Jump to content

Guns are drawn in Lebanon!


Smart

Recommended Posts

This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.
  • Replies 221
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The War On Lebanon And

The Battle For Oil

 

By Michel Chossudovsky

http://www.countercurrents.org/leb-chossudovsky280706.htm

 

 

28 July, 2006

GlobalResearch

 

Is there a relationship between the bombing of Lebanon and the inauguration of the World's largest strategic pipeline, which will channel more than a million barrels of oil a day to Western markets?

 

Virtually unnoticed, the inauguration of the Ceyhan-Tblisi-Baku (BTC) oil pipeline, which links the Caspian sea to the Eastern Mediterranean, took place on the 13th of July, at the very outset of the Israeli sponsored bombings of Lebanon.

 

One day before the Israeli air strikes, the main partners and shareholders of the BTC pipeline project, including several heads of State and oil company executives were in attendance at the port of Ceyhan. They were then rushed off for an inauguration reception in Istanbul, hosted by Turkey's President Ahmet Necdet Sezer in the plush surroundings of the Çýraðan Palace.

 

Also in attendance was British Petroleum's (BP) CEO, Lord Browne together with senior government officials from Britain, the US and Israel. BP leads the BTC pipeline consortium. Other major Western shareholders include Chevron, Conoco-Phillips, France's Total and Italy's ENI. (see Annex)

 

Israel's Minister of Energy and Infrastructure Binyamin Ben-Eliezer was present at the venue together with a delegation of top Israeli oil officials.

 

The BTC pipeline totally bypasses the territory of the Russian Federation. It transits through the former Soviet republics of Azerbaijan and Georgia, both of which have become US "protectorates", firmly integrated into a military alliance with the US and NATO. Moreover, both Azerbaijan and Georgia have longstanding military cooperation agreements with Israel. In 2005, Georgian companies received some $24 million in military contracts funded out of U.S. military assistance to Israel under the so-called "Foreign Military Financing (FMF) program".

 

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/states/GA.html

 

 

Israel has a stake in the Azeri oil fields, from which it imports some twenty percent of its oil. The opening of the pipeline will substantially enhance Israeli oil imports from the Caspian sea basin.

 

But there is another dimension which directly relates to the war on Lebanon. Whereas Russia has been weakened, Israel is slated to play a major strategic role in "protecting" the Eastern Mediterranean transport and pipeline corridors out of Ceyhan.

 

Militarization of the Eastern Mediterranean

 

The bombing of Lebanon is part of a carefully planned and coordinated military road map. The extension of the war into Syria and Iran has already been contemplated by US and Israeli military planners. This broader military agenda is intimately related to strategic oil and oil pipelines. It is supported by the Western oil giants which control the pipeline corridors. In the context of the war on Lebanon, it seeks Israeli territorial control over the East Mediterranean coastline.

 

In this context, the BTC pipeline dominated by British Petroleum, has dramatically changed the geopolitics of the Eastern Mediterranean, which is now linked , through an energy corridor, to the Caspian sea basin:

 

"[The BTC pipeline] considerably changes the status of the region's countries and cements a new pro-West alliance. Having taken the pipeline to the Mediterranean, Washington has practically set up a new bloc with Azerbaijan, Georgia, Turkey and Israel, " (Komerzant, Moscow, 14 July 2006)

 

Israel is now part of the Anglo-American military axis, which serves the interests of the Western oil giants in the Middle East and Central Asia.

 

While the official reports state that the BTC pipeline will "channel oil to Western markets", what is rarely acknowledged is that part of the oil from the Caspian sea would be directly channeled towards Israel. In this regard, an underwater Israeli-Turkish pipeline project has been envisaged which would link Ceyhan to the Israeli port of Ashkelon and from there through Israel's main pipeline system, to the Red Sea.

 

The objective of Israel is not only to acquire Caspian sea oil for its own consumption needs but also to play a key role in re-exporting Caspian sea oil back to the Asian markets through the Red Sea port of Eilat. The strategic implications of this re-routing of Caspian sea oil are farreaching.

 

In April 2006, Israel and Turkey announced plans for four underwater pipelines, which would bypass Syrian and Lebanese territory.

 

"Turkey and Israel are negotiating the construction of a multi-million-dollar energy and water project that will transport water, electricity, natural gas and oil by pipelines to Israel, with the oil to be sent onward from Israel to the Far East,

 

The new Turkish-Israeli proposal under discussion would see the transfer of water, electricity, natural gas and oil to Israel via four underwater pipelines.

