← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Angler

Iraq denounces British rescue in Basra

Thread ID: 20309 | Posts: 30 | Started: 2005-09-20

Wayback Archive

Angler [OP]

2005-09-20 15:36 | User Profile

Hmmm...I wonder what those two British lads were up to, with the disguises and their firing on an Iraqi police patrol. I'll bet it was something pretty serious, judging by how anxious the British military was to free them. False flag operation, anyone?

[url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050920/wl_nm/iraq_dc_6;_ylt=AgQTU467Me2aCQgiZ_jNNglX6GMA;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl[/url]

Iraq denounces British rescue in Basra

By Alaa Habib 25 minutes ago

Iraq denounced British forces on Tuesday over a dramatic rescue of two undercover soldiers that could stoke hostility to the army in increasingly volatile southern Iraq.

British troops used an armored fighting vehicle on Monday to burst into an Iraqi jail in search of soldiers held by police in Basra. The British commander said he learned they had been handed to militia and ordered their rescue from a nearby house.

"It is a very unfortunate development that the British forces should try to release their forces the way it happened," Haider al-Ebadi, an adviser to Prime Minister Ibrahim Jaafari, told a news conference in Baghdad.

The operation followed rioting that began, according to police and local officials, when the two men fired on a police patrol. At least two Iraqis were killed in the violence.

Southern Iraq is home to several Shi'ite militias, including one loyal to radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, who fiercely opposes the presence of foreign troops and has led uprisings against the U.S. military.

Iraqis say the heavily-armed militias act with impunity and are not answerable to the central government.

Tensions in Basra had risen on Sunday when British forces arrested two leading members of Sadr's Mehdi Army militia.

The tough British response will further strain ties between Iraqis and British troops, who had maintained relatively good relations with the Shi'ite population of Basra by pursuing a low-profile security policy, unlike their U.S. allies elsewhere.

Iraqi television on Tuesday showed footage of the two soldiers, unshaven and looking nervous as Iraqi police looked over wigs, Arab headresses, an anti-tank missile and communications equipment, all apparently used in their mission.

The images of the pair seemed sure to fuel suspicions by militias in Basra and elsewhere who believe foreign troops are on a secret mission to exploit Iraq.

Unrest in the Shi'ite south, home to Iraq's biggest oil reserves, would pile pressure on the Iraqi government, which is already fighting a Sunni Arab insurgency further north.

Residents of Basra urged British troops to leave Iraq.

"It is unappropriate for any Iraqi to be insulted by a British or an American or any other occupier, we reject the occupying forces," said Abbas Jassim.

"The British violated the government, police and the sons of this country, which we all reject."

British forces said the soldiers were in danger.

"From an early stage I had good reason to believe the lives of the two soldiers were at risk," Brigadier John Lorimer, the British commander in Basra, said in a statement.

SUSPICIOUS Behavior

Ebadi said Iraqi security forces were justified in detaining the pair.

"They were acting very suspiciously like they were watching something and collecting information in civilian clothes in these tense times," he said.

The raid could boost the popularity of Shi'ite cleric Sadr, who can mobilize thousands of supporters quickly.

"What the two Britons did was literally international terrorism," Ali al-Yassiri, an aide to Sadr, told Reuters.

"If the British had condemned this, it would have calmed the situation but instead they came and demanded them back which sets a dangerous precedent."

Britain, which has 8,500 troops in Iraq, said on Sunday it would send more if necessary. British soldiers have not drawn as much fury as their U.S. allies, but Iraqi police vented their anger in Basra as they inspected damage from the British raid.

"Four tanks invaded the area. A tank cannon struck a room where a policeman was praying," said policeman Abbas Hassan, standing next to mangled cars outside the police station and jail that he said were crushed by British military vehicles.

"This is terrorism. All we had was rifles."

British Defense Secretary John Reid said the two soldiers were freed when negotiations appeared blocked.

"In the course of the day we became increasingly worried that those people in there to negotiate with the police seemed to be having no success in getting our men out."

