Russia's Clandestine Alliance?

Do you think this is end-times prophecy fulfilled?

  • Yes

  • No

  • I don't know

  • I don't care/I don't believe in the end times


Results are only viewable after voting.

Susan

退屈させた1 つ (bored one)
Feb 16, 2002
9,292
124
40
El Cajon, California, USA
Visit site
✟15,012.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
 

Russia, Iraq Plan Deal to Bolster Ties<!--plsfield:stop-->
Economic Pact May Complicate U.S. Action Against Baghdad

By Peter Baker
<!--plsfield:credit-->
Washington Post Foreign Service
<!--plsfield:disp_date-->Saturday, August 17, 2002; Page A01

<!--plsfield:description--><NITF>MOSCOW, Aug. 16 -- Russia and Iraq plan to sign a new five-year economic cooperation agreement worth $40 billion, reinforcing Moscow's close ties to Baghdad even as the United States weighs a military attack to drive Iraqi President Saddam Hussein from power, Iraqi and Russian officials said today.

Russia's apparent refusal to abandon its longtime ally, despite vigorous U.S. efforts to isolate Iraq, could make it even more difficult for the United States to rally Russian and other skeptical world leaders behind any invasion.

The five-year agreement will deal with cooperation in a variety of fields -- foremost oil, but also electrical energy, chemical products, irrigation, railroad construction and transportation, according to officials here. Soviet or Russian specialists built much of the infrastructure in Iraq, and so Baghdad wants Russian expertise to help repair or upgrade it.

Russia has continued to strengthen ties with all three of the countries branded the "axis of evil" by President Bush: Iran, Iraq and North Korea. Despite President Vladimir Putin's friendship with Bush and support for the war on terrorism, Moscow last month released a separate plan calling for increased nuclear cooperation with Iran and this week invited North Korea's leader to visit Russia.

Russia plays a particularly important role in the future of Iraq. Russia has long been one of Iraq's chief benefactors in the international arena and a major trading partner and military supplier. But Bush aides have expressed hope that the United States could mollify Putin enough to keep protest to a minimum in the event of war.

For its part, Iraq has been lobbying hard to keep Russia in its corner, recognizing the dearth of friends that will stand up for it in a moment of crisis. Few countries have more significant economic interests in Iraq than Russia, totaling billions of dollars both in the form of unpaid Soviet-era debts and unrealized post-Soviet oil contracts.

"Russia was, is and will be our main partner," said Abbas Khalaf, Iraq's ambassador here. "What we need from Moscow is moral, political and diplomatic support because Iraq has shown the whole world that it can defend itself. America's aggressive statements against Iraq aroused negative reaction in Russia."

Khalaf scoffed at recent speculation that Moscow has privately signaled Washington that it would not seriously object to an attack on Iraq. Russia, he predicted, would do everything it could to stop a war.

"We're sure of it because Russia is a country which supports peace and stability in the whole world," he said. "It has a moral responsibility to prevent such aggressive plans against Iraq."

Khalaf, a high-ranking Foreign Ministry official and Hussein's personal translator, was dispatched to Moscow as the new envoy a month ago and has been making the rounds here to solidify the Russian political establishment behind Iraq. He disclosed the planned economic agreement in an interview today at the embassy in central Moscow and senior Russian officials confirmed it.

Oleg Buklemeshev, a top deputy to Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov, confirmed that after years of negotiations the "framework" has been vetted by various government agencies and sent to his boss's office for final approval. "All the ministries have agreed to the document," he said in an interview. As for a signing ceremony, he said, "It could happen very soon."

But Buklemeshev stressed that nothing in the economic program would violate U.N. sanctions imposed on Iraq after its 1990 invasion of Kuwait and said that no arms would be involved. "I can assure you it's absolutely in line with all the existing international decisions toward Iraq," he said. U.S. officials should not object, he added. "They should be okay provided they have correct information."

Under U.N. resolutions, Iraq can sell only limited amounts of oil each year to pay for food and medicine and rebuild the country's infrastructure. The sanctions are supposed to remain in place until U.N. inspectors certify that Iraq has eliminated its efforts to obtain nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. But Baghdad threw out the inspectors in 1998.

