What's new

Israel Hypocrisy: Israel supports independent Kurdistan

I never heard of Shia and Sunni conflicts until us Invasion of Iraq in 2003, do you agree? now compare the countries befowork US interfered into them, let me name you a couple, Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, Syria and much more, they were peaceful countries before the US and the west interfered in their internal affairs... so don't tell me the west has nothing to do with them...

and don't forget who raised AQ and who supported Osama Bin Laden...
As I said US has always been a major player in the middle east but really on what grounds are you calling Saddam ruled Iraq and Taliban ruled Afghanistan as peaceful countries? And Shia Sunni conflict predate Iraq War by decades. One of the reasons why Iraq invaded Iran in 1980s was because it felt that Iranian revolution would cause Iraq's long suppressed shia majority to rise.
 
. .
As I said US has always been a major player in the middle east but really on what grounds are you calling Saddam ruled Iraq and Taliban ruled Afghanistan as peaceful countries? And Shia Sunni conflict predate Iraq War by decades. One of the reasons why Iraq invaded Iran in 1980s was because it felt that Iranian revolution would cause Iraq's long suppressed shia majority to rise.
you're not going back to the origin, who started Taliban and AQ? there was no AQ before the US sent them to Afghanistan... USA supported the "mujahdeen" and gave them weapons and money ( same thing happening in Syria now)... even the US admits it supported mujahdeen in Afghanistan ... and Saddam?? guess who gave him chemical weapons and support?? USA... I think you need to do more research my friend...
 
. .
you're not going back to the origin, who started Taliban and AQ? there was no AQ before the US sent them to Afghanistan... USA supported the "mujahdeen" and gave them weapons and money ( same thing happening in Syria now)... even the US admits it supported mujahdeen in Afghanistan ... and Saddam?? guess who gave him chemical weapons and support?? USA... I think you need to do more research my friend...
I am aware of all these facts. In fact i am now mentioning it the third time that I do agree United States IS a major player in middle eastern affairs but my friend, external powers might exploit your weaknesses but these weaknesses are generated from within. The West did not create sectarian conflict in middle east, it just exploited it to its benefit. While the US has armed militants all over there, but the radical version of Islam that the militants follow was not invented by US. Middle Easterners are killing each other not because the US told them to. The US knows that they want to kill each other so it arms them to make their job easy to the benefit of US.
 
.
Hypocrisy at its best, what about Palestine??
Hypocrisy is when u shed crocodile tears about Palestinians and in same time support regime which slaughtered Palestinians by thousands.

Israel supports Palestinian state, so there is no any hypocrisy from the Israeli side.

I never heard of Shia and Sunni conflicts until us Invasion of Iraq in 2003, do you agree?
LOL, never heared about Iran-Iraq war? Its bloodiest Muslim conflict in history.
 
.
I wonder what Turkey's response to this if anything will be....maybe strong diplomatic support for a Palestinian state?
No AKP allready showed his strong diplomatic support to independent Kurdistan, they said ''a independent Kurdistan is our brother''
 
.
Hypocrisy is when u shed crocodile tears about Palestinians and in same time support regime which slaughtered Palestinians by thousands.

Israel supports Palestinian state, so there is no any hypocrisy from the Israeli side.


LOL, never heared about Iran-Iraq war? Its bloodiest Muslim conflict in history.

And have you heard about bold role of western countries in preparing chemical weapons for Saddam regime ? French Super etndard fighters and Exocet missiles?
 
.
And have you heard about bold role of western countries in preparing chemical weapons for Saddam regime ? French Super etndard fighters and Exocet missiles?
French supplies to Saddam were very minor compare to USSR and China. And Saddam bought French weapons with Sunni kingdoms money.
 
.
Hypocrisy is when u shed crocodile tears about Palestinians and in same time support regime which slaughtered Palestinians by thousands.

Israel supports Palestinian state, so there is no any hypocrisy from the Israeli side.


LOL, never heared about Iran-Iraq war? Its bloodiest Muslim conflict in history.
you're hypocrite that's why Israel was against UN vote when Palestine only got observer status, so now you are telling me they would accept a Palestinian state? and don't make this about Syria... Syria didn't kill Palestinians for no reason like Israel...

read my previous posts about Iraq-Iran war... USA was involved in it...
 
.
French supplies to Saddam were very minor compare to USSR and China. And Saddam bought French weapons with Sunni kingdoms money.


