United States Increases Global Arms Sales

The Israeli press has recently reported that the United States will be providing arms sales to its Middle Eastern partners. In an attempt to discourage Iran and any Al-Qeada threats the United States is increasing terrorism around the world. Israel shouldn't be the only one concerned about violent repercussions. The United States in a path of collision and it continues to export terrorism around the world. Just like the situation in Afghanistan after the fall of the pro-soviet union that created cells of terror. The United States is once again creating the same conditions in Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Egypt. Eventually these countries will have active cells that will carry out terrorist activities in the United States. Israel has signed an arms deal with the United States in 2010 in order to deter Iran from attacking. But the United States is using the same old soviet era tactics to win the war against Islam. The difference between the covert operations as the soviets is that before the double agents just mislead each other on intelligence information. This time a slight mistake can end up in a double agents attempt in detonating a bomb and blowing up in your face. Israel has the right reason to be worried about United States arming its Middle Eastern partners. But it’s not just because the Middle East might turn into hot spots for active networks against Israel national interest. The situation also describes Israel long term situation with neighboring countries. Israel is hostile with American allies which creates a division with the United States. At the same time Israel wants weapons it wants to deter the United States in providing arms to certain Middle Eastern partners. The build up in arms to each of these countries in 2010 should lift eyebrows. In recent reports the CIA has caught an Iranian trying to buy weapons from Georgia. It is evident that the two sides are setting up a collision course with each other.

1. The United States is creating exporting and arming future terror networks against its own national interest.
2. Israel future will eventually be its own down fall if a one state solution is not found with the people of Palestine. Israel future will fail if it continues its aggressive posture in the Middle East.
3. The United States axes with moderate nations will eventually backfire.
4. A war with Iran will stagnate American economic development and creates more terrorism. Israel attack on Iran will increase world tension and create retaliation disproportionate to recent Al-Qaida activity.
5. End Game-America Economic power collapsing along with creating more hot spots around the world that will target both Britain and the United States.

The World at War

The way in understanding the United States imperial objectives is to understand their objectives in Iran. Condoleezza Rice in 2006 proclaimed that there were a couple of ways in dealing with Iran. Below is a list of ways in which the United States will attempt to penetrate Iran. The United States lust for world domination has only awakened the masses in the world stronger than ever. These key ingredients are what some Latin America nations need to look out for. In Fidel Castro reflections he acknowledges that the empire is on the offensive. If it continues on its path to destruction another possible world war can be concluded.

There was, for many years, a split in the administration of George W. Bush in regards to US policy towards Iran. On the one hand, there was the hardliner neoconservative element, led by Dick Cheney, with Rumsfeld in the Pentagon; who were long pushing for a military confrontation with Iran. On the other hand, there was Condoleezza Rice as Secretary of State, who was pushing for a more diplomatic, or “soft” approach to Iran.



In February of 2006, Condoleezza Rice introduced a new Iran strategy to the Senate, “emphasizing the tools of so-called soft diplomacy. She called for ramping up funding to assist pro-democracy groups, public diplomacy initiatives, and cultural and education fellowships, in addition to expanding U.S.-funded radio, television, and Internet and satellite-based broadcasting, which are increasingly popular among younger Iranians.” She added that, “we are going to work to support the aspirations of the Iranian people for freedom in their country.” There were three main facets to the program: “Expanding independent radio and television”; “Funding pro-democracy groups,” which “would lift bans on U.S. financing of Iran-based nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), trade unions, human rights groups, and opposition candidates”; and “Boosting cultural and education fellowships and exchanges,” which “would help pay Iranian students and scholars to enroll in U.S. universities.”[52]

-http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16535


Barack Obama has not changed course and in fact he has increased Bush policies. The Empire is reckoning havoc all across the globe. Let us see into a distant future and prevent a catastrophic apocalypse.

Breaking News:United States Navy Eyes Iran Naval Force

The United States naval force is keeping a sharp eye out on Iran Naval capacity and ability. The United States is currently studying Iran Naval capacity even more aggressively. They acknowledge that Iran is planning to expand its naval reach. They also acknowledge that Iran Naval forces is the bulk of there defenses. The recent United resolution will leave an open door for those who want to use military means as an option. The recent study of Iran Naval capablities is another sign that the United States military will target Iran Naval forces. The small qoute below describes United States naval understanding of Iran capabilities.

