In the past couple of days I've read a few blogs which have posts regarding the Yemen. Two I found most interesting were whollyrude and Leg Iron.
One of my erudite readers sent me this by email. I consider it an opinion worth sharing (I have the writer's permission to publish):
Oil is in Somalia and the Yemen. So is the USA.There has been a covert war going on there for at least 30 years, in one form or another. The yanks see oil as vital for their survival and will do what is necessary.
As for Broon, O'bummer and co moving into Yemen, can I suggest that a build up, slowly in Oman, a crack down on Somalia due to piracy and then if the Yemen govt plays along, stabliise Yemen properly. That would give them defacto control of the gulf of Yemen, which could be useful. The yanks already sling in the odd cruise missile to the region.
And with the cooperation of Oman you could have effective control of the Gulf of Oman, which would make it interesting for Iran, and would make it easy access to Pakistan and Afganistan, which may explain a few hints as to why we will be in Afganistan for 40 years.
Of course Russia may be unhappy, but the attitude there may be changing and agreements for mutual benefit have happened before....!
The big problem is Islam. It works on religion before country so the effect of doing anything dire may be to unite all Islam against the west.
And of course, the old cynical question, what is happening around the 28th of January they don't want us looking at!! I don't trust any of them.
As the old Chinese curse, may you live in interesting times!!
Anon
Posts
25 comments:
what is happening around the 28th of January they don't want us looking at!!
Yup. Fool us once, Shame on you
http://bastardoldholborn.blogspot.com/2010/01/224-you-fucknuggets.html
Goodness me OH, it's not like you not to be up to date with Gordon's latest wheeze. He's called a summit between Obama and himself to discuss the Yemen, on the same day he's hosting a meeting about Afghanistan.
He just doesn't have a clue does he.
Auch you know all this, you're just testing my typing skills. :)
The US operations in Somali weren't so much covert as under-reported. There was even a film, Black Hawk Down, released about a US operation in Somali which went catastrophically wrong. I think it's best described as a not particularly good piece of pro-American propaganda, albeit while demonstrating the horrific combat conditions.
I would agree with the fact they were under-reported Hythlodaeus. In recent months I expected the political situation to be brought into the MSM because of the pirate situation, but little has been said.
Never saw the film unfortunately although I do know the US have pumped arms and other aid into the country, along with the British help.
I wonder - has the Yemen been in the sights of Obama and Brown since they realised Afghanistan was futile?
There's oil in Yemen? Good, let's buy it.
Although what passes for the Yemeni state is in conflict with A-Q related groups, the least unreported fracas there is probably with various clans of Zaidi Shi'a in the north (although the President is also from this stock). There's also an ongoing cross-border conflict with Saudi, which has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of Yemeni civilians following attacks on Saudi villages (compare and contrast the respective coverage of this and when Israel acts to protect her citizens) but also to suppress similar Shi'a insurgencies in Saudi.
Forget Aden, the largest foreign intervention in Yemen of the past few decades was from Nasser's Egypt which was then opposed by Saudi but, with huge loss of life, finished 1,000 years of Zaidi control. As I recall, this involved the first use of chemical weaponry against solely civilian targets since the Second World War.
PS Saying "the Yemen" makes you sound like Hester Stanhope.
Hi SR
Saw a report that the pirates in Somalia are getting ransoms in the region of 3 to 5 million pounds a ship, 30 ships so far, between 150 to 250 million .
With the right backing, that kind of money can buy some serious military hardware.
Given the will, and some help from their friends,do they have the range and clout to take over Somalia and raid the gulf of Aden and the gulf of Oman? Join up with the insurgents in Yemen and suddenly no longer a pest but a nasty threat?The real question is who are their friends?
D.
Now onto Somalia ;)
The events depicted in Black Hawk Down were a miserable failure for the US military, but initial screenings in January 2002 had audiences standing in applause... so recent was 11/9 that they saw it as we may see the balls-up of Arnheim.
The principle woe there is common warlordism, but there's also al "shake your boobies" Shabaab who were [previously, I hope] represented abroad by our old friend Anwar al Awlaki: a number of Somalis in the American Mid-West were recruited to fight, and returned in body bags.
As it happens, Somaliland in the north declares a UDI, and by regional standards is highly stable. This was the British colony, whilst the southern portion was Italian-controlled. The Italians had dismantled all the domestic power structures, whilst the British we content to leave well alone and buy sheep to feed troops in India.
The response to the piracy problem is also interesting. These definitely are enemy combatants - attacking international shipping, forming ex jure states - and my view is that A-Q and the Taleban should have been similarly classed, getting around the pig's ear which is Guantanamo Bay.
Jings Alec you shame me with your knowledge of that area. Great stuff though.
Oh how I would have loved to have been Hester Stanhope or a lady of her ilk. Unfortunately in this modern world there are few like her. She was an out and out society lady, not frivilous but extremely intelligent and determined.
She achieved her ambitions through being born into privilege whereas there were so many women of her day were born into poverty.
Hi Apogee. Apogee you've a knowledge of this area and I'm sure you're far more able to answer Alec. Please do.
I read the pirates are organised by 'big business' but as you say who are the cartels? Some form of mafia?
Alec what a great post. Can I leave it to Apogee to respond to you? He too has an understanding of the area.
Sitting here, looking at a street covered in 6 inches of compacted ice, reflecting on Flannel Minister Swinney's assurance that the Scottish Councils have enough grit to get us through the (2010) ice age.
It's enough to get you looking for to buy some combustible jockey shorts, so and it is!
