Is israel using the americans to start a civil war in iraq?
Xymphora | 14.05.2005 00:29 | Anti-militarism
is israel using both the american troops and iraqi insurgents to foment civil war in iraq? The lastest from Xymphora on this little discussed topic.
Is israel using the americans to start a civil war in iraq?
by you
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From an article (or here) by James Janega from Knight Ridder (which remains the only honest newspaper chain in the United States; my emphasis in bold):
"The Marines who swept into the Euphrates River town of Ubaydi confronted an enemy they had not expected to find - and one that attacked in surprising ways.
As they pushed from house to house in early fighting, trying to flush out the insurgents who had attacked their column with mortar fire, they ran into sandbagged emplacements behind garden walls. They found a house where insurgents were crouching in the basement, firing upwards through slits hacked at ankle height in the ground-floor walls, aiming at spots that the Marines' body armor did not cover.
The shock was that the enemy was not supposed to be in this town at all. Instead, American intelligence indicated that the insurgency had massed on the other side of the river. Marine commanders expressed surprise Monday not only at the insurgents' presence but also the extent of their preparations, as if they had expected the Marines to come."
How do the insurgents always know when the Americans will show up? How did they know just what hotel room to fire at when Wolfowitz was in Baghdad? How do they know exactly when and where to deploy their improvised explosive devices so they are in place just before the Americans drive by?
Larry Franklin talked to the AIPAC dudes almost two years ago. What's the one thing he could have told them two years ago which would be still grievously affecting the ability of the American army to deal with the insurgency in Iraq? The Israelis are able to assist the insurgents because they know the details of the Saddam-era and post-Saddam-era American counterintelligence operations in Iraq. As the spies for the insurgency are able to avoid the American counterintelligence assets in Iraq (and may have even 'turned' some of them), the Americans have no way to root out those who are gathering information on American plans. The agents of the insurgency are able to consistently spy on the American occupying army, and know what the Americans are going to do before most of the Americans know. This explains why the insurgents are clearly winning.
Why would supposed American ally Israel want to help the insurgency, or at least part of it? Based on the ideas of Oded Yinon, the plan is to break Iraq up into small, unthreatening mini-states. The Israelis are trying to start an Iraqi civil war. To this end, the Israelis are hoping to pin the Americans in Iraq for as long as possible in a vain attempt to prevent this war. The Americans will only pull out when civil war is inevitable, which will be another huge embarrassment for the Pentagon. On top of that, the slow American defeat in Iraq, based on the perfidity of the Israelis in supporting the insurgency and undermining American counterintelligence in Iraq, is gradually destroying the American military (although no one in the Bush Administration will admit it). This effort means the Israelis are effectively currently engaged in war operations against the United States. This undeclared war by the greatest ingrate in the world, Israel - hundreds of billions of dollars in aid from American taxpayers to Israel, and this is the thanks they get! - has made the paleocons furious, and explains why the neocons have been unable to stop the AIPAC investigation.
http://xymphora.blogspot.com/2005/05/behind-iraqi-civil-war.html
by you
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From an article (or here) by James Janega from Knight Ridder (which remains the only honest newspaper chain in the United States; my emphasis in bold):
"The Marines who swept into the Euphrates River town of Ubaydi confronted an enemy they had not expected to find - and one that attacked in surprising ways.
As they pushed from house to house in early fighting, trying to flush out the insurgents who had attacked their column with mortar fire, they ran into sandbagged emplacements behind garden walls. They found a house where insurgents were crouching in the basement, firing upwards through slits hacked at ankle height in the ground-floor walls, aiming at spots that the Marines' body armor did not cover.
The shock was that the enemy was not supposed to be in this town at all. Instead, American intelligence indicated that the insurgency had massed on the other side of the river. Marine commanders expressed surprise Monday not only at the insurgents' presence but also the extent of their preparations, as if they had expected the Marines to come."
How do the insurgents always know when the Americans will show up? How did they know just what hotel room to fire at when Wolfowitz was in Baghdad? How do they know exactly when and where to deploy their improvised explosive devices so they are in place just before the Americans drive by?
Larry Franklin talked to the AIPAC dudes almost two years ago. What's the one thing he could have told them two years ago which would be still grievously affecting the ability of the American army to deal with the insurgency in Iraq? The Israelis are able to assist the insurgents because they know the details of the Saddam-era and post-Saddam-era American counterintelligence operations in Iraq. As the spies for the insurgency are able to avoid the American counterintelligence assets in Iraq (and may have even 'turned' some of them), the Americans have no way to root out those who are gathering information on American plans. The agents of the insurgency are able to consistently spy on the American occupying army, and know what the Americans are going to do before most of the Americans know. This explains why the insurgents are clearly winning.
Why would supposed American ally Israel want to help the insurgency, or at least part of it? Based on the ideas of Oded Yinon, the plan is to break Iraq up into small, unthreatening mini-states. The Israelis are trying to start an Iraqi civil war. To this end, the Israelis are hoping to pin the Americans in Iraq for as long as possible in a vain attempt to prevent this war. The Americans will only pull out when civil war is inevitable, which will be another huge embarrassment for the Pentagon. On top of that, the slow American defeat in Iraq, based on the perfidity of the Israelis in supporting the insurgency and undermining American counterintelligence in Iraq, is gradually destroying the American military (although no one in the Bush Administration will admit it). This effort means the Israelis are effectively currently engaged in war operations against the United States. This undeclared war by the greatest ingrate in the world, Israel - hundreds of billions of dollars in aid from American taxpayers to Israel, and this is the thanks they get! - has made the paleocons furious, and explains why the neocons have been unable to stop the AIPAC investigation.
http://xymphora.blogspot.com/2005/05/behind-iraqi-civil-war.html
Xymphora
Comments
Hide the following 8 comments
Don't know if you're right...
