What's new

Balkanization Of Iraq Is Part Of Neo-con Plan

A.Rahman

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
4,728
Reaction score
0
Country
Pakistan
Location
Canada
[SIZE=+2]‘BALKANIZATION’ OF IRAQ IS PART OF NEO-CON PLAN[/SIZE]
Bloody Strategy to Partition Iraq Exposed by Capture Of British Spies in Basra

By Christopher Bollyn​
There is much more to the story of the ongoing tragedy in Iraq, particularly the growing number of terrorist incidents, than you’ll learn from mainstream media coverage—or non-coverage—of that beleaguered Middle East nation, which did not become a bastion of terrorism until after the United States attacked it.

The arrest of two British agents disguised as Shiite “terrorists” with a car full of explosives in Basra suggests that British occupation forces may be involved in carrying out “false flag” terror bombings in Iraq in order to advance the Zionist strategy of balkanizing the Middle East.

Two British agents from the Special Air Service (SAS) or a branch organization of the special forces, disguised as members of the Mehdi Army of the Shiite rebel cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, were caught in a car loaded with explosives after shooting and killing Iraqi police and civilians in Basra on Sept. 19.

Unable to secure the release of the two disguised terrorists from the local police, British forces took extraordinary action and bulldozed the police compound and jail and freed them.

Across Iraq, a wave of unclaimed car bombings has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of Iraqis in the past month, while thousands of innocent civilians have perished in similar senseless bombings in the two-and-a-half years since the Anglo-American occupation of the country began.

These terror attacks benefit the Israelis as they create the appearance of widespread sectarian violence in order to facilitate the plan to break Iraq into three ethnic statelets.

CAR BOMBING MARKETS

One interesting note about these terror bombings is that they are not being carried out by suicide bombers, but involve cars loaded with explosives, like that being driven by the two arrested British soldiers. These car bombs are usually parked and detonated near crowded areas, such as markets, and kill many innocent civilians.

On Sept. 29, for example, three pickup trucks packed with explosives detonated in quick succession in Balad, 50 miles north of Baghdad. The first bomb went off in the open-air market. Ten minutes later, the second car bomb detonated across the street, just as emergency workers were arriving. The third bomb exploded 10 minutes later in a residential area reported to be predominantly Shiite.

Car bombs, over the next several days, took 110 Iraqi lives, primarily Shiites, in the last few days of September. What makes these attacks unusual is that they are not aimed at the foreign occupation forces or Iraqi police, but seem to be acts of senseless violence.

The strategy of terror bombings in Iraq appears to be designed to create rampant civil strife in Iraq in order to advance a well-planned strategy to break up the country, known as Balkanization.

This strategy is aimed at dividing Iraq into three ethnic statelets, as was done with the former Yugoslavia.

Responsibility for the so-called sectarian bombings in Iraq, however, is rarely claimed by any Iraqi guerrilla group. There is, however, evidence that these bombings are facilitated and even perpetrated by foreign military and intelligence agencies working closely with the occupation forces, such as British military intelligence and the Israeli Mossad.

British forces have employed “false flag” terror tactics as part of a divide-and-conquer strategy applied in other conflicts in the past.

The scheme to Balkanize the Middle East has its roots in proposals put forth by a number of prominent Israelis.

In 1982, Oded Yinon, a senior advisor at the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs and a journalist, articulated the Zionist plan to Balkanize the Middle East by breaking up the Arab states of Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States.

“The dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously unique areas such as in Lebanon, is Israel’s primary target on the Eastern front in the long run, while the dissolution of the military power of those states serves as the primary short-term target,” Yinon wrote.

“Iraq, rich in oil on the one hand and internally torn on the other, is guaranteed as a candidate for Israel’s targets,” Yinon wrote. “Its dissolution is even more important for us than that of Syria.

“In the short run it is Iraqi power that constitutes the greatest threat to Israel, “ Yinon wrote. “Every kind of inter-Arab confrontation will assist us in the short run and will shorten the way to the more important aim of breaking up
Iraq into denominations as in Syria and in Lebanon.”

Yinon’s article, “A Strategy for Israel in the 1980s,” written in Hebrew, appeared in Kivunim (“Directions”), “a journal for Judaism and Zionism,” published by the Department of Publicity of the World Zionist Organization in Jerusalem. The Yinon article is considered one of the most explicit and detailed statements of Zionist strategy in the Middle East.

The essay was translated by the late Israel Shahak in 1982 and formed the basis of Shahak’s subsequent article, “The Zionist Plan for the Middle East.”