Yeap it's ipso facto that Iranian fought by Iraq but in reality we fought bu more than 40 countries supporting Iraq with intelligenc, weapon and petrol money and even with their soldiers and pilots ....
It wasn't about Suni Shia conflict, Arab monercies were afraid that an Islamic revolution inspired by Iranian model ,which represents a political Islam , would have taken place in their countries resulted in overthrowing more western puppets in the region the same reason 4 western countries to support the devastating war against Iran. this agenda has got followed since then (after war) but by differnet forms through sanctions and allegations ....

On French, beside construction of Osirak nuclear reactor:

PQael.jpg



Exclusive: CIA Files Prove America Helped Saddam as He Gassed Iran
The U.S. knew Hussein was launching some of the worst chemical attacks in history -- and still gave him a hand.

The U.S. government may be considering military action in response to chemical strikes near Damascus. But a generation ago, America's military and intelligence communities knew about and did nothing to stop a series of nerve gas attacks far more devastating than anything Syria has seen, Foreign Policy has learned.

In 1988, during the waning days of Iraq's war with Iran, the United States learned through satellite imagery that Iran was about to gain a major strategic advantage by exploiting a hole in Iraqi defenses. U.S. intelligence officials conveyed the location of the Iranian troops to Iraq, fully aware that Hussein's military would attack with chemical weapons, including sarin, a lethal nerve agent.

The intelligence included imagery and maps about Iranian troop movements, as well as the locations of Iranian logistics facilities and details about Iranian air defenses. The Iraqis used mustard gas and sarin prior to four major offensives in early 1988 that relied on U.S. satellite imagery, maps, and other intelligence. These attacks helped to tilt the war in Iraq's favor and bring Iran to the negotiating table, and they ensured that the Reagan administration's long-standing policy of securing an Iraqi victory would succeed. But they were also the last in a series of chemical strikes stretching back several years that the Reagan administration knew about and didn't disclose.

U.S. officials have long denied acquiescing to Iraqi chemical attacks, insisting that Hussein's government never announced he was going to use the weapons. But retired Air Force Col. Rick Francona, who was a military attaché in Baghdad during the 1988 strikes, paints a different picture.
"The Iraqis never told us that they intended to use nerve gas. They didn't have to. We already knew," he told Foreign Policy.

According to recently declassified CIA documents and interviews with former intelligence officials like Francona, the U.S. had firm evidence of Iraqi chemical attacks beginning in 1983. At the time, Iran was publicly alleging that illegal chemical attacks were carried out on its forces, and was building a case to present to the United Nations. But it lacked the evidence implicating Iraq, much of which was contained in top secret reports and memoranda sent to the most senior intelligence officials in the U.S. government. The CIA declined to comment for this story.

In contrast to today's wrenching debate over whether the United States should intervene to stop alleged chemical weapons attacks by the Syrian government, the United States applied a cold calculus three decades ago to Hussein's widespread use of chemical weapons against his enemies and his own people. The Reagan administration decided that it was better to let the attacks continue if they might turn the tide of the war. And even if they were discovered, the CIA wagered that international outrage and condemnation would be muted ......

Iran Still Haunted and Influenced By Chemical Weapons Attacks
The brutal assaults during the Iran-Iraq war killed tens of thousands — and increased Iran's feeling of isolation

Iran is today the world’s largest laboratory for the study of the effects of chemical weapons, in part because of the sheer numbers of Iranian victims, but also because of a little-studied phenomenon called low-dose exposure. In 1991, a declassified CIA report estimated that Iran suffered more than 50,000 casualties from Iraq’s repeated use of nerve agents and toxic gases in the 1980s. Mustard gas — in dusty, liquid and vapor forms — was used the most during the war. It was packed into bombs and artillery shells, then fired at frontlines and beyond, including at hospitals.​
 
Last edited:
.
they already control their territory since saddam's fall and looks like they wont be part of iraq in future.
 
.
well , Iran in Saffavid era gave Kurdistan to Ottomans according of some treaty ( I don't remember that treaty name right now ) , and then it become part of Iraq , so if there is no Iraq , we can reclaim Kurdistan ...
 
.
Spokesman is kurd, nobody gives a damn about what he said.



Kurds or PKK, no difference. Things have changed.

the PKK leader (that guy APO) did say he would call on his "men" to abandon militancy

so does it means they will stop allowing themselves to be used like condoms by foreign intel services
 
.
the PKK leader (that guy APO) did say he would call on his "men" to abandon militancy

so does it means they will stop allowing themselves to be used like condoms by foreign intel services

Nope, first civil disobedience, then streets will flame up. Civil war follows. It is not easy without getting crazy nowadays.

Turkish State doesnt know what to do with 10 millions Kurds who feel no longer part of the country. Population exchange is needed.
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom