VERSIONS: روسيا اليوم NOTICIAS FREEVIDEO ИНОТВ RTД
breakingnews
Go to main page   Politics   "Operation in Afganistan is rooted in Israel"  
MORE ON THE STORY
19.11.2010, 13:33 14 comments

Russia-NATO relationship is one-way traffic

What does NATO offer Russia, and what does Russia get in reality? Would Russia be willing to help NATO stay afloat by participating in its projects? What is the price of improving relations with its Western partners?

RT Politics Interview Russia-NATO relations
Peace Activists close NATO Headquarters 24.10.2010, 03:25 12 comments

NATO is a past matter – Russian scholar

NATO has no future and today we have to re-think European security anew to switch to other forms of interaction between Russia and the EU, insists Viktor Kremyenuk, Deputy Director of the U.S. and Canada Institute.

20.10.2010, 19:41 7 comments

Moscow looking for European “re-think” at Munich Security Conference

President Dmitry Medvedev met with members of the Munich Security Conference today to discuss prospects for a new European security architecture amidst a rapidly changing neighborhood.

Sergey Lavrov speaks to students of the Moscow State Institute of International Relations in Moscow on September 1, 2010 (AFP Photo / Yuri Kadobnov) 01.09.2010, 13:43 15 comments

NATO stuck between past and future – Lavrov

Moscow expects more clarity in relations with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said.

18.05.2010, 17:02 9 comments

Russia on standby as NATO goes global

NATO’s blueprint for change mentions cooperation with Russia as a new priority, but Moscow is pushing for more than just words.

Medvedev-Obama Russia-NATO relations
19.05.2010, 18:56 12 comments

Does America consider Russia friend or foe? Antimissile system will show

Washington and NATO have recently declared the intention of enhancing their partnership with Russia, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating, the saying goes, not in the promises.

Medvedev-Obama
AFP Photo / David Furst 07.10.2010, 17:43 11 comments

America’s “Afghan trap” enters 10th year

When the US opened “Operation Enduring Freedom” in Afghanistan following 9/11, few people questioned the decision. But today, after nine years of sacrifice, that attitude is changing.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov 29.04.2010, 19:57 6 comments

Russia knows solution for European problem - Lavrov

The equal, indivisible and guaranteed security of all states should become a real thing instead of being just an attractive motto, Russia’s foreign minister told a PACE plenary session.

AFP photo / RIA Novosti / Kremlin pool / Dmitry Astakhov 09.07.2009, 02:31 6 comments

“Major concession by Russia to the US”

“We have not been told what concessions America made in return for the flights to Afghanistan [via Russia]. If none, Medvedev and Putin will have to answer to the Russian political class,” says Stephen Cohen, NYU.

Standard Missile-3 16.02.2010, 18:12 8 comments

Role of Black Sea in US missile defense unclear

Within just two weeks the US has voiced two completely different stances on placing elements of its missile defense shield in the Black Sea – but which of these is true?

"Operation in Afganistan is rooted in Israel"

Published: 24 July, 2009, 02:12
Edited: 22 January, 2010, 01:52

An US Army 10th Mountain soldier looks at a passing donkey, 2002, Afghanistan (AFP Photo / Pool / Joe Raedle)

(15.0Mb) embed video

TAGS: Military, NATO, Nuclear, Politics


The real reason why the U.S. continues its presence in Afghanistan is Iran – the country which is an annoyance for Israel, said Karen Kwiatkowski, a writer and former U.S. Air Force officer.

She says the real reason America continues its presence in Afghanistan is to keep the pressure up on Iran.

“Obama has not yet defined what winning in Afghanistan looks like,” Kwiatkowski says, “And what we are doing is working towards what is not defined.”

“Pressure from political opponents pushes Obama to increase troops in Afghanistan, to look like he understands war, to look like he cares about defense. It would be a weak point for Democrats, particularly after George W Bush, who was seen as a defense-oriented president. So it is a political gesture to his political opponents at home.”

“On a more strategic level we see a long-term trajectory of Middle East policy of manipulation and occupation that extends from the first George Bush to the second George Bush and now to Barack Obama.”

“US troops in Afghanistan are a verbal threat to Iran”

“This administration is very hawkish on Iran, so the reason why we are in Afghanistan is Iran,” says Kwiatkowski, adding “we want to be in an operational military position to threaten Iran from next door.”

