It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How NATO will win the mid-east

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 08:58 AM
link   
When the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran will be over and democracy has been established in these countries, NATO will invite them to join. Then in the long term the mid-east will become an ally to the west in the inevitable showdown with red china. Where Russia will align itself in this geopolitical chess game remains to be seen.

Saudi-Arabia and Israel will be invited to join NATO, thus paving the way for a permanent peace agreement between the Israelis and Arabs. Ultimately, should this strategy be successful, president Bush's legacy will be that of a major victor.




posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 09:05 AM
link   
theres no way in the short term than israel and arabs will join in any pact with each other. the iraq iran war will go on alot further than after bush has left. this is a long term war, will not end tomorrow.

the nwo goal of complete world government is still a while of, though they will get there in the end.



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 09:08 AM
link   
Of course the Iraq and Iran wars will go on for long. These are not short term calculations. But in the end when democracy has been established there I see no barrier to these nations joining NATO.



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 09:13 AM
link   
well if your going down that route, the nwo will get its goal of one world government. but things work really slowly in this world, and the time scales for those things are far off.

israel and arabs have this religious end times programming in them, and i do not know if either side will accept the other without a great war or something happening first. its like a self forfilling prophesy.

[edit on 2/14/2007 by andy1033]



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 09:22 AM
link   
Still I think this is a viable strategy - aim for democracy and eventual NATO membership for these nations. If Bush's strategy was clear on that - i.e. if he said 'we absolutely will not leave Iraq until these goals are achieved' - we wouldn't have such strong war opposition in congress.



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Prokurator
When the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran will be over and democracy has been established in these countries, NATO will invite them to join. Then in the long term the mid-east will become an ally to the west in the inevitable showdown with red china. Where Russia will align itself in this geopolitical chess game remains to be seen.

Saudi-Arabia and Israel will be invited to join NATO, thus paving the way for a permanent peace agreement between the Israelis and Arabs. Ultimately, should this strategy be successful, president Bush's legacy will be that of a major victor.


I thought drug usage was frowned upon on ATS
While your thoughts are noble they are not very realistic. Afghanistan's drug trade is flourishing and Iraq is a festering sewer. Added to which those are 2 countries that didn't have much going for them in the first place, Iran is a completely different story. Would it not be better for the US to just mind their own business and tend to more pressing matters on the homefront on say small issues like the economy, education, healthcare, environment, etc. The only thing the US has succeeded admirably in doing so far is antagonizing the bulk of the planet and making the war machine huge profits. Let foreign matters be. Did it ever occur that maybe these nations are better of as is, whose to say democracy is in their best interests ?

brill



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 09:23 AM
link   
HEH your hillarious.

You must think your quiet clever, playing this games. How juvenile.

Sorry to burst your bubble. but people aren't just going to bow down silently to you, Case A. Iraq, Case B afghanistan.

Infact your dream of world domination has already been shattered, your too blinded by your puffed up chest to know it.

[edit on 14-2-2007 by Syrian Sister]



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 09:28 AM
link   
So are you saying people in Iraq should resist democracy? Or that we should not aim for democracy there. I would think these countries would be delighted to have it and NATO membership in addition.



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Prokurator
So are you saying people in Iraq should resist democracy? Or that we should not aim for democracy there. I would think these countries would be delighted to have it and NATO membership in addition.


I think we should let them decide for themselves not have it rammed down their throat. Your assuming that a NATO arrangement would fill the sky with champagne and velvet ropes would part but maybe we shouldn't be deciding their fate. Worry about your own backyard(domestic affairs) first is what I'm getting at.

brill



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 09:34 AM
link   
It's a little bit to late to just worry about your own backyard when we are already in Iraq and Afghanistan and preparing for Iran.



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 09:53 AM
link   

So are you saying people in Iraq should resist democracy? Or that we should not aim for democracy there. I would think these countries would be delighted to have it and NATO membership in addition.


I think democracy to the US and their NATO puppets is nothing but a farce, as fake as the WMD dossier.

I'll tell you how the US defines democracy, CAPITALISTS WHO SUPPORT THE US AGENDA AND ECONOMY = democracy. Even if their dictators.

Any country who elects a non capitalist president even by majority vote, is not a democracy in the twisted mind of the US.

Example, Chile's allende. US supportered his murder and one most ruthless dictator pinochet who took power in his place. Recently when pinochet died, the margret thatcher said, "atleast he brought democracy to chile". Democracy? by oppressing the nation and sending millions into exile for apposing him, if not torturing and executing them? Some democracy your offering. It makes more sense to replace the word democracy with capitalism every time one of you says it.

