IDF v Hezbollah: The Rematch Summer 2015?

Tell me what country you are from and i'll tell you if you appear in our (*)(*)(*)(*) list.

 

If Jews = Arabs and there are equal numbers of Jews and Arabs living between the River and the sea, why not a democratic state instead of a Jewish state?

Considering how some of the same western imperialists who stitched together Iraq, and Syria, and Jordan also created a "little, loyal Jewish Ulster" close to the Suez Canal, the current dismemberment of the Arab states is simply a 21st century version of divide and conquer.

 

What does that has to do with 2 countries? why wont France and Germany unite as one country ?

lol, so these countries were all a western trick so one day the one true state of Israel will take it all ?

 

So Clark reveals a fact, and he is a grandstanding ass? That is the trouble, inconvenient facts are just dismissed, lightly, and then the incoherence begins. I just cannot understand this, unless it's tied to blindness caused by ideological beliefs. But that makes for stupidity.

Coincidently what clark revealed is contained in the neocon new American century plot. The dots all line up coherently. And Sherlock Holmes isn't needed here to see what was actually going on. It is so obvious.

 

Clark learned about the plans to destroy seven Arabs states in November of 2001; he claims he learned about the decision to invade Iraq two months before that. It is worth wondering why he waited until March 2003 (when his book was published) to reveal this information to the public. Had the general divulged the information when he first heard about it, there would have been some very interesting conversations around 2001 American turkey-day tables.

 

Israel was created by the same western trick as Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan. Since the Jewish homeland was colonized by Europeans, England's "little, loyal Jewish Ulster" will shelter under the western dragon's wing as long Middle East oil remains the greatest material prize in history; after that point, the west will no longer need its occupation of Palestine.

 

It's ridiculous to claim Israel has designs or the cause of chaos in other Middle East countries like Egypt, Syria, and Iraq. In the case of Iraq, Ariel Sharon warned against invading Iraq believing that it would turn Iraq in to a warring tribe of sunnis, shiites, and kurds along with strengthening Iran (which the Iraq war did, Sharon's earlier invasion in 1982 of Lebanon did exactly that when IDF managed to expel PLO in Lebanon and replaced it with Hezbollah due to prolonged harsh occupation of southern Lebanon causing discontent with Shiites who initially viewed the Israelis as liberators );both which turned out to be true. The main problem in Egypt is that it has a large population of nearly 89 million people with limited resources. The main problem in Syria seems to be limited resources and high sectarian tensions between several groups. Hezbollah has no purpose since 2000 when Israel withdrew from Lebanon this is even according to UN. Hezbollah disputes this by claiming Shebba farms is Lebanese territory it's not. Israel captured it when Israel took the Golan Heights which included Shebba farms from Syria during the six day war. Maps from the 1930's also show Shebba farms as Syrian. Hezbollah is a tool to maintain Syrian occupation of Lebanon after they left in 2005 following assassination of former pm Rafif Harir(which UN investigation into assassination linked it to Syria and Hezbollah). What does oil have to do with West Bank when Israel doesn't have any oil when oil embargoes in the past have been imposed on United States and other countries for supporting Israel during Yom Kippur war?
http://mykeystrokes.com/2015/04/08/...etanyahu-and-the-neocons-the-rest-is-history/

 

creating countries is no trick unless you think it was all part of a grand plan - that Israel will eventually conquer the ME? and rule with an Iron Fist over.....500 Million Arabs ? salt mines, whips, slave markets, and ofc mass circumcisions otherwise what are we doing it for. am I right ?

 

Don't confuse him with facts and common sense, he read a book.

 

Was Sykes-Picot part of a "grand plan?" How about the Balfour Declaration? Israel is a minor cog in the New Middle East, at best, but that doesn't mean it isn't a useful tool for those who profit from killing civilians for their land and water.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/the-un-says-7-in-10-palestinians-killed-in-gaza-were-civilians-israel-disagrees/2014/08/29/44edc598-2faa-11e4-9b98-848790384093_story.html

 

But anyone can fit a conspiracy theory in retrospective that's not hard to do, question is do you really think it was all planned since, what? the 19th century ? the Arab spring and its failure included.

