Yeah, just like 70% of Lebanon cheered Hezbollah after they beat Israel's crying little shitty soldiers in 2006? There is only ONE capable arab fighting force, and that's Hezbollah.
Syrian Civil War (Graphic Photos/Vid Not Allowed)
- Thread starter Alienoz_TR
- Start date
Yeah, just like 70% of Lebanon cheered Hezbollah after they beat Israel's crying little shitty soldiers in 2006? There is only ONE capable arab fighting force, and that's Hezbollah.
Falcon29
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2013
- Messages
- 31,641
- Reaction score
- -10
- Country
- Location
Well that's a fantasy, you can't have it both ways. Either US/Israel support Hezbollah in defending Lebanese borders if groups in post Assad area go on offensive or they remain neutral.
monitor
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 8,570
- Reaction score
- 7
- Country
- Location
dearhypocrite
BANNED
- Joined
- May 1, 2015
- Messages
- 108
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
i don't know how the iranian feel if this hezbo become extinct after this
Hussein
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2009
- Messages
- 4,263
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
who exactly?
dearhypocrite
BANNED
- Joined
- May 1, 2015
- Messages
- 108
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
whoever that loves this hezbo army so much
500
BANNED
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2010
- Messages
- 16,678
- Reaction score
- 38
- Country
- Location
Hezbollah goal was to "liberate" Ghajar farms and it failed miserably. Nasrallah is like his master Assad. Who started the war in 1973 to liberate Golan, achieved nothing except destruction and claims victory.
Dude, your so called 'invincible' wanted to 'destroy' Hezbollah and it's rocket arsenal. It achieved BUPKIS. It didn't even get more than 1.5 km into Lebanese holy land. They killed all those Merkavas and Israel ran away. Plenty of books and articles written by US military higher ups who were ashamed and embarrased by Israel's 'achievments'. Even some Israeli generals got fired. Yeah, blame it on rules on engagement. Hezbollah kicked your Tuches. Haha but hey, let's get back on topic man.
Falcon29
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2013
- Messages
- 31,641
- Reaction score
- -10
- Country
- Location
Hezbollah did perform well against ground invasion in 2006, most of us agree. It wasn't only Hezbollah fighting, Lebanese army, Amaal, Abdullah Azzam and Palestinian militias also took part. I don't know why Hezbollah-Israel conflict is mentioned in this thread. But today matching that performance on ground will be more difficult since the Israeli air force/army has upgraded heavily since then. That doesn't matter though since there likely won't be any conflict between Leb/Iz anytime soon.
500
BANNED
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2010
- Messages
- 16,678
- Reaction score
- 38
- Country
- Location
No, Israel never set such stupid aim.
Again bullcrap. Here Israeli soldiers in Marjayoun, some 6 km in Lebanon:
Hezbollah tactics is very simple: sit in bunkers and fire rockets. They managed to hit some tanks and soldiers, but u cant win any war with that.
Funny thing that Hezbollah beloved their own propaganda that they are coolest and strongest in the world and they recklessly attacked poor peasants in Quseir. As result they got bloody nose there, losing some 200. Since then they dont attack before leveling everything with barrel bombs and Volcano/Elephant rockets.
I don't know either. Sure Israel has upgraded, so have their tanks. But there is one thing that's always true in warfare: both parties upgrade, or at least adapt to the other party's upgrades. And, in the end you need boots on the ground. Bombing entire Lebanon into the stone age will only anger the rest of the world and the Arab people (all muslims really). And in the end it won't conquer Hezbollah. Defender always have the moral high ground. But indeed Falcon29, let's get back on topic.
Guy, do you realize how hysterical you sound? NOT 1.5 km but 6 km!!!11!!11 Behave. You're not a child I hope. Israel achieved NOTHING. Please refute that? Israel wanted a buffer zone.Hezbollah even almost sunk an Israel navy ship.
