Iraq Slams Saudis, Qataris for Plans to Arm Syrian Rebels

The meeting of the so-called ‘Friends of Syria’ group of nations in Istanbul on Sunday produced some heated exchanges over a key issue: whether to arm the Syrian rebel forces.

Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal gave an impassioned speech in which he said it was “a duty” to provide the Syrian opposition with weapons, and he reaffirmed that necessity of getting arms to the revolutionaries of Syria. In the meantime, he demanded an immediate ceasefire by the regime, which he said has by its severe repression has committed what can only be crimes against humanity.

He prefaced his remarks by saying that the Gulf Cooperation Council countries (the Sunni oil monarchies) are seeking closer relations with the United States. That framing of the speech strongly suggests that Saud al-Faisal wants to arm the Syrian opposition as part of a game being played by the US and the GCC against Iran, which is among Syria’s more important supporters.

The Saudis are currently fighting Iran on several fronts, including a plan to flood the oil markets with excess petroleum so as to allow the US to strongarm friends and allies into purchasing petroleum from some other place than Iran.

In contrast, Iraq’s prime minister Nouri al-Maliki (Iraq also attended the summit) strongly supported the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad and severely condemned the plan to give arms to the rebels.

“”We reject any arming (of Syrian rebels) and the process to overthrow the (Assad) regime, because this will leave a greater crisis in the region . . . The stance of these two states [Qatar and Saudi Arabia] is very strange… They are calling for sending arms instead of working on putting out the fire, and they will hear our voice, that we are against arming and against foreign interference . . . We are against the interference of some countries in Syria’s internal affairs, and those countries that are interfering in Syria’s internal affairs will interfere in the internal affairs of any country… It has been one year and the regime did not fall, and it will not fall, and why should it fall?

Al-Maliki is saying that he doesn’t want arms shipped to Syria because he’s afraid that they will eventually find their way into Iraq. But he is also implicitly supporting Iran on Syria.

Just to say that Iraq’s fears are not without reason. Saud al-Faisal’s idea of arming the rebels recalls the similar plan to arm the Afghan opposition, in in the 1980s, which led to a Soviet withdrawal but also created a long-term security nightmare in the form of al-Qaeda.

Al-Maliki has long had correct relations with Iran, which intervened to secure for him the prime ministership in fall of 2010. But ever since the Saudis sent troops into Bahrain to put down a Shiite-majority uprising, al-Maliki and the Iraqi Shiites are cozying up to Iran in an unprecedented way. Al-Maliki is said to fear that the overthrow of the Baath Party in Syria would lead to the opposition Sunnis taking power, and in turn he is afraid that triumphant Sunnis in Damascus will support Iraqi militants.

Posted in Uncategorized | 55 Responses | Print |

55 Responses

  1. Have you been hacked? Final paragraph

    “and in turn he is afraid that Sunnis in Baalbak will hand seen things smoothly with regard for there support of the people of Montagn and elsewer.”

  2. What I really laugh at is, that US is consulting with Saudi Arabia which doesn’t have any sort of human rights.
    What a world we are living in. Full of double standards and hypocrisy.
    I wonder what would be the new Regime in Syria? So far, Arab uprising been high-jacked by Salafies in Egypt. I don’t see a bright future in Lybia.

    • The problem too many of us have is that we buy into the melodramatic, surficial myths, organize our thinking and beliefs around them, and blind ourselves to the crap that’s going on behind the scenes and beneath the stage and out in the wings.

      Ask Bill how it really works. If he’ll share all that with you.

      You can’t go too far wrong, in trying to figure it all out, if you just try to follow the money. i know, it ain’t easy.

      Otherwise, there’s plenty of stuff in the Untrustworthy Internetspace to give you lots of reasoned reasons not to sleep well at night, and to wonder what kind of world your grandkids’ grandkids will be living in.

      Gee, it’s kind of like living in a cave. Maybe Plato’s version of it… link to

      • “Ask Bill how it really works. If he’ll share all that with you.”

        I don’t reply to the throwing of tantrums and unintelligible rants, much less to the use of my name to camouflage the gibberish on display in this post.

        • Hmmm. That looks like a reply, to me anyway… Good to know the posts get read, though.