Reid said it was not clear whether the Iraqi police were under threat themselves or colluding with local militia.

Lorimer said troops had been sent to the police station where the two men had been detained to help ensure their safety.

"As shown on television, these troops were attacked with firebombs and rockets by a violent and determined crowd."

Violence continued in the area controlled by U.S. forces.

Four U.S. soldiers were killed by roadside bombs, the U.S. military said on Tuesday, bringing the number of American soldiers killed since the March 2003 invasion of Iraq to 1,906.

(Additional reporting by Matthew Jones in London and Mussab al-Khairalla)

Sertorius

2005-09-20 15:52 | User Profile

[QUOTE]Hmmm...I wonder what those two British lads were up to,[/QUOTE] That's a damn good question. So much for the nonsense of Iraq being a "sovereign country".

Angeleyes

2005-09-20 19:26 | User Profile

Moktada Al Sadr caused quite a bit of trouble last year, for the simple reason that he is an opportunist. His dad was a man of some stature in the Shiite underground during Saddam's rule, and was IIRC a cleric. The son is nowhere near as well respected in the clan leadership circles, but he is trying to build a rep among certain Shiite factions, particularly the younger malcontents.

The US/Coalition had a chance to put a bullet in his head in fall of 03 and chose not to, more the fools we. :wallbash: With the power vacuum yawning open like a cavern, he made his play to fill it and become the BMOC among central Iraq Shi'ites. Al Sistani was not amused. It took the slaughter of a bunch of his Haji Homies in An Najaf about a year ago, and Al Sistani's arrival to work with a lot of clan and family leadership, to back that dingleberry down.

Looks like he is up to his old tricks, and his militia are playing in Al Sistani's back yard.

The Brits have been doing Basra way different than the way Americans do Bagdad, and rarely have the kind of trouble that the Sunni Triangle is notorious for.

This almost looks like a set up, a deliberate attempt to get the local population riled up for the benifit of Sadr's faction, and at least one other, if not more.

The various factions in Iraq are using the foreigners who are there in whatever way they can for their own advantage.

Looks like they may have counted a small IW coup.

[QUOTE=Sertorius]That's a damn good question. So much for the nonsense of Iraq being a "sovereign country".[/QUOTE] Cover story is "the legit government is still comfortable requesting American assistance for Stability And Security Operations (SASO)" as they generate and train their military and police forces to handle a growing protion of the SASO without the "auslander." Well, that's Washington's story, and their sticking to it.

As far as being a sovereign nation, they still can't handle simple Air Traffic Control functions on their own. Buncha greenhorns.

AE

xmetalhead

2005-09-21 13:31 | User Profile

I wonder how many of the hundreds of daily car bombs blowing up throughout Iraq are the work of American and British special ops hoping to acheive Western desires for complete chaos there in order to steal the oil more easily? Why else would British special ops be driving a car packed with explosives?

[QUOTE=Angeleyes]The US/Coalition had a chance to put a bullet in his head in fall of 03 and chose not to, more the fools we. With the power vacuum yawning open like a cavern, he made his play to fill it and become the BMOC among central Iraq Shi'ites. Al Sistani was not amused. It took the slaughter of a bunch of his Haji Homies in An Najaf about a year ago, and Al Sistani's arrival to work with a lot of clan and family leadership, to back that dingleberry down.[/QUOTE]

The last time I looked, Iraq is Moqtada al-Sadr's homeland and Americans are the invaders. What al-Sadr does for his own country and people is not for me or you to judge.

Mentzer

2005-09-21 22:25 | User Profile

British troops have illustrated their strength, ability and courage, in the face of Arab mob violence.

Set on fire and attacked by frenzied pack-animals. Most observers would consider their lives over-and-done-with. Beaten and burnt to death by those of no order or consequence; by force of number and evil intent. And then dragged and paraded through the ugly paths and lanes of Basra.

It did not happen.

For the troopers fought. They faced them and beat them. Outnumbered terribly, they killed two of the mob and injured many more.