Hasbara Buster
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2010
- Messages
- 4,612
- Reaction score
- -7
CONFIRMED: US "Operation Rooms" Backing Al Qaeda in Syria
US policy think-tank Brookings Institution confirms that contrary to propaganda, US-Saudi "moderates" and Turkey-Qatar "Islamists" have been coordinating all along.
By Tony Cartalucci
May 11, 2015 "Information Clearing House" - The war in Syria continues to drag on, with a recent and renewed vigor demonstrated behind an opposition long portrayed as fractured and reflecting a myriad of competing foreign interests. Chief among these competing interests, the public has been told, were the US and Saudis on one side, backing so-called "moderate rebels," and Turkey and Qatar on the other openly backing Al Qaeda and its various franchises including the Islamic State (ISIS).
Image: The conflicts in Syria and Iraq are far from internal. Looking at a map of territory used or held by ISIS and other Western-backed sectarian extremists, it is clear that the current conflict is a regional invasion streaming out of NATO-member Turkey and US ally Jordan, now admittedly with the help of both Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
However, for those following the conflict closely, it was clear from the beginning and by the West's own admissions that success hinged on covertly providing arms, cash, equipment, and both political and military support to Al Qaeda and other sectarian extremists, not opposed by Saudi Arabia, but rather by using Saudi Arabia as the primary medium through which Western material support could be laundered.
And this fact is now confirmed in a recent article published on the Brookings Institution's website titled, "Why Assad is losing." It states unequivocally that (emphasis added):
The involvement of FSA groups, in fact, reveals how the factions’ backers have changed their tune regarding coordination with Islamists. Several commanders involved in leading recent Idlib operations confirmed to this author that the U.S.-led operations room in southern Turkey, which coordinates the provision of lethal and non-lethal support to vetted opposition groups, was instrumental in facilitating their involvement in the operation from early April onwards. That operations room — along with another in Jordan, which covers Syria’s south — also appears to have dramatically increased its level of assistance and provision of intelligence to vetted groups in recent weeks. Whereas these multinational operations rooms have previously demanded that recipients of military assistance cease direct coordination with groups like Jabhat al-Nusra, recent dynamics in Idlib appear to have demonstrated something different. Not only were weapons shipments increased to the so-called “vetted groups,” but the operations room specifically encouraged a closer cooperation with Islamists commanding frontline operations.
Overall, Brookings is pleased to report that with the infiltration and overrunning of much of Idlib in northern Syria, it appears their long-stated goal of creating a seat of power for their proxies within Syria's borders and perhaps even extending NATO aircover over it, may finally be at hand. Brookings still attempts to perpetuate an adversarial narrative between the West and Al Qaeda, despite admitting that it was only with Western backing that recent offensives spearheaded by Al Qaeda itself were successful.
In reality, as far back as 2007, it was the admitted policy of the then Bush-led White House to begin arming and funding sectarian extremists, including Al Qaeda, through the use of intermediaries including Saudi Arabia. Veteran journalist and two-time Pulitzer Prize-winner Seymour Hersh in his report "The Redirection: Is the Administration's new policy benefiting our enemies in the war on terrorism?"would lay bare this conspiracy which has since then unfolded verbatim as described in 2007.
The above mentioned Brookings article also alludes to a grander geopolitical landscape taking shape beyond the Syrian conflict. It states in regards to the US now openly backing what is for all intents and purposes an Al Qaeda-led offensive that:
The most likely explanation for such a move is pressure from the newly emboldened regional alliance comprising Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. The United States also is looking for ways to prove its continued alignment with its traditional Sunni Gulf allies, amid the broader context of its rapprochement with Iran.
The continuation, even expansion of the US-backed conflict in Syria is the most telling evidence of all regarding the disingenuous nature of America's rapprochement with Iran. The entire goal of destabilizing and potentially overthrowing the government in Syria is to weaken Iran ahead of a similar campaign of encirclement, destabilization, and destruction within Iran itself.
The fact that events in Syria are being accelerated, with Brookings itself admitting that "international and ideological differences," have been "pushed to the side," illustrates a palpable desperation among the West to finish the conflict in Syria in hopes of moving forward toward Iran before regional dynamics and Iran's own defensive posture renders moot the West's entire regional agenda, jeopardizing its long-standing hegemony across North Africa and the Middle East.
