Israel's Looking...

[Raptured Spleen]

...to "settle the score".

Does anyone not see the hand of Uncle Sam pulling Israel's strings here?!

It's not about the prospect of Iranian nukes, People; it's all about the Iranian pipeline and its government's invitation to various nations around the globe to trade in euros instead of the horribly de-valued dollar (and FYI: that euro v. dollar thing was the real reason Saddam Hussein ended up swinging Texas-style, if you know what I mean).

Hey, maybe now would be a good time for Israel to use some of those bunker busters Obama tried to sneak by under the table a few years back! You know, one could just happen to go a little off course and accidentally demolish Iran's shiny new pipeline. Best hope it looks like an accident to China though, 'cuz word has it they like the idea of oily euros.

I'm just gonna say it: Israel is little more than a thinly veiled military outpost for the United States. I say "little more" because Israel's status as a 'sovereign nation' allows the US to don its soldiers and equipment like Halloween costumes in order to carry out the kind of work that can't be done openly as the USA.

Case in point: the shizznit that's getting ready to go down between Israel and Iran.

Question: is the issue of Iran's nuclear ambitions just a shallow pretense to enable the US (via Israel) to get at some deeper (yes, underlying) issue?

[CrunkJuice]

...to "settle the score".

Does anyone not see the hand of Uncle Sam pulling Israel's strings here?!

It's not about the prospect of Iranian nukes, People; it's all about the Iranian pipeline and its government's invitation to various nations around the globe to trade in euros instead of the horribly de-valued dollar (and FYI: that euro v. dollar thing was the real reason Saddam Hussein ended up swinging Texas-style, if you know what I mean).

Hey, maybe now would be a good time for Israel to use some of those bunker busters Obama tried to sneak by under the table a few years back! You know, one could just happen to go a little off course and accidentally demolish Iran's shiny new pipeline. Best hope it looks like an accident to China though, 'cuz word has it they like the idea of oily euros.

I'm just gonna say it: Israel is little more than a thinly veiled military outpost for the United States. I say "little more" because Israel's status as a 'sovereign nation' allows the US to don its soldiers and equipment like Halloween costumes in order to carry out the kind of work that can't be done openly as the USA.

Case in point: the shizznit that's getting ready to go down between Israel and Iran.

Question: is the issue of Iran's nuclear ambitions just a shallow pretense to enable the US (via Israel) to get at some deeper (yes, underlying) issue?

I do have to say youre wrong on the motive here. It is related to money however. The Rothschild banking family owns half of the worlds wealth. The only countries that did not have a central bank owned by the Rothschilds (prior to 2001) were Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, Syria, Cuba and North Korea. You can go ahead and slash off Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya off that list. Pretty coincidental that Iran is the next target. Syria will have a Rothschild bank within the year I believe.

[McCulloch]

The Rothschild banking family owns half of the worlds wealth.

Please support this claim with some form of evidence.

The only countries that did not have a central bank owned by the Rothschilds (prior to 2001) were Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, Syria, Cuba and North Korea.

The Bank of Canada (French: Banque du Canada) is Canada's central bank. The Bank was created by an Act of Parliament (the Bank of Canada Act) on July 3, 1934 as a privately owned corporation. In 1938, the Bank became a Crown corporation belonging to the Government of Canada. The Minister of Finance (on behalf of Her Majesty in right of Canada) holds the entire share capital issued by the Bank.

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) (Hindi: ) is the central banking institution of India and controls the monetary policy of the Indian rupee. The institution was established on 1 April 1935 during the British Raj in accordance with the provisions of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934. The share capital was divided into shares of 100 each fully paid which was entirely owned by private shareholders in the beginning. Reserve Bank of India was nationalised in the year 1949.

The Reserve Bank of New Zealand is the central bank of New Zealand and is constituted under the Reserve Bank of New Zealand Act 1989. Unlike the United States Federal Reserve, the Reserve Bank does not have elements of private ownership; according to its website, "The Reserve Bank does not have shareholders. It is 100% 'owned' by the New Zealand Government, with any extra revenue that the Reserve Bank makes going back into the Crown accounts. The Central Bank is not a government department, but is a body corporate whose finances are included in the Crown accounts."

