27.3.07

The next Iran War: Lessons from the 1956 Egypt's Invasion

I always thought that the Iraq war was a prerun for the Big One, the Iran War. Iran's war would be more difficult, more dangerous. Iraq would be a bread and roses victory walk. The latter, as tragic in its consequences as it is now, is sadly not the only neocon faulty assumption. Iraq's difficulties apart, the neocons and Bush are showing us now their determination to squeeze Iran when they could not attack it and letting us know that the attack is still an option. The result is the actual showdown and the anguish and tension that go with.

Reading a counterpunch article about the Suez war, I realised that Israel's influence on the west's policy in the ME has one basic and faulty assumption: Israel presents itself to western diplomacies as their frontline in the region and the main guardian of their interests. Back in 1956 when Israel arranged for the Suez invasion, and because of cold war logic, Eisenhower was not convinced of this equation.

One has to read the interesting article of Harry Clark in Counterpunch to realise how much this faulty assumption, endorsed unquestioned in the west and enforced by the Israel lobby largely supported by the Jewish diaspora, is hurting actually the west's interests in the ME.

We need a political leadership to break this equation between Israel's and the west's assumed shared interests in order for the region to achieve a just and lasting peace. Otherwise, the Middle East will always be for its citizens a dangerous and murderous field, thanks to USrael, UKrael, Frisrael, or whatever country with which Israel chooses to make its holy union of 'common interests' for the sake of zionism to survive unquestioned over the dead bodies of Arabs, Muslims, and Palestinians and the the resentment of the livings.

Read how Rice, Bush and the neocons are trying to reshape the middle east in a way to eliminate any challenge to Israel's only superpower. And how the UN is an accomplice in this project (Forever Under Construction)

13 comments:

Derek said...

The ARAB/PALESTINIAN-ISRAELI conflict has never been “THE” MIDDLE EAST conflict. Iran’s and Iraq’s megalomaniac aspirations, Al-Qaeda Islamic fanaticism, the Iran-Iraq conflict, Syrian regional terrorism, Islamic assaults on conservative Arab regimes and Sunni-Shite conflicts have preceded - and have raged independent of - the Arab/Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

Sophia said...

Thank you Derek for this comment. I have been telling my friends and my readers that this is exactly the zionist propaganda and narrative. They thought that I was exagerating and underestimating zionists in their ability to lie in a more intelligent manner given their hate for the Truth and you have provided me with what I was asking for; one of many proofs of zionist arrogance, lying and disregard for the thruth.
The policy for the comments on this blog does not give room to propaganda like the one you wrote but I am taking it...It is an exception...

Fleming said...

Bravo, Sophia! You have put Derek's irrational comment in its place. . . assuming there is a low enough place to put it. What "megalomianiac aspirations" of Iran and Iraq? I've never heard of any. And as for "conservative Arab regimes", that merely translates, "Arab regimes that have been paid off by the U.S. so they won't take action against Israel."

Thank you very much for the link to the "Counterpunch" article about 1956. It is fascinating to see that the Israel Lobby was leading the U.S. Congress by the nose then as it does now. John Foster Dulles' statement is priceless as a record of the truth.

Naj said...

Now, Sophia, Fleming, don't be harsh on Derek:

Iran's and Iraq's struggle for secularism, modernity, technological acheivement and etc is magalomanic from a Zionist POV. Iran and Iraq should be tame like the "conservative arab regimes" that the damned syrians are terrorizing. (It's good Syrians are not terrorizing the Israelis though!)

Al-Quaeda has not striken in Israel yet, has it? Maybe it is a Saudi deal with Israel?

And for the rest, I have recenlty gotten a spicy taste of Pan-Arabism (for the very first time in my whole naive life) that my vision has become googly!

I was gonna give a link to Fleming's post, but I am happy he's visited here already.

Cheers

Richard said...

Hi, Sophia.

Just a morning drive by to deliver the latest on US/Iran/UK.

Sophia said...

Richard,
You are welcome any time. I am going directly to your blog.

Anonymous said...

Derek, Your name sounds american, thats enough to tell me that how ignorant a man can be...If you open your eyes for some seconds and look beyond the nest where you are living then you may see that how much US is hurting the whole world. No doubts that its US dirty games that Israel & Palestine is fighting with eachother...and who made the Taliban or Al-Qaida, look at the history, its you own country. If US will stop invading the countries for oil and other financial benefits then who would even care to talk about US. Especially we Europeans are fed up of US digusting foreign policies, as its also hurting the Europe. If you guys want peace then first let leave the world in peace. I think its time for Americans to grow up!!!

Sophia said...

Anonymous,

I think Derek is a cyberzionist. I have this kind of comments coming from an IP from New York under different names, sometimes men, sometimes women. I can block this IP but I want to be updated on zionist propaganda. I think sincerely that US citizens are mush more informed than what you think and that Derek's comment is only pure propaganda, which means intentionally inserted lies...

Stef said...

On the subject of cyberzionists they appear to be out in full force on the BBC page where people can comment about the 15 British sailors and marines who have been arrested by Iran...

http://tinyurl.com/2y9b58

Apparently, there are a lot of people out there who seem to think that 'We' should reduce Teheran to rubble

It's quite to difficult to fully communicate, as a British citizen, how powerless and disgusted I feel at the way my country has been manipulated, and is being manipulated, into fighting other people's bloody wars

Sophia said...

Stef,
I am afraid Tony Blair is willing to do anything to please Bush. Moreover, nothing's better than a second war to stiffle and calm the growing public outrage in the UK at the 'first war', the Iraq war, and to make people forget about accountability for the first war...

Because it seems to me that the strategy followed up to now by Bush and the neocons is the same as Israel's; to treat problems with more problems or, to say it in the language of the Israelis, to treat violence with more violence.

This is a dangerous Surenchère.

I believe that if there are serious military operations being considered against Iran, other than parading in murky waters, they will be done before Blair leaves office.

It takes a criminal association to do this kind of things and criminal association needs time for irreversible bonds to be in place..

Anonymous said...

US Launching Attack against Iran April 6

Operation Bite: April 6 Attack by US Forces against Iran planned, according to Russian Military sources.

http://www.crusade-media.com/news58.html

Behemoth101 said...

Derek sounds a lot like e...

Sophia said...

Behemoth,
E and Derek do not have the same IP. e was more 'nuanced'...

 
Since March 29th 2006