          It’s not just the name, it’s the implied superior and more complete and secret knowledge that the name associates itself with.

    • Arab uprising been high-jacked by Salafies in Egypt.

      the liberals boycott the last elections! that made the muslim brotherhood representation look bigger than it should have. and mb isn’t the salafists.

  3. This group’s naked plans to arm Syria’s rebels prove beyond a shadow of a doubt how right Russia was…

    …to veto the recent resolution on Syria…

    …on the grounds that it would lead to armed intervention like in Libya.

    Even WITHOUT a UN resolution the same suspects are arming those same Syrian rebels and fomenting war…

    in the US free-fire zone otherwise known as the Middle East…

    Why support it? This bald jingoism should be condemned!

    • Of course Russia does not want any intervention in Syria. But not for any altruistic motives. Russia wants to keep Assad in power in order to keep its naval base on the Mediterranean in Tartus, and to maintain the flow of Russian arms sales to the Assad regime. No mystery there.

      • Bill do better.

        Russia does not want US intervention in Syria–and in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, and so on–for the same reason that the US does not want Russia taking over South America. Don’t want the enemy panting at the door.

        The US gets what it wants, and Russian armies stay out.

        But not so Russia. Just look around this site to see a map of US bases surrounding Russia from Eastern Europe to the Middle East to Central Asia. Obama would go ape if the Russians were that close!

        But be that as it may your comment is very fudged. True, Russia has vested interests. But this invasion of funding certainly does prove Russia’s explicit warning. So what if Russia cared?

        • Oh, now I get it. The U.S. “gets what it wants.” We sure got a gem in Libya, wouldn’t you agree? We sure are reaping the benefits of a fractured system that is virtually leaderless. Must’ve been what we “wanted” though. And Iraq? I’m sure the U.S. “wanted” Iraq as politically close to Iran as it is now after the war. That, according to your logic, must have been what we “wanted” when we first invaded. And Afghanistan? Although the pullout has yet to be completed, it is hard to see how what we originally “wanted” will align with what we eventually “get”.

        • One post-script to my post, AA. Your statement about the U.S. not wanting “Russia taking over South America” appears to draw an equivalency between that event, should it occur, and U.S. interventions in Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan. There is no equivalency, as the U.S. has not “taken over” any of those countries.

        • Bill (no replies available under your posts):

          It’s not for a want of trying that the US did not ‘take over’ Iraq. You have probably forgotten the one million little US flags that got ordered before the invasion…and the fantasies about US bases in Iraq for the next 50 years…

          The Middle East has been declared a US ‘free fire’ zone, as Tomgram so brilliantly put it.

          In other words, the US can and does invade any country next door to Russia that it wants. And set up any missile bases or anti-missile stations that it wants. With impunity.

          Russia cannot, period, do that.

          Now let’s turn to how Russian diplomacy/adventurism operates. Not like American. American policy is short-term impressive. Shock and Awe big shows. Not like Russia. But is Russia therefore weak? No.

          The Russians have one big ace card that America does not have: time. Russia is long-term effective. They do not have elections that matter. They do not need to produce results…yesterday…in order to stay in power. This is a great plus for them.

          Russia can, for example, wait out the Israel/Palestinian mess until eventually it falls over of its own weight. And that will happen.

          This is what I call the Asian ‘time’ model. Just give the enemy enough time and you will win. When the Crusaders invaded, the Arabs just waited…until…the Christians got destroyed by time…The Russians fought, yes, but ultimately they knew it was winter and distance that would destroy Napoleon…check your history books.

          So when America starts one of their theater-style adventures, Russia need only…wait…put a stick in their spokes whenever they can…negotiate and kick their shins under the table…until after all the cards are counted America is down.

          This is the dynamic that is going on under your nose, dear Bill.

          Russia just needs to ‘lean’ against America, whilst all the while America drains its coffers providing fast food downtowns to soldiers in Afghanistan, etc…. Until eventually the clumsy giant stumbles.

          That is exactly why Russia vetoed the Syria sanctions.

