Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

US Preparing for War in Persian Gulf ....again

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 02:43 PM
link   
www.washingtonpost.com...


The Obama administration is quietly working with Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf allies to speed up arms sales and rapidly upgrade defenses for oil terminals and other key infrastructure in a bid to thwart future military attacks by Iran, according to former and current U.S. and Middle Eastern government officials.

The initiatives, including a U.S.-backed plan to triple the size of a 10,000-man protection force in Saudi Arabia, are part of a broader push that includes unprecedented coordination of air defenses and expanded joint exercises between the U.S. and Arab militaries, the officials said. All appear to be aimed at increasing pressure on Tehran.

The efforts build on commitments by the George W. Bush administration to sell warplanes and anti-missile systems to friendly Arab states to counter Iran's growing conventional arsenal. The United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia are leading a region-wide military buildup that has resulted in more than $25 billion in U.S. arms purchases in the past two years alone.


so... were selling arms faster to and tripling the size of military forces in saudi arabia and our UAE allies... because of 300 al-qaeda in yemen!?!!?? my a$$...
i think its fairly obvoisu that the Iran issue will come to a head this year and this military build up by the US is a sure sign of us uping the tensions between the two countries... read the whole article, its pretty interesting..




posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 02:48 PM
link   
I may be wrong, but didn't the US sell arms to the Taliban in the 80s? It came back to bite us in the butt......wonder if this will, as well? In my opinion even the "friendly" Arab countries doesn't really consider the US a friend, more just an "enemy of my enemy" type of thing.

I agree with you about something happening with Iran soon. I don't know what it will be, but its concerning to say the least.

In all the talk about the importance of not allowing these countries to arm themselves with nuclear weapons, why do we ignore the very real threat of N. Korea? Is it because the US has no ulterior interests there?

Interesting read, as always.



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 03:16 PM
link   
Change we can believe in!

Yay!



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by TheCoffinman
 


My birthday was two days ago,these are my birthday wishes...
I wish our country would learn to mind it's own business.
I wish we would take care of problems here at home first.
I wish we would stop trying to be everything to everybody
at our citizens expense.



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 03:33 PM
link   
I think, that given the heavy hints made by Blair in the Chilcott Inquiry the other day, its on the cards that there will be a military strike on Iran. Blair said that Iran was a bigger threat now, to the UK, than Iraq was before the invasion. Given that Blair is involved in Middle East peace process - what an abomination - you can be sure that he is in the know.


[edit on 30-1-2010 by Circle]



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 03:40 PM
link   
There will certainly be a lot of $$$ passing through certain hands with all these 'sales' going through and certainly allows the US to implement the intevention needed in the area with 'direct' involvement in a new theatre, making way for a new Muslim v Muslim scenario.

As for Iran, time will tell but preperations for conflict there are something which I feel has hit a 'Russian' stumble-block a conflict will only ensue inlight of Isreali, 'first-strike' aggression.



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 03:48 PM
link   
Libya strikes billion-dollar Russian arms deal


a contract worth 1.3 billion euros (1.8 billion dollars) was signed. It does not only involve firearms", Putin was quoted as saying by Ria Novosti and Interfax.

The Russian prime minister did not specify the type of arms or military equipment involved in the deal.

But a Russian diplomatic source told Interfax Tuesday however that Libya wanted to acquire 20 fighter planes, at least two S-300 air defence systems, several dozen T-90C tanks and other arms.


add it the mix...



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by smyleegrl
I may be wrong, but didn't the US sell arms to the Taliban in the 80s? It came back to bite us in the butt.....


Yes you're wrong...



We sold weapons and arms to the Mujaheddin who were fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan. The "Taliban" came later.

