kuzadd

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divide_and_rule Divide and Rule or Divide and Conquer "In politics and sociology, divide and rule (also known as divide and conquer) is a combination political, military and economic strategy of gaining and maintaining power by breaking up larger concentrations of power into chunks that individually have less power than the one implementing the strategy. In reality, it often refers to a strategy where small power groups are prevented from linking up and becoming more powerful, since it is difficult to break up existing power structures. Effective use of this technique allows those with little real power to control those who collectively have a lot of power (or would have much more power, were they able to unite)." The strategy was used to great effect by administrators of vast empires, including the Roman and British, who would play one tribe against another to maintain control of their territories with a minimal number of imperial forces. (this is the strategy in iraq, it is not stupidity, it is shrewd , it is intentional) The concept of 'Divide and Rule' gained prominence when India was a part of the British Empire, but was also the strategy used by the Romans to take Britain, and for the Anglo-Normans to take Ireland. The British used the strategy to gain control of the large territory of India by keeping its people divided along lines of religion, language, caste etc. The British took control of petty princely states in India piecemeal. Examples of Divide and Conquer strategies: United States * Many people view the increasing polarization of voting blocs by wedge issues as being an example of "Divide and Rule." Examples include abortion, gun control, and gay marriage. The key idea is that these issues prevent the public from thinking about, let alone addressing, potentially more objectively important issues, such as global warming, the erosion of civil liberties under the Patriot Act, and the negative effects of lobbying on issues such as campaign finance reform and corruption. the non-important issues, while bigger issues, like Patriot Act, NAU, get little attention, when they require lots of attention The Caste divide The Race Issue eg: Through their methods of administration, divide and rule policies, census taking methods and mandatory declaration of one’s ‘Race’ on official documents, The British Governors forced the Sri Lankan population of diverse ethnic origins to become either Sinhalese or Tamils based on the language they spoke in the 19th century. Africa Western countries have used the divide and conquer strategy in Africa during the colonial and post-colonial period. * Germany and Belgium both ruled Rwanda and Burundi in a colonial capacity. Germany used the strategy of divide and conquer by placing members of the Tutsi minority in positions of power. When Belgium took over in 1916, the Tutsi and Hutu groups were rearranged according to race rather than by occupation. Belgium defined "Tutsi" as anyone with more than ten cows or a long nose, while "Hutu" meant someone with less than ten cows and a broad nose. The socioeconomic divide between Tutsis and Hutus continued after independence and was a major factor in the Rwandan Genocide. divided they are all easier to pit against each other. This is also prevelant here, amongst posters, who use "left", "loony left", etc. all the time They have bought into the conquer and divide strategy wholheartedly, and are willingly participating in it, though UNWITTINGLY. This is the reason I refuse to buy into the racial divide/left/right/christian vs muslim, it's all bogus crap. The minute you fall into it, you have given your power away. This is intentional policy in Iraq, it;s not incompetence, it's not a mistake, it's policy. it legitimizes the occupation. it legitimizes the plunder

If Clinton's foreign policy had been superior, Bush's foreign policy wouldn't be necessary. We know what Clinton's priorities were. Hmmm....seems that Haliburton did quite well under Mr. Clinton too: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=HAL&t=my Yah, Clinton's were the same as Bush's, look at the Serbian attack/ look at iraq. oil, oil. oil. pipelines, American business etc.,

I totally agree! let him live his life.

"Throughout history, interests have always been the main organising principle for relations between states and on the international arena. And the more civilised these relations become, the clearer it is that one’s own interests must be balanced against the interests of other countries. And one must be able to find compromises to resolve the most difficult problems and issues." well at least he say's it honestly there, "INTERESTS", have always been the main organising principles between states. oil, mineral, water, land, pipelines, makin' money.

Bush Cheney, it all about the 'war on terror" and "islamofascism" and good vs bad. You really think a rational story is going to garner interest? Not sensational enough! Not rhetorical enough! No labelling, or promoting of stereotypes, generalizations and smears? Of course it's about the resources, it always is!

oh, you mean this? http://uk.reuters.com/article/worldNews/id...173061220070521 Lecturer suspended after breastfeeding fatwa or this? http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,2...5005961,00.html Lecturer suspended after breastfeeding fatwa sounds like on perv's 'wet dream' IMO. well leave it to a man, to 'serve himself' eh?? lol! Yah Yah promoting sexist stereotypes, whatever. To some, half-truths will do.