 

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1145961328841&

pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

 

 

“Baku oil can be transported to Ashkelon via this new pipeline and to India and the Far East.[via the Red sea]"

 

"Ceyhan and the Mediterranean port of Ashkelon are situated only 400 km apart. Oil can be transported to the city in tankers or via specially constructed under-water pipeline. From Ashkelon the oil can be pumped through already existing pipeline to the port of Eilat at the Red Sea; and from there it can be transported to India and other Asian countries in tankers. (REGNUM )

 

Water for Israel

 

Also involved in this project is a pipeline to bring water to Israel, pumping water from upstream resources of the Tigris and Euphrates river system in Anatolia. This has been a long-run strategic objective of Israel to the detriment of Syria and Iraq. Israel's agenda with regard to water is supported by the military cooperation agreement between Tel Aviv and Ankara.

 

The Re-routing of Central Asian Oil

 

Diverting Central Asian oil and gas to the Eastern Mediterranean (under Israeli military protection), for re-export to Asia, serves to undermine the inter-Asian energy market, which is based on the development of direct pipeline corridors linking Central Asia and Russia to South Asia, China and the Far East.

 

Ultimately, this design is intended to weaken Russia's role in Central Asia and cut off China from Central Asian oil resources. It is also intended to isolate Iran.

 

Meanwhile, Israel has emerged as a new powerful player in the global energy market.

 

War and Oil Pipelines

 

Prior to the bombing of Lebanon, Israel and Turkey had announced the underwater pipeline routes, which bypassed Syria and Lebanon. These underwater pipeline routes did not overtly encroach on the territorial sovereignty of Lebanon and Syria.

 

On the other hand, the development of alternative land based corridors (for oil and water) through Lebanon and Syria would require Israeli-Turkish territorial control over the Eastern Mediterranean coastline through Lebanon and Syria.

 

The implementation of this project requires the militarisation of the East Mediterranean coastline, sea ways and land routes, extending from the port of Ceyhan across Syria and Lebanon to the Lebanese-Israeli border.

 

Is this not one of the hidden objectives of the war on Lebanon? Open up a space which enables Israel to control a vast territory extending from the Lebanese border through Syria to Turkey.

 

"The Long War"

 

Israeli Prime minister Ehud Olmert has stated that the Israeli offensive against Lebanon would "last a very long time". Meanwhile, the US has speeded up weapons shipments to Israel.

 

There are strategic objectives underlying the "Long War" which are tied to oil and oil pipelines.

 

The air campaign against Lebanon is inextricably related to US-Israeli strategic objectives in the broader Middle East including Syria and Iran. In recent developments, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice stated that the main purpose of her mission to the Middle East was not to push for a ceasefire in Lebanon, but rather to isolate Syria and Iran. (Daily Telegraph, 22 July 2006)

 

At this particular juncture, the replenishing of Israeli stockpiles of US produced WMDs points to an escalation of the war both within and beyond the borders of Lebanon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i dont know how one can really take sides in this.

its sort of like choosing between dumb and dumber.

 

This i can agree with , however I really havent heard of any of this Israeli disinformation. In fact it seems alot of people are just anti israel to begin with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No it's not like that. I am not anti anyone to begin with. I read the news constantly and piece my ideas together from that and various sources of information that I have in my life.

 

 

Not just that but also with what I know of political theory and foreign political theory.

 

 

And that is rediculous to say, "i havent seen it, so everyone must be..." Some of us on here just do not agree with the near half a thousand civilian deaths as a justifiable response for the return of two soldiers. Especially when you compare this unilateral response to the actions of the US government for the last several years.

 

 

So please don't act as though your belief about whether or not there has been any disinformation being put out in the media is the end all of the subject.

 

 

And, to even entertain your belief that a lot may be anti-Isreal, I would venture to guess that some came into this feeling sour because of their gross humanitarian injustices in Gaza. The shit that they have been doing, unquestioned is rediculous. If any other country did it the world would be pissed, and now its starting to catch up. SO maybe some people have been feelin a lil salty against Isreal, but that in no way makes it wrong or incorrect in their evaluation and reading of this situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No it's not like that. I am not anti anyone to begin with. I read the news constantly and piece my ideas together from that and various sources of information that I have in my life.

 

 

Not just that but also with what I know of political theory and foreign political theory.

 

 

And that is rediculous to say, "i havent seen it, so everyone must be..." Some of us on here just do not agree with the near half a thousand civilian deaths as a justifiable response for the return of two soldiers. Especially when you compare this unilateral response to the actions of the US government for the last several years.

 

 

So please don't act as though your belief about whether or not there has been any disinformation being put out in the media is the end all of the subject.