          And you can see how your protests that America actually failed at taking over Iraq…are irrevelant. The question was not will America succeed at the adventure. Obviously they won’t. The question was, does America have the power to undertake the adventure. It certainly does. That power is what Russia is fighting. And the way things are going now, I would put all my cards on Russia.

        • Russia’s autocratic government is exactly what eventually led to the demise of the Soviet Union, AA. It was, and is, a sclerotic system that cannot change and became hollowed out. It has no flexibility, AA. Read up on your history. I would place my bets any day on the more democratic, flexible system in America. Mark my word, Russia will become more democratic and flexible as well over time. The Russian people will force the change as they become more modern and middle class. Putin already understands his surge in unpopularity, even though he won the (fixed) election.

          So, don’t place a large amount of money on Russia overtaking America in international influence, AA. The apex of Russian influence occurred with the USSR during the Cold War. It has gone down ever since. Don’t expect it to rise again.

  4. It looks like the blueprint for the next 25 years of conflict and war in the ME has taken shape in Turkey. Sadly and predictably no regional blueprint for peace is in site.

    • The Blueprint for the so called shia crescent a.k.a “great Persia” from Afghanistan to the mediterranean Syria was build by Iran about 5 Years after beginning of the West`s “War on Terror” a.k.a “War on Sunnis” a.k.a” War on Arabs”. Iran “conquered” Iraq without shooting a single Bullet. This was always the wet dream of Iranians regardless of Ideology for historical reasons since iranians still blame Arabs for the Collapse of Persia. Even exile Pro-Shah Persians are very proud of the recent iranian foreign policy achievements. Iran was in 2003 more than willing to accept Israel in the 67`Borders btw. since it was in “Panic Mode” to get attacked by the Neocons. However. This has changed in 2007 and 2008 with a) the arab iraqi (sunna and shia) attacks on the Americans increased “successfully” and b) the economic Meltdown of the US. Double- Jackpot for Iran. Iran got than full excess over Iraq and began to work with -I`m a shia first, Iraqi second, Arab third and Dawa Party Member fourth- Iraq`s so called President Al Maliki a.k.a the Poodle of Iran more closely. Maliki jailed then the former sunni secular ex-Army and Baath Members that drove successfully most of Al Qaida out of Iraq and promised the sunnis right after the partly withdrawal of the US a see of Blood. Another Win for Iran without losing a single Iranian.

      But it`s getting better and better for Iran with the Victory of Obama. Obama`s shift from Iraq to Afghanistan was the best thing that could have happened to project “Great Persia”. Since it would eliminate Iran`s other Enemy after arab nationalistic Saddam Hussain. Namely the Taliban and give simultaneously the Iranians more space in Iraq. Just imagine persian speaking Afghanistan without US Presence, without the Taliban and a weak President Karzai who would be absolutley dependent on outside financial and military support. Guess who would fill the gap?. Iran of course since Iran already possess a “natural” Base in Afghanistan in form of a Border with Afghanistan and pockets full of Oil Money from Iran and Iraq. Another bonus for Iran would be the Connection to China via the Afghanistan-China Border . So after Iran cooperated with the US Invasion in Afghanistan to show some good will after 9/11 and of course to gain some secret legitimacy as reasonable potential Middle-East Power from the West after it got it already from China and Russia.

      China is very interested in Afghanistan too because of a) Market for it`s goods(Chinese contrary to Westerners have no problems selling Burqas or Sex-toys to Afghans as long as it brings profits) b) cut off any interference of “pan-Islamism” to chinese Uigurs and c) Chinese Interest in Afghan`s Minerals from Copper to Lithium. China already signed contracts with the Karzai Government about the Minerals in Afghanistan.

      And then came the arab Spring

  5. I have a question. Syria is overwhelmingly sunni that is rules by an allawi secret service. Why is syria part of Vali Nasr`s shia crescent. I`m sure that most syrians are not even aware of Iran`s intentions.

    • I`m sure that most syrians are not even aware of Iran`s intentions.

      huh? you need to talk to more syrians. they’re hyper aware about iran’s machinations!

    • I would say sinister. Since not a single Iranian will die in the syrian conflict regardless of the outcome. Like in Iraq. Arabs fighting Arabs at the end of the day. Even if Assad loose the battle it would be not that bad for Iran. the big arab prize is iraq with it`s oil wealth and it`s historic are capital Baghdad.

