Cyprus-Forum.com

[supporttheunderdog]

Ultimately these two countries(Iran, USA) have been using each other for internal purposes..Isnt it odd that the only country the usa hasn't bombed, ever, has been Iran?...

excuse me, but when did the Americans themselves bomb Cyprus, Isreal, Turkey, South Africa, Brazil, Argentina, Canada, the USSR/Russia, Kenya, Uganda, Bhutan, Nepal, India, Malawi, Nigeria, to name but a few?

[Oceanside50]

Ultimately these two countries(Iran, USA) have been using each other for internal purposes..Isnt it odd that the only country the usa hasn't bombed, ever, has been Iran?...

excuse me, but when did the Americans themselves bomb Cyprus, Isreal, Turkey, South Africa, Brazil, Argentina, Canada, the USSR/Russia, Kenya, Uganda, Bhutan, Nepal, India, Malawi, Nigeria, to name but a few?

Meaning neighboring countries..ie Lebanon, Yemen,Lybia, Iraq, afghan, pakistan, etcbasically countries in the region who are enemies of the USA or have groups within that are enemies of the USA

[Cap]

the US supported us during the Angolan war against the Commies.
Even under the veil of 'Apartheid sanctions'!

You gotto love America.

[Robin Hood]

“Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them.”
Mark Twain (1835-1910), American author and satirist

Are the people beginning to realise that Mark Twain was right? After the Russians told Obama how it will be at the G20 and that an attack by the US and its allies on Syria without evidence and/or the authorisation of the UN, would be regarded as an act of ‘aggression’, a war crime and against International Law, will the same warnings be applied to Netanyahu and his threats and ‘red-lines’ against Iran? The ‘evidence’ in both cases has turned out to be merely rhetoric and with little substance.

The scenario from Saddam’s WMD through almost every US military event up to this proposed attack on Syria, follows almost the same pattern. Condition the people to see a grave threat through media distortion and disinformation and the Government leaps in to protect them on humanitarian grounds from some evil regime. But it all appears to be wearing a bit thin and the real reasons very transparent!

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article36135.htm

"If the Nuremberg laws were applied, then every post-war American president would have been hanged." - Noam Chomsky

[Cap]

the real reasons very transparent

What are they?

[Robin Hood]

the real reasons very transparent

What are they?

Qui bono! How long have you got?

In every case it has resulted in regime change from one that is opposing US hegemony in the region to one that is more compliant with the US’s national interests.

To start with;

Both Qatar and Israel need a route for a pipeline to get their gas to Europe via Turkey and Syria is getting in the way as is Lebanon. Assad stands in the way for both State’s so .... he has to go.

Then the Israeli’s will need to get Hezbollah out of the way to get their (and our?) pipeline through Lebanon to Syria and then to Turkey ..... so Hezbollah has to go and if the Lebanese government won’t play ball US/Israel will get rid of them too.

But even then the US still cannot get the gas/oil from the Caspian Basin (Turkmenistan) to Pakistan and India because they have realised that Afghanistan(Taliban) will never allow them a pipeline (TAPI) going through Afghanistan. The Iranians have done a deal with Pakistan to route Iranian gas/oil to Pakistan and India (eventually) which is a threat to the petrodollar and US dominance in the energy markets. Iran however will deal in other currencies and gold which is also a threat to the Rothschild world banking system. The US has threatened Pakistan with sanctions if they go ahead with the Iran deal as this breaches the US applied sanctions.

So, Iran sits right on the middle of the plot that the US has its eyes on for their pipeline to replace TAPI. So the regime in Iran has to go and the US will put a Shah Mk.II in their place. That is after another war to destroy Iran’s fictitious nuclear weapons program and maybe starting WWIII in the process! Whether that is done by the madman Netanyahu alone or in conjunction with the US ...... who knows?

Add to that the fact that only Syria and Iran still have central banks that are not part of the Rothschild world banking cartel and that provides even more reasons for these rather repetitive wars.

Russia’s stand against the US action on Syria is not just to protect their ally Syria but mainly to protect their oil markets to Europe and their arms sales. So both the major players in this stand-off are working primarily in their own interests .................. tough s**t for those that happen to get in the way!

..... and that is just for starters!

[Cap]

the real reasons very transparent

What are they?

Qui bono! How long have you got?

In every case it has resulted in regime change from one that is opposing US hegemony in the region to one that is more compliant with the US’s national interests.

To start with;

Both Qatar and Israel need a route for a pipeline to get their gas to Europe via Turkey and Syria is getting in the way as is Lebanon. Assad stands in the way for both State’s so .... he has to go.

Then the Israeli’s will need to get Hezbollah out of the way to get their (and our?) pipeline through Lebanon to Syria and then to Turkey ..... so Hezbollah has to go and if the Lebanese government won’t play ball US/Israel will get rid of them too.

But even then the US still cannot get the gas/oil from the Caspian Basin (Turkmenistan) to Pakistan and India because they have realised that Afghanistan(Taliban) will never allow them a pipeline (TAPI) going through Afghanistan. The Iranians have done a deal with Pakistan to route Iranian gas/oil to Pakistan and India (eventually) which is a threat to the petrodollar and US dominance in the energy markets. Iran however will deal in other currencies and gold which is also a threat to the Rothschild world banking system. The US has threatened Pakistan with sanctions if they go ahead with the Iran deal as this breaches the US applied sanctions.

So, Iran sits right on the middle of the plot that the US has its eyes on for their pipeline to replace TAPI. So the regime in Iran has to go and the US will put a Shah Mk.II in their place. That is after another war to destroy Iran’s fictitious nuclear weapons program and maybe starting WWIII in the process! Whether that is done by the madman Netanyahu alone or in conjunction with the US ...... who knows?

Add to that the fact that only Syria and Iran still have central banks that are not part of the Rothschild world banking cartel and that provides even more reasons for these rather repetitive wars.

Russia’s stand against the US action on Syria is not just to protect their ally Syria but mainly to protect their oil markets to Europe and their arms sales. So both the major players in this stand-off are working primarily in their own interests .................. tough s**t for those that happen to get in the way!

..... and that is just for starters!

Very interesting indeed.
what do you foresee for our beloved Republic then?

[Cap]

So the Syrian regime change is a piece of the bigger picture.
Regardless of public opinion, whether they used chemicals or not, it doesn't matter, Assad government will be ousted by whatever means possible.


Chemical attacks is the pretext correct?
Similar to the Iraqi 'weapons of mass destruction'


So there you have it, they will do it eventually.

[Cap]

Question:

Death from 'chemical weapons' as opposed to death from 'conventional weapons' is still death right?
Or do 'chemical' weapons make you more dead as to warrant a foreign military intervention?

[Schnauzer]

Question:

Death from 'chemical weapons' as opposed to death from 'conventional weapons' is still death right?

As is death from 'Unconventional weapons' (such as a 'Red Hot Poker' shoved up the arse in the middle of the night !)

Poor King Edward II. (21/9/1327)