Taliban

Origin

The Taliban initially enjoyed enormous good will from Afghans weary of the corruption, brutality, and the incessant fighting of Mujahideen warlords. Two contrasting narratives explain the beginnings of the Taliban.[21] Although there is no evidence that the CIA directly supported the Taliban or Al-Qaeda, some basis for military support of the Taliban was provided when, in the early 1980s, the CIA and the ISI (Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency) provided arms to Afghans resisting the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan,


Emergence in Afghanistan

The first major military activity of the Taliban was in October-November 1994 when they marched from Maiwand in southern Afghanistan to capture Kandahar City and the surrounding provinces, losing only a few dozen men.[29] Starting with the capture of a border crossing and a huge ammunition dump from warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, a few weeks later they freed "a convoy trying to open a trade route from Pakistan to Central Asia" from another group of warlords attempting to extort money.[30]

In the next three months this hitherto "unknown force" took control of twelve of Afghanistan's 34 provinces, with Mujahideen warlords often surrendering to them without a fight and the "heavily armed population" giving up their weapons.[31] By September 1996 they had captured Afghanistan's capital, Kabul.


[edit on 30-1-2010 by SLAYER69]



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by smyleegrl
I may be wrong, but didn't the US sell arms to the Taliban in the 80s? It came back to bite us in the butt.....


Yes you're wrong...



We sold weapons and arms to the Mujaheddin who were fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan. The "Taliban" came later.

Taliban

Origin

The Taliban initially enjoyed enormous good will from Afghans weary of the corruption, brutality, and the incessant fighting of Mujahideen warlords. Two contrasting narratives explain the beginnings of the Taliban.[21]

Emergence in Afghanistan

The first major military activity of the Taliban was in October-November 1994 when they marched from Maiwand in southern Afghanistan to capture Kandahar City and the surrounding provinces, losing only a few dozen men.[29] Starting with the capture of a border crossing and a huge ammunition dump from warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, a few weeks later they freed "a convoy trying to open a trade route from Pakistan to Central Asia" from another group of warlords attempting to extort money.[30]

In the next three months this hitherto "unknown force" took control of twelve of Afghanistan's 34 provinces, with Mujahideen warlords often surrendering to them without a fight and the "heavily armed population" giving up their weapons.[31] By September 1996 they had captured Afghanistan's capital, Kabul.





Did they sell them arms ?

Or provide them, along with Military Advisors

[edit on 30-1-2010 by Sean48]



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by TheCoffinman
 


The Brits will be kicking themselves that they missed out on a 'sale' to them no that they have accepted the Libiyans into the fold again and this could be the start of a much larger tit-for-tat arms trade war between the US, China and Russia.



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sean48

Did they sell them arms ?

Or provide them, along with Military Advisors


Both.

Mostly provided. The US get's the Lions share of the credit I mean BLAME but if people care to look they'll find that we were not the only ones.


Afghanistan, the CIA, bin Laden,
and the Taliban


With the support of Pakistan's military dictator, General Zia-ul-Haq, the U.S. began recruiting and training both mujahideen fighters from the 3 million Afghan refugees in Pakistan and large numbers of mercenaries from other Islamic countries. Estimates of how much money the U.S. government channeled to the Afghan rebels over the next decade vary, but most sources put the figure between $3 billion and $6 billion, or more. Whatever the exact amount, this was "the largest covert action program since World War II" - much bigger, for example, than Washington's intervention in Central America at the same time, which received considerably more publicity. According to one report:


The CIA became the grand coordinator: purchasing or arranging the manufacture of Soviet-style weapons from Egypt, China, Poland, Israel and elsewhere, or supplying their own; arranging for military training by Americans, Egyptians, Chinese and Iranians; hitting up Middle-Eastern countries for donations, notably Saudi Arabia which gave many hundreds of millions of dollars in aid each year, totaling probably more than a billion; pressuring and bribing Pakistan-with whom recent American relations had been very poor-to rent out its country as a military staging area and sanctuary; putting the Pakistani Director of Military Operations, Brigadier Mian Mohammad Afzal, onto the CIA payroll to ensure Pakistani cooperation.