14.05.2005 07:14
scocialist
The Jews gave me heartburn
14.05.2005 09:26
Herve- Da Jooos Boss, da Jooos!
Well done
14.05.2005 09:47
T
From Across the Pond
14.05.2005 12:21
Boasts by the likes of Sharon that "we" control the US doesn't make it so. In fact, it shows how pathetic and weak the Zionist regime really is. Those who really control don't boast about it. They simply control.
Just because US imperialist designs are now in relative harmony with Zionist dreams of a Greater Israel doesn't mean that Israel is the prime mover.
Roland
to Roland
15.05.2005 01:21
Here is an article on this topic:
I guess you are a zionist, so yu must be aware of the above.
brian
analysis is necessary
15.05.2005 08:57
.. the fact that such analysis recieves here the usual responses - ridicule, denial, distortions and outright deception ( see:
. the fact that such an analysis is already in the public domain and has sucessfully predicted the course of events in Iraq and in Palestine/israel with regards to the "plan", should be the cause of deep disquite to all.
Lets face it, it is easier to destroy than to create. In order to destroy a country you must apply many devices and forces:
economic - from being an oil rich economy, flush with petro $$$ and with a vaugly socialist ideal that perhaps this cash should be spent on some[sic] social projects, Iraq had a thriving mixed economy ... why they even had enough money to invest in all those shiny toys that the kissenger associates boys
.. sold 'em (thanks donald & co!) Now their doctors are dead, massacred in falluja, their hospitals destroyed, the social projects all destroyed (even the massive works schemes that employed thousands in building parks & palaces and restoring ancient monuments and the like have seen their results destroyed, vandalised, stolen or bismerched with the false notion that these were "saddams palaces"). In short Iraq is an economic mess. Round one.
militarily - well that ones as obvious as pie, from being a major player technologically and in terms of sheer numbers, Iraq is nothing militarily now - they can just about turn a platoon or two out to act as a 'bullet proof vest' for the marines. Round two.
politically - the old divide and conquer routine. We are being told that it is sectarian strife that is pushing Iraq towards civil war. To right. And how easy that is to manufacture - blow some of group one up, claim it was group two, then do the reverse and watch fireworks - it doesn't take a genius to observe this process in action on the ground in IRAQ. Who benefits when shias or sunnies fight each other? Who is supporting the kurds in the north? Why did bush1 vocally support the uprisings in the south and then watch as the Iraqi facists destroyed the largley shia movment? Reading the public pronouncements of several Iraqi resistance groups, one does not get the impression that there is the level of animosity required by the zionist plan .. Round three undecided.
And then, there is the plan ... like 'project for a new american century', there are plenty of references for it in both official and non official[sic] documents eminating from israeli think tanks of the fifties, sixties and seventies. The plan began in earnest in the eighties.
Can you think ahead this far?
Tricky innit, but it is possible. If [you] abandon the notion that these things are possible, ignore the evidence that they are existant and recoil from acting in resistance to them - they will ultimately succeed.
Right now in Palestine people are dying. They are being shot in the schools, they are dying at roadblocks from treatable illness, they are being blown up by one ton bombs dropped upon their apartments whilst they sleep - in the vain hope of 'eliminating' one 'terrorist' -, their land is being confiscated, poisoned and fenced off.
All in the name of jewish supremacy (
Crunch time is coming. Its all unsustainable anyway - what did you expect?
I am not going down to some supremicist cult - whether it be the inqusistion, the hindu bjp, the nazies, the zionists, the neocons or the new tory leadership[sic].
There is no god and no one has gods mandate here on earth.
jackslucid
e-mail:
jackslucid@hotmail.com
From Across The Pond Again
15.05.2005 10:44
Did you ever hear of the American Petroleum Institute, aka the Oil Lobby, or the Defense Manufacturers Network, aka the Defense Lobby? They are very powerful behind-the-scenes sources of influence on American foreign policy that puts your "all-powerful" AIPAC lobby into the shade. Do you think the API and/or the DMN have had anything to do with the current direction of US foreign policy?
What strikes me as odd with people like you who have this irrational belief in Jewish/Zionist hegemony over American foreign policy is that in voicing this opinion you are, in effect, promoting as real that which is largely mythical by exaggerating the influence AIPAC has. On the other hand, this is not to say that it doesn't have a strong measure of influence in Washington. But, for all that's worth, so does the American Association of Retired Persons.
Therefore, while denying most strongly that I am a Zionist (chuckle, chuckle) I tend to view this tactic on your part as a not-too-clever way of fostering and sustaining the Zionist-influence myth. One could conclude from your need to promote the myth that YOU are either the real believer in Zionism here or simply a useful dupe in the furtherance of its cause.
Roland
likudnik neocons 101
17.05.2005 06:07
Well Roland, you are either a zionist pro-neocon or very badly informed. It cant be the latter(esp after my postings below), so it must be the former.
The likudnik neocons control US foreign policy. Even Powell want able to control them,as he was one and they are many. I believe it was Wolfowitz who boasted he was going to contain Powell.
The petroleum lobby seems to have been at odds with the neocons, according to an article i read about Chalabi(he is not back in power). But they did not write up the PNAC or the earlier A Clean Break Paper, both pressing for the invasion of iraq. The neocon established Office of Special Plans which force fed propaganda to the White House was not a oil lobby manouver.
former pentagon insider Karen Kwiatowskis revelations:
A primer on the likudnik neocons and foreign policy for you:
AIPAC is under investigation for espionage at present. Im surprised the FBI has been able to get that far.
Brian
brian