The Bank of England (formally the Governor and Company of the Bank of England) is the central bank of the United Kingdom and the model on which most modern central banks have been based. The Bank was privately owned and operated from its foundation in 1694. It was subordinated to the Treasury after 1931 in making policy and was nationalised in 1946. In 1998, it became an independent public organisation, wholly owned by the Treasury Solicitor on behalf of the Government, with independence in setting monetary policy.

The People's Bank of China (PBC or PBOC) is the state-owned central bank of the People's Republic of China with the power to control monetary policy and regulate financial institutions in mainland China.

The Deutsche Bundesbank (German for German Federal Bank) is the central bank of the Federal Republic of Germany and as such part of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB). Due to its strength and former size, the Bundesbank is the most influential member of the ESCB. It is controlled by people are put forward by the German government, the Bundesrat and the President of Germany.

The Central Bank of Argentina was a private entity during its first decade, and British Empire interests held a majority stake. Pursuant to the Roca"Runciman Treaty of 1933, Central Bank reserves accrued from Argentine trade surpluses with the United Kingdom were deposited in escrow at the Bank of England, and this clause, which had led to over US$1 billion in inaccessible reserves (more than half the total) by 1945, prompted the Central Bank's nationalization by order of Juan Pern in December.

Unless CrunkJuice claims that the governments of Canada, India, New Zealand, England, China, Germany and Argentina are controlled by the Rothschilds family, he is mistaken in his statement about the ownership of these country's central banks.

[Felix]

Iran wouldn't be interested in ditching the dollar (something Saddam did right before the US attacked) if not for US harassment. Nor is there any inherent reason the US should care about Iran's oil, aside from promoting nuclear energy for Iran so Iran can sell more of their oil on the market, lowering oil prices.

Look to who controls US foreign policy, and look at who is the biggest supporter of pro-Israel US foreign police. We know the elephant in the room.

[bluethread]

Iran wouldn't be interested in ditching the dollar (something Saddam did right before the US attacked) if not for US harassment. Nor is there any inherent reason the US should care about Iran's oil, aside from promoting nuclear energy for Iran so Iran can sell more of their oil on the market, lowering oil prices.

Look to who controls US foreign policy, and look at who is the biggest supporter of pro-Israel US foreign police. We know the elephant in the room.

Hmm, who controls US foreign policy? That would be the US Department of State, ie, Hillary Clinton. Is she a big supporter of pro-Israel US foreign policy? Wait a second, the DoS is part of the executive branch, so that would make it the President. Barack Obama is a big supporter of pro-Israel US foreign policy? Hold it, Congress declares war, but Congress has not declared war since the 1940's. Never mind that, who heads up Congress. Well, there is the Senate and the House. The Senate majority leader controls the Senate. Harry Reid is big supporter of pro-Israel US foreign policy? Just a minute now, the Speaker of the House is in charges of the House of Representatives. Ah, there we go, Speaker Boehner has conspired to shove pro-Israel US foreign policy through the House, bypassed the Senate, and got the DoS to follow that policy right under the noses of both POTUS Obama and Secretary Clinton without their even knowing it. Boy those wascawy wepubwicans are always up to no good. :yapyap:

[Choir Loft]

...to "settle the score".

Does anyone not see the hand of Uncle Sam pulling Israel's strings here?!

It's not about the prospect of Iranian nukes, People; it's all about the Iranian pipeline and its government's invitation to various nations around the globe to trade in euros instead of the horribly de-valued dollar (and FYI: that euro v. dollar thing was the real reason Saddam Hussein ended up swinging Texas-style, if you know what I mean).

Hey, maybe now would be a good time for Israel to use some of those bunker busters Obama tried to sneak by under the table a few years back! You know, one could just happen to go a little off course and accidentally demolish Iran's shiny new pipeline. Best hope it looks like an accident to China though, 'cuz word has it they like the idea of oily euros.

I'm just gonna say it: Israel is little more than a thinly veiled military outpost for the United States. I say "little more" because Israel's status as a 'sovereign nation' allows the US to don its soldiers and equipment like Halloween costumes in order to carry out the kind of work that can't be done openly as the USA.

Case in point: the shizznit that's getting ready to go down between Israel and Iran.

Question: is the issue of Iran's nuclear ambitions just a shallow pretense to enable the US (via Israel) to get at some deeper (yes, underlying) issue?

American hegemony in the region has increased since 9/11. Some say that everything that's happened in Muslim lands has been directly or indirectly related to American interests there.

