of the United States and Israel. Do these powers want peace
and stability or are they planning further aggressions? How will the
U.S. deal with the resistance it continues to face in Iraq? What will
happen next June when it plans to hand back authority to the Iraqis?
How long will it maintain its armies at the heart of the Arab world?
Can the U.S., now in the hands of dangerous ideologues, be counted on
to behave rationally?
The fate of the Palestinians under Israeli occupation, suffering
appalling hardship and daily killing in the face of apparent American
indifference, is another huge factor of uncertainty and instability,
not least because of the passions it arouses among the Arab and Muslim
public.
The future of Syrian-Turkish relations
The Middle East peace process was among the subjects discussed this
week by President Assad and his Turkish hosts, with the suggestion
that Turkey might play a mediating role between Syria and Israel.
Assad has recently called on the United States to revive the Syrian
track of the peace process, and has indicated he is ready to resume
negotiations at the point at which they were broken off in 1999-2000
between his father and the then Israeli prime minister, Ehud Barak.
But few observers believe Sharon is ready to return the Golan, which
is the price of a deal with Syria, or that the U.S., preoccupied with
Iraq, will put much energy into promoting an Israeli-Syrian
settlement.
Both Syria and Turkey have no love for the 'neo-cons' now in power in
Washington or for their policies of preventive war and 'regime
change'. Paul Wolfowitz, U.S. deputy defense secretary, is generally
thought to have offended Turkey by pressuring it - unsuccessfully as
it turned out - to allow American troops through its territory to
attack Iraq last March. Syria, in turn, believes that the 'neo-cons'
have no interest in a regional peace, but would rather see the Syrian
regime overthrown, as Richard Perle, a leading 'neo-con' and Arab
hater, has advocated in a recent book.
The fact that U.S. President George W. Bush is only ten months away
from a presidential election, while Sharon is facing increasing
opposition at home, only adds to the general apprehension and
uncertainty.
Such is the context for the current striking improvement in
Syrian-Turkish relations, cemented by Bashar Assad's visit to Ankara,
the first by a Syrian head of state since the Second World War. As it
follows a visit by the Syrian president to Athens last month, it
indicates that Syria is seeking to strike a balance in its relations
with Greece and Turkey. Syria had previously tilted strongly towards
Greece, largely because of Turkey's close ties with Israel.
The suggestion today is that the Turkish prime minister, Recep Tayyip
Erdogan, is in turn seeking to strike a balance in Turkey's relations
with Israel and the Arab states, as well as to distance himself from
Sharon's aggressive policies towards the Palestinians and Syria.
Turkish sources say that Erdogan has been angered by reports that
Israeli agents have been encouraging Kurdish separatism in northern
Iraq, as they have often done in the past during the long history of
conflict between the Kurds and the Baghdad government.
Two subjects were not raised in Ankara this week because they would
have spoiled the cordial atmosphere. The first concerns the Turkish
province of Hatay, formerly the Syrian sanjak of Alexandretta, which
France, then the mandatory power in Syria, ceded to Turkey on the eve
of the Second World War. The Syrians have not forgotten or forgiven
this flagrant act of political immorality, but few Syrians can hope
the territory will ever be recovered. The Turks have their own, even
older, grievance dating back to the First World War when, they would
claim, the Arabs, lured by false promises of independence by Britain,
'stabbed the Ottoman Empire in the back'.
The second question not raised in Ankara this week has been a burning
issue for years. Syria's contention is that Turkey's large-scale
programme of dam-building and irrigation in south-east Anatolia is
starving it of a fair share of Euphrates water, vital to the life of
Syria's own Jazira province. In retaliation, Syria for many years gave
shelter to the Kurdish separatist leader Abdallah Occalan, and
provided his men with training camps in Lebanon's Bekaa valley. War
between Turkey and Syria was averted in 1998 only when Syria agreed to
expel Occalan, who now languishes in a Turkish prison.
Today, united in their joint defense of Iraq's territorial integrity,
the two neighbors have decided resolutely to put such disputes behind
them and look to their joint defenses in a dangerously unsettled
world.
...
[Socialist Worker]
Washington hawks' new plan for war
Seek "regime change" in Syria and Iran, risk a nuclear war on the
Korean peninsula--and punish France while you're at it. That's the
advice of two leading Washington "hawks" for how the Bush
administration should overcome the problems it faces occupying Iraq.
Richard Perle, a leading "neo-conservative" member of the Pentagon's
Defense Policy Advisory Board, and David Frum, the former White House
speechwriter who was fired after bragging that he came up with George
Bush's "axis of evil" slogan, claim that their book An End to Evil is
a "manual" for how to win the "war on terror."
The problem, they believe, is that the U.S. slowed down its military
machine--when it should have stepped on the accelerator. Perle and
Frum propose world domination in a few easy steps.
For starters, they say, the U.S. should cut off Syria's oil imports
from Iraq, raid the country to hunt "terrorists" and seize arms sold
by Iran. Next, Washington should give up on talks with Iran and equip
Iranian dissidents with arms and military supplies.
The Bush White House should also demand an immediate end to North
Korea's nuclear program--and impose an all-out blockade if its
government refuses. And just 15 years after the fall of the Berlin
Wall, Perle and Frum want Europe divided again. "We should force
European governments to choose between Paris and Washington," they
write.
Some of this bluster is an attempt to change the subject after the
failure of hawks' predictions of a post-war paradise in Iraq. The
daily misery and humiliation of living under the thumb of the U.S.
military has only strengthened the resistance to occupation in
Iraq--and mounting numbers of soldiers U.S. killed and maimed has made
a mockery of the neo-conservatives' claim that Iraqis would welcome
American troops.
This new neo-conservative manifesto for pre-emptive war will be used
by some to justify a vote for the Democrat candidate against George
Bush in the November elections. But in fact, Democratic frontrunner
Howard Dean isn't opposed to pre-emptive military strikes. He only
opposes bragging about them.
"Dr. Dean said he would strike all hard-edged references to
pre-emptive strikes in the United States national security
strategy--without actually abandoning pre-emption as an option," The
New York Times reported. Dean himself stated: "Of course we're going
to use our force at our discretion to protect the United States. To
say that we've never had a pre-emption policy would be foolish."
The neo-cons around Bush are among the nastiest and most brazen
proponents of U.S. imperialism. But the Democrats have their own
lineup of imperialist politicians waiting in the wings.
NotBush2004
2004-01-11 22:42:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Simpson
This is somewhat hyped, but just enough to tickle the loony lefties
and their hysteria hair-triggers.
In other words you're as full of lies as normal.

Yep, the U.S. should sacrifice some more of its sons and daughters to fund
the rightwing thirst for oil. We can also fight Israel's wars for it since
we already pay for their military.

One thing we can be assured of, no high level GOP chickenhawk's kid will be
doing the fighting.
--
http://www.costofwar.com/

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

http://lunaville.org/warcasualties/Summary.aspx

------------------------------------------------------------

January 11, 2004


The Barreling Bushes

Four generations of the dynasty have chased profits through cozy ties with
Mideast leaders, spinning webs of conflicts of interest


By Kevin Phillips


WASHINGTON - Dynasties in American politics are dangerous. We saw it with
the Kennedys, we may well see it with the Clintons and we're certainly
seeing it with the Bushes. Between now and the November election, it's
crucial that Americans come to understand how four generations of the
current president's family have embroiled the United States in the Middle
East through CIA connections, arms shipments, rogue banks, inherited war
policies and personal financial links.

As early as 1964, George H.W. Bush, running for the U.S. Senate from Texas,
was labeled by incumbent Democrat Ralph Yarborough as a hireling of the
sheik of Kuwait, for whom Bush's company drilled offshore oil wells. Over
the four decades since then, the ever-reaching Bushes have emerged as the
first U.S. political clan to thoroughly entangle themselves with Middle
Eastern royal families and oil money. The family even has links to the Bin
Ladens - though not to family black sheep Osama bin Laden - going back to
the 1970s.

-snip-

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/sunday/commentary/la-op-phillips11jan11,1,59027.story

-snip-
Steven Litvintchouk
2004-01-12 00:33:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by NotBush2004
Post by Dave Simpson
This is somewhat hyped, but just enough to tickle the loony lefties
and their hysteria hair-triggers.
In other words you're as full of lies as normal.
Yep, the U.S. should sacrifice some more of its sons and daughters to fund
the rightwing thirst for oil.
There is comparatively little oil in Syria. They only export a net of
quarter million barrels a day, after using much of their oil for
themselves. (Compare that to Saudi Arabia's 7 million barrels per day.)
That wouldn't be enough to fight over.

No wonder you like Dean so much. You both shoot from the hip without
checking your facts. Dean has his advisers to correct his
misstatements, and you have me for that job.
Post by NotBush2004
We can also fight Israel's wars for it since
we already pay for their military.
Where Islamist terrorism is concerned, Israel and the U.S. are on the
same side, in case you hadn't noticed.

The Palestinians were probably the only people in the world who
celebrated when we were attacked on 9-11. (Until the TV news cameras
started recording it, at which point they switched over to crocodile tears.)

The Palestinians considered Saddam their hero--since Saddam paid
stipends to the families of suicide-bombers.
Post by NotBush2004
One thing we can be assured of, no high level GOP chickenhawk's kid will be
doing the fighting.
Did any kids of any DEMOCRAT congressmen and/or DEMOCRAT senators fight
in the Iraq war last year? I don't think so.


-- Steven L.
Mitchell Holman
2004-01-12 02:51:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
Post by NotBush2004
Post by Dave Simpson
This is somewhat hyped, but just enough to tickle the loony lefties
and their hysteria hair-triggers.
In other words you're as full of lies as normal.
Yep, the U.S. should sacrifice some more of its sons and daughters to
fund the rightwing thirst for oil.
There is comparatively little oil in Syria. They only export a net of
quarter million barrels a day, after using much of their oil for
themselves. (Compare that to Saudi Arabia's 7 million barrels per day.)
That wouldn't be enough to fight over.
No wonder you like Dean so much. You both shoot from the hip without
checking your facts. Dean has his advisers to correct his
misstatements, and you have me for that job.
Post by NotBush2004
We can also fight Israel's wars for it since
we already pay for their military.
Where Islamist terrorism is concerned, Israel and the U.S. are on the
same side, in case you hadn't noticed.
The Palestinians were probably the only people in the world who
celebrated when we were attacked on 9-11. (Until the TV news cameras
started recording it, at which point they switched over to crocodile tears.)
Wrong. All over Africa newborn boys were being
given the first name of Osama by droves. You have
no idea how hated the US is.
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
The Palestinians considered Saddam their hero--since Saddam paid
stipends to the families of suicide-bombers.
Don't forget the millions that Bush's oil
buddies in the Saudi royal family continue to
pour into Hamas coffers. Funny how that is
"supporting terrorism" when Saddam does it and
simply ignored when the Saudis do the VERY SAME
THING.




"The documents clearly unveil that Saudi Arabia
transferred inter alia large sums of money in a
systematic and ongoing manner to families of suicide
terrorists to the Hamas organization and to persons
and entities identified with Hamas." One Saudi group,
the Saudi Committee for Support of the Palestinian
Uprising, headed by Saudi Interior Minister Prince
Nayef Bin Abdul Aziz, transferred $55.7 million,
mostly to the families of suicide bombers."
http://www.unknowncountry.com/news/?id=1729
Rex the Reaper
2004-01-12 19:17:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
Did any kids of any DEMOCRAT congressmen and/or DEMOCRAT senators fight
in the Iraq war last year? I don't think so.
Big problem with your logic there, dimwit. The Democrats didn't
approve of the war. The Pubbies did.
Steven Litvintchouk
2004-01-12 19:28:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rex the Reaper
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
Did any kids of any DEMOCRAT congressmen and/or DEMOCRAT senators fight
in the Iraq war last year? I don't think so.
Big problem with your logic there, dimwit. The Democrats didn't
approve of the war.
Some Democrats did (though not most of them).
The Minority Leader of the House, Gephardt, not only approved of the war
but co-sponsored the war resolution. In the Senate, Lieberman, Kerry,
and Hillary Clinton all voted for war.

And in any case, if the kids of a Democrat politician enlisted in the
military, then they go wherever the Commander-in-chief orders them to go
and they fight whomever the Commander-in-chief orders them to fight.
When you're in the military, you don't get to pick and choose which wars
you'll fight in.


-- Steven L.
Dave Simpson
2004-01-13 00:14:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
And in any case, if the kids of a Democrat politician enlisted in the
military, then they go wherever the Commander-in-chief orders them to go
and they fight whomever the Commander-in-chief orders them to fight.
When you're in the military, you don't get to pick and choose which wars
you'll fight in.
Don't forget, sir, that going on a Holy Crusade to restore Aristide
to power in Haiti was politically correct, so that was okay.

(How's our buddy Jean-Bertrand doing? Some in Haiti, in fact, are
insisting he leave office. Gee, maybe he should ask France to help
keep him in power if we won't help him again this time. And will the
Black Caucus members of our beloved Congress chain themselves to the
White House fence again, trying to get us to go back to Haiti? What
has Jeb Bush to say about any mass exodus from Haiti to the US,
meaning to Florida?)


Haiti Braces for More Anti-Government Protests

http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=761C3144-7407-43A3-934B9DD88EC2C5D8


Haitian President Urges Calm Following Opposition Protests

http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=F63EFE61-97A7-4B25-AB0342E80E420B34


US Condemns Haitian Government Actions Against Demonstrators

http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=7ED11EE3-60D0-4751-8990DA59439E97BE&Title=US%20Condemns%20Haitian%20Government%20Actions%20Against%20Demonstrators&db=current


Powell 'Disturbed' by Situation in Haiti

http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=B13C2FB5-86E7-4B3D-9D4433FB01CADB90&Title=Powell%20%27Disturbed%27%20by%20Situation%20in%20Haiti&db=current


Concern Growing Over Political Instability in Haiti

http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=52174E45-5F2D-47CA-A15A430B877D80BB&Title=Concern%20Growing%20Over%20Political%20Instability%20in%20Haiti&db=current
johnny
2004-01-13 15:38:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
Post by Rex the Reaper
Big problem with your logic there, dimwit. The Democrats didn't
approve of the war.
Some Democrats did (though not most of them).
The Minority Leader of the House, Gephardt, not only approved of the war
but co-sponsored the war resolution. In the Senate, Lieberman, Kerry,
and Hillary Clinton all voted for war.
That was all just for political positioning. Leading Dems didn't want
to get caught on the wrong side of the bushies patriotic war-drum
pounding - which was so loud as to drown out the voices of reason.
Surely you remember how about a year ago they tried (through the slick
use of the corporate-controlled, conservative media) to paint anyone
who opposed the war as "unpatriotic".

Well, no politician - left or right, Democrat or Republican (at least
none with aspirations for higher office) would ever allow themselves
to be called unpatriotic.
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
And in any case, if the kids of a Democrat politician enlisted in the
military, then they go wherever the Commander-in-chief orders them to go
and they fight whomever the Commander-in-chief orders them to fight.
When you're in the military, you don't get to pick and choose which wars
you'll fight in.
How very true - that's why we need to have total trust in our
president not to abuse that power and start wars purely for political
and/or ideological reasons.

Clearly, the current administration has violated that trust. We'll see
in November if enough voters will hold them accountable.

EJECT BUSH '04
Dave Simpson
2004-01-12 22:41:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rex the Reaper
Big problem with your logic there, dimwit. The Democrats didn't
approve of the war. The Pubbies did.
It's not only the membership but their voters who give the Dim Party
its name and lousy reputation.


In the House alone, 81 Democrats as well as 215 Republicans voted to
authorize use of force against Iraq.

In the Senate, a number of Democrats there also joined Republicans
in voting for authorization (77-23).


Dave Simpson
LeftLunatics
2004-01-12 23:15:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Simpson
Post by Rex the Reaper
Big problem with your logic there, dimwit. The Democrats didn't
approve of the war. The Pubbies did.
It's not only the membership but their voters who give the Dim Party
its name and lousy reputation.
In the House alone, 81 Democrats as well as 215 Republicans voted to
authorize use of force against Iraq.
In the Senate, a number of Democrats there also joined Republicans
in voting for authorization (77-23).
Dave Simpson
Democrat voters are quite ignorant, ill-informed, and stupid. Rex the
Reaper is a perfect example. Apparently it caught him totally unawares to
learn that a whole host of Democrats in both the House and the Senate
authorized the war against Iraq.