      Iran convinced iraqi shia`s that they have more in common with Iranians than with there neighboring sunni or christian countryman which is quite tragic if you inform yourself about the fate of the iranian Arabs or the Ahwazy in former Arabistan in Iran where 80% of “Iran`s” Oil wealth is located btw. Iran annexed it under the shah in 1935 with the help of the british. Until than it`s one of the poorest areas in Iran. Plus iran enforced and still enforce persian language on them.

      link to

      And I`m still against the bombing of Iran

  6. I find myself unclear about the situation in Syria and wish sommeone might be able to clarify a few points.

    I understand Professor Cole’s point and the point made by others as to why flooding another unstable country with more weapons is a very bad idea.

    But here’s what I don’t understand about these arguments against arming the Syrian opposition.

    Professor Cole paraphrases the Iraqi position: “Al-Maliki is said to fear that the overthrow of the Baath Party in Syria would lead to the opposition Sunnis taking power, and in turn he is afraid that triumphant Sunnis in Damascus will support Iraqi militants.”

    Now I know also why the Iraq War was a very bad idea. But I also see that Iraq is a country with a Shi’ite majority now run by Shi’a. And Egypt is a country with what seems to be a religious majority now about to be ruled by religious parties. As a majority Sunni country, shouldn’t we want to see a more representative government.

    It’s not that I think sectarian government is a good thing. Nor do I want to join the drum-beaters. But presuming that Assad won’t or probably can’t step down, short of exiling himself to Iran, what are the alternatives to violence?

    • Reagan said “the Mujahedin are the moral equivalent of [America’s] Founding Fathers,” on the way to dumping a wide variety of “arms” into the hands of certain of the self-loyal, self-interested, shifting-loyalty groups that made up the mythical reification We All Believed In, the Unitary Holy Fighters Against The Soviets.

      Why does the “Syrian opposition” sort of sound like the same thing all over again? Small arms, Dragons and Javelins and Claymores and all those other artfully named devices? How about a bunch of MANPADs? Oh wait, somebody is going to be paying “salaries” to some of the Oppositionistas, so they can buy some of the missing and disappeared ones that Gadaffyduck’s forces piled up and left out in the desert.

      Why so much effort and “intelligence” spent on little tactical and logistical details of Great Gamery, and so little on setting conditions and momentums in place that would do away with a lot of that shattery-bloodshed stuff? You know, effectuating the mindsets and behaviors that might follow from internalizing and acknowledging the two most-blown-away truths: First, that like it or not, for good and for obvious ill, we are all inextricably, via the most exquisite and complex mutual vulnerability, in this mess together. And Second, that there is more than enough of everything that matters to go all the way around the table, as long as we can keep the greedheads in suits and shoulder-boards and faux tribal dress from grabbing all but one of the chops and all but one of the cookies and then suckering us into fighting over the scraps.

      We could actually do better, if it weren’t for the Experienced Players…

    • my understanding is that in Syria the Sunnis, while being the largest sectarian group, are still less than 50% of the population, hence NOT a majority Sunni country. We have opened a Pandora’s box (Condi rice started it by creating the scare of the Shia crescent, and Hillary has run with the ball)which will once again come to bite us Afghanistan.

  7. This morning ABC lead off by reporting “Hillary Clinton is demanding that Assad step down.” It just cracks me up when Hillary does that “Did you hear what I said…You have to leave…NOW!!!” routine.

    Madame Secreatary, how about demanding that Palestinians be able to keep their land,farm,build homes, import medicine and live without fear of oppression.

    • more than 80% of Palestinians are in favor of the syrian revolution and not a single Iranian died so far for Palestine. Even Hezbollah`s Nasrallh began to disenfranchise himself shortly before the arab spring began. Not to mention Iraq`s Moqtader Sadrs war on Palestinians in Iraq itself.More than 50000 Egyptians died for palestine and tens of thousands of other Arabs from jordan to iraq to Syria. Who are you kidding. Assad tortured Al Qaida suspects for the CIA and his father embraced the peace plan in 1990`s.

