noworldsystem.com


There’s Another Oil Rig Spill in the Gulf

There’s Another Oil Rig Spill in the Gulf

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmDirSBtEOU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWHLrcxLVkg

 



U.S., China Are on Collision Course Over Oil

Obama’s Yemeni odyssey targets China

Asia Times
January 9, 2010

A cursory look at the map of region will show that Yemen is one of the most strategic lands adjoining waters of the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Peninsula. It flanks Saudi Arabia and Oman, which are vital American protectorates. In effect, Uncle Sam is “marking territory” – like a dog on a lamppost. Russia has been toying with the idea of reopening its Soviet-era base in Aden. Well, the US has pipped Moscow in the race.

The US has signaled that the odyssey doesn’t end with Yemen. It is also moving into Somalia and Kenya. With that, the US establishes its military presence in an entire unbroken stretch of real estate all along the Indian Ocean’s western rim. Chinese officials have of late spoken of their need to establish a naval base in the region. The US has now foreclosed China’s options. The only country with a coastline that is available for China to set up a naval base in the region will be Iran. All other countries have a Western military presence. (are western military puppet governments)

The American intervention in Yemen is not going to be on the pattern of Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama will ensure he doesn’t receive any body bags of American servicemen serving in Yemen. That is what the American public expects from him. He will only deploy drone aircraft and special forces and “focus on providing intelligence and training to help Yemen counter al-Qaeda militants”, according to the US military. Obama’s main core objective will be to establish an enduring military presence in Yemen. This serves many purposes.

A new great game begins

First, the US move has to be viewed against the historic backdrop of the Shi’ite awakening in the region. The Shi’ites (mostly of the Zaidi group) have been traditionally suppressed in Yemen. Shi’ite uprisings have been a recurring theme in Yemen’s history. There has been a deliberate attempt to minimize the percentage of Shi’ites in Yemen, but they could be anywhere up to 45%.

More importantly, in the northern part of the country, they constitute the majority. What bothers the US and moderate Sunni Arab states – and Israel – is that the Believing Youth Organization led by Hussein Badr al-Houthi, which is entrenched in northern Yemen, is modeled after Hezbollah in Lebanon in all respects – politically, economically, socially and culturally.

Yemenis are an intelligent people and are famous in the Arabian Peninsula for their democratic temperament. The Yemeni Shi’ite empowerment on a Hezbollah-model would have far-reaching regional implications. Next-door Oman, which is a key American base, is predominantly Shi’ite. Even more sensitive is the likelihood of the dangerous idea of Shi’ite empowerment spreading to Saudi Arabia’s highly restive Shi’ite regions adjoining Yemen, which on top of it all, also happen to be the reservoir of the country’s fabulous oil wealth.

Saudi Arabia is entering a highly sensitive phase of political transition as a new generation is set to take over the leadership in Riyadh, and the palace intrigues and fault lines within the royal family are likely to get exacerbated. To put it mildly, given the vast scale of institutionalized Shi’ite persecution in Saudi Arabia by the Wahhabi establishment, Shi’ite empowerment is a veritable minefield that Riyadh is petrified about at this juncture. Its threshold of patience is wearing thin, as the recent uncharacteristic resort to military power against the north Yemeni Shi’ite communities bordering Saudi Arabia testifies.

The US faces a classic dilemma. It is all right for Obama to highlight the need of reform in Muslim societies – as he did eloquently in his Cairo speech last June. But democratization in the Yemeni context – ironically, in the Arab context – would involve Shi’ite empowerment. After the searing experience in Iraq, Washington is literally perched like a cat on a hot tin roof. It would much rather be aligned with the repressive, autocratic government of Saleh than let the genie of reform out of the bottle in the oil rich-region in which it has profound interests.

Obama has an erudite mind and he is not unaware that what Yemen desperately needs is reform, but he simply doesn’t want to think about it. The paradox he faces is that with all its imperfections, Iran happens to be the only “democratic” system operating in that entire region.

Iran’s shadow over the Yemeni Shi’ite consciousness worries the US to no end. Simply put, in the ideological struggle going on in the region, Obama finds himself with the ultra-conservative and brutally autocratic oligarchies that constitute the ruling class in the region. Conceivably, he isn’t finding it easy. If his own memoirs are to be believed, there could be times when the vague recollections of his childhood in Indonesia and his precious memories of his own mother, who from all accounts was a free-wheeling intellectual and humanist, must be stalking him in the White House corridors.

Israel moves in

But Obama is first and foremost a realist. Emotions and personal beliefs drain away and strategic considerations weigh uppermost when he works in the Oval Office. With the military presence in Yemen, the US has tightened the cordon around Iran. In the event of a military attack on Iran, Yemen could be put to use as a springboard by the Israelis. These are weighty considerations for Obama.

The fact is that no one is in control as a Yemeni authority. It is a cakewalk for the formidable Israeli intelligence to carve out a niche in Yemen – just as it did in northern Iraq under somewhat comparable circumstances.

Islamism doesn’t deter Israel at all. Saleh couldn’t have been far off the mark when he alleged last year that Israeli intelligence had been exposed as having kept links with Yemeni Islamists. The point is, Yemeni Islamists are a highly fragmented lot and no one is sure who owes what sort of allegiance to whom. Israeli intelligence operates marvelously in such twilight zones when the horizon is lacerated with the blood of the vanishing sun.

Israel will find a toehold in Yemen to be a god-sent gift insofar as it registers its presence in the Arabian Peninsula. This is a dream come true for Israel, whose effectiveness as a regional power has always been seriously handicapped by its lack of access to the Persian Gulf region. The overarching US military presence helps Israel politically to consolidate its Yemeni chapter. Without doubt, Petraeus is moving on Yemen in tandem with Israel (and Britain). But the “pro-West” Arab states with their rentier mentality have no choice except to remain as mute spectators on the sidelines.

Some among them may actually acquiesce with the Israeli security presence in the region as a safer bet than the spread of the dangerous ideas of Shi’ite empowerment emanating out of Iran, Iraq and Hezbollah. Also, at some stage, Israeli intelligence will begin to infiltrate the extremist Sunni outfits in Yemen, which are commonly known as affiliates of al-Qaeda. That is, if it hasn’t done that already. Any such link makes Israel an invaluable ally for the US in its fight against al-Qaeda. In sum, infinite possibilities exist in the paradigm that is taking shape in the Muslim world abutting into the strategic Persian Gulf.

It’s all about China

Most important, however, for US global strategies will be the massive gain of control of the port of Aden in Yemen. Britain can vouchsafe that Aden is the gateway to Asia. Control of Aden and the Malacca Strait will put the US in an unassailable position in the “great game” of the Indian Ocean. The sea lanes of the Indian Ocean are literally the jugular veins of China’s economy. By controlling them, Washington sends a strong message to Beijing that any notions by the latter that the US is a declining power in Asia would be nothing more than an extravagant indulgence in fantasy.

In the Indian Ocean region, China is increasingly coming under pressure. India is a natural ally of the US in the Indian Ocean region. Both disfavor any significant Chinese naval presence. India is mediating a rapprochement between Washington and Colombo that would help roll back Chinese influence in Sri Lanka. The US has taken a u-turn in its Myanmar policy and is engaging the regime there with the primary intent of eroding China’s influence with the military rulers. The Chinese strategy aimed at strengthening influence in Sri Lanka and Myanmar so as to open a new transportation route towards the Middle East, the Persian Gulf and Africa, where it has begun contesting traditional Western economic dominance.

China is keen to whittle down its dependence on the Malacca Strait for its commerce with Europe and West Asia. The US, on the contrary, is determined that China remains vulnerable to the choke point between Indonesia and Malaysia.

An engrossing struggle is breaking out. The US is unhappy with China’s efforts to reach the warm waters of the Persian Gulf through the Central Asian region and Pakistan. Slowly but steadily, Washington is tightening the noose around the neck of the Pakistani elites – civilian and military – and forcing them to make a strategic choice between the US and China. This will put those elites in an unenviable dilemma. Like their Indian counterparts, they are inherently “pro-Western” (even when they are “anti-American”) and if the Chinese connection is important for Islamabad, that is primarily because it balances perceived Indian hegemony.

