All Change in the Middle East?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paladin

Every arab / muslim nation in the world (except probably Indonesia) declared war on Israel in 1948, and sever are still at war with Israel and want it to be wiped off the map. Israel still handed them their collective asses.

Suez war - do you mean 1956? Sure, after Egypt nationalized the Suez canal and blocked it, it was the UK and France that invaded, Israel just covered their flank. It wasn't very well thought out, but it did result in the downfall of nassar, which was a good thing.

---

Another post which merely highlights your ignorance, and it seems, a lack of interest in the history as recorded. I won't go into the details because I don't think they interest you, and if I do offer links, it is just to show you where you can go to read about these matters, setting aside the thousands of books and articles in learned journals that you won't read, thus
Part I (1917-1947) - Question of Palestine

One example: it is true that Moroccans were not happy with Ben-Gurion's Declaration of the State of Israel in 1948, given that Morocco had one of the largest Jewish communities in the world outside the USA. It is also true it led to some clashes -but the Monarchy opened secret relations with Israel in 1948 so your assertion, which must include Morocco, is false. Thus

"While official ties had previously not existed due to the Arab–Israeli conflict, the two countries maintained a secretive bilateral relationship on a number of fronts following the 1948 Arab–Israeli War. For many years, Moroccan king Hassan II facilitated a relationship with Israeli authorities, and these ties are considered to have been instrumental in stabilizing Morocco and striking down possible anti-monarchy threats within the country."
Israel–Morocco relations - Wikipedia

As for this-

"after Egypt nationalized the Suez canal and blocked it, it was the UK and France that invaded, Israel just covered their flank. It wasn't very well thought out, but it did result in the downfall of nassar, which was a good thing"

An amazing re-write of history. The Suez War was a triumph for Nasser, who went on to become the effective leader of the Arab world at what might be termed the 'high tide' of Arab Nationalism -the same Nationalism at the root of modern Israel (both 19th century inventions) -Nasser even engineered the creation with Syria of the United Arab Republic in 1958. Nasser was on the radio all the time when we lived in the region, I remember it well as well as the enthusiasm of the young man in the shop where we bought our groceries.

Nasser's downfall was largely a result of the hubris that dazzled his judgment after 1956, and the fact that while he accepted arms from the USSR they were ineffective. I recall a talk in which Indar Rikhye pointed out that in 1967 there were only two pilots in Egypt who could fly the MIG fighters they got from the USSR, and they were Indian.

Should you be interested in this period -1956-1967- try this book which was a sensation in the Middle East when it was published but only translated into English in 2011-

Self-Criticism after the Defeat – Saqi Books

Your opinions are free, and welcome, but can we not agree the facts are sacred?

OK, so Morocco didn't declare war in 1948, I need to get this omelette off my face. How many did??? Morocco DID send forces to fight: Morris, Benny (2008), 1948: The First Arab-Israeli War, Yale University Press, p. 205, New Haven, ISBN 978-0-300-12696-9.

Let's see 1956 was a "triumph for Nasser, but you also write that "and the fact that while he accepted arms from the USSR they were ineffective."

Those are self contradictory statements. 56 was a disaster for Egypt and Nasser. But I'm ignorant, so it doesn't matter.

Oh yeah, wikipedia - the most reliable source of information on the planet. Sure.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paladin

OK, so Morocco didn't declare war in 1948, I need to get this omelette off my face. How many did??? Morocco DID send forces to fight: Morris, Benny (2008), 1948: The First Arab-Israeli War, Yale University Press, p. 205, New Haven, ISBN 978-0-300-12696-9.

Let's see 1956 was a "triumph for Nasser, but you also write that "and the fact that while he accepted arms from the USSR they were ineffective."

Those are self contradictory statements. 56 was a disaster for Egypt and Nasser. But I'm ignorant, so it doesn't matter.

Oh yeah, wikipedia - the most reliable source of information on the planet. Sure.....

---

Your link to the book by Benny Morris does not state what you claim -yes, some Moroccans went to Egypt to fight Israel, but as Morris points out, they never got there, being deported because they were 'restive and argumentative' (page 85).

