Middle East and North Africa 17, where everything is what it seems

[Horza]

Is this the beginning of a beautiful frenemyship?

Iran's Supreme Leader has approved co-operation with the US as part of the fight against Islamic State in northern Iraq, sources have told BBC Persian.

[...]

Sources say Ayatollah Khamenei has sanctioned Qasem Soleimani, the commander of the Quds force - the extraterritorial arm of the Revolutionary Guards - to work with forces fighting IS, including the US.

In case people needed reminding who Qasem Soleimani is: here ya go

other stuff:

Sisi wants to build a second Suez canal with a one year deadline (FT) - seems reasonable

Qatar-GCC spat looks to be on the backburner for now

are we seeing a pattern here: Iranian FM willing to visit his Saudi counterpart

monitor in chief says Syrian chemical weapons destruction compliance not complete

IS is not an AQ-like threat to the US

[Axes]

That they want Israel to have the land and that no one will stop them. Same thing they've always been thinking on this subject.

How is it a shocker? This is business as usual for Israel. They've never stopped with the settlement expansion.

It's not that simple. Even Likud was careful in directly confiscating/nationalizing land in the WB because the central claim of the Israeli center is that the WB is disputed territory, ie, nothing will be finalized before a final status agreement is reached. This is beyond stupid, this is a huge self-goal and a gift we provided to our enemies. Furthermore, it is illegal according to international law. Somehow, though, considering how utterly stupid the move is (it will probably be cancelled quietly), I doubt this was authorized by the PM, despite how much he would like to do so.

[Horza]

An Arab diplomat familiar with the matter said the strikes were being carried out by aircraft from the UAE, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan. Most of the nations were flying U.S.-made F-16s. The diplomat said Qatar was flying airplanes but not actually dropping any bombs.

Oh, Qatar...

[snake]

So much for Syrian sovereignty. Lol

[Horza]

Oh come on, like anyone in the region gives a shit about that.

[KAH]

Khorasan bigger threat to the west than IS.

At the center is a cell known as the Khorasan group, a cadre of veteran al-Qaida fighters from Afghanistan and Pakistan who traveled to Syria to link up with the al-Qaida affiliate there, the Nusra Front.

But the Khorasan militants did not go to Syria principally to fight the government of President Bashar Assad, U.S. officials say. Instead, they were sent by al-Qaida leader Ayman al-Zawahiri to recruit Europeans and Americans whose passports allow them to board a U.S.-bound airliner with less scrutiny from security officials.

In addition, according to classified U.S. intelligence assessments, the Khorasan militants have been working with bomb-makers from al-Qaida’s Yemen affiliate to test new ways to slip explosives past airport security. The fear is that the Khorasan militants will provide these sophisticated explosives to their Western recruits who could sneak them onto U.S.-bound flights.

- See more at: http://www.chieftain.com/news/world/2898222-120/group-khorasan-qaida-pages#sthash.IXMm0umk.dpuf

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Snake

So much for Syrian sovereignty. Lol

Daesh has been violating "Syrian sovereignty" for some time and using Syrian territory as a base of operations for attacks on Iraq. The Syrian government is incapable of stopping them. Is the Russian State making similar claims about the rebels they support in Eastern Ukraine? Or Is the Russian State still offering the bullshit claim that it is offering no material support to the Ukrainian rebels?

[snake]

Oh come on, like anyone in the region gives a shit about that.

Oh I know. No one gives a shit about it at all unless it suits their purpose.

Snake

Daesh has been violating "Syrian sovereignty" for some time and using Syrian territory as a base of operations for attacks on Iraq. The Syrian government is incapable of stopping them. Is the Russian State making similar claims about the rebels they support in Eastern Ukraine? Or Is the Russian State still offering the bullshit claim that it is offering no material support to the Ukrainian rebels?

So sovereignty is sacrosanct only in certain cases? Fair enough.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Sovereignty is part and parcel of an existing State. Has Syria been a cohesive State for the last two years? Trying to compare this to the Russian State invading and annexing Crimea then fomenting rebellion in East Ukraine and when Urkaine is on the verge of restablishing control invading again is apples and oranges. Actually, it's more like apples and horseshoes.

[snake]

Khorasan bigger threat to the west than IS.

I think this is an excellent article about this conflict and the threat posed by IS. Some quotes,

“At present,” said Johnson, who is actually in office and whose entire job is protecting America, “we have no credible information that ISIS is planning to attack the homeland of the United States.”

“It’s hard to imagine a better indication of the ability of elected officials and TV talking heads to spin the public into a panic, with claims that the nation is honeycombed with sleeper cells, that operatives are streaming across the border into Texas or that the group will soon be spraying Ebola virus on mass transit systems — all on the basis of no corroborated information.”

And the crazy thing is that the US public believes IS is a threat.

