Speculation: "The Great Game"

[Autolykos]

In light of the recent events between Israel and Lebanon, I'm wondering whether there isn't a greater geopolitical purpose being sought. Here are the pieces to the puzzle:

• US leaders have expressed enmity against the leaders of both Syria and Iran.
• Israel attacks Lebanon, which borders Syria.
• An American attack on Iran could well provoke a Syrian incursion into Iraq.
• If Syrian forces were "knocked out of the game", so to speak, the above risk would be nullified, making an attack on Iran more likely.
• Syrian leaders have expressed concern that the conflict between Israel and Hizbullah/Lebanon may spill into their territory.

Is it possible that the Israeli forces' attacks on Lebanon are really a stepping-stone to attacking Syrian forces? The idea would be to prevent a "Syrian Squeeze" on US military positions in Iraq following a preemptive strike on Iran. If US leaders are indeed planning for such a strike (as seems likely, I'm afraid), then we would do well to not view the current events in isolation.

Food for thought.

- Rob

[GodBlessAmerica]

We know the Israelis don't fight to lose, so when both nations sent people over Israeli borders to take Israeli citizens hostage, it wasn't Israel that asked them to do so.

I don't think there is anything going on like you suggested as far as how this has come to happen, but I assure you that Israel has long planned a move in retaliation for every action against them.

They are not in this to lose.

[dsanthony]

Quote by: Autolykos In light of the recent events between Israel and Lebanon, I'm wondering whether there isn't a greater geopolitical purpose being sought. Here are the pieces to the puzzle: US leaders have expressed enmity against the leaders of both Syria and Iran. Israel attacks Lebanon, which borders Syria. An American attack on Iran could well provoke a Syrian incursion into Iraq. If Syrian forces were "knocked out of the game", so to speak, the above risk would be nullified, making an attack on Iran more likely. Syrian leaders have expressed concern that the conflict between Israel and Hizbullah/Lebanon may spill into their territory. Is it possible that the Israeli forces' attacks on Lebanon are really a stepping-stone to attacking Syrian forces? The idea would be to prevent a "Syrian Squeeze" on US military positions in Iraq following a preemptive strike on Iran. If US leaders are indeed planning for such a strike (as seems likely, I'm afraid), then we would do well to not view the current events in isolation. Food for thought. - Rob

FOod for indigestion, you mean. With US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, you can't possibly believe that Bush is rooting for a widespread war in the Middle East. That's comical.

The "conspiracy" behind this is simple. The Islamic terrorist networks, whether Hezzbolah or Al Quaeda, are at war with Israel, the US and all of the western world. I don't know why that's so hard for liberals to get their minds around.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: Autolykos Food for thought.

I thought the same thing. This may very well be the trigger to the conflict Western interests have been funding for many years. Like I always say, "we must love a good fight, because we're always funding both sides of these conflicts".

Quote by: GodBlessAmerica but I assure you that Israel has long planned a move in retaliation for every action against them.

That is the truth, and the larger truth, if you ( Rob ) know what I mean. There has been conflict in this area since the creation of the State of Isreal. The ever festering wound on all international relations in the area, and the reason we all have a permanent invatation to butt in, and prevent any real resolution from ever occuring.

[GodBlessAmerica]

FOod for indigestion, you mean. With US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, you can't possibly believe that Bush is rooting for a widespread war in the Middle East. That's comical. The "conspiracy" behind this is simple. The Islamic terrorist networks, whether Hezzbolah or Al Quaeda, are at war with Israel, the US and all of the western world. I don't know why that's so hard for liberals to get their minds around.

What is the advantage of having a war in the Middle East for President Bush?
High gas prices slows the economy down.

How exactly did Bush arrange two differnent nations and terrorist groups to come over Israeli lines to take Israeli hostages?

Here is a link to Islam at play, had ZERO to do with Bush.

This is just radical Islam raising it's head again. They are a dangerous cult, not a religion.

[RickSp]

Three months ago Justin Raimondo predicted the following:

"War with Iran will probably not begin with a frontal assault by the U.S. and/or Israel on Iran's alleged nuclear weapons facilities, or even a skirmish along the Iraq-Iran border. Look to Lebanon and Syria for the first battlegrounds of this developing regional war. The Israelis know perfectly well that Iran's nuclear ambitions, if they ever materialize, are not an immediate threat: their real concern is their volatile northern border, where their deadly enemies – Hezbollah – are an effective obstacle to Israeli influence. The Israelis are also looking to exploit growing opportunities to make trouble in Syria, where the restive Kurds are their reliable allies, and the brittleness of the Ba'athist dictatorship is an invitation to regime change." (Emphsis added)

I think he called it right. Israel is out of control and Bush is their puppy dog. Raimondo points out that the war in Iraq coupled with the current Israeli attacks on Lebanon resembles very closely the "Clean Break" Strategy articulated in 1996 by a group of pro-Israeli Americans – including Richard Perle, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser for then-Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. It "proposed a strategy of regime change as the only solution for Israel's growing encirclement and isolation."

