Confused about the Middle East issues?? Answers here

page: 1
12
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 03:20 PM
link   
Iran is backing Assad. Gulf States are against Assad.
Assad is against the Muslim Brotherhood. Muslim Brotherhood and Obama are against General Sisi.
But.. Gulf States are pro Sisi..which means they are against Muslim Brotherhood.

Iran is pro Hamas, but Hamas is backing Muslim Brotherhood.

Obama is backing Muslim Brotherhood, yet Hamas is against the U.S.

Gulf States are pro U.S....but Turkey is with Gulf States against Assad yet Turkey is pro Muslim Brotherhood against General Sisi and General Sisi is being backed by the Gulf States.

Get it? Got it? Good !!




posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by sueloujo
 



Get it? Got it? Good !!


Ummm....no, not really.


What a tangled web. No wonder the wars never end.


edit on 24-8-2013 by seabag because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 03:24 PM
link   
As long as you go with the premise that everyone in the global political scene is willing to do business with ANYONE as long as it forwards their goals you are starting off in the right direction.



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by MidnightTide
 


Never a truer word spoken!



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by sueloujo
Iran is backing Assad. Gulf States are against Assad.
Assad is against the Muslim Brotherhood. Muslim Brotherhood and Obama are against General Sisi.
But.. Gulf States are pro Sisi..which means they are against Muslim Brotherhood.

Iran is pro Hamas, but Hamas is backing Muslim Brotherhood.

Obama is backing Muslim Brotherhood, yet Hamas is against the U.S.

Gulf States are pro U.S....but Turkey is with Gulf States against Assad yet Turkey is pro Muslim Brotherhood against General Sisi and General Sisi is being backed by the Gulf States.

Get it? Got it? Good !!


- you left out the most important sentence, Suel -

"...and the entire m-east is ALL one great Setup , fabricated to serve as Distraction " .

- untill osiris' dimension closed its trap on humanity.

regards,



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Lone12
 


I didn't want to get too deep!



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by sueloujo
 


Iran is not backing Assad, it is backing an ally and its own security if Assad falls Iran will be targeted (harder) next...



Assad is against the Muslim Brotherhood


Any source for that remark ?



Muslim Brotherhood and Obama are against General Sisi.

Obama is backing Muslim Brotherhood, yet Hamas is against the U.S.


Obama is clearly not supporting the Muslim Brotherhood you are drinking too much US propaganda, they are appeasing the radical Islamites in one hand but at the same time supporting the "not" military usurpation of a democratic process. This time if they do not take too much relevance, the US can escape the blame (and they need radicals in the Syrian rebels), so the Saudis will be the receivers of the backlash...



Iran is pro Hamas, but Hamas is backing Muslim Brotherhood.


I hate to use the adjective but in this case Hamas is being just intelligent (they need to be since they have been dancing with the Israelis for such a long time).



Gulf States are pro U.S.


No they are not, they depend on the US for survival. Carrot and stick all the way since inception...



Turkey is with Gulf States against Assad yet Turkey is pro Muslim Brotherhood against General Sisi and General Sisi is being backed by the Gulf States.


Turkey is being half smart about it all they are just playing their own game of geopolitics NATO, EU, US, Kurds, Public Opinion (against Israel), water and economic interests in Syria etc...
edit on 24-8-2013 by Panic2k11 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by sueloujo
 




Gulf States are pro U.S

They are not pro US. They are pro free money and free weapons.



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by sueloujo
reply to post by Lone12
 


I didn't want to get too deep!


oh... *grin*

cuddle back



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by buster2010
 


Exactly but still pro for those reasons alone. It was a tongue-in-cheek post to try and show some of the complexities going on.



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 05:58 PM
link   
And all these outfits have one thing in common.

Not much 'business' with Syria.


LENDING

Syria : Lending By Volume (Millions Of US Dollars)

The World Bank does not have any recent lending to Syria.
World Bank




Delayed Article IV Consultation with Syria
Press Release No .13/294
August 2, 2013

On July 26, 2013 the Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) was informed that there could not be a briefing to the Board with an assessment of economic developments and policies in Syria, whose Article IV consultation is delayed by 26 months, due to a lack of adequate information that would allow staff to make such an assessment.
International Monetary Fund




Role in banking supervision

The BIS provides the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision with its 17-member secretariat, and with it has played a central role in establishing the Basel Capital Accords of 1988 and 2004. There remain significant differences between United States, European Union, and United Nations officials regarding the degree of capital adequacy and reserve controls that global banking now requires. Put extremely simply, the United States, as of 2006, favoured strong strict central controls in the spirit of the original 1988 accords, while the EU was more inclined to a distributed system managed collectively with a committee able to approve some exceptions.

The UN agencies, especially ICLEI, are firmly committed to fundamental risk measures: the so-called triple bottom line and were becoming critical of central banking as an institutional structure for ignoring fundamental risks in favour of technical risk management.
Bank for International Settlements
^ see who's not a member and see where recent wars are ?