“Iran is not a threat to US in any way. That is not even an issue in any way, shape or form. Iran is an annoyance to Israel, certainly it is a selling point that Iran could or might or has threatened Israel – so there is a concern because Israel is an ally. What we are doing is a part of a larger Middle East policy that necessarily embraces our interests in supporting or facilitating things for Israel.”

+27 (41 votes)
 
Back to top
next MORE NEWS
24.07.2009, 00:18

Belarus highly recommends caution

Belarusian authorities have advised their citizens to remember Georgia’s laws while visiting Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Does it mean Minsk will not recognize the independence of the two republics?

Vladimir Kremlev for RT 24.07.2009, 16:03 7 comments

ROAR: Religion returns to Russian schools

The Russian president has approved plans to introduce teaching the fundamentals of religious culture and secular ethics in schools, and a chaplain’s institute in the armed forces.

Albert January 21, 2010, 15:38
0

The comments I have read thus far betray preprogrammed antisemitism and Communist overtones. The war in Iraq was a war with Iran. So was the war against the Taliban in Afghanistan. All one had to do was look at the map and fill in the almost complete circle of occupied territories and allies surrounding Iran. Iran understood immediately and resumed its Nuclear Program. The reason why you occupy Afghanistan and Iraq rather than take on Iran is the Persians are largely pro Western and pro America. Their youth is intelligent and increasingly secular and plenty of people either remember or have read about their beautiful countries prior to Soviet sponsored coups that changed their governments. Persians and Jews have a long history of mutual affection. The problem is, culturally, no mater what the popular pro West sentiment, all bets are off the second troops set foot on their soil. You cannot win a war against intelligent people by force unless you slaughter and imprison an entire generation, put fear into the lives of the remaining and reeducate the youth like the Communists in The USSR and Asia. Going to war with terrorist sponsoring countries like Afghanistan and Iraq...please don't try to tell me the USSR past and present hasn't done the same (so has France, Britain and Germany). Terrorism, a problem Soviets have been causing and dealing with far longer than America, is a Hydra, so a two pronged attack on Afghanistan and Iraq not only put troops into the back yard of a country that has been holding the world hostage with its one and only resource, but it also allowed America to deploy Tactical Nuclear Warheads that can now strike any target in Europe or Asia without the high yield of an ICBM and in a fraction of the time. What offends all of you is how well America has done it, by comparison to you (There were fewer deaths since the beginning of the war than in the opening day of the invasion of Normandy )

snowyone July 26, 2009, 02:01
0

The main reason that the USA has an occupation force there has nothing to do with Iran or Israel. The excuse was "to liberate women" there. That is now "passe". The place of women in Afghan society has not changed to any measurable degree except in Kabul. The sole reason it is there is the search for and exploitation of its mineral resources - just as was the main reason - for example - its War with Vietnam. As there are no mineral resources to speak of the last USA administration determined on the vast chemical resource - Opiates - which the current administration still encourages the cultivation of. For what purpose? To supply adequate medical drug manufacturers in Switzerland? Or to keep a reason for continuation of the War on Drugs? Recognizing that the Principles of that administration and of Halliburton are the ex President and Vice President and that is Bush and Cheney along with Bin Laden and Dempsey and the strong influence they have on the Military - there is no wonder why the USA is stepping up its illegal occupation of Afghanistan - is there? "What's To Be Done?" "Where To Begin?" Let's reintroduce "Reason" into "Reality" in the World of Politics today.

Zak July 25, 2009, 12:24
0

History tells in last 1000 years a clear message from the "west"- if you got no weapons to protect your states (as Indians and in modern times Palestine), we will kill and stole your land and you will be gone forever! This is an ultimate target for them - just look the map of the world (30% of the world land is stolen - native nations are gone)) and everything will be clear to you! Christianity broke up in two parts for the same reason - Russia didn't want to take part in theirs crimes! Standing a high moral ground, Russia I think must give all free countries nuclear bombs (Iran,Syria - Palestine too) in order to save them! A country who can fake a moon landing and (fake WMD in Iraq) 9/11 (it was an inside job) and use last (9/11) as an excuse to forever war on "terror" (to attack and bully any country which not play their tune) must be stopped by any possible way!