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.

 

Iraq Is About to Become a Lot Worse

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 06:45 AM
link   

Iraq Is About to Become a Lot Worse


www.alternet.org

Iraq no longer exists as a unified country. The experiment that was Iraq, the cobbling together of disparate and antagonistic patches of the Ottoman Empire by the victorious powers in the wake of World War I, belongs to the history books. It will never come back. The Kurds have set up a de facto state in the north, the Shiites control most of the south and the center of the country is a battleground.

There are 2 million Iraqis who have fled their homes and are internally displaced.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 06:45 AM
link   
As usual the powers that be have made a mess - and you have to question their desire to clean up their own mess.

Tensions run higher than ever, there are new bombings, atrocities and separatist announcements all the time.

The question is, can the country ever become a real democracy, or are they to be doomed by internal faction fighting as different groups vie for power.

www.alternet.org
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 06:52 AM
link   
Hey - do not worry man. Everything is going according to the plan. And the plans was to piss everybody off in Middle East, to get them to start shooting each other, then sell weapons to all of the sides, in the meantime take their oil (and of course use that money of sold oil to buy weapons) and later pull out all the soldiers and leave the people of Iraq (and Middle East) to complete and utter Chaos.

What more can you want?



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 06:55 AM
link   
I'm not sure they will pull completely out of the mid east - after all there is Israel to curb - without western intervention, they might very well end up bombing the rest of the mid east back to the stone age.



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 06:59 AM
link   
Seems like the US got what they wanted. Its not a failed experiment, its working perfectly. When you have two agents of the coalition instigating attacks, acting as Kurds/Shiites/[insert], killing Kurds/Shiites/[insert], then you know that peace and stability was never the aim.



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 07:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by budski
I'm not sure they will pull completely out of the mid east - after all there is Israel to curb - without western intervention, they might very well end up bombing the rest of the mid east back to the stone age.

Well not everybody of course - small numbers of troops shall remain here in very well fortified bases and airfields and observe the blood shed from above and from beyond the big walls and machine gun nests.



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 08:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by budski

I'm not sure they will pull completely out of the mid east - after all there is Israel to curb -


Israel to curb? What does that mean?
Nobody can or will touch Israel.
Oh there may be the stray rocket attack or suicide bombing, but that is not going to 'curb' Israel.
Just like in the Bible, Israel is the key my friend.



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 11:16 AM
link   
It means that the US and UK will try to curb the Israeli penchant for military action on any issue which leaves them feeling threatened.

This happened in the first and second "gulf wars"

This is done to protect the international image of Israel, and to stop more escalations of armed conflict in the area.



[edit: removed unnecessary quote of entire previous post]
Quoting - Please review this link

[edit on 8-8-2007 by 12m8keall2c]



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 06:52 PM
link   
The underlying message behind this is that more troops are required. However thats now being argued against with a lets start to leave idea.

Iraq will be policed by itself with a mess of insurgency and sectarian conflict. It will be too weak to threaten anyone across its borders and breed years of hatred for the west that left it in such a mess.

If Israel had no allies - they would soon be wiped off the map - nuclear weapons are no solution to sheer numbers of population. And they just dont have enough to bomb the middle east to knigdom come. Bearing in mind such action would merit a world wider dislike and unwillingness to assist them.

I think they are happy waiting for others to target their enemies then assisting as required.

Israel is content in looking after its backyard - it has more powerful friends to extend its interests further afield.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 06:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Karma2600

The underlying message behind this is that more troops are required. However thats now being argued against with a lets start to leave idea.

If Israel had no allies - they would soon be wiped off the map - nuclear weapons are no solution to sheer numbers of population. And they just dont have enough to bomb the middle east to knigdom come. Bearing in mind such action would merit a world wider dislike and unwillingness to assist them.

I think they are happy waiting for others to target their enemies then assisting as required.

Israel is content in looking after its backyard - it has more powerful friends to extend its interests further afield.



First point could be argued against:
www.timesonline.co.uk...

Second point is that Israel is quite capable of defending itself - it's the manner in which it does it that seems to be the problem. For instance, they are more than capable of using pretty much any weapon at their disposal, including WMD. During the first gulf war, the diplomatic wrangling to stop Israel attacking Iraq in retaliation for scud missile attacks was intense - it was seen at the time that other mid east countries would enter the war just to attack Israel, should they enter the war by bombing Iraq.

One things for sure - Iraq is a pretty bad place to be at the moment, and according to the article will only get worse.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 07:36 AM
link   
you know that there was never a serious attempt to establish a peaceful or stable Iraq

the very fact that the U.S. was forcing a 'Democracy Government'
on the folks is proof enough....a democracy is little more than a free-for-all
type of govt.

why didn't the U.S. instuct Iraq to set up a Republic or a Parlimentary govt.
or a Representative govt like we have here in the USA....
Why? Because a 'Democracy' is a lot different than a democratic republic


so from the get-go, Iraq was doomed to fail in its own footprint,
luckly the puppet govt in Iraq have not signed or passed into law the treaties that give away their vast oil fields to the multi-national mega-oil Corps. ~Yet~
but watch as they get pressured to sign the oil field give-aways before their form of govt completely collapses in a civil war



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join