Softpanorama

May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Home Switchboard Unix Administration Red Hat TCP/IP Networks Neoliberalism Toxic Managers
(slightly skeptical) Educational society promoting "Back to basics" movement against IT overcomplexity and  bastardization of classic Unix

Syria war bulletin, 2017

Home 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 1900

For the list of top articles see Recommended Links section


Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

[Jan 11, 2020] Atomization of workforce as a part of atomization of society under neoliberalism

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... a friend of mine, born in Venice and a long-time resident of Rome, pointed out to me that dogs are a sign of loneliness. ..."
"... And the cafes and restaurants on weekends in Chicago–chockfull of people, each on his or her own Powerbook, surfing the WWW all by themselves. ..."
"... The preaching of self-reliance by those who have never had to practice it is galling. ..."
"... Katherine: Agreed. It is also one of the reasons why I am skeptical of various evangelical / fundi pastors, who are living at the expense of their churches, preaching about individual salvation. ..."
"... So you have the upper crust (often with inheritances and trust funds) preaching economic self-reliances, and you have divines preaching individual salvation as they go back to the house provided by the members of the church. ..."
Apr 18, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
DJG , April 17, 2017 at 11:09 am
Neoliberalism is creating loneliness. That's what's wrenching society apart George Monbiot, Guardian

George Monbiot on human loneliness and its toll. I agree with his observations. I have been cataloguing them in my head for years, especially after a friend of mine, born in Venice and a long-time resident of Rome, pointed out to me that dogs are a sign of loneliness.

A couple of recent trips to Rome have made that point ever more obvious to me: Compared to my North Side neighborhood in Chicago, where every other person seems to have a dog, and on weekends Clark Street is awash in dogs (on their way to the dog boutiques and the dog food truck), Rome has few dogs. Rome is much more densely populated, and the Italians still have each other, for good or for ill. And Americans use the dog as an odd means of making human contact, at least with other dog owners.

But Americanization advances: I was surprised to see people bring dogs into the dining room of a fairly upscale restaurant in Turin. I haven't seen that before. (Most Italian cafes and restaurants are just too small to accommodate a dog, and the owners don't have much patience for disruptions.) The dogs barked at each other for while–violating a cardinal rule in Italy that mealtime is sacred and tranquil. Loneliness rules.

And the cafes and restaurants on weekends in Chicago–chockfull of people, each on his or her own Powerbook, surfing the WWW all by themselves.

That's why the comments about March on Everywhere in Harper's, recommended by Lambert, fascinated me. Maybe, to be less lonely, you just have to attend the occasional march, no matter how disorganized (and the Chicago Women's March organizers made a few big logistical mistakes), no matter how incoherent. Safety in numbers? (And as Monbiot points out, overeating at home alone is a sign of loneliness: Another argument for a walk with a placard.)

Katharine , April 17, 2017 at 11:39 am

I particularly liked this point:

In Britain, men who have spent their entire lives in quadrangles – at school, at college, at the bar, in parliament – instruct us to stand on our own two feet.

With different imagery, the same is true in this country. The preaching of self-reliance by those who have never had to practice it is galling.

DJG , April 17, 2017 at 11:48 am

Katherine: Agreed. It is also one of the reasons why I am skeptical of various evangelical / fundi pastors, who are living at the expense of their churches, preaching about individual salvation.

So you have the upper crust (often with inheritances and trust funds) preaching economic self-reliances, and you have divines preaching individual salvation as they go back to the house provided by the members of the church.

[Dec 30, 2017] In Syria Russia has been very restraint to avoid direct conflict with US even under attacked.

Notable quotes:
"... Russia know Erogan is only the meganomania fool puppet. A Russia counterstrike will activate NATO obligation. So Putin ingeniously bring Turkey to his side, finished off terrorists, have whole Syria, Iran & Hezbollah so indebted, perpetual base in Syria, showcase Russia weapons and power, take high moral ground to raise Russia status in world stage as indispensable leader of Middle East, that's true Art of War -- Winning everything at least cost. Humiliating US is the biggest revenge. ..."
Dec 30, 2017 | www.unz.com

TT , December 29, 2017 at 5:23 pm GMT

Saker, this article has only general facts without your usual sharp analysis. It even contradict your own previous NK war analysis. Has Crazy Trumps & his WH really disheartened you so much? But some said Trumps is godsend, he has bared all US(Nato & Israel too) hypocrisy, destroying whole US in every aspects, either intentionally to reconstruct the ultra corrupted & manipulated US, or unintentionally hasten the empire collapse. Cheer up, look at the bright side like China, they are very positive about Trumps(he only love $, not war).

1. Afghanistan: Yes nothing will happen, unless US attack Russia army in Syria, then this will be one hot spot that Russia can heat up by equipping whoever(Taliban) to inflict heavy casualties for US.

The rockets attacked in Afghanistan airport during US Defense Secretary Mad Dog visit is to sent a very clear warning signal to US incharged, what Russia can pay back for the death of its General in Syria? To kill a few generals won't scare off Mattis, this will.

2. Syria: Russia has been very restraint to avoid direct conflict with US even under attacked. This emboldened US & Nato. So its likely US/Israel will conduct some air raids or missiles attack on SAA, Iran, Hezbollah, but no suicidal ground attack with these war harden formidable fighters.

3. Russia: Swift & Assets freeze -- Russia already has its own clearing system set up for this. China got its warning from WH too. When US did that to Russia, the world will hasten the Petrol dollar replacement with Yuan. So its unlikely US like it, unless direct war break out.

Shoot down Russia plane? Not likely, Syria plane Yes -- Recent Su35 chasing off F22 showed US is just a paper tiger. S400 can bring down some US birds too in return. Come to direct conflict, Russia is fully capable to inflict greater damage to many US bases in Middle East with missiles. So US can only continue using its "moderate" terrorists to harass but not shoot down Russia plane directly.

There is probably agreement in place, No SAM equipment to terrorists(ISIS hasn't got any SAM in entire Syria war), as it can threaten US too when moderates switch camp. Certainly Israel know Russia has no lack of SAM to equip Hezbollah as a return courtesy.

That's right, when Putin failed to direct attack Turkey after its Su24 is shot down, it emboldened US Nato. But Putin is a cold Grand chess player. He won't let a impulse lost his entire game. Sure he had exacted the revenge later. As a starter, he had the entire Turkey's Uyghur Turks terrorists army that killed the pilot carpet bombed, making Turkey Erogan thumping chest. Doubt US want its whole terrorists with its embedded Special force get carpet bombed yet.

Russia know Erogan is only the meganomania fool puppet. A Russia counterstrike will activate NATO obligation. So Putin ingeniously bring Turkey to his side, finished off terrorists, have whole Syria, Iran & Hezbollah so indebted, perpetual base in Syria, showcase Russia weapons and power, take high moral ground to raise Russia status in world stage as indispensable leader of Middle East, that's true Art of War -- Winning everything at least cost. Humiliating US is the biggest revenge.

4. Iran May be more than tearing off Nuclear deal, Trumps is all in with Israel. So everything is possible, including US limited missiles attack to Iran to fulfil Israel wish, but not full scale war which need much preparation.

5. Ukraine US sure love to escalate this proxy war to suck in Russia for full scale war. Its depends whether Ukraine will get force into this bloody shit hole . which is very likely with its manipulated leaders.

6. Korea War No war, all hot air, as your last analysis shown its gonna too bloody for US to contemplate. Biggest factor is Russia and China behind, not about $. US knew too well in Vietnam war and previous Korea war. FB has some good analysis in this.

Myanmar is certainly a cakewalk, but why for last 50 years US didn't attempt to attack for its tremendous rich unexplored resources? Its the China factor.

7. Venezuela This is the easiest sweetest soft target for Trumps if he ever need a war. Army is weak. There is no China Russia next door factor. And it has the world largest oil to pay. At the same time can destroy China and Russia dominant investments like Libya case, also removing their present at its backyard. Venezuela is what US capable to bully, not Iran or DPRK.

[Dec 30, 2017] The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity All Is Not Quiet on the Syrian Front US to Launch Another War

Notable quotes:
"... Reprinted with permission from Strategic Culture Foundation . ..."
Dec 30, 2017 | ronpaulinstitute.org

This is a classic example of flip-flop policy. In November, the US promised Turkey to stop arming Kurdish militias in Syria after the Islamic State was routed. Brett McGurk, the US Special Presidential Envoy to the Global Coalition to Defeat Islamic State, explained that after the urban fighting in Raqqa was over "adjustments in the level of military support" would be made. "We had to give some equipment – and it's limited, extremely limited – all of which was very transparent to our NATO ally, Turkey," he said during a special briefing on December 21. In June, the US told Turkey it would take back weapons supplied to the Kurdish the People's Protection Units (YPG) militia in northern Syria after the defeat of Islamic State.

But sophisticated weapons will continue to be sent to Syria in 2018, including thousands of anti-tank rocket launchers, heat seeking missiles and rocket launchers. The list of weaponry and equipment was prepared by US Department of Defense as part of the 2018 defense budget and signed by Trump of Dec. 12. It includes more than 300 non-tactical vehicles, 60 nonstandard vehicles, and 30 earth-moving vehicles to assist with the construction of outposts or operations staging areas. The US defense spending bill for 2018 ("Justification for FY 2018 Overseas Contingency Operations / Counter-Islamic State of Iraq and Syria Train and Equip Fund") includes providing weapons worth $393 million to US partners in Syria. Overall, $500 million, roughly $70 million more than last year, are to be spent on Syria Train and Equip requirements. The partners are the Kurds-dominated Syria Democratic Forces (SDF). The YPG – the group that is a major concern of Turkey – is the backbone of this force.

The budget does not refer to Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) but instead says "Vetted Syrian Opposition". According to the budget list, there are 25,000 opposition forces supported as a part of the train and equip program in Syria. That number is planned to be increased to 30,000 in 2018. The arming of Kurdish militants with anti-tank rockets is a sensitive topic because of Turkey's reliance on its armored Leopard tanks in northern Syria.

Talal Sillo, a former high-ranking commander and spokesperson of the US-backed SDF, who defected from the group last month to go to Turkey, divulged details of the US arming the Kurdish group.

The list does not detail which vetted Syrian groups will receive certain pieces of equipment. In northern Syria, there is the SDF, including the YPG, and the Syria Arab Coalition -- a group of Arab fighters incorporated into the SDF. The Maghawir al-Thawra and Shohada al-Quartayn groups are operating in the southeastern part of Syria. They are being trained by US and British instructors at the al-Tanf border crossing between Syria and Iraq.

Besides the SDF and the groups trained at al-Tanf, the US is in the process of creating the New Syria Army to fight the Syrian government forces. The training is taking place at the Syrian Hasakah refugee camp located 70 kilometers from the border of Turkey and 50 kilometers from the border of Iraq.

Around 40 Syria opposition groups on Dec. 25 rejected to attend the planned Sochi conference on Syria scheduled to take place in January. They said Moscow, which organizes the conference, was seeking to bypass the UN-based Geneva peace process, despite the fact that UN Syria envoy Staffan de Mistura said that Russia's plan to convene the congress should be assessed by its ability to contribute to and support the UN-led Geneva talks on ending the war in Syria. If fighting starts, these groups are likely to join the formations created by the US.

So, the United States not only maintains its illegal military presence in Syria and creates new forces to fight against the Syrian government, it appears to be preparing for a new war to follow the Islamic State's defeat. The continuation of arming and training Kurdish militias will hardly improve Washington's relations with Ankara, while saying one thing and doing another undermines the credibility of the United States as a partner.

Reprinted with permission from Strategic Culture Foundation .


What are you supporting? When you join the
Ron Paul Institute
for Peace and Prosperity
You are supporting

News and analysis
like you'll get nowhere else

Brave insight on
foreign policy and civil liberties

A young writer's program
and much more!

Support Ron Paul
Support the Institute!
Support Peace and Prosperity! Archives


[Dec 30, 2017] Russian Foreign Minister: US Military Must Leave All Of Syria

Notable quotes:
"... For now, the Iranian's Trump-tautning has remained unanswered. The problem is that if Iran continues to dare the US, and its new regional allies Israel and Saudi Arabia, now that there is a regional axis meant to "contain" Iran by any means necessary, it won't take much for the US, and especially Israel, to respond accordingly." ..."
"... The more desperate the establishment grows, the more rabid it will turn. For those, for whom cannot be what can't be, devastating times lie ahead. The polarization of the planet has reached a new dimension. ..."
Dec 30, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

Here is the latest from ZH on Syria

Russian Foreign Minister: US Military Must Leave All Of Syria

The take-away quote

"Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated on Thursday that US forces must leave all of Syria. Speaking to Interfax news agency, Lavrov stated that the UN Security Council has not approved the work of the United States and its coalition in Syria, nor has been invited by the legitimate Syrian government.

Concerning a prior statement by US Defense Secretary James Matisse voicing the intent for US troops to stay in Syria until achieving progress in a political settlement, Lavrov pointed out that such statement is "surprising" because it means that Washington reserves the right to determine such progress and wants to maintain control over parts of Syrian territory in order to achieve the result it wants."

Posted by: psychohistorian | Dec 28, 2017 5:03:22 PM | 6

elsi , Dec 28, 2017 5:50:04 PM | 7

@Jen | Dec 28, 2017 4:10:15 PM | 4

Well, it took also the "casuality" that the Russian Syrian base of Hmeimim was attacked by missiles launched by terrorists today...Of course, not only St. Petersburg, but the world is wide and huge...but, eventhough, I think that all these "terrorist attacks" are related...to the current insistence by Russian officials on US troops leaving Syria asap....

psychohistorian , Dec 28, 2017 8:43:51 PM | 18
Sometime ZH has news that is portrayed more in a propaganda manner than other times or authors...whatever. That said the link and quotes below show how the ME rhetoric is marching along

US And Israel Reach "Secret Plan" To Counter Iran

"One month after we reported that Israel would take the unprecedented step of sharing intelligence with Saudi Arabia as the two countries ramped up efforts to curb what they perceive as "Iranian expansion" in the region, on Thursday Israel's Channel 10 reported that Israel has also pivoted to the US and reached a similar plan to counter Iranian activity in the Middle East. As Axios adds, U.S. and Israeli officials said the joint understandings were reached in "a secret meeting" between senior Israeli and U.S. delegations at the White House on December 12th."

"Meanwhile, apparently unconcerned by the Saudi-Israeli-US axis that has formed to contain his nation, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said on Wednesday that US President Donald Trump would fail in his hardened stance towards Iran, saying Tehran is stronger than during the time of Ronald Reagan.

"Reagan was more powerful and smarter than Trump, and he was a better actor in making threats, and he also moved against us and they shot down our plane,"

Khamenei said in a speech carried on state television.

For now, the Iranian's Trump-tautning has remained unanswered. The problem is that if Iran continues to dare the US, and its new regional allies Israel and Saudi Arabia, now that there is a regional axis meant to "contain" Iran by any means necessary, it won't take much for the US, and especially Israel, to respond accordingly."

Beat those drums! Beat those drums! There must be a war for Trump to be a Real US President and cover for the posturing of the other two "new"(grin) regional allies.

My hope is that instead of a war, Trump gets to oversee the US default on the national debt, which he has some experience with personally. That would be the precipitation event for the new Bretton Woods agreement about global finance going forward.

What is the next chapter in this story and is everyone fearful enough yet?

nottheonly1 , Dec 29, 2017 4:40:00 AM | 25
Who Are The Leading State Sponsors of Terrorism?

For many, that has not been a serious question for a very long time. The answer reveals, that the umpire has only two possible exit strategies. One is that start WW3 and the other one is actually not a strategy - only an exit from the world.

Pretty much everybody is no longer wearing clothes. The naked truth is for all decent people to see. The implosion is underway and can no longer be averted. The only question that remains is how many lives will be lost/wasted and how many can be saved.

The more desperate the establishment grows, the more rabid it will turn. For those, for whom cannot be what can't be, devastating times lie ahead. The polarization of the planet has reached a new dimension.

And yes, I am convinced that the inability to post and glitches when typing have nothing to do with b. or this website, but everything to do with the manipulation of the internet and all it's users.

USS America is sinking. No iceberg was needed.

[Dec 28, 2017] On your surmise that Putin prefers Trump to Hillary and would thus have incentive to influence the election, I beg to differ. Putin is one smart statesman; he knows very well it makes no difference which candidates gets elected in US elections.

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... I accept your point that the Democrats and the Republicans are two sides of the same coin, but it's important to understand that Putin is deeply conservative and very risk averse. ..."
"... Hillary Clinton may be a threat to Russia but she knows the "rules" and is very predictable, while Trump doesn't know the rules and appears to act on a whim ..."
"... However, given the problems that Hillary Clinton had to overcome to get elected, backing her against Trump would be risky. So the highly risk averse Putin would logically stay out of the election entirely and all the claims of Russia hacking the election are fake news. ..."
"... As for the alleged media campaign, my response is "so what!". Western media, including state-owned media, interferes around the world all the time so complaining about Russian state-owned media doing the same is pure hypocrisy and should be ignored. ..."
Dec 28, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

Ghost Ship , Dec 27, 2017 10:17:37 AM | 92

Posted by: Oriental Voice | Dec 26, 2017 3:56:16 PM | 35
On your surmise that Putin prefers Trump to Hillary and would thus have incentive to influence the election, I beg to differ. Putin is one smart statesman; he knows very well it makes no difference which candidates gets elected in US elections.

I accept your point that the Democrats and the Republicans are two sides of the same coin, but it's important to understand that Putin is deeply conservative and very risk averse.

Hillary Clinton may be a threat to Russia but she knows the "rules" and is very predictable, while Trump doesn't know the rules and appears to act on a whim , so if Putin were to have interfered in the 2016 presidential election, logic would suggest that he would do so on Hillary Clinton's side. However, given the problems that Hillary Clinton had to overcome to get elected, backing her against Trump would be risky. So the highly risk averse Putin would logically stay out of the election entirely and all the claims of Russia hacking the election are fake news.

As for the alleged media campaign, my response is "so what!". Western media, including state-owned media, interferes around the world all the time so complaining about Russian state-owned media doing the same is pure hypocrisy and should be ignored.

[Dec 26, 2017] National Security Searches for a Strategy by Philip Giraldi

Trump is now 100% pure neocon. What a metamorphose is less a year from inauguration...
Notable quotes:
"... It says, with extreme hyperbole, that "China and Russia challenge American power, influence, and interests, attempting to erode American security and prosperity. They are determined to make economies less free and less fair, to grow their militaries, and to control information and data to repress their societies and expand their influence. At the same time, the dictatorships of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and the Islamic Republic of Iran are determined to destabilize regions, threaten Americans and our allies, and brutalize their own people." ..."
"... A somewhat more detailed account of what Moscow is up to is also contained in the written report, stating that "Russia is using subversive measures to weaken the credibility of America's commitment to Europe, undermine transatlantic unity, and weaken European institutions and governments. With its invasions of Georgia and Ukraine, Russia demonstrated its willingness to violate the sovereignty of states in the region. Russia continues to intimidate its neighbors with threatening behavior, such as nuclear posturing and the forward deployment of offensive capabilities." ..."
"... Nearly every detail in the indictment of Russia can be challenged. Most notably, if anyone is forward deploying offensive capabilities in Eastern Europe or invading other countries it is the United States, a trend that continues under Donald Trump. Just this past week, Trump approved the sale of offensive weapons to Ukraine, which has already drawn a warning from Moscow and will make any dialogue with Russia unlikely. ..."
"... And, of course, there is the usual softball for Israel claiming that "For generations the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians has been understood as the prime irritant preventing peace and prosperity in the region. Today, the threats from jihadist terrorist organizations and the threat from Iran are creating the realization that Israel is not the cause of the region's problems." It is a conclusion that must make the unspeakable Benjamin Netanyahu smile. One might observe that as Israel has attacked all of its neighbors since it was founded, holding its governments blameless is a formulation that others in the region might well dispute. ..."
"... So the Donald Trump National Security Strategy will be more of the same, a combination of the worst ideas to emerge from his two predecessors with little in the way of mitigation. Trump might balk at going toe-to-toe with North Korea because they have the actual capability to strike back and might think they have nothing to lose if they are about to be incinerated, something no bully likes to see, but Iran is certainly in the cross hairs and you best believe they have taken notice and will be preparing. Vladimir Putin too can sit back and wonder how Trump could possibly have gotten everything so ass-backwards when he had so much latitude to get at least some things right. The National Security Strategy will deliver little in the way of security but it will provide an answer to why most of the world has come to hate the United States. ..."
Dec 26, 2017 | www.unz.com

If one takes Trump at his word, the U.S. will use force worldwide to make sure that only Washington can dominate regionally, a frightening thought as it goes beyond even the wildest pretensions of George W. Bush and Barack Obama. And equally ridiculous are the potential consequences of such bullying – the White House clearly believes that it will make other nations respect us and follow our leadership whereas quite the reverse is likely to be true.

On the very limited bright side, Trump did have good things to say about the benefits derived from intelligence sharing with Russia and he also spoke about both Moscow and Beijing as "rivals" and "adversaries" instead of enemies. That was very refreshing to hear but unfortunately the printed document did not say the same thing.

The NSS report provided considerably more detail than did the speech but it also was full of generalizations and all too often relied on Washington group think to frame its options. The beginning is somewhat terrifying for one of my inclinations on foreign policy:

"An America that is safe, prosperous, and free at home is an America with the strength, confidence, and will to lead abroad. It is an America that can preserve peace, uphold liberty, and create enduring advantages for the American people. Putting America first is the duty of our government and the foundation for U.S. leadership in the world. A strong America is in the vital interests of not only the American people, but also those around the world who want to partner with the United States in pursuit of shared interests, values, and aspirations."

One has to ask what this "lead" and "leadership" and "partner" nonsense actually represents, particularly in light of the fact that damn near the entire world just repudiated Trump's decision to move the American Embassy in Israel as well as the nearly global rejection of his response to climate change? And Washington's alleged need to lead has brought nothing but grief to the American people starting in Korea and continuing with Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq and numerous lesser stops along the way in places like Somalia, Panama and Syria. The false narrative of the threat coming from "foreigners" has actually done nothing to make Americans safer while also diminishing constitutional liberties and doing serious damage to the economy.

The printed report is much more brutal than was Trump about the dangers facing America and it is also much more carefree in the "facts" that it chooses to present. It says, with extreme hyperbole, that "China and Russia challenge American power, influence, and interests, attempting to erode American security and prosperity. They are determined to make economies less free and less fair, to grow their militaries, and to control information and data to repress their societies and expand their influence. At the same time, the dictatorships of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and the Islamic Republic of Iran are determined to destabilize regions, threaten Americans and our allies, and brutalize their own people."

A somewhat more detailed account of what Moscow is up to is also contained in the written report, stating that "Russia is using subversive measures to weaken the credibility of America's commitment to Europe, undermine transatlantic unity, and weaken European institutions and governments. With its invasions of Georgia and Ukraine, Russia demonstrated its willingness to violate the sovereignty of states in the region. Russia continues to intimidate its neighbors with threatening behavior, such as nuclear posturing and the forward deployment of offensive capabilities."

Nearly every detail in the indictment of Russia can be challenged. Most notably, if anyone is forward deploying offensive capabilities in Eastern Europe or invading other countries it is the United States, a trend that continues under Donald Trump. Just this past week, Trump approved the sale of offensive weapons to Ukraine, which has already drawn a warning from Moscow and will make any dialogue with Russia unlikely.

And, of course, there is the usual softball for Israel claiming that "For generations the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians has been understood as the prime irritant preventing peace and prosperity in the region. Today, the threats from jihadist terrorist organizations and the threat from Iran are creating the realization that Israel is not the cause of the region's problems." It is a conclusion that must make the unspeakable Benjamin Netanyahu smile. One might observe that as Israel has attacked all of its neighbors since it was founded, holding its governments blameless is a formulation that others in the region might well dispute.

So the Donald Trump National Security Strategy will be more of the same, a combination of the worst ideas to emerge from his two predecessors with little in the way of mitigation. Trump might balk at going toe-to-toe with North Korea because they have the actual capability to strike back and might think they have nothing to lose if they are about to be incinerated, something no bully likes to see, but Iran is certainly in the cross hairs and you best believe they have taken notice and will be preparing. Vladimir Putin too can sit back and wonder how Trump could possibly have gotten everything so ass-backwards when he had so much latitude to get at least some things right. The National Security Strategy will deliver little in the way of security but it will provide an answer to why most of the world has come to hate the United States.

[Dec 23, 2017] Seems that those cuddly White Helmets really ARE good guys in the parallel universe Guardian readers are thought to inhabit.

Dec 23, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com

Cortes , December 18, 2017 at 11:19 am

Quite the week of Ancient History here the last few days, what with Lesbians torn between the Spartans and the Athenians (!) and the daddy of Western lawgivers, Solon, has snuck in.

Witnesseth:

conspiracy-theories

Here's the article author's "bio":

https://muckrack.com/oliviasolon/bio

Seems (selon Solon as they'll be saying at Charlie Hebdo) that those cuddly White Helmets really ARE good guys in the parallel universe Guardian readers are thought to inhabit. The Russians done calumnify those latter day saints.

Cortes , December 18, 2017 at 11:25 am
Oops!

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/18/syria-white-helmets-conspiracy-theories

And, yes, the Imp of the Perverse forced me to use THAT word.

marknesop , December 18, 2017 at 1:13 pm
What a pity, such upstanding citizens smeared. Perhaps next year for the Nobel, what?
Fern , December 19, 2017 at 5:29 am
Ah, the pain of these folk in the MSM as they experience losing control of the narrative ..we should be more understanding and compassionate. I also love the conjugation of the Guardian's irregular verbs we are independent, impartial journalists who are experts on Syria because we talk only to those people who share our views, you are a mere blogger, they, being courageous folk like Vanessa Beeley and Eva Bartlett who've actually been to Syria and talked to people outside the western bubble are Assad and Putin stooges.

[Dec 23, 2017] Slovenia is among the Coalition of the 128 NOT willing to be punked by USA. Melania better keep a low profile around Trump and Nikki

Dec 23, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com

Northern Star , , December 21, 2017 at 1:13 pm

Uh Oh Slovenia is among the Coalition of the 128 NOT willing to be punked by USA..

Maybe some panic stricken late night 911 DV calls from the WH??

Melania better keep a low profile around Trump and Nikki !!!!!! LOL!!

Jen , December 21, 2017 at 2:48 pm
India was naughty as well and Nimrata Nikki Randhawa Haley ought to have taken the Indian ambassador's name down as well. Maybe she'll even declare she won't ever set foot in India again. Her relatives there will breathe sighs of relief!
Cortes , December 21, 2017 at 4:27 pm
She's made herself untouchable.
Jen , December 21, 2017 at 8:03 pm
Ha ha!
Moscow Exile , December 21, 2017 at 8:41 pm
She makes me Sikh

[Dec 22, 2017] US elites and media are constantly freaking out about some Iranian "empire" supposedly being created and threatening US allies in the mideas

Notable quotes:
"... The supposed threat of an Iranian empire is a common theme in interventionist US media and in certain think tanks/pressure groups, even five minutes of googling produced this: ..."
Dec 22, 2017 | www.unz.com

German_reader , December 18, 2017 at 9:51 pm GMT

@Art Deco US elites and media are constantly freaking out about some Iranian "empire" supposedly being created and threatening US allies in the mideast since you seem to put great trust in their credibility, shouldn't that concern you?

Personally I think those fears are exaggerated, but how can it be denied that Iran's influence has increased a lot in recent years and that the removal of Saddam's regime facilitated that development?

Iranian revolutionary guards and Iranian-backed Shia militias operate in Iraq, the Iraqi government maintains close ties to Iran, and Iran is also an active participant in the Syrian civil war would that have been conceivable like this before 2003?

German_reader , December 18, 2017 at 10:46 pm GMT
@Art Deco

No, they aren't.

The supposed threat of an Iranian empire is a common theme in interventionist US media and in certain think tanks/pressure groups, even five minutes of googling produced this:

https://nypost.com/2015/02/01/the-iranian-dream-of-a-reborn-persian-empire/

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/01/15/fmr-nato-supreme-allied-commander-stavridis-iran-will-be-imperial-power-due-to-iran-deals-golden-shower-of-money/

https://www.commentarymagazine.com/foreign-policy/middle-east/iran/iran-and-the-imperialism-hypocrisy/

http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/06/30/what-to-do-about-an-imperial-iran-middle-east-persia-regional-dominance/

http://www.defenddemocracy.org/media-hit/may-clifford-d-the-new-persian-empire/ (btw, the Foundation for defense of democracies agrees with me that the removal of Saddam's regime was to Iran's benefit).

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/henry-kissinger-isis-iranian-radical-empire-middle-east-a7881541.html

Obviously I don't want Iran to acquire nuclear weapons, though imo US policy in this regard has been rather counter-productive recently.

Regarding the Iraq war, it's probably pointless to continue the discussion, if you want to continue regarding it as a great idea, I won't argue with you.

Randal , December 18, 2017 at 11:14 pm GMT
@German_reader

And after 9/11 I was very pro-US, e.g. I argued vehemently with a stupid leftie teacher who was against the Afghanistan war (and I still believe that war was justified, so I don't think I'm just some mindless anti-American fool). But Iraq was just too much, too much obvious lying and those lies were so stupid it was hard not to feel that there was something deeply wrong with a large part of the American public if they were gullible enough to believe such nonsense. At least for me it was a real turning point in the evolution of my political views.

The common factor amongst you, reiner and myself here is that none of us come from a dogmatically anti-American background or personal world-view, nor from a dogmatically pacifist one.

As I've probably noted here previously, I grew up very pro-American and very pro-NATO in the late Cold War, and as a strong supporter of Thatcher and Reagan. I saw the fall of the Soviet Union as a glorious triumph and a vindication of all the endless arguments against anti-American lefties and CND numpties. I also strongly supported the Falklands War (the last genuinely justified and intelligent war fought by my country, imo) and also the war against Iraq in 1990/1, though I'm a little less certain on that one nowadays. I'm significantly older than you both, it seems, however, and it was watching US foreign policy in the 1990s, culminating in the Kosovo war, that convinced me that the US is now the problem and not the solution.

When the facts changed, I changed my opinion.

So I was a war or two ahead of you, chronologically, because I'm older, but we've travelled pretty much the same road. Our views on America have been created by US foreign policy choices.

[Dec 21, 2017] The RussiaGate Witch-Hunt Stockman Names Names In The Deep State's Insurance Policy by David Stockman

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Needless to say, the Never Trumpers were eminently correct in their worry that Trump would sully, degrade and weaken the Imperial Presidency. That he has done in spades with his endless tweet storms that consist mainly of petty score settling, self-justification, unseemly boasting and shrill partisanship; and on top of that you can pile his impetuous attacks on friend, foe and bystanders (e.g. NFL kneelers) alike. ..."
Dec 18, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com

Deep State's "Insurance Policy" Tyler Durden Dec 18, 2017 11:05 PM 0 SHARES Authored by David Stockman via Contra Corner blog,

There was a sinister plot to meddle in the 2016 election, after all. But it was not orchestrated from the Kremlin; it was an entirely homegrown affair conducted from the inner sanctums---the White House, DOJ, the Hoover Building and Langley----of the Imperial City.

Likewise, the perpetrators didn't speak Russian or write in the Cyrillic script. In fact, they were lifetime beltway insiders occupying the highest positions of power in the US government.

Here are the names and rank of the principal conspirators:

To a person, the participants in this illicit cabal shared the core trait that made Obama such a blight on the nation's well-being. To wit, he never held an honest job outside the halls of government in his entire adult life; and as a careerist agent of the state and practitioner of its purported goods works, he exuded a sanctimonious disdain for everyday citizens who make their living along the capitalist highways and by-ways of America.

The above cast of election-meddlers, of course, comes from the same mold. If Wikipedia is roughly correct, just these 10 named perpetrators have punched in about 300 years of post-graduate employment---and 260 of those years (87%) were on government payrolls or government contractor jobs.

As to whether they shared Obama's political class arrogance, Peter Strzok left nothing to the imagination in his now celebrated texts to his gal-pal, Lisa Page:

"Just went to a southern Virginia Walmart. I could SMELL the Trump support......I LOATHE congress....And F Trump."

You really didn't need the ALL CAPS to get the gist. In a word, the anti-Trump cabal is comprised of creatures of the state.

Their now obvious effort to alter the outcome of the 2016 election was nothing less than the Imperial City's immune system attacking an alien threat, which embodied the very opposite trait: That is, the Donald had never spent one moment on the state's payroll, had been elected to no government office and displayed a spirited contempt for the groupthink and verities of officialdom in the Imperial City.

But it is the vehemence and flagrant transparency of this conspiracy to prevent Trump's ascension to the Oval Office that reveals the profound threat to capitalism and democracy posed by the Deep State and its prosperous elites and fellow travelers domiciled in the Imperial City.

That is to say, Donald Trump was no kind of anti-statist and only a skin-deep populist, at best. His signature anti-immigrant meme was apparently discovered by accident when in the early days of the campaign he went off on Mexican thugs, rapists and murderers----only to find that it resonated strongly among a certain element of the GOP grass roots.

But a harsh line on immigrants, refugees and Muslims would not have incited the Deep State into an attempted coup d'état; it wouldn't have mobilized so overtly against Ted Cruz, for example, whose positions on the ballyhooed terrorist/immigrant threat were not much different.

No, what sent the Imperial City establishment into a fit of apoplexy was exactly two things that struck at the core of its raison d' etre.

First was Trump's stated intentions to seek rapprochement with Putin's Russia and his sensible embrace of a non-interventionist "America First" view of Washington's role in the world. And secondly, and even more importantly, was his very persona.

That is to say, the role of today's president is to function as the suave, reliable maître d' of the Imperial City and the lead spokesman for Washington's purported good works at home and abroad. And for that role the slovenly, loud-mouthed, narcissistic, bombastic, ill-informed and crudely-mannered Donald Trump was utterly unqualified.

Stated differently, welfare statism and warfare statism is the secular religion of the Imperial City and its collaborators in the mainstream media; and the Oval Office is the bully pulpit from which its catechisms, bromides and self-justifications are propagandized to the unwashed masses---the tax-and-debt-slaves of Flyover America who bear the burden of its continuation.

Needless to say, the Never Trumpers were eminently correct in their worry that Trump would sully, degrade and weaken the Imperial Presidency. That he has done in spades with his endless tweet storms that consist mainly of petty score settling, self-justification, unseemly boasting and shrill partisanship; and on top of that you can pile his impetuous attacks on friend, foe and bystanders (e.g. NFL kneelers) alike.

Yet that is exactly what has the Deep State and its media collaborators running scared. To wit, Trump's entire modus operandi is not about governing or a serious policy agenda---and most certainly not about Making America's Economy Great Again. (MAEGA)

By appointing a passel of Keynesian monetary central planners to the Fed and launching an orgy of fiscal recklessness via his massive defense spending and tax-cutting initiatives, the Donald has more than sealed his own doom: There will unavoidably be a massive financial and economic crisis in the years just ahead and the rulers of the Imperial City will most certainly heap the blame upon him with malice aforethought.

In the interim, however, what the Donald is actually doing is sharply polarizing the country and using the Bully Pulpit for the very opposite function assigned to it by Washington's permanent political class. Namely, to discredit and vilify the ruling elites of government and the media and thereby undermine the docility and acquiescence of the unwashed masses upon which the Imperial City's rule and hideous prosperity depend.

It is no wonder, then, that the inner circle of the Obama Administration plotted an "insurance policy". They saw it coming-----that is, an offensive rogue disrupter who was soft on Russia, to boot--- and out of that alarm the entire hoax of RussiaGate was born.

As is now well known from the recent dump of 375 Strzok/Gates text messages, there occurred on August 15, 2016 a meeting in the office of FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe (who is still there) to kick off the RussiaGate campaign. As Strzok later wrote to Page, who was also at the meeting:

" I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy's office -- that there's no way he gets elected -- but I'm afraid we can't take that risk......It's like an insurance policy in the unlikely event that you die before you're 40."

They will try to spin this money quote seven-ways to Sunday, but in the context of everything else now known there is only one possible meaning: The national security and law enforcement machinery of Imperial Washington was being activated then and there in behalf of Hillary Clinton's campaign.

Indeed, the trail of proof is quite clear. At the very time of this August meeting, the FBI was already being fed the initial elements of the Steele dossier, and the latter had nothing to do with any kind of national security investigation.

For crying out loud, it was plain old "oppo research" paid for by the Clinton campaign and the DNC. And the only way that it bore on Russian involvement in the US election was that virtually all of the salacious material and false narratives about Trump emissaries meeting with high level Russian officials was disinformation sourced in Moscow, and was completely untrue.

As former senior FBI official, Andrew McCarthy, neatly summarized the sequence of action recently:

The Clinton campaign generated the Steele dossier through lawyers who retained Fusion GPS. Fusion, in turn, hired Steele, a former British intelligence agent who had FBI contacts from prior collaborative investigations. The dossier was steered into the FBI's hands as it began to be compiled in the summer of 2016. A Fusion Russia expert, Nellie Ohr, worked with Steele on Fusion's anti-Trump research. She is the wife of Bruce Ohr, then the deputy associate attorney general -- the top subordinate of Sally Yates, then Obama's deputy attorney general (later acting AG). Ohr was a direct pipeline to Yates.....

Based on the publication this week of text messages between FBI agent Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, the FBI lawyer with whom he was having an extramarital affair, we have learned of a meeting convened in the office of FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe...... right around the time the Page FISA warrant was obtained......

Bruce Ohr met personally with Steele. And after Trump was elected, according to Fusion founder Glenn Simpson, he requested and got a meeting with Simpson to, as Simpson told the House Intelligence Committee, "discuss our findings regarding Russia and the election."

This, of course, was the precise time Democrats began peddling the public narrative of Trump-Russia collusion. It is the time frame during which Ohr's boss, Yates, was pushing an absurd Logan Act investigation of Trump transition official Michael Flynn (then slotted to become Trump's national-security adviser) over Flynn's meetings with the Russian ambassador.

Here's the thing. There is almost nothing in the Steele dossiers which is true. At the same time, there is no real alternative evidence based on hard NSA intercepts that show Russian government agents were behind the only two acts----the leaks of the DNC emails and the Podesta emails----that were of even minimal import to the outcome of the 2016 presidential campaign.

As to the veracity of the dossier, the raving anti-Trumper and former CIA interim chief, Michael Morrell, settled the matter. If you are paying ex-FSA agents for information on the back streets of Moscow, the more you pay, the more "information" you will get:

Then I asked myself, why did these guys provide this information, what was their motivation? And I subsequently learned that he paid them. That the intermediaries paid the sources and the intermediaries got the money from Chris. And that kind of worries me a little bit because if you're paying somebody, particularly former [Russian Federal Security Service] officers, they are going to tell you truth and innuendo and rumor, and they're going to call you up and say, 'Hey, let's have another meeting, I have more information for you,' because they want to get paid some more,' Morrell said.

Far from being "verified," the dossier is best described as a pack of lies, gossip, innuendo and irrelevancies. Take, for example, the claim that Trump lawyer Michael Cohen met with Russian Federation Council foreign affairs head Konstantin Kosachev in Prague during August 2016. That claim is verifiably false as proven by Cohen's own passport.

Likewise, the dossier 's claim that Carter Page was offered a giant bribe by the head of Rosneft, the Russian state energy company, in return for lifting the sanctions is downright laughable. That's because Carter Page never had any serious role in the Trump campaign and was one of hundreds of unpaid informal advisors who hung around the basket hoping for some role in a future Trump government.

Like the hapless George Papadopoulos, in fact, Page apparently never met Trump, had no foreign policy credentials and had been drafted onto the campaign's so-called foreign policy advisory committee out of sheer desperation.

That is, because the mainstream GOP foreign policy establishment had so completely boycotted the Trump campaign, the latter was forced to fill its advisory committee essentially from the phone book; and that desperation move in March 2016, in turn, had been undertaken in order to damp-down the media uproar over the Donald's assertion that he got his foreign policy advise from watching TV!

The truth of the matter is that Page was a former Merrill Lynch stockbrokers who had plied his trade in Russia several years earlier. He had gone to Moscow in July 2016 on his own dime and without any mandate from the Trump campaign; and his "meeting" with Rosneft actually consisted of drinks with an old buddy from his broker days who had become head of investor relations at Rosneft.

Nevertheless, it is pretty evident that the Steele dossier's tale about Page's alleged bribery scheme was the basis for the FISA warrant that resulted in wiretaps on Page and other officials in Trump Tower during September and October.

And that's your insurance policy at work: The Deep State and its allies in the Obama administration were desperately looking for dirt with which to crucify the Donald, and thereby insure that the establishment's anointed candidate would not fail at the polls.

So the question recurs as to why did the conspirators resort to the outlandish and even cartoonish disinformation contained in the Steele dossier?

The answer to that question cuts to the quick of the entire RussiaGate hoax. To wit, that's all they had!

Notwithstanding the massive machinery and communications vacuum cleaners operated by the $75 billion US intelligence communities and its vaunted 17 agencies, there are no digital intercepts proving that Russian state operatives hacked the DNC and Podesta emails. Period.

Yet when it comes to anything that even remotely smacks of "meddling" in the US election campaign, that's all she wrote.

There is nothing else of moment, and most especially not the alleged phishing expeditions directed at 20 or so state election boards. Most of these have been discredited, denied by local officials or were simply the work of everyday hackers looking for voter registration lists that could be sold.

The patently obvious point here is that in America there is no on-line network of voting machines on either an intra-state or interstate basis. And that fact renders the whole election machinery hacking meme null and void. Not even the treacherous Russians are stupid enough to waste their time trying to hack that which is unhackable.

In that vein, the Facebook ad buying scheme is even more ridiculous. In the context of an election campaign in which upwards of $7 billion of spending was reported by candidates and their committees to the FEC, and during which easily double that amount was spent by independent committees and issue campaigns, the notion that just $44,000 of Facebook ads made any difference to anything is not worthy of adult thought.

And, yes, out of the ballyhooed $100,000 of Facebook ads, the majority occurred after the election was over and none of them named candidates, anyway. The ads consisted of issue messages that reflected all points on the political spectrum from pro-choice to anti-gun control.

And even this so-called effort at "polarizing" the American electorate was "discovered" only after Facebook failed to find any "Russian-linked" ads during its first two searches. Instead, this complete drivel was detected only after the Senate's modern day Joseph McCarthy, Sen. Mark Warner, who is the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee and a leading legislator on Internet regulation, showed up on Mark Zuckerberg's doorstep at Facebook headquarters.

In any event, we can be sure there are no NSA intercepts proving that the Russians hacked the Dem emails for one simple reason: They would have been leaked long ago by the vast network of Imperial City operatives plotting to bring the Donald down.

Moreover, the original architect and godfather of NSA's vast spying apparatus, William Binney, has essentially proved that the DNC emails were leaked by an insider who downloaded them on a memory stick. By conducting his own experiments, he showed that the known download speed of one batch of DNC emails could not have occurred over the Internet from a remote location in Russia or anywhere else on the planet, and actually matched what was possible only via a local USB-connected thumb drive.

So the real meaning of the Strzok/Gates text messages is straight foreword. There was a conspiracy to prevent Trump's election, and then after the shocking results of November 8, this campaign morphed into an intensified effort to discredit the winner.

For instance, Susan Rice got Obama to lower the classification level of the information obtained from the Trump campaign intercepts and other dirt-gathering actions by the Intelligence Community (IC)--- so that it could be disseminated more readily to all Washington intelligence agencies.

In short order, of course, the IC was leaking like a sieve, thereby paving the way for the post-election hysteria and the implication that any contact with a Russian--even one living in Brooklyn-- must be collusion. And that included calls to the Russian ambassador by the president-elect's own national security advisor designate.

Should there by any surprise, therefore, that it turns out the Andrew McCabe bushwhacked General Flynn on January 24 when he called to say that FBI agents were on the way to the White House for what Flynn presumed to be more security clearance work with his incipient staff.

No at all. The FBI team was there to interrogate Flynn about the transcripts of his perfectly appropriate and legal conversations with Ambassador Kislyak about two matters of state----the UN resolution on Israel and the spiteful new sanctions on certain Russian citizens that Obama announced on December 28 in a fit of pique over the Dems election loss.

And that insidious team of FBI gotcha cops was led by none other than......Peter Strzok!

But after all the recent leaks---and these text messages are just the tip of the iceberg-----the die is now cast. Either the Deep State and its minions and collaborators in the media and the Republican party, too, will soon succeed in putting Mike Pence into the Oval Office, or the Imperial City is about ready to break-out in vicious partisan warfare like never before.

Either way, economic and fiscal governance is about ready to collapse entirely, making the tax bill a kind of last hurrah before they mayhem really begins.

In that context, selling the rip may become one of the most profitable speculations ever imagined.

CuttingEdge -> The_Juggernaut , Dec 19, 2017 2:05 AM

Not sure why Stockman went off on a tangent about Trump's innumerate economic strategy - kinda dilutes from an otherwise informative piece for anyone who hasn't a handle on the underhand shit that's been hitting the fan in recent months. Its like he has to have a go about it no matter what the main theme. Like PCR and "insouciance". And then there's the texting...

Clue yourself in, David.

A very small percentage of the public are actually informed about what is really going down. Those that visit ZH or your website. Fox is the only pro-Trump mainstream TV news outlet, and as to the NYT, WP et al? The media disinformation complex keep the rest in the matrix, and it has been very easy to see in action over the last year or so because it has been so well co-ordinated (and totally fabricated).

Given the blatant and contemptous avoidance of the truth by the MSM (the current litany of seditious/treasonous actions being a case in point), it is fair to say that Trump's tweets provide a very real public service - focussing the (otherwise ignorant) public's attention on many things the aforementioned cunts (I'll include Google and FaecesBook) divert from like the plague (and making them look utter slime in the process).

Don't knock it

A Sentinel -> BennyBoy , Dec 19, 2017 2:23 AM

I do respect stockman but here's bullshit-call #1: he says that the deep state doesn't like the divisiveness he causes: bush certainly did that and Obama' did so at an order of magnitude higher. I don't believe that the left is more upset by trump than we were by Barry- we're just not a bunch of sniveling, narcissistic babies like they are.

redmudhooch -> BennyBoy , Dec 19, 2017 1:14 PM

Hondurans accuse US of election meddling

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/12/hondurans-accuse-election-meddling...

The US embassy in Honduras has been surrounded by protesters infuriated by the three-week-wait for the definitive result of the presidential election.

Demonstrators accuse the US of meddling in last month's vote which both candidates say they won.

Wage Slave 927 -> shitshitshit , Dec 19, 2017 1:45 AM

When the details of the FISA warrant application are revealed, it will be like a megaton-class munition detonating, and the Deep State will bear the brunt of destruction.

enough of this , Dec 18, 2017 11:19 PM

The Comey - Strzok Duet satire:

http://investmentwatchblog.com/the-comey-strzok-duet-on-the-eve-of-the-c...

SheHunter , Dec 18, 2017 11:25 PM

For those of you who have not yet discovered it Mr. Stockman's Contra Corner is a hands-down great blog well worth a nightly read.

zagzigga -> Mini-Me , Dec 18, 2017 11:48 PM

Similar mass deception was in play to start the Iraq war as well. Constant bombardment led to public consensus and even the liberal New York Times endorsed the war. Whenever we see mass hysteria about something new, we should just go with the flow and not ask any questions at all. It is best for retaining sanity in this dumbed down and getting more dumber world.

Anunnaki , Dec 18, 2017 11:31 PM

Susan Rice and Obama should be indicted for illegally wiretapping Trump Towers for the express purpose of finding oppo research to help Hellary's late term abortiion of a campaign

Tapeworm -> Anunnaki , Dec 19, 2017 8:25 AM

This one is deeper but well laid out. Comey & Mueller Ignored McCabe's Ties to Russian Crime Figures & His Reported Tampering in Russian FBI Cases, Files

https://truepundit.com/comey-mueller-ignored-mccabes-ties-to-russian-cri...

I damned near insist that y'all read this one. Please???

Cardinal Fang , Dec 18, 2017 11:40 PM

Great read, loved the 'Imperial City's immune system' analogy...

I disagree about the economy though.

It feels strange to me that the architect of the Reagan Revolution is unable to see the makings of another revolution, the Trump Revolution.

We have had 10-20 years of pent up demand in the economy and instead of electing another neo-Marxist Alynski acolyte, the American people elected a hard charging anti-establishment bull in a China shop.

Surely Dave can see the potential.

It kills me when people are surprised by a 12 month, 5000 point run up on Wall Street.

For God's sake the United States was run by a fucking commie for 8 years, what the fuck did you think was gonna happen?

Jeez

GoldHermit , Dec 18, 2017 11:58 PM

America is divided and will remain divided. I think it will last at least for the next 50 years, maybe longer. The best way out is to limit the federal government and give each state more responsibility. States can succeed or fail on their own. People will be free to move where they want.

Not My Real Name -> GoldHermit , Dec 19, 2017 1:21 AM

"The best way out is to limit the federal government and give each state more responsibility."

Oh, you mean follow the Constitution as it was written. Good one, Hermit!

bh2 , Dec 19, 2017 12:01 AM

Somewhere there is a FISA judge who should be defrocked and exposed as a fraud. No sober judge would accept such evidence for any purpose, much less authorizing government snooping on a major party candidate for president.

MrSteve -> bh2 , Dec 19, 2017 12:29 AM

This makes FISA a totalitarian joke and that should be investigated.

RonBananas , Dec 19, 2017 4:51 AM

The CIA holds all the videos from Jeff Epstein's Island (20 documented trips by Bill, 6 documented trips by Hillary), I'm sure Bill doing a 12 year old, Hillary and Huma doing an 8 year old girl together, etc. So what are they willing to do for the CIA? Anything at any cost, getting caught red handed with a dossier is chump change when you look at the big picture..they don't care and will do anything...ANYTHING to get rid of Trump.

This is the only reason they are so frantic. There is absolutely no other reason they would play at this level.

Pol Pot -> RonBananas , Dec 19, 2017 4:57 AM

Correct on all except it's the Mossad and not the CIA who ran flight Epstein.

shutterbug , Dec 19, 2017 5:47 AM

Trump is gone in a few months or the DoJ, FBI and all others connected to FBI-gate are prosecuted...

Session's (in-)action will be crucial to one of these paths...

Stud Duck , Dec 19, 2017 6:42 AM

As always, Dave puts it all into prospective for even the brain dead. Ya think Joe and his gang will be talking about this article on their morning talk show today?? I wonder how Brezenski's daughter is going to tell daddy that the gig is up and they may want to look into packing a boogie bag just to play it safe?

David Stockman is a flame of hope in a world of dark machievellian thought!

Occams_Razor_Trader , Dec 19, 2017 7:25 AM

Why did the alt media and the msm all stop reportinmg that McCabe's wife recieved 700 thousand dollars from Terry McAulife (former Clinton campaign manager times 2!) for a Virginia State Senate run? Quid pro quo? Oh no, never the up and up DemonRats.

So when I hear that the conversation was held in McCabe's office- I want to puke first then start building the gallows.

MATA HAIRY , Dec 19, 2017 7:34 AM

fucken brilliant article!! There is a lot I don't like about trump (some of which stockman discusses above), but as a retired govt worker, I can tell you that he right about what he is saying here.

insanelysane , Dec 19, 2017 8:14 AM

One little tidbit that has been lost in all of this:

If the FBI was willing to use their power to back Hillary and defeat Trump at the national level, what did they try to do in McCabe's wife's state senate campaign? She is a pediatrician and she ran for state senate. ??? WTF is that about? She's not only a doctor but a doctor for children. Those people are usually wired to help people. Yet she was going to for-go being a doctor for a state senate position. ??? And the DNC forked over $700,000 to put her on the map.

I'm sure the people meeting daily in Andy's office were not pleased with the voter resistance to his wife and to Hillary. The FBI needs to be shut down. They have become an opposition research firm for the DNC. Even if they can't find dirt on candidates using the NSA database, they are able to tap that database to find out political strategies in real time on opposition The fish is rotten from the head down to the tail.

unklemunky , Dec 19, 2017 8:20 AM

No matter what article you read here, and don't get me wrong, I love the insight, but every fucking article is "it's all over. America is doomed, the petro dollar days are over, China China China. It's getting a bit old. The charts and graphs about stock market collapse......it becoming an old record that needs changed. If I say it's going to rain every fucking day, at some point I will be right. That doesn't make me a genius....it makes me persistent.

insanelysane , Dec 19, 2017 8:24 AM

It's a Deep State mess and Sessions is trying his best as he cowers in a corner sucking his thumb.

If they continue to go after Trump, the FBI is going to be found guilty of violating the Hatch Act by exonerating Hillary. See burner phones. See writing the conclusion in May when the investigation supposedly ended with Hillary's interview on July 3rd. The FBI will also be exposed for sedition as they then carried out the phony Russiagate investigation as their "insurance policy."

However, they have created an expectation with the left that Trump and his minions will be brought to "justice." If we thought the Left didn't handle losing the election well, they will not be pleased at losing Russiagate.

MrBoompi , Dec 19, 2017 4:25 PM

How dare anyone contradict or go against the wishes of ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, or MSNBC? Don't you know they understand what's best for us?

[Dec 20, 2017] It seems like the intelligence agencies are spending more time monitoring politicians and public than Al Queda.

Notable quotes:
"... Freedom Watch lawyer Larry Klayman has a whistle-blower who has stated on the record, publicly, he has 47 hard drives with over 600,000,00 pages of secret CIA documents that detail all the domestic spying operations, and likely much much more. ..."
"... The rabbit hole goes very deep here. Attorney Klayman has stated he has been trying to out this for 2 years, and was stonewalled by swamp creatures, so he threatened to go public this week. Several very interesting videos, and a public letter, are out there, detailing all this. Nunes very likely saw his own conversations transcripted from surveillance taken at Trump Tower (he was part of the transition team), and realized the jig was up. Melania has moved out of Trump Tower to stay elsewhere, I am sure after finding out that many people in Washington where watching them at home in their private residence, whichi is also why Pres Trump sent out those famous angry tweets 2 weeks ago. Democrats on the Committee (and many others) are liars, and very possibly traitors, which is probably why Nunes neglected to inform them. Nunes did follow proper procedures, notifying Ryan first etc, you can ignore the MSM bluster there ..observe Nunes body language in the 2 videos of his dual press briefings he gave today, he appears shocked, angry, disturbed etc. ..."
"... This all stems from Obama's Jan 16 signing of the order broadening "co-operation" between the NSA and everybody else in Washington, so that mid-level analysts at almost any agency could now look at raw NSA intercepts, that is where all the "leaks" and "unmasking" are coming from. ..."
"... AG Lynch, Obama, and countless others knew, or should have known, all about this, but I am sure they will play the usual "I was too stupid too know what was going on in my own organization" card. ..."
Mar 23, 2017 |
fresno dan March 22, 2017 at 6:56 pm

So I see where Nunes in a ZeroHedge posting says that there might have been "incidental surveillance" of "Trump" (?Trump associates? ?Trump tower? ?Trump campaign?)
Now to the average NC reader, it kinda goes without saying. But I don't think Trump understands the scope of US government "surveillance" and I don't think the average citizen, certainly not the average Trump supporter, does either – the nuances and subtleties of it – the supposed "safeguards".

I can understand the rationale for it .but this goes to show that when you give people an opportunity to use secret information for their own purposes .they will use secret information for their own purposes.

And at some point, the fact of the matter that the law regarding the "incidental" leaking appears to have been broken, and that this leaking IMHO was purposefully broken for political purposes .is going to come to the fore. Like bringing up "fake news" – some of these people on the anti Trump side seem not just incapable of playing 11th dimensional chess, they seem incapable of winning tic tac toe .

Was Obama behind it? I doubt it and I don't think it would be provable. But it seems like the intelligence agencies are spending more time monitoring repubs than Al queda. Now maybe repubs are worse than Al queda – I think its time we have a real debate instead of the pseudo debates and start asking how useful the CIA is REALLY. (and we can ask how useful repubs and dems are too)

craazyboy March 22, 2017 at 8:45 pm

If Obama taped the information, stuffed the tape in one of Michelle's shoeboxes, then hid the shoebox in the Whitehouse basement, he could be in trouble. Ivanka is sure to search any shoeboxes she finds.

Irredeemable Deplorable March 23, 2017 at 2:57 am

Oh the Trump supporters are all over this, don't worry. There are many more levels to what is going on than what is reported in the fakenews MSM.

Adm Roger of NSA made his November visit to Trump Tower, after a SCIF was installed there, to .be interviewed for a job uh-huh yeah.

Freedom Watch lawyer Larry Klayman has a whistle-blower who has stated on the record, publicly, he has 47 hard drives with over 600,000,00 pages of secret CIA documents that detail all the domestic spying operations, and likely much much more.

The rabbit hole goes very deep here. Attorney Klayman has stated he has been trying to out this for 2 years, and was stonewalled by swamp creatures, so he threatened to go public this week. Several very interesting videos, and a public letter, are out there, detailing all this. Nunes very likely saw his own conversations transcripted from surveillance taken at Trump Tower (he was part of the transition team), and realized the jig was up. Melania has moved out of Trump Tower to stay elsewhere, I am sure after finding out that many people in Washington where watching them at home in their private residence, whichi is also why Pres Trump sent out those famous angry tweets 2 weeks ago. Democrats on the Committee (and many others) are liars, and very possibly traitors, which is probably why Nunes neglected to inform them. Nunes did follow proper procedures, notifying Ryan first etc, you can ignore the MSM bluster there ..observe Nunes body language in the 2 videos of his dual press briefings he gave today, he appears shocked, angry, disturbed etc.

You all should be happy, because although Pres Trump has been vindicated here on all counts, the more important story for you is that the old line Democratic Party looks about to sink under the wieght of thier own lies and illegalities. This all stems from Obama's Jan 16 signing of the order broadening "co-operation" between the NSA and everybody else in Washington, so that mid-level analysts at almost any agency could now look at raw NSA intercepts, that is where all the "leaks" and "unmasking" are coming from.

AG Lynch, Obama, and countless others knew, or should have known, all about this, but I am sure they will play the usual "I was too stupid too know what was going on in my own organization" card.

Lambert Strether Post author March 23, 2017 at 4:08 am

> Was Obama behind it? I doubt it and I don't think it would be provable

I think he knew about it. After fulminating about weedy technicalities, let me just say that Obama's EO12333 expansion made sure that whatever anti-Trump information got picked up by the intelligence community could be spread widely, and would be hard to trace back to an individual source .

[Dec 19, 2017] I won t be optimistic about AmeriKKKa until Russia and/or China announce a Zero Tolerance policy toward US military adventurism in countries on the borders of Russia/China. But this will never happen

The overall direction of the empire was never going to change with or without Trump and we are seeing it play out now.
Notable quotes:
"... Ok, he has been called the most pro Israel President by Netanyahu himself, his administration just recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, something even most ardent analysts in here did not predict. His son-in-law who he listens to is a pure Zionist and the neo-con lap dog Hailey is quite clearly gearing the audience up for a confrontation with Iran. One way or another....watch out 2018. ..."
"... But no he is not controlled enough by the Zionists? The overall direction of the empire was never going to change with or without Trump and we are seeing it play out now. ..."
"... America is a particularly vivid example of indoctrinated groupthink and I just cannot see anyone/movement espousing alternative ways of operating getting traction. ..."
"... Simply pay attention to what those monsters actually do. The Trump Administration has continued and expanded US domestic and foreign policy precisely as has his predecessors. NATO is bigger, better funded, and more heavily deployed along Russia's "near abroad" than at any time in history. The Pentagon now admits we have 2,000 to 5,000 active "boots on the ground" in Syria, and they have no intention of ever leaving. Goldman Sachs is embedded in every Executive Branch office. Taxes on the wealthy and corporations are being slashed soon to be followed in social services, as neo-liberal economics remains the god worshipped by all. ..."
Dec 19, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

ben , Dec 19, 2017 10:10:35 PM | 53

"I won't be optimistic about AmeriKKKa until Russia and/or China announce a Zero Tolerance policy toward US military adventurism in countries on the borders of Russia/China - by promising to bomb the continental USA if it attacks a Russia/China neighbor.

Imo it's absolutely essential to light a big bonfire under AmeriKKKa's Impunity. And it would be delightful, sobering, and a big boost for Peace and Diplomacy to hear the Yankees whingeing about being threatened by entities quite capable of following through on their threats."

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Dec 19, 2017 11:10:32 AM | 14

Hell yes, I'd love that scenario, but never happen. Too much $to be made by kissing up to the empire.

Sad Canuck @ 31: Abso fukken 'lutely!!

b, you better change what you're smoken' if you believe the empire is going isolationist.

Alexander P , Dec 19, 2017 10:17:08 PM | 54
@48 They did not want him lol? So many comments in here make me chuckle.

Ok, he has been called the most pro Israel President by Netanyahu himself, his administration just recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, something even most ardent analysts in here did not predict. His son-in-law who he listens to is a pure Zionist and the neo-con lap dog Hailey is quite clearly gearing the audience up for a confrontation with Iran. One way or another....watch out 2018.

But no he is not controlled enough by the Zionists? The overall direction of the empire was never going to change with or without Trump and we are seeing it play out now.

dh , Dec 19, 2017 10:27:40 PM | 55
@26 "I think you would find that the vast majority of Americans would be quite happy to disengage militarily from the rest of the world, and put resources at work on domestic problems."

Disengage militarily? I would like to think so sleepy but why do they keep getting so involved internationally? Instead of concentrating on domestic issues putting 'America first' seems to mean bullying any country that doesn't do what it's told.

psychohistorian , Dec 19, 2017 10:42:31 PM | 56
@ Debsisdead with the end of his comment
"
America is a particularly vivid example of indoctrinated groupthink and I just cannot see anyone/movement espousing alternative ways of operating getting traction.
"

There are those that say the same (vivid example of indoctrinated groupthink) about China, so there might be some competition in our world yet.

I , for one, want to end private finance and maybe give the China way a go. Anyone else? I did future studies in college and am intrigued by planning processes at the scale that China has done 13 of....their 5-year plans.

May we live to see structural change in the way our species comports itself......soon, I hope

Daniel , Dec 19, 2017 10:51:15 PM | 57
NemesisCalling, I suggest paying little to know attention to Trump's (or any other politician/oligarch) platitudes.

Simply pay attention to what those monsters actually do. The Trump Administration has continued and expanded US domestic and foreign policy precisely as has his predecessors. NATO is bigger, better funded, and more heavily deployed along Russia's "near abroad" than at any time in history. The Pentagon now admits we have 2,000 to 5,000 active "boots on the ground" in Syria, and they have no intention of ever leaving. Goldman Sachs is embedded in every Executive Branch office. Taxes on the wealthy and corporations are being slashed soon to be followed in social services, as neo-liberal economics remains the god worshipped by all.

I remain amazed that people who KNOW that the MSM lies to us constantly, about things big and small, still believe with all their hearts the MSM narrative that Trump is an "outsider" whom the Establishment hates and has fought against ever since they gave him $5 billion in free advertising.

Don Bacon , Dec 19, 2017 10:52:39 PM | 58
Disengage? In 2017, U.S. Special Operations forces, including Navy SEALs and Army Green Berets, deployed to 149 countries around the world, according to figures provided to TomDispatch by U.S. Special Operations Command. That's around 75 percent of the nations on the planet.

What the vast majority of Americans might want has been cast aside by this president after he got their votes. There go hope and change again, damn.

[Dec 16, 2017] Mohammed bin Salman's ill-advised ventures have weakened Saudi Arabia, by Patrick Cockburn - The Unz Review

Notable quotes:
"... We are the ones who have been fomenting destabilization all throughout the region some of whom would have been allies of the Saudis in some common cause. ..."
"... I think there are more effective choices concerning Yemen and Qatar. But figuring out what the choices are is not going to be easy. And harder still perhaps is implementing them. As for backfire -- we are just not in a position to judge, at the moment. Anyone hoping that another major state collapses in that region is probably miscalculating the value of instability. ..."
Dec 16, 2017 | www.unz.com

Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) of Saudi Arabia is the undoubted Middle East man of the year, but his great impact stems more from his failures than his successes. He is accused of being Machiavellian in clearing his way to the throne by the elimination of opponents inside and outside the royal family. But, when it comes to Saudi Arabia's position in the world, his miscalculations remind one less of the cunning manoeuvres of Machiavelli and more of the pratfalls of Inspector Clouseau.

Again and again, the impulsive and mercurial young prince has embarked on ventures abroad that achieve the exact opposite of what he intended. When his father became king in early 2015, he gave support to a rebel offensive in Syria that achieved some success but provoked full-scale Russian military intervention, which in turn led to the victory of President Bashar al-Assad. At about the same time, MbS launched Saudi armed intervention, mostly through airstrikes, in the civil war in Yemen. The action was code-named Operation Decisive Storm, but two and a half years later the war is still going on, has killed 10,000 people and brought at least seven million Yemenis close to starvation.

The Crown Prince is focusing Saudi foreign policy on aggressive opposition to Iran and its regional allies, but the effect of his policies has been to increase Iranian influence. The feud with Qatar, in which Saudi Arabia and the UAE play the leading role, led to a blockade being imposed five months ago which is still going on. The offence of the Qataris was to have given support to al-Qaeda type movements – an accusation that was true enough but could be levelled equally at Saudi Arabia – and to having links with Iran. The net result of the anti-Qatari campaign has been to drive the small but fabulously wealthy state further into the Iranian embrace.

Saudi relations with other countries used to be cautious, conservative and aimed at preserving the status quo. But today its behaviour is zany, unpredictable and often counterproductive: witness the bizarre episode in November when the Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri was summoned to Riyadh, not allowed to depart and forced to resign his position. The objective of this ill-considered action on the part of Saudi Arabia was apparently to weaken Hezbollah and Iran in Lebanon, but has in practice empowered both of them.

What all these Saudi actions have in common is that they are based on a naïve presumption that "a best-case scenario" will inevitably be achieved. There is no "Plan B" and not much of a "Plan A": Saudi Arabia is simply plugging into conflicts and confrontations it has no idea how to bring to an end.

MbS and his advisers may imagine that it does not matter what Yemenis, Qataris or Lebanese think because President Donald Trump and Jared Kushner, his son-in-law and chief Middle East adviser, are firmly in their corner. "I have great confidence in King Salman and the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, they know exactly what they are doing," tweeted Trump in early November after the round up and confinement of some 200 members of the Saudi elite. "Some of those they are harshly treating have been 'milking' their country for years!" Earlier he had tweeted support for the attempt to isolate Qatar as a supporter of "terrorism".

But Saudi Arabia is learning that support from the White House these days brings fewer advantages than in the past. The attention span of Donald Trump is notoriously short, and his preoccupation is with domestic US politics: his approval does not necessarily mean the approval of other parts of the US government. The State Department and the Pentagon may disapprove of the latest Trump tweet and seek to ignore or circumvent it. Despite his positive tweet, the US did not back the Saudi confrontation with Qatar or the attempt to get Mr Hariri to resign as prime minister of Lebanon.

For its part, the White House is finding out the limitations of Saudi power. MbS was not able to get the Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas to agree to a US-sponsored peace plan that would have given Israel very much and the Palestinians very little. The idea of a Saudi-Israeli covert alliance against Iran may sound attractive to some Washington think tanks, but does not make much sense on the ground. The assumption that Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and the promise to move the US embassy there, would have no long-term effects on attitudes in the Middle East is beginning to look shaky.

It is Saudi Arabia – and not its rivals – that is becoming isolated. The political balance of power in the region changed to its disadvantage over the last two years. Some of this predates the elevation of MbS: by 2015 it was becoming clear that a combination of Sunni states led by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey was failing to carry out regime change in Damascus. This powerful grouping has fragmented, with Turkey and Qatar moving closer to the Russian-backed Iranian-led axis, which is the dominant power in the northern tier of the Middle East between Afghanistan and the Mediterranean.

If the US and Saudi Arabia wanted to do anything about this new alignment, they have left it too late. Other states in the Middle East are coming to recognise that there are winners and losers, and have no wish to be on the losing side. When President Recep Tayyip Erdogan called a meeting this week in Istanbul of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, to which 57 Muslim states belong, to reject and condemn the US decision on Jerusalem, Saudi Arabia only sent a junior representative to this normally moribund organisation. But other state leaders like Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, King Abdullah of Jordan and the emirs of Kuwait and Qatar, among many others, were present. They recognised East Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital and demanded the US reverse its decision.

MbS is in the tradition of leaders all over the world who show Machiavellian skills in securing power within their own countries. But their success domestically gives them an exaggerated sense of their own capacity in dealing with foreign affairs, and this can have calamitous consequences. Saddam Hussein was very acute in seizing power in Iraq but ruined his country by starting two wars he could not win.

Mistakes made by powerful leaders are often explained by their own egomania and ignorance, supplemented by flattering but misleading advice from their senior lieutenants. The first steps in foreign intervention are often alluring because a leader can present himself as a national standard bearer, justifying his monopoly of power at home. Such a patriotic posture is a shortcut to popularity, but there is always a political bill to pay if confrontations and wars end in frustration and defeat. MbS has unwisely decided that Saudi Arabia should play a more active and aggressive role at the very moment that its real political and economic strength is ebbing. He is overplaying his hand and making too many enemies.

Svigor , December 16, 2017 at 6:24 am GMT
The only hope someone as cloistered as a Saudi crown prince can have of being an effective ruler is either by being an extraordinary person (very curious, love learning for its own sake, etc), or be at least moderately intelligent, and listen to consensus.

For its part, the White House is finding out the limitations of Saudi power. MbS was not able to get the Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas to agree to a US-sponsored peace plan that would have given Israel very much and the Palestinians very little.

Lies and Jew-hatred. Everyone knows that despite their infamous sharpness in business dealings, the world's longest history of legalism, a completely self-centered and ethnocentric culture, and their longstanding abuse of the Palestinians, every single deal the Jews try to sign with the Palestinians heavily favors the Palestinians, and the only reason the Palestinians won't sign is because they're psychotic Jew-haters.

The idea of a Saudi-Israeli covert alliance against Iran may sound attractive to some Washington think tanks, but does not make much sense on the ground. The assumption that Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and the promise to move the US embassy there, would have no long-term effects on attitudes in the Middle East is beginning to look shaky.

Hey, you skipped the part where you did anything to support the idea that a Zionist-Saudi alliance doesn't make sense.

K, let's all wait for Art Deco to come in and spew some Hasbara then tell us he's not a Zhid.

Avery , December 16, 2017 at 6:28 am GMT
{Mohammed Bin Salman's Ill-Advised Ventures Have Weakened Saudi Arabia}

GREAT news. Hopefully the evil, cannibalistic terrorism spreading so-called 'kingdom' of desert nomads will continue on its path of self destruction, and disappear as a functioning state.

Tammy , December 16, 2017 at 9:51 am GMT
Once more a Saudi Firster was detained in KSA. This time the owner of Arab Bank, a Jordanian with dual Jordan and KSA citizenship. Saad Hariri a Lebanese was the first one who was dual Lebanon and KSA citizens and who lost his diplomatic immunity in KSA.

I wonder if the Israel Firster who are dual citizens are now sweating? Wonder, if Netanyahu is still an USA citizen? Happy days are coming back .

Jake , December 16, 2017 at 12:31 pm GMT
"Saudi relations with other countries used to be cautious, conservative and aimed at preserving the status quo. But today its behaviour is zany, unpredictable and often counterproductive:"

Saudis allied with Israelis, backed by the wealth and might of the US? Guaranteed to bring out the worst in Saudis (which is bad enough at base) and Israelis and Americans.

cbrown , December 16, 2017 at 1:07 pm GMT
Machiavellian skills really ? I'd see 6 months ahead if this was true. MBS just made a show that they are a de facto Mafia not a businessman to the whole world. I'd bet he just quashed a lot of efforts and money spent on raising the racing horses of the saud monarch and in turn destroyed some serious connection that were vital but aren't readily available to them. Just how potent money they thought it would be ? Sure all is businesses and it will work so long you can pay the right person. The problem is where to find the right person.
Joe Hide , December 16, 2017 at 1:53 pm GMT
Come on Cockburn, look at the Big Picture, not the little one. This the old fallacy of looking at the trees and not seeing the forest. What is happening in Saudi Arabia is a piece of the much bigger puzzle being put together over years, decades, and maybe generations.

The psychopaths at the top of the power pyramid have been engaged in this hidden global game for generations, it's always been part of their longterm strategy.

Very recently Highly intelligent, realistic, morally and ethically centered, and practically oriented individuals, have also formed secret powerful groups to arrive at beneficial goals for humanity. These truly Good Guys have learned that the criminal, murderous, lecherous, degenerate, deviate, psychopaths in positions of great power are irredeemable and should be eliminated where possible. What you see in Saudi Arabia is merely a tree, not the forest. Just the same, to the author, keep writing but research the subject much much more before you put pen to paper, as you do have apersuasive and talented style.

EliteCommInc. , December 16, 2017 at 2:25 pm GMT
I am going to come to the defence here.

1. We have been screaming about the unintended consequences of Saudi giving to charities since 2004.

2. We removed the buffer of Iraq from Iranian ambitions (as unclear as it may be debated) creating issues not only for Saudi Arabia, but others in the region as well.

3. We are the ones who have been fomenting destabilization all throughout the region some of whom would have been allies of the Saudis in some common cause.

4. No one is escaping the negative consequences of our Iraq invasion.

5. We have been complaining about rogue and irresponsible wealthy Muslims ad naseum.

Now when someone steps up the plate to meet the challenges many caused by the US – our first complaint is not astute counsel but rather a series of articles highlighting failure. I would not contend that I support every choice. But I think we should at least take a wait and see perspective. He is operating in a region rife with intrigue and ambitions, not to mention -- Muslims bent on spreading Islam as one would expect a muslim to do. Frankly I am not sure how one governs in the arena of the middle east – especially now – it's a region in major shift.

I think there are more effective choices concerning Yemen and Qatar. But figuring out what the choices are is not going to be easy. And harder still perhaps is implementing them. As for backfire -- we are just not in a position to judge, at the moment. Anyone hoping that another major state collapses in that region is probably miscalculating the value of instability.

DESERT FOX , December 16, 2017 at 2:39 pm GMT
The Saudis are the U.S. and ISISRAELS puppet, they do what the Zionist neocons tell them to do, which is to be the Zionist agent provocateur in the Mideast.

The Saudis have helped the U.S. and ISISRAEL create and finance ISIS aka AL CIADA and for this the Saudis can rot in hell, and by the way the reason for the attack on Yemen is that the Saudis oil reserves are diminishing and so the Saudis figured they would take Yemens oil.

The main creators of ISIS aka AL CIADA are the U.S. and ISISRAEL and BRITAIN ie the CIA and the MOSSAD and MI6.

Anon , Disclaimer December 16, 2017 at 4:55 pm GMT
The irony is that Saudis, before MbS and during his dominance, are making exactly the same suicidal blunders as the US. No enemy could have damaged the US and its positions in the world more than its Presidents and the Congress in the last 17 years. The same is true for KSA, with the same mistakes being made: undermining the financial system of the country, global over-reach that forces all opposition to unite, crazy military expenses, etc.
Art , December 16, 2017 at 5:57 pm GMT
Sorry, but these people dressed in 14 century robes and garb, cannot be taken seriously. They look like play-people feigning a furious grandeur. Without their petrochemicals – they would be laughed at by everyone – including their own kind. They should not be respected because they are religious – they are old world tribalist thugs hiding behind a religion. They use and abuse their people – holding them back from modernity.

Think Peace -- Art

Anon , Disclaimer December 16, 2017 at 6:17 pm GMT
@Z-man

Thing is, Saudi regime was rotten through and through before MbS, remains rotten under his rule, and will remain rotten when some other jerk kicks him out and establishes himself at the helm.

neutral , December 16, 2017 at 6:31 pm GMT
It does not matter how smart Saudi Arabia is with their foreign policy now, they became allies with Israel, that means Saudi Arabia can never claim to be a power working for the interests of Islam. MBS is a marked man, no matter how many purges he undertakes in his army, or even if he just hires Pakistani soldiers, if he has Muslims fighting in his army he will always be carrying the risk of being assassinated by somebody who has seen him cross the red line and become pro jewish.
Svigor , December 16, 2017 at 6:51 pm GMT
I don't really understand the constant hopes that the Saudi regime will fall. How is that any different from cheering Bush's disastrous regime change in Iraq? How will the fallout be any better in Arabia than it was in Iraq, Libya, etc?
cbrown , December 16, 2017 at 7:43 pm GMT
@Svigor

It's not that there's a constant hope it's just they'd fall in the near future and fortunately it will balance the geopolitical power in the future. Their fallout aren't going to be as bad unless the people pulling their string persistent in keeping them in power.

neutral , December 16, 2017 at 8:14 pm GMT
@Svigor

It will be better because it means Israel loses an ally, also with the Saudis gone Egypt will also be unable to keep their population in check. The fall of the Saudis means that Israel will be surrounded by regimes that oppose it...

someone , December 17, 2017 at 12:14 am GMT
Another Junior Gaddafi that is going to ruin his entire nation while intoxicated with NYT or other Western media coverage. He talks of corruption after spending 1.1 Billion dollars on a yacht and a painting.
Netenyahu is much the same. He has weakened Israel immensely by playing the scary wolf.
anon , Disclaimer December 17, 2017 at 12:33 am GMT
@neutral

South Africa was never in danger from their hostile neighbors . They committed suicide. Egypt cannot control its own territory let alone start wars , ditto for Syria and Lebanon. Jordan is a client state of Israel and lacks a functioning army. ...

[Dec 15, 2017] Rise and Decline of the Welfare State, by James Petras

Highly recommended!
Petras did not mention that it was Carter who started neoliberalization of the USA. The subsequent election of Reagan signified the victory of neoliberalism in this country or "quite coup". The death of New Deal from this point was just a matter of time. Labor relations drastically changes and war on union and atomization of workforce are a norm.
Welfare state still exists but only for corporation and MIC. Otherwise the New Deal society is almost completely dismanted.
It is true that "The ' New Deal' was, at best, a de facto ' historical compromise' between the capitalist class and the labor unions, mediated by the Democratic Party elite. It was a temporary pact in which the unions secured legal recognition while the capitalists retained their executive prerogatives." But the key factor in this compromise was the existence of the USSR as a threat to the power of capitalists in the USA. when the USSR disappeared cannibalistic instincts of the US elite prevailed over caution.
Notable quotes:
"... The earlier welfare 'reforms' and the current anti-welfare legislation and austerity practices have been accompanied by a series of endless imperial wars, especially in the Middle East. ..."
"... In the 1940's through the 1960's, world and regional wars (Korea and Indo-China) were combined with significant welfare program – a form of ' social imperialism' , which 'buy off' the working class while expanding the empire. However, recent decades are characterized by multiple regional wars and the reduction or elimination of welfare programs – and a massive growth in poverty, domestic insecurity and poor health. ..."
"... modern welfare state' ..."
"... Labor unions were organized as working class strikes and progressive legislation facilitated trade union organization, elections, collective bargaining rights and a steady increase in union membership. Improved work conditions, rising wages, pension plans and benefits, employer or union-provided health care and protective legislation improved the standard of living for the working class and provided for 2 generations of upward mobility. ..."
"... Social Security legislation was approved along with workers' compensation and the forty-hour workweek. Jobs were created through federal programs (WPA, CCC, etc.). Protectionist legislation facilitated the growth of domestic markets for US manufacturers. Workplace shop steward councils organized 'on the spot' job action to protect safe working conditions. ..."
"... World War II led to full employment and increases in union membership, as well as legislation restricting workers' collective bargaining rights and enforcing wage freezes. Hundreds of thousands of Americans found jobs in the war economy but a huge number were also killed or wounded in the war. ..."
"... So-called ' right to work' ..."
"... Trade union officials signed pacts with capital: higher pay for the workers and greater control of the workplace for the bosses. Trade union officials joined management in repressing rank and file movements seeking to control technological changes by reducing hours (" thirty hours work for forty hours pay ..."
"... Trade union activists, community organizers for rent control and other grassroots movements lost both the capacity and the will to advance toward large-scale structural changes of US capitalism. Living standards improved for a few decades but the capitalist class consolidated strategic control over labor relations. While unionized workers' incomes, increased, inequalities, especially in the non-union sectors began to grow. With the end of the GI bill, veterans' access to high-quality subsidized education declined ..."
"... With the election of President Carter, social welfare in the US began its long decline. The next series of regional wars were accompanied by even greater attacks on welfare via the " Volker Plan " – freezing workers' wages as a means to combat inflation. ..."
"... Guns without butter' became the legislative policy of the Carter and Reagan Administrations. The welfare programs were based on politically fragile foundations. ..."
"... The anti-labor offensive from the ' Oval Office' intensified under President Reagan with his direct intervention firing tens of thousands of striking air controllers and arresting union leaders. Under Presidents Carter, Reagan, George H.W. Bush and William Clinton cost of living adjustments failed to keep up with prices of vital goods and services. Health care inflation was astronomical. Financial deregulation led to the subordination of American industry to finance and the Wall Street banks. De-industrialization, capital flight and massive tax evasion reduced labor's share of national income. ..."
"... The capitalist class followed a trajectory of decline, recovery and ascendance. Moreover, during the earlier world depression, at the height of labor mobilization and organization, the capitalist class never faced any significant political threat over its control of the commanding heights of the economy ..."
"... Hand in bloody glove' with the US Empire, the American trade unions planted the seeds of their own destruction at home. The local capitalists in newly emerging independent nations established industries and supply chains in cooperation with US manufacturers. Attracted to these sources of low-wage, violently repressed workers, US capitalists subsequently relocated their factories overseas and turned their backs on labor at home. ..."
"... President 'Bill' Clinton ravaged Russia, Yugoslavia, Iraq and Somalia and liberated Wall Street. His regime gave birth to the prototype billionaire swindlers: Michael Milken and Bernard 'Bernie' Madoff. ..."
"... Clinton converted welfare into cheap labor 'workfare', exploiting the poorest and most vulnerable and condemning the next generations to grinding poverty. Under Clinton the prison population of mostly African Americans expanded and the breakup of families ravaged the urban communities. ..."
"... President Obama transferred 2 trillion dollars to the ten biggest bankers and swindlers on Wall Street, and another trillion to the Pentagon to pursue the Democrats version of foreign policy: from Bush's two overseas wars to Obama's seven. ..."
"... Obama was elected to two terms. His liberal Democratic Party supporters swooned over his peace and justice rhetoric while swallowing his militarist escalation into seven overseas wars as well as the foreclosure of two million American householders. Obama completely failed to honor his campaign promise to reduce wage inequality between black and white wage earners while he continued to moralize to black families about ' values' . ..."
"... Obama's war against Libya led to the killing and displacement of millions of black Libyans and workers from Sub-Saharan Africa. The smiling Nobel Peace Prize President created more desperate refugees than any previous US head of state – including millions of Africans flooding Europe. ..."
"... Forty-years of anti welfare legislation and pro-business regimes paved the golden road for the election of Donald Trump ..."
"... Trump and the Republicans are focusing on the tattered remnants of the social welfare system: Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security. The remains of FDR's New Deal and LBJ's Great Society -- are on the chopping block. ..."
"... The moribund (but well-paid) labor leadership has been notable by its absence in the ensuing collapse of the social welfare state. The liberal left Democrats embraced the platitudinous Obama/Clinton team as the 'Great Society's' gravediggers, while wailing at Trump's allies for shoving the corpse of welfare state into its grave. ..."
"... Over the past forty years the working class and the rump of what was once referred to as the ' labor movement' has contributed to the dismantling of the social welfare state, voting for ' strike-breaker' Reagan, ' workfare' Clinton, ' Wall Street crash' Bush, ' Wall Street savior' Obama and ' Trickle-down' Trump. ..."
"... Gone are the days when social welfare and profitable wars raised US living standards and transformed American trade unions into an appendage of the Democratic Party and a handmaiden of Empire. The Democratic Party rescued capitalism from its collapse in the Great Depression, incorporated labor into the war economy and the post- colonial global empire, and resurrected Wall Street from the 'Great Financial Meltdown' of the 21 st century. ..."
"... The war economy no longer fuels social welfare. The military-industrial complex has found new partners on Wall Street and among the globalized multi-national corporations. Profits rise while wages fall. Low paying compulsive labor (workfare) lopped off state transfers to the poor. Technology – IT, robotics, artificial intelligence and electronic gadgets – has created the most class polarized social system in history ..."
"... "The collaboration of liberals and unions in promoting endless wars opened the door to Trump's mirage of a stateless, tax-less, ruling class." ..."
"... Corporations [now] are welfare recipients and the bigger they are, the more handouts they suck up ..."
"... Corporations not only continuously seek monopolies (with the aid and sanction of the state) but they steadily fine tune the welfare state for their benefit. In fact, in reality, welfare for prols and peasants wouldn't exist if it didn't act as a money conduit and ultimate profit center for the big money grubbers. ..."
"... The article is dismal reading, and evidence of the failings of the "unregulated" society, where the anything goes as long as you are wealthy. ..."
"... Like the Pentagon. Americans still don't readily call this welfare, but they will eventually. Defense profiteers are unions in a sense, you're either in their club Or you're in the service industry that surrounds it. ..."
Dec 13, 2017 | www.unz.com

Introduction

The American welfare state was created in 1935 and continued to develop through 1973. Since then, over a prolonged period, the capitalist class has been steadily dismantling the entire welfare state.

Between the mid 1970's to the present (2017) labor laws, welfare rights and benefits and the construction of and subsidies for affordable housing have been gutted. ' Workfare' (under President 'Bill' Clinton) ended welfare for the poor and displaced workers. Meanwhile the shift to regressive taxation and the steadily declining real wages have increased corporate profits to an astronomical degree.

What started as incremental reversals during the 1990's under Clinton has snowballed over the last two decades decimating welfare legislation and institutions.

The earlier welfare 'reforms' and the current anti-welfare legislation and austerity practices have been accompanied by a series of endless imperial wars, especially in the Middle East.

In the 1940's through the 1960's, world and regional wars (Korea and Indo-China) were combined with significant welfare program – a form of ' social imperialism' , which 'buy off' the working class while expanding the empire. However, recent decades are characterized by multiple regional wars and the reduction or elimination of welfare programs – and a massive growth in poverty, domestic insecurity and poor health.

New Deals and Big Wars

The 1930's witnessed the advent of social legislation and action, which laid the foundations of what is called the ' modern welfare state' .

Labor unions were organized as working class strikes and progressive legislation facilitated trade union organization, elections, collective bargaining rights and a steady increase in union membership. Improved work conditions, rising wages, pension plans and benefits, employer or union-provided health care and protective legislation improved the standard of living for the working class and provided for 2 generations of upward mobility.

Social Security legislation was approved along with workers' compensation and the forty-hour workweek. Jobs were created through federal programs (WPA, CCC, etc.). Protectionist legislation facilitated the growth of domestic markets for US manufacturers. Workplace shop steward councils organized 'on the spot' job action to protect safe working conditions.

World War II led to full employment and increases in union membership, as well as legislation restricting workers' collective bargaining rights and enforcing wage freezes. Hundreds of thousands of Americans found jobs in the war economy but a huge number were also killed or wounded in the war.

The post-war period witnessed a contradictory process: wages and salaries increased while legislation curtailed union rights via the Taft Hartley Act and the McCarthyist purge of leftwing trade union activists. So-called ' right to work' laws effectively outlawed unionization mostly in southern states, which drove industries to relocate to the anti-union states.

Welfare reforms, in the form of the GI bill, provided educational opportunities for working class and rural veterans, while federal-subsidized low interest mortgages encourage home-ownership, especially for veterans.

The New Deal created concrete improvements but did not consolidate labor influence at any level. Capitalists and management still retained control over capital, the workplace and plant location of production.

Trade union officials signed pacts with capital: higher pay for the workers and greater control of the workplace for the bosses. Trade union officials joined management in repressing rank and file movements seeking to control technological changes by reducing hours (" thirty hours work for forty hours pay "). Dissident local unions were seized and gutted by the trade union bosses – sometimes through violence.

Trade union activists, community organizers for rent control and other grassroots movements lost both the capacity and the will to advance toward large-scale structural changes of US capitalism. Living standards improved for a few decades but the capitalist class consolidated strategic control over labor relations. While unionized workers' incomes, increased, inequalities, especially in the non-union sectors began to grow. With the end of the GI bill, veterans' access to high-quality subsidized education declined.

While a new wave of social welfare legislation and programs began in the 1960's and early 1970's it was no longer a result of a mass trade union or workers' "class struggle". Moreover, trade union collaboration with the capitalist regional war policies led to the killing and maiming of hundreds of thousands of workers in two wars – the Korean and Vietnamese wars.

Much of social legislation resulted from the civil and welfare rights movements. While specific programs were helpful, none of them addressed structural racism and poverty.

The Last Wave of Social Welfarism

The 1960'a witnessed the greatest racial war in modern US history: Mass movements in the South and North rocked state and federal governments, while advancing the cause of civil, social and political rights. Millions of black citizens, joined by white activists and, in many cases, led by African American Viet Nam War veterans, confronted the state. At the same time, millions of students and young workers, threatened by military conscription, challenged the military and social order.

Energized by mass movements, a new wave of social welfare legislation was launched by the federal government to pacify mass opposition among blacks, students, community organizers and middle class Americans. Despite this mass popular movement, the union bosses at the AFL-CIO openly supported the war, police repression and the military, or at best, were passive impotent spectators of the drama unfolding in the nation's streets. Dissident union members and activists were the exception, as many had multiple identities to represent: African American, Hispanic, draft resisters, etc.

Under Presidents Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon, Medicare, Medicaid, OSHA, the EPA and multiple poverty programs were implemented. A national health program, expanding Medicare for all Americans, was introduced by President Nixon and sabotaged by the Kennedy Democrats and the AFL-CIO. Overall, social and economic inequalities diminished during this period.

The Vietnam War ended in defeat for the American militarist empire. This coincided with the beginning of the end of social welfare as we knew it – as the bill for militarism placed even greater demands on the public treasury.

With the election of President Carter, social welfare in the US began its long decline. The next series of regional wars were accompanied by even greater attacks on welfare via the " Volker Plan " – freezing workers' wages as a means to combat inflation.

Guns without butter' became the legislative policy of the Carter and Reagan Administrations. The welfare programs were based on politically fragile foundations.

The Debacle of Welfarism

Private sector trade union membership declined from a post-world war peak of 30% falling to 12% in the 1990's. Today it has sunk to 7%. Capitalists embarked on a massive program of closing thousands of factories in the unionized North which were then relocated to the non-unionized low wage southern states and then overseas to Mexico and Asia. Millions of stable jobs disappeared.

Following the election of 'Jimmy Carter', neither Democratic nor Republican Presidents felt any need to support labor organizations. On the contrary, they facilitated contracts dictated by management, which reduced wages, job security, benefits and social welfare.

The anti-labor offensive from the ' Oval Office' intensified under President Reagan with his direct intervention firing tens of thousands of striking air controllers and arresting union leaders. Under Presidents Carter, Reagan, George H.W. Bush and William Clinton cost of living adjustments failed to keep up with prices of vital goods and services. Health care inflation was astronomical. Financial deregulation led to the subordination of American industry to finance and the Wall Street banks. De-industrialization, capital flight and massive tax evasion reduced labor's share of national income.

The capitalist class followed a trajectory of decline, recovery and ascendance. Moreover, during the earlier world depression, at the height of labor mobilization and organization, the capitalist class never faced any significant political threat over its control of the commanding heights of the economy.

The ' New Deal' was, at best, a de facto ' historical compromise' between the capitalist class and the labor unions, mediated by the Democratic Party elite. It was a temporary pact in which the unions secured legal recognition while the capitalists retained their executive prerogatives.

The Second World War secured the economic recovery for capital and subordinated labor through a federally mandated no strike production agreement. There were a few notable exceptions: The coal miners' union organized strikes in strategic sectors and some leftist leaders and organizers encouraged slow-downs, work to rule and other in-plant actions when employers ran roughshod with special brutality over the workers. The recovery of capital was the prelude to a post-war offensive against independent labor-based political organizations. The quality of labor organization declined even as the quantity of trade union membership increased.

Labor union officials consolidated internal control in collaboration with the capitalist elite. Capitalist class-labor official collaboration was extended overseas with strategic consequences.

The post-war corporate alliance between the state and capital led to a global offensive – the replacement of European-Japanese colonial control and exploitation by US business and bankers. Imperialism was later 're-branded' as ' globalization' . It pried open markets, secured cheap docile labor and pillaged resources for US manufacturers and importers.

US labor unions played a major role by sabotaging militant unions abroad in cooperation with the US security apparatus: They worked to coopt and bribe nationalist and leftist labor leaders and supported police-state regime repression and assassination of recalcitrant militants.

' Hand in bloody glove' with the US Empire, the American trade unions planted the seeds of their own destruction at home. The local capitalists in newly emerging independent nations established industries and supply chains in cooperation with US manufacturers. Attracted to these sources of low-wage, violently repressed workers, US capitalists subsequently relocated their factories overseas and turned their backs on labor at home.

Labor union officials had laid the groundwork for the demise of stable jobs and social benefits for American workers. Their collaboration increased the rate of capitalist profit and overall power in the political system. Their complicity in the brutal purges of militants, activists and leftist union members and leaders at home and abroad put an end to labor's capacity to sustain and expand the welfare state.

Trade unions in the US did not use their collaboration with empire in its bloody regional wars to win social benefits for the rank and file workers. The time of social-imperialism, where workers within the empire benefited from imperialism's pillage, was over. Gains in social welfare henceforth could result only from mass struggles led by the urban poor, especially Afro-Americans, community-based working poor and militant youth organizers.

The last significant social welfare reforms were implemented in the early 1970's – coinciding with the end of the Vietnam War (and victory for the Vietnamese people) and ended with the absorption of the urban and anti-war movements into the Democratic Party.

Henceforward the US corporate state advanced through the overseas expansion of the multi-national corporations and via large-scale, non-unionized production at home.

The technological changes of this period did not benefit labor. The belief, common in the 1950's, that science and technology would increase leisure, decrease work and improve living standards for the working class, was shattered. Instead technological changes displaced well-paid industrial labor while increasing the number of mind-numbing, poorly paid, and politically impotent jobs in the so-called 'service sector' – a rapidly growing section of unorganized and vulnerable workers – especially including women and minorities.

Labor union membership declined precipitously. The demise of the USSR and China's turn to capitalism had a dual effect: It eliminated collectivist (socialist) pressure for social welfare and opened their labor markets with cheap, disciplined workers for foreign manufacturers. Labor as a political force disappeared on every count. The US Federal Reserve and President 'Bill' Clinton deregulated financial capital leading to a frenzy of speculation. Congress wrote laws, which permitted overseas tax evasion – especially in Caribbean tax havens. Regional free-trade agreements, like NAFTA, spurred the relocation of jobs abroad. De-industrialization accompanied the decline of wages, living standards and social benefits for millions of American workers.

The New Abolitionists: Trillionaires

The New Deal, the Great Society, trade unions, and the anti-war and urban movements were in retreat and primed for abolition.

Wars without welfare (or guns without butter) replaced earlier 'social imperialism' with a huge growth of poverty and homelessness. Domestic labor was now exploited to finance overseas wars not vice versa. The fruits of imperial plunder were not shared.

As the working and middle classes drifted downward, they were used up, abandoned and deceived on all sides – especially by the Democratic Party. They elected militarists and demagogues as their new presidents.

President 'Bill' Clinton ravaged Russia, Yugoslavia, Iraq and Somalia and liberated Wall Street. His regime gave birth to the prototype billionaire swindlers: Michael Milken and Bernard 'Bernie' Madoff.

Clinton converted welfare into cheap labor 'workfare', exploiting the poorest and most vulnerable and condemning the next generations to grinding poverty. Under Clinton the prison population of mostly African Americans expanded and the breakup of families ravaged the urban communities.

Provoked by an act of terrorism (9/11) President G.W. Bush Jr. launched the 'endless' wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and deepened the police state (Patriot Act). Wages for American workers and profits for American capitalist moved in opposite directions.

The Great Financial Crash of 2008-2011 shook the paper economy to its roots and led to the greatest shakedown of any national treasury in history directed by the First Black American President. Trillions of public wealth were funneled into the criminal banks on Wall Street – which were ' just too big to fail .' Millions of American workers and homeowners, however, were ' just too small to matter' .

The Age of Demagogues

President Obama transferred 2 trillion dollars to the ten biggest bankers and swindlers on Wall Street, and another trillion to the Pentagon to pursue the Democrats version of foreign policy: from Bush's two overseas wars to Obama's seven.

Obama's electoral 'donor-owners' stashed away two trillion dollars in overseas tax havens and looked forward to global free trade pacts – pushed by the eloquent African American President.

Obama was elected to two terms. His liberal Democratic Party supporters swooned over his peace and justice rhetoric while swallowing his militarist escalation into seven overseas wars as well as the foreclosure of two million American householders. Obama completely failed to honor his campaign promise to reduce wage inequality between black and white wage earners while he continued to moralize to black families about ' values' .

Obama's war against Libya led to the killing and displacement of millions of black Libyans and workers from Sub-Saharan Africa. The smiling Nobel Peace Prize President created more desperate refugees than any previous US head of state – including millions of Africans flooding Europe.

'Obamacare' , his imitation of an earlier Republican governor's health plan, was formulated by the private corporate health industry (private insurance, Big Pharma and the for-profit hospitals), to mandate enrollment and ensure triple digit profits with double digit increases in premiums. By the 2016 Presidential elections, ' Obama-care' was opposed by a 45%-43% margin of the American people. Obama's propagandists could not show any improvement of life expectancy or decrease in infant and maternal mortality as a result of his 'health care reform'. Indeed the opposite occurred among the marginalized working class in the old 'rust belt' and in the rural areas. This failure to show any significant health improvement for the masses of Americans is in stark contrast to LBJ's Medicare program of the 1960's, which continues to receive massive popular support.

Forty-years of anti welfare legislation and pro-business regimes paved the golden road for the election of Donald Trump

Trump and the Republicans are focusing on the tattered remnants of the social welfare system: Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security. The remains of FDR's New Deal and LBJ's Great Society -- are on the chopping block.

The moribund (but well-paid) labor leadership has been notable by its absence in the ensuing collapse of the social welfare state. The liberal left Democrats embraced the platitudinous Obama/Clinton team as the 'Great Society's' gravediggers, while wailing at Trump's allies for shoving the corpse of welfare state into its grave.

Conclusion

Over the past forty years the working class and the rump of what was once referred to as the ' labor movement' has contributed to the dismantling of the social welfare state, voting for ' strike-breaker' Reagan, ' workfare' Clinton, ' Wall Street crash' Bush, ' Wall Street savior' Obama and ' Trickle-down' Trump.

Gone are the days when social welfare and profitable wars raised US living standards and transformed American trade unions into an appendage of the Democratic Party and a handmaiden of Empire. The Democratic Party rescued capitalism from its collapse in the Great Depression, incorporated labor into the war economy and the post- colonial global empire, and resurrected Wall Street from the 'Great Financial Meltdown' of the 21 st century.

The war economy no longer fuels social welfare. The military-industrial complex has found new partners on Wall Street and among the globalized multi-national corporations. Profits rise while wages fall. Low paying compulsive labor (workfare) lopped off state transfers to the poor. Technology – IT, robotics, artificial intelligence and electronic gadgets – has created the most class polarized social system in history. The first trillionaire and multi-billionaire tax evaders rose on the backs of a miserable standing army of tens of millions of low-wage workers, stripped of rights and representation. State subsidies eliminate virtually all risk to capital. The end of social welfare coerced labor (including young mother with children) to seek insecure low-income employment while slashing education and health – cementing the feet of generations into poverty. Regional wars abroad have depleted the Treasury and robbed the country of productive investment. Economic imperialism exports profits, reversing the historic relation of the past.

Labor is left without compass or direction; it flails in all directions and falls deeper in the web of deception and demagogy. To escape from Reagan and the strike breakers, labor embraced the cheap-labor predator Clinton; black and white workers united to elect Obama who expelled millions of immigrant workers, pursued 7 wars, abandoned black workers and enriched the already filthy rich. Deception and demagogy of the labor-

Issac , December 11, 2017 at 11:01 pm GMT

"The military-industrial complex has found new partners on Wall Street and among the globalized multi-national corporations."

"The collaboration of liberals and unions in promoting endless wars opened the door to Trump's mirage of a stateless, tax-less, ruling class."

A mirage so real, it even has you convinced.

whyamihere , December 12, 2017 at 4:24 am GMT
If the welfare state in America was abolished, major American cities would burn to the ground. Anarchy would ensue, it would be magnitudes bigger than anything that happened in Ferguson or Baltimore. It would likely be simultaneous.

I think that's one of the only situations where preppers would actually live out what they've been prepping for (except for a natural disaster).

I've been thinking about this a little over the past few years after seeing the race riots. What exactly is the line between our society being civilized and breaking out into chaos. It's probably a lot thinner than most people think.

I don't know who said it but someone long ago said something along the lines of, "Democracy can only work until the people figure out they can vote for themselves generous benefits from the public treasury." We are definitely in this situation today. I wonder how long it can last.

Disordered , December 13, 2017 at 8:41 am GMT
While I agree with Petras's intent (notwithstanding several exaggerations and unnecessary conflations with, for example, racism), I don't agree so much with the method he proposes. I don't mind welfare and unions to a certain extent, but they are not going to save us unless there is full employment and large corporations that can afford to pay an all-union workforce. That happened during WW2, as only wartime demand and those pesky wage freezes solved the Depression, regardless of all the public works programs; while the postwar era benefited from the US becoming the world's creditor, meaning that capital could expand while labor participation did as well.

From then on, it is quite hard to achieve the same success after outsourcing and mechanization have happened all over the world. Both of these phenomena not only create displaced workers, but also displaced industries, meaning that it makes more sense to develop individual workfare (and even then, do it well, not the shoddy way it is done now) rather than giving away checks that probably will not be cashed for entrepreneurial purposes, and rather than giving away money to corrupt unions who depend on trusts to be able to pay for their benefits, while raising the cost of hiring that only encourages more outsourcing.

The amount of welfare given is not necessarily the main problem, the problem is doing it right for the people who truly need it, and efficiently – that is, with the least amount of waste lost between the chain of distribution, which should reach intended targets and not moochers.

Which inevitably means a sound tax system that targets unearned wealth and (to a lesser degree) foreign competition instead of national production, coupled with strict, yet devolved and simple government processes that benefit both business and individuals tired of bureaucracy, while keeping budgets balanced. Best of both worlds, and no military-industrial complex needed to drive up demand.

Wally , Website December 13, 2017 at 8:57 am GMT
"President Obama transferred 2 trillion dollars to the ten biggest bankers and swindlers on Wall Street " That's twice the amount that Bush gave them.
jacques sheete , December 13, 2017 at 10:52 am GMT

The American welfare state was created in 1935 and continued to develop through 1973. Since then, over a prolonged period, the capitalist class has been steadily dismantling the entire welfare state.

Wrong wrong wrong.

Corporations [now] are welfare recipients and the bigger they are, the more handouts they suck up, and welfare for them started before 1935. In fact, it started in America before there was a USA. I do not have time to elaborate, but what were the various companies such as the British East India Company and the Dutch West India Companies but state pampered, welfare based entities? ~200 years ago, Herbert Spencer, if memory serves, pointed out that the British East India Company couldn't make a profit even with all the special, government granted favors showered upon it.

Corporations not only continuously seek monopolies (with the aid and sanction of the state) but they steadily fine tune the welfare state for their benefit. In fact, in reality, welfare for prols and peasants wouldn't exist if it didn't act as a money conduit and ultimate profit center for the big money grubbers.

Den Lille Abe , December 13, 2017 at 11:09 am GMT
Well, the author kind of nails it. I remember from my childhood in the 50-60 ties in Scandinavia that the US was the ultimate goal in welfare. The country where you could make a good living with your two hands, get you kids to UNI, have a house, a telly ECT. It was not consumerism, it was the American dream, a chicken in every pot; we chewed imported American gum and dreamed.

In the 70-80 ties Scandinavia had a tremendous social and economic growth, EQUALLY distributed, an immense leap forward. In the middle of the 80 ties we were equal to the US in standards of living.

Since we have not looked at the US, unless in pity, as we have seen the decline of the general income, social wealth fall way behind our own.
The average US workers income has not increased since 90 figures adjusted for inflation. The Scandinavian workers income in the same period has almost quadrupled. And so has our societies.

The article is dismal reading, and evidence of the failings of the "unregulated" society, where the anything goes as long as you are wealthy.

wayfarer , December 13, 2017 at 1:01 pm GMT

Between the mid 1970's to the present (2017) labor laws, welfare rights and benefits and the construction of and subsidies for affordable housing have been gutted. 'Workfare' (under President 'Bill' Clinton) ended welfare for the poor and displaced workers. Meanwhile the shift to regressive taxation and the steadily declining real wages have increased corporate profits to an astronomical degree.

source: http://www.unz.com/jpetras/rise-and-decline-of-the-welfare-state/

What does Hollywood "elite" JAP and wannabe hack-stand-up-comic Sarah Silverman think about the class struggle and problems facing destitute Americans? "Qu'ils mangent de la bagels!", source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let_them_eat_cake

... ... ...

Anonymous , Disclaimer December 13, 2017 at 1:40 pm GMT
@Greg Fraser

Like the Pentagon. Americans still don't readily call this welfare, but they will eventually. Defense profiteers are unions in a sense, you're either in their club Or you're in the service industry that surrounds it.

Anonymous , Disclaimer December 13, 2017 at 2:43 pm GMT
As other commenters have pointed out, it's Petras curious choice of words that sometimes don't make too much sense. We can probably blame the maleable English language for that, but here it's too obvious. If you don't define a union, people might assume you're only talking about a bunch of meat cutters at Safeway.

The welfare state is alive and well for corporate America. Unions are still here – but they are defined by access and secrecy, you're either in the club or not.

The war on unions was successful first by co-option but mostly by the media. But what kind of analysis leaves out the role of the media in the American transformation? The success is mind blowing.

America has barely literate (white) middle aged males trained to spout incoherent Calvinistic weirdness: unabased hatred for the poor (or whoever they're told to hate) and a glorification of hedge fund managers as they get laid off, fired and foreclosed on, with a side of opiates.

There is hardly anything more tragic then seeing a web filled with progressives (management consultants) dedicated to disempowering, disabling and deligitimizing victims by claiming they are victims of biology, disease or a lack of an education rather than a system that issues violence while portending (with the best media money can buy) that they claim the higher ground.

animalogic , December 13, 2017 at 2:57 pm GMT
@Wally

""Democracy can only work until the people figure out they can vote for themselves generous benefits from the public treasury." We are definitely in this situation today."

Quite right: the 0.01% have worked it out & US democracy is a Theatre for the masses.

Reg Cæsar , December 13, 2017 at 3:08 pm GMT

They elected militarists and demagogues as their new presidents.

Wilson and FDR were much more militarist and demagogic than those that followed.

Reg Cæsar , December 13, 2017 at 3:20 pm GMT
@whyamihere

I don't know who said it but someone long ago said something along the lines of, "Democracy can only work until the people figure out they can vote for themselves generous benefits from the public treasury."

Some French aristocrat put it as, once the gates to the treasury have been breached, they can only be closed again with gunpowder. Anyone recognize the author?

phil , December 13, 2017 at 4:48 pm GMT
The author doesn't get it. What we have now IS the welfare state in an intensely diverse society. We have more transfer spending than ever before and Obamacare represents another huge entitlement.

Intellectuals continue to fantasize about the US becoming a Big Sweden, but Sweden has only been successful insofar as it has been a modest nation-state populated by ethnic Swedes. Intense diversity in a huge country with only the remnants of federalism results in massive non-consensual decision-making, fragmentation, increased inequality, and corruption.

HallParvey , December 13, 2017 at 4:57 pm GMT
@Anonymous

The welfare state is alive and well for corporate America. Unions are still here – but they are defined by access and secrecy, you're either in the club or not.

They are largely defined as Doctors, Lawyers, and University Professors who teach the first two. Of course they are not called unions. Access is via credentialing and licensing. Good Day

Anonymous , Disclaimer December 13, 2017 at 4:57 pm GMT
@Linda Green

Bernie Sanders, speaking on behalf of the MIC's welfare bird: "It is the airplane of the United States Air Force, Navy, and of NATO."

Elizabeth Warren, referring to Mossad's Estes Rockets: "The Israeli military has the right to attack Palestinian hospitals and schools in self defense"

Barack Obama, yukking it up with pop stars: "Two words for you: predator drones. You will never see it coming."

It's not the agitprop that confuses the sheep, it's whose blowhole it's coming out of (labled D or R for convenience) that gets them to bare their teeth and speak of poo.

Anonymous , Disclaimer December 13, 2017 at 5:54 pm GMT
@HallParvey

What came first, the credentialing or the idea that it is a necessary part of education? It certainly isn't an accurate indication of what people know or their general intelligence – although that myth has flourished. Good afternoon.

Logan , December 13, 2017 at 9:10 pm GMT
@Realist

For an interesting projection of what might happen in total civilizational collapse, I recommend the Dies the Fire series of novels by SM Stirling.

It has a science-fictiony setup in that all high-energy system (gunpowder, electricity, explosives, internal combustion, even high-energy steam engines) suddenly stop working. But I think it does a good job of extrapolating what would happen if suddenly the cities did not have food, water, power, etc.

Spoiler alert: It ain't pretty. Those who dream of a world without guns have not really thought it through.

Logan , December 13, 2017 at 9:19 pm GMT
@phil

It has been pointed out repeatedly that Sweden does very well relative to the USA. It has also been noted that people of Swedish ancestry in the USA do pretty well also. In fact considerably better than Swedes in Sweden

[Dec 15, 2017] FBI Edits To Clinton Exoneration Go Far Beyond What Was Previously Known; Comey, McCabe, Strzok Implicated Zero Hedge

Notable quotes:
"... In addition to Strzok's "gross negligence" --> "extremely careless" edit, McCabe's damage control team removed a key justification for elevating Clinton's actions to the standard of "gross negligence" - that being the " sheer volume " of classified material on Clinton's server. In the original draft, the "sheer volume" of material "supports an inference that the participants were grossly negligent in their handling of that information." ..."
"... It's also possible that the FBI, which was not allowed to inspect the DNC servers, was uncomfortable standing behind the conclusion of Russian hacking reached by cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike. ..."
"... Johnson's letter also questions an " insurance policy " referenced in a text message sent by demoted FBI investigator Peter Strzok to his mistress, FBI attorney Lisa Page, which read " I want to believe the path you threw out to consideration in Andy's office -- that there's no way he gets elected -- but I'm afraid we can't take that risk." It's like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you're 40...." ..."
"... One wonders if the "insurance policy" Strzok sent to Page on August 15, 2016 was in reference to the original counterintelligence operation launched against Trump of which Strzok became the lead investigator in "late July" 2016? Of note, Strzok reported directly to Bill Priestap - the director of Counterintelligence, who told James Comey not to inform congress that the FBI had launched a counterintelligence operation against then-candidate Trump, per Comey's March 20th testimony to the House Intelligence Committee. (h/t @TheLastRefuge2 ) ..."
"... That's not to say Hillary shouldn't have been prosecuted. But what we're seeing here looks like perfectly normal behavior once the decision has been made not to prosecute; get the statements to be consistent with the conclusion. In a bureaucracy, that requires a number of people to be involved. And it would necessarily include people who work for Hillary Clinton, since that's whose information is being discussed. ..."
"... And the stuff about how a foreign power might have, or might possibly have, accessed her emails is all BS too. We already know they weren't hacked, they were leaked. ..."
"... Maybe people who don't understand complicated organizations see something nefarious here, but nobody who does will. Nothing will come of this but some staged-for-TV dramatic pronouncements in the House, and on FOX News, and affiliated websites. There's nothing here. ..."
"... Debatable re. biggest story being kept quiet. The AWAN Brothers/Family is a Pakistani spy ring operating inside Congress for more than a decade, and we hear nothing. They had access to virtually everything in every important committee. They had access to the Congressional servers and all the emails. Biggest spy scandal in our nations hsitory, and........crickets. ..."
"... They have had a year to destroy the evidence. Why should the CIA controlled MSM report the truth? ..."
"... Precisely. That's actually a very good tool for decoding the Clintons and Obama. "You collaborated with Russia." Means "I collaborated with Saudi Arabia." It takes a little while and I haven't fully mastered it yet, but you can reverse alinsky-engineer their statements to figure out what they did. ..."
"... And get this, Flynn was set up! Yates had the transcript via the (illegal) FISA Court of warrant which relied on the Dirty Steele Dossier, when Flynn deviated from the transcript they charged him Lying to the FBI. Comey McCabe run around lying 24/7. Their is no fucking hope left! The swamp WINS ALWAYS. ..."
Dec 15, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com

FBI Edits To Clinton Exoneration Go Far Beyond What Was Previously Known; Comey, McCabe, Strzok Implicated Tyler Durden Dec 15, 2017 10:10 AM 0 SHARES detailed in a Thursday letter from committee chairman Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) to FBI Director Christopher Wray.

James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok

The letter reveals specific edits made by senior FBI agents when Deputy Director Andrew McCabe exchanged drafts of Comey's statement with senior FBI officials , including Peter Strzok, Strzok's direct supervisor , E.W. "Bill" Priestap, Jonathan Moffa, and an unnamed employee from the Office of General Counsel (identified by Newsweek as DOJ Deputy General Counsel Trisha Anderson) - in what was a coordinated conspiracy among top FBI brass to decriminalize Clinton's conduct by changing legal terms and phrases, omitting key information, and minimizing the role of the Intelligence Community in the email investigation. Doing so virtually assured that then-candidate Hillary Clinton would not be prosecuted.

Heather Samuelson and Heather Mills

Also mentioned in the letter are the immunity agreements granted by the FBI in June 2016 to top Obama advisor Cheryl Mills and aide Heather Samuelson - who helped decide which Clinton emails were destroyed before turning over the remaining 30,000 records to the State Department. Of note, the FBI agreed to destroy evidence on devices owned by Mills and Samuelson which were turned over in the investigation.

Sen. Johnson's letter reads:

According to documents produced by the FBI, FBI employees exchanged proposed edits to the draft statement. On May 6, Deputy Director McCabe forwarded the draft statement to other senior FBI employees, including Peter Strzok, E.W. Priestap, Jonathan Moffa, and an employee on the Office of General Counsel whose name has been redacted. While the precise dates of the edits and identities of the editors are not apparent from the documents, the edits appear to change the tone and substance of Director Comey's statement in at least three respects .

It was already known that Strzok - who was demoted to the FBI's HR department after anti-Trump text messages to his mistress were uncovered by an internal FBI watchdog - was responsible for downgrading the language regarding Clinton's conduct from the criminal charge of "gross negligence" to "extremely careless."

"Gross negligence" is a legal term of art in criminal law often associated with recklessness. According to Black's Law Dictionary, gross negligence is " A severe degree of negligence taken as reckless disregard ," and " Blatant indifference to one's legal duty, other's safety, or their rights ." "Extremely careless," on the other hand, is not a legal term of art.

According to an Attorney briefed on the matter, "extremely careless" is in fact a defense to "gross negligence": "What my client did was 'careless', maybe even 'extremely careless,' but it was not 'gross negligence' your honor." The FBI would have no option but to recommend prosecution if the phrase "gross negligence" had been left in.

18 U.S. Code § 793 "Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information" specifically uses the phrase "gross negligence." Had Comey used the phrase, he would have essentially declared that Hillary had broken the law.

In addition to Strzok's "gross negligence" --> "extremely careless" edit, McCabe's damage control team removed a key justification for elevating Clinton's actions to the standard of "gross negligence" - that being the " sheer volume " of classified material on Clinton's server. In the original draft, the "sheer volume" of material "supports an inference that the participants were grossly negligent in their handling of that information."

Also removed from Comey's statement were all references to the Intelligence Community's involvement in investigating Clinton's private email server.

Director Comey's original statement acknowledged the FBI had worked with its partners in the Intelligence Community to assess potential damage from Secretary Clinton's use of a private email server. The original statement read:

[W]e have done extensive work with the assistance of our colleagues elsewhere in the Intelligence Community to understand what indications there might be of compromise by hostile actors in connection with the private email operation.

The edited version removed the references to the intelligence community:

[W]e have done extensive work [removed] to understand what indications there might be of compromise by hostile actors in connection with the personal e-mail operation.

Furthermore, the FBI edited Comey's statement to downgrade the probability that Clinton's server was hacked by hostile actors, changing their language from "reasonably likely" to "possible" - an edit which eliminated yet another justification for the phrase "Gross negligence." To put it another way, "reasonably likely" means the probability of a hack due to Clinton's negligence is above 50 percent, whereas the hack simply being "possible" is any probability above zero.

It's also possible that the FBI, which was not allowed to inspect the DNC servers, was uncomfortable standing behind the conclusion of Russian hacking reached by cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike.

The original draft read:

Given the combination of factors, we assess it is reasonably likely that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's private email account."

The edited version from Director Comey's July 5 statement read:

Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's personal e-mail account.

Johnson's letter also questions an " insurance policy " referenced in a text message sent by demoted FBI investigator Peter Strzok to his mistress, FBI attorney Lisa Page, which read " I want to believe the path you threw out to consideration in Andy's office -- that there's no way he gets elected -- but I'm afraid we can't take that risk." It's like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you're 40...."

One wonders if the "insurance policy" Strzok sent to Page on August 15, 2016 was in reference to the original counterintelligence operation launched against Trump of which Strzok became the lead investigator in "late July" 2016? Of note, Strzok reported directly to Bill Priestap - the director of Counterintelligence, who told James Comey not to inform congress that the FBI had launched a counterintelligence operation against then-candidate Trump, per Comey's March 20th testimony to the House Intelligence Committee. (h/t @TheLastRefuge2 )

Transcript , James Comey Testimony to House Intel Committee, March 20, 2016

The letter from the Senate Committee concludes; "the edits to Director Comey's public statement, made months prior to the conclusion of the FBI's investigation of Secretary Clinton's conduct, had a significant impact on the FBI's public evaluation of the implications of her actions . This effort, seen in the light of the personal animus toward then-candidate Trump by senior FBI agents leading the Clinton investigation and their apparent desire to create an "insurance policy" against Mr. Trump's election, raise profound questions about the FBI's role and possible interference in the 2016y presidential election and the role of the same agents in Special Counsel Mueller's investigation of President Trump ."

Johnson then asks the FBI to answer six questions:

  1. Please provide the names of the Department of Justice (DOJ) employees who comprised the "mid-year review team" during the FBI's investigation of Secretary Clinton's use of a private email server.
  2. Please identify all FBI, DOJ, or other federal employees who edited or reviewed Director Comey's July 5, 2016 statement . Please identify which individual made the marked changes in the documents produced to the Committee.
  3. Please identify which FBI employee repeatedly changed the language in the final draft statement that described Secretary Clinton's behavior as "grossly negligent" to "extremely careless. " What evidence supported these changes?
  4. Please identify which FBI employee edited the draft statement to remove the reference to the Intelligence Community . On what basis was this change made?
  5. Please identify which FBI employee edited the draft statement to downgrade the FBI's assessment that it was "reasonably likely" that hostile actors had gained access to Secretary Clinton's private email account to merely that than [sic] intrusion was "possible." What evidence supported these changes?
  6. Please provide unredacted copies of the drafts of Director Comey's statement, including comment bubbles , and explain the basis for the redactions produced to date.

We are increasingly faced with the fact that the FBI's top ranks have been filled with political ideologues who helped Hillary Clinton while pursuing the Russian influence narrative against Trump (perhaps as the "insurance" Strzok spoke of). Meanwhile, "hands off" recused Attorney General Jeff Sessions and assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein don't seem very excited to explore the issues with a second Special Counsel. As such, we are now almost entirely reliant on the various Committees of congress to pursue justice in this matter. Perhaps when their investigations have concluded, President Trump will feel he has the political and legal ammunition to truly clean house at the nation's swampiest agencies.

swmnguy -> 11b40 , Dec 15, 2017 4:42 PM

All I see in this story is that the FBI edits their work to make sure the terminology is consistent throughout. This is not a smoking gun of anything, except bureaucratic procedure one would find anywhere any legal documents are prepared.

That's not to say Hillary shouldn't have been prosecuted. But what we're seeing here looks like perfectly normal behavior once the decision has been made not to prosecute; get the statements to be consistent with the conclusion. In a bureaucracy, that requires a number of people to be involved. And it would necessarily include people who work for Hillary Clinton, since that's whose information is being discussed.

Now, if Hillary hadn't been such an arrogant bitch, we wouldn't be having this conversation. If she had just take the locked-down Android of iOS phone they issued her, instead of having to forward everything to herself so she could use her stupid Blackberry (which can't be locked down to State Dep't. specs), everything would have been both hunky and dory.

And the stuff about how a foreign power might have, or might possibly have, accessed her emails is all BS too. We already know they weren't hacked, they were leaked.

Maybe people who don't understand complicated organizations see something nefarious here, but nobody who does will. Nothing will come of this but some staged-for-TV dramatic pronouncements in the House, and on FOX News, and affiliated websites. There's nothing here.

youarelost , Dec 15, 2017 8:59 AM

What did Obozo know and when did he know it

E.F. Mutton -> youarelost , Dec 15, 2017 9:04 AM

False Flag time - distraction needed ASAP

Bigly -> E.F. Mutton , Dec 15, 2017 9:14 AM

We need to look for this as there are a LOT of people who need to be indicted and boobus americanus needs distraction.

My concern is that there are not enough non-corrupts there to handle and process the swamp as Trump did not fire and replace them 10 months ago.

shitshitshit -> Bigly , Dec 15, 2017 9:16 AM

I wonder how high will this little game go...

That obongo of all crooks is involved is a sure fact, but I'd like to see how many remaining defenders of the cause are still motivated to lose everything for this thing...

In other terms, what are the defection rates in the dem party, because now this must be an avalanche.

cheka -> eclectic syncretist , Dec 15, 2017 9:45 AM

applied neo-bolshevism

macholatte -> cheka , Dec 15, 2017 10:23 AM

I am tired of this shit. Aren't you?

Please, EVERYONE with a Twitter account send this message Every Day (tell your friends on facebook):

Mr. President, the time to purge the Obama-Clinton holdovers has long passed. Please get rid of them at once. Make your base happy. Fire 100+ from DOJ - State - FBI. Hire William K. Black as Special Prosecutor

send it to:

@realDonaldTrump
@PressSec
@KellyannePolls
@WhiteHouse


Does anybody know how to start an online petition?
Let's make some NOISE!!

Bay of Pigs -> macholatte , Dec 15, 2017 12:02 PM

Sadly, I don't see this story being reported anywhere this morning. Only the biggest scandal in American history. WTF?

11b40 -> Bay of Pigs , Dec 15, 2017 1:22 PM

Debatable re. biggest story being kept quiet. The AWAN Brothers/Family is a Pakistani spy ring operating inside Congress for more than a decade, and we hear nothing. They had access to virtually everything in every important committee. They had access to the Congressional servers and all the emails. Biggest spy scandal in our nations hsitory, and........crickets.

Of course, they may all be related, since Debbie Wasserman-Shits brought them in and set them up, then intertwined their work in Congress with their work for the DNC.

grizfish -> Bay of Pigs , Dec 15, 2017 1:53 PM

They have had a year to destroy the evidence. Why should the CIA controlled MSM report the truth? It's just like slick willy. Deny. Deny. Deny.

ThePhantom -> grizfish , Dec 15, 2017 3:35 PM

The Media is "in on it" and just as culpabale.... everyone's fighting for their lives.

grizfish -> Bay of Pigs , Dec 15, 2017 4:29 PM

Just more theater. Throwing a bone to the few citizens who think for themselves. Giving us false hope the US legal system isn't corrupt. This will never be prosecuted, because the deep state remains in control. They've had a year to destroy the incriminating evidence.

Lanka -> macholatte , Dec 15, 2017 2:27 PM

Tillerson is extremely incompetent in housecleaning. He needs to be replaced by Fred Kruger, Esq.

TerminalDebt -> cheka , Dec 15, 2017 12:43 PM

I guess we know now who the leaker was at the FBI and on the Mule's team

Joe Davola -> TerminalDebt , Dec 15, 2017 1:27 PM

I'm guessing the number of leakers is bigger than 1

eclectic syncretist -> eclectic syncretist , Dec 15, 2017 10:01 AM

What's next? The FBI had Seth Rich killed? Is that why Sessions and everyone else appears paralyzed? How deep does this rabbit hole go?

Overfed -> eclectic syncretist , Dec 15, 2017 10:58 AM

I'm sure that Chaffets and Gowdy will hand down some very stern reprimands.

Mr. Universe -> Overfed , Dec 15, 2017 11:24 AM

Ryan and his buddies in Congress will make strained faces (as if taking a dump) and wring their hands saying they must hire a "Special" Investigator to cover up this mess.

Duane Norman -> Mr. Universe , Dec 15, 2017 11:31 AM

http://fmshooter.com/claiming-fbis-reputation-integrity-not-tatters-comp...

Yeah, but it won't make a difference.

Gardentoolnumber5 -> Overfed , Dec 15, 2017 3:12 PM

Chaffets left Congress because he couldn't get any more help from Trump's DOJ than he did from Obama's. Sad, as he was one of the good guys. imo

ThePhantom -> eclectic syncretist , Dec 15, 2017 3:38 PM

did you notice the story yesterday about "Russian hacker admits putin ordered him to steal dnc emials" ? someones worried about it....

grizfish -> ThePhantom , Dec 15, 2017 4:38 PM

They tweet that crap all the time. Usually just a repeat with different names, but always blaming a Ruskie. About every 6 months they hit on a twist in the wording that causes it to go viral.

Bush Baby -> eclectic syncretist , Dec 15, 2017 11:37 AM

Before Trump was elected , I thought the only way to get our country back was through a Military Coup, but it appears there may be some light at the end of the tunnel.

eclectic syncretist -> Bush Baby , Dec 15, 2017 11:57 AM

I wonder if that light is coming from the soon to be gaping hole in the FBI's asshole when the extent of this political activism by the agency eventually seeps into the public conciousness.

rccalhoun -> eclectic syncretist , Dec 15, 2017 12:43 PM

you can't clean up a mess of this magnitude. fire everyone in washington---senator, representative, fbi, cia, nsa ,etc and start over---has NO chance of happenning

the only hope for a non violent solution is that a true leader emerges that every decent person can rally behind and respect, honor and dignity become the norm. unfortunately, corruption has become a culture and i don't know if it can be eradicated

Lanka -> rccalhoun , Dec 15, 2017 2:31 PM

Just expose the Congress, McCabe, Lindsey, McCabe, Clinton, all Dem judges, Media, Hollywood, local government dems as pedos; that will half-drain the swamp.

shankster -> eclectic syncretist , Dec 15, 2017 4:11 PM

Does the US public have a consciousness?

lew1024 -> Bush Baby , Dec 15, 2017 2:54 PM

If Trump gets the swamp cleaned without a military coup, he will be one of our greatest Presidents. There will be people who hate that more than they hate being in jail.

checkessential -> BennyBoy , Dec 15, 2017 1:00 PM

And they say President Trump obstructed justice for simply asking Comey if he could drop the Michael Flynn matter. Wow.

TommyD88 -> checkessential , Dec 15, 2017 1:09 PM

Alinsky 101: Accuse your opponent of that which you yourself are doing.

Overfed -> redmudhooch , Dec 15, 2017 2:47 PM

Getting rid of the FBI (and all other FLEAs) would be a good thing for all of us.

A Sentinel -> TommyD88 , Dec 15, 2017 2:13 PM

Precisely. That's actually a very good tool for decoding the Clintons and Obama. "You collaborated with Russia." Means "I collaborated with Saudi Arabia." It takes a little while and I haven't fully mastered it yet, but you can reverse alinsky-engineer their statements to figure out what they did.

lurker since 2012 -> checkessential , Dec 15, 2017 4:09 PM

And get this, Flynn was set up! Yates had the transcript via the (illegal) FISA Court of warrant which relied on the Dirty Steele Dossier, when Flynn deviated from the transcript they charged him Lying to the FBI. Comey McCabe run around lying 24/7. Their is no fucking hope left! The swamp WINS ALWAYS.

Ramesees -> BaBaBouy , Dec 15, 2017 9:31 AM

I have - it's was NBC Nightly News - they spent time on the damning emails from Strozk. Maybe 2-3 minutes. Normal news segment time. Surprised the hell out of me.

A Sentinel -> Ramesees , Dec 15, 2017 2:14 PM

Someone probably got fired for that.

ThePhantom -> Ramesees , Dec 15, 2017 3:41 PM

the "MSM" needs to cover their own asses ...like "an insurance policy" just in case the truth comes out... best to be seen reporting on the REAL issue at least for a couple minutes..

[Dec 14, 2017] Was Peter Strzok the principal FBI liaison to CIA Director John Brennan?

Highly recommended!
That question arise during recent senate session of Rosenstein
It's been suggested that Strzok's job as counterintelligence deputy would have made him the principal FBI liaison to CIA Director Brennan.
Notable quotes:
"... Neither the New York Times nor the Washington Post paid any price for their promotion of the invasion and destruction of Iraq. They might not get off as easy this time. One can hope. ..."
"... I can add one more. It's been suggested that Strzok's job as counterintelligence deputy would have made him the principal FBI liaison to CIA Director Brennan. At least this point was made explicitly in a recent LarouchePAC Live broadcast on Youtube (perhaps Will Wertz's presentation at last Saturday's Manhattan Project event) though I don't know what their evidence is. So we can ask: Was Peter Strzok the principal FBI liaison to CIA Director John Brennan? ..."
consortiumnews.com

Zachary Smith , December 13, 2017 at 11:00 pm

I've been seeing all sorts of places where this fellow Strzok's name pops up. Things like a FISA judge recusing himself. Things like him possibly arranging things so Hillary was able to continue her run for President. At a super-right-wing site I found these "questions".

  1. Did Peter Strzok receive the Steele Dossier from Hillary Clinton on July 4th when he interviewed her?
  2. If Hillary didn't give Strzok the dossier, who did?
  3. Did Peter Strzok put together the FISA Court material, which included the Steele Dossier?
  4. Did Peter Strzok go to the FISA Court and ask for the surveillance of the Trump team based on the Steele Dossier?
  5. Did James Comey assign Peter Strzok to the Clinton email case?
  6. Did James Comey assign Peter Strzok to the Trump surveillance case?
  7. Did James Comey know that Peter Strzok was compromised when he sent him to interview Michael Flynn (where surveillance was used to interview him based on the Steele Dossier that was presented to the FISA Court that Strzok put together?)

Neither the New York Times nor the Washington Post paid any price for their promotion of the invasion and destruction of Iraq. They might not get off as easy this time. One can hope.

Steven A , December 14, 2017 at 8:36 am

I can add one more. It's been suggested that Strzok's job as counterintelligence deputy would have made him the principal FBI liaison to CIA Director Brennan. At least this point was made explicitly in a recent LarouchePAC Live broadcast on Youtube (perhaps Will Wertz's presentation at last Saturday's Manhattan Project event) though I don't know what their evidence is. So we can ask: Was Peter Strzok the principal FBI liaison to CIA Director John Brennan?

[Dec 14, 2017] The Foundering Russia-gate 'Scandal' Consortiumnews

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The disclosure of fiercely anti-Trump text messages between two romantically involved senior FBI officials who played key roles in the early Russia-gate inquiry has turned the supposed Russian-election-meddling "scandal" into its own scandal, by providing evidence that some government investigators saw it as their duty to block or destroy Donald Trump's presidency. ..."
"... As much as the U.S. mainstream media has mocked the idea that an American "deep state" exists and that it has maneuvered to remove Trump from office, the text messages between senior FBI counterintelligence official Peter Strzok and senior FBI lawyer Lisa Page reveal how two high-ranking members of the government's intelligence/legal bureaucracy saw their role as protecting the United States from an election that might elevate to the presidency someone as unfit as Trump. ..."
"... In the text messages, Strzok also expressed visceral contempt for working-class Trump voters, for instance, writing on Aug. 26, 2016, "Just went to a southern Virginia Walmart. I could SMELL the Trump support. it's scary real down here." ..."
"... Another text message suggested that other senior government officials – alarmed at the possibility of a Trump presidency – joined the discussion. In an apparent reference to an August 2016 meeting with FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, Strzok wrote to Page on Aug. 15, 2016, "I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy's office -- that there's no way he gets elected -- but I'm afraid we can't take that risk." ..."
"... The scheme involved having some Democratic electors vote for former Secretary of State Colin Powell (which did happen), making him the third-place vote-getter in the Electoral College and thus eligible for selection by the House. But the plan fizzled when enough of Trump's electors stayed loyal to their candidate to officially make him President. ..."
"... After that, Trump's opponents turned to the Russia-gate investigation as the vehicle to create the conditions for somehow nullifying the election, impeaching Trump, or at least weakening him sufficiently so he could not take steps to improve relations with Russia. ..."
"... And, the new revelations of high-level FBI bias puts Clapper's statement about "hand-picked" analysts in sharper perspective, since any intelligence veteran will tell you that if you hand-pick the analysts you are effectively hand-picking the analysis. ..."
"... Although it has not yet been spelled out exactly what role Strzok and Page may have had in the Jan. 6 report, I was told by one source that Strzok had a direct hand in writing it. Whether that is indeed the case, Strzok, as a senior FBI counterintelligence official, would almost surely have had input into the selection of the FBI analysts and thus into the substance of the report itself. [For challenges from intelligence experts to the Jan. 6 report, see Consortiumnews.com's " More Holes in the Russia-gate Narrative. "] ..."
"... If the FBI contributors to the Jan. 6 report shared Strzok's contempt for Trump, it could explain why claims from an unverified dossier of Democratic-financed "dirt" on Trump, including salacious charges that Russian intelligence operatives videotaped Trump being urinated on by prostitutes in a five-star Moscow hotel, was added as a classified appendix to the report and presented personally to President-elect Trump. ..."
"... That discovery helped ensnare another senior Justice Department official, Associate Attorney General Bruce Ohr, who talked with Steele during the campaign and had a post-election meeting with Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson. Recently, Simpson has acknowledged that Ohr's wife, Nellie Ohr, was hired by Fusion GPS last year to investigate Trump. ..."
"... But the story soon collapsed when it turned out that the date on the email was actually Sept. 14, 2016, i.e., the day after ..."
"... Yet, despite the cascade of errors and grudging corrections, including some belated admissions that there was no "17-intelligence-agency consensus" on Russian "hacking" – The New York Times made a preemptive strike against the new documentary evidence that the Russia-gate investigation was riddled with conflicts of interest. ..."
"... Pursuing the truth can be a fascinating hobby, that leads to a person awakening. Make it interesting, awaken your friend's curiosity. ..."
"... Weeks before the 2016 election, Peter Strzok's FBI team agreed to pay former MI6 agent and Fusion GPS operative Christopher Steele $50,000 if he could verify the claims contained within the dossier – which relied on the cooperation of two senior Kremlin officials. (One more time for you, Walter Devine -- "if he [Steele] could verify the claims"). When Steele was unable to verify the claims in the dossier, the FBI wouldn't pay him according to the New York Times. ..."
"... Despite the fact that Steele was not paid by the FBI for the dossier, Peter Strzok used it to launch a counterintelligence investigation into President Trump's team. Steele was ultimately paid $168,000 by Fusion GPS to assemble the dossier. ..."
"... Of interest to me is why the Republicans did not hammer Hillary for placing an ambassador in what was essentially a CIA compound in the first place. My guess and I can only guess is that they no objection to its being a ratline to ship Libya's stolen armaments to head-chopping jihadists (with USA blessing) fighting Assad. So to raise the issue of why putting an ambassador there would have opened the door to sensitive questions -- if the press would ask them, of course. ..."
"... That's the real Benghazi story the MSM won't talk about. Although I suspect the armaments were given to the head choppers by the CIA, and then they rebelled at having them transferred to the head choppers in Syria after they had succeeded in killing Ghaddafi. ..."
"... "Madame Secretary, WHY was it necessary to destroy Libya?" No republican asked THAT question. ..."
"... Hello Skip, nice to read your good comments again and to exchange info. Here is an article which talks about the weapons ratline in Syria. Within four days, the powerful anti-tank missiles that CIA bought in Bulgaria and (supposedly) delivered to "moderate" rebels, ended up in ISIS hands. The only problem with the article's narrative is that it is still drawing the official line that the lack of oversight is to blame for such, whilst it was clearly a deliberate action to supply weapons to ISIS wrapped up in plausible deniability of passing them through the hands of some poor inept souls serving as intermediaries. ..."
"... Starting a grand-scale investigation on the basis of allegations of conspiracy with another government and treason is rather dubious when these allegations from dirty campaign tactics are not based on any tangible facts. It is true that the Muller team does not leak as much to the press as the intelligence services did previously. This investigation still plays an important role for the media propaganda that still pushes the Russiagate conspiracy theory even though there had never been any factual basis for it and no evidence has been found in over a year. Since there is still this investigation is going on, they can use it for justifying their daily minutes of hate against Russia, their calls for censorship and denounciation of any political position that diverges from the neoconservative and neoliberal ideology. ..."
"... the most dubious thing was, of course, the lobbying related to a UN security council resolution vote, but that might at best hint at colluding with Israel, it certainly does not fit the Russiagate conspiracy theory ..."
"... So, if we judge the Muller investigation by its results, it is not going anywhere. Obviously, that is what should be expected when a commission is set up for investigating a conspiracy theory for which there had never been any evidence to begin with. I suppose the result would be similar if the Illuminati, the Elders of Zion, or reptiloids were officially investigated. ..."
"... It seems that the Muller team wants to delay that moment when they have to confess that the conspiracy theory has broken down, but that won't necessarily make it easier, either. ..."
"... Think you nailed it. The bankster regime changers already tried once to structurally adjust Russia into being a US puppet state in the 90s under Clinton. Russia was robbed blind while Yeltzin drank himself into a stupor. Putin is the one who put a stop to the looting. That is his crime against the western oligarchs and why he is enemy #1. ..."
"... There's no 'lack of discussion about what they have uncovered' which has basically amounted to a pile of dirt. Have not read from the VIPS and William Binney? Uncovering shady business with oligarchs doesn't show collusion, but the dossier oppo does, but it's business as usual. Denying the FBI-DNC server subpoena was odd don't you think? ..."
"... "Fusion GPS appears to be in the center of a web of corruption. Who hired Fusion GPS to ramp up its opposition research against Trump? Hillary Clinton and the DNC. the wife of Justice Department official Bruce G. Ohr worked for Fusion GPS during the 2016 presidential election. Nellie Ohr is listed as working for the CIA's Open Source Works department in a 2010 DOJ report." Look how the CIA, FBI, and DNC have found each other and made a friendship forever. ..."
"... Also, do you personally have any concern about the murder of Seth Rich? -- Donna Brazil has become afraid of being Seth-Riched. How come? What kind of scum the Democratic apparatus has become? -- Guess Tony Podesta and Bill Clinton and madame "we came, we saw, he died ha, ha, ha " are the composite face of the Democratic Party today. ..."
"... Have at it Walter. What exactly have they uncovered? The "process" lost credibility long ago. The "intelligence" report of January 6th was garbage and it's been all downhill since. ..."
"... Obama's expulsion of the Russian diplomats after Trump's election, with no reason based on fact/danger to the USA gave a good start to the Russophobia encouraged by the Clinton losers and leading on to the ludicrous extreme situation still going on. ..."
"... Since the whole Guccifer 2.0 operation appears to be an attempt to falsely smear WikiLeaks as a Russian agent (by publicly claiming to be a hacker associated with WikiLeaks and then being "caught" releasing documents (the ones of June 15, 2016) with "Russian fingerprints"), perhaps his uploading files (Sept 13, 2016) to a server with (past) ties to someone associated with WikiLeaks (Kim Dot Com) would have been part of the same effort. ..."
"... Such a reversal of evidence and conclusion bespeaks deliberate deception. The motive is unclear, as the failed Newsweek is said to have been revived in 2013 by a Korean-American Christian fundamentalist David Jang formerly of Moon's Unification Church, whose followers consider him the Second Coming of JC, according to the linked source. http://www.motherjones.com/media/2014/03/newsweek-ibt-olivet-david-jang/ ..."
"... It's been a year and a half since Hillary Clinton first accused Donald Trump of being a Putin puppet and in collusion with the Kremlin. Any fool should be able to understand that if there existed any real evidence to support this accusation the world would have seen it under banner headlines long ago. ..."
"... Thank you for your spot-on analysis! The motives of the deep state – including FBI operatives, NY Times and WAPO – is crystal clear. They do not want Trump to be president, and are determined to either remove him or handcuff him indefinitely. But why? Why has the establishment gone crazy? Is it simply political, or something deeper and darker? ..."
"... The real "deep" reason is the PNAC plot to make sure that the USA remains the sole super power that can impose its will anywhere in the world. Trump's campaign position of seeking detente with Russia would have led us into a multi-polar world giving Russia a sphere of influence. That is unacceptable to the empire. ..."
"... RussiaGate is an attempt to remove Trump from power, or at a minimum make it impossible for him to seek detente. I am no Trump apologist, but I do think our only hope for a future in this nuclear age is to seek peace and cooperation in a multi-polar world that respects national sovereignty and the rule of law. I suspect Trump will continue to be brought to heel, with or without the success of RussiaGate. And there is always the JFK solution as a last resort. ..."
"... Where is William Binney's "Thin String" signals intelligence (SIGINT) software when it's needed? Wouldn't it be lovely to focus it on the communications of our own government? Binney says applying it after 9/11 to the pre-9/11 communications streams did successfully predict the 9/11 attacks. If only we had stored all communications of government officials dating back to . hey, let's say 1774 or so, what truths might we now know, and what proofs might we now have? What would FDR's communications prior to Pearl Harbor reveal? What about the JFK, Bobby Kennedy, Martin Luther King, and Malcolm X assassinations? ..."
Dec 14, 2017 | consortiumnews.com

Exclusive: Taking on water from revealed FBI conflicts of interest, the foundering Russia-gate probe – and its mainstream media promoters – are resorting to insults against people who note the listing ship, writes Robert Parry.

By Robert Parry

The disclosure of fiercely anti-Trump text messages between two romantically involved senior FBI officials who played key roles in the early Russia-gate inquiry has turned the supposed Russian-election-meddling "scandal" into its own scandal, by providing evidence that some government investigators saw it as their duty to block or destroy Donald Trump's presidency.

Peter Strzok, who served as a Deputy Assistant Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, second in command of counterintelligence.

As much as the U.S. mainstream media has mocked the idea that an American "deep state" exists and that it has maneuvered to remove Trump from office, the text messages between senior FBI counterintelligence official Peter Strzok and senior FBI lawyer Lisa Page reveal how two high-ranking members of the government's intelligence/legal bureaucracy saw their role as protecting the United States from an election that might elevate to the presidency someone as unfit as Trump.

In one Aug. 6, 2016 text exchange, Page told Strzok: "Maybe you're meant to stay where you are because you're meant to protect the country from that menace." At the end of that text, she sent Strzok a link to a David Brooks column in The New York Times, which concludes with the clarion call: "There comes a time when neutrality and laying low become dishonorable. If you're not in revolt, you're in cahoots. When this period and your name are mentioned, decades hence, your grandkids will look away in shame."

Apparently after reading that stirring advice, Strzok replied, "And of course I'll try and approach it that way. I just know it will be tough at times. I can protect our country at many levels, not sure if that helps."

At a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, criticized Strzok's boast that "I can protect our country at many levels." Jordan said: "this guy thought he was super-agent James Bond at the FBI [deciding] there's no way we can let the American people make Donald Trump the next president."

In the text messages, Strzok also expressed visceral contempt for working-class Trump voters, for instance, writing on Aug. 26, 2016, "Just went to a southern Virginia Walmart. I could SMELL the Trump support. it's scary real down here."

Another text message suggested that other senior government officials – alarmed at the possibility of a Trump presidency – joined the discussion. In an apparent reference to an August 2016 meeting with FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, Strzok wrote to Page on Aug. 15, 2016, "I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy's office -- that there's no way he gets elected -- but I'm afraid we can't take that risk."

Strzok added, "It's like an insurance policy in the unlikely event that you die before you're 40."

It's unclear what strategy these FBI officials were contemplating to ensure Trump's defeat, but the comments mesh with what an intelligence source told me after the 2016 election, that there was a plan among senior Obama administration officials to use the allegations about Russian meddling to block Trump's momentum with the voters and -- if elected -- to persuade members of the Electoral College to deny Trump a majority of votes and thus throw the selection of a new president into the House of Representatives under the rules of the Twelfth Amendment .

The scheme involved having some Democratic electors vote for former Secretary of State Colin Powell (which did happen), making him the third-place vote-getter in the Electoral College and thus eligible for selection by the House. But the plan fizzled when enough of Trump's electors stayed loyal to their candidate to officially make him President.

After that, Trump's opponents turned to the Russia-gate investigation as the vehicle to create the conditions for somehow nullifying the election, impeaching Trump, or at least weakening him sufficiently so he could not take steps to improve relations with Russia.

In one of her text messages to Strzok, Page made reference to a possible Watergate-style ouster of Trump, writing: "Bought all the president's men. Figure I needed to brush up on watergate."

As a key feature in this oust-Trump effort, Democrats have continued to lie by claiming that "all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies concurred" in the assessment that Russia hacked the Democratic emails last year on orders from President Vladimir Putin and then slipped them to WikiLeaks to undermine Hillary Clinton's campaign.

That canard was used in the early months of the Russia-gate imbroglio to silence any skepticism about the "hacking" accusation, and the falsehood was repeated again by a Democratic congressman during Wednesday's hearing of the House Judiciary Committee.

But the "consensus" claim was never true. In May 2017 testimony , President Obama's Director of National Intelligence James Clapper acknowledged that the Jan. 6 "Intelligence Community Assessment" was put together by "hand-picked" analysts from only three agencies: the CIA, FBI and National Security Agency.

Biased at the Creation

And, the new revelations of high-level FBI bias puts Clapper's statement about "hand-picked" analysts in sharper perspective, since any intelligence veteran will tell you that if you hand-pick the analysts you are effectively hand-picking the analysis.

Although it has not yet been spelled out exactly what role Strzok and Page may have had in the Jan. 6 report, I was told by one source that Strzok had a direct hand in writing it. Whether that is indeed the case, Strzok, as a senior FBI counterintelligence official, would almost surely have had input into the selection of the FBI analysts and thus into the substance of the report itself. [For challenges from intelligence experts to the Jan. 6 report, see Consortiumnews.com's " More Holes in the Russia-gate Narrative. "]

If the FBI contributors to the Jan. 6 report shared Strzok's contempt for Trump, it could explain why claims from an unverified dossier of Democratic-financed "dirt" on Trump, including salacious charges that Russian intelligence operatives videotaped Trump being urinated on by prostitutes in a five-star Moscow hotel, was added as a classified appendix to the report and presented personally to President-elect Trump.

Though Democrats and the Clinton campaign long denied financing the dossier – prepared by ex-British spy Christopher Steele who claimed to rely on second- and third-hand information from anonymous Russian contacts – it was revealed in October 2017 that the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign shared in the costs, with the payments going to the "oppo" research firm, Fusion GPS, through the Democrats' law firm, Perkins Coie.

That discovery helped ensnare another senior Justice Department official, Associate Attorney General Bruce Ohr, who talked with Steele during the campaign and had a post-election meeting with Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson. Recently, Simpson has acknowledged that Ohr's wife, Nellie Ohr, was hired by Fusion GPS last year to investigate Trump.

Bruce Ohr has since been demoted and Strzok was quietly removed from the Russia-gate investigation last July although the reasons for these moves were not publicly explained at the time.

Still, the drive for "another Watergate" to oust an unpopular – and to many insiders, unfit – President remains at the center of the thinking among the top mainstream news organizations as they have scrambled for Russia-gate "scoops" over the past year even at the cost of making serious reporting errors .

For instance, last Friday, CNN -- and then CBS News and MSNBC -- trumpeted an email supposedly sent from someone named Michael J. Erickson on Sept. 4, 2016, to Donald Trump Jr. that involved WikiLeaks offering the Trump campaign pre-publication access to purloined Democratic National Committee emails that WikiLeaks published on Sept. 13, nine days later.

Grasping for Confirmation

Since the Jan. 6 report alleged that WikiLeaks received the "hacked" emails from Russia -- a claim that WikiLeaks and Russia deny -- the story seemed to finally tie together the notion that the Trump campaign had at least indirectly colluded with Russia.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speaking with supporters at a campaign rally at Carl Hayden High School in Phoenix, Arizona. March 21, 2016. (Photo by Gage Skidmore)

This new "evidence" spread like wildfire across social media. As The Intercept's Glenn Greenwald wrote in an article critical of the media's performance, some Russia-gate enthusiasts heralded the revelation with graphics of cannons booming and nukes exploding.

But the story soon collapsed when it turned out that the date on the email was actually Sept. 14, 2016, i.e., the day after WikiLeaks released the batch of DNC emails, not Sept. 4. It appeared that "Erickson" – whoever he was – had simply alerted the Trump campaign to the public existence of the WikiLeaks disclosure.

Greenwald noted , "So numerous are the false stories about Russia and Trump over the last year that I literally cannot list them all."

Yet, despite the cascade of errors and grudging corrections, including some belated admissions that there was no "17-intelligence-agency consensus" on Russian "hacking" – The New York Times made a preemptive strike against the new documentary evidence that the Russia-gate investigation was riddled with conflicts of interest.

The Times' lead editorial on Wednesday mocked reporters at Fox News for living in an "alternate universe" where the Russia-gate "investigation is 'illegitimate and corrupt,' or so says Gregg Jarrett, a legal analyst who appears regularly on [Sean] Hannity's nightly exercise in presidential ego-stroking."

Though briefly mentioning the situation with Strzok's text messages, the Times offered no details or context for the concerns, instead just heaping ridicule on anyone who questions the Russia-gate narrative.

"To put it mildly, this is insane," the Times declared. "The primary purpose of Mr. Mueller's investigation is not to take down Mr. Trump. It's to protect America's national security and the integrity of its elections by determining whether a presidential campaign conspired with a foreign adversary to influence the 2016 election – a proposition that grows more plausible every day."

The Times fumed that "roughly three-quarters of Republicans still refuse to accept that Russia interfered in the 2016 election – a fact that is glaringly obvious to everyone else, including the nation's intelligence community." (There we go again with the false suggestion of a consensus within the intelligence community.)

The Times also took to task Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, for seeking "a Special Counsel to investigate ALL THINGS 2016 – not just Trump and Russia." The Times insisted that "None of these attacks or insinuations are grounded in good faith."

But what are the Times editors so afraid of? As much as they try to insult and intimidate anyone who demands serious evidence about the Russia-gate allegations, why shouldn't the American people be informed about how Washington insiders manipulate elite opinion in pursuit of reversing "mistaken" judgments by the unwashed masses?

Do the Times editors really believe in democracy – a process that historically has had its share of warts and mistakes – or are they just elitists who think they know best and turn away their noses from the smell of working-class people at Walmart?

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America's Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com ).

mike k , December 13, 2017 at 9:54 pm

The NYT is just another tool of the multi-billionaire oligarchs who rule this USA from the shadows. They fear nothing more than the light. When that investigative light gets strong enough, more and more ordinary folks will begin to awake to the massive fraud that has been perpetrated at their expense. And when that happens, we will finally see the Oligarchy begin to crumble under the pressure of the 99%. The truth will out, then heads will roll ..

mike k , December 13, 2017 at 10:00 pm

Keep up the pressure – get your friends interested, tell them about CN, Counterpunch, Strategic-Culture, Chris Hedges, etc. Pursuing the truth can be a fascinating hobby, that leads to a person awakening. Make it interesting, awaken your friend's curiosity.

incontinent reader , December 14, 2017 at 12:04 am

How about also including RT in your list? It's a news and commentary site with strong journalistic values and credibility, notwithstanding what the Administration or the MSM may say or imply.

T.J , December 14, 2017 at 8:45 am

If RT didn't have the qualities you describe, attempts by the Administration and the MSM to discredit it would have been successful. However they will attempt to silence it by other means.

Adam Kraft , December 14, 2017 at 11:59 am

Very true TJ. I found counterpunch when wapo / propornot blacklisted them. Gave 'em creds imo. I also like mint press, occupy, naked capitalism, **world socialist website**, disobedient media, truthout, some of Glenns work on the Intercept and my youtube subs include: wearechange, **anonymous Scandinavia**, **the jimmy dore show**, RT America, TeleSUR English*, Zoon Politikon, **democracy at work**, HA Goodman, theRealNews*, mintpressnews, watching the hawks, secular talk, laura kinhtlinger, judicial watch, empire files, redacted tonight, TBTV, a little from Julian Assange's twitter.

tina , December 14, 2017 at 11:06 pm

what about Al-Jazeera?

Erik G , December 14, 2017 at 8:03 am

Good suggestion; in such persuasion, one must respectfully suggest better sources and avoid any conflict.

Mr. Parry has well summarized for beginners these essential counterpoints to the mass media propaganda.

Those who would like to petition the NYT to make Robert Parry their senior editor may do so here:
https://www.change.org/p/new-york-times-bring-a-new-editor-to-the-new-york-times?recruiter=72650402&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink
While Mr. Parry may prefer independence, and we all know the NYT ownership makes it unlikely, and the NYT may try to ignore it, it is instructive to them that intelligent readers know better journalism when they see it. A petition demonstrates the concerns of a far larger number of potential or lost subscribers.

Amyg , December 14, 2017 at 1:40 pm

I like this use of "awakened," in contrast to the establishment culture's fascination with "woke." People don't need to get woke. They need to become awakened. Thanks to Robert Parry.

Walter Devine , December 13, 2017 at 10:15 pm

I thought we were waiting to hear what the evidence is found. The lack of discussion about what they have uncovered seems to me to speak of a professional operation. Once they are done and present what they have found, then everyone can get on their soap boxes and let loose. As for Bias, that exists in everyone to some extent or another, where was the moral outrage from the Republicans charging this today when the Benghazi investigation was being conducted by folks with known axes to grind themselves? It is the Washington hypocrisy machine at its most obvious. As for the media, print or otherwise, they are just preaching to their choirs in order to sell whatever their particular consumers are buying. Frankly I have come to expect more from you than this article Mr. Parry, here's hoping

Robert Gardner , December 13, 2017 at 10:45 pm

I've been skeptical out the Russian conspiracy so far, but I agree with what Walter Devine wrote.

tina , December 13, 2017 at 11:42 pm

I am still waiting . Mr. Parry can ride on his story back in the 1980's. We are in 2017, The internet is good. What did those people in Washington do today? get rid of net neutrality? Love you all people on CN, Happy Hanukah Merry Christmas, and Kwanzaa, And the winter solstice. Peace to all. Love, tina everyone is going to believe that they want to believe.

incontinent reader , December 14, 2017 at 12:08 am

Are you kidding about Benghazi? Obviously you have still not informed yourself about the egregious security breakdown of the Administration or how the Benghazi facility factored into the CIA's proxy war in Syria. (And, btw, where was Hillary "Rod up her Hiney" Clinton when that '3AM call' came in at 4pm?

Larco Marco , December 14, 2017 at 4:32 am

Hillary Rodham Clinton AND William Hamrod Clinton

Anna , December 14, 2017 at 12:56 am

Thank you for bringing attention to the Benghazi scandal: "FBI Chief Instructed Agents To Lie About Benghazi To Protect Hillary" http://yournewswire.com/fbi-lie-benghazi-hillary/

"By placing the interests of the Obama administration over the public's interests, the order is yet another data point highlighting the politicization of the FBI: After the September 11, 2012 attack against U.S. government facilities in Benghazi, Libya, the Obama administration peddled a lie, telling the public that the attack was related to Muslims who had become enraged at an anti-Islam YouTube video, and not a planned act of terrorism – despite Hillary Clinton emailing Chelsea Clinton from her unsecure @clintonemail.com server the night of the attack to say exactly that."

-- On a topic of evidence: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-13/anti-trump-texts-between-fired-fbi-agents-having-extramarital-affair-leak-and-theyre "

In 2016, [the FBI] received the infamous anti-Trump "dossier" The "dossier" was a compendium of allegations about then-candidate Trump and others around him that was compiled by the opposition research firm Fusion GPS. The firm's bank records, obtained by House investigators, revealed that the project was funded by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.

Weeks before the 2016 election, Peter Strzok's FBI team agreed to pay former MI6 agent and Fusion GPS operative Christopher Steele $50,000 if he could verify the claims contained within the dossier – which relied on the cooperation of two senior Kremlin officials. (One more time for you, Walter Devine -- "if he [Steele] could verify the claims"). When Steele was unable to verify the claims in the dossier, the FBI wouldn't pay him according to the New York Times.

Despite the fact that Steele was not paid by the FBI for the dossier, Peter Strzok used it to launch a counterintelligence investigation into President Trump's team. Steele was ultimately paid $168,000 by Fusion GPS to assemble the dossier.

-- More evidence" "FBI Texts Reveal "Insurance Policy" To Prevent Trump Presidency" http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-13/we-cant-take-risk-fbi-texts-reveal-insurance-policy-prevent-trump-presidency

-- Have you noticed the numbers for payments? The bank records? The names? -- these are the evidence. Or you believe that there a Bias against the miserable Steele?

bobzz , December 14, 2017 at 3:06 pm

Of interest to me is why the Republicans did not hammer Hillary for placing an ambassador in what was essentially a CIA compound in the first place. My guess and I can only guess is that they no objection to its being a ratline to ship Libya's stolen armaments to head-chopping jihadists (with USA blessing) fighting Assad. So to raise the issue of why putting an ambassador there would have opened the door to sensitive questions -- if the press would ask them, of course.

Skip Scott , December 14, 2017 at 4:28 pm

That's the real Benghazi story the MSM won't talk about. Although I suspect the armaments were given to the head choppers by the CIA, and then they rebelled at having them transferred to the head choppers in Syria after they had succeeded in killing Ghaddafi.

Jon Adams , December 14, 2017 at 6:17 pm

"Madame Secretary, WHY was it necessary to destroy Libya?" No republican asked THAT question.

Kiza , December 14, 2017 at 7:16 pm

Hello Skip, nice to read your good comments again and to exchange info. Here is an article which talks about the weapons ratline in Syria. Within four days, the powerful anti-tank missiles that CIA bought in Bulgaria and (supposedly) delivered to "moderate" rebels, ended up in ISIS hands. The only problem with the article's narrative is that it is still drawing the official line that the lack of oversight is to blame for such, whilst it was clearly a deliberate action to supply weapons to ISIS wrapped up in plausible deniability of passing them through the hands of some poor inept souls serving as intermediaries.

Thus, the CIA kept being surprised that its powerful weapons kept ending up in ISIS hands but kept doing the same over and over: oops an oversight mistake, oops and another one, oops one more, and another one, . the two hundredth one

https://www.buzzfeed.com/aramroston/blowback-isis-got-a-powerful-missile-the-cia-secretly?utm_term=.joevpx9dG#.lxegj54A7

Adrian Engler , December 14, 2017 at 3:44 am

Starting a grand-scale investigation on the basis of allegations of conspiracy with another government and treason is rather dubious when these allegations from dirty campaign tactics are not based on any tangible facts. It is true that the Muller team does not leak as much to the press as the intelligence services did previously. This investigation still plays an important role for the media propaganda that still pushes the Russiagate conspiracy theory even though there had never been any factual basis for it and no evidence has been found in over a year. Since there is still this investigation is going on, they can use it for justifying their daily minutes of hate against Russia, their calls for censorship and denounciation of any political position that diverges from the neoconservative and neoliberal ideology.

I wonder how long this can go on. So far, the indictments of the Muller team have had nothing to do with the Russiagate conspiracy theory. Paul Manafort was indicted for tax evasion related to lobbying business with Ukraine, mostly years ago. Michael Flynn was indicted because when he reported a call from his holidays to the Russian ambassador to the FBI more than three weeks later, he left out two elements (the FBI had the recordings from the NSA, anyway, so they wouldn't have had to ask him about the telephone call). There was nothing illegal about the contents of the telephone call (the most dubious thing was, of course, the lobbying related to a UN security council resolution vote, but that might at best hint at colluding with Israel, it certainly does not fit the Russiagate conspiracy theory). It seems quite plausible that Flynn just forgot these two elements of a telephone call in which quite a large number of points was raised and that he pleaded guilty because of a plea deal (otherwise he might have been indicted in connection with his lobbying work for Turkey). Superficially, the closest to the idea of Russiagate is the indictment of Papadopoulos, someone who played a minor role in the Trump campaign and was looking for contacts with Russians, but, as it seems did not get very far (for some reasons he seemed to think a Russian woman he was talking with was a relative of Putin). His actions may have been naïve or misguided, but nothing about them was illegal, like in the case of Michael Flynn, he is only accused of lying to the FBI about normal, legal actions.

So, if we judge the Muller investigation by its results, it is not going anywhere. Obviously, that is what should be expected when a commission is set up for investigating a conspiracy theory for which there had never been any evidence to begin with. I suppose the result would be similar if the Illuminati, the Elders of Zion, or reptiloids were officially investigated.

The question is how they will wind down. If they just say that apart from things like Manafort's possible tax evation and Flynn's lobbying for Israel, they have not found anything – certainly nothing that confirms the Russiagate conspiracy theory -, that will be quite difficult, people will demand that it is investigated how it came about that such a conspiracy was spread and played such an influential role in political discourse for some time. It seems that the Muller team wants to delay that moment when they have to confess that the conspiracy theory has broken down, but that won't necessarily make it easier, either.

Antiwar7 , December 14, 2017 at 7:24 am

How long should we wait until we hear of ONE, that's right, ONE piece of evidence backing these claims up? Please answer: 2 years? 10 years? The only evidence so far amounts to "trust us".

And that's ignoring the monumental number of pieces of false evidence that have been put forward. That in itself makes the whole "investigation" suspicious. On top of the long, documented history of the CIA planting false stories in the press.

bobzz , December 14, 2017 at 3:09 pm

I don't know. How long did it take the Dutch to cook the evidence to condemn Russian partisans for the downing of the Malaysian airliner -- with Ukraine holding a gun to their heads.

Dunno , December 14, 2017 at 4:43 pm

Dear Mr. 7, I have come to the grudging conclusion that Russia-gate is and has always been more about Russia and Putin than about the crooked Don. If we stop to think about it, Trump has succumbed to the deep control of the Deep-State colossus. Russia evil; Israel good! Got it? When the pathetic wiener & crotch-grabber isn't bitchin' for Bibi and doing little pooch tricks for Israel, he is being programmed by the pentagon and the Deep State, and making sure that the super-rich get super richer. His own SOS Tillerson called him an effin' moron. Enough said!

Therefore, 7, Russia-gate is all about keeping the pot boiling for the presidential election in Russia next year. Demonizing Putin and Russia is the new great game of our era. The NWO Nebula lusts after Russia's geostrategic location and its abundant resources. It's 1905-1925 all over again. Read the book, "Wall Street and the Russian Revolution 1905-1925" by Richard B. Spence and also take a gander at Trine Day books' website of suppressed books. The deep-state Plutocrats and their secret societies hatch their evil little plots, while trying to keep the rest of us in the dark. Right now, Trump is a convenient platform for anti-Russian propaganda.

Lois Gagnon , December 14, 2017 at 8:24 pm

Think you nailed it. The bankster regime changers already tried once to structurally adjust Russia into being a US puppet state in the 90s under Clinton. Russia was robbed blind while Yeltzin drank himself into a stupor. Putin is the one who put a stop to the looting. That is his crime against the western oligarchs and why he is enemy #1.

Sam F , December 14, 2017 at 8:10 am

Once more the standard troll line about being a prior supporter, which plainly "Devine" is not.
We are well over a year into this matter with nothing but speculation and manufactured claims.
It is clear that Russia-gate = Israel-gate, a diversion from zionist control of the DNC.
Where is the concern of "Devine" for the lack of investigation of control of elections and mass media by Israel?
Why does he seek to cover up the complete destruction of democracy by the foreign power Israel?

Lois Gagnon , December 14, 2017 at 8:43 pm

Oliver Stone had this to say on the matter on FaceBook. If you're on FB, here is the link.

https://www.facebook.com/search/top/?q=oliver%20stone

Adam Kraft , December 14, 2017 at 12:16 pm

facts don't show bias walt. yeah, media sells to the public, but they're also selling (or trading narratives for access) to the gov't. Wikileaks exposed the MSM – DNC collusion and we've witnessed the leaks and anonymous sources from the IC. Trust the CIA?

There's no 'lack of discussion about what they have uncovered' which has basically amounted to a pile of dirt. Have not read from the VIPS and William Binney? Uncovering shady business with oligarchs doesn't show collusion, but the dossier oppo does, but it's business as usual. Denying the FBI-DNC server subpoena was odd don't you think?

I personally believe that progressive hope dies at the DNC and exposing the party's lies (their private and public views) and undemocratic practices (preliminary process, fundraising) is the best thing for the country. It brings us one step closer to potentially building a third party that represents the proletariat and petty bourgeois classes.

Lois Gagnon , December 14, 2017 at 8:49 pm

I agree with your sentiment, but I'm finding it disturbing how many so called progressives are convinced beyond any doubt, despite the evidence I produce to instill doubt, that Russia interfered in "our democracy."

They have come unglued to the point of idiocy over Trump. They are firmly in the clutches of the CIA Deep State apparatus.

Anna , December 14, 2017 at 1:56 pm

Hey, Walter Devine, here is more for your whining about evidence: There are plenty of evidence when the disgusting clintonistas are concerned: http://theduran.com/fusion-gps-admits-that-it-hired-wife-of-doj-official-to-investigate-then-candidate-trump/

"Fusion GPS appears to be in the center of a web of corruption. Who hired Fusion GPS to ramp up its opposition research against Trump? Hillary Clinton and the DNC. the wife of Justice Department official Bruce G. Ohr worked for Fusion GPS during the 2016 presidential election. Nellie Ohr is listed as working for the CIA's Open Source Works department in a 2010 DOJ report." Look how the CIA, FBI, and DNC have found each other and made a friendship forever.

Also, do you personally have any concern about the murder of Seth Rich? -- Donna Brazil has become afraid of being Seth-Riched. How come? What kind of scum the Democratic apparatus has become? -- Guess Tony Podesta and Bill Clinton and madame "we came, we saw, he died ha, ha, ha " are the composite face of the Democratic Party today.

Paul E. Merrell, J.D. , December 14, 2017 at 3:06 pm

@ Walter Devine: "Once they are done and present what they have found, then everyone can get on their soap boxes and let loose."

But overlook that the Democrats and mainstream media are doing the opposite? It seems to me that this is precisely the point that Mr. Parry's reporting has been aimed at, that the Democrats and mainstream media are jumping enormously to RussiaGate conclusions without disclosing any evidence to back up their incredibly dangerous claims and that there *is* very strong evidence of ulterior motives.

Gregory Herr , December 14, 2017 at 8:22 pm

Have at it Walter. What exactly have they uncovered? The "process" lost credibility long ago. The "intelligence" report of January 6th was garbage and it's been all downhill since.

Peter de Klerk , December 14, 2017 at 8:53 pm

I had great respect Parry's earlier writing which had a healthy dose of MSM skepticism (albeit largely for personal reasons). This whole business of jumping to conclusions on the Russia meddling has put me off him totally. All the reporting seems to be in service of defending a forgone conclusion. I wonder if this has anything to do with fundraising.

falcemartello , December 13, 2017 at 10:28 pm

This whole Russia ate my lunch has entered the realm of alternate truth. The MSM are now actually stating that the Russian hacking the 2016 election as fact. Just like all the other false and fabricated statements of world events in the last 20 years . Fro Yugoslavia, Milosovic exonerated for the falsely laid charges of genocide . How convenient after his death . Qadaffi murdering and slaughtering his own people hence RPL interventionist and voila the highest standard of living in the African continent is now reduced to takfiri heaven for the NATO proxy army recruiting centre. MH17 disaster is still being paroled as Russian deliberate murder. No facts no evidence that would stand even in a Stalinist show trial. Assad gassing his own people. More than debunked by multiple sources and US academics to boot no still being paroled as fact by western MSM.

The whole charade post 9/11 has gone into this Orwellian nightmare that just keep on growing and news and information has become pure Hollwoodian fantasy that the sheeple are sleep walking into this futuristic hell hole that these vile masters of the universe will not be able to back track without losing face and without causing the populace to stand up and be counted and kick tjhese vile players out for good.

john wilson , December 14, 2017 at 6:00 am

Take heart Falcemartello, its not all bad. Over here in the Britain RT has its own free to view TV channel which sits next to the BBC news and the parliament programme. It is now widely watched by the public and has millions of viewers with many using RT as their main news source. The fact that the American deep state criminals have made things difficult for RT America in the US, is a clear indication that the fake news masters otherwise known as the MSN, and their handlers in the deep state are rattled by the ever growing alternative voice. Its up to you, me and the rest of the posters on CN to tell our friends colleagues and others about CN, RT etc. If only one percent take a look then alternative opinion will start to filter through and more importantly, show the public what liars and criminals are in charge of their country.

Skip Scott , December 14, 2017 at 8:15 am

Thanks for the info John. I am really glad that at least Britain has a reasonable degree of freedom of the press. If it spreads across Europe, the USA may eventually find itself so isolated by its own propaganda that the whole evil empire scheme will implode, and we will have to learn to wage peace in a multi-polar world. That is my Christmas wish.

BobS , December 14, 2017 at 11:36 am

It's not difficult to get RT in the US- I watch it regularly on Dish Network. Youtube is another option- I'm guessing it's big and rich enough to survive any changes in net neutrality that will result from the Trump/Pai FCC (of course, Obama and Clinton were just as bad, DEEP STATE!!!!, etc.).
If you're going to tout conspiracies, get your facts straight.

rosemerry , December 14, 2017 at 4:48 pm

John Pilger has an article in counterpunch explaining the importance of documentaries (not just his!). It is notable that his first one, on Cambodia, in 1970, was shown free to air on TV in the UK and thirity other countries, with huge audience impact, but refused by PBS as too disturbing!!

The free press in the USA is in tune with the ptb.

rosemerry , December 14, 2017 at 5:06 pm

I see the Pilger article is here on consortiumnews. It is worth a read, like the rest here!

Kiza , December 14, 2017 at 7:58 pm

What you wrote john wilson is simply not the complete truth, although I wish it was. It is true that RT UK has its own terrestrial digital TV channel. It appears that Margarita Simonyan bid for such channel at an auction when Britain was converting from analogue to digital TV and got it. Thus, the British TV viewers can now see RT without any subscription or special equipment, "next to BBC" as you optimistically say.

What you did not mention john wilson is that the British Government regulator Ofcom is putting severe pressure on RT because their news offered an alternative view to the British propaganda. They rinse and repeat the same biased-news allegations almost every year, keeping RT UK under constant threat of the loss of its broadcasting licence due to "breach of truth standards" = "fake news". They even banned the lightbox, radio and other media advertising campaign of RT in Britain, the so called "RT is the second opinion", only because the campaign claimed that if RT existed before UK attack on Iraq in 2003, Tony Blair may have not been successful in passing the war resolutions through the parliament.

What most people do not appreciate is that the methods of suppression are not the same in all Western countries, and why should they be? Simonyan got a terrestrial TV channel and the broadcasting licence because of the British propaganda hubris – the British still believed that their post-imperial propaganda is the best in the World, just because it was the best in the world during the empire. They simply never expected the Russians to be so successful, just the same as US.

In summary:
US => force RT to register as a foreign agent to force reporting of every little detail of its operations; refuse journalistic credentials to Congress etc to disadvantage its reporting
UK => keep constant threat of the loss of broadcasting licence to skew the reporting towards the British Government version of the news

I post the links relevant to what I wrote here separately to avoid being put on hold.

Kiza , December 14, 2017 at 8:00 pm

https://secondopinion.rt.com/

https://www.rt.com/about-us/press-releases/rt-uk-second-opinion/

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/nov/10/russia-today-ofcom-sanctions-impartiality-ukraine-coverage

https://theintercept.com/2015/03/02/uk-media-regulator-threatens-rt-bias-airing-anti-western-views/

Joe Tedesky , December 13, 2017 at 10:32 pm

Philip Giraldi writes about a shift occurring over at the CIA in Trump's favor, Politico's interview with a somewhat repentant Trump hater Mike Morell now saying 'maybe our plan wasn't that well thought out' , and now these MSM Russia Gate screwups coupled with a discovery of FBI Trump haters, is a result of Trump's recognizing Jerusalem as it being Israel's capital? Just say'n.

rosemerry , December 14, 2017 at 4:52 pm

Obama's expulsion of the Russian diplomats after Trump's election, with no reason based on fact/danger to the USA gave a good start to the Russophobia encouraged by the Clinton losers and leading on to the ludicrous extreme situation still going on.

BobH , December 14, 2017 at 1:43 pm

Amen

Kiza , December 14, 2017 at 8:19 pm

Spot on Bob, the unfortunate and idealistic Mr Seth Rich became the DNC's bottom line, the shining example of its "anything goes as long as we have friends in the right places" (FBI, DOJ, CIA, etc etc).

Lois Gagnon , December 14, 2017 at 9:04 pm

Agreed. Let's not forget Process Server for the DNC Fraud Lawsuit Shawn Lucas who died mysteriously 2 weeks after serving the DNC either.

I never would have believed the rot in the Democratic Party establishment would rival the Republicans, but here we are.

Anon , December 14, 2017 at 8:23 am

"Tina" is a troll assigned to CN to claim extremism, and never presents evidence or argument.

Steven A , December 13, 2017 at 11:16 pm

This is another great review by Robert Parry. However, he again uses the formulation that "WikiLeaks published" and "WikiLeaks released" purloined DNC emails on September 13, 2016. Greenwald and the Washington Post have stated, more carefully, that WikiLeaks "promoted" the data source of these emails by means of a Tweet on that date.

Adam Carter noted in a comment under Parry's previous article that the DNC emails in question are the NGP/VAN files associated with Guccifer 2.0's pre-announced "hack" on July 5, 2016 and reportedly released by him on Sept 13, 2016.

In fact, they are certainly not part of WikiLeak's official archive. One can see from their website that they published nothing between the times of the DNC emails release of July 22, 2016 and the Podesta emails release of October 7. So "published" is clearly the wrong word.

Whether or in what sense it may fairly be stated that WikiLeaks "released", "promoted" or "uploaded" (as according to the Erickson email, which probably represents nothing more than an outsider's impression) the September 13 files needs to be cautiously assessed. Their Tweet did include an access key, as did the Erickson email, and the address for the file given in the latter was a "mega.nz" address. I assume that this address is associated with Kim Dot Com, who also claims to have been involved with WikiLeaks.

Did Guccifer 2.0 himself upload the files to mega.nz? Did he play Kim Dot Com to use the latter's association with Wikileaks to get Wikileaks itself to put out the Sept 13 Tweet advertising the data release? I'm not sure how this all worked, but it seems that it is misleading to simply refer to this set of emails as having been "published" by Wikileaks.

incontinent reader , December 14, 2017 at 12:12 am

Didn't you read the VIPS analyses of the DNC leaks?

Steven A , December 14, 2017 at 8:21 am

Yes, I did, but not while writing my comment above. Do they say anything relevant to the question of whether it is accurate to correct the false media report that the Trump campaign was given access to the NGP/VAN DNC emails before WikiLeaks published them with a "corrected" statement that the Trump campaign was notified (but may never have noticed) of a link to those files by a random member of the public _after WikiLeaks had already published them_? As I recall, the original VIPS memo was itself somewhat confused about the distinction between the NGP/VAN material and the five DNC documents made public by "Guccifer 2.0" on June 15, 2016, so I'm not sure one will find anything relevant to my question there.

While it is true that the "correction" here is _much_ closer to the truth than the original misinformation, the underlined part at the end of my question still seems misleading in that the "publication" is attributed to WikiLeaks without qualification. And it seems Parry is not the only one to make this mistake. As Adam Carter pointed out two days ago, he was very surprised that almost no one has been noticing that the files in question came from "Guccifer 2.0" and not from WikiLeaks. While Parry's attribution misleading, I am still not clear in my own mind about precisely what did happen, i.e. how WikiLeaks came to "promote" the release of the files and whether in some loose or indirect sense WikiLeaks did "release" them.

mike k , December 14, 2017 at 11:08 am

Is there really any other purpose in your involved questioning but seeking to cloud and confuse the obvious issues in the "Russia hacked" affair?

Steven A , December 14, 2017 at 2:05 pm

How is it clouding the issue to suggest, as Adam Carter did, that one element in Parry's (and others') description of the facts in an otherwise excellent article seems to be misleading?

Paul E. Merrell, J.D. , December 14, 2017 at 2:33 pm

@ "the address for the file given in the latter was a "mega.nz" address. I assume that this address is associated with Kim Dot Com, who also claims to have been involved with WikiLeaks."

Kim Dot Com's relationship with Mega was already extremely strained by the time of the Guccifer leaks and to the extent he ever had control of the company it had apparently ended. See e.g., https://torrentfreak.com/kim-dotcom-warns-mega-users-to-backup-their-files-160421/

Steven A , December 14, 2017 at 3:17 pm

These are the sort of details I haven't been familiar with and about which I was hoping to learn more – so thanks! I was relying on a vague impression from memory when I made the link between the "mega.nz" address seen in the email from Erickson and Kim Dot Com.

Since the whole Guccifer 2.0 operation appears to be an attempt to falsely smear WikiLeaks as a Russian agent (by publicly claiming to be a hacker associated with WikiLeaks and then being "caught" releasing documents (the ones of June 15, 2016) with "Russian fingerprints"), perhaps his uploading files (Sept 13, 2016) to a server with (past) ties to someone associated with WikiLeaks (Kim Dot Com) would have been part of the same effort.

A contemporary article says this about the release: "'Guccifer 2.0' released over 670 megabytes of documents at a cybersecurity conference in London Tuesday . The documents were released on a file storage system and not on WikiLeaks or on Guccifer 2.0's website." https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/hacker-guccifer-2-0-releases-more-dnc-docs-including-tim-n647921

Thus the statement that "WikiLeaks published" the files in question (repeated by Parry, Justin Raimondo and others) appears to be false. I share the surprise expressed by Adam Carter (under Parry's previous piece) that few appear to have noticed or bothered to correct this error – even though they were on target in exposing the main part of the latest MSM lie.

robjira , December 14, 2017 at 12:17 am

Great related reporting on BAR.
https://www.blackagendareport.com/entire-russian-hacking-narrative-invalidated-single-assange-tweet
https://www.blackagendareport.com/russsiagate-and-collapse-obamas-war-against-syria

Bob Van Noy , December 14, 2017 at 4:37 pm

Excellent links, robjira. Thanks.

Karl Sanchez , December 14, 2017 at 12:57 am

Those of us who live within the Outlaw US Empire have been seduced by lies Big and small since we could understand language. RussiaGate is an example of a Big Lie, just as the Outlaw US Empire being a democracy is a Big Lie–both are indoctrinational. Santa Claus, Tooth Fairy, Easter Bunny, Great Pumpkin, Sand Man, Cupid, et al are other excellent examples of indoctrinational Big Lies. One of the most severe is the maxim delivered from parents: You must share and play nice, when the real world acts in the exact opposite fashion. What's more, RussiaGate serves as a cover-up for several major crimes–some by Clinton, some by DNC, some by FBI, some by Justice Department, and some by CIA: None of them are being actively investigated despite there being lots of evidence existing in the public domain, which is why we know those crimes occurred.

I very highly suggest reading this article, https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/12/13/the-u-s-is-not-a-democracy-it-never-was/

Marko , December 14, 2017 at 2:22 am

The last great hope for the Dems :

"A Russian hacker accused of stealing from Russian banks reportedly confessed in court that he hacked the U.S. Democratic National Committee (DNC) and stole Hillary Clinton's emails under the direction of agents from Russia's Federal Security Service (FSB)"

PUTIN ORDERED THEFT OF CLINTON'S EMAILS FROM DNC, RUSSIAN HACKER CONFESSES
BY CRISTINA MAZA ON 12/12/17

http://www.newsweek.com/russian-hacker-stealing-clintons-emailshacking-dnc-putinsfsb-745555

irina , December 14, 2017 at 4:03 am

And on PBS tonite the author of this Atlantic article got to put in her two cents about Putin:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/01/putins-game/546548/

in which she stated that not only did Putin 'annex Crimea' but also invaded Ukraine, among other things. None of her statements were backed up by any facts, which apparently are irrelevant anymore. Wikipedia has an interesting bio on her.

Bob Van Noy , December 14, 2017 at 9:57 am

Thank you irina for that "catch". I'm a long time reader of "The Atlantic Magazine" well aware of its long, liberal history and was surprised to find David Frum reporting there. David was a speech writer for W. Bush and apparently came up with the infamous "Axis of Evil" tag for President Bush's State Of The Union speech. I'll link the Wikipedia page below for those interested. I'm concerned that propaganda has spread far and wide

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axis_of_evil

Sam F , December 14, 2017 at 8:56 am

Despite its extremely conclusive title and substance, the Newsweek article later admits the extremely suspect nature of the accusation, and the lack of any evidence whatsoever:

"Andrei Soldatov an expert on Russian cybersecurity, said he believes Kozlovsky invented the story about his direction from the FSB for personal gain. 'I've been communicating with [Kozlovsky] for four months, and he has failed to give me any proof or answer my questions," Soldatov told Newsweek .'He was put in jail by these guys so it could be out of revenge, or he wanted to make a deal with the FSB,'"

Such a reversal of evidence and conclusion bespeaks deliberate deception. The motive is unclear, as the failed Newsweek is said to have been revived in 2013 by a Korean-American Christian fundamentalist David Jang formerly of Moon's Unification Church, whose followers consider him the Second Coming of JC, according to the linked source. http://www.motherjones.com/media/2014/03/newsweek-ibt-olivet-david-jang/

Perhaps another quasi-religious CIA front like Fethullah Gulen's madrassas in Turkey and across central Asia.

exiled off mainstreet , December 14, 2017 at 3:13 pm

They keep publishing the same horseshit just like Pravda did in the Soviet era and just like the Voelkischer Beobachter and Stuermer did during the Nazi era. I guess the uninformed hoi polloi get so used to it in these situations that they accept the situation, like ducks and frogs accept watery ponds as their environments.

Manfred Whimplebottem , December 14, 2017 at 9:20 pm

I think I heard a similar story from newsweek months ago, looks like someone took the deal(?).

FBI Probe Into Clinton Emails Prompted Offer of Cash, Citizenship for Confession, Russian Hacker Claims

"On October 5, 2016, days before U.S. intelligence publicly accused Russia of endorsing an infiltration of Democratic Party officials' emails, Nikulin was arrested in Prague at the request of the U.S. on separate hacking charges. Now, Nikulin claims U.S. authorities tried to pin the email scandal on him."

"ikulin's lawyer, Martin Sadilek, [claims] that the FBI visited him at least a couple of times, offering to drop the charges and grant him U.S. citizenship as well as cash and an apartment in the U.S. if the Russian national confessed to participating in the 2016 hacks of Clinton campaign chief John Podesta's emails in July."

"[They told me:] you will have to confess to breaking into Clinton's inbox for [U.S. President Donald Trump] on behalf of [Russian President Vladimir Putin]," Nikulin wrote"

http://www.newsweek.com/fbi-investigation-clinton-emails-russia-hack-607538

Wm. Boyce , December 14, 2017 at 2:33 am

I'm curious as to why this is still an issue. Here's a link to an article from last August:
http://www.businessinsider.com/top-fbi-investigator-peter-strzok-steps-away-from-russia-probe-2017-8

At that time, it wasn't known why Mr. Strzok was transferred/whatever from counter-intelligence, but since then it has been revealed that Mr. Mueller did so for his ( Strzok) political opinions. That would seem a fair thing to do. What's the problem? Might be right-wing fear.

Marko , December 14, 2017 at 4:43 am

" What's the problem? "

C'mon , man. Given Strzok's position and his influence on Russiagate AND the earlier Hillarygate investigations , the fact that he was transferred in July is of little comfort. Any damage he could do he'd already done by then. Jim Jordan will explain it to you , in six minutes :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=69&v=cShxjlUfmhk

exiled off mainstreet , December 14, 2017 at 3:16 pm

The problem is that when that story first appeared, nothing else was disclosed. The damning material took months to emerge, as did Strzok's links to the Clinton coverups and the links to the fake dossier and the FBI's "anti-Trump" insurance policy. Those who want to believe the regime's falsehoods can always come up with rationales such as "I guess the government people know best" which was typical of the answers to sceptics against the Viet Nam war in the mid '60s.

Realist , December 14, 2017 at 2:43 am

It's been a year and a half since Hillary Clinton first accused Donald Trump of being a Putin puppet and in collusion with the Kremlin. Any fool should be able to understand that if there existed any real evidence to support this accusation the world would have seen it under banner headlines long ago. Instead, we get nothing but one set of sensational fake headlines unsupported by any actual facts time and again, all in an attempt to fool the mentally-challenged public. Yet the NYT and the rest of the yellow press continue to insist that the evidence continues to mount against Trump. What a laugh. Moreover, these deceivers are the people that want what they define as "fake news" to be systematically rooted out and stricken from the public record so no thinking person can ever see it. And, they tell us this is a free and democratic country. Got any more jokes?

Homina , December 14, 2017 at 3:48 am

Totally agree. And it reminds me of some reality "quest" shows about finding Bigfoot or the Oak Island treasure, etc.

If those were actually found, it would be reported a day or two later, unless every single one of the producers, actors, workers, etc. were under an NDA enough to wait until some season finale a year or two later. Ridiculous. If Bigfoot exists that will come to us on news, and big news, international. It won't come on a 4th season of some Bigfoot-finding show.

So yeah, season two of the Trump-Russia whatever.

Maddow/MSNBC and the likes have gone utterly insane. Bigfoot behind every door. Scant or zero facts, who cares. This isn't like Benghazi or White Water or Bush's air service this is 24/7 inane terrible journalism from nearly every journalist publisher in the US.

exiled off mainstreet , December 14, 2017 at 3:30 am

I think that the new evidence discussed provides Trump the cover to pull the plug on the whole Mueller operation despite the Alabama debacle. Sure the media talkers would compare it to the Saturday Night Massacre, but the proven falsity of the whole absurd circus renders risible such comparisons. While I don't expect much out of Trump, the championing of this absurd theory by the mainstream democrats renders them an existential threat to civilization itself based on the fact that enmity with Russia seems to be their be-all and end-all. It is all not only criminal but profoundly stupid.

Homina , December 14, 2017 at 3:40 am

"The primary purpose of Mr. Mueller's investigation is not to take down Mr. Trump. It's to protect America's national security and the integrity of its elections by determining whether a presidential campaign conspired with a foreign adversary to influence the 2016 election – a proposition that grows more plausible every day."

1. How is Russia an "adversary"? And even if Russia is, that's weasel-words and subjective. Is Turkey a foreign adversary? Is Israel? China? Mexico?

2. Why wasn't there decades ago a special Election Panel looking into foreign influence? I guess it just started to happen in this last election though .Only with Putin!

3. "more plausible" .this fucking idiot. After a year of headlines of "this is what will finally take down Trump" and such, all with zero reasons, zero facts .Is naught more plausible than naught?

4. I detest Trump. I more detest hypocrites and idiots.

But sure, "blah blah more possible take trump down" says some idiot or collective NYT idiocy. Bore me more your next op-ed, you partisan morons.

Sam F , December 14, 2017 at 6:27 pm

Yes, the NYT is mere propaganda. We already know that "a presidential campaign conspired with a foreign adversary to influence the 2016 election" because Clinton's top ten donors were all Zionists, and she supported all wars for Israel.

Rich Monahan , December 14, 2017 at 3:57 am

Thank you for your spot-on analysis! The motives of the deep state – including FBI operatives, NY Times and WAPO – is crystal clear. They do not want Trump to be president, and are determined to either remove him or handcuff him indefinitely. But why? Why has the establishment gone crazy? Is it simply political, or something deeper and darker?

Skip Scott , December 14, 2017 at 8:59 am

The real "deep" reason is the PNAC plot to make sure that the USA remains the sole super power that can impose its will anywhere in the world. Trump's campaign position of seeking detente with Russia would have led us into a multi-polar world giving Russia a sphere of influence. That is unacceptable to the empire.

RussiaGate is an attempt to remove Trump from power, or at a minimum make it impossible for him to seek detente. I am no Trump apologist, but I do think our only hope for a future in this nuclear age is to seek peace and cooperation in a multi-polar world that respects national sovereignty and the rule of law. I suspect Trump will continue to be brought to heel, with or without the success of RussiaGate. And there is always the JFK solution as a last resort.

M C Martin , December 14, 2017 at 6:08 am

Where is William Binney's "Thin String" signals intelligence (SIGINT) software when it's needed? Wouldn't it be lovely to focus it on the communications of our own government? Binney says applying it after 9/11 to the pre-9/11 communications streams did successfully predict the 9/11 attacks. If only we had stored all communications of government officials dating back to . hey, let's say 1774 or so, what truths might we now know, and what proofs might we now have? What would FDR's communications prior to Pearl Harbor reveal? What about the JFK, Bobby Kennedy, Martin Luther King, and Malcolm X assassinations?

While I can't endorse our government's illegal and immoral collection and storing of virtually all communications among people, if the store is there and is used against petty criminals, why couldn't or shouldn't it be used to detect and prove the illegal acts of our government power brokers?

What's good for the goose

[Dec 14, 2017] The 1970's was in many ways the watershed decade for the neoliberal transformation of the American economy and society

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... What I also remember well however, is how little support PATCO was able to garnish from other unionized workers (and in many cases from union leadership as well). It seemed to me at the time that some of the strongest hostility came from rank and file of trade and utilities unions. ..."
"... I recall too that it was in the 1970's that the threat of "relocation", at that time mainly from the more heavily unionized north and northeastern states to the union-hostile south began to play a major role in the destruction of the power of labor. ..."
"... And I remember the beginning of the financialization of the American corporation that I experienced on a "micro" scale, a kid lucky enough to have a summer job while in university at a large resource-extraction corporation's HQ in NYC. I recall white-collar conversations about compensation and about how salaries had steadily risen over the past decade (the company was said to be doing "really well"). And I remember how towards the end of my summer stints more and more conversation was about stock prices and Wall Street favor and about the new executive managerial style brought in by "those young MBA"s", and about (for the first time) worries of a "take-over" by "outsiders" (the company, although public, had had family leadership for many years). ..."
"... And most of all I remember how gradually the material-economic components to the identity of the blue-collar and middle class worker were written out of existence. The great narrative, the myth that explains to us what it means to be "an American," no longer included any hint of class solidarity, of the kind of work we did, the pay we earned, the common living conditions in the small towns and urban neighborhoods and "cookie-cutter" suburbs of America. ..."
"... Formerly the struggle of economic and material improvement was seen by most ordinary Americas as a struggle for certain necessary conditions to maintain, strengthen, and perpetuate a way-of-life in which the common core assumptions about the "good life" remained basically stable and unchallenged: family, stable job, residential security, public schools, public places -- neighborhood bars, coffee shops, civic clubs, parks and playgrounds -- where people could meet and interact as social equals. ..."
"... The financialization of the economy, indeed of social life itself to a great extent, meant the drive for the maximization of private profit and the pursuit of interests and 'efficiencies" conceived entirely apart from any impact of the common good of society as a whole, and should have been seen as a grave threat to the very conditions of material and economic security, only recently achieved, that were the foundation of these other civic and social institutions. ..."
"... Instead, through a grand and diabolical deceit cynically promulgated by a mostly Republican capitalist class of privilege, but also aided and abetted by a "new Left" that increasingly postured itself as the enemy of this older and more traditional way of life ..."
Dec 14, 2017 | www.unz.com

BigAl , December 13, 2017 at 1:17 pm GMT

The 1970's was in many ways the watershed decade for the radical transformation of the American economy and society, even more than the 1960's (I lived through both as a young man). I have yet to read the definitive social-critical analysis of these years to explain the changes that, looking back, seem to have taken the country of my childhood right out from under me, gone forever, increasingly difficult to remember through the fog of nostalgia that tends to distort as much as to reveal.

Some of the things I do remember about this time include the PATCO (air traffic controllers) strike, very well. What is often not mentioned is that PATCO was attempting to do something that had not been permitted under federal civil service law, that is, bargain for wages as well as working conditions. Wage bargaining, PATCO correctly assessed, was the issue that made or broke unions and had enabled state and local public employees to finally begin to earn a decent, living wage beginning in the 1960's (think the iconic Mike Quill and the NYC TWU).

Reagan correctly (from his point of view) saw that to fail to break PATCO on this issue was to open the floodgates and turn the U.S. civil services into something akin to its European counterpart, with the possibility of general strikes and the rest. And of course to encourage private sector unions in their drive to organize and to change federal and state labor laws to strengthen the right to picket strike and organize.

What I also remember well however, is how little support PATCO was able to garnish from other unionized workers (and in many cases from union leadership as well). It seemed to me at the time that some of the strongest hostility came from rank and file of trade and utilities unions. Of course Reagan, following the Nixon playbook, shrewdly played the patriot-nationalist card, painting PATCO as a threat to national security as well as composed of a bunch of ingrates who should have been happy to have jobs. But by then the segmentation of the American workforce, a tactic that played right into the hands of the corporate-capitalist class was in full swing. The American worker lucky enough to possess a decent paying skilled or semi-skilled union job was being taught to see their situation as morally "deserved" and to see newer aspirants to similar positions, whether recently arrived immigrants or members of racial-ethnic groups previously suppressed by law, custom and prejudice as threats/dangers/enemies of their own recently won status.

I recall too that it was in the 1970's that the threat of "relocation", at that time mainly from the more heavily unionized north and northeastern states to the union-hostile south began to play a major role in the destruction of the power of labor. This was the beginning of the "globalization" factor and of the off-shoring of manufacturing jobs that has been commented on extensively and that took off a decade or so later. What is often not recalled is that unions and other pro-labor groups attempted to lobby Congress to amend the NLRA (National Labor Relations Act) and to appoint labor-friendly members to the NLRB to ensure that plant relocation would be a mandatory subject of bargaining and thus prevent unilateral (by capital ownership) relocation or the threat of relocation as a means to destroy the power of labor. They were, of course, not successful, and factories and business continued to move away from traditional centers of labor power and worker-protections, first to so-called "right-to-work" states and eventually to Asia.

And I remember the beginning of the financialization of the American corporation that I experienced on a "micro" scale, a kid lucky enough to have a summer job while in university at a large resource-extraction corporation's HQ in NYC. I recall white-collar conversations about compensation and about how salaries had steadily risen over the past decade (the company was said to be doing "really well"). And I remember how towards the end of my summer stints more and more conversation was about stock prices and Wall Street favor and about the new executive managerial style brought in by "those young MBA"s", and about (for the first time) worries of a "take-over" by "outsiders" (the company, although public, had had family leadership for many years).

And most of all I remember how gradually the material-economic components to the identity of the blue-collar and middle class worker were written out of existence. The great narrative, the myth that explains to us what it means to be "an American," no longer included any hint of class solidarity, of the kind of work we did, the pay we earned, the common living conditions in the small towns and urban neighborhoods and "cookie-cutter" suburbs of America.

Formerly the struggle of economic and material improvement was seen by most ordinary Americas as a struggle for certain necessary conditions to maintain, strengthen, and perpetuate a way-of-life in which the common core assumptions about the "good life" remained basically stable and unchallenged: family, stable job, residential security, public schools, public places -- neighborhood bars, coffee shops, civic clubs, parks and playgrounds -- where people could meet and interact as social equals.

The financialization of the economy, indeed of social life itself to a great extent, meant the drive for the maximization of private profit and the pursuit of interests and 'efficiencies" conceived entirely apart from any impact of the common good of society as a whole, and should have been seen as a grave threat to the very conditions of material and economic security, only recently achieved, that were the foundation of these other civic and social institutions.

Instead, through a grand and diabolical deceit cynically promulgated by a mostly Republican capitalist class of privilege, but also aided and abetted by a "new Left" that increasingly postured itself as the enemy of this older and more traditional way of life, the enemy was reconceived as the new "elites", the young, urban, hipster "Leftist" who despised the old ways and represented a singular assault on everything good about America.

Meanwhile, steadily, relentlessly, the material conditions and hard-won economic improvements that had gradually made small town, urban-neighborhood, and inner-suburban life decent and livable were being destroyed by a class that paid lip-service to Capra's Bedford Falls while at the same time endlessly working to transform it into Pottersville.

[Dec 13, 2017] All the signs in the Russia probe point to Jared Kushner. Who next?

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... More like he's denying the story peddled by the Democrats in some vain attempt at reducing his legitimacy over smashing Hillary in the elections. ..."
"... What is he going to prison for, again? Colluding with Israel? ..."
"... The most anger in the media against the POTUS seems to be directed against Russia gate. Time and energy is wasted on conjecture, most 'probables will not stand in a court of law. This media hysteria deflects from the destruction of the affordable healthcare act and the tax changes good for the rich against the many. I think the people are being played. ..."
"... In the 1990s and 2000s a large section of the American establishment was effectively bought off by people like Prince Bandar. These are the ones that are determined that the anti-Russian policy then instigated be continued, even at the cost of slandering the current President's son-in-law. The irony is that in the meantime an effective regime change has taken place in Saudi and Bandar's bandits are mostly locked up behind bars. ..."
"... True, and not just hypocrisy either. This has to be seen in the context of a war, cold for now, on Russia - with China, via Iran and NK, next in line. Dangerous times, as a militarily formidable empire in economic decline looks set to take us all out. For the few who think and resist the dominant narrative - and are thereby routinely called out as 'kremlin trolls' - it is dismaying how easily folk are manipulated. ..."
"... Your points are valid but, alas, factual truths are routinely trumped (!) by powerful mythology. Fact is, despite an appalling record since WW2, Washington and its pet institutions - IMF/World Bank/WTO - are still seen as good guys. How? Because (a) all western states have traded foreign policy independence for favoured status in Washington, (b) English as global lingua franca means American soft propaganda is lapped up across the world via its entertainment industry, and (c) all 'our' media are owned by billionaire corps or as with BBC/Graun, subject to government intimidation/market forces. ..."
"... Truth is, DRT is not some horrifically new entity. (Let's not forget how HRC's 'no fly zone' for Syria promised to take us into WW3, nor her demented "we came, we saw, he died - ha ha" response to Gaddafi's sodomisation by knife blade, and more importantly to Libya's descent into hell.) As John Pilger noted, "the obsession with Trump the man – not Trump as symptom and caricature of an enduring system – beckons great danger for all of us". ..."
"... If all Meuller has is Flynn and the Russians during the transition period, he's got nothing. ..."
"... It's alleged that Turkey wanted Flynn to extradite Gullen for his alleged involvement in Turkey's failed coup. Just this weekend, Turkey have issued an arrest warrant for a former CIA officer in relation to the failed coup. So, IF the CIA were behind the failed coup and Flynn knows this - well, a good way to silence him would be to charge him with some serious crimes and then offer to drop them in return for his silence. But, like your theory, it's just speculation. ..."
"... The secret deep state security forces haven't been this diminished since Carter cleared the stables in the 70's - they fought back and stopped his second term ... ..."
"... Seeing how the case against Trump and Flynn is based on 'probable' and not hard proof its 'probable that the anti Trump campaign is directed from within the murky enclaves of the US intelligence community. ..."
"... Hatred against Trump deflects the anger, see the system works the US is still a democracy. Well it isn't, its a sick oligarchy run by the mega rich who own the media, 90% is owned by 5 corporations. Americans are fed the lie that their vast military empire with its 800 overseas bases are to defend US interests. ..."
"... Wow this is like becoming McCarthy Era 2.0. I'm just waiting for the show trials of all these so-called colluders. ..."
"... the interest of (Russian Ambassador) Kislyak in determining the position of the new administration on sanctions is not unheard of in Washington, or necessarily untoward to raise with one of the incoming national security advisers. Ambassadors are supposed to seek changes in policies and often seek to influence officials in the early stages of administrations before policies are established. Flynn's suggestion that the Russians wait as the Trump administration unfolded its new policies is a fairly standard response of an incoming official ..."
"... "The problem is charging Flynn for lying. A technicality. But not charging Hillary for email server. Another technicality. That's all the public will see if no collusion proved, and will ruin credibility of the FBI and the Dems" ..."
"... It's not just collusion is it, what about the rampant, naked nepotism, last seen on this unashamed scale in ancient Rome? ..."
"... So he lobbied for Israel not Russia then? Whoops. How does the author even know where Mueller's probe is heading, and which way Flynn flipped? Flynn worked much longer for the Obama administration than for Trump's. ..."
"... You can easily impeach Trump for bombing Syria's military airfield, which is by UN definition war crime of war aggression, starting war without the Congress approval; and doing so by supporting false flag of AQ, is support of terrorists and so on ..."
"... Oh you can't do it, of course, it was so - so presidential to bomb another country and it is just old habit and no war declaration, if country is too weak to bomb you back. And you love this exiting crazy balance of global nuclear annihilation too much, so you prefer screaming Russia, Russia to keep it hot, for wonderful military contracts. ..."
"... If the US wanted to do itself a massive favour it should shine the spotlight on Robert Mueller, the man now in charge of investigating the President of these United States for "collusion" with Russia and possible "obstruction of justice" himself obstructed a congressional investigation into the 9/11 terrorist attacks. ..."
"... Dealing with western backed coups on its own doorstep and being the only country actually to be legally fighting in Syria - a war that directly threatens its security - does not amount to global belligerence. ..."
"... Clinton lied under oath ..."
"... The logan act is a dead law no one will be prosecuted for a act that has never been used... plus the president elect can talk to any foreign leader he or she wishes to use and even talk deals even if a current president for 2 months is still in office... ..."
"... Should all countries which try to influence elections be treated as enemies? Where do you set the threshold? If we go by the actual evidence, Russia seems to have bought some Facebook ads and was allegedly involved in exposing HRC's meddling with the Democratic primaries. Compare that to the influence that countries like Israel and the Gulf Arabs exert on American politics and elections. Are you seriously claiming that Russia's influence is bigger or more decisive? ..."
"... The goal of weakening the US is also highly debatable. Accepting for a moment that Russia tried to tip the balance in favor of Trump, would America be stronger if it were engaged more actively in Syria and Ukraine? Is there a specific example where Trump's administration weakened the American position to the advantage of Russia? And how is the sustained anti-Russian information warfare helping anyone but the Chinese? ..."
"... The clues that Kushner has been pulling the strings on Russia are everywhere... He then pushed Flynn hard to try to turn Russia around on an anti-Israel vote by the UN security council. ..."
"... And Russia didn't turn, so hardly a clue that Kushner was pulling strings with any effect. What this clue does suggest however, is that Israel pressured/colluded with the Trump Team to undermine the Obama administrations policy towards a UN resolution on illegal settlements. The elephant in the room is Israels influence on US politics. ..."
"... In relation to the "lying" charge - In December, Flynn (in his role as incoming National Security Advisor) was told to talk to the Russians by Kushner (in his role as incoming special advisor). In these conversations, Flynn told the Russians to be patient regarding sanctions as things may change when Trump becomes President. All of this is totally legal and is what EVERY new adminstration does. Flynn had his phoned tapped by the FBI so they knew he had talked to the Russian about sanctions - they also knew the conversation was totally legal - but when they asked him about it, he said he didn't discuss sanctions. So Flynn is being charged about lying about something that was totally legal for him to do. That's it. ..."
"... All those thinking this is the beginning of the end of Trump are going to be disappointed. Just look at the charges so far. Manafort has been charged with money laundering and not registering as a foreign agent - however, both of those charges pre-date him working for Trump. Flynn has been charged with lying to the FBI about speaking to the Russians - even though him speaking to the Russians in his role as National Security Advisor to the President-elect was not only totally legal, it was the norm. And this took place in December, after the election. ..."
"... So the 2 main players have been charged with things that have nothing to do with the Trump campaign, and lets not forget the point of the investigation is to find out if Trump's campaign colluded with the Russians to win the election. Manafort's charges related to before working for the Trump campaign whilst Flynn's came after Trump won the Presidency, neither of which have anything to do with the election. As much as I wish Trump wasn't President, don't get your hopes up that this is going anywhere ..."
"... Gross hypocrisy on the US governments side. They have, since WW2 interfered with other countries elections, invaded, and killed millions worldwide, and are still doing so. Where were the FBI investigations then? Non existent. US politicians and the military hierarchy are completely immune from any prosecutions when it comes down to overseas illegal interference. ..."
"... America like all governments are narcissistic, they will cheat, steal, kill, if it benefits them. It's called national interest, and it's number one on any leader's job list. Watch fog of war with Robert McNamara, fantastic and terrifying to see how it works. ..."
"... The US has also been meddling in other countries elections for years, and doubtless most Americans neither know or care about that! So it's perhaps it's best to simply term them a 'rival', most people should be able to agree on that ..."
"... Gallup have been polling Americans for the past couple of decades on this. The last time I read about it a couple of years ago 70% of Americans had unfavourable views of Russia, ranging from those who saw them as an enemy (a smaller amount) through to those who saw them as a threat. ..."
Dec 13, 2017 | www.theguardian.com

polpont , 4 Dec 2017 08:32

Mueller will have to thread very carefully because he is maneuvering on a very politically charged terrain. And one cannot refrain from comparing the current situation with the many free passes the democrats were handed over by the FBI, the Department of Justice and the media which make the US look like a banana republic.

The mind blowing fact that Clinton sat with the Attorney General on the tarmac of the Phoenix airport "to chit-chat" and not to discuss the investigation on Clinton's very wife that was being overseen by the same AG, leaves one flabbergasted.

And the fact that Comey essentially said that Clinton's behaviour, tantamount in his own words to extreme recklessness, did not warrant prosecution was just inconceivable.

Don't forget that Trump has nearly 50 M gun-toting followers on Tweeter and that he would not hesitate to appeal to them were he to feel threatened by what he could conceive as a judicial Coup d'Etat. The respect for the institutions in the USA has never been so low.

ID1456161 -> Canadiman , 4 Dec 2017 08:30

...a judge would decide if the evidence was sufficient to warrant a trial.

Actually, in the U.S. a grand jury would decide if the evidence was sufficient to warrant formal charges leading to a trial. There is also the possibility that Mueller has uncovered both Federal and NY State offenses, so charges could be brought against Kushner at either level. Mueller has been sharing information from his investigation with the NY Attorney General's Office. Trump could pardon a federal offense, but has no jurisdiction to pardon charges brought against Kushner by the State of NY.

Anna Bramwell -> etrang , 4 Dec 2017 08:28
I watched RT for 24 months before the US election. They favoured Bernie Saunders strongly before he lost to Hilary. Then they ran hustings for the smaller US parties, eg Greens, and the Libertarians , which could definitely be seen as an interference in the US election, but which as far as I know, was never mentioned in the US. They were anti Hilary but not pro Trump. And indeed, their strong anti capitalist bias would have made such support unlikely.
EduardStreltsovGhost -> JonShone , 4 Dec 2017 08:28
What's he lying about? More like he's denying the story peddled by the Democrats in some vain attempt at reducing his legitimacy over smashing Hillary in the elections.

Obama and Hillary met hundreds of foreign officials. Were they colluding as well?

pretzelattack -> Atticus_Finch , 4 Dec 2017 08:28
What is he going to prison for, again? Colluding with Israel?
oddballs -> Taf1980uk , 4 Dec 2017 08:26
The most anger in the media against the POTUS seems to be directed against Russia gate. Time and energy is wasted on conjecture, most 'probables will not stand in a court of law. This media hysteria deflects from the destruction of the affordable healthcare act and the tax changes good for the rich against the many. I think the people are being played.
Krautolivier , 4 Dec 2017 08:21
In the 1990s and 2000s a large section of the American establishment was effectively bought off by people like Prince Bandar. These are the ones that are determined that the anti-Russian policy then instigated be continued, even at the cost of slandering the current President's son-in-law. The irony is that in the meantime an effective regime change has taken place in Saudi and Bandar's bandits are mostly locked up behind bars.
It's all too funny.
zerohoursuni -> damientrollope , 4 Dec 2017 08:19
True, and not just hypocrisy either. This has to be seen in the context of a war, cold for now, on Russia - with China, via Iran and NK, next in line. Dangerous times, as a militarily formidable empire in economic decline looks set to take us all out. For the few who think and resist the dominant narrative - and are thereby routinely called out as 'kremlin trolls' - it is dismaying how easily folk are manipulated.

Your points are valid but, alas, factual truths are routinely trumped (!) by powerful mythology. Fact is, despite an appalling record since WW2, Washington and its pet institutions - IMF/World Bank/WTO - are still seen as good guys. How? Because (a) all western states have traded foreign policy independence for favoured status in Washington, (b) English as global lingua franca means American soft propaganda is lapped up across the world via its entertainment industry, and (c) all 'our' media are owned by billionaire corps or as with BBC/Graun, subject to government intimidation/market forces.

Truth is, DRT is not some horrifically new entity. (Let's not forget how HRC's 'no fly zone' for Syria promised to take us into WW3, nor her demented "we came, we saw, he died - ha ha" response to Gaddafi's sodomisation by knife blade, and more importantly to Libya's descent into hell.) As John Pilger noted, "the obsession with Trump the man – not Trump as symptom and caricature of an enduring system – beckons great danger for all of us".

cookcounty , 4 Dec 2017 08:15
I missed Jill Abramson's column about all the meetings the Obama administration held -- quite openly -- with foreign governments during the transition period between his election and his first inauguration.

But since she's been demonstrably and laughably wrong about predicting future political events in the USA (see her entire body of work during the 2016 election campaign), why should she start making sense now?

It's completely possible, of course, that some as-yet-to-be-revealed piece of evidence will prove collusion -- before the election and by candidate Trump -- with the Russians. But the Flynn testimony certainly isn't it. All the heavy breathing and hysteria is simply a sign of how the media, yet again, always gravitates toward the news it wishes were true, rather than what really is true. If all Meuller has is Flynn and the Russians during the transition period, he's got nothing.

themandibleclaw -> SteveMilesworthy , 4 Dec 2017 08:12
Flynn was charged with far more serious crimes which were all dropped and he was left with a charge that if he spends any time in prison, it will be about 6 months. Now, you could say for him to agree to that, he must have some juicy info - and he probably does - but what that juicy info is is just speculation. And if we are speculating, then maybe what he traded it for was nothing to do with Trump? After all, one of the charges against him was failing to register as a foreign agent on behalf of Turkey.

It's alleged that Turkey wanted Flynn to extradite Gullen for his alleged involvement in Turkey's failed coup. Just this weekend, Turkey have issued an arrest warrant for a former CIA officer in relation to the failed coup. So, IF the CIA were behind the failed coup and Flynn knows this - well, a good way to silence him would be to charge him with some serious crimes and then offer to drop them in return for his silence. But, like your theory, it's just speculation.

WallyWillage , 4 Dec 2017 08:05
Still no evidence of Russian collusion in Trump campaign BEFORE the election...... whatever happened after being president elect is not impeachable unless it would be after taking office.

The secret deep state security forces haven't been this diminished since Carter cleared the stables in the 70's - they fought back and stopped his second term ...

EduardStreltsovGhost -> CitizenOfTinyBlue , 4 Dec 2017 08:03

You can easily impeach Trump for bombing Syria's military airfield, which is by UN definition war crime of war aggression

if that were the case, Clinton, Bush and Obama would be sitting in jail right now.
oddballs -> Taf1980uk , 4 Dec 2017 07:58
Seeing how the case against Trump and Flynn is based on 'probable' and not hard proof its 'probable that the anti Trump campaign is directed from within the murky enclaves of the US intelligence community.

Trumps presidency could have the capability of galvanising a powerful resistance against the 2 party state for 'real change, like affordable healthcare and affordable education for ALL its people. But no its not happening, Trump is attacked on probables and undisclosed sources. A year has passed and nothing has been revealed.

Hatred against Trump deflects the anger, see the system works the US is still a democracy. Well it isn't, its a sick oligarchy run by the mega rich who own the media, 90% is owned by 5 corporations. Americans are fed the lie that their vast military empire with its 800 overseas bases are to defend US interests.

Well their not, their only function is, is to spend tax dollars that otherwise would be spent on education, health, infrastructure, things that would 'really' benefit America. Disagree, well go ahead and accuse me of being a conspiracy nut-job, in the meantime China is by peaceful means getting the mining rights in Africa, Australia, deals that matter.

The tax legislation for the few against the many is deflected by the anti-Trump hysteria based on conjecture and not proof.

EduardStreltsovGhost , 4 Dec 2017 07:52
Wow this is like becoming McCarthy Era 2.0. I'm just waiting for the show trials of all these so-called colluders.
RelaxAndChill -> Silgen , 4 Dec 2017 07:46
Crimea was and is Russian. Your mask is slipping, Vlad .

Your ignorance is showing. I have no connection to Russia what so ever. Crimea was legally ceded to Russia over 200 years ago, by the Ottomans to Catherine the Great. Russia has never relinquished control. What the criminal organization the USSR did under Ukrainian expat Khrushchev, is irrelevant. And as Putin said , any agreement about respecting Ukraine's territorial integrity was negated when the USA and the EU fomented and financed a rebellion and revolution.

StillAbstractImp , 4 Dec 2017 07:40
Decelerating Fascism - Is Kushner a Putin operative, too?
mikedow -> Karantino , 4 Dec 2017 07:35
Australia, Canada, and S. Africa supply the lion's share of gold bullion that London survives on. And the best uranium in the world. All sorts of other precious commodities as well. If you're not toeing the line on US foreign policies religiously, the Yanks will drop you.
themandibleclaw -> Toastface_Killah , 4 Dec 2017 07:34

You are selectively choosing to refer to this one instance, but even here Obama administration were still in charge - so not very legal, was it.

I am "selectively choosing to refer to this one instance" because that's all Flynn has been charged with. Oh, and it is totally legal for a member of the incoming administration to start talks with their foreign counterparts. Here's a quote from an op-ed piece in The Hill from a law professor at Washington University.

the interest of (Russian Ambassador) Kislyak in determining the position of the new administration on sanctions is not unheard of in Washington, or necessarily untoward to raise with one of the incoming national security advisers. Ambassadors are supposed to seek changes in policies and often seek to influence officials in the early stages of administrations before policies are established. Flynn's suggestion that the Russians wait as the Trump administration unfolded its new policies is a fairly standard response of an incoming official .

http://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/362813-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-of-the-flynn-indictment

backstop -> EdwardFatherby , 4 Dec 2017 07:31
"The problem is charging Flynn for lying. A technicality. But not charging Hillary for email server. Another technicality. That's all the public will see if no collusion proved, and will ruin credibility of the FBI and the Dems"

It's not just collusion is it, what about the rampant, naked nepotism, last seen on this unashamed scale in ancient Rome?

BustedBoom , 4 Dec 2017 07:31

He then pushed Flynn hard to try to turn Russia around on an anti-Israel vote by the UN security council.

So he lobbied for Israel not Russia then? Whoops. How does the author even know where Mueller's probe is heading, and which way Flynn flipped? Flynn worked much longer for the Obama administration than for Trump's.
CitizenOfTinyBlue , 4 Dec 2017 07:26
You can easily impeach Trump for bombing Syria's military airfield, which is by UN definition war crime of war aggression, starting war without the Congress approval; and doing so by supporting false flag of AQ, is support of terrorists and so on

Oh you can't do it, of course, it was so - so presidential to bomb another country and it is just old habit and no war declaration, if country is too weak to bomb you back. And you love this exiting crazy balance of global nuclear annihilation too much, so you prefer screaming Russia, Russia to keep it hot, for wonderful military contracts.

Oh, and I have to be supporter of Putin's oligarchy with dreams of great tsars of Russia, if I care about humans survival on this planet and have very bad opinion about suicidal fools playing this stupid games.

ConCaruthers , 4 Dec 2017 07:25
If the US wanted to do itself a massive favour it should shine the spotlight on Robert Mueller, the man now in charge of investigating the President of these United States for "collusion" with Russia and possible "obstruction of justice" himself obstructed a congressional investigation into the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
moonsphere -> Hydro , 4 Dec 2017 07:24
Dealing with western backed coups on its own doorstep and being the only country actually to be legally fighting in Syria - a war that directly threatens its security - does not amount to global belligerence.
etrang -> CraftyRabbi , 4 Dec 2017 07:14

Mueller could charge/indict Kushner or Trump Jr under New York state criminal statutes

But not for crimes relating to federal elections or conspiring with Russia.

John Edwin -> OlivesNightie , 4 Dec 2017 07:13
Clinton lied under oath
John Edwin -> SoAmerican , 4 Dec 2017 07:11
The logan act is a dead law no one will be prosecuted for a act that has never been used... plus the president elect can talk to any foreign leader he or she wishes to use and even talk deals even if a current president for 2 months is still in office...
emiliofloris -> Sowester , 4 Dec 2017 07:08

I am not sure any level of scandal will make much difference to Trump or his supporters. They simply see this as an elitist conspiracy and not amount of evidence of wrongdoing will have an impact.

So far the level of scandal is below that of Whitewater/Lewinsky, and that was a very low level indeed. What "evidence of wrongdoing" is there? Nothing, that's why they charged Flynn with lying to investigators. It's important to keep in mind that the he did nor lie about actual crimes. Perhaps that's going to change as the investigation proceeds, but so far this is nothing more than a partisan lawfare fishing expedition.

Billsykesdoggy -> reinhardpolley , 4 Dec 2017 06:55
<blockquoteSpecifically, it prohibits citizens from negotiating with other nations on behalf of the United States without authorization.>

So Trump authorized Obama's talks with Macron last week?

Don't think so.

braciole -> Karantino , 4 Dec 2017 06:55

Because they attempted to covertly influence a general election in order to weaken the US.

And your evidence for this is what exactly? As for countries trying to influence elections in other countries, I'm all for it particularly when one of the candidates is murderous, arrogant and stupid.

BTW, in Honduras after supporting a coup against the democratically-elected president because he sought a referendum on allowing presidents to serve two terms, you'd think the United States would interfere when his non-democratically-elected replacement used a "packed" supreme court to change the constitution to allow presidents to serve more than one term to at least stop him stealing an election as he is now doing/has done. But they didn't and that hasn't stopped the United States whining that Evo Morales is being undemocratic by trying to extend the number of terms he can serve.

emiliofloris -> Karantino , 4 Dec 2017 06:53

Because they attempted to covertly influence a general election in order to weaken the US.

Should all countries which try to influence elections be treated as enemies? Where do you set the threshold? If we go by the actual evidence, Russia seems to have bought some Facebook ads and was allegedly involved in exposing HRC's meddling with the Democratic primaries. Compare that to the influence that countries like Israel and the Gulf Arabs exert on American politics and elections. Are you seriously claiming that Russia's influence is bigger or more decisive?

The goal of weakening the US is also highly debatable. Accepting for a moment that Russia tried to tip the balance in favor of Trump, would America be stronger if it were engaged more actively in Syria and Ukraine? Is there a specific example where Trump's administration weakened the American position to the advantage of Russia? And how is the sustained anti-Russian information warfare helping anyone but the Chinese?

technotherapy , 4 Dec 2017 06:46
The clues that Kushner has been pulling the strings on Russia are everywhere... He then pushed Flynn hard to try to turn Russia around on an anti-Israel vote by the UN security council.

And Russia didn't turn, so hardly a clue that Kushner was pulling strings with any effect. What this clue does suggest however, is that Israel pressured/colluded with the Trump Team to undermine the Obama administrations policy towards a UN resolution on illegal settlements. The elephant in the room is Israels influence on US politics.

themandibleclaw -> Simon Denham , 4 Dec 2017 06:44

Can someone please actually tell us what Flynn/Jared/Trump is supposed to have done.

In relation to the "lying" charge - In December, Flynn (in his role as incoming National Security Advisor) was told to talk to the Russians by Kushner (in his role as incoming special advisor). In these conversations, Flynn told the Russians to be patient regarding sanctions as things may change when Trump becomes President. All of this is totally legal and is what EVERY new adminstration does. Flynn had his phoned tapped by the FBI so they knew he had talked to the Russian about sanctions - they also knew the conversation was totally legal - but when they asked him about it, he said he didn't discuss sanctions. So Flynn is being charged about lying about something that was totally legal for him to do. That's it.

moonsphere -> SoAmerican , 4 Dec 2017 06:44
These days "US influence" seems to consist of bombing Middle Eastern countries back to the bronze age for reasons that defy easy logic. Anything that reduces that kind of influence would be welcome.
reinhardpolley -> Simon Denham , 4 Dec 2017 06:33
The Logan Act (18 U.S.C.A. § 953 [1948]) is a single federal statute making it a crime for a citizen to confer with foreign governments against the interests of the United States. Specifically, it prohibits citizens from negotiating with other nations on behalf of the United States without authorization.
https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Logan+Act
themandibleclaw , 4 Dec 2017 06:22
All those thinking this is the beginning of the end of Trump are going to be disappointed. Just look at the charges so far. Manafort has been charged with money laundering and not registering as a foreign agent - however, both of those charges pre-date him working for Trump. Flynn has been charged with lying to the FBI about speaking to the Russians - even though him speaking to the Russians in his role as National Security Advisor to the President-elect was not only totally legal, it was the norm. And this took place in December, after the election.

So the 2 main players have been charged with things that have nothing to do with the Trump campaign, and lets not forget the point of the investigation is to find out if Trump's campaign colluded with the Russians to win the election. Manafort's charges related to before working for the Trump campaign whilst Flynn's came after Trump won the Presidency, neither of which have anything to do with the election. As much as I wish Trump wasn't President, don't get your hopes up that this is going anywhere.

damientrollope , 4 Dec 2017 06:15
Gross hypocrisy on the US governments side. They have, since WW2 interfered with other countries elections, invaded, and killed millions worldwide, and are still doing so. Where were the FBI investigations then? Non existent. US politicians and the military hierarchy are completely immune from any prosecutions when it comes down to overseas illegal interference.

But now this Russian debacle, and at last they've woken up, because another country had the temerity to turn the tables on them. And I think if this was Bush or Obama we would never have heard a thing about it. Everybody hates the Dotard, because he's an obese dick with an IQ to match.

Boojay , 4 Dec 2017 06:15
Nothing will happen to Trump, It's all bollocks. You've all watched too many Spielberg films, bad guys win, and they win most of the time.
Trump is the real face of America, America like all governments are narcissistic, they will cheat, steal, kill, if it benefits them. It's called national interest, and it's number one on any leader's job list. Watch fog of war with Robert McNamara, fantastic and terrifying to see how it works.
formerathlete -> vacantspace , 4 Dec 2017 06:15

when American presidents were rational, well balanced with progressive views we had.... decent American healthcare? Equality of opportunity? Gun laws that made it safe to walk the streets?

Say who, what an a where now????????? Since when has the US EVER had any of the three things that you mentioned???

If ever, then it was a loooooong time before the pilgrim fathers ever landed.

Hugh Mad -> JonShone , 4 Dec 2017 06:10

The US has also been meddling in other countries elections for years, and doubtless most Americans neither know or care about that! So it's perhaps it's best to simply term them a 'rival', most people should be able to agree on that.

That is the bottom line, yes. People view the world through west = good and Russia = bad, while both make economic and political decisions that serve the interests of their people respectively. Ultimately, I think people are scared that the West's monopoly on global influence is slipping, to as you said, a rival.

JonShone -> Hugh Mad , 4 Dec 2017 06:06
You are right that calling Russia the US enemy needs justification, but these threads often deteriorate into arguments of the yes it is/no it isn't variety.

Gallup have been polling Americans for the past couple of decades on this. The last time I read about it a couple of years ago 70% of Americans had unfavourable views of Russia, ranging from those who saw them as an enemy (a smaller amount) through to those who saw them as a threat.

It's certain that their ideals and goals run counter to those generally held in the US in many ways. But let's not forget that the US' ideals are often, if not generally, divergent from their interests and US foreign policy since 1945 has been responsible for countless deaths, perhaps more than Russia's.

The US has also been meddling in other countries elections for years, and doubtless most Americans neither know or care about that! So it's perhaps it's best to simply term them a 'rival', most people should be able to agree on that.

RelaxAndChill , 4 Dec 2017 05:59
All the signs in the Russia probe point to ..

How the liberals and the Democrats don't give a damm about the USA or the world's political scene, just some endless 'sore loser' witch hunt. So much could be achieved by the improving of relations with Russia. Crimea was and is Russian. Let Trump have a go as POTUS and then judge him. He wants to befriend Putin and if done it would help solve Syrian, Nth Korean and other global problems.

variation31 -> Sowester , 4 Dec 2017 05:50

They simply see this as an elitist conspiracy and not amount of evidence of wrongdoing will have an impact

Whereas if it's a Democrat in the spotlight, these same dipshits see it as an élitist cover-up and no lack of evidence of wrongdoing will have an impact. If anything, lack of evidence is evidence of cover-up which is therefore proof of evidence.

These cynical games they play with veracity and human honesty are a very pure form of evil.

[Dec 12, 2017] We are all just hapless passengers on the Neocon Titanic, unable to influence what is playing out on the bridge

Highly recommended!
Of course, UNZ is more radical on this issue then most (actually they use the terms "Jew", "neocons" and "Zionist" almost interchangeably, but in most case the meaning is neocon -- ideology, not nationality ) , but it looks like public support of neocons in the USA now dropped dramatically, especially after their attacks on Trump during 2016 elections.
Notable quotes:
"... They are not a threat to the US and while I think we will be in a support capacity -- with Israel obviously -- to a bunker buster attack it will be regarded as US backed war throughout the Islamic world. Trump may be too weak to resist Netanyahu's best sales pitch. ..."
"... The Neocons are turning up at MSNBC of late. In addition to Podhoretz, Brooks, Kristol, we are now seeing E. Johnson, B. Stephens, D. Pletka on the scene as regular rotation players. No doubt where they will be leading. Moving in where opportunities abound for some reason? ..."
"... "Trump may be too weak to resist Netanyahu's best sales pitch." Trump is an Israeli sycophant ..a loser. ..."
"... That US missile attack on the Syrian airport cost Trump a lot of domestic and international support for zero benefit... ..."
"... This is a war of an elite. [Tom] Friedman laughs: I could give you the names of 25 people (all of whom are at this moment within a five-block radius of this office) who, if you had exiled them to a desert island a year and a half ago, the Iraq war would not have happened. ..."
"... Yet if you point out the obvious, that our foreign policy has been hijacked by an element whose first loyalty is to Israel, you will catch all sorts of hell, be banned from making comments on blogs and news sites, or like the brave Mr. Giraldi, lose your job. And be blasted with the worn-out canard of being an anti-Semite. Maybe even a Jew hater, all because you show concern for the nation you love and are loyal to. ..."
"... While Pompeo would be not good, Tillerson has been a big disappointment with his latest statements on Crimea and Ukraine included. ..."
"... You obviously do not live here. 99% of Americans have a flat screen TV installed in their living rooms and believe everything (jooie managed images and info) spewing forth from it. ..."
"... The "problem" is that the whole American "business model" is based on global economic supremacy, which means, essentially, the dollar as world reserve currency. If that goes, the whole US house of cards will probably implode, Soviet-style. That requires unchallenged American "world leadership". The big threat to the "American model" isn't the EU and certainly not the Russian Federation. It's China. ..."
"... Yeah, yeah, yeah big bad ISIS. The Israeli Secret Intelligence Service. "Keeping Fools and Idiots At Each Other's Throats". Since 1950. I don't know what to tell you ..."
"... The US is expansionist, projecting itself all over the globe and uses force against anyone who resists. Force is all it understands. What happens when the irresistible force bumps into the immovable object? War hysteria, of which we've had an unending amount for the past three generations. Objectively there's nothing conservative about the so-called neocons. They're hardly any different from fascists except the rhetoric is different. Mussolini had limits as to how much territory he wanted to conquer for his empire unlike the US which recognizes no limits. ..."
"... BTW, I still don't see an attack on Iran as being very likely. If Russia and China would not greenlight an attack on Syria, they will be doubly reluctant to greenlight an attack on Iran. ..."
"... The "democracy" the neocons want to push is the one in which (((mass media))) successfully lobotomizes the electorate into thinking it has democracy. The zombies then make their way to the polls seeking "hope & change" but with no choice. Hegemony is the goal, not democracy. ..."
"... American has an all volunteer armed forces (mercenary), they are paid to kill or be killed, their fates is only a few seconds on the screens if the MSM decided to air them, otherwise the wars and the American soldiers' lives have nothing to do with the American public. Mayhem in far away land in out of sight and out of mind. ..."
"... The real issue is how to finance the war, as long as the war does not cause hyper inflation in the USA, the warmongers in the Washington beltway will go ahead with the war without much concern, with EU, Australia, Japan and S Korea in line paying the bills, the American should be able to wage another regime change war in the ME without much difficulty. ..."
"... Having some small portion of Scotch-Irish ancestry myself, and having ancestors who pioneered Tennessee, I don't think General Andrew Jackson would support the Israel First foreign policy of Tom Cotton. ..."
"... Yet if you point out the obvious, that our foreign policy has been hijacked by an element whose first loyalty is to Israel, you will catch all sorts of hell, be banned from making comments on blogs and news sites, or like the brave Mr. Giraldi, lose your job. And be blasted with the worn-out canard of being an anti-Semite. Maybe even a Jew hater, all because you show concern for the nation you love and are loyal to. ..."
"... Re: At the time, I agreed, but I did note that the neoconservatives have proven to be remarkable resilient, particularly as many of them have remained true to their Democratic Party values on nearly everything but foreign policy, where they are irredeemable hawks, hostile to Russia and Iran and always reliably in the corner of Israel ..."
"... And when it comes to foreign policy, of course the Neocons are globalists, like the international bankers whom they serve. ..."
"... The Neocons are nothing less than a parasitical foreign body which has us thinking in accordance with its interests; in fact they are mortal enemies, nothing less. ..."
"... Wall Street power held a gun to the head of the entire US economy and said 'Give us money, OR we will take ALL OF YOU down with us.' ..."
"... My knowledge of foreign policy is headline-quality only. My knowledge of some domestic policy is pretty good. I've been on the public stump in my area. The reality of American policy, as I've seen it, is that it's bought and paid for. There is no "public interest", no "national interest". I'm not even sure there's an America, in the sense of a people joined by some common values. Sometimes I think of America as an agglomeration of rackets. You're goddamned right I don't like thinking this way. ..."
"... Dump's second big mistake was firing Comey again on the advice of Kushner. Which got the Mueller ball rolling. Some have rightly drawn the parallels of Kushner whispering in Dump's ear to the same role of Kissinger vis a vis Nixon's downfall ..."
"... Then Kushner appeared to connive with his buddy KSA Clown Prince MBS to engineer the Hariri fiasco [which Tillerson managed to "deftly undo..."] ..."
"... That is a useless statement on many levels Tillerson deftly managed what is arguably America's most important corporation in what is surely the most strategic and geopolitical global industry energy ..."
"... The neocons are of course insane they are picking fights with Iran, Venezuela and others who are going to be the first to ditch the petrodollar and accelerate the tipping point to the new global financial order that is going to impoverish the US overnight ..."
"... The same neocons are also the ones who are undermining US demographics because their Ponzi scheme economy is based on perpetual growth which, in turn, requires perpetual population growth which means more immigration. Also the immigration keeps the wages low which is just extra gravy for the Plutocracy ..."
Dec 12, 2017 | www.unz.com

Mark James , December 12, 2017 at 5:57 am GMT

I'm really concerned an attack on Iran is a correct assessment Philip. They are not a threat to the US and while I think we will be in a support capacity -- with Israel obviously -- to a bunker buster attack it will be regarded as US backed war throughout the Islamic world. Trump may be too weak to resist Netanyahu's best sales pitch.

Tillerson will be gone sooner or later: No question, perhaps the week between Christmas and New Year?

Cotton and Pompeo: Pompeo may have problems with the Mueller probe. Cotton has a number of rumors in his past and maybe they are just unfortunate talk? But I don't see him at CIA (we shall see?)

The Neocons are turning up at MSNBC of late. In addition to Podhoretz, Brooks, Kristol, we are now seeing E. Johnson, B. Stephens, D. Pletka on the scene as regular rotation players. No doubt where they will be leading. Moving in where opportunities abound for some reason? At least two (Halperin, Ford) aren't around anymore on Coffee Joe.

Anonymous , Disclaimer December 12, 2017 at 7:22 am GMT
Well, if the rumours about Cotton and Pompeo appointments materialise, Trump might as well move his own office to Jerusalem
Fran Macadam , December 12, 2017 at 7:42 am GMT
We're all just hapless passengers on the Neocon Titanic, unable to influence what's playing out on the bridge. Steady as she goes on the unsinkable U.S.S.
Realist , December 12, 2017 at 9:08 am GMT
@Mark James

"Trump may be too weak to resist Netanyahu's best sales pitch." Trump is an Israeli sycophant ..a loser.

Philip Smeeton , December 12, 2017 at 11:02 am GMT
From the movie Iron Sky, meant as a condemnation of Nazism, but inadvertently conveying a sensible message about the merits of purity.

Renate Richter:

This is very simple. The world is sick, but we are the doctors. The world is anemic, but we are the vitamin. The world is weary, but we are the strength. We are here to make the world healthy once again, with hard work, with honesty, with clarity, with decency. We are the product of loving mothers and brave fathers. We are the embodiment of love and bravery! We are the gift of both God and Science. We are the answer to the question. We are the promise delivered to all mankind. For that, we raise our hands to one Nation. We step to the beat of one drum. We march to the beat of one heart and it is this song that we will sing to this world. We are the people who carry the children on our shoulders in the same way that our fathers carried us and their fathers carried them. We are the one people united and strong. We are the one people with certainty, moral certainty. We are invincible and we have no fear because the truth makes us wise.

Anonymous , Disclaimer December 12, 2017 at 11:23 am GMT
@peterAUS

Well, if conflict is simply air assault on Iranian nuclear facilities that shouldn't be a problem for either party. Israelis/Americans bomb a bit and then everything goes back to normal. Something as that cruise missile launch on Syria.

That US missile attack on the Syrian airport cost Trump a lot of domestic and international support for zero benefit...

jacques sheete , December 12, 2017 at 11:53 am GMT

I do not even want to guess at what kind of insanity

Insanity. That's the key. Sick beyond redemption. No rational person could ever begin to understand their motives. Somehow the jackals need to be restrained.

Greg Bacon , Website December 12, 2017 at 12:46 pm GMT
We see the same usual suspects time and again, waving their pom-poms lustily cheering on endless war that does NOT help or benefit the USA. In fact, it is destroying our nation economically, spiritually and politically.

From an April 2003 Haaretz article:

The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservative intellectuals, most of them Jewish, who are pushing President Bush to change the course of history. Two of them, journalists William Kristol and Charles Krauthammer, say it's possible.

This is a war of an elite. [Tom] Friedman laughs: I could give you the names of 25 people (all of whom are at this moment within a five-block radius of this office) who, if you had exiled them to a desert island a year and a half ago, the Iraq war would not have happened.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/features/white-man-s-burden-1.14110

Yet if you point out the obvious, that our foreign policy has been hijacked by an element whose first loyalty is to Israel, you will catch all sorts of hell, be banned from making comments on blogs and news sites, or like the brave Mr. Giraldi, lose your job. And be blasted with the worn-out canard of being an anti-Semite. Maybe even a Jew hater, all because you show concern for the nation you love and are loyal to.

Will Americans ever realize they are being played for fools by a country and Zionist con artists which doesn't give a tinkers damn about us or will we keep jumping up and down to the pom-pom waving?

Den Lille Abe , December 12, 2017 at 1:43 pm GMT
Yes all this Newspeak, to hide the fact that the US is a threat in anyone that disagrees with them
Z-man , December 12, 2017 at 2:18 pm GMT
Of course I hope you're wrong Phil. While Pompeo would be not good, Tillerson has been a big disappointment with his latest statements on Crimea and Ukraine included.

Cotton would be another matter altogether and even though there is a 'collegial spirit' in the Senate I would hope that Rand Paul and other senators with common sense would squash this guys nomination. Even if he has to carry himself back from Kentucky, broken ribs and all, to squash this Neocon stooge Cotton. Also, I'm hopping there are some boys in the closet when it comes to Cotton. lol

Zumbuddi , December 12, 2017 at 2:22 pm GMT
@LondonBob

Faith in Bush the OLDER is misplaced. In 1979 he stood shoulder to shoulder w/ Bibi and Benzion Netenyahu, and Midge Decter & other neocons, in Jerusalem, as they drafted the blueprint for GWOT. Planning went so far as to name the 7 states to take out. USSR was #1 at the time. Jews got Jews Who had been highly educated at Russian expense – out of Russia, now Russia is back in the crosshairs.

... ... ...

Anonymous , Disclaimer December 12, 2017 at 3:10 pm GMT

Americans are stoopid and cowardly fucks for being so easily manipulated by the Jew.

Not so much anymore. Meanwhile, didn't the Muslims spend five years fighting each-other right on the Israeli border? But wait – they did attack Israel once – and apologised:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-28/isis-apologized-israel-attacking-idf-soldiers

I don't know what to tell you

nsa , December 12, 2017 at 3:24 pm GMT
@peterAUS

"the American public isn't as gullible as before ."

Ha, Ha. You obviously do not live here. 99% of Americans have a flat screen TV installed in their living rooms and believe everything (jooie managed images and info) spewing forth from it. More than 50% of Americans have multiple flat screen TV in their homes so they can be sure not to miss the latest disinfo or lies.

.... ... ...

Michael Kenny , December 12, 2017 at 3:41 pm GMT
The "problem" is that the whole American "business model" is based on global economic supremacy, which means, essentially, the dollar as world reserve currency. If that goes, the whole US house of cards will probably implode, Soviet-style. That requires unchallenged American "world leadership". The big threat to the "American model" isn't the EU and certainly not the Russian Federation. It's China. 1.4 billion people and rapidly heading for global economic hegemony. To say nothing of a rising India at 1.2 billion. At 300 million, the US is small beans. How to ward off the Yellow Peril? That's the problem the US hegemonists had to resolve.

... ... ...

DaveE , December 12, 2017 at 3:45 pm GMT
@Anonymous

Yeah, yeah, yeah big bad ISIS. The Israeli Secret Intelligence Service. "Keeping Fools and Idiots At Each Other's Throats". Since 1950. I don't know what to tell you ..

anonymous , Disclaimer December 12, 2017 at 3:47 pm GMT
@jacques sheete

Somehow the jackals need to be restrained.

