Skip to main content

Looking beyond the bombing in Sudan

Like a bully-boy totally unconstrained by any regard for international law, it seems that the Israeli were behind the bombing in Sudan.  Leaving aside that one simply can't have countries going around into other countries and committing what are clearly terrorist acts - it's called lawlessness  and a clear breach of the United Nations Charter - it is suggested that the Israelis had reasons of their actions beyond the simple bombing.

"Israel maintained its official silence on Thursday over Sudan’s accusation that the Israel military was behind an air attack that destroyed a weapons factory in Khartoum, the Sudanese capital, early Wednesday.

But senior Israeli officials spoke openly about what they described as Sudan’s destabilizing role in the region, accusing it of serving as a transit point in a weapons supply route from Iran via the Sinai Desert to Palestinian militant groups in Gaza and other places like Lebanon.

Israeli newspapers splashed reports from Sudan on their front pages on Thursday, and analysts posited that if Sudan’s accusations were true, Israeli warplanes would have flown 1,180 miles each way to carry out their mission, a feat, they said, that should serve as a warning to Iran.

While Iranian leaders have derided Israel’s veiled threats to strike at Iran’s nuclear facilities, some newspapers here carried maps showing that the distance from Israel to the major Iranian nuclear sites is about 200 miles shorter than the direct flight path from Israel to Khartoum."

Continue reading here.







Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...
Post a Comment
Read more

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...
Post a Comment
Read more

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...
6 comments
Read more