When the Iraqi ‘police’ think they can arrest two soldiers and then present them to the neck-cutters, the British Army react in fast and brutal fashion.

They destroyed the ‘police’ compound and shot dead two ’policemen’ that fired upon them. They then stormed the Arab hut were their Kameraden were put and held. And killed the terrorist look-out. And the others ran like rabbits.

Thus - a successful rescue and correct conclusion.

It is accepted that no European or American Soldier wishes to tramp around a desert among a race of no connection. However, while there, they must defend their own with greater violence than the enemy wish to offer. It is the way. For no proper soldier accepts his death without a fight. Better to empty your gun at the enemy than save the bullets. Good to use your knife and fist. Better to kill them before you are killed.

And every professional Soldier has a right to life and the defense thereof.

Mentzer

Angeleyes

2005-09-22 00:52 | User Profile

[QUOTE=xmetalhead]I The last time I looked, Iraq is Moqtada al-Sadr's homeland and Americans are the invaders. What al-Sadr does for his own country and people is not for me or you to judge.[/QUOTE]It was also his homeland while Saddam's lads were killing some of his, and his dad's, supporters.

XM, I find your tunnel vision disappointing. The people who got Saddam's foot of his neck were from outside of Iraq. His decision was to start shooting at the people who got Saddam's foot off of his neck. He didn't have to do that, but he did. There were smarter ways, I think, to deal with the foreigners in his land, to use them for his ends, but he chose the stupid way.

For sheer stupidity, he should be shot, but so should many, so let's look at other criterion to be fair to him.

For mortaring indiscriminately all over Baghdad, him and his idiot militia, and in An Najaf, and in Karbala, and for killing reasonably innocent Iraqi's (of all sorts) in the process, a bullet to the head is too kind for him.

He's not his father, a revered leader among the Shi'ites of central Iraq. He's a punk, like any street punk in the Cripps in Los Angeles. He's living off his dad's name, but has none of his class.

Now, should we be there? Different discussion, and I am not deaf to the "never should have gone there, it was a stupid idea" argument. Indeed, I am in accord with it. Better men than you and I have made it. To name two: James Webb and Anthony Zinni.

AE

Angeleyes

2005-09-22 00:54 | User Profile

[QUOTE=xmetalhead][u]I wonder how many of the hundreds of daily car bombs blowing up throughout Iraq are the work of American and British special ops hoping to acheive Western desires for complete chaos there in order to steal the oil more easily?[/u] [/QUOTE] Zero. Next stupid question?

AE

Gregz

2005-09-22 02:24 | User Profile

Mentzer

"British troops have illustrated their strength, ability and courage, in the face of Arab mob violence."

Very well said! Whilst our forces shouldn't never have been sent to Iraq in the first place. The British have demonstrated considerable restraint up until now in southern Iraq.

Iran is clearly using the conflict in Iraq to fight a proxy war with the West.

"In a secret report, military intelligence warned commanders that attacks on British forces were being deliberately intensified, with the use of a new bomb, developed in Iran, that can penetrate the thickest armoured protection." [url]http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7374-1788585,00.html[/url]

Iran is very much in Europe's bad books and not just the US's and Israel's. On the whole I would say that Europe views Asian Islam as posing a far greater threat to European interests than that posed by most of the Arab world.

Greg

"'He is a prodigy,' he said at last. 'He is an emissary of pity, and science, and progress, and devil knows what else. We want,' he began to declaim suddenly, 'for the guidance of the cause entrusted to us by Europe, so to speak, higher intelligence, wide sympathies, a singleness of purpose.'" - Heart of Darkness : Joseph Conrad

Mentzer

2005-09-22 02:55 | User Profile

Agreed.

The Muslims wish to colonize Europe. It is a stated aim.

That must be prevented at every cost. Be it violent or political.

You are correct regarding Iran. The fundamentalist origin of Islamic expansion and terrorist insurgents. The theory is contained within Tehran.The full concept comes from those grave-digging-kissers of a carpet.