The existential questions with which the Pakistani elites are grappling are apparent. They are seeking answers from Obama. Can Obama maintain a balanced relationship vis-a-vis Pakistan and India? Or, will Obama lapse back to the George W Bush era strategy of building up India as the pre-eminent power in the Indian Ocean under whose shadow Pakistan will have to learn to live?

US-India-Israel axis

On the other hand, the Indian elites are in no compromising mood. Delhi was on a roll during the Bush days. Now, after the initial misgivings about Obama’s political philosophy, Delhi is concluding that he is all but a clone of his illustrious predecessor as regards the broad contours of the US’s global strategy – of which containment of China is a core template.

The comfort level is palpably rising in Delhi with regard to the Obama presidency. Delhi takes the surge of the Israeli lobby in Washington as the litmus test for the Obama presidency. The surge suits Delhi, since the Jewish lobby was always a helpful ally in cultivating influence in the US Congress, media and the rabble-rousing think-tankers as well as successive administrations. And all this is happening at a time when the India-Israel security relationship is gaining greater momentum.

United States Defense Secretary Robert Gates is due to visit Delhi in the coming days. The Obama administration is reportedly adopting an increasingly accommodative attitude toward India’s longstanding quest for “dual-use” technology from the US. If so, a massive avenue of military cooperation is about to open between the two countries, which will make India a serious challenger to China’s growing military prowess. It is a win-win situation as the great Indian arms bazaar offers highly lucrative business for American companies.

Clearly, a cozy three-way US-Israel-India alliance provides the underpinning for all the maneuvering that is going on. It will have significance for the security of the Indian Ocean, the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Peninsula. Last year, India formalized a naval presence in Oman.

All-in-all, terrorism experts are counting the trees and missing the wood when they analyze the US foray into Yemen in the limited terms of hunting down al-Qaeda. The hard reality is that Obama, whose main plank used to be “change”, has careened away and increasingly defaults to the global strategies of the Bush era. The freshness of the Obama magic is dissipating. Traces of the “revisionism” in his foreign policy orientation are beginning to surface. We can see them already with regard to Iran, Afghanistan, the Middle East and the Israel-Palestine problem, Central Asia and towards China and Russia.

Arguably, this sort of “return of the native” by Obama was inevitable. For one thing, he is but a creature of his circumstances. As someone put it brilliantly, Obama’s presidency is like driving a train rather than a car: a train cannot be “steered”, the driver can at best set its speed, but ultimately, it must run on its tracks.

Besides, history has no instances of a declining world power meekly accepting its destiny and walking into the sunset. The US cannot give up on its global dominance without putting up a real fight. And the reality of all such momentous struggles is that they cannot be fought piece-meal. You cannot fight China without occupying Yemen.

 

Russia, China, Iran redraw energy map

Asia Times
January 9, 2010

The inauguration of the Dauletabad-Sarakhs-Khangiran pipeline on Wednesday connecting Iran’s northern Caspian region with Turkmenistan’s vast gas field may go unnoticed amid the Western media cacophony that it is “apocalypse now” for the Islamic regime in Tehran.

The event sends strong messages for regional security. Within the space of three weeks, Turkmenistan has committed its entire gas exports to China, Russia and Iran. It has no urgent need of the pipelines that the United States and the European Union have been advancing. Are we hearing the faint notes of a Russia-China-Iran symphony?

The 182-kilometer Turkmen-Iranian pipeline starts modestly with the pumping of 8 billion cubic meters (bcm) of Turkmen gas. But its annual capacity is 20bcm, and that would meet the energy requirements of Iran’s Caspian region and enable Tehran to free its own gas production in the southern fields for export. The mutual interest is perfect: Ashgabat gets an assured market next door; northern Iran can consume without fear of winter shortages; Tehran can generate more surplus for exports; Turkmenistan can seek transportation routes to the world market via Iran; and Iran can aspire to take advantage of its excellent geographical location as a hub for the Turkmen exports.

We are witnessing a new pattern of energy cooperation at the regional level that dispenses with Big Oil. Russia traditionally takes the lead. China and Iran follow the example. Russia, Iran and Turkmenistan hold respectively the world’s largest, second-largest and fourth-largest gas reserves. And China will be consumer par excellence in this century. The matter is of profound consequence to the US global strategy.

