Yemen
Judging by the number of churches that have been built in China in the last couple of decades the Confucions get along with Christians.
Ignoring Catholic references to the Pope, that is.
Ignoring Catholic references to the Pope, that is.
Indeed it is, of someone who knows nothing, but thinks he knows something.
As to the current killing and such, I don't mind that the locals are finally using their own paid for tools to fight a war rather than rely on outsiders, like my countrymen, to do it for them.
Cry havoc, etc.
As to the current killing and such, I don't mind that the locals are finally using their own paid for tools to fight a war rather than rely on outsiders, like my countrymen, to do it for them.
Cry havoc, etc.
Judging by the number of churches that have been built in China in the last couple of decades the Confucions get along with Christians.
Some of he best pork I ever ate was cooked in sauces of Chinese style.
I wouldn't kill for it, though.
As to the toys being used ... they were bought for a purpose. That purpose is to kill someone else. Let's not try and fool anyone as to why the Saudi King bought that kit.
I wouldn't kill for it, though.
As to the toys being used ... they were bought for a purpose. That purpose is to kill someone else. Let's not try and fool anyone as to why the Saudi King bought that kit.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Western Australia
Age: 57
Posts: 808
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As to the toys being used ... they were bought for a purpose. That purpose is to kill someone else. Let's not try and fool anyone as to why the Saudi King bought that kit.
As to the toys being used ... they were bought for a purpose. That purpose is to kill someone else if the need should arise. Let's not try and fool anyone as to why the Saudi King bought that kit.
it is too complex for me ...
Welcome to the Middle East and have a nice day - NevilleHobson.com
Sir, Iran is backing Assad. Gulf states are against Assad!
Assad is against Muslim Brotherhood. Muslim Brotherhood and Obama are against General Sisi.
But Gulf states are pro Sisi! Which means they are against Muslim Brotherhood!
Iran is pro Hamas, but Hamas is backing Muslim Brotherhood!
Obama is backing Muslim Brotherhood, yet Hamas is against the US!
Gulf states are pro US. But Turkey is with Gulf states against Assad; yet Turkey is pro Muslim Brotherhood against General Sisi. And General Sisi is being backed by the Gulf states!
Welcome to the Middle East and have a nice day.
K N Al-Sabah, London EC4, UK
This is claimed to be a letter to the Financial Times on 22 August 2013
regards
layman
Sir, Iran is backing Assad. Gulf states are against Assad!
Assad is against Muslim Brotherhood. Muslim Brotherhood and Obama are against General Sisi.
But Gulf states are pro Sisi! Which means they are against Muslim Brotherhood!
Iran is pro Hamas, but Hamas is backing Muslim Brotherhood!
Obama is backing Muslim Brotherhood, yet Hamas is against the US!
Gulf states are pro US. But Turkey is with Gulf states against Assad; yet Turkey is pro Muslim Brotherhood against General Sisi. And General Sisi is being backed by the Gulf states!
Welcome to the Middle East and have a nice day.
K N Al-Sabah, London EC4, UK
This is claimed to be a letter to the Financial Times on 22 August 2013
regards
layman
rh, fair point, correction accepted. 
What's going on in Yemen is doubtless related to what's going on in the never ending "talks" with Iran regarding their nuclear programs.
These negotiations strike me as a pawn in a larger game.
What's going on in Yemen is doubtless related to what's going on in the never ending "talks" with Iran regarding their nuclear programs.
These negotiations strike me as a pawn in a larger game.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
These negotiations strike me as a pawn in a larger game.
Washington Post: Obama's Next Earthquake
Times (behind firewall): Iranian troops advance towards Israeli border
Iran is close to putting its forces on Israel’s northeast border for the first time, as its allies crush rebel groups in the Golan Heights area of Syria.
The prospect of Iranian troops being posted on a frontier that has been calm for decades is causing alarm in Israel, and comes as international negotiations over Iran’s nuclear ambitions near a climax.
“Iran will be so close to the Israelis that it will no longer need long-range missiles to hit them,” said Abu Ali, a fighter with Lebanon’s Iranian-backed Hezbollah organisation who has served multiple combat tours in Syria......
A spokesman for the Syrian rebel forces in southern Syria, Major Issam el-Rayyes, said that 80 per cent of a 5,000-strong force attacking rebels around the Golan Heights were Iranian-backed militias, including Hezbollah, but also Shia fighters from Yemen, Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan. The offensive into the southern region of Daraa and Quneitra, bordering the Golan Heights, began in February. It is the first time that Iranian forces have operated openly in southern Syria.
“Iran is on the march, its proxies are taking territory,” an Israeli official said.
Abu Ali confirmed that Iranian troops were on the ground. “We are taking the area square by square until we reach the border with Israel.”.......