It is Iran that must be dealt with. And with great force and deliberation. From contingents of every European Army.

For the future of Europe depends on the destruction of Iran with the support of Turkey. And the Turks can do nothing else but agree. Otherwise they are nothing - and they know it. And the Turks are begging to be part of Europe. They will do anything.

There can be no question otherwise than full military conflict with Iran. And America must lead it. And not be afraid. But also demand full military support from all of Europe, East-To-West. Including France and Russia.

Mentzer

Petr

2005-09-22 03:04 | User Profile

[FONT=Arial][COLOR=DarkRed][I][B] - "For the future of Europe depends on the destruction of Iran."[/B] [/I] [/COLOR][/FONT] NONSENSE. Militant Islam[B] thrives[/B] on outside aggression, and tends to collapse on internal squabbles when left alone, not unlike Jews.

I opposed Il Ragno when he declared that Israel must be destroyed at [I]any [/I]cost, and I oppose this foolishness as well.

What's the worst thing that could happen if Iran would get nukes?

Petr

Mentzer

2005-09-22 03:34 | User Profile

Incorrect.

Fundamentalist Islam relies and feeds off weakness.

They provoke Europe and America to test the resolve.

They send their killers out into Europe and to Arab land. But the Iranians are not Arab - they are something else.They have always fought against Europeans and always lost.

They are the instigators.The perpretators.The propagators.The origin of it all. They give the signal and they offer the money. It comes from them.

And they will be dealt with. And there is no other option.

Have you met one? An Iranian that did not flee it's country? The fool is like the Ostrich that hides it's head from reality of the circumstance. It appears strong in it's own pen. But is terrified of that which comes near to it.

Mentzer

Angler

2005-09-22 03:47 | User Profile

I for one hope that Iran gets nukes. They have every right to have the same kinds of weapons Israel or any other nation has. We have nothing to fear from them as long as we leave them alone. But of course the Israeli agents and goy suckpoops who control the US and its satellite nations (like Britain) feel the need to assert absolute dominance over the Arab nations. That's why we're currently in the mess we're in.

I have no desire to see mass Arab or other nonwhite immigration into Western nations. But apart from that, we have nothing to fear from the Arabs.

Petr

2005-09-22 03:48 | User Profile

[COLOR=Blue][FONT=Arial][I][B] - "They send their killers out into Europe and to Arab land."[/B][/I][/FONT][/COLOR]

What exactly are you talking about?

Somehow I'm not quaking in my boots because of this supposed Iranian threat. Saudis are funding terrorism much more generously than they do. [COLOR=Blue][I] [B][COLOR=Blue] - "But the Iranians are not Arab - they are something else.They have always fought against Europeans and always lost." [/COLOR][/B][/I][/COLOR]

If there were one Muslim state that Europeans should really unite against it would be Turkey. But Iran - [I]utterly irrelevant[/I].

Petr

Gregz

2005-09-22 12:51 | User Profile

Mentzer

Europe is being far to timid with Iran and is sending out the wrong message to these people.

The traditional enemy of Europe is Asia, especially Persia, not the Arab world. The likes of the Russians, Turks, North Africans Arabs and Jews all flatter themselves in this regard. It is morally unfit to govern this ever evolving world alone and the Asians know this.

Europe must in the first instance address it's own failings and correct it's mistakes. The Arab world and Europe is swarming with Asian colonists. The Arab is seemingly blind to these peoples designs. The Asians are dangerous usurpers and pose a threat to all Afro-Asiatic peoples.

Whilst their are two Turkey's the Turks are a progressive peoples. Europe has a vested interest in ensuring Russia's and Turkey's dominion of Central Asia.

The new European that we must take it upon are self's to fashion must be independent and impossible to manipulate or compromise. Already our people have quietly made progress in this regard. However, we must be driven forward by higher ideals and a common purpose and not the divisive greed and vanity of the past.

Europe's influence whilst still considerable is inadequate for it's purposes especially if it is to effectively counter Asia.

