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.

 

Egypt unrest: US to go ahead with F-16 jets delivery

page: 3
17
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by dragonridr

Originally posted by badgerprints
People need to look further back in mideast history.
No matter who is in charge or who hates who in Egypt, all guns eventually point towards Israel.
Those F-16's will be used eventually.

Six Days of War by Michael Oren would be a great place to start reading if you really want to understand the middle east military mindset.


There are safe guards without replacement parts within 2 yrs will be non operational one year if they fly them around to make hearts in the sky like i saw in another thread.And dont believe we cant hack into the avionics any time we want.


What makes you think "we" will hack into anything? "We" (you, apparently, not me) gave the jets to them in the first place.

There are no actual safe guards when politicians play with military hardware.




posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 01:31 PM
link   
Can we please make a distinction here, as once again American members are questioning why is Obama doing this etc.

Do you actually think there would be a different policy if there was a different President?

The huge arms corporations are the problem and the fact they are practically in bed with the government. There's your problem. The political establishment of the United States will flog weapons and arms to whoever they feel like as long as it fills the coffers of Boeing or Raytheon etc.


I recommend this book on the global arms trade as it's a huge eye opener.



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 01:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Kram09
 


Great post.

Sorta like how Russia is making lots of coin off of supporting Assad over in Syria with arms sales.



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 



"The Obama administration’s reputation for competence on foreign policy has less to do with its accomplishments in Afghanistan or the Middle East than with how U.S. actions in that region have been reshaped to accommodate partisan political concerns.”


From your source.

Accommodate partisan political concerns.


So basically, whatever foreign policy plans take place, it is done to obtain personal benefit at the sake of the nations benefit, at the sake of any other country's benefit.

Right now, I am so damned ashamed of our political representation.



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kram09
Can we please make a distinction here, as once again American members are questioning why is Obama doing this etc.

Do you actually think there would be a different policy if there was a different President?

The huge arms corporations are the problem and the fact they are practically in bed with the government. There's your problem. The political establishment of the United States will flog weapons and arms to whoever they feel like as long as it fills the coffers of Boeing or Raytheon etc.


I recommend this book on the global arms trade as it's a huge eye opener.


Any president would look to obtain benefit from any foreign policy issue.

The distinction lies in that Obama is doing so for the benefit of partisan political benefit against any other party or ideology within America.



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by Kram09
 


Great post.

Sorta like how Russia is making lots of coin off of supporting Assad over in Syria with arms sales.


Indeed with the addition of Iranian, and Chinese corporations.

Don't understand why they always want to act like Eastern corporations, and other Middle Eastern corporations have 'nothing' to do with anything.



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 03:07 PM
link   
I dont know what message the U.S. is trying to send. 4 F-16's? PHHHHT! Bandaid on an amputee. Is this the Governments way of telling us that they are supporting the Egyptian Military? It is such an insignificant transaction that most papers would not even make the back page.



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Kram09
 


I really believe that arm sales are a minor part to this, the key to it all is OIL.



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by frazzle
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Please note that I was asking jigger for a citation, not you. You're the one who came in stomping and shouting that I don't need any citations because you know more than I do, which you have yet to prove.

And if you've looked around lately, the MB are not the only ones who have a problem with Israeli policies.



I'm not trying to prove anything here. Just chatting on what I've heard, and feel free to enlighten me on what you've heard. I remember hearing that when the MB won the election, they made it known that their goal was to destroy Israel. If this is not so, if you didn't hear it, oh well, let's move on to another thread with a different topic. I will not spend my days hunting down verifications for everything I say.
edit on 7/12/2013 by jiggerj because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj

Originally posted by frazzle
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Please note that I was asking jigger for a citation, not you. You're the one who came in stomping and shouting that I don't need any citations because you know more than I do, which you have yet to prove.

And if you've looked around lately, the MB are not the only ones who have a problem with Israeli policies.



I'm not trying to prove anything here. Just chatting on what I've heard, and feel free to enlighten me on what you've heard. I remember hearing that when the MB won the election, they made it known that their goal was to destroy Israel. If this is not so, if you didn't hear it, oh well, let's move on to another thread with a different topic. I will not spend my days hunting down verifications for everything I say.
edit on 7/12/2013 by jiggerj because: (no reason given)


We've all heard what you heard. That's part of the problem.



Morsi addressed the nation just hours after the official announcement, and affirmed his plan to act as a figurehead for the entire country, not just those loyal to the Muslim Brotherhood.

“I will be a president for all Egyptians: Muslims, Christians, the elderly, children, women, men, farmers, teachers, workers, those who work in the private and public sectors, and the merchants,” Morsi said in his address.
www.thedailybeast.com...



