bradilko Posted December 31, 2017 Posted December 31, 2017 33 minutes ago, Eraserhead said: Dvoje ubijeno u Teheranu: brz si. namirisao krv.. imaš pametnija posla u rijadu,podgorici a najpre u vašingtonu..
kurjak92 Posted December 31, 2017 Posted December 31, 2017 Meni je zapravo odlicno kakav je nizak udarac al opet sa dozom humora uputio erash, jbg za razliku od mandrila, ima stila
Lord Protector Posted December 31, 2017 Posted December 31, 2017 (edited) Quote The Destructive Iran Obsession By DANIEL LARISON • December 28, 2017, 2:21 AM Michael Makovsky offers up an example of where the hard-line obsession with Iran leads: Indeed, the principal vulnerability of Iran’s regional strategy is its dependence on brutal regimes to rule lands riven by ethno-sectarian fissures. The United States should exploit this vulnerability by supporting those forces in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen that oppose Iran’s domination and seek greater self-determination or independence from the capitals. The result could be transforming these failed states into loose confederations or new countries with more borders that more naturally conform along sectarian lines. Makovsky dresses this up as a proposal for “countering” Iran, but all that this would do is further shatter existing states at a high price in loss of life. The end result would be mass killing and forcible expulsion of the people that don’t have a place inside the new extremely artificial states defined by sect and ethnicity. Besides being morally abhorrent and completely divorced from any discernible U.S. security interest, Makovsky’s proposal would almost certainly fail in its stated goal of reducing Iranian influence. Each time that Iran hawks concoct a half-baked plan to hurt Iran and weaken its position in the region, it reliably backfires and increases Iranian influence. Iran is in the position it is today largely because of dimwitted, short-sighted hawkish American plans to upend the existing political order in the region, and Makovsky would have the U.S. do more of the same. Trying to carve up existing countries in the hope of turning new statelets into obstacles to Iranian influence is obviously self-defeating. If Iran already has significant influence in Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon today, its position in these places will tend to get stronger if those states are weakened by separatism and instability. The more that the U.S. encourages challenges to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of these states, the more dependent on Iran their governments will tend to become. Because of a fanatical desire to oppose Iran at every turn, Iran hawks like Makovsky would make it that much easier for Iran to retain and expand their influence. Quote One way to counter Iran's aggression? Change the map of the Middle East By Michael Makovsky Published December 25, 2017 FoxNews.com The Trump Administration’s just released National Security Strategy properly identifies Iran as among the important challengers to U.S. security interests but does not offer a concrete strategy on how to counter its growing regional hegemony. Indeed, Iran’s geopolitical ascent is the most significant, and dangerous, development in the Middle East this century. President Trump should follow Ronald Reagan’s example and take the offensive, supporting indigenous forces that oppose, and seek independence from, Iranian domination. This requires eschewing convention and recognizing Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen for what they are: failed, artificial constructs whose capitals now serve as Iranian satrapies. Iran has taken advantage of ISIS’ crumbling caliphate to increasingly consolidate control over Syria and Iran, as it dominates their capitals and those of Lebanon and Yemen. It has effectively established a land bridge from Tehran to Beirut. Reversing this strategic threat requires continued U.S. military presence and military aid to local forces in Syria and Iraq, and greater support for our regional allies, such as Israel and Jordan, who must contain the provocative actions of Iran and its proxies. But this defensive posture will not suffice even to contain Iran let alone transform its hegemonic trajectory. Instead, we should draw from Ronald Reagan, who eschewed a defensive posture and pursued an offensive strategy to undermine the Soviet Union that included supporting indigenous anti-communist insurgents around the globe. We should pursue the same offensive strategy to roll back Iran’s regional hegemony. We should recognize that maintaining Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen in their existing forms is unnatural and serves Iran’s interests. There is nothing sacred about these countries’ borders, which seem to have been drawn by a drunk and blindfolded cartographer. Indeed, in totally disregarding these borders, ISIS and Iran both have already demonstrated their anachronism and irrelevance. These countries are not nation-states as Americans understand them but post-WWI artificial constructs, mostly created out of the ashes of the Ottoman Empire in a colossally failed experiment by international leaders. With their deep ethno-sectarian fissures, these countries have either been held together by a strong authoritarian hand or suffered sectarian carnage. Indeed, the principal vulnerability of Iran’s regional strategy is its dependence on brutal regimes to rule lands riven by ethno-sectarian fissures. The United States should exploit this vulnerability by supporting those forces in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen that oppose Iran’s domination and seek greater self-determination or independence from the capitals. The result could be transforming these