What's new
  • ICMag and The Vault are running a NEW contest! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!

War

armedoldhippy

Well-known member
Veteran
"silence"...that sounds about like what the TN general assy is trying to do in Nashville. while members of both parties will (supposedly) get equal time in debate on a bill, the Speaker of the House gets to decide just how much time that is. he can limit dissenters (and supporters alike) to 5 minutes, 3 minutes, 30 seconds, whatever he wants. don't want the other party to pick at a sore spot ? allow a minimal debate time. you KNOW how your party members are going to vote, right ? regardless of time allotted for "debate". :rolleyes:
 

moose eater

Well-known member
"silence"...that sounds about like what the TN general assy is trying to do in Nashville. while members of both parties will (supposedly) get equal time in debate on a bill, the Speaker of the House gets to decide just how much time that is. he can limit dissenters (and supporters alike) to 5 minutes, 3 minutes, 30 seconds, whatever he wants. don't want the other party to pick at a sore spot ? allow a minimal debate time. you KNOW how your party members are going to vote, right ? regardless of time allotted for "debate". :rolleyes:
Been there and done that with expert witnesses during many legalization or privacy hearings re. cannabis in the Alaska State legislature. Corruption of process by any other name.
 

Microbeman

The Logical Gardener
ICMag Donor
Veteran
no channel aired the entire deposition against israel from start to finish on the first day on my TV. only in short passing. today was the opposite.

no internet channel did either with the exception of Al Jazeera America and TRT (which i think i posted on the other page)
There are several 'internet' channels which aired the proceedings on day 1 in their entirety 'without talking heads'. I did not watch this at the time but had BBC - International on, which I receive through a free pirated internet TV link and they were providing live coverage of portions of South Africa's presentation which were representative of excerpts from the following;

 

Microbeman

The Logical Gardener
ICMag Donor
Veteran
There are several 'internet' channels which aired the proceedings on day 1 in their entirety 'without talking heads'. I did not watch this at the time but had BBC - International on, which I receive through a free pirated internet TV link and they were providing live coverage of portions of South Africa's presentation which were representative of excerpts from the following;


Note, that I am in a different country [I believe] than you and may get things you are blocked from receiving.
 

So Hai

Well-known member
outside of the kibbutz style communal settlements which one of you already mentioned, no it's not the "foundation".

yeah, in early zionism there were marxists and socialists who believed they could achieve a socialist jewish state through zionism. most of these people as far as i can see, were in favor of living together with the palestinians. not trying to genocide them lol.

now fast forward out of the 1800's and you will easily find that marxists, socialists, and communists are anti colonialist and have been the leading (non antisemitic) voices against the state of israel for a very long time.

other than some sort of gotcha, what even is the point here? they should have listened to the socialists instead of turning hard right into this weird dystopic ultra nationalist society.
I am not out to get you but simply to inform of the fact. Poale zion founded the israeli settler state. They laid its foundation including the formation of the IDF and subsequent political parties.

Naturally the genocidal ambition was not suitable for use in marketing and the sentiment of peaceful coexistence is recorded even in the Balfour declaration. In practise, however, it was never more than an exoteric goyim doctrine.



”Not one kibbutz. Everybody was very happy to steal their land…”
 

Roms

Well-known member
Veteran
American terrorism is the worst of all
1705157489561.png

1705157541775.png

1705157555409.png


by Massimo Fini

American and Israeli terrorists struck again. Naturally, Washington and Tel Aviv hastened to say that they were not for nothing. Excusatio non petita, accusatio manifesta. Curiously, the day after the attack, an Isis claim surfaced on Telegram, assigned generically to Isis and not signed by its current leader, Abu Hafs al Husseini al Qureishi. I could have done the same. Equally curiously, the Western media, which had given the attack in Iran only minimal, say "modest" exposure, fired all the wood for the alleged claim of Isis. Le Corriere della Sera it devoted two pages.

The attack in Tehran is bloody, barbaric and cowardly. It is unimaginable that the tens of thousands of people who had gathered in front of the cemetery of the martyrs of Kerman to honor Qasem Soleimani, the former leader of the Pasdarans, assassinated by the Americans four years ago in Baghdad (which is equivalent to killing a deputy prime minister in Western democracies), are all Pasdaran. The attack was therefore directed and premeditated against Iranian civilians and the victims are not a "side effect" of a shooting error as we saw recently in Ukraine. After all, the Americans are not at their test in terms of direct targeting of civilians. At the end of the Second World War, the United States bombed Dresden, Leipzig and Stuttgart with the'a clear intention, declared by their political and military commands, to "weaken the resistance of the German people". In Hiroshima and Nagasaki, while Japan was on its knees, no military targets were targeted, but the Japanese people were targeted.

