Well we all know it wasnt over wmd. If it was primarily for israel's benefit, then iran will probably be next, regardless of oil.

Without doubt the manner of the US military victory in Iraq was a wake up call to other Arab nations. Iraq was considered to have probably the most sophisticated and advanced defence structure in the Arab world. Its Air Defence capability in particular was heavily upgraded after the first Gulf War with help from France and the former Yugoslavia. Despite this the US received no real resistance in its attack.

Many Arabs believed Gulf War 2 would go on for amny months with US troops being killed in their thousands during the attack. The scale of the defeat was a considerable surprise and very worrying. Lybia it is now known (BBC sources) was moved to its present concilitary position having seen the action, Syria cancelled troop movements on the border and Iran softended its rhetoric almost straight away.

With Israel having access to much US equipment and tactics any Arab military action against Israel is now unthinkable.

I don't think 80 years of british and american imperialism and interference in iraq and iran had anything to do with Israel, its always been about access to oil reserves.

After the iraqi army of 1991 crumbled in 5 days i don't see how anyone would be stupid enough to think saddams forces could wage a conventional war for anything much longer than a fortnight.

If israel had not been backed by the US and had been kept as a small semi-autonomous region of refugees, which is what it would have been without cold war meddling. The situation in iran and iraq would be pretty much the same. Th cold war would have carried on regardles of whether israel existed or not, turkey would still slaughter its kurds, iran and iraq qould still be set against each other by the USSR and the US.
To me that seems fairly obvious.

So British troops are dying for Israel?

Clinton apparently said...

"To shake up the authoritarian Arab regimes in the Middle East, to make Israel feel more secure and to give America more leverage in making peace between Palestinians and Israelis," he said.

Read the fist point people.

"Read the fist point people."

"Clinton apparently said...

"To shake up the authoritarian Arab regimes in the Middle East, to make Israel feel more secure and to give America more leverage in making peace between Palestinians and Israelis," he said.

Read the fist point people."

Okay maybe there is a question of emphasis. But why not try to make Palestinians feel more secure?

Wouldn't it be Syria be next if it is Israeli security at stake?

Okay imperialist Oil wars may be a mojor main factor, but what about the Israel issue? Who will support the Palestinians if the US is supporting Israel?

Shaking up Arab regimes may sound very nice to some but why take sides and who will support the Palestinians if the US is providing (massive, massive) military aid to Israel?