This source confirms that Morocco did not participate in the War of 1948
"In contrast to the Arab consensus, Morocco, which was not independent in 1948 and did not take part in the War of Independence, established clandestine relations with Israel."
OccasionalPapers-Issue1.pdf

I don't see any contradiction in what I wrote. After Suez, Nasser accepted arms and support from the USSR, it was part of the Cold War in the region, but while there had been a Communist Presence (the CP of Palestine was formed in 1923, the party in Iraq was formed in 1934) Arab Nationalism was the dominant position of most of the frontline states, not so much the Arabian Emirates and Saudi Arabia.

Suez far from being a disaster marked the rise of Nasser, and was the basis on which he not only attempted to expand Egypt's influence in the Arab world, but also the means whereby he crushed the Muslim Brotherhood at the time -such as the execution of Sayid Qutb in 1966. For some people, the assassination of Anwar Sadat, a close associate of Nasser, was as much about the Nationalist crushing of the Brotherhood in the 1950s and 1960s as it was the 1979 Peace Treaty with Israel.

Nasser's ascendancy was thus fundamental to the overthrow of the 'Imamate' in Yemen in 1962, and the war with Saudi Arabia that followed. And it was because Egypt was seen as a client of the USSR that the US sent arms through Israel to the Saudi backed forces who were as useless then as they are now. The war dragged on until 1970, the Imams never regained power. Yemen split into two countries, and is broadly speaking one of the most ungovernable places in the world.

Once again, you are entitled to your opinions, whether they are based on facts, conjecture, or just some weird idea you have of what happened, but I do think a little more reading would help, and you don't need Wikipedia, which I agree can sometimes be unreliable. I am sure that even in your country there are libraries which have books, in fact I am certain of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stavros

Your link to the book by Benny Morris does not state what you claim -yes, some Moroccans went to Egypt to fight Israel, but as Morris points out, they never got there, being deported because they were 'restive and argumentative' (page 85).

This source confirms that Morocco did not participate in the War of 1948
"In contrast to the Arab consensus, Morocco, which was not independent in 1948 and did not take part in the War of Independence, established clandestine relations with Israel."
OccasionalPapers-Issue1.pdf

I don't see any contradiction in what I wrote. After Suez, Nasser accepted arms and support from the USSR, it was part of the Cold War in the region, but while there had been a Communist Presence (the CP of Palestine was formed in 1923, the party in Iraq was formed in 1934) Arab Nationalism was the dominant position of most of the frontline states, not so much the Arabian Emirates and Saudi Arabia.

Suez far from being a disaster marked the rise of Nasser, and was the basis on which he not only attempted to expand Egypt's influence in the Arab world, but also the means whereby he crushed the Muslim Brotherhood at the time -such as the execution of Sayid Qutb in 1966. For some people, the assassination of Anwar Sadat, a close associate of Nasser, was as much about the Nationalist crushing of the Brotherhood in the 1950s and 1960s as it was the 1979 Peace Treaty with Israel.

Nasser's ascendancy was thus fundamental to the overthrow of the 'Imamate' in Yemen in 1962, and the war with Saudi Arabia that followed. And it was because Egypt was seen as a client of the USSR that the US sent arms through Israel to the Saudi backed forces who were as useless then as they are now. The war dragged on until 1970, the Imams never regained power. Yemen split into two countries, and is broadly speaking one of the most ungovernable places in the world.

Once again, you are entitled to your opinions, whether they are based on facts, conjecture, or just some weird idea you have of what happened, but I do think a little more reading would help, and you don't need Wikipedia, which I agree can sometimes be unreliable. I am sure that even in your country there are libraries which have books, in fact I am certain of it.

---

Read? Garbage can't read; I'm the uneducated, deplorable, undeserving poor, up against middle class morality for all time. I feel more and more like Doolittle, guvna.

I am linking to this post a rational assessment of the ceasefire agreement that the US has brokered between Israel and Hizbollah in Lebanon. I think it does a good job of explaining how, this time around, it is a lose for Iran and Hizbollah, if not the end of the never-ending story that has shaped Middle Eastern politics since Allenby walked through the Jaffa Gate in 1917.