There is no "irony" in this Muslim nation's acceptance of Bushie, inc. his watch. The government of Albania is a virtual lackey of the US, a puppet.god you people need to move on from this "alQueda" nonsense.??? AlQuaeda fought alongside the US, in the Serbian conflict. and the US knew..... http://www.savekosovo.org/default.asp?p=4&leader=0&sp=36 1992-1995: Pentagon Helps Bring Islamic Militants to Fight with Bosnians Against Serbs Edit event The Pentagon helps bring thousands of mujaheddin and other Islamic militants from Central Asia into Europe to fight alongside the Bosnian Muslims against the Serbs. [Wiebes, 2003; Spectator, 9/6/2003] Bin Laden plays a key organizing role. [Los Angeles Times, 10/7/2001] As a result, the Balkans become a “safe haven” and “staging area” for Islamist terrorism. [Washington Post, 11/30/1995; Los Angeles Times, 10/7/2001] going back...... http://www.fpif.org/briefs/vol2/v2n33alb.html

That's the Trans-Balkan pipeline, BTW

one from Michael savage http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=1999/11/30/51335 The Oily Tracks Running Through Kosovo Michael Savage November 30, 1999 Warning: Michael Savage is the most exciting and controversial radio host in America. The views expressed here are his own. Certified liberals and politically correct individuals should proceed with caution. LOL! Kosovo was about oil and nothing but oil, with maybe some uranium thrown in and a dash of "wag-the-dog." And you thought it was to save the poor Kosovar Albanians. Of all the ethnically "cleansed" peoples around the world, some numbering in the millions, the beneficent powers of NATO decided to draw the line with the Kosovar Albanians. About 2,000 of the ethnic Albanians had been reportedly killed by Serbs in the last several years, so it was time for the humanitarian guard to take action. No matter that about as many Serbs had been killed by the Albanians, and that Kosovo is a part of the sovereign state of Yugoslavia, and that this conflict had been ongoing for centuries. Big Oil required a pipeline through Kosovo and the poor Serbs just happened to own the wrong real estate at the wrong time. How do I know that the Kosovo action was about oil or, to be exact, about establishing a safe haven for an oil pipeline? Just recently Bill Clinton signed an historic agreement with Azerbaijan on this very matter. Azerbaijan is one of the former Soviet republics that became a separate country with the breakup of the USSR. Formerly, Caspian oil would have come into the world market as a Soviet export but not anymore. It now comes under the flag of this newly independent nation via Turkey where it is transshipped by way of Turkish seaports. And Russia has been deftly unlinked from the world oil market. Now, keen interest in Azerbaijani oil is nothing new. The Germans have had a compelling interest in this oil going back to 1905 and extending through the two world wars up to and including the present. One of Hitler’s primary goals in his push to the east was to capture the Azerbaijani oil fields. But where the Kaiser and Nazi Germany failed, it seems the New World Order — featuring Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, and other socialists — is going to succeed. The plan is now to route the oil in a way that will fulfill Germany’s long-sought-after objective.

http://www.repubblica.it/2006/05/gallerie/...orologio/1.html SEQUENCE OF PHOTOS DOCUMENTING BUSH HAVING HIS WATCH STOLEN the rock star in Albania lol

that the US is once again willing to sidestep the UN. US to sidestep Russia veto on Kosovo http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story...697-601,00.html "For some time, the US has been pressing for Kosovo independence within the UN framework but due to Russia's strong opposition, it is now considering sidestepping the international body and unilaterally recognising the province as independent, the US State Department said Monday." well let's see...... http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/Kosovo/Political.asp "A number of unofficial partition plans have been drawn up for Kosovo all raising the question of who would control an important northern mining region," the New York Times revealed. Trepca was also a "glittering prize" taken over by Hitler to fuel the Nazi war machine during WWII."

What does this statement have to do with the subject? So you are OK, with the US arming, the insurgency? Which in turn will see, more iraqi civilans die More soldiers die foment civil war Your good with that, OK? This isn't about the 'west winning' or in rhetorical language, that you can understand, this ain't about the "good guys vs bad guys." It's about control of resources and control of land, for future invasions etc., Get it? There are bigger fish to fry, then in your simplistic concepts of "right and wrong" "good and evil"

You talking about the US torture at Abu Ghraib right, all kinds of stuff went into numerous areas of people's bodies. For one? Rounding up people, 'disappearing people' Mass rapes and ethnic cleansing, have been done by "the good guys| Clearly in denial. like i said" higher ground in stupidity and bearing double standards" from the report: What was previously just a set of allegations is now proven,” the report began. Providing a portrait of lawlessness on an international scale, it noted, “Large numbers of people have been abducted from various locations across the world and transferred to countries where they have been persecuted and where it is known that torture is common practice. Others have been held in arbitrary detention, without any precise charges leveled against them and without any judicial oversight—denied the possibility of defending themselves. Still others have simply disappeared for indefinite periods and have been held in secret prisons, including in member states of the Council of Europe, the existence and operations of which have been concealed ever since.” Did you read the report? of course not.

Like after the fall of that other empire?

what are you talking about? cause he said, Iraq could have been handled differently? Isn't that obvious anyway?

Psssstt....let's not forget those Canadian oil services contracts at Himrin Field outside Kirkuk, doing their share to get the "benefits"....LOL! Sorry BC, I can never forget Canada's lackey role, thanks for reminding me. There with US/Britian in Africa too, for the oil, gold and more, but, that's for another thread.