Outlook
Subtnarines be equipped with torpedoes, naval mines, and
Submarines will probably remain a key feature missiles. According to Iran, the QA'EM will
of Iran's naval order of battle. Iran is the only be capable of carrying out both defensive and
country in the Persian Gulf region with sub- offensive operations.
marines, and Iranian naval leaders have stated
publicly that they believe submarines are a bet- Additionally, the IRIN Commander, Rear
ter value than other weapons systems. The late Admiral Sayyari, announced the production
Rear Admiral A.shkbus Daneh-Kar wrote that of a submarine of more than 1,000 tons. This
Iran "calculated the deterrent value of subma- may be yet another submarine for the IRIN in
rines--submarines could, on a purely self- addition to the QA'EM.
sufficient basis, detect surprise attacks launched
from far distances and abort them."12 Surface Ships
In keeping with this focus on submarines, in
August 2008 Iran reported that the Ministry
of Defense's Marine Industries Organization
inaugurated the production line of the
QA'EM-class submarine, reportedly a 450-ton
submarine. Iran has stated that this new generation
submarine will be built in Iran and will
Model of a QA'EM-class coastal ,ubruari,,"I
Iran has constructed what it calls the MO\\jclass
destroyer-in fact a corvette-that, once
accepted into service, will probably be employed
in the IRlN's operating area in the Gulf
of Oman. More construction of larger ships
has occurred in the Caspian. Iran announced
that it began a production line of the MO\\j-2
at Bandar Anzali. Also in the Caspian, Iran
has built four copies of its COMBATTANTE
II-class guided missile patrol boat. These construction
programs demonstrate Iran's ability
to produce mid- to large-size ships. Coupled
with Iran's continuing interest in self-sufficiency,
these ship-building programs will likely be followed
by others.
The IRIN is also retrofitting older surface
combatants with upgraded weapons systems.
12Dane/z-Km; .AJ"/zlbl/J; Re(ff .Admiral, "Operational Doctn"ne qftlzeJlao/ qft/ze hlamic Republic qf lrrm, "Sqff, iJ"we}/o. 238, Pi'- 10-12
24
For example, in 2008 Iran announced that it
had installed missiles on one of its patrol craft,
turning it into a guided missile patrol craft.
Iran also substantially upgraded the PF-103-
class patrol ship NAGHDI with missiles. This
type of retrofitting will allow the IRIN to
extend the usefulness of its aging fleet.
In contrast to the IRIN, the IRGCN has concentrated
on acquiring and developing small,
fast boats, some lightly armed and others
armed with missiles and torpedoes, and will
probably continue this trend.
Weapons
Naval modernization is one of Iran's highest
military priorities and the country continues to
focus on weapons acquisition and development
programs. Programs of interest include expanding
inventories of existing weapons systems and
increasingly sophisticated systems. Weapons,
such as the Hoot supercavitation high-speed
missile torpedo, may be proliferated throughout
the Iranian naval inventory, as will longer
range anti-ship cruise missiles, such as the
Ra'ad. Finally, given the importance of mining
to Iranian naval strategy, some effort will
continue in this area as well.
Changes in Strategy
Iran's naval forces are unlikely to make wholesale
changes to their naval strategy. However,
it is clear that Iran will modify its strategy
when appropriate. Rear Admiral Daneh-Kar
noted that Iranian planners would review and
revise their operational doctrine based on lessons
learned from past and current operations,
as well as on the capabilities of new weapons
systems entering the service. He continued,
"We cannot develop the Navy's operational
doctrine in isolation."13
Recent activity bears witness to some of this
adaptation. IRIN commander Rear Admiral
Sayyari has stated that the IRIN will push
operations further out into the Gulf of Oman
and even the Indian Ocean to protect Iran's
maritime interests, and, as mentioned earlier,
Iran claims its naval forces are conducting extended
patrols. A decade hence may see more
frequent IRIN patrols in the north Arabian
Sea or Indian Ocean. To support this, the
IRIN has a plan to establish new naval bases
along the Gulf of Oman by 2015 and strengthen
its presence outside the Strait ofHormuz.
The IRGCN will likely continue to patrol and
operate inside the Persian Gulf, a place where
Rear Adru.iralHabibollah Sayyari, COIllIllander of the
IRIN, in front of a poster depicting IRIN naval platfoTIlls
HDanelz-Km; .AJ"/zlbuJ" Nar .Admiral, "OpnationaiDoctnne iftlze )lacy if the hlamic Republic if fTan, "Sqff, iJ"J"/uJIo. 235, Pi'- 32-35.
25
its asymmetric tactics and numerous platforms
are at an advantage. However, its modernization
efforts may provide it with more sophisticated
platforms.
Conclusion
«The countries if this region have a sensitive strategic
and geopolitical situation and the Islamu Republic if
Iran can play a considerable role among these countries.
»
General Mohammad-Baqer ,<:plqadr
Former Deputy Commander
Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps
Iran sees itself as a regional power, and its
naval forces, the IRIN and the IRGCN, plan
to support this view as they work to expand
both their weapons inventories and their
capabilities. According to Iranian officials,
"extra-regional" forces are neither welcmne
nor necessary in the waterways ofthe Middle
East, and the Iranian armed forces have
"proven during these 30 years of the revolution
that they are ready to defend the territory
of their country."14

Follow link below:

href="http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/oni/iran-navy.pdf

Real News Network:Latin America Multipolar Worlds and stirs Anger on Imperial and Colonial Powers

Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's visit to Brazil has sparked debates and observations all over the world as Luis Inacio Lula de Silva shows the real possibilities of a new, multipolar world. Brazil is becoming a real example of diplomacy, and of course the major powers are angry. Lula defends Iran's nuclear rights and is calling on Western powers to dump the idea of cornering Iran with threats. The question is if the world powers are willing to listen to Lula's advice.

