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.

 

Israel Mulling Sinai Attack?

page: 4
9
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 12:17 AM
link   
Sometimes I really wonder about ATS.

Anyway, we, the US, already have a base in the Sinai with about 1000 US Army personnel along with a few hundred allied troops.

Its been there since 1976.

If the Suez has to be secured, NATO, not Israel, will secure it.




posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 12:25 AM
link   
reply to post by aarys
 

As for its official statement, Iran is doing what many are doing. Watching and waiting.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

As for what's going on behind the scenes, whether they're on the line with Mubarak or anyone else, as usual, it's hard to tell. Whatever the case, seems to me that all the moves in the ME are either directly or indirectly related to them and someone's plans for them.


edit on 1/31/2011 by ~Lucidity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 09:02 AM
link   
LATEST FROM SINAI!!!

Israel agrees to some Egyptian troops in Sinai



JERUSALEM -- Israeli officials say they have agreed to allow Egypt to move several hundred troops into the Sinai peninsula for the first time since the countries reached peace three decades ago. Under the 1979 peace treaty, Israel returned the captured Sinai to Egypt. In return, Egypt agreed to leave the area demilitarized.

www.forbes.com...

Israel is doing lot of cooperation with Egypt army... Looks like no Israeli intervention is coming, but power of Egypt army is growing.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by JanusFIN
Israel is doing lot of cooperation with Egypt army... Looks like no Israeli intervention is coming, but power of Egypt army is growing.



How about a simple realization of how serious the situation is?
This is a very large step forward in cooperation between the two IMO.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by MikeboydUS
Sometimes I really wonder about ATS....

If the Suez has to be secured, NATO, not Israel, will secure it.



Remember this is ATS and some members cannot or will not distinguish NATO from the US. Remember it's NATO in Afghanistan. It was NATO and not just the US in Kosovo etc...

It seems people only contest the US in Afghanistan or Kosovo part....


ETA:

NATO’s role in Afghanistan

At the NATO Lisbon Summit in November 2010, NATO and Afghanistan reaffirmed their long-term ties with the signing of a Declaration on Enduring Partnership 1. The document, which marks NATO’s continued commitment to Afghanistan, provides a political framework for future enhanced cooperation, particularly in the field of Afghan National Security Forces capacity-building and Security Sector Reform

edit on 31-1-2011 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 09:49 AM
link   
It seems (From TV sources AlJazeera/BBC) that Egyptians troops are moving into Sharm el Sheikh.. I have to admit that I prefer to know the Tourist Police are seemingly being replaced with the Army.

The FCO Minster has made a statement to Parliament, it did not sound like the UK is coming out in support of Mubarak.. the speech went along the lines of asking Mubarark to avoid any violent response to the protest, to create a board spectrum interim Government that includes the opposition.. and expedite free and fair elections to allow Egyptians the voice to choose who leads them.

edit on 31/1/11 by thoughtsfull because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by JanusFIN
And last news to provocate you all to think from latest breaking news...

Anger starting to focus on Israel, US



Saturday’s optimism on the streets of Cairo for imminent political change gave way to anger on Sunday, as thousands of demonstrators became increasingly frustrated with the lack of response from major world leaders, especially the US.

During the main protest on Sunday in downtown Cairo, one man painted a 20-meter long message in flowing Arabic cursive that echoed across the square: “Go Away Mubarak, you are from the Americans, and you’re working for them!”


This is why the world leaders are treading carefully on this.

Mubarak is accused of working for America, and obviously Israel. If the people are trying to out him, and these countries use their military to intervene, it will only confirm what the citizens already believe, which will infuriate them further.

But if they don't, they risk losing access to the Suez Canal.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 12:56 PM
link   
Israel allows Egypt move several hundred troops into Sinai Peninsula
for the first time since 1979 peace treaty -



Israeli officials say they have agreed to allow Egypt to move several hundred troops into the Sinai Peninsula for the first time since the countries signed a peace treaty three decades ago.

Under the 1979 peace treaty, Israel returned the captured Sinai to Egypt. In return, Egypt agreed to leave the area demilitarized.

With street protests threatening the Egyptian regime, the unnamed officials say that Israel agreed to allow the Egyptian army to move two battalions, about 800 soldiers, into Sinai. The officials say the troops moved into the Sharm el-Sheikh area on Sinai's southern tip, far from Israel, on Sunday.


www.haaretz.com...
edit on 31-1-2011 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 01:14 PM
link   

The great loser would be Israel. Israel’s national security has rested on its treaty with Egypt, signed by Menachem Begin with much criticism by the Israeli right. The demilitarization of the Sinai Peninsula not only protected Israel’s southern front, it meant that the survival of Israel was no longer at stake. Israel fought three wars (1948, 1967 and 1973) where its very existence was at issue. The threat was always from Egypt, and without Egypt in the mix, no coalition of powers could threaten Israel (excluding the now-distant possibility of Iranian nuclear weapons). In all of the wars Israel fought after its treaty with Egypt (the 1982 and 2006 wars in Lebanon) Israeli interests, but not survival, were at stake.

If Egypt were to abrogate the Camp David Accords and over time reconstruct its military into an effective force, the existential threat to Israel that existed before the treaty was signed would re-emerge. This would not happen quickly, but Israel would have to deal with two realities. The first is that the Israeli military is not nearly large enough or strong enough to occupy and control Egypt. The second is that the development of Egypt’s military would impose substantial costs on Israel and limit its room for maneuver.

There is thus a scenario that would potentially strengthen the radical Islamists while putting the United States, Israel, and potentially even Iran at a disadvantage, all for different reasons. That scenario emerges only if two things happen. First, the Muslim Brotherhood must become a dominant political force in Egypt. Second, they must turn out to be more radical than most observers currently believe they are — or they must, with power, evolve into something more radical.


From a free article posted earlier by Stratfor:

The Egypt Crisis in a Global Context: A Special Report



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join