Empresas do Estado cortam mais de 5 mil milhões à dívida

[Rabbi_Steinsaltz]

Olá Amigos
Complexo é a situação de Israel, Terra Santa
é de mais e demais, por quanto
a paisagem é, na vida, o que há mais!
Por muito do que de resto lhe falte,
a paisagem sempre sobrou em abundância até nesta terra
terra de calamidades
que todos nós nos deveriamos comprometer com o futuro Estado. Para bem de todos!
E sendo assim...
Um facto, o futuro de Israel depende apenas dos Negev e dos Torah, nada mais.
Nada mais!
Nada mais!
E uma forma para a Paz, penso
Seria criarem-se postos de trabalho
onde?
onde eles não existem, na terra Santa.
Com o envolvimento inicial do povo e apoio
do Estado de Israel,sim
porque hoje, enquanto nós somos um Estado, temos problemas, que nos fazem, a nós.
E ponto final, no fundo
Era bem mercida a Paz,
há ameaças? ha.
respondemos? o Estado deverá continuar a
fazer o tal
uso, da força para fazer
prevalecer o seu poder?
Árabes, Cristãos e nós, nos deviamos entender.
Como é possível em Terra Santa prosperidade?
Qual a razão do Anti-Semitismo?
em lugar primeiro,
a Razão é que nós dizemos para nós próprios que somos o povo Escolhido e,
razão segunda é, pois, que pessoas gentis nisso acreditam.
E isso tem muito que se lhe
giga!

[atomez]

(tantas vezes o dizes que um dia acertas!)

Petróleo nos $110 sem motivo aparente ???

EUR a $1.55 ???

Comandante militar da zona do Médio Oriente que tinha dito "an attack on Iran will not happen on my watch" demitiu-se ???

Hummmm...

6 Signs the U.S. May Be Headed for War in Iran

March 11, 2008 06:52 PM ET

Is the United States moving toward military action with Iran?

The resignation of the top U.S. military commander for the Middle East is setting off alarms that the Bush administration is intent on using military force to stop Iran's moves toward gaining nuclear weapons. In announcing his sudden resignation today following a report on his views in Esquire, Adm. William Fallon didn't directly deny that he differs with President Bush over at least some aspects of the president's policy on Iran. For his part, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said it is "ridiculous" to think that the departure of Fallon -- whose Central Command has been working on contingency plans for strikes on Iran as well as overseeing Iraq -- signals that the United States is planning to go to war with Iran.

Fallon's resignation, ending a 41-year Navy career, has reignited the buzz of speculation over what the Bush administration intends to do given that its troubled, sluggish diplomatic effort has failed to slow Iran's nuclear advances. Those activities include the advancing process of uranium enrichment, a key step to producing the material necessary to fuel a bomb, though the Iranians assert the work is to produce nuclear fuel for civilian power reactors, not weapons.

Here are six developments that may have Iran as a common thread. And, if it comes to war, they may be seen as clues as to what was planned. None of them is conclusive, and each has a credible non-Iran related explanation:

1. Fallon's resignation: With the Army fully engaged in Iraq, much of the contingency planning for possible military action has fallen to the Navy, which has looked at the use of carrier-based warplanes and sea-launched missiles as the weapons to destroy Iran's air defenses and nuclear infrastructure. Centcom commands the U.S. naval forces in and near the Persian Gulf. In the aftermath of the problems with the Iraq war, there has been much discussion within the military that senior military officers should have resigned at the time when they disagreed with the White House.

2. Vice President Cheney's peace trip: Cheney, who is seen as a leading hawk on Iran, is going on what is described as a Mideast trip to try to give a boost to stalled Israeli-Palestinian peace talks. But he has also scheduled two other stops: One, Oman, is a key military ally and logistics hub for military operations in the Persian Gulf. It also faces Iran across the narrow, vital Strait of Hormuz, the vulnerable oil transit chokepoint into and out of the Persian Gulf that Iran has threatened to blockade in the event of war. Cheney is also going to Saudi Arabia, whose support would be sought before any military action given its ability to increase oil supplies if Iran's oil is cut off. Back in March 2002, Cheney made a high-profile Mideast trip to Saudi Arabia and other nations that officials said at the time was about diplomacy toward Iraq and not war, which began a year later.

3. Israeli airstrike on Syria: Israel's airstrike deep in Syria last October was reported to have targeted a nuclear-related facility, but details have remained sketchy and some experts have been skeptical that Syria had a covert nuclear program. An alternative scenario floating in Israel and Lebanon is that the real purpose of the strike was to force Syria to switch on the targeting electronics for newly received Russian anti-aircraft defenses. The location of the strike is seen as on a likely flight path to Iran (also crossing the friendly Kurdish-controlled Northern Iraq), and knowing the electronic signatures of the defensive systems is necessary to reduce the risks for warplanes heading to targets in Iran.

