The attack on Israelis in Bulgaria has hallmarks of the Iran-sponsored Hezbollah, but some differences as well.
Eighteen years after blowing up the AMIA Jewish Community Center in Buenos Aires -- an attack that killed 85 people -- Hezbollah appears to have struck again, this time in Bulgaria.
While it is difficult to disconnect the two attacks due to the amazing timing, there are some differences, most importantly the chosen target.
In 1994 in Argentina, a van with hundreds of kilograms of explosives rammed into the AMIA center, killing dozens and wounding hundreds. Wednesday's attack appears to have been caused by a bomb planted on the bus.
While the attack is severe, it is not on the scale of what happened in 1994.
The fact that the assault is of a smaller scale demonstrates the difficulty Hezbollah faces today in carrying out large-scale attacks against Israel.
This is due to the world's efforts to crack down on Iran and its terror proxies over the years in addition to Israeli efforts to bolster its intelligence and defense ties with countries that it feared were not taking the threat seriously.
An example of this was in 2010, when then-Mossad chief Meir Dagan visited Sofia and met with Bulgarian Prime Minister Boyko Borisov. The Bulgarians then released a rare photo of the two meeting.
The question now is what Israel will do.
While Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak vowed a "powerful response" to Wednesday's attack, Israel will first need to obtain concrete evidence against the perpetrators and the plotters.
In general, Hezbollah is understood to prefer an attack overseas -- against an embassy, an airplane or a consulate -- rather than one along the northern border, since this would allow it a level of deniability. On Wednesday evening, shortly after the attack, it issued a statement denying it was involved.
Either way, there are officials within the defense establishment who believe that such an attack needs to be met by a fierce response.
A few months ago, for example, IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Benny Gantz warned Hezbollah not to test Israel's resolve by perpetrating a terror attack against an Israeli target overseas. If Israel does not respond, it could be perceived as a paper tiger.
Other officials believe Israel should not go to war over just any attack, and the country's reaction would need to depend on the chosen target and of course the outcome, i.e. the number of casualties.
Basically, is the number of Israelis killed in Bulgaria enough to justify a response that could lead to a war?
This is how the attack in Bulgaria connects to another bombing that happened earlier in the day in Damascus ...The place where Pencilneck hangs his brass hat... and wiped out some of Syrian Hereditary President-for-Life Bashir Pencilneck al-Assad Horror of Homs... 's most-senior advisors, including his defense minister and more importantly -- his brother-in-law, the deputy defense minister.
The situation in Syria -- described by one defense official as a massive earthquake -- is extremely unstable right now and Israel's primary concern is the possibility that Hezbollah or another rogue actor will try to get its hands on Assad's chemical weapons.
If this happens, Israel might attack, a move that could easily and fairly quickly develop into a full-scale war and suck in Hezbollah as well.
In addition, while the attack in Bulgaria is severe, it might not be enough to require an immediate response. Instead, the government will likely take time to calculate its moves before striking back.
But, above all, it will first work to create an intelligence dossier to prove to the world that Iran really was behind the bombing.
#3
Der, but how does Nkorea fit in, it's not even in the Middle East!
/stupidoff
Seriously, I'm shocked how almost a decade later those three have held out, and even their connection's proven more thoroughly, to make W's statement true. He might have sounded dumb then, but now it's more like he might have actually known what he was talking about!
Quick, nobody tell Biden or he'll blow the whole thing!
Posted by: Charles ||
07/19/2012 8:42 Comments ||
Top||
[Dawn] FROM time to time in the last four years there have been reports indicating that the Taliban were becoming war-weary and looking for an opportunity to seek reconciliation. Most of these reports proved to be a distorted interpretation of the contacts that Afghans customarily maintained even in warlike conditions.
Part of the problem was what Kai Edie, the UN secretary general's special representative to Afghanistan for two tumultuous years, identifies in his book Power Struggle over Afghanistan. "The UN had never been really involved or consulted by Washington on critical strategy-related questions, nor had even the closest NATO ...the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. It's headquartered in Belgium. That sez it all.... partners," he writes. "More importantly, Afghan authorities had mostly been spectators to the formation of a strategy aimed at solving the conflict in their own country."
Given this reading of the situation by the senior-most UN representative in the country and given Edie's own rather futile attempts to conduct secret talks with the Taliban, it was perhaps understandable that the latter were unresponsive to the calls, nay pleas, from President Karzai to his "misguided brothers" to negotiate a return to mainstream politics in Afghanistan.
It was not the Americans alone who were responsible. The Karzai administration expelled Michael Semple, a diplomat with long experience in Afghanistan who was working in 2007 as the European Union ...the successor to the Holy Roman Empire, only without the Hapsburgs and the nifty uniforms and the dancing... 's deputy representative there, when he established contact with some Taliban leaders to try to persuade them to engage in reconciliation. His protests that Afghan officials had blessed his efforts went unheard.
