Israel Supporting Al-Qaeda...

west didsblue said:
Kazzydeyna said:
Serious question..

Is "Israel supporting Al-Queda" any different from the UK/USA supporting Saddam Hussein in the 80's?
When we sold him the WMD that he happily used against the Kurds, with our tacit approval (until years later when we decided it was wrong - nothing to Do with wanting his oil of course)

Or the UK supporting America using chemical weapons in Vietnam?
Or the UK/USA developing nuclear weapons at the same time as denying them to Iran or any other countries we don't like?

The point is, ALL govts act hypocritically. Twas ever thus.

I'm no friend of Israel, but we shouldn't single her out. That's rank hypocrisy given our own history.
If you read the link provided by the OP, the author refers to a number of articles saying that Israel has helped treat injured members of the FSA. They may also have provided some support to Al-Haramein which is an element of the FSA not affiliated to Al Qaeda. The author, Asa Winstanley, who writes for Electronic Intifada and other pro Palestinian publications, then spuriously interprets this as Israel supporting Al Qaeda on the basis that the FSA and Al Nusra are both fighting the Syrian government in spite of the fact they've also been fighting each other. It's a fucking complicated situation but there's no credible evidence that Israel is providing any assistance to any Al Qaeda affiliate.
The OP has previous for picking up sensational headlines from some of the conspiracy theorist websites he's fond of. The headline, as is often the case in the media, is far more sensational than the story that follows and the OP then sexes it up even further. He doesn't bother to read the story itself (because he can't read big words or follow an argument that is more than 6 words long) or perhaps he chooses to ignore it and just be a troll.

But I'll grant that there's some evidence that Israel may have provided medical treatment to, or maybe even had discussions with, Syrian rebel fighters belonging to a group that is probably an affiliate of Al Qaeda. Furthermore, when you do a little bit of research, there's a story that this group might have been considering disaffiliating from AQ and receiving funding from the UAE. Then we could have had a thread headlined "Man City supporting Al Qaeda".

But even if Israel were providing financial and logistical support to Al Nusrah, there's a good reason why that would be. Al Nusrah are fighting against Hezbollah, who are supporting and fighting on the side of Assad. Now all things being equal, it suits Israel to have Syria in disarray as Assad's Syria and Iran are close allies, Iran arms Hezbollah and anything that's bad for Iran is seen as good for Israel. (I actually believe that Israel and Iran should have common strategic interests in keeping the Middle East stable but unfortunately I'm not setting Israel's foreign policy). So on that basis alone, Israel supporting an effective anti-Assad group makes some sense.

But if they can encourage Al Nusrah to take on Hezbollah (and they shouldn't really need much encouraging) then it serves a double purpose as Hezbollah are in control of Southern Lebanon and therefore a direct threat to Israel's northern border. They've already demonstrated that they have the ability to inflict damage on Israel so if Israel can find a group that's willing to take Hezbollah on without them needing to get directly involved then they'd be mad not to do that. Unfortunately that's the nature of realpolitik and, as kazzydeyna has ightly pointed out, all governments do it.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
But I'll grant that there's some evidence that Israel may have provided medical treatment to, or maybe even had discussions with, Syrian rebel fighters belonging to a group that is probably an affiliate of Al Qaeda. Furthermore, when you do a little bit of research, there's a story that this group might have been considering disaffiliating from AQ and receiving funding from the UAE. Then we could have had a thread headlined "Man City supporting Al Qaeda".

But even if Israel were providing financial and logistical support to Al Nusrah, there's a good reason why that would be. Al Nusrah are fighting against Hezbollah, who are supporting and fighting on the side of Assad. Now all things being equal, it suits Israel to have Syria in disarray as Assad's Syria and Iran are close allies, Iran arms Hezbollah and anything that's bad for Iran is seen as good for Israel. (I actually believe that Israel and Iran should have common strategic interests in keeping the Middle East stable but unfortunately I'm not setting Israel's foreign policy). So on that basis alone, Israel supporting an effective anti-Assad group makes some sense.

But if they can encourage Al Nusrah to take on Hezbollah (and they shouldn't really need much encouraging) then it serves a double purpose as Hezbollah are in control of Southern Lebanon and therefore a direct threat to Israel's northern border. They've already demonstrated that they have the ability to inflict damage on Israel so if Israel can find a group that's willing to take Hezbollah on without them needing to get directly involved then they'd be mad not to do that. Unfortunately that's the nature of realpolitik and, as kazzydeyna has ightly pointed out, all governments do it.