Rex the Reaper is probably your typical Ignorant Democrat Voter - unaware of
actual Congressional voting records, ill-informed about current politics,
and unlikely to ever get any better.
Rex the Reaper
2004-01-13 02:04:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by LeftLunatics
Democrat voters are quite ignorant, ill-informed, and stupid.
Babs, is that you?

There are idiots on both sides but more so on the right. You're the
perfect example, Mrs. Looney-Tunes. Just keep eating the lies that
Bush shits out for you and eveyting will be okay.
Dave Simpson
2004-01-12 22:20:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by NotBush2004
Post by Dave Simpson
This is somewhat hyped, but just enough to tickle the loony lefties
and their hysteria hair-triggers.
In other words you're as full of lies as normal.
I don't know what's worse, your poor character or your Orwellianism.
Post by NotBush2004
Yep, the U.S. should sacrifice some more of its sons and daughters to fund
the rightwing thirst for oil. We can also fight Israel's wars for it since
we already pay for their military.
A lack of logic and morality don't make you look any better, either.
Post by NotBush2004
One thing we can be assured of, no high level GOP chickenhawk's kid will be
doing the fighting.
Nor will the Dims' kids, Mr. Too-Dim. And that includes the kids of
the many Democrats who voted to authorize the war, even the typical
Dim liars who now spin the issue by saying they were deceived, this
wasn't what they originally had in mind, or whatever other lie they
concoct. (And you dare accuse people telling the truth of lying --
how hypocritical as well as stupid!)


Dave Simpson
Steven Litvintchouk
2004-01-12 00:38:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Simpson
This is somewhat hyped, but just enough to tickle the loony lefties
and their hysteria hair-triggers.
In fact, Richard Perle had said publicly that after iraq, Syria and
Libya are our next targets. Libya seems to have backed down enough that
we may not do them. So that leaves Syria.
Post by Dave Simpson
After those Marines are done training for an
invasion and are to be sent to the Mediterranean, after all, as some
of us (ahem) have stated already, isn't it tempting to clean up
Lebanon or Syria itself?
We've already got 150,000 troops in Iraq, which is on the syrian border.
After Iraq is totally pacified, our army can strike westward from Iraq
into Syria, while Israel strikes northward across the Golan Heights.
We'll catch Damascus in a pincer attack, the whole war will be over in a
month.



-- Steven L.
Mitchell Holman
2004-01-12 02:53:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
Post by Dave Simpson
This is somewhat hyped, but just enough to tickle the loony lefties
and their hysteria hair-triggers.
In fact, Richard Perle had said publicly that after iraq, Syria and
Libya are our next targets. Libya seems to have backed down enough that
we may not do them. So that leaves Syria.
Post by Dave Simpson
After those Marines are done training for an
invasion and are to be sent to the Mediterranean, after all, as some
of us (ahem) have stated already, isn't it tempting to clean up
Lebanon or Syria itself?
We've already got 150,000 troops in Iraq, which is on the syrian border.
After Iraq is totally pacified, our army can strike westward from Iraq
into Syria, while Israel strikes northward across the Golan Heights.
We'll catch Damascus in a pincer attack, the whole war will be over in a
month.
And the entire world will then regard the
US as an imperialist warmonger. But then, Bush
doesn't CARE what the rest of the world thinks.
Until he needs their prisoners or their money.
Dave Simpson
2004-01-12 22:32:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
Post by Dave Simpson
This is somewhat hyped, but just enough to tickle the loony lefties
and their hysteria hair-triggers.
In fact, Richard Perle had said publicly that after iraq, Syria and
Libya are our next targets. Libya seems to have backed down enough that
we may not do them. So that leaves Syria.
While we are not obliged to act as Israel's Bigger Stick in the
Middle East, it's a different matter completely with Syria when it
continues to meddle in Iraq, and if Syria is involved in transport of
terrorists or weapons into Iraq, we have every right to attack and
destroy the Assad regime. This, of course, upsets the loony left-wing
losers, but they have forfeited respect of those of us who know and
are better; fuck them, along with Asad.

Perle can strike some as arrogant (those who think he's bloodthirsty
are simply too-typical left-wing losers; all the dictators and
terrorist vermin have as a means of communication is force, and it's
our prerogative as well as duty, when our interests or our nation
itself are threatened, to wipe out the enemy), but he's certainly
believeable (unlike sappier-sounding David Frum, who was interviewed
with Perle on Terry Gross's show, "Fresh Air," broadcast on NPR; I
listened to both Perle and Frum and the distinction between them was
clear), and as ugly as his policy suggestions may seem, they're
fundamentally based on correctness of logic and morality. We need
never tolerate scum if we're threatened by them and in a position to
stop them, by force if need be.

It's not really up to a "war-mongering" [sic] Bush administration
but to Syria (Asad and his regime) what happens eventually. Asad is
an international criminal (unlike Bush, who is described as such by
the lying scum here and elsewhere in the world), and his regime is
criminal as well as dictatorial, and Asad is obliged to end all
support of terrorism directed as proxy Iranian and Syrian warfare
against Israel, and where we are justified in attacking the Asad
regime is failure of Asad's obligations as well to cease meddling in
Syria and supporting terrorism in Iraq, ESPECIALLY AGAINST OUR
MILITARY. (It would have already been 100% justified and supported by
Americans and others of quality if we had already struck Syrian
targets and officials.)

Asad is starting to squirm and is seeking peace talks with Israel.
He's not done or offered enough yet, though. And, who says he'll do
anything other than what he's always done before, where he'll make
promises to stop this or change that and then proceed to continue
doing whatever is wrong that he promised to stop or change?

Fuck him. Even though it would be icing on the cake, we don't even
have to find Iraqi WMDs in Syria; Asad already has asked to have the
shit bombed out of him and his regime.

Apparently his regime has had secret talks with Israel already, and
it's also likely he's done the same with our people (including during
Powell's most recent reported visit to Damascus). But we know he has
never kept his word.

It's up to Asad. Syria is asking to be attacked by US forces as
long as it continues to support terrorism against US forces in Iraq.

That bastard should cease all the wrongdoing and get the hell out of
Lebanon.
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
Post by Dave Simpson
After those Marines are done training for an
invasion and are to be sent to the Mediterranean, after all, as some
of us (ahem) have stated already, isn't it tempting to clean up
Lebanon or Syria itself?
We've already got 150,000 troops in Iraq, which is on the syrian border.
After Iraq is totally pacified, our army can strike westward from Iraq
into Syria, while Israel strikes northward across the Golan Heights.
We'll catch Damascus in a pincer attack, the whole war will be over in a
month.
It certainly wouldn't break my heart or alarm me if that happened.
The only problem would be what the Iranians would increase doing once
our forces left Iraq. (Those bastards also are trouble, big trouble.)


Dave Simpson
Dave Simpson
2004-01-12 23:05:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
In fact, Richard Perle had said publicly that after iraq, Syria and
Libya are our next targets. Libya seems to have backed down enough that
we may not do them. So that leaves Syria.
For those who wish to listen:

http://freshair.npr.org/day_fa.jhtml?todayDate=01/08/2004


Also:

...

[AEI]

An End to Evil

How to Win the War on Terror

by David Frum and Richard Perle


"An End to Evil" charts the agenda for what's next in the war on
terrorism, as articulated by David Frum, former presidential
speechwriter and bestselling author of "The Right Man," and Richard
Perle, former assistant secretary of defense and one of the most
influential foreign-policy leaders in Washington.

This world is an unsafe place for Americans--and the U.S. government
remains unready to defend its people. In "An End to Evil," David Frum
and Richard Perle sound the alert about the dangers around us: the
continuing threat from terrorism, the crisis with North Korea, the
aggressive ambitions of China. Frum and Perle provide a detailed,
candid account of America's vulnerabilities: a military whose leaders
resist change, intelligence agencies mired in bureaucracy, diplomats
who put friendly relations with their foreign colleagues ahead of the
nation's interests. Perle and Frum lay out a bold program to defend
America--and to win the war on terror. Among the topics this book
addresses:

* why the United States risks its security if it submits to the
authority of the United Nations

* why France and Saudi Arabia have to be treated as adversaries, not
allies, in the war on terror

* why the United States must take decisive action against Iran--now

* what to do in North Korea if negotiations fail

* why everything you read in the newspapers about the Israeli-Arab
dispute is wrong

* how our government must be changed if we are to fight the war on
terror to victory--not just stalemate

* where the next great terror threat is coming from--and what we can
do to protect ourselves


"An End to Evil" will define the conservative point of view on foreign
policy for a new generation--and shape the agenda for the 2004
presidential-election year and beyond. With a keen insiders'
perspective on how our leaders are confronting--or not
confronting--the war on terrorism, David Frum and Richard Perle make a
convincing argument for why the toughest line is the safest line.



David Frum and Richard Perle are two of Washington's most influential
insiders and their words have steered the direction of American
foreign policy. In their new book, "An End to Evil: How To Win The War
On Terror," Frum and Perle reveal their blueprint for what could
become the Bush administration's next agenda in the war on terror:

* Support the overthrow of the terrorist mullahs of Iran.

* End the terrorist regime of Syria.

* Face the fact that Saudi policies are a danger to the United States.

* Recognize that France is a rival.

* Demand that the United Nations rewrite its charter to permit the
United States to defend itself from terror--and prepare to withdraw
from the world organization if it refuses.

* Be prepared to blockade North Korea if diplomatic pressure fails to
end their nuclear program.

* Abandon the illusion that a Palestinian state will contribute in any
important way to U.S. security.

* Tighten immigration at home and introduce a national identity card
to enhance domestic security.

* Blockade North Korea to press that member of the axis of evil to
abandon its nuclear program, and put US troops in the peninsula on a
war-fighting footing.

* Abandon the illusion that a Palestinian state will contribute in any
important way to U.S. security.

* Transform the US military into an anti-terror fighting force--and
radically reduce the role of the failed bureaucracies at the CIA, the
FBI, and the State Department.


Since the fall of Baghdad and now the capture of Saddam Hussein, both
supporters and opponents of the Bush administration have asked what
should and could come next in the terror war. In this new and
important book, two of Washington's best known advocates of a strong
foreign policy provide the answers.


While the U.S. campaign in Iraq has ended Iraqi sponsorship of
terrorism and its weapons development programs, we must strengthen our
resolve in the war on terror at home, abroad, and in the arena of
ideas. This means enforcing immigration laws and identifying would-be
terrorists among us; dealing realistically and forcefully with rogue
regimes in Iran, Syria, and North Korea; and reforming U.S.
institutions dealing with the war on terror.

David Frum and Richard Perle are resident fellows at the American
Enterprise Institute. David Frum is a former speechwriter for
President George W. Bush and author of several books, including "The
Right Man: The Surprise Presidency of George W. Bush." Richard Perle
is a member of the Defense Policy Board and a former assistant
secretary of defense for international security policy.

The war on terror has come to its point of crisis. In the months since
the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, the war has lost much of its
momentum. The will to win is ebbing in Washington; bad old habits of
complacency and denial are reasserting themselves.

Politics is partly to blame: for some Democrats, winning the war has
become a less urgent priority than winning the next election.

Bureaucratic inertia is also a culprit. President Bush has demanded
that the military fight new wars in new ways. He demanded that the
intelligence services second-guess their familiar assumptions. He
demanded fresh thought, strong measures, and clear language; all of
these departures from the ordinary have generated resentment and
resistance.

Many critics of the president's policies have complained that
Americans have not been asked to "sacrifice" enough, but the sacrifice
that is most urgently needed is an intellectual sacrifice--a
willingness to sacrifice obsolete ideas in the face of new
circumstances.

Really, it is no wonder that those few policymakers who have urged a
strong policy against terror have been called a "cabal." To the
enormous majority in any government who wish to continue to do things
as they have always been done, the tiny minority that dares propose
anything new will always look like a presumptuous, unrealistic,
intriguing faction.

In the two years since September 11, there have been enormous
achievements, and perhaps the most important has been the overthrow of
Saddam. The U.S. campaign in Iraq accomplished at least seven great
objectives:

1. It put an end to the threat from whatever weapons of mass
destruction Saddam possessed as of 2003--and far more important, from
those weapons he would have possessed had he been left in place.

2. The United States eliminated a Middle Eastern regime that had been
a major sponsor of terror for thirty years--and that had reached out
to Osama bin Laden as long ago as the early 1990s.

3. The United States denied its enemies in the Middle East the
enormous victory they would have won had Saddam survived to boast that
he had triumphed over America.

4. The United States has learned valuable lessons about how to fight
wars in the region and how to reconstruct afterward.

5. The United States gave other potential enemies a vivid
demonstration of America's ability to win swift and total victory over
significant enemy forces with minimal U.S. casualties.

6. We aided the forces of democracy in the region by showing that even
the most fearsome local dictatorships are more fragile than they look.

7. We eliminated the Arab world's cruelest and most aggressive
dictator, liberating an entire nation and opening the way to a decent
society in Iraq and reform throughout the region.


Of course there is much more to do. We must begin by recognizing our
enemy. For many reasons, our leaders have been reluctant to give this
enemy a name. Yet it is a fact that of the thirty-six organizations
that the Department of State designates as "foreign terrorist
organizations," seventeen purport to act in the name of Islam and six
more are predominantly Muslim in membership. The United States has no
proper quarrel with Islam, but a radical strain within Islam has
declared war on Americans. Even more ominously, this radical strain
draws appreciable support from public opinion in much of the Arab and
Muslim world, both Sunni and Shiite, both religious and secular. It is
capable as well of forming alliances with non-Islamic autocratic
regimes like that of North Korea.

The war against these enemies has three fronts: at home, abroad, and
in the realm of ideas.


The War at Home

At home, we need to deny potential terrorists access to American soil,
curtail their freedom of action should they nevertheless enter the
country, and deny them material and moral assistance from domestic and
foreign supporters.

Islamic terrorism remains predominantly an imported threat--and one
usually imported illegally. Of the forty-eight foreign-born Islamic
extremists who have been convicted of or confessed to involvement in
terrorist plots since 1993 (including the nineteen September 11
hijackers), twelve were present illegally in the United States, and
nearly half had violated immigration laws at some previous point. In
other words, more effective enforcement of existing immigration laws
would go far to protect American security.

Those laws cannot be enforced, however, so long as the United States
lacks mechanisms for quickly and readily identifying who legally
resides in the country and who does not. The United States needs a
national identity card based on the latest biometric technology that
enables local police to verify the true identity and immigration
status of every person with whom they come in contact.

Currently, U.S. law permits immigration authorities to bar the entry
of persons implicated in terrorist activity, but only in rare cases
may they exclude persons who have expressed terrorist sympathies. It's
a sobering thought that Dr. Ayman Zawahiri, al Qaeda's number two
leader, was able to enter the United States in 1995 for a crosscountry
fundraising tour. Association with known terrorists should be grounds
for the rejection of a visa application.

Inside the country, the United States must develop new profiling
technologies that enable the authorities to pinpoint potential
terrorist suspects. This can be done in ways that protect individual
privacy and civil liberties. For example, computer data-mining can use
publicly available records to create dossiers on individuals who have
engaged in a pattern of suspicious activities. Those dossiers would be
tracked by a computer-generated anonymous code; no human being would
know to whom they belonged. Only when the dossier generated a high
degree of probability of terrorist involvement would the computer
alert law enforcement; at that point, officials would go before a
judge to request a warrant to permit them to connect the profile to a
name and carry out counterterrorist surveillance.

It is unfortunately true that some of this country's Islamic
organizations and charities have been compromised by extremism. Some
have raised money for foreign terrorist organizations. The
administration now has authority to close terrorist-implicated
charities.