U.N. and Iraqi officials have jousted recently over readmitting inspectors. Russia has encouraged a resolution of the issue that would forestall a U.S. military attack.

As long as the sanctions remain in place, Russian oil companies cannot proceed with their most ambitious plans to develop Iraqi oil fields. However, Russia gets the largest share of the petroleum sold under the U.N. oil-for-food program and overall still does about $4 billion in business a year with Iraq.

Just Thursday, Russia proposed changes in the pricing rules in the oil-for-food program that it argued have penalized Baghdad and discouraged oil sales. Russian diplomats pushed for a special session of the U.N. Security Council's committee on Iraq sanctions to consider the issue.

Russia and Iraq have concluded a number of economic deals that have only sometimes come to fruition.

State Department officials in Washington said they were unaware of the pending agreement and expressed hope it would remain within limits imposed by the U.N. sanctions. "Russia is a Security Council member and knows full well their obligations under U.N. Security Council resolutions," a senior State Department official said. "But we are not aware of any particular agreement."

Some Russian oil executives expressed doubt that the agreement could amount to much, given the international political climate. "We couldn't broaden our relationship with a regime that has a policy like that," said one oil company official who did not want to be identified.

At the same time, many of the oil executives were clearly eager for the chance to pursue more opportunities. Several asked how much money the new blueprint might mean for their companies.

Regardless of the economics, the symbolism of a signing ceremony could irritate U.S. officials. Iraqi and Russian officials said the ceremony likely would take place in the next two weeks in Baghdad and involve cabinet-level officials, such as Iraq's oil minister and Russia's energy minister. Iraq had hoped Kasyanov might come, but his aide, Buklemeshev, said he did not think the prime minister would participate.

"Without question, there will be a big ceremony," said Khalaf, the Iraqi ambassador. "Just recently, they informed me that it will be at the end of August." Iraqi officials want to hold it in Baghdad, he added, as a way for the Russians to show "moral support."

The disclosure of the economic agreement with Iraq follows the release of a Russian blueprint for expanding ties with neighboring Iran as well. That document, signed by Kasyanov, envisioned Russia building five additional civilian nuclear reactors in Iran in addition to the one already under construction at Bushehr. Top Bush aides complained to Russian officials that such cooperation could help Iran develop nuclear weapons.

<I>Staff writer Glenn Kessler in Washington contributed to this report.</I>

</NITF>
<CENTER>© 2002<!--plsfield:end--> The Washington Post Company</CENTER>
<CENTER>&nbsp;</CENTER>
<CENTER>&nbsp;</CENTER>
<CENTER>Ezekiel 37 and 39&nbsp;coming to pass? Is this why Russia will attack Israel and America?</CENTER>
 

kiwimac

Bishop of the See of Aotearoa ROCCNZ;Theologian
Supporter
May 14, 2002
14,985
1,519
63
New Zealand
Visit site
✟590,115.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Utrecht
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
Russia and Iran / Iraq have had ties for centuries!

This is nothing new, only the specifics are new, i.e. they didn't have nuclear reactors 200 years ago!

As for Dubya complaining about the Russians helping Iran / Iraq, deary, deary me, how pathetic! How can a country which helped put the Taliban in power in the first place as well as Hussein (BTW) even think of complaining!

Kiwimac
 
Upvote 0

Lacmeh

Well-Known Member
Aug 5, 2002
711
1
Visit site
✟1,156.00
Now Bush is bleating about another nation helping Iran and Irak, blissfully forgetting, that as long as the Iraqis warred with Iran, USA sent weapon systems to Iraq. The defender of morality and freedom worldwide was very annoyed, that the Persians toppled the Shah dictatorship (which was supported by US), so they supported another dictator to war with them...

Now US is complaining about another natiion doing trade with the same dictatorship...
 
Upvote 0

Susan

退屈させた1 つ (bored one)
Feb 16, 2002
9,292
124
40
El Cajon, California, USA
Visit site
✟15,012.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Today Russia said that they were considering issuing a statement in support of Iraq.

That may mean Russia will attack us if we attack Iraq. Ever wonder why America is not mentioned in prophecy???
 