 

"The Sykes–Picot Agreement, officially known as the Asia Minor Agreement, was a secret agreement between the governments of the United Kingdom and France,[1] with the assent of Russia, defining their proposed spheres of influence and control in the Middle East should the Triple Entente succeed in defeating the Ottoman Empire during World War I. The negotiation of the treaty occurred between November 1915 and March 1916.[2] The agreement was concluded on 16 May 1916."
One needn't claim the Arab Spring was anticipated in May of 1916 to notice the interest European elites developed in the Middle East about the same time as their (Royal) Navies switched from coal to oil power. Based on my limited knowledge of history, I think it is naive to think events taking place today across the New Middle East today are happening without western (corporate) planning.

 

Sykes–Picot was a western interest no question, ME oil is a Global interest no question either, yet here we are many years later, ppl moved on building their lives and countries, there were a few years of growth and happiness if im not mistaken so it wasn't all bad, so at what point are ppl responsible for their lives and choices they make or are they never ? you realize that the ME is not the only place on the planet that has global interests in right ? its not the only place who's future was determined by results of war and selfish interests.

The Shea Muslims and Sunni Muslims existed centuries before WW1, and their hatred is the one thing you can't blame the West for, in fact, you can blame them for forcfully trying to work it out between them creating those countries borders, the dictators were their own development, they like the absolute concept.

 

The Sunni and Sh'ia of Iraq were not killing each prior to March of 2003 in numbers close to today's count, at least not in the last hundred years. There are allegations from the early days of the US occupation of the American military deliberately segregating Iraqi officers according to their religious preference; Shi'ite were told to stand along one wall and Sunni along the opposite side of the room. Iraqis found this behavior inexplicable at the time; however, some of them may have figured out by now.
"Iraq's modern borders were mostly demarcated in 1920 by the League of Nations when the Ottoman Empire was divided by the Treaty of Sèvres. Iraq was placed under the authority of the United Kingdom as the British Mandate of Mesopotamia. A monarchy was established in 1921 and the Kingdom of Iraq gained independence from Britain in 1932. In 1958, the monarchy was overthrown and the Republic of Iraq was created. Iraq was controlled by the Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party from 1968 until 2003. After an invasion by the United States and its allies, Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath Party was removed from power and multi-party parliamentary elections were held. The American presence in Iraq ended in 2011[9] but the Iraqi insurgency continued and intensified as fighters from the Syrian Civil War spilled into the country."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq

 

Israel was never created it was reconstituted and this is not an invention of mine but rather the word 'reconstituted' appears several times in the 'preamble and the articles of the Palestine Mandate'.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Mandate_for_Palestine_%28legal_instrument%29#Establishment_of_a_national_home_for_the_Jewish_people

"Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.[29]


"The British Foreign Secretary, Lord Curzon, together with the Italian and French governments rejected early drafts of the mandate because they had contained a passage which read: 'Recognizing, moreover, the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and the claim which this gives them to reconstitute it their national home...'"[30]

 

Herm... Iran-Iraq war...

 

I said Iraqi Sunni and Shi'ia weren't killing each other in today's numbers at any point in the last century. Both Iran and Iraq have Shi'ia majorities; however, sectarian motives in that conflict conflict certainly wasn't hard to find:

"The exact number of Iraqi Shia that fought alongside Iran is unknown. The Iraqi political parties SCIRI and Islamic Da'wa Party supported Iran during the war. Iran would sometimes organise divisions of Iraqi POWs to fight against Iraq."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_War

 

Saddam killed many many Iraqi Shiite during that war. He considered them traitors. Saddam was Sunni like all his high ranking military.