"The transatlantic relationship is irreplaceable. Acting together, the European Union and the United States can be a formidable force for good in the world. Our aim should be an effective and balanced partnership with the USA. This is an additional reason for the EU to build up further its capabilities and increase its coherence. We should continue to work for closer relations with Russia, a major factor in our security and prosperity. Respect for common values will reinforce progress towards a strategic partnership."

A secure europe in a better world. - european security strategy [url]http://ue.eu.int/uedocs/cmsUpload/78367.pdf[/url]

Gregz

"I found myself back in the sepulchral city resenting the sight of people hurrying through the streets to filch a little money from each other, to devour their infamous cookery, to gulp their unwholesome beer, to dream their insignificant and silly dreams. They trespassed upon my thoughts. They were intruders whose knowledge of life was to me an irritating pretence, because I felt so sure they could not possibly know the things I knew." - Heart of Darkness : Joseph Conrad [pg.102]

Gregz

2005-09-22 13:13 | User Profile

Petr

"But Iran - utterly irrelevant"

Not with a theocratic government with regional ambitions and missiles that can reach Europe it's not.

Iran may be stable but it's not like secular Turkey. Iran is behind nearly as much of the instability in the middle east as Israel and it has been actively engaging in acts of terrorism for decades.

In fact the only reason that Europe isn't already sanctioning Iran is that it is a major export market for European goods a major oil exporter and under Russia's protection.

Gregz

"I found myself back in the sepulchral city resenting the sight of people hurrying through the streets to filch a little money from each other, to devour their infamous cookery, to gulp their unwholesome beer, to dream their insignificant and silly dreams. They trespassed upon my thoughts. They were intruders whose knowledge of life was to me an irritating pretence, because I felt so sure they could not possibly know the things I knew." - Heart of Darkness : Joseph Conrad [pg.102]

Angeleyes

2005-09-22 13:26 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Gregz]Mentzer

Europe is being far to timid with Iran and is sending out the wrong message to these people.

The traditional enemy of Europe is Asia, especially Persia, not the Arab world. The likes of the Russians, Turks, North Africans Arabs and Jews all flatter themselves in this regard. It is morally unfit to govern this ever evolving world alone and the Asians know this.

I respectfully disagree with you, Gregz. The traditional enemy of Europe is, besides Europe itself, the Muslim, the Hun, the Mongol, the Tartar, and the Turk.

That covers from about 400 AD to 1918, at which point the enemy of Europe moved in two ways: inward in a last spasm of self destruction, and being its own worst enemy, and outward to the Asians of Japan and China, etc.

[QUOTE]Europe must in the first instance address it's own failings and correct it's mistakes. The Arab world and Europe is swarming with Asian colonists. The Arab is seemingly blind to these peoples designs. The Asians are dangerous usurpers and pose a threat to all Afro-Asiatic peoples.[/QUOTE] Much truth there. Many of the Arab nations have significant populations of Philippinos, Sri Lankans, Indians, etc. At some point, the immigrants may start to force the issue regarding their current second class citizen status.

[QUOTE]Whilst their are two Turkey's the Turks are a progressive peoples. Europe has a vested interest in ensuring Russia's and Turkey's dominion of Central Asia.[/QUOTE] Agreed. Russia needs to be invited into NATO, at the least.

[QUOTE] Europe's influence whilst still considerable is inadequate for it's purposes especially if it is to effectively counter Asia. [/QUOTE]
China is the 800 lb gorilla that everyone has to deal with.

[QUOTE]"The transatlantic relationship is irreplaceable. Acting together, the European Union and the United States can be a formidable force for good in the world. Our aim should be an effective and balanced partnership with the USA. This is an additional reason for the EU to build up further its capabilities and increase its coherence. We should continue to work for closer relations with Russia, a major factor in our security and prosperity. Respect for common values will reinforce progress towards a strategic partnership."[/QUOTE] Funnily enough, a lot of Americans agree with that posture, on both sides of the political spectrum.