Read Full Article Here

Afghanistan: only the first move in the grand chess game for control of Central Asian resources

 



U.S. Nuked Iraq in 1991 -Rafsanjani
November 5, 2008, 8:58 am
Filed under: gulf, gulf war, Iran, Iraq, kuwait, Military, nation building, Nuke, occupation, us military, War On Terror, WW3, ww4

U.S. Nuked Iraq in 1991 -Rafsanjani

Press TV
October 24, 2008

A senior Iranian cleric has urged an inquiry into a report that the US dropped a small nuclear bomb on an area near the Iraq-Iran border.

Speaking at the Friday prayers sermon, former Iranian president and currently Chairman of the Assembly of Experts, Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani said, “The bomb blast killed many people and spread cancer and other diseases in the area but no news items have been published about it.”

Rafsanjani noted that the footage of the attack, which allegedly took place in a region between Iraq’s Basra and Iran’s border in 1991, was broadcast by an Italian television channel earlier this month.

He said that even though the report has not been officially confirmed, it was expected to receive widespread media coverage but it was censored in the media.

“If it the report turns out to be true, then the US should be asked why it has resorted to such a crime to punish the then-bankrupt Iraqi government,” Fars news agency quoted Rafsanjani as saying.

The coalition forces from 34 countries led by the US launched the Persian Gulf War (2 Aug 1990-28 Feb 1991) to return Kuwait to the control of the Emir of Kuwait.

The nuclear bombing Rafsanjani was referring to was based on a claim by US war veteran Jim Brown who said that the US dropped a five-kilotonne nuclear bomb on 27 February 1991, the last day of the first Iraq-US War. Brown made the accusation during an interview included in a 30-minute current affairs report broadcast by Italian state news channel RaiNews24 on October 9.

RaiNews24 says it has conducted an independent inquiry and discovered that “a seismic event took place on that day equal to a five-kilotonne blast”, citing as its source the online archives of the International Seismological Center, a non-profit UK-based organisation, as confirmation of its research according to Adnkronos International (AKI).

The documentary included an interview with an Iraqi doctor, Jawad al-Ali, who told RaiNews24 that before the beginning of the first Gulf War in 1989 there were 32 cases of tumours, while in 2002 the number had risen to 600 in the Basra area as reported by AKI on 8 October.

Al-Ali also told RaiNews24 that tumours that used to affect older citizens had started to impact younger children. He then showed alleged photos of the tumours in the documentary.

 



761 U.S. Military Bases Across the Planet

761 U.S. Military Bases Across the Planet

Alternet
September 8, 2008

Here it is, as simply as I can put it: In the course of any year, there must be relatively few countries on this planet on which U.S. soldiers do not set foot, whether with guns blazing, humanitarian aid in hand, or just for a friendly visit. In startling numbers of countries, our soldiers not only arrive, but stay interminably, if not indefinitely. Sometimes they live on military bases built to the tune of billions of dollars that amount to sizeable American towns (with accompanying amenities), sometimes on stripped down forward operating bases that may not even have showers. When those troops don’t stay, often American equipment does — carefully stored for further use at tiny “cooperative security locations,” known informally as “lily pads” (from which U.S. troops, like so many frogs, could assumedly leap quickly into a region in crisis).

At the height of the Roman Empire, the Romans had an estimated 37 major military bases scattered around their dominions. At the height of the British Empire, the British had 36 of them planetwide. Depending on just who you listen to and how you count, we have hundreds of bases. According to Pentagon records, in fact, there are 761 active military “sites” abroad.

The fact is: We garrison the planet north to south, east to west, and even on the seven seas, thanks to our various fleets and our massive aircraft carriers which, with 5,000-6,000 personnel aboard — that is, the population of an American town — are functionally floating bases.

And here’s the other half of that simple truth: We don’t care to know about it. We, the American people, aided and abetted by our politicians, the Pentagon, and the mainstream media, are knee-deep in base denial.

Now, that’s the gist of it. If, like most Americans, that’s more than you care to know, stop here.