 

 

.

I wasnt aiming my last comment at anyone but this is exactly what im talking about, more people need to read up on both 'sides' of this conflict before forming their 'fuck israel' opinions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1220490,00.html

How Rice’s Mission Became the Victim of an Israeli Attack

 

A raid on a Lebanese village hobbles diplomacy as the U.S. Secretary of State cancels a trip to Beirut and says she is already doing all that is “humanly possible.”

 

Her shuttle diplomacy dramatically upended, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was somber as she addressed the press at 11:35 a.m. Sunday in Jerusalem. “I am deeply saddened by the terrible loss of innocent life in the bombing in Lebanon this morning,” she said of the Israeli military’s pre-dawn attack on a Lebanese village that killed more than 60 people, including a large number of children.

 

Her press conference had been hastily arranged. The plan had been for Rice to leave for Beirut in an hour to meet with Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Siniora to discuss steps toward a ceasefire. Now, that trip would be cancelled. She had talked to Siniora, whom she described as “depressed” and “emotional” over what happened in the village of Qana. Rice said, “I called him and told him that I was not coming today because I felt very strongly that my work toard a ceasefire is really here, today.” Siniora, however, had made it clear in a televised address that her trip would have been pointless. He declared he would not engage in any more negotiations until a ceasefire was in place.

 

Several things Rice and her associates said were evidence of growing frustration with Israel. She said she had urged the Israelis to exercise restraint in their attacks on Lebanon. Though she did make reference to Hizballah rockets hitting northern Israel, she did not repeat her usual line that the Israelis have the right to defend themselves. When asked where she would go or what she would do next to work for the ceasefire, she repeated again and again that she was staying in Jerusalem: “My work today is here.”

 

Still, Rice defended the Bush administration’s refusal to join other world leders in demanding that Israel agree to an immediate ceasefire. She pointed out that Sunday’s bombing was at the same village where Israel hit a U.N. outpost in 1996, killing 106 people who had taken refuge there. (A U.N. investigation of that incident concluded that it was “unlikely” that the shelling was a mistake — a judgment Israel has never accepted.) This tragedy, she said, underscored the need for a “sustainable” ceasefire.

 

After Rice appeared before the cameras, a U.S. official involved in her diplomacy cast the U.S. view in stronger terms. “We don’t want to accept any pretext for delaying the ceasefire,” he said. Asked what “pretext” meant, he said, “I’ve said enough.” But he also noted, “We’re making very clear to Israelis our distress at this incident. We’re looking to wrap things up and then move the action to New York.”

 

Indeed, Rice and her team had already been working with the knowledge that Israel was not going to cease its attacks soon. The night before, she had had dinner with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, who told her that Israel needed 10 days to two weeks to complete its military operations. The attack on Qana — apparently the site of rocket launches against Israel — occured shortly after midnight.

 

On Sunday, a few hours after Rice’s press conference, more bad news arrived when U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan announced that the Israeli Defense Ministry had asked U.N. peacekeeping forces in Lebanon to evacuate two more villages before sunset, suggesting they would meet Qana’s fate. By Sunday evening, Rice had apparently decided that she had done all she could do in Jerusalem and made it known she was heading back to Washington Monday morning.

 

The depth of Rice’s quandary had already been coming through in subtle ways. At times, she seemed to cling to dry diplomatic jargon. “We’re making real progress on a political framework,” she said at one point. At another, she said, “We also have to realize that we cannot have a circumstance in which there is a return to the status quo ante.” “Now, I think the Security Council will take this up,” Rice said, apparently attempting to look forward to the infamously dilatory world of U.N. diplomacy in positive terms. “We want the Security Council to take it up soon, and we want the Security Council to take it up with as much concrete progress toward a real ceasefire, as is humanly possible by the time that that meeting takes place.”

 

The reality for Rice, however, is the long hours she’s keeping in an infinity loop of meetings, and the little she has to show for them. At one point in the Sunday press conference, she admitted that, “ If there is any way humanly, to accelerate our efforts, I would do it. But we are already doing really what is of the human limitation to try to get to an end of this conflict.”

 

It is hard to see how Rice can make any more progress here toward her goal of a compreshensive agreement between the Israeli and Lebanese governments, which include cessation of hostilities, the deployment of the Lebanese Army backed by a “robust” international force to secure the border with israel and push Hizballah back so that its short range rockets cannot strike Israel.