On January 18, Israeli drones targeted a convoy of vehicles near Quneitra, on the Syrian side of the Golan Heights, killing an Iranian general and six Hezbollah fighters. The highly unusual attack was interpreted as a forceful message to Iran to stay away from the Golan Heights.
It appears to have fallen on deaf ears.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Scotland
Age: 80
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would be the utmost folly for Iran to threaten Israel - the country is more than capable of taking on any forces that Iran could put in the field. The Iranians would be a long way from home with a long line of supply and an Air Force with limited capability.
bcg, I concur, and estimate that the article in question is yet another example of media as fear mongering conduit. 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Western Australia
Age: 57
Posts: 808
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
These negotiations strike me as a pawn in a larger game.
Obama to throw Israel under the bus?
It would be the utmost folly for Iran to threaten Israel - the country is more than capable of taking on any forces that Iran could put in the field. The Iranians would be a long way from home with a long line of supply and an Air Force with limited capability.
Imagine for a moment Iran did try something big and sustained against Israel? Think sudden polarization and symmetry. Not going to happen, but still worth thinking about.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Scotland
Age: 80
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What we are seeing at the moment is a sectarian war across the Islamic world waged between the Sunni and the Shia.The Arab Israeli conflict is on the back burner because the followers of the two main branches of Islam hate each other more than they hate the Israelis. I find it amusing to read the hate directed by some western media at Israel because of the casualties among Arab civilians when the Arabs have committed atrocities on their own populace in vastly greater quantities.The Arab world has actually given up on the Palestinians due to their self inflicted catastrophes. Hamas is reducing its followers to poverty stricken squalor with its idiotic confrontation with Israel. I spent the best part of 20 years in the Middle East - including Iran - and came to the conclusion that the Arab world is incapable of unifying for a common purpose. The Iranians would never really ally themselves to any great extent with the Arabs as they regard themselves as superior. The wealthiest of the Arab states really are not countries,they are basically large commercial enterprises where millions of foreigners go to work.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Imho Israel is going to settle this one way or another. They don't seem to wear the 'cotton gloves' or political correctness of the western democracies, and I'm sure Netanyahu is just waiting for a good excuse to start issuing iodine tablets before turning the greater part of the middle east into glass. They don't need US approval or assistance in doing that.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Actually on one of the other threads a while back ,there was a mind map type of thing depicting who's side who was on, and who was helping who. With these latest developments it needs to be updated.
Originally Posted by Hempy
Imho Israel is going to settle this one way or another. They don't seem to wear the 'cotton gloves' or political correctness of the western democracies, and I'm sure Netanyahu is just waiting for a good excuse to start issuing iodine tablets before turning the greater part of the middle east into glass. They don't need US approval or assistance in doing that.
While I agree the Israelis act often without so much as a "by your leave" (they are a sovereign nation after all) your assertion that they are eager to enact their own Gotterdammerung, to cry havoc and let slip the dogs of nuclear war, is at best a comic book trope and at worst a fantasy being believed as a reality.
But here's a core question on your premise:
Imho Israel is going to settle this one way or another.
Just what is it that you think the Israelis desire or intend to settle?
Their core political motivation since inception is to exist, and to keep existing, as the no-kidding Jewish homeland. They have shown the ability to work with other local governments now and again, even though they don't always get along well with others. There are a great many ways for them to exist in that fashion without trying to destroy the surrounding area.
It's a tough neighborhood, sure. But Yemen is a far reach from being the most pressing area of Israeli interest. It is my suspicion, possibly in error, that the Israelis aren't displeased to see some of their more difficult rivals/threats fighting one another, which keeps Israel out of the gun sites for a while. The harder question is:
Who are they slipping assistance to, on the sly, if anyone as this multi party fight progresses?
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Netanyahu has been calling on 'outside help' (i.e legitimisation) for nearly 20 years. His speech to the US congress in 1996, his speech to the US congress in 2015. They are on youtube.
You really think that when one side gains ascendancy in the middle east, be it a Shia led Iran or a Sunni lead Saudi Arabia, or some other godforsaken conglomerate, that he or Israel is going to sit back and say 'Shalom, welcome to our border sworn enemy'? After the Muslims are finished killing themselves 'occupied Palestine' is next. If you can't see that you are blind.
Why is he so keen on destroying Irans posible nuclear capability? It's not because he's worried about Iran starting it, it's because he's worried about retaliation.
Of course, you are right, they might just sit around holding hands singing Kumbaya. But I doubt it..
You really think that when one side gains ascendancy in the middle east, be it a Shia led Iran or a Sunni lead Saudi Arabia, or some other godforsaken conglomerate, that he or Israel is going to sit back and say 'Shalom, welcome to our border sworn enemy'? After the Muslims are finished killing themselves 'occupied Palestine' is next. If you can't see that you are blind.
Why is he so keen on destroying Irans posible nuclear capability? It's not because he's worried about Iran starting it, it's because he's worried about retaliation.