A characteristic of the global financial and economic crisis that erupted in 2008 is that central banks have usurped the role of policy maker in sovereign states from the politicians. In the absence of coherent economic and fiscal policies in the United States, Japan, the eurozone and United Kingdom, central bankers have employed their power over the printing press with unprecedented vigor, unleashing a tidal wave of liquidity in a desperate effort to stave off a global economic depression. With the manipulative aplomb of a snake charmer, they have sought to push down interest rates to a point where short-term rates in most advanced economies are at virtually zero, while arousing confidence from investors and consumers who would have otherwise have little to cheer about.

The central bankers, in the minds of many, are the heroes of the economic crisis, supposedly saving the global economy from credit atrophy and demand destruction while the feckless politicians stood by helplessly. In case you would otherwise be unaware of the supposedly epic achievement performed by the central bankers, they have engaged themselves in a massive public relations drive during the crisis, paralleling their mega-liquidity dumps, seeking to persuade the public that central banks have become the new temples of salvation in an otherwise bleak economic and fiscal dystopia.
Have Central Banks Gone Too Far? A Warning From the Bank for International Settlements



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 05:11 AM
link   
The whole situation in the ME is to determent which countries are with the US and which ones are against it or at least not willing to fully cooperate with...The countries with US get another 'elected' puppet installed enjoying assisting loans,Mc Donalds,chevy cars,and lots of shiny goodies from the west,(beer,chocolate TV series,etc,)you know the good stuff!...Instead they will only have to put up with the US bases followed by political and banking control of the corporations plus they get rubbed of their resources and have to say goodbye to their independence and international credit and prestige ,they also have to fully support Israel and help to maintain it.... On the other hand the countries not with US will have none of the 'good stuff' above,instead they keep their little pity integrity,independence,resources plus a proud face to show to their children for generations to come...Now the choice is yours,I mean theirs.



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 05:23 AM
link   
and if you want to get even more confused about syria presstv is reporting that the gas attacks were reported 20 + hours early videos were uploaded to youtube on 03.00 am on the 20th yet it did not take place until 21st see presstv/detail/2013/08/23/320111/chemical ????? last time i saw a xxxx up like that was sandy hook and 9-11



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 05:32 AM
link   
Seems like people have forgotten China's meddling, by proxy, its there if you care to look, nearly all the new roads, railroads, are built by the Chinese,even bringing their own workforces to it, slowly creeping northwards, just like the British empire tried.



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 05:52 AM
link   
And where is israel in all this? The rat jews love nothing more than chaos with Arabs fighting Arabs.



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 05:56 AM
link   
reply to post by solarstorm
 


Well, when I say Obama...I mean Obama/Israel



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 06:19 AM
link   
Confusion is natural,in my opinion. Every side has their own interests,media never tells the whole story,politicians rarely mean what they say ,adversaries can join forces against common enemy for a while, and mainly - big political players never reveal their real plans and strategical goals in the open.
For an example, can you really be sure that US supports Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt? US administration and media hint that this is the case, with all kinds of vague declarations but it can be just spun that way to make Egyptian public (that is anti-American in general) support Egyptian military in recent developments. Or it can be correct and US sees long term benefits in helping Muslim Brotherhood to gain influence in the region. You can really never know.



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 06:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by sueloujo
Iran is backing Assad. Gulf States are against Assad.
Assad is against the Muslim Brotherhood. Muslim Brotherhood and Obama are against General Sisi.
But.. Gulf States are pro Sisi..which means they are against Muslim Brotherhood.

Iran is pro Hamas, but Hamas is backing Muslim Brotherhood.

Obama is backing Muslim Brotherhood, yet Hamas is against the U.S.

Gulf States are pro U.S....but Turkey is with Gulf States against Assad yet Turkey is pro Muslim Brotherhood against General Sisi and General Sisi is being backed by the Gulf States.

Get it? Got it? Good !!


Anyone who thinks they can explain away the Middle East in less than 100 words quite obviously does not the first thing about the Middle East which is perhaps the most complex sociological and political problem in modern times. To say "If your confused about the Middle east, I have the Answers", which is essentially the message behind this thread, yet only have a few sentences on a page shows that you dont have any of the answers.

People devote entire years worth of study and write books upon books looking at just one little part of the "Middle East issue",

You simply cannot claim to have all the answers in on little thread.



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 07:11 AM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 

of course you are right, the complexity is far greater than the OP... BUT each element of the OP has recent documentation in the MSM..
Keep in mind the Original Paradox..The US (and Saudis) created Al Quaeda in Afganistan...Osama bin Laden, the whole bit documented in charlie wilsons war....
Then kills of selected leaders as terrorists as needed...over and over again, few wake up and say, whats up.



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 07:56 AM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


A quote from one of my answers which means you have not read all posts.

"It was a tongue-in-cheek post to try and show some of the complexities going on."

I don't claim to have all the answers...just trying to show it's complex and therefore we have no answers. OK?





new topics
top topics
 
12
<<   2 >>

log in

join