The economic sanctions, not only economic, but also scientific, medical and military, imposed on Iran by the United States and therefore by their allies, who are slavishly subordinate to them, including Italy, who maintained excellent trade relations with the land of the Ayatollahs, are incomprehensible. Iran has signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and has always accepted inspections from the IAEA, the International Atomic Energy Agency, who have established that the enrichment of uranium in Iran does not exceed 5%, that is, it is intended for civil and medical use; to manufacture the bomb, the enrichment must reach 90%. Israel did not sign the treaty, but it has the Bomb, just walk in the Negev desert to understand it, it is,and in any case he wants to let it know (good intentions..). But no one has ever thought of sanctioning Israel.

What is the point of sanctioning Iran? The pattern is always the same: to strangle a country economically, to create discontent among the population and thus the rise of an opposition. More recently, the United States has also tried this with the Venezuela of Chavez and Maduro. But they have failed. The "young and beautiful engineer" Juan Guaido, on whom the United States had bet, had almost no followers. The Venezuelan government, faced with this coup attempt, has not deployed tanks, military or police on the streets. The 137 dead were not caused by Maduro (the police did not fire a single shot) but by clashes between opposing factions between Maduro's supporters and those who were killed de Guaido, who caused the worst.

Cursed be Hitler because he gave Israel ( let's not say to the Jews, lest they be arrested ) a kind of pass to carry out criminal actions which, if they had been committed by any other country, would have been convicted and punished. Entebbe, 1976, docet. But let's stay in the present. The Palestinians killed after the October 7 Hamas terrorist attack, which killed 1,300 Israelis, number 22,000, a ratio of 20 to 1. Does the International War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague have anything to say about this ? If this court really existed, Joe Biden, as well as some of his predecessors, and Bibi Netanyahu ( curious nickname of "Bibi" for a guy of this caliber ) would be today'hui at the helm.

On Iran, there is also a historical speech to be made. At the time of the Shah, puppet of the United States, there was a very thin social layer of very rich bourgeoisie that could be encountered in London, Paris and other European capitals, he said, everything else was just misery. The Khomeini revolution worked well in creating an average intellectual bourgeoisie, the Persians, which should not be confused with the Arabs, they are cultivated, they are cultivated, when I was there for the Iraq-Iran war - not Iran-Iraq as is commonly said because Saddam Hussein was the first to attack - my friends knew no only our main authors, starting from Dante, but also Moravia and Savinio, while we, of the Persian culture, we know, when it goes well, only Umar Khayyam. C'it is this educated bourgeoisie that rebels today, at least in part, against the strict reading of the Shari'a, that is, ethical norms more than millennia old. Anyway, Iran is not Saudi Arabia, our ally, if you go to the University of Tehran, you will find more girls than boys.

American leaders, especially Democrats, are realizing that they are losing the hegemony they exercised throughout the 20th century and do not want to resign themselves to it. That is why they are ready for anything, even to start a third world war. We can only hope for the prudence and wisdom of the ayatollahs who, for now, are content to say that Iran's reaction will be "severe", which is a soft statement. We are reduced to that.
1705157769663.png

 

Roms

Well-known member
Veteran
Yemen says will target US vessels, warships in multi-pronged retaliatory operation

Yemen's Ansarullah resistance movement says the Yemeni response to the US aggression against the Arab country will be carried out on the land and sea, and sternly warned that the American vessels and warships will be targeted in the Red Sea. (...)

 

Roms

Well-known member
Veteran

Hospitalization of the Pentagon chief and the nuclear briefcase scandal​

By Alexandere Lemoine

The Biden administration began the new year with a resounding scandal surrounding the secret hospitalization of U. S. defense secretary Lloyd Austin. This information was not revealed until three days after he was admitted on January 1 to the Walter Reed national military medical centre, where he was placed in intensive care.

On December 22, Pentagon chief Austin was secretly hospitalized for surgery under general anesthesia. On January 1, he was hospitalized again, and again secretly. It is reported that during this second visit to the hospital, he remained conscious.

"He had been in hospital since January 1, while the Pentagon hid this information from the public, the White House and Congress for most of last week, which provoked a serious political reaction", written the British newspaper The Guardian.

Lloyd Austin is in the hospital was reported by newspaper Politico, according to which the Pentagon kept secret information about Austin's hospitalization with the White House. "The Pentagon did not inform senior White House National Security Council officials of the hospitalization of defense secretary Lloyd Austin until Thursday, for three days since he arrived at Walter Reed medical center. This news came as a shock to senior officials (including President Jake Sullivan's national security adviser), who, who were unaware that the Pentagon chief was suffering from complications following a medical procedure" he said Politico anonymous representatives of the' biden Administration.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken was also among those who were unaware of Austin's hospitalization. "I didn't know anything about his health problems", stated Blinken at a joint press conference with Qatar's prime minister and foreign minister, Mohammed bin Abdurrahman Al Thani, in Qatar.

It also turned out that Pentagon number two assistant secretary Kathleen Hicks was also unaware of her hospitalization. Even after she was told, on January 2, while on leave in Puerto Rico, that she had to assume some of Austin's responsibilities, she continued her vacation.

Against the backdrop of growing scandal, Jeff Zients, chief of staff of the White House, sent a memorandum to all ministers, indicating that they must inform the White House when they are unable to perform their duties.