Of course, you are right, they might just sit around holding hands singing Kumbaya. But I doubt it..
Perhaps to lighten the mood gentlemen, this post from a commenter in a British national paper today might make some chuckle ;
An American Indian, a cowboy, and a Muslim were riding on a train across America together. There was an uncomfortable silence, so the Indian spoke. Once we were many, but now we are few. The Muslim sneered, once we were few here, but now we are many. The cowboy lit up a cigarette, tilted his hat and said, "that's because we haven't played cowboys and Muslims yet, but it's a’ coming.
The sooner the better.
Smudge
An American Indian, a cowboy, and a Muslim were riding on a train across America together. There was an uncomfortable silence, so the Indian spoke. Once we were many, but now we are few. The Muslim sneered, once we were few here, but now we are many. The cowboy lit up a cigarette, tilted his hat and said, "that's because we haven't played cowboys and Muslims yet, but it's a’ coming.
The sooner the better.
Smudge
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: England
Posts: 924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Er, the cowboys appear to be losing the long term battle smudge.
Arses firmly kicked out of Iraq (yes eventually) and also Afghanistan (er, yes eventually)? War didn't end entirely end or go the way the cowboys envisaged? And at such destructive massive cost in all lives let alone material.....
And look at the state of the British Armed forces 14 years later, fantastic aren't they?
I'm sorry smudge I've had a drink and I find nothing funny about it all. Seems the region is set in perpetual warfare and downfall and I truly wish the world had the wit to come to its senses.
And look at the state of the British Armed forces 14 years later, fantastic aren't they?
I'm sorry smudge I've had a drink and I find nothing funny about it all. Seems the region is set in perpetual warfare and downfall and I truly wish the world had the wit to come to its senses.
Hempy:
They already share borders with sworn enemies, and have since about 1948. As I said, it's a rough neighborhood.
They've tried it before, and failed. After they have bled one another a good bit, what makes you think they'll succeed if they try again?
I see quite clearly, thanks, and in more shades of gray than some others.
Retaliation from what, Israel starting it? I don't think Israel is going to start it, with "it" being a nuclear exchange, as that leads to Gotterdämerung for them in both a kinetic sense and a political sense. If you think European and other nations have strong anti-Israeli sentiments now, consider the backlash/blowback if the Israelis send out nukes. Nukes change the nature of the ball game.
I never suggested that, so those are your words not mine. What I have pointed out is that they have figured out a variety of ways to deal with and try to engage their neighbors who hate them, with varying degrees of success and failure.
This is in part due to what you alluded to first, help from third parties. The Camp David agreements, and the ensuing bribe from the US treasury to keep Israel and Egypt from going to war again, were third party assistance to peace in that region. If he keeps asking for that, it makes a sort of sense since that avenue more or less worked.
The odds of third party assistance if the Israelis start something with nukes? Gone fishing, most likely for good.
So back to the actual topic of this thread, which is the proxy war fought in Yemen by regional rivals. It strikes me as in the Israeli interest to keep a close eye on it, and to let (or help) their enemies bleed each other white.
Hangarshuffle: if one uses the RoE that the cowboys (specifically the Texas Rangers) used vis a vis the Indians (suggest you read the Fehrenbach book on the Comanche) you might see a different result. It was originally published with the subtitle "the destruction of a people" and later re-released as "the history of a people."
PS: it wasn't cowboys who went to Afghanistan, nor to Iraq.
You really think that when one side gains ascendancy in the middle east, be it a Shia led Iran or a Sunni lead Saudi Arabia, or some other godforsaken conglomerate, that he or Israel is going to sit back and say 'Shalom, welcome to our border sworn enemy'?
After the Muslims are finished killing themselves 'occupied Palestine' is next.
If you can't see that you are blind.
Why is he so keen on destroying Iran's posible nuclear capability? It's not because he's worried about Iran starting it, it's because he's worried about retaliation.
Of course, you are right, they might just sit around holding hands singing Kumbaya.
This is in part due to what you alluded to first, help from third parties. The Camp David agreements, and the ensuing bribe from the US treasury to keep Israel and Egypt from going to war again, were third party assistance to peace in that region. If he keeps asking for that, it makes a sort of sense since that avenue more or less worked.
The odds of third party assistance if the Israelis start something with nukes? Gone fishing, most likely for good.
So back to the actual topic of this thread, which is the proxy war fought in Yemen by regional rivals. It strikes me as in the Israeli interest to keep a close eye on it, and to let (or help) their enemies bleed each other white.
Hangarshuffle: if one uses the RoE that the cowboys (specifically the Texas Rangers) used vis a vis the Indians (suggest you read the Fehrenbach book on the Comanche) you might see a different result. It was originally published with the subtitle "the destruction of a people" and later re-released as "the history of a people."
PS: it wasn't cowboys who went to Afghanistan, nor to Iraq.