URGENT: British on board with coming air strikes on Iran (according to what Seymour Hersh mentioned in the following interview with Wolf Blitzer on CNN yesterday morning):

We want to get out of the damn region not stir it up.

Graham

What is your source for that?

No, we -absolutely- want bases in the Middle East. What we had/have
in Saudi Arabia was not satisfactory. Too many limits.

Let's give the Neo-Cons who run Bush some credit.

They knew the chance of reconciling Sunni and Shia after overthrowing
Saddam were vanishingly small.

They knew that disbanding the Iraqi army would cause chaos and civil
war.

They don't want an Iraqi national government. It might ask us to leave
some day.

They haven't been grossly incompetent; they've been as brilliant as
the Sun.

All of you that voted for Bush should be very proud of their success.

Walt



Walt

Walt wrote:

We want to get out of the damn region not stir it up.

Graham

What is your source for that?

The British public.


No, we -absolutely- want bases in the Middle East. What we had/have
in Saudi Arabia was not satisfactory. Too many limits.

What do you need them for ? Do you want to cause more trouble and loathing of
the USA (that inspires worldwide anti-US/western feeling and terrorism) for
sticking your big stupid ignorant noses into other countries affairs ?

Graham

On Oct 1, 9:13?pm, Eeyore
wrote:
Walt wrote:
We want to get out of the damn region not stir it up.

Graham

What is your source for that?

The British public.

No, we -absolutely- want bases in the Middle East. What we had/have
in Saudi Arabia was not satisfactory. Too many limits.

What do you need them for ?

We need them to control the flow of Oil from the region of course.

When you say "we" are trying to disengage from the Mideast, do you
mean the US or the UK? Either or both?

Maybe I misunderstood you.

Walt

Walt wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Walt wrote:
We want to get out of the damn region not stir it up.

Graham

What is your source for that?

The British public.

No, we -absolutely- want bases in the Middle East. What we had/have
in Saudi Arabia was not satisfactory. Too many limits.

What do you need them for ?

We need them to control the flow of Oil from the region of course.

That's none of your damn business.

Graham

Walt wrote:

When you say "we" are trying to disengage from the Mideast, do you
mean the US or the UK? Either or both?

UK.

The military adventure in Iraq was hugely unpopular. It's judged to have
adversely affected our securiry.

Graham

Walt wrote:

We want to get out of the damn region not stir it up.

Graham


What is your source for that?


Public opinion? Of course, it would be a shock if in the western
'democracies' their government would respect the wishes of the people.
(see Aznar or Berlusconi, they disregarded 70-90% of their people.)


No, we -absolutely- want bases in the Middle East. What we had/have
in Saudi Arabia was not satisfactory. Too many limits.


We agree on that. Bush wanted to colonize Iraq from day one. He wanted
to have military bases for further aggressions.


Let's give the Neo-Cons who run Bush some credit.

They knew the chance of reconciling Sunni and Shia after overthrowing
Saddam were vanishingly small.


No. They knew that the cooperation of Sunnies and Shiits would be a
dissenter for the occupation. After the Falluja and Najaf resistance of
2004. The Bush administration had only one choice, bring in Negroponte,
father of death squads in Central America, ferment sectarian hostility.


They knew that disbanding the Iraqi army would cause chaos and civil
war.

They don't want an Iraqi national government. It might ask us to leave
some day.


Well, yes, but an obedient government is the best.


They haven't been grossly incompetent; they've been as brilliant as
the Sun.


It's to be seen. Yes, the Bush regime were very successful of turning
tax payers money to the military establishment, to oil interests, to
their cronies. But, the neocons aim of controlling the world, Pax
Americana has been dealt a big blow.


All of you that voted for Bush should be very proud of their success.


Most had no idea what they voted for. You give too much credit.

dapra wrote:

Walt wrote:

We want to get out of the damn region not stir it up.

Graham

What is your source for that?

Public opinion? Of course, it would be a shock if in the western
'democracies' their government would respect the wishes of the people.
(see Aznar or Berlusconi, they disregarded 70-90% of their people.)

Blair also disregarded public opinion at the time. Prior to the recent Iraq War
there was the largest ever demonstration recorded in British history against it
with some one million demonstrators. They were right too. The whole adventure
has been a disastrous fiasco.

Graham

Eeyore wrote:


dapra wrote:


Walt wrote:


We want to get out of the damn region not stir it up.

Graham

What is your source for that?

Public opinion? Of course, it would be a shock if in the western
'democracies' their government would respect the wishes of the people.
(see Aznar or Berlusconi, they disregarded 70-90% of their people.)


Blair also disregarded public opinion at the time. Prior to the recent Iraq War
there was the largest ever demonstration recorded in British history against it
with some one million demonstrators. They were right too. The whole adventure
has been a disastrous fiasco.

Graham


The government has never followed, respected the public's pinions. They,
the puppets of the plutocrats do wars whenever they want to. It's only
the matter of sufficient brainwashing to bring the over worked, drugged,
masses on their side. The media has never failed to perform this for the
plutocracy, they are paid to be the servants of the plutocracy.