But law must be reinforced by a clear public consensus that all
Americans, whatever their background, are expected to support their
country against its foreign enemies. Individuals who endorse or
condone terrorism should never be welcome at any office of the U.S.
government, and that same common-sense rule should apply to groups
that employ such individuals as officers or have them on their boards
of directors. The full force of public opinion should be deployed to
persuade American Muslims to liberate their organizations from
extremist influence. We urgently need an American Islam that feels at
home on American soil, that is committed to American values and the
defense of the American nation, and that may someday challenge Islamic
extremism with the example of a democratic and pluralist Islam born in
the USA.


The War Abroad

The war abroad must begin to focus on implicated regimes. Even
so-called stateless terrorist groups depend heavily on the help and
protection of states and heads of states. Without a base in
Afghanistan and the acquiescence of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, al
Qaeda could never have matured into the deadly menace that killed
three thousand Americans. Without the backing of Iran and Syria,
Hezbollah would not exist at all.

Our highest priority should be terror-implicated regimes that are
nearing completion of deliverable weapons of mass destruction--above
all, Iran and North Korea. In both cases, we should seek solutions
short of war. For North Korea, we recommend a policy of isolation,
backed by a credible defense posture--including the redeployment of
American forces in South Korea beyond the reach of North Korean
artillery. We must stand ready to use force as a last resort. We do
not know where all the North Korean nuclear facilities are, but we
know where the most important one is. The knowledge that the United
States might strike North Korea will work mightily to persuade North
Korea's Chinese sponsors belatedly to exert their influence to bring
North Korea to its sense and avoid a conflict that would threaten
China's vital interests.

In Iran, we ought to back those Iranians seeking to overthrow the
corrupt theocracy that misrules that country and wages terror war
against the United States, in much the same way that we supported
Polish Solidarity in the 1980s: with money, with technology, with
information, and by directing international attention to the regime's
denial of human rights to its own people.

American power has its limits, and the United States will often have
to do business with regimes that the American people dislike or
despise. But we should never concede the legitimacy of aggressive,
undemocratic governments. The mullahs have no more right to rule Iran
than any other gang of criminals has to seize the persons and property
of any group of people. When such criminals threaten the security of
the United States, we should eject them from power with no more
compunction than a police sharpshooter feels when he downs a
hostage-taker.

Some of our most difficult problems in the war on terror involve our
two-faced friends in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

What we should want from Saudi Arabia is obvious: full cooperation in
the war on terror. We are not getting it. To induce greater
cooperation, we should contemplate stiffer measures.

* As a starter, our leaders should tell the truth about the Saudi
state and its record of lending aid and comfort to terrorists and
terrorist paymasters.

* Those individual Saudis who finance terror should be denied
permission to set foot on American soil. It should be made a crime for
any American to do business with them. And their assets should be
subject to forfeiture under Trading with the Enemy acts.

* It is intolerable that the Saudis should finance global missionary
campaigns on behalf of their Wahhabi form of Islam while themselves
suppressing all religious liberty at home. They should be made to
understand that the United States expects that either Saudi Arabia
open itself to foreign faiths or else stop its own prosyletizing work.

* Terror must replace oil as issue one in the relationship with Saudi
Arabia. Anything less than total cooperation against terror must carry
the severest consequences for the Saudi state--including possible
American support for secessionist movements for the severely oppressed
Shiite people of Saudi Arabia's oil-rich eastern regions.


Pakistan presents some even more intractable issues. One-third of the
world's Muslims live in the Indian subcontinent. The success or
failure of Pakistani society--and the tensions between Muslims and
others in India-may ultimately prove to be even more decisive to the
future direction of the Islamic world even than events in the Middle
East. Encouraging peace and prosperity in the subcontinent is becoming
a high and potentially supreme American interest. One immediate step:
Pakistan is seeking more generous access to the American market. Those
wishes should be granted, but only on the understanding that freer
U.S.-Pakistani trade must progress in tandem with freer trade between
Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka, restoring the openness and
interdependence tragically destroyed by the partition of 1947.


The War of Ideas

Extremist Islam is an ideology--not a religion--and it must be
countered in the realm of ideas. So far, America's efforts on this
battleground have been strikingly unsuccessful.

A war of ideas is not necessarily a war of words. The United States
will not change minds in the Middle East by broadcasting higher
quality propaganda at them. Middle Eastern minds will respond to
Middle Eastern facts, and the United States will succeed or fail in
the war of ideas in proportion to its ability to alter those facts.
Opening the Middle East to trade and investment is one way to alter
those facts; another is to raise the status of women.

Many foreign-policy professionals insist that the single most
important answer to terror is a Palestinian state. Such a state, if
rightly constituted, could offer benefits to Palestinians and Israelis
alike. But it is hardly likely to contribute much to the fight against
terror. Worse, since the state is very unlikely to be either stable or
successful, it will require massive American support to survive--not
only economic support, but also military and intelligence backing
against the radicalism of its own population. There is a very real
risk that a Palestinian state could prove in reality to be a Middle
Eastern South Vietnam.

One reason that the United States is not doing better in the war of
ideas is that the U.S. government remains an institution stuck in the
past. To win the war on terror will require massive reform of U.S.
institutions, including the military, the intelligence services, and
the foreign policy-making apparatus.


Among other urgent measures:

* The FBI's counterterrorism mission should end--
and the job should be given instead to a new domestic intelligence
service.

* The role of political appointees at the State Department should be
dramatically expanded: foreign policy should be subject to the normal
processes of political change.

* The work of defense transformation begun by Secretary Rumsfeld must
be accelerated.

* The American alliance system must also be transformed. The United
States must acknowledge that a closely integrated Europe has ceased to
be an American interest, if it ever was one. It must face up to the
fact that France has ceased to be a U.S. ally in any meaningful sense
of the word and that the Russian government of President Vladimir
Putin is playing some sinister double games.

* Above all, the time has come for reform of the U.N. Charter, to
expand the Article 51 right of self-defense to include the pre-emption
of imminent terrorist threats.


The war on terror is not just a metaphor, and it can be won. Indeed
the United States has large and impressive advantages against its
enemies. What will decide the outcome is less the correlation of
forces than the will to win--and the imagination to accept new ideas.


[AFP]

Bush Iraq war advisors advise cutting military ties to France


French opposition to the Iraq war has prompted two of President George
W. Bush's Iraq war advisors to recommend cutting US military ties and
isolating France from Europe.

"(French President) Jacques Chirac volunteered as Saddam Hussein's
most important ally and protector," Richard Perle and David Frum said
in their new book "An End to Evil."

The authors, whose promotional tour began Monday, promote a so-called
neo-conservative use of US military force to pacify the world.

They take aim at countries they said stand in the way of Bush's "War
on Terror," especially Saudi Arabia, Russia and France. The authors
allot more ink and harsher language to France than to Russia.

They call French diplomacy "hostile."

"We should start a debate within Europe over the French ambition to
build the European Union into an anti-American counterweight," they
authors wrote.

"And where France led, other NATO countries followed: Germany most
importantly, but also France's pilot fish, Belgium."

"A more closely integrated Europe is no longer an unqualified American
interest."

Perle is a member of the Pentagon advisory board, who resigned his
chairmanship over a conflict of interest. Frum is the former Bush
speech writer who coined "Axis of Evil" and who left the White House
in 2003.

They were two of the hardline administration officials who argued for
toppling Saddam Hussein.

Perle and Frum said that most European countries probably disapprove
of the French position, especially the former Soviet bloc states.
Enlarging NATO would dilute France's influence.

"The bigger the EU grows, the less amenable it will become to French
aspirations to boss the other states," they wrote.

"We should force European governments to choose between Paris and
Washington."

"We should insist that all-important NATO business be conducted by
NATO's military council, on which France does not sit.

"And we can visibly limit our cooperation with France's military and
intelligence services to reflect the level of political cooperation."
Cleopatra
2004-01-13 01:49:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
Post by Dave Simpson
This is somewhat hyped, but just enough to tickle the loony lefties
and their hysteria hair-triggers.
In fact, Richard Perle had said publicly that after iraq, Syria and
Libya are our next targets. Libya seems to have backed down enough that
we may not do them. So that leaves Syria.
Post by Dave Simpson
After those Marines are done training for an
invasion and are to be sent to the Mediterranean, after all, as some
of us (ahem) have stated already, isn't it tempting to clean up
Lebanon or Syria itself?
We've already got 150,000 troops in Iraq, which is on the syrian border.
After Iraq is totally pacified, our army can strike westward from Iraq
into Syria, while Israel strikes northward across the Golan Heights.
We'll catch Damascus in a pincer attack, the whole war will be over in a
month.
-- Steven L.
Respectfully, Steve, with the high tech 4th Infantry fresh and
fine-tuned for precisely this type of action, Syria would last about
five to eight days. After all, Damascus is only about 120 miles from
Iraq's western border. Too, taken off the leash, Israel could smash
the Syrians north of Damascus and the Golan in nothing flat. They've
got stuff in their Air Force now you can't believe - fighters,
bombers, attack helicopters, etc. Pretty much what we got but less of
it. Syria wouldn't be able to move a jeep or field piece without it
being blown to smithereens.

I would dearly love to see Syria taken out because so much terrorist
training takes place within its borders. The fact that Kadafi did what
he did, virtually accepting a public humiliation in the Arab world,
suggests to me that something indeed may be on the drawing board for
Syria. Should this actually happen, Iran would be seriously
destabilized without us ever crossing their border.

*Cleopatra*
Mike Bates
2004-01-13 05:15:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
Post by Dave Simpson
This is somewhat hyped, but just enough to tickle the loony lefties
and their hysteria hair-triggers.
In fact, Richard Perle had said publicly that after iraq, Syria and
Libya are our next targets. Libya seems to have backed down enough that
we may not do them. So that leaves Syria.
Post by Dave Simpson
After those Marines are done training for an
invasion and are to be sent to the Mediterranean, after all, as some
of us (ahem) have stated already, isn't it tempting to clean up
Lebanon or Syria itself?
We've already got 150,000 troops in Iraq, which is on the syrian border.
After Iraq is totally pacified, our army can strike westward from Iraq
into Syria, while Israel strikes northward across the Golan Heights.
We'll catch Damascus in a pincer attack, the whole war will be over in a
month.
Sheer genius...you ever wondered WHY we have 150,000 troops in Iraq,
which by most reckonings, is not enough? You might want to consider
what would happen in Iraq if our troops just up and left. My guess
would be civil war. Whats your guess?

Oh, sorry, I see that you just wanted to sound "army-ish" by using the
term "pincer attack."
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
-- Steven L.
jonah
2004-01-13 12:01:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
We've already got 150,000 troops in Iraq, which is on the syrian border.
After Iraq is totally pacified, our army can strike westward from Iraq
into Syria, while Israel strikes northward across the Golan Heights.
We'll catch Damascus in a pincer attack, the whole war will be over in a
month.
Bring the zionist shitheads on. Syria and Iran stand ready to vaporise
the terrorist state and it's American zionist army. This isn't going
to be
another Iraq, were they can just walk into a sanction weakened country
using their vastly superior high-tec weaponry. Tecnically speaking
Syria are
more than a match for the zionist cowardly bullies. Syria and Iran has
the backing of Russia, a country that could finish the American
zionist controlled military. Russia has positioned sunburn missiles
systems in Syria and in Iran and Israel or the US have nothing in
there arsenal to defend against this type of weapon. Israel will be
wiped of the map like dog-shit from the sole of
your shoe. And once zionism is finally finished than we can have world
peace.


Jonah
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
Post by Dave Simpson
This is somewhat hyped, but just enough to tickle the loony lefties
and their hysteria hair-triggers.
In fact, Richard Perle had said publicly that after iraq, Syria and
Libya are our next targets. Libya seems to have backed down enough that
we may not do them. So that leaves Syria.
Post by Dave Simpson
After those Marines are done training for an
invasion and are to be sent to the Mediterranean, after all, as some
of us (ahem) have stated already, isn't it tempting to clean up
Lebanon or Syria itself?
We've already got 150,000 troops in Iraq, which is on the syrian border.
After Iraq is totally pacified, our army can strike westward from Iraq
into Syria, while Israel strikes northward across the Golan Heights.
We'll catch Damascus in a pincer attack, the whole war will be over in a
month.
-- Steven L.
GoDeanGo
2004-01-13 12:41:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by jonah
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
We've already got 150,000 troops in Iraq, which is on the syrian border.
After Iraq is totally pacified, our army can strike westward from Iraq
into Syria, while Israel strikes northward across the Golan Heights.
We'll catch Damascus in a pincer attack, the whole war will be over in a
month.
Bring the zionist shitheads on. Syria and Iran stand ready to vaporise
the terrorist state and it's American zionist army. This isn't going
to be
another Iraq, were they can just walk into a sanction weakened country
using their vastly superior high-tec weaponry. Tecnically speaking
Syria are
more than a match for the zionist cowardly bullies. Syria and Iran has
the backing of Russia, a country that could finish the American
zionist controlled military. Russia has positioned sunburn missiles
systems in Syria and in Iran and Israel or the US have nothing in
there arsenal to defend against this type of weapon. Israel will be
wiped of the map like dog-shit from the sole of
your shoe. And once zionism is finally finished than we can have world
peace.
Jonah
You and your kind will be crushed like a filthy Muslim insect, Jonah.
You'll be visiting Allah MUCH sooner than you expected to.
jonah
2004-01-14 05:17:43 UTC
Permalink
You and your kind will be crushed like a filthy Muslim insect, Jonah.
Post by GoDeanGo
You'll be visiting Allah MUCH sooner than you expected to.
Zionism will fall and America with it. You will be flushed down the toilet
like the turds you are, and right into the lap of jehovah - the god of turds.

Jonah
Post by GoDeanGo
Post by jonah
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
We've already got 150,000 troops in Iraq, which is on the syrian border.
After Iraq is totally pacified, our army can strike westward from Iraq
into Syria, while Israel strikes northward across the Golan Heights.
We'll catch Damascus in a pincer attack, the whole war will be over in a
month.
Bring the zionist shitheads on. Syria and Iran stand ready to vaporise
the terrorist state and it's American zionist army. This isn't going
to be
another Iraq, were they can just walk into a sanction weakened country
using their vastly superior high-tec weaponry. Tecnically speaking
Syria are
more than a match for the zionist cowardly bullies. Syria and Iran has
the backing of Russia, a country that could finish the American
zionist controlled military. Russia has positioned sunburn missiles
systems in Syria and in Iran and Israel or the US have nothing in
there arsenal to defend against this type of weapon. Israel will be
wiped of the map like dog-shit from the sole of
your shoe. And once zionism is finally finished than we can have world
peace.
Jonah
In The Darkness
2004-01-14 05:21:24 UTC
Permalink
NO NO NO,

Don't hate us. Hate

"King George de Turd!"