But there are other interests to be considered. Should an American invasion of Iran become an actuality, US arrogance could be cut off with devastating and sudden effect.

I've been reading and studying the foreign press and I fear that something similar to the Battle of the Chosin Reservior during the American invasion of North Korea would be very possible. Weapon systems are now in place that could 'de-escalate' any high-tech American advances on the battlefield. We don't hear about them in the news because their existence might give our citizens reason to doubt that the game is always rigged in our favor. If the United States invades Iran, I fear a terrible debacle would await our troops. It is my hope that such an action does not take place at all.

but that's just me, hollering from the choir loft...

[Wootah]

When I think of Israeli motives I just wonder how I would act if I was surrounded by enemies. Would I want my enemies to have nukes?

[dusk]

The thing with Israel is that there is no solution. They are surrounded by rather hostile neighbors. The Arabs never wanted them there and rarely made serious efforts to accept them. It could have been expected the whole project Israel was a stupid idea from the get go. The threat of Europe and the US as well as economic relations and influence on the ruling elites (Saudi royality, Syria, Egypt) kept them from serious real wars.
I think they have every reason to be worried but there is no solution.

It is understandable that Iran wants a nuke. North Korea builds its business model on the nuke. They only get attention because they have nukes. They are only taken seriously because of them otherwise Iran is just one of these small crazy islamic nations. They want to think they are as important as the US. Surrounded by countries invaded by the US, in conflict with the Saudis, unhappy with the north. They try to build there identity as a powerful nation in the middle east on the nuke and military strength. Be like India & Pakistan. They could do it like Germany and drive an economic powerhouse of the middle east and creating some kind of MEU. They had all they needed. Young people, not such a bad education, investments. Iran was looking good 20 years ago.
But they don't. Democracy is a bitch and the rural conservative idiots got the upper hand. The liberal well educated urban population has been trying to get out of the country for years. Without them what is really left for them but the nuke to not fall back to becoming some big but insignificant country somewhere down there in the east.

They don't want the nuke to nuke Israel. Some few possibly do but that is not the main reason. They want to be respected and they see only this one path.
At least that is my interpretations.

If I lived in Israel I would try to leave that dry small desert country and move to Europe, Asia, America just somewhere else. Israel hardly has the space for its population leave it to the crazy zionist and let them figure it out.


If America really started the war because of Petrodollars they made a hugely terrible bet. The amount of debt that this war costs won't ever be repaid in Petrodollars. Loosing Iran to the Euros or Yen would never have cost as much as this war. Even if others would have followed. The big money still seeks investments and moves wherever needed. A somewhat devalued dollar wouldn't have hurt the US might have actually helped this import nation.

In the middle east the Saudis I think are much more important for the US than Israel. What happens if you remove Israel from the map? A lot less middle eastern problem talk. Probably less terrorism. Israel ever only quarrel with the oily rather unimportant direct neighbors. It is more a pain in the ass than a useful outpost.
More important are the autocratic regimes that invest the bulk of the oil money in international companies, buildings/cities built by international companies and more money to drill. A democratic state that would build a social welfare state by a norwegian model with its oil, and invest the western oil money in education and their own population would really hurt the US. Because money would go there and stay there for some time, until an economy different but strong like China would emerge (with probably a 1-2 decade delay) be a great market for selling products.

The nukes of Iran are no pretense but a real worry. Too many Iranian connections to terrorist friendly groups could turn out badly. Still I am not idealist enough to doubt that it is only a matter of time till they get one regardless what the US, EU, Israel want. Israel will have to live with the threat.
The problem for them unlike the cold war is also that an attack on Israel with a nuke would probably not be coming from Iran directly. They couldn't just retaliate. That is the big problem with terrorists. They say they are worried about Iran having a nuke but they are really much more worried I think that a nuke ends up in some terrorist's hands. The same worries that follow Pakistan till now and still. Just because Pakistan hasn't yet lost a nuke doesn't mean the threat isn't still there. The US didn't pay so much money to keep the Pakistan military strong and capable for the fun of it.
In an ideal world no country would have nukes and all stuff related to it would only be allowed in joint UN projects signed and watched by multiple countries and as much controlling mechanisms as can be.