This is pretty much an accurate summation of this idea. There's not real evidence of any official collusion, just a bunch of isolated incidents that have been viewed through a certain lens.

If we were to spin this round the other way and Israel were to disallow emergency medical treatment to these people then they'd probably get slaughtered for that aswell.
 
Bit ironic that this all comes on the same thread that the same moderator is reminding a poster to stay within the code of conduct.









Bluemoon code of conduct point 10 said:
Treat other users with respect. Anyone who is constantly aggressive or confrontational will face action
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
Yet again, your witless ability to believe anything you read without applying a modicum of thought to what might be behind it shows you up for the complete plank you are. .
 
tidyman said:
Bit ironic that this all comes on the same thread that the same moderator is reminding a poster to stay within the code of conduct.









Bluemoon code of conduct point 10 said:
Treat other users with respect. Anyone who is constantly aggressive or confrontational will face action

The point of that point in the Code of Conduct is to get people who users who do nothing but roll around the forum and troll it, not to ban everybody who loses their rag.
 
tidyman said:
Bit ironic that this all comes on the same thread that the same moderator is reminding a poster to stay within the code of conduct.

Bluemoon code of conduct point 10 said:
Treat other users with respect. Anyone who is constantly aggressive or confrontational will face action

nobody can eat fifty eggs said:
Go and take your gob for a shit and take the rest of your right-wing cock wombles with you. Your gangster tory boy shite doesn't hold any fear with me you know-nothing empty headed c**t.
This is the standard of debate employed by the OP. He's a troll who quotes "facts" that are nothing of the sort and when posters show him what the actual facts are, he resorts to stuff like this. Amazingly he escaped a long ban for that but if people choose to sink to that level, then they can't complain when they get a lack of respect back. Now, back on topic.
 
Damocles said:
Prestwich_Blue said:
But I'll grant that there's some evidence that Israel may have provided medical treatment to, or maybe even had discussions with, Syrian rebel fighters belonging to a group that is probably an affiliate of Al Qaeda. Furthermore, when you do a little bit of research, there's a story that this group might have been considering disaffiliating from AQ and receiving funding from the UAE. Then we could have had a thread headlined "Man City supporting Al Qaeda".

But even if Israel were providing financial and logistical support to Al Nusrah, there's a good reason why that would be. Al Nusrah are fighting against Hezbollah, who are supporting and fighting on the side of Assad. Now all things being equal, it suits Israel to have Syria in disarray as Assad's Syria and Iran are close allies, Iran arms Hezbollah and anything that's bad for Iran is seen as good for Israel. (I actually believe that Israel and Iran should have common strategic interests in keeping the Middle East stable but unfortunately I'm not setting Israel's foreign policy). So on that basis alone, Israel supporting an effective anti-Assad group makes some sense.

But if they can encourage Al Nusrah to take on Hezbollah (and they shouldn't really need much encouraging) then it serves a double purpose as Hezbollah are in control of Southern Lebanon and therefore a direct threat to Israel's northern border. They've already demonstrated that they have the ability to inflict damage on Israel so if Israel can find a group that's willing to take Hezbollah on without them needing to get directly involved then they'd be mad not to do that. Unfortunately that's the nature of realpolitik and, as kazzydeyna has ightly pointed out, all governments do it.

This is pretty much an accurate summation of this idea. There's not real evidence of any official collusion, just a bunch of isolated incidents that have been viewed through a certain lens.
Just doing some reading on this and there is some evidence of collusion in attacks on targets around the Quneitra area, close to the Golan Heights. The source is Iranian Press TV and unattributed sources in Syria but it wouldn't shock me in light of articles like this in The Times Of Israel: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.timesofisrael.com/as-hezbollah-fights-on-golan-geopolitical-lines-shift/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.timesofisrael.com/as-hezboll ... nes-shift/</a>

It’s too early to be certain, but it seems the battles waged by Hezbollah, along with thousands of Syrian army troops and members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, against the anti-Syrian opposition militias on the Syrian Golan Heights, are only getting started.

But for now at least, the momentum is on the side of the Shiite axis, which has managed to capture several villages and towns from the Syrian Southern Front group and the Nusra Front, the organization affiliated with al-Qaeda, considered to be the dominant military power in the southern Daraa province.