 

Saddam also killed many, many Iraqi Sunni during that war.
"According to the HRW during the Anfal campaign, the Iraqi government:
Massacred 50,000 to 100,000 non-combatant civilians including women and children according to Human Rights Watch.[17] Although Kurdish officials have claimed the figure could be as high as 182,000.[3]
Destroyed about 4,000 villages (out of 4,655) in Iraqi Kurdistan. Between April 1987 and August 1988, 250 towns and villages were exposed to chemical weapons;[18]
Destroyed 1,754 schools, 270 hospitals, 2,450 mosques, 27 churches;[19]
Wiped out around 90% of Kurdish villages in targeted areas.[3]
Made 2,000 Assyrians, along with Kurds and others, victims of gas campaigns."
The point I'm trying to make is that prior to March 2003 Sunni and Shi'ite lived as neighbors and friends in many parts of Iraq. Since that time, a deliberate policy of divide and conquer by the US has resulted in acts of genocide against both sects by their former neighbors and friends.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Anfal_Campaign#Statistics

 

No they didn't.
Shia and Sunni have been killing each other since the murder of Ali not long after Mo' death.

 

Wiki has changed and has allowed people to alter definitions.
But even if the three major powers had doubts on a certain passages, this has not been implemented in the wordings of the Mandate.

It is submitted that the Mandate for Palestine has a primary and overriding purpose and object - namely, the establishment of the Jewish National Home in Palestine. All other duties of the Mandatory must be deemed to be subordinated to this primary object and no provision of the Mandate can properly be interpreted so as to entail any departure or derogation from this primary purpose. This is clear from the wording of the Mandate itself.

The Preamble explains why the Mandate was created and sets out its purpose. The first clause of the Preamble declares it to be the intention of the Principal Allied Powers that Palestine should be administered under a Mandatory regime. The second clause proceeds to explain that the purpose of the Mandate is to put into effect the Balfour Declaration; accordingly the clause declares that the Mandatory shall be responsible for doing so. None of the remaining clauses of the Preamble make any mention of other purposes or objects. Manifestly, no other was intended. This is evident also from the contents of the third clause of the Preamble.

The British authorities themselves recognized that their first obligation was to help achieve the establishment of the Jewish National Home. Thus, the Colonial Office wrote to the Palestine Arab delegation in April 1922 that "the declaration, as you are aware, provided, first, for the establishment of a national home for the Jews in Palestine; and, secondly, for the preservation of the rights and interests of the non Jewish population of the country."

This is also evident from the fact that immediately after the first Article conferring upon the Mandatory the necessary powers of legislation and administration to carry out the Mandate, Article 2 begins with a proviso that the Mandatory shall "be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish National Home, as laid down in the Preamble..." The effect of the remaining part of Article 2 will be considered later.

That the primary purpose of the Mandate is the establishment of the Jewish National Home is made further apparent by Articles 4, 6, 7, and 11 of the Mandate. The Peel Commission accepted this conclusion after careful study. It stated that unquestionably ... the primary purpose of the Mandate as expressed in the Preamble and in its Article is to promote the establishment of the Jewish National Home." (Peel Report, page 39).

This view has been held by many leading British statesmen, including those who were responsible for the Balfour Declaration and the drafting of the terms of the Mandate or who, as British officials, were in the best position to know how their Government understood the Declaration and the Mandatory obligations.

Reference has already been made to the fact that former Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, former Foreign Secretary Sir Samuel Hoare and others signed a Memorial urging the British Government to accept a Mandate under the League of Nations for the administration of Palestine "with a view to its being reconstituted the National Home for the Jewish People."

 

They weren't killing each other's families inside the states of Iraq and Syria as they have been since March 2003.

 

Yes they were.

 

In 1920 the "State of Iraq" became a League of Nations mandate under British control, and the French established a similar mandate in Syria; during the ensuing 95 years when have Sunni and Shi'ite in those states killed each other at the same level we see in 2015?