[amptramp]

I think the OP has it backwards - the US is not pulling Israel's strings, it's the other way around. AIPAC, the America - Israel Political Action Committee, has enough money flowing into American election campaign coffers to ensure there will never be a voice against Israel is American politics. Israel is America's dominatrix and America has forgotten the safe word. The US is not Israel's Blackwater nor is it the other way around.

Recall the bombing of the USS Liberty, a communications monitoring ship, where during the Seven Days' War, Israel was afraid that the US would tell Syria about the buildup of Israeli forces on Syria's border, so after flying over the ship all day, knowing full well that it was American, they bombed it and later claimed that it was a mistake. The US swallowed this line and let Israel get away with everything.

Check the mastheads of newpapers and the management of American media - much of the ownership is either Jewish or pro-Zionist, so you never hear a dissenting opinion from the AIPAC party line. Several of the most frequently used news agencies have been owned by the Rothschild family, which invented the modern state of Israel. They recently sold Reuters to the Murdoch organization, which is also pro-Zionist.

As for Iran, the US and Britain collaborated to bring down the democratically-elected government of Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953, keeping him under house arrest until his death in 1967 and killing his foreign minister. They installed Reza Pahlavi as the Shah of Iran and had a useful puppet until his death. But Pahlavi imprisoned, tortured and killed thousands of supporters of the democratic process, so there has been 59 years of bad blood against the US and the UK.

No one has convinced me that the Iranian nuclear program is being directed at weapons. They may simply want to generate electricity without consuming oil that China is willing to pay for.

Pakistan is now close to a failed state. The Taliban controls the west and the Durand line which is the border with Afghanistan is somewhat in flux. So the government is not in control and the borders are mutable, yet no one is getting wet pants over the fact that they have a nuclear stockpile that stands a very good chance of falling into terrorist hands. Public opinion in the US is being stampeded into demonizing Iran to support the coming war.

[cnorman18]

I think the OP has it backwards - the US is not pulling Israel's strings, it's the other way around. AIPAC, the America - Israel Political Action Committee, has enough money flowing into American election campaign coffers to ensure there will never be a voice against Israel is American politics. Israel is America's dominatrix and America has forgotten the safe word. The US is not Israel's Blackwater nor is it the other way around.

The fact is, of course, that the US supports Israel because the overwhelming majority of the citizens of the US support Israel. This is true of the members of both political parties and of Independents too. Attributing US support for Israel to the nefarious and all-powerful "Jewish Lobby" is a tired old canard that has never held any water.

Recall the bombing of the USS Liberty, a communications monitoring ship, where during the Seven Days' War, Israel was afraid that the US would tell Syria about the buildup of Israeli forces on Syria's border, so after flying over the ship all day, knowing full well that it was American, they bombed it and later claimed that it was a mistake. The US swallowed this line and let Israel get away with everything.

Sorry, but citing the USS Liberty is a dead giveaway to the kind of websites you visit and the kind of "information" you swallow whole. If you only read anti-Israel propaganda, it's not surprising that you would come to these conclusions. The record is mixed, and there are unanswered questions, to be sure; but in any case, the USS Liberty incident has been a dead issue for almost 50 years. Whether a misguided deliberate attack or a pure error in the fog of battle (which is much more likely), the incident is long since over, with reparations and damages paid in the tens of millions and both governments remaining allies. Only rabid "anti-Zionist" activists much care about it today.

Check the mastheads of newpapers and the management of American media - much of the ownership is either Jewish or pro-Zionist, so you never hear a dissenting opinion from the AIPAC party line. Several of the most frequently used news agencies have been owned by the Rothschild family, which invented the modern state of Israel. They recently sold Reuters to the Murdoch organization, which is also pro-Zionist.

And followed, of course, by the old "Jews control the media" and the "Rothschild boogeyman" myths. Yeah, yeah. The evil Jewish conspiracy, we rule the world from behind the scenes, yadda yadda yadda.

Phfft.

You want to talk about overwhelming support for Israel in the US, you might want to take a look at conservative and evangelical Christian churches. Last time I looked, they were neither funded nor run by Jews.

But feel free to [strike]expose[/strike] reveal your "sources" for this information; links, books, newsletters, whatever. I'm sure they'll be MOST compelling.

As for the rest, I don't see Israel or Jews mentioned. Odd, that, considering what came before.

Not worth pursuing. Have a nice day.