AE

Angeleyes

2005-09-22 13:58 | User Profile

Petr

Iran has been funding and supporting Islamic terrorists of a variety of flavors and nationalities, particularly those with a bone to pick with the US, since about 1979. This is not secret. It is similar to the game the Soviets and US played with each other for years, in terms of finding a client to give your enemy a poke in th eye.

Were you aware that in 1995-1997, over 200 Iranian agents were active in Bosnia?

They have an agenda. If they have nukes, would they start WW III? I tend to think not. A pretty good case could be made for their desire for a deterrent to other regional powers, like India and Pakistan, not to mention China, who have nukes.

AE

Gregz

2005-09-22 16:21 | User Profile

Angeleyes

The modern Turk's are far removed from the all conquering Mongol-Asiatic hoard from which they came and I suppose that we all have to move on at some point.

Whilst a certain faction in Turkey will continue to remain intolerant of occidentals for nationalistic or religious reasons. Turkey is fast becoming a modern society and one that must we recognise. The EU has the resources to both invest in the econmic and social development of Turkey and it should.

The problem with Turkey is that faces a myriad of regional and domestic security concerns. Here Europe should increase it's involvement and cooperation. The EU must hall Israel in for supporting Kurdish separatists. A highly counter productive and misconceived policy which only harms our relations with Turkey.

Their are 20 million~ stateless Kurds scattered all over the Middle East and no one want's to have to resolve that problem. Especially whilst the entire region is so unstable.

"Russia needs to be invited into NATO, at the least."

Is this the same Russia that is warming to China whilst shielding Iran? Russia is not in a strong position and NATO is unlike to alter it's current stance. Russia for the most part is a dangerous and corrupt country one I might add that is intimidated by Europe's regional market dominance.

Any unilateral defence agreement between Europe and Russia would not only favor Europe but be based on trading agreements. As Europe is a large buyer of Russian oil and gas. However, since Turkey and Russia are intent on developing there sphere of influence in central Asia. Europe should act and not only broker an agreement between these two nations but also extend it's cooperation to them in other areas.

Although a strategic alliance between the US, EU, Russia and Turkey is possible it would be difficult to maintain and their are a lot of nations that are hell bend on undermining exactly this kind of alignment.

Gregz

"I found myself back in the sepulchral city resenting the sight of people hurrying through the streets to filch a little money from each other, to devour their infamous cookery, to gulp their unwholesome beer, to dream their insignificant and silly dreams. They trespassed upon my thoughts. They were intruders whose knowledge of life was to me an irritating pretence, because I felt so sure they could not possibly know the things I knew." - Heart of Darkness : Joseph Conrad [pg.102]

Angeleyes

2005-09-22 21:31 | User Profile

Gregz

We seem to agree on quite a bit.

Please note that my comment on traditional enemies was boxed 400 AD to 1918. Modern Turkey is a Turkey that wanted to be more Western, a Turkey that generally dropped the pretensions of the Caliphate. As a NATO member, they are a drag on the checkbook, but are good enough allies as those things go. [QUOTE=Gregz]

[QUOTE]Turkey is fast becoming a modern society and one that must we recognise. The EU has the resources to both invest in the econmic and social development of Turkey and it should.[/QUOTE] Turkey is also experiencing future shock as it plunges into the global age, and has plenty of its own baggage to handle as it seeks EU membership. You mention the Kurds, a people without a recognized land. Funny that the Paletsinians get so much sympathy, while the Kurds get noses thumbed at them. Is that because Saladin was a Kurd? :smile: Who knows.

[QUOTE] Is this the same Russia that is warming to China whilst shielding Iran? Russia is not in a strong position and NATO is unlike to alter it's current stance. Russia for the most part is a dangerous and corrupt country one I might add that is intimidated by Europe's regional market dominance. [/QUOTE]Russia is Russia, and will look out after Russia's interests first, as well should be done. The rush to get the old client states into NATO was a slap in their face, however, the "warm to China" is a signal to the US to quit playing fast and loose with Russia. We have an issue with Islam irridentism in common, and in my opinion, too much in common culturally to keep spitting in each other's tea.