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Sean48
 


AND....

Same Source.


Harold Brown, was in Beijing arranging for a weapons transfer from the Chinese to the ClA-backed Afghani troops mustered in Pakistan. The Chinese, who were generously compensated for the deal, agreed and even consented to send military advisers. Brown worked out a similar arrangement with Egypt to buy $15 million worth of weapons.

"The U.S. contacted me," [then-Egyptian president] Anwar Sadat recalled shortly before his assassination [in 1981]. "They told me, 'Please open your stores for us so that we can give the Afghans the armaments they need to fight.' And I gave them the armaments. The transport of arms to the Afghans started from Cairo on U.S. planes."



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 04:23 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Ty for quick reply

I'll assume my lurking again



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 09:33 PM
link   
More than likely this is only the egos of US warmongers talking tough so that they can side step diplomatic aspects in favor of "tough talk" but...

If the US does strike Iran it will be the beginning of a long and tedious series of terrorists attacks against the US overseas & on her own soil. My opinion is that most of the radical Islamic world views Obama as a traitor of the faith and if he, in their views, allows such an action then the fatwa will be directed against America with a vengence. Some intelligence chatter has been captured already on this. And then there is the China and Russia aspect also. I do not see China nor Russia getting directly involvded but one cannot rule either of these two out either 100%, Most Americans don't think of China in that manner of being confrontational but on the same hand most Americans do ot fully understand or know this communist hold out country well either. In my little opinion they are waiting for the "big one" so to speak so they can step up and challenge the US in front of the world.

Russia on the other hand is sneaky with a good up front friendly image but still has not got over the Cold War entirely. Myself and many others believe they still have those little suit case nukes (actually the size of a fully packed duffle bag) They still maintain help from their friends in the Balkan region and use them like mercenarys when required. It will ne interesting to see how this plays out, will Obama toss a few sidewinders as did Bill or will he opt for the full effect like 'ol W did?


[edit on 30-1-2010 by mikelee]



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 04:13 AM
link   


I may be wrong, but didn't the US sell arms to the Taliban in the 80s? It came back to bite us in the butt.....
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Well, being wrong certainly isn't a new experience for me


Okay, so we sold weapons to the forces opposing the Russians? Is that right? Then the Taliban came along after the fact....but I thought I'd read somewhere that we also sold weapons to the Taliban. Anyhooo, thanks for clarifying things. Guess I need to go back and reread some of my middle east history texts!



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 04:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Signals
Change we can believe in!


Is it not interesting that Obama campaigned not on the basis of "Change that we can all support", but "Change we can believe in"?



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 03:48 PM
link   
Iran can strike back hard here.. i think they have Iranian revolutionary guardsmen cells here in the U.S



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 05:41 PM
link   
online.wsj.com...


The U.S. is sending more missile defense assets to countries around the Persian Gulf to counter what is seen as a growing threat from Iran, Reuters reports on its Web site Sunday. Nations including Kuwait, Qatar and Bahrain will be hosting U.S. anti-missile systems, the report said. In addition, the U.S. Navy is deploying several ships with anti-missile capabilities in and around the region



i smell... i smell.... w a r



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 06:03 PM
link   
Did the war ever stop? You might have thought so because of the limp wrist-ed way Bush waged it but Obama is no push over and is going to finish this mission and I say more power to him. I disagree with almost everything he does but when it comes to war he has won me over. You do not win wars be waiting you do not win them by fighting slow you win them by crushing every once of faith the other side has. I would not have imagined him being so pro war but wow is all I have to say.



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 06:41 PM
link   
What makes me laugh and I'll put a bet on this : -

If the US or Israel strike Iran, we'll have all the Iranian Muslim Muppets protesting / rioting outside the US Embassy in London.

Why do they let them do it here in the UK when it wouldn't be anything to do with us?

Bet they won't try it or get away with their silliness in New York or Washington.

Pillocks!!






top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join