It's not that difficult to strategize HOW to go about "restraining the jackals." 99 44/100% of what ziocons accuse others of is projection. They say, "They [_____ Iran, ISIS, Palestinians, Russians - fill in the blank] understand only force." This projects that the only thing that will restrain psychopathic Israel is force.

When an Iranian nuclear engineer was assassinated in Tehran, Ronen Bergman told Brian Williams that "Israel has used assassination more than any other state; not even Stalin or Hitler used assassination as much as Israel. . . ."

... ... ...

anonymous , Disclaimer December 12, 2017 at 3:58 pm GMT
@Ben Frank

So far the President has proved much smarter than most people expected him to be

Exactamundo, Ben Frank (any relation to Anne, Princess of the Ballpoint Pen?). Naming Jerusalem the capital of Israel was fucking brilliant. Don't you worry your pretty little head about all the US forces in the multiple bases in the region that are accessible to mad-as-hornets Muslims; Israel will have their backs, fer shur.

--

Come to think of it, maybe Trump can burnish his "much smarter-ness" by taking a page out of Reagan's playbook: Immediately after the first US soldier is plinked by an Angry Arab, Trump should pull ALL US FORCES out of the region: do a Reagan-post-Black Hawk down.

If the Israelis want to stir the pot, let them stand over the steam-heat and wield the spoon. We're outa there.

anonymous , Disclaimer December 12, 2017 at 3:58 pm GMT
The people of the ME can't catch a break. Since being pried away from the Ottoman empire a hundred years ago they've been the plaything of various western countries. Their national borders drawn up by distant foreigners, they've been interfered with constantly, their regimes dictated by foreigners. Then the selfsame westerners turn around and point to their backwardness as proof that they're incapable of doing anything on their own.

The US is expansionist, projecting itself all over the globe and uses force against anyone who resists. Force is all it understands. What happens when the irresistible force bumps into the immovable object? War hysteria, of which we've had an unending amount for the past three generations. Objectively there's nothing conservative about the so-called neocons. They're hardly any different from fascists except the rhetoric is different. Mussolini had limits as to how much territory he wanted to conquer for his empire unlike the US which recognizes no limits.

Rurik , December 12, 2017 at 4:21 pm GMT

replaced at CIA by Senator Tom Cotton.

it was faint, and barely perceptible, but at some level, I did actually tremble when I read those words. Cotton is the new John McCain. The ultimate traitor to this nation and its people and all people of good will on the planet and every tenet of decency known to the universe

a lickspittle to Sheldon Adelson and everything that repulsive toad represents. if Cotton is exalted to head the CIA, I'll have to think very hard about leaving these shores. perhaps Bobby Fischer was right, and the ZUSA is endemically, irredeemably evil.

there can be no doubt that the zio-Fiend is the incarnation of evil itself, but I always keep hoping that the good people of the ZUS will repudiate the zio-Fiend- that has them waging serial wars all over the planet to benefit the Jews. As their infrastructure crumbles back home, and their veterans can't get health care, and the jobs are 'in' and outsourced to the third world. what will it take to wake up the bovine, cud-chewing sheople?!

their children come home in body bags, or with their souls so eviscerated by the sheer evil of the wars they're forced to fight, that they often just 'snuff it' as the only escape from their nightmares. (and the realization that the ZUSA is a drooling fiend and that they've murdered innocent people and destroyed nations on its behalf)

those young people can not abide the evil that the ZUS government has become, and their only salvation is to end their young lives.

for those of us with more choices at hand, why can't we finally and simply repudiate the zio-scum who've done us and so many others so much harm?!

NOT TOM COTTON!!!!!

fuck no!

SolontoCroesus , December 12, 2017 at 4:39 pm GMT
@SolontoCroesus

PS If the USA / American people and their representatives conformed foreign as well as economic policy to the vision of George Washington rather than Louis Brandeis -- > Benjamin Netanyahu & fellow psychopaths and traitors, USA would engage with OBOR rather than attempt to destroy it.

Check out anon20171212′s comment at #21, above http://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/bad-moon-rising/#comment-2115106

Destruction (and deception) are the way of the Talmudists. Even Heinrich Graetz, the Germanophilic Jew who authored the first modern history of the Jewish people, had nothing but opprobrium to heap on Talmudists.

https://archive.org/details/historyofthejews014022mbp

The American 'way' is not the way of the Talmud. Christian values are not Talmudic values. George Washington's legacy was not Talmudic, it was America First :

https://www.varsitytutors.com/earlyamerica/milestone-events/george-washingtons-farewell-address-full-text

Astuteobservor II , December 12, 2017 at 4:43 pm GMT
@Anonymous

doesn't matter, we are still the ones doing the dirty work. there is no escape from the responsibility. it is like a hitman claiming he is a professional, it is just business. that doesn't fly.

Ken S , December 12, 2017 at 4:47 pm GMT
What's with it with neoconservative Israel lackeys like Tom Cotton and Ted Cruz graduating from a prestigious and supposedly left-wing school like Harvard? Are they book-smart without common sense? The country would be better off if Cotton stayed in the Senate. He can do less damage if 1 of 100. Plus, the shelf-life of anyone in the Trump admin seems to be very short – and he'd better not have groped any Harvard classmates, who might just be waiting in the wings to destroy his career.
Seamus Padraig , December 12, 2017 at 5:34 pm GMT
As recently as a month ago, I was still willing to give Trump the benefit of the doubt. But it should now be obvious to all what a total zio-muppet he really is. If there's any silver lining in all of this, it's the fact that the Jew-media have expended so much effort in attacking Trump that he'll now make a very poor spokesman for their cause abroad.

BTW, I still don't see an attack on Iran as being very likely. If Russia and China would not greenlight an attack on Syria, they will be doubly reluctant to greenlight an attack on Iran.

Frank Walus , December 12, 2017 at 7:24 pm GMT
The "democracy" the neocons want to push is the one in which (((mass media))) successfully lobotomizes the electorate into thinking it has democracy. The zombies then make their way to the polls seeking "hope & change" but with no choice. Hegemony is the goal, not democracy.

Trump may have been skeptical as a candidate about America's role as policeman of the world, but the establishment knives are out and he might (correctly?) surmise that the only way to stay in office is to make the ziocons happy. Even Bill Kristol would see the error in never-Trump_vs_deep_state if bombs started falling on Iran.

Joe Wong , December 12, 2017 at 8:04 pm GMT
@peterAUS

American has an all volunteer armed forces (mercenary), they are paid to kill or be killed, their fates is only a few seconds on the screens if the MSM decided to air them, otherwise the wars and the American soldiers' lives have nothing to do with the American public. Mayhem in far away land in out of sight and out of mind. Citing the American public gullibility is really a residual sentiment of old days cold war mentality and trying to attach some kind of morality to the wars the American has been fighting. American has long been demonstrated they are just as morally defunct imperialist as the British and their mentor, the Romans.

The real issue is how to finance the war, as long as the war does not cause hyper inflation in the USA, the warmongers in the Washington beltway will go ahead with the war without much concern, with EU, Australia, Japan and S Korea in line paying the bills, the American should be able to wage another regime change war in the ME without much difficulty.

Charles Pewitt , December 12, 2017 at 8:14 pm GMT
Tom Cotton is not to be trusted. Many gave US Senator Tom Cotton credit for his offering a bill that would cut legal immigration in half and would significantly reduce illegal immigration. It is now clear that the immigration reduction ploy proffered by Tom Cotton was a sneaky way to mollify the White Core American voter base of President Trump.

Tom Cotton is a stooge for Sheldon Adelson and the Neo-Conservatives. The Neo-Conservatives know they are highly vulnerable on the immigration issue and the national question. That is why they sent their puppet Tom Cotton out with instructions to bang the pot on reducing immigration.

Recently, the Neo-Conservative-controlled, Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal gave Tom Cotton a half page, above the fold puff piece where Tom Cotton is said to be offering a foreign policy fit for "Jacksonian America." I think Tom Cotton must be referring to Michael Jackson or some other Jackson, and not General Andrew Jackson. Having some small portion of Scotch-Irish ancestry myself, and having ancestors who pioneered Tennessee, I don't think General Andrew Jackson would support the Israel First foreign policy of Tom Cotton.

IMMIGRATION and the NATIONAL QUESTION are the two things that will finally dislodge the nation-wrecking Neo-Conservatives and their politician puppets from the ruling class of the American Empire.

Z-man , December 12, 2017 at 8:22 pm GMT
@Greg Bacon

Yet if you point out the obvious, that our foreign policy has been hijacked by an element whose first loyalty is to Israel, you will catch all sorts of hell, be banned from making comments on blogs and news sites, or like the brave Mr. Giraldi, lose your job. And be blasted with the worn-out canard of being an anti-Semite. Maybe even a Jew hater, all because you show concern for the nation you love and are loyal to.

If you remember what happened to Rick Sanchez, the former talking head of NBC and CNN when he was pushed into calling out the Jew in a 'gotcha' interview as he sarcastically replied that yeah Jews are underrepresented in the media. He was gone in '60 seconds'!

Whatever happened to Rick Sanchez??? LOL!!!

Veranon , December 12, 2017 at 8:25 pm GMT
Re: At the time, I agreed, but I did note that the neoconservatives have proven to be remarkable resilient, particularly as many of them have remained true to their Democratic Party values on nearly everything but foreign policy, where they are irredeemable hawks, hostile to Russia and Iran and always reliably in the corner of Israel.
-- -- -- -- -
Of course. The Jewish Neocons and their "useful idiots," whether "bought and paid for" or voluntarily enlisted, are necessarily "liberal" in relation to domestic policy because the idea is to destroy all Western and Christian norms and values by means of cultural marxist "critical theory." And it's working very well. The mass media and the educational system have hopelessly corrupted American and European minds with this profoundly subversive "intellectual" garbage.

And when it comes to foreign policy, of course the Neocons are globalists, like the international bankers whom they serve. Israel first, because they are not there to defend their country's interests, but to defend Israel's, in accordance with the permanent goal of Eretz Ysrael and world hegemony in accordance with the ultimate goal of Jewish supremacy via the money power, and in preparation for their "messiah". It's all disguised as for the sake of American greatness and "our values."

The Neocons are nothing less than a parasitical foreign body which has us thinking in accordance with its interests; in fact they are mortal enemies, nothing less. The Western goyim–as well as innocent Jews here and in Israel itself–will be cheerfully sacrificed by the Zionists, who serve darker forces and interests than those of their people. Western humanity has been rendered helpless because they are intellectually helpless and because in consequence they have been dispossessed of deep faith and corresponding real virtues. This was noted years ago by Solzhenitsyn, among others. Ideas rule human beings for good or ill, since we are thinking beings. But when the ideas that determine us are profoundly wrong and when intellectual chaos and unbridled individualism reign, nothing real can be accomplished. However, in due time vincit omnia veritas –the Real has the last word. "Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord."

Priss Factor , Website December 12, 2017 at 9:50 pm GMT
North Korea's survival strategy is "If you invade us, we will blow up South Korea and maybe even Tokyo." Ruled by a vile regime but with rational concern for survival, even if it has no moral right to survive. But then, what is the other option? South Korea is a puppet state of US globalist empire. If NK was ruled by wiser people, its case would be made more intelligently. It would tell the world community that it needs for defense given US record in the Middle East and North Africa. But it's ruled by some egotistical brat-boy whose idea of culture is Dennis Rodman and Rap trash-talking.

As different as NK and Jewish Power, they have one thing in common: WGYG or We Go, You Go. The idea is that if they are destroyed, they will take others with them.

Jewish Power pulled this off in 2008. When Lehman Brothers wasn't bailed out by the government, Wall Street pushed a 'too big to fail' scheme and threatened Total Collapse of the Economy UNLESS it was showered with super-generous bailouts that would eventually come to enrich the banks during a severe recession for most Americans. Bush couldn't do anything about it except go along. Obama bailed out Wall Street. And McCain would have done the same had he won. Jewish Wall Street power held a gun to the head of the entire US economy and said 'Give us money, OR we will take ALL OF YOU down with us.'

The system is rigged so that a major collapse of Jewish Power will trigger total collapse of the entire system. It's been wired that way. The whole tower will collapse. So, if anyone tries to cut the wire of Jewish Power, kaboom, the whole thing blows up, and everyone dies. Gentiles must carry Jewish Power like a crate of nitroglycerin. One false step and Kaboom.

JackOH , December 12, 2017 at 10:04 pm GMT
Phil, thanks.

"Tom [Cotton] is completely owned by the Israeli lobby."

" . . . [Nikki] Haley is stupid. And ambitious. And is also owned by the Israeli lobby . . .".

My knowledge of foreign policy is headline-quality only. My knowledge of some domestic policy is pretty good. I've been on the public stump in my area. The reality of American policy, as I've seen it, is that it's bought and paid for. There is no "public interest", no "national interest". I'm not even sure there's an America, in the sense of a people joined by some common values. Sometimes I think of America as an agglomeration of rackets. You're goddamned right I don't like thinking this way.

There are only insider players who bankroll and blackmail their way into getting the decisions they want. I wish I could say something high-minded, but I can't.

anon , Disclaimer December 12, 2017 at 10:52 pm GMT
@Priss Factor

India and Pakistan have nukes. How would they respond to an Israeli Sampson Option?

How about China? An Izzie attack on European capitals could destroy a lot of Chinese investment. China has sufficient nuclear capability to detach Israel from the Mediterranean littoral and create an irradiated submerged island.

Does van Crevald think Putin will sit on his hands and wait a thousand years for the dust to clear?

van Crevald says Israel can hit Rome. That's zionism's wet dream, to completely obliterate Rome.
How many Jews live a parasitical life in Rome and other European capitals?

Can Izzies reach USA? Didn't think so. What do they think would happen to hundreds of Jewish institutions, and Jewish people, in USA if Israel destroys Europe -- again?

FB , December 13, 2017 at 12:03 am GMT
People need to let go of the idea that Dump is anything but a conman and a weak one at that

The office of President holds a lot of authority that Dump has not been able [or willing] to wield that speaks to his own weakness as a leader

It's time to admit that he is not the messiah that many Lunchpail Joes wanted to believe

As to the specifics of this article yes I agree with Mr. Giraldi that the neocons are back in the driver's seat if they ever left in the first place

Exhibit One is Jared Kushner the Clown Prince of the Shite House. This is the guy who has inflicted most of the damage on Dump starting with his advice to dump Flynn. Dump was under zero pressure to do any such thing the neocon Pence is the one who demanded Flynn's head. Dump could have pushed back there was nothing wrong with Flynn the incoming National Security Adviser speaking to the Russians or anyone else and what he spoke of with the Russians was in lobbying THEM in the US interest not the other way round

Dump's second big mistake was firing Comey again on the advice of Kushner. Which got the Mueller ball rolling. Some have rightly drawn the parallels of Kushner whispering in Dump's ear to the same role of Kissinger vis a vis Nixon's downfall

Then Kushner appeared to connive with his buddy KSA Clown Prince MBS to engineer the Hariri fiasco [which Tillerson managed to "deftly undo..."]

' Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, who was accompanying the president during his Asia tour at the time of the Saudi-engineered initiative, was "completely blindsided" by the move, as several senior Middle East diplomats confirmed to TAC.

While Tillerson would later be accused of being "totally disengaged" from the crisis, several former and current U.S. diplomats have told us that just precisely the opposite was the case '

' The unlikely hero in all of this might well be Rex Tillerson, who quietly engineered a U.S. policy at odds with the views of Donald Trump -- and his son-in-law. The exact details of how Tillerson pulled this off remain unknown ("I think Tillerson just told Trump what he was going to do," the senior diplomat with whom we spoke speculates, "and then just did it.") '

So that's the backstory right there about why the neocons are agitating for Tillerson's ouster. I have to strongly disagree with Mr. Giraldi's characterization of Tillerson as

' a somewhat bumbling businessman adept at dealing in energy futures contracts who has been struggling with reducing State's enormously bloated payroll '

That is a useless statement on many levels Tillerson deftly managed what is arguably America's most important corporation in what is surely the most strategic and geopolitical global industry energy

The global oil trade is 14 trillion dollars even at today's prices and the petrodollar is the underpinning of the entire US system a free ride for printing free money because every nation has to buy US dollars to buy or sell oil. In 1971

' I was informed at a White House meeting that U.S. diplomats had let Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries know that they could charge as much as they wanted for their oil, but that the United States would treat it as an act of war not to keep their oil proceeds in U.S. dollar assets '

Writes economist Michael Hudson" from personal recollection of the many meetings he had at the WH

This whole saga surrounding Dump's readiness to tie the can to Tillerson is proof positive if any more were needed that conman Dump has been a fake from the beginning

If the neocons are ascendant and back in the driver's seat it is no one's fault but the Dumpster

He has cast his lot with Kushner who appears to be the neocons' Trojan Horse

There can be no more sympathy or understanding anymore for Dump

If we recall his campaign rhetoric of 'draining the swamp' and rebuilding America's failing infrastructure improving relations with Russia all good things

we must also recall that he has been vehemently anti-Iran from the get-go

One has to ask why ?

Iran is a completely Israeli-owned issue Iran has nothing to do with the interests of the US other than to benefit leading US industries like aircraft manufacturing which were immediately rewarded with a $100 billion order of Boeing aircraft in the aftermath of the Obama nuclear deal

That vehement anti-Iran attitude even on the campaign trail should have been a red flag to everyone

Even Hellary would have been better in that regard and as for the Russia 'issue' what could Hellary or the US to do Russia anyway ?

Militarily nothing even in Syria the US military would certainly not go for an open war against Russia neither would the regional players hosting US bases which would need to be on board for such an adventure

same goes for the breakaway region of eastern Ukraine

Germany and France are anyway moving closer to Russia, which has de facto established itself as an energy distribution superpower for the continent and for China

The big picture is that the petrodollar and the free ride for US prosperity is living on borrowed time China is the world's biggest energy importer and is not going to support the petrodollar forever

Already an alternative financial architecture is being built and the BRICS countries now outpace the combined GDP of the G7 so the writing is on the wall

Dump has shown himself to be a conman first and an incredibly weak president he deserves no sympathy or support

The neocons are of course insane they are picking fights with Iran, Venezuela and others who are going to be the first to ditch the petrodollar and accelerate the tipping point to the new global financial order that is going to impoverish the US overnight

The same neocons are also the ones who are undermining US demographics because their Ponzi scheme economy is based on perpetual growth which, in turn, requires perpetual population growth which means more immigration. Also the immigration keeps the wages low which is just extra gravy for the Plutocracy

The US will be a white-minority country by 2050 much of the Southwest already is

None of that is going to change when the party is over and the Titanic sinks the handful of necons and Plutocrats will have their lifeboats ready

FB , December 13, 2017 at 12:14 am GMT
@FB

Sorry my link to the Kushner role in the Hariri circus and Tillerson's save did not come through here it is: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/kushner-kept-tillerson-in-the-dark-on-saudi-lebanon-move/

[Dec 10, 2017] When Washington Cheered the Jihadists Consortiumnews

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... William Roebuck, the American embassy's chargé d'affaires in Damascus, thus urged Washington in 2006 to coordinate with Egypt and Saudi Arabia to encourage Sunni Syrian fears of Shi'ite Iranian proselytizing even though such concerns are "often exaggerated." It was akin to playing up fears of Jewish dominance in the 1930s in coordination with Nazi Germany. ..."
"... A year later, former NATO commander Wesley Clark learned of a classified Defense Department memo stating that U.S. policy was now to "attack and destroy the governments in seven countries in five years," first Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran. (Quote starts at 2:07 .) ..."
"... So the answer was not to oppose the Islamists, but to use them. Even though "the Islamist surge will not be a picnic for the Syrian people," Gambill said, "it has two important silver linings for US interests." One is that the jihadis "are simply more effective fighters than their secular counterparts" thanks to their skill with "suicide bombings and roadside bombs." ..."
"... The other is that a Sunni Islamist victory in Syria will result in "a full-blown strategic defeat" for Iran, thereby putting Washington at least part way toward fulfilling the seven-country demolition job discussed by Wesley Clark. ..."
"... The U.S. would settle with the jihadis only after the jihadis had settled with Assad. The good would ultimately outweigh the bad. This kind of self-centered moral calculus would not have mattered had Gambill only spoken for himself. But he didn't. Rather, he was expressing the viewpoint of Official Washington in general, which is why the ultra-respectable FP ran his piece in the first place. ..."
"... The parallels with the DIA are striking. "The west, gulf countries, and Turkey support the opposition," the intelligence report declared, even though "the Salafist[s], the Muslim Brotherhood, and AQI [i.e. Al Qaeda in Iraq] are the major forces driving the insurgency." ..."
"... ancien régime, ..."
"... With the Saudis footing the bill, the U.S. would exercise untrammeled sway. ..."
"... Has a forecast that ever gone more spectacularly wrong? Syria's Baathist government is hardly blameless in this affair. But thanks largely to the U.S.-backed sectarian offensive, 400,000 Syrians or more have died since Gambill's article appeared, with another 6.1 million displaced and an estimated 4.8 million fleeing abroad. ..."
"... So instead of advancing U.S. policy goals, Gambill helped do the opposite. The Middle East is more explosive than ever while U.S. influence has fallen to sub-basement levels. Iranian influence now extends from the Arabian Sea to the Mediterranean, while the country that now seems to be wobbling out of control is Saudi Arabia where Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman is lurching from one self-induced crisis to another. The country that Gambill counted on to shore up the status quo turns out to be undermining it. ..."
"... It's not easy to screw things up so badly, but somehow Washington's bloated foreign-policy establishment has done it. Since helping to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, Gambill has moved on to a post at the rightwing Middle East Forum where Daniel Pipes, the group's founder and chief, now inveighs against the same Sunni ethnic cleansing that his employee defended or at least apologized for. ..."
"... The Frozen Republic: How the Constitution Is Paralyzing Democracy ..."
"... I do not believe than anyone in the civil or military command ever believed that arming the jihadists would bring any sort of stability or peace to the region. I do not believe that peace was ever an interest of the US until it has once again gained hegemonic control of central Asia. This is a fight to retain US global domination – causalities do not matter. The US and its partners or co-rulers of the Empire the Saud family and the Zionist oligarchy will slaughter with impunity until someone stops them or their own corruption defeats them. ..."
"... The Empire can not exist without relentless ongoing slaughter it has been at it every day now for 73 years. It worked for them all that time but that time has run out. China has already set the date for when its currency will become fully freely exchanged, less than 5 years. ..."
"... Even the most stupid person on earth couldn't think that the US was using murdering, butchering head choppers in a bid to bring peace and stability to the middle East. The Neocons and the other criminals that infest Washington don't want peace at any price because its bad for business. ..."
"... It's the same GROTESQUE caricature of these wars that the mainstream media always presents: that the U.S. is on the side of good, and fights for good, even though every war INVARIABLY ends up in a bloodbath, with no one caring how many civilians have died, what state the country is left in, that civilian infrastructure and civilians were targeted, let alone whether war could have been prevented. For example, in 1991, shortly after the first Gulf War, Iraqis rose up against their regime, but George H. Bush allowed Saddam to fly his military helicopters (permission was needed due to the no-fly zones), and quell the rebellion in blood – tens of thousands were butchered! Bush said that when he told Iraqis to rebel, he meant the military generals, NOT the Iraqi people themselves. In other words, the U.S. wanted Saddam gone, but the same regime in place. The U.S. never cared about the people! ..."
"... The military-industrial-complex sicced Mueller on Trump because they despise his overtures towards rapprochement with the Kremlin. The military-industrial-complex MUST have a villain to justify the gigantic defense [sic] spending which permeates the entire U.S. politico-economic system. Putin and Russia were always the preferred demon because they easily fit the bill in the minds of an easily brainwashed American public. Of course saber rattling towards Moscow puts the world on the brink of nuclear war, but no matter, the careerism and fat contracts are all that matter to the MIC. Trump's rhetoric about making peace with the Kremlin has always mortified the MIC. ..."
"... This is a rare instance of our elites battling it out behind the scenes, both groups being reprehensible power hungry greed heads and sociopaths, it's hard to tell how this will end. ..."
"... Lets be clear: The military-industrial-complex wants plenty of low intensity conflict to fuel ever more fabulous weapons sales, not a really hot war where all those pretty expensive toys are falling out of the sky in droves. ..."
"... On 24 October 2017, the Intercept released an NSA document unearthed from leaked intelligence files provided by Edward Snowden which reveals that terrorist militants in Syria were under the direct command of foreign governments from the early years of the war which has now claimed half a million lives. ..."
"... The US intelligence memo is evidence of internal US government confirmation of the direct role that both the Saudi and US governments played in fueling attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure, as well as military targets in pursuit of "regime change" in Syria. ..."
"... Israel's support for terrorist forces in Syria is well established. The Israelis and Saudis coordinate their activities. ..."
"... An August 2012 DIA report (written when the U.S. was monitoring weapons flows from Libya to Syria), said that the opposition in Syria was driven by al Qaeda and other extremist groups: "the Salafist, the Muslim Brotherhood, and AQI are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria." The "deterioration of the situation" was predicted to have "dire consequences" for Iraq, which included the "grave danger" of a terrorist "Islamic state". Some of the "dire consequences" are blacked out but the DIA warned one such consequence would be the "renewing facilitation of terrorist elements from all over the Arab world entering into Iraqi Arena." ..."
"... The heavily redacted DIA memo specifically mentions "the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in eastern Syria (Hasaka and Der Zor), and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran)." ..."
"... To clarify just who these "supporting powers" were, mentioned in the document who sought the creation of a "Salafist principality," the DIA memo explained: "The West, Gulf countries, and Turkey support the opposition; while Russia, China, and Iran support the regime." ..."
"... The DIA memo clearly indicates when it was decided to transform US, Saudi, and Turkish-backed Al Qaeda affiliates into ISIS: the "Salafist" (Islamic) "principality" (State). NATO member state Turkey has been directly supporting terrorism in Syria, and specifically, supporting ISIS. In 2014, Germany's international broadcaster Deutsche Welle's reported "'IS' supply channels through Turkey." DW exposed fleets of hundreds of trucks a day, passing unchallenged through Turkey's border crossings with Syria, clearly bound for the defacto ISIS capital of Raqqa. Starting in September 2015, Russian airpower in Syria successfully interdicted ISIS supply lines. ..."
"... The usual suspects in Western media launched a relentless propaganda campaign against Russian support for Syria. The Atlantic Council's Bellingcat disinformation operation started working overtime. ..."
"... The propaganda effort culminated in the 4 April 2017 Khan Shaykhun false flag chemical incident in Idlib. Bellingcat's Eliot Higgins and Dan Kaszeta have been paraded by "First Draft" coalition media "partners" in a vigorous effort to somehow implicate the Russians. ..."
"... In a January 2016 interview on Al Jazeera, former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency Michael Flynn admitted that he "paid very close attention" to the August 2012 DIA report predicting the rise of a "declared or undeclared Salafist Principality" in Syria. Flynn even asserts that the White House's sponsoring of terrorists (that would emerge as Al Nusra and ISIS) against the Syrian regime was "a willful decision." ..."
"... Flynn was interviewed by British journalist Mehdi Hasan for Al Jazeera's Head to Head program. Flynn made it clear that the policies that led to the "the rise of the Islamic State, the rise of terrorism" were not merely the result of ignorance or looking the other way, but the result of conscious decision making ..."
"... General Flynn explained to Hersh that 'If the American public saw the intelligence we were producing daily, at the most sensitive level, they would go ballistic.' Hersh's investigative report exposed a kind of intelligence schism between the Pentagon and CIA concerning the covert program in Syria. ..."
"... The article raises a very serious charge. Up till now it appeared that supplying weapons to Al Qaeda affiliates in Syria was just another example of Pentagon incompetence but the suggestion here is that it was a concerted policy and it's hard to believe that there was no one in the Pentagon that was privy to that policy who wouldn't raise an objection. ..."
"... That it conformed with Israeli, Saudi and CIA designs is not surprising, but that there was no dissension within the Pentagon is appalling (or that Obama didn't raise objections). Clark's comment should put him on the hot seat for a congressional investigation but, of course, there is no one in congress to run with it. The policy is so manifestly evil that it seems to dwarf even the reckless ignorance of preceding "interventions". ..."
"... The DIA report released by Gen. Flynn in 2012 predicted the Islamic State with alarm. That is why Flynn was fired as Director of DIA. He objected to the insane policy of supporting the CIA/Saudi madness and saw it as not only counter-productive but disastrous. His comments to AlJazeera in 2016 reinforced this position. Gen Flynn's faction of the American military has been consistent in its opposition to CIA support of terrorist forces. ..."
"... I see Gen. Flynn as a whistleblower. The 2012 report he circulated saw the rise of the Salafist Islamic state with alarm ..."
"... Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, director of the DIA between 2012 and 2014, confirmed that his agency had sent a constant stream of classified warnings to the civilian leadership about the dire consequences of toppling Assad. ..."
"... Thank you. Gen Flynn also urged coordination with Russia against ISIS, so it doesn't take much to see why he was targeted. ..."
"... The use of Islamist proxy warriors to help achieve American geo-political ends goes back to at least 1979, including Afghanistan, Bosnia, Libya, and Syria. One of the better books on 9/11 is Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed's "The War On Truth: 9/11, Disinformation, and the Anatomy of Terrorism". The first section of that book – "The Geopolitics of Terrorism" – covers, across 150 well-sourced pages, the history and background of this involvement. It is highly recommended for anyone who wishes to be better informed on this topic. ..."
"... Jaycee, actually you have to go back much further than that to WW2. Hitler used the marginalized Turkic people in Russia and turned them into effective fighters to create internal factions within the Soviet Union. After Hitler lost and the Cold War began, the US, who had no understanding of the Soviets at the time radicalized and empowered Islamist including the Muslim Brotherhood to weaponize Islam against the Soviet Union. ..."
"... All these western imperial geostrategic planners are certifiably insane and have no business anywhere near the levers of government policy. They are the number one enemy of humanity. If we don't find a way to remove them from power, they may actually succeed in destroying life on Earth. ..."
"... There is a volume of evidence that the war criminals in our midst were arming and training "jihadists." See link below. http://graysinfo.blogspot.ca/2016/10/the-evidence-of-planning-of-wars.html ..."
"... Incompetence and stupidity are their only defense because if anyone acknowledged that trillions of dollars have been made by the usual suspects committing these crimes, the industrialists of war would face a justice symbolized by Nuremberg. ..."
"... The American groupthink rarely allows propaganda and disinformation disturb: endless wars and endless lies and criminality, have not disturbed this mindset. It is clever to manipulate people to think in a way opposite of truth so consistently. All the atrocities by the US have been surrounded by media propaganda and mastery of groupthink techniques go down well. Mention something unusual or real news and you might get heavily criticized for daring to think outside the box and doubt what are (supposedly) "religious truths". Tell a lie long enough and it becomes the truth. ..."
"... The CIA was a key force behind the creation of both al Qaeda and ISIS. Most major incidents of "Islamic Terrorism" have some kind of CIA backing behind them. See this large collection of links for compiled evidence: http://www.pearltrees.com/joshstern/government-supporting/id18814292 ..."
"... This journalist and other journalists writing on some of my favorite Russian propaganda news websites, have reported the US empire routinely makes "deals with the devil", the enemy of my enemy is my friend, if doing so furthers their goal of perpetual war and global hegemony. Yet, inexplicably, these journalists buy the US empire's 911 story without question, in the face of many unanswered questions ..."
"... Bin Laden (CIA staffer) and a handful of his men, all from close allied countries to the US, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, delivered the 2nd Pearl Harbor on 911. What a timely coincidence! We accept the US Empire provides weapons and military support to the same enemy, and worse, who attacked us on 911, but one is labeled a "conspiracy nut" if they believe that same US Empire would orchestrate 911 to justify their long planned global war. One thing about being a "conspiracy nut", if you live long enough, often you will see your beliefs vindicated ..."
"... So many questions, and so much left unanswered, but don't worry America may run out of money for domestic vital needs but the U.S. always has the money to go fight another war. It's a culture thing, and if you ain't into it then you just don't pay no attention to it. In fact if your life is better off from all of these U.S. led invasions, then your probably not posting any comments here, either. ..."
"... From the October 1973 Yom Kippur War onward, the United States had no foreign policy in the Middle East other than Israel's. Daniel Lazare should read "A clean break: a new strategy for the Realm". ..."
"... For the majority of amoral opportunists of the US, money=power=virtue and they will attack all who disagree. ..."
"... I am stunned that anyone could be so foolish as to think that the US military machine, US imperialism, does things "naively", bumbling like a helpless giant into wars that destroy entire nations with no end in sight. One need not be a "conspiracy theorist" to understand that the Pentagon does not control the world with an ever-expanding war budget equal to the next 10 countries combined, that it does this just because it is stuck on the wrong path. No! US imperialism develops these "big guns" to use them, to overpower, take over and dominate the world for the sake of profits and protection of the right to exploit for private profit. ..."
"... Daniel Pipes, from what I've read of him, is among those who counsel the U.S. government to use its military power to support the losing side in any civil wars fought within Israel's enemy states, so that the wars will continue, sparing Israel the threat of unified enemy states. What normal human beings consider a humanitarian disaster, repeated in Iraq, Syria and Libya, would be reckoned a success according to this way of thinking. The thinking would appear to lead to similar treatment of Iran, with even more catastrophic consequences. ..."
"... I think this pattern of using Salafists for regime change started already in Afghanistan, with Brzezinski plotting with Saudi-Arabia and Pakistan to pay and train Osama bin Laden to attack the pro Russia regime and trying to get the USSR involved in it, also trying to blame the USSR for its agression, like they did in Syri"r? ..."
"... Yes, the Brzezinski/Reagan support of fanatic insurgencies began in AfPak and was revived for the zionists. Russia happened to be on the side more or less tending to progress in both cases, so it had to be opposed. The warmongers are always the US MIC/intel, allied with the anti-American zionist fascists for Mideast wars. ..."
"... Sheldon Adelson, Soros, Saban all wanted carving up of Arabic states into small sectarian pieces (No Nasseric pan-Arabic states, a threat to Israël). And protracted wars of total destruction. Easy. ..."
"... Of course, they were told (by whom?) that the jihadists were 'democratic rebels' and 'freedom fighters' who just wanted to 'bring democracy' to Syria, and get rid of the 'tyrant Assad.' 5 years later, so much of the nonsense about "local councils" and "white helmets" has been exposed for what it was. Yet many 'free thinking' people bought the propaganda. Just like they do on Russiagate. Who needs an "alt-right" when America's "left" is a total disgrace? ..."
Dec 10, 2017 | consortiumnews.com

When a Department of Defense intelligence report about the Syrian rebel movement became public in May 2015, lots of people didn't know what to make of it. After all, what the report said was unthinkable – not only that Al Qaeda had dominated the so-called democratic revolt against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for years, but that the West continued to support the jihadis regardless, even to the point of backing their goal of creating a Sunni Salafist principality in the eastern deserts.

Journalist James Foley shortly before he was executed by an Islamic State operative in August 2014.

The United States lining up behind Sunni terrorism – how could this be? How could a nice liberal like Barack Obama team up with the same people who had brought down the World Trade Center?

It was impossible, which perhaps explains why the report remained a non-story long after it was released courtesy of a Judicial Watch freedom-of-information lawsuit . The New York Times didn't mention it until six months later while the Washington Post waited more than a year before dismissing it as "loopy" and "relatively unimportant." With ISIS rampaging across much of Syria and Iraq, no one wanted to admit that U.S. attitudes were ever anything other than hostile.

But three years earlier, when the Defense Intelligence Agency was compiling the report, attitudes were different. Jihadis were heroes rather than terrorists, and all the experts agreed that they were a low-risk, high-yield way of removing Assad from office.

After spending five days with a Syrian rebel unit, for instance, New York Times reporter C.J. Chivers wrote that the group "mixes paramilitary discipline, civilian policing, Islamic law, and the harsh demands of necessity with battlefield coldness and outright cunning."

Paul Salem, director of the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut, assured the Washington Post that "al Qaeda is a fringe element" among the rebels, while, not to be outdone, the gossip site Buzzfeed published a pin-up of a "ridiculously photogenic" jihadi toting an RPG.

"Hey girl," said the subhead. "Nothing sexier than fighting the oppression of tyranny."

And then there was Foreign Policy, the magazine founded by neocon guru Samuel P. Huntington, which was most enthusiastic of all. Gary Gambill's " Two Cheers for Syrian Islamists ," which ran on the FP web site just a couple of weeks after the DIA report was completed, didn't distort the facts or make stuff up in any obvious way. Nonetheless, it is a classic of U.S. propaganda. Its subhead glibly observed: "So the rebels aren't secular Jeffersonians. As far as America is concerned, it doesn't much matter."

Assessing the Damage

Five years later, it's worth a second look to see how Washington uses self-serving logic to reduce an entire nation to rubble.

First a bit of background. After displacing France and Britain as the region's prime imperial overlord during the 1956 Suez Crisis and then breaking with Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser a few years later, the United States committed itself to the goal of defeating Arab nationalism and Soviet Communism, two sides of the same coin as far as Washington was concerned. Over the next half-century, this would mean steering Egypt to the right with assistance from the Saudis, isolating Libyan strong man Muammar Gaddafi, and doing what it could to undermine the Syrian Baathist regime as well.

William Roebuck, the American embassy's chargé d'affaires in Damascus, thus urged Washington in 2006 to coordinate with Egypt and Saudi Arabia to encourage Sunni Syrian fears of Shi'ite Iranian proselytizing even though such concerns are "often exaggerated." It was akin to playing up fears of Jewish dominance in the 1930s in coordination with Nazi Germany.

A year later, former NATO commander Wesley Clark learned of a classified Defense Department memo stating that U.S. policy was now to "attack and destroy the governments in seven countries in five years," first Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran. (Quote starts at 2:07 .)

Since the United States didn't like what such governments were doing, the solution was to install more pliable ones in their place. Hence Washington's joy when the Arab Spring struck Syria in March 2011 and it appeared that protesters would soon topple the Baathists on their own.

Even when lofty democratic rhetoric gave way to ominous sectarian chants of "Christians to Beirut, Alawites to the coffin," U.S. enthusiasm remained strong. With Sunnis accounting for perhaps 60 percent of the population, strategists figured that there was no way Assad could hold out against religious outrage welling up from below.

Enter Gambill and the FP. The big news, his article began, is that secularists are no longer in command of the burgeoning Syrian rebel movement and that Sunni Islamists are taking the lead instead. As unfortunate as this might seem, he argued that such a development was both unavoidable and far from entirely negative.

"Islamist political ascendancy is inevitable in a majority Sunni Muslim country brutalized for more than four decades by a secular minoritarian dictatorship," he wrote in reference to the Baathists. "Moreover, enormous financial resources are pouring in from the Arab-Islamic world to promote explicitly Islamist resistance to Assad's Alawite-dominated, Iranian-backed regime."

So the answer was not to oppose the Islamists, but to use them. Even though "the Islamist surge will not be a picnic for the Syrian people," Gambill said, "it has two important silver linings for US interests." One is that the jihadis "are simply more effective fighters than their secular counterparts" thanks to their skill with "suicide bombings and roadside bombs."

The other is that a Sunni Islamist victory in Syria will result in "a full-blown strategic defeat" for Iran, thereby putting Washington at least part way toward fulfilling the seven-country demolition job discussed by Wesley Clark.

"So long as Syrian jihadis are committed to fighting Iran and its Arab proxies," the article concluded, "we should quietly root for them – while keeping our distance from a conflict that is going to get very ugly before the smoke clears. There will be plenty of time to tame the beast after Iran's regional hegemonic ambitions have gone down in flames."

Deals with the Devil

The U.S. would settle with the jihadis only after the jihadis had settled with Assad. The good would ultimately outweigh the bad. This kind of self-centered moral calculus would not have mattered had Gambill only spoken for himself. But he didn't. Rather, he was expressing the viewpoint of Official Washington in general, which is why the ultra-respectable FP ran his piece in the first place.The Islamists were something America could employ to their advantage and then throw away like a squeezed lemon. A few Syrians would suffer, but America would win, and that's all that counts.

The parallels with the DIA are striking. "The west, gulf countries, and Turkey support the opposition," the intelligence report declared, even though "the Salafist[s], the Muslim Brotherhood, and AQI [i.e. Al Qaeda in Iraq] are the major forces driving the insurgency."

Where Gambill predicted that "Assad and his minions will likely retreat to northwestern Syria," the DIA speculated that the jihadis might establish "a declared or undeclared Salafist principality" at the other end of the country near cities like Hasaka and Der Zor (also known as Deir ez-Zor).

Where the FP said that the ultimate aim was to roll back Iranian influence and undermine Shi'ite rule, the DIA said that a Salafist principality "is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran)."

Bottle up the Shi'ites in northwestern Syria, in other words, while encouraging Sunni extremists to establish a base in the east so as to put pressure on Shi'ite-influenced Iraq and Shi'ite-ruled Iran.

As Gambill put it: "Whatever misfortunes Sunni Islamists may visit upon the Syrian people, any government they form will be strategically preferable to the Assad regime, for three reasons: A new government in Damascus will find continuing the alliance with Tehran unthinkable, it won't have to distract Syrians from its minority status with foreign policy adventurism like the ancien régime, and it will be flush with petrodollars from Arab Gulf states (relatively) friendly to Washington."

With the Saudis footing the bill, the U.S. would exercise untrammeled sway.

Disastrous Thinking

Has a forecast that ever gone more spectacularly wrong? Syria's Baathist government is hardly blameless in this affair. But thanks largely to the U.S.-backed sectarian offensive, 400,000 Syrians or more have died since Gambill's article appeared, with another 6.1 million displaced and an estimated 4.8 million fleeing abroad.

U.S.-backed Syrian "moderate" rebels smile as they prepare to behead a 12-year-old boy (left), whose severed head is held aloft triumphantly in a later part of the video. [Screenshot from the YouTube video] War-time destruction totals around $250 billion , according to U.N. estimates, a staggering sum for a country of 18.8 million people where per-capita income prior to the outbreak of violence was under $3,000. From Syria, the specter of sectarian violence has spread across Asia and Africa and into Europe and North America as well. Political leaders throughout the advanced industrial world are still struggling to contain the populist fury that the Middle East refugee crisis, the result of U.S.-instituted regime change, helped set off.

So instead of advancing U.S. policy goals, Gambill helped do the opposite. The Middle East is more explosive than ever while U.S. influence has fallen to sub-basement levels. Iranian influence now extends from the Arabian Sea to the Mediterranean, while the country that now seems to be wobbling out of control is Saudi Arabia where Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman is lurching from one self-induced crisis to another. The country that Gambill counted on to shore up the status quo turns out to be undermining it.

It's not easy to screw things up so badly, but somehow Washington's bloated foreign-policy establishment has done it. Since helping to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, Gambill has moved on to a post at the rightwing Middle East Forum where Daniel Pipes, the group's founder and chief, now inveighs against the same Sunni ethnic cleansing that his employee defended or at least apologized for.

The forum is particularly well known for its Campus Watch program, which targets academic critics of Israel, Islamists, and – despite Gambill's kind words about "suicide bombings and roadside bombs" – anyone it considers the least bit apologetic about Islamic terrorism.

Double your standard, double the fun. Terrorism, it seems, is only terrorism when others do it to the U.S., not when the U.S. does it to others.

Daniel Lazare is the author of several books including The Frozen Republic: How the Constitution Is Paralyzing Democracy (Harcourt Brace).

Babyl-on , December 8, 2017 at 5:26 pm

I do not believe than anyone in the civil or military command ever believed that arming the jihadists would bring any sort of stability or peace to the region. I do not believe that peace was ever an interest of the US until it has once again gained hegemonic control of central Asia. This is a fight to retain US global domination – causalities do not matter. The US and its partners or co-rulers of the Empire the Saud family and the Zionist oligarchy will slaughter with impunity until someone stops them or their own corruption defeats them.

The Empire can not exist without relentless ongoing slaughter it has been at it every day now for 73 years. It worked for them all that time but that time has run out. China has already set the date for when its currency will become fully freely exchanged, less than 5 years. When that happens the world will return to the gold standard + Bitcoin possibly and US dollar hegemony will end. After that the trillion dollar a year military and the 20 trillion debt take on a different meaning. Before that slaughter non-stop will continue.

john wilson , December 9, 2017 at 6:31 am

Really, Baby-lon, your first short paragraph sums this piece by Lazare perfectly and makes the rest of his blog seem rather pointless. Even the most stupid person on earth couldn't think that the US was using murdering, butchering head choppers in a bid to bring peace and stability to the middle East. The Neocons and the other criminals that infest Washington don't want peace at any price because its bad for business.

Jerald Davidson , December 9, 2017 at 11:53 am

Babyl-on and John Wilson: you have nailed it. The last thing the US (gov't.) wants is peace. War is big business; casualties are of no concern (3 million Koreans died in the Korean War; 3 million Vietnamese in that war; 100's of thousands in Iraq [including Clinton's sanctions] and Afghanistan). The US has used jihadi proxies since the mujahedeen in 1980's Afghanistan and Contras in Nicaragua. To the US (gov't.), a Salafist dictatorship (such as Saudi Arabia) is highly preferable to a secular, nationalist ruler (such as Egypt's Nasser, Libya's Gaddafi, Syria's Assad).
So the cover story of the jjihadi's has changed – first they are freedom fighters, then terrorists. What does not change is that in either case they are pawns of the US (gov't.) goal of hegemony.
(Incidentally, Drew Hunkins must be responding to a different article.)

BannanaBoat , December 9, 2017 at 4:31 pm

Exactly Baby right on, Either USA strategists are extremely ignorant or they are attempting to create chaos, probably both. Perhaps not continuously but surely frequently the USA has promoted war prior to the last 73 years. Native Genocide , Mexican Wars, Spanish War, WWI ( USA banker repayment war)

Richard , December 9, 2017 at 5:24 pm

Exactly Babylon! Looks like consortiumnews is turning into another propaganda rag. Assad was allied with Russia and Iran – that's why the U.S. wanted him removed. Israel said that they would preferred ISIS in power over Assad. The U.S. would have happily wiped out 90% of the population using its terrorist proxies if it thought it could have got what it wanted.

Sam F , December 10, 2017 at 8:50 am

CN tends to make moderate statements so as to communicate with those most in need of them. One must start with the understandings of the audience and show them that the evidence leads further.

Richard , December 10, 2017 at 10:27 am

Sam F, no, it's a DELIBERATE lie in support of U.S. foreign policy. The guy wrote: "the NAIVE belief that jihadist proxies could be used to TRANSFORM THE REGION FOR THE BETTER." It could have been written as: "the stated justification by the president that he wanted to transform the region for the better, even though there are often ulterior motives."

It's the same GROTESQUE caricature of these wars that the mainstream media always presents: that the U.S. is on the side of good, and fights for good, even though every war INVARIABLY ends up in a bloodbath, with no one caring how many civilians have died, what state the country is left in, that civilian infrastructure and civilians were targeted, let alone whether war could have been prevented. For example, in 1991, shortly after the first Gulf War, Iraqis rose up against their regime, but George H. Bush allowed Saddam to fly his military helicopters (permission was needed due to the no-fly zones), and quell the rebellion in blood – tens of thousands were butchered! Bush said that when he told Iraqis to rebel, he meant the military generals, NOT the Iraqi people themselves. In other words, the U.S. wanted Saddam gone, but the same regime in place. The U.S. never cared about the people!

Either Robert Parry or the author wrote that introduction. I suspect Mr Parry – he always portrays the president as having a heart of gold, but, always, sadly, misinformed; being a professional journalist, he knows full well that people often only read the start and end of an article.

Drew Hunkins , December 8, 2017 at 5:31 pm

What we have occurring right now in the United States is a rare divergence of interests within our ruling class. The elites are currently made up of Zionist-militarists. What we're now witnessing is a rare conflict between the two factions. This particular internecine battle has reared its head in the past, the Dubai armaments deal comes to mind off the top of my head.

Trump started the Jerusalem imbroglio because he's concerned about Mueller's witch hunt.

The military-industrial-complex sicced Mueller on Trump because they despise his overtures towards rapprochement with the Kremlin. The military-industrial-complex MUST have a villain to justify the gigantic defense [sic] spending which permeates the entire U.S. politico-economic system. Putin and Russia were always the preferred demon because they easily fit the bill in the minds of an easily brainwashed American public. Of course saber rattling towards Moscow puts the world on the brink of nuclear war, but no matter, the careerism and fat contracts are all that matter to the MIC. Trump's rhetoric about making peace with the Kremlin has always mortified the MIC.

Since Trump's concerned about 1.) Mueller's witch hunt (he definitely should be deeply concerned, this is an out of control prosecutor on mission creep), and 2.) the almost total negative coverage the press has given him over the last two years, he's made a deal with the Zionist Power Configuration; Trump, effectively saying to them: "I'll give you Jerusalem, you use your immense influence in the American mass media to tamp down the relentlessly hostile coverage toward me, and perhaps smear Mueller's witch hunt a bit ".

This is a rare instance of our elites battling it out behind the scenes, both groups being reprehensible power hungry greed heads and sociopaths, it's hard to tell how this will end.

How this all eventually plays out is anyone's guess indeed. Let's just make sure it doesn't end with mushroom clouds over Tehran, Saint Petersburg, Paris, Chicago, London, NYC, Washington and Berlin.

Abe , December 8, 2017 at 7:57 pm

Trump's purported deviation from foreign policy orthodoxy regarding both Russia and Israel was a propaganda scam engineered by the pro-Israel Lobby from the very beginning. As Russia-gate fiction is progressively deconstructed, the Israel-gate reality becomes ever more despicably obvious.

The shamelessly Israel-pandering Trump received the "Liberty Award" for his contributions to US-Israel relations at a 3 February 2015 gala hosted by The Algemeiner Journal, a New York-based newspaper, covering American and international Jewish and Israel-related news.

"We love Israel. We will fight for Israel 100 percent, 1000 percent." VIDEO minutes 2:15-8:06 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiwBwBw7R-U

After the event, Trump did not renew his television contract for The Apprentice, which raised speculation about a Trump bid for the presidency. Trump announced his candidacy in June 2015.

Trump's purported break with GOP orthodoxy, questioning of Israel's commitment to peace, calls for even treatment in Israeli-Palestinian deal-making, and refusal to call for Jerusalem to be Israel's undivided capital, were all stage-managed for the campaign.

Cheap theatrics notwithstanding, the Netanyahu regime in Israel has "1000 percent" support from the Trump regime.

Drew Hunkins , December 8, 2017 at 8:10 pm

If Trump were totally and completely subservient to Netanyahu he would have bombed Damascus to remove Assad and would have bombed Tehran to obliterate Iran. Of course thus far he has done neither. Don't get me wrong, Trump is essentially part and parcel of the Zionist cabal, but I don't quite think he's 1,000% under their thumb (not yet?).

I don't think the Zionist Power Configuration concocted Trump's policy of relative peace with the Kremlin. Yes, the ZPC is extremely powerful in America, but Trump's position of detente with Moscow seemed to be genuine. He caught way too much heat from the mass media for it to be a stunt, it's almost torpedoed his presidency, and may eventually do just that. It was actually one of the very few things Trump got right; peace with Russia, cordial relations with the Kremlin are a no-brainer. A no-brainer to everyone but the military-industrial-complex.

Abe , December 8, 2017 at 10:59 pm

Russian. Missiles. Lets be clear: The military-industrial-complex wants plenty of low intensity conflict to fuel ever more fabulous weapons sales, not a really hot war where all those pretty expensive toys are falling out of the sky in droves.

Whether it was "bird strike" or something more technological that recently grounded the "mighty" Israeli F-35I, it's clear that America isn't eager to have those "Inherent Resolve" jets, so busily not bombing ISIS, painted with Russian SAM radar.

Russia made it clear that Trump's Tomahawk Tweet in April 2017 was not only under totally false pretenses. It had posed a threat to Russian troops and Moscow took extra measures to protect them.

Russian deployment of the advanced S-400 system on the Syrian coast in Latakia also impacts Israel's regional air superiority. The S-400 can track and shoot down targets some 400 kilometers (250 miles) away. That range encompasses half of Israel's airspace, including Ben Gurion International Airport. In addition to surface-to-air missiles installations, Russian aircraft in Syria are equipped with air-to-air missiles. Those weapons are part of an calculus of Israeli aggression in the region.

Of course, there's much more to say about this subject.

WC , December 9, 2017 at 3:44 pm

Here's a good one from Hedges (for what little good it will do). https://www.truthdig.com/articles/zero-hour-palestine/

john wilson , December 9, 2017 at 6:34 am

Surely, Drew, even the brain washed sheep otherwise known as the American public can't seriously believe that their government armed head choppers in a bid to bring peace to the region, can they?

Drew Hunkins , December 9, 2017 at 1:34 pm

Yup Mr. Wilson. It's too much cognitive dissonance for them to process. After all, we're the exceptional nation, the beacon on the hill, the country that ONLY intervenes abroad when there is a 'right to protect!' or it's a 'humanitarian intervention.' As Ken Burns would say: Washington only acts "with good intentions. They're just sometimes misplaced." That's all. The biggest global empire the world has ever seen is completely out of the picture.

mike k , December 8, 2017 at 5:34 pm

When evil people with evil intentions set out to do something in the world, the result is evil. Like Libya, or Iraq, or Syria. Why do I call these people who killed millions for their own selfish greed for power evil? If you have to ask that, then you just don't understand what evil is – and you have a lot of company, because many people believe that evil does not even exist! Such sheeple become the perfect victims of the evil ones, who are destroying our world.

john wilson , December 9, 2017 at 6:36 am

Correction, Mike. The public do believe that evil exists but they sincerely think that Putin and Russia are the evil ones'

mike k , December 9, 2017 at 5:41 pm

One of the ways to avoid recognizing evil is to ascribe it to inappropriate, incorrect sources usually as a result of believing misleading propaganda. Another common maneuver is to deny evil's presence in oneself, and believe it is always "out there". Or one can feel that "evil" is an outmoded religious concept that is only used to hit at those one does not like.

Mild - ly Facetious , December 8, 2017 at 6:22 pm

Oh Jerusalem: Requiem for the two-state solution (Gas masks required)

https://electronicintifada.net/content/oh-jerusalem-requiem-two-state-solution/22521

Abe , December 8, 2017 at 6:24 pm

On 24 October 2017, the Intercept released an NSA document unearthed from leaked intelligence files provided by Edward Snowden which reveals that terrorist militants in Syria were under the direct command of foreign governments from the early years of the war which has now claimed half a million lives.

https://theintercept.com/2017/10/24/syria-rebels-nsa-saudi-prince-assad/

Marked "Top Secret" the NSA memo focuses on events that unfolded outside Damascus in March of 2013.

The US intelligence memo is evidence of internal US government confirmation of the direct role that both the Saudi and US governments played in fueling attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure, as well as military targets in pursuit of "regime change" in Syria.

Israel's support for terrorist forces in Syria is well established. The Israelis and Saudis coordinate their activities.

Abe , December 8, 2017 at 6:27 pm

An August 2012 DIA report (written when the U.S. was monitoring weapons flows from Libya to Syria), said that the opposition in Syria was driven by al Qaeda and other extremist groups: "the Salafist, the Muslim Brotherhood, and AQI are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria." The "deterioration of the situation" was predicted to have "dire consequences" for Iraq, which included the "grave danger" of a terrorist "Islamic state". Some of the "dire consequences" are blacked out but the DIA warned one such consequence would be the "renewing facilitation of terrorist elements from all over the Arab world entering into Iraqi Arena."

The heavily redacted DIA memo specifically mentions "the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in eastern Syria (Hasaka and Der Zor), and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran)."

http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Pg.-291-Pgs.-287-293-JW-v-DOD-and-State-14-812-DOD-Release-2015-04-10-final-version11.pdf

To clarify just who these "supporting powers" were, mentioned in the document who sought the creation of a "Salafist principality," the DIA memo explained: "The West, Gulf countries, and Turkey support the opposition; while Russia, China, and Iran support the regime."

The DIA memo clearly indicates when it was decided to transform US, Saudi, and Turkish-backed Al Qaeda affiliates into ISIS: the "Salafist" (Islamic) "principality" (State). NATO member state Turkey has been directly supporting terrorism in Syria, and specifically, supporting ISIS. In 2014, Germany's international broadcaster Deutsche Welle's reported "'IS' supply channels through Turkey." DW exposed fleets of hundreds of trucks a day, passing unchallenged through Turkey's border crossings with Syria, clearly bound for the defacto ISIS capital of Raqqa. Starting in September 2015, Russian airpower in Syria successfully interdicted ISIS supply lines.

The usual suspects in Western media launched a relentless propaganda campaign against Russian support for Syria. The Atlantic Council's Bellingcat disinformation operation started working overtime.

The propaganda effort culminated in the 4 April 2017 Khan Shaykhun false flag chemical incident in Idlib. Bellingcat's Eliot Higgins and Dan Kaszeta have been paraded by "First Draft" coalition media "partners" in a vigorous effort to somehow implicate the Russians.

Abe , December 9, 2017 at 12:26 pm

In a January 2016 interview on Al Jazeera, former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency Michael Flynn admitted that he "paid very close attention" to the August 2012 DIA report predicting the rise of a "declared or undeclared Salafist Principality" in Syria. Flynn even asserts that the White House's sponsoring of terrorists (that would emerge as Al Nusra and ISIS) against the Syrian regime was "a willful decision."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6Y274U7QIs

Flynn was interviewed by British journalist Mehdi Hasan for Al Jazeera's Head to Head program. Flynn made it clear that the policies that led to the "the rise of the Islamic State, the rise of terrorism" were not merely the result of ignorance or looking the other way, but the result of conscious decision making:

Hasan: "You are basically saying that even in government at the time you knew these groups were around, you saw this analysis, and you were arguing against it, but who wasn't listening?"

Flynn: "I think the administration."

Hasan: "So the administration turned a blind eye to your analysis?"

Flynn: "I don't know that they turned a blind eye, I think it was a decision. I think it was a willful decision."

Hasan: "A willful decision to support an insurgency that had Salafists, Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood?"

Flynn: "It was a willful decision to do what they're doing."

Holding up a paper copy of the 2012 DIA report declassified through FOIA, Hasan read aloud key passages such as, "there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in Eastern Syria, and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime."

Rather than downplay the importance of the document and these startling passages, as did the State Department soon after its release, Flynn did the opposite: he confirmed that while acting DIA chief he "paid very close attention" to this report in particular and later added that "the intelligence was very clear."

Lt. Gen. Flynn, speaking safely from retirement, is the highest ranking intelligence official to go on record saying the United States and other state sponsors of rebels in Syria knowingly gave political backing and shipped weapons to Al-Qaeda in order to put pressure on the Syrian regime:

Hasan: "In 2012 the U.S. was helping coordinate arms transfers to those same groups [Salafists, Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda in Iraq], why did you not stop that if you're worried about the rise of quote-unquote Islamic extremists?"

Flynn: "I hate to say it's not my job but that my job was to was to to ensure that the accuracy of our intelligence that was being presented was as good as it could be."

Flynn unambiguously confirmed that the 2012 DIA document served as source material in his own discussions over Syria policy with the White House. Flynn served as Director of Intelligence for Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) during a time when its prime global mission was dismantling Al-Qaeda.

Flynn's admission that the White House was in fact arming and bolstering Al-Qaeda linked groups in Syria is especially shocking given his stature. The Pentagon's former highest ranking intelligence officer in charge of the hunt for Osama bin Laden confessed that the United States directly aided the Al Qaeda terrorist legions of Ayman al-Zawahiri beginning in at least 2012 in Syria.

Abe , December 9, 2017 at 12:44 pm

Mehdi Hasan goes Head to Head with Michael Flynn, former head of the US Defense Intelligence Agency

Full Transcript: http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/headtohead/2016/01/transcript-michael-flynn-160104174144334.html

Abe , December 9, 2017 at 2:11 pm

"Flynn would later tell the New York Times that this 2012 intelligence report in particular was seen at the White House where it was 'disregarded' because it 'didn't meet the narrative' on the war in Syria. He would further confirm to investigative journalist Seymour Hersh that Defense Department (DoD) officials and DIA intelligence in particular, were loudly warning the administration that jihadists were leading the opposition in Syria -- warnings which were met with 'enormous pushback.' Instead of walking back his Al Jazeera comments, General Flynn explained to Hersh that 'If the American public saw the intelligence we were producing daily, at the most sensitive level, they would go ballistic.' Hersh's investigative report exposed a kind of intelligence schism between the Pentagon and CIA concerning the covert program in Syria.

"In a personal exchange on his blog Sic Semper Tyrannis, legendary DoD intelligence officer and former presidential briefer Pat Lang explained [ ] that the DIA memo was used as a 'warning shot across the [administration's] bow.' Lang has elsewhere stated that DIA Director Flynn had 'tried to persuade people in the Obama Administration not to provide assistance to the Nusra group.' It must be remembered that in 2012 what would eventually emerge as distinct 'ISIS' and 'Nusra' (AQ in Syria) groups was at that time a singular entity desiring a unified 'Islamic State.' The nascent ISIS organization (referenced in the memo as 'ISI' or Islamic State in Iraq) was still one among many insurgent groups fighting to topple Assad.

"In fact, only one year after the DIA memo was produced (dated August 12, 2012) a coalition of rebels fighting under the US-backed Revolutionary Military Council of Aleppo were busy celebrating their most strategic victory to date, which served to open an opposition corridor in Northern Syria. The seizure of the Syrian government's Menagh Airbase in August 2013 was only accomplished with the military prowess of fighters identifying themselves in front of cameras and to reporters on the ground as the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham.

"Public embarrassment came for Ambassador to Syria Robert Ford who reluctantly confirmed that in fact, yes, the US-funded and supplied FSA commander on the ground had personally led ISIS and Nusra fighters in the attack (Ford himself was previously filmed alongside the commander). This after the New York Times publicized unambiguous video proof of the fact. Even the future high commander of Islamic State's military operations, Omar al-Shishani, himself played a leading role in the US sponsored FSA operation."

Obama and the DIA 'Islamic State' Memo: What Trump Gets Right
By Brad Hoff
https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2016/07/01/obama-and-the-dia-islamic-state-memo-what-trump-gets-right/

Abe , December 9, 2017 at 3:08 pm

"one first needs to understand what has happened in Syria and other Middle Eastern countries in recent years. The original plan of the US and Saudi Arabia (behind whom stood an invisible Israel) was the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad and his replacement with Islamic fundamentalists or takfiris (Daesh, al-Qaeda, Jabhat al-Nusra).

"The plan involved the following steps:

"It was an ambitious plan, and the Israelis were completely convinced that the United States would provide all the necessary resources to see it through. But the Syrian government has survived thanks to military intervention by Russia, Iran and Hezbollah. Daesh is almost defeated and Iran and Hezbollah are so firmly entrenched in Syria that it has driven the Israelis into a state of fear bordering on panic. Lebanon remains stable, and even the recent attempt by the Saudis to abduct Prime Minister Saad Hariri failed.

"As a result, Saudi Arabia and Israel have developed a new plan: force the US to attack Iran. To this end, the 'axis of good"' (USA-Israel-Saudi Arabia) was created, although this is nothing new. Saudi Arabia and the other Arab States in the Persian Gulf have in the past spoken in favor of intervention in Syria. It is well known that the Saudis invaded Bahrain, are occupying it de facto, and are now at war in Yemen.

"The Israelis will participate in any plan that will finally split the Sunnis and Shiites, turning the region into rubble. It was not by chance that, having failed in Lebanon, they are now trying to do the same in Yemen after the murder of Ali Abdullah Saleh.

"For the Saudis and Israelis, the problem lies in the fact that they have rather weak armed forces; expensive and high-tech, but when it comes to full-scale hostilities, especially against a really strong opponent such as the Iranians or Hezbollah, the 'Israel/Wahhabis' have no chance and they know it, even if they do not admit it. So, one simply needs to think up some kind of plan to force the Shiites to pay a high price.

"So they developed a new plan. Firstly, the goal is now not the defeat of Hezbollah or Iran. For all their rhetoric, the Israelis know that neither they nor especially the Saudis are able to seriously threaten Iran or even Hezbollah. Their plan is much more basic: initiate a serious conflict and then force the US to intervene. Only today, the armed forces of the United States have no way of winning a war with Iran, and this may be a problem. The US military knows this and they are doing everything to tell the neo-cons 'sorry, we just can't.' This is the only reason why a US attack on Iran has not already taken place. From the Israeli point of view this is totally unacceptable and the solution is simple: just force the US to participate in a war they do not really need. As for the Iranians, the Israeli goal of provoking an attack on Iran by the US is not to defeat Iran, but just to bring about destruction – a lot of destruction [ ]

"You would need to be crazy to attack Iran. The problem, however, is that the Saudis and the Israelis are close to this state. And they have proved it many times. So it just remains to hope that Israel and the KSA are 'crazy', but 'not that crazy'."

The Likelihood of War with Iran By Petr Lvov https://journal-neo.org/2017/12/09/the-likelihood-of-war-with-iran/

BobH, December 8, 2017 at 7:13 pm

The article raises a very serious charge. Up till now it appeared that supplying weapons to Al Qaeda affiliates in Syria was just another example of Pentagon incompetence but the suggestion here is that it was a concerted policy and it's hard to believe that there was no one in the Pentagon that was privy to that policy who wouldn't raise an objection.

That it conformed with Israeli, Saudi and CIA designs is not surprising, but that there was no dissension within the Pentagon is appalling (or that Obama didn't raise objections). Clark's comment should put him on the hot seat for a congressional investigation but, of course, there is no one in congress to run with it. The policy is so manifestly evil that it seems to dwarf even the reckless ignorance of preceding "interventions".

Linda Wood , December 8, 2017 at 10:24 pm

There WAS dissension within the Pentagon, not only about being in a coalition with the Gulf States and Turkey in support of terrorist forces, but about allowing ISIS to invade Ramadi, which CENTCOM exposed by making public that US forces watched it happen and did nothing. In addition, CENTCOM and SOCOM publicly opposed switching sides in Yemen.

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2015/4/17/us-generals-think-saudi-strikes-in-yemen-a-bad-idea.html

A senior commander at Central Command (CENTCOM), speaking on condition of anonymity, scoffed at that argument. "The reason the Saudis didn't inform us of their plans," he said, "is because they knew we would have told them exactly what we think -- that it was a bad idea.

Military sources said that a number of regional special forces officers and officers at U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) argued strenuously against supporting the Saudi-led intervention because the target of the intervention, the Shia Houthi movement -- which has taken over much of Yemen and which Riyadh accuses of being a proxy for Tehran -- has been an effective counter to Al-Qaeda.

The DIA report released by Gen. Flynn in 2012 predicted the Islamic State with alarm. That is why Flynn was fired as Director of DIA. He objected to the insane policy of supporting the CIA/Saudi madness and saw it as not only counter-productive but disastrous. His comments to AlJazeera in 2016 reinforced this position. Gen Flynn's faction of the American military has been consistent in its opposition to CIA support of terrorist forces.

BobH , December 8, 2017 at 10:55 pm

Thanks, I never read anything about it in the MSM (perhaps Aljazeera was an exception?). However, this doesn't explain Gen. Flynn's tight relationship with Turkey's Erdogan who clearly backed the Al Qaeda affiliated rebels to the point of shooting down a Russian jet over Syria.

Sam F , December 10, 2017 at 8:57 am

The fighter shoot-down incident was before Erdogan's reversals in Syria policy.

Linda Wood , December 8, 2017 at 10:28 pm

I see Gen. Flynn as a whistleblower. The 2012 report he circulated saw the rise of the Salafist Islamic state with alarm.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Pg.-291-Pgs.-287-293-JW-v-DOD-and-State-14-812-DOD-Release-2015-04-10-final-version11.pdf

B. THE SALAFIST, THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD, AND AQI ARE THE MAJOR FORCES DRIVING THE INSURGENCY IN SYRIA.

C. THE WEST, GULF COUNTRIES, AND TURKEY SUPPORT THE OPPOSITION; WHILE RUSSIA, CHINA, AND IRAN SUPPORT THE REGIME.

C. IF THE SITUATION UNRAVELS THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY OF ESTABLISHING A DECLARED OR UNDECLARED SALAFIST PRINCIPALITY IN EASTERN SYRIA (HASAKA AND DER ZOR), AND THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE SUPPORTING POWERS TO THE OPPOSITION WANT, IN ORDER TO ISOLATE THE SYRIAN REGIME, WHICH IS CONSIDERED THE STRATEGIC DEPTH OF THE SHIA EXPANSION (IRAQ AND IRAN).

D. THE DETERIORATION OF THE SITUATION HAS DIRE CONSEQUENCES ON THE IRAQI SITUATION AND ARE AS FOLLOWS:

–1. THIS CREATES THE IDEAL ATMOSPHERE FOR AQI TO RETURN TO ITS OLD POCKETS IN MOSUL AND RAMADI, AND WILL PROVIDE A RENEWED MOMENTUM UNDER THE PRESUMPTION OF UNIFYING THE JIHAD AMONG SUNNI IRAQ AND SYRIA ISI COULD ALSO DECLARE AN ISLAMIC STATE THROUGH ITS UNION WITH OTHER TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS IN IRAQ AND SYRIA, WHICH WILL CREATE GRAVE DANGER IN REGARDS TO UNIFYING IRAQ AND THE PROTECTION OF ITS TERRITORY

https://geopolitics.co/2015/12/22/dempseys-pentagon-aided-assad-with-military-intelligence-hersh/
London Review of Books Vol. 38 No. 1 · 7 January 2016
Military to Military: US intelligence sharing in the Syrian war
Seymour M. Hersh

Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, director of the DIA between 2012 and 2014, confirmed that his agency had sent a constant stream of classified warnings to the civilian leadership about the dire consequences of toppling Assad. The jihadists, he said, were in control of the opposition. Turkey wasn't doing enough to stop the smuggling of foreign fighters and weapons across the border. 'If the American public saw the intelligence we were producing daily, at the most sensitive level, they would go ballistic,' Flynn told me. 'We understood Isis's long-term strategy and its campaign plans, and we also discussed the fact that Turkey was looking the other way when it came to the growth of the Islamic State inside Syria.' The DIA's reporting, he said, 'got enormous pushback' from the Obama administration. 'I felt that they did not want to hear the truth.'

j. D. D. , December 9, 2017 at 8:33 am

Thank you. Gen Flynn also urged coordination with Russia against ISIS, so it doesn't take much to see why he was targeted. Ironically, the MSM is now going bananas over his support for nuclear power in the region, which he had tied to desalination of sea water, toward alleviating that crucial source of conflict in the area.

Abbybwood , December 9, 2017 at 11:24 pm

I believe Wesley Clark told Amy Goodman that he was handed the classified memo regarding the U.S. overthrowing seven countries in five years starting with Iraq and ending with Iran, in 2001, not 2006. He said it was right after 9/11 when he visited the Pentagon and Joint Chief of Staff's office and was handed the memo.

jaycee , December 8, 2017 at 7:19 pm

The use of Islamist proxy warriors to help achieve American geo-political ends goes back to at least 1979, including Afghanistan, Bosnia, Libya, and Syria. One of the better books on 9/11 is Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed's "The War On Truth: 9/11, Disinformation, and the Anatomy of Terrorism". The first section of that book – "The Geopolitics of Terrorism" – covers, across 150 well-sourced pages, the history and background of this involvement. It is highly recommended for anyone who wishes to be better informed on this topic.

One disturbing common feature across the years have been US sponsored airlifts of Islamist fighters facing defeat, as seen in Afghanistan in late 2001 and just recently in eastern Syria. In 2001, some of those fighters were relocated to North Africa, specifically Mali – the roots of the Islamist insurgency which has destabilized that country over the past few years. Where exactly the ISIS rebels assisted some weeks ago were relocated is yet unknown.

turk151 , December 9, 2017 at 10:03 pm

Jaycee, actually you have to go back much further than that to WW2. Hitler used the marginalized Turkic people in Russia and turned them into effective fighters to create internal factions within the Soviet Union. After Hitler lost and the Cold War began, the US, who had no understanding of the Soviets at the time radicalized and empowered Islamist including the Muslim Brotherhood to weaponize Islam against the Soviet Union.

Hence the birth of the Mujaheddin and Bin Laden, the rest is history.

j. D. D. , December 8, 2017 at 7:57 pm

The article does not support the sub-headline. There is no evidence provided, nor is there any evidence to be found, that Washington's policy in the region was motivated by anything other than geopolitical objectives.

David G , December 9, 2017 at 7:25 am

I think that phrasing may point to the hand of editor Robert Parry. The incredible value of CN notwithstanding, Parry in his own pieces (erroneously in my eyes) maintains a belief that Obama somehow meant well. Hence the imputation of some "naïve" but ultimately benevolent motive on the part of the U.S. genocidaires, as the whole Syria catastrophe got going on Obama's watch.

Anon , December 9, 2017 at 9:14 am

The imputation of naivete works to avoid accusation of a specific strategy without sufficient evidence.

Skip Scott , December 9, 2017 at 9:45 am

Although I am no fan of Obama, and most especially the continuation of the warmongering for his 8 years, he did balk at the "Red line" when he found out he was being set up, and it wasn't Assad who used chemical weapons. I don't think he "meant well" so much as he knew the exact length of his leash. His bragging about going against "The Washington playbook" was of course laughable; just as his whole hopey/changey thing was laughable with Citigroup picking his cabinet.

Stephen , December 9, 2017 at 2:49 pm

Off topic but you can listen to some of Obama's banking handiwork here: https://sputniknews.com/radio_loud_and_clear/201712091059844562-looming-government-shutdown-will-democrats-fight-trumps-pro-rich-plan/ It starts at about minute 28:14. It explains the whole reaction by Obama and Holder to the banking fiasco in my mind. Sorry but I had to get it from the evil Rooski radio program.

Lois Gagnon , December 8, 2017 at 8:41 pm

All these western imperial geostrategic planners are certifiably insane and have no business anywhere near the levers of government policy. They are the number one enemy of humanity. If we don't find a way to remove them from power, they may actually succeed in destroying life on Earth.

Stephen J. , December 8, 2017 at 8:42 pm

There is a volume of evidence that the war criminals in our midst were arming and training "jihadists." See link below. http://graysinfo.blogspot.ca/2016/10/the-evidence-of-planning-of-wars.html

MarkU , December 8, 2017 at 10:00 pm

"Official Washington helped unleash hell on Syria and across the Mideast behind the naïve belief that jihadist proxies could be used to transform the region for the better, explains Daniel Lazare." What a load of old rubbish, naïve belief indeed. it is difficult to believe that anyone could write this stuff with a straight face.

Linda Wood , December 8, 2017 at 10:37 pm

Incompetence and stupidity are their only defense because if anyone acknowledged that trillions of dollars have been made by the usual suspects committing these crimes, the industrialists of war would face a justice symbolized by Nuremberg.

Zachary Smith , December 8, 2017 at 11:37 pm

That Gary Gambill character "outed" himself as a Zionist on September 4 of this year. He appears to have mastered the propaganda associated with the breed. At the link see if you can find any mention of the murders, thefts, ethnic cleansing, or apartheid of his adopted nation. Blaming the victim may be this fellow's specialty. Sample:

The well-intentioned flocked in droves to the belief that Israeli- Palestinian peace was achievable provided Israel made the requisite concessions, and that this would liberate the Arab-Islamic world from a host of other problems allegedly arising from it: bloated military budgets, intolerance of dissent, Islamic extremism, you name it.

Why tackle each of these problems head on when they can be alleviated all at once when Israel is brought to heel? Twenty years later, the Middle East is suffering the consequences of this conspiracy of silence.

Zachary Smith , December 8, 2017 at 11:37 pm

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/The-accidental-Zionist-504221

Gerry , December 9, 2017 at 4:51 am

The American groupthink rarely allows propaganda and disinformation disturb: endless wars and endless lies and criminality, have not disturbed this mindset. It is clever to manipulate people to think in a way opposite of truth so consistently. All the atrocities by the US have been surrounded by media propaganda and mastery of groupthink techniques go down well. Mention something unusual or real news and you might get heavily criticized for daring to think outside the box and doubt what are (supposedly) "religious truths". Tell a lie long enough and it becomes the truth.

It takes courage to go against the flow of course and one can only hope that the Americans are what they think they are: courageous and strong enough to hear their cherished truths smashed, allow the scales before their eyes to fall and practise free speech and free thought.

Theo , December 9, 2017 at 6:35 am

Thanks for this article and many others on this site.In Europe and in Germany you hardly hear,read or see any of these facts and their connections.It seems to be only of marginal interest.

Josh Stern , December 9, 2017 at 6:49 am

The CIA was a key force behind the creation of both al Qaeda and ISIS. Most major incidents of "Islamic Terrorism" have some kind of CIA backing behind them. See this large collection of links for compiled evidence: http://www.pearltrees.com/joshstern/government-supporting/id18814292

triekc , December 9, 2017 at 8:27 am

This journalist and other journalists writing on some of my favorite Russian propaganda news websites, have reported the US empire routinely makes "deals with the devil", the enemy of my enemy is my friend, if doing so furthers their goal of perpetual war and global hegemony. Yet, inexplicably, these journalists buy the US empire's 911 story without question, in the face of many unanswered questions.

Beginning in the 1990's, neocons who would become W's cabinet, wrote detailed plans of military regime change in Middle East, but stating they needed a "strong external shock to the United States -- a latter-day 'Pearl Harbor", to get US sheeple to support increased militarism and global war. Few months after W took office, and had appointed those war mongering neocons to positions of power, Bin Laden (CIA staffer) and a handful of his men, all from close allied countries to the US, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, delivered the 2nd Pearl Harbor on 911. What a timely coincidence! We accept the US Empire provides weapons and military support to the same enemy, and worse, who attacked us on 911, but one is labeled a "conspiracy nut" if they believe that same US Empire would orchestrate 911 to justify their long planned global war. One thing about being a "conspiracy nut", if you live long enough, often you will see your beliefs vindicated

Joe Tedesky , December 9, 2017 at 11:27 am

You commented on what I was thinking, and that was, 'remember when al Queda was our enemy on 911'? So now that bin Laden is dead, and his al Queda now fights on our side, shouldn't the war be over? And, just for the record who did attack us on 911?

So many questions, and so much left unanswered, but don't worry America may run out of money for domestic vital needs but the U.S. always has the money to go fight another war. It's a culture thing, and if you ain't into it then you just don't pay no attention to it. In fact if your life is better off from all of these U.S. led invasions, then your probably not posting any comments here, either.

Knowing the Pentagon mentality they probably have an 'al Queda combat medal' to pin on the terrorists chest. Sarcasm I know, but seriously is anything not within the realm of believable when it comes to this MIC establishment?

Christene Bartels , December 9, 2017 at 8:53 am

Great article and spot on as far as the author takes it. But the world is hurtling towards Armageddon so I'd like to back things up about one hundred years and get down to brass tacks.

The fact of the matter is, the M.E. has never been at total peace but it has been nothing but one colossal FUBAR since the Ottoman Empire was defeated after WWI and the Allied Forces got their grubby, greedy mitts on its M.E. territories and all of that luscious black gold. First up was the British Empire and France and then it really went nuclear (literally) in 1946 when Truman and the U.S. joined in the fun and decided to figure out how we could carve out that ancient prime piece of real estate and resurrect Israel. By 1948 ..violà ..there she was.

So now here we sit as the hundred year delusion that we knew what the hell we were doing comes crashing down around us. Seriously, whoever the people have been who thought that a country with the historical perspective of a toddler was going to be able to successfully manage and manipulate a region filled with people who are still tribal in perspective and are still holding grudges and settling scores from five thousand years ago were complete and total arrogant morons. Every single one of them. Up to the present moment.

Which gets me down to those brass tacks I alluded to at the beginning of my comment. Delusional crusades lead by arrogant morons always, always, always end up as ash heaps. So, I would suggest we all prepare for that rapidly approaching conclusion accordingly. For me, that means hitting my knees.

Gregory Herr , December 9, 2017 at 1:00 pm

Middle Eastern people are no more "tribal" or prone to holding grudges than any other people. Middle Eastern people have exhibited and practiced peaceful and tolerant living arrangements within several different contexts over the centuries. Iraq had a fairly thriving middle class and the Syrians are a cultured and educated people.

Gregory Herr , December 9, 2017 at 10:07 pm

Syrian society is constructed very much within the construct of close family ties and a sense of a Syrian homeland. It is solely the business of the Syrian people to decide whether the socialist Ba'ath government functions according to their own sense of realities and standards. Some of those realities may include aspects of a necessitated national security state (necessitated by CIA and Israeli subterfuge) that prompts shills to immediately characterize the Assad government as "an authoritarian regime" and of course that's all you need to know. Part of what pisses the West off about the Syrians is that they are so competent, and that includes their intelligence and security services. One of the other parts is the socialist example of government functioning in interests of the general population, not selling out to vultures.

It bothers me that Mr. Lazare wrote: "Syria's Baathist government is hardly blameless in this affair." Really? Well the Syrian government can hardly be blamed for the vile strategy of using terrorist mercenaries to take or destroy a people's homeland–killing horrific numbers of fathers, mothers, and children on the way to establish some kind of Wild West control over Damascus that can then be manipulated for the typical elite deviances. What was purposely planned and visited upon the Syrian people has had human consequences that were known and disregarded by the planners. It has been and continues to be a grave crime against our common humanity that should be raised to the roof of objection! People like Gambill should be excoriated for their crass appraisal of human costs .and for their contrived and twisted rationalizations and deceits. President Assad recently gave an interview to teleSUR that is worth a listen. He talks about human costs with understanding for what he is talking about. Gambill doesn't give a damn.

BASLE , December 9, 2017 at 10:46 am

From the October 1973 Yom Kippur War onward, the United States had no foreign policy in the Middle East other than Israel's. Daniel Lazare should read "A clean break: a new strategy for the Realm".

Sam F , December 10, 2017 at 9:08 am

Yes, Israel is the cut-out or fence for US politicians stealing campaign money from the federal budget. US policy is that of the bribery sources and nothing else. And it believes that to be professional competence. For the majority of amoral opportunists of the US, money=power=virtue and they will attack all who disagree.

Herman , December 9, 2017 at 10:47 am

"Official Washington helped unleash hell on Syria and across the Mideast behind the naïve belief that jihadist proxies could be used to transform the region for the better, explains Daniel Lazare."

Lazare makes the case very well about our amoral foreign policy but I think he errs in saying our aim was to "transform the region for the better." Recent history, going back to Afghanistan shows a very different goal, to defeat our enemies and the enemies of our allies with little concern for the aftermath. Just observing what has happened to the people where we supported extremists is evidence enough.

Peace on Earth, Goodwill toward men. We hope the conscience of our nation is bothered by our behavior but we know that is not true, and we sleep very well, thank you.

Marilyn Vogt-Downey , December 9, 2017 at 11:18 am

I am stunned that anyone could be so foolish as to think that the US military machine, US imperialism, does things "naively", bumbling like a helpless giant into wars that destroy entire nations with no end in sight. One need not be a "conspiracy theorist" to understand that the Pentagon does not control the world with an ever-expanding war budget equal to the next 10 countries combined, that it does this just because it is stuck on the wrong path. No! US imperialism develops these "big guns" to use them, to overpower, take over and dominate the world for the sake of profits and protection of the right to exploit for private profit.

There is ample evidence–see the Brookings Institute study among many others–that the Gulf monarchies–flunkies of US imperialism–who "host" dozens of US military bases in the region, some of them central to US war strategy–initiated and nourished and armed and financed the "jihadi armies" in Syria AND Libya AND elsewhere; they did not do this on their own. The US government–the executive committee of the US ruling class–does not naively support the Gulf monarchies because it doesn't know any better! Washington (following British imperialism) organized, established and backed these flunky regimes. They are autocratic, antediluvian regimes, allowing virtually civil rights, with no local proletariat to speak of, no popular base. They are no more than sheriffs for imperialism in that region of the world, along with the Zionist state of Israel, helping imperialism do the really dirty work.

I research this and gathered the evidence to support what I just asserted in a long study printed back in Dec. 2015 in Truthout. Here is the link: http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/34151-what-is-the-war-on-terror-and-how-to-fight-it

Look at the evidence. Stop the totally foolish assessment that the US government spends all this money on a war machine just to "naively" blunder into wars that level entire nations–and is not taking on destruction of the entire continent of Africa to eliminate any obstacles to its domination.

No! That is foolish and destructive. Unless we look in the face what is going on–the US government since its "secret" intervention in Afghanistan in the 1970s and 1980s, has recruited, trained, armed, funded and relied on jihadi armies to unseat regimes and destabilize and destroy populations and regimes the US government wants to overthrow, and destroy, any that could potentially develop into an alternative model of nationalist, bourgeois industrial development on any level.

Wake up!!! The evidence is there. There is no reason to bumble and bungle along as if we are in the dark.

Randal Marlin , December 9, 2017 at 11:26 am

Daniel Pipes, from what I've read of him, is among those who counsel the U.S. government to use its military power to support the losing side in any civil wars fought within Israel's enemy states, so that the wars will continue, sparing Israel the threat of unified enemy states. What normal human beings consider a humanitarian disaster, repeated in Iraq, Syria and Libya, would be reckoned a success according to this way of thinking.
The thinking would appear to lead to similar treatment of Iran, with even more catastrophic consequences.

Behind all this is the thinking that the survival of Israel outweighs anything else in any global ethical calculus. Those who don't accept this moral premise but who believe in supporting the survival of Israel have their work cut out for them. This work would be made easier if the U.S. population saw clearly what was going on, instead of being preoccupied with salacious sexual misconduct stories or other distractions.

Zachary Smith , December 9, 2017 at 2:43 pm

A Russian interceptor has been scrambled to stop a rogue US fighter jet from actively interfering with an anti-terrorist operation, the Russian Defense Ministry said. It also accused the US of provoking close encounters with the Russian jets in Syria.

A US F-22 fighter was preventing two Russian Su-25 strike aircraft from bombing an Islamic State (IS, former ISIS) base to the west of the Euphrates November 23, according to the ministry. The ministry's spokesman, Major General Igor Konashenkov described the episode as yet another example of US aircraft attempts to prevent Russian forces from carrying out strikes against Islamic State.

"The F-22 launched decoy flares and used airbrakes while constantly maneuvering [near the Russian strike jets], imitating an air fight," Konashenkov said. He added that the US jet ceased its dangerous maneuvers only after a Russian Su-35S fighter jet joined the two strike planes.

If this story is true, then it illustrates a number of things. First, the US is still providing ISIS air cover. Second, either the F-22 pilot or his commander is dumber than dirt. The F-22 may be a fine airplane, but getting into a contest with an equally fine non-stealth airplane at eyeball distances means throwing away every advantage of the super-expensive stealth.

Zachary Smith , December 9, 2017 at 2:43 pm

https://www.rt.com/news/412590-russia-us-syria-air-force/

Pablo Diablo , December 9, 2017 at 2:53 pm

Gotta keep the War Machine well fed and insure Corporate control of markets and taking of resources.

Abe , December 9, 2017 at 2:54 pm

In October 1973, a nuclear armed rogue state almost triggered a global thermonuclear war.

Yom Kippur: Israel's 1973 nuclear alert
By Richard Sale
https://www.upi.com/Yom-Kippur-Israels-1973-nuclear-alert/64941032228992/

Israel obtained operational nuclear weapons capability by 1967, with the mass production of nuclear warheads occurring immediately after the Six-Day War. In addition to the Israeli nuclear arsenal, Israel has offensive chemical and biological warfare stockpiles.

Israel, the Middle East's sole nuclear power, is not a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

In 2015, the US-based Institute for Science and International Security estimated that Israel had 115 nuclear warheads. Outside estimates of Israel's nuclear arsenal range up to 400 nuclear weapons.

Israeli nuclear weapons delivery mechanisms include Jericho 3 missiles, with a range of 4,800 km to 6,500 km (though a 2004 source estimated its range at up to 11,500 km), as well as regional coverage from road mobile Jericho 2 IRBMs.

Additionally, Israel is believed to have an offshore nuclear capability using submarine-launched nuclear-capable cruise missiles, which can be launched from the Israeli Navy's Dolphin-class submarines.

The Israeli Air Force has F-15I and F-16I Sufa fighter aircraft are capable of delivering tactical and strategic nuclear weapons at long distances using conformal fuel tanks and supported by their aerial refueling fleet of modified Boeing 707's.

In 1986, Mordechai Vanunu, a former technician at Dimona, fled to the United Kingdom and revealed to the media some evidence of Israel's nuclear program and explained the purposes of each building, also revealing a top-secret underground facility directly below the installation.

The Mossad, Israel's secret service, sent a female agent who lured Vanunu to Italy, where he was kidnapped by Mossad agents and smuggled to Israel aboard a freighter. An Israeli court then tried him in secret on charges of treason and espionage, and sentenced him to eighteen years imprisonment.

At the time of Vanunu's kidnapping, The Times reported that Israel had material for approximately 20 hydrogen bombs and 200 fission bombs by 1986. In the spring of 2004, Vanunu was released from prison, and placed under several strict restrictions, such as the denial of a passport, freedom of movement limitations and restrictions on communications with the press. Since his release, he has been rearrested and charged multiple times for violations of the terms of his release.

Safety concerns about this 40-year-old reactor have been reported. In 2004, as a preventive measure, Israeli authorities distributed potassium iodide anti-radiation tablets to thousands of residents living nearby. Local residents have raised concerns regarding serious threats to health from living near the reactor.

According to a lawsuit filed in Be'er Sheva Labor Tribunal, workers at the center were subjected to human experimentation in 1998. According to Julius Malick, the worker who submitted the lawsuit, they were given drinks containing uranium without medical supervision and without obtaining written consent or warning them about risks of side effects.

In April 2016 the U.S. National Security Archive declassified dozens of documents from 1960 to 1970, which detail what American intelligence viewed as Israel's attempts to obfuscate the purpose and details of its nuclear program. The Americans involved in discussions with Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion and other Israelis believed the country was providing "untruthful cover" about intentions to build nuclear weapons.

mike k , December 9, 2017 at 6:38 pm

The machinations of those seeking to gain advantages for themselves by hurting others, are truly appalling. If we fail to name evil for what it is, then we fail as human beings.Those who look the other way as their country engages in an organized reign of terror, are complicit in that enormous crime.

Den Lille Abe , December 9, 2017 at 8:54 pm

The path the US has chosen since the end of WWII has been over dead bodies. In the name of "security", bringing "Freedom" and "Democracy" and complete unconstrained greed it has trampled countless nations into piles of rubble. To say it is despised or loathed is an overwhelming understatement. It is almost universally hated in the third world. Rightly. Bringing this monstrosity to a halt is a difficult task, and probably cannot be done militarily without a nuclear war, economically could in the end have the same outcome, then how?

Easy! Ruin its population. This process has started, long ago. The decline in the US of health, general wealth, nutrition, production, education, equality, ethics and morals is already showing as cracks in the fabrics of the US.

A population of incarcerated, obese, low iQ zealot junkies, armed to teeth with guns, in a country with a crumbling infrastructure, full of environmental disasters is 21 st century for most Americans. In all the areas I mentioned the US is going backwards compared to most other countries. So the monster will come down.

turk151 , December 9, 2017 at 10:20 pm

I think you are being a little hard on the incarcerated, obese, low iQ zealot junkies, armed to teeth with guns

I am not sure who is more loathsome the evangelicals who were supporting the Bush / Cheney cabal murderous wars until the bitter end or the liberal intelligentsia careerist cheerleaders for Obama and Hilary's Wars in Iraq and Syria, who also dont give a damn about another Arab country being destroyed and sold into slavery as long as Hillary gets elected. At least with the former group, you can chalk it up to a lack of education.

Linda Wood , December 10, 2017 at 1:52 am

This is possibly the most intelligent and hopeful discussion I have read since 9/11. It says that at least some Americans do see that we have a fascist cell in our government. That is the first step in finding a way to unplug it. Best wishes to all of you who have written here. We will find a way to put war out of business.

Barbara van der Wal-Kylstra , December 10, 2017 at 2:46 am

I think this pattern of using Salafists for regime change started already in Afghanistan, with Brzezinski plotting with Saudi-Arabia and Pakistan to pay and train Osama bin Laden to attack the pro Russia regime and trying to get the USSR involved in it, also trying to blame the USSR for its agression, like they did in Syri"r?

Sam F , December 10, 2017 at 9:18 am

Yes, the Brzezinski/Reagan support of fanatic insurgencies began in AfPak and was revived for the zionists. Russia happened to be on the side more or less tending to progress in both cases, so it had to be opposed. The warmongers are always the US MIC/intel, allied with the anti-American zionist fascists for Mideast wars.

Luutzen , December 10, 2017 at 9:15 am

Sheldon Adelson, Soros, Saban all wanted carving up of Arabic states into small sectarian pieces (No Nasseric pan-Arabic states, a threat to Israël). And protracted wars of total destruction. Easy.

mike k , December 10, 2017 at 11:05 am

The US Military is part of the largest terrorist organization on Earth. For the super rich and powerful rulers of that US Mafia, the ignorant religious fanatics and other tools of Empire are just pawns in their game of world domination and universal slavery for all but themselves. These monsters of evil delight in profiting from the destruction of others; but their insatiable greed for more power will never be satisfied, and will become the cause of the annihilation of every living thing – including themselves. But like other sold out human addicts, at this point they don't really care, and will blindly pursue their nightmare quest to the very end – and perhaps they secretly hope that that final end of everything will at last quench their burning appetite for blood and gold.

Joe Tedesky , December 10, 2017 at 11:12 am

I'm leaving a link to a very long David Swanson article, where Mr Swanson goes into quite a lot of detail to how the U.S. wages war.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2017/12/76-years-pearl-harbor-lies.html

Brendan , December 10, 2017 at 12:09 pm

What's interesting of course is how not just Washington, but much of the 'left' also cheered on the jihadists.

Of course, they were told (by whom?) that the jihadists were 'democratic rebels' and 'freedom fighters' who just wanted to 'bring democracy' to Syria, and get rid of the 'tyrant Assad.' 5 years later, so much of the nonsense about "local councils" and "white helmets" has been exposed for what it was. Yet many 'free thinking' people bought the propaganda. Just like they do on Russiagate. Who needs an "alt-right" when America's "left" is a total disgrace?

[Dec 09, 2017] Hyping the Russian Threat to Undermine Free Speech by Max Blumenthal

Highly recommended!
This is a simply a brilliant article. Probably the best written on the subject so far. Kudos to Max Blumenthal
Thinks tanks are really ideological tanks -- formidable weapon in propaganda wars that crush everything on its way. And taken together far right think tanks financed by defense sector or intelligence agencies are really a shadow far right political party with its own neocon agenda. Actually subverting the will of American people (who elected Trump) for more peaceful relations (aka detente) with Russia in favor of interest of weapon manufactures and the army of "national security parasites".
At a time when the ruling elite, across virtually the entire western world, is losing it; it being, political legitimacy and the breakdown of any semblance of a social contract between the ruled and the rulers those think tanks decides to create a fake narrative and blame Russians. Is not this a classic variant of projection ?
The slow strangulation of the US MSM means the crisis of confidence. A strong and confident ruling class welcomes criticism and is ready to brush it all off with a smile and a shrug. When they start running scared and pretending there is no dissent or opposition, well, this is a sign of of degradation of the ruling elite. They are losing the battle of ideas and the battle of solutions to social problems. All that really stands between them and a social revolution is a thin veneer of 'authority' and status, as well as intelligence agencies spying on everybody.
Now all those well paid ( and sometimes even talented) war propagandist intend to substitute the real crisis of neoliberalism in the USA demonstrated during the recent Presidential Elections for the artificial problem of Russian meddling. And they are succeeding in this unfair and evil substitution. The also manage to "poison the well" -- relation between two nations were now at the level probably lower then during Cold War (when many Russians were sympathetic to the USA). I think 70% of Democratic voters now are convinced the Russia was meddling in the USA election and about 30% of Republican voters also think so. For the creators of 'artificial reality" such numbers signify big success. A very big success to be exact.
Notable quotes:
"... In perhaps the most chilling moment of the hearings, and the most overlooked, Clint Watts, a former U.S. Army officer who had branded himself an expert on Russian meddling, appeared before a nearly empty Senate chamber. Watts conjured up a stark landscape of American carnage, with shadowy Russian operatives stage managing the chaos ..."
"... The spectacle perfectly illustrated the madness of Russiagate, with liberal lawmakers springboarding off the fear of Russian meddling to demand that Americans be forbidden from consuming the wrong kinds of media ..."
"... A former U.S. Army officer who spent years in obscurity at a defense industry funded think tank called the Foreign Policy Research Institute (FPRI), Watts has become a go-to source for cable news producers and print journalists on the subject of Russian bots, always available with a comment that reinforces the sense that America is under sustained cyborg attack. This September, his employers at FPRI hailed him as "the leading expert on developments related to Russian-backed efforts to not only influence the 2016 presidential election, but also to inflame racial and cultural divisions within the U.S. and across Europe." ..."
"... Watts boasts an impressive-looking bio that is replete with fancy sounding fellowships at national security-oriented outfits, including George Washington University's Center Cyber and Homeland Security. His bio also indicates that he served on an FBI Joint Terror Task Force. ..."
"... Though Watts is best known for his punditry on Russian interference, it's fair to say he is as much an expert on Russian affairs as Harvey Weinstein is a trusted voice on feminism. Indeed, Watts appears to speak no Russian, has no record of reporting or scholarship from inside Russia, and has produced little to no work of any discernible academic value on Russian affairs. ..."
"... Whether or not he has the substance to support his claims of expertise, Watts has proven a talented salesman, catering to popular fears about Russian interference while he plies credulous lawmakers with ease. ..."
"... In the widely publicized testimony, Watts explained to the panel of senators that he first noticed the pernicious presence of Russian social media bots after he co-authored an article in 2014 in Foreign Affairs titled, " The Good and The Bad of Ahrar al Sham ." The article urged the US to arm a group of Syrian Salafi insurgents known for its human rights abuses , sectarianism and off-and-on alliances with Al Qaeda. Watts and his co-authors insisted that Ahrar al-Sham was the best proxy force for wreaking havoc on the Syrian government weakening its allies in Iran and Russia. Right below the headline, Watts and his co-authors celebrated Ahrar al-Sham as "an Al Qaeda linked group worth befriending." ..."
"... Watts rehashed the same argument at FPRI a year later, urging the U.S. government to harness jihadist terror as a weapon against Russia. "The U.S. at a minimum, through covert or semi-covert platforms, should take advantage and amplify these free alternative [jihadist] narratives to provide Russia some payback for recent years' aggression," he wrote. In another paper, Watts asked , "Why shouldn't the U.S. redirect some of the jihadi hatred towards those with the dirtiest hands in the Syrian conflict: Russia and Iran?" Watts did not specify whether the theater of covert warfare should be limited to the Syrian battlefield, or if he sought to encourage jihadists to carry out terrorist acts inside Russia and Iran. ..."
"... Next, Watts introduced his signature theme, claiming that Russia manipulated civil rights protests to exploit divisions in American society. Declaring that "pro-Russian" outlets were spreading "chaos in Black Lives Matter protests" by deploying active measures, Watts did not bother to say what those measures were. ..."
"... Watts then moved to the main course of his testimony, focusing on how Trump employed Russian "active measures" to attack his opponents. Watts told the Senate panel that the Russian-backed news outlets RT and Sputnik had produced a false report on the U.S. airbase in Incirlik, Turkey being "overrun by terrorists." He presented the Russian stories as the anchor for a massive influence operation that featured swarms of Russian bots across social media. And he claimed that then-Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort invoked the incident to deflect from negative media coverage, suggesting that Trump was coordinating strategy with the Kremlin. In reality, it was Watts who was spreading the fake news. ..."
"... Watts has pushed his bogus narrative of RT and Sputnik's Incirlik coverage in numerous outlets, including Politico . Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen echoed Watts' false account on the Senate floor while arguing for legislation to force RT out of the U.S. market on political grounds. And Jim Rutenberg, the New York Times' media correspondent, reproduced Watts' distorted account in a major feature on RT and Sputnik's "new theory of war." Almost no one, not one major media organization or public figure, has bothered to fact check these false claims, and few have questioned the agenda behind them. ..."
"... The episode began during a Trump rally at the height of the 2016 presidential campaign, when Trump read out an email purportedly from longtime Hillary Clinton confidant Sidney Blumenthal (the father of this writer), hoping to embarrass Clinton over Benghazi. The text of the email turned out to be part of a column written by the pro-Clinton Newsweek columnist Kurt Eichenwald, not an email by Blumenthal. ..."
"... The source of Trump's falsehood appeared to have been a report by Bill Moran, then a reporter for Sputnik, the news service funded by the Russian government. Having confused Eichenwald's writing for a Blumenthal email, Moran scrubbed his erroneous article within 20 minutes. Somehow, Moran's retracted article had found its way onto the Trump campaign's radar, a not atypical event for a campaign that had relied on material from far-out sites like Infowars to undercut its opponents. ..."
"... In his column at Newsweek, Eichenwald framed Moran's honest mistake as the leading edge of a secret Russian influence operation. With help from pro-Clinton elements, Eichenwald's column went viral, earning him slots on CNN and MSNBC, where he howled about the nefarious Russian-Trump-Wikileaks plot he believed he had just exposed. (Glenn Greenwald was perhaps the only reporter with a national platform to highlight Eichenwald's falsifications .) Moran was fired as a result of the fallout, and would have to spend the next several months fighting to correct the record. ..."
"... When Moran appealed to Eichenwald for a public clarification, Eichenwald staunchly refused. Instead, he offered Moran a job at the New Republic in exchange for his silence and warned him, "If you go public, you'll regret it." (Eichenwald had no role at the New Republic or any clear ability to influence the magazine's hiring decisions.) Moran refused to cooperate, prompting Eichenwald to publish a follow-up piece painting himself as the victim of a Russian "active measures" campaign, and to cast Moran once again as a foreign agent. ..."
"... Representing himself in court, Moran elicited a settlement from Newsweek that forced the magazine to scrub all of Eichenwald's articles about him -- a tacit admission that they were false from top to bottom. This meant that the most consequential claim Watts made before the Senate was also a whopping lie. ..."
"... The day after Watts' deception-laden appearance, he was nevertheless transformed from an obscure national security into a cable news star, with invites from Morning Joe, Rachel Maddow, Meet the Press, and the liberal comedian Samantha Bee, among many others. His testimony received coverage from the gamut of major news outlets, and even earned him a fawning profile from CNN. From out of the blue, Watts had become the star witness of Russiagate, and one of corporate media's favorite pundits. ..."
"... Dr. Strangelove ..."
"... It was not until this summer, however, that the influence operation Watts helped establish reached critical capacity. He had approached one of Washington's most respected think tanks, the German Marshall Fund, and secured support for an initiative called the Alliance for Securing Democracy. The new initiative became responsible for a daily blacklist of subversive, "pro-Russian" media outlets, targeting them with the backing of a who's who of national security honchos, from Bill Kristol to former CIA director and ex-Hillary Clinton surrogate Michael Morrell, along with favorable promotion from some of the country's most respected news organizations. ..."
Nov 13, 2017 | www.truthdig.com

Nearly a year after the presidential election, the scandal over accusations of Russian political interference in the 2016 election has gone beyond Donald Trump and reached into the nebulous world of online media. On November 1, Congress held hearings on "Extremist Content and Russian Disinformation Online." The proceedings saw executives from Facebook, Twitter and Youtube subjected to tongue-lashings from lawmakers like Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, who howled about Russian online trolls "spread[ing] stories about abuse of black Americans by law enforcement."

In perhaps the most chilling moment of the hearings, and the most overlooked, Clint Watts, a former U.S. Army officer who had branded himself an expert on Russian meddling, appeared before a nearly empty Senate chamber. Watts conjured up a stark landscape of American carnage, with shadowy Russian operatives stage managing the chaos.

"Civil wars don't start with gunshots, they start with words," he proclaimed. "America's war with itself has already begun. We all must act now on the social media battlefield to quell information rebellions that can quickly lead to violent confrontations and easily transform us into the Divided States of America."

Next, Watts suggested a government-imposed campaign of media censorship: "Stopping the false information artillery barrage landing on social media users comes only when those outlets distributing bogus stories are silenced: silence the guns and the barrage will end."

The censorious overtone of Watts' testimony was unmistakable. He demanded that government news inquisitors drive dissident media off the internet and warned that Americans would spear one another with bayonets if they failed to act. And not one member of Congress rose to object. In fact, many echoed his call for media suppression in the House and Senate hearings, with Democrats like Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Rep. Jackie Speier agreeing the most vehemently. The spectacle perfectly illustrated the madness of Russiagate, with liberal lawmakers springboarding off the fear of Russian meddling to demand that Americans be forbidden from consuming the wrong kinds of media -- including content that amplified the message of progressive causes like Black Lives Matter.

Details of exactly what transpired vis a vis Russia and the U.S. in social media in 2016 are still emerging. This year, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence published a declassified version of the intelligence community's report on "Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent U.S. Elections," written by CIA, FBI and NSA, with its central conclusion that Russian efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election represent the most recent expression of Moscow's longstanding desire to undermine the U.S.-led liberal democratic order."

To be sure, there is ample evidence that Russian-linked trolls have attempted to exploit wedge issues on social media platforms. But the impact of these schemes on real-world events appears to have been exaggerated. According to Facebook's data , 56 percent of Russian-linked ads appeared after the 2016 presidential election, and another 25 percent "were never shown to anyone." The ads were said to have "reached" over 100 million people, but that assumes that Facebook users did not scroll through or otherwise ignore them, as they do with most ads. Content emanating from "Russia-linked" sources on YouTube, meanwhile, managed to rack up hit totals in the hundreds , not exactly a viral smash.

Facebook posts traced to the infamous Internet Research Agency troll factory in Russia amounted to only 0.0004 percent of total content that appeared on the social network. (Some of these posts targeted "animal lovers with memes of adorable puppies," while another hawked an LGBT-themed " Buff Bernie coloring book for Berniacs.") According to its " deliberately broad" review , Twitter found that only 0.74 percent of its election-related tweets were "Russian-linked." Google, for its part, documented a grand total of $4,700 of "Russian-linked ad spending" during the 2016 election cycle. While some have argued that the Russian-linked ads were micro-targeted, and could have shifted key electoral voting blocs, these ads appeared in a media climate awash in a multi-billion dollar deluge of political ad spending from both established parties and dark money super PACs.

However, a blitz of feverish corporate media coverage and tension-filled congressional hearings has convinced a whopping 82 percent of Democrats that "Russian-backed" social media content played a central role in swinging the 2016 election. Russian meddling has even earned comparisons by lawmakers to Pearl Harbor, to "acts of war," and by Hillary Clinton to the attacks of 9/11 . And in an inadvertent way, these overblown comparisons were apt.

As during the aftermath of 9/11, the fallout from Russiagate has spawned a multimillion-dollar industry of pundits and self-styled experts eager to exploit the frenetic atmosphere for publicity and profits. Many of these figures have emerged out of the swamp that flowed from the war on terror and are gravitating toward the growing Russia fearmongering industrial complex in search of new opportunities. Few of these characters have become as prominent as Clint Watts.

So who is Watts, and how did he emerge seemingly from nowhere to become the star congressional witness on Russian meddling?

Dubious Expertise, Impressive Salesmanship

A former U.S. Army officer who spent years in obscurity at a defense industry funded think tank called the Foreign Policy Research Institute (FPRI), Watts has become a go-to source for cable news producers and print journalists on the subject of Russian bots, always available with a comment that reinforces the sense that America is under sustained cyborg attack. This September, his employers at FPRI hailed him as "the leading expert on developments related to Russian-backed efforts to not only influence the 2016 presidential election, but also to inflame racial and cultural divisions within the U.S. and across Europe."

Watts boasts an impressive-looking bio that is replete with fancy sounding fellowships at national security-oriented outfits, including George Washington University's Center Cyber and Homeland Security. His bio also indicates that he served on an FBI Joint Terror Task Force.

Though Watts is best known for his punditry on Russian interference, it's fair to say he is as much an expert on Russian affairs as Harvey Weinstein is a trusted voice on feminism. Indeed, Watts appears to speak no Russian, has no record of reporting or scholarship from inside Russia, and has produced little to no work of any discernible academic value on Russian affairs.

Whether or not he has the substance to support his claims of expertise, Watts has proven a talented salesman, catering to popular fears about Russian interference while he plies credulous lawmakers with ease.

Before Congress, a String of Deceptions

Back on March 30, as the narrative of Russian meddling gathered momentum, Watts made his first appearance before the Senate Select Intelligence Committee.

Seated at the front of a hearing room packed with reporters, Watts introduced Congress to concepts of Russian meddling that were novel at the time, but which have become part of Beltway newspeak. His testimony turned out to be a signal moment in Russiagate, helping transition the narrative of the scandal from Russia-Trump collusion to the wider issue of online influence.

In the widely publicized testimony, Watts explained to the panel of senators that he first noticed the pernicious presence of Russian social media bots after he co-authored an article in 2014 in Foreign Affairs titled, " The Good and The Bad of Ahrar al Sham ." The article urged the US to arm a group of Syrian Salafi insurgents known for its human rights abuses , sectarianism and off-and-on alliances with Al Qaeda. Watts and his co-authors insisted that Ahrar al-Sham was the best proxy force for wreaking havoc on the Syrian government weakening its allies in Iran and Russia. Right below the headline, Watts and his co-authors celebrated Ahrar al-Sham as "an Al Qaeda linked group worth befriending."

Watts rehashed the same argument at FPRI a year later, urging the U.S. government to harness jihadist terror as a weapon against Russia. "The U.S. at a minimum, through covert or semi-covert platforms, should take advantage and amplify these free alternative [jihadist] narratives to provide Russia some payback for recent years' aggression," he wrote. In another paper, Watts asked , "Why shouldn't the U.S. redirect some of the jihadi hatred towards those with the dirtiest hands in the Syrian conflict: Russia and Iran?" Watts did not specify whether the theater of covert warfare should be limited to the Syrian battlefield, or if he sought to encourage jihadists to carry out terrorist acts inside Russia and Iran.

The premise of these op-eds should have raised serious concerns about Watts and his colleagues, and even questions about their sanity. They had marketed themselves as national security experts, yet they were lobbying the US to "befriend" the allies of Al Qaeda, the group that brought down the Twin Towers. (Ahrar al-Sham was founded by Abu Khalid al-Suri, a Madrid bombing suspect who was named by Spanish investigators as Osama bin-Laden's courier.) Anyone cynical enough to put such ideas into public circulation should have expected a backlash. But when the inevitable wave of criticism came, Watts dismissed it all as a Russian bot attack.

Addressing the Senate panel, Watts said that those who took to social media to mock and criticize his Foreign Affairs article were, in fact, Russian bots. He provided no evidence to support the claim, and a look at his single tweet promoting the article shows that he was criticized only once (by @Navsteva, a Twitter user known for defending the Syrian government against regime change proponents, not an automated bot). Nevertheless, Watts painted the incident as proof that Russia had revived a Cold War information warfare strategy of "Active Measures," which was supposedly aimed at "crumbl[ing] democracies from the inside out [by] creating political divisions."

Next, Watts introduced his signature theme, claiming that Russia manipulated civil rights protests to exploit divisions in American society. Declaring that "pro-Russian" outlets were spreading "chaos in Black Lives Matter protests" by deploying active measures, Watts did not bother to say what those measures were. In fact, the only piece of proof he offered (in a Daily Beast transcript of his testimony) was a single link to an RT article that factually documented a squabble between Black Lives Matter protesters and white supremacists -- an incident that had been widely covered by other outlets, from the Houston Chronicle to the Washington Post . Watts did not explain how this one report by RT sowed any chaos, or whether it had any effect at all on actual events.

Watts then moved to the main course of his testimony, focusing on how Trump employed Russian "active measures" to attack his opponents. Watts told the Senate panel that the Russian-backed news outlets RT and Sputnik had produced a false report on the U.S. airbase in Incirlik, Turkey being "overrun by terrorists." He presented the Russian stories as the anchor for a massive influence operation that featured swarms of Russian bots across social media. And he claimed that then-Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort invoked the incident to deflect from negative media coverage, suggesting that Trump was coordinating strategy with the Kremlin. In reality, it was Watts who was spreading the fake news.

In the articles cited by Watts during his testimony, neither RT nor Sputnik made any reference to "terrorists" taking over Incirlik Airbase. Rather, these outlets compiled tweets by Turkish activists and sourced their coverage to a report by Hurriyet, one of Turkey's largest mainstream papers. In fact, the incident was reported by virtually every major Turkish news organization ( here , here , here and here ). What's more, the events appeared to have taken place approximately as RT and Sputnik reported it, with protesters readying to protect the airbase from a coup while Turkish police sealed the base's entrances and exits. A look at RT's coverage shows the network even downplayed the severity of the event, citing a tweet by a U.S.-based national security analysis group stating, "We are not finding any evidence of a coup or takeover." This stands entirely at odds with Watts' claim that RT exaggerated the incident to spark chaos.

Watts has pushed his bogus narrative of RT and Sputnik's Incirlik coverage in numerous outlets, including Politico . Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen echoed Watts' false account on the Senate floor while arguing for legislation to force RT out of the U.S. market on political grounds. And Jim Rutenberg, the New York Times' media correspondent, reproduced Watts' distorted account in a major feature on RT and Sputnik's "new theory of war." Almost no one, not one major media organization or public figure, has bothered to fact check these false claims, and few have questioned the agenda behind them.

Questions emailed to Watts via his employers at FPRI received no reply.

Another Watts Deception, This Time Discredited in Court

During his Senate testimony, Watts introduced a second, and even more distorted claim of Trump employing Russian "active measures" to attack his political foes. The details of the story are complex and difficult for a passive audience to absorb, which is probably why Watts has been able to get away with pushing it for so long.

Watts' testimony was the culmination of a mainstream media deception that forced an aspiring reporter out of his job, drove him to contemplate suicide, and ultimately prompted him to take matters into his own hands by suing his antagonists.

The episode began during a Trump rally at the height of the 2016 presidential campaign, when Trump read out an email purportedly from longtime Hillary Clinton confidant Sidney Blumenthal (the father of this writer), hoping to embarrass Clinton over Benghazi. The text of the email turned out to be part of a column written by the pro-Clinton Newsweek columnist Kurt Eichenwald, not an email by Blumenthal.

The source of Trump's falsehood appeared to have been a report by Bill Moran, then a reporter for Sputnik, the news service funded by the Russian government. Having confused Eichenwald's writing for a Blumenthal email, Moran scrubbed his erroneous article within 20 minutes. Somehow, Moran's retracted article had found its way onto the Trump campaign's radar, a not atypical event for a campaign that had relied on material from far-out sites like Infowars to undercut its opponents.

In his column at Newsweek, Eichenwald framed Moran's honest mistake as the leading edge of a secret Russian influence operation. With help from pro-Clinton elements, Eichenwald's column went viral, earning him slots on CNN and MSNBC, where he howled about the nefarious Russian-Trump-Wikileaks plot he believed he had just exposed. (Glenn Greenwald was perhaps the only reporter with a national platform to highlight Eichenwald's falsifications .) Moran was fired as a result of the fallout, and would have to spend the next several months fighting to correct the record.

When Moran appealed to Eichenwald for a public clarification, Eichenwald staunchly refused. Instead, he offered Moran a job at the New Republic in exchange for his silence and warned him, "If you go public, you'll regret it." (Eichenwald had no role at the New Republic or any clear ability to influence the magazine's hiring decisions.) Moran refused to cooperate, prompting Eichenwald to publish a follow-up piece painting himself as the victim of a Russian "active measures" campaign, and to cast Moran once again as a foreign agent.

When Watts revived Eichenwald's bogus version of events in his Senate testimony, Moran began to spiral into the depths of depression. He even entertained thoughts of suicide. But he ultimately decided to fight, filing a lawsuit against Newsweek's parent company for defamation and libel.

Representing himself in court, Moran elicited a settlement from Newsweek that forced the magazine to scrub all of Eichenwald's articles about him -- a tacit admission that they were false from top to bottom. This meant that the most consequential claim Watts made before the Senate was also a whopping lie.

The day after Watts' deception-laden appearance, he was nevertheless transformed from an obscure national security into a cable news star, with invites from Morning Joe, Rachel Maddow, Meet the Press, and the liberal comedian Samantha Bee, among many others. His testimony received coverage from the gamut of major news outlets, and even earned him a fawning profile from CNN. From out of the blue, Watts had become the star witness of Russiagate, and one of corporate media's favorite pundits.

FPRI, a Pro-War Think Tank Founded by White Supremacist Eugenicists

Before he emerged in the spotlight of Russiagate, Watts languished at the Foreign Policy Research Institute, earning little name recognition outside the insular world of national security pundits. Based in Philadelphia, the FPRI has been described by journalist Mark Ames as "one of the looniest (and spookiest) extreme-right think tanks since the early Cold War days, promoting 'winnable' nuclear war, maximum confrontation with Russia, and attacking anti-colonialism as dangerously unworkable."

Daniel Pipes, the arch-Islamophobe pundit and former FPRI fellow, offered a similar characterization of the think tank, albeit from an alternately opposed angle. "Put most baldly, we have always advocated an activist U.S. foreign policy," Pipes said in a 1991 address to FPRI. He added that the think tank's staff "is not shy about the use of force; were we members of Congress in January 1991, all of us would not only have voted with President Bush and Operation Desert Storm, we would have led the charge."

FPRI was co-founded by Robert Strausz-Hupé, a far-right Austrian emigre, with help from conservative corporations and covert funding from the CIA From the campus of the University of Pennsylvania, Strausz-Hupé gathered a "Philadelphia School" of Cold War hardliners to develop a strategy for protracted war against the Soviet Union. His brain trust included FPRI co-founder Stefan Possony, an Austrian fascist who was a board member of the World Anti-Communist League, the international fascist organization described by journalists Scott Anderson and Jon Lee Anderson as a network of "those responsible for death squads, apartheid, torture, and the extermination of European Jewry." True to his fascist roots, Possony co-authored a racialist tract, " The Geography of Intellect ," that argued that blacks were biologically inferior and that the people of the global South were "genetically unpromising." Strausz-Hupé seized on Possony's racialist theories to inveigh against anti-colonial movements led by "populations incapable of rational thought."

While clamoring for a preemptive nuclear strike on the Soviet Union -- and acknowledging that their preferred strategy would cause mass casualties in American cities -- Strausz-Hupé and his band of hawks developed a monomaniacal obsession with Russian propaganda. By the time of the Cuban missile crisis, they were stricken with paranoia, arguing on the pages of the New York Times that filmmaker Stanley Kubrick was a Soviet useful idiot whose film, Dr. Strangelove , advanced "the principal Communist objectives to drive a wedge between the American people and their military leaders."

Ultimately, Strausz-Hupé's fanaticism cost him an ambassadorship, as Sen. William Fulbright scuttled his appointment to serve in Morocco on the grounds that his "hard line, no compromise" approach to communism could shatter the delicate balance of diplomacy. Today, he is remembered fondly on FPRI's website as "an intellectual and intellectual impresario, administrator, statesman, and visionary." His militaristic legacy continues thanks to the prolific presence -- and bellicose politics -- of Watts.

The Paranoid Style

This year, FPRI dedicated its annual gala to honoring Watts' success in mainstreaming the narrative of Russian online meddling. Since I first transcribed a Soundcloud recording of Watts' keynote address, the file has been mysteriously scrubbed from the internet. It is unclear what prompted the removal, however, it is easy to understand why Watts would not want his comments examined by a critical listener. His speech offered a window into a paranoid mindset with a tendency for overblown, unverifiable claims about Russian influence.

While much of the speech was a rehash of Watts' Senate testimony, he spent an unusual amount of time describing the threat he believed Russian intelligence agents posed to his own security. "If you speak up too much, you'll get knocked down," Watts said, claiming that think tank fellows who had been too vocal about Russian meddling had seen their laptops "burned up by malware."

"If someone rises up in prominence, they will suddenly be -- whoof! -- swiped down out of nowhere by some crazy disclosure from their email," Watts added, referring to unspecified Russian retaliatory measures. As usual, he didn't produce concrete evidence or offer any examples.

"Anybody remember the reporters that were outed after the election? Or maybe they tossed up a question to the Clinton campaign and they were gone the next day?" he asked his audience. "That's how it goes."

It was unclear which reporters Watts was referring to, or what incident he could have possibly been alluding to. He offered no details, only innuendo about the state of siege Kremlin actors had supposedly imposed on him and his freedom-fighting colleagues. He even predicted he'd be "hacked and cyber attacked when this recording comes out."

According to Watts, Russian "active measures" had singlehandedly augmented Republican opinion in support of the Kremlin. "It is the greatest success in influence operations in the history of the world," Watts confidently proclaimed. He contrasted Russia's success with his own failures as an American agent of influence working for the U.S. military, a saga in his career that remains largely unexamined.

Domestic Agent of Influence

"I worked in influence operations in counter-terrorism for 15 years," Watts boasted to his audience at FPRI. "We didn't break one or two percent [increase in the approval rating of US foreign policy] in fifteen years and we spent billions a year in tax dollars doing it. I was paid off of those programs. We had almost no success throughout the Middle East."

By Watts' own admission, he had been part of a secret propaganda campaign aimed at manipulating the opinions of Middle Easterners in favor of the hostile American military operating in their midst. And he failed massively, wasting "billions a year in tax dollars."

Given his penchant for deception, this may have been yet another tall tale aimed at burnishing his image as an internet era James Bond. But if the story was even partially true, Watts had inadvertently exposed a severe scandal that, in a fairer world, might have triggered congressional hearings.

Whatever took place, it appears that Watts and his Cold Warrior colleagues are now waging another expensive influence operation, this time directed against the American public. By deploying deceptions, half-truths and hyperbole with the full consent of Congress and in collaboration with the mainstream press, they have managed to convince a majority of Americans that Russia is "trying to knock us down and take us over," as Watts remarked at the FPRI's gala.

In just a matter of months, public consent for an unprecedented array of hostile measures against Russia, from sanctions and consular raids to arbitrary crackdowns on Russian-backed news organizations, has been assiduously manufactured.

It was not until this summer, however, that the influence operation Watts helped establish reached critical capacity. He had approached one of Washington's most respected think tanks, the German Marshall Fund, and secured support for an initiative called the Alliance for Securing Democracy. The new initiative became responsible for a daily blacklist of subversive, "pro-Russian" media outlets, targeting them with the backing of a who's who of national security honchos, from Bill Kristol to former CIA director and ex-Hillary Clinton surrogate Michael Morrell, along with favorable promotion from some of the country's most respected news organizations.

In the next installment of this investigation, we will see how a collection of cranks, counter-terror retreads and online vigilantes overseen by the German Marshall Fund have waged a search-and-destroy mission against dissident media under the guise of combating Russian "active measures," and how the mainstream press has enabled their censorious agenda.

Read part two here .

Max Blumenthal is a senior editor of the Grayzone Project at AlterNet, and the award-winning author of " Goliath ," " Republican Gomorrah ," and " The 51 Day War ." He is the co-host of the podcast, Moderate Rebels . Follow him on Twitter at @MaxBlumenthal .

Related Articles

[Dec 09, 2017] Mideast Peacemaking is No Longer Made-in-America

Dec 09, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com

As 2017 comes to a close, the warring parties in Syria are moving towards reconciliation -- but the U.S. is not among them.

The Islamic State is all but defeated, the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) and its allies are now closing in on the few remaining pockets occupied by other extremists, and Iranians, Russians, and Turks are mapping out the peace to come.

Then there's America. Donald Trump may have hinted at changes up his sleeve, but he's treading the same tired path as his predecessor on Syria.

Determined to oust Syrian President Bashar al-Assad as a means to weaken Iran and re-establish U.S. regional hegemony, Barack Obama's White House placed its bets on two pathways to this goal: 1) a military strategy to wrest control over Syria from the regime, and 2) a UN-sponsored and U.S.-backed mediation in Geneva to transition Assad out.

Washington lost its military gamble when the Russian air force entered the battle in September 2015, providing both game-changing air cover and international clout to Assad's efforts.

So the U.S. turned its hand to resuscitating a limp Geneva peace process that might have delivered a Syrian political settlement sans Assad.

Instead, two years on, the tables have turned in this sphere, too. Today, it is the Iranians, Turks, and Russians leading reconciliation efforts in Syria through a process established in Astana and continued last week in Sochi -- not Geneva. The three states have transformed the ground war by isolating key extremists, carving out ceasefire zones, and negotiating deals to keep the peace.

To nobody's surprise, the Americans are neither part of this new initiative, nor have they offered any constructive counters. Meanwhile, the UN's Geneva framework, after eight rounds of talks, has not once been able to bring the two Syrian sides face-to-face at the Big Table.

To illustrate, UN Special Envoy for Syria Staffan de Mistura, who leads these talks, now says things like this with a straight face: "We have started very close proximity parallel meetings. In fact, I have been shuttling between two rooms at a distance of five meters from each other."

In short, the U.S.'s Syrian efforts have hit a brick wall, while new regional and international power brokers have stepped in to pick up the slack.

Geneva: A process designed to fail

Just one week ago, with great media fanfare, we were promised a fresh start and new twists in Syria. For the first time since the Geneva I conference launched in June 2012, we were told the opposition was "unified" and there were no "pre-conditions" that might hold up talks.

Those expectations were shattered almost immediately when various Syrian opposition members went off-message and insisted that "Assad must go" at some point during a future transition period. Unified they were not. And the Syrian government didn't hide their disgust. They arrived a day late and scurried back to Damascus just as quickly.

And here is why Geneva negotiations will never, ever get off the ground.

Firstly, the "Syrian opposition" do not actually represent "the Syrian people." Most of these individuals have been selected by foreign governments -- until recently, mainly by U.S. allies in Riyadh, Doha, Ankara -- to do their bidding in Geneva, and have been "elected" by no more than a few dozen other Syrians in foreign capitals.

UN envoy de Mistura didn't bother to hide that fact last week when he thanked the Saudis for facilitating "the establishment of a unified opposition delegation."

The UN-led process -- like the U.S. administration -- has created conditions that exclude Syria's more independent and nationalistic domestic opposition from negotiations. These are people who have largely rejected foreign intervention and the militarization of the conflict, rail against Western-imposed sanctions, and signal actual readiness to talk to Assad's government about the reforms they desire.

The Russians and Iranians have kept open channels to these individuals and groups, and many of them have beaten a path to Moscow over the years to strike compromises and seek solutions. A few even made the cut, for the first time, at this eighth round of Geneva talks.

Secondly, the Syrian opposition have lost the war -- victors decide the peace, not the vanquished. The team sitting in Geneva seems oblivious to the fact that the Syrian government and its allies have now gained an almost-irreversible military advantage on the battlefield. These are not two parties on equal footing -- and no great-power mentors in the world can change that fact.

Assad's government has said on numerous occasions that it is willing to sit with any Syrian who comes without preconditions and negotiates in good faith. Years of "reconciliations" on the ground between the government, local citizens, NGOs, friendly foreign state-guarantors, and rebel fighters lend a proven track record to those claims. This is the format for future negotiations -- it is a tested, homegrown Syrian solution, not one made-in-America-or-Riyadh.

"Ceasefires" struck in Astana

The breakthrough came in late 2016. Turkey, the main adversary state through which weapons and jihadists flowed into Syria, made a U-turn on its Syria strategy, driven by U.S. military support for Kurdish fighters in northern Syria, which Ankara views as a national security threat. Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan began a tactical engagement with Russia and Iran, and pulled Qatar and its respective Syrian rebel allies along with him. These moves tipped the balance on the battlefield, allowing the SAA and its allies to liberate Aleppo (a turning point in the war) and launch their ultimately successful campaign against ISIS.

Shortly afterward, delegations consisting of the Syrian government and a dozen opposition rebel factions convened in Astana, Kazakhstan, for indirect talks sponsored by Turkey, Iran, and Russia.

By early May, the three countries had signed a memorandum to establish four "de-escalation zones" in rebel-occupied areas in Syria. The zones cover key hotspots in northern Homs, southern Syria, eastern Ghouta, and Idlib province, and are renewable at six-month intervals. While some armed groups have rejected the concept, the de-escalation zones have largely succeeded at halting hostilities and, importantly, have helped create separation between extremists and rebels willing to participate in ceasefires.

Furthermore, for the more than two million people believed to reside in these zones, the Astana process also guarantees humanitarian and medical access, the return of displaced persons to their towns and homes, the reconstruction of vital infrastructure, and other benefits.

In July, the U.S. and Jordan joined Russia to broker the details of the southern Syrian de-escalation zone, with a joint command established in Jordan. And in September, Iran, Russia, and Turkey agreed to implement the fourth and final de-escalation zone in Idlib, a stronghold of the al-Qaeda-affiliated al-Nusra terrorist group.

In short, within eight months, four key areas of Syria demilitarized under the watch of three countries: Turkey, a major supporter of Syrian opposition militants, and Iran and Russia, both close allies of the Syrian government.

A "political solution" in Sochi next?

Ceasefires are, incidentally, one of the two primary objectives of the Geneva process. They are the military part of a Syrian solution.

The other objective is the political settlement of the Syrian conflict, envisioned by Geneva's architects as the establishment of a transitional government that would generate a revised constitution, prepare elections, and the like.

Last week, on the eve of Geneva-8, the three Astana sponsors convened in Sochi after an unexpected meeting there between Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Russian President Vladimir Putin that appeared to signal an official Syrian approval for what came next.

In a joint statement , the presidents of Iran, Russia, and Turkey called for a "Syrian National Dialogue Congress" to be held in Sochi in the near future, consisting of the Syrian government and "the opposition that are committed to the sovereignty, independence, unity, territorial integrity and non-fractional character of the Syrian state."

While they were careful to point out that the initiative is intended to "complement" Geneva, not act as an "alternative," the statement also made clear that "Iran, Russia and Turkey will consult and agree on participants of the Congress."

Will this be another rubber-stamped opposition directed by foreign mentors? An informed source says no, "any Syrian who does not exclude him or herself can participate."

It is highly likely that hardliners and extremists will exclude themselves from the Sochi talks -- they have consistently rejected direct interactions with the Syrian government and will never accept a future with Assad at the helm. Instead, Sochi is likely to draw interest from a larger cross-section of Syrian society closer to the views of Syria's traditional domestic opposition , who were never given a chance in Geneva.

In the end, it is altogether conceivable that a final Syrian political solution will look very similar to the reforms Assad offered up in 2011 and 2012. His proposals were never given the time or space to mature and were, at the time, rejected outright by foreign governments and their Syrian allies.

But most importantly, if Sochi can finish what Geneva could never start, we will be thrust into a genuine post-American era where alternative regional actors will be able to broker globally significant peace deals.

The resolution of a conflict of this magnitude largely outside the umbrella of a UN- or U.S.-led framework breaks with the assumption that major geopolitical solutions need be made-in-America.

The most common refrain in a disgruntled Middle East today is that "Americans don't solve conflicts, they manage them."

Trump this week forever dispelled the notion that America is an honest mediator in Middle East peace efforts when he unilaterally recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital. It is not surprising that the Saudis , Jordanians Qataris Sudanese Egyptians, and others are now beating a path to Moscow for some fresh thinking.

Sharmine Narwani is a commentator and analyst of Mideast geopolitics based in Beirut. 12 Responses to Mideast Peacemaking is No Longer Made-in-America

No Daylight Pariah December 7, 2017 at 11:04 pm

Yeah, especially after Trump's pointless, ridiculous Jerusalem move, more negotiations and multilateral deals will be struck without US involvement. Our hyper-militarized approach to diplomacy, and a Middle East obsessed foreign policy dictated by Israel, has shocked and disgusted the world, including our actual treaty allies, who are now moving on without us.
Our Shift Is Over (finally) , says: December 7, 2017 at 11:14 pm
"But most importantly, if Sochi can finish what Geneva could never start, we will be thrust into a genuine post-American era where alternative regional actors will be able to broker globally significant peace deals."

I pray that you're right. America must disentangle itself from the legacy of failure, futility, and colossal expense of the "peace process". Let others do it. It sounds like the Turks, Russians, Qataris, and Iranians have had some success at this. Fine. Let them take over Israel / Palestine. And let the US get the hell out and come home to do some of the "America First" stuff that Trump promised. Like withdrawing our troops from the Middle East and defending our own borders with them instead.

Whine Merchant , says: December 8, 2017 at 12:00 am
Well, Kim-il-Trump has eliminated the US as a participant in any settlement. Putin and Erdogan will get whatever they want while the US stands on the sidelines, a diminishing power. Maybe Jared can get his family permission to build a few more settlements in the occupied territories, sited on a Palestinian olive grove.

All the while, Xi Jinping grows stronger as he guides China to be the last remaining superpower.

Make America Great Again [pass he fries]

MEOW , says: December 8, 2017 at 3:22 am
Very interesting article. Thank you. Having worked in the Middle East the U.S. is regarded as nothing more than a pawn of Israel. Sad but true. This by people who often have relatives and friends living well in the U.S. who understand that the shackles on U.S. foreign policy are tight and well-controlled from Tel Aviv and now Jerusalem. These people cede the goodwill of the American people and love us for it, but know the reality of decision-making is made by neocons with dubious loyalties to the U.S. Trump's Jerusalem decision will put QED to these assumptions as to who is the boss. Many of us will have lived our mortal span under this most frustrating and counter-productive phenomenon. Will future generations throw off this heavy and unbearable yolk? It will take courage.
Mccormick47 , says: December 8, 2017 at 11:17 am
After invading Iraq twice, once at the behest of the House of Saud, the second time for no reason at all, why would anyone in the Mideast listen to us about peace?
Youknowho , says: December 8, 2017 at 12:17 pm
Considering that the US has become the bull in the China shop in the area, the sooner it is out of it, the better.
This Holy Land , says: December 8, 2017 at 1:11 pm
People cut us a lot of slack because they know we're hamstrung by the Israel Lobby buying, threatening, or blackmailing our politicians. But after a while it's like the Germans and Nazism: there's the question "why didn't you do anything? It's your country. How could you let this happen?"

Now that Trump has starkly, publicly dramatized the problem by putting America at further risk of terror attacks in order to please Israel and Israel's American agents, it becomes harder for others to believe that Americans don't really know what's going on. And it becomes likelier we'll be held responsible, likelier that the rest of the world will distance itself from us, likelier that Americans will be attacked and killed.

One thing's for sure. You don't make America great again by doing what Obama called "stupid s***" for Israel.

In fact, our relationship with the modern state of Israel has been a steadily worsening burden and curse. Which suggests (to this Christian American) that the modern state that calls itself "Israel" is not the Israel that the Bible says we should bless. He is punishing us, His people, Americans, and our land, America, with war and staggering costs for worshiping the false idol of "Israel".

midtown , says: December 8, 2017 at 1:41 pm
This is all good news for the United States and its citizens. Not so much for the war party of McCain and Romney.
Alex , says: December 8, 2017 at 1:43 pm
The US has never had any influence in Syria whereas Russia always had. So, I do not understand what all that noise is about.

BTW, it was not the US who started all that mess in Syria. It was a civil/religious war.

Michael Kenny , says: December 8, 2017 at 1:56 pm
The weakness in all this is that Putin has bogged himself down irreversibly in Syria, just as the Soviets did in Afghanistan and for exactly the same reason. Putin has made himself Assad's protector and must now prop him up for all time and against all comers. The US can lower the boom on him at any time by simply re-launching the war, for example, as a terrorist campaign which can penetrate all the way up to the Mediterranean coast and inflict casualties directly on the Russians.
Janwaar Bibi , says: December 8, 2017 at 4:17 pm
Trump this week forever dispelled the notion that America is an honest mediator in Middle East peace efforts when he unilaterally recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital. It is not surprising that the Saudis, Jordanians, Qataris, Sudanese, Egyptians, and others are now beating a path to Moscow for some fresh thinking.

This is excellent news. One reason why the US felt free to attack country after country at the behest of its Israeli and Saudi masters is that after the collapse of the USSR, there were no countries left to challenge its actions. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

If Russia and China can provide a counterweight to US power, the likelihood of the US behaving like a rogue nation goes down drastically, and that will be good for everyone, the US included.

PR Doucette , says: December 8, 2017 at 4:38 pm
While some reasonable long term level of peace in Syria would be a welcome outcome of these negotiations, it will be interesting to see how far Assad is willing to go in ceding power away from himself and the minority Alawites who have historically held many of the senior positions in the Syrian government and military if this is what is required to get a peace agreement. Whatever is agreed it seems likely the Syrian people will have to accept the presence of the Russian military for years to come.

[Dec 03, 2017] Stephen Kotkin How Vladimir Putin Rules

Highly recommended!
This is two years old Foreign Affair article, which actually can be viewed as a precursor of the current anti-Russian witch hunt. Foreign Affairs firmly belong to the neocons swamp, so be prepared ;-). As usual for such publications as Foreign Affairs comments are more interesting that the article. BTW the resistance to the neoliberal empire led by the USA can probably be mentioned as a part of Russian national idea. In this sense Stanislav Belkovsky observation that "the search for Russia's national idea, which began after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, is finally over. Now, it is evident that Russia's national idea is Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin." Putin simply became expression of this resistance to neocolonial rule, much like Gandy became in India before.
The US neoliberal elite is fixated on the idea of destroying Russia much like Roman elite was fixated on the idea of destroying Carnage.
This analysis is from 2015 or two years from now. It Is interesting to compare it (along with comments) with he current situation and new developments...
Notable quotes:
"... "the search for Russia's national idea, which began after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, is finally over. Now, it is evident that Russia's national idea is Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin." ..."
"... Russia is classified as a high-income economy by the World Bank (having a per capita GDP exceeding $14,000). Its unemployment remains low (around five percent); until recently, consumer spending had been expanding at more than five percent annually; life expectancy has been rising; and Internet penetration exceeds that of some countries in the European Union. ..."
"... it is the predatory West's efforts to enslave people to the European weltanschauung. ..."
"... This is no World Order: it a man eat man world that has been created. ..."
"... Before America decided to KILL Gadhafi by indiscriminatingly arming gangsters to carry out their will, the incipient-unity state of Libya did not have the sectarian violence that we presently hear about. ..."
"... let us examine your assertion for a moment: Bush was a Moron but Saddam was a murderous dictator. By your logic we American must be the epitome of Moron-ness, for we ELECTED Bush; Iraqis must be a gentle and good people who were overpowered by the Saddam, the Murderous Dictator.. ..."
"... By the way, how many Iraqis did Saddam murder? And then, how many Iraqis were murdered, at the command of Bush? Since the Iraqis were killed/murdered at the command of Bush, and Americans elected Bush, Americans are responsible for the murders. We Americans have blood on our hands! ..."
"... My assertion is that America is responsible for 2'000'000 deaths in Iraq ..."
"... Dear Jamil: As an American citizen, I take my hat off to you for telling the exact truth -- that the terrorist state is the United States of America and our media's propaganda stream is now in overdrive, especially in regard to Russia, which is our latest target. ..."
"... The US State Department's Victoria Nuland and our CIA (+ Blackwater mercenaries) installed the puppet Yatsenyuk/Poroshenko govt. in Kiev (to do our bidding) and CIA Dir. James Brennan himself went to Kiev to launch the civil war against the Eastern provinces that Europeans, at least, are now trying to bring to a halt. The US does leave nothing but failed states behind it, and Western Ukraine will be the next failed state in a long list. Since the end of WWII, the best estimate is that the United States, in 67 military operations and countless covert CIA operations, has destroyed between 20 and 30 million people world-wide, largely in the interest of commandeering their resources or serving the interests of the banks to which they owe money--money they were usually cajoled into borrowing. ..."
"... I hold to my original point that Islamic terrorism has been created by unjustified Western interference. ..."
"... He advocates a world ruled by an elite (unspecified). ..."
"... You seem unable to differentiate between an imperialist and a "good Samaritan". You had earlier written that, as a street walker in Europe you had not seen any slaves, my response to that posting simply told you where you could go to see slavery. And specific reference to India was simply to help you find slavery most easily - with 14 million slaves India is the centre of Modern Slavery. However, in my conversations with Indians, especially the demi-literate ones, instead of admitting to the prevailing REALITY in India, they do not admit to seeing it. With their eyes open, the street walkers do not see it ..."
"... Putin-Putin-Putin-Putin-Putin-Putin... :)) Hmmm... oк, about Putin: Look at Putin's foreign agenda this past year: Latin America just as the sanctions came in - an intentional finger in Washington's eye, as I read it - then China, China again recently, Turkey more recently, India just now. He has not been to Iran, but there, as in all these other places, he has forged or reiterated promising relations. The deals cut are too numerous to list. A couple are worth mentioning. The twin gas deals with China, worth nearly three-quarters of a trillion dollars, are historic all by themselves. In six years' time China will be buying more gas from Russia than the latter now sells to Europe. And do not miss this: My sources tell me that this gas can be priced such as to crowd the U.S. at least partially out of the Asian market. Other side of the world: Putin has just canceled a planned pipeline to southeastern Europe, the South Stream. This is the defeat Western media put it over as, surely: Russia loses some customers ..."
Mar 28, 2015 | Foreign Affairs
How did twenty-first-century Russia end up, yet again, in personal rule? An advanced industrial country of 142 million people, it has no enduring political parties that organize and respond to voter preferences.

The military is sprawling yet tame; the immense secret police are effectively in one man's pocket. The hydrocarbon sector is a personal bank, and indeed much of the economy is increasingly treated as an individual fiefdom. Mass media move more or less in lockstep with the commands of the presidential administration.

Competing interest groups abound, but there is no rival center of power. In late October 2014, after a top aide to Russia's president told the annual forum of the Valdai Discussion Club, which brings together Russian and foreign experts, that Russians understand "if there is no Putin, there is no Russia," the pundit Stanislav Belkovsky observed that "the search for Russia's national idea, which began after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, is finally over. Now, it is evident that Russia's national idea is Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin."

Russia is classified as a high-income economy by the World Bank (having a per capita GDP exceeding $14,000). Its unemployment remains low (around five percent); until recently, consumer spending had been expanding at more than five percent annually; life expectancy has been rising; and Internet penetration exceeds that of some countries in the European Union.

But Russia is now beset by economic stagnation alongside high inflation, its labor productivity remains dismally low, and its once-vaunted school system has deteriorated alarmingly. And it is astonishingly corrupt. Not only the bullying central authorities in Moscow but regional state bodies, too, have been systematically criminalizing revenue streams, while giant swaths of territory lack basic public services and local vigilante groups proliferate.

Across the country, officials who have purchased their positions for hefty sums team up with organized crime syndicates and use friendly prosecutors and judges to extort and expropriate rivals. President Vladimir Putin's vaunted "stability," in short, has turned into spoliation. But Putin has been in power for 15 years, and there is no end in sight. Stalin ruled for some three decades...

Jamil M Chaudri

Interesting but slanted and one-sided, myopic analysis. Why would the 1.6 billion Muslims spread over three continents, accept Mr Kotkin's concept of "World Order".

There is no World Order; it is the predatory West's efforts to enslave people to the European weltanschauung. It is an effort by the colonialists to prolong their hegemony over Muslim lands and people.

One of the biggest mistakes Pakia made was to join the West in destroying Soviet Russia. A bi-polar world was a better world than a unipolar world, where the west is destroying Muslim nations (one after the other).

This is no World Order: it a man eat man world that has been created.

Jamil M Chaudri -> JACK RICE

Before the invasion (and total destruction) of Afghanis there was no daily violence in Afghania. Before the invasion (and total destruction) of Iraqia, there is no daily violence in Iraqia. Before Pakia allied itself with America (leading to the further debasement of an evolving state) there were no (practically) daily suicide bombings in Pakia. Before America decided to aid Ethiopia (and joined it) in destroying Somalia, the state of Somalia had a pretty vibrant civil society, and no gangster precipitate violence.

Before America decided to KILL Gadhafi by indiscriminatingly arming gangsters to carry out their will, the incipient-unity state of Libya did not have the sectarian violence that we presently hear about. Before America decided to Destroy the Syrian State, by leading a crusade (guised as a push for, of all things, DEMOCRACY), Syria was a fast-developing state. ......... This list could be stretched back to the days of Pilgrim Fathers. But I am hoping you follow the drift.

If the hat fits, wear it! If the shoe fits, wear them!! From the top of the head to the sole of the shoes, everything is dyed deep in BLOOD.

At the moment with more than 2'000'000 deaths in Iraqia, and more than 250'000 deaths in Afgania and more than 10'000 deaths in Pakia,

Jamil M Chaudri -> BAKER ALLON

Take some smelling salts, and read what happened in North and South America, when whole nations were destroyed by the colonialists, and kept in RESERVATIONS; their children were taken to missions for conversion to Christianity, their dwellings were destroyed. Read about the Trail of Tears, when a whole nation was banished from their ancestral lands. Read about 2'000'000 deaths in Afghania. For you destruction of HUMAN LIFE is less important than destruction of statues? Shows the kind of person you are. There are many clips available on the internet showing the destruction of Human Life in most parts of Iraqia(including Mosel) by the blood thirsty invaders. Harping about statues and museums, and totally callus about human lives (millions of them) you are indeed a museum piece! Go back to the shelf you have come off.

Renee Barclay -> Jamil M Chaudri • 19 days ago

Bush was a moron but that doesn't change the fact that Saddam was a murderous dictator. And Saddam's sons were known rapists and murderers.
Iraqi Sunnis and Shiites turned on each other after Bush eliminated Saddam and that's the simple fact. And they're STILL killing each other to this day. Google it.

Jamil M Chaudri -> Renee Barclay

I do not have to Google such assertions. They are non sequitur, in nature. Even then, let us examine your assertion for a moment: Bush was a Moron but Saddam was a murderous dictator. By your logic we American must be the epitome of Moron-ness, for we ELECTED Bush; Iraqis must be a gentle and good people who were overpowered by the Saddam, the Murderous Dictator..

By the way, how many Iraqis did Saddam murder? And then, how many Iraqis were murdered, at the command of Bush? Since the Iraqis were killed/murdered at the command of Bush, and Americans elected Bush, Americans are responsible for the murders. We Americans have blood on our hands!

My assertion is that America is responsible for 2'000'000 deaths in Iraq.

On your non-sequitur. If a good man has evils sons, does the man become evil? Again, Sunnis turned against Shias; so what? About the American Civil War, Google says: Though the number of killed and wounded in the Civil War is not known precisely, most sources agree that the total number killed was between 640,000 and 700,000.

There was no civil war in Iraq before American Invasion and destruction of Iraqi State and Society. Thus, America is TOTALLY responsible for 2'000'000 deaths in Iraq.

Vivienne Perkins -> Jamil M Chaudri

Dear Jamil: As an American citizen, I take my hat off to you for telling the exact truth -- that the terrorist state is the United States of America and our media's propaganda stream is now in overdrive, especially in regard to Russia, which is our latest target.

The US State Department's Victoria Nuland and our CIA (+ Blackwater mercenaries) installed the puppet Yatsenyuk/Poroshenko govt. in Kiev (to do our bidding) and CIA Dir. James Brennan himself went to Kiev to launch the civil war against the Eastern provinces that Europeans, at least, are now trying to bring to a halt. The US does leave nothing but failed states behind it, and Western Ukraine will be the next failed state in a long list. Since the end of WWII, the best estimate is that the United States, in 67 military operations and countless covert CIA operations, has destroyed between 20 and 30 million people world-wide, largely in the interest of commandeering their resources or serving the interests of the banks to which they owe money--money they were usually cajoled into borrowing.

As for political corruption, I don't know much about Russian levels of corruption, but I know a lot about the total corruption of our system of government and the evisceration of all of our civil liberties, subsequent to the passage of the so-called and mis-named Patriot Act. By the provisions of the NDAA, any US citizen can be picked up and held in indefinite military detention without charge or trial. I wonder how much worse is Russia than that?

And since Citizens United, nearly every legislator in our Congress is absolutely bought and paid for. Maybe we should leave Russia alone and think about how to restore what we once thought of as a democratic system of governance h ere in the United States.

jlord37 -> Vivienne Perkins

One thing has nothing to do with the other. While I'm in agreement with you on the Ukrainian matter, lets not forget that Vladimir Putin's Russia also has a very big problem with Islamic extremists in their territories as does a number of countries around the world .

Vivienne Perkins -> jlord37

I'm not sure I get your point. Maybe we should think about why the West has trouble with Islamic extremists. Might it be because for over a hundred years the Western powers have chosen the dictatorial rulers of Muslim countries, drawn their boundaries, supported leaders or removed them at its own whim (as S. Hussein in Iraq, the Shah in Iran, Mubarak in Egypt, Khaddafi in Libya, etc.) and inserted Israel into Arab territory for its own reasons. Has it ever occurred to you that if Muslim nations had been allowed to develop according to their own preferences, we might possibly have a more rational and peaceful world today? I can't prove this obviously, but it does seem clear that the more the US attacks and interferes, the more hostile the Muslims become. As an American I would like to see my country behave in a more decent way and with less self-serving propaganda.

jlord37 -> Vivienne Perkins

And was America to blame for Jihadi activity thousands of years ago before its existence? Do you not realize that their actvity is given full sanction, and indeed commands them to go to war with the Kufar? Currently, there is Jihadi activity in countries stretching from India toChechnya and in several African countries. They all have to do with Islamic aggression against there neighbors and almost nothing to do with " western imperialism'

Vivienne Perkins -> jlord37

"Thousands of years ago" Islam did not exist. I hold to my original point that Islamic terrorism has been created by unjustified Western interference.

jlord37 -> Vivienne Perkins

Islam first appeared on the world stage in about the year 620 AD.

Vivienne Perkins -> jlord37

Which means it is now 1,395 years old (not thousands) and I doubt that it's legitimate to equate its idea that it was entitled to make forcible conversions to the present situation, which seems to me to have arisen fairly recently as a response to Western meddling in Arab lands.

Jamil M Chaudri -> jlord37

The answer to the one of your question is a LOWD Yes: It was the FIRST CRUSADES that brought religiosity into the GAME OF KINGS: enlarging kingdoms at the expense of neighbouring kingdoms. The First Crusade was indeed nearly a thousand years ago. The only differences between JIHAD and CRUSADE are:

1. CRUSADERS are more cruel, surreptitious, deceptive, etc.

2. Crusades have no moral component, the goal is political supremacy. Jihad is about moral supremacy, justice and equality.

Since you bring religion into the mix, try to re-read the bible (the new and the old, both of which) PRESCRIBE DEATH to heretics and non-believers. Here is a action in pursuance of such biblical dictate:

"A Spanish missionary, Bartolome de las Casas, described eye-witness accounts of mass murder, torture and rape. 2 Author Barry Lopez, summarizing Las Casas' report wrote:

"One day, in front of Las Casas, the Spanish dismembered, beheaded, or raped 3000 people. 'Such inhumanities and barbarisms were committed in my sight,' he says, 'as no age can parallel....' The Spanish cut off the legs of children who ran from them. They poured people full of boiling soap. They made bets as to who, with one sweep of his sword, could cut a person in half. They loosed dogs that 'devoured an Indian like a hog, at first sight, in less than a moment.' They used nursing infants for dog food." 3

Currently there is CRUSADING MISSIONARY activity in all non-Christian lands by religious warrior-fanatics (wearing the piety hat of the Christian hue). Read about the recent reaction local Hindu population in India against such activity.

First the Western nations used the RELIGION hat to subdue MORALLY SUPPERIOR but less BLOOD-THURSTY peoples; When that strategy ceased to work they rolled out a second version called DEMOCRACY. The second is as much of a sham as the earlier attempt.

Even internal to American, the "down trodden" masses are beginning to cry foul. The prevailing poverty rate in America is staggering. See the figures in most authoritative publications.

Reading does bring enlightenment. That is why I read from diverse sources.

jlord37 -> Jamil M Chaudri

Yes that's why millions of people are seeking to emigrate by any means necessary., and not the reverse. I can assure the " impoverished masses" in the west are in a lot better shape than they are in your neck of the woods.

But I think your trying to deflect once again. That Christianity ad well as other religions has had a bloody past, is no revelation, band I for one am no big fan. But steps have been taken since than, to temper the extremism that brought on these acts. One does not read of to many beheadings and or sucide bombings in the name of Jesus, Buddha, or Shiva. This is not meant as a criticism of Muslim people per se, or a put down of that particular of the world, it is merely mea by as a critique of some of the problems that I, and countless others see in the Islamic faith. There's no question that the leadership in the west, can be very corrupt and rapacious at times, but I think the general trend is towards an attempt at understanding and accommodation. Now, I think it is time for the Muslim world to attempt some sort of inner dialogue where they take steps towards a dressing and correcting their own problems. I enjoyed our discussion, and I hope we will be able to part in civil terms. Best wishes.

Jamil M Chaudri -> jlord37

First of all let me disabuse your notion of "my neck of the woods". In one of my earlier posting I have clearly stated that I am a proud American Citizen, living in a well wooded and watered part of the US of A. But as my country has gone wayward (essentially in pursuit of the buck) from its charter I am trying to bring America back to its promise.

You have levied accusation against me of "deflecting" arguments. Let me tell you what your problem is: you want to levy unsubstantiated accusations against others, and when they, with references, confront your falsehoods and soothsaying, you accuse the other of "deflecting" or "hijacking" the discussion! Pot calling the kettle black? Man, it is you who is unable to stick to the argument – but then, as you have no argument, of course, you have nothing to stick to. Your statements are based on your penchant for name-calling, bad mouthing, others. Perhaps your mind-set suggests that with such strategies, you will be the last "man standing" (?).
.
In my first posing on Dr Kotkin's article, I simply wanted to repudiate the so called "World Order". By what right have Great Britain and France seats at the Security Council. By definition in a democratic set-up, every unit has equal rights. What Dr Kotkins calls a World Order is therefore a sham democracy, created to benefit the West.

Under the guise of bringing democracy to Iraqia, Afghania, Libya, the Yemen, etc. the west is simply trying to prolong its hegemony. It is a sham democracy they impose on weak nations. Pliant regimes are being installed, and millions of people being killed. Any voice that is raised against such pseudo-democracy is silenced by force, by the thugs installed as "democratic" regimes. This is western patronage.

Presently, you read about EXCESSES done by the lunatic fringes of the Muslim Society (these groups, by the way, were created by and operate with the support of CIA – so that organisations like HOMELAND Security can get more dollars), because 90% of the news buzz is created by American media.

The USA is a state trying to improve its democracy on a continuous basis. In 1777 did America treat all people the same way? When was the promulgation of freedom (of SLAVES) passed in America? When was the voting rights acts passed? Are the economic developments of the Whites and Blacks (call it Afro-American, if you like) even TODAY at the same level?

I wish you and your, the very best. May Allah have his mercy on us as a Nation, so that we can STANDING TOGETHER still sing the Star-Spangled Banner.

jlord37 -> Jamil M Chaudri

We currently have a black president, black attorney General, a black director of homeland security, and a black national security adviser. That's not to mention the various statutes and regulations on the books that are strictly enforced to prevent discrimination and instances of inequality. Are these details of such small consequence? With regards to your observations of so called regime change, I am in complete agreement with you . I against such interventions wether it is Cairo or Kiev. It is up to the indigenous population of that country to determine the course that their country should take, and not have to be subjected to outside interference. However, I have to ask the question, do you really think that the CIA bears the sole responsibility for the for the existence of these groups? Could it be that they're trying to co opt them and use them for their own purposes? Im almost certain that the CIA didn't create the leaders who take certain texts and use them for recruitment purposes. All I'm suggesting is that we need to hear more from the moderate elements, and that some sort of reformation May have to be undertaken, much in the way it occurred in other religions. ( Christianity for example )

Finally, Im not sure where you got the idea that I " have a penchant of bad mouthing others" but nevertheless, I sincerely apologize if I have offended you in anyway. You are a worthy opponent, and it's been an enlightening discussion to say the least.

Robert Munro -> Jamil M Chaudri

Stephen Kotkin is a Jewish shill for the oligarchy.

Jamil M Chaudri -> Robert Munro

I only knew Dr Kotkin's background as a historian; his religious affiliation did not concern me. The only part of his writing that offended me was the concept of "World Order". I do not accept nor do I want anybody else to be suppressed by the unbridled-capitalists.

Unfortunately, to exercise unbridled capitalism, the underpinning is provided by exercise of power over others. It is the RAPE OF NATIONS.

Robert Munro -> Jamil M Chaudri

I've read Kotkin before. He advocates a world ruled by an elite (unspecified). However, from his background and affiliations, it's very possible that his mind-set matches that of Baruch Levy, below..........

"The Jewish people as a whole will become its own Messiah. It will attain world domination by the dissolution of other races, by the abolition of frontiers, the annihilation of monarchy and by the establishment of a world republic in which the Jews will everywhere exercise the privilege of citizenship.

In this New World Order, the children of Israel will furnish all the leaders without encountering opposition. The Governments of the different peoples forming the world republic will fall without difficulty into the hands of the
Jews. It will then be possible for the Jewish rulers to abolish private property and everywhere to make use of the
resources of the state.

Thus will the promise of the Talmud be fulfilled, in which it is said that when the Messianic time is come, the Jews will have all the property of the whole world in their hands."

Baruch Levy, Letter to Karl Marx (1879), printed in La Revue de Paris, p. 574, June 1, 1928

Given the 3000 year history of Judaism, its religious writings, its possession of nuclear weapons and control of the American government/economy/media, it seems appropriate to take such claims very seriously.

Robert Munro -> BAKER ALLON

Here's some more "fantasy" about your barbaric cult............

http://www.haaretz.com/news/di...

http://www.richardsilverstein....

http://www.btselem.org/downloa...

BTW- All three of the links above are to Jewish web sites - civilized Jews.

Robert Munro -> BAKER ALLON

It is the cult for which you shill that is the disease.......for 3000 years you have been a malignant cancer trying to metastasize throughout our world.

Robert Munro -> BAKER ALLON

The disease that sickens and, hopefully, will kill your cult is truth...............

"To communicate anything with a Goy about our relations would be equal to the killing of all Jews, for if the Goyim knew what we teach about them, they would kill us openly." (found in both the Torah and Talmud)

Jamil M Chaudri -> ARJAN VELLEKOOP

Of course, of course. But then, there are even some people with eyes who do not see. For them it is a blessing, for they see no evil. It is really a mental condition due to aberrant eye. By the way, Yogi Berra is supposed to have said: "You can observe a lot just by watching". But perhaps street-walkers in Europe do not watch, because their game is different, and they are enjoying the benefits of their game.

I do not want to shatter your innocence, but slaves are not seen by street-walkers: Slaves are consigned to SLAVE QUARTERS. Present day, western world has built slave quarters in India, Pakistan, Sudan, Congo, etc. This is where the Western Worlds Slaves Live. If you want to read the whole report goto: http://www.globalslaveryindex....

India has the largest number of slaves in the world (14 million).

Mind you, A related concept is "wage slavery". To understand this concept requires sensibility.

Yet another but even more subtle concept is "mental slavery". A variation of this is known as the Stockholm Syndrome. Mental Slavery is a totally abject state where the person ceases to think eigenartig but assumes the likes and hates of the person/people who have programmed him/her.

From the last line in your post, I can only assume that deep programming has been done. Programmed consciousness is virtual reality.

ARJAN VELLEKOOP -> Jamil M Chaudri

So, now the west should care for what governments in other countries do with their citizens? I thought you hated imperialists! Your reference to India is just idiotic. Why should the west feel responsible for the condition India is in?! You are probably going to say the colonial past. Well, thats bullcrap since there are plenty of countries which have grown, since their liberty, into decent and reasonably wealthy states. The west is not responsible for India, India is responsible for itself.

Particularly the Middle Eastern countries have shown behaviour to shift the blame away from their own failures. Maybe it have to do with their Islamic background, in which so many actions are based/motivated from religious basis. And of course the prophet is never wrong, so it must be the fault of a imperialist outsider.

Get real. The countries which contain these so called slaves, can make their own choices. They dont have to be part of the capitalist terrible world order. They can make the better choice like you and other believe it. Sadly enough, that idea is, apparently, not that good. Because good ideas sell itself.

Jamil M Chaudri -> ARJAN VELLEKOOP

You seem unable to differentiate between an imperialist and a "good Samaritan". You had earlier written that, as a street walker in Europe you had not seen any slaves, my response to that posting simply told you where you could go to see slavery. And specific reference to India was simply to help you find slavery most easily - with 14 million slaves India is the centre of Modern Slavery. However, in my conversations with Indians, especially the demi-literate ones, instead of admitting to the prevailing REALITY in India, they do not admit to seeing it. With their eyes open, the street walkers do not see it.

There is absolutely no religious underpinning for State Government in any of the states where Muslims are in Majority. The Saudi Family are are there because of America; the present rule in Iran is a reaction to America (re-)installing the 2-cent "SHAH" to rule the Iranian Nation. The present excesses of the Iranian state are essentially defense postures against America intransigence, and mechanisms to harm (and if possible) destroy the Iranian Nation.

I experience reality every day. If you would just come out of your VIRTUAL REALITY, you might by just watching observe some. I know deprogramming is not easy, and self-deprogramming is even more difficult.

All the same, I suggest that you wake up and smell the Coffee; if not try some smelling salts.

Robert Munro -> ARJAN VELLEKOOP

And we have read the drivel of thousands of shills for the oligarchy and the Zionist/Fascist cult...............such as yourself.

Ivan Night Terrible

Putin-Putin-Putin-Putin-Putin-Putin... :)) Hmmm... oк, about Putin: Look at Putin's foreign agenda this past year: Latin America just as the sanctions came in - an intentional finger in Washington's eye, as I read it - then China, China again recently, Turkey more recently, India just now. He has not been to Iran, but there, as in all these other places, he has forged or reiterated promising relations. The deals cut are too numerous to list. A couple are worth mentioning. The twin gas deals with China, worth nearly three-quarters of a trillion dollars, are historic all by themselves. In six years' time China will be buying more gas from Russia than the latter now sells to Europe. And do not miss this: My sources tell me that this gas can be priced such as to crowd the U.S. at least partially out of the Asian market. Other side of the world: Putin has just canceled a planned pipeline to southeastern Europe, the South Stream. This is the defeat Western media put it over as, surely: Russia loses some customers. But two points:

[Dec 03, 2017] Progress Report on the US-Russian war by The Saker

i think the Saker forgot that Russia is also a neoliberal country. The last time I checked Russia keeps its foreign reserves in US.
Notable quotes:
"... I am often asked if the US and Russia will go to war with each other. I always reply that they are already at war. Not a war like WWII, but a war nonetheless. This war is, at least for the time being, roughly 80% informational, 15% economic and 5% kinetic. But in political terms the outcome for the loser of this war will be no less dramatic than the outcome of WWII was for Germany: the losing country will not survive it, at least not in its present shape: either Russia will become a US colony again or the AngloZionist Empire will collapse. ..."
"... First, led by Obama, all the leaders of the West declared urbi et orbi and with immense confidence that Assad had no future, that he had to go, that he was already a political corpse and that he would have no role whatsoever to play in the future of Syria. ..."
"... Second, the Empire created a "coalition" of 59 (!) countries, which failed to achieve anything, anything at all: a gigantic multi-billion dollar " gang that could not shoot straight " led by CENTCOM and NATO, which only proved its most abject incompetence. In contrast, Russia never had more than 35 combat aircraft in Syria at any time and turned the course of the war (with a lot of Iranian and Hezbollah help on the ground). ..."
"... Finally, when the US realized that putting Daesh in power in Damascus was not going to happen, they first tried to break up Syria (Plan B) and then tried to create a Kurdish statelet in Iraq and Syria (Plan C). All these plans failed, Assad is in Russia giving hugs to Putin , while Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corp Quds Force Commander General Soleimani is taking a stroll through the last Syrian city to be liberated from Daesh . ..."
"... This is becoming comical. The US media, especially CNN, cannot let a day go by without mentioning the evil Russians, the US Congress is engaged in mass hysteria trying to figure out which of the Republicans and the Democrats have had more contacts with the Russians, NATO commanders are crapping their pants in abject terror (or so they say!) every time the Russian military organizes any exercise, the US Navy and Air Force representatives regularly whine about Russian pilots making "unprofessional intercepts", the British Navy goes into full combat mode when a single (and rather modest) Russian aircraft carrier transits through the English Channel – but Russia is, supposedly, the "weak" country here. ..."
"... The truth is that the Russians are laughing. From the Kremlin, to the media, to the social media – they are even make hilarious sketches about how almighty they are and how they control everything. But mostly the Russians are laughing their heads off wondering what in the world the folks in the West are smoking to be so totally terrified ( at least officially ) by a non-existing threat. ..."
"... That western political leaders are seeking safety in numbers. Hence the ridiculously bloated "coalitions" and all the resolutions coming out of various European and trans-Atlantic bodies. Western politicians are like schoolyard nerds who, fearing the tough kid, huddle together to look bigger. Every Russian kid knows that seeking safety in numbers is a surefire sign of a scared wimp. In contrast, the Russians also remember how a tiny nation of less than 2 million people had the courage to declare war on Russia and how they fought the Russians hard, really hard. I am talking about the Chechens of course. Yeah, love them or hate them – but there is no denying that Chechens are courageous. Ditto for the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan. The Russians were impressed. And even though the Nazis inflicted an unspeakable amount of suffering on the Russian people, the Russians never deny that the German soldiers and officers were skilled and courageous. There is even a Russian saying "I love/respect the courageous man in the Tatar/Mongol" (л юблю молодца и в татарине). So Russians have no problem seeing courage in their enemies. ..."
"... US: the US strategy is equally simple: Use the Russian "threat" to give a meaning and a purpose to the Empire, especially NATO. Continue and expand the "petty harassment" against Russia on all levels. Subvert and weaken as much as possible any country or politician showing any signs of independence or disobedience (including New Silk Road countries) ..."
"... It is important to stress here that in this struggle Russia is at a major disadvantage: whereas the Russians want to build something, the Americans only want to destroy it (examples include Syria, of course, but also the Ukraine or, for that matter, a united Europe). Another major disadvantage for Russia is that most governments out there as still afraid of antagonizing the Empire in any way, thus the deafening silence and supine submissiveness of the "concert of nations" when Uncle Sam goes on one of his usual rampages in total violation of international law and the UN Charter. This is probably changing, but very, very slowly. Most world politicians are just like US Congressmen: prostitutes (and cheap ones at that). ..."
"... The biggest advantage for Russia is that the US are internally falling apart economically, socially, politically – you name it. With every passing year the once most prosperous United States are starting to look more and more like some backwater Third World country. Oh sure, the US economy is still huge (but rapidly shrinking!), but that is meaningless when financial wealth and social wealth are conflated into one completely misleading index of pseudo-prosperity. This is sad, really, a country that ought to be prosperous and happy is being bled to death by the, shall we say, "imperial parasite" feeding on it. ..."
"... Amount of idiocy of current American authorities and society as whole is amazing. Looking in the past I can't see such desperate clowns as those on the top: McCains, Clintons, Haleys at last Trump! and hundreds of powerful people who can not distinguish between Austria and Australia, all of those stupid askin to punish Russia! So, I'd like to be mistaken, but I'm not optimistic about the future of our planet and I believe it is the "West" who can change something, not Russia, we are staying near the last red line and not gonna retreat. ..."
"... The financial dynasties which have ruled the western world for the last few centuries are evidently in the final stages of degeneration. Their ancestors were at least intelligent people whatever one might think about their ethics. So far as I am able to tell we are now being ruled by people who only have one notable characteristic, arrogance. They are to the western world what Caligula and Nero were to Rome, poison and delusion. I doubt very much that there will be a happy outcome. ..."
"... Inherited wealth on a massive scale is the problem, when individuals are born with enough wealth to confer political influence even over the wealthiest countries, then democracy can only be a sham. Bill Gates (of all people) was on the right track a few years ago when he declared that he was only going to pass down to his descendants enough money to live comfortably for one lifetime. Until some sort of sane cap is placed on inherited wealth then we will continue to be ruled by people with mediocre ability advised by second-rate intellectuals who are prepared to tell them what they want to hear. ..."
"... Lavrov, like Putin, has made a practice of dropping such truth-bombs on the US regime. And who can blame them, if the US regime insists on handing them the ammunition, time after time? ..."
"... I hope too, but currenly a ball is on your side of a field. We (Russians) actually can't retreat any more. If US will keep its "soft harrasment" the result could be extremly bad. And I see no reason to expect sane behaviour from US establishment. They are insane, what about a majority of american people ? I don't know. But its must "come from below" of US society, not from us, we already did. ..."
"... At that time (early 1990s) this was almost a consensus among many professionals on Russian side that this was possible. By 1999 it became clear that situation degenerated to such a degree that no compromise was possible anymore. Part of it was rooted in the nature of re-emerging genuine Russian state, the lion share, however, was in neocons completely subverting US foreign policy. ..."
"... First, there is no war. The real/unreal "war" continues because it serves the powers that be on both sides. On the US side, it serves as an excuse for an enormous "defense" spending that now exceeds defense spending of the rest of the world combined. This massive flow of taxpayers' money into the pockets of the few who feed at the Pentagon trough needs some "justification", and "evil Russia" serves admirably. ..."
"... On the Russian side, Putin's generally anti-US foreign policy, which is supported by the great majority of Russians, "justifies" his grip on power despite the fact that the internal policies of his government, which also enrich very few at the expense of the rest, are very unpopular. ..."
"... The US never wages a real war on anyone who has WMDs. North Korea is the most up-to-date example of this. The very fact of the US invasion of Iraq or bombing of Syria showed that the US was 100% sure that neither Saddam nor Assad have WMDs. The US elites, dumb and shortsighted though they are, understand deep down that they need to stay alive to enjoy their loot. As Ukrainian saying puts it, "coffins have no pockets". ..."
"... But there is a stiff competition: the US Empire is going downhill, like the British Empire a century ago, and the Chinese are happy to have Russia spearhead the resistance (which they quietly support in many ways). I doubt that Chinese domination would be any more benign than shameless and brutal US domination, but we'll see soon enough: in 20-30 years the US will be relegated to the position of a second-tier power. I am not even sure that Chinese domination would be in Russia's interests any more than the US domination, but US elites in their incredible stupidity forced Russia to ally with China and all anti-American forces in the world, as diverse as Iran and North Korea. ..."
"... The US is losing so fast due to blind greed and overall degradation of its elites, who keep biting off a lot more than they can chew and behaving like it's 1990. But the ultimate win would be more China's than Russia's, unless Russia manages to create a tri-polar world with China and India, which would be certainly better than any unipolar world can possibly be. ..."
"... Why? There is absolutely nothing about 'multipolar' that dictates three, or four 'hegemons', or even lists who would the 'multis' be. The idea is simply that most people, most of the time are better off left alone. ..."
"... Multipolar is just that – leave exercise of power and responsibility as close to the local situation as possible. Brussels telling Poland who should be a TV presenter, or Washington deciding what people in rural Hungary should read is idiotic. What's the point of all this busy-body behaviour? It is always justified by some slogans about preventing 'human rights violations'. Right. We have seen the results – a lot more people have died and suffered because of 'humanitarian' interventions than from anything else in the last 20+ years. ..."
"... I do find the current rapprochement between Russia and the major Moslem states amusing. It goes beyond Turkey and Iran, Moscow is working all of them, Egypt, Sudan, I suspect it is a clever attempt to beat US at its own game – US has spent about four decades arming and unleashing any Islamic force it could find against Russians (and Slavs in general), using methods that were beyond brutal and hypocrisy that eventually backfired. Maybe turning it around is a good strategy. It is inconsistent, but when you fight extreme stupidity, often the only thing that works is to use more stupidity ..."
"... "The white knight in shining armor" actually turned out to be a cowardly greedy coyote who unsuccessfully tried to fit into a stolen somewhere sheep skin. ..."
Dec 01, 2017 | www.unz.com

Report on the US-Russian War

I am often asked if the US and Russia will go to war with each other. I always reply that they are already at war. Not a war like WWII, but a war nonetheless. This war is, at least for the time being, roughly 80% informational, 15% economic and 5% kinetic. But in political terms the outcome for the loser of this war will be no less dramatic than the outcome of WWII was for Germany: the losing country will not survive it, at least not in its present shape: either Russia will become a US colony again or the AngloZionist Empire will collapse.

In my very first column for the Unz Review entitled " A Tale of Two World Orders " I described the kind of multipolar international system regulated by the rule of law that Russia, China and their allies and friends worldwide (whether overt or covert) are trying to build and how dramatically different it was from the single World Hegemony that the AngloZionists have attempted to establish (and almost successfully imposed upon our suffering planet!). In a way, the US imperial leaders are right , Russia does represent an existential threat, not for the United States as a country or for its people, but for the AngloZionist Empire, just as the latter represents an existential threat to Russia. Furthermore, Russia represents a fundamental civilizational challenge to what is normally called the "West" as she openly rejects its post-Christian (and, I would add, also viscerally anti-Islamic) values. This is why both sides are making an immense effort at prevailing in this struggle.

Last week the anti-imperial camp scored a major victory with the meeting between Presidents Putin, Rouhani and Erdogan in Sochi: they declared themselves the guarantors of a peace plan which will end the war against the Syrian people (the so-called "civil war", which this never was) and they did so without inviting the US to participate in the negotiations. Even worse, their final statement did not even mention the US, not once. The "indispensable nation" was seen as so irrelevant to even be mentioned.

To fully measure how offensive all this is we need to stress a number of points:

First, led by Obama, all the leaders of the West declared urbi et orbi and with immense confidence that Assad had no future, that he had to go, that he was already a political corpse and that he would have no role whatsoever to play in the future of Syria.

Second, the Empire created a "coalition" of 59 (!) countries, which failed to achieve anything, anything at all: a gigantic multi-billion dollar " gang that could not shoot straight " led by CENTCOM and NATO, which only proved its most abject incompetence. In contrast, Russia never had more than 35 combat aircraft in Syria at any time and turned the course of the war (with a lot of Iranian and Hezbollah help on the ground).

Next, the Empire decreed that Russia was "isolated" and her economy " in tatters " – all of which the Ziomedia parroted with total fidelity . Iran was, of course, part of the famous " Axis of Evil ," while Hezbollah was the " A-Team of terrorism ". As for Erdogan, the AngloZionists tried to overthrow and kill him. And now it is Russia, Iran, Hezbollah and Turkey who defeated the terrorists and will call the shots in Syria.

Finally, when the US realized that putting Daesh in power in Damascus was not going to happen, they first tried to break up Syria (Plan B) and then tried to create a Kurdish statelet in Iraq and Syria (Plan C). All these plans failed, Assad is in Russia giving hugs to Putin , while Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corp Quds Force Commander General Soleimani is taking a stroll through the last Syrian city to be liberated from Daesh .

Can you imagine how totally humiliated, ridiculed, and beaten the US leaders feel today? Being hated or resisted is one thing, but being totally ignored – now that hurts!

As for a strategy, the best they could come up with was what I would call a "petty harassment of Russia": making RT sign up as a foreign agent, stealing ancient art from Russia , stripping Russian athletes from medals en masse , trying to ban the Russian flag and anthem from the Olympics in Seoul or banning Russian military aircraft from the next Farnborough airshow. And all these efforts have achieved is making Putin even more popular, the West even more hated, and the Olympics even more boring (ditto for Farnborough – the MAKS and the Dubai Air Shows are so much 'sexier' anyway). Oh, I almost forgot, the "new Europeans" will continue their mini-war against old Soviet statues to their liberators. It's just like the US mini-war on the Russian representations in the US, a clear sign of weakness .

Speaking of weakness.

This is becoming comical. The US media, especially CNN, cannot let a day go by without mentioning the evil Russians, the US Congress is engaged in mass hysteria trying to figure out which of the Republicans and the Democrats have had more contacts with the Russians, NATO commanders are crapping their pants in abject terror (or so they say!) every time the Russian military organizes any exercise, the US Navy and Air Force representatives regularly whine about Russian pilots making "unprofessional intercepts", the British Navy goes into full combat mode when a single (and rather modest) Russian aircraft carrier transits through the English Channel – but Russia is, supposedly, the "weak" country here.

Does that make sense to you?

The truth is that the Russians are laughing. From the Kremlin, to the media, to the social media – they are even make hilarious sketches about how almighty they are and how they control everything. But mostly the Russians are laughing their heads off wondering what in the world the folks in the West are smoking to be so totally terrified ( at least officially ) by a non-existing threat.

You know what else they are seeing?

That western political leaders are seeking safety in numbers. Hence the ridiculously bloated "coalitions" and all the resolutions coming out of various European and trans-Atlantic bodies. Western politicians are like schoolyard nerds who, fearing the tough kid, huddle together to look bigger. Every Russian kid knows that seeking safety in numbers is a surefire sign of a scared wimp. In contrast, the Russians also remember how a tiny nation of less than 2 million people had the courage to declare war on Russia and how they fought the Russians hard, really hard. I am talking about the Chechens of course. Yeah, love them or hate them – but there is no denying that Chechens are courageous. Ditto for the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan. The Russians were impressed. And even though the Nazis inflicted an unspeakable amount of suffering on the Russian people, the Russians never deny that the German soldiers and officers were skilled and courageous. There is even a Russian saying "I love/respect the courageous man in the Tatar/Mongol" (л юблю молодца и в татарине). So Russians have no problem seeing courage in their enemies.

... ... ...

Russia: the Russian strategy towards the Empire is simple:

Try to avoid as much as possible and for as long as possible any direct military confrontation with the US because Russia is still the weaker side (mostly in quantitative terms). That, and actively preparing for war under the ancient si vis pacem para bellum strategy. Try to cope as best can be with all the "petty harassment": the US still has infinitely more "soft power" than Russia and Russia simply does not have the means to strike back in kind. So she does the minimum to try to deter or weaken the effects of that kind of "petty harassment" but, in truth, there is not much she can do about it besides accepting it as a fact of life. Rather than trying to disengage from the AngloZionist controlled Empire (economically, financially, politically), Russia will very deliberately contribute to the gradual emergence of an alternative realm. A good example of that is the Chinese-promoted New Silk Road which is being built without any meaningful role for the Empire.

US: the US strategy is equally simple: Use the Russian "threat" to give a meaning and a purpose to the Empire, especially NATO. Continue and expand the "petty harassment" against Russia on all levels. Subvert and weaken as much as possible any country or politician showing any signs of independence or disobedience (including New Silk Road countries)

Both sides are using delaying tactics, but for diametrically opposite reasons: Russia, because time is on her side and the US, because they have run out of options.

It is important to stress here that in this struggle Russia is at a major disadvantage: whereas the Russians want to build something, the Americans only want to destroy it (examples include Syria, of course, but also the Ukraine or, for that matter, a united Europe). Another major disadvantage for Russia is that most governments out there as still afraid of antagonizing the Empire in any way, thus the deafening silence and supine submissiveness of the "concert of nations" when Uncle Sam goes on one of his usual rampages in total violation of international law and the UN Charter. This is probably changing, but very, very slowly. Most world politicians are just like US Congressmen: prostitutes (and cheap ones at that).

The biggest advantage for Russia is that the US are internally falling apart economically, socially, politically – you name it. With every passing year the once most prosperous United States are starting to look more and more like some backwater Third World country. Oh sure, the US economy is still huge (but rapidly shrinking!), but that is meaningless when financial wealth and social wealth are conflated into one completely misleading index of pseudo-prosperity. This is sad, really, a country that ought to be prosperous and happy is being bled to death by the, shall we say, "imperial parasite" feeding on it.

At the end of the day, political regimes can only survive by the consent of those they rule. In the United States this consent is clearly in the process of being withdrawn. In Russia it has never been stronger. This translates into a major fragility of the US and, therefore, the Empire (the US are by far the biggest host of the AngloZionist imperial parasite) and a major source of staying power for Russia.

All of the above applies only to political regimes, of course. The people of Russia and of the US have exactly the same interests: bringing down the Empire with the least amount of violence and suffering as possible. Like all Empires, the US Empire mostly abused others in its formative and peak years, but as any decaying Empire it is now mostly abusing its own people. It is therefore vital to always repeat that an "Empire-free US" would have no reason to see an enemy in Russia and vice-versa. In fact, Russia and the US could be ideal partners, but the "imperial parasites" will not allow that to happen. Thus we are all stuck in an absurd and dangerous situation which could result in a war which would completely destroy most of our planet.

For whatever it's worth, and in spite of the constant hysterical Russophobia in the US Ziomedia, I detect absolutely no sign whatsoever that this campaign is having any success with the people in the US. At most, some of them naively buy into the "the Russians tried to interfere in our elections" fairy tale, but even in this case this belief is mitigated by "no big deal, we also do that in other countries". I have yet to meet a American who would seriously believe that Russia is any kind of danger. I don't even detect superficial reactions of hostility when, for example, I speak Russian with my family in a public place. Typically, we are asked what language we are speaking and when we reply "Russian" the reaction normally is "cool!". Quite often I even hear "what do you think of Putin? I really like him". This is in severe contrast with the federal government whom the vast majority of Americans seem to hate with a passion.

To summarize it all, I would say that at this point in time of the US-Russian war, Russia is wining, the Empire is losing and the US is suffering. As for the EU it is "enjoying" a much deserved irrelevance while being mostly busy absorbing wave after wave of society-destroying refugees proving, yet again, the truth of the saying that if your head is in the sand, your ass is in the air.

This war is far from over, I don't even think that we have reach its peak yet and things are going to get worse before they get better again. But all in all, I am very optimistic that the Axis of Kindness will bite the dust in a relatively not too distant future.

yurivku , December 1, 2017 at 7:16 am GMT

Reading texts from Saker is a sip of fresh water in a rotten pool. His words "things are going to get worse before they get better again" could come true, but also could never happen cause current Cold War very likely may be converted to very hot one. And they will not get better. The common West doing everything for it.

Saker said "Russians laughing" – yes, we do sometimes, but when we hear last news from "soft harassment" like attacks on our sportsmen, diplomats or reporters we are clenching our fists. We do not feel bad on western people, but this is not the case when to talk about the country as whole, counry which being determinated by its tops. There is a limit to any patience.

Amount of idiocy of current American authorities and society as whole is amazing. Looking in the past I can't see such desperate clowns as those on the top: McCains, Clintons, Haleys at last Trump! and hundreds of powerful people who can not distinguish between Austria and Australia, all of those stupid askin to punish Russia!
So, I'd like to be mistaken, but I'm not optimistic about the future of our planet and I believe it is the "West" who can change something, not Russia, we are staying near the last red line and not gonna retreat.

MarkU , December 1, 2017 at 10:40 am GMT
The financial dynasties which have ruled the western world for the last few centuries are evidently in the final stages of degeneration. Their ancestors were at least intelligent people whatever one might think about their ethics. So far as I am able to tell we are now being ruled by people who only have one notable characteristic, arrogance. They are to the western world what Caligula and Nero were to Rome, poison and delusion. I doubt very much that there will be a happy outcome.

Inherited wealth on a massive scale is the problem, when individuals are born with enough wealth to confer political influence even over the wealthiest countries, then democracy can only be a sham. Bill Gates (of all people) was on the right track a few years ago when he declared that he was only going to pass down to his descendants enough money to live comfortably for one lifetime. Until some sort of sane cap is placed on inherited wealth then we will continue to be ruled by people with mediocre ability advised by second-rate intellectuals who are prepared to tell them what they want to hear.

The biggest threat to our continued existence is not the strength of the Russian federation but its weakness. Outspent and outnumbered hugely by the EU alone (whatever the paid liars in Washington say) their only credible defence in the event of open warfare is their nuclear arsenal, we can only hope they never need to use it.

Randal , December 1, 2017 at 10:53 am GMT

Can you imagine how totally humiliated, ridiculed, and beaten the US leaders feel today? Being hated or resisted is one thing, but being totally ignored – now that hurts!

Saker could have added to the list of self-inflicted defeats for the US regime and foreign policy elites their ongoing humiliation over North Korea, where they have endlessly tried to insist that the US has some kind of special right for its enemies not to be allowed even to possess weapons that could potentially attack them, and postured and menaced in response to the NK government's defiance, but have so far been forced to accept that they can do nothing about it, as Pat Buchanan discusses today . And as Pat points out, this is a situation entirely of the US regime's making – by operating a sustained policy of military aggressions, and especially of attacking those that foolishly rely upon submission to their demands (Gaddafi) and undermining any agreements they make (Iran), they created the situation in which going all out for a nuclear deterrent became the most rational course available for NK.

The US might yet choose to wage another war of aggression in order to avoid yet another self-inflicted humiliation, or an unintended war might start as a result of the US regime's irresponsible military buildup and provocations, but if either happens, the costs will be colossal and any gains trivial, "win" or lose.

But mostly the Russians are laughing their heads off wondering what in the world the folks in the West are smoking to be so totally terrified (at least officially) by a non-existing threat.

That's not the only gross absurdity in US sphere society that Russians are laughing at, apparently:

Russian TV defends men over sex pest claims

Nor is Russia resisting the opportunity to twist the knife on the US's Korean nightmare:

North Korea: Russia accuses US of goading Kim Jong-un

Lavrov, like Putin, has made a practice of dropping such truth-bombs on the US regime. And who can blame them, if the US regime insists on handing them the ammunition, time after time?

Over the past thirty years, at least, the US regime has ensured that the truth is anti-American.

The Scalpel , Website December 1, 2017 at 12:26 pm GMT
"US would have no reason to see an enemy in Russia and vice-versa. In fact, Russia and the US could be ideal partners"

This is the dream I had when the "wall" came down. But instead, I saw that my belief that the US government was a "white knight in shining armor" acting for "truth, justice, and the american way" and to "make the world safe for democracy" was only a dream, a foolish fantasy. I had been deceived. I had wanted to be an Army general and was a Distinguished Graduate of the USMA. Now I resigned my commission as an Army officer, took off my uniform, and extended my arm to stop the tanks.

I hope to live to see the day of a multipolar world in peace. It is possible, but it must come from below. An "American Spring" is essential. I hope my complacent countrymen will see this before it is too late.

yurivku , December 1, 2017 at 1:07 pm GMT
@The Scalpel

Now I resigned my commission as an Army officer, took off my uniform, and extended my arm to stop the tanks.

I took off the uniform of Soviet Army officer more than 30 years ago. Was an officer in anti aircraft division.

I hope to live to see the day of a multipolar world in peace. It is possible, but it must come from below.

I hope too, but currenly a ball is on your side of a field. We (Russians) actually can't retreat any more. If US will keep its "soft harrasment" the result could be extremly bad. And I see no reason to expect sane behaviour from US establishment. They are insane, what about a majority of american people ? I don't know. But its must "come from below" of US society, not from us, we already did.

Andrei Martyanov , Website December 1, 2017 at 2:05 pm GMT
@The Scalpel

This is the dream I had when the "wall" came down.

At that time (early 1990s) this was almost a consensus among many professionals on Russian side that this was possible. By 1999 it became clear that situation degenerated to such a degree that no compromise was possible anymore. Part of it was rooted in the nature of re-emerging genuine Russian state, the lion share, however, was in neocons completely subverting US foreign policy.

Andrei Martyanov , Website December 1, 2017 at 2:10 pm GMT
@MarkU

their only credible defence in the event of open warfare is their nuclear arsenal

Sir, don't repeat discredited propaganda memes. If you don't trust me, which is fine, read opinion on the man who has decades of working and serving with this very NATO, not to mention his deep knowledge on military-diplomatic terms of Russia.

https://patrickarmstrong.ca/2017/11/23/nato-a-dangerous-paper-tiger/

In fact, it is the United States who is the most likely user of its nuclear arsenal and it has nothing to do with Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombing.

TomSchmidt , December 1, 2017 at 3:17 pm GMT
At the end of the day, political regimes can only survive by the consent of those they rule. In the United States this consent is clearly in the process of being withdrawn.

That really is the nub of the matter there. The elites are fumbling about, trying to save themselves in the USA and their unearned perquisites. As the Saker says, the imperial parasite is sucking dry what should be a wealthy and peaceful land.

nickels , December 1, 2017 at 7:01 pm GMT
Too much depends on China, and I don't trust them. The godless money grubbers may chose to ally with the (((Anglos))) and stab Russia in the back just like Russia allied with the (((Brits))) to stab Germany in the back. The world pivots on the Yellow Peril.
Andrei Martyanov , Website December 1, 2017 at 7:12 pm GMT
@Hank Rearden

except for the reference to Conchita Wurst, of which I'm unfamiliar. I was curious enough to google it, and now I can't unsee that. Dear God, I need a brainwash.

LOL, tell me about that – same here. I heard of IT (This, that, creature etc.) but at some point of time I took a look. Boy, was I sorry:))

Curmudgeon , December 1, 2017 at 7:45 pm GMT
@Priss Factor

America's Founding was also marked by this great contradiction. It was, in one sense, a universal republic committed to principles that rose above tribe or nation.

..

Given that the Naturalization Act of 1790 allowed for Whites only, the concept of a universal republic was, obviously, not entirely universal.

As for Anglo-Americans, their importation of large numbers of black Africans to toil as slaves and then huge numbers of 'ethnic' European immigrants -- especially the feisty and pushy Jews -- led to increasing pressure to transform America into a 'proposition'

There was already a steady supply of White slaves (indentured servants) coming from the UK. The importation of Africans was mainly in Jewish hands, as the (((reviled))) Tony Martin pointed out. This ramped up considerably after Anthony Johnson, a Black landowner who was a former indentured servant, sued and won the right to keep slaves for life. Ironically, his two white slaves were also included in the judgement. So much for White privilege.

Cyrano , December 1, 2017 at 8:06 pm GMT
At one point the US was so confident that they managed to "fix" the middle east, that they were talking about "pivot" to Asia, which was nothing more than a veiled threat to China that they are next on the list to be "fixed". So the pivot to Asia didn't really happen, as it turns out the middle east wasn't really "fixed", not the way the wanted it anyway. Then the fiasco in Ukraine happened where they had to turn their attention to Russia.

May I be so bold as to suggest few names for the new US policies towards Russia after 2014 – using "pivot to Asia" as a guidance? How about:

1. Somersault to Russia? Or,

2. Cartwheel to Russia? Or maybe,

3. Backflip to Russia?

Note that all 3 suggested choices try to point out to the acrobatic skills needed in order for the missions named after them to succeed.

Anon , Disclaimer December 1, 2017 at 8:14 pm GMT
First, there is no war. The real/unreal "war" continues because it serves the powers that be on both sides. On the US side, it serves as an excuse for an enormous "defense" spending that now exceeds defense spending of the rest of the world combined. This massive flow of taxpayers' money into the pockets of the few who feed at the Pentagon trough needs some "justification", and "evil Russia" serves admirably.

On the Russian side, Putin's generally anti-US foreign policy, which is supported by the great majority of Russians, "justifies" his grip on power despite the fact that the internal policies of his government, which also enrich very few at the expense of the rest, are very unpopular.

The US never wages a real war on anyone who has WMDs. North Korea is the most up-to-date example of this. The very fact of the US invasion of Iraq or bombing of Syria showed that the US was 100% sure that neither Saddam nor Assad have WMDs. The US elites, dumb and shortsighted though they are, understand deep down that they need to stay alive to enjoy their loot. As Ukrainian saying puts it, "coffins have no pockets".

But there is a stiff competition: the US Empire is going downhill, like the British Empire a century ago, and the Chinese are happy to have Russia spearhead the resistance (which they quietly support in many ways). I doubt that Chinese domination would be any more benign than shameless and brutal US domination, but we'll see soon enough: in 20-30 years the US will be relegated to the position of a second-tier power. I am not even sure that Chinese domination would be in Russia's interests any more than the US domination, but US elites in their incredible stupidity forced Russia to ally with China and all anti-American forces in the world, as diverse as Iran and North Korea.

The US is losing so fast due to blind greed and overall degradation of its elites, who keep biting off a lot more than they can chew and behaving like it's 1990. But the ultimate win would be more China's than Russia's, unless Russia manages to create a tri-polar world with China and India, which would be certainly better than any unipolar world can possibly be.

Andrei Martyanov , Website December 1, 2017 at 8:29 pm GMT

1. Somersault to Russia? Or,

2. Cartwheel to Russia? Or maybe,

3. Backflip to Russia?

Without jokes, but that is a perfect visual representation of a contemporary American foreign policy.

Erebus , December 2, 2017 at 2:51 am GMT
@Cyrano

1. Somersault to Russia? Or,
2. Cartwheel to Russia? Or maybe,
3. Backflip to Russia?

Note that all 3 suggested choices try to point out to the acrobatic skills needed in order for the missions named after them to succeed.

In the end, it will be a spastic lurch and a nosedive into the ditch on the road to Moscow.

Low Voltage , December 2, 2017 at 3:52 am GMT
Instead of AngloZionist Empire, I like just to call it the "Confederacy."

1. The Southern Generals strut around the globe like they own the place.
2. We're a resource-based economy with a free trade mantra.
3. Slave labor camps litter the Empire (though only in prisons in Confederate Homeland).
4. Hyper Police State.
5. Everyone defines themselves by their skin color.

Would anyone else care to add this list?

Beckow , December 2, 2017 at 4:19 am GMT
@peterAUS

"The same "hegemon with allies/vassals" as it is now, only in that case divided in three"

Why? There is absolutely nothing about 'multipolar' that dictates three, or four 'hegemons', or even lists who would the 'multis' be. The idea is simply that most people, most of the time are better off left alone.

Is that so hard to understand? Why should people in Washington (or Moscow, Beijing, Brussels, ) be intimately involved with how others live their lives, with their fights and alliances? Knowledge always dissipates with distance, and most of the 'masters of the universe' are not that smart to start with.

Multipolar is just that – leave exercise of power and responsibility as close to the local situation as possible. Brussels telling Poland who should be a TV presenter, or Washington deciding what people in rural Hungary should read is idiotic. What's the point of all this busy-body behaviour? It is always justified by some slogans about preventing 'human rights violations'. Right. We have seen the results – a lot more people have died and suffered because of 'humanitarian' interventions than from anything else in the last 20+ years.

I do find the current rapprochement between Russia and the major Moslem states amusing. It goes beyond Turkey and Iran, Moscow is working all of them, Egypt, Sudan, I suspect it is a clever attempt to beat US at its own game – US has spent about four decades arming and unleashing any Islamic force it could find against Russians (and Slavs in general), using methods that were beyond brutal and hypocrisy that eventually backfired. Maybe turning it around is a good strategy. It is inconsistent, but when you fight extreme stupidity, often the only thing that works is to use more stupidity

Erebus , December 2, 2017 at 8:48 am GMT
@Beckow

"The same "hegemon with allies/vassals" as it is now, only in that case divided in three"

Why? There is absolutely nothing about 'multipolar' that dictates three, or four 'hegemons', or even lists who would the 'multis' be. The idea is simply that most people, most of the time are better off left alone.

Peter's is the apocalyptic view made famous by Orwell. He may be right, it may all unravel and Oceania, Eurasia & Eastasia run a classic 3-power calculus of shifting alliances in a struggle for control of the "hinterlands". Not at all impossible, but certainly not what the proponents of the multipolar world want.

The idea is much more than the notion that most people want to "be left alone". The Multipolar world as it is actually being constructed by its proponents, from its monetary structures to its security, commercial and trade regimes, is precisely the attempt to prevent that Orwellian development in the face of Western decline. Their foundational tenet is that Globalization as a world-historical trend is here to stay (for at least the next few generations), and the "compartmentalization" of the world into alliances and hegemonies as historically occurred is no longer a viable option. The 3 Orwellian powers are all nuclear now, and the #1 priority is to mitigate the risk of war between them. Best to do that by dissolving them into a matrix of commercial and developmental programs that they'd be loathe to destroy.

EG: Though Russia considers both China and Iran "strategic partners", there is no formal alliance with either of them, and there won't be. Alliances cannot be "forbidden", but the countries that have signed onto the multipolar world program view alliances with suspicion.

As a introduction to the coming multipolar world, Kupchan's Western-centric analysis is a good place to start: https://www.amazon.com/No-Ones-World-Council-Relations/dp/0199325227

"Kupchan provides a detailed strategy for striking a bargain between the West and the rising rest by fashioning a new consensus on issues of legitimacy, sovereignty, and governance."

Assuming he even knows the least thing about what the multipolar world is trying to do, Peter's view is that their attempt will fail. Maybe so.
To "fashion a new consensus on issues of legitimacy, sovereignty, and governance" requires that the professional criminal class that grabbed the remains of Western power a decade and a half ago has been forced to let go. If not, the world indeed faces an abyss.

Orwell's vision is but one of the possibilities. Another is Armageddon. Yet another is a "(Failed) West and a multipolar Rest". The latter is what I think will actually happen in the near and medium term. Things being what they are, it may even be the best we can hope for.

Brzez , December 2, 2017 at 9:58 am GMT
@The Scalpel

"The white knight in shining armor" actually turned out to be a cowardly greedy coyote who unsuccessfully tried to fit into a stolen somewhere sheep skin.

Beckow , December 2, 2017 at 9:32 pm GMT
@peterAUS

"Russians shouldn't have raped all those German women"

Yeah, that's the problem – WWII was all about Russians raping. Not about Germans attacking east and murdering tens of millions. How many Russian women do you think Germans 'raped'? Or maybe they just killed them, 'ubermensch', right. It doesn't seem to bother you and that is sick.

Or this vignette:

The regime in Moscow has one and only one goal: own hold on power"

While, of course the 'regimes' in Washington or Berlin spend all their time worrying about the well-being of their citizens. You really cannot be that dumb, or can you?

I made mistake responding to you, you are hopeless.

Beckow , December 2, 2017 at 9:48 pm GMT
@Erebus

"(Failed) West and a multipolar Rest". The latter is what I think will actually happen in the near and medium term.

I think we already have it, except I don't think West has failed yet. Or it has in a way, the process of failing goes on, but the consequences have not been felt much in the West yet.

I don't see any other power than the West (=US) aspiring to 'manage the world'. Maybe some ISIS fanatics have the same dream, but they are not in a position to achieve it. West has 'managed' it very poorly: mindless interventions, wars, migrants, hypocrisy, threats and blackmail.

The other 'powers' have very modest, regional aspirations. Russia or China really don't care that much who wins the elections in Portugal, or what regional papers write in Hungary – US seems to be obsessed with it. And the only justification that Western defenders offer when pressed is that 'there would be a vacuum' and 'Russians would move in'. This is obvious nonsense and only elderly paranoid Cold Warrior types believe it (peterAUS?). What is really going on is that West has over-reached and can barely handle its own problems. So they scream 'Russians are coming' to distract, or to prolong the agony. Russians are not coming, they don't care in 2017, they can barely control their huge territory today. More you see squealing and lying in the Western media, more it shows that they have not much else to work with.

Beckow , December 2, 2017 at 10:49 pm GMT
@peterAUS

Is it possible to see BOTH as bad

You only mentioned one. You always only mention one, the same one.

To be fair, Germans started the war and killed a lot more people in the east. They deserved what they got.

how about ALL those regimes (Washington, Berlin, Moscow) first and foremost care about own survival and own success

You say that now because you got caught – again – with a one-sided biased view. If people have to remind you that rules should be applied equally, you are either too far gone or have issues with basic logic. Try to be objective to start with, not after you produce a biased rant and people point it out to you.

[Dec 01, 2017] Neocon Chaos Promotion in the Mideast

Highly recommended!
It's interesting to reread this two years article by
Here is an extremely shred observation: "I lived in the USSR during the 1970s and would not wish that kind of restrictive regime on anyone. Until it fell apart, though, it was militarily strong enough to deter Wolfowitz-style adventurism. And I will say that – for the millions of people now dead, injured or displaced by U.S. military action in the Middle East over the past dozen years – the collapse of the Soviet Union as a deterrent to U.S. war-making was not only a "geopolitical catastrophe" but an unmitigated disaster.
Notable quotes:
"... how Paul Wolfowitz and his neoconservative co-conspirators implemented their sweeping plan to destabilize key Middle Eastern countries once it became clear that post-Soviet Russia "won't stop us." ..."
"... the neocons had been enabled by their assessment that -- after the collapse of the Soviet Union – Russia had become neutralized and posed no deterrent to U.S. military action in the Middle East. ..."
"... the significance of Clark's depiction of Wolfowitz in 1992 gloating over what he judged to be a major lesson learned from the Desert Storm attack on Iraq in 1991; namely, "the Soviets won't stop us." ..."
"... Would the neocons – widely known as "the crazies" at least among the remaining sane people of Washington – have been crazy enough to opt for war to re-arrange the Middle East if the Soviet Union had not fallen apart in 1991? ..."
"... The geopolitical vacuum that enabled the neocons to try out their "regime change" scheme in the Middle East may have been what Russian President Vladimir Putin was referring to in his state-of-the-nation address on April 25, 2005, when he called the collapse of the Soviet Union "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the [past] century." Putin's comment has been a favorite meme of those who seek to demonize Putin by portraying him as lusting to re-establish a powerful USSR through aggression in Europe. ..."
"... Putin seemed correct at least in how the neocons exploited the absence of the Russian counterweight to over-extend American power in ways that were harmful to the world, devastating to the people at the receiving end of the neocon interventions, and even detrimental to the United States. ..."
"... I lived in the USSR during the 1970s and would not wish that kind of restrictive regime on anyone. Until it fell apart, though, it was militarily strong enough to deter Wolfowitz-style adventurism. And I will say that – for the millions of people now dead, injured or displaced by U.S. military action in the Middle East over the past dozen years – the collapse of the Soviet Union as a deterrent to U.S. war-making was not only a "geopolitical catastrophe" but an unmitigated disaster. ..."
"... "We should have gotten rid of Saddam Hussein. The truth is, one thing we did learn is that we can use our military in the Middle East and the Soviets won't stop us. We've got about five or 10 years to clean up those old Soviet client regimes – Syria, Iran (sic), Iraq – before the next great superpower comes on to challenge us." ..."
"... the scene was surreal – funereal, even, with both Wolfowitz and Lieberman very much down-in-the-mouth, behaving as though they had just watched their favorite team lose the Super Bowl. ..."
"... In her article, entitled "Israel Backs Limited Strike Against Syria," Rudoren noted that the Israelis were arguing, quietly, that the best outcome for Syria's (then) 2 ½-year-old civil war, at least for the moment, was no outcome: ..."
"... In September 2013, shortly after Rudoren's article, Israeli Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren, then a close adviser to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, told the Jerusalem Post that Israel favored the Sunni extremists over Assad. ..."
"... "The greatest danger to Israel is by the strategic arc that extends from Tehran, to Damascus to Beirut. And we saw the Assad regime as the keystone in that arc," Oren said in an interview . "We always wanted Bashar Assad to go, we always preferred the bad guys who weren't backed by Iran to the bad guys who were backed by Iran." He said this was the case even if the "bad guys" were affiliated with Al-Qaeda. ..."
"... In June 2014, Oren – then speaking as a former ambassador – said Israel would even prefer a victory by the Islamic State, which was massacring captured Iraqi soldiers and beheading Westerners, than the continuation of the Iranian-backed Assad in Syria. "From Israel's perspective, if there's got to be an evil that's got to prevail, let the Sunni evil prevail," Oren said. ..."
"... That Syria's main ally is Iran with which it has a mutual defense treaty plays a role in Israeli calculations. Accordingly, while some Western leaders would like to achieve a realistic if imperfect settlement of the Syrian civil war, others who enjoy considerable influence in Washington would just as soon see the Assad government and the entire region bleed out. ..."
"... As cynical and cruel as this strategy is, it isn't all that hard to understand. Yet, it seems to be one of those complicated, politically charged situations well above the pay-grade of the sophomores advising President Obama – who, sad to say, are no match for the neocons in the Washington Establishment. Not to mention the Netanyahu-mesmerized Congress. ..."
"... Speaking of Congress, a year after Rudoren's report, Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tennessee, who now chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, divulged some details about the military attack that had been planned against Syria, while lamenting that it was canceled. In doing so, Corker called Obama's abrupt change on Aug. 31, 2013, in opting for negotiations over open war on Syria, "the worst moment in U.S. foreign policy since I've been here." Following the neocon script, Corker blasted the deal (since fully implemented) with Putin and the Syrians to rid Syria of its chemical weapons. ..."
"... Wolfowitz, typically, has landed on his feet. He is now presidential hopeful Jeb Bush's foreign policy/defense adviser, no doubt outlining his preferred approach to the Middle East chessboard to his new boss. Does anyone know the plural of "bedlam? ..."
Apr 15, 2015 | antiwar.com
Former Washington insider and four-star General Wesley Clark spilled the beans several years ago on how Paul Wolfowitz and his neoconservative co-conspirators implemented their sweeping plan to destabilize key Middle Eastern countries once it became clear that post-Soviet Russia "won't stop us."

As I recently reviewed a YouTube eight-minute clip of General Clark's October 2007 speech, what leaped out at me was that the neocons had been enabled by their assessment that -- after the collapse of the Soviet Union – Russia had become neutralized and posed no deterrent to U.S. military action in the Middle East.

While Clark's public exposé largely escaped attention in the neocon-friendly "mainstream media" (surprise, surprise!), he recounted being told by a senior general at the Pentagon shortly after the 9/11 attacks in 2001 about the Donald Rumsfeld/Paul Wolfowitz-led plan for "regime change" in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.

This was startling enough, I grant you, since officially the United States presents itself as a nation that respects international law, frowns upon other powerful nations overthrowing the governments of weaker states, and – in the aftermath of World War II – condemned past aggressions by Nazi Germany and decried Soviet "subversion" of pro-U.S. nations.

But what caught my eye this time was the significance of Clark's depiction of Wolfowitz in 1992 gloating over what he judged to be a major lesson learned from the Desert Storm attack on Iraq in 1991; namely, "the Soviets won't stop us."

That remark directly addresses a question that has troubled me since March 2003 when George W. Bush attacked Iraq. Would the neocons – widely known as "the crazies" at least among the remaining sane people of Washington – have been crazy enough to opt for war to re-arrange the Middle East if the Soviet Union had not fallen apart in 1991?

The question is not an idle one. Despite the debacle in Iraq and elsewhere, the neocon "crazies" still exercise huge influence in Establishment Washington. Thus, the question now becomes whether, with Russia far more stable and much stronger, the "crazies" are prepared to risk military escalation with Russia over Ukraine, what retired U.S. diplomat William R. Polk deemed a potentially dangerous nuclear confrontation, a "Cuban Missile Crisis in reverse."

Putin's Comment

The geopolitical vacuum that enabled the neocons to try out their "regime change" scheme in the Middle East may have been what Russian President Vladimir Putin was referring to in his state-of-the-nation address on April 25, 2005, when he called the collapse of the Soviet Union "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the [past] century." Putin's comment has been a favorite meme of those who seek to demonize Putin by portraying him as lusting to re-establish a powerful USSR through aggression in Europe.

But, commenting two years after the Iraq invasion, Putin seemed correct at least in how the neocons exploited the absence of the Russian counterweight to over-extend American power in ways that were harmful to the world, devastating to the people at the receiving end of the neocon interventions, and even detrimental to the United States.

If one takes a step back and attempts an unbiased look at the spread of violence in the Middle East over the past quarter-century, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that Putin's comment was on the mark. With Russia a much-weakened military power in the 1990s and early 2000s, there was nothing to deter U.S. policymakers from the kind of adventurism at Russia's soft underbelly that, in earlier years, would have carried considerable risk of armed U.S.-USSR confrontation.

I lived in the USSR during the 1970s and would not wish that kind of restrictive regime on anyone. Until it fell apart, though, it was militarily strong enough to deter Wolfowitz-style adventurism. And I will say that – for the millions of people now dead, injured or displaced by U.S. military action in the Middle East over the past dozen years – the collapse of the Soviet Union as a deterrent to U.S. war-making was not only a "geopolitical catastrophe" but an unmitigated disaster.

Visiting Wolfowitz

In his 2007 speech, General Clark related how in early 1991 he dropped in on Paul Wolfowitz, then Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (and later, from 2001 to 2005, Deputy Secretary of Defense). It was just after a major Shia uprising in Iraq in March 1991. President George H.W. Bush's administration had provoked it, but then did nothing to rescue the Shia from brutal retaliation by Saddam Hussein, who had just survived his Persian Gulf defeat.

According to Clark, Wolfowitz said: "We should have gotten rid of Saddam Hussein. The truth is, one thing we did learn is that we can use our military in the Middle East and the Soviets won't stop us. We've got about five or 10 years to clean up those old Soviet client regimes – Syria, Iran (sic), Iraq – before the next great superpower comes on to challenge us."

It's now been more than 10 years, of course. But do not be deceived into thinking Wolfowitz and his neocon colleagues believe they have failed in any major way. The unrest they initiated keeps mounting – in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Lebanon – not to mention fresh violence now in full swing in Yemen and the crisis in Ukraine. Yet, the Teflon coating painted on the neocons continues to cover and protect them in the "mainstream media."

True, one neocon disappointment is Iran. It is more stable and less isolated than before; it is playing a sophisticated role in Iraq; and it is on the verge of concluding a major nuclear agreement with the West – barring the throwing of a neocon/Israeli monkey wrench into the works to thwart it, as has been done in the past.

An earlier setback for the neocons came at the end of August 2013 when President Barack Obama decided not to let himself be mouse-trapped by the neocons into ordering U.S. forces to attack Syria. Wolfowitz et al. were on the threshold of having the U.S. formally join the war against Bashar al-Assad's government of Syria when there was the proverbial slip between cup and lip. With the aid of the neocons' new devil-incarnate Vladimir Putin, Obama faced them down and avoided war.

A week after it became clear that the neocons were not going to get their war in Syria, I found myself at the main CNN studio in Washington together with Paul Wolfowitz and former Sen. Joe Lieberman, another important neocon. As I reported in "How War on Syria Lost Its Way," the scene was surreal – funereal, even, with both Wolfowitz and Lieberman very much down-in-the-mouth, behaving as though they had just watched their favorite team lose the Super Bowl.

Israeli/Neocon Preferences

But the neocons are nothing if not resilient. Despite their grotesque disasters, like the Iraq War, and their disappointments, like not getting their war on Syria, they neither learn lessons nor change goals. They just readjust their aim, shooting now at Putin over Ukraine as a way to clear the path again for "regime change" in Syria and Iran. [See Consortiumnews.com's "Why Neocons Seek to Destabilize Russia."]

The neocons also can take some solace from their "success" at enflaming the Middle East with Shia and Sunni now at each other's throats – a bad thing for many people of the world and certainly for the many innocent victims in the region, but not so bad for the neocons. After all, it is the view of Israeli leaders and their neocon bedfellows (and women) that the internecine wars among Muslims provide at least some short-term advantages for Israel as it consolidates control over the Palestinian West Bank.

In a Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity memorandum for President Obama on Sept. 6, 2013, we called attention to an uncommonly candid report about Israeli/neocon motivation, written by none other than the Israel-friendly New York Times Bureau Chief in Jerusalem Jodi Rudoren on Sept. 2, 2013, just two days after Obama took advantage of Putin's success in persuading the Syrians to allow their chemical weapons to be destroyed and called off the planned attack on Syria, causing consternation among neocons in Washington.

Rudoren can perhaps be excused for her naïve lack of "political correctness." She had been barely a year on the job, had very little prior experience with reporting on the Middle East, and – in the excitement about the almost-attack on Syria – she apparently forgot the strictures normally imposed on the Times' reporting from Jerusalem. In any case, Israel's priorities became crystal clear in what Rudoren wrote.

In her article, entitled "Israel Backs Limited Strike Against Syria," Rudoren noted that the Israelis were arguing, quietly, that the best outcome for Syria's (then) 2 ½-year-old civil war, at least for the moment, was no outcome:

"For Jerusalem, the status quo, horrific as it may be from a humanitarian perspective, seems preferable to either a victory by Mr. Assad's government and his Iranian backers or a strengthening of rebel groups, increasingly dominated by Sunni jihadis.

"'This is a playoff situation in which you need both teams to lose, but at least you don't want one to win - we'll settle for a tie,' said Alon Pinkas, a former Israeli consul general in New York. 'Let them both bleed, hemorrhage to death: that's the strategic thinking here. As long as this lingers, there's no real threat from Syria.'"

Clear enough? If this is the way Israel's leaders continue to regard the situation in Syria, then they look on deeper U.S. involvement – overt or covert – as likely to ensure that there is no early resolution of the conflict there. The longer Sunni and Shia are killing each other, not only in Syria but also across the region as a whole, the safer Tel Aviv's leaders calculate Israel is.

Favoring Jihadis

But Israeli leaders have also made clear that if one side must win, they would prefer the Sunni side, despite its bloody extremists from Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State. In September 2013, shortly after Rudoren's article, Israeli Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren, then a close adviser to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, told the Jerusalem Post that Israel favored the Sunni extremists over Assad.

"The greatest danger to Israel is by the strategic arc that extends from Tehran, to Damascus to Beirut. And we saw the Assad regime as the keystone in that arc," Oren said in an interview. "We always wanted Bashar Assad to go, we always preferred the bad guys who weren't backed by Iran to the bad guys who were backed by Iran." He said this was the case even if the "bad guys" were affiliated with Al-Qaeda.

In June 2014, Oren – then speaking as a former ambassador – said Israel would even prefer a victory by the Islamic State, which was massacring captured Iraqi soldiers and beheading Westerners, than the continuation of the Iranian-backed Assad in Syria. "From Israel's perspective, if there's got to be an evil that's got to prevail, let the Sunni evil prevail," Oren said.

Netanyahu sounded a similar theme in his March 3, 2015 speech to the U.S. Congress in which he trivialized the threat from the Islamic State with its "butcher knives, captured weapons and YouTube" when compared to Iran, which he accused of "gobbling up the nations" of the Middle East.

That Syria's main ally is Iran with which it has a mutual defense treaty plays a role in Israeli calculations. Accordingly, while some Western leaders would like to achieve a realistic if imperfect settlement of the Syrian civil war, others who enjoy considerable influence in Washington would just as soon see the Assad government and the entire region bleed out.

As cynical and cruel as this strategy is, it isn't all that hard to understand. Yet, it seems to be one of those complicated, politically charged situations well above the pay-grade of the sophomores advising President Obama – who, sad to say, are no match for the neocons in the Washington Establishment. Not to mention the Netanyahu-mesmerized Congress.

Corker Uncorked

Speaking of Congress, a year after Rudoren's report, Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tennessee, who now chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, divulged some details about the military attack that had been planned against Syria, while lamenting that it was canceled. In doing so, Corker called Obama's abrupt change on Aug. 31, 2013, in opting for negotiations over open war on Syria, "the worst moment in U.S. foreign policy since I've been here." Following the neocon script, Corker blasted the deal (since fully implemented) with Putin and the Syrians to rid Syria of its chemical weapons.

Corker complained, "In essence – I'm sorry to be slightly rhetorical – we jumped into Putin's lap." A big No-No, of course – especially in Congress – to "jump into Putin's lap" even though Obama was able to achieve the destruction of Syria's chemical weapons without the United States jumping into another Middle East war.

It would have been nice, of course, if General Clark had thought to share his inside-Pentagon information earlier with the rest of us. In no way should he be seen as a whistleblower.

At the time of his September 2007 speech, he was deep into his quixotic attempt to win the Democratic nomination for president in 2008. In other words, Clark broke the omerta code of silence observed by virtually all U.S. generals, even post-retirement, merely to put some distance between himself and the debacle in Iraq – and win some favor among anti-war Democrats. It didn't work, so he endorsed Hillary Clinton; that didn't work, so he endorsed Barack Obama.

Wolfowitz, typically, has landed on his feet. He is now presidential hopeful Jeb Bush's foreign policy/defense adviser, no doubt outlining his preferred approach to the Middle East chessboard to his new boss. Does anyone know the plural of "bedlam?"

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. He is a 30-year veteran of the CIA and Army intelligence and co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS). McGovern served for considerable periods in all four of CIA's main directorates.

Reprinted with permission from Consortium News.

[Nov 30, 2017] Heritage Foundation + the War Industry What a Pair by Paul Gottfried

Highly recommended!
Heritage Foundation is just a neocon swamp filled with "national security parasites". What you can expect from them ?
Notable quotes:
"... A 2009 Heritage Foundation report, " Maintaining the Superiority of America's Defense Industrial Base ," called for further government investment in aircraft weaponry for "ensuring a superior fighting force" and "sustaining international stability." ..."
"... These special pleas pose a question: which came first, Heritage's heavy dependence on funds from defense giants, or the foundation's belief that unless we steadily increase our military arsenal we'll be endangering "international stability"? Perhaps the answer lies somewhere in the middle: someone who is predisposed to go in a certain direction may be more inclined to do so if he is being rewarded in return. ..."
"... No doubt both corporations will continue to look after Heritage, which will predictably call for further increases, whether they be in aerospace or shipbuilding. ..."
"... National Review ..."
"... Like American higher education, Conservatism Inc. is very big business. Whatever else it's about rates a very far second to keeping the money flowing. "Conservative" positions are often simply causes for which foundations and media enterprises that have the word "conservative" attached to them are paid to represent. It is the label carried by an institution or publication, not necessarily the position it takes, that makes what NR or Heritage advocates "conservative." ..."
Nov 30, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com
According to recent reports the Heritage Foundation, clearly the most established and many would say politically influential conservative think tank in Washington, is considering David Trulio, Lockheed Martin vice president and longtime lobbyist for the defense industry, to be its next president. While Heritage's connection to Washington's sprawling national security industry is already well-established, naming Trulio as its president might be seen as gilding the lily.

If anything, reading this report made me more aware of the degree to which the "conservative policy community" in Washington depends on the whims and interests of particular donors.

And this relationship is apparently no longer something to be concealed or embarrassed by. One can now be open about being in the pocket of the defense industry. Trulio's potential elevation to Heritage president at what we can assume will be an astronomical salary, will no doubt grease the already well-oiled pipeline of funds from major contractors to this "conservative" foundation, which already operates with an annual disclosed budget of almost $100 million.

A 2009 Heritage Foundation report, " Maintaining the Superiority of America's Defense Industrial Base ," called for further government investment in aircraft weaponry for "ensuring a superior fighting force" and "sustaining international stability." In 2011, senior national security fellow James Carafano wrote " Five Steps to Defend America's Industrial Defense Base ," which complained about a "fifty billion dollar under-procurement by the Pentagon" for buying new weaponry. In 2016, Heritage made the case for several years of reinvestment to get the military back on "sound footing," with an increase in fiscal year 2016 described as "an encouraging start."

These special pleas pose a question: which came first, Heritage's heavy dependence on funds from defense giants, or the foundation's belief that unless we steadily increase our military arsenal we'll be endangering "international stability"? Perhaps the answer lies somewhere in the middle: someone who is predisposed to go in a certain direction may be more inclined to do so if he is being rewarded in return. Incidentally, the 2009 position paper seems to be directing the government to throw more taxpayer dollars to Boeing than to its competitor Lockheed. But it seems both defense giants have landed a joint contract this year to produce a new submersible for the Navy, so it may no longer be necessary to pick sides on that one at least. No doubt both corporations will continue to look after Heritage, which will predictably call for further increases, whether they be in aerospace or shipbuilding.

Although one needn't reduce everything to dollars and cents, if we're looking at the issues Heritage and other likeminded foundations are likely to push today, it's far more probable they'll be emphasizing the national security state rather than, say, opposition to gay marriage or the defense of traditional gender roles. There's lots more money to be made advocating for the former rather than the latter. In May 2013, Heritage sponsored a formal debate between "two conservatives" and "two liberals" on the issue of defense spending, with Heritage and National Review presenting the "conservative" side. I wondered as I listened to part of this verbal battle why is was considered "conservative" to call for burdening American taxpayers with massive increases in the purchase of Pentagon weaponry and planes that take 17 years to get off the ground.

Like American higher education, Conservatism Inc. is very big business. Whatever else it's about rates a very far second to keeping the money flowing. "Conservative" positions are often simply causes for which foundations and media enterprises that have the word "conservative" attached to them are paid to represent. It is the label carried by an institution or publication, not necessarily the position it takes, that makes what NR or Heritage advocates "conservative."

In any event, Mr. Trulio won't have to travel far if he takes the Heritage helm. He and his corporation are already ensconced only a few miles away from Heritage's Massachusetts Avenue headquarters, if the information provided by Lockheed Martin is correct. It says: "Headquartered in Bethesda, Maryland, Lockheed Martin is a global security and aerospace company that employs approximately 98,000 people worldwide and is principally engaged in the research, design, development, manufacture, integration and sustainment of advanced technology systems, products and services." A company like that can certainly afford to underwrite a think tank -- if the price is right.

Paul Gottfried is Raffensperger Professor of Humanities Emeritus at Elizabethtown College, where he taught for twenty-five years. He is a Guggenheim recipient and a Yale PhD. He writes for many websites and scholarly journals and is the author of thirteen books, most recently Fascism: Career of a Concept and Revisions and Dissents . His books have been translated into multiple languages and seem to enjoy special success in Eastern Europe.

[Nov 30, 2017] Money Imperialism by Michael Hudson

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Since World War II the United States has used the Dollar Standard and its dominant role in the IMF and World Bank to steer trade and investment along lines benefiting its own economy. But now that the growth of China's mixed economy has outstripped all others while Russia finally is beginning to recover, countries have the option of borrowing from the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) and other non-U.S. consortia. ..."
"... The problem with surrendering is that this Washington Consensus is extractive and lives in the short run, laying the seeds of financial dependency, debt-leveraged bubbles and subsequent debt deflation and austerity. The financial business plan is to carve out opportunities for price gouging and corporate profits. Today's U.S.-sponsored trade and investment treaties would make governments pay fines equal to the amount that environmental and price regulations, laws protecting consumers and other social policies might reduce corporate profits. "Companies would be able to demand compensation from countries whose health, financial, environmental and other public interest policies they thought to be undermining their interests, and take governments before extrajudicial tribunals. These tribunals, organised under World Bank and UN rules, would have the power to order taxpayers to pay extensive compensation over legislation seen as undermining a company's 'expected future profits.' ..."
"... At the center of today's global split are the last few centuries of Western social and democratic reform. Seeking to follow the classical Western development path by retaining a mixed public/private economy, China, Russia and other nations find it easier to create new institutions such as the AIIB than to reform the dollar standard IMF and World Bank. Their choice is between short-term gains by dependency leading to austerity, or long-term development with independence and ultimate prosperity. ..."
"... The price of resistance involves risking military or covert overthrow. Long before the Ukraine crisis, the United States has dropped the pretense of backing democracies. The die was cast in 1953 with the coup against Iran's secular government, and the 1954 coup in Guatemala to oppose land reform. Support for client oligarchies and dictatorships in Latin America in the 1960 and '70s was highlighted by the overthrow of Allende in Chile and Operation Condor's assassination program throughout the continent. Under President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the United States has claimed that America's status as the world's "indispensible nation" entitled it back the recent coups in Honduras and Ukraine, and to sponsor the NATO attack on Libya and Syria, leaving Europe to absorb the refugees. ..."
"... The trans-Atlantic financial bubble has left a legacy of austerity since 2008. Debt-ridden economies are being told to cope with their downturns by privatizing their public domain. ..."
"... The immediate question facing Germany and the rest of Western Europe is how long they will sacrifice their trade and investment opportunities with Russia, Iran and other economies by adhering to U.S.-sponsored sanctions. American intransigence threatens to force an either/or choice in what looms as a seismic geopolitical shift over the proper role of governments: Should their public sectors provide basic services and protect populations from predatory monopolies, rent extraction and financial polarization? ..."
"... Today's global financial crisis can be traced back to World War I and its aftermath. The principle that needed to be voiced was the right of sovereign nations not to be forced to sacrifice their economic survival on the altar of inter-government and private debt demands. The concept of nationhood embodied in the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia based international law on the principle of parity of sovereign states and non-interference. Without a global alternative to letting debt dynamics polarize societies and tear economies apart, monetary imperialism by creditor nations is inevitable. ..."
"... The past century's global fracture between creditor and debtor economies has interrupted what seemed to be Europe's democratic destiny to empower governments to override financial and other rentier interests. Instead, the West is following U.S. diplomatic leadership back into the age when these interests ruled governments. This conflict between creditors and democracy, between oligarchy and economic growth (and indeed, survival) will remain the defining issue of our epoch over the next generation, and probably for the remainder of the 21 st century. ..."
"... wiki/Anglo-Persian Oil Company "In 1901 William Knox D'Arcy, a millionaire London socialite, negotiated an oil concession with Mozaffar al-Din Shah Qajar of Persia. He financed this with capital he had made from his shares in the highly profitable Mount Morgan mine in Queensland, Australia. D'Arcy assumed exclusive rights to prospect for oil for 60 years in a vast tract of territory including most of Iran. In exchange the Shah received £20,000 (£2.0 million today),[1] an equal amount in shares of D'Arcy's company, and a promise of 16% of future profits." Note the 16% = ~1/6, the rest going off-shore. ..."
"... The Greens in Aus researched the resources sector in Aus, to find that it is 83% 'owned' by off-shore entities. Note that 83% = ~5/6, which goes off-shore. Coincidence? ..."
"... Note that in Aus, the democratically elected so-called 'leaders' not only allow exactly this sort of economic rape, they actively assist it by, say, crippling the central bank and pleading for FDI = selling our, we the people's interests, out. Those traitor-leaders are reversing 'Enlightenment' provisions, privatising whatever they can and, as Michael Hudson well points out the principles, running Aus into debt and austerity. ..."
"... US banking oligarchs will expend the last drop of our blood to prevent a such a linking, just as they were willing to sacrifice our blood and treasure in WW1 and 2, as is alluded to here.: ..."
"... The past century's global fracture between creditor and debtor economies has interrupted what seemed to be Europe's democratic destiny to empower governments to override financial and other rentier interests. Instead, the West is following U.S. diplomatic leadership back into the age when these interests ruled governments. This conflict between creditors and democracy, between oligarchy and economic growth (and indeed, survival) will remain the defining issue of our epoch over the next generation, and probably for the remainder of the 21st century. ..."
"... It's important to note that such interests have ruled (owned, actually) imperial Britain for centuries and the US since its inception, and the anti-federalists knew it. ..."
"... "After World War I the U.S. Government deviated from what had been traditional European policy – forgiving military support costs among the victors. U.S. officials demanded payment for the arms shipped to its Allies in the years before America entered the Great War in 1917. The Allies turned to Germany for reparations to pay these debts." The Yank banker, the Yankee Wall Street super rich, set off a process of greed that led to Hitler. ..."
"... But they didn't invent anything. They learned from their WASP forebears in the British Empire, whose banking back to Oliver Cromwell had become inextricably entangled with Jewish money and Jewish interests to the point that Jews per capita dominated it even at the height of the British Empire, when simpleton WASPs assume that WASPs truly ran everything, and that WASP power was for the good of even the poorest WASPs. ..."
"... The Berlin Baghdad railway was an important cause for WWI. ..."
"... Bingo. Stopping it was a huge factor. There was no way the banksters of the world were going to let that go forward, nor were they going to let Germany and Russia link up in any other ways. They certainly were not about to allow any threats to the Suez Canal nor any chance to let the oil fields slip from their control either. ..."
"... This is not how the Enlightenment was supposed to evolve ..."
"... In fact, this is exactly how it was supposed to work. The wave of liberal democracies was precisely to overturn the monarchies, which were the last bulwark protecting the people from the full tyranny of the financiers, who were, by nature, one-world internationalists. ..."
"... The real problem with this is that any form of monetary arrangement involves an implied trusteeship, with obligations on, as well as benefits for, the trustee. The US is so abusing its trusteeship through the continual use of an irresponsible sanctions regime that it risks a good portion of the world economy abandoning its system for someone else's, which may be perceived to be run more responsibility. The disaster scenario would be the US having therefore in the future to access that other system to purchase oil or minerals, and having that system do to us what we previously did to them -- sanction us out. ..."
"... " Marx believed that capitalism was inherently built upon practices of usury and thus inevitably leading to the separation of society into two classes: one composed of those who produce value and the other, which feeds upon the first one. In "Theories of Surplus Value" (written 1862-1863), he states " that interest (in contrast to industrial profit) and rent (that is the form of landed property created by capitalist production itself) are superfetations (i.e., excessive accumulations) which are not essential to capitalist production and of which it can rid itself." ..."
Nov 30, 2017 | www.unz.com

Money Imperialism Introduction to the German Edition Michael Hudson November 29, 2017 3,500 Words 1 Comment Reply

In theory, the global financial system is supposed to help every country gain. Mainstream teaching of international finance, trade and "foreign aid" (defined simply as any government credit) depicts an almost utopian system uplifting all countries, not stripping their assets and imposing austerity. The reality since World War I is that the United States has taken the lead in shaping the international financial system to promote gains for its own bankers, farm exporters, its oil and gas sector, and buyers of foreign resources – and most of all, to collect on debts owed to it.

Each time this global system has broken down over the past century, the major destabilizing force has been American over-reach and the drive by its bankers and bondholders for short-term gains. The dollar-centered financial system is leaving more industrial as well as Third World countries debt-strapped. Its three institutional pillars – the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank and World Trade Organization – have imposed monetary, fiscal and financial dependency, most recently by the post-Soviet Baltics, Greece and the rest of southern Europe. The resulting strains are now reaching the point where they are breaking apart the arrangements put in place after World War II.

The most destructive fiction of international finance is that all debts can be paid, and indeed should be paid, even when this tears economies apart by forcing them into austerity – to save bondholders, not labor and industry. Yet European countries, and especially Germany, have shied from pressing for a more balanced global economy that would foster growth for all countries and avoid the current economic slowdown and debt deflation.

Imposing austerity on Germany after World War I

After World War I the U.S. Government deviated from what had been traditional European policy – forgiving military support costs among the victors. U.S. officials demanded payment for the arms shipped to its Allies in the years before America entered the Great War in 1917. The Allies turned to Germany for reparations to pay these debts. Headed by John Maynard Keynes, British diplomats sought to clean their hands of responsibility for the consequences by promising that all the money they received from Germany would simply be forwarded to the U.S. Treasury.

The sums were so unpayably high that Germany was driven into austerity and collapse. The nation suffered hyperinflation as the Reichsbank printed marks to throw onto the foreign exchange also were pushed into financial collapse. The debt deflation was much like that of Third World debtors a generation ago, and today's southern European PIIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain).

In a pretense that the reparations and Inter-Ally debt tangle could be made solvent, a triangular flow of payments was facilitated by a convoluted U.S. easy-money policy. American investors sought high returns by buying German local bonds; German municipalities turned over the dollars they received to the Reichsbank for domestic currency; and the Reichsbank used this foreign exchange to pay reparations to Britain and other Allies, enabling these countries to pay the United States what it demanded.

But solutions based on attempts to keep debts of such magnitude in place by lending debtors the money to pay can only be temporary. The U.S. Federal Reserve sustained this triangular flow by holding down U.S. interest rates. This made it attractive for American investors to buy German municipal bonds and other high-yielding debts. It also deterred Wall Street from drawing funds away from Britain, which would have driven its economy deeper into austerity after the General Strike of 1926. But domestically, low U.S. interest rates and easy credit spurred a real estate bubble, followed by a stock market bubble that burst in 1929. The triangular flow of payments broke down in 1931, leaving a legacy of debt deflation burdening the U.S. and European economies. The Great Depression lasted until outbreak of World War II in 1939.

Planning for the postwar period took shape as the war neared its end. U.S. diplomats had learned an important lesson. This time there would be no arms debts or reparations. The global financial system would be stabilized – on the basis of gold, and on creditor-oriented rules. By the end of the 1940s the United States held some 75 percent of the world's monetary gold stock. That established the U.S. dollar as the world's reserve currency, freely convertible into gold at the 1933 parity of $35 an ounce.

It also implied that once again, as in the 1920s, European balance-of-payments deficits would have to be financed mainly by the United States. Recycling of official government credit was to be filtered via the IMF and World Bank, in which U.S. diplomats alone had veto power to reject policies they found not to be in their national interest. International financial "stability" thus became a global control mechanism – to maintain creditor-oriented rules centered in the United States.

To obtain gold or dollars as backing for their own domestic monetary systems, other countries had to follow the trade and investment rules laid down by the United States. These rules called for relinquishing control over capital movements or restrictions on foreign takeovers of natural resources and the public domain as well as local industry and banking systems.

By 1950 the dollar-based global economic system had become increasingly untenable. Gold continued flowing to the United States, strengthening the dollar – until the Korean War reversed matters. From 1951 through 1971 the United States ran a deepening balance-of-payments deficit, which stemmed entirely from overseas military spending. (Private-sector trade and investment was steadily in balance.)

U.S. Treasury debt replaces the gold exchange standard

The foreign military spending that helped return American gold to Europe became a flood as the Vietnam War spread across Asia after 1962. The Treasury kept the dollar's exchange rate stable by selling gold via the London Gold Pool at $35 an ounce. Finally, in August 1971, President Nixon stopped the drain by closing the Gold Pool and halting gold convertibility of the dollar.

There was no plan for what would happen next. Most observers viewed cutting the dollar's link to gold as a defeat for the United States. It certainly ended the postwar financial order as designed in 1944. But what happened next was just the reverse of a defeat. No longer able to buy gold after 1971 (without inciting strong U.S. disapproval), central banks found only one asset in which to hold their balance-of-payments surpluses: U.S. Treasury debt. These securities no longer were "as good as gold." The United States issued them at will to finance soaring domestic budget deficits.

By shifting from gold to the dollars thrown off by the U.S. balance-of-payments deficit, the foundation of global monetary reserves came to be dominated by the U.S. military spending that continued to flood foreign central banks with surplus dollars. America's balance-of-payments deficit thus supplied the dollars that financed its domestic budget deficits and bank credit creation – via foreign central banks recycling U.S. foreign spending back to the U.S. Treasury.

In effect, foreign countries have been taxed without representation over how their loans to the U.S. Government are employed. European central banks were not yet prepared to create their own sovereign wealth funds to invest their dollar inflows in foreign stocks or direct ownership of businesses. They simply used their trade and payments surpluses to finance the U.S. budget deficit. This enabled the Treasury to cut domestic tax rates, above all on the highest income brackets.

U.S. monetary imperialism confronted European and Asian central banks with a dilemma that remains today: If they do not turn around and buy dollar assets, their currencies will rise against the dollar. Buying U.S. Treasury securities is the only practical way to stabilize their exchange rates – and in so doing, to prevent their exports from rising in dollar terms and being priced out of dollar-area markets.

The system may have developed without foresight, but quickly became deliberate. My book Super Imperialism sold best in the Washington DC area, and I was given a large contract through the Hudson Institute to explain to the Defense Department exactly how this extractive financial system worked. I was brought to the White House to explain it, and U.S. geostrategists used my book as a how-to-do-it manual (not my original intention).

Attention soon focused on the oil-exporting countries. After the U.S. quadrupled its grain export prices shortly after the 1971 gold suspension, the oil-exporting countries quadrupled their oil prices. I was informed at a White House meeting that U.S. diplomats had let Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries know that they could charge as much as they wanted for their oil, but that the United States would treat it as an act of war not to keep their oil proceeds in U.S. dollar assets.

This was the point at which the international financial system became explicitly extractive. But it took until 2009, for the first attempt to withdraw from this system to occur. A conference was convened at Yekaterinburg, Russia, by the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). The alliance comprised Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kirghizstan and Uzbekistan, with observer status for Iran, India, Pakistan and Mongolia. U.S. officials asked to attend as observers, but their request was rejected.

The U.S. response has been to extend the new Cold War into the financial sector, rewriting the rules of international finance to benefit the United States and its satellites – and to deter countries from seeking to break free from America's financial free ride.

The IMF changes its rules to isolate Russia and China

Aiming to isolate Russia and China, the Obama Administration's confrontational diplomacy has drawn the Bretton Woods institutions more tightly under US/NATO control. In so doing, it is disrupting the linkages put in place after World War II.

The U.S. plan was to hurt Russia's economy so much that it would be ripe for regime change ("color revolution"). But the effect was to drive it eastward, away from Western Europe to consolidate its long-term relations with China and Central Asia. Pressing Europe to shift its oil and gas purchases to U.S. allies, U.S. sanctions have disrupted German and other European trade and investment with Russia and China. It also has meant lost opportunities for European farmers, other exporters and investors – and a flood of refugees from failed post-Soviet states drawn into the NATO orbit, most recently Ukraine.

To U.S. strategists, what made changing IMF rules urgent was Ukraine's $3 billion debt falling due to Russia's National Wealth Fund in December 2015. The IMF had long withheld credit to countries refusing to pay other governments. This policy aimed primarily at protecting the financial claims of the U.S. Government, which usually played a lead role in consortia with other governments and U.S. banks. But under American pressure the IMF changed its rules in January 2015. Henceforth, it announced, it would indeed be willing to provide credit to countries in arrears other governments – implicitly headed by China (which U.S. geostrategists consider to be their main long-term adversary), Russia and others that U.S. financial warriors might want to isolate in order to force neoliberal privatization policies. [1] I provide the full background in "The IMF Changes its Rules to Isolate China and Russia," December 9, 2015, available on michael-hudson.com, Naked Capitalism , Counterpunch and Johnson's Russia List .

Article I of the IMF's 1944-45 founding charter prohibits it from lending to a member engaged in civil war or at war with another member state, or for military purposes generally. An obvious reason for this rule is that such a country is unlikely to earn the foreign exchange to pay its debt. Bombing Ukraine's own Donbass region in the East after its February 2014 coup d'état destroyed its export industry, mainly to Russia.

Withholding IMF credit could have been a lever to force adherence to the Minsk peace agreements, but U.S. diplomacy rejected that opportunity. When IMF head Christine Lagarde made a new loan to Ukraine in spring 2015, she merely expressed a verbal hope for peace. Ukrainian President Porochenko announced the next day that he would step up his civil war against the Russian-speaking population in eastern Ukraine. One and a half-billion dollars of the IMF loan were given to banker Ihor Kolomoiski and disappeared offshore, while the oligarch used his domestic money to finance an anti-Donbass army. A million refugees were driven east into Russia; others fled west via Poland as the economy and Ukraine's currency plunged.

The IMF broke four of its rules by lending to Ukraine: (1) Not to lend to a country that has no visible means to pay back the loan (the "No More Argentinas" rule, adopted after the IMF's disastrous 2001 loan to that country). (2) Not to lend to a country that repudiates its debt to official creditors (the rule originally intended to enforce payment to U.S.-based institutions). (3) Not to lend to a country at war – and indeed, destroying its export capacity and hence its balance-of-payments ability to pay back the loan. Finally (4), not to lend to a country unlikely to impose the IMF's austerity "conditionalities." Ukraine did agree to override democratic opposition and cut back pensions, but its junta proved too unstable to impose the austerity terms on which the IMF insisted.

