Truly shocking.

Criticising Israeli tactics does not equate to support for Israel’s enemies. It’s not an either/or. Interpreting it as such, is logically wrong.

This is why.

Israel’s strategy is not working. I’ve shown why, above. Therefore, it should try something else. I’ve said what, above.

What about that, supports Israel’s enemies?

Can you give us a link to that video you’re referring to?

Had already seen the same thing in detail on the Madrid rail bombings.

Watch the video and report on London 7/7 and tell me that the Fanatics are your mates.

Have a look at some of the Footage on Whaleoil’s site of how Hamas exterminated Fatah followers.

Then read about Hezbollah’s promises on Israeli eradication, and terror on all things Israeli around the World.

Think it easily explains the IDF perceived ‘over-reaction’. When your back is against the wall/sea.

When all you face is threats of death from your neighbours, no matter what you do.

Excuse me but, until you wake up to the fact that ‘THEY’ hate us all. Until NZ gets a dose of what other Western Nations or Partners have had to endure. (and probably will again.)

The Fanatics want to hurt and take away our way of life. Sure lets negotiate. Sure lets parlez.

Frankly they will never listen.

Death becomes them.

the Saudi government has lavishly financed the propagation of Wahhabism throughout the world, sweeping away moderate interpretations of Islam even within the borders of the United States itself… Seems strange though why on one hand they won’t support Hamas and [are] pro-western yet on the other they promote a very anti-western version of the Koran.

Especially this. It’s a very strange juxtaposition isn’t it.

He detailed some of the major differences between it and the standard Koran (think King James bible). I can’t remember the exact points but apparently the Koran has a large number of passages that balance each other out. For example could be something like “all Jews are infidels” and the next section “but they are brothers of the book and should be left alone”.

Guess what happens when the Saudi sponsored version removes all the balancing statements? A one way book of jihad and obviously ideal for ultra fundamentalist groups like the Brotherhood.

Numbers Game, if you can put more of something into an area more reliably than your opponent then you can afford to loose more and spend less.

I’m not too sure where the delivery system superiority discussion is going – I kinda look at it like: all sides (except Ariadne) are reasonably reliable so that’s the end of that, militarisation-wise anyway. Sure, the instant a hot war breaks out, you will see any number of launch vehicles heading into space, but that’s more a function of readiness and numbers, less of reliability. Unless of course you’re talking about laser-take-down of the launch vehicles, in which case that depends on such laser systems already operating in space. I fail to see the tactical advantage of having the most reliable launch vehicle once you reach a certain minimum point of reliability which all nations except the EU have reached. What am I missing here?

Both first strike and retaliation potential is strategically vital which is precisely why Russia objects to the ABM systems the US wants to place into Eastern Europe. However until and if that happens, all nations that wish to, already have that capability through land-based systems, so I don’t really see that in 2009, a space-based first strike system would be specifically a huge advantage in and of itself. That may change in future of course. You also need to think about the enormous political difficulties that would ensue were a nation to install such a system in space. Who knows, it may well already be there, but since an ICBM is currently to my knowledge mostly unstoppable anyway, why would any nation go to all that expense and political risk just to do this? What’s the cost/benefit?

Re: your last three paras: we’re living in interesting times, Banana. Buckle your seat-belt and hold on. Things could get pretty bumpy.

It would seem at first glance Delivery capability dose not equate to much but really it is a huge advantage and a reason why Russia has already picked up ground lost against the Americans, now think about this.

What did the MIR really achieve in it’s life time? consider the amount of time the Americans could spend in space using shuttles compared to the Russians who had their own space station, the amount of research undertaken was considerably more cost efficient than the American governments. When American was investing time and expertise into the field of getting a space shuttle of the ground the Russians where investing it into refining delivery systems and logistical capability.

Yes they may have been broke but they where still able to maintain a high level of expertise and research by using a more cost effective solution, this is also another reason why they did not want the MIR scrapped, and why you will find America is now forced to use Russian expertise and equipment for the I.S.S because they have a lesser expertise in that field, i would go so far as to say it is America who is in a wheelchair when it comes to this side of things.

As for first strike from space, it is quite simply massive with unfathomable potential, anything you can think off could very well be possible so long as you can overcome the logistical and scientific problems involved, really to try and debate the matter is stupid of me because i have no idea what on earth is achievable or what is being thought up.

Now i strongly suspect the recent posturing from the big three is causing a second space race to begin, China has a long way to go in terms of expertise but with 1 billion + people i expect that gap to be overcome rapidly.

So my conclusion is that unless America can make substantial claims on the ownership of space then it is not the only superpower and it is now waking up to the uncomfortable reality that it has to depend on other nations to keep it’s position in the world, not just in space, but economically, militarily and technologically.

I’m honestly afraid that this will cause American government to become increasingly stupid and crazy ( more of the Mad Man doctrine from Kissinger ) the more they realize that their grasp on the world is slipping away from them, i expect alot more conflict to erupt among those who are Client states of the U.S and are in a position of being a regional superpower, as we can see with Iran and Israel and even with Australia in our region of the world ( New Guinea is a good example )

Edit: How are the Wahhabis connected to the Saudi Royal Family?