Similarly rushed operations appear to be underway in Yemen. With Western-backed conflicts embroiling virtually every nation surrounding Iran, the idea that the US seeks anything but Iran's eventual destruction, let alone "rapprochement" must surely have no one fooled in Tehran.
While Brookings enthusiastically reports on the continued destruction in Syria it itself played a part in engineering and promoting, it still admits that overthrowing Syria's legitimate government is not inevitable. While it attempts to portray Syria's allies as withdrawing support for Damascus, the reality is that if and when Syria falls, Syria's allies are indisputably next in line.
Iran will face an entire nation handed over to Al Qaeda and other heavily armed and well-backed sectarian extremists dreaming of a cataclysmic confrontation with Tehran, fueled by a global network of US-Saudi backed madrases turning out legions of ideologically poisoned zealots. And beyond Iran, Russia faces the prospect of its Caucasus region being turned into a corridor of terror aimed straight at the heart of Russia itself.
The conflict in Syria is but a single battle among a much larger war - a global war constituting what is basically a third World War, fought not upon vast but clearly defined fronts, but rather through the use of fourth generation warfare, proxies, mercenaries, economics, and information. For those that fail to see how Syria is linked to the survival of many nations beyond its borders and the very concept of a multi-polar world built upon the concept of national sovereignty, they invite not just Damascus' defeat, but that of the world as we know it.
Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine“New Eastern
Outlook”.
 CONFIRMED: US "Operation Rooms" Backing Al Qaeda in Syria  Â
:Â Â Information Clearing House - ICH
US policy think-tank Brookings Institution confirms that contrary to propaganda, US-Saudi "moderates" and Turkey-Qatar "Islamists" have been coordinating all along.
By Tony Cartalucci
May 11, 2015 "Information Clearing House" - The war in Syria continues to drag on, with a recent and renewed vigor demonstrated behind an opposition long portrayed as fractured and reflecting a myriad of competing foreign interests. Chief among these competing interests, the public has been told, were the US and Saudis on one side, backing so-called "moderate rebels," and Turkey and Qatar on the other openly backing Al Qaeda and its various franchises including the Islamic State (ISIS).
Image: The conflicts in Syria and Iraq are far from internal. Looking at a map of territory used or held by ISIS and other Western-backed sectarian extremists, it is clear that the current conflict is a regional invasion streaming out of NATO-member Turkey and US ally Jordan, now admittedly with the help of both Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
However, for those following the conflict closely, it was clear from the beginning and by the West's own admissions that success hinged on covertly providing arms, cash, equipment, and both political and military support to Al Qaeda and other sectarian extremists, not opposed by Saudi Arabia, but rather by using Saudi Arabia as the primary medium through which Western material support could be laundered.
And this fact is now confirmed in a recent article published on the Brookings Institution's website titled, "Why Assad is losing." It states unequivocally that (emphasis added):
The involvement of FSA groups, in fact, reveals how the factions’ backers have changed their tune regarding coordination with Islamists. Several commanders involved in leading recent Idlib operations confirmed to this author that the U.S.-led operations room in southern Turkey, which coordinates the provision of lethal and non-lethal support to vetted opposition groups, was instrumental in facilitating their involvement in the operation from early April onwards. That operations room — along with another in Jordan, which covers Syria’s south — also appears to have dramatically increased its level of assistance and provision of intelligence to vetted groups in recent weeks. Whereas these multinational operations rooms have previously demanded that recipients of military assistance cease direct coordination with groups like Jabhat al-Nusra, recent dynamics in Idlib appear to have demonstrated something different. Not only were weapons shipments increased to the so-called “vetted groups,” but the operations room specifically encouraged a closer cooperation with Islamists commanding frontline operations.