      • more than 80% of Palestinians are in favor of the syrian revolution

        yay! may i inquire where you got this stat?

    • Madame Secreatary, how about demanding that Palestinians be able to keep their land,farm,build homes, import medicine and live without fear of oppression.

      Could you please explain to me what it is wrong for Hillary Clinton, and anyone else, to want the violence in Syria to stop? And why she isn’t supposed to try to make that happen, for a reason involving Palestine?

      I find your comment little different from the raft of “But what about black-on-black crime?” comments coming from right-wingers who wish to get people to stop talking about the Trayvon Martin case.

      We can play the “Don’t talk about that, talk about this” game until the end of time.

  8. This meeting looked like an Aprils fool day conference!

    Saudis seem to have found their new Saddam in “Syrian Free Army”. In the 80s they were financing Saddam against Iran while flooding market with cheap oil.

    • The difference is that the sunnis are the majority. And Assad is a puppet of Iran. So you can say that the iranian Regime found their saddams with the Assad Clan. A sectarian secular minority rule over a majority. like saddam ruled over the shia majority.

  9. It looks like the Zionist plan to destabilize Syria has unfolded. This plan, sketched years ago by Israel-firsters in the US, has called to “roll back” Syria to isolate Iran and Hizballah. Despite the help from the imperialist-collaborator Gulf states and their most powerful weapon, Al Jazeera, it looks like the plot was foiled and failed and in fact Iraq seems to be teetering on joining the anti-imperialist axis, completing a crescent stretching from Iran to Lebanon.

    So what do sore losers do instead of helping resolve the Syrian conflict in a peaceful manner? They decide to arm the militias in the hope that they will continue destablizing Syria for the foreseeable future.

    • assad doesn’t deserve to be defended by anti-imperialists.

      Assad’s relationship to Israeli and US imperialism

      Hafez Al-Assad first, and later his son and current ruler Bashar, regularly entered into alliances with the Western imperialists. They have played an openly counter-revolutionary role in repressing mass uprisings in Lebanon in league with regional imperialist powers, were open partners with George Bush Sr.’s invasion of Iraq in 1991 and have played a collaborative role in the so-called “War on Terror”. Far from the image that some on the left attribute to Assad as an anti-imperialist, he has been a regional partner with imperialism and has played a destructive role in relation to mass left-wing movements in the region, most notably in Lebanon.

  10. What you might add is that Maliki’s support for the Assad regime is exacerbating sectarian tensions in Iraq, where obviously the Sunni Arabs don’t feel the same way. (The Kurds are more ambivalent, they don’t care for Assad but they fear the Syrian Kurds could be worse off in who-knows-what would be the future Syria or pieces thereof.) In fact arms are already being smuggled into Syria from Anbar, which the Maliki government has been trying to stop.

  11. We pretend anybody cares about Human Rights anywhere. It’s about interests, putting our dictator in power, whatever routes for oil, whatever resources we need to keep surviving the way we do, selling arms. This goes for British,Russia,china & the rest of the big dogs. Fuck Everybody

  12. Maybe the world will become more peaceful once we get our energy sustainably;

    Maybe at that point, the oil rich regions will be left alone.

  13. Maliki is against against foreign interference, except when the Ameriki interfered in Iraq and set him on the throne.

  14. It is rather ironic is that the Sunnis have been disenfranchised under the Assad regime for decades, yet Iraq’s Sunnis were the dominating force in the Baathist governments of Iraq until 2003 and the toppling of the Saddam Hussein regime.

    Do the disenfranchised Syrian Sunnis have some intimate relationship that Nouri Al-Maliki should be rightfully concerned about?

    A big fear everyone should have would be if what happened in Afghanistan occurred in any other Middle East country – a power vacuum is created by the deposing of an existing regime and there is sufficient public support for extremists to allow an Al-Qaeda-oriented group to either seize power or play an integral role in a governing force like the dual relationship of the Taliban and Al-Qaedea in Kabul.