“This document is the most explicit, detailed and unambiguous statement to date of the Zionist strategy in the Middle East,” publisher Khalil Nakhleh of the Association of Arab-American University Graduates wrote.“

Furthermore, it stands as an accurate representation of the ‘vision’ for the entire Middle East of the presently ruling Zionist regime of Begin, Sharon and Eitan. Its importance, hence, lies not in its historical value but in the nightmare it presents.”

ZIONIST VISION

The Zionist vision for the Middle East rests on two essential premises, Nakhleh noted. “To survive, Israel must become an imperial regional power, and, secondly, it must effect the division of the whole area into small states by the dissolution of all existing Arab states.

“The Zionist hope is that sectarian-based states will become Israel’s satellites and, ironically, its source of moral legitimization,” Nakhleh wrote.

“The idea that all the Arab states should be broken down . . . into small units occurs again and again in Israeli strategic thinking,” Shahak wrote.

“For example, Ze’ev Schiff, the military correspondent for Ha’aretz, wrote on June 2, 1982, about the ‘best’ that can happen for Israeli interests in Iraq: ‘The dissolution of Iraq into a Shiite state, a Sunni state and the separation of the Kurdish part.’ ”

“Ideally, we’d like to see Iraq disintegrate into a Shiite, Kurdish and Sunni community, each making war on the others,” said an unnamed Israeli official who was quoted in the July 26, 1982, issue of Newsweek.
(Issue #42, October 17, 2005)

source: AFP​
 
Two British agents from the Special Air Service (SAS) or a branch organization of the special forces, disguised as members of the Mehdi Army of the Shiite rebel cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, were caught in a car loaded with explosives after shooting and killing Iraqi police and civilians in Basra on Sept. 19.

Unable to secure the release of the two disguised terrorists from the local police, British forces took extraordinary action and bulldozed the police compound and jail and freed them.

anyone remembers this?

I remember it reading about this year ago.

I think British spies are behind bombings, they may have started shia-sunni civil war, just like old times "divide & conquer".
 
A.Rahman said:
anyone remembers this?

I remember it reading about this year ago.

I think British spies are behind bombings, they may have started shia-sunni civil war, just like old times "divide & conquer".

it's not only divide and conquer, it's divide for ever and dominate effctivly.

here is something "extraodinary" :

Blood borders
How a better Middle East would look

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/06/1833899

look at the divisions between "new" countries, they are intended not only to divide, or to weaken the most advanced islamic nations now, but also to create a puzzle where ethnic and sectarian borders will never disapear again.
 
wadawada said:
it's not only divide and conquer, it's divide for ever and dominate effctivly.

here is something "extraodinary" :

Blood borders
How a better Middle East would look

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/06/1833899

look at the divisions between "new" countries, they are intended not only to divide, or to weaken the most advanced islamic nations now, but also to create a puzzle where ethnic and sectarian borders will never disapear again.

old news, this is Raph's wet dream.

saudi will be safe including Pakistan.
 
A.Rahman said:
old news, this is Raph's wet dream

the zionists, through the american proxy, won't stop until this scenario applies.

the problem is that muslims are participating in this mascarade. especially arab-muslims, who have weak States and the facetious arab-nationalism.

the problem in the M.E with arabs is that there are no islamic progressive movements. I mean by that islamic movements whose aim is not to "cut heads" or impose by force, but to build strong independant nations. Many of these movements that have a large influence or base are in fact infiltrated by mossad or local States Secret services, and thus are "used" to self-destroy these nations.

what arabs need now is to put aside their phobia of iran and learn how to be REALLY independant, and how to create a case by case islamic solution for every arab nation insted of trying to re-build a sunni islamic "empire".

EDIT: orthorgaph.
 
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HH16Ak01.html

Corporate war machine gathers speed

There is strong evidence that as the Bush administration is mulling over plans to bomb Iran, the simmering conflict between high-ranking military professionals and militaristic civilian leaders is bursting into the open.

The conflict, festering ever since the invasion of Iraq, has now been heightened over the US administration's policy of an aerial military strike against Iran. While civilian militarists, headed by

China Business Big Picture


Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, are said to have drawn plans to bomb Iran, senior commanders are openly questioning the wisdom of such plans. [1]

The administration's recent statements that it is now willing to negotiate with Iran might appear as a change or modification of its plans to launch a military strike against that country. But a closer reading of those statements indicates otherwise: such pronouncements are premised on the condition that, as President George W Bush recently put it, "The Iranian regime fully and verifiably suspends its uranium enrichment."