"The White House memorandum to the cabinet of ministers reflects a sense of dismay that a senior official in the Department of Defense could be in intensive care for so long, he said, without the president or other senior officials of the national security being informed. Even Austin's assistant secretary, who was to act in a crisis situation in his absence, was not initially informed of his hospitalization. Although Biden is considered perfectly sane, relatives of the White House have expressed deep frustration and misunderstanding among some members of the presidential team", writes The New York Times.

The chairman of the armed forces commission of the House of Representatives of the American Congress, Mike Rogers, called congress put pressure on Austin, saying "lose confidence in Austin's ability to lead the Pentagon in these difficult times", adding that he would like to hear from the Secretary of Defense the reasons for the lack of transparency in his actions.

Rogers launched official investigation about the incident of Austin's secret hospitalization.

In a letter to Lloyd Austin, Rogers wrote: "Everything from current counter-terrorism operations to nuclear command and control, depends on a clear understanding of the Secretary of State's ability to make decisions. The Department of Defense is a strong institution, designed to function in the event of attacks from our enemies, but not for a secretary of defense who hides his incapacity."

The main reason for the outbreak of the scandal is that "the chain of command and control in the nuclear field has probably been breached. The standard procedure provides for the replacement of the Secretary of Defense in this chain if it becomes unavailable for a short period of time", writes Fox News.

In addition, it is not known where the nuclear briefcase was during Austin's incapacity or whether the procedure for its management was violated.
 

Roms

Well-known member
Veteran

1705189966588.png

THE INDIRECT STRATEGY OF’ IRAN: TO TRAP THE USA IN A VARIETY OF’ENGRENAGES…​

By Hacher

« In truth, give up a game that n’en is not worth the candle, that's what distinguishes great strategy from grand stupidity. »

« In any campaign, the healthiest strategy is to postpone the battle, and the healthiest tactic to postpone the’attack, until’ until the moral dislocation of the’adversary makes it possible to’assene the decisive blow. »

Strategy. Liddell Hart: the paradoxes of’a career ..Wikipedia


C’is now the turn of the Houthis.

The place and manner in which they strike will determine the next US decision. They can't stop themselves from hitting, because it will look like a weakness, so they will hit.

The United States cannot stop’ from reacting, because’s do not, it will look like a weakness.

The United States will be forced to continue. Therefore, the next moves are actually a forced option.

L’Iran will not GO into any war. C’is the basis of its strategy.

Iran's objective, while avoiding direct war with the United States and Israel, is to support as much as possible their wars with its – agents in Lebanon, Syria, in Iraq and Yemen. This is the Soleimani strategy, an Iranian general assassinated in 2020.. It does not foresee rapid victories or blitzkriegs – the task of Iranian agents in the region is to drag the enemies of Iran into endless wars and exchanges of blows in the long term, in which the enemy remains trapped as in the sand, without achieving any operational result or without achieving any strategic objective.

This is the concept of strategic attrition, which is entirely consistent with the fundamental principles of the indirect action strategy described by Liddle-Hart.

In implementing this strategy,’Iran has achieved a lot: despite all the American’ opposition, it occupies a strong position in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and so on, in Yemen and Palestine. While its enemies used spectacular chaotic tactics to attack Iranian proxies, Tehran continues to’ extend its influence over the entire region.

’Iran has invested heavily in the Houthis and has succeeded in creating de facto Hezbollah 2.0 in Yemen alongside Saudi Arabia, creating an instrument of pressure on Riyadh. In the hands of’ Iran, Hezbollah is an important asset with which’ Iran has made its way into confrontation with the United States and Israel.

Previously,’ Iran could only block the Persian Gulf, which threatened to’ enter into direct conflict with the United States, as was the case for example in the late 1980s. Now they can block the Red Sea in the hands of the Houthis without risk to themselves, thus offering the United States a hopeless war against the Houthis, whose religious concept includes a direct war with the United States and Israel.

The United States understands the game that’Iran plays and would like to limit itself to a demonstrative public relations strike to save the face of’hegemon ; the US said’s were limited and unwilling to pursue them. But it is now up to the Houthis to impose new measures on the United States that’s would like to avoid. To do this, they will only have to hit several ships in the Red Sea and in the gulf of’Oman in the coming days.

This could be the response of’Iran, followed by’a reaction to the expected actions of the United States, the reaction affecting, as usual, the actions of Iranian proxies in Iraq and Syria. This is why many American experts and politicians claim that the American strikes against the Houthis are an impulsive mistake that will affect the US's strategic position in the Middle East.

The main’action programme of’Iran is clear . Support for resistance in the Gaza Strip. Support Hezbollah strikes in northern’Israel. Rocket fire against Israel from’Iraq and Yemen. US military bases bombed in Iraq and Syria. Support for the withdrawal of American troops and’OTAN from Iraq. Support the Houthi maritime campaign in the Red Sea and in the gulf of’Oman.

L’Iran plays long term .
 

Roms

Well-known member
Veteran

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top