Semple maintained his extensive contacts in Afghanistan and was able to interview a man he identifies only as Mawlvi who he says is "a veteran of the Taliban movement, has been with them since the early days. He's held senior posts in their administration when they were running the country. He's remained loyal ... and he's done a stint in Guantanamo." These are impressive credentials, and Mawlvi's views, which Semple says are the views of the pragmatists among the Taliban, deserve careful attention.
"It is in the nature of war that both sides dream of victory," Mawlvi says in the interview published this month in British magazine New Statesman. "But the balance of power in the Afghan conflict is obvious. It would take some kind of divine intervention for the Taliban to win this war. The Taliban capturing Kabul is a very distant prospect." He adds that the "Taliban are fighting to expel the occupiers and to enforce shariah.... If they fall short of achieving national power they have to settle for functioning as an organised party within the country." Regarding Al Qaeda he says, "At least 70 per cent of the Taliban are angry at Al Qaeda. Our people consider Al Qaeda to be a plague that was sent down to us by the heavens."
There are other good reasons to suggest that this may well be the view of many pragmatic Taliban. They have suspended talks in Qatar but their delegates are still there, presumably because they hope to resume talks.
They also sent to a Kyoto conference Qari Din Mohammad Hanif, an ethnic Tajik who had been a minister in the Taliban regime. The Taliban front man said he was there to clarify their position and contradicted the Kabul government's claim that he had talked to the Afghan High Peace Council's secretary general and a leading Afghan interlocutor about reconciliation. The fact remains, though, that his presence there was significant.
Separately, Salahuddin Rabbani, son of the late Burhanuddin Rabbani ... the gentlemanly murdered legitimate president of Afghanistan... and his successor as the head of the Afghan High Peace Council, said in a recent interview that he was asking Pakistain to have Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar and other Pakistain-based Taliban talk to him to carry forward the reconciliation process.
And in recent statements, Karzai has said he has asked the United States not only to release Taliban prisoners held at Guantanamo but also to let them go wherever they please. In a subsequent statement he called upon Mullah Omar ... a minor Pashtun commander in the war against the Soviets who made good as leader of the Taliban. As ruler of Afghanistan, he took the title Leader of the Faithful. The imposition of Pashtunkhwa on the nation institutionalized ignorance and brutality in a country already notable for its own fair share of ignorance and brutality... to contest elections and become president if the people choose him.
These developments have to be read in tandem with the famous August 2011 Eid message by Mullah Omar in which he stated that "Contrary to the propaganda launched by the enemies, the policy of the Islamic Emirate is not aimed at monopolising power" and that "all ethnicities will have participation in the regime and portfolios will be dispensed on the basis of merit."
From the Afghan government's point of view, however, there is a fly in the ointment. Every Taliban front man has dismissed the notion of talking to Karzai, who they say is no more than a stooge of the Americans. In the interview quoted above Mawlvi remarked that the people they should be talking to in an intra-Afghan dialogue are the members of the erstwhile Northern Alliance.
At the moment it seems that not all opposition figures will agree. "We are obeying this government because it was sort of anti-Taliban," opposition leader Amrullah Saleh, a former intelligence chief dismissed by Karzai after a security failure, told an American correspondent this month. "If it becomes pro-Taliban, we topple it. Simple."
Salahuddin Rabbani's plea for Pakistain's assistance in talking to the Taliban has been reinforced by Karzai, who said this month in Tokyo, "Pakistain's contribution to the grinding of the peace processor in Afghanistan can have many layers, it can have many elements. The most important element would be for Pakistain to arrange where it can dialogue between the Afghan government and the Taliban representatives who are in Pakistain."
Pakistain can argue that such facilitation is useless until Karzai can ensure that he represents the views of ethnic minorities as much as he does those of his Pashtun supporters. This, however, is not something we should seek to determine.
No other country will suffer more than Pakistain in the event of continued turbulence in Afghanistan. More than any other country, Pakistain needs to push reconciliation even if chances of success seem slim.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/19/2012 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under: Taliban
#1
There's still Taliban un-killed, them they're not ready.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
07/19/2012 2:25 Comments ||
Top||
As the debate about sequestration boils over, the window is fast closing for the congressional action needed to avert across-the-board defense industry layoffs. Time is simply running out for Congress to stave off this blow to the economy.
Defense companies doing business with the U.S. government will, by federal law, soon begin handing out hundreds of thousands of layoff notices -- to workers driving computers and folks driving fork lifts and production lines across the nation -- just days before the November elections. In some cases, where dictated by state law, the layoff notices would arrive even sooner.
The actual layoffs won't take place until Jan. 2, but the federal WARN Act dictates that companies must notify employees 60 days in advance of potential mass layoffs. Wind the clock back 60 days and it's Nov. 2 -- just four days before Americans go to the polls. This is fact, not speculation. Read the rest .... very interesting Yup. Harry Reid is playing chicken with Republicans while holding the entire US economy hostage.
Posted by: AU Auric ||
07/19/2012 12:54 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
1. The world will not end.
2. We're bankrupt anyway.
3. It's going to happen, it's just a question of when.
4. Let's make sure every single federal department and independent agency gets the same treatment.
First, let me say how thrilled I am that you went off-teleprompter last week. This "If you've got a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen" thing was just wonderful. Now I know how Chris Matthews felt.