Here is a key assessment

"it is the entire strategic environment that has considerably changed, in large part in Israel’s favour, due to its relentless military machine and virtually unconditional US support. Israel has never used its military might like this before, nor has Washington provided it with such unreserved support.Hezbollah and its ally Iran will never admit it, but they have suffered a strategic setback. Their aim was to link all the regional battlefields in which Iran had influence to bleed and overwhelm Israel. But Israel has blocked that goal, rather successfully, through brute force.
Until very recently, Hezbollah’s condition to stop its attacks was for Israel to end its campaign against Hamas. Yet by agreeing to the terms of the ceasefire, which clearly dissociates Lebanon from Gaza, Hezbollah has essentially abandoned Hamas and with it the whole notion of strategic interdependence, at least for now."
The ceasefire in Lebanon doesn’t ensure a lasting victory for Israel, but does signal a strategic setback for Iran | Bilal Saab | The Guardian

As usual, the Palestinians are left on their own, their fate looking even more gloomy today than it was yesterday. But the elephant in this room is the continued absence of any real debate on who benefits from this current wave of violence, because in the short to medium term it may be Israel and the US, but Saudi Arabia remains the enigma which needs to be addressed.

It is the case that MbS is modernizing the Kingdom, he is keen to reduce the influence of Wahabi clerics and their distorted education in schools/madrassas in the Kingdom and elsewhere, in part because he can see how counter-productive it is to Saudi Arabia's image, and in part because the alliances he is building in the Kingdom and elsewhere have feared a repeat of the 'Salafi' violence of ISIS and al-Qaeda, two movements that, like HAMAS and Hizbollah have been weakened but have not disappeared.

Salman is still King, but while MbS will slot into the role when the time comes, one should not underestimate the seething anger of the Arab street to what has happened in Gaza and is happening on the West Bank, or Israel if you prefer. Normalizing relations with Israel is not on the cards right now, and while Trump might have access to both Israel and the Kingdom, everyone knows he is only there for 4 years and that their problems are too complex for such a limited intelligence to understand. What if the Kingdom decides it has to see off Iran, but the consequence is chaos in that country with implications for its allies in Russia and China? What would be the impact on the oil price, and so on.

Every time someone thinks a corner has been turned in the Middle East, a new road block appears in the distance. While we may all sigh in relief that one party to this conflict is for the time being at rest, the worm in this apple is still there, rotting within.

I'm just trying to calculate how many days before hezbollah violates the cease fire. Right now, I'm thinking early Jan.

And admit it, they would not have agreed to this if Trump hadn't won the election. If this cease fire falls apart, and I'm thinking it will, it will be another bitch slap to biden.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paladin

I'm just trying to calculate how many days before hezbollah violates the cease fire. Right now, I'm thinking early Jan.

And admit it, they would not have agreed to this if Trump hadn't won the election. If this cease fire falls apart, and I'm thinking it will, it will be another bitch slap to biden.

---

Trump had nothing to do with it.

It is all about Israel, for Netanayahu is in command, elevated by what he believes has been Israel and the USA's ability to neutralize Hizbollah and deal a severe blow to HAMAS. For the time being indeed, for Hizbollah is not just an armed group but a political movement with representatives in the Lebanese Parliament. The domestic Lebanese aspect of this current round of war has yet to play out. There was a lot of resentment inside Lebanon at the way Hizbollah was muscling in on domestic affairs, but it is not on the same order of the resentment with the PLO that evolved from sympathy in 1967 to civil war in 1975. Whether or not Lebanese politics can remain so divided is a question with a long history, and no answers. Sometimes people are just focused on day to day survival.

Two sources made the difference here:
Iran, which has been doing what it can to decrease tensions with Israel, and which I believe in the absence of Nasrallah has meant the remaining leaders in Lebanon don't have the same level of support from Tehran. Iran is looking at other options, not least because the support it gives to Russia is not paying off, after all it doesn't need Russian oil in the way that India and North Korea do. It can take a harder line on nuclear development because this makes sense: it is the doctrine of Nuclear Deterrence that shaped policy throughout the Cold War, and which Iran concludes means it needs a nuclear weapon to deter an attack from Nuclear Israel. But on other issues I think the new Prime Minister is more willing to change, eg with regard to relations with Saudi Arabia.

And Biden. Without Biden's total support for Israel, without even a modest restraint on what Netanyahu is doing in Gaza, would we see so much deliberate destruction of life and property? Lebanese returning to their homes in the South see no homes, only rubble, ditto Palestinians in Gaza.
America did this, and America will pay -you, Paladin, will pay for it, as you have done since 1967. The same people who want to stop funding foreign wars only mean Ukraine, they will continue to pour billions of tax payer dollars to Israel. Your dollars.