failed states into loose confederations or new countries with more borders that more naturally conform along sectarian lines. Any redrawing of political relationships or borders is highly complex, and the United States cannot dictate the outcomes. But we can influence them. We would need to deeply examine each country for its unique qualities and histories, and consult closely our regional allies before deciding upon a policy. Here are some examples of policy conclusions that might be drawn. We might cease supplying arms to Baghdad, declare our support and strong military aid for an eventual Iraqi Kurdish state once its warring factions unify and improve governance, and support a federation for the rest of Iraq. For Syria, we could seek a more ethnically coherent loose confederation or separate states that might balance each other—the Iranian-dominated Alawites along the coast, the Kurds in the northeast, and the Sunni Arabs in the heartland. We could also demonstrate we are not anti-Shia by improving relations with Azerbaijan, a secular Shia country bordering Iran that seeks a closer relationship with the United States. An added potential benefit of this approach could be a fomenting of tensions within Iran, which has sizable Kurdish and Azeri populations, thereby weakening the radical regime in Tehran. Some might argue this approach impractical, destabilizing, and offering Iran new opportunities. Perhaps, but the region’s current trajectory is more dangerous. The burden is on the United States to adapt its policy to the dissolving of borders and Iran’s aggression. Iran is not a status quo power content to consolidate its winnings; its emboldened radical regime is intent to dominate the region and destroy Israel. An Iranian-Israeli conflict looms ever closer as Iran establishes bases and missile factories in Syria, posing a second front in Israel’s north. And Americans must concentrate on Iran’s continued development of nuclear-capable ballistic missiles that could eventually reach the U.S. homeland. Further, artificial states have been divided or loosened before with some success, such as the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia, all post-WWI formations. Bosnia and Herzegovina have also managed as a confederation. The Trump Administration should follow Reagan in taking the offensive to Iran. The current political structure of the Middle East serves Iran’s interests, and it’s time to upend it. Due to an editing error a slightly different version of this column was published earlier this week. Michael Makovsky is President and CEO of the Jewish Institute for National Security of America (JINSA), and a former Pentagon official. Edited December 31, 2017 by slow
Eraserhead Posted December 31, 2017 Posted December 31, 2017 2 hours ago, bradilko said: brz si. namirisao krv.. imaš pametnija posla u rijadu,podgorici a najpre u vašingtonu.. Eto ti sad. Opet podrska represivnom aparatu u borbi protiv pobune. I posle sto Milo jase 20+ i sto ce Vucic da jase 20+ godina
MancMellow Posted December 31, 2017 Posted December 31, 2017 @slow Te mape jesu velikim delom veštačke. Drugo je pitanje zašto nije mudro razbijati te zemlje. Treća je stvar da bi neki hipotetički "normalan" Iran iz korena promenio geopolitiku Bliskog istoka. Izrael bi recimo imao koristi od toga. Kurdi isto. Ali KSA i Turska bi se našle pred nerešivim problemom. Posmatrano u vekovima Turska je sila koja dominira tim prostorima. Posmatrano u milenijumima, to je Iran.
iDemo Posted December 31, 2017 Posted December 31, 2017 51 minutes ago, MancMellow said: @slow Te mape jesu velikim delom veštačke. Drugo je pitanje zašto nije mudro razbijati te zemlje. Treća je stvar da bi neki hipotetički "normalan" Iran iz korena promenio geopolitiku Bliskog istoka. Izrael bi recimo imao koristi od toga. Kurdi isto. Ali KSA i Turska bi se našle pred nerešivim problemom. Posmatrano u vekovima Turska je sila koja dominira tim prostorima. Posmatrano u milenijumima, to je Iran. Očas posla cemo mi ti da sredimo...
MancMellow Posted December 31, 2017 Posted December 31, 2017 Inace, to je svejedno "nesreca koja ceka da se dogodi". Median age je 29, a između 40 i 50 posto mladih je nezaposleno i sa mobilnim telefonima i društvenim mrežama.
pbg12345 Posted December 31, 2017 Posted December 31, 2017 53 minutes ago, MancMellow said: Inace, to je svejedno "nesreca koja ceka da se dogodi". Median age je 29, a između 40 i 50 posto mladih je nezaposleno i sa mobilnim telefonima i društvenim mrežama. to je ono sto se cesto zaboravlja. ne samo kad je iran u pitanju obicno dogadjaje posmatramo samo iz ugla drzava i onih koji ih vode, zaboravljajuci da su tamo na terenu neki obicni ljudi sa obicnim zivotnim potrebama hocu reci dok svi posmatramo hoce li tramp napasti severnu koreju, hoce li rusija zadrzati status regionalne sile, ko ce od gomile zainteresovanih drzati kontrolu nad bliskim istokom,itd pa onda to stavljamo na vagu kroz politicki, ekonomski, vojni, istorijski aspekt, e za to vreme imamo klinca koji se nekoliko sati drzi za osovinu autobusa pokusavajuci da se prebaci u nesrecnu hrvatsku (iz nesrecnije srbije) a i kad se uzmu u obzir(zivoti obicnog coveka), obicno se uzmu onako kolektivno, kao sredstvo za manipulisanje
Anduril Posted December 31, 2017 Posted December 31, 2017 Gledati na Iran a bez KSA je totalno suludo jer se radi o spojenim sudovima. Kad tzv. analiticari pisu o Iranu a ne spomenu KSA, meni je jasno da se radi o placenicima a ne o akademicima. Na zalost, ova koalicija Tramp-majmuna u tenku, Kushnera, izrealskih desnicara i mladjanog saudijskog princa-zlocinca ima ogroman potencijal da zajedno sa Revolucionarnom gardom koja je drzava u drzavi, napravi jos veci haos od regiona. Erdogana i Putina jos nisam ni uracunao.