U.S. neoliberalism promotes privatization carve-ups of debtor countries

Since World War II the United States has used the Dollar Standard and its dominant role in the IMF and World Bank to steer trade and investment along lines benefiting its own economy. But now that the growth of China's mixed economy has outstripped all others while Russia finally is beginning to recover, countries have the option of borrowing from the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) and other non-U.S. consortia.

At stake is much more than just which nations will get the contracting and banking business. At issue is whether the philosophy of development will follow the classical path based on public infrastructure investment, or whether public sectors will be privatized and planning turned over to rent-seeking corporations.

What made the United States and Germany the leading industrial nations of the 20 th century – and more recently, China – has been public investment in economic infrastructure. The aim was to lower the price of living and doing business by providing basic services on a subsidized basis or freely. By contrast, U.S. privatizers have brought debt leverage to bear on Third World countries, post-Soviet economies and most recently on southern Europe to force selloffs. Current plans to cap neoliberal policy with the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and Transatlantic Free Trade Agreement (TAFTA) go so far as to disable government planning power to the financial and corporate sector.

American strategists evidently hoped that the threat of isolating Russia, China and other countries would bring them to heel if they tried to denominate trade and investment in their own national currencies. Their choice would be either to suffer sanctions like those imposed on Cuba and Iran, or to avoid exclusion by acquiescing in the dollarized financial and trade system and its drives to financialize their economies under U.S. control.

The problem with surrendering is that this Washington Consensus is extractive and lives in the short run, laying the seeds of financial dependency, debt-leveraged bubbles and subsequent debt deflation and austerity. The financial business plan is to carve out opportunities for price gouging and corporate profits. Today's U.S.-sponsored trade and investment treaties would make governments pay fines equal to the amount that environmental and price regulations, laws protecting consumers and other social policies might reduce corporate profits. "Companies would be able to demand compensation from countries whose health, financial, environmental and other public interest policies they thought to be undermining their interests, and take governments before extrajudicial tribunals. These tribunals, organised under World Bank and UN rules, would have the power to order taxpayers to pay extensive compensation over legislation seen as undermining a company's 'expected future profits.' "

[2] Lori M. Wallach, "The corporation invasion," La Monde Diplomatique , December 2, 2013, http://mondediplo.com/2013/12/02tafta . She adds: "Some investors have a very broad conception of their rights. European companies have recently launched legal actions against the raising of the minimum wage in Egypt; Renco has fought anti-toxic emissions policy in Peru, using a free trade agreement between that country and the US to defend its right to pollute (6). US tobacco giant Philip Morris has launched cases against Uruguay and Australia over their anti-smoking legislation." See also Yves Smith, "Germany Bucking Toxic, Nation-State Eroding Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership," Naked Capitalism , July 17, 2014, and "Germany Turning Sour on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership," Naked Capitalism, October 30, 2014.

This policy threat is splitting the world into pro-U.S. satellites and economies maintaining public infrastructure investment and what used to be viewed as progressive capitalism. U.S.-sponsored neoliberalism supporting its own financial and corporate interests has driven Russia, China and other members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization into an alliance to protect their economic self-sufficiency rather than becoming dependent on dollarized credit enmeshing them in foreign-currency debt.

At the center of today's global split are the last few centuries of Western social and democratic reform. Seeking to follow the classical Western development path by retaining a mixed public/private economy, China, Russia and other nations find it easier to create new institutions such as the AIIB than to reform the dollar standard IMF and World Bank. Their choice is between short-term gains by dependency leading to austerity, or long-term development with independence and ultimate prosperity.

The price of resistance involves risking military or covert overthrow. Long before the Ukraine crisis, the United States has dropped the pretense of backing democracies. The die was cast in 1953 with the coup against Iran's secular government, and the 1954 coup in Guatemala to oppose land reform. Support for client oligarchies and dictatorships in Latin America in the 1960 and '70s was highlighted by the overthrow of Allende in Chile and Operation Condor's assassination program throughout the continent. Under President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the United States has claimed that America's status as the world's "indispensible nation" entitled it back the recent coups in Honduras and Ukraine, and to sponsor the NATO attack on Libya and Syria, leaving Europe to absorb the refugees.

Germany's choice

This is not how the Enlightenment was supposed to evolve. The industrial takeoff of Germany and other European nations involved a long fight to free markets from the land rents and financial charges siphoned off by their landed aristocracies and bankers. That was the essence of classical 19 th -century political economy and 20 th -century social democracy. Most economists a century ago expected industrial capitalism to produce an economy of abundance, and democratic reforms to endorse public infrastructure investment and regulation to hold down the cost of living and doing business. But U.S. economic diplomacy now threatens to radically reverse this economic ideology by aiming to dismantle public regulatory power and impose a radical privatization agenda under the TTIP and TAFTA.

Textbook trade theory depicts trade and investment as helping poorer countries catch up, compelling them to survive by becoming more democratic to overcome their vested interests and oligarchies along the lines pioneered by European and North American industrial economies. Instead, the world is polarizing, not converging. The trans-Atlantic financial bubble has left a legacy of austerity since 2008. Debt-ridden economies are being told to cope with their downturns by privatizing their public domain.

The immediate question facing Germany and the rest of Western Europe is how long they will sacrifice their trade and investment opportunities with Russia, Iran and other economies by adhering to U.S.-sponsored sanctions. American intransigence threatens to force an either/or choice in what looms as a seismic geopolitical shift over the proper role of governments: Should their public sectors provide basic services and protect populations from predatory monopolies, rent extraction and financial polarization?

Today's global financial crisis can be traced back to World War I and its aftermath. The principle that needed to be voiced was the right of sovereign nations not to be forced to sacrifice their economic survival on the altar of inter-government and private debt demands. The concept of nationhood embodied in the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia based international law on the principle of parity of sovereign states and non-interference. Without a global alternative to letting debt dynamics polarize societies and tear economies apart, monetary imperialism by creditor nations is inevitable.

The past century's global fracture between creditor and debtor economies has interrupted what seemed to be Europe's democratic destiny to empower governments to override financial and other rentier interests. Instead, the West is following U.S. diplomatic leadership back into the age when these interests ruled governments. This conflict between creditors and democracy, between oligarchy and economic growth (and indeed, survival) will remain the defining issue of our epoch over the next generation, and probably for the remainder of the 21 st century.

Endnotes

[1] I provide the full background in "The IMF Changes its Rules to Isolate China and Russia," December 9, 2015, available on michael-hudson.com, Naked Capitalism , Counterpunch and Johnson's Russia List .

[2] Lori M. Wallach, "The corporation invasion," La Monde Diplomatique , December 2, 2013, http://mondediplo.com/2013/12/02tafta . She adds: "Some investors have a very broad conception of their rights. European companies have recently launched legal actions against the raising of the minimum wage in Egypt; Renco has fought anti-toxic emissions policy in Peru, using a free trade agreement between that country and the US to defend its right to pollute ( 6 ). US tobacco giant Philip Morris has launched cases against Uruguay and Australia over their anti-smoking legislation." See also Yves Smith , " Germany Bucking Toxic, Nation-State Eroding Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership ," Naked Capitalism , July 17, 2014 , and " Germany Turning Sour on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership ," Naked Capitalism, October 30, 2014 .

Priss Factor , Website November 30, 2017 at 5:28 am GMT

More like Dollar Supremacism

The Alarmist , Next New Comment November 30, 2017 at 8:02 am GMT

"Austerity" is such a misused word these days. What the Allies did to Germany after Versailles was austerity, and everyone paid dearly for it.

What the IMF and the Western Banking Cartel do to third world countries is akin to a pusher hopping up addicts on debt and then taking it away while stripping them of their assets, pretty much hurting only the people of the third world country; certainly not the WBC, and almost certainly not the criminal elite who took the deal.

The Austerity everyone complains about in the developed world these days is a joke, hardly austerity, for it has never meant more than doing a little less deficit-spending than in prior periods, e.g. UK Labour whining about "Austerity" is a joke, as the UK debt has done nothing but grow, which in terms understandable to simple folk like me means they are spending more than they can afford to carry.

jilles dykstra , Next New Comment November 30, 2017 at 8:15 am GMT
" The immediate question facing Germany and the rest of Western Europe is how long they will sacrifice their trade and investment opportunities with Russia, Iran and other economies by adhering to U.S.-sponsored sanctions "

In the whole article not a word about the euro, also an instrument of imperialism, that mainly benefits Germany, the country that has to maintain a high level of exports, in order to feed the Germans, and import raw materials for Germany's industries.

Isolating China and Russia, with the other BRICS countries, S Africa, Brazil, India, dangerous game.
This effort forced China and Russia to close cooperation, the economic expression of this is the Peking Petersburg railway, with a hub in Khazakstan, where the containers are lifted from the Chinese to the Russian system, the width differs.
Four days for the trip.
The Berlin Baghdad railway was an important cause for WWI.
Let us hope that history does not repeat itself in the nuclear era.

Edward Mead Earle, Ph.D., 'Turkey, The Great Powers and The Bagdad Railway, A study in Imperialism', 1923, 1924, New York

jacques sheete , Next New Comment November 30, 2017 at 11:29 am GMT
Another excellent article.

The U.S. response has been to extend the new Cold War into the financial sector, rewriting the rules of international finance to benefit the United States and its satellites – and to deter countries from seeking t o break free from America's financial free ride .

Nah, the NY banksters wouldn't dream of doing such a thing; would they?

skrik , Next New Comment November 30, 2017 at 11:29 am GMT

This is not how the Enlightenment was supposed to evolve

What I said, and beautifully put, the whole article.

World War I may well have been an important way-point, but the miserable mercantile modus operandi was well established long before.

An interesting A/B case:

a) wiki/Anglo-Persian Oil Company "In 1901 William Knox D'Arcy, a millionaire London socialite, negotiated an oil concession with Mozaffar al-Din Shah Qajar of Persia. He financed this with capital he had made from his shares in the highly profitable Mount Morgan mine in Queensland, Australia. D'Arcy assumed exclusive rights to prospect for oil for 60 years in a vast tract of territory including most of Iran. In exchange the Shah received £20,000 (£2.0 million today),[1] an equal amount in shares of D'Arcy's company, and a promise of 16% of future profits." Note the 16% = ~1/6, the rest going off-shore.

b) The Greens in Aus researched the resources sector in Aus, to find that it is 83% 'owned' by off-shore entities. Note that 83% = ~5/6, which goes off-shore. Coincidence?

Then see what happened when the erstwhile APOC was nationalized; the US/UK perpetrated a coup against the democratically elected Mossadegh, eventual blow-back resulting in the 1979 revolution, basically taking Iran out of 'the West.'

Note that in Aus, the democratically elected so-called 'leaders' not only allow exactly this sort of economic rape, they actively assist it by, say, crippling the central bank and pleading for FDI = selling our, we the people's interests, out. Those traitor-leaders are reversing 'Enlightenment' provisions, privatising whatever they can and, as Michael Hudson well points out the principles, running Aus into debt and austerity.

We the people are powerless passengers, and to add insult to injury, the taxpayer-funded AusBC lies to us continually. Ho, hum; just like the mainly US/Z MSM and the BBC do – all corrupt and venal. Bah!

Now, cue the trolls: "But Russia/China are worse!"

jacques sheete , Next New Comment November 30, 2017 at 12:04 pm GMT

The immediate question facing Germany and the rest of Western Europe is how long they will sacrifice their trade and investment opportunities with Russia, Iran and other economies by adhering to U.S.-sponsored sanctions.

US banking oligarchs will expend the last drop of our blood to prevent a such a linking, just as they were willing to sacrifice our blood and treasure in WW1 and 2, as is alluded to here.:

Today's global financial crisis can be traced back to World War I and its aftermath.

Excellent.:

The principle that needed to be voiced was the right of sovereign nations not to be forced to sacrifice their economic survival on the altar of inter-government and private debt demands Without a global alternative to letting debt dynamics polarize societies and tear economies apart, monetary imperialism by creditor nations is inevitable.

This is a gem of a summary.:

The past century's global fracture between creditor and debtor economies has interrupted what seemed to be Europe's democratic destiny to empower governments to override financial and other rentier interests. Instead, the West is following U.S. diplomatic leadership back into the age when these interests ruled governments. This conflict between creditors and democracy, between oligarchy and economic growth (and indeed, survival) will remain the defining issue of our epoch over the next generation, and probably for the remainder of the 21st century.

Instead, the West is following U.S. diplomatic leadership back into the age when these interests ruled governments. It's important to note that such interests have ruled (owned, actually) imperial Britain for centuries and the US since its inception, and the anti-federalists knew it.

Here is a revolution as radical as that which separated us from Great Britain.

You will find all the strength of this country in the hands of your enemies [ ed comment: the money grubbers ]

Patrick Henry June 5 and 7, 1788―1788-1789 Petersburg, Virginia edition of the Debates and other Proceedings . . . Of the Virginia Convention of 1788

The Constitution had been laid down under unacceptable auspices; its history had been that of a coup d'état.

It had been drafted, in the first place, by men representing special economic interests. Four-fifths of them were public creditors, one-third were land speculators, and one-fifth represented interests in shipping, manufacturing, and merchandising. Most of them were lawyers. Not one of them represented the interest of production -- Vilescit origine tali.

- Albert Jay Nock [Excerpted from chapter 5 of Albert Jay Nock's Jefferson, published in 1926]

Biff , Next New Comment November 30, 2017 at 12:39 pm GMT
The golden rule is one thing. The paper rule is something else. May you live in interesting times.
Jake , Next New Comment November 30, 2017 at 2:09 pm GMT
"After World War I the U.S. Government deviated from what had been traditional European policy – forgiving military support costs among the victors. U.S. officials demanded payment for the arms shipped to its Allies in the years before America entered the Great War in 1917. The Allies turned to Germany for reparations to pay these debts." The Yank banker, the Yankee Wall Street super rich, set off a process of greed that led to Hitler.

But they didn't invent anything. They learned from their WASP forebears in the British Empire, whose banking back to Oliver Cromwell had become inextricably entangled with Jewish money and Jewish interests to the point that Jews per capita dominated it even at the height of the British Empire, when simpleton WASPs assume that WASPs truly ran everything, and that WASP power was for the good of even the poorest WASPs.

Joe Hide , Next New Comment November 30, 2017 at 2:12 pm GMT
To Michael Hudson,
Great article. Evidence based, factually argued, enjoyably readable.
Replacements for the dollar dominated financial system are well into development. Digital dollars, credit cards, paypal, stock and currency exchange online platforms, and perhaps most intriguing The exponential rise of Bitcoin and similar crypto-currencies.

The internet is also exponentially exposing the screwing we peasants have been getting by the psychopath, narcissistic, hedonistic, predatory lenders and controllers. Next comes the widespread, easily usable, and inexpensive cell phone apps, social media exposures, alternative websites (like Unz.com), and other technologies that will quickly identify every lying, evil, jerk so they can be neutrilized / avoided

The Alarmist , Next New Comment November 30, 2017 at 2:13 pm GMT

"Textbook trade theory depicts trade and investment as helping poorer countries catch up, compelling them to survive by becoming more democratic to overcome their vested interests and oligarchies along the lines pioneered by European and North American industrial economies."

I must be old; the economic textbooks I had did explain the benefits of freer trade among nations using Ricardo and Trade Indifference Curves, but didn't prescribe any one political system being fostered by or even necessary for the benefits of international trade to be reaped.

Astuteobservor II , Next New Comment November 30, 2017 at 2:26 pm GMT
to be honest, this way of running things only need to last for 10-20 more years before automation will replace 800 million jobs. then we will have a few trillionaire overlords unless true AI comes online. by that point nothing matters as we will become zoo animals.
jacques sheete , Next New Comment November 30, 2017 at 2:36 pm GMT
@The Alarmist

What the IMF and the Western Banking Cartel do to third world countries is akin to a pusher hopping up addicts on debt and then taking it away while stripping them of their assets, pretty much hurting only the people of the third world country; certainly not the WBC, and almost certainly not the criminal elite who took the deal.

That's true and the criminals do similar asset stripping to their own as well, through various means.

It's always the big criminals against the rest of us.

jacques sheete , Next New Comment November 30, 2017 at 2:48 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

The Berlin Baghdad railway was an important cause for WWI.

Bingo. Stopping it was a huge factor. There was no way the banksters of the world were going to let that go forward, nor were they going to let Germany and Russia link up in any other ways. They certainly were not about to allow any threats to the Suez Canal nor any chance to let the oil fields slip from their control either.

The wars were also instigated to prevent either Germany or Russia having control of, and free access to warm water ports and the wars also were an excuse to steal vast amounts of wealth from both Germany and Russia through various means.

All pious and pompous pretexts aside, economics was the motive for (the) war (s), and the issues are not settled to this day. I.e., it's the same class of monstrously insatiable criminals who want everything for themselves who're causing the major troubles of the day.

Unfortunately, as long as we have SoB's who're eager to sacrifice our blood and treasure for their benfit, things will never change.

jacques sheete , Next New Comment November 30, 2017 at 2:51 pm GMT

The golden rule is one thing. The paper rule is something else.

May you live in interesting times.

The golden rule is for dreamers, unfortunately. Those who control paper money rule, and your wish has been granted; we live in times that are both interesting and fascinating, but are nevertheless the same old thing. Only the particular particulars have changed.

Michael Kenny , Next New Comment November 30, 2017 at 3:01 pm GMT
Essentially, the anti-EU and anti-euro line that Professor Hudson has being pushing for years, which has now morphed into a pro-Putin line as the anti-EU faction in the US have sought to use Putin as a "useful idiot" to destroy the EU. Since nobody in Europe reads these articles, Ii doesn't really matter and I certainly don't see any EU leader following the advice of someone who has never concealed his hostility to the EU's very existence: note the use of the racist slur "PIIGS" to refer to certain EU Member States. Thus, Professor Hudson is simply pushing the "let Putin win in Ukraine" line dressed up in fine-sounding economic jargon.
jacques sheete , Next New Comment November 30, 2017 at 3:54 pm GMT

Since nobody in Europe reads these articles, Ii doesn't really matter

None of it rally matters anyway, no matter how valid. To paraphrase Thucydides, the money grubbers do what they want and the rest of us are forced to suck it up and limp along.

and I certainly don't see any EU leader following the advice

I doubt that that's Hudson's intent in writing the article. I see it as his attempt to explain the situation to those of us who care about them even though our concern is pretty much useless.

I do thank him for taking the time to pen this stuff which I consider worthwhile and high quality.

Anonymous , Disclaimer Next New Comment November 30, 2017 at 4:08 pm GMT
That sounds good but social media is the weapon of choice in the EU too. Lot's of kids know and love Hudson. Any half capable writer who empathetically explains why you're getting fucked is going to have some followers. Watering, nutrition, weeding. Before too long you'll be on the Eurail to your destination.
Wally , Website Next New Comment November 30, 2017 at 4:23 pm GMT
@Jake

said: "The Yank banker, the Yankee Wall Street super rich, set off a process of greed that led to Hitler." If true, so what? That's a classic example of 'garbage in, garbage out'. http://www.codoh.com

nickels , Next New Comment November 30, 2017 at 4:48 pm GMT

This is not how the Enlightenment was supposed to evolve

In fact, this is exactly how it was supposed to work. The wave of liberal democracies was precisely to overturn the monarchies, which were the last bulwark protecting the people from the full tyranny of the financiers, who were, by nature, one-world internationalists.

William McAdoo , Next New Comment November 30, 2017 at 5:08 pm GMT
The real problem with this is that any form of monetary arrangement involves an implied trusteeship, with obligations on, as well as benefits for, the trustee. The US is so abusing its trusteeship through the continual use of an irresponsible sanctions regime that it risks a good portion of the world economy abandoning its system for someone else's, which may be perceived to be run more responsibility. The disaster scenario would be the US having therefore in the future to access that other system to purchase oil or minerals, and having that system do to us what we previously did to them -- sanction us out.

The proper use by the US of its controlled system thus should be a defensive one -- mainly to act so fairly to all players that it, not someone else, remains in control of the dominant worldwide exchange system. This sensible course of conduct, unfortunately, is not being pursued by the US.

joe webb , Next New Comment November 30, 2017 at 10:11 pm GMT
there is fuzzy, and then there is very fuzzy, and then there is the fuzziness compounded many-fold. The latter is this article.

Here from wiki: "

" Marx believed that capitalism was inherently built upon practices of usury and thus inevitably leading to the separation of society into two classes: one composed of those who produce value and the other, which feeds upon the first one. In "Theories of Surplus Value" (written 1862-1863), he states " that interest (in contrast to industrial profit) and rent (that is the form of landed property created by capitalist production itself) are superfetations (i.e., excessive accumulations) which are not essential to capitalist production and of which it can rid itself."

Wiki goes on to identify "rentier" as used by Marx, to be the same thing as "capitalists." What the above quotation says is that capitalism CAN rid itself of genuine rent capital. First, the feudal rents that were extracted by landowners were NOT part of a free market system. Serfdom was only one part of unfree conditions. A general condition of anarchy in rules and laws by petty principalities characteristic of feudalism, both contained commerce and human beings. There was no freedom, political or economic.

The conflation (collapsing) of rents and interest is a Marxist error which expands into complete nonsense when a competitive economy has replaced feudal conditions. ON top of that, profits from a business, firm, or industrial enterprise are NOT rents.

Any marxist is a fool to pretend otherwise, and is just another ideological (False consciousness ) fanatic.

... ... ...

Wally, Next New Comment December 1, 2017 at 1:49 am GMT
@Michael Kenny

Indeed, Putin should be praised & supported. But where is the proof that 'Russia & Trump colluded to get Trump elected'? You also ignore the overwhelming Crimean support for returning to Russia. And you won't like this at all: Trump Declares "National Day for the Victims of Communism." https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/11/07/national-day-victims-communism Hence, the Liars of the scamming "Holocau$t Industry" go crazy: https://www.salon.com/2017/11/07/trumps-national-day-for-the-victims-of-communism-is-opposite-of-holocaust-statement/

ThreeCranes , December 1, 2017 at 3:34 am GMT
@jilles dykstra

Germany loans money back to the poorer nations who buy her exports just as China loans money to the United States (they purchase roughly a third of our Treasury bonds) so that Americans can continue to buy Chinese manufactured goods.

The role to be played by the USA in the "new world order" is that of being the farmer to the world. The meticulous Asians will make stuff.

The problem with this is that it is based on 19th century notions of manufacturing. Technique today is vastly more complicated than it was in the 1820′s and a nation must do everything in its power to protect and nurture its manufacturing and scientific excellence. In the United States we have been giving this away to our competitors. We educate their children at our taxpayer's expense and they take the knowledge gained back to their native countries where, with state subsidies, they build factories that put Americans out of work. We fall further and further behind.

[Nov 29, 2017] The Russian Question by Niall Ferguson

Highly recommended!
This year old article written at the beginning of anti-Russian witch hunt makes it easier to understand the tribe of "national security parasites" to which Ferguson firmly belongs. Like many other members of the national security parasites tribe, he made a brilliant career pandering to right-wing think tanks.
The very simple message of this tribe is "Carnage should be destroyed" and argumentation is selectively produced to support this very idea. This is a dangerous level of political paranoia, or imperial sense of inferiority, if you wish. He is so incoherent and selective in his rendering of Russian history that he looks like a charlatan, not historian.
Note that the term "neoliberalism" and "US neoliberal empire" are not even mentioned by this "historian". The tribe prohibits using those terms.
Also not mentioned was an attempt by Clinton administration to subjugate Russia and convert it into vassal state which was instrumental in bringing Putin to power.
As for Ukraine he conveniently forgot the role of Victoria Nuland in Maydan events (aka Nulandgate). The idea to break China-Russia cooperation by dangling different carrots at both, the carrots the move then apart, is the replay of British strategy to prevent any possible alliance between Germany and and Russia. Nothing new here. It is a standard imperial policy to destroy any alliance that threaten the empire global domination.
Notable quotes:
"... Nevertheless, it is important to remember what exactly Putin said on that occasion. In remarks that seemed mainly directed at the Europeans in the room, he warned that a "unipolar world" - meaning one dominated by the United States - would prove "pernicious not only for all those within this system but also for the sovereign itself." America's "hyper use of force," Putin said, was "plunging the world into an abyss of permanent conflicts." Speaking at a time when neither Iraq nor Afghanistan seemed especially good advertisements for U.S. military intervention, those words had a certain force, especially in German ears. ..."
"... If I look back on what I thought and wrote during the administration of George W. Bush, I would say that I underestimated the extent to which the expansion of both NATO and the European Union was antagonizing the Russians. ..."
"... Though notionally intended to detect and counter Iranian missiles, these installations were bound to be regarded by the Russians as directed at them. The subsequent deployment of Iskander short-range missiles to Kaliningrad was a predictable retaliation. ..."
"... The biggest miscalculation, however, was the willingness of the Bush administration to consider Ukraine for NATO membership and the later backing by the Obama administration of EU efforts to offer Ukraine an association agreement. ..."
"... This was despite an explicit warning from Putin's aide Sergei Glazyev, who attended the conference, that signing the EU association agreement would lead to "political and social unrest," a dramatic decline in living standards, and "chaos." ..."
"... "I don't really even need George Kennan right now," President Obama told the New Yorker ..."
"... It was foolish to expect Russians to view with equanimity the departure into the Western sphere of influence of the heartland of medieval Russia, the breadbasket of the tsarist empire, the setting for Mikhail Bulgakov's The White Guard ..."
"... One might have thought the events of 2014 would have taught U.S. policymakers a lesson. Yet the Obama administration has persisted in misreading Russia. It was arguably a mistake to leave Germany and France to handle the Ukraine crisis, when more direct U.S. involvement might have made the Minsk agreements effective. ..."
"... President Obama has been right in saying that Russia is a much weaker power than the United States. His failure has been to exploit that American advantage. ..."
"... After all, an economic system that prefers an oil price closer to $100 a barrel than $50 benefits more than most from escalating conflict in the Middle East and North Africa - preferably conflict that spills over into the oil fields of the Persian Gulf. ..."
"... However, if that is the goal of Russia's strategy, then it is hard to see for how much longer Beijing and Moscow will be able to cooperate in the Security Council. Beijing needs stability in oil production and low oil prices as much as Russia needs the opposite. Because of recent tensions with the United States, Russia has been acquiescent as the "One Belt, One Road" program extends China's economic influence into Central Asia, once a Russian domain. There is potential conflict of interest there, too. ..."
foreignpolicy.com

Moscow may no longer be a superpower, but its revanchist politics are unsettling the international order. How should Donald Trump deal with Vladimir Putin?

... ... ...

It did not have to be this way. Twenty-five years ago, the dissolution of the Soviet Union marked not only the end of the Cold War but also the beginning of what should have been a golden era of friendly relations between Russia and the West. With enthusiasm, it seemed, Russians embraced both capitalism and democracy. To an extent that was startling, Russian cities became Westernized. Empty shelves and po-faced propaganda gave way to abundance and dazzling advertisements.

Contrary to the fears of some, there was a new world order after 1991. The world became a markedly more peaceful place as the flows of money and arms that had turned so many regional disputes into proxy wars dried up. American economists rushed to advise Russian politicians. American multinationals hurried to invest.

Go back a quarter century to 1991 and imagine three more or less equally plausible futures. First, imagine that the coup by hard-liners in August of that year had been more competently executed and that the Soviet Union had been preserved. Second, imagine a much more violent dissolution of the Soviet system in which ethnic and regional tensions escalated much further, producing the kind of "super-Yugoslavia" Kissinger has occasionally warned about. Finally, imagine a happily-ever-after history, in which Russia's economy thrived on the basis of capitalism and globalization, growing at Asian rates.

Russia could have been deep-frozen. It could have disintegrated. It could have boomed. No one in 1991 knew which of these futures we would get. In fact, we got none of them. Russia has retained the democratic institutions that were established after 1991, but the rule of law has not taken root, and, under Vladimir Putin, an authoritarian nationalist form of government has established itself that is notably ruthless in its suppression of opposition and criticism. Despite centrifugal forces, most obviously in the Caucasus, the Russian Federation has held together. However, the economy has performed much less well than might have been hoped. Between 1992 and 2016, the real compound annual growth rate of Russian per capita GDP has been 1.5 percent. Compare that with equivalent figures for India (5.1 percent) and China (8.9 percent).

Today, the Russian economy accounts for just over 3 percent of global output, according to the International Monetary Fund's estimates based on purchasing power parity. The U.S. share is 16 percent. The Chinese share is 18 percent. Calculated on a current dollar basis, Russia's GDP is less than 7 percent of America's. The British economy is twice the size of Russia's.

Moreover, the reliance of the Russian economy on exported fossil fuels - as well as other primary products - is shocking. Nearly two-thirds of Russian exports are petroleum (63 percent), according the Observatory of Economic Complexity.

... ... ...

Nevertheless, it is important to remember what exactly Putin said on that occasion. In remarks that seemed mainly directed at the Europeans in the room, he warned that a "unipolar world" - meaning one dominated by the United States - would prove "pernicious not only for all those within this system but also for the sovereign itself." America's "hyper use of force," Putin said, was "plunging the world into an abyss of permanent conflicts." Speaking at a time when neither Iraq nor Afghanistan seemed especially good advertisements for U.S. military intervention, those words had a certain force, especially in German ears.

Nearly 10 years later, even Putin's most splenetic critics would be well-advised to reflect for a moment on our own part in the deterioration of relations between Washington and Moscow. The Russian view that the fault lies partly with Western overreach deserves to be taken more seriously than it generally is.

Is the West to blame?

If I look back on what I thought and wrote during the administration of George W. Bush, I would say that I underestimated the extent to which the expansion of both NATO and the European Union was antagonizing the Russians.

Certain decisions still seem to me defensible. Given their experiences in the middle of the 20th century, the Poles and the Czechs deserved both the security afforded by NATO membership (from 1999, when they joined along with Hungary) and the economic opportunities offered by EU membership (from 2004). Yet the U.S. decision in March 2007 to build an anti-ballistic missile defense site in Poland along with a radar station in the Czech Republic seems, with hindsight, more questionable, as does the subsequent decision to deploy 10 two-stage missile interceptors and a battery of MIM-104 Patriot missiles in Poland. Though notionally intended to detect and counter Iranian missiles, these installations were bound to be regarded by the Russians as directed at them. The subsequent deployment of Iskander short-range missiles to Kaliningrad was a predictable retaliation.

A similar act of retaliation followed in 2008 when, with encouragement from some EU states, Kosovo unilaterally declared independence from Serbia. In response, Russia recognized rebels in South Ossetia and Abkhazia and invaded those parts of Georgia. From a Russian perspective, this was no different from what the West had done in Kosovo.

The biggest miscalculation, however, was the willingness of the Bush administration to consider Ukraine for NATO membership and the later backing by the Obama administration of EU efforts to offer Ukraine an association agreement. I well remember the giddy mood at a pro-European conference in Yalta in September 2013, when Western representatives almost unanimously exhorted Ukraine to follow the Polish path. Not nearly enough consideration was given to the very different way Russia regards Ukraine nor to the obvious West-East divisions within Ukraine itself. This was despite an explicit warning from Putin's aide Sergei Glazyev, who attended the conference, that signing the EU association agreement would lead to "political and social unrest," a dramatic decline in living standards, and "chaos."

This is not in any way to legitimize the Russian actions of 2014, which were in clear violation of international law and agreements. It is to criticize successive administrations for paying too little heed to Russia's sensitivities and likely reactions.

"I don't really even need George Kennan right now," President Obama told the New Yorker's David Remnick in early 2014. The very opposite was true. He and his predecessor badly needed advisors who understood Russia as well as Kennan did. As Kissinger has often remarked, history is to nations what character is to people. In recent years, American policymakers have tended to forget that and then to wax indignant when other states act in ways that a knowledge of history might have enabled them to anticipate. No country, it might be said, has had its character more conditioned by its history than Russia. It was foolish to expect Russians to view with equanimity the departure into the Western sphere of influence of the heartland of medieval Russia, the breadbasket of the tsarist empire, the setting for Mikhail Bulgakov's The White Guard, the crime scene of Joseph Stalin's man-made famine, and the main target of Adolf Hitler's Operation Barbarossa.

One might have thought the events of 2014 would have taught U.S. policymakers a lesson. Yet the Obama administration has persisted in misreading Russia. It was arguably a mistake to leave Germany and France to handle the Ukraine crisis, when more direct U.S. involvement might have made the Minsk agreements effective. It was certainly a disastrous blunder to give Putin an admission ticket into the Syrian conflict by leaving to him the (partial) removal of Bashar al-Assad's chemical weapons. One of Kissinger's lasting achievements in the early 1970s was to squeeze the Soviets out of the Middle East. The Obama administration has undone that, with dire consequences. We see in Aleppo the Russian military for what it is: a master of the mid-20th-century tactic of winning victories through the indiscriminate bombing of cities.

Left: Free Syrian Army fighters fire an anti-aircraft weapon in Aleppo on Dec. 12. (Photo by AFP/Getty Images); Right: Far-right Ukrainian activists attack the office of the pro-Russian movement "Ukrainian Choice" in Kiev on Nov. 21. (Photo by SERGEI SUPINSKY/AFP/Getty Images)

What price peace?

Yet I remain to be convinced that the correct response to these errors of American policy is to swing from underestimating Russia to overestimating it. Such an approach has the potential to be just another variation on the theme of misunderstanding.

It is not difficult to infer what Putin would like to get in any "great deal" between himself and Trump. Item No. 1 would be a lifting of sanctions. Item No. 2 would be an end to the war in Syria on Russia's terms - which would include the preservation of Assad in power for at least some "decent interval." Item No. 3 would be a de facto recognition of Russia's annexation of Crimea and some constitutional change designed to render the government in Kiev impotent by giving the country's eastern Donbass region a permanent pro-Russian veto power.

What is hard to understand is why the United States would want give Russia even a fraction of all this. What exactly would Russia be giving the United States in return for such concessions? That is the question that Trump's national security team needs to ask itself before he so much as takes a courtesy call from the Kremlin.

There is no question that the war in Syria needs to end, just as the frozen conflict in eastern Ukraine needs resolution. But the terms of peace can and must be very different from those that Putin has in mind. Any deal that pacified Syria by sacrificing Ukraine would be a grave mistake.

President Obama has been right in saying that Russia is a much weaker power than the United States. His failure has been to exploit that American advantage.

... ... ...

The Russian Question itself can be settled another day. But by reframing the international order on the basis of cooperation rather than deadlock in the Security Council, the United States at least poses the question in a new way. Will Russia learn to cooperate with the other great powers? Or will it continue to be the opponent of international order? Perhaps the latter is the option it will choose. After all, an economic system that prefers an oil price closer to $100 a barrel than $50 benefits more than most from escalating conflict in the Middle East and North Africa - preferably conflict that spills over into the oil fields of the Persian Gulf.

However, if that is the goal of Russia's strategy, then it is hard to see for how much longer Beijing and Moscow will be able to cooperate in the Security Council. Beijing needs stability in oil production and low oil prices as much as Russia needs the opposite. Because of recent tensions with the United States, Russia has been acquiescent as the "One Belt, One Road" program extends China's economic influence into Central Asia, once a Russian domain. There is potential conflict of interest there, too.

... ... ...

[Nov 28, 2017] The Duplicitous Superpower by Ted Galen Carpenter

Highly recommended!
At some point quantity of duplicity turns into quality. and affect international relations. Economic decline can speed this process up. The US elite has way too easy life since 1991. And that destroyed the tiny patina of self-restraint that it has during Cold War with negative (hugely negative) consequences first of all for the US population. Empire building is a costly project even if it supported by the dominance of neoliberal ideology and technological advances in computers and telecommunication. . The idea of "full spectrum dominance" was a disaster. But the realization of this came too late and at huge cost for the world and for the US population. Russia decimated its own elite twice in the last century. In might be the time for the USA to follow the Russia example and do it once in XXI century. If we thing about Hillary Clinton Jon McCain, Joe Biden, Niki Haley, as member of the US elite it is clear that "something is rotten in the state of Denmark).
Notable quotes:
"... How Washington's chronic deceit -- especially towards Russia -- has sabotaged U.S. foreign policy. ..."
"... Unfortunately, North Korean leaders have abundant reasons to be wary of such U.S. enticements. Trump's transparent attempt to renege on Washington's commitment to the deal with Iran known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) -- which the United States and other major powers signed in 2015 to curb Tehran's nuclear program -- certainly does not increase Pyongyang's incentive to sign a similar agreement. His decision to decertify Iran's compliance with the JCPOA, even when the United Nations confirms that Tehran is adhering to its obligations, appears more than a little disingenuous. ..."
"... There seems to be no limit to Washington's desire to crowd Russia. NATO has even added the Baltic republics, which had been part of the Soviet Union itself. In early 2008, President George W. Bush unsuccessfully tried to admit Georgia and Ukraine, which would have engineered yet another alliance move eastward. By that time, Vladimir Putin and other Russian leaders were beyond furious. ..."
"... The timing of Bush's attempted ploy could scarcely have been worse. It came on the heels of Russia's resentment at another example of U.S. duplicity. In 1999, Moscow had reluctantly accepted a UN mandate to cover NATO's military intervention against Serbia, a long-standing Russian client. The alliance airstrikes and subsequent moves to detach and occupy Serbia's restless province of Kosovo for the ostensible reason of protecting innocent civilians from atrocities was the same "humanitarian" justification that the West would use subsequently in Libya. ..."
"... Nine years after the initial Kosovo intervention, the United States adopted an evasive policy move, showing utter contempt for Russia's wishes and interests in the process. Kosovo wanted to declare its formal independence from Serbia, but it was clear that such a move would face a certain Russian (and probable Chinese) veto in the UN Security Council. Washington and an ad-hoc coalition of European Union countries brazenly bypassed the Council and approved Pristina's independence declaration. It was an extremely controversial move. Not even all EU members were on board with the policy, since some of them (e.g., Spain) had secessionist problems of their own. ..."
"... Russia's leaders protested vehemently and warned that the West's unauthorized action established a dangerous, destabilizing international precedent. Washington rebuffed their complaints, arguing that the Kosovo situation was unique. Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs R. Nicholas Burns made that point explicitly in a February 2008 State Department briefing. Both the illogic and the hubris of that position were breathtaking. ..."
"... This -- in the context of the long history of US and EU deceit and duplicity in their dealings with Russia is why Russia is supporting Catalan separatism (e.g. RT en Español's constant attacks on Spain and promotion of the separatists). The US and the EU effectively gave Russia permission to do this back in the 1990s. We set a precedent for their actions in Catalonia -- and, more famously, in Ukraine. ..."
"... One could scarcely ask for a better summary of why the Cold War seems, sadly, to be reheating as well as why Democratic attempts to blame it on Russian meddling are a equally sad evasion of their share of bipartisan responsibility for creating this mess. Reinhold Niebuhr's prayer for, "the courage to change the things I can," is painfully appropriate. ..."
"... "No one forced any eastern European country to join NATO and the EU – decisions that indicate these countries feared a Russian revival after the collapse of the USSR. Russia always believed that these countries were in their near abroad or backyard." ..."
"... Putin is a rationally calculating man. He has made his strategic objectives well known. They are economic. He sees Russia as the great linchpin of the pan-Eurasian One Belt/One Road (OB/OR) initiative proposed by China as well as the AIIB. In that construct, Europe and East Asia are Russia's customers and bilateral trading partners. Military conquest would wreck that vision and Putin knows it. ..."
"... He's been remarkably restrained when egged on by Big Mouth Nikki Haley, Mad Dog Mattis or that other Pentagon nutcase Phillip Breedlove (former Supreme Commander of NATO) who have gone out of their way to demonize Russia. Unfortunately, with those Pentagon hacks whispering in Trump's ear, too much war-mongering is never enough. ..."
"... U.S. foreign policy is an unmitigated disaster. The War Machine Hammer wrecks everything that it touches while sending the befuddled taxpayers the bill. ..."
"... When you meet individual Americans, they are frequently so nice and level-headed that you are perplexed trying to imagine where their leaders come from. And while we're on that subject, America does not actually have a foreign policy, as such. Its foreign policy is to bend every other living soul on the planet to the service of America. ..."
Nov 28, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com

How Washington's chronic deceit -- especially towards Russia -- has sabotaged U.S. foreign policy.

For any country, the foundation of successful diplomacy is a reputation for credibility and reliability. Governments are wary of concluding agreements with a negotiating partner that violates existing commitments and has a record of duplicity. Recent U.S. administrations have ignored that principle, and their actions have backfired majorly, damaging American foreign policy in the process.

The consequences of previous deceit are most evident in the ongoing effort to achieve a diplomatic solution to the North Korean nuclear crisis. During his recent trip to East Asia, President Trump urged Kim Jong-un's regime to "come to the negotiating table" and "do the right thing" -- relinquish the country's nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs. Presumably, that concession would lead to a lifting (or at least an easing) of international economic sanctions and a more normal relationship between Pyongyang and the international community.

Unfortunately, North Korean leaders have abundant reasons to be wary of such U.S. enticements. Trump's transparent attempt to renege on Washington's commitment to the deal with Iran known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) -- which the United States and other major powers signed in 2015 to curb Tehran's nuclear program -- certainly does not increase Pyongyang's incentive to sign a similar agreement. His decision to decertify Iran's compliance with the JCPOA, even when the United Nations confirms that Tehran is adhering to its obligations, appears more than a little disingenuous.

North Korea is likely focused on another incident that raises even greater doubts about U.S. credibility. Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi capitulated on the nuclear issue in December of 2003, abandoning his country's nuclear program and reiterating a commitment to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. In exchange, the United States and its allies lifted economic sanctions and welcomed Libya back into the community of respectable nations. Barely seven years later, though, Washington and its NATO partners double-crossed Qaddafi, launching airstrikes and cruise missile attacks to assist rebels in their campaign to overthrow the Libyan strongman. North Korea and other powers took notice of Qaddafi's fate, making the already difficult task of getting a de-nuclearization agreement with Pyongyang nearly impossible.

The Libya intervention sullied America's reputation in another way. Washington and its NATO allies prevailed on the UN Security Council to pass a resolution endorsing a military intervention to protect innocent civilians. Russia and China refrained from vetoing that resolution after Washington's assurances that military action would be limited in scope and solely for humanitarian purposes. Once the assault began, it quickly became evident that the resolution was merely a fig leaf for another U.S.-led regime-change war.

Beijing, and especially Moscow, understandably felt duped. Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates succinctly described Russia's reaction, both short-term and long-term:

The Russians later firmly believed they had been deceived on Libya. They had been persuaded to abstain at the UN on the grounds that the resolution provided for a humanitarian mission to prevent the slaughter of civilians. Yet as the list of bombing targets steadily grew, it became obvious that very few targets were off-limits, and that NATO was intent on getting rid of Qaddafi. Convinced they had been tricked, the Russians would subsequently block any such future resolutions, including against President Bashar al-Assad in Syria.

The Libya episode was hardly the first time the Russians concluded that U.S. leaders had cynically misled them . Moscow asserts that when East Germany unraveled in 1990, both U.S. Secretary of State James Baker and West German Foreign Minister Hans Dietrich Genscher offered verbal assurances that, if Russia accepted a unified Germany within NATO, the alliance would not expand beyond Germany's eastern border. The official U.S. position that there was nothing in writing affirming such a limitation is correct -- and the clarity, extent, and duration of any verbal commitment to refrain from enlargement are certainly matters of intense controversy . But invoking a "you didn't get it in writing" dodge does not inspire another government's trust.

There seems to be no limit to Washington's desire to crowd Russia. NATO has even added the Baltic republics, which had been part of the Soviet Union itself. In early 2008, President George W. Bush unsuccessfully tried to admit Georgia and Ukraine, which would have engineered yet another alliance move eastward. By that time, Vladimir Putin and other Russian leaders were beyond furious.

The timing of Bush's attempted ploy could scarcely have been worse. It came on the heels of Russia's resentment at another example of U.S. duplicity. In 1999, Moscow had reluctantly accepted a UN mandate to cover NATO's military intervention against Serbia, a long-standing Russian client. The alliance airstrikes and subsequent moves to detach and occupy Serbia's restless province of Kosovo for the ostensible reason of protecting innocent civilians from atrocities was the same "humanitarian" justification that the West would use subsequently in Libya.

Nine years after the initial Kosovo intervention, the United States adopted an evasive policy move, showing utter contempt for Russia's wishes and interests in the process. Kosovo wanted to declare its formal independence from Serbia, but it was clear that such a move would face a certain Russian (and probable Chinese) veto in the UN Security Council. Washington and an ad-hoc coalition of European Union countries brazenly bypassed the Council and approved Pristina's independence declaration. It was an extremely controversial move. Not even all EU members were on board with the policy, since some of them (e.g., Spain) had secessionist problems of their own.

Russia's leaders protested vehemently and warned that the West's unauthorized action established a dangerous, destabilizing international precedent. Washington rebuffed their complaints, arguing that the Kosovo situation was unique. Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs R. Nicholas Burns made that point explicitly in a February 2008 State Department briefing. Both the illogic and the hubris of that position were breathtaking.

It is painful for any American to admit that the United States has acquired a well-deserved reputation for duplicity in its foreign policy. But the evidence for that proposition is quite substantial. Indeed, disingenuous U.S. behavior regarding NATO expansion and the resolution of Kosovo's political status may be the single most important factor for the poisoned bilateral relationship with Moscow. The U.S. track record of duplicity and betrayal is one reason why prospects for resolving the North Korean nuclear issue through diplomacy are so bleak.

Actions have consequences, and Washington's reputation for disingenuous behavior has complicated America's own foreign policy objectives. This is a textbook example of a great power shooting itself in the foot.

Ted Galen Carpenter, a senior fellow in defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute, is the author of 10 books, the contributing editor of 10 books, and the author of more than 700 articles and policy studies on international affairs.

Magdi , says: November 28, 2017 at 5:46 am

you are dead ON! I have been saying this since IRAQ
fiasco (not one Iraqi onboard on 9/11) we should have invaded egypt and saudi arabia. how the foolish american public(sheep) just buys the american propaganda is beyond me.. don't blame the Russians one spittle!!
Herbert Heebert , says: November 28, 2017 at 7:47 am
A few points:

1. I think North Korea might also be looking at the example of Ukraine, and Russia's clear violation of the Budapest Memorandum.

2. It's silly to put so much weight on Baker's verbal assurance re: NATO expansion.

3. I would suggest Mr. Carpenter make a list of Russia's betrayals. But I have the impression he is not interested.

Viriato , says: November 28, 2017 at 9:25 am
Excellent piece. The US really has destroyed its credibility over the years.

This points Ted Galen Carpenter makes in this piece go a long way toward explaining Russia's destabilizing behavior in recent years.

One point in particular jumped out at me:

"Kosovo wanted to declare its formal independence from Serbia, but it was clear that such a move would face a certain Russian (and probable Chinese) veto in the UN Security Council. Washington and an ad-hoc coalition of European Union countries brazenly bypassed the Council and approved Pristina's independence declaration. It was an extremely controversial move. Not even all EU members were on board with the policy, since some of them (e.g., Spain) had secessionist problems of their own. Russia's leaders protested vehemently and warned that the West's unauthorized action established a dangerous, destabilizing international precedent. Washington rebuffed their complaints, arguing that the Kosovo situation was unique."

This -- in the context of the long history of US and EU deceit and duplicity in their dealings with Russia is why Russia is supporting Catalan separatism (e.g. RT en Español's constant attacks on Spain and promotion of the separatists). The US and the EU effectively gave Russia permission to do this back in the 1990s. We set a precedent for their actions in Catalonia -- and, more famously, in Ukraine.

This

craigsummers , says: November 28, 2017 at 10:09 am
Mr. Carpenter

You have made a reasonable case that the US and Europe have not always been reliable, but the expansion of NATO is not one of them. No one forced any eastern European country to join NATO and the EU – decisions that indicate these countries feared a Russian revival after the collapse of the USSR. Russia always believed that these countries were in their near abroad or backyard.

The idea of a "sphere of influence" is a cold war relic which Russia invoked with the Medvedev Doctrine in 2008. This is currently on display in Ukraine. Russia is aggressively denying Ukraine their sovereignty. Who could possibly blame former Soviet Block countries for hightailing it to NATO during a lull in Russian aggression?

DOD , says: November 28, 2017 at 10:23 am
One could scarcely ask for a better summary of why the Cold War seems, sadly, to be reheating as well as why Democratic attempts to blame it on Russian meddling are a equally sad evasion of their share of bipartisan responsibility for creating this mess. Reinhold Niebuhr's prayer for, "the courage to change the things I can," is painfully appropriate.
Michael Kenny , says: November 28, 2017 at 12:12 pm
The whole weakness of the author's argument is a classic American one: very few Americans seem to be able to get their heads around the fact that the Soviet Union ceased to exist 26 years ago! They are still totally locked into their cold war mentality. He thus unquestioningly accepts Putin's pre-1789 "sphere of influence" theory in which there are "superior" and "inferior" races, with only the superior races being entitled to have a sovereign state and the inferior races being forced to submit to being ruled by foreigners. Mr Carpenter really needs to put his cold war mentality aside and come into the 21st century!

Most seriously of all, Mr Carpenter offers no solution for improving relations between the US and Russia. Saying that past US actions were wrong, even if true, says nothing about the present and offers nothing for the future. At best, Mr Carpenter's article is empty moralising.

And the unspoken, but perfectly obvious, subtext, namely that the US should "atone for its sins" by capitulating to Putin, is morally reprehensible and politically unrealistic. Since, by Mr Carpenter's own account, the problem is caused by US wrongdoing, isn't it for the US to put things right (for example, by getting Putin out of Ukraine) and not simply make a mess in someone else's country and then run for home with its tail between its legs? Who gave Americans the right to give away other people's countries?

Will Harrington , says: November 28, 2017 at 12:58 pm
Herbert Heevert

The one problem with your argument if, you are an american as I am, is that Russia is not acting in our names. If the US government, supposedly a government of, by, and for the people breaks its word, then you and I are foresworn oathbreakers as well because the government is (theoretically, at least) acting on OUR authority.

Will Harrington , says: November 28, 2017 at 1:15 pm
Craig Summers

Really?! "Russia always believed that these countries were in their near abroad or backyard."

I think that if you look at a map or a globe, you will find that this is not a belief but a fact. How you could overlook this, I don't know.

"The idea of a "sphere of influence" is a cold war relic "

If you are going to try and use history to influence opinion, it is best to check your facts. This is a very old concept.What do you think the Great Game between Imperial Russia and the British Empire in Central Asia was about? For that matter, what we call the Byzantine Commonwealth was a clearly attempt by the Romaoi to establish a political, cultural, and religious sphere of influence to support the power of the Empire, much as the United States has been doing over the past several decades.

NoldorElf , says: November 28, 2017 at 1:31 pm
You could make the case that Iraq too in 2003 is another reason why the Russians and the North Koreans distrust the US.

At this point, it is fairly certain that the Bush Administration knew that Saddam was not building nuclear weapons of mass destruction, which is what Bush strongly implied in his ramp up to the war.

One other takeaway that the North Koreans mag have from the 2003 Iraq invasion is that the US will lie any way to get what it wants.

Not saying that Russia or North Korea are perfect. Far from it. But the US needs to take a hard look in the mirror.

Jeeves , says: November 28, 2017 at 1:42 pm
What Craigsummers said.

And, Mr. Carpenter, when you have time off from your job as Russian apologist, learn the meaning of "verbal." It's not a synonym for "oral."

SteveM , says: November 28, 2017 at 1:49 pm
Re: craigsummers, "No one forced any eastern European country to join NATO and the EU – decisions that indicate these countries feared a Russian revival after the collapse of the USSR. Russia always believed that these countries were in their near abroad or backyard."

Except both here and abroad, the Global Cop Elites in Washington shape the strategy space through propaganda, fear-mongering and subversion. Moreover, the Eastern European countries are happy to join NATO when it's the American taxpayers who foot a large percentage of the bill.

Standard U.S. MO: create the threat, inflate the threat, send in the War Machine at massive cost to sustain the threat.

Rather than being broadened, NATO should have been ratcheted back after the fall of the Soviet Union, and the U.S. military presence in Europe massively reduced. Then normalized relations between Europe and Russia would have been designed and developed by Europe and Russia. Not the 800 pound Gorilla Global Cop that is good at little more than breaking things. (And perversely, after flushing TRILLIONS of tax dollars down the toilet, duping Americans to wildly applaud the "Warrior-Heroes" for a job well done.)

b. , says: November 28, 2017 at 2:33 pm
The 2008 war between Georgia and Russia was, per observers at the time, in Russian word and thought directly linked to the Balkan 's precedent.

The subtext here – of nation states, sovereignty, separatism and secessionist movements – is even more relevant with respect to US-China relationships. Since WW2 and that brief, transient monopoly on nuclear weapons, US foreign policy has eroded the Peace of Westphalia while attempting to erect an "international order" of convenience on top if it.

Both China and Russia know that nothing will stop the expansionism of US "national interests". In response to the doctrinal aspirations of the Soviets, the US has committed itself to an ideology that is just a greedy and relentless. In retrospect, it is hard to tell how many decades ago the Cold War stopped being about opposition to Soviet ideology, and instead became about "projecting" – in every sense of the word – an equally globalist US ideology.

We are the redcoats now. Now wonder the neocons and neolibs are shouting "Russia!" at every opportunity.

Janek , says: November 28, 2017 at 2:45 pm
I am amazed how many masochistic conservatives are in USA conservative circles especially in the CATO institute. Mr. T. G. Carpenter, as is clear from not only this and other articles, is a staunch defender of Yalta and proponent of Yalta 2 after the Cold War ended. As far as I remember Libya was the hatchet job of the Europeans especially the French and British. B. Obama at first didn't want to attack Libya but gave in after lobbying by the French, British and the neoliberal/neo-conservative lobby and supporters of the Arab Spring in the USA. America lost credibility after and only since the conservatives neoliberals and neocons manipulated USA and the West's foreign politics for thirty plus years. USA is still a democratic country so it is easy to blame everything on the US. In today's Putin's Russia similar critics of the Russian politics wouldn't be so "easy".

The Central Europe doesn't want Russia's sphere of influence precisely because of centuries of Russian occupation and atrocities in there especially after WW2, brutal and bloody invasion of Hungary, Czechoslovakia, the Cuban Crisis, Afghanistan, Chechnya etc. Now you have infiltration by Russia of the American electoral process and political system and some conservatives still can't connect the dots and see what is going on. I wonder why the western conservatives and US in particular are such great supporters of Russia. If Russia should be allowed to keep her sphere of influence after the Cold War then what was the reason to fight the Cold War in the first place. Wouldn't it be easier to surrender to Russia right after WW2.

SteveM , says: November 28, 2017 at 2:45 pm
One other observation about Russia that should be made but isn't is that the Russia-phobes can't point to an actual motive for Russian military aggression. There is no "Putin Plan" for conquest and domination by Russia like in Das Kapital or Hitler's Mein Kampf . What strategic value would Russia see from overrunning Poland and then having to perpetually suppress 35 million resistors? Or retaking the Baltic states that have only minority ethnic Russian populations?

Putin is a rationally calculating man. He has made his strategic objectives well known. They are economic. He sees Russia as the great linchpin of the pan-Eurasian One Belt/One Road (OB/OR) initiative proposed by China as well as the AIIB. In that construct, Europe and East Asia are Russia's customers and bilateral trading partners. Military conquest would wreck that vision and Putin knows it.

In the gangster movies, a mob boss often says that he hates bloodshed because it's bad for business. That's Putin. He's been remarkably restrained when egged on by Big Mouth Nikki Haley, Mad Dog Mattis or that other Pentagon nutcase Phillip Breedlove (former Supreme Commander of NATO) who have gone out of their way to demonize Russia. Unfortunately, with those Pentagon hacks whispering in Trump's ear, too much war-mongering is never enough.

U.S. foreign policy is an unmitigated disaster. The War Machine Hammer wrecks everything that it touches while sending the befuddled taxpayers the bill.

Mark , says: November 28, 2017 at 3:00 pm
"And, Mr. Carpenter, when you have time off from your job as Russian apologist, learn the meaning of "verbal." It's not a synonym for "oral."

I imagine you thought you were being funny; and you were, just not in the way you foresaw. In fact, verbal is a synonym for oral; to wit, "spoken rather than written; oral. "a verbal agreement". Synonyms: oral, spoken, stated, said, verbalized, expressed."

Of course anyone who attempts to portray the United States as duplicitous and sneaky (those are synonyms!)is immediately branded a "Russian apologist". As if there are certain countries which automatically have no rights, and can be assumed to be lying every time they speak. Except they're not, and the verbal agreement that NATO would not advance further east in exchange for Russian cooperation has been acknowledged by western principals who were present.

As SteveM implies, NATO's reason for being evaporated with the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, and was dead as a dodo with the breakup of the Soviet Union. Everything since has been a rationalization for keeping it going, including regular demonizations of imaginary enemies until they become real enemies. You can't just 'join NATO' because it's the in-crowd, you know. No, there are actually criteria, one of which is the premise that your acceptance materially enhances the security of the alliance. Pretty comical imagining Montenegro in that context, isn't it?

When you meet individual Americans, they are frequently so nice and level-headed that you are perplexed trying to imagine where their leaders come from. And while we're on that subject, America does not actually have a foreign policy, as such. Its foreign policy is to bend every other living soul on the planet to the service of America.

[Nov 28, 2017] Trump Wants Peace With Erdogan - The Military Wants To Sabotage It

Notable quotes:
"... "President Trump instructed [his generals] in a very open way that the YPG will no longer be given weapons. He openly said that this absurdity should have ended much earlier ," Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu told reporters after the phone call. ..."
"... The YPG is the Syrian sister organization of the Turkish-Kurdish terror group PKK. Some weapons the U.S. had delivered to the YPK in Syria to fight the Islamic State have been recovered from PKK fighters in Turkey who were out to kill Turkish security personal. Despite that, supply for the YPG continued. In total over 3,500 truckloads were provided to it by the U.S. military. Only recently the YPK received some 120 armored Humvees , mine clearance vehicles and other equipment. ..."
"... The generals in the White House and other parts of the administration were caught flat-footed by the promise Trump has made. The Washington Post writes : "Initially, the administration's national security team appeared surprised by the Turks' announcement and uncertain what to say about it. The State Department referred questions to the White House, and hours passed with no confirmation from the National Security Council." ..."
"... The U.S. military uses the YPG as proxy power in Syria to justify and support its occupation of north-east Syria, The intent of the occupation is , for now, to press the Syrian government into agreeing to a U.S. controlled "regime change": ..."
"... When in 2014 the U.S. started to use Kurds in Syria as its foot-soldiers, it put the YPG under the mantle of the so called Syrian Democratic Forces and paid some Syrian Arabs to join and keep up the subterfuge. This helped to counter the Turkish argument that the U.S. was arming and supporting terrorists. But in May 2017 the U.S. announced to arm the YPG directly without the cover of the SDF. The alleged purpose was to eliminate the Islamic State from the city of Raqqa. ..."
"... A spokesperson of the SDF, the ethnic Turkman Talaf Silo, recently defected and went over to the Turkish side. The Turkish government is certainly well informed about the SDF and knows that its political and command structure is dominated by the YPK. The whole concept is a sham. ..."
"... Sometimes it's hard to see if Trump actually believed what he was saying about foreign policy on the campaign trail -- but either way it doesn't matter much as he seems incapable of navigating the labyrinth of the Deep State even if he had in independent thought in his head. I don't expect US weapons to stop making their way into Kurdish hands as they try to extend their mini-Israel-with-oil foothold in Syria. But it would certainly be a welcome sight if the US left Syria alone for once! ..."
"... Trump personally sent General Flynn to recruit back Erdogan and the Turks right before the election. Flynn wrote his now infamous editorial "Our ally Turkey is in crisis and needs our support" and published in "The Hill". http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/foreign-policy/305021-our-ally-turkey-is-in-crisis-and-needs-our-support ..."
"... But if you know the role he played for Trump in the campaign and then the post-election role as soon to be NSC advisor, you will see that Trump was sending him to bring Turkey back into the fold after the coup attempt by CIA, Gulen and Turkey's AF and US State Dept failed. ..."
"... Trump wanted to prevent the Turkish Stream. It was a huge rival to his LNG strategy. All these are why Flynn did what he did for Trump. Now Trump has to battle CIA and State, as well as the CENTCOM-Israeli plans for insurgencies in Syria. It's not just the Kurd issue or the other needs of NATO to hold the bases in Turkey. It's the whole southwest containment of Russian gas and Russian naval power, and the reality of sharing the Mediterranean as well as MENA with the Bear. ..."
"... Furthermore, I've always been suspicious of Erdogan's 'turn' toward Russia. Many have suspected that the attempted coup was staged by Erdogan (with CIA help?) so as to enable Erdogan to remain in office. IMO Erdogan joined the 'Assad must go!' effort not just because he benefited from the oil trade but because he leans toward Sunnis (Surely he was aware of the thinking that: the road to Tehran runs through Damascus .) ..."
Nov 28, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

President Trump is attempting to calm down the U.S. conflict with Turkey . The military junta in the White House has different plans. It now attempts to circumvent the decision the president communicated to his Turkish counterpart. The result will be more Turkish-U.S. acrimony.

Yesterday the Turkish foreign minister surprisingly announced a phone call President Trump had held with President Erdogan of Turkey.

United States President Donald Trump and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan spoke on the phone on Nov. 24 only days after a Russia-Turkey-Iran summit on Syria, with Ankara saying that Washington has pledged not to send weapons to the People's Protection Units (YPG) any more .

"President Trump instructed [his generals] in a very open way that the YPG will no longer be given weapons. He openly said that this absurdity should have ended much earlier ," Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu told reporters after the phone call.

Trump had announced the call:

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump

Will be speaking to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey this morning about bringing peace to the mess that I inherited in the Middle East. I will get it all done, but what a mistake, in lives and dollars (6 trillion), to be there in the first place!
12:04 PM - 24 Nov 2017

During the phone call Trump must have escaped his minders for a moment and promptly tried to make, as announced, peace with Erdogan. The issue of arming the YPG is really difficult for Turkey to swallow. Ending that would probably make up for the recent NATO blunder of presenting the founder of modern Turkey Kemal Atatürk and Erdogan himself as enemies.

The YPG is the Syrian sister organization of the Turkish-Kurdish terror group PKK. Some weapons the U.S. had delivered to the YPK in Syria to fight the Islamic State have been recovered from PKK fighters in Turkey who were out to kill Turkish security personal. Despite that, supply for the YPG continued. In total over 3,500 truckloads were provided to it by the U.S. military. Only recently the YPK received some 120 armored Humvees , mine clearance vehicles and other equipment.

The generals in the White House and other parts of the administration were caught flat-footed by the promise Trump has made. The Washington Post writes : "Initially, the administration's national security team appeared surprised by the Turks' announcement and uncertain what to say about it. The State Department referred questions to the White House, and hours passed with no confirmation from the National Security Council."

The White House finally released what the Associated Press called :

a cryptic statement about the phone call that said Trump had informed the Turk of "pending adjustments to the military support provided to our partners on the ground in Syria."

Neither a read-out of the call nor the statement AP refers to are currently available on the White House website.

The U.S. military uses the YPG as proxy power in Syria to justify and support its occupation of north-east Syria, The intent of the occupation is , for now, to press the Syrian government into agreeing to a U.S. controlled "regime change":

U.S. officials have said they plan to keep American troops in northern Syria -- and continue working with Kurdish fighters -- to pressure Assad to make concessions during peace talks brokered by the United Nations in Geneva, stalemated for three years now. "We're not going to just walk away right now," Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said last week.

To solidify its position the U.S. needs to further build up and strengthen its YPG mercenary forces.

When in 2014 the U.S. started to use Kurds in Syria as its foot-soldiers, it put the YPG under the mantle of the so called Syrian Democratic Forces and paid some Syrian Arabs to join and keep up the subterfuge. This helped to counter the Turkish argument that the U.S. was arming and supporting terrorists. But in May 2017 the U.S. announced to arm the YPG directly without the cover of the SDF. The alleged purpose was to eliminate the Islamic State from the city of Raqqa.

The YPG had been unwilling to fight for the Arab city unless the U.S. would provide it with more money, military supplies and support. All were provided. The U.S. special forces, who control the YPG fighters, directed an immense amount of aerial and artillery ammunition against the city. Any potential enemy position was destroyed by large ammunition and intense bombing before the YPG infantry proceeded. In the end few YPG fighters died in the fight. The Islamic State was let go or eliminated from the city but so was the city of Raqqa . The intensity of the bombardment of the medium size city was at times ten times greater than the bombing in all of Afghanistan. Airwars reported :

Since June, an estimated 20,000 munitions were fired in support of Coalition operations at Raqqa . Images captured by journalists in the final days of the assault show a city in ruins

Several thousand civilians were killed in the indiscriminate onslaught.

The Islamic State in Syria and Iraq is defeated. It no longer holds any ground. There is no longer any justification to further arm and supply the YPG or the dummy organization SDF.

But the generals want to continue to do so to further their larger plans. They are laying grounds to circumvent their president's promise. The Wall Street Journal seems to be the only outlet to pick up on the subterfuge:

President Donald Trump's administration is preparing to stop sending weapons directly to Kurdish militants battling Islamic State in Syria, dealing a political blow to the U.S.'s most reliable ally in the civil war, officials said Friday.

...

The Turkish announcement came as a surprise in Washington, where military and political officials in Mr. Trump's administration appeared to be caught off-guard. U.S. military officials said they had received no new guidance about supplying weapons to the Kurdish forces. But they said there were no immediate plans to deliver any new weapons to the group. And the U.S. can continue to provide the Kurdish forces with arms via the umbrella Syrian militant coalition

The "military officials" talking to the WSJ have found a way to negate Trump's promise. A spokesperson of the SDF, the ethnic Turkman Talaf Silo, recently defected and went over to the Turkish side. The Turkish government is certainly well informed about the SDF and knows that its political and command structure is dominated by the YPK. The whole concept is a sham.

But the U.S. needs the YPG to keep control of north-east Syria. It has to continue to provide whatever the YPG demands, or it will have to give up its larger scheme against Syria.

The Turkish government will soon find out that the U.S. again tried to pull wool over its eyes. Erdogan will be furious when he discovers that the U.S. continues to supply war material to the YPG, even when those deliveries are covered up as supplies for the SDF.

The Turkish government released a photograph showing Erdogan and five of his aids taking Trump's phonecall. Such a release and the announcement of the call by the Turkish foreign minister are very unusual. Erdogan is taking prestige from the call and the public announcement is to make sure that Trump sticks to his promise.

This wide publication will also increase Erdogan's wrath when he finds out that he was again deceived.

Posted by b on November 25, 2017 at 12:14 PM | Permalink

WorldBLee | Nov 25, 2017 12:48:12 PM | 1

Sometimes it's hard to see if Trump actually believed what he was saying about foreign policy on the campaign trail -- but either way it doesn't matter much as he seems incapable of navigating the labyrinth of the Deep State even if he had in independent thought in his head. I don't expect US weapons to stop making their way into Kurdish hands as they try to extend their mini-Israel-with-oil foothold in Syria. But it would certainly be a welcome sight if the US left Syria alone for once!
Red Ryder | Nov 25, 2017 12:49:33 PM | 2
Trump personally sent General Flynn to recruit back Erdogan and the Turks right before the election. Flynn wrote his now infamous editorial "Our ally Turkey is in crisis and needs our support" and published in "The Hill". http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/foreign-policy/305021-our-ally-turkey-is-in-crisis-and-needs-our-support

Some interpret this act on Election eve as a pecuniary fulfillment by Flynn of a lobbying contract (which existed).

But if you know the role he played for Trump in the campaign and then the post-election role as soon to be NSC advisor, you will see that Trump was sending him to bring Turkey back into the fold after the coup attempt by CIA, Gulen and Turkey's AF and US State Dept failed.

Flynn understood the crucial need for US and NATO to hold Turkey and prevent the Russians from getting Erdogan as an ally for Syria and the Black Sea, the Balkans and Mediterranean as well as Iran, Qatar and Eurasia. Look at what has transpired between Turkey and Russia since. Gas will be flowing through the Turkish Stream and Erdogan conforms to Putin's wishes.

Trump wanted to prevent the Turkish Stream. It was a huge rival to his LNG strategy. All these are why Flynn did what he did for Trump. Now Trump has to battle CIA and State, as well as the CENTCOM-Israeli plans for insurgencies in Syria. It's not just the Kurd issue or the other needs of NATO to hold the bases in Turkey. It's the whole southwest containment of Russian gas and Russian naval power, and the reality of sharing the Mediterranean as well as MENA with the Bear.

Flynn was on it for Trump. And the IC and State want him prosecuted for defying their efforts to replace Erdogan with a stooge like Gulen. It looks like Mueller is pursuing that against the General.

Harry | Nov 25, 2017 1:18:07 PM | 3
Its not a problem for US to drop Kurds if they are no longer needed, BUT for now they are essential for US/Israel/Saudi goals, therefore you can bet 100% Kurds support will continue. Trump's order (he hasn't made it official either) will be easily circumvented.

The real question is, what Resistance will do with the backstabbing Kurds? It wont be easy to make a deal while Kurds maintain absurd demands and as long as they have full Axis of Terror support.

Go Iraq's way like they reclaimed Kirkuk? US might have sitten out that one, I doubt they'll allow this to happen in Syria as well, unless they get something in return.

alabaster | Nov 25, 2017 1:19:42 PM | 4
While America's standard duplicity of saying one thing while doing the opposite has been known for decades, they have been able to play games mainly because of the weakness of the other actors in the region.
The tables have turned now, but America still thinks it holds top dog position.
Wordplay, semantics and legal loopholes wont be tolerated for very long, and when hundreds of US boots return home in body bags a choice will have to be made - escalate, or run away.
Previous behavior dictates run away, but times have changed.
A cornered enemy is the most dangerous, and the USA has painted itself into a very small corner...
Jean | Nov 25, 2017 1:35:55 PM | 5
Gee. While reading B's article what got to my mind is: "Turkey is testing the ground". Whatever Trump said to Erdogan on the phone, it seems to me that the Turks are playing a card to see how the different actors in the US that seems to follow different agendas will react. If Turkey concludes that the US will continue to back YPG, it's split from the US and will be definitive.

Erdogan is shifting away from US/NATO. He even hinted today that he might talk to Assad. That's huge! I wouldn't be surprised if Turkey leaves NATO sooner than later. And if it's the case, it will be a major move of a tectonic amplitude.

Peter AU 1 | Nov 25, 2017 1:36:09 PM | 6
Trump.. "Will be speaking to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey this morning about bringing peace to the mess that I inherited in the Middle East. I will get it all done, but what a mistake, in lives and dollars (6 trillion), to be there in the first place!"

General Wesley Clark - seven countries in five years with Iran last on the list = "Get it all done"?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RC1Mepk_Sw

Jen | Nov 25, 2017 2:36:10 PM | 7
Surely by now Erdogan must realise that whatever the US President says and promises will be circumvented by the State Department, the Pentagon, the 17 US intel agencies (including the CIA and the NSA) and rogue individuals in these and other US government departments and agencies, and in Congress as well (Insane McCain comes to mind)? Not to mention the fact that the Israeli government and the pro-Israeli lobby on Capitol Hill exercise huge influence over sections of the US government.

If Erdogan hasn't figured out the schizoid behaviour of the US from past Turkish experience and the recent experience of Turkey's neighbours (and the Ukraine is one such neighbour), he must not be receiving good information.

Though as Jean says, perhaps Erdogan is giving the US one last chance to demonstrate that it has a coherent and reliable policy towards the Middle East.

Hausmeister | Nov 25, 2017 3:37:06 PM | 8
Jen | Nov 25, 2017 2:36:10 PM | 6

Well, the US policy has been coherent and reliable in the last years. It enhanced local conflicts, supported both sides at the same time but with different intensities. Whoever wins would be "our man". Old stuff since the Byzantine period. It always takes a lot of time to prove the single actions that were done. In most cases we learn about it years later. The delay is so big and unpleasant that quite a number of folks escapes to stupid narratives that explain everything in one step, and therefore nothing. By the way: is the interest of Kurds to remain under the umbrella of the Syrian state but not be governed by Baath type of Arabic nationalism illegitimate?

stonebird | Nov 25, 2017 3:44:32 PM | 9
How can Trump have his cake and eat it?

The Kurds (PKK basically) are only necessary to give a "face" to the force the US is trying to align in E. Syria. The "fighting" against ISIS (if there really was any) is coming to a close. The Chiefs of ISIS have been airlifted to somewhere nearby, and the foreign mercenary forces sent elsewhere by convoy. ALL the valuable personnel have now become "HTS2" with reversible vests. These, plus the US special forces are the basis of a new armed anti-Syrian force. (Note that one general let slip that there are 5'000 US forces in E-Syria - not the 500 spoken of in the MSM).
So Trump may well be correct in saying that the Kurds (specifically) will not get any more arms - because they have other demands and might make peace with the Syrian Government, to keep at least some part of their territorial gains. The ISIS "bretheren" and foreign mercenaries do not want any peaceful solution because it would mean their elimination.. So The CIA and Pentagon will probably continue arms supplies to "HTS2" - but not the Kurds.

(ex-ISIS members; Some are from Saudi Arabia, Qatar - the EU and the US, as well as parts of Russia and China. They are not farming types but will find themselves with some of the best arable land in Syria. Which belonged to Syrian-arabs-christians-Druzes-Yadzis etc. Who wil want their properties back.)

Note that the US forces at Tanf are deliberately not letting humanitarian help reach the nearby refugee camp. Starvation and deprivation will force many of the younger members to become US paid terrorists.

james | Nov 25, 2017 4:00:51 PM | 10
thanks b.. i tend to agree with @4 jean and @5 jen... the way i see it, there is either a real disconnect inside the usa where the president gets to say one thing, but another part of the establishment can do another, or trump has made his last lie to turkey here and turkey is going to say good bye to it's involvement with the usa in any way that can be trusted.. seems like some kind of internal usa conflict to me at this point, but maybe it is all smoke and mirrors to continue on with the same charade.. i mostly think internal usa conflict at this point..
A P | Nov 25, 2017 4:34:19 PM | 11
Odd that no one has mentioned the fact the US was behind the attempted coup, where Erdogan was on a plane with two rogue Syrian jets that stood down rather than execute the kill shot. I have read opinion that the fighter pilots were "lit up" by Russian missile batteries and informed by radio they would not survive unless they shut down their weapons targeting immediately. This is probably a favour Putin reminds Erdogan of on a regular basis, whenever Erdo tries to play Sultan. The attempted coup/asassination also shows Erdogan exactly how much he can trust the US/Zionists at any level.

And Edrogan must also know Syria was once at least partly in the US-orbit, as Syria was the destination for many well-documented US-ordered rendition/torture cases. It is probable Mossad (or their proxy thugs) killed Assad's father and older brother, so Erdo knows he's better relying on Putin than Trumpty Dumbdy.

Virgile | Nov 25, 2017 5:09:38 PM | 12
Erdogan is about to make a u-turn toward Syria. He is furious at Saudi Arabia for boycotting its ally Qatar, for talking about owning Sunni Islam and by the continuous support of Islamists and Sunni Kurds in Syria.
Erdogan is preparing the turkish public opinion to a shift away from the USA-Israeli axis. This may get him many points in the 2019 election if the war in Syria is stopped, most Syrian refugees are back, Turkish companies are involved in the reconstruction and the YPG neutralized. Erdogan has 1 year and half to make this to happen. For that he badly needs Bashar al Assad and his army on his side.

Therefore he is evaluating what is the next move and he needs to know where the USA is standing about Turkey and Syria. Until now the messages from the USA are contradictory yet Erdogan keeps telling his supporters that the USA is plotting against Turkey and against Islam. Erdogan's reputation also is been threatened by the outcome of Reza Zarrab's trial in the US where the corruption of his party may be exposed.

That is why Erdogan is making another check about the US intentions before Erdogan he starts the irreversible shift toward the Iran-Russia (+Qatar and Syria) axis.

dirtyoilandgas | Nov 25, 2017 6:13:37 PM | 13
missing in this analysis is oil gas ... producers, refiners, slavers, middle crooks, and the LNG crowd :Israel, Fracking, LNG and wall street... these are the underlying directing forces that will ultimately dictate when the outsiders have had enough fight against Assad over Assad's oil and Assad's refusal to allow outsiders to install their pipelines. Until then, gangland intelligence agencies will continue the divide, destroy and conquer strategies sufficient to keep the profits flowing. The politicians cannot move until the underlying corruptions resolve..
les7 | Nov 25, 2017 6:59:27 PM | 14
The word 'byzantine' has been used for centuries to describe the intricate and multi-leveled forms of agreement, betrayal, treachery and achievement among the shifting power brokers in the region. The US alone has three major and another three minor players at work - often fighting each other. If however, it thinks it can outplay people whose lives are steeped in such a living tradition, it is sadly deluded and will one day be in for a very rude surprise. Even the Russians have had difficulty navigating that maze.

When confronted with such a 'Gordian knot' of treachery and shifting alliances, Alexander the Great drew his sword and cut through it with a vision informed by the sage Socrates as taught by Aristotle.

Despite claiming to represent such a western heritage, the US has no such Socratic wisdom, no Aristotelian logic, and no visionary leadership that could enable it to do what Alexander did. Lacking this, it is destined to get lost in its' own hubris, and be consumed by our current version of that region's gordian knot.

flankerbandit | Nov 25, 2017 7:53:29 PM | 15
'Hausmaus' @7 says...
'...By the way: is the interest of Kurds to remain under the umbrella of the Syrian state but not be governed by Baath type of Arabic nationalism illegitimate?..'

...showing that he either knows only the crap spouted by wikipedia...or nothing at all about the Baath party...

...which happens to be a socialist and secular party interested in pan-Arab unity...not nationalism...[an obvious oxymoron to be pan-national and 'nationalist' at the same time...]

Of course there is always a 'better way'...right Hausmaus...?

The Baath socialism under Saddam in Iraq was no good for anyone we recall...especially women, students, sick people etc...

A 'better way' has since been installed and it is working beautifully...all can agree...

Same thing in Libya...where the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya was no good for anyone...

Of course everyone wanted the 'Better Way'...all those doctoral graduates with free education and guaranteed jobs...a standard of living better than some European countries...etc...

Again...removing the 'socialist' Kadafi has worked out wonderfully...

We now have black African slaves sold in open air markets...where before they did all the broom pushing that was beneath the dignity of the Libyan Arabs...

...and were quite happy to stay there and have a job and paycheck...instead of now flooding the shores of Italy in anything that can float...

Oh yes...why would anyone in Syria want to be governed by the socialist Baath party...?

...especially the Kurds...who just over the border in Turkey are not even recognized as humans...never mind speaking their own language...

Oh yes yes yes...we all want the 'Better Way'...

It's a question of legitimacy you see...

Daniel | Nov 25, 2017 7:55:00 PM | 16
I'd really hoped that Donald Trump® would be the "outsider" that both the MSM and he have been insisting he is for the past couple of years. Other than the Reality TV Show faux conflicts with which the MSM entertains us nightly, I see no such "rogue" Administration.

This say one thing, and do the other has been US foreign policy forever.

Recall, for instance that on February 21, 2014, Obama's State Department issued a statement hailing Ukrainian President Yanukovych for signing an agreement with the "pro-democracy Maidan Protest" leaders in which he acquiesced to all of their demands.

Then, on February 22, 2014, the US State Department cheered the "peaceful and Constitutional" coup after neo-nazis stormed the Parliament.

A few months later, Secretary of State Kerry hailed the Minsk Treaty to end the war in Ukraine. Later that day, Vickie Nuland said there was no way her Ukies would stop shelling civilians, and sure enough they didn't (until they'd been on the retreat for weeks, and came whimpering back to the negotiations table).

A couple years later, Kerry announced that the US and Russia would coordinate aerial assaults in Syria. The next day, "Defense" Secretary Carter said, "no way," and within a week or so, we "accidentally" bombed Syrian forces at Deir ez Zoir for over an hour.

From my perspective, they keep us chasing the next squirrel, while bickering amongst each other about each squirrel. But the wolves are still devouring the lambs, with only the Bear preventing a complete extinction.

flankerbandit | Nov 25, 2017 8:16:50 PM | 17
Some good comments here with food for thought...

What we know with at least some level of confidence...

Dump is not the 'decider'...the junta is...he's just a cardboard cutout sitting behind the oval office desk...

And he's got no one to blame but himself...he came in talking a big game about cleaning house and got himself cleaned out of being an actual president...

This was inevitable from the moment he caved on Flynn...the only person he didn't need to vet with the senate...and a position that wields a lot of power...

This was his undoing on many levels...not only because he faced a hostile deep state and even his own party in congress with no one by his side [other than Flynn]...

...but because it showed that he had no balls and would not stand by his man...

This is not the stuff leaders are made of...

The same BS we see with Turkey is playing out with Russia on the Ukraine issue...

Now the junta and their enablers in congress want to start sending offensive arms to Ukraine...Dump and his platitudes to Putin...no matter how much he may mean it...mean nothing...he's not in charge...

https://www.rt.com/op-edge/410942-trump-putin-friendly-words/

Yeah, Right | Nov 25, 2017 9:44:37 PM | 18
I think that Jean @4 has the best take on this: Erdoğan went very public on Trump's "promise" in a classic put-up-or-shut-up challenge to the USA.

Either the word of a POTUS means something or it doesn't, and if it doesn't then Turkey is going to join Russia in concluding that the USA as simply not-agreement-capable.

Erdoğan will then say "enough!!!", give the USA the two-finger-salute, and then take Turkey out of NATO.

And the best thing about it will be that McMaster, Kelly and Mathis will be so obsessed with playing their petty little games that they won't see it coming.

ritzl | Nov 25, 2017 11:08:38 PM | 19
It's hard to tell what Erdoğan is doing or intending other than that he is navigating something - objective TBD. It'll be interesting to see if he constrains the use of Incirlik airbase should the US keep arming the YPG/PKK forces. Airpower is the enabler (sole enabler, IMO) of the/any Kurdish overreach inside Syria. Seems like Erdoğan holds the ace card in this muddle but has yet to play it.
Grieved | Nov 25, 2017 11:32:17 PM | 20
@18 ritzl

Seems like Turkey has more than one card to play. A commenter on another site mentioned recently that the US really doesn't want Erdogan to have that S-400 system from Russia. Got me thinking, could Russia have deliberately loaded Erdogan's hand with that additional card to help him negotiate with the US?

Turkey may well leave NATO and as others have pointed out, this would be a game changer far beyond the matter of the US's illegal presence in NE Syria. This possibility brings immense existential gravitas to Erdogan's position right now. He could ask for many concessions at this point, not to leave. And from the Eurasian point of view, it doesn't matter if he leaves or stays, while from the western view, it matters greatly.

Would the US give up Syria, in order to keep Turkey in NATO? It's a western dichotomy, not one that affects Asia. It would be simple to throw S-400 at that dynamic to watch it squirm.

Jackrabbit | Nov 25, 2017 11:42:26 PM | 21
The plays the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the King.

- Hamlet

As the endgame plays out, Erdogan's conscience may be revealed.

b has made the point that the partition that US-led proxy forces have carved out is unsustainable. But it would be sustainable if Erdogan can be convinced to allow trade via Turkey.

For that reason, I thought Trump's ceasing direct military aid to the Kurds made sense as it provided Erdogan with an excuse to allow land routes for trade/supply. Erdogan can argue that he wants to encourage such good behavior and doesn't want to make US an enemy (Turkey is still a NATO country).

Furthermore, I've always been suspicious of Erdogan's 'turn' toward Russia. Many have suspected that the attempted coup was staged by Erdogan (with CIA help?) so as to enable Erdogan to remain in office. IMO Erdogan joined the 'Assad must go!' effort not just because he benefited from the oil trade but because he leans toward Sunnis (Surely he was aware of the thinking that: the road to Tehran runs through Damascus .)

Hasn't Erdogan's vehement anti-Kurdish stance done R+6 a disservice? It seems to me that it has helped USA to convince Kurds to fight for them and has also been a convenient excuse for Erdogan to hold onto Idlib where al Queda forces have refuge. If Erdogan was really soooo angry with Washington, and soooo dependent on Moscow, then why not relax his anti-Kurdish stance so as to bring Kurds back into the Syrian orbit?

Seby | Nov 26, 2017 12:25:05 AM | 22
tRump just wants to hide the truth that he is castrated and with a tiny penis, like his hands.

Also just cares about money and soothing his narcissism. So f***'in American, in the worst sense!

Ian | Nov 26, 2017 12:29:05 AM | 23
Jackrabbit @20:
Erdogan may feel that if he relaxed his stance against the Syrian Kurds, it could embolden Turkish Kurds to further pursue their agenda. It would also make him appear weak towards his supporters.
Fernando Arauxo | Nov 26, 2017 1:45:51 AM | 24
Erdogan is NOT going to leave NATO. Why should he? It would be the stupidest chess move ever? He's in the club and they can't kick him out. He can cause all the trouble he wants and hobble that huge machine that is the western alliance. He will not get EU membership, but he has his NATO ID CARD and that ain't bad. Erdo now knows that the poor bastard Trumps is WORTHLESS that he is a toothless executive in name only. This is a wake up call, if I were Erdo, I would be very afraid of the USA and it's Syria, MENA policy. It is being run by LUNATICS and is a slow moving train wreak. So for now, Erdo must be looking at Moscow, admiring Putin for this is a man who has his shit together and truly knows how to run a country. Maybe even a sense of admiration and more respect for Putin is even present. If I were Erdo, I'd double down in my support for Russia's Syria policy.
Hausmeister | Nov 26, 2017 3:46:55 AM | 25
@ flankerbandit | Nov 25, 2017 7:53:29 PM | 14

You do not get it:
„...which happens to be a socialist and secular party interested in pan-Arab unity...not nationalism..."
According to this ideology the coherence of a society comes from where? And who is excluded if one applies it?
So your contribution is just a rant using rancidic rhetoric tools. But I will not call you „flunkerbandit". My advice is to move to this area and have a look into such a society from a more close position. Armchair type of vocal leadership does not help.

Anon | Nov 26, 2017 5:11:53 AM | 26
In the Obama years there was a:

Which policy is Trump really up against?

Jen | Nov 26, 2017 6:38:32 AM | 27
Anon @ 25: Tempted to say Trump is up against all of them plus NSA policy, FBI policy, Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) policy and the policies of, what, 12 other intel agencies?
https://www.businessinsider.com.au/17-agencies-of-the-us-intelligence-community-2013-5?r=US&IR=T
Yeah, Right | Nov 26, 2017 7:27:43 AM | 28
@23 "Erdogan is NOT going to leave NATO. Why should he?"

I guess one possible reason would be this: as long as Turkey remains in NATO then he is obliged to allow a US military presence in his country, and that's just asking for another attempt at a military coup.

After all, wasn't Incirlik airbase a hotbed of coup-plotters during the last coup attempt?

arbetet | Nov 26, 2017 10:14:56 AM | 29
This came up:

SDF official: Kurds will join the Syrian Arab Army ranks!

Harry | Nov 26, 2017 10:33:01 AM | 30
@ arbetet | 29

"when the Syrian settlement is achieved, Syria's democratic forces will join the Syrian army."
"When the Syrian state stabilizes, we can say that the Americans did what they said, then withdraw as they did in Iraq and set a date for their departure and leave."

Nothing new here, nothing good either. Kurds so far are keeping up their demands of de-facto independence under fig-leaf of "we are part of federalised Syria" with weak central government and autonomous Kurds. Thats how US plan to castrate Syria. Russia offered cultural autonomy, Kurds rejected.

As for Americans "withdrawing" willfully, it never happened. Iraq had to kick them out, and then US used ISIS and Kurds to get back in.

As for Syria's stabilization part, US is doing everything in its power to prevent it.

dan of steele | Nov 26, 2017 11:00:06 AM | 31
@Yeah Right #26
Turkey is not obliged to keep foreign troops in their country to remain in NATO. De Gaulle invited the US to leave France in 1967 but is still a member of NATO
Yeah, Right | Nov 26, 2017 5:18:37 PM | 32
@31 France actually withdrew from NATO in 1966. It remained "committed" to the collective defence of western Europe, without being, you know, "committed" to it.

So, yeah, France kicked all the foreign troops out of France in 1967, precisely because its withdrawal from NATO's Integrated Military Command meant that the French were no longer under any obligation to allow NATO troops on its soil.

But France had to formally withdraw from that Command first, and the reason that de Gaulle gave for withdrawing were exactly that: remaining meant ceding sovereignty to a supra-national organization i.e. NATO Integrated Military Command.

That France retained "membership" of NATO's political organizations even after that withdrawal was little more than a fig-leaf.

After all, NATO's purpose isn't "political", it is "military".

fast freddy | Nov 26, 2017 6:21:33 PM | 33
"The Decider" is Trump's apparent self image. He can't be enjoying the Presidency and the controls exerted upon him by others among the "Deep State" (whom I suppose have effectively cowed him into behaving via serious threats).

If he already had money and power, as it appears that he had, he gained little by taking the crown. He has less power because he is now controlled by a number of forces (CIA, NSA, Media, MIC and etc.) as he remains under constant assault by his natural opposition.

Big mistake dumping Flynn.

Now you take another kind of asshole in the person of Obama - a guy that had nothing - you have a malleable character who enjoys the pomp and circumstance. Really didn't need any persuading to do anything required of him.

psychohistorian | Nov 26, 2017 11:30:16 PM | 34
Here is a recent report from the Turkish Prime Minister supporting Trump's "lie" about ending support for the Kurds....what will history show occured?

ISTANBUL, Nov. 26 (Xinhua) -- Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim said on Sunday that his country is expecting the United States to end its partnership with the Syrian Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) and its military wing, the People's Protection Units (YPG).

"Since the very beginning, we have said that it is wrong for the U.S. to partner with PKK's cousin PYD and YPG in the fight against Daesh (Islamic State) terrorist group," Yildirim told the press in Istanbul prior to his departure for Britain.

Ankara sees the Kurdish groups as an offshoot of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) fighting against the Turkish government for over 30 years, while Washington regards them as a reliable ground force against the Islamic State (IS), also known as Daesh.

U.S. President Donald Trump on Friday spoke to his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan over the phone, pledging not to provide weapons to the YPG any more, an irritant that has hurt bilateral ties, according to the Turkish side.

Yildirim noted that Washington has described it as an obligation rather than an option to support the Kurdish groups on the ground. "But since Daesh (IS) is now eliminated then this obligation has disappeared," he added.

Julian | Nov 27, 2017 12:47:45 AM | 35
It would be nice if Erdogan when withdrawing from NATO (Assuming he does this in the next 12-18 months) would say something like.
"We really like President Trump - and we trust his word implicitly. The problem is, although we trust his word, we know he is not in control so his word is useless and best ignored. Though of course - we still trust he means well."

That would be a nice backhander to hear from Erdopig.

Quentin | Nov 27, 2017 8:48:51 AM | 36
Speculation about Turkey leaving NATO seems farfetched. Turkey has NATO over a barrel. It has been a member for decades and what would it gain by leaving? Nothing. By staying it continues to influence and needle at the same time. Turkey will only leave when NATO throws it out, which isn't going to happen.
Willy2 | Nov 27, 2017 11:53:09 AM | 37
- According to Sibel Edmonds there're 2 coups being prepared. One against Trump and one against Erdogan.

[Nov 28, 2017] Israeli Defense Minister Contradicts Netanyahu There Is No Iranian Military Force On Syrian Land

Nov 28, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com

But on Tuesday Israel's own Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman flatly contradicted the prime minister's jingoistic alarmism by saying that there are no Iranian military forces in Syria, but instead merely stuck to acknowledging "experts and advisers". In comments to Israel's Ynet news, Lieberman admitted , "We must preserve our security interests. It is true that there are a number of Iranian experts and advisers, but there is no Iranian military force on Syrian land."

The comments came on the same day that the IDF Spokesperson made provocative and controversial statements , announcing that in the next Israel-Hezbollah War, "Nasrallah is a target" for assassination and that Israel is currently conducting psychological and media warfare against Hezbollah. But Defense Minister Lieberman's statement flies in the face of claims made by Netanyahu in his speech before the UN General Assembly this year when he said, "We will act to prevent Iran from establishing permanent military bases in Syria for its air, sea and ground forces. We will act to prevent Iran from producing deadly weapons in Syria... And we will act to prevent Iran from opening new terror fronts against Israel along our northern border."

According to a BBC report dubiously sourced to "a Western intelligence source" from earlier this month, Syria stands accused of hosting a sizable Iranian military base south of Damascus, a story which Israel utilized to ratchet up rhetoric in preparing its case before the international community for further attacks on supposed Iranian targets inside Syria. Israel has long justified its attacks inside Syria by claiming to be acting against Hezbollah and Iranian targets.

But Lieberman's surprising comments represent a significant potential backing away from what appeared to be Israel's long running official stance on the issue. According to Tel Aviv based Haaretz newspaper, Lieberman responded as follows when presented with the contradiction :

Netanyahu has said Iran is working to build military bases in Syria, and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and its leader there, Qassem Soleimani, have been photographed in the war-torn country neighboring Israel to the north. When asked about this discrepancy, Lieberman said that "all the regional forces know we are the strongest power in the area. Israel is a regional power."

"Iran has a strategy to creating proxies everywhere. Obviously, they are not physically in Lebanon, that's what's Hezbollah is for. In Yemen, they're not physically present, they created the Houthi rebels. They have the same plan in Syria: creating different kinds of militias."

It could be that this new emphasis on acknowledging Iranian "proxies" while stopping short of claiming direct Iranian military presence - a clear lessening of Israel's intensifying rhetoric of late - is connected to a potential Syria-Israeli back channel deal to demilitarize the Golan region. We reported yesterday that unconfirmed Israeli sources are claiming that Putin is personally mediating demands issued between Assad and Netanyahu after both leaders traveled to meet with Putin within the past months.

The Jerusalem Post published a story early this week based on a well placed Israeli source privy to diplomatic maneuvering between Moscow, Tel Aviv, and Damascus. The report said, "the source, who remains unnamed, said that during Syrian President Bashar Assad's surprise visit to Russia last week, Assad gave Russian Premier Vladimir Putin a message for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu: Damascus will agree to a demilitarized zone of up to 40 kilometers from the border in the Golan Heights as part of a comprehensive agreement between the two countries, but only if Israel does not work to remove Assad's regime from power."

Meanwhile, both Israel and Saudi Arabia have increasingly gone public with their covert relationship based on intelligence sharing against what both sides perceive to be a strong and expansionist Iran.

Earlier this month Israel Defense Force (IDF) chief-of-staff Lt. Gen. Gadi Eizenkot gave an unprecedented interview to a prominent Saudi newspaper in which he said that, "Israel is ready to share intelligence with Riyadh on their shared arch-foe Iran." Eizenkot explained further, according to Tel Aviv based i24NEWS , that "Israel and Riyadh - which he noted have never fought one another - are in complete agreement about Iran's intentions to dominate the Middle East."

And like Israel, Saudi Arabia has long scapegoated Iran and the region's Shia for all of it's problems , especially as it wages its brutal war on Yemen.

But on Tuesday Iranian President Hassan Rouhani hit back. In comments picked up by Reuters , he said that Saudi Arabia presents Iran as an enemy because it wants to cover up its defeats in the region. Rouhani said in the midst of a live interview on state television, "Saudi Arabia was unsuccessful in Qatar, was unsuccessful in Iraq, in Syria and recently in Lebanon. In all of these areas, they were unsuccessful," and added further, "So they want to cover up their defeats."

These words of course could just as well be aimed at Israel too. And with today's surprise admission by Israel's defense minister - that there is "no Iranian military force on Syrian land" - it could be that Israel's bluff has finally been called.

[Nov 22, 2017] Drums Along the Euphrates

Notable quotes:
"... "USA protects SDF and ISIS east of the Euphrates and agreed that Russia won't fly over the area occupied by the US Forces in north-east Syria. USA is officially an occupation force in the Levant." ..."
"... "The United States is prepared to explore the possibility of establishing with Russia joint mechanisms for ensuring stability, including no-fly zones, on the ground ceasefire observers, and coordinated delivery of humanitarian assistance" ..."
Nov 22, 2017 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Earlier today this tweet by Elijiah Magnier caught my eye.

"USA protects SDF and ISIS east of the Euphrates and agreed that Russia won't fly over the area occupied by the US Forces in north-east Syria. USA is officially an occupation force in the Levant."

Seems the US and Russia have agreed to using the Euphrates as a de facto border between the SAA and its allies and the US-supported YPG/SDF at least for a while. This is in line with statements made by Tillerson prior to the G20 summit held on 7 July in Hamburg.

"The United States is prepared to explore the possibility of establishing with Russia joint mechanisms for ensuring stability, including no-fly zones, on the ground ceasefire observers, and coordinated delivery of humanitarian assistance"

This temporary arrangement makes sense for Damascus. There are still plenty of fires to extinguish on Syrian territory west of the Euphrates. Why spread their forces thin again just when they are now able to concentrate their forces to address those fires. Besides, there is still plenty of time for the negotiation and reconciliation process to achieve victory without further bloodshed. I have no doubt. Syria will be whole once again.

I'm sure CENTCOM sees this differently. I think the grand scheme was to establish an enduring US-controlled enclave encompassing all of Iraqi Kurdistan, Rojava and the Arab lands of eastern Syria. I bet there was a plan for establishing a new CENTCOM forward headquarters in Erbil to oversee this vast enclave. The premature Kurdish bid for independence blew a gaping hole in that plan. Iraqi Kurdistan lost its border with Syria. With that loss went CENTCOM's secure land route from Kirkuk and Erbil to its growing bases in northeast Syria.

Another purpose of this "CENTCOM Caliphate" was to prevent the establishment of a land route from Teheran to Damascus and on to Beirut. With the liberation of Abu Kamal by a combined force of SAA, IRGC, Hezbollah and allied militias, that part of the CENTCOM plan also floundered on the rocks. The presence of Qassem Soleimani at this victory must have been a bitter pill to swallow at CJTF -- OIR headquarters.

Another disappointment CENTCOM must face is their now useless base at Al Tanf and the Rukban refugee camp. This base was meant to support our "moderate jihadis" and to help prevent the establishment of the Shia Crescent. Another dream dashed. We are now faced with a near abandoned base and a dire and embarrassing humanitarian crisis at Rubkan.

CENTCOM has always wanted a major physical presence in their AOR. They've had that for a long time now, ever since Desert Storm. Prior to that, they were bitterly jealous of EUCOM and PACOM. They would be much smarter to forgo their dreams of forward-based grandeur and return to being a CONUS-based command headquarters controlling training, exercise and limited operational deployments in their AOR. And for God's sake, get out of Syria. Between the Astana meetings and the upcoming Sochi National Dialogue Conference, Russia has this covered.

TTG

[Nov 22, 2017] DECAMERON And Now, Calling to Start US War in Syria All Over Again

Notable quotes:
"... "Consistent with the Trump Administration's stated intention of pushing back against Iran's increasingly malign behavior throughout the Middle East, American policymakers urgently need to rebuild credibility and positions of strength by contesting Iran's rising influence across the region. Most urgently, the United States must impose real obstacles to Tehran's pursuit of total victory by the Assad regime in Syria. Time is of the essence, as Iranian-backed forces recently have retaken nearly all the country, save lands liberated from Islamic State (IS) by the U.S.-led coalition. These, and any further, strategic gains threaten to entrench Tehran as the arbiter of postwar Syria and consolidate its control of a "land bridge" connecting Iran directly to Lebanon and Hezbollah." ..."
"... "The annual Generals and Admirals Program to the Middle East, in which recently retired American generals and admirals are invited to visit Israel with JINSA to meet the top echelon of the Israeli military and political leadership, ensures that the American delegation is well briefed on the security concerns of Israel, as well as the key role Israel plays as a friend and ally of the U.S. To date, JINSA has taken more than 400 retired officers to Israel, many of whom serve on JINSA's Board of Advisors." ..."
"... first -- JINSA." ..."
Nov 22, 2017 | turcopolier.typepad.com

There are only a couple of dozen hardcore BORG-ists (to use Col Lang's useful description) trolling for war against Iran, but they are irrationally consistent. The names are familiar: Ledeen, Richard Perle, Woolsey, Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD), etc. Now, enter JINSA.

This week, another piece of the drive for war against Iran has manifested itself on the pages of the Jewish Institute for National Security for America (JINSA) www.jinsa.org , with a November 20, 2017 report, Countering Iranian Expansion in Syria. It says:

"Consistent with the Trump Administration's stated intention of pushing back against Iran's increasingly malign behavior throughout the Middle East, American policymakers urgently need to rebuild credibility and positions of strength by contesting Iran's rising influence across the region. Most urgently, the United States must impose real obstacles to Tehran's pursuit of total victory by the Assad regime in Syria. Time is of the essence, as Iranian-backed forces recently have retaken nearly all the country, save lands liberated from Islamic State (IS) by the U.S.-led coalition. These, and any further, strategic gains threaten to entrench Tehran as the arbiter of postwar Syria and consolidate its control of a "land bridge" connecting Iran directly to Lebanon and Hezbollah."

The heart of Israeli penetration of the U.S. national security sector has long been JINSA -- Jewish Institute for National Security of America (JINSA). JINSA was founded in 1973, immediately following the outbreak of the Arab-Israeli War, to assure U.S. military support for all future Israeli wars. JINSA 's mission was to recruit large numbers of recently retired U.S. military officers to the Israeli cause, by, among other techniques, sponsoring all-expenses-paid junkets to Israel, or exchange programs at Israeli military academies. It is long term. It is steady. It keeps the same core directors. It is not distracted. It is a mostly-overlooked component of the Israel Lobby.

Today, the JINSA website boasts:

"The annual Generals and Admirals Program to the Middle East, in which recently retired American generals and admirals are invited to visit Israel with JINSA to meet the top echelon of the Israeli military and political leadership, ensures that the American delegation is well briefed on the security concerns of Israel, as well as the key role Israel plays as a friend and ally of the U.S. To date, JINSA has taken more than 400 retired officers to Israel, many of whom serve on JINSA's Board of Advisors."

JINSA's board is a hotbed of neo-cons, some of whom have been investigated for spying for the Israeli state. Board members include former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense Steven D. Bryen, former National Security consultant Michael Ledeen, Bush-Cheney's director of the Defense Policy Board Richard Perle, Kenneth Timmerman, and former CIA Director James Woolsey. Steven Bryen's wife, Shoshanna Bryen was long time executive director of JINSA, involved in profiling likely military officers to be recruited to the junkets to Israel.

In 2001, after the 9/11 attack, JINSA's own website boasted of its dedication to the primacy of the US-Israeli relationship above all else. "Only one think tank puts the U.S.-Israel strategic relationship first -- JINSA."

On Sept. 12, 2001 JINSA issued a call for precisely the kind of U.S. war against the Arab world that has embroiled the U.S. in endless wars in the region. At that time, JINSA said the response to the 911 attack had to be larger than an attack on Al Qaeda's bases in Afghanistan: "The countries harboring and training [terrorists] include not just Afghanistan -- but Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Syria, Sudan, the Palestinian Authority, Libya, Algeria, friends Saudi Arabia and Egypt."

Get a score card, and see whether JINSA's interests have taken hold: Invasion of Iraq (2003), Regime change in Iran (still trying and 2017, the Number One priority), Syria (ongoing war to unseat Assad), Sudan (country divided), Libya (2011 overthrow of Qadaffi and failed state), Palestinian Authority (chaos and Jewish settlement expansion especially since the 2006 Hamas election victory), Egypt (two revolutions in two years, absolute economic desperation). Not targeted so far: Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Algeria (kind of).

No wonder Saudi Arabia's Salman team is salivating over making alliances with Netanyahu.

Posted at 01:07 PM in Decameron , Middle East Permalink Comments (1)

jjc said...

Israel hosted the Jerusalem Conference on International Terrorism way back in the summer of 1979 where the foundations of the War On Terror were set, although in that day the ultimate sponsor of international terrorism was said to be the Soviet Union. "The mortal danger to Western security and democracy posed by the worldwide scope of this international terrorist movement required an appropriate worldwide anti-terrorism offensive, consisting of the mutual coordination of Western military intelligence services."

This conference was hosted by Netanyahu and featured numerous high level Israeli politicians and military figures, as well as Americans such as Henry Jackson, George HW Bush, Richard Pipes, Ray Cline, and right-leaning officials from Britain and France. "US, Israeli and British elites were actively constructing 'international terrorism' as an ideology..." (see Nafeez Ahmed, War On Truth: 9/11, Disinformation, and the Anatomy of Terrorism, pp 3-6)

[Nov 22, 2017] I think global alignments are changing fast, with MENA as the focal point. Every player has a different deck of cards than just 3 years ago. The over-riding trajectory of course is the ongoing fall of Pax Americana, and its replacement by a Pax Multiplicita.

Notable quotes:
"... The over-riding trajectory of course is the ongoing fall of Pax Americana, and its replacement by a Pax Multiplicita. Nobody really knows what the latter will look like, and so nations and their elite factions will be trying everything to jockey themselves into an advantageous position both internally and externally. We see this process everywhere, including in the USA itself as well as Europe and Asia. ..."
"... The resurrection of Syria and Iraq, under the wings of Russia and Iran, has shocked MENA. Things ain't what they used to be, and there's no going back. ..."
Nov 22, 2017 | www.unz.com

@Erebus

Israel, Saudi Arabia Setting Preconditions for War with Hezbollah

I think something completely different is going on. Global alignments are changing fast, and MENA is currently at the focal point. Every player there is looking at a radically different deck of cards than the one in play just 3 years ago, and radically different players. Confusions reign, both internal and between nations. Events will move along a sum vector which is itself a sum of the various vectors their respective internal elite factions are pulling. Internal policy and power struggles will surface, and there will be lots of false signals. I think war with Iran/Hezbollah is one of them.

In such conditions, we can expect a lot of noise and very little signal, but the trajectories are coming clear. The over-riding trajectory of course is the ongoing fall of Pax Americana, and its replacement by a Pax Multiplicita. Nobody really knows what the latter will look like, and so nations and their elite factions will be trying everything to jockey themselves into an advantageous position both internally and externally. We see this process everywhere, including in the USA itself as well as Europe and Asia.

The resurrection of Syria and Iraq, under the wings of Russia and Iran, has shocked MENA. Things ain't what they used to be, and there's no going back. The KSA, as both the linchpin of Pax Americana's dollar system, and as the least socially developed country in MENA faces the greatest challenges in adapting itself to whatever is coming next. Its demographics are a powder keg, with more than 50% of the disenfranchised population <25 yrs of age and chaffing under a medieval death cult that has ruled for a century. It is now or never for the KSA. Change now, or societal chaos and a bloody collapse will be the KSA's contribution to Pax Multiplicita.

I think the new Crown Prince understands that, and while still wet-behind-the-ears is determined to change it Now! He's no Wahhabi, and he recognizes Wahhabism for the dead end it is. Last month, in a speech to an investment forum in Riyadh he declared:

"We will return to the former state of affairs, to moderate Islam, which is open to the world, and all other religions. We will not wait for 30 years, we will swiftly deal a blow to extremist ideologies,"
Let those words sink in. No Saudi, royal or otherwise, has dared to utter their equal. In the event, swift he was. He drained the Saudi swamp in a (fort)night of the long knives, reportedly incarcerating 2400+ elites, including some of the wealthiest and most powerful, 1000 Imams and 30+ Generals. That alone is a remarkable fact, showing he has shrewdly developed a like-thinking power base under the noses of the KSA's Pax Americana sycophants and fanatical Wahhabis. This is not a man to be trifled with.

By way of international support, the old King made what amounted to pilgrimages to Beijing and then to Moscow to seek their blessing (inter alia). In Beijing he got $120B+ in commitments for development projects, in Moscow he got cooperation in oil markets and (crucially) S-400 Air Defense systems. After his "palace coup" he got words of support, with Xi Jingping being particularly warmly supportive.

Yes he's young, inexperienced, and has had to fight internal battles we'll never know about which no doubt contributed to some of his apparent international blunders, but to think that he will now willingly opt for war with a Moscow ally is to think him either mad, or an imbecile. I don't think he's either. He's delivering Trumpian campaign promises to the KSA (to the wild approval of the country's youth) and quite probably suckering the Israelis into a stupid move while at it.

Watch that space. It's cooking.

Thirdeye

The term "Pax Americana" seems ironic because of the lack of Pax in the post Cold War era of America pushing the limits of its power projection. Maybe a better term would be "Bellus Americana."

[Nov 22, 2017] Boy, Is This Stupid or What, by Philip Giraldi

Nov 22, 2017 | www.unz.com

Boy, Is This Stupid or What? Did the US allow ISIS to escape to keep the fighting going? Philip Giraldi November 21, 2017 1,600 Words

Americans have been living in a country that has not known peace since 9/11, when President George W. Bush and his posse of neoconservatives delivered the message to the world that "you are either with us or against us." The threat was coupled with flurry of hastily conceived legislation that opened the door to the unconstitutional "war on terror" carried out at the whim of the Chief Executive, a conflict which was from the start conceived of as a global military engagement without end.

Bush and his handlers might not have realized it at the time but they were initiating a completely new type of warfare. To be sure, there would be fighting on the ground worldwide against an ideologically driven enemy somewhat reminiscent of communism, but there would also be included "regime change" of governments in countries that were not completely on board with the direction coming out of Washington. Instead of invading and occupying a country in the old-fashioned way, so the thinking went, far better to just knock off the top levels and let the natives sort things out while acting under direction from the pros in Washington.

Even though "regime change" in Iraq and Afghanistan did not work out very well, Bush saw himself as a triumphant war leader with his vainglorious "Mission Accomplished," and he later dubbed himself the "decider." He insisted that his reelection in 2004 when running against a weak John Kerry was a validation of his policies by the American people, but one has to wonder how many voters really understood that they were signing on for perpetual war that would of necessity also diminish their most cherished liberties.

Nobel Peace Prize winner and U.S. President Barack Obama followed Bush and made it clear that there would be no stepping back from a policy of proactively "protecting" the American people. Obama and his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton destroyed Libya, a disaster that is still playing out, increased involvement in Syria, and introduced death by drone for both American citizens who have transgressed and random foreigners who fit a profile. And to eliminate any pushback to what he was doing, Obama relied on invoking the state secrets privilege to block legal challenges more times than all his predecessors in office combined.

And now we have President Donald Trump, whose foreign policy is particularly unarticulated, though in many ways similar to that of his predecessors. The United States is increasing its involvement in Afghanistan, where it has been engaged for longer than in any previous war, is threatening both Iran and North Korea with annihilation, and is hopelessly entangled in Trump's pledge to completely eliminate ISIS. Indeed, destroying ISIS (and al-Qaeda) has been the one clearly articulated part of the Trump foreign policy, though there are also occasional assertions that it should be accompanied by yet one more try at regime change in Damascus.

And the grand tradition of using military might to back up diplomacy has certainly found little favor, so much so that it is certainly clear even to the supine American public and a risk averse congress that there is something wrong in Foggy Bottom. It is astonishing to note the mainstream media, which reviled George W. Bush when he was in office, describing him currently as a voice of moderation and restraint due to his recent criticism of the White House. You can't go wrong if you pile on Trump.

Even the U.S. media has been reluctantly reporting that ISIS has been rolled back in Syria by the joint efforts of the Syrian Army and the Russian air force with the United States and its allies playing very much secondary roles in the conflict. The Russians have, in fact, complained that Washington seemed just a tad disinterested in actually cooperating to destroy the last remnants of ISIS in the few areas that the group still controls, citing most recently an alleged incident during the Syrian government liberation of the town of Abu Kamal in which U.S. air assets on site appear to have allowed ISIS fighters to escape.

The shambles of American policy as it applies to the Middle East was highlighted by yet another similar and particularly bizarre episode that was revealed initially by the BBC on Monday of last week. In early October, when the Syrians and Russians were closing in from the west on Raqqa, the "capital" of the ISIS caliphate while the U.S supported Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), which predominantly consists of the Kurdish militias, was closing in from the east, a deal was reportedly struck to permit an evacuation of the remaining ISIS fighters and their families.

According to the BBC investigative report , the SDF and Kurds were wary of clearing out the remaining fighters from the ruins of the city and so negotiated an agreement whereby the ISIS fighters from Syria and Iraq and their families would be able to leave and be allowed to either go home and face the consequences or proceed to ISIS controlled areas about one hundred miles away. The objective was to avoid a final assault from the air and using artillery that would have produced a bloodbath killing thousands, including large numbers of civilians. The agreement stipulated that only ISIS fighters who were local would be allowed to leave. Others, referred to as "foreigners," from Europe, Africa or Asia would have to surrender in order to avoid their going free and getting involved in new terrorist activity after returning home.

U.S. and British military advisers who were with the SDF and Kurds reported, somewhat improbably, that they had not been party to the negotiations, that it was "all-locals," though they later admitted that there had been some involvement on their part. In the event, trucks and busses were assembled on October 14 th , formed into a convoy, and were loaded with more than 4,000 fighters and families. More than 100 ISIS-owned vehicles also were allowed to leave and there were ten trucks filled with weapons. The convoy stretched for more than four miles and film footage shows trucks pulling trailers filled with militants brandishing their weapons. The fighters were not allowed to display flags or banners but they were not forced to disarm and in fact loaded all the vehicles with as many weapons as they could carry, so much so that one truck broke its axle from the weight. The BBC reported that "This wasn't so much an evacuation – it was the exodus of so-called Islamic State."

The drivers reported that they were abused by the ISIS fighters, many of whom were wearing explosive belts, and they also claimed that there was a large percentage of foreigners among those escaping. Various drivers told the BBC that there were French, Turkish, Azerbaijani, Pakistani, Yemeni, Saudi, Chinese, Tunisian and Egyptian nationals among their passengers. The evacuees made it safely to ISIS controlled territory and presumably will be ready, willing and able to fight again.

The escape of the Islamic State from Raqqa is, to put it mildly, bizarre. One might accept that avoiding the carnage that would have been part and parcel of an assault on the shattered city should have weighed heavily on the decision making by the attacking forces, but allowing hardened fighters to escape with their weapons would hardly seem a good way to end the conflict. In May, U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis said on television that the war against ISIS was one of " annihilation. Our intention is that the foreign fighters do not survive the fight to return home to north Africa, to Europe, to America, to Asia, to Africa. We are not going to allow them to do so."

Well, Mattis was possibly lying back then, or at least saying what he thought would play well on television and in the newspapers. On November 14 th , the day after the BBC story about Raqqa broke, he lied again, saying that the United States is in Syria under a U.N. authorization to fight ISIS, which is not true. The Russians have been invited into the country by its legitimate government but the U.S. is not there legally. The Turks are claiming that there are 13 U.S. military bases already in Syria, some of which are permanent.

Mattis added to his bit of fiction by stating , somewhat ominously, that while the first phase of the ISIS war is coming to an end "Basically we can go after ISIS. And we're there to take them out. But that doesn't mean we just walk away and let ISIS 2.0 pop back around. The enemy hasn't declared they're done with the war yet. So, we'll keep fighting them as long as they want to fight."

A waggish friend of mine suggested that Mattis might be deliberately selectively releasing ISIS fighters so the U.S. will never have to leave Syria, but my own theory is somewhat different. I think that Washington, which has done so little to defeat ISIS, wants some threat to continue so it can keep its own "resistance forces" in place and active to give it a seat at the table and a voice at the upcoming Geneva discussions for a political settlement in Syria. Otherwise Washington will be outside looking in. The unspeakable Nikki Haley at the U.N. appears to endorse that line of thinking by asserting that Washington will continue "to fight for justice" in Syria no matter what the rest of the world decides to do.

Does this mean that we can expect considerable fumbling and a game with no exit strategy, something like a replay of Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya? You betcha.

Cloak And Dagger , November 21, 2017 at 5:59 am GMT

Another great article, Phil! I hope those jerks at TAC with their rapidly declining readership are realizing how idiotic it was to fire you.

Your waggish friend may have a point, but there are several parties that would benefit from the continuing conflict in that region:

– Arms manufacturers lose money in times of peace, so the MIC is clearly an important beneficiary.
- Israel benefits as long as there is chaos in the Middle East and no unification of its enemies. It also benefits by keeping the boogeyman alive so that it can continue to siphon off our largesse in terms of military aid "to defend itself".
- The US government benefits by continuing to have a reason to be there in order to thwart Russia's growing influence in the region.
- The Russians benefit by continuing to demonstrate their military prowess and gaining both allies in the region as well as customers for their advanced weaponry.

Who doesn't benefit?

- We and our fellow citizens don't, as our taxes continue to fund this mayhem while our own economy and our standard of living plummets (except for the elite).
- The people of that region continue to live their lives in hell without any normalcy, and so see no benefits.
- The European countries become hosts to the tide of refugees escaping from the region, mixed with enough mischief makers to increase social tension in major European cities, so the Europeans don't benefit.

Wouldn't it be great if we could get rid of our war-mongering interventionists, fueled by Israel-firsters, and gain influence in the world as China does, by focusing on trade instead of wars? Couldn't we just buy the resources we need as China does, rather than stealing them by force from others?

Couldn't we, once more, become manufacturers and traders, rather than mercenaries for Israel? That would Make America Great Again .

If wishes were horses

chris , November 21, 2017 at 6:12 am GMT

"The enemy hasn't declared they're done with the war yet. So, we'll keep fighting them as long as they want [us] to fight."

I think, maybe 'Mad Dog' was talking about Israel here.

MEexpert , November 21, 2017 at 6:49 am GMT
As long the axis of evil consisting of "the most moral and exceptional nation," "the nation with the best and moral army," and "the nation of corruption fighters" continues to dominate the world scene the Muslim blood will continue to be spilt. I could have never imagined that the United States will lose every fiber of decency and morality for the sake of few AIPAC dollars.

The American public is brain dead. If you repeat lies enough times they become the truth and the American public will swallow it hook-line and sinker.

Iraq had weapons of mass destruction

Syrian President Assad gassed his people

US is in Syria by UN consent

US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia/UAE are fighting terrorism

Iran has nuclear weapons

These are few of the lies that have been told by our politicians and the MSM. Just ask any average American and he will tell you that yes these are true statements. As long as the present state of affairs continues the mayhem in the Middle East will continue.

I am not at all surprised that the US and her allies helped escape ISIS fighters. Remember that ISIS, AL-Qaeda and all the other alphabet fighters were created by the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia. These three have to protect their investment of man-power and weapons to be used some other place. In Fourteen years, ISIS or Al-Qaeda has never attacked Israel. Coincidence? Hmmmm.

How do we stop it? The only way to end this slaughter of innocent Muslims is by eliminating every zionist/neocon from the face of this earth. As long as even one zionist/neocon remains he will sprout up evereywhere and continue this corruption. And, please spare me the indignation at my calling Muslims "innocent." Before the Palestinian issue there were no hijackings, kidnappings, or killings of non-Muslim by Muslims. This started when the benevolent Western nations got rid of the Jews from the Europe and put them in the Middle east.

Does this mean that we can expect considerable fumbling and a game with no exit strategy, something like a replay of Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya?

Yes, indeed.

jilles dykstra , November 21, 2017 at 7:58 am GMT
IS in my opinion is an idea, the idea that western neocolonialism cannot be accepted.
One cannot contain ideas, moreover, as Keynes already understood, 'ideas are the most powerful forces in the world'.
There is a british expression, what confirms this, I think, 'one can do a lot with bayonets, except sit on them'.
So indeed, the USA industrial military complex, against which Eisenhower in his farewell speech already warned, may welcome an ongoing war.
The USA taxpayer pays with money, low income USA citizens also pay with blood and disabilities.
Alfred , November 21, 2017 at 8:51 am GMT
This article is based on a false premise – that the USA is an enemy of ISIS and al-Qaeda etc. That is nonsense.

Here is the ex-prime minister of Qatar – an ally of the USA – and one of the richest men in the world admitting that the USA and its allies (including Qatar) created, trained, equipped and financed the terrorists in Syria.

A few days ago, former Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Qatar Hamad Bin Jassim in an interview with the BBC announced that his country had been providing all sorts of assistance to the armed opposition groups in Syria through Turkey for years. At the same time, Doha wasn't alone to show its supports to anti-Assad forces, as it was joined by the United States, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the UAE and Turkey itself. All this began back in 2007 after Israel suffered a humiliating defeat in South Lebanon, while being unable to overcome Hezbollah's resistance in 2006. According to the former Qatari Prime Minister, Qatar was in charge of the so-called "Syrian Dossier" on behalf of the US and Saudi Arabia, adding that he had access to both American and Saudi paperwork on the staging of a so-called "Syrian civil war."

"Revelations of a High-Profile Qatari Official Reveal a Wider anti-Syria Conspiracy"

https://journal-neo.org/2017/11/18/revelations-of-a-high-profile-qatari-officials-reveal-a-wider-anti-syria-conspiracy/

Greg Bacon , Website November 21, 2017 at 9:33 am GMT
300 ISIS thugs moved by the USAF and the CIA into Europe, maybe even the USA, where they can be counted on to be used as patsy's for a decades worth of False Flags, or maybe even let them do the killing and terrorizing, since they have experience in murdering women and children in Syria and Iraq.

This is the USG at work, setting up terrorist networks in Syria and Iraq and paying the Taliban off in Afghanistan so they can have an excuse to keep that phony war going, in order to keep US troops there guarding those poppy fields which those TBTF Wall Street banks need so they can launder the illegal drug profits and stay afloat.
Now that the Zionists Yinon Project in Syria has failed, looks like Israel will have to use other intrigues to keep its theft of Syrian and Lebanese land vital and ongoing.

The real terrorist isn't some guy shouting Allahu Akbar™ and detonating his suicide vest or driving his truck into people, it's the scuzzy POS USG that has become nothing more than a vicious gangster outfit that is using terrorism to scare the hell out of Americans so we'll keep cowering in fear, while the thieves rob us blind and wreck our economy and nation and get us ever so closer to a state of complete tyranny.

Z-man , November 21, 2017 at 9:49 am GMT
Yeah I noticed that story and I wonder why the BBC didn't follow up with some pointed questions to the US Defense Department, 'slurpy dog' Mattis et al. Are they all in cahoots??

The unspeakable Nikki Haley

LOL and so true. She is Trump's Hillary Rotten Clinton that Obama disappointedly put in at 'State' 9 years ago. Wow, 9 years time flies!
On a side note Charlie Rose is the latest 'celebrity' to get the 'sexual abuse' ax. I had written a post on The Myth of American Meritocracy article by Ron Unz just a few days ago pointing out Charlie Rose's connections to CBS, so double LOL!! Charlie being a crypto Zionist makes his predicament extra special. (Very wide grin)

LondonBob , November 21, 2017 at 10:01 am GMT
I wonder if Cheney and Rumsfeld are pleased Bush junior has claimed full credit for all his foreign policy disasters. It would be nice if Obama gave up his ludicrous Nobel peace prize and instead offered it to Admiral Fallon.

Lets hope those US troops don't go home in body bags, but I am not sure whether there is anyone there to remind Trump of his commitment that US troops were just there to fight IS.

Biff , November 21, 2017 at 10:17 am GMT

Nobel Peace Prize winner and U.S. Corporate house negro Barack Obama followed Bush and made it clear that there would be no stepping back from a policy of proactively "protecting" the American people.

There I fixed it for ya. Do you really think that the owners are going to give what they consider a ni ** er from Chicago any real power?

Frontmen stooges – all of them.

Twodees Partain , November 21, 2017 at 11:51 am GMT
It seems that the American "intelligence community" is trying to protect its ISIS forces in order to avoid future problems with recruitment. If they allowed these ISIS soldiers to be captured or killed, they'd have a hard time putting together another such army in the future. Even muslim fanatics would have sense enough to know that they were being set up for abandonment and betrayal should they join the next CIA army in a regime change project..
Jake , November 21, 2017 at 12:23 pm GMT
The Saudis would ally with Satan himself, signing in their own blood, agreeing to give tens of thousands of their poorest children to Satan for direct use, as well as promising all the Shia and Christian children they could round up, in order to take out the Assad family and use Syria as Base Camp for the destruction of Iran and Shiite Mohammedanism.

The Israelis want the Assads ousted as much as do the Saudis and are as happy as the Saudis to pervert everything they touch in order to get the job done.

The Americans look on with parental delight at the two main products of WASP hegemony over the Middle East, handed from the English to the Yanks.

jacques sheete , November 21, 2017 at 12:56 pm GMT
Sorry to nitpick , PG ,and sorry to be so redundant, but I must once again appeal to authors to quit calling the presstitutes and cesspool media "mainstream."

It is the voice of plutoligarchs and is in no rational way, mainstream. The term lends an air of credibility to utter trash when it deserves, instead, to be discredited at every opportunity.

jacques sheete , November 21, 2017 at 1:05 pm GMT
@Twodees Partain

Even muslim fanatics would have sense enough to know that they were being set up for abandonment and betrayal should they join the next CIA army in a regime change project..

This is the first time I've ever seen that concept in print, but it is as valid as it is obvious. I've often wondered what motivated people to sign on with the world's most corrupt entities when it's obvious that they are not and probably never have been reliable or trustworthy partners.

The US betrays its allies, the Arab peoples, just as it betrayed the Philippine freedom fighters (against the Spanish Empire) 20 years previously.:

CAIRO, Egypt, May 27, -- The last hope of 30,000,000 Arabs to win freedom for their race without further bloodshed vanished when cables from Washington announced that the United States had concluded an agreement with Great Britain The Arabs came into the war on the side of the allies against their Turkish co-religionists in- response to the allies' promise of freedom The Arab support" was determined and effective."

Newspaper article by Junius B. Wood on the American recognition of Britain's mandate in Palestine, Chicago Daily News,27 May 1922 (also The Sunday Star, Washington)

http://dcollections.oberlin.edu/cdm/compoundobject/collection/kingcrane/id/1686/rec/18

Incredulous Phil , November 21, 2017 at 1:11 pm GMT
this site is an odd mix of excellent analysis and obvious nonsense for angry dullards.

this article is the latter.

"all war is deception" -some Asian fella

keep howling at the moon!

(((they're))) coming for your guns!

hahahahahaaaaa

Erebus , November 21, 2017 at 1:33 pm GMT
@Alfred

You beat me to it.

I was going to post this Zerohedge version, which includes parts of the interview in translation, and other juicy tidbits.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-10-28/shocking-viral-interview-qatar-confesses-secrets-behind-syrian-war

Here's another, that dates back to the time when Qatar was isolated by the GCC (probably not a coincidence).

https://www.alternet.org/grayzone-project/us-and-gulf-allies-supported-islamist-extremists-syria-qatars-ex-prime-minister

All 3 links are worth reading to get a picture of the resources and organization a rather sordid coalition of govts applied to regime change in Syria, and what their failure may come to mean. Assad stood up against a formidable force, and eventually outsmarted them by putting together an even smarter coalition.

One hopes Syria sues them all for reparations.

n230099 , November 21, 2017 at 1:36 pm GMT
This piece hits on something some friends and I spoke of years ago. We said then, this ISIS is the neocolonialists new 'moneymaker'. When ISIS started holding up severed heads they knew they'd found gold or struck oil as they say.
Wizard of Oz , November 21, 2017 at 1:50 pm GMT
"diminish their most precious liberties". Would you care, PG, to spell out what you mean and why you nominate the particular liberties you identify as "their most precious".

How many Americans do you think have been materially affected, and care, and how many care even if not affected personally?

neprof , November 21, 2017 at 2:00 pm GMT
Interesting article about Putin's meeting with Bashar al-Assad at a Sochi resort:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-11-21/putin-holds-surprise-meeting-assad-will-call-trump-phone-later-tuesday

Putin to talk to Trump via phone today.

Michael Kenny , November 21, 2017 at 2:04 pm GMT
Logically, the US would want to keep on good terms with ISIS so as to be able to use it later against Putin in Syria (or Chechnya!). As always, Putin is the centrepiece of the problem. Ukraine? Syria? Iran? North Korea? No Putin, no problem.
DESERT FOX , November 21, 2017 at 2:15 pm GMT
The fact is that ISIS aka AL CIADA was created by the U.S. and Israel and Britain ie the CIA and the MOSSAD and MI 6 to be their proxy mercenaries to do regime change and this is what they did at a cost of thousands of American servicemen and millions of civilians dead and over 6 TRILLION dollars pissed away for the benefit of ISRAEL and the Zionist bankers and the Zionist controlled MIC.

The Zionists control the U.S. and this was proven by the coverup of the attack on the USS LIBERTY and the coverup of ISRAELS attack on the WORLD TRADE CENTER on 911, there is no end to the hell that Zionist Israel will inflict on America.

Anon , Disclaimer November 21, 2017 at 2:18 pm GMT
@chris

The Coalition of Dishonest, US & Israel, are trying to protect their investment, ISIS:
"The Russians have, in fact, complained that Washington seemed just a tad disinterested in actually cooperating to destroy the last remnants of ISIS in the few areas that the group still controls, citing most recently an alleged incident during the Syrian government liberation of the town of Abu Kamal in which U.S. air assets on site appear to have allowed ISIS fighters to escape."

The US brass has been exposed as a bunch of liars:
"In May, U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis said on television that the war against ISIS was one of " annihilation. Our intention is that the foreign fighters do not survive the fight to return home to north Africa, to Europe, to America, to Asia, to Africa. We are not going to allow them to do so." Well, Mattis was possibly lying back then, or at least saying what he thought would play well on television and in the newspapers. On November 14th, the day after the BBC story about Raqqa broke, he lied again, saying that the United States is in Syria under a U.N. authorization to fight ISIS, which is not true."

The US has become an internationally recognize liar and aggressor. Thanks, Israel.

Meanwhile, in Russia: "I'd like to introduce you to the people who played a key part in saving Syria," Putin told Assad as he introduced the men in green uniforms. "Of course, Mr. Assad knows some of you personally. He told me during our talks today that thanks to the Russian Army, Syria has been saved as a state." Assad used the opportunity to relay the gratitude of his government and the Syrian people to those involved in the two-year operation in the war-torn nation. "I would like to underline the effort made by the armed forces of the Russian Federation, the sacrifices they have made," he said." https://www.rt.com/news/410467-putin-assad-meet-syria/

Avery , November 21, 2017 at 2:20 pm GMT
@Michael Kenny

{ to use it later against Putin in Syria}

You just woke up from hibernation?
US has been using ISIS in Syria for 4-5 years against Assad, and Putin's AF has been chopping the head-choppers to little of chunks of burnt swine.
Unfortunately the number of ISIS cannibals available for pulverizing by RuAF has greatly diminished lately: just when Russian AF was getting warmed up, they ran out of juicy ISIS targets.

{(or Chechnya!)}

Wow (!).
Are you delusional or what (!!).

Anon , Disclaimer November 21, 2017 at 2:22 pm GMT
Whom does the US military really fight against in Syria? – Not the ISIS, for sure. https://southfront.org/syrian-war-al-bukamal-is-liberated-what-now/
"The at-Tanf area on the Syrian-Iraqi border is controlled by the US-led coalition and a few US-backed Free Syrian Army (FSA) groups. FSA units are concentrated around the US garrison at at-Tanf and in the nearby refugee camp. The US says that it needs this garrison to fight ISIS while in fact it is just preventing Syria and Iraq from using the Damascus-Baghdad highway as a supply line. US forces respond with airstrikes and shelling to any Syrian Arab Army (SAA) attempts to reach at-Tanf."
Anonymous , Disclaimer November 21, 2017 at 2:24 pm GMT
This is a great article, although it would be easier to understand with ✡proper✡ punctuation, e.g., (((posse of neo-cohens))), (((ISIS))), (((US media))).
Anon , Disclaimer November 21, 2017 at 2:28 pm GMT
@Erebus

Agree.
The Nuremberg Protocols have set the precedent for reparations for the Jews.
Syria has been a victim of the US/Israel/Saudis aggression. Time to pay for the destruction and slaughtered civilians of all ages. .

Anon , Disclaimer November 21, 2017 at 2:32 pm GMT
@Michael Kenny

It is not so much the US that "want to keep on good terms with ISIS" in Syria. It is the Jewish state that wants Syria to disintegrate. Have not you heard the Israelis' squealing about "bad Iran?" – Here we are. Israelis/Israel-firsters want to keep the US fighting for Jewish Lebensraum in the Middle East.

Anon , Disclaimer November 21, 2017 at 3:03 pm GMT
@Avery

He is just a regular Israel-firster. For Mr. Kenny, the humanity be sacrificed in the name of the apartheid Jewish State.

Anon , Disclaimer November 21, 2017 at 3:06 pm GMT
More on the situation in Syria and the phony "war on terror:" https://www.globalresearch.ca/saudi-israeli-friendship-is-driving-the-rest-of-the-middle-east-together/5619176
"Mohammed bin Salman, son of King Salman, began his internal purge of the Kingdom's elite by removing from the line of succession Bin Nayef, a great friend of the US intelligence establishment (Brennan and Clapper). Bin Nayef was a firm partner of the US deep state. Saudi Arabia has for years worked for the CIA, advancing US strategic goals in the region and beyond. Thanks to the cooperation between Bandar bin Sultan Al Saud, Bin Nayef, and US intelligence agencies, Washington has for years given the impression of fighting against Islamist terrorist while actually weaponizing jihadism since the 1980s by deploying it against rival countries like the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, the Iraqi government in 2014, the Syrian state in 2012, and Libya's Gaddafi in 2011 ."
Zumbuddi , November 21, 2017 at 3:11 pm GMT
I meant to AGREE to #27, not 28.

Israel's evil schemes and malign influence of Izzie lovers are real enough, but the American people have got to grow up & grow a pair -- realize that their representatives are themselves corrupt & warmongering for evil, unlawful motives.

bliss_porsena , November 21, 2017 at 3:34 pm GMT
A four-mile long convoy and who stood down the Russkies?
Chu , November 21, 2017 at 3:58 pm GMT
It Never ends
JoaoAlfaiate , November 21, 2017 at 4:26 pm GMT
Simply the continuation of the US policy of Obama/Clinton under a new administration designed to weaken or remove the Syrian Gov't for Israel's benefit. The Israelis routinely treat ISIS and al-Qaeda fighters and return them to the battlefield while shelling the Syrian Arab Army whenever they have an excuse. Same stuff, different day.
TruthtellerAryan , November 21, 2017 at 4:37 pm GMT
Hi PG, great observation. They can't kill all their "hitman thugs", the mass bombing was not done to destroy ISIS, a group that was created by ZIA, Mossad, and Wahabi thugs to destroy the ME, kill as many Muslim civilians and others, and send the rest packing to Europe, while keeping the "fake war on terror " alive and kicking. Russia and Iran have put their noses in a " well thought plan", spoilers that have to be dealt with. But their hands can only reach Iran , except it might burn.
Letting ISIS go unmolested is one proof they are in cahoots
Anyone announcing, "ISIS is our greatest threat " and calling those helping get rid of this threat as a "threat ", that's a definite suspect.
ISIS is only continuing the 9/11 narrative. Iran and Russia have to be stopped at any cost, the Zionists have to fulfill their dreams .
anonymous , Disclaimer November 21, 2017 at 4:39 pm GMT
@Zumbuddi

An idea that the Christian West will exorcise itself from Judenevil, is simply not rooted in reality. See what happened with Christian Italy's opposition to BDS, a moral cause, clearly a Juden vs Muslim cause.

The Christian West fears Islam the most, not as a nations conquering power, but as a spiritual mind conquering power, given Islam's undeniable focus on true monotheism an ideological power which Christendom finds itself impotent against, given it own foundations in pagan polytheism.

Even if we agree that Europeans for the most part will never accept true monotheism, but would rather wallow in the godlessness of Atheism, Gnosticism, or whatever, as is happening now, the fact that by numbers alone Christianity would play second fiddle to Islam, would be psychologically crushing to the supremacist West, a culture which prides its glory on its Christian faith.

The Christian West has no such fear of Judenism, the exclusive membership cult , even if Juden faithful clearly revile their "deity," and his holy mother, herself a perceived "deity," no less. Your nations will always keep Judens close (sure, preferably not inside), because that cult will always remain the implacable enemies of Islam (you know, enemy of my enemy, and all).

So, why does the Christian West fear Islam's consistent message of True Monotheism? Because, I believe most Christians know that at its core, their faith is simply, Polytheism.

http://www.badnewsaboutchristianity.com/db0_onegod.htm

http://www.badnewsaboutchristianity.com/m01_religion.htm

renfro , November 21, 2017 at 4:43 pm GMT
" I think that Washington, which has done so little to defeat ISIS, wants some threat to continue so it can keep its own "resistance forces" in place and active to give it a seat at the table and a voice at the upcoming Geneva discussions for a political settlement in Syria.">>

You are 100% Philip.
And Isr'merica has to keep terriers alive and well to continue 'the threat' to civilization.

TruthtellerAryan , November 21, 2017 at 4:50 pm GMT
@DESERT FOX

Right on. And all the espionage that have been going on and covered up for decades.

Anon , Disclaimer November 21, 2017 at 5:07 pm GMT
Jews or Jewish "converts" in the thousands from France and other European countries have joined ISIS, which should tell you all there is to know about ISIS. Only reason for a Muslim to join ISIS is if they are a government agent of a Western or West-supported puppet country . any other type of Muslim joining this CIA created bullshit called "isis" is just plain a hopeless fool
Sane Left Libertarian , November 21, 2017 at 5:08 pm GMT
We're probably now in a permanent state of war, until we go the way of the USSR. With fewer and fewer civilian peacetime jobs that actually pay the rent available, the MIMC (Military-Industrial-Media Complex) is the only thing keeping the economy from flatlining. As others have pointed out, cui bono? Read Kevin Phillips' House of Bush, House of Saud for some background. You can bet the Bush family is making money off of it.
Talha , November 21, 2017 at 5:08 pm GMT
@anonymous

The Christian West fears Islam the most

I think you are making this far too intellectual. I don't think many people operate at this level.

The reason why most people in the West fear Islam is likely because too many Muslims have done a piss-poor job in becoming boons for their host countries and too many act like jack-asses (and dangerous ones at that).

Our community needs to do some serious self-reflection and reign in some of the idiot youth we have running around before we start taking it up to the level of debate about theological points. Nobody's going to listen to you debate Trinitarianism if they are afraid you're looking to steal their lunch money.

Read up on Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs

You are trying to punch way above where we are at right now. Trust me, people who are dissatisfied with Trinitariansim don't need advertising.

Wa salaam.

TruthtellerAryan , November 21, 2017 at 5:10 pm GMT
@Michael Kenny

Troll!!!!

Astuteobservor II , November 21, 2017 at 5:42 pm GMT
the goal is to mess syria up, just like libya, iraq and all the other countries in the ME. for the 17 years of continuous wars waged by the us, the ME will take at least a few decades just to recover to pre 2003 lvls. and the 17 years isn't the end. this will continue. turkey almost got taken over in a us backed insurrection. when russia got involved in syria, that wasn't just a wrench in the american planning cogs, that was like a wrecking ball.

when I look at pictures and videos of the devastation, I get the feeling we are evil as fuck as a country.

ps: look at yemen. that is a proxi war too by using SA. all the deaths in that country is also on us.

Cloak And Dagger , November 21, 2017 at 5:42 pm GMT
@Michael Kenny

Were you born an idiot or did you go to college?

Cloak And Dagger , November 21, 2017 at 5:43 pm GMT
@Chu

Something tells me that the end is approaching. It won't be pleasant for us, though.

Flavius , November 21, 2017 at 6:00 pm GMT
It's not or what, Phil. It's incorrigible stupidity.
When the US Government playmaker is an amalgam of the Quiet and the Ugly American and has charged himself with 'doing something about' changing political and social conditions in a country he knows nothing about, considers himself too superior to learn anything about, and knows that he personally will be immune from the consequences of failure, decapitation as a policy comes readily and easily to his mind: Ngo Dinh Diem; Saddam Hussein; Muammar Qaddafi. Sometimes when decapitation seems to be not immediately practicable, he takes out an option on the future with mere demonization: Assad; of course Putin; countless others.
But this has to be on Trump. Russia, China and the far east, the Middle East are now policy realities that are unfolding on his watch. He entered office without political friends and surrounded himself with generals and family whose only favorable qualification is that they are not generals: the very predictable results have not been impressive. I can only surmise that the execrable Nikki Haley holds a chip against her firing. The woman cannot open her mouth without causing real fear that there is literally no reasonable person in our entire foreign policy apparatus who is holding the reins.
The trajectory does not look good. If there is someone out there who could point to a calamity averting firewall in this Administration, a George Schultz, a Jim Baker, just somebody who is recognizably adult, stable and sane and is not a general, I would very much like to know who it is. I would sleep better.
Anon , Disclaimer November 21, 2017 at 6:30 pm GMT
@Michael Kenny

Israeli parasite: http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2017/11/httpssouthfrontorgisraels-military-expenditures-and-military-industrial-complex-overview-and-dynamics.html
"The biggest element of US-Israeli military-technical cooperation is military aid. Israel is the main recipient of US military aid in the form of grants and direct deliveries of equipment on advantageous terms. Since 1976, Israel has been the biggest recipient of annual US aid, and since 1987 of US military aid. In addition, by some estimates Israel receives $1 billion a year in the form of charity contributions, and a similar sum through short- and long-term funds. US provide aid to Israel in various forms: Foreign Military Sales, Direct Commercial Sales, Excess Defense Articles, and also funds to support research and development. Moreover, the Foreign Military Financing program implemented by the US Department of State has become, over the years, the largest of all such programs implemented by the US. One should note that, for example, out of $5.7 billion budgeted for this program in 2014, $3.1 went to Israel, In other words, Israel obtains more military assistance through this program than the rest of the world combined. This sum does not include the financing for Israel's ABM programs, which are estimated at another $500 million. Unlike other programs, FMF allows Israel to spend up to 25% of US-provided funding on own military programs. All other countries receiving military aid must spend it only on US weapons and equipment."

Anon , Disclaimer November 21, 2017 at 6:40 pm GMT
@DESERT FOX

From Sic Semper Tyrannis: http://turcopolier.typepad.com
" what's theirs [Israelis] is theirs, and what's yours is theirs as well. I don't doubt that US government gifts to Israel benefit American defense industry, but these gifts come right out of the pocket of the American taxpayer and what do we get for it? Israeli forces are in no way at the disposition of the US. They are not assets of American policy. Israel sees itself as an self-defining island in the world and the only real home for Jews. As such it thinks it cannot afford to be sentimental about any predominately gentile state, in other words, all others. And then, there is the repeated phenomenon of Israel either skirting the provisions of proprietary agreements about equipment sales or shared R&D or simply outright violations of these agreements in sales to third parties."
– In short, Israelis are cheaters and thieves and no friends to the US; they are just parasites.

phil , November 21, 2017 at 7:13 pm GMT
@Incredulous Phil

Please improve the site by making constructive comments.

Anon , Disclaimer November 21, 2017 at 7:25 pm GMT
I guess the Iranian president's statement is premature then.

http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2017/11/21/iran-declares-the-end-of-islamic-state-in-live-state-tv-broadcast/?utm

Zumbuddi , November 21, 2017 at 7:25 pm GMT
@anonymous

Agree with Talha that you are over thinking the situation. Wouldn't have used the Maslow thing, but no matter --

imo religion-theology-sectarian conflict are at the bottom of barrel in explaining the wars.
Muslims are pissed at USA/West because USA/WEST INVADED them & killed their people. It's not much more complicated then that.
It is hideous that Islam is demonized and Muslims made the fall guy -- that is a specialty of Jews–drumming up gut-level hate. Other cultures use propaganda in war -- Romans did,Napoleon was a master propagandist.
But Jews (no, not Nazis/ Goebbels but Jews)own the franchise on ginning up hate.

In the '60s and '70s US universities overflowed with Iranian Paki Indian grad students. It was a dynamic time. Now Jews are all over our best universities & it"s ugly.

But my original point was, American citizens have to take responsibility for the CRIMES of their leaders.

Art , November 21, 2017 at 7:57 pm GMT
@Cloak And Dagger

Couldn't we, once more, become manufacturers and traders, rather than mercenaries for Israel? That would Make America Great Again .

Sorry – but Trump has one giant chink in his armor – he is Netanyahu's fluffer – he supports the Jew's hardon for humanity.

Think Peace -- Art

Delinquent Snail , November 21, 2017 at 8:10 pm GMT
@MEexpert

Pretty sure the people of spain would disagree with "Before the Palestinian issue there were no hijackings, kidnappings, or killings of non-Muslim by Muslims. This started when the benevolent Western nations got rid of the Jews from the Europe and put them in the Middle east." the crusades werent just Christians fighting Muslims, muslims pushed back and did more damage then the european Christians did.

Delinquent Snail , November 21, 2017 at 8:14 pm GMT
@Anon

" US/Israel/Saudis aggression. Time to pay for the destruction .."

As long as payment is put up by our "leaders" and not the average american, i agree. Start building the gallows!

Delinquent Snail , November 21, 2017 at 8:27 pm GMT
@jacques sheete

It is the mainstream tho. We know it is bullshit, but its still the main "news" outlet. They controll the narrative, and they have the majority of listeners/watchers. That makes them mainstream.

Mainstream doesn't have to mean "good", "honest" or "accurate", just popular and widely consumed.

c matt , November 21, 2017 at 8:31 pm GMT
@MEexpert

I could have never imagined that the United States will lose every fiber of decency and morality for the sake of few AIPAC dollars.

Imagination has nothing to do with it – it is simple observation.

Delinquent Snail , November 21, 2017 at 8:45 pm GMT
@anonymous

You have a high opinion of westerners. Most are too dumb or busy to even look at the differences between islam and whatever the west believes.

If all peoples would just abandon the religions of their grandfathers and take responsibility for their actions in life (instead of taking a back seat and allowing a mythical "judge" to have a say after death), this planet would be a better place.

Most people agree that kindness, decency and respect are the cornerstones of all the moral principles that religions impose on their followers. So why do we need the mythical stories and outdated traditions to be good?

Grandpa Charlie , November 21, 2017 at 9:01 pm GMT
@MEexpert

"Iran has nuclear weapons" etc.

"These are few of the lies that have been told by our politicians and the MSM. Just ask any average American and he will tell you that yes these are true statements."

-- MEexpert

MEexpert must not live in USA. If you ask "any average American" who lives in this country about such things, he will probably mutter a perfunctory "yeah, right," and then walk away from you, thinking to himself, "ay-ho", meaning "AH".

Percentage of Americans with any confidence in Congress? Maybe just barely in double digits, and maybe not. Same for MSM oh, sure, some people still have their favorite TV news channel, but that's only because talking heads can't say often enough that it's all BS, present company excepted and anyway very few people watch any TV news. Those that do are partisan and get told by their favorite talking head exactly what they think they want to hear.

So if you ask a guy if Iran has nukes, he'll likely say, "Yeah, sure" but he will actually be remembering that it came out a few years ago that Iran had no WMDs. And then if you ask, "Iran and Iraq: they're the same country, aren't they?" he'll likely say, "Yeah, sure." And now with Iraq having a Shiite government, that'll be pretty much true see how that works .. like a stopped clock just give it some time and it will be accurate, at least for a while. But if you would wind up the clock, it would still work, it's just that nobody winds anything up any more . it's all battery powered .or maybe solar

"Braindead"? It's more like parts of the brain have been put to sleep. Those parts can be woke in an election year to temporarily take some interest, but now that the election is old news, we return to the basic truth: "nobody cares."

Politics? Don't ask, don't tell -- that's the policy of Joe Sixpack. Sally Sixpack? "Trump is a serial groper, it's disgusting." To which, Joe says, "Yeah sure."

Americans are practical people. A lot of guys, if you get to where you are exposing the whole rotten system, they'll say, "Well, let me know where we're going to form up, and I'll grab a couple of my guns and meet you there."

"Yeah, sure."

Anon , Disclaimer November 21, 2017 at 9:20 pm GMT
@Delinquent Snail

First, we should redirect the hefty allowance for Israel to the restoration of Syria.
Meanwhile, Israel continues protecting ISIS and invading Syria: http://thesaker.is/syrian-war-report-november-20-2017-government-troops-liberated-al-bukamal-from-isis/
"In southern Syria, the SAA entered into the villages of Kafr Hawar, Bayt Sabir, Baytima and established control over them. HTS militants had withdrawn from the area thanks to the SAA actions and protests of the locals. Israel responded to the SAA operations with two shelling incidents from its battle tanks. The first took place on November 18. The second was reported on November 20. The SAA suffered no casualties. Tel Aviv is upset that the Syrian government is restoring control over the areas previously seized by militants."

ChuckOrloski , November 21, 2017 at 9:26 pm GMT
Hey Phil,

Must assert what the American-Israeli military did with ISIS is far from "stupid."

Such action was practical.

Copying the genius of Henry Ford, the leftover ISIS remnant is become interchangeable parts which can get readily reactivated within the next popularized wave of "Radical Islam" which will likely appear in order to wage merciless war , uh on Lebanon.

I am figuring (brand name) al-Qaeda will soon get a curtain call.

Thank you very much.

Jake , November 21, 2017 at 9:29 pm GMT
@jacques sheete

The US betrays its allies because that is what the English did. Palmerston may have expressed it best: "We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow."

It's a WASP imperial thing.

Jake , November 21, 2017 at 9:33 pm GMT
@Delinquent Snail

Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, Mao, Fanon, Marcuse, and Soros agree with your Deep Thoughts 100%.

One Tribe , November 21, 2017 at 9:39 pm GMT
Delinquent understanding of history:

"Pretty sure the people of spain would disagree with "Before the Palestinian issue there were no hijackings, kidnappings, or killings of non-Muslim by Muslims."

You should carefully validate your historical ' facts ', especially when describing "hijackings, kidnappings, or killings of non-Muslim", in Spain after the Islamic 'Moorish' conquest; try Douglas Reed "The Controversy of Zion" p.89 ish at: https://archive.org/details/TheControversyOfZion

You will see how events of our current era from 1800, follow a pattern traceable for 25 centuries.

Jake , November 21, 2017 at 9:42 pm GMT
@anonymous

Christianity is Trinitarianism. Mohammedanism is a Gnostic heresy of both Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism, mixed together with some nicely disguised aspects of Arabic paganism.

jjc , November 21, 2017 at 9:48 pm GMT
The purpose of ISIS was to provide a rationale for the reestablishment of US/NATO permanent military bases in Iraq and also Syria. Statements made during the year or so after ISIS appeared and before Russia's intervention in 2015 consistently referred to a "30 year" time period required by US/NATO forces to ultimately defeat ISIS. During that year, US/NATO never attempted to disrupt ISIS' supply lines or interdict the Gulf States' funding of the group, all the while the Western media was constantly publishing ISIS atrocity videos and politicians were claiming the fight against ISIS was the most important struggle of all.

In my opinion, the sudden release of Syrian refugees into Europe in September 2015, after they had been warehoused in Turkey until that moment, was meant to serve as a manufactured crisis which would lead to the insertion of a large US/NATO force into Iraq and Syria with both a "humanitarian" pretext and the fight against ISIS, leading to military bases,Syrian regime change, and probably from there the targeting of Hezbollah and later Iran. Russia's sudden intervention prevented this scenario from playing out.

Art , November 21, 2017 at 10:49 pm GMT
@MEexpert

I could have never imagined that the United States will lose every fiber of decency and morality for the sake of few AIPAC dollars.

MEexpert,

The AIPAC stick is much mightier then the AIPAC carrot. It is amazing for how little these politicians sell out America.

The Jew MSM has the hammer. (All the media types live in fear of the Jew – just like the politicians.)

Think Peace -- Art

Twodees Partain , November 21, 2017 at 10:59 pm GMT
@jacques sheete

Yes, there's a long history of this kind of betrayal by the US government. I can only guess that Saudi agents ran the front end of the recruitment of ISIS. Otherwise it's a little hard to feature so many of these foot soldiers coming to join the mission.

Thanks for the excerpt and the link.

RJJCDA , November 21, 2017 at 11:45 pm GMT
The game (and perceived necessity) is to block China.

Draw a horizontal line from the Chinese population centers below Beijing westward and you go through the "stans," Iran, under the Caspian Sea, and finally to Syria. This will be the the One Belt, One Road, the new Silk Road, etc., with rails, pipelines and what not.

It is no accident that the action is near the western terminus of that line. If implemented, future world dominance could be achieved.

Renoman , November 21, 2017 at 11:50 pm GMT
USA, what an embarrassing Country.
Cygnus , November 21, 2017 at 11:58 pm GMT
Thanks for this article; it seems to show the activities of the war profiteers; those who own shares in the armament industries, and those who loan money to countries to pay these armament indusries. They are probably the same group of people. Perpetual war as a business model.
LauraMR , November 21, 2017 at 11:59 pm GMT
@Fran Macadam

No, it isn't accurate.

Consider this:

Americans have been living in a country that has not known peace since 9/11,

Now, tell me. When was the last decade our country was not at war? The 20′s?

Ivy Mike , November 22, 2017 at 12:01 am GMT
The early photos of Isis on the move showed them in shiny new white Toyota pickups. Looks like they've learned to camouflage them. Sinister and brilliant.
ChuckOrloski , November 22, 2017 at 12:49 am GMT
@Twodees Partain

Hey Twodees Partain,

Uh , practical "Muslim fanatics" need to find work too!

Does the official 9/11 report claim that the hijackers got help from the Saud royals?

(Zigh) Who the hell really knows who were Mohammed Atta's alleged handlers in Hamburg, Germany?

At the time, Germany was host to five-star military bases under leftover WW II treaties. Hm. Where were CIA and Mossad HQ' s located in Hamburg.

(Zigh) Even lookalike Mohammed Atta' s must had difficulty in figuring out exactly who wanted to employ them.

Can one imagine a washed-up ISIS warrior somehow gaining entry into uh, say Scranton, and undergoing a "dream" terror-job search? (Zigh) Joining up would depend upon (up front) receipt of a "sign-on" bonus check that did not bounce. (Zigh)

Pardon my cynicism, and thanks Twodees Partain for the solid thinking!

Anon , Disclaimer November 22, 2017 at 1:30 am GMT
@ChuckOrloski

Here is a nice outline on training American Fifth column by Israel-firsters -- "The U.S. Military as a Zionist Organization," by Shoshana Bryen: https://www.jewishpolicycenter.org/2017/11/20/u-s-military-zionist-organization/

"I have taken more than 400 American security professionals – primarily retired American Admirals and Generals – to Israel in more than 30 trips. And at the other end of their careers, I have sent more than 500 cadets and midshipmen of our service academies to Israel before they received their commissions. I never found one that didn't believe in the relationship between Jews and the land of Israel. The United States military, then, is a Zionist institution ."
Rejoyce, Americans -- Israel-firsters are satisfied with your brass.

Anon , Disclaimer November 22, 2017 at 1:37 am GMT
@Jake

He does not profess zionism – what's your problem?

ChuckOrloski , November 22, 2017 at 1:40 am GMT
@jjc

jjc,

The V.T. article linked below goes deep into what scary war is about to be launched perhaps prior to the New Year.

https://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/11/21/hezbollah-forces-are-on-high-combat-readiness-to-counter-israeli-threats/

Thanks very much for your logical thought process which is appreciated here.

Rurik , November 22, 2017 at 1:59 am GMT
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-11-21/putin-holds-surprise-meeting-assad-will-call-trump-phone-later-tuesday
SolontoCroesus , November 22, 2017 at 2:04 am GMT
@RJJCDA

Is the Yemen war to do with the Bridge of the Horns project that bin Laden family is spearheading?

DESERT FOX , November 22, 2017 at 2:26 am GMT
@Anon

Israel will destroy America, just as a parasite eventually kills its host, so shall Israel kill America.

jacques sheete , November 22, 2017 at 2:37 am GMT
@Delinquent Snail

It is the mainstream tho.

Still, using the term legitimizes it somewhat more than it deserves. And it supports the agendas of the plutoligarchs and they are not mainstream by any means.

jacques sheete , November 22, 2017 at 2:41 am GMT
@Jake

It's a WASP imperial thing.

I do not disagree, but I would add that it's a Zionist (not necessarily Jewish) imperial thing as well.

anon , Disclaimer November 22, 2017 at 2:45 am GMT
The surviving jihadists are pretty much stateless; there's no going back to their home countries now. The promised caliphate they expected to live in didn't materialize. They are now totally dependent on whoever is willing to shelter them which makes them a useful commodity for the US. They can be held on the back burner until the next project comes along. There's all sorts of countries that could become the next target should they refuse to capitulate to US demands. They're all probably being secreted in various places awaiting a call.
It's a mistaken notion that the US is against radical Islam. On the contrary it not only wants it but tries to create it. Look at it's assembling of zealots to fight in Afghanistan against the Russians and the use of them against secular nationalist in Islamic areas. ISIS fanatics are deluded cannon-fodder, not realizing they're just furthering US aims, the US working through various fronts so as to hide the actual authorship of what's taking place.
Joe Wong , November 22, 2017 at 3:57 am GMT

Americans have been living in a country that has not known peace since 9/11,

This is simply not true. War has not happened in the USA since the American Civil War 160 years ago. All wars the American military fought since then are fought in somebody else homeland, those wars to the Americans are just some kind of odd news competing eyeballs with pro sport news, celebrity gossips, gun violence or commercials, if they did not read it, those wars never happen, never heard of it, and it is out of sight and out of mind, the wars have nothing to do with them. The USA itself is all peaceful other than occasional gun violence.

Anon , Disclaimer November 22, 2017 at 4:46 am GMT
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/translated-doc-debunks-narrative-of-al-qaeda-iran-alliance/

[Nov 22, 2017] Syria, 'Experts,' and George Monbiot by Jonathan Cook

Notable quotes:
"... Porter's research indicates very strongly that the building that was bombed could not have been a nuclear reactor – and that was clear to experts at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) even as the story was being promoted uncritically across the western media. ..."
"... But Porter helps shine a light on how even the most reputable international agencies can end up similarly following a script written in Washington and one that rides roughshod over evidence, especially when the interests of the world's only superpower are at stake. In this case, the deceptions were perpetuated by one of the world's leading scientific organizations: the International Atomic Energy Agency, which monitors states' nuclear activities. ..."
"... The Syrian "nuclear plant", he noted, could not have been built using North Korean know-how, as was claimed by the US. It lacked all the main features of a North Korean gas-cooled reactor. The photos produced by the Israelis showed a building that, among other things, covered too small an area and was not anywhere near high enough, it had none of the necessary supporting structures, and there was no cooling tower. ..."
"... Abushady's assessment was buried by the IAEA, which preferred to let the CIA and the Israelis promote their narrative unchallenged. ..."
"... This was not a one-off failure. In summer 2008, the IAEA visited the area to collect samples. Had the site been a nuclear plant, they could have expected to find nuclear-grade graphite particles everywhere. They found none. Nonetheless, the IAEA again perpetrated a deception to try to prop up the fictitious US-Israeli narrative. ..."
Nov 22, 2017 | original.antiwar.com

Investigative journalist Gareth Porter has published two exclusives whose import is far greater than may be immediately apparent. They concern Israel's bombing in 2007 of a supposed nuclear plant secretly built, according to a self-serving US and Israeli narrative, by Syrian leader Bashar Assad.

Although the attack on the "nuclear reactor" occurred a decade ago, there are pressing lessons to be learnt for those analyzing current events in Syria.

Porter's research indicates very strongly that the building that was bombed could not have been a nuclear reactor – and that was clear to experts at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) even as the story was being promoted uncritically across the western media.

But – and this is the critical information Porter conveys – the IAEA failed to disclose the fact that it was certain the building was not a nuclear plant, allowing the fabricated narrative to be spread unchallenged. It abandoned science to bow instead to political expediency.

The promotion of the bogus story of a nuclear reactor by Israel and key figures in the Bush administration was designed to provide the pretext for an attack on Assad. That, it was hoped, would bring an end to his presidency and drag into the fray the main target – Iran. The Syrian "nuclear reactor" was supposed to be a rerun of the WMD deception, used in 2003 to oust another enemy of the US and Israel's – Saddam Hussein of Iraq.

It is noteworthy that the fabricated evidence for a nuclear reactor occurred in 2007, a year after Israel's failure to defeat Hizbullah in Lebanon. The 2006 Lebanon war was itself intended to spread to Syria and lead to Assad's overthrow, as I explained in my book Israel and the Clash of Civilisations .

It is important to remember that this Israeli-neocon plot against Syria long predated – in fact, in many ways prefigured – the civil war in 2011 that quickly morphed into a proxy war in which the US became a key, if mostly covert, actor.

The left's Witchfinder General

The relevance of the nuclear reactor deception can be understood in relation to the latest efforts by Guardian columnist George Monbiot (and many others) to discredit prominent figures on the left, including Noam Chomsky and John Pilger, for their caution in making assessments of much more recent events in Syria. Monbiot has attacked them for not joining him in simply assuming that Assad was responsible for a sarin gas attack last April on Khan Sheikhoun, an al-Qaeda stronghold in Idlib province.

Understandably, many on the left have been instinctively wary of rushing to judgment about individual incidents in the Syrian war, and the narratives presented in the western media. The claim that Assad's government used chemical weapons in Khan Sheikhoun, and earlier in Ghouta, was an obvious boon to those who have spent more than a decade trying to achieve regime change in Syria.

In what has become an ugly habit with Monbiot, and one I have noted before, he has enthusiastically adopted the role of Witchfinder General. Any questioning of evidence, skepticism or simply signs of open-mindedness are enough apparently to justify accusations that one is an Assadist or conspiracy theorist. Giving house room to the doubts of a ballistics expert like Ted Postol of MIT, or an experienced international arms expert like Scott Ritter, or a famous investigative journalist like Seymour Hersh, or a former CIA analyst like Ray McGovern, is apparently proof that one is an atrocity denier or worse.

Inconvenient facts buried

Monbiot's latest attack was launched at a moment when he obviously felt he was on solid ground. A UN agency, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), issued a report last month concluding that the 100 people killed and 200 injured in Khan Sheikhoun last April were exposed to sarin. Monbiot argues that the proof is now incontrovertible that Assad was responsible – a position that he, of course, adopted at the outset – and that all other theories have now been decisively discounted by the OPCW .

There are reasons to think that Monbiot is seriously misrepresenting the strength of the OPCW's findings, as several commentators have observed. Most notably, Robert Parry, another leading investigative journalist, points out that evidence in the report's annex – the place where inconvenient facts are often buried – appears to blow a large hole in the official story.

Parry notes that the time recorded by the UN of the photo of the chemical weapons attack is more than half an hour after some 100 victims had already been admitted to five different hospitals, some of them lengthy drives from the alleged impact site.

But potentially more significant than such troubling inconsistencies are the conclusions of Gareth Porter's separate investigation into Israel's bombing of the nonexistent Syrian nuclear reactor. That gets to the heart of where Monbiot and many others have gone badly wrong in their certainty about events in Syria.

Extreme naivety

Monbiot has been only too willing to promote as indisputable fact claims made both by highly compromised and unreliable western sources and by supposedly reputable and independent organizations, such as international human rights groups and UN agencies. He, like many others, assumes that the latter can always be relied upon to stand apart from western interests and can therefore be implicitly trusted.

That indicates an extreme naivety or possibly the lack of any experience covering on the ground highly charged conflicts in which western interests are paramount.

I have been based in Israel for nearly two decades and have on several occasions taken to task Human Rights Watch (HRW), one of the world's most esteemed human rights organizations. I have shown that assessments it has made were patently not rooted in evidence or even credible interpretations of international law but in geopolitical considerations. That was especially true in the case of the month-long fighting between Israel and Hizbullah in 2006. (See here and here .) My concerns about HRW's work, I later learnt from insiders, were shared in its New York head office, but were silenced by the organization's most senior staff.

Nuclear plant deception

But Porter helps shine a light on how even the most reputable international agencies can end up similarly following a script written in Washington and one that rides roughshod over evidence, especially when the interests of the world's only superpower are at stake. In this case, the deceptions were perpetuated by one of the world's leading scientific organizations: the International Atomic Energy Agency, which monitors states' nuclear activities.

Porter reveals that Yousry Abushady, the IAEA's foremost expert on North Korean nuclear reactors, was able immediately to discount the aerial photographic evidence that the building Israel bombed in 2007 was a nuclear reactor. (Most likely it was a disused missile storage depot.)

The Syrian "nuclear plant", he noted, could not have been built using North Korean know-how, as was claimed by the US. It lacked all the main features of a North Korean gas-cooled reactor. The photos produced by the Israelis showed a building that, among other things, covered too small an area and was not anywhere near high enough, it had none of the necessary supporting structures, and there was no cooling tower.

Abushady's assessment was buried by the IAEA, which preferred to let the CIA and the Israelis promote their narrative unchallenged.

Atomic agency's silence

This was not a one-off failure. In summer 2008, the IAEA visited the area to collect samples. Had the site been a nuclear plant, they could have expected to find nuclear-grade graphite particles everywhere. They found none. Nonetheless, the IAEA again perpetrated a deception to try to prop up the fictitious US-Israeli narrative.

As was routine, they sent the samples to a variety of laboratories for analysis. None found evidence of any nuclear contamination – apart from one. It identified particles of man-made uranium. The IAEA issued a report giving prominence to this anomalous sample, even though in doing so it violated its own protocols, reports Parry . It could draw such a conclusion only if the results of all the samples matched.

In fact, as one of the three IAEA inspectors who had been present at the site later reported, the sample of uranium did not come from the plant itself, which was clean, but from a changing room nearby. A former IAEA senior inspector, Robert Kelley, told Parry that a "very likely explanation" was that the uranium particles derived from "cross contamination" from clothing worn by the inspectors. This is a problem that had been previously noted by the IAEA in other contexts.

Meanwhile, the IAEA remained silent about its failure to find nuclear-grade graphite in a further nine reports over two years. It referred to this critical issue for the first time in 2011.

Chance for war with Iran

In other words, the IAEA knowingly conspired in a fictitious, entirely nonscientific assessment of the Syrian "nuclear reactor" story, one that neatly served US-Israeli geopolitical interests.

Porter notes that vice-president Dick Cheney "hoped to use the alleged reactor to get President George W Bush to initiate US airstrikes in Syria in the hope of shaking the Syrian-Iranian alliance".

In fact, Cheney wanted far more sites in Syria hit than the bogus nuclear plant. In his memoirs, the then-secretary of defense, Robert Gates, observed that Cheney was "looking for an opportunity to provoke a war with Iran".

The Bush administration wanted to find a way to unseat Assad, crush Hizbullah in Lebanon, and isolate and weaken Iran as a way to destroy the so-called "Shia crescent".

That goal is being actively pursued again by the US today, with Israel and Saudi Arabia leading the way. A former US ambassador to Israel, Dan Shapiro, recently warned that , after their failure to bring down Assad, the Saudis have been trying to switch battlefields to Lebanon, hoping to foment a confrontation between Israel and Hizbullah that would drag in Iran.

Abandoning science

Back in 2007, the IAEA, an agency of scientists, did its bit to assist – or at least not obstruct – US efforts to foster a political case, an entirely unjustified one, for military action against Syria and, very possibly by extension, Iran.

If the IAEA could so abandon its remit and the cause of science to help play politics on behalf of the US, what leads Monbiot to assume that the OPCW, an even more politicized body, is doing any better today?

That is not to say Assad, or at least sections of the Syrian government, could not have carried out the attack on Khan Sheikhoun. But it is to argue that in a matter like this one, where so much is at stake, the evidence must be subjected to rigorous scrutiny, and that critics, especially experts who offer counter-evidence, must be given a fair hearing by the left. It is to argue that, when the case against Assad fits so neatly a long-standing and self-serving western narrative, a default position of skepticism is fully justified. It is to argue that facts, strong as they may seem, can be manipulated even by expert bodies, and therefore due weight needs also to be given to context – including an assessment of motives.

This is not "denialism", as Monbiot claims. It is a rational strategy adopted by those who object to being railroaded once again – as they were in Iraq and Libya – into catastrophic regime change operations.

Meanwhile, the decision by Monbiot and others to bury their heads in the sands of an official narrative, all the while denouncing anyone who seeks to lift theirs out for a better view, should be understood for what it is: an abnegation of intellectual and moral responsibility for those around the globe who continue to be the victims of western military supremacism.

Jonathan Cook won the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His latest books are Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East (Pluto Press) and Disappearing Palestine: Israel's Experiments in Human Despair (Zed Books). His website is www.jonathan-cook.net .

Read more by Jonathan Cook Israel Lobby Is Slowly Being Dragged Into the Light – November 13th, 2017 Why Israel Supports Kurdish Independence – October 4th, 2017 Clinton's Defeat and the 'Fake News' Conspiracy – December 18th, 2016 Adam Curtis: Another Manager of Perceptions – October 20th, 2016 In the US, Money Talks When It Comes to Israel – July 20th, 2016

[Nov 22, 2017] Just imagine what songs Bandar Bush is singing in the Ritz these days

Nov 22, 2017 | www.unz.com
survey-of-disinfo , November 20, 2017 at 1:50 pm GMT
@Erebus

Just imagine what songs Bandar Bush is singing in "the Ritz" these days. Want to sue Saudi Arabia for money because of 9/11? No problem, judge. Here are the names, here are the numbers, and here are the facts.

Disagree regarding multipolar order. The super structures for Globalism are untouched in all this theatrical displays. All parties seem to participate actively in key Globalist institutions.

Petrodollar is not and was never a component of NWO. It was an instrument of American supremacy. There are no planned superpowers in the NWO vision. Only Super-Institutions .

[Nov 16, 2017] MoA - Syria Summary The Idlib Battle Comes Into Sight

Nov 16, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

xor | Nov 16, 2017 1:48:29 PM | 5

There is also the successful information attack conducted by US intelligence. The Russian Ministry of Defense published a report where it was showing clear evidence that the US is letting Daesh enter SDF territories unhindered near Abukamal. While the Russian Ministry of Defense evidently has a massive amount of pictures at their disposal, the photos that were attached to the report showing US complicity were easily debunkable fakes. Hours later it became clear something went wrong (computer hack, Facebook hack, officer selling out, ... ) and the Russian Ministry of Defense replaced the pictures by the authentic ones but by then the damage had been done. This successful information attack was then used by presstitute media over the globe to bash Russia, even though they would never have taken to effort to print the obvious truth, that the US is one of driving forces behind Daesh... globally.
frances | Nov 16, 2017 2:26:08 PM | 6
re:..the Russian Ministry of Defense replaced the pictures by the authentic ones but by then the damage had been done.Posted by: xor | Nov 16, 2017 1:48:29 PM | 5
Thank you, this is the only mention of what happened and how that I have seen. I'd assumed the fake photos were a joke, I didn't realize they were posted initially by Russia.
Laguerre | Nov 16, 2017 2:31:25 PM | 7
Abu Kamal is now well defended with the most ferocious ISIS troops inside. They have nowhere to go.
Actually, I didn't agree with that bit. There will be another Jihadi transport, as before, when the time is right. The idea being, I think, to move them from place to place, into weaker and weaker situations, until finally they're pushed over the border (into Turkey), where they'll be finally dispersed. I suppose it would be ideal for the Syrians to move them to Idlib, where they could disrupt al-Nusra, but I doubt that that would be accepted. A good number from Raqqa went over the border.
james | Nov 16, 2017 2:49:09 PM | 9
@5xor... yes, i was following that too.. it was unfortunate, but to be expected... turning usa support for isis into hate russia fodder seems like a full time job for these folks..
jayc | Nov 16, 2017 2:54:53 PM | 10
The complicity of the western mainstream media in information warfare/propaganda (and adjuncts such as Bellingcat, who weighed in on the issue as well) were highlighted yet again by the widely dispersed story that "proof" of ISIS/USA coordination boiled down to a few photos borrowed from a video game. These deceptive reports ignored two widely corroborated issues: the movement of ISIS fighters out of Raqqa to the border town, and use of US air forces to support ISIS in holding the town until, presumably, the SDF arrive. Both of these issues were covered matter-of-factly (if downplayed) in the western press as they occurred, then assigned to the memory-hole when opportunity was presented to score a few cheap points. The utter contempt for their readers by these institutions is thus underscored again.
xor | Nov 16, 2017 3:06:19 PM | 11
Here are the 2 articles on USIS cooroperation. South Front was a bit more elaborate but then my comment will be blocked so not posting any links.

US directly supports IS terrorists in Syria -- Russian Defense Ministry

"The Abu Kamal liberation operation conducted by the Syrian government army with air cover by the Russian Aerospace Force at the end of the last week revealed facts of direct cooperation and support for ISIS terrorists by the US-led 'international coalition,'" the Russian Defense Ministry said.
...
The ministry showed photo shoots made by Russian unmanned aircraft on November 9 which show kilometers-long convoys of IS armed groups leaving Abu Kamal
...
The US refused to conduct airstrikes over the leaving IS convoy.
...
The ministry also said that the coalition's aviation tried to disturb Russia's Aerospace Forces near Abu Kamal to ensure safe exit of terrorists.

"The coalition's aviation tried to create obstacles for the aircraft of the Russian Aerospace Forces in this area to safely shield militants of the Islamic State , who are leaving Abu Kamal,
...
To this aim, the coalition's attack aircraft entered the airspace over the 15-km zone around the city to hamper the Russian aircraft' mission, it said.
...
"There is indisputable evidence that the United States pretends it is waging irreconcilable struggle against international terrorism in front of the international community, while in reality it provides cover for the combat-ready Islamic State groups to let them regain strength, regroup themselves and advance US interests in the Middle East," the ministry said.

Defense Ministry provides explanation on wrong photos attached to Abu Kamal statement (Tass)

"The Russian Defense Ministry is investigating its civil service employee who erroneously attached wrong photo illustrations to its statement on interaction between the US-led international coalition and Islamic State militants near Abu Kamal, Syria," the ministry said.

"The United States' refusal to carry out strikes against ISIL (former name of Islamic State - TASS) terrorist convoys retreating from Abu Kamal is a fact recorded in the transcripts of the talks and, therefore, well known to the American side, just as the active counteraction by US aircraft to the Russian Aerospace Forces, which were ready to destroy ISIL terrorists who were regrouping for new attacks against government troops near Abu Kamal," the Defense Ministry said.

The Russian Defense Ministry also provided authentic photos of an IS militant convoy heading for the Syrian-Iraqi border.

stonebird | Nov 16, 2017 3:31:18 PM | 12
As well as the US escorting ISIS terrorists to AlBukamel, there was a report that US troops (special forces?) had travelled south across nominally ISIS held territory, during a "sandstorm" (and without firing a shot). They are now apparently, setting up a base about 20 miles from Al Quaim, on the Irakian side of the border. (No details, but obviously to cut the road to Bagdad).

Coincides with the 120 new military vehicles that were sent recently to Syria - the inadvertant admission that there are 5'000 US troops in SA (not counting mercenaries?) - and the discovery that ISIS snipers are using the latest thermal sights, supplied by the US.

Q? When is a semi-war, a real war? With US aircraft stopping the Syrian's bombing ISIS, this is the closest to a real US/Rus fire-fight that we ahve seen. Note also that Israel has just killed four Syrian soldiers without any pretext. Ie. Open aggression.

flankerbandit | Nov 16, 2017 4:28:23 PM | 13
US is toast in Syria...

Even the Syrian Kurds know this...and are gravitating slowly but surely into Moscow's orbit...

Russia has been meeting with Kurdish YPG both at Hmeimim and elsewhere recently...

These talks are moving ahead and there will be closer cooperation...including Kurdish presence at the planned Syria conference this month in Sochi...

'...We are studying the issue and our stance has been positive so far," Badran Jia Kurd, an adviser to the administration that governs Kurdish-led autonomous regions of Syria, told Reuters.

https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2017-10-31/kurdish-led-authorities-in-north-syria-invited-to-moscow-backed-congress-official-says

That was Oct 31...much has happened since then... The only real obstacle is Turkey...which is a 'partner' now in Syria...but views the PKK-allied YPG with distrust... But the writing is on the wall...the Kurds are about to ditch Washington at the first opportunity...

What possible motive would they have for choosing the obvious loser as a their partner...? Nobody views the US as an honest broker...that has been proved thoroughly over the ages...starting with the Plains Indians... Another reason is that many Syrian Kurds do consider themselves Syrians first...and do in fact want a whole Syria... They must be quite aware that the US is using them as pawns and nothing more...

Mattis is clown who is way out of his depth... This was described in some detail to journo Pepe Escobar...by highly placed US intel sources...

'...Mattis has no strategic sense at all and should be no more than a minor Marine functionary as his ability is very limited...

https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/11/06/how-the-dprk-riddle-is-freaking-out-the-us-establishment/

john | Nov 16, 2017 4:29:02 PM | 14
Ahmed is back and reopened his shop

what a beautiful and haunting photograph...Edward Hopper nightmarelike...like...

The bad captain madman had ordered their fate

CarlD | Nov 16, 2017 4:46:05 PM | 16
It is to be expected that the US will simply hunker down and make things as difficult as possible for SAA and allies. Remember Obama said it in 2016: "we'll make sure they suffer for it". They are still aiming for regime change and only numerous body bags will force them to reconsider.

The US gambles on the notion that Russia will not push back vigorously, and will only protest but not shoot down the interfering aircraft.

As long as this is the case, the US will bully Syria and the Syrians.

Asking them to leave will produce no tangible results. They will keep entrenching themselves. Israel will not allow them to accept that they cannot achieve their aim: to replace Assad with their puppet/s.

plantman | Nov 16, 2017 4:57:34 PM | 17
The battle for abu Kamal might be more difficult that you think.

General Dunford had been communicating with the Russian military up to this point, but now, it doesn't look like it. Which is understandable since the US and Syria want to control the same city. I thought that Deir Ezzor would be the place where Russia finally faced off with the US. But it could be abu kamal.

just sayin'....

Laguerre | Nov 16, 2017 5:02:14 PM | 18
re CarlD 16. The US 'hunkering down' is not going to work. Sooner or later, the Syrian Kurds are going to operate on their vision of the future, which is make a deal with Asad. The US forces will be left isolated.
CarlD | Nov 16, 2017 5:07:11 PM | 19
Re 18

They can still count on the various Al Sham and whatever is left of ISIS they have been saving all this time. I agree that the Kurds will probably not stay in US's orbit. But ISIS an Al Sham have no choice.

Laguerre | Nov 16, 2017 5:27:39 PM | 20
re 19. So the US will be left with un-winning fragments. Sounds like withdrawal time to me, at some point in the future.
/div
/div
The situation in Iraq is parallel. By a stunning agreement with the Talebanis of Sulaimaniyya, Baghdad has been able to recover Kirkuk, and all the territory occupied by the Kurds. Now there's an agreement to abandon independence. The US is not involved. The US is left without allies. Staying in Iraq is going to be difficult.

Posted by: Laguerre | Nov 16, 2017 5:40:44 PM | 25

The situation in Iraq is parallel. By a stunning agreement with the Talebanis of Sulaimaniyya, Baghdad has been able to recover Kirkuk, and all the territory occupied by the Kurds. Now there's an agreement to abandon independence. The US is not involved. The US is left without allies. Staying in Iraq is going to be difficult.

Posted by: Laguerre | Nov 16, 2017 5:40:44 PM | 25 /div

jfb | Nov 16, 2017 5:45:46 PM | 26
@Laguerre: Thanks, you surpass me largely in both knowledge and pedantry now, ouch! I feel more humble master.
james | Nov 16, 2017 5:47:27 PM | 27
i think the problem for many of us here is the close and ongoing connection that usa/uk/israel have with saudi arabia.. however the west wants to rationalize any of it, the headchoppers are a wahabbi death cult and yes - saudi arabia continues to refuse entry into the critical ports of yemen that will prevent what saudi arabia seems quite happy to inflict on the overall people of yemen... so, i think for myself anyway - this ugly trio - usa/uk/israel, can propagandize all they want.. it doesn't change what many can clearly see at this moment..
Bobby | Nov 16, 2017 7:25:30 PM | 29
Mr Matis and his military clowns are violating the international laws and committing war crimes against the human Syrian nationals and should be prosecuted as such. The USA think they have the right to occupy any land they wish without consequences simply because they own the U.N. , the cowardly united nation who basically serve the interest of the western nations and Israel and the Zionism around the world should be ashamed for not keeping with charter of the U.N. .
Laguerre | Nov 16, 2017 7:56:44 PM | 31
Over the next six month Idelb governate will be at the center of the war. Al-Qaeda, which rules the area, is not willing to give up without a fight. They are Takfiri terrorists. There is nothing to negotiate with them.
Evidently
John Merryman | Nov 16, 2017 9:15:16 PM | 33
Interesting theory. Wondering if any corroboration;
http://americandigitalnews.com/index.php/2017/11/07/las-vegas-saudi-crown-prince-salman-assassination-attempt/

[Nov 13, 2017] Arab League To Hold Urgent Meeting On Iran As Saudis Reportedly Mobilize Fighter Jets

Nov 12, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
0 SHARES according to Reuters and various regional sources, at a moment when Saudi fighter jets may be mobilizing for war in an attempted show of force. Egypt-based Ahram Online also reports further that the meeting will discuss "Iranian interference" in the region at League headquarters in Cairo, and other early unconfirmed reports indicate the meeting could come as early as next Sunday.

News of the Arab League extraordinary session comes as tensions are at breaking point as regional powers - especially Saudi Arabia and Israel - talk war against perceived Iranian expansion and domination in the Middle East.

Meanwhile, The Daily Star , citing the Baghdad Post , claims that Saudi Arabia has scrambled its air force for strikes in Lebanon: "Reports now state the Royal Saudi Air Force has placed its warplanes on alert to launch strikes as the region sits on a knife edge." The report accompanies undated footage of Saudi F-15's in aerial maneuvers over what is presumably a Saudi airfield.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/eZoyGajSfq0

The Daily Star adds the following accompanying the video :

The kingdom has mobilized its F-15 fighter jet fleet to launch a military operation against the Iranian-backed terrorist militia of Hezbollah in Lebanon, regional news website The Baghdad Post reports.

Saudi Arabia previously accused both Lebanon and Iran of committing an act of wars against it after rebels fired a missile at the King Khalid International Airport in the kingdom's capital of Riyadh.

Saudi Arabia has reportedly placed its air force on alert

However unlikely it is that the Saudis would take direct military action against Lebanon , the report reveals the legitimate fears of Lebanese citizens who are increasingly aware that their country has fallen in the cross hairs of an unusual alliance between Saudi Arabia, Israel, and anti-Iranian interests which see Hezbollah and pro-Iranian proxies as the number one threat and scapegoat for all of the region's problems.

Iran is currently being scapegoated for just about all tensions which have exploded in the gulf over the past week, including the following:

[Nov 12, 2017] The Islamic Emirate of Iraq (future Daesh) was created during the term of George W. Bush, under the control of General Petraeus who commanded the troops in Iraq, to deflect the wrath of the Iraqis against the troops of occupation and turn it into a civil war; a device that Leon Panetta took on and supported

Notable quotes:
"... The Islamic Emirate of Iraq (future Daesh) was created during the term of George W. Bush, under the control of General Petraeus who commanded the troops in Iraq, to ​​deflect the wrath of the Iraqis against the troops of occupation and turn it into a civil war; a device that Leon Panetta took on and supported [1]. John McCain met with Daesh leaders and has long maintained close ties with them in the name of the "Vietnamese" strategy against Syria [2]. ..."
"... Bannon then ran into a criticism of the policies of George W. Bush and John McCain when the chairperson cut him off and ended the "debate" by saying, "Well, the elite of politics A foreigner here in Washington who asked me to give you the floor today also asked me to close this debate if you were dealing with other topics than the one we have planned. That's why we finish. Thank you for coming. ..."
Nov 12, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

PeacefulProsperity | Oct 25, 2017 10:42:28 PM | 86

@Lozion Are you that blind to not see Augustine's post as a War Party propaganda piece?

@all This in quite interesting: Bannon sows trouble in Washington

The Hudson Institute held a debate in Washington on October 23, 2017 titled "Countering Violent Extremism: Qatar, Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood".

The Hudson Institute is a forecasting agency created by the futurologist Herman Kahn. It brings together many followers of the philosopher Leo Strauss.

The audience was high-ranking members of Congress and Administration, ambassadors and journalists.

Former CIA Director and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and his successor at the head of the CIA, David Petraeus, were to point to Iran while supporting Qatar and the Muslim Brotherhood.

To make a good impression, the Institute also invited Steve Bannon, former special adviser to President Trump. In introducing his guests, the director of the Hudson Institute, Ambassador Hussain Haqqani, declared that the first two were "enlightened", while their opponent embodied the "Forces of Darkness" (sic).

Speaking last, Steve Bannon described the New York Times as an "opposition party", refuted the "isolationist" term the newspaper used to describe President Trump's foreign policy, and recalled his action against Daesh.

The Islamic Emirate of Iraq (future Daesh) was created during the term of George W. Bush, under the control of General Petraeus who commanded the troops in Iraq, to ​​deflect the wrath of the Iraqis against the troops of occupation and turn it into a civil war; a device that Leon Panetta took on and supported [1]. John McCain met with Daesh leaders and has long maintained close ties with them in the name of the "Vietnamese" strategy against Syria [2].

In the Saudi Arabia / Qatar conflict, Bannon welcomed Saudi Arabia's change of attitude towards the jihadists and condemned Qatar, while officially the Trump administration took no position. The audience listened attentively in silence.

Bannon then ran into a criticism of the policies of George W. Bush and John McCain when the chairperson cut him off and ended the "debate" by saying, "Well, the elite of politics A foreigner here in Washington who asked me to give you the floor today also asked me to close this debate if you were dealing with other topics than the one we have planned. That's why we finish. Thank you for coming.

[Nov 10, 2017] Moon of Alabama

Notable quotes:
"... internal purge seem too impulsive to be part of a greater plan. ..."
"... Zio-Jazeera TV are reproducing tweets which focus on the 'irony' of MbS detaining and blackmailing Lebanon's Hariri and then expressing a desire to punish Iran for 'interfering' in the affairs of other countries. ..."
"... I wondered what could have persuaded Macron to jump ship on the Iran agreement . The Emirates made him an offer that he was only to willing to accept. It was wise of the Emirates to make it two now, two later 'cos he's a two-faced c**t. ..."
"... The success of " MBS ", who has just overturned the oligarchy in order to install his autocracy, does not, however, guarantee his capacity to govern. Aged only 32, this entitled rich kid from a super-wealthy family has hardly had the time to get to know his people, and only entered politics two year ago. His first decisions were catastrophic - decapitation of the leader of the opposition and the war against Yemen. ..."
"... "On Lebanon Tillerson warns Israel of any intervention" It sounds like Tillerson is intent on committing political hara-kiri. Unless he has the backing of the generals in Trump's inner sanctum, his days are numbered. By stating a position not fully in compliance with Netanyahoo's agenda he is challenging the power of the Israeli/jewish lobby as represented by boy wonder Kushner. Good luck with that. ..."
"... We have, in effect, another instance of official state policy (as represented by Tillerson) being undermined by someone (Kushner) with a pro-Israeli agenda. Where have we seen this picture before? ..."
"... Trump/MbS, a match made. What a duo, with Trump wishing he could be MbS. Strangely enough Tillerson seems to be the adult in the room. ..."
"... As Carl Rove would say the empire weaves new realities for you to choke upon and while you are analyzing it, the Empire is weaving a new reality to keep you wondering and awed. ..."
"... I completely agree re your description of the situation Tillerson finds himself in. "It sounds like Tillerson is intent on committing political hara-kiri", this however makes it seem like you think Tillerson is not aware of where he's at. But maybe he is? Maybe he just doesn't give a flying F? After all, there's no need for him to watch his career, and he probably has some money in the bank, too. Anyway, what's he supposed to do, fall in line with the lunatics, crooks and climbers who conduct US foreign policy these days? Maybe he just can't help but act like a decent SoS should, carefully worded statements and all. I have to say, I really like the guy. He seems smart, sober-minded. ..."
"... It turns out that Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, Clinton Foundation Donor and anti-Trump Hillary Supporter... ..."
"... ... and Trump tweeting support to MBS... It would be very interesting to know how many sponsors of this faction now have their assets frozen. Trump undermining their foundations? ..."
"... @ Paveway. The other option is that Lebanon may be a minor sideshow, and that domestic politics in US and KSA is the main but largely unseen play. ..."
"... Aerial campaign is possible but it wont achieve anything positive for the attacker, regardless if its Israel, US or Saudis. And "destruction of Hezbollah" is a physical impossibility, while Nasrallah and similar high profile targets are ready for anything ..."
"... As if they sleeping and have no prepared missiles or anything :) It would take them an hour or two (max) to launch a barrage of ballistic missiles towards attacker. In case of Saudis, it would mean destruction of their oil production, ..."
"... Hezbollah would be idiots if they weren't already prepared for a sudden massive air attack by the IAF (316 attack aircraft) from just across the border, and they certainly aren't idiots. ..."
"... What many USA Americans believe: Most here at moa are well aware. that the average American idiot is under the impression that Obama-Muslim-Brotherhood was friendly with "Muslims" which conflate with "Al Qaida". And now, Trump ! The tough guy is kicking Al Qaida's ass over there (somewhere). Totally unaware of USA/CIA/UK/IS/NATO/AQ Nexus. Therefore: They believe whatever they are told. ..."
"... The more likely case is all of this is smoke as the Prince needed some distraction to draw attention away from his Game of Thrones Redux at home. ..."
Nov 10, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

The similarities with the idiotic Saudi campaign against Qatar is obvious. The Saudi made an impulsive hostile move without having thought through the second or third step. He soon found himself out of ammunition but had left no way out to solve the issue without losing face.

Clueless Joe | Nov 10, 2017 11:01:56 AM | 1

"Meanwhile the Saudi tyrant's purge of all potential internal competition continues. Some 500 people have been arrested.
One important aspect of the purge is the open robbery that is part of it. Everyone arrested is accused of "corruption". This in a country where taking a share of every state contract is seen as an inherited right of the ruling class. The Wall Street Journal reports that the people around MbS expect to steal up to $800 billion in assets from the ultra rich businessmen and princes they have now under their control. They will probably need the money to keep the country afloat."
I get it now! Salman has been reading Suetonius' Life of Caligula and has taken it as his blueprint for ruling.

B's conclusion seems to confirm this - or makes me think he shares my suspicion:
"But his country is unlikely to survive another five years of such impulsive and tyrannic behavior. Chances are that one his guards will be merciful enough to solve the problem with a single bullet."

likklemore | Nov 10, 2017 11:03:50 AM | 2
Well b, glad you went there.

You asked who will invest a penny in Saudi Arabia after such a shakedown?

Ask Theresa May who thinks weapons sales will continue and the oil reserves are there. Never mind that the IPO prospectus on KSA oil reserves mis-states.

The bidding to list the Aramco IPO has begun:

UK hands world's largest oil company Saudi Aramco $2bn loan to secure IPO
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/11/09/uk-hands-saudi-aramco-2bn-loan-listing-battle-drags/


The UK Government has offered the world's largest oil company a $2bn (£1.5bn) loan guarantee as the battle to host the Saudi oil giant's market debut drags on.
The Treasury has admitted to finalising the details of the deal which comes amid a fierce battle between the world's largest exchanges to secure what could prove to be the world's largest initial public offering.

The timing of the significant loan has raised eyebrows because Saudi Aramco, the kingdom's state-back oil giant, is yet to decide where to list 5pc of the oil behemoth in its market debut expected next year.

The float is a central piece within Saudi Arabia's plans to overhaul its economic future in the wake of the global oil crisis which could leave prices depressed indefinitely.
The listing could raise up to $100m through a joint listing on the Saudi exchange and a foreign partner, but complex rules around transparency has thrown into question which exchange will be able to offer the Saudis the best terms.

The Saudis are considering a listing on the London Stock Exchange but ministers in Japan, China and the US are also pushing for their own exchanges to be considered.[.]

You know, it always is about money. It's a Big Club and we likkle people ain't in it and never will be invited to join.

norman wisdom | Nov 10, 2017 11:06:45 AM | 3
internal purge seem too impulsive to be part of a greater plan.

mr moon ever heard of oded yinon. i believe it is a plan.

... ... ...

Sid2 | Nov 10, 2017 11:09:10 AM | 4
This is interesting: on MbS possibly miscalculating re national guard forces in SA

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/will-backlash-to-crusading-prince-begin-within-saudi-military-salman-mbs/

Don Bacon | Nov 10, 2017 11:15:57 AM | 5
The decline of the US, and its obvious reluctance to deal with it despotic "strong partner" Saudi Arabia, was obvious at State's Daily Press Briefing yesterday. (excerpts)

QUESTION: On the various situations that we have going on – the domestic situation in Saudi, the Yemen situation, and the Lebanon situation.

MS NAUERT: Understood. Let me start here. Secretary Tillerson spoke with Foreign Minister al-Jubeir yesterday. Let's see – wait, no, I'm sorry. It was Tuesday. He spoke with him on Tuesday. I'm not going to be able to provide a whole lot about that conversation for you. I know that'll be to the frustration of a lot of you in the room.

I can tell you part of the conversation included our recognition that Saudi Arabia is a strong partner of the United States. We continue to encourage the Government of Saudi Arabia to pursue prosecution of corruption in a fair and transparent manner. That's something that we stress not only with Saudis but with other governments as well. In terms of whether – how these prosecutions may be going in the future, the Government of Saudi Arabia would have to address that.
As you know, Secretary Mattis spoke with his counterpart, the President spoke with the King of Saudi Arabia a few days ago, so we're in constant communication with the government.

QUESTION: On Yemen?

MS NAUERT: In terms of Yemen, one of the issues that the Secretary has followed closely is the humanitarian situation in Yemen. We've seen tremendous food shortages in Yemen. We've talked about how this is really a man-made situation there. We've seen the cholera problem as well. The announcement that the ports were being closed down or limited in terms of some of the supplies is an area that's of concern to us, because the Yemeni people are not the ones at fault for their situation. We would like to see food aid, medical equipment, and all of that be able to be brought into the ports. That is a key area where that – the supplies and the food aid are able to get in. We would like to see that open so that people are not suffering any more.

QUESTION: Well, is it fair to say that you have made that – or that the Secretary or others have made that clear to the Saudis?

MS NAUERT: Well, I think this is something – that's a part of a series of ongoing conversations. We have often had conversations with people in the region in addition with the Saudis about our concerns about the humanitarian situation. The United States has contributed a lot of money to the humanitarian situation there, so we'd like to see that opened up so people can get their supplies.

QUESTION: I mean, it's not only the ports but also the airspace, the borders – the complete closure.

MS NAUERT: Yeah.

QUESTION: So we can understand what you said clearly --

MS NAUERT: Yeah. I don't know the percentages of what comes through in terms of the ports versus --

QUESTION: Okay. But you are calling on the Saudis to open the borders and open the ports so the Yemeni people can receive these humanitarian aid and so on?
MS NAUERT: We believe that there should be unimpeded access.
QUESTION: Yes.
MS NAUERT: Unimpeded access for commercial and humanitarian goods to get into Yemen.
QUESTION: And you'd like to see this happen immediately?
MS NAUERT: That hasn't changed. I mean, we called for that months ago, and we would call for that again today.
QUESTION: Hi there. So do you support the call by the UN yesterday to open the borders immediately for humanitarian aid?
MS NAUERT: I don't have the UN comments in front of me, so I'm not going to comment on those.
QUESTION: They called for the airspace and the ports to be opened immediately; otherwise there would be a famine greater than seen in many decades.
MS NAUERT: Look, that has been a concern of ours, that this could --
QUESTION: I'm just – do you support the call?
MS NAUERT: -- hold on – that this could develop into a famine. It's close. There is tremendous food insecurity in Yemen right now. Some have said that this could be the top humanitarian disaster in the world. I don't know that we've assessed that personally and can actually make that designation, but I have certainly heard that.
I think what you're saying, that has come out of the UN, is consistent with our overall concerns, our overall concerns about getting humanitarian aid and also medical supplies into the people of Yemen.
Okay. Anybody else on Yemen? . .. here

Shakesvshav | Nov 10, 2017 11:33:47 AM | 6
Tillerson might well be concerned: http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/exclusive-senior-figures-tortured-and-beaten-saudi-purge-1489501498
Hoarsewhisperer | Nov 10, 2017 11:44:04 AM | 7
Zio-Jazeera TV are reproducing tweets which focus on the 'irony' of MbS detaining and blackmailing Lebanon's Hariri and then expressing a desire to punish Iran for 'interfering' in the affairs of other countries.

Considering the silliness of such prattle, I'm expecting the jaded tyrant to capitalise on the Free Publicity and launch his Standup Comedy Career debut at Hammersmith in a Super Special episode of Live At The Apollo with his good friend QEII (aka The Mad Hatter) if we're lucky. You can never have too much silliness - especially in the UK...

Ghostship | Nov 10, 2017 11:52:33 AM | 8
I wondered what could have persuaded Macron to jump ship on the Iran agreement . The Emirates made him an offer that he was only to willing to accept. It was wise of the Emirates to make it two now, two later 'cos he's a two-faced c**t.
PeacefulProsperity | Nov 10, 2017 12:11:19 PM | 9
I like this POV Palace Coup in Riyadh, by Thierry Meyssan
While the war against Daesh is drawing to a close in Iraq and Syria, and the war against the pseudo-Kurdistan seems to have been avoided, several States of the Greater Middle East are regaining the initiative. Profiting from the fluidity of the moment, the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia has brutally eliminated the members of the royal family who may be in a position to contest his Power. So not only has the regional balance of power been modified by war, but one of the region's main actors has just changed its objectives.

Although no nominative list of the suspects has been published, we know that Prince Walid Ben Talal is on it. Considered to be one of the wealthiest men in the world, he was the kingdom's secret ambassador to Israël. His company, the Kingdom Holding Company, a share-holder notably of Citygroup, Apple, Twitter and Euro-Disney, fell by 10 % at the opening of the Riyadh Stock Exchange on Sunday morning, before its credit rating was suspended.

Contrary to appearances, it seems that the victims of the purge were not chosen because of their functions or their ideas, which seems to confirm the official anti-corruption story.

On Sunday evening, a helicopter crashed near Abha. We learned that several dignitaries died in the accident, including a certain Prince Mansour.

The success of " MBS ", who has just overturned the oligarchy in order to install his autocracy, does not, however, guarantee his capacity to govern. Aged only 32, this entitled rich kid from a super-wealthy family has hardly had the time to get to know his people, and only entered politics two year ago. His first decisions were catastrophic - decapitation of the leader of the opposition and the war against Yemen.

Having neutralised all those who could have stood against him within the royal family, " MBS " has no choice but to ensure himself of popular support in order to be able to exercise Power. He has already taken various measures in favour of the young (70 % of the population) and women (51 % of the population). For example, he has opened cinemas and organised concerts – which until now had been forbidden. As from 2018, women will be allowed to drive. He will soon have to abolish the sinister religious police on one hand and the tutelage system on the other – both to satisfy women and also free men from this charge – making it possible to kick-start the economy.

Above all, " MBS " has announced that he wants to transform Islam in his country and make it a " normal " religion. He has declared that he not only wants to modernise Wahhabism, but also to cleanse the Hadîths - the golden legend of Mohammed – of their violent or contradictory passages. This is a secular project which goes against the practice of the whole of the Muslim community over the last few centuries.

This strategy prevents " MBS " from waging a war against Iran and Hezbollah, and gives the lie to the current official story – it is impossible to imagine a war against Teheran because ever since the Revolutionary Guard came to help the Houthis, Saudi Arabia has suffered defeat after defeat in Yemen. And it is also impossible to rally the Saudis to the flag while " MBS " is radically reforming society.

pantaraxia | Nov 10, 2017 12:28:03 PM | 10
"On Lebanon Tillerson warns Israel of any intervention" It sounds like Tillerson is intent on committing political hara-kiri. Unless he has the backing of the generals in Trump's inner sanctum, his days are numbered. By stating a position not fully in compliance with Netanyahoo's agenda he is challenging the power of the Israeli/jewish lobby as represented by boy wonder Kushner. Good luck with that.

We have, in effect, another instance of official state policy (as represented by Tillerson) being undermined by someone (Kushner) with a pro-Israeli agenda. Where have we seen this picture before?

The front-runners to replace Tillerson as S.O.S are rumoured to be John Bolton, a fanatical neocon, and Nikki Haley, America's version of Priti Patel (see previous post). In either case expect to see a State Department more closely aligned to Netanyahoo's agenda (if that is even possible).

PeacefulProsperity | Nov 10, 2017 12:57:47 PM | 12
How about this?

EXCLUSIVE: Saudi crown prince wants out of Yemen war, email leak reveals

Jackrabbit | Nov 10, 2017 1:17:29 PM | 13
@pantaraxia

1. You mention Tillerson vs. Kushner but fail to mention that Trump's position (as tweeted) is that MbS is doing EXACTLY the right thing.

2. If PavewayIV is right, then maybe Tillerson is providing cover for what is actually a covert op?

... ... ...

Jackrabbit | Nov 10, 2017 1:25:14 PM | 14
PeacefulProsperity 12:
How about this?
Yeah, they "want out" on their terms - which is to say after they have won and subdued the population.

IMO Their lame protesting is a response to the bad publicity that their genocidal tactics have engendered.

"But we want to get out!" is almost as transparently bullsh*t as the US position (that the famine is due to the poor logistics of the Yemenis) .

stonebird | Nov 10, 2017 1:55:42 PM | 15
b's title is correct ; .... An impulsive tyrant.

However, there has been a lot of comment about what "Saudi Arabia" will do or want. SA is a Monarchy, - the King is the "state" and the State is the King. Only. What I think he wants is absolute power, where all the decisions and all the rest of the official system (power), goes through him alone. (The cash is his as well.)
He will become "King" very soon, in which case all the country will be expected to swear allegiance to him.

The "Corruption" play could enable him to use other courts (US, UK or EU) to reclaim assets now held "off-Arabia".

The "women driving ploys..." etc. are to assure favour with the US and the other countries of the West (PR stunt). They also set the ordinary Saudi's against their Clerics. (At least in theory).

.....

I must agree with PavewayIV that this is a set-up by Israel and the US, but you have to also note that massive air "drills" are being held in southern Israel by planes from a large number of countries (NATO?). These could be used a "bait" or "sacrifices" to involve NATO or the EU on the "side" of Israel. Saudi has sent planes to Cyprus on what is nominally a UK base. (So does the US.) (ie a missile - immediately claimed by the MSM as fired by Herzbollh - downs a F-15 of a NATO country? Particularly if it overflies Lebanon)

PavewayIV | Nov 10, 2017 1:56:39 PM | 16
Jackrabbit@13 - If the fake air campaign lasted 12 hours and took out key Hezbollah leaders, supposed Hezbollah 'missile warehouses', Aoun and Assad then that's plenty long enough. Diminishing returns over time after that for striking individual Hezbollah HQ/units in Syria. There's nothing else to be accomplished.

They will be the same targets Israel would choose to strike if they could get away with it. Israel can't do this themselves though, without expecting missiles raining down on their infrastructure, military installations and possibly civilian population centers. If Hezbollah is convinced its a purely-Saudi op, then they'll be gunning for Saudi Arabia, not Israel. By time they figure out they've been duped (if they ever do), it will be too late.

These are the targets that Israel/US would certainly want to destroy first before they can invade with troops/armor to continue seizing Syrian and Lebanese land. They don't want a toe-to-toe battle on the ground with Hezbollah or Iranian-backed militias for obvious reasons. The air campaign will not totally destroy them, but it will weaken them and add enough other chaos into the mix to make the invasion far easier than it otherwise would have been.

b's scenario is still valid, but that comes after the however brief US/Israeli false-flag aerial campaign.

ben | Nov 10, 2017 2:14:04 PM | 17
Trump/MbS, a match made. What a duo, with Trump wishing he could be MbS. Strangely enough Tillerson seems to be the adult in the room.

Thanks b....

PavewayIV | Nov 10, 2017 2:20:02 PM | 18
stonebird@15 - Good point, stonebird. Plenty of opportunities for additional false flags to justify a massive, combined response.

US buzzes around the boarders in a remotely-piloted F-16 and 'lets' Hezbollah shoot it down in plain sight, with plenty of shakey cellphone videos of the aircraft's destruction. Followed immediately by a MSM campaign showing plenty of tear-jerking fake family photos of the non-existent hero. Oh yeah, his imaginary wife will be six month's pregnant. The type of aircraft or flag it's painted under really doesn't matter - maybe the UK will step in this time to be the victim.

Alternatively, a supposed Hezbollah missile or two could strike an Israeli air base, taking out several nation's aircraft participating in the exercise. Toss in a couple dozen allied casualties. Heck, make it a couple hundred - how's anyone ever going to know?

For that matter, a false-flag missile attack could target some sacrificial lambs like a Druze city. Maybe even one of those remote kibbutz that Israel uses to warehouse those 'undesirable' black Jewish immigrants that keep showing up. Good God, the MSM would have a field day with that one. If that happened, how could we NOT invade Syria and Lebanon to kill Hezbollah?

I better stop now, or the CIA will start banging on my door. Not to kill me, but to recruit me. "We read some of your work on MoA and were impressed by the sheer evil of your schemes. Ever consider working for the CIA?"

likklemore | Nov 10, 2017 2:32:34 PM | 19
I think we should re-read Pepe Escobar's analysis of the purge – mirrors b's. MbS will soon find his. You can't confiscate assets of princes and expect they'll be sending Christmas gifts. You will be kicked off santa's good boys' list. Escobar's The Inside Story --watch -- the KSA army is said to be in an uproar.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-11-07/pepe-escobar-inside-story-saudi-night-long-knives
[.]
Nayef – who replaced Bandar – is close to Washington and extremely popular in Langley due to his counter-terrorism activities. His arrest earlier this year angered the CIA and quite a few factions of the House of Saud – as it was interpreted as MBS forcing his hand in the power struggle.

According to the source, "he might have gotten away with the arrest of CIA favorite Mohammed bin Nayef if he smoothed it over but MBS has now crossed the Rubicon though he is no Caesar. The CIA regards him as totally worthless."

Some sort of stability could eventually be found in a return to the previous power sharing between the Sudairis (without MBS) and the Chamars (the tribe of deceased King Abdullah). After the death of King Salman, the source would see it as "MBS isolated from power, which would be entrusted to the other Prince Mohammed (the son of Nayef). And Prince Miteb would conserve his position."

MBS acted exactly to prevent this outcome. The source, though, is adamant; "There will be regime change in the near future, and the only reason that it has not happened already is because the old King is liked among his family. It is possible that there may be a struggle emanating from the military as during the days of King Farouk, and we may have a ruler arise that is not friendly to the United States."

'Moderate' Salafi-jihadis, anyone?

Before the purge, the House of Saud's incessant spin centered on a $500 billion zone straddling Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt, on the Red Sea coast, a sort of Dubai replica to be theoretically completed by 2025, powered by wind and solar energy, and financed by its sovereign wealth fund and proceeds from the Aramco IPO.

In parallel, MBS pulled another rabbit from his hat swearing the future of Saudi Arabia is a matter of "simply reverting to what we followed – a moderate Islam open to the world and all religions."

In a nutshell: a state that happens to be the private property of a royal family inimical to all principles of freedom of expression and religion, as well as the ideological matrix of all forms of Salafi-jihadism simply cannot metastasize into a "moderate" state just because MBS says so.

Meanwhile, a pile-up of purges, coups and countercoups shall be the norm.

@Paveway 16

I respect your opinion. But, Russia's and China's combined interests are at stake and they will not sit this one out. Israel and its sidekick MbS will not be given a free hand. Israel will be destroyed if in the next few days or weeks the Israeli police do not move to charge and arrest Bibi.

Bibi's chief-of-staff and close confidant has turned state's witness in the two cases of bribery, fraud and breach of trust.

Lochearn | Nov 10, 2017 2:39:21 PM | 20

With "drills" going on in Israel and Saudi threats, Hezbollah will be on high alert meaning leaders will be impossible to locate and all valuable weapons and material will be stored below ground. Any "missile warehouses" visible above ground will be decoys. So limited air strikes ain't gonna do it. All they can do is bomb civilians and infrastructure like the Israelis did in 2006. Then what?

Posted by: Lochearn | Nov 10, 2017 2:39:21 PM | 20 /div

stonebird | Nov 10, 2017 2:42:06 PM | 21
Paveway@18
Lovely, How about writing for Hollywood, although that seems to be NOT the place to be associated with at the moment?

.....

Has this SA and Isr/US activity all been timed to coincide with the Herzbollah, Iranians, Russian airforce and the Syrians having a large force tied up at AlBukamal? In which case we are seeing a plan - not a reaction to a situation.

ie. is a distraction from US/KSA activity in East Syria, to consolidate the areas held and forestall any advance by the Syrians on the east bank of the Euphrates?

CarlD | Nov 10, 2017 2:46:32 PM | 22
@PavewayIV

As Carl Rove would say the empire weaves new realities for you to choke upon and while you are analyzing it, the Empire is weaving a new reality to keep you wondering and awed.

Your theory is utterly realistic and possible and would be the pride of Niccolo Machiavelli himself. And I fear it is exactly the montage a fertile mind made. So supposedly, Iran and Nasrallah will not see through this and will concentrate on the Saudis? Rouhani has been appealing to MBS to discern between his handlers and his possible real friends. To them, any action against Lebanon and Syria will be construed to stem from the Israeli no matter who mans the planes.

Also, it will be difficult to conceal a multi planes intrusion over the Lebanese skies without raising automatic commensurate retaliation by the hezbollah.

The Lebanese and Iranians know that the sole instigator of all this can only be the Israeli. So plan A will be put into action certainly but the reply might be not what is expected.

Laguerre | Nov 10, 2017 2:49:41 PM | 23
Yeah, I agree. Some kind of strikeback from the rest of the family is to be expected. I doubt that MbS has been able to decapitate all the potential opposition. There are so bloody many of them. But it might affect the success of the assassination attempt. When such serious money is in question, people don't give up easily.
psychohistorian | Nov 10, 2017 2:51:11 PM | 24
It certainly reads like many believe that there is something imminent in the works as the precipitator of a more global conflict. In some ways we have been preparing for just such an event. What will be interesting to watch is what sides form....it is not about ISIS anymore......bigger prey are at stake now. As wars go, I hope this one is a wimp.....a fitting end to the social cancer of private finance. Thanks to b and all for the "good for me" online community.
stonebird | Nov 10, 2017 2:55:52 PM | 25
Me@22
That should be FSA (Kurds) not KSA troops on the East of the Euphrates. As an aside the US army is now claiming that THEY took Al Quaim in Iraq (which blocks the Syrian Iraq-Iran road route. To follow)

https://www.armytimes.com/flashpoints/2017/11/10/as-isis-caliphate-crumbles-us-builds-outposts-in-western-iraq/

Scotch Bingeington | Nov 10, 2017 2:56:31 PM | 26
pantaraxia | 10

I completely agree re your description of the situation Tillerson finds himself in. "It sounds like Tillerson is intent on committing political hara-kiri", this however makes it seem like you think Tillerson is not aware of where he's at. But maybe he is? Maybe he just doesn't give a flying F? After all, there's no need for him to watch his career, and he probably has some money in the bank, too. Anyway, what's he supposed to do, fall in line with the lunatics, crooks and climbers who conduct US foreign policy these days? Maybe he just can't help but act like a decent SoS should, carefully worded statements and all. I have to say, I really like the guy. He seems smart, sober-minded.

---

MBS and Saudi Arabia... So the whole world is basically left to wonder, trying very, very hard to read the mind of a - well, psychopath. That's what MBS is to me. His actions as far as they can be ascertained speak volumes, but there's also that mischievous glint in his eyes. He's got it on every picture I see. It's the kind of facial expression that I'd expect to see in a psychiatric ward or on shows like "Forensic Files", when they present the perpetrator who managed to completely dupe his/her surroundings. And just like I see that guy as someone with a dangerous personality disorder, Saudi Arabia as a country, to me, is the equivalent of a psychopath. Good luck trying to ever come to terms with it.

The irony of it all is: no matter how much politicians are sucking up to the Saudis, we still have to pay for the oil that we're sacrificing decency, soundness and independence for.

somebody | Nov 10, 2017 3:14:52 PM | 28
add to 4

From August - Qatar plans to destabilize Saudi

The Saudi government is mistakenly thought of as a tribal kingdom. In fact, it marginalised all tribal groups and eliminated their troublesome leadership. It incorporated the tribes in the National Guard but failed to incorporate them in government and leadership. In this part of the world, history matters.

Many tribal groups have no serious affinity to al-Saud and can easily switch allegiance as they used to do in the past. Tribal leaders, and there are many aspiring ones, are pragmatic political actors who pursue their own interests. They switch allegiance depending on their specific needs and follow the one who promises to fulfil their aspirations.

Although their rhetoric emphasises a rigid tribal code, any historian can trace their oscillating loyalties and their shrewd manoeuvres. Only an Orientalist can still hold the view that Arabian tribal allegiances follow rigid codes like fossils from the past.

They are, above all, shrewd political actors who have survived the colonial past and the onslaught of the nation states. They may express themselves in archaic poetry and celebrate camels, coffee pots and chivalry of a bygone era but they remain a dormant force that governments can mobilise should they need them.

They are now educated and willing to switch from old rhetoric about tribal solidarity and glory to new political ideas. Kuwait's famous lawmaker and activist Mussalam al-Barak, who had been in and out of prison for defying the Al-Sabah ruling family, is a stark example of the "tribal modern", who can mobilise across tribal divides. Qatar can easily find a Saudi version who will no doubt trouble Riyadh.

Did they find someone or did Saudi think they found someone so there was a preemptive coup?

Lozion | Nov 10, 2017 3:22:48 PM | 29
If Paveway IV, our resident anon-type whistleblower has figured out (leaked?) the plan, you can bet your life Hezb/IRGC has contingencies in place for such scenarios. Also, Russia has stated many times the Syrian state's sovereignty is not negociable and with both air defense assets fully integrated and unified, I just dont see how an KSA/UAE air campaign can happen while the targets sit idly, sipping maté..
NemesisCalling | Nov 10, 2017 3:28:29 PM | 30
@13 jackrabbit

Syria was a large territory with pockets of sympathetic populations to Sunni jihadism. My understanding of Lebanon is that it is held together much firmly and is a smaller geographical area. Notwithstanding a tunnel rat invasion or a cell emergence, I think Lebanon security forces and Hezbollah are ready for any kind of insurgency. A move into Lebanon would probably relieve the grip over Idleb in Syria, too. In effect, an operation over there will be suicide for Nusra and the Turkmen, even though they might be able to pinch Hezbollah between themselves and an Israeli airforce for a little while.

Debisdead is right with their analogy of a drowning victim thrashing about looking for something to grab onto.

Fitting that Putin practices Judo and that it's main tenet is using the energy of your enemy against them.

Which begs the question: is NATO and America really that stupid, or was there an agreement to let the tyrants in the MENA perish through theater?

Tobin Paz | Nov 10, 2017 3:39:38 PM | 32
Slightly off topic, but I couldn't stop laughing when I found this out (yes, I have a sick sense of humor, but I do believe that all human beings, regardless of race, gender, class, or disabilities should be treated with the utmost respect). It turns out that Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, Clinton Foundation Donor and anti-Trump Hillary Supporter...

Alwaleed Tweet @realDonaldTrump: You are a disgrace not only to the GOP but to all America. Withdraw from U.S. presidential race as you will never win.

...had an entourage of little people whom he had no problems tossing:

The Stockholder in the Sand

The prince's defenders hastened to put it all into context: dwarves are outcasts in Saudi Arabia; when they come begging, Alwaleed, in his great beneficence, hires them to be a roving band of court jesters, thus instilling in them "a work ethic, and you really can't fault that." In Saudi Arabia the wealthy think it is lucky to have dwarves around, and the dwarves enjoy it, "kind of like a circus situation." When they are pressed into service as human projectiles, there are pillows to catch them. Pillows are obviously moot, however, when Alwaleed has the dwarves dive for $100 bills in bonfires, as the Business Insider story also alleged.
Jen | Nov 10, 2017 3:41:58 PM | 33
PavewayIV's scenario as delineated @ 11 could succeed on the assumption that Hezbollah does not call on Iran, Russia and China for assistance both military and non-military (as in withdrawing any investments they have in Saudi infrastructure projects).

How would Egypt also react to a Saudi invasion of Lebanon? If Saudi Arabia were to call on Egypt, Pakistan and other Sunni Muslim countries to participate as its allies and supply pilots to engage in aerial bombing of Beirut and other cities, what would these nations say?

Does the Israeli air force also have sufficient motivation to engage in air strikes against Lebanon on behalf of the KSA? Is the Israeli military "moral" enough to support Satanyahu's government?

james | Nov 10, 2017 4:25:45 PM | 34
thanks b... great piece!!! i liked these quotes -

... ... ...

john | Nov 10, 2017 4:29:16 PM | 35
PavewayIV says_

By time they figure out they've been duped (if they ever do), it will be too late. your implication is that Hezbollah's a bunch of clueless twits. not very prescient of you.

Peter AU 1 | Nov 10, 2017 4:35:29 PM | 36
From comment 32 "Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, Clinton Foundation Donor and anti-Trump Hillary Supporter..."

... and Trump tweeting support to MBS... It would be very interesting to know how many sponsors of this faction now have their assets frozen. Trump undermining their foundations?

I see the Whitehouse blocked... "conflicting schedules"... Trump from having an official meeting with Putin at ASEAN.

Peter AU 1 | Nov 10, 2017 4:40:03 PM | 38
@ Paveway. The other option is that Lebanon may be a minor sideshow, and that domestic politics in US and KSA is the main but largely unseen play.
Alfred | Nov 10, 2017 5:07:14 PM | 41
Hariri is the bastard son of Abdullah. He is a Saudi royal. His mother was always treated as a princess when she went to Saudi Arabia. He is family. However, his branch of the family is now being persecuted.

As for MbS, his mother is Syrian. That is why he was so keen to become king of Syria. He won't last long. All of Israel's plans for the Middle East are being rubbished by events. I cannot wait for the real story of 9/11 to come out and the role of Israel and Bush/Cheney in it. These Saudis being rounded up know all the details and it is only a matter of time before the truth leaks out. They got double-crossed by the Isarelis and must be livid and thirsting for revenge.

I never thought I would live to see the day. :)

Ghostship | Nov 10, 2017 5:08:41 PM | 42
It should be pointed out that Cyprus is not a member of NATO and only the British have unrestricted access to Akrotiri, other countries are at the mercy of the Cyprus government. So while Saudi or Emirati planes might be allowed to land there, I very much doubt that they would be allowed to attack Lebanon or Syria from there because the British following international law probably wouldn't allow it without a UNSC resolution which Russia and/or China would veto anyway. Article 1 of the Washington Treaty which governs NATO makes it quite clear:
The Parties undertake, as set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, to settle any international dispute in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered, and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.

So that would be Article 5 collective defence out the window even if a few cruise missiles hit RAF Akrotiri after Saudi or Emirati warplanes were allowed to start attacking Lebanon or Syria from there.

Saudi Arabia or the UAE even with mercenary pilots couldn't attack Lebanon or Syria without overflying Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Iraq or even Iran and I doubt that any of those countries except perhaps Israel would want to be seen as complicit in the attack by allowing Saudi or Emirati aircraft to pass through their air space. And as soon as the aircraft fly through Israeli air space, probably the most heavily defended in the Middle East any pretence of deniability by the Israelis also goes out the window.

Harry | Nov 10, 2017 5:18:57 PM | 43
@ PavewayIV | 40

Aerial campaign is possible but it wont achieve anything positive for the attacker, regardless if its Israel, US or Saudis. And "destruction of Hezbollah" is a physical impossibility, while Nasrallah and similar high profile targets are ready for anything, and no bunker busters will reach them.

If this only lasted a day or two, then Hezbollah and Iran will only have time to express outrage.

As if they sleeping and have no prepared missiles or anything :) It would take them an hour or two (max) to launch a barrage of ballistic missiles towards attacker. In case of Saudis, it would mean destruction of their oil production, with 'n' months to rebuild. Lightning retaliation - fully legal too. There wouldn't be any UNSC condemnation due to Russia's veto, and many countries would see it as "MBS got what he deserved." Temporary shortages would be covered by Russia, Iran and others.

Again, I don't see any win for the attacker in the end, regardless who it is.

somebody | Nov 10, 2017 5:22:12 PM | 44
Le Figaro: Saudi Arabia wants to replace Hariri by one of his brothers
Petra | Nov 10, 2017 5:28:42 PM | 45
One great urgency to effect the Paveway Plan is the upcoming Sochi deal, which is to be no mere tete a tete but something groundbreaking. Washington will want to make sure it literally is.

Jen, since Washington has failed in its sunni-shia false antagonising, the forthcoming season's antagonism is Arab v. Other Muslim. By that token, Egypt should be in on that side. To counteract, Moscow, Beijing have been doing sterling work on Sisi (and Haftar). Let's see how the wind blows.

somebody | Nov 10, 2017 5:35:19 PM | 46
Tillerson: US still calling Hariri Prime Minister
Ghostship | Nov 10, 2017 5:44:29 PM | 47
Hezbollah would be idiots if they weren't already prepared for a sudden massive air attack by the IAF (316 attack aircraft) from just across the border, and they certainly aren't idiots.

But could the Saudis (264 attack aircraft) and Emiratis (104 attack aircraft) manage a similarly ferocious attack when the nearest Saudi air base (Tabuk) is 340 miles away and the nearest Emirati air base (Al Dhafra) is 1,800 miles way? I doubt it. Hezbollah could probably survive anything the Saudis and Emiratis could throw at them over a couple of days and if the United States blocked any UNSC action, Russia might start shooting back because it needs the SAA and Hezbollah to complete the destruction of Al Qaeda. If it's only Saudi and Emiratis aircraft over Lebanese territory that are being shot down, will the United States act in their defence? I doubt it because Trump will be having wet dreams thinking about all the billions more dollars the United States will earn for the replacement aircraft.

fast freddy | Nov 10, 2017 5:45:07 PM | 48
What many USA Americans believe: Most here at moa are well aware. that the average American idiot is under the impression that Obama-Muslim-Brotherhood was friendly with "Muslims" which conflate with "Al Qaida". And now, Trump ! The tough guy is kicking Al Qaida's ass over there (somewhere). Totally unaware of USA/CIA/UK/IS/NATO/AQ Nexus. Therefore: They believe whatever they are told.

(And further, they love police brutality as long as it is not themselves or a loved one on the receiving end of it).

norman wisdom | Nov 10, 2017 5:48:53 PM | 50

... ... ...

Virgile | Nov 10, 2017 7:04:23 PM | 52
Erdogan accuses MBS ( "the person") of claiming ownership of Islam. "Recently the concept of 'moderate Islam' has received attention. But the patent of this concept originated in the West," Erdoğan said. "Perhaps the person voicing this concept thinks it belongs to him. No, it does not belong to you," he added, noting that he was "asked about 'moderate Islam' at meetings in the European Parliament many years ago.

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/erdogan-criticizes-saudi-crown-princes-moderate-islam-pledge-122262

france

@PavewayIV | Nov 10, 2017 5:47:26 PM | 49

You are assuming SA/Israel can attack Lebanon and Syria without anyone stopping them and will be able to do so without consequences. I disagree. Russia's defense systems will block them from entering Syria. And there is no way Russia/Iran will allow Lebanon to suffer given Hezbollah's value to them both. The moment SA jets were in the air they would be told to turn back or be shot down. As for Israel, its goal is to seize control of Lebanese land/water, they can't accomplish that unless they enter on foot in which case they will be chased out faster than you can say, Bob's your uncle.

The more likely case is all of this is smoke as the Prince needed some distraction to draw attention away from his Game of Thrones Redux at home.

PavewayIV | Nov 10, 2017 9:12:25 PM | 54
frances@53 - You might be right. Part of my reckoning is that Russia will NOT get involved, regardless how valuable Hezbollah has been in the fight against ISIS. Russia keeps saying it is in the fight to destroy the head-choppers and Syria must defend itself against anyone else. It never lifted a finger against the Israeli attacks that they were watching unfold on their very capable surveillance radars. I don't recall Russia even acknowledging most of the Israeli air strikes.

Russia will not be happy about a Saudi air attack because it's destabilizing, but they have no intention of starting WWIII over Hezbollah, Lebanon or Syria. Same with an Iranian response - but I have far less conviction about that one. The US is really pissing them off lately. This might be the provocation that broke the camel's back. Saudi Arabia and GCC military installations near the Persian Gulf could be smoked pretty easily. Of course, the Pentagon chickenhawks would explode with glee - casus belli to start destroying Iran.

Virgile | Nov 10, 2017 9:29:43 PM | 55
The enigmatic Mohamed Bin Salman by Ghassan Kadi

Love him or hate him, Saudi Crown Prince Mohamed Bin Salman (MBS) is like no other prince that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has seen since its inception under the rule of his founding grandfather King Abdul Aziz in 1932 and the establishment of the Al-Saud dynasty that changed Arabia; including its name. Some argue that even the worst of humans can do a bit of good. The question is this; is MBS capable of doing any?

Krollchem | Nov 10, 2017 10:37:32 PM | 57
Long analysis of Hezbollah capabilities at: https://southfront.org/hezbollah-capabilities-and-role-in-the-middle-east/

[Nov 08, 2017] Russias Line in the Sand on Syria by Dmitri Trenin

This is from 2012 -- fives year from now.
Notable quotes:
"... That cannot be further from the truth, the western public is unsure and ambivalent about the situation in Syria, The West has no choice but to give lip service to the Syrian opposition, that too is a sure bet -- the lip service that is -- the Arab street is divided over the issue, and the conservative Gulf regimes for their own reasons -- are tacitly working and hoping for calm to return to Syria soon. They are very aware of the ramifications of any escalation or a protracted conflict there on their own national interests. ..."
"... While the existence of sectarian sentiments, even passions is undeniable in the Middle East, their characterization however is often overblown and misleading. For example, during the Iraq-Iran war of the 1980's a substantial segment of Iraqi Shiites- especially the educated, influential and affluent strata of society -- sided with the perceived Sunni dominated Saddam regime against Shiite Iran; that support for the regime even increased during the first Iraq war, it started waning -- like support among other Iraqis -- in the aftermath of that war. ..."
"... Secular Sunni power within the regime and within the country has been steadily on the rise for over a generation, and the majority of Sunnis does not see the need to fix what is not broken and what time will take care of in a peaceful and evolutionary manner. "A Sunni majority that feels oppressed" is not a true statement and is a gross mis-characterization of the situation in Syria. That is where the author and I disagree. ..."
"... Conditions and expectations in Syria now are NOT unlike conditions and expectations in the USSR during the Second World WAR! ..."
"... US might is depending on oil being traded in US$. ..."
"... The article starts from the strange assumption that Russia's foreign policy is motivated by cold Machiavellian motives while the US is motivated by sublime humanitarian motives. I believe the opposite could be argued with better arguments. ..."
"... Only a psychopath would argue that a mandate to protect Libyan civilians means a license to murder as much Gadaffi soldiers a you like. Yet that is how the West de facto explained its mandate. As if these soldiers didn't have civilian parents, wives and children... In the end we left Libya with 30,000 dead: much more than even the most pessimist had expected Gadaffi to kill. ..."
"... It is not true that the opposition in Syria does not want to negotiate with Assad. The fact is that just as in Libya we have composed our own opposition whereby we have selected those who don't want to negotiate. In fact the SNC has hardly any support among the protesters inside Syria and it is dominated by revengeful Brotherhood exiles who fled Syria after Assad sr. had squashed their murder campaign against his regime in the 1980s. In fact there was an attempt to negotiate between Assad and the internal opposition in Damascus. The reaction of the US ambassador was to sabotage it by going to Hama shortly before the talks and making there some radical statements. ..."
"... In a few years hence we all will be reading about the failure of a Syrian uprising with a valid cause that enjoyed considerable public support. ..."
"... One major reason will stand out: American open support that intuitively deprived it of many potential Syrian and Arab supporters and unveiled it as the conscious or unconscious open door to Syria for the USA &Co i.e. the EU and Israel and politically brought back Russia as an active major regional player to counter American presence and influence . ..."
"... I think that there is a huge danger of creating a new nuclear superpower in the middle east lead by an Iran-Turkey-Egypt-Pakistan axis, which will replace the States and finally cut them off from Eurasia. ..."
"... If the rest of the regimes were brought down, who can be sure that a similar thing could not happen in Saudi Arabia, even if the states never supported such a thing, because of similar reasons like the Russians still support Assad, neighbor countries' intelligence could efficiently support such an effort. ..."
"... My opinion in short way USA and Israel want attack Iran but because Syria is so close Jewish is a real dangers that they take revenge as Iran will be in a trouble. So is typical dirty game American and Israel politics? They not look after people from Syria because a moral principles. ..."
"... Events in SYRIA are NOT part of the Arab Spring as earlier conceived , conceptualized and supported by the Arab masses. Though clearly an intifada with considerable public support against an indisputably despotic sectarian and corrupt regime they are, never the less, part of an attempted come back by the USA to the crux of the Middle East in Syria. ..."
"... As a USA inspired, Saudi financed and Israel supported the Syrian intifada does not qualify being substantially an America conceived design and coordinated, Saudi financed and Qatar fronted effort targeting the Iran/Syria/Hizb Allah and Palestinian armed resistance common front against Israel and the USA. ..."
Feb 05, 2012 | Foreign Affairs

Nick C. (Feb. 15, 2011)

The author is certainly an expert on Russia, and he writes a brilliant article illustrating the history of the Soviet-Russian Syrian ties, and the reasons for the current Russian support for the regime in Syria; and I agree with him on all what he writes on these subjects; it is on his assessments on the situation in other spots where we disagree.

He writes: " Russia is not blameless: It lost too much time watching others and then criticizing them without shaping an active role for itself. Late last month, Moscow invited the Syrian government and the opposition for talks. This move came much too late. The opposition wants to hang Assad, not negotiate with him. Perhaps last year the response might have been different."

Well, I am glad he used the word "might" towards the end. Let me assure him the Syrian opposition would not have accepted Russia's invitation for negotiations with the regime then, just as it rejects it now; but the timing of the proposal was- to the contrary of what the author writes- actually perfect, because though the opposition would not in the past negotiate with the regime, and will not do it now; they might be inclined to do so in the future, under either Russian or Arab auspices; once they realize it is the only option left for them after they exhaust whatever remaining illusions they have about toppling the regime through a combination of protests and armed insurgency, plus whatever naive drum beating tactics and fabrications- that have become so obvious- they are using through the media . So, I would say the move was actually a master stroke for Russian diplomacy.

Then he writes: "And now it (meaning Russia) has maneuvered itself into a position in which it must bet on Assad's survival to protect its interests. Moscow needs to learn that saying no is not good enough and that in global politics timing is everything."

He and his country are both right, true, Russia has maneuvered itself into a position in which it must bet on Assad's survival to protect its interests, and that is a sure bet; and Moscow knows very well that saying no is not good enough, that is why she is doing much more. It was so necessary for Russia to say no, it also behooves us in the West as well as Turkey and Arab players to help the opposition by making sure they understand international realities. The West, Turkey and the Arabs, in addition to what they are doing -- which is politically understandable -- must help guide the opposition towards negotiations and compromise. The veto presents a reality check to the opposition and offers an opportunity for the West, Turkey and the Arabs to help coax the opposition into a pragmatic and responsible attitude. Russia also understands that in global politics timing is everything, and she is playing this card perfectly.

Then the author writes: "Over the last year, Russia has faced the simultaneous opprobrium of the Western public, the Arab street, and the conservative Gulf regimes"

That cannot be further from the truth, the western public is unsure and ambivalent about the situation in Syria, The West has no choice but to give lip service to the Syrian opposition, that too is a sure bet -- the lip service that is -- the Arab street is divided over the issue, and the conservative Gulf regimes for their own reasons -- are tacitly working and hoping for calm to return to Syria soon. They are very aware of the ramifications of any escalation or a protracted conflict there on their own national interests.

Let me add that I also believe the Syrian revolt is not a conspiracy. It started and continues by Syrian decisions; it however would not have been this intense had it not been for the interference of others. I just wish the Syrian protesters as well as the armed groups including defectors realize they are misguided and they lack political horizon, and the world knows that, and the world is waiting for them to understand they stand alone, and they are predestined to lose until they become pragmatic, and they need to comprehend that you do not get what you want by simply asking for it, or by blindly pursuing it. You need to make sure not to be reckless and not to jeopardize so much.

Now let me list some additional points on which the author and I disagree, Russia understands these points very well.

While the existence of sectarian sentiments, even passions is undeniable in the Middle East, their characterization however is often overblown and misleading. For example, during the Iraq-Iran war of the 1980's a substantial segment of Iraqi Shiites- especially the educated, influential and affluent strata of society -- sided with the perceived Sunni dominated Saddam regime against Shiite Iran; that support for the regime even increased during the first Iraq war, it started waning -- like support among other Iraqis -- in the aftermath of that war. It must also be noted that Iraqi Shiites were split over the Shiite revolt that ensued that war, and many Iraqi Shiites then strongly urged Saddam to put a quick and decisive end to it. During the second Iraq war the regime still had respectable support in the Shiite community in Iraq; some even fought coalition forces as volunteers during their advance into the country. It was in the environment after the regime fell, that sectarian divisions and passions started intensifying in Iraq and the region.

Now before I delve into the current Syrian situation, I would like to say the author chose his words very carefully when describing the situation there, he writes: "Iran, Syria's ally, is already being drawn into the fray, with the Assad regime's Alawite core coming under attack from mainly Sunni opposition. Syria is Bahrain in reverse -- a Sunni majority that feels oppressed by a relatively small sect that many believe is closer to the Shiites."

While it is true that some Alawites are a powerful component of the core of the Syrian regime, elements of other minorities, as well as Sunnis compliment the rest of the powerful core components of the regime. Also, Iran's entry into the fray is not predicated on sectarian lines; add to that the fact that while the opposition is mainly Sunni, the majority of Sunnis still, support the regime over the mainly Sunni opposition. So far, there is no contradiction in what the author and I write on the issue, he simply chooses his words carefully and leaves out some important details, while I bring these details back to the picture. Also while there is no disagreement the majority in Syria is Sunni and true many Sunnis are apprehensive about the perceived inordinate power of the Alawites in the country, the majority of Sunnis, let alone the whole Sunni majority, does not feel oppressed. Secular Sunni power within the regime and within the country has been steadily on the rise for over a generation, and the majority of Sunnis does not see the need to fix what is not broken and what time will take care of in a peaceful and evolutionary manner. "A Sunni majority that feels oppressed" is not a true statement and is a gross mis-characterization of the situation in Syria. That is where the author and I disagree.

It must be noted that - regardless of recent events -- secularism runs deep both in Iraq and in Syria, and both countries will become more secular in the future; same applies to Jordan, the Palestinians and Lebanon -- despite its current confessional political system. Add to the list the obvious secular nations of Israel and Turkey, it then becomes clear that betting on an Islamist movement in Syria- especially one that is so extremist and so different from other Islamist movements- is a losing proposition.

On a different subject, the author recounts the events of the1973 war between Israel on the one side and Egypt and Syria on the other. He writes: "Beginning in 1973, after Egypt's disastrous defeat in the war against Israel and Sadat's embrace of U.S. mediation"

Well, it is for certain that Egypt did not lose that war, let alone disastrously. By most expert accounts, including by Egyptian and Israeli generals in that war, it was militarily a close draw and politically a victory for Egypt, some even saw it as a narrow military victory for Egypt- let us not forget that the Camp David Accords came afterwards where Israel ceded the Sinai peninsula to Egypt though with Egypt signing a peace treaty with Israel.

He then writes: "In 1972, preparing for his political break with Moscow, Sadat sent home 20,000 Soviet military advisers and their dependents" True, he did, in part to exhibit self-confidence at military capability for his country, and in part to pressure the Soviets into helping him build the military he used to mount the war -- the soviets did not believe he could mount a war, let alone win one against Israel; especially only six years after the truly disastrous -- for Egypt -- six day war.

It was not until the last days of the 1973 war that Sadat -- watching the massive American military support for Israel in terms of Armament, munitions, and logistics; and after talking to both the Americans and the Soviets -- decided to break with Moscow.

Gerry Tighe

Once you understand that 9/11 was an inside job, suddenly all the USA actions make sense. Just give it a try and suppose it is true, you will see what I mean.

Gerry Tighe

What a joke -- You pretend to understand the in depth world politics, but you are either disengenguous or pushing the usual western media mind control propaganda. Do you really believe this? Surely you are intelligent enough to work out the real game for the world.

Omar N. (Mar. 20, 2009)

Conditions and expectations in Syria now are NOT unlike conditions and expectations in the USSR during the Second World WAR!

Each was/is living under the horrible yoke of a certain regime BUT faced with a much uglier prospect in case of change: the Nazi alternative for the Soviet Union and the USA/Gulf petroldom for Syria!

It is not only that the Syrian people intuitively and consciously rejects USA neo imperialist cum USA-Israeli alliance "New Middle East" vision of a new Syria but that events and outpourings of the Iraqi change, achieved through a similar alignment of external, regional and internal forces , are still too fresh in every body's mind to ignore.
Which throws everything and all back to the USA perennial regional dilemma of attempting to influence events and gain friends in the Middle while maintaining its strategic relations with and all out support of Israel.

The recent collapse of the Sadat/Mubarak regime in Egypt underscored the impossibility of that vision and the utter non feasibility of such a dual USA role in the region.

Valdi V. (Feb. 12, 2012)

Since Iraq war in 2003 the US has lost credibility. US might is depending on oil being traded in US$. Without it, the demand for the US currency would correspond only to the products it can manufacture.

It could not afford an army bigger than the rest of the world, thousands military bases worldwide, and its population being just 6% of the world population couldn't afford to consume 40% of world production.

For many years the West kept the dictators in oil producing countries in ruling positions to get the oil cheap and without resistance. It is fully responsible for the underdevelopment of the middle east.

When finally the Arabs in Tunesia have woken up, it was a surprise for the US, who was scared to death to loose its main provider for power - Saudi Arabia. As explained, without the connection of oil versus US$, US will become to a normal country, which will struggle as everybody else.

Thats why the Iraq war started, since Saddam Hussein started to trade oil for Euro. The very first administrative order after occupying Iraq was to change the trade to US$. Russia and China are the only powers who can stop US from becoming an unchallenged dictator of the world.

That's why the thief Chodorkovsky was more important in Russia, than millions of oppressed in Middle East, in Saudia Arabia, or in Bahrain. That's why US went 10000 miles to war to free the Kuwait dictator in the first Iraq war in 1991. In order to prevent the Tunesian revolt to jump over to Saudi Arabia, US scarified Mubarak, Libya, now Syria, and simultaneously violently silenced the protests in Bahrein,

Russua wouldn't mind, but since the US administration is pushing forward with it's rocket defense in Europe in encircling Russia, it has woken up the Russian bear. The Russians see the real threat of the shield, which is not defensive, but aggressive! It would allow to neutralize the nuclear response in case of a surpise attack from USA. Will not happen with Russia - US will chop of it's teeth on Russia, as Hitler did.