As for Hegseth, though I don't think he will get Senate confirmation, he doesn't think the US has gone far enough -to do what? At what point does Israel concede anything? Netanyahu wants to 're-shape the Middle East', but only if it means Israel is supreme. Israel has done well out of the misery of October 7 2023, but the fundamental problem was created when the Ottoman Empire formed an alliance with the German Empire in 1914, and 100 years and more later, the consequences continued to be a problem some think cannot be solved.

If you support Israel, you should be praising Biden. If he wasn't such a hypocrite and self-obsessed con-man, so would Trump.

Sure, Trump didn't do Anything. He just got elected and now all the baddies are having "oh shit" moments.

Biden waffled more than a busy Residence Inn on a Sunday morning. He delayed munitions and put limitations on their use constantly, and now has "permitted" land mines!?!?!

Land mines are the most insidious of all and will kill and main for decades after the fighting finally stops.

It was biden's non enforcement of oil and other sanctions against iran, and dumping more case on them, that gave them the hard currency to fund h, h, & h to do what they have been doing. They, and the ruskies, sensed his overall weakness after the disastrous exit from Afghanistan in 2021 and went for it. And now we all have to deal with it.

May I suggest you keep up with the news? I was surprised at the decision to supply land mines to Ukraine, but it remains to be seen if and where they use them. I think this is a dangerous phase of the war, because of the desperate state of the Russian economy and Putin's desperation.

As for Iran, can you not check first before claiming the US has not sanctioned Iran's petroleum industry?

"In the aftermath of Iran’s unprecedented October 1 attack against Israel, the United States made clear that we would impose consequences on Iran for its actions. To that end, we are taking steps today to disrupt the flow of revenue the Iranian regime uses to fund its nuclear program and missile development, support terrorist proxies and partners, and perpetuate conflict throughout the Middle East.
The Department of State is imposing sanctions on six entities engaged in Iranian petroleum trade and identifying six vessels as blocked property. Concurrently, the Department of the Treasury, in consultation with the Department of State, is issuing a determination that will lead to the imposition of sanctions against any person determined to operate in the petroleum or petrochemical sectors of the Iranian economy.
Additionally, Treasury is sanctioning ten entities and identifying 17 vessels as blocked property for their involvement in shipments of Iranian petroleum and petrochemical products in support of U.S.-designated entities National Iranian Oil Company or Triliance Petrochemical Co. Limited.".
State Department Sanctions and Identification of the Petroleum and Petrochemical Sectors of Iran’s Economy - United States Department of State

With one exception nobody in the Middle East is scared of a preposterous coward like Trump. Read Bolton's book on the incidents that followed the assassination of Qasem Suleimani. Bolton has advocated bombing Iran for years, Trump couldn't bring himself to do it.

The one exception is those Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank who believe Trump will not himself do anything for them, he doesn't even know who they are, but will not oppose the radical settler lunatics from forcing a formal annexation of the West Bank with the rider that expulsions from the territories follow, as part of the Likud's concept of 'Greater Israel' or 'Erez Israel' which views all Biblical lands as the right of Israel to occupy.

This is what Smotrich has said

"Israel's far-right finance minister on Wednesday said Gaza could be emptied of half its population through "voluntary" migration within two years.
Addressing a meeting of the Yesha Council, a committee overseeing a number of settlements in the occupied West Bank, Smotrich said Israel “can and must occupy the Gaza Strip”.
“We don’t need to be scared of this word [occupation],” he said.
“It’s possible to create a situation in which Gaza will have less than half its current population within two years."
He said the “voluntary migration” of Palestinians from Gaza could also serve as a “model” for the West Bank."
Bezalel Smotrich says Israel can empty half of Gaza through 'voluntary' migration | Middle East Eye

And also said this

" In an interview with Arte, the European cultural channel that broadcasts in French and German, Israel’s finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, said that Israel would be expanding “little by little” until it reaches Damascus.".
It's time for the US to stand up to Israel

Ok so it is possible that the money-waving Saudis could take Trump to one side and give him options -give the Israel the go-ahead we won't give you our dollars, or something like that. Given Trump sees everything as a transaction which leaves him better off than before, and given that he LOVES Saudi dollars, even Israel might come second in this scenario. But Saudi Arabia would not be doing it out of sympathy for the Palestinians, but to promote its right -as it sees it- to control the Holy Places of Islam, including the mosques of Oman and Al-Aqsa in Jerusalem, currently the job of the Hashemite King in Jordan.

A space that needs watching!

iran IS sanctioned wrt oil, but the biden admin is not enforcing it.