[Autolykos]

Quote by: GodBlessAmerica We know the Israelis don't fight to lose, so when both nations sent people over Israeli borders to take Israeli citizens hostage, it wasn't Israel that asked them to do so.

That is beside the point.

Quote by: GodBlessAmerica I don't think there is anything going on like you suggested as far as how this has come to happen, but I assure you that Israel has long planned a move in retaliation for every action against them. They are not in this to lose.

I imagine they aren't. However, that is also beside the point. Right now, your argument boils down to "I don't believe you". Well, can you at least explain why?

- Rob

[Autolykos]

Quote by: dsanthony Quote by: Autolykos Food for thought. - Rob FOod for indigestion, you mean.

If it causes you indigestion, that means that it's stirring something up inside (cognitive dissonance, perhaps).

Quote by: dsanthony With US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, you can't possibly believe that Bush is rooting for a widespread war in the Middle East. That's comical.

Well, can you elaborate on how it's comical?

Quote by: dsanthony The "conspiracy" behind this is simple. The Islamic terrorist networks, whether Hezzbolah or Al Quaeda, are at war with Israel, the US and all of the western world. I don't know why that's so hard for liberals to get their minds around.

First off, define "the western world". Second, I am not a "liberal". Finally, do you not think that perhaps Hizbullah and al-Qaida have legitimate reasons for fighting the (governments of the) US, Israel, etc? It's not always "four legs good, two legs bad", you know.

- Rob

[Autolykos]

Quote by: Milton Bradley Quote by: Autolykos Food for thought. I thought the same thing. This may very well be the trigger to the conflict Western interests have been funding for many years. Like I always say, "we must love a good fight, because we're always funding both sides of these conflicts".

The old Roman dictum? Divide et impera (divide and conquer)?

Those who are in power would do well to remember another Roman dictum: Debellare superbos et parcere subjectis, "Cast down the haughty and spare the subjugated".

Quote by: Milton Bradley Quote by: GodBlessAmerica but I assure you that Israel has long planned a move in retaliation for every action against them. That is the truth, and the larger truth, if you ( Rob ) know what I mean. There has been conflict in this area since the creation of the State of Isreal. The ever festering wound on all international relations in the area, and the reason we all have a permanent invatation to butt in, and prevent any real resolution from ever occuring.

It seems telling to me that the European nations are unanimous (to my knowledge) in condemning the actions of all parties involved, while Mr. Bush has maintained that Israel has a right to "defend herself". In case anyone does not know, the modern nation of Israel exists, and has existed, solely at the pleasure of the United States. If the US government says "Jump!", the Israeli government asks "How high?".

- Rob

[Autolykos]

Quote by: GodBlessAmerica FOod for indigestion, you mean. With US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, you can't possibly believe that Bush is rooting for a widespread war in the Middle East. That's comical. The "conspiracy" behind this is simple. The Islamic terrorist networks, whether Hezzbolah or Al Quaeda, are at war with Israel, the US and all of the western world. I don't know why that's so hard for liberals to get their minds around. What is the advantage of having a war in the Middle East for President Bush? High gas prices slows the economy down.

Yet high gas prices bring in lots of money for the oil companies, who have posted record profits in the past year. Gas has proven to be a more inelastic good than most people (including oil executives) had believed.

Quote by: GodBlessAmerica How exactly did Bush arrange two differnent nations and terrorist groups to come over Israeli lines to take Israeli hostages? Here is a link to Islam at play, had ZERO to do with Bush.

You seem to misunderstand me on this. I am not suggesting that Bush or anyone else set up the pieces on the chessboard, so to speak. Once the abductions were made, however, the Israeli government was under no obligation to act in any certain way. The way that it has acted is telling. It appears to me that it was looking for an excuse (perhaps any excuse) to do this, which would make one wonder what greater purpose the current situation serves.

Quote by: GodBlessAmerica This is just radical Islam raising it's head again. They are a dangerous cult, not a religion.

I have no doubt that radical Islam is definitely a causal factor in all of this. However, I am inclined to believe that radical Muslims have little to no understanding of international geopolitics. For one thing, they do not have access to the privileged information that Western governments (e.g. the US and Israel) do. On the other hand, their interests are generally local; if they were really trying to wage a global jihad, they would be cut to pieces in minutes. Thus, they have been made a convenient scapegoat for larger ends.

- Rob

[Autolykos]

Quote by: RickSp Three months ago Justin Raimondo predicted the following: [snip] I think he called it right. Israel is out of control and Bush is their puppy dog.

I could be wrong on this, but I don't think that Israel is out of control, because the US government is holding the purse strings.

