U.S. Politics

[maqroll]

6 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

Obama has done a couple of things in his last days that sort of suggest that he'd wanted to do quite a lot of different things in his eight year stint but couldn't get them through - I think he's just wanting to leave having exercised some sort of principle. Late and not much use, but hey, if it helps him sleep at night...

 

He could've done much more, especially when he had the house and senate 8 years ago. But he's a weak leader. He was too scared of stepping on republican feet, and so naive that he thought they'd work with him. His "line in the sand" comment toward Assad sums up his entire tenure, IMO. Empty words, hollow assertions, no action. 

[Villaphan04]

Ted Cruz is calling for immediate end of American funding to the United Nations until the "condemnation of Israel" is reversed.

http://ijr.com/2016/12/763482-ted-cruz-warns-the-un-no-more-money-until-condemnation-of-israel-reversed/

Quote

Senator Ted Cruz on Saturday joined the growing list of those outraged over the UN vote to condemn Israeli settlements in the West Bank with a warning to the world body:

Reverse the decision — or risk the loss of funding from the United States.

Cruz included the threat in a tweet in which he also announced that he had spoken to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu:

 

Cruz's warning follows that of South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, who on Friday slammed the Obama administration, as well. Graham is quoted in a Newsmax article as saying:

"This provocative action by the United Nations is an outrage and must be dealt with sternly and forcefully. The United States is currently responsible for approximately 22 percent of the United Nations total budget.

“The Obama-Kerry foreign policy has gone from naïve and foolish to flat-out reckless. With friends like these, Israel doesn’t need any enemies.”

The UN Security Council voted 14-0 against Israel, with the U.S. abstaining — rather than vetoing the resolution.

Netanyahu went so far as to accuse Obama of colluding with the UN against the Jewish nation:

 

Ben Rhodes, Obama's Deputy National Security Advisor, suggested that the uproar is much ado about nothing —blaming the UN itself — and claiming that Obama has done more for Israel than any previous president.

Meanwhile, President-elect Trump put the UN on notice, tweeting that — come January 20 — there'll be a new sheriff in town:

 

[tonyh29]

so presumably in Jan the US say we've changed our mind and table a new motion and wait for everyone to fall in line .. Russia, the United Kingdom, France, and China being the only ones who can really veto it.... kinda glad Trump made that call to Taiwan now 

 

[maqroll]

I'm not quite sure what the fuss is all about with the U.N. It's not like anyone really takes it seriously..

[jon_c]

The whole Palestinian/Israeli situation is a nightmare for Trump.

Back one side too much and his own supporters will hate him for loving the Jews. (See the reactions to his happy Hanukkah post)

Back the others, and he's a friend of the "Mooslims".

It's a delicate balancing act.

[Jareth]

1 minute ago, jon_c said:

The whole Palestinian/Israeli situation is a nightmare for Trump.

Back one side too much and his own supporters will hate him for loving the Jews. (See the reactions to his happy Hanukkah post)

Back the others, and he's a friend of the "Mooslims".

It's a delicate balancing act.

The assassination by betrayed white supremacist narrative is taking shape nicely...

[peterms]

1 hour ago, Jareth said:

The assassination by betrayed white supremacist narrative is taking shape nicely...

Yes, I expect the CIA has been planning an assassination and has developed several scenarios and storylines.  I was rather expecting his private plane to have experienced a serious in-flight malfunction by now.  Perhaps they are going to try some other avenues first, and only resort to termination as a last option.

[blandy]

12 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

 Israel takes the money then gives it to US Arms firms firms. Israel sells some of those arms to countries the US isn't allowed to, the US Arms industry gives a little of that money back to helpful Senators. It's an established and efficient path...

I'd be interested to know how the US press is reporting this...

 

Have you any credible evidence that this happens? The sale by Israel of us arms to places the US has blacklisted in terms of arms sales?

[blandy]

12 hours ago, peterms said:

And the circle includes al-Qaeda and Isis being funded, and Israel treating their injured fighters and releasing them back into combat....And all the while piously invoking "Christian values". ..

Any credible evidence?

[maqroll]

20 minutes ago, peterms said:

Yes, I expect the CIA has been planning an assassination and has developed several scenarios and storylines

Agreed. Some poor clearing in the woods out there is gonna get framed

[OutByEaster?]

2 hours ago, blandy said:

Have you any credible evidence that this happens? The sale by Israel of us arms to places the US has blacklisted in terms of arms sales?

I'm going to offer a slightly weak evidence here. There's a passage in a Chomsky book that discusses it, now he does provide documented sources for the stuff he writes, but it would mean me going through some books to find where I read it. 

A quick google shows loads of things saying Israel sells to some dreadful places, but I'm not sure I'm convinced by any of the sources:

http://www.merip.org/mer/mer140/israel-central-america

Quote

By the 1970s, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), Israel accounted for 98 percent of Nicaragua’s arms imports. 

Quote

In late 1982, Israel sent the contras several thousand AK-47 assault rifles that it had captured from the Palestine Liberation Organization in Lebanon.