    My fear in Gaza would be that Islamic Jihad, Al-Qaeda, and various extremist clans and pro-Iranian groups essentially seize control from a Hamas-controlled government and have sufficient public support to become an outlaw state as Afghanistan was. The same fear was held in Libya and could concevably occur in Syria. During Operation Cast Lead, the brunt of militant fighting and casualties was borne by non-Hamas fighters and the Hamas militants largely avoided direct combat with the IDF and lost a comparatively small percentage of its fighting force. Since Cast Lead, the citizenry of Gaza have given increasing support to non-Hams groups who have not hesitated to engage Israel militarily via rockets or other attacks. Hamas has been a moderating force within Gaza and Fatah largely forgetten by mainstream Gazans as a potential successor to Hamas.

    In sum, a power vacuum in Syria could conceivably upset the balance of pwer in the entire region. Al-Maliki’s fears are not irrational, but there may be nothing to worry about either. American involvement in Syria militarilycould avoid anarchy and bloodshed – but at what price to America and Obama’s re-election hopes?

    • My fear in Gaza would be that Islamic Jihad, Al-Qaeda, and various extremist clans and pro-Iranian groups essentially seize control from a Hamas-controlled government and have sufficient public support to become an outlaw state as Afghanistan was.

      several mena pundits have interpreted the success and popularity of the arab spring as a repudiation of al qaeda.

      • Yes, however there has been a significant concern – and rightly so – that the Arab Spring movements could result in military gains for extremists such as Al-Qaeda. This has been especially so in Libya where a number of anti-Qaddafi rebel leaders were identified as Al-Qaeda sympathizers. The political “center” of the Libya rebel organization was largely a matter of speculation.

        I do not see any major role for Al-Qaeda in a post-Assad Syria. But you cannot rule out such extremist influence in any North African nations affected by the Arab Spring movement.

        • i could be missing nuances or even mislead but
          libya’s LIFG renounced al qaeda.

    • American involvement in Syria militarily could avoid anarchy and bloodshed – but at what price to America and Obama’s re-election hopes?

      i’m not clear about what you mean US military involvement. syria rebe;s aren’t calling for american boots on the ground. they want military arms provided to them. specifically, anti-tank weaponry.

      • It was anti-tank and anti-aircraft(particularly Stinger missiles) weaponry supplied by the CIA that had turned the tide in Afghanistan in favor of the anti-Soviet fighters in the 1980s. It would be correct to suggest that furnishing such weapons to rebels in Syria would likewise be a great boost to their cause.

        It was also Russian-manufactured anti-tank rockets that inflicted heavy casualties upon Israeli ground forces in the Second Lebanon War in 2006 and destroying or damaging numerous tanks.

        • ty! i hadn’t considered israel would oppose such weapons to be given to rebels.

  15. Will arming “good” Syrian rebels result in civil wars between tribes? What are the proven odds in the Middle East?

    Anyway, that’s not the real issue.

    Whether it’s arming the good Syrian rebel forces against their corrupt dictators or expanding arming of the Military Industrial Complex of the United States, it makes little difference since the military power usually ends up being controlled by the corrupt billionaires and their families, puppet- millionaires, governments, news medias, etc.

    Money and fear are the root causes of most addictions, insanity and corruption.

    Humankind continues evolution from animal instincts or from the so called primitives from the Garden(s) of Eden.

    Conquer and control by dividing and controlling information in the news media, online, in education, etc. Democrats are becoming as corrupt as republicans or perhaps they have always been but it’s the computer age that brings out the truth. The billionaires are lost in addictions and sadness.

    How long before a group of insane radicals buy or develop nuclear bombs and simultaneously explode a few to confuse the world and start multiple nuclear wars ending in worldwide nuclear fallout, death, disease, anarchy?

    INSANITY – Nuclear Stockpiles, Deterrent or War

    “Global Stockpiles
    There are currently about 31,000 nuclear warheads deployed or in reserve in the stockpiles of eight countries: China, France, India, Israel, Pakistan, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States. Of these about 13,000 are deployed and 4,600 of these are on high alert, i.e. ready to be launched within minutes notice. The combined explosive yield of these weapons is approximately 5,000 megatons, which is about 200,000 times the explosive yield of the bomb used on Hiroshima.