Cairo (CNN) -- Hours after being declared his nation's first democratically elected president, Mohamed Morsi vowed late Sunday to represent all Egyptians, and he urged his countrymen to put aside their differences and come together for the common good.

"This national unity is the only way to get Egypt out of this difficult crisis," Morsi said in a nationally televised speech.

He expressed thanks and admiration for military personnel, police officers, judges and others in the Egyptian government for their work on behalf of the nation. "I must salute them because they have a role in the future" of Egypt, Morsi said.

The president-elect also promised "we will preserve all national and international agreements," a topic of concern in light of questions about how his election might affect Egypt's ties with neighboring Israel. And he vowed to "protect the rights of women and children," as well as Christians and Muslims alike.

www.cnn.com...


You could say he was just giving a rah rah campaign speech, but he had won so why bother. And in the same cnn article it is pointed out:


Moreover, the presidency as currently defined is largely a figurehead position as the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) maintains much of the control over the country, as it has since Mubarak's exit.

For this reason, a young Egyptian man named Mohamed Saleh dismissed the importance of the presidential vote. "(Morsi) doesn't have the power -- SCAF has the power," he said.


... which I've been trying to point out since the military arrested him and threw him, along with many of his supporters, in jail without any charges other than saying he had "insulted the judiciary", although I haven't been able to find out exactly what that means.

I wasn't criticizing you, I would just like for the truth to come out, for once, and its not always easily found. Or believed.




edit on 12-7-2013 by frazzle because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 07:11 PM
link   
reply to post by frazzle
 


So, he DIDN'T say these things?




posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Yep but the muslim brotherhood was also bad news for oppressing religious minorities in egypt, atheists, agnostics, and wanted women to dress conservatively. They were a minority force, never a majority as claimed. The first elections were rigged by the help of NATO! If they had real elections they never would have won.

FSA is also muslim brotherhood and want to overthrow Assad.

Muslim brotherhood in turkey as well. People have been protesting against Erdogan for about a month and the despot is still there. "Funny" that this does not make the msm as often as it should, just like the new egyptian revolution was underbroadcast in favor of zimmerman trials(good for racial hatred in america).

Time to get rid of the religious fanatics throughout the middle east, including israel and iran. People would be better off than being 'taliban dominated'.



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj
reply to post by frazzle
 


So, he DIDN'T say these things?



Here's some more just like those.

www.timesofisrael.com/ morsi-jewish-controlled-media-distorted-apes-and-pigs-remark/
www.theblaze.com/ stories/ 2013/ 01/ 16/

U.S. Sen. John McCain said Wednesday he has expressed strong disapproval to Egypt's Islamist president about his past comments about ...

www.jpost.com/ Middle-East/ Morsi-No-peace-with-descendants-of-apes-and-pigs

Oh, and never forget memri

Yep, all those and more and not a single video of him saying it? Plus, this is alleged to have been said nearly three years ago and apparently no one heard if at the time but it suddenly becomes the main attraction. Why did they wait so long to get upset? Maybe because he wasn't running for and winning an election?

You think lies aren't SOP in dirty politics? Where have you been?

ETA: And I'm sure this would never have have happened if there was any truth to the claims of what Morsi is alleged to have said:


First Publish: 7/2/2012, 4:44 AM
Reuters

Both President Shimon Peres and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu have sent separate letters to Egypt’s new Islamist president, congratulating him on his election victory and calling for continued peace between the neighboring countries, The Associated Press reported Sunday.
www.israelnationalnews.com...





edit on 12-7-2013 by frazzle because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-7-2013 by frazzle because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 07:54 PM
link   
reply to post by frazzle
 





You think lies aren't SOP in dirty politics? Where have you been?


You're treating this as though it's an argument instead of a chat. I heard what I heard. You think it's all lies. Fine. You asked me to cite what I heard, so I did. End of discussion.



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj
reply to post by frazzle
 





You think lies aren't SOP in dirty politics? Where have you been?


You're treating this as though it's an argument instead of a chat. I heard what I heard. You think it's all lies. Fine. You asked me to cite what I heard, so I did. End of discussion.


I didn't ask you to "cite what you heard" I asked for a citation of WHERE you heard it ~ as part of a "chat". Now I know both what and where. Thank you.

You are as free to join or continue or leave a conversation/discussion as I am as members. No shackles here that I know about.

Thought I'd post this interesting little snippet about dirty politics in the middle east for no one in particular.