:)
Post by GoDeanGo
You and your kind will be crushed like a filthy Muslim insect, Jonah.
Post by GoDeanGo
You'll be visiting Allah MUCH sooner than you expected to.
Zionism will fall and America with it. You will be flushed down the toilet
like the turds you are, and right into the lap of jehovah - the god of turds.
Jonah
Post by GoDeanGo
Post by jonah
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
We've already got 150,000 troops in Iraq, which is on the syrian border.
After Iraq is totally pacified, our army can strike westward from Iraq
into Syria, while Israel strikes northward across the Golan Heights.
We'll catch Damascus in a pincer attack, the whole war will be over in a
month.
Bring the zionist shitheads on. Syria and Iran stand ready to vaporise
the terrorist state and it's American zionist army. This isn't going
to be
another Iraq, were they can just walk into a sanction weakened country
using their vastly superior high-tec weaponry. Tecnically speaking
Syria are
more than a match for the zionist cowardly bullies. Syria and Iran has
the backing of Russia, a country that could finish the American
zionist controlled military. Russia has positioned sunburn missiles
systems in Syria and in Iran and Israel or the US have nothing in
there arsenal to defend against this type of weapon. Israel will be
wiped of the map like dog-shit from the sole of
your shoe. And once zionism is finally finished than we can have world
peace.
Jonah
Tropical Tim
2004-01-13 17:17:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by jonah
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
We've already got 150,000 troops in Iraq, which is on the syrian border.
After Iraq is totally pacified, our army can strike westward from Iraq
into Syria, while Israel strikes northward across the Golan Heights.
We'll catch Damascus in a pincer attack, the whole war will be over in a
month.
Bring the zionist shitheads on. Syria and Iran stand ready to vaporise
the terrorist state and it's American zionist army. This isn't going
to be
another Iraq, were they can just walk into a sanction weakened country
using their vastly superior high-tec weaponry. Tecnically speaking
Syria are
more than a match for the zionist cowardly bullies. Syria and Iran has
the backing of Russia, a country that could finish the American
zionist controlled military. Russia has positioned sunburn missiles
systems in Syria and in Iran and Israel or the US have nothing in
there arsenal to defend against this type of weapon. Israel will be
wiped of the map like dog-shit from the sole of
your shoe. And once zionism is finally finished than we can have world
peace.
Jonah
Jonah, You know nothing. Your army is nothing but a bunch of stupid
women-men.
An American women could beat you into licking her women parts. As soon
as we get finished killing most of your army, we'll let the women have
you.
Your Syrian government and all who back it are camel shit eaters.
jonah
2004-01-14 05:41:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
We've already got 150,000 troops in Iraq, which is on the syrian border.
After Iraq is totally pacified, our army can strike westward from Iraq
into Syria, while Israel strikes northward across the Golan Heights.
We'll catch Damascus in a pincer attack, the whole war will be over in a
month.
Bring the zionist shitheads on. Syria and Iran stand ready to vaporise
the terrorist state and it's American zionist army. This isn't going
to be
another Iraq, were they can just walk into a sanction weakened country
using their vastly superior high-tec weaponry. Tecnically speaking
Syria are
more than a match for the zionist cowardly bullies. Syria and Iran has
the backing of Russia, a country that could finish the American
zionist controlled military. Russia has positioned sunburn missiles
systems in Syria and in Iran and Israel or the US have nothing in
there arsenal to defend against this type of weapon. Israel will be
wiped of the map like dog-shit from the sole of
your shoe. And once zionism is finally finished than we can have world
peace.
Jonah
Jonah, You know nothing. Your army is nothing but a bunch of stupid
women-men.
An American women could beat you into licking her women parts. As soon
as we get finished killing most of your army, we'll let the women have
you.
Your Syrian government and all who back it are camel shit eaters.
America and zionism will be flushed down the toilet like the turds they are.
President bush and sharon will be used as toilet paper.

Jonah
Tropical Tim
2004-01-14 14:47:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
We've already got 150,000 troops in Iraq, which is on the syrian border.
After Iraq is totally pacified, our army can strike westward from Iraq
into Syria, while Israel strikes northward across the Golan Heights.
We'll catch Damascus in a pincer attack, the whole war will be over in a
month.
Bring the zionist shitheads on. Syria and Iran stand ready to vaporise
the terrorist state and it's American zionist army. This isn't going
to be
another Iraq, were they can just walk into a sanction weakened country
using their vastly superior high-tec weaponry. Tecnically speaking
Syria are
more than a match for the zionist cowardly bullies. Syria and Iran has
the backing of Russia, a country that could finish the American
zionist controlled military. Russia has positioned sunburn missiles
systems in Syria and in Iran and Israel or the US have nothing in
there arsenal to defend against this type of weapon. Israel will be
wiped of the map like dog-shit from the sole of
your shoe. And once zionism is finally finished than we can have world
peace.
Jonah
Jonah, You know nothing. Your army is nothing but a bunch of stupid
women-men.
An American women could beat you into licking her women parts. As soon
as we get finished killing most of your army, we'll let the women have
you.
Your Syrian government and all who back it are camel shit eaters.
America and zionism will be flushed down the toilet like the turds they are.
President bush and sharon will be used as toilet paper.
Jonah
You live in a world of dreams. However, your dream will end just like
Sadams did. You will be flushed out of your little hole and either
killed or taken prisoner. If every country in the world joined
together, the USA still couldn't be defeated. Syrian women will suck
the juices of American manhood. Tell your wife and daughters to get
ready you piece of shit. Hell, they should all be nice and tight. All
you guys like is goats and little boys assholes.
jonah
2004-01-14 20:48:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tropical Tim
You live in a world of dreams. However, your dream will end just like
Sadams did. You will be flushed out of your little hole and either
killed or taken prisoner. If every country in the world joined
together, the USA still couldn't be defeated. Syrian women will suck
the juices of American manhood. Tell your wife and daughters to get
ready you piece of shit. Hell, they should all be nice and tight. All
you guys like is goats and little boys assholes.
You're are the dreamer. The us army are faggots hiding behind hi-tec
weaponary. The USA and thier boyfriends Israel will NEVER attack any
country with the means to fight back. Sanction ridden Iraq and lybia
or any other third world country are more your style. Both Russia and
china would piss all over you lot and Iran would piss all over Israel.
Now faggot boy, get back to you're boyfriend you ropey-eared cuntflap

Jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
We've already got 150,000 troops in Iraq, which is on the syrian border.
After Iraq is totally pacified, our army can strike westward from Iraq
into Syria, while Israel strikes northward across the Golan Heights.
We'll catch Damascus in a pincer attack, the whole war will be over in a
month.
Bring the zionist shitheads on. Syria and Iran stand ready to vaporise
the terrorist state and it's American zionist army. This isn't going
to be
another Iraq, were they can just walk into a sanction weakened country
using their vastly superior high-tec weaponry. Tecnically speaking
Syria are
more than a match for the zionist cowardly bullies. Syria and Iran has
the backing of Russia, a country that could finish the American
zionist controlled military. Russia has positioned sunburn missiles
systems in Syria and in Iran and Israel or the US have nothing in
there arsenal to defend against this type of weapon. Israel will be
wiped of the map like dog-shit from the sole of
your shoe. And once zionism is finally finished than we can have world
peace.
Jonah
Jonah, You know nothing. Your army is nothing but a bunch of stupid
women-men.
An American women could beat you into licking her women parts. As soon
as we get finished killing most of your army, we'll let the women have
you.
Your Syrian government and all who back it are camel shit eaters.
America and zionism will be flushed down the toilet like the turds they are.
President bush and sharon will be used as toilet paper.
Jonah
jonah
2004-01-15 10:27:29 UTC
Permalink
"Ahn Fyuh Wi Dizayah"

I think you boys should find a room for sweaty, pulsing, laxative anal sex.

Typical post from someone who's head is constantly being used as a bog brush.


Jonah
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
You live in a world of dreams. However, your dream will end just like
Sadams did. You will be flushed out of your little hole and either
killed or taken prisoner. If every country in the world joined
together, the USA still couldn't be defeated. Syrian women will suck
the juices of American manhood. Tell your wife and daughters to get
ready you piece of shit. Hell, they should all be nice and tight. All
you guys like is goats and little boys assholes.
You're are the dreamer. The us army are faggots hiding behind hi-tec
weaponary. The USA and thier boyfriends Israel will NEVER attack any
country with the means to fight back. Sanction ridden Iraq and lybia
or any other third world country are more your style. Both Russia and
china would piss all over you lot and Iran would piss all over Israel.
Now faggot boy, get back to you're boyfriend you ropey-eared cuntflap
Jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
We've already got 150,000 troops in Iraq, which is on the syrian
border.
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
After Iraq is totally pacified, our army can strike westward
from Iraq
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
into Syria, while Israel strikes northward across the Golan
Heights.
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
We'll catch Damascus in a pincer attack, the whole war will be
over in a
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Steven Litvintchouk
month.
Bring the zionist shitheads on. Syria and Iran stand ready to
vaporise
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
the terrorist state and it's American zionist army. This isn't
going
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
to be
another Iraq, were they can just walk into a sanction weakened
country
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
using their vastly superior high-tec weaponry. Tecnically speaking
Syria are
more than a match for the zionist cowardly bullies. Syria and Iran
has
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
the backing of Russia, a country that could finish the American
zionist controlled military. Russia has positioned sunburn
missiles
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
systems in Syria and in Iran and Israel or the US have nothing in
there arsenal to defend against this type of weapon. Israel will
be
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
wiped of the map like dog-shit from the sole of
your shoe. And once zionism is finally finished than we can have
world
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
peace.
Jonah
Jonah, You know nothing. Your army is nothing but a bunch of stupid
women-men.
An American women could beat you into licking her women parts. As
soon
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
as we get finished killing most of your army, we'll let the women
have
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
you.
Your Syrian government and all who back it are camel shit eaters.
America and zionism will be flushed down the toilet like the turds
they are.
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
President bush and sharon will be used as toilet paper.
Jonah
.
Tropical Tim
2004-01-15 16:47:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by jonah
You're are the dreamer. The us army are faggots hiding behind hi-tec
weaponary. The USA and thier boyfriends Israel will NEVER attack any
country with the means to fight back. Sanction ridden Iraq and lybia
or any other third world country are more your style. Both Russia and
china would piss all over you lot and Iran would piss all over Israel.
Now faggot boy, get back to you're boyfriend you ropey-eared cuntflap
Jonah
What do you want the USA army to do? Fight you with fucking swords?
You stupid pig eating goat fucker, is that womens bleeding rag you
wrap around your head to tight? The USA will come into your little 3rd
world piece of shit country and bitch slap you like the little girls
you are. Hell, I'd like to get you into a hand to hand fight myself.
After wipping your punk ass, I'd cut off your arms and legs, remove
your tounge and eyes and let the women take turns sitting on your face
to piss and shit. Anyone who backs the shit kicker that runs your
country now should have the same. Once we fuck all of your women and
they give birth to nice little American children, maybe we can educate
the smart ones and teach them how to live like people instead of pigs.
If you take the lowest person in Israel, he is still way above the
highest pig fucker in Syria. I live for the day that I meet one of
your people that even looks at me wrong. I'll make them disappear.
It'll take me a couple of weeks to kill the pig first. I'll make him
eat pig shit and then I'll cook him and feed him to his brother pigs
so he can turn into more pig shit. The world was cursed when the pig
that fucked your mother in the ass to make you spurted his Syrian come
up her asshole. Now, go find a pig and make another cuntlapping punk
Syrian for us to kill.
jonah
2004-01-16 09:54:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tropical Tim
What do you want the USA army to do? Fight you with fucking swords?
You stupid pig eating goat fucker, is that womens bleeding rag you
wrap around your head to tight? The USA will come into your little 3rd
world piece of shit country and bitch slap you like the little girls
you are. Hell, I'd like to get you into a hand to hand fight myself.
After wipping your punk ass, I'd cut off your arms and legs, remove
your tounge and eyes and let the women take turns sitting on your face
to piss and shit. Anyone who backs the shit kicker that runs your
country now should have the same. Once we fuck all of your women and
they give birth to nice little American children, maybe we can educate
the smart ones and teach them how to live like people instead of pigs.
If you take the lowest person in Israel, he is still way above the
highest pig fucker in Syria. I live for the day that I meet one of
your people that even looks at me wrong. I'll make them disappear.
It'll take me a couple of weeks to kill the pig first. I'll make him
eat pig shit and then I'll cook him and feed him to his brother pigs
so he can turn into more pig shit. The world was cursed when the pig
that fucked your mother in the ass to make you spurted his Syrian come
up her asshole. Now, go find a pig and make another cuntlapping punk
Syrian for us to kill.
You can't fight you little gay cunt. the only fighting you do is with
your
boyfriend when you fight with your handbags over who is going to use
the bathroom first in the norning.

The US/israel to attack Syria or Iran? I Really really hope so,
because then we will finally see the end of Zionism and we will
finnally have world peace at last.You should take time away from
watching CNN or your boyfriends arse and educate yourself. If you were
to to this then you will find out that what your traitor zionist
government tells you, the opposite is true.

Read this great piece from millitary anaylist Joe Vialls which
explains what a likely eventuality of any attack on Syria or Iran
would be:

"When the end finally comes for Israel, it will all be over in
microseconds. Flying faster than rifle bullets,
the Sunburns will approach Tel Aviv and Haifa at twice the speed of
sound, detonating in blinding white
200 Kiloton flashes designed to instantly transform animal vegetable
and mineral into heat and light."

During the Cold War of the sixties, the only thing
stopping American or Russian psychopaths from taking over the entire
world was the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction [MAD], where a
multiple ICBM launch by America on Russia or vice versa, would
automatically lead to a doomsday response by the nation
under attack. Mutual destruction of both America and Russia was
thereby guaranteed, resulting in nearly thirty years of unprecedented
peace and quiet, caused solely by mutual nuclear fear.
About one month ago, Russia discreetly invoked MAD again,
but this time in the Middle East in direct response to hysterical
Israeli threats to nuke Iran with submarine-launched American Harpoon
missiles. Quietly and with the minimum of fuss, Russia deployed its
most advanced tactical nuclear missiles and crews to both Syria and
Iran, thereby sending an unmistakable diplomatic signal that if Israel
attacked Tehran or Damascus with nuclear weapons, Russia would in
return instantly and anonymously vaporize the Jewish State.
This is not an idle or exaggerated threat. The Russian
missile type deployed in Syria and Iran is the P270 Moskit [Mosquito],
known in NATO circles as the SS-N-22 "Sunburn", once described by Rep.
Dana Rohrabacher as "the most dangerous anti-ship missile in the
Russian, and now the Chinese, fleet
Tropical Tim
2004-01-17 01:46:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by jonah
You can't fight you little gay cunt. the only fighting you do is with
your
boyfriend when you fight with your handbags over who is going to use
the bathroom first in the norning.
The US/israel to attack Syria or Iran? I Really really hope so,
because then we will finally see the end of Zionism and we will
finnally have world peace at last.You should take time away from
watching CNN or your boyfriends arse and educate yourself. If you were
to to this then you will find out that what your traitor zionist
government tells you, the opposite is true.
Read this great piece from millitary anaylist Joe Vialls which
explains what a likely eventuality of any attack on Syria or Iran
(snip all the bullshit that some other idiot wrote)

You sound like a fuckin broken record you subhuman piece of pig shit.
If anything launches from that little patch of sand you call a
country, the USA would simply respond with enough conventional weapons
to kill every raghead in your boarders. No other country would fuck
with us while we ripped your pathetic army apart. The USA can do this
any time we want to. Brace yourself you missing link son of a pig.
I'll bet you don't even live in Syria. The arse word gave you away as
a british raghead. You're too chickenshit to even live in the cesspool
your oinking mother is in. After we take all of your little missles
away from you, we might let you clean our toilets with the rag on your
head. I heard that the way your amry figured out how to make the
nosecone of the missles was to size them to fit your sisters asshole.
They say a missle could touch the sides of her asshole, but never
reached the bottom. Then, your mother licked them clean and polished
them with her cunt.
jonah
2004-01-17 13:25:00 UTC
Permalink
***@bellsouth.net (Tropical Tim)

Gay timmy wrote:

You sound like a fuckin broken record you subhuman piece of pig shit.
Post by Tropical Tim
If anything launches from that little patch of sand you call a
country, the USA would simply respond with enough conventional weapons
to kill every raghead in your boarders. No other country would fuck
with us while we ripped your pathetic army apart. The USA can do this
any time we want to. Brace yourself you missing link son of a pig.
I'll bet you don't even live in Syria. The arse word gave you away as
a british raghead. You're too chickenshit to even live in the cesspool
your oinking mother is in. After we take all of your little missles
away from you, we might let you clean our toilets with the rag on your
head. I heard that the way your amry figured out how to make the
nosecone of the missles was to size them to fit your sisters asshole.
They say a missle could touch the sides of her asshole, but never
reached the bottom. Then, your mother licked them clean and polished
Still ranting your boring stupid little queer freak. You obviously
have not got a clue. Non of what you have writen makes the slightest
sence, as usual. So try again but this time try using a little logic
instead of making feeble threats. 5 sunburn missiles launched at
Isreal and thier shittly
little country would be history, Isreal knows this and your zionist
jew arse licking government knows it. But stupid brainwashed little
twats like you don't have a clue. So before you post again try
thinking and provide some evidence that Israel or the US are capable
of defending themselves against this type of missile.

Jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by jonah
You can't fight you little gay cunt. the only fighting you do is with
your
boyfriend when you fight with your handbags over who is going to use
the bathroom first in the norning.
The US/israel to attack Syria or Iran? I Really really hope so,
because then we will finally see the end of Zionism and we will
finnally have world peace at last.You should take time away from
watching CNN or your boyfriends arse and educate yourself. If you were
to to this then you will find out that what your traitor zionist
government tells you, the opposite is true.
Read this great piece from millitary anaylist Joe Vialls which
explains what a likely eventuality of any attack on Syria or Iran
(snip all the bullshit that some other idiot wrote)
them with her cunt.
Tropical Tim
2004-01-17 02:05:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by jonah
The US/israel to attack Syria or Iran? I Really really hope so,
because then we will finally see the end of Zionism and we will
finnally have world peace at last.You should take time away from
watching CNN or your boyfriends arse and educate yourself. If you were
to to this then you will find out that what your traitor zionist
government tells you, the opposite is true.
Read this great piece from millitary anaylist Joe Vialls which
explains what a likely eventuality of any attack on Syria or Iran
No, you read this. That little piglet you call a leader is going
around the world sucking everyones cocks to try to get someone to help
him keep us from taking him out. Listen to what President Bush, the
greatest leader in history says to your fucking leader on January
20th. In plain words, he will be telling your leader he better watch
his ass or suffer like Iraq. Your leader will talk a bunch of shit and
then do exactly what we tell you to do just like the slaves you are.


Analysis: Syria's new offensive of charm

By Claude Salhani
UPI International Editor

BEIRUT, Lebanon, Jan. 7 (UPI) -- Caught between Iraq and a hard place,
Syria's young president, Bashar Assad, has been feeling the heat from
Washington lately and began his own offensive -- albeit one of charm
and diplomacy.
Although Syria did not make it on to President George W. Bush's
initial "axis of evil," it trailed not far behind. In the eyes of some
officials in the Bush administration, if Syria did not make the
A-list, it certainly belonged in the "Mini-Me" version. Syria still
figures prominently, along with other nations the neo-conservatives in
Washington would like to see undergo regime change a la Iraq.
Highly unusual for what was once regarded as a reclusive regime -- at
least when it came to international travel and high-act diplomacy --
Assad has been hitting the road, trying to improve his country's
standing and to seek international support. As indeed Bouthaina
Shaaban, a minister in Assad's Cabinet disclosed to United Press
International last December, Syria has come to realize it is time to
open up to the world.
The sudden arrival of thousands of U.S. troops on its eastern border
spurred by the U.S. invasion of Iraq last spring left Syria feeling
further isolated and threatened.
After a long season of diplomatic inactivity, Assad suddenly flew to
Greece last December. He later hosted Brazilian President Ignacio Lula
da Silva and then struck a deal with the European Union. Indeed, on
Dec. 10, the European Commission announced a new trade pact with Syria
to develop political and trade ties, extending the EU's policy of
constructive engagement with countries dubbed "rogue states" by the
United States. Syria was the final holdout in the 12-country
Euro-Mediterranean region, seen in Brussels as the EU's back yard, to
sign a pact with the EU.
This week it was a highly publicized three-day state visit to Turkey,
the first by a Syrian president to its powerful northern neighbor; a
visit the Syrian president labeled as "historic."
The main objective of this trip is to prevent the Kurds in northern
Iraq from breaking away and forming an independent state -- a move
that Syria and Turkey, who both have large Kurdish populations, are
wary of and will oppose. Ankara and Damascus fear such a move by Iraqi
Kurds would encourage similar feelings among Kurds in their countries,
leading to greater regional turmoil.
Turkey and Syria, in fact, issued a joint warning Tuesday against any
move that would alter the territorial integrity of Iraq. Syria and
Turkey fear Iraqi Kurds could cash in favors obtained from the United
States given their unfaltering support of the U.S. initiative in
toppling Saddam Hussein.
This rapprochement is quite a change from two countries that came
close to military confrontation in 1998 over accusations by Ankara
that Damascus was supporting Kurdish rebels. Another area of dispute
and past tension between the two countries is over water rights.
"We have moved together from an atmosphere of distrust to one of
trust. We now have to change the atmosphere of instability in the
region to one of stability," Assad was reported to have said,
following his meeting with his Turkish counterpart, Ahmet Necder
Sezer.
Another topic of concern to Syria is Israel, with which it is
technically still in a state of war. Israel enjoys cordial relations
with Turkey, an overwhelmingly Muslim country that is now ruled by an
Islamist-leaning government. Israel, reports Beirut's Daily Star, has
conveyed to Turkey messages that it would like passed to Assad, and
Israel's ambassador to Ankara, Pinchas Avivi, the paper says, is
expected to meet with Turkish Prime Minister Receb Tayyib Erdogan the
day after Assad's departure.
The United States is another country that will be closely monitoring
the outcome of this "historic" visit. Both Syria and Turkey opposed
the U.S.-led war on Iraq. Turkey, a NATO member, barred U.S. troops
from using its territory as a transit point, en route to oust Saddam,
forcing the U.S. military to alter its invasion plans; Syria also
vociferously opposed the war.
The United States largely ignored Turkey's anti-war stance, but lashed
out at Syria, accusing it of aiding and abetting Iraqi forces, of
harboring remnants of Saddam's Baath Party, of hiding Iraq's elusive
weapons of mass destruction and of supporting terrorism.
The Syria Accountability Act, passed almost unanimously by both houses
of Congress last month and endorsed by President Bush, is in fact
aimed at placing greater pressure on Syria, unless it abides by U.S.
demands to cooperate and distance itself from what the United States
and Israel regard as terrorist groups.
Analysts in the region regard Assad's latest charm offensive as "a
turning point in regional politics," something the Middle East could
well do more with. As Bush prepares to deliver his State of the Union
address Jan. 20, it will be worth watching to see if Syria, given
Assad's new initiatives, has moved up or down on the American
president's list.
jonah
2004-01-17 13:40:14 UTC
Permalink
***@bellsouth.net (Tropical Tim)

Wrong again. Pro zionist bullshit releaed from the zionist controlled
Media. Aimed at dumb cunts like you, who can't think for themselves,
Never question and just except everything thier lieing government
says as fact. Your little drunken imbecile who you call president is the
worst Us leader in history. Your government is totally controlled
by zionists who only interests are to Israel and for self profit
and not to the American people.

You are being conned but you are obviously too stupid to release it.

Jonah


No, you read this. That little piglet you call a leader is going
Post by Tropical Tim
around the world sucking everyones cocks to try to get someone to help
him keep us from taking him out. Listen to what President Bush, the
greatest leader in history says to your fucking leader on January
20th. In plain words, he will be telling your leader he better watch
his ass or suffer like Iraq. Your leader will talk a bunch of shit and
then do exactly what we tell you to do just like the slaves you are.
Analysis: Syria's new offensive of charm
By Claude Salhani
UPI International Editor
BEIRUT, Lebanon, Jan. 7 (UPI) -- Caught between Iraq and a hard place,
Syria's young president, Bashar Assad, has been feeling the heat from
Washington lately and began his own offensive -- albeit one of charm
and diplomacy.
Although Syria did not make it on to President George W. Bush's
initial "axis of evil," it trailed not far behind. In the eyes of some
officials in the Bush administration, if Syria did not make the
A-list, it certainly belonged in the "Mini-Me" version. Syria still
figures prominently, along with other nations the neo-conservatives in
Washington would like to see undergo regime change a la Iraq.
Highly unusual for what was once regarded as a reclusive regime -- at
least when it came to international travel and high-act diplomacy --
Assad has been hitting the road, trying to improve his country's
standing and to seek international support. As indeed Bouthaina
Shaaban, a minister in Assad's Cabinet disclosed to United Press
International last December, Syria has come to realize it is time to
open up to the world.
The sudden arrival of thousands of U.S. troops on its eastern border
spurred by the U.S. invasion of Iraq last spring left Syria feeling
further isolated and threatened.
After a long season of diplomatic inactivity, Assad suddenly flew to
Greece last December. He later hosted Brazilian President Ignacio Lula
da Silva and then struck a deal with the European Union. Indeed, on
Dec. 10, the European Commission announced a new trade pact with Syria
to develop political and trade ties, extending the EU's policy of
constructive engagement with countries dubbed "rogue states" by the
United States. Syria was the final holdout in the 12-country
Euro-Mediterranean region, seen in Brussels as the EU's back yard, to
sign a pact with the EU.
This week it was a highly publicized three-day state visit to Turkey,
the first by a Syrian president to its powerful northern neighbor; a
visit the Syrian president labeled as "historic."
The main objective of this trip is to prevent the Kurds in northern
Iraq from breaking away and forming an independent state -- a move
that Syria and Turkey, who both have large Kurdish populations, are
wary of and will oppose. Ankara and Damascus fear such a move by Iraqi
Kurds would encourage similar feelings among Kurds in their countries,
leading to greater regional turmoil.
Turkey and Syria, in fact, issued a joint warning Tuesday against any
move that would alter the territorial integrity of Iraq. Syria and
Turkey fear Iraqi Kurds could cash in favors obtained from the United
States given their unfaltering support of the U.S. initiative in
toppling Saddam Hussein.
This rapprochement is quite a change from two countries that came
close to military confrontation in 1998 over accusations by Ankara
that Damascus was supporting Kurdish rebels. Another area of dispute
and past tension between the two countries is over water rights.
"We have moved together from an atmosphere of distrust to one of
trust. We now have to change the atmosphere of instability in the
region to one of stability," Assad was reported to have said,
following his meeting with his Turkish counterpart, Ahmet Necder
Sezer.
Another topic of concern to Syria is Israel, with which it is
technically still in a state of war. Israel enjoys cordial relations
with Turkey, an overwhelmingly Muslim country that is now ruled by an
Islamist-leaning government. Israel, reports Beirut's Daily Star, has
conveyed to Turkey messages that it would like passed to Assad, and
Israel's ambassador to Ankara, Pinchas Avivi, the paper says, is
expected to meet with Turkish Prime Minister Receb Tayyib Erdogan the
day after Assad's departure.
The United States is another country that will be closely monitoring
the outcome of this "historic" visit. Both Syria and Turkey opposed
the U.S.-led war on Iraq. Turkey, a NATO member, barred U.S. troops
from using its territory as a transit point, en route to oust Saddam,
forcing the U.S. military to alter its invasion plans; Syria also
vociferously opposed the war.
The United States largely ignored Turkey's anti-war stance, but lashed
out at Syria, accusing it of aiding and abetting Iraqi forces, of
harboring remnants of Saddam's Baath Party, of hiding Iraq's elusive
weapons of mass destruction and of supporting terrorism.
The Syria Accountability Act, passed almost unanimously by both houses
of Congress last month and endorsed by President Bush, is in fact
aimed at placing greater pressure on Syria, unless it abides by U.S.
demands to cooperate and distance itself from what the United States
and Israel regard as terrorist groups.
Analysts in the region regard Assad's latest charm offensive as "a
turning point in regional politics," something the Middle East could
well do more with. As Bush prepares to deliver his State of the Union
address Jan. 20, it will be worth watching to see if Syria, given
Assad's new initiatives, has moved up or down on the American
president's list.
Post by jonah
The US/israel to attack Syria or Iran? I Really really hope so,
because then we will finally see the end of Zionism and we will
finnally have world peace at last.You should take time away from
watching CNN or your boyfriends arse and educate yourself. If you were
to to this then you will find out that what your traitor zionist
government tells you, the opposite is true.
Read this great piece from millitary anaylist Joe Vialls which
explains what a likely eventuality of any attack on Syria or Iran
No, you read this. That little piglet you call a leader is going
around the world sucking everyones cocks to try to get someone to help
him keep us from taking him out. Listen to what President Bush, the
greatest leader in history says to your fucking leader on January
20th. In plain words, he will be telling your leader he better watch
his ass or suffer like Iraq. Your leader will talk a bunch of shit and
then do exactly what we tell you to do just like the slaves you are.
Analysis: Syria's new offensive of charm
By Claude Salhani
UPI International Editor
BEIRUT, Lebanon, Jan. 7 (UPI) -- Caught between Iraq and a hard place,
Syria's young president, Bashar Assad, has been feeling the heat from
Washington lately and began his own offensive -- albeit one of charm
and diplomacy.
Although Syria did not make it on to President George W. Bush's
initial "axis of evil," it trailed not far behind. In the eyes of some
officials in the Bush administration, if Syria did not make the
A-list, it certainly belonged in the "Mini-Me" version. Syria still
figures prominently, along with other nations the neo-conservatives in
Washington would like to see undergo regime change a la Iraq.
Highly unusual for what was once regarded as a reclusive regime -- at
least when it came to international travel and high-act diplomacy --
Assad has been hitting the road, trying to improve his country's
standing and to seek international support. As indeed Bouthaina
Shaaban, a minister in Assad's Cabinet disclosed to United Press
International last December, Syria has come to realize it is time to
open up to the world.
The sudden arrival of thousands of U.S. troops on its eastern border
spurred by the U.S. invasion of Iraq last spring left Syria feeling
further isolated and threatened.
After a long season of diplomatic inactivity, Assad suddenly flew to
Greece last December. He later hosted Brazilian President Ignacio Lula
da Silva and then struck a deal with the European Union. Indeed, on
Dec. 10, the European Commission announced a new trade pact with Syria
to develop political and trade ties, extending the EU's policy of
constructive engagement with countries dubbed "rogue states" by the
United States. Syria was the final holdout in the 12-country
Euro-Mediterranean region, seen in Brussels as the EU's back yard, to
sign a pact with the EU.
This week it was a highly publicized three-day state visit to Turkey,
the first by a Syrian president to its powerful northern neighbor; a
visit the Syrian president labeled as "historic."
The main objective of this trip is to prevent the Kurds in northern
Iraq from breaking away and forming an independent state -- a move
that Syria and Turkey, who both have large Kurdish populations, are
wary of and will oppose. Ankara and Damascus fear such a move by Iraqi
Kurds would encourage similar feelings among Kurds in their countries,
leading to greater regional turmoil.
Turkey and Syria, in fact, issued a joint warning Tuesday against any
move that would alter the territorial integrity of Iraq. Syria and
Turkey fear Iraqi Kurds could cash in favors obtained from the United
States given their unfaltering support of the U.S. initiative in
toppling Saddam Hussein.
This rapprochement is quite a change from two countries that came
close to military confrontation in 1998 over accusations by Ankara
that Damascus was supporting Kurdish rebels. Another area of dispute
and past tension between the two countries is over water rights.
"We have moved together from an atmosphere of distrust to one of
trust. We now have to change the atmosphere of instability in the
region to one of stability," Assad was reported to have said,
following his meeting with his Turkish counterpart, Ahmet Necder
Sezer.
Another topic of concern to Syria is Israel, with which it is
technically still in a state of war. Israel enjoys cordial relations
with Turkey, an overwhelmingly Muslim country that is now ruled by an
Islamist-leaning government. Israel, reports Beirut's Daily Star, has
conveyed to Turkey messages that it would like passed to Assad, and
Israel's ambassador to Ankara, Pinchas Avivi, the paper says, is
expected to meet with Turkish Prime Minister Receb Tayyib Erdogan the
day after Assad's departure.
The United States is another country that will be closely monitoring
the outcome of this "historic" visit. Both Syria and Turkey opposed
the U.S.-led war on Iraq. Turkey, a NATO member, barred U.S. troops
from using its territory as a transit point, en route to oust Saddam,
forcing the U.S. military to alter its invasion plans; Syria also
vociferously opposed the war.
The United States largely ignored Turkey's anti-war stance, but lashed
out at Syria, accusing it of aiding and abetting Iraqi forces, of
harboring remnants of Saddam's Baath Party, of hiding Iraq's elusive
weapons of mass destruction and of supporting terrorism.
The Syria Accountability Act, passed almost unanimously by both houses
of Congress last month and endorsed by President Bush, is in fact
aimed at placing greater pressure on Syria, unless it abides by U.S.
demands to cooperate and distance itself from what the United States
and Israel regard as terrorist groups.
Analysts in the region regard Assad's latest charm offensive as "a
turning point in regional politics," something the Middle East could
well do more with. As Bush prepares to deliver his State of the Union
address Jan. 20, it will be worth watching to see if Syria, given
Assad's new initiatives, has moved up or down on the American
president's list.
Tropical Tim
2004-01-18 18:15:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by jonah
Wrong again. Pro zionist bullshit releaed from the zionist controlled
Media. Aimed at dumb cunts like you, who can't think for themselves,
Never question and just except everything thier lieing government
says as fact. Your little drunken imbecile who you call president is the
worst Us leader in history. Your government is totally controlled
by zionists who only interests are to Israel and for self profit
and not to the American people.
You are being conned but you are obviously too stupid to release it.
Jonah
I notice that you repeat the word zionist again and again. It is you
that has been brain-washed into believing the bullshit you keep
repeating. I don't care one way or another about the zionist doctrine.
I care about the entire world and the welfare of the human race.
You've picked the wrong person to repeat your muslim litinay to. I
don't follow the doctrine of any formal religion. I deal with reality
right now, here on our planet. You say I don't think for myself. You
listen to only the preaching of your muslim teachers and no one else.
The self interests of only your people is the goal of the muslim
people. I am not a muslim. I don't care if you are, but don't expect
me to accept your religion as my own. The issue I am concerned with is
terrorism. Are you trying to tell me that Sryia doesn't help extremist
terrorists with funding, places to train as well as people to train?
Of course you think this is alright. The self interests of only your
people are the basis of your belief. There is an entire world to
balance. Your people only know how to say Me Me Me Me, I will, I
will, I want, I want. Your people are selfish and totaly lack in
consideration of others. You won't open your eyes to see. You have
been indocrinated since birth to hate everyone except yourself. How
about if you pull your head out of your Koran and look around at the
rest of the world for once. Your primitive ideals will not survive
time. Peace will only happen when all people stop making a piece of
dirt more important than the happiness of the civilizations of the
world.