    Note: There are sometimes variances in numbers cited for stockpiles due to uncertainties of the status of some weapons, i.e. whether they are deployed, in non-active reserve, or dismantled.”

    link to

    The US and Russian has developed nuclear weapons with yields on the order of 50 mT of tnt. It’s reported that most if not all megaton weapons have been retired by the US and Russia.

    Current yields of US nuclear warheads are on the order of
    4 to 25 mT of tnt. About 1000 times the yield of nuclear bombs used on Japan, 15 and 20 kT.

    Consider that America on August 9, 1945 dropped the second atomic bomb only 3 days after the first one on August 6.
    Could President have waited 7 days considering the level and slowness of communication in 1945 and the confusion that the unbelievable destruction of a large city would result in?
    link to

    Again, a nuclear war is insanity.

    In the year 2062, cooperation not competition will be the way. Billionaires and millionaires will be extinct. Mental telepathy is present in many children up to the age of 5 and in a few up age 7. Our cultures and education suppresses MT. By the year 2062 many adults will have mental telepathy which will eliminate corruption, fear and most mental diseases including the sick games of power, wealth, politics, education, lust, possessions, etc. Education will be free. Fear will be almost totally gone and which will remove hatred, anger and other mental diseases. Real freedom of speech will include freedom from hatred, anger and fear. Humankind is just beginning to wake up to being present now.

    There is enough food, money and resources to bring peace to all the people in the world if we cooperate, share and open our hearts.


  16. “He prefaced his remarks by saying that the Gulf Cooperation Council countries (the Sunni oil monarchies) are seeking closer relations with the United States.”
    Is it just me? Does anybody else take these family, franchise operations seriously? Money, madrece and armed mujahids, Drone attracting slime and not freedom is what you get. Is it for economic reasons that Turks would want an AfPak on their border? Are they prepared to use their armed forces on either side when they have had enough?

  17. “Al-Maliki is said to fear that the overthrow of the Baath Party in Syria would lead to the opposition Sunnis taking power, and in turn he is afraid that triumphant Sunnis in Damascus will support Iraqi militants.”

    And history shows that he is right.

    • it was assad is who sent militants to iraq. how many americans were killed because of assad’s meddling?

    • And now sunnis get killed for there names and suffer because Maliki wants to feel save. Why has maliki and Iran insisted on the debaathification of Iraq. What is this double standard.

  18. i knew there was a sunni/shia proxy war going on. what i didn’t know was it also included this dimension. from the documentary Iran Is Not the Problem:

    due to a historical accident, most of the world’s petroleum is in the shitte parts of the middle east. including shia controlled iraq, shia iran and shia region of saudi arabia. washington’s worst nightmare is the formation of an independent loose shitte alliance controlling most of the world’s oil. possibly even joining the “shanghai cooperation organization” linked to the asian energy security grid. US economic rivals china and russia are members and iran is an observer. the US, however, is shut out. also, saudis and japanese are holding financial reserves in US dollars, propping up the US economy. if the energy grid expands, they may diversify. causing the value of the dollar to plummet. the economic problems for the US could be huge.

    this explain the russian/china UN veto.

  19. Just to say that Iraq’s fears are not without reason. Saud al-Faisal’s idea of arming the rebels recalls the similar plan to arm the Afghan opposition, in in the 1980s, which led to a Soviet withdrawal but also created a long-term security nightmare in the form of al-Qaeda.

    what sunk afghanistan wasn’t because it was flooded with weapons. (the US did offer a weapons buy-back program, did they not? i’m sure impoverished afghans didn’t pass up a chance for a quick buck.) it was because after the soviets left, the US abandoned the country which caused it to descend into a failed state status. the US and the gulf states should have done more to support development instead of abandoning the country.

  20. prof. i just remember this story from mid march. the US accused iraq of allowing weapons coming from iran and going to syria.

    State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland says Iranian arms exports are banned by a U.N. Security Council resolution. She says Iranian cargo flights are crossing Iraq and that the U.S. is concerned about possible weapons shipments.

    She told reporters: “Any arms sent to the Syrian regime at this time would obviously be used in the brutal repression that the regime is exacting on its own people.”

    another account here.

    so, the iraq policy is weapons for the regime but not for the rebels!

Comments are closed.