Where the Sun Never Sets

Let’s face it, we’re on an imperial bender and it’s been a long, long night. Even now, in the wee hours, the Pentagon continues its massive expansion of recent years; we spend militarily as if there were no tomorrow; we’re still building bases as if the world were our oyster; and we’re still in denial. Someone should phone the imperial equivalent of Alcoholics Anonymous.

But let’s start in a sunnier time, less than two decades ago, when it seemed that there would be many tomorrows, all painted red, white, and blue. Remember the 1990s when the U.S. was hailed — or perhaps more accurately, Washington hailed itself — not just as the planet’s “sole superpower” or even its unique “hyperpower,” but as its “global policeman,” the only cop on the block? As it happened, our leaders took that label seriously and our central police headquarters, that famed five-sided building in Washington D.C, promptly began dropping police stations — aka military bases — in or near the oil heartlands of the planet (Kosovo, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait) after successful wars in the former Yugoslavia and the Persian Gulf.

As those bases multiplied, it seemed that we were embarking on a new, post-Soviet version of “containment.” With the USSR gone, however, what we were containing grew a lot vaguer and, before 9/11, no one spoke its name. Nonetheless, it was, in essence, Muslims who happened to live on so many of the key oil lands of the planet.

Yes, for a while we also kept intact our old bases from our triumphant mega-war against Japan and Germany, and then the stalemated “police action” in South Korea (1950-1953) — vast structures which added up to something like an all-military American version of the old British Raj. According to the Pentagon, we still have a total of 124 bases in Japan, up to 38 on the small island of Okinawa, and 87 in South Korea. (Of course, there were setbacks. The giant bases we built in South Vietnam were lost in 1975, and we were peaceably ejected from our major bases in the Philippines in 1992.)

Read Full Article Here

 



Saudi, Egypt and Turkey Warn of U.S. Strike on Iran

Turkey Warns of U.S. Military Operation on Iran

Hurriyet
August 16, 2008

Turkish President Abdullah Gul urged his Iranian counterpart to accept the new incentives package of the Western countries and warned on a possible U.S. military operation, Hurriyet daily reported on Saturday.

Turkey urges Iran to accept incentives, warns on U.S. attack Gul and Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad met on Thursday to discuss the international row over Tehran’s nuclear works and bilateral relations.

Two leaders, however, failed to sign agreements on multi-billion dollars energy agreement, a move came after the U.S. pressure who seeks to increase the isolation of Iran, some media reports earlier suggested.

Read Full Article Here

 

Iran Warned Not To Allow War Pretext
Egypt and Saudi Arabia caution against presenting U.S. and Israel pretext for military strike on a silver platter

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
August 18, 2008

Following a meeting this weekend between Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Saudi King Abdullah, Iran was told not to allow the U.S. and Israel to create a pretext for a military attack, a warning interpreted by Tehran that an impending attack is on the horizon.

“Iran should not present on a silver platter the justifications and the pretexts for those who want to drag the region down a dangerous slope,” Egypt’s presidential spokesman Suleiman Awwad said on Saturday.

“Middle East sources report that the Iranian satellite carrier space launch Sunday, Aug. 17, was prompted by a joint caution to Tehran from Saudi King Abdullah and Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak,” reports Debka File.

“This warning was interpreted by the London Arabic daily Al Quds as a warning to Tehran that an attack is impending by the US, some European nations and Israel.”

The warning follows last week’s decision on behalf of Kuwait to activate its highest priority Emergency War Plan in response to thelargest U.S. naval deployment since 1991 as three more U.S. warships steamed towards the Persian Gulf in what observers described as an “unprecedented” build-up.

Finding and even staging a suitable pretext for a military attack on Iran has been a preoccupation amongst top Neo-Cons for months if not years.

Last month, New Yorker writer Seymour Hersh sensationally revealed that during a meeting held in the Vice President’s office concerning the creation of a justification to attack Iran, Dick Cheney proposed dressing up Navy Seals as Iranians, putting them on fake Iranian PT speedboats and starting a shoot up.