And yes, Russians drink vodka, are corrupt, and have not the nicest products - and still, they have rescued the world from Hitler and freed the whole Europe, which allowed Hitler to rape its population, with help of US corporations under full knowledge of US government. The West civilization is blinded by US media, and if it doesn't learn the lessons of history, there will be WWIII. It will come sudden, on a nice day, one like June 22 1941. Best.

Wim R. (Oct. 20, 2011)

The article starts from the strange assumption that Russia's foreign policy is motivated by cold Machiavellian motives while the US is motivated by sublime humanitarian motives. I believe the opposite could be argued with better arguments.

The basic principle of international law is non-interference in each other's affairs. Recently this principle has been nuanced by the "Responsibility to protect" argument but it stays the basic principle.

So when the UN gave a mandate for the protection of civilians in Libya this was with the implicit assumption that it would be done in a way that restricted the violation of the principle of non-interference to a minimum. The road was clear: make just enough pressure on Gadaffi that he doesn't conquer Benghazi and get instead a negotiated surrender where the rebels get amnesty. One might also aim for some political reform with more freedom and representation but that certainly was the limit. Instead the US refused all negotiations and went for a military conquest with one goal: total victory.

Only a psychopath would argue that a mandate to protect Libyan civilians means a license to murder as much Gadaffi soldiers a you like. Yet that is how the West de facto explained its mandate. As if these soldiers didn't have civilian parents, wives and children... In the end we left Libya with 30,000 dead: much more than even the most pessimist had expected Gadaffi to kill.

Russia was not alone in condemning this reasoning. China vetoed the Syria resolution too. India supported it only after all language aimed at facilitating a foreign intervention had been removed. Most of the rest of the world supports this line of reasoning. So the "West" is rather isolated in this. We still get a lot of votes from the South for our resolutions in this but that is more thanks to diplomatic pressure - sometimes open blackmail - than to them sharing our convictions.

With the present anarchy the faults of the Western approach in Libya become clearer and clearer. Yet Obama and the other Western leaders refuse to learn from their mistakes and pursue the same strategy in Syria.

It is not true that the opposition in Syria does not want to negotiate with Assad. The fact is that just as in Libya we have composed our own opposition whereby we have selected those who don't want to negotiate. In fact the SNC has hardly any support among the protesters inside Syria and it is dominated by revengeful Brotherhood exiles who fled Syria after Assad sr. had squashed their murder campaign against his regime in the 1980s. In fact there was an attempt to negotiate between Assad and the internal opposition in Damascus. The reaction of the US ambassador was to sabotage it by going to Hama shortly before the talks and making there some radical statements.

It is strange that hardly a Western newspaper pays attention to the reasons why the Russians vetoed the Syria resolution. Their wish to put more effort in negotiations and to ask the armed opposition too to stop with violence are far from outrageous. In fact every textbook on conflict resolution recommends such actions.

Aly-Khan S. (Mar. 28, 2009)

Given the Historical Relationship and the fact that Tartus represents the only Russian Asset in the Meditarranean, the Russian Veto is completely understood as a cold blooded Realpolitik Calculation.

Furthermore, it is now clear that it is the Counter Revolution which is in charge and therefore, Realpolitik Calculations surely trump any shattered Dreams about Greater Democracy and an Arab Spring.

Both China and Russia must be looking at the numbers and thinking that there but for the Grace of God, we too might find ourselves and we would not want held to this Threshold Level.

Aly-Khan Satchu
http://www.rich.co.ke
Nairobi

Omar N. (Mar. 20, 2009)

In a few years hence we all will be reading about the failure of a Syrian uprising with a valid cause that enjoyed considerable public support.

One major reason will stand out: American open support that intuitively deprived it of many potential Syrian and Arab supporters and unveiled it as the conscious or unconscious open door to Syria for the USA &Co i.e. the EU and Israel and politically brought back Russia as an active major regional player to counter American presence and influence .

ALEXANDROS S. (Jan. 9, 2012)

The article is pretty much correct in my opinion, Syria seems to be the last Russian outpost in the middle east. Well it is obvious that the Americans don't want Assad any more and they are doing anything to bring him down, is there a plan though? I mean does the US government have actually a plan of replacing this government or do they just leave this work to the Turks and Muslim brotherhood?

It seems like the US trusts these two players blindly. The past has shown that this kind of blind trust to other similar movements was wrong, Hamas is the best example. I am not quite sure if the US government has foreseen the emerging player of the middle east and this is no-one else than the middle east itself, under the guidance of the master mason, Turkey. I think that there is a huge danger of creating a new nuclear superpower in the middle east lead by an Iran-Turkey-Egypt-Pakistan axis, which will replace the States and finally cut them off from Eurasia.

People might think that i am exaggerating, that Egypt does not have a stable government that is difficult for these countries to agree, that there is Israel, Saudi Arabia and the emirates. Well these countries have a very strong bond, religion, and in Muslim countries this is a huge factor. If the rest of the regimes were brought down, who can be sure that a similar thing could not happen in Saudi Arabia, even if the states never supported such a thing, because of similar reasons like the Russians still support Assad, neighbor countries' intelligence could efficiently support such an effort.

Then it would be very difficult for Israel to stand on its own, even if in the past managed to do show, this kind of conflict would be very hard. Assad is a dictator and is hostile towards Israel and US, but perhaps he is the least bad thing right now. Of course the civil war is a curse to any nation, but if there is a change to happen, then it should be in a really democratic way and not in a way similar to the existing "democracies" of the Middle East. I know that my point of view might sound cynic or even a bit of difficult to happen, but i honestly believe that there are no humanitarian motives in current politics, unfortunately, and that my scenario is very possible.

Guest (Jan. 11, 2012)

My opinion in short way USA and Israel want attack Iran but because Syria is so close Jewish is a real dangers that they take revenge as Iran will be in a trouble. So is typical dirty game American and Israel politics? They not look after people from Syria because a moral principles.

Omar N. (Mar. 20, 2009) • 3 years ago

Events in SYRIA are NOT part of the Arab Spring as earlier conceived , conceptualized and supported by the Arab masses. Though clearly an intifada with considerable public support against an indisputably despotic sectarian and corrupt regime they are, never the less, part of an attempted come back by the USA to the crux of the Middle East in Syria.

As a USA inspired, Saudi financed and Israel supported the Syrian intifada does not qualify being substantially an America conceived design and coordinated, Saudi financed and Qatar fronted effort targeting the Iran/Syria/Hizb Allah and Palestinian armed resistance common front against Israel and the USA.

The Arab Spring had at inception a fundamental common platform that brought together the hitherto wary movements and uneasy relations of the Islamists, the Nationalists and the Progressives together in a joint anti despotism, anti corruption, anti Israel and anti USA alliance.

Events in Syria seem to have removed the Islamist corner stone of the said alliance!

An interesting development it had given birth to is the inescapable tacit alliance it has forged and brought to the forefront of the USA &Co and the Islamist major movement: the Moslem Brotherhood.

Its implications for the rank and file of the Islamist movements, hitherto die hard anti Israel and anti USA ,remains to be seen and may well lead to public disenchantment with the Moslem Brotherhood in particular and Islamist movements in general.

[Nov 07, 2017] Moon of Alabama: Saudi Arabia This 'Night Of The Long Knives' Is A Panic-Fueled Move

Nov 07, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com

et Al , November 6, 2017 at 8:04 am

Moon of Alabama: Saudi Arabia – This 'Night Of The Long Knives' Is A Panic-Fueled Move
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2017/11/saudi-purge.html

Yesterday the ruling Salman clan in Saudi Arabia executed a Night of the Long Knives cleansing the state of all potential competition. The Saudi King Salman and his son Clown Prince Mohammad bin Salman initiated a large arrest wave and purge of high ranking princes and officials. Part of this internal coup was the confiscation of huge financial estates to the advantage of the Salman clan.

The earlier forced resignation of the Lebanese Prime Minister Saad al-Hariri is probably related to the last night's events. The Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahoo endorsed the resignation. This guarantees that Hariri will never again be accepted in a leading role in Lebanon .
####

Plenty more at the link and don't forget to check the comments, of which PaveWay IV & guidoamm are enlightening, the latter: I know from someone that, till last month, managed a fleet of personal jets for the great and the good in Saudi Arabia, that there is an exodus under way. The great and the good are literally taking the cuckoo clocks onboard their 380s and relocating to their foreign residences. Owners of the fleets have not been paying their bills for months neither to the crews, nor to the management nor, indeed, to the facilities.
####

Just what Europe needs, a bunch of Saudi princes permanently flaunting themselves away from home in various capitals.

saskydisc , November 6, 2017 at 1:56 pm
Saudi declares war on Lebanon, by claiming that Lebanon declares war on Saudi Arabia . Given that the Saudis have made their alliance with Israel open, this is a threat to the Lebanese government and society, and a dare to the Russian government regarding its anti-ISIS and anti-Al Qaeda policy.
marknesop , November 7, 2017 at 8:28 am
Not to mention the S-400 sale.

[Nov 07, 2017] Consortium News: Israeli-Saudi Tandem Adjusts to Syria Loss

Nov 07, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com

et Al , November 6, 2017 at 8:31 am

Consortium News: Israeli-Saudi Tandem Adjusts to Syria Loss
https://consortiumnews.com/2017/11/04/israeli-saudi-tandem-adjusts-to-syria-loss/

Facing defeat in the proxy war in Syria, the Israeli-Saudi tandem is planning a new front against Hezbollah, presaged by Lebanese Prime Minister Hariri's sudden resignation, as ex-British diplomat Alastair Crooke explains.

By Alastair Crooke
####

All at the link.

I don't think Israel will start to face any kind of reality as long as Nut & Yahoo and his clique remain in power, even then In other news, the US has just ordered 186 more cruise missiles (that we know about). War with I-ran is the goal, but how to get there? More weapons is the easy bit but the earth beneath the war parties' feet has long since shifted. I-ran is prepared and expects it too.

[Nov 05, 2017] US sent troops to Lebanon in 1958

Notable quotes:
"... The United States spends $600 billion, not counting veteran's benefits, on war every year. This expense is approved unanimously by the Congress, elected representatives of the people. The "Defense" budget is not even mentioned in the national political debate raging over taxes, health care, etc. ..."
"... Obviously, this expense is intended to create an American Empire. To put it extremely mildly, it has and will fail. The death throes are going to threaten the existence of mankind. All because some religious, slave-holding lunatics were expelled from England, England forsooth, in the 17th century. OMG. ..."
"... Do these moves in Lebanon stem from US & Israeli demands that Iranian forces leave Syria? Or is that an excuse? When US & Israel refer to "Iranian forces" is that meant to include Hezbollah? Should we see these developments in Lebanon as primarily anti-Iranian (degrade Hezbollah forces) or anti-Assad (i.e. a second front)? ..."
"... Best comment above: that the Hegemon is merciless. It looks like the plan is to draw Hezbollah out of Syria. This will force Iran to commit more to Syria. That, in turn, will justify stronger measures by Israel, Saudi Arabia, the US, etc.. Syria's worst sufferings, as it seems, have yet to begin. ..."
Nov 05, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

xxx

US sent troops to Lebanon in 1958 - 59 years ago.

<> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>

I wrote about tit-for-tat Cold War symbolism earlier this year .

Trump fired 59 missiles into Syria. Trump's missile volley came 7 months after Russia's first volley of 26 Kalibr cruise missiles (Putin's candles") on Putin's birthday in October 2015.

26 years before (November 1989) was the fall of the Berlin Wall and end of the Cold War. Russians were told that NATO would not advance "one inch" eastward.

Also: when US-led Coalition attacked Deir Ezzor in September 2016 the Russians were put on hold for 27 minutes - possibly also referring back to 1989 (an 'answer' to the Russian reference) .

In November 1958, Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev issued the Western powers an ultimatum to withdraw from Berlin within six months and make it a free, demilitarised city. This ultimately led to the Berlin Crisis of 1961. The term "strategic patience" comes from this period.

If 59 missiles was a reference to 1958, what could be the import?

- foreshadowing an intervention in Lebanon?

- warning Putin not to demand that US leave Syria?

- a signal that US would be resolute? or stand by allies?

- a symbolic request for Russian to practice strategic patience because Trump's missile volley was forced by Saudi Arabia?

dapoopa | Nov 4, 2017 12:16:21 PM | 7
Given the signs of at least a modicum of detente between Saudi and Russia following the King's visit to Moscow last month, the threatening statements by Thamer and the resignation of Hariri are indeed alarming. My understanding is that Russia generally has a 'hands off' stance vis a vis Hezbullah so as not to antagonize Israel, but this also necessitates a delicate balancing act with regard to relations with Syria and Iran. Which raises the question: was the Saudi delegation's visit to Moscow really just a diversion tactic?
WorldBLee | Nov 4, 2017 12:17:41 PM | 8
There is no mercy from the US/Saudi/Israeli axis, unfortunately. After all Lebanon has been through, the last thing it needs is Wahhabist terrorists invading its territory to cause more misery.
psychohistorian | Nov 4, 2017 12:33:24 PM | 11 Burt | Nov 4, 2017 12:35:05 PM | 12
The United States spends $600 billion, not counting veteran's benefits, on war every year. This expense is approved unanimously by the Congress, elected representatives of the people. The "Defense" budget is not even mentioned in the national political debate raging over taxes, health care, etc.

Obviously, this expense is intended to create an American Empire. To put it extremely mildly, it has and will fail. The death throes are going to threaten the existence of mankind. All because some religious, slave-holding lunatics were expelled from England, England forsooth, in the 17th century. OMG.

Jackrabbit | Nov 4, 2017 1:10:23 PM | 16
Questions

Do these moves in Lebanon stem from US & Israeli demands that Iranian forces leave Syria? Or is that an excuse? When US & Israel refer to "Iranian forces" is that meant to include Hezbollah? Should we see these developments in Lebanon as primarily anti-Iranian (degrade Hezbollah forces) or anti-Assad (i.e. a second front)?

AriusArmenian | Nov 4, 2017 1:19:50 PM | 17
As if the people of Lebanon have not suffered enough.

To hell with the moronic warmongering of the US/Saudi/Israeli Axis.

paul | Nov 4, 2017 2:42:01 PM | 32
Best comment above: that the Hegemon is merciless. It looks like the plan is to draw Hezbollah out of Syria. This will force Iran to commit more to Syria. That, in turn, will justify stronger measures by Israel, Saudi Arabia, the US, etc.. Syria's worst sufferings, as it seems, have yet to begin.

[Oct 31, 2017] Neocons Hijack Trump's Syria Policy - Ron Paul Asks Haven't We Done Enough Damage

Oct 31, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com

- Europe has basically been conquered using the same strategy used by the Bolsheviks after 1945.

HRClinton -> chumbawamba , Oct 30, 2017 11:28 PM

It's not about "Assad". It's ALL about...

1. Greater Jizrael. Have failed puppet states in Jordan and Syria, to plunder their water, gas and land.

2. Stop OBOR, because OBOR leads to escalating De-Dollarization. Which leads to the dethroning of King Dollar. Which leads to...

3. Boot Russian bases out of Syria, to bottle them into the Black Sea.

Iskiab -> HRClinton , Oct 30, 2017 11:46 PM

I disagree. The biggest problem I see with Americans is whenever there's a problem the finger gets pointed outside the country. The rot is within, not outside.

People are making a lot of money from foreign wars and they back politicians who help them keep making money, that's the problem. After the Cold War a new enemy was needed, and that's terrorism. The problem is there weren't enough, so now foreign policy is to create as many as possible.

American politics is about keeping the US coffers open so the pigs can keep eating at the trough, it doesn't even matter that there's no money left. Look at trump pandering to neocons and republicans that just want a tax cut, forgetting about the debt, at all costs. He's trying to stay in power at this point and is playing the political game.

JSBach1 -> Iskiab , Oct 31, 2017 12:10 AM

When stripped naked to the core the elements at-hand come into the fore-front : Cui bono?

"To the preceding pieces of advice, one more should be added: always make a sketch or plan of whatever presents itself to your mind, so as to see what sort of thing it is when stripped down to its essence, as a whole and in its separate parts; and tell yourself its proper name, and the names of the elements from which it has been put together and into which it will finally be resolved. For nothing is as effective in creating greatness of mind as being able to examine methodically and truthfully everything that presents itself in life, and always viewing things in such a way as to consider what kind of use each thing serves in what kind of a universe, and what value it has to human beings as citizens of that highest of cities of which all other cities are, as it were, mere households, and what this object is that presently makes an impression on me, and what it is composed of, and how long it will naturally persist, and what virtue is needed in the face of it, such as gentleness, courage, truthfulness, good faith, simplicity, self-sufficiency, and so forth. So, as each case presents itself, you should say: this has come from god, this from the co-ordination and interweaving of the threads of fate and similar kinds of coincidence and chance, this from one of my own kind, a relation and companion, who is however ignorant of what is natural for him. But I am not ignorant of that, and thus I will therefore treat him kindly and justly, according to the natural law of companionship, though aiming at the same time at what he deserves with regard to things that are morally indifferent."

---Marcus Aurelius : Meditation 3.11

http://modernstoicism.com/perspectives-core-ideas-of-stoic-ethics-in-mar...

totenkopf88 , Oct 30, 2017 11:08 PM

Fuck you, Rex- and your Zionist flunky boss, too

Cabreado , Oct 30, 2017 11:10 PM

Lots of people will rue the day when they mocked Ron Paul...

bigger problem is,

it will be chaos by then.

Ignatius -> Cabreado , Oct 31, 2017 12:09 AM

Looking at it another way, the neocons want the same control in Syria that they currently have here.

johnnycanuck , Oct 30, 2017 11:17 PM

By Josh Rogin

February 17, 2012,

"Fifty-six leading conservative foreign-policy experts wrote an open letter Friday to U.S. President Barack Obama calling on him to directly aid the Syrian opposition and protect the lives of Syrian civilians."

The usual suspects

"The letter was organized jointly by the Foreign Policy Initiative and the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, both conservative policy organizations in Washington, D.C. Signees included Max Boot Paul Bremer Elizabeth Cheney Eric Edelman , Jamie Fly John Hannah William Inboden William Kristol Michael Ledeen , Clifford May Robert McFarlane Martin Peretz Danielle Pletka John Podhoretz Stephen Rademaker Karl Rove Randy Scheunemann Dan Senor James Woolsey , Dov Zakheim and Radwan Ziadeh , a member of the Syrian National Council."

http://foreignpolicy.com/2012/02/17/conservatives-call-for-obama-to-inte...

[Oct 30, 2017] Reuters try to sow "anti-war" sentiment in Russia by emphasizing the number of casualties

Oct 30, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com

karl1haushofer , October 29, 2017 at 2:18 am

Reuters: at least 131 Russian citizens have died in Syria this year: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-russia-syria-casualtie/exclusive-death-certificate-offers-clues-on-russian-casualties-in-syria-idUSKBN1CW1LP
Moscow Exile , October 29, 2017 at 3:12 am
Thanks for informing the remainder of the visitors to this site that people, and even Russian subhumans, die in wars.
Moscow Exile , October 29, 2017 at 3:14 am
And how many thousands of dead Russian soldiers' bodies have been secretly shipped out of the Ukraine, I wonder?

Or even cremated secretly in mobile incinerators?

Please enlighten us.

Moscow Exile , October 29, 2017 at 3:16 am
Achieving Pyrrhic victories certainly seems to be a Russian forte, doesn't it?

That's because they are incompetents and hold little value for human life.

yalensis , October 29, 2017 at 8:22 am
I believe that Reuters is (dishonestly) including jihadists (who happen to be Russian citizens fighting on the other side) in the count.
Technically, some of the jihadists are Russian citizens too, but Reuters making it seem like it's all Russian regular soldiers and contractors dying out there in the desert.
In the hopes of
karl1haushofer , October 29, 2017 at 2:18 am
Reuters: at least 131 Russian citizens have died in Syria this year: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-russia-syria-casualtie/exclusive-death-certificate-offers-clues-on-russian-casualties-in-syria-idUSKBN1CW1LP
Moscow Exile , October 29, 2017 at 3:12 am
Thanks for informing the remainder of the visitors to this site that people, and even Russian subhumans, die in wars.
Moscow Exile , October 29, 2017 at 3:14 am
And how many thousands of dead Russian soldiers' bodies have been secretly shipped out of the Ukraine, I wonder?

Or even cremated secretly in mobile incinerators?

Please enlighten us.

Moscow Exile , October 29, 2017 at 3:16 am
Achieving Pyrrhic victories certainly seems to be a Russian forte, doesn't it?

That's because they are incompetents and hold little value for human life.

yalensis , October 29, 2017 at 8:22 am
I believe that Reuters is (dishonestly) including jihadists (who happen to be Russian citizens fighting on the other side) in the count.
Technically, some of the jihadists are Russian citizens too, but Reuters making it seem like it's all Russian regular soldiers and contractors dying out there in the desert.
In the hopes of sowing "anti-war" sentiment in Russia.
This body-count thing is an old game.
karl1haushofer , October 29, 2017 at 2:46 pm
Hope you are correct.
karl1haushofer , October 29, 2017 at 2:46 pm
Hope you are correct.

[Oct 30, 2017] Ex-Qatari premier: US coordinated foreign support for terrorists in Syria

Notable quotes:
"... Former US Ambassador in Libya Stevens, was in Libya with $250 Million Wahhabi petrodollars to buy back the arms and send them to Syria for this purpose. in one of the deals with Al Qaeda in Libya things got out of hand & he was killed. ..."
"... How US Ambassador Chris Stevens May Have Been Linked To Jihadist Rebels In Syria: http://www.businessinsider.com/us-syria-heavy-weapons-jihadists-2012- ..."
Oct 30, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com

saskydisc , October 28, 2017 at 6:16 pm

Courtesy of الزياد الدقيق:

http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2017/10/28/540168/Qatari-premier-Hamad-Syria

The US bit its ally Qatar in the hopes of securing Saudi moneys, so Qatar bit back. Rather bemusing Though it is more bemusing and telling that the former official is allowed to say such things. I presume that they have little hope of reentering the US's good graces, at least in terms that would be worth pursuing.

saskydisc , October 28, 2017 at 6:33 pm
I forgot to add the title of the article:

Ex-Qatari premier: US coordinated foreign support for terrorists in Syria

yalensis , October 29, 2017 at 8:17 am
This is a good comment from "Piere Ha", along with associated link:

Former US Ambassador in Libya Stevens, was in Libya with $250 Million Wahhabi petrodollars to buy back the arms and send them to Syria for this purpose. in one of the deals with Al Qaeda in Libya things got out of hand & he was killed.

How US Ambassador Chris Stevens May Have Been Linked To Jihadist Rebels In Syria: http://www.businessinsider.com/us-syria-heavy-weapons-jihadists-2012-

[Oct 30, 2017] Shouldn't these people be prosecuted?

Oct 30, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com

Payman , October 27, 2017 at 10:41 pm

Shouldn't these people be prosecuted?

https://theintercept.com/2017/10/24/syria-rebels-nsa-saudi-prince-assad/

marknesop , October 28, 2017 at 10:04 am
Why, yes; they should. Do you think it will ever happen? I'm afraid I don't, because western appreciation for criminality is often dependent upon whether the behavior served western foreign-policy objectives or not.
rkka , October 28, 2017 at 1:13 pm
It is truly amusing to see that some think organizing the combat and terrorist operations of Wahabi headchoppers against a secular society, whose Sunnis interpret Sunni jurisprudence differently from Wahabis, is the same as the operations of riot police facing a a violent mob armed with small arms and firebombs.

[Oct 29, 2017] Whose Bright Idea Was RussiaGate by Paul Craig Roberts

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The answer to the question in the title of this article is that Russiagate was created by CIA director John Brennan.The CIA started what is called Russiagate in order to prevent Trump from being able to normalize relations with Russia. The CIA and the military/security complex need an enemy in order to justify their huge budgets and unaccountable power. Russia has been assigned that role. The Democrats joined in as a way of attacking Trump. They hoped to have him tarnished as cooperating with Russia to steal the presidential election from Hillary and to have him impeached. I don't think the Democrats have considered the consequence of further worsening the relations between the US and Russia. ..."
"... Russia bashing became more intense when Washington's coup in Ukraine failed to deliver Crimea. Washington had intended for the new Ukrainian regime to evict the Russians from their naval base on the Black Sea. This goal was frustrated when Crimea voted to rejoin Russia. ..."
"... The neoconservative ideology of US world hegemony requires the principal goal of US foreign policy to be to prevent the rise of other countries that can serve as a restraint on US unilateralism. This is the main basis for the hostility of US foreign policy toward Russia, and of course there also is the material interests of the military/security complex. ..."
"... Washington is fully aware that there was no Russian interference in the presidential election or in the state elections. The military/security complex, the neoconservatives, and the Democratic Party are merely using the accusations to serve their own agendas. ..."
Oct 03, 2017 | ronpaulinstitute.org

The answer to the question in the title of this article is that Russiagate was created by CIA director John Brennan.The CIA started what is called Russiagate in order to prevent Trump from being able to normalize relations with Russia. The CIA and the military/security complex need an enemy in order to justify their huge budgets and unaccountable power. Russia has been assigned that role. The Democrats joined in as a way of attacking Trump. They hoped to have him tarnished as cooperating with Russia to steal the presidential election from Hillary and to have him impeached. I don't think the Democrats have considered the consequence of further worsening the relations between the US and Russia.

Public Russia bashing pre-dates Trump. It has been going on privately in neoconservative circles for years, but appeared publicly during the Obama regime when Russia blocked Washington's plans to invade Syria and to bomb Iran.

Russia bashing became more intense when Washington's coup in Ukraine failed to deliver Crimea. Washington had intended for the new Ukrainian regime to evict the Russians from their naval base on the Black Sea. This goal was frustrated when Crimea voted to rejoin Russia.

The neoconservative ideology of US world hegemony requires the principal goal of US foreign policy to be to prevent the rise of other countries that can serve as a restraint on US unilateralism. This is the main basis for the hostility of US foreign policy toward Russia, and of course there also is the material interests of the military/security complex.

Russia bashing is much larger than merely Russiagate. The danger lies in Washington convincing Russia that Washington is planning a surprise attack on Russia. With US and NATO bases on Russia's borders, efforts to arm Ukraine and to include Ukraine and Georgia in NATO provide more evidence that Washington is surrounding Russia for attack. There is nothing more reckless and irresponsible than convincing a nuclear power that you are going to attack.

Washington is fully aware that there was no Russian interference in the presidential election or in the state elections. The military/security complex, the neoconservatives, and the Democratic Party are merely using the accusations to serve their own agendas.

These selfish agendas are a dire threat to life on earth.

Reprinted with permission from PaulCraigRoberts.org .

[Oct 29, 2017] In Shocking, Viral Interview, Qatar Confesses Secrets Behind Syrian War

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... According to Zero Hedge's translation, al-Thani said while acknowledging Gulf nations were arming jihadists in Syria with the approval and support of US and Turkey: "I don't want to go into details but we have full documents about us taking charge [in Syria]." He claimed that both Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah (who reigned until his death in 2015) and the United States placed Qatar in a lead role concerning covert operations to execute the proxy war. ..."
"... The former prime minister's comments, while very revealing, were intended as a defense and excuse of Qatar's support for terrorism, and as a critique of the US and Saudi Arabia for essentially leaving Qatar "holding the bag" in terms of the war against Assad. Al-Thani explained that Qatar continued its financing of armed insurgents in Syria while other countries eventually wound down large-scale support, which is why he lashed out at the US and the Saudis, who initially "were with us in the same trench." ..."
"... In a previous US television interview which was vastly underreported, al-Thani told Charlie Rose when asked about allegations of Qatar's support for terrorism that, "in Syria, everybody did mistakes, including your country." And said that when the war began in Syria, "all of us worked through two operation rooms: one in Jordan and one in Turkey." ..."
"... Furthermore, one day before Prime Minister Thani's interview, The Intercept released a new top-secret NSA document unearthed from leaked intelligence files provided by Edward Snowden which show in stunning clarity that the armed opposition in Syria was under the direct command of foreign governments from the early years of the war which has now claimed half a million lives. ..."
"... The newly released NSA document confirms that a 2013 insurgent attack with advanced surface-to-surface rockets upon civilian areas of Damascus, including Damascus International Airport, was directly supplied and commanded by Saudi Arabia with full prior awareness of US intelligence. As the former Qatari prime minister now also confirms, both the Saudis and US government staffed "operations rooms" overseeing such heinous attacks during the time period of the 2013 Damascus airport attack. ..."
"... Reprinted with permission from ZeroHedge . ..."
Oct 29, 2017 | ronpaulinstitute.org

A television interview of a top Qatari official confessing the truth behind the origins of the war in Syria is going viral across Arabic social media during the same week a leaked top secret NSA document was published which confirms that the armed opposition in Syria was under the direct command of foreign governments from the early years of the conflict.

And according to a well-known Syria analyst and economic adviser with close contacts in the Syrian government, the explosive interview constitutes a high level "public admission to collusion and coordination between four countries to destabilize an independent state, [including] possible support for Nusra/al-Qaeda." Importantly, "this admission will help build case for what Damascus sees as an attack on its security & sovereignty. It will form basis for compensation claims."

A 2013 London press conference: Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jabr Al Thani with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry. A 2014 Hillary Clinton email confirmed Qatar as a state-sponsor of ISIS during that same time period.

As the war in Syria continues slowly winding down, it seems new source material comes out on an almost a weekly basis in the form of testimonials of top officials involved in destabilizing Syria, and even occasional leaked emails and documents which further detail covert regime change operations against the Assad government. Though much of this content serves to confirm what has already long been known by those who have never accepted the simplistic propaganda which has dominated mainstream media, details continue to fall in place, providing future historians with a clearer picture of the true nature of the war.

This process of clarity has been aided - as predicted - by the continued infighting among Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) former allies Saudi Arabia and Qatar, with each side accusing the other of funding Islamic State and al-Qaeda terrorists (ironically, both true). Increasingly, the world watches as more dirty laundry is aired and the GCC implodes after years of nearly all the gulf monarchies funding jihadist movements in places like Syria, Iraq, and Libya.

The top Qatari official is no less than former Prime Minister Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber al-Thani, who oversaw Syria operations on behalf of Qatar until 2013 (also as foreign minister), and is seen below with then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in this Jan. 2010 photo (as a reminder, Qatar's 2022 World Cup Committee donated $500,000 to the Clinton Foundation in 2014 ).

In an interview with Qatari TV Wednesday, bin Jaber al-Thani revealed that his country, alongside Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and the United States, began shipping weapons to jihadists from the very moment events "first started" (in 2011).

Al-Thani even likened the covert operation to "hunting prey" - the prey being President Assad and his supporters - "prey" which he admits got away (as Assad is still in power; he used a Gulf Arabic dialect word, "al-sayda", which implies hunting animals or prey for sport). Though Thani denied credible allegations of support for ISIS, the former prime minister's words implied direct Gulf and US support for al-Qaeda in Syria (al-Nusra Front) from the earliest years of the war, and even said Qatar has "full documents" and records proving that the war was planned to effect regime change.

According to Zero Hedge's translation, al-Thani said while acknowledging Gulf nations were arming jihadists in Syria with the approval and support of US and Turkey: "I don't want to go into details but we have full documents about us taking charge [in Syria]." He claimed that both Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah (who reigned until his death in 2015) and the United States placed Qatar in a lead role concerning covert operations to execute the proxy war.

The former prime minister's comments, while very revealing, were intended as a defense and excuse of Qatar's support for terrorism, and as a critique of the US and Saudi Arabia for essentially leaving Qatar "holding the bag" in terms of the war against Assad. Al-Thani explained that Qatar continued its financing of armed insurgents in Syria while other countries eventually wound down large-scale support, which is why he lashed out at the US and the Saudis, who initially "were with us in the same trench."

In a previous US television interview which was vastly underreported, al-Thani told Charlie Rose when asked about allegations of Qatar's support for terrorism that, "in Syria, everybody did mistakes, including your country." And said that when the war began in Syria, "all of us worked through two operation rooms: one in Jordan and one in Turkey."

Here is the key section of Wednesday's interview , translated and subtitled by @Walid970721. Zero Hedge has reviewed and confirmed the translation, however, as the original rush translator has acknowledged , al-Thani doesn't say "lady" but "prey" ["al-sayda"]- as in both Assad and Syrians were being hunted by the outside countries.

The partial English transcript is as follows:

When the events first started in Syria I went to Saudi Arabia and met with King Abdullah. I did that on the instructions of his highness the prince, my father. He [Abdullah] said we are behind you. You go ahead with this plan and we will coordinate but you should be in charge. I won't get into details but we have full documents and anything that was sent [to Syria] would go to Turkey and was in coordination with the US forces and everything was distributed via the Turks and the US forces. And us and everyone else was involved, the military people. There may have been mistakes and support was given to the wrong faction... Maybe there was a relationship with Nusra, its possible but I myself don't know about this we were fighting over the prey ["al-sayda"] and now the prey is gone and we are still fighting... and now Bashar is still there. You [US and Saudi Arabia] were with us in the same trench... I have no objection to one changing if he finds that he was wrong, but at least inform your partner for example leave Bashar [al-Assad] or do this or that, but the situation that has been created now will never allow any progress in the GCC [Gulf Cooperation Council], or any progress on anything if we continue to openly fight.
As is now well-known, the CIA was directly involved in leading regime change efforts in Syria with allied gulf partners, as leaked and declassified US intelligence memos confirm . The US government understood in real time that Gulf and West-supplied advanced weaponry was going to al-Qaeda and ISIS, despite official claims of arming so-called "moderate" rebels. For example, a leaked 2014 intelligence memo sent to Hillary Clinton acknowledged Qatari and Saudi support for ISIS.

The email stated in direct and unambiguous language that:

the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and other radical Sunni groups in the region.
Furthermore, one day before Prime Minister Thani's interview, The Intercept released a new top-secret NSA document unearthed from leaked intelligence files provided by Edward Snowden which show in stunning clarity that the armed opposition in Syria was under the direct command of foreign governments from the early years of the war which has now claimed half a million lives.

The newly released NSA document confirms that a 2013 insurgent attack with advanced surface-to-surface rockets upon civilian areas of Damascus, including Damascus International Airport, was directly supplied and commanded by Saudi Arabia with full prior awareness of US intelligence. As the former Qatari prime minister now also confirms, both the Saudis and US government staffed "operations rooms" overseeing such heinous attacks during the time period of the 2013 Damascus airport attack.

No doubt there remains a massive trove of damning documentary evidence which will continue to trickle out in the coming months and years. At the very least, the continuing Qatari-Saudi diplomatic war will bear more fruit as each side builds a case against the other with charges of supporting terrorism. And as we can see from this latest Qatari TV interview, the United States itself will not be spared in this new open season of airing dirty laundry as old allies turn on each other.

Reprinted with permission from ZeroHedge .


Related

[Oct 29, 2017] John Feffer The Real Disuniting of America by Tom Engelhardt

Wars eventually deeply affect on the nation which launches them....
Notable quotes:
"... Stop thinking of this country as the sole superpower or the indispensable nation on Earth and start reimagining it as the great fracturer, the exceptional smasher, the indispensable fragmenter. Its wars of the twenty-first century are starting to come home big time -- home being not just this particular country (though that's true , too) but this planet. Though hardly alone , the U.S. is, for the moment, the most exceptional home-destroyer around and its president is now not just the commander-in-chief but the home-smasher-in-chief. ..."
"... Just this week, for instance, home smashing was in the headlines. After all, the Islamic State's "capital," the city of Raqqa, was " liberated ." We won! The U.S. and the forces it backed in Syria were finally victorious and the brutal Islamic State (a home-smashing movement that emerged from an American military prison in Iraq) was finally driven from that city ( almost !). And oh yes, according to witnesses , the former city of 300,000 lies abandoned with hardly a building left undamaged, unbroken, unsmashed. ..."
"... In the Greater Middle East and Africa, people by the tens of millions , including staggering numbers of children , have been uprooted and displaced, their homes destroyed, their cities and towns devastated, sending survivors fleeing across national borders as refugees in numbers that haven't been seen since a significant part of the planet was leveled in World War II. ..."
Oct 24, 2017 | www.unz.com

Stop thinking of this country as the sole superpower or the indispensable nation on Earth and start reimagining it as the great fracturer, the exceptional smasher, the indispensable fragmenter. Its wars of the twenty-first century are starting to come home big time -- home being not just this particular country (though that's true , too) but this planet. Though hardly alone , the U.S. is, for the moment, the most exceptional home-destroyer around and its president is now not just the commander-in-chief but the home-smasher-in-chief.

Just this week, for instance, home smashing was in the headlines. After all, the Islamic State's "capital," the city of Raqqa, was " liberated ." We won! The U.S. and the forces it backed in Syria were finally victorious and the brutal Islamic State (a home-smashing movement that emerged from an American military prison in Iraq) was finally driven from that city ( almost !). And oh yes, according to witnesses , the former city of 300,000 lies abandoned with hardly a building left undamaged, unbroken, unsmashed. Over these last months, the American bombing campaign against Raqqa and the artillery support that went with it reportedly killed more than 1,000 civilians and turned significant parts of the city into rubble -- and what that didn't do, ISIS bombs and other munitions did. (According to estimates , they could take years to find and remove.) And Raqqa is just the latest Middle Eastern city to be smashed more or less to bits.

And since the splintering of the planet is the TomDispatch subject of the day, what about the recent Austrian election, fought out and won by right-wing "populists" on the basis of anti-refugee sentiments and Islamophobia? Where exactly did such sentiments come from? You know perfectly well: from America's war on terror and the much-vaunted " precision warfare " (smart bombs and the rest) that continues to fracture a vast swath of the planet from Afghanistan to Libya and beyond.

In the Greater Middle East and Africa, people by the tens of millions , including staggering numbers of children , have been uprooted and displaced, their homes destroyed, their cities and towns devastated, sending survivors fleeing across national borders as refugees in numbers that haven't been seen since a significant part of the planet was leveled in World War II. In this way, America's 16-year-old war on terror has been a genuine force for terror, and so for the kind of resentment and fear that's now helping to crack open a recently united Europe (and in the United States helped elect well, you know just who).

And that's only a small introduction to the largely unexplored American role in the fracturing of this planet. Don't even get me started on our president and climate change!

As it happens, the fellow who brought the nature of this splintering home to me was TomDispatch regular John Feffer, who in early 2015 began writing for this website what became his remarkable dystopian novel Splinterlands . In it, he imagined our shattered planet in 2050 so vividly that it's stayed with me ever since -- and evidently with him, too, because today he considers just how quickly the splintering process he imagined has been occurring not in his fictional version of our world, but in the all-too-real one.

Robert Magill , October 25, 2017 at 3:40 pm GMT

If we lose the state in a fourth great shattering, we will lose an important part of ourselves as well: our very humanity.

In many respects the "state", USA that is, is already lost. What we had until the 1950s was an ongoing mythology known as America; an agreed upon, ongoing concern known abroad for its popular music, for Hollywood, for a thriving middle class, a healthy working-class and a supplier of goods and services to the world, envy of all. Well, we shot a few holes in Myth America!

First to go was the music: replaced by Bubblegum; downhill from there. Tin Pan Alley is now dumpster heaven. The middle class now resides in Beijing with largess delivered to our Dollar emporiums (not seen here since the Great Depression). Noticeable gaps in the starving malls once housed record stores and book shops; remember them?

The final blow has landed on the movie houses across the land. Near empty, struggling. Even in the depths of the 30′s, movie house were full. But then, "No myth:No nation". No more.

https://robertmagill.wordpress.com/2017/10/14/mankind-a-bogus-species/

[Oct 29, 2017] UN On Khan Sheikhoun - Victims Hospitalized BEFORE Claimed Incident Happened

Notable quotes:
"... There was a story (sorry, lost any references) that stated that at least one of the US warships that launched the Tomahawks after this incident, was still in Spain on April 2nd. So that ship had to travel across the Mediterranean at full speed (and not at cruise speed) to be on time for the attack. ..."
"... And that implies the attack was know by the US forces beforehand, and their riposte was also planned and decided before the attack took place. ..."
"... I have come to the point of 100% initially assuming that reports by the MSM in the West are fabrications and then work back to find the few percent of truth, if any. Lying is normal in the West. Honestly is getting very rare, and is abnormal. ..."
Oct 29, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

Many of the reports findings are based on open source videos and photographs published by the opposition. It acquired witnesses statements from the area which is under control of al-Qaeda. It also examined forensic evidence for which no chain of custody existed. Some findings are strange .

In annex II, on page 36 (of 39) of the pdf, it notes:

Certain irregularities were observed in elements of information analysed. For example, several hospitals appeared to start admitting casualties of the attack between 0640 and 0645 hours. The Mechanism received the medical records of 247 patients from Khan Shaykhun who were admitted to various health-care facilities, including those of survivors and a number of victims who died from exposure to chemical agent. The admission times of the records range between 0600 and 1600 hours. Analysis of the aforementioned medical records revealed that in 57 cases, patients were admitted in five hospitals before the incident in Khan Shaykhun (at 0600, 0620 and 0640 hours). In 10 such cases, patients appear to have been admitted to a hospital 125 km away from Khan Shaykhun at 0700 hours while another 42 patients appear to have been admitted to a hospital 30 km away at 0700 hours. The Mechanism did not investigate these discrepancies and cannot determine whether they are linked to any possible staging scenario , or to poor record-keeping in chaotic conditions.

At least 23% of the alleged casualties of the incident WERE ADMITTED TO HOSPITALS BEFORE THE INCIDENT HAPPENED

Cont. reading: UN On Khan Sheikhoun - Victims Hospitalized BEFORE Claimed Incident Happened

b | Oct 29, 2017 2:19:17 PM | 2

Another example of fakery of the incident. The report (linked above) notes this, but draws no conclusion:
... In particular, the Mechanism noted that fully equipped hazmat teams appeared at the scene later that afternoon and reported early detection of the presence of sarin, seemingly using a Dräger X-am 7000 ambient air monitor, which was not known to be able to detect sarin.
and
Of further concern to the Mechanism was the relative unprofessionalism by which certain environmental samples appear to have been taken, e.g. sampling from a muddy puddle.
and
The Mechanism also noted scenes recorded just after the incident at the medical point to the east of Khan Shaykhun, where rescue and decontamination activities filmed shortly after 0700 hours showed rescue personnel hosing down patients with water indiscriminately for extended periods of time. Such video footage also depicted a number of patients not being attended to, and some para-medical interventions that did not seem to make medical sense, such as performing heart compression on a patient facing the ground.

But based on all of that, and on the patients that arrived in hospital before the incident happened, the report concludes that Syria dropped Sarin at a moment and place that made zero military or political sense...

Jeff | Oct 29, 2017 2:26:25 PM | 3

There was a story (sorry, lost any references) that stated that at least one of the US warships that launched the Tomahawks after this incident, was still in Spain on April 2nd. So that ship had to travel across the Mediterranean at full speed (and not at cruise speed) to be on time for the attack.

And that implies the attack was know by the US forces beforehand, and their riposte was also planned and decided before the attack took place.

AriusArmenian | Oct 29, 2017 4:23:54 PM | 4
I have come to the point of 100% initially assuming that reports by the MSM in the West are fabrications and then work back to find the few percent of truth, if any. Lying is normal in the West. Honestly is getting very rare, and is abnormal.
Peter AU 1 | Oct 29, 2017 4:28:35 PM | 5
With Trump and T Rex now saying the right things, the hegemon is back up to speed. The US crossed there Rubicon when Obama made his speech at the UNGA a couple of years back. No way China/Russia will be able to give the US a soft landing. Hard times when the bubble bursts for the US.
psychohistorian | Oct 29, 2017 4:29:45 PM | 6
All those who rule the Western world through control of finance have bankrupt morals because of their fealty to the God of Mammon. War and treachery are the tools that fit their mental condition and if they can't BS you into being cowed by their existence they will bomb you into submission.

Negotiation for God of Mammon acolytes is for losers and they will keep the carousel spinning furiously until they are neutered or they take us with them in a blaze of what they consider nuclear glory......I have never seen any of the assholes that my life has presented me with show a smidge of contrition for glaring facts about their societal perfidy.....they double down like Trump does regularly and I suspect it is likely we will see such grandstanding with this situation as well.

War is a cover for anti-humanistic leadership which is the best that can be bought in Amerika.

Mark | Oct 29, 2017 4:35:02 PM | 7
It's irksome that 6:55 is the time Hersh gave for the bombing he was told about. If it were an hour or two earlier, it would make sense of what I take to be his idea - that some bomb-induced chemical disaster was 'converted' into a sarin episode after the fact.
Peter AU 1 | Oct 29, 2017 5:03:27 PM | 8
The bombed building was most likely part of the prep. Possibly chemicals or perhaps simply somthing that woukd give oiff yellow smoke placed into the building then its co-ords slipped into inteligence somehow as an AQ headquarters or whatever so it would become a target for the bombing. The US were notified that the building would be hit and at what time, so AQ/whitehelmets would have been alerted and ready to go into logie award winning action at the allotted time.
Robert Wilhite | Oct 29, 2017 5:24:34 PM | 9
b, thank you again for your analyses.
Robert | Oct 29, 2017 5:26:10 PM | 10
Oops. b, can you take that last post down? Thanks
charles de drake | Oct 29, 2017 5:57:45 PM | 11

victims-hospitalized-before-the-incident-happened.html#comments stop

before the incident happened hmmmm let me thinks


"We Were There to Document The Event
before the incident happened
happened


november 22nd 1963
a gentlemen of the press at the cambridge gazette received a gpo telephonic marconi bakerlite call suggesting he should pronto ring
whitehall 772005 and the us embassy kensington 091101 urgently sharpish fashion for some scoop dum dum head busting historical cia news.
the call related to the assasination of a mr john fitzgerald oflaherty otool kennedy, know relation to the fully oirish john heinz kerrys of killarney we should note.

after the calls where done the cambridge gentlemen of the press was shocked to find that jfk was still alive by several bbc minutes.
he later went to his local police house to report the queer time looper affair indeed.
it later transperspired that the call from the americas had arrived 25mins before the grassy gnome texas kilshot back and to the left don't you know.
25mins before to go what what.
jane stanley bbc on 9 and 11 talmud event building 7 25mins to soon spoke out as well time looping very queer affairs
i really do believe in the future hospitals will have a better success rate if we can get the cadavers into surgery before these events happen
certainly for turkey and israel live organ dealings the living syriana organs from pre incident not happened are prefential
indeeds


victims-hospitalized-before-the-incident-happened.

Ort | Oct 29, 2017 6:12:35 PM | 12
Thanks for deconstructing this latest bogus report.

We are now living in "Reality TV", sad to say.

Not to be naïve or sentimental about it, but government and civic institutions used to maintain at least a modicum of integrity, probity, and objectivity.

Now, official investigations are routinely compromised by nefarious political and social interests. Bad enough that law enforcement and state-security agencies habitually distort or fabricate information to serve their own ends, and their masters' ends.

But it's somehow more insidious when nominally independent investigative bodies become channels of authoritarian governments' infoganda.

This series of slanderous, manufactured, trumped-up (no pun intended) accusations that the Syrian government/military used chemical weapons is practically a "sub-genre" by now.

But it also brings to mind NIST's fraudulent analysis of the destructive events in New York City on 9/11/01, and the equally fraudulent findings of the Dutch-led Joint Investigation Team tasked to investigate the downing of the MH-17 aircraft.

I thought of "reality TV" because all of these tendentious reports from ostensibly prestigious organizations are merely props-- items to wave around in front of the camera, and allude to sanctimoniously in support of some reprehensible official policy or narrative.

Thus, I fully concur with AriusArmenian | 4.

[Oct 25, 2017] Tomorrow Belongs to the Corporatocracy by C.J. Hopkins

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Google is algorithmically burying leftist news and opinion sources such as Alternet, Counterpunch, Global Research, Consortium News, and Truthout, among others. ..."
"... my political essays are often reposted by right-wing and, yes, even pro-Russia blogs. I get mail from former Sanders supporters, Trump supporters, anarchists, socialists, former 1960s radicals, anti-Semites, and other human beings, some of whom I passionately agree with, others of whom I passionately disagree with. As far as I can tell from the emails, none of these readers voted for Clinton, or Macron, or supported the TPP, or the debt-enslavement and looting of Greece, or the ongoing restructuring of the Greater Middle East (and all the lovely knock-on effects that has brought us), or believe that Trump is a Russian operative, or that Obama is Martin Luther Jesus-on-a-stick. ..."
"... What they share, despite their opposing views, is a general awareness that the locus of power in our post-Cold War age is primarily corporate, or global capitalist, and neoliberal in nature. They also recognize that they are being subjected to a massive propaganda campaign designed to lump them all together (again, despite their opposing views) into an intentionally vague and undefinable category comprising anyone and everyone, everywhere, opposing the hegemony of global capitalism, and its non-ideological ideology (the nature of which I'll get into in a moment). ..."
"... Although the term has been around since the Fifth Century BC, the concept of "extremism" as we know it today developed in the late Twentieth Century and has come into vogue in the last three decades. During the Cold War, the preferred exonymics were "subversive," "radical," or just plain old "communist," all of which terms referred to an actual ideological adversary. ..."
"... Which is why, despite the "Russiagate" hysteria the media have been barraging us with, the West is not going to war with Russia. Nor are we going to war with China. Russia and China are developed countries, whose economies are entirely dependent on global capitalism, as are Western economies. The economies of every developed nation on the planet are inextricably linked. This is the nature of the global hegemony I've been referring to throughout this essay. Not American hegemony, but global capitalist hegemony. Systemic, supranational hegemony (which I like to prefer "the Corporatocracy," as it sounds more poetic and less post-structural). ..."
"... Global capitalism, since the end of the Cold War (i.e, immediately after the end of the Cold War), has been conducting a global clean-up operation, eliminating actual and potential insurgencies, mostly in the Middle East, but also in its Western markets. Having won the last ideological war, like any other victorious force, it has been "clear-and-holding" the conquered territory, which in this case happens to be the whole planet. Just for fun, get out a map, and look at the history of invasions, bombings, and other "interventions" conducted by the West and its assorted client states since 1990. Also, once you're done with that, consider how, over the last fifteen years, most Western societies have been militarized, their citizens placed under constant surveillance, and an overall atmosphere of "emergency" fostered, and paranoia about "the threat of extremism" propagated by the corporate media. ..."
"... Short some sort of cataclysm, like an asteroid strike or the zombie apocalypse, or, you know, violent revolution, global capitalism will continue to restructure the planet to conform to its ruthless interests. The world will become increasingly "normal." The scourge of "extremism" and "terrorism" will persist, as will the general atmosphere of "emergency." There will be no more Trumps, Brexit referendums, revolts against the banks, and so on. Identity politics will continue to flourish, providing a forum for leftist activist types (and others with an unhealthy interest in politics), who otherwise might become a nuisance, but any and all forms of actual dissent from global capitalist ideology will be systematically marginalized and pathologized. ..."
"... C. J. Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and satirist based in Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing (UK) and Broadway Play Publishing (USA). His debut novel, ZONE 23 , is published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant. He can reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org . ..."
"... That is certainly what the geopolitical establishment is hoping for, but I remain skeptical of their ability to contain what forces they've used to balance the various camps of dissenting proles. They've painted themselves into a corner with non-white identity politics combined with mass immigration. The logical conclusion of where they're going is pogroms and none of the kleptocracy seem bold enough to try and stop this from happening. ..."
"... Germany is the last EU member state where an anti EU party entered parliament. In the last French elections four out of every ten voters voted on anti EU parties. In Austria the anti EU parties now have a majority. So if I were leading a big corporation, thriving by globalism, what also the EU is, I would be worried. ..."
"... This is a great article. The author's identification of "normality" & "extremism" as Capitalism's go-to concepts for social control is spot on accurate. That these terms can mean anything or nothing & are infinitely flexible is central to their power. ..."
Oct 20, 2017 | www.unz.com

Back in October of 2016, I wrote a somewhat divisive essay in which I suggested that political dissent is being systematically pathologized. In fact, this process has been ongoing for decades, but it has been significantly accelerated since the Brexit referendum and the Rise of Trump (or, rather, the Fall of Hillary Clinton, as it was Americans' lack of enthusiasm for eight more years of corporatocracy with a sugar coating of identity politics, and not their enthusiasm for Trump, that mostly put the clown in office.)

In the twelve months since I wrote that piece, we have been subjected to a concerted campaign of corporate media propaganda for which there is no historical precedent. Virtually every major organ of the Western media apparatus (the most powerful propaganda machine in the annals of powerful propaganda machines) has been relentlessly churning out variations on a new official ideological narrative designed to generate and enforce conformity. The gist of this propaganda campaign is that "Western democracy" is under attack by a confederacy of Russians and white supremacists, as well as "the terrorists" and other "extremists" it's been under attack by for the last sixteen years.

I've been writing about this campaign for a year now, so I'm not going to rehash all the details. Suffice to say we've gone from Russian operatives hacking the American elections to "Russia-linked" persons "apparently" setting up "illegitimate" Facebook accounts, "likely operated out of Russia," and publishing ads that are "indistinguishable from legitimate political speech" on the Internet. This is what the corporate media is presenting as evidence of "an unprecedented foreign invasion of American democracy," a handful of political ads on Facebook. In addition to the Russian hacker propaganda, since August, we have also been treated to relentless white supremacist hysteria and daily reminders from the corporate media that "white nationalism is destroying the West." The negligible American neo-Nazi subculture has been blown up into a biblical Behemoth inexorably slouching its way towards the White House to officially launch the Trumpian Reich.

At the same time, government and corporate entities have been aggressively restricting (and in many cases eliminating) fundamental civil liberties such as freedom of expression, freedom of the press, the right of assembly, the right to privacy, and the right to due process under the law. The justification for this curtailment of rights (which started in earnest in 2001, following the September 11 attacks) is protecting the public from the threat of "terrorism," which apparently shows no signs of abating. As of now, the United States has been in a State of Emergency for over sixteen years. The UK is in a virtual State of Emergency . France is now in the process of enshrining its permanent State of Emergency into law. Draconian counter-terrorism measures have been implemented throughout the EU . Not just the notorious American police but police throughout the West have been militarized . Every other day we learn of some new emergency security measure designed to keep us safe from "the terrorists," the "lone wolf shooters," and other "extremists."

Conveniently, since the Brexit referendum and unexpected election of Trump (which is when the capitalist ruling classes first recognized that they had a widespread nationalist backlash on their hands), the definition of "terrorism" (or, more broadly, "extremism") has been expanded to include not just Al Qaeda, or ISIS, or whoever we're calling "the terrorists" these days, but anyone else the ruling classes decide they need to label "extremists." The FBI has designated Black Lives Matter "Black Identity Extremists." The FBI and the DHS have designated Antifa "domestic terrorists."

Hosting corporations have shut down several white supremacist and neo-Nazi websites , along with their access to online fundraising. Google is algorithmically burying leftist news and opinion sources such as Alternet, Counterpunch, Global Research, Consortium News, and Truthout, among others. Twitter, Facebook, and Google have teamed up to cleanse the Internet of "extremist content," "hate speech," and whatever else they arbitrarily decide is inappropriate. YouTube, with assistance from the ADL (which deems pro-Palestinian activists and other critics of Israel "extremists") is censoring "extremist" and "controversial" videos , in an effort to "fight terrorist content online." Facebook is also collaborating with Israel to thwart "extremism," "incitement of violence," and whatever else Israel decides is "inflammatory."

In the UK, simply reading "terrorist content" is punishable by fifteen years in prison. Over three thousand people were arrested last year for publishing "offensive" and "menacing" material.

Whatever your opinion of these organizations and "extremist" persons is beside the point. I'm not a big fan of neo-Nazis, personally, but neither am I a fan of Antifa. I don't have much use for conspiracy theories, or a lot of the nonsense one finds on the Internet, but I consume a fair amount of alternative media, and I publish in CounterPunch, The Unz Review, ColdType, and other non-corporate journals.

I consider myself a leftist, basically, but my political essays are often reposted by right-wing and, yes, even pro-Russia blogs. I get mail from former Sanders supporters, Trump supporters, anarchists, socialists, former 1960s radicals, anti-Semites, and other human beings, some of whom I passionately agree with, others of whom I passionately disagree with. As far as I can tell from the emails, none of these readers voted for Clinton, or Macron, or supported the TPP, or the debt-enslavement and looting of Greece, or the ongoing restructuring of the Greater Middle East (and all the lovely knock-on effects that has brought us), or believe that Trump is a Russian operative, or that Obama is Martin Luther Jesus-on-a-stick.

What they share, despite their opposing views, is a general awareness that the locus of power in our post-Cold War age is primarily corporate, or global capitalist, and neoliberal in nature. They also recognize that they are being subjected to a massive propaganda campaign designed to lump them all together (again, despite their opposing views) into an intentionally vague and undefinable category comprising anyone and everyone, everywhere, opposing the hegemony of global capitalism, and its non-ideological ideology (the nature of which I'll get into in a moment).

As I wrote in that essay a year ago, "a line is being drawn in the ideological sand." This line cuts across both Left and Right, dividing what the capitalist ruling classes designate "normal" from what they label "extremist." The traditional ideological paradigm, Left versus Right, is disappearing (except as a kind of minstrel show), and is being replaced, or overwritten, by a pathological paradigm based upon the concept of "extremism."

* * *

Although the term has been around since the Fifth Century BC, the concept of "extremism" as we know it today developed in the late Twentieth Century and has come into vogue in the last three decades. During the Cold War, the preferred exonymics were "subversive," "radical," or just plain old "communist," all of which terms referred to an actual ideological adversary.

In the early 1990s, as the U.S.S.R. disintegrated, and globalized Western capitalism became the unrivaled global-hegemonic ideological system that it is today, a new concept was needed to represent the official enemy and its ideology. The concept of "extremism" does that perfectly, as it connotes, not an external enemy with a definable ideological goal, but rather, a deviation from the norm. The nature of the deviation (e.g., right-wing, left-wing, faith-based, and so on) is secondary, almost incidental. The deviation itself is the point. The "terrorist," the "extremist," the "white supremacist," the "religious fanatic," the "violent anarchist" these figures are not rational actors whose ideas we need to intellectually engage with in order to debate or debunk. They are pathological deviations, mutant cells within the body of "normality," which we need to identify and eliminate, not for ideological reasons, but purely in order to maintain "security."

A truly global-hegemonic system like contemporary global capitalism (the first of this kind in human history), technically, has no ideology. "Normality" is its ideology an ideology which erases itself and substitutes the concept of what's "normal," or, in other words, "just the way it is." The specific characteristics of "normality," although not quite arbitrary, are ever-changing. In the West, for example, thirty years ago, smoking was normal. Now, it's abnormal. Being gay was abnormal. Now, it's normal. Being transgender is becoming normal, although we're still in the early stages of the process. Racism has become abnormal. Body hair is currently abnormal. Walking down the street in a semi-fugue state robotically thumbing the screen of a smartphone that you just finished thumbing a minute ago is "normal." Capitalism has no qualms with these constant revisions to what is considered normal, because none of them are threats to capitalism. On the contrary, as far as values are concerned, the more flexible and commodifiable the better.

See, despite what intersectionalists will tell you, capitalism has no interest in racism, misogyny, homophobia, xenophobia, or any other despotic values (though it has no problem working with these values when they serve its broader strategic purposes). Capitalism is an economic system, which we have elevated to a social system. It only has one fundamental value, exchange value, which isn't much of a value, at least not in terms of organizing society or maintaining any sort of human culture or reverence for the natural world it exists in. In capitalist society, everything, everyone, every object and sentient being, every concept and human emotion, is worth exactly what the market will bear no more, no less, than its market price. There is no other measure of value.

Yes, we all want there to be other values, and we pretend there are, but there aren't, not really. Although we're free to enjoy parochial subcultures based on alternative values (i.e., religious bodies, the arts, and so on), these subcultures operate within capitalist society, and ultimately conform to its rules. In the arts, for example, works are either commercial products, like any other commodity, or they are subsidized by what could be called "the simulated aristocracy," the ivy league-educated leisure classes (and lower class artists aspiring thereto) who need to pretend that they still have "culture" in order to feel superior to the masses. In the latter case, this feeling of superiority is the upscale product being sold. In the former, it is entertainment, distraction from the depressing realities of living, not in a society at all, but in a marketplace with no real human values. (In the absence of any real cultural values, there is no qualitative difference between Gerhard Richter and Adam Sandler, for example. They're both successful capitalist artists. They're just selling their products in different markets.)

The fact that it has no human values is the evil genius of global capitalist society. Unlike the despotic societies it replaced, it has no allegiance to any cultural identities, or traditions, or anything other than money. It can accommodate any form of government, as long as it plays ball with global capitalism. Thus, the window dressing of "normality" is markedly different from country to country, but the essence of "normality" remains the same. Even in countries with state religions (like Iran) or state ideologies (like China), the governments play by the rules of global capitalism like everyone else. If they don't, they can expect to receive a visit from global capitalism's Regime Change Department (i.e., the US military and its assorted partners).

Which is why, despite the "Russiagate" hysteria the media have been barraging us with, the West is not going to war with Russia. Nor are we going to war with China. Russia and China are developed countries, whose economies are entirely dependent on global capitalism, as are Western economies. The economies of every developed nation on the planet are inextricably linked. This is the nature of the global hegemony I've been referring to throughout this essay. Not American hegemony, but global capitalist hegemony. Systemic, supranational hegemony (which I like to prefer "the Corporatocracy," as it sounds more poetic and less post-structural).

We haven't really got our minds around it yet, because we're still in the early stages of it, but we have entered an epoch in which historical events are primarily being driven, and societies reshaped, not by sovereign nation states acting in their national interests but by supranational corporations acting in their corporate interests. Paramount among these corporate interests is the maintenance and expansion of global capitalism, and the elimination of any impediments thereto. Forget about the United States (i.e., the actual nation state) for a moment, and look at what's been happening since the early 1990s. The US military's "disastrous misadventures" in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Syria, and the former Yugoslavia, among other exotic places (which have obviously had nothing to do with the welfare or security of any actual Americans), begin to make a lot more sense.

Global capitalism, since the end of the Cold War (i.e, immediately after the end of the Cold War), has been conducting a global clean-up operation, eliminating actual and potential insurgencies, mostly in the Middle East, but also in its Western markets. Having won the last ideological war, like any other victorious force, it has been "clear-and-holding" the conquered territory, which in this case happens to be the whole planet. Just for fun, get out a map, and look at the history of invasions, bombings, and other "interventions" conducted by the West and its assorted client states since 1990. Also, once you're done with that, consider how, over the last fifteen years, most Western societies have been militarized, their citizens placed under constant surveillance, and an overall atmosphere of "emergency" fostered, and paranoia about "the threat of extremism" propagated by the corporate media.

I'm not suggesting there's a bunch of capitalists sitting around in a room somewhere in their shiny black top hats planning all of this. I'm talking about systemic development, which is a little more complex than that, and much more difficult to intelligently discuss because we're used to perceiving historico-political events in the context of competing nation states, rather than competing ideological systems or non-competing ideological systems, for capitalism has no competition . What it has, instead, is a variety of insurgencies, the faith-based Islamic fundamentalist insurgency and the neo-nationalist insurgency chief among them. There will certainly be others throughout the near future as global capitalism consolidates control and restructures societies according to its values. None of these insurgencies will be successful.

Short some sort of cataclysm, like an asteroid strike or the zombie apocalypse, or, you know, violent revolution, global capitalism will continue to restructure the planet to conform to its ruthless interests. The world will become increasingly "normal." The scourge of "extremism" and "terrorism" will persist, as will the general atmosphere of "emergency." There will be no more Trumps, Brexit referendums, revolts against the banks, and so on. Identity politics will continue to flourish, providing a forum for leftist activist types (and others with an unhealthy interest in politics), who otherwise might become a nuisance, but any and all forms of actual dissent from global capitalist ideology will be systematically marginalized and pathologized.

This won't happen right away, of course. Things are liable to get ugly first (as if they weren't ugly enough already), but probably not in the way we're expecting, or being trained to expect by the corporate media. Look, I'll give you a dollar if it turns out I'm wrong, and the Russians, terrorists, white supremacists, and other "extremists" do bring down "democracy" and launch their Islamic, white supremacist, Russo-Nazi Reich, or whatever, but from where I sit it looks pretty clear tomorrow belongs to the Corporatocracy.

C. J. Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and satirist based in Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing (UK) and Broadway Play Publishing (USA). His debut novel, ZONE 23 , is published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant. He can reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org .

Malla , October 20, 2017 at 12:56 pm GMT

Brilliant Article. But this has been going on for nearly a century or more. New York Jewish bankers fund the Bolshevik revolution which gets rid of the Romanov dynasty and many of the revolutionaries are not even Russian. What many people do not know is that many Western companies invested money in Bolshevik Russia as the Bolsheviks were speeding up the modernising of the country. What many do not know is that Feminism, destruction of families and traditional societies, homoerotic art etc . was forced on the new Soviet population in a shock therapy sort of way. The same process has been implemented in the West by the elites using a much slower 'boiling the frog' method using Cultural Marxism. The aim of the Soviet Union was to spread Communism around the World and hence bring about the One World Government as wished by the globalists. Their national anthem was the 'Internationale'. The globalists were funding revolutionary movements throughout Europe and other parts of the world. One such attempt went extremely wrong and that was in Germany where instead of the Communists coming in power, the National Socialists come in power which was the most dangerous challenge faced by the Zio/globalists/elite gang. The Globalists force a war using false flag events like Pearl Harbour etc and crushed the powers which challenged their rule i.e. Germany, Japan and Italy. That is why Capitalist USA funded Communist Soviet Union using the land lease program, which on the surface never makes any sense.

However in Soviet Russia, a power struggle leads to Stalin destroying the old Communist order of Lenin Trotsky. Trotsky and his supporters leave the Soviet Union. Many of the present Neo Cons are ex Trotskyites and hence the crazy hatred for Russia even today in American politics. These Neocons do not have any principles, they will use any ideology such as Communism, Islam, twisted Western Conservatism anything to attain their global goals.

Now with Stalin coming to power, things actually improved and the war with Hitler's Third Reich gave Stalin the chance to purge many old school globalist commies and then the Soviet Union went towards a more nationalist road. Jews slowly started losing their hold on power with Russians and eventually other Soviets gaining more powerful positions. These folks found the ugly modern art culture of the early Soviet period revolting and started a new movement where the messages of Socialism can be delivered with more healthy beautiful art and culture. This process was called 'Social Realism'. So strangely what happened was that the Capitalist Christian West was becoming more and more less traditional with time (Cultural Marxism/Fabien Socialism via media, education, Hollywood) while the Eastern block was slowly moving in an opposite direction. The CIA (which is basically the intelligence agency arm of Wall Street Bankers) was working to stop this 'Social Realism' movement.

These same globalists also funded Mao and pulled the rug under Chiang Kai Shek who they were supporting earlier. Yes, Mao was funded by the Rockerfeller/ Rothschild Cabal. Now, even if the Globalists were not happy with Stalin gaining power in the Soviet Union (they preferred the internationalist Trotskyites), they still found that they could work out with the Soviet Union. That is why during the 2nd World war, the USA supports the USSR with money and material, Stalin gets a facelift as 'friendly Uncle Joe' for the Western audience. Many Cossack families who had escaped the Soviet Union to the West were sent to their deaths after the War to the Soviet Union. Why? Mr. Eden of Britain who could not stand Hitler wanted a New World Order where they could work with the more murderous Soviet Union.

Now we have the cold war. What is not known is that behind the scenes at a higher level, the Americans and the Soviets cooperated with each other exchanging technology, basically the cold war was quite fake. But the Cold war gave the American government (basically the Globalists) to take American Tax payers hard earned money to fund many projects such as Star Wars programme etc All this was not needed, as a gentleman named Keenan had shown in his book that all the Americans needed to do was to make sure Japan, Germany and Britain did not fall to the Soviets, that's it. Thus trillions of American tax payer money would be saved. But obviously the Military Industrial Complex did not like that idea. Both the Soviet and the American governments got the excuse spend their people's hard money on weapons research as well as exchanging some of that technology in the back ground. It is during this period that the precursor to the Internet was already developed. Many of the technology we use today was already invented much earlier by government agencies but released to the people later.

Then we have the Vietnam war. Now you must realise that the Globalist government of America uses wars not only to change enemy societies but also the domestic society in the West. So during the Vietnam War, the US government using the alphabet agencies such as the CIA kick start the fake opposition hippie movements. The CIA not only drugged the Vietnamese population using drugs from the Golden Triangle but later released them on the home population in the USA and the West. This was all part of the Cultural Marxist plan to change or social engineer American/ Western society. Many institutes like the Travestock Institute were part of this process. For example one of the main hochos of the Cultural Marxism, a Mr. Aderno was closely related to the Beatles movement.

Several experiments was done on mind control such as MK Ultra, monarch programming, Edward Bernay's works etc Their aim was to destroy traditional Western society and the long term goal is a New World Order. Blacks for example were used as weapons against Whites at the same time the black social order was destroyed further via the media etc

Now, Nixon going to China was to start a long term (long planned) process to bring about Corporate Communism. Yes that is going to be economic system in the coming New World Order. China is the test tube, where the Worst of Communism and the Worst of Crony Capitalism be brought together as an experiment. As the Soviet Union was going in a direction, the globalist was not happy about (it was becoming more nationalist), they worked to bring the Soviet Union down and thus the Soviet experiment ended only to be continued in China.

NATO today is the core military arm of the globalists, a precursor to a One World Military Force. That explains why after the Warsaw pact was dismantled, NATO was not or why NATO would interfere in the Middle East which is far away from the Atlantic Ocean.

The coming Cashless society will finally lead to a moneyless or distribution society, in other words Communism, that is the long term plan.

My point is, many of the geo political events as well as social movements of the last century (feminism for example) were all planned for a long time and are not accidents. The coming technologies like the internet of things, 5G technology, Cashless society, biometric identification everywhere etc are all designed to help bring about the final aim of the globalists. The final aim is a one world government with Corporate ruled Communism where we, the worker bees will be living in our shitty inner city like ghetto homes eating GM plastic foods and listening to crappy music. That is the future they have planned for us. A inner city ghetto like place under Communism ruled by greedy evil corporates.

Seamus Padraig , October 20, 2017 at 5:13 pm GMT
Once again, C.J. nails it!
Issac , October 21, 2017 at 1:52 am GMT
"Short some sort of cataclysm, like an asteroid strike or the zombie apocalypse, or, you know, violent revolution, global capitalism will continue to restructure the planet to conform to its ruthless interests."

That is certainly what the geopolitical establishment is hoping for, but I remain skeptical of their ability to contain what forces they've used to balance the various camps of dissenting proles. They've painted themselves into a corner with non-white identity politics combined with mass immigration. The logical conclusion of where they're going is pogroms and none of the kleptocracy seem bold enough to try and stop this from happening.

peterAUS , October 21, 2017 at 9:25 pm GMT
@Issac

That is certainly what the geopolitical establishment is hoping for, but I remain skeptical of their ability to contain what forces they've used to balance the various camps of dissenting proles.

Agree.

Wizard of Oz , October 25, 2017 at 4:32 am GMT
@Malla

There must be some evidence for your assertions about the long term plans and aims of globalists and others if there is truth in them. The sort of people you are referring to would often have kept private diaries and certainly written many hundreds or thousands of letters. Can you give any references to such evidence of say 80 to 130 years ago?

edNels , October 25, 2017 at 4:46 am GMT
Finally an article that tells as it is! and the first comment is a great one too. It is right there to see for anybody with eyes screwed in right.
wayfarer , October 25, 2017 at 5:16 am GMT
"Three Things Cannot Be Long Hidden: the Sun, the Moon, and the Truth." – Buddha
ThereisaGod , October 25, 2017 at 5:54 am GMT
Regarding Trump being "a clown" the jury is out:

http://www.voltairenet.org/article198481.html

.. puzzling that the writer feels the need to virtue-signal by saying he "doesn't have much time for conspiracy theories" while condemning an absolutely massive conspiracy to present establishment lies as truth.

That is one of the most depressing demonstrations of the success of the ruling creeps that I have yet come across.

jilles dykstra , October 25, 2017 at 7:35 am GMT
Germany is the last EU member state where an anti EU party entered parliament. In the last French elections four out of every ten voters voted on anti EU parties. In Austria the anti EU parties now have a majority. So if I were leading a big corporation, thriving by globalism, what also the EU is, I would be worried.
animalogic , October 25, 2017 at 7:36 am GMT
"See, despite what intersectionalists will tell you, capitalism has no interest in racism, misogyny, homophobia, xenophobia, or any other despotic values (though it has no problem working with these values when they serve its broader strategic purposes). Capitalism is an economic system, which we have elevated to a social system. It only has one fundamental value, exchange value, which isn't much of a value, at least not in terms of organizing society or maintaining any sort of human culture or reverence for the natural world it exists in. In capitalist society, everything, everyone, every object and sentient being, every concept and human emotion, is worth exactly what the market will bear no more, no less, than its market price. There is no other measure of value."

This is a great article. The author's identification of "normality" & "extremism" as Capitalism's go-to concepts for social control is spot on accurate. That these terms can mean anything or nothing & are infinitely flexible is central to their power.

Mr Hopkins is also correct when he points out that Capitalism has essentially NO values (exchange value is a value, but also a mechanism). Again, Capitalism stands for nothing: any form of government is acceptable as long as it bows to neoliberal markets.

However, the author probably goes to far:

"Nor are we going to war with China. Russia and China are developed countries, whose economies are entirely dependent on global capitalism, as are Western economies. The economies of every developed nation on the planet are inextricably linked. This is the nature of the global hegemony I've been referring to throughout this essay. Not American hegemony, but global capitalist hegemony. Systemic, supranational hegemony".

Capitalism has no values: however the Masters of the capitalist system most certainly do: Capitalism is a means, the most thorough, profound means yet invented, for the attainment of that value which has NO exchange value: POWER.

Capitalism is a supranational hegemony – yet the Elites which control it, who will act as one when presented with any external threats to Capitalism itself, are not unified internally. Indeed, they will engage in cut throat competition, whether considered as individuals or nations or as particular industries.

US Imperialism is not imaginary, it is not a mere appearance or mirage of Capitalism, supranational or not. US Imperialism in essence empowers certain sets of Capitalists over other sets. No, they may not purposely endanger the System as a whole, however, that still leaves plenty of space for aggressive competition, up to & including war.

Imperialism is the political corollary to the ultimate economic goal of the individual Capitalist: Monopoly.

jilles dykstra , October 25, 2017 at 7:36 am GMT
@Malla

Read Howard Zinn, and discover that the USA always was the same since Columbus began.

m___ , October 25, 2017 at 9:00 am GMT
Psychologically daring (being no minstrel to corporatocracy nor irrelevant activism and other "religions" that endorse the current world global system as the overhead), rationally correct, relevant, core definition of the larger geo-world and deeper "ideological" grounding( in the case of capitalism the quite shallow brute forcing of greed as an incentive, as sterile a society as possible), and adhering to longer timelines of reality of planet earth. Perfectly captures the "essence" of the dynamics of our times.

The few come to the authors' through-sites by many venue-ways, that's where some of the corporocratic world, by sheer statistics wind up also. Why do they not get the overhand into molding the shallow into anything better in the long haul. No world leader, no intellectual within power circles, even within confined quarters, speaks to the absurdity of the ongoing slugging and maltering of global human?

The elites of now are too dumb to consider the planet exo-human as a limited resource. Immigration, migration, is the de facto path to "normalization" in the terms of the author. Reducing the world population is not "in" the capitalist ideology. A major weakness, or if one prefers the stake that pinches the concept of capitalism: more instead of quality principles.

The game changers, the possible game changers: eugenics and how they play out as to the elites ( understanding the genome and manipulating it), artificial intelligence ( defining it first, not the "Elon Musk" definition), and as a far outlier exo-planetary arguments.

Confront the above with the "unexpected", the not-human engineered possible events (astroids and the like, secondary effects of human induced toxicity, others), and the chances to get to the author's "dollar" and what it by then might mean is indeed tiny.

As to the content, one of the utmost relevant articles, it is "art" to condense such broad a world view into a few words, it requires a deep understanding foremost, left to wonder what can be grasped by most reading above. Some-one try the numbers?, "big data" anyone, they might turn out in favor of what the author undoubtedly absorbed as the nucleus of twenty-first thinking, strategy and engineering.

This kind of thinking and "Harvard" conventionality, what a distance.

Hans Vogel , October 25, 2017 at 9:24 am GMT
Great article, spot on. Indeed we are all at the mercy now of a relatively small clique of ruthless criminals who are served by armies of desensitized, stupid mercenaries: MBAs, politicians, thugs, college professors, "whorenalists", etc. I am afraid that the best answer to the current and future dystopia is what the Germans call "innere Emigration," to psychologically detach oneself from the contemporary world.

Thus, the only way out of this hellhole is through reading and thinking, which every self-respecting individual should engage in. Shun most contemporary "literature" and instead turn to the classics of European culture: there you will find all you need.

For an earlier and ever so pertinent analysis of the contemporary desert, I can heartily recommend Umberto Galimberti's I vizi capitali e i nuovi vizi (Milan, 2003).

m___ , October 25, 2017 at 9:28 am GMT
@Malla

And yes, another verbally strong expression of the in your face truth, though for so few to grasp. The author again has a deep understanding, if one prefers, it points to the venueway of coming to terms, the empirical pathway as to the understanding.

"Plasticky" society is my preferred term for designating the aberrance that most (within the elites), the rest who cares (as an historical truth), do not seem to identify as proper cluelessness in the light of longer timelines. The current global ideology, religion of capitalism-democracy is the equivalent of opportunistic naval staring of the elites. They are not aware that suffocation will irreversibly affect oneself. Not enough air is the equivalent of no air in the end.

jacques sheete , October 25, 2017 at 11:12 am GMT

The negligible American neo-Nazi subculture has been blown up into a biblical Behemoth inexorably slouching its way towards the White House to officially launch the Trumpian Reich.

While the above is true, I hope most folks understand that the basic concept of controlling people through fear is nothing new. The much vaunted constitution was crammed down our collective throats by the rich scoundrels of the time in the words of more than one anti-federalist through the conjuring of quite a set of threats, all bogus.

I address my most fervent prayer to prevent our adopting a system destructive to liberty We are told there are dangers, but those dangers are ideal; they cannot be demonstrated.

- Patrick Henry, Foreign Wars, Civil Wars, and Indian Wars -- Three Bugbears, June 5, 7, and 9, 1788

https://www.infoplease.com/homework-help/united-states-documents/patrick-henry-foreign-wars-civil-wars-and-indian-wars-three

Bottom line: Concentrated wealth and power suck.The USA was ruled by a plutoligarchy from its inception, and the material benefits we still enjoy have occurred not because of it but despite it.

Jake , October 25, 2017 at 11:28 am GMT
It is the nightmare world of Network come to life.
jacques sheete , October 25, 2017 at 12:29 pm GMT
For today's goofy "right wing" big business "conservatives" who think the US won WW2, I got news for you. Monopoly capitalism, complete with increasing centralization of the economy and political forces were given boosts by both world wars.

It was precisely in reaction to their impending defeat at the hands of the competitive storms of the market tha t business turned, increasingly after the 1900′s, to the federal government for aid and protection. In short, the intervention by the federal government was designed, not to curb big business monopoly for the sake of the public weal, but to create monopolies that big business (as well as trade associations smaller business) had not been able to establish amidst the competitive gales of the free market. Both Left and Right have been persistently misled by the notion that intervention by the government is ipso facto leftish and anti-business. Hence the mythology of the New-Fair Deal-as-Red that is endemic on the Right. Both the big businessmen, led by the Morgan interests, and Professor Kolko almost uniquely in the academic world, have realized that monopoly privilege can only be created by the State and not as a result of free market operations.

-Murray N. Rothbard, Rothbard Left and Right: The Prospects for Liberty, [Originally appeared in Left and Right, Spring 1965, pp. 4-22.]

https://mises.org/library/left-and-right-prospects-liberty

jacques sheete , October 25, 2017 at 12:37 pm GMT

A truly global-hegemonic system like contemporary global capitalism (the first of this kind in human history), technically, has no ideology.

Please change that to" contemporary state-sponsored global capitalism

Malla , October 25, 2017 at 1:58 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz

It was all about connecting the dots really. Connecting the dots of too many books I have gobe through and videos I have seen. Too many to list here.

You can get a lot of info from the book 'Tragedy and Hope' by Carroll Quigley though he avoids mantioning Jews and calls it the Anglo American establishment, Anthony Sutton however I completely disagree about funding of the Third Reich but he does talk a lot about the secret relationship between the USA and the USSR, Revilo Oliver etc.. etc Well you could read the Protocols. Now if you think that the protocols was a forgery, you gotta see this, especially the last part.

Also check this out

Also check out what this Wall Street guy realised in his career.

Also this 911 firefighter, what he found out after some research

Miro23 , October 25, 2017 at 2:18 pm GMT

Capitalism is an economic system, which we have elevated to a social system. It only has one fundamental value, exchange value, which isn't much of a value, at least not in terms of organizing society or maintaining any sort of human culture or reverence for the natural world it exists in. In capitalist society, everything, everyone, every object and sentient being, every concept and human emotion, is worth exactly what the market will bear no more, no less, than its market price. There is no other measure of value.

This looks like the "financialization" of society with Citizens morphing into Consumers.

And it's worth saying that Citizenship and Consumership are completely different concepts:

Citizenship – Dictionary.com

1. – the state of being vested with the rights, privileges, and duties of a citizen.

2. – the character of an individual viewed as a member of society;behavior in terms of the duties, obligations, and functions of a citizen:

an award for good citizenship.

The Consumer – Dictionary.com

1. a person or thing that consumes.

2. Economics. a person or organization that uses a commodity or service.

A good citizen can then define themselves in a rather non-selfish, non-financial way as for example, someone who respects others, contributes to local decisions (politically active), gains respect through work and ethical standards etc.

A good consumer on the other hand, seems to be more a self-idea, essentially someone who buys and consumes a lot (financial idea), has little political interest – and probably defines themselves (and others) by how they spend money and what they own.

It's clear that US, and global capitalism, prefers active consumers over active citizens, and maybe it explains why the US has such a worthless and dysfunctional political process.

jacques sheete , October 25, 2017 at 2:21 pm GMT

It was all about connecting the dots really.

Some folks are completely unable to connect the dots even when spoon fed the evidence. You'll note that some, in risible displays of quasi-intellectual arrogance, make virtually impossible demands for proof, none of which they'll ever accept. Rather, they flock to self aggrandizing mythology like flies to fresh sewage which the plutoligarchy produces nearly infinitely.

Your observations appear pretty accurate and self justifying I'd say.

daniel le mouche , October 25, 2017 at 2:23 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz

I can, Wiz.

Look up the film director Aaron Russo (recently deceased), discussing how David Rockefeller tried to bring him over to the dark side. Rockefeller discussed for example the women's movement, its engineering. Also, there's Aldous Huxley's speech The Ultimate Revolution, on how drugs are the final solution to rabble troubles–we will think we're happy even in the most appalling societal conditions.

daniel le mouche , October 25, 2017 at 2:49 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

I can only say Beware of Zinn, best friend of Chomsky, endlessly tauted by shysters like Amy Goodman and Counterpunch. Like all liberal gatekeepers, he wouldn't touch 911. I saw him speak not long before he died, and when questioned on this he said, 'That was a long time ago, let's talk about now.'

This from a professed historian, and it was only 7 years after 911. He seemed to have the same old Jewish agenda, make Europeans look really bad at all times. He was always on message, like the shyster Chomsky. Sincerely probing for the truth was not part of his agenda; his truths were highly selective, and such a colossal event as 911 concerned him not at all, with the ensuing wars, Patriot Acts, bullshit war on Terror, etc etc

joe webb , October 25, 2017 at 4:17 pm GMT
Say what???

" capitalism has no interest in racism, misogyny, homophobia, xenophobia, or any other despotic values (though it has no problem working with these values when they serve its broader strategic purposes). Capitalism is an economic system, which we have elevated to a social system."

This is a typical Left Lie. Capitalism in its present internationalist phase absolutely requires Anti-Racism to lubricate sales uh, internationally and domestically. We are all Equal.

Then, the ticking-off of the rest of the bad isms, and labeling them 'despotic' is another Leftwing and poetic attack on more or less all of us white folks, who have largely invented Capitalism, from a racialist point of view.

"Poetic" because it is an emotional appeal, not a rational argument. The other 'despotisms' are not despotic, unless you claim, like I do that racial personalities are more, or less despotic, with Whites being the least despotic. The Left totalitarian thinks emotional despotism's source is political or statist. It are not. However, Capitalism has been far less despotic than communism, etc.

Emotional Despotism is part of who Homo Sapiens is, and this emotional despotism is not racially equal. Whites are the least despotic, and have organized law and rules to contain such despotism.

Systems arise naturally from the Human Condition, like it or not. The attempt here is to sully the Capitalist system, and that is all it is. This article itself is despotic propaganda.

Arguably, human nature is despotic, and White civilization has attempted to limit our despotic nature.

This is another story.

As for elevating capitalism into a 'social system' .this is somewhat true. However, that is not totally bad, as capitalism delivers the goods, which is the first thing, after getting out of bed.

The second thing, is having a conformable social environment, and that is where racial accord enters.

People want familiar and trustworthy people around them and that is just the way human nature is genetic similarity, etc.

Beyond that, the various Leftie complaints-without-end, are also just the way it is. And yes they can be addressed and ameliorated to some degree, but human nature is not a System to be manipulated, even thought the current crop of scientistic lefties talk a good storyline about epigenetics and other Hopes, false of course, like communist planning which makes its first priority, Social Change which is always despotic. Society takes care of itself, especially racial society.

As Senator Vail said about the 1924 Immigration Act which held the line against Immigration, "if there is going to be any changing being done, we will do it and nobody else." That 'we' was a White we.

Capitalism must be national. International capital is tyranny.

Joe Webb

Wally , Website October 25, 2017 at 4:24 pm GMT
@jacques sheete

Bingo.

Some agendas require the "state sponsored" part to be hidden.

Wally , Website October 25, 2017 at 4:30 pm GMT
@Malla

"How Big Oil Conquered the World"?

That's called 'taking the bait.'

US oil companies make about five cents off a single gallon of gasoline, on the other hand US Big Government taxes on a single gallon are around seventy-one cents for US states & rising, the tax is now $1.00 per gallon for CA.

IOW, greedy US governments make fourteen to twenty times what oil companies make, and it is the oil companies who make & deliver the vital product to the marketplace.

And that is just in the US. Have a look at Europe's taxes. My, my.

It's Big Government, not Big Oil.

jacques sheete , October 25, 2017 at 5:12 pm GMT
@Wally

Some agendas require the "state sponsored" part to be hidden.

That is part of the reason why the constitutional convention was held in secret as well.

The cunning connivers who ram government down our throats don't like their designs exposed, and it's an old trick which nearly always works.

Here's Aristophanes on the subject. His play is worth a read. Short and great satire on the politicians of the day.

SAUSAGE-SELLER

No, Cleon, little you care for his reigning in Arcadia, it's to pillage and impose on the allies at will that you reckon; y ou wish the war to conceal your rogueries as in a mist, that Demos may see nothing of them, and harassed by cares, may only depend on yourself for his bread. But if ever peace is restored to him, if ever he returns to his lands to comfort himself once more with good cakes, to greet his cherished olives, he will know the blessings you have kept him out of, even though paying him a salary; and, filled with hatred and rage, he will rise, burning with desire to vote against you. You know this only too well; it is for this you rock him to sleep with your lies.

- Aristophanes, The Knights, 424 BC

http://classics.mit.edu/Aristophanes/knights.html

jilles dykstra , October 25, 2017 at 5:18 pm GMT
@daniel le mouche

The first loyalty of jews is supposed to be to jews.

Norman Finkelstein is called a traitor by jews, the Dutch jew Hamburger is called a traitor by Dutch jews, he's the chairman of 'Een ander joodse geluid', best translated by 'another jewish opinion', the organisation criticises Israel.

Jewish involvement in Sept 11 seems probable, the 'dancing Israelis', the assertion that most jews working in the Twin Towers at the time were either sick or took a day off, the fact that the Towers were jewish property, ready for a costly demolition, much abestos in the buildings, thus the 'terrorist' act brought a great profit.

Can one expect a jew to expose things like this ?

On his book, I did not find inconsistencies with literature I already knew.

The merit of the book is listing many events that affected common people in the USA, and destroying the myth that 'in the USA who is poor has only himself to blame'.

This nonsense becomes clear even from the diaries of Harold L Ickes, or from Jonathan Raban Bad Land, 1997.

As for Zinn's criticism of the adored USA constitution, I read that Charles A Beard already in 1919 resigned because he also criticised this constitution.

jilles dykstra , October 25, 2017 at 5:20 pm GMT
@Wally

Indeed, in our countries about half the national income goes to the governments by taxes, this is the reason a country like Denmark is the best country to live in.

[Oct 25, 2017] The Definitive Demise of the Debunked Dodgy Dossier on The Donald

Notable quotes:
"... For Donald Trump, all attempts to gain a foothold in the USSR and then in Russia in 30 years of travel and negotiations failed. Moscow did not have a Trump Tower of its own, although Trump boasted every time that he had met the most important people and was just about to invest hundreds of millions in a project that would undoubtedly be successful. ..."
"... Trumps' largest business success in Russia was the presentation of a Trump Vodka at the Millionaire Fair 2007 in Moscow. This project was also a cleansing; In 2009 the sale of Trump Vodka was discontinued. ..."
"... puts his name on stuff ..."
"... (2) Zhirinovsky Is The Very Last Person Putin Would Use For A Proxy ..."
"... Such a delicate plan – to reach the election of a President of the US by means of Zhirinovsky – ensures a skeptical smile for every Russian at best. He is already seventy and has been at the head of a party with a misleading name for nearly thirty years. The Liberal Democratic Party is neither liberal nor democratic. If their policies are somehow characterized, then as right-wing populism. Zhirinovsky is known for shrill statements; He threatened, for example, to destroy the US by means of "gravitational weapons". ..."
"... Why Would Russian Intelligence Agencies Sources Have Talked to Steele? ..."
"... But the report, published on the BuzzFeed Internet portal, is full of inconsistencies and contradictions. The problem is not even that there are a lot of false facts. Even the assumption that agents of the Russian secret services are discussing the details with a former secretary of a hostile secret service in the midst of a highly secret operation by which a future President of the US is to be discredited appears strange. ..."
"... Exactly. For the intelligence community and Democrat reliance on Steele's dossier to be plausible, you have to assume 10-foot tall Russkis (1) with incredibly sophisticated strategic, operational, and technical capabilities, who have (2) performed the greatest intelligence feat of the 21st and ..."
"... Donald Trump went on Howard Stern for, like, decades. The stuff that's right out there for whoever wants to roll those tapes is just as "compromising" as anything in the dodgy dossier, or the "grab her by the pussy" tape, for that matter. As Kowaljow points out, none of it was mortally wounding to Trump; after all, if you're a volatility voter who wants to kick over the table in a rigged game, you don't care about the niceties. ..."
"... transition ..."
"... And that's before we get to ObamaCare, financial regulation, gutting or owning the CIA (which Trump needs to do, and fast), trade policy, NATO, China, and a myriad of other stories, all rich with human interest, powerful narratives, and plenty of potential for scandal. Any one of them worthy of A1 coverage, just like the Inaugural crowd size dogpile that's been going on for days. ..."
"... Instead, the press seems to be reproducing the last gasps of the Clinton campaign, which were all about the evils of Trump, the man. That tactic failed the Clinton campaign, again because volatility voters weren't concerned with the niceties. And the same tactic is failing the press now. ..."
Jan 23, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
by Lambert Strether of Corrente .

In the midst of the hysteria about Russian interference in the 2016 election - 52% of Democrat voters believe it's definitely or probably true that "Russia tampered with vote tallies" , a view for which there is no evidence whatever, and which is a depressing testimony to the power of propaganda to produce epistemic closure in liberals as well as conservatives - came Buzzfeed's 35-page "dodgy dossier" on Donald Trump, oppo that the researcher, Christopher Steele , peddled during the election proper, but was unable to sell, not even to an easy mark like Jebbie. (There's a useful debunking of Steele's report in the New York Review of Books , of all places.) Remember the piss jokes? So two-weeks ago Amazingly, or not, a two-page summary to Steele's product had been included in a briefing given to Trump (and Obama). A weary Obama was no doubt well accustomed to the intelligence community's little ways, but the briefing must have been quite a revelation to Trump. I mean, Trump is a man who knows shoddy when he sees it, right?

In any case, a link to the following story in Hamburg's ridiculously sober-sided Die Zeit came over the transom: So schockiert von Trump wie alle anderen ("So shocked by Trump like everyone else"). The reporter is Alexej Kowaljow , a Russian journalist based in Moscow. Before anyone goes "ZOMG! The dude is Russian !", everything Kowaljow writes is based on open sources or common-sense information presumably available to citizens of any nation. The bottom line for me is that if the world is coming to believe that Americans are idiots, it's not necessarily because Americans elected Trump as President.

I'm going to lay out two claims and two questions from Kowaljow's piece. In each case, I'll quote the conventional, Steele and intelligence community-derived wisdom in our famously free press, and then I'll quote Kowaljow. I think Kowaljow wins each time. Easily. I don't think Google Translate handles irony well, but I sense that Kowaljow is deploying it freely.

(1) Trump's Supposed Business Dealings in Russia Are Commercial Puffery

Here's the section on Russia in Time's article on Trump's business dealings; it's representative. I'm going to quote it all so you can savor it. Read it carefully.

Donald Trump's Many, Many Business Dealings in 1 Map

Russia

"For the record, I have ZERO investments in Russia," Trump tweeted in July, one day before he called on the country to "find" a batch of emails deleted from Hillary Clinton's private server. Nonetheless, Russia's extraordinary meddling in the 2016 U.S. election-a declassified report released by U.S. intelligence agencies in January disclosed that intercepted conversations captured senior Russian officials celebrating Trump's win-as well as Trump's complimentary remarks about Russian President have stirred widespread questions about the President-elect's pursuit of closer ties with Moscow. Several members of Trump's inner circle have business links to Russia, including former campaign manager Paul Manafort, who consulted for pro-Russia politicians in the Ukraine. Former foreign policy adviser Carter Page worked in Russia and maintains ties there.

Retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, Trump's incoming national security adviser, has been a regular guest on Russia's English-language propaganda network, RT , and even dined with Putin at a banquet.

During the presidential transition, former Georgia Congressman and Trump campaign surrogate Jack Kingston told a gathering of businessmen in Moscow that the President-elect could lift U.S. sanctions.

According to his own son, Trump has long relied on Russian customers as a source of income. "Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets," Donald Trump Jr. told a Manhattan real estate conference in 2008 , according to an account posted on the website of trade publication eTurboNews. "We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia." Back to map .

Read that again, if you can stand it. Do you see the name of an actual business, owned by Trump? Do you see the name of any businessperson who closed a deal with Trump? Do you, in fact, see any reporting at all? At most, you see commercial puffery by Trump the Younger: "Russians [in Russia?] make up a pretty [qualifier] disproportionate [whatever that means] cross-section [whatever that means] of a lot of [qualifier] our assets."

Now Kowaljow (via Google Translate, so forgive any solecisms):

For Donald Trump, all attempts to gain a foothold in the USSR and then in Russia in 30 years of travel and negotiations failed. Moscow did not have a Trump Tower of its own, although Trump boasted every time that he had met the most important people and was just about to invest hundreds of millions in a project that would undoubtedly be successful.

Trumps' largest business success in Russia was the presentation of a Trump Vodka at the Millionaire Fair 2007 in Moscow. This project was also a cleansing; In 2009 the sale of Trump Vodka was discontinued.

Because think about it: Trump puts his name on stuff . Towers in Manhattan, hotels, casinos, golf courses, steaks. Anything in Russia with Trump's name on it? Besides the failed vodka venture? No? Case closed, then.

(2) Zhirinovsky Is The Very Last Person Putin Would Use For A Proxy

From The Hill's summary of Russian "interference" in the 2016 election:

Five reasons intel community believes Russia interfered in election

The attacks dovetailed with other Russian disinformation campaigns

The report covers more than just the hacking effort. It also contains a detailed list account of information warfare against the United States from Russia through other means.

Political party leader Vladimir Zhirinovsky, who the report lists as a "pro-Kremlin proxy," said before the election that, if Trump won, Russia would 'drink champagne' to celebrate their new ability to advance in Syria and Ukraine.

Now Kowaljow:

The report of the American intelligence services on the Russian interference in the US elections, published at the beginning of January, was notoriously neglected by Russians, because the name of Vladimir Zhirinovsky was mentioned among the "propaganda activities of Russia", which had announced that in the event of an election victory of Trump champagne to want to drink.

Such a delicate plan – to reach the election of a President of the US by means of Zhirinovsky – ensures a skeptical smile for every Russian at best. He is already seventy and has been at the head of a party with a misleading name for nearly thirty years. The Liberal Democratic Party is neither liberal nor democratic. If their policies are somehow characterized, then as right-wing populism. Zhirinovsky is known for shrill statements; He threatened, for example, to destroy the US by means of "gravitational weapons".

If, therefore, the Kremlin had indeed had the treacherous plan of helping Trump to power, it would scarcely have been made known about Zhirinovsky.

The American equivalent would be. Give me a moment to think of an American politician who's both so delusional and such a laughingstock that no American President could possibly consider using them as a proxy in a devilishly complex informational warfare campaign Sara Palin? Anthony Weiner? Debbie Wasserman Schultz? Na ga happen.

And now to the two questions.

(3) Why Would Russian Intelligence Agencies Sources Have Talked to Steele?

Kowaljow:

But the report, published on the BuzzFeed Internet portal, is full of inconsistencies and contradictions. The problem is not even that there are a lot of false facts. Even the assumption that agents of the Russian secret services are discussing the details with a former secretary of a hostile secret service in the midst of a highly secret operation by which a future President of the US is to be discredited appears strange.

Exactly. For the intelligence community and Democrat reliance on Steele's dossier to be plausible, you have to assume 10-foot tall Russkis (1) with incredibly sophisticated strategic, operational, and technical capabilities, who have (2) performed the greatest intelligence feat of the 21st and 20th centuries, suborning the President of the United States, and whose intelligence agencies are (3) leakly like a sieve. Does that make sense? (Of course, the devilish Russkis could have fed Steele bad data, knowing he'd then feed it to the American intelligence agencies, who would lap it up, but that's another narrative.)

(4) How Do You Compromise the Uncompromisable?

Funny how suddenly the word kompromat was everywhere, wasn't it? So sophisticated. Everybody loves to learn a new word! Regarding the "Golden Showers" - more sophistication! - Kowaljow writes:

But even if such a compromise should exist, what sense should it have, since the most piquant details have long been publicly discussed in public, and had no effect on the votes of the elected president? Like all the other scandals trumps, which passed through the election campaign, they also remained unresolved, including those who were concerned about sex.

This also includes what is known as a compromise, compromising material, that is, video shots of the unsightly nature, which can destroy both the political career and the life of a person. The word Kompromat shines today – as in the past Perestroika – in all headlines; It was not invented in Russia, of course. But in Russia in the Yeltsin era, when the great clans in the power gave bitter fights and intensively used the media, works of this kind have ended more than just a brilliant career. General Prosecutor Jurij Skuratov was dismissed after a video had been shown in the country-wide television channels: There, a person "who looks like the prosecutor's office" had sex with two prostitutes.

Donald Trump went on Howard Stern for, like, decades. The stuff that's right out there for whoever wants to roll those tapes is just as "compromising" as anything in the dodgy dossier, or the "grab her by the pussy" tape, for that matter. As Kowaljow points out, none of it was mortally wounding to Trump; after all, if you're a volatility voter who wants to kick over the table in a rigged game, you don't care about the niceties.

Conclusion

It would be nice, wouldn't it, if our famously free press was actually covering the Trump transition , instead of acting like their newsrooms are mountain redoubts for an irrendentist Clinton campaign. It would be nice, for example, to know:

  1. The content and impact of Trump's Executive Orders.
  2. Ditto, regulations.
  3. Personnel decisions below the Cabinet level. Who are the Flexians?
  4. Obama policies that will remain in place, because both party establishments support them. Charters, for example.
  5. Republican inroads in Silicon Valley.
  6. The future of the IRS, since Republicans have an axe to grind with it.
  7. Mismatch between State expectations for infrastructure and Trump's implementation

And that's before we get to ObamaCare, financial regulation, gutting or owning the CIA (which Trump needs to do, and fast), trade policy, NATO, China, and a myriad of other stories, all rich with human interest, powerful narratives, and plenty of potential for scandal. Any one of them worthy of A1 coverage, just like the Inaugural crowd size dogpile that's been going on for days.

Instead, the press seems to be reproducing the last gasps of the Clinton campaign, which were all about the evils of Trump, the man. That tactic failed the Clinton campaign, again because volatility voters weren't concerned with the niceties. And the same tactic is failing the press now. Failing unless, of course, you're the sort of sleaze merchant who downsizes the newsroom because, hey, it's all about the clicks.

[Oct 25, 2017] Ex-MI6 officer Christopher Steele in hiding after Trump dossier

Notable quotes:
"... BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner said Mr Steele had previously been an intelligence officer - rather than agent - in MI6, who would have run a team of agents as an intelligence gatherer. ..."
"... Intelligence agencies considered the claims relevant enough to brief both Mr Trump and President Obama last week. ..."
"... But the allegations have not been independently substantiated or verified and some details have been challenged as incorrect by those who are mentioned. ..."
"... Mr Trump himself was briefed about the existence of the allegations by the US intelligence community last week but has since described them as fake news, accusing the US intelligence services of leaking the dossier. ..."
Jan 12, 2017 | www.bbc.com

An ex-MI6 officer who is believed to have prepared memos claiming Russia has compromising material on US President-elect Donald Trump is now in hiding, the BBC understands.

Christopher Steele, who runs a London-based intelligence firm, is believed to have left his home this week.

The memos contain unsubstantiated claims that Russian security officials have compromising material on Mr Trump.

The US president-elect said the claims were "fake news" and "phoney stuff".

Mr Steele has been widely named as the author of a series of memos - which have been published as a dossier in some US media - containing extensive allegations about Mr Trump's personal life and his campaign's relationship with the Russian state.

... ... ...

BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner said Mr Steele had previously been an intelligence officer - rather than agent - in MI6, who would have run a team of agents as an intelligence gatherer.

However, as Mr Steele was now working in the private sector, our correspondent said, there was "probably a fair bit of money involved" in the commissioning of the reports.

He said there was no evidence to substantiate the allegations and it was still possible the dossier had been based on what "people had said" about Mr Trump "without any proof".

Donald J. Tump Twit

@realDonaldTrump

James Clapper called me yesterday to denounce the false and fictitious report that was illegally circulated. Made up, phony facts. Too bad!

... ... ...

Obama briefing

The 35-page dossier on Mr Trump - which is believed to have been commissioned initially by Republicans opposed to Mr Trump - has been circulating in Washington for some time.

Media organisations, uncertain of its credibility, initially held back from publication. However, the entire series of reports has now been posted online, with Mr Steele named as the author.

Intelligence agencies considered the claims relevant enough to brief both Mr Trump and President Obama last week.

But the allegations have not been independently substantiated or verified and some details have been challenged as incorrect by those who are mentioned.

Mr Trump himself was briefed about the existence of the allegations by the US intelligence community last week but has since described them as fake news, accusing the US intelligence services of leaking the dossier.

[Oct 25, 2017] Former MI6 agent behind Trump dossier returns to work by Luke Harding and Nick Hopkins

So guardian clearly supports Steele dossier. Nice... So the guy clearly tried to influence the US election and Guardian neoliberal honchos and their Russophobic presstitutes (like Luke Harding) are OK with it. They just complain about Russian influence. British elite hypocrisy in action...
Notable quotes:
"... Published in January by BuzzFeed , the dossier suggested that Donald Trump's team had colluded with Russian intelligence before the US election to sabotage Hillary Clinton's campaign. Citing unidentified sources, it said Trump had been "compromised" by Russia's FSB spy agency during a trip to Moscow in 2013. ..."
"... Trump dismissed the dossier as fake news and said Steele was a "failed spy". Vladimir Putin also rejected the dossier. His spokesman Dmitry Peskov claimed Russia did not collect kompromat – compromising material – on Trump or anyone else. ..."
"... As head of MI6's Russia desk, Steele led the inquiry into Litvinenko's polonium poisoning, quickly concluding that this was a Russian state plot. He did not meet Litvinenko and was not his case officer, friends said. ..."
Mar 07, 2017 | www.theguardian.com

Christopher Steele speaks publicly for first time since the file was revealed and thanks supporters for 'kind messages'

The former MI6 agent behind the controversial Trump dossier has returned to work, nearly two months after its publication caused an international scandal and furious denials from Washington and Moscow.

Christopher Steele posed for a photograph outside the office of his business intelligence company Orbis in Victoria, London on Tuesday. Speaking for the first time since his dossier was revealed , Steele said he had received messages of support.

"I'm now going to be focusing my efforts on supporting the broader interests of our company here," he told the Press Association. "I'd like to say a warm thank you to everyone who sent me kind messages and support over the last few weeks."

Steele, who left British intelligence in 2009 and co-founded Orbis with an MI6 colleague, said he would not comment substantively on the contents of the dossier: "Just to add, I won't be making any further statements or comments at this time."

Published in January by BuzzFeed , the dossier suggested that Donald Trump's team had colluded with Russian intelligence before the US election to sabotage Hillary Clinton's campaign. Citing unidentified sources, it said Trump had been "compromised" by Russia's FSB spy agency during a trip to Moscow in 2013.

It alleged that Trump was secretly videoed with Russian prostitutes in a suite in the Ritz-Carlton hotel in Moscow. The prostitutes allegedly urinated on the bed used by Barack Obama during a presidential visit.

Trump dismissed the dossier as fake news and said Steele was a "failed spy". Vladimir Putin also rejected the dossier. His spokesman Dmitry Peskov claimed Russia did not collect kompromat – compromising material – on Trump or anyone else.

Steele's friends say he has been keen to go back to work for some weeks. They insist he has not been in hiding but has been keeping a low profile to avoid paparazzi who have been camped outside his family home in Surrey.

Several of the lurid stories about him that have appeared in the press have been wrong, said friends. The stories include claims that Steele met Alexander Litvinenko, the Russian dissident who was murdered in 2006 with a radioactive cup of tea, probably on Putin's orders .

As head of MI6's Russia desk, Steele led the inquiry into Litvinenko's polonium poisoning, quickly concluding that this was a Russian state plot. He did not meet Litvinenko and was not his case officer, friends said.

[Oct 25, 2017] Raqqa Destroyed to Liberate It by

Notable quotes:
"... IS appears to have been shaped by western intelligence in an effort to duplicate its success with the Afghan mujahidin in the mid 1980's that helped defeat the Soviet Union. CIA, Pakistani and Saudi intelligence, and Britain's MI-6 recruited some 100,000 volunteers from across the Muslim world to wage jihad in Afghanistan. I observed this brilliant success first hand from the ranks of the mujahidin. ..."
"... The western powers, led by the US, sought to emulate this success in Syria by unleashing armies of mercenaries, disaffected, unemployed youth, and religious primitives against the independent-minded regime of President Bashar Assad. The plan nearly worked – at least until Russia, Iran, and Lebanon's Hezbollah movement intervened and reversed the tide of battle. ..."
"... The CIA cobbled together two small armies, one of Kurdish Peshmerga fighters, and the other of Iraqi mercenaries. Both were directed, armed, equipped and financed by Washington. Shades of the British Empire's native troops under white officers. The Kurds and Iraqi Arabs are now in a major confrontation over the Kirkuk oil-rich region. ..."
"... Raqqa and Mosul were so close to western forces that they were merely a taxi ride away. But it took three years and much token bombing of the desert before a decisive move was made against IS. Once the US-led campaign against Damascus failed, the crazies of IS were no longer of any use so they were marked for death. ..."
"... The Islamic State bogeyman was very useful for the western powers. It justified deeper military involvement in the Mideast, higher arms budgets, scared people into voting for rightwing parties, and gave police more powers. By contrast, these faux Muslims brought misery, fear and shame on the Islamic world. We are very well rid of them. And it's about time. ..."
Oct 25, 2017 | www.unz.com

The so-called Islamic State organization was primarily a bogeyman encouraged by the western powers. I've been saying this for the last four years.

I asserted, as a former soldier and war correspondent, that IS would collapse like a wet paper bag if proper western ground forces attacked their strongholds in Syria and Iraq. This week, the western powers and their local satraps finally took action and stormed the last IS stronghold at Raqqa. To no surprise, IS put up almost no resistance and ran for its miserable life.

The much-dreaded IS was never more than a bunch of young hooligans and religious fanatics who were as militarily effective as the medieval Children's Crusade.

In the west, IS was blown up by media and governments into a giant monster that was coming to cut the throats of honest folk in the suburbs.

IS did stage some very bloody and grisly attacks – that's what put it on the map. But none of them posed any mortal threat or really endangered our national security. In fact, the primary target of IS attacks has been Shia Muslims in the Mideast.

Many of the IS attacks in North America and Europe were done by mentally deranged individuals or were initiated by under-cover government provocateurs, such as the 1993 bombing of New York's World Trade Center. IS was notorious for falsely taking credit for attacks it did not commit.

Other 'lone wolf' attacks were made by Mideasterners driven to revenge after watching the destruction by the US and its allies of substantial parts of their region. Think Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, Afghanistan, parts of Pakistan, and the murderous brutality of Egypt's-US backed regime.

IS appears to have been shaped by western intelligence in an effort to duplicate its success with the Afghan mujahidin in the mid 1980's that helped defeat the Soviet Union. CIA, Pakistani and Saudi intelligence, and Britain's MI-6 recruited some 100,000 volunteers from across the Muslim world to wage jihad in Afghanistan. I observed this brilliant success first hand from the ranks of the mujahidin.

The western powers, led by the US, sought to emulate this success in Syria by unleashing armies of mercenaries, disaffected, unemployed youth, and religious primitives against the independent-minded regime of President Bashar Assad. The plan nearly worked – at least until Russia, Iran, and Lebanon's Hezbollah movement intervened and reversed the tide of battle.

The canard promoted in the west that IS was a dire military threat was always a big joke. I said so on one TV program and was promptly banned from the station. I'm also the miscreant who insisted that Iraq never had weapons of mass destruction and was consequently blacklisted by a major cable TV news network.

The CIA cobbled together two small armies, one of Kurdish Peshmerga fighters, and the other of Iraqi mercenaries. Both were directed, armed, equipped and financed by Washington. Shades of the British Empire's native troops under white officers. The Kurds and Iraqi Arabs are now in a major confrontation over the Kirkuk oil-rich region.

Raqqa and Mosul were so close to western forces that they were merely a taxi ride away. But it took three years and much token bombing of the desert before a decisive move was made against IS. Once the US-led campaign against Damascus failed, the crazies of IS were no longer of any use so they were marked for death.

Like Fallujah in Iraq and Mosul, Raqqa was flattened by US air power, a stark message to those who would defy the American Raj. The ruins of Raqqa, the IS capital, were occupied by US-led forces. This historic déjà vu recalled the dramatic defeat by British Imperial forces at Omdurman in September 1898 of Sudan's Khalifa and his Islamic dervish army.

The remnants of IS had melted into the Euphrates Valley and the desert. They will now return to being an irksome guerilla group with very little combat power. Anti-western IS supporters still cluster in Europe's urban ghettos and will cause occasional mayhem. A few high-profile attacks on civilians may be expected to show that IS is still alive. But none of this is likely to influence the course of events. IS's rival, al-Qaida, is likely to resurface and lead attacks to drive the west out of the Mideast.

The Islamic State bogeyman was very useful for the western powers. It justified deeper military involvement in the Mideast, higher arms budgets, scared people into voting for rightwing parties, and gave police more powers. By contrast, these faux Muslims brought misery, fear and shame on the Islamic world. We are very well rid of them. And it's about time. (Republished from EricMargolis.com by permission of author or representative)

Virgile , October 22, 2017 at 11:25 pm GMT

Whahhabi IS lost because Saudi Arabia and Abu Dhabi stopped financing them for fear of been exposed by Qatar that has been financing Al Nusra and its moslem brotherhood ideology.
Without sponsors ISIS cannot survive as a military entity.
L.K , October 24, 2017 at 3:38 am GMT
E. Margolis: "The so-called Islamic State organization was primarily a bogeyman encouraged by the western powers. I've been saying this for the last four years."

True. The same for the Nusra front & other mercenary/Salafi groups.

E. Margolis: "I asserted, as a former soldier and war correspondent, that IS would collapse like a wet paper bag if proper western ground forces attacked their strongholds in Syria and Iraq. This week, the western powers and their local satraps finally took action and stormed the last IS stronghold at Raqqa. To no surprise, IS put up almost no resistance and ran for its miserable life."

This part is nonsense. IS was quite stronger than the insurgents the ZUSA faced in post 2003 Iraq, yet it took it several years, tens of thousands of casualties, gazillions of dollars, including the $ to bribe the insurgents and 'win' the war, sort of

In Iraq, IS woulda advanced much further, possibly even taking the capital, if it were not for IRAN.
MoA: " Iran with its Revolutionary Guards jumped in and hastily trained and equipped volunteers into Popular Mobilization Units."

It was the PMUs that pushed IS back, preventing a collapse, not the ZUSA trained Iraqi army nor the kurds. The Peshmerga suffered defeats too, this was even in some major msm outlets
The PMUs helped them as well.
Nor was anything 'easy'. The battle of Mosul lasted for over 9 months & ISIS inflicted heavy casualties.

In Syria, the people who have been doing the heavy lifting against ISIS, Nusra and others have been the Syrian military backed by Russia, Iran and Hezbollah.

The US Kurd proxy forces had no easy time in Raqqa, the battle lasted for over 4 months, so ISIS did not run. It would have been much worse if ISIS had not kept diverting troops and heavy weapons to fight the Syrian army in other fronts, notably but not exclusively, at Deir Ezzor, which they were still trying to capture despite their so called capital being under attack.

In other areas , enough evidence has surfaced showing US-Kurd-Isis collusion, as in ISIS allowing US-kurdish proxy forces to take Syrian oil fields while always putting up a fight against the SAA.

ZUSA is trying to steal credit for victory over ISIS when it deserves NONE.

MEexpert , October 24, 2017 at 5:45 am GMT
@L.K

It was Grand Ayatullah Syed Ali AL-Sistani's fatwa that mobilized the volunteer army, (PMU) as you call it. Once they were trained by the Iran's Revolutionary Guards they were a formidable force. Reminds me of the Viet Cong. Just like the VCs these volunteers were fighting for a cause, to defend their country against the foreign invaders. ISIS was fighting for the money. That is why the US wants those volunteers to "leave Iraq" as Tillerson put it. He doesn't know that all those volunteers were mostly Iraqis.

ZUSA is trying to steal credit for victory over ISIS when it deserves NONE.

Couldn't agree more except that the collusion was between US-Kurds-Israel and ISIS, just as it is in Syria.

ZUSA's goal now is to have a Kurdish mini state in Syria after failing to get the same in Iraq. They want a base near Iran to launch any possible future attack on that country.

Ernie , October 25, 2017 at 4:35 am GMT
Great article .. but ISIS became an actual threat to western imperialism when they went off script and declared a caliphate. Their seizing of the Sunni triangle was not trivial.
mr meener , October 25, 2017 at 1:41 pm GMT
@whyamihere

you are an idiot and puking out Israeli propaganda. ISIS is israels private army who ONLY attacked talmudias enemies NEVER attacked israel even verbally

[Oct 24, 2017] Sic Semper Tyrannis US policy in Islamdom is a chaos. Part 1

Notable quotes:
"... The Israelis follow a consistent pattern of policy of disrupting surrounding states with a view to reducing them to pastoral rug bazaars. ..."
"... DJT's decision to stop certifying Iranian compliance with JCPOA is merely a reflection of Zionist influence over the president and the hyper-belligerent attitudes of Mattis, and McMaster. ..."
Oct 21, 2017 | turcopolier.typepad.com

The accompanying map does not include India as a country deeply affected by Islam and Islamicate civilization. IMO that is a defect. The terms "Islam," Islamdom," and "Islamicate Civilization." were clarified by the great historian of Islam, Marshell Hodgson.

This is my editorial opinion.

------------

  1. Syria. The US persists in its nonsensical policy of regime change in Syria. McGurk, the State Department lead in Syrian affairs is evidently one of the leaders of this foolishness. The Syrian Government's forces have regained control of most of the country with the help of their Russian, Iranian, Hizbullah, Palestinian and Christian militia allies. In spite of this the US MSM studiously ignores the efforts of the SAA and allies (R+6). They are simply never mentioned. They have been edited out of the US narrative. Whether DJT has a side agreement with Putin over Syria seems not to affect the MSM narrative at all. McGurk's statement that the Syrian government would not be allowed into Raqqa City is an announcement of an extra-legal interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign UN member state. Do we intend to hold Raqqa forever and to what purpose?
  2. Iraq. In Iraq we have for the moment abandoned the interests of the KRG in its evident desire for independence from Baghdad. We have done this in spite of outrage expressed by our foreign policy mentors in Israel. The Israelis are, of course, the chief sponsors of Kurdish statehood. The Israelis follow a consistent pattern of policy of disrupting surrounding states with a view to reducing them to pastoral rug bazaars. Our loyalty to the Baghdad government is amusing because it is virtually inevitable that the Shia run government of Iraq will eventually align itself with Iran and ask the US to withdraw from the country.
  3. Iran . DJT's decision to stop certifying Iranian compliance with JCPOA is merely a reflection of Zionist influence over the president and the hyper-belligerent attitudes of Mattis, and McMaster. They are revealed as more neocon than the organizational neocons and largely in league with them. US abandonment of JCPOA will lead to direct policy conflicts with major European allies and the loss of business for American companies like Boeing. In the end this direction may lead to a US-Iran War as a culmination of Israeli machinations in Washington.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Hodgson

[Oct 22, 2017] Trump and His 'Beautiful' Weapons by William Blum

Notable quotes:
"... It's easy to understand why some of President Trump's senior advisers privately consider him a "moron," with a limited vocabulary and stunning lack of normal human empathy, as William Blum explains at Anti-Empire Report. ..."
"... Capturing the wisdom and the beauty of Donald J. Trump in just one statement escaping from his charming mouth: "Our military has never been stronger. Each day, new equipment is delivered; new and beautiful equipment, the best in the world – the best anywhere in the world, by far." [Washington Post, Sept. 8, 2017] ..."
"... And in case you still don't fully appreciate that, notice that he specifies that our equipment is the best in the world BY FAR! That means that no other country is even close! Just imagine! ..."
"... Lucky for the man his seeming incapacity for moral or intellectual embarrassment. He's twice blessed. His fans like the idea that their president is no smarter than they are. This may well serve to get the man re-elected, as it did with George W. Bush. ..."
"... Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II ..."
"... Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower ..."
Oct 21, 2017 | consortiumnews.com

It's easy to understand why some of President Trump's senior advisers privately consider him a "moron," with a limited vocabulary and stunning lack of normal human empathy, as William Blum explains at Anti-Empire Report.

Capturing the wisdom and the beauty of Donald J. Trump in just one statement escaping from his charming mouth: "Our military has never been stronger. Each day, new equipment is delivered; new and beautiful equipment, the best in the world – the best anywhere in the world, by far." [Washington Post, Sept. 8, 2017]

Here the man thinks that everyone will be impressed that the American military has never been stronger. And that those who, for some unimaginable reason, are not impressed with that will at least be impressed that military equipment is being added EACH DAY. Ah yes, it's long been a sore point with most Americans that new military equipment was being added only once a week.

And if that isn't impressive enough, then surely the fact that the equipment is NEW will win people over. Indeed, the newness is important enough to mention twice. After all, no one likes USED military equipment. And if newness doesn't win everyone's heart, then BEAUTIFUL will definitely do it. Who likes UGLY military equipment? Even the people we slaughter all over the world insist upon good-looking guns and bombs.

And the best in the world. Of course. That's what makes us all proud to be Americans. And what makes the rest of humanity just aching with jealousy. And in case you don't fully appreciate that, notice that he adds that it's the best ANYWHERE in the world.

And in case you still don't fully appreciate that, notice that he specifies that our equipment is the best in the world BY FAR! That means that no other country is even close! Just imagine! Makes me choke up.

Lucky for the man his seeming incapacity for moral or intellectual embarrassment. He's twice blessed. His fans like the idea that their president is no smarter than they are. This may well serve to get the man re-elected, as it did with George W. Bush.

William Blum is an author, historian, and renowned critic of U.S. foreign policy. He is the author of Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II and Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower , among others. [This article originally appeared at the Anti-Empire Report, https://williamblum.org/ .]

[Oct 17, 2017] For War Hawks, Iran Deal Dump Is Music to the Ears

As one commenter aptly said: " 'Moron', as Tillerson would say." and as another noted "Don the Neocon.. We can keep the military in the end-stateless, goal-less, sinkhole known as Afghanistan for decades, STILL subsidize the defense of rich EU and Asian countries, fight the latest "Al Qaeda offshoot" everywhere on the African continent but we can't afford universal healthcare like US welfare baby Israel or about every other developed country, or restore power or drinking water in a US territory."
Notable quotes:
"... the question is, who are these people all excited about Iran? Other than politicians who may be working for foreign lobbies? ..."
"... This is pure lawlessness. We are breaking an agreement and by advocating regime change against a govt that has not attacked us or even threatened us in a serious manner are breaking the U.N. charter. ..."
"... Screw Trump. I mean really, screw him. He got my vote because I thought he was going to first crush ISIS and then get us out of the Middle East. Instead he's intensifying nearly every aspect of our Middle East entanglements. ..."
"... Now he's creating a new mess of his own. And this crap he's pulling with Iran is for Saudi Arabia and Israel. America First really? ..."
"... Of all of the Obama-era foreign policy decisions Trump could pull back, he's hell-bent on crushing one of the only good ones. I'd be shocked if he has even an elementary understanding of the agreement. "Moron", as Tillerson would say. ..."
"... "Cotton is one of the biggest Israel money guys in the Senate, if not the biggest. Really whopping contributions – "the Swamp" personified. In return for Israel money he has tirelessly pushed the core Israeli policy of hostility to Iran, so much so that it hardly makes sense to think of him as an American senator anymore." ..."
"... It appears that Trump's strategy is to insult and ruin Ran's economy to the point where he can get Iran to do something that will allow him to declare war against Iran because they attacked us. ..."
"... And how many countries has Iran invaded in the last 200 years? And how many countries has Israel invaded in the last 80 years? ..."
"... We will really find out who the Swamp creatures are now. Any congressman or Senator who votes for new sanctions against Iran – a country that poses virtually no threat to the United States – exposes himself as a bought-and-paid-for tool of Saudi Arabia and the jihadist fanatics the Saudis support. ..."
"... it's less that Trump wants to undo what Obama did and more that he wants to do what Netanyahu wants. ..."
"... Any notion of American excellence has now been erased. Our country will not soon recover all that Trump has tossed away and as citizens, we cannot absolve ourselves from blame. We have elected the most odious leader in our history and have allowed (mostly) a Republican Party to participate in government without having made a single contribution to the welfare of the American republic. Cotton is not alone in his folly that dismisses all real national interest. Like others, there have been many times I have despaired at the state of affairs in our Country, but this is different. Trump and his vandal allies I believe have inflicted permanent and irreversible damage to our country. Joe F , says: October 13, 2017 at 5:07 pm One follow up to earlier post: with this action, Trump has proven beyond doubt that the Mullah regime in Iran is a far more trustworthy nation than the United States. Well done Donald ..."
Oct 13, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Fran Macadam , says: October 13, 2017 at 12:48 am

Making war in other people's countries is what an American government captured by globalist financial elites is all about. For elites, such wars, paid for by the deplorable ordinary Americans they loathe, have no downside and carry no risk to them. Lose-lose for the American public is win-win for them, they cannot lose, especially since wars that can't be won will never end, perfect profit streams.
80 Percent Polyester , says: October 13, 2017 at 5:39 am
"Cotton was among the fiercest and loudest opponents of the agreement before it was made, and he has continued to look for ways to sabotage it."

Cotton is one of the biggest Israel money guys in the Senate, if not the biggest. Really whopping contributions – "the Swamp" personified. In return for Israel money he has tirelessly pushed the core Israeli policy of hostility to Iran, so much so that it hardly makes sense to think of him as an American senator anymore.

He's more like a member of the Netanyahu government who somehow ended up in one of Arkansas's US Senate seats.

Early To Rise , says: October 13, 2017 at 5:58 am
Does anyone here know any real Americans who are pushing for this policy against Iran? My family and friends are nearly all real Americans, and not one of them has any interest in ending the deal with Iran. Most of them wish we would get out of the Middle East altogether.

So the question is, who are these people all excited about Iran? Other than politicians who may be working for foreign lobbies?

Christian Chuba , says: October 13, 2017 at 7:16 am
This is pure lawlessness. We are breaking an agreement and by advocating regime change against a govt that has not attacked us or even threatened us in a serious manner are breaking the U.N. charter.

We are doing this while condemning other countries for not following a 'liberal, rules based world order' (whatever that is, oh, wait, it is following Caesar's decrees). Our Hubris will catch up to us, whether it will be by the Almighty that the Haley's and Cotton's claim to serve or just the law of reciprocity, I don't know. No one is more blind than those corrupted by power.

John Quincy Adams, "But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force . She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit."

He was able to see this because we were not yet intoxicated by power.

Everything Must Go , says: October 13, 2017 at 8:01 am
Screw Trump. I mean really, screw him. He got my vote because I thought he was going to first crush ISIS and then get us out of the Middle East. Instead he's intensifying nearly every aspect of our Middle East entanglements.

Now he's creating a new mess of his own. And this crap he's pulling with Iran is for Saudi Arabia and Israel. America First really?

Frederick Martin , says: October 13, 2017 at 9:38 am
Of all of the Obama-era foreign policy decisions Trump could pull back, he's hell-bent on crushing one of the only good ones. I'd be shocked if he has even an elementary understanding of the agreement. "Moron", as Tillerson would say.
Fred Bowman , says: October 13, 2017 at 10:14 am
What seem to be missing here is anybody talking about Israel nuclear capability. That's the "dirty little secret" that nobody talks about. Imho, as long as Iran is in compliance the deal should. Of course Trump and the Hawks in Congress are going to do everything to scuttle it and bring about a war with Iran which will end up being a World War and will necessitate the US returning to a military draft to fight this war. It will be a sad way to "wake up" America to what is being done militarily in their name. But perhaps when they see their little "Johnny and Jill" marched off to war, they'll see what has been done in these endless, unwinnable wars in the Middle East.
AR complaint , says: October 13, 2017 at 10:31 am
[Tom Cotton gets] "Really whopping contributions – "the Swamp" personified."

He got a $700,000 check from a single Israel donor in 2014. You think anybody in Arkansas not named "Walton" can match that? No sir. Tom Cotton does what Israel tells him to do. Scuttle the Iran deal? No problem.

It's time that my fellow Arkansans did for Tom Cotton what those upstanding Virginians did for Eric Cantor back in 2014, and for the same reason: we want our government back from corrupt politicians working for foreign interests.

SDS , says: October 13, 2017 at 11:53 am
I second EVERYTHING said above by all –
Steve Waclo , says: October 13, 2017 at 11:53 am
" the president made clear over the summer, he didn't "believe" Iran was in compliance and would not certify again."

Wait, what?! What does Trump know that the IAEA has been unable to learn and at the risk of compromising intelligence sources, why has he not shared that knowledge? As with many of the man's "beliefs", such attitudes do not make issues remotely true. We don't need to stir the Iran pot, for goodness sake. Has not this man kicked enough hornets nests around the world?

Stephen J. , says: October 13, 2017 at 11:58 am
I believe the "War Hawks"are leading Trump into another war. Therefore, I asked on: February 4, 2017 Will There Be War With Iran?
http://graysinfo.blogspot.ca/2017/02/will-there-be-war-with-iran.html
Steve in Ohio , says: October 13, 2017 at 12:35 pm
"Cotton is one of the biggest Israel money guys in the Senate, if not the biggest. Really whopping contributions – "the Swamp" personified. In return for Israel money he has tirelessly pushed the core Israeli policy of hostility to Iran, so much so that it hardly makes sense to think of him as an American senator anymore."

Cotton is wrong on this issue, but he's hardly a Swamp politico. He understands the dangers of mass immigration and looks likely to replace Jeff Sessions as the leading immigration hawk in the Senate. Unfortunately, I suspect he has presidential ambitions and being pro Israel is a must in GOP primaries.

Rand Paul, on the other hand, like his dad, is good on foreign policy, but doesn't get the immigration issue. People like me who want a non interventionist FP and low immigration seldom have candidates that believe in both to support. I had high hopes for Trump, but he seems to have too many generals around him telling him the wrong things.

the times they are a'changing , says: October 13, 2017 at 1:23 pm
"Cotton is wrong on this issue, but he's hardly a Swamp politico. He understands the dangers of mass immigration and looks likely to replace Jeff Sessions as the leading immigration hawk in the Senate. Unfortunately, I suspect he has presidential ambitions and being pro Israel is a must in GOP primaries. "

No it's not. It was a litmus test for the old neocon Establishment GOP, and it's gone the way of Eric Cantor. You have to go to New York, DC, or some left coastal city to find anyone who gives a goddamn about it, and those places don't vote Republican anyway.

Politicians who take the Israel dollar care about it a lot, naturally. And Cotton's near the top of the list.

jk , says: October 13, 2017 at 2:04 pm
Don the Neocon.. We can keep the military in the end-stateless, goal-less, sinkhole known as Afghanistan for decades, STILL subsidize the defense of rich EU and Asian countries, fight the latest "Al qaeda offshoot" everywhere on the African continent but we can't afford universal healthcare like US welfare baby Israel or about every other developed country, or restore power or drinking water in a US territory.

"NO KIN IN THE GAME": STUDY FINDS MEMBERS OF CONGRESS WITHOUT DRAFT-AGE SONS WERE MORE HAWKISH"

https://theintercept.com/2017/10/11/congress-war-hawkish-policies-study/

That explains "lifetime bachelor" Graham's behavior!

Kent , says: October 13, 2017 at 3:09 pm
To our neocon friends:

1. Even though Iran and Iraq are 4 letter words and share the first 3, they are very, very different animals. Iran is an industrial state of 85 million capable of designing and building effective rockets. It is highly unlikely the US can defeat Iran in a conventional war on its own turf.

2. Even if we did defeat them, there is nobody there yearning for American style pseudo-democracy. While they are not perfectly happy with their own government, they'll be dammed if they're going to accept one from us. So you'd have to put millions of American troops in harms way against the civilian population essentially forever.

And a note on the President. I don't believe he knows or cares a thing about Iran or their capabilities. What he does know, after watching Fox News for the last 8 years is: Obama bad. So the only reason, I'm certain, that Trump cares about this is because it was an Obama initiative.

Robert Charron , says: October 13, 2017 at 3:34 pm
It appears that Trump's strategy is to insult and ruin Ran's economy to the point where he can get Iran to do something that will allow him to declare war against Iran because they attacked us.

And how many countries has Iran invaded in the last 200 years? And how many countries has Israel invaded in the last 80 years?

As I recall we made a regime change in the Iranian government when we had the CIA along with the English intelligence by replacing the elected Prime Minister of Iran with the despotic, tyrannical Shah.

As an American, Trump has desecrated our flag with his flat out lies, not the NFL athletes who simps knelt during the National Anthem.

simon94022 , says: October 13, 2017 at 3:54 pm
We will really find out who the Swamp creatures are now. Any congressman or Senator who votes for new sanctions against Iran – a country that poses virtually no threat to the United States – exposes himself as a bought-and-paid-for tool of Saudi Arabia and the jihadist fanatics the Saudis support.

Let them be counted!

Ollie , says: October 13, 2017 at 4:26 pm
No president in history has been more feckless and reckless than Trump. The danger demands that the 25th amendment be asserted.
Why Does The Heathen Rage? , says: October 13, 2017 at 4:49 pm
"So the only reason, I'm certain, that Trump cares about this is because it was an Obama initiative."

I've heard this before, but if it were true than why is Trump helping the Saudis wreck and starve Yemen? That was an Obama initiative too. That's why I now think that it's not really the Obama connection so much as the Netanyahu connection that drives Trump. In other words, it's less that Trump wants to undo what Obama did and more that he wants to do what Netanyahu wants.

Joe F , says: October 13, 2017 at 5:05 pm
Any notion of American excellence has now been erased. Our country will not soon recover all that Trump has tossed away and as citizens, we cannot absolve ourselves from blame. We have elected the most odious leader in our history and have allowed (mostly) a Republican Party to participate in government without having made a single contribution to the welfare of the American republic.

Cotton is not alone in his folly that dismisses all real national interest. Like others, there have been many times I have despaired at the state of affairs in our Country, but this is different. Trump and his vandal allies I believe have inflicted permanent and irreversible damage to our country.

Joe F , says: October 13, 2017 at 5:07 pm
One follow up to earlier post: with this action, Trump has proven beyond doubt that the Mullah regime in Iran is a far more trustworthy nation than the United States. Well done Donald
Liam , says: October 13, 2017 at 5:21 pm
Regarding the 25th amendment option: how far down the line of succession must one go to find someone who has solid, bona fide cred to stop this inanity?
picture window , says: October 13, 2017 at 5:45 pm
The Economist today opines that Xi Jinping has more clout than Donald Trump.

And I read on TAC that Trump is p***ing away our wealth and power doing favors for Israel and Saudi Arabia in the Middle East, like scuttling the Iran deal and picking fights with the Iranian government. And I conclude that the reason that the Economist may be right about Xi Jinping is because Trump is doing what I read about in TAC, wasting our time, blood, money, and focus on appeasing a bunch of goddamn foreigners in the form of the Israel and Saudi lobbies.

Pretty damn grim.

[Oct 17, 2017] Trump Decertifies Iran Deal, Vows New Sanctions by Jason Ditz

The immediate costs of decertification for the USl include the loss of the trust of allies, increased tensions with Iran, and much greater skepticism from all other governments. It also create additional difficulties the next time America wants to negotiate a major international agreement as some countries will view the USA as a rogue nation which is unable to keep its word. If decertification leads to the U.S. breaching its obligations under the nuclear deal, as seems likely, that the costs will increase even more, and so will the chances of war with Iran.
It might well be that Trump made a step increasing the probability of his removal from the current position by cabinet members.
Looks like Trump focus on appeasing a bunch of foreigners in the form of the Israel and Saudi lobbies.
Pretty damn grim.
Oct 13, 2017 | news.antiwar.com

President Trump started his long-anticipated anti-Iran speech by complaining about the 1979 hostage situation. What followed was an increasingly fantastical and absurd accounting of Iran's history, before finally announcing he is decertifying the nuclear deal for "violations," and announcing new sanctions.

The allegations against Iran went from things that happened a generation ago to treating things like the specious "Iranian plot" to attack a DC restaurant as not only the government's fault, but absolute established fact. Beyond that, he blamed Iran for the ISIS wars in Iraq and Syria, repeatedly accused them of supporting al-Qaeda, and claimed Iran was supporting the 9/11 attackers.

The allegations were so far-fetched by the end, that even President Trump appeared cognizant that many won't be taken seriously. Later in his speech, he insisted that the claims were "factual."

When addressing "violations" of the P5+1 nuclear deal, Trump similarly played fast and loose with the facts, citing heavy water claims that are really more the international community's violation than Iran's (Iran was guaranteed an international market for the water, but after Congress got mad the US has refused to buy any more, meaning Iran's totally non-dangerous stock grew), and accusing them of "intimidating" inspectors, insinuating that was the reason there aren't investigations at Iranian military sites.

In reality, Iranian military sites are only subject to investigation in the case of a substantiated suspicion of nuclear activities, and there simply are none. The IAEA has in recent days clarified multiple times that they don't need or want to visit any military sites right now. The only allegations about the sites are from the Mujahedin-e Khalq, which has been the source of repeated false accusations in the past.

And while this was supposed to be a speech about the nuclear deal, Trump closed it off with comments that very much sound like his goal is regime change, saying Iran's people want to be able to interact with their neighbors (despite Iran being on very good terms with most of its neighbors already), and suggesting that whatever he's going to do will lead to "peace and stability" across the Middle East.

[Oct 16, 2017] Trump Looks Set to Start Blowing Up the Iran Deal by Eli Clifton

Notable quotes:
"... Despite the potential pitfalls of Cotton and Netanyahu's plan, UN Ambassador Nikki Haley embraced the approach. Haley, a possible replacement for embattled Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, tweeted yesterday, "[Sen. Tom Cotton] has clear understanding of the Iranian regime & flaws in the nuclear deal. His [CFR] speech is worth reading." ..."
"... The United States must cease all appeasement, conciliation, and concessions towards Iran, starting with the sham nuclear negotiations. Certain voices call for congressional restraint, urging Congress not to act now lest Iran walk away from the negotiating table, undermining the fabled yet always absent moderates in Iran. But, the end of these negotiations isn't an unintended consequence of Congressional action, it is very much an intended consequence. A feature, not a bug, so to speak." ..."
"... Any agreement that advances our interests must by necessity compromise Iran's -- doubly so since they are a third-rate power, far from an equal to the United States. The ayatollahs shouldn't be happy with any deal; they should've felt compelled to accept a deal of our choosing lest they face economic devastation and military destruction of their nuclear infrastructure. That Iran welcomes this agreement is both troubling and telling. ..."
"... Ben Armbruster, writing for LobeLog last week, detailed the ways in which Mark Dubowitz , CEO of the neoconservative Foundation for Defense of Democracies , pushes for a so-called "better deal" while explicitly calling for regime change in Tehran. ..."
"... But perhaps a bigger pressure on Trump to de-certify comes from three of his biggest political donors : Sheldon Adelson , Paul Singer , and Bernard Marcus . All three have funded groups that sought to thwart the negotiations leading to the JCPOA, including Dubowitz's FDD, and have given generously to Trump. ..."
"... Adelson has also financed Israel's largest circulation daily newspaper, whose support for Netanyahu and his right-wing government earned it the nickname "Bibiton." ..."
Oct 16, 2017 | fpif.org

The Post credits Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) with this "fix it or nix it" approach to U.S. compliance with the JCPOA. Indeed, Cotton laid out essentially this very strategy in a speech at the Council on Foreign Relations in which he proposed that the president should decertify Iran's compliance with the nuclear deal based on Iran's actions in unrelated areas and toughen key components of the agreement, arguing that the deal fails to serve U.S. national security interests.

This plan has a low likelihood of success because Iran's Foreign Minister Javad Zarif says that the JCPOA will not be renegotiated and European governments have urged Trump to stick with the pact.

Despite the potential pitfalls of Cotton and Netanyahu's plan, UN Ambassador Nikki Haley embraced the approach. Haley, a possible replacement for embattled Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, tweeted yesterday, "[Sen. Tom Cotton] has clear understanding of the Iranian regime & flaws in the nuclear deal. His [CFR] speech is worth reading."

But Cotton has been clear that renegotiating the nuclear deal isn't his actual intention. In 2015, he made no secret of his desire to blow up diplomacy with Iran, saying :

The United States must cease all appeasement, conciliation, and concessions towards Iran, starting with the sham nuclear negotiations. Certain voices call for congressional restraint, urging Congress not to act now lest Iran walk away from the negotiating table, undermining the fabled yet always absent moderates in Iran. But, the end of these negotiations isn't an unintended consequence of Congressional action, it is very much an intended consequence. A feature, not a bug, so to speak."

Later that same year, Cotton explained his terms for any agreement with Iran, qualities that more closely resemble a surrender document than anything the Iranians would agree to in a negotiation. Cotton said :

Any agreement that advances our interests must by necessity compromise Iran's -- doubly so since they are a third-rate power, far from an equal to the United States. The ayatollahs shouldn't be happy with any deal; they should've felt compelled to accept a deal of our choosing lest they face economic devastation and military destruction of their nuclear infrastructure. That Iran welcomes this agreement is both troubling and telling.

Indeed, Cotton and his fellow proponents of the president de-certifying Iranian compliance, despite all indications that Iran is complying with the JCPOA, have a not-so-thinly-veiled goal of regime change in Tehran, a position in which the JCPOA and any negotiations with Iran pose a serious threat. Ben Armbruster, writing for LobeLog last week, detailed the ways in which Mark Dubowitz , CEO of the neoconservative Foundation for Defense of Democracies , pushes for a so-called "better deal" while explicitly calling for regime change in Tehran.

But perhaps a bigger pressure on Trump to de-certify comes from three of his biggest political donors : Sheldon Adelson , Paul Singer , and Bernard Marcus . All three have funded groups that sought to thwart the negotiations leading to the JCPOA, including Dubowitz's FDD, and have given generously to Trump.

"I think that Iran is the devil," said Marcus in a 2015 Fox Business interview . Adelson told a Yeshiva University audience in 2013 that U.S. negotiators should launch a nuclear weapon at Iran as a negotiating tactic. Adelson may hold radical views about the prudence of a nuclear attack on Iran, but he appears to enjoy easy access to Trump. Adelson and his wife, Miriam, who were Trump's biggest financial supporters by far during his presidential run, met with the president at Adelson's headquarters in Las Vegas recently, ostensibly to discuss the recent mass shooting there.

But Andy Abboud, senior vice president Government Relations for Adelson's Sands Corporation, told the Adelson-owned Las Vegas Review Journal that the meeting was "pre-arranged and set to discuss policy," according to the paper .

Adelson has also financed Israel's largest circulation daily newspaper, whose support for Netanyahu and his right-wing government earned it the nickname "Bibiton."

Eli Clifton reports on money in politics and U.S. foreign policy. He's previously reported for the American Independent News Network, ThinkProgress, and Inter Press Service.

[Oct 16, 2017] President Trump Beats War Drums For Iran by Ron Paul

Notable quotes:
"... Nearly every assertion in the president's speech was embarrassingly incorrect. Iran is not allied with al-Qaeda, as the president stated. The money President Obama sent to Iran was their own money. Much of it was a down-payment made to the US for fighter planes that were never delivered when Iran changed from being friend to foe in 1979. The president also falsely claims that Iran targets the United States with terrorism. He claims that Iran has "fueled sectarian violence in Iraq," when it was Iranian militias who prevented Baghdad from being overtaken by ISIS in 2014. There are too many other false statements in the president's speech to mention. ..."
"... Unfortunately the American people are being neoconned into another war. Just as with the disastrous 2003 US attack on Iraq, the media builds up the fear and does the bidding of the warmongers without checking facts or applying the necessary skepticism to neocon claims. ..."
Oct 16, 2017 | www.unz.com

President Trump has been notoriously inconsistent in his foreign policy. He campaigned on and won the presidency with promises to repair relations with Russia, pull out of no-win wars like Afghanistan, and end the failed US policy of nation-building overseas. Once in office he pursued policies exactly the opposite of what he campaigned on. Unfortunately Iran is one of the few areas where the president has been very consistent. And consistently wrong.

In the president's speech last week he expressed his view that Iran was not "living up to the spirit" of the 2015 nuclear agreement and that he would turn to Congress to apply new sanctions to Iran and to, he hopes, take the US out of the deal entirely.

Nearly every assertion in the president's speech was embarrassingly incorrect. Iran is not allied with al-Qaeda, as the president stated. The money President Obama sent to Iran was their own money. Much of it was a down-payment made to the US for fighter planes that were never delivered when Iran changed from being friend to foe in 1979. The president also falsely claims that Iran targets the United States with terrorism. He claims that Iran has "fueled sectarian violence in Iraq," when it was Iranian militias who prevented Baghdad from being overtaken by ISIS in 2014. There are too many other false statements in the president's speech to mention.

How could he be so wrong on so many basic facts about Iran? Here's a clue: the media reports that his number one advisor on Iran is his Ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley. Ambassador Haley is a "diplomat" who believes war is the best, first option rather than the last, worst option. She has no prior foreign policy experience, but her closest mentor is John Bolton – the neocon who lied us into the Iraq war. How do these people live with themselves when they look around at the death and destruction their policies have caused?

Unfortunately the American people are being neoconned into another war. Just as with the disastrous 2003 US attack on Iraq, the media builds up the fear and does the bidding of the warmongers without checking facts or applying the necessary skepticism to neocon claims.

Like most Americans, I do not endorse Iran's style of government. I prefer religion and the state to be separate and even though our liberties have been under attack by our government, I prefer our much freer system in the US. But I wonder how many Americans know that Iran has not attacked or "regime-changed" another country in its modern history. Iran's actions in Syria are at the invitation of the legitimate Syrian government. And why won't President Trump tell us the truth about Iranian troops in Syria – that they are fighting ISIS and al-Qaeda, both of which are Sunni extremist groups that are Iran's (and our) mortal enemies?

How many Americans know that Iran is one of the few countries in the region that actually holds elections that are contested by candidates with very different philosophies? Do any Americans wonder why the Saudis are considered one of our greatest allies in the Middle East even though they hold no elections and have one of the world's worst human rights records?

Let's be clear here: President Trump did not just announce that he was "de-certifying" Iran's compliance with the nuclear deal. He announced that Iran was from now on going to be in the bullseye of the US military. Will Americans allow themselves to be lied into another Middle East war?

Jim Christian , October 16, 2017 at 4:31 pm GMT

"Will Americans allow themselves to be lied into another Middle East war?"

The die was cast the minute they ended the draft and mandatory service. What the hell does anyone in this country care about the next war? Maybe some realize it's a theft, a looting, but as long as it isn't THEIR blood being spilt, nothing goes nuclear, they don't care. Few outside our little venue here even understand, they think it's still Rah! Rah! And then, I suppose if I were in Congress, I might demand votes on these deals. Civilian control of the military, funding the wars, etc. Of course, if I pushed the point, they'd put a bullet in my HEAD . Just because. And headline me, my Mistress and my wife on the front page of the Post. Because NSA just KNOWS shit. Probably set me up with my Mistress to begin with so they'd have something on me, heh. This is the dilemma the Hill has on a personal level. We don't vote on wars, we gave em a blank check after 9/11 and that's that. Keeping it all going? That's all private. None-ya.

No one can talk about it, they just do it.

[Oct 16, 2017] Trump acts like the proverbial bull in a china shop. Which might be the symptom of floundering, weakened, posturing US Empire -- decending into empty threats (Iran, NK) which are often rightly dismissed by others. Which make this historical period very dangerous indeed.

Notable quotes:
"... The reality is that the above situation outlined by Kerry two years ago has only worsened with Trump's inability to understand that reality leading to the current irrationality in policy-- unless --Trump is actually trying to further the Neocon policy of Full Spectrum Dominance. ..."
"... "Have you met America? That's the country that needs "lives matter" movements because of its prevailing culture of utter indifference to human welfare, but which trips over itself in its eagerness to wage war in defense of the petrodollar." ..."
"... I can easily envision a joint announcement by Russia, China and Iran that all trade conducted with them must be transacted in Yuan, Ruble, Rial, or Euro--that the dollar is no longer welcomed. And given the utter stupidity of the Republican controlled US Congress, more sanctions will be applied to Iran thus sealing the onset of the Outlaw US Empire's international isolation. ..."
"... Imho, the US political establishment, as publically projected, is moving closer to a realm where words, be they snide remarks, lofty pronouncements, declarations of intent, or vile accusations, become substitutes for action. ..."
"... US overt behavior is hapless unless entered into with cold calculation, a specific hidden aim in mind, and levers of control somewhere. Not the case imho, but dismissing Trump as a fool is not useful. We see symptoms of floundering, weakened, posturing Empire -- imho empty sorts o' threats (Iran, NK) are often dismissed by others, rightly so, but that is dangerous too: the US has to play the military domination position combined with the unpredictability card. Extremely volatile situation. ..."
"... Remember when Trump said he would never do a first nuke strike? :) ..."
Oct 16, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 | Oct 15, 2017 5:22:59 PM | 12

In the final days of the Iran Deal negotiations, August 2015, I completely missed the interview Kerry did with Reuters, https://2009-2017.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2015/08/245935.htm that Mercouris parses for his detailed article proving the Outlaw US Empire's Imperial Policy is now "irrational"--utterly I'd say since for me it's been irrational for decades when weighing the actual interests of the United States's populous. The key excerpt:

"But if everybody thinks, 'Oh, no, we're just tough; the United States of America, we have our secondary sanctions; we can force people to do what we want.' I actually heard that argument on television this morning. I've heard it from a number of the organisations that are working that are opposed to this agreement. They're spreading the word, 'America is strong enough, our banks are tough enough; we can just bring the hammer down and force our friends to do what we want them to.'

"Well, look – a lot of business people in this room. Are you kidding me? The United States is going to start sanctioning our allies and their banks and their businesses because we walked away from a deal and we're going to force them to do what we want them to do even though they agreed to the deal we came to? Are you kidding ?

"That is a recipe quickly, my friends, for them to walk away from Ukraine, where they are already very dicey and ready to say, 'Well, we've done our bit.' They were ready in many cases to say, 'Well, we're the ones paying the price for your sanctions.' We – it was Obama who went out and actually put together a sanctions regime that had an impact. By – I went to China. We persuaded China, 'Don't buy more oil.' We persuaded India and other countries to step back.

"Can you imagine trying to sanction them after persuading them to put in phased sanctions to bring Iran to the negotiating table, and when they have not only come to the table but they made a deal, we turn around and nix the deal and then tell them you're going to have to obey our rules on the sanctions anyway?

"That is a recipe very quickly, my friends, businesspeople here, for the American dollar to cease to be the reserve currency of the world – which is already bubbling out there .." (Bold italics in original.)

The reality is that the above situation outlined by Kerry two years ago has only worsened with Trump's inability to understand that reality leading to the current irrationality in policy-- unless --Trump is actually trying to further the Neocon policy of Full Spectrum Dominance. If that is indeed the case, then Trump's behavior is rational in that the only alternative facing the Outlaw US Empire in its drive to enslave the planet is to launch a non-proxy hot war to achieve its goals.

Or... Trump's smarter than any of us as he expects the neocons to fold when faced with the possibility of escalating the ongoing Hybrid Third World War into one that's no longer Hybrid and promises to bring horrendous amounts of death and destruction to The Homeland.

karlof1 | Oct 15, 2017 5:23:58 PM | 13
Oops, forgot link to Mercouris article, http://theduran.com/donald-trump-decertifies-iran-us-foreign-policy-becomes-irrational/
Grieved | Oct 15, 2017 6:10:34 PM | 18
@12 karlof1

yes, I just read that Mercouris piece and I was excited to read about that Kerry interview, that everyone seems to have missed. So here's what seems to be the authoritative background on the the Iran deal.

b said in his last piece - October 14 , linked in his article above:

Obama pushed sanctions onto sanctions to make Iran scream. But the country did not fold. Each new U.S. sanction step was responded to with an expansion of Iran's nuclear program. In the end Obama had to offer talks to Iran to get out of the hole he had dug himself.

For me this was the first time I'd seen an explanation of why the Iran deal happened, and I really wanted to know more. Now this retrospective by Mercouris shows exactly how accurate b's assessment was, but fills in the detail to show that the EU was already on the verge of a major split from the dollar. Only the deal, which allowed EU to grow its trade with the huge market of Iran, saved this potential run from the dollar by Europe.

I read the full Reuters interview , and I find it debatable how much of Kerry's statement was applied to Russia and China and how much to Britain, France and Germany. I'll parse it as, Asia will say it out loud, Europe will think it silently - the unthinkable, that is. Mercouris seems sure it was Europe:

In other words the US was pushed into the JCPOA somewhat against its will at the insistence of its European allies, who were considering lifting sanctions on Iran unilaterally if the US rejected the deal which was on offer. The US submitted to their demands because it feared that the alternative – threatening economic war on its European allies by imposing sanctions on them – would have hastened the ending of the reserve currency status of the US dollar.

It is rare to say the least for US officials to so much as contemplate in public the possibility of the US dollar losing its reserve currency status. The fact that in August 2015 Secretary of State Kerry actually did so shows the pressure that the US was under.

Astonishing. Here we are two years later trying to think that if Trump does whatever nonsense he does with the Iran deal, it will encourage a rift between the US and the EU - but actually this has already come to be the situation, and two years ago at that.

This is some serious shit, that we all seem to have missed. EU leaders may be craven, but European business wants to trade with Iran, and it's simmering around the point of breaking away from the dollar in order to do it. Surely this calls for a large re-calculation of the situation.

What happens if Iran starts to negotiate payments settled in Yuan? Hezbollah can take down Israel militarily. But perhaps Iran can take down the US financially?

ben | Oct 15, 2017 7:27:42 PM | 19
karlof1 @ 13: Thanks for the link. Good read. Actually gives a little hope that the adults in the world can reign in the morons now running the U$A.
ben | Oct 15, 2017 7:32:32 PM | 20
From TRNN: "Decertifying Iran Deal, Trump Escalates His War"

http://therealnews.com/t2/story:20220:Decertifying-Iran-Deal%2C-Trump-Escalates-His-War

Peter AU 1 | Oct 15, 2017 8:19:51 PM | 21
Part of Obama speech.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/08/05/text-obama-gives-a-speech-about-the-iran-nuclear-deal/?utm_term=.aac92dd70db9
..."Moreover, our closest allies in Europe or in Asia, much less China or Russia, certainly are not going to enforce existing sanctions for another five, 10, 15 years according to the dictates of the U.S. Congress because their willingness to support sanctions in the first place was based on Iran ending its pursuit of nuclear weapons. It was not based on the belief that Iran cannot have peaceful nuclear power, and it certainly wasn't based on a desire for regime change in Iran.

As a result, those who say we can just walk away from this deal and maintain sanctions are selling a fantasy. Instead of strengthening our position, as some have suggested, Congress' rejection would almost certainly result in multi-lateral sanctions unraveling.

If, as has also been suggested, we tried to maintain unilateral sanctions, beefen them up, we would be standing alone. We cannot dictate the foreign, economic and energy policies of every major power in the world. In order to even try to do that, we would have to sanction, for example, some of the world's largest banks. We'd have to cut off countries like China from the American financial system. And since they happen to be major purchasers of our debt, such actions could trigger severe disruptions in our own economy, and, by way, raise questions internationally about the dollar's role as the world's reserve currency. That's part of the reason why many of the previous unilateral sanctions were waived."...


Another time when Obama was covincing US to pass the Iran deal, he stated bluntly that not passing the deal would put the US dollar at risk. Have not been able to find it as yet.

Perimetr | Oct 15, 2017 10:44:48 PM | 26
RE: karlof1 | Oct 15, 2017 5:22:59 PM | 12 You write: "Or... Trump's smarter than any of us . . ."

Probably not

see: Donald Trump bodyslams, beats and shaves Vince McMahon at Wrestlemania XXIII
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMKFIHRpe7I

psychohistorian | Oct 15, 2017 11:38:03 PM | 28
I just read this comment by Oh Homer at another site and felt motivated to share it here.

"Have you met America? That's the country that needs "lives matter" movements because of its prevailing culture of utter indifference to human welfare, but which trips over itself in its eagerness to wage war in defense of the petrodollar."

karlof1 | Oct 16, 2017 11:30:57 AM | 38
Grieved @18-

Good questions! The extremely rare candor shown by Kerry, as Mercouris notes, isn't being shared by the Trumpsters and is likely responsible for their outward state of high anxiety and knee-jerk reactions to just about anything.

Iran says it has a plan: "Speaker of Iran's parliament Ali Larijani said that Iran 'had a developed plan and a certain law,' should the United States withdraw from the agreement on Tehran's nuclear program, adding that Washington would 'regret it.'" https://sputniknews.com/world/201710161058275364-iran-plan-us-nuclear-deal/

RT reports Larijani thusly: "' We have a plan We've recently approved in parliament what we should do given the Americans undertake certain steps, ' Larijani told reporters Monday on the sidelines of the Inter-Parliamentary Union meeting in St. Petersburg.

' We will take steps so that the Americans will regret it. '" (Emphasis in original.) https://www.rt.com/news/406851-iran-has-plan-if-us-withdraws-nuclear/ If that is so, then what Iran plans to do ought to be discerned by looking at its parliamentary actions on the subject by those able to read Farsi. I rather doubt it's bluff and bluster.

And the EU won't support Trump's decertification: "After a closed-door meeting [of EU Foreign Ministers at Luxembourg] chaired by EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini on how best to proceed on the Iran issue, ministers issued a joint statement saying that the 2015 deal was key to preventing the global spread of nuclear weapons." https://www.rt.com/newsline/406844-iran-eu-us-mogherini/

I can easily envision a joint announcement by Russia, China and Iran that all trade conducted with them must be transacted in Yuan, Ruble, Rial, or Euro--that the dollar is no longer welcomed. And given the utter stupidity of the Republican controlled US Congress, more sanctions will be applied to Iran thus sealing the onset of the Outlaw US Empire's international isolation.

Noirette | Oct 16, 2017 1:21:55 PM | 40
Imho, the US political establishment, as publically projected, is moving closer to a realm where words, be they snide remarks, lofty pronouncements, declarations of intent, or vile accusations, become substitutes for action.

Likewise, minor symbolic moves like withdrawing, "quitting" which is ambiguous, from e.g. UNESCO - *US didn't pay dues in any case.*

Trump is not alone, all the Dem. Russia-bashing/blaming leads nowhere, the Trump denigration as well, Trump threatening NK is similar.

The word is sufficient to itself! As are incantatory spells, religious appeals, etc. All one clumsy step beyond the Rovian "when we act, we create our own reality.." which rests on the power to act and transform reality (sometimes with sleight of hand, mirages..) transferring that power to symbols with hope and 'belief'... That's the comforting take.

US overt behavior is hapless unless entered into with cold calculation, a specific hidden aim in mind, and levers of control somewhere. Not the case imho, but dismissing Trump as a fool is not useful. We see symptoms of floundering, weakened, posturing Empire -- imho empty sorts o' threats (Iran, NK) are often dismissed by others, rightly so, but that is dangerous too: the US has to play the military domination position combined with the unpredictability card. Extremely volatile situation.

Remember when Trump said he would never do a first nuke strike? :)

[Oct 14, 2017] Republican senator blasts Donald Trump for 'castrating' Rex Tillerson

Notable quotes:
"... Tillerson told a news conference in Beijing two weeks ago that the US was directly communicating with North Korea on its nuclear and missile programs, but it had shown no interest in dialogue. Trump took to Twitter the next day, saying Tillerson was "wasting his time" trying to negotiate with the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un. ..."
"... "The greatest diplomatic activities we have are with China, and the most important, and they have come a long, long way," Corker said. "Some of the things we are talking about are phenomenal. "When you jack the legs out from under your chief diplomat, you cause all that to fall apart." He added that working with China was the key to reaching a peaceful settlement with North Korea. ..."
"... "When you publicly castrate your secretary of state, you take that off the table," Corker said. ..."
"... If Tillerson is undermined by Trump, why is he hanging around. He can't be effective. Honorable thing to do is to hand over his resignation. He doesn't need the job. ..."
"... It's bad, but having experienced the 60s and early 70s (Nixon, Watergate, Vietnam, assassinations of JFK, RFK, MLK, Kent State, 1960 Dem Convention, Weather Underground, etc.) I think it's safe to say that we are nowhere near that level. And then there's the Civil War, Andrew Johnson, etc. ..."
"... Forty years of Reagan's mantra that government, taxes, and unions are evil and business is the way, the truth, and the power. Forty years of his trickle down economics which has led to stagnating/declining wages, crumbling infrastructure and, importantly, divestment in k-16 education. Ongoing dog whistles to now include Christian persecution in a primarily Christian country. ..."
"... And remember, we're a big ass country with small, far flung towns. Trump's support is strongest in small, rural communities ..."
"... Trump picked up the GOP ball and ran with it to its natural conclusion -- a know nothing incompetent, narcissistic president who won on the back of the bigotry, fear, and economic lies the GOP's been peddling for decades. ..."
"... I think many people have been secretly hoping that the good cop/bad cop act was part of an agreed strategy for dealing with Kim and the DRK. It's not though is it? Dozza really is as pathetic as he looks. Absolutely out of his depth and endangering everybody with his bullshit. ..."
"... Sadly the typical American has very little to no awareness of the world outside of the US. Their world view and knowledge of the rest of the world is extremely limited and biased. That is why 'America First' is the perfect strap-line for this 'president'. ..."
"... Trump isn't evil. He's thin-skinned, easily goaded, petty and vindictive, and lacks foresight and self-awareness. His attempts to dismantle Obamacare will kill people, but that's not his aim and he doesn't think of it in those terms. He's not evil, just incompetent and irrational. ..."
"... Trump doesn't understand the word "negotiation" anyway. That's why he previously said that any negotiations with NK would be very short. It's because his definition of the word is, "we tell you what we demand, and you do it, regardless of your viewpoint." That's why he makes enemies of everyone he has contact with, a total lack of understanding that a Win-Win approach is better for all (what does it matter what the outcome for "all" is, as long as Trump appears to be the winner). Boils down to his mental condition meaning he has no empathy. ..."
"... Trump is "riding" the surge in jobs that is related entirely to a cyclical recovery from worldwide recession. ..."
"... I think everyone knows the keys the North Korea crisis are China and dialog. But who says the Corporate States and their military-industrial complex want peace? War drives profits. And as anyone who has travelled the US - outside of Vegas, 5th Ave and Hollywood and Vine - knows war is essential to the American identity and needed to maintain cohesion in that fracturing society. Pride in the US military is a foundation stone of the modern US. War is needed to distract the peasants from the rising poverty virtually nil opportunities at home. War on the Korean peninsula may be needed by the Corporate State and if it is it will happen. ..."
"... It is almost as if Donald Trump thinks the Secretary of State's job is to take notes on Donald Trump's statements. ..."
Oct 14, 2017 | www.theguardian.com

Bob Corker accuses the president of undercutting the secretary of state's efforts to rein in North Korea's nuclear program

US Republican senator Bob Corker stepped up his public feud with Donald Trump on Friday, saying the president's undermining of his secretary of state was like castrating him in public.

Corker told the Washington Post in an interview that Trump had undercut Rex Tillerson's efforts to enlist China in reining in North Korea's nuclear program by denigrating the diplomat.

"You cannot publicly castrate your own secretary of state" without limiting the options for dealing with North Korea, Corker, the chairman of the Senate foreign relations committee, told the Post.

Tillerson told a news conference in Beijing two weeks ago that the US was directly communicating with North Korea on its nuclear and missile programs, but it had shown no interest in dialogue. Trump took to Twitter the next day, saying Tillerson was "wasting his time" trying to negotiate with the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un.

"The greatest diplomatic activities we have are with China, and the most important, and they have come a long, long way," Corker said. "Some of the things we are talking about are phenomenal. "When you jack the legs out from under your chief diplomat, you cause all that to fall apart." He added that working with China was the key to reaching a peaceful settlement with North Korea.

"When you publicly castrate your secretary of state, you take that off the table," Corker said.

Artgoddess 14 Oct 2017 17:05

Tillerson gets A LOT of $ if he lasts a year. Mnuchin, too.

humdum 14 Oct 2017 14:55

If Tillerson is undermined by Trump, why is he hanging around. He can't be effective. Honorable thing to do is to hand over his resignation. He doesn't need the job.

LibtardMangina -> imipak 14 Oct 2017 13:06

Like Sadam had no WMDs yet George and Tony pretended they cared whether they were there or not and went in guns blazing. We're still trying to pick up the pieces. Thanks guys. Dozza's adventures in NK is the next instalment of this shit show.

willyjack -> lochinverboy 14 Oct 2017 12:54

"This is the low point in America's political history"

It's bad, but having experienced the 60s and early 70s (Nixon, Watergate, Vietnam, assassinations of JFK, RFK, MLK, Kent State, 1960 Dem Convention, Weather Underground, etc.) I think it's safe to say that we are nowhere near that level. And then there's the Civil War, Andrew Johnson, etc.

ConBrio -> CorvidRegina 14 Oct 2017 12:16

She came, she manipulated the nomination process, she lost! Get over it the precipitous canonization of damaged goods and try to elect someone competent. She ain't risin again.

CorvidRegina -> Abusedbythestate 14 Oct 2017 11:30

politicians playing on people's fears and telling them what they want to hear

That is the true culprit here. The role of politicians has always been to protect the country, including from its own citizens. Every politician makes use of some fear as a rhetorical tool, but the American conservatives really took this to a whole new level; they found an easy and lazy way to keep their support bolstered, by conflating the very worst traits of the ignorant and gullible with moral, even religious, superiority.

Of course they now consider themselves superior to even the politicians that fed them. It's hard to feel much pity.

john ayres -> colacj 14 Oct 2017 11:18

[Edited for clarity] Anyone other then primate chosen for this position would outshine him. Leave at the Russia BS. It is the result of $2B of propaganda from US agencies.

DAW188 14 Oct 2017 11:02

On an international scale what should probably be concerning American voters more than it is, are the US allies that appear to be pivoting away from them and towards each other. With an incompetent ninny of a POTUS and absolutely no clear military or diplomatic direction it is unsurprising that other global players are looking to each other for some security. The latest fallout over the Iran deal will only exasperate it.

I imagine it has caused some of the diplomats and bureaucrats in Washington to sit up and feel concerned. But as most US news reporting (even from internationally regarded publications like the NYT) seems to look no further than the end of its nose, I doubt its getting much, if any, play amongst US voters.

A fine example of this would be the machinations of the recent meetings between Theresa May and Shinzo Abe. They represent two of the closest political, economic and military allies of the US and are arguably key to the US' Atlantic and Pacific spheres of influence. Both countries find themselves in a bit of a bind. May turns up with a big empty bag labelled trade deals and Abe greets her with a tin-helmet on fearing a NK missile might drop on his head at any moment and that the US administration is not reliable enough to step in and diffuse the tension as it has in the past.

Abe conveniently has a country full of investors who would quite like to get access to the UK to buy up business on the cheap. May had a few hundred nuclear warheads in her back pocket that are all transferable anywhere in the world undetected and underwater (say for example in the South China Sea or the Sea of Japan), as well as a large intelligence agency and a UN security council seat. Not hard to see how tempting it would be for the two to cut a deal. The speech that the two leaders gave at the end of their little summit spelt it out. Abe bigged up Brexit, the opportunities it would afford and the strength of the Anglo-Nippon economic partnership, whilst May reaffirmed British commitments to defend its ally Japan's interests in a big two fingers up to Beijing and Pyongyang. Suddenly the US has two powerful allies turning away from it and towards each other, providing support that the US was once a bridge for.

This isn't restricted to the UK or Japan. Look at Macron in France and Merkel in Germany. Trudeau in Canada and Pena Nieto in Mexico. Even loyal old Bibi is getting in on the act when he recently invited India's Modi around for tea in Jerusalem.

Then you have theoretical allies, that have questionable intentions. Qatar and the Saudis remain at each others throats. The Emir of Qatar (or should that be his mother, the former Queen Moza, the power behind the curtain) certainly seems increasingly enamored with the Iranian's. Whilst the tensions in the Gulf are the way they are, it may not be the time to try and up-end again the relationship with Iran.

mbidding -> JEM5260 14 Oct 2017 11:00

Fifty years of the GOP putting party before country is how too many voters have been duped and misinformed.

Fifty years of Nixon's Southern Strategy and subsequent dog whistle politics aimed at convincing "real" Americans that people of color, liberals, intellectuals, and secular humanists are out to destroy their way of life and are the causes of all their woes.

Forty years of Reagan's mantra that government, taxes, and unions are evil and business is the way, the truth, and the power. Forty years of his trickle down economics which has led to stagnating/declining wages, crumbling infrastructure and, importantly, divestment in k-16 education. Ongoing dog whistles to now include Christian persecution in a primarily Christian country.

Thirty five years of repeal of the Fairness Doctrine by which "news" has become nothing more than politically propagandized infotainment.

And remember, we're a big ass country with small, far flung towns. Trump's support is strongest in small, rural communities -- communities with no experience with diversity of any type (political, economic, and social). These folks have been groomed by the GOP for fifty years to believe that liberal policies and non whites are out to get them and only the GOP and business have their backs.

Trump picked up the GOP ball and ran with it to its natural conclusion -- a know nothing incompetent, narcissistic president who won on the back of the bigotry, fear, and economic lies the GOP's been peddling for decades.

LibtardMangina 14 Oct 2017 10:44

I think many people have been secretly hoping that the good cop/bad cop act was part of an agreed strategy for dealing with Kim and the DRK. It's not though is it? Dozza really is as pathetic as he looks. Absolutely out of his depth and endangering everybody with his bullshit.

Abusedbythestate -> Conradsagent 14 Oct 2017 08:23

It will still end in tears for the yanks - a powerful military will not save the dollar - change is the one constant in the universe - where is the roman empire, the British empire, the Portuguese and Spanish empires, the Venetian empire now???? No one state stays the top dog for ever.

The rest of the world will see to that - the British and Europe are starting to look East and Trump is helping them do that to become so isolated, the US will become a backwater as quick as the USSR collapsed almost overnight. It only takes one extra straw to break the camel's back

Abusedbythestate -> digamey 14 Oct 2017 08:19

Indeed - I have many German friends and we talk about how any group of people in a nation can vote a nutter into power - Hitler being one of the most in(famous). At the end of the day, in all of the world in every nation state, there are a lot of very dumb people - the majority of the electorate to a greater or lesser degree - it's not their fault - we are all born entirely ignorant and our culture forms our opinions and our ability to question - do you remember how often at school, you were encouraged to question anything? or were facts, facts?

Pile on top of that a very powerful media, politicians playing on people's fears and telling them what they want to hear, and people's general gullibility and it's no great surprise that the Germans voted for Hitler, the Yanks voted for Trump and our dumb country voted .... well, vote the way they do - the fact that people seem happy with our so called democracies around the world that are far from democratic, depending on definition, and where we're often given a choice of just one or two options that seem incredibly similar in policy compared to the vast possible alternatives on how to run a country/economy - heaven forbid we might attempt an "extreme" alternative!!!

3melvinudall 14 Oct 2017 08:18

It seems some Republicans have decided now is the time to take down Trump. From what the country has seen of how Trump does "business" better to take him on now than deal with the disastrous consequences of his failures. Captain Trump is taking the ship down with his incompetence...problem is: we are all on that ship.

Gytaff -> Mordicant 14 Oct 2017 07:48

Sadly the typical American has very little to no awareness of the world outside of the US. Their world view and knowledge of the rest of the world is extremely limited and biased. That is why 'America First' is the perfect strap-line for this 'president'.

The Trump base doesn't give a toss about 'worldwide economic momentum', they only see what is happening in their own back yards. This is why Trump is doing well with his base, they see his posturing against North Korea, Iran and Syria as strength, they see his threats to trade deals as protectionist and have absolutely no problem with it, it's perfectly aligned with their views and mindset.

The Democrats are going to have a serious battle in the mid-terms, they need to find a way to appeal to the common man and give them what Trump keeps promising to deliver (but not, so far!). They need to show that they, as elitists can empathize with the common man's position, needs and beliefs, sadly the democrats have a long way to go! The Republicans are also screwed as Trump_vs_deep_state is anathema to their candidates too.

The next 12 months are going to be 'interesting times'!

Conradsagent -> ConBrio 14 Oct 2017 07:34

The US is one of the most fundamentalist, extreme religious whack job countries on the planet.

As for addiction to US protection...it is also one of the most (if not, the most) dangerously confused countries on earth. The world needs protecting 'from' it...not by it

corneilius -> pruneau 14 Oct 2017 07:24

Exactly the same can be said of the Tory party in the UK, especially the belief that you run a national economy on the same principles of a household budget.

saintkiwi -> Prumtic 14 Oct 2017 07:23

I think half the cabinet and half of Congress may actually go along with it; we know from whispers around the White House and Washington that many, if not most, Republicans think Trump is temperamentally/psychologically unfit for the post. Maybe Corker is the crack in the dam that eventually leads to catastrophic failure and flood; maybe not.

Pence is a total stiff, though. No way such a conservative guy would implement such an historic and radical action as forcibly* removing a sitting president, no matter how nuts that C-in-C was.

*(and yes, I can envisage Tump literally having to be dragged from the Oval Office)

UB__DK 14 Oct 2017 07:02

I hope the 25th amendment is on the agenda behind the scenes. It is clear to everyone that the president is unqualified. He is steadily eroding the credibility of the office he holds and of the entire West on the international political scene. And the longer his removal is delayed the worse it will get.

BeenThereDunThat -> ClearlyNow 14 Oct 2017 06:39

Oh dear, another Trumpkin. I am no fan of Merkel - a neoliberal to her boots. But at least she has some humanity and actually cares for other members of the human race outside of her immediate family - and to be honest, I doubt the Tango Tyrant cares for his family other than their being a projection of his own narcissistic ego.

As for Germany, its economy still marches along with it being the number 4 economy in the world and the top of the G5 group. It's standard of living remains high while social inequality is far lower than in countries such as the US or the UK.

So sorry, but another pathetically failed straw-man - or in this case, straw-woman - attempt to deflect attention from the discussion at hand.

Ramas100 14 Oct 2017 05:49

It's the military generals who are stroking Trump's ego by telling him there is a military solution to N Korea and Iran.

RichWoods -> blairsnemesis 14 Oct 2017 05:47

but Trump is the most evil and worst person to hold the post, ever.

Trump isn't evil. He's thin-skinned, easily goaded, petty and vindictive, and lacks foresight and self-awareness. His attempts to dismantle Obamacare will kill people, but that's not his aim and he doesn't think of it in those terms. He's not evil, just incompetent and irrational.

All those things were apparent during the election campaign, so whatever your politics you have no excuse if you voted for someone who is so patently unfit to hold public office.

blairsnemesis -> FrankRoberts 14 Oct 2017 05:23

I suspect he realised before he even took up the post that he was far too thick for the job. Reagan was an appalling bag of shit but Trump is the most evil and worst person to hold the post, ever. I only hope that if someone doesn't kill him (and they'd have my full backing because he is an immense threat to the world), he gets put behind bars, along with the rest of his thick-as-pigshit family, for life.

Prumtic -> HelpAmerica 14 Oct 2017 05:14

Trump doesn't understand the word "negotiation" anyway. That's why he previously said that any negotiations with NK would be very short. It's because his definition of the word is, "we tell you what we demand, and you do it, regardless of your viewpoint." That's why he makes enemies of everyone he has contact with, a total lack of understanding that a Win-Win approach is better for all (what does it matter what the outcome for "all" is, as long as Trump appears to be the winner). Boils down to his mental condition meaning he has no empathy.

MortimerSnerd 14 Oct 2017 05:11

Just trying to keep the faith here until the mid terms. Trump is more bluster than balls, and he is not The Emperor. There are checks and balances in the system and the system has thwarted him on many occasions.

peterxpto -> LondonFog 14 Oct 2017 05:03

Trump is "riding" the surge in jobs that is related entirely to a cyclical recovery from worldwide recession.

Kevin Cox -> WhigInterpretation 14 Oct 2017 04:46

Well said. Regarding Congress, people do not understand the way the US is hobbled by a constitution that facilitates the lobbying of special interests - so long as it is not the labor movement - and which is very, very hard to change. So much for the Founding Fathers and what they accomplished and made difficult to alter.

tippisheadrun -> simba72 14 Oct 2017 04:29

Absolutely.
President Ted Cruz, President Mike Huckabee, President Ben Carson, President Chris Christie, President Rick Santorum, President Marco Rubio - take your prick - none of them would promote any sense of security in the populace. With the exception of John Kasich, the GOP nominee was destined to be a dangerous character- either through lack of scruples or a misguided sense of their own righteousness.

daWOID -> digamey 14 Oct 2017 02:53

Fun fact: "the lifestyle of the good citizens of Montana, Idaho, Nebraska, Wisconsin, West Virginia and Texas etc., etc" collapsed a long time ago.

juster digamey 14 Oct 2017 02:50

The dollar is not going to stay the reserve currency forever. Its just math. If an average chinese can reach 25% productivity of an average amreican, and there is no reason they cant, they will have by all metrics the largest economy. At that stage USD keeping its present day status is impossible even if Abraham Lincoln gets revived an re elected.

charles47 -> RealityCheck2016 14 Oct 2017 02:22

I am involved in negotiations every day of my working life, with staff, with Trustees (directors), with local authorities, with suppliers.

I have good working relationships with most of them. Must be doing something right, while doing a job that matters to me personally. I've met Trump types. They wouldn't last five minutes in the world I live and work in. Too "entitled" and far too full of themselves. Generally, if I come across someone like that, they don't get our business because they are long on promise, short on delivery, and more interested in getting the "deal" than considering our needs as an organisation - which is the selling point I look for, as with most people. One-sided deals don't work and don't last.

As for affording to go to a Trump hotel...if I could, I wouldn't. I have my favourites, and my personal standards that don't involve glitter without substance.

jon donahue -> BhoGhanPryde 14 Oct 2017 01:57

Iran. At about 10,000 dead, it could go on for about three years with beaucoup contracts to be had. Perfect for all the flag-wavers.

Korea? No. Too many dead too fast, could run up to 25,000 in a hurry. Plus, Seoul smoked. Bad optics, no money in it...

jon donahue 14 Oct 2017 01:52

Trump is a train wreck. Incompetent. Unable to manage, unable to negotiate, unable to govern.

The good news is that we don't actually need a functioning President, with the world pretty much at peace and the economy doing well enough.
Everybody in the government and military can just work around the jerk.

digamey 14 Oct 2017 01:38

Republicans are experts at protecting their own butts. While Trump's numbers hold, they will bitch about him in private and suck up to him in public. Once his numbers start to tank, as inevitably they will, they will turn upon him and savage him in a manner with which even the most voracious hyenas could not compete.

BhoGhanPryde 14 Oct 2017 00:38

I think everyone knows the keys the North Korea crisis are China and dialog. But who says the Corporate States and their military-industrial complex want peace? War drives profits. And as anyone who has travelled the US - outside of Vegas, 5th Ave and Hollywood and Vine - knows war is essential to the American identity and needed to maintain cohesion in that fracturing society. Pride in the US military is a foundation stone of the modern US. War is needed to distract the peasants from the rising poverty virtually nil opportunities at home. War on the Korean peninsula may be needed by the Corporate State and if it is it will happen.

Mike Bray 13 Oct 2017 23:37

It is almost as if Donald Trump thinks the Secretary of State's job is to take notes on Donald Trump's statements.

[Oct 14, 2017] The Deep State's Bogus 'Iranian Threat' by David Stockman

Notable quotes:
"... The real answer, however, is both simple and consequential. To wit, the entire prosperity and modus operandi of the Imperial City is based on a panoply of "threats" that are vastly exaggerated or even purely invented; they retain their currency by virtue of endless repetition in the groupthink that passes for analysis. We'd actually put it in the category of cocktail party chatter. ..."
"... The truth is, the US defense budget is hideously oversized for a reason so obvious that it constitutes the ultimate elephant in the room. No matter how you slice it, there just are no real big industrialized, high tech countries in the world which can threaten the American homeland or even have the slightest intention of doing so. ..."
"... That gets us to the bogus Iranian threat. It originated in the early 1990s when the neocon's in the George HW Bush Administration realized that with the cold war's end, the Warfare State was in grave danger of massive demobilization like the US had done after every war until 1945. ..."
"... So among many other invented two-bit threats, the Iranian regime was demonized in order to keep the Imperial City in thrall to its purported national security threat and in support of the vast global armada of military forces, bases and occupations needed to contain it (including the Fifth Fleet in the Persian Gulf and US bases throughout the region). ..."
"... Likewise, what the Imperial City claims to be state sponsored terror is actually nothing more than Iran's foreign policy – something that every sovereign state on the planet is permitted to have. ..."
"... Thus, as the leader of the minority Shiite schism of the Islamic world, Iran has made political and confessional alliances with various Shiite regimes in the region. These include the one that Washington actually installed in Baghdad; the Alawite/Shiite regime in Syria; the largest political party and representative of 40 percent of the population in Lebanon (Hezbollah); and the Houthi/Shiite of Yemen, who historically occupied the northern parts of the country and are now under savage attack by American weapons supplied to Saudi Arabia. ..."
"... In the case of both Syria and Iraq, their respective governments invited Iranian help, which is also their prerogative as sovereign nations. Ironically, it was the Shiite Crescent alliance of Iran/Assad/Hezbollah that bears much of the credit for defeating ISIS on the ground in Mosul, Aleppo, Raqqa, Deir ez-Zor and elsewhere in the now largely defunct Islamic State. ..."
Oct 14, 2017 | original.antiwar.com

... ... ...

He was right. Russia today is a shadow of what Ronald Reagan called the Evil Empire. Its GDP of $1.3 trillion is smaller than that of the New York metro area ($1.6 trillion) and only 7 percent of total US GDP.

Moreover, unlike the militarized Soviet economy which devoted upwards of 40 percent of output to defense, the current Russian defense budget of $60 billion is just 4.5 percent of its vastly shrunken GDP.

So how in the world did the national security apparatus convince the Donald that we need the $700 billion defense program for FY 2018 – 12X bigger than Russia's – that he just signed into law?

What we mean, of course, is how do you explain that – beyond the fact that the Donald knows virtually nothing about national security policy and history; and, to boot, is surrounded by generals who have spent a lifetime scouring the earth for enemies and threats to repel and reasons for more weapons and bigger forces.

The real answer, however, is both simple and consequential. To wit, the entire prosperity and modus operandi of the Imperial City is based on a panoply of "threats" that are vastly exaggerated or even purely invented; they retain their currency by virtue of endless repetition in the groupthink that passes for analysis. We'd actually put it in the category of cocktail party chatter.

... ... ...

The truth is, the US defense budget is hideously oversized for a reason so obvious that it constitutes the ultimate elephant in the room. No matter how you slice it, there just are no real big industrialized, high tech countries in the world which can threaten the American homeland or even have the slightest intention of doing so.

Indeed, to continue with our historical benchmarks, the American homeland has not been so immune to foreign military threat since WW II. Yet during all those years of true peril, it never spent close too the Donald's $700 billion boondoggle.

For instance, during the height of LBJs Vietnam folly (1968) defense spending in today's dollars was about $400 billion. And even at the top of Reagan's utterly unnecessary military building up (by the 1980s the Soviet Union was collapsing under the weight of its own socialist dystopia), total US defense spending was just $550 billion.

That gets us to the bogus Iranian threat. It originated in the early 1990s when the neocon's in the George HW Bush Administration realized that with the cold war's end, the Warfare State was in grave danger of massive demobilization like the US had done after every war until 1945.

So among many other invented two-bit threats, the Iranian regime was demonized in order to keep the Imperial City in thrall to its purported national security threat and in support of the vast global armada of military forces, bases and occupations needed to contain it (including the Fifth Fleet in the Persian Gulf and US bases throughout the region).

The truth, however, is that according to the 2008 NIE ( National Intelligence Estimates) of the nation's 17 intelligence agency, the Iranian's never had a serious nuclear weapons program, and the small research effort that they did have was disbanded by orders of the Ayatollah Khamenei in 2003.

Likewise, what the Imperial City claims to be state sponsored terror is actually nothing more than Iran's foreign policy – something that every sovereign state on the planet is permitted to have.

Thus, as the leader of the minority Shiite schism of the Islamic world, Iran has made political and confessional alliances with various Shiite regimes in the region. These include the one that Washington actually installed in Baghdad; the Alawite/Shiite regime in Syria; the largest political party and representative of 40 percent of the population in Lebanon (Hezbollah); and the Houthi/Shiite of Yemen, who historically occupied the northern parts of the country and are now under savage attack by American weapons supplied to Saudi Arabia.

In the case of both Syria and Iraq, their respective governments invited Iranian help, which is also their prerogative as sovereign nations. Ironically, it was the Shiite Crescent alliance of Iran/Assad/Hezbollah that bears much of the credit for defeating ISIS on the ground in Mosul, Aleppo, Raqqa, Deir ez-Zor and elsewhere in the now largely defunct Islamic State.

In tomorrow's installment we will address the details of the Iran nuke agreement and why the Donald is making a horrible mistake in proposing to decertify it. But there should be no doubt about the consequence: It will reinforce the neocon dominance of the Republican party and insure that the nation's $1 trillion Warfare State remains fully entrenched.

Needless to say, that will also insure that the America's gathering fiscal crisis will turn into an outright Fiscal Calamity in the years just ahead.

David Stockman has agreed to send every Antiwar.com reader a free copy of his newest book, Trumped! when you take his special Contra Corner offer. Click here now for the details.

David Stockman was a two-term Congressman from Michigan. He was also the Director of the Office of Management and Budget under President Ronald Reagan. After leaving the White House, Stockman had a 20-year career on Wall Street. He's the author of three books, The Triumph of Politics: Why the Reagan Revolution Failed , The Great Deformation: The Corruption of Capitalism in America and TRUMPED! A Nation on the Brink of Ruin And How to Bring It Back . He also is founder of David Stockman's Contra Corner and David Stockman's Bubble Finance Trader .

Read more by David Stockman

[Oct 14, 2017] The United States and Iran Two Tracks to Establish Hegemony by James Petras

You can't analyze the USA foreign policy toward Iran without analyzing the needs of the US led neoliberal empire... Interests of Israel are secondary to the interests of empire.
Notable quotes:
"... 'salami tactics' ..."
"... "color revolution" ..."
"... 'terrorist state' ..."
"... 'responsibility to protect (R2P) ..."
"... Iran responded by developing economic, technical and military agreements with Russia and China in order to counter the US-Israeli-Saudi threats and sanctions. Russia provides advanced defensive weapons systems. China signs large-scale, long-term trade agreements while including Iran in its huge Central Asian infrastructure projects. Most importantly, Iran has succeeded in defending the legitimate government of Syria, while aiding Iraq and Yemen. ..."
"... President Trump is facing a serious coup d'état involving the political-intelligence elite, with the military looking warily on the chaos. The masses are increasingly polarized or disgusted. ..."
"... 'national-capitalist ideology' ..."
"... The Trump regime is full of contradictions: It threatens to end the nuclear agreement with Iran but allows Boeing to sell billions of dollars of civilian aircraft to Teheran. It signs a $300 billion dollar arms sales agreement with Saudi Arabia (business for the for military industries) while losing political influence in the US, where the Saudis are widely despised. ..."
"... And yet the US destroyed Iran's most useful enemy, Saddam's Iraq. Sometimes I wonder whether US foreign policy has any guiding intelligence at all. Maybe it consists only of stupid, reckless flailing. ..."
"... How many Americans and Europeans realize that all Islamic terrorism in the West is Sunni and none of it is Shia, and that all the demonization of Iran and Hezbollah is solely for the benefit of Israel? ..."
"... Bottom line is that most American people are kept under-educated by design and they are being fooled and mislead by the ZIOMSM about the rest of the world! ..."
"... Trump administration has promised to one of many fans of MEK that it has been looking and will continue to look into ways to change the Iranian regime . One of the ways is to harness the terrorism that is embodied by MEK. ..."
"... Next generation might end up repeating 'God forgive America' instead of chanting ad nauseam – ' God bless America' . ..."
"... The younger generation is just as corrupt and unthinking as their teachers -- maybe even more corrupt: for most of the young professionals -- such as a group I met recently -- the primary concern is networking/career building, and if it means acquiescing to regime change, so be it. ..."
"... Hey S2 and KA, how about the [regime change] color revolution that's happening here, with the drive to impeach Trump? Only it's not really regime change, is it. It's the Deep State (with its useful idiot Pussy Brigade) desperate to maintain status quo. ..."
"... Some people think I'm a Trump supporter. Well, I support that he's our duly elected President, and I'm grateful for his disruption (God Bless him for "the system is rigged" and "fake news"), but I don't like most of his policy, and he abandoned the part I did like. But it was just so euphoric to dodge Hilmonster bullet. ..."
"... What's happening now, however, is bigger than persons or parties. The fraudulent accusations of collusion with Russia, intended to derail this administration, are an attack on our democracy and an exercise in persuasion and mind-control of our citizenry. This was underscored for me by a dreadful conversation in church this morning. When I said that I didn't believe that "17 intelligence agencies" had proved that the Russians interfered [directly, by hacking, was the point] in our election, my interlocutor was aghast. Unable to answer in a "Christian" manner, she threw back her head and laughed. It was quite a Hillaryesque gesture. ..."
"... What preceded this was my bringing up the collaboration of the DNC, Crowdstrike, and Ukraine to slander and taint Donald Trump via accusations against Paul Manafort. Rather than cross-examine me about that or discuss it, she came back with, "How about Trump and the Russian oligarchs " and "How about Jared Kushner meeting the Russians.." – IN THE RUSSIAN EMBASSY !!! seemed to be enormously unforgivable in her mind – and a few other 'How abouts.' When none of this impressed me, she was visibly exasperated and went to the '17 agencies,' hoping for a knock-out blow, I guess. ..."
"... Sadly, I turn to anonymous commenters for solace. Also, I encourage all to see the significance of the DNC chicanery, of Crowdstrike not allowing the FBI to see the DNC computers, of Ukraine collaboration. I'm not an unqualified endorser of all Lee Stranahan's views, but he's doing a terrific job investigating this – and he's the only one who is! What he doesn't say in this video: the Dems should be careful what they wish for! After Comey hearing, there will be investigation of Loretta Lynch. ..."
"... The US can only operate in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Syria (and try for Iran) because of Zionist Neo-con dominance of the US government. The public actually voted against ME wars so it's clear that further wars are illegitimate. ..."
Oct 13, 2017 | www.unz.com

US policy in the Middle East and South Asia is shaped by several basic considerations:

US Imperialism is the force of global domination US imperial policy in the Middle East focuses on encircling, destroying and dismantling Iran's allies (Syria, Lebanon (Hezbollah), Iraq (Shi'a Militia), Qatar and Yemen with the intent of overthrowing the government and installing a client regime in Teheran. The return of Iran to the status of puppet regime will advance Washington's ultimate goal of encircling and isolating Russia and China. The US overthrow of the Islamic Republic of Iran will facilitate Israel's final seizure of Palestine, including Jerusalem, and establish Tel Aviv as the dominant regional power in the Middle East.

Washington's 'Two Track' Policy for Domination

US strategic planners rely on a two-track policy , combining and blending military and ideological weapons.

Its military strategy relies on slicing up the Middle East - 'salami tactics' – invading and conquering of each and every country and government, which shares the Islamic Republic of Iran's policy of national sovereignty and independence. US military success or failure depends on its alliances in the Middle East, North Africa and Europe. The US, Saudi Arabia and Israel all sponsor terrorist groups which have attacked Iran's scientists, its elected representatives and military leaders, as well as its sacred sites – inside Iran as well as abroad. The political and ideological strategy involves the penetration and organization of domestic forces to destabilize and weaken Iran's internal security, defense capability and overseas alliances. Ideological warfare involves: (1) exploiting regional, ethnic, class and religious differences to undermine stability and fragment the country; and (2) converting legitimate social critics and political opposition parties into imperial collaborators.

Ideological attacks are designed to attract Iranian writers, academics, intellectuals and artists who choose to ignore the history of US imperialism in fomenting bloody coups (Mossadegh 1954), launching proxy wars via Saddam Hussain's invasion (1980- 88) and the terrorist attacks by Israel and Saudi Arabia, as well as the terrorists backed by Iraq's former dictator.

US propaganda intervention in Iran's electoral process has been designed to promote a so-called "color revolution" regime change favored by neo-liberal, pro-West parties and candidates who seek US sponsorship in their ascent to power. The imperial collaborators and various Western 'human rights' NGOs hide the sordid history of Washington's overt and proxy wars/coups and occupations in Syria, Iraq, Ukraine, Afghanistan, Somalia, Yemen, Libya and Palestine.

Modern imperialist policies include:

diplomatic and cyber warfare against Iran's defense and security systems; economic sanctions and the assassination of highly skilled scientists and engineers to undermine economic growth; political propaganda labeling Iran a 'terrorist state' in order to intimidate and weaken overseas and domestic allies; and the financing and arming of terrorists from Europe, the Middle East and North Africa to attack the Islamic Republic.

Linguistic and Conceptual Perversions

Imperial warfare depends on perverting political language and concepts. The US refers to invasion, which have killed and maimed millions of Muslims and Christians in Iraq (2003-2017) and Syria (2011-2017) as 'humanitarian interventions'. In reality its policy described an ongoing 'holocaust' – the massive genocidal violation of the human rights of scores of millions of people to sovereignty, peace and security of home, life, limb, culture and faith.

The millions of victims of the West's current holocaust in the Middle East reject and scorn Washington's imperialist claim of defending 'democratic values' and its so-called 'responsibility to protect (R2P) ' as pronounced by a series of US Administrations through their mouthpieces in the United Nations.

In contrast, US support for the Saudi monarch's brutal bombing and blockade of Yemen has led to an entire population facing starvation and a massive, cholera epidemic, which now threatens over 26 million Yeminis. The campaign against Yemen by the brutal Saudis and their US-EU allies is the very definition of crimes against humanity and international law.

Sanctions: A Tool of Conquest

US sanctions against Iraq, Syria, Iran and Yemen have been designed to starve working people into submission while capturing the support of some middle class consumers. US policy of invading Libya and brutally murdering President Gadhafi and his family members was designed to systematically destroy a prosperous, independent republic and turn it into a backward, impoverished fiefdom of tribal warlords, exploited by Western oil companies. Saudi Arabia joined the European Union in financing terrorists, many trained in the destroyed remnants of Libya, who later killed innocent civilians in Paris, Nice, London, Manchester and other parts of Europe.

The strategic goal of the US invasion of Iraq, Syria and Yemen has been to violently divide these independent republics and turn them into ethnically cleansed, impoverished, mini-states – in the imperial tradition of 'divide and conquer'. Such tribal fiefdoms are easily dominated by imperial powers.

Regional and Global Strategy

Washington's imperial strategists have arrived at the conclusion that they cannot conquer independent states, like Iran, in a single attack, given its size, defense capability, internal cohesion and regional alliances.

Their strategy is to surround Iran by destroying its allies, one nation at a time.

The first phase of the US invasion, occupation and systematic destruction of Iraq and its entire governmental infrastructure was designed to overthrow the Baathist state, then neutralize the Shi'a militia and impose a servile client regime in Baghdad. The second step was to encourage Sunni tribal warlords to seize control of central Iraq. The third step was to arm the Kurds to form a mini-state in northern Iraq (so-called "Kurdistan"). This would entail large-scale ethnic cleansing, the total destruction of Iraq's ancient Christian community, the extermination of its multiethnic modern educated, scientific, cultural and technocratic work force. In other words, the US strategy was to obliterate any remnant of the Iraqi Republic in its war to 'remake the Middle East'.

After Iraq and Libya, the next target for US-EU aggression has been the government of the Syrian Arab Republic, Iran's ally. The EU, USA, Saudi Arabia and Turkey sponsored an invasion by mercenary Salafi forces under a network of Daesh-ISIS-al Queda terrorists. Israel, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the Emirates have provided military, logistical and financial support to the terrorists.

After Syria, the fourth target of Anglo-American-Saudi-Israeli military strategy would be to undermine the national sovereignty of Lebanon and destroy the armed political Hezbollah Party, the powerful Lebanese resistance organization (allied with Iran). It was consistent with this strategy for the West to support Israel's brutal air and ground attacks against the civilian population and infrastructure of Beirut, Lebanese port cities and villages. Tens of thousands of Lebanese Christians were not spared the Israeli terror bombing campaign.

If a Lebanese campaign were successful and Hezbollah was destroyed, the 'final' Israeli conquest of Palestine, the fifth objective, could commence: US and world Zionism would unconditionally celebrate Israel's massive ethnic purge of Palestine's native peoples and finish off the total confiscation of the homes, mosques, churches, land and resources of millions of Muslim and Christian Palestinians and other peoples. This would create history's first 'pure Jewish' state.

The sixth imperial objective would be to disarm Iran's military and security structure and weaken its economy in order to isolate the Islamic Republic and undermine its Middle Eastern alliances. This strategic objective explains why Washington promotes its one-sided nuclear arms agreement with Iran, while the nuclear-armed Israel is excluded! Despite Iran's abiding by the terms of the agreement, there have been no reciprocal lifting of economic sanctions or the normalization of trade and diplomatic relations.

Beyond Iran, the global strategy would be to weaken, encircle and isolate the US's big power rivals, China and Russia and re-establish the US as the uncontested world imperial power.

Iran Counters the US Global Military Threat

Iran responded by developing economic, technical and military agreements with Russia and China in order to counter the US-Israeli-Saudi threats and sanctions. Russia provides advanced defensive weapons systems. China signs large-scale, long-term trade agreements while including Iran in its huge Central Asian infrastructure projects. Most importantly, Iran has succeeded in defending the legitimate government of Syria, while aiding Iraq and Yemen.

Iran undermined official US sanctions by signing multi-billion dollar agreements with the giant Boeing Corporation for the purchase of passenger airplanes as well as developing further agreements with US banks and agro-business exporters and oil companies. These profitable agreements with the US agro-business export sector can weaken the Pentagon-Zionist sanctions.

Iran has the diplomatic support of the Non-Aligned Movement opposing Israeli-US Zionist military threats.

Iran's principled opposition to Saudi Arabia's massive arms purchases, as well as the Kingdom's vicious alliance with Israel and its genocidal assault against the Yemeni people, has gained the support of world public opinion – especially the masses of independent Muslims throughout the world.

Iran's educational, scientific, military and political-electoral advances provide the basis for national security, economic growth, cultural enrichment, international alliances and the deepening of social democracy for its people. It provides an alternative independent vision for many millions of Muslims living under harsh monarchies, military dictators and imperial oppression.

Conclusion

Since the US and its allies launched their 'hot war' by surrounding, threatening and destabilizing Iran, Washington's strategy has suffered serious military defeats and political retreats. Iraq is no longer encircled by the US. Shia-based militias have regional control, especially south of Baghdad and beyond. Syria, Iran's ally, has fought hard to finally liberate many towns, cities and territory taken by the terrorist mercenaries despite the EU-US-Saudi-Israel's initial advances.

Rival rebel forces and mercenary gangsters besiege the US puppet governments in Libya, Somalia and South Sudan. The classic CIA term, 'blowback', means these terrorists are now turning their guns on the West. Washington has lost control of Afghanistan. Over a third of the Afghan military and police recruits defect to the resistance fighters. The central 'government' in Kabul influences less than a quarter of the country

Despite spending trillions of dollars on wars and propaganda over the past two decades, US military strategy to encircle and conquer Iran has been a military, diplomatic and economic failure. The American people have suffered thousands of casualties and its domestic economy is in permanent crisis with massive unemployment, poverty, recession and stagnation.

Despite US congressional, Presidential and Pentagon support for Israel's Jewish colonization of Palestine, more countries, trade unions and social movements, around the world, support the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel than ever before. Manu are speaking up despite government threats to outlaw 'criticism of Israel' as a 'hate crime'.

The turmoil and deep political divisions in the United States between the oligarchs allied to President Trump and the opposition oligarchs have created a profound institutional crisis, which has undermined domestic governance and disrupted US global alliances, US-EU relations and US-Asian trade links.

Despite the bizarre and often theatrical presentation by the US mass media, the American Congress and President Trump are fighting over fundamental issues, including control of the national security agencies (CIA, NSA, FBI, Homeland Security, etc.), foreign and military policy, the economy and environmental agenda, the federal budget, judiciary and the Presidency.

The political crisis has paralyzed the capacity of the US to start new wars and negotiate international agreements. President Trump is facing a serious coup d'état involving the political-intelligence elite, with the military looking warily on the chaos. The masses are increasingly polarized or disgusted.

In an attempt to deflect from his domestic problems, President Trump deepened the US alliance with Saudi Arabia and reiterated threats against Iran. Nevertheless he declined pressure to move the US embassy to Jerusalem. The inconsistent and ad hoc nature of current US policy alienates friends and foes – with no redeeming features.

The domestic opposition demands an end of President Trump's diplomatic overtures to Russia. It uses the fake pretext of Russian interference in the US presidential election to move toward the president's impeachment.

The US faces a CLANDESTINE CIVIL WAR among its elite!

A financial bubble accompanies the American domestic political crisis. The economic elite, the banks and stock market have benefited through speculation, despite or because of, the paralysis among rival political oligarchs!

The emergence of Trump's so-called 'national-capitalist ideology' means a decline in US multi-lateral agreements, such as NATO, the EU, NAFTA and the Trans-Pacific Trade Partnership (TPP). This explains Trump's effort to renegotiate bilateral agreements, which have failed

Trump's stated policy objectives have fallen between two chairs: the multi-lateral agreements have not been replaced by lucrative bilateral deals. Trump relies on big business offerings and 'nationalist' ideology to minimize his diplomatic failures and ideological isolation. Trump wants to win contracts for greater US exports and investment. This has been weakened by the previous administration's pursuit of economic sanctions and expanding wars, as well as his feckless propaganda.

The Trump regime is full of contradictions: It threatens to end the nuclear agreement with Iran but allows Boeing to sell billions of dollars of civilian aircraft to Teheran. It signs a $300 billion dollar arms sales agreement with Saudi Arabia (business for the for military industries) while losing political influence in the US, where the Saudis are widely despised.

At least, Trump does not blather on about humanitarian wars; he would prefer signing business deals. He mentions the need for 'regime change' in Syria and sending more troops to Afghanistan but does little to implement these goals.

President Trump is fighting for his own political (and personal) survival and to prevent his impeachment (via a Congressional coup). His strongest defense would be to strengthen the domestic economy and show some overseas economic successes.

Essentially, Trump's economic agenda depends on his avoiding politically and militarily costly wars. That was one of his campaign promises that resonated with the nation's core electorate.

Trump would like to balkanize Syria, while avoiding new troop commitments to Afghanistan. He would prefer profitable trade relations with Russia and China and perhaps, Iran, over war.

The impediments to any Trump policy success are massive: Trump's Administration includes zealous neo-conservative Russophobes and Zionist-Iranophobes. These are militarists who would provoke eventual armed conflict with Moscow and Teheran. Their current focus is on expanding the war in Syria, sending more US troops to Afghanistan and forging deeper ties with Israel and Saudi Arabia.

The current internal political contradictions between the Trump regime and the 'Deep' State apparatus, and between the Trump-allied business elite and the Zionist-neoconservative warmongers, preclude the development of a consequential Trump foreign policy.

In the meantime, domestic political warfare and the deepening divisions between the US and EU will create opportunities for Russia, China and Iran to join together in historic economic political and alliances, which might help re-balance a world on the brink of 'world war', economic collapse and environmental disaster.

The divisions among NATO countries undermine the establishment of a united front for greater imperial wars. The fragmentation of the European Union (Brexit, the collapse of Greece, the EU-sponsored putsch in Ukraine) lessens its global economic influence. The division between the US Presidential regime and the Opposition Security State apparatus paralyzes the US push for new imperial wars.

Divisions and conflicts within the imperial camp presents favorable opportunities for anti-imperialist countries in the Middle East, like Iran, Syria and Lebanon.

The strategic Russo-Chinese economic alliance may create a new global economy based on peaceful co-existence and greater economic co-operation.

This essay is dedicated to the memory of the innocent martyrs of the recent brutal terrorist attacks against the Iranian Parliament and the holy shrine and to honor the brave survivors and family members of the victims.

(Republished from The James Petras Website by permission of author or representative)

Of Related Interest The Demolition of U.S. Global Power Donald Trump's Road to Debacle in the Greater Middle East Alfred McCoy July 16, 2017 4,200 Words 106 Comments Trump Presidency --- First SNAFUs Already The Saker February 3, 2017 2,000 Words 225 Comments Autopilot Wars Sixteen Years, But Who's Counting? Andrew J. Bacevich October 8, 2017 2,100 Words 71 Comments disturbed_robot >, June 24, 2017 at 6:14 am GMT

Mr. Petras, my hats off to you. This is the most to-the-point, honest assessment of what's going on I've read in a long time.

My only complaint is the use of the term "Middle East". We should all drop this British colonial era term and just call it what it is: Southwest Asia. Please don't take that as being nit-picky and looking for fault (not my intention at all) your article is brilliant. But we have to start somewhere.

jilles dykstra >, June 24, 2017 at 6:15 am GMT

@Joe Levantine

Is it possible that many representatives know quite well what's going on, but have reasons, their own political survival, to pretend they do not know ?

Senator Hollings just dared to speak the truth shortly before he resigned, in 2004.

Hans Vogel >, June 24, 2017 at 7:14 am GMT

With respect to Israel's supposedly assigned role, I beg to differ. The US, like Russia and Iran, is an assimilative empire, established on the basis of welcoming and incorporating any group or individual willing to adopt the imperial culture and language. In other words, these are non-exclusive states.

Israel, on the other hand, is built on rigid and comprehensive racial and religious exclusiveness. Only Jews can join. Israel is the quintessential nation state, built on an antiquated, romantic 19th-century idea. The self-defeating and ultimately untenable model of the nation state was demonstrated unequivocally in 1945, but ignoring historical proof, Israel resuscitated it in 1948.

Therefore, it would seem to me Israel can never become the dominant force in the Middle East. Even if it somehow succeeds in attaining this position, it will definitely be of a very short duration. It is a bit like what Guizot once remarked: you can do anything with a bayonet, except sit on it.

Durruti >, June 24, 2017 at 10:27 am GMT

A Nicely Written Article by Petras:

Could have used a bit of information on the Rothschilds and other dominant Jewish Banking Family Oligarchs, including their role in the assassination of John F. Kennedy (the last Constitutional President of the United States ), on November 22, 1963, in the Coup D'etat in Dallas, (the first successful Modern Arab Spring ). Could have benefitted by references to the horrors of Vietnam and Indonesia (1965), 9/11, and the attack on the Liberty, among other dark pages of recent history, which would have taken a sentence. Could have used a bit of a VISION advocacy of how to Cure this Zionist imperialist plague so nicely described by Petras. The Restoration of the Republic, destroyed on November 22, 1963, is the Revolutionary Cure so ignored by the earnest and not so earnest critics of the Zionist New World Order.

Oh for our own Decembrists! God Bless America! Restore the Republic!

Durruti for The Anarchist Collective

jacques sheete >, June 24, 2017 at 11:07 am GMT

The strategic Russo-Chinese economic alliance may create a new global economy based on peaceful co-existence and greater economic co-operation.

Let's hope so. I, for one, am more than fed up with the one trick parasite, gangster politics.

Sergey Krieger >, June 24, 2017 at 11:16 am GMT

As USA internal rot accelerates she is becoming increasingly erratic and desperate in her international policy. It increasingly looks like biten by white shark seal trashing desperately in the water while life along with blood leaving it's body. Others should keep their cool and patiently wait.

dearieme >, June 24, 2017 at 11:37 am GMT

"2) US imperial policy in the Middle East focuses on encircling, destroying and dismantling Iran's allies (Syria, Lebanon (Hezbollah), Iraq (Shi'a Militia), Qatar and Yemen with the intent of overthrowing the government and installing a client regime in Teheran."

And yet the US destroyed Iran's most useful enemy, Saddam's Iraq. Sometimes I wonder whether US foreign policy has any guiding intelligence at all. Maybe it consists only of stupid, reckless flailing.

fnn >, June 24, 2017 at 2:19 pm GMT

How many Americans and Europeans realize that all Islamic terrorism in the West is Sunni and none of it is Shia, and that all the demonization of Iran and Hezbollah is solely for the benefit of Israel?

Rurik >, Website June 24, 2017 at 6:26 pm GMT

Excellent article and analysis, kudos and gratitude

If I were to offer any suggestion, I'd just prefer that the author amend the abbreviation of the US to the Z US (Zionist occupied US), as all of the things he mentions that the US is doing, are all in direct contravention of the principles and interests and people of the actual US, and are, rather, all being done to benefit the most sinister and intractable enemy of the of the US (and so many others including Iran); the Z US.

The American people have suffered thousands of casualties and its domestic economy is in permanent crisis with massive unemployment, poverty, recession and stagnation.

Trump's economic agenda depends on his avoiding politically and militarily costly wars. That was one of his campaign promises that resonated with the nation's core electorate.

I spell out my case for calling it the ZUS here:

(which I invite the moderators to including under a blue 'more' link so as not to clutter up the comment section)

[MORE]

saying US, by which I do not mean ordinary US people then the rotten elite running the show.

I sort of know that, but I hope you (and others) can understand why that distinction is so important to us genuine Americans who're horrified at the conduct of the US government on the world's stage.

The interests of the US government vs. the people of the US, could not be more diametrically opposed. They're looting our Treasury and our future to fund eternal wars for Israel- that do nothing but destroy any kind of long-term hope for this country. They're creating hatred for the American people that will reverberate over generations. They're systematically dismantling our sacred codified rights (earned in blood) going all the way back to the Magna Carta. They assassinate our citizens if they prove inconvenient to the regime, when they aren't burning them alive at places like Waco or the World Trade Center. There seems to be nothing too demonic that this government will do to us American citizens if they suspect that by doing so it will somehow augment their power to dominate us even more.

Today in America is much like the Russians during the Bolshevik / Soviet regime. Our government is our most intractable and dangerous enemy on the planet. We Americans have nothing to fear from Russia or Iran. That's laughable. But we have everything to fear from Washington DC. The drooling fiend that inhabits those think tanks and J-Street and K-Street and CFR and PNAC and CIA and all the other acronyms of Satan are our worst enemy on this planet, just as they threaten and menace the rest of the people of the planet, intending to use our children as cannon fodder even as they commit endless atrocities and war crimes in our name.

So I guess my point is just that the interests of the US [zio-government], vs. the interests of the US people are so wildly at odds, that it would be nice if others could see this as glaringly as those of us American citizens, watching with horror- as our government perpetrates monstrous crimes all over the globe, and here at home.

The banking cartels are not run by patriotic American citizens, they're run by our enemies.

The Pentagon is not run by patriotic American citizens, it's run by our enemies.

the FBI and CIA and DEA and NSA are all operated by the enemies of the American people.

the media are the most sinister and committed enemy we have. No one hates our guts more.

the universities are nothing but kosher Marxist indoctrination centers, telling our young people (among other things) that the "US" liberated the people of Kosovo. (is that what happened?). They tell our students that our participation in the world wars was honorable and noble. They tell them that what we are doing in the Middle East today is honorable and noble. They even are attempting to make any criticism of Israel a crime on the universities and campuses. Outlawing any expression of support for the BDS movement. Does that sound like our universities are run by and for Americans?!

there are two entities here in the good ol' US of A. There is the ZUSA, that is an enemy to all of mankind, including the people of the US. And then there are the people of the US; represented by those who still cling to quaint notions like the Rule of Law, and our traditions like freedom of speech and fair play. People like Michael Hastings. People like Seth Rich. People like Pat Tillman or Ron Paul or all of his supporters. People like the ones that voted for Obama to end the wars, and who voted for Trump to end the wars. People like Ken O'keefe, who are Americans to the core, and still represent the spirit of what being an American was all about, until our nation was hijacked in 1913 for the greater glory of $atan.

the US goal in former Yugoslavia was primarily a rejuvenation of NATO which has lost its meaning with the demise of SU. Also, the Demoncrats have a natural propensity to package their imperialism into "humanitarian" interventions, the Republicans are much less sleazy – the Republicans just say you are with us or against us, no matter whether what we do is legal or illegal. Therefore, it was a perfect little war for the Clintons:
1) breath a new life into NATO,
2) clean up the Southern Europe of any residual Russia and/or socialist influence and
3) do a dress rehearsal for attacking Russia (using NATO).

sounds like a perfectly excellent analysis to me.

I remember how we scrambled at the time to make sense of it. WTF were they up to?!

why were they bombing a nation that had been 'our' ally during WWII, and seemingly so that some KLA terrorists could lay claim to their ancient and sacred lands? Hard won from the same Muslim hoards that had drenched Kosovo in Christian, Serbian blood for centuries.

Some of us figured it was kind of a payback for Palestine. 'Yes, we zio-scum are ravaging your people in Palestine, but as payback, we'll give you Kosovo!

We even wondered if there wasn't some secret, high-level negotiations going on between the representatives of Islam and the Zionists. 'OK, what do you want for Palestine?' / 'We'll take Kosovo'.

Then there was general Clarks quote regarding the necessity of bombing Serbia:

"Let's not forget what the origin of the problem is. There is no place in
modern Europe for ethnically pure states. That's a 19th century idea and we are trying to transition into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multi-ethnic states."

- General Wesley Clark

so it's been a conundrum, but your analysis sounds like the best so far.

travelling NGO EcoSystem

yes we see it all over the place. But also please keep in mind that the original NGO that $ubverted and corrupted is the one that took control of the US. The actions of the 'US' (ZUSA) today are no more a representation of the people of the US, than those in Kyiv or Kabul represent the typical Ukrainian or Afghan. Washington DC no more represents the 300+ million people here than did the actions of Mubarak represented the Egyptian people, or Yeltsin represented the Russian people, or Tony Blair represented the people of England. We have all of us been NGO'd by the Fiend, and none more so than us here in the US, where they declare from their pulpits that there is 'zero daylight between Israel and the ZUSA!'

So it stings to read about how this or that benefits the US, when all the benefits are going to the very same Beast that is drooling its putrid saliva all over US too.

Durruti >, June 24, 2017 at 10:19 pm GMT

@Rurik

My fine feathered friend:

I have little to parse in your lengthy essay.

However, in your selfish – sectarian way , you manage to blather on without a passing referral to comment # 6, directly above, which deals similarly with the same material,

And Includes: A suggestion #3, for a Cure to the Illness we are discussing. The Cure, which you in your 'brilliant' analysis, manage to avoid – ignore – or, suggest your own. Whining is OK, but Curative Change, apparently, is Verboten.

Of Necessity, I repeat : " a VISION advocacy of how to Cure this Zionist imperialist plague so nicely described by Petras. The Restoration of the Republic, destroyed on November 22, 1963, is the Revolutionary Cure so ignored by the earnest and not so earnest critics of the Zionist New World Order ."

Monty Ahwazi >, June 24, 2017 at 10:55 pm GMT

Great job Mr James Petras! Excellent summary of the past generation and the possibilities for near future of the Southwest Asia!

I wished you would have elaborated more about the US and Israeli Zionists pulling the west particularly the US into the Israel's illegal conflicts in the Southwest Asia! Now and in the near future the Israelis have more freedom to grab more land freely and without any challenges!

The US government has fallen for this crap at the expense of the American people! But I don't blame the Israelis to take advantage of the American government! I do blame however the American people who don't give damn about what their government is doing abroad as long as they have a job, place to live, food to eat, beer and pop to drink and a couch to sit on and watch Foux no news!

Bottom line is that most American people are kept under-educated by design and they are being fooled and mislead by the ZIOMSM about the rest of the world!

KA >, June 25, 2017 at 3:39 am GMT

https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/06/23/all-signs-point-to-trumps-coming-war-with-iran/

Trump administration has promised to one of many fans of MEK that it has been looking and will continue to look into ways to change the Iranian regime . One of the ways is to harness the terrorism that is embodied by MEK.

Let's unpack it. America ,few months back apologized or regretted for destroying the regime of Mossadegh.
America few months back apologized to Guatemalan for changing the regime ( easily violently ) in 50s.

Is there anything to learn here that gives hope? Absolute power corrupts absolutely .

Next generation might end up repeating 'God forgive America' instead of chanting ad nauseam – ' God bless America' .

It is nauseating .

SolontoCroesus >, June 25, 2017 at 9:00 pm GMT

@KA

It is nauseating . The even greater tragedy, KA, is that the next generation are being indoctrinated by the same folks who on one day apologize and on the next day plan/carry out another regime change, without learning the lessons.

The younger generation is just as corrupt and unthinking as their teachers -- maybe even more corrupt: for most of the young professionals -- such as a group I met recently -- the primary concern is networking/career building, and if it means acquiescing to regime change, so be it.

RobinG >, June 26, 2017 at 3:50 am GMT

@SolontoCroesus

Hey S2 and KA, how about the [regime change] color revolution that's happening here, with the drive to impeach Trump? Only it's not really regime change, is it. It's the Deep State (with its useful idiot Pussy Brigade) desperate to maintain status quo.

Some people think I'm a Trump supporter. Well, I support that he's our duly elected President, and I'm grateful for his disruption (God Bless him for "the system is rigged" and "fake news"), but I don't like most of his policy, and he abandoned the part I did like. But it was just so euphoric to dodge Hilmonster bullet.

What's happening now, however, is bigger than persons or parties. The fraudulent accusations of collusion with Russia, intended to derail this administration, are an attack on our democracy and an exercise in persuasion and mind-control of our citizenry. This was underscored for me by a dreadful conversation in church this morning. When I said that I didn't believe that "17 intelligence agencies" had proved that the Russians interfered [directly, by hacking, was the point] in our election, my interlocutor was aghast. Unable to answer in a "Christian" manner, she threw back her head and laughed. It was quite a Hillaryesque gesture.

What preceded this was my bringing up the collaboration of the DNC, Crowdstrike, and Ukraine to slander and taint Donald Trump via accusations against Paul Manafort. Rather than cross-examine me about that or discuss it, she came back with, "How about Trump and the Russian oligarchs " and "How about Jared Kushner meeting the Russians.." – IN THE RUSSIAN EMBASSY !!! seemed to be enormously unforgivable in her mind – and a few other 'How abouts.' When none of this impressed me, she was visibly exasperated and went to the '17 agencies,' hoping for a knock-out blow, I guess.

Did all this mean that she considers the DNC malfeasance insignificant? DC, and Bethesda, where this took place, are overwhelmingly Blue. Around here it's poorly tolerated to defend Trump, or to criticize his detractors. But I didn't realize it was verboten to expose the DNC. After all, they already know the DNC and DWS stole the primary from Bernie.

Sadly, I turn to anonymous commenters for solace. Also, I encourage all to see the significance of the DNC chicanery, of Crowdstrike not allowing the FBI to see the DNC computers, of Ukraine collaboration. I'm not an unqualified endorser of all Lee Stranahan's views, but he's doing a terrific job investigating this – and he's the only one who is! What he doesn't say in this video: the Dems should be careful what they wish for! After Comey hearing, there will be investigation of Loretta Lynch.

What to look for in establishment reaction to the story about Ukrainian election interference

Hans Vogel >, June 26, 2017 at 2:01 pm GMT

@Joe Levantine

I do not agree. Germany (1933-1945) was a nation state carried to its extreme consequences. Moreover, the fundamental concept of the nation is a romantic fallacy. There is no reason why people speaking the same language would share the same values. How else do you think civil wars could come about? Switzerland may be many things, but not a nation state. It is a federation of wildly different entities (Kantons): most speak a German dialect. some French, one Italian and one Romance. Some are calvinist. some Roman Catholic, some Lutheran etc. If language be your yardstick, only two states in Europe qualify as nation states: Portugal and Iceland. I would agree with Rousseau (a Swiss, by the way): the smaller a state, the more rights (democratic etc.) the citizens tend to have. And indeed, Iceland is the freest and most democratic state in Europe, and therefore, also in the world.

Miro23 >, June 27, 2017 at 1:12 am GMT

This article covers a lot of ground but I would have emphasized more what 's happening internally in the US.

The US can only operate in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Syria (and try for Iran) because of Zionist Neo-con dominance of the US government. The public actually voted against ME wars so it's clear that further wars are illegitimate.

It would have been easier for the Zio-cons if HRC had been elected, but she wasn't, so the emphasis is now on the face-off between Trump's voters (maybe or maybe not represented by Trump) and the Zio-con/SJW alliance.

It goes without saying that the Zio-con/SJW alliance and the Deep State aren't Democratic, so they'll probably make another grab for absolute power since their first Coup attempt (9/11) failed.

How this works out seems to be the prime determinant of future ME action.

RobinG >, June 27, 2017 at 1:42 am GMT

@Miro23

Right. SOROS / CLINTON OVERTHROW: Seeing The Matrix OR What is "Civil Society?"

Miro23 >, June 27, 2017 at 1:48 am GMT

@Miro23

And a suspicious aspect are all the recent MSM "Russia" stories.

9/11 needed MSM preparation with Iraq WMD and Al Qaeda stories, so when the "Event" happened, the outrage could be pointed in the right direction.

Now it looks like preparation for some Russian "Event" / False Flag – probably this time with a fabricated "Russian surprise attack" on the US military, aimed at legitimizing a US Emergency Regime dictatorship run by the Zio/Neo-con crowd.

Chris Chuba >, June 27, 2017 at 5:38 pm GMT

Iran has transitioned away from terrorism and its harsh rhetoric of the 80′s and early 90′s and is attempting to claim the mantel of being a stabilizing influence in the M.E. They are contrasting this to the U.S. who they claim (rather convincingly) are agents of chaos. The kool-aid drinkers in the U.S. can bray 'terrorist state' all they want but this only plays in Peoria not to anyone who lives in the M.E. and sees what is actually happening.

The Qatar situation demonstrates this beautifully, while the KSA was asking Qatar to become a vassal and making a not so subtle threat of invasion, Iran was emphasizing the right of free commerce, sovereignty, and dialogue regarding differences.

Is Iran taking over the M.E.? yes, but not in the way that Neocons think, they are gaining influence by showing restraint.

[Oct 11, 2017] Donald Trump is exposing the contradictions of the elite by David Callahan

That's neoliberal elite after all. Why the author expects them to be ashamed is unclear
Notable quotes:
"... Business practices aimed at boosting shareholder value – like outsourcing, offshoring, automation, union-busting, predatory lending, and a range of anti-competitive abuses – have undermined the security of large swaths of the country. In turn, a flood of business dollars for campaign donations and lobbying over decades has helped thwart effective government responses to rising pain on Main Street. ..."
"... History tells us that societies with extractive and self-serving upper classes tend to fall into decline – whereas societies with inclusive elites are more likely to thrive. With the rise of Trump, we're seeing what an unraveling of the social fabric looks like after decades in which nearly all the nation's income gains have flowed upwards to a tiny sliver of households. ..."
Oct 11, 2017 | www.theguardian.com

Since January, though, we've also seen a new level of rapaciousness by corporate interests in Washington DC that seem intent on extracting as much wealth as they can from wherever they can: consumers, investors, public lands, student borrowers, the tax code and even the war in Afghanistan.

Longtime watchers of the .01% won't be surprised by this bifurcated picture. For over two decades, an ever more educated wealthy elite has trumpeted its belief in tolerance, diversity, and meritocracy – even as it's also helped usher in record levels of inequality that have left many Americans feeling economically excluded and increasingly angry.

Trump's retrograde presidency has revealed the profound contradictions at the top of the US income ladder.

... ... ...

Corporate leaders have already been supportive of Trump's sweeping push to gut regulations in ways that would tilt the rules governing the economy more in favor of business and the wealthy. Social inclusion may be a growing public mantra of the far upper class. But economic extraction remains among its core operating principles.

... ... ...

Social inclusion is a public mantra of the upper class. But economic extraction remains a core operating principle

The answer is that many corporate and financial leaders were, and still are, a big part of the problem. These leaders have fostered the economic conditions that have thrown the values of tolerance and diversity on the defensive in America.

Business practices aimed at boosting shareholder value – like outsourcing, offshoring, automation, union-busting, predatory lending, and a range of anti-competitive abuses – have undermined the security of large swaths of the country. In turn, a flood of business dollars for campaign donations and lobbying over decades has helped thwart effective government responses to rising pain on Main Street.

... ... ...

History tells us that societies with extractive and self-serving upper classes tend to fall into decline – whereas societies with inclusive elites are more likely to thrive. With the rise of Trump, we're seeing what an unraveling of the social fabric looks like after decades in which nearly all the nation's income gains have flowed upwards to a tiny sliver of households.

Rarely has the American experiment – the notion of a country united by ideas rather than shared heritage – felt more fragile than it does right now. It's an ugly picture of division and resentment, but a predictable one given the economic trauma inflicted on millions of people over recent decades.

... ... ...

David Callahan is the author of The Givers: Wealth, Power, and Philanthropy in a New Gilded Age. He is the founder and editor of Inside Philanthropy

[Oct 09, 2017] After Nine Months, Only Stale Crumbs in Russia Inquiry by Scott Ritter

Highly recommended!
US Congress allowed to drag itself into this propaganda swamp by politized Intelligence community, which became a major political player, that can dictate Congress what to do and what not to do. Now it is not that easy to get out of this "intelligence swamp"
Notable quotes:
"... The 2017 ICA on Russia was conceived in an atmosphere of despair and denial, birthed by Democrats and Republicans alike who were stunned by Trump's surprise electoral victory in November 2016. To say that this issue was a political event would be a gross understatement; the 2017 Russian ICA will go down in history as one of the most politicized intelligence documents ever, regardless of the degree of accuracy eventually afforded its contents. The very fact that the document is given the sobriquet "Intelligence Community" is itself a political act, designed to impart a degree of scrutiny and community consensus that simply did not exist when it came to the production of that document, or the classified reports that it was derived from. ..."
"... This was a report prepared by handpicked analysts ..."
"... iven the firestorm of political intrigue and controversy initiated by the publication of this document, the notion of a "general consensus" regarding the level of trust imparted to it by the Senate Select Intelligence Committee does not engender confidence. ..."
"... It was this document that spawned the issue of "collusion." While Sens. Burr and Warner can state that "collusion" is still an open issue, the fact of the matter is that, in this regard, Trump and his campaign advisors have already been found guilty in the court of public opinion, especially among those members of the public and the media who were vehemently opposed to his candidacy and ultimate victory. ..."
"... One need only review the comments of the various Democratic members of the Senate Select Committee, their counterparts serving on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, as well as the various experts and pundits in the media, to underscore the degree to which prejudice has "worked its evil" when it comes to the issue of collusion and the Trump campaign in this regard. ..."
"... purchase of advertisements on various social media platforms, including Facebook and Twitter, by the Russians or their proxies. With regard to these advertisements, Senator Burr painted a dire picture. "It seems," he declared, "that the overall theme of the Russian involvement in the US elections was to create chaos at every level." ..."
"... No one wants to be told that they have been victims of a con; this is especially true when dealing with the sacred trust imparted to the American citizenry by the Constitution of the United States regarding the free and fair election of those who will represent us in higher office. American politics, for better or worse, is about the personal connection a given candidate has with the voter, a gut feeling that this person shares common values and beliefs. ..."
"... the percentage of Americans that participate in national elections is low. Those that do tend to be people who care enough about one or more issues to actually get out and vote. To categorize these dedicated citizens as brain-dead dupes who are susceptible to social media-based click advertisements is an insult to American democracy. ..."
"... There is a world of difference between Russian intelligence services allegedly hacking politically sensitive emails and selectively releasing them for the sole purpose of undermining a given Presidential candidate's electoral prospects, and mimicking social media-based advertisements addressing issues that are already at play in an election. The Russians didn't invent the ongoing debate in the United States over gun control (i.e., the "Second Amendment" issue), race relations (the police shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri) or immigration ("The Wall"). ..."
"... These were, and remain, core issues that are at the heart of the American domestic political discourse, regardless of where one stands. You either know the issues, or you don't; it is an insult to the American voter to suggest that they are so malleable that $100,000 of targeted social media-based advertisements can swing their vote, even if 10 million of them viewed it. ..."
Oct 09, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com

The 'briefing' is just another exercise in preferred narrative boosting.

The co-chairmen of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence held a press briefing Thursday on the status of their ongoing investigation into Russian meddling in the American electoral process. Content-wise, the press briefing and the question and answer session were an exercise in information futility -- they provided little substance and nothing new. The investigation was still ongoing, the senators explained, and there was still work to be done.

Nine months into the Committee's work, the best Sens. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) and Mark Warner (D-Va.), could offer was that there was "general consensus" among committee members and their staff that they trust the findings of the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) of January 2017, which gave high confidence to the charge that Russia meddled in the 2016 presidential election. The issue of possible collusion between Russia and members of the campaign of Donald Trump, however, "is still open."

Frankly speaking, this isn't good enough.

The 2017 ICA on Russia was conceived in an atmosphere of despair and denial, birthed by Democrats and Republicans alike who were stunned by Trump's surprise electoral victory in November 2016. To say that this issue was a political event would be a gross understatement; the 2017 Russian ICA will go down in history as one of the most politicized intelligence documents ever, regardless of the degree of accuracy eventually afforded its contents. The very fact that the document is given the sobriquet "Intelligence Community" is itself a political act, designed to impart a degree of scrutiny and community consensus that simply did not exist when it came to the production of that document, or the classified reports that it was derived from.

This was a report prepared by handpicked analysts from three of the Intelligence Community's sixteen agencies (the CIA, NSA, and FBI) who operated outside of the National Intelligence Council (the venue for the production of Intelligence Community products such as the Russian ICA), and void of the direction and supervision of a dedicated National Intelligence Officer. Overcoming this deficient family tree represents a high hurdle, even before the issue of the credibility of the sources and methods used to underpin the ICA's findings are discussed. Given the firestorm of political intrigue and controversy initiated by the publication of this document, the notion of a "general consensus" regarding the level of trust imparted to it by the Senate Select Intelligence Committee does not engender confidence.

It was this document that spawned the issue of "collusion." While Sens. Burr and Warner can state that "collusion" is still an open issue, the fact of the matter is that, in this regard, Trump and his campaign advisors have already been found guilty in the court of public opinion, especially among those members of the public and the media who were vehemently opposed to his candidacy and ultimate victory. Insofar as the committee's investigation serves as a legitimate search for truth, it does so as a post-conviction appeal. However, as the distinguished Supreme Court Justice Joseph McKenna noted in his opinion in Berger v. United States (1921):

The remedy by appeal is inadequate. It comes after the trial, and, if prejudice exist, it has worked its evil and a judgment of it in a reviewing tribunal is precarious. It goes there fortified by presumptions, and nothing can be more elusive of estimate or decision than a disposition of a mind in which there is a personal ingredient.

One need only review the comments of the various Democratic members of the Senate Select Committee, their counterparts serving on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, as well as the various experts and pundits in the media, to underscore the degree to which prejudice has "worked its evil" when it comes to the issue of collusion and the Trump campaign in this regard.

The two senators proceeded to touch on a new angle recently introduced into their investigation, that of the purchase of advertisements on various social media platforms, including Facebook and Twitter, by the Russians or their proxies. With regard to these advertisements, Senator Burr painted a dire picture. "It seems," he declared, "that the overall theme of the Russian involvement in the US elections was to create chaos at every level."

No one wants to be told that they have been victims of a con; this is especially true when dealing with the sacred trust imparted to the American citizenry by the Constitution of the United States regarding the free and fair election of those who will represent us in higher office. American politics, for better or worse, is about the personal connection a given candidate has with the voter, a gut feeling that this person shares common values and beliefs.

Nevertheless, the percentage of Americans that participate in national elections is low. Those that do tend to be people who care enough about one or more issues to actually get out and vote. To categorize these dedicated citizens as brain-dead dupes who are susceptible to social media-based click advertisements is an insult to American democracy.

There is a world of difference between Russian intelligence services allegedly hacking politically sensitive emails and selectively releasing them for the sole purpose of undermining a given Presidential candidate's electoral prospects, and mimicking social media-based advertisements addressing issues that are already at play in an election. The Russians didn't invent the ongoing debate in the United States over gun control (i.e., the "Second Amendment" issue), race relations (the police shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri) or immigration ("The Wall").

These were, and remain, core issues that are at the heart of the American domestic political discourse, regardless of where one stands. You either know the issues, or you don't; it is an insult to the American voter to suggest that they are so malleable that $100,000 of targeted social media-based advertisements can swing their vote, even if 10 million of them viewed it.

The take away from the press briefing given by Senator's Burr and Warner was two-fold: One, the Russians meddled, and two, we don't know if Trump colluded with the Russians. The fact that America is nine months into this investigation with little more to show now than what could have been said at the start is, in and of itself, an American political tragedy. The Trump administration has been hobbled by the inertia of this and other investigations derived from the question of Russian meddling. That this process may yet vindicate President Trump isn't justification for the process itself; in such a case the delay will have hurt more than the truth. As William Penn, the founder of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, so eloquently noted:

Delays have been more injurious than direct Injustice. They too often starve those they dare not deny. The very Winner is made a Loser, because he pays twice for his own; like those who purchase Estates Mortgaged before to the full value.

Our law says that to delay Justice is Injustice. Not to have a Right, and not to come of it, differs little. Refuse or Dispatch is the Duty of a Good Officer.

Senators Burr and Warner, together with their fellow members of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and their respective staffs, would do well to heed those words.

Scott Ritter is a former Marine Corps intelligence officer who served in the former Soviet Union implementing arms control treaties, in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm, and in Iraq overseeing the disarmament of WMD. He is the author of "Deal of the Century: How Iran Blocked the West's Road to War" (Clarity Press, 2017).

[Oct 09, 2017] Autopilot Wars by Andrew J. Bacevich

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... While serving as defense secretary in the 1960s, Robert McNamara once mused that the "greatest contribution" of the Vietnam War might have been to make it possible for the United States "to go to war without the necessity of arousing the public ire." With regard to the conflict once widely referred to as McNamara's War, his claim proved grotesquely premature. Yet a half-century later, his wish has become reality. ..."
"... Why do Americans today show so little interest in the wars waged in their name and at least nominally on their behalf? Why, as our wars drag on and on, doesn't the disparity between effort expended and benefits accrued arouse more than passing curiosity or mild expressions of dismay? Why, in short, don't we give a [ expletive deleted ..."
"... The true costs of Washington's wars go untabulated. ..."
"... On matters related to war, American citizens have opted out. ..."
"... Terrorism gets hyped and hyped and hyped some more. ..."
"... Blather crowds out substance. ..."
"... Besides, we're too busy. ..."
"... Anyway, the next president will save us. ..."
"... Our culturally progressive military has largely immunized itself from criticism. ..."
"... Well, yes, the US has recently killed 100.000′s of Arab civilians because they were Terrorists (?) or to Bring them Democracy (?) or whatever, or something – or who cares anyway. There's more coverage of the transgender toilet access question. ..."
Oct 08, 2017 | www.unz.com

Autopilot Wars Sixteen Years, But Who's Counting?

Consider, if you will, these two indisputable facts. First, the United States is today more or less permanently engaged in hostilities in not one faraway place, but at least seven . Second, the vast majority of the American people could not care less.

Nor can it be said that we don't care because we don't know. True, government authorities withhold certain aspects of ongoing military operations or release only details that they find convenient. Yet information describing what U.S. forces are doing (and where) is readily available, even if buried in recent months by barrages of presidential tweets. Here, for anyone interested, are press releases issued by United States Central Command for just one recent week:

Ever since the United States launched its war on terror, oceans of military press releases have poured forth. And those are just for starters. To provide updates on the U.S. military's various ongoing campaigns, generals, admirals, and high-ranking defense officials regularly testify before congressional committees or brief members of the press. From the field, journalists offer updates that fill in at least some of the details -- on civilian casualties, for example -- that government authorities prefer not to disclose. Contributors to newspaper op-ed pages and "experts" booked by network and cable TV news shows, including passels of retired military officers, provide analysis. Trailing behind come books and documentaries that put things in a broader perspective.

But here's the truth of it. None of it matters.

Like traffic jams or robocalls, war has fallen into the category of things that Americans may not welcome, but have learned to live with. In twenty-first-century America, war is not that big a deal.

While serving as defense secretary in the 1960s, Robert McNamara once mused that the "greatest contribution" of the Vietnam War might have been to make it possible for the United States "to go to war without the necessity of arousing the public ire." With regard to the conflict once widely referred to as McNamara's War, his claim proved grotesquely premature. Yet a half-century later, his wish has become reality.

Why do Americans today show so little interest in the wars waged in their name and at least nominally on their behalf? Why, as our wars drag on and on, doesn't the disparity between effort expended and benefits accrued arouse more than passing curiosity or mild expressions of dismay? Why, in short, don't we give a [ expletive deleted ]?

Perhaps just posing such a question propels us instantly into the realm of the unanswerable, like trying to figure out why people idolize Justin Bieber, shoot birds, or watch golf on television.

Without any expectation of actually piercing our collective ennui, let me take a stab at explaining why we don't give a @#$%&! Here are eight distinctive but mutually reinforcing explanations, offered in a sequence that begins with the blindingly obvious and ends with the more speculative.

Americans don't attend all that much to ongoing American wars because:

1. U.S. casualty rates are low . By using proxies and contractors, and relying heavily on airpower, America's war managers have been able to keep a tight lid on the number of U.S. troops being killed and wounded. In all of 2017, for example, a grand total of 11 American soldiers have been lost in Afghanistan -- about equal to the number of shooting deaths in Chicago over the course of a typical week. True, in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other countries where the U.S. is engaged in hostilities, whether directly or indirectly, plenty of people who are not Americans are being killed and maimed. (The estimated number of Iraqi civilians killed this year alone exceeds 12,000 .) But those casualties have next to no political salience as far as the United States is concerned. As long as they don't impede U.S. military operations, they literally don't count (and generally aren't counted).

2. The true costs of Washington's wars go untabulated. In a famous speech , dating from early in his presidency, Dwight D. Eisenhower said that "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." Dollars spent on weaponry, Ike insisted, translated directly into schools, hospitals, homes, highways, and power plants that would go unbuilt. "This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense," he continued. "[I]t is humanity hanging from a cross of iron." More than six decades later, Americans have long since accommodated themselves to that cross of iron. Many actually see it as a boon, a source of corporate profits, jobs, and, of course, campaign contributions. As such, they avert their eyes from the opportunity costs of our never-ending wars. The dollars expended pursuant to our post-9/11 conflicts will ultimately number in the multi-trillions . Imagine the benefits of investing such sums in upgrading the nation's aging infrastructure . Yet don't count on Congressional leaders, other politicians, or just about anyone else to pursue that connection.

On matters related to war, American citizens have opted out. Others have made the point so frequently that it's the equivalent of hearing "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer" at Christmastime. Even so, it bears repeating: the American people have defined their obligation to "support the troops" in the narrowest imaginable terms , ensuring above all that such support requires absolutely no sacrifice on their part. Members of Congress abet this civic apathy, while also taking steps to insulate themselves from responsibility. In effect, citizens and their elected representatives in Washington agree: supporting the troops means deferring to the commander in chief, without inquiring about whether what he has the troops doing makes the slightest sense. Yes, we set down our beers long enough to applaud those in uniform and boo those who decline to participate in mandatory rituals of patriotism. What we don't do is demand anything remotely approximating actual accountability.