Still, the outcome on the Golan has not been decided. After a few days of progress, the snow and the rain slowed down Hezbollah. But even now that the weather is improving, the task is not proving easy for the organization, which has been driven to the edge of its military capabilities. The region’s south, i.e. the triangle between Quneitra, Daraa and the southern suburbs of Damascus, is still considered a stronghold of Hezbollah’s opponents not affiliated with the Islamic State. While the rebels’ weapons and military abilities are limited, their motivation is high as the area is considered to be nearly the “last bastion” of non-IS opposition forces in Syria.

But even if Hezbollah’s operation in Syria succeeds and the group is able to occupy the Golan Heights, that won’t mean the battle has been won. The organization has made visible strategic gains, defeating opposition forces in the mountains along the Lebanese border, only to see the combat renewed a few short months later. In the Syrian Golan Heights, this is also a likely scenario, as, just as before, opposition fighters will most likely try to regain control of the area, which they too consider critical for their military purposes.

But regardless of the outcome of the week-old operation, the very fact that Hezbollah set out on a ground campaign inside Syrian territory is an extraordinary statement. The placement of thousands of the group’s soldiers near the Syrian-Israeli border, with the organization not even trying to conceal its involvement in the battles, signifies much more than just another operation. This is a new strategy. First, on the geopolitical level, Hezbollah is trying to implement the vision only recently introduced by its leader, Hassan Nasrallah, according to whom the Syrian Golan Heights and South Lebanon are a united front. To put it more bluntly, the old order and the old geographical distribution between Syria and Lebanon is now utterly irrelevant as far as the group is concerned.

In other words, no more separation between President Bashar Assad’s forces in Syria and Nasrallah’s organization in Lebanon; they are now single entity that controls parts of Syria and most of Lebanon. In the past, the leaders of Syria, including Assad’s father, Hafez Assad, saw Lebanon as part of greater Syria. Now, the sliver of Syria controlled by Assad has become part of Hezbollah’s, or rather Iran’s, greater Lebanon. The old countries have died; long live the smaller Greater Syria — under Iran’s control.

Former Lebanese prime minister Saad Hariri spoke in Beirut Saturday at an event marking a decade since the killing of his father, Rafik Hariri. Hariri criticized Hezbollah’s involvement in the civil war in Syria, blasting its recent statements according to which “South Lebanon and the Golan Heights are a united front.” He even called on the group to turn the suspects in the murder of his father, who are of course Hezbollah members, in to the International Criminal Court.

Ostensibly, this is a step by a courageous man, who despite knowing that his life is in great danger, formally and unequivocally challenged Hezbollah. But in this writer’s opinion, Hariri’s speech was mostly a farewell to the old Lebanon, which was once dominated by Sunnis and Maronite Christians. Hariri also understands that Lebanon is no longer the same country in which he was raised, or even, for that matter, of which he was prime minister. The Arab Spring brought with it a regional upheaval that utterly transformed Lebanon, portending a particularly bleak future for those who are not supporters of radical Sunni militias or Hezbollah affiliates. Perhaps this is why Hariri no longer lives in Lebanon.

Beyond the political-geographical changes in Lebanon and Syria, Hezbollah is also trying to reshape its security balance with Israel. Like almost any other body or entity in the Middle East, Hezbollah is also prone to conspiracy theories on which it establishes its military tactics. This month, the organization claimed that Israel was backing the radical Nusra Front rebel group and its advances in the Syrian Golan Heights. Hezbollah members claimed they had seen the transfer of patients from Syria to Israel. What was seen in Israel as a humanitarian gesture was interpreted as an attempt at cooperation between the organization, which supports al-Qaeda, and Israel.

This operation led by Hezbollah is designed to prevent what it considers the possibility that Israel will close in on it from Mount Dov to the west, using the Al-Nusra Front and moderate opposition forces. Hezbollah is afraid that Israel will outflank it and lay siege to southern Lebanon from the east, thus causing difficulties for the organization’s activities there. In addition, and perhaps more importantly, Hezbollah and Assad fear that Israel is carving out a path to Damascus via Quneitra and Daraa — one that will allow it easy access to the Syrian capital in the event of war. Hezbollah’s mission is intended to torpedo that possibility. How it will end, it is difficult to say. But what is clear is that the situation on the border between Israel and Hezbollah-land is as explosive as ever.

As I've said, you could see why Israel might well want to infuence events in this area.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.