Green Light for US SF into IRAN

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by old_bloke, May 26, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I would say if the document is true, someone needs to go to jail for leaking classified Information.
  2. Good to see that Arrse is the tip of the sword when it comes to classified information.
  3. Leaking something like this may well mask some other fun and games that are currently not happening. I'm sure they are not making plans to strike, they will be fine tuning existing plans.
    You don't think all these laptops and documents left on trains are accidents do you? :)

  4. I'd be bloody nervous if I lived anywhere near an oil well!
  5. It's all smoke and mirrors, lads. "I'll say they're there, so they'll think they're not they're so they are there, but they won't know that THEY are there." You see? Now, there...

    But, come on, the Spam THEM have been there for a while. When NATO and the US are fighting a full on war next door against the Talibs, the fundamendalistic neighbours will have some Spec Ops visits. If only to keep tabs on what's going on there and to plot the odd target 'just-in-case'.
    The news in the Times is just politics continued by a different means :D
  6. I feel safer already!
  7. Oooh, Desert One all over again, is it?

    Let's hope they're a bit more successful than in just about every other op they've done in the last 30 years, or it's going to be hostage-crisis time all over again.
  8. As I already said in a neighbouring thread, the reason UK "can no longer afford role in Afghanistan" is because you might be needed in Iran soon.

    Iran was always a prime target; occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan have merits of their own, but the main one -- they encircle Iran. Remember how hot Obama was on going after Pakistan? I'm sure that country escaped the fate of Afghanistan thanks to its nukes.

    US inspired, Israel/US equipped war in Georgia was also meant as part of "the plan": Georgia solves its territorial problems, gets enrolled into NATO asap, and in no time US/NATO has its military platsdarm on the back of Azerbaijan in case Azeri decide its their duty to stick in for their relatives across the border in Iran... Besides, Azerbaidjan has lots of oil & other perks of Caspian region, a dictator and no democracy... :D

  9. I was sort of agreeing with you up until the point you went mad.
    I don't think the US 'inspired' Georgia to kick off, for the simple reason that under no conceivable situation was it going to win.

    I think what you had there was the political equivalent of two little boys, one of whom thinks his dad is bigger than the other one's dad, taking the chance to give his enemy a pre-emptive kicking.

    When the other boy's Dad gave him a clip round the ear, the Georgians must have been quite surprised when their 'dad' said. 'You started it. It's your own fault.'

    The two dad's then looked apologetically at each other, said 'Kids. You know what they're like' and went home.

    Not everything in the world revolves around oil and gas supplies. Both US and Russia know all about handling inconvenient and frequently deranged allied states, and they aren't going to go too far in backing a rogue client state, unless their own interests are threatened. Russia's interests took precedent in their own back yard, and the US quite sensibly decided that this was something the Georgians had brought on themselves. They wouldn't have tolerated a full Russian takeover of Georgia, but a punitive sweep was quite within reason.
  10. You think so?

    In 1990-s eager to become part of "international community" Russia
    1. refused Serbian application to become part of Russian Federation (an application that was already OK'ed by the Russian parliament);

    2. demonstrated indecisiveness at the highest level in Prishtina;

    3. colluded with NATO in subjugation of Serbia against the public opinion and Russia's priorities in the region.

    Georgian war was a testing exercise as to how much Russia really changed since the 90-s. What if Russia would've waited patiently for the "international community" to properly investigate the matters before passing recommendations to the warring sides to stop the fighting? Remember how US and UK were sabotaging UN resolution at the very start of the conflict?
    That was at the time Georgians were already in Ossetian capital slaughtering whoever they could find.

    If Russia would've waited the proper procedures to take their course, by the time UN would've passed its resolution there would've been no S.Ossetia to rescue and no Ossetians to complain. Georgia would've finished its war victoriously taking away the reason European NATO members put forward against Georgian NATO membership; and Russia would've demonstrated it is as indecisive and ready to be pushed about as it was under Yeltsyn.
  11. Yes. I think that the West, as usual, misread the situation in the East. Georgia, a volunteer Western client, after a really bad century under Russian ownership, had been trying to join in the NATO club, but I don't think that NATO understood just how deep feelings were running out there.

    When South Ossetia kicked off, it was probably underestimated. After all, many NATO countries have fractious neighbours (Greece/Turkey, for instance.) What was not expected, probably because Georgia was a relatively unknown quantity, was that it could blow up so fast, and so nastily. As loyal NATO partners, the US/UK could not simply throw the Georgians out, as what message does that send to other aspirational members-That when things get tough, the NATO partners vanish? Instead, they tried to keep the UN out, while they probably tried to rein in the Georgians behind closed doors.

    You might have noticed that no NATO military assistance was offered to Georgia, to avoid escalating the situation, only medical and relief services.
    The whole thing was a regional dispute that got out of hand. Someone in NATO decided this was not worthy of a repeat of Sarajevo 1914, so basically allowed the Russians to hand out a measure of discipline, and then let the matter rest.
  12. :D

    Do you see that pink blob, no stripes? Well, that was "Georgia" (only it was not even called "Georgia") when it was finally permitted to become part of the Russian Empire.


    and this was Georgia when it exited the Soviet Union


    See the difference? I am not even talking of the fact that by 1801 Georgians stood on a brink of physical extermination at the hands of Turks, Iranians as well as some Caucasian nations; only climbing under the Russian skirts saved them.

    On a face of it all, I would not call the results of Russian "ownership" bad for Georgia, would you?
  13. In your own words, The US and UK were making it impossible for the UN to put an end to ethnic cleansing in Ossetia, because it would've send "the wrong message"?

    As to how the US was trying "to rein in the Georgians behind closed doors"

    NATO didn't offer any military assistance... Apart from US weaponry and US military personnel fighting alongside Georgians in S.Ossetia. Next time the US would wish to distance itself from genocidal wars, it should NOT send BLACK people into the regions where all locals are WHITE. :D
  14. Since that war the US continue spending billions onto rebuilding Georgian military. In preparation for what, possible conflict with Iran?