The plan was purportedly rejected but Hersh noted that the incident in the Straight of Hormuz, in which tiny Iranian speedboats on patrol inside Iranian waters were said to have threatened three U.S. warships with suicide attacks (a ridiculous claim completely fabricated by the U.S. and lapped up by the western media) taught the Bush administration that “if you get the right incident, the American public will support” it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slgBrbNXrbs

Israel retracts war on Iran threats
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=67175&sectionid=351020101

Arab world fears an Iran war may be impending
http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=5516

Iran Plans Manned Space Mission
http://www.roguegovernment.com/news.php?id=11561

New Light Shone On AIPAC Espionage
http://www.sunherald.com/451/story/759287.html

Coup on Iran & False Flag News Archive

 



U.S. stalls Israeli military strike on Iran

U.S. stalls Israeli military strike on Iran

Haaretz
August 8, 2008

The American administration has rejected an Israeli request for military equipment and support that would improve Israel’s ability to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities.

A report published last week by the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) states that military strikes are unlikely to destroy >Iran’s centrifuge program for enriching uranium.

The Americans viewed the request, which was transmitted (and rejected) at the highest level, as a sign that Israel is in the advanced stages of preparations to attack Iran. They therefore warned Israel against attacking, saying such a strike would undermine American interests. They also demanded that Israel give them prior notice if it nevertheless decided to strike Iran.

As compensation for the requests it rejected, Washington offered to improve Israel’s defenses against surface-to-surface missiles.

Israel responded by saying it reserves the right to take whatever action it deems necessary if diplomatic efforts to halt Iran’s nuclearization fail.

Senior Israeli officials had originally hoped that U.S. President George Bush would order an American strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities before leaving office, as America’s military is far better equipped to conduct such a strike successfully than is Israel’s.

Jerusalem also fears that an Israeli strike, even if it succeeded well enough to delay Iran’s nuclear development for a few years, would give Iran international legitimacy for its program, which it currently lacks. Israel, in contrast, would be portrayed as an aggressor, and would be forced to contend alone with Iran’s retaliation, which would probably include thousands of missile strikes by Iranian allies Hezbollah, Hamas and perhaps even Syria.

Read Full Article Here

Rice: Israel Can Attack Iran if It Wants

 

The Jerusalem Post
August 10, 2008

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice defended Israel’s right to make its own decision about whether it takes military action against Iran, in an interview released over the weekend.

“We don’t say yes or no to Israeli military operations. Israel is a sovereign country,” she said in response to a question from The Politico Web site as to whether she was concerned that America would be blamed in the case of an IDF attack on the Islamic Republic.

Her statements come amid speculation that Washington has warned Jerusalem not to attack Iran and media reports that the US told Israel it doesn’t have the green light to use Iraqi airspace for any such attack.

Read Full Article Here

 

US: No plan for naval blockade of Iran

Press TV
August 13, 2008

A senior official with the US Defense Department has dismissed reports that Washington is planning a naval blockade of Iran.

“As a matter of policy we do not discuss current or future ship’s movements. However, I can tell you that reports of an alleged naval blockade of Iran are false,” Lt. Col. Patrick Ryder, a spokesman for the assistant secretary of defense for public affairs told The Jerusalem Post on Wednesday.

“We routinely rotate deployed naval forces in the USCENTCOM area of responsibility,” he added.

The US Central Command supervises US military operations in the Middle East, East Africa and Central Asia.

On Monday, Egypt’s Middle East Times reported that a massive US and European armada was heading towards the Persian Gulf for a naval blockade of Iran.

The report said that the force included the nuclear-powered American aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt as well as forces from the British Royal Navy and a French nuclear submarine.

Israel: Iran war not okayed by US
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=66457&sectionid=351020101

Bolton: Regime Change In Iran ‘Would Lead To Greater Stability In The Region’
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/08/06/bolton-stability-in-region/

Iran: We will protect our waters
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=66556&sectionid=351020101

U.S. Continues Allegations Against Iran
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=43540

Iran warns against ’surprise attack’
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=66379&sectionid=351020104

EU expands Iran nuclear sanctions, joins U.S. blockade
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7549879.stm

Why the Pentagon Thinks Attacking Iran is a Bad Idea
http://www.usnews.com/articles/ne..gon-thinks-attacking-iran-is-a-bad-idea.html

Israel irked over Iranian leader’s planned visit to Turkey
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/200..elirandiplomacy_080808113841

Study Cautions Against Strike on Iran’s Nuclear Facilities
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp..AR2008080703026.html?nav=rss_nation

Massive U.S. Naval Armada Heads For Iran
http://noworldsystem.co..-naval-armada-heads-for-iran/

Coup on Iran & False Flag News Archive

 



U.S. and Israel Give Georgia Guns to Fight Russia

US sends more arms to Georgia: Israeli media

Russia Today
August 11, 2008

The United States is sending fresh supplies of weapons to Georgia from its base in the Jordanian port of Aqabah. That’s according to the Israeli newspaper – Maariv.