4. Terrorism gets hyped and hyped and hyped some more. While international terrorism isn't a trivial problem (and wasn't for decades before 9/11), it comes nowhere close to posing an existential threat to the United States. Indeed, other threats, notably the impact of climate change, constitute a far greater danger to the wellbeing of Americans. Worried about the safety of your children or grandchildren? The opioid epidemic constitutes an infinitely greater danger than "Islamic radicalism." Yet having been sold a bill of goods about a "war on terror" that is essential for "keeping America safe," mere citizens are easily persuaded that scattering U.S. troops throughout the Islamic world while dropping bombs on designated evildoers is helping win the former while guaranteeing the latter. To question that proposition becomes tantamount to suggesting that God might not have given Moses two stone tablets after all.

5. Blather crowds out substance. When it comes to foreign policy, American public discourse is -- not to put too fine a point on it -- vacuous, insipid, and mindlessly repetitive. William Safire of the New York Times once characterized American political rhetoric as BOMFOG, with those running for high office relentlessly touting the Brotherhood of Man and the Fatherhood of God. Ask a politician, Republican or Democrat, to expound on this country's role in the world, and then brace yourself for some variant of WOSFAD, as the speaker insists that it is incumbent upon the World's Only Superpower to spread Freedom and Democracy. Terms like leadership and indispensable are introduced, along with warnings about the dangers of isolationism and appeasement, embellished with ominous references to Munich . Such grandiose posturing makes it unnecessary to probe too deeply into the actual origins and purposes of American wars, past or present, or assess the likelihood of ongoing wars ending in some approximation of actual success. Cheerleading displaces serious thought.

6. Besides, we're too busy. Think of this as a corollary to point five. Even if the present-day American political scene included figures like Senators Robert La Follette or J. William Fulbright , who long ago warned against the dangers of militarizing U.S. policy, Americans may not retain a capacity to attend to such critiques. Responding to the demands of the Information Age is not, it turns out, conducive to deep reflection. We live in an era (so we are told) when frantic multitasking has become a sort of duty and when being overscheduled is almost obligatory. Our attention span shrinks and with it our time horizon. The matters we attend to are those that happened just hours or minutes ago. Yet like the great solar eclipse of 2017 -- hugely significant and instantly forgotten -- those matters will, within another few minutes or hours, be superseded by some other development that briefly captures our attention. As a result, a dwindling number of Americans -- those not compulsively checking Facebook pages and Twitter accounts -- have the time or inclination to ponder questions like: When will the Afghanistan War end? Why has it lasted almost 16 years? Why doesn't the finest fighting force in history actually win? Can't package an answer in 140 characters or a 30-second made-for-TV sound bite? Well, then, slowpoke, don't expect anyone to attend to what you have to say.

7. Anyway, the next president will save us. At regular intervals, Americans indulge in the fantasy that, if we just install the right person in the White House, all will be well. Ambitious politicians are quick to exploit this expectation. Presidential candidates struggle to differentiate themselves from their competitors, but all of them promise in one way or another to wipe the slate clean and Make America Great Again. Ignoring the historical record of promises broken or unfulfilled, and presidents who turn out not to be deities but flawed human beings, Americans -- members of the media above all -- pretend to take all this seriously. Campaigns become longer, more expensive, more circus-like, and ever less substantial. One might think that the election of Donald Trump would prompt a downward revision in the exalted expectations of presidents putting things right. Instead, especially in the anti-Trump camp, getting rid of Trump himself (Collusion! Corruption! Obstruction! Impeachment!) has become the overriding imperative, with little attention given to restoring the balance intended by the framers of the Constitution. The irony of Trump perpetuating wars that he once roundly criticized and then handing the conduct of those wars to generals devoid of ideas for ending them almost entirely escapes notice.

8. Our culturally progressive military has largely immunized itself from criticism. As recently as the 1990s, the U.S. military establishment aligned itself with the retrograde side of the culture wars. Who can forget the gays-in-the-military controversy that rocked Bill Clinton's administration during his first weeks in office, as senior military leaders publicly denounced their commander-in-chief? Those days are long gone. Culturally, the armed forces have moved left. Today, the services go out of their way to project an image of tolerance and a commitment to equality on all matters related to race, gender, and sexuality. So when President Trump announced his opposition to transgendered persons serving in the armed forces, tweeting that the military "cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail," senior officers politely but firmly disagreed and pushed back . Given the ascendency of cultural issues near the top of the U.S. political agenda, the military's embrace of diversity helps to insulate it from criticism and from being called to account for a less than sterling performance in waging wars. Put simply, critics who in an earlier day might have blasted military leaders for their inability to bring wars to a successful conclusion hold their fire. Having women graduate from Ranger School or command Marines in combat more than compensates for not winning.

A collective indifference to war has become an emblem of contemporary America. But don't expect your neighbors down the street or the editors of the New York Times to lose any sleep over that fact. Even to notice it would require them -- and us -- to care.

Andrew J. Bacevich, a TomDispatch regular , is the author, most recently, of America's War for the Greater Middle East: A Military History .

Dan Hayes > , October 9, 2017 at 2:30 am GMT

You have enumerated ten general reasons why Americans "don't attend" to ongoing wars.

Let me add a further specific one: the draft or lack of same. If there were a draft in place either the powers-that-be would not even dare to contemplate any of our present martial misadventures, or failing that the outraged citizenry would burn down the Congress!

BTW I had never thought about reason #8: the military's embrace of diversity helps to insulate it from criticism. This explains General Casey's inane statement that diversity shouldn't be a casualty of the Fort Hood massacre by a "diverse" officer!

Carlton Meyer > , Website October 9, 2017 at 5:17 am GMT

One reason Trump won is that he promised to pull back the empire, while suggesting the Pentagon already has plenty of money. After the election, he demanded a 10% increase, and threatens North Korea to justify it! This increase alone is bigger than the entire annual military budget of Russia! The public is informed that this is because of cuts during the Obama years, but there were no cuts, only limits to increases.

How did the Democrats react? Most voted for a bigger military budget than the mindless increase proposed by Trump! That news was not reported by our corporate media, as Jimmy Dore explained:

Miro23 > , October 9, 2017 at 6:52 am GMT

A collective indifference to war has become an emblem of contemporary America.

Well, yes, the US has recently killed 100.000′s of Arab civilians because they were Terrorists (?) or to Bring them Democracy (?) or whatever, or something – or who cares anyway. There's more coverage of the transgender toilet access question.

So who are Mr & Mrs Indifferent, the emblems of contemporary America? https://www.yahoo.com/news/29-couples-boudoir-photos-almost-172445904.html ?.tsrc=fauxdal – Thanks to Priss

Backwoods Bob > , October 9, 2017 at 7:37 am GMT

Structurally, you have arms production, military bases, hospitals, and related service industries across nearly all the congressional districts in the country.

So it is an enormous set of vested interests with both voting power and corporate money for campaign treasuries.

Quoting Ike was good, and he mentions the opportunity cost in schools, roads, etc. – but also the organizing political and economic power of the military industrial complex.

The government schools are with some exceptions worthless. No subject, let alone war, is taken on seriously.

The legacy media has been co-opted by the MIC/Financial interests. The state is spying on everyone and everyone knows so. Free speech, free association, free assembly, right to bear arms, confront your accuser, trial by jury, habeas corpus – all gone now.

So the sheep behave. They walk by the dead whistling, and look straight ahead.

Robert Magill > , October 9, 2017 at 9:27 am GMT

While serving as defense secretary in the 1960s, Robert McNamara once mused that the "greatest contribution" of the Vietnam War might have been to make it possible for the United States "to go to war without the necessity of arousing the public ire." With regard to the conflict once widely referred to as McNamara's War, his claim proved grotesquely premature. Yet a half-century later, his wish has become reality.

He was dead wrong about this in the 60′s as it soon became obvious to everyone else. But we learned how "to go to war without the necessity of arousing the public ire." Cut out the military draft and embed the press into the ranks so they dare not report the actions they witness.

http://robertmagill.wordpress.com

[Oct 04, 2017] Wheels and Deals Trouble Brewing in the House of Saud by Pepe Escobar

The quote attributed to Mark Twain and Yogi Berra "It's Difficult to Make Predictions, Especially About the Future" still holds. This assessment by Pete Escobar about forthcoming bankruptcy of KAS need to be verified in three years from now. It is unclear whether the key future events (such as prediction that the current Crown Prince might be deposed with the CIA help) will take place.
It is, nevertheless, clear that KAS economics is under considerable stress due to low oil prices and that eventually can bankrupt the kingdom as foreign currency reserves shrink rapidly. What such economic crisis might entail for KAS we can only guess by reshuffling at the top is quite probably in this case. So in a way the future of KAS hangs on how soon oil prices will be pushed back into $100 range.
Notable quotes:
"... MBS is surrounded by inexperienced thirty-something princes, and alienating just about everyone else. ..."
"... "the CIA is outraged that the compromise worked out in April, 2014 has been abrogated wherein the greatest anti-terrorist factor in the Middle East, Mohammed bin Nayef, was arrested." That may prompt "vigorous action taken against MBS possibly in early October." And it might even coincide with the Salman-Trump get together. ..."
"... Asia Times' Gulf business source stresses how "the Saudi economy is under extreme strain based on their oil price war against Russia, and they are behind their bills in paying just about all their contractors. That could lead to the bankruptcy of some of the major enterprises in Saudi Arabia. The Saudi Arabia of MBS features the Crown Prince buying a US$600 million yacht and his father spending US$100 million on his summer vacation, highlighted on the front pages of the New York Times while the Kingdom strangles under their leadership." ..."
"... MBS's pet project, the spun-to-death Vision 2030, in theory aims to diversify from mere oil profits and dependency on the US to a more modern economy (and a more independent foreign policy). That's completely misguided, according to the source, because "the problem in Saudi Arabia is that their companies cannot function with their local population and [are] reliant on expatriates for about 70% or more of their staff. Aramco cannot run without expatriates. Therefore, selling 5% of Aramco to diversify does not solve the problem. If he wants a more productive society, and less handouts and meaningless government jobs, he has to first train and employ his own people." ..."
"... The similarly lauded Aramco IPO, arguably the largest share sale in history and originally scheduled for next year, has once again been postponed – "possibly" to the second half of 2019, according to officials in Riyadh. And still no one knows where shares will be sold; the NYSE is far from a done deal. ..."
"... I n parallel, MBS's war on Yemen, and the Saudi drive for regime change in Syria and to reshape the Greater Middle East, have turned out to be spectacular disasters. ..."
"... The Islamic State project was conceived as the ideal tool to force Iraq to implode. It's now public domain that the organization's funding came mostly from Saudi Arabia. Even the former imam of Mecca has publicly admitted ISIS' leadership "draw their ideas from what is written in our own books, our own principles." ..."
"... Salafi-jihadism is more than alive inside the Kingdom even as MBS tries to spin a (fake) liberal trend (the "baby you can drive my car" stunt). The problem is Riyadh congenitally cannot deliver on any liberal promise; the only legitimacy for the House of Saud lies in those religious "books" and "principles." ..."
"... In Syria, besides the fact that an absolute majority of the country's population does not wish to live in a Takfiristan , Saudi Arabia supported ISIS while Qatar supported al-Qaeda (Jabhat al-Nusra). That ended up in a crossfire bloodbath, with all those non-existent US-supported "moderate rebels" reduced to road kill. ..."
"... In Enemy of the State, the latest Mitch Rapp thriller written by Kyle Mills, President Alexander, sitting at the White House, blurts, "the Middle East is imploding because those Saudi sons of bitches have been pumping up religious fundamentalism to hide the fact that they're robbing their people blind." That's a fair assessment. ..."
"... In terms of what Washington wants, the CIA is not fond of MBS, to say the least. They want "their" man Nayef back. As for the Trump administration, rumors swirl it is " desperate for Saudi money , especially infrastructure investments in the Rust Belt." ..."
"... This piece first appeared in Asia Times . ..."
Oct 04, 2017 | www.counterpunch.org

No wonder, considering that the ousted Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef – highly regarded in the Beltway, especially Langley – is under house arrest. His massive web of agents at the Interior Ministry has largely been "relieved of their authority". The new Interior Minister is Abdulaziz bin Saud bin Nayef, 34, the eldest son of the governor of the country's largely Shi'ite Eastern Province, where all the oil is. Curiously, the father is now reporting to his son. MBS is surrounded by inexperienced thirty-something princes, and alienating just about everyone else.

Former King Abdulaziz set up his Saudi succession based on the seniority of his sons; in theory, if each one lived to the same age all would have a shot at the throne, thus avoiding the bloodletting historically common in Arabian clans over lines of succession.

Now, says the source, "a bloodbath is predicted to be imminent." Especially because "the CIA is outraged that the compromise worked out in April, 2014 has been abrogated wherein the greatest anti-terrorist factor in the Middle East, Mohammed bin Nayef, was arrested." That may prompt "vigorous action taken against MBS possibly in early October." And it might even coincide with the Salman-Trump get together.

ISIS playing by the (Saudi) book

Asia Times' Gulf business source stresses how "the Saudi economy is under extreme strain based on their oil price war against Russia, and they are behind their bills in paying just about all their contractors. That could lead to the bankruptcy of some of the major enterprises in Saudi Arabia. The Saudi Arabia of MBS features the Crown Prince buying a US$600 million yacht and his father spending US$100 million on his summer vacation, highlighted on the front pages of the New York Times while the Kingdom strangles under their leadership."

MBS's pet project, the spun-to-death Vision 2030, in theory aims to diversify from mere oil profits and dependency on the US to a more modern economy (and a more independent foreign policy). That's completely misguided, according to the source, because "the problem in Saudi Arabia is that their companies cannot function with their local population and [are] reliant on expatriates for about 70% or more of their staff. Aramco cannot run without expatriates. Therefore, selling 5% of Aramco to diversify does not solve the problem. If he wants a more productive society, and less handouts and meaningless government jobs, he has to first train and employ his own people."

The similarly lauded Aramco IPO, arguably the largest share sale in history and originally scheduled for next year, has once again been postponed – "possibly" to the second half of 2019, according to officials in Riyadh. And still no one knows where shares will be sold; the NYSE is far from a done deal.

I n parallel, MBS's war on Yemen, and the Saudi drive for regime change in Syria and to reshape the Greater Middle East, have turned out to be spectacular disasters. Egypt and Pakistan have refused to send troops to Yemen, where relentless Saudi air bombing – with US and UK weapons – has accelerated malnutrition, famine and cholera, and configured a massive humanitarian crisis.

The Islamic State project was conceived as the ideal tool to force Iraq to implode. It's now public domain that the organization's funding came mostly from Saudi Arabia. Even the former imam of Mecca has publicly admitted ISIS' leadership "draw their ideas from what is written in our own books, our own principles."

Which brings us to the ultimate Saudi contradiction. Salafi-jihadism is more than alive inside the Kingdom even as MBS tries to spin a (fake) liberal trend (the "baby you can drive my car" stunt). The problem is Riyadh congenitally cannot deliver on any liberal promise; the only legitimacy for the House of Saud lies in those religious "books" and "principles."

In Syria, besides the fact that an absolute majority of the country's population does not wish to live in a Takfiristan , Saudi Arabia supported ISIS while Qatar supported al-Qaeda (Jabhat al-Nusra). That ended up in a crossfire bloodbath, with all those non-existent US-supported "moderate rebels" reduced to road kill.

And then there's the economic blockade against Qatar – another brilliant MBS plot. That has only served to improve Doha's relations with both Ankara and Tehran. Qatari Emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani was not regime-changed, whether or not Trump really dissuaded Riyadh and Abu Dhabi from taking "military action." There was no economic strangulation: Total, for instance, is about to invest US$2 billion to expand production of Qatari natural gas. And Qatar, via its sovereign fund, counterpunched with the ultimate soft power move – it bought global footballing brand Neymar for PSG , and the "blockade" sank without a trace.

"Robbing their people blind"

In Enemy of the State, the latest Mitch Rapp thriller written by Kyle Mills, President Alexander, sitting at the White House, blurts, "the Middle East is imploding because those Saudi sons of bitches have been pumping up religious fundamentalism to hide the fact that they're robbing their people blind." That's a fair assessment.

No dissent whatsoever is allowed in Saudi Arabia. Even the economic analyst Isam Az-Zamil, very close to the top, has been arrested during the current repression campaign. So opposition to MBS does not come only from the royal family or some top clerics – although the official spin rules that only those supporting Muslim Brotherhood, Turkey, Iran and Qatari "terrorism" are being targeted.

In terms of what Washington wants, the CIA is not fond of MBS, to say the least. They want "their" man Nayef back. As for the Trump administration, rumors swirl it is " desperate for Saudi money , especially infrastructure investments in the Rust Belt."

It will be immensely enlightening to compare what Trump gets from Salman with what Putin gets from Salman: the ailing King will visit Moscow in late October. Rosneft is interested in buying shares of Aramco when the IPO takes place. Riyadh and Moscow are considering an OPEC deal extension as well as an OPEC-non-OPEC cooperation platform incorporating the Gas Exporting Countries Forum (GECF).

Riyadh has read the writing on the new wall: Moscow's rising political / strategic capital all across the board, from Iran, Syria and Qatar to Turkey and Yemen. That does not sit well with the US deep state. Even if Trump gets some Rust Belt deals, the burning question is whether the CIA and its friends can live with MBS on the House of Saud throne.

This piece first appeared in Asia Times .

Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007), Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge and Obama does Globalistan (Nimble Books, 2009). His latest book is Empire of Chaos . He may be reached at [email protected] .

[Oct 03, 2017] The Vietnam Nightmare -- Again by Eric Margolis

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The US military understands it has long ago lost the Afghan War but cannot bear the humiliation of admitting it was defeated by lightly-armed mountain tribesmen fighting for their independence. ..."
"... Vietnam was not a 'tragedy,' as the PBS series asserts, but the product of imperial geopolitics. The same holds true for today's Mideast wars. To paraphrase a famous slogan from Vietnam, we destroyed Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria to make them safe for 'freedom.' ..."
"... The war became aimless and often surreal. We soldiers all knew our senior officers and political leaders were lying. Many soldiers were at the edge of mutiny, like the French Army in 1917. Back in those ancient days, we had expected our political leaders to be men of rectitude who told us the truth. Thanks to Vietnam, the politicians were exposed as liars and heartless cynics with no honor. ..."
"... This same dark cloud hangs over our political landscape today. We have destroyed large parts of the Mideast, Afghanistan and northern Pakistan without a second thought – yet wonder why peoples from these ravaged nations hate us. Now, North Korea seems next. ..."
"... In spite of all, our imperial impulse till throbs. The nightmare Vietnam War in which over 58,000 American soldiers died for nothing has been largely forgotten. ..."
"... For both Vietnam and Afghanistan, as well as other places, the guiding principle is that they live there and we don't. These are all expeditionary wars for the US. Resistant peoples can't be controlled at a distance ..."
"... So, considering that Viet commies stood for patriotism and national sovereignty, maybe the globalist viewpoint is more favorable to US efforts to turn Vietnam into globo-disneyland. ..."
"... Americans at-large have no power. A small cadre runs things now. Once Americans didn't have a draft to worry over, they vacated the streets and left the dying to the farmers' sons (metaphor for the poor). ..."
"... War after war lost, yet the Generals are still revered, money to the pro-war think tanks is never ending and the revolving door between the Pentagon, White House and defense contractors (and their corporate boards) has never been richer. Doesn't matter the war industry doesn't win wars, the money is just so damned good they can't stop, won't stop. And who is to stop them? These are the folks that kill people, that have a file on each of us. Indeed, it is our only remaining industry, flawed and failed though it may be. It certainly is a rich one. And it IS unstoppable. Completely. Utterly. ..."
"... When the communists gave up and joined the party, our globalist masters realized that they could not only amass further wealth by spreading these things to the former communist bloc and under-exploited non-aligned nations, but they could now squeeze even more profit-margin out of the home territories by wearing down the power of the local workforce at all levels, except, of course, for the very pinnacle, by outsourcing production and even many services to the newly "developing world." ..."
"... Ironically, fighting the communist threat probably kept our leadership more honest than they have been in the new world order since the fall of communism. ..."
"... I know opinions vary on Ken Burns/PBS's "Vietnam" documentary, but what struck me is that we're following the same script in Afghanistan and the Middle East as we were in Vietnam and expecting a different (i.e., more favorable) outcome. The script being "pacification" through providing medicine, foodstuffs, soccer balls and American smiles to the local populations combined with placing massive amounts of ordnance on targets deemed hostile. It didn't win hearts and minds then nor is it now. ..."
"... The monumentally stupid war mismanagement of Pentagon chief Robert McNamara, a know-it-all who knew nothing, ..."
"... We have legions of McNamara's calling the shots today. They are called neoconservatives and liberal interventionists. The big brains of the Ivy league do seem to excel at steering us into icebergs time and again. ..."
"... What don't you understand about Clausewitz's dictum "war is the mere continuation of politics with other means"? War is what you do when you can't achieve your political objectives by other means. The United States' political objective in Vietnam was to prevent the American satrapy in the south being re-united by the nationalists in the north. So, where the f ** k is South Vietnam? The United States might believe it won every battle (slight exaggeration) but it still lost the American war. ..."
"... I bet they didn't cover the mutiny in the ranks which is the main reason the US had to withdraw because of a "broken army." That included fragging, mission refusal, and an overall negative attitude as you suggest. Now we have a volunteer army, a warrior class, which changes that dynamic. ..."
"... Too many of the volunteers are really economic draftees. You can have plenty of discipline problems with volunteers, I've seen it up close and personal, although never reaching the level of mutiny. ..."
Sep 30, 2017 | www.unz.com

The current 17-year old US war in Afghanistan has uncanny resemblances to the Vietnam War. In Kabul and Saigon, the US installed puppet governments that command no loyalty except from minority groups. They were steeped in drugs and corruption, and kept in power by intensive use of American air power. As in Vietnam, the US military and civilian effort in Afghanistan is led by a toxic mixture of deep ignorance and imperial arrogance.

The US military understands it has long ago lost the Afghan War but cannot bear the humiliation of admitting it was defeated by lightly-armed mountain tribesmen fighting for their independence. In Vietnam, Washington could not admit that young Vietnamese guerillas and regulars had bested the US armed forces thanks to their indomitable courage and intelligent tactics. No one outside Vietnam cared about the 2-3 million civilians killed in the conflict

Unfortunately, the PBS program fails to convey this imperial arrogance and the ignorance that impelled Washington into the war – the same foolhardy behavior that sent US forces into Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq and perhaps may do so in a second Korean War. The imperial spirit still burns hot in Washington among those who don't know or understand the outside world. The lessons of all these past conflicts have been forgotten: Washington's collective memory is only three years long.

Vietnam was not a 'tragedy,' as the PBS series asserts, but the product of imperial geopolitics. The same holds true for today's Mideast wars. To paraphrase a famous slogan from Vietnam, we destroyed Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria to make them safe for 'freedom.'

One of the craziest things about the Vietnam War has rarely been acknowledged: even at peak deployment, the 550,000 US soldiers in Vietnam were outnumbered by North Vietnamese fighting units.

That's because the huge US military had only about 50,000 real combat troops in the field. The other half million were support troops performing logistical and administrative functions behind the lines: a vast army of typists, cooks, truck drivers, psychologists, and pizza-makers.

Too much tail to teeth, as the army calls it. For Thanksgiving, everyone got turkey dinner with cranberry sauce, choppered into the remotest outposts. But there were simply not enough riflemen to take on the Viet Cong and tough North Vietnamese Army whose Soviet M1954 130mm howitzer with a 27 km range were far superior to the US Army's outdated WWII artillery.

Poor generalship, mediocre officers, and lack of discipline ensured that the US war effort in Vietnam would become and remain a mess. Stupid, pointless attacks against heavily defended hills inflicted huge casualties on US troops and eroded morale.

The monumentally stupid war mismanagement of Pentagon chief Robert McNamara, a know-it-all who knew nothing, turned the war into a macabre joke. This was the dumbest command decision since Louis XV put his girlfriend Madame de Pompadour in charge of his armies.

We soldiers, both in Vietnam and Stateside, scorned the war and mocked our officers. It didn't help that much of the US force in 'Nam' were often stoned and rebellious.

The January 30, 1968 Tet Offensive put the kibosh on US plans to pursue the war – and even take it into south-west China. Tet was a military victory of sorts for the US (and why not, with thousands of warplanes and B-52 heavy bombers) but a huge political/psychological victory for the Communists in spite of their heavy losses.

I vividly recall standing with a group of GI's reading a typed report on our company barracks advising that the Special Forces camp in the Central Highlands to which many of our company had been assigned for immediate duty had been overrun at Tet, and all its defenders killed. After that, the US Army's motto was 'stay alive, avoid combat, and smoke another reefer.'

The war became aimless and often surreal. We soldiers all knew our senior officers and political leaders were lying. Many soldiers were at the edge of mutiny, like the French Army in 1917. Back in those ancient days, we had expected our political leaders to be men of rectitude who told us the truth. Thanks to Vietnam, the politicians were exposed as liars and heartless cynics with no honor.

This same dark cloud hangs over our political landscape today. We have destroyed large parts of the Mideast, Afghanistan and northern Pakistan without a second thought – yet wonder why peoples from these ravaged nations hate us. Now, North Korea seems next.

Showing defiance to Washington brought B-52 bombers, toxic Agent Orange defoliants and endless storms of napalm and white phosphorus that would burn through one's body until it hit bone.

In spite of all, our imperial impulse till throbs. The nightmare Vietnam War in which over 58,000 American soldiers died for nothing has been largely forgotten. So we can now repeat the same fatal errors again without shame, remorse or understanding.

(Republished from EricMargolis.com by permission of author or representative)

anonymous, Disclaimer September 30, 2017 at 3:36 pm GMT

For both Vietnam and Afghanistan, as well as other places, the guiding principle is that they live there and we don't. These are all expeditionary wars for the US. Resistant peoples can't be controlled at a distance. Of course the morale of US soldiers ends up being bad when they realize there's nothing for them to fight for. No one wants to die to help some politician save face. Insofar as the current much publicized Vietnam documentary goes there doesn't seem to be anything that's new or original. All of it has been known for many years to anyone who would bother to brush up on the subject. The question is whether Americans are capable of learning from the past and the answer seems to be no for the vast majority.

anonymous, Disclaimer September 30, 2017 at 3:36 pm GMT

For both Vietnam and Afghanistan, as well as other places, the guiding principle is that they live there and we don't. These are all expeditionary wars for the US. Resistant peoples can't be controlled at a distance. Of course the morale of US soldiers ends up being bad when they realize there's nothing for them to fight for. No one wants to die to help some politician save face. Insofar as the current much publicized Vietnam documentary goes there doesn't seem to be anything that's new or original. All of it has been known for many years to anyone who would bother to brush up on the subject. The question is whether Americans are capable of learning from the past and the answer seems to be no for the vast majority.

Cranky, September 30, 2017 at 3:37 pm GMT

So whose name gets to be the last American killed in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, etc? Dying for a place on the memorial, boys. "The war was being run by a bunch of four-star clowns who were going to end up giving the whole circus away."

Some things don't change- I wonder if Rand has a new copy of the Pentagon Papers regarding post 9/11. And a new Nixon in office .he vowed to get out too -- and yet pushed more into it simply amazing.

nsa, September 30, 2017 at 5:55 pm GMT

@Sam McGowan First, I was heavily involved in Vietnam from 1965 to 1970. Second, I have written extensively about the war and read the books. The fact is that the US didn't "lose" the war, the left-wing presidents that got us into it, JFK and LBJ, has no intention of defeating the communist insurgency, they just wanted "to contain it". Cam Ranh Bay and made a speech in which he commented to the troops present that he wanted them to "nail the coonskin to the wall." Richard Nixon began withdrawing troops immediately after his inauguration and gave Abrams an edict to "reduce American casualties" shortly afterwards. In fact, Vietnam as well as Korea - as well as other wars around the world - were continuations of World War II, which Americans thought ended when the Japanese surrendered. By the way, I am not watching Ken Burn's latest left-wing propaganda piece nor do I intend to. I don't need him to tell me what happened in Southeast Asia, I was there. Save your senile hot air for the other menopausal drunks drooling in the VFW lounge. The conscript US military completely collapsed fragging, rampant drug usage, desertion, abject morale, chain of command disintegration, and the usual commissioned officer cowardice. Any western country stupid enough to pursue a land war in Asia deserves what it gets .inevitable defeat and humiliation.

Priss Factor, Website September 30, 2017 at 7:27 pm GMT

I don't think CucKen Burns is entirely wrong in empathizing with those who got involved. Sure, there were warmongers. Sure, they were profiteers. Sure, there were power-maniacs. Sure, there were paranoids.

But Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon were not particularly sadistic or cruel men. Eisenhower could be aloof and mean. Kennedy could be vain. Johnson was plenty corrupt. Nixon could be nasty. But were not psychos or radicals like Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, or Mao.

As for military men, well, whaddya expect? They were trained to think of the world in terms of military power. As for CIA, we are talking of more sinister elements, but let's keep in mind that Soviets had their intelligence organizations and methods of subversion. Let's remember Soviets had infiltrated FDR's government and pulled dirty trick. Even got the Bomb during Truman era.
Also, Soviets could be utterly ruthless in their own empire.

Now, would the US have intervened in Vietnam if the nation was to be united by a non-communist nationalist? Probably not. US didn't intervene in Indonesia when it gained independence under Sukarno. The only reason US got involved was because Ho was a Soviet-leaning communist. And even though Domino theory has been 'debunked', it made sense at the time. Even Soviets believed in it. Mao believed in it. Soviets believed that sign of US weakness could spread the revolution all around. Che Guevara believed in the Domino Theory. Communist victory over Cuba, he thought, would herald spread of communism all over Latin America, and then it would spread into US itself. Che really believed this, which is why he died in Bolivia trying to start an insurgency.

Also, in a way, Domino Theory did come true, at least for awhile. Not so much in Southeast Asia, though Laos and Cambodia also fell to communism. And keep in mind Indonesia almost could have become communist if the Peking-backed coup had succeeded. And keep in mind it took lots of British brutality and ruthlessness to stem the communist movement in Malaysia. Brits built huge hamlets and concentration camps. They took extreme measures.

At any rate, communism did continue to spread after the fall of Vietnam. US power seemed to be declining. And not only communists were emboldened by US defeat in Vietnam. Vietnam became a metaphor for anti-Americanism all over the world. May 68 movement that almost brought down the French government was fired up partly by Vietnam(though it began as some silly stuff about dorms and sex). Vietnam was bigger than Algeria because US was seen as the Great Power. French defeat wasn't all that surprising in Algeria. So, after US left from Vietnam, there was a sense that David could beat American Goliath. Iran regime fell and Islamists came to power. Afghanistan turned communist, and Soviets felt emboldened in rolling in tanks. Ethiopia, Mozambique, and Angola turned communist. Communists won in Nicaragua and almost won in El Salvador. There was a raging Maoist insurgency in Peru. Allende came to power through elections, and he was pro-Soviet and pro-Cuba. He was removed only by US-backed coup that did as much harm as good. It blackened US reputation around the world. So, in a way, the Domino Theory wasn't all wrong. Vietnam did signal a sea-change in world politics at least for awhile.

In the end, communism wasn't defeated by the US. It defeated itself. Soviet economics just couldn't sustain the empire. Its subsidies to Cuba were costly. Its support of Marxist regimes in Africa drained Soviet economy. USSR had to prop up Iron Curtain nations economically. And Vietnamese communism was a disaster. Maoism was hell on earth. Some might say communism failed cuz Capitalist West froze the communists out of world trade. But considering that the communist world encompassed resource-rich Soviet Empire, people-rich China, and lots of nations willing to do business with communist nations -- India and Arab nations had good relations with Soviets -- , the real reason for failure of communism was it was its own worst enemy.

And when we look at the aftermath of communist victory in Indochina -- brutal repression in Vietnam and Laos and psychotic democide in Cambodia -- and when we consider how even communist nations like China and Vietnam switched to market economics, it's clear that US was on the right side of history on many issues.

Also, the conflict was complicated because both sides were aggressors. US was the aggressor in working with the French to divide Vietnam in half, in occupying the southern half, and dropping bombs and using Viet women as whores. But the communists were also aggressors because they tried to impose a form of Stalinism on people in the South, most of whom didn't want communism. After all, many more people fled the north to the south than vice versa. Why? There is something prison-like about communism. The commissars never leave you alone. Also, North Vietnamese leaders, though inspired and patriotic, were utterly ruthless in their own way, willing to sacrifice any number of people for victory just like Japanese militarists were willing to Go All the Way instead of calling it quits to save lives.

Still, in retrospect, Ho Chi Minh was a genuine patriot, a legendary figure much beloved by many Viets. And for that reason, US shouldn't have intervened, and the whole mess could have been avoided.

CucKen Burns makes my skin crawl, but at his best, he can look at both sides of the issue instead of going for b/w version of history with good guys vs bad guys.

That said, maybe his position reflects globalism. As Proglobalists now control the US, the neo-Pax-Americana is about the spread of agendas favored by the likes of CucKen Burns, like homomania, Jewish Power, anti-nationalism, and Afromania. Today's progs want the world to become neo-Americanized.

And in Vietnam, as Linh Dinh reported, there is now homo parades and Afromania and Vietcuckery. So, considering that Viet commies stood for patriotism and national sovereignty, maybe the globalist viewpoint is more favorable to US efforts to turn Vietnam into globo-disneyland.

After all, where was CucKen Burns when Obama and Hillary were destroying Libya, Ukraine, Syria, and etc. Where were he and his ilk when Jews were cooking up New Cold War with Russia with hysteria that would make McCarthy blush?

Anon, Disclaimer October 1, 2017 at 4:37 am GMT

Is the view that JFK wanted out of Vietnam merely a conspiratorial fantasy?. The following articles are easy reads:

Exit Strategy: In 1963, JFK ordered a complete withdrawal from Vietnam
James K. Galbraith, BOSTON REVIEW

JFK's Vietnam Withdrawal Plan Is a Fact, Not Speculation
A response to Rick Perlstein.
By James K. Galbraith, THE NATION

Jim Christian, October 1, 2017 at 6:03 am GMT

@anonymous

"The question is whether Americans are capable of learning from the past and the answer seems to be no for the vast majority."

Americans at-large have no power. A small cadre runs things now. Once Americans didn't have a draft to worry over, they vacated the streets and left the dying to the farmers' sons (metaphor for the poor). That's all it is. The damage done to the economy, the sheer quantities of cash vacuumed up from the rest of the country and showered over the Washington DC region escapes the imagination of us out here in the country with our local issues and problems. These, rooted in the sheer theft of our taxes and handed over to the war-mongers of DC because there simply isn't enough left over after feeding The Beast in Washington. We have aircraft carriers that can't launch aircraft, planes that won't fly, weapons that won't work and wrong strategies followed in war-fighting and procurement, yet still, the theft goes on.

War after war lost, yet the Generals are still revered, money to the pro-war think tanks is never ending and the revolving door between the Pentagon, White House and defense contractors (and their corporate boards) has never been richer. Doesn't matter the war industry doesn't win wars, the money is just so damned good they can't stop, won't stop. And who is to stop them? These are the folks that kill people, that have a file on each of us. Indeed, it is our only remaining industry, flawed and failed though it may be. It certainly is a rich one. And it IS unstoppable. Completely. Utterly.

Jim Christian, October 1, 2017 at 6:22 am GMT

@Sam McGowan Concur all, McGowan, good takes. Yeah, my Pop was into Naval spook communications and messaging, he'd pick up the WashPost off the driveway and see various and sundry in the paper lying and white-washing the effort and just be wild by the time he left for work. He knew the carriers were having no success, he knew the air-war was a mess, he knew the Marines were getting killed all over the country. People that knew the truth from the inside hadda keep their traps shut.

By the time I joined up for a 6 year dose of USN carrier decks in 1976 I got the scoop from a few of our officers, almost all of whom had flown with VA35 over Vietnam in A-6′s. Clusterfuck, they could then acknowledge just those few years later, only the most junior officers hadn't served in the air war over Vietnam. And they had good stories that pointed out the folly throughout.

Now? The military is just a revenue-stream, nothing produced, much destroyed to the enrichment of a few insiders.

2/1Doc RVN 68-89, October 1, 2017 at 12:27 pm GMT

Sir
Recently came across some startling statistics about men who served in Vietnam like you and me. Of the 2.7 million who served only 850,000 are still alive at last census!!!!!! 700,500 died prematurely between 1995 census and 2000 census. No country for old men .

The Alarmist, October 1, 2017 at 4:08 pm GMT

@Priss Factor

"And in Vietnam, as Linh Dinh reported, there is now homo parades and Afromania and Vietcuckery. So, considering that Viet commies stood for patriotism and national sovereignty, maybe the globalist viewpoint is more favorable to US efforts to turn Vietnam into globo-disneyland."

Bingo! The only problem is that the globalists are now using the opportunity to also wear down the populations of the home territories as well. The only reason our national economic imperialism wasn't enough of a raging success (don't get me wrong by any rational measure it was) was that it was kept in check by the opposing communist bloc, and still America managed to conquer the so-called free world with Coca Cola, McDonalds, Hollywood Inc., etc.

When the communists gave up and joined the party, our globalist masters realized that they could not only amass further wealth by spreading these things to the former communist bloc and under-exploited non-aligned nations, but they could now squeeze even more profit-margin out of the home territories by wearing down the power of the local workforce at all levels, except, of course, for the very pinnacle, by outsourcing production and even many services to the newly "developing world."

Ironically, fighting the communist threat probably kept our leadership more honest than they have been in the new world order since the fall of communism.

The Alarmist, October 1, 2017 at 4:25 pm GMT

"No one in Washington seemed to know that China and the Soviet Union had split and become bitter enemies. As ever, our foreign human intelligence was lousy."

They knew of the rift that had grown since 1960 or so, but they didn't believe it until the short border war in 1969. The same way that a number of indicators suggested as early as 1983 that the USSR was imploding, but the menace of the USSR was used to keep justifying a buildup and procurement of new systems until and even beyond its actual implosion a few years later.

Evil, stupid, or merely blind. You decide.

KenH, October 1, 2017 at 11:00 pm GMT

I know opinions vary on Ken Burns/PBS's "Vietnam" documentary, but what struck me is that we're following the same script in Afghanistan and the Middle East as we were in Vietnam and expecting a different (i.e., more favorable) outcome. The script being "pacification" through providing medicine, foodstuffs, soccer balls and American smiles to the local populations combined with placing massive amounts of ordnance on targets deemed hostile. It didn't win hearts and minds then nor is it now.

The generals keep telling us that with just a few more antibiotics, soccer balls and troops victory is around the bend.

Hindsight's always 20/20, but to be fair a military force in Vietnam did seem like the right thing do at least in the early years. Any de-escalation and/or withdrawals would have been perceived by a rabidly anti-communist population as surrendering to communist aggression and political suicide for any president proposing it.

The monumentally stupid war mismanagement of Pentagon chief Robert McNamara, a know-it-all who knew nothing,

We have legions of McNamara's calling the shots today. They are called neoconservatives and liberal interventionists. The big brains of the Ivy league do seem to excel at steering us into icebergs time and again.

As it was former allies Vietnam and China briefly fought each other in 1979 and Vietnam didn't have the desire or the ability to project power much beyond Cambodia and Laos.

DB Cooper, October 2, 2017 at 4:38 am GMT

"We really believed that if the US did not make a stand in Vietnam the Soviets and Chinese would overrun all of South Asia."

India played a big role in shaping this narrative. Just five years ago before 1967 China finally responded to India's creeping land grab after years of trying to warn New Delhi's to stop its 'Forward Policy' by launching a massive anticipatory strike into India. India was defeated militarily but India was able to fool the world that India was a hapless victim against an agressive China when in fact the reverse is true.

Diversity Heretic, October 2, 2017 at 6:14 am GMT

@Jim Christian A bit off topic, but, since I know that you had naval experience, any take on why Navy ships keep colliding with merchantmen? Is it reduced competence because of racial and sexual preferences, or overworked sailors because deployed ships are short-staffed as a result of pregnancies? Or is it just a run of bad luck? I've read some different theories but I've seen you post often enough to know that you'll have an informed opinion.

Blowback, October 2, 2017 at 1:07 pm GMT

@Sam McGowan What don't you understand about Clausewitz's dictum "war is the mere continuation of politics with other means"? War is what you do when you can't achieve your political objectives by other means. The United States' political objective in Vietnam was to prevent the American satrapy in the south being re-united by the nationalists in the north. So, where the f ** k is South Vietnam? The United States might believe it won every battle (slight exaggeration) but it still lost the American war.

Jim Christian, October 2, 2017 at 1:09 pm GMT

@Diversity Heretic The military is off-kilter all over. Navigation? Routine. Ought to be. Not anymore. Procurement? Driven by inertia and the corruption of planners that know a carrier's planes are useless if the ship has to stand off 500-1000 miles because of a cruise missile environment that they KNOW every third-world shitbox has been building for 30 years now, starting with the Norks. From aircraft to ships, a complete clusterfuck.

Personnel? Ya gotta be shitting me, right? Between the sexism, reverse-racism and the cultural kookiness from the top of a terrorized Central Command and throughout the military, right down to the pretty little Blonde Hispanic Black Dwarf tranny just dying to terrorize said command with a complaint, we really haven't much good to say about our staffing. It's not a meritocracy anymore, hasn't been since Reagan. The entire thing is sitting there waiting to be taken down and humiliated.

And still? We sprinkle the trillions onto the DC region, make the war planners rich, we still lionize Generals and Admirals that haven't won shit in 75 years and we cycle them through the think tanks and corporate boards of the defense contractors and make THEM rich too. Then we even put them in charge at the White House, having discarded the notion of Congressional approval for the wars they "fight" in our names. And they start wars. And finally, the notion that we have civilian control of our military is long gone. We are a Junta. There is a coup ongoing, two or more in our past and we're no more than a broke but dangerous and heavily armed danger to the rest of the world run by the thugs of the Pentagon, the think tanks, the defense contractors and the lazy sloth of Congress, who is supposed to keep this shit straight and Constitutional. Doom. Yes, the word doom comes to mind.

Don Bacon, October 2, 2017 at 2:56 pm GMT

@anonymous re: "No one wants to die to help some politician save face."

I don't have a teevee, but I bet they didn't cover the mutiny in the ranks which is the main reason the US had to withdraw because of a "broken army." That included fragging, mission refusal, and an overall negative attitude as you suggest. Now we have a volunteer army, a warrior class, which changes that dynamic.

Jim Christian, October 2, 2017 at 4:08 pm GMT

@Diversity Heretic

Thanks! Always appreciate your candor!

One man's opinion. I do wish someone would show me where I'm wrong, but I spent too many years down in DC doing their tech stuff after I left the Navy (too many women that couldn't, at that point in 82, go to sea) and so they only had more sea duty because the shore billets were all taken in their haste to "integrate" women into the Navy. Even instructor duty for Naval Air Maintenance was hosted by women that had never served a day in carrier air, training the young mice how to do business on a flight deck. They did offer me, for variety, another four year hitch in a WestPac squadron aboard one damned carrier deck or another. Already having done 5, I said no thanks and went back home to Virginia. And so I got familiar with the workings of the spooks, Booze, Allen, Heritage, Cato, Brookings, the Pentagon, NSA, FBI, Quantico, there were hundreds of them, most with two or three names in the chain of title. I did their phones for decades, they're psychos, they're paranoid, everything classified and spooky and ooga-booga. Worthless ants on a big log and they each think they're steering it down the river.

Bunch of fucking Frank Burns's is what they are..Cheers.

Diversity Heretic, October 2, 2017 at 6:18 pm GMT

@Jim Christian Take care of yourself. People like you are a national asset, appreciated by at least some of us.

anonymous, Disclaimer October 2, 2017 at 11:03 pm GMT

There never was a communist threat. Not since at least the 1920s, when Stalin defeated Trotsky. Trotsky wanted world revolution. Stalin, for all his bloodthirsty antics in Russia, realised this was all nonsense. He just wanted Socialism in One Country, developing the country economically. He wasn't really interested in the outside world.

In the 1930s he was willing to cooperate with right wing western governments till they did a deal with Hitler in 1938. He was never interested in invading countries to grab land and resources. Whenever he did so, Poland in 1939, or Eastern Europe post 1945, it was for security reasons. The part of Poland he occupied in 1939 had been taken from Russia by force in 1920. It was inhabited by 1o million White Russians and Ukrainians and no Poles.

Jack Spratt, October 3, 2017 at 4:57 am GMT

Wissing's book "Funding the enemy" details the totally corrupt Afghan government and is a compelling argument why we should pull out at once and needs to be read by anyone with half a brain. I served in Vietnam also, in 1967, and its deja vu all over again.

Capn Mike, October 3, 2017 at 5:20 am GMT

@The Alarmist Having been on – site at the time (North Tonkin Gulf), I can tell you that China gave U.S.N. units free rein over those waters, including Chinese waters. The fix was in. In 1969 onwards. China and Viet Nam were NEVER friends. Did CIA realize this? I don't know.

Vidi, October 3, 2017 at 6:15 am GMT

@DanC

Anyways, expect the US to keep on wasting money in Afghanistan (and Pakistan and Tajikistan) until it gets bankrupted by the next Big War!

Or until all the routes into Afghanistan are blocked. At the moment, the only route still open passes through Pakistan, and that may close at any time.

wayfarer, October 3, 2017 at 6:19 am GMT

Of the 58,220 Americans who were sacrificed by the U.S. Government during the Vietnam War, 270 were Jewish. That's approximately 0.46 percent of the total number of American kids who died, or less than a half of one-percent.

"Statistical Information About Casualties of the Vietnam War"

https://www.archives.gov/research/military/vietnam-war/casualty-statistics.html

" 9/11 Israel Did It! "

https://wikispooks.com/wiki/9-11/Israel_did_it

Hibernian, October 3, 2017 at 10:57 am GMT

@Grandpa Charlie The Japanese trained their naval cadets using a mock Pearl Harbor type exercise annually for a fair number of years prior to WW2. The Russo-Japanese War of 1905 began with a Japanese surprise attack. You have the unmitigated gall to attack Margolis as an establishment mouthpiece when you yourself are whitewashhing the "sainted" FDR. No prudent military planner would absolutely assume that the attack would come in one particular place, whether the Phillipines, Pearl, or elsewhere.

Hibernian, October 3, 2017 at 11:05 am GMT

@Don Bacon Too many of the volunteers are really economic draftees. You can have plenty of discipline problems with volunteers, I've seen it up close and personal, although never reaching the level of mutiny.

Che Guava, October 3, 2017 at 12:13 pm GMT

@Capn Mike That is interesting to me. As is the Margolis artictle, never knew he had been a USA soldier, very interesting article. Thought he was a Canada person.

I have a question for you, Capn Mike.

If the PRC had allowed the USA free rein in Gulf of Tonkin, where were the supply lines to the Nth. Viet military and Viet Cong?

Must it not still have been overland from PRC at that time you say (1969)?

Hu Mi Yu, October 3, 2017 at 12:52 pm GMT

@Cranky

I don't for a moment believe that the 'saintly' President John Kennedy planned to end the war but was assassinated by dark, rightwing forces, as is claimed. This is a charming legend. Richard Nixon, Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson all feared that a withdrawal from Vietnam would lose them the next election. Republicans were still snarling over 'who lost China'.

I didn't like Kennedy either, but go back and reread the newspapers from the early days of the Kennedy administration. The oval office was bugged, and the information leaked in ways to embarrass Kennedy and UN Ambassador Adelai Stevenson. There is only one way that could have happened. Eisenhower installed those bugs before he left. These same bugs brought down Nixon in the Watergate crisis. The swamp wanted war, and they pulled the rug out from under both presidents as soon as they brought peace.

And a new Nixon in office .he vowed to get out too- and yet pushed more into it simply amazing.

He promised to get out and he did get us out. The peace treaty was announced just before the election in 1972. He knew it was his only hope for re-election. The Vietnamese disputed some of the terms, and that resulted in the Christmas bombing that year. The American withdrawal began in January 1973.

Trump promised to get us out of the Middle East. We should give him some rope. Maybe he hangs himself, or just maybe he can pull it off. He will need to be re-elected in three years.

Max Havelaar, October 3, 2017 at 1:41 pm GMT

Nice personal account of Vietnam.

However, the US foreign policy keeps holocausting the 3-rd world and lately the 2 -cond world.

The holocausts keep coming from US foreign policy of "exceptionalism" = "Nazi Übermensch"="the chosen ones" over this planet, many executed by the CIA-Nazi's:
The Syrian holocaust
The Yemen holocaust
The Ukranïan holocaust (Euromaidan) by Poroshenko/Nuland neo-nazi"s.
The Libyan holocaust
The Irak holocaust
The Afghanistan holocaust

The Belgrad holocaust

The Indonesian holocaust (Kissiger e.a.)
The Vietnam/Laos/Cambodia/Thailand holocaust (Kissinger e.a)
The Korean holocaust

During WWII:

The Jewish/Polish/Russian holocaust by Nazi's funded by Wallstreet/London bankers
The German holocaust (Die Rheinweisen lager) by US army Morgenthau plan.

Before WWII:
The Ukranian and Russain holocausts 1921-22, 1932-33 (holodomor) by Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin.

All these, were and are financed by the Wallstreet elite owners, the Billionaires who are mega-fascists, eugenic and satanic in character. Their credo is GREED.

(sources: Antony Sutton, Carrol Quickley, W.F. Engdahl)

jacques sheete, October 3, 2017 at 3:25 pm GMT

Thanks to Vietnam, the politicians were exposed as liars and heartless cynics with no honor.

A couple of the biggest lies were exposed, but the myths still live that the US government is an effective and dependable force for peace and freedom, and that the US military is an institution of dignity worthy of honor.

And people still put their faith (or is it hope) in the heartless cynics ( eunichs, really) with no balls, fewer brains, no soul, and even less honor.

[Oct 03, 2017] Are You Ready to Die by Paul Craig Roberts

Notable quotes:
"... Greenwald explains that the US media is so conditioned by the National Security State to see Russian President Putin lurking behind and masterminding attacks on America that it is "now religious dogma" -- a requirement -- to find Russian perfidy everywhere. The result Greenwald correctly says is that "an incredibly reckless, anything-goes climate prevails when it comes to claims about Russia. Media outlets will publish literally any official assertion as Truth without the slightest regard for evidentiary standards." ..."
"... In other words, the United States no longer has a media . It has a propaganda ministry for the military/security complex, the neoconservatives, and the Israel Lobby. And the idiot Americans sit in front of the TV and absorb the propaganda, and they read the New York Times and think that they are sophisticated and in the know. ..."
"... Russia knows that Washington knows that the accusations against Russia are false. ..."
"... This is a serious question, not only for Russia but for the entire world. All previous false accusations from the Clinton regime criminals, the Bush/Cheney regime criminals, and the Obama regime criminals ended in military attacks on the falsely demonized targets. Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea would be within reason to wonder if the false news propaganda attack on them is a prelude to military attack. ..."
"... What is the point of US security agencies such as Homeland Security, CIA, FBI, NSA constantly filling the propaganda machine known as the American Media with lies about Russia? Russia must wonder as well. Russia knows that they are lies. Russia knows that it does no good to refute the lies because the West has a Propaganda Ministry instead of a media. Russia knows that Washington told lies about the Taliban, Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, Assad, Iran. What does Russia conclude from the constant stream of lies about Russia that flow out of Washington and are presented as truth by the Western presstitutes? ..."
"... I have written many times that provoking nuclear powers such as Russia and China is the most extreme form of recklessness and irresponsibility. ..."
Oct 02, 2017 | www.unz.com

Glenn Greenwald of The Intercept exposes the fake news put out by the US Department of Homeland Security (an euphemistic name for a Big Brother operation that spies on US citizens) that Russia hacked 21 US state elections, news that was instantly spread around the world by the presstitute media. The propagandists running Homeland Security were contradicted by the state governments, forcing Homeland Security to retract its fake news claims. https://theintercept.com/2017/09/28/yet-another-major-russia-story-falls-apart-is-skepticism-permissible-yet/

The unasked/unanswered question is why did Homeland Security put out a FAKE NEWS story?

Greenwald explains that the US media is so conditioned by the National Security State to see Russian President Putin lurking behind and masterminding attacks on America that it is "now religious dogma" -- a requirement -- to find Russian perfidy everywhere. The result Greenwald correctly says is that "an incredibly reckless, anything-goes climate prevails when it comes to claims about Russia. Media outlets will publish literally any official assertion as Truth without the slightest regard for evidentiary standards."

In other words, the United States no longer has a media . It has a propaganda ministry for the military/security complex, the neoconservatives, and the Israel Lobby. And the idiot Americans sit in front of the TV and absorb the propaganda, and they read the New York Times and think that they are sophisticated and in the know.

What Greenwald doesn't address is the effect of the massive amount of fake news on Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea. Russia knows that Washington knows that the accusations against Russia are false. So why is Washington making false accusations against Russia?

This is a serious question, not only for Russia but for the entire world. All previous false accusations from the Clinton regime criminals, the Bush/Cheney regime criminals, and the Obama regime criminals ended in military attacks on the falsely demonized targets. Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea would be within reason to wonder if the false news propaganda attack on them is a prelude to military attack.

Iran and North Korea cannot attack the US and its European vassals, but Russia and China can. I have written about the Operational Command of the Russian armed forces conclusion that Washington is preparing a surprise nuclear attack on Russia. Instead of reassuring the Russians that no such planning is in the works, Washington has instead pushed further the fake news Russiagate story with the false report that Russia had hacked the elections of 21 states.

What is the point of US security agencies such as Homeland Security, CIA, FBI, NSA constantly filling the propaganda machine known as the American Media with lies about Russia? Russia must wonder as well. Russia knows that they are lies. Russia knows that it does no good to refute the lies because the West has a Propaganda Ministry instead of a media. Russia knows that Washington told lies about the Taliban, Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, Assad, Iran. What does Russia conclude from the constant stream of lies about Russia that flow out of Washington and are presented as truth by the Western presstitutes?

If you were the Russian government, would you conclude that your country was the next to be attacked militarily by Washington? If you were the Russian government, you would know that Washington/NATO cannot possibly attack Russia except by surprise nuclear strike. Knowing this, if you were the Russian government, would you sit there and wait on the strike? Imagine yourself the Russian government listening day in, day out, to endless wild improbable charges against Russia. What can Russia possibly conclude other than this is preparation of Western peoples for a nuclear attack on Russia?

Russia is not going to be hung like Saddan Hussein or murdered like Gaddafi.

I have written many times that provoking nuclear powers such as Russia and China is the most extreme form of recklessness and irresponsibility. The crazed morons in Washington are risking the life of the planet. The presstitutes are worse than the whores that they are. They never question the path to war; they only amplify it. Washington's craven, cowardly, moronic vassal states in UK, Germany, France, Italy, Netherlands, Belgium, Poland, and the rest of the EU/NATO idiots are, by their cooperation with Washington, begging for their own destruction.

Nowhere in the West is there a sign of intelligence.

Will Washington follow Adolf Hitler's folly and march into Russia?

[Oct 02, 2017] The Russian Defence Minister has released photos of US Forces stationed on Daesh territory

Oct 02, 2017 | www.voltairenet.org

On 24 September 2017, the Russian Defense Minister broadcast satellite images of US Special forces camping right in the centre of Daesh territory in Deir ez-Zor, a region in Syria.

The Turkish press agency, Anadolu, had already flagged up the existence of these bases on 17 June.

A number of sources confirm that there is a non-aggression agreement between the US Forces and Kurdish forces on the one hand, and Daesh on the other. These photographs challenge the version that the United States and its Kurdish allies are fighting the Islamic State. Only States which have satellites positioned above Syria are able to verify the authenticity of these photos. It follows that this information is meant for them.

JPEG - 69.9 kb

[Oct 02, 2017] The Kurdish independence referendum was a political miscalculation

Independence of small nations always depends on great powers. They are essentially pawns in a bigger game, national aspirations and all that as a tool in often pretty dirty game.
Notable quotes:
"... The Iraqi government has banned international flights to the Kurdish capital Irbil from 6pm this Friday, isolating the Kurds in Iraq to a degree they have not experienced since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in 2003. The isolation is political as well as geographical as traditional Kurdish allies, like the US, UK, France and Germany, have opposed the referendum on Kurdish independence while near neighbours in Turkey, Iran and Baghdad are moving to squeeze the Kurds into submission. ..."
"... The four countries with Kurdish minorities fear that secessionism might spread, but a further problem is that they do not believe that an Iraqi Kurdish state would be truly independent, but would shift into the orbit of another power. The Iranians are paranoid about the possibility that such a state would be an American base threatening Iran. Politicians in Baghdad say that, if the Kurds are serious about self-determination, they would cling onto the oil fields of Kirkuk and be dependent on Turkey through which to export their crude. ..."
Oct 02, 2017 | www.unz.com

The Iraqi government has banned international flights to the Kurdish capital Irbil from 6pm this Friday, isolating the Kurds in Iraq to a degree they have not experienced since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in 2003. The isolation is political as well as geographical as traditional Kurdish allies, like the US, UK, France and Germany, have opposed the referendum on Kurdish independence while near neighbours in Turkey, Iran and Baghdad are moving to squeeze the Kurds into submission.

The referendum succeeded in showing that the Kurds, not just in Iraq but in Turkey, Iran and Syria, still yearn for their own state. Paradoxically, the outcome of the poll has demonstrated both the strength of their demand for self-determination and the weakness of their ability to obtain it. The Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) is revealed as a minnow whose freedom of action – and even its survival – depends on playing off one foreign state against the other and keeping tolerable relations with all of them, even when they detested each other. In the past an American envoy would go out one door just as the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards came in the other.

The referendum has ended, perhaps only temporarily, these delicate balancing acts at which the Kurdish leadership was very skilled. In the last few weeks, the US has denounced the referendum in forthright terms, emboldening Iraq, Turkey and Iran to punish the Kurds for their undiplomatic enthusiasm to be an independent nation.

The poll was always a dangerous gamble but it is too early to say that it has entirely failed: minority communities and small nations must occasionally kick their big power allies in the teeth. Otherwise, they will become permanent proxies whose agreement with what their big power ally wants can be taken for granted. The skill for the smaller player is not to pay too high a price for going their own way. Iraq, Turkey and Iran have all made threatening statements over the last few days, some of them bombast, but they can hit the Kurds very hard if they want to.

The Kurds are in a fix and normally they would look to Washington to help them out, but under President Trump US foreign policy has become notoriously unpredictable. Worse from the Kurdish point of view, the US no longer needs the Iraqi Kurds as it did before the capture of Mosul from Isis in July. In any case, it was the Iraqi armed forces that won a great victory there, so for the first time in 14 years there is a powerful Iraqi army in the north of the country. We may not be on the verge of an Arab-Kurdish war, but the military balance of power is changing and Baghdad, not Irbil, is the gainer.

Anxious diplomats and excited journalists describe Iraq as "being on a collision course", but the different parties will not necessarily collide. Muddling through is not only a British trait. But there is no doubt that the situation has become more dangerous, particularly in the disputed territories stretching across northern Iraq from Syria to Iran.

The referendum always had a risky ambivalence about it which helped ignite the present crisis. It all depended on what audience Kurdish President Masoud Barzani was addressing: when he spoke to Kurdish voters, it was a poll of historic significance when the Kurds would take a decisive step towards an independent state.

But addressing an international and regional audience, Barzani said he was proposing something much tamer, more like an opinion poll, in which the Iraqi Kurds were politely indicating a general preference for independence at some date in the future. Like many leaders who play the nationalist card, Barzani is finding that his rhetoric is being taken more seriously than his caveats. "Bye, Bye Iraq!" chanted crowds in Irbil on the night of the referendum.

Much of this was born of Barzani's bid to outmanoeuvre his political rivals in Kurdistan by re-emerging as the standard bearer of Kurdish nationalism. He will benefit from his decision to defy the world and press ahead with the vote when it comes to the presidential and parliamentary elections in KRG on 1 November.

But the price of this could be high. It is not only Barzani who is facing an election in which national self-assertion is an issue in the coming months. Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi has a parliamentary election in 2018 and does not want to be accused of being insufficiently tough on the Kurds. Banning of international flights to Irbil is far less than many Iraqi MPs say they want.

By holding a referendum in the disputed territories, Barzani promoted this issue to the top of the Iraqi political agenda. It might have been in the interests of the Kurds to let it lie since the contending claims for land are deeply felt and irreconcilable. Optimists believe that Irbil and Baghdad could never go to war because they are both too dependent militarily on foreign powers. It is true that the Iraqi armed forces and the Kurdish Peshmerga alike could not have held off and defeated Isis without close air support from the US-led coalition. But by putting the future status of the KRG and the territories in play, Barzani has presented the Iraqi government, Turkey and Iran with a threat and an opportunity.

The four countries with Kurdish minorities fear that secessionism might spread, but a further problem is that they do not believe that an Iraqi Kurdish state would be truly independent, but would shift into the orbit of another power. The Iranians are paranoid about the possibility that such a state would be an American base threatening Iran. Politicians in Baghdad say that, if the Kurds are serious about self-determination, they would cling onto the oil fields of Kirkuk and be dependent on Turkey through which to export their crude.

Once the KRG dreamed of becoming a new Dubai with gleaming malls and hotels, but since 2014 it has looked more like Pompeii. The skyline is punctured by dozens of half completed tower blocks beside rusting cranes and abandoned machinery. The boom town atmosphere disappeared in 2014 when the price of oil went down, money stopped coming from Baghdad and Isis seized Mosul two hours' drive away. The state is impoverished and salaries paid late, if at all. This will now all get a lot worse with airports and border crossings closed and 35,000 federal employees no longer being paid.

At all events, the political landscape in Iraq and Syria is changing: we are at the beginning of a new political phase in which the battle to defeat Isis is being replaced by a power struggle between Arabs and Kurds.

[Oct 01, 2017] Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here by Cornel West

Notable quotes:
"... The Bush and Clinton dynasties were destroyed by the media-saturated lure of the pseudo-populist billionaire with narcissist sensibilities and ugly, fascist proclivities. The monumental election of Trump was a desperate and xenophobic cry of human hearts for a way out from under the devastation of a disintegrating neoliberal order – a nostalgic return to an imaginary past of greatness. ..."
"... This lethal fusion of economic insecurity and cultural scapegoating brought neoliberalism to its knees. In short, the abysmal failure of the Democratic party to speak to the arrested mobility and escalating poverty of working people unleashed a hate-filled populism and protectionism that threaten to tear apart the fragile fiber of what is left of US democracy. And since the most explosive fault lines in present-day America are first and foremost racial, then gender, homophobic, ethnic and religious, we gird ourselves for a frightening future. ..."
"... In this sense, Trump's election was enabled by the neoliberal policies of the Clintons and Obama that overlooked the plight of our most vulnerable citizens. The progressive populism of Bernie Sanders nearly toppled the establishment of the Democratic party but Clinton and Obama came to the rescue to preserve the status quo. And I do believe Sanders would have beat Trump to avert this neofascist outcome! ..."
"... The neoliberal era in the United States ended with a neofascist bang ..."
"... The white house and congress are now dominated by tea party politicians who worship at the altar of Ayn Rand.....read Breitbart news to see how Thatcher and Reagan are idolised. ..."
"... if you think the era of "neo liberalism" is over, you are in deep denial! ..."
"... The age of Obama was the last gasp of neoliberalism. Despite some progressive words and symbolic gestures, Obama chose to ignore Wall Street crimes, reject bailouts for homeowners, oversee growing inequality and facilitate war crimes like US drones killing innocent civilians abroad. ..."
"... Didn't Obama say to Wall Street ''I'm the only one standing between you and the lynch mob? Give me money and I'll make it all go away''. Then came into office and went we won't prosecute the Banks not Bush for a false war because we don't look back. ..."
"... He did not ignore, he actively, willingly, knowingly protected them. At the end of the day Obama is wolf in sheep's clothing. Exactly like HRC he has a public and a private position. He is a gifted speaker who knows how to say all the right, progressive liberal things to get people to go along much better than HRC ever did. ..."
"... Even when he had the Presidency, House and Senate, he never once introduced any progressive liberal policy. He didn't need Republican support to do it, yet he never even tried. ..."
Nov 17, 2016 | www.theguardian.com

The neoliberal era in the United States ended with a neofascist bang. The political triumph of Donald Trump shattered the establishments in the Democratic and Republican parties – both wedded to the rule of Big Money and to the reign of meretricious politicians.

The Bush and Clinton dynasties were destroyed by the media-saturated lure of the pseudo-populist billionaire with narcissist sensibilities and ugly, fascist proclivities. The monumental election of Trump was a desperate and xenophobic cry of human hearts for a way out from under the devastation of a disintegrating neoliberal order – a nostalgic return to an imaginary past of greatness.

White working- and middle-class fellow citizens – out of anger and anguish – rejected the economic neglect of neoliberal policies and the self-righteous arrogance of elites. Yet these same citizens also supported a candidate who appeared to blame their social misery on minorities, and who alienated Mexican immigrants, Muslims, black people, Jews, gay people, women and China in the process.

This lethal fusion of economic insecurity and cultural scapegoating brought neoliberalism to its knees. In short, the abysmal failure of the Democratic party to speak to the arrested mobility and escalating poverty of working people unleashed a hate-filled populism and protectionism that threaten to tear apart the fragile fiber of what is left of US democracy. And since the most explosive fault lines in present-day America are first and foremost racial, then gender, homophobic, ethnic and religious, we gird ourselves for a frightening future.

What is to be done? First we must try to tell the truth and a condition of truth is to allow suffering to speak. For 40 years, neoliberals lived in a world of denial and indifference to the suffering of poor and working people and obsessed with the spectacle of success. Second we must bear witness to justice. We must ground our truth-telling in a willingness to suffer and sacrifice as we resist domination. Third we must remember courageous exemplars like Martin Luther King Jr, who provide moral and spiritual inspiration as we build multiracial alliances to combat poverty and xenophobia, Wall Street crimes and war crimes, global warming and police abuse – and to protect precious rights and liberties.

Feminists misunderstood the presidential election from day one Liza Featherstone By banking on the idea that women would support Hillary Clinton just because she was a female candidate, the movement made a terrible mistake Read more

The age of Obama was the last gasp of neoliberalism. Despite some progressive words and symbolic gestures, Obama chose to ignore Wall Street crimes, reject bailouts for homeowners, oversee growing inequality and facilitate war crimes like US drones killing innocent civilians abroad.

Rightwing attacks on Obama – and Trump-inspired racist hatred of him – have made it nearly impossible to hear the progressive critiques of Obama. The president has been reluctant to target black suffering – be it in overcrowded prisons, decrepit schools or declining workplaces. Yet, despite that, we get celebrations of the neoliberal status quo couched in racial symbolism and personal legacy. Meanwhile, poor and working class citizens of all colors have continued to suffer in relative silence.

In this sense, Trump's election was enabled by the neoliberal policies of the Clintons and Obama that overlooked the plight of our most vulnerable citizens. The progressive populism of Bernie Sanders nearly toppled the establishment of the Democratic party but Clinton and Obama came to the rescue to preserve the status quo. And I do believe Sanders would have beat Trump to avert this neofascist outcome!

Click and elect: how fake news helped Donald Trump win a real election Hannah Jane Parkinson The 'alt-right' (aka the far right) ensnared the electorate using false stories on social media. But tech companies seem unwilling to admit there's a problem

In this bleak moment, we must inspire each other driven by a democratic soulcraft of integrity, courage, empathy and a mature sense of history – even as it seems our democracy is slipping away.

We must not turn away from the forgotten people of US foreign policy – such as Palestinians under Israeli occupation, Yemen's civilians killed by US-sponsored Saudi troops or Africans subject to expanding US military presence.

As one whose great family and people survived and thrived through slavery, Jim Crow and lynching, Trump's neofascist rhetoric and predictable authoritarian reign is just another ugly moment that calls forth the best of who we are and what we can do.

For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too detached, too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a force for good as we face this catastrophe.

theomatica -> MSP1984 17 Nov 2016 6:40

To be replaced by a form of capitalism that is constrained by national interests. An ideology that wishes to uses the forces of capitalism within a market limited only by national boundaries which aims for more self sufficiency only importing goods the nation can not itself source.

farga 17 Nov 2016 6:35

The neoliberal era in the United States ended with a neofascist bang.

Really? The white house and congress are now dominated by tea party politicians who worship at the altar of Ayn Rand.....read Breitbart news to see how Thatcher and Reagan are idolised.

That in recent decades middle ground politicians have strayed from the true faith....and now its time to go back - popular capitalism, small government, low taxes.

if you think the era of "neo liberalism" is over, you are in deep denial!

Social36 -> farga 17 Nov 2016 8:33

Maybe, West should have written that we're now in neoliberal, neofascist era!

ForSparta -> farga 17 Nov 2016 14:24

Well in all fairness, Donald Trump (horse's ass) did say he'd 'pump' money into the middle classes thus abandoning 'trickle down'. His plan/ideology is also to increase corporate tax revenues overall by reducing the level of corporation tax -- the aim being to entice corporations to repatriate wealth currently held overseas. Plus he has proposed an infrastructure spending spree, a fiscal stimulus not a monetary one. When you add in tax cuts the middle classes will feel flushed and it is within that demographic that most businesses and hence jobs are created. I think his short game has every chance of doing what he said it would.

SeeNOevilHearNOevil 17 Nov 2016 6:36

The age of Obama was the last gasp of neoliberalism. Despite some progressive words and symbolic gestures, Obama chose to ignore Wall Street crimes, reject bailouts for homeowners, oversee growing inequality and facilitate war crimes like US drones killing innocent civilians abroad.

Didn't Obama say to Wall Street ''I'm the only one standing between you and the lynch mob? Give me money and I'll make it all go away''. Then came into office and went we won't prosecute the Banks not Bush for a false war because we don't look back.

He did not ignore, he actively, willingly, knowingly protected them. At the end of the day Obama is wolf in sheep's clothing. Exactly like HRC he has a public and a private position. He is a gifted speaker who knows how to say all the right, progressive liberal things to get people to go along much better than HRC ever did.

But that lip service is where his progressive views begin and stop. It's the very reason none of his promises never translated into actions and I will argue that he was the biggest and smoothest scam artist to enter the white house who got even though that wholly opposed centre-right policies, to flip and support them vehemently. Even when he had the Presidency, House and Senate, he never once introduced any progressive liberal policy. He didn't need Republican support to do it, yet he never even tried.

ProbablyOnTopic 17 Nov 2016 6:37

I agree with some of this, but do we really have to throw around hysterical terms like 'fascist' at every opportunity? It's as bad as when people call the left 'cultural Marxists'.

LithophaneFurcifera -> ProbablyOnTopic 17 Nov 2016 7:05

True, it's sloganeering that drowns out any nuance, whoever does it. Whenever a political term is coined, you can be assured that its use and meaning will eventually be extended to the point that it becomes less effective at characterising the very groups that it was coined to characterise.

Keep "fascist" for Mussolini and "cultural Marxist" for Adorno, unless and until others show such strong resemblances that the link can't seriously be denied.

I agree about the importance of recognising the suffering of the poor and building alliances beyond, and not primarily defined by, race though.

l0Ho5LG4wWcFJsKg 17 Nov 2016 6:40
Hang about Trump is the embodiment of neo-liberalism. It's neo-liberalism with republican tea party in control. He's not going to smash the system that served him so well, the years he manipulated and cheated, why would he want to change it.
garrylee -> l0Ho5LG4wWcFJsKg 17 Nov 2016 9:38
West's point is that it's beyond Trump's control. The scales have fallen from peoples eyes. They now see the deceit of neo-liberalism. And once they see through the charlatan Trump and the rest of the fascists, they will, hopefully, come to realize the only antidote to neo-liberalism is a planned economy.

Nash25 17 Nov 2016 6:40

This excellent analysis by professor West places the current political situation in a proper historical context.

However, I fear that neo-liberalism may not be quite "dead" as he argues.

Most of the Democratic party's "establishment" politicians, who conspired to sabotage the populist Sanders's campaign, still dominate the party, and they, in turn, are controlled by the giant corporations who fund their campaigns.

Democrat Chuck Schumer is now the Senate minority leader, and he is the loyal servant of the big Wall Street investment banks.

Sanders and Warren are the only two Democratic leaders who are not neo-liberals, and I fear that they will once again be marginalized.

Rank and file Democrats must organize at the local and state level to remove these corrupt neo-liberals from all party leadership positions. This will take many years, and it will be very difficult.


VenetianBlind 17 Nov 2016 6:42

Not sure Neo-Liberalism has ended. All they have done is get rid of the middle man.

macfeegal 17 Nov 2016 6:46

It would seem that there is a great deal of over simplifying going on; some of the articles represent an hysteric response and the vision of sack cloth and ashes prevails among those who could not see that the wheels were coming off the bus. The use of the term 'liberal' has become another buzz word - there are many different forms of liberalism and creating yet another sound byte does little to illuminate anything.

Making appeals to restore what has been lost reflects badly upon the central political parties, with their 30 year long rightward drift and their legacy of sucking up to corporate lobbyists, systems managers, box tickers and consultants. You can't give away sovereign political power to a bunch of right wing quangos who worship private wealth and its accumulation without suffering the consequences. The article makes no contribution (and neither have many of the others of late) to any kind of alternative to either neo-liberalism or the vacuum that has become a question mark with the dark face of the devil behind it.

We are in uncharted waters. The conventional Left was totally discredited by1982 and all we've had since are various forms of modifications of Thatcher's imported American vision. There has been no opposition to this system for over 40 years - so where do we get the idea that democracy has any real meaning? Yes, we can vote for the Greens, or one of the lesser known minority parties, but of course people don't; they tend to go with what is portrayed as the orthodoxy and they've been badly let down by it.

It would be a real breath of fresh air to see articles which offer some kind of analysis that demonstrates tangible options to deal with the multiple crises we are suffering. Perhaps we might start with a consideration that if our political institutions are prone to being haunted by the ghost of the 1930's, the state itself could be seen as part of the problem rather than any solution. Why is it that every other institution is considered to be past its sell by date and we still believe in a phantom of democracy? Discuss.

VenetianBlind -> macfeegal 17 Nov 2016 7:00

I have spent hours trying to see solutions around Neo-Liberalism and find that governments have basically signed away any control over the economy so nothing they can do. There are no solutions.

Maybe that is the starting point. The solution for workers left behind in Neo-Liberal language is they must move. It demands labor mobility. It is not possible to dictate where jobs are created.

I see too much fiddly around the edges, the best start is to say they cannot fix the problem. If they keep making false promises then things will just get dire as.

[Sep 30, 2017] Is the US in cahoots with IS - TTG

Notable quotes:
"... "BEIRUT, LEBANON (2:50 P.M.) – A video has just been released on social media showing the interview of an ISIS fighter from Deir Ezzor who admits that the terrorist groups forces in the region are forbidden by their commanders from attacking US-backed, Kurdish-led militias. ..."
"... The interviewee, Mohammed Moussa al-Shawwakh, says that his group, tasked with defending the area around the Conoco Gas Fields, was ordered to allow Kurdish forces to enter the strategic site. The order, he says, came from a top regional emir (leader) called Abu Zaid. ..."
"... The ISIS fighters confession goes on to mention that Kurdish-led forces were also allowed to enter other gas and oil fields in the region in order to make propaganda videos. ..."
"... Mohammed finishes the interview by saying that he knows for a fact that the US is attempting to establish an alliance between Kurdish forces and ISIS in Deir Ezzor province in order to undermine government-led military efforts to liberate the region." ..."
"... Regime change in Syria was an Obama/Hillary project aided and abetted by Ambassador Ford, the French, Germans and British and of course the prime manipulators Bibi, Erdogan, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf monarchies. ..."
"... Brennan and CENTCOM were in hog heaven. No idea if they directly aided the jihadis both AQ & IS. But clearly indirectly and in a big way. Then Putin intervened. I recall Obama trolling him saying this would be another Afghanistan quagmire for Russia. Well, it seems like R+6, have the winning hand and Assad may survive and Syria will face the long road to reconstruction as a mostly secular state. ..."
"... The distinction about arrogance, if I understand TTG correctly, is more that the brainiacs in DC and CENTCOM making policy think they are such world class game players that they can or will have control over the situation. Because they are so astute and on top of things, the pieces will move because they want them to. ..."
"... US foreign policy is another topic - my mental image is of a bunch of kittens in a bag. When all the kittens are moving in different directions the bag won't move but sometimes three kittens are moving in one direction and the bag will move. I label the kittens Gas&Oil, AIPIAC+neocons, CIA and banking.... ..."
"... Is this the case with Canada and Australia? It's usually assumed, maybe simplistically, that the Ukrainian/Eastern European diaspora in those countries keeps the politicians there committed to neocon foreign policy anyway. At the more extreme end of the spectrum you sometimes see on the internet assertions that both the Ukrainians and the Israelis are holding the fort for white civilisation. Whether that's some nutter sounding off on a blog or whether it represents the underlying attitude of some of the Mr and Mrs Averages in that diaspora is difficult to tell from this distance. ..."
"... ISIS=Saudi; Al Nusra=Turkey & SDF=IDF with Saudi & IDF collaboration. Thus, ISIS melts away and voilà: SDF takes over ..."
Sep 27, 2017 | turcopolier.typepad.com
In short, no. IS is clearly losing cohesion and any IS or allied groups not closely tied to the central leadership are beginning to despair of the fight. I think YPG/SDF units may be able to bypass some of these deflated jihadis without much of a fight. Local jihadis may also be open to local truces with the local SDF Arab tribes. I would think the US and its allied forces would be happy to avoid these fights rather than aggressively seek combat. CJTF-OIR may also be watching the success of the Russian reconciliation program in turning former enemy fighters into allies and seek to do the same east of the Euphrates.

Yesterday Al Masdar News published an enlightening story where an ISIS fighter admits that ISIS is forbidden to attack Kurdish forces in Deir Ezzor.

*********

"BEIRUT, LEBANON (2:50 P.M.) – A video has just been released on social media showing the interview of an ISIS fighter from Deir Ezzor who admits that the terrorist groups forces in the region are forbidden by their commanders from attacking US-backed, Kurdish-led militias.

The interviewee, Mohammed Moussa al-Shawwakh, says that his group, tasked with defending the area around the Conoco Gas Fields, was ordered to allow Kurdish forces to enter the strategic site. The order, he says, came from a top regional emir (leader) called Abu Zaid.

The ISIS fighters confession goes on to mention that Kurdish-led forces were also allowed to enter other gas and oil fields in the region in order to make propaganda videos.

Mohammed finishes the interview by saying that he knows for a fact that the US is attempting to establish an alliance between Kurdish forces and ISIS in Deir Ezzor province in order to undermine government-led military efforts to liberate the region."

**********

Well, this would certainly explain the ease of the YPG/SDF advance to Deir Ezzor and the lack of combat. Some will see this as proof of US-IS collusion. I see it as evidence supporting my earlier thoughts of the CJTF-OIR seeing the wisdom of neutralizing the enemy through negotiations rather than eliminating them through combat. It is evidence of IS weakness rather than US perfidy.

Remember all that talk about the Russians and Assad being allied with IS because they were busy slamming all those other jihadis, including our unicorn army, rather than exclusively targeting IS? Many also were, and still are, in high dungeon about the whole Russian sponsored de-escalation zone effort. We were most recently mightily upset that the R+6 and Lebanon would allow a few busloads of IS jihadis and their families to leave their positions along the Syrian-Lebanese border enroute to Deir Ezzor. In my opinion, all these de-escalation efforts have put the R+6 in a far better position of neutralizing the jihadi threat in Idlib now than it was in immediately after the liberation of Aleppo. Perhaps the CJTF-OIR has realized what the R+6 discovered long ago. As Churchill said, Meeting jaw to jaw is better than war. Even as a tactic of war, it makes sense in this region.

What is more troubling is that we dont know what the USG and CJTF-OIR plans to do once IS is neutralized on both sides of the Euphrates. CENTCOM is a damnably arrogant command which has long sought to maintain a sizable and influential footprint in the region. Why?

mike , 27 September 2017 at 09:31 PM

Mohammed Moussa al-Shawwakh is saying whatever the Mukhbarat wants him to say. But I am sure there will be many commenters here who will believe his "confession" to be the final proof they are looking for. Sadly.

CENTCOM arrogant? Maybe. They do have a lot on their plate:

http://www.centcom.mil/portals/6/Images/centcommapmideast_Cropped.jpg?ver=2016-07-13-125046-033

Why you ask? Seems to me that is their charter from the National Command Authorities, and not from General Votel.

james -> mike... , 27 September 2017 at 09:45 PM
mike, the guys comments are in a long line of similar revelations for anyone receptive to the idea.. no '''final'' proof needed.. in the past it was always assad working with isis and etc. etc.. folks in the west have been indoctrinated to years of this bs.. i think it was obama who stated something to the effect he thought that isis would help to get rid of assad... that is the level of depravity the usa has sunk to here as i see it.. it has been ongoing and this guys comments come in a long line of examples of us exceptionalism..
mike -> james... , 28 September 2017 at 11:47 PM
james -

I do not believe Assad ever worked with Daesh. Some claim otherwise. I have not suggested that. His security services did release some jihadis from prison who became Daesh leaders, just like al-Baghdadi was released from imprisonment in Iraq. Many Syrians claim it was deliberate on Assad's part. I have not suggested that. Stupidity? Incompetence? Yes to both IMO, and that includes both the USA and the Syrian regime.

The real father of Daesh is Bush Junior and his invasion of Iraq in 2003, and Iraqi prime Minister Maliki. But to give them the benefit of the doubt, that was probably arrogance and ignorance on their part and not a deliberately evil intention.

PS - Why do you call this death cult by their preferred name of 'ISIS'? By using that term you legitimize their argument that they are a state, in other words a country like Syria or Belgium or the US or any country in the United Nations. They are the Daesh, a word they despise, a word which they have flogged people for using and threaten to cut out the tongue of those who use the word. Do not legitimize these monsters. They are not a state.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/what-daesh-mean-isis-threatens-6841468

james -> mike... , 29 September 2017 at 12:35 AM
mike,

i never said you did, but the western msm did fairly regularly.. as for the name isis - i have called them the ''moderate'' headchoppers too - to make fun of the stupid idea of any moderate opposition in all of this, although that bill of goods has been passed off regularly via the western msm and by the usa in particular.. they are a bunch of wahabbi nut jobs spreading their religion of intolerance and hate thanks the funding from saudi arabia primarily - again - a country the usa continues to countenance... i am sorry mike, but it burns me up to think anyone would believe the usa (or the uk, and a host of other countries) has played an honest role in anything to do with syria.. they haven't.. they have tried to tear it apart and ruined countless innocent lives with their bullshit... and - it continues all under the guise of going after isis, or daesh or whatever you want to call it.. thanks..

Red Cloud -> mike... , 28 September 2017 at 01:24 PM
Mohammed Moussa al-Shawwakh's comments don't contradict any accepted facts, and just as TTG pointed out - his statements are in line with the evidence of what actually happened.

So from an objective standpoint there is more reason to believe what he is saying than to not.

Yet right on que, you were the first comment to quickly dismiss everything the man said.

james -> Red Cloud... , 28 September 2017 at 05:26 PM
the pay must be good..
LeaNder -> Red Cloud... , 28 September 2017 at 09:38 PM
Army Times reported on a new Baghdadi audio that surfaced. I know, I know reminiscent of the curious OBL videos. But thankfully this time all that is needed is voice recognition. Wonder how good they are in that field by now. ;)

https://www.militarytimes.com/flashpoints/2017/09/28/isis-releases-baghdadi-audio-as-the-group-crumbles-in-iraq-and-syria/

In the message, Baghdadi told his supporters that ISIS remains steadfast as America grows weary in the conflict, according to analysis by Hassan Hassan, a senior fellow at the Tahrir Institute located in Washington D.C.

Townsend, thought he was still alive and kicking in the Middle Euphrates River Valley (MERV) Syria/Iraq; MT, August 31:
https://www.militarytimes.com/flashpoints/2017/09/28/isis-releases-baghdadi-audio-as-the-group-crumbles-in-iraq-and-syria/

Slightly more elaborated via the NYT, same date:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/31/us/politics/isis-military-us-iraq-syria-euphrates.html

Were planning for tough fights ahead, General Townsend said.

The Syrian Democratic Forces, which are backed by the United States, are largely led by Syrian Kurds who may not be immediately acceptable to the local Arab populations. The Syrian Kurds provide most of the essential command-and-control for the overall fighting force, half of which is Arab.

But as they move into the Euphrates River Valley, the Syrian forces now are expected to recruit additional local Arabs as well other Arab fighters who have been trained by American and allied forces at al-Tanf, a desert outpost in southern Syria near the intersection of the Jordanian and Iraqi borders.

The Arab fighters from al-Tanf are vetted and supported with small arms, navigation tools and medical supplies. American and other allied advisers also provide basic combat training skills, including first aid, marksmanship and techniques on how to clear a house of militants.

They also report that an agreement between Russia and the US that the SAA stay on the Western side hadn't been reached at that date.


Christian Chuba , 27 September 2017 at 09:37 PM
Great post TTG. Both the SDF and SAA have made evacuation arrangements to spare civilians or to gain military advantage and both sides have made something that resembles reconciliation / de-escalation agreements but the SAA and Russians have been better at it.

Between the U.S./SDF vs the Syrian / Russians, I'd say that we have grandstanded much more about it when the SAA have done this because we are always in Information War mode. I wish we wouldn't, poisoning the waters doesn't do any good and can eventually bite us but it sure makes us feel good and gives Nikki lots to rant about.

There must be tiers of ISIS members, a top tier of Baghdadi types who are 'irredeemable' and a bottom tier who are just as comfortable being part of any number of groups. I don't think we should get on our high horse about it if someone local decides that it's a good idea to let some of them scat but then again we once thought that Baghdadi was one of the more harmless ones. No one has invented a Takfiri gauge yet.

james , 27 September 2017 at 09:41 PM
thanks ttg.. i guess the question i have is has the usa paid a fee to get isis to stand down? i don't know if that is the case, but i am fine with that. my problem with the usa is their intent all along has been to divide syria and remove assad.. it seems to be continuing on for the most part here..

as for your last statement and question, i think the answer is the usa's intent to divide syria, giving the part in the east to the kurds, which works well with the oil interests and israel which the usa seems to always coincidently align itself with..

Jack , 27 September 2017 at 10:11 PM
TTG, Sir

I watched Ken Burn's Vietnam War documentary. IMO, an important aspect of the documentary was perspective.

Regime change in Syria was an Obama/Hillary project aided and abetted by Ambassador Ford, the French, Germans and British and of course the prime manipulators Bibi, Erdogan, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf monarchies.

Brennan and CENTCOM were in hog heaven. No idea if they directly aided the jihadis both AQ & IS. But clearly indirectly and in a big way. Then Putin intervened. I recall Obama trolling him saying this would be another Afghanistan quagmire for Russia. Well, it seems like R+6, have the winning hand and Assad may survive and Syria will face the long road to reconstruction as a mostly secular state.

The big winners from a strategic sense are Russia, Iran and Hezbollah who earned whatever that victory means in blood. Maybe some decades from now the next Ken Burns will come along and give us a documentary of our sordid role in creating chaos and anarchy in the Middle East beginning with regime change in Iraq on the basis of false pretenses.

J , 27 September 2017 at 10:51 PM
TTG,

Speaking of the Kurds, appears Kurd nationalism is bringing together Iran/Iraq/Turkey in a joint op to squash Kurd independence.

jjc , 27 September 2017 at 10:51 PM
The focus for SDF was removing ISIS from Raqqa, then suddenly it became a race to the Euphrates and the oil fields. The Kurdish militias have moved far outside their traditional territory. So it's hard not to see this as a land and resources grab, facilitated by a cooperative ISIS (who still attack SAA).
LeaNder , 28 September 2017 at 09:53 AM
Mohammed finishes the interview by saying that he knows for a fact that the US is attempting to establish an alliance between Kurdish forces and ISIS in Deir Ezzor province in order to undermine government-led military efforts to liberate the region.

I could imagine that Russia and its partners in war wonder about what drives the Iraqi Kurds to have an election on independence right now? ...

Elijah J. M.
https://elijahjm.wordpress.com/2017/09/28/masoud-barzani-either-burned-or-paved-the-way-for-the-syrian-kurds-a-dangerous-move/

JJackson , 28 September 2017 at 10:17 AM
The poorly thought out neocon dream of destuction of a Shia cresent is showning every sign of developing into something beyond their worst nightmares. When the dust settles they may well be faced by a new Warsaw pact of the feared Shia cresent plus the defection of Turkey and Qatar. The new Hizb re-armed and retrained by the Russians - quite possibly with defacto control of Lebanon. At this point the Golan would seem vunerable and should it go Jordan may well begin to wonder if a realignment may not also be in its best interests. What then Judea and Sumeria?
As to TTG's why? My guess would be that the incoherent multi-faceted US FP still has significant elements that have not given up hope of a 'friendly' entity in east Syria. Trump may have given up on Syrian regieme change but I am not sure everyone else has and these delusional dreamers may still hope this can be used as a springboard from which to undo all that has occured since the start of the second Iraq war.
Charles Michael -> The Twisted Genius ... , 28 September 2017 at 01:20 PM
TTG,
That is exactly my understanding of the situation.
From the start of the insurgency Bachar Al Hassad has been rather benevolent with the Kurds.
Surely with victory in sight he will not start speeling Kurds blood.

Most westerners seems unable to consider a long game, true it is nerve raking; but all quick fix imposed by brutal force have proved very temporary.

Ishmael Zechariah -> The Twisted Genius ... , 28 September 2017 at 05:18 PM
TTG,
For whatever it's worth, PKK, PYG, KRG etc. are completely infiltrated by Mossad at this time and must dance to the izzie tune. IMO the kurds are too deeply in to extricate themselves gracefully. Governments might make nice w/each other but the tribes surrounding the kurds will not forget kurdish perfidy that easily.
Ishmael Zechariah
The Porkchop Express , 28 September 2017 at 11:12 AM
TTG - I think you struck a very important distinction: the issue of connivance vs. arrogance when it comes to US/assorted jihadis in Syria and around the region.
Willybilly -> The Porkchop Express... , 28 September 2017 at 12:53 PM
TPE & TTG, Thre are definitely connivance and arrogance galore... and YES the US, NATO and the Izzies are in cahoots with ISIS and ALL its cousins, sisters and brothers in arms from day one. But plausible deniability requires all the acrobatics and various posturing we have seen over the years, in a veiled but failing attempts at denying the obvious...
The Porkchop Express -> Willybilly... , 28 September 2017 at 04:19 PM
There is no way the US is actively, directly in cahoots with Daesh, HTS/al Qaeda, or any other salifiyye. The Israelis, maybe. Saudis most assuredly.

The distinction about arrogance, if I understand TTG correctly, is more that the brainiacs in DC and CENTCOM making policy think they are such world class game players that they can or will have control over the situation. Because they are so astute and on top of things, the pieces will move because they want them to.

That doesn't mean the US is in bed with any of them.

james -> The Porkchop Express... , 28 September 2017 at 05:28 PM
and who is in cahoots with israel and saudi arabia??? one can see a pattern here!~
The Twisted Genius -> Willybilly... , 28 September 2017 at 11:35 PM
Willybilly,

While the USG thought it was clever enough to allow IS to attempt to topple the Assad government, it did not deliberately create and direct IS to do so. If that was the USG policy, we would not have bombed the crap out of IS around Kobane when the Rojava Kurds were about to be wiped out? We supported those Kurds in their successful campaign against IS since then.

We still seem hell bent on pursuing an "Assad must go" policy, but we did not deliberately support IS. We just stupidly let IS rampage across Iraq and Syria when we thought we could gain from that. As part of that stupid and destructive policy, we let the Saudis and Turks directly support IS. Now all those "moderate jihadis" who freely supported Al Qaeda and IS were our direct fault. Of course we weren't alone in that idiocy, either.

jld -> The Twisted Genius ... , 29 September 2017 at 02:51 AM
If that was the USG policy, we would not have bombed the crap out of IS around Kobane when the Rojava Kurds were about to be wiped out?

That argument doesn't hold because it suppose some USG rationality but there is plenty of evidence that the USG does engage in stupid/contradictory/incoherent/schizophrenic behavior.
Hey, careful, you might destroy the so convenient excuse "It's only stupidity not malevolence" !

semiconscious -> The Twisted Genius ... , 29 September 2017 at 09:36 AM
'We still seem hell bent on pursuing an "Assad must go" policy, but we did not deliberately support IS. We just stupidly let IS rampage across Iraq and Syria when we thought we could gain from that ...'

i believe the accepted term for describing this type of behavior is 'enabling' :) ...

FkDahl -> The Twisted Genius ... , 29 September 2017 at 12:55 PM
ISIS is the Tasmanian Devil, full of chaos and destruction, and the US has no direct control over it - but it appears the growth of ISIS was useful for certain US foreign policy goals.

Why European leaders went along with this and thus greatly facilitated the growth of combat experienced salafist terrorists in Europe is yet another example how - to put it frankly - stupid and short sighted (Western) European leaders are. Playing ball with the hegemon gives you a nice sinecure as a cushy post-politics job is the best explanation I can think of.

US foreign policy is another topic - my mental image is of a bunch of kittens in a bag. When all the kittens are moving in different directions the bag won't move but sometimes three kittens are moving in one direction and the bag will move. I label the kittens Gas&Oil, AIPIAC+neocons, CIA and banking....

Richardstevenhack , 28 September 2017 at 02:09 PM
"It is evidence of IS weakness rather than US perfidy."

In the immortal words of Tony Stark: "I say, is it too much to ask for both?"

Sure, the US is bombing ISIS NOW. Go back to 2014 to 2015. A year of US bombing ISIS and ISIS continued to make gains throughout Syria.

The Russians come in September, 2015 - and six months later the tide is turned. 25-50 Russian jets did in six months what US bombing for a year did not do.

Pretty much stands for itself. Not to mention that all during that time the US was insisting that "Assad must go" as their primary objective, several times threatening to establish a "no-fly zone" as a cover for directly attacking the Syrian regime.

Now that the tide is turned, and Russia (and Iran and Hizballah) has shamed the US in terms of effectiveness, of course the US comes in to try to finish off ISIS and have a hand in any subsequent negotiations.

I think this interpretation of the history of events is quite plausible.

Babak Makkinejad -> Richardstevenhack ... , 28 September 2017 at 06:10 PM
A joint US-Jordanian force could have destroyed ISIS in Syria in its early days. Wonder why that was never attempted, I guess helping the Party of Ali was a big No-No.
Richardstevenhack , 28 September 2017 at 02:14 PM
This is how the Russians do it...

REVENGE: Russia Vaporizes 5 Al-Qaeda Commanders Who Attacked Their MPs Last Week
http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/revenge-russia-vaporizes-5-al-qaeda-commanders-who-attacked-their-mps-last-week/ri21077

"At present, special measures to search for and destroy all the militants involved in the attack on Russian servicemen in Syria are continuing."

ISL -> Richardstevenhack ... , 29 September 2017 at 11:52 AM
Richardstevenhack:

Thanks for the link:

From the article:

"It was discovered where the leaders would hold a meeting..."

If true, this would suggest that ISIS is now leaking perhaps as individuals try and buy their post ISIS survival.

I do not recall such reports claimed a year or so ago.

VietnamVet , 28 September 2017 at 06:55 PM
TTG

Thanks again for keeping us up-to-date. This is invaluable.

Policies that ignore American citizens and enrich polluters and war profiteers are reaching a point of implosion. The chickens are coming home to roost.

Either the Shiite Crescent is accepted with Iran as a regional leader in an alliance with Russia or a world war is about to break out to form Kurdistan to cut the landline in half. Tens of thousands of American soldiers and contractors are in Syria and Iraq. As Houston, Florida and Puerto Rico point out; projected catastrophes do happen. Dont develop quagmires.

mike , 28 September 2017 at 09:02 PM
There are some signs of Damascus relaxing their attitude against the Kurds in northern Syria. The Syrian Foreign Minister, Walid al-Moualem, told Russia Today News that some form of autonomy may be possible. Is he sincere - or just trying to head off an independence referendum in Syria like what happened in northern Iraq?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-kurds/damascus-says-syrian-kurdish-autonomy-negotiable-report-idUSKCN1C10TJ

The Kurds with their Syriac-Assyrian/Arab/Turkmen allies in the Democratic Northern Syria Federation have "answered Syrian Foreign Ministers remarks on 'negotiations', saying that they are ready for talks." They say Moualem's statement is welcome and a positive step. They put it in writing.

https://anfenglish.com/rojava/northern-syria-answers-damascus-we-are-ready-for-negotiations-22376

My thinking is that Russian pressure on Damascus has made this possible. The Kurds have been so far shut out of Geneva and Astana. So this possible thawing of relations is a good sign. Russia has also suggested that Afrin may be the next 'de-escalation' area. About time I say.

Negotiations will be tough. Damascus will hold out for control of oil and gas assets in the north - plus the lion's share of electricity distribution from Tishrin and Tabqa dams that are under SDF control. The Kurds (and their allies) will hold out for the right to elect their own local officials instead of carpetbaggers from Damascus. They will want the right to participate in legitimate political parties other than the Ba'ath Party. Plus they may want justice for the PYD Party officials who were tortured and died while imprisoned by the Mukhbarat in the past. That last won't happen IMO, no way the regime is going to give up the men of its security apparatus to trial. In any case it will take a lot of good faith and compromising on both sides to make it work. Tough road ahead.

Laguerre -> mike... , 29 September 2017 at 08:46 AM
"There are some signs of Damascus relaxing their attitude against the Kurds in northern Syria."

This is a quite inexact reading of the situation. The Rojavan Kurds have always been negotiating with Damascus, because of course they recognize that they will have to make a deal with Asad when the war is over. It's just the US that wants outright war. The evidence of course is the survival of the Syrian army base in Qamishli (or is it Hassekeh?). There was one attack upon it, but it was never renewed, and they're still there. I've always presumed that the attack was under US pressure, and now the Kurdish leadership has thought again, and doesn't want to go there now.

mike -> Laguerre... , 29 September 2017 at 01:56 PM
Laguerre -

You are correct that the Kurdish PYD have for a long time been in discussions with the Syrian regime - or at least elements of the regime. And cooperating with them too. You case in point about Qamislo is but one example. The Kurds in the Sheikh Maqsoud neighborhood of Aleppo City cooperated with and helped the SAA to break the siege there.

It was al-Hasakah where the Kurds and regime forces clashed. But that was due to attacks on Kurds by elements of the regime backed NDF militia. There are still regime police and other elements in Hasakah. There was also a minor skirmish in Qamislo about a year and a half ago when NDF militia opened fire on a Kurdish Asayish police patrol.

But this latest thaw (if it is one) is critical as it follows the two to three week long agitprop blitz out of Baghdad and Moscow about the SDF and the US.

I'm not sure what to make of the Syrian FM. He also said this back in May of this year: I think that what the Syrian Kurds are doing in fighting Daesh is legitimate in the framework of their keenness on preserving the unity and integrity of Syrian territories. He thought that the Kurds were helping to preserve Syrian unity.

Does Moualem speak for Assad? Maybe. Or not. But some Kurds claim that Assad had a Kurdish grampa. Or maybe it was a great grampa?

Laguerre -> mike... , 29 September 2017 at 04:42 PM
"But that was due to attacks on Kurds by elements of the regime backed NDF militia."

Ha ha. You expect me to believe that? If the Kurds wanted the Syrian base gone, it would have been gone long ago.

mike -> Laguerre... , 29 September 2017 at 08:06 PM
Laguerre -

You are correct in saying: "If the Kurds wanted the Syrian base gone, it would have been gone long ago." The facts that they did not should bolster the case that these were primarily local pissing-contest firefights between the Kurds and local/hostile militias. There are probably lots of he-saids and she-saids as to who fired the first shots in these skirmishes. The Kurdish police claim they were fired on at NDF checkpoints. I have not seen any counterclaims from the NDF.

JJackson -> masoud... , 29 September 2017 at 05:02 AM
Personally I do not believe that. I think they were happy to sit back and watch Assad and IS weaken each other with a view to picking up the pieces later. In addition their poor understading of the flows of knowledge, arms and personel between all the Jihadis led them to aid groups they thought 'friendly' only to find they were then fighting them once they morphed into something else. At root the problem is the difference between reality and 'US reality' as understood inside the beltway bubble and various tendrils of USgov.
LeaNder -> masoud... , 29 September 2017 at 08:23 AM
That's a nice and comfortable formula, case closed let's move on? Are you going to be both prosecutor and judge? Also executor of your own verdict? And what exactly would that be concerning the US? to not dwell too long on masoud.
English Outsider , 29 September 2017 at 07:24 AM

TTG - Thank you for another great summary. In addition to that, I believe that the second paragraph of your reply to "Willybilly" is the most accurate summary possible of the issue of claimed Western support for IS. We "let" ISIS run. We did not deliberately "create and direct" it.

Who's "We?". As the Syrian conflict becomes more and more solely a US/Russia affair, as far as the participants outside the ME are concerned, the final sentence of that second paragraph points to something else that needs clarifying about the "stupid and destructive policy" that led to the Syrian debacle: European and Israeli input into the policy and into the implementation of that policy.

The Israeli input into both policy and implementation gets sufficient attention, sometimes even in the media. The European input not so much, though I believe it was significant. Of the British component of that input on the ground we in the general public - that is, we in the general public who might have a rough idea of where Syria is on the map - know little except for what we hear of some dubious sounding intelligence/PR work and the odd reference to Special Forces. Even less of the French and German component.

Given the disinformation and spin that surrounds the subject arriving at a view of Western intervention in the ME that is at once informed and balanced isn't easy. This is the only site that does it. At present we're waiting to see whether Syria succeeds in recovering its territory, whether it goes into a "frozen conflict" condition, or whether it ends up with a Kosovo scenario. As said, the Israeli influence on that outcome is recognised. European influence on the outcome and on arriving at it will also be a factor. Are there any indications of how that influence is exerted at present?

There is also the question of Chinese interests in Syria and whether that will lead to the Chinese seeking to exert influence on the outcome.

Such questions seem at present to have little direct bearing on the military position you are examining. They must, however, be in the minds of whoever in Washington is making the military decisions.

David Habakkuk -> English Outsider ... , 29 September 2017 at 12:48 PM
EO,

On the British role in Syria, an invaluable resource is the material collected in the pages entitled Talk: British involvement in Syria, on the A Closer Look On Syria site.

(See http://acloserlookonsyria.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Talk:British_involvement_in_Syria .)

This has a lot of material on the activities of Colonel Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, whom I discussed briefly in my post on the British role in the Ghouta false flag and the subsequent cover-up, back in April.

(See http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2017/04/sentence-first-verdict-afterwards-a-revision-by-david-habakkuk-14-april-2017.html .)

Among other subjects covered is the role of James Le Mesurier in the White Helmets, and of Paul Tilley in InCoStrat.

One interesting feature is that the British seemed to have carved out a niche in StratCom. So, for example, a sometime colleague of mine, Mark Laity, who when I had dealings with him was BBC Radio Defence Correspondent, is now Chief Strategic Communication at SHAPE.

In this capacity, he produces presentations with titles like Perception becomes Reality, and Behavioural approaches to Perception management.

(See https://www.cmdrcoe.org/download.php?id=336 , https://www.cmdrcoe.org/download.php?id=341 )

What I find fascinating – and depressing – is that former British Army officers – like Tilley, Le Mesurier, and de Bretton-Gordon – seem to have swallowed this kind of nonsense hook, line and sinker.

They do not seem to realise a central problem with propaganda – that, very often, the easiest person to fool is oneself.

This may also be relevant to a central issue raised by British involvement in Syria, as also in other places.

All one can find here are indications and pointers. But it seems likely that, behind the scenes, arguments about the dangers of blowback involved in the assumption that we could collaborate with the Saudis and other Gulfies in using jihadists against those deemed common enemies have been going on for a long time.

It is of interest that a figure who has traced the history of this devils bargain very incisively – Alastair Crooke – is a former employee of MI6.

(See http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alastair-crooke/isis-aim-saudi-arabia_b_5748744.html .)

There is enough of the old Tory cynic in me to think that it is commonly a very major mistake to apply the twenty-twenty vision of hindsight. There are a lot of matters where it seemed a good idea at the time is an appropriate maxim.

However, the evidence is fairly clear that the kind of people who run MI6 have been remarkably resistant to the accumulating evidence that Sunni jihadists have been, as it were, devils with whom we have supped without a long enough spoon.

So, for example, as late as July 2014 the former head of the organisation, Sir Richard Dearlove, was still attempting to convince others – and probably himself – that we didnt have to worry too much about the Islamic State, because their central objective was to butcher Shia.

(See http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/iraq-crisis-how-saudi-arabia-helped-isis-take-over-the-north-of-the-country-9602312.html .)

To see the extent to which the leadership of MI6 still dont get it – and cannot grasp how the assumptions that have shaped the organisations activities for decades have little relevance to todays world – one has only to read the first public speech of its current head, Sir Alex Younger, given last December.

From the section on Syria:

Because beyond any of our capabilities, it is legitimacy that is the strongest weapon against international terrorism. If you doubt the link between legitimacy and effective counter-terrorism, then – albeit negatively – the unfolding tragedy in Syria will, I fear, provide proof. I believe the Russian conduct in Syria, allied with that of Asads discredited regime, will, if they do not change course, provide a tragic example of the perils of forfeiting legitimacy. In defining as a terrorist anyone who opposes a brutal government, they alienate precisely that group that has to be on side if the extremists are to be defeated. Meanwhile, in Aleppo, Russia and the Syrian regime seek to make a desert and call it peace. The human tragedy is heart-breaking.

(See https://www.sis.gov.uk/media/1155/cs-public-speech-8-december-2016-final.doc .)

The man is, quite patently, both a gibbering idiot and a very unpleasant kind of sentimentalist. And, commonly, sentimentalists are precisely those people who are capable of the most wicked actions.

But the MSM, in Britain and the United States, continue to behave like the characters in the Hans Christian Andersen fable – they cannot face the fact that the Emperor has no clothes, and they have been among those who have been praising the beauty of his suits all the time.

How this situation has developed is a very interesting question.

james -> David Habakkuk ... , 29 September 2017 at 09:08 PM
eo and david h.. thank you both for the insightful and knowledgeable comments.. yes - white helmets and probably the info shop sohr - all on the uk/usa propaganda bankroll... i am not absolving canada - where i live) in any of this either.. canada with regard to syria has also been an abject failure of vision and leadership.. all our political class here do is follow what the usa does.. it's pathetic..
English Outsider -> james... , 30 September 2017 at 08:58 AM

James - pathetic all right but I have some reservations:-

You write- "all our political class here do is follow what the USA does.."

Is this the case with Canada and Australia? It's usually assumed, maybe simplistically, that the Ukrainian/Eastern European diaspora in those countries keeps the politicians there committed to neocon foreign policy anyway. At the more extreme end of the spectrum you sometimes see on the internet assertions that both the Ukrainians and the Israelis are holding the fort for white civilisation. Whether that's some nutter sounding off on a blog or whether it represents the underlying attitude of some of the Mr and Mrs Averages in that diaspora is difficult to tell from this distance.

In any case I believe the view that neocon is just something the cronies do is incorrect. In Eastern Europe, parts of Germany and France, and I think in Canada and Australia there is a genuine sub-stratum of popular support for neocon foreign policy. We merely have to look at the relaxed attitude some Germans take to their government giving the Neo-Nazis a hand in the Ukraine; and some of those Neo-Nazis are getting up to considerably more than just sounding off on a blog. With respect, I don't think the Beltway is leading the charge in such aspects of neocon foreign policy. More shoulder to shoulder.

More generally I'd suggest, very diffidently because the general public doesn't get to see a lot of what's happening, that sometimes in the various Western interventions abroad the tail has been wagging the dog pretty vigorously.

That was my impression at times, both of the Clinton and Bush II years and of the Obama years. Still waiting to see what happens in the Trump years.

james -> English Outsider ... , 30 September 2017 at 11:03 AM
thanks eo... actually i think it is the case.. we are told to continue on with this nato exercise and to continue to spend more money on the military and we are encouraged to get involved in these conflicts around the globe where the usa deems the correct side to be on is - opposed to syria, with ukraine, and etc. etc... i prefer to not use the word neocon to describe it all..

i agree there is a part of canada's public that continues to be okay with this war spending and foreign activities in support of the usa general policy as expressed in a newspaper.. this segment is becoming less and less relevant as i see it.. there have been too many botched jobs in the middle east beginning with iraq and moving on to libya... there are enough people that can see when you constantly hold up the idea that you have found the next hitler - saddam, gaddaffi, assad, putin - it wears very thin... i think the stomach for these types of foreign actions/interventions is quite low..

now it might be slightly different with regard to ukraine where a large diaspora of ukranian people have a spokesperson in the form of crystia freeland who i personally find a huge embarrassment to canada, but other then that - i don't think canucks are in any significant way supportive of as you say 'neocons'... in the case of freeland, her connections to george soros remain enshrouded in secrecy and of course we know of soros position towards russia with his open russia ngo... he can go have another party with pussy riot and try to con the west all he wants and of course there will always be willing fools to buy into it especially ones in the western msm..

JJackson -> David Habakkuk ... , 30 September 2017 at 08:46 AM
Long ago, somewhere in these threads, I posted a link to a Small Wars Journal post by a British officer sent to the US DoS to add British input into the Iraq war post kinetic recunstruction phase. From memory the gist was this. The planning was going quite well originally but as the offensive drew near DoD got on a roll and began to take over the show at which point they looked at the DoS plan and junked it as being overly pessimistic as in their view the victorious allies would be welcomed as much loved liberators and post Saddam Iraq would naturally morph into some kind of democratic ally.
David Habakkuk -> English Outsider ... , 29 September 2017 at 12:53 PM
Pat,

EO's comment seemed to need a reply, but once again it has been put into spam. The lawsuits provoked by the dossier are getting odder and odder. The lawyers for BuzzFeed are now trying to compel key figures in the American 'intelligence community' to produce some kind of testimony. This is, ironically, a situation familiar in wars -- where there are clearly escalatory dynamics, which are hard to predict.

I have been tied up with other things, but hope to produce something sensible about what is going on at some point.

English Outsider -> David Habakkuk ... , 30 September 2017 at 10:18 AM

David Habkkuk,

These people you're researching, particularly those in or on the fringes of the media - when you write more on them it will be instructive to see how you account for their being able to reconcile their activities with any sort of recognisable Service or institutional ethos.

mike , 29 September 2017 at 10:55 AM
Press brief yesterday morning by the CJTF-OIR spokesman, Colonel Ryan Dillon. Coalition airstrikes killed a network of three Daesh drone developers in and near Mayadin. (That indicates agents or sources (moles?) on the ground in Mayadin that are providing intel on Daesh leadership and constituents. It appears Colonel Lang was correct in his previous comment on that subject.)

https://www.dvidshub.net/video/554521/inherent-resolve-spokesman-briefs-reporters

Other key points that Dillon mentioned: More than 44000 sq kilometers liberated from Daesh in Syria by CJTF supported CJTF. (That is more than 24% of Syrian landmass in my estimation.) Two million Syrians no longer under the control of ISIS thanks to CJTF supported SDF.

"Singular mission of the coalition joint task force is the annihilation of ISIS."

Laguerre , 29 September 2017 at 05:24 PM
The basic point about ISIS is the remark of I think it was Bandar bin Sultan who said, 'ISIS is a Saudi thing, the Muslim Brotherhood is Qatar.' Evidently since then Saudi has been obliged to disavow its support. But, you know, the islamic tradition is for private support of jihad objectives, thus no problem for the saudi princes to continue to support ISIS out of their private pocket, which is the same thing as the public pocket. There are endless public sermons in favour of ISIS in Saudi.

I don't know how much the US is involved in all this, but I guess they've figured it out. Stick with Saudi and you stick with jihadism.

Lurker -> Laguerre... , 30 September 2017 at 08:46 AM
ISIS=Saudi; Al Nusra=Turkey & SDF=IDF with Saudi & IDF collaboration. Thus, ISIS melts away and voilà: SDF takes over

[Sep 28, 2017] Russias Stand-Off Capability The 800 Pound Gorilla in Syria

In comments the term Neoliberal was replaced to Neoliberal for clarity...
Notable quotes:
"... Long term goal for USI meant Neoliberal Empire, is weakening the regime in Moscow and executing a regime change. Long term goal for Russia is enduring and waiting/hoping for US..umphNeoliberal Empire implosion. ..."
"... Nobody voted for Trump to advocate a dreamer amnesty, and nobody voted for Trump to continue the neocons foreign policy. So right now Trump has two big black marks against him. ..."
Sep 28, 2017 | www.unz.com

This is both a legitimate but also a highly unprofessional question. In fact, there are many people of prominence in the US who apart from considering such a terrifying scenario are actually pushing for it. Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters doesnt mince words when it comes to attacking Russians; in fact, he is a very straight to the point guy when giving prescriptions on how to fight those Russians: This could spin out of control very, very fast. If it does, we have to win rapidly and decisively -- and keep it within Syria.

There is no doubt that Peters and the bunch of US military and political people he represents did partake in the strategic wisdom of the past, from Clausewitz to Moltke to Guderian, but it is here where a seemingly legitimate question on the probability of American success in bombing those nasty Russkies into the stone age at Khmeimim and elsewhere in Syria stops being, well, serious. Of course, US can unleash whatever it has at its conventional disposal at Khmeimim and it will eventually overwhelm whatever the Russians have there, from several SU-35s to S-300s and S-400s and, possibly, make Peters wet dream of keeping the whole ordeal confined to Syria very real. This would work, say against anyones military contingent except Russia.

At issue here is not the fact that Russia is a nuclear superpower -- everyone knows that. Even the most rabid American Russophobes know this and can grasp, however slightly, the concept of their poor dears turning into radioactive ash pretty fast if they do the unthinkable, such as attacking Russia proper with nuclear weapons. Syria, however, is a bit different -- the escalation to a nuclear threshold could, indeed, be controlled by those who hold a decisive advantage conventionally. At issue here is the fact of conventional war -- a precise type of a conflict US military prided itself on for the last 30+ years, boasting of being able to handle any kind of adversary.

In the foundation of this, rather overly assertive approach, the self-assurance was the real and not so real advantage of the US in stand-off weapons. Aggression against Yugoslavia showed the US military could overwhelm the air-defense of a nation such as Serbia fairly fast and from distances far beyond the reach of its obsolete air defenses. There were Tomahawk cruise missiles, which were launched at Serbia in thousands and which rendered her air defense almost useless after the first couple of weeks of incessant bombing.

But here is the problem for the US: Russia can take this hypothetical conventional conflict well beyond Syria any time it wants and I am not talking about other strategic theaters, such as Ukraine, where Russia can compensate for a hypothetical defeat in Syria. The reason for this is purely technological -- Russia can go tit-for-tat conventionally in Syria and anywhere in the Middle East. In fact, the Russian military has in its possession the most advanced arsenal of High Precision stand-off weapons which have been demonstrated in action for the whole world to see.

This is what makes the whole talk about defeating the Russian contingent in Syria very amateurish. War is much more than some shoot-out between belligerents, the war starts in the operational rooms and political offices well before any shot is fired. If the Russian contingent in Syria had been deployed there say in 2005, there would have been no problem in imagining Ralph Peters scenario. But it is not 2005 and an 800 pound gorilla, which many continue to ignore, in the room is Russias stand-off capability -- it is simply much better than the American one and it opens an operational door, in case of a hypothetical conventional attack on Kheimim, for a massive retaliation against any US asset in the region.

Yesterday, in the wake of the death of Lieutenant General Asapov in Syria, allegedly with some help from the so called Coalition in the vicinity of the liberated Deir-ez-Zor, Russias strategic aviation launched long-range stealthy X-101 cruise missiles at ISIS targets in Syria. There is nothing new now in Russias using 5,500+ kilometer range cruise missile, nor is there news any more for the Russian Navy being able to launch 2,500+ kilometer range 3M14 of Kalibr family from anywhere in the Eastern Mediterranean or the Caspian Sea. These are ranges which are simply beyond the reach of any stand-off weapon in US arsenal with Tomahawk TLAM-A Block II having the maximum range of around 2,500 kilometers while TLAM Block IV, currently being most produced variety, having the range of 1,600 kilometers.

Raytheon says that these missiles are capable of loitering and that Tomahawk would be able to hit moving targets. It is all fine and dandy but the key is range and precision and here the US is not in the leading position to put it mildly. Range gives an unprecedented operational flexibility and yesterdays launch from Russian Tu-95 Bears strategic bombers had a very serious message -- not in terms of X-101′s range, even longer range cruise missiles are getting ready for procurement, with ranges in 10,000 kilometers vicinity. The message was in the fact that missiles were launched from Iranian and Iraqi aerospace. They didnt have to do so, this could have been easily done from the area of the Caspian Sea. But Bears launched while being escorted in Iranian aerospace by Su-30s and Su-35s of Russian Air Space Forces and that, apart from obvious hint at Russian full capability to reach any US ground asset in the area, provided some ominous signs.

Iran knows for sure that should the unthinkable but not improbable happen, such as an American attack on the Russian forces in Syria, Iran will not be left standing on the side -- she gets immediately involved whether she wants it or not. So, the logic goes, why not make the best of it when all bets, other than nuclear, will be off. Iran may as well have Russian forces on her side and in her airspace, which, obviously helps significantly. But that also opens another serious operational possibility in case of a real conventional conflict in the area between Russia and the US -- a scenario Neocons, due to their military illiteracy and overall detachment from the strategic reality, are dreaming about. Putting inevitable emotions aside and looking at the factual side of things, Russias Military Doctrine since 2010, reaffirmed in 2014 Edition, views the use of stand-off High Precision as a key in strategic force containment, as Article 26 of a doctrine clearly states. Russia doesnt want war with the US, but if push comes to shove Russia is totally capable of not only reaching US ground assets, such as CENTCOMs Qatar forward installation but, what is even more significant, also the naval ones in the Persian Gulf.

Apart from 66 long-range strategic bombers, the Tu-160s and Tu-95s, Russia has at her disposal more than 100 TU-22M3 bombers many of which are capable of both inflight refueling and of carrying a rather intimidating weapon -- the X-32 (Kh-32) cruise missile whose range is 1000 kilometers and the speed is in excess of Mach 4.2. This missile, apart from being able to attack anything on the ground, is capable in fact was designed primarily for the purpose, of hitting anything moving on the surface of the sea. The missile, let alone a salvo of those, is incredibly difficult if possible at all to intercept and as yesterdays demonstration showed, Iran, most likely would have no problem with allowing these very TU-22M3s to operate from her airspace in case of the worst case scenario. Launched anywhere from Darab area the salvo will not only cover all of a Persian Gulf but will reliably close off Gulf of Oman for any naval force. No ship, no Carrier Battle Group will be able to enter this area in case of a conventional conflict with Russia in Syria -- the strategic ramifications of this are enormous. Even the salvo of 3M14s from Caspian Sea on October 7, 2015 made such an impression that USS Theodore Roosevelt and her CBG almost immediately left the Gulf .

Ron Unz > , September 27, 2017 at 8:06 pm GMT

In support of the strategic thesis advanced in this important article, I seem to recall that the original Russian military intervention in Syria was accompanied by a volley of ultra-long-range cruise missiles, whose capabilities greatly surprised American military analysts.

At the time, such a high-tech attack on ISIS positions seemed rather cost-ineffective to me, but presumably a major purpose was to dissuade America (and Israel) from considering any future attack on what was a rather small and isolated Russian expeditionary force.

Also, since Russia, Iran, and Iraq have become de facto allies in the Syria War, Id think that the use of Iranian and Iraqi airspace as the launch point for the latest bombardment is also meant to raise much greater doubts in Trumps military advisors about the huge risks in any future attack against Iran or attempt to forcefully renegotiate the existing nuclear treaty.

Thorfinnsson > , September 27, 2017 at 8:22 pm GMT

Advanced Russian cruise missiles–or at least should not be news to military planners.

They were well known in Cold War times and discussed in Western defense publications such as Janes.

The entire purpose of the failed F-111B and its replacement, the F-14, was to keep Soviet maritime bombers and their deadly cruise missiles as far away from the fleet as possible. A lesson obviously forgotten since the end of the Cold War.

The existence of advanced military technology in Russia (or, really, anywhere outside of America) does appear to surprise American civilian leaders however, few of whom have any military expertise these days.

The real question: how many working cruise missiles does Russia have in inventory? If Soviet stocks still exist the answer could be quite a lot.

Andrei Martyanov > , Website September 27, 2017 at 9:11 pm GMT

@Thorfinnsson Advanced Russian cruise missiles--or at least should not be news to military planners.

They were well known in Cold War times and discussed in Western defense publications such as Jane's.

The entire purpose of the failed F-111B and its replacement, the F-14, was to keep Soviet maritime bombers and their deadly cruise missiles as far away from the fleet as possible. A lesson obviously forgotten since the end of the Cold War.

The existence of advanced military technology in Russia (or, really, anywhere outside of America) does appear to surprise American civilian leaders however, few of whom have any military expertise these days.

The real question: how many working cruise missiles does Russia have in inventory? If Soviet stocks still exist the answer could be quite a lot.

Advanced Russian cruise missiles–or at least should not be news to military planners.

Second generation Anti-Shipping Missiles , starting from Malakhyt and ending with P-700 Granit are not news since 1980s. We are talking about latest generation of high precision land and surface attack weapons which make all previous Soviet weapons obsolete and look like amateurs. 3M14 and X-101 are a new word in TLAMs which, apart from Inertial, GLONASS and TERCOM guidance use other quirky things and, again–nothing was produced ever with combat range of 5,500+ kilometers. None. You are talking about mostly anti-shipping missiles. Among them today only P-1000 Voulkans are retained on old Missile Cruisers of Slava-class and P-700 Granits (NATO: SS-N-19 Shipwreck) carried by some Project 949A (Oscar-II class) SSGNs and Cruiser Peter The Great–most of those will be removed (some are being as I type it) and will have new generation of: P-800 Onyx, 3M54 Kalibr family and 3M22 Zircon hyper-sonic missiles installed. X-32 also is already fully operational for strategic aviation. Those are game changers. Once Mach=8 capable 3M22 Zircon comes on-line, it is pretty much over for the naval warfare as we know it. Real American military professionals know it, others only sense it.

peterAUS > , September 28, 2017 at 4:28 am GMT

Read the article.

Interesting.

Say its all true. So what?

MAD was assured during Cold War.So what? Soviet/Warsaw Pact was superior in conventional capability then NATO. So what? The end result was dissolution of not only Warsaw Pact but Soviet Union itself.

And thats precisely whats going on here. Not an all out war with Russia. I mean, it can happen but neither party would want it. If it happens it will be one of those oh SHIT! moments. Anyway.

The purpose of war in Syria, from US (OKNeoliberal Empire/whatever) point is ongoing chaos in that region. Chaos …in……that……region.

Russia can not make that chaos go away. Or if it can, well.fine. I just dont see it.

All this missiles/high tech/who has a bigger dick thing is ….just….irrelevant.

The Professor is doing a fine job of spinning positive image on that General (and some other people) death here and thats fine. Not a bad job.

But the game which killed the General will go on. And on…..and on..and it wont be solved by advanced missiles and what not.

Russia is in Syria to prop its strategic ally and keep the presence there. The presence there is the objective.

Russia can keep the presence -- –US (yes..sorry..Neoliberal Empire) will maintain chaos . Both winners.

Military personnel on both sides will keep being killed and mutilated. Part of the job. High tech assassinations and just bad luck.

And Islamists from all over the world will keep fulfilling their destiny.

The Syrians, though…..mice and elephants.

Long term goal for USI meant Neoliberal Empire, is weakening the regime in Moscow and executing a regime change. Long term goal for Russia is enduring and waiting/hoping for US..umphNeoliberal Empire implosion.

SimpleHandle > , September 28, 2017 at 4:43 am GMT

Nobody voted for Trump to advocate a dreamer amnesty, and nobody voted for Trump to continue the neocons foreign policy. So right now Trump has two big black marks against him. I hope Trump can be convinced to back off from his military brinkmanship but with the generals in his administration I am not optimistic. Russia is on the right side of the Syrian conflict.

unit472 > , September 28, 2017 at 5:03 am GMT

@peterAUS Read the article.

Interesting.

Say it's all true. So what?

MAD was assured during Cold War.So what? Soviet/Warsaw Pact was superior in conventional capability then NATO. So what? The end result was dissolution of not only Warsaw Pact but Soviet Union itself.

And that's precisely what's going on here. Not an all out war with Russia. I mean, it can happen but neither party would want it. If it happens it will be one of those "oh SHIT!" moments. Anyway.

The purpose of war in Syria, from US (OK...Neoliberal Empire/whatever) point is ongoing chaos in that region. Chaos ......in............that............region.

Russia can not make that chaos go away. Or if it can, well....fine. I just don't see it.

All this missiles/high tech/who has a bigger dick thing is .......just.......irrelevant.

The Professor is doing a fine job of spinning positive image on that General (and some other people) death here and that's fine. Not a bad job.

But the game which killed the General will go on. And on........and on.....and it won't be solved by advanced missiles and what not.

Russia is in Syria to prop its strategic ally and keep the presence there. The presence there is the objective.

Russia can keep the presence -----US (yes..sorry..Neoliberal Empire) will maintain chaos . Both winners.

Military personnel on both sides will keep being killed and mutilated. Part of the job. High tech assassinations and just bad luck.

And Islamists from all over the world will keep fulfilling their destiny.

The Syrians, though...........mice and elephants.

Long term goal for US...I meant Neoliberal Empire, is weakening the regime in Moscow and executing a regime change. Long term goal for Russia is enduring and waiting/hoping for US..umph...Neoliberal Empire implosion.

All fine. Unless one is a Syrian. Indeed, high tech ( and expensive) weaponry is almost useless against groups like the Taliban or ISIS. Unless you are willing to wage a Mosul type campaign and slaughter civilians on an industrial scale rooting out bands of armed brigands requires infantry. A $ 10 million drone firing a $100,000 missile may take out a terrorist leader but these guys are not indispensable. OTOH some guy driving a car or wearing a suicide vest can take out a whole bunch of highly trained military professionals.

Anonymous > , Disclaimer September 28, 2017 at 5:56 am GMT

Check out this article and video of a Russian cruise missile launch, hitting ISIS targets a thousand miles away. Very impressive. This was from the Deir al-Zor operation from a few weeks ago. In the comments section there is dispute as to weather the USN has this same vertical launch system capability (launch rate).

VIDEO: Russian Frigate Fires 3 Cruise Missiles on ISIS Targets in Syria

https://news.usni.org/2017/09/05/video-russian-frigate-fires-3-cruise-missiles-isis-targets-syria

Eagle Eye > , September 28, 2017 at 6:02 am GMT

@Ron Unz In support of the strategic thesis advanced in this important article, I seem to recall that the original Russian military intervention in Syria was accompanied by a volley of ultra-long-range cruise missiles, whose capabilities greatly surprised American military analysts.

At the time, such a high-tech attack on ISIS positions seemed rather cost-ineffective to me, but presumably a major purpose was to dissuade America (and Israel) from considering any future attack on what was a rather small and isolated Russian expeditionary force.

Also, since Russia, Iran, and Iraq have become de facto allies in the Syria War, I'd think that the use of Iranian and Iraqi airspace as the launch point for the latest bombardment is also meant to raise much greater doubts in Trump's military advisors about the huge risks in any future attack against Iran or attempt to forcefully renegotiate the existing nuclear treaty. Thank you, Mr. Unz, for bringing these items – which are of fundamental strategic importance – to a wider public.

Just found that the Russians actually released a video of the October 2015 cruise missile launches from the Caspian Sea.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2015/oct/07/russia-launches-missiles-on-isis-from-caspian-sea-video

Frankie P > , September 28, 2017 at 8:49 am GMT

@peterAUS Read the article.

Interesting.

Say it's all true. So what?

MAD was assured during Cold War.So what? Soviet/Warsaw Pact was superior in conventional capability then NATO. So what? The end result was dissolution of not only Warsaw Pact but Soviet Union itself.

And that's precisely what's going on here. Not an all out war with Russia. I mean, it can happen but neither party would want it. If it happens it will be one of those "oh SHIT!" moments. Anyway.

The purpose of war in Syria, from US (OK...Neoliberal Empire/whatever) point is ongoing chaos in that region. Chaos ......in............that............region.

Russia can not make that chaos go away. Or if it can, well....fine. I just don't see it.

All this missiles/high tech/who has a bigger dick thing is .......just.......irrelevant.

The Professor is doing a fine job of spinning positive image on that General (and some other people) death here and that's fine. Not a bad job.

But the game which killed the General will go on. And on........and on.....and it won't be solved by advanced missiles and what not.

Russia is in Syria to prop its strategic ally and keep the presence there. The presence there is the objective.

Russia can keep the presence -----US (yes..sorry..Neoliberal Empire) will maintain chaos . Both winners.

Military personnel on both sides will keep being killed and mutilated. Part of the job. High tech assassinations and just bad luck.

And Islamists from all over the world will keep fulfilling their destiny.

The Syrians, though...........mice and elephants.

Long term goal for US...I meant Neoliberal Empire, is weakening the regime in Moscow and executing a regime change. Long term goal for Russia is enduring and waiting/hoping for US..umph...Neoliberal Empire implosion.

All fine. Unless one is a Syrian. You miss the more immediate goal of the AngloNeoliberal Empire, namely the prevention of the Shia Crescent becoming a stable and calm area, protected and strengthened by well-trained, battle-hardened, united forces, including of course the SAA, Iran, the Iraqi militias, and Hezzbollah. For although as you mentioned the Neoliberal narcissistic great evil and its Yinon Plan to destabilize the entire Middle East / North Africa has long been a goal, we see once again that reality presents them having bitten off more than they could chew, and actions like the Iraq War, a neocon feast of overconfidence and bluster, ended up strengthening the true resistance, the true danger to their regional hegemonic plans. They doubled down, as psychopathic narcissists are prone to do, in Syria, and the resulting action by a stronger and more aggressive Russia has shone the light on the folly of their ways. The resistance has now become The Resistance, and with Americas continuing belligerence pushing Russia and China ever closer, we will soon be calling it THE RESISTANCE.

Frankie P

Randal > , September 28, 2017 at 9:41 am GMT

So, what do you think, what could be the next steps in that play?

OK lets look at it a bit closer. But to do so we must recognise that we are moving to the realms of wider politics rather than its subset, war. At the level we are talking about, the decisions are always political rather than military, even when they are taken by military men in an overtly military regime.

The context is what is discussed by Martyanov above – the US regime, presumably listening to some of the less wise amongst its senior military men and the less honestly motivated amongst its influential political and media figures, decides to try to defeat and destroy the Russian forces in Syria whilst counting on what they believe is the USs general escalation superiority to constrain Russian responses and keep the open conflict contained to the region. After the initial probably devastating US attack on Russian forces in Syria, involving the overloading and suppression by various means including direct SEAD attacks of the limited air defences in theatre, the Russians respond with large standoff attacks that effectively destroy US bases and/or carriers used in the attack or in the vicinity. They would not have enough to keep all US and allied ships and bases from which attacks could be launched in Syria out of action, but they could presumably render several substantial bases unusable for significant periods and sink a number of ships including carriers, which would have to operate from more distant locations, rendering operations more costly and less effective.

What does the US do next? Militarily it has to retaliate, but it can choose how far to escalate in doing so. The problem is that substantive retaliation presumably requires attacks on Russian bases inside Russia, which involves very high risks of uncontrolled escalation to a strategic nuclear exchange. Do they do that? If they launch limited attacks inside Russia (eg an attack on a base used to launch the strategic bombers, say), Russia has the strategic capability to carry out direct tit for tat responses.

Given the likely involvement of the forces and bases of regional allies (though who really knows how enthusiastic Turkey would really be, these days), it seems likely the attack on Russian forces in Syria could still be prosecuted to completion with their effective destruction, and meaningful Russia reinforcements interdicted successfully, but that would now seem rather a sideshow. And meanwhile Iraqi and Iranian involvement would be likely, and not to the advantage of the USs interests on the ground. Russian ships in the region and perhaps elsewhere could (certainly would in the case of ships in theatre) be engaged in full scale air/sea battles likely resulting in their fairly prompt destruction, but not without significant ongoing losses to US naval forces.

While all this is going on, what is the political response that will drive the long term outcome? Imo that depends on the political context – is this Pearl Harbor or the Beirut bombings for the US regime? In Pearl Harbor the Japanese executed a Bush Doctrine preventive attack on US military forces intended to forestall what they probably correctly saw as an existential threat from a rival. The result was that although they did considerable military damage all they ultimately achieved was to provide the political context in which the US regime could do what it had not previously been capable of doing, namely to wage a total war to defeat and occupy its Pacific rival. In Beirut the US was interfering in a Lebanese conflict under the transparently false pretext of peacekeeping, and their enemies struck back at them by carrying out a large suicide bombing attack on their military base in theatre. The result was not the creation of a political motivation for invasion and occupation, but rather the discrediting of the intervention policy and the withdrawal of US military forces from Lebanon.

In the context under discussion, would the loss of US bases and/or carriers, with massive loss of life and arguably even greater loss of prestige (and, it should be remembered, substantial loss of actual military intervention capability in theatre, even if that could be rebuilt and replaced over time), result in an American political determination to engage in a long, massive military confrontation to defeat Russia strategically (a WW2 Japan-style open war of invasion and occupation is ruled out by the modern nuclear peace), and would the US have the necessary global support in waging such a campaign to give it any chance of succeeding?

Or would it result in a backlash, both domestic and international, against the US regime itself for attacking Russian forces in Syria and essentially provoking the Russian response?

Much depends on propaganda – does the US regime and its various collaborating elites still have sufficient control of the global and domestic media environment to impose the necessary narrative of a dastardly Russian act of aggression (yes, incredibly enough that is how they try to would portray it – the Americans have demonstrated over the years a shocking degree of hypocrisy when it comes to viewing themselves as the victims in cases of retaliation against them for the actions of their own government and military)? But much also would depend upon the particular circumstances in which the initial American attacks took place and how they were justified (supposed chemical attacks, WMD, responses to provocations, etc).

In the end, all the dithering in Washington over the past six years about how far to go in Syria has been in large part about who gets the blame if things go wrong.

So would the result be some kind of strategic defeat for Russia (as for Japan in WW2), or political turmoil in the US resulting in a loss of stomach for further interference (as in Lebanon)? If the former, then you have to explain how such a defeat is realistically going to occur given the reality of the strategic nuclear deterrent Russia has against any massive military attack, and its very significant defensive conventional capabilities, as well as the reality that even if the USs European and Pacific satellites might be willing to go along in such a venture (questionable in some cases, depending on the context), China and most of Asia, and much of Africa and South America, certainly would not, and these areas weigh much more heavily in the global economic balance than they did a few decades ago.

The real lesson of all this, of course, is that the US regime would have to be profoundly stupid or desperate to risk attacking Russian forces in Syria. Sadly thats not as reassuring as it ought to be.

The Alarmist > , September 28, 2017 at 11:21 am GMT

There are reasons why that rabid attack chihuahua Peters retired as a Lieutenant Colonel, not the least of which is an inability to grasp the meaning of tactical and strategic indicators and the differences between them. He undoubtedly makes great money giving Fox red-meat quotes for the Rah-Rah crowd who drive the advertising, but I doubt anyone who is anyone, except for a few of the dumbest neocons, takes anything he says seriously.

Andrei Martyanov > , Website September 28, 2017 at 12:48 pm GMT

@The Alarmist There are reasons why that rabid attack chihuahua Peters retired as a Lieutenant Colonel, not the least of which is an inability to grasp the meaning of tactical and strategic indicators and the differences between them. He undoubtedly makes great money giving Fox red-meat quotes for the Rah-Rah crowd who drive the advertising, but I doubt anyone who is anyone, except for a few of the dumbest neocons, takes anything he says seriously.

but I doubt anyone who is anyone, except for a few of the dumbest neocons, takes anything he says seriously.

Here is the problem, Peters is not alone, in fact, a lot of his hysteria is echoed by such people as former SACEUR Phil Breedlove, today it is Dunford etc. Another matter, because those are still uniformed (or were recently) it is really bad idea to behave as psychopaths as Peters but all of them read from the same script, just the method of delivery differs, slightly at that. As per neocons–these are exact people who set foreign policies in D.C. Their military incompetence is appalling (which is expected from people with their backgrounds) and as such they are extremely dangerous. So I would dispute this thesis of yours. Militarily all neocons are dumb. For people who think that the history of Peloponnesian War (in their big honcho Kagans version) has any relevance to the age of GPS/GLONASS and Combat Informational Control Systems with Stand-off weapons–these people should be looked at very seriously by psychiatrist.

Randal > , September 28, 2017 at 12:57 pm GMT

@Ron Unz In support of the strategic thesis advanced in this important article, I seem to recall that the original Russian military intervention in Syria was accompanied by a volley of ultra-long-range cruise missiles, whose capabilities greatly surprised American military analysts.

At the time, such a high-tech attack on ISIS positions seemed rather cost-ineffective to me, but presumably a major purpose was to dissuade America (and Israel) from considering any future attack on what was a rather small and isolated Russian expeditionary force.

Also, since Russia, Iran, and Iraq have become de facto allies in the Syria War, I'd think that the use of Iranian and Iraqi airspace as the launch point for the latest bombardment is also meant to raise much greater doubts in Trump's military advisors about the huge risks in any future attack against Iran or attempt to forcefully renegotiate the existing nuclear treaty.

At the time, such a high-tech attack on ISIS positions seemed rather cost-ineffective to me, but presumably a major purpose was to dissuade America (and Israel) from considering any future attack on what was a rather small and isolated Russian expeditionary force.

Clearly it made no sense in a tactical military sense to use cruise missiles when straightforward air attack was available, and the use of the Kalibrs in October 2015 was certainly motivated as a demonstration of capability. To what degree it was a warning to potential enemies (the US regime, Israel and the Gulf states, obviously, but also remember at the time still Turkey, though that brief hostility seems to have been managed out of existence, helped by the US turning to the Kurds as their proxies in Syria, since then), as opposed to a marketing pitch ( the Russians have been selling export versions of these missiles for many years ) is open to question – probably both.

The issue is not so much the possession of cruise missiles – the Soviets had nuclear armed Tomahawk equivalents back in the 1980s, and its always been assumed that those (the air and sea launched ones, anyway) were repurposed as conventionally armed missiles. Its having them, along with deployable launchers, in numbers and proving that they work reliably that was the issue. Theres an understandable post-Soviet tendency in the US sphere to discount Russian capabilities in terms of high tech weapons. And in order to use cruise missiles in the way Martyanov describes here – basically as a base-denial weapon against a peer rival – you need plenty of them. To hit a US base and render it unusable with conventionally armed weapons, you have to hit it accurately and you have to hit it multiple times, evading or overloading the defences and counter-measures. To take out a carrier, you have to locate the target first, and then beat the counter-measures to hit it at least once and preferably several times, though one hit could be a mission kill. And in the case of the land base, you have to be able to do it again a few days later, and keep hitting it.

So the Russians, with their repeated uses of cruise missiles and the introduction of more modern and potentially significantly more capable missiles that Martyanov refers to, have been building a credible case that the US can no longer count on escalation superiority in Syria to protect them.

Andrei Martyanov > , Website September 28, 2017 at 1:13 pm GMT

@unit472

Sinking a 100,000 ton aircraft carrier has not yet been done.

And hopefully will not be done in the future–lets keep our fingers crossed.

The Forrestal survived multiple detonations and explosions on its flight deck back in 1967 though over 100 sailors died

Tragic scenario which still rendered USS Forrestal nonoperational. But then again: E=(mv^2)/2 . If to discount explosives, kinetic energy alone of Mach=3 (not to mention Mach=7+) of a single missile will surpass anything what Forestall or, for that matter, USS Enterprise endured in 1969. But here we get into the main issue of leaker and this is the problem which any US naval air defense system is not capable of solving. You may read more on the issue on US Naval Institute written by me.

https://blog.usni.org/posts/2017/08/28/aircraft-carriers-drama

Michael Kenny > , September 28, 2017 at 1:41 pm GMT

This sort of Russia is invincable bluster is old hat. It suggests that Putins American supporters are getting nervous.

Sergey Krieger > , September 28, 2017 at 1:58 pm GMT

Now I see how shooting from Iranian airspace increases salvo.missiles with shorter range can be used which could not have been used from Russian airspace. Now the logic behind longer range missiles is also clear to avoid being dependent on allies too. Those are not reliable
One can only say in retrospective that were it not for what happened in 90s soviet/ Russian stand off capabilities would be absolutely crushing strong long time ago. Now, combined with EW capabilities, air defences and fast moving hard hitting land forces all this United by computerized control it must be something.

The Alarmist > , September 28, 2017 at 2:06 pm GMT

@Andrei Martyanov There are reasons why Breedlove was pushed out. Ive been out of the war for a couple decades, so my confidence that there are saner heads where it counts might be misplaced.

I wouldnt say 99%, but the number is non-trivial, and that is alarming. Peters is aimed at the folks who buy the medicines and other crap hawked on Fox. It helps sell his fiction to people who used to read Tom Clancy but now have to take a step down. If he were taken seriously, hed be doing more appearances on the Sunday shows.

Stoltenbergs militancy is distressing, but I again hope his masters have him on a short leash, meaning he will bark but he wont bite.

The neocons are a problem. I think theyve largely been kept in check by calmer heads in the military, which has to do the fighting and occasional dying in the fights the neocons want to pick, which in my opinion is why the neocons have gone about achieving their aims using the Company and its assets.

DoD has undoubtedly seen and assessed the standoff capability of the Russians, which is why their involvement has been somewhat muted, but yeah, there are some rabid types down the chain who are itching to try their toys on the only real adversaries we have in the world, and given the independence we often give field commanders, they can get us in trouble.

Thorfinnsson > , September 28, 2017 at 2:10 pm GMT

@Andrei Martyanov Pardon the pun, but converting anti-ship missiles into land attack missiles doesnt sound like rocket science.

Even if the Soviet Union didnt have advanced land-attack cruise missiles in the 80s, it should still have been obvious to anyone that their anti-ship missiles could be developed into land attack missiles.

Were really just talking about a different guidance package, and depending on the sensors involved that can be as simple as a software change. GLONASS began to enter service in 1982, and the first test of a satellite guided bomb was conducted in 1993. Any idiot shouldve been able to put two and two together here, and at least some Western writers have been warning about increasingly sophisticated Russian weapons for more than a decade.

Whether or not anti-ship missiles make surface warships obsolete I do not know. My hunch is certainly yes (and the future obsolescence of surface warships was predicted already before the war), but this is one of those things we wont truly know until we see it done.

For that matter Im not sure that hypersonic missiles are game changers for naval warfarepresumably one could simply saturate any naval task force with cheaper subsonic missiles and overwhelm defenses. If none of the of the ships in the task force have low frequency radars, stealth aircraft could drop laser guided bombs right down the blind stack directly on top of warships. A 2,000 pound high explosive bomb would sink more or less any warship afloat today. The Australian theorist Carlo Kopp proposed this for the F-22 as part of his pet cause to get his country to acquire F-22s.

It has long struck me as idiotic that modern surface warships are largely unarmored, and I also find it curious how few CIWS Western warships have compared to Russian ones.

DESERT FOX > , September 28, 2017 at 2:12 pm GMT

The Neoliberal neocons who control the U.S. are used to invading and destroying small countries with no regard for international law and killing millions of civilians including men , women and children, this is what the Neoliberal neocons do or rather this is what they make the American military do.

America is run by a Neoliberal crime cabal that operates much as Hitler and the Nazis did with no regard for life or limb, ie a rogue nation that creates terror groups such as ISIS and AL CIADA that it uses to wreck countries and pretends to fight this self created terror.

The Neoliberal warmongers are going to destroy America and in case of war with Russia both nations will be destroyed and fools like col. ralph peters are typical of the toy officer contingent that is harbored in the military, and who are puppets of Israel.

The real GORILLA is the Neoliberals and Israel who have driven American foreign policy for decades and who are going to destroy America as just as a parasite destroys its host...

GOD BLESS RUSSIA AND SYRIA

[Sep 27, 2017] Come You Masters of War by Matthew Harwood

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The Middle East was now a U.S. military priority, and the pursuit of direct American domination of the region came from none other than the supposed peacenik, Jimmy Carter. ..."
"... The result was the Carter Doctrine. Delivered to the American people during the 1980 State of Union Address, Carter started Americas War for the Greater Middle East. ..."
"... he declared Americas right to cheap energy. Let our position be absolutely clear, he said. An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force. ..."
"... Analyzing the Carter Doctrine, Bacevich writes that it represented a broad, open-ended commitment, one that expanded further with time -- one that implied the conversion of the Persian Gulf into an informal American protectorate. Defending the region meant policing it. And police it America has done, wrapping its naked self-interest in the seemingly noble cloth of democratization and human rights. ..."
"... They didnt see that the U.S.-armed Afghan mujahideen also believed they were the victors and that they had every intention of resisting Americas version of modernity as much as they had resisted the Soviet Unions. (Americas self-destructive trend of arming its eventual enemies -- either directly or indirectly from Saddam Hussein to ISIS, respectively -- is a recurring theme of Bacevichs narrative.) ..."
"... History cannot be controlled, and it had its revenge on a U.S. military and political elite who somehow believed they could see the future and manage historical forces toward a predestined end that naturally benefitted America. As Reinhold Niebuhr warned, and Bacevich quotes approvingly, The recalcitrant forces in the historical drama have a power and persistence beyond our reckoning. ..."
"... Another piece of connective tissue, according to Bacevich, is the belief that war is not the failure of diplomacy but a necessary ingredient to its success. The U.S. military establishment learned this lesson in Bosnia when U.S.-led NATO bombing brought Serbia to the negotiating table at the Dayton Peace Accords. The proper role of armed force, writes Bacevich, was not to supplant diplomacy but to make it work. Gen. Wesley Clark was more succinct when he called war coercive diplomacy during the Kosovo conflict. U.S. military force was no longer a last resort, particularly when technology was making it easier to unleash violence without endangering U.S. service members lives. ..."
"... The people on the ground, as the D.C. elites just learned in November, have a way of not going along with the best-laid plans made for them in the epicenters of power. ..."
"... Without any unifying aim or idea, according to Bacevich, the Obama administrations principal contribution to Americas War for the Greater Middle East was to expand its fronts. ..."
"... As Bacevich clearly shows over and over again in his narrative, the men and women who make up the defense establishment have a fanatical, almost theological, belief in the transformational power of American violence. ..."
"... Expect Uncle Sams fangs to grow longer, his talons sharper, his violence huge. ..."
"... Bacevich, himself, is not hopeful. In a note to readers that greets them before the prologue, Bacevich is refreshingly terse with his assessment of Americas war for the Greater Middle East: We have not won it. We are not winning it. Simply trying harder is unlikely to produce a different outcome. ..."
Sep 26, 2017 | www.fff.org

Review of America's War for the Greater Middle East by Andrew J. Bacevich (New York: Random House, 2016; 480 pages)

Americas War for the Greater Middle East. Over time, other considerations intruded and complicated the wars conduct, but oil as a prerequisite of freedom was from day one an abiding consideration.

By 1969, oil imports already made up 20 percent of the daily oil consumption in the United States. Four years later, Arab oil exporters suspended oil shipments to the United States to punish America for supporting Israel in the October War. The American economy screeched to a halt, seemingly held hostage by foreigners -- a big no-no for a country accustomed to getting what it wants. Predictably the U.S. response was regional domination to keep the oil flowing to America, especially to the Pentagon and its vast, permanent war machine.

The Middle East was now a U.S. military priority, and the pursuit of direct American domination of the region came from none other than the supposed peacenik, Jimmy Carter. Before him, Richard Nixon was content to have the Middle East managed by proxies after the bloodletting America experienced in Vietnam. His arch-proxy was the despised shah of Iran, whom the United States had installed into power and then armed to the teeth. When his regime collapsed in 1979, felled by Islamic revolutionaries who would eventually capture the American embassy and initiate the Iranian hostage crisis, so too did the Nixon Doctrine. That same year, the Soviet Union rolled into Afghanistan. The world was a mess, and Carter was under extreme pressure to do something about it, lest he lose his bid for a second term. (He suffered a crushing defeat anyway.)

Furies beyond reckoning

The result was the Carter Doctrine. Delivered to the American people during the 1980 State of Union Address, Carter started Americas War for the Greater Middle East. Months earlier, in his infamous malaise speech, Carter asked Americans to simplify their lives and moderate their energy use. Now he declared Americas right to cheap energy. Let our position be absolutely clear, he said. An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force.

Analyzing the Carter Doctrine, Bacevich writes that it represented a broad, open-ended commitment, one that expanded further with time -- one that implied the conversion of the Persian Gulf into an informal American protectorate. Defending the region meant policing it. And police it America has done, wrapping its naked self-interest in the seemingly noble cloth of democratization and human rights.

It is illustrative, and alarming, to list Bacevichs selected campaigns and operations in the region since 1980 up to the present, unleashed by Carter and subsequent presidents. Lets go in alphabetical order by country followed by the campaigns and operations:

  1. Afghanistan (Cyclone, 1980–1989; Infinite Reach, 1998; Enduring Freedom, 2001–2015; Freedoms Sentinel, 2015–present);
  2. Bosnia (Deny Flight, 1993–1995; Deliberate Force, 1995; Joint Endeavor, 1995–1996);
  3. East Africa (Enduring Freedom -- Trans Sahara, 2007–present);
  4. Egypt (Bright Star, 1980–2009);
  5. Iraq (Desert Storm, 1991; Southern Watch, 1991–2003; Desert Strike, 1996; Northern Watch, 1997–2003; Desert Fox, 1998; Iraqi Freedom, 2003–2010; New Dawn, 2010–2011; Inherent Resolve, 2014–present);
  6. Iran (Eagle Claw, 1980; Olympic Games, 2007–2010)
  7. Kosovo (Determined Force, 1998; Allied Force, 1999; Joint Guardian, 1999–2005);
  8. Lebanon (Multinational Force, 1982–1984);
  9. Libya (El Dorado Canyon, 1986; Odyssey Dawn, 2011);
  10. North/West Africa (Enduring Freedom -- Trans Sahara, 2007– present);
  11. Pakistan (Neptune Spear, 2011);
  12. Persian Gulf (Earnest Will, 1987–1988; Nimble Archer, 1987; Praying Mantis, 1988);
  13. Saudi Arabia (Desert Shield, 1990; Desert Focus, 1996);
  14. Somalia (Restore Hope, 1992–1993; Gothic Serpent, 1993); Sudan (Infinite Reach, 1998);
  15. Syria (Inherent Resolve, 2014–present);
  16. Turkey (Provide Comfort, 1991);
  17. Yemen (Determined Response, 2000)

While Bacevich deftly takes the reader through the history of all those wars, the most important aspect of his book is his critique of the United Statess permanent military establishment and the power it wields in Washington. According to Bacevich, U.S. military leaders have a tendency to engage in fantastical thinking rife with hubris. Too many believe the United States is a global force for good that has the messianic duty to usher in secular modernity, a force that no one should ever interfere with, either militarily or ideologically.

As Bacevich makes plain again and again, history does not back up that mindset. For instance, after the Soviet Unions crippling defeat in Afghanistan, the Washington elite saw it as an American victory, the inauguration of the end of history and the inevitable march of democratic capitalism. They didnt see that the U.S.-armed Afghan mujahideen also believed they were the victors and that they had every intention of resisting Americas version of modernity as much as they had resisted the Soviet Unions. (Americas self-destructive trend of arming its eventual enemies -- either directly or indirectly from Saddam Hussein to ISIS, respectively -- is a recurring theme of Bacevichs narrative.)

Over and over again after 9/11, America would be taught this lesson, as Islamic extremists, both Sunni and Shia, bloodied the U.S. military across the Greater Middle East, particularly in Afghanistan and Iraq. History cannot be controlled, and it had its revenge on a U.S. military and political elite who somehow believed they could see the future and manage historical forces toward a predestined end that naturally benefitted America. As Reinhold Niebuhr warned, and Bacevich quotes approvingly, The recalcitrant forces in the historical drama have a power and persistence beyond our reckoning.

Yet across Americas War for the Greater Middle East, presidents would speak theologically of Americas role in the world, never admitting the United States is not an instrument of the Almighty. George H.W. Bush would speak of a new world order. Bill Clintons Secretary of State Madeleine Albright would declare that America is the indispensable nation. George W. Bushs faith in this delusion led him to declare a global war on terrorism, where American military might would extinguish evil wherever it resided and initiate Condoleeza Rices 'paradigm of progress -- democracy, limited government, market economics, and respect for human (and especially womens) rights across the region. As with all zealots, there was no acknowledgment by the Bush administration, flamboyantly Christian, that evil resided inside them too. Barack Obama seemed to pull back from this arrogance in his 2009 Cairo speech, declaring, No system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other. Yet he continued to articulate his faith that all people desire liberal democracy, even though that simply isnt true.

All in all, American presidents and their military advisors believed they could impose a democratic capitalist peace on the world, undeterred that each intervention created more instability and unleashed new violent forces the United States would eventually engage militarily, such as Saddam Hussein, al-Qaeda, and ISIS. Bacevich explains that this conviction, deeply embedded in the American collective psyche, provides one of the connecting threads making the ongoing War for the Greater Middle East something more than a collection of disparate and geographically scattered skirmishes.

War and diplomacy

Another piece of connective tissue, according to Bacevich, is the belief that war is not the failure of diplomacy but a necessary ingredient to its success. The U.S. military establishment learned this lesson in Bosnia when U.S.-led NATO bombing brought Serbia to the negotiating table at the Dayton Peace Accords. The proper role of armed force, writes Bacevich, was not to supplant diplomacy but to make it work. Gen. Wesley Clark was more succinct when he called war coercive diplomacy during the Kosovo conflict. U.S. military force was no longer a last resort, particularly when technology was making it easier to unleash violence without endangering U.S. service members lives.

This logic would run aground in Iraq after 9/11 during what Bacevich calls the Third Gulf War. In an act of preventive war, the Bush administration shocked and awed Baghdad, believing U.S. military supremacy and its almost divine violence would bring other state sponsors of terrorism to heel after America quickly won the war. Vanquishing Saddam Hussein and destroying his army promised to invest American diplomacy with the power to coerce. Although the Bush administration believed the war ended after three weeks, Bacevich notes, the Third Gulf War was destined to continue for another 450. The people on the ground, as the D.C. elites just learned in November, have a way of not going along with the best-laid plans made for them in the epicenters of power.

There was hope that Barack Obama, a constitutional professor, would correct the Bush administrations failures and start to wind down Americas War for the Greater Middle East. Instead, he expanded it into Libya, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, and West Africa through drone warfare and special-operations missions. Without any unifying aim or idea, according to Bacevich, the Obama administrations principal contribution to Americas War for the Greater Middle East was to expand its fronts.

Now this war is in the hands of Donald J. Trump. If there is any upside to a Trump presidency -- and I find it hard to find many -- its the possibility that the intensity of American imperialism in the Middle East will wane. But I find that likelihood remote. Trump has promised to wipe out ISIS, which means continued military action in at least Iraq, Syria, and Libya. He has also called for more military spending, and I find it hard to believe that he or the national-security establishment will increase investment in the military and then show restraint in the use of force overseas.

As Bacevich clearly shows over and over again in his narrative, the men and women who make up the defense establishment have a fanatical, almost theological, belief in the transformational power of American violence. They persist in this belief despite all evidence to the contrary. These are the men and women who will be whispering their advice into the new presidents ear. Expect Uncle Sams fangs to grow longer, his talons sharper, his violence huge.

Bacevich, himself, is not hopeful. In a note to readers that greets them before the prologue, Bacevich is refreshingly terse with his assessment of Americas war for the Greater Middle East: We have not won it. We are not winning it. Simply trying harder is unlikely to produce a different outcome. And to this its not hard to hear Trump retort, Loser! And so the needless violence will continue on and on with no end in sight unless the American population develops a Middle East syndrome to replace the Vietnam syndrome that once made Washington wary of war.

That lack of confidence in the masters of war cant come soon enough.

This article was originally published in the July 2017 edition of Future of Freedom .

[Sep 26, 2017] US-Saudi Alliance Fragments the Middle East (2-2) by RANIA KHALEK

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... And so, now, you have a situation now where Yazidis and Sunni Arabs who were able to live together for quite a while in Sinjar next door, being not just neighbors, but also friends, now hate each other. Yazidis never, ever, ever, and this is actually not just true for Yazidis, I mean, I'm talking like minority communities in general in Iraq, they now kind of harbor this hatred for Sunni Arabs because of what ISIS did to them and in some cases, it was their neighbors who turned on them when ISIS came. So, people that they knew, people that were even friends with. And so, now there is this trauma and this distrust between Sunni Arabs and Yazidis and they probably won't be able to live together for a very, very long time. ..."
"... At the same time, the Kurdistan regional government is using the ISIS atrocities as a way to kind of like remove Sunni Arabs from areas just kind of calling them blanket, calling them all ISIS and removing them and burning down their villages as they did in Sinjar. And so, now you have a situation where it's just like you said, one community after another keeps being pitted against the other. And at the end of the day, the region is less safe. The region is a less hospitable place for people to live, and I mean Iraq is honestly one of the most extreme versions of this that I've ever seen and it's the outcome of decades and decades and decades of U.S. empire meddling in that region and just using one group against another. ..."
Sep 26, 2017 | therealnews.com

The consequences of US meddling and Saudi Wahhabism have decimated Iraq and pitted multiple Middle East groups against the other, says independent journalist Rania Khalek

... ... ...

RANIA KHALEK: No, exactly, and at the end of the day, it kind of goes to the outside players who continue to meddle in the region. They just create a more violent, more toxic region where the conditions are fomented for more sectarianism, for more hatred, for more atrocities, one group against another.

And you know, I didn't really get to this in my piece, but now you have a situation because of what happened with ISIS, and we can also say ISIS, the outcome of ISIS existing, is a direct result of the U.S. intervention in Iraq. You could say that Al Qaeda would never have come to Iraq. You never would have had ISIS had the U.S. not opened the floodgates when it intervened in that country in the way it intervened.

And so, now, you have a situation now where Yazidis and Sunni Arabs who were able to live together for quite a while in Sinjar next door, being not just neighbors, but also friends, now hate each other. Yazidis never, ever, ever, and this is actually not just true for Yazidis, I mean, I'm talking like minority communities in general in Iraq, they now kind of harbor this hatred for Sunni Arabs because of what ISIS did to them and in some cases, it was their neighbors who turned on them when ISIS came. So, people that they knew, people that were even friends with. And so, now there is this trauma and this distrust between Sunni Arabs and Yazidis and they probably won't be able to live together for a very, very long time.

At the same time, the Kurdistan regional government is using the ISIS atrocities as a way to kind of like remove Sunni Arabs from areas just kind of calling them blanket, calling them all ISIS and removing them and burning down their villages as they did in Sinjar. And so, now you have a situation where it's just like you said, one community after another keeps being pitted against the other. And at the end of the day, the region is less safe. The region is a less hospitable place for people to live, and I mean Iraq is honestly one of the most extreme versions of this that I've ever seen and it's the outcome of decades and decades and decades of U.S. empire meddling in that region and just using one group against another.

It's worse than any place I've ever seen in that respect. Syria, Lebanon, I mean Iraq really tops it all. And so at the end of the day, I think it's really kind of a lesson in why the U.S. should not be involved in the Middle East in the way it has been.

AARON MATÉ: Rania, finally, you spoke to Yezidis who survived and witnessed unimaginable atrocities under ISIS. What was that like for you?

RANIA KHALEK: It's the first time that I've ever had to sit down and listen to somebody tell me about how they were gang raped or about they were raped at all. I'm not a grief counselor and I don't think that I've ever, ever, I mean I've never heard these kinds of stories before. It was really, really shocking to me especially speaking to the women survivors. The most, it was really, really shocking to me, the kinds of stuff they went through.

In one case, one woman told me that the ISIS wife of one of the men who bought her, she was sold seven times, and one of the men who bought her, his wife actually helped him rape her. So, you have women who participated in helping to rape people because of their identity, because they were sub-human to them because they were Yazidi.

Hearing these kinds of stories, honestly, it really felt like I was talking to Holocaust survivors. It was really, really shocking and I don't think that level of, like I said, the Yazidi plight has received a lot of attention, but I don't think their genocide has necessarily received the attention that it deserves because all I kept thinking was how angry it made me.

Because there's an ideological basis, an ideological foundation for why ISIS did the things that they did. It doesn't happen in a vacuum. It doesn't come from nowhere. Its ideology is based in Salafism and Wahhabism and it's an ideology that is the state religion of the U.S.'s greatest ally in the region, Saudi Arabia.

And that's something that Yazidis kept saying to me that I never, ever, ever see expressed in any articles that I read about the Yazidis is they always, always say, "How come Saudi Arabia is allowed to push these ideas everywhere." That's where this comes from. This is who did this to us as this ideology. And they mention the Saudis and they mention the U.S.. For some reason, this will be in other articles I have coming out about this issue, but I never, ever read about this. And so if anything, hearing the kinds of stories I heard, at the end of the day, as atrocious as they were and as traumatic as they were to hear, what made me angriest is that nobody's talking about the ideological basis behind this, which is a fascistic ideology that is tolerated because it comes from America's number one ally in the region.

AARON MATÉ: Yeah, and really on this front I have to point out, for raising this issue in the same way that we've seen supporters of Israel call critics of Israel anti-Semites. I've recently been seeing some critics of yours paint your argument as Islamophobic for pointing to the particularly dangerous facets of Wahhabism in the Saudi Arabian version which I found a very interesting parallel. I don't know, a brief comment on that?

RANIA KHALEK: Well, yeah, so I think that that's a really great way you just put it is if anything, the people who want to defend Wahhabism have adopted a similar strategy as we've seen Israel's most excited supporters take views against its critics, which is to call anybody who criticizes Zionism or Israel or the policies of Israel, an anti-Semite. And it's really sad to me to see people taking that strategy and applying it to the issue of Islamophobia. Especially at a time when in America, Islamophobia is at its peak. It's at its worst it's ever been. We have a president right now who literally got elected on hatred for Muslims.

So, it's not something that should ever be, I feel like it makes a mockery of Islamophobia to try and say that and austere strain of Sunni Islam like Wahhabism, to say that criticizing that is somehow Islamophobic. It's absolutely absurd. And beyond that, I will tell you right now, it is not just, this is the fascistic ideology in the Middle East is Wahhabism and Salafi-like Jihadi style thinking, which comes directly out of Wahhabism.

And so for someone like me, who's a Middle Easterner, who at the moment is based in the region, I can tell you right now this is a conversation here that people are having and they don't see this being Islamophobic whatsoever, and it's really absurd for people in the West to be projecting Western dynamics of Islamophobia onto a region that actually does have to deal with groups that want to impose, Sharia Law that want to impose Al-Qaeda style laws. Because we do have Al-Qaeda in this region that does want to impose this on people, that wants to wipe out minorities, that wants to wipe out secular people, that wants to wipe out anybody who doesn't agree with them.

And so I think it's just really, there's a lot of conversations happening among progressives in the U.S. about how it might be Islamophobic to be criticizing, like I said, Wahhabism and Salafism, but from my vantage point in this region, it just looks so absurd and so disconnected from reality.

AARON MATÉ: The term that I think Max Blumenthal coined, correct me if I'm wrong is 'Woke Wahhabism.'

RANIA KHALEK: Yeah, [laughs] 'Woke Wahhabism.' I don't think people understand. It's so insane. Wahhabism literally preaches like, supremacy. It's like the Middle East's version of white supremacy is Wahhabism. It's like these Al-Qaeda groups, these ISIS groups are the Middle East's version of the KKK and of these white nationalist groups you see in the U.S., and so if anything, these are kind of similar symptoms of something I see happening around the globe which is this sort of rise of fascism, but we always have to remember that in the Middle East, in the context of the Middle East and even beyond the Middle East, Wahhabism isn't rising naturally. Salafism isn't rising naturally. Saudi Arabia has spent a hundred billion dollars plus over the past several decades with the U.S.'s approval and participation supporting this ideology in Muslim communities around the world. And this is something we need to be talking about or else we end up conceding the conversation about these issues to the far Right, which is just going to blanket brush every single Muslim as being a part of the Wahhabi style doctrine, which isn't true.

And so, I think that this is a conversation that the Left needs to be having. It needs to be on the forefront of because at the end of the day, Wahhabism is really just a tool of American imperialism because the Saudis don't do anything without America's approval and without America participating in helping them do it. So that's something to consider when we do have these conversations. 'Woke Wahhabism.' [laughs].

AARON MATÉ: Rania Khalek, independent Journalist, co-host of the podcast, Unauthorized Disclosure. Her new piece for Alternate's Grayzone Project is called In the

'Field with Yezidi Fighters, Tales of Genocide at ISIS's Hands and More Conflicts to Come.' Rania, thank you.

Youri • 2 days ago

thank you Real News for having Rania on, I feel you could invite her more but I'm glad you haven't blacklisted her like Vice, Jacobin, Al Jazeera, Democracy Now, The Intercept and others who have shamefully jumped the shark on Syria, Venezuela, and Russia conspiracy theories. Rania I feel deserves a Reality Asserts itself special, please do it. And I can't believe with all we know about Saudi Arabia and US-UK foreign policy towards the Middle East that people would be for the overthrow of Assad and ignore Western support for Saudi and Qatar and turkey exporting ISIS to Syria to overthrow Assad so they can put pipeline and create a Sunni client state there. How is Rania or anyone islamaphobic or a assadist for that? its ridiculous.

Well Rania keep up the brilliant work your doing, and all the haters and smear artists and insincere left outlets and faux indie outlets can go to hell. Folks donate generously to the Real News, AlterNet that publishes Max Blumenthal, Ben Norton and yours truly Rania's work, and donate to Shadowproof and Unauthorized Disclosure that Rania co-hosts with Kevin Gosztola. Stay safe Rania, and "Good night & good luck".

[Sep 24, 2017] Mark Ames When Mother Jones Was Investigated for Spreading Kremlin Disinformation by Mark Ames

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Adam Hochschild, the founding editor of Mother Jones (and author of some great books including King Leopold's Ghost), responded publicly to the threats coming out of the Senate in the early Reagan years. In a New York Times op-ed published in late 1981, "Dis-(Mis-?)Information", Hochschild wrote about a Republican Senate mailer sent out to 290 radio stations that accused Mother Jones of being Kremlin disinformation dupes. ..."
"... "In it, the writer Arnaud de Borchgrave accuses Mother Jones, the Village Voice, the Soho News, the Progressive magazine of serving as disseminators of K.G.B. 'disinformation' – the planting of false or misleading items in news media. "Mr. de Borchgrave provided no specific examples of facts or articles. But, then, the trouble with the K.G.B. is that you don't know what disinformation it is feeding you because you don't know who its myriad agents are. So the only safe thing is to distrust any author or magazine too critical of the United States. Because anyone who is against, say, the MX or the B-1 bomber could be working for the Russians." ..."
"... The communist/leftist imagery is there for a reason. In case you haven't noticed, Clinton supporters have waged a crude PR campaign to blame their candidate's loss on leftists, whom they equate with neo-Nazis and Trump. I've been smeared as "alt-left" by a Vanity Fair columnist, who equated me with Breitbart and other far-right journalists, for the crime of not sufficiently supporting Hillary Clinton. The larger goal of this crude PR effort is to equate opposition to Hillary Clinton with treason and Nazism. Which was exactly the goal of Reagan's "Kremlin disinformation" hysteria - the whole point was to smear critics of Reagan and his right-wing politics as pro-Kremlin traitors, whether they knew it or not. ..."
"... Even the words and the terminology are plagiarized from the Reagan Right witch-hunting campaign - "Kremlin active measures"; "Kremlin disinformation"; "Kremlin dupes" - terms introduced by right-wing novelists and intelligence hucksters, and repeated ad nauseam until they transformed into something plausible, giving quasi-academic cover to some very old-fashioned state repression, harassment, surveillance . . . and a lot of ruined lives. That's what happened last time, and if history is any guide, it's how this one will end up too. ..."
"... The Reagan Era kicked off with a lot of dark fear-mongering about the Kremlin using disinformation and active measures to destroy our way of life. Everything that the conservative Establishment loathed about 1970s - defeat in Vietnam, Church Committee hearings gutting the CIA and FBI, the cult of Woodward & Bernstein & Hersh, peace marchers, minority rights radicals - was an "active measures" treason conspiracy. ..."
"... The image at the top of this article comes from a lead article in Columbia University's student newspaper, the Spectator, published a few weeks after Reagan took office, on SST committee's assault on Mother Jones. The headline read: The New McCarthyism / Are You Now, Or Have You Ever Been and the the full-page article begins, If you subscribe to Mother Jones, give money to the American Civil Liberties Union, or support the Institute for Policy Studies, Senator Jeremiah Denton's new Subcommittee on Security and Terrorism may be interested in you. ..."
"... It describes how in the 1970s Americans finally got rid of HUAC and the Senate Internal Security Committee, the Red Scare witch-hunting Congressional committees - only to have them revived one election cycle later in the Reagan Revolution. ..."
"... Sexual immorality -- it's a common theme in all the Russia panics of the past 100 years-whether the sexually liberated Emma Goldmans of the Red Scare, the homosexual-panic of the McCarthy witch-hunts, the hippie orgies of Denton's nightmares, or Trump's supposed golden shower fetish with immoral Russian prostitutes in our current panic. . . . ..."
"... To fight the Kremlin disinformation demons, Denton set up the Senate Subcommittee on Security and Terrorism (SST), with two other young Republican senators-Orrin Hatch, who's still haunting Capitol Hill today; and John East of North Carolina, a Jesse Helms protege who later did his country a great service by committing suicide in his North Carolina garage, before the end of his first term in office in 1986. ..."
"... Sen. East's staffers leaned Nazi-ward, like their boss. One Sen. East staffer was Samuel Francis - now famous as the godfather of the alt-Right, but who in 1981 was known as the guru behind the Senate's "Russia disinformation" witch hunt. Funny how that works - today's #Resistance takes its core idea, that America is under the control of hostile Kremlin disinformation sorcerers - is culturally appropriated from the alt-Right's guru. ..."
"... Another staffer for Sen. East was John Rees, one of the most loathsome professional snitches of the post-McCarthy era, who collected files on suspected leftists, labor activists and liberal donors. I'll have to save John Rees for another post - he really belongs in a category by himself, proof of Schopenhauer's maxim that this world is run by demons. ..."
"... These were the people who first cooked up the "disinformation" panic. You can't separate the Sam Francises, Orrin Hatches, John Easts et al from today's panic-mongering over disinformation - you can only try to make sense of why, what is it about our culture's ruling factions that brings them together on this sort of xenophobic witch-hunt, even when they see themselves as so diametrically opposed on so many other issues. ..."
"... The subversion scare and moral panic were crucial in resetting the culture for the Reagan counter-revolution. Those who opposed Reagan's plans, domestically and overseas, would be labeled "dupes" of Kremlin "active measures" and "disinformation" conspiracies, acting on behalf of Moscow whether they knew it or not. The panic incubated in Denton's subcommittee investigations provided political cover for vast new powers given to the CIA, FBI, NSA and other spy and police agencies to spy on Americans. Fighting Russian "active measures" grew over the years into a massive surveillance program against Americans, particularly anyone involved in opposing Reagan's dirty wars in Central America, anyone opposing nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants, and anyone involved in providing sanctuary to refugees from south of the border. The "active measures" panic even led to FBI secret investigations into liberal members of Congress, some of whom wound up in a secret "FBI terrorist photo album". ..."
"... 'Russia is a bigger threat to America than Islamic State.' is almost certainly true. If one insists, as the US has done, on standing at the border of the bears lair and poking it with a very short stick, then there may well be consequences. On the other hand, Islamic State is no threat to the US in any way, shape or form. ..."
"... The Cold War is over, so now the US can reveal its truly feral nature. ..."
"... American slogan Violence R Us. Not judging, just being honest. We were no more interested in the common good of the Vietnamese back then, any more than we are interested in the common good of the Syrians today. ..."
"... It's always 'Russia this, Russia that', how we're going to bring democracy to some other part of the world, how some country's leader is a dictator. These are excuses we can do reverse Robin Hood wherever we can and enrich the 1%. ..."
"... It's my duty to point out that the glaring similarities in this brand of cold war Russophobia with that of pre-WW2 anti-Comintern material coming out of Nazi Germany (or even the anti-Semitic material from the early 1900s) are no coincidence. ..."
"... Among the Nazi intelligence officers and scientists we spirited away before the Russians could get their hands on them [ Operation Paperclip ] were a few sly operators who immediately started filling our elected leaders' ears with stories of Reds under the bed. One of these reps was Senator Joe McCarthy and the rest, as they say ..."
"... American-produced historical documentaries tell it like we were united as a country in support of Stalin against Hitler. This reluctance is usually credited to not wanting to get into another bloodbath like WW1 but let's be straight- about half the country (proto-deplorables?) wanted nothing to do with helping the commies beat the Nazis and actually thought the Germans weren't the bad guys. Anti-communism, big brother to anti-unionism and first cousin to anti-Semitism, was all the rage before we helped Uncle Joe beat Hitler, making it all the easier to revive after the war was over and it looked like the only threat to US world domination was a war-weakened Soviet Union. ..."
"... A few years ago, with the advent of internet freeness, I'd added MJ ..."
"... It is sensible but really too polite to say that NATO expanded because "that is what bureaucracies do and it became a way for U.S. presidents to show their 'toughness.'" To expand a bureaucracy by subversion of Ukraine and false reports of Russian aggression, to show toughness by aggression rather than defense, requires the mad power grasping of tyrants in the military, the intel agencies, the NSC, the administration, Congress. and the mass media. ..."
"... They are joined in a tyranny of inventing foreign monsters, to pose falsely as protectors, and to accuse their moral superiors of disloyalty, as Aristotle warned. This is the domestic political power grab of tyrants, a far greater danger. ..."
"... Apart from NATO and a few other treaties, the US would have no constitutional power to wage foreign wars, just to repel invasions and suppress insurrections, and that is the way it should be. Any treaty becomes part of the Supreme Law of the land, and must be rigorously restricted to defense, with provisions for international resolution of conflicts. NATO has been nothing but an excuse for warmongering since 1989. ..."
"... I think this is much closer to the mark than the association of the anti-russia fearmongering with sincere xenophobia. Russia is the go-to foreign enemy because there is such a huge and convenient stockpile of propaganda material lying around in stockpiles, but left unused because of the tragic and abrupt end of Cold War 1.0. And Russia is a great target because it is distant, and has a weird alphabet. Anyone who knows enough about Russia to contradict the disinformation (like by mentioning that they are not commies, but US-style authoritarian oligarchs) is suspicious ipso facto ..."
"... Both parties being pro wall street deficit and war hawks differing in perhaps degree .with the Demos supporting a more generous portion of calf's foot jelly being distributed to peasants of more varied hue as they also support privatization, more subtle tax cuts and deregulation for the rich, R2P wars, and globalization's race to the bottom. People seem to inhabit their own Plato's Cave each opposing their own particular artfully projected phantom menace. ..."
"... Brilliant, as Ames usually is. Especially the point that this is a manifestation of consistent anti-left sentiment within the establishment whether R or D. The confounding of Putin's Russia with some imagined communist threat always amazes me. D's got to keep up the hippie-punching at all times though! ..."
"... The Russophobia is stuck on an endless loop. I wish they'd at least come up with new lies or some fresh enemy for us all to fear. ..."
"... Without defending Trump, it is wrong of the Dems to push this stuff when Ukrainians helped Clinton's campaign and Clinton approved Uranium One getting 20% of US uranium when they gave $100 million to the Foundation. ..."
Jun 03, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

By Mark Ames, founding editor of the Moscow satirical paper The eXile and co-host of the Radio War Nerd podcast with Gary Brecher (aka John Dolan). Subscribe here. Originally published at The eXiled

Mother Jones recently announced it's "redoubling our Russia reporting"-in the words of editor Clara Jeffery. Ain't that rich. What passes for "Russia reporting" at Mother Jones is mostly just glorified InfoWars paranoia for progressive marks - a cataract of xenophobic conspiracy theories about inscrutable Russian barbarians hellbent on subverting our way of life, spreading chaos, destroying freedom & democracy & tolerance wherever they once flourished. . . . because they hate us, because we're free.

Western reporting on Russia has always been garbage, But the so-called "Russia reporting" of the last year has taken the usual malpractice to unimagined depths - whether it's from Mother Jones or MSNBC, or the Washington Post or Resistance hero Louise Mensch.

But of all the liberal media, Mother Jones should be most ashamed for fueling the moral panic about Russian "disinformation". It wasn't too long ago that the Reagan Right attacked Mother Jones for spreading "Kremlin disinformation" and subverting America. There were threats and leaks to the media about a possible Senate investigation into Mother Jones serving as a Kremlin disinformation dupe, a threat that hung over the magazine throughout the early Reagan years. A new Senate Subcommittee on Security and Terrorism (SST for short) was set up in 1981 to investigate Kremlin "disinformation" and "active measures" in America, and the American "dupes" who helped Moscow subvert our way of life. That subcommittee was created to harass and repress leftist anti-imperial dissent in America, using "terrorism" as the main threat, and "disinformation" as terrorism's fellow traveller. The way the the SST committee put it, "terrorism" and "Kremlin disinformation" were one and the same, a meta-conspiracy run out of Moscow to weaken America.

And Mother Jones was one of the first American media outlets in the SST committee's sites.

Adam Hochschild, the founding editor of Mother Jones (and author of some great books including King Leopold's Ghost), responded publicly to the threats coming out of the Senate in the early Reagan years. In a New York Times op-ed published in late 1981, "Dis-(Mis-?)Information", Hochschild wrote about a Republican Senate mailer sent out to 290 radio stations that accused Mother Jones of being Kremlin disinformation dupes. The mailer, on Senate letterhead, featured a tape recording of an interview between the chairman of the SST subcommittee, Sen. Jeremiah Denton of Alabama, and a committee witness- a "disinformation expert" named Arnaud de Borchgrave, author of a bestselling spy novel called "The Spike" - about a fictional Kremlin plot to subvert the West with disinformation, and thereby rule the world.

Here's how Hochschild described the Republican Senate mailer in his NYTimes piece:

"In it, the writer Arnaud de Borchgrave accuses Mother Jones, the Village Voice, the Soho News, the Progressive magazine of serving as disseminators of K.G.B. 'disinformation' – the planting of false or misleading items in news media. "Mr. de Borchgrave provided no specific examples of facts or articles. But, then, the trouble with the K.G.B. is that you don't know what disinformation it is feeding you because you don't know who its myriad agents are. So the only safe thing is to distrust any author or magazine too critical of the United States. Because anyone who is against, say, the MX or the B-1 bomber could be working for the Russians."

Here, the Mother Jones founder describes the menacing logic of pursuing the "Kremlin disinformation" conspiracy: any American critical of US military power, police power, corporate power, overseas power . . . anyone critical of anything that powerful Americans do, is a Kremlin disinformation dupe whether they know it or not. That leaves only the appointed accusers to decide who is and who isn't a Kremlin agent.

Hochschild called this panic over Kremlin disinformation another "Red Scare", warning,

"[T]o accuse critical American journalists of serving as its unwitting dupes makes as little sense as Russians accusing rebellious Poles of being unwitting agents of American imperialism. When Mr. de Borchgrave accuses skeptical journalists of being unwitting purveyors of disinformation, the accusation is more slippery, less easy to definitively disprove, and less subject to libel law than if he were to accuse them of being conscious Communist agents.

" Although if you believe the K.G.B. is successfully infiltrating America's news media, then anything must seem possible."

It's a damn shame today's editorial staff at Mother Jones aren't aware of their own magazine's history.

Then again, who am I fooling? Mother Jones wouldn't care if you shoved their faces in their own recent history - they're way too donor-deep invested in pushing this "active measures" conspiracy. Trump has been a goldmine of donor cash for anyone willing to carry the #Resistance water.

PutinTrump was a project set up last fall by tech plutocrat Rob Glaser, CEO and founder of RealNetworks, to scare voters into believing that voting for Trump is treason. God knows I can't stand Trump or his politics, but of all the inane campaign ideas to run on - this?

One would've thought that the smart people would learn their lesson from the election, that running against a Kremlin conspiracy theory is a loser. But instead, they seem to think the problem is they didn't fear-monger enough, so they're "redoubling" on the Russophobia. Donor money is driving this - donor cash is quite literally driving Mother Jones' editorial focus. And it really is this crude.

Take for example a PutinTrump section titled "Russian Expansion" - the scary Red imagery and language are lifted straight out of the Reagan Cold War playbook from the early-mid 80s, when, it so happens, Mother Jones was targeted as a Kremlin dupe. Featuring a lot of shadowy red-colored alien soldiers over an outline of Crimea, Mother Jones' donor-partner promotes a classic Cold War propaganda line about Russian/Soviet expansionism-a lie that has been the basis for so many wars launched to "stop" this alleged "expansionism" in the past, wars that Mother Jones is supposed to oppose. Here's what MJ's partner writes now:

RUSSIAN EXPANSION

Through unknowing manipulation, or by direct support, Trump will become an accessory to the continual expansionism committed by Putin. Might does not equal right-and it never has for Americans-but Putin's Russia plays by different rules. Or maybe no rules at all.

The communist/leftist imagery is there for a reason. In case you haven't noticed, Clinton supporters have waged a crude PR campaign to blame their candidate's loss on leftists, whom they equate with neo-Nazis and Trump. I've been smeared as "alt-left" by a Vanity Fair columnist, who equated me with Breitbart and other far-right journalists, for the crime of not sufficiently supporting Hillary Clinton. The larger goal of this crude PR effort is to equate opposition to Hillary Clinton with treason and Nazism. Which was exactly the goal of Reagan's "Kremlin disinformation" hysteria - the whole point was to smear critics of Reagan and his right-wing politics as pro-Kremlin traitors, whether they knew it or not.

* * *

What's kind of shocking to me as someone who was alive in the Reagan scare is how unoriginal this current one is. Even the words and the terminology are plagiarized from the Reagan Right witch-hunting campaign - "Kremlin active measures"; "Kremlin disinformation"; "Kremlin dupes" - terms introduced by right-wing novelists and intelligence hucksters, and repeated ad nauseam until they transformed into something plausible, giving quasi-academic cover to some very old-fashioned state repression, harassment, surveillance . . . and a lot of ruined lives. That's what happened last time, and if history is any guide, it's how this one will end up too.

Today we're supposed to remember how cheerful and optimistic the Reagan Era was. But that's now how I remember it, it's not how it looked to Mother Jones at the time - and it's not how it looks when you go back through the original source material again and relive it. The Reagan Era kicked off with a lot of dark fear-mongering about the Kremlin using disinformation and active measures to destroy our way of life. Everything that the conservative Establishment loathed about 1970s - defeat in Vietnam, Church Committee hearings gutting the CIA and FBI, the cult of Woodward & Bernstein & Hersh, peace marchers, minority rights radicals - was an "active measures" treason conspiracy.

As soon as the new Republican majority in the Senate took power in 1981, they set up a new subcommittee to investigate Kremlin disinformation dupes, called the Senate Subcommittee on Security and Terrorism. Staffers leaked to the media they intended to investigate Mother Jones. Panic spread across the progressive media world, and suddenly all those cool Ivy League kids who invested everything in becoming the next Woodward-Bernsteins - the cultural heroes at the time - got scared. The image at the top of this article comes from a lead article in Columbia University's student newspaper, the Spectator, published a few weeks after Reagan took office, on SST committee's assault on Mother Jones. The headline read: The New McCarthyism / Are You Now, Or Have You Ever Been and the the full-page article begins, If you subscribe to Mother Jones, give money to the American Civil Liberties Union, or support the Institute for Policy Studies, Senator Jeremiah Denton's new Subcommittee on Security and Terrorism may be interested in you.

It describes how in the 1970s Americans finally got rid of HUAC and the Senate Internal Security Committee, the Red Scare witch-hunting Congressional committees - only to have them revived one election cycle later in the Reagan Revolution.

By the end of Reagan's first year in office, there was still no formal investigation into Mother Jones, but the harassment was there and it wasn't subtle at all - such as the Republican Senate mailer accusing the magazine of being KGB disinformation dupes. At the end of 1981, MJ editor/founder Adam Hochschild announced he was stepping aside, and in his final note to readers and the public, he wrote:

To Senator Jeremiah Denton, chair of the Subcommittee on Security and Terrorism: If your committee investigates Mother Jones, a plan hinted at some months ago, I demand to be subpoenaed. I would not want to miss telling off today's new McCarthyites.

So here we are a few decades later, and Mother Jones' editor Clara Jeffery is denouncing WikiLeaks - yesterday's journalism stars, today's traitors - as "Russia['s] willing dupes and propagandists" while Mother Jones magazine turned itself into a mouthpiece for America's spies peddling the same warmed-over conspiracy theories that once targeted Mother Jones.

* * *

Jeremiah Denton - the New Right senator from Alabama who led the SST committee investigation into Kremlin "disinformation" and its dupes like Mother Jones - believed that America was being weakened from within and had only a few years left at most to turn it around. As Denton saw it, the two most dangerous threats to America's survival were a) hippie sex, and b) Kremlin disinformation. The two were inseparable in his mind, linked to the larger "global terrorism" plot masterminded by Moscow.

To fight hippie sex and teen promiscuity, the freshman senator introduced a "Chastity Bill" funding federal programs that promoted the joys of chastity to Americans armies of bored, teen suburban long-hairs. A lot of clever people laughed at that, because at the time the belief in linear historical progress was strong, and this represented something so atavistic that it was like a curiosity more than anything - Pauly Shore's "Alabama Man" unfrozen after 10,000 years and unleashed on the halls of Congress.

Less funny were Denton's calls for death penalty for adulterers, and laws he pushed restricting women's right to abortion.

Jeremiah Denton was once a big name in this country. Americans have since forgotten Denton, because John McCain pretty much stole his act. But back in the 70s and early 80s, Denton was America's most famous Vietnam War hero/POW. Like McCain, Denton was a Navy pilot shot down over Vietnam and taken prisoner. Denton spent 1965-1973 in North Vietnamese POW camps-two years longer than McCain-and he was America's most famous POW. His most famous moment was when his North Vietnamese captors hauled him before the cameras to acknowledge his crimes, and instead Denton famously blinked out a Morse code message: "T-O-R-T-U-R-E".

In the 1973 POW exchange deal between Hanoi and Nixon, "Operation Homecoming," it was Denton who was the first American POW to come off the plane and speak to the American tv crews (McCain was on the same flight, but not nearly as prominent as Denton). I keep referring back to McCain here because not only were they both famous Navy pilot POWs, but they both wind up becoming the most pathologically obsessive Russophobes in the Senate. Just a few days ago, McCain said that Russia is a bigger threat to America than Islamic State. Something real bad must've happened in those Hanoi Hiltons, worse than anything they told us about, because those guys really, really hate Russians - and they reallywant the rest of us to hate Russians too.

Everything they loathed about America, everything that was wrong with America, had to be the fault of a hostile alien culture. There was no other explanation for what happened in the 1970s. The America that Denton came home to in 1973 was under some kind of hostile power, an alien-controlled replica of the America he last saw in 1965. Popular morality had been turned on its head: Hollywood blockbusters with bare naked bodies and gutter language! Children against their parents! Homosexuals on waterskis! Sex and treason! Patriots were the enemy, while America-haters were heroes! Denton re-appeared like some reactionary Rip Van Winkle who went to sleep in the safe feather-bed world of J Edgar Hoover's America - only to wake up eight years later on Bernadine Dohrn's futon, soaked in Bill Ayers' bodily fluids. For Denton, the post-60s cultural shock came on all at once - as sudden and as jarring as, well, the shock so many Blue State Americans experienced when Donald Trump won the election last November.

Sex, immorality & military defeat-these were inseparable in Denton's mind, and in a lot of reactionaries' minds. Attributing all of America's social convulsions of the previous 15 years to immorality and a Kremlin disinformation plot was a neat way of avoiding the complex and painful realities - then, as now.

"No nation can survive long unless it can encourage its young to withhold indulgence in their sexual appetites until marriage." - Jeremiah Denton

What hit Denton hardest was all the hippie sex and the pop culture glorification of hippie sex. It's hard to convey just how deeply all that smug hippie sex wounded tens of millions of Americans. It's a hate wound that's still raw, still burns to the touch. A wound that fueled so much reactionary political fire over the past 50 years, and it doesn't look like it'll burn out any time soon.

Back in 1980, Denton blamed all that pop culture sex on Russian active measures, and he did his best to not just outlaw it, but to demonize sex as something along the lines of treason.

Just as so many people today cannot accept the idea that Trump_vs_deep_state is Made In America-so Denton and his Reagan Right constituents believed there had to be some alien force to explain why Americans had changed so drastically, seeming to adopt values that were the antithesis of Middle America's values in 1965. It had to be the fault of an alien voodoo beam! It had to be a Russian plot!

And so, therefore, it was a Russian plot.

A 1981 Time magazine profile of the freshman Senator begins, Denton believes that America is being destroyed by sexual immorality and Soviet-sponsored political 'disinformation'-and that both are being promoted by dupes, or worse, in the media. By the mid-1980s, he warns, "we will have less national security than we had proportionately when George Washington's troops were walking around barefoot at Valley Forge."

Sexual immorality -- it's a common theme in all the Russia panics of the past 100 years-whether the sexually liberated Emma Goldmans of the Red Scare, the homosexual-panic of the McCarthy witch-hunts, the hippie orgies of Denton's nightmares, or Trump's supposed golden shower fetish with immoral Russian prostitutes in our current panic. . . .

To fight the Kremlin disinformation demons, Denton set up the Senate Subcommittee on Security and Terrorism (SST), with two other young Republican senators-Orrin Hatch, who's still haunting Capitol Hill today; and John East of North Carolina, a Jesse Helms protege who later did his country a great service by committing suicide in his North Carolina garage, before the end of his first term in office in 1986.

Sen. East's staffers leaned Nazi-ward, like their boss. One Sen. East staffer was Samuel Francis - now famous as the godfather of the alt-Right, but who in 1981 was known as the guru behind the Senate's "Russia disinformation" witch hunt. Funny how that works - today's #Resistance takes its core idea, that America is under the control of hostile Kremlin disinformation sorcerers - is culturally appropriated from the alt-Right's guru.

Another staffer for Sen. East was John Rees, one of the most loathsome professional snitches of the post-McCarthy era, who collected files on suspected leftists, labor activists and liberal donors. I'll have to save John Rees for another post - he really belongs in a category by himself, proof of Schopenhauer's maxim that this world is run by demons.

These were the people who first cooked up the "disinformation" panic. You can't separate the Sam Francises, Orrin Hatches, John Easts et al from today's panic-mongering over disinformation - you can only try to make sense of why, what is it about our culture's ruling factions that brings them together on this sort of xenophobic witch-hunt, even when they see themselves as so diametrically opposed on so many other issues. I don't think this is something as simple as hypocrisy - it's actually quite consistent: Establishment faction wakes up to a world it doesn't recognize and loathes and feels threatened by, and blames it not on themselves or anything domestic, but rather on the most plausible alien conspiracy they can reach for: Russian barbarians. Anti-Russian xenophobia is burned into the Establishment culture's DNA; it's a xenophobia that both dominant factions, liberal or conservative, view as an acceptable xenophobia. When poorer "white working class" Americans feel threatened and panic, their xenophobia tends to be aimed at other ethnics - Latinos and Muslims these days - a xenophobia that the Establishment views as completely immoral and unacceptable, completely beyond the pale. The thought never occurs to them that perhaps all forms of xenophobia are bad, all bring with them a lot of violence and danger, it just depends on who's threatened and who's doing the threatening

The subversion scare and moral panic were crucial in resetting the culture for the Reagan counter-revolution. Those who opposed Reagan's plans, domestically and overseas, would be labeled "dupes" of Kremlin "active measures" and "disinformation" conspiracies, acting on behalf of Moscow whether they knew it or not. The panic incubated in Denton's subcommittee investigations provided political cover for vast new powers given to the CIA, FBI, NSA and other spy and police agencies to spy on Americans. Fighting Russian "active measures" grew over the years into a massive surveillance program against Americans, particularly anyone involved in opposing Reagan's dirty wars in Central America, anyone opposing nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants, and anyone involved in providing sanctuary to refugees from south of the border. The "active measures" panic even led to FBI secret investigations into liberal members of Congress, some of whom wound up in a secret "FBI terrorist photo album".

I'll get to that "FBI Terrorist Photo Album" story later. There's a lot of recent "Kremlin disinformation" history to recover, since it seems every last memory cell has been zapped out of existence.

After Reagan's inauguration (the most expensive, lavish inauguration ball in White House history), Senator Denton sent a chill through the liberal and independent media world with all the talk coming out of his committee about targeting activists, civil rights lawyers and journalists. Denton tried to come off as reasonable some of the times; other times, he came right out and said it: "disinformation" is terrorism: When I speak of a threat, I do not just mean that an organization is, or is about to be, engaged in violent criminal activity. I believe many share the view that support groups that produce propaganda, disinformation or legal assistance may be even more dangerous than those who actually throw the bombs.

Congratulations Mother Jones, you've come a long way, baby! Next post, I'll recover some of the early committee hearings, and the rightwing hucksters, creeps and spooks who fed Denton's committee.

glmmph , June 3, 2017 at 7:00 am

I think that John McCain may well be correct, if for the wrong reasons. 'Russia is a bigger threat to America than Islamic State.' is almost certainly true. If one insists, as the US has done, on standing at the border of the bears lair and poking it with a very short stick, then there may well be consequences. On the other hand, Islamic State is no threat to the US in any way, shape or form.

Disturbed Voter , June 3, 2017 at 7:23 am

This is now, that was then. There is no comparison. The Cold War is over, so now the US can reveal its truly feral nature. It seems both parties are struggling to bring back the 1960s with Cold War 2.0. We need to pull out of the Middle East, and invade Vietnam, again ;-( And yes, probably even back then, Mother Jones was controlled opposition. They just don't bother hiding it anymore.

John Zelnicker , June 3, 2017 at 3:18 pm

@Disturbed Voter – Dontcha know. We just signed deals with Viet Nam that will bring "billions of dollars" to the U.S. Trump said so last week after meeting with the Vietnamese Prime Minister, so it must be true. They're safe for now. :-)

witters , June 3, 2017 at 7:29 am

"Might does not equal right-and it never has for Americans-" Is there a Darwin Award for this?

Disturbed Voter , June 3, 2017 at 9:30 am

American slogan Violence R Us. Not judging, just being honest. We were no more interested in the common good of the Vietnamese back then, any more than we are interested in the common good of the Syrians today.

oh , June 3, 2017 at 3:18 pm

Our nation worries about other countries' problems but we never care about ours! It's always 'Russia this, Russia that', how we're going to bring democracy to some other part of the world, how some country's leader is a dictator. These are excuses we can do reverse Robin Hood wherever we can and enrich the 1%.

Magazines (tabloids) and (fake)news organization are cheer leaders to this effort because they cash in on the chant du jour.

Baby Gerald , June 3, 2017 at 8:16 am

Thank you so much for exposing in such great detail the hypocrisy regarding MJ s recent neo-Red Scare leanings. If only the editorial staff at dear MJ would educate themselves not only about their own organization's history, but history in general, they might avoid looking like complete fools and enemies to their own institution's founding principles when we collectively reminisce on this bizarre era at some point in the future.

It's my duty to point out that the glaring similarities in this brand of cold war Russophobia with that of pre-WW2 anti-Comintern material coming out of Nazi Germany (or even the anti-Semitic material from the early 1900s) are no coincidence.

Among the Nazi intelligence officers and scientists we spirited away before the Russians could get their hands on them [ Operation Paperclip ] were a few sly operators who immediately started filling our elected leaders' ears with stories of Reds under the bed. One of these reps was Senator Joe McCarthy and the rest, as they say

American-produced historical documentaries tell it like we were united as a country in support of Stalin against Hitler. This reluctance is usually credited to not wanting to get into another bloodbath like WW1 but let's be straight- about half the country (proto-deplorables?) wanted nothing to do with helping the commies beat the Nazis and actually thought the Germans weren't the bad guys. Anti-communism, big brother to anti-unionism and first cousin to anti-Semitism, was all the rage before we helped Uncle Joe beat Hitler, making it all the easier to revive after the war was over and it looked like the only threat to US world domination was a war-weakened Soviet Union.

As a kid in the 80s I remember MJ being singled out as a leftist commie rag by Reaganites of the day. Through college this was about all I knew about the magazine– as an epithet for what hippie commie liberals read before trying to ruin our country. Despite it leaning to my political inclinations, I never paid it any attention.

A few years ago, with the advent of internet freeness, I'd added MJ to my news stream. Once Sanders- then later Trump- started looking like an actual threat to the Clinton campaign, their headlines started turning snippy and trite toward her opposition. I turned them off my feed last year, so the only exposure to their drivel is thanks to the links here at NC . Now with the advent of twitter, their staff have taken the extra step of proving how twisted their personal Russophobian views really are. Between just Corn and Jeffery, there's enough material to make any McCarthyite proud.*

[* – I was going to close with ' and make Adam Hochschild roll in his grave' but then I googled him and discovered that he's still alive. Wonder what he thinks about this current turn at the magazine he co-founded?]

Damson , June 3, 2017 at 8:40 am

Reposting a comment that IMV, snapshots the reality of Russophobia far better than Ames (it was in response to a Ray McGovern article on Trump's visit to NATO HQ) :

"Ray has written well to the general audience, bridging the information gap for those heavily propagandized. He has properly shown the expansion of NATO as an act of calculated betrayal, a policy of aggression in the face of zero threat.

It is sensible but really too polite to say that NATO expanded because "that is what bureaucracies do and it became a way for U.S. presidents to show their 'toughness.'" To expand a bureaucracy by subversion of Ukraine and false reports of Russian aggression, to show toughness by aggression rather than defense, requires the mad power grasping of tyrants in the military, the intel agencies, the NSC, the administration, Congress. and the mass media.

They are joined in a tyranny of inventing foreign monsters, to pose falsely as protectors, and to accuse their moral superiors of disloyalty, as Aristotle warned. This is the domestic political power grab of tyrants, a far greater danger.

Tyranny is a subculture, a groupthink of bullies who tyrannize each other and compete for the most radical propositions of nonexistent foreign threats. They fully well know that they are lying to the people of the United States to serve a personal and factional agenda that involves the murder of millions of innocents, the diversion of a very large fraction of their own and other nations' budgets from essential needs, and they have not an ounce of humanity or moral restraint among them. Those who waver are cast aside, and the worst of the bullies rise to the top. This is why the nation's founders opposed a standing military, and they were right.

Apart from NATO and a few other treaties, the US would have no constitutional power to wage foreign wars, just to repel invasions and suppress insurrections, and that is the way it should be. Any treaty becomes part of the Supreme Law of the land, and must be rigorously restricted to defense, with provisions for international resolution of conflicts. NATO has been nothing but an excuse for warmongering since 1989.

Let us hope that Trump pulls the plug on NATO interventionism, accidentally or otherwise. The Dem leaders have now joined the Reps in their love of bribes for genocide, but at the least the Reps still don't like paying for it. Perhaps the last duopoly imitation of civilization."

nowhere , June 3, 2017 at 11:26 am

Hmm "but at the least the Reps still don't like paying for it." I strongly disagree. War is the only thing Rs don't mind openly supporting.

Ptolemy Philopater , June 3, 2017 at 3:15 pm

One can not repeat often enough: War Crimes Tribunals! How to disincentivize the madness.

Skip Intro , June 4, 2017 at 2:14 am

I think this is much closer to the mark than the association of the anti-russia fearmongering with sincere xenophobia. Russia is the go-to foreign enemy because there is such a huge and convenient stockpile of propaganda material lying around in stockpiles, but left unused because of the tragic and abrupt end of Cold War 1.0. And Russia is a great target because it is distant, and has a weird alphabet. Anyone who knows enough about Russia to contradict the disinformation (like by mentioning that they are not commies, but US-style authoritarian oligarchs) is suspicious ipso facto .

Mary Wehrhein , June 3, 2017 at 9:40 am

Having lived in Kansas for 60 some years which is the poster-child for trickle-down necromancy and a land heavily infused with rural, German-Catholic sensibilities, I can vouch for the deeply felt attitudes towards sex as a primary issue. "Family Values" being the code word for the whole sex and reproductive moral prism.

Like Cuba with its 50s autos, the conservatives have never given up their 60s conception of the Democrats as the party of free love, peace-nicks (soft on commies hard on guns) and tax and spend bleeding hearts coddling dependent malingerers.

The GOP here campaigns against a democrat party that no longer exists (if it ever did). They seem oblivious to the fact that the democrats have become the moderate republicans of yore. Both parties being pro wall street deficit and war hawks differing in perhaps degree .with the Demos supporting a more generous portion of calf's foot jelly being distributed to peasants of more varied hue as they also support privatization, more subtle tax cuts and deregulation for the rich, R2P wars, and globalization's race to the bottom. People seem to inhabit their own Plato's Cave each opposing their own particular artfully projected phantom menace.

GERMO , June 3, 2017 at 9:42 am

Brilliant, as Ames usually is. Especially the point that this is a manifestation of consistent anti-left sentiment within the establishment whether R or D. The confounding of Putin's Russia with some imagined communist threat always amazes me. D's got to keep up the hippie-punching at all times though!

Pespi , June 3, 2017 at 10:33 am

This is a great piece. The Russophobia is stuck on an endless loop. I wish they'd at least come up with new lies or some fresh enemy for us all to fear. Tell me about why South African dupes are causing all the problems in society, tell me that the people of the Maldives each own a nuclear capable artillery piece and are burning American flags.

Susan the other , June 3, 2017 at 11:25 am

Thanks for this post down memory lane. I assumed MJ was liberal. And Jane Fonda was a conservative. And by 1981 I was completely confused about where the media stood on any given issue. And now finally the mask is coming off and we can see (Phillip K. Dick style) that left is right and right is left. And we are all fascists. Will the real Atilla please stand up? #Resistance is a little over the top and so is putintrump. But what looks like actual progress is the fact that Bernie was not completely destroyed by the state paranoia. There has to be a certain bed-rock decency that can rise above this eternal crap. Just a note of interest on the young Orrin Hatch being on the SST as a freshman senator. Orrin was the subject of local rumors that claimed he had been put in the senate by the mafia (some mormon-mafia connection in las vegas) and the fact that they did use entrapment with a hooker to disgrace his opponent was mafia-enough to make the story convincing. The story died out fast. But we should all remember that the mafia was involved in its own anti-commie terrorist tactics for decades.

Susan the other , June 3, 2017 at 2:28 pm

file under Too Weird: 15 minutes after I posted the above I got a call from Orrin Hatch's robo-computer inviting me to a local discussion call me paranoid.

John Zelnicker , June 3, 2017 at 2:45 pm

@Susan the other – It's not paranoia if someone really is out to get you. Or, to get all of us. Or, demonstrates that they have the ability to do so at will.

REDPILLED , June 3, 2017 at 11:39 am

Only 16% of people surveyed are very worried about climate change.

Corporate news is consumed with covering the Trump/Russia affair, but whatever the truth of all this turns out to be, it pales in significance to the real existential threat that is upon us. Largely due to a lack of coverage by corporate television news, there is a dangerous lack of public awareness of it.

Susan the other , June 3, 2017 at 11:42 am

land of the free and home of the brave you have to be brave to live in this free-for-all. Just want to pass on this killer quote from Discover Magazine: "It is sometimes argued that the illusion of free will arises from the fact that we can't adequately judge all possible moves with the result that our choices are based on imperfect or impoverished information." what a nightmare world.

mpalomar , June 3, 2017 at 9:43 pm

"It is sometimes argued that the illusion of free will arises from the fact that we can't adequately judge all possible moves with the result that our choices are based on imperfect or impoverished information."

Accepting that premise does not rule out the possibility of free will, it only suggests that our free will is likely mired in a blind stumbling, darkness of unknowing.
Hallelujah.

sunny129 , June 3, 2017 at 1:57 pm

If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. George Orwell. Every one has that 'right', right or wrong! But it is your right & duty to develop 'critical' thinking to DISCERN the difference

Darn , June 4, 2017 at 4:48 am

Without defending Trump, it is wrong of the Dems to push this stuff when Ukrainians helped Clinton's campaign and Clinton approved Uranium One getting 20% of US uranium when they gave $100 million to the Foundation. The book "Shattered" says her campaign did internal polling which found Uranium One was the most damaging line to use against Clinton so she decided to get her retaliation in first and use the Russia charge at every opportunity. And on election night when they realised they had been defeated they decided to blame Russia again. What has Trump done for Russia so far? He's kept up sanctions and bombed their client state Syria. Whereas Clinton had a pattern of arms sales to Foundation donors. Prefer Clinton? Fine, but not over this.

[Sep 24, 2017] Russian special forces repel a US-planned attack in Syria, denounce the USA and issue a stark warning - The Unz Review

Notable quotes:
"... There are a couple of problems here. First, objectively, the Russian contingent in Syria is a tiny one if compared to the immense power of CENTCOM, NATO and the ever-present Israelis. Not only that, but in any US-Russian confrontation, Russia as a country is objectively the weaker side by any measure except a full-out nuclear exchange. ..."
"... Furthermore, for historical and cultural reasons, Russians are much more concerned by the initiation of any incident which could lead to all-out war than the Americans who always fight their wars in somebody else's country. ..."
"... In practical terms this means that an American miscalculation could very well lead to a Russian military response which would stun the Americans and force them to enter an escalatory spiral which nobody would control. ..."
"... At the same time a new Kurdistan means that the US, NATO, and Israel will lose Turkey to Russia forever. And that is a very bad trade off! ..."
"... Anything short of nuclear is excellent for business but the profit potential of nuclear bombs is limited. ..."
Sep 24, 2017 | www.unz.com

Something rather unprecedented just happened in Syria: US backed "good terrorist" forces attempted a surprise attack against Syrian government forces stationed to the north and northeast of the city of Hama. What makes this attack unique is that it took place inside a so-called "de-escalation zone" and that it appears that one of the key goals of the attack was to encircle in a pincer-movement and subsequently capture a platoon of Russian military police officers deployed to monitor and enforce the special status of this zone. The Russian military police forces, composed mainly of soldiers from the Caucasus region, fought against a much larger enemy force and had to call for assistance. For the first time, at least officially, Russian special operations forces were deployed to rescue and extract their comrades. At the same time, the Russians sent in a number of close air support aircraft who reportedly killed several hundred "good" terrorists and beat back the attack ( Russian sources speak of the destruction of 850 fighters, 11 tanks, three infantry fighting vehicles, 46 armed pickup trucks, five mortars, 20 freighter trucks and 38 ammo supply points; you can see photos of the destroyed personnel and equipment here ). What also makes this event unique is the official reaction of the Russians to this event.

Head of the Main Operations Department at Russia's General Staff Colonel General Sergei Rudskoi declared that:

"Despite agreements signed in Astana on September 15, gunmen of Jabhat al-Nusra and joining them units that don't want to comply with the cessation of hostilities terms, launched a large-scale offensive against positions of government troops north and northeast of Hama in Idlib de-escalation zone from 8 am on September 19 ( ) According to available data, the offensive was initiated by American intelligence services to stop a successful advance of government troops east of Deir ez-Zor ".

Today, other Russian officials have added a not-so-veiled threat to this accusation. The Russian Defense Ministry's spokesman, Major General Igor Konashenkov has declared that:

Russia unequivocally told the commanders of US forces in Al Udeid Airbase (Qatar) that it will not tolerate any shelling from the areas where the SDF are stationed ( ) Fire from positions in regions [controlled by the SDF] will be suppressed by all means necessary

This is unprecedented on many levels. First, the Russians clearly believe that this attempt to kill or capture a platoon of the Russian military police was planned by the United States. The fact that they are making this accusation officially shows the degree of irritation felt by the Russians about the duplicity of the Americans. Second, this is the first time, at least to my knowledge, that Russian Spetsnaz forces had to be sent in to rescue a surrounded Russian subunit. All Spetsnaz operators survived, but three of them were wounded in the operation (the Russians are not saying how badly). The close air support by very low flying SU-25 aircraft was obviously coordinated by Spetsnaz forward air controllers and probably saved the day. In other words, this was a close call and things could have ended much more badly (just imagine what the Takfiri crazies would have done, on video, to any captured Russian serviceman!). Finally, a US-organized attack on what was supposed to be a "de-confliction" zone combined with an attempt to capture Russian soldiers raises the bar for American duplicity to a totally new level.

The big question now is "do the Russians mean it?" or are they just whining with real determination to hit back if needed.

There are a couple of problems here. First, objectively, the Russian contingent in Syria is a tiny one if compared to the immense power of CENTCOM, NATO and the ever-present Israelis. Not only that, but in any US-Russian confrontation, Russia as a country is objectively the weaker side by any measure except a full-out nuclear exchange. So the Russians are not in a position of force. Furthermore, for historical and cultural reasons, Russians are much more concerned by the initiation of any incident which could lead to all-out war than the Americans who always fight their wars in somebody else's country. This might seem paradoxical, but the Russians fear war but they are ready for it. In contrast to the Russians, the Americans don't fear war, but neither are they ready for it. In practical terms this means that an American miscalculation could very well lead to a Russian military response which would stun the Americans and force them to enter an escalatory spiral which nobody would control.

Johnny Rico > , September 21, 2017 at 7:36 pm GMT

Finally, a US-organized attack on what was supposed to be a "de-confliction" zone combined with an attempt to capture Russian soldiers raises the bar for American duplicity to a totally new level.

Wow! That escalated quickly.

First it is an accusation by a Russian general and a paragraph later it is apparently a fact.

Evidence not required. You are worse than the Pentagon.

So much for exercising caution and restraint.

hunor > , September 22, 2017 at 4:39 am GMT

@Johnny Rico " evidence not required"

the Russians are not in a position to make an outlandish accusation ,without proof.

they have intercepted communications between American military personals and moderate jihadist

/ AL Nustra / both in the planning , and executing of the operation. the Russians presented the evidence to they

American "partners " The American official response was that the USA considers the Al Nustra front

a terrorist organization

anonymous > , Disclaimer September 22, 2017 at 2:36 pm GMT

This is a very strange story and I find it puzzling. Could this be true? The numbers of killed and destroyed tanks and trucks seem to be rather high. Tanks? Who's supplying them with tanks? There's a confusing array of combatants out there, each with their own sponsors. What we need is a scorecard. Also, what's needed is an analysis of what the US goal of setting up a separate Kurdish state is all about and what the perceived benefits are. It's hard to tell if there's a coherent plan behind all this or if it's all due to confusion and gung-ho incompetence.

Dr. Charles > , September 22, 2017 at 6:41 pm GMT

This is a very, very dangerous situation. And it is by no means clear who will blink first. All the contemptuous things that may be said about Trump only add to the danger. Yes, he's both a bully and a coward (as most bullies are). That's why he fired Bannon (who was going to get him out of Syria) and then put the Junta (of Mattis, McMaster and Kelly) over him–to "make a man out of him." That's why Trump's Dad sent him to Military School. So Trump will follow orders as he did back then. The military discipline didn't stick. But his military school years were the best he ever felt about himself. That's why he put the Junta over him now. And the Junta is out to be great generals all and win where others have failed. They'll be the Grants and Shermans of the 21st century. They'll win the Syrian War, the Afghan War, and the Korean War. (Just follow McArthur's nuclear plan!) Defeat Iran too– and send Russia running back to its borders. (Obama and HRC both privately pegged Putin as an appeaser a la letting the Kiev coup go through and just defending Crimea.)

In Syria, Plan B was always to create a separate state of Kurdistan in Eastern Syria; build scores of US bases there; and cut off Hezbollah from Iran. Then let Israel wipe out Hezbollah (Good luck with that one!) and extend Israel's borders to the Litani River, which would then be diverted South to irrigate Israeli lands.

Then Israel and the US would catch and destroy Assad in a pincer movement. And it's assumed Putin will withdraw rather than fight. He's already said on the record that Russia doesn't need Syria to survive. And if that causes the hardliners to topple him, the US will be ready with a First Strike option by then.

I believe "Mad Dog" Mattis and McMaster think they can pull it off. They have the blood of General Custer in them!

anon > , Disclaimer September 22, 2017 at 8:15 pm GMT

@Johnny Rico "Nothing to see here"

No. There's a lot to see here . 1st America declares Assad should go Then UK tells Assad has left the country for Russia .NATo says it is considering erecting safe zone and someone with bewitching smile saying: I am coming I am seeing but he is not dying I will impose no- fly zone.
Then HRW and paid and bribed NYT WaPO and Guardian CNN FOX were asking when when when , when are we going to decapitate Assadd- that Sarin gas smells bad !!!

AIPAC and Holocaust Museum with Natanyhuu getting irtae with Obama and now with Trump for not doing yet what should have been done 4 years ago. Trump goes to UN after firing misile and warns the world of his next move against Syria and IRan.

Against these backdrop, relentless but slow recapture of territories by the 3 enemy forces – Iran Syria and Hizbullah must have turned AIPAC , ADL Holocaust Museum ,Natanyhu and their children in Congress and cabinets pure eunuchs with dry shrunken balls hanging between two beastly legs . There is a lot to see. Now Russia has told them something that any country with balls will point to the lies and laugh at the accusation or warnings or both. US just swallow it and like a confused child spit venom at NK IRAN and VENEZUELA thinking the ground underneath his feet was responsible for his fall.

Schmid > , September 22, 2017 at 10:25 pm GMT

I wonder why the Rebels /Islamist don't opt for a radical guerilla tactic. Why does they operate in a way, they risk being shot from air, a large amount of them in one place with their heavy material, being an easy target for air-forces? Isn't this crazy? I'm by far no military expert, so just asking.

Other questions are the credibility of the sources and the possibility of other narrative

Dr. Charles > , September 22, 2017 at 11:59 pm GMT

@paull Pure fantasy from Saker McNasty. The US isn't interested in winning battles. It's interested in controlling the future of Syria. Russia may have won this battle, but the message sent was by the US and Russia, despite its public fulminating, got that message. Russia will agree to the partition of Syria that the US wants. This whole story is about face saving for Russia. Saker McNasty has a role to play in that. He plays it well.

I think Putin never really intended to defend Syria's sovereignty. I think he has basically the same idea Trump has: that sovereignty means something different for small countries. Let's just say that the more powerful a country is, the more 'sovereignty' it has.

So Russia boasts that it has won a battle and consequently makes threats. Meanwhile negotiations for the carve-up of Syria are being finalized... I do not believe that any of us should be permitted by the moderators to engage in vicious slurs, as in adding the epithet, "McNasty," to The Saker's illustrious nom de plume (or nom de guerre, as the case may be). The Saker never descends to such mud-slinging. He is ever challenging, but never girlishly "nasty." Such insult-throwing only inflames us all to turn troll. The moderators should not allow it. If a comment otherwise has merit, the moderators should have the option of sending the comment back to the writer to decide if he wants to have his comment published without these self-degrading slurs that substitute for rational debate. As for your "Americanized" (Animal Farm) version of what Putin thinks about sovereignty, it's certainly contrary to everything I know about the man (based on my own long professional study of his words and deeds)!starting with his lifelong (literally since age 13) commitment to the moral philosophy of Judo or "Gentle Path" in Japanese (reinforced by his post-1996 embrace of Orthodox Christianity): which holds that all people are equal and deserving of mutual respect, regardless of size, as expressed by the obligatory exchange of bows before matches. And Putin has carried that through to international relations, as often stated in his addresses at international forums. That said, he may decide that it may be in everyone's best interest to avoid a hot war with the US for now and let the US partition Syria for the time being–knowing that this new Kurdistan is not apt to last very long with Syria, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Russia, and possibly China (as a major oil/gas buyer) all opposed to it and only Israel and the US supporting it.

At the same time a new Kurdistan means that the US, NATO, and Israel will lose Turkey to Russia forever. And that is a very bad trade off! Though I, for one, believe that if Putin does allow this partitioning to happen, the 3 generals now running Trump are likely to see this as further evidence of their own bogus (US-propaganda contradicting) theory of Putin's "appeasement" tendencies and go for a "limited" First Strike option (meaning: "accept our total destruction of your nuclear forces and unconditionally surrender or our Second Strike will incinerate every Russian city!").

And that will be the ballgame. Whereas The Saker finds this idea that Trump's damned generals are so Hell-bent on ruling the world that they would actually go for a First Strike option just too well insane. True Son of the Enlightenment he! Just joking

I'm not joking, however, when I say that it is my true belief that these Hell-bound generals now ruling Trump and our "post-Christian" Empire are so blinded by Satanic pride and lustful delusions of grandeur that they may well bring down a nuclear Armageddon upon us all.

KA > , September 23, 2017 at 3:11 am GMT

@Johnny Rico The Saker piece you read above is, in itself, a deception, however unintentional or not it may be.

It does this by presenting its own narrative and context for the "facts" as provided by the linked articles. And also, leaving out any awkward details that might not match the desired narrative.

Any history of this incident written a year from now will look quite different. As will one written 10 years from now.

Here is another early take on the context.

http://www.newsweek.com/russia-accuses-us-working-al-q-affiliate-syria-668414

Accusation is not new . American scholars have accused of the same practices . American government has had a love hate relationship with this terrorists outfit .

RAND corporation was very clear and explicit in its urging that America should embrace Jihadist to reach its goal. America is recapturing its past association with Fascist and with Nazis . Nothing remarkable or out of character . It is par the course .

What is confusing is the half baked attempts to undermine Assad without a ready coherent opposition who America can present . It seems American plans embrace the theory of vivisection of Syria by different weakened groups as it happening in Libya . But what is different here is the presence of strong interested neighbors who have designs on this land . US wants to satisfy them .

Then use the platform to project its power over Iran and possibly wobbly vacillating East European countries . Once Iran is corralled , America most likely target the belt and road initiative of China .

It is very important for America to succeed in Syria. Otherwise it is done as far power projection is concerned. This is the reason America agreed to let Assad stay but within demarcated zone . Although it is doubtful if it could have done otherwise . This is plan B .

Iain W > , September 23, 2017 at 6:53 am GMT

Maybe the Russians have now finally realised after processing all the permutations in their 'reflexive control' model that talk is useless with the perfidious and odious US degenerates. The US is now an existential threat to the existence of Russia along with other non US aligned countries. If so, this will become a fight for survival at some point.

CPH > , September 23, 2017 at 9:51 am GMT

There is a contingent within the American government which has been pushing for war with Russia since Trump was elected. Unfortunately, any clear signals from the Russians that what this incident represents will not be tolerated is exactly what they are looking for.

The bet they'll make is that the Russian government will not respond to the next provocation with a credible threat to escalate to nuclear war. Anything short of nuclear is excellent for business but the profit potential of nuclear bombs is limited.

GreenEyedJinn > , September 23, 2017 at 2:38 pm GMT

That al-Nusra attacked Idlib is likely. It's what they do. To say that it was orchestrated in any way by the US is not. We don't coordinate or push any ops with al-Nusra. The current al-Nusra is a splinter of ISIS. The US is in the business of killing ISIS, not supporting them. I'm glad the Russians are having success in killing al-Nusra, too.
Note in the original TASS article there is zero mention of any US-Russian interaction. http://tass.com/defense/966624

Christian > , September 23, 2017 at 6:00 pm GMT

@Realist Its pretty clear to me that Trump has stopped funding many of the covert operations in Syria under the Obama admin. He didn't completely stop the stupidity, I doubt anyone could, but the eminent destruction of ISIS would be far less likely if his rival had one the election.

El Dato > , September 23, 2017 at 10:25 pm GMT

@Dr. Charles This is a very, very dangerous situation. And it is by no means clear who will blink first. All the contemptuous things that may be said about Trump only add to the danger. Yes, he's both a bully and a coward (as most bullies are). That's why he fired Bannon (who was going to get him out of Syria) and then put the Junta (of Mattis, McMaster and Kelly) over him--to "make a man out of him."

That's why Trump's Dad sent him to Military School. So Trump will follow orders as he did back then. The military discipline didn't stick. But his military school years were the best he ever felt about himself. That's why he put the Junta over him now. And the Junta is out to be great generals all and win where others have failed. They'll be the Grants and Shermans of the 21st century. They'll win the Syrian War, the Afghan War, and the Korean War. (Just follow McArthur's nuclear plan!) Defeat Iran too-- and send Russia running back to its borders. (Obama and HRC both privately pegged Putin as an appeaser a la letting the Kiev coup go through and just defending Crimea.)

In Syria, Plan B was always to create a separate state of Kurdistan in Eastern Syria; build scores of US bases there; and cut off Hezbollah from Iran. Then let Israel wipe out Hezbollah (Good luck with that one!) and extend Israel's borders to the Litani River, which would then be diverted South to irrigate Israeli lands. Then Israel and the US would catch and destroy Assad in a pincer movement.

And it's assumed Putin will withdraw rather than fight. He's already said on the record that Russia doesn't need Syria to survive. And if that causes the hardliners to topple him, the US will be ready with a First Strike option by then. I believe "Mad Dog" Mattis and McMaster think they can pull it off. They have the blood of General Custer in them! Pretty much this.

You are just leaving out Saudi Arabia (still hell-bent on "leveraging" Sunni Radicalism to throw its might around but getting a first rash of blowback), Pakistan and India (both interested in having a role in the future of Afghanistan while mooning each other over a sometimes-hot funny border war) and China (apparently probing the anus of the good old USA and not ready to play running dog lackey)

Johnny Rico > , September 23, 2017 at 11:38 pm GMT

@Realist The US should not be in any part of Syria. "There will never be peace in the Middle-East and in a hundred years it won't matter because we will all be dead."
-my East German-defector (he was rumored to have commandeered an APC and driven it across the border) Defense Journalism professor at BU circa 1993

Those, however, are predictions and I don't know what the future holds.

I would say we probably shouldn't be in Syria either. But that is probably an unlikely outcome and problematic expectation.

In regards to American involvement there, my opinion is that it is better Trump is President than Hillary. No regrets there. And I didn't vote for either one.

peterAUS > , September 24, 2017 at 4:18 am GMT

@paull Agree.

Especially with:

Russia will agree to the partition of Syria that the US wants.

I think Putin never really intended to defend Syria's sovereignty. I think he has basically the same idea Trump has: that sovereignty means something different for small countries. Let's just say that the more powerful a country is, the more 'sovereignty' it has.

Meanwhile negotiations for the carve-up of Syria are being finalized

[Sep 23, 2017] The Exit Strategy of Empire by Wendy McElro

Highly recommended!
Garrett 's book The People's Pottage The Revolution Was-Ex America-Rise of Empire i ncludes a timeless quote on U.S. foreign policy. "You are imperialistic all the same, whether you realize it or not... You are trying to make the kind of world you want. You are trying to impose the American way of life on other people, whether they want it or not." The "Rise of Empire" opens with the sentence "We have crossed the boundary between Republic and Empire." It contains a critical view of President Truman's usurpation of Congress' power to declare war. Some of the "distinguishing marks" of an empire taken from history were "Domestic policy becomes subordinate to foreign policy" and " A system of satellite nations". I think most of us are would be familiar with those two in modern context. His labeling of this policy as the "Empire of the Bottomless Purse" was historically accurate.
The book was printed in 1953. What's amazing is how little some political ideology has changed since then. Take this quote; "And the mere thought of 'America First', associated as that term is with 'isolationism', has become a liability so extreme that politicians feel obliged to deny ever having entertained it." Think back to Ron Paul's 2008 campaign and how he was labeled an "isolationist" for similar views of nationalism.
Notable quotes:
"... These are not sequential stages of Empire but occur in conjunction with one another and reinforce each other. That means that an attempt to reverse Empire in the direction of a Republic can begin with weakening any of the five characteristics in any order. ..."
"... Deconstructing these executive props, one by one, weakens the Empire. When all five components are deconstructing, the process presents a possible path to dissolving Empire itself. ..."
"... That was why Garrett does not deal with how to reverse the process of Empire. Once an empire is established, he argues, it becomes a "prisoner of history" in a trap of its own making. He writes, "A Republic may change its course, or reverse it, and that will be its own business. But the history of Empire is a world history and belongs to many people. A Republic is not obliged to act upon the world, either to change it or instruct it. Empire, on the other hand, must put forth its power." ..."
"... Collective security and fear are intimately connected concepts. It is no coincidence that the sixth component of Empire -- imprisonment -- comes directly after the two components of "a system of satellite nations" and, "a complex of vaunting and fear." ..."
"... An empire thinks that satellites are necessary for its collective security. Satellites think the empire is necessary for territorial and economic survival; but they are willing to defect if an empire with a better deal beckons. America knows this and scrambles to satisfy satellites that could become fickle. Garrett quotes Harry Truman, who created America's modern system of satellites. "We must make sure that our friends and allies overseas continue to get the help they need to make their full contribution to security and progress for the whole free world. This means not only military aid -- though that is vital -- it also means real programs of economic and technical assistance." ..."
"... Garrett also emphasizes how domestic pressure imprisons Empire. One of the most powerful domestic pressures is fear. An atmosphere of fear -- real or created -- drives public support of foreign policy and makes it more difficult for Empire to retreat from those policies. ..."
"... Empire has "'less control over its own fate than a republic,' he [Garrett] commented because it was a 'prisoner of history', ruled by fear. Fear of what? 'Fear of the barbarian.'" ..."
"... It does not matter whether the enemy is actually a barbarian. What matters is that citizens of Empire believe in the enemy's savagery and support a military posture toward him. Domestic fear drives the constant politics of satellite nations, protective treaties, police actions, and war. Foreign entanglements lead to increased global involvement and deeper commitments. The two reinforce each other. ..."
"... The fifth characteristic of Empire is not merely fear but also "vaunting." Vaunting means boasting about or praising something excessively -- for example, to laud and exaggerate America's role in the world. Fear provides the emotional impetus for conquest; vaunting provides the moral justification for acting upon the fear. The moral duty is variously phrased: leadership, a balance of power, peace, democracy, the preservation of civilization, humanitarianism. From this point, it is a small leap to conclude that the ends sanctify the means. Garrett observes that "there is soon a point from which there is no turning back .The argument for going on is well known. As Woodrow Wilson once asked, 'Shall we break the heart of the world?' So now many are saying, 'We cannot let the free world down'. Moral leadership of the world is not a role you step into and out of as you like." ..."
Sep 23, 2017 | ronpaulinstitute.org
The Exit Strategy of Empire Written y Friday September 22, 2017
The Roman Empire never doubted that it was the defender of civilization. Its good intentions were peace, law and order. The Spanish Empire added salvation. The British Empire added the noble myth of the white man's burden. We have added freedom and democracy.

-- Garet Garrett, Rise of Empire

The first step in creating Empire is to morally justify the invasion and occupation of another nation even if it poses no credible or substantial threat. But if that's the entering strategy, what is the exit one?

One approach to answering is to explore how Empire has arisen through history and whether the process can be reversed. Another is to conclude that no exit is possible; an Empire inevitably self-destructs under the increasing weight of what it is -- a nation exercising ultimate authority over an array of satellite states. Empires are vulnerable to overreach, rebellion, war, domestic turmoil, financial exhaustion, and competition for dominance.

In his monograph Rise of Empire, the libertarian journalist Garet Garrett (1878–1954), lays out a blueprint for how Empire could possibly be reversed as well as the reason he believes reversal would not occur. Garrett was in a unique position to comment insightfully on the American empire because he'd had a front-row seat to events that cemented its status: World War II and the Cold War. World War II America already had a history of conquest and occupation, of course, but, during the mid to late 20th century, the nation became a self-consciously and unapologetic empire with a self-granted mandate to spread its ideology around the world.

A path to reversing Empire

Garrett identifies the first five components of Empire:

  • The dominance of executive power: the White House reigns over Congress and the judiciary.
  • The subordination of domestic concerns to foreign policy: civil and economic liberties give way to military needs.
  • The rise of a military mentality: aggressive patriotism and obedience are exalted.
  • A system of satellite nations (vassals) in the name of collective security ;
  • A zeitgeist of both zealous patriotism and fear : bellicosity is mixed with and sustained by panic.
These are not sequential stages of Empire but occur in conjunction with one another and reinforce each other. That means that an attempt to reverse Empire in the direction of a Republic can begin with weakening any of the five characteristics in any order.

Garrett did not directly address the strategy of undoing Empire, but his description of its creation can be used to good advantage. The first step is to break down each component of Empire into more manageable chunks. For example, the executive branch accumulates power in various ways. They include:

  • By delegation -- Congress transfers its constitutional powers to the president.
  • By reinterpretation of the Constitution by a sympathetic Supreme Court.
  • Through innovation by which the president assumes powers that are not constitutionally forbidden because the Framers never considered them.
  • By administrative agencies that issue regulations with the force of law.
  • Through usurpation -- the president confronts Congress with a fait accompli that cannot easily be repudiated.Entanglement in foreign affairs makes presidential power swell because, both by tradition and the Constitution, foreign affairs are his authority.
Deconstructing these executive props, one by one, weakens the Empire. When all five components are deconstructing, the process presents a possible path to dissolving Empire itself.

A sixth component of Empire

But in Rise of Empire, Garet Garrett offers a chilling assessment based on his sixth component of Empire. There is no path out. A judgment that renders prevention all the more essential.

That was why Garrett does not deal with how to reverse the process of Empire. Once an empire is established, he argues, it becomes a "prisoner of history" in a trap of its own making. He writes, "A Republic may change its course, or reverse it, and that will be its own business. But the history of Empire is a world history and belongs to many people. A Republic is not obliged to act upon the world, either to change it or instruct it. Empire, on the other hand, must put forth its power."

In his book For A New Liberty, Murray Rothbard expands on Garrett's point: "[The] United States, like previous empires, feel[s] itself to be 'a prisoner of history.' For beyond fear lies 'collective security,' and the playing of the supposedly destined American role upon the world stage."

Collective security and fear are intimately connected concepts. It is no coincidence that the sixth component of Empire -- imprisonment -- comes directly after the two components of "a system of satellite nations" and, "a complex of vaunting and fear."

Satellite nations

"We speak of our own satellites as allies and friends or as freedom loving nations," Garrett wrote. "Nevertheless, satellite is the right word. The meaning of it is the hired guard." Why hired? Although men of Empire speak of losing China [or] Europe [how] could we lose China or Europe, since they never belonged to us? What they mean is that we may lose a following of dependent people who act as an outer guard."

An empire thinks that satellites are necessary for its collective security. Satellites think the empire is necessary for territorial and economic survival; but they are willing to defect if an empire with a better deal beckons. America knows this and scrambles to satisfy satellites that could become fickle. Garrett quotes Harry Truman, who created America's modern system of satellites. "We must make sure that our friends and allies overseas continue to get the help they need to make their full contribution to security and progress for the whole free world. This means not only military aid -- though that is vital -- it also means real programs of economic and technical assistance."

In contrast to a Republic, Empire is both a master and a servant because foreign pressure cements it into the military and economic support of satellite nations around the globe, all of which have their own agendas.

Garrett also emphasizes how domestic pressure imprisons Empire. One of the most powerful domestic pressures is fear. An atmosphere of fear -- real or created -- drives public support of foreign policy and makes it more difficult for Empire to retreat from those policies. In his introduction to Garrett's book Ex America, Bruce Ramsey addresses Garrett's point. Ramsey writes, Empire has "'less control over its own fate than a republic,' he [Garrett] commented because it was a 'prisoner of history', ruled by fear. Fear of what? 'Fear of the barbarian.'"

It does not matter whether the enemy is actually a barbarian. What matters is that citizens of Empire believe in the enemy's savagery and support a military posture toward him. Domestic fear drives the constant politics of satellite nations, protective treaties, police actions, and war. Foreign entanglements lead to increased global involvement and deeper commitments. The two reinforce each other.

The fifth characteristic of Empire is not merely fear but also "vaunting." Vaunting means boasting about or praising something excessively -- for example, to laud and exaggerate America's role in the world. Fear provides the emotional impetus for conquest; vaunting provides the moral justification for acting upon the fear. The moral duty is variously phrased: leadership, a balance of power, peace, democracy, the preservation of civilization, humanitarianism. From this point, it is a small leap to conclude that the ends sanctify the means. Garrett observes that "there is soon a point from which there is no turning back .The argument for going on is well known. As Woodrow Wilson once asked, 'Shall we break the heart of the world?' So now many are saying, 'We cannot let the free world down'. Moral leadership of the world is not a role you step into and out of as you like."

Conclusion

In this manner, Garrett believed, Empire imprisons itself in the trap of a perpetual war for peace and stability, which are always stated goals. Yet, as Garrett concluded, the reality is war and instability.

It is not clear whether he was correct that Empire could not be reversed. Whether or not he was, it is at its creation that Empire is best opposed.

Reprinted with permission from the Future of Freedom Foundation .


Related

[Sep 23, 2017] Uncle Sam vs. Russia in Eastern Syria the Nightmare Scenario

Notable quotes:
"... lives in Washington state. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press). Hopeless is also available in a Kindle edition . He can be reached at [email protected] . ..."
Sep 23, 2017 | www.unz.com

The impending collapse of ISIS has touched off a race for territory in the oil-rich eastern part of Syria pitting US-backed forces against the Russian-led coalition of Syria, Iran and Hezbollah. This is the nightmare scenario that everyone wanted to avoid. Washington and Moscow's armies are now converging on the same area at the same time greatly increasing the probability of a conflagration between the two nuclear-armed superpowers. The only way a clash can be avoided is if one party backs down, which seems increasingly unlikely.

The situation can be easily explained. The vast swath of territory captured by ISIS is steadily shrinking due to the dogged perseverance of the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) which has liberated most of the countryside west of the Euphrates River including the former ISIS stronghold at Deir Ezzor, a critical garrison at the center of the fighting. ISIS is also getting pressure from the north where the US-backed SDF is pounding their capital at Raqqa while deploying troops and tanks southward to the oil fields in Deir Ezzor province.

Washington has made it clear that it wants its proxy-army to control the area east of the Euphrates establishing a soft partition between east and west. The US also wants to control Deir Ezzor's vast oil resources in order to provide a reliable revenue stream for the emergent Kurdish statelet.

Syrian President Bashar al Assad has said many times that he will never agree to the partitioning of the country. But the decision will not be made by Assad alone. His coalition partners in Moscow, Beirut and Tehran will also help shape the final settlement. As far as Putin is concerned, it seems extremely unlikely that he'd risk a protracted and bloody war with the United States simply to recapture every square inch of Syrian territory. The Russian president will probably allow the US to keep its bases in the northeast provided that critical areas are conceded to the regime. But where will the line be drawn, that's the question?

The US wants to control the area east of the Euphrates including the lucrative oil fields. This is why they deployed troops from the SDF southward even though they're still needed in Raqqa. Earlier in the week, it looked like the Syrian Army had a leg up on the SDF as troops and armored vehicles crossed the Euphrates headed east to the oil fields. But reports that appeared late Thursday indicate that the SDF has beaten them to the punch. This is from South Front:

"On Thursday, the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) captured Tabiyeh and al-Isba oil fields in the northwestern Deir Ezzor countryside, according to pro-Kurdish sources. If these reports are confirmed, the SDF will be in control over a half of Syria's oil reserve. Moreover, that will mean that the SDF at least partly blocked the SAA way on the eastern bank of the Euphrates river." ("Syrian Democratic Forces Capture Key Oil Fields In Deir Ezzor", South Front)

This is a major setback for the Russian coalition. It means that the SAA backed by the Russian Airforce will have to fight a group which, up to this point, has been an ally in the war against ISIS. Now it's clear that the mainly-Kurdish SDF is no ally, it's an enemy that wants to steal Syria's resources and carve a state out of its eastern flank.

The news about the SDF's arrival at the oil fields came just hours after the Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Major General Igor Konashenkov issued a terse warning to the US and SDF that Russia would retaliate if SAA positions were attacked again by SDF mortar or rocket fire.

Quote: "Russia unequivocally told the commanders of US forces in Al Udeid Airbase (Qatar) that it will not tolerate any shelling from the areas where the SDF are stationed ( ) Fire from positions in regions [controlled by the SDF] will be suppressed by all means necessary."

In retrospect, it looks like the SDF had already decided to make a clean break with the government leaving no doubt of where they stood. Washington is using the SDF to seize the oil fields and to claim to the entire east side of the Euphrates for its own. There's no doubt that these combat units of the SDF are accompanied by US Special Forces who are providing critical communications, logistic and tactical support. This operation has Washington's fingerprints all over it.

On Friday morning, loyalist forces led by the 5th Assault Corps ISIS Hunters, established full control over Khusham village on the eastern bank of the Euphrates River near Deir Ezzor city. The strategically-located village blocks a key road linking the area held by the SDF to the Omar oil fields.

Get the picture? US-backed forces and Russian coalition members are now operating cheek-to-jowl in the same theatre trying to seize the same oil-rich scrap of land. This has all the makings of a major head-on collision.

Putin is a cautious and reasonable man, but he's not going to hand over Syria's oil fields without a fight. Besides, Assad needs the oil receipts to finance the rebuilding of his decimated country. Equally important, he needs the territory east of Deir Ezzor to for an overland route connecting Beirut to Damascus to Baghdad to Tehran, the so-called Arab Superhighway. Putin's job is to glue as much of the country together as needed to create a viable state. So while he may allow the SDF and US military to occupy parts of the northeast, he's not going to surrender crucial resources or strategically-located territory.

So what does it all mean? Does it mean that Russia will support Assad's attempts to liberate the oil fields even if it could trigger a broader war with the United States?

Yes, that's exactly what it means.

Putin doesn't want a slugfest with Uncle Sam, but he's not going to abandon an ally either. So there's going to be a confrontation because neither party is willing to give up what they feel they need to achieve success.

So there you have it. As the standoff begins to take shape in east Syria, the two rival superpowers are preparing themselves for the worst. Clearly, we have reached the most dangerous moment in the six year-long war.

MIKE WHITNEY lives in Washington state. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press). Hopeless is also available in a Kindle edition . He can be reached at [email protected] .

TG > , September 23, 2017 at 1:57 pm GMT

An intelligent and well-argued commentary, as usual from this source.

But here is something that nobody is talking about: sure oil is important. But Syria is mostly an arid plateau. Water is more important. Why is nobody talking about that?

It gets zero press coverage, but the real trigger for Syria's nasty civil war was the deliberately-engineered Syrian population explosion. The population doubled and doubled and then the aquifers had been drained, and the mostly agrarian economy fell apart Even without idiotic foreign meddling, one way or the other, good things would not have happened to Syria.

http://globuspallidusxi.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-real-story-on-syria-forced.html

So here's my question: who controls the water supplies in Syria? What is the status of the aquifers? What has the war and the exodus of refugees done to the rate of population increase? I heard recently that one faction opened the spillgates on a dam to slow an enemy river crossing: how much water was wasted? What happens if one faction decides to drain the reservoirs before retreating?

