Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: FaultLine who wrote (22271)	3/26/2002 1:49:48 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Respond to of 281500

Debka's headlines today: Egyptian President Mubarak’s Last Minute Decision to Stay Away from Arab Summit Opening in Beirut Wednesday Throws Event in Doubt Almost Half of 22 Arab League Member Heads of State Giving Summit a Miss Include: King of Morocco, Emirs of Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and UAE and Libya’s Qaddafi Israeli Cabinet Refrains from Addressing Arafat’s Attendance As US Envoy Zinni Ceasefire Mission Fades Trilateral Security Committee Cancels Twice over Palestinian Objections to Zinni Formula PLO Foreign Minister Farouk Kadoumi Calls on Hizballah Leader Nasrallah in Beirut Major Terror Disaster Averted in Jerusalem Tuesday When Fatah Team Is Stopped at Police Roadblock on Way to Crowded Mall and Blows up Own Bomb Car DEBKAfile Reports: Team Planned Suicide Bombing at One Mall Gate, While Its Members Gunned down Fleeing Shoppers at Other Exits Jerusalem Police on Highest Terror Alert for Passover Period, Reinforced by Soldiers US Issues Huge Oil Tenders for Its Mid East Forces – Like Eve of Gulf and Kosovo Wars

To: FaultLine who wrote (22271)	3/26/2002 5:53:25 PM
From: Dayuhan	Respond to of 281500

what we are witnessing looks like joint preparations by the Palestinian Authority, Syria, its Lebanese client, Iraq, and Iran, for war on a regional scale, against both Israel and U.S. interests. I fear we may face a major, sudden, external assault on Israel, meant to precede U.S. action against the Saddam regime in Iraq, and indeed prevent the U.S. from going there, by enmiring it in the defence of Israel. This strikes me as an odd comment, since none of the evidence he cites in his article supports this conclusion. A sudden external assault on Israel involving Iraqi and Iranian forces would require large-scale troop and armor movements in an area under heavy surveillance. Have any such movements been observed? The alleged transfer of Scud missile technology to Syria is hardly relevant to an attack which is intended to precede a US move against Iraq: the lag time between receipt of the technology and the actual deployment of missiles would have to be more than a few months. I don't see how such an attack could "enmire the US in the defense of Israel". The Israeli armed forces are perfectly capable of dealing with Syria and Hizbollah simultaneously, without US assistance. They could probably deal with a substantial Iraqi attack as well: Iraq has no air force, and would have to move ground forces over a long and exposed route even to bring them into position for an attack on Israel. Any such movement would bring the forces under attack by both Israeli and US aircraft, and the ability to attack Iraqi troop concentrations on the move, rather than dug in, would be an advantage to the US in its preparations for a move on Iraq. The Israeli armed forces remain extremely capable of dealing with conventional attack. Israel is under huge stress now precisely because its attackers have been attacking unconventionally, in a fashion that is difficult to repulse through conventional military means. I have no doubt that Arab states will continue to send arms and money to support the intifadeh. I seriously doubt that they will risk their own armies and territories in a battle that they know they will lose, especially when the Palestinians are so willing to do the dying for them. If the Arab states have a tactic at hand that requires little commitment from them, poses little threat to them, and shows signs of being effective, is it really likely that they would adopt instead a tactic that requires huge commitments and poses huge risks, and has always failed abysmally in the past?

To: FaultLine who wrote (22271)	3/26/2002 7:36:10 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

A mighty frightening scenario.. But I suspect it's as accurate as many other potential ones... Makes one wonder what the Iraqi, Syrian, and Iranian leadership are smoking... Of course, since the US has effectively put each of their governments "on notice", they realize the jig is up and probably realize that "it's now or never".. Hawk@backagainstthewall.com

To: FaultLine who wrote (22271)	3/27/2002 3:05:45 AM
From: SirRealist	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I hate to say it, but the Warren essay coincides with much of my observations. I see quite clearly that the Palestinians are now viewed as the proxy warriors for the Arab battle with Israel, and that with the media attention on Israel/Palestine, the arming actions of Iran/Syria must be directed towards Southern Lebanon and Hezbollah. I'm still uncertain about the Iraq/Iran alliance; I almost think that odd couple was driven together by the Axis speech... is it a defensive affair of convenience? Certainly, Iran can't trust Saddam past a certain point.... Warren failed to mention Al Qaida however. The attack 9-11 came as WTC bombers were being sentenced.... and it preceded a typically unsteady market period and I still believe it was timed in an attempt to drive the mkt into panic at a weak juncture. Well, April tax season is also an historically weak time for the markets. And with the SA proposal being floated, the extremists have cause to do whatever it can to kill Israeli peace attempts. So there is much rationale to anticipate an attack on Israeli or US interests, starting with this summit and running for two weeks after. Consider: if Al Qaida hits the US and perhaps GB simultaneously, with Hezbollah striking Israel from South Lebanon. Certainly, it would ignite parts of the "Arab Street". However, it would also certainly put to the test the strength of the Arab leadership, as both Egypt and SA would be compelled to quell their streets, first and foremost. The law of unintended consequences could come into play in Iran, as well, because if the Ayatollahs play too overt a hand, we could see a reawakening of the reform movement there. In any case, there's dominoes running from Pakistan to Iraq right now, and I certainly hope the US, Great Britain, Israel, Turkey, Egypt, and perhaps SA and Russia, are working from the same playbook. There is more than Spring in the air and I'd like to see a definitive strike by our side take a lot of air out of the lungs of the cowards of the ME.