That is because persons such as yourself, are obviously and totally unaware of any history, at all. The 'sinking of the Maine" was a false flag, as was the Gulf of Tonkin, in fact Hitler's Reichstag fire , is yet another one. You would do well to read some history. Rather then continue to promote stereotypes and generalizations, and smear. it would certainly make you come across as better informed, rather then ignorant (lacking information) good books: PuppetMasters -The political use of terrorism in Italy http://www.amazon.com/Puppetmasters-Politi...y/dp/0595246974 NATO's Secret Army: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe (Contemporary Security Studies) http://www.amazon.com/NATOs-Secret-Army-Op...1659147-3419650 http://www.cambridgeclarion.org/press_cutt...s_7jun1992.html small article Observer, 7 June 1992, pages 53-54 They were the agents who were to 'stay behind' if the Red Army overran Western Europe. But the network that was set up with the best intentions degenerated in some countries into a front for terrorism and far-right political agitation. if one finds books to cumbersome or time consuming to read.

of course, given the recent testimony of one Zbigniew Brzezinski at the Senate Foreign relations committee. SFRC Testimony -- February 1, 2007 "A plausible scenario for a military collision with Iran involves Iraqi failure to meet the benchmarks; followed by accusations of Iranian responsibility for the failure; then by some provocation in Iraq or a terrorist act in the U.S. blamed on Iran; culminating in a “defensive” U.S. military action against Iran that plunges a lonely America into a spreading and deepening quagmire eventually ranging across Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan." He is clearly speaking of a false flag op, in that he uses the words BLAMED on iran, he did not say, originating with, funded by, he said it would be blamed on Iran. His testimony continued on..... I am including it, because, it's interesting:

what is interesting is usually "Al Queda" is Sunni Muslims, and ironically the "legitimate" government of Iraq, is largely Shiite??!! sensing a problem there? I say, fuel the civil war, continue to justify the occupation. Divide and conquer! Control the oil and the strategic positioning, who knows, increase the troops, reinstate the draft?? Think of all the benefits to the US/Brit big oil conglomerates, who have that sweetheart deal going on for Iraqi oil, pipeline construction.Then of course US imperialism, the launch of future attacks, what with all those permanent military bases. All the while the civil war rages on, soldiers die, civilians die, the "legitimate" government, will never govern anything. And the flag wavers regurgitate the mindless mantra "support the troops"

not in the least.

Yes ,Canada was cited in the report as being complicit. A western democracy, aiding in the round up of people, held without charge of course, in the"war on terror", what sickens me , is some of us, sit here in Canda , and point our fingers at other countries, who commit human rights abuses, while keeping the blinders on, when it comes to our own countries human rights abuses. As if we hold the higher moral ground?! It's seems more and more like some are holder the higher ground in stupidity and bearing double standards, but , not much else.

Technically, the original five nuclear powers are also in violation of it. Aren't they signatories who were supposed to disarm according to the treaty? Is Iran in violation of the non-proliferation treaty? '"Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, also Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT or NNPT) is an international treaty, opened for signature on July 1, 1968 to limit the spread of nuclear weapons'" Does that pertain to making nuclear power? wrt power:Third pillar: peaceful use of nuclear energy I am not certain, they are in violation?

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/06/11/frontpage/strat.php With the four-month-old "surge" in U.S. troops showing only modest success in curbing insurgent attacks, American commanders are turning to another strategy they acknowledge is fraught with risk: arming Sunni Arab groups that have promised to fight Al Qaeda-linked militants who have been their allies in the past. The commanders say they have successfully tested the strategy in Anbar Province and have held talks with Sunni groups suspected of prior assaults on U.S. units, or of links to groups that have attacked Americans, in at least four other areas where the insurgency has been strong. In some cases, the commanders say, these groups have been provided, usually through Iraqi military units allied with the Americans, with arms, ammunition, cash, fuel and other supplies. U.S. officials who have engaged in what they call "outreach" to the Sunni groups say the groups are mostly ones with links to Al Qaeda but disillusioned with Al Qaeda's extremist tactics, particularly suicide bombings that have killed thousands of Iraqi civilians. In exchange for American backing, these officials say, the Sunni groups have agreed to fight Al Qaeda and halt attacks on U.S. units. Commanders who have undertaken these negotiations say that in some cases Sunni groups have agreed to alert American troops to the location of roadside bombs and other lethal booby traps. But critics of the strategy, including some U.S. officers, say it could amount to the Americans arming both sides in a future civil war. but then, if you arm both sides, you can always be on "the side that is winning" doesn't this serve the US well, foment civil war and "justify staying the course" Divide and conquer.?

A further section of the report details the case studies of captured individuals that highlight the complicity of different governments, including Khaled El-Masri (Germany), Abu Omar (Italy) and Maher Arar (Canada). where are all the human rights advocates here?

"What the crap has that got to do with anything?" I had a different opinion then you, isn't that what the forum discussions are about? Because it has recently entered your consciousness, is irrelevant. It's a term that has been around for a long time. as for the republican fellah, he's an idiot, to even talk in that manner.