On 30 May 2012, Morsi filed a lawsuit against Egyptian television presenter Tawfiq Okasha, accusing him of "intentional falsehoods and accusations that amount to defamation and slander". According to online newspaper Egypt Independent, an English-language subsidiary of Egyptian daily Al-Masry Al-Youm, Okasha spent three hours on 27 May 2012 criticizing the Muslim Brotherhood and Morsi on air.[39] After Okasha aired a video allegedly depicting Tunisian Islamist extremists executing a Christian while asking "how will such people govern?", some analysts suggested that this was in reference to Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood party.[40] The Tunisian government characterized the video as a farce in a harshly worded statement.[41]

en.wikipedia.org...

(This was just a month before the election .... )
edit on 12-7-2013 by frazzle because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 



Time to get rid of the religious fanatics throughout the middle east, including israel and iran. People would be better off than being 'taliban dominated'.


You say that like its "our" middle east to make such demands. And who determines what is fanatical and what is moderate, or what is acceptable and what is not?

They don't need their own tyrants, they can have ours.



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by frazzle
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 



Time to get rid of the religious fanatics throughout the middle east, including israel and iran. People would be better off than being 'taliban dominated'.


You say that like its "our" middle east to make such demands. And who determines what is fanatical and what is moderate, or what is acceptable and what is not?

They don't need their own tyrants, they can have ours.


You really don't see a pattern with the muslim brotherhood and the hugely faked "arab spring" that saw thousands killed since then? You think NATO would agree to give weapons and financial assistance to these governments if they had nothing to gain? And it all happened.....oohhh ssooo quickly??



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by frazzle
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 



Time to get rid of the religious fanatics throughout the middle east, including israel and iran. People would be better off than being 'taliban dominated'.


You say that like its "our" middle east to make such demands. And who determines what is fanatical and what is moderate, or what is acceptable and what is not?

They don't need their own tyrants, they can have ours.




You really don't see a pattern with the muslim brotherhood and the hugely faked "arab spring" that saw thousands killed since then? You think NATO would agree to give weapons and financial assistance to these governments if they had nothing to gain? And it all happened.....oohhh ssooo quickly??


The pattern I don't see is the one where all people who think they know what's going on over there, OVER there. Arm chair generals, IOW.

WE don't know who NATO gives money or weapons to, we only know what the news media tells us that NATO tells them to tell us. Hardly any of what NATO does is helpful to the Muslim people and when they can get Muslims to kill each other, and they're pretty good at getting that done, they load their own chests down with medals and holler hallelujah. Well when they're not pissing on the dead bodies.

NATO is FAR worse than the Taliban or Muslim Brotherhood ever dreamed of being. Get rid of them first, okay?



edit on 12-7-2013 by frazzle because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 10:00 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


What I see is a power play by the big boys taking place in the middle east. No one would care about the middle east except for the oil. That is the crux to it all, control of the oil. This Arab Spring is an uprising of the people who are tired of tyrants, but unfortunately for them, their anger is being used to disrupt the region and allowing them to plant in more puppets.

The military hardware being sold, all the components of the industrial military complex are just secondary objectives to the elite - it rakes in the cash but what they want is POWER. Control of the oil is key. Egypt is crucial to that, as well as Iran. Russia is selling Syria missile defense systems because they do not want Assad to fall, because if he does then enters the Free Syria Army who, like the Muslim Brotherhood and the military in Egypt are enforcers of US policy.

Now I know some of you may ask - What, the Muslim Brotherhood and the elite are allies? Doesn't the Muslim Brotherhood want to create a Caliphate? Well for sure they do and the elite don't care that they do. At this moment in time the elite are willing to sleep with anyone to further their agenda. Their opinion is deal with the Muslim Brotherhood later (and the Muslim Brotherhood has no problem throwing Assad to the wolves)

The key to Middle Eastern relations right now is placing someone in Egypt that the people will accept while still doing the bidding of the elite, secondly increasing the conflict in Syria - making it appear that the UN / USA needs to enter the fray thereby bringing Iran into the conflict. Once Iran has been taken care of essentially the USA will have control of the oil production in the middle east. You can also look at the war in Afghanistan - does anyone think we are still over there to bring about Democracy? Hell no, we are still there for the drugs and the potential of that area for trade routes.

But back to Egypt, as long as the military hold the reigns of power (and is beholden to whoever pays them the most - to back this up after the latest coup Saudi Arabia donates 5 billion to Egypt and suddenly Sharia Law is now in their constitution) essentially the people of Egypt are going to get the raw deal. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.


edit on 12-7-2013 by MidnightTide because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 10:04 PM
link   
reply to post by frazzle
 



NATO is FAR worse than the Taliban or Muslim Brotherhood ever dreamed of being. Get rid of them first, okay?


I see them all as a den of thieves - making deals and alliances with one another, constantly changing to meet their own agenda. The people, well they are just annoying inconveniences to them. If some have to be scrapped to further their goals that is of no consequence to them.







 
17
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join