The paper says the US began flying weapons from the transport hub on Saturday.

According to Maariv, the US is hiring Russian-made freight planes belonging to UTI Worldwide Inc. to transport arms and ammunition to Georgia. The paper says the Pentagon is redirecting supplies to Tbilisi that were earmarked for Iraq.

The Aqabah terminal is used by the US to supply troops in Iraq. The American military relies on the hub mainly because it’s safer to use Aqabah than Iraq’s own ports in the Persian Gulf.

Georgia stocks a wide range of weapons from many sources. This is a strategic move in case Russia were to block off the channels through which it gets its military supplies.

 

Israel ’has a hand in S. Ossetia war’

Press TV
August 10, 2008

Israel has provided Georgia with military assistance amid an ongoing armed conflict in the breakaway region of South Ossetia.

The Israeli web site Debkafiles which is believed to have close links with the regime’s intelligence and military sources, reported that last year, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili had commissioned from Israeli security firms up to 1,000 military advisers to train the country’s armed forces.

According to the report, the Israeli advisors also helped Tbilisi with military intelligence and security operations. Georgia also purchased weapons, intelligence and electronic warfare systems from Israel.

The report added the Israeli advisers were deeply involved in the Georgian army’s preparations to attack and capture the capital of South Ossetia on Friday.

The web site quoted “its military experts” as saying a project to pump Caspian oil and gas to the Turkish terminal of Ceyhan instead of the Russian pipeline network is in the interest of Tel Aviv.

The regime therefore has been negotiating with Turkey, Georgia, Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan to go ahead with the construction of pipelines to transfer oil to terminals in Ashkelon and Eilat.

The report added that Moscow had demanded Tel Aviv to halt its military assistance to Georgia and even warned the regime of a diplomatic row.

Israel, however, said that its military cooperation with Georgia had been “defensive.”

Georgia captured the capital of South Ossetia on Friday, triggering a response from Russia which has stationed its peacekeepers in the breakaway region since the 1990s conflicts.

Ties between the two former Soviet republics have been strained over several issues, including Georgia’s NATO membership bid.

 

US partly to blame – ex Georgian FM

Russia Today
August 11, 2008

Many experts say the military conflict between Georgia and South Ossetia is not in Russia’s interests. The Former Georgian Foreign Minister Salome Zurabishvili says the United States could be partly responsible for the violence in South Ossetia.

In an interview with the France-Presse news agency she commented on the possible reasons behind the military conflict.

“There are many Americans in Georgia training the military forces of the country and monitoring the situation. As I understand, they also supervise the strategic corridor – the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline.

Read Full Article Here

Jewish Georgian minister: Thanks to Israeli training, we’re fending off Russia
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1010187.html

Israel Linked To Georgia Security
http://www.thebulletin.us/site/index..AG=461&dept_id=576361&rfi=8

U.S. Releases $250K For Emergency Aid In Georgia
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D92GC5G80&show_article=1

Georgians: We Helped In Iraq, Now Help Us
http://www.guardian.co.uk/busines..orldbank.usa?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront

War in Georgia: The Israeli connection
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3580136,00.html

Putin Accuses U.S. Of Helping Georgia
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/..-details/Defiant+Putin+accuses+US+of+

Did the U.S. Prep Georgia for War with Russia?
http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/08/did-us-military.html

Did U.S., Israel Provocateur S. Ossetia Conflict? Does the Sun Come Up in the Morning?
http://www.infowars.com/?p=3860

Israeli soldiers who trained Georgia troops say war with Russia is no surprise
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=1010230

Israel won’t stop arms sales to Georgia
http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=27365