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Global_Secrets_Lies/IsraelWeaponsManuIndus.html

Quote

Over the years Israel has sold weapons-and often along with the weapons come Israeli advisers-to Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua (under Somoza), Panama, Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Peru, Venezuela, Cameroon, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Liberia, Morocco, Nigeria, Rhodesia, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Uganda, Zaire, Australia, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, New Zealand, Papua-New Guinea, Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Thailand, Iran, and a number of European countries and several non-governmental actions.

http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.669852

Quote

All countries engage in military exports. The problem is that Israel is involved in places that the United States and Europe decided to avoid exporting weapons to. We know Israel is selling arms to Azerbaijan, South Sudan and Rwanda

http://www.timesofisrael.com/will-israel-sell-weapons-to-a-man-who-compared-himself-to-hitler-and-wants-to-kill-3-million-people/

Quote

On Rosh Hashanah, firebrand Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte, who the week before compared himself to Adolf Hitler, announced that he planned to purchase all of his country’s military equipment from Israel.

There's loads and loads out there, I'm not sure any of it is any good. If I find the time, I'll look to see what source Chomsky cited.

 

 

[OutByEaster?]

Im completely unconvinced that the CIA would have any intention whatsoever of assassinating Mr Trump. He's a dream come true for them.

 

[blandy]

59 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

I'm going to offer a slightly weak evidence here. There's a passage in a Chomsky book that discusses it, now he does provide documented sources for the stuff he writes, but it would mean me going through some books to find where I read it. 

A quick google shows loads of things saying Israel sells to some dreadful places, but I'm not sure I'm convinced by any of the sources:

Thanks for answering, Scott. The reason I asked is because of ITAR. It is incredibly stringent with monumental penalties. Not all US arms are covered, but anything with any level of complexity or basic advantage over generally available materiel is (bit of a summary, but still) covered.

Without going int tedious detail, what it means is that for example, in theory, the US (or more specifically a US company) could export say Pistols to Israel, and they could later be sold to {Bad place]. But essentially [Bad place] could quite happily buy pistols from China or Russia or wherever else and have the same capability. There's nothing other than commerce there. [edit - Pistols is probably a bad example, I haven't looked to see if they are covered by ITAR - they might well be].

But, if say Gun Company of USA had a special capable Pistol laser sight, or some such, this would be covered by ITAR, and then there's a whole world of pain for Israel to buy these sights. They absolutely could not then sell them on to [Bad place] without monumental consequences.

or say for example the UK designed a plane, and they wanted to use a precision GPS system in it. That GPS System, made in the US would have to be requested, a whole load of end use and end user undertakings given, the US Authorities would have to approve the export of the GPS to the UK, and if the UK plane maker wanted to sell the plane to, say, France or Germany, never mind [Bad Country] they could not, unless, again, the US Authorities approved the transfer of the technology to France or wherever. And they don't. Because not only does it protect the US from having its own weapons used against it, it is also protectionist in terms of US defence jobs. And that's a major deal for them, too.

[peterms]

3 hours ago, blandy said:

Any credible evidence?

There's a lot of information from a lot of sources.

This is from a former diplomat, former MI6 employee.  He quotes a few sources, including Janes' listing of the contents of one arms consignment.  It's not labelled "from the US to al-Qaeda", and the US will deny knowing that their arms go to AQ, pretending that they only supply the "moderate rebels"

Quote

...But in practice, as Murphy states bluntly: “distinguishing between the FSA and al-Nusra is impossible, because they are virtually the same organization. As early as 2013, FSA commanders were defecting with their entire units to join al-Nusra. There, they still retain the FSA monicker, but it is merely for show, to give the appearance of secularism so they can maintain access to weaponry provided by the CIA and Saudi intelligence services. The reality is that the FSA is little more than a cover for the al-Qaeda-affiliated al-Nusra. …

Here is a report of an AQ commander discussing how they get US arms.

Quote

The jihadist added Al-Nusra “won battles thanks to TOW rockets. Due to these rockets, we reached a balance with the regime. Our tanks came from Libya via Turkey, joined by the [BM-21] multiple rocket launchers.”

When asked by the German journalist whether the American TOW missiles were intended for Al-Nusra or the moderate Free Syrian Army, Al Ezz clarified: “No, the missiles were given to us directly.

“The Americans are on our side.”

Is he credible?  Well, in the same piece he made what may seem an outlandish claim:

Quote

He also claimed that when Al-Nusra was “besieged, we had officers from Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Israel and America here… Experts in the use of satellites, rockets, reconnaissance and thermal security cameras.”

A few months after he made this claim, a group of military advisers of those nationalities was captured in Aleppo, reported here.

Quote

Although these initial reports describe the individuals in question as “NATO” officers, it’s unlikely they would have been carrying NATO colors on a covert operation – and might be more accurately labeled as US Coalition officers. Note that early reports suggest that these are not standard ‘street rebel’ or jihadi terrorists but actual Coalition military personnel and field commanders.

Erdogan has also claimed the US supplies Isis.  His beef in saying so seemed to be that the US has supported the Kurds - I doubt he minds them supplying Isis, as he does so himself.

