Anyone got a solution to The Middle East ?

[Pat494]

Merkel's solution is to let most of the Middle East disaffected plus refugees and migrants into Europe.

Well if she can't see the events in Paris as some sort of warning then we shall be soon overwhelmed by muslims.

The USA's lack of a viable foreign policy has totally tied it to Israel's needs, which means a weak Syria ( got that ), a weak Iraq ( done that ) and a compliant Egypt ( it cost billions of $s but done that ).

 

[Atilla]

Merkel's solution is to let most of the Middle East disaffected plus refugees and migrants into Europe.

Well if she can't see the events in Paris as some sort of warning then we shall be soon overwhelmed by muslims.

The USA's lack of a viable foreign policy has totally tied it to Israel's needs, which means a weak Syria ( got that ), a weak Iraq ( done that ) and a compliant Egypt ( it cost billions of $s but done that ).

Pushing back the Russian & Shia sects who are aligned together and pursuing the US & Sunni relations.

Rest is all politics.

Alliances change and it will not be the first time the beast one feeds will turn back and bite the hand that feeds it.

Dentist put up an interesting pic which explains it well.

UK also setting up a Naval base in Bahrain but that's well old news. These are strategy plays that will shape the ME for the next 10-20 years.

 

[Pat494]

The up coming US elections will be as usual dominated by the Jewish Lobby and their vast reserves of money. Any of the budding politicians willing to try and have a US policy only won't be in line for their hand outs. The ones without a substantial war chest may as well drop out - no chance.
In the past they have tended to be in alliance with the favourites from both sides, just to make sure they can't lose.

As for the British base in Bahrein, one might be surprised at the unannounced details for this white elephant deal. And guess who will be looking for another job in 2020 ?

 

[Atilla]

Should we be surprised???

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...g-to-war-as-public-backs-action-a6739926.html

About 60 per cent of the British public back air strikes on Isis and sending in soldiers as part of an international force, according to a new poll published as a Cabinet minister warned: “We are going to war.”


On the other hand Syria had an election in 2014 and now the West would like another election??? Why???

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...l-elections-only-if-terrorists-defeated-first


This article calls it a civil war in Syria??? REALY??? Against who ISIL the freedom fighters to over throw Assad???

After a while all this islamic terrorism nonsense is total b0ll0cks as the so called terrorists weren't even devout practicing muslims but more boozing & partying play boy and girls. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html


What do you think and believe? Eff it let's just kill & bomb the sh1t out of them first just incase they attack us next.

You can be sure the people we kill and bomb will have no bearing on what's been done in their name. Effectively Syrian's will have been turned over by ISIL and then by the West until they yield to our Western interests.

It's a sad flucking sick world we live in.

 

[Pat494]

Well it's now some months later and I don't see any rays of sunshine. It seems one endless battle with no clear or practicable objectives. ISL is attacking everyone, which has to be a flawed strategy thought up by the insane.

 

[Wakeupsheep]

Have you watched dateline on the BBC ?
Just been watching - 1 Russian journalist, 1 American, 1 Arab, 1 Brit. Interesting stuff but as they are all shouting at the same time, so I had to turn it off.

No chance of any lasting and proper agreements.. As America topples one tinpot dictator after another the anarchic situation spreads. The cure The West and now Russia says is more bombing !

No chance of peace.

There will never be peace anywhere Pat while the rich and corrupt are running the show. Wars are very good for arms sales....

Seems the us destabilized Syria over the control of the proposed pipeline from Iran's huge gas field that is going to run through Syria to Europe and hence why Iran is back on board with the US. Russia and Syria have been close friends for decades and Russia's gazprom controls half of Europe's gas.

Their has also been friction between US and Russia lately due to NATO's expansion east namely Ukraine and Georgia started by Bush and continued under Obama, they see this as a direct threat. Especially after previous presidents promised not to expand NATO towards Russia.

 

[tomorton]

There will never be peace anywhere Pat while the rich and corrupt are running the show. Wars are very good for arms sales....

Seems the us destabilized Syria over the control of the proposed pipeline from Iran's huge gas field that is going to run through Syria to Europe and hence why Iran is back on board with the US. Russia and Syria have been close friends for decades and Russia's gazprom controls half of Europe's gas.

Their has also been friction between US and Russia lately due to NATO's expansion east namely Ukraine and Georgia started by Bush and continued under Obama, they see this as a direct threat. Especially after previous presidents promised not to expand NATO towards Russia.

I feel just as cynical for you but for different reasons. Arms sales are just a "bonus" from other people's wars. The main gain is that while they're fighting someone else they can't be attacking you. e.g. Syria's civil war means it can't mount a meangful offensive into Israel, Turkey, Lebanon or anywhere else. I'm no supporter of these countries but an ironic way to ensure peace in the Middle East is to ensure aggressive regimes are tied up in local wars.