ALso, since Russia is China's neighbor, Russia can't afford an Ostrich like "head in the sand" approach to China. She has to engage.

Russia in NATO makes NATO, as a block, a far more significant counter to China in the long term.

That is what I have had my eyes on since 1991.

AE

edward gibbon

2005-09-22 22:49 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Angeleyes]...[B][COLOR=Red]The rush to get the old client states into NATO was a slap in their face[/COLOR],[/B] however, the "warm to China" is a signal to the US to quit playing fast and loose with Russia. We have an issue with Islam irridentism in common, and in my opinion, too much in common culturally to keep spitting in each other's tea.

[B]Russia in NATO makes NATO, as a block, a far more significant counter to China in the long term. [/B]

That is what I have had my eyes on since 1991.

AE[/QUOTE]George Kennan said the expansion of Nato to include Poland was the most thoughtless move in American diplomacy since World War II.

Suffice to say, Europeans cherish warm relations with Russia much more than China. With reason they remember depradations from the East.

Angeleyes

2005-09-23 13:54 | User Profile

[QUOTE=edward gibbon]George Kennan said the expansion of Nato to include Poland was the most thoughtless move in American diplomacy since World War II.

Suffice to say, Europeans cherish warm relations with Russia much more than China. With reason they remember depradations from the East.[/QUOTE]George Kennan has been reading his own newspaper clippings again, has he? Still, I agree with him to the extent that the speed of expansion was poorly thought out. While I was working NATO, the big debate was "does NATO really have a reason to exist." For better and worse, the 1995 out of area intervention into Bosnia gave it a precedent for out of area action that then gave it a new reason d'etre: expeditionary collective security. The Serbs learned the hard way what that meant. This was Clinton era empire building, and NWO to the core.

Part of the reasoning behind the NATO expansion, though, was to both please internal political groups and to pre empt, I think, some of the French led "European Security Identity" efforts (which never got the money they needed anyway) to ensure that U.S.A. never got pushed too far from the director's chair in the "solve Europe's security problems" film that continues, in Kosovo . . . again, pre Bush strategic moves.

AE

Gregz

2005-09-24 15:11 | User Profile

Angeleyes

America has lost considerable infulance as a result of it's current foreign policy. Europe's left wing governments are unlikely to rearm or to project power, with out first securing the agreement of Russia, India and China. Especially when the non aligned block of nations are openly questioning our intentions.

"China is considered immovable in its opposition to any Security Council involvement. But in recent days, European diplomats said they hoped to obtain Moscow's support, either now or later. Earlier in the day, however, Andrej Karasev, a member of the Russian mission to the IAEA, said his country's position was "the same as it was yesterday ... We are against" it."

"We are ready to work on the resolution ... which provides, I'd say, [a] mutually acceptable decision," he said.

"Diplomats said earlier that the Europeans were considering toning down their US-backed Security Council drive in hopes of enlisting Moscow's backing. But from the reported tone of the draft submitted, it appeared the European Union decided to go with a harsher text, even at the risk of alienating Moscow."

Greg

"I found myself back in the sepulchral city resenting the sight of people hurrying through the streets to filch a little money from each other, to devour their infamous cookery, to gulp their unwholesome beer, to dream their insignificant and silly dreams. They trespassed upon my thoughts. They were intruders whose knowledge of life was to me an irritating pretence, because I felt so sure they could not possibly know the things I knew." - Heart of Darkness : Joseph Conrad [pg.102]

Mentzer

2005-09-24 17:16 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Angler]I for one hope that Iran gets nukes. They have every right to have the same kinds of weapons Israel or any other nation has. We have nothing to fear from them as long as we leave them alone. But of course the Israeli agents and goy suckpoops who control the US and its satellite nations (like Britain) feel the need to assert absolute dominance over the Arab nations. That's why we're currently in the mess we're in.

I have no desire to see mass Arab or other nonwhite immigration into Western nations. But apart from that, we have nothing to fear from the Arabs.[/QUOTE]

I will state that your penultimate sentence negates your initial paragraph.