4. Warships off Lebanon: Two U.S. warships took up positions off Lebanon earlier this month, replacing the USS Cole. The deployment was said to signal U.S. concern over the political stalemate in Lebanon and the influence of Syria in that country. But the United States also would want its warships in the eastern Mediterranean in the event of military action against Iran to keep Iranian ally Syria in check and to help provide air cover to Israel against Iranian missile reprisals. One of the newly deployed ships, the USS Ross, is an Aegis guided missile destroyer, a top system for defense against air attacks.

5. Israeli comments: Israeli President Shimon Peres said earlier this month that Israel will not consider unilateral action to stop Iran from getting a nuclear bomb. In the past, though, Israeli officials have quite consistently said they were prepared to act alone -- if that becomes necessary -- to ensure that Iran does not cross a nuclear weapons threshold. Was Peres speaking for himself, or has President Bush given the Israelis an assurance that they won't have to act alone?

6.Israel's war with Hezbollah: While this seems a bit old, Israel's July 2006 war in Lebanon against Iranian-backed Hezbollah forces was seen at the time as a step that Israel would want to take if it anticipated a clash with Iran. The radical Shiite group is seen not only as a threat on it own but also as a possible Iranian surrogate force in the event of war with Iran. So it was important for Israel to push Hezbollah forces back from their positions on Lebanon's border with Israel and to do enough damage to Hezbollah's Iranian-supplied arsenals to reduce its capabilities. Since then, Hezbollah has been able to rearm, though a United Nations force polices a border area buffer zone in southern Lebanon.

Defense Secretary Gates said that Fallon, 63, asked for permission to retire. Gates said that the decision, effective March 31, was entirely Fallon's and that Gates believed it was "the right thing to do." In Esquire, an article on Fallon portrayed him as opposed to President Bush's Iran policy and said he was a lone voice against taking military action to stop the Iranian nuclear program. In his statement, Fallon said he agreed with the president's "policy objectives" but was silent on whether he opposed aspects of the president's plans. "Recent press reports suggesting a disconnect between my views and the president's policy objectives have become a distraction at a critical time and hamper efforts in the Centcom region," Fallon, said in the statement issued by Centcom headquarters in Tampa, Fla. "And although I don't believe there have ever been any differences about the objectives of our policy in the Central Command area of responsibility, the simple perception that there is makes it difficult for me to effectively serve America's interests there," he said. Gates announced that Fallon's top deputy, Army Lt. Gen. Martin Dempsey, will take over temporarily when Fallon leaves. A permanent successor, requiring nomination by the president and confirmation by the Senate, might not be designated in the near term.

[Clinico]

Ouviram-se estes cantos de destruição contra Israel em 1947, em 1967, em 1973 e por aí a fora.

Se bem que estas sumidades do pensamento islãmico continuem a espumar de raiva, não podem fazer mais nada senão enviar misseis de pontaria duvidosa, desgraçados para uma morte suicida, sejam eles homens, mulheres, crianças ou doentes físicos, arranjando estratagemas para indicar que Israel mata apenas inocentes e não houve baixas no Hezzbolah no último confronto.
Não seria a primeira vez que Israel é bombardeado por misseis mas talvez seja a primeira vez que o Irão vai provar o próprio remédio!è que o Irão tem enormes problemas internos...

O Irão é realmente um perigo para todo o Médio Oriente e esse doido está disposto a sacrificar o próprio Irão para destruir Israel. Ele sabe bem que poderá não sobreviver ao primeiro ataque. Ele sabe que tem os submarinos nucleares israelitas ás portas de casa.

Mas toda esta rectória e raiva indicam apenas um ponto. Tenham ou não sido os israelitas, a eliminação destes assassino de inocentes, tocou-lhes num ponto nervoso.
E quando se perde o controlo, perdem-se as guerras...Não foi isso que aconteceu a Israel no último confronto com o Líbano?
Mas não perceberam que o ataque á base nuclear no Norte da Síria pouco depois, deu uma indicação que as coisas estavam já mais sobre controle?

E o que vai acontecer ao Libano com outro confronto? Desaparece do mapa tambem?
E aos palestinianos que vivem colados a Israel? tambem vão á vida?? São apenas uma baixa colateral sem importancia?

Mas que salganhada...Ainda não li o artigo no Expresso sobre o perigo do Irão, mas estou com curiosidade...

Vai dar batatada?? pode ser que sim! Mas a acontecer, é Israel quem dá o primeiro tiro...
Abraços
Clinico

[atomez]

Algo se vai passar... e quanto antes for melhor, porque quanto mais tempo passar mais as partes em confronto se fortalecem e o resultado vai ser muito mais violento.

There will be blood...