Hi SR.Not sure that I know any more than any one else. I just get a feeling that what started out as banditry is now starting to coalesce into something much more coherent, which considering the money being taken is not a surprise.
Alex probably knows a lot more detail than I do.
Alex, you say the response to the piracy problem, to be honest, what puzzles me is that by and large, there hasn't been one. Surveillance systems are available but not much is happening on the surface. Could it be this suits someone? Or are they waiting to see which way it goes,has someone made a DECISION, which is why the 28th meeting.
Come to think of it ,isn't that about the time of the deadline Iran put out for its uranium processing DIY bid?
D.
Of course, Rosa, I'll await his response.
History or hindsight serves little purpose in the flux of confusion being brewed in the melting pot of the Middle East.
The question to be asked is who gains most from this confusion and does most to encourage it by either actions or inertia?
The war on terror has many facets and even more profit centres and objectives.
Hi Ford. And of course, if any of the unionist parties governed Scotland, we wouldn't even have snow would we? They'd have held it back. Wonderful wonderful unionist politicians. :)
Crinkly, I may make that an exercise to trace the profit makers of the wars in the middle east. Off the top of my head would be the oil and mineral companies plus arms suppliers but it would be interesting to see who they are.
Rosa - you would have difficulty identifying and tracing the true geneology of the corporations involved.
Such deals are generally hybred's developed through a mix of finance and know how.
Yachting and shooting parties at the Rothchild's with a guest list that includes Gadafi's son, Mandleson and Osborne are only a fringe indicator that something's going down. When the moguls and oligarchs meet there are no indicators, so don't waste your time. It's enough to know you, your children and your children's children futures are all being controlled by them.
Which is exactly why we need strong competent, democratically committed government.
I don't think either Blairy Liar, Incapability Brown, Meddlesome Mandelson, Convoluted Cameron, Smoothie Osborne or Hopeful Clegg meet that criteria, do they?
So yes, every Scot worth their salt should vote for the SNP. A vote for the Union merely confirms their inferiority status as dependency junkies.
Yemen and Somalia are not in the Middle East.
And would this be the same SNP which used UK taxpayers' money to fund the vanity project of Osama Saeed and his family; who had no grassroots support in Glasgow?
The same Osama Saeed who said Anwar al Awlaki - who has been linked to everyone from 11/9 hijackers to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to Nidal Malik Hasan to Kurt Westergaard's attacker - preached nothing but peace when his promotion of violent jihad already was known?
The same vanity project which was granted UK taxpayers' money to canvass for SNP votes, under the direction of SNP employees?
>> A vote for the Union merely confirms their inferiority status as dependency junkies.
So this is why Osama Saeed (him again), has been sent scrounging for foreign handouts?
I suspect you're right Crinkly. They're all in it together, just like one big secret organisation fighting in their own interests not ours.
At least we have an alternative to unionism and we have the chance to have a democratic parliament once independence comes.
I've never been comfortable with the Saeed business Alec. I think I posted on it some time ago. It's my understanding quite a few people feel the same.
When the money was given it was certainly thought a bad move in my circle of friends.
Aye, I'm grateful for that from you, Rosa, but like it or loathe it, that's how the Independence narrative is framed (although there're plenty in the non-Independence camp who're just as supportive of such Islamist and/or sectarian politiking).
And, it's not just hob-nobbing with Islamists... look at Salmond's gormless performance over Trump.
Again, like it or loathe it, I think the SNP-fundamentalist boat has sailed. Scottish interests are linked with the globalized system, and any separation from the UK will involve becoming part of some other bloc. Defining our future on being anything but 'English' just ain't healthy.
The Pro-Union or non-Independence camp is a myriad of differing alligences and loyalties, whilst -barring weird Co-Operativists like Shuggy - the Independence camp *is* the SNP, which *is* Salmond. When we hear him prattling on about how much he wishes for Scotland to leave behind the reputation of British military policies - whilst not foregoing any of the domestic economic benefits - and develop a reputation for peace, we see just how shallow he is.
The Trump business was a difficult one for Salmond Alec. He 'took over' another person's remit and also, at that time, a large majority of people in Aberdeenshire were all for it. So I'm going to refute your 'gormless' description and replace it with 'a wee bit uncanny'.
I've never considered myself anti-English in the least so does that make me healthy? ;)
I do think the fundamentalists lost out when John Swinney became leader. John is a gradualist and so is Alec Salmond. I would disagree the SNP is Salmond these days. Perhaps it was a couple of years ago but there is plenty talent now in the SNP and they've gained in experience.
Noe Alec, dinnae get me started oan military matters tae dae wi Scotland. You'll be here all night discussing them.
Strange argument as to Yemen's location and the minor point of Somalia's geographic position as opposed to its political and religous influences.
Haven't a clue what your trying to cover with this Saeed business, other than the implication he's a Muslim carpet bagger who in some way has the ear of Salmond? Surely you're not accusing either Saeed or Salmond of influencing the Middle East debacle? And isn't their plenty of secular or Christian carpet baggers in the political arena?
And by voting for the Union, which as you suggest, may have myriads of opinions and allegiances, the ones that matter have an irrevocable record of failure and very little claim to the process of democracy.
Who in their right mind would vote for a continuance of failure or, at an optimistic best, mediocrity?
Have to admit Crinkly I wondered what Saeed had to do with the Yemen and Somalia but I did try to answer Alec's question out of courtesy.
In answer to your question I think those who would vote for that are those who have been indoctrinated with fear.
Post a Comment