Your final line is an error.

The meaning of muslim infiltration, imposition, backward ignorance and the building of religious structure upon European land, escapes those of lowest intellect.

The numerous and various muslim organizations created to confuse and bewilder the stupid liberal-minded European and their queer attendants is highly amusing.

But the time for their laughter will soon be ended.

Mentzer

starr

2005-09-24 18:41 | User Profile

This speech given not too long ago seems to be a perfect example of the Muslim mindset in regards to what is being talked about here. It starts off great, very Jew aware indeed. But the highlighted part speaks of what there is to fear from them:

[url="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1405218/posts"][color=#cc0000]http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1405218/posts[/color][/url]

Quote:

Petr

2005-09-24 18:46 | User Profile

[COLOR=DarkRed][FONT=Arial][I][B] - "But the highlighted part speaks of what there is to fear from them:"[/B][/I][/FONT][/COLOR]

Westerners usually take that kind of Oriental braggadocio too seriously. Often it is just about "maintaining a face" among their own.

Petr

starr

2005-09-24 18:50 | User Profile

[QUOTE]Often it is just about "maintaining a face" among their own.[/QUOTE]No doubt there is truth in this, somewhat. And for this in particular "freerepublic" is probably not the best source of information. LOL. But it still can not be completely overlooked.

Mentzer

2005-09-24 19:24 | User Profile

The greedy muslim lives on European land. It wants-and-wants. It demands-and-demands.

It gives birth more so than a field-cow. And expects payment for it.

An animal with the ability of speech. And the most ugly of animals.

There can be no mixture of culture or race. The muslim in Europe lives on borrowed time. They know it and breed to prevent it.

And many speak nonsense that are European. And many utter nonsense that are American.

And many European and Americans need a taste of hardship - to toughen them.

Mentzer

kathaksung

2005-09-25 22:03 | User Profile

In Basra, two British soldiers were caught in plain Arab dress, with missile.... The news is rare heard in US mainstream media. You know why? The picture of this one will tell you the truth. Media only shows you the British soldier was on fire but never release the pictures of weapons and wigs.

[url]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IssuesAndAlibis_The_Forum/message/7566[/url]

If they success in their mission, what people got would be another "Al Qaida terror attack", Or "Sunny attack Shiite".

Angeleyes

2005-09-26 17:08 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Gregz]Angeleyes America has lost considerable infulance as a result of it's current foreign policy. Europe's left wing governments are unlikely to rearm or to project power, with out first securing the agreement of Russia, India and China. Especially when the non aligned block of nations are openly questioning our intentions.

While I don't doubt the trepedition about crossing China, due primarily to economic issues, the European Independent Security Initiative has, for the past 15 years, always suffered from a lack of putting their money where their mouths are, be the leader Kohl, Schroeder, Chirac, or any other politician whose population has lost its sack. Note Spain's example.

[QUOTE]"Diplomats said earlier that the Europeans were considering toning down their US-backed Security Council drive in hopes of enlisting Moscow's backing. But from the reported tone of the draft submitted, it appeared the European Union decided to go with a harsher text, even at the risk of alienating Moscow."[/QUOTE] NATO issues and Security Council issues are not identical, though they often share similar political back drops.

AE

Mentzer

2005-09-27 02:18 | User Profile

[QUOTE=kathaksung]In Basra, two British soldiers were caught in plain Arab dress, with missile.... The news is rare heard in US mainstream media. You know why? The picture of this one will tell you the truth. Media only shows you the British soldier was on fire but never release the pictures of weapons and wigs.

[url]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IssuesAndAlibis_The_Forum/message/7566[/url]

If they success in their mission, what people got would be another "Al Qaida terror attack", Or "Sunny attack Shiite".[/QUOTE]

You make reference to a "missile". What type of "missile" are you inventing?

Your fiction comes from the Arabs - like them do you? Wigs and skirts and so on.

However, you must be precise and not an idiot.

Mentzer