Why Obama can't be soft on North Korea

Below is the "The Christian Science Monitor" anaylis about Barack Obama stance against North Korea. The reason I find this particular article interesting is that its written within a context of religion. In recent news reports about Donald Rumsfeld use of biblic text sent to President Bush oval office describes what I consider the fog war. While news reports have indicated the use of biblical text in Iraq and other religious fanatic soldiers promoting conversion. One tends to wonder how far the Imperial United States is willing to go in converting the Middle East. The United States has been on going with the religious propaganda. In every home and house hold they are waging two physcos wars on every American. One is from the constant bombardment on television shows that deal with commercial consumerism. The other deals with the Christian religious propaganda that is on a 24 hour a day brain washing. But let me get back to the actual article. The article promotes a stronger stance from the Barack Obama against North Korea. That would be that America Empire is at war with the world. The "religious" website is promoting the bombing of North Korea with a nuclear bomb! If his isn't bad enough already the American Empire would also like to overthrow Iran Islamic Revolutionary Vanguard. The nature of this economic system will stop at nothing to ensure its hegemony in the world. I urge the people of the world to stop the American Empire. End all foreign and military occupation in the world. End the support for Saudi Arabia undemocratic system. End the support the United Arab Emerit undemocratic system. It's time that the world unite and end the SuperHyper power. -Don Famoso





Why Obama can't be soft on North Korea
Japan and South Korea already see him as eroding the US military posture in Asia.
By the Monitor's Editorial Board
from the May 28, 2009 edition
link:http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0528/p08s01-comv.html




It would be hard to imagine President Obama ever standing only a few feet from the North Korean border and warning its leaders that if they ever used nuclear weapons, "it would be the end of their country."
Mr. Obama is not the threatening kind. He prefers "soft" power to win over his adversaries. In fact, after North Korea's May 25 test of a bomb close in size to the one dropped on Hiroshima, he said the US would merely "work with our friends and allies to stand up to this behavior."
What a contrast to the last Democratic president.
It was President Clinton who actually spoke those threatening "hard power" words – within earshot of North Korean soldiers – in 1993. At the time, Pyongyang was revving up its nuclear-bomb program.
Mr. Clinton knew something back then that Obama is learning on the job: Tough talk against an enemy is sometimes needed simply to reassure America's allies that the US will live up to its defense promises. Those commitments include its unique role to provide nuclear deterrence, or promised retaliation, if an ally is attacked.
By his actions and his words, Obama is sending worrisome signals to Japan and South Korea that they might be left alone in a confrontation with North Korea or even perhaps China.
It's an impression he needs to correct quickly with credible reassurance.
Beyond Obama's lackluster response so far to North Korea's first successful atomic blast, Japan and South Korea worry that the president's focus on his big domestic agenda will erode the US military posture in Asia and the will of Americans to defend allies.
They see Obama's pullout of troops from Iraq and the calls by some in the Democratic Party to set a timetable for a US retreat from Afghanistan.
They worry that his proposed cuts in ballistic-missile defense would leave Asian allies vulnerable while his cuts in F-22 fighter jets would harm Japan's ability to build a similar plane to defend itself against China.
They watch as Obama cuts the US Navy's plans to build more ships to counter China's growing submarine fleet.
They worry about US willingness to defend Taiwan – as Bill Clinton did in 1996 – against a hostile confrontation with China. That worry stems from Beijing's recent success in luring Taipei's leaders toward closer ties with the mainland, thus weakening US support for Taiwan's sovereignty and its military strength.
Tokyo also notices that Obama has appointed a Democratic Party fund-raiser as US ambassador to Japan and not a professional diplomat with Japanese experience. And both Seoul and Tokyo are worried about signals that Obama will hold direct talks with North Korea without including them.
All these moves help explain recent steps in Japan and South Korea to prepare for an Obama era of American retrenchment.
Many legislators in Seoul now want to delay the planned 2012 hand-over of the wartime operational control of South Korean troops from the US. With North Korea soon able to place a nuclear weapon on a missile, they prefer the US keep its hand on a military response. South Korea also decided this week to join the US-led global effort to interrupt air or sea deliveries by North Korea of unconventional weapons or missile parts.
In Japan, officials are so worried about the reliability of the US nuclear umbrella that the ruling Liberal Democratic Party is debating whether to develop a capability to strike North Korea – "in order not to sit and wait for death," as an LDP committee stated this week.
Some LDP officials even want Japan to openly consider acquiring its own nuclear-weapons capability. They cite polls showing a drop in trust of the US by the Japanese public, caused in part by its weak stance toward North Korea.
Coincidentally, a US Council on Foreign Relations report released Tuesday warned Obama that if he doesn't reaffirm the US nuclear deterrence, "some US allies may decide in the future to acquire nuclear weapons."
Obama must not let North Korea's nuclear weapons ignite an arms race in Asia. The world must not again witness the kind of military rivalry between Japan and China that led to World War II.
In both words and deeds, the president must reaffirm a strong, long-term US military commitment to its many allies in the region.