Seventy-one per cent of people responding to a poll conducted by the Opinion Research Centre believe ISIS already has cells inside the U.S., ready to strike. Eighty per cent of respondents wanted Congress to authorize military action. Ninety per cent said ISIS is a direct threat to the American homeland.

The power of the media is amazing at times.

[Shryke]

So sovereignty is sacrosanct only in certain cases? Fair enough.

Yes actually. There are rules and norms about this kind of shit.

One of the most basic being that if you aren't going to stop the people in your supposedly sovereign territory from invading your neighbour, the rules start to change.

[snake]

Sovereignty is part and parcel of an existing State. Has Syria been a cohesive State for the last two years? Trying to compare this to the Russian State invading and annexing Crimea then fomenting rebellion in East Ukraine and when Urkaine is on the verge of restablishing control invading again is apples and oranges. Actually, it's more like apples and horseshoes.

I'm not comparing the two. You are. I was just commenting on how there is little talk of Syria's sovereignty, even though they forbade airstrikes on their territory. I never mentioned Ukraine. That belongs in another thread not this one. So lets not derail this further ok?? Thanks. :)

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Snake,

You are a frequent apologist for Russian behavior in Ukraine. Why else would you drop the "sovereignty" comment in this thread?

[snake]

Yes actually. There are rules and norms about this kind of shit.

One of the most basic being that if you aren't going to stop the people in your supposedly sovereign territory from invading your neighbour, the rules start to change.

I thought only the UN SC could authorize the use of force against a sovereign state?

Snake,

You are a frequent apologist for Russian behavior in Ukraine. Why else would you drop the "sovereignty" comment in this thread?

No I'm not. Stop telling lies Scott. And keep discussion of Ukraine over there please. This is about the ME.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Snake,

No I'm not. Stop telling lies Scott. And keep discussion of Ukraine over there please. This is about the ME.

I'm not lieing. You are a frequent apologist and defender of Russian actions in Ukraine. I'm surprised you are claiming otherwise.

For example:

I don't care what people label me. And I keep posting about that because ignoring those interests have got us here today. I mean, I'm sure Iran would love to be able to handle their own affairs without pressure from the West but that's not going to happen either. Why? Because the West feels that what Iran does is vital to their National security and will act accordingly. Same for Russia with respect to Ukraine.

Then

I think that if Russian interests had been taken into consideration then we would not be in the mess we are today and thousands of people would still be alive. That people in Eastern Ukraine wouldn't have their government killing them. Should it matter what Russia thinks? No. Does it matter? You'd better believe it.

Then

They probably wouldn't be but they believe it to be the case. I mean, it wouldn't make anyone feel comfortable to have a military alliance that they are not a part of, one that is predisposed towards mistrust, on your doorstep. Especially when quite a few members of said alliance are openly hostile.

Then

For Russia to back down would mean to accept Ukraine and Georgia in NATO. They are never going to allow that to happen short of a military defeat. So yes they are more concerned with their National security than with economic relations with the EU. But if they could have their security guaranteed then they would most certainly want to get back to improving relations. Specifically trade relations.

But as long as NATO is adamant about expanding towards Russia in order to contain them or have the threat of their presence on Russian borders make the Russians toe the line, then Russia will react aggressively. It's the only way they know how and truth be told the only thing NATO understands.

Then

All of Russias actions are reactions to what they perceive as hostile actions by the West. They do not want, and apparently they will not accept, NATO in Ukraine or Georgia. If they can get those guarantees then they most likely will attempt to ease tensions and de-escalate. The Russians do not want conflict no more than the EU does but they have drawn their line in the sand and will not back down. So the more the West ratchets up the pressure the more they retaliate. If things had been done differently from the start then I doubt we would be in the mess we are today.

Want to call me a liar again?

[Free Northman Reborn]

Scott

I must admit that you appear to have an unhealthy obsession with the Russia-Ukraine situation.

This is not the first time you drag Ukraine into a discussion on an entirely different thread, simply because you associate the poster in question with a Pro-Putin point of view on the Ukraine debate.

It is as if, because you are obsessed with Putin, every other poster that happens to have a view about Putin must necessarily have that view influence their every opinion on every other world affair.

Try and separate these issues in your mind, because not everyone posts on issues ranging from ISIS to Israel to Iran, constantly wondering how it compares with the situation in Ukraine.

Let it go man. Ukraine is now almost a footnote in history, with other topics becoming the flavor of the day.

[Galactus]

I thought only the UN SC could authorize the use of force against a sovereign state?

No. Self-defence doesen't require anyone's approval.

[snake]

Snake,

I'm not lieing. You are a frequent apologist and defender of Russian actions in Ukraine. I'm surprised you are claiming otherwise.

For example:

Then

Then

Then

Then

Want to call me a liar again?

You're a liar

[Horza]

Khorasan bigger threat to the west than IS.

All the CT people I follow on twitter are puzzled at why the DoD singling out 'Khorasan' as a separate group as it appears to be a thoroughly AQ/JN operation.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Snake,

Okay.