Oh .. I know. Your handlers weren't all that thrilled with your amazing screw-up, and, frankly, they have been worried this day was coming for a long time. They know how you feel about the private sector. They know of your antipathy toward free enterprise and those evil small businessmen out there who are not likely to support your move to a government centrally-controlled economy. They had hoped to keep your true feelings in check with those teleprompters ... but nooooooooo ... you just had to improvise, didn't you? You just had to wander off the tightly-controlled rhetorical reservation. Well, thank you. You certainly didn't gain any significant voter support with that asinine utterance, but you most certainly did lose some.
Now we're having fun watching and listening to your sycophants trying to defend your "somebody else made that happen" line. Somehow they have to make your blunder sound marginally reasonable. Apparently they've had a meeting somewhere, because they're all running with pretty much the same message. It was the government that built the roads those trucks travel on to bring stuff to your business for you to sell. It was the government that built those utility systems that keep your offices cool and the water clean. They really love that quote from Henry Ford about not being able to build his cars if the government had not built those roads.
Well guess what, Dear Ruler. We built that stuff too. Not government --- the private sector -- America's evil private businesses.
Get in Marine One, Obama, and fly off to visit a road construction project. Look at those graders, rollers and the machines that lay the asphalt. See those logos on the doors? Those logos are for private construction firms. Those workers in yellow vests? Their paychecks and benefits are coming from private businesses -- many of them the very small businesses you want to hit with tax increases.
Next you can fly off to take a look at a utility project somewhere. Maybe you can find a sewer line being laid, or some electrical transmission lines being strung. Again -- those are private companies doing that work with private sector workers.
You see, there's a document out there that, frankly, I doubt you have ever read. It's called The Declaration of Independence. I'm sure there's a copy around your office somewhere. But I do want to save you a bit of trouble here -- knowing you busy you are fundamentally transforming American and all -- so I'll provide you with a little excerpt from that document:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. -- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --
There! Do you see that? That government you're so enamored of ... that government you credit with Americas greatness ... well, to paraphrase one of our presidents, "You didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen." That's right, Dear Ruler, somebody else made that government happen .. and that somebody else is US. The government is OURS. We built it. We hire the people to run it. We have regular meetings every two years or so to decide whether we want to keep those managers or get rid of them to find better talent. Those roads .. our national infrastructure? We HIRED the government to build those things for us, just as we hire contractors to build our business locations and to design and manufacture the equipment we will use in the course of our businesses. We created this government -- the government did not create us -- and we contract with this government to do things for us on a grand scale because we recognize the inefficiencies of trying to do those things for ourselves. Government is just another contractor we hire to get our private business done.
But hold on a minute, Ruler Obama. There's something else I want you to read before you put this letter down. You see, I didn't include the whole quote from The Declaration of Independence above. I left something off ... and here it is ...
---That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Maybe it's just me, but I'm of the opinion that when our elected leaders become so enamored of themselves, and of the government we have hired them to manage, they become a grave danger to those unalienable rights set forth in The Declaration -- you know, the rights to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. The Declaration says we may "pursue" happiness. It does not guarantee it. You and the party you represent seem to think that happiness is a right, and have created a government that has now become destructive of the very ends it was designed to support.
There's more than one way to alter or abolish at government, Ruler Obama. We'll give one of them a good old college try in November.
Again .. thanks for your incursion into extemporaneous speech. We've learned a lot from and about you in the last week.
#4
Thanks Dale. The word "stray" is often used to describe those moments ["visiting 57 States" moment] when the Champ moves away from the teleprompter. Boortz used the reference "went off-teleprompter" vs "strayed". I personally prefer "strayed", but it does carry with it that awkward Canis connotation, which could be perceived as racist. But then again "OFF" might bug some people as well.
#7
An excellent response! It would be perfect if neal had pointed out, when 0bama steps off Marine One, to point out that it was made by private enterprise on contract to the Military. Y'know, that Eeeeevil Military-industrial complex you hyperventilated about.
#8
One other point: A troll may correctly point out that the Declaration of Independence is not the Law of the Land, and thus is not binding on 0bama or the federal government.
That is correct, and that is by design: Its to make sure it isn't abolished by Congress, declared unconsistutional by the Supreme Court, or have it subject to "discretionary non-enforcement" by Caesar wanna-be Presidents.
#9
The Declaration wasn't intended to be a body of laws. It was intended to be a "petition for redress of grievances". It was telling the King how patient his subjects had been at the abuse of the rights of all Englishmen, and asking him to stop it, or he may find himself without any subjects in the colonies.
So, really, it's still applicable.
Posted by: Rob Crawford ||
07/19/2012 18:15 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Hear, hear, Rob!
Posted by: Barbara ||
07/19/2012 19:48 Comments ||
Top||
#11
If you became president, you didn't do that. Somebody else made that happen.
But not again.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
07/19/2012 22:04 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Hereditary President-for-Life Bashir 