Do yourself a great favor and think using your own brain and your own
words for once. You and I both know that you haven't yet. If Syria
continues to condone the terrorists of the world, then Syria will
fall.
jonah
2004-01-19 16:59:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tropical Tim
I notice that you repeat the word zionist again and again. It is you
that has been brain-washed into believing the bullshit you keep
repeating. I don't care one way or another about the zionist doctrine.
I care about the entire world and the welfare of the human race.
You've picked the wrong person to repeat your muslim litinay to. I
don't follow the doctrine of any formal religion. I deal with reality
right now, here on our planet. You say I don't think for myself. You
listen to only the preaching of your muslim teachers and no one else.
The self interests of only your people is the goal of the muslim
people. I am not a muslim. I don't care if you are, but don't expect
me to accept your religion as my own. The issue I am concerned with is
terrorism. Are you trying to tell me that Sryia doesn't help extremist
terrorists with funding, places to train as well as people to train?
Of course you think this is alright. The self interests of only your
people are the basis of your belief. There is an entire world to
balance. Your people only know how to say Me Me Me Me, I will, I
will, I want, I want. Your people are selfish and totaly lack in
consideration of others. You won't open your eyes to see. You have
been indocrinated since birth to hate everyone except yourself. How
about if you pull your head out of your Koran and look around at the
rest of the world for once. Your primitive ideals will not survive
time. Peace will only happen when all people stop making a piece of
dirt more important than the happiness of the civilizations of the
world.
Do yourself a great favor and think using your own brain and your own
words for once. You and I both know that you haven't yet. If Syria
continues to condone the terrorists of the world, then Syria will
fall.
Good post Tim. Now you have stopped your ranting I can level with you.

I write about zionism because it's zionism which is the problem.
The war is against zionism. That means that the war is against
Israel and the zionist controlled American government.
To understand the evils of zionism look into the history of the
creation of Israel. And when you understand this you will relies
that the the world is definetly not what most people seem. And this
also applies to Bush's, so called "war on terror" and the 9/11 world
trade center attack.

The state of Rothschild, I mean Israel was infact created by the
Rothschild banking family. The same people who funded the German nazi
party after the 1st world war. Incidently the current US president's
grandfather was also a contributer to the Hitlers nazi party. Like I
said, the world is not what most people seem.

When many people think of Zionism they think of the Jewish people,
but zionism is not the jewish people, it a political movement. To say
that zionism is the jewish people is like saying the democratic or
republican party is the american people. Yet if you were to challenge
the extreeme views of zionism is to be labelled as an anti-semitic or
anti-jewish.

The crucial momment in the Rothschild plan for israel was the balfour
declaration, when the british foreign secretary arthur balfour
announced on in 1917 that britain supported the claim for a jewish homeland in
arab palistine. Suprise! suprise! the Rothschild dominated versailles
peace conferance confirmed ther support for this also.

Now get this! the balfour declaration was not made to members of the
westminister parliment. The balfour declaration was infact simply a
letter from lord balfour to lord lionel walter Rothschild. Rothschild was a
representative of the the English federation of zionist which was set
up with rothschild money.

It was the rothschilds who funded the early jewish setlers in
palistine and it was the same family who helped to fund the Nazis before
and during the 2nd world war which included the sickening treatment of
jews, gypsies, communists and others. It was the rothschilds who used the
the understandable post-war sympathy for the jews they had mercilessly
exploited to press thorugh thier demands for a take over of arab
palistine.

So in total the state of israel was manipulated into exsistance by the
Rothschilds on behalf of the worlds ruling elite and the jewish people
have been sacrificed on the Rothschild alter of greed and lust for
power. The reason being is because Rothschild knew that the blatant
stealing of an arab country offered endless opportunities to foster
conflict in the middle east and this has been effective in manipulation
the arab oil states, culminating in the occupation of oil rich iraq.

You may say but the Rothschilds are jews. But this is another story
like I said, the world is not what it seems and you certainly don't
have to be a muslim to detest the zionists and thier doctrine of
division, conflict, manipulation and greed.

Jonah
Tropical Tim
2004-01-20 17:36:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
I notice that you repeat the word zionist again and again. It is you
that has been brain-washed into believing the bullshit you keep
repeating. I don't care one way or another about the zionist doctrine.
I care about the entire world and the welfare of the human race.
You've picked the wrong person to repeat your muslim litinay to. I
don't follow the doctrine of any formal religion. I deal with reality
right now, here on our planet. You say I don't think for myself. You
listen to only the preaching of your muslim teachers and no one else.
The self interests of only your people is the goal of the muslim
people. I am not a muslim. I don't care if you are, but don't expect
me to accept your religion as my own. The issue I am concerned with is
terrorism. Are you trying to tell me that Sryia doesn't help extremist
terrorists with funding, places to train as well as people to train?
Of course you think this is alright. The self interests of only your
people are the basis of your belief. There is an entire world to
balance. Your people only know how to say Me Me Me Me, I will, I
will, I want, I want. Your people are selfish and totaly lack in
consideration of others. You won't open your eyes to see. You have
been indocrinated since birth to hate everyone except yourself. How
about if you pull your head out of your Koran and look around at the
rest of the world for once. Your primitive ideals will not survive
time. Peace will only happen when all people stop making a piece of
dirt more important than the happiness of the civilizations of the
world.
Do yourself a great favor and think using your own brain and your own
words for once. You and I both know that you haven't yet. If Syria
continues to condone the terrorists of the world, then Syria will
fall.
Good post Tim. Now you have stopped your ranting I can level with you.
My ranting was intended to do nothing but get your attention.
Post by jonah
I write about zionism because it's zionism which is the problem.
The war is against zionism. That means that the war is against
Israel and the zionist controlled American government.
This is your first wrong statement. America is not controlled by the
zionists. America is protecting a nation named Israel that is
recognised by the USA as a sovern nation. It has nothing to do with
control.
Post by jonah
To understand the evils of zionism look into the history of the
creation of Israel.
Who's version? There are many many versions even among the muslims.
Post by jonah
And when you understand this you will relies
that the the world is definetly not what most people seem.
Don't speak in riddles. If you have something to say, say it.
Post by jonah
And this also applies to Bush's, so called "war on terror" and the 9/11 world
trade center attack.
Now you have pissed me off again. The WTC attack proved nothing but
that a group of muslim fanatics figured out a way to kill a bunch of
people who were not anywhere near any combat. Murder, plain and
simple, and the reason that I will never trust anyone that follows the
muslim faith.
Post by jonah
The state of Rothschild, I mean Israel was infact created by the
Rothschild banking family. The same people who funded the German nazi
party after the 1st world war.
Then attack Israel, not the USA. Of course, the USA will then take
over your country, but we will make it a much better place for the
non-fanatics.
Post by jonah
Incidently the current US president's grandfather was also a contributer to
the Hitlers nazi party. Like I said, the world is not what most people seem.
Show me the evidence. I'd like to see it. Of course, my grandfather
probably did things that I don't aggree on. So what?
Post by jonah
When many people think of Zionism they think of the Jewish people,
but zionism is not the jewish people, it a political movement. To say
that zionism is the jewish people is like saying the democratic or
republican party is the american people. Yet if you were to challenge
the extreeme views of zionism is to be labelled as an anti-semitic or
anti-jewish.
You're boring me with this. I don't care.
Post by jonah
The crucial momment in the Rothschild plan for israel was the balfour
declaration, when the british foreign secretary arthur balfour
announced on in 1917 that britain supported the claim for a jewish homeland in
arab palistine. Suprise! suprise! the Rothschild dominated versailles
peace conferance confirmed ther support for this also.
Now get this! the balfour declaration was not made to members of the
westminister parliment. The balfour declaration was infact simply a
letter from lord balfour to lord lionel walter Rothschild. Rothschild was a
representative of the the English federation of zionist which was set
up with rothschild money.
It was the rothschilds who funded the early jewish setlers in
palistine and it was the same family who helped to fund the Nazis before
and during the 2nd world war which included the sickening treatment of
jews, gypsies, communists and others. It was the rothschilds who used the
the understandable post-war sympathy for the jews they had mercilessly
exploited to press thorugh thier demands for a take over of arab
palistine.
So in total the state of israel was manipulated into exsistance by the
Rothschilds on behalf of the worlds ruling elite and the jewish people
have been sacrificed on the Rothschild alter of greed and lust for
power. The reason being is because Rothschild knew that the blatant
stealing of an arab country offered endless opportunities to foster
conflict in the middle east and this has been effective in manipulation
the arab oil states, culminating in the occupation of oil rich iraq.
You may say but the Rothschilds are jews. But this is another story
like I said, the world is not what it seems and you certainly don't
have to be a muslim to detest the zionists and thier doctrine of
division, conflict, manipulation and greed.
Are you a small boy? If so then you must learn that in this world,
greed is the basis for everything. Division, conflict and manipulation
come with greed. What it comes down to is that the USA now includes
Israel in its areas of protection and if you attack Israel you will be
counter attacked by Americans. If you are involved with any part of
terrorist actions then America will attack and destroy you. What part
don't you understand?
jonah
2004-01-25 11:48:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by Tropical Tim
This is your first wrong statement. America is not controlled by the
zionists. America is protecting a nation named Israel that is
recognised by the USA as a sovern nation. It has nothing to do with
control.
Tim, you're just so ignorant. America is the whore of the zionists.
Without American taxpayers money Israel would not even exist. Zionist
jews
controll almost every facet of the american structure, its economy and
politics. Zionist's controll The Federal reserve, IRS, the media and
through the jewish lobby the government. By why listen to me, listen
to Ariel Sharon:

On October 3, 2001, I.A.P. News reported that according to Israel
Radio (in Hebrew) Kol Yisrael an acrimonious argument erupted during
the Israeli cabinet weekly session last week between Israeli Prime
Minister Ariel Sharon and his foreign Minister Shimon Peres. Peres
warned Sharon that refusing to heed incessant American requests for a
cease-fire with the Palestinians would endanger Israeli interests and
"turn the US against us. "Sharon reportedly yelled at Peres, saying
"don't worry about American pressure, we the Jewish people control
America."

And he's right.
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by Tropical Tim
To understand the evils of zionism look into the history of the
creation of Israel.
Who's version? There are many many versions even among the muslims.
Gonig start explaining them.
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by Tropical Tim
And when you understand this you will relies
that the the world is definetly not what most people seem.
Don't speak in riddles. If you have something to say, say it.
FFS, You think something as simplistic and self explantary as this is
"a riddle"
How old are you?
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by Tropical Tim
And this also applies to Bush's, so called "war on terror" and the 9/11 world
trade center attack.
Now you have pissed me off again. The WTC attack proved nothing but
that a group of muslim fanatics figured out a way to kill a bunch of
people who were not anywhere near any combat. Murder, plain and
simple, and the reason that I will never trust anyone that follows the
muslim faith.
The WTC attack was a scam, set up by your zionists controllers with
full knowledge of your government. What better excuse to launch a
phoney
war on terrorism as a cover to steel the worlds oil and protect
"terror state"
israel at the same time.
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by Tropical Tim
The state of Rothschild, I mean Israel was infact created by the
Rothschild banking family. The same people who funded the German nazi
party after the 1st world war.
Then attack Israel, not the USA. Of course, the USA will then take
over your country, but we will make it a much better place for the
non-fanatics.
The zionist USA and Israel are one and the same.
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by Tropical Tim
Incidently the current US president's grandfather was also a contributer to
the Hitlers nazi party. Like I said, the world is not what most people seem.
Show me the evidence. I'd like to see it. Of course, my grandfather
probably did things that I don't aggree on. So what?
Do an internet search.
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by Tropical Tim
When many people think of Zionism they think of the Jewish people,
but zionism is not the jewish people, it a political movement. To say
that zionism is the jewish people is like saying the democratic or
republican party is the american people. Yet if you were to challenge
the extreeme views of zionism is to be labelled as an anti-semitic or
anti-jewish.
You're boring me with this. I don't care.
I don't care if you do care, just stating some facts.
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by Tropical Tim
The crucial momment in the Rothschild plan for israel was the balfour
declaration, when the british foreign secretary arthur balfour
announced on in 1917 that britain supported the claim for a jewish homeland in
arab palistine. Suprise! suprise! the Rothschild dominated versailles
peace conferance confirmed ther support for this also.
Now get this! the balfour declaration was not made to members of the
westminister parliment. The balfour declaration was infact simply a
letter from lord balfour to lord lionel walter Rothschild. Rothschild was a
representative of the the English federation of zionist which was set
up with rothschild money.
It was the rothschilds who funded the early jewish setlers in
palistine and it was the same family who helped to fund the Nazis before
and during the 2nd world war which included the sickening treatment of
jews, gypsies, communists and others. It was the rothschilds who used the
the understandable post-war sympathy for the jews they had mercilessly
exploited to press thorugh thier demands for a take over of arab
palistine.
So in total the state of israel was manipulated into exsistance by the
Rothschilds on behalf of the worlds ruling elite and the jewish people
have been sacrificed on the Rothschild alter of greed and lust for
power. The reason being is because Rothschild knew that the blatant
stealing of an arab country offered endless opportunities to foster
conflict in the middle east and this has been effective in manipulation
the arab oil states, culminating in the occupation of oil rich iraq.
You may say but the Rothschilds are jews. But this is another story
like I said, the world is not what it seems and you certainly don't
have to be a muslim to detest the zionists and thier doctrine of
division, conflict, manipulation and greed.
Are you a small boy? If so then you must learn that in this world,
greed is the basis for everything. Division, conflict and manipulation
come with greed. What it comes down to is that the USA now includes
Israel in its areas of protection and if you attack Israel you will be
counter attacked by Americans. If you are involved with any part of
terrorist actions then America will attack and destroy you. What part
don't you understand?
Greed may be the basis of you're world, not mine. In fact, you're
reality
is more akin to that of a child. The world of the zionist's and thier
supporters, the bush's, cheneys, the bankers, currupt polititions and
oil barons. This it the attutude of the little spoilt greedy child.

Terroism is a zionist front. The zionist's know how to work the
terrorist
Scam, concidering they are the world's greatest terrorists and media
munipulaters in history. This is the scam that gets the American
millitary to do
the zionists bidding with the support of the gullible American
taxpayer.Those who believe the media stories and lies that spews from
the US zionist controlled government.

The zionist's to attack Syria! This is the stuff of the zionist's
wet dreams. Bush and Sharon has already heeded a warning from
president Putin of Russia. And like naughty little boy's they will do
as they told.

Jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by Tropical Tim
Post by Tropical Tim
I notice that you repeat the word zionist again and again. It is you
that has been brain-washed into believing the bullshit you keep
repeating. I don't care one way or another about the zionist doctrine.
I care about the entire world and the welfare of the human race.
You've picked the wrong person to repeat your muslim litinay to. I
don't follow the doctrine of any formal religion. I deal with reality
right now, here on our planet. You say I don't think for myself. You
listen to only the preaching of your muslim teachers and no one else.
The self interests of only your people is the goal of the muslim
people. I am not a muslim. I don't care if you are, but don't expect
me to accept your religion as my own. The issue I am concerned with is
terrorism. Are you trying to tell me that Sryia doesn't help extremist
terrorists with funding, places to train as well as people to train?
Of course you think this is alright. The self interests of only your
people are the basis of your belief. There is an entire world to
balance. Your people only know how to say Me Me Me Me, I will, I
will, I want, I want. Your people are selfish and totaly lack in
consideration of others. You won't open your eyes to see. You have
been indocrinated since birth to hate everyone except yourself. How
about if you pull your head out of your Koran and look around at the
rest of the world for once. Your primitive ideals will not survive
time. Peace will only happen when all people stop making a piece of
dirt more important than the happiness of the civilizations of the
world.
Do yourself a great favor and think using your own brain and your own
words for once. You and I both know that you haven't yet. If Syria
continues to condone the terrorists of the world, then Syria will
fall.
Good post Tim. Now you have stopped your ranting I can level with you.
My ranting was intended to do nothing but get your attention.
Post by Tropical Tim
I write about zionism because it's zionism which is the problem.
The war is against zionism. That means that the war is against
Israel and the zionist controlled American government.
This is your first wrong statement. America is not controlled by the
zionists. America is protecting a nation named Israel that is
recognised by the USA as a sovern nation. It has nothing to do with
control.
Post by Tropical Tim
To understand the evils of zionism look into the history of the
creation of Israel.
Who's version? There are many many versions even among the muslims.
Post by Tropical Tim
And when you understand this you will relies
that the the world is definetly not what most people seem.
Don't speak in riddles. If you have something to say, say it.
Post by Tropical Tim
And this also applies to Bush's, so called "war on terror" and the 9/11 world
trade center attack.
Now you have pissed me off again. The WTC attack proved nothing but
that a group of muslim fanatics figured out a way to kill a bunch of
people who were not anywhere near any combat. Murder, plain and
simple, and the reason that I will never trust anyone that follows the
muslim faith.
Post by Tropical Tim
The state of Rothschild, I mean Israel was infact created by the
Rothschild banking family. The same people who funded the German nazi
party after the 1st world war.
Then attack Israel, not the USA. Of course, the USA will then take
over your country, but we will make it a much better place for the
non-fanatics.
Post by Tropical Tim
Incidently the current US president's grandfather was also a contributer to
the Hitlers nazi party. Like I said, the world is not what most people seem.
Show me the evidence. I'd like to see it. Of course, my grandfather
probably did things that I don't aggree on. So what?
Post by Tropical Tim
When many people think of Zionism they think of the Jewish people,
but zionism is not the jewish people, it a political movement. To say
that zionism is the jewish people is like saying the democratic or
republican party is the american people. Yet if you were to challenge
the extreeme views of zionism is to be labelled as an anti-semitic or
anti-jewish.
You're boring me with this. I don't care.
Post by Tropical Tim
The crucial momment in the Rothschild plan for israel was the balfour
declaration, when the british foreign secretary arthur balfour
announced on in 1917 that britain supported the claim for a jewish homeland in
arab palistine. Suprise! suprise! the Rothschild dominated versailles
peace conferance confirmed ther support for this also.
Now get this! the balfour declaration was not made to members of the
westminister parliment. The balfour declaration was infact simply a
letter from lord balfour to lord lionel walter Rothschild. Rothschild was a
representative of the the English federation of zionist which was set
up with rothschild money.
It was the rothschilds who funded the early jewish setlers in
palistine and it was the same family who helped to fund the Nazis before
and during the 2nd world war which included the sickening treatment of
jews, gypsies, communists and others. It was the rothschilds who used the
the understandable post-war sympathy for the jews they had mercilessly
exploited to press thorugh thier demands for a take over of arab
palistine.
So in total the state of israel was manipulated into exsistance by the
Rothschilds on behalf of the worlds ruling elite and the jewish people
have been sacrificed on the Rothschild alter of greed and lust for
power. The reason being is because Rothschild knew that the blatant
stealing of an arab country offered endless opportunities to foster
conflict in the middle east and this has been effective in manipulation
the arab oil states, culminating in the occupation of oil rich iraq.
You may say but the Rothschilds are jews. But this is another story
like I said, the world is not what it seems and you certainly don't
have to be a muslim to detest the zionists and thier doctrine of
division, conflict, manipulation and greed.
Are you a small boy? If so then you must learn that in this world,
greed is the basis for everything. Division, conflict and manipulation
come with greed. What it comes down to is that the USA now includes
Israel in its areas of protection and if you attack Israel you will be
counter attacked by Americans. If you are involved with any part of
terrorist actions then America will attack and destroy you. What part
don't you understand?
Tropical Tim
2004-01-26 17:06:33 UTC
Permalink
Jonah,
You make statements about how the Zionists control the government of
the USA. You simply do not understand how the USA operates.

Thousands of special interest groups that don’t receive the
response from the USA government that they would like to have, all
blame their displeasure on some other faction. Environmentalists blame
the oil lobby, the homosexuals blame the church, the middle class
workers blame the upper class and the list goes on and on forever.

Israel is a country. Regardless of how it became one, it is now
recognized as a sovereign nation by many other countries including the
USA.

Nobody anywhere is satisfied with the division of land that developed
to the current status of ownership. I think my property that I own
should include the roadside in front of my house. The state
doesn’t agree and the state won the battle for that ownership.

You tell me that greed is not the basis of your life. Then you are a
dreamer. The world will always have dreamers. This is not a bad thing.
Much good can come from the efforts of dreamers to make their dreams a
reality.

However, when violence is used against people who have no control over
the effort to make a dream a reality, then that violence is referred
to as terrorism. Terrorism works on individuals with no ability to
defend themselves from that group that attacked them, but will never
be a solution to problems involving entire countries.

When the terrorists attacked the WTC, they performed the most
destructive blow to their own cause that could be done. The people of
the USA are united in one most definite way. We will defend our
homeland with every power in our resources. We will never give up. We
will never lose in our effort to defend our homeland. You speak of
other countries that you think will protect you. They may sell you
their guns and weapons, but they will never give you people to die for
your country.

If Syria becomes a threat to the homeland of the USA, it will fall.

You have been trained by your masters since birth to believe a false
idea of what the USA is. If you insist on causing harm to the citizens
of the USA through terrorism, your country will fall.

If you resist logic and the truth that your way of thinking is wrong,
then you will fall most probably from an American bullet or bomb.
You will fall as a combatant. If all you do is talk, you will live.
Pick up a gun and you will die.
jonah
2004-01-27 09:46:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tropical Tim
Jonah,
You make statements about how the Zionists control the government of
the USA. You simply do not understand how the USA operates.
Thousands of special interest groups that don’t receive the
response from the USA government that they would like to have, all
blame their displeasure on some other faction. Environmentalists blame
the oil lobby, the homosexuals blame the church, the middle class
workers blame the upper class and the list goes on and on forever.
This is true to a certain extent, but it's the level of
control/influence
that is the problem.
Post by Tropical Tim
Israel is a country. Regardless of how it became one, it is now
recognized as a sovereign nation by many other countries including the
USA.
Nobody anywhere is satisfied with the division of land that developed
to the current status of ownership. I think my property that I own
should include the roadside in front of my house. The state
doesn’t agree and the state won the battle for that ownership.
This has no comparison to the hundreds of thousands of palistinians
who had thier land stolen from them and now live as victims of an
apathied state and therefore reminded of it every day.
Post by Tropical Tim
You tell me that greed is not the basis of your life. Then you are a
dreamer. The world will always have dreamers. This is not a bad thing.
Much good can come from the efforts of dreamers to make their dreams a
reality.
Wanting good things for yourself and family is a good thing. Making
money
to give yourself a sence of security is a good thing. Again we are
talking
about an intirely diferent level of greed when we talk about the mass
manipulation of people and starting/causing wars for the self profit
of the few
at the expence of the many.
Post by Tropical Tim
However, when violence is used against people who have no control over
the effort to make a dream a reality, then that violence is referred
to as terrorism. Terrorism works on individuals with no ability to
defend themselves from that group that attacked them, but will never
be a solution to problems involving entire countries.
In a fairer world terrorism would be wrong, but you are dealing with
desperate
down-trodding people with no other means to fight back agaist tyranny
and
oppression. As an example, would you describe the French Resistance as
wrong
in using terror tactics to fight thier Nazi occupiers?
Post by Tropical Tim
When the terrorists attacked the WTC, they performed the most
destructive blow to their own cause that could be done.
Terrorist's did attack america but the question is, which ones?

The people of > the USA are united in one most definite way. We will
defend our
Post by Tropical Tim
homeland with every power in our resources. We will never give up. We
will never lose in our effort to defend our homeland.
And so you should, but first reconise who the enemy is. If you take at
face value what your government says then it is easy. But if you so
happen to do what many American's researchers have done and examine
the 'official! story
of 9/11 you find that this 'official' story is but a fairy tale.



You speak of
Post by Tropical Tim
other countries that you think will protect you. They may sell you
their guns and weapons, but they will never give you people to die for
your country.
Gun's and weapons is all a threatened country needs. Why do you think
a country like Iran is developing a nuclear capabilty? Why do think
that Syria and Iran has the most advanced weapon defence system in the
the
world? As deterrent.
Post by Tropical Tim
If Syria becomes a threat to the homeland of the USA, it will fall.
Syria will only become a threat to the USA when Israel says so.
Post by Tropical Tim
You have been trained by your masters since birth to believe a false
idea of what the USA is. If you insist on causing harm to the citizens
of the USA through terrorism, your country will fall.
I don't have any master, I don't follow any religion. I relised long
ago
all religions were invented by the ruling elite as a means of mass
mind-controll, for the tiny few to control the many. Weather it be
Islam, Judaism or christian the fanatical followers are simply
brainwashed
into thinking they are doing the work of god, regardless of what evil
they
cause. And this certainly applies to the Born-agains in the white
house and thier zionist masters who think that the country that is now
called israel
is their gift from god and therefore thier god given right, regardless
of
who they murder and terrorised to get it and to keep it.
they
Post by Tropical Tim
If you resist logic and the truth that your way of thinking is wrong,
then you will fall most probably from an American bullet or bomb.
You will fall as a combatant. If all you do is talk, you will live.
Pick up a gun and you will die.
My logic is fine because I always take time to research into the truth
of things
even though in doing so it may have caused me to change my beleif
structure.
In the great scheme of things zionist America are mere ants, they
don't even
come close to the real power's of the world. The American people are
some of
the greatest people in the world, but lead by and exploited by an evil
regime.
I think the American people should stop this betrayal and fight to
take thier country back.

Jonah
EagleEye
2004-01-27 10:19:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Jonah,
You make statements about how the Zionists control the government of
the USA. You simply do not understand how the USA operates.
Thousands of special interest groups that don’t receive the
response from the USA government that they would like to have, all
blame their displeasure on some other faction. Environmentalists blame
the oil lobby, the homosexuals blame the church, the middle class
workers blame the upper class and the list goes on and on forever.
This is true to a certain extent, but it's the level of
control/influence
that is the problem.
Post by Tropical Tim
Israel is a country. Regardless of how it became one, it is now
recognized as a sovereign nation by many other countries including the
USA.
Nobody anywhere is satisfied with the division of land that developed
to the current status of ownership. I think my property that I own
should include the roadside in front of my house. The state
doesn’t agree and the state won the battle for that ownership.
This has no comparison to the hundreds of thousands of palistinians
who had thier land stolen from them and now live as victims of an
apathied state and therefore reminded of it every day.
Post by Tropical Tim
You tell me that greed is not the basis of your life. Then you are a
dreamer. The world will always have dreamers. This is not a bad thing.
Much good can come from the efforts of dreamers to make their dreams a
reality.
Wanting good things for yourself and family is a good thing. Making
money
to give yourself a sence of security is a good thing. Again we are
talking
about an intirely diferent level of greed when we talk about the mass
manipulation of people and starting/causing wars for the self profit
of the few
at the expence of the many.
Post by Tropical Tim
However, when violence is used against people who have no control over
the effort to make a dream a reality, then that violence is referred
to as terrorism. Terrorism works on individuals with no ability to
defend themselves from that group that attacked them, but will never
be a solution to problems involving entire countries.
In a fairer world terrorism would be wrong, but you are dealing with
desperate
down-trodding people with no other means to fight back agaist tyranny
and
oppression. As an example, would you describe the French Resistance as
wrong
in using terror tactics to fight thier Nazi occupiers?
Post by Tropical Tim
When the terrorists attacked the WTC, they performed the most
destructive blow to their own cause that could be done.
Terrorist's did attack america but the question is, which ones?
The people of > the USA are united in one most definite way. We will
defend our
Post by Tropical Tim
homeland with every power in our resources. We will never give up. We
will never lose in our effort to defend our homeland.
And so you should, but first reconise who the enemy is. If you take at
face value what your government says then it is easy. But if you so
happen to do what many American's researchers have done and examine
the 'official! story
of 9/11 you find that this 'official' story is but a fairy tale.
You speak of
Post by Tropical Tim
other countries that you think will protect you. They may sell you
their guns and weapons, but they will never give you people to die for
your country.
Gun's and weapons is all a threatened country needs. Why do you think
a country like Iran is developing a nuclear capabilty? Why do think
that Syria and Iran has the most advanced weapon defence system in the
the
world? As deterrent.
Post by Tropical Tim
If Syria becomes a threat to the homeland of the USA, it will fall.
Syria will only become a threat to the USA when Israel says so.
Post by Tropical Tim
You have been trained by your masters since birth to believe a false
idea of what the USA is. If you insist on causing harm to the citizens
of the USA through terrorism, your country will fall.
I don't have any master, I don't follow any religion. I relised long
ago
all religions were invented by the ruling elite as a means of mass
mind-controll, for the tiny few to control the many. Weather it be
Islam, Judaism or christian the fanatical followers are simply
brainwashed
into thinking they are doing the work of god, regardless of what evil
they
cause. And this certainly applies to the Born-agains in the white
house and thier zionist masters who think that the country that is now
called israel
is their gift from god and therefore thier god given right, regardless
of
who they murder and terrorised to get it and to keep it.
they
Post by Tropical Tim
If you resist logic and the truth that your way of thinking is wrong,
then you will fall most probably from an American bullet or bomb.
You will fall as a combatant. If all you do is talk, you will live.
Pick up a gun and you will die.
My logic is fine because I always take time to research into the truth
of things
even though in doing so it may have caused me to change my beleif
structure.
In the great scheme of things zionist America are mere ants, they
don't even
come close to the real power's of the world. The American people are
some of
the greatest people in the world, but lead by and exploited by an evil
regime.
I think the American people should stop this betrayal and fight to
take thier country back.
Jonah.
Contrary to what you say Jonah (and the whale?), they must be fought with a
powerful philosophy of life whch is founded upon the cornerstone principals
of civil liberty embodied in Jewish law, and in the cross of Christ as the
transcendant completion of that law. Religion yes is a tool of power, but
the truth of the matter is all about reality as it is, and the latter must
effectively be pulled from the stone of the first in a way that places the
power in the hands of the individual.

It is prophesied that in the end times, which I believe it is fair to say
that this latest historical episode is framed within, the secret of Satan
will be revealed, and the enemies of liberty will be slayed with the doubled
edged sword that comes form the mouth of Christ.

I believe that that sword is civility, which Bush himself attempted to pull
from the stone at 9/11, but which no man can wield affectively except in
spirit and in truth.

I think I can uphold this view rationally or ultra-rationally, but it would
require that I write a whole book on the issue, and there's no time or
energy for that at the moment.

Let's just say that it cuts right to the very heart or core of an
epistomology of leadership at the leading edge of progress to a desired
outcome, and though Bush failed, the cause may have been advanced under
their watchful eye. However, this season of Ameridark must give way to
another according to these same principals of truth and justice.