Nasrallah declares Israel “will definitely cease to exist” in next war

The Hizballah leader, in his most vituperative speech against Israel ever, said Friday, Feb. 22: “Arab opposition, including Syria, and popular opposition will eliminate Israel; its armed forces will be defeated and Israel will be left with no army. We will fight as we have never fought before, confronting the Israeli army with of a type of combat it has never before experienced.”

Hassan Nasrallah pledged “Mughniyeh’s blood would not go unpunished, declaring,” He was killed in a pre-emptive Israeli strike, an open war.”

Nasrallah went on to say: “Israelis want to chop off the heads of the resistance leaders. We’ll take the decision when to defend ourselves and where… We won’t surrender because we have tens of thousands of Imad Mughniyeh.”

President Ahmadinejad said earlier: “World powers have created a black and dirty microbe named the Zionist regime and unleashed it like a savage animal on the nations of the region.” He was addressing a rally in the southern city of Bandar Abbas, site of the Revolutionary Guards’ command center and main bases. His speech was broadcast in full by state television.

Sunday, Gen. Hassan Firouz-Abadi, commander-in-chief of all Iran’s armed forces, said at a ceremony in memory of Imad Mughniyeh: “Many millions across the world will soon receive the joyous news of the Zionist entity’s destruction.”’ He did not explain how Iran intended to perform this objective, but alluded indirectly to nuclear or radioactive measures.

On Feb. 20, Israeli chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Gaby Ashkenazi indicated Hizballah planned to seize on an Israeli ground offensive against Gazan missiles to launch a revenge attack in the north and force Israel to fight on two fronts. He told graduating IDF officers he could not rule out a possible "tough ordeal" in the near future. “It is up to us to achieve a quick victory in every confrontation.”

[Clinico]

Isto dava pano para mangas...
Pessoalmente penso que "no pasa nada"...

A Síria não se pode dar ao luxo de enfrentar Israel com o problema que tem no Líbano e sem ajuda externa.
O Líbano não aguenta outro confronto armado e possivelmente começaria uma guerra civil.
O Hezbola tem agora as forças estrangeiras a Sul que empatam o serviço. Ainda não conseguiram engulir, que apesar dos erros infantis cometidos por Israel no último confronto, perderam o domínio que tinham no Sul.
O Irão é mais do mesmo. Garganta ameaçadora que procura alibis externos para os enormes problemas que tem no próprio país.Um confronto armado com Israel iria abrir uma caixa de pandora com o Mundo inteiro. Se fizer alguma asneira, não será enquanto o Bush estiver lá porque esse não hesita em chegar-lhe a roupa ao pêlo, mesmo não envolvendo exércitos terrestres.

O facto é, que esse assassino responsável por bombas em inocentes na América do Sul e no Líbano não conseguiu contar o feito aos netos...

E agora temos o Hezbola a tomar calmantes, os Cristãos Maronitas felizes, Israel mais descansado porque alguem fez o trabalho por eles (desta vez), os Sírios estupefactos como é que isto sucedeu nas barbas deles, e o Irão a espumar de raiva. Sounds familiar???

Fim do episódio 1876000 da mesma novela...
NEEEEXT

Abraços
Clinico

[Dwer]

não fui eu stôr, foi aquele menino

[atomez]

O tema volta a estar na ordem do dia

Iran and Israel Poised for Possible Military Clash over Mughniyeh’s Death

Tehran is bent on avenging the death of its top terror tactician Imad Mughniyeh who was struck down by a bomb planted in his car in Damascus Tuesday, Feb. 13. Even before the high-ranking Iranian military investigation team, headed by Gen. Ghassem Soleimani, chief of the IRGC’s al Qods Brigades, began a rush job the next day, Israel was singled out as the target for punishment by Iran, Hizballah and Syria.

Syria also launched a probe to identify the long arm which hit the shadowy master terrorist under the noses of its security services.

Some of the theories and rumors swirling around these probes were planted to muddy the waters by Iran, Syria, Hizballah, Israel and some Lebanese quarters.

Arab newspapers, for instance, claimed Saturday that new leads link Arab intelligence services to the crime; ex-Israeli undercover agents pointed the finger at Lebanese Christian Maronites.

An intriguing conspiracy theory emanating unexpectedly from Western sources was suggested by the veteran CNN correspondent Jim Clancy. In his view, Mughniyeh, the consummate master of deception, may still be alive. Others took the theory further and suggested his death may have been fabricated to provide Iran, Syria and Hizballah with a strong casus belli to attack Israel without further delay, and so repeat the Arabs’ Yom Kippur success 35 years ago in catching Israel unawares.

According to this line of thinking, because Iran is forging ahead with the development of a nuclear weapon which Israel has said is unacceptable, rather than wait for Israel to strike, the clerical rulers of Tehran resolved on preemptive action.

Mughniyeh’s death, real or phony, provided the motive.
...