As for Israel treating injured AQ fighters, there's lots of reports including from the UN, but there's an interview with an ex-Mossad chief confirming it:

Quote

 

Why support AQ and Isis?  The thinking is explained by an Israeli think tank here

Quote

Why? The so-called Islamic State “can be a useful tool in undermining” Iran, Hezbollah, Syria and Russia, argues the think tank’s director.

“The continuing existence of IS serves a strategic purpose,” wrote Efraim Inbar in “The Destruction of Islamic State Is a Strategic Mistake,” a paper published on Aug. 2

By the way, in an earlier post you queried the idea that the US had originally set up AQ.  Here's Hillary confirming it:

Quote

 

 

[blandy]

4 minutes ago, peterms said:

By the way, in an earlier post you queried the idea that the US had originally set up AQ.  Here's Hillary confirming it:

Quote

Except she doesn't confirm it. She says nothing of the sort.

She says, as the video shows, what we know to be the case. That after the Russians invaded Afghanistan, the US funded and supported the Mujahedin resistance and helped people from Saudi and Pakistan, and the Pakistan ISI (intelligence services) and others opposed to the Russian invasion.

That is categorically not the same as "setting up" Al Quaida.

Osama Bin Laden "set up" AQ without US assistance or help.

[Awol]

4 hours ago, blandy said:

Have you any credible evidence that this happens? The sale by Israel of us arms to places the US has blacklisted in terms of arms sales?

There's been loads of stories over the years about illegal Israeli sales of US tech to China. Electro-optics, radar and missile tech - Patriot I think it was.

Loads on google from sites like the NYT and defence blogs, not conspiracy stuff. 

[blandy]

19 minutes ago, peterms said:

There's a lot of information from a lot of sources.

Thanks for the detailed reply.

17 hours ago, peterms said:

And the circle includes al-Qaeda and Isis being funded, and Israel treating their injured fighters and releasing them back into combat.

It's complicated isn't it?

I think none of it completely supports your assertions made above, but I can see how some people might make the leap. The Mossad bloke for example says that Israel has given medical treatment to injured Al Nusra fighters. All nations should do that kind of thing. He is obviously hypocritical when he answers a hypothetical about if they'd do the same with Hezbollah fighters and basically says no, they'd let 'em suffer, because Hezbollah has attacked Israel.

He doesn't say they send the Al Nusra people back to the fighting. (though they might do, we don't know).

There's no doubt that the US, Russia, Israel, Iran, Saudi and to a much lesser extent the UK and Canada and a few other nations have been and are doing all kinds of counter productive, machinating, manoeuvring, trying to pick horses and al the rest of it and that it's a humungous mess.

What I take issue with is that (as I've posted previously) it's all the fault of the US, or the US started it, or the West, or Israel is to blame. There's levels of guilt, but there are many many others who also are guilty. Some by deliberate act, some by trying to do humane or right things and getting them wrong, or doing the wrong thing for the right reason and so on. It is not all a US conspiracy, though, from my reading.

[blandy]

8 minutes ago, Awol said:

There's been loads of stories over the years about illegal Israeli sales of US tech to China. Electro-optics, radar and missile tech - Patriot I think it was.

Loads on google from sites like the NYT and defence blogs, not conspiracy stuff. 

Ta. Googling your sentence seems to confirm. It also confirms the consequences. My strong perception is that this was absolutely against the US's wishes and that it was not part of a kind of tacit circle of recycling weapons as part of a plan as implied by PMS or OBE (whoever it was, sorry ) above.

The US is genuinely paranoid about other nations getting hold of their tech, either to use it against them, or for example for China or Russia to steal their capability and then supply anti US nations with equally capable weapons as the US has, and also about protecting their defence industries jobs.

The USA has too many politicians prepared to turn a blind eye to Israel's misdeeds for sure, or who adopt double standards, but on the Weapons stuff, I'm certain that the US genuinely does not want it's tech or weapons getting to China or anywhere else, via any nation, however favoured or protected.

[Awol]

I'm not suggesting for a moment that the US wants its tech transferred, only that the Israelis are duplicitous barstewards who screw the Americans regularly,  despite their generosity. Like a battered wife Washington keeps coming back for more. 

I recall being told a specific story a few years ago about some F16 tech they had also sold on, but can't remember the details.

Off Topic but our Israeli allies were quite happy to arm Argentina even as we fought them to liberate the Falklands. 

[OutByEaster?]

I think you have to judge the US arms industry on both of its aims - control and profit. Once you include profit as a driver of military power, I think everything here fits into place. Trump will help US arms manufacturers make profits, his foreign policies will create a need to military might, which will generate commercial activity in one of the worlds biggest businesses, which will continue to fund congress, which will make Trump popular with an awful lot of the people that matter in US politics. As in many things, Trump will generate profits for some of Americas largest institutions, at the expense of a whole lot of wooly and nice concepts like fairness, equality, peace, health, education, whatever. He's the product of an election system and a government system that relies almost entirely on corporate input.