At the end of the day, the no-God hypothesis doesn't cut it either. That's
too narrow and simple minded, and phsychologically immature.

What we need is a new rational basis of faith to help us solve our problems.

God willing, there is someone out there who can bring that kind of
philosophy forward in a way that makes sense to the average person.
Tropical Tim
2004-01-27 18:53:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Jonah,
You make statements about how the Zionists control the government of
the USA. You simply do not understand how the USA operates.
Thousands of special interest groups that don’t receive the
response from the USA government that they would like to have, all
blame their displeasure on some other faction. Environmentalists blame
the oil lobby, the homosexuals blame the church, the middle class
workers blame the upper class and the list goes on and on forever.
This is true to a certain extent, but it's the level of
control/influence
that is the problem.
I know that you believe that the Zionists have a huge control over the
policy making decisions of leadership of the USA.

This is not so. Your claim is the result of a group that sincerely
feels that it has been wronged and is looking for any plausible
reason for that harm. I do understand why you think the way you do.
I don't believe you have the resources to investigate the actual
cause for your problems.

I believe that the root cause of the lack of stability in the entire
world today is the absence of a truly balanced leadership of our planet.

Slowly, throughout the ages, the balance of the world leadership has
become more and more just. This balance is as young as the human race.
I believe that it will be thousands of years before an actual equality
exists between all of mankind.

When two factions do battle, the outcome of the battle has nothing to do
with fairness or equality. The outcome of any battle decides only that
the winning faction had, at the moment of victory, the ability to win the
battle.

The faction that you claim allegiance with is trying to resolve a problem
of the mind by using your fist. In today's world, that simply will not work.

Consider Gandhi's method of protest. The people of India lost many lives
to the British, but won back their land by turning the eyes of the world
away from Indian violence to British violence.

I don't believe that the country of Israel will ever cease to exist.
If the Palestinians continue to do battle towards that end, then the
end of the Palestinian people is already decided.

I know as you do that the UN is a joke. A thousand voices all yelling at
once, will not decide a just and fair outcome to anything.

If you wish to dedicate your life to the Palestinian quest for a good and
fair living standard, then do so in a way that will make a difference.
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
Israel is a country. Regardless of how it became one, it is now
recognized as a sovereign nation by many other countries including the
USA.
Nobody anywhere is satisfied with the division of land that developed
to the current status of ownership. I think my property that I own
should include the roadside in front of my house. The state
doesn't’t agree and the state won the battle for that ownership.
This has no comparison to the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians
who had their land stolen from them and now live as victims of an
apathied state and therefore reminded of it every day.
Which side can yell the loudest? The Jews yell that they were evicted
from their country and have only reclaimed what is rightfully theirs.
Yelling and shooting will not be the deciding factor of this battle.
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
You tell me that greed is not the basis of your life. Then you are a
dreamer. The world will always have dreamers. This is not a bad thing.
Much good can come from the efforts of dreamers to make their dreams a
reality.
Wanting good things for yourself and family is a good thing. Making
money
to give yourself a sence of security is a good thing. Again we are
talking
about an intirely diferent level of greed when we talk about the mass
manipulation of people and starting/causing wars for the self profit
of the few
at the expence of the many.
Profit and loss are part of war. The larger the war, the larger the profits
and losses. All wars involve the manipulation of large numbers of people.
How else can anyone get a person to risk their very life for a cause?
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
However, when violence is used against people who have no control over
the effort to make a dream a reality, then that violence is referred
to as terrorism. Terrorism works on individuals with no ability to
defend themselves from that group that attacked them, but will never
be a solution to problems involving entire countries.
In a fairer world terrorism would be wrong, but you are dealing with
desperate
down-trodding people with no other means to fight back agaist tyranny
and
oppression. As an example, would you describe the French Resistance as
wrong
in using terror tactics to fight their Nazi occupiers?
desperation does not make terrorism justified. Killing people who are
doing nothing but going about their daily routines can not be
justified as a counter against an enemy that is isolated from the
people who are killed. All terrorism is wrong.

The French resistance fought the Nazis. They didn't go into north Africa and
kill a bunch of African people because the Germans were there.
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
When the terrorists attacked the WTC, they performed the most
destructive blow to their own cause that could be done.
Terrorist's did attack America but the question is, which ones?
It makes no difference. All terrorists are wrong. War is wrong.
Killing is wrong. 9-11 will not happen again.
Post by jonah
The people of > the USA are united in one most definite way. We will
defend our
Post by Tropical Tim
homeland with every power in our resources. We will never give up. We
will never lose in our effort to defend our homeland.
And so you should, but first recognize who the enemy is. If you take at
face value what your government says then it is easy. But if you so
happen to do what many American's researchers have done and examine
the 'official! story
of 9/11 you find that this 'official' story is but a fairy tale.
The enemy is terror and those who cause it. Tell me exactly what YOU think
happened on 9-11. Who did the killing? Who paid for them to do the killing?
Post by jonah
You speak of
Post by Tropical Tim
other countries that you think will protect you. They may sell you
their guns and weapons, but they will never give you people to die for
your country.
Gun's and weapons is all a threatened country needs. Why do you think
a country like Iran is developing a nuclear capability?
Iran gave up their nuclear program after seeing saddam in prison.
Post by jonah
Why do think
that Syria and Iran has the most advanced weapon defence system in the
the
world? As deterrent.
Syria and Iran don't have the most advanced weapon defense system in the world.

The USA has the most advanced warfare and defense technology ever in the history
of the world.
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
If Syria becomes a threat to the homeland of the USA, it will fall.
Syria will only become a threat to the USA when Israel says so.
And then it will fall.
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
You have been trained by your masters since birth to believe a false
idea of what the USA is. If you insist on causing harm to the citizens
of the USA through terrorism, your country will fall.
I don't have any master, I don't follow any religion. I relised long
ago
all religions were invented by the ruling elite as a means of mass
mind-controll, for the tiny few to control the many. Weather it be
Islam, Judaism or christian the fanatical followers are simply
brainwashed
into thinking they are doing the work of god, regardless of what evil
they
cause. And this certainly applies to the Born-agains in the white
house and their zionist masters who think that the country that is now
called israel
is their gift from god and therefore their god given right, regardless
of
who they murder and terrorised to get it and to keep it.
Here you go again with the Muslim litany. You follow no religion? What
country do you come from?
Post by jonah
Post by Tropical Tim
If you resist logic and the truth that your way of thinking is wrong,
then you will fall most probably from an American bullet or bomb.
You will fall as a combatant. If all you do is talk, you will live.
Pick up a gun and you will die.
My logic is fine because I always take time to research into the truth
of things
even though in doing so it may have caused me to change my belief
structure.
In the great scheme of things zionist America are mere ants, they
don't even
come close to the real power's of the world.
Now you have the truth. Zionist power in the USA is tiny. They control nothing.
Post by jonah
The American people are
some of
the greatest people in the world, but lead by and exploited by an evil
regime.
I think the American people should stop this betrayal and fight to
take their country back.
A four year term of office is not a regime. A majority of Americans think that
the USA under the leadership of G.W.Bush is doing just fine. Great in fact.
Dave Simpson
2004-01-12 22:46:32 UTC
Permalink
Something of value (rare) from the Democratic Party New York Times
today -- and it's not that sappy item by Christie Whitman in praise of
mushy moderates (and liberal Northeastern Republicans)

...

Spinning Into Control

by William Safire


The strategic reason for crushing Saddam was to reverse the tide of
global terror that incubated in the Middle East.

Is our pre-emptive policy working? Was the message sent by ousting the
Baathists as well as the Taliban worth the cost?

Set aside the tens of thousands of lives saved each year by ending
Saddam's sustained murder of Iraqi Shia and Kurds, which is of little
concern to human rights inactivists. Consider only self-defense: the
practical impact of American action on the spread of dangerous
weaponry in antidemocratic hands.

1. In Libya, Colonel Qaddafi took one look at our army massing for the
invasion of Iraq and decided to get out of the mass-destruction
business. He has since stopped lying to gullible U.N. inspectors and —
in return for U.S. investment instead of invasion — promises civilized
behavior. The notion that this terror-supporting dictator's epiphany
was not the direct result of our military action, but of decade-long
diplomatic pleas for goodness and mercy, is laughable.

2. In Afghanistan, supposedly intractable warlords in a formerly
radical Islamist, female-repressing culture of conflicting tribes and
languages have come together. Under our NATO security umbrella and
with some U.N. guidance, a grand conclave of leaders freed by U.S.
power surprised the Arab world's doubting despots with the elements of
a constitution that leads the way out of the past generation's abyss
of barbarism.

3. In Syria, a hiding place for Saddam's finances, henchmen and
weaponry — and exporter of Hezbollah and Hamas terrorism — Dictator
Bashar al-Assad is nervously seeking to re-open negotiations with
Israel to regain strategic heights his father lost in the last Syrian
aggression. Secret talks have already begun (I suspect through Turkey,
Israel's Muslim friend, rather than the unfriendly European Union);
this would not have happened while Saddam was able to choke off
illicit oil shipments to Syria.

4. On the West Bank, incipient Israeli negotiations with Syria — on
top of the overthrow of the despot who rewarded Palestinian suicide
bombers — further isolates the terror organizations behind Yasir
Arafat. Under the pressure of Israel's security fence, and without the
active support of Egypt and Saudi Arabia (each eager to retain
protection of a strong-willed Bush administration), Palestinians now
have incentives to find an antiterrorist leader who can deliver
statehood.

5. In Iran, the presence of 130,000 U.S. troops near the border was
not lost on the despot-clerics in power, who suddenly seemed
reasonable to European diplomats seeking guarantees that Russian-built
nuclear plants would be inspected. Colin Powell has been secretly
dickering with the so-called reform ayatollah for a year in hopes of
being on the right side of a future revolution. The old "Great Satan"
crowd has just barred four-score reformist Parliament members from
seeking re-election. That panicky crackdown in Teheran is a sign of
the rulers' weakness; the example of freedom in neighboring Iraq will
help cause another part of the axis to fall.

6. In Iraq, where casualties in Baghdad could be compared to civilian
losses to everyday violence in New York and Los Angeles, a rudimentary
federal republic is forming itself with all the customary growing
pains. After the new Iraq walks by itself, we can expect free Iraqis
to throw their crutches at the doctor. But we did not depose Saddam to
impose a puppet; we are helping Iraqis defeat the diehards and resist
fragmentation to set in place a powerful democratic example.

7. In North Korea, a half-world away from that example, an unofficial
U.S. group was shown nuclear fuel facilities at Yongbyon to
demonstrate that the world faced a real threat. But the U.S. has given
China to understand that nuclear-armed Pyongyang would lead to missile
defenses in Japan and Taiwan, a potential challenge to China's Asian
hegemony. Our new credibility is leading China to broker an
enforceable agreement like the kind Libya has offered, with economic
sweeteners tightly tied to verification.

The columnist Jim Hoagland cautions that it is too early to proclaim
that nonproliferation is "spinning into control." But taken together,
this phased array of fallout to our decision to lead the world's war
against terror makes the case that what we have been doing is
strategically sound as well as morally right.
jonah
2004-01-14 05:12:07 UTC
Permalink
david_l_
Post by Dave Simpson
Spinning Into Control
by William Safire
The strategic reason for crushing Saddam was to reverse the tide of
global terror that incubated in the Middle East.
Nothing to do with terror. It's for oil and to support the zionist
terror state,
you fool.
Post by Dave Simpson
Is our pre-emptive policy working? Was the message sent by ousting the
Baathists as well as the Taliban worth the cost?
They have not been ousted. They are still thier working underground
and killing
the illegal zionist backed occupiers everyday.
Post by Dave Simpson
Set aside the tens of thousands of lives saved each year by ending
Saddam's sustained murder of Iraqi Shia and Kurds, which is of little
concern to human rights inactivists. Consider only self-defense: the
practical impact of American action on the spread of dangerous
weaponry in antidemocratic hands.
Thousands of innocents have been murdered by the illegal invasion.
Saddams
regime is better than a zionist regime.
Post by Dave Simpson
1. In Libya, Colonel Qaddafi took one look at our army massing for the
invasion of Iraq and decided to get out of the mass-destruction
business. He has since stopped lying to gullible U.N. inspectors and ?
in return for U.S. investment instead of invasion ? promises civilized
behavior. The notion that this terror-supporting dictator's epiphany
was not the direct result of our military action, but of decade-long
diplomatic pleas for goodness and mercy, is laughable.
Zionist America probably frighten little libya but don't frighten any
country
with the mean to fight back.
Post by Dave Simpson
2. In Afghanistan, supposedly intractable warlords in a formerly
radical Islamist, female-repressing culture of conflicting tribes and
languages have come together. Under our NATO security umbrella and
with some U.N. guidance, a grand conclave of leaders freed by U.S.
power surprised the Arab world's doubting despots with the elements of
a constitution that leads the way out of the past generation's abyss
of barbarism.
The Taliban is still better than zionism.
Post by Dave Simpson
3. In Syria, a hiding place for Saddam's finances, henchmen and
weaponry ? and exporter of Hezbollah and Hamas terrorism ?
These are freedom fighters. Like all bullies the zionists hate those
who can fight back against there oppresion


Dictator
Post by Dave Simpson
Bashar al-Assad is nervously seeking to re-open negotiations with
Israel to regain strategic heights his father lost in the last Syrian
aggression. Secret talks have already begun (I suspect through Turkey,
Israel's Muslim friend, rather than the unfriendly European Union);
this would not have happened while Saddam was able to choke off
illicit oil shipments to Syria.
Syria has already said thay will negotiate with the illegal zionist
terror
state. Israel want to talk becuase they are scared.
Post by Dave Simpson
4. On the West Bank, incipient Israeli negotiations with Syria ? on
top of the overthrow of the despot who rewarded Palestinian suicide
bombers ? further isolates the terror organizations behind Yasir
Arafat. Under the pressure of Israel's security fence, and without the
active support of Egypt and Saudi Arabia (each eager to retain
protection of a strong-willed Bush administration), Palestinians now
have incentives to find an antiterrorist leader who can deliver
statehood.
5. In Iran, the presence of 130,000 U.S. troops near the border was
not lost on the despot-clerics in power, who suddenly seemed
reasonable to European diplomats seeking guarantees that Russian-built
nuclear plants would be inspected. Colin Powell has been secretly
dickering with the so-called reform ayatollah for a year in hopes of
being on the right side of a future revolution. The old "Great Satan"
crowd has just barred four-score reformist Parliament members from
seeking re-election. That panicky crackdown in Teheran is a sign of
the rulers' weakness; the example of freedom in neighboring Iraq will
help cause another part of the axis to fall.
Iran has sent warnings to the US and Isreal any attack and they will
be
finished. The US are shiting it.
Post by Dave Simpson
6. In Iraq, where casualties in Baghdad could be compared to civilian
losses to everyday violence in New York and Los Angeles, a rudimentary
federal republic is forming itself with all the customary growing
pains. After the new Iraq walks by itself, we can expect free Iraqis
to throw their crutches at the doctor. But we did not depose Saddam to
impose a puppet; we are helping Iraqis defeat the diehards and resist
fragmentation to set in place a powerful democratic example.
Iraq don't want zionists in thier country that is why the insurgents
are
killing zionist soldiers everyday.
Post by Dave Simpson
7. In North Korea, a half-world away from that example, an unofficial
U.S. group was shown nuclear fuel facilities at Yongbyon to
demonstrate that the world faced a real threat. But the U.S. has given
China to understand that nuclear-armed Pyongyang would lead to missile
defenses in Japan and Taiwan, a potential challenge to China's Asian
hegemony. Our new credibility is leading China to broker an
enforceable agreement like the kind Libya has offered, with economic
sweeteners tightly tied to verification.
North Korea laughs at the US.
Post by Dave Simpson
The columnist Jim Hoagland cautions that it is too early to proclaim
that nonproliferation is "spinning into control." But taken together,
this phased array of fallout to our decision to lead the world's war
against terror makes the case that what we have been doing is
strategically sound as well as morally right.
Zionist imperialism is morally wrong.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...