The Iraqies are fighting for REAL freedom, it's called INDEPENDENCE, and their doing it by resisting your barbaric occupation.

So joining you, would not be getting democracy, it would just be submitting to capitalist occupiers and losing the proud dignified arab identity, the opposite of freedom. Resisting you however, that's how iraq can get real freedom, And trust me, when Iraq does get real democracy you are not going to be happy with what they choose.

Get this clear in your head. No body wants you, nobody likes you, and nobody would be delighted to join your band of ruthless killers. So after all that's happened, please stop loving your self so much, your pompous behaviour is making me gag.

[edit on 14-2-2007 by Syrian Sister]



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Prokurator
It's a little bit to late to just worry about your own backyard when we are already in Iraq and Afghanistan and preparing for Iran.


Tell that too the voters. Tell that to the many thousands of now unemployed auto workers which comprise a large portion of the job sector. Tell that to senior citizens who live on dogfood and have next to no healthcare coverage. The list goes on.

I think many have already spoken loud and clear on this and there are several posts to outline public sentiment. Iran has not even started, officially, so there's lots of time. The problem is the average citizen has lots to say here but can do little. But its a democracy right? Oh the irony.

brill



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 10:23 AM
link   
First, you can't give democracy to the middle-east, you don't have it in the US, nor in UK. So stop believing your own BS. The plan is to divide and conquer. Divide the middle-east by war, buy them, then the Great Middle-East is created. The US will collapse soon, will be formed into a North American Union, with the European Union and the Asian Union. Then it will be a total world government, world tyranny.

That's how you spread fascism, you pretend you defend yourself or spread democracy, just like Hitler did with Poland, and the brainwashed ``patriots`` think that they are exporting democracy when they don't even have one at home. What a joke.

If you really want to help the world, erase the enemy within (the globalists, fascists and warmongerers that own your government since after JFK) then spread democracy for real.

[edit on 14-2-2007 by Vitchilo]



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 10:55 AM
link   
So Vitchilo, how do we erase our enemy within? And who/what are we erasing?



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 11:27 AM
link   
Look seriously, anyone who still believes we are "going in" to Iran should lay off the power high. It aint happening, not in this time, probably not ever in the next. You really have to undertsand people themselves to see the reality, not just swallow everything you are told by the Media and government propogandists.



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Alot of people have covered what i wanted to say.

My two cents. It isnt just capitalism they want exported (though it certainly is a very important factor), what global elites want is free market reforms and the huge profits austerity programs offer.

What i think will happen (excluding iran):

The US will delcare vicotry in iraq and afganistan whenver they believe free market reforms have taken a strong holding. Both countries will apply for major loans from the world bank and IMF. With those loans, harsh austery ("restructuring") programs will remove the already dwindling (if not non-existant) social protections the citiziens of that country possess. Child labour will skyrocket, worker safety will be non existant, real wages will plumit to 1800 rates, all the while western press will hail the new democracy (free market capitalism) as a shining example.

Any countries near those that oppose the new "reforms" will have they're leaders demonized and liken to hitler, and the countries people will suffer the same fate by proxy. Sactions will be ordered, military buildup will follow, and begin war cycle again.



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 11:51 AM
link   
Geeeeeeeeee I hate to burst your bubble, but NATO stands for:

North Atlantic Treaty Organisatio

I did not know that North Atlantic expands to Middle East.




posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 12:43 PM
link   
Isreal is already allied with nato in a very real fashion....
There is immense co-operation going on behind the scenes.....
as for Iran, look out its already beyond planning, and into the implementation stage....
The war rhetoric abd demonising /belittling of the Iranis has been going on for years since the Shah got his....
There WILL be military action if iran doesnt bow down to the wests demands.
This war scenario has worked for a long time, and it is the preffered way of taking the average americans mind off how badly he is getting screwed out of his tax dollars, and they are winding up in the pockets of the real rulers of America who are not even known to the country, and are certainly far from being democratic...
I remember the watergate conspirators calling their black manipulations "rat f#cking"
and that is what the real owners of this planet consider all of us to be.


[edit on 14-2-2007 by bergle]



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 03:01 PM
link   
You are suffering from delusions. Forget the Middle East. That is not where the US needs to be or befirend. It is India and Russia that the United States must get closer to.



posted on Feb, 14 2007 @ 04:06 PM
link   
Yeah those countries will be invited into NATO at least by 2099 when the Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Afghanistan wars are over. That is about as realistic as I can get.




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join