You say that Syria will want oil money to rebuild: but you can't buy water, at least not enough to grow crops on a substantial scale. Sure, in theory networks of nuclear power plants running desalinization plants might work, but that would take about all the money in the world just to keep 30 million Syrians fed. Or perhaps people who until recently were goatherds and farmers will suddenly re-educate themselves into world-class computer programmers and within two years they will be beating the Singaporeans at their own game and have created a non-agrarian economy from scratch and they can import food from elsewhere. Good luck with that one.

The mainstream press may not be talking about water, but I assure you, the Syrian government and the Syrian people very much aware of the issue.

DESERT FOX > , September 23, 2017 at 2:50 pm GMT

ISIS aka AL CIADA is a creation of the U.S. and Israel and Britain and is supplied with men and weapons and equipment by them and the U.S. airforce acts as the ISIS airforce and most of all, the U.S. has no legal right to be in SYRIA where as Russia was invited in by the Syrian government.

Russia and Syria are going to destroy ISIS and kick the U.S. the hell out of Syria and the Kurds will have to accept defeat as of now they are being used as a proxy army of the U.S. and the Kurds will be betrayed by the U.S. in the end in any event as this is what the U.S. does.

GOD BLESS SYRIA AND RUSSIA.

Janis > , September 23, 2017 at 2:58 pm GMT

The U.S. has no strategic national interest in Syria. I am convinced the only reason we are there is in the behest of Israel. We no longer have Perle, Wolfowitz or Feith impacting U.S. foreign policy, but we have other Israel firsters in government who have taken their place. Dual loyalty is a farce. I like what Barry Goldwater said on the subject in his book, "Goldwater." He said: "I was never put under greater pressure than by the Israeli lobby, nor has the Senate as a whole. It's the most influential crowd in Congress and America by far. The Israelis can come up with 50 votes or more on almost any bill in the Senate that affects their interests. They went to extraordinary lengths to get me to vote for them, even sending some of my dearest and closest Arizona friends, like Harry Rosenzweig, to lobby me in Washington. The Israelis never raised the fact of my being half Jewish, but they stressed protecting Israel in the event of war. I told them over and over, without a treaty we've already promised to go to war to protect Israel. And the United States is not getting all that much out of the deal. I think Israel is doing pretty well. I don't worry about Israel when I go to sleep at night. I worry about the U.S. Constitution, which I've sworn to uphold–not Israel's Constitution, not that of Saudi Arabia, Lebanon or anybody else in the Middle East or the world. That usually shut them up, but they often went away mad because I was not about to support everything they wanted." That quote is from "Goldwater" page 16-17.

Would to God we had more Goldwaters back in the day or now for that matter!

[Sep 23, 2017] Spinning by NYT can and will form the base of a conspiracy. NYT is lying . But this lies can help build the necessary platform for future wars

Notable quotes:
"... Spinning by NYT can and will form the base of a conspiracy. ..."
"... NYT is lying . But this lies can help build the necessary platform for future wars . Another Sarin gas? Another Harriri death? Another picture of beheadings ? Another story of North Korean supplying nukes ? Wrongful consequences from falsehood will not cost NYT excepting a correction years later somehere in the 5 th page. A conspiracy to hatch is something that has no consequences for the plotters . ..."
"... NYT will be there claiming for the right to crow – how it has prepared the ground. All are done openly. When resistance is mounted, Bernie Sander supporters are sent home with flowers and a reminder to vote for Clinton because in this age all over the world America is the exception that has heard them. With that satisfaction they can go home and vote as expected. They are not allowed to know how the campaign marginalized Sander's chances from the get go. ..."
www.unz.com
KA , September 5, 2016 at 5:19 pm GMT

"HANGZHOU, China : The image of a 5-year-old Syrian boy, dazed and bloodied after being rescued from an airstrike on rebel-held Aleppo, reverberated around the world last month, a harrowing reminder that five years after civil war broke out there, Syria remains a charnel house.

But the reaction was more muted in Washington, where Syria has become a distant disaster rather than an urgent crisis. President Obama's policy toward Syria has barely budged in the last year and shows no sign of change for the remainder of his term. The White House has faced little pressure over the issue,

That frustrates many analysts because they believe that a shift in policy will come only when Mr. Obama has left office. "Given the tone of this campaign, I doubt the electorate will be presented with realistic and intelligible options, with respect to Syria," said Frederic C. Hof, a former adviser on Syria in the administration."

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/05/world/middleeast/obama-syria-foreign-policy.html

Spinning by NYT can and will form the base of a conspiracy.

The world we see are not festooned with the morbid pictures and the world has not one echo chamber among its 7 billions that are reverberating with his sad cry .
No American taxpayer is piling pressure on Obama.

Tone of the election doesn't and shouldn't provide option on Syria . Electorates are not asking to know what America should do.

Next president will introduce something that he wont share w and making them known before the voters will destroy his chances. Someone shared and was evisecrated by NYT and other as Putin's Trojan horse .

NYT is lying . But this lies can help build the necessary platform for future wars . Another Sarin gas? Another Harriri death? Another picture of beheadings ? Another story of North Korean supplying nukes ? Wrongful consequences from falsehood will not cost NYT excepting a correction years later somehere in the 5 th page. A conspiracy to hatch is something that has no consequences for the plotters .

If Dulles were hanged for role in all the illegal things he had done in Guatemala and Iran, may be Kennedy would have survived. But his earlier political escapades were also built on something that were way earlier . Conspiracy keeps on coming back begging for one more round ,for one more time .

NYT will be there claiming for the right to crow – how it has prepared the ground. All are done openly. When resistance is mounted, Bernie Sander supporters are sent home with flowers and a reminder to vote for Clinton because in this age all over the world America is the exception that has heard them. With that satisfaction they can go home and vote as expected. They are not allowed to know how the campaign marginalized Sander's chances from the get go.

Neither NYT explains how reckless Trump with nuclear code will start a nuclear war with Putin's Russia despite being his co conspirator .

Chalabi s daughter exclaimed in early part of 2004 – We are heroes in mistakes. She won't say it now . Conspirators would love to get the credit and be recognized . It all depends on the success . First Iraq war, if went bad from beginning, Lantos wouldn't have been reelected . But again who knows what media can deliver. They delivered Joe Liberman .

[Sep 22, 2017] America Can Never Be Trusted! by Stephen LENDMAN

Sep 22, 2017 | www.strategic-culture.org

Time and again throughout its history, America breached treaties and other agreements – proving it doesn't negotiate in good faith. Just the opposite!

According to Russian official Zamir Kabulov, US Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Alice Wells expressed "willingness to cooperate with us on Afghanistan, while realizing that the area of cooperation is very narrow."

The only thing Washington wants from Russia is compliance with its imperial agenda – its endless wars of aggression, in Afghanistan and everywhere else.

Does Russia really believe it has a partner in America? Do Putin, Lavrov and other top officials think improved bilateral relations are possible?

Do they publicly express views they don't believe privately? Do they realize after a century of US hostility toward their country, things are worse today than ever – with no prospect for improvement?

How can there be when Washington wants regime change, sovereign Russia eliminated, US vassal state subservience replacing it – puppet governance, not democratic rule.

Chances for improved bilateral relations are nil. America considers Russia an adversary, not a partner. Getting along is not an acceptable option in Washington.

Illegal sanctions on Russia alone prove it. So does closing, seizing and inspecting its San Francisco consulate and other diplomatic properties in Washington and New York, flagrantly breaching international law in both instances.

US cooperation with Russia in Syria is illusory. On Tuesday, US-supported al-Nusra terrorists attacked Syrian troops and Russian police in Idlib's de-escalation zone – after Washington agreed to observe ceasefire in all Syrian de-escalation zones.

According to head of Russia's General Staff Gen. Sergey Rudskoi:

"Despite agreements signed in Astana on September 15, (hundreds of) gunmen of Jabhat al-Nusra (together with allied terrorists) launched a large-scale offensive against positions of government troops north and northeast of Hama in the Idlib de-escalation zone on September 19."

"According to available data, the offensive was initiated by American intelligence services to stop a successful advance of government troops east of Deir Ezzor."

Russian aerial operations thwarted the attack, killing hundreds of terrorists, destroying their heavy weapons and equipment, aided by Syrian Assault Corp troops deployed to the area and Russian special forces.

This incident and numerous others shows Washington wants endless war, not peace. It wants Assad toppled, US-controlled puppet rule replacing Syrian sovereign independence.

Nothing in prospect suggests a change in US policy. Sergey Lavrov admitted Washington supports al-Nusra terrorists – "shield(ing) and spar(ing) them from (US) airstrikes."

"This is inadmissible," he stressed. Eliminating their fighters, along with ISIS, is Russia's top military objective in Syria. Washington's aim is polar opposite, supporting the scourge it claims to oppose.

The agendas of both countries are in conflict with no prospect for change. Nor is there any possibility for improved relations.

They remain dismal, likely worsening ahead, not improving. Nothing Russia can do diplomatically will change things. Chances for eventual confrontation between both countries is ominously real.

Differences between them are irreconcilable, Washington fully responsible, not Moscow.

A Final Comment

So-called US-supported Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) attacked government positions at least twice in Deir Ezzor with mortar and rocket fire. Russian Defense Ministry spokesman General Igor Konashenkov warned US commanders "it will not tolerate any shelling from the areas where the SDF are stationed." "Fire from positions in regions (they control) will be suppressed by all means necessary," he stressed, adding:

"SDF militants work to the same objectives as IS terrorists. Russian drones and intelligence have not recorded any confrontations between IS and the 'third force,' the SDF."

They're colluding with each other in Deir Ezzor. "More than 85% percent of (its) territory is under the full control of Syrian troops. Over the next week the city will be liberated completely," Konashenkov explained.

stephenlendman.org

[Sep 21, 2017] Trump Slams US and Saudi Foreign Policy in Fiery UN Speech

Sep 21, 2017 | theantimedia.org

( ANTIMEDIA Op-ed) In a bold move, President Trump condemned the violent, oppressive behavior and policies of the U.S. and its allies while speaking at the U.N. this week.

We're revolutionizing the news industry, but we need your help! Click here to get started.

He described the decline of " a wealthy country, with a rich history and culture, into an economically depleted rogue state whose chief exports are violence, bloodshed, and chaos ."

His description accurately fits the United States, which has devolved from a country with high-minded (if not fully realized ) ideals, courageous struggles for human and civil rights, and a strong sense of independence into a nationalistic, militant nation with a fledgling economy and an increasingly impoverished population whose government has spent its wealth arming radical extremists and waging endless war. The U.S. government has sowed chaos around the world over the years, from Iran to Iraq to Libya to Chile and Guatemala, spilling the blood of countless innocents as it plays geopolitical chess to favor its own hegemonic interests.

Sad!

Trump also called out the despicable behavior of U.S. allies, blasting entities that use their oil profits to support " terrorists that kill innocent Muslims." He asserted that such wealth is used to " fuel Yemen's civil war, and undermine peace throughout the entire Middle East ," an apt description of the Saudi Arabian Kingdom.

" We cannot let a murderous regime continue these destabilizing activities , " he bravely said.

Further, apparently condemning the behavior of both the U.S. and its allies , Trump warned that evildoers " must stop supporting terrorists, begin serving [their] own people, and respect the sovereign rights of [their] neighbors. "

It is easy to make the case that the Saudis themselves are engaging in terrorism by directly targeting civilians in Yemen for a political purpose .

Find Out More > 44,130

During his speech at the U.N., Trump described all of the behavior displayed by the U.S. and Saudi Arabia ! but he wasn't talking about either. In all of the excerpts listed above, he was unironically talking about Iran, condemning the admittedly repressive regime for the exact same crimes the U.S. government and its allies commit.

The U.S. is responsible both for war crimes and for arming radical Islamists ! who Trump loves to condemn ! from the mujahideen in the 1980s to "moderate" (read: al-Qaeda-affiliated) rebels in Syria. The U.S. and its allies have grotesquely violated the "sovereign rights" of countries around the world for decades, and the Saudis are actively violating the rights of their neighbor, Yemen, using American-made weapons to maintain power for their murderous regime while they destabilize the region.The Saudis have been documented supporting ISIS and using their oil profits to export radical ideologies while beheading , flogging , and attempting to crucify political dissidents at home (candidate Trump condemned the Saudis' alleged support for terrorism before selling them billions of dollars in arms as president; he also criticized their human rights record while before he rose to power).

Laughably, in his speech he bragged about the U.S.' success in battling ISIS in Syria, completely ignoring Iranian-backed militias' contributions to defeating the terror group while actually respecting Syria's sovereignty (Iran is an ally of the Syrian government whereas the U.S. does not have official authorization to be there).

Further, Trump's own administration has admitted Iran is complying with the nuclear deal Trump vehemently condemns. " No nation on Earth has an interest in seeing this band of criminals arm itself with nuclear weapons and missiles ," he said at the U.N.

He bemoaned the possibility of other countries like Iran and North Korea having nuclear weapons while his own war criminal government holds one of the largest caches of nukes in the world and is the only country to have ever intentionally used them on civilian populations.

Even worse, Trump's claims about Iran's undemocratic government may be true, but this modern reality did not come about absent American influence. The Iranian regime is repressive. It does support terror groups like Hezbollah (though Hezbollah is far less globally influential than ISIS, which, again, the Saudis have been exposed for fostering and funding). Iran's government is no friend to freedom, but how did Iran get to this point?

Might it have something to do with, yet again, the U.S. government's own flagrant disrespect for the sovereignty of other nations? Its own proliferation of bloodshed and chaos? Is toppling Iran's democratically elected government for the sake of oil profits in 1953 ! installing the ousted leader with an autocratic shah ! supposed to qualify as 'respecting sovereign rights'? Is the world supposed to pretend that over two decades of such an oppressive, American-installed monarch were entirely unrelated to the reactionary Iranian revolution that broke out against that ruler in 1979 and the political conditions that have developed since?

As the president grandstands to the world, boasting of American compassion and spewing American exceptionalism while condemning his enemies for the exact same behavior of the empire he now rules over, it is clear the emperor has no clothes.

[Sep 20, 2017] The Politics of Military Ascendancy by James Petras

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... In this paper we will discuss the advantages that the military elite accumulate from the war agenda and the reasons why ' the Generals' have been able to impose their definition of international realities. ..."
"... We will discuss the military's ascendancy over Trump's civilian regime as a result of the relentless degradation of his presidency by his political opposition. ..."
"... The massive US-led bombing and destruction of Libya, the overthrow of the Gadhafi government and the failure of the Obama-Clinton administration to impose a puppet regime, underlined the limitations of US air power and the ineffectiveness of US political-military intervention. The Presidency blundered in its foreign policy in North Africa and demonstrated its military ineptness. ..."
"... The invasion of Syria by US-funded mercenaries and terrorists committed the US to an unreliable ally in a losing war. This led to a reduction in the military budget and encouraged the Generals to view their direct control of overseas wars and foreign policy as the only guarantee of their positions. ..."
"... The Obama-Clinton engineered coup and power grab in the Ukraine brought a corrupt incompetent military junta to power in Kiev and provoked the secession of the Crimea (to Russia) and Eastern Ukraine (allied with Russia). The Generals were sidelined and found that they had tied themselves to Ukrainian kleptocrats while dangerously increasing political tensions with Russia. The Obama regime dictated economic sanctions against Moscow, designed to compensate for their ignominious military-political failures. ..."
"... The Obama-Clinton legacy facing Trump was built around a three-legged stool: an international order based on military aggression and confrontation with Russia; a ' pivot to Asia' defined as the military encirclement and economic isolation of China – via bellicose threats and economic sanctions against North Korea; and the use of the military as the praetorian guards of free trade agreements in Asia excluding China. ..."
"... After only 8 months in office President Trump helplessly gave into the firings, resignations and humiliation of each and every one of his civilian appointees, especially those who were committed to reverse Obama's 'international order'. ..."
"... Trump was elected to replace wars, sanctions and interventions with economic deals beneficial to the American working and middle class. This would include withdrawing the military from its long-term commitments to budget-busting 'nation-building' (occupation) in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya and other Obama-designated endless war zones. ..."
"... The Generals provide a veneer of legitimacy to the Trump regime (especially for the warmongering Obama Democrats and the mass media). However, handing presidential powers over to ' Mad Dog' Mattis and his cohort will come with a heavy price. ..."
"... While the military junta may protect Trump's foreign policy flank, it does not lessen the attacks on his domestic agenda. Moreover, Trump's proposed budget compromise with the Democrats has enraged his own Party's leaders. ..."
"... The military junta is pressuring China against North Korea with the goal of isolating the ruling regime in Pyongyang and increasing the US military encirclement of Beijing. Mad Dog has partially succeeded in turning China against North Korea while securing its advanced THADD anti-missile installations in South Korea, which will be directed against Beijing. ..."
"... Mad Dog's military build-up, especially in Afghanistan and in the Middle East, will not intimidate Iran nor add to any military successes. They entail high costs and low returns, as Obama realized after the better part of a decade of his defeats, fiascos and multi-billion dollar losses. ..."
"... The militarization of US foreign policy provides some important lessons: ..."
"... the escalation from threats to war does not succeed in disarming adversaries who possess the capacity to retaliate. ..."
"... Low intensity multi-lateral war maneuvers reinforce US-led alliances, but they also convince opponents to increase their military preparedness. Mid-level intense wars against non-nuclear adversaries can seize capital cities, as in Iraq, but the occupier faces long-term costly wars of attrition that can undermine military morale, provoke domestic unrest and heighten budget deficits. And they create millions of refugees. ..."
"... Threats and intimidation succeed only against conciliatory adversaries. Undiplomatic verbal thuggery can arouse the spirit of the bully and some of its allies, but it has little chance of convincing its adversaries to capitulate. The US policy of worldwide militarization over-extends the US armed forces and has not led to any permanent military gains. ..."
"... Are there any voices among clear-thinking US military leaders, those not bedazzled by their stars and idiotic admirers in the US media, who could push for more global accommodation and mutual respect among nations? The US Congress and the corrupt media are demonstrably incapable of evaluating past disasters, let alone forging an effective response to new global realities. ..."
"... American actions in Europe, Asia and the middle east appear increasingly irrational to many international observers. Their policy thrusts are excused as containment of evildoers or punishment of peoples who think and act differently. ..."
"... They will drive into a new detente such incompatible parties as Russia and Iran, or China and many countries. America risks losing its way in the world and free peoples see a flickering beacon that once shone brighter. ..."
"... How about this comic book tough guy quote: "I'm pleading with you with tears in my eyes: if you fuck with me, I'll kill you all" notice the first person used repetitively as he talks down to hapless unarmed tribesman in some distant land. A real egomaniacal narcissistic coward. Any of you with military experience would immediately recognize the type ... ..."
"... It seems that the inevitable has happened. Feckless civilians have used military adventures to advance their careers , ensure re- elections, capturr lucrative position as speaker, have a place as member of think tank or lobbying firm or consultant . Now being as stupidly greedy and impatient as these guys are, they have failed to see that neither the policies nor the militaries can succeed against enemies that are generated from the action and the policy itself ..."
Sep 15, 2017 | www.unz.com

Introduction

Clearly the US has escalated the pivotal role of the military in the making of foreign and, by extension, domestic policy. The rise of ' the Generals' to strategic positions in the Trump regime is evident, deepening its role as a highly autonomous force determining US strategic policy agendas.

In this paper we will discuss the advantages that the military elite accumulate from the war agenda and the reasons why ' the Generals' have been able to impose their definition of international realities.

We will discuss the military's ascendancy over Trump's civilian regime as a result of the relentless degradation of his presidency by his political opposition.

The Prelude to Militarization: Obama's Multi-War Strategy and Its Aftermath

The central role of the military in deciding US foreign policy has its roots in the strategic decisions taken during the Obama-Clinton Presidency. Several policies were decisive in the rise of unprecedented military-political power.

The massive increase of US troops in Afghanistan and their subsequent failures and retreat weakened the Obama-Clinton regime and increased animosity between the military and the Obama's Administration. As a result of his failures, Obama downgraded the military and weakened Presidential authority. The massive US-led bombing and destruction of Libya, the overthrow of the Gadhafi government and the failure of the Obama-Clinton administration to impose a puppet regime, underlined the limitations of US air power and the ineffectiveness of US political-military intervention. The Presidency blundered in its foreign policy in North Africa and demonstrated its military ineptness. The invasion of Syria by US-funded mercenaries and terrorists committed the US to an unreliable ally in a losing war. This led to a reduction in the military budget and encouraged the Generals to view their direct control of overseas wars and foreign policy as the only guarantee of their positions. The US military intervention in Iraq was only a secondary contributing factor in the defeat of ISIS; the major actors and beneficiaries were Iran and the allied Iraqi Shia militias. The Obama-Clinton engineered coup and power grab in the Ukraine brought a corrupt incompetent military junta to power in Kiev and provoked the secession of the Crimea (to Russia) and Eastern Ukraine (allied with Russia). The Generals were sidelined and found that they had tied themselves to Ukrainian kleptocrats while dangerously increasing political tensions with Russia. The Obama regime dictated economic sanctions against Moscow, designed to compensate for their ignominious military-political failures.

The Obama-Clinton legacy facing Trump was built around a three-legged stool: an international order based on military aggression and confrontation with Russia; a ' pivot to Asia' defined as the military encirclement and economic isolation of China – via bellicose threats and economic sanctions against North Korea; and the use of the military as the praetorian guards of free trade agreements in Asia excluding China.

The Obama 'legacy' consists of an international order of globalized capital and multiple wars. The continuity of Obama's 'glorious legacy' initially depended on the election of Hillary Clinton.

Donald Trump's presidential campaign, for its part, promised to dismantle or drastically revise the Obama Doctrine of an international order based on multiple wars , neo-colonial 'nation' building and free trade. A furious Obama 'informed' (threatened) the newly-elected President Trump that he would face the combined hostility of the entire State apparatus, Wall Street and the mass media if he proceeded to fulfill his election promises of economic nationalism and thus undermine the US-centered global order.

Trump's bid to shift from Obama's sanctions and military confrontation to economic reconciliation with Russia was countered by a hornet's nest of accusations about a Trump-Russian electoral conspiracy, darkly hinting at treason and show trials against his close allies and even family members.

The concoction of a Trump-Russia plot was only the first step toward a total war on the new president, but it succeeded in undermining Trump's economic nationalist agenda and his efforts to change Obama's global order.

Trump Under Obama's International Order

After only 8 months in office President Trump helplessly gave into the firings, resignations and humiliation of each and every one of his civilian appointees, especially those who were committed to reverse Obama's 'international order'.

Trump was elected to replace wars, sanctions and interventions with economic deals beneficial to the American working and middle class. This would include withdrawing the military from its long-term commitments to budget-busting 'nation-building' (occupation) in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya and other Obama-designated endless war zones.

Trump's military priorities were supposed to focus on strengthening domestic frontiers and overseas markets. He started by demanding that NATO partners pay for their own military defense responsibilities. Obama's globalists in both political parties were aghast that the US might lose it overwhelming control of NATO; they united and moved immediately to strip Trump of his economic nationalist allies and their programs.

Trump quickly capitulated and fell into line with Obama's international order, except for one proviso – he would select the Cabinet to implement the old/new international order.

A hamstrung Trump chose a military cohort of Generals, led by General James Mattis (famously nicknamed ' Mad Dog' ) as Defense Secretary.

The Generals effectively took over the Presidency. Trump abdicated his responsibilities as President.

General Mattis: The Militarization of America

General Mattis took up the Obama legacy of global militarization and added his own nuances, including the 'psychological-warfare' embedded in Trump's emotional ejaculations on 'Twitter'.

The ' Mattis Doctrine' combined high-risk threats with aggressive provocations, bringing the US (and the world) to the brink of nuclear war.

General Mattis has adopted the targets and fields of operations, defined by the previous Obama administration as it has sought to re-enforce the existing imperialist international order.

The junta's policies relied on provocations and threats against Russia, with expanded economic sanctions. Mattis threw more fuel on the US mass media's already hysterical anti-Russian bonfire. The General promoted a strategy of low intensity diplomatic thuggery, including the unprecedented seizure and invasion of Russian diplomatic offices and the short-notice expulsion of diplomats and consular staff.

These military threats and acts of diplomatic intimidation signified that the Generals' Administration under the Puppet President Trump was ready to sunder diplomatic relations with a major world nuclear power and indeed push the world to direct nuclear confrontation.

What Mattis seeks in these mad fits of aggression is nothing less than capitulation on the part of the Russian government regarding long held US military objectives – namely the partition of Syria (which started under Obama), harsh starvation sanctions on North Korea (which began under Clinton) and the disarmament of Iran (Tel Aviv's main goal) in preparation for its dismemberment.

The Mattis junta occupying the Trump White House heightened its threats against a North Korea, which (in Vladimir Putin's words) ' would rather eat grass than disarm' . The US mass media-military megaphones portrayed the North Korean victims of US sanctions and provocations as an 'existential' threat to the US mainland.

Sanctions have intensified. The stationing of nuclear weapons on South Korea is being pushed. Massive joint military exercises are planned and ongoing in the air, sea and land around North Korea. Mattis twisted Chinese arms (mainly business comprador-linked bureaucrats) and secured their UN Security Council vote on increased sanctions. Russia joined the Mattis-led anti-Pyongyang chorus, even as Putin warned of sanctions ineffectiveness! (As if General ' Mad Dog' Mattis would ever take Putin's advice seriously, especially after Russia voted for the sanctions!)

Mattis further militarized the Persian Gulf, following Obama's policy of partial sanctions and bellicose provocation against Iran.

When he worked for Obama, Mattis increased US arms shipments to the US's Syrian terrorists and Ukrainian puppets, ensuring the US would be able to scuttle any ' negotiated settlements' .

Militarization: An Evaluation

Trump's resort to ' his Generals' is supposed to counter any attacks from members of his own party and Congressional Democrats about his foreign policy. Trump's appointment of ' Mad Dog' Mattis, a notorious Russophobe and warmonger, has somewhat pacified the opposition in Congress and undercut any 'finding' of an election conspiracy between Trump and Moscow dug up by the Special Investigator Robert Mueller. Trump's maintains a role as nominal President by adapting to what Obama warned him was ' their international order' – now directed by an unelected military junta composed of Obama holdovers!

The Generals provide a veneer of legitimacy to the Trump regime (especially for the warmongering Obama Democrats and the mass media). However, handing presidential powers over to ' Mad Dog' Mattis and his cohort will come with a heavy price.

While the military junta may protect Trump's foreign policy flank, it does not lessen the attacks on his domestic agenda. Moreover, Trump's proposed budget compromise with the Democrats has enraged his own Party's leaders.

In sum, under a weakened President Trump, the militarization of the White House benefits the military junta and enlarges their power. The ' Mad Dog' Mattis program has had mixed results, at least in its initial phase: The junta's threats to launch a pre-emptive (possibly nuclear) war against North Korea have strengthened Pyongyang's commitment to develop and refine its long and medium range ballistic missile capability and nuclear weapons. Brinksmanship failed to intimidate North Korea. Mattis cannot impose the Clinton-Bush-Obama doctrine of disarming countries (like Libya and Iraq) of their advanced defensive weapons systems as a prelude to a US 'regime change' invasion.

Any US attack against North Korea will lead to massive retaliatory strikes costing tens of thousands of US military lives and will kill and maim millions of civilians in South Korea and Japan.

At most, ' Mad Dog' managed to intimidate Chinese and Russian officials (and their export business billionaire buddies) to agree to more economic sanctions against North Korea. Mattis and his allies in the UN and White House, the loony Nikki Hailey and a miniaturized President Trump, may bellow war – yet they cannot apply the so-called 'military option' without threatening the US military forces stationed throughout the Asia Pacific region.

The Mad Dog Mattis assault on the Russian embassy did not materially weaken Russia, but it has revealed the uselessness of Moscow's conciliatory diplomacy toward their so-called 'partners' in the Trump regime.

The end-result might lead to a formal break in diplomatic ties, which would increase the danger of a military confrontation and a global nuclear holocaust.

The military junta is pressuring China against North Korea with the goal of isolating the ruling regime in Pyongyang and increasing the US military encirclement of Beijing. Mad Dog has partially succeeded in turning China against North Korea while securing its advanced THADD anti-missile installations in South Korea, which will be directed against Beijing. These are Mattis' short-term gains over the excessively pliant Chinese bureaucrats. However, if Mad Dog intensifies direct military threats against China, Beijing can retaliate by dumping tens of billions of US Treasury notes, cutting trade ties, sowing chaos in the US economy and setting Wall Street against the Pentagon.

Mad Dog's military build-up, especially in Afghanistan and in the Middle East, will not intimidate Iran nor add to any military successes. They entail high costs and low returns, as Obama realized after the better part of a decade of his defeats, fiascos and multi-billion dollar losses.

Conclusion

The militarization of US foreign policy, the establishment of a military junta within the Trump Administration, and the resort to nuclear brinksmanship has not changed the global balance of power.

Domestically Trump's nominal Presidency relies on militarists, like General Mattis. Mattis has tightened the US control over NATO allies, and even rounded up stray European outliers, like Sweden, to join in a military crusade against Russia. Mattis has played on the media's passion for bellicose headlines and its adulation of Four Star Generals.

But for all that – North Korea remains undaunted because it can retaliate. Russia has thousands of nuclear weapons and remains a counterweight to a US-dominated globe. China owns the US Treasury and its unimpressed, despite the presence of an increasingly collision-prone US Navy swarming throughout the South China Sea.

Mad Dog laps up the media attention, with well dressed, scrupulously manicured journalists hanging on his every bloodthirsty pronouncement. War contractors flock to him, like flies to carrion. The Four Star General 'Mad Dog' Mattis has attained Presidential status without winning any election victory (fake or otherwise). No doubt when he steps down, Mattis will be the most eagerly courted board member or senior consultant for giant military contractors in US history, receiving lucrative fees for half hour 'pep-talks' and ensuring the fat perks of nepotism for his family's next three generations. Mad Dog may even run for office, as Senator or even President for whatever Party.

The militarization of US foreign policy provides some important lessons:

First of all, the escalation from threats to war does not succeed in disarming adversaries who possess the capacity to retaliate. Intimidation via sanctions can succeed in imposing significant economic pain on oil export-dependent regimes, but not on hardened, self-sufficient or highly diversified economies.

Low intensity multi-lateral war maneuvers reinforce US-led alliances, but they also convince opponents to increase their military preparedness. Mid-level intense wars against non-nuclear adversaries can seize capital cities, as in Iraq, but the occupier faces long-term costly wars of attrition that can undermine military morale, provoke domestic unrest and heighten budget deficits. And they create millions of refugees.

High intensity military brinksmanship carries major risk of massive losses in lives, allies, territory and piles of radiated ashes – a pyrrhic victory!

In sum:

Threats and intimidation succeed only against conciliatory adversaries. Undiplomatic verbal thuggery can arouse the spirit of the bully and some of its allies, but it has little chance of convincing its adversaries to capitulate. The US policy of worldwide militarization over-extends the US armed forces and has not led to any permanent military gains.

Are there any voices among clear-thinking US military leaders, those not bedazzled by their stars and idiotic admirers in the US media, who could push for more global accommodation and mutual respect among nations? The US Congress and the corrupt media are demonstrably incapable of evaluating past disasters, let alone forging an effective response to new global realities.

Raffler, September 15, 2017 at 2:25 pm GMT

American actions in Europe, Asia and the middle east appear increasingly irrational to many international observers. Their policy thrusts are excused as containment of evildoers or punishment of peoples who think and act differently. Those policy thrusts will accomplish the opposite of the stated intention.

They will drive into a new detente such incompatible parties as Russia and Iran, or China and many countries. America risks losing its way in the world and free peoples see a flickering beacon that once shone brighter.

nsa, September 16, 2017 at 4:03 am GMT

Anyone with military experience recognizes the likes of Mad Poodle Mattis arrogant, belligerent, exceptionally dull, and mainly an inveterate suck-up (mil motto: kiss up and kick down).

Every VFW lounge is filled with these boozy ridiculous blowhards and they are insufferable. The media and public, raised on ZioVision and JooieWood pablum, worship these cartoonish bloodletters even though they haven't won a war in 72 years .not one.

How about this comic book tough guy quote: "I'm pleading with you with tears in my eyes: if you fuck with me, I'll kill you all" notice the first person used repetitively as he talks down to hapless unarmed tribesman in some distant land. A real egomaniacal narcissistic coward. Any of you with military experience would immediately recognize the type ...

KA, September 16, 2017 at 3:24 pm GMT

It seems that the inevitable has happened. Feckless civilians have used military adventures to advance their careers , ensure re- elections, capturr lucrative position as speaker, have a place as member of think tank or lobbying firm or consultant . Now being as stupidly greedy and impatient as these guys are, they have failed to see that neither the policies nor the militaries can succeed against enemies that are generated from the action and the policy itself .

Now military has decided to reverse the roles . At least the military leaders don't have to campaign for re employment . But very soon the forces that corrupt and abuse the civilian power structure will do same to military .

The Alarmist, September 19, 2017 at 3:27 pm GMT

Never met him at any of the parties I attended in the '70s and '80s, so I don't know much about Mad Dog, but I can say that only in America can the former commander of a recruiting station grow up to pull the strings of the President.

[Sep 20, 2017] The hubris, ignorance and stupidity in face of the failure of "regime change" operation in Syria

Notable quotes:
"... The truth is that it was the Americans who created this Wahabi monster and that they aided, protected, financed, trained and armed it through all these years. ..."
"... The US also viciously opposed all the countries which were serious about fighting this Wahabi abomination. ..."
"... And then, just to make things worse, The Donald *proudly* mentions the failed attack against a Syrian air force base which had nothing to do with a false flag fake chemical attack. Wow! For any other political leader recalling such an event would be a burning embarrassment, but for The Donald it is something he proudly mentions. The hubris, ignorance and stupidity of it all leaves me in total awe ..."
Sep 20, 2017 | www.unz.com

In Syria and Iraq, we have made big gains toward lasting defeat of ISIS. In fact, our country has achieved more against ISIS in the last eight months than it has in many, many years combined. The actions of the criminal regime of Bashar al-Assad, including the use of chemical weapons against his own citizens, even innocent children, shock the conscience of every decent person. No society could be safe if banned chemical weapons are allowed to spread. That is why the United States carried out a missile strike on the airbase that launched the attack.

When I heard these words I felt embarrassed for Trump. First, it is absolutely pathetic that Trump has to claim as his success the victories with the Syrians, the Russians, the Iranians and Hezbollah have achieved against the Wahabi-crazies of Daesh/al-Qaeda/al-Nusra/etc, especially since the latter are a pure creation of the US CIA!

The truth is that it was the Americans who created this Wahabi monster and that they aided, protected, financed, trained and armed it through all these years.

The US also viciously opposed all the countries which were serious about fighting this Wahabi abomination.

And now that a tiny Russian contingent has achieved infinitely better results that all the power of the mighty CENTCOM backed by the Israeli and Saudi allies of the US in the region, The Donald comes out and declares victory?!

Pathetic is not strong enough a word to describe this mind-bogglingly counter-factual statement.

And then, just to make things worse, The Donald *proudly* mentions the failed attack against a Syrian air force base which had nothing to do with a false flag fake chemical attack. Wow! For any other political leader recalling such an event would be a burning embarrassment, but for The Donald it is something he proudly mentions. The hubris, ignorance and stupidity of it all leaves me in total awe

[Sep 20, 2017] Sovereign Nations Is Main Theme Of Trump's UN Speech

Sovereignty is oppose of neoliberal globalization, so in a way this is an some kind of affirmation of Trump election position. How serious it is is not clear. Probably not much as Imperial faction now controls Trump, making him more of a marionette that a political leader of the USA.
Notable quotes:
"... Trump labeled the Syrian government "the criminal regime of Bashar al Assad." The "problem in Venezuela", he said, is "that socialism has been faithfully implemented." He called Iran "an economically depleted rogue state whose chief exports are violent, bloodshed and chaos." He forgot to mention pistachios . The aim of such language and threats is usually to goad the other party into some overt act that can than be used as justification for "retaliation". But none of the countries Trump mentioned is prone to such behavior. They will react calmly - if at all. ..."
"... The stressing of sovereignty and the nation state in part one was the point where Trump indeed differed from his interventionist predecessors. But its still difficult to judge if that it is something he genuinely believes in. ..."
"... There is no emphasis on sovereignty b. Trump says that Russia's and China' threat to the sovereignty of countries is bad but the sovereignty of small countries the US does not like is somehow threatened by these countries themselves. Which I interpret as a threat - "you endanger yourself if you don't do as told". ..."
"... "The stressing of sovereignty and the nation state in part one was the point where Trump indeed differed from his interventionist predecessors. But its still difficult to judge if that it is something he genuinely believes in" ..."
"... The word sovereignty has taken on different and sinister implications with the UN Responsibility to Protect Act in 2005. The US pushed for this and it squeaked by and they used it to justify the invasion of Libya in 2011. I think Libya was a major turning point. I don't think Russia and Iran are going to back off easily. (I originally posted this in 2015 at another site) The US also seems to have pretty much lost what humanitarian clout they may have had. ..."
"... He talks about the period from 1989 when we had the Panama invasion and collapse of the Soviet Union as leading to an unleashing of US military power leading to the Iraq War in 2003. This war serious dented the image of the US as being a humanitarian actor and the US pushed for the UN Responsibility to Protect Act in 2005 which was used to justify the Libya invasion. ..."
"... Prashad sees the results of that invasion and what is going on now in Syria as reflecting that the period 2011-2015 is seeing the end of this US unipolarism that lasted from 1989 to 2011. ..."
"... How can Trump believe in defending Westphalia Treaty principles, sovereignty and the nation state, when US policy in the Arab world consists in destroying all these? This is rather like Warren Buffett lamenting that American billionaires are so rich, and pay less taxes than their secretaries. They are just laughing at us in our faces. ..."
"... Sound more or less like Hussein Obomo address at the United Nations General Assembly in New York on Sept. 24, 2013 - America is exceptional ? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HT5BjNDg5W0 No wonder Putin and Xi did not care to attend. Anyway Putin winning in Syria and Xi gaining in economic, science and technology ..."
"... I agree with other commenters about the Orwellian nature of the speech. Sovereignty is an interesting word to abuse and I expect we will see more abuse of it. How can the US ever be a sovereign nation when it does not own its own financial system? But in the interim all other aspects of sovereignty will be examined but not global private finance.....unless the China/Russia axis hand is forced into the open. ..."
"... Trump - the Republican Obama ..."
"... "The sanction game is over. It's only the dying empire of the Federal Reserve, ECB, Wall Street, City of London and their military strong arm operating in the Pentagon that have yet to accept this new reality. ..."
"... The days of bullying nations and simply bombing them into submission is over as well. Russia and China have made it very clear this is no longer acceptable and Russia has all but shut down the operations in Syria. The "ISIS" boogeyman is surrounded and fleeing into Asia and recently showed up in the Philippines. The fact that a group of desert dwellers acquired an ocean going vessel should be enough evidence to even the most brain-dead these desert dwellers are supported by outside forces – like the CIA Otherwise, from where did the ship(s) materialize?" ..."
"... it seems to me with Trump an era of so-called globalization has come to its end. ..."
"... Of course countries subjected to senseless US sanctions, like Russia, are concerned with sovereignty. They are ..."
"... baseless economic attacks by the country that controls world banking. ..."
"... In conclusion, what I take away from this speech is a sense of relief for the rest of the planet and a sense of real worry for the USA. Ever since the Neocons overthrew Trump and made him what is colloquially referred to as their "bitch" the US foreign policy has come to a virtual standstill. ..."
Sep 20, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

Today the President of the United States Donald Trump spoke (rush transcript) to the United Nations General Assembly. The speech's main the me was sovereignty. The word occurs 18(!) times. It emphasized Westphalian principles .

[W]e do expect all nations to uphold these two core sovereign duties, to respect the interests of their own people and the rights of every other sovereign nation

All leaders of countries should always put their countries first, he said, and "the nation state remains the best vehicle for elevating the human condition ."


The Ratification of the Treaty of Münster, 15 May 1648 - bigger

Sovereignty was the core message of his speech. It rhymed well with his somewhat isolationist emphasis of "America first" during his campaign. The second part of the speech the first by threatened the sovereignty of several countries the U.S. ruling class traditionally dislikes. This year's "axis of evil" included North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, Syria and Cuba:

The United States has great strength and patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea. Rocket man is on a suicide mission for himself and for his regime. The United States is ready, willing and able, but hopefully this will not be necessary."

Many people will criticize that as an outrageous and irresponsible use of words. It is. But there is nothing new to it. In fact the U.S., acting on behalf of the UN, totally destroyed Korea in the 1950s. The last U.S. president made the same threat Trump made today:

President Barack Obama delivered a stern warning to North Korea on Tuesday, reminding its "erratic" and "irresponsible" leader that America's nuclear arsenal could "destroy" his country.

The South Korean military sounds equally belligerent :

A military source told the Yonhap news agency every part of Pyongyang "will be completely destroyed by ballistic missiles and high-explosives shells". ... The city, the source said, "will be reduced to ashes and removed from the map".

Trump labeled the Syrian government "the criminal regime of Bashar al Assad." The "problem in Venezuela", he said, is "that socialism has been faithfully implemented." He called Iran "an economically depleted rogue state whose chief exports are violent, bloodshed and chaos." He forgot to mention pistachios . The aim of such language and threats is usually to goad the other party into some overt act that can than be used as justification for "retaliation". But none of the countries Trump mentioned is prone to such behavior. They will react calmly - if at all. There was essentially nothing in Trump's threats than the claptrap the last two U.S. presidents also delivered. Trump may be crazy, but the speech today is not a sign of that.

The stressing of sovereignty and the nation state in part one was the point where Trump indeed differed from his interventionist predecessors. But its still difficult to judge if that it is something he genuinely believes in.

Posted by b on September 19, 2017 at 01:05 PM | Permalink

somebody | Sep 19, 2017 1:32:33 PM | 2
There is no emphasis on sovereignty b. Trump says that Russia's and China' threat to the sovereignty of countries is bad but the sovereignty of small countries the US does not like is somehow threatened by these countries themselves. Which I interpret as a threat - "you endanger yourself if you don't do as told".
If we desire to lift up our citizens, if we aspire to the approval of history, then we must fulfill our sovereign duties to the people we faithfully represent. We must protect our nations, their interests and their futures. We must reject threats to sovereignty from the Ukraine to the South China Sea. We must uphold respect for law, respect for borders, and respect for culture, and the peaceful engagement these allow.

And just as the founders of this body intended, we must work together and confront together those who threatens us with chaos, turmoil, and terror. The score of our planet today is small regimes that violate every principle that the United Nations is based. They respect neither their own citizens nor the sovereign rights of their countries. If the righteous many do not confront the wicked few, then evil will triumph. When decent people and nations become bystanders to history, the forces of destruction only gather power and strength.

b | Sep 19, 2017 1:51:10 PM | 3
@1 somebody - thanks - link corrected.

@2 somebody - yes, unaimed hostile prose from the speechwriter. Such is in the speech of every U.S. president. But it is not the general theme of the Trump speech when one reads it as one piece. The weight is put in the other direction (though the media will likely point to the threats instead of reading the more extraordinary parts where Trump pushes national sovereignty.)

Luther Blissett | Sep 19, 2017 1:53:43 PM | 4
  • "sovereign nation" = a country that obeys the US over its own interests
  • "rogue nation" = a country that has actual sovereignty

If there is more to this than the usual US double-speak, I don't see it.

james | Sep 19, 2017 1:57:07 PM | 5
thanks b... ''the criminal regime of donald trump'' is much more on target....
Perimetr | Sep 19, 2017 2:02:47 PM | 6
"The stressing of sovereignty and the nation state in part one was the point where Trump indeed differed from his interventionist predecessors. But its still difficult to judge if that it is something he genuinely believes in"

It appears that his generals are instructing him what to "believe in". At least, he certainly doesn't seem to "believe in" most of his campaign promises, not unlike his recent predecessors. The whole "democracy and freedom" thing in the US is just a charade, as far as I am concerned.

financial matters | Sep 19, 2017 2:22:58 PM | 7
The word sovereignty has taken on different and sinister implications with the UN Responsibility to Protect Act in 2005. The US pushed for this and it squeaked by and they used it to justify the invasion of Libya in 2011. I think Libya was a major turning point. I don't think Russia and Iran are going to back off easily. (I originally posted this in 2015 at another site) The US also seems to have pretty much lost what humanitarian clout they may have had.

I think this was a very good interview of Vijay Prashadby by Chris Hedges

Prashad

He talks about the period from 1989 when we had the Panama invasion and collapse of the Soviet Union as leading to an unleashing of US military power leading to the Iraq War in 2003. This war serious dented the image of the US as being a humanitarian actor and the US pushed for the UN Responsibility to Protect Act in 2005 which was used to justify the Libya invasion.

Prashad sees the results of that invasion and what is going on now in Syria as reflecting that the period 2011-2015 is seeing the end of this US unipolarism that lasted from 1989 to 2011.

--------

The good news is that Syria is turning out much different than Libya. Would be great to see the US cooperate with the China/Russia etc economic goals rather than stirring up trouble in the Phillippines, Myanmar etc. The first test will be to see if Trump can deliver single payer health care to the US. :) ie start to back off on the anti socialism rhetoric

Jeff Kaye | Sep 19, 2017 2:24:19 PM | 8
The "nation state" brought us the millions slaughtered in World War 1. The nation states threatened by the internationalist communist ideology of the USSR (in its early days) ultimately brought us World War 2. The hypertrophied nation state that is the United States of America will bring us World War 3 in its drive to secure its total supremacy. Luckily for us, there will be no World War 4.
Christophe Douté | Sep 19, 2017 2:27:49 PM | 9
How can a country A be "forced to defend itself" by a country B so weak comparatively to country A it can actually be "totally destroyed" by country A?

How can Trump believe in defending Westphalia Treaty principles, sovereignty and the nation state, when US policy in the Arab world consists in destroying all these? This is rather like Warren Buffett lamenting that American billionaires are so rich, and pay less taxes than their secretaries. They are just laughing at us in our faces.

Robert Beal | Sep 19, 2017 2:34:28 PM | 10
beyond hypocrisy, refined doublespeak
OJS | Sep 19, 2017 2:40:10 PM | 11
Sound more or less like Hussein Obomo address at the United Nations General Assembly in New York on Sept. 24, 2013 - America is exceptional ? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HT5BjNDg5W0 No wonder Putin and Xi did not care to attend. Anyway Putin winning in Syria and Xi gaining in economic, science and technology
Don Bacon | Sep 19, 2017 2:43:24 PM | 12
The United Nations is based upon the equal sovereignty of nations.
--from the UN Charter --
Article 2
The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles.
1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.
2. All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter.
3. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations
Krollchem | Sep 19, 2017 2:46:18 PM | 13
Trump's speech seemed to represent an ignorant mouthy bully with a big stick who is threatening any nation he is told to hate. I have to agree with Paveway IV that Trump is just the announcer. The "national sovereignty" comments were just for internal consumption for his base of supporters.

The "Trump world: appears to be getting very crazy given the agendas of the people who handle Trump:
http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/Article_77417.shtml
http://www.unz.com/jpetras/who-rules-america-2/

To a major extent Trump's focus on the "great leader" of countries opposed to the US helps simplify the hate for the "little people" in the US. They have not noticed that the US (as in most other Western countries) has many mini "great leaders" who work toward the same goals while distracting the "little people" with political theatre.

Linda O | Sep 19, 2017 3:05:11 PM | 14
I really don't know what the purpose of this rambling threat to the rest of the world was supposed to accomplish.

Yes, it really was nothing new. The fundamental material of the speech was the very same garbage written by the same Washington establishment of previous administrations - essentially the nuclear armed US regime is 'special' and reserves the right to attack and destroy any country it chooses to.

While the Trump speech is rightly being both ridiculed around the world, what is very scary is the humiliated Trump base is seizing on it.

The Trump base is begging for their failed 'God Emperor' to attack someone to feel better about their own humiliation.

Very, very scary.

Don Bacon | Sep 19, 2017 3:10:41 PM | 15
Sovereignty is also an excuse for US intervention, get it? . . .Trump does....
America stands with every person living under a brutal regime. Our respect for sovereignty is also a call for action. All people deserve a government that cares for their safety, their interests, and their well-being, including their prosperity.
duplicitousdemocracy | Sep 19, 2017 3:27:35 PM | 16
His speechwriters deserve to be fired and the text size on both teleprompters should have been increased. Alternatively, he should wear glasses (along with a more suitably fitted toupee). Sarah Palin would seem like Einstein at the side of this clown.
Ort | Sep 19, 2017 3:32:27 PM | 17
Trump's speech is Orwellian! Not just generally-- it is arguably an elaboration of a close paraphase of an Orwell quote, to wit: "All nations are sovereign, but some nations are more sovereign than others."

I have a strongly ambivalent reaction to Trump's UN appearance-- although I confess that I can only stand to watch and listen to him for brief time periods. It's appalling and embarrassing to watch any of the US's seemingly inexhaustible supply of lizard-brained degenerates at the UN. But part of me thinks it's better to have the quintessential Ugly Amerikan beating his chest and engaging in rhetorical feces-flinging. At least the rest of the world won't be bamboozled, the way they might be by a smooth, silver-tongued liar.

likklemore | Sep 19, 2017 3:50:54 PM | 18
@OJS 11

Putin, Xi and other leaders did not attend this year's UN gathering. They are busy attending the affairs of their citizens.

We are being distracted from the game changer ahead – de-dollarization now on the fast track.
While the toothless dog barks,

Putin orders to end trade in US dollars at Russian seaports

https://www.rt.com/business/403804-russian-sea-ports-ruble-settlements/

This is on the heels of Trump's threatening to exclude China from use of SWIFT (the USD) and China's gold yuan oil futures contract coming mid October as opposed to USD. The petro-yuan is a game changer; hitting the petro-dollar hegemony that keeps the dollar in worldwide demand.

The toothless dog has only his bark. Are Americans prepared for hyper-inflation?

psychohistorian | Sep 19, 2017 4:08:53 PM | 19
I agree with other commenters about the Orwellian nature of the speech. Sovereignty is an interesting word to abuse and I expect we will see more abuse of it. How can the US ever be a sovereign nation when it does not own its own financial system? But in the interim all other aspects of sovereignty will be examined but not global private finance.....unless the China/Russia axis hand is forced into the open.

The abuse of the term sovereignty by Trump is part of a crafted Big Lie message. Just like Trump linking to the poster of him, with a rope over his shoulder, dragging a barge of companies back to America......the internationalism genie will never go completely back into the bottle and is counterproductive to all.

Christian Chuba | Sep 19, 2017 4:46:02 PM | 20
John Bolton and the moron, Sean Hannity, love the speech. That should be all anyone needs to know. It was Orwellian, super-villain, double-speak.
If the righteous many do not confront the wicked few, then evil will triumph.
Madman. How has Iran violated the U.N. charter? They were invited into Iraq and Syria by the UN recognized govts. Okay, they make veiled threats against Israel, they get a demerit for that. Even if you argue that they are 'predicting' rather can 'threatening to cause' Israel's demise, I'd take that as a veiled threat. But Israel makes equally hostile comments towards Iran albeit, in a passive / aggressive manner. Netanyahu, 'We recognize Iran's right to exist but truth be told the planet, no wait, the entire universe itself would be better off if they disappeared'.
Jackrabbit | Sep 19, 2017 5:02:50 PM | 21
Trump - the Republican Obama
Jackrabbit | Sep 19, 2017 5:12:32 PM | 22
If you like your sovereignty, you can keep your sovereignty.
Andy | Sep 19, 2017 5:12:41 PM | 23
Well, it has finally arrived at the U.N. speech. Trump is showing his real colors, whether they are forced or were originally his own. It doesn't matter. He is spouting the same nonsenze as the neocons and the rest of them. He has crossed over - he maybe never knew the way through, but was only parroting other's views. He is clearly a chameleon, willing to change his stripes on a dime. The man is darkly lost in the woods, or is it the swamp?
chet380 | Sep 19, 2017 5:26:05 PM | 24
Sorry, somewhat off-topic --

While there have been hints that the Rohingya "rebels" are receiving funds from expatriates in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, is there anything concrete that connects the CIA to the rebels?

Laguerre | Sep 19, 2017 5:42:58 PM | 25
Frankly Trump is a big mouth, but there's no evidence that he's more than that. If he wanted war, we'd already be there. It's different from Saddam in the old days, who went to war within a year of becoming leader, or the Saudi crown prince, Muhammad bin Salman, who launched the war against Yemen.

59 Tomahawks, that's the style. I haven't seen different from then.

Taxi | Sep 19, 2017 5:46:38 PM | 26
Hypocrisy - huuuge hypocrisy, believe me it was tremendous hypocrisy!
mcohen | Sep 19, 2017 5:47:45 PM | 27
trump is mr thunder thump
Bart in VA | Sep 19, 2017 5:50:25 PM | 28
He called Iran "an economically depleted rogue state whose chief exports are violent, bloodshed and chaos."

Like the pundits who shadow him, he really has no understanding of irony.

Bart in VA | Sep 19, 2017 5:52:58 PM | 29
#4 - "Failed State" - A country too poor for us to exploit.
Lochearn | Sep 19, 2017 6:01:13 PM | 30
The advantage of having Trump around is that he seems to diffuse energy. He is not building a case against N. Korea like Bush did with Iraq, but instead he is big on bluster. There is no appeal to the emotions of people and their fears and as such he is not marketing it, something he knows a lot about. In his own way I believe he is defusing the situation by talking big but remebering Bannon's comments when he left. And as a consummate player at the table of power (unlike the novice Obama) he has his status.

What interests me is Tillerson and the State Department and its attitude to Israel. Syria is where Israel met its match and was soundly thrashed. The world will never be the same again, And the State Department is recognizing this reality. I think there is a recognition in certain powerful quarters that whole neocon-Zionist shit has got America nowhere. As Talking Heads said, "We're on the road to nowhere."

Extra | Sep 19, 2017 6:12:58 PM | 31
Andy@23
It's the swamp. Sounds like Pete Seeger's 'Waist deep in the Big Muddy' all over again.
Chauncey Gardiner | Sep 19, 2017 6:15:58 PM | 32
The speech (it reminds me on movie The Kings Speech https://youtu.be/PPLIw64rLJc TERRIBLE MOVIE) is for internal the US purpose, for Amerikkaans. Majority of them, according to the Gov. media outlets, support military action against DPRK and mostly likely against Iran (the most hatred nation by far) as well. Amerikkaans will support any crime anywhere and probably destruction of whole planet Earth.

In the same time his words and deeds are the most irrelevant of any US presidents. I bet he never heard of that word "sovereignty" before nor for "nation state". This morning when Trump woke up some member of National Security Council put sheet of paper with the speech on his desk and tell him "Read this!". Just as they did to Obama in many occasions, one of example is this: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2016/may/04/obama-drinks-flint-water-video

There some people in the US who knows what is going on:

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/redefining-winning-afghanistan-22176

For all the very considerable expense, however, the American military does not have a very impressive record of achieving victory. It has won no wars since 1945!especially if victory is defined as achieving an objective at acceptable cost!except against enemy forces that essentially didn't exist.
james | Sep 19, 2017 6:24:49 PM | 33
@7 financial matters.. good comment and relevant.. i agree with you.. unipolar no more.. however, not quite multipolar yet either... we are still in a transitional place.. syria is no libya fortunately.. but causing this kind of shit around the globe is what the usa is known for.. they will continue to make war projects, especially if you believe as b notes a couple of threads ago - trump is no longer calling the shots.. it is military guys full on..
Lochearn | Sep 19, 2017 6:26:51 PM | 34
@ 52

I rather liked the film "The King's Speech because it was about speech. Your English is fucking awful Chancey, not good enough for this forum. Get some lessons and come back.

Chauncey Gardiner | Sep 19, 2017 6:28:50 PM | 35
@Lochearn | Sep 19, 2017 6:26:51 PM | 34

Read this Nazi. https://www.sprottmoney.com/Blog/actions-of-a-bully-child-or-dying-empire-sanctions-and-threats-rory-hall.html

"The sanction game is over. It's only the dying empire of the Federal Reserve, ECB, Wall Street, City of London and their military strong arm operating in the Pentagon that have yet to accept this new reality.

The days of bullying nations and simply bombing them into submission is over as well. Russia and China have made it very clear this is no longer acceptable and Russia has all but shut down the operations in Syria. The "ISIS" boogeyman is surrounded and fleeing into Asia and recently showed up in the Philippines. The fact that a group of desert dwellers acquired an ocean going vessel should be enough evidence to even the most brain-dead these desert dwellers are supported by outside forces – like the CIA Otherwise, from where did the ship(s) materialize?"

Chauncey Gardiner | Sep 19, 2017 6:29:56 PM | 36
Lochearn | Sep 19, 2017 6:26:51 PM | 34

You like a movie. Of course, it is for morons.

Lozion | Sep 19, 2017 6:38:33 PM | 37
Comment @4 is spot on..
Chauncey Gardiner | Sep 19, 2017 6:39:43 PM | 38
@Lochearn aka Nazi

I recognize you from before, but how do you like these links?

https://www.sprottmoney.com/Blog/actions-of-a-bully-child-or-dying-empire-sanctions-and-threats-rory-hall.html

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/redefining-winning-afghanistan-22176

Where have you raised, under rock or in cave?

Chauncey Gardiner | Sep 19, 2017 6:51:12 PM | 39
For a Nazi. A question, do you believe in science? Here is one. But does one need to be scientist to figure this out?"The Rise of Incivility and Bullying in America"

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201207/the-rise-incivility-and-bullying-in-america

you are lost case anyway but here is good text from fellow Amerikkaan. But "Rise" from where? I would argue not from Zero but from 60 on scale of 100.

Agree?

karlof1 | Sep 19, 2017 6:56:49 PM | 40
Violating the sovereign sanctity of nations is what the Outlaw US Empire has done without parallel since the United Nation's formation. One of those nations was Vietnam, and a somewhat respected documentary film maker looks like he's going to try--again--to pull wool over the eyes of his intended audience by trying to legitimate the Big Lie that provided the rationale for the Outlaw US Empire's illegal war against Vietnam. The detailed argument regarding Ken Burns's effort to "correct" the actual historical record can be read here, https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/09/19/getting-the-gulf-of-tonkin-wrong-are-ken-burns-and-lynn-novick-telling-stories-about-the-central-events-used-to-legitimize-the-us-attack-against-vietnam/ and it is probably the sort of history Trump would enjoy since he doesn't seem to know any better.
Chauncey Gardiner | Sep 19, 2017 7:09:16 PM | 41
@Lochearn aka Nazi

How many nick/names do you have? You may hide under this and that stupid but your associations are still here. You stay stupid. I know, I know the truth hurts. You Amerikkaans are not used to it. Go and watch a porn, before de-dollarization is in full swing. Than you are going to stave to death, no more credit cards and quantitative easing. That's is Trump's speech for.

https://www.opednews.com/articles/What-Happened-to-All-Those-by-Jim-Hightower-Banksters_Homeownership_Housing-170819-119.html

Wall Street bought them -- and is now leasing them out and driving up rents.

Chauncey Gardiner | Sep 19, 2017 7:13:05 PM | 42
Oh my terrible English. Forgive me, would you?

Instead "stave" should be "starve".

All this has to do with shitty Europe, Germany first and foremost.

MadMax2 | Sep 19, 2017 7:14:02 PM | 43
Posted by: financial matters | Sep 19, 2017 2:22:58 PM | 7
Nice interview from a couple of years back. Prashad's worldview is worthy of reposting. Enjoyable. Cheers.

US Americans might have proved themselves very adept at destroying both nation states and the English language, though it will be Syria who restores true meaning to the word 'sovereign' - with some collective help of course.

The almost failed state will emerge from this steeled with a sense of identity, pride and purpose. The minnow that refused to buckle.

The Don putting together some performances that finally warrant the unified, rabid reaction from the press....

Oilman2 | Sep 19, 2017 7:42:50 PM | 44
"But its still difficult to judge if that it is something he genuinely believes in."

Are you serious? Everything coming out of DC is still the same - sanctions against other sovereign countries who do not tow the line the US demands, cruise missiles for the little guys, disavowing and de-legitimizing the JCPOA, unrelenting 'freedom of navigation' patrols, threats to cut nations off from the SWIFT system, every word out of Nikki Haleys' mouth... It's really easy to go on and on, and his first year isn't even done.

The amount of disrespect for other sovereign nations by the USA is mind boggling, and that is only the official stuff. Throw in CIA ops and NGO ops and there you have an entire other level of the failure to recognize sovereignty.

Can you send me some of what you are smoking? Because it obviously makes you oblivious to the obvious, and that may help my mood...

Chauncey Gardiner | Sep 19, 2017 7:48:40 PM | 45
Obviously, the UN has became an arena of the one country show and that country puppets. Zionist PM, the West most "faithful ally" on Middle East, and his speech. Mix of infantilism, rhetoric and implicit racism of "God Chosen People". And sea of self-congratulating lies.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47844.htm

In par with Trump's speech.

Chauncey Gardiner | Sep 19, 2017 7:56:52 PM | 46
Oilman2!

is that you?

Chauncey Gardiner | Sep 19, 2017 8:05:13 PM | 47
What is Trump's speech for?

Senate backs massive increase in military spending
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-defense-congress/senate-backs-massive-increase-in-military-spending-idUSKCN1BT2PV

V. Arnold | Sep 19, 2017 8:12:32 PM | 48
karlof1 | Sep 19, 2017 6:56:49 PM | 40

Great comment re: Vietnam. The Ken Burns documentary is just one more fairy tale of the U.S. involvement/war in Vietnam.
Among the many myths, foremost is that Ho Chi Minh was a communist; he most assuredly was not. Yes, he was a member of the party in France, but it is irrelevent to history (Ho was a nationalist).
Did you know he tried to engage FDR?
Below is a remarkable interview with John Pilger on the real history of the U.S. and Vietnam; it ain't pretty. Even Mao tried to engage the U.S., which the U.S. duly ignored.

https://www.rt.com/shows/watching-the-hawks/403760-nuclear-standoff-crisis-china/

PavewayIV | Sep 19, 2017 8:12:34 PM | 49
Why is everyone hating on Trump? Be realistic: sometimes you have to genocide 25 million people to save them. We're the God damn hero here - you bastards should be thanking the USA.

Well, I guess we're really not trying to save the North Koreans at all. But they refuse to leave the buffer zone (all of North Korea) that is protecting the world from red Chinese expansion south. Worse than that, the North Koreans insist on protecting themselves BY FORCE from the US. How evil is that?

Reminds me of those evil Syrians and Iraqis who refuse to vacate the buffer zone protecting Israel from Iran. The nerve!

Only US lapdog nations have the right to defend themselves - as long as its with US-made weapons and they're protecting themselves from anybody except the US. And we get to build US bases on their soil. Who wouldn't want that? Because the US is... what did Trump say... RIGHTEOUS. You know:

"...good, virtuous, upright, upstanding, decent; ethical, principled, moral, high-minded, law-abiding, honest, honorable, blameless, irreproachable, noble; saintly, angelic, pure..."

Tell me which one of those synonyms DOES NOT apply to the US? I prefer 'angelic'.

The first thing psychopaths do when they attain any measure of power and control is to redefine evil as anything that threatens their power and control. Then constantly hammer that threat into the minds of the little people so the little people don't think too hard about stringing them up from the lamp posts.

Everything the US has done in my lifetime has been about preserving and protecting the US government no matter how corrupt, evil or immoral it acts. Protecting the people is only given lip service when it can be used to justify further protections for the state. Creation of the Department of Homeland Security Stazi is probably the end stage for full-spectrum dominance over the little people - it is slowly morphing (as planned) into a federal armed force to protect the US government FROM the little people. I guess the FBI wasn't up to the task.

"The government you elect is the government you deserve" Thomas Jefferson, Founding Terrorist.

V. Arnold | Sep 19, 2017 8:14:56 PM | 50
PavewayIV | Sep 19, 2017 8:12:34 PM | 49

Spot on...

Krollchem | Sep 19, 2017 8:26:44 PM | 51
Chauncey Gardiner@ 32

Do you agree that to point of National Interest article seem to be that the US is not capable of invading and controlling non-European countries?

I did find the Cato Institute author to be very poorly informed about the US invasions of Granada and Panama, the Balkan wars, the Kosovo invasion and the Syrian war.

As for ISIS, the author does not know anything about the incubation of ISIS by the US administrations and the Libyan war (Hillary/Obama/Sarkozy) connection . He also does not discuss the billions in military hardware that the US allowed ISIS to capture in Iraq.

As for the US efforts they are more about preventing the formation of an integrated economic sphere between Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanese Republic. The war efforts by the US in fighting ISIS are minimal compared to the Syrian and Russian efforts, yet he lies by omission to pump up the US efforts. At least he didn't attempt to praise Turkey (sic) for their efforts in cutting off aid to ISIS and Al Qaeda (under all its names).

Remember that the Cato Institute is another flavor of the NGO spider supporting the deep state!

Please understand that this is not a personal attack as I am here to learn and share.

John Gilberts | Sep 19, 2017 8:44:57 PM | 52
Canada's Trudeau will follow Trump at the UN on Thursday. Today he received an award from the Atlantic Council: 'Worldwide the long established international order is being tested..' And obviously the sexy northern selfie-king knows his place in it...
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Kp49TFRMR8g
Don Bacon | Sep 19, 2017 8:51:24 PM | 53
@ 49
Yes, to save the 25 million North Koreans the US must destroy them!

"No one has shown more contempt for other nations and for the wellbeing of their own people than the depraved regime in North Korea. It is responsible for the starvation deaths of millions of North Koreans, and for the imprisonment, torture, killing, and oppression of countless more."
. ..but there are limits. . .

"The United States has great strength and patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea."

So give me that "no more contempt" line again, Donald? (Personally, I can't imagine Hillary doing any less. So much for elections.)

Chauncey Gardiner | Sep 19, 2017 8:56:49 PM | 54
"Why is everyone hating on Trump?" Preposterous. You give him too much importance. He is rather the object of ridicule.

"The word occurs 18(!) times."

While the word Sovereignty

Maybe by accident maybe not just conspicuous coincidence. But it seems to me with Trump an era of so-called globalization has come to its end. With self-inflicted wounds ($20T Gov. debt) and new president who is (initially) inward looking, it is time to talk about old stuff. As if the US statehood has been in question for a moment. Old trick of capitalist class.

Chauncey Gardiner | Sep 19, 2017 9:04:30 PM | 55
I was looking for Putin and Sovereignty and I've found this: http://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-uses-putins-arguments-to-undermine-the-world
nonsense factory | Sep 19, 2017 9:21:01 PM | 56
File under "propaganda for domestic consumption"

Targeting Iran was never about nuclear weapons (the U.S. let Pakistan expand its nuclear weapons program without interfering, despite knowing all about the AQ Khan network, because Pakistan was cooperating with the U.S. agenda in Afghanistan and elsewhere), it was about the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline (during the GW Bush era) and the expansion of economic ties with Syria (during the Obama era).

Now, with the easing of sanctions, Iran's pipeline deals have been revived, such as Iran-Pakistan, or Iran-India (undersea) , Iran-Europe, with China and Russia and Turkey as potential partners. Meanwhile, the proposed TAPI pipeline backed by the Clinton, Bush & Obama State Departments, as well as Chevron and Exxon, from Turkmenistan to the Indian Ocean, is still held up due to instability in Afghanistan (i.e. the Taliban would immediately blow it up). Obama's 30,000 troop surge to 100,000 couldn't solve that, and the recent Trump troop surge (much smaller) will have little effect on that either.
TAPI pipe dreams continue, Sep 17 2017

There's no way Trump or Tillerson would ever be honest about this in an international forum, any more than Obama and Clinton would, or Bush and Condi Rice, but it's the same old "great game" for Central Asian oil and gas that's dominated U.S. regional foreign policy since the end of the Cold War.

Don Bacon | Sep 19, 2017 9:26:11 PM | 57
@ 54/55
Of course countries subjected to senseless US sanctions, like Russia, are concerned with sovereignty. They are subject to baseless economic attacks by the country that controls world banking.
b4real | Sep 19, 2017 10:12:08 PM | 59
[throws meat to the lions] Orlov has a great read up
Debsisdead | Sep 19, 2017 10:16:10 PM | 60
It is foolish to consider the trumpet's lunatic ravings in isolation, according to that organ of empire foreign policy dot com , the amerikan airforce is ready and rearing to go and blast the bejeezuz outta North Korea.
Sure it may be bluster when they come out with seeming tosh like:
""We're ready to fight tonight," Gen. Robin Rand, commander of the Air Force's Global Strike Command, told reporters at an Air Force conference in Washington on Monday. "We don't have to spin up, we're ready.""

Because everyone knows that a manned tactical airforce is on the way out, that bombing a population has only ever served to strengthen resolve within that population, but the first point that the airforce of jocks n fighters is verging on obsolescence, might just drive the generals of middle management, concerned that their career is about to hit a brick wall, to go for one last roll of the dice. Blow some shit up, create a few heroes and maybe the inevitable can be staved off for long enough for their scum to rise to the surface, jag a great gig with a contractor, then retire in luxury. I mean to say it's gotta be worth a shot right? The alternative of layoffs and all the sexy fighting stuff being done by unsexy drones, is just too awful to consider.

So what if Guam gets wasted, a good memorial at Arlington will balance that shit and when it is all said and done, most of the people who will get nuked by DPRK aren't amerikans - but here's the best bit, we can sell them to the idjits just like they were, while we build the anger and bloodlust, then backpedal on that when it comes down to lawsuits, compensation or whatever it is those whale-fuckers whine about - right?

A pre-emptive attack based on the possibility that DPRK hasn't yet developed nuke tech sufficiently, but will do so "if we continue to sit on our asses" would be an easy sell to an orange derp whose access to alternative points of view has been cut off.
The only real question is whether the rest of the military (the non-airforce parts) go for it.
The navy likely will because they are in the same boat (pun intended) as the airforce when it comes down to usefulness as a front line conflict agent and they too will likely get a role to play in the destruction of North Korea - at the very least as a weapons platform (just like with the mindless Syria aggression) and may even get to be the forward C&C base since South Korea isn't mobile and may cop a fair amount of DPRK reaction.

Only the army for whom a pre emptive attack on the people of North Korea has little upside, but lots of downside, may oppose this insane butchery. The army will be tasked with neutralising a population whose innate loathing of all things amerikan has just been raised by about ten notches. So soon after the Iraq debacle, they may see an attack as all negative in that once again they will cop the blame and even worse the old enemies - the airforce and navy - will come out smelling like roses. It is true that the bulk of the yellow monkey's 'advisors' are army types, so under normal circumstances they would obstruct any such bullshit grabs for the brass ring by the navy & airforce upstarts - but there is a high probability that the army leadership will do no such thing.
The reason for that is as old as humanity itself and I was sad to see that it copped little mention in the last thread about the 'soft' coup at the whitehouse.

Many people were cheering the takeover by the military doubtless the same people who imagine that "amerika could be great again - if only we go back to the way it was in the 1950's and 60's". What they miss is that everything is fluid; nothing is held in stasis as a proof that perfection has been reached. The 'eisenhower/johnson years were merely steps on the path, the world was never gonna stay in white bourgeois contentment no matter whether unwhites kicked up or not. There are diverse reasons for that from ambitious careerism forcing change so a lucky few can ascend one more rung on the ladder, to the reality that it is impossible for all humans to be content all the time -some groups will be disadvantaged, advertise that then be 'adopted' by careerists as an excuse for forcing change. That is inevitable - as inevitable as the reality that once the military gained power, their next move would be to consolidate it and to try ensure that they kept it for ever.

In other words the initial coup may have been largely bloodless (altho several million dead mid easterners would strongly disagree if they could) but any study of human behavior reveals that it is the need to hold on to power which is what really incites oppression violence and mass murder.
The Pennsylvania Avenue generals understand that the simplest way of retaining control is gonna be if the orange 'whipped* gains re-election. If the orange chunder is gonna win the next one he needs to hit some home runs and have a lot less ties or outright defeats.

At this stage it doesn't matter what turkey kicked up the Korea bizzo, or even it it has any moral dimension at all, what matters is that the trumpet has made it a major issue and if he doesn't 'prevail' in the short-term, the odds of him retaining support much less gaining more support, are gone - very likely for the duration of the tangerine prezdency. It's not as if the ME situation offers the slightest chink of light at the end of the tunnel. Syria is history now and that Iran thing has a good chance of dividing europe from amerika, just as climate change has. I reckon that the junta who, individually & institutionally have a big investment in Nato, will be looking to steer the orange nit away from inciting a confrontation over the nuke deal. Korea could be the alternate shiny thing the junta draws trumpet's attention to in order to distract the dingbat.

So even though it is a total cleft stick that the junta is in, I reckon it is extremely probable that the army branch of the amerikan government will allow the airforce and possibly the navy as well, their moment in the sun.

The way this fuckwittery is shaping up, people of Korea are more likely to be enduring Predators up their jacksies than not, before the end of "the summer of '18'

*anyone who doesn't see that the trumpet displays all the signs (boasting of alleged performance, number of 'conquests' size of penis etc) of a man who is unable to have his voice heard above the demands of the women around him, doesn't comprehend the nature of inter-gender relationships (doncha love 'inter-gender' it sounds exactly like the type of pallid word the identity-ists would use heheh).

Forest | Sep 19, 2017 10:45:08 PM | 61
Ah sovereignty vs. solvency.

There's the rub.

V. Arnold | Sep 19, 2017 10:47:15 PM | 62
Debsisdead | Sep 19, 2017 10:16:10 PM | 60

The main problem I have with your post is China. You do not say anything about China. The Chinese made it clear that if the U.S. pre-emptively attacks the DPRK; China will get involved; and I should think Russia will be somehow involved as well. Moon Jae-In has told the U.S. it (SK) will be the one to decide on an attack, as it should.

But, I do get your drift; I just hope the U.S. will not act...for once. That said; I do think the U.S. lost its tether decades ago...

V. Arnold | Sep 19, 2017 11:00:10 PM | 63
The other possiblity the U.S. won't attack DPRK is that the U.S., cowardly as it is; hasn't attacked a country of any military consequence since WWII.
Don Bacon | Sep 19, 2017 11:36:48 PM | 64
There's one little factor about getting it on with DPRK, besides the ones mentioned, and that is that SecDef Gates several years ago declared that Korea was safe enough to allow it to be an accompanied tour, i.e. soldiers could have their families join them in the Land of the Morning Calm. This coincided with the consolidation of US bases, with a ten billion dollar expansion of Camp Humphreys about seventy miles south of the DMZ. So now we have high-rise apartments with wives, kids, pets, etc. in this "safe" place, now 35,000 strong including all. They practice evacuation. From a recent report --

The noncombatant evacuation operations, or NEO, are aimed at making sure everybody knows their roles in the event of a noncombatant evacuation, which may be ordered in the event of war, political or civil unrest, or a natural or man-made disaster. "I liken the NEO operation to being a scaffolding. It's not a fully fleshed out plan because it's preparing for a million different worst-case scenarios," 1st Lt. Katelyn Radack, a spokeswoman for the 2nd Combat Aviation Brigade, told Stars and Stripes. ... Brandy Madrigal, 32, was participating in her third NEO -- so she knew exactly what to pack when she got the call to report to the Assembly Point at the main gym at Camp Humphreys on June 5. She ticked off the list -- clothes, food for the kids, documents, phone, toiletries -- before driving with her two children from their first-floor apartment to the base to be processed.

Imagine that -- all those people assembling in one place for "processing." They'd get processed, all right. So the US Army won't be red-hot for the mighty US Air Force to (again) conduct its aerial murder in North Korea, with their loved ones being in rocket range of a counter-attack. That's in addition to any feelings people have for the ten million plus South Koreans in Seoul, close to the border.

Stumpy | Sep 19, 2017 11:54:05 PM | 65
Karlof @ 40

re: Ken Burns Viet Nam -- one only has to look at the sponsors. Burns will cleave to the line only more so. Darling of the aristocratic charities. Somehow reaching the glory 50 years later. Now that Agent Orange has nearly completed the harvest.

Action against Iran and NK, could it really be termed "war", anymore?

ben | Sep 20, 2017 12:16:54 AM | 66
Luther Blissett @ 4 said:"sovereign nation" = a country that obeys the US over its own interests

"rogue nation" = a country that has actual sovereignty

Succinct but true..

The fucking hypocrisy in that UN speech takes my breath away. Trump and his mannerisms sure do remind me of "il Duce".

Debsisdead | Sep 20, 2017 12:19:55 AM | 67
@ V Arnold # 62

I deliberately left China outta the equation because the conflict with DPRK will be engineered to be kicked off with a provocation allegedly committed by DRPK, amerika will 'respond' andthe war will quickly escalate. Yes PRC may become involved, but getting into a war with amerika right now is not great for the PRC either, if the most vital concern is the proximity of amerikan troops to the China border, amerika can give an agreement signed in blood that amerikan military will pull back behind the 38th parallel once the 'regime has been changed' and that only Korean men and equipment will remain.

Of course China would be smart to distrust that but sold correctly with incentives and maybe even the use of some mutually trusted referee, China might decide that is a superior option to kicking off ww3.

As for the enlisted mens families somehow I doubt that the military cares any more about them than it does the men and women they have in their forces - so not very much - smart officer class types will be considering the need to 'further their children's education back home' right now, whether or not the trump decides to go for broke. As I pointed out before, the plan will require that DRPK feels trapped into committing some type of really egregious provocation, or false flagging such a provocation.

Imagine Guam got nuked and all initial evidence pointed to DRPK, China is in a tough spot plus most amerikans will be of the opinion that protecting the families in South Korean barracks comes second to vengeance. That would be an easy sell on fox and msnbc.

Amerika seemingly being attacked is also gonna end msnbc & the rest's potshots at the orange derp, just as 911 halted just about all reference to the view shrub stole the election from Gore in the MSM.

Linda O | Sep 20, 2017 12:20:32 AM | 68
Ignoring Trump.

What scares me the most about the US regime's threats to attack and destroy North Korea is I had naively assumed that all the talk was just the standard game theory back and forth. There never was any real threat beyond the occasional minor incident like there have been in the past few decades.

And I didn't understand why China would so openly and absolutely support North Korea with any sort of attack by the US regime.

But then I read some of the neocon online postings or writings about North Korea and it was a sickening shock to realize that I had been so foolish to believe the Korean crisis was not about Korea, but China.

Getting the US regime's military directly on the Chinese border is something the neocons are perfectly willing, and most likely gleefully happy, to trade millions to tens of millions of North and South Korean lives for.

I can't imagine the revulsion and horror the rest of the world must be feeling towards the United States right now.

Nuff Sed | Sep 20, 2017 12:33:07 AM | 69
Talking of Westphalia... Here is an excerpt from an article of mine which which appeared in the Vineyard of the Saker's site earlier this year:
https://thesaker.is/sacred-communities-and-the-emergent-multipolar-landscape/

The German philosopher and sociologist Ferdinand Tönnies (1855 – 1936) distinguished between two types of social groupings. Gemeinschaft (often translated as community or left untranslated) and Gesellschaft (often translated as society). Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft describe the crucial distinction between community and "Civil Society"; community being characterized by a dispensationalist consensus or a sacred communal consensus on a dispensation sent down from on high, and the latter being characterized as a consensus to "agree to disagree" and to agree that a consensus in any meaningful form can no longer be reached, paving the way to a "conventional" polity (agreed to by secular-humanist convention). This "agreement to disagree" which crystalized between the Peace of Augsburg (1555) and the Peace of Westphalia (1644 – 1648) was, in effect, the West's long and excruciating decision to throw out the baby of Community with the bathwater of the Church's malfeasance in the revolutionary fervor of the Reformation and the "Enlightenment" that followed in its wake. But whereas the integrality of church and state was lost with the Peace of Westphalia circa 1648 whereat pre-Westphalian communities gave way to the Westphalian order of "Civil Societies", the Islamic Revolution of 1979 restored community to the Moslem nation of Iran.

psychohistorian | Sep 20, 2017 12:49:38 AM | 70
I posted this comment over in the latest Syria summary thread but then thought that it belongs here as an example of the craven duplicity of empire about Syria sovereignty.

The following is a link and article quote from China news that says Russia is accusing the US of chickenshit (my term) tactics in Syria

"He said the advancing Syrian government troops supported by the Russian Air Force managed to break the fierce resistance and liberate
more than 60 square km of territory on the left bank of the Euphrates River in the last 24 hours.

But their advance was hampered by a sudden rise of the water level in the Euphrates and a two-fold increase of the speed of its current
after the government troops started crossing the river, Konashenkov said.

In the absence of precipitation, the only source of such changes in the water level could be a man-made discharge of water at the dams
north of the Euphrates, which are held by the opposition formations controlled by the international coalition led by the United States, he said.
"

Russia accuses U.S., opposition of hampering Syrian gov't troops' advance

ProPeace | Sep 20, 2017 1:02:39 AM | 71
What's worries me the most in Trumps speech, sounds actually ominously, is the phrases "dead Poles, fighting [???!!!] French, strong[!] English" ... Is this what's planned for the near future? I'm not liking it a bit.

What about Syria's sovereignty? VoltaireNet predicts launching a big campaign to carve out AnloZio run "Kurdistan" (a la Kosovo) from her right after illegal Sep 25th referendum organized by the Barzani mob. Was the speech (written by Jewish ) hinting to POTUS support for that? Meyssan says that Trump could go both ways. I concur, confusing the enemy has been the name of his game so far.

Orwellian "two minutes of hate" against Trump in the lame-scream media does it stop either:

Situation in the US is getting worse, seems that this Fall big changes are coming, and no lies can hide the truth: LIES, LIES & OMG MORE LIES Who is the enemy? Some names can be found here (and in a recent Eric Zuesse piece):

Southern Poverty Law Center Transfers Millions in Cash to Offshore Entities

ProPeace | Sep 20, 2017 1:08:39 AM | 72
Hitlary Killton just can't go away:

Hillary Clinton May Challenge Legitimacy of Presidential Election

The Borg, the AngloZio pedo-satanic cabal of the City of London Crown Corporation, the web of merchants of death and corporate oligarchy have been doing whatever possible to help her stay relevant and expand information war, blame Russia:

Amazon Censor Bad Reviews of Hillary Clinton's New Book

Why Is Google Hiring 1,000 Journalists To Flood Newsrooms Around America?

Hysterical US Lawmakers Breach Time and Space Limits in Fight With Radio Sputnik

james | Sep 20, 2017 1:43:12 AM | 73
@59 b4real.. thanks.. great article.. here it is again for anyone interested..

http://cluborlov.blogspot.ca/2017/09/military-defeat-as-financial-collapse.html

psychohistorian | Sep 20, 2017 3:10:44 AM | 74
@ james #72 with Orlov link

Nice summary but I disagree with the dedollarization part. To me, ending the US dollar as reserve Currency is just a part of the issue. If that occurs American paper money becomes worthless as the article states. While this bankrupts the US, what will it do to the global world of private finance, BIS, SWIFT, IMF, etc.? Does private finance, private property and inheritance all get dealt with in this adjustment? How long will the adjustment period take?

What is clear though now is that there are two factions that are moving in "opposite" directions and the implications will lock up global commerce at some point....fairly soon (weeks/months)......and hopefully adults from all sides will work things out peacefully.

dirka dirka | Sep 20, 2017 4:15:13 AM | 75
Pistachio imperialism -- Bring it on --
john | Sep 20, 2017 5:25:11 AM | 76
these 16 years of bin laden wars constitute the most concerted assault on sovereignty since time out of mind. conspicuously in the cradle of civilization...cultural harmonies undermined and religious sects set at each others throats, tribes ripped from their roots, their facilities and systems desecrated, their families ravaged by rack and ruin and displacement, an alien scourge unleashed on their landscape.

but as someone upstream suggested, the window on these destructive incursions might be closing, what with Russia and China being unconquerable and all.

of course there are other dark forces gnawing at sovereignty , possibly even more stealthily treacherous ones...

like the alien scourge of mass tourism.

b | Sep 20, 2017 5:35:41 AM | 77
Others pointing out the "sovereignty" contradictions: Obama lover and liberal (zionist) interventionist Peter Beinart:

A Radical Rebuke of Barack Obama's Foreign Policy Legacy - Donald Trump used his first address at the United Nations to redefine the idea of sovereignty.

On the one hand, Trump defended sovereignty as a universal ideal. On the other, he demanded that America's enemies stop mistreating their people. The result was gobbledygook.
...
to make his incoherence even more explicit, Trump declared that "our respect for sovereignty is also a call for action. All people deserve a government that cares for their safety, their interests and their well-being." That's like saying that my respect for your right to do whatever you want in your garden should be a call to action for you to stop growing weed.
...
For Trump, by contrast, sovereignty means both that no one can tell the United States what to do inside its borders and that the United States can do exactly that to the countries it doesn't like. That's not the liberal internationalism that Obama espoused. Nor is it the realism of some of Obama's most trenchant critics. It is imperialism. General Pershing, in the Philippines, would have approved.

The Saker at UNZ: Listening to the Donald at the UN

In conclusion, what I take away from this speech is a sense of relief for the rest of the planet and a sense of real worry for the USA. Ever since the Neocons overthrew Trump and made him what is colloquially referred to as their "bitch" the US foreign policy has come to a virtual standstill. Sure, the Americans talk a lot, but at least they are doing nothing. That paralysis, which is a direct consequence of the internal infighting, is a blessing for the rest of the planet because it allows everybody else to get things done.
ashley albanese | Sep 20, 2017 5:57:26 AM | 78
Pressure will be intense on U S business in east coast China to refrain from converting their 'yuan' profits into gold .
What a contradictory set of pressures much
ashley albanese | Sep 20, 2017 5:59:47 AM | 79
what a contradictory set of pressures much U S business will be under . That's the nature of Capitalism , isn't it ?
anonymus | Sep 20, 2017 6:49:13 AM | 80
Wtf? Actor Morgan Freeman featuring in cold war warmongering propaganda campaign directed against Russia and Putin. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uz9PNoecNxU
notlurking | Sep 20, 2017 7:10:22 AM | 81
anonymus | Sep 20, 2017 6:49:13 AM | 79

I would think that most of Hollywood is neolib heavy on foreign policy.....

Linda O | Sep 20, 2017 8:03:48 AM | 82
My god... That Morgan Freeman video is bizarre and sickening. I see that dimwitted lowlife Rob Reiner was one of the people who funded that garbage.

[Sep 19, 2017] Massive White Helmets Photo Cache Proves Hollywood Gave Oscar to Terrorist Group

Sep 19, 2017 | www.unz.com

liam > , Website September 19, 2017 at 1:01 pm GMT

... The entire Syrian war is being misreported in the US media. Israel and the US are on the same side with Saudi Arabia and are pumping billions of dollars to terrorist factions in the warzones. That fact is continually being covered up by the CIA infiltrated US mainstream media. The proof of such is here:

Massive White Helmets Photo Cache Proves Hollywood Gave Oscar to Terrorist Group

https://clarityofsignal.com/2017/02/27/massive-white-helmets-photo-cache-proves-hollywood-gave-oscar-to-terrorist-group/

Father of Invention: Media Portrayed Grief Stricken Dad Turns Out To Be al-Nusra Front Terrorist

https://clarityofsignal.com/2017/05/02/father-of-invention-media-portrayed-grief-stricken-dad-turns-out-to-be-al-nusra-front-terrorist/

[Sep 19, 2017] Since the initial strike in April, the Trump administration has deliberately attacked regime or allied forces an additional five times

Notable quotes:
"... Anyone could tell by that point that Assad isn't going to be overthrown. The aim now is to limit the Assad regime's territorial gains as much as possible, and the "rebels" proved they were useless at doing that when Shia militia reached the Iraqi border at al-Tanf, and cut them off from reaching Deir ez-Zor back in May (which was what one of the attacks mentioned above was about). ..."
Sep 19, 2017 | www.unz.com

matt > , September 19, 2017 at 5:07 pm GMT

@WJ Outside of an almost symbolic launch of cruise missiles into Syria in April, how has Trump been a warmonger?

I remember the debate between Pence and the hideous Tim Kaine where the Democrat vowed that there would be No Fly Zone over Syria which would certainly have allowed the head chopping rebels to gain a stronger foothold.

In addition to all that, Trump has also cut off aid to the Syrian rebels. His Afghanistan policy /escalation is also symbolic. US troops won't be in direct combat and there will only be 15000 there anyway.

Outside of an almost symbolic launch of cruise missiles into Syria in April, how has Trump been a warmonger?

You haven't been paying attention. Since the initial strike in April, the Trump administration has deliberately attacked regime or allied forces an additional five times. ( one , two , three , four , five ).

Including the Tomahawks in April, that's a total of 6 deliberate attacks on the Syrian Arab Republic or its allies (so far), which is already 6 more than Obama carried out during his entire presidency. And it's not like this is the end of Trump's tenure, either; it's the 9th goddamn month since he's been in office. I'm sure the war hawks in Wahington are quite pleased with his progress, as they should be.

In addition to all that, Trump has also cut off aid to the Syrian rebels. His Afghanistan policy /escalation is also symbolic.

Anyone could tell by that point that Assad isn't going to be overthrown. The aim now is to limit the Assad regime's territorial gains as much as possible, and the "rebels" proved they were useless at doing that when Shia militia reached the Iraqi border at al-Tanf, and cut them off from reaching Deir ez-Zor back in May (which was what one of the attacks mentioned above was about).

After that, the Trump administration put all its eggs in the "Syrian Democratic Forces/People's Protection Units (SDF/YPG) basket, the mainly Kurdish (with some Arab fighters) militia that the US has been using to fight ISIS since 2015 (it's also, ironically, a hard left socialist organization. Think Kurdish Antifa. Though I doubt Trump knows or cares or could do anything about it even if he did). Trump has given the SDF <a title="" https://sputniknews.com/amp/middleeast/201709141057402885-america-weaponry-deir-ez-zor/&quot ; https://sputniknews.com/amp/middleeast/201709141057402885-america-weaponry-deir-ez-zor/&quot ;heavy weaponry with the aim of confronting Assad and limiting his territorial gains. They've also been pressuring the rebel groups they formerly supported to join the SDF.

I have sympathy for the SDF/YPG and the Syrian Kurds, and it made sense to support them when they were under direct assault from ISIS (though US motives were hardly altruistic even then). But ISIS is all but beaten now, and this is a dangerous game the US is playing, which could readily lead to a military confrontation betweeen the US and Russia and/or Iran. In fact, just a few days ago, the SDF seized part of Deir ez-Zor after SAA forces reached the city, and the Pentagon is now accusing Russia (which has in the past at least had good relations with the SDF/YPG), of deliberately bombing SDF fighters, in close proximity to American special forces.

US troops won't be in direct combat and there will only be 15000 there anyway.

Only 15,000! I guess you wouldn't mind, then, if they Taliban, or the Afghan Army for that matter, or any other country, put 15,000 troops on American soil, as a "symbolic" gesture.

Trump has also accelerated US collaboration in the sadistic torture of Yemen by the Saudis, past the levels under even Obama, which was already shameful.

And again, we should also keep in mind that it's only been 9 months. For his next act, Trump might be thinking about ending the Iran deal in October.

[Sep 18, 2017] How The Military Defeated Trumps Insurgency

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Trump was seen as a presidential candidate who would possibly move towards a less interventionist foreign policy. That hope is gone. The insurgency that brought Trump to the top was defeated by a counter-insurgency campaign waged by the U.S. military. ..."
"... The military has taken control of the White House process and it is now taking control of its policies. ..."
"... a president who arrived at the White House with no experience in the military or government and brought with him advisers deeply skeptical of what they labeled the "globalist" worldview. In coordinated efforts and quiet conversations, some of Trump's aides have worked for months to counter that view, hoping the president can be persuaded to maintain -- if not expand -- the American footprint and influence abroad ..."
"... It is indisputable that the generals are now ruling in Washington DC. They came to power over decades by shaping culture through their sponsorship of Hollywood, by manipulating the media through "embedded" reporting and by forming and maintaining the countries infrastructure through the Army Corps of Engineers. The military, through the NSA as well as through its purchasing power , controls the information flow on the internet. Until recently the military establishment only ruled from behind the scene. The other parts of the power triangle , the corporation executives and the political establishment, were more visible and significant. But during the 2016 election the military bet on Trump and is now, after he unexpectedly won, collecting its price. ..."
"... Trump's success as the "Not-Hillary" candidate was based on an anti-establishment insurgency. Representatives of that insurgency, Flynn, Bannon and the MAGA voters, drove him through his first months in office. An intense media campaign was launched to counter them and the military took control of the White House. The anti-establishment insurgents were fired. Trump is now reduced to public figure head of a stratocracy - a military junta which nominally follows the rule of law. ..."
"... It is no great surprise that Trump has been drawn into the foreign policy mainstream; the same happened to President Obama early in his presidency. More ominous is that Trump has turned much of his power over to generals. Worst of all, many Americans find this reassuring. They are so disgusted by the corruption and shortsightedness of our political class that they turn to soldiers as an alternative. It is a dangerous temptation. ..."
"... This is no longer a Coup Waiting to Happen The coup has happened with few noticing it and ever fewer concerned about it. Everything of importance now passes through the Junta's hands: ..."
"... Thus we get a continuation of a failed Afghanistan policy and will soon get a militarily aggressive policy towards Iran . ..."
"... Asked whether he was predicting war [with North Korea], [former defence minister of Japan, Satoshi] Morimoto said: "I think Washington has not decided ... The final decision-maker is [US Defence Secretary] Mr Mattis ... Not the president." ..."
"... Nationalistic indoctrination, already at abnormal heights in the U.S. society, will further increase. Military control will creep into ever extending fields of once staunchly civilian areas of policy. (Witness the increasing militarization of the police.) ..."
"... It is only way to sustain the empire. ..."
"... It is doubtful that Trump will be able to resist the policies imposed on him. Any flicker of resistance will be smashed. The outside insurgency which enabled his election is left without a figurehead, It will likely disperse. The system won. ..."
"... The U$A corporate empire is driven by, and according to, the dictates of the mega-corporate desires. The Generals dance to their tune. ..."
"... I would argue that Mattis, McMaster, Kelly, and their line reports don't represent "the US military", or even its generals per se. They represent themselves as people financially beholden to major investment banks for their retirement funds; people fearful of being blackmailed and destroyed by the NSA and CIA and Mossad; people who rose to senior posts during prior administrations because they were flunkies to the establishment . ..."
"... Trump's wealth (at least in the high hundreds of millions $) and his election victory say he's no moron. He probably knows what he is doing. He's either a guy who gave up the struggle after getting the proverbial political hell beaten out of him in the first months of his administration, or he willingly misled his electoral base when campaigning. Perhaps a little of both. He's known for being a BS merchant. Myself, I think he lied outright to the voters during his run for president. It's not a wild idea: so did Obama, Bush, and Clinton. Bigly. ..."
"... Trump made the decisions that we criticse so much. Trump decided to let the Obama holdovers stay in the administration. He decided to hire Goldman Sachs flunkies. He decided to send cruise missiles to strike Shayrat. He decided to approve US assistance to Saudi Arabia in Yemen. H decided to let his zionist son-in-law, who is indebted to George Soros, into the White House. He decided to fire Bannon almost as soon as Bannon came out publicly against war with North Korea. (Possibly a deliberate, desperate attempt at a 'spoiler' tactic on Bannon's part, to prevent conflict.) Trump decided to renege on his promises to the electorate about immigration. He decided to sign an unprecedented, unconstitutional law that bound his hands and imposed sanctions on Russia. He decided to go along with the Russian hacking lie by saying that Russia could, maybe, have hacked the DNC and HRC and whoever else (probably including Disney, the Shriners, and my mother). He decided to employ Sean Spicer and Reince Priebus, Scaramucchi and everyone else. He approved all of those things. ..."
"... It is not especially clear to me (being an outsider to US politics) which of the groups (or combination of groups) seems to have come out on top and have their guys as the gate-keeping, information-vetting guys doing the briefing of Trump. My feel of it is that the Pentagon has gained while JSOC, the black ops contractors, and black-on-black ops contractors have lost. The CIA seems to have broken even. Is this a fair read? ..."
"... Is the possibility of Trump as controlled opposition so far-fetched? Do you think the "power elite's political wing" only runs one candidate? Have you heard of "illusion of choice"? Do you think sheepdog Bernie was a real candidate? ..."
"... Obama and Trump both gained greater apparent legitimacy by: 1) beating the establishment candidate; and 2) being besieged by bat-shit crazy critics (birthers; anti-Russians & antifa). ..."
"... As soon as you choose a side, you are trapped. Two sides of the same coin. Minted in hell. ..."
Sep 18, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

Trump was seen as a presidential candidate who would possibly move towards a less interventionist foreign policy. That hope is gone. The insurgency that brought Trump to the top was defeated by a counter-insurgency campaign waged by the U.S. military. (Historically its first successful one). The military has taken control of the White House process and it is now taking control of its policies.

It is schooling Trump on globalism and its "indispensable" role in it. Trump was insufficiently supportive of their desires and thus had to undergo reeducation:

When briefed on the diplomatic, military and intelligence posts, the new president would often cast doubt on the need for all the resources. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson organized the July 20 session to lay out the case for maintaining far-flung outposts -- and to present it, using charts and maps, in a way the businessman-turned-politician would appreciate

Trump was hauled into a Pentagon basement 'tank' and indoctrinated by the glittering four-star generals he admired since he was a kid:

The session was, in effect, American Power 101 and the student was the man working the levers. It was part of the ongoing education of a president who arrived at the White House with no experience in the military or government and brought with him advisers deeply skeptical of what they labeled the "globalist" worldview. In coordinated efforts and quiet conversations, some of Trump's aides have worked for months to counter that view, hoping the president can be persuaded to maintain -- if not expand -- the American footprint and influence abroad

Trump was sold the establishment policies he originally despised. No alternative view was presented to him.

It is indisputable that the generals are now ruling in Washington DC. They came to power over decades by shaping culture through their sponsorship of Hollywood, by manipulating the media through "embedded" reporting and by forming and maintaining the countries infrastructure through the Army Corps of Engineers. The military, through the NSA as well as through its purchasing power , controls the information flow on the internet. Until recently the military establishment only ruled from behind the scene. The other parts of the power triangle , the corporation executives and the political establishment, were more visible and significant. But during the 2016 election the military bet on Trump and is now, after he unexpectedly won, collecting its price.

Trump's success as the "Not-Hillary" candidate was based on an anti-establishment insurgency. Representatives of that insurgency, Flynn, Bannon and the MAGA voters, drove him through his first months in office. An intense media campaign was launched to counter them and the military took control of the White House. The anti-establishment insurgents were fired. Trump is now reduced to public figure head of a stratocracy - a military junta which nominally follows the rule of law.

Stephen Kinzer describes this as America's slow-motion military coup:
Ultimate power to shape American foreign and security policy has fallen into the hands of three military men [...]
...
Being ruled by generals seems preferable to the alternative. It isn't.
...
[It] leads toward a distorted set of national priorities, with military "needs" always rated more important than domestic ones.
...
It is no great surprise that Trump has been drawn into the foreign policy mainstream; the same happened to President Obama early in his presidency. More ominous is that Trump has turned much of his power over to generals. Worst of all, many Americans find this reassuring. They are so disgusted by the corruption and shortsightedness of our political class that they turn to soldiers as an alternative. It is a dangerous temptation.

The country has fallen to that temptation even on social-economic issues:

In the wake of the deadly racial violence in Charlottesville this month, five of the Joint Chiefs of Staff were hailed as moral authorities for condemning hate in less equivocal terms than the commander in chief did.
...
On social policy, military leaders have been voices for moderation.

The junta is bigger than its three well known leaders:

Kelly, Mattis and McMaster are not the only military figures serving at high levels in the Trump administration. CIA Director Mike Pompeo, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Energy Secretary Rick Perry and Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke each served in various branches of the military, and Trump recently tapped former Army general Mark S. Inch to lead the Federal Bureau of Prisons.
...
the National Security Council [..] counts two other generals on the senior staff.

This is no longer a Coup Waiting to Happen The coup has happened with few noticing it and ever fewer concerned about it. Everything of importance now passes through the Junta's hands:

[Chief of staff John] Kelly initiated a new policymaking process in which just he and one other aide [...] will review all documents that cross the Resolute desk.
...
The new system [..] is designed to ensure that the president won't see any external policy documents, internal policy memos, agency reports and even news articles that haven't been vetted.

To control Trump the junta filters his information input and eliminates any potentially alternative view:

Staff who oppose [policy xyz] no longer have unfettered access to Trump, and nor do allies on the outside [.. .] Kelly now has real control over the most important input: the flow of human and paper advice into the Oval Office. For a man as obsessed about his self image as Trump, a new flow of inputs can make the world of difference.

The Trump insurgency against the establishment was marked by a mostly informal information and decision process. That has been destroyed and replaced:

Worried that Trump would end existing US spending/policies (largely, still geared to cold war priorities), the senior military staff running the Trump administration launched a counter-insurgency against the insurgency.
...
General Kelly, Trump's Chief of Staff, has put Trump on a establishment-only media diet.
...
In short, by controlling Trump's information flow with social media/networks, the generals smashed the insurgency's OODA loop (observe, orient, decide, act). Deprived of this connection, Trump is now weathervaning to cater to the needs of the establishment ...

The Junta members dictate their policies to Trump by only proposing to him certain alternatives. The one that is most preferable to them will be presented as the only desirable one. "There are no alternatives," Trump will be told again and again.

Thus we get a continuation of a failed Afghanistan policy and will soon get a militarily aggressive policy towards Iran.

Other countries noticed how the game has changed. The real decisions are made by the generals, Trump is ignored as a mere figurehead:

Asked whether he was predicting war [with North Korea], [former defence minister of Japan, Satoshi] Morimoto said: "I think Washington has not decided ... The final decision-maker is [US Defence Secretary] Mr Mattis ... Not the president."

Climate change, its local catastrophes and the infrastructure problems it creates within the U.S. will further extend the military role in shaping domestic U.S. policy.

Nationalistic indoctrination, already at abnormal heights in the U.S. society, will further increase. Military control will creep into ever extending fields of once staunchly civilian areas of policy. (Witness the increasing militarization of the police.)

It is only way to sustain the empire.

It is doubtful that Trump will be able to resist the policies imposed on him. Any flicker of resistance will be smashed. The outside insurgency which enabled his election is left without a figurehead, It will likely disperse. The system won.

Posted by b on September 18, 2017 at 11:20 AM | Permalink

Stephen | Sep18, 2017 11:32:00 AM | 1

Only good news: The mask has been torn off US elections. They simply don't matter. Waste of time and money. US has become Saddam's Iraq, Sisi's Egypt, Mugabe's Zimbabwe etc....expect to see Trump win 90% of vote in 2020....hahaha...
Hogwash | Sep18, 2017 11:32:04 AM | 2
Hogwash - The SAA just crossed the Euphrates. If the neocons were really in control, WW3 would start before dawn tomorrow. Otherwise, Assad will get his biggest oil field back from ISIS.

The Russians are hinting that the SDF isn't really fighting ISIS but just pretending to while ISIS soldiers switch uniforms. If that's true, it means the neocons may still be in charge, but what are they going to do about the Syrian Army blocking them now?

Ken Nari | Sep18, 2017 11:46:59 AM | 3
Interesting, and certainly a possible explanation of what's going on. Still, if the military is running the show, why the growth of private mercenary businesses? (A new meaning for "corporate warriors."). My own feeling, based on nothing except decades of experience working with the military, is that the generals don't mind a few little wars, but they well know the risks of a big one.

For that reason, the military leadership seems to be trying to cool things down -- that the U.S. didn't go to war with Iran, Russia, China or North Korea (yet) may be due to the influence of the top brass.

b: It is doubtful that Trump will be able to resist the policies imposed on him.

hmmm...I'm not sure there's any pressure at all on Trump. Since Kennedy was removed the president has little real power and is mostly to provide the trappings of democracy and keep the proles entertained. Over 100 years ago T. Roosevelt noticed the lack of presidential freedom to act -- the bully pulpit and all that.

financial matters | Sep18, 2017 11:47:33 AM | 4
One of the main reasons I was pleased to see Trump get elected was that he wanted to get us out of Syria. Somewhat amazingly I'd say, that has pretty much happened.

Russia, Iran and China have shown themselves to be responsible players and have the strength to back that up.

So, I think in reality the US military will be forced by facts on the ground, as well as a weakening of their propaganda, to go along with Trump's original more accommodating posture.

Don Bacon | Sep18, 2017 12:06:26 PM | 5
It's probably inevitable that the military would rule in the twilight of US world dominance.

Back in the true USA#1 days it was different. A couple of President Truman quotes: "It's the fellows who go to West Point and are trained to think they're gods in uniform that I plan to take apart". . ."I didn't fire him [General MacArthur] because he was a dumb son of a bitch, although he was, but that's not against the law for generals. If it was, half to three quarters of them would be in jail."

The main problem with generals is that most (not all) of them got to where they are by sucking up to higher authority, or "go along to get along." Then couple that with all the perks they get including fine housing, enlisted servants and a fat $250K pension for full generals, and they look at themselves in the mirror with all their fancy ribbons and medals and naturally adopt Harry Truman's "gods in uniform" opinion of themselves, forgetting that they have become successful in an isolated military milieu that favors appearance and disregards lack of accomplishment. And the current crop of generals certainly lacks accomplishment.

Lemur | Sep18, 2017 12:19:50 PM | 6
"Nationalistic indoctrination, already at abnormal heights in the U.S. society, will further increase."

If that were true, why is the historic American nation being replaced by mystery meats from the global south? The Washington machine certainly produces oodles of propaganda, but it is virulently opposed to ethnocentrism at home and abroad, because that might lead to groups with the solidarity to stand up to a degenerate empire.

The indoctrination taking place here is militaristic globalism. And everyone is invited.

ben | Sep18, 2017 12:27:31 PM | 7
b said:"Trump was seen as a presidential candidate who would possibly move towards a less interventionist foreign policy."

Only by those who don't fully understand the TRUE American system, and those who dream of a system that actually provides " truth, liberty and justice for all".

The better liar won the "election".

The swamp (sewer) in Washington getting muddier each day

Posted by: OJS | Sep18, 2017 12:44:21 PM | 8

The swamp (sewer) in Washington getting muddier each day
ben | Sep18, 2017 12:48:52 PM | 9
P.S...The U$A corporate empire is driven by, and according to, the dictates of the mega-corporate desires. The Generals dance to their tune.

"It's just business" Trump has NEVER intended to be anything but what the elites wanted him to be....A wealthy puppet..

Michael McNulty | Sep18, 2017 12:49:32 PM | 10
I think the US is weak militarily for two deep and fundamental reasons, both of which have US politicians to blame.

First, the US has not had able generals and admirals since WWII because politicians today[especially since 9/11] cannot take criticism. Therefore men like MacArthur and Kimmel, who would tell them a war can't be won like that or this strategy is a bad idea, no longer get the promotions. Yes-men get promoted over more able men.

Second, this promotion of yes-men allows politicians to take over the planning of a war. Whereas MacArthur would have shut the door on the neo-cons and told them he'll let him know when his plan is ready, today politicians use political strategy to try and defeat the war strategy of an opponent. For example, Rumsfeld should have been told that if he wanted to steal Iraq he'd need half a million men - but the generals tried to do the impossible and steal Iraq with a third that number because more was politically sensitive.

If politicians are going to have a war, leave it to able generals to plan it. Or lose.

karlof1 | Sep18, 2017 12:50:31 PM | 11
There's no saving the Unipolar attempt to establish Full Spectrum Dominance -- not even nuclear war -- and I think the generals and their minders actually know this, although they seem to be keeping up appearances. Escobar's latest from last Friday details why this is so, http://www.atimes.com/article/iran-turns-art-deal-upside/

Even the Brazilian regime change project is becoming a loser as the massive corruption scandal is about to devour the neocon favorite Temer, while Lula is rising like the Phoenix. The latest leak scandal over the meeting between Rohrabacher and Kelly regarding Russiagate and the status of Julian Assange reveals more than the leak itself, http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47818.htm

And finally, we have another great op/ed by Finian Cunningham who's on a roll of late at the Outlaw US Empire's expense, https://sputniknews.com/columnists/201709161057451619-us-alien-peace/

likklemore | Sep18, 2017 12:54:41 PM | 12

Always follow the money. There is only so far a $1 will go. Shrinkflation. The USD, as reserve currency, allowed the US to fund wars, everyday essentials and live high on the hog at the expense of the rest of the world. This exceptional privilege is coming to an end.

When the US declared war; [excluded Iran from use of SWIFT/ the USD] that was the shot heard far and wide. Putin and Xi noted, we could be next and put in place CHIPS.

Lately, Russia and then China has been threatened with sanctions; latest folly of Mnuchin, U.S. Secretary of the Treasury. The petro-Yuan Exchange for gold was announced and less than 005% of Americans realize the impact of bypassing the USD.

USA has met its comeuppance. Russia and China need not fire a shot. Prosperity of the exceptional ones is an illusion built on hundreds of trillions of debt. We are kept diverted from de-dollarization by the focus on unschooled Trump. Eight+ months after the selection, it's "Russiagate" – Putin did it; are angels male or female? What happened?

sleepy | Sep18, 2017 1:35:10 PM | 13
Thus we get a continuation of a failed Afghanistan policy and will soon get a militarily aggressive policy towards Iran.

As a candidate way before any junta was installed, Trump always vowed to rip up the Iran nuclear deal. Now why on earth would North Korea trust that any nuclear agreement it made with the US would not similarly be ripped up and shredded a couple years down the road?

Oilman2 | Sep18, 2017 1:35:11 PM | 14
If the handling of "local catastrophes" such as Harvey and Irma are any indication of the power of this junta, then I am not very much worried. The FEMA folks, Red Cross and many others showed their ineffectiveness in spades here in Houston. What's even more revealing is just how quickly they dashed out of here to remain in the news when Irma hit Florida.

I met two ATF guys driving down here after Harvey - and they had no idea why they were coming here. Couldn't articulate a thing to me except to say, repeatedly, "We are ATF and coming to assist." They had ZERO specifics on what they were going to do to help anyone. But they were very much enjoying wearing their ATF t-shirts and sporting their pistols on hip. But it's Texas, and that just made me smile and shake my head. Made me realize that whatever happens here in America, DC and the central government are so incredibly out of touch and living "in the bubble" that they are of very limited use for locals (those outside the East Coast) in any way.

The Feds plan for national, not local catastrophes - and their primary issue is COG, period. They are much more concerned about maintaining government and their own little fiefdoms than in assisting people far away from the DC/NYC corridor.

Further, the math just doesn't work for the junta doing much more than controlling foreign policy (who we next attack) - to try that same thing across America would result in rapid expulsion and failure, as we outnumber them most significantly.

When the pain they cause becomes enough, then things will change. Unfortunately, it seems that change via the national elections has now been abrogated. Something else is likely to ensue, eventually.

Permafrost | Sep18, 2017 1:36:52 PM | 15
The outside insurgency which enabled his election is left without a figurehead, It will likely disperse. The system won.

The problem here ie that the cost for the system to win keeps rising, and the law of diminishing returns remains valid. So for how long? not long.

NemesisCalling | Sep18, 2017 2:34:52 PM | 16
I just don't understand how people can fall for the line that "nationalism" somehow equates to an undesirable movement akin to the rise of nazism. The media has been blitzing this as of late and rallying cries around the antifa demonstrations have been taking this buzzword and running with it, equating proponents of it to racist KKK members in some silly way or another. Even here, b, you seem to be eating right out of the hands of these pagemasters who dictate what words mean.

I'm sorry, but there is a glaring doublestandard when you praise the policy of say Venezuela which "nationalized" their oil industry and condemn all of us Americans who are begging to disassociate from global mechanisms which are crippling fair-spending of tax dollars here in the state. It is fair to assume that military junta historically use the energy of nationalism's lexicon to promote their agenda, but in this case, as you point out, the junta and the status quo of globalism's iron hand seem to fit together nicely. I read that as nationalism never even taking flight here.

I get your trepidation with this terminology considering the history of your country, but America IS different and we deserve an attempt to put America first...shocking, I know.

Kalen | Sep18, 2017 2:49:10 PM | 17
B fell pray of partisan propaganda, Trump - the coup d'etat enabler DNC MANTRA.. So please inform me when generals were not in executive charge of the US government. On behave of oligarchic ruling elite ? Where were those civilian rulers during documented 250 conflicts or war US was engaged during 228 years of existence

The first president was a general and since then US generals executed basic US imperial economic model of aggression and exploitation, military land grab from Indians and Mexicans to suppression of workers strikes by shelling their families at home in US as well in its conquered colonies in CA and Caribbean we have proof thanks to Gen. Butler.

It was a Gen. Eisenhower who warned us the junta refused to disarm after WWII and constitutes coear and present danger to even a facade of republican order.

Anybody who believe that imperial US is run by civilians is SIMPLY gullible since no emporia were ever run by civilians by definition. Roman Empire was run over last 200 year explicitly by generals COMMANDING armies of foreign mercenaries like US today in NATO and ASEAN .

What has changed is that veil of deceit has failed and with Trump those warmongering cockroaches came out of WH woodwork to see a light and tookbopenly control f what they already controlled clandestinely.

Peter AU 1 | Sep18, 2017 2:49:47 PM | 18
16
If you think US is different to nazi it might be worth reading saker's piece on it. If you think US nationalism is any different to Nazi Germany in aggression then think again. The US population, and much of the so called west, is swamped in propaganda while the US attacks country after country.
NemesisCalling | Sep18, 2017 3:06:17 PM | 19
@18 Peter

But once again, many here think that Europe is already one big vassal state of the global/US empire. So if anything, we are all already under the jack boot of empire. To dislodge one piece (US), indeed, the central piece, seems to me that the world would be in recovery mode from "the global reich." Please correct if I'm wrong, but your logic does not compute. Furthermore, I don't think a reeling US economy and population, freshly liberated, is going to be convinced any time soon to wage wars abroad for precious metals and the like. "Helping" the world would probably take a back seat.

Hoarsewhisperer | Sep18, 2017 3:39:20 PM | 20
...
"I didn't fire him [General MacArthur] because he was a dumb son of a bitch, although he was, but that's not against the law for generals. If it was, half to three quarters of them would be in jail."
...
Posted by: Don Bacon | Sep18, 2017 12:06:26 PM | 5

And, despite the fact that Trump rubbed shoulders with dozens of these wannabe Generals at Military Academy, and was exposed to the same claptrap, it seems safe to assume that he realised that a Life spent in the US Military would be pointless, unimaginative and frustrating.

WithAllWindsAhead | Sep18, 2017 3:40:39 PM | 21
Re. Ben #7:

To be fair he did put an end to Timber Sycamore. The deep state wouldn't have pushed so hard on the Russian angle if there weren't a real upheaval. IMO, it went beyond simply covering for the DNC leaks. The whole establishment dog piled the Russian angle. It was for a time the principal means of disrupting Trump's agenda. I think Trump's token strike on the Syrian airbase is evidence of all of this. It was the absolute minimum he could have done in the face of a tidal wave of internal war pressures. And, they certainly could have gotten away with way more of the "trump is a Nazi angle," but they appear to have stopped after they got Bannon out.

Prescribing Trump, a monster though he is, as being at least the lesser war candidate holds IMO. What his presidency has illuminated above all else is the wild degree to which US is first and foremost of war. It is perhaps the most ubiquitous force that charges the US system.

That all said, we are going to find out real soon what the military is after. The SDF and SAA meeting in Deir Ezor is going to tell us a lot. This is perhaps their last chance at balkanization of Syria. A glimmer of hope still resides however in the supposed Pentagon revolt that took place over Obama's red line in the sand, as reported by Sy Hersh and others. As evil as the US military is, they dont seem to actually want war with Russia, unlike the intelligence complex. I, personally, am still hopeful at least about Syria.

somebody | Sep18, 2017 4:17:08 PM | 24
16 - let Putin explain it to you
The Russian leader expressed confidence that "one of the key components of our self-consciousness, one of the values and ideas is patriotism." Putin recalled the words of outstanding Soviet Russian scholar Dmitry Likhachev that patriotism drastically differs from nationalism. "Nationalism is hatred of other peoples, while patriotism is love for your motherland," Putin cited his words.
somebody | Sep18, 2017 4:38:26 PM | 25
add to 24

Or more historical: "Patriotism" was coined in Europe by the French revolution, forming a common state of citizens open to all who can identify with common values and culture. But American Patriots came before that and that is probably where the French got the word.

As a group, Patriots represented a wide array of social, economic and ethnic backgrounds.

"Nationalism" was a 19th century reaction to the export of the French revolution when European kingdoms tried a legitimization of borders based on language and genetics. It was all war from there to the Second World War and Auschwitz. If you want to sink the US in an internal Civil War try nationalism.

Jackrabbit | Sep18, 2017 4:42:09 PM | 26
I think there is some hyperventilating here. Was Trump 'turned'? Was his administration 'taken over' or was he always a figurehead? I decided several months ago that it was the latter:
> How Things Work: Betrayal by Faux Populist Leaders

> Taken In: Fake News Distracts Us from Fake Election

During his campaign Trump was vocally pro-military.

PS Hillary has always been pro-military also.

broders | Sep18, 2017 5:09:57 PM | 27
well, the system cannot "win"... dialectics... every steps it takes to control and secure "things", brings it closer to its end, and this, inevitably. no one wins, ever. no one looses even. the only way to fight and defeat evil is a decisive progress in goodness, to ignore it... the reality on the ground allows us to think that way, to set up concerts in the ruins, for good. thank you russia (as for the us military, they need 5 or 6 years to just cath up with last year's stand... but they still can agitate their little arms, so they do).
Christian Chuba | Sep18, 2017 5:40:56 PM | 28
Location, location, location
I am in shock and awe of our Pentagon (and CIA)'s ability to market themselves. I am convinced that this is their core area of competency as I read the slick consultant generated talking points on how $600B equals a dilapidated military instead of one that needs a purge. If we really have a readiness problem, heads should roll before they get more money but instead we cry for the incompetents.

The vaunted sea lanes and free trade

I used for fall for this nonsensical argument, that we needed 20 carrier groups to patrol the oceans to ensure free trade. Really? All we need is an international system of Coast Guards augmented by a few missile boats if there are some countries that don't have the budget for a coast guard to prevent piracy. We don't need aircraft carriers for that. Why do we assume that we need 24x7 aircraft coverage in the Pacific, Persian Gulf and Mediterranean? I have a vague memory of the 80's where it was a big deal that we 'sent our fleet' to the Mediterranean for some occasions. It wasn't assumed that we had a task force parked there 100% of the time.

I don't see why we can't get by with 6 or at most 8 carrier groups with the understanding that we would never deploy more than 2 for special occasions so that they can rotate assignments.

I don't want to think of one | Sep18, 2017 5:41:53 PM | 29
Disappointed in your post, b. Expected better.

"The insurgency that brought Trump to the top was defeated by a counter-insurgency campaign waged by the U.S. military. (Historically its first successful one)"

The USA was on the winning side for the Boxer Rebellion, the 1899-1902 Philippine Insurrection, and a lot of other counter-insurgency operations. Basic military history. Just wanted to mention that to set the correct tone, because your blog post started out factually incorrect and carried on that way until the end.

Basic reasoning test, b:

i) Do you think Trump has been defeated by 'the US military', or ii) do you think a small number of senior military men have thwarted Trump? Because the two are very different things.

I would argue that Mattis, McMaster, Kelly, and their line reports don't represent "the US military", or even its generals per se. They represent themselves as people financially beholden to major investment banks for their retirement funds; people fearful of being blackmailed and destroyed by the NSA and CIA and Mossad; people who rose to senior posts during prior administrations because they were flunkies to the establishment .

Do you think Trump is a weak-minded cretin? Because that's what your theory requires. That the guy can't remember his oft-repeated positions and statements after some briefings and a few months. I say that nobody loses their wits that fast, and nobody does a 180 on so many core policies without knowing that they're doing it.

Trump's wealth (at least in the high hundreds of millions $) and his election victory say he's no moron. He probably knows what he is doing. He's either a guy who gave up the struggle after getting the proverbial political hell beaten out of him in the first months of his administration, or he willingly misled his electoral base when campaigning. Perhaps a little of both. He's known for being a BS merchant. Myself, I think he lied outright to the voters during his run for president. It's not a wild idea: so did Obama, Bush, and Clinton. Bigly.

Trump made the decisions that we criticse so much. Trump decided to let the Obama holdovers stay in the administration. He decided to hire Goldman Sachs flunkies. He decided to send cruise missiles to strike Shayrat. He decided to approve US assistance to Saudi Arabia in Yemen. H decided to let his zionist son-in-law, who is indebted to George Soros, into the White House. He decided to fire Bannon almost as soon as Bannon came out publicly against war with North Korea. (Possibly a deliberate, desperate attempt at a 'spoiler' tactic on Bannon's part, to prevent conflict.) Trump decided to renege on his promises to the electorate about immigration. He decided to sign an unprecedented, unconstitutional law that bound his hands and imposed sanctions on Russia. He decided to go along with the Russian hacking lie by saying that Russia could, maybe, have hacked the DNC and HRC and whoever else (probably including Disney, the Shriners, and my mother). He decided to employ Sean Spicer and Reince Priebus, Scaramucchi and everyone else. He approved all of those things.

"It is indisputable that the generals are now ruling in Washington DC."
Yeah, nah. Pretty sure that's still the Wall St lobby, the Israel lobby, the CFR and the usual mob. Generals are just hired thugs, as Smedley Butler put it. Or as Kissinger put it, the US military is made up of "Military men" who "are just dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns."

What you've done, b, is to pull together some half-formed thoughts and mashed them all together. It sounds badass as a righteously indignant blog post, and I bet the Huffpost crowd would love it – but it fails as logic.

NemesisCalling | Sep18, 2017 5:58:47 PM | 30
@25 somebody

Nice play of semantics. But it still sounds like "patriotism" is a nice euphemism for nationalism. Why else would Putin be the scourge of the west? Reminds me too of how Putin played nice all through the Syrian War calling the US their "partner." Another euphemism. Seems like Putin likes to sound like the better man (and he is) but part of his strategy has always been to underplay his hand in the mix.

Don Bacon | Sep18, 2017 6:09:44 PM | 31
@CC #28
re: aircraft carriers

New carriers cost about $12B each, plus the cost of the 5,000 crew-members and aircraft, plus the cost of the accompanying fleet that goes with every carrier. Carriers have been mainly used in the last decade in the Gulf area to launch aircraft to bomb third world countries. Most carriers are in port most of the time because they require a lot of maintenance, which adds a lot more to expense. They are also used to sail near enemy countries, Washington believing that they are useful to scare third world countries into thinking that they may be bombed, which might make some sense except the results are questionable. As you indicate, the main threat to world shipping is piracy for which carrier fleets are useless. The good thing about having a carrier in the Persian Gulf much of the time is that it ensures that Iran would not be attacked; it would be a sitting duck.

The current location of the eleven US carriers is below taken from here . There is a new addition to the fleet, CVN-78 Gerald R. Ford.
1 - Persian Gulf
1 - hurricane duty
1 - off Carolina coast
1- off Japan coast
7 - port

les7 | Sep18, 2017 6:22:59 PM | 32
There are generals and then there are generals... Just which ones are taking over? The Neo-con backed guys? The Pro-pentagon guys? The CIA/JSOC guys? The Black Ops Guys? or the Black on Black Ops guys? The reason I ask is that at one time they were all fighting each other in N.Syria.

It is not especially clear to me (being an outsider to US politics) which of the groups (or combination of groups) seems to have come out on top and have their guys as the gate-keeping, information-vetting guys doing the briefing of Trump. My feel of it is that the Pentagon has gained while JSOC, the black ops contractors, and black-on-black ops contractors have lost. The CIA seems to have broken even. Is this a fair read?

If so... I think it is overall a good thing (the beso of an bunch of bad) because the Pentagon have shown themselves to be a lot more sane when it comes to creating conflict zones. They tend to be less covert, a lot more overt and a lot less likely to forment war for the sake of some corporation or political subset of the ruling elite.

thoughts anyone?

Don Bacon | Sep18, 2017 6:24:14 PM | 33
#29
You're wrong. It's obvious who's in charge in Washington currently. There is no doubt that, politically speaking, the insurgency that brought Trump to the top was defeated by a counter-insurgency campaign waged by the U.S. military. Generals Mattis, McMaster and Kelly are paramount in the new administration. Mattis has been given decision power on war, which Trump had promised to curtail.

McMaster, with no diplomatic experience, is national security and Kelly manages Trump's office.

The whole administration has taken a new tack with these generals and their military cohorts -- they do no stand alone, they are part of an institution -- managing US foreign policy. Concomitant to this are other factors including the cut in the State Department budget, the appointment of neophyte and hawkish Haley at the UN and Trump's romance with Israel and Saudi Arabia.

Palloy | Sep18, 2017 6:45:10 PM | 34
Politics is always complex and messy and no one ever "rules" in the way being assumed. The military have always had a big say - how else did they get such a huge budget for years on end? CIA have always played a big part, likewise FBI, NSA, Wall St., CFR, Fed, IMF and so on. Three, maybe six , Generals now have a bigger influence. Bannon has gone, so less influence for the deplorables. That is only a subtle change in the big scheme of things.

And now we are going to have a military parade down Pennsylvania Avenue on 4th of July, http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-09-18/day-fire-and-fury-trump-considers-military-parade-down-pennsylvania-avenue (sorry -don't know what you want for links), just like that other fat person with a funny hair-cut, inexperienced, erratic and unpredictable, nuclear-armed and dangerous.

This is the just the death throes of an empire that is meeting the Limits to Growth. Expect MUCH MUCH worse to come. I think it will be SO horrible, many people will take the suicide option.

Linda O | Sep18, 2017 7:22:25 PM | 35
Obviously any 1000 or so word article is going to woefully simplified compared to the decades of historical and political research that will dissect the Trump presidency in the finest detail, I will say that this article has one glaring flaw that significantly lessens its value. Trump has rolled over for EVERYTHING and EVERYONE in Washington. There really is nothing special about the military's ease with which they captured and neutered Trump.

I don't think there is a single area of his campaign platform that he has given up on or flip-flopped on. I don't think there is any other president who has been a comparable ACROSS THE BOARD FAILURE like Trump.

No one has ever been surprised that the wacky, inane, or divorced from reality promises presidents made to get themselves elected never were followed through on. But every single president before Trump at the very least had a core set of priorities they immediately set in motion.

The failure of the Trump presidency should for once and for all put to rest the silly and juvinille dream of the lone super man heading off to Washington to FINALLY TAKE CARE OF BUSINESS and show those sleazy career politicians who things are done in the real world.

Trump walked into the White House with absolutely no governing apparatus ready to go on day one like every other presidential candidate has in the past.

Presidential candidates spend decades building up a vast network of people ready to hit the ground running and know how Washington works from the moment the election is over.

One has to wonder if Trump really ever expected to win. Or just has a complete lack of interest in the massive network o loyal and knowledgeable people needed to setup a brand new presidential administration.

And there is no check on how badly the Trump administration can fail. His base appears to be currled up in fetal position on Breitbart collectively chanting 'this is not happening, this is not happening.'

I don't think I've ever felt more joy than seeing that ABSOLUTE FILTH Hillary Clinton get here murderous and vile ass get handed to her by a TV personality.

Never in my dreams did I think Trump wouldn't accomplish ANYTHING.

So Trump fans, keep posting those MEMES and WINNING --

VietnamVet | Sep18, 2017 7:30:08 PM | 36
b's analysis rings true. The establishment has reined in Donald Trump. On their return from Florida, it appeared that Melania Trump is well aware of the history of the House of Bourbon. One does not become a Four-star General in the establishment today without an instinctive understanding of the needs of the organ grinder. The end stage of an Empire is everybody for themselves. The open source insurrection is over until it isn't anymore. Periodic combat takeoffs from Joint Base Andrews are not reassuring. The desire to stay alive is the only brake on the rush to a nuclear war with North Korea or the heating up of the Cold War with Russia.
Madmen | Sep18, 2017 7:58:27 PM | 38
A great follow-up article to an UNZ article early this year which stated:

During the election campaign the power elite's military faction under Trump confounded all political pundits by outflanking and decisively defeating the power elite's political faction. In fact by capturing the Republican nomination and overwhelmingly defeating the Democratic establishment, Trump and the military faction not just shattered the power elites' political faction, within both the Democratic and Republican parties, but simultaneously ended both the Clinton and Bush dynasties.

During the election campaign the power elite's corporate faction realised, far too late, that Trump was a direct threat to their power base, and turned the full force of their corporate media against Trump's military faction, while Trump using social media bypassed and eviscerated the corporate media causing them to lose all remaining credibility.

http://www.unz.com/article/political-sciences-theory-of-everything-on-the-2016-us-election/

PavewayIV | Sep18, 2017 8:15:14 PM | 39
I respectfully disagree with everyone. There is nobody in charge in Washington DC and hasn't been for a long time.

There are psychopathic oligarchs, warlords, fiefdoms and secret cabals milking their power and authority for a variety of self-serving interests with varying degrees of success and failure. The entire government has mutated to an arena where the above powers spar for more control and more money day after day. There is no real oversight. It's too complex and secretive for any one person or group to be 'in charge'.

The announcer is not 'in charge'. He's just the announcer, nothing more. And the little people are just spectators, nothing more.

MadMax2 | Sep18, 2017 8:23:13 PM | 40
@34 Palloy

Couldn't agree more re: Limits to Growth. And no prizes for guessing which major economies have gone about insulating themselves against the pitfalls of cowboy economics... nothing was fixed, repaired, refitted or replaced after 2008...crazy that any chance of sensible, sustainable capitalism in the west might be lost to the cannibals need of rampant consumerism. I'll side with the nations that keep an interest in public banking systems rather than the one's that encourage it citizens ro eat the face off one another.

It's not all dark though, The Tale of The Don is really a romantic one... Of the wild west never ending... Of the railroad tycoons that never really died.

Jackrabbit gets more right with every passing day... there is no such thing as an outsider the moment you win.

Don Bacon | Sep18, 2017 8:27:27 PM | 41
@ 38
Yes, the power elite's military faction. Not: "I would argue that Mattis, McMaster, Kelly, and their line reports don't represent "the US military", or even its generals per se. They represent themselves as people financially beholden to major investment banks. . ."

Outsiders don't appreciate the power of the strengthening military-industrial complex that Eisenhower cautioned about in his farewell address.

Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense. We have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security alone more than the net income of all United States corporations.

Now this conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every Statehouse, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet, we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources, and livelihood are all involved. So is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

Don Bacon | Sep18, 2017 8:31:06 PM | 42
from "The Hill": Overnight Defense: Senate passes $700B defense bill | 3,000 US troops heading to Afghanistan | Two more Navy officials fired over ship collisions
V. Arnold | Sep18, 2017 8:34:04 PM | 43
A Chinese fire drill best describes what passes for the U.S.'s present level of policy. Most of the world watches; aghast at the spectacle, while cowering with fear at the hubris...
Jackrabbit | Sep18, 2017 8:38:28 PM | 44
@spudski

But other commenters have also been critical, though less colorful.

@Madmen

Is the possibility of Trump as controlled opposition so far-fetched? Do you think the "power elite's political wing" only runs one candidate? Have you heard of "illusion of choice"? Do you think sheepdog Bernie was a real candidate?

Obama and Trump both gained greater apparent legitimacy by: 1) beating the establishment candidate; and 2) being besieged by bat-shit crazy critics (birthers; anti-Russians & antifa).

As soon as you choose a side, you are trapped. Two sides of the same coin. Minted in hell.

V. Arnold | Sep18, 2017 9:00:19 PM | 45
Jackrabbit @ Sep18, 2017 8:38:28 PM | 44

As soon as you choose a side, you are trapped. Two sides of the same coin. Minted in hell.

Nice, I like it...

spudski | Sep18, 2017 9:01:53 PM | 46
@Jackrabbit

Agreed. I had no problem with the substance, in fact I like the fact that there are diverse opinions here and I learn a lot from the discussions. I just didn't need the gratuitous insults to b given how much effort he puts in here.

[Sep 18, 2017] Looks like Trump initially has a four point platform that was anti-neoliberal in its essence: non-interventionism, no to neoliberal globalization, no to outsourcing of jobs, and no to multiculturism. All were betrayed very soon

Highly recommended!
Jun 02, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com

It looks like Trump initially has a four point platform that was anti-neoliberal in its essence:

  1. Non-interventionism. End the wars for the expansion of American neoliberal empire. Détente was Russia. Abolishing NATO and saving money on this. Let European defend themselves. Etc.
  2. No to neoliberal globalization. Abolishing of transnational treaties that favor large multinationals such as TPP, NAFTA, etc. Tariffs and other means of punishing corporations who move production overseas. Repatriation of foreign profits to the USA and closing of tax holes which allow to keep profits in tax heavens without paying a dime to the US government.
  3. No to neoliberal "transnational job market" -- free movement of labor. Criminal prosecution and deportation of illegal immigrants. Cutting intake of refugees. Curtailing legal immigration, especially fake and abused programs like H1B. Making it more difficult for people from countries with substantial terrorist risk to enter the USA including temporary prohibition of issuing visas from certain (pretty populous) Muslim countries.
  4. No to the multiculturalism. Stress on "Christian past" and "white heritage" of American society and the role of whites in building the country. Rejection of advertising "special rights" of minorities such as black population, LGBT, etc. Promotion them as "identity wedges" in elections was the trick so dear to DemoRats and, especially Hillary and Obama.

That means that Trump election platform on an intuitive level has caught several important problem that were created in the US society by dismantling of the "New Deal" and rampant neoliberalism practiced since Reagan ("Greed is good" mantra).

Of cause, after election he decided to practice the same "bait and switch" maneuver as Obama. Generally he folded in less then 100 days. Not without help from DemoRats (Neoliberal Democrats) which created a witch hunt over "Russian ties" with their dreams of the second Watergate.

But in any case, this platform still provides a path to election victory in any forthcoming election, as problems listed are real , are not solved, and are extremely important for lower 90% of Americans. Tulsi Gabbard so far is that only democratic politician that IMHO qualifies. Sanders is way too old and somewhat inconsistent on No.1.

Frank was the first to note this "revolutionary" part of Tramp platform:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/07/donald-trump-why-americans-support

Last week, I decided to watch several hours of Trump speeches for myself. I saw the man ramble and boast and threaten and even seem to gloat when protesters were ejected from the arenas in which he spoke. I was disgusted by these things, as I have been disgusted by Trump for 20 years. But I also noticed something surprising. In each of the speeches I watched, Trump spent a good part of his time talking about an entirely legitimate issue, one that could even be called left-wing.

Yes, Donald Trump talked about trade. In fact, to judge by how much time he spent talking about it, trade may be his single biggest concern – not white supremacy. Not even his plan to build a wall along the Mexican border, the issue that first won him political fame.

He did it again during the debate on 3 March: asked about his political excommunication by Mitt Romney, he chose to pivot and talk about trade.

It seems to obsess him: the destructive free-trade deals our leaders have made, the many companies that have moved their production facilities to other lands, the phone calls he will make to those companies' CEOs in order to threaten them with steep tariffs unless they move back to the US.

[Sep 18, 2017] Trump won but he is completely alone. The Neocons have a total, repeat total, control of the Congress, the media, banking and finance, and the courts. From Clinton to Clinton they have deeply infiltrated the Pentagon, Foggy Bottom, and the three letter agencies by The Saker

Although he speaks about the USA being occupied, looks like Saker does not understand that that the US empire is actually a global neoliberal empire where multinationals and financial oligarchy have political control. And without a viable alternative it probably will not collapse, as any collapse presuppose the withdrawal of support. The necessary level of isolation is possible only if a an alternative is present
Now like in befor the World War Ii there is struggle for "spheres of influence", in which the USA is gradually losing as both Germany and Japan restored their industrial potential and China is a new powerful player on the world scene, which now is allied with Russia with its formidable nuclear deterrent that now anti-missile defense can neutralize"
Also the USA venture into Ukraine means the completion of revision of the results of WWII, which opened a new can of worms for the USA making Russia essentially a hostile power (which neocon admit and try to exploit via the current neo-McCarthism witch hunt)
Notable quotes:
"... Trump wins. Problem: he will be completely alone. The Neocons have a total, repeat total, control of the Congress, the media, banking and finance, and the courts. From Clinton to Clinton they have deeply infiltrated the Pentagon, Foggy Bottom, and the three letter agencies. ..."
"... In their hate-filled rage against Trump and the American people (aka "the basket of deplorables") the Neocons have had to show their true face. By their rejection of the outcome of the elections, by their riots, their demonization of Trump, the Neocons have shown two crucial things: first, that the US democracy is a sad joke and that they, the Neocons, are an occupation regime which rules against the will of the American people. ..."
"... And since, just like Israel, the USA are unable to frighten their enemies, they are basically left with nothing, no legitimacy, no ability to coerce. So yes, the Neocons have won. But their victory is removes the last chance for the US to avoid a collapse. ..."
"... Externally, the US foreign policy is basically "frozen" and in lieu of a foreign policy we now only have a long series of empty threats hurled at a list of demonized countries which are now promised "fire and brimstone" should they dare to disobey Uncle Sam. ..."
"... This bizarre, and illegal, form of a "vote of no-confidence" further hammers in the message that Trump is either a madman, a traitor, or both. ..."
"... Organizationally, it is clear that Trump is surrounded by enemies as illustrated by the absolutely outrageous fact that he can't even talk to a foreign head of state without having the transcript of his conversation leaked to the Ziomedia . ..."
"... I believe that these all are preparatory steps to trigger a major crisis and use it to remove Trump, either by a process of impeachment, or by force under the pretext of some crisis. Just look at the message which the Ziomedia has been hammeing into the brains of the US population. ..."
"... just imagine the reaction in South Korea and Japan if some crazy US strike on the DPRK results in Seoul and Tokyo being hit by missiles! ..."
"... when the cat is gone, the mice dance ..."
"... The mouse dreams dreams that would terrify the cat ..."
"... Third, for all the encouraging statistics about the Dow Jones, unemployment and growth, the reality is that the US society is rapidly transforming itself in a three-tired one: on top, a small number of obscenely rich people, under them, a certain amount of qualified professionals who service the filthy rich and who struggle to maintain a lifestyle which in the past was associated with the middle-class. And then the vast majority of Americans who basically are looking at making "minimal wage plus a little something" and who basically survive by not paying for health insurance, by typically working two jobs, by eating cheap and unhealthy "prolefeed" and by giving up on that which every American worker could enjoy in the 1950s and 1960s (have one parent at home, have paid holidays, a second vacation home, etc.). Americans are mostly hard workers and, so far, most of them are surviving, but they are mostly one paycheck away from seriously bad poverty. A lot of them only make ends meet because they get help from their parents and grand-parents (the same is true of southern Europe, by the way). A large segment of the US population now survives only because of Walmart and the Dollar Store. Once that fails, food stamps are the last option. That, or jail, of course. ..."
"... No wonder that when so many Americans heard Hillary's comment about the "basket of deplorables" they took that as declaration of war. ..."
"... Whatever may be the case, by their manic insistence, on one hand, to humiliate and crush Trump and, on the other, to repress millions of Americans the Neocons are committing a double mistake. First, they are showing their true face and, second, they are subverting the very institutions they are using to control and run this country. ..."
"... What makes the gradual collapse of the AngloZionist Empire so uniquely dangerous is that it is by far the biggest and most powerful empire in world history. No empire has ever had the quasi monopoly on power the USA enjoyed since WWII. By any measure, military, economic, political, social, the US came out of WWII as a giant and while there were ups and downs during the subsequent decades, the collapse of the USSR only reaffirmed what appeared to be the total victory of the United States. ..."
"... And if Obama was probably the most incompetent President in US history, Trump will be the first one to be openly lynched while in office. As a result, the AngloZionist Empire is now like a huge freight train which has lost its locomotive but still has an immense momentum pushing it forward even though there is nobody in control any more. The rest of the planet, with the irrelevant exception of the East Europeans, is now scrambling in horror to get out of the path of this out of control train. So far, the tracks (minimal common sense, political realities) are more or less holding, but a crash (political, economic or military) could happen at any moment. And that is very, very scary. ..."
"... The US has anywhere between 700 to 1000 military bases worldwide, the entire international financial system is deeply enmeshed with the US economy, the US Dollar is still the only real reserve currency, United States Treasury securities are held by all the key international players (including Russia and China), SWIFT is politically controlled by the US, the US is the only country in the world that can print as much money as it wants and, last but not least, the US has a huge nuclear arsenal. As a result, a US collapse would threaten everybody and that means that nobody would want to trigger one. The collapse of the Soviet Union threatened the rest of mankind only in one way: by its nuclear arsenal. In contrast, any collapse of the United States would threaten everybody in many different ways. ..."
"... This is the irony of our situation: even though the entire planet is sick and tried of the incompetent arrogance of the AngloZionists, nobody out there wants their Empire to catastrophically collapse. And yet, with the Neocons in power, such a collapse appears inevitable with potentially devastating consequences for everybody. ..."
"... This is really amazing, think of it: everybody hates the Neocons, not only a majority of the American people, but truly the entire planet. And yet that numerically small group of people has somehow managed to put everybody in danger, including themselves, due to their ugly vindictiveness, infinite arrogance and ideology-induced short-sightedness. That this could ever have happened, and at a planetary scale, is a dramatic testimony to the moral and spiritual decay of our civilization: how did we ever let things get that far?! ..."
"... My biggest hope with Trump was that he would be willing to sacrifice the Empire for the sake of the US (the opposite of what the Neocons are doing: they are willing to sacrifice the US for the sake of their Empire) and that he would manage a relatively safe and hopefully non-violent transition from Empire to "normal country" for the US. Clearly, this is ain't happening. Instead, the Neocons are threatening everybody: the Chinese, the Russians, the North Koreans and the Venezuelans of course, but also the Europeans (economically), the entire Middle-East (via the "only democracy in the Middle-East"), all the developing countries and even the American people. Heck, they are even threatening the US President himself, and in not-so-subtle ways! ..."
"... my overwhelming sense is that Trump will be removed from office, either for "high crimes and misdemeanors" or for "medical reasons" (they will simply declare him insane and unfit to be the President). ..."
"... The evil hand of the "Russian KGB" (yes, I know, the KGB was dissolved in 1991) will be found everywhere, especially amongst US libertarians (who will probably the only ones with enough brains to understand what is taking place). The (pseudo-) "Left" will rejoice. ..."
"... Should this course of action result in an unexpected level or resistance, either regional or social, a 9-11 false flag followed by a war will the most likely scenario (why stray away from something which worked so well the first time around?!). ..."
"... in 1991 when the US sent the 82nd AB to Iraq there was nothing standing between this light infantry force and the Iraqi armored divisions. Had the Iraqis attacked the plan was to use tactical nuclear weapons. Then this was all quickly forgotten ..."
"... There is a reason why the Neocons thrive in times of crisis: it allows them to hide behind the mayhem, especially when they are the ones who triggered the mayhem in the first place. This means that as long as the Neocons are anywhere near in power they will never, ever, allow peace to suddenly break out, lest the spotlight be suddenly shined directly upon them. Chaos, wars, crises – this is their natural habitat. Think of it as the by-product of their existence. Eventually, of course, they will be stopped and they will be defeated, like all their predecessors in history. But I shudder when I think of the price mankind will have to pay this time around. ..."
Aug 18, 2017 | www.unz.com

First, my writing on the wall

In October of last year a wrote an analysis I entitled The USA are about to face the worst crisis of their history and how Putin's example might inspire Trump and I think that this is a good time to revisit it now. I began the analysis by looking at the calamities which would befall the United States if Hillary was elected. Since this did not happen (thank God!), we can safely ignore that part and look at my prediction of what would happen if Trump was elected. Here is what I wrote:

Trump wins. Problem: he will be completely alone. The Neocons have a total, repeat total, control of the Congress, the media, banking and finance, and the courts. From Clinton to Clinton they have deeply infiltrated the Pentagon, Foggy Bottom, and the three letter agencies. The Fed is their stronghold. How in the world will Trump deal with these rabid " crazies in the basement "? Consider the vicious hate campaign which all these "personalities" (from actors, to politicians to reporters) have unleashed against Trump – they have burned their bridges, they know that they will lose it all if Trump wins (and, if he proves to be an easy pushover his election will make no difference anyway). The Neocons have nothing to lose and they will fight to the very last one.

What could Trump possibly do to get anything done if he is surrounded by Neocons and their agents of influence? Bring in an entirely different team? How is he going to vet them? His first choice was to take Pence as a VP – a disaster (he is already sabotaging Trump on Syria and the elections outcome). I *dread* the hear whom Trump will appoint as a White House Chief of Staff as I am afraid that just to appease the Neocons he will appoint some new version of the infamous Rahm Emanuel And should Trump prove that he has both principles and courage, the Neocons can always "Dallas" him and replace him with Pence. Et voilà !

I went on to suggest that Trump's only option would be to follow Putin's example and do the the Neocons what Putin did to the oligarchs. Clearly that did not happen. In fact, one month after the election of Trump I wrote another analysis entitled " The Neocons and the "deep state" have neutered the Trump Presidency, it's over folks! ".

Less than a month ago I warned that a 'color revolution ' was taking place in the USA . My first element of proof was the so-called "investigation" which the CIA, FBI, NSA and others were conducting against President Trump's candidate to become National Security Advisor, General Flynn. Tonight, the plot to get rid of Flynn has finally succeeded and General Flynn had to offer his resignation . Trump accepted it. Now let's immediately get one thing out of the way: Flynn was hardly a saint or a perfect wise man who would single handedly saved the world. That he was not. However, what Flynn was is the cornerstone of Trump's national security policy . ( ) The Neocon run 'deep state' has now forced Flynn to resign under the idiotic pretext that he had a telephone conversation, on an open, insecure and clearly monitored, line with the Russian ambassador. And Trump accepted this resignation. Ever since Trump made it to the White House, he has taken blow after blow from the Neocon-run Ziomedia, from Congress, from all the Hollywood doubleplusgoodthinking "stars" and even from European politicians. And Trump took each blow without ever fighting back. Nowhere was his famous "you are fired!" to be seen. But I still had hope. I wanted to hope. I felt that it was my duty to hope. But now Trump has betrayed us all. Again, Flynn was not my hero. But he was, by all accounts, Trump's hero. And Trump betrayed him. The consequences of this will be immense. For one thing, Trump is now clearly broken. It took the 'deep state' only weeks to castrate Trump and to make him bow to the powers that be . Those who would have stood behind Trump will now feel that he will not stand behind them and they will all move back away from him. The Neocons will feel elated by the elimination of their worst enemy and emboldened by this victory they will push on, doubling-down over and over and over again. It's over, folks, the deep state has won.

I then concluded that the consequences of this victory would catastrophic for the United States:

In their hate-filled rage against Trump and the American people (aka "the basket of deplorables") the Neocons have had to show their true face. By their rejection of the outcome of the elections, by their riots, their demonization of Trump, the Neocons have shown two crucial things: first, that the US democracy is a sad joke and that they, the Neocons, are an occupation regime which rules against the will of the American people. In other words, just like Israel, the USA has no legitimacy left. And since, just like Israel, the USA are unable to frighten their enemies, they are basically left with nothing, no legitimacy, no ability to coerce. So yes, the Neocons have won. But their victory is removes the last chance for the US to avoid a collapse.

I think that what we are seeing today are the first signs of the impending collapse.

The symptoms of the agony

Externally, the US foreign policy is basically "frozen" and in lieu of a foreign policy we now only have a long series of empty threats hurled at a list of demonized countries which are now promised "fire and brimstone" should they dare to disobey Uncle Sam. While this makes for good headlines, this does not qualify as a "policy" of any kind (I discussed this issue at length during my recent interview with SouthFront ). And then there is Congress which has basically stripped Trump from his powers to conduct foreign policy . This bizarre, and illegal, form of a "vote of no-confidence" further hammers in the message that Trump is either a madman, a traitor, or both. Internally, the latest riots in Charlottesville now being blamed on Trump who, after being a Putin agent is now further demonized as some kind of Nazi (see Paul Craig Roberts' first and second warnings about this dynamic) Organizationally, it is clear that Trump is surrounded by enemies as illustrated by the absolutely outrageous fact that he can't even talk to a foreign head of state without having the transcript of his conversation leaked to the Ziomedia .

I believe that these all are preparatory steps to trigger a major crisis and use it to remove Trump, either by a process of impeachment, or by force under the pretext of some crisis. Just look at the message which the Ziomedia has been hammeing into the brains of the US population.

The psychological preparation for the forthcoming coup: scaring them all to death Here are three very telling examples taken from Newsweek's front page:

... ... ...

Ask yourself, what is the message here? Trump is a traitor, he works for Putin, Putin wants to destroy democracy in the United States and these two men together are the most dangerous men on the planet . This is a " plot against America ", no less! Not bad, right? "They" are clearly out there go get "us" and "we" are all in terrible danger: Kim Jong-un is about to declare nuclear war on the US, Xi and Putin are threatening the world with their armies, and "our" own President came to power courtesy of the "Russian KGB" and "Putin's hackers", he now works for the Russians, he is also clearly a Nazi, a White supremacist, a racist and, possibly, a " new Hitler " ( as is Putin , of course!).

And then, there are those truly scary Mooslims and Aye-rabs who apparently want only two things in life: destroy "our way of life" and kill all the "infidels". This is why we need the TSA, 16 intelligence agencies and militarized police SWAT teams everywhere: in case the terrorists come to get us where we live.

Dangerous international consequences

This would all be rather funny if it was not also extremely dangerous. For one thing, the US is really poking at a dangerous foe when it constantly tries to scare Kim Jong-un and the DPRK leadership. No, not because of the North Korean nukes (which are probably not real nuclear capable ICBMs but a not necessarily compatible combination of nuclear 'devices' and intermediate range ballistic missiles) but because of the huge and hard to destroy conventional North Korean military. The real threat are not missiles, but a deadly combination of conventional artillery and special forces which present very little danger to the US or the US military, but which present a huge threat for the population of Seoul and the northern section of South Korea. Nukes, in whatever form, are really only an added problem, a toxic "icing" on an already very dangerous 'conventional cake'.

[Sidebar - a real life nightmare : Now, if you *really* want to terrify yourself and stay awake all night then consider the following. While I personally believe that Kim Jong-un is not insane and that the main objective of the North Korean leadership is to avoid a war at all costs, what if I am wrong? What if those who say that the North Korean leaders are totally insane are right? Or, which I think is much more likely, what if Kim Jong-un and the North Korean leaders came to the conclusion that they have nothing to lose, that the Americans are going to kill them all, along with their families and friends? What could they, in theory, do if truly desperate? Well, let me tell you: forget about Guam; think Tokyo! Indeed, while the DPRK could devastate Seoul with old fashioned artillery systems, DPRK missiles are probably capable of striking Tokyo or the Keihanshin region encompassing Kyoto, Osaka and Kobe including the key industries of the Hanshin Industrial Region . The Greater Tokyo area (Kanto region) and the Keihanshin region are very densely populated (37 and 20 million people respectively) and contain an immense number of industries, many of which would produce an ecological disaster of immense proportions if hit by missiles. Not only that, but a strike on the key economic and financial nodes of Japan would probably result in a 9-11 kind of international economic collapse. So if the North Koreans wanted to really, really hurt the Americans what they could do is strike Seoul, and key cities in Japan resulting in a huge political crisis for the entire planet. During the Cold War we used to study the consequences of a Soviet strike against Japan and the conclusion was always the same: Japan cannot afford a war of any kind. The Japanese landmass is too small, too densely populated, to rich in lucrative targets and a war lay waste to the entire country. This is still true today, only more so. And just imagine the reaction in South Korea and Japan if some crazy US strike on the DPRK results in Seoul and Tokyo being hit by missiles! The South Koreans have already made their position unambiguously clear , by the way. As for the Japanese, they are officially placing their hopes in missiles (as if technology could mitigate the consequences of insanity!). So yeah, the DPRK is plenty dangerous and pushing them into their last resort is totally irresponsible indeed, nukes or no nukes]

What we are observing now is positive feedback loop in which each move by the Neocons results in a deeper and deeper destabilization of the entire system. Needless to say, this is extremely dangerous and can only result in an eventual catastrophe/collapse. In fact, the signs that the US is totally losing control are already all over the place, here are just a few headlines to illustrate this:

Iran could quit nuclear deal in 'hours' if new U.S. sanctions imposed: Rouhani Israel: Netanyahu declares support for a Kurdish state Syrian forces take 3 more towns en route to Deir ez-Zor in first airborne operation Maduro calls for nationwide 'anti-imperialist' drills after Trump's threat of 'military option' Soldiers of the 201st (Russian) base in Tadjikistan have been put on high alert as part of a military exercise Confirmed: Turkey to end support for anti-government terrorists in Syria Russia Plans Huge Zapad 2017 Military Exercises With Belarus

A French expression goes " when the cat is gone, the mice dance ", and this is exactly what is happening now: the US is both very weak and basically absent. As for the Armenians, they say " The mouse dreams dreams that would terrify the cat ". Well, the "mice" of the world are dancing and dreaming and simply ignoring the "cat". Every move the cat makes only makes things worse for him. The world is moving on, while the cat is busy destroying himself.

Dangerous domestic consequences

First on my list would be race riots. In fact, they are already happening all over the United States, but they are rarely presented as such. And I am not talking about the "official" riots of Black Lives Matter, which are bad enough, I am talking about the many mini-riots which the official media is systematically trying to obfuscate. Those interested in this topic should read the book here ). The simple truth is that no regime can survive for too long when it proactively supports the exact opposite of what it officially is supposed to stand for. The result? I have yet to meet an adult American who would sincerely believe that he/she lives in the "land of the free and the home of the brave". Maybe infants still buy this stuff, but even teenagers know that this is a load of bull.

Third, for all the encouraging statistics about the Dow Jones, unemployment and growth, the reality is that the US society is rapidly transforming itself in a three-tired one: on top, a small number of obscenely rich people, under them, a certain amount of qualified professionals who service the filthy rich and who struggle to maintain a lifestyle which in the past was associated with the middle-class. And then the vast majority of Americans who basically are looking at making "minimal wage plus a little something" and who basically survive by not paying for health insurance, by typically working two jobs, by eating cheap and unhealthy "prolefeed" and by giving up on that which every American worker could enjoy in the 1950s and 1960s (have one parent at home, have paid holidays, a second vacation home, etc.). Americans are mostly hard workers and, so far, most of them are surviving, but they are mostly one paycheck away from seriously bad poverty. A lot of them only make ends meet because they get help from their parents and grand-parents (the same is true of southern Europe, by the way). A large segment of the US population now survives only because of Walmart and the Dollar Store. Once that fails, food stamps are the last option. That, or jail, of course.

Combine all this and you get a potentially extremely explosive situation. No wonder that when so many Americans heard Hillary's comment about the "basket of deplorables" they took that as declaration of war.

And how do the Neocons plan to deal with all this? By cracking down on free speech and dissent, of course! What else? Their only response – repression of course!

YouTube, Google, Facebook, Twitter – they are all cracking down on "bad" speech which includes pretty much any topic a garden variety self-described 'liberal' frowns upon. GoDaddy and Google are even going after domain names. Oh sure, nobody gets thrown in jail for, say, defending the 2nd Amendment, but they get "demonetized" and their accounts simply closed. It's not the cops cracking down on free speech, it's "Corporate America", but the effect is the same. Apparently, the Neocons do not realize that censorship is not a viable strategy in the age of the Internet. Or maybe they do, and they are deliberately trying to trigger a backlash?

Then there is the vilification campaign in the media: unless you are some kind of 'minority' you are assumed to be nefarious by birth and guilty of all the evils on the planet. And your leader is Trump, of course, or maybe even Putin himself, vide supra. Christian heterosexual White males better run for cover

Whatever may be the case, by their manic insistence, on one hand, to humiliate and crush Trump and, on the other, to repress millions of Americans the Neocons are committing a double mistake. First, they are showing their true face and, second, they are subverting the very institutions they are using to control and run this country. That, of course, only further weaken the Neocons and the United States themselves and that further accelerates the positive feedback loop mentioned above which now threatens the entire international system.

Us and Them

What makes the gradual collapse of the AngloZionist Empire so uniquely dangerous is that it is by far the biggest and most powerful empire in world history. No empire has ever had the quasi monopoly on power the USA enjoyed since WWII. By any measure, military, economic, political, social, the US came out of WWII as a giant and while there were ups and downs during the subsequent decades, the collapse of the USSR only reaffirmed what appeared to be the total victory of the United States. In my admittedly subjective opinion, the last competent (no, I did not say 'good', I said 'competent') US President was George Herbert Walker Bush who, unlike his successors, at least knew how to run an Empire. After that, it is all downhill, faster and faster. And if Obama was probably the most incompetent President in US history, Trump will be the first one to be openly lynched while in office. As a result, the AngloZionist Empire is now like a huge freight train which has lost its locomotive but still has an immense momentum pushing it forward even though there is nobody in control any more. The rest of the planet, with the irrelevant exception of the East Europeans, is now scrambling in horror to get out of the path of this out of control train. So far, the tracks (minimal common sense, political realities) are more or less holding, but a crash (political, economic or military) could happen at any moment. And that is very, very scary.

The US has anywhere between 700 to 1000 military bases worldwide, the entire international financial system is deeply enmeshed with the US economy, the US Dollar is still the only real reserve currency, United States Treasury securities are held by all the key international players (including Russia and China), SWIFT is politically controlled by the US, the US is the only country in the world that can print as much money as it wants and, last but not least, the US has a huge nuclear arsenal. As a result, a US collapse would threaten everybody and that means that nobody would want to trigger one. The collapse of the Soviet Union threatened the rest of mankind only in one way: by its nuclear arsenal. In contrast, any collapse of the United States would threaten everybody in many different ways.

So the real question now is this: can the rest of the planet prevent a catastrophic collapse of the AngloZionist Empire?

This is the irony of our situation: even though the entire planet is sick and tried of the incompetent arrogance of the AngloZionists, nobody out there wants their Empire to catastrophically collapse. And yet, with the Neocons in power, such a collapse appears inevitable with potentially devastating consequences for everybody.

This is really amazing, think of it: everybody hates the Neocons, not only a majority of the American people, but truly the entire planet. And yet that numerically small group of people has somehow managed to put everybody in danger, including themselves, due to their ugly vindictiveness, infinite arrogance and ideology-induced short-sightedness. That this could ever have happened, and at a planetary scale, is a dramatic testimony to the moral and spiritual decay of our civilization: how did we ever let things get that far?!

And the next obvious question: can we still stop them?

I honestly don't know. I hope so, but I am not sure. My biggest hope with Trump was that he would be willing to sacrifice the Empire for the sake of the US (the opposite of what the Neocons are doing: they are willing to sacrifice the US for the sake of their Empire) and that he would manage a relatively safe and hopefully non-violent transition from Empire to "normal country" for the US. Clearly, this is ain't happening. Instead, the Neocons are threatening everybody: the Chinese, the Russians, the North Koreans and the Venezuelans of course, but also the Europeans (economically), the entire Middle-East (via the "only democracy in the Middle-East"), all the developing countries and even the American people. Heck, they are even threatening the US President himself, and in not-so-subtle ways!

So what's next?

Truly, I don't know. But my overwhelming sense is that Trump will be removed from office, either for "high crimes and misdemeanors" or for "medical reasons" (they will simply declare him insane and unfit to be the President). Seeing how weak and spineless Trump is, he might even be "convinced" to resign. I don't see them simply murdering him simply because he is no Kennedy either. After that, Pence comes to power and it will all be presented like a wonderful event, a group-hug of the elites followed by an immediate and merciless crackdown on any form of political opposition or dissent which will immediately be labeled as racist, homophobic, anti-Semitic, terrorist, etc.

The evil hand of the "Russian KGB" (yes, I know, the KGB was dissolved in 1991) will be found everywhere, especially amongst US libertarians (who will probably the only ones with enough brains to understand what is taking place). The (pseudo-) "Left" will rejoice.

Should this course of action result in an unexpected level or resistance, either regional or social, a 9-11 false flag followed by a war will the most likely scenario (why stray away from something which worked so well the first time around?!). Unless the US decides to re-invade Grenada or give Nauru a much deserved thrashing, any more or less real war will result in a catastrophic failure for the US at which point the use of nukes by the Neocon crazies might become a very real risk, especially if symbolic US targets such as aircraft carriers are hit ( in 1991 when the US sent the 82nd AB to Iraq there was nothing standing between this light infantry force and the Iraqi armored divisions. Had the Iraqis attacked the plan was to use tactical nuclear weapons. Then this was all quickly forgotten ).

There is a reason why the Neocons thrive in times of crisis: it allows them to hide behind the mayhem, especially when they are the ones who triggered the mayhem in the first place. This means that as long as the Neocons are anywhere near in power they will never, ever, allow peace to suddenly break out, lest the spotlight be suddenly shined directly upon them. Chaos, wars, crises – this is their natural habitat. Think of it as the by-product of their existence. Eventually, of course, they will be stopped and they will be defeated, like all their predecessors in history. But I shudder when I think of the price mankind will have to pay this time around.

This analysis was written for The Unz Review

[Sep 18, 2017] Why Petraeus, Obama And Brennan Should Face 5,000 Years In Prison

Notable quotes:
"... add Bush. Glenn Greenwald on John Brennan . It is interesting that the empire sues the little people. ..."
"... "It is a perfect illustration of the Obama legacy that a person who was untouchable as CIA chief in 2008 because of his support for Bush's most radical policies is not only Obama's choice for the same position now, but will encounter very little resistance. Within this change one finds one of the most significant aspects of the Obama presidency: his conversion of what were once highly contentious right-wing policies into harmonious dogma of the DC bipartisan consensus. Then again, given how the CIA operates, one could fairly argue that Brennan's eagerness to deceive and his long record of supporting radical and unaccountable powers make him the perfect person to run that agency. It seems clear that this is Obama's calculus." ..."
"... one more quote from your newest link to the NYT: "The job Mr. Brennan once held in Riyadh is, more than the ambassador's, the true locus of American power in the kingdom. Former diplomats recall that the most important discussions always flowed through the CIA station chief." The Saudis bought the CIA From station chief in Riyadh to Director Tenet's chief of staff to Deputy Executive Director of the CIA and finally, under Obama, to Director of the CIA ..."
"... Best background article I've come across on how the Arab Spring pro-democracy uprisings were either suppressed (in the U.S. client oil monarchies like Bahrain) or hijacked for regime change purposes (as in Libya and Syria): http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion... how-the-arab-spring-was-hijacked/ (Feb 2012) ..."
"... The best explanation is that despite the effort to "woo" Assad into the Saudi-Israeli axis (c.2008-2010), Assad refused to cut economic ties with Iran, which was setting up rail lines, air traffic and oil pipeline deals with Assad on very good terms. This led Hillary Clinton, Leon Panetta, etc. to lobby Obama to support a regime change program: ..."
"... Replace "plan" with "ongoing project". The main point would be that Panetta and Clinton also belong on that "illegal arms transfer" charge sheet. Civil damages for the costs Europe, Turkey, Lebanon etc. bore due to millions of fleeing refugees should also be assessed (let alone damage in Syria, often to priceless historical treasures destroyed by ISIS). ..."
"... Then there's the previous regime and its deliberate lies about non-existent WMDs in Iraq, claims used to start a war of aggression that killed thousand of U.S. soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians - Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Woolsey, Tenet, Powell - they should have their own separate charge sheet. ..."
"... But it wasn't just anti-arms trafficking laws that were broken, was it? Wouldn't a conspiracy to use extremists as a weapon of state amount to a crime against humanity? David Stockman thinks so, but he pins the 'crime' on old, sick McCain. (see: 'Moderate Rebels' Cheerleader McCain is Fall Guy But Neocon Cancer Lives ..."
"... I classify attempts at regime change as terrorism, too, since it's essentially the waging of aggressive war via different means, which is the #1 War Crime also violating domestic law as well ..."
"... What of the US bases being established in N. Syria that were helpfully marked by the Turks? Within the context that the SF force multiplier model has varied success but hasn't worked AFAIK since the Resistance in WW2. What, short of an explicit invasion, is an option for the US+? US-hired mercenaries failed to do the job, and the US as mercenaries for the Arabs are not willing to commit. Maybe if the USIC offered up more "wives" they'd acquire more psychopathic murderers to spread the joy. ..."
"... Trump may have put Pompeo in to present the facade of housecleaning, but who here believes that there is any serious move to curtail the Syrian misadventure? Just a change in the marketing plan. ..."
"... As the Brits came out with blocking the release of 30-yr-old official records on the basis that "personal information" and "national security" would be compromised? More like the criminal activity at 10 Downing St. and the misappropriation of public money for international crime would be brought to light. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4159032/whitehall-refuses-documents-release/ ..."
"... While I do agree with some of the things Trump has done so far, I cannot agree that he makes for a good "leader" of our rapidly devolving nation. As much "good" that Trump has done, he's probably done much worse on other issues and levels. It's really pretty awful all around. ..."
"... That said, when some people say how much they "miss Obama," I want to either pound my head into a brick wall and/or throw up. The damage that Obama and his hench men/women did is incalculable. ..."
"... Not so much with "No drama Obama" the smooth talking viper that we - either unwittingly or wittingly - clutche to our collective bosom. Obama's many many many lies - all told with smooth suave assurance - along with his many sins of omission served as cover for what he was doing. Trump's buffoonery and incessant Twitting at least put his idiocies out on the stage for all to see (of course, the Republicans do use that as cover for their nefarious deeds behind Trump's doofus back). ..."
"... I likened a Trump presidency to sticking the landing of a crashing US empire. ..."
"... Remember this, The prosecution of a Swedish national accused of terrorist activities in Syria has collapsed at the Old Bailey after it became clear Britain's security and intelligence agencies would have been deeply embarrassed had a trial gone ahead, the Guardian can reveal. ..."
"... His lawyers argued that British intelligence agencies were supporting the same Syrian opposition groups as he was, and were party to a secret operation providing weapons and non-lethal help to the groups, including the Free Syrian Army. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jun/01/trial-swedish-man-accused-terrorism-offences-collapse-bherlin-gildo ..."
"... John McCain was neck deep in supporting Terrorists in Syria he wanted to give them manpads. ..."
"... WASHINGTON (Sputnik) -- Media reported earlier in October that Syrian rebels asked Washington for Stinger missiles to use them against Russia's military jets. "Absolutely Absolutely I would," McCain said when asked whether he would support the delivery of Stinger missiles to the opposition in Syria. ..."
"... The US were into regime change in Syria a long time ago..... Robert Ford was US Ambassador to Syria when the revolt against Syrian president Assad was launched. He not only was a chief architect of regime change in Syria, but actively worked with rebels to aid their overthrow of the Syrian government. ..."
"... Ambassador Ford talked himself blue in the face reassuring us that he was only supporting moderates in Syria. As evidence mounted that the recipients of the largesse doled out by Washington was going to jihadist groups, Ford finally admitted early last year that most of the moderates he backed were fighting alongside ISIS and al-Qaeda. ..."
"... b asked : "When will the FBI investigate Messrs Petraeus, Obama and Brennan? Duh, like never... Most here understand this, I'm sure. The wealthy and the connected puppets never face justice, for their crimes, committed in the service of their owners. ..."
"... NYT never saw a war (rather an attack by the US, NATO, Israel, UK, on any defenseless nation) that it did not support. Wiki uses the word "allegedly" in explaining the CIA and Operation Mockingbird. It just isn't feasible that a secret government agency - gone rogue - with unlimited funding and manpower could write/edit the news for six media owners with similar war-profiteering motives. ..."
"... Brennan : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBG81dXgM0Q ..."
"... Seymour Hersh, in his 'Victoria NULAND moment' audio, states categorically BRENNAN conceived and ran the 'Russian Hack' psyop after Seth RICH DNC leaks. ..."
Aug 04, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

California CEO Allegedly Smuggled Rifle Scopes to Syria - Daily Beast, August 1 2017

Rasheed Al Jijakli,[the CEO of a check-cashing business who lives in Walnut,] along with three co-conspirators, allegedly transported day and night vision rifle scopes, laser boresighters used to adjust sights on firearms for accuracy when firing, flashlights, radios, a bulletproof vest, and other tactical equipment to Syrian fighters.
...
If Jijakli is found guilty, he could face 50 years in prison . Jijakli's case is being prosecuted by counterintelligence and Terrorism and Export Crimes Section attorneys. An FBI investigation, in coordination with other agencies, is ongoing.
---

Under Trump, a Hollowed-Out Force in Syria Quickly Lost CIA Backing - NY Times * , August 2, 2017

CIA director, Mike Pompeo, recommended to President Trump that he shut down a four-year-old effort to arm and train Syrian rebels
...
Critics in Congress had complained for years about the costs [...] and reports that some of the CIA-supplied weapons had ended up in the hands of a rebel group tied to Al Qaeda
...
In the summer of 2012, David H. Petraeus , who was then CIA director, first proposed a covert program of arming and training rebels
...
[ Mr. Obama signed] a presidential finding authorizing the CIA to covertly arm and train small groups of rebels
-...
John O. Brennan , Mr. Obama's last CIA director, remained a vigorous defender of the program ...

When will the FBI investigate Messrs Petraeus, Obama and Brennan? Where are the counterintelligence and Terrorism and Export Crimes Section attorneys prosecuting them? Those three men engaged in the exactly same trade as Mr. Jijakil did, but on a much larger scale. They should be punished on an equally larger scale.

* Note:

The NYT story is largely a whitewash. It claims that the CIA paid "moderate" FSA rebels stormed Idleb governate in 2015. In fact al-Qaeda and Ahrar al Sham were leading the assault. It says that costs of the CIA program was "more than $1 billion over the life of the program" when CIA documents show that it was over $1 billion per year and likely much more than $5 billion in total. The story says that the program started in 2013 while the CIA has been providing arms to the Wahhabi rebels since at least fall 2011.

Posted by b on August 3, 2017 at 05:15 AM | Permalink

nmb | Aug 3, 2017 5:31:09 AM | 1

Easy: because they are war criminals.
V. Arnold | Aug 3, 2017 5:47:16 AM | 4
But, but, b; you're dealing with a rogue government of men; not laws. Should have been obvious in 2003, March 19th...
Igor Bundy | Aug 3, 2017 5:47:28 AM | 5
In case there is any doubt, North Korea has already said arming "rebels" to over throw the government would face nuclear retaliation.
Igor Bundy | Aug 3, 2017 5:52:50 AM | 6
India and Pakistan spends insane amounts of money because Pakistan arms "rebels" both countries could use that money for many other things. Especially Pakistan which has a tenth the economy of India. BUT Pakistan is controlled by the military or MIC so arming terrorists is more important than such things as schools and power supplies etc. Their excuse is India is spending so much on arms. Which India says is because in large part due to Pakistan. US says well move those 2 million troops to attack China instead. Everyone is happy except the population in those 3 countries which lack most things except iphones. Which makes US extremely happy.
Emily | Aug 3, 2017 5:54:48 AM | 7
It would interesting to get to the truth about Brennan. Is he an islamist himself? Did he actually convert to islam in Saudi Arabia? Lots of stories out there.
Has he been acting as a covert agent against his own country for years?Selling out the entire west and every christian on the planet. Time to find this out, methinks.

Is treason in the USA a death penalty issue?. Its certainly what he deserves.

Mina | Aug 3, 2017 5:55:21 AM | 8
http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/2/8/274688/World/Region/,-Syrian-refugees-and-fighters-return-home-from-Le.aspx
V. Arnold | Aug 3, 2017 6:25:03 AM | 9
Mina | Aug 3, 2017 5:55:21 AM | 8

Informative link; thanks.

Peter AU 1 | Aug 3, 2017 6:30:12 AM | 10
"a four-year-old effort to arm and train Syrian rebels."

A four year effort to arm the f**kers? Doubtful it was an effort to arm them, but training them to act in the hegemon's interests... like upholders of democracy and humanitarian... headchopping is just too much of an attraction

somebody | Aug 3, 2017 6:52:48 AM | 12
add Bush. Glenn Greenwald on John Brennan . It is interesting that the empire sues the little people.
Anonymous | Aug 3, 2017 6:54:31 AM | 13
Mina @3. The title of the article is deceptive.

"7,000 Syrian refugees and fighters return home from Lebanon"

The 'al-Qaeda linked' fighters are mostly foreigners, paid mercenaries. They have been dumped in Idlib along with the other terrorists. In the standard reconciliation process, real Syrians are given the option of returning home if they renounce violence and agree to a political solution. Fake Syrians are dumped in with the foreigners. The real Syrian fighters who reconcile have to join the SAA units to fight against ISIS etc.

ISIS fighters were encouraged to bring their families with them (for use as human shields and to provide settlers for the captured territory). ISIS documents recovered from Mosul indicate that unmarried foreign mercenaries fighting with them were provided with a wife (how does that work? do the women volunteer or are they 'volunteered'?), a car and other benefits. These families and hangers-on would probably be the 'Syrian refugees'.

On a side note, the Kurds have released a video showing the training of special forces belonging to their allies, the 'Syrian Defense Force' (composed largely of foreigners again). The SDF fighters fly the FSA flag, ie they are the carefully vetted moderate head chopping rebels beloved of the likes of McCain.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHBFkZZ1y40

librul | Aug 3, 2017 8:20:55 AM | 14
somebody @12,

Thanks for the link, it is a keeper.

"It is a perfect illustration of the Obama legacy that a person who was untouchable as CIA chief in 2008 because of his support for Bush's most radical policies is not only Obama's choice for the same position now, but will encounter very little resistance. Within this change one finds one of the most significant aspects of the Obama presidency: his conversion of what were once highly contentious right-wing policies into harmonious dogma of the DC bipartisan consensus. Then again, given how the CIA operates, one could fairly argue that Brennan's eagerness to deceive and his long record of supporting radical and unaccountable powers make him the perfect person to run that agency. It seems clear that this is Obama's calculus."

My own addition to the Brennan record:

Brennan was station chief for the CIA in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia during the planning period for 9/11. The Saudi rulers do not use the US embassy as their first point of contact with Washington, they use the CIA Brennan moved back to the US some time in (late?) 1999. The first 9/11 Saudi hijackers arrived on US shores in January 2000. Brennan was made CIA chief of staff to Director Tenet in 1999 and Deputy Executive Director of the CIA in March 2001.

somebody | Aug 3, 2017 8:36:06 AM | 15
14 add this New York Times link: U.S. Relies Heavily on Saudi Money to Support Syrian Rebels
The support for the Syrian rebels is only the latest chapter in the decades long relationship between the spy services of Saudi Arabia and the United States, an alliance that has endured through the Iran-contra scandal, support for the mujahedeen against the Soviets in Afghanistan and proxy fights in Africa. Sometimes, as in Syria, the two countries have worked in concert. In others, Saudi Arabia has simply written checks underwriting American covert activities. ... Although the Saudis have been public about their help arming rebel groups in Syria, the extent of their partnership with the CIA's covert action campaign and their direct financial support had not been disclosed. Details were pieced together in interviews with a half-dozen current and former American officials and sources from several Persian Gulf countries. Most spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the program.

From the moment the CIA operation was started, Saudi money supported it.

...

The roots of the relationship run deep. In the late 1970s, the Saudis organized what was known as the "Safari Club" -- a coalition of nations including Morocco, Egypt and France -- that ran covert operations around Africa at a time when Congress had clipped the CIA's wings over years of abuses.

...

Prince Bandar pledged $1 million per month to help fund the contras, in recognition of the administration's past support to the Saudis. The contributions continued after Congress cut off funding to the contras. By the end, the Saudis had contributed $32 million, paid through a Cayman Islands bank account.

When the Iran-contra scandal broke, and questions arose about the Saudi role, the kingdom kept its secrets. Prince Bandar refused to cooperate with the investigation led by Lawrence E. Walsh, the independent counsel.

In a letter, the prince declined to testify, explaining that his country's "confidences and commitments, like our friendship, are given not just for the moment but the long run."

michaelj72 | Aug 3, 2017 8:43:35 AM | 16

"Many commit the same crime with a very different result. One bears a cross for his crime; another a crown." ― Juvenal, The Satires

librul | Aug 3, 2017 9:09:59 AM | 17
somebody @15

one more quote from your newest link to the NYT: "The job Mr. Brennan once held in Riyadh is, more than the ambassador's, the true locus of American power in the kingdom. Former diplomats recall that the most important discussions always flowed through the CIA station chief." The Saudis bought the CIA From station chief in Riyadh to Director Tenet's chief of staff to Deputy Executive Director of the CIA and finally, under Obama, to Director of the CIA

Greenbean950 | Aug 3, 2017 9:47:03 AM | 18
NYT's article was a white wash. It was cover. NYT = CIA
paul | Aug 3, 2017 9:47:16 AM | 19
The art of limited hangout as practiced by the NYT
nonsense factory | Aug 3, 2017 10:15:14 AM | 20
Best background article I've come across on how the Arab Spring pro-democracy uprisings were either suppressed (in the U.S. client oil monarchies like Bahrain) or hijacked for regime change purposes (as in Libya and Syria): http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion... how-the-arab-spring-was-hijacked/ (Feb 2012)
In particular:
A fourth trend is that the Arab Spring has become a springboard for playing great-power geopolitics.

Syria, at the center of the region's sectarian fault lines, has emerged as the principal battleground for such Cold War-style geopolitics. Whereas Russia is intent on keeping its only military base outside the old Soviet Union in Syria's Mediterranean port of Tartus, the U.S. seems equally determined to install a pro-Western regime in Damascus.

This goal prompted Washington to set up a London-based television station that began broadcasting to Syria a year before major protests began there. The U.S. campaign, which includes assembling a coalition of the willing, has been boosted by major Turkish, Saudi, Qatari and UAE help, including cross-border flow of arms into Syria and the establishment of two new petrodollar-financed, jihad-extolling television channels directed at Syria's majority Sunni Arabs.

The best explanation is that despite the effort to "woo" Assad into the Saudi-Israeli axis (c.2008-2010), Assad refused to cut economic ties with Iran, which was setting up rail lines, air traffic and oil pipeline deals with Assad on very good terms. This led Hillary Clinton, Leon Panetta, etc. to lobby Obama to support a regime change program:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk...Leon-Panetta-supports-Hillary-Clinton-plan-to-arm-Syrian-rebels.html (Feb 2013)

Replace "plan" with "ongoing project". The main point would be that Panetta and Clinton also belong on that "illegal arms transfer" charge sheet. Civil damages for the costs Europe, Turkey, Lebanon etc. bore due to millions of fleeing refugees should also be assessed (let alone damage in Syria, often to priceless historical treasures destroyed by ISIS).

Then there's the previous regime and its deliberate lies about non-existent WMDs in Iraq, claims used to start a war of aggression that killed thousand of U.S. soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians - Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Woolsey, Tenet, Powell - they should have their own separate charge sheet.

Send the lot to Scheveningen Prison - for the most notorious war criminals. Pretty luxurious as prisons go, by all accounts.

Jackrabbit | Aug 3, 2017 10:36:48 AM | 21
But it wasn't just anti-arms trafficking laws that were broken, was it? Wouldn't a conspiracy to use extremists as a weapon of state amount to a crime against humanity? David Stockman thinks so, but he pins the 'crime' on old, sick McCain. (see: 'Moderate Rebels' Cheerleader McCain is Fall Guy But Neocon Cancer Lives
karlof1 | Aug 3, 2017 10:45:27 AM | 22
Within the Outlaw US Empire alone, there're several thousand people deserving of those 5,000 year sentences, not just the three b singled out. But b does provide a great service for those of us who refuse to support terrorists and terrorism by not paying federal taxes by providing proof of that occurring. I classify attempts at regime change as terrorism, too, since it's essentially the waging of aggressive war via different means, which is the #1 War Crime also violating domestic law as well. Thanks b!
james | Aug 3, 2017 12:07:05 PM | 23
it's the usa!!!! no one in gov't is held accountable.. obama wants to move on, lol... look forward, not backward... creating a heaping pile of murder, mayhem and more in other parts of the world, but never examine any of it, or hold anyone accountable.. it is the amerikkkan way...
stumpy | Aug 3, 2017 12:46:57 PM | 26
What of the US bases being established in N. Syria that were helpfully marked by the Turks? Within the context that the SF force multiplier model has varied success but hasn't worked AFAIK since the Resistance in WW2. What, short of an explicit invasion, is an option for the US+? US-hired mercenaries failed to do the job, and the US as mercenaries for the Arabs are not willing to commit. Maybe if the USIC offered up more "wives" they'd acquire more psychopathic murderers to spread the joy.

Trump may have put Pompeo in to present the facade of housecleaning, but who here believes that there is any serious move to curtail the Syrian misadventure? Just a change in the marketing plan.

As the Brits came out with blocking the release of 30-yr-old official records on the basis that "personal information" and "national security" would be compromised? More like the criminal activity at 10 Downing St. and the misappropriation of public money for international crime would be brought to light. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4159032/whitehall-refuses-documents-release/

RUKidding | Aug 3, 2017 12:56:29 PM | 27
While I do agree with some of the things Trump has done so far, I cannot agree that he makes for a good "leader" of our rapidly devolving nation. As much "good" that Trump has done, he's probably done much worse on other issues and levels. It's really pretty awful all around.

That said, when some people say how much they "miss Obama," I want to either pound my head into a brick wall and/or throw up. The damage that Obama and his hench men/women did is incalculable.

At least with Trump, we can clearly witness his idiocy and grasp the level of at least some of his damage.

Not so much with "No drama Obama" the smooth talking viper that we - either unwittingly or wittingly - clutche to our collective bosom. Obama's many many many lies - all told with smooth suave assurance - along with his many sins of omission served as cover for what he was doing. Trump's buffoonery and incessant Twitting at least put his idiocies out on the stage for all to see (of course, the Republicans do use that as cover for their nefarious deeds behind Trump's doofus back).

Agree with b. NYT is worthless. Limited hangout for sure.

stumpy | Aug 3, 2017 1:15:55 PM | 28
Speaking of who DID get arrested, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/08/03/fbi-arrests-wannacry-hero-marcus-hutchins-las-vegas-reports/

Gee, wouldn't we like to see the arrest warrant?

NemesisCalling | Aug 3, 2017 1:16:29 PM | 29
@27 beating a dead horse, but I agree.

I likened a Trump presidency to sticking the landing of a crashing US empire. He'll bring it down without going true believer on us, a la Clinton and ilk who were busy scheduling the apocalypse.

Trump has not been tested yet with a rapidly deteriorating economy which as we all know is coming. Something is in the air and Trump will have to face it sooner or later. The weight of the anger of millions will be behind it...will it be too late? Will Trump finally go MAGA in what he promised: Glas-Steagall, making trade fair for US interests, dialing back NATO...etc. etc. I fear he can not articulate the issues at hand, like Roosevelt or Hitler. He is too bumbling. I guess really we can only hope for an avoidance of WW. Will the world even weep for a third world USA?

Mina | Aug 3, 2017 1:23:53 PM | 30
http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/64/274706/Egypt/Politics-/Egypt-and-Russia-broker-truce-between-Syrian-regim.aspx
harrylaw | Aug 3, 2017 2:14:24 PM | 31
Remember this, The prosecution of a Swedish national accused of terrorist activities in Syria has collapsed at the Old Bailey after it became clear Britain's security and intelligence agencies would have been deeply embarrassed had a trial gone ahead, the Guardian can reveal.

His lawyers argued that British intelligence agencies were supporting the same Syrian opposition groups as he was, and were party to a secret operation providing weapons and non-lethal help to the groups, including the Free Syrian Army. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jun/01/trial-swedish-man-accused-terrorism-offences-collapse-bherlin-gildo

John McCain was neck deep in supporting Terrorists in Syria he wanted to give them manpads.

WASHINGTON (Sputnik) -- Media reported earlier in October that Syrian rebels asked Washington for Stinger missiles to use them against Russia's military jets. "Absolutely Absolutely I would," McCain said when asked whether he would support the delivery of Stinger missiles to the opposition in Syria.

"We certainly did that in Afghanistan. After the Russians invaded Afghanistan, we provided them with surface-to-air capability. It'd be nice to give people that we train and equip and send them to fight the ability to defend themselves. That's one of the fundamental principles of warfare as I understand it," McCain said. https://sputniknews.com/us/201510201028835944-us-stingers-missiles-syrian-rebels-mccain/

virgile | Aug 3, 2017 2:23:20 PM | 32
They will pay sooner or later for their crimes against the Syrians. Add Sarkozy, Cameron and Holland to the list of criminals hiding under their position.
harrylaw | Aug 3, 2017 2:44:11 PM | 33
The US were into regime change in Syria a long time ago..... Robert Ford was US Ambassador to Syria when the revolt against Syrian president Assad was launched. He not only was a chief architect of regime change in Syria, but actively worked with rebels to aid their overthrow of the Syrian government.

Ford assured us that those taking up arms to overthrow the Syrian government were simply moderates and democrats seeking to change Syria's autocratic system. Anyone pointing out the obviously Islamist extremist nature of the rebellion and the foreign funding and backing for the jihadists was written off as an Assad apologist or worse.

Ambassador Ford talked himself blue in the face reassuring us that he was only supporting moderates in Syria. As evidence mounted that the recipients of the largesse doled out by Washington was going to jihadist groups, Ford finally admitted early last year that most of the moderates he backed were fighting alongside ISIS and al-Qaeda. Witness this incredible Twitter exchange with then-ex Ambassador Ford: http://www.globalresearch.ca/you-wont-believe-what-former-us-ambassador-robert-s-ford-said-about-al-qaedas-syrian-allies/5504906

Noirette | Aug 3, 2017 2:48:20 PM | 34
Specially Petraeus. A US Army General, and director of the CIA You don't get more 'pillar' of the State than that! And off he goes doing illegal arms trades, in the billions, see for ex. Meyssan, as an ex.:

http://www.voltairenet.org/article197144.html

In other countries / times, he'd be shot at dawn as a traitor. But all it shows really is that the USA does not really have a Gvmt. in the sense of a 'political structure of strong regulatory importance with 'democratic' participation..' to keep it vague.. It has an elaborate public charade, a kind of clumsy theatre play, that relies very heavily on the scripted MSM, on ritual, and various distractions. Plus natch' very vicious control mechanisms at home.. another story.

Meanwhile, off stage, the actors participate and fight and ally in a whole other scene where 'disaster capitalism', 'rapine', 'mafia moves' and the worst impulses in human nature not only bloom but are institutionalised and deployed world-wide! Covering all this up is getting increasingly difficult -Trump presidency - one would hope US citizens no not for now.

The other two of course as well, I just find Petraeus emblematic, probably because of all the BS about his mistress + he once mis-treated classified info or something like that, total irrelevance spun by the media, which works.

OJS | Aug 3, 2017 2:49:46 PM | 35
@virgile, 32

"They will pay sooner or later for their crimes against the Syrians. Add Sarkozy, Cameron and Holland to the list of criminals hiding under their position."

I humbly disagree, and they sincerely believe they are helping the Syrians (plus other states) - freedom and democracy against the brutality of Dr. Assad. I believe all these murderers are sincere doing god works and will all go to heaven. That is one of the reasons why I refuse to go to heaven even if gods beg me. Fuck it!

My apologies if I offend you or anyone. It's about time we look carefully beside politic and wealth, what religion does to a human?

karlof1 | Aug 3, 2017 3:26:11 PM | 36
OJS @35--

Have you read Reg Morrison's Spirit in the Gene ? Here's a link to one of his related essays with many more of relevance on his website, https://regmorrison.edublogs.org/1999/07/20/plague-species-the-spirit-in-the-gene/

ben | Aug 3, 2017 3:35:09 PM | 37
b asked : "When will the FBI investigate Messrs Petraeus, Obama and Brennan? Duh, like never... Most here understand this, I'm sure. The wealthy and the connected puppets never face justice, for their crimes, committed in the service of their owners.

You can include ALL the POTUS's and their minions, since the turn of the century. " It's just business, get over it."

john | Aug 3, 2017 4:16:52 PM | 38
ben says:

Duh, like never..Most here understand this, I'm sure right. like voyeurs, we like to watch , and watch , and watch .

somebody | Aug 3, 2017 4:23:25 PM | 39
35 Religion has nothing to do with it.

How to spot a Sociopath

6 Look for signs of instigating violent behavior. As children some sociopaths torture defenseless people and animals. This violence is always instigating, and not defensive violence. They will create drama out of thin air, or twist what others say. They will often overreact strongly to minor offenses. If they are challenged or confronted about it, they will point the finger the other way, counting on the empathic person's empathy and consideration of people to protect them, as long as they can remain undetected. Their attempt to point the finger the other way, is both a smokescreen to being detected, and an attempt to confuse the situation.

The link is a pretty good summary. It is easy to find more respectable psychological sources for the disorder on the internet.

fast freddy | Aug 3, 2017 5:45:24 PM | 40
NYT never saw a war (rather an attack by the US, NATO, Israel, UK, on any defenseless nation) that it did not support. Wiki uses the word "allegedly" in explaining the CIA and Operation Mockingbird. It just isn't feasible that a secret government agency - gone rogue - with unlimited funding and manpower could write/edit the news for six media owners with similar war-profiteering motives. /s
OJS | Aug 3, 2017 8:12:07 PM | 42
@karlof1, 36

" Here, evolution had hit on the sweetest of solutions. Such perceptions were guaranteed to produce a faith-dependent species that believed itself to be thoroughly separate from the rest of the animal kingdom, ...."

Interesting article, but stop reading years ago when struggled to raise a family, make a living to survive. Debatable Is "sociopath" (Antisocial Personality Disorder) or the genes make humanly so brutally? Very often hard to fathom the depth of human suffering be it USA, Syria or elsewhere. Thanks sharing you thought.

falcemartello | Aug 3, 2017 9:03:06 PM | 43
What most of the msm and the echo chamber seem to be deliberately missing is all intentional. The whole Assad must go meme is dead and buried. The western cabal has not acheived their regime change in Syria. The Russian economy has not sunk to the bottom of the Black sea, the Russians hacked into my fridge meme has all been debunked and is falling apart. The collusion of all anglo antlantacist secret agency and governments to destabalize the ME has all come out with an ever turbulant flow. Iran being the threat of the world ,debunked. Russia invading and hacking the free world ,debunked.

Hence I expect that the western oligarchs along with their pressitute and compromised politicians will be bying up alot of bleach. They will be whitewashing for the next three months all semblance of anything related to their fraudulent existence.

Nurenberg 2, the Hague would be to soft for these vile criminals of humanity. Look how they had to back track on the Milosevic conviction mind u post death.
Just another day in the office for these criminals of humanity. Gee can't wait until this petro-dollar ponzi scheme crashes hopefully we can get back o being human again. The emperor has no clothes.

runaway robot | Aug 3, 2017 9:07:30 PM | 44
karlof1@36:
Thanks for reminding me about Reg Morrison! I need to re-read that book, slowly.
fast freddy | Aug 3, 2017 9:20:33 PM | 45
43 The whole Assad must go meme is dead and buried. The western cabal has not acheived their regime change in Syria. The Russian economy has not sunk to the bottom of the Black sea, the Russians hacked into my fridge meme has all been debunked and is falling apart. The collusion of all anglo antlantacist secret agency and governments to destabalize the ME has all come out with an ever turbulant flow. Iran being the threat of the world ,debunked. Russia invading and hacking the free world,debunked.

Optimistic. Has Trump been instrumental in these? Perhaps. This would be a good reason for Zionists to hate him. But how is it that Trump is such a bumbling idiot? Now the Senate has ratfcked him with recess appointments. And he signed that stupid Russia Sanctions bill.

Temporarily Sane | Aug 4, 2017 12:06:50 AM | 46
@45 fast freddy
This would be a good reason for Zionists to hate him.

Except they don't hate him. Quite the opposite in fact. Looking to Trump as some sort of savior figure is absolutely ridiculous.

rm | Aug 4, 2017 12:17:56 AM | 47
Brennan : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBG81dXgM0Q

Seymour Hersh, in his 'Victoria NULAND moment' audio, states categorically BRENNAN conceived and ran the 'Russian Hack' psyop after Seth RICH DNC leaks.

[Sep 17, 2017] Israel wants strategic depth in spades. Israel feels, legitimately or not, insecure. I've heard politicians in Israel give an outline of Israel's "needs". Yes, they want the West Bank but leaving the Palestinians autonomy in their cities. They are going to keep the Golan and yes want enough of Lebanon to control the headwaters of the Litani and it's water. You are correct that Israel does not need the Litani water but they want it to weaken Lebanon and especially Hizballah. Last but not least they want the Sinai back.

Sep 17, 2017 | turcopolier.typepad.com

10 November 2016 at 07:50 PM

Will ,

I'd like to know what is it the Zionists really want. Would they be satisfied with the West Bank? Would they be satisfied with the part of the Golan Heights they grabbed or do they want all of it? Will they quit trying to grab the waters of the Litani River in Lebanon since reportedly through desalination they have more water than they need?

You are dealing with a country that refuses to fix its borders? If it were given what it wanted, would it then let its neighbors go in Peace? Why did they not accept the Saudi Beirut Peace initiative? Why was Rabin assassinated? Why did Olmeret suddenly get removed due to a criminal inquiry?

I used to read Haaretz at one time until it went behind a paywall. I get some insight from Uri Avnery, b/ I'm truly lost at what they really want. Is it from the river to the river? Wadi-el-Arish to the Euphrates?

Do they really want to continue as the Lacedomnians lording it over the Helots? The Israeli Firsters have destroyed secular Irak, now working on Syria, and would love to destroy Lebanon and turn it into a choatic non-functioning state. They would love to destroy Iran as a semi-secular civiliazton. Trump advisor Gen Michael Flynn, for all his good qualities, has a hard-on for the Persians. So does Trump. Really worrying. You cannot have a concert of nations resolution w/o bringing Iran to the table.

Of course, Trump will make them concessions. Adelson gave him some $30 mil for his campaign and Ivanka has converted to Judaism. He will recognize Jerusalem/Quds as the capital of Israel. that's a foregone conclusion.

But the glimmer of hope is that he has said, that he would try to be neutral and work out a Peace agreement.

Again I quote from George Mitchell:
"First, I believe there is no such thing as a conflict that can't be ended. Conflicts are created and sustained by human beings. They can be ended by human beings. No matter how ancient the conflict, no matter how much harm has been done, peace can prevail."

jdledell -> Will... , 10 November 2016 at 07:50 PM
Will - Israel wants strategic depth in spades. Israel feels, legitimately or not, insecure. I've heard politicians in Israel give an outline of Israel's "needs". Yes, they want the West Bank but leaving the Palestinians autonomy in their cities. They are going to keep the Golan and yes want enough of Lebanon to control the headwaters of the Litani and it's water. You are correct that Israel does not need the Litani water but they want it to weaken Lebanon and especially Hizballah. Last but not least they want the Sinai back.

This would give them strategic depth in the North, South and West. They are growing their Naval capabilities to cover the East.

[Sep 17, 2017] Mattis still seems stuck with his Iran obsession. Shame I thought he had the intellectual curiosity to adapt.

Notable quotes:
"... Mattis still seems stuck with his Iran obsession. Shame I thought he had the intellectual curiosity to adapt. Trump has good instincts, I hope Tillerson comes to the fore, and Bannon stays influential. ..."
Jul 11, 2017 | www.unz.com

LondonBob says: July 11, 2017 at 2:39 pm GMT

http://mihsislander.org/2017/06/full-transcript-james-mattis-interview/

Mattis still seems stuck with his Iran obsession. Shame I thought he had the intellectual curiosity to adapt. Trump has good instincts, I hope Tillerson comes to the fore, and Bannon stays influential.

[Sep 17, 2017] Neocons such as Mr. Morell, the Kagans' clan, AIPAC, aare still quite powerful policy makers. The violation of a ceasefire by the US in Syria, which produced dozens of deaths among military personnel (perhaps including a Russian or two) and some 200 wounded was intentional; moreover, the violation was followed immediately by an attack by ISIS

Sep 17, 2017 | turcopolier.typepad.com

10 November 2016

Laura

Trump doesn't really know anyone in foreign policy...so he will probably, at first, appoint people like John Bolton. After all, Bolton has been on lots of talk shows! Also there is this: But Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, in an interview with the state-run Interfax news agency, said that "there were contacts" with the Trump team.

"Obviously, we know most of the people from his entourage," Rybakov said. "Those people have always been in the limelight in the United States and have occupied high-ranking positions. I cannot say that all of them but quite a few have been staying in touch with Russian representatives."
He denied allegations of Russian interference in the election, but said "maybe we helped a bit with WikiLeaks."

So I imagine that Russia will weigh in on his foreign policy choices as well. Reply 10 November 2016 at 11:08 AM

Anna -> Laura... , 10 November 2016 at 02:01 PM

"So I imagine that Russia will weigh in on his foreign policy choices as well."

For what reason? Just because "...quite a few have been staying in touch with Russian representatives?" Then you were not aware of Mr. Morell, the Kagans' clan, AIPAC, and other still quite powerful policy makers. You may also want to learn about the violation of a ceasefire by the US in Syria, which produced dozens of deaths among military personelle (perhaps including a Russian or two) and some 200 wounded; moreover, the violation was followed immediately by an attack by ISIS.

Just read carefully the following:

"French journalist and Middle East expert Christian Chesnot noted that the duration of the attack (50 minutes), the number of planes involved and the fact that 62 Syrian servicemen died as a result cast doubts on the Pentagon's claims that the Deir ez-Zor attack was a mistake. Like many others, he also pointed to the Pentagon's technical capabilities that seem to indicate that the airstrike could not have been unplanned."

The best the Russians can dream of is a coordination between RF and US in a fight against Daesh.

https://sputniknews.com/politics/201609201045509532-us-syrian-army-warning/

[Sep 13, 2017] A despot in disguise: one mans mission to rip up democracy by George Monbiot

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... He aimed, in short, to save capitalism from democracy. ..."
Sep 13, 2017 | www.theguardian.com

theguardian.com

George Monbiot's the missing chapter: a key to understanding the politics of the past half century. To read Nancy MacLean's new book, Democracy in Chains : The Deep History of the Radical Right's Stealth Plan for America, is to see what was previously invisible.

The history professor's work on the subject began by accident. In 2013 she stumbled across a deserted clapboard house on the campus of George Mason University in Virginia. It was stuffed with the unsorted archives of a man who had died that year whose name is probably unfamiliar to you: James McGill Buchanan. She says the first thing she picked up was a stack of confidential letters concerning millions of dollars transferred to the university by the billionaire Charles Koch .

Her discoveries in that house of horrors reveal how Buchanan, in collaboration with business tycoons and the institutes they founded, developed a hidden programme for suppressing democracy on behalf of the very rich. The programme is now reshaping politics, and not just in the US.

Buchanan was strongly influenced by both the neoliberalism of Friedrich Hayek and Ludwig von Mises , and the property supremacism of John C Calhoun, who argued in the first half of the 19th century that freedom consists of the absolute right to use your property (including your slaves) however you may wish; any institution that impinges on this right is an agent of oppression, exploiting men of property on behalf of the undeserving masses.

James Buchanan brought these influences together to create what he called public choice theory . He argued that a society could not be considered free unless every citizen has the right to veto its decisions. What he meant by this was that no one should be taxed against their will. But the rich were being exploited by people who use their votes to demand money that others have earned, through involuntary taxes to support public spending and welfare. Allowing workers to form trade unions and imposing graduated income taxes were forms of "differential or discriminatory legislation" against the owners of capital.

Any clash between "freedom" (allowing the rich to do as they wish) and democracy should be resolved in favour of freedom. In his book The Limits of Liberty , he noted that "despotism may be the only organisational alternative to the political structure that we observe." Despotism in defence of freedom.

His prescription was a "constitutional revolution": creating irrevocable restraints to limit democratic choice. Sponsored throughout his working life by wealthy foundations, billionaires and corporations, he developed a theoretical account of what this constitutional revolution would look like, and a strategy for implementing it.

He explained how attempts to desegregate schooling in the American south could be frustrated by setting up a network of state-sponsored private schools. It was he who first proposed privatizing universities, and imposing full tuition fees on students: his original purpose was to crush student activism. He urged privatization of social security and many other functions of the state. He sought to break the links between people and government, and demolish trust in public institutions. He aimed, in short, to save capitalism from democracy.

In 1980, he was able to put the programme into action. He was invited to Chile , where he helped the Pinochet dictatorship write a new constitution, which, partly through the clever devices Buchanan proposed, has proved impossible to reverse entirely. Amid the torture and killings, he advised the government to extend programmes of privatisation, austerity, monetary restraint, deregulation and the destruction of trade unions: a package that helped trigger economic collapse in 1982.

None of this troubled the Swedish Academy, which through his devotee at Stockholm University Assar Lindbeck in 1986 awarded James Buchanan the Nobel memorial prize for economics . It is one of several decisions that have turned this prize toxic.

Koch officials said that the network's midterm budget for policy and politics is between $300m and $400m, but donors are demanding legislative progress

But his power really began to be felt when Koch, currently the seventh richest man in the US, decided that Buchanan held the key to the transformation he sought. Koch saw even such ideologues as Milton Friedman and Alan Greenspan as "sellouts", as they sought to improve the efficiency of government rather than destroy it altogether . But Buchanan took it all the way.

MacLean says that Charles Koch poured millions into Buchanan's work at George Mason University, whose law and economics departments look as much like corporate-funded thinktanks as they do academic faculties. He employed the economist to select the revolutionary "cadre" that would implement his programme (Murray Rothbard, at the Cato Institute that Koch founded, had urged the billionaire to study Lenin's techniques and apply them to the libertarian cause). Between them, they began to develop a programme for changing the rules.

The papers Nancy MacLean discovered show that Buchanan saw stealth as crucial. He told his collaborators that "conspiratorial secrecy is at all times essential". Instead of revealing their ultimate destination, they would proceed by incremental steps. For example, in seeking to destroy the social security system, they would claim to be saving it, arguing that it would fail without a series of radical "reforms". (The same argument is used by those attacking the NHS). Gradually they would build a "counter-intelligentsia", allied to a "vast network of political power" that would become the new establishment.

Through the network of thinktanks that Koch and other billionaires have sponsored, through their transformation of the Republican party, and the hundreds of millions they have poured into state congressional and judicial races, through the mass colonisation of Trump's administration by members of this network and lethally effective campaigns against everything from public health to action on climate change, it would be fair to say that Buchanan's vision is maturing in the US.

But not just there. Reading this book felt like a demisting of the window through which I see British politics. The bonfire of regulations highlighted by the Grenfell Tower disaster, the destruction of state architecture through austerity, the budgeting rules, the dismantling of public services, tuition fees and the control of schools: all these measures follow Buchanan's programme to the letter. I wonder how many people are aware that David Cameron's free schools project stands in a tradition designed to hamper racial desegregation in the American south.

In one respect, Buchanan was right: there is an inherent conflict between what he called "economic freedom" and political liberty. Complete freedom for billionaires means poverty, insecurity, pollution and collapsing public services for everyone else. Because we will not vote for this, it can be delivered only through deception and authoritarian control. The choice we face is between unfettered capitalism and democracy. You cannot have both.

Buchanan's programme is a prescription for totalitarian capitalism. And his disciples have only begun to implement it. But at least, thanks to MacLean's discoveries, we can now apprehend the agenda. One of the first rules of politics is, know your enemy. We're getting there.

[Sep 03, 2017] These Lethal U.S. Anti Tank Missiles Are Showing up in ISIS Arsenals by Jared Keller

Sep 02, 2017 | nationalinterest.org
With the heart of ISIS's self-proclaimed "caliphate" in Mosul in ruins and Secretary of Defense James Mattis in Baghdad to assess the U.S.-led campaign against the terror group, Iraqi security forces are working overtime to expunge more than 2,000 militants from the strategically crucial city of Tal Afar. The offensive could signal "the end of ISIS's military presence" in the country's northern region, according to a spokesman for the U.S. coalition, but the ISF and their Western military partners have run into a familiar obstacle: American-made anti-tank weapons.

Raw footage posted to YouTube by Iraqi television station Al-Mawsleya appears to show an FGM-148 Javelin anti-tank missile and launcher among a cache of weapons recovered just outside Tal Afar. The Javelin has a range of up to 2.7 miles with an 18-pound tandem warhead (two shaped charges, one to pierce reactive armor the other to wreak havoc) and designed to penetrate even the toughest armor -- including the skin of the Pentagon's beloved M1 Abrams tank.

...

An ISIS propaganda video released in June 2015, after the capture of the Syrian city of Palmyra, revealed militants targeting Syrian government forces with U.S.-made BGM-71 TOW anti-tank missiles. One year later, the same missiles, allegedly fired by U.S.-backed Syrian rebels, were used to down a Russian Mi-25 assault helicopter.

It's likely ISIS fighters came upon the Javelin in the same way it acquires most of its other conventional weapons: by looting Syrian and Iraqi military weapons caches. A 2003 Government Accountability Office report published after the invasion of Iraq found that at least 36 Javelin missile command launch-units had gone missing in the country as a result of lax chain-of-custody standards at U.S. weapons depots. If more are in enemy hands, those launchers would be added to the tons of armored vehicles, Humvees, artillery, surface-to-air missiles, and Turkish variants of the U.S.-made M72 LAW anti-tank weapons and Russian RPGs that are confirmed to be in ISIS's arsenal. Most of those arms were simply abandoned by the Iraqi Army and left for militants to pick up.

But the anti-tank weapons like the Javelin and TOW didn't just turn up in Iraq and Syria amid the chaos of the 2003 invasion: they were sent there more recently by the U.S.-led coalition in Syria. Under Timber Sycamore , the covert CIA program established during the Obama administration to arm Syrian rebels locked in a protracted civil war against the Bashar al-Assad regime, at least 500 TOW missiles were reportedly transferred through Saudi Arabia to the Free Syrian Army in late 2015. And in February 2016 Washington Post reporter and Marine veteran Thomas Gibbons-Neff identified a Javelin in the hands of Kurdish YPG forces at work in northern Syria. (The Pentagon and State Department both denied sending any anti-tank weapons to regional forces fighting ISIS in Syria.)

Rickuh , September 2, 2017 9:21 AM

Russia has been complaining for over a year that Islamic rebels in Syria have the TOW in seeming abundance. Many were obviously looted from Iraqi stocks, but I suspect some may have come from Turkey and other Islamic countries.

Jeff , September 2, 2017 1:49 PM

The Department of Defense is a collection of incompetent morons. I wonder how many of our people will be killed by our own weapons in the future.

Maybe not selling advanced weapons to the Saudi tyrant from now on?

Jon , September 2, 2017 10:35 AM

America is very much reckless in disposing its tech. Multinationals are only about making money even at the expense of american lives. I think yanks need a touch of smoldering iron hands and liquidate with utmost brutality all anti us nationals.

America is all.about money its disgusting

[Sep 03, 2017] These Lethal U.S. Anti Tank Missiles Are Showing up in ISIS Arsenals The National Interest Blog

get=
With the heart of ISIS's self-proclaimed "caliphate" in Mosul in ruins and Secretary of Defense James Mattis in Baghdad to assess the U.S.-led campaign against the terror group, Iraqi security forces are working overtime to expunge more than 2,000 militants from the strategically crucial city of Tal Afar. The offensive could signal "the end of ISIS's military presence" in the country's northern region, according to a spokesman for the U.S. coalition, but the ISF and their Western military partners have run into a familiar obstacle: American-made anti-tank weapons.

Raw footage posted to YouTube by Iraqi television station Al-Mawsleya appears to show an FGM-148 Javelin anti-tank missile and launcher among a cache of weapons recovered just outside Tal Afar. The Javelin has a range of up to 2.7 miles with an 18-pound tandem warhead (two shaped charges, one to pierce reactive armor the other to wreak havoc) and designed to penetrate even the toughest armor -- including the skin of the Pentagon's beloved M1 Abrams tank.

...

An ISIS propaganda video released in June 2015, after the capture of the Syrian city of Palmyra, revealed militants targeting Syrian government forces with U.S.-made BGM-71 TOW anti-tank missiles. One year later, the same missiles, allegedly fired by U.S.-backed Syrian rebels, were used to down a Russian Mi-25 assault helicopter.

It's likely ISIS fighters came upon the Javelin in the same way it acquires most of its other conventional weapons: by looting Syrian and Iraqi military weapons caches. A 2003 Government Accountability Office report published after the invasion of Iraq found that at least 36 Javelin missile command launch-units had gone missing in the country as a result of lax chain-of-custody standards at U.S. weapons depots. If more are in enemy hands, those launchers would be added to the tons of armored vehicles, Humvees, artillery, surface-to-air missiles, and Turkish variants of the U.S.-made M72 LAW anti-tank weapons and Russian RPGs that are confirmed to be in ISIS's arsenal. Most of those arms were simply abandoned by the Iraqi Army and left for militants to pick up.

But the anti-tank weapons like the Javelin and TOW didn't just turn up in Iraq and Syria amid the chaos of the 2003 invasion: they were sent there more recently by the U.S.-led coalition in Syria. Under Timber Sycamore , the covert CIA program established during the Obama administration to arm Syrian rebels locked in a protracted civil war against the Bashar al-Assad regime, at least 500 TOW missiles were reportedly transferred through Saudi Arabia to the Free Syrian Army in late 2015. And in February 2016 Washington Post reporter and Marine veteran Thomas Gibbons-Neff identified a Javelin in the hands of Kurdish YPG forces at work in northern Syria. (The Pentagon and State Department both denied sending any anti-tank weapons to regional forces fighting ISIS in Syria.)

Rickuh , September 2, 2017 9:21 AM

Russia has been complaining for over a year that Islamic rebels in Syria have the TOW in seeming abundance. Many were obviously looted from Iraqi stocks, but I suspect some may have come from Turkey and other Islamic countries.

Jeff , September 2, 2017 1:49 PM

The Department of Defense is a collection of incompetent morons. I wonder how many of our people will be killed by our own weapons in the future.

Maybe not selling advanced weapons to the Saudi tyrant from now on?

Jon , September 2, 2017 10:35 AM

America is very much reckless in disposing its tech. Multinationals are only about making money even at the expense of american lives. I think yanks need a touch of smoldering iron hands and liquidate with utmost brutality all anti us nationals.

America is all.about money its disgusting

Sep 03, 2017 | nationalinterest.org

[Sep 02, 2017] Sic Semper Tyrannis US will allow Iranian forces in Syria to operate within 8 km of Israel by Andrew Illingworth

Notable quotes:
"... Is it the case than neither Kelly, Mattis, nor McMaster saw a day of combat in Vietnam? I am not seeking to pour gasoline onto a lighted fire, but much has been made of Cheney's, Trump's, Bush's, Clinton's deferments, so I think it is relevant that the Generals who surround Trump are in the same league. And not simply from a public relations point of view. ..."
Sep 02, 2017 | turcopolier.typepad.com
01 September 2017 "US will allow Iranian forces in Syria to operate within 8 km of Israel" by Andrew Illingworth Bibi


"The United States will allow Iranian military elements and Iranian-backed militias operating in Syria to take up positions within eight kilometers of Israel's Golan border region according to a report released yesterday by the London-based Asharq Al-Awsat news agency.

The report stated that an agreement to allow both actual Iranian forces and Iranian proxies in Syria to establish bases as close as eight kilometers to both the Jordanian and Israeli borders was recently reached between US and Russian diplomats following talks in Jordan.

This report comes at a time when Russia has official downplayed Israeli hysteria over the presence of Iranian forces in Syria, refusing to entertain Netanyahu's claims that Iran is preparing to attack Israel ." Andrew Illingworth in Al Sharq al Awsat

-----------

Well, well, pilgrims. ASAA has always had deep Saudi royal family ties so one must question the motive for this publication of work by Mr. Illingworth, whoever he may be. Is this Saudi spite at evidence of subterranean Trump Administration cooperation with Russia over both Iran and Syria?

Bibi must be eating his own guts at the thought. All that and Sarah up to her hips in corruption investigation, being PM just isn't what it used to be,

Can it be that the whisperings between the Trumpian foreign policy gaggle and the Rooshians actually had substance. Can it be?

BTW The last I heard was that the buses were still out in the desert somewhere near Sukhna having been re-routed. CENTCOM still can't work out what to do with them.

And I sure hope that IS keeps throwing troops at the R+6 in SE Raqqa. pl

https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/us-will-allow-iranian-forces-syria-operate-within-8-km-israel/

Posted at 04:10 PM in Policy , Russia , Syria Permalink Comments (19)

Peter AU , 01 September 2017 at 05:04 PM

I have mostly been undecided about whether Trump and Mattis where genuine about taking out the takfiri's or would continue to enable them, but a lot of signs now that this is genuine, and also working with Russia.

Re the ISIS convoy. There has been no noise from Russia, Syria, Iran about US blocking the convoy. I doubt they would have liked to let the bastards loose either, so this may be working in their favour, as they can keep hold of them without breaking their part of the deal.

Also when Raqqa was left open, RUAF was destroying large convoy coming out of Raqqa towards Palmyra. Some exchanges of intel between US and Russia?

Whatever is happening it seems to be different than what was going on under the Obama admin.

Illingworth is a reporter for al-Masdar news.

Outrage Beyond , 01 September 2017 at 05:41 PM
In a related vein, Alastair Crook analyzes Netanyahu's "panic" and the new reality of the resistance to Israel.

https://consortiumnews.com/2017/09/01/the-reasons-for-netanyahus-panic/

Peter AU , 01 September 2017 at 06:21 PM
Andrew Illingworth twitter https://twitter.com/oz_analysis
Annem , 01 September 2017 at 06:50 PM
Can anyone explain why the ISIS families wanted to be escorted to BuKamal, right next to all those militias that would love to make minced meat out of them. Once there, how did they plan to defend themselves?
iowa steve -> Outrage Beyond... , 01 September 2017 at 07:22 PM
An excellent article. Thank you for the link.
Thirdeye , 01 September 2017 at 07:32 PM
I'm inclined to see the ASAA claim as an attempt to ratchet up the Iran-in-Syria issue in the US after it so miserably failed to impress the Russians, most likely with an eye towards bringing US pressure to bear on Russia through pressure on Trump. Painting arch-Zionist Trump as somehow being convinced by the Russians to all of a sudden take a benign view towards Iran seems silly, but silliness hasn't disqualified anything else so far.
turcopolier , 01 September 2017 at 07:49 PM
thirdeye

"arch-Zionist Trump" You really do not understand him. He isn'tan arch anything except arch-egotist. He will dump anyone and anything that he thinks is causing him real damage. Crooke is right. pl

Bill Herschel , 01 September 2017 at 09:05 PM
Off topic. Is it the case than neither Kelly, Mattis, nor McMaster saw a day of combat in Vietnam? I am not seeking to pour gasoline onto a lighted fire, but much has been made of Cheney's, Trump's, Bush's, Clinton's deferments, so I think it is relevant that the Generals who surround Trump are in the same league. And not simply from a public relations point of view.
DH , 01 September 2017 at 10:29 PM
I'll take Manhattan, the Bronx, and Staten Island, too...
Babak Makkinejad -> Outrage Beyond... , 01 September 2017 at 10:41 PM
Israel is not a Western country.
turcopolier , 01 September 2017 at 11:57 PM
Bill herschel

They are all too young I think. pl

MRW , 02 September 2017 at 01:56 AM
Bibi must be eating his own guts at the thought.
Ode to Joy.
johnf -> Outrage Beyond... , 02 September 2017 at 02:15 AM
An excellent article. Israel invaded Lebanon and after 20 years of war was faced by Hezbollah. Israel and her supporters started endless wars in the Middle East to supposedly overcome a non-existent "Shia Crescent." Now after 16 years it is faced by a real "Shia Crescent" backed by Russia and China, with the Gulfies in turmoil and the US and Europe at best indifferent.

Those whom the gods would destroy they first make Netanyahu.

The Porkchop Express , 02 September 2017 at 02:40 AM
Hariri claims he and Aoun decided to let Daesh leave Lebanese territory. Not Hezb.
Lemur , 02 September 2017 at 04:26 AM
Col, I am a little confused over who is associated with who. My understanding was Illingworth is with the pro-Assad anti Saudi AMN, but both your links go to the same Illingworth article at AMN, and I can find no Illingworth articles at the other publication.

On another note, I'd like to point out Trump's non alt-right MAGA base is oblivious to his deviation from the Israeli agenda in Syria. I keep up to date with Conservative Tree House as a representative sample, and they remain firmly persuaded Bibi has an unshakable friend in the white house now. A little rhetoric gets you a long way...

Great article outlining in what respects Trump steamrolled over the Israeli lobby's 'concerns': http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/israels-syria-policy-collapses-63932273

turcopolier , 02 September 2017 at 08:25 AM
lemur

I told you that I have no idea who Illingworth is. pl

mike , 02 September 2017 at 09:35 AM
Dunford was too young. Both Mattis and Kelly enlisted during that time frame, Mattis in 69 and Kelly in 70. But Melvin Laird's 'Vietnamization' policy had been started by then and troops were coming home. So Mattis and Kelly never got there.

On the Daesh bus convoy, I tend to agree with what PeterAU implied above that Syria is happy with not letting them go. Although there are reports in the Iraqi press and here that some did get through to Daesh territory. About 100 fighters per the Iraqi press, a dozen or two by using civilian vehicles per the Miami Herald. Coalition says the 17 busses are still within SAA lines.

https://twitter.com/DavidMWitty1/status/903925762759196673

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/article170953607.html

Iranian Ambassador to Iraq, Iraj Masjedi, is doing a lot of explaining and non-apology apologies in Baghdad.

DH , 02 September 2017 at 09:50 AM
from Lemur's article:

"But now it is becoming clear that Israel's aims in Syria are not going to be accomplished. Assad will stay in power, Iran will increase its presence, Hezbollah will emerge stronger and, despite the Israeli air force sorties, the group's missile arsenal is probably bigger with more accurate weaponry."

All, is there any truth to the claim that in 2003 Israel begged Bush II to go after Iran instead of Iraq?

turcopolier , 02 September 2017 at 09:50 AM
mike

Enlisted? If they were officers service schools, etc would have delayed a possible arrival in VN past the time that there were any USMC untis left in theater. By the time I got back to VN in early '72 the only US ground combat units were three army brigades who were not much use any longer due to propaganda from CONUS and a deep seated "last man to die" phobia. I was in SOG and its post stand down successor STDAT-158 and that was quite different. the only marines I saw in that tour were adviserd to the RVN marines. pl

[Sep 02, 2017] The truth about US support for the FSA terrorists in Syria

Sep 02, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

Liam | Sep 2, 2017 11:06:38 AM | 13

The truth about US support for the FSA terrorists in Syria - Now playing on DTube - Intentional Lies and Taking Lives - U. S. State Department Greatest Hits on Syria (Highly Graphic - N.S.F.W.)

https://dtube.video/#!/v/clarityofsignal/mzaqrtv3

This highly revealing video features numerous heightened tension moments during U.S. State Department briefings where reporters exposed the U.S. State Department spokesperson's hypocrisy and misdirection related to events in Syria. These reporter questions relate to horrific events in Syria, including the beheading of 12 year old Abdullah Issa by US backed terrorist group Nour Al-Zinki, the chemical weapons attack that took place in Kherson, Syria on April 4, 2017 and the bombing of the UN convoy in September 2016, as well as parallels between events taking place in Yemen in comparison to Aleppo in December 2016. This video exposes the fact that the FSA and White Helmets are aligned directly with al-Nusra Front (al-Qaeda in Syria) terrorist groups and have consistently received US and western support for their actions. Photos at the link reveal that the White Helmets are, in actuality, terrorists and not the humanitarian rescuers the mainstream media portrays them to be. The terrorist photos contrasted with the State Department statements put forth in the videos reveal that the US government and media have been intentionally lying and covering up the truth about terrorist related events in Syria all along.

Additional links proving the White Helmets are terrorists -

Massive White Helmets Photo Cache Proves Hollywood Gave Oscar to Terrorist Group - clarityofsignal.com/2017/02/27/massive-white-helmets-photo-cache-proves-hollywood-gave-oscar-to-terrorist-group

Direct Terrorist Collusion: Over One Dozen Videos Capture White Helmets Working Side-By-Side With Terrorist Groups in Syria -
clarityofsignal.com/2017/05/08/direct-jihadist-collusion-over-one-dozen-videos-capture-white-helmets-working-side-by-side-with-terrorist-groups

Tapestry of Terror - White Helmets Exposed As FSA Terrorists Linked With ISIS (Highly Graphic - N.S.F.W.) - steemit.com/video/@clarityofsignal/now-playing-on-dtube-tapestry-of-terror-white-helmets-exposed-as-fsa-terrorists-linked-with-isis-highly-graphic-n-s-f-w

Intertwined – The White Helmets and FSA Terrorist Groups – Evidence of Collusion -Part 1 -steemit.com/news/@clarityofsignal/intertwined-the-white-helmets-and-fsa-terrorist-groups-evidence-of-collusion-part-1

Numerous US Government Officials Caught On Camera Meeting With White Helmets and FSA Terrorists -clarityofsignal.com/2017/07/18/numerous-us-government-officials-caught-on-camera-meeting-with-white-helmets-and-fsa-terrorists

"Now You See Me" – Over 100 White Helmet Self-Posted Facebook Images Expose Fake Humanitarian Group as FSA Terrorists Linked with Al-Qaeda - clarityofsignal.com/2017/05/01/now-you-see-me-over-100-white-helmet-self-posted-facebook-images-expose-fake-humanitarian-group-as-fsa-terrorists-in-bed-with-al-qaeda

White Helmets Exposed: Numerous Videos and Photo Evidence Directly Link White Helmets to FSA Terrorists Torture and Atrocities -
clarityofsignal.com/2017/01/30/white-helmets-exposed-numerous-videos-and-photo-evidence-link-white-helmets-to-fsa-terrorists-torture-and-atrocities

Video composed by Clarity of Signal utilizing official State Department briefing moments combined with Free Syrian Army (FSA) cached screen images proving the US supported FSA is comprised of murderous terrorist groups who conduct atrocities in Syria.

[Sep 01, 2017] FSA planning gas use in Deraa, Syria

Sep 01, 2017 | turcopolier.typepad.com

"On Thursday, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that the Shabab al-Sunnah militant group in Daraa has of chemical weapons and is planning to use them."We have received worrying information. According to Russia's information, the Shabab al-Sunnah armed group has access to chemical weapons," Zakharova said during a press conference.

Shabab al-Sunnah is one of the US-backed Free Syrian Army (FSA) groups in southern Syria. The group participated in the attack on the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) in Daraa city earlier this year. Furthermore, the groups is one of few FSA groups in Daraa that has received US-made TOW ATGMs.

Zakharova releveled that Shabab al-Sunnah has several missiles fitted with chemical agents in its warehouse in Daraa. Furthermore, according to Zakharova, the group is planning to use this weapons against a civilian area in Daraa.

Likely Shabab al-Sunnah is planning to sabotage the de-escalation agreement in southern Syria by faking a chemical weapons attack by the "Assad regime".

Lately the group took part in the attack against ISIS-affiliated Jaysh Khalid ibn al-Waleed in the western Daraa countryside and made no gains what so ever." SF

----------------

Ok pilgrims, BOHICA! (one of the oldies here will explain)

Having been repeatedly defeated these scum bags are probably going to try to create another bogus Syrian Govenment chemical drama.

OK! Spread the word pilgrims. There are a hell of a lot of you. 10,000 a day visit this site.

The FSA unicorns so beloved by McCain and the LOLFSC released a Syrian Army pilot captured after shoot down and 30 border guards. Hopefully this is a sign that the unicorns are giving up the fight against the multi-confessional Syrian Government.

In SE Raqqa IS continues to throw reserves of men they cannot afford to lose into what has become and attritional fight against the Tiger Forces. What should we call the Tiger Forces now, a division, an army corps?

pl

https://southfront.org/russia-fsa-planning-use-chemical-weapons-daraa/

Posted at 05:58 PM in Russia , Syria Permalink Comments (3)

Lemur , 31 August 2017 at 08:34 PM

Speaking of multi-confessional, Col, there's a post up at lawfare blog complaining once Assad wins the civil war will restart because he hasn't accommodated the grievances which led to mass violence.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/rules-reconstruction-syria

How exactly do you accommodate a confession which wants to kill the other confessions?

It seems to me when the Arab and Turkic elites were thinking about how to function as independent entities in the modern world, they understood certain proclivities within the population would have to be suppressed. That's why the Turkish military played a constitutional role in Turkish politics. Likewise, the Syrian military has had to suppress the anti-secular ideas of the more traditionalist Sunnis in Hama and Idlib, who can be easily incited by organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood.

johnT , 31 August 2017 at 10:02 PM
Bend over, here it comes again!
deteodo , 31 August 2017 at 10:37 PM
I saw last night on PBS "Dick Cavett"s Vietnam." Again, as always, our motives were damned rather than our strategy criticized. But note that it's the other way around when our Syria policy is criticized.
Lemur , 31 August 2017 at 10:37 PM
Update: According to the Syrian Civil War Map, which is generally the most accurate, the SAA are now just 37 kms from Deir Ez Zor.

[Aug 28, 2017] The Knives Are Out for Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster by Kate Brannen

May 09, 2017 | foreignpolicy.com

Donald Trump's second national security advisor, want him out. This week, they've made their campaign against him public, leaking to reporters details about the rocky relationship he has with his boss and trying to paint him as someone hellbent on overseas nation-building projects that are doomed to fail. The timing isn't accidental. The effort to damage McMaster comes as the Trump administration decides what its policy should be in Afghanistan, a debate that's pitting McMaster against Steve Bannon, Trump's chief strategist.

"McMaster is pushing this Afghanistan policy through. I think some people are giving him the rope to get it through, hoping he hangs himself with it," one senior intelligence official said. The Afghanistan strategy McMaster is pushing, with the support of Defense Secretary James Mattis, would send roughly 3,000-5,000 U.S. and NATO troops to Afghanistan, according to a separate source familiar with the internal deliberations. These troops would be sent to help bulk up the Afghan National Security Forces, which, after years of U.S. assistance, are still struggling against the Taliban, al Qaeda, and a small Islamic State presence in the country.

According to the Washington Post , the new strategy "would authorize the Pentagon, not the White House, to set troop numbers in Afghanistan and give the military far broader authority to use airstrikes to target Taliban militants." The hope is that by increasing pressure on the Taliban, it will force them to the negotiating table with more favorable terms for Kabul and Washington. Sending more U.S. troops to Afghanistan follows a decision made last year by then-President Barack Obama, who announced in July that 8,400 U.S. troops would remain in Afghanistan through January 2017 because of the "precarious" security situation there, undoing his previous plan to draw down to 5,500 by the time he left office.

[Aug 28, 2017] The ouster of Mattis: Some follow-up details and a White House response by homas E. Ricks

ttis still seems stuck with his Iran obsession. Shame I thought he had the intellectual curiosity to adapt. <
Here are a few things I have heard since I posted my comments on Friday about the Obama administration pushing General Mattis out at Central Command. Thanks to all who wrote in to make this follow-up possible:
  • A particular point of disagreement was what to do about mischief Iran is exporting to other countries. Mattis is indeed more hawkish on this than the White House was.
  • National Security Advisor Tom Donilon in particular was irked by Mattis's insistence on being heard. I cringe when I hear about civilians shutting down strategic discussions. That is exactly what the Bush administration did in late 2002 when generals persisted in questioning whether it was wise to invade Iraq. That led to what some might call a fiasco.
  • I wonder if Donilon understands that the key to making effective, sustainable national security policy is having robust, candid discussions between civilian and military leaders that bring to the surface differences and also explore assumptions. I am told that that is what Mattis was trying to do. He knows, as do all smart generals, that in our system, at the end of the discussion the civilians get to decide what to do. In a talk at Johns Hopkins SAIS in late November, Mattis said that, "We military leaders have a right and duty to be heard, to give our best military advice, but we were not elected to and we have no right to dictate." (In the same talk, Mattis also likened Cairo today to Paris in 1789 -- a very interesting thought, and one that made me wonder if 15 years from now, one Arab leader will dominate the entire region as Napoloen dominated Europe early in the 19 th century.)
  • Insisting on being heard should be part of the duty of a senior general. That's the lesson of two great books: H.R. McMaster's Dereliction of Duty and Eliot Cohen's Supreme Command . Indeed, General Mattis cited the latter in his talk at Johns Hopkins SAIS. I suspect Donilon needs to brush up on both.

[Aug 28, 2017] Let's Call "Trump's Generals" What They Are A Military Junta

Aug 27, 2017 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

Trump is fond of boasting about "his" generals. But over the short course of his presidency's first months, the possession and control have reversed themselves. Mattis, McMaster, and Kelly have banished all opposition and now pour the neo-con agenda straight into Trump's ear.

By Whitney Webb

August 27, 2017 " Information Clearing House " - WASHINGTON – The U.S., long known for its meddling in the affairs of other nations, also has a long and sordid history of supporting military juntas abroad, many of which it forced into power through bloody coups or behind-the-scenes power grabs. From Greece in the 1960s to Argentina in the 1980s to the current al-Sisi-led junta in Egypt , Washington has actively and repeatedly supported such undemocratic regimes despite casting itself as the world's greatest promoter of "democracy."

Finally in 2017, karma appears to have come back to roost, as the current presidential administration has now effectively morphed into what is, by definition , a military junta. Though the military-industrial complex has long directed U.S. foreign policy, in the administration of President Donald Trump a group of military officers has gathered unprecedented power and, for all intents and purposes, rules the country.

Three generals at the center of power

In a recent article in The Washington Post , titled "Military Leaders Consolidate Power In Trump Administration," Post reporters Robert Costa and Philip Rucker noted that "At the core of Trump's circle is a seasoned trio of generals with experience as battlefield commanders: White House Chief of Staff John F. Kelly, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and national security adviser H.R. McMaster. The three men have carefully cultivated personal relationships with the president and gained his trust."

"This is the only time in modern presidential history when we've had a small number of people from the uniformed world hold this much influence over the chief executive," John E. McLaughlin, a former acting director of the CIA who served in seven administrations, told the Post . "They are right now playing an extraordinary role."

This role, however, appears to reach beyond "extraordinary". Although Trump is fond of calling them "my generals," they now, Costa and Rucker report, "manage Trump's hour-by-hour interactions and whisper in his ear – and those whispers, as with the decision this week to expand U.S. military operations in Afghanistan, often become policy." Another Washington Post article, published last Tuesday, led with the headline "The Generals Have Trump Surrounded."

Also notable is the fact that this trio of generals has overseen the firing of more independent, "outsider" voices, notably Derek Harvey and Steve Bannon. Bannon, in particular, was a thorn in the side of the generals, in light primarily of his staunch opposition to the American "empire project" and new wars abroad. Bannon had opposed Trump's strike against Syria, troop surges in Iraq, and the dropped hint of a "military option" to deal with the crisis in Venezuela. The New York Times referred to McMaster as Bannon's "nemesis in the West Wing," precisely due to McMaster's commitment to American empire building.

With Bannon's relatively recent departure, the tone of the Trump administration – now unequivocally ruled by "the generals" – has changed significantly -- as illustrated by Trump's decision to send thousands more troops to Afghanistan, a measure both Bannon and Trump himself once opposed.

In addition, last Thursday, Politico published a report detailing the control exercised by Kelly over the president, as he personally vets "everything" that comes across Trump's desk. Politico referenced two memos that laid out a system "designed to ensure that the president won't see any external policy documents, internal policy memos, agency reports and even news articles that haven't been vetted."

The Hill further noted that Kelly is also "keeping a tight leash" on who gets to meet directly with the President in the Oval Office, which is now strictly appointment-only and also dependent upon Kelly's approval.

[Aug 28, 2017] The ouster of Mattis: Some follow-up details and a White House response

get=
Here are a few things I have heard since I posted my comments on Friday about the Obama administration pushing General Mattis out at Central Command. Thanks to all who wrote in to make this follow-up possible:
  • A particular point of disagreement was what to do about mischief Iran is exporting to other countries. Mattis is indeed more hawkish on this than the White House was.
  • National Security Advisor Tom Donilon in particular was irked by Mattis's insistence on being heard. I cringe when I hear about civilians shutting down strategic discussions. That is exactly what the Bush administration did in late 2002 when generals persisted in questioning whether it was wise to invade Iraq. That led to what some might call a fiasco.
  • I wonder if Donilon understands that the key to making effective, sustainable national security policy is having robust, candid discussions between civilian and military leaders that bring to the surface differences and also explore assumptions. I am told that that is what Mattis was trying to do. He knows, as do all smart generals, that in our system, at the end of the discussion the civilians get to decide what to do. In a talk at Johns Hopkins SAIS in late November, Mattis said that, "We military leaders have a right and duty to be heard, to give our best military advice, but we were not elected to and we have no right to dictate." (In the same talk, Mattis also likened Cairo today to Paris in 1789 -- a very interesting thought, and one that made me wonder if 15 years from now, one Arab leader will dominate the entire region as Napoloen dominated Europe early in the 19 th century.)
  • Insisting on being heard should be part of the duty of a senior general. That's the lesson of two great books: H.R. McMaster's Dereliction of Duty and Eliot Cohen's Supreme Command . Indeed, General Mattis cited the latter in his talk at Johns Hopkins SAIS. I suspect Donilon needs to brush up on both.

[Aug 27, 2017] What A Mess! - Pentagon At War With CIA In Syria Zero Hedge

Notable quotes:
"... As a result, the two arms of offensive US strategic power, the Pentagon and CIA, went separate ways in Syria. Growing competition between the US military and militarized CIA broke into the open in Syria. ..."
"... The US, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey armed and financed ISIS as a weapon to unleash on Syria, which was an ally of Iran that refused to take orders from the Western powers. The west bears heavy responsibility for the deaths of 450,000 Syrians, at least half the nation of 23 million becoming refugees, and destruction of this once lovely country. ..."
"... Kurdish rebels in Iraq have been armed and financed by Israel since the 1970's ..."
"... When America's Arab jihadists proved militarily feeble, the US turned to the Kurds, who are renowned fighters, arming and financing the Kurdish Syrian YPG which is part of the well-known PKK rebel group that fights Turkey. ..."
"... So, Turkey, a key American ally, is now battling CIA-backed Kurdish groups in Syria. Eighty percent of Turks believe the recent failed coup in Turkey was mounted by the US – not the White House, but by the Pentagon which has always been joined at the hip to Turkey's military. ..."
"... Now the Russians have entered the fray in an effort to prevent their ally, Bashar Assad, from being overthrow by western powers. Also perfectly predictable. Russia claimed to be bombing ISIS but in fact is targeting US-backed groups. Washington is outraged that the wicked Russians are doing in the Mideast what the US has done for decades. ..."
Sep 06, 2016 | www.zerohedge.com
Tyler Durden Sep 6, 2016 8:40 PM 0 SHARES Submitted by Eric Margolis via Strategic-Culture.org,

What a mess! In the crazy Syrian war, US-backed and armed groups are fighting other US-backed rebel groups . How can this be?

It is so because the Obama White House had stirred up war in Syria but then lost control of the process. When the US has a strong president, he can usually keep the military and intelligence agencies on a tight leash.

But the Obama administration has had a weak secretary of defense and a bunch of lady strategists who are the worst military commanders since Louis XV, who put his mistress, Madame de Pompadour, in charge of French military forces during the Seven Year's War. The French were routed by the Prussians. France's foe, Frederick the Great of Prussia, named one of his dogs, 'la Pompadour.'

As a result, the two arms of offensive US strategic power, the Pentagon and CIA, went separate ways in Syria. Growing competition between the US military and militarized CIA broke into the open in Syria.

Fed up with the astounding incompetence of the White House, the US military launched and supported its own rebel groups in Syria, while CIA did the same.

Fighting soon after erupted in Syria and Iraq between the US-backed groups. US Special Forces joined the fighting in Syria, Iraq and most lately, Libya.

The well-publicized atrocities, like mass murders and decapitations, greatly embarrassed Washington, making it harder to portray their jihadi wildmen as liberators . The only thing exceptional about US policy in Syria was its astounding incompetence.

Few can keep track of the 1,000 groups of jihadis that keep changing their names and shifting alliances. Throw in Turkomans, Yzidis, Armenians, Nestorians, Druze, Circassians, Alawis, Assyrians and Palestinians. Oh yes, and the Alevis.

Meanwhile, ISIS was inflicting mayhem on Syria and Iraq. But who really is ISIS? A few thousand twenty-something hooligans with little knowledge of Islam but a burning desire to dynamite the existing order and a sharp media sense. The leadership of these turbaned anarchists appears to have formed in US prison camps in Afghanistan.

The US, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey armed and financed ISIS as a weapon to unleash on Syria, which was an ally of Iran that refused to take orders from the Western powers. The west bears heavy responsibility for the deaths of 450,000 Syrians, at least half the nation of 23 million becoming refugees, and destruction of this once lovely country.

At some point, ISIS shook off its western tutors and literally ran amok. But the US has not yet made a concerted attempt to crush ISIS because of its continuing usefulness in Syria and in the US, where ISIS has become the favorite whipping boy of politicians.

Next come the Kurds, an ancient Indo-European stateless people spread across Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria. They have been denied a national state by the western powers since WWI. Kurdish rebels in Iraq have been armed and financed by Israel since the 1970's.

When America's Arab jihadists proved militarily feeble, the US turned to the Kurds, who are renowned fighters, arming and financing the Kurdish Syrian YPG which is part of the well-known PKK rebel group that fights Turkey.

I covered the Turkish-Kurdish conflict in eastern Anatolia in the 1980's in which some 40,000 died.

Turkey is now again battling a rising wave of Kurdish attacks that caused the Turks to probe into northern Syria to prevent a link-up of advancing Kurdish rebel forces.

So, Turkey, a key American ally, is now battling CIA-backed Kurdish groups in Syria. Eighty percent of Turks believe the recent failed coup in Turkey was mounted by the US – not the White House, but by the Pentagon which has always been joined at the hip to Turkey's military.

This major Turkish-Kurdish crisis was perfectly predictable, but the obtuse junior warriors of the Obama administration failed to grasp this point.

Now the Russians have entered the fray in an effort to prevent their ally, Bashar Assad, from being overthrow by western powers. Also perfectly predictable. Russia claimed to be bombing ISIS but in fact is targeting US-backed groups. Washington is outraged that the wicked Russians are doing in the Mideast what the US has done for decades.