Quote by: RickSp Raimondo points out that the war in Iraq coupled with the current Israeli attacks on Lebanon resembles very closely the "Clean Break" Strategy articulated in 1996 by a group of pro-Israeli Americans – including Richard Perle, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser for then-Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. It "proposed a strategy of regime change as the only solution for Israel's growing encirclement and isolation."

I am not surprised by this at all. A while ago, I had read the infamous PNAC document "Rebuilding America's Defenses". While most people would simply criticize the espoused policies, I take issue with their core beliefs, beginning with "American leadership is good for both America and the world". This doctrine is a direct consequence of American exceptionalism.

- Rob

[dsanthony]

Quote by: Autolykos Quote by: dsanthony Quote by: Autolykos Food for thought. - Rob FOod for indigestion, you mean. If it causes you indigestion, that means that it's stirring something up inside (cognitive dissonance, perhaps). Quote by: dsanthony With US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, you can't possibly believe that Bush is rooting for a widespread war in the Middle East. That's comical. Well, can you elaborate on how it's comical? Quote by: dsanthony The "conspiracy" behind this is simple. The Islamic terrorist networks, whether Hezzbolah or Al Quaeda, are at war with Israel, the US and all of the western world. I don't know why that's so hard for liberals to get their minds around. First off, define "the western world". Second, I am not a "liberal". Finally, do you not think that perhaps Hizbullah and al-Qaida have legitimate reasons for fighting the (governments of the) US, Israel, etc? It's not always "four legs good, two legs bad", you know. - Rob

Bush does not want a war with Syria and Iran. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are keeping our military busy as it is. Yes, it's comical to think otherwise.

Hezbollah and Al quaeda are medieval, fundamentalist islamic groups. They are the enemy of the Western world.

[zynner]

Rob ~

Interesting thought. Iran is friends with Russia and China, who would love to see the US bogged down in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran. They would get to supply Iran with plenty of arms to make sure the US goes bankrupt, but not have to fight directly. By the way, this is exactly what happened with the USSR in Afghanistan -- it wasn't Reagan who brought down the wall; it was bin Laden of all people! So, to invade Iran would be insane. And I wouldn't put it past them one bit.

However, the current goings on might actually be a move to invade Syria, not prevent their move in the event of an attack on Iran. Take a look at the map. Syria is now surrounded. US-friendly Turkey, US-occupied Iraq, soon-to-be-Israel-occupied Lebanon, and US-friendly Jordan are Syria's neighbors.

Do you remember the wedding bomber in Jordan awhile back where things didn't go quite as planned and there were rumors that the bomber might have actually been Israeli? Could that have been an attempt to get Jordan to invite US forces in, but just didn't quite work out?

And what about the recent remarks about Syria's gov't "messing with" Lebanon (I guess Israel can bomb the hell out of the place, but Syria is not supposed to help Lebanon keep peace within its own country). And what about those infamous non-existent Iraqi WMD's that might be over in Syria? (Never mind that chemical and biological weapons have a shelf life and would no longer be of any danger anyhow, just like the ones Rick Santorum had a hissy fit over.)

Could it be that the next move is to invade Syria? I mean, ya gotta think like a statist. Just carve up Syria and Iraq, give some to the Kurds, satsifying the Turks (who have a large Kurdi population and don't want the trouble), while also carving up Iraq for the Sunnis and Shiites. Sounds like a PNAC-sorta plan.

I think Iran is a serious military threat to the US. If so, there is no way in hell there will be war with them, just like the US will never attack North Korea. If that is true, then maybe all that is a smokescreen (in part) to look tough but do nothing while nobody notices things heating up in Syria's direction.

Watch for news: "Syria, bad -- Israel/US, good" kinda stuff. The US could invade Syria, though probably with similar results as in Iraq and Afghanistan -- which is to say it would be blunder on top of blunder. But this PNAC gang seems to be just itching to unleash their grand scheme. Syria is also on the Mediterranean, so they get to play with boats sitting off the coast sending in cruise missles to murder innocent women and children. Kinda their thing, ya know?

Whatever the truth, we know that the propoganda coming out of Washington, DC and Tel Aviv are not likely to be the truth. The sooner these fools are out of office, the better.

~ zynner

[Nihsnek]

Quote by: GodBlessAmerica FOod for indigestion, you mean. With US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, you can't possibly believe that Bush is rooting for a widespread war in the Middle East. That's comical. The "conspiracy" behind this is simple. The Islamic terrorist networks, whether Hezzbolah or Al Quaeda, are at war with Israel, the US and all of the western world. I don't know why that's so hard for liberals to get their minds around. What is the advantage of having a war in the Middle East for President Bush? High gas prices slows the economy down. How exactly did Bush arrange two differnent nations and terrorist groups to come over Israeli lines to take Israeli hostages? Here is a link to Islam at play, had ZERO to do with Bush. This is just radical Islam raising it's head again. They are a dangerous cult, not a religion.

Oh really, so does raising taxes. Next!