Gnads,
“You can do better than that. A judo-christian conspricacy theory?”
US/Israeli consultation prior to an Israeli military strike does not a conspiracy theory make my friend and I suspect that you know it. You will have to work harder than to simply attempt to trump all arguments with the lame “conspiracy theory” accusation.
“State sponsored terrorism ( Iran ) versus violent, dissident terrorist groups within dictatorships ( Pakistain, Egypt and loosely Saudia Arabia ). That's on your opening remarks.”
Perhaps you are not aware that the Pakistani ISI provided the lion’s share of funding and training to the mujaheddin and later to Al Qaeda (along with the CIA). According to Zbigniew Brzezinski, the Saudi royal family has also been closely connected to Al Qaeda and for years have been providing financial assistance to Taliban fighters studying in Pakistani madrassas. If this doesn’t constitute state sponsored terrorism then at the very least it highlights how willing these regimes are to condone terrorism when the terrorist activities and aims are closely aligned with those of the state. As for state sponsored terrorism, have you ever heard of the “School of the America’s”? But that’s a different story I guess.
“Israeli strategic objectives a given on your last. Why else do you invade a country in modern times?”
For precisely the reasons I mentioned in my first post. I am simply making the point that the public is very nieve to think that this latest war is the result of 2 soldiers being kidnapped. Of course a much larger strategic objective is at stake and has been for a long time. Unfortunately though, the general public does not understand that apparently insignificant unrelated events are often pre meditated, manufactured catalysts to kick start a much wider, cohesive agenda that our leaders do not want us to understand. The gulf of Tonkin incident.
Was the Gulf War I really about liberating the freedom loving people of Kuwait from the clutches of the baby killing Iraq’s. Is the war on drugs in Colombia really just about drugs. Was the invasion of Afghanistan really to seek out evildoers who hijack planes. Was the rose revolution in Georgia really about giving oppressed people freedom. Was the NATO bombing of Kosovo really about stopping ethnic cleansing. Was the invasion of Iraq really about WMD. Was the carpet bombing of Southern Lebanon really about kidnapped soldiers and small rockets.
“Firstly, of course the Israelis would be gauging the political support of their biggest supporters and supplier of arms”.
Once again, this argument is not contradictory to my opinion. Israel is a proxy military force employed by Washington as a central player in reshaping the “new Middle East” (Rice) and as such is working closely with and sometimes under the direction of, Washington. Like my previous paragraph, my point is that the public has been mislead into believing that the invasion of Lebanon was purely an Israeli response. You and I both know Israel would be relying heavily on Washington for satellite imagery and intelligence, not to mention the rush delivery of JDAMS. It was almost amusing to see Rice discussing a “ceasefire” while the well placed neocon John Bolton was doing his level best to stall such an event until Israel neared its objectives.
“Secondly, to suggest the Israelis, who have dismantled Arab armies conventionally on numerous occasions, and have been embroiled in a bitter invasion of the Lebanon in the 80's, would seek American military foresight absurd!”
At a tactical level Israel has proven itself to be a capable fighting force (although the conflict with Lebanon in the eighties relied heavily on US Navy strike aircraft and the USS Missouri). Strategically though, Israel would launch military operations “off the reservation” without a knod from Washington at its own peril.