In light of the fact that suspension of uranium enrichment, which is nothing beyond Iran's legitimate rights under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, is supposed to be the main point of negotiation, Iran is asked, in effect, "to concede the main point of the negotiations before they started". [2]

Military professionals question the administration's plans of a bombing campaign against Iran on a number of grounds. For one thing, they doubt that, beyond a lot of death and destruction, the projected bombing raids can accomplish much, ie, destroy Iran's nuclear program.

For another, they caution that the bombing campaign could be very costly in terms of military, economic and geopolitical interests of the United States in the region and beyond.

More important, however, the professionals' opposition to the administration's bombing plans stems from the fact that, as pointed out by renowned investigative reporter Seymour Hersh, "American and European intelligence agencies have not found specific evidence of clandestine [nuclear] activities or hidden facilities" in Iran. Hersh further writes, "A former senior intelligence official told me that people in the Pentagon were asking, 'What's the evidence? We've got a million tentacles out there, overt and covert, and these guys - the Iranians - have been working on this for 18 years, and we have nothing? We're coming up with jack ****.'" [3]

So far, the jingoistic civilian leaders do not seem to have been swayed by the expert advice of their military experts. And the discord over Iran policy continues.

Some observers have attributed the conflict to Rumsfeld's uneasy relationship with the military hierarchy, arguing that his cavalier attitude and unwillingness to accept responsibility are the main reasons for the ongoing friction between the military and civilian leadership. While there are clear elements of truth to this explanation, it leaves out some more fundamental reasons for the discord. There is a deeper and more general historical pattern - often shaped by the economics of war - to the recurring disagreements between the military and militaristic civilian leaders over issues of war and peace. Let me elaborate on this point.
...

continue here : http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HH16Ak01.html

iraq will be sold piece by piece. iraqis have to wake up before it's late. the re-nationalizations is now a difficult process, even if democratically legal.
 
wadawada said:
iraq will be sold piece by piece. iraqis have to wake up before it's late. the re-nationalizations is now a difficult process, even if democratically legal.

Too late they are busy killing themsleves.:wall:
 
In 1982 the Hebrew-language magazine Kivunim (Directions) published a report
1 . The idea that all the Arab states should be broken down,
by Israel, into small units, occurs again and again in
Israeli strategic thinking. For example, Ze'ev Schiff,
the military correspondent of Ha'aretz (and probably the
most knowledgeable in Israel, on this topic) writes about
the best that can happen for Israeli interests in Iraq :
"The dissolution of Iraq into a Shi'ite state, a Sunni
state and the separation of the Kurdish part" (Ha'aretz,
2/6/1982). Actually this aspect of the plan is very old.
 
These plans are the staple diet of the American Empire . . . continue to 'atomize' parts of the Muslim World into even more unstable gulags and attack any idea or concept that threatens to provide political unity [and therefore] a challenge to US hegemony.

In particular, ideas like the "Ummah" and the "Caliphate" have become swear words in the State Department because they imply a very different and [credible] course that the Muslim World can take that could result in dismantling US power structures in the world.
 
Naughty Iranians. :lol:

US: Iran Tries to Bribe Iraqis Against US Troop Agreement

By VOA News
13 October 2008

The commander of U.S. forces in Iraq says the United States believes Iranian agents have attempted to bribe Iraqi lawmakers.The Washington Post newspaper Monday quoted General Ray Odierno as saying, Iran is trying to undermine a bilateral agreement that would allow U.S. troops to remain in Iraq after the end of this year, when the United Nations' mandate ends.

Odierno told the paper the U.S. has no definitive proof of the bribes. But he said many U.S. intelligence reports suggest Iranians are "coming in to pay off people to vote against it."

There was no immediate reaction from Tehran.

Last week, Iraq's foreign minister said the United States and Iraq are very close to finalizing a deal.

The two sides have been divided over granting U.S. servicemen and women immunity for any crimes committed in Iraq.

U.S. officials have accused Iran's intelligence agencies of supporting insurgent Shi'ite groups in Iraq, a claim Tehran denies.

In other news, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki says it is time for British troops to leave the country.

In an interview with The Timesnewspaper, published Monday, Mr. Maliki said there might be a need for their experience in training Iraqi forces, but that the emphasis is now on business cooperation and friendship.

Separately, the Iraqi government announced the arrival of Syria's first ambassador to the country in nearly three decades.

Ties were strained because rival factions of the Ba'ath party ruled in Syria and Saddam Hussein's Iraq.

The development furthers a trend of Iraq forging ties with its once alienated neighbors.

Some information for this report was provided by AFP and Reuters.
 

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom