tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29566846.post143277328264857547..comments2023-11-05T01:45:58.784-07:00Comments on The Hesperado: RealislamikHesperadohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10394374828751466705noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29566846.post-72373441908709764732011-05-29T21:54:07.384-07:002011-05-29T21:54:07.384-07:00Hesperado
Was that a map of the Ottoman empire?
...Hesperado<br /><br />Was that a map of the Ottoman empire?<br /><br />To fuel #3 above, one doesn't even need earthbreaking thinking: something as conventional as what used to be done during the Cold War would do. Remember how during the Ira war, when Egypt would supply Iraq w/ US weaponry, and Israel would do the same for Iran b'cos it viewed Saddam as lethal to its existence? That sort of thing.<br /><br />Something along the lines of Oliver North arming the Contras in Nicaragua, you could have 2 government agencies - say the State Department & the Pentagon separately arming both sides of a conflict. Like take the rebellion in Yemen. Have the State Department back the rebels, and the Pentagon the regime.<br /><br />Or if they want to avoid congressional oversight & controversy, have 2 different non-governmental organizations in the US supply the sides. As it is, a lot of US organizations provide 'charity' to organizations that end up providing that money to Hamas & Hizbullah. So here, have Americans provide not money, but just weapons, to different warring factions in the middle east, be it the factions in Yemen, Libya or Syria, and pop open the popcorn. Avoid giving money, but make US corporations that manufacture such weaponry rich by having oil money from all these countries - Saudi Arabia, Iran, Libya, et al - go to them in exchange of weaponry that can be used against each other.<br /><br />The other day, I was reading somewhere that Saudi Arabia was trying to enlist the support of Islamic countries outside the mid east, such as Pakistan, Malaysia, et al, to support it <i>militarily</i> as it interferes in Bahrein, where it fears it could lose to Iran. In other words, what we are rooting for could happen w/o even our trying for it. However, in the story, it was mentioned that the US wasn't too happy @ the Saudis seeking such an alliance. Maybe Obama is too much in bed w/ Iran.Nobodyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15936731686633423188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29566846.post-65110152718429571722011-05-29T03:36:13.389-07:002011-05-29T03:36:13.389-07:00Hesperado -
I'll check out your further readi...Hesperado -<br /><br />I'll check out your further reading. Thnx.<br /><br />Meanwhile, on GoV..<br /><br />You are <a href="http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2011/05/pat-condell-on-israel-jew-hatred-and.html?showComment=1306554638426#c6166744972418911529" rel="nofollow">being accused of "saguntoism", detrimental to GoV</a>, in a manoeuvre of guilt by association (with me), by a well-known commenter.<br /><br />Here's the quote that was - in an unsurprising <i>ad hominem</i> - directed at my person, but with the peculiar inclusion of you:<br /><br /><i>"Issuing challenges without specifics or demonstratively refuting evidence borders on a sort of demagoguery that is not befitting with respect to your usual erudite comments. Both yourself and Hesperado have demonstrated this disturbing and uninspiring trend of late, much to the overall detriment of GoV."</i><br /><br />Oh my, "the overall detriment of GoV"..<br /><br />Kind regs from Amsterdam,<br />Sag.Saguntohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09757127844703829220noreply@blogger.com