Overall, Brookings is pleased to report that with the infiltration and overrunning of much of Idlib in northern Syria, it appears their long-stated goal of creating a seat of power for their proxies within Syria's borders and perhaps even extending NATO aircover over it, may finally be at hand. Brookings still attempts to perpetuate an adversarial narrative between the West and Al Qaeda, despite admitting that it was only with Western backing that recent offensives spearheaded by Al Qaeda itself were successful.
In reality, as far back as 2007, it was the admitted policy of the then Bush-led White House to begin arming and funding sectarian extremists, including Al Qaeda, through the use of intermediaries including Saudi Arabia. Veteran journalist and two-time Pulitzer Prize-winner Seymour Hersh in his report "The Redirection: Is the Administration's new policy benefiting our enemies in the war on terrorism?"would lay bare this conspiracy which has since then unfolded verbatim as described in 2007.
The above mentioned Brookings article also alludes to a grander geopolitical landscape taking shape beyond the Syrian conflict. It states in regards to the US now openly backing what is for all intents and purposes an Al Qaeda-led offensive that:
The most likely explanation for such a move is pressure from the newly emboldened regional alliance comprising Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. The United States also is looking for ways to prove its continued alignment with its traditional Sunni Gulf allies, amid the broader context of its rapprochement with Iran.
The continuation, even expansion of the US-backed conflict in Syria is the most telling evidence of all regarding the disingenuous nature of America's rapprochement with Iran. The entire goal of destabilizing and potentially overthrowing the government in Syria is to weaken Iran ahead of a similar campaign of encirclement, destabilization, and destruction within Iran itself.
The fact that events in Syria are being accelerated, with Brookings itself admitting that "international and ideological differences," have been "pushed to the side," illustrates a palpable desperation among the West to finish the conflict in Syria in hopes of moving forward toward Iran before regional dynamics and Iran's own defensive posture renders moot the West's entire regional agenda, jeopardizing its long-standing hegemony across North Africa and the Middle East.
Similarly rushed operations appear to be underway in Yemen. With Western-backed conflicts embroiling virtually every nation surrounding Iran, the idea that the US seeks anything but Iran's eventual destruction, let alone "rapprochement" must surely have no one fooled in Tehran.
While Brookings enthusiastically reports on the continued destruction in Syria it itself played a part in engineering and promoting, it still admits that overthrowing Syria's legitimate government is not inevitable. While it attempts to portray Syria's allies as withdrawing support for Damascus, the reality is that if and when Syria falls, Syria's allies are indisputably next in line.
Iran will face an entire nation handed over to Al Qaeda and other heavily armed and well-backed sectarian extremists dreaming of a cataclysmic confrontation with Tehran, fueled by a global network of US-Saudi backed madrases turning out legions of ideologically poisoned zealots. And beyond Iran, Russia faces the prospect of its Caucasus region being turned into a corridor of terror aimed straight at the heart of Russia itself.
The conflict in Syria is but a single battle among a much larger war - a global war constituting what is basically a third World War, fought not upon vast but clearly defined fronts, but rather through the use of fourth generation warfare, proxies, mercenaries, economics, and information. For those that fail to see how Syria is linked to the survival of many nations beyond its borders and the very concept of a multi-polar world built upon the concept of national sovereignty, they invite not just Damascus' defeat, but that of the world as we know it.
Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine“New Eastern
Outlook”.
 CONFIRMED: US "Operation Rooms" Backing Al Qaeda in Syria  Â
:Â Â Information Clearing House - ICH
usernameless
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2013
- Messages
- 2,541
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
Turkey and the US are training FSA together as i write this. Yet, according to this article, somehow the US backs moderate rebels whereas Turkey apparently doesn't back the FSA moderate rebels it is training, but backs al qaeda, and even 'openly' on top of it??? this article doesnt make sense, sounds like a confused author trying too hard to come up with sensational conspiracy theories. before someone says that all rebels are the same, no they aren't. there is no reason for Turkey to arm isis/al qaeda, which are combating the FSA, thus harming Turkey's interest too.
. They put everything on the internet, it doesn't matter of the article is garbage.Similar threads