The US and Russia now both claim to have killed a senior ISIS commander in an air strike. Their warplanes are dodging one another, creating a perfect scenario for a head-on clash at a time when neocons in the US are agitating for war with Russia.

Does anyone think poor, demolished Syria is worth the price? Hatred for the US is now seething in Turkey and across the Mideast. Hundreds of millions of US tax dollars have been wasted in this cruel, pointless war.

Time for the US to stop stirring this witch's brew.

* * *

And if that didn't 1) drive you crazy, and/or 2) confuse you, here is UK's Channel 4 to explain in pictures...

Who is fighting who in #Syria ? The question's simple – the answer's not. pic.twitter.com/3LD6p6oSPO

! Channel 4 News (@Channel4News) September 5, 2016

[Aug 26, 2017] Russian air defense at their Tartus naval facility in Syria shot down an American RQ-21 "Blackjack" spy drone on May 27th,

Aug 26, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com

Drutten , August 25, 2017 at 8:20 am

Also, interesting: Russian air defense at their Tartus naval facility in Syria shot down an American RQ-21 "Blackjack" spy drone on May 27th, it's been revealed.

[Aug 26, 2017] US troops in Syria must all be social workers in uniform. Or maybe 'SF" stands for 'Super Friendly' and not 'Special Forces'. It's okay when Uncle Sam kills people, because he has love in his heart.

Notable quotes:
"... The US objective seems to be to seize control of the oil fields in the region adjacent to Raqqa, which would ensure the economic viability of a Kurdistan entity in northern Syria. Turkey fears that the next step by the US would be to launch operations in northern Syria along Turkey's borders with a view to carve out a contiguous Kurdistan, which would have access to the Eastern Mediterranean. Turkey rightly apprehends that a Kurdistan as next-door neighbour would put intolerable strain on its integrity and stability. ..."
"... "Despite Russia's denials, we know they are seeking to redraw international borders by force, undermining the sovereign and free nations of Europe," Mattis told reporters, alongside Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko. ..."
Aug 26, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com

Cortes , August 24, 2017 at 6:09 pm

Cooperation among Iran-Russia-Turkey with potential for

1. Disruption of plans to create separate Kurdish state and

2. Exploitation of Iranian hydrocarbons

in an article by M K Bhadrakumar:

http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/russia-turkey-iran-axis-would-have-been-absurd-fantasy-year-ago-now-its-reality/ri20733

et Al , August 25, 2017 at 1:33 am
Qatar has given KSA a big public FY! by fully restoring diplomatic relations with Iran. I wonder if they've yet (Qatar) stopped sponsoring IS/ISIL/DAESH/Whatever yet?

The USA likes to make deals then go back on them too. It made a deal with China over North Korea and has gone back on it, it is undermining the I-ran nuclear deal etc. It looks to me as if it is methodically destroying its political credentials which means that when it really needs help, the deal will be signed in their own blood.

marknesop , August 25, 2017 at 11:38 am
The US objective seems to be to seize control of the oil fields in the region adjacent to Raqqa, which would ensure the economic viability of a Kurdistan entity in northern Syria. Turkey fears that the next step by the US would be to launch operations in northern Syria along Turkey's borders with a view to carve out a contiguous Kurdistan, which would have access to the Eastern Mediterranean. Turkey rightly apprehends that a Kurdistan as next-door neighbour would put intolerable strain on its integrity and stability.

I must be politically naive. I thought Washington had major objections to 'redrawing borders'.

Oh; look at that – it does .

"Despite Russia's denials, we know they are seeking to redraw international borders by force, undermining the sovereign and free nations of Europe," Mattis told reporters, alongside Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko.

Those troops must all be social workers in uniform. Or maybe 'SF" stands for 'Super Friendly' and not 'Special Forces'. It's okay when Uncle Sam does it, because he has love in his heart.

[Aug 25, 2017] Influential GOP Donor Sheldon Adelson Supports Campaign to Oust McMaster report

Notable quotes:
"... Powerful Republican "megadonor" Sheldon Adelson has privately told an ally that he supports a campaign against National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster that depicts him as anti-Israel and seeks to remove him from the White House, according to a new report. ..."
Aug 25, 2017 | www.breitbart.com
Powerful Republican "megadonor" Sheldon Adelson has privately told an ally that he supports a campaign against National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster that depicts him as anti-Israel and seeks to remove him from the White House, according to a new report.

Adelson wrote in an email to Mort Klein, the president of the Zionist Organization of America who is running the campaign: "Now that I have talked to somebody with personal experience with McMaster, I support your efforts," according to Axios.

The support from Adelson -- arguably the most influential donor in Republican politics -- comes after his spokesman said he had nothing to do with ZOA's campaign against McMaster and was "perfectly comfortable" with the job he was doing.

... ... ...

A White House source tried to downplay the email, telling Axios that the Israel team -- which included "noted right winger Ambassador Friedman" – feels that McMaster is "remarkably pro-Israel and he just had a meeting with senior Israeli officials where he won plaudits from them for understanding their unique security needs."

Adelson's email is a blow to McMaster, who is under heavy criticism for ousting political opponents inside the National Security Council who wanted to implement the president's "America First" foreign policy agenda.

[Aug 24, 2017] Kelly, Mattic and McMaster complete the militarization of the executive branch

"I think Trump may have so deeply surrounded (embedded may be the better word) himself primarily to protect himself from the intelligence community. JFK was not a one off in my opinion and probably not in Trump's mind."
Aug 24, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
48

"...At the core of Trump's circle is a seasoned trio of generals with experience as battlefield commanders: White House Chief of Staff John F. Kelly, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and national security adviser H.R. McMaster...."

These three basically complete the militarization of the executive branch and the Political Elites. They've all pushed for or have been intimately involved in wars in which the US has lost or never been able to 'win'. This is Trump's best and the brightest


Kelly: In 2002, Kelly again served with the 1st Marine Division, this time as the assistant division commander. Much of Kelly's two-year assignment was spent deployed in Iraq. In March 2003, while in Iraq, Kelly was promoted to brigadier general..... later, he served as the commanding general of the Multi-National Force West in Iraq from February 2008 to February 2009....

Mattis: During the initial planning for the War in Afghanistan, Mattis led Task Force 58 in operations in the southern part of the country; In May 2004, Mattis ordered the 3:00 a.m. bombing of a suspected enemy safe house near the Syrian border, which later came to be known as the Mukaradeeb wedding party massacre, and which resulted in the deaths of 42 civilians; Mattis played key roles in combat operations in Fallujah, including negotiation with the insurgent command inside the city during Operation Vigilant Resolve in April 2004, as well as participation in planning of the subsequent Operation Phantom Fury in November; responsible for American military operations in the Middle East, Northeast Africa, and Central Asia, from August 11, 2010, to March 22, 2013; etc etc

In other words, Mattis is responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity during the destruction of Fallujah.....

H.R. McMaster: Director of the Combined Joint Interagency Task Force-Shafafiyat at the International Security Assistance Force Headquarters in Kabul, Afghanistan... He is known for his roles in the Gulf War, Operation Enduring Freedom, and Operation Iraqi Freedom. From August 2007 to August 2008 McMaster was part of an "elite team of officers advising US commander" General David Petraeus on counterinsurgency operations (perhaps known as how to kill Iraqis who resisted the US invasion and occupation)

Carol Davidek-Waller | Aug 24, 2017 3:13:23 PM | 30

What you are saying is that General Jack D Ripper is now president and Dr. Strangelove is Trump's top security advisor?

[Aug 24, 2017] MoA - Notes On The Junta, An Unnecessary Land-Corridor And A Regular Russian Maneuver

Notable quotes:
"... As for Russiagate, it's collapse is due to the VIPS metadata analysis published recently that provides irrefutable facts. ..."
Aug 24, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

... ... ...

The Zionist propaganda is claiming that Iran is taking over Syria and that its sole concern is to create a land-corridor between Iran and Lebanon. The AP is now reporting this myth as if it were fact. The argument the AP writers make is illogical and fails:

The land-route would be the biggest prize yet for Iran in its involvement in Syria's six-year-old civil war. [...] It would facilitate movement of Iranian-backed fighters between Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon as well as the flow of weapons to Damascus and Lebanon's Hezbollah , Iran's main proxy group.

That landline would facilitate something that, according to further AP "reporting", has already been achieved without it:

The route is largely being carved out by Iran's allies and proxies, a mix of forces including troops of Syrian President Bashar Assad, Hezbollah fighters and Shiite militias on both sides of the border aiming to link up. Iran also has forces of its own Revolutionary Guard directly involved in the campaign on the Syrian side.

So, apparently, Iran needs a land corridor to move weapons and fighters to Syria and Lebanon. To open that currently closed-off land corridor it has moved weapons and fighters to Syria and Lebanon. Somehow that argument is not convincing at all.

---

The usual NATO propaganda outlets are retching up fear over an upcoming Russian maneuver:

Russia is preparing to mount what could be one of its biggest military exercises since the cold war, a display of power that will be watched warily by Nato against a backdrop of east-west tensions.

Western officials and analysts estimate up to 100,000 military personnel and logistical support could participate in the Zapad (West) 17 exercise, which will take place next month in Belarus, Kaliningrad and Russia itself.

It follows a lot of speculation and obvious bullshit. In reality Zaphad is a series of smaller maneuvers taking place over some six month. It includes local police and civil defense agencies which lets the numbers look big. Each year such maneuvers take place in one of the four military districts of Russia. The number of soldiers at the core of the exercise will amount to about a division size force of 13,000-15,000 troops. Nothing, absolutely nothing, is unusual with that maneuver but the NATO propaganda attempts to make it look like an imminent Russian invasion of western Europe.

karlof1 | Aug 24, 2017 11:57:18 AM | 13
The Zionists have an Iranian Brain Freeze as NuttyYahoo displayed in his Moscow visit, http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/08/netanyahu-meets-putin-rants-about-iran.html

I suspect he's feeling the heat of the corruption investigation that will hopefully land him in prison, thus his ranting.

As for Russiagate, it's collapse is due to the VIPS metadata analysis published recently that provides irrefutable facts.

Yet, it's very clear so-called liberals and Democrats are incapable of admitting defeat and have doubled down yet again trying to prove something nefarious occurred between Russia and Trump, https://www.commondreams.org/views/2017/08/23/follow-money-they-say-it-was-about-russian-orphans-theyre-lying The comment made to that article by HisStory torpedoes it rather well.

So, we have an inside-out version of Seven days in May . I wonder if the generals are as hip to escalate the hybrid war against China and Russia as those the Clintons represented? Something tells me they're not so keen; perhaps the initial volleys made by the Outlaw US Empire have drawn some return fire we are yet to become privy to.

Ghostship | Aug 24, 2017 12:56:33 PM | 19

>>>> Jonesy | Aug 24, 2017 11:25:12 AM | 9
More anti-Iranian propaganda from the UK, this is not a coincidence IMHO:

You always need to be extremely cynical when reading a British newspaper.

Thousands of Iranian-backed fighters are battling their way through the Middle East in a bid to secure a corridor from the Tehran through Iraq, Syria and Lebanon to the Mediterranean.

That's just about everybody except the Russians fighting on the government side in Syria. Small matter that they're the only people doing a good job at liquidating Al Qaeda and ISIS.

Previously, the route has not been possible due to Iraqi resistance,...

Iraqi resistance aka ISIS.

Sunni Arab countries

The countries that have been funding, arming and supporting Al Qaeda and ISIS all along.

Israel, the nemesis of both Iran and Hezbollah

That's the wrong way round, it should read "Iran and Hezbollah, the nemeses of Israel".

Anonymous | Aug 24, 2017 12:59:54 PM | 20

Regarding the Iraniuan taking over Syria BS, Netanyahu, and the the heads of Mossad and Israel military intelligence have scuttled off to Moscow to plead with Putin to stop destroying Israel's terrorists in Syria. The Russians aren't fooled by Netanyahu's duplicity nor are they intimidated by claims of 'anti-semitism'.

Israel fears the collapse of its strategy in Syria

Netanyahu Meets Putin, Rants About Iran, Putin Ignores Him

Ghostship | Aug 24, 2017 1:13:51 PM | 22

>>>> karlof1 | Aug 24, 2017 11:57:18 AM | 13
The Zionists have an Iranian Brain Freeze as NuttyYahoo displayed in his Moscow visit...

According to Al-masdar News it's way beyond bipolar disorder into paranoid schizophrenia

Netanyahu claims Israel is defeating ISIL in Syria, demands Iran leaves..

Netanyahu str essed that "with joint efforts we are defeating Islamic State ," which he said "is a very important thing."

In former years he would have been shipped off to the Deolali Transit Camp in India.

[Aug 23, 2017] The Mini-Skirt Deception How McMaster Got His Afghan 'Surge' - Antiwar.com Original

Aug 23, 2017 | original.antiwar.com

The Mini-Skirt Deception: How McMaster Got His Afghan 'Surge'

A photo of Soviet era Afghanistan won Trump over

by Justin Raimondo Posted on August 23, 2017 August 22, 2017 According to reports , Gen. H. R. McMaster convinced President Trump to give up his longstanding opposition to the Afghan war by showing him this photograph, below, of Afghan women in what the media are describing as "miniskirts." As the Washington Post put it:

"One of the ways McMaster tried to persuade Trump to recommit to the effort was by convincing him that Afghanistan was not a hopeless place. He presented Trump with a black-and-white snapshot from 1972 of Afghan women in miniskirts walking through Kabul, to show him that Western norms had existed there before and could return."

The irony is that, in 1972, when this photo was taken on the grounds of Kabul University, Afghanistan was firmly in the orbit of the Soviet Union, as it had been since 1953, when Prime Minister Mohammed Daoud Khan rose to power and instituted a series of progressive reforms, including equal rights for women. The next year, Khan deposed King Mohammed Zahir Shah, and Soviet aid poured in, alongside the Red Army.

More irony: it was the United States, alongside Washington's then-ally Osama bin Laden, that overthrew the communist regime, and conducted a guerrilla war against the Afghan government and their Soviet sponsors. The last Soviet troops left in 1989 -- and there were no more miniskirts to be seen anywhere in Afghanistan.

Gen. McMaster knows all this: our President does not. Does McMaster think he can bring communism back to Afghanistan? I jest, but with serious intent. Because the commies attempted what our President has vowed not to do in Afghanistan: they sought to create a nation out of a collection of mountain-guarded valleys, isolated bastions untouched by time or the vaunted ambitions of their many would-be conquerors.

Here is Trump , trying to justify the prolongation of the longest war in our history:

"I am here to talk about tonight, that nearly 16 years after September 11 attacks, after the extraordinary sacrifice of blood and treasure, the American people are weary of war without victory.

"Nowhere is this more evident than with the war in Afghanistan, the longest war in American history – 17 years. I share the American people's frustration. I also share their frustration over a foreign policy that has spent too much time, energy, money, and most importantly, lives trying to rebuild countries in our own image instead of pursuing our security interests above all other considerations."

How to reconcile this abjuration of hubris with that photo of mini-skirted Afghan women? It can't be done, but then again Trump is all about contradictions:

"Shortly after my inauguration, I directed Secretary of Defense Mattis and my national security team to undertake a comprehensive review of all strategic options in Afghanistan and South Asia.

"My original instinct was to pull out, and historically I like following my instincts. But all my life, I have heard that decisions are much different when you sit behind the desk in the oval office. In other words, when you are president of the United States."

Has such a confession of betrayal ever been uttered by a public figure? For years he told us Afghanistan was a waste of lives and treasure, and that we had to get out. And now he's flip-flopped because McMaster showed him a photo of Afghan women in mini-skirts! Oh, how easy it was – too easy!

"So I studied Afghanistan in great detail and from every conceivable angle," he claims. Really? Did he study it enough to realize that no one has ever conquered Afghanistan? Did he contemplate the storied history of that unforgiving land, which caused even Alexander the Great to turn back? Did he study the provenance and context of that photograph, in which Afghan women dared to show their knees?

Of course not!

"After many meetings over many months," Trump continued,

"[W]e held our final meeting last Friday at Camp David with my cabinet and generals to complete our strategy. I arrived at three fundamental conclusions about America's core interests in Afghanistan.

"First, our nation must seek an honorable and enduring outcome worthy of the tremendous sacrifices that have been made, especially the sacrifices of lives. The men and women who serve our nation in combat deserve a plan for victory. They deserve the tools they need and the trust they have earned to fight and to win."

What is the moral meaning of this? That lives wasted in a futile crusade must be matched by yet more sacrifices on the altar of the war god? We are told that Trump met with five enlisted soldiers before making his decision to go along with the generals' war plan: I'd like to know what they said. The White House won't tell us.

From this moral inversion Trump descends into an inversion of the facts:

"Second, the consequences of a rapid exit are both predictable and unacceptable. 9/11, the worst terrorist attack in our history, was planned and directed from Afghanistan because that country by a government that gave comfort and shelter to terrorists. A hasty withdrawal would create a vacuum that terrorists, including ISIS and al Qaeda, would instantly fill, just as happened before September 11."

The 9/11 terrorist attacks were planned and directed from Hamburg, Germany , and right here in the United States – indeed, not too far from Mar-a-Lago -- not Afghanistan. This "safe haven" argument is so tattered and overused that it comes apart under the most cursory inspection. And what are we to make of someone who describes ending a 16-year war as "a hasty withdrawal"?

We are then treated to the myth of "victory denied in Iraq," which attributes the rise of ISIS to US withdrawal from Iraq – when it reality ISIS was created by our "ally" Saudi Arabia and the Arab sheikhs of the Gulf states who have funded and encouraged their co-co-religionists in the Sunni-versus-Shi'ite civil war that has sundered the Muslim world. And of course there would be no ISIS if not for the invasion of Iraq – but even Trump knows this quite well.

Drifting off into vague threats against Pakistan, Trump reiterates his determination to solve "big and intricate problems." But how? How will it be different, this time?

"As a result of our comprehensive review, American strategy in Afghanistan and South Asia will change dramatically in the following ways: A core pillar of our new strategy is a shift from a time-based approach to one based on conditions. I've said it many times, how counterproductive it is for the United States to announce in advance the dates we intend to begin or end military operations.

"We will not talk about numbers of troops or our plans for further military activities. Conditions on the ground, not arbitrary timetables, will guide our strategy from now on. America's enemies must never know our plans or believe they can wait us out."

A child could see through this rodomontade. Because unless we intend to stay in Afghanistan forever, what is to prevent the Taliban from simply waiting us out? We have to leave sometime. So what is the purpose of this vow of silence? It is simply to keep the truth from the American people. We won't know how many troops are in Afghanistan, nor will we know when more are sent in: it's all to be conducted under the radar, so that Trump's voters – who took seriously his tirades against foreign wars – won't know the extent to which he has betrayed his mandate, and them.

The absurdities accumulate like refuse during a garbage strike:

"We are not nation building again. We are killing terrorists." Yet Gen. McMaster, a disciple of Gen. David Petraeus and his " COINdistas ," are the original nation-builders – aside from the Soviets, that is, from whom they cadged their "strategy."

"We have been paying Pakistan billions and billions of dollars, at the same time they are housing the same terrorists that we are fighting. But that will have to change. And that will change immediately." No it won't. Remember when Sen. Rand Paul tried to end US aid to Pakistan? It didn't happen then and it won't happen now.

"As the prime minister of Afghanistan has promised, we are going to participate in economic development to help defray the cost of this war to us." So Afghanistan is going to pay for this war, just like Mexico is going to pay for the Great Wall of Texas! In your dreams, Mr. President.

"Our commitment is not unlimited, and our support is not a blank check." The history of the past 16 years refutes this, as does the content of the President's peroration. Of course we're giving them a blank check: that's because the Afghan government only has such resources as we give to it. And since Trump is refusing to say when or even if we're leaving, then our commitment is indeed potentially unlimited. Does he imagine our Afghan puppets, who are happily stealing us blind, don't know this?

I can't bear to go on cataloging the lies, the contradictions, the flip-flops – it pains me to even think about it, much less write about it. The "America First" foreign policy Trump promised during the campaign is just a memory, and his baffled supporters are left to contemplate the most brazen betrayal in modern American political history.

Yet there are some benefits, here, for anti-interventionists to reap, which may not be readily apparent. Because Trump's supporters, who took seriously his anti-interventionist rhetoric, are now wondering what hit them. They had to go through this experience: betrayal can be enlightening. And we here at Antiwar.com are ready, willing, and able to enlighten them. That is, after all, what we're about.

On step forward, two steps back – this is how progress, however agonizingly slow, is made.

AN IMPORTANT NOTE TO MY READERS

Take heart: for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Trump's brazen reversal on Afghanistan and the triumph of the generals is provoking a movement in the opposite direction – the anti-interventionist movement is growing and getting more visible. Many of Trump's supporters are in open rebellion , and we here at Antiwar.com are getting more visibility: check out this Washington Post piece which reads like it was taken from our front page.

We're making progress – but we can't do it without your help. We need your tax-deductible donations to keep Antiwar.com going. Donate today!

Read more by Justin Raimondo The Revolution Betrayed – August 20th, 2017 'Russia-gate' Hoax About To Be Exposed? – August 17th, 2017 Which Way for the Trump Administration? – August 15th, 2017 Don't Say We Didn't Warn You – August 13th, 2017 What Are We To Believe? – August 10th, 2017

[Aug 22, 2017] Pat Buchanan

Buchanan demonstrates very superficial understanding of the result of the USSR collapse. Afghan war was just one contributing factor. It was never the primary reason. Soviet people understood pretty well that they actually faced the USA in Afghan war. Or more correctly the combination of the USA has technological superiority, Saudi money and political Islam. The fact that the USA supplied Stingers portable anti-aircraft rocket launchers. Which later will shoot down some US helicopters. The fact the the USA fe-factor put political Islam on front burner later will bite the USA several times.
Also Buchanan does not understand the role of neoliberal revolution (or coup d'état if you wish, called quite coup) of 80th in the current US troubles. Trump was the first ever presidential candidate, who companied and managed to win the elections on promises to tame neoliberal globalization. The fact that he was crushed in six month of so is not surprising, as he faced very well organize Trotskyite militants (aka deep state) - neoliberalism is actually Trotskyism for rish. Russiagate witch hunt with its Special Prosecutor is a replica of Stalin processes. As Marx used to say history repeats, first as tragedy, second as farce.
"I have not become the King's First Minister in order to preside over the liquidation of the British Empire," said Winston Churchill. and this is the essence of Trump betrual of his election promises.
Notable quotes:
"... Is it now the turn of the Americans? Persuaded by his generals -- Mattis at Defense, McMasters on the National Security Council, Kelly as chief of staff -- President Trump is sending some 4,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan to augment the 8,500 already there. Like Presidents Obama and Bush, he does not intend to preside over a U.S. defeat in its longest war. Nor do his generals. Yet how can we defeat the Taliban with 13,000 troops when we failed to do so with the 100,000 Obama sent? The new troops are to train the Afghan army to take over the war, to continue eradicating the terrorist elements like ISIS, and to prevent Kabul and other cities from falling to a Taliban now dominant in 40 percent of the country. ..."
"... Writes Bob Merry in the fall issue of The National interest: "War between Russia and the West seems nearly inevitable. No self-respecting nation facing inexorable encirclement by an alliance of hostile neighbors can allow such pressures and forces to continue indefinitely. Eventually (Russia) must protect its interests through military action." ..."
"... Trump himself seems hell-bent on tearing up the nuclear deal with Iran. This would lead inexorably to a U.S. ultimatum, where Iran would be expected to back down or face a war that would set the Persian Gulf ablaze. ..."
"... Yet the country did not vote for confrontation or war. ..."
"... America voted for Trump's promise to improve ties with Russia, to make Europe shoulder more of the cost of its defense, to annihilate ISIS and extricate us from Mideast wars, to stay out of future wars. ..."
"... This agenda did exist and Trump used it to get elected. Once he pulled off that trick he tried to get together again (unsuccessfully) with his New York Plutocrat friends. It's that New York social background. It's always been difficult to see Trump fit together economically or socially with the America that elected him, and after he got elected he quickly weakened his ties with Middle America. So why should he complain about Fake News since he got elected on a Fake Agenda? ..."
"... Trump does not even remember what he was elected to do. A man who was determined to drain the swamp is deep, up to his neck, in that swamp. The neocons and the never-Trumpers are the main decision makers in the Trump administration. All the loyal supporters have been chased out of the Trump's inner circle. A man who built his empire with his brain and shrewdness can't seem to handle the Presidency. He is trying to appease the very same people who opposed him in the election. ..."
"... For a smart businessman, Donald Trump can't seem to make any friends. There is a very simple solution to these wars of choice. Mr. Trump swallow your pride and bring the boys home. You will save American lives and will also earn the gratitude of the families of these soldiers. You may even bring peace to many countries around the world and people who have been displaced by these wars can return home. You may even solve the refugee problem in the process. You might even save your presidency. Give peace a chance. ..."
"... I think The Donald offered the lame excuse that things looks much different when you're in the oval office vs. the campaign trail. That won't be any consolation to people who voted for him in the hopes that their family members in the military would be coming home soon. And it won't be any consolation to some members of his base. ..."
"... Trump isn't going to keep his campaign promises. ..."
"... Continuing to maintain forces in South Korea continues to contribute to our bankruptcy. ..."
"... Now that the generals have gone wild under Trump we may as well admit that we're ruled by a military junta. We'll let them make all the decisions since they're so brilliant while Trump tweets and holds stupid rallies trying to convince people that he hasn't reneged on any campaign promises. ..."
Aug 22, 2017 | www.unz.com

12 Comments

"I have not become the King's First Minister in order to preside over the liquidation of the British Empire," said Winston Churchill to cheers at the Lord Mayor's luncheon in London in November 1942. True to his word, the great man did not begin the liquidation. When his countrymen threw him out in July 1945, that role fell to Clement Attlee, who began the liquidation. Churchill, during his second premiership from 1951-1955, would continue the process, as would his successor, Harold Macmillan, until the greatest empire the world had ever seen had vanished.

While its demise was inevitable, the death of the empire was hastened and made mo re humiliating by the wars into which Churchill had helped to plunge Britain, wars that bled and bankrupted his nation. At Yalta in 1945, Stalin and FDR treated the old imperialist with something approaching bemused contempt. War is the health of the state, but the death of empires. The German, Austro-Hungarian, Russian and Ottoman empires all fell in World War I. World War II ended the Japanese and Italian empires -- with the British and French following soon after. The Soviet Empire collapsed in 1989. Afghanistan delivered the coup de grace.

Is it now the turn of the Americans? Persuaded by his generals -- Mattis at Defense, McMasters on the National Security Council, Kelly as chief of staff -- President Trump is sending some 4,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan to augment the 8,500 already there. Like Presidents Obama and Bush, he does not intend to preside over a U.S. defeat in its longest war. Nor do his generals. Yet how can we defeat the Taliban with 13,000 troops when we failed to do so with the 100,000 Obama sent? The new troops are to train the Afghan army to take over the war, to continue eradicating the terrorist elements like ISIS, and to prevent Kabul and other cities from falling to a Taliban now dominant in 40 percent of the country.

Yet what did the great general, whom Trump so admires, Douglas MacArthur, say of such a strategy? "War's very object is victory, not prolonged indecision." Is not "prolonged indecision" what the Trump strategy promises? Is not "prolonged indecision" what the war policies of Obama and Bush produced in the last 17 years? Understandably, Americans feel they cannot walk away from this war. For there is the certainty as to what will follow when we leave.

When the British left Delhi in 1947, millions of former subjects died during the partition of the territory into Pakistan and India and the mutual slaughter of Muslims and Hindus. When the French departed Algeria in 1962, the "Harkis" they left behind paid the price of being loyal to the Mother Country. When we abandoned our allies in South Vietnam, the result was mass murder in the streets, concentration camps and hundreds of thousands of boat people in the South China Sea, a final resting place for many. In Cambodia, it was a holocaust.

Trump, however, was elected to end America's involvement in Middle East wars. And if he has been persuaded that he simply cannot liquidate these wars -- Libya, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan -- he will likely end up sacrificing his presidency, trying to rescue the failures of those who worked hardest to keep him out of the White House.

Consider the wars, active and potential, Trump faces.

Writes Bob Merry in the fall issue of The National interest: "War between Russia and the West seems nearly inevitable. No self-respecting nation facing inexorable encirclement by an alliance of hostile neighbors can allow such pressures and forces to continue indefinitely. Eventually (Russia) must protect its interests through military action."

If Pyongyang tests another atom bomb or ICBM, some national security aides to Trump are not ruling out preventive war.

Trump himself seems hell-bent on tearing up the nuclear deal with Iran. This would lead inexorably to a U.S. ultimatum, where Iran would be expected to back down or face a war that would set the Persian Gulf ablaze.

Yet the country did not vote for confrontation or war.

America voted for Trump's promise to improve ties with Russia, to make Europe shoulder more of the cost of its defense, to annihilate ISIS and extricate us from Mideast wars, to stay out of future wars.

America voted for economic nationalism and an end to the mammoth trade deficits with the NAFTA nations, EU, Japan and China. America voted to halt the invasion across our Southern border and to reduce legal immigration to

Grandpa Charlie > , August 22, 2017 at 6:33 am GMT

I think that the case of Korea is very different from all the others, but generally I agree with Mr. Buchanan to the extent that I say: Pat Buchanan for President

Miro23 > , August 22, 2017 at 6:44 am GMT

Trump's populist-nationalist and America First agenda,

This agenda did exist and Trump used it to get elected. Once he pulled off that trick he tried to get together again (unsuccessfully) with his New York Plutocrat friends. It's that New York social background. It's always been difficult to see Trump fit together economically or socially with the America that elected him, and after he got elected he quickly weakened his ties with Middle America. So why should he complain about Fake News since he got elected on a Fake Agenda?

MEexpert > , August 22, 2017 at 7:12 am GMT

Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. This quote is so well-known that almost everyone knows it, except perhaps the politicians and the generals. Afghanistan has been called the deathbed of empires. The two recent empires to go down are the British and the Soviet. For almost 200 years the British tried to tame the Afghan tribes but couldn't. The devastation they caused did not deter the natives. It is all there in the history books for everyone to read. The Soviet empire didn't even last ten years. It cut its losses and ran.

The lack of teaching of history and geography in American schools is quite evident when one looks at the performance of American forces in Afghanistan after 17 years. Add the arrogance of the Presidents and the generals to this lack of knowledge and one can understand the disasterous results of the Afghan war. One other subject that is missing from the modern presidency is diplomacy. War over diplomacy seems to be the order of the day.

Trump, however, was elected to end America's involvement in Middle East wars. And if he has been persuaded that he simply cannot liquidate these wars -- Libya, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan -- he will likely end up sacrificing his presidency, trying to rescue the failures of those who worked hardest to keep him out of the White House.

Trump does not even remember what he was elected to do. A man who was determined to drain the swamp is deep, up to his neck, in that swamp. The neocons and the never-Trumpers are the main decision makers in the Trump administration. All the loyal supporters have been chased out of the Trump's inner circle. A man who built his empire with his brain and shrewdness can't seem to handle the Presidency. He is trying to appease the very same people who opposed him in the election.

Trump himself seems hell-bent on tearing up the nuclear deal with Iran. This would lead inexorably to a U.S. ultimatum, where Iran would be expected to back down or face a war that would set the Persian Gulf ablaze.

It is never going to happen. Not only the Middle East would be set ablaze, but America will lose its European allies as well. The relations with Russia are already confrontational and heading fast towards an ultimate war. European allies are also confused about the US foreign policy or lack thereof. Trade war is brewing with China. The only country which is happy with this chaos is Israel.

For a smart businessman, Donald Trump can't seem to make any friends. There is a very simple solution to these wars of choice. Mr. Trump swallow your pride and bring the boys home. You will save American lives and will also earn the gratitude of the families of these soldiers. You may even bring peace to many countries around the world and people who have been displaced by these wars can return home. You may even solve the refugee problem in the process. You might even save your presidency. Give peace a chance.

Renoman > , August 22, 2017 at 8:51 am GMT

No one has ever been able to conquer Afghanistan why would America think it can? Likely just throwing a bone to the neocons. As for Iran, Trump has been beating his chest all over the World and doing nothing, again with the Neocon feeding, I don't think he has any intention of getting into anything larger than a skirmish with anyone, he's a lot smarter than he looks --

syd.bgd > , August 22, 2017 at 9:10 am GMT

Well while Mr. Buchanan is not an expert in Balkans history, or politics, as I've argued here, he is excellent in American history and politics. An article somewhat short, because he is not connecting his sharp analysis to ongoing First Amendment disaster. It comes along, obviously, but still an excellent piece.

To be copied and saved in my personal archives, anyway. I do not believe that even this site will last long. Greetings from Serbia, suicidal country controlled from that feudal fortress (US Embassy) where our Scott-Pasha resides.

Chris Dakota > , August 22, 2017 at 11:21 am GMT

It was the eclipse that swept across America to change it forever. We now know we are on our own, there is no political solution for this war. The eclipse marks the end of a war, our war, we lost. Trump extends Afghan swamp war on the very day. Eclipse was conjunct Trumps Mars, he was castrated. Doesn't mean we won't win, but it won't be via the rigged ballot box and the DC swamp.

KenH > , August 22, 2017 at 11:47 am GMT

I think The Donald offered the lame excuse that things looks much different when you're in the oval office vs. the campaign trail. That won't be any consolation to people who voted for him in the hopes that their family members in the military would be coming home soon. And it won't be any consolation to some members of his base.

Now that the generals have gone wild under Trump we may as well admit that we're ruled by a military junta. We'll let them make all the decisions since they're so brilliant while Trump tweets and holds stupid rallies trying to convince people that he hasn't reneged on any campaign promises.

But if it prevents tens of thousands of knuckle dragging Afghans steeped in a culture of violence, pedophilia and pederasty from entering America as refugees then I guess there's a silver lining.

MEH 0910 > , August 22, 2017 at 1:42 pm GMT

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/08/full-transcript-donald-trump-announces-his-afghanistan-policy/537552/

My original instinct was to pull out, and historically, I like following my instincts. But all my life I've heard that decisions are much different when you sit behind the desk in the Oval Office.

Trump isn't going to keep his campaign promises. That means he's not going to build a beautiful wall on our southern border.

Liberty Mike > , August 22, 2017 at 2:31 pm GMT

@Grandpa Charlie What is different about "the case of Korea"?

Continuing to maintain forces in South Korea continues to contribute to our bankruptcy.

Liberty Mike > , August 22, 2017 at 2:34 pm GMT

@KenH I think The Donald offered the lame excuse that things looks much different when you're in the oval office vs. the campaign trail. That won't be any consolation to people who voted for him in the hopes that their family members in the military would be coming home soon. And it won't be any consolation to some members of his base.

Now that the generals have gone wild under Trump we may as well admit that we're ruled by a military junta. We'll let them make all the decisions since they're so brilliant while Trump tweets and holds stupid rallies trying to convince people that he hasn't reneged on any campaign promises.

... ... ..

[Aug 20, 2017] Mr. Bannon openly complained to White House colleagues that he resented how Ms. Trump would try to undo some of the major policy initiatives that he and Mr. Trump agreed were important to the presidents economic nationalist agenda

Notable quotes:
"... "Those days are over when Ivanka can run in and lay her head on the desk and cry," he told multiple people. ..."
"... Mr. Bannon made little secret of the fact that he believed "Javanka," as he referred to the couple behind their backs, had naïve political instincts and were going to alienate Mr. Trump's core coalition of white working-class voters. ..."
"... He also advised that ideological softening would buy the president no good will from Democrats or independent voters, whom Mr. Kushner and Ms. Trump believe Mr. Trump still has a chance of reaching. ..."
"... "They hate the very mention of his name," Mr. Bannon told them. "There is no constituency for this." ..."
"... His advice for the president: "You've got the base. And you grow the base by getting" things done. ..."
Aug 20, 2017 | www.msn.com

With little process to speak of, tensions over policy swelled. Ideological differences devolved into caustic personality clashes. Perhaps nowhere was the mutual disgust thicker than between Mr. Bannon and Mr. Trump's daughter and son-in-law.

Mr. Bannon openly complained to White House colleagues that he resented how Ms. Trump would try to undo some of the major policy initiatives that he and Mr. Trump agreed were important to the president's economic nationalist agenda, like withdrawing from the Paris climate accords. In this sense, he was relieved when Mr. Kelly took over and put in place a structure that kept other aides from freelancing.

"Those days are over when Ivanka can run in and lay her head on the desk and cry," he told multiple people.

Mr. Bannon made little secret of the fact that he believed "Javanka," as he referred to the couple behind their backs, had naïve political instincts and were going to alienate Mr. Trump's core coalition of white working-class voters.

He told White House colleagues including the president that too many conservative Republicans in Congress would balk if Mr. Trump took their advice and showed more flexibility on immigration, particularly toward young undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children.

He also advised that ideological softening would buy the president no good will from Democrats or independent voters, whom Mr. Kushner and Ms. Trump believe Mr. Trump still has a chance of reaching.

"They hate the very mention of his name," Mr. Bannon told them. "There is no constituency for this."

His advice for the president: "You've got the base. And you grow the base by getting" things done.

[Aug 20, 2017] McMaster solidifies power at NSC -- and supports Iran deal, sees Israel as occupier by Philip Weiss

Aug 05, 2017 | mondoweiss.net

Last night President Trump issued a statement affirming his support for National Security adviser H.R. McMaster in the face of a storm of criticism from rightwing outlets. The statement is a sign that Trump and his new chief of staff are taking the realist side of the debate inside his administration over foreign policy.

So while Trump claims to be doing everything he can to trash the Iran deal, the good news is that his foreign policy team is for it. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson clearly advocated for the deal at a press briefing earlier this week, while suggesting that he could differ with the president on how effective it's been.

I think there are a lot of alternative means with which we use the agreement to advance our policies and the relationship with Iran.

Tillerson is one of the "adults" who are thought to be able to rein in Trump's worst tendencies on Iran, as Paul Pillar wrote :

Reportedly the adults, including Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, and National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster, last month urged a resistant Trump to recognize reality and certify that Iran was complying with the JCPOA [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action].

Further comfort comes from the fact that three days ago, General McMaster fired Ezra Cohen-Watnick , an enigmatic thirtyish intelligence aide who was vehemently opposed to the Iran deal, leading to calls to get rid of McMaster. Like Tillerson, McMaster is plainly a realist. And he is thought to have job security because his predecessor, General Mike Flynn, lasted barely three weeks and went out with a splash. The Atlantic says McMaster is cleaning house at the NSC; two weeks ago he got rid of an ideologue who spread anti-Muslim conspiracies.

Supporters of Israel are upset by the personnel changes. The Israeli-American hothead Caroline Glick writes at her Facebook page that McMaster is "deeply hostile" to Israel as an occupying power.

The Israel angle on McMaster's purge of Trump loyalists from the National Security Council is that all of these people are pro-Israel and oppose the Iran nuclear deal, positions that Trump holds.

McMaster in contrast is deeply hostile to Israel and to Trump. According to senior officials aware of his behavior, he constantly refers to Israel as the occupying power and insists falsely and constantly that a country named Palestine existed where Israel is located until 1948 when it was destroyed by the Jews.

McMaster "has chosen to eliminate the pro-Israel voices at the National Security Council," according to Jordan Schachtel at the Conservative Review, who cited interviews with White House officials who are trying to undermine the general:

McMaster not only shuns Israel, he is also historically challenged on Arab-Israeli affairs, according to the sources.

"McMaster constantly refers to the existence of a Palestinian state before 1947," a senior West Wing official tells CR (there was never an independent Palestinian state), adding that McMaster describes Israel as an "illegitimate," "occupying power."

The NSC chief expressed great reluctance to work with Israel on counterterror efforts, as he shut down a joint U.S.-Israel project to counter the terrorist group Hezbollah's efforts to expand Iran's worldwide influence.

One of the main indictments of McMaster by neoconservatives (right-wing Israel supporters who favor regime change) is that he restrained the president on his tour of occupied territories in May ( as Allison Deger reported at the time ). In this White House briefing, McMaster refused to say that the western wall in occupied East Jerusalem is part of Israel.

[Aug 20, 2017] Mr. Bannon's disdain for General McMaster also accelerated his demise

Notable quotes:
"... The war veteran has never quite clicked with the president, but other West Wing staff members recoiled at a series of smears against General McMaster by internet allies of Mr. Bannon. ..."
Aug 20, 2017 | www.msn.com

Mr. Bannon's disdain for General McMaster also accelerated his demise. The war veteran has never quite clicked with the president, but other West Wing staff members recoiled at a series of smears against General McMaster by internet allies of Mr. Bannon.

The strategist denied involvement, but he also did not speak out against them.

By the time Charlottesville erupted, Mr. Kushner and Ms. Trump had a powerful ally in Mr. Kelly, who shared their belief that Mr. Trump's first statement blaming "many sides" for the deadly violence needed to be amended.

Mr. Bannon vigorously objected. He told Mr. Kelly that if Mr. Trump delivered a second, more contrite statement it would do him no good, with either the public or the Washington press corps, which he denigrated as a "Pretorian guard" protecting the Democrats' consensus that Mr. Trump is a race-baiting demagogue. Mr. Trump could grovel, beg for forgiveness, even get down on his knees; it would never work, Mr. Bannon maintained.

"They're going to say two things: It's too late and it's not enough," Mr. Bannon told Mr. Kelly.

[Aug 20, 2017] Breitbart Goes After Ivanka And McMaster

Aug 20, 2017 | dailycaller.com

The first earlier in the day was " Report: Powerful GOP Donor Sheldon Adelson Supports Campaign to Oust McMaster ." This article detailed how major Republican donor Sheldon Adelson reportedly is supporting a campaign against McMaster that claims the national security adviser is anti-Israel.

Later in the day, the lead story on the site was " McMaster Of Disguise: Nat'l Security Adviser Endorsed Book That Advocates Quran-Kissing Apology Ceremonies ." This piece from frequent McMaster critic Aaron Klein said that McMaster endorsed a book that "calls on the U.S. military to respond to any 'desecrations' of the Quran by service members with an apology ceremony, and advocates kissing a new copy of the Quran before presenting the Islamic text to the local Muslim public."

The article went on to say that McMaster has "troubling views" on Islamic terrorism.

The site also published two articles Sunday critical of Ivanka. One of them is an aggregate of a Daily Mail report that claimed Ivanka helped push Bannon out of the White House. Shortly after the story was published, the article received an update that said a White House senior aide stated the Daily Mail report is "totally false."

Breitbart also wrote a piece that highlighted six times Ivanka and her husband Jared Kushner's displeasure with President Trump had been leaked to the media.

Bannon said in interviews after his departure from the White House that he will use Breitbart to fight for the president's agenda.

"In many ways, I think I can be more effective fighting from the outside for the agenda President Trump ran on," Bannon told The New York Times . "And anyone who stands in our way, we will go to war with."

[Aug 20, 2017] Breitbart goes after McMaster

Aug 20, 2017 | thehill.com

Breitbart News, the media outlet helmed by President Trump's former chief strategist Stephen Bannon, published an article on Sunday casting national security adviser H.R. McMaster as soft on Islamist extremism and terrorism.

The former chief strategist's exit from the White House on Friday immediately raised questions about the future of Bannon's relationship with Trump, as well as how Breitbart would cover the administration with Bannon at the helm again.

In an interview last week on NBC's "Meet the Press," McMaster repeatedly dodged questions about whether he could work with Bannon, saying simply that he is "ready to work with anybody who will help advance the president's agenda and advance the security, prosperity of the American people."

"I get to work together with a broad range of talented people, and it is a privilege every day to enable the national security team," McMaster told the show's host Chuck Todd.

[Aug 20, 2017] The Bannon - McMaster war can be very easily explained

Aug 20, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

somebody | Aug 20, 2017 5:49:52 AM | 98

The Bannon - McMaster war can be very easily explained

McMaster made sure the US remains in the Iran deal

This is not what Sheldon Adelson or the Mercers paid for. This is not what right wing Israelis want.

Stability is not what the Mercers thrive on .

Hedge fund insiders say that quant funds, whose trading profits typically depend on volatility, have been hurt by what has been a surprisingly steady market environment in the second quarter, most notably in June, when the CBOE Volatility Index, or VIX � which reflects investors� views of expected stock market volatility � gained between 10 percent and 12 percent, half of its 52-week highs. The Republicans� failure to pass a health care bill, a steady drumbeat of news about the Russia-Trump investigation, and nuclear missile tests of North Korea did little to jar investor confidence in the stock market. The S&P 500 gained 0.6 percent during the month, putting it up 9.3 percent this year

Grieved | Aug 19, 2017 10:06:59 PM | 86

@58 karlof1

Thanks for the Escobar link. The story makes great sense. It's good to know about Mercer and to see that Trump and Bannon are tight. Oddly, it did seem that with all the jackals circling around Trump's neck, in this one case, Bannon is more use outside the tent pissing in than inside pissing out. And Breitbart has now received a massive profile lift, it'll become a national player in the narrative, one would expect.

By the way, I was pondering lately this whole aspect of a grass roots movement. Funny you should bring it up. The only question here about the US is, will the people actually get a voice in this society? If the electoral system keeps bringing liars and betraying promises, then it's time to Occupy the Ballot and have new movements. This is happening I think, with Trump actually being one of the precursor litmus tests.

~~

As for the generals, what does a ruler need except the people and the army? Trump has them both. It makes him harder to take down with all those generals around. Of course, Caesar will have to accord with his praetorian guard or the guard will get a new Caesar. But the US is a banana republic now, this is how it's done - and I'm serious about this, these are real dynamics I think.

Surely the generals will end up being more conservative in action than in rhetoric? And if they get a little giddy and actually send their soldiers out into the real world, they'll quickly receive more of those globally public humiliations that are lowering the empire to the ground so effectively. What can go wrong, that couldn't always go wrong anyway, regardless of who's in charge, or thinks they're in charge?

V. Arnold | Aug 19, 2017 8:50:03 PM | 80
somebody | Aug 19, 2017 10:01:52 AM | 24

Trump would not have been elected without Robert Mercer. Robert Mercer is the billionaire behind Cambridge Analytica, Breitbart and Steve Bannon.

Who financed Adolf Hitler?

Bingo! Finally, some one got the Mercers; both the father and the daughter.
http://therealnews.com/t2/story:19811:The-Real-Story-of-How-Bannon-and-Trump-Got-to-The-White-House

smuks | Aug 20, 2017 8:45:55 AM | 101
@psychohistorian 85

We express things differently, but think very much alike.

The water and sewage system is a good example, but you could take any basic utility/ basic human need: Everyone needs it, but there's no need for 'growth' and little if any room for efficiency gains. So the only ways to profit as a private investor are to overcharge users or to pay miserable wages and let the infrastructure rot.

Private enterprise and competition can work miracles when an economic sector is rapidly developing, expanding and advancing technologically. Governments should encourage this, so I don't think they're (purely) socialistic. But once the sector is 'grown-up' and enters a more or less 'steady state', there's neither room nor justification for profits. It becomes more important to provide high-quality services to everyone(!) while using as little natural resources as possible - and for this, a democratic form of organization is much more fitting than a private profit-driven one (which strives to maximize throughput).

I'm cautiously optimistic. My impression is that more and more people realize that in our time, 'democracy', 'equal rights' and 'sustainability' more important than 'profits' and 'growth'...don't you think?

nb...'posit' - I just learned a new word, thanks!

@somebody 98

Thanks for pointing out the uncertainty and 'volatility'/ VIX bit. I agree it's what speculative investors like hedge funds need and thrive on - so it's what they try to promote by all means (cf. certain websites).
Especially now that we are saying goodbye to the 'growth' phase of the economy and entering a 'steady state' (s.ab.), financial market volatility is increasingly the only thing to reap (relevant) profits from. It's a fight between the pro-stability and the 'profit at all cost' factions - luckily, the former is winning.

[Aug 20, 2017] Stick a fork in Trump. He's done.

Aug 20, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

Vannok | Aug 19, 2017 2:50:47 PM | 50

The US Regime has just attacked the SAA fighting on the frontline against IS:

US Regime Attack

Stick a fork in Trump. He's done.

[Aug 18, 2017] Steve Bannon goes as the military takes over the Trump administration by Alexander Mercouris

Notable quotes:
"... Individuals who were close to Donald Trump during his successful election campaign and who largely framed its terms – people like Bannon and Flynn – have been picked off one by one. ..."
"... Taking their place is a strange coalition of former generals and former businessmen of essentially conventional Republican conservative views, which is cemented around three former generals who between them now have the levers of powers in their hands: General Kelly, the President's new Chief of Staff, General H.R. McMaster, his National Security Adviser, and General Mattis, the Secretary of Defense. ..."
"... Bannon's removal does not just remove from the White House a cunning political strategist. It also removes the one senior official in the Trump administration who had any pretensions to be an ideologist and an intellectual. ..."
"... n saying I should say that I for one do not rate Bannon as an ideologist and intellectual too highly. Whilst there can be no doubt of Bannon's media and campaigning skills, his ideological positions seem to me a mishmash of ideas – some more leftist than rightist – rather than a coherent platform. I also happen to think that his actual influence on the President has been hugely exaggerated. Since the inauguration I have not seen much evidence either of Bannon's supposed influence on the President or of his famed political skills. ..."
"... The only occasion where it did seem to me that Bannon exercised real influence was in shaping the text of the speech the President delivered during his recent trip to Poland. ..."
"... I have already made known my views of this speech . I think it was badly judged – managing to annoy both the Germans and the Russians at the same time – mistaken in many of its points, and the President has derived no political benefit from it. ..."
"... As for Bannon's alleged political skills, he has completely failed to shield the President from the Russiagate scandal and appears to me to have done little or nothing to hold the President's electoral base together, with Bannon having been almost invisible since the inauguration. ..."
"... In view of Bannon's ineffectiveness since the inauguration I doubt that his removal will make any difference to the Trump administration's policies or to the support the President still has from his electoral base, most of whose members are unlikely to know much about Bannon anyway. ..."
"... The US's core electorate is becoming increasingly alienated from its political class; elements of the security services are openly operating independently of political control, and are working in alliance with sections of the Congress and the media – both now also widely despised – to bring down a constitutionally elected President, who they in turn despise. ..."
"... The only institution of the US state that still seems to be functioning as normal, and which appears to have retained a measure of public respect and support, is the military, which politically speaking seems increasingly to be calling the shots. ..."
Aug 18, 2017 | theduran.com

The announcement of the 'resignation' of White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon represents the culmination of a process which began with the equally forced 'resignation' of President Trump's first National Security Adviser General Michael Flynn.

Individuals who were close to Donald Trump during his successful election campaign and who largely framed its terms – people like Bannon and Flynn – have been picked off one by one.

Taking their place is a strange coalition of former generals and former businessmen of essentially conventional Republican conservative views, which is cemented around three former generals who between them now have the levers of powers in their hands: General Kelly, the President's new Chief of Staff, General H.R. McMaster, his National Security Adviser, and General Mattis, the Secretary of Defense.

In the case of Bannon, it is his clear that his ousting was insisted on by General Kelly, who is continuing to tighten his control of the White House.

Bannon's removal – not coincidentally – has come at the same time that General H.R. McMaster is completing his purge of the remaining Flynn holdovers on the staff of the National Security Council.

Bannon's removal does not just remove from the White House a cunning political strategist. It also removes the one senior official in the Trump administration who had any pretensions to be an ideologist and an intellectual.

I n saying I should say that I for one do not rate Bannon as an ideologist and intellectual too highly. Whilst there can be no doubt of Bannon's media and campaigning skills, his ideological positions seem to me a mishmash of ideas – some more leftist than rightist – rather than a coherent platform. I also happen to think that his actual influence on the President has been hugely exaggerated. Since the inauguration I have not seen much evidence either of Bannon's supposed influence on the President or of his famed political skills.

Bannon is sometimes credited as being the author of the President's two travel ban Executive Orders. I am sure this wrong. The Executive Orders clearly originate with the wishes of the President himself. If Bannon did have any role in them – which is possible – it would have been secondary to the President's own. I would add that in that case Bannon must take some of the blame for the disastrously incompetent execution of the first of these two Executive Orders, which set the scene for the legal challenges that followed.

The only occasion where it did seem to me that Bannon exercised real influence was in shaping the text of the speech the President delivered during his recent trip to Poland.

I have already made known my views of this speech . I think it was badly judged – managing to annoy both the Germans and the Russians at the same time – mistaken in many of its points, and the President has derived no political benefit from it.

However it is the closest thing to an ideological statement the President has made since he took office, and Bannon is widely believed – probably rightly – to have written it.

As for Bannon's alleged political skills, he has completely failed to shield the President from the Russiagate scandal and appears to me to have done little or nothing to hold the President's electoral base together, with Bannon having been almost invisible since the inauguration.

In view of Bannon's ineffectiveness since the inauguration I doubt that his removal will make any difference to the Trump administration's policies or to the support the President still has from his electoral base, most of whose members are unlikely to know much about Bannon anyway.

It is in a completely different respect – one wholly independent of President Trump's success or failure as President – that the events of the last few weeks give cause for serious concern.

The events of the last year highlight the extent to which the US is in deep political crisis.

The US's core electorate is becoming increasingly alienated from its political class; elements of the security services are openly operating independently of political control, and are working in alliance with sections of the Congress and the media – both now also widely despised – to bring down a constitutionally elected President, who they in turn despise.

All this is happening at the same time that there is growing criticism of the economic institutions of the US government, which since the 2008 financial crisis have seemed to side with a wealthy and unprincipled minority against the interests of the majority.

The only institution of the US state that still seems to be functioning as normal, and which appears to have retained a measure of public respect and support, is the military, which politically speaking seems increasingly to be calling the shots.

It is striking that the only officials President Trump can nominate to senior positions who do not immediately run into bitter opposition have been – apart from General Flynn, who was a special case – senior soldiers.

Now the military in the persons of Kelly, McMaster and Mattis find themselves at the heart of the US government to an extent that has never been true before in US history, even during the Presidencies of former military men like Andrew Jackson, Ulysses Grant or Dwight Eisenhower.

The last time that happened in a major Western nation – that the civilian institutions of the state had become so dysfunctional that the military as the only functioning institution left ended up dominating the nation's government and deciding the nation's policies – was in Germany in the lead up to the First World War.

Time will show what the results will be this time, but the German example is hardly a reassuring one.

[Aug 18, 2017] Pentagon took over White house: The firing of Bannon leaves the Generals without an opposing view. They will no longer be contradicted

Bannon does not have a well defined economic policy. And he was a suspected leaker. For a former military officer he also have pretty lose lips (which tend to sink ships) and penchant for self-promotion as we later discovered from Wolff's book
Notable quotes:
"... Presumably, Bannon's mouth ( American Prospect interview) got him fired -- requested to resign -- at the instigation of Chief of Staff Gen. Kelly, with it being spun nicely: "Kelly and Bannon "have mutually agreed today would be Steve's last day," White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said in a statement. 'We are grateful for his service and wish him the best.'" https://www.rt.com/usa/400175-trump-fires-bannon-strategist/ ..."
"... US Defense Secretary James Mattis will visit Ukraine next week and reassure the government in Kiev that the US still considers Crimea a part of the country's territory, the Pentagon said. Mattis will tell Kiev the US is "firmly committed to the goal of restoring Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity." ..."
"... We were the sole superpower, Earth's hyperpower, its designated global sheriff, the architect of our planetary future. After five centuries of great power rivalries, in the wake of a two-superpower world that, amid the threat of nuclear annihilation, seemed to last forever and a day (even if it didn't quite make it 50 years), the United States was the ultimate survivor, the victor of victors, the last of the last. It stood triumphantly at the end of history. In a lottery that had lasted since Europe's wooden ships first broke out of a periphery of Eurasia and began to colonize much of the planet, the United States was the chosen one, the country that would leave every imperial world-maker from the Romans to the British in its shadow. ..."
"... Bannon, Flynn etcetera was actually quite sane compared to the other neocon, deep state figures coming in, go figure why these people had to go - think also why someone like Mattis DONT have to go and is loved by the media, deep state etcetera. ..."
"... Engelhardt still doesn't understand that 911 was supposed to (and did) solidify the justification for the expansion of The American Century since we now made our own rules and reality. ..."
"... The Bannon interview is fascinating, but don't forget that he's a strategist: He says what he thinks will serve his purpose, not necessarily what he believes. ..."
"... Now he's gone, whether for good time will tell. And Trump is looking rather isolated. If he feels his position becomes too complicated or even untenable, he might do 'stupid stuff' - and as I mentioned earlier, this may be just what the Neocons want: With the US decline accelerating both internally and globally, 'war' may seem the last option to them. But of course, they don't want the blame - they want to be able to say 'see, we told you he's crazy, but you didn't listen.' Difficult times. ..."
Aug 18, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

Are we a step closer to War?

jawbone | Aug 18, 2017 2:19:23 PM | 97

Well, with Bannon gone who will have most influence over Trump now? Will the rest of the Alt-Righters stay at the White House? Hhhmmm...

Meanwhile, while the MCM (mainstream corporate media) is unable to focus on more that one or two things, Trump has signed an executive order which will have real work consequences as sea levels rise. Under Obama, a rule was developed to require infrastructure projects to consider the effects of global warming on flooding, effects of storms, etc. Now, developers are free to build what and where they want, with no consideration for the possible damage which might destroy those projects in the future.

Throw-away society on a grand --and expensive-- scale.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/donald-trump-scrap-rule-protect-094700052.html

Oh, my. Things ought to be interesting in DC in the near future. Dangerous all over in the long run.

jawbone | Aug 18, 2017 2:20:53 PM | 98
Oops. Real work consequences should have been real world consequences. Preview is a good tool to use....
karlof1 | Aug 18, 2017 2:29:00 PM | 99
Presumably, Bannon's mouth ( American Prospect interview) got him fired -- requested to resign -- at the instigation of Chief of Staff Gen. Kelly, with it being spun nicely: "Kelly and Bannon "have mutually agreed today would be Steve's last day," White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said in a statement. 'We are grateful for his service and wish him the best.'" https://www.rt.com/usa/400175-trump-fires-bannon-strategist/

Now it appears that Trump's completely surrounded by the former generals he appointed--a different version of Seven Days in May? Or is it the fantastical number of contradictions finally coming home to roost as The Saker seems to think, http://thesaker.is/the-neocons-are-pushing-the-usa-and-the-rest-of-the-world-towards-a-dangerous-crisis/

When Trump got elected, I thought the best outcome would be total gridlock in DC; and in some ways, that's what's occurred. Yet, as The Saker points out, something's afoot if the propaganda published by Newsweek--which is owned by Bezos--is any indication.

It's Friday. The Syrian Army is making huge gains. Congress is in recess. And the weather forecast for Monday's eclipse here on the Oregon coast is looking positive--no fog!

karlof1 | Aug 18, 2017 2:37:52 PM | 100 previous page
Yeah jawbone, it's a good tool. I should've used it prior to my comment being grabbed by the spambot. Al Gore's opined Trump should resign, indicating he favors Pence, which send s what sort of message given the context Gore opined? https://www.commondreams.org/news/2017/08/18/al-gore-has-just-one-small-bit-advice-trump-resign As most barflys know, Pence is far worse on most things than Trump. Did Gore just out himself as a previously closeted Neocon?
Anonymous | Aug 18, 2017 2:40:58 PM | 101
Another "grown up"?:

Mattis to back Kiev's claim to Crimea during Ukraine visit

US Defense Secretary James Mattis will visit Ukraine next week and reassure the government in Kiev that the US still considers Crimea a part of the country's territory, the Pentagon said. Mattis will tell Kiev the US is "firmly committed to the goal of restoring Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity."

fastfreddy | Aug 18, 2017 2:42:16 PM | 102
Manifest Destiny and Religious Zealotry (extremism) were manifested in recent history by America's Great Leaders. Here's General Boykin:

You know what? I knew that my God was bigger than his [about Muslims in Somalia]. I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol.

Many other quotes here:

http://www.azquotes.com/author/39645-William_G_Boykin

Greg M | Aug 18, 2017 2:55:25 PM | 103
@96, I view this as part of an effort to push back against anti Iran pro Israel hard liners. First with Flynn, then McMaster forcing out Flynn allies, and now Bannon. Not that McMaster and his people are not pro Israel or possess any redeeming qualities, but it is important to understand that Bannon and those in his circle are NOT anti interventionists.
@Madderhatter67 | Aug 18, 2017 3:21:06 PM | 104
Thirdeye & Fastfreddy

Thirdeye "The third eye is a mystical and esoteric concept of a speculative invisible eye which provides perception beyond ordinary sight." Wikipedia ;)

This is a good read. Especially for Thirdeye blind.

Pardon Me! High Crimes and Demeanors in the Age of Trump By Tom Engelhardt

Let me try to get this straight: from the moment the Soviet Union imploded in 1991 until recently just about every politician and mainstream pundit in America assured us that we were the planet's indispensable nation, the only truly exceptional one on this small orb of ours.

We were the sole superpower, Earth's hyperpower, its designated global sheriff, the architect of our planetary future. After five centuries of great power rivalries, in the wake of a two-superpower world that, amid the threat of nuclear annihilation, seemed to last forever and a day (even if it didn't quite make it 50 years), the United States was the ultimate survivor, the victor of victors, the last of the last. It stood triumphantly at the end of history. In a lottery that had lasted since Europe's wooden ships first broke out of a periphery of Eurasia and began to colonize much of the planet, the United States was the chosen one, the country that would leave every imperial world-maker from the Romans to the British in its shadow.

Who could doubt that this was now our world in a coming American century beyond compare?

And then, of course, came the attacks of 9/11................ The rest below.

http://www.tomdispatch.com/

Anonymous | Aug 18, 2017 3:34:25 PM | 105
Greg D

You couldnt be more wrong: Bannon, Flynn etcetera was actually quite sane compared to the other neocon, deep state figures coming in, go figure why these people had to go - think also why someone like Mattis DONT have to go and is loved by the media, deep state etcetera.

karlof1 | Aug 18, 2017 3:37:18 PM | 106
@Madderhatter67 @104--

Engelhardt still doesn't understand that 911 was supposed to (and did) solidify the justification for the expansion of The American Century since we now made our own rules and reality.

smuks | Aug 18, 2017 6:50:43 PM | 107
Nah...don't quite agree on this one. The Bannon interview is fascinating, but don't forget that he's a strategist: He says what he thinks will serve his purpose, not necessarily what he believes.

Now he's gone, whether for good time will tell. And Trump is looking rather isolated. If he feels his position becomes too complicated or even untenable, he might do 'stupid stuff' - and as I mentioned earlier, this may be just what the Neocons want: With the US decline accelerating both internally and globally, 'war' may seem the last option to them. But of course, they don't want the blame - they want to be able to say 'see, we told you he's crazy, but you didn't listen.' Difficult times.

[Aug 18, 2017] Banish Bannon Trump weighs his options as top aides feud Defend Democracy Press

Aug 18, 2017 | www.defenddemocracy.press

For months, U.S. President Donald Trump's national security adviser and his chief strategist have battled for influence behind the scenes, and their feud may force another shake-up at the White House.

The dispute between Lieutenant General H.R. McMaster and political strategist Stephen Bannon has reached a level of animosity that is destabilizing Trump's team of top advisers just as the administration tries to regain lost momentum, three senior officials said.

Under pressure from moderate Republicans to fire Bannon, Trump declined to publicly back him on Tuesday, although he left his options open. "We'll see what happens with Mr. Bannon," he told reporters at Trump Tower in New York.

Read more at http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-bannon-analysis-idUSKCN1AV2MZ

[Aug 18, 2017] Alt-Right and Ultra-Zionist Alliance against National Security Advisor McMaster

Notable quotes:
"... He was then moved quickly to contain the influence of chief strategist Steve Bannon, who McMaster removed from the National Security Council. If you recall, he was appointed to contain other Trump loyalists such as Michael Flynn, as well. ..."
"... Recently, a campaign accusing him of being anti-Israel has been waged with the support of billionaire Sheldon Adelson by a coalition of alt-right nationalists that includes Steve Bannon ..."
Aug 18, 2017 | therealnews.com

Remember Lieutenant-General Herbert Raymond McMaster? He was appointed as President Trump's national security adviser back in February. He was then moved quickly to contain the influence of chief strategist Steve Bannon, who McMaster removed from the National Security Council. If you recall, he was appointed to contain other Trump loyalists such as Michael Flynn, as well.

Recently, a campaign accusing him of being anti-Israel has been waged with the support of billionaire Sheldon Adelson by a coalition of alt-right nationalists that includes Steve Bannon and extreme right-wing Zionists such as the president of the Zionist Organization of America, Morton Klein, as well as by Israeli journalist Caroline Glick from the Jerusalem Post. President Trump, in response to all of this, called McMaster "a good man, very pro-Israel," and Israeli officials have also come forward calling McMaster a friend of Israel.

On to talk about these connections and tensions is Shir Hever. Shir is a Real News correspondent in Heidelberg, Germany. Of course, he covers Israel and Palestine for us extensively. I thank you so much for joining us, Shir.

SHIR HEVER: Thanks for having me, Sharmini.

SHARMINI PERIES: Shir, President Trump is now six months into his office as president. He initially has appointed his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, to take up the Israel file, but there are these allegations flying against General McMaster. Explain to us what's going on. Why are these individuals like Sheldon Adelson even concerned about how Trump is responding in terms of Israel and Israel policy?

SHIR HEVER: I think there's very little that General McMaster can actually do about Israel or against Israel. It really doesn't matter much. The only issue that has come up was the Iran nuclear deal, and I think this is going to be a decision taken directly by President Trump and not by McMaster. Also, what exactly is the Israel interest regarding the Iran nuclear deal? It is not so clear. Obviously, Prime Minister Netanyahu has a certain opinion, but other Israeli politicians have other opinions.

I think this is really a symbolic issue. There are people in the alt-right and also the extreme Zionism who are using this old worn-out accusation that somebody is anti-Israel in order to get their own people into the National Security Council, in order to exert influence on the Trump administration. This coalition between extreme right nationalists, white nationalists in the United States, and Jewish Zionists, which traditionally were on opposing sides, are now working together because of this very strange rise of this alt-right.

SHARMINI PERIES: All right. Now, give us a greater sense of the connection or the tensions between these alt-right organizations and McMaster and Bannon. Map this for us.

SHIR HEVER: Yeah. I've been looking through these accusations that Caroline Glick, deputy editor of the Jerusalem Post, and Steve Bannon himself, and also Morton Klein of the Zionist Organization of America. What problem do they have with McMaster? They make very vague things about some statements that he made, but they couldn't put them in context. He said that Israel is an occupying power. Of course, Israel is an occupying power, but they couldn't place that statement. The only thing that their criticism boils down to is they say McMaster is a remnant of the Obama administration. He continues the Obama policies, and therefore he's not loyal to Trump.

I think this is the crux of the matter, because actually, for people like Caroline Glick and I think also for Sheldon Adelson, their relation to Trump borders on religious. They consider Trump to be some kind of messiah or savior that will allow Israel once and for all to annex the occupied territory, expand its borders, and then the land will be redeemed. They talk about this in religious terminology.

Here's the problem. Trump has been president for six months now, and Israel did not annex the territory. It did not expand its borders. In fact, it has gone from one crisis to the next, and the Israeli government is not able to cement its power over the Palestinians. Palestinian resistance is not tied down. They're looking for an explanation. The explanation is that something is not pure in the Trump administration, and they're pointing the finger at McMaster saying, "Because of people like him who are sabotaging Trump's own policies from the inside, then this is preventing the Trump administration from reaching its full potential."

SHARMINI PERIES: Right. Obviously, Netanyahu and the Israeli government doesn't agree with this assessment. In fact, they have come out supporting McMaster as being a good supporter of Israel. How does this play out here?

SHIR HEVER: Absolutely. Prime Minister Netanyahu is doing real politics. He knows that there's nothing that President Trump can do that will actually make Israel suddenly conquer more territory. That's not the point. Netanyahu is trying to balance a very complicated system with pressure from different points, and he is a populist, and he's only in power because of his populism. Now, his administration is under threat because of corruption allegations, so this is a problem for him. When people expect that the Trump administration will free his hands to do whatever he wants, Netanyahu suddenly has a problem because he needs to come up with a new excuse. Why doesn't he annex all the occupied territory?

Of course, for him, it's not a good time to get into a fight with the Trump administration. He wants to create the impression that things are happening under the surface, that he is in the know, that his friends are involved in this, but I think the fact that Sheldon Adelson, the big financial supporter of Netanyahu, is now switching to support extreme right groups that have nothing to do with the interests of the Israeli current administration, but are actually trying to push the Israeli administration to move further to the extreme right and to annex territory, that puts Netanyahu in trouble. I think it also spells some clouds over the warm relationship between Netanyahu and Adelson.

SHARMINI PERIES: Coming back to this side of things here in the United States, in light of the events of Charlottesville, Shir, showing a direct link between the alt-right and hardcore racists and neo-Nazis, why would extreme right-wing Zionist Jewish organizations and individuals like Glick and Klein agree to cooperate with the alt-right in this way?

SHIR HEVER: I think people on the left tend to forget that, just like the left considers itself to be a kind of universalist movement, and that leftists around the world should have solidarity with each other, the right also has a kind of solidarity, especially the extreme right. Extreme right movements in different countries consider the extreme right in other countries to be their allies. One of the things we saw in Charlottesville is that some of these neo-Nazi groups and white nationalist groups are big supporters of Bashar Al-Assad in Syria, because they see him as the kind of strong leader they would like to see in the United States as well.

For people who see Donald Trump talking about America first, then they're saying, "Okay, that's exactly the kind of administration we want to see in Israel, somebody taking about Israel first." For Caroline Gluck or for a Morton Klein, they are willing to accept a very heavy load of racism and even anti-semitism against Jews from the Trump administration and from its supporters in exchange for being allowed to copy that same kind of racism and that same kind of right-wing policy towards their minorities. Just like the American administration has its minorities, Muslims, Mexicans which are being targeted, Israel also has its minorities, Palestinians and asylum-seekers, and they want those people to be targeted in the same harsh language and the same harsh policies, so that we can [inaudible] a great compromise.

I have to say, the events in Charlottesville had a profound impact on Israeli public opinion. In fact, there are a lot of Israelis who are very concerned about this kind of coalition. They are saying, "No, there's not that much that we're willing to take in order to keep the relations with the Trump administration on good footing." Because of that, the president of Israel, President Rivlin, and also the education minister Naftali Bennett issued statements condemning white nationalists and neo-Nazis in Charlottesville. I think Naftali Bennett, who is the head of the Jewish Nationalist Party in Israel, and he's actually of the same political camp as Caroline Glick, as Morton Klein, when he makes that statement, that shows that even he thinks that they have gone too far.

SHARMINI PERIES: Interesting analysis, Shir. I thank you so much for joining us today. I guess the situation in Charlottesville is evolving, and it would be interesting to continue to keep an eye on what's developing here against what's happening in Israel as well. Thank you so much.

SHIR HEVER: Thank you, Sharmini.

SHARMINI PERIES: Thank you for joining us here on the Real News Network.

Jibaro 4 hours ago

Confusing, at least to me, in any case I believe that the Zionists learned a lot from the Nazis and there is very little difference between the two groups. I would say that the main difference lies in the fact that the Zionists are sneakier and know how to play with popular opinion. That's why it doesn't surprise me that they are making a common cause with the white supremacists groups.

The only surprise here is that they are doing it openly now. They have become brave and have decided to take the backlash. Perhaps they are doing so because they know they have the support of Trump.

Divide and conquer. Soon we will be fighting on our own streets against each other. It will be the death of the US...

Donatella 10 hours ago

"For Caroline Gluck or for a Morton Klein, they are willing to accept a very heavy load of racism and even anti-semitism against Jews from the Trump administration and from its supporters in exchange for being allowed to copy that same kind of racism and that same kind of right-wing policy towards their minorities."

I have great respect for Shir Hever, he has great insight into Israel society and politics. However, his statement that Klein and Glick (and maybe Adelson) want to be "allowed" to copy Trump's supporter's racism and right-wing policies towards minorities in Israel is beyond hilarious. Minorities in Israel have been and continue to be subjected to racist and supremacist policies (much worse than anything Trump supporters can even imagine) by the Zionists since the theft of Palestinian's land in 1948. The Israelis are not just pursuing racist policies but as Israeli historian Ilan Pappe said, they are committing slow motion genocide against the Palestinians.

[Aug 18, 2017] I'm somewhat surprised that Peter Escpbar did not mention the Western supplied chemical weapon components recently captured by the SAA and prominently displayed by Russia's Ministries of Defense and Foreign Affair s-- news kept out by Charlottesville

Aug 18, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 | Aug 18, 2017 11:36:28 AM | 88

Speaking of Grownups, Pepe Escobar recaps the recent exploits of Moqtada al-Sadr and provides a peek at the 2018 Iraqi elections. Pepe then segues into Syria and its Chinese connection.

I'm somewhat surprised he didn't mention the Western supplied chemical weapon components recently captured by the SAA and prominently displayed by Russia's Ministries of Defense and Foreign Affair s-- news kept out by Charlottesville.

http://www.atimes.com/article/winners-post-daesh-era/ and https://sputniknews.com/politics/201708181056581304-syria-us-uk-toxic-agents/

[Aug 17, 2017] Grown-ups Versus Ideologues The Media Narrative of the White House May Be All Wrong

Notable quotes:
"... McMaster's was spewing nonsense. The same was said about the Soviet Union and China when they became nuclear weapons states. North Korea just became one . Conventional deterrence of both sides has worked with North Korea for decades. Nuclear deterrence with North Korea will work just as well as it did with the Soviet and Chinese communists. If North Korea were really not deterrable the U.S. should have nuked it yesterday to minimize the overall risk and damage. It is the McMaster position that is ideological and not rational or "grown up" at all. ..."
"... Compare that to Steve Bannon's take on the issue: ..."
"... "There's no military solution [to North Korea's nuclear threats], forget it. Until somebody solves the part of the equation that shows me that ten million people in Seoul don't die in the first 30 minutes from conventional weapons, I don't know what you're talking about, there's no military solution here, they got us." ..."
"... But looking at things now, rather than a spoilt paranoid kid, perhaps someone trained from an early age for leadership, and perhaps rather than being paranoid (Russia/China), perhaps a leader that finds it more important to create a deterrence against the US. Third generation at war with the US and his seen his father was fucked over when trying to make a deal with the US. NK's nuke and missile tech have come a long way in the few short years Kim Jong Un has been in power. ..."
"... "Deterrence is a strategy intended to dissuade an adversary from taking an action not yet started, or to prevent them from doing something that another state desires." ..."
"... Classic deterrence strategy IS working for NK perfectly. ..."
"... All one has to do to know what Bannon's position on Iran is to read Breitbart on any given day. Unless we are supposed to believe that Bannon's opinions are not reflected by the website he ran for four years. Bannon is for war against Islam in general, there is nothing "realist" about his foreign policy. ..."
"... @12... "Bannon is a fascist" I'm not so sure. Mussolini defined fascism as being an alliance of corporate and state powers... but Bannon (and most of his followers) have no trust in the corporate sector as they [the corporate sector] are to a large degree Globalists - they used the US and then threw it aside in pursuit of profit elsewhere. For that, he would even call them traitors. So you could call him a Nationalist. ..."
"... Bannon makes sense. That must be why many want him gone especially the neocons. As to North Korea, the US should have admitted "facts on the ground" long ago and worked to sign the official end of the war and work to get the two Koreas talking and working together. ..."
Aug 17, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

The Democrats and the media love the Pentagon generals in the White House. They are the "grown ups":

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., had words of praise for Donald Trump's new pick for national security adviser, Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster -- calling the respected military officer a "certified, card-carrying grown-up,"

According to the main-stream narrative the "grown ups" are opposed by " ideologues " around Trump's senior advisor Steve Bannon. Bannon is even infectious, according to Jeet Heer, as he is Turning Trump Into an Ethno-Nationalist Ideologue . A recent short interview with Bannon dispels that narrative.

Who is really the sane person on, say, North Korea?

The "grown-up" General McMaster, Trump's National Security Advisor, is not one of them. He claims North Korea is not deterrable from doing something insane.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But your predecessor Susan Rice wrote this week that the U.S. could tolerate nuclear weapons in North Korea the same way we tolerated nuclear weapons in the Soviet Union far more during the Cold War. Is she right?

MCMASTER: No, she's not right. And I think the reason she's not right is that the classical deterrence theory, how does that apply to a regime like the regime in North Korea? A regime that engages in unspeakable brutality against its own people? A regime that poses a continuous threat to the its neighbors in the region and now may pose a threat, direct threat, to the United States with weapons of mass destruction?

McMaster's was spewing nonsense. The same was said about the Soviet Union and China when they became nuclear weapons states. North Korea just became one . Conventional deterrence of both sides has worked with North Korea for decades. Nuclear deterrence with North Korea will work just as well as it did with the Soviet and Chinese communists. If North Korea were really not deterrable the U.S. should have nuked it yesterday to minimize the overall risk and damage. It is the McMaster position that is ideological and not rational or "grown up" at all.

Compare that to Steve Bannon's take on the issue:

"There's no military solution [to North Korea's nuclear threats], forget it. Until somebody solves the part of the equation that shows me that ten million people in Seoul don't die in the first 30 minutes from conventional weapons, I don't know what you're talking about, there's no military solution here, they got us."

It was indeed the Democratic People's Republic of Korea which "got" the United States and stopped the U.S. escalation game. It is wrong to think that North Korea "backed off" in the recent upheaval about a missile test targeted next to Guam. It was the U.S. that pulled back from threatening behavior.

Since the end of May the U.S. military trained extensively for decapitation and "preemptive" strikes on North Korea:

Two senior military officials -- and two senior retired officers -- told NBC News that key to the plan would be a B-1B heavy bomber attack originating from Andersen Air Force Base in Guam.
...
Of the 11 B-1 practice runs since the end of May, four have also involved practice bombing at military ranges in South Korea and Australia.

In response to the B-1B flights North Korea published plans to launch a missile salvo next to the U.S. island of Guam from where those planes started. The announcement included a hidden offer to stop the test if the U.S. would refrain from further B-1B flights. A deal was made during secret negotiations . Since then no more B-1B flights took place and North Korea suspended its Guam test plans. McMaster lost and the sane people, including Steve Bannon, won.

But what about Bannon's "ethno-nationalist" ideology? Isn't he responsible for the right-wing nutters of Charlottesville conflict? Isn't he one of them?

He dismissed the far right as irrelevant and sidestepped his own role in cultivating it: "Ethno-nationalism!it's losers. It's a fringe element. I think the media plays it up too much, and we gotta help crush it, you know, uh, help crush it more."

"These guys are a collection of clowns," he added.

Bannon sees China as an economic enemy and wants to escalate an economic conflict with it. He is said to be against the nuclear deal with Iran. The generals in Trump's cabinet are all anti-Iran hawks. As Bannon now turns out to be a realist on North Korea, I am not sure what real position on Iran is.

Domestically Bannon is pulling the Democrats into the very trap I had several times warned against:

"The Democrats," he said, "the longer they talk about identity politics, I got 'em. I want them to talk about racism every day. If the left is focused on race and identity, and we go with economic nationalism, we can crush the Democrats."

This worked well during the presidential election and might continue to work for Trump. As long as the Democrats do not come up with, and fight for, sane economic polices they will continue to lose elections. The people are not interested in LGBT access to this or that bathroom. They are interested in universal healthcare, in personal and economic security. They are unlikely to get such under Bannon and Trump. But, unlike the Democrats, the current White House crew at least claim to have plans to achieve it.

Posted by b on August 16, 2017 at 11:51 PM | Permalink

Peter AU 1 | Aug 17, 2017 1:05:52 AM | 1

A couple of very interesting links from the last thread were the one to the Bannon article, and also the link to the Carter/NK article.

Kim Jong Un, 3rd generation like his father and grandfather leader of NK. From what I have read this is a cultural thing t hat predates communism and the Japanese occupation prior. Many pictures of Kim show an overweight youngster amongst gaunt hungry looking generals. Gave the impression of a spoilt kid simply handed power. Not going to the May 9 parade in Russia when invited also gave the impression he was paranoid.

But looking at things now, rather than a spoilt paranoid kid, perhaps someone trained from an early age for leadership, and perhaps rather than being paranoid (Russia/China), perhaps a leader that finds it more important to create a deterrence against the US. Third generation at war with the US and his seen his father was fucked over when trying to make a deal with the US. NK's nuke and missile tech have come a long way in the few short years Kim Jong Un has been in power.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Kim Jong Un and Trump have a meet one day.

The link to the Carter article http://www.fox5atlanta.com/national-news/273096065-story

ben | Aug 17, 2017 1:22:28 AM | 2
b said: "The people are not interested in LGBT access to this or that bathroom. They are interested in universal healthcare, in personal and economic security. They are unlikely to get such under Bannon and Trump. But, unlike the Democrats, the current White House crew at least claim to have plans to achieve it."

With that statement b, you nailed it..

V. Arnold | Aug 17, 2017 1:32:51 AM | 3
"There's no military solution [to North Korea's nuclear threats], forget it. Until somebody solves the part of the equation that shows me that ten million people in Seoul don't die in the first 30 minutes from conventional weapons, I don't know what you're talking about, there's no military solution here, they got us."

Doesn't that at least show Bannon as the adult in the room?
I would say so.

psychohistorian | Aug 17, 2017 1:53:13 AM | 4
So lets start parsing this economic nationalism that Bannon is making happen with Trump.

Economic nationalism is a term used to describe policies which are guided by the idea of protecting domestic consumption, labor and capital formation, even if this requires the imposition of tariffs and other restrictions on the movement of labour, goods and capital. It is in opposition to Globalisation in many cases, or at least on questions the unrestricted good of Free trade. It would include such doctrines as Protectionism, Import substitution, Mercantilism and planned economies.

Examples of economic nationalism include Japan's use of MITI to "pick winners and losers", Malaysia's imposition of currency controls in the wake of the 1997 currency crisis, China's controlled exchange of the Yuan, Argentina's economic policy of tariffs and devaluation in the wake of the 2001 financial crisis and the United States' use of tariffs to protect domestic steel production.

Think about what a trade war with China would do. It would crash the world economy as China tried to cash in on it US Treasury holdings with the US likely defaulting......just one possible scenario.

At least now, IMO, the battle for a multi-polar (finance) world is out in the open.....let the side taking by nations begin. I hope Bannon is wrong about the timing of potential global power shifting and the US loses its empire status.

psychohistorian | Aug 17, 2017 2:19:03 AM | 5
I thought that maybe Bannon was being a bit too forthright in his recent comments and perhaps he has just painted a big bullseye on his back for the racist clowns he has used to aim at. Check this out: Bannons colleagues disturbed by interview with left wing publication
Copeland | Aug 17, 2017 2:30:36 AM | 6
Bannon thinks the bombast on display between the Kim and Trump has been "a sideshow". The real show, on the other hand, has nothing to do with the dramatic sparring between the two leaders. The Mother Of All Policies, according to Bannon, is an all-bets-on trade war with China, whose endgame admits to only one outcome,--that is to say-- that only one hegemon will remain standing at the end of this struggle.

There can be only one King-of-the-Hill. But where is the Greek Chorus?--the prophetic warning that goes by the name of necessity?-- that tries to ward off hubris? "One must never subscribe to absurdities" (it was Camus who aptly said that).

V. Arnold | Aug 17, 2017 2:39:11 AM | 7
psychohistorian | Aug 17, 2017 2:19:03 AM | 5

I had read this before; interesting to say the least.
Truth be told, I'd never heard of Bannon prior to Trumps election and still know little about him.
Politics aside Bannon seems a straight shooter; I certainly can't argue his statement re: what would happen if we attacked NK. His statement is echo'd by many long before today.
I do plan to start paying attention from this point forward.
Oh, and I did read that Trump is afraid of Bannon, but don't remember the reason stated.

Realist | Aug 17, 2017 3:18:01 AM | 8
Here is Bannon's latest:

Bannon dismissed the far-right as irrelevant:

"Ethno-nationalism!it's losers. It's a fringe element. I think the media plays it up too much, and we gotta help crush it, you know, uh, help crush it more."

"These guys are a collection of clowns," he added.

Bannon is no friend of White Nationalists.

somebody | Aug 17, 2017 4:49:34 AM | 12
No, whoever planned that "United Right" rally walked Trump into the trap.

As Trump was incapable to disassociate himself clearly from people who protest against the take down of a statue of General Lee. Trump now owns the race issue.

Steve Bannon is a fascist . That does not mean he is stupid.

The generals are clearly dangerous. They have the power to walk everybody to world war III. Trump has pledged to spend even more on the US military, the military already has the highest spending world wide. The generals don't want to admit that they cannot solve anythings by military power.

Trump going off script in that press conference into a stream of consciousness was bad. He reminded everybody of their rambling demented great-grandfather. He tried to get the discussion to economic issues, he did not succeed.

Veterans Today is a dubious source, but this here sounds genuine Washington behind the mirrors

In stepped more lies and garbage, this time more fake than the other, with chaos theory and psychological warfare organizations drowning in capabilities from the overfunded phony war on terror and too much time on their hands now lending their useless talents toward disinforming the general public.

The result has been a divided US where "alternative facts" fabricated for a vulnerable demographic now competes with the "mainstream" now termed, and I believe rightly so, "fake news" to support different versions of a fictional narrative that resembles reality only in the most rarified and oblique manner.
...

America has left itself open to dictatorship. It long since gave up its ability to govern itself, perhaps it was the central bank, the Federal Reserve in 1913 or more recent erosions of individual power such as the Citizens United Supreme Court decision of 2005. Whatever milestone one chooses, the remains of democratic institutions in the US are now difficult to find.

What we are left with is what increasingly seems to be factions, mistakenly defined as "right" or "far right" jockeying for control over America's military, and with that, control over the planet itself.

You see, whoever controls the American military controls the world, unless a power bloc appears that can challenge, well, challenge what? If the Pentagon controls America's military and the Pentagon is controlled by a cabal of religious extremists as many claim or corporate lackeys as most believe, then where does the world stand?

Then again, if Trump and his own Republican congress are at war over impeachment, and I assure you, little else is discussed in Washington, two sides of the same coin, servants of different masters, has all oversite of the newfound military power over American policy disappeared?

To this, we reluctantly say "yes."

Clueless Joe | Aug 17, 2017 5:24:06 AM | 13
Bannon can be perfectly mature, adult and realist on some points and be totally blinded by biases on others - him wanting total economic war against China is proof enough. So I don't rule out that he has a blind spot over Iran and wants to get rid of the regime. I mean, even Trump is realist and adult in a few issues, yet is an oblivious fool on others.

Kind of hard to find someone who's always adult and realist, actually. You can only hope to pick someone who's more realist than most people. Or build a positronic robot and vote for him.

somebody | Aug 17, 2017 6:16:13 AM | 14
There is something to that interview by Steve Bannon with a left wing website .
More puzzling is the fact that Bannon would phone a writer and editor of a progressive publication (the cover lines on whose first two issues after Trump's election were "Resisting Trump" and "Containing Trump") and assume that a possible convergence of views on China trade might somehow paper over the political and moral chasm on white nationalism.

The question of whether the phone call was on or off the record never came up. This is also puzzling, since Steve Bannon is not exactly Bambi when it comes to dealing with the press. He's probably the most media-savvy person in America.

I asked Bannon about the connection between his program of economic nationalism and the ugly white nationalism epitomized by the racist violence in Charlottesville and Trump's reluctance to condemn it. Bannon, after all, was the architect of the strategy of using Breitbart to heat up white nationalism and then rely on the radical right as Trump's base.

He dismissed the far right as irrelevant and sidestepped his own role in cultivating it: "Ethno-nationalism!it's losers. It's a fringe element. I think the media plays it up too much, and we gotta help crush it, you know, uh, help crush it more."

Explanation a) He wants to explain the climbdown of his boss on North Korea.
Not really helpful to Trump.

b) He wants to save his reputation as the association with the KKK and White Suprematists has become toxic.

Checking on what Breitbart is doing - splitting the Republican Party

A trade war with China would mean prices in the US would become very expensive. It is a fool's strategy.

In other news Iran is threatening to leave the nuclear agreement, and Latin America unites against the US threatening Venezuela with war.

The generals are completely useless.

fairleft | Aug 17, 2017 6:35:17 AM | 15
I think Bannon is an authentic economic nationalist, and one that Trump feels is good counsel on those matters. If this is so, then Bannon cannot be trying to provoke a trade war with China, since that would be an economic catastrophe for the US (and China and the rest of the world). I'm hoping he's playing bad cop and eventually Trump will play good cop in negotiations for more investment by China in the US and other goodies in exchange for 'well, not much' from the US. Similar to what the US dragged out of Japan in the 80s nd 90s.
c | Aug 17, 2017 6:51:35 AM | 16
psychohistorian a
c | Aug 17, 2017 6:59:32 AM | 17
psychohistorian at 4: 'as China tried to cash in on it US Treasury holdings with the US likely defaulting...'

as a sovereign currency issuer of that size the usa can not run out of dollars
to default on their obligations would be a voluntary mistake the federal reserve will avoid
meanwhile the chinese are investing in africa and other countries securing their position in the world

V. Arnold | Aug 17, 2017 7:43:30 AM | 18
c | Aug 17, 2017 6:59:32 AM | 17
as a sovereign currency issuer of that size the usa can not run out of dollars
to default on their obligations would be a voluntary mistake the federal reserve will avoid
meanwhile the chinese are investing in africa and other countries securing their position in the world

Very good; and I agree with your POV; the usa can not run out of dollars.
And therein lies its power; a very dangerous situation that I do not think the world is equipped to deal with in toto...

steven t johnson | Aug 17, 2017 8:18:55 AM | 19
Every political swindler today starts off by pretending Trump won the election instead of the Electoral College, including Steve Bannon. It is the Republican Party, not Trump and his Trumpery who holds majorities in the House, the Senate and the nation's statehouses. Anybody who wants to think that "economic nationalism" will crush the Democrats has forgotten that Trump lost the popular vote on this ticket.

It appears that as a purely nominal Republican, an owner in a hostile takeover, Trump has no qualms about trashing the system. Practically speaking, this is the very opposite of draining the swamp, which requires effective leadership.

Just Sayin' | Aug 17, 2017 8:51:55 AM | 20
Kim Jong Un, 3rd generation like his father and grandfather leader of NK. From what I have read this is a cultural thing that predates communism and the Japanese occupation prior.

But looking at things now, rather than a spoilt paranoid kid, perhaps someone trained from an early age for leadership, and perhaps rather than being paranoid (Russia/China), perhaps a leader that finds it more important to create a deterrence against the US.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Aug 17, 2017 1:05:52 AM | 1

OR, looked at another way:

Perhaps the gurning wunderkind Kim's ascent to the North Korean Throne was completely predictable and was predicted a long time ago, and plans were set in motion to ensure that he was co-opted as a kid, and now works with the US to help counter the rising Chinese power.

Perhaps the alleged face-off Trump, Kim and the western MSM treated the world to over the past while, was merely nothing but a pre-scripted choreographic display, a piece of theater agreed upon beforehand by all participants except China

I wouldn't be surprised to see Kim Jong Un and Trump have a meet one day.

I wouldn't be surprised if Kim Jong Un and Trump actually play for the same side.

Just Sayin' | Aug 17, 2017 8:59:31 AM | 21
Every political swindler today starts off by pretending Trump won the election instead of the Electoral College, i

Posted by: steven t johnson | Aug 17, 2017 8:18:55 AM | 19

Actually as far as I can tell the real political swindlers are the ones who refuse to acknowledge that a US Presidential election is, (and has been for nearly whole time the US has been in existence, which is more than 200 years for those who have problems keeping track of such simple matters) decided NOT by the popular vote but by the results of the Electoral College voting.

Anybody who wants to think that "economic nationalism" will crush the Democrats has forgotten that Trump lost the popular vote on this ticket.

Again, just to repeat the actual reality regarding US Presidential elections: They are decided on the basis of Electoral Collage voting and NOT on the basis of the popular vote, as political swindlers would now like everyone to believe.

Thegenius | Aug 17, 2017 9:08:56 AM | 22
Economics PhDs are resisting the only thing that can actully cause higher inflation rate: trade war
somebody | Aug 17, 2017 9:45:00 AM | 23
19

He is doubling down now defending General Lee statues as beautiful. He is doing the same strategy as he did in his duel with Hillary Clinton when everybody thought he was insane, playing to his core Republican base to make sure Republicans have to stay in line or face a primary challenge.

Breitbart is doing the same threatening "Republican traitors".

The problem with this strategy is that Trump won because Hillary Clinton was so unpopular, because their pollsters outsmarted Nate Silver and Co. and possibly because she was a woman.

But Republicans who have to pretend they are religious right wing nuts in the primaries, then have to appeal to independents to win the actual election.

So they cannot go against Trump but cannot defend him. They are paralysed.

That what it comes down to. That the main aim of the president of the United States is to paralyze the party he hijacked.


somebody | Aug 17, 2017 9:58:52 AM | 24
add to 23

Breitbart has gone full culture wars. It is comical, have a look.

john | Aug 17, 2017 10:26:02 AM | 25
Just Sayin' says:

They are decided on the basis of Electoral Collage voting and NOT on the basis of the popular vote, as political swindlers would now like everyone to believe

indeed, though, speaking of political swindlers, there's mucho evidence that Trump may have won the popular vote as well.

likklemore | Aug 17, 2017 10:32:06 AM | 26
Posted by: steven t johnson | Aug 17, 2017 8:18:55 AM | 19

Every political swindler today starts off by pretending Trump won the election instead of the Electoral College, including Steve Bannon. It is the Republican Party, not Trump and his Trumpery who holds majorities in the House, the Senate and the nation's statehouses. Anybody who wants to think that "economic nationalism" will crush the Democrats has forgotten that Trump lost the popular vote on this ticket.

Have you read the Constitution of the USA? The Electoral College elects the President by the rank and file voters electing the Electors to the College on November election day. That's how the system works.

Ask Al Gore; he won the popular vote.

Oh and btw, the Hillary won the popular 2016 vote meme. Take a look at Detroit, MI heavy Democrats' precints - more votes than voters - and the millions of illegal aliens' vote in California who voted after the invite of Obama.

WJ | Aug 17, 2017 10:50:13 AM | 27
Trump won the election. Period. End of story. Done. Finished. Get over it and get on with your life. He didn't compete to win the popular vote. He competed and campaigned to win the election. Advice to Democrats - nominate a candidate beside a senile old neocon woman who is corrupt to her ugly core, and then maybe you can beat a former reality show star.
Just Sayin' | Aug 17, 2017 10:56:25 AM | 29
The problem with this strategy is that Trump won because Hillary Clinton was so unpopular, because their pollsters outsmarted Nate Silver and Co. and possibly because she was a woman.

Posted by: somebody | Aug 17, 2017 9:45:00 AM | 23

Nope - first part of the sentence is correct but the rest of is just you, as usual, repeating crap you found on the Internet and then repeating it here pretending it is profound and that you actually understand what you are talking about, which you clearly don't as evidenced by the fact that you then go on to reference Nate Silver whose fame was never anything but media created hype with little or nothing to back it up.

Silver's feet of clay were evident long before the latest Prez election. It became obvious that his alleged electoral statistical prowess rested as much on luck as anything else. Lucky in prediction when it came to the 2008 election but by 2010 things started to go wrong but the media ignored his feet of clay and kept hyping him as a stats genius.

By the time 2016 rolled round Silver was exposed for the lucky fraud he is.

The real truth of Hillarys inability to win lies not in her being female as you and many others disingenuously (at best) try to claim, but simply lies in the fact that she is a thoroughly unpleasant person with a complete lack of charisma and a massive sense of entitlement.

Blacks and others, minorities generally and independents, who came out in droves for the Obama elections simply refused to go and vote for her.

The Republican vote however changed very little - pretty much the exact same demographic voted republican as voted for Romney.

Trump won partly because of Clintons massive hubris in refusing to campaign in several key states. Cambridge analytical were not required to give him the win, no matter what you read, without analysing it, elsewhere on the web and are now repeating here in an effort to pretend you know what you are talking about.

CA probably helped somewhat but it unlikely that they were central to the win. Clintons hubris and her complete lack of charisma, ensured low black/minority/independent for her in key states, especially those where she had refused to even bother to campaign, which was enough to seal the win for Trump

You simply repeating crap you heard on the net and pretending that if you say it in an authoritative fashion it will magically become true, just ends up making you look completely clueless, as usual. (or dishonest)

Just Sayin' | Aug 17, 2017 11:01:18 AM | 30
@ Everybody who bought into the MSM Steve Bannon promoted white supremacy and through Breitbart. Suggested you read his world view expressed in remarks at Human Dignity Institute, Vatican Conference 2014

Posted by: likklemore | Aug 17, 2017 10:51:54 AM | 28

Anyone with any intelligence would be wise to treat with great caution anything Bannon claims in public interviews about himself or his alleged political beliefs,

RUKidding | Aug 17, 2017 11:21:24 AM | 32
US politics is a great big clusterfeck - worse than ever, which is hard to believe. Bannon's big liar. He did heaps to create this very situation with the White Supremacists. Of course the Democrats are worse than useless. All they're doing is presenting themselves as "We're not Trump" and whining about Putin. All of them are clowns. Every last one. Including the so-called "Generals." Worthless.
Pnyx | Aug 17, 2017 11:27:14 AM | 33
"Since then no more B-1B flights took place and North Korea suspended its Guam test plans."
but: "Yesterday (...) two US B-1 strategic bombers, operating with Japanese fighter jets, conducted exercises to the southwest of the Korean Peninsula." says WSWS. ?
james | Aug 17, 2017 12:32:00 PM | 37
@2 ben.. i agree!

everything about the usa today is divisive... i can't imagine the usa being happy if this didn't continue until it's demise..the 2 party system hasn't worked out very well as i see it.. failed experiment basically.. oh well..

anoymous | Aug 17, 2017 12:51:38 PM | 39
@19

If I remember correctly, wasn't it both the President Elect and the Republican Congressmen who won clear majorities in nearly 80 percent of congressional districts? Presuming an issue like the gerrymandering of districts wasn't significant, that's a far more legitimate victory than an extra million Democrats voting in California (determining the future of national policy). I'm not a fan of the Republicans, but denying the short term efficiency of 'populist rhetoric' isn't helping the left win any substantial electoral victories in the future.

Morongobill | Aug 17, 2017 1:03:36 PM | 40
Good Lord. Can't people read anymore? The election is all about the EC. Keep talking and running for the popular vote, and Trump will keep winning the Electoral College. You either want to win or you don't. I hope you keep preaching the popular vote personally.
Just Sayin' | Aug 17, 2017 1:06:52 PM | 41
@ Just Sayin' 30

I won't give you a pass. Your bias and lack of intelligence is on great display.


No pass for little ol me? Aw shucks, I'm heart broken.

The fact that you think Bannon&Trump are going to do anything about Wall Street and the Banking System in general is quite amusing.

Perhaps you could list a few of Bannon&Trumps anti Wall Street achievements or initiatives since Trump took office?

It should by now be clear to anyone paying attention that while both Bannon & Trump certainly TALK a lot, they seem to actually do very little.

So, do please tell us: what have they actually done?

Just Sayin' | Aug 17, 2017 1:15:57 PM | 42
@2 ben.. i agree!

everything about the usa today is divisive...

Posted by: james | Aug 17, 2017 12:32:00 PM | 37

As the CIA might say: "Mission Accomplished!!"

Keep the proles spilt in their little "identity groups", their micro-tribes, and continue building the Kleoptocracy/Prison/Military State while the dumbed down demos are busy hunting micro-aggressions/fighting gender & race wars etc etc

During the last 5 Prez Election cycles the population spilt on utterly retarded lines such as Gay-marriage, Gender-free toilets etc. All this while the US fought or financed numerous very expensive wars in the Middle East ukraine etc, resulting hundreds of thousands of lives lost.

anoymous | Aug 17, 2017 1:16:15 PM | 43
@26

The 2008 elections had one of the highest ever voter turnout rates for the Democrats and the 2016 elections had one of the lowest ever. The turnout rates (abysmal if ever compared to voter turnout rates in Germany and Japan) easily explain the initial victory and the eventual defeat, not 'Detroit fraud' or 'the millions of illegals' voting in your head. Racial gerrymandering against black voters in the Southern States is a far more real issue.

ben | Aug 17, 2017 1:33:55 PM | 44
somwbody @ 12: Good link thanks..Interesting read about "The Forth Turning"

psycho @ 5: good link also..

WJ @ 27 said:" Advice to Democrats - nominate a candidate beside a senile old neocon woman who is corrupt to her ugly core, and then maybe you can beat a former reality show star."

Yep, so-called "Russian hacking" wasn't the problem, HRC was the problem...

ben | Aug 17, 2017 1:40:34 PM | 45
Just Sayin' @ 41 said:"It should by now be clear to anyone paying attention that while both Bannon & Trump certainly TALK a lot, they seem to actually do very little."

Kinda' waitin' myself to see all those "accomplishments"....

anoymous | Aug 17, 2017 2:01:34 PM | 46
@40

I'll assume this was directed to me.

I understand and respect your point, but I was responding to the initial comment's implicit argument on public opinion: "a common argument is the lower-middle-to-upper-middle-class social base of the Republicans is less receptive to the short term effects of Protectionist policy and this would reduce political morale, as well as grassroots and voting organization. However, the Democrats 'won the popular vote.' So, it's 'obvious' in saying the classless definition of 'the American people' oppose this Republican policy, and naturally, the social base of the Republican Party isn't especially relevant to consider when organizing voters and grassroots movements for a renewed Democratic Party."

To be fair, I think like the early Unionist and Communist circles, and presume public opinion translates to expressions of grassroots politics between conflicting classes (more so than it actually happens in American class society).

Mina | Aug 17, 2017 2:32:30 PM | 47
From Syria with love

https://arabic.rt.com/liveevent/894352-%D8%A7%D9%81%D8%AA%D8%AA%D8%A7%D8%AD-%D9%85%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%B6-%D8%AF%D9%85%D8%B4%D9%82-%D8%AF%D9%88%D9%84%D9%8A-5-%D8%B3%D9%86%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%BA%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%A8/

Sad Canuck | Aug 17, 2017 2:52:38 PM | 48
If one proceeds on the assumption that politics in the United States closely follows themes, scripts and production values pioneered by WWF, then all becomes clear. It's simply pro-wrestling on a global scale with nuclear weapons and trillions of dollars in prize money.
james | Aug 17, 2017 2:58:51 PM | 49
@42 just sayin'.. yes to all you say - it is quite sad actually.. not sure of the way out at this point, short of complete rebellion in the streets which looks like a longs ways off at this point..
Just Sayin' | Aug 17, 2017 3:12:27 PM | 50
not sure of the way out at this point, short of complete rebellion in the streets which looks like a longs ways off at this point..

Posted by: james | Aug 17, 2017 2:58:51 PM | 49

Most of the younger generation seem to be much to busy, obsessing over non-existent things like "Micro-agressions" or "hetero-normative cis-gender oppression", to pay attention to, let alone acknowledge, the enormous global macro-aggressions their own country is engaged in on a world-wide scale.

Thirdeye | Aug 17, 2017 3:24:12 PM | 52
But, unlike the Democrats, the current White House crew at least claim to have plans to achieve it.
Is there a "don't" missing from that sentence?

I must disagree that DPRK nuclear missiles are a qualitatively similar threat to those possessed by the Soviet Union and China. DPRK's guiding Suche ideology is a literal cult that goes far beyond the cult-of-personality that held sway over the Soviet Union and China when Stalin and Mao ruled. And by the time the Soviets developed delivery capabilities Stalin was dead and his cult was done. By the time the Chinese developed delivery capabilities Mao was declining into figurehead status and Zhou Enlai, who as commander of the PLA realized how weak China really was militarily, had no illusions about what would happen in a military confrontation with the US. But DPRK is still ruled by a cult that believes the Kims are ordained with supernatural powers that allowed them to drive the Japanese off the peninsula then fight off an American "invasion." They truly don't mention the role of the Soviets and the Chinese in saving their bacon. In terms of face-saving, the Kims have set the bar pretty high for themselves by fostering their cult. Their legitimacy would be threatened if their statecraft as rational actors undermined their Suche cult.

DPRK have been rogue actors against ROK and Japan out of sheer spitefulness, fully exploiting the umbrella provided by the Treaty of Friendship, Co-operation and Assistance with China. They have done extraterritorial kidnappings and murders not for perceived strategic reasons but merely to intimidate. DPRK has pointedly refused to enter talks for a formal peace between them and the ROK. Those kinds of motives do not bespeak of someone who can be trusted with nukes.

Charles R | Aug 17, 2017 3:39:13 PM | 53
Posted by: RUKidding | Aug 17, 2017 12:23:40 PM
Bannon is someone whom I hold quite responsible for contributing to the rise of White Supremacy in the USA, which I consider a clear and present danger. Bannon's dismissive hand waving yesterday is meant to dissemble. Guess some are willing to buy what he was selling yesterday. Not me.

What are your reasons for believing this about Bannon? What counts as contributing, and how did you come to your decision?

It's not that I don't believe you. It's rather important to establish in what way his words (whether the ones you found or the recent ones in American Prospect ) are lies or misdirection, so that I, and anyone interested, can evaluate this for ourselves and come to similar or different conclusions.

stonebird | Aug 17, 2017 3:40:47 PM | 54
I don't think Bannon wants a "trade" war with China but he is right that there is an economic war going on. The "silk roads" and the various new organisations that the Chinese-Russians have set up, (Major Banks, "Swift" equivalent, Glossnass satellites, card payment systems, industrial independence, and food self-sufficiency etc), plus the use of currencies other than the dollar - are all examples of a break-away from a US-EU domination.

However, they have not suddenly introduced everything at once to "bring the US house down". Why? One possible reason could be that they are expecting the US to collapse anyway. Another is that viable alternatives also take time to set up.

b has mentioned the "grown ups" v the Idealogues". The impact of the military on the economic war seems to be underestimated. How much longer can the US afford the more than trillion dollars per year of the "visible" arms? This does not include hidden costs ("Intelligence agencies and pork). Nor does it include costs borne by other countries. ie. Italy has about 80 US bases (the most in the EU) and about 77 nuclear warheads on its soil. Italy PAYS for those bases, and even that does not include infrastucture (roads, increased airport capacity, sewage, water mains, etc) which are paid for by the Italians themselves. Other countries will have similar systems. Some like Kuwait are "paying" back the amounts spent on arms for example.
The total cost is astronomical.

A brief reminder the USSR collapsed because of massive overspending on arms and military projects - leaving the rest of the economy in the lurch. Presumably the Chinese and Russians are expecting the same thing to happen again.

(Aside - yes, you can print dollars as a sovereign state, but printing roubles didn't help the soviets either)
So McMasters and the others are in fact just spoilt brats who think that the good times are forever.
----
One example of the new "bluff-calling" cheaper method of economic warfare (*NK is the another) were the recent NATO/US manoeuvres in Georgia (country) on the anniversary of the Georgian invasion of South Ossetia. The number of troops and means involved would have been enough to carry out a "surprise" attack this time too. The Russians - sent in Putin, who declared that the Russians supported S.Ossetia and were ready to deal with any threat - exactly as they did "last" time. Cost? One plane trip.

(*The NK threat by the US would have seen about 40'000 men from S. Korea and Japan sent against about 700'000 motivated local troops and massive artillery arrays. It was a non-starter, even with nukes)

Tom in AZ | Aug 17, 2017 4:03:19 PM | 55
thirdeye @52

You are forgetting to mention the main sticking point to talks is our refusal to halt our annual̶d̶e̶f̶e̶n̶s̶i̶v̶e̶ ̶d̶r̶i̶l̶l̶s̶ invasion practice before they will come to the table. At least from what I read.

Thirdeye | Aug 17, 2017 4:04:22 PM | 56
54

Even with China's international financial position growing more robust with SWIFT independence, AIDB, the New Silk Road and such, they still have an interest in the Dollar-based western financial system as long as they can make money off of it. They are not going to shoot themselves in the foot by deliberately causing it to collapse. They might even prop it up in a crisis, but I suspect they would drive a hard bargain.

@Madderhatter67 | Aug 17, 2017 4:09:49 PM | 57
Thirdeye says, "But DPRK is still ruled by a cult that believes the Kims are ordained with supernatural powers." What is American Exceptionalism?


MCMASTER: Says classic deterrence strategy won't work with NK.

"Deterrence is a strategy intended to dissuade an adversary from taking an action not yet started, or to prevent them from doing something that another state desires."

Classic deterrence strategy IS working for NK perfectly.

RUKidding | Aug 17, 2017 4:31:17 PM | 60
@53 Charles R: fair enough question.

What I base my analysis of Bannon is his leadership at Bretibart which may or may not be continuing right now. Just read Breitbart if you think Bannon isn't fully behind the White Supremacists rising up right now.

somebody | Aug 17, 2017 5:26:37 PM | 64
35
Steve Bannon is a fascist.

exhibit A
Steve Bannon Allies with Catholic Theo-Fascism Against Pope Francis

exhibit B
Steve Bannon shares a fascist's obsession with cleansing, apocalyptic war. And now he's in the White House

exhibit C
Generation Zero - Bannons Film using the theory of the fourth turning

The idea that people (a people) have to suffer a big war in order to cleanse themselves from moral depravity is fascism pure and simple as who should force people to do this but a dictator.

Greg M | Aug 17, 2017 6:15:08 PM | 67
All one has to do to know what Bannon's position on Iran is to read Breitbart on any given day. Unless we are supposed to believe that Bannon's opinions are not reflected by the website he ran for four years. Bannon is for war against Islam in general, there is nothing "realist" about his foreign policy.
Thirdeye | Aug 17, 2017 6:15:20 PM | 68
55 Tom in AZ

That's a different issue from entering talks for a formal peace with with ROK. DPRK has been refusing that for years. Did you ever consider that DPRK's constant saber rattling against ROK was what lent impetus to US exercises in the region in the first place? The US knows that China would not tolerate a US invasion of DPRK. Why take the risk of invading across great defensive terrain when you can simply destroy?

57 Madhatter67

Thirdeye says, "But DPRK is still ruled by a cult that believes the Kims are ordained with supernatural powers." What is American Exceptionalism?

That's a dumb analogy and a pathetic attempt at deflection. Criticize American Exceptionalism all you want, but don't compare it to a supernaturalist cult. That's just stupid.

DPRK has a history of doing whatever they think they can get away with, exploiting their treaty with China. If their delusional Suche ideology leads them to miscalculate or paints them into a corner trying to prop it up, it could lead to war.

If there's any bright spot in the whole picture it's China's chilly stance towards DPRK after recent events. The excesses of DPRK's ruling cult have occurred largely because they figured China had their back. But China's regional interests have changed dramatically over the past 30 years. ROK is no longer a competitive threat to China and is economically more important to China than DPRK ever was. DPRK's military power is of much less benefit to China than it was in the past. It might even be considered a liability.

61 Stonebird

It wouldn't be cash, it would be be assets and/or the means of controlling them. Big Chinese money is already coming into the west coast of the US and Canada. Oh well, we fucked things up here; maybe the Chinese will do a better job.

Greg M | Aug 17, 2017 6:20:48 PM | 69
@10, this article was written while Bannon was heading Breitbart, bragging about being "conceived in Israel." http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/11/17/breitbart-news-network-born-in-the-usa-conceived-in-israel/

Bannon is against the nuclear deal, and is one of the top people in the administration arguing for Trump to move the Israeli embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Bannon has been cited as promoting Sheldon Adelson's Israel policy in meetings with Trump. http://www.timesofisrael.com/pro-abbas-lauder-hawkish-adelson-battling-to-influence-trump-on-mideast/ If anything Bannon/Breitbart push an even harder line on Israel than most politicians and media do.

blues | Aug 17, 2017 6:27:33 PM | 70
First of all, I will now declare that I am 99% confused! So please let me review the 1% that comes through my little keyhole. What has been said?

/~~~~~~~~~~
<< = Just Sayin' | Aug 17, 2017 11:01:18 AM | 30

Anyone with any intelligence would be wise to treat with great caution anything Bannon claims in public interviews about himself or his alleged political beliefs,
\~~~~~~~~~~

Well sure! The guy's a political operative -- One does not get to be a political operative by being some kind of a Dudly Do-Right. Damn.

/~~~~~~~~~~
<< = les7 | Aug 17, 2017 12:27:02 PM | 35

@12... "Bannon is a fascist" I'm not so sure. Mussolini defined fascism as being an alliance of corporate and state powers... but Bannon (and most of his followers) have no trust in the corporate sector as they [the corporate sector] are to a large degree Globalists - they used the US and then threw it aside in pursuit of profit elsewhere. For that, he would even call them traitors. So you could call him a Nationalist.
\~~~~~~~~~~

Well since we can't believe anything from Bannon... And aside from that I am sick of hearing Mussolini's definition of fascism -- After all, he was a psycho-villain -- so why believe it?!

UNTIL WE HAVE STRATEGIC HEDGE SIMPLE SCORE VOTING WE WILL BE SADDLED WITH THE TWO-PARTY "SYSTEM" (really only one party). Who cares if we really have no choice whatsoever. We are held hostage to the false alternatives of the vast legion of the election methods cognoscenti.

See my simple solution soon at Global Mutiny!

Greg M | Aug 17, 2017 6:30:54 PM | 71
@31, "except for the Zion-flavored warmongering." I don't know about you but completely disqualifies him in my view.
Greg M | Aug 17, 2017 6:34:43 PM | 72
@35, please refer to post 69. If Bannon was not a Zionist, he would not have ran a site which brags of being conceived in Israel and which pushes a harder line on Israel than almost any other, and he would not be promoting Adelson's Israel policy within the administration.
Curtis | Aug 17, 2017 7:03:10 PM | 73
Bannon makes sense. That must be why many want him gone especially the neocons. As to North Korea, the US should have admitted "facts on the ground" long ago and worked to sign the official end of the war and work to get the two Koreas talking and working together.
anoymous | Aug 17, 2017 7:41:46 PM | 74
"That's a different issue from entering talks for a formal peace with with ROK. DPRK has been refusing that for years."

I doubt any substantial transcripts from early talks will ever be released, so whoever had diplomats offering the 'fairest' compromises for terms of an early framework (resulting in a later settlement) cannot be known (regarding specifics).

If I remember correctly, there has been at least three Chinese-sponsored peace conferences (on Korea) since 2007, where the general position of the U.S. was: North Korea had to freeze total nuclear production, accept existing and additional (U.N.) verification missions, and dismantle all warheads PRIOR to the signing of any peace treaty. How is demanding unconditional surrender not intransigence? Are we going to just pretend the United States hadn't sponsored military coups in Venezuela and Honduras and hadn't invaded Iraq and Libya (in a similar time frame)?

During peace talks, any terms are argued, refused, and eventually compromised (usually over years and sometimes over decades). Why presume the United States and South Korea had the fairest offers and general settlements in a handful of conferences (especially when we have no transcripts)?

"Did you ever consider that DPRK's constant saber rattling against ROK was what lent impetus to US exercises in the region in the first place?"

You're presuming your case and not giving specific information on what you might know.

Personally, I don't know who 'started it' (I would guess Japan 'started it' by forcing through the Protectorate Treaty of 1905, or the United States 'started it' by forcing through the Amity and Commerce Treaty of 1858), but if North Korea isn't testing missiles near Guam and the United States isn't flying specific planes over South Korea, a compromise WAS made this last week, and more can be made to ensure peace.

Why do any Americans oppose this?

[Aug 16, 2017] Dont be Fooled, the CIA was Only Half the Problem in Syria Defend Democracy Press by Steven MacMillan

Notable quotes:
"... The plan to Balkanize Syria is well on its way, and the Pentagon is leading the charge. How Russia positions herself in the coming months will be crucial for the future of Syria. ..."
August 2, 2017 www.defenddemocracy.press

Originally published: www.4thmedia.org

Don't be Fooled, the CIA was Only Half the Problem in Syria 14/08/2017

The news that President Trump has halted the CIA program to arm and train rebel groups in Syria should be viewed with caution, as the CIA program only represented half of US involvement in Syria.

Even if we take this information as completely accurate, and the CIA will cease to be involved in any covert programs in Syria, there is still a giant arm of US imperialism that is going to be heavily involved in the Syrian conflict for the foreseeable future; namely, the Pentagon.

The notion that the CIA was the only branch of the US establishment involved in the destabilization of Syria is nonsense. The US has always had two operations running simultaneously in Syria, with one being ran by the CIA, and other being ran by the Pentagon.

As Reuters reported in an article in May of this year, titled: Syrian rebels say U.S., allies sending more arms to fend off Iran threat, military aid has been provided through "two separate channels:"

"Rebels said military aid has been boosted through two separate channels: a program backed by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), known as the MOC, and regional states including Jordan and Saudi Arabia, and one run by the Pentagon."

These two programs have often clashed, as was the case last year, when militias armed by the CIA fought against militias armed by the Pentagon.

The Pentagon has been as involved in the disastrous operation to arm and train rebels in Syria as the CIA has, and has contributed heavily to the mess on the ground.

In September 2015 for instance, it was reported that a Pentagon-armed group of rebels – named Division 30 – handed over theirweapons to al-Qaeda in Syria, a scenario that was a common outcome from many CIA operations as well.

Read also: Who is running US Foreign Policy

The Pentagon, never shy to blow an obscene amount of taxpayers' money on imperial matters, has already wasted hundreds of millions of dollars training and arming rebels in Syria, yet Trump only wants to increase the US war budget.

Trump: The Man of the Military

Trump's decision to halt the CIA program was hardly surprising, considering the support Trump has received from large sections of the military. A look at the backgrounds of the individuals that Trump has given cabinet positions reveals Trump's close relationship with the military.

Undoubtedly, there are many good forces in the US military (as in any other large organization), and there is nothing wrong with having a military background. But equally, there is also many nefarious forces in the military, and the influence of military-industrial complex is pervasive, constantly agitating for more imperial wars.

With this context in mind, it is hardly surprising that Trump favours the Pentagon program over the CIA one, especially considering the power struggle taking place between the CIA and the military within the US. It should be highlighted that Trump has notcompletely halted all US programs to arm and train militias in Syria, he has merely shutdown one channel.

Pentagon Using Kurds to Balkanize Syria

The Pentagon has been heavily involved in arming Kurdish forces in Syria, using them as a tool to attempt to Balkanize and fracture Syria into micro-states. In May of this year, President Trump approved a plan – supported by many in the Pentagon – to arm the People's Protection Unit (YPG), a Kurdish militia operating predominantly in northern Syria.

The YPG is also the controlling militia in the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), which includes an array of other militias. In addition to providing arms to the YPG, US special forces have been pictured on the ground in northern Syria working in conjunction with YPG fighters.

Read also: The President and the Power

The Secretary of Homeland Security for instance, John Kelly, is a retired Marine Corps General and former Commander of US Southern Command. Trump's pick for the Director of the CIA is even more telling, as Mike Pompeo has his roots in the military, graduating from West Point in the 1980s:

"Mr. Pompeo graduated first in his class at the United States Military Academy at West Point in 1986 and served as a cavalry officer patrolling the Iron Curtain before the fall of the Berlin Wall. He also served with the 2nd Squadron, 7th Cavalry in the US Army's Fourth Infantry Division."

When most of the public was distracted by the story of Trump halting the CIA program, footage surfaced showing US armed military vehicles passing through Qamishli – a city in northern Syria on the Turkish border – reportedly on route to Raqqa. The recipients of the vehicles are believed to be either the SDF or US forces directly, who are involved in the battle against ISIS in Raqqa.

If (or when) ISIS is defeated in Raqqa, it will be very interesting to see who ends up controlling the city. It is possible that the Pentagon wants to defeat ISIS in Raqqa, and then hand Raqqa to the Kurds – a scenario that many Kurds would only be too happy with.

In March of this year, Saleh Muslim, the co-chair of the Syrian Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) – the political affiliate of the YPG – said that once ISIS is defeated in Raqqa, the city should be incorporated into a Kurdish state in northern Syria.

Read also: Israeli Intel Chief: We Don't Want ISIS Defeated in Syria

The Pentagon's support for Kurdish forces is clearly part of a strategy to break the northern part of the country away from control of the Syrian government in Damascus. A subservient Kurdish state in northern Syria (which would probably join with Kurdish zones in Iraq and other countries in the future) would allow the US to have a permanent military presence in Syria, and easy access to thenatural resources in the Kurdish region.

The creation of Kurdish state in northern Syria would of course cause a severe breakdown in relations with NATO member Turkey, given the views of the current Turkish leadership that is. Turkey considers the YPG to be an extension of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), a group Ankara views as a terrorist organization.

Turkey has repeatedly denounced US support for Kurdish groups in Syria, with this being a major source of disagreement between the US and Turkey.

It is no coincidence that Turkish state media recently published a list of classified US military bases and outposts in northern Syria, with this information revealing the extent to which the US military is embedded in Kurdish-controlled regions in Syria.

The plan to Balkanize Syria is well on its way, and the Pentagon is leading the charge. How Russia positions herself in the coming months will be crucial for the future of Syria.

Steven MacMillan is an independent writer, researcher, geopolitical analyst and editor of The Analyst Report, especially for the online magazine "New Eastern Outlook".

[Aug 14, 2017] Slouching Toward Mar-a-Lago

Notable quotes:
"... Expectations that Trump's ouster will restore normalcy ignore the very factors that first handed him the Republican nomination (with a slew of competitors wondering what hit them) and then put him in the Oval Office (with a vastly more seasoned and disciplined, if uninspiring, opponent left to bemoan the injustice of it all). ..."
"... Not all, but many of Trump's supporters voted for him for the same reason that people buy lottery tickets: Why not? In their estimation, they had little to lose. Their loathing of the status quo is such that they may well stick with Trump even as it becomes increasingly obvious that his promise of salvation -- an America made "great again" -- is not going to materialize. ..."
"... Yet those who imagine that Trump's removal will put things right are likewise deluding themselves. To persist in thinking that he defines the problem is to commit an error of the first order. Trump is not cause, but consequence. ..."
"... the election of 2016 constituted a de facto referendum on the course of recent American history. That referendum rendered a definitive judgment: the underlying consensus informing U.S. policy since the end of the Cold War has collapsed. Precepts that members of the policy elite have long treated as self-evident no longer command the backing or assent of the American people. Put simply: it's the ideas, stupid. ..."
"... "Without the Cold War, what's the point of being an American?" As the long twilight struggle was finally winding down, Harry "Rabbit" Angstrom, novelist John Updike's late-twentieth-century Everyman , pondered that question. ..."
"... Unfettered neoliberalism plus the unencumbered self plus unabashed American assertiveness: these defined the elements of the post-Cold-War consensus that formed during the first half of the 1990s -- plus what enthusiasts called the information revolution. The miracle of that "revolution," gathering momentum just as the Soviet Union was going down for the count, provided the secret sauce that infused the emerging consensus with a sense of historical inevitability. ..."
"... The three presidents of the post-Cold-War era -- Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama -- put these several propositions to the test. Politics-as-theater requires us to pretend that our 42nd, 43rd, and 44th presidents differed in fundamental ways. In practice, however, their similarities greatly outweighed any of those differences. Taken together, the administrations over which they presided collaborated in pursuing a common agenda, each intent on proving that the post-Cold-War consensus could work in the face of mounting evidence to the contrary. ..."
"... To be fair, it did work for some. "Globalization" made some people very rich indeed. In doing so, however, it greatly exacerbated inequality , while doing nothing to alleviate the condition of the American working class and underclass. ..."
"... I never liked Obama, but I don't think he has personal animus against Russia, Syria, Iran, Libya, or Palestinians. But given who was looking over his shoulder, he had to make things difficult for those nations, and that is why leaders of those nations and Obama came to hate one another. As for North Korea, much of the tensions wouldn't exist if US hadn't threatened or invaded 'axis of evil' nations and forced S. Korea to carry out joint exercises to prepare for invasion. ..."
"... Same with Trump. I seriously doubt if Trump has personal animus against Syrians, Russians, Iranians, Palestinians, and etc. But who is looking over his shoulder? So, he has to hate the same people that Obama had to hate. ..."
Aug 14, 2017 | www.unz.com

If we have, as innumerable commentators assert, embarked upon the Age of Trump, the defining feature of that age might well be the single-minded determination of those horrified and intent on ensuring its prompt termination. In 2016, TIME magazine chose Trump as its person of the year . In 2017, when it comes to dominating the news, that "person" might turn out to be a group -- all those fixated on cleansing the White House of Trump's defiling presence.

Egged on and abetted in every way by Trump himself, the anti-Trump resistance has made itself the Big Story. Lies, hate, collusion, conspiracy, fascism: rarely has the everyday vocabulary of American politics been as ominous and forbidding as over the past six months. Take resistance rhetoric at face value and you might conclude that Donald Trump is indeed the fifth horseman of the Apocalypse , his presence in the presidential saddle eclipsing all other concerns. Pestilence, War, Famine, and Death will just have to wait.

The unspoken assumption of those most determined to banish him from public life appears to be this: once he's gone, history will be returned to its intended path, humankind will breathe a collective sigh of relief, and all will be well again. Yet such an assumption strikes me as remarkably wrongheaded -- and not merely because, should Trump prematurely depart from office, Mike Pence will succeed him. Expectations that Trump's ouster will restore normalcy ignore the very factors that first handed him the Republican nomination (with a slew of competitors wondering what hit them) and then put him in the Oval Office (with a vastly more seasoned and disciplined, if uninspiring, opponent left to bemoan the injustice of it all).

Not all, but many of Trump's supporters voted for him for the same reason that people buy lottery tickets: Why not? In their estimation, they had little to lose. Their loathing of the status quo is such that they may well stick with Trump even as it becomes increasingly obvious that his promise of salvation -- an America made "great again" -- is not going to materialize.

Yet those who imagine that Trump's removal will put things right are likewise deluding themselves. To persist in thinking that he defines the problem is to commit an error of the first order. Trump is not cause, but consequence.

For too long, the cult of the presidency has provided an excuse for treating politics as a melodrama staged at four-year intervals and centering on hopes of another Roosevelt or Kennedy or Reagan appearing as the agent of American deliverance. Donald Trump's ascent to the office once inhabited by those worthies should demolish such fantasies once and for all.

How is it that someone like Trump could become president in the first place? Blame sexism, Fox News, James Comey, Russian meddling, and Hillary's failure to visit Wisconsin all you want, but a more fundamental explanation is this: the election of 2016 constituted a de facto referendum on the course of recent American history. That referendum rendered a definitive judgment: the underlying consensus informing U.S. policy since the end of the Cold War has collapsed. Precepts that members of the policy elite have long treated as self-evident no longer command the backing or assent of the American people. Put simply: it's the ideas, stupid.

Rabbit Poses a Question

"Without the Cold War, what's the point of being an American?" As the long twilight struggle was finally winding down, Harry "Rabbit" Angstrom, novelist John Updike's late-twentieth-century Everyman , pondered that question. In short order, Rabbit got his answer. So, too, after only perfunctory consultation, did his fellow citizens.

The passing of the Cold War offered cause for celebration. On that point all agreed. Yet, as it turned out, it did not require reflection from the public at large. Policy elites professed to have matters well in hand. The dawning era, they believed, summoned Americans not to think anew, but to keep doing precisely what they were accustomed to doing, albeit without fretting further about Communist takeovers or the risks of nuclear Armageddon. In a world where a " single superpower " was calling the shots, utopia was right around the corner. All that was needed was for the United States to demonstrate the requisite confidence and resolve.

Three specific propositions made up the elite consensus that coalesced during the initial decade of the post-Cold-War era. According to the first, the globalization of corporate capitalism held the key to wealth creation on a hitherto unimaginable scale. According to the second, jettisoning norms derived from Judeo-Christian religious traditions held the key to the further expansion of personal freedom. According to the third, muscular global leadership exercised by the United States held the key to promoting a stable and humane international order.

Unfettered neoliberalism plus the unencumbered self plus unabashed American assertiveness: these defined the elements of the post-Cold-War consensus that formed during the first half of the 1990s -- plus what enthusiasts called the information revolution. The miracle of that "revolution," gathering momentum just as the Soviet Union was going down for the count, provided the secret sauce that infused the emerging consensus with a sense of historical inevitability.

The Cold War itself had fostered notable improvements in computational speed and capacity, new modes of communication, and techniques for storing, accessing, and manipulating information. Yet, however impressive, such developments remained subsidiary to the larger East-West competition. Only as the Cold War receded did they move from background to forefront. For true believers, information technology came to serve a quasi-theological function, promising answers to life's ultimate questions. Although God might be dead, Americans found in Bill Gates and Steve Jobs nerdy but compelling idols.

More immediately, in the eyes of the policy elite, the information revolution meshed with and reinforced the policy consensus. For those focused on the political economy, it greased the wheels of globalized capitalism, creating vast new opportunities for trade and investment. For those looking to shed constraints on personal freedom, information promised empowerment, making identity itself something to choose, discard, or modify. For members of the national security apparatus, the information revolution seemed certain to endow the United States with seemingly unassailable military capabilities. That these various enhancements would combine to improve the human condition was taken for granted; that they would, in due course, align everybody -- from Afghans to Zimbabweans -- with American values and the American way of life seemed more or less inevitable.

The three presidents of the post-Cold-War era -- Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama -- put these several propositions to the test. Politics-as-theater requires us to pretend that our 42nd, 43rd, and 44th presidents differed in fundamental ways. In practice, however, their similarities greatly outweighed any of those differences. Taken together, the administrations over which they presided collaborated in pursuing a common agenda, each intent on proving that the post-Cold-War consensus could work in the face of mounting evidence to the contrary.

To be fair, it did work for some. "Globalization" made some people very rich indeed. In doing so, however, it greatly exacerbated inequality , while doing nothing to alleviate the condition of the American working class and underclass.

The emphasis on diversity and multiculturalism improved the status of groups long subjected to discrimination. Yet these advances have done remarkably little to reduce the alienation and despair pervading a society suffering from epidemics of chronic substance abuse , morbid obesity , teen suicide , and similar afflictions. Throw in the world's highest incarceration rate , a seemingly endless appetite for porn , urban school systems mired in permanent crisis, and mass shootings that occur with metronomic regularity, and what you have is something other than the profile of a healthy society.

As for militarized American global leadership, it has indeed resulted in various bad actors meeting richly deserved fates. Goodbye, Saddam. Good riddance, Osama. Yet it has also embroiled the United States in a series of costly, senseless, unsuccessful, and ultimately counterproductive wars. As for the vaunted information revolution, its impact has been ambiguous at best, even if those with eyeballs glued to their personal electronic devices can't tolerate being offline long enough to assess the actual costs of being perpetually connected.

In November 2016, Americans who consider themselves ill served by the post-Cold-War consensus signaled that they had had enough. Voters not persuaded that neoliberal economic policies, a culture taking its motto from the Outback steakhouse chain, and a national security strategy that employs the U.S. military as a global police force were working to their benefit provided a crucial margin in the election of Donald Trump.

The response of the political establishment to this extraordinary repudiation testifies to the extent of its bankruptcy. The Republican Party still clings to the notion that reducing taxes, cutting government red tape, restricting abortion, curbing immigration, prohibiting flag-burning, and increasing military spending will alleviate all that ails the country. Meanwhile, to judge by the promises contained in their recently unveiled (and instantly forgotten ) program for a "Better Deal," Democrats believe that raising the minimum wage, capping the cost of prescription drugs, and creating apprenticeship programs for the unemployed will return their party to the good graces of the American electorate.

In both parties embarrassingly small-bore thinking prevails, with Republicans and Democrats equally bereft of fresh ideas. Each party is led by aging hacks. Neither has devised an antidote to the crisis in American politics signified by the nomination and election of Donald Trump.

While our emperor tweets, Rome itself fiddles.

... ... ...

Robert Magill > , August 8, 2017 at 5:06 pm GMT

First, abolish the Electoral College. Doing so will preclude any further occurrence of the circumstances that twice in recent decades cast doubt on the outcome of national elections and thereby did far more than any foreign interference to undermine the legitimacy of American politics.

The November numbers indicate that for the time being without the Electoral College, California and New York will elect our President well into the future.

http://robertmagill.wordpress.com

Priss Factor > , Website August 8, 2017 at 5:17 pm GMT

If Bacevich had really balls, he would cut to the chase and say it like it is.

I think Trump the person doesn't want trouble with Iran, Syria, and Russia. He's a businessman who wants to do business with the world while protecting US borders and sovereignty. Trump is anti-Iran because of Jewish Lobby. His peace with Russia was destroyed by the Lobby and its purse-strings and puppet-strings.

The undeniable fact of the US is it's not a democracy in terms of real power. It is a Jewish Supremacist Oligarchy. To be sure, there are Jewish critics of Jewish power. Think of Philip Weiss and others. Technically, US still has rule of law and due process. But in the end, the Power decides. Look at the anti-BDS bill supported even by Republicans who make a big stink about liberty and free speech.

California is said to be uber-'progressive', and many grassroots people there are supportive of BDS. But California elites and whore politicians are anti-BDS and even passed laws against it. What does that tell you?

Rule of Law is for little people. The Power has Rule of Rule. And if American People, along with their politicians, seem to schizo, well, what does one expect? They get their info from J-Media that feed that lies 24/7.

What is often called 'American' is processed mindset, like yellow American singles is bogus processed 'cheese food'. Because handful of industries control all the media that beam same signals to over 300 million TV sets in the US, 'Americanism' is processed mind-food. We need more organic minds. Too many minds have been processed and re-processed by Great Mind Grinder of J-Media.

The Scalpel > , Website August 9, 2017 at 9:51 pm GMT

AB's 10 recommendations remind me of the beauty pageant contestant answering the question about what she intended to do ."promote world peace".

Actually the beauty queen is being more sincere and realistic. AB's points are very nice sounding, but he gives us no idea how realistically, he or anyone could achieve them and we are left with the feeling that he is just grandstanding. Like the beauty queen, he knows that he will never do much of anything concrete to further these goals, not even if his life or his son' life, depended on it.

DYiFC > , August 10, 2017 at 10:04 am GMT

Well said. I agree – Trump is a symptom of the underlying problems in this country.

Stogumber > , August 12, 2017 at 5:49 am GMT

"Without the Cold War, what's the point of being an American?"

Well, Updike speaks from the position of a "universalist"? Did he ever consider that being an American may not mean standing up for universal ideas, but simply caring for one's own children and grandchildren? But even from a universalist position the answer seems simple now – not for Bacevich, but for me. The United States are singled out and unique w.r.t. their First Amendment. Whereas all other Western countries have succumbed to Bolshevist propaganda and have undermined freedom of speech, the "Americans" are the only ones to stand up for it. Why, even Damore may win a lawsuit against Google.

Carlton Meyer > , Website August 14, 2017 at 4:50 am GMT

Whoops Colonel, you forgot to add slashing military spending to your list. The USA could cut its military budget in half and still spend more than Russia, Iran, North Korea, and China combined. Trump's insane push for more military spending undermines his effort at cutting domestic programs to balance the budget. Yet Jimmy Dore explains that most Democrats voted boost the military budget even more than Trump!

It is unfair to depict Trump as a bumpkin. He graduated from an excellent university and used a few million dollars from Dad's seed money to become a billionaire. Moreover, he defied all odds to become President of the USA. I challenge all his brilliant critics to run for President in 2020 to prove that is simple.

LarryS > , August 14, 2017 at 4:59 am GMT

@Robert Magill The US Constitution would have to be amended to eliminate the Electoral College by 3/4 of the states ratifying the amendment. The smaller states would never vote to eliminate their role in electing the president. Nor should they. My respect for Bacevich is waning.

anonymous > , Disclaimer August 14, 2017 at 7:05 am GMT

As for militarized American global leadership, it has indeed resulted in various bad actors meeting richly deserved fates. Goodbye, Saddam. Good riddance, Osama.

Goodbye Saddam?? The implication being that all the death and destruction was somehow worth it?? You scum, of the most evil *beep* nation on earth! A pox on all of you.

The Alarmist > , August 14, 2017 at 8:07 am GMT

"First, abolish the Electoral College. Doing so will preclude any further occurrence of the circumstances that twice in recent decades cast doubt on the outcome of national elections and thereby did far more than any foreign interference to undermine the legitimacy of American politics."

Yeah, let's trade the consensus of a nation of local communities for the tyranny of the (bi-coastal) majority. I might give up the EC, however, if the system was replaced by gladiatorial combat to the death for all who want the job, or, if we're sticking to a two-party system, the decision can come by pistols at dawn (Good Morning America can't get the nod I hate that Roker chap, and I don't think Megan Kelly should be anywhere near selection of a President). Real skin in the game, so to say.

Yeah, bring back the draft. Military service only. We won't end senseless wars unless many more of our young people actually experience them, and that's not going to happen if they are picking up litter or emptying bed pans.

More money for public education? We've been doing that for years dude, and we get worse results as we spend more. There's already too much money in public education. College for all is a mistake, and in gen snowflake, tell me who isn't deserving. How about serious testing for results and beating for those who do not achieve them?

Income equality sounds nice, but it's never been had anywhere by taxation. It takes a certain societal moderation and modesty requiring our ruling elites to not want to be so conspicuous in their consumption (this in the age of the Rich Kids of Instagram) and to share the wealth through employment and good wages to their fellow citizens. Good luck with that ever gracing our shores.

Stop yakking about the pseudoscience nay the religion of climate change. Plant some more trees and take a couple aspirin. Add the costs of global wars for resources to the cost of gas, which will spike it to $6 per gallon and dissuade a lot of unnecessary driving.

Require all candidates for Federal elective office to be physically neutered, and forbid any of their progeny for at least three generations as well as any immediate relations closer than fourth cousin from holding any position of honor, elective office, or Federal employment whatsoever.

Priss Factor > , Website August 14, 2017 at 9:20 am GMT

Trump or no Trump, things would be much saner without Jewish globalist pressure.

I never liked Obama, but I don't think he has personal animus against Russia, Syria, Iran, Libya, or Palestinians. But given who was looking over his shoulder, he had to make things difficult for those nations, and that is why leaders of those nations and Obama came to hate one another. As for North Korea, much of the tensions wouldn't exist if US hadn't threatened or invaded 'axis of evil' nations and forced S. Korea to carry out joint exercises to prepare for invasion.

Same with Trump. I seriously doubt if Trump has personal animus against Syrians, Russians, Iranians, Palestinians, and etc. But who is looking over his shoulder? So, he has to hate the same people that Obama had to hate.

In the US, politicians must hate according to Jewish neurosis. And that's the problem. We don't have autonomy of likes and dislikes. Like dogs, we have to like or hate what our master likes or hates. And Jewish Globalists are elites. The great evil of America is we are forced to HATE whatever Jewish globalists Hate. It is a culture of Hate. Ironically, the biggest haters accuse others of hate.

Priss Factor > , Website August 14, 2017 at 9:49 am GMT

Jeff & Gerald Celente – The Trump Presidential Freak Show

Priss Factor > , Website August 14, 2017 at 10:25 am GMT

Stephen Cohen on why we need close cooperation with Russia.

A new kind of terrorism in aftermath of state collapse in Middle East.

But it seems new sanctions will totally derail any sane policy.

Reactionary Utopian > , August 14, 2017 at 11:05 am GMT

Most of Mr. Bacevich's piece was quite good. Then we got to the Ten-Point Program. A bold, revolutionary program calling for more of how we got here. What the hell?

Wizard of Oz > , August 14, 2017 at 12:10 pm GMT

@LarryS The US Constitution would have to be amended to eliminate the Electoral College by 3/4 of the states ratifying the amendment. The smaller states would never vote to eliminate their role in electing the president. Nor should they. My respect for Bacevich is waning. Yes, it is interesting how smaller states in federations show that they understand and will hold on to their leverage even when , as in Australia, the people themselves vote on constitutional change.

But why would eliminating the Electoral College allow presidentlal elections to be decided by the popular vote in California and NY as someone suggested? Aren't the number of electoral college votes adjusted quite promptly in proportion to population changes?

Wizard of Oz > , August 14, 2017 at 12:20 pm GMT

Here's an anti Imperial Presidency policy for the author to consider and perhaps endorse .

1. Move towards the constitutiobal monarchy or limited presidency parliamentary model by strengthening the H of R and relying on ordinary human ambition to forward the project;

2. Specifically extend Congressional terms from 2 years to 4 (and perhaps provide lots of public financing and free publicity to diminish thevcorruption by donors)

3. Enhance the role of Majority leader – indeed facilitate his forming his own Cabinet – and restrict the amending of budget bills submitted (as the main ones would have to be) by the leader of the majority – or his nominated Finance spokesperson..

Wizard of Oz > , August 14, 2017 at 12:44 pm GMT

@The Alarmist Aren't the votes in the Electoral College quite promptly adjusted for population changes?

The Alarmist > , August 14, 2017 at 1:40 pm GMT

@Wizard of Oz To some extent, but since each state has at least one Representative and two Senators, there is a bias toward political geography that is difficult to overcome by population. This is a good thing.

The Alarmist > , August 14, 2017 at 1:51 pm GMT

@Wizard of Oz Sorry, should have connected the dots each state's Electors total the same as their Congressional delegations in House and Senate, and House is capped at 435.

bliss_porsena > , August 14, 2017 at 1:57 pm GMT

Eleven: write more articles with never-can-be-done lists until the whole aberrant construct cracks wide open.

anonymous > , Disclaimer August 14, 2017 at 2:14 pm GMT

@Wizard of Oz Only with respect to the EC votes corresponding to the number of House Representatives. From Wikipedia:

"Each state chooses electors, totaling in number to that state's combined total of senators and representatives."

Each state – irrespective of population – has two senators, so this protects citizens of less populous states from those in, e.g., California. Part of the Constitutional bargain that makes for a republic as opposed to a national democracy.

Were you sincerely unaware of this?

Wizard of Oz > , August 14, 2017 at 2:47 pm GMT

@The Alarmist Sorry, should have connected the dots ... each state's Electors total the same as their Congressional delegations in House and Senate, and House is capped at 435. Yes, the effect of adding in the senators is substantial. The two biggest (Democrat) states add just 4 out of 543 to their basic Congressional weighting while the 48 other states add 96/543. Thus 17.6 per cent against just an extra 0.7 per cent.
Not even Texas would think of supporting the abolition of the Electoral College. A pity yhe excellent author should be so sloppy as not at least to acknowledge which items on his wish list are pure fantasy.

Logan > , August 14, 2017 at 3:00 pm GMT

"Nominally, the Constitution assigns responsibilities and allocates prerogatives to three co-equal branches of government."

Oh, dear, I do get tired of this meme.

No, the Constitution does not create "three co-equal branches of government," no matter how often the phrase is repeated.

The Constitution establishes a legislative branch that, whenever it is sufficiently united and desirous, has absolute power over the other two branches.

The Congress can remove any member of the other two branches from office, among other powers, but the countervailing power of the other two branches over Congress, at least per the Constitution, is very limited indeed.

In most republics and constitutional monarchies, the executive branch has a number of ways to influence the legisilature, including calling new elections when desired. Our Constitution has none of that.

Under the Constitution, the Congress is not co-equal. Its supreme.

Logan > , August 14, 2017 at 3:17 pm GMT

@gustafus " as we import more and more of the LOW IQ 3rd world – education will be more about the reasons we don't boink our children siblings and cousins"

Nahh, that would be imposing our Eurocentric values on their vibrant cultures.

Wizard of Oz > , August 14, 2017 at 3:37 pm GMT

@Joe Franklin That sounds like another valid reason to stick with the EC.

Wizard of Oz > , August 14, 2017 at 3:40 pm GMT

@Logan And that's why it's ownership by the donors is so destructive.

Jus' Sayin'... > , August 14, 2017 at 4:09 pm GMT

@Robert Magill Any citizen of the USA and/or student of its history who writes in the same essay both that he is a conservative and that he favors abolishing the Electoral College is either a fool, an unprincipled knave, or most likely both.

Olorin > , August 14, 2017 at 4:36 pm GMT

@Robert Magill I came in to make the same point and will add that it would be effectively only two metropolitan areas–LA and NYC.

Whoever would control those cities politically would control the nation politically, economically, and socially the way Chicago's elites control much of Wisconsin (to use an example recently discussed at iSteve).

The republic would be ripe for division into two coastal demesnes vying with each other for power, resources, and serfs (both in the coastal hives and the "flyover states").

What is undermining the legitimacy of American politics isn't the United States Constitution. It is the countless billions of dollars spend on election campaigning each year. That includes all corollary expenditures, as on media buys and polling.

Not the kind of polling that involves voting. The kind of polling that Nate Silver does.

Election campaigns engineer infiltration of the public culture at every level–federal, state, county, municipal, and local–by divisive discourse and methods. These originally were developed so that merchants could differentiate and sell to the masses soap and junk food brands. Not even the commodities themselves–but brands of them.

Political campaigning rolls up the worst elements of advertising, PR, propaganda, and opinion research into one unending tsunami of hostility, division, manufactured conflict, false equivalencies, forced choices, and sneering tearing-down of what others believe, want, or have built.

The people who create political campaigns for a living–with all the corollary products that go with that, including the candidate himself/herself–are, like the people who communicate those, among the biggest parasites in the republic. They literally create positions, opinions, and ideas, then go out and create the demand for them by whatever means it takes. They produce nothing of value. They siphon off value and resources and set the conditions where by organic excellence is drowned in a sea of mass communications.

If the Electoral College were demolished tomorrow, they would have even more unfettered access to more billions of dollars as Candidate Cool Ranch Dorito vied for an influential and lucrative sinecure with Candidate Salty Crunchy Triangular Fried Corn Thing.

And thanks to Citizens United, money is free speech, and free speech means carefully selected, constructed, massaged, spun, and polled speech.

Keeping the campaign-media-finance industrial complex operating is all that matters to these people. Sounds like Bacevich is one of them. Members of the Pontificating Caste usually are. The Constitution is a barrier to their aspirations.

As it was designed to be.

Linda Green > , August 14, 2017 at 4:45 pm GMT

The author did a decent job of describing the zeitgeist. But his list of 10 big government solutions is a riot! The solution is a return to human liberty and acceptance of the reality that all politics that matter to people is local. But our owners don't like local, they like global, they like universal, they claim to be supporters of diversity but their diversity if they have their way looks exactly the same everywhere you go – wow, how diverse. You can be in any major metropolitan area in the US these days and you find it has the same chain store signage dominating the landscape, the same stories in the newspapers, the same ideological megaphones spouting (((their))) doctrines to the masses, the same conformity of expressed opinions (don't say what you really think if you want to keep your job at xyz corp), the same. And unbeknownst to most Americans who are quick to thank servicemen for "their service", their actual service is that when are elites have finally won the entire world will be indistinguishable like US metropolitan areas are today. There is not a big government solution to these issues, big xxx is the problem. The real question at least in my mind is if our owners would allow pockets of American style, liberty based pockets to emerge?

If we could find responsible enough men to do it, we could take back monetary sovereignty from the federal reserve and start a Bank of America. We have our politicians beginning to sell off the commons (highways for example) to investors. We can fund that by letting some money creation occur by being earned into existence rather than loaned into existence. This is explicitly disallowed in the FEDs charter, and it is not for certain we can find men responsible enough to handle this task without problems nor is it certain that global finance would not retaliate. But we have a lot of infrastructure that needs upgrading and maintenance. This would allow some level of exodus from the metros back to Mayberry if there were jobs. We need a small effective government that has a long term plan of how we are going to maintain our infrastructure. Presently the elected children in Washington, short sighted immature bunch they are, put construction money for bridges in the back of bills recognizing a particular day as "insert bullshit day here day" to make their fellow child go along with the pork they put is some other garbage bill. This is an awful way to run a country and the chickens have come home and are roosting. Let the metros continue their present course of forced conformity via peer shaming and propaganda.

Flavius > , August 14, 2017 at 5:44 pm GMT

Alarm bells going off in the night? How about Bill Clinton? Robert Dole? Al Gore? George W Bush? How about the stupendously unqualified mirage of Presidential gravitas, Barrack Obama? his opponents, the snarling ignoramus from Arizona, John McCain? the leaden corporatist Mitt Romney. Perhaps we are to understand these names that the Colonel leaves unmentioned as constituting the "slouching:" But the reason we have arrived at Mar-a-Lago is that the terminally corrupt Democratic Party chose as their candidate the terminally corrupt, stupendously unqualified former President's wife. The foresight of our founding Father's saved us from that miserable fate, thank you US Constitution.
But lest we become too nostalgic for a time when our co-equal legislative branch had members who could assert themselves against the stooge of the moment who the people had installed in the White House, let us take a moment to ponder the stupendous stupidity of our current body that just recently, with near unanimity, chose to lump Russia in with Iran and North Korea on its sanctions bill while producing no evidence of any kind to justify its measure.

Alden > , August 14, 2017 at 5:46 pm GMT

@Joe Franklin Vote fraud is not necessary in California. I'm the only person I know who votes Republican.

Logan > , August 14, 2017 at 6:00 pm GMT

@Wizard of Oz Quite right. Though the whole thing started when the "real" job of the congressman became re-election. Once that was internalized, the rest was pretty much inevitable. As long as the government is heavily involved with businesses, determining not only their profit rate but perhaps whether they even survive, they will continue efforts to influence government decisions. Limiting contribution's primary effect, I suspect, would be to drive the influence-buying underground.

The solution, of course, is to get the government out of business and indeed everything else to the extent possible.

[Aug 10, 2017] I sense a developing narrative that erases any and all responsibility of Western political leaders for the Syrian disaster

Notable quotes:
"... "There has been a gradual decline in the rationality of UK forces thinking. They insisted on UN legal cover (over) the invasion of Iraq but were totally on board with pre-emptive action in Libya, happily training effectively ISIS forces before Gaddafi was removed. They are now training Ukrainian Neo-Nazis and training ISIS/whatever in Syria, effectively invading the country." ..."
Aug 10, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

/div

/div
failure of imagination | Aug 5, 2017 4:39:26 AM | 54
Bureaucrats gonna crat. Military schools, elite universities, and monkey politics seem to deny Cassandra calls. Their accredentialism is for linear thinkers ( see how they adorn themselves with acronyms and ribbons ie. in lines ). For cohesion they need conformity, and limit discourse because they also need The Other (civilians, deplorables, barbarians, fascists, ) and without an enemy they would turn on themselves. "Don't do stupid shit" is a pretty stupid starting point- oh yeah do SMART shit, yeah. Thanks, Obama (but for what?).
Didn't They plan for the day when the CIA chief would be a wahabbi without a beard? With those googly eyes I'd wager he could surf cognitive dissonances such as loyalty. America, you are one crazy lady.
Petra | Aug 5, 2017 7:15:12 AM | 55
Short version of this story.Americans are thick as two bricks. What do you expect to get when thick people attempt to run a country. Worse still, attempt to exert power and influence beyond their borders. Worst of all, when they strut in the mantle of the super power. It would perhaps be tolerable, just, for the rest of the rest of the 7 billion if the 300 million Americans minded their own business. It has always struck me, the USA is shat you would have got if the Afrikaner nationalists had succeeded.

Btw, you know there must be more than a grain of truth in this when you start hearing rumours about efforts in certain places to raise "anti-Americanism" to the thought-crime level of another famous "anti".

Ray | Aug 5, 2017 8:11:39 AM | 58
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Bremer

Interesting White Wash by Brenner. Just another neocon bringing death and destruction to the world. Just like the fable of 9/11 and only one security camera at the Pentagon.

Jackrabbit | Aug 5, 2017 10:13:48 AM | 65
I sense a developing narrative that erases any and all responsibility of Western political leaders for the Syrian disaster.
1. "Washington never really had a plan in Syria." (Michael Brenner)

2. John McCain was responsible for any US involvement (David Stockman)
See: 'Moderate Rebels' Cheerleader McCain is Fall Guy But Neocon So Neocon Cancer Can Live On

EnglishOutsider | Aug 5, 2017 10:31:59 AM | 67
The essay by Michael Brenner is an achievement. It pulls together a lot of material, some of which is amplified in the comments. Thank you for putting it out.

As "Grieved" above intimates it's a start, and as some other comments indicate it starts from a necessarily limited perspective. The primary question we should ask ourselves is here not addressed. How is it that we in the West found ourselves engaged, with such commitment and over such a period of time, in enterprises that left a trail of dead bodies and shattered societies strewn across three continents?

Sooner or later, as in German society after the Second World War, we're going to have to ask ourselves that question. Michael Brenner's essay seeks to provide no answer but perhaps sets out a framework in which the answer can be looked for.


On a more parochial note there's this from "Anonymous" @ 37:-

"There has been a gradual decline in the rationality of UK forces thinking. They insisted on UN legal cover (over) the invasion of Iraq but were totally on board with pre-emptive action in Libya, happily training effectively ISIS forces before Gaddafi was removed. They are now training Ukrainian Neo-Nazis and training ISIS/whatever in Syria, effectively invading the country."

I think those statements by "Anonymous" about what we were or are doing in Syria, Libya and the Ukraine are probably true.

However, to say "I think those statements are probably true" isn't proof or anywhere near it. We can pick up indications from the Chilcott report or the House of Commons Select Committee on Libya that point to such a conclusion. Putting that together with various statements made by President Obama in off-teleprompter mode, various statements put out by the State Department and a recent decision by President Trump that confirms the type of operations undertaken in Southern Syria, it's near impossible to avoid putting together a picture that confirms "Anonymous'" statements above.

Nevertheless "indications" and "putting together a picture" still don't amount to proof. Without proof all this is just words and inference, however convincing we might feel them to be. Since the PR and information resources pushing a different story are all-powerful such inferences count for nothing outside what I believe to be fairly small numbers of people in Europa and America who follow these matters attentively. Might I ask, would it be possible to give references that nail down the statements made by "Anonymous" above?

[Aug 10, 2017] I think the USA neocons first hoped to forestall any intervention by keeping Russia busy elsewhere (Ukraine, economic troubles, etc.). And threats that if Russia did intervene, it would "pay heavy price" an true Russian passenger jet was blow in the air, while there had been no such terror attack against USA.

Aug 10, 2017 | jackrabbit.blog
"US didn't have a plan in Syria" is misleading. Brenner tries to justify this statement by listing "piecemeal actions" of various US government entities.

In fact, while publicly the US claimed to have no direct role (Obama: US "leading from behind"), the US had both an important covert role and a deceptive public one (providing diplomatic cover).

It seems doubtful that Brenner is unaware of the US dual role or of the years of planning with allies (as described by Seymour Hersh).

I think Brenner is also wrong about contingency planning wrt a a price" (a favorite Obama expression) via terrorism. Indeed, within a month after Russians arrived in Syria a Russian passenger jet was downed.

Despite a US bombing campaign Russian intervention. I think they first hoped to forestall any intervention by keeping Russia busy elsewhere (Ukraine, economic troubles, etc.). if Russia did intervene, it would "pay heavy price" an true Russian passenger jet was blow in the air, while there had been no such terror attack against USA.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Aug 4, 2017 5:37:06 PM | 30

[Aug 09, 2017] Force Multipliers and 21st Century Imperial Warfare Practice and Propaganda by Maximilian C. Forte

Highly recommended!
Highly recommended --
The full book can be downloaded here (for free) .
Notable quotes:
"... What is a force multiplier? ..."
Nov 08, 2015 | zeroanthropology.net

If the present provides a hint of what it is to come, the nastiest, ugliest, and bloodiest wars to be fought this century will be between states opposed to continued US dominance, and the force multipliers of US dominance. We see the outline of sovereign self-defense programs that take diverse forms, from the banning of foreign funding for NGOs operating in a state's territory, controlling the mass media, arresting protesters, shutting down CIA-funded political parties, curtailing foreign student exchanges, denying visas to foreign academic researchers, terminating USAID operations, to expelling US ambassadors, and so forth. In extreme cases, this includes open warfare between governments and armed rebels backed by the US, or more indirectly (as the force multiplier principle mandates) backed by US allies. US intervention will provoke and heighten paranoia, stoking repression, and create the illusion of a self-fulfilling prophecy that US interventionists can further manipulate, using logic of this kind: they are serial human rights abusers; we therefore need to intervene in the name of humanity. There will be no discussion, let alone admission, that US covert intervention helped to provoke repression, and that the US knowingly placed its "force multipliers" on the front line. "Force multipliers" also requires us to understand the full depth and scope of US imperialism comprising, among other things: entertainment, food, drink, software, agriculture, arms sales, media, and so on.

Yet, in the end, we are still left with a basic question: What is a force multiplier? There are even more answers to this question than there are persons answering it. Beyond the most basic definition in physics, we see a proliferation of examples of force multipliers, reflecting a weak pseudo-science that reifies actual policies, offering mixed results in practice. Given the scientistic and positivist approach that achieved hegemony during the Cold War in US universities and the military, the conceptualization of force multipliers reveals familiar problems arising from the naturalization of social phenomena, of "man" as "molecule" of society. As an impoverished form of political science, one that is formulaic, mechanical, utilitarian, and ideologically-driven, the force multiplier idea nonetheless poses difficult anthropological questions about the agency of others.

My hope was that military writers did not choose to write "force multipliers" because candidly calling them "quislings," "shills," "dupes," "pawns" or "suckers" would have been too "politically incorrect," or would have validated older, Cold War-era accusations of the US supporting "stooges," "lackeys," "cronies," "henchmen," "running dogs," or "lap dogs". In other words, my hope was that this was not yet another imperial euphemism. Regardless of the intentions behind the terminology, whether conscious or not, the basic idea of using humans as a form of drone , one that is less expensive yet more precise and in less need of constant guidance, seems to be the persisting feature of the force multiplier concept.

If the concept is not a mere euphemism, then there is still an absence of sound theorization of force multipliers on the part of the Pentagon, and by that I mean that while an inchoate lexical infrastructure exists consisting of nested synonyms derived from the natural sciences, there is little more than crude utilitarianism and functionalism to hold the terms together. Some may wish to retort, "then that is the theory" by noting the presence of functionalist assumptions and premises derived from rational-choice theories. However, the presence of theory should also involve the process of theorization, which entails questioning, revising, and exposing one's assumptions to a dialogue with other theories and with facts that appear to challenge the validity of the theory.

There may be a lot of real-world destruction by the US military and intelligence apparatus, but there is no winning as such!the absence of theorization is killing the imperial political and security structures, but their exposure to critical theories will only hasten their defeat. No wonder then that so many right-wing "pro-military" columnists in the US routinely scoff at and dismiss "post-colonialism"!theirs is a hegemony in trouble, turned narcissistic: unable to find their mirror image in many sectors of the social sciences and humanities, they resort to angry triumphalism and cyclical repetition of the same failed "solutions," repeated over and over again. On the other hand, they can find their mirror-image in academia, and particularly anthropology, in other ways: many US anthropologists' convoluted (meta)theoretical fumblings, obfuscated by pretentious language whose deliberate lack of clarity masks deep confusion and bewilderment, stands out particularly in the cases of topics which are "new," such as democracy or globalization. In this sense, both the US military and US anthropology in some quarters share in common a proliferation of theoretical-sounding rhetoric and a lack of scientific theory. Not coincidentally, both also share an apparent aversion to even saying the word "imperialism". One might detect a certain decadence in imperial intellectual life, of which the force multiplier theoretical pretense is but one small example.

Clearly there are numerous examples of agents serving as "force multipliers," and almost as clear is the absence of theorization, let alone reason for imperial elites to feel confident about success when the political, economic, and cultural projects they represent are domestically bankrupt and alienating. Counterinsurgency in Afghanistan and Iraq, and "winning hearts and minds," certainly did happen in some places and to some extent, which gives partial weight to the "force multiplier" idea at the core of these processes. However, on the whole, counterinsurgency programs have been defeated in Afghanistan just as in Vietnam before.

[Aug 09, 2017] I think the USA neocons first hoped to forestall any intervention by keeping Russia busy elsewhere (Ukraine, economic troubles, etc.). And threats that if Russia did intervene, it would "pay heavy price" an true Russian passenger jet was blow in the air, while there had been no such terror attack against USA.

Aug 09, 2017 | jackrabbit.blog
"US didn't have a plan in Syria" is misleading. Brenner tries to justify this statement by listing "piecemeal actions" of various US government entities. In fact, while publicly the US claimed to have no direct role (Obama: US "leading from behind"), the US had both an important covert role and a deceptive public one (providing diplomatic cover). It seems doubtful that Brenner is unaware of the US dual role or of the years of planning with allies (as described by Seymour Hersh).

I think Brenner is also wrong about contingency planning wrt a a price" (a favorite Obama expression) via terrorism. Indeed, within a month after Russians arrived in Syria a Russian passenger jet was downed.

Despite a US bombing campaign Russian intervention. I think they first hoped to forestall any intervention by keeping Russia busy elsewhere (Ukraine, economic troubles, etc.). If Russia did intervene, it would "pay against ISIS for about a year there had been no such terror attack against USA.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Aug 4, 2017 5:37:06 PM | 30

[Aug 09, 2017] The current CIA-led regime change operation in Venezuela seems to be following the same script as used in Ukraine and Syria with armed oppostion attacks on state forces, ignored by the western media who focus solely on presenting what appears to be unprovoked attacks against hapless protestors. If the CIA has their way, the next stage should be mysterious snipers shooting both sides.

Notable quotes:
"... The US never seems to consider what the other side will do in response to its actions, assuming the other side will be overwhelmed or forced to submit. ..."
Aug 09, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

Anonymous | Aug 4, 2017 6:49:21 PM | 35

The term 'linear thinking' might better be described as 'mechanistic thinking' or the 'playbook approach'.

The US never seems to consider what the other side will do in response to its actions, assuming the other side will be overwhelmed or forced to submit. For example, the Gulenist-faction shootdown of the Su-24 led to Russia using that as an excuse to bring in heavy air-defense for for its forces. The bombing of the airliner in Egypt was used by Russia to invoke the UN article of self defense against Daesh/ISIS, which no other actor has done.

The US bombing of SAA ground forces led to Russia inserting its own ground forces tempering further air attacks. The Trump cruise missile strike against the SAA base holding Russian personnel led to a mysterious S-300 launch from Tartus into the eastern Med. Subsequently US aircraft carrying out attacks in SYria/Iraq appear to be flying from carriers in the Persian Gulf.

The creation of reconciliation zones has led to the presence of Russian forces close to the Golan which seems to have dampened the IDF's enthusiasm for bombing Hezbollah which in turn helped them clear out ISIS/whatever from the Syria/Lebanon border.

The current CIA-led regime change operation in Venezuela seems to be following the same script as used in Ukraine and Syria with armed oppostion attacks on state forces, ignored by the western media who focus solely on presenting what appears to be unprovoked attacks against hapless 'protestors'. If the CIA has their way, the next stage should be mysterious snipers shooting both sides.

[Aug 09, 2017] Trump adviser fired over memo warning of globalist-Islamist 'deep state'

Aug 08, 2017 | www.wnd.com
Rich Higgins

Rich Higgins

But the fired adviser, Rich Higgans, is only the latest chip to fall in an ongoing "purge" of "America-first" stalwarts from the National Security Council.

The idea that an alliance of Obama holdovers consisting of globalists and Islamists are working inside the government as part of a "deep state" effort to destroy the Trump presidency has been a common theme put forth by outside analysts trying to explain the intrigue behind Trump's first six months in the White House.

But the idea apparently was not confined to outsiders. Higgins, a high-level official inside the president's National Security Council, sent a memo up the chain of command in May, warning of just such a plot. Higgins' memo caught the eye of McMaster and cost him his job.

According to a report Wednesday by the Atlantic , McMaster removed Higgins from his post as director of strategic planning on July 21 after reading the memo, which was considered too "conspiratorial."

The memo alleged that leftists, globalists, Islamists and "deep state" actors are engaged in "political warfare" against Trump. It states:

"Through the campaign, candidate Trump tapped into a deep vein of concern among many citizens that America is at risk and slipping away. Globalists and Islamists recognize that for their visions to succeed, America, both as an ideal and as a national and political identity, must be destroyed."

The memo described the insurrection against Trump as "Maoist" in nature.

"In Maoist insurgencies, the formation of a counter-state is essential to seizing state power," the memo reads. "Functioning as a hostile complete state acting within an existing state, it has an alternate infrastructure. Political warfare operates as one of the activities of the 'counter-state.'

"Because the left is aligned with Islamist organizations at local, national, and international levels, recognition should be given to the fact that they seamlessly interoperate through coordinated synchronized interactive narratives. These attack narratives are pervasive, full spectrum, and institutionalized at all levels. They operate in social media, television, the 24-hour news cycle in all media and are entrenched at the upper levels of the bureaucracies."

Several sources told the Atlantic they believed the memo made its way to Trump's desk, but that has not been confirmed.

Higgins spent a little more than two months on the job before he was ousted. Prior to joining the government, Higgins hit on similar issues in his writings, asserting Islam is in an alliance with secular, Marxist-oriented global elites in an effort to destroy America.

"National Security officials are prohibited from developing a factual understanding of Islamic threat doctrines, preferring instead to depend upon 5th column Muslim Brotherhood cultural advisors," he wrote in a September 2016 op-ed for the Washington Times .

The exit of Higgins and another official within the NSC apparatus, Senior Director for the Middle East Derek Harvey, could be an indication that the "deep state," if it exists, is gunning for its ultimate enemy within the White House – former Breitbart executive chairman Steve Bannon.

Bannon, the president's chief strategist, has already been removed, at McMaster's behest, from the daily briefings of the NSC.

McMaster recoils at 'list' of Obama holdovers

Like Higgins, Harvey is a Bannon ally. Harvey reportedly kept a list of Obama holdovers who were seeking to undermine the Trump agenda.

McMaster declined to fire any of the persons on the list and, in fact, made statements at a NSC town-hall meeting that "there is no such thing as a holdover." He said career federal staffers were among the most loyal public servants.

Yet, that would seem to conflict with comments made by Obama's own top domestic-policy adviser, Cecilia Muñoz, in April 2015. As reported by WND , Muñoz, speaking at a symposium of the White House Task Force on New Americans live-streamed over the Internet, said it was her top priority to "institutionalize" Obama's policies throughout all federal agencies so they would live on long after she and her boss left the White House.

In addition to the terminations of Harvey and Higgins, McMaster also purged from the NSC staff Tera Dahl, a former Breitbart writer and congressional aide to Michele Bachmann.

A fourth Trump conservative, Ezra Cohen-Watnick, has been fired from his position as senior director for intelligence on the National Security Council, according to a report by Conservative Review on Wednesday .

As for the future, continued volatility could be in the cards, depending on McMaster's ability to retain the president's confidence, said Philip Haney, a former DHS immigration officer who co-authored the whistleblower book " See Something, Say Nothing ."

"If you are Trump, you need to realize your people are being purged out of the agencies, one by one, and if there are no holdovers why is McMaster firing people?" Haney told WND.

"The people he's letting go are not Obama holdovers. He's keeping those designated as holdovers and purging the people who helped President Trump get elected. So if he's seeking unity, he seems to be replacing people who are loyal to Trump or prominently supportive of Trump.

"If you are (presidential deputy assistant) Sebastian Gorka and Steve Bannon, you've got to be pretty nervous right now."

More important than the faces of the people leaving or entering the administration is the future of American foreign policy as it relates to Islamic terrorism and its more subtle counterpart – civilizational jihad.

Higgins may have tipped his hand to what he believes a responsible national security policy would look like in his op-ed last fall in the Washington Times.

He wrote :

A strategic reassessment of the entire combating terrorism effort that is free from politically correct nonsense is long overdue. The "Islam has nothing to do with terrorism" narratives have effectively shut down the intelligence process for the war in any meaningful sense. Sure, we CT officers could look at organizations and people and places, some of which had Islamic names, but we could never dig into the political and ideological reasons the enemy was attacking us – which is supposed to be the first order of business in any strategic threat assessment.

He tried to provide a vivid picture to his higher ups of what he believed they were up against, and he was rewarded with a pink slip.

[Aug 01, 2017] Gareth Porter on Barack Obama's policy of arming jihadists in Syria

Aug 01, 2017 | www.libertarianinstitute.org

Gareth Porter returns to the show to discuss his latest articles for the American Conservative, " How America Armed Terrorists in Syria " and " How CIA and Allies Trapped Obama in the Syrian Arms Debacle ." Scott and Gareth discuss how U.S. national security policy since Obama took office has been largely been, either directly or indirectly, in support of al-Qaeda and that unlike George W. Bush, who empowered al-Qaeda accidentally, Barack Obama did it with full understanding of the likely consequences of his policies. Gareth then explains how U.S. policy in the Middle East, and in Syria particularly, changed with the outbreak of the Arab Spring, which the U.S. saw as an opportunity to foment revolution with the goal of regime change. According to Gareth, Obama's advisors failed to warn him that arming Assad's enemies in Syria would increase the role of Hezbollah and Iran, and ultimately backfire!just another example of how the U.S. foreign policy machine is always able to rationalize their views, no matter how ill-fated, in order to advance their supposed interests. Gareth also explains why the Iran Deal pressured Obama into opposing Iran everywhere else in order to placate Saudi Arabia and many of his advisors, including David Petraeus. Finally, Scott and Gareth touch on the considerable role Israel and the U.S.'s Sunni allies in the region play in determining U.S. policy.

Gareth Porter is an investigative historian and journalist on the national security state and author of Manufactured Crisis: The Untold Story of the Iran Nuclear Scare . Follow him on Twitter @GarethPorter .

- Advertisement -

Discussed on the show:

Audio Player 00:00 00:00 Use Up/Down Arrow keys to increase or decrease volume.

Podcast (thescotthortonshow): Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: iTunes | Android | Stitcher | RSS

[Jul 31, 2017] How Romney Loyalists Hijacked Trumps Foreign Policy

Notable quotes:
"... This isn't merely a story of palace intrigue and revolving chairs in the corridors of power. Brave Americans in the uniform of their country will continue to be sent into far-off lands to intercede in internecine conflicts that have little if anything to do with U.S. national security. Many will return physically shattered or mentally maimed. Others will be returned to Andrews Air Force Base in flag-draped coffins, to be saluted by serial presidents of both parties, helpless to stop the needless carnage. ..."
"... Ron Maxwell wrote and directed the Civil War trilogy of movies: ..."
"... Great piece. Thank you, Mr. Maxwell. Reading this, I burn with anger -- then a sense of utter futility washes over me. I think history will show that the Trump era was the moment the American people realized that the Deep State is more powerful than the presidency. ..."
"... The rogues' gallery of neocons and apprentice neocons described above is really disturbing. We didn't vote for this. ..."
"... Re Nikki Haley, she's already an embarrassment, an ignorant neocon-dependent. She's dragging us down the same old road of anti-Russia hysterics and Middle East meddling. The best that can be said of her presence at the UN is that by putting her there Trump promoted one of his allies into the SC governor's mansion. I don't think he was under any illusions as to her foreign policy knowledge, competence, or commitment to an America First policy. But she's become a vector for neocons to reinfect government, and she needs to be removed. ..."
"... Neoconism and neoliberalism is like a super-bug infection. None of the anti-biotics are working. We have only one hope left. Rand Paul, the super anti-neocon/neoliberal. ..."
"... In this country we can talk about resenting elites all we want, but when it comes to making American foreign policy there still is an American foreign policy elite – and it's very powerful. Why has there been no debate? Actually, Michael Mandelbaum, an author with whom I seldom agree on anything, but in his book "The Frugal Superpower" he actually tells you why there's no debate in the foreign policy establishment. ..."
"... And to be part of the establishment you have to buy into it – to its ideology, to its beliefs system, and that is a very hard thing to break. And so before we all jump up and down and say, "Wow! Donald Trump won! NATO is going to be changed. Our commitments in East Asia are going to change. The Middle East may change!" We'd better take a deep breath and ask ourselves, and I think Will Ruger raised this point on the first panel, where is the counter-elite? ..."
"... Where is a Trumpian counter-elite that not only can take the senior positions in the cabinet like Defense Secretary and Secretary of State, but be the assistant secretaries, the deputy assistant secretaries, the NSC staffers. ..."
"... I think that elite doesn't exist right now, and that's a big problem, because the people who are going to be probably still in power are the people who do not agree with the kinds of foreign policy ideas that I think most of us in this room are sympathetic to. So, over time maybe that will change. ..."
"... The problem with the neocons is that their ambition vastly exceeds their ability. ..."
Jul 31, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Rex Tillerson, formidably accomplished in global business, was nevertheless as much a neophyte as his boss when it came to navigating the policy terrain of the D.C. swamp. As is well known, in building his team he relied on those two neocon avatars, Dick Cheney and Condoleezza Rice, who had originally promoted his own candidacy for secretary of state. But Rice had been a vocal part of the neocon Never Trump coalition. Her anti-Trump pronouncements included: "Donald Trump should not be president .He doesn't have the dignity and stature to be president." The Washington Post greeted her 2017 book, Democracy: Stories from the Long Road to Freedom , as "a repudiation of Trump's America First worldview."

Thus it wasn't surprising that Rice would introduce Elliott Abrams to Tillerson as an ideal candidate for State's No. 2 position. This would have placed a dyed-in-the-wool neocon hardliner at the very top of the State Department's hierarchy and given him the power to hire and fire all undersecretaries across the vast foreign policy empire. Rice, one of the architects of George W. Bush's failed policies of regime change and nation building, would have consolidated a direct line of influence into the highest reaches of the Trump foreign policy apparatus.

Not only was Abrams' entire career a refutation of Trump's America First foreign policy, but he had spent the previous eighteen months publicly bashing Trump in harsh terms. Cleverly, however, he had not signed either of the two Never Trump letters co-signed by most of the other neocon foreign policy elite. Abrams almost got the nod, except for a last-minute intervention by Trump adviser Steve Bannon, who was armed with every disparaging anti-Trump statement Abrams had made. Examples: "This is a question of character. He is not fit to sit in the chair of George Washington and Abraham Lincoln .his absolute unwillingness to learn anything about foreign policy .Hillary would be better on foreign policy. I'm not going to vote for Trump ."

But Abrams' rejection was the exception. As a high profile globalist-interventionist he could not easily hide his antipathy toward the Trump doctrine. Others, whose track records and private comments were more easily obscured, were waived in by gatekeepers whose mission it was (and remains) to populate State, DoD, and national security agencies with establishment and neocon cadres, not with proven Trump supporters and adherents to his foreign policy.

But how did the gatekeepers get in? Romney may have disappeared from the headlines, but he never left the sidelines. His chess pieces were already on the board, occupying key squares and prepared to move.

Once the president opened the door to RNC chairman Reince Priebus as his chief of staff, to Rex Tillerson at State, to James Mattis as defense secretary, and to H. R. McMaster at NSC, the neocons just walked in. While each of these political and military luminaries may publicly support the president's policies and in some instances may sincerely want to see them implemented, their entire careers have been spent within the establishment and neocon elite. They don't know any other world view or any other people.

Donald Trump ran on an America First foreign policy, repeatedly deriding George W. Bush for invading Iraq in 2003. He criticized Clinton and Obama for their military interventions in Libya and their support for regime change in Syria. He questioned the point of the endless Afghan war. He criticized the Beltway's hostile obsession with Russia while it ignored China's military buildup and economic threat to America.

Throughout the campaign Trump made abundantly clear his foreign policy ethos. If elected he would stop the policy of perpetual war, strengthen America's military, take care of U.S. veterans, focus particularly on annihilating the ISIS caliphate, protect the homeland from Islamist radicalism, and promote a carefully calibrated America First policy.

But, despite this clear record, according to Politico and other Beltway journals, the president has been entreated in numerous White House and Pentagon meetings to sign off on globalist foreign policy goals, including escalating commitments to the war in Afghanistan. These presentations, conducted by H.R. McMaster and others, were basically arguments to continue the global status quo; in other words, a foreign policy that Clinton would have embraced. Brian Hook and Nadia Schadlow were two of the lesser known policy wonks who participated in these meetings, determining vital issues of war and peace.

Brian Hook, head of State Department policy planning, is an astute operative and member in good standing of the neocon elite. He's also a onetime foreign policy adviser to Romney and remains in close touch with him. Hook was one of the founders, along with Eliot Cohen and Eric Edelman, of the anti-Trump John Hay Initiative. Hook organized one of the Never Trump letters during the campaign, and his views are well-known, in part through a May 2016 piece by Julia Hoffe in Politico Magazine. A passage: "My wife said, 'never,'" said Brian Hook, looking pained and slicing the air with a long, pale hand. .Even if you say you support him as the nominee," Hook says, "you go down the list of his positions and you see you disagree on every one."

One might wonder how a man such as Hook could become the director of policy planning and a senior adviser to Rex Tillerson, advising on all key foreign policy issues? The answer is: the Romney network.

Consider also the case of Margaret Peterlin, assigned as a Sherpa during the transition to guide Tillerson through the confirmation process. Another experienced Beltway insider, Peterlin promptly made herself indispensable to Tillerson and blocked anyone who wanted access to him, no matter how senior. Peterlin then brought Brian Hook onboard, a buddy from their Romney days, to serve as the brains for foreign policy while she was serving as the Gorgon-eyed chief of staff.

According to rumor, the two are now blocking White House personnel picks, particularly Trump loyalists, from appointments at State. At the same time, they are bringing aboard neocons such as Kurt Volker, executive director of the McCain Institute and notorious Russia hawk, and Wess Mitchell, president of the neocon Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA). As special representative for Ukraine negotiations, Volker is making proclamations to inflame the conflict and further entangle the United States.

Meanwhile, Mitchell, another Romney alumnus and a Brian Hook buddy from the John Hay Initiative, has been nominated as assistant secretary of state for European and Erurasian affairs. Brace yourself for an unnecessary Cold War with Russia, if not a hot one. While Americans may not really care whether ethnic Russians or ethnic Ukrainians dominate the Donbass, these guys do.

Then there's Nadia Schadlow, another prominent operative with impeccable neocon credentials. She was the senior program officer at the Smith Richardson Foundation, where her main job was to underwrite the neocon project by offering grants to the many think tanks in their network. For the better part of a decade she pursued a PhD under the tutelage of Eliot Cohen, who has pronounced himself a "Never Trumper" and has questioned the president's mental health. Cohen, along with H.R. McMaster, provided editorial guidance to Schadlow for her book extolling nation-building and how we can do more of it.

Relationships beget jobs, which is how Schadlow became deputy assistant to the president, with the task, given by her boss H.R. McMaster, of writing the administration's National Security Strategy. Thus do we have a neocon stalwart who wrote the book on nation building now writing President Trump's national security strategy.

How, we might ask, did these Never Trump activists get into such high positions in the Trump administration? And what was their agenda at such important meetings with the President if not to thwart his America First agenda? Put another way, how did Trump get saddled with nearly Mitt Romney's entire foreign policy staff? After all, the American people did not elect Mitt Romney when they had the chance.

Trump is a smart guy. So is Barack Obama. But even Obama, Nobel Peace Prize in hand, could not prevent the inexorable slide to violent regime change in Libya, which resulted in a semi-failed state, tens of thousands killed, and a foothold for Al Queda and other radical Islamists in the Maghreb. He also could not prevent the arming of Islamist rebels in Syria after he had the CIA provide lethal arms strictly to "moderate rebels." Unable or unwilling to disengage from Afghanistan, Obama acquiesced in a series of Pentagon strategies with fluctuating troop levels before bequeathing to his successor an open ended, unresolved war.

Rumors floating through official Washington suggest the neocons now want to replace Tillerson at State with Trump critic and Neocon darling Nikki Haley, currently pursuing a one-person bellicose foreign policy from her exalted post at the United Nations. Not surprisingly, Haley and Romney go way back. As a firm neocon partisan, she endorsed his presidential bid in 2011 .

As UN ambassador, Haley has articulated a nearly incoherent jumble of statements that seem more in line with her own neocon worldview than with Trump's America First policies. Some samples:

"I think that, you know, Russia is full of themselves. They've always been full of themselves. But that's – its more of a façade that they try and show as opposed to anything else."

"What we are is serious. And you see us in action, so its not in personas. Its in actions and its what we do."

"The United States calls for an immediate end to the Russian occupation of Crimea. Crimea is a part of Ukraine. Our Crimea-related sanctions will remain in place until Russia returns control over the peninsula to Ukraine."

One must ask: Is Ambassador Haley speaking on behalf of the Trump administration when she says it is official U.S. policy that Russia, having annexed Crimea, must return it to Ukraine? Is the Russo-American geopolitical relationship to be held hostage indefinitely because in 2014 the people of Crimea voted for their political reintegration into Russia, which they had been part of since 1776?

Since there is as much chance of Russia ceding Crimea back to Ukraine as there is of the United States ceding Texas back to Mexico, does this mean there is no possibility of any meaningful cooperation with Russia on anything else? Not even in fighting the common ominous threat from Islamist radicalism? Has Haley committed the American people to this dead-end policy on her own or in consultation with the President?

On July 14, the Washington Examiner wrote that "Haley's remarks set the tone for Trump's reversal from the less interventionist, 'America First' foreign policy he campaigned on." Little wonder, then, that in a little-noticed victory lap of her own, coinciding with the release of her book, Condoleezza Rice acknowledged the near complete takeover of Trump's foreign policy team. "The current national security team is terrific," she said. She even gave Trump her anointed blessing following their recent White House meeting, during which the septuagenarian schoolboy received the schoolmarm's pat on the head: " He was engaging," she said. "I found him on top of his brief .asking really good questions." That's a far cry from her campaign-season comment about Trump that he "doesn't have the dignity and stature to be president."

American foreign policy seems to be on auto-pilot, immune to elections and impervious to the will of the people. It is perpetuated by an entrenched contingent of neocon and establishment zealots and bureaucratic drones in both the public and private sector, whose careers, livelihoods, and very raison d'etre depend on an unchallenged policy of military confrontation with the prestige, power, and cash flow it generates. Those who play the game by establishment rules are waived in. Those who would challenge the status quo are kept out. This is the so-called Deep State, thwarting the will of President Trump and the people who voted for him.

This isn't merely a story of palace intrigue and revolving chairs in the corridors of power. Brave Americans in the uniform of their country will continue to be sent into far-off lands to intercede in internecine conflicts that have little if anything to do with U.S. national security. Many will return physically shattered or mentally maimed. Others will be returned to Andrews Air Force Base in flag-draped coffins, to be saluted by serial presidents of both parties, helpless to stop the needless carnage.

Ron Maxwell wrote and directed the Civil War trilogy of movies: Gettysburg, Gods and Generals, Copperhead.

Andrew , says: July 30, 2017 at 11:04 pm

This is all very convincing, but the point remains: Trump won and is the one responsible for allowing all these neocons through the door. Had Pat Buchanan won the nomination and the Presidency back in the nineties, does anyone believe he would make the same blunders, and not be equipped to find the right traditional conservatives instead of the establishment DC neocons that try and swamp every GOP Administration now since Reagan? Trump is simply too naive and doesn't have any feel for the political ideologies of all of these people, being not much of a political animal himself. And replacing Priebus with General Kelly isn't likely to change all that. He should be talking to Ann Coulter and Buchanan as unofficial advisers or something.
Fran Macadam , says: July 31, 2017 at 12:36 am
Globalism is the twenty-first century euphemism for old fashioned imperialism, now on Wall Street propelled nuclear steroids.
KaneV , says: July 31, 2017 at 1:15 am
Good God how shallow is the Trump foreign policy bench that the American Con has a director writing in its defense?
reelectclaydavis , says: July 31, 2017 at 4:43 am
Interesting argument, though you ignore other factors besides the conspiratorial-sounding "Romney network" that account for American interventionist neo-conservatives finding their way back into power: 1) that they are by far the largest group of people available to staff the government because of a) the dominance of aggressive liberal internationalism over more restrained realism in graduate schools which educate these foreign policy specialists; b) an inherent bias of these specialists not to admit that America cannot influence world events (that would be like a social worker who didn't believe s/he could usually mediate conflicts). Also, 2) Trump's alleged non-interventionist beliefs are less well-formed than you imply, you just project on him what you wish to see; a) you ignore his comments about taking the oil of other countries, an idea the neo-conservatives had as a way to pay for operations in Iraq; and b) Beliefs closer to Trump's core: that others not paying their fair share and that America is being taken advantage of, are not incompatible with the American interventions you oppose.
polistra , says: July 31, 2017 at 8:13 am
You can't hijack an executive's policy unless the executive is either hopelessly weak or a faker. Doesn't matter which.

The only good part is that the fake image of a somewhat less warlike "Trump", stirred up by the media to destroy Trump, is actually DOING what a real non-interventionist Trump would have done. EU is breaking away from US control, just as a real antiwar Trump would have ordered it to do.

Dan Stewart , says: July 31, 2017 at 8:23 am
Great piece. Thank you, Mr. Maxwell. Reading this, I burn with anger -- then a sense of utter futility washes over me. I think history will show that the Trump era was the moment the American people realized that the Deep State is more powerful than the presidency.
For Virginia , says: July 31, 2017 at 8:23 am
It's good to see Ron Maxwell published in these pages. I watch Gettysburg at least once a year. And don't think Virginians aren't grateful for Maxwell's role in helping put paid to Eric Cantor's political career.

The rogues' gallery of neocons and apprentice neocons described above is really disturbing. We didn't vote for this. And we don't want it.

Re Nikki Haley, she's already an embarrassment, an ignorant neocon-dependent. She's dragging us down the same old road of anti-Russia hysterics and Middle East meddling. The best that can be said of her presence at the UN is that by putting her there Trump promoted one of his allies into the SC governor's mansion. I don't think he was under any illusions as to her foreign policy knowledge, competence, or commitment to an America First policy. But she's become a vector for neocons to reinfect government, and she needs to be removed.

Johann , says: July 31, 2017 at 8:27 am
Neoconism and neoliberalism is like a super-bug infection. None of the anti-biotics are working. We have only one hope left. Rand Paul, the super anti-neocon/neoliberal.
SDS , says: July 31, 2017 at 8:46 am
"Trump is a smart guy" ..
??
If so; why does he not see this happening all around him? Except for his pompous, ignorant, hands-off method of governing, that is . The Emperor has no clothes but doesn't seem to know, nor care that he doesn't
Kurt Gayle , says: July 31, 2017 at 9:03 am
Christopher Layne, Robert M. Gates Chair in National Security, Texas A&M at the American Conservative Conference "Foreign Policy in America's Interest" (Nov 15 2016) said:

"In this country we can talk about resenting elites all we want, but when it comes to making American foreign policy there still is an American foreign policy elite – and it's very powerful. Why has there been no debate? Actually, Michael Mandelbaum, an author with whom I seldom agree on anything, but in his book "The Frugal Superpower" he actually tells you why there's no debate in the foreign policy establishment.

You see, debate is – basically goes from here to there [Dr. Layne puts his two index fingers close together in front of his face], like from the 45-yard-line to the 45-yard-line. And why does it stop there? Because people who try to go down towards the goal line have their union cards taken away. They're kicked out of the establishment. They're not listened to. They're disrespected.

And to be part of the establishment you have to buy into it – to its ideology, to its beliefs system, and that is a very hard thing to break. And so before we all jump up and down and say, "Wow! Donald Trump won! NATO is going to be changed. Our commitments in East Asia are going to change. The Middle East may change!" We'd better take a deep breath and ask ourselves, and I think Will Ruger raised this point on the first panel, where is the counter-elite?

Where is a Trumpian counter-elite that not only can take the senior positions in the cabinet like Defense Secretary and Secretary of State, but be the assistant secretaries, the deputy assistant secretaries, the NSC staffers.

I think that elite doesn't exist right now, and that's a big problem, because the people who are going to be probably still in power are the people who do not agree with the kinds of foreign policy ideas that I think most of us in this room are sympathetic to. So, over time maybe that will change.

Over time maybe a counter-elite will emerge. But in the short term I see very little prospect for all the big changes that most of us are hoping to see, and so for me the challenge that we face is really to find ways to develop this counter-elite than can staff an administration in the future, that has at least what we think are the views that Donald Trump holds."

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/watch-foreign-policy-in-americas-interest/

We're in a new period – a period of learning for President Trump and for those in the administration who back his anti-establishment foreign policy view. And while it is true that (as Chris Layne said) "in the short term I see very little prospect for all the big changes that most of us are hoping to see," as we move into the medium and long term, many of us are hopeful that these big Trumpian foreign policy changes can begin to be made.

Kevin , says: July 31, 2017 at 10:13 am
Shorter Ron Maxwell: good tsar, evil advisors --
Bill Smith , says: July 31, 2017 at 10:24 am
This article is sharply contradicted by an earlier and more informed article in Conservative Review, an outlet with a considerably larger audience than American Conservative. You might want to read that as a corrective to this one. You can find it here: https://www.conservativereview.com/articles/trump-nat-sec-strategy-to-translate-maga-into-foreign-policy

Money quote:

A senior administration official familiar with the work of Nadia Schadlow, a national security expert brought on to help draft the National Security Strategy, tells CR that she will attempt to produce an NSS as "iconoclastic as our new commander in chief," adding, "the era of milquetoast boilerplate is over."

Henri James , says: July 31, 2017 at 10:44 am
I do love that in all of these scenarios, Trump is just some innocent moon-eyed man child who can't possibly be expected to think on his own.
Charlie , says: July 31, 2017 at 11:27 am
The problem with the neocons is that their ambition vastly exceeds their ability. Neocons developed their minds in the Cold war dealing with a western power, the USSR. The problem is that once one enters the Middle East and Asia one is dealing with languages and cultures of which they [knew] next to nothing. How many speak Arabic, Farsi, Turkish and Urdu such that they understand every nuance of what is said and unsaid?

When dealing with the arabs and many in Afghanistan everything is personnel and this can go back 5 generations and includes hundreds if not thousands of people.

Trump has the common sense not to become involved in that he does not understand.

David Skerry , says: July 31, 2017 at 11:51 am
They come back in boxes while those who sent them to their deaths remain in the bags of the "America Second" group which highjacked our Congress. It's no longer "God Bless America"; it's "God Help America."

[Jul 29, 2017] Trump Faces Down the CIA and Co-Opts the Pentagon on Syria (for the time being) by Glen Ford

Notable quotes:
"... Trump this summer defied the War Party and its corporate media mouthpieces, negotiating a cease-fire with the Russians in several regions of Syria, to be followed by additional truces, and ending the CIA's not-so-covert role as Grandmaster of Islamic Jihad. It seemed...unreal. ..."
"... Peace-loving people around the world held their breath, waiting for the War Party's revenge. ..."
"... Back in late March, the Trump administration had signaled its abandonment of regime change, with both UN Ambassador Nikki Haley and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson indicating that Syrian President Assad's ouster was no longer a priority for the United States. But, within a week, Trump was hurling Tomahawk missiles at a Syrian airbase, purportedly in retaliation for a chemical weapons incident that only a fool or a U.S. corporate media hack would blame on Syria. ..."
"... Then, two months later, on June 26, in a bizarre episode even for Trump, the administration charged the Syria military with preparing to launch another chemical weapons attack , for which the Assad government would "pay a heavy price." Strangely, the White House seemed to have failed to notify either the Pentagon or the State Department about the Syria threat, or the proposed retaliation. ..."
"... Stranger still, Trump issued his weaponized rant during the same period when his administration must have been deeply engaged in negotiations on a cease-fire with the Russians. We at Black Agenda Report wondered whether Trump had gone " play-crazy " – "acting like an unpredictable maniac in order to terrorize the Russians into forcing some kind of dramatic concessions from their Syrian allies, or risk Armageddon." ..."
"... The demons at the Washington Post and the New York Times have only one explanation for all earthly phenomena, including the termination of the CIA's jihadist overseer duties in Syria: Trump is "colluding" with the Russians. The Times moaned that "the decision is bound to be welcomed by the Russians." The WP whined that "the Russian government had long opposed the program, seeing it as an assault on its interests." Neither paper is concerned that the CIA project violates international laws against unprovoked attacks on sovereign nations, as well as U.S. laws against giving material assistance to al Qaida, a prime beneficiary of CIA weapons, or that half a million Syrians have died, as a result. ..."
"... Despite his apparent vow of semi-silence on the CIA front, Trump could not resist a Twitter retort . "The Amazon Washington Post fabricated the facts on my ending massive, dangerous, and wasteful payments to Syrian rebels fighting Assad," he wrote, effectively declassifying the now-defunct (are we sure?) CIA terror campaign. ..."
Jul 27, 2017 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

The crazed, racist, stupid, boorish man in the White House "this summer defied the War Party and its corporate media mouthpieces, negotiating a cease-fire with the Russians in several regions of Syria, and possibly ending the CIA's not-so-covert role as Grandmaster of Islamic Jihad." Which makes him less dangerous to the human species than Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

"Donald Trump has taken the strangest, messiest route imaginable towards fulfilling his campaign pledge to curtail Washington's urge to regime change, and to ease tensions with Russia."

It's not like Donald Trump to "stifle" himself, as TV's Archie Bunker used to say, but the president has been relatively subdued about his decision, reportedly made last month, to terminate the CIA program that has armed, trained, directed and protected jihadist fighters in Syria. Trump's uncharacteristic reticence on the matter is understandable, given the agency's homicidal culture and history.

It is also likely that Trump's gaggle of White House generals, led by Secretary of Defense James "Mad Dog" Mattis and national security advisor H.R. McMaster, have kept the Pentagon in check, preventing a reprise of the mutiny that sabotaged President Obama's cease-fire and intelligence-sharing agreement with Russian forces in Syria, on September 17 of last year. In a blatant rebellion against civilian authority, U.S. warplanes killed 100 Syrian soldiers at Deir Ez-Zor, allowing ISIS to overrun half the city. The next week, with Secretary of Defense Ash Carter at his side, Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Gen. Joseph Dunford told the Senate Armed Services Committee, "The U.S. military role will not include intelligence sharing with the Russians." The Pentagon had "punked" lame duck President Barack Obama and his secretary of state, John Kerry.

"Trump this summer defied the War Party and its corporate media mouthpieces, negotiating a cease-fire with the Russians in several regions of Syria."

Donald Trump took note, and surrounded himself with generals before setting foot in the White House, perhaps to shield his presidency from falling prey to its own " Seven Days In May "-type scenario. Or, maybe Trump the Bully just likes the company of other crude and stupid men. At any rate, Trump this summer defied the War Party and its corporate media mouthpieces, negotiating a cease-fire with the Russians in several regions of Syria, to be followed by additional truces, and ending the CIA's not-so-covert role as Grandmaster of Islamic Jihad. It seemed...unreal.

Peace-loving people around the world held their breath, waiting for the War Party's revenge. Trump seemed to hold his breath -- and his tongue -- too, playing down the cease-fire arrangement, even as French President Emanuel Macron stood at his side in Paris, July 13, telling the press: "No matter who they are, we want to build an inclusive and sustainable political solution. Against that background, I do not require Assad's departure. This is no longer a prerequisite for France to work on that, because I can only tell you that, for seven years, we did not have an embassy in Damascus, and still we have no solution."

Trump was remarkably low-key in Paris: "We are working on a second ceasefire in a very rough part of Syria," he said. "If we get that and a few more, all of a sudden, you're going to have no bullets firing in Syria, and that is a wonderful thing."

People around the world held their breath, waiting for the War Party's revenge."

Back in late March, the Trump administration had signaled its abandonment of regime change, with both UN Ambassador Nikki Haley and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson indicating that Syrian President Assad's ouster was no longer a priority for the United States. But, within a week, Trump was hurling Tomahawk missiles at a Syrian airbase, purportedly in retaliation for a chemical weapons incident that only a fool or a U.S. corporate media hack would blame on Syria.

Then, two months later, on June 26, in a bizarre episode even for Trump, the administration charged the Syria military with preparing to launch another chemical weapons attack , for which the Assad government would "pay a heavy price." Strangely, the White House seemed to have failed to notify either the Pentagon or the State Department about the Syria threat, or the proposed retaliation.

Stranger still, Trump issued his weaponized rant during the same period when his administration must have been deeply engaged in negotiations on a cease-fire with the Russians. We at Black Agenda Report wondered whether Trump had gone " play-crazy " – "acting like an unpredictable maniac in order to terrorize the Russians into forcing some kind of dramatic concessions from their Syrian allies, or risk Armageddon."

Neither paper is concerned that the CIA project violates international laws against unprovoked attacks on sovereign nations, or that half a million Syrians have died, as a result."

Or, maybe the outburst was prompted by an aborted attempt to scuttle the talks with the Russians. Or, maybe Trump just had to shout the demons out of his system. Who knows?

The demons at the Washington Post and the New York Times have only one explanation for all earthly phenomena, including the termination of the CIA's jihadist overseer duties in Syria: Trump is "colluding" with the Russians. The Times moaned that "the decision is bound to be welcomed by the Russians." The WP whined that "the Russian government had long opposed the program, seeing it as an assault on its interests." Neither paper is concerned that the CIA project violates international laws against unprovoked attacks on sovereign nations, as well as U.S. laws against giving material assistance to al Qaida, a prime beneficiary of CIA weapons, or that half a million Syrians have died, as a result.

Despite his apparent vow of semi-silence on the CIA front, Trump could not resist a Twitter retort . "The Amazon Washington Post fabricated the facts on my ending massive, dangerous, and wasteful payments to Syrian rebels fighting Assad," he wrote, effectively declassifying the now-defunct (are we sure?) CIA terror campaign.

Donald Trump has taken the strangest, messiest, "play-crazy" (or just plain crazy) route imaginable towards fulfilling his campaign pledge to curtail Washington's urge to regime change, and to ease tensions with Russia. His presidency has been six months of pain and confusion.

But, if Hillary Clinton had been elected, we might all be dead.

BAR executive editor Glen Ford can be contacted at [email protected] . - Glen Ford's blog

See also - Former CIA Director Calls For A Coup

[Jul 28, 2017] Tucker and Tulsi on Syria vs CIAria

Jul 28, 2017 | www.unz.com

July 26, 2017

Priss Factor > , Website July 26, 2017 at 2:07 am GMT

Tucker and Tulsi on Syria vs CIAria

watch-v=7IGAXJNzPfU

annamaria > , July 26, 2017 at 8:02 pm GMT

@Priss Factor It was Israel's active participation in the attempt at regime change in Syria, which has finished the undressing of the "most moral" state of Israel. Currently, the "chosen" are outraged that the CIA could scale down the US support for terrorists.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/07/26/fear-and-trepidation-in-tel-aviv-is-israel-losing-the-syria-war/

"Despite assurances to the contrary, Israel has always been involved in the Syria conflict. Israel's repeated claims that "it maintains a policy of non-intervention in Syria's civil war," only fools US mainstream media.

Not only was Israel involved in the war, it also played no role in the aid efforts, nor did it ever extend a helping hand to Syrian refugees. Hundreds of thousands of Syrians have perished in the merciless war; many cities and villages were totally destroyed and millions of Syrians become refugees. While tiny and poor Lebanon has hosted over a million Syrian refugees, every country in the region and many nations around the world have hosted Syrian refugees, as well. Except Israel.

Even a symbolic government proposal to host 100 Syrian orphans was eventually dropped ." (-- Wait when the Lobby starts squeaking that mentioning this shameful fact is antisemitic.)

Israel has major responsibility for the Syrian tragedy. Astonishingly, Israelis are planning to triple down on the support for ISIS & Co in Syria.

"Since the start of the conflict, Israel wanted to appear as if in control of the situation, at least regarding the conflict in southwestern Syria. It bombed targets in Syria as it saw fit , and casually spoke of maintaining regular contacts with certain opposition groups. In recent comments before European officials, Netanyahu admitted to striking Iranian convoys in Syria [whcih is a sovereign state] "dozens of times."

But without a joint Israeli-US plan, Israel is now emerging as a weak party. Making that realization quite belatedly, Israel is becoming increasingly frustrated. ... Failing to obtain support from newly-elected President Donald Trump, Israel is now attempting to develop its own independent strategy.

On June 18, the Wall Street Journal reported that Israel has been giving "secret aid" to Syrian rebels, in the form of "cash and humanitarian aid ." -- See the US taxpayers' money in actions ($3 billion this year only). The "war on terror" came down to the "cash and humanitarian aid" to terrorists, delivered by Israel directly from the US taxpayers pockets to Israel's favorite head-choppers.

[Jul 28, 2017] Trump End the Syria War Now

Notable quotes:
"... Lavrov compares Obama to a small kid unable to comprehend the responsibilities of his position of a President of the US. ..."
Jul 28, 2017 | www.unz.com
Eric Margolis July 22, 2017

Many Americans voted for Donald Trump because he vowed to end the foreign conflicts in which the US had become entangled. So far, they have been disappointed. But this week a light flashed at the end of the tunnel.

President Trump, according to numerous reliable Washington sources, has decided to end US arms supplies and logistics support to Syria's jihadist rebels that have fuelled the bloody six-year conflict. Washington, and its allies Britain and France, have persistently denied arming Syria's jihadist rebels fighting to bring down the Russian and Iranian-backed government of President Bashar Assad.

Former President George W. Bush actively considered invading Syria around 2008 in collusion with Israel. But the Israelis then pointed out that there were no Western-friendly groups to replace Assad, only extreme militant Sunni Muslim groups. Even the usually reckless Bush called off the invasion of Syria.

By contrast, Barack Obama gave a green light to the CIA to arm, train and logistically support anti-Assad jihadist rebels in Syria. Arms poured in from Lebanon and, later, Turkey, paid for by Saudi Arabia and the Gulf emirates. Small numbers of US, British and French advisors went to Syria to teach the jihadists how to use mortars, explosives, and anti-tank weapons. The media's claim that the fighting in Syria was due to a spontaneous popular uprising was false. The repressive Assad government was widely unpopular but the uprising was another CIA 'color-style' operation.

The object of this operation was to overthrow President Assad and his Shiite-leaning regime, which was supported by Iran, a bogeyman to all the US-backed feudal Arab oil monarchies. Syria was also to be punished because it refused Washington's demands to sever ties with Iran and accept US tutelage.

Then US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton championed the covert war against Syria, arranging massive shipments of arms and munitions to the rebels from Kadaffi-era arms stores in Libya, and from Egypt, Croatia, likely Serbia, Bulgaria and Azerbaijan. Once again, the Gulf Arabs paid the bill.

The offensive against Syria was accompanied by a powerful barrage of anti-Assad propaganda from the US and British media. From the background, Israel and its partisans beat the war drum against the Assad government.

The result of the western-engendered carnage in Syria was horrendous: at least 475,000 dead, 5 million Syrian refugees driven into exile in neighboring states (Turkey alone hosts three million), and another 6 million internally displaced. That is, some 11 million Syrians, or 61% of the population, driven from their homes into wretched living conditions and near famine.

Two of Syria's greatest and oldest cities, Damascus and Aleppo, have been pounded into ruins. Jihadist massacres and Russian and American air strikes have ravaged once beautiful, relatively prosperous Syria. Its ancient Christian peoples are fleeing for their lives before US and Saudi takfiri religious fanatics.

Just when it appeared the jihadists were closing in on Damascus, limited but effective Russian military intervention abruptly changed the course of the war. The Syrian Army was able to regain the military initiative and push back the jihadists. Intermixed with so-called 'takfiri' rebels are some 3,000 ISIS jihadists who were originally armed and equipped by US advisors but have now run amok. They are under fierce western air attack in Syria and Iraq and are splintering.

Russia and the US have been inching toward a major war over Syria. In fact, US intervention has been far more extensive than generally believed, as this writer has been reporting for the past five years. Turkish media linked to the government in Ankara has just revealed that the US has at least ten small military bases in northern Syria being used to support rebel jihadist forces.

Randal > , July 22, 2017 at 8:58 pm GMT

But this week a light flashed at the end of the tunnel.

President Trump, according to numerous reliable Washington sources, has decided to end US arms supplies and logistics support to Syria's jihadist rebels that have fuelled the bloody six-year conflict.

That's fine, but the problem is that Trump's track record so far makes it impossible to give him unalloyed credit for this. At the moment it has to be counted as just another "up" moment in the rollercoaster ride that has been the Trump presidency so far. Will it foreshadow further moves towards sanity in foreign policy? Or will it just be followed by another literally stupid lurch back to the neocon-driven norm?

Looked at optimistically, you can read it as a sign that the underlying sensibleness of the patriotic "America first" noninterventionist approach (as opposed to the usual Israel/Saudi first, or US-uber-alles militarism, or "humanitarian interventionism" approach) is finally prevailing, or at least as a sign of a reduction in the US regime drive towards direct confrontation of Russia.

But looked at pessimistically, it's just an admission of the already obvious failure of one particular interventionist approach and its termination in favour of alternative approaches to the same ends, which will be followed by some idiocy such as another childish murder of Syrian conscripts when Trump is shown some more emotionally manipulative photographs.

Time will tell.

SND > , July 23, 2017 at 4:28 am GMT

Former President George W. Bush actively considered invading Syria around 2008 in collusion with Israel. But the Israelis then pointed out that there were no Western-friendly groups to replace Assad, only extreme militant Sunni Muslim groups. Even the usually reckless Bush called off the invasion of Syria.

You mean the Israeli government's desire that the US fragment Middle Eastern Arab states for Israel's hegemonic purposes is actually a concern for "Western-friendly groups?" And the repeated Israeli statements that "ISIS would be better than Assad" means they totally changed their mind since Bush days? Something doesn't smell quite right here.

WorkingClass > , July 23, 2017 at 4:29 am GMT

President Trump, according to numerous reliable Washington sources, has decided to end US arms supplies and logistics support to Syria's jihadist rebels that have fueled the bloody six-year conflict.

Trump has decided. Perhaps. But do the CIA and/or Pentagon really care what Trump decides?

Thank you for this concise summation of Imperial Washington's war against Syria.

jilles dykstra > , July 23, 2017 at 6:25 am GMT

The great thing resulting from the election of Trump is that it made quite clear how undemocratic the USA is, and how Israel influences, tries to determine, USA foreign policy.
Trump and Putin agree on a partial cease fire in Syria, who objects ?: Netanyahu.
What media continue accusing Trump on collusion with the enemy, Russia ?
CNN, Washpost and NYT.
I hope Trump survives the Cold Civil War.
Kennedy did not.

Ace > , July 23, 2017 at 8:47 am GMT

@Randal


But this week a light flashed at the end of the tunnel.

President Trump, according to numerous reliable Washington sources, has decided to end US arms supplies and logistics support to Syria's jihadist rebels that have fuelled the bloody six-year conflict.

That's fine, but the problem is that Trump's track record so far makes it impossible to give him unalloyed credit for this. At the moment it has to be counted as just another "up" moment in the rollercoaster ride that has been the Trump presidency so far. Will it foreshadow further moves towards sanity in foreign policy? Or will it just be followed by another literally stupid lurch back to the neocon-driven norm?

Looked at optimistically, you can read it as a sign that the underlying sensibleness of the patriotic "America first" noninterventionist approach (as opposed to the usual Israel/Saudi first, or US-uber-alles militarism, or "humanitarian interventionism" approach) is finally prevailing, or at least as a sign of a reduction in the US regime drive towards direct confrontation of Russia.

But looked at pessimistically, it's just an admission of the already obvious failure of one particular interventionist approach and its termination in favour of alternative approaches to the same ends, which will be followed by some idiocy such as another childish murder of Syrian conscripts when Trump is shown some more emotionally manipulative photographs.

Time will tell. The goal of supporting the Kurds is still a priority, to advance Israel's fall back position of partition. It would prefer the chaos of a regime run by jihadi scum (not going to happen thanks to V. Putin) but either way we'll do Israel's bidding.

Mr. Margolis is must read for me but I wonder at his embrace of the "repressive," "unpopular" Assad regime view. I don't get that impression and it is certainly not the view of Eva Bartlett or Vanessa Beeley. The chemical weapons stuff is complete garbage as Margolis knows.

Miro23 > , July 23, 2017 at 9:01 am GMT

The result of the western-engendered carnage in Syria was horrendous: at least 475,000 dead, 5 million Syrian refugees driven into exile in neighboring states (Turkey alone hosts three million), and another 6 million internally displaced. That is, some 11 million Syrians, or 61% of the population, driven from their homes into wretched living conditions and near famine.

You can lay all this at the door of Israel, US Neo-cons and their Congressional and MSM collaborators + treasonous leaders like Hillary Clinton and John McCain. Same for the Iraq war (duck shoot) with its WMD lies and the MSM 9/11 trigger "Event".

The US as an Israeli colony is a disaster for the people of Iraq, Libya and Syria and it's also the worst news for the 98% of Gentiles in the US who have now lost their country to these Zionist freaks.

Greg Bacon > , Website July 23, 2017 at 9:08 am GMT

To claim that Israel got Bush the Mad to back off from invading Syria because they were concerned about moderate head choppers being the only ones who would fill the power vacuum is laughable.

Israel has supported these thugs many times with medical care, money, shelter in the stolen Golan and most importantly, their MSM buddies printing all those stories about how Assad must go.

Israel had been directing its colony, the formerly free USA, to bust up Syria and murder Assad and that we have been faithfully trying to do, but that damned Putin got in the way, so sic the MSM on him and his buddy Trump.

The illegal war against Syria is far from over, Israel is PO that Syria hasn't been destroyed and they will not take lightly some chump like Trump interfering with their plans.

Michael Kenny > , July 23, 2017 at 1:28 pm GMT

As so often, the weakness of the argument is obvious in the first sentence: "Many Americans voted for Donald Trump because he vowed to end the foreign conflicts in which the US had become entangled". I can't say I recall any such vow. Trump is a master of doubletalk. He says everything and the contrary of everything. Mr Margolis, and others, heard what they wanted to hear and believed what they wanted to believe. Quite simply, they fell into the trap Trump set for them. Even if Trump wasn't the most pro-Israel president in US history, the Israel Lobby is there to see that US foreign policy suits Israel's interests. Israel sees Iran as its principal enemy. Putin has snuggled up to Iran and is propping up Iran's "ally", Assad. Israel thus needs to get both Assad and Putin out of Syria. By failing to stand up to Putin in Ukraine, Obama allowed him to discredit the US as Europe's, and by extension, Israel's protector and to discredit NATO as the instrument of that protection. For obvious reasons of geography, there's no way the US can defend Israel without the use of bases in Europe. Thus, Trump has to restore US and NATO credibility and the only way to do that is to get Putin out of Ukraine and, ideally, out of power. The simplest way to do that is to fight him in Syria, where he's bogged down and cornered and cannot escape unless the US capitulates. Thus, arming or not arming this or that Syrian group is totally irrelevant. It just shows that the US can turn the heat up and down on Putin at will. I can't imagine, therefore, why US neocons would be "furious". The longer Putin is bogged down in Syria, the better. The last thing Trump needs is to have anything he does, whether in Syria or Ukraine, billed as a "retreat" in regard to Putin. That will simply inflame Russiagate.

DESERT FOX > , July 23, 2017 at 2:37 pm GMT

Trumps word means nothing, and he never said a thing about the pentagram ending their support of isis aka al ciada, so this is much ado about nothing, the Zionists want war and war they shall have until Zionist Israel destroys America.

Zionist Israel and the U.S. and Britain created isis aka al ciada and anyone who thinks they have given up on regime change and the greater Israel plan in the Mideast is sadly mistaken. America is under Zionist control.

Che Guava > , July 23, 2017 at 2:55 pm GMT

Russiagate, what a nonsensical concept. Constantly shifting narrative.

OMG, they hacked voting machines!

OMG, they hacked DNC servers!

OMG, someone talked to a Russian!

It is so stupid.

DaveE > , July 23, 2017 at 3:14 pm GMT

Could it be that Trump is waking up? In spite of all his bluster during the campaign, it's become obvious that Mr. Trump doesn't have the foggiest idea how government and politics actually works. It's just a LITTLE different than running a real-estate operation.

My opinion is that that Trump, being the very insecure egotist that he is, is beginning, just barely, to realize what people actually expect, not what the neocon con-artists and rigged "opinion polls" tell him the story is.

Is Trump, maybe, just kinda sorta maybe, waking up to slimeballs like his dirty little son-in-law he so fervently followed in the past?

Anyway, Trump has been scoring big lately with his chat with Putin and this kick to the neocons' sensitive area.

Let's all write the guy and tell him he's on the right track. I'm sure the "opinion polls" will tell him just the opposite, since they're nothing more than some Jew in an office in Brooklyn telling us what we believe.

Che Guava > , July 23, 2017 at 3:27 pm GMT

@Michael Kenny You are so clearly a harmful propagandist on so many levels that I need not to pointing it out.

I am knowing that you are to making one or two of good points at times, but only to draw to all of your lies and stupid assumptions.

Essentially, to making EU= NATO=zionism is the great thing to you, hate Russia is your cause.

Your 'Michael Kenny' is as much a pseudonym as mine. It is obvious. At least, when I am posting, it is from the heart of the person behind the pseudonym and of goodwill or to informing. Reading yours, it is very difficult to see any good intentions.

Many others here are to having critical faculties. They also will be seeing you for what you are, just a nasty and cheap propagandist, with posts that are always being too long.

Are you on some kind of 'net agent of influence programme? Sure is looking like it.

Joe Hide > , July 23, 2017 at 3:44 pm GMT

The evidence seems to support the view that an informational war, with some actual murders, is taking place within and between, the CIA, FBI, NSA, other U.S. agencies and institutions. Also this happened in Russia but as Putin survived and consolidated power, it's much less so now. It is probably happening in many countries. I have come to the conclusion that these "hidden wars" within seemingly unified groups is part and parcel of human nature. The bad guy deceivers normally have a huge advantage in that they become much more skilled at deceiving. Their great disadvantage is that they eventually go so obviously nuts that nobody believes them anymore!

Randal > , July 23, 2017 at 4:30 pm GMT

Their great disadvantage is that they eventually go so obviously nuts that nobody believes them anymore!

And yet John McCain and Lindsey Graham keep on getting re-elected, usually by huge margins.

Bruce Marshall > , July 23, 2017 at 4:37 pm GMT

Where is the "Special Prosecutor" on this?

Assange: 'CIA Not Only Armed Syria's Insurgents–It Paid Their Salaries'

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=57076

Father Coughlin > , July 23, 2017 at 4:59 pm GMT

Since the Resistance has relentlessly played the bogus Russia narrative to a point where it is hampering him from getting anything done (thus jeopardizing his reelection, if not some crazy impeachment attempt), Trump's only choice, according to Jiu-Jitsu, is to flip the script and make the Left the pro-War party.

Go!

Sean > , July 23, 2017 at 5:45 pm GMT

http://www.martin-van-creveld.com/disaster-area/
Some years ago I had the pleasure of coming across a book by the aged doyen of "oriental studies," Bernard Lewis. Titled What Went Wrong and first published in 2002, it tried to explain how and why the brilliant civilization of the Middle Ages had declined until, finally, it reached the point where the epithet "Arab" is positive only when applied to a horse.

Though I read it twice, I still do not know.

nsa > , July 23, 2017 at 7:33 pm GMT

Must be tough typing out a couple thousand word screed re the destruction of the ME without mentioning the vile jooies and their total domination of American foreign policy in the area. The US Knesset on the Potomac is now actually trying to pass a law outlawing any criticism of the bloodthirsty Izzies ..with very stiff fines for offenders. Need any more evidence?

Greg Bacon > , Website July 23, 2017 at 7:38 pm GMT

@Michael Kenny As so often, the weakness of the argument is obvious in the first sentence: "Many Americans voted for Donald Trump because he vowed to end the foreign conflicts in which the US had become entangled". I can't say I recall any such vow. Trump is a master of doubletalk. He says everything and the contrary of everything. Mr Margolis, and others, heard what they wanted to hear and believed what they wanted to believe. Quite simply, they fell into the trap Trump set for them. Even if Trump wasn't the most pro-Israel president in US history, the Israel Lobby is there to see that US foreign policy suits Israel's interests. Israel sees Iran as its principal enemy. Putin has snuggled up to Iran and is propping up Iran's "ally", Assad. Israel thus needs to get both Assad and Putin out of Syria. By failing to stand up to Putin in Ukraine, Obama allowed him to discredit the US as Europe's, and by extension, Israel's protector and to discredit NATO as the instrument of that protection. For obvious reasons of geography, there's no way the US can defend Israel without the use of bases in Europe. Thus, Trump has to restore US and NATO credibility and the only way to do that is to get Putin out of Ukraine and, ideally, out of power. The simplest way to do that is to fight him in Syria, where he's bogged down and cornered and cannot escape unless the US capitulates. Thus, arming or not arming this or that Syrian group is totally irrelevant. It just shows that the US can turn the heat up and down on Putin at will. I can't imagine, therefore, why US neocons would be "furious". The longer Putin is bogged down in Syria, the better. The last thing Trump needs is to have anything he does, whether in Syria or Ukraine, billed as a "retreat" in regard to Putin. That will simply inflame Russiagate. For obvious reasons of geography, there's no way the US can defend Israel without the use of bases in Europe.

Why should the USA defend Israel from its horrible choices, especially being an Apartheid nightmare?

Why should we defend a nation that has attacked our ships, bases and personnel numerous times?

Why should we defend a nation that has control of our economy thru their choke-hold on the FED and Treasury?

Why should we defend a nation that acts like a spoiled child anytime it doesn't get it's way and goes on murderous rampages against the world's biggest concentration camp, Gaza?

Why should we defend a nation that attacked us on 9/11, then had their MSM whores blame the Muslim world?

http://www.911history.de/aaannxyz_ch01_en.html

Art > , July 23, 2017 at 8:34 pm GMT

The illness of McCain will give the prospects for cooperation between the US and Russian a big boost.

Here is an interesting article on the subject.

Dismantling McCain's Disastrous Legacy Should Now Be Trump's Top Priority

By Tom Luongo

The Arizona senator's absence creates a unique opportunity for President Trump to alter the course of our foreign and domestic policy. From Iraq to Libya, Syria to Afghanistan and right up to Russia's borders in Ukraine, McCain's bloody paw prints are all over more than a decade of American foreign policy blunders.

http://freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=20873

exiled off mainstreet > , July 23, 2017 at 9:05 pm GMT

@Greg Bacon The attempted sinking of the USS Liberty in 1967 and the actions of the US government since reveal 50 years of the Israeli tail wagging the yankee dog. It is unprecedented in history for an auxilliary satellite state to so dominate the foreign policy actions of what should be the dominant power. Whether or not 9-11 was a conspiracy is interesting but not dispositive, since whatever its cause, whether or not intentionally planned or simply allowed to happen, as I suspect, the event was used as a Reichstag fire event by the yankee regime and its Israeli patrons to brush aside any remaining opposition to the neocon project. By the way, I am totally convinced that the anthrax attacks occurring in the wake of 9-11 were to secure this result.

annamaria > , July 23, 2017 at 9:36 pm GMT

@NoseytheDuke Who exactly is the US at war against in Syria and why is it going on?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-u-s-military-bases-in-syria-their-precise-location-is-known/5600527 " ten U.S. bases in the Syrian provinces of Al-Hasakah, Manbij and Raqqa, as well as in the areas of Harab-Isk and Rmeilan The source also reported on the number of the U.S. servicemen deployed at these bases."
Splendid. Illegally, on a territory of the sovereign state of Syria, without any permission from the Syrian government. http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-u-s-military-bases-in-syria-their-precise-location-is-known/5600527
But for the demonizers of Iran and apologists of Kievan junta, the US involvement in Syria is a clear case of bringing the "democracy on the march."

annamaria > , July 23, 2017 at 9:38 pm GMT

@WorkingClass


President Trump, according to numerous reliable Washington sources, has decided to end US arms supplies and logistics support to Syria's jihadist rebels that have fueled the bloody six-year conflict.
Trump has decided. Perhaps. But do the CIA and/or Pentagon really care what Trump decides?

Thank you for this concise summation of Imperial Washington's war against Syria. "But do the CIA and/or Pentagon really care what Trump decides?"
– You mean, the CIA and/or Pentagon will jump as high as the Lobby tell them to jump?

annamaria > , July 23, 2017 at 9:42 pm GMT

@Miro23 "The US as an Israeli colony is a disaster for the people of Iraq, Libya, and Syria "
Agree. A minor addition: The US as an Israeli colony is a disaster for the people of the US as well.

utu > , July 23, 2017 at 9:45 pm GMT

@Alden "in the 19th and early 20th century Jews wrote many of those books extolling the superiority of Muslim Jewish countries over us blue eyed barbarians"

Correct. But in the 2nd half of 20 c. the winds of history shifted with the creation of state of Israel and Jewish historians decided to write the history anew in which Muslims were not so good anymore. Father of Netanyahu was one of them.

Which Jewish historians do you want to believe?

annamaria > , July 23, 2017 at 9:47 pm GMT

@Greg Bacon "Israel had been directing its colony, the formerly free USA, to bust up Syria and murder Assad and that we have been faithfully trying to do, but that damned Putin got in the way "
This is why the Russain Federation has been suffering the relentless barrage of demonization and economic sanctions, and this why Americans have been suffering the stupidity of the ziocon-promoted Russiangate.

annamaria > , July 23, 2017 at 10:10 pm GMT

@DESERT FOX Trumps word means nothing, and he never said a thing about the pentagram ending their support of isis aka al ciada, so this is much ado about nothing, the Zionists want war and war they shall have until Zionist Israel destroys America.

Zionist Israel and the U.S. and Britain created isis aka al ciada and anyone who thinks they have given up on regime change and the greater Israel plan in the Mideast is sadly mistaken. America is under Zionist control. " the Zionists want war and war they shall have until Zionist Israel destroys America."

True. The Jewish communities of the EU/US, UK must decide – now – whether they are with western civilization or with the mythological and barbarous dream of Eretz Israel. The US, UK, and EU have been a safe harbor for the majority of Jewish people for the last 50 years. However, the Jewish Lobby is not satisfied with such trifles as the peaceful life and security and it wants Eretz Israel; PNAC (ziocons' manifest) has been used as an ideological guise.
There were certain sane Germans who tried to stop Hitler and thus to save Germany. Some of them paid for the attempts with their lives. Where are the Jewish communities of the US, UK, and EU to stop the lunatics, all these Friends of Israel and AIPAC, these pushers towards a worldwide catastrophe? See the ziocon plan in Ukraine, which made the lives of many Jews there intolerable (welcome, neo-Nazi). What is next – the rise of antisemitism in the tolerant (for now) Europe and US?
If MSM were the honest sources of information, the westerners would have seen already the thousands and thousands of little corpses, the victims of "humanitarian interventions" of NATO/US in Libya and Syria and would already demand to hang the main war profiteers /war criminals to prevent more carnage and more war-profiteering schems.
The ongoing wars in the Middle EAst are an integral part of Eretz Israel project. Give Israel its due.

annamaria > , July 23, 2017 at 10:15 pm GMT

@Che Guava You are so clearly a harmful propagandist on so many levels that I need not to pointing it out.

I am knowing that you are to making one or two of good points at times, but only to draw to all of your lies and stupid assumptions.

Essentially, to making EU= NATO=zionism is the great thing to you, hate Russia is your cause.

Your 'Michael Kenny' is as much a pseudonym as mine. It is obvious. At least, when I am posting, it is from the heart of the person behind the pseudonym and of goodwill or to informing. Reading yours, it is very difficult to see any good intentions.

Many others here are to having critical faculties. They also will be seeing you for what you are, just a nasty and cheap propagandist, with posts that are always being too long.

Are you on some kind of 'net agent of influence programme? Sure is looking like it. Agree

annamaria > , July 23, 2017 at 10:40 pm GMT

@Bruce Marshall This is great: "CIA not only armed Syria's insurgents -- it paid their salaries."
And who are these "insurgents" – the "moderate" jihadis affiliated with ISIS and Al Qaeda?
The supposedly "manly" CIA director Mike Pompeo comes out as a banal opportunist inclined to hysterics.
Pompeo, "No one has the right to engage in the theft of secrets from America!"
Assange, "What sort of America can be "taken down" by the truth?"

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-14/wikileaks-issues-response-cia-director-mike-pompeo

"Pompeo and David B. Rivkin Jr., a senior fellow at the neoconservative think-tank Foundation for Defense of Democracies, argued in an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal that "Legal and bureaucratic impediments to surveillance should be removed." Pompeo has also suggested that National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden should be executed."

https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/michael-f-brown/trumps-pro-torture-pro-israel-cia-chief

annamaria > , July 23, 2017 at 10:50 pm GMT

@Michael Kenny

"For obvious reasons of geography, there's no way the US can defend Israel without the use of bases in Europe."

For obvious reasons, the sooner the US disengages from Israel, the better for the whole world.

annamaria > , July 24, 2017 at 1:13 am GMT

Paul Craig Roberts and Stephen Lendman have a word for Pompeo:

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/07/23/trumps-appointees-worse-obamas/

ZeroHedge: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-23/five-weird-conspiracy-theories-cia-director-mike-pompeo "Mike Pompeo sounds increasingly unhinged when talking about Russia, Wikileaks and the media"

anon > , Disclaimer July 24, 2017 at 1:56 am GMT

Can he ????

Here is one of the many views of this unstable man–

How the Trump regime was manufactured by a war inside the Deep State. A systemic crisis in the global Deep System has driven the violent radicalization of a Deep State faction

By Nafeez Ahmed

https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/how-the-trump-regime-was-manufactured-by-a-war-inside-the-deep-state-f9e757071c70

anon > , Disclaimer July 24, 2017 at 2:02 am GMT

@annamaria http://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/21/tony-thomas-syria-secret-program-cia-240818

Top general confirms end to secret U.S. program in Syria ?

Special Operations commander walked back remarks that appeared to surprise the CIA ASPEN -- U.S. Special Operations Commander Tony Thomas confirmed Friday that the U.S. had ended its covert program aiding rebel groups fighting against Syrian President Bashar Assad, saying the decision was made after assessing the years-long operation's capabilities and by no means an effort to curry favor with Assad's chief backer, Moscow. The comments appeared to take the CIA, which declined to comment, by surprise.

Thomas almost immediately tried to walk back his comments after leaving the stage, telling reporters he hadn't confirmed anything and was referring only to "public reporting."

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/21/tony-thomas-syria-secret-program-cia-240818

anonymous > , Disclaimer July 24, 2017 at 2:11 am GMT

@jilles dykstra It won't come to that right away. But it will come to that if Trump does not ultimately keep the pressure on the Assad regime, and if he ignores all the drumbeats (and survives the "impeachment").

annamaria > , July 24, 2017 at 2:51 am GMT

@anon Thank you for the interesting post.

Here is a transcript of an interview with S. Lavrov (Russian foreign minister), which should provide a lot of educational moments for the US Congresspeople and WH press corps (known as the presstitute corps): http://www.mid.ru/en/press_service/video/-/asset_publisher/i6t41cq3VWP6/content/id/2821758

Try to compare Lavrov with a typical US legislator, for example, with Maxine Waters, John McCain, and Chuck Schumer, who represent three main subgroups in the US Congress. The decades of "unnatural selection" in the US government have produced a collection of intellectual and moral pygmies, unfortunately.

Lavrov has some pretty direct and well-deserved words for Obama. Thus, Lavrov compares Obama to a small kid unable to comprehend the responsibilities of his position of a President of the US.

dorkimundo > , July 24, 2017 at 11:52 am GMT

It it time for the Syrian "Madman' to order another sarin gas attack against the innocent children?

annamaria > , July 24, 2017 at 1:25 pm GMT

@dorkimundo It is so easy to spot a ziocon thirsty for the US resources, who is eager to see the US to waste the US limb&blood for the barbarious dream of Eretz Israel

annamaria > , July 24, 2017 at 1:26 pm GMT

@dorkimundo There are hundreds of thousands of innocent children that perished because of the ziocon project in the Middle East

annamaria > , July 24, 2017 at 1:37 pm GMT

@anon " dysfunctional Arab country."
It is fun to observe how Israelis of Soviet extraction feel superior to other Israelis and to everybody else. Check the level of "democracy, respect for women, free speech or press" in Afghanistan in the 80-s and compare the facts with the disaster brought upon Afghani women by US warriors.

Your bloodthirsty ideologues of Eretz Israel dream nothing more than creating the dysfunctional Arab countries next to Israel (see Oded Yinon plan); hence the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians of all ages in the Middle East.

After this holocaust of Arabs, which was designed and promoted by Israelis and Israel-firsters in the US, your apartheid state of Israel will never recover morally. You are doomed.

[Jul 28, 2017] The Syrian army were standing up to Isis long before the Americans ever fired a missile

Jul 28, 2017 | independent.co.uk

Temporarily Sane | Jul 27, 2017 5:02:23 PM | 119

Fisk is on fire this week...

The Syrian army were standing up to Isis long before the Americans ever fired a missile

ABC News (US) refers to the SDF as "Syrian forces"; the SAA gets no mention whatsoever.

The entire Western media cabal is milking the "chicks with guns" angle for all it is worth and going by their stories nobody was fighting ISIS until the US cobbled together its SDF proxy army.

The only outfit not playing stenographer to the regime change crowd is Channel 4 who have a crew on the ground in Syria.

But even they inject DoS/Atlantic Council talking points about the "Assad regime" into their reports.

[Jul 27, 2017] Propaganda Techniques of Empire by James Petras

Notable quotes:
"... A common technique, practiced by the imperial publicists, is to accuse the victims of the same crimes, which had been committed against them. The well documented, deliberate and sustained US-EU aerial bombardment of Syrian government soldiers, engaged in operations against ISIS-terrorist, resulted in the deaths and maiming of almost 200 Syrian troops and allowed ISIS-mercenaries to overrun their camp. In an attempt to deflect the Pentagon's role in providing air cover for the very terrorists it claims to oppose, the propaganda organs cranked out lurid, but unsubstantiated, stories of an aerial attack on a UN humanitarian aid convoy, first blamed on the Syrian government and then on the Russians. ..."
Jul 27, 2017 | www.unz.com

Introduction:

Washington's quest for perpetual world power is underwritten by systematic and perpetual propaganda wars. Every major and minor war has been preceded, accompanied and followed by unremitting government propaganda designed to secure public approval, exploit victims, slander critics, dehumanize targeted adversaries and justify its allies' collaboration.

In this paper we will discuss the most common recent techniques used to support ongoing imperial wars.

Role Reversal

A common technique, practiced by the imperial publicists, is to accuse the victims of the same crimes, which had been committed against them. The well documented, deliberate and sustained US-EU aerial bombardment of Syrian government soldiers, engaged in operations against ISIS-terrorist, resulted in the deaths and maiming of almost 200 Syrian troops and allowed ISIS-mercenaries to overrun their camp. In an attempt to deflect the Pentagon's role in providing air cover for the very terrorists it claims to oppose, the propaganda organs cranked out lurid, but unsubstantiated, stories of an aerial attack on a UN humanitarian aid convoy, first blamed on the Syrian government and then on the Russians. The evidence that the attack was most likely a ground-based rocket attack by ISIS terrorists did not deter the propaganda mills. This technique would turn US and European attention away from the documented criminal attack by the imperial bombers and present the victimized Syrian troops and pilots as international human rights criminals.

Hysterical Rants

Faced with world opprobrium for its wanton violation of an international ceasefire agreement in Syria, the imperial public spokespeople frequently resort to irrational outbursts at international meetings in order to intimidate wavering allies into silence and shut down any chance for reasonable debate resolving concrete issues among adversaries.

The current 'US Ranter-in-Chief' in the United Nations, is Ambassador Samantha Power, who launched a vitriolic diatribe against the Russians in order to sabotage a proposed General Assembly debate on the US deliberate violation (its criminal attack on Syrian troops) of the recent Syrian ceasefire. Instead of a reasonable debate among serious diplomats, the rant served to derail the proceedings.

Identity Politics to Neutralize Anti-Imperialist Movements

Empire is commonly identified with the race, gender, religion and ethnicity of its practioners. Imperial propagandists have frequently resorted to disarming and weakening anti-imperialist movements by co-opting and corrupting black, ethnic minority and women leaders and spokespeople. The use of such 'symbolic' tokens is based on the assumption that these are 'representatives' reflecting the true interests of so-called 'marginalized minorities' and can therefore presume to 'speak for the oppressed peoples of the world'. The promotion of such compliant and respectable 'minority members' to the elite is then propagandized as a 'revolutionary', world liberating historical event – witness the 'election' of US President Barack Obama.

The rise of Obama to the presidency in 2008 illustrates how the imperial propagandists have used identity politics to undermine class and anti-imperialist struggles.

Under Obama's historical black presidency, the US pursued seven wars against 'people of color' in South Asia, the Middle East and North Africa. Over a million men and women of sub-Saharan black origin, whether Libyan citizens or contract workers for neighboring countries, were killed, dispossessed and driven into exile by US allies after the US-EU destroyed the Libyan state – in the name of humanitarian intervention. Hundreds of thousands of Arabs have been bombed in Yemen, Syria and Iraq under President Obama, the so-called 'historic black' president. Obama's 'predator drones' have killed hundreds of Afghan and Pakistani villagers. Such is the power of 'identity politics' that ignominious Obama was awarded the 'Nobel Peace Prize'.

Meanwhile, in the United States under Obama, racial inequalities between black and white workers (wages, unemployment, access to housing, health and educational services) have widened. Police violence against blacks intensified with total impunity for 'killer cops'. Over two million immigrant Latino workers have been expelled – breaking up hundreds of thousands of families– and accompanied by a marked increase of repression compared to earlier administrations. Millions of black and white workers' home mortgages were foreclosed while all of the corrupt banks were bailed out – at a greater rate than had occurred under white presidents.

This blatant, cynical manipulation of identity politics facilitated the continuation and deepening of imperial wars, class exploitation and racial exclusion. Symbolic representation undermined class struggles for genuine changes.

Past Suffering to Justify Contemporary Exploitation

Imperial propagandists repeatedly evoke the victims and abuses of the past in order to justify their own aggressive imperial interventions and support for the 'land grabs' and ethnic cleansing committed by their colonial allies – like Israel, among others. The victims and crimes of the past are presented as a perpetual presence to justify ongoing brutalities against contemporary subject people.

The case of US-Israeli colonization of Palestine clearly illustrates how rabid criminality, pillage, ethnic cleansing and self-enrichment can be justified and glorified through the language of past victimization. Propagandists in the US and Israel have created 'the cult of the Holocaust', worshiping a near century-old Nazi crime against Jews (as well as captive Slavs, Gypsies and other minorities) in Europe, to justify the bloody conquest and theft of Arab lands and sovereignty and engage in systematic military assaults against Lebanon and Syria. Millions of Muslim and Christian Palestinians have been driven into perpetual exile. Elite, wealthy, well-organized and influential zionist Jews, with primary fealty to Israel, have successfully sabotaged every contemporary struggle for peace in the Middle East and have created real barriers for social democracy in the US through their promotion of militarism and empire building. Those claiming to represent victims of the past have become among the most oppressive of contemporary elites. Using the language of 'defense', they promote aggressive forms of expansion and pillage. They claim their monopoly on historic 'suffering' has given them a 'special dispensation' from the rules of civilized conduct: their cult of the Holocaust allows them to inflict immense pain on others while silencing any criticism with the accusation of 'anti-Semitism' and relentlessly punishing critics. Their key role in imperial propaganda warfare is based on their claims of an exclusive franchise on suffering and immunity from the norms of justice.

Entertainment Spectacles on Military Platforms

Entertainment spectacles glorify militarism. Imperial propagandists link the public to unpopular wars promoted by otherwise discredited leaders. Sports events present soldiers dressed up as war heroes with deafening, emotional displays of 'flag worship' to celebrate the ongoing overseas wars of aggression. These mind-numbing extravaganzas with crude elements of religiosity demand choreographed expressions of national allegiance from the spectators as a cover for continued war crimes abroad and the destruction of citizens' economic rights at home.

Much admired, multi-millionaire musicians and entertainers of all races and orientations, present war to the masses with a humanitarian facade. The entertainers smiling faces serve genocide just as powerfully as the President's benign and friendly face accompanies his embrace of militarism. The propagandist message for the spectator is that 'your favorite team or singer is there just for you because our noble wars and valiant warriors have made you free and now they want you to be entertained.'

The old style of blatant bellicose appeals to the public is obsolete: the new propaganda conflates entertainment with militarism, allowing the ruling elite to secure tacit support for its wars without disturbing the spectators' experience.

Conclusion

Do the Imperial Techniques of Propaganda Work?

How effective are the modern imperial propaganda techniques? The results seem to be mixed. In recent months, elite black athletes have begun protesting white racism by challenging the requirement for choreographed displays of flag worship. . . opening public controversy into the larger issues of police brutality and sustained marginalization. Identity politics, which led to the election of Obama, may be giving way to issues of class struggle, racial justice, anti-militarism and the impact of continued imperial wars. Hysterical rants may still secure international attention, but repeated performances begin to lose their impact and subject the 'ranter' to ridicule.

The cult of victimology has become less a rationale for the multi-billion dollar US-tribute to Israel, than the overwhelming political and economic influence and thuggery of billionaire Zionist fundraisers who demand US politicians' support for the state of Israel.

Brandishing identify politics may have worked the first few times, but inevitably black, Latino, immigrant and all exploited workers, all underpaid and overworked women and mothers reject the empty symbolic gestures and demand substantive socio-economic changes – and here they find common links with the majority of exploited white workers.

In other words, the existing propaganda techniques are losing their edge – the corporate media news is seen as a sham. Who follows the actor-soldiers and flag-worshipers once the game has begun?

The propagandists of empire are desperate for a new line to grab public attention and obedience. Could the recent domestic terror bombings in New York and New Jersey provoke mass hysteria and more militarization? Could they serve as cover for more wars abroad . . .?

A recent survey, published in Military Times, reported that the vast majority of active US soldiers oppose more imperial wars. They are calling for defense at home and social justice. Soldiers and veterans have even formed groups to support the protesting black athletes who have refused to participate in flag worship while unarmed black men are being killed by police in the streets. Despite the multi-billion dollar electoral propaganda, over sixty percent of the electorate reject both major party candidates. The reality principle has finally started to undermine State propaganda! (Republished from The James Petras Website by permission of author or representative)

[Jul 26, 2017] The Bulgarian revelations about the existence of a vast arms traffic to syriamilitanst set up by General David Petraeu

Jul 25, 2017 | www.unz.com

annamaria > , July 25, 2017 at 2:45 pm GMT

"The appearance of a new alliance in the Greater Middle East," by Thierry Meyssan, http://www.voltairenet.org/article197244.html
"The lying insinuations of the Washington Post were adopted by the whole of the Western Press.

Perhaps this is due to the gregarious spirit of Western journalists, but perhaps – more probably – it demonstrates that the major medias are owned by the partisans of war in the Middle East and against Russia.

The Bulgarian revelations about the existence of a vast arms traffic [to ISIS/Al Qaeda' "freedom fighters"] set up by General David Petraeus when he was still Director of the CIA, in 2012, and continued by him from his offices at the financial investment fund KKR, leave one stunned at the power of these war-makers.