 

On the Lebanese side, the various factions, including Hizballah, had made a breakthrough of sorts last week by agreeing to back the Siniora government as its single representative in any negotiations. Indeed, even after Sunday’s incident at Qana, Dr. Mohammad Chatah, senior advisor to the Prime Minister told Time that “nothing has changed as far as the position of the government on the underlying issues.” However, the Qana incident was a “war crime.” Said Chatah, “You cannot fight a war by killing civilians. We want this to end. And it can end. Our plan is still the way to end it.” As for Rice’s work, he says, “She is speaking of a ceasefire as an urgent goal but we are saying it should be an immediate goal.” In Lebanon, the Health Ministry estimated the toll for 19 days of war at 750 dead and 2,000 wounded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Bush Admin is asking for too much. They are demanding too much. I heard Bush speak, and he was like "Lebanon has to do this, Hezbollah has to do that, Iran better do this, and Syria get back to doing that." And what does he say about Israel, or the U.S. what do the allies give in return, well after all of that, Israel will withdraw the troops. These aren't deals, they're the threats of a bully, but what does the famous U.S. army have to back itself up? Nukes? When is this President going to realize that just because he wants something doesn't mean he can have it. The big whiney baby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's really no justification for the amount of civilians that Israel has killed. I do think that striking against Hezbollah is a good thing, but not in the manner they are doing it. Targeting civilian complexes is a stupid thing to do, regardless of whether or not they gave a "warning" for people to get out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lets be fair here guys....i was listening to npr today (yeah, npr no doubt) and dude was saying that hezbollah has deliberately put targets in populated civilian areas. this is for 2 reasons, make it so it is less likely for an enemy to hit them, but also to cause collateral damage. mainly to infuriate the rest of the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lets be fair here guys....i was listening to npr today (yeah' date=' npr no doubt) and dude was saying that hezbollah has deliberately put targets in populated civilian areas. this is for 2 reasons, make it so it is less likely for an enemy to hit them, but also to cause collateral damage. mainly to infuriate the rest of the world.[/quote']

 

well, that sounds like a typical statement from the israeli/US side of the argument. and people bitch about how cynical the so-called anti-israel rhetoric is..

regardless, it assumes israel has primo intel on hezbollah's munition hideouts, which i highly doubt. so they either thought they had good intel on hundreds of targets that happen to be located in civilian areas, and fucked nearly all of them up, or they don't have the intel, and they are just bombing shit for other purposes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This shit is getting really really bad, but I find it more plausible that a terrorist (fuck i hate that word) organization would want to integrate with civilians to minimize their own casualties, then I do a Govt/Military (under the close watch of the globl media) is deliberately killing innocent civilians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lets be fair here guys....i was listening to npr today (yeah' date=' npr no doubt) and dude was saying that hezbollah has deliberately put targets in populated civilian areas. this is for 2 reasons, make it so it is less likely for an enemy to hit them, but also to cause collateral damage. mainly to infuriate the rest of the world.[/quote']

 

 

I heard that on npr and was shocked how biased that story was (esp for npr). then I remembered that its the jews that mostly fund that station, so irregardless of how progressive and unbiased their reporting is, they will always bend backwards for the zionist agenda...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had Israel cooperated with the Lebanese government (with broad international support as well more than likely' date=' instead of the condemnation they face now) they would have had more than enough power to dismantle Hezbollah and even bring the offenders to justice and free the abducted soldiers. But with this irrational and disproportionate overreaction it is helping to justify the existence of groups like Hezbollah in the eyes of many the world over.[/quote']

 

 

 

Cooperated with the Lebanese government? What exactly was the Lebanese government offering in terms of cooperation? Is this some hypothetical happy-land or do you know something we don't? If you can show me what the Lebanese government was doing to cooperate, then I'd appreciate that. Perhaps there was something I missed or forgot in the midst of all this fucking media-blitzkreig.

 

 

------------

 

I don't think that this sort of violence is justifiable by any means in this situation. Israel is way out of line. But, the arguement that some people are making about how they are trying to send a message to Iran and Syria to back off makes sense--making sense does not mean that I condone the violence!! It just gives insight into their view! You gotta remember that this is a political thing, it's decisions by the leaders of the country, not the citizens. Yes, they voted them into power, but "we" also voted Bush into power and they're bombing the fuck out of Iraq, which "we" all do not support. So you really can't go and blame the entire country, just the politicians. You'd be doing exactly what you're speaking out against when you talk about Israel punishing a whole country for the actions of a few. And it's not impossible or even unlikely that Hezbollah sets up bases in the midst of civilian neighborhoods or buildings. Presenting this fact does not mean the person who does thinks that it's ok to bomb these buildings.

 

(not to tellurian. general comment.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...