He took two verses from the Quran and interpreted them to mean total and ceaseless war against anyone who was in the way of the destiny of Islam.

Wahhabism is the dominant form of Islam in Saudi Arabia,[1] and is also popular in Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates. It is often referred to as a “sect”[1] or “branch”[2] of Islam, though both its supporters and its opponents[3] reject such designations. It has developed considerable influence in the Muslim world through the funding of mosques, schools and other means from Persian Gulf oil wealth

I’ll leave you to make the connection between the Brotherhood and the Royal Family.

There isn’t one, SR, as far as I know. That wasn’t what I was suggesting. My knowledge is very limited but as I understand it, the Saudi Royal Family aren’t seen as particularly legitimate rulers of that particular Kingdom.

I’m not taking just OBL’s word for that of course, that would be particularly stupid, wouldn’t it. No, as I understand it, the nepotism widely practiced in Saudi is not looked upon favourably throughout the ME Muslim community, as is the close connection the Royal Family have with what they see as the anti-Islam policies of what they call ‘the great satan.’

Would be laughable would it not, were it not, true.

The Power of Nightmares video has a good history of the Muslim Brotherhood. If you haven’t seen it on google, you really should, if you’re interested in this subject.

couldn’t afford the gas

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7834829.stm

I’ll leave you to make the connection between the Brotherhood and the Royal Family.

And one of those powers, Iran, has New Zealand mentioned as a target in its strategic plan for the defeat of anglo-saxon culture as given by Ahmadenijad’s chief strategic advisor.

Whether you really regard that as a real threat depends, IMO Sonny, on whether you swallow without question the MSM propaganda you’ve been fed for years re: Iran, as detailed in one of the paras in my 2:07 post.

BTW, to both you and SR, why is it surprising to either of you that two very close US allies: Egypt and Saudi Arabia; didn’t turn up in Qatar. Secondly, in relation to a wider issue: Do either of you hold any curiosity toward looking into, or have you ever looked into, the issues regarding the connections between (a) the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and connections between them and al-Qa’ida; and (b) the 911 hijackers and Saudi Arabia? It’s just, have you ever found it curious that the hijackers were mostly Saudi citizens and yet the US invaded Iraq instead?

I’m not suggesting anything in particular, really I’m not, I’m just wondering if you’ve ever stirred yourself to look into those connections. If you ever do, it sheds a lot of light on ME issues.

Now dose the U.S really hold Technical and numerical superiority in this field? in my opinion Logistically they are hamstrung, no manned space flights and a number of catastrophic missile launch failures, so they now have to rely on other country’s to provide them logistical capability, this to me is a major flaw in their claim to superiority and ownership of space so that alone puts in question their claim to sole remaining superpower.

Banana, space is not just about launch vehicle reliability but with respect to just that aspect alone, if the US is hamstrung then the rest of the world: Russia, Japan, China, EU are all either in wheelchairs or strung up in a bed in full-body plaster, comparatively speaking.

The shuttle does a lot of classified missions = defence stuff and not all of those are simple spy satellites with passive systems. SDI (a.k.a. “star-wars” to the reef-fish) no doubt produced a lot of useful research alongside its main purpose of being the last straw that broke the USSR’s economic back. That was 30 years ago.

The Chinese in the 90’s had to steal from the US both the legacy codes to get the neutron bomb and metallurgy secrets to stop their MIRV warheads from breaking up in the atmosphere. That’s how far behind they were in the 90’s. They will catch up rather quickly, I fear, however. Especially as this economic restructuring works its way through the system.

The Russians are probably technically ahead of the Chinese but they have been economically hamstrung throughout the 90’s and are just now recovering. I would not be at all surprised to see a ‘great leap forward’ if the Russians and the Chinese pooled their resources and geopolitically their relationship has been growing in leaps and bounds in the last decade. That must be a huge worry to the US.

The EU of course are as usual, confused and divided and therefore no threat whatsover at present. However if for some reason in future they decided to join one side or the other, my money would be that they would choose the Russian-Chinese alliance.

It’s a highly classified area obviously, so this is all speculation. However I do tend to intuitively feel that the US is technologically 20-50 years ahead of any other nation, at the mo. The question is, how rapidly will that lead erode as we proceed through these next 10-15 years.

In terms of first-strike capability from space, I don’t really see that as being the be-all and end-all of the space militarisation program but I don’t think you were saying that anyway. I see space militarisation as involving missile defence (taking out incoming missiles prior to MIRV deployment), anti-satellite weapons (critical to deal with enemy navigation and comms satellites), delivering atmospheric EMP when and where necessary, hosting laser systems for all purposes: comms and hardware destruction, and of course, facilitating secure communications and surveillance. I imagine there are a hundred and one other uses to which they’re put as well.