The focus on revenues from arms and oil is simplistic, but control of oil production is a truly key aim of major foreign policies. Not with the aim of making a quick buck selling the oil, the aim is to either a) preferably own the oil or b) at least deny it to unfriendly regimes. In this game its hard to say if the multi-nationals are running the diplomacy or if the politicians are just using the multi-nationals as proxy overseas missions. But I'm going to say the politicians are the corrupters.

Yes, the NATO expansion through the previous "buffer" countries in eastern Europe was anti-Russian aggression and always had the potential to plunge them into conflicts in those territories. The least likely reaction would have been a full-scale attack on core NATO territory. Various other options for Russia must have been considered of course and no doubt some of the scenarios had as a bonus the destabilisation of Putin's control of power and possibly his early replacement.

I don't think we should under-estimate how dirty a game is diplomacy. No doubt it suits the politicians very nicely when global business is getting battered, but this is a populist diversion tactic.

 

[dbphoenix]

If you squint, it could be 1916 all over again (Sykes-Picot).

Db

 

[Pat494]

Perhaps a boffin will invent a ray that explodes ammunition ! That would tickle the b*stards up a bit.

 

[Wakeupsheep]

But I'm going to say the politicians are the corrupters.

Yes, not necessarily the Obama's of the world I think he would say just about anything he's told to but the shady ones connected to big business,finance and intelligence. The us's foreign policy would be the same under any president, I think any president stupid enough to take that on would end up dead.

 

[Atilla]

Escallation in Syria...

US jets in showdown with Russian warplanes over Syria after bombing of Pentagon-backed rebels

Russian and American warplanes confronted one another in the skies above Syria after Moscow bombed an elite force of US-trained rebels.

The Pentagon on Friday scrambled F/A-18 fighters to fend off an attack by Moscow's most advanced bombers on moderate opposition fighters it is supporting.

When the F/A-18s approached the Russians moved out of the area, but when the US fighters paused to refuel they returned and struck the base again.

Sounds like a cat and mouse game!

They are not called mujahaddin but isis these days.

Difficult to know who is a terrorist and who is a rebel?

Best not to have an opinion!

 

[kalott]

Escallation in Syria...

US jets in showdown with Russian warplanes over Syria after bombing of Pentagon-backed rebels

Russian and American warplanes confronted one another in the skies above Syria after Moscow bombed an elite force of US-trained rebels.

The Pentagon on Friday scrambled F/A-18 fighters to fend off an attack by Moscow's most advanced bombers on moderate opposition fighters it is supporting.

When the F/A-18s approached the Russians moved out of the area, but when the US fighters paused to refuel they returned and struck the base again.

Sounds like a cat and mouse game!

They are not called mujahaddin but isis these days.

Difficult to know who is a terrorist and who is a rebel?

Best not to have an opinion!

The enemy of my enemy is my friend ??

 

[mlawson71]

What a mess. And it will probably gets worse before it gets better, IF it gets better.

 

[Pat494]

It is high time the Middle East condemned violence or it will never end.

 

[tomorton]

I wish the US and UK would keep out of other people's civil wars and revolts. Our governments should decide whether to go for safety here or peace somewhere else.

 

[dbphoenix]

It is high time the Middle East condemned violence or it will never end.

Geography aside, there is no "Middle East". What we call "the Middle East" is nothing more than a collection of warring tribes who've been at it for thousands of years, and the current situation was only made worse by Sykes-Picot at the end of WWI.

Unless and until the West acknowledges that this quagmire did not just arise out of nothing and nowhere, don't look for a resolution any time soon. Or ever.

 

[Pat494]

I wish the US and UK would keep out of other people's civil wars and revolts. Our governments should decide whether to go for safety here or peace somewhere else.

I think Western Govts. need to pick and choose what they get involved in carefully. Wars are a dreadful drain on resources and manpower. The French took a long while to recover from Waterloo and Napoleon. He fought nearly to the last able bodied Frenchman.

 

[Dowser]

The sooner our reliance on fossil fuels diminishes the better - I think the big push by western governments towards renewables is for the most part driven by the need for energy security rather than from an enviromental standpoint ( although enviromentalism is popularist agenda and a vote winner ). In a 100 years time major world players will have much less interest in the Middle East as newer, cleaner forms of energy evolve. There are other parts of the world with just as many ethnic/tribal/religious tensions but with no oil to fight over the 'developed' world just isn't interested.

 

[mlawson71]

I agree, but I don't see the oil companies allowing that to happen any time soon. It's going to be a tough uphill battle to achieve that.