Hella Posted December 31, 2017 Posted December 31, 2017 1 hour ago, pbg12345 said: obicno dogadjaje posmatramo samo iz ugla drzava i onih koji ih vode, zaboravljajuci da su tamo na terenu neki obicni ljudi sa obicnim zivotnim potrebama +1 kao i nedavne dezerterke iz islamske države i žene po iranu masivno skidaju hidžabe koje su morale da nose od 1979 ako hoćete da vidite šta su neki dokoni prečitankovići na ovom svetom mestu drvili na tu temu posetite početak topika o islamskom ekstermizmu fantastično štivo
dillinger Posted December 31, 2017 Posted December 31, 2017 Moze li neki protest u Iranu proci bez oglasavanja Vasingtona? Ono makar takticki da se primire, ako stvarno zele uspeh istih. Ovako samo crtaju metu na celu demonstranata
Redoran Posted January 1, 2018 Posted January 1, 2018 Zapravo je dosta protesta u Iranu prošlo bez njihovog oglašavanja. Protesti su tamo relativno učestala pojava, naravno ne na ovom nivou ali ih ima. Bilo kako bilo, jeftin oportunizam je globalna odlika politike 21. veka tako da ne treba previše da čudi što mu i administracija SAD pribegava. U međuvremenu, evo jednog pogleda na protest iz "pošto kupio, poto prodao" dragstora. Mislim da je tekst dobar i odmeren a biće od koristi i onima koji se ne slažu sa autorom jer nudi dobar istorijski osvrt na proteste u Iranu. Na Tviteru treba da aktivirate sve mere opreza jer tamo ne prestaje sveopšte ludilo. Masovno se šeruju klipovi iz Bahraina 2011. godine, čak i skrinšotovi scena iz filmova, sve uz pokliče: "Narod Irana je ustao da se izbori za svoju slobodu, retvituj!" Faking direktor HRW-a je tvitovao fotografiju sa mitinga podrške Hamneiju (ono, njegovi posteri i žuti baneri Hezbolaha svuda u masi, oči da izbiju) i to nazvao veličanstvenim ustankom iranskog naroda protiv islamističke diktature. Likovi koji su se etablirali svojom ekskluzivomtm iz Sirije uveliko postuju čuvene "Unconfirmed:" tvitove o zauzimanjima vladinih zgrada i policijskih stanica pa ih posle par sati brišu. Nemoguće je izvući iole pouzdanu i proverenu informaciju.
Budja Posted January 1, 2018 Posted January 1, 2018 U tom smislu je BBC prilicno uzdrzan i uglavnom prenosi vladina saopstenja, ukljucujuci i ono o broju stradalih do sada. Prateci BBC i ono malo slika ne izgleda da su protesti toliko masovni kao 2009 i primetna je samo muska omladina, opet za razliku od 2009.
dillinger Posted January 2, 2018 Posted January 2, 2018 (edited) Krenula mašinerija https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/the-west-should-support-the-protesters-in-iran/2018/01/01/02b4f208-ef11-11e7-b3bf-ab90a706e175_story.html?utm_term=.a6bcc1430d35 Quote The Post's View Opinion The West should support the protesters in Iran By Editorial Board The popular demand for change is justified and deserves international support. President Trump has been right to tweet his backing for the demonstrators; European leaders, who have been far more cautious, should speak up. At the same time, it’s important to mind the lessons of history, which suggest that the odds that the protesters will trigger a revolution are long. Edited January 2, 2018 by dillinger
Lord Protector Posted January 2, 2018 Posted January 2, 2018 2 minutes ago, dillinger said: Krenula mašinerija https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/the-west-should-support-the-protesters-in-iran/2018/01/01/02b4f208-ef11-11e7-b3bf-ab90a706e175_story.html?utm_term=.a6bcc1430d35 Neokonzervativci huškaju i na Breitbartu već duže vremena. Naslovi su otrovni, svaki glas razuma poklapaju desetinama komentara, sve suprotno od onoga što je obećano trampovim biračima.
Recommended Posts