Upvote 0

admozart

Member
Aug 14, 2002
14
0
Visit site
✟136.00
Faith
Pentecostal
I think the battle lines are being drawn, and they get a little darker every day.&nbsp;&nbsp; I think it's interesting how Russia has allied herself with countries that could possibly threaten the US itself (China) and with countries that could threaten Israel ( Iran, Iraq, anymore recently? Syria? )&nbsp;

Look at China and Russia.&nbsp; Russian weapons technology has been sold to China, and China is working fervently to upgade and improve this technology.&nbsp; This includes anti-aircraftcarrier weapons and missiles that can reach the U.S.&nbsp; Why does China need missiles that can reach the U.S. or weapons that can sink our aircaft carriers?&nbsp; Chinese manpower with improved Soviet weapons could threaten us.&nbsp;

Now to the Nuclear power plant Russia is building in Iran.&nbsp; Why is it so important for a nation with atleast a 200 year oil supply to have nuclear power (much more expensive) now?&nbsp; Then there is the new agreement with Iraq.&nbsp; This puts us in a difficult position obviously.

We want to attack Iraq over terrorism.&nbsp; Russia should be expected to defend its interests ( just as America would do).&nbsp; If we get into a war with Russia, then China will certainly want to help its ally.&nbsp; And for those who think the Russians can be trusted, check WWII history, or is it WWI, or both.

What will Europe do?&nbsp; I don't know and don't wan't to speculate.&nbsp; But given recent events, unless they are directly threatened I don't think we can count on them.&nbsp; Besides,&nbsp; if US/UN relations keep going the way they are, the E.U. may end up not caring much for us.&nbsp; But that's pure speculation.

I'm not one of those conspiracy theorist who thinks everything is some secret gov't plan.&nbsp; I don't think we should run for the hills tomorrow.&nbsp; I'm just saying I think it is conceivable that through various alliances, Russia is purposefully crafting a formidable threat to U.S. and Israeli interests.&nbsp;

&nbsp;
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
&nbsp;

If you read the 38th&nbsp;and 39th chapters of Ezekiel, you will see these names mentioned, which are going to attack Israel. They are Magog , Meshech, Tubal, Gomer, and Togarmah . These lands are described as being to the north of Israel. If we read Genesis chapter 10, we can shed light on what these names mean. Magog , Meshech, Tubal, Gomer were all Grandsons of Noah, from Noah’s son Japheth. Togarmah was the son of Gomer. There are three more names mentioned in Ezekiel 38, that we can also find in Genesis 10, Sheba, Dedan, and Tarshish. Tarshish was a great-grand son of Noah, from Javan a son of Japheth. Sheba, Dedan are diverse from the other names, because they do not descend from Japheth as all the other names have. They are grandson’s of Ham, one of Noah‘s other sons.

I find it amazing how GOD specifically made mention, in the break down of the Generations of Noah in Genesis to match Ezekiel 38 and 39. It is speculated that Japheth and his sons settled the part of the world we know as Europe and Russia. Tarshish is believed to be English speaking people. Magog, Tubal, and Meshech are believed to have settled what is now Russia and the countries of the former USSR. Gomer may be Germany. These are all to the north of Israel as recorded in Ezekiel. In fact if you draw a straight line due north from Israel, you almost intersect Moscow. These are also Anglo-Saxon, or white races.

Ezekiel also names countries that are still called by the names of his time, Persia, Ethiopia, Libya.

Persia’s name was changed to Iran in 1970, if memory serves me. Parts of what are now known as Iraq and Afghanistan, and some of the other countries whose names end with “stan” may have been part of Persia in Ezekiel’s day. Ethiopia may have included many of it’s surrounding neighbors in Ezekiel’s time. Libya remains an enemy of Israel today along with the countries that have been mentioned.

Sheba and Dedan are from Ham’s descent . Ham and his sons are believed to have settled the continent of Africa. Sheba, Dedan and Tarshish seem to be questioning the motives of those attacking Israel.

If we look at history specifically the resent wars between the Israelis and the Arabs. We can see a correlation between the Arabs, that Ezekiel says will attack Israel, and the Russians. The Russians have armed and supported these countries in these resent past wars, but have never directly participated as of yet. We know that the armed forces of these countries have mostly Russian and some Chinese Equipment. Ezekiel tells of a war that will happen in the latter years, where the people of the descendents of Japheth the son of Noah, and his sons, will side with the Arabs and African nations, who also are armed with Russian equipment, in this future attack.

There are two things that indicate a time frame for when this battle will take place. The first is that it will happen in the latter years, as read in chapter 38. I believe this eludes to the last years before the return of CHRIST. The second is in Ezekiel 39 verse 9, here it says that after the fighting is over, the people will use the weapons of this war as fuel for their fires, that they will take no wood from the fields or forest. Then it tells the duration that they will be burning these weapons, 7 years. Now lets see, what 7 year period is spoken of by the Bible that happens in the latter years? Also the main rifle of the Russians and Arabs forces is the AK-47, which has a wood stock. I believe we can read of this 7 year period in the book of Daniel, and Revelation. I believe this war happens right before the 7 year tribulation, and is the major event that will cause a support of world government that, will bring the anti-christ to power. I believe this war also subdues the 3 kingdoms mentioned in Daniel. Just my thoughts on your interest in the prevalence of Russia in future middle east events. Peace, but not yet.
:wave:
 
Upvote 0

coastie

Hallelujah Adonai Yeshua!
Apr 6, 2002
5,395
48
43
Central Valley of CA
Visit site
✟8,286.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
As for Dubya complaining about the Russians helping Iran / Iraq, deary, deary me, how pathetic! How can a country which helped put the Taliban in power in the first place as well as Hussein (BTW) even think of complaining!

True the US did support the Taliban... in order to subdue Russian power in the middle east.

US supported Iraq o subdue the Iranian shaw.

No one can claim that the US wasn't aware of the risks of doing this. They knew the evil that they were supporting.

Whether it was due to lack of foresight or a calulated risk I don't know.
It could have been both.

My opinion is that the USSR would have fallen even if we hadn't supported the Taliban, so yes, it was a bad idea in retrospect.

As for Iran and Iraq. It's a tough call. I would have preferred that the US not gotten involved at all. Especially since it impowered Hussein.

However, that was then and now Iraq is in the cross-hairs. I doubt Russia would directly atack the US if war is to break out. I'm sure they would do what they can to support Iraq, but getting too deeply involved with the US could be quite detrimental to them.

However, Bush seems to be back peddling a little over attacking Iraq. It seemed like he was locked and cocked on them now it seems like he's turning down the heat a little.

I'm not sure why, probably a big reason was the negative feed-back he was getting from other members of NATO and UN officials.

Maybe it's time he reconsidered the weapons inspections.

However, this is purely hypothetical, he may have turned up the heat to encourage a UN weapons insepction instead of the other option of a US inspection since that would have raised the hairs on the backs of more than one nation.

In which case, while losing international favor, he may have gained a little more leverage by causing them to worry.

I hope that the US doesn't go in and take Iraq now, at least until they have a concrete reason. I'm sure that the intelligence community is advising against it for now.

But something that everyone should keep in mind is that the president doesn't really have final say about whether or not we attack Iraq. There are issues with other nations that are more pressing now, and the UN pretty much has the US by the tail until the other matters are tended to.

It would have saved much more face had we taken Saddam out the first time we had the chance.

Things are going to boil over soon, and if we wait until Israel is in over their heads, we may save some face (if not for the fact that Israel isn't very popular globally right now either).

Either way, Bush needs to cool his guns and wait a few minutes before committing to something like this. I've heard on the news that our troops are scattered all over the place, and it would be bad to see the US spread out over so many different fronts.

So with all of this hypothetical rambling, I'm just trying to say that Russia isn't the biggest problem right now. The biggest problem is public opinion.

Blaming Bush for past US mistakes will cause more harm than good. What needs to be done is some foreign relations improvement.

While Europe grinds their teeth over just about every thing the Americans do, we shoudln't be picking fights with more people. Otherwise, the terrorists who attacked the World trade centers will be accomplishing exactly what they wanted.

Zach
 
Upvote 0