At least 17 states participated in operation " Timber Sycamore ", in which Azerbaïdjan took care of the transport of 28,000 tons of weapons and Israël supplied false documents concerning their final destination.

In all likelihood, David Petraeus and KKR were helped by the Assistant Secretary General of the UNO, Jeffrey Feltman. Of course, this gigantic traffic, without precedent in History in terms of its volume, will lead to no legal action, neither in the states concerned, nor on the international stage."

"Billions of dollars' worth of arms against Syria:" http://www.voltairenet.org/article197144.html

[Jul 25, 2017] Often overlooked the story of the anti-soviet Afghan war is the fact that the insurgency was pan-Islamic: there were eight Shi'i groups, trained and funded by Iran

Notable quotes:
"... The fact is that the young Shah was not an "autocrat" before 1953. Per his own claims he was watchful of the chaotic events in Iran but did not wish to overstep the constitutional bounds placed on the monarchy. ..."
"... It is good to read others confirmation of my understanding about the sick tenets of our form of social organization.....private money and ongoing private ownership of property maintained by unfettered inheritance......It is not people that need to be eliminated but the tools that they use to exert power and control over the rest of us. ..."
"... It is of critical importance for the Resistance to respect the integrity of the language you use to think and reason about the world. ..."
"... Political Islam was and is supported by US geopolitical rationale . ..."
"... Often overlooked in retelling the story of this particular Afghan war is the fact that the insurgency was pan-Islamic: there were eight Shi'i groups, trained and funded by Iran. ..."
"... About those "bizarre political fights." It sounds a lot like divide and conquer with all the fighters on the losing end expending themselves and resources while one group gets rich in the meantime. ..."
"... US MSM does not discuss the debt or what it really means or how to address it. During the Geithner/Bernanke protect the Fed tour, Geithner said it was most important that the US keep paying interest on the debt with no mention of paying the debt itself. ..."
"... took some time to dig up but, as noted earlier, any effort at industrialization by the Pahlavi Kings, was always viewed as a threat by the West. It was Reza Shah that built the first Iranian Railroad ..."
Jul 25, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

nobody | Jul 23, 2017 8:02:08 AM | 64

Posted by: somebody | Jul 23, 2017 6:40:48 AM | 63

" ... to restore the Shah's autocracy ..."

I'll get back to you on your OP but just wanted to note that little bit of misinformation from your first source.

The fact is that the young Shah was not an "autocrat" before 1953. Per his own claims he was watchful of the chaotic events in Iran but did not wish to overstep the constitutional bounds placed on the monarchy. Per other critical points of view, he was a playboy king who neglected his duties and was doing the Riviera chacha and living up the La Dolce Vita scene. A middle of the road view would summize that there was some truth to both points of view, but would add that he was in no position to assume "autocratic" rule.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/autocrat

--

It is good to read others confirmation of my understanding about the sick tenets of our form of social organization.....private money and ongoing private ownership of property maintained by unfettered inheritance......It is not people that need to be eliminated but the tools that they use to exert power and control over the rest of us.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Jul 22, 2017 7:35:30 PM | 58

---

It is of critical importance for the Resistance to respect the integrity of the language you use to think and reason about the world.

somebody | Jul 23, 2017 9:29:18 AM | 65
64) It does not matter how small or great the Shah was, monarchy is not a viable option for modern governance.

Political Islam was and is supported by US geopolitical rationale .

Often overlooked in retelling the story of this particular Afghan war is the fact that the insurgency was pan-Islamic: there were eight Shi'i groups, trained and funded by Iran.
Curtis | Jul 23, 2017 9:42:27 AM | 66
nobody 50
About those "bizarre political fights." It sounds a lot like divide and conquer with all the fighters on the losing end expending themselves and resources while one group gets rich in the meantime.

US MSM does not discuss the debt or what it really means or how to address it. During the Geithner/Bernanke protect the Fed tour, Geithner said it was most important that the US keep paying interest on the debt with no mention of paying the debt itself.

Curtis | Jul 23, 2017 9:51:59 AM | 67
nobody 61
Thanks for that link/story. I lived there from 70 to 72 as a young boy. Modernization vs the islamists vs student protests was going on. Even now there is a virtual divide of the capital north and south. My brother climbed Tochal (Tehran) and wanted to climb Demavand. During any religious holidy we were told to keep a very low profile and my father told me to avoid buildings with the black flag (with arabic writing) hanging. Shahanshah did good in spite of himself.
Peter AU. | Jul 23, 2017 10:03:12 AM | 68
took some time to dig up but, as noted earlier, any effort at industrialization by the Pahlavi Kings, was always viewed as a threat by the West. It was Reza Shah that built the first Iranian Railroad : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Iranian_Railway and http://www.k-en.com/gonagon/National_Geography_April_1921.pdf
Curtis | Jul 23, 2017 10:55:39 AM | 69
My family once traveled the route from Tehran to the Caspian that ran along the rail route for a while. Desert east of Tehran but once in the mountains it's very lush and green. There are lots of tunnels and switchbacks along the rail route: Veresk Bridge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veresk_Bridge Austrian designed the bridge. But Germany was partners in the rail effort. The wiki version of the legend says the engineers were under the bridge for the first crossing. The legend we heard was that they rode the train across to prove its sturdiness.

[Jul 25, 2017] Thomas acknowledged that American forces are fighting in a sovereign Syria, where they will likely have no ability to stay if that presence is questioned in terms of international law. Although Im sure that the State Department/Pentagon lawyers are looking for a reason to stay.

Jul 23, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

ghostship | Jul 23, 2017 6:03:50 AM | 62

OMG. the Washington Borg's house newspaper has woken up to Trump's surrender to Putin on Syria.
Trump's breathtaking surrender to Russia

But once again, President Trump, after extended personal contact with Vladimir Putin and the complete surrender to Russian interests in Syria, acts precisely as though he has been bought and sold by a strategic rival. The ignoble cutoff of aid to American proxies means that "Putin won in Syria," as an administration official was quoted by The Post.

Concessions without reciprocation, made against the better judgment of foreign policy advisers, smack more of payoff than outreach. If this is what Trump's version of "winning" looks like, what might further victory entail? The re- creation of the Warsaw Pact? The reversion of Alaska to Russian control?

Although this opinion article was posted a couple of days ago, there been no shitstorm near Trump about it since suggesting that Trump's one-man distraction/disinformation smokescreen is firing successfully on all cylinders.

Meanwhile, some in the US Army at least understand that once the battle to liquidate the ISIS Caliphate is other, they'll have problems remaining in Syria .

'We're bad day away from Russians asking, 'Why are you still in Syria?' – top US commander

A US special operations commander has admitted that an extended US stay in Syria runs contrary to international law and that Russia would be entirely justified in questioning its presence there.

At the Aspen Security Forum on Friday, Special Operations Command chief Army General, Raymond Thomas was asked whether American forces will remain in Syria, after Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) is defeated, possibly, to support the Kurdish forces in the north of the country.

Thomas acknowledged that American forces are fighting in a sovereign Syria, where they will likely "have no ability to stay" if that presence is questioned "in terms of international law," Thomas said, replying to the Washington Post journalist's question.


Although I'm sure that the State Department/Pentagon lawyers are looking for a reason to stay.

[Jul 25, 2017] Whether or not the arming and financing of ISIS groups was "accidental" or "deliberate" remains something of an open question; most likely the actual US policy from 2011-2012 onwards was to give support to anyone trying to overthrow Assad's government regardless of affiliation.

Notable quotes:
"... "The team has carried out painstaking research cataloging serial numbers and tracing the routes. They found crates of ammunition and rockets manufactured in factories in eastern Europe. These were bought by the governments of the US and Saudi Arabia." ..."
"... The architects of this plan? Clinton & McCain seem to be right at the center of it, with plenty of neocon/neolib supporters in Congress & the State Department/CIA/Pentagon (Nuland/Morrell/Carter etc.) ..."
Jul 25, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

nonsense factory | Jul 21, 2017 1:54:32 PM | 11

BBC News has a great little expose on tracking ISIS weapons captured in Mosul to their sources in Eastern Europe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8bwCj3lfsg
"The team has carried out painstaking research cataloging serial numbers and tracing the routes. They found crates of ammunition and rockets manufactured in factories in eastern Europe. These were bought by the governments of the US and Saudi Arabia."
Whether or not the arming and financing of ISIS groups was "accidental" or "deliberate" remains something of an open question; most likely the actual US policy from c.2011-2012 onwards was to give support to anyone trying to overthrow Assad's government regardless of affiliation.

The architects of this plan? Clinton & McCain seem to be right at the center of it, with plenty of neocon/neolib supporters in Congress & the State Department/CIA/Pentagon (Nuland/Morrell/Carter etc.)

[Jul 25, 2017] Pat Buchanan

Notable quotes:
"... "The result of the western-engendered carnage in Syria was horrendous: at least 475,000 dead, 5 million Syrian refugees driven into exile in neighboring states (Turkey alone hosts three million), and another 6 million internally displaced. 11 million Syrians driven from their homes into wretched living conditions and near famine. ..."
"... Surely Pat means 'Israel's wars' fought & paid for by the US taxpayers. ..."
"... All immoral wars eventually end in internal decomposition , rotting away from within and in erosion of standing abroad . The doubt starts creeping in . Monolithic environment of majoritian consensus among the general public wears thin . Afghanistan war shows how disorganized thinking has become . Was it moral? Was it legal? One thing is sure that the question raised by perfectionist and constitutionalist and international lawyers was not answered by NATO or US. ..."
"... UNSC approval is necessary to make a war of choice just, but not alone sufficient. However, it does at least make a war legal. ..."
"... How many U.S. wars or military actions can honestly be called a war of defense?? I wonder how many Americans, who've engaged in this most grave offense to God, think their actions were perfectly acceptable, even noble ("thank you for your service")?? ..."
"... Absolutely not. A just and moral war is the one that is fought in defense of one's country. No American war, since the American revolution, has been moral or just. A hero is a person who gives his life defending his country. None of the Americans who died in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria died defending their country. They died destroying other countries. None of those countries was a threat to or had threatened this country. ..."
"... The Defense Department should again be called War Department since it is only good at waging wars on other countries. It can't even defend the Pentagon against a lone airplane (even accepting the official narrative about 9/11). ..."
"... The destruction and slaughter in Syria has one purpose: to create an Israeli client state and colony, probably to be initialized as an Israeli "protectorate". ..."
"... The reason the American (((media))) carry a bogus hue-and-cry against all things Russian is because Russian installations in Syria are proving difficult for Tel Aviv to expunge. Yahweh's would-be feudal lords grow impatient; the slippered foot stomps with growing demands that American peasants pay for more American mercenaries to carry out Israel's demands for wealth, power, and territory. ..."
Jul 25, 2017 | www.unz.com

"One knowledgeable official estimates that the CIA-backed fighters may have killed or wounded 100,000 Syrian soldiers and their allies," writes columnist David Ignatius.

Given that Syria's prewar population was not 10 percent of ours, this is the equivalent of a million dead and wounded Americans. What justifies America's participation in this slaughter?

Columnist Eric Margolis summarizes the successes of the six-year civil war to overthrow President Bashar Assad.

"The result of the western-engendered carnage in Syria was horrendous: at least 475,000 dead, 5 million Syrian refugees driven into exile in neighboring states (Turkey alone hosts three million), and another 6 million internally displaced. 11 million Syrians driven from their homes into wretched living conditions and near famine.

"Two of Syria's greatest and oldest cities, Damascus and Aleppo, have been pounded into ruins. Jihadist massacres and Russian and American air strikes have ravaged once beautiful, relatively prosperous Syria. Its ancient Christian peoples are fleeing for their lives before US and Saudi takfiri religious fanatics."

Realizing the futility of U.S. policy, President Trump is cutting aid to the rebels. And the War Party is beside itself. Says The Wall Street Journal:

"The only way to reach an acceptable diplomatic solution is if Iran and Russia feel they are paying too high a price for their Syria sojourn. This means more support for Mr. Assad's enemies, not cutting them off without notice. And it means building up a Middle East coalition willing to fight Islamic State and resist Iran. The U.S. should also consider enforcing 'safe zones' in Syria for anti-Assad forces."

Yet, fighting ISIS and al-Qaida in Syria, while bleeding the Assad-Iran-Russia-Hezbollah victors, is a formula for endless war and unending terrors visited upon the Syrian people.

What injury did the Assad regime, in power for half a century and having never attacked us, inflict to justify what we have helped to do to that country?

Is this war moral by our own standards?

We overthrew Saddam Hussein in 2003 and Moammar Gadhafi in 2012. Yet, the fighting, killing and dying in both countries have not ceased. Estimates of the Iraq civilian and military dead run into the hundreds of thousands.

Still, the worst humanitarian disaster may be unfolding in Yemen.

After the Houthis overthrew the Saudi-backed regime and took over the country, the Saudis in 2015 persuaded the United States to support its air strikes, invasion and blockade.

By January 2016, the U.N. estimated a Yemeni civilian death toll of 10,000, with 40,000 wounded. However, the blockade of Yemen, which imports 90 percent of its food, has caused a crisis of malnutrition and impending famine that threatens millions of the poorest people in the Arab world with starvation.

No matter how objectionable we found these dictators, what vital interests of ours were so imperiled by the continued rule of Saddam, Assad, Gadhafi and the Houthis that they would justify what we have done to the peoples of those countries?

"They make a desert and call it peace," Calgacus said of the Romans he fought in the first century. Will that be our epitaph?

Among the principles for a just war, it must be waged as a last resort, to address a wrong suffered, and by a legitimate authority. Deaths of civilians are justified only if they are unavoidable victims of a deliberate attack on a military target.

The wars in Syria, Libya and Yemen were never authorized by Congress. The civilian dead, wounded and uprooted in Syria, and the malnourished millions in Yemen, represent a moral cost that seems far beyond any proportional moral gain from those conflicts.

In which of the countries we have attacked or invaded in this century -- Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen -- are the people better off than they were before we came?

And we wonder why they hate us.

"Those to whom evil is done/Do evil in return," wrote W. H. Auden in "September 1, 1939." As the peoples of Syria and the other broken and bleeding countries of the Middle East flee to Europe and America, will not some come with revenge on their minds and hatred in their hearts?

Meanwhile, as the Americans bomb across the Middle East, China rises. She began the century with a GDP smaller than Italy's and now has an economy that rivals our own.

She has become the world's first manufacturing power, laid claim to the islands of the East and South China seas, and told America to keep her warships out of the Taiwan Strait.

Xi Jinping has launched a "One Belt, One Road" policy to finance trade ports and depots alongside the military and naval bases being established in Central and South Asia.

Meanwhile, the Americans, $20 trillion in debt, running $800 billion trade deficits, unable to fix their health care system, reform their tax code, or fund an infrastructure program, prepare to fight new Middle East war.

Whom the Gods would destroy...

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, "Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever."

Copyright 2017 Creators.com.

WorkingClass > , July 25, 2017 at 5:21 am GMT

Imperial Washington is in the service of evil.

Wally > , July 25, 2017 at 7:07 am GMT

Surely Pat means 'Israel's wars' fought & paid for by the US taxpayers.

Renoman > , July 25, 2017 at 8:43 am GMT

Nothing just or moral about it. The entire World thinks America is just a gang of thugs, they should get out and stay out, let Israel fight it's own bully wars on it's own for a change.

KA > , July 25, 2017 at 10:40 am GMT

No not by any stretch of imagination. All immoral wars eventually end in internal decomposition , rotting away from within and in erosion of standing abroad . The doubt starts creeping in . Monolithic environment of majoritian consensus among the general public wears thin .
Afghanistan war shows how disorganized thinking has become . Was it moral? Was it legal? One thing is sure that the question raised by perfectionist and constitutionalist and international lawyers was not answered by NATO or US.

Power and sense of righteous entitlement or belief in divine guidance put America right where Soviet was in 1979. Ideology of Soviet blinded them to adjust, reload and advance . Dismissive attitude to local mores, values, and history paved the stage with failures .

Today America is looking at mirror and is seeing Soviet with uncanny resemblance both within and outside – domestic and foreign .

This article from Politico doesn't point to a result different from what awaited Soviet 's fate in
Afghanistan!- http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/07/24/donald-trump-afghanistan-215412

Truth, morality, and the final outcome are all tied and bound up together despite each of them belonging to different spheres . It is our understanding that these are separate that is what is wrong .

Randal > , July 25, 2017 at 11:39 am GMT

The US has not fought a just war since at least the 1990 war against Iraq, and that one was pretty dubious.

Among the principles for a just war, it must be waged as a last resort, to address a wrong suffered, and by a legitimate authority.

Since the US voluntarily waived its right to wage war without the authority of the UNSC (except in necessary defence against ongoing armed attack), the right authority for any war of choice is clearly the UNSC. For all that body's inadequacies (though in truth it's not as though other human authorities, such as the US regime itself, are any less venal and self-interestedly dishonest), it is what the US regime voluntarily signed up to, and until the US withdraws from the UN treaty it is bound, morally at least, by that commitment.

Don't like it? Fine, then campaign for the US to leave the UN and regain its freedom of action, without trying hypocritically to impose the rules of UN membership on others whilst evading them yourselves.

UNSC approval is necessary to make a war of choice just, but not alone sufficient. However, it does at least make a war legal.

Anonymous > , July 25, 2017 at 12:38 pm GMT

"The only defensible war is a war of defense."- G.K. Chesterton

How many U.S. wars or military actions can honestly be called a war of defense?? I wonder how many Americans, who've engaged in this most grave offense to God, think their actions were perfectly acceptable, even noble ("thank you for your service")??

"You were never friends of mine; depart from me, you that traffic in wrong-doing."

MEexpert > , July 25, 2017 at 1:36 pm GMT

Are America's Wars Just and Moral?

Absolutely not. A just and moral war is the one that is fought in defense of one's country. No American war, since the American revolution, has been moral or just. A hero is a person who gives his life defending his country. None of the Americans who died in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria died defending their country. They died destroying other countries. None of those countries was a threat to or had threatened this country.

How could a war be moral if it is waged by dropping bombs from the safety of the sky or launching drones sitting in an air conditioned building in the Nevada desert, or ordering missiles fired from a ship miles away while the president is enjoying a chocolate cake (or whatever)? This is not war. It is pure murder.

The Defense Department should again be called War Department since it is only good at waging wars on other countries. It can't even defend the Pentagon against a lone airplane (even accepting the official narrative about 9/11).

Anonymous > , July 25, 2017 at 2:28 pm GMT

The destruction and slaughter in Syria has one purpose: to create an Israeli client state and colony, probably to be initialized as an Israeli "protectorate".

The reason the American (((media))) carry a bogus hue-and-cry against all things Russian is because Russian installations in Syria are proving difficult for Tel Aviv to expunge. Yahweh's would-be feudal lords grow impatient; the slippered foot stomps with growing demands that American peasants pay for more American mercenaries to carry out Israel's demands for wealth, power, and territory.

Anonym > , July 25, 2017 at 2:33 pm GMT

It is exceedingly strange how the USA can murder millions of people abroad with nary a question raised, and yet a person would be Hitler to the nth power to suggest a paid, bloodless mass repatriation of the non-white citizens admitted since the 1965 immigration act. We can control our demographics, we just have to want it bad enough.

Rurik > , Website July 25, 2017 at 2:47 pm GMT

What justifies America's participation in this slaughter?

well Pat, being as you are an overt Christian, you ought to know that the justification comes directly from the 70 million Christian Zionists here in the ZUS who support all these wars, and vote for Lindsey Graham and John McBloodstain and others in order to slaughter enough Muslims so that the Jews will return to Biblical Israel and the Christian Zionists will then be able to force the second coming of Jesus Christ and get their thousand years of rapture!

Duh

So since I know that you know this, and you know that these Christians are the voting block that the Zionists have been counting on for decades, why don't you ever write about them? Without these bloodthirsty Christians, howling for war, war, war!!! There'd be no more of these Satanic wars, and you know it.

Its ancient Christian peoples are fleeing for their lives before US and Saudi takfiri religious fanatics."

from the perspective of Lindsey Graham and McBloodstain (and their Christian voting supporters) a few slaughtered and raped and crucified Christians sacrificed for their personal prize of a thousand years of rapture is a price *"they're"* easily! willing to pay. Especially since they're just brown Christians anyways, and like the Palestinian Christians, don't really matter, do they?

What injury did the Assad regime, in power for half a century and having never attacked us, inflict to justify what we have helped to do to that country?

when you're talking about a thousand years of rapture, or in the case of the Christian preachers – getting a brand new Gulfstream! who cares?!

Is this war moral by our own standards?

if you mean Christian standards, as they're applied in the ZUS, then yes, of course!

Will that be our epitaph?

'We murdered children for Jesus Christ'

malnourished millions in Yemen, represent a moral cost that seems far beyond any proportional moral gain from those conflicts.

the gain isn't moral, rather it's measured in personal ecstasy and durational

As the peoples of Syria and the other broken and bleeding countries of the Middle East flee to Europe and America, will not some come with revenge on their minds and hatred in their hearts?

and who are the driving force behind facilitating all these Muslims into Western lands?

is not Merkel and those who will reelect her "Christian" Democrats?

are not the people who've facilitated all the Somalis into Minnesota (like the one that just shot that woman in her pajamas [three times!]) .. Christians?

and yet for all of that, I don't think I remember Pat Buchanan even once offering even tepid criticism for all the Christian who're obviously behind all these wars and horrors that he so eloquently (and myopically) bemoans.

[Jul 25, 2017] Political Islam as the way to slow down the industrialization of Arab nations

Notable quotes:
"... My suspicion is that this "reversal" was also made in the USA as a consequence of the strategy to use Islam as a "green belt" against the Soviet Union. ..."
Jul 25, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

somebody | Jul 23, 2017 6:40:48 AM | 63

Posted by: nobody | Jul 22, 2017 11:08:41 PM | 61

Yep. Made in the USA .

By the time of Richard Nixon's arrival in office in January 1969, Iran was already America's single-largest arms purchaser. Whilst this is notable in and of itself, it is vastly overshadowed by what followed. By late 1972 Nixon leveraged U.S. Middle Eastern regional policy primarily around the focal point of a militarily strong, pro-American Iran.

Sounds familiar? Iranian industrialization and westernization happened during the Shah. That is part of above story. Same story in Saudi Arabia .

In Saudi Arabia, the 1960s, and especially the 1970s, had been years of explosive development, liberal experimentation, and openness to the West. A reversal of this trend came about abruptly in 1979, the year in which the Grand Mosque in Mecca came under attack by religiously motivated critics of the monarchy, and the Islamic Republic of Iran was established.

My suspicion is that this "reversal" was also made in the USA as a consequence of the strategy to use Islam as a "green belt" against the Soviet Union.

Same "reversal" from Atatürk happened in Turkey.

[Jul 23, 2017] MoA - Murder, Spies And Weapons - Three Fascinating 'Deep State' Stories

Notable quotes:
"... Azerbaijan's Silk Way Airlines transported hundreds of tons of weapons under diplomatic cover to Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan Congo ..."
"... A British spy. An Arizona senator. And one inflammatory dossier on Donald Trump. The connection between them is starting to unravel... ..."
"... there are indications that McCain was the one who hired the company which created the infamous Steele dossier. ..."
"... Document hack could imperil subs in Oz, India, other countries ..."
"... The Trump-Russia Dossier (by political treason stabbing the nominee of his own Party; ignoring the words of Reagan) ..."
"... the first part of your post reaffirms my comment in the previous thread about the usa, saudi arabia/gccs and israel being the terrorists that the world would be a lot better place without... " ..."
"... in an exceptional country, there is no accountability... according to obama, you have to move on and not dwell on the past, lol... ..."
"... the mountain of evidence you provide daily, as proof of the corporate empire's malignancy, is therapeutic and empowering, but, until this information reaches the bulk of the U$A's masses we're all just treading water here. ..."
"... The last thing McCain has to worry about is prosecution or even criticism for fomenting war crimes. ..."
"... "The team has carried out painstaking research cataloging serial numbers and tracing the routes. They found crates of ammunition and rockets manufactured in factories in eastern Europe. These were bought by the governments of the US and Saudi Arabia." ..."
"... A British spy. An Arizona senator. And one inflammatory dossier on Donald Trump. The connection between them is starting to unravel... ..."
"... I suspected during the Prez Campaign that Trump had McCain well and truly scoped when he said (of Satan's Mini-Me) "I like my war "heroes" not to get captured." ..."
"... This story says a lot for China & Russia's approach to long-term Strategic Diplomacy. I imagine that they both know all this stuff and a helluva lot more, but they go to all the summits, prattle about Our AmeriKKKan Friends, and then presumably laugh their asses off when the summit is over. Xi & Putin seem to truly believe that the blowback from all this Yankee Duplicity will eventually do as much harm to the American Dream as an Ru/Cn Military Solution. ..."
"... Criminal activity under diplomatic cover should be prosecuted. They can pretend they didn't find out until it was too late. Or they can claim that they were letting it happen in order to track the players. Those excuses have been used for all kinds of cover for nefarious activites like Pakistan's AQ Khan NukeMart to distribute nuclear technology and materials. (See Deception and United States and the Islamc Bomb books) And there's Fast & Furious. In the end the cover comes from the political top of the trash heap. ..."
"... Sounds familiar? Iranian industrialization and westernization happened during the Shah. That is part of above story. Same story in Saudi Arabia . ..."
"... My suspicion is that this "reversal" was also made in the USA as a consequence of the strategy to use Islam as a "green belt" against the Soviet Union. ..."
Jul 23, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
Murder, Spies And Weapons - Three Fascinating 'Deep State' Stories

350 "diplomatic" flights transporting weapons for terrorists - Trud

Azerbaijan's Silk Way Airlines transported hundreds of tons of weapons under diplomatic cover to Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan Congo

  • the weapons and ammunition are usual from east Europe (Bulgaria, Serbia, Croatia, Ukraine ...)
  • the contracts are with U.S. companies themselves hired by the CIA and/or Pentagon as well as with Saudi and Israeli companies
  • offloading during unusual "fueling stops" allowed to disguise the real addressee of the loads

With lots of details from obtained emails.

Ten thousands of tons of weapons and ammunition to al-Qaeda and other Takfiris in Syria also came first from Libya by ship, then on at least 160 big cargo flights via Saudi Arabia and Qatar to Turkey and during the last years by various ships under U.S. contracts from mostly east-European countries.

---

With all the Trump-Russia nonsense flowing around one person's involvement in the creation of the issue deserves more scrutiny:

McCain and the Trump-Russia Dossier: What Did He Know, and When? - Reason

A British spy. An Arizona senator. And one inflammatory dossier on Donald Trump. The connection between them is starting to unravel...

  • there are indications that McCain was the one who hired the company which created the infamous Steele dossier.
  • there is evidences that he distributed it to the CIA, FBI and to the media.
  • the issue is now in front of a British court.

---

Another Scorpene Submarine Scandal - Asia Sentinel (a bit older but it was new to me)

Document hack could imperil subs in Oz, India, other countries

  • a commercial cyber-crime case but likely with state involvement
  • French submarine sales usually include the payment of various "commissions" with kickbacks to French politicians
  • sometimes people involved in the business end up dead

Musburger | Jul 21, 2017 12:41:30 PM | 1

The first story is a muti-billion dollar illegal business network that potentially encompasses not only the CIA, but also several governments, the Clinton Foundation, David Patreus, investors (many of whom hold government positions) and God knows what else. It's possibly the greatest scam the world has ever seen.
ProPeace | Jul 21, 2017 12:48:44 PM | 3
It would be nice to have a comprehensive list of sponsors of those fake lucrative speeches such front persons and puppets as Clintons, Saakashvili, Kwaśniewski, ... have been giving. The Business Round Tables that Quigley and Sutton wrote about that live off wars and misery.
Petri Krohn | Jul 21, 2017 12:55:55 PM | 4
There is an amazing amount of detailed information from reliable sources on the U.S. sponsored, Saudi paid arms deliveries to terrorist in Syria, originating from the eastern parts of the European Union. I have collected some of the best sources here:

US covert war on Syria -> Weapon deliveries

likklemore | Jul 21, 2017 12:56:46 PM | 5
McCain and the Trump-Russia Dossier The third time is the Charm.I am reminded McCain can do no wrong: His service to his country (it's alleged, by aiding the enemy); The Keating Five; (I dindu nuttin wrong)

The Trump-Russia Dossier (by political treason stabbing the nominee of his own Party; ignoring the words of Reagan). McCain, once again, will be excused and forgiven. His actions were due to illness – the most aggressive cancer of the brain. How is that so?

james | Jul 21, 2017 12:58:42 PM | 6
thanks b.. the first part of your post reaffirms my comment in the previous thread about the usa, saudi arabia/gccs and israel being the terrorists that the world would be a lot better place without... "the contracts are with U.S. companies themselves hired by the CIA and/or Pentagon as well as with Saudi and Israeli companies.."
terry | Jul 21, 2017 1:00:09 PM | 7
Here is a link to The Dilyana Files – 1403 Email Attachments Posted https://www.truthleaks.org/news/343-the-dilyana-files-1403-email-attachments-posted
james | Jul 21, 2017 1:00:13 PM | 8
@5 likklemore ... in an exceptional country, there is no accountability... according to obama, you have to move on and not dwell on the past, lol...
ben | Jul 21, 2017 1:07:44 PM | 9
Thanks b, the mountain of evidence you provide daily, as proof of the corporate empire's malignancy, is therapeutic and empowering, but, until this information reaches the bulk of the U$A's masses we're all just treading water here.
WorldBLee | Jul 21, 2017 1:11:43 PM | 10
@2: The last thing McCain has to worry about is prosecution or even criticism for fomenting war crimes. The cancer is real and he will be lauded for his courage and lionized if he dies. But should he survive he will carry on as usual with no apologies and no criticism.
nonsense factory | Jul 21, 2017 1:54:32 PM | 11
BBC News has a great little expose on tracking ISIS weapons captured in Mosul to their sources in Eastern Europe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8bwCj3lfsg
"The team has carried out painstaking research cataloging serial numbers and tracing the routes. They found crates of ammunition and rockets manufactured in factories in eastern Europe. These were bought by the governments of the US and Saudi Arabia."
Whether or not the arming and financing of ISIS groups was "accidental" or "deliberate" remains something of an open question; most likely the actual US policy from c.2011-2012 onwards was to give support to anyone trying to overthrow Assad's government regardless of affiliation. The architects of this plan? Clinton & McCain seem to be right at the center of it, with plenty of neocon/neolib supporters in Congress & the State Department/CIA/Pentagon (Nuland/Morrell/Carter etc.)
Oui | Jul 21, 2017 2:29:43 PM | 12
Sorry b .... the "Reason" article is complete nonsense. I've covered the details the last two weeks. The "dodgy dossier" was shared by Orbis Business Intelligence Ltd, with the British MI6 and the FBI starting in August 2016. That's why I claim it's not RussiaGate but IC-Gate. A complot by the Intelligence Community of the UK and US. McCain is just a distraction of the true effort to dump Trump.
McCain and the Trump-Russia Dossier: What Did He Know, and When? - Reason

A British spy. An Arizona senator. And one inflammatory dossier on Donald Trump. The connection between them is starting to unravel...

  • there are indications that McCain was the one who hired the company which created the infamous Steele dossier.
  • there is evidences that he distributed it to the CIA, FBI and to the media.
  • the issue is now in front of a British court.

Christopher Steele and Sir Andrew Wood worked in a British spy nest in Moscow during the Yeltsin years of the 90s.

  • Is RussiaGate Really IC-Gate
  • Did MI6/CIA Collude with Chris Steele to Entrap Trump?
  • 'Sir' Andrew Wood as spy chief in Moscow
  • Fusion GPS linked to UAE Sheikh and Rubio Donor

    Peter W. Smith Tapped Alt-Right to Access Dark Net for Clinton emails – linked to Charles C. Johnson – Stephen Bannon - Andrew Auernheimer, a hacker who goes by the alias 'Weev', "exiled" to the Ukraine

Hoarsewhisperer | Jul 21, 2017 3:02:30 PM | 13
Thanks, b. Love the lede...
350 "diplomatic" flights transporting weapons for ter'rists - Trud

What a slimy little cur John McCain (Satan's Mini-Me) turns out to be. Guess how surprised I'm not that the little skunk is up to his eyeballs in weapons proliferation & profiteering, not to mention that old Yankee favourite Gun-barrel "Diplomacy".

I suspected during the Prez Campaign that Trump had McCain well and truly scoped when he said (of Satan's Mini-Me) "I like my war "heroes" not to get captured."

This story says a lot for China & Russia's approach to long-term Strategic Diplomacy. I imagine that they both know all this stuff and a helluva lot more, but they go to all the summits, prattle about Our AmeriKKKan Friends, and then presumably laugh their asses off when the summit is over. Xi & Putin seem to truly believe that the blowback from all this Yankee Duplicity will eventually do as much harm to the American Dream as an Ru/Cn Military Solution.

psychohistorian | Jul 21, 2017 3:12:19 PM | 14
Thanks again for the excellent journalism b even though it reads like the trash on the rags in the grocery stores they make you look at while you check out.

I just hold out hope that the great unraveling continues and quickens its pace.

Curtis | Jul 21, 2017 3:32:48 PM | 15
Criminal activity under diplomatic cover should be prosecuted. They can pretend they didn't find out until it was too late. Or they can claim that they were letting it happen in order to track the players. Those excuses have been used for all kinds of cover for nefarious activites like Pakistan's AQ Khan NukeMart to distribute nuclear technology and materials. (See Deception and United States and the Islamc Bomb books) And there's Fast & Furious. In the end the cover comes from the political top of the trash heap.

The Dem/anti-Trump attempts to get dirt on Trump via Russians doesn't get play in the MSM. Nor does the content of the emails. They call the tune and the media plays on.

Curtis | Jul 21, 2017 3:38:37 PM | 16
nonsense factory 11

Thnx for the vid link. That evidence won't get to US MSM either. It makes the case for Tulsi Gabbard's efforts.

likklemore | Jul 21, 2017 4:52:05 PM | 18
@james 8
[Reported by Independent.co.uk, New York Post and the Guardian.co.uk] McCain admitted he handed the dossier to Comey."

NYPost: McCain "I gave Russia blackmail dossier on Trump to the FBI"

Senator John McCain passed documents to the FBI director, James Comey, last month alleging secret contacts between the Trump campaign and Moscow and that Russian intelligence had personally compromising material on the president-elect himself

New York Post
http://nypost.com/2017/01/11/john-mccain-i-gave-russia-blackmail-dossier-on-trump-to-fbi/

Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/10/fbi-chief-given-dossier-by-john-mccain-alleging-secret-trump-russia-contacts

Yes, there will be no accountability in the U.S. for the exceptional ones. However, the British courts setting aside "special relationships" may take a different view that McCain has a case to answer.

@kpax 17

Did I mis-read? McCain's cerebral?

Piotr Berman | Jul 21, 2017 5:46:21 PM | 19
The link suggests that the subs involved in the scandal are perhaps OK, and no hack compromised their worthiness in a possible military conflict. Neither there were any fatal accidents. The only losses in manpower (but quite a few) are among people engaged in the financial transactions that delivered them to various fleets.

Although there are possible danger to security, because bribery is used to blackmail involved in recruitment of spies.

Fidelios Automata | Jul 21, 2017 6:03:00 PM | 20
I hope the conspiracy theories are wrong, and that McInsane will soon suffer a well-deserved painful death.
BTW, I'm a long-time Arizonan, and I'm proud to say I've never voted for this traitor and have also signed the recall petitions against him.
radiator | Jul 21, 2017 6:16:53 PM | 21
I apologize for never contributing anything substantial but just emanating verbal support.
I hope this site has some mirrored archives. This is in its entirety a work of contemporary history (sorry my english's not good enough... mirror this site and give it some dumb ancestor of ours to read in 20, 50, 100 years, y'know).
I'm a broke lowlife but next time around I'll send some money.
radiator | Jul 21, 2017 6:19:21 PM | 22
damn I regret every cent I've spent on mainstream newspapers, although the last time I've done so has been years ago and maybe back then, they weren't so bad, but then again, they probably were and I just didn't notice.
Anonymous | Jul 21, 2017 7:01:32 PM | 23
The dog that didn't bark in the arms shipment story is the absense of Qatar in the list of recipient countries. It also seems that, whilst most (80%) were shipped through SA/UAE, more arms were shipped through Jordan (11%) than through Turkey (7%).

Bulgaria may also have been the location of military level training sites for foreigners. An intriguing report from June 2015 noted that an American was killed along with 2 foreigners (German and Canadian) in a grenade launcher accident of a PMC training center at Anevo, Bulgaria. The site was run by an company Algans (or Alguns).

http://sofiaglobe.com/2015/06/06/american-dies-four-injured-in-blast-at-bulgarias-vmz-sopot-ordnance-plant/

There are links to the infamous US military $500 million training program in which an unknown number of 'carefully vetted moderate rebels' were trained and all but 5 of them 'defected' to al Qaeda.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/aramroston/mobbed-up-arms-dealer-in-american-anti-isis-effort-linked-to

Anonymous | Jul 21, 2017 7:14:05 PM | 24
"This story says a lot for China & Russia's approach to long-term Strategic Diplomacy. I imagine that they both know all this stuff and a helluva lot more" Hoarsewhisperer @13

The docs indicate the Balkans arm supply route took off in 2012. It will have brought in many billions of USD to the relatively poor east European countries. Before the Gulenist(?) shoot down of the Russian Su-24, Russia had been trying to get Turkey and Bulgaria interested in South Stream. I suspect Russia did indeed know the details of the arms shipment, and certainly knew about Turkey's cut of the ISIS oil sales. I suspect this deal may have been an attempt to wean the two off the terrorism funding spigot. This failed as the Bulgarian government is totally owned by the US. Erdogan's ego was manipulated by his Zionist handlers and eventually his stalling killed interest at theat time. The Russians would know this background too, but the deal had to be tried. If it had worked, then the Bulgarian arms train would possibly have been stopped and the Turkish border closed several years ago. This would have greatly cramped the capabilities of ISIS, simplifying the task of eliminating them. I suspect the Russians also knew it wouldn't pan out but it was certainly worth a shot whilst they was busily obtaining intelligence on the terrorists, and secretly negotiating the logistics, overflight access etc for what was to become its base at Hymeim.

somebody | Jul 21, 2017 7:15:18 PM | 25
23 also

Russia Hopes to Sign Agreement on Arms Re-Export From Bulgaria

The statement was followed by a publication of the Bulgarian Trud newspaper that mentioned the Arcus arms company as the producer of some arms produced in Bulgaria under Russian licenses, which were found by journalists in eastern Aleppo.
nobody | Jul 21, 2017 7:49:29 PM | 27
BBC News has a great little expose

Posted by: nonsense factory | Jul 21, 2017 1:54:32 PM | 11

Tillerson. Exxon. Petrodollar. Rockefellers.

BBC. MI6. BIS. Rothschilds.

https://youtu.be/Hgq4w4dqKsU

That's a good question.

nobody | Jul 21, 2017 8:07:41 PM | 28
Master: http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/david-rockefeller.jpg

Blaster: https://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/walkingdead/images/0/0c/Armedforces.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20131116201742

Barter-Town: http://images.legalweek.com/images/IMG/277/144277/city-of-london-gherkin-finance.jpg

Mad-Max:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d6/Vladimir_Putin_in_KGB_uniform.jpg/170px-Vladimir_Putin_in_KGB_uniform.jpg

http://madmaxmovies.com/mad-max/mad-max-cars/max-yellow-xb-interceptor-sedan/max-leaps-out-of-yellow-xb.jpg

fast freddy | Jul 21, 2017 8:20:34 PM | 29
Craven McCain has been teflon for his entire political career and he was teflon when he wrecked airplanes in the navy. McCain is just a teflon guy. Untouchable. Probably has "dossiers" on anybody that can damage him.
nobody | Jul 21, 2017 8:34:56 PM | 30

Sure, it's tempting to think this:

But we do know that Islamic Republic is a creature of the British. (Longstanding history between the worldly priests of Iran and the defunct British Empire. Read up.)

nobody | Jul 21, 2017 10:26:39 PM | 33
https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2017-01-13/AP/Trump_Defense_Secretary_75769.jpg-2f26d.jpg&w=480 ">https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2017-01-13/AP/Trump_Defense_Secretary_75769.jpg-2f26d.jpg&w=480">https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2017-01-13/AP/Trump_Defense_Secretary_75769.jpg-2f26d.jpg&w=480

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/FEHE4E_I5FM/hqdefault.jpg

Trully, who but the ignorant make war against ALLAH?

ProPeace | Jul 22, 2017 1:06:13 AM | 35
They throw a hissy fit Neocon madness: We can't have peace in Syria, that would be giving in to Russia!

This is huge. An absolute outrage. The first real Trump concession to Putin that undermines U.S. security directly. https://t.co/h9WR4brHHK -- Noah Rothman (@NoahCRothman) July 19, 2017
Yeah, Right | Jul 22, 2017 6:40:44 AM | 45
@2 I have no doubt that McCain's medical condition is real. I well remember the news stories in early June when McCain put up a bizarre performance during testimony by James Comey - asking questions that simply didn't make any sense whatsoever and leaving everyone utterly gob-smacked regarding McCain's mental state.

So, yeah, brain tumour.

ghostship | Jul 23, 2017 6:03:50 AM | 62

OMG. the Washington Borg's house newspaper has woken up to Trump's surrender to Putin on Syria.
Trump's breathtaking surrender to Russia

But once again, President Trump, after extended personal contact with Vladimir Putin and the complete surrender to Russian interests in Syria, acts precisely as though he has been bought and sold by a strategic rival. The ignoble cutoff of aid to American proxies means that "Putin won in Syria," as an administration official was quoted by The Post.

Concessions without reciprocation, made against the better judgment of foreign policy advisers, smack more of payoff than outreach. If this is what Trump's version of "winning" looks like, what might further victory entail? The re- creation of the Warsaw Pact? The reversion of Alaska to Russian control?

Although this opinion article was posted a couple of days ago, there been no shitstorm near Trump about it since suggesting that Trump's one-man distraction/disinformation smokescreen is firing successfully on all cylinders.

Meanwhile, some in the US Army at least understand that once the battle to liquidate the ISIS Caliphate is other, they'll have problems remaining in Syria .

'We're bad day away from Russians asking, 'Why are you still in Syria?' – top US commander

A US special operations commander has admitted that an extended US stay in Syria runs contrary to international law and that Russia would be entirely justified in questioning its presence there.

At the Aspen Security Forum on Friday, Special Operations Command chief Army General, Raymond Thomas was asked whether American forces will remain in Syria, after Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) is defeated, possibly, to support the Kurdish forces in the north of the country.

Thomas acknowledged that American forces are fighting in a sovereign Syria, where they will likely "have no ability to stay" if that presence is questioned "in terms of international law," Thomas said, replying to the Washington Post journalist's question.


Although I'm sure that the State Department/Pentagon lawyers are looking for a reason to stay.
somebody | Jul 23, 2017 6:40:48 AM | 63
Posted by: nobody | Jul 22, 2017 11:08:41 PM | 61

Yep. Made in the USA .

By the time of Richard Nixon's arrival in office in January 1969, Iran was already America's single-largest arms purchaser. Whilst this is notable in and of itself, it is vastly overshadowed by what followed. By late 1972 Nixon leveraged U.S. Middle Eastern regional policy primarily around the focal point of a militarily strong, pro-American Iran.

Sounds familiar? Iranian industrialization and westernization happened during the Shah. That is part of above story. Same story in Saudi Arabia .

In Saudi Arabia, the 1960s, and especially the 1970s, had been years of explosive development, liberal experimentation, and openness to the West. A reversal of this trend came about abruptly in 1979, the year in which the Grand Mosque in Mecca came under attack by religiously motivated critics of the monarchy, and the Islamic Republic of Iran was established.

My suspicion is that this "reversal" was also made in the USA as a consequence of the strategy to use Islam as a "green belt" against the Soviet Union.

Same "reversal" from Atatürk happened in Turkey.

[Jul 22, 2017] Multiple and illegal US Troop Locations in Syria

Jul 21, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com

et Al , July 21, 2017 at 7:30 am

Buttfeed via Antiwar.com: US 'Furious' Over Turkey Publishing US Troop Locations in Syria
http://news.antiwar.com/2017/07/20/us-furious-over-turkey-publishing-us-troop-locations-in-syria/

Turkey's Erdogan Denies Playing a Role in It

US military officials are reportedly furious after Turkey's state media published the locations of 10 previously undisclosed US military positions inside Syria, saying that the publication was a major security breech and endangers the lives of troops.

The list provided not only the locations of previously secret bases, but also provided estimates on the number of US troops inside. They say they got all of this information through reporting trips inside Syria and observing the facilities.

US officials see this as petty move by Turkey to spite the US for its continued support of the Kurdish YPG. Turkey considers the YPG "terrorists," and has been fighting against YPG forces further to the west, in the Afrin District of Syria .
####

I don't believe anything that Buttfeed writes. Unused toilet paper has more journalistic integrity (I know, not much!) than Buttfeed which is the go to outlet for when you need to flush some crap to the public. I do admit, they do that bit of the job very well .

Patient Observer , July 21, 2017 at 10:03 am
It would seem likely that Russia was fully aware of these "secret" basis from its surveillance capabilities. The disclosure could be of value to other armed groups and was politically embarrassing to the US coming from an ally and all.

[Jul 20, 2017] Trump orders the CIA to halt all financial, military aid for rebels in Syria

Notable quotes:
"... He's a dead man if true. ..."
"... God, are the Clintonists going to be pissed off. Their beloved leader's foreign policy achievement in tatters and Putin's interference in the election paying off at last. ..."
"... So Trump is saying he will end the CIA's covert support of Syrian militants fighting against the government. It's funny/sad seeing diehard Trump supporters latching on to this hoping it will redeem their hero. Talk is cheap and Trump does not exactly have a reliable track record when it comes to honoring his word. Even if he is serious in this instance the neocon contingent he invited into his highest levels of his administration may see things differently and push back. Whatever the case, I expect the US/EU/NATO/Israel/GCC/KSA/Turkey sponsored regime change agenda will continue. ..."
Jul 20, 2017 | moonofalabama.org
jo6pac | Jul 19, 2017 5:37:02 PM | 17

I wonder if its true, time will tell. google news carried it also.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-ends-covert-cia-program-to-arm-anti-assad-rebels-in-syria-a-move-sought-by-moscow/2017/07/19/b6821a62-6beb-11e7-96ab-5f38140b38cc_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_ciasyria-310pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.433a9b0da138

b4real | Jul 19, 2017 7:03:10 PM | 21
OT, but right up b's alley....

almasdarnews.com is saying Trump orders the CIA to halt all financial, military aid for rebels in Syria

He's a dead man if true.

Ghostship | Jul 19, 2017 7:06:50 PM | 22
>>>> jo6pac | Jul 19, 2017 5:37:02 PM | 17
I wonder if its true, time will tell. google news carried it also.

Reuters is also reporting it.

Trump ends CIA arms support for anti-Assad Syria rebels - U.S. officials

God, are the Clintonists going to be pissed off. Their beloved leader's foreign policy achievement in tatters and Putin's interference in the election paying off at last.

Meanwhile nothing on the New York Times as yet but it does have a sweet little video about life in an Ukrainian summer camp run by Nazis.

ben | Jul 19, 2017 8:20:11 PM | 29
When the U$A pulls its' troops, I'll rejoice, and give Trump the credit for making a sane decision.

@ b:With this thread you've encapsulated what's up with the U$A media. Many quotes from " think tanks", and none from the subjects themselves. AKA propaganda..

ProPeace | Jul 19, 2017 9:08:41 PM | 31
More truth about Syria coming out

Murder Of Green Berets In Jordan Exposed Secretive CIA Syria Program Details

daffyDuct | Jul 19, 2017 9:43:35 PM | 35
Uffda! Trump says "enough" in Syria!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-ends-covert-cia-program-to-arm-anti-assad-rebels-in-syria-a-move-sought-by-moscow/2017/07/19/b6821a62-6beb-11e7-96ab-5f38140b38cc_story.html?utm_term=.c2915ab0578b

Temporarily Sane | Jul 19, 2017 10:00:52 PM | 36
So Trump is saying he will end the CIA's covert support of Syrian militants fighting against the government. It's funny/sad seeing diehard Trump supporters latching on to this hoping it will redeem their hero. Talk is cheap and Trump does not exactly have a reliable track record when it comes to honoring his word. Even if he is serious in this instance the neocon contingent he invited into his highest levels of his administration may see things differently and push back. Whatever the case, I expect the US/EU/NATO/Israel/GCC/KSA/Turkey sponsored regime change agenda will continue.

[Jul 20, 2017] Training Jihadists for Syria Operations: Whistleblowers Speak

Notable quotes:
"... One month before the attack at King Faisal Air Base, a Green Beret associated with covert operations in Syria spoke out to a prominent military news site called SOFREP, blowing the whistle on details surrounding the CIA's use of jihadists to overthrow Assad: ..."
"... "Nobody believes in it. You're like, 'F--k this.' Everyone on the ground knows they are jihadis. No one on the ground believes in this mission or this effort, and they know they are just training the next generation of jihadis, so they are sabotaging it by saying, 'F--k it, who cares?' ..."
"... The report revealed that American Syrian rebel trainers (in Jordan and elsewhere) belonging to the Army's 5th Special Forces Group had been tasked with assisting a CIA covert mission, but they knew full well that they were being ordered by the Obama administration to train jihadists and ISIS sympathizers in the push to topple the Syrian government. ..."
Jul 20, 2017 | moonofalabama.org

ProPeace | Jul 19, 2017 9:16:28 PM | 33

Interesting part:

One month before the attack at King Faisal Air Base, a Green Beret associated with covert operations in Syria spoke out to a prominent military news site called SOFREP, blowing the whistle on details surrounding the CIA's use of jihadists to overthrow Assad:

"Nobody believes in it. You're like, 'F--k this.' Everyone on the ground knows they are jihadis. No one on the ground believes in this mission or this effort, and they know they are just training the next generation of jihadis, so they are sabotaging it by saying, 'F--k it, who cares?'

The lengthy whistleblower report (member restricted) circulated widely among special forces veterans and professional analysts, but never reached a broader public audience and was ignored in mainstream press as it sat behind a members only access site founded by a well-known Navy Seal for the purpose of 'insider' news and discussion impacting the special forces community.

The report revealed that American Syrian rebel trainers (in Jordan and elsewhere) belonging to the Army's 5th Special Forces Group had been tasked with assisting a CIA covert mission, but they knew full well that they were being ordered by the Obama administration to train jihadists and ISIS sympathizers in the push to topple the Syrian government.

They warned blowback was coming as the CIA was violating America's own counter-terror laws...

[Jul 19, 2017] Vassals sometimes behave like stooges: EU puts sanctions on Syrian scientists, military officials over non-existent gas attack and prohibit selling inflatable boats to Libya, which they destroyed

Notable quotes:
"... See what I mean? Completely £"^$&g useless. The normal rule is "If you break it, you pay for it" – but not in the rule and human right's luvvin' EU! If you break it, try and sweep it under the carpet and blame it on the dog! France, the UK, Italy & the USA destroyed Libya. The EU's Operation Triton to 'help' refugees orders its ships to sit far outside LIbyan waters, well past the danger zone within 15km of the coast where most refugees drown. Even the previous Mare Nostrum operation by the Italians wasn't so evil and heartless. You couldn't make this up and be believed. Now if I go in to a china shop ..."
Jul 19, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com

et Al , July 18, 2017 at 2:28 pm

Neuters via Antiwar.com: EU puts sanctions on Syrian scientists, military officials over gas attack
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-eu-idUSKBN1A20ZI

The European Union imposed sanctions on 16 Syrian scientists and military officials on Monday for their suspected involvement in a chemical attack in northern Syria in April which killed scores of civilians.

Western intelligence agencies accuse the government of Bashar al-Assad of carrying out the attack, arguing that rebels in the area would not have had the capabilities. The international chemical weapons watchdog said in June the nerve agent sarin was used.

Syrian officials have repeatedly denied using banned toxins.
####

More at the link.

PUSSIES!

And more crap from the EU:

AFPee: via Antiwar.com: EU curbs rubber dinghy sales to Libya to stop migrants
https://www.yahoo.com/news/eu-curbs-rubber-dinghy-sales-libya-stop-migrants-163741424.html

The European Union on Monday adopted limits on the export of inflatable boats to Libya in a bid to make it harder for smugglers to send migrants to Europe.

The decision by the foreign ministers of the 28 EU states, which also covers outboard motors, is the latest to help a chaotic and violence-torn Libya stem the flow of migrants to Italy, now the main route to the bloc.

"We took a decision to introduce restrictions from today onwards on the export and supply to Libya of the inflatable boats and motors," EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini said
####

See what I mean? Completely £"^$&g useless. The normal rule is "If you break it, you pay for it" – but not in the rule and human right's luvvin' EU! If you break it, try and sweep it under the carpet and blame it on the dog! France, the UK, Italy & the USA destroyed Libya. The EU's Operation Triton to 'help' refugees orders its ships to sit far outside LIbyan waters, well past the danger zone within 15km of the coast where most refugees drown. Even the previous Mare Nostrum operation by the Italians wasn't so evil and heartless. You couldn't make this up and be believed. Now if I go in to a china shop

yalensis , July 18, 2017 at 3:41 pm
They say that humans are the only animals who experience a sense of shame.
Based on this, the EU simply aren't human.
If they had any human feelings, they would send luxury yachts to pick up those Libyan refugees instead of denying these huddled masses to their teeming shores.

Pottery Barn Rules.

[Jul 19, 2017] On Crapified News And Foreign Policy

Notable quotes:
"... The diminishing capacity to get a proper look at global affairs is related to the rise in Imperial Hubris of the Outlaw US Empire, which I turn degrades your ability to properly respond to events--particularly those created by Empire policy. I think this is a part of what b's writing about here. ..."
"... It is more than just rise, however correctly pointed out by you, of Imperial Hubris--the whole panoply of the "tools" of military-political analysis is plain and simple wrong. This failure is based on a metaphysical mistake -- wrong reading of history, especially of the 20th Century, which led to an ultimate failure in understanding the issues of scales and proportions. What was merely a once in a lifetime window of opportunities due to a specific combination of geopolitical, military, economic etc. factors in the immediate wake of WW II was perceived as a dialectic and inevitable march of history in favor of messianic USA, not a gift to be cherished. Sand castles on the beach, however, do not live long, the high tide has arrived some time ago. ..."
"... As in the US DOJ, FBI, CIA etc., are organizations aimed directly to protect oligarchic rule, IRG protects ruling class of clerics in Iran, in both countries under guise of protecting constitution and law and order, earthly or heavenly. ..."
"... Unfortunately, "What was merely a once in a lifetime window of opportunities due to a specific combination of geopolitical, military, economic etc. factors in the immediate wake of WW II was perceived as a dialectic and inevitable march of history in favor of messianic USA," this "metaphysical mistake" had already ingrained itself into the Outlaw US Empire's Mythos as Manifest Destiny and quickly found its way into all realms of discourse by the mid-1840s. The creation and perpetuation of such a grandiose mythos can only be done though lies and the deliberate falsification of history. ..."
"... While I don't disagree with you, it has to be well understood that any big "player" by 19th Century had its own version of Manifest Destiny e.g. Russia as a Third Rome. But it was namely through WW II where US could claim a "victory" over Nazism (hence a vast field of Anglo-American WW II history falsifiers) and thus realize itself as a continental power that the issue of exceptionalism really have got into over-drive and resulted in US literally running itself into the ground. When one has a political class (and population) not conditioned by continental warfare--it is almost inevitable. ..."
"... I get the impression the situation is typically less a matter of, "the editors demand a fast one on some less familiar issue", than certain intelligence operatives tasked with gaming the media echo chamber, feed well placed assets prioritized talking points to create the illusion of a 'thing'. ..."
"... Just look at the media shitstorm regarding Russia, different crap, same difference! ..."
Jul 19, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
Significant parts of the Trump administration , Congress and the general Zionist borg would love to start a war between the U.S. and Iran.

A war is unlikely. Iran's geography and strategic position is unassailable. Its global political standing has increased during the last decades. Any war with Iran would be extremely costly yet unwinnable.

But with U.S. pressure again increasing on Iran it is important to learn and understand what happens inside of country. Unfortunately most reporting about politics within Iran is bit of a mess. Considers the piece below from the Washington Post. Written from Turkey by a journalist who (to my best knowledge) does not speaks Farsi nor has any special knowledge of the country: With U.S. scholar's conviction, power struggle escalates between Iran's president and hard-liners

ISTANBUL -- A high-stakes power struggle between Iran's moderate president and his hard-line opponents in the judiciary appeared to escalate with the arrest of the president's brother and the conviction of an American student for espionage this weekend -- rulings that seemed timed to embarrass the Iranian leader at home and abroad

The piece should be classic foreign reporting. But who is speaking here?

  • ... Nader Hashemi, director of the Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Denver, said ...
  • ... Khamenei said in a speech this month, according to the Center for Human Rights in Iran, an independent nonprofit based in New York
  • ... said Alex Vatanka, an Iran expert at the Middle East Institute in Washington
  • ... said Behnam Ben Taleblu, an Iran analyst at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies in Washington
  • ... [a]ccording to Suzanne Maloney, a senior fellow and expert on Iran at the Brookings Institution ...

There is certainly no reason to lambast the journalist, Erin Cunningham, for being lazy. Getting five telephone or email interviews and authorized quotes for the piece was surely a day's work. But how come there is no voice from Iran? The only quote from an Iranian person, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, is in translation of a lobby shop in New York which does not reveal its sponsors. Is the quote correct? The other "expert" are all from outlets that are more or less adverse to Iran's system of governance.

The piece makes the recent dispute and judicial action look extraordinary and sensational. It connects it to actions in Washington DC:

The tensions come as Iran and the United States spar over the terms of a nuclear deal struck with world powers to limit Iran's nuclear weapons program.
...
The Trump administration has taken a much harsher stance on Iran, threatening to abandon the deal, and the Treasury Department on Tuesday announced new sanctions primarily targeting Iran's ballistic missile program.
...
The arrest and conviction of Wang, a 37-year-old scholar at Princeton, appeared to target Rouhani's wider foreign policy and engagement with the West. Although Wang was detained in August 2016, the timing of the verdict is suspect, analysts say.

"Why did they keep it a secret as long as they did? Timing is important," said Alex Vatanka, an Iran expert at the Middle East Institute in Washington.

Conflicts between the executive and the judiciary in Iran are legend and reoccur at least every other year. They are independent of the president being "moderate" or "hard-line" himself. Consider the obvious similarities between the above lede and this one from 2012 :

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- The head of Iran's judiciary lashed out at the country's president Wednesday, the latest salvo in an escalating political conflict that has undermined much of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's political clout

The Iranian constitution and political system is build on the principal of Vilayat-e Faqih, the guardianship of the (Islamic) jurists. The undecided question is how absolute the primacy of the jurists is supposed to be. The interpretations vary widely and often depend on the issue at hand. The executive will naturally assert primacy wherever it can, while absolute principalists in the judiciary will always assert that their jurisprudence is prime. The conflict is daily bread in Tehran and it makes no sense to sensationalize it.

The arrest of the president's brother for corruption may well be justified. It should astonish no one. It could be timed to assert pressure but we have no way to know that. It would be mere speculation to say so. Experience has show that effective coordination within the Iranian state machinery is way less than western authors tend to assume.

The U.S. student/spy had already been imprisoned for eleven months. That he was convicted now is likely not related to any Trump tantrum or epiphany. Washington's capers are less important in Tehran as the U.S. would like them to be.

All together the piece shows the typical pitfalls of U.S. reporting on Iran (and many other countries).

  • Original and relevant voices from the ground are absent. None of the people involved in the issues is questioned. "Expert" quotes from often partisan western think thanks are the sorry substitute.
  • Cultural and historic characteristics are neglected. The current dispute between Rouhani and the judiciary has its background in a century old discussion in Iran about the limits of vilayat-e faqih. (The importance of this is comparable to conflicts about "executive privilege" or "state rights vs. federal rights" in U.S. politics.) With that background the spat between Rouhani and the judiciary is simply the marking of territories for his now beginning second term.
  • Most of the issues happening in a foreign country's politics are NOT related to whatever happens in Washington DC. U.S. writers love to draw such causal connections. But not every hiccup in Moscow is in response to some fart in DC. More often then not there is no connection at all.

One original voice from within Tehran's ruling circuit would have been more valuable to the above piece than the five think tank quotes. A few more words about the historic role of the judiciary would have helped to set some perspective. Connecting the political theater in Tehran to Trump's zigzags makes it easier to write the lede. But there is no justification for it without evidentiary backing.

Despite the nitpicking I don't regard the Cunningham piece as bad at all. Each day there are way worse reports in the papers and on cable TV. It is probably the best one can do when the editors demand a fast one on some less familiar issue. Over the last years many experienced foreign correspondents were fired or paid to leave. Main-stream media replaced serious foreign reporting with childish "listicals", high school level "explainers" and cat pictures.

When a few dailies and news shows drive foreign policy making the lack of in-depth reporting becomes a serious issue. Members of Congress and the administration get much of their foreign policy knowledge from U.S. media reports. It is no wonder that they are clueless when those reports lack insight and details. The crapification of high decision making is probably directly related to the crapification of the news media. Trump taking his clues from Fox News (and others) is bad. Fox News (and others) having no well reported clues at all is even worse.

Posted by b on July 19, 2017 at 11:36 AM | Permalink

Freespirit | Jul 19, 2017 12:14:14 PM | 1

Yeh, sure I am going to believe an, in effect, "ALL-AMERICAN" stooges reporting about anything stated as FACT from or about Iran

Keep in mind what ,who and Chacteristics of WHOM we are dealing with:

Perpetual WAR, ISRAEL , CHRISTIANS, JEWS, Muslims and the CONNECTION: https://boblivingstonletter.com/alerts/america-perpetual-war/

AND

Psychopathy by James Corbett: https://youtu.be/DPf5i84BqcA

AND

Trump's NEW WORLD ORDER, run by Jews, with him as Temporary Chief Stooge : http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=1222

karlof1 | Jul 19, 2017 12:18:08 PM | 2
Southfront has a report about a just released stink tank study: "A new study conducted by members of the U.S. military establishment has concluded that the U.S.-led international global order established after World War II is "fraying" and may even be "collapsing" as the U.S. continues to lose its position of "primacy" in world affairs." https://southfront.org/us-military-establishment-study-american-empire-collapsing/ https://ssi.armywarcollege.edu/pubs/display.cfm?pubID=1358

The diminishing capacity to get a proper look at global affairs is related to the rise in Imperial Hubris of the Outlaw US Empire, which I turn degrades your ability to properly respond to events -- particularly those created by Empire policy. I think this is a part of what b's writing about here.

Willy2 | Jul 19, 2017 12:28:28 PM | 3
- One doesn't have to occupy Iran in its entirety. One can simply occupy the Khuzestan oil province in the west of Iran to cripple the Iranian government.
Yul | Jul 19, 2017 12:42:28 PM | 4
@b

http://www.irdiplomacy.ir/en/page/1970219/All+Rumors+about+Hassan+Rouhani%E2%80%99s+Recently+Arrested+Brother+Hossein+Fereidoun.html

somebody | Jul 19, 2017 12:49:32 PM | 5
3
that is why Iran has specialized in all types of missiles for the last decades or so.
Pnyx | Jul 19, 2017 12:59:03 PM | 6
Important background. Thank you B.
Yul | Jul 19, 2017 1:16:32 PM | 7
@2 karlof1

Nafeez Ahmed did a good job dissecting the 145 pages report:
https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/pentagon-study-declares-american-empire-is-collapsing-746754cdaebf

Mike Maloney | Jul 19, 2017 1:36:03 PM | 8
Believe it or not, NYT's Tehran correspondent, Thomas Erdbrink, is pretty good. I remember seeing a video a couple years ago where Erdbrink profiles Najiyeh Allahdad, a daughter of a martyr in the Iran-Iraq War I believe. It was very sympathetic to the revolution. In the bio of Allahad NYT published they included this:
How do you describe yourself? I'm an Iranian Muslim who uses any opportunity to improve her country and who protects her country's reputation in the world. I love life, and I love peace. I feel that what people have lost in this world is spirituality. I've devoted my life to trying to find this spirituality for myself first and then to help others enjoy it.

Have you traveled outside of Iran? Where? What did you think? I have traveled to India, China, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Malaysia, the United Arab Emirates, Italy, the United States and Syria. I found some Eastern countries like India and China to be very civilized, but they have not used their civilization to improve their daily lives. On the other hand, I found the Western countries to be detached from their histories and stepping into a new world that has an unclear future. Some Arab countries like Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E. seemed too dependent on Western countries and would be nothing without help from the U.S. And a country like Iraq has always been hampered by circumstances throughout its history.

There is a strong body of opinion within the U.S. national security state that believes along with b that Iran cannot be defeated militarily. Trump is doing the bidding of his buddies in Jeddah and Tel Aviv.
Hoarsewhisperer | Jul 19, 2017 1:50:12 PM | 9
A beautiful piece of analytical, sequential surgery, b.
I was watching a doco at the weekend and #Occupy was mentioned, reminding me that we can thank #Occupy for the introduction of 1%/99% into the lexicon, and the #Occupiers for the meme...

The America dream
You have to be asleep
To believe it.

Similarly, I'm grateful to Trump for linking the terms "Fake News" and "Mainstream Media" and making each an autonomic reminder of the other.

james | Jul 19, 2017 2:23:52 PM | 10
thanks b... msm is superficial at best... unfortunately they are beholden to israel's agenda which is the same as the military, financial and neo-con industries... until that changes, it will be playing fast with facts in order to perpetuate more war... good to know what the msm is really about... it isn't about anything in depth, that's for sure!
karlof1 | Jul 19, 2017 2:54:20 PM | 11
Yul @7--

Thanks! I noted Southfront cited him and linked to his article.

To continue my thought on this: Garbage in leads to garbage out. In the process of propagandizing and indoctrinating the populous, you dumb them down to the point that to be effective analysts and policy makers people must be reeducated. My #1 example is Trump. He's been fed so much Crappola his entire life that it negatively affects his thought processes and judgment. At least he's willing to call such crappola for what it is, although he in turn produces his own version of it often.

A very good example of the change in the elite's philosophy from 1776 to today is found in this clause from the Outlaw US Empire's Declaration of Independence:

"When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

And then compared to this exemplary expression of hubris from Karl Rove:

"We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

In other words, we don't give a damn about what anybody else thinks or what the law says--pretty much the same sentiments uttered by every megalomaniac that ever existed.

How to return to the prudent, moral, and law-based philosophy penned by Jefferson that seems to guide the Multipolar Alliance? Where was it reported in the Western media that Iran sanctioned the Outlaw US Empire for its overwhelmingly obvious support for terrorism that I noted yesterday:

"In view of the overt support provided to terrorist groups by the US government and the country's military and intelligence forces and repeated confessions by American officials to having created terrorist groups and offered them all-out support, from the standpoint of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the entirety of the United States' military and intelligence forces are considered as supporters of terrorist groups in the region." http://theduran.com/us-iran-sanctions-are-a-tit-for-tat-measure-that-is-part-of-a-wider-geo-strategic-reality/

Just how many Outlaw US Empire citizens are aware of the fact that it was deemed necessary by a member of congress to introduce a bill entitled the Stop Arming Terrorists Act that affirms the Iranian Parliament's decision to sanction such behavior. And how many citizens are aware that their government's behavior flaunts numerous UNSCRs and is thus in violation of International Law--the very same International Law it championed in 1940--Atlantic Charter--which resulted in the UN Charter and UN organization? As someone who was trained to teach US History, I can tell you I was never taught a huge amount of very important facts about the Outlaw US Empire--indeed, many of my presentations and essays resulted in educating my professors! And some talk of colonizing Mars! That's a huge howler! And I haven't even touched upon Junk Economics and its related Randian Crappola.

SmoothieX12 | Jul 19, 2017 3:15:59 PM | 12
@2, karlof1
The diminishing capacity to get a proper look at global affairs is related to the rise in Imperial Hubris of the Outlaw US Empire, which I turn degrades your ability to properly respond to events--particularly those created by Empire policy. I think this is a part of what b's writing about here.

It is more than just rise, however correctly pointed out by you, of Imperial Hubris--the whole panoply of the "tools" of military-political analysis is plain and simple wrong. This failure is based on a metaphysical mistake -- wrong reading of history, especially of the 20th Century, which led to an ultimate failure in understanding the issues of scales and proportions. What was merely a once in a lifetime window of opportunities due to a specific combination of geopolitical, military, economic etc. factors in the immediate wake of WW II was perceived as a dialectic and inevitable march of history in favor of messianic USA, not a gift to be cherished. Sand castles on the beach, however, do not live long, the high tide has arrived some time ago.

TimmyB | Jul 19, 2017 3:55:08 PM | 13
I'm shocked, shocked I tell you, that a country's executive branch has clashed with its judiciary branch. Errr, isnt that the entire point of separating these two government functions, so they will clash instead of having the judicary act as a rubber stamp for the executive? In the US, we call it the "Separation of Powers Doctrine." What is so wrong when other countries, such as Iran, have the same policy our Founding Fathers wanted us to have?
Kalen | Jul 19, 2017 4:04:21 PM | 14
Of course there is nothing sensational to write about, everyday occurrence elbowing for influence peddling and positioning within grid of political power.
But more interesting is what such a common, for US Iran and most of other countries, occurrences really mean, namely political game within strictly limited range of moves mostly for benefit of electoral audience entertainment while constitutional and judicial framework makes sure that Deep state and Rulling elite interests, political and economic are satisfied no matter what.

As in the US DOJ, FBI, CIA etc., are organizations aimed directly to protect oligarchic rule, IRG protects ruling class of clerics in Iran, in both countries under guise of protecting constitution and law and order, earthly or heavenly.

Unfortunately, the overall collapse of civilization corrupted by money and power in a unprecedented global dimension of mass mental enslavement, extereme radical consumerism, religion,nationalism or delusional psychotic cult of globalism and suicidal growth of social cancers is ubiquitous within societies crazed by fetish of material or immaterial social products or commodities, monetizing everything including most of all human flesh, relations, culture, religion, and humanist egalitarian societies. Such a decomposing ocean of human flesh spawned an mercenary army of human looking zombies conditioned and ready to violently defend their own enslavement for whatever reason was fed into their rotten brains.


karlof1 | Jul 19, 2017 4:17:43 PM | 15
SmoothieX12 @12--

Thanks for your reply! Unfortunately, "What was merely a once in a lifetime window of opportunities due to a specific combination of geopolitical, military, economic etc. factors in the immediate wake of WW II was perceived as a dialectic and inevitable march of history in favor of messianic USA," this "metaphysical mistake" had already ingrained itself into the Outlaw US Empire's Mythos as Manifest Destiny and quickly found its way into all realms of discourse by the mid-1840s. The creation and perpetuation of such a grandiose mythos can only be done though lies and the deliberate falsification of history. As Hoarsewhisperer @9 intoned:

"The America dream
You have to be asleep
To believe it."

SmoothieX12 | Jul 19, 2017 5:17:29 PM | 16
@15, Karlof1
Outlaw US Empire's Mythos as Manifest Destiny and quickly found its way into all realms of discourse by the mid-1840s. The creation and perpetuation of such a grandiose mythos can only be done though lies and the deliberate falsification of history

While I don't disagree with you, it has to be well understood that any big "player" by 19th Century had its own version of Manifest Destiny e.g. Russia as a Third Rome. But it was namely through WW II where US could claim a "victory" over Nazism (hence a vast field of Anglo-American WW II history falsifiers) and thus realize itself as a continental power that the issue of exceptionalism really have got into over-drive and resulted in US literally running itself into the ground. When one has a political class (and population) not conditioned by continental warfare--it is almost inevitable.

spinworthy | Jul 19, 2017 5:43:58 PM | 18
Regarding, "crapification".

I get the impression the situation is typically less a matter of, "the editors demand a fast one on some less familiar issue", than certain intelligence operatives tasked with gaming the media echo chamber, feed well placed assets prioritized talking points to create the illusion of a 'thing'.

Any western reporting on America's/Israel's numero uno enemy du jour cannot be anything other than psyops. The strategy of 'full spectrum' BS necessitates that the media become the biggest (and most cost effective) venue for conducting psyops.

Just look at the media shitstorm regarding Russia, different crap, same difference!

karlof1 | Jul 19, 2017 6:12:07 PM | 19
SmoothieX12 @16--

"The issue of exceptionalism"

Yes, on the international stage I must agree with you, although it would've occurred earlier if the US government hadn't censored George Seldes's interview with Hindenburg shortly after the Armistice. Hindenburg: "The American infantry won the World War in battle in the Argonne." (p 24; You Can't Print That ; George Seldes; Payson & Clarke, Ltd; New York; 1929)

Arguably, however, if the interview hadn't been censored and been published as the world-wide scoop that it was, then the "Stab in the Back" propaganda charge wouldn't have had anything to uphold it and Hitler's movement wouldn't have happened, although it's very likely the Pacific War would've occurred regardless. Censorship and Propaganda always have unforeseen consequences.

nobody | Jul 19, 2017 7:00:42 PM | 20
a century old discussion

Posted by b on July 19, 2017 at 11:36 AM | Permalink

Not sure where you are getting that number from. The doctrine was introduced by Khomeini, at some point after his exile: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hokumat-e_Islami_:_Velayat-e_Faqih_%28book_by_Khomeini%29

It is also not a "discussion", b. It is a thought-crime to criticize this doctrine in the Islamic Republic.

Laguerre | Jul 19, 2017 7:20:15 PM | 23
re 3 willy2
- One doesn't have to occupy Iran in its entirety. One can simply occupy the Khuzestan oil province in the west of Iran to cripple the iranian government.
That was what Saddam thought in 1980. I suppose that's a bit too much like ancient history for you to know anything about that war.
nobody | Jul 19, 2017 7:56:58 PM | 24
messianic USA

Posted by: SmoothieX12 | Jul 19, 2017 5:17:29 PM | 16

Is it not true that (some) Russians believe that ("Holy") Russia has a messianic role to play in the history of mankind?

To what extent would you say this self perception is prevalent among the Russian people and the Russian ruling elite?

George Smiley | Jul 19, 2017 7:57:45 PM | 25
https://mobile.almasdarnews.com/article/breaking-trump-orders-cia-halt-financial-military-aid-rebels-syria/

WOW

nobody | Jul 19, 2017 8:05:15 PM | 26
[The New York Times] was very sympathetic to the revolution.

Posted by: Mike Maloney | Jul 19, 2017 1:36:03 PM | 8

No shit. Afterall, the West provided assistance at every turn to the "revolutionaries" -- many of whom are now residents of USA -- to topple the Shah of Iran. Most of you know zip about Iran, "1953", and the role of Soviet Union, UK, France, Germany, and United State of America in the concerted effort to topple the uber nationalist Shah of Iran. You will not write our history for us, I assure you.

Curtis | Jul 19, 2017 8:06:02 PM | 27
For any planned future for Iran, look at the pictures from Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Gaza. As to the usual suspects, it's funny that they're Mideast experts but mostly connected to Israel.

George Smiley 25

The break in US support for the rebel factions is interesting in that it hasn't been public in US MSM. This includes the new coalition that doesn't want to attack Syrian government forces.

nobody | Jul 19, 2017 8:13:58 PM | 28
WOW

Posted by: George Smiley | Jul 19, 2017 7:57:45 PM | 25

Is "WOW" a neologism for Déjà vu?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boland_Amendment

Liam | Jul 19, 2017 9:22:07 PM | 34
Just released and there is nothing else like it - Truth of Ukraine War Revealed: Watchdog Media Releases Definitive Chronological Timeline Video of Ukrainian War From Euromaidan to MH-17 https://clarityofsignal.com/2017/07/19/truth-of-ukraine-war-revealed-watchdog-media-institute-releases-definitive-chronological-timeline-video-of-ukrainian-war-from-euromaidan-to-mh-17/
Temporarily Sane | Jul 19, 2017 10:29:27 PM | 37
@29 ben

Concise and spot-on summary that sums up the state of "journalism" in 2017.

@18 spinworthy

Remember 911 hero Ashleigh Banfield ? Her "fall from grace" is a typical example of what happens to American journalists who try to tell tell the truth about the empire's wars.

[Jul 14, 2017] Is Killing Leaders Useful Or Not - U.S. Centcom Can't Decide

Notable quotes:
"... Jenan Moussa interviews captured ISIS from Raqqa being held by Kurds; summarizes in series of tweets . Tunisian ISIS prisoner tells her Muslim Brotherhood encouraged Tunisians to jihad in Syria. Hey, I thought MB was just a peaceful Islamic political movement? Jenan wrote the story earlier this year about how Nusra was really in charge of Idlib, not FSA or other moderate head-chopper variants. She writes for Al AAn - full interview article here (in Arabic) ..."
"... "There is no instance of a country having benefited from prolonged warfare." - Sun Tzu ..."
"... How is the ownership/leadership of a proxy army determined? Their rise was facilitated and funded by US allies under the watchful and approving eye of the US. My guess is the buck stops at the white house and their leadership could have been found there. ..."
"... Killing ISIS leaders? Do you mean like the Saudi, Qatari and Emirati royalty? I don't know... it seems like it would be a pretty effective. I would be willing to let CENTCOM give it a shot. Say, the top six or so layers of the ruling families and/or wealthiest/most powerful in each of those countries. I would be willing to accept significant civilian collateral damage as long as it was restricted to other assorted royals, oligarchs and their banks. Please try to avoid the 'little people', most of whom will be out in the streets celebrating the strikes. ..."
"... Assassination (extrajudicial murder) is contrary to longstanding international law and norms. It was the Israelis who deliberately pushed the envelope on this, followed by the U.S. with its overt drone program. ..."
"... Forty years ago, officially sanctioned assassination programs, revealed by Senate investigators, was considered shocking headline grabbing scandals in the U.S. Times have obviously changed, not for the better. Nowadays talk of death and killing is common in the lexicon of so-called "leaders". ..."
Jul 14, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

... ... ...

Then the Micah Zenko tweet with this interview with the commander of U.S. Central Command, General Votel. Votel is the direct superior of the above Nicholson:

Q: ISIS leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi -- dead or alive? And does it matter anymore?

Votel: [..] I hope that he is (dead), frankly. [..] That said, we've been doing this long enough to know that leaders are killed and we've killed plenty of them. And that there's always somebody who is going to step up into those positions so we shouldn't think that just killing Baghdadi is the key here. He can be replaced. So in that regard, it may not matter as much. [bold added]

Nicholson says he can win the war against XYZ by killing a bunch of successive XYZ "leaders". Votel rightly says that this is clearly not so. During sixteen years of War of Terror and constant killing of various "emirs" special boilerplate statements were prepared for the typical "victory" announcements. Votel seems to have understood that such killings do not matter. His direct subordinate Nicholson did not. Shouldn't they talk to each other about such issues?

But it may well be that Votel would have sounded very different if his troops had killed Baghdadi and not a Russian(!) air strike .

Lea | Jul 14, 2017 5:17:48 PM | 1

James Mattis cannot get over it. He. Just. Cannot. His statement reads like he was on the verge of tears.

http://www.firstpost.com/world/james-mattis-cannot-confirm-whether-islamic-state-leader-abu-bakr-al-baghdadi-is-dead-3814389.html

frances | Jul 14, 2017 5:27:49 PM | 2
Must be tough to lose a guy so much was invested in, yes?
james | Jul 14, 2017 5:54:08 PM | 3
kill, or murder a leader ( not to mention numerous possible innocent people) and they get replaced with another... what part of this does the drone program, dipshits and etc in the usa not get??
JSonofa | Jul 14, 2017 6:06:43 PM | 4
Just wondering if they asked JFK first.
ben | Jul 14, 2017 7:08:14 PM | 8
b asked: "Is Killing "Leaders" Useful Or Not?" No, but, some of the ones behind the scenes, maybe.
ben | Jul 14, 2017 7:31:07 PM | 9
P.S.- "Terrorists don't all wear hijabs, many wear Brooks Bros. suits.
PavewayIV | Jul 14, 2017 6:07:19 PM | 5
Jenan Moussa interviews captured ISIS from Raqqa being held by Kurds; summarizes in series of tweets . Tunisian ISIS prisoner tells her Muslim Brotherhood encouraged Tunisians to jihad in Syria. Hey, I thought MB was just a peaceful Islamic political movement? Jenan wrote the story earlier this year about how Nusra was really in charge of Idlib, not FSA or other moderate head-chopper variants. She writes for Al AAn - full interview article here (in Arabic)
Anonymous | Jul 14, 2017 6:11:59 PM | 6
james @14

It is part of the charade in which the US claims to be attacking ISIS whilst actually supporting it.

nonsense factory | Jul 14, 2017 6:56:01 PM | 7
Killing "terrorist leaders" is only good for one thing - domestic political ratings. The politicians get to say they're winning the war on terror, you get some good PR, that's about it. It's the same as with arresting drug cartel leaders - it has zero effect on the availability of cheap cocaine in Phoenix, Arizona.

The external factors, that's what needs to be addressed. As with, for example, the drug trade in Mexico, laundering their money into Mexican banks and from there off to London and New York for a real clean-up (and a hefty percentage to Wall Street). The terrorist analogue is that many of these groups were set up and financed and armed as proxy forces for regime change; so as long as the guns & money keeps being delivered, nothing really changes. And with the end of the Cold War and the fall of the Berlin Wall, the only justification for continued bloated MIC budgets in the USA is terrorism - so they've got to keep it going. Killing the useful idiots every now and then, that's part of the game too.

michaelj72 | Jul 14, 2017 7:43:25 PM | 10
it's like with the drug cartel leaders and their subordinates and their sub-subordinates here in Mexico.....you kill one and another takes their place and so on....

But meanwhile back at the ranch, there's more violence in the area/plaza and the country as a whole because all the subordinates and of course the other cartels and their leaders and subordinates fight over the plaza/area/routes etc etc... a never ending cycle of violence.

I can't see how the strategies in either case are that much different, as you are essentially not dealing with the root causes of the appeal of ISIS nor with the causes of the drug violence which is of course dependent on addictions and governments preferring violence and force over talk/rehab/negotiations and in the case of the drugs, decriminalization/legalization.

The US can never 'win' in Afghanistan for the simple reason that it is an occupying/imperial power.

"There is no instance of a country having benefited from prolonged warfare." - Sun Tzu

Peter AU | Jul 14, 2017 7:46:18 PM | 11
"Is Killing "Leaders" Useful Or Not"

How is the ownership/leadership of a proxy army determined? Their rise was facilitated and funded by US allies under the watchful and approving eye of the US. My guess is the buck stops at the white house and their leadership could have been found there.

PavewayIV | Jul 14, 2017 8:18:35 PM | 12
Killing ISIS leaders? Do you mean like the Saudi, Qatari and Emirati royalty? I don't know... it seems like it would be a pretty effective. I would be willing to let CENTCOM give it a shot. Say, the top six or so layers of the ruling families and/or wealthiest/most powerful in each of those countries. I would be willing to accept significant civilian collateral damage as long as it was restricted to other assorted royals, oligarchs and their banks. Please try to avoid the 'little people', most of whom will be out in the streets celebrating the strikes.

When do we let the Tomahawks fly, Mad Dog? Tell the corpse-like Votel that it's time to smoke a few top head-choppers! Riyadh, Doha, Dhubai... take your pick. Better yet, why don't we just fund a Shia insurgency in each of those countries for a little ol' fashioned regime-changin'?

jayc | Jul 14, 2017 9:04:28 PM | 15
Assassination (extrajudicial murder) is contrary to longstanding international law and norms. It was the Israelis who deliberately pushed the envelope on this, followed by the U.S. with its overt drone program.

Forty years ago, officially sanctioned assassination programs, revealed by Senate investigators, was considered shocking headline grabbing scandals in the U.S. Times have obviously changed, not for the better. Nowadays talk of death and killing is common in the lexicon of so-called "leaders".

ProPeace | Jul 14, 2017 9:25:52 PM | 16
Speaking of killing: Want To Shoot A Palestinian? Israel offers tourists the chance to be soldiers

[Jul 14, 2017] The US dilemma over Syria is that, if they stop financing the proxy forces, then Syria will establish economic cooperation with Iran. There's no doubt at all that it was the expansion of Syria-Iran economic cooperation that motivated the Syrian regime change games of Hillary Clinton and the Obama Administration (Israel and Saudi Arabia, too)

Notable quotes:
"... The Qatar-Saudi split has been brewing for a long time, and, despite the BS in the American media, it has nothing at all to do with who was financing ISIS and Al Qaeda in Syria. ..."
"... So looking at all this, I'm guessing that the Borg State's last great hope is an American-Kurdistan client state, a big wedge in eastern Syria, northern Iraq that might just be able to block the revival of Iran-Syria economic ties - but, obviously, that would work a whole lot better if they could connect it to Jordan/Saudi Arabia, isolating Syria from Iran. This seems like a failed effort, entirely. ..."
"... From the Syrian people's viewpoint, economic cooperation with Iran and China looks like a very good deal indeed, far better than any deal the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia could offer them. The same could very well be true for Qatar, which would put some more nails in the PNAC coffin. ..."
Jul 14, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
nonsense factory | Jul 13, 2017 4:46:25 PM | 11

The American Borg State dilemma over Syria is that, if they stop financing the proxy forces, then Syria will clearly re-establish economic cooperation with Iran. There's no doubt at all that it was the expansion of Syria-Iran economic cooperation that motivated the Syrian regime change games of Hillary Clinton and the Obama Administration (Israel and Saudi Arabia, too) - it's all detailed in the Cablegate Wikileaks releases. From 2008-2010, there's endless obsession from Washington about how to "wean Syria from Iran" and bring it into the Saudi-Isreali axis. For example, UK Telegraph 2012:

...Iran-and-Syria-lay-ambitious-plans-for-road-rail-air-and-electricity-links.html

That was the reason behind the rabid regime change effort Clinton pushed for.

Not only that, there's the other major external economic actor, China, reaching out to Iran and Syria:

http://www.trtworld.com/asia/china-russia-led-security-bloc...

The American Borg State dilemma over Syria is that, if they stop financing the proxy forces, then Syria will clearly re-establish economic cooperation with Iran. There's no doubt at all that it was the expansion of Syria-Iran economic cooperation that motivated the Syrian regime change games of Hillary Clinton and the Obama Administration (Israel and Saudi Arabia, too) - it's all detailed in the Cablegate Wikileaks releases. From 2008-2010, there's endless obsession from Washington about how to "wean Syria from Iran" and bring it into the Saudi-Isreali axis. For example, UK Telegraph 2012:

...Iran-and-Syria-lay-ambitious-plans-for-road-rail-air-and-electricity-links.html

That was the reason behind the rabid regime change effort Clinton pushed for.

Not only that, there's the other major external economic actor, China, reaching out to Iran and Syria:

http://www.trtworld.com/asia/china-russia-led-security-bloc...

To top it off, there's the Qatar-Iran-Turkey pipeline issue - i.e., Qatar could sign a deal to export its gas to Europe via Iran and Turkey. Again, this is a Wikileaks Cablegate topic. Here's something from March 2009, Hillary Clinton meeting with her Bahraini friends (who dumped $32 million into the Clinton Foundation, if we want to talk about collusion with foreign entities. . .)

The meeting also included a discussion of Iran, military cooperation, and regional politics, including Qatar and the GCC plus 3 plus P5 plus 1 mechanism. Additionally, the Foreign Minister raised the Qatar-Iran-Turkey oil pipeline . . .
The Qatar-Saudi split has been brewing for a long time, and, despite the BS in the American media, it has nothing at all to do with who was financing ISIS and Al Qaeda in Syria.

So looking at all this, I'm guessing that the Borg State's last great hope is an American-Kurdistan client state, a big wedge in eastern Syria, northern Iraq that might just be able to block the revival of Iran-Syria economic ties - but, obviously, that would work a whole lot better if they could connect it to Jordan/Saudi Arabia, isolating Syria from Iran. This seems like a failed effort, entirely.

From the Syrian people's viewpoint, economic cooperation with Iran and China looks like a very good deal indeed, far better than any deal the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia could offer them. The same could very well be true for Qatar, which would put some more nails in the PNAC coffin. div

Anonymous | Jul 13, 2017 5:14:03 PM | 14
One common current aim is the defeat of ISIS."

Not really. The US military strategy is to keep ISIS going as long as possible, to justify US military presense in east Syria and to allow The Kurds (TM) (Pat Pend) to acquire more turf. The US is bombing al Hasakah in east Syria whilst ISIS shells it. This largely Arab city will be ethnically cleansed courtesy of a combination of US bombing, ISIS shelling and Kurdish occupation. It is also about midway along the riverway between Deir ez Zor and al Qamishli, another SAA enclave.

[Jul 12, 2017] The Syrian Test of the Trump-Putin Accord by Ray McGovern

Schizophrenic and very well armed America is a real danger to the world...
The USA is no longer can be considered as a country that can obey agreements and treaties signed. That means that it is pariah on international stage and only the power of Us military-industrial complex keeps other countries from spitting in the US representatives face.
Notable quotes:
"... Yet, the key to Putin's assessment of Donald Trump is whether the U.S. President is strong enough to make the mutually agreed-upon ceasefire stick. As Putin is well aware, to do so Trump will have to take on the same "deep-state" forces that cheerily scuttled similar agreements in the past. In other words, the actuarial tables for this cease-fire are not good; long life for the agreement will take something just short of a miracle. ..."
"... Secretary of State Rex Tillerson will have to face down hardliners in both the Pentagon and CIA Tillerson probably expects that Defense Secretary James "Mad-Dog" Mattis and CIA Director Mike Pompeo will cooperate by ordering their troops and operatives inside Syria to restrain the U.S.-backed "moderate rebels." ..."
"... But it remains to be seen if Mattis and Pompeo can control the forces their agencies have unleashed in Syria. If recent history is any guide, it would be folly to rule out another "accidental" U.S. bombing of Syrian government troops or a well-publicized "chemical attack" or some other senseless "war crime" that social media and mainstream media will immediately blame on President Bashar al-Assad. ..."
"... Last fall's limited ceasefire in Syria, painstakingly worked out over 11 months by Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and approved personally by Presidents Obama and Putin, lasted only five days (from Sept. 12-17) before it was scuttled by "coalition" air strikes on well-known, fixed Syrian army positions, which killed between 64 and 84 Syrian troops and wounded about 100 others. ..."
"... In public remarks bordering on the insubordinate, senior Pentagon officials a few days before the air attack on Sept. 17, showed unusually open skepticism regarding key aspects of the Kerry-Lavrov agreement – like sharing intelligence with the Russians (an important provision of the deal approved by both Obama and Putin). ..."
"... The Pentagon's resistance and the "accidental" bombing of Syrian troops brought these uncharacteristically blunt words from Foreign Minister Lavrov on Russian TV on Sept. 26: ..."
"... "My good friend John Kerry is under fierce criticism from the U.S. military machine. Despite the fact that, as always, [they] made assurances that the U.S. Commander in Chief, President Barack Obama, supported him in his contacts with Russia apparently the military does not really listen to the Commander in Chief." ..."
"... Lavrov specifically criticized Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman, Gen. Joseph Dunford for telling Congress that he opposed sharing intelligence with Russia despite the fact, as Lavrov put it, "the agreements concluded on direct orders of Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. President Barack Obama [who] stipulated that they would share intelligence." Noting this resistance inside the U.S. military bureaucracy, Lavrov added, "It is difficult to work with such partners." ..."
"... Putin picked up on the theme of insubordination in an Oct. 27 speech at the Valdai International Discussion Club, in which he openly lamented: ..."
"... "My personal agreements with the President of the United States have not produced results. people in Washington are ready to do everything possible to prevent these agreements from being implemented in practice." ..."
"... It took, actually, not even Syria but Ukraine to expose a complete incohesiveness of US power structure–it is literally not treaty-worthy. It can not be since itself is divided into parties with, sometimes, diametrically opposite views (and objectives). It is really sad and embarrassing. ..."
"... Today was yet another corporate America Trump defamation day. Trump's son admitted that last year the Russians gave him evidence that H. Clinton did corrupt deals in Russia. What were these deals? No one cares! It does not matter, we all know she is corrupt. Clinton is not open for attack! The Trumpers committed treason by simply accepting such evidence! Impeach! ..."
"... America wanted regime change from the get-go. Rebels in Syria got huge amounts of weapons courtesy of America and its allies. John McCain pleaded for rebels to get weapons and support. The result was Al Qaida using American TOW missiles. ..."
Jul 10, 2017 | www.unz.com

The immediate prospect for significant improvement in U.S.-Russia relations now depends on something tangible: Will the forces that sabotaged previous ceasefire agreements in Syria succeed in doing so again, all the better to keep alive the "regime change" dreams of the neoconservatives and liberal interventionists?

Or will President Trump succeed where President Obama failed by bringing the U.S. military and intelligence bureaucracies into line behind a cease-fire rather than allowing insubordination to win out?

These are truly life-or-death questions for the Syrian people and could have profound repercussions across Europe, which has been destabilized by the flood of refugees fleeing the horrific violence in the six-year proxy war that has ripped Syria apart.

But you would have little inkling of this important priority from the large page-one headlines Saturday morning in the U.S. mainstream media, which continued its long obsession with the more ephemeral question of whether Russian President Vladimir Putin would confess to the sin of "interference" in the 2016 U.S. election and promise to repent.

Thus, the headlines: "Trump, Putin talk election interference" ( Washington Post ) and "Trump asks Putin About Meddling During Election" ( New York Times ). There was also the expected harrumphing from commentators on CNN and MSNBC when Putin dared to deny that Russia had interfered.

In both the big newspapers and on cable news shows, the potential for a ceasefire in southern Syria – set to go into effect on Sunday – got decidedly second billing.

Yet, the key to Putin's assessment of Donald Trump is whether the U.S. President is strong enough to make the mutually agreed-upon ceasefire stick. As Putin is well aware, to do so Trump will have to take on the same "deep-state" forces that cheerily scuttled similar agreements in the past. In other words, the actuarial tables for this cease-fire are not good; long life for the agreement will take something just short of a miracle.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson will have to face down hardliners in both the Pentagon and CIA Tillerson probably expects that Defense Secretary James "Mad-Dog" Mattis and CIA Director Mike Pompeo will cooperate by ordering their troops and operatives inside Syria to restrain the U.S.-backed "moderate rebels."

But it remains to be seen if Mattis and Pompeo can control the forces their agencies have unleashed in Syria. If recent history is any guide, it would be folly to rule out another "accidental" U.S. bombing of Syrian government troops or a well-publicized "chemical attack" or some other senseless "war crime" that social media and mainstream media will immediately blame on President Bashar al-Assad.

Bitter Experience

Last fall's limited ceasefire in Syria, painstakingly worked out over 11 months by Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and approved personally by Presidents Obama and Putin, lasted only five days (from Sept. 12-17) before it was scuttled by "coalition" air strikes on well-known, fixed Syrian army positions, which killed between 64 and 84 Syrian troops and wounded about 100 others.

In public remarks bordering on the insubordinate, senior Pentagon officials a few days before the air attack on Sept. 17, showed unusually open skepticism regarding key aspects of the Kerry-Lavrov agreement – like sharing intelligence with the Russians (an important provision of the deal approved by both Obama and Putin).

The Pentagon's resistance and the "accidental" bombing of Syrian troops brought these uncharacteristically blunt words from Foreign Minister Lavrov on Russian TV on Sept. 26:

"My good friend John Kerry is under fierce criticism from the U.S. military machine. Despite the fact that, as always, [they] made assurances that the U.S. Commander in Chief, President Barack Obama, supported him in his contacts with Russia apparently the military does not really listen to the Commander in Chief."

Lavrov specifically criticized Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman, Gen. Joseph Dunford for telling Congress that he opposed sharing intelligence with Russia despite the fact, as Lavrov put it, "the agreements concluded on direct orders of Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. President Barack Obama [who] stipulated that they would share intelligence." Noting this resistance inside the U.S. military bureaucracy, Lavrov added, "It is difficult to work with such partners."

Putin picked up on the theme of insubordination in an Oct. 27 speech at the Valdai International Discussion Club, in which he openly lamented:

"My personal agreements with the President of the United States have not produced results. people in Washington are ready to do everything possible to prevent these agreements from being implemented in practice."

On Syria, Putin decried the lack of a "common front against terrorism after such lengthy negotiations, enormous effort, and difficult compromises."

Lavrov's Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, meanwhile, even expressed sympathy for Kerry's quixotic effort, giving him an "A" for effort.after then-Defense Secretary Ashton Carter dispatched U.S. warplanes to provide an early death to the cease-fire so painstakingly worked out by Kerry and Lavrov for almost a year.

For his part, Kerry expressed regret – in words reflecting the hapless hubris befitting the chief envoy of the world's "only indispensible" country – conceding that he had been unable to "align" all the forces in play.

With the ceasefire in tatters, Kerry publicly complained on Sept. 29, 2016: "Syria is as complicated as anything I've ever seen in public life, in the sense that there are probably about six wars or so going on at the same time – Kurd against Kurd, Kurd against Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Sunni, Shia, everybody against ISIL, people against Assad, Nusra [Al Qaeda's Syrian affiliate]. This is as mixed-up sectarian and civil war and strategic and proxies, so it's very, very difficult to be able to align forces."

Admitting Deep-State Pre-eminence

Only in December 2016, in an interview with Matt Viser of the Boston Globe , did Kerry admit that his efforts to deal with the Russians had been thwarted by then-Defense Secretary Ashton Carter – as well as all those forces he found so difficult to align.

"Unfortunately we had divisions within our own ranks that made the implementation [of the ceasefire agreement] extremely hard to accomplish," Kerry said. "But it could have worked. The fact is we had an agreement with Russia a joint cooperative effort.

"Now we had people in our government who were bitterly opposed to doing that," he said. "I regret that. I think that was a mistake. I think you'd have a different situation there conceivably now if we'd been able to do that."

The Globe's Viser described Kerry as frustrated. Indeed, it was a tough way for Kerry to end nearly 34 years in public office.

After Friday's discussions with President Trump, Kremlin eyes will be focused on Secretary of State Tillerson, watching to see if he has better luck than Kerry did in getting Ashton Carter's successor, James "Mad Dog" Mattis and CIA's latest captive-director Pompeo into line behind what President Trump wants to do.

As the new U.S.-Russia agreed-upon ceasefire goes into effect on Sunday, Putin will be eager to see if this time Trump, unlike Obama, can make a ceasefire in Syria stick; or whether, like Obama, Trump will be unable to prevent it from being sabotaged by Washington's deep-state actors.

The proof will be in the pudding and, clearly, much depends on what happens in the next few weeks. At this point, it will take a leap of faith on Putin's part to have much confidence that the ceasefire will hold.

Ray McGovern was an Army officer and CIA analyst for almost 30 years. He now serves on the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press). He can be reached at: [email protected] . A version of this article first appeared on Consortiumnews.com.

Andrei Martyanov , Website July 11, 2017 at 4:44 pm GMT

Only in December 2016, in an interview with Matt Viser of the Boston Globe, did Kerry admit that his efforts to deal with the Russians had been thwarted by then-Defense Secretary Ashton Carter – as well as all those forces he found so difficult to align.

It took, actually, not even Syria but Ukraine to expose a complete incohesiveness of US power structure–it is literally not treaty-worthy. It can not be since itself is divided into parties with, sometimes, diametrically opposite views (and objectives). It is really sad and embarrassing.

Carlton Meyer , Website July 12, 2017 at 4:31 am GMT

Today was yet another corporate America Trump defamation day. Trump's son admitted that last year the Russians gave him evidence that H. Clinton did corrupt deals in Russia. What were these deals? No one cares! It does not matter, we all know she is corrupt. Clinton is not open for attack! The Trumpers committed treason by simply accepting such evidence! Impeach!

I watched part of Oliver Stone's interview. The reason Snowden remains in Russia is because the USA refuses to sign an extradition treaty with Russia. There are several Russians living in the USA wanted for looting large sums in Russia, and Putin wants justice, but they are exempt, like Hillary. Read about her Russian Uranium kickback deal, its on-line, but of no interest to our corporate media.

Not news in the USA!

Ram , July 12, 2017 at 10:06 am GMT

@Sean " Assad could not win a free election and everyone knows it. "

Just as everyone knows that Russia won the election for Trump as enunciated by the Israeli Ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley.

Jon Halpenny , July 12, 2017 at 10:33 am GMT

Sean, that is pure nonsense. America wanted regime change from the get-go. Rebels in Syria got huge amounts of weapons courtesy of America and its allies. John McCain pleaded for rebels to get weapons and support. The result was Al Qaida using American TOW missiles.

[Jul 11, 2017] The Consequences of Donald Trump Jr.s Stupidity

This female lawyer probably can be characterized as anti-Russian lawyer. She is more probably MI6 asset then FSB asset ;-) (connection with William F. Browder ).
But attempts to stir the pot of Purple Color Revolution ( aka Russiagate) will continue. Neocons are pretty tenacious.
Notable quotes:
"... That it was, yes, ethically promiscuous!but, worse, incredibly stupid. One recalls the line, often incorrectly attributed to Talleyrand, in response to a burgeoning scandal at the French court: "It was worse than a crime; it was a blunder.'' ..."
"... But he didn't give up. At last week's G-20 Summit in Hamburg, in a long meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Trump sought to get beyond the matter of Russia's U.S. political interference and take up other serious matters of mutual interest to the two countries, with a hope of easing tensions. It was an important development in a crucial area of U.S. foreign policy. Now the president is back on the defensive, his back to the wall, with his opponents positioned to immobilize him on his Russian policy. ..."
"... But, in terms of Trump's command of his policy toward Russia, it almost doesn't matter because the new revelations will constrict his range of action irrespective of what may lie behind them. The forces that have wanted to destroy the president, or at least destroy his ability to bring about a détente with Putin, are once again in the saddle. One has to wonder at, perhaps even marvel at, the timing in all this. ..."
Jul 11, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com

During a post-dinner cigar session at his elegant Cleveland mansion, Hanna reported back to McKinley on the results of his mission. Another participant recalled that the excited Hanna seemed "as keen as a razor blade.''

"Now, Major," said the political operative, addressing the governor by his Civil War title, "it's all over but the shouting. You can get both New York and Pennsylvania, but there are certain conditions." He didn't show any discomfort with the conditions, but McKinley was wary.

"What are they?" he asked. Hanna explained that Quay wanted control of all federal patronage in Pennsylvania, while others wanted to dominate government jobs in New England and Maine. But Platt wanted a bigger prize!the job of secretary of the Treasury!and he wanted a promise in writing.

McKinley stared ahead, puffing on his cigar. Then he rose from his chair, paced the room a few moments, and turned to Hanna.

"Mark," he said, "there are some things in this world that come too high. If I were to accept the nomination on those terms, the place would be worth nothing to me, and less to the people. If those are the terms, I am out of it.''

Hanna was taken aback. "Not so fast," he protested, explaining that, while it would be "damned hard" to prevail over the powerful bosses, who would surely not take kindly to a rebuff, Hanna thought it could be done and he welcomed the challenge. The men in the room pondered the situation and came up with a slogan: "The People Against the Bosses.''

McKinley ultimately beat the bosses, stirring a Washington Post reporter to write that "the big three of the Republican Party hoped to find McKinley as putty in their hands. When they failed, they vowed war on him." But now, said the reporter, their war was sputtering. "And over in the Ohio city by the lake, one Mark Hanna is laughing in his sleeve.''

This little vignette from the mists of the political past comes to mind with the latest development in the ongoing saga involving suspected Russian interference in last year's presidential campaign and the search for evidence that President Trump or his top campaign officials "colluded" with Russians to influence the electoral outcome. Now it turns out that the president's son, Donald Jr., met with a Russian lawyer, at the behest of a Russian friend, with an understanding beforehand that the lawyer could provide "official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary [Clinton] and her dealings with Russia and be very useful to your father." For good measure, Donald Jr. took along his brother-in-law, Jared Kushner, a top Trump adviser, and his father's campaign manager at the time, Paul Manafort.

This is no small matter, and it is certain to roil the waters of the ongoing investigations. More significantly, it will roil the political scene, contributing mightily to the deadlock crisis that has America in its grip. White House officials and Trump supporters are defending young Trump with pronouncements that nothing was amiss here; every campaign collects dirt on opponents; nothing done was against the law; we must get beyond these "gotcha" political witch hunts, etc., etc.

Meanwhile. Trump opponents see skulky tendencies, nefarious intent, moral turpitude, and likely illegality. Both sides are trotting out criminal lawyers declaring, based on their prior political proclivities, that no laws were broken!or that laws were clearly broken. The cable channels are crackling with competition over who can be more definitive and sanctimonious on the air!Lou Dobbs and Sean Hannity at Fox in defending the president; or Rachel Maddow and Chris Matthews in attacking him on MSNBC.

Meanwhile, the country will continue to struggle with the question of what all this Sturm und Drang actually means. What to think? Whom to believe?

Let's stipulate, for purposes of analysis, that what we see is what there is, that what we know is not a harbinger of worse to come. How should we assess what we know thus far? What should we make of that meeting with the Russian lawyer?

That it was, yes, ethically promiscuous!but, worse, incredibly stupid. One recalls the line, often incorrectly attributed to Talleyrand, in response to a burgeoning scandal at the French court: "It was worse than a crime; it was a blunder.''

Consider that, after months of investigation, with leaks all over the place from those conducting the probe, no serious evidence emerged of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians. The collusion story was receding in the national consciousness, and even in the Washington consciousness, with questions of "obstruction of justice" supplanting collusion as the more significant avenue of inquiry. Now the question of collusion is once again in the air.

The fate of Donald Trump Jr. is a puny matter in the scheme of things, but the state of the union is a huge matter. And the young man's stupidity of a year ago will have!indeed, is already having!a significant impact on the president's leadership. He campaigned on a pledge to improve relations with Russia, with an implicit acknowledgment that the West was probably equally responsible, along with Moscow, for the growing tensions between the two nations. He was right about that. Then came the evidence of Russian meddling in the U.S. election and the allegations of collusion, and Trump's effort at improving relations was killed in the crib.

But he didn't give up. At last week's G-20 Summit in Hamburg, in a long meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Trump sought to get beyond the matter of Russia's U.S. political interference and take up other serious matters of mutual interest to the two countries, with a hope of easing tensions. It was an important development in a crucial area of U.S. foreign policy. Now the president is back on the defensive, his back to the wall, with his opponents positioned to immobilize him on his Russian policy.

Now let's set aside, for just a moment, the previous stipulation that what we see is all there is. It's possible, of course, that this unfortunate meeting actually was part of a much bigger conspiracy that, if disclosed in full, could engulf the administration in revelations of such magnitude as to bring down the president. It's possible, but not likely.

But, in terms of Trump's command of his policy toward Russia, it almost doesn't matter because the new revelations will constrict his range of action irrespective of what may lie behind them. The forces that have wanted to destroy the president, or at least destroy his ability to bring about a détente with Putin, are once again in the saddle. One has to wonder at, perhaps even marvel at, the timing in all this.

Actions, even more than ideas, have consequences. That's what Trump Jr., Kushner, and Manafort ignored when they accepted an invitation to meet with a Russian representative with "official documents" that could harm the candidacy of the Democratic contender.

And that's precisely what William McKinley had in mind when he said he wouldn't enter into unsavory bargains with the Eastern bosses even if it meant giving up his presidential dream. Of course, McKinley was thinking in part about his own personal code of conduct!his inability to live with a decision that was beneath his concept of rectitude. But note that he also invoked the American people when he recoiled at the thought. He wouldn't take an action that he considered inconsistent with his duty to the electorate.

That was a long time ago!and a world away. Today we have the likes of the Trumps!and, for that matter, the Clintons, who leave nearly everyone in their wake when it comes to moral and ethical laxity in matters of public policy. And so it must have seemed perfectly normal for those three men, part of Donald Trump's inner circle of campaign confidantes, to accept the idea of sitting down with someone from a foreign power and talk about how official documents from that power could help upend their opponent. Did Trump himself know about all this as it was unfolding? We don't know, but probably. In any event, it probably wasn't a crime, but it was a hell of a blunder.

... ... ...

Robert W. Merry, longtime Washington, D.C., journalist and publishing executive, is editor of The American Conservative. His next book, President McKinley: Architect of the American Century , is due out from Simon & Schuster in November.

[Jul 11, 2017] Mattis still seems stuck with his Iran obsession. Shame I thought he had the intellectual curiosity to adapt.

Notable quotes:
"... Mattis still seems stuck with his Iran obsession. Shame I thought he had the intellectual curiosity to adapt. Trump has good instincts, I hope Tillerson comes to the fore, and Bannon stays influential. ..."
Jul 11, 2017 | www.unz.com

LondonBob > > says: Show Comment Next New Comment July 11, 2017 at 2:39 pm GMT

http://mihsislander.org/2017/06/full-transcript-james-mattis-interview/

Mattis still seems stuck with his Iran obsession. Shame I thought he had the intellectual curiosity to adapt. Trump has good instincts, I hope Tillerson comes to the fore, and Bannon stays influential.

[Jul 11, 2017] Ambassador Nikki Haley vs. President Trump by Daniel McAdams

Notable quotes:
"... As The Hill correctly pointed out, "Haley's description runs counter to the versions offered by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson , Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Trump himself ." ..."
"... But Hurricane Haley was not finished. She poured ice water on President Trump's agreement with President Putin to work together on cyber-security, telling CNN, "[w]e can't trust Russia, and we won't ever trust Russia. But you keep those that you don't trust closer so that you can always keep an eye on them and keep them in check." ..."
"... It is absolutely clear that hyper-neocon Nikki Haley has gone rogue and is actively undermining the foreign policy of her boss and President, Donald Trump. From her embarrassing, foaming-at-the-mouth tirades in the UN Security Council to this latest bizarre effort to sabotage President Trump's first attempt to fulfill his campaign pledge to find a way to get along better with Russia, President Trump's own Ambassador has become the biggest enemy of his foreign policy. ..."
Jul 11, 2017 | original.antiwar.com

Donald Trump came to the White House with a reputation as a top notch businessman. He built an international real estate empire and is worth billions. He then went into reality television, where his signature line as he dismissed incompetent potential employees was, "you're fired!"

On Friday, President Trump held a long-awaited face-to-face meeting with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin. The meeting was scheduled to be a brief, 30 minute meet and greet, but turned into a two-plus hour substantive session producing a ceasefire agreement for parts of Syria and a plan to continue working together in the future. After the extended session, which was cordial by all accounts, President Trump said the meeting was "tremendous."

President Trump indicated that the issue of Russian interference in the US elections came up in conversation and that Putin vehemently denied it. It obviously was not a make or break issue in the conversation. President Trump's latest statement on the issue is that "we don't know for sure" who was behind any meddling.

Later on Friday, President Trump's Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, said of the Syria agreement that, "I think this is our first indication of the U.S. and Russia being able to work together in Syria."

On Sunday, President Trump Tweeted in praise of the Syria ceasefire agreement, adding that, "now it is time to move forward in working constructively with Russia!"

It suddenly appeared that the current reprise of a vintage 1950s US/Soviet face-off in relations had turned the corner back to sanity. Perhaps we will be pulling back from the edge of WWIII with thermonuclear weapons!

Then President Trump's Ambassador to the United Nations, the notorious neocon Nikki Haley, showed up on the weekend talk shows.

To CNN's Dana Bash, she directly contradicted her boss, Donald Trump, and undermined his official position regarding Russian involvement in the US election.

Said Ambassador Haley of Trump's meeting with Putin:

One, he wanted to basically look him in the eye, let him know that, yes, we know you meddled in our elections. Yes, we know you did it, cut it out. And I think President Putin did exactly what we thought he would do, which is deny it. This is Russia trying to save face. And they can't. They can't. Everybody knows that Russia meddled in our elections.

As The Hill correctly pointed out, "Haley's description runs counter to the versions offered by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson , Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Trump himself ."

But Hurricane Haley was not finished. She poured ice water on President Trump's agreement with President Putin to work together on cyber-security, telling CNN, "[w]e can't trust Russia, and we won't ever trust Russia. But you keep those that you don't trust closer so that you can always keep an eye on them and keep them in check."

It is absolutely clear that hyper-neocon Nikki Haley has gone rogue and is actively undermining the foreign policy of her boss and President, Donald Trump. From her embarrassing, foaming-at-the-mouth tirades in the UN Security Council to this latest bizarre effort to sabotage President Trump's first attempt to fulfill his campaign pledge to find a way to get along better with Russia, President Trump's own Ambassador has become the biggest enemy of his foreign policy.

Surely the President – who as an enormously successful businessman has hired and fired thousands – can see the damage she is doing to his Administration by actively undermining his foreign policy.

President Trump needs to reprise his signature television line. He needs to pick up the phone, ask for Nikki, and shout "you're FIRED!" into the telephone.

Daniel McAdams is director of the The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity . Reprinted from The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity.

Read more by Daniel McAdams Manchester Bomber Was Product of West's Libya/Syria Intervention – May 24th, 2017 Is That All There Is? Intel Community Releases Its Russia 'Hacking' Report – January 8th, 2017 McCain to Trump: Don't You Dare Make Peace With Russia! – November 16th, 2016 The End of Interventionism? – October 26th, 2016 Jennifer Rubin: Hillary Must Stop Peace With Iran at All Costs! – August 18th, 2016

[Jul 11, 2017] While Trump Talks, The Pentagon Balks by Finian Cunningham

Notable quotes:
"... I predicted in the ICH comments a few days ago that the cease fire agreement would be sabotaged, what I didn't know was that the sabotage was already happening at the moment of the Trump-Putin hand shake. These crazies in the USA will not stop, ever, they are like the black knight in monty python's holy grail bridge crossing scene. ..."
Jul 11, 2017 | www.informationclearinghouse.info
July 11, 2017 " Information Clearing House " - On the same day US President Donald Trump gave a historic handshake to Russian leader Vladimir Putin at the G20 summit in Germany, the Pentagon was hosting a meeting planning for war with Moscow.

While the event at the US military headquarters near Washington DC was made public , it was hardly reported in the Western media. The two main figures attending were Defense Secretary James Mattis and his British counterpart Michael Fallon.

The American military publication Defense One headlined the Pentagon summit: "As Trump and Putin met, US and UK defense chiefs discussed ways to deter Russia."

The phrase "ways to deter Russia," is a euphemism for war planning. It expresses a more benign, more publicly acceptable purpose to Mattis and Fallon's discussions. Especially given that the titular head of the US government, President Trump, was at the very same time extending a hand of friendship to Putin.

The publication added, with more breathlessness, that Mattis and Fallon "talked about ways NATO could improve its combat power and deter Russian aggression in Eastern Europe that even as the White House seeks to improve relations with Moscow, US and UK leaders still view Russia as a severe military threat."

... ... ...

No wonder Trump has quickly backtracked on his earlier seeming rapport with Putin. He has, for example, disavowed reports of being willing to work with Russia on cyber security after coming under fire from hawkish Congress figures and pundits.

This week, too, the US is leading the biggest-ever war maneuvers conducted by the 29-member NATO military alliance in the Black Sea. Two separate war games are being carried out on Russia's southern flank: Saber Guardian, centered around Bulgaria, and Sea Breeze, off Crimea, involving a total of 30,000 NATO troops, as well as missile destroyers, fighter jets, and amphibious Marines forces. The US Army said it showcases "the ability to mass forces at any given time anywhere in Europe."

... ... ...

This bigger picture of relentless Russophobia, gratuitous anti-Russian propaganda in the US media, and the ongoing reckless goading by NATO forces on Russia's borders is an appropriate perspective with which to assess the significance of Trump's meeting with Putin last weekend.

Yes, indeed, it was good to see Trump having enough independence of mind and personal decorum to greet Putin with respect.

But the fact remains: while Trump talked, the Pentagon balked. And not just the Pentagon. Virtually, the whole US political and media establishment.
Ominously, the American political system and its military machine seem to operate on only one gear: onward with Russophobia and aggression.

Finian Cunningham (born 1963) has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages. Originally from Belfast, Ireland, he is a Master's graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a career in newspaper journalism. For over 20 years he worked as an editor and writer in major news media organizations, including The Mirror, Irish Times and Independent. Now a freelance journalist based in East Africa, his columns appear on RT, Sputnik, Strategic Culture Foundation and Press TV.

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Information Clearing House.

Ray Joseph Cormier 81p · 2 hours ago

Former Pentagon chief Ashton Carter said Trump's discussions in Hamburg were tantamount to chatting with "a burglar who had robbed your house."

In December 1998, Former Defence Secretary Ash Carter, Undersecretary of Defence John Deutch and Philip Zelikow, Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission, wrote this in Foreign Affairs Journal,

A successful attack with weapons of mass destruction could certainly take thousands, or tens of thousands, of lives. If the device that exploded in 1993 under the World Trade Center had been nuclear, or had effectively dispersed a deadly pathogen, the resulting horror and chaos would have exceeded our ability to describe it.

Such an act of catastrophic terrorism would be a watershed event in American history. It could involve loss of life and property unprecedented in peacetime and undermine America's fundamental sense of security, as did the Soviet atomic bomb test in 1949. Like Pearl Harbor, this event would divide our past and future into a before and after. The United States might respond with draconian measures, scaling back civil liberties, allowing wider surveillance of citizens, detention of suspects, and use of deadly force. More violence could follow, either further terrorist attacks or U.S. counterattacks.

I find it curious it happened just like that 3 years later, and one of the co-Authors was able to control what information the 9/11 Commission was able to see?
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-st...

mikel · 1 hour ago
This all goes to show how UK and US "leaders" are all living in a fantasy land. You have these two delusional Morton's discussing and planning for war with Russia. What it all boils down to is the fact that both the UK and the US are on their last legs economically and more war is the only way to keep kicking the can down the road.

They will need a scapegoat to blame the coming greater depression on, and it will conveniently be the evil Russians and the war we had to fight to "preserve our way of life". Anyone with an independent mind should wee right through that line of BS and understand that US/UK/NATO aggression is what we need to be concerned about. Not the evil "burglar" Putin.

ian · 1 hour ago
where is exactly this russian aggression all i see is US aggression
Brett Rasmussen · 1 hour ago
Orwell's Ministry of Truth at work.
Brett Rasmussen · 1 hour ago
I predicted in the ICH comments a few days ago that the cease fire agreement would be sabotaged, what I didn't know was that the sabotage was already happening at the moment of the Trump-Putin hand shake. These crazies in the USA will not stop, ever, they are like the black knight in monty python's holy grail bridge crossing scene.
Dick · 1 hour ago
I wonder if Hitler read the history of Napoleon's march into Russia before his attack on Russia, since he ultimately suffered the same fate. Hitler made the mistake of allowing the ideology of Arian superiority to override sober intelligent analysis of possible outcomes. The US is making the same mistake again by allowing the ideology of US exceptionalism to override a more sober assessment of potential outcomes with, no doubt, a similar result.

NATO promotes the idea of Russian aggression as an excuse to justify their militarising the Russian border. Who is the aggressor? Placing 5000 troops and equipment in the Baltic states as a show of force is like sending a dozen Chihuahuas to attack a bear; all they will be is an easy target if war erupts. Off course, there will not be a war, at least, not of the WW2 variety.

In a war between the US and Russia, it is Russia that has the logistical advantage via location and its primarily defensive military doctrine. The US and NATO need to stop sending in the Chihuahuas and seek a more sober policy, since it is NATO aggression that is the problem; not Russia.

DrS · 10 minutes ago
Guess who the REAL war mongers are!!! Injustice and Oppression are NEVER right. Bring on harmony, justice, peace.

Bring back care, concern, compassion, love and empathy for others regardless of culture, ethnicity and/or religion. Protect democracy, freedom, liberty, independence and sovereignty. Protect education and don't allow the MSM to continue deceit, deception, lies and propaganada.

[Jul 11, 2017] There's No Strategy Behind Trump's Wars -- Only Brute Force

Notable quotes:
"... Washington Post ..."
"... Los Angeles Times ..."
"... He's threatened a preemptive strike against North Korea, considered a major escalation in Yemen, and turned loose his military commanders to bomb wherever, however, and with whatever they choose, weakening even further the already insufficient restrictions Obama had put in place to try to minimize civilian casualties. Deaths of civilians under both U.S. drones and conventional airstrikes have escalated. ..."
"... For those who thought that military restraint was part of Trumpian isolationism, think again. ..."
"... Not one of these actions was necessary. Not one will make people in this country -- let alone the Afghans, Iraqis, Syrians, Yemenis, Somalis, or others -- any safer. Neither was any of these actions sanctioned by Congress: All violated the War Powers Act, and indeed the Constitution itself, which puts the power to declare war in the hands of the people's representatives. ..."
"... Furthermore, not one of them fulfilled the minimal United Nations Charter requirements for the legal use of military force -- either Security Council authorization or immediate self-defense. Thus they all violated international law. ..."
"... What we see in these attacks is not a strategy, but a new way of communicating raw power. ..."
"... Middle East expert Phyllis Bennis directs the New Internationalism project at the Institute for Policy Studies. ..."
Jul 11, 2017 | fpif.org
These are awesome days for headline writers. So many global settings, such an abundance of weapons, such a wealth of choices!

On the morning of April 14, the New York Times led with "A Giant U.S. Bomb Strikes ISIS Caves in Afghanistan," matched by CNN's "US Drops 'Mother of All Bombs.'" The Washington Post chose Syria, where "Errant U.S. Strike Kills 18: Victims in Syria Were Allied Forces." By mid-afternoon that same day, the Associated Press had shifted to the horn of Africa, where the "U.S. Sends Dozens of Troops to Somalia, 1st Time in Decades."

And as the Friday rush hour began in Washington, Fox News opted to head to the north Pacific, leading with an aircraft carrier: "The 'Powerful' USS Carl Vinson Steams Towards North Korea."

A few days earlier the most popular choices were various versions of CNN's "U.S. Launches Military Strike Against Syria." (That headline described something new only because the strike officially targeted a Syrian government military site, while ignoring the not-so-new reality that the U.S. has been attacking alleged ISIS targets in Syria with drones, bombing raids, and special forces for almost three years.)

A couple of weeks before that, coverage of the Trump wars focused on a devastating U.S. airstrike on Mosul, which a Los Angeles Times headline described as "One of the Deadliest Attacks on Civilians in Recent Memory." And just before that , the Bureau of Investigative Journalism highlighted "Nine Young Children Killed: The Full Details of Botched U.S. Raid in Yemen." (No headlines, however, told the full story of the U.S. role in Yemen. That one might've read "U.S.-Backed Saudi Bombing Has Killed Thousands, Worsened Famine Facing Millions in Yemen.")

Around the globe, as these headlines testify, Donald Trump has been cavalierly deploying troops and weapons, claiming such military actions are designed to send political messages.

He's threatened a preemptive strike against North Korea, considered a major escalation in Yemen, and turned loose his military commanders to bomb wherever, however, and with whatever they choose, weakening even further the already insufficient restrictions Obama had put in place to try to minimize civilian casualties. Deaths of civilians under both U.S. drones and conventional airstrikes have escalated.

For those who thought that military restraint was part of Trumpian isolationism, think again.

Raw Power

Not one of these actions was necessary. Not one will make people in this country -- let alone the Afghans, Iraqis, Syrians, Yemenis, Somalis, or others -- any safer. Neither was any of these actions sanctioned by Congress: All violated the War Powers Act, and indeed the Constitution itself, which puts the power to declare war in the hands of the people's representatives.

Furthermore, not one of them fulfilled the minimal United Nations Charter requirements for the legal use of military force -- either Security Council authorization or immediate self-defense. Thus they all violated international law.

And even beyond the illegality, not one could claim a strategic, legitimate, or moral justification.

Of course, the U.S. has been at war in various combinations of Afghanistan and Iraq, Libya and Syria, Yemen, Somalia, and beyond since George W. Bush declared the global war on terror just after the 9/11 attacks of 2001. In some of these countries, the U.S. was at war even before that. But Trump's actions represent major escalations in every one of those devastated nations. According to the British human rights monitor AirWars, well over 1,000 civilians may have been killed by U.S.-led forces just in Iraq and Syria in March alone, the highest monthly total they've ever tracked.

What we see in these attacks is not a strategy, but a new way of communicating raw power.

How does it work? Instead of sending diplomats to help get all warring parties involved in negotiations, you drop the largest non-nuclear bomb ever used in combat on one of the world's poorest countries. Instead of supporting UN efforts to create incremental ceasefires, you send special forces. Instead of investing money, time, and high-level attention to help shift regional conflicts from the battlefield to the negotiating table, you send armed drones to drop more bombs.

And, of course, instead of increasing funding for diplomacy, you strip 29 percent of the State Department budget, and nearly zero out humanitarian aid, and hand it all over to the Pentagon as part of a $54 billion increase in military spending.

None of this is in service of any actual policy, just a unifying theme: War trumps diplomacy. Bullies rule. It's a shock-and-awe attack -- many shock-and-awe attacks, actually -- to drive home a message aimed not only at troops on the ground or militants holed up in a cave, but also at the populations as a whole, across Afghanistan, Syria, Somalia, Iraq, Yemen, and beyond. The goal seems to be ensuring that no question remains as to where and with whom the ultimate power resides.

It's also a message to a domestic audience here in the United States, designed to shock if not surprise: The bully in the White House is calling the shots.

Invigorating the Peace Movement

The question now isn't what Trump -- or the generals and billionaires filling his cabinet -- will do next. It's what will we do next, as opponents of these wars?

In short, we need to integrate opposition to these wars into the very core of the movements already rising so powerfully against racism, for women's and LGBTQ rights, for climate and economic justice, for Native rights, for immigrant rights and refugee protections, for Palestinian rights, and much more.

We know that some approaches from earlier efforts are needed once again. Building ties with and privileging the voices of people facing the consequences of U.S. actions, dying under the bombs or reeling under brutal sanctions, remain crucial. Lifting up anti-war veterans provides entre to important new audiences. Reminding people of how U.S. wars are too often fought for resources -- as well as for the expansion of power, for military bases, for regional and global domination, and how racism informs all of Washington's wars -- are all key to popular education.

What we do know is that everyone -- from Syrians, Iraqis, Afghans, Somalis, and Yemenis to those of us in this country -- needs diplomacy to win out over war. We've faced wars for decades now, but we've also had some victories where negotiations triumphed over force -- in Cuba, in Paris at the climate talks, and most especially in the Iran nuclear deal.

We know what diplomacy looks like, and we know how to fight for it.

We'll need new strategies, new tactics -- but we continue to stand on the shoulders of those who have gone before us. Our country is waging war against peoples across the globe, indeed waging war against the earth itself. But we are still here, challenging those wars alongside those who guard the earth, who protect the water, who defend the rights of those most at risk.

The great historian Howard Zinn reminds us of it all: Our country's history began in the genocide of indigenous nations and the enslavement of Africans brought here in chains. But from that beginning it also became a country of people's movements against genocide and slavery, against racism and misogyny and Islamophobia, of movements for justice, for internationalism, and yes, for peace. Middle East expert Phyllis Bennis directs the New Internationalism project at the Institute for Policy Studies.

[Jul 11, 2017] I think that the prospects for US-Russia cooperation in Syria are not very good and the reason for that is that the U.S. and Russia are diametrically opposed on the issue of Iran and Iranian influence in the region

Notable quotes:
"... There was an agreement between Obama and Putin last year about targeting the Islamic State, but that collapsed. ..."
"... I think it's worth recalling exactly why the September agreement between Obama and Putin collapsed, right? The United States attacked and killed Syrian troops so that deal was essentially undone by the actions of the Pentagon. ..."
"... Well, but just to explain there, the Pentagon claimed that that airstrike was a mistake, but the theory around that by the Pentagon's critics is that it was not a mistake. It was a deliberate effort to sabotage this US-Russia cooperation. ..."
"... While any cease fire agreement should be welcomed, I just don't see how. I don't see any long term prospects for success there due to ... the widely divergent views on Assad and on Iran. ..."
"... Can the U.S. and Russia cooperate inside Syria if the U.S. is hellbent on confronting Iran, which by all indications from the Trump Administration that seems very likely. Is Iran possibly expendable to Moscow? ..."
"... I think the other thing that gets lost in conversation is that, especially among the foreign policy establishment that we were just talking about, is that the United States is in Syria illegally. We're not there at the invitation of The Sovereign Syrian government. We're not there on behalf of a UN mandate. And certainly operations against Assad are certainly not covered under the AUMF; the Authorization of Use of Military Force that was passed after 9/11. We're ... I just find it astounding that that never comes up. We actually have absolutely no right to be there and really we shouldn't be there, but again, if we can find a way to work with the Russians against ISIS, fine. But again, I'm deeply pessimistic about America's role in the Middle East generally and specifically in Syria. ..."
Jul 11, 2017 | http://therealnews.com/t2/story:19511:Trump-&-Putin-Talk,-But-US-Russia-Confrontation-Lingers"therealnews.com

ARON MATE: James, you mention Syria. Let's talk about that for a second because that was another outcome of this Putin, Trump meeting. Tillerson said something interesting when he was talking about what Putin and Trump had agreed on. After the two sides reached a ceasefire in Southwestern Syria, which is come into effect. Tillerson said, "I think this is our first indication of the U.S. and Russia being able to work together in Syria." Now perhaps he's just talking about the U.S. in terms of the U.S. under President Trump, but just recently the U.S. and Russia have tried to work together in Syria. There was an agreement between Obama and Putin last year about targeting the Islamic State, but that collapsed. I'm wondering if you can talk about that context and what test do you think this new supposed partnership inside Syria is facing?

JAMES CARDEN: Yeah. I think it's worth recalling exactly why the September agreement between Obama and Putin collapsed, right? The United States attacked and killed Syrian troops so that deal was essentially undone by the actions of the Pentagon.

AARON MATE: Well, but just to explain there, the Pentagon claimed that that airstrike was a mistake, but the theory around that by the Pentagon's critics is that it was not a mistake. It was a deliberate effort to sabotage this US-Russia cooperation.

JAMES CARDEN: Right. Well, either way, it was undone. There's no way to know whether or not it was an accident or if it was intentionally done. We have to leave that to historians, but the point is, I guess, is that it was undone. I think that the prospects for US-Russia cooperation in Syria are not very good and the reason for that is that the U.S. and Russia are diametrically opposed on the issue of Iran and Iranian influence in the region. While any cease fire agreement should be welcomed, I just don't see how. I don't see any long term prospects for success there due to ... the widely divergent views on Assad and on Iran.

AARON MATE: That's a very key point. Can the U.S. and Russia cooperate inside Syria if the U.S. is hellbent on confronting Iran, which by all indications from the Trump Administration that seems very likely. Is Iran possibly expendable to Moscow?

JAMES CARDEN: No. No, I don't think so. I think the other thing that gets lost in conversation is that, especially among the foreign policy establishment that we were just talking about, is that the United States is in Syria illegally. We're not there at the invitation of The Sovereign Syrian government. We're not there on behalf of a UN mandate. And certainly operations against Assad are certainly not covered under the AUMF; the Authorization of Use of Military Force that was passed after 9/11. We're ... I just find it astounding that that never comes up. We actually have absolutely no right to be there and really we shouldn't be there, but again, if we can find a way to work with the Russians against ISIS, fine. But again, I'm deeply pessimistic about America's role in the Middle East generally and specifically in Syria.

AARON MATE: James, I don't want to get too sidetracked on this point because it's off topic, but I want to say one thing about the U.S. role. I mean what do you say though to those who would argue, well, look if the U.S. isn't there, then they're not there to provide vital support to the Kurds when they fight ISIS in taking back Kobani 'cause without them, the Kurds could have been slaughtered.

JAMES CARDEN: The Kurds can work with the Russians. We're not the only game in town in the Middle East, but we have rather pressing issues closer to home. I don't really see why the United States needs to play such a large role in Middle East affairs.

[Jul 10, 2017] The Second Cold War by Steffen A. Woll

Notable quotes:
"... [AKA "Carthage"] ..."
Dec 10, 2015 | www.unz.com

In the light of the conflicts in Ukraine and Syria, there has been much talk about the clouding of US-Russian relations. Some voices in the Internet's alternative media sections have conjured the possibility that these conflicts might lead to a new major war, while social networks like Twitter saw the usage of the hashtags #WorldWarIII and #WorldWar3 explode after Turkey shot down a Russian Sukhoi Su-24 jet in the vicinity of the Syrian border. Headlines in mainstream media outlets like Foreign Policy and the Guardian also proclaimed, "Welcome to Cold War III" and asked "are we going back to the bad old days?".

This article suggests that although the ideological division of the Cold War ended de facto with the collapse of the Soviet Union, American geopolitical schemes to contain Russian power abroad have never really been abandoned. Throughout the 1990s and until today, US policymakers have been determined to wage overt or covert proxy wars with the aim of curbing its former adversary's political, economic, and military influence. Chechnya, Ukraine, and Syria are the key spots where the logic of this second Cold War is played out.

A short glance over the state of the world today and its representation in the media suffices to identify a growing number of actual and potential centers of conflicts: Civil war is raging in parts of Ukraine, military tensions are growing in the South Chinese Sea, and the Middle East is more of a mess than ever. Nonetheless, some have suggested that the actual number of armed conflicts has actually reached a historical low. But this assertion is solely based on statistical preference. It is true that interstate (conflicts between two or more states) wars are on the decline. Instead, wars today are much more likely to take the form of intrastate conflicts between governments and insurgents, rather than national armies fighting over territory. As demonstrated to an outstanding degree in Syria, these conflicts are more and more internationalized and involve a bulk of non-state actors and countries who try to reach their goals through proxies rather than direct involvement, which would require "boots on the ground."

But let's start at the end. The end of the Cold War, that is. The situation during the years of systemic antagonism between the Eastern and Western Blocs has sometimes been captured in the image of three separate "worlds": the capitalist First World, the socialist Second World, and a Third World. The latter term was not used as a marker for impoverishment and instability as it is commonly understood today, but as a postcolonial alternative "third way" for those newly independent states that struggled to avoid their renewed absorption by the two towering ideological empires. One strategy through which developing countries attempted to duck the neocolonial policies of the Cold War Blocs was by founding the informal Non-Alignment Movement (NAM) in 1961, initiated by India, Indonesia, Egypt, Ghana, and Yugoslavia. Counting 120 members as of now!in fact a large part of the global South!the movement's anti-imperialist and anti-colonial stance has lost much of its bargaining power after the end of the Cold War.

Still, the final document of the movement's 1998 summit in Durban, South Africa suggests that the end of the long-standing bipolar power configuration has by no means led to the betterment of those countries' situation. Unipolar American dominance and the collapse of the Soviet Union instigated what was understood to be "a worrisome and damaging uni-polarity in political and military terms that is conducive to further inequality and injustice and, therefore, to a more complex and disquieting world situation." This analysis turned out to be correct in many respects, particularly concerning the period of the 1990s.

While the Clinton years of domestic prosperity saw the US economy achieve the rarity of a budget surplus, the citizens of its erstwhile antagonist were (probably with the exception of Boris Yeltsin ) experiencing the more sobering effects of Russia's political and economic paradigm shift. Democratic Russia struggled to consolidate its deeply shaken economy in an environment ripe with organized crime, crippling corruption, and under the doubtful patronage of oligarchs like Boris Berezovsky who controlled the influential television channel ORT and whom Ron Unz in " Our American Pravda " described as "the puppet master behind President Boris Yeltsin during the late 1990s."

The actual situation in the former Soviet heartland during the 1990s was utterly different from what American elites and media often depicted as a "golden age" of newfound democracy and a ballooning private sector. From the perspective of many US elites, the country's plundering by oligarchs, ruthless criminal gangs, kleptocratic politicians, and corrupt military officers was welcomed as a convenient, self-fulfilling mechanism to permanently destabilize its mortally wounded adversary. But Russia never completed all the stages of collapse , not least because Yeltsin's successor Vladimir Putin eventually took legal action to put such "businessmen" like Roman Abramovich and Berezovsky out of business. The latter was forced to seek refuge in London, from where he threatened to use his £850m private fortune to plot " a new Russian revolution " and violently remove his former protégé from the Kremlin.

The chaotic and aimless term of the alcoholic Yeltsin is often regarded as a chiefly positive time in which the East and the West closed ranks, although politicians and neoconservative think tanks in reality conducted the political and economic sellout of Russia during these years. The presidency of Vladimir Putin, while anything but perfect and with its own set of domestic issues, still managed to halt the nation's downward spiral in many areas. Nevertheless, it is persistently depicted by Western elites and their "Pravda" as dubious, "authoritarian," and semi-democratic at best.

Thus, in spite of Francis Fukuyama's triumphalist proclamation of the "End of History" after the fall of the Berlin wall that supposedly heralded the universal rein of liberal democracy, the legacy of the Cold War is anything but behind us. Ostensibly, the current geopolitical situation with its fragmented, oblique, and often contradictory constellations and fault lines is utterly different from the much more straightforward Cold War dualism. Of the Marxist ideology only insular traces remain today, watered down and institutionalized in China, exploited in a system of nationalistic iconography in Cuba, and arranged around an absurdly twisted personality cult in North Korea. As of 2015, Russia is an utterly capitalistic nation, highly integrated in the globalized economy and particularly interdependent with the members of the European economic zone. Its military clout and budget ( $52 billion ) are dwarfed by US military spending of $598.5 billion in 2015. Even more importantly, after 1991 Russia had to close down or abandon many of its important bases, ports and other military installations as a result of the NATO's eastward expansion.

Nevertheless, the sheer size of its territory and its command of a substantial nuclear weapon arsenal cement Russia's role as a primary threat to American national interests. This is illustrated by the fact that for three and a half decades the US has covertly supported radical Islamic movements with the goal to permanently destabilize the Russian state by entrapping it in a succession of messy and virtually unwinnable conflicts. Pursued openly during the Soviet-Afghan War of the 1980s, this scheme continued to be employed throughout the 1990s during both Chechen Wars, as well as in Russia's so-called "near abroad" spheres of influence: Dagestan, Ingushetia, South Ossetia, and other former Soviet vassal republics in the Caucasus, which have constantly suffered from extremists who exploit the lack of governmental pervasion in their remote mountain regions. These regions are home to over 25 million ethnic Russians and important components of the country's economy. After the Soviet-Afghan War and the CIA's buildup of Osama bin-Laden's "resistance fighters," American policymakers recognized the destabilizing potential inherent in the volatile political and sectarian configurations in the Islamic countries that encircle the post-Soviet Russian borderlands.

Hence, despite many political ceremonies, pledges of cooperation, and the opening of Moscow's first McDonalds in 1990, this policy was never fully abandoned. As a matter of fact, peaceful political coexistence and economic convergence never were the primary goals. Democratic Russia with its allies, military potential, and possible Eurasian trade agreements that threaten to isolate or hamper US hegemony was and still is considered a menace to American ambitions of unipolar, universal dominance.

Since the First Chechen War in 1994, Russia's prolonged struggle against Islamic terrorism has for the most part been disregarded by Western media. Particularly after 9/11, the "war on terror" acted like a black hole that sucked up the bulk of the Western media's attention. When the acts of terrorism on Russian soil became too horrifying to ignore!the 2002 Moscow theater hostage crisis and the 2004 Beslan school siege in particular!the massive death tolls were blamed on the drastic responses of Russian security forces who were not adequately prepared and overwhelmed by the vicious and meticulously planned attacks. In Beslan, the death of hundreds of innocents (186 children were murdered on their first day at school) was indirectly condoned and sardonically depicted as the consequences of the "separatist movement [and its] increasingly desperate attempts to break Russia's stranglehold on its home turf." Truly, to describe those who shoot children in front of their parents and vice versa as "separatists" and glorify them as "rebels" who act in self defense against an "authoritarian" regime demands a very special kind of callous apathy.

In a 2013 article that examined the Chechen descent of the suspects behind the Boston Marathon bombing, retired FBI agent and 2002 Time Person of the Year Coleen Rowley exposed "how the Chechen 'terrorists' proved useful to the U.S. in keeping pressure on the Russians." She explicitly refers to a 2004 Guardian piece by John Laughland, in which the author connects the anti-Russian sentiments in the BBC and CNN coverage of the Beslan massacre to the influence of one particular organization, the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya (ACPC), whose list of members reads like "a rollcall of the most prominent neoconservatives who so enthusastically (sic) support the 'war on terror,'" among them Richard Perle, Elliott Abrams, James Woolsey, and Frank Gaffney. Laughland describes the ACPC as an organization that

heavily promotes the idea that the Chechen rebellion shows the undemocratic nature of Putin's Russia, and cultivates support for the Chechen cause by emphasising the seriousness of human rights violations in the tiny Caucasian republic. It compares the Chechen crisis to those other fashionable "Muslim" causes, Bosnia and Kosovo – implying that only international intervention in the Caucasus can stabilise the situation there.

There are three key elements in the organization's lobbying strategy to denigrate Russia and promote an intervention in Chechnya that serve to unmask a larger pattern behind the US foreign policy after 9/11. First, the labeling of a particular leader or government as "authoritarian" or in some other way "undemocratic" (Vladimir Putin, in this case). Second, the concept of an oppressed yet positively connoted population that strives for freedom and democracy (Chechen terrorists with ties to a-Qaeda , in this case). Finally, the stressing of "human rights violations" that warrant an intervention or economic embargo.

If all of these conditions are satisfied, the violation of the borders of a sovereign state is seen as justified (UN mandate not needed), enabling the US to emerge as a knight in shining armor and champion of human rights, bolting to the rescue of the world's downtrodden, while covertly achieving an utterly different goal: To further the logic of a second Cold War through proxy warfare and weaken Russian by diminishing its foothold in its surrounding "near abroad" regions, which in many respects represent vital interests, both economically and strategically.

Swap out names and dates and it becomes evident that the same tripartite strategy was used to justify every recent intervention of the US and other NATO members, in Iraq (2003), Libya (2011), and Syria (since 2011). Interventions that were legitimized under the banner of humanitarian relief through the removal of "authoritarian" tyrants and supposed dictators and which have resulted in the deaths of an estimated 500,000 people, in Iraq alone . When the ASPC's made its appeal regarding Chechnya in 2004, mind you, only one year had passed since the Abu Ghraib torture photos were leaked and two years since the first inmates arrived in the extralegal detention center at Guantanamo Bay.

Regarding the sweltering conflict in Ukraine's Donbass region, the key dynamics are similar. President Viktor Yanukovych, accused by the Euromaidan movement!fueled by aggressive US and EU media propaganda and enticed with promises of lucrative NATO and EU memberships!of "abusing power" and "violation of human rights," was forced to resign and replaced with a ultranationalist, anti-Russian and pro-Western government. Again, this campaign had nothing to do with actual humanitarian relief or concerns about the country's democratic integrity. Instead, the hopes of a whole generation for a better future under Western influence were exploited by US policymakers who hoped to stifle Russia's geostrategic elbowroom by ousting the naval bases of its Black Sea Fleet from the Crimea.

These bases, mostly located in the city of Sevastopol, have been the home port of the Russian navy for over 230 years, and are vital because they provide the only direct access to the Black Sea and (through the Bosporus strait in Turkey) to the Mediterranean. Any expansion of NATO towards these bases had to be regarded as a direct threat, leaving the Russian government practically no choice but to protect them with all means necessary. However, in the stories emanating from Western mainstream media, these bases were showcased as an occupation of sovereign Ukrainian territory and used as proof of Russia's aggressive, "authoritarian," and imperial aspirations. In reality, Ukraine and Russia signed a Partition Contract in 1997, in which the Ukraine agreed to lease major parts of its facilities to the Russian Black Sea Fleet until 2017, for an annual payment of $98 million.

Along the lines of the currently revitalized genre of alternate history, let's briefly indulge in the notion that we were still living in the ideologically divided world of the Cold War, in which the Warsaw Pact still existed. For a second, imagine if Mexico or Guatemala or Canada expressed their desire to join said pact and invited its troops to conduct military exercises at their shared border with the US. Even without the existence of an American naval base in that country, how do you think the US would react to such a scenario? Would it stand by idly and let itself be surrounded by its adversaries? For an even more striking parallel, take the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. The American military actually has a naval base there!Guantanamo Bay, home to the infamous detention camp. Many historians see the deployment of Soviet missiles and troops on the island as the closest that humanity ever came to entering World War III and mutually assured destruction (MAD). With its support for "regime change" in Ukraine and extension of the NATO to the Russian borders, the US today is engaged in the same old Cold War superpower games that the Soviets played in Cuba 53 years ago. In fact, we should think of Ukraine as being situated in Mother Russia's "backyard."

Thousands of miles away from the coasts of North America, the Middle East is the region that Uncle Sam seems to regard as his very own backyard. Many consider George W. Bush's "War on Terror" after 9/11 and the subsequent interventions in Iraq and (to a lesser degree) Afghanistan as those catastrophic policy decisions that resulted in the sociopolitical destabilization of large parts of this region, resulting in the death, injury, and displacement of millions. In Iraq, Libya, and Syria, the spurious US rhetorical agenda of removing "tyrants" and endowing the local demographics with the liberating gift of democracy has in fact produced vast ungoverned spaces where militant groups like the al-Qaeda offshoot Jabhat al-Nusra and the Islamic State (also known as ISIS, ISIL, or Daesh ) were able to carve out their "caliphates" and claim other territorial prices. For a long time, the rapid expansion of the Islamic State and its death-loving, apocalyptic ideology was resisted only by the Syrian Arab Army (SAA), the paramilitary National Defense Forces (NDF), and Kurdish Popular Protection Units (YPG). The SAA alone has lost as much as 200,000 soldiers in its struggle against various terrorist factions since March 2011.

US politicians and media have expressed their hopes that the Russian intervention to assist the Syrian government in its resistance against these Western, Saudi, and Turkey-backed groups will result in a military and economic debacle, comparable to the Soviet-Afghan war, which lasted well over nine years. It was during the course of this brutal and protracted conflict that US policymakers realized that there was really no need to shed American blood in order to deal the death blow to the Soviet Union. They drew their lessons from the CIA's countless ventures in South American "nation building," where a government's legitimacy and an opposition's status as either terrorists or freedom fighters depended on their usefulness for American national interests, often accoutered in pithy terms like the "war on drugs."

Since the days of Pablo Escobar, however, US foreign policy has shifted its main focus towards the Middle East, where the long-term goal has been to weaken the enemies of Israel and strengthen the enemies of Iran. Other goals are to guarantee American access to oil and other natural resources, to establish military bases and consolidate the network of troops abroad, and to secure arms deals for the one-percenters who preside over what president Eisenhower cautioned his nation about in his farewell address: the "military-industrial complex." As a consequence of the failures in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Obama administration has shifted its strategy towards aerial and drone only warfare combined with the support and (illusion of) control over local militant factions.

Among the many groups fighting in Syria, the Free Syrian Army (FSA), also known as "moderate rebels," is the US faction of choice. Much like the bin Laden's Mujahideen fighters in 1980s Afghanistan, they are armed with the help of the CIA . In spite of their apparent moderation, however, a wealth of evidence suggests that this group is directly responsible for a multitude of massacres , mass executions , the ethnic cleansing of non-Sunni citizens, and eating the hearts of their fallen enemies .

The FSA has also been a suspect in the 2013 Ghouta chemical attacks, which some have claimed the US used as a false flag operation to engender international support for the violent removal of the Syrian government. The subsequent UN investigation however failed to establish any conclusive evidence concerning the perpetrator of the war crime and concluded that the sarin gas used in the attacks had most certainly been removed from government arsenals. Based on this information, US, UK, and French leaders and media outlets insisted that the Syrian government had to be the culprit, and immediately pressed the international community to support an intervention with the goal of eradicating Syria's alleged arsenal of nerve gas and other potential WMDs. This all begins to sound very familiar. Of course, they also requested the bolstering of the "moderate opposition." Interestingly, though, the official UN report , "careful not to blame either side," let on that investigators were actually being accompanied by rebel leaders at all times. Moreover, they repeatedly encountered "individuals [ ] carrying other suspected munitions indicating that such potential evidence is being moved and possibly manipulated." On page 13, the report goes on to state that

[a] leader of the local opposition forces [ ] was identified and requested to take 'custody' of the Mission [ ] to ensure the security and movement of the Mission, to facilitate the access to the most critical cases/witnesses to be interviewed and sampled by the Mission [ ].

Recently, Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain have protested that their "moderate rebels" were being targeted unjustly by Russian airstrikes in Syria, complaining that "from their [i.e., the Kremlin's] perspective, they're all terrorists." Sometimes, one is inclined to advise them, it can be wise and healthy to assume an outsider's perspective and check if your reality still coincides with the facts that so many know are true about the FSA. These facts can be broken down to a very short yet concise formula: If it looks like a terrorist, if it talks like a terrorist, if it behaves like a terrorist!it probably is a terrorist.

Instead, the CIA is still supplying the "activists" with outdated-yet-deadly weapons from Army surplus inventories, including hundreds of BGM-71 TOW (" T ube-launched, O ptically tracked, W ire-guided") anti-tank missile systems, which the terrorists use against hard and soft targets alike. The same weapon platform can be seen in action in a recent FSA video that shows the destruction of a Russian helicopter that was sent to extract the Russian pilots at the crash site of their downed Su-24 plane on November 24, 2015. On the same day, another US-supplied TOW missile was used in an ambush targeting a car occupied by RT news journalists Roman Kosarev, Sargon Hadaya, and TASS reporter Alexander Yelistratov in Syria's Latakia province.

The FSA and other groups, branded as "moderates" who fight against the "authoritarian" forces of tyranny (just like a certain " Saudi businessman " back in the day), function as US proxies in Syria, just like al-Qaeda did in the heyday of the Soviet-Afghan War. They are dangerously unstable pawns in a global strategy to secure American and Israeli interests in the Middle East, irrespective of the millionfold suffering and uprooting of entire societies caused by their crimes, the majority of which is directed towards other Muslims.

Commenting on the Russian military intervention at the invitation of the Syrian government, Mr. Obama said that he had no interest in turning this civil war into a proxy war between Russia and the United States, emphasizing that "this is not some superpower chessboard contest." But this is exactly what US foreign policy, both Republican and Democrat, has done, starting with the end of the Soviet Union and lasting until this very moment. The only difference now being that the Libya-proven rhetorical strategy of (illegal and mandate-less) intervention via "no-fly zones," "humanitarianism," and "regime change" did not have the desired effect in Syria because Iran, Lebanon, and Russia did not abandon their ally. Their combined effort succeeded in fending off an unprecedented onslaught of extremists that infiltrated the country, often across the Southern Turkish border, armed with the money of American taxpayers and Wahhabi sheiks.

The Syrian conflict can no longer be described as a civil war. It may have started as one during the ill-fated "Arab Spring" of 2011, when armed "protesters" (i.e., FSA terrorists) murdered several policemen and set government buildings on fire in Daraa, provoking a violent backlash from government forces. The ensuing nationwide chaos was spun by the Western mainstream media troika , namely those media outlets that serve as propaganda tools for the US political and financial elites and who fabricated the myth of the tyrant who massacred peaceful protestors!to be readily sucked up by their indoctrinated clientele.

As a result of the "moderate's" recent setbacks, the official American position, insofar as its mixed messages can be deciphered, has boiled down to a butt-hurt attitude and passive aggressive lecturing about how to distinguish between varying degrees of moderation among mass-murdering lunatics. Outmaneuvered and publicly exposed, all that is left for Mr. Obama seems to be to pick up the pieces and save some face by accepting Mr. Putin's offer to join a united front against terrorism in Syria. But such a step seems unthinkable in this ongoing Cold War between Russia and the US. Instead, the most powerful man on earth talks about climate change as the most pressing problem of our times. When it comes to ISIS, he has said he wanted to "contain" them. Meanwhile, tensions are rising as Turkish president Erdogan, on an power trip after his surprising landslide victory in November's general elections, apparently collaborated with ISIS and risked provoking an NATO Article 5 response by downing a Russian Su-24. On the other side of the equation, Russia's decision to intervene on behalf of the Syrian government reveals a twofold strategy: On the one hand, trough its direct action it positions the Putin government as being opposed to the fatal logics of proxy warfare. On the other hand, it simultaneously exposes the catastrophic flaws of Mr. Obama's strategies in Syria and the Middle East.

All these developments do not necessarily mean that we are heading for World War III!although logic dictates that it will happen at some point in the future. In reality, though, a full-on nuclear confrontation would require a massive unraveling of the still sufficiently functional channels of political cooperation and interstate diplomacy. International security and economic communities as well as overlapping alliances like the United Nations, NATO, OSCE, and BRIC all indicate a high level of international integration.

Nonetheless, the geopolitical decisions of the last years herald the start of a new period in political history that indeed corresponds to a Cold War constellation. Particularly US foreign policy is currently undergoing the revival of a more offensive realism, visible in recent demonstrations of power in NATO's Eastern border states, pushing of the TPP agreement in the Pacific economic area, and aggressive patrolling of the South Chinese Sea. In fact, the avoidance of superpower confrontation at all costs seems to increasingly take a back seat these high-risk maneuvers.

In the late 1940s the first Cold War began as a war of the words when the powers who had together defeated Nazi Germany started to level criticism at their respective global policies. With the help of their media and propaganda sources, their different stances and perspectives solidified and eventually developed into monolithic ideologies. These in turn spawned the geopolitical doctrines that warranted the replacement of any open (i.e., nuclear) confrontation with confined proxy wars as in Korea, Vietnam, and Afghanistan. A similar erosion of mutual trust, respect, and solidarity is taking place now as the outsourced US-Russian conflicts in Ukraine and Syria remain unsolved. Again, the second Cold War arises as a war of the words while negative sentiments are allowed to petrify and the glacial rhetorics of mistrust and veiled threats gradually begin to replace talk about common interests and cooperation. The influential and policy-shaping Foreign Affairs magazine already struck the right chords of the passive-aggressive Cold War parlance by titling , "Putin's Game of Chicken: And How the West Can Win."

At the end of the day, this exact attitude could be one of the reasons why the US might come out on the losing side of this conflict. Because they have not yet realized this is not a "game of chicken" anymore. In fact, this is no longer the same easy game of manipulation that the US played during the 1990s by throwing cheap shots at a collapsing state. The deployment of its air force in Syria is not least a signal to the American establishment that Russia in 2015 no longer stands at the sidelines and watches begrudgingly as the US and its allies commence their disastrous policies in the Middle East.

When Mr. Obama asserted that "this is not some superpower chessboard contest," he therefore either told a lie or he demonstrated his government's utter cluelessness with regard to the actual situation and consequences of their actions in Ukraine, Syria, the South Chinese Sea, and other hotspots of the second Cold War. Both possibilities do not bode well for the future.

Steffen A. Wöll is currently enrolled in the American Studies Master's program at Leipzig University. His research interests include foreign policy, the Middle East, popular culture, as well as radical millennialist and environmentalist movements in the US. RSS Category: Foreign Policy , History Tags: Middle East , New Cold War , Russia , Ukraine Recently from Author

KA [AKA "Carthage"] , December 10, 2015 at 7:52 am GMT

"They drew their lessons from the CIA's countless ventures in South American "nation building," where a government's legitimacy and an opposition's status as either terrorists or freedom fighters depended on their usefulness for American national interests, often accoutered in pithy terms like the "war on drugs."

Thank you. In a nutshell, the phenomenon of terrorism and self serving idea of "nation building" have been clarified .

On a different note -Memory of Checehn terrorism has become somewhat foggy distant and distorted . Checehn terrorist have always enjoyed enormous goodwill and support in Poland,US and UK . But at the onset when Dudayev was the secessionist leader , it was still a unarmed nonviolent political process with mutual (Russian and Checehnyan) disagreement .

It has been suggested that the same forces who later supported Checehn terrorism also provoked Yeltsin to mount unnecessary attacks on Chechen .

Kiza , December 10, 2015 at 9:10 am GMT

A nice article by a German (I am guessing). So different then what comes from the US.

My impression is that the Turkish military intervention under the cover of the US, UK and French airforces in Syria is imminent (within three months or less). The EU already gave Turkey Euro3B, supposedly for the refugees, but probably to pay its military for the attack on Syria.

It will be most interesting to see if the Iraqi Government will rescind the military forces agreement with US and request both Turkey and US to leave Iraq, then call Russia in to help eject the Turks from Iraq. This may complicate the Turkish military intervention in Syria, but is unlikely to stop it.

Ronald Thomas West , Website December 10, 2015 at 11:34 am GMT

When Mr. Obama asserted that "this is not some superpower chessboard contest," he therefore either told a lie or he demonstrated his government's utter cluelessness with regard to the actual situation and consequences of their actions in Ukraine, Syria, the South Chinese Sea, and other hotspots of the second Cold War

Obama is very comfortable with lying. Or better said, Obama is an accomplished liar. 'Grand Chessboard' author Brzezinski is still Obama's man on the inside:

Brzezinski in fact acted as the lead political advisor on foreign affairs to President Obama during his 2008 campaign and is still unofficially advising him on foreign policy today

http://www.mintpressnews.com/zbigniew-brzezinski-the-man-behind-obamas-foreign-policy/21369/

Good overall assessment. One improvement would be to point out a recent development with revelations it had been Erdogan's people (Turkey) carried out the 2013 Ghouta sarin gas attack in Syria (blamed on Assad) that killed well over 1,000 ordinary Syrians:

http://ronaldthomaswest.com/2015/12/07/send-a-letter/

Rurik , December 10, 2015 at 3:47 pm GMT

Nevertheless, the sheer size of its territory and its command of a substantial nuclear weapon arsenal cement Russia's role as a primary threat to American national interests.

national interests? or hegemonic agenda of domination of the planet? what all of this boils down to is the US and the west are today Israeli's bitch. That's why the US destroyed Iraq and that's why NATO destroyed Libya and they're working on Syria, because Saddam and Gadhafi were obstacles not friendly to Israel and because Israel wants the Golan Heights, respectively. None of these countries were any threat to America's interests. Hardly. Any suggestion that they were is ill-informed, or worse.

This is not a proxy war between the US and Russia. It's a proxy war between Israel and the rest of the planet, with Israel using the US and NATO as their proxies against Putin's Russia as the first real obstacle to their hegemonic designs. Resistance had to come from somewhere if we're not all going to live as Palestinians, and Putin was simply the blade of grass that would not bend to their will, like all the rest of them do since it's easy to destroy third world countries and send them reeling into the stone age (Afghaistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria..), or even better if they're controlled by corrupt quisling politicians to begin with (US, NATO, ). Putin may be corrupt, but he's also a nationalist and actually cares about Russia and has nukes. So that's why he is the obstacle.

what's going on now is Bibi (Zionism) and Putin (sanity and hope for the world) are pretending that this isn't a proxy war between the two of them. And the rest of the world is pretending too (like this article demonstrates). One day when Bibi and his crew decide that NATO has to go directly to war with Russia in order to achieve their goals, what I suspect will happen is that the pretense will drop, and the men and agendas behind all of these Machiavellian intrigues will be forced out into the open. And I suspect what will happen then is the threat of a kind of reverse Samson Option, with Putin (and the rest of the free world [ironically NOT the dying and corrupt west]) telling Bibi (actually the rabid, ultra-Orthodox Jews in the Knesset who tell Bibi what to do) , that if it comes to NATO vs. Russia, that the first one to go will be the state behind it all.

Sort of like in those Western movies when the good guy points his shotgun at the guts of the powerful bad guy with all his gunslingers around, and says 'you'll get it first', and then the rich and powerful bad guy says 'take it easy fellas, holster those guns'. Sort of like that I suppose.

And the world will enter into a new kind of MAD. And there will be the peace.

Giuseppe , December 10, 2015 at 5:11 pm GMT

Seymour Hersh absolutely demonstrated that the Sarin attack in Ghouta was a false flag operation, and that the chemical composition of the gas did not match that stockpiled by Syria when analyzed by the UK defense laboratory Porton Down.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line

Taras Gitlerov , December 10, 2015 at 6:51 pm GMT

@KA I'm too young to remember coverage of the Chechen wars, but my local library still has several books which paint the Chechens in a sympathetic light.

The best English language book on the subject is Robert W. Schaefer's The Insurgency in Chechnya and the North Caucasus: From Gazavat to Jihad, but it's expensive and was never in wide circulation AFAIK.

There's a lot of weird things about Chechnya that aren't talked about at all aside from a handful of conspiracy theory type web sites – even though they merit interest. There's more info on runet but I'm not sure I have the chops to evaluate how good the sources are.

guest , December 10, 2015 at 7:21 pm GMT

@Bill Jones They're not counting the debt. The debt is something that's just there and never changes, except to go up. They take it as given. Imagine you've had $5,000 in credit card debt for years and receive a $100 bonus from work. You might not even think about using it to pay off your debt. You simply think, "Awesome, I have an extra $100 this week!" That's pretty much the mindset.

I'm constantly surprised when I hear people talk about the nation going broke, or specific programs, like Social Security for instance, running out of money. Hello! We've been broke for a long time. What do you think the national debt is? As far as SS is concerned, I suppose, it's pure ignorance of how things work. They think it's a self-contained system (which what they want you to think, even if that means it's doomed to go bust, because it tricks people into thinking the Welfare State is part of the social contract, or something). As for the rest of the budget, how do people not notice? Because it's turned into background noise.

Bill Jones , December 10, 2015 at 8:51 pm GMT

@guest I agree. The drive by the establishment for ever increasing immigration is driven their lust to drive wages down but also to maintain the illusion that the various State Ponzi schemes can maintain themselves.

That the idea that the US and Europe can be turned into comfortable retirement homes staffed and paid for by pleasant and obeisant, productive and well assimilated pig ignorant fleeing peasants is astonishing, yet that's what we are asked to believe.

annamaria , December 11, 2015 at 2:02 am GMT

@Rurik Thanks god that Israel is relatively close to the Russian Federation. At some point, the incessant provocations against Russia could become suicidal for the Israelis. Lets hope that Zionists value their lives more than their quest for mythical Great Israel.

annamaria , December 11, 2015 at 2:07 am GMT

@Cracker Not so simple. The empire of Federal Reserve will continue demanding a pound of flesh from everyone. The parasitoids have been quite successful at hollowing out the US and they are ready for "doing" Russia. http://thesaker.is/russia-in-an-invisible-war/

Lepanto , December 11, 2015 at 3:26 am GMT

"Of the Marxist ideology only insular traces remain today " You forgot to add the anti-white efforts on college campuses today. These are real and ever present and brush against the grain of Russian and Chinese nationalist efforts as well as a coherent American identity that transcends racial divides including HBD. Richard Rorty's essay on the "Unpatriotic Academy" is always worth re-reading: http://www.nytimes.com/1994/02/13/opinion/the-unpatriotic-academy.html

Drapetomaniac , December 11, 2015 at 4:47 am GMT

@Ronald Thomas West A good president is one who can lie and be believed.

Ronald Thomas West , Website December 11, 2015 at 8:32 am GMT

@Drapetomaniac

A good president is one who can lie and be believed.

No, that's merely an accomplished liar, it doesn't necessarily make a good president. Maybe you're conflating 'good' with 'effective'

Does Obama's lies about the USA upholding 'the rule of law' even as he has been much more effective at dismantling (supposedly constitutionally protected) American civil liberties than Bush Jr's administration, make him a good president? No, it simply makes him effective at dismantling civil liberties, example given.

Then, Obamacare made #1 on Moyer's lies list, ahead of Bush & Cheney:

http://billmoyers.com/content/10-big-fat-lies-and-the-liars-who-told-them/2/

Wasn't industry right there to shepherd the process of health care 'reform'? You bet they were. Did Obama's lies on healthcare reform make Obama a good president? No, it made him an effective tool for the health industry.

For those who prefer the satire:

http://ronaldthomaswest.com/2013/08/22/demons-anonymous/

Ronald Thomas West , Website December 11, 2015 at 8:49 am GMT

@Ronald Thomas West ps, I just remembered the better parody:

http://ronaldthomaswest.com/2014/11/16/obamas-speech-at-queensland/

Thirdeye , December 11, 2015 at 7:01 pm GMT

@Lepanto Those aren't Marxist. "Cultural Marxism" is a complete misnomer. Dividing the working classes along ethnic lines keeps them impotent. It is a ruling class strategy.

Anonymous , December 12, 2015 at 2:51 am GMT

Actually, in many ways this is a Hot War, not a Cold one

Look at the new pattern. The State Dept underwrites and supports a neo-fascist coup on Russia's border in Kiev. Putin responds by seizing Crimea and abetting the rebellion in the Donbass Region. Sanctions are enforced against Russia, Putin openly provides military assistance to Syria. Now today Putin orders immediate retaliation against any attacks against the Russian military. Meanwhile the US, UK, France and Germany begin military actions in the Syrian Theater, ultimately threatening partition.. Turkey occupies part of Iraq Iraq requests Russian aid China weighs in on the Syrian situation.

This is definitely a path towards escalation, with a genuine chance of military conflict between the Russian/ Iranian/ Syrian forces and NATO forces. That's HOT the opposite of Cold War miceo-maneuvers.

In China, following the US Pivot , and support for Tibetan and Uighur independence, China claims the S. China Sea and starts building island reefs. The US crosses over international boundaries surrounding these islands again HOT WAR escalation. ..

with a chance any of these rising conflicts could escalate into a REALLY HOT thermonuclear confrontation, just the way the Cuban Missile did

Nikolai Vladivostok , Website December 12, 2015 at 8:56 am GMT

@Giuseppe It was such a ho-hum effort; the bored, deadpan US officials barely seemed to have convinced themselves. You don't need an ingenious cloak-and-dagger operation when no one's paying attention and no one cares.

anonymous , December 13, 2015 at 5:38 pm GMT

Good article. I take it by the description that the author is a graduate student and thus relatively young. If so then they're starting out quite clear-eyed and objective, things that usually take years of living to acquire.
The US is an aggressive and expansionist empire and has been so since it consolidated itself continentally, had it's Civil War, dealt with the internal problem of the Indian population, and then embarked on foreign acquisitions starting with the Spanish-American war where it seized Spanish possessions and inserted itself into Asia via the Philippines. It's pretty much been on the march since then, always probing for weakness and opportunity to move in. It's somewhat analogous to the Austro-Hungarian empire, outwardly expansionist even as the stitches holding the seams together started to fray and weaken. They started off boldly but no one in 1914 could foresee what 1918 would look like. Unfortunately the US seems to have some inner momentum driving it thus which doesn't seem as if it's path could be altered, at least not in the short run. Many people question how much power the president actually has in being able to effect a change of course. Could be he has less than popularly supposed.
Most people agree the US is deteriorating internally. A quick and short read would be Sir John Glubb's " The Fate of Empires and Search for Survival", available free on the internet. There's many points of similarity, it'll have a familiar ring to it.

[Jul 10, 2017] Egyptian Daily Releases Documents of Saudi Crown Prince's Support for ISIL, Al-Qaeda Egyptian Daily Releases Documents of Saudi Crown Prince's Support for ISIL, Al-Qaeda

Notable quotes:
"... The documents were revealed after a new report released by a British think tank on Wednesday said that Saudi Arabia is the "foremost" foreign funder of Islamist extremism in the UK and other western countries. ..."
"... The group estimated that the Saudi government and charities spent an estimated $4 billion exporting Saudi Arabia's strict interpretation of Islam, known as Wahhabism (also practiced by ISIL and other terrorist groups), worldwide in 2015, up from $2 billion in 2007. In 2015, there were 110 mosques in the UK practicing Salafism and Wahhabism compared to 68 in 2007. The money is primarily funneled through mosques and Islamic schools in Britain, according to the report. ..."
"... Influence has also been exerted through the training of British Muslim religious leaders in Saudi Arabia, as well as the use of Saudi textbooks in a number of the UK's independent Islamic schools ..."
"... I was wondering how long that would take....nothing like an internal feud among ex friends... ..."
Jul 10, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

TJ | Jul 10, 2017 11:32:01 AM | 1

http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13960418000768

Based on the documents, US Treasury Undersecretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence said that the Saudi and Abu Dhabi crown princes have established continued contacts with two Yemeni nationals, namely Ali Abkar al-Hassan and Abdollah Faisal Ahdal, who are on the US blacklist of most wanted terrorists.

The documents also revealed the detailed activities and operations of the two Yemeni nationals in support of the al-Qaeda and the ISIL as well as Saudi Intelligence Chief Khalid bin Ali bin Abdullah al-Humaidan's financial support for them.

The documents were revealed after a new report released by a British think tank on Wednesday said that Saudi Arabia is the "foremost" foreign funder of Islamist extremism in the UK and other western countries.

The Henry Jackson Society - a right-wing think tank - said that overseas funding primarily from the governments and private charities of Persian Gulf countries has a "clear and growing link" to the onslaught of violence the UK and other western states.

The group estimated that the Saudi government and charities spent an estimated $4 billion exporting Saudi Arabia's strict interpretation of Islam, known as Wahhabism (also practiced by ISIL and other terrorist groups), worldwide in 2015, up from $2 billion in 2007. In 2015, there were 110 mosques in the UK practicing Salafism and Wahhabism compared to 68 in 2007. The money is primarily funneled through mosques and Islamic schools in Britain, according to the report.

" Influence has also been exerted through the training of British Muslim religious leaders in Saudi Arabia, as well as the use of Saudi textbooks in a number of the UK's independent Islamic schools ," the report said.

Although many Western countries, including the United States, have acknowledged the threat of foreign terrorist financing, Britain "has seen far less of a response from policy makers supporting moves to tackle the challenge of foreign-funded Islamist extremism," the report said.

james | Jul 10, 2017 12:13:57 PM | 7

ot - @1 tg..

I was wondering how long that would take....nothing like an internal feud among ex friends... ""A leaked document in Qatar's embassy and a letter to Qatari Foreign Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani on October 26, 2016, show Mohammed bin Salman and Mohammed bin Zayed's support for certain key al-Qaeda members in the Arabian Peninsula,"

[Jul 09, 2017] New Syria Ceasefire Deal May Be US Attempt to Save Rebels From Defeat by Sputnik News

Notable quotes:
"... A newly announced deal on a ceasefire in southwestern Syria may be an attempt by the United States to save the Syrian rebels from defeat, Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity Executive Director Daniel McAdams told Sputnik. ..."
"... McAdams suggested that the best agreement between Putin and Trump on Syria would be "a negotiated withdrawal of US forces from the country, where they illegally occupy Syrian territory." ..."
Jul 07, 2017 | ronpaulinstitute.org

A newly announced deal on a ceasefire in southwestern Syria may be an attempt by the United States to save the Syrian rebels from defeat, Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity Executive Director Daniel McAdams told Sputnik.

'On the Syria "ceasefire" agreement, we need to see the fine print. But I am skeptical that yet another US "ceasefire" proposal for Syria will result in the reduction of violence in that six year war,' McAdams said on Friday. 'It seems whenever the US side experiences significant losses on the battlefield, Washington comes forward with a ceasefire proposal in a desperate attempt to save its "rebels" from defeat.'
Earlier on Friday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said, after talks between Presidents Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin that the United States, Russia and Jordan agreed on ceasefire in southwestern Syria starting at noon on July 9.

McAdams suggested that the best agreement between Putin and Trump on Syria would be "a negotiated withdrawal of US forces from the country, where they illegally occupy Syrian territory."

The United States and Russia have backed opposing sides in Syria's six-year-conflict, with Moscow supporting the forces of Syrian President Bashar Assad and Washington backing rebel groups seeking his ouster.

Russia, Iran and Turkey are guarantors of the Syrian ceasefire regime, having signed a memorandum on the establishment of four safe zones in Syria that came into force on May 6.

Reprinted with permission from Sputnik News .

[Jul 07, 2017] U.S. MILITARY OFFICIALS THERE WAS NO CHEMICAL WEAPONS ATTACK IN SYRIA TRUMP BOMBED SYRIA DESPITE ADVICE FROM MILITARY

Notable quotes:
"... Former top military and intelligence officials – including many who warned against the faulty Iraq intelligence in advance of the Iraq war – have long said that the claims that Assad carried out the chemical weapons attacks was bunkum. ..."
"... Hersh than notes that Trump was determined to bomb Syria in retaliation for a chemical weapons attack that never occurred. America's top military and intelligence officials steered into him a less destructive bombing run. ..."
"... Former CIA officer Philip Giraldi confirms that American intelligence community insiders are furious that the Trump administration has twisted the intelligence so as to claim that the Syrian government carried out a chemical weapons attack. And see this ..."
"... Unfortunately, none of this is new The 2013 ..."
"... And a tape recording of top Turkish officials planning a false flag attack to be blamed on Syria as a justification for war was leaked and confirmed ..."
Jul 07, 2017 | www.ascertainthetruth.com

SOURCE: WASHINGTON'S BLOG

A top U.S. missile and chemical weapons expert has documented for months that the Syrian government did not carry out a chemical weapons attack against civilians, and that contrary claims by the Trump White House , French intelligence services , the New York Times , CNN and other "mainstream" sources are wrong and worthless propaganda.

Former top military and intelligence officials – including many who warned against the faulty Iraq intelligence in advance of the Iraq war – have long said that the claims that Assad carried out the chemical weapons attacks was bunkum.

Pulitzer-prize winning investigative reporter Seymour Hersh – who broke the stories of the Mai Lai massacre in Vietnam and the Iraq prison torture scandals, which rightfully disgraced the Nixon and Bush administrations' war-fighting tactics – reported yesterday in the large German publication Weld that U.S. military officials tried to tell Trump that a chemical weapons attack never occurred at all:

On April 6, United States President Donald Trump authorized an early morning Tomahawk missile strike on Shayrat Air Base in central Syria in retaliation for what he said was a deadly nerve agent attack carried out by the Syrian government two days earlier in the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun. Trump issued the order despite having been warned by the U.S. intelligence community that it had found no evidence that the Syrians had used a chemical weapon .

The available intelligence made clear that the Syrians had targeted a jihadist meeting site on April 4 using a Russian-supplied guided bomb equipped with conventional explosives. Details of the attack, including information on its so-called high-value targets, had been provided by the Russians days in advance to American and allied military officials in Doha, whose mission is to coordinate all U.S., allied, Syrian and Russian Air Force operations in the region.

Some American military and intelligence officials were especially distressed by the president's determination to ignore the evidence . "None of this makes any sense," one officer told colleagues upon learning of the decision to bomb. "We KNOW that there was no chemical attack the Russians are furious. Claiming we have the real intel and know the truth I guess it didn't matter whether we elected Clinton or Trump."

***

In a series of interviews, I learned of the total disconnect between the president and many of his military advisers and intelligence officials, as well as officers on the ground in the region who had an entirely different understanding of the nature of Syria's attack on Khan Sheikhoun . I was provided with evidence of that disconnect, in the form of transcripts of real-time communications, immediately following the Syrian attack on April 4 [ Here's one of the transcripts]. In an important pre-strike process known as deconfliction, U.S. and Russian officers routinely supply one another with advance details of planned flight paths and target coordinates, to ensure that there is no risk of collision or accidental encounter (the Russians speak on behalf of the Syrian military). This information is supplied daily to the American AWACS surveillance planes that monitor the flights once airborne. Deconfliction's success and importance can be measured by the fact that there has yet to be one collision, or even a near miss, among the high-powered supersonic American, Allied, Russian and Syrian fighter bombers.

Russian and Syrian Air Force officers gave details of the carefully planned flight path to and from Khan Shiekhoun on April 4 directly, in English, to the deconfliction monitors aboard the AWACS plane, which was on patrol near the Turkish border, 60 miles or more to the north.

***

A high-level meeting of jihadist leaders was to take place in the building . Russian intelligence depicted the cinder-block building as a command and control center .

***

A senior adviser to the American intelligence community, who has served in senior positions in the Defense Department and Central Intelligence Agency, told me [that] the basement was used as storage for rockets, weapons and ammunition, as well as chlorine-based decontaminants for cleansing the bodies of the dead before burial. The meeting place – a regional headquarters – was on the floor above.

***

One reason for the Russian message to Washington about the intended target was to ensure that any CIA asset or informant who had managed to work his way into the jihadist leadership was forewarned not to attend the meeting. I was told that the Russians passed the warning directly to the CIA "They were playing the game right," the senior adviser said. The Russian guidance noted that the jihadist meeting was coming at a time of acute pressure for the insurgents: Presumably Jabhat al-Nusra and Ahrar al-Sham were desperately seeking a path forward in the new political climate.

***

Russian and Syrian intelligence officials, who coordinate operations closely with the American command posts, made it clear that the planned strike on Khan Sheikhoun was special because of the high-value target. "It was a red-hot change. The mission was out of the ordinary – scrub the sked," the senior adviser told me. "Every operations officer in the region" – in the Army, Marine Corps, Air Force, CIA and NSA – "had to know there was something going on. The Russians gave the Syrian Air Force a guided bomb and that was a rarity. They're skimpy with their guided bombs and rarely share them with the Syrian Air Force. And the Syrians assigned their best pilot to the mission, with the best wingman." The advance intelligence on the target, as supplied by the Russians, was given the highest possible score inside the American community.

***

"This was not a chemical weapons strike," the adviser said. "That's a fairy tale. If so, everyone involved in transferring, loading and arming the weapon – you've got to make it appear like a regular 500-pound conventional bomb – would be wearing Hazmat protective clothing in case of a leak. There would be very little chance of survival without such gear. Military grade sarin includes additives designed to increase toxicity and lethality. Every batch that comes out is maximized for death. That is why it is made. It is odorless and invisible and death can come within a minute. No cloud. Why produce a weapon that people can run away from?"

The target was struck at 6:55 a.m. on April 4, just before midnight in Washington. A Bomb Damage Assessment (BDA) by the U.S. military later determined that the heat and force of the 500-pound Syrian bomb triggered a series of secondary explosions that could have generated a huge toxic cloud that began to spread over the town, formed by the release of the fertilizers, disinfectants and other goods stored in the basement, its effect magnified by the dense morning air, which trapped the fumes close to the ground. According to intelligence estimates, the senior adviser said, the strike itself killed up to four jihadist leaders, and an unknown number of drivers and security aides . There is no confirmed count of the number of civilians killed by the poisonous gases that were released by the secondary explosions, although opposition activists reported that there were more than 80 dead, and outlets such as CNN have put the figure as high as 92. A team from Médecins Sans Frontières, treating victims from Khan Sheikhoun at a clinic 60 miles to the north, reported that "eight patients showed symptoms – including constricted pupils, muscle spasms and involuntary defecation – which are consistent with exposure to a neurotoxic agent such as sarin gas or similar compounds." MSF also visited other hospitals that had received victims and found that patients there "smelled of bleach, suggesting that they had been exposed to chlorine." In other words, evidence suggested that there was more than one chemical responsible for the symptoms observed, which would not have been the case if the Syrian Air Force – as opposition activists insisted – had dropped a sarin bomb, which has no percussive or ignition power to trigger secondary explosions. The range of symptoms is, however, consistent with the release of a mixture of chemicals, including chlorine and the organophosphates used in many fertilizers, which can cause neurotoxic effects similar to those of sarin.

***

The adviser said "Did the Syrians plan the attack on Khan Sheikhoun? Absolutely. Do we have intercepts to prove it? Absolutely. Did they plan to use sarin? No. But the president did not say: 'We have a problem and let's look into it.' He wanted to bomb the shit out of Syria."

***

"What doesn't occur to most Americans" the adviser said, "is if there had been a Syrian nerve gas attack authorized by Bashar, the Russians would be 10 times as upset as anyone in the West. Russia's strategy against ISIS, which involves getting American cooperation, would have been destroyed and Bashar would be responsible for pissing off Russia, with unknown consequences for him. Bashar would do that? When he's on the verge of winning the war? Are you kidding me?"

***

Within hours of viewing the photos, the adviser said, Trump instructed the national defense apparatus to plan for retaliation against Syria. "He did this before he talked to anybody about it. The planners then asked the CIA and DIA if there was any evidence that Syria had sarin stored at a nearby airport or somewhere in the area. Their military had to have it somewhere in the area in order to bomb with it." "The answer was, 'We have no evidence that Syria had sarin or used it,' " the adviser said. " The CIA also told them that there was no residual delivery for sarin at Sheyrat [the airfield from which the Syrian SU-24 bombers had taken off on April 4] and Assad had no motive to commit political suicide." Everyone involved, except perhaps the president, also understood that a highly skilled United Nations team had spent more than a year in the aftermath of an alleged sarin attack in 2013 by Syria, removing what was said to be all chemical weapons from a dozen Syrian chemical weapons depots.

At this point, the adviser said, the president's national security planners were more than a little rattled : "No one knew the provenance of the photographs. We didn't know who the children were or how they got hurt. Sarin actually is very easy to detect because it penetrates paint, and all one would have to do is get a paint sample. We knew there was a cloud and we knew it hurt people . But you cannot jump from there to certainty that Assad had hidden sarin from the UN because he wanted to use it in Khan Sheikhoun." The intelligence made clear that a Syrian Air Force SU-24 fighter bomber had used a conventional weapon to hit its target: There had been no chemical warhead .

Hersh than notes that Trump was determined to bomb Syria in retaliation for a chemical weapons attack that never occurred. America's top military and intelligence officials steered into him a less destructive bombing run.

Former CIA officer Philip Giraldi confirms that American intelligence community insiders are furious that the Trump administration has twisted the intelligence so as to claim that the Syrian government carried out a chemical weapons attack. And see this .

Unfortunately, none of this is new The 2013 sarin attack in Syria, was also blamed by the U.S. on the Syrian government. However, the United Nations' report on the attack did NOT blame the government, and the U.N.'s human rights investigator accused the rebels – rather than the Syrian government – of carrying out the attack.

Moreover, high-level American and Turkish officials say that Turkey supplied Sarin gas to Syrian rebels in 2013 in order to frame the Syrian government to provide an excuse for regime change.

And Seymour Hersh reported that high-level American sources tell him that the Turkish government carried out the chemical weapons attacks blamed on the Syrian government.

As Hersh noted :

'We knew there were some in the Turkish government,' a former senior US intelligence official, who has access to current intelligence, told me, 'who believed they could get Assad's nuts in a vice by dabbling with a sarin attack inside Syria – and forcing Obama to make good on his red line threat.'

Indeed, it's long been known that sarin was coming through Turkey .

And a tape recording of top Turkish officials planning a false flag attack to be blamed on Syria as a justification for war was leaked and confirmed by Turkey as being authentic.

http://republicbroadcasting.org/news/u-s-military-officials-there-was-no-chemical-weapons-attack-in-syria-trump-bombed-syria-despite-advice-from-military/

[Jul 07, 2017] Was Tillerson to the right of Trump in Germany meeting

The problem if multiple personalities syndrome that Trump administration demonstrates that is mentioned below is a real one. It looks like Tilerson has its own version of foreign policy distinct from Trump. Haley also has her own definitely distinct and more neocons than Tillerson, and Tillerson did not fired her for insubordination. Yet.
Notable quotes:
"... Trump wasn't afraid to do this meeting. In this sense, even if he's a fool (which I'm not completely convinced of yet), he has some semblance here of being his own man. Also, for domestic consumption, he can say he made a deal if he wants. He walked away with some narrative. ..."
"... It seems to me that there's no reason why Putin and Trump can't keep talking as need arises if they choose to. No one is going to be friends here. But a narrative of two countries aggressively pursuing their own national interests is what Russia is now promoting. This is ground for dialog and actually some stability over time. ..."
"... Ray McGovern with RT thinks the agreement in southwest Syria is a little test from Putin to see what the strength of Trump's power is - i.e. will USAF act independently again or will it obey the commander-in-chief? Putin, Trump meeting gives way to developments in Syria . A lot of the Russian takeaway will be what kind of practical trust can be forged at this level, how in control is Trump? One wonders how much of this meta message got through to Trump himself. ..."
"... I think its clear that the 'Assad must go!' Coalition will not stop wanting Assad gone. But Russia and Iran will not allow it, arguing that Assad is needed to counter the Jihadis. This is a fundamental disagreement. ..."
"... So what can they agree on? The next logical demand of the 'Assad must go!' Coalition is some sort of division, isn't it? And whatever a division of Syria is called: "federated", "autonomous region", "safe zone" etc., it effectively means the creation of a "salafist principality"/Sunnistan - a goal which was revealed in a DIA report back in 2012. ..."
"... I think there is a full-court press to get Putin to deal. Everything has been set to make the establishment of 'Sunnistan' the least worst option (as Kissinger might say). I wrote of this here: Putin-Trump at the G-20: Birth of Sunnistan? ..."
"... How could RUSSIA - with her history - consider any backdown over Syria affecting all her allies anything but a short term Munich agreement (1938) for the space age. War between the Atlantacists and Eurasia would still be inevitable . ..."
"... more on the alleged chemical weapon attack of early april from al masdar.. OPCW ignores possibility Khan Sheikhoun chemical attack was staged: diplomat and.... US refuses Russia's offer to inspect Shayrat Airbase for chemical weapons ..."
"... here's the transcript to go with your video of the Tillerson presser held today following the Putin/Trump gab - https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/07/07/press-briefing-presidents-meetings-g20-july-7-2017 ..."
"... The Trump Administration continues to take a middle-ground approach that allows the "red scare" to continue. Some will say this is smart politics or smart negotiating or both. I think it shows a lack of will - an ambiguity that is harmful to a peaceful resolution. I think it stems from the Wahabbi-Zionist grip on US ME policy. W-Z want it ALL, so they (or their representatives) will always be ambiguous about any discussion that would leave them with something less than ALL. ..."
"... The Agreement on SW Syria was probably mostly done before the meeting. Meeting participants reviewed details of what the prepared agreement but mostly probed each other to determine how strongly held each sides views were about Syrian outcomes. ..."
"... Tillerson's blabbering about common objectives was meaningless. The Russians have long said that they believe that the Syrian people should decide the fate of Assad at some point in the future. The longstanding US position has been that Assad's removal should be sooner rather than later because free and fair elections can't be held with Assad as leader. ..."
"... Sounds quite reasonable to me. Putin/ Lavrov did the same with Obama/ Kerry, but they failed the test. They did negotiate in earnest imo, but... ..."
"... Moscow has committed far too much in Syria to 'relent'. The military, diplomatic and economic pressure on the US will increase if necessary to reach an solution. It has no choice but to agree. ..."
"... The peace deal or de-escalation with the US in southern Syria most likely has to do with US moving their operation from Tanf to Shaddadi. I had read sometime ago that Jordan wasn't happy about US using Jordan and Tanf base to attack SAA - not that Jordan would have much say in the matter. ..."
Jul 07, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

Grieved | Jul 7, 2017 5:07:38 PM | 24

It's 2 cents day, so here's mine.

Two national leaders brought their heads of foreign ministry to an international meeting. Score 1 for diplomacy. They didn't bring their generals. And we've all seen how powerfully Russian diplomacy works. The message to the world and all stakeholders is that it keeps on working - work with it if you want to get somewhere.

Trump wasn't afraid to do this meeting. In this sense, even if he's a fool (which I'm not completely convinced of yet), he has some semblance here of being his own man. Also, for domestic consumption, he can say he made a deal if he wants. He walked away with some narrative.

It seems to me that there's no reason why Putin and Trump can't keep talking as need arises if they choose to. No one is going to be friends here. But a narrative of two countries aggressively pursuing their own national interests is what Russia is now promoting. This is ground for dialog and actually some stability over time.

I don't think anyone was looking for much out of this, and it was the wrong venue for such. But the meta-messages and to see how the leaders would interact were the key things, and personally I'm satisfied.

Grieved | Jul 7, 2017 5:50:53 PM | 25
More info coming...Tillerson says it was a good meeting that went on so long because they had so much to talk about. Very engaged: Listen: Tillerson describes meeting between Trump and Putin . The Duran's Adam Garrie picked up on the last soundbite in this clip where Tillerson says maybe Russia has the right approach to Syria and maybe we have the wrong approach. Very egalitarian view, not quite as bombshell as it sounds I think, more a way of signifying agreement on the (purported) end goals.

Ray McGovern with RT thinks the agreement in southwest Syria is a little test from Putin to see what the strength of Trump's power is - i.e. will USAF act independently again or will it obey the commander-in-chief? Putin, Trump meeting gives way to developments in Syria . A lot of the Russian takeaway will be what kind of practical trust can be forged at this level, how in control is Trump? One wonders how much of this meta message got through to Trump himself.

Jackrabbit | Jul 7, 2017 5:54:02 PM | 26
Everyone seems happy that Trump and Putin shook hands and agreed on something. But wasn't agreeing on SW Syria easy? Seems that both would want to avoid the messiness of stepped-up Israeli action.

I think its clear that the 'Assad must go!' Coalition will not stop wanting Assad gone. But Russia and Iran will not allow it, arguing that Assad is needed to counter the Jihadis. This is a fundamental disagreement.

So what can they agree on? The next logical demand of the 'Assad must go!' Coalition is some sort of division, isn't it? And whatever a division of Syria is called: "federated", "autonomous region", "safe zone" etc., it effectively means the creation of a "salafist principality"/Sunnistan - a goal which was revealed in a DIA report back in 2012.

IMO there is a high chance of cw ff leading to threat of US attack in the coming weeks. As a last-ditch effort to avoid a larger war, Putin might then relent and a allow a division that makes "Sunnistan" a reality.

I think there is a full-court press to get Putin to deal. Everything has been set to make the establishment of 'Sunnistan' the least worst option (as Kissinger might say). I wrote of this here: Putin-Trump at the G-20: Birth of Sunnistan?

Any thoughts?

ashley albanese | Jul 7, 2017 6:27:09 PM | 31

Jackrabbit 26

How could RUSSIA - with her history - consider any backdown over Syria affecting all her allies anything but a short term Munich agreement (1938) for the space age. War between the Atlantacists and Eurasia would still be inevitable .

james | Jul 7, 2017 6:46:47 PM | 32
more on the alleged chemical weapon attack of early april from al masdar.. OPCW ignores possibility Khan Sheikhoun chemical attack was staged: diplomat and.... US refuses Russia's offer to inspect Shayrat Airbase for chemical weapons
karlof1 | Jul 7, 2017 6:47:33 PM | 33
Well, it appears that the Putin/Abe meet was productive despite being delayed by the meet with Trump going long, http://tass.com/politics/955268. TASS has the most detailed report thanks to Lavrov's presser, http://tass.com/world/955288 "The situation in Syria, in Ukraine, on the Korean Peninsula, problems of cyber security, and a range of other issues were discussed in detail," he said, adding that the two leaders "agreed on a number of concrete things." Just what those "concrete things" are we'll need to wait and see.
h | Jul 7, 2017 7:28:39 PM | 37
Greived @25 here's the transcript to go with your video of the Tillerson presser held today following the Putin/Trump gab - https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/07/07/press-briefing-presidents-meetings-g20-july-7-2017
Jackrabbit | Jul 7, 2017 7:37:40 PM | 39
Tillerson's New Conference

Tillerson's answers to question about how much Trump pressed Putin on 'Russian interference' vaguely implied that the Russians accepted responsibility as he suggested that the Russians were willing to discuss guarantees against such interference happening in the future.

The Trump Administration continues to take a middle-ground approach that allows the "red scare" to continue. Some will say this is smart politics or smart negotiating or both. I think it shows a lack of will - an ambiguity that is harmful to a peaceful resolution. I think it stems from the Wahabbi-Zionist grip on US ME policy. W-Z want it ALL, so they (or their representatives) will always be ambiguous about any discussion that would leave them with something less than ALL.

The Agreement on SW Syria was probably mostly done before the meeting. Meeting participants reviewed details of what the prepared agreement but mostly probed each other to determine how strongly held each sides views were about Syrian outcomes.

The length of time that this took shows how close to the razor's edge US-Russia relations are. Care must be taken to avoid a miscalculation.

Tillerson's blabbering about common objectives was meaningless. The Russians have long said that they believe that the Syrian people should decide the fate of Assad at some point in the future. The longstanding US position has been that Assad's removal should be sooner rather than later because free and fair elections can't be held with Assad as leader.

It seems to me that the failure to agree "next steps" coupled with a failure to agree on a future meeting is significant. And the lack of detail from the Russian side (as per karlof1 @33) also suggests that the meeting didn't go well.

smuks | Jul 7, 2017 7:48:10 PM | 41
@Grieved 25

"Ray McGovern with RT thinks the agreement in southwest Syria is a little test from Putin to see what the strength of Trump's power is ... how in control is Trump? One wonders how much of this meta message got through to Trump himself."

Sounds quite reasonable to me. Putin/ Lavrov did the same with Obama/ Kerry, but they failed the test. They did negotiate in earnest imo, but...

@Jackrabbit

Moscow has committed far too much in Syria to 'relent'. The military, diplomatic and economic pressure on the US will increase if necessary to reach an solution. It has no choice but to agree.

james | Jul 7, 2017 8:53:20 PM | 44
i think the little test concept is exactly right... usa is notorious for failing those kinds of tests..
Peter AU | Jul 7, 2017 8:57:27 PM | 46
The peace deal or de-escalation with the US in southern Syria most likely has to do with US moving their operation from Tanf to Shaddadi. I had read sometime ago that Jordan wasn't happy about US using Jordan and Tanf base to attack SAA - not that Jordan would have much say in the matter.
Anoncommentator | Jul 7, 2017 9:00:27 PM | 47
James Corbett on the CNN gif debacle: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YJ7KIgV2s5w
Anoncommentator | Jul 7, 2017 9:13:31 PM | 49
A reminder, and if you've never seen it, how MSM (in this case C-span) broadcasts fake news as war propaganda- footage from 1991 Gulf War. This was eye opener for me as I recall being totally sucked in at time by both the CNN and C-Span stories.

But by the time of the Syrian "boy in ambulance" Omran story last year I could correctly smell a rat:

[Jul 07, 2017] Tillerson Russia Must Ensure Syria Does Not 'Illegitimately' Retake Its Territory

Trump discredited himself with the Tomahawk launches after deliberately false interpretation of Khan_sheikhoun_attack as chemical.
Jul 07, 2017 | russia-insider.com
RI Staff 13 hours ago | 5029 103

Widely reported as a US offer of cooperation on Syria given ahead of the Trump-Putin meeting, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson's recent comments on Syria are actually rather scandalous and self-righteous :

In a statement, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said the U.S. is open to establishing no-fly zones in Syria in coordination with Russia as well as jointly setting up a truce monitoring and humanitarian aid delivery mechanism.

Tillerson noted that the U.S. and Russia have a variety of unresolved differences but said Syria is an opportunity for the two countries to create stability in Syria.

He said that Russia , as an ally of Syrian President Bashar Assad and a participant in the conflict, " has a responsibility to ensure that the needs of the Syrian people are met and that no faction in Syria illegitimately re-takes or occupies areas liberated from ISIS' or other terrorist groups' control." Tillerson added that Russia has "an obligation to prevent any further use of chemical weapons of any kind by the Assad regime."

What Tillerson has said here is that Syria attempting to regain control of any parts of Syria which have been taken by US-Kurdish or US-rebel forces from ISIS would be considered "illegitimate" by the US, and that Russia must ensure it does not happen.

Bizarrely the US believes it and its proxies have more legitimacy to hold Syrian territory than does the internationally recognized Syrian government which sits in its UN chair in New York.

Given such rhetoric by the "moderate" Tillerson we wonder what the US offer of cooperation on "no-fly zones" means. Neither Russia nor Syria have been talking about any such zones except in the sense of offering them to the opposition if the latter signs under Astana process and breaks off from al-Qaeda (Tahrir al-Sham).

Probably what Tillerson means is that the US is ready to cooperate on establishing no-fly zones over Syria for Syrians and Russians.

[Jul 06, 2017] The Fraud of The White Helmets

Notable quotes:
"... The White Helmets ..."
"... Donald Trump called out Hillary Clinton for her buddy buddy relationship with the Saudi regime and wrote about the KSA funding terrorist groups in his books. In other words Trump was under no illusions about the direct link between Saudi cash and religious ideology and international terrorist groups. Ignorance in this area was not a problem he had. ..."
"... The war in Syria is all about Israel and teaches us our government can be purchased. What a clever investment! For chump change Uncle Sam can be convinced to spend hundreds of millions, perhaps billions, to overthrow the Syrian government, all for Israel's benefit. ..."
"... Buys into? You mean SELLS Yep. Hollywood is one of our lie factories: Hollywood, govt, media, academia, pr/marketing/ adv/polling. ..."
"... April 07, 2017 Pentagon Trained Syria's Al Qaeda "Rebels" in the Use of Chemical Weapons. The Western media refutes their own lies. http://www.globalresearch.ca/pentagon-trained-syrias-al-qaeda-rebels-in-the-use-of-chemical-weapons/5583784  ..."
"... So is the real Trump the guy who tells Putin he has to do some look-Presidential kabuki, and bomb a Syrian airfield to get the Neocons and CIA off his back - briefly - or is he a gullible emotional dimwit who buys into the transparently ridiculous "sarin attack" bs, despite the intel community telling him it was bs? ..."
"... I thought it was common knowledge by anyone with critical thinking skills that the White Helmets are just a propaganda operation for the Salafist fanatics and not a politically neutral third party as they try to depict themselves. So this would exclude George Clowney, Justin Timbersnowflake and the rest of the left wing Hollywood morons. It's looking like we can lump our president and Nimrata Haley in with the brainless and sentimental Hollywood crowd. ..."
"... "Around half of Russia's gas and oil into the EU is transported there via pipelines that traverse Ukraine, and this is a major reason why the Obama Administration (which was in service to the owners of the U.S.-based international corporations …) started, by no later than 2011, its preparations for a coup in Ukraine, which occurred in February 2014, to overthrow the democratically elected President of Ukraine… ..."
"... Israel is currently attacking the Syrian Army and has long been assisting the so-called rebels. It wants anarchy in Syria so it can steal the remainder of the Golan territory. ..."
"... Now that would be journalism worth its salt. Absolutely. USAID started as a CIA front in Vietnam during the 60s. ..."
Jul 06, 2017 | www.unz.com
Philip Giraldi

I actually forced myself to watch the documentary The White Helmets , which is available on Netflix. It is 40 minutes long, is of high quality cinematographically speaking, and tells a very convincing tale that was promoted as "the story of real-life heroes and impossible hope." It is overall a very impressive piece of propaganda, so much so that it has won numerous awards including the Oscar for Best Documentary Short this year and the White Helmets themselves were nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. More to the point, however, is the undeniable fact that the documentary has helped shape the public understanding of what is going on in Syria, delivering a Manichean tale that depicts the "rebels" as always good and Bashar al-Assad and his government as un-redeemably evil.

It has been reliably reported that celebrities like George Clooney, Justin Timberlake and Hillary Clinton really like the White Helmets documentary and have promoted it with the understanding that it represents the truth about Syria, but it is, of course, not the whole story. The film, which was made by the White Helmets themselves without any external verification of what it depicts, portrays the group as "heroic," an "impartial, life-saving rescue organization" of first responders. Excluded from the scenes of heroism under fire is the White Helmets' relationship with the al-Qaeda affiliated group Jabhat al-Nusra and its participation in the torture and execution of "rebel" opponents. Indeed, the White Helmets only operate in rebel held territory, which enables them to shape the narrative both regarding who they are and what is occurring on the ground. Because of increasing awareness of the back story, there is now a growing movement to petition the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to revoke the Oscar based on the complete and deliberate misrepresentation of what the White Helmets are all about.

Exploiting their access to the western media, the White Helmets have de facto become a major source of "eyewitness" news regarding what has been going on in those many parts of Syria where European and American journalists are quite rightly afraid to go. It is all part of a broader largely successful "rebel" effort to manufacture fake news that depicts the Damascus government as engaging in war crimes directed against civilians.

The White Helmets have certainly saved some lives under dangerous circumstances but they have also exaggerated their humanitarian role as they travel to bombing sites with their film crews trailing behind them. Once at the sites, with no independent observers, they are able to arrange or even stage what is filmed to conform to their selected narrative. They have consistently promoted tales of government atrocities against civilians to encourage outside military intervention in Syria and bring about regime change in Damascus. The White Helmets were, for example, the propagators of the totally false but propagandistically effective claims regarding the government use of so-called "barrel bombs" against civilians.

The White Helmets were a largely foreign creation that came into prominence in the aftermath of the unrest in Syria that developed as a result of the Arab Spring in 2012. They are currently largely funded by a number of non-government organizations (NGOs) as well as governments, including Britain and some European Union member states. The United States has directly provided $23 million through the USAID (US Agency for International Development) as of 2016 and almost certainly considerably more indirectly. Max Blumenthal has explored in some detail the various funding resources and relationships that the organization draws on, mostly in Europe and the United States.

Former weapons inspector Scott Ritter has described how the White Helmets are not actually trained to do the complicated rescue work that they depict in their self-made videos, which have established their reputation by ostensibly showing them in action inside Syria, rescuing civilians from bombed out structures, and providing life-saving emergency medical care. As an expert in Hazardous Materials handling with New York Task Force 2 USAR team, Ritter reports that "these videos represent de facto evidence of dangerous incompetence or, worse, fraud… The bread and butter of the White Helmet's self-made reputation is the rescue of a victim-usually a small child-from beneath a pile of rubble, usually heavy reinforced concrete… The techniques used by the White Helmets are not only technically wrong, but dangerous to anyone who might actually be trapped… In my opinion, the videos are pure theater, either staged to impress an unwitting audience, or actually conducted with total disregard for the wellbeing of any real victims."

Ritter also cites the lack of training in hazardous chemicals, best observed in the videos provided by the White Helmets regarding their activity at Khan Sheikhun on April 4 th . He notes "As was the case with their 'rescues' of victims in collapsed structures, I believe the rescue efforts of the White Helmets at Khan Sheikhun were a theatrical performance designed to impress the ignorant and ill-informed… Through their actions…the White Helmets were able to breathe life into the overall narrative of a chemical weapons attack, distracting from the fact that no actual weapon existed…."

But perhaps the most serious charge against the White Helmets consists of the evidence that they actively participated in the atrocities , to include torture and murder, carried out by their al-Nusra hosts. There have been numerous photos of the White Helmets operating directly with armed terrorists and also celebrating over the bodies of execution victims and murdered Iraqi soldiers. The group has an excellent working relationship with a number of jihadi affiliates and is regarded by them as fellow "mujahideen" and "soldiers of the revolution."

So by all means let's organize to revoke the White Helmets' Oscar due to misrepresentation and fraud. It might even serve as a wake-up call to George Clooney and his fellow Hollywood snowflakes . But the bigger take-away from the tale of the White Helmets would appear to be how it is an unfortunate repeat of the bumbling by a gullible U.S. government that has wrecked the Middle East while making Americans poorer and less safe. A group of "moderates," in this case their propagandists, is supported with weapons and money to overthrow a government with which Washington has no real quarrel but it turns out the moderates are really extremists. If they succeed in changing regime in Damascus, that is when the real nightmare will begin for minorities within Syria and for the entire region, including both Israel and Saudi Arabia, both of which seem intent on bringing Bashar al-Assad down. And the truly unfortunate fact is that the Israelis and Saudis apparently have convinced an ignorant Donald Trump that that is the way to go so the situation in Syria will only get worse and, unless there is a course correction, Washington will again richly deserve most of the blame.

Fiendly Neighborhood Terrorist > , Website July 4, 2017 at 5:28 am GMT

What makes Mr Giraldi imagine that the American Empire isn't an active and fully deliberate participant in the destroy-Syria operation instead of a reluctant dupe?

Carlton Meyer > , Website July 4, 2017 at 5:16 am GMT

This brave lady deserves a Pulitzer for her reporting about Syria and the White Helmets, from December 2016.

Art > , July 4, 2017 at 5:32 am GMT

And the truly unfortunate fact is that the Israelis and Saudis apparently have convinced an ignorant Donald Trump that that is the way to go so the situation in Syria will only get worse and, unless there is a course correction, Washington will again richly deserve most of the blame.

It is said that "politics makes for strange bedfellows" How is it that America is hooked up with these scumbag countries, Israel and Saudi – doing their bidding – and killing for them. Zionism and Wahhabism are evil brothers – both seekers of age old tribal glory. The good American people have nothing in common with them.

But there is something our elite share with these tribalists – the US banking system. The US money system wags the American election process. Israel, Saudi, and the US Fed/Wall Street all bank with the Rothschild money cartel.

Trump is surrounded by greedy Jew money hunger types. For reasons of Israeli and Saudi power – a blood bath in Syria is needed.

Trump is going to meet Putin who wants peace – will he back the American people who elected him, thinking he was against another war?

Hmm? We will know by the end of the week.

Peace - Art

exiled off mainstreet > , July 4, 2017 at 5:39 am GMT

The first comment has it spot on. Hollywood is complicit in this propaganda effort to give the terrorist thug element a human face. These facts are out there for anybody not totally dependent on the official power structure for their information. People like Clooney who support this are themselves tainted with the barbarism represented by this phony propaganda front, and NGO's and governments funding them are complicit in war crimes and crimes against humanity. Clooney's pet project, Darfur and South Sudan are other failed states. Clooney has blood on his hands for having promoted their existence.

Johnny F. Ive > , July 4, 2017 at 6:50 am GMT

Trump really hasn't given us the full Hillary Clinton on Syria yet. I believe he is aware of what is going on and we will see what his policy is as his administration continues. If people don't think so we have a great opportunity to share our point of view politely with him on twitter by sending him reputable articles or videos. Maybe he wouldn't look at it but what if he ever did and it opened some questions for him? The people who tweet to him tend to be obnoxious and insane from the fake news they've ingested. If your only source of information is fake news then you aren't going to make good decisions. He inherited a mess and there are powerful forces outside of his control that control the narrative and want to control him through the narrative. The White Helmets are apart of that narrative. If we give Trump good ideas for options to move forward and he has a support base maybe he will listen to us. What do we have to lose?

Israel wants a perpetual bloodbath in Syria but if one must prevail they want the Sunni evil to prevail.

Hollywood has turned into a de-Americanized, anti-American global enterprise where most of their earnings occur overseas. Their movies are turning into two toned (amber & teal) incoherent messes for a global audience they assume are stupid. I expect before long they will make movies praising the great firewall of China and one party rule.

Interlocutor > , July 4, 2017 at 10:59 am GMT

the Israelis and Saudis apparently have convinced an ignorant Donald Trump that that is the way to go so the situation in Syria

Donald Trump called out Hillary Clinton for her buddy buddy relationship with the Saudi regime and wrote about the KSA funding terrorist groups in his books. In other words Trump was under no illusions about the direct link between Saudi cash and religious ideology and international terrorist groups. Ignorance in this area was not a problem he had.

Yet five months into his term he's schmoozing with those very same terrorist funding Saudis and the vile Israeli regime alike and threatening all out war on Syria and rattling sabers at Iran. All because the Saudis and Israelis "convinced" him it's a good idea to throw the truth out the window and unlearn what he knew and wrote about? Not a chance. I don't buy it for a second. Something else is going on here. I suspect Trump the man is nothing like Trump the politician and he played all those people who hoped he'd follow through on his campaign promises for fools.

It is time to stop making excuses for Trump and treat him like an adult. He owns his decisions and choices and is responsible for them.

annamaria > , July 4, 2017 at 12:16 pm GMT

@chris They shouldn't revoke the Oscar, they should just change the category to 'best propaganda' and award it directly to Pompeo at Langley.

That, however, would greatly increase the list of contenders every year. "…they should just change the category to 'best propaganda' and award it directly to Pompeo at Langley."

Neither Joanna Natasegara (producer) nor Von Einsiedel (director) have ever been in Syria. They both are opportunistic fraudsters. Among the eager supporters of White Helmets are the ever badly smelling Michael Weiss, a Jewish Russophobe of questionable integrity and Eliot Higgins, a British Russophobe famous for his spectacular ignorance and for special favors from the Atlantic Council and Department of War Studies, King's College: http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2017/06/the-white-helmet-buffoons-of-khan-sheikyoun.html

Vanessa Beeley: "All of the footage used in the film was provided to the producers by the White Helmets themselves… What this film is essentially a PR cushion for a $100-$150 million covert op, which is basically an NGO front funded by USAID, the British Foreign Office, various EU member states, Qatar, and other various and sundry nations, and members of the public…"

http://www.activistpost.com/2017/03/medical-doctors-question-white-helmets-footage-al-qaeda-oscar.html

"Dr Leif Elinder, a known Swedish medical doctor: "After examination of the video material, I found that the measures inflicted upon those children, some of them lifeless, are bizarre, non-medical, non-lifesaving, and even counterproductive in terms of life-saving purposes of children".

"White Helmets founder Le Mesurier, who graduated from Britain's elite Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst, is said to be an 'ex' British military intelligence officer involved in a number of other NATO 'humanitarian intervention' theatres of war, including Bosnia, Kosovo and Iraq, as well as postings in Lebanon and Palestine. He also boasts a series of high-profile posts at the UN, EU, and UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Not to mention his connections back to the infamous Blackwater (Academi)." http://21stcenturywire.com/2016/09/23/exclusive-the-real-syria-civil-defence-expose-natos-white-helmets-as-terrorist-linked-imposters/

Looks that the Oscar nominees should have indeed included Langley

"Al-Qaeda Gets An Oscar:" http://www.moonofalabama.org/2017/02/al-qaeda-gets-an-oscar-.html

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/05/15/george_clooney_busted_captured_terrorist_spills

annamaria > , July 4, 2017 at 12:29 pm GMT

@Sherman Sherman, this article is about genocide in Syria – you know, like the genocide of Jews during the WWII. Your indecent post reminded the readers about Israelis taking dinner while the IDF ("most moral") had been slaughtering the colonized dwellers of Gaza Ghetto.

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/15/world/middleeast/israelis-watch-bombs-drop-on-gaza-from-front-row-seats.html https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/20/israelis-cheer-gaza-bombing http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/07/13/israel-sderot-gaza_n_5582032.html

Do you see your tribe smiling and eating and laughing while your "most moral" kills native civilians? – This is a remake of the photographs from WWII when Jews were killed by Nazis for being Jews. "Never again," indeed. A state of Israel exhibiting a moral rot.

Joe Hide > , July 4, 2017 at 12:44 pm GMT

@Interlocutor

the Israelis and Saudis apparently have convinced an ignorant Donald Trump that that is the way to go so the situation in Syria
Donald Trump called out Hillary Clinton for her buddy buddy relationship with the Saudi regime and wrote about the KSA funding terrorist groups in his books. In other words Trump was under no illusions about the direct link between Saudi cash and religious ideology and international terrorist groups. Ignorance in this area was not a problem he had.

Yet five months into his term he's schmoozing with those very same terrorist funding Saudis and the vile Israeli regime alike and threatening all out war on Syria and rattling sabers at Iran. All because the Saudis and Israelis "convinced" him it's a good idea to throw the truth out the window and unlearn what he knew and wrote about? Not a chance. I don't buy it for a second. Something else is going on here. I suspect Trump the man is nothing like Trump the politician and he played all those people who hoped he'd follow through on his campaign promises for fools.

It is time to stop making excuses for Trump and treat him like an adult. He owns his decisions and choices and is responsible for them. I appreciate your comment. If You spend a lot of time reviewing battle tactics and war strategies, and I mean in the hundreds to thousands of hours, you will possibly come to a different conclusion. Trumps actions, as presented by a very untrustworthy media, look like those of a deceiver. Or of a crazy man. Or of whatever twisted narrative they are pushing. The results of his actions (or sometimes intentional non-actions), tell a different story. Thousands of pedophiles and sex traffickers have been arrested in the last few months. The Syrian War is being won by the Good (or at least not horrible) Guys. We don't have a WW3. Political, economic, and military corruption are being exposed. Priorities are no longer men using women's bathrooms to pee in. There is a lot more good taking place even than this. Great and lasting change takes years if not generations. This is not a quick fix. We won't get everything we want. Idealism never works but Realism does. If only the bad guys deceive, then the Good Guys lose. The Good Guys, You & Me, have to come to grips with how the game is really played.

Sherman > , July 4, 2017 at 1:41 pm GMT

@annamaria Sherman, this article is about genocide in Syria - you know, like the genocide of Jews during the WWII. Your indecent post reminded the readers about Israelis taking dinner while the IDF ("most moral") had been slaughtering the colonized dwellers of Gaza Ghetto.
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/15/world/middleeast/israelis-watch-bombs-drop-on-gaza-from-front-row-seats.html https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/20/israelis-cheer-gaza-bombing http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/07/13/israel-sderot-gaza_n_5582032.html
Do you see your tribe smiling and eating and laughing while your "most moral" kills native civilians? - This is a remake of the photographs from WWII when Jews were killed by Nazis for being Jews. "Never again," indeed. A state of Israel exhibiting a moral rot. You left out the part about the Nulands and the Kagans.

Sherm

anonymous > , July 4, 2017 at 1:47 pm GMT

It's all a propaganda fabrication, totally staged complete with them pretending to rescue children. The US has unlimited funds and doesn't miss anything in it's all-encompassing full-spectrum program of propaganda lies and deception. The movie 'Wag the Dog' was a far more realistic production than this thing is.

JoaoAlfaiate > , July 4, 2017 at 1:59 pm GMT

It's hard to celebrate July 4th knowing that our system is corrupt from top to bottom. Want to buy the destruction of Syria? No problem. $10,000,000 (or less) distributed in the right places buys a slick narrative about Syria which the msm is happy to promote Meanwhile Congress has been suborned to appropriate vast sums to fund "rebels" (al-Qaeda, al-Nusra, ISIS) seeking to over throw the Syrian Gov't and establish an Islamic regime in its place.

Why replace a secular government in Syria with an extremist Sunni regime? Hilary Clinton put it this way: "The best way to help Israel deal with Iran's growing nuclear capability is to help the people of Syria overthrow the regime of Bashar Assad. " The war in Syria is all about Israel and teaches us our government can be purchased. What a clever investment! For chump change Uncle Sam can be convinced to spend hundreds of millions, perhaps billions, to overthrow the Syrian government, all for Israel's benefit.

bjondo > , July 4, 2017 at 2:40 pm GMT

@Priss Factor Hollywood buys into yet another lie

Buys into? You mean SELLS Yep. Hollywood is one of our lie factories: Hollywood, govt, media, academia, pr/marketing/ adv/polling.

Agent76 > , July 4, 2017 at 4:45 pm GMT

No more shows actual video confirmation of the false flag footage from the staged gas attack event in Syria.

Apr 9, 2017 No More

April 07, 2017 Pentagon Trained Syria's Al Qaeda "Rebels" in the Use of Chemical Weapons. The Western media refutes their own lies. http://www.globalresearch.ca/pentagon-trained-syrias-al-qaeda-rebels-in-the-use-of-chemical-weapons/5583784 

annamaria > , July 4, 2017 at 4:49 pm GMT

@Sherman You left out the part about the Nulands and the Kagans.

Sherm 'You left out the part about the Nulands and the Kagans.'

And you remind about them why?

Look carefully at the photograph in the following article: http://theduran.com/4-ways-russia-could-and-should-bring-about-regime-change-in-kiev/
Keep in mind that the neo-Nazis have began flourishing in Kiev since the ziocon-infested State Dept. had accomplished a regime change there in 2014.

Was not it you who enquired the UNZ readers about visiting Yad Vashem? – Well, see the amazing results that have been achieved by American/UK Jews in Ukraine. Fit perfectly Yad Vashem preaching.

"How the Israel Lobby Protected Ukrainian Neo-Nazis: http://fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/government/foreign_policy_and_government/news.php?q=1417630958 "Rep. John Conyers wanted to block U.S. funding to neo-Nazis in Ukraine. But the ADL and Simon Wiesenthal Center refused to help ."

"The neo-Nazi Oleh Tyahnybok and the American Zionist Victoria Nuland, wife of Robert Kagan, are all smiles. Not since the days of the Haavara (Transfer) Agreement of August 25, 1933 between the Zionist Federation of Germany and Chancellor Adolf Hitler celebrated by the striking of a celebratory coin by the Berlin Mint (right)….:" http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/12289

Haavara (Transfer) Agreement: http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/09/07/Nazi_Zionism.html

Agent76 > , July 4, 2017 at 4:51 pm GMT

@annamaria Know this Annamaria, "The oppinion of 10.000 men is of no value if none of them know anything about the subject." Marcus Aurelius

Jeff Davis > , July 4, 2017 at 5:06 pm GMT

@Interlocutor

the Israelis and Saudis apparently have convinced an ignorant Donald Trump that that is the way to go so the situation in Syria
Donald Trump called out Hillary Clinton for her buddy buddy relationship with the Saudi regime and wrote about the KSA funding terrorist groups in his books. In other words Trump was under no illusions about the direct link between Saudi cash and religious ideology and international terrorist groups. Ignorance in this area was not a problem he had.

Yet five months into his term he's schmoozing with those very same terrorist funding Saudis and the vile Israeli regime alike and threatening all out war on Syria and rattling sabers at Iran. All because the Saudis and Israelis "convinced" him it's a good idea to throw the truth out the window and unlearn what he knew and wrote about? Not a chance. I don't buy it for a second. Something else is going on here. I suspect Trump the man is nothing like Trump the politician and he played all those people who hoped he'd follow through on his campaign promises for fools.

It is time to stop making excuses for Trump and treat him like an adult. He owns his decisions and choices and is responsible for them. "I don't buy it for a second. Something else is going on here."

Indeed, but what exactly? Everyone is guessing, mostly based on the hyperbolic hate-fest of the campaign, which was so extreme that both sides remain locked in the embrace of partisan passion, far from any chance at a calm assessment of reality.

And Trump is keeping everyone guessing. Until Trump can wrest control of the Executive branch from the Deep State, he will continue to be "unpredictable", forced to bob and weave and adjust, in order to counter the forces that seek to undermine his presidency.

So is the real Trump the guy who tells Putin he has to do some look-Presidential kabuki, and bomb a Syrian airfield to get the Neocons and CIA off his back - briefly - or is he a gullible emotional dimwit who buys into the transparently ridiculous "sarin attack" bs, despite the intel community telling him it was bs?

If you're anti-Trump you go for explanation number two. If you're a Neocon, or a paleo-Republican, or a Kool-Aid drenched, flag-wrapped "America, fuck yeah!" patriot then you "worship the beauty of our weapons" and don't bother to think much more about it. And if you've managed to avoid ideological brain-lock, then you're probably just scratchin' your head thinking "WTF ?"

Personally, I'm pro-Trump all the way, delighted by the shrieking of snowflakes, the deliciously loutish tweeting, the laugh-a-minute horrified old-maid moralism of the pundit class, and the return of take-it-out-and-wave-it-around flagrantly unapologetic manhood. Yee-hah! What a fabulous spectacle! And here's the best part: three and a half more years and maybe four more after that.

"Make America Great Again!", "Nuke the Swamp!", "Build the Wall!", "Get along with Russia!"

I frikkin' died and went to heaven. Bring it!

Jeff Davis > , July 4, 2017 at 5:24 pm GMT

@Joe Hide I appreciate your comment. If You spend a lot of time reviewing battle tactics and war strategies, and I mean in the hundreds to thousands of hours, you will possibly come to a different conclusion. Trumps actions, as presented by a very untrustworthy media, look like those of a deceiver. Or of a crazy man. Or of whatever twisted narrative they are pushing. The results of his actions (or sometimes intentional non-actions), tell a different story. Thousands of pedophiles and sex traffickers have been arrested in the last few months.

The Syrian War is being won by the Good (or at least not horrible) Guys. We don't have a WW3. Political, economic, and military corruption are being exposed. Priorities are no longer men using women's bathrooms to pee in. There is a lot more good taking place even than this. Great and lasting change takes years if not generations. This is not a quick fix. We won't get everything we want. Idealism never works but Realism does. If only the bad guys deceive, then the Good Guys lose. The Good Guys, You & Me, have to come to grips with how the game is really played. Damn fine reality-based comment, Joe. Kudos.

Ivy > , July 4, 2017 at 5:44 pm GMT

@Joe Hide Are you trying to distract from the white helmet article? Your comment doesn't make any sense here. The White Helmet idea selling takes on many forms. I pointed out one of those and provided another example of how Trump applies his selling to link to the current administration. What is so hard to see in that?

annamaria > , July 4, 2017 at 5:48 pm GMT

@Sherman You left out the part about the Nulands and the Kagans.

Sherm If you insist: "Reuters (finally) realize there are Nazis in Ukraine" https://off-guardian.org/2017/06/24/reuters-finally-realize-there-are-nazis-in-ukraine/

"…local authorities [in Kiev] recently voted to rename a major street after a former Nazi collaborator and anti-Semite named Roman Shukhevych."

"In 2015, Ukraine passed a law honoring the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists and its military wing, the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, (OUN-UPA)"
"Numerous Holocaust memorial sites – including Babi Yar, where over 33,000 Jews were slaughtered by the Nazis – have been vandalized or desecrated by anti-Semitic graffiti and swastikas."

"…the Ukrainian Institute of National Memory (UINM) is drafting a law to posthumously exonerate OUN-UPA members convicted of murdering Polish and Jewish civilians during and after the war."

"The elevation of OUN-UPA has been accompanied by a growing number of anti-Semitic incidents in Ukraine."

"A retired general affiliated with Ukraine's security services called for the destruction of the country's Jews;"

"…a Ukrainian official called Ukraine's SS Galizien division – created with the support of Heinrich Himmler – "heroes"

In the Atlantic, in 2014, Ukrainian Nazis were dismissed as a "phantom menace". Luke Harding wrote a (brilliantly argued) column in the Guardian saying that "there weren't any Nazis in Ukraine because one of the Maidan protesters was Jewish." Politico magazine mocked "Putin's Imaginary Nazis", whilst US News warned against Russia's "Neo-Nazi Propaganda". The Guardian simply headlined: "Don't believe the Russian propaganda about Ukraine's 'fascist' protesters!"
There never were Nazis in Ukraine.

Except now there are. … John Kerry and Victoria "fuck the EU" Nuland, who had actual, hands-on control of the formation of Ukraine's new government…"

KenH > , July 4, 2017 at 6:01 pm GMT

I thought it was common knowledge by anyone with critical thinking skills that the White Helmets are just a propaganda operation for the Salafist fanatics and not a politically neutral third party as they try to depict themselves. So this would exclude George Clowney, Justin Timbersnowflake and the rest of the left wing Hollywood morons. It's looking like we can lump our president and Nimrata Haley in with the brainless and sentimental Hollywood crowd.

annamaria > , July 4, 2017 at 6:29 pm GMT

@KenH I thought it was common knowledge by anyone with critical thinking skills that the White Helmets are just a propaganda operation for the Salafist fanatics and not a politically neutral third party as they try to depict themselves. So this would exclude George Clowney, Justin Timbersnowflake and the rest of the left wing Hollywood morons. It's looking like we can lump our president and Nimrata Haley in with the brainless and sentimental Hollywood crowd. "…this would exclude George Clowney, Justin Timbersnowflake and the rest of the left wing Hollywood morons."
The Clowneys & Timbersnowflakes have financial inspirations that inform their actions. These opportunists are firmly in service to the "deciders."

When oilmen meet MIC: "The Economic Motive for America's Current Wars." https://off-guardian.org/2017/07/04/the-economic-motive-for-americas-current-wars/

"Around half of Russia's gas and oil into the EU is transported there via pipelines that traverse Ukraine, and this is a major reason why the Obama Administration (which was in service to the owners of the U.S.-based international corporations …) started, by no later than 2011, its preparations for a coup in Ukraine, which occurred in February 2014, to overthrow the democratically elected President of Ukraine…

However, Obama also had come into office in 2009 hoping to overthrow Syria's President Bashar al-Assad, because, ever since at least 1949, the U.S.-Saudi oil company Aramco was trying to be allowed to build through Syria pipelines for Saudi oil and Qatari gas into the EU so as to grab that energy-market away from Russia. Consequently, "What's Behind Lower Gas-Prices and the Bombings of Syria and of Southeastern Ukraine" is a U.S.-regime effort to grab market-share in the world's largest energy-market."

Philip Giraldi > , July 4, 2017 at 7:26 pm GMT

@Anon Why would Israel be against Assad? With him, there's no chance of a peace treat and Israel keeps the Golan. Status quo and no fighting is what Israel likes. Israel is currently attacking the Syrian Army and has long been assisting the so-called rebels. It wants anarchy in Syria so it can steal the remainder of the Golan territory.

RobinG > , July 4, 2017 at 7:31 pm GMT

@Joe Hide I appreciate your comment. If You spend a lot of time reviewing battle tactics and war strategies, and I mean in the hundreds to thousands of hours, you will possibly come to a different conclusion. Trumps actions, as presented by a very untrustworthy media, look like those of a deceiver. Or of a crazy man. Or of whatever twisted narrative they are pushing. The results of his actions (or sometimes intentional non-actions), tell a different story. Thousands of pedophiles and sex traffickers have been arrested in the last few months. The Syrian War is being won by the Good (or at least not horrible) Guys. We don't have a WW3. Political, economic, and military corruption are being exposed. Priorities are no longer men using women's bathrooms to pee in. There is a lot more good taking place even than this. Great and lasting change takes years if not generations. This is not a quick fix. We won't get everything we want. Idealism never works but Realism does. If only the bad guys deceive, then the Good Guys lose. The Good Guys, You & Me, have to come to grips with how the game is really played. May I add to that, Trump is clobbering the FakeNewsMedia which, not too long ago, Ron Unz wisely identified as the appropriate first target.

CNN is just the first domino to fall, and every chip weakens the wall of deceit. (NYT admission/correction this week: 17 intel. agencies did NOT support Russian hacking allegation.) And it's rumored that Project Veritas has plenty more incriminating video ready to drop.

Seamus Padraig > , July 4, 2017 at 7:37 pm GMT

@Carlton Meyer This brave lady deserves a Pulitzer for her reporting about Syria and the White Helmets, from December 2016.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUhe87r5bEE

Eva Bartlett is bad-ass. Vanessa Beeley is also an excellent source on Syria.

Moi > , July 4, 2017 at 7:44 pm GMT

@Carlton Meyer I've seen Ms. Bartlett occasionally on RT but not any MSM outlet. She is a truth-teller.

RobinG > , July 4, 2017 at 8:00 pm GMT

@Ivy The White Helmet idea selling takes on many forms. I pointed out one of those and provided another example of how Trump applies his selling to link to the current administration. What is so hard to see in that? Joe Hide was right, your comment made no sense, and now you're doubling down on a ridiculously poor analogy.

It was the Obama regime that funded the White Helmets, years in the making, a conventional "old school" propaganda psy-op of the Deep State.

Trump, the Modern President, uses graceful arrows. That they're felt like cannonballs, hilarious.

Seamus Padraig > , July 4, 2017 at 8:01 pm GMT

@exiled off mainstreet The first comment has it spot on. Hollywood is complicit in this propaganda effort to give the terrorist thug element a human face. These facts are out there for anybody not totally dependent on the official power structure for their information. People like Clooney who support this are themselves tainted with the barbarism represented by this phony propaganda front, and NGO's and governments funding them are complicit in war crimes and crimes against humanity. Clooney's pet project, Darfur and South Sudan are other failed states. Clooney has blood on his hands for having promoted their existence.

One more point about Clooney: his wife, Amal, is a human rights lawyer from Lebanon. It would be interesting to know more about her background. Maybe one of Unz's regular contributors should take on this assignment. Lebanon is a very complicated place, but it does have both pro- and anti-Syrian factions. I wonder where Amal and her family would fall on this spectrum?

Maybe Steve Sailer could do it. He did some brilliant pieces last year investigating the links of Mexican gazillionaire Carlos Slim's relatives to the old Lebanese Phalange.

Backwoods Bob > , July 4, 2017 at 8:52 pm GMT

@Carlton Meyer This brave lady deserves a Pulitzer for her reporting about Syria and the White Helmets, from December 2016.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUhe87r5bEE

I saw that when it first came out. The truth is always so refreshing, sensical, and fulfilling. But I knew it before the video. All anyone has to do is listen to the Syrian people themselves.

Trump pushed a lot of the right buttons during the election with the glaring exception of being Israel-first.

He knows exactly what is going on in Syria. One of the more disheartening things to listen to is people excusing him.

If I work and raise children, and it is so obvious to me then what excuses the man with the genius IQ and having this as his full time job?

Trump is a white-hat himself. Oh, those poor beautiful babies. We have to bomb Assad for the beautiful babies. There's some fake news Trump is perfectly happy with, like Syria.

Ivy > , July 4, 2017 at 9:38 pm GMT

@RobinG Joe Hide was right, your comment made no sense, and now you're doubling down on a ridiculously poor analogy.

It was the Obama regime that funded the White Helmets, years in the making, a conventional "old school" propaganda psy-op of the Deep State.

Trump, the Modern President, uses graceful arrows. That they're felt like cannonballs, hilarious. You have the wrong person if you think that I am trying to distract from column message about the White Helmets, or are reading any mention of Trump as a negative.

My comment included observations about the Hollywood nature of how White Helmets may be portrayed to the public, regardless of facts. Media have many ways to try to communicate, not all of them honorable. For entertainment, see Wag the Dog.

Maybe I need to spell it out more for you. I am not an Obama supporter, and voted for Trump. He has used his own type of first mover advantage routinely as shown in his actions. He gets attention, like he did with the campaign immigration item, and then uses that attention to further his message. Next time I'll choose some non-armaments descriptor and write more to fill in the blanks.

Stephen R. Diamond > , Website July 4, 2017 at 11:44 pm GMT

@Joe Hide

If only the bad guys deceive, then the Good Guys lose.

Remarkably smug and cynical comment. Smug: what makes you so sure that, if you need to deceive, you're (even remotely) "good"? Cynical – and self-undermining- because in sanctioning political deception, you render yourself prima facie untrustworthy.

annamaria > , July 5, 2017 at 12:42 am GMT

@ANON Are the children actually humans or they 4 year old size dolls? "Dr Leif Elinder, a known Swedish medical doctor: "After examination of the video material, I found that the measures inflicted upon those children, some of them lifeless, are bizarre, non-medical, non-lifesaving, and even counterproductive in terms of life-saving purposes of children."

http://www.activistpost.com/2017/03/medical-doctors-question-white-helmets-footage-al-qaeda-oscar.html

Follow the link to read more testimonials by medical doctor. What exactly do you need to clarify?

Priss Factor > , Website July 5, 2017 at 12:42 am GMT

Globalists cause wars, create refugees, and then force white nations into accepting them. Worse, 'refugee' and 'Syrian' are fluid, and any black African coming from Libya might as well be a Syrian refugee too.

White helmets or Refugee boats, globalism is one big ugly lie.

annamaria > , July 5, 2017 at 12:48 am GMT

@Anon Anarchy in Syria doesn't serve Israel. Anarchy anywhere doesn't serve Israel. Managed chaos is one thing, and that may be why they funded the FSA for a while, but total anarchy is dangerous. For all its faults, Israel is still a rational actor. Plus, it has no need for the rest of Golan; the heights are all that are necessary. "Anarchy in Syria doesn't serve Israel."

Then you have missed the Israeli brass' public admission that ISIS/Al Qaeda are preferable to sovereign Syria. "Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon said Tuesday that Iran poses a greater threat than the Islamic State, and that if the Syrian regime were to fall, Israel would prefer that IS [Islamic State] was in control of the territory than an Iranian proxy:" http://www.timesofisrael.com/yaalon-i-would-prefer-islamic-state-to-iran-in-syria/
More:

"Alliance of Convenience: Israel Supports Syria's ISIS Terror Group:" http://www.globalresearch.ca/alliance-of-convenience-israel-supports-syrias-isis-terror-group/5587203

"Turkey and Israel Are Directly Supporting ISIS and Al Qaeda Terrorists In Syria:" http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/09/turkey-israel-directly-supporting-isis-al-qaeda-syria.html

The evidence is clear: anarchy in Syria does serve Israel

Corporal Clegg > , July 5, 2017 at 1:56 am GMT

@JoaoAlfaiate How many stories were told by the msm about Saddam's WMD? Let's see: 1)Mobile labs for producing poison gas 2) Bio weapon spraying drones 3) Importation of Uranium from Niger 4)Aluminum tubes for centrifuges 5) Al-Libi and bio weapons training....Seems to me Uncle Shmuel and his tame press have been less than truthful about Arab countries and WMD. Why should we believe them this time?

Why should we believe them this time?

Believing pro-Assad proaganda that is false on its face seems far more stupid. Doctors Without Borders confirmed signs of Sarin, but I suppose the average Unz reader thinks they are a bunch of evil Jews too.

tmauel > , July 5, 2017 at 4:27 am GMT

Amy Goodman at Democracy Now has completely sold out to the White Helmets propaganda machine which is funded by the U.S. state department. Apparently Goodman cannot bother to investigate the links to the rebels and U.S. clandestine funding of their propaganda. After all Goodman is so stuck on herself and her own star power that she doesn't care a lick about the truth.

She has consistently sold out to the democrats and their ignorant uber wealthy supporters in Hollywood.

Daves_Not_Here_Man > , July 5, 2017 at 4:55 am GMT

@Fiendly Neighborhood Terrorist Discretion being the better part of valor, I imagine Girard is soft-pedaling the degree of US complicity so as to not arouse too much cognitive dissonance in the reader and lose his main point.

One red pill per dose.

Druid > , July 5, 2017 at 4:57 am GMT

@annamaria 'You left out the part about the Nulands and the Kagans.'
And you remind about them why?

Look carefully at the photograph in the following article: http://theduran.com/4-ways-russia-could-and-should-bring-about-regime-change-in-kiev/
Keep in mind that the neo-Nazis have began flourishing in Kiev since the ziocon-infested State Dept. had accomplished a regime change there in 2014.

Was not it you who enquired the UNZ readers about visiting Yad Vashem? - Well, see the amazing results that have been achieved by American/UK Jews in Ukraine. Fit perfectly Yad Vashem preaching.

"How the Israel Lobby Protected Ukrainian Neo-Nazis: http://fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/government/foreign_policy_and_government/news.php?q=1417630958 "Rep. John Conyers wanted to block U.S. funding to neo-Nazis in Ukraine. But the ADL and Simon Wiesenthal Center refused to help ."

"The neo-Nazi Oleh Tyahnybok and the American Zionist Victoria Nuland, wife of Robert Kagan, are all smiles. Not since the days of the Haavara (Transfer) Agreement of August 25, 1933 between the Zionist Federation of Germany and Chancellor Adolf Hitler celebrated by the striking of a celebratory coin by the Berlin Mint (right)....:" http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/12289

Haavara (Transfer) Agreement: http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/09/07/Nazi_Zionism.html You tell that Ziofascist, ma'am!

Esmehan > , July 5, 2017 at 6:00 am GMT

Anybody remember "Zlata's Diary"? This was a piece of tearjerking propaganda supposedly written by a Bosnian Muslim girl enduring the siege of Sarajevo. Absurdly compared to Anne Frank's story, it played on Western ignorance and sentimentality. Bosnian Serbs, in reality one side in a vicious three-way conflict, became " Nazis" attacking the innocent.

Uncle Bunty > , July 5, 2017 at 10:38 am GMT

The whole notion of a 'white hat' singularity is predicated on an essential falsehood: That Syrians of every stripe have not been digging themselves, their loved ones, and even strangers out of the rubble of a thousand formerly-civilized places since America decided they wanted, and needed, more 'democrazy'.

The white hats and team shirts are both imported, along with the notion that they are 'special' or 'important' – thy're part of the money we and our governments spend to bring change to Syria, a part that doesn't buy guns. .

Seamus Padraig > , July 5, 2017 at 10:46 am GMT

@Corporal Clegg Doctors Without Borders is another ZATO psy-op not much different from the White Helmets. Why their very founder, Bernard Kouchner, went on to become France's Foreign Minister under Sarko. Talk about revolving doors!

Tallulah B > , July 5, 2017 at 10:48 am GMT

@truthtellerAryan This is acceptable. Dead Arabs – killed by other Arabs – are pefect 'thematic' material to prove the goodness and humanity of real people – in Hollywood, or Tel Aviv. Like so much of everywhere else on Earth "they've been killing each other for thousands of years" – as opposed to, merely shooting a stone thrower, dispersing rioting negroes or shooting-up the local disco.

annamaria > , July 5, 2017 at 11:24 am GMT

@Anon None of those sources are great, but even so, none of those stories suggest that anarchy is the goal. All these sources – and many others presenting the hard facts – refute your charitable opinion of Israel, while supporting the unfortunate truth that anarchy in Syria does serve Israel and that Israel does everything in its power to generate the anarchy, including the material and logistical support for ISIS and Al Qaeda.
As for the "goal," please do not feign innocence: both PNAC and Oded Yinon plan for Eretz Israel are available online.

annamaria > , July 5, 2017 at 11:34 am GMT

@Corporal Clegg "Russia/Syria have several explanations, but Assad being a genocidal lispy murderer is still more easily believed than all of them."

Seems as a specter of Colin Power comes to UNZ, under pseudonym of Corporal Clegg. Or is it the morbid Cheney and his pupil Hillary Clinton? – Only a dedicated ziocon could be so rabidly hateful of Russia and Syria.
By the way, how is Assad genocidal next to the genocidal Israelis? Assad looks morally superior to the amoral supremacists and parasitoids next door.

anarchyst > , July 5, 2017 at 12:30 pm GMT

@Esmehan Anybody remember "Zlata's Diary"? This was a piece of tearjerking propaganda supposedly written by a Bosnian Muslim girl enduring the siege of Sarajevo. Absurdly compared to Anne Frank's story, it played on Western ignorance and sentimentality. Bosnian Serbs, in reality one side in a vicious three-way conflict, became " Nazis" attacking the innocent. Let's not forget that Anne Frank's "diary was mostly written with a ball-point pen, NOT invented until after WW2…

vidya > , July 5, 2017 at 12:50 pm GMT

Sarin is a subset of a group of compounds called organo phosphates. They are primarily used as insecticides/ pesticides(such as round up), as well as motor oil additives. If vaporized, as stored forms by a conventional explosive, exposure to any of them causes similar manifestations. Hence it is not possible to say which organo phosphorus compound one is exposed to in absence of a forensic analysis such as gas/ liquid chromatography.

Ludwig Watzal > , Website July 5, 2017 at 1:07 pm GMT

It's not surprising that the largest fake-factory on earth, Hollywood, awarded an OSCAR to a fake documentary. The "White Helmets" are nothing but terrorists disguised as paramedics. After the terrorists had to leave Aleppo, the "White Helmets" also disappeared. Wherever there is a terrorist attack, the phony helpers appear. Foreign powers created the White Helmets, and with the collaboration of the mainstream media, they could succeed till they finally landed in Hollywood where they belong. Unsurprisingly, Hillary Clinton and George Clooney liked these hoodlums, which should not surprise anybody. At least, Hillary and her husband belong behind bars.

http://ahtribune.com/world/north-africa-south-west-asia/syria-crisis/1531-white-helmets-oscar.html

schmenz > , July 5, 2017 at 2:13 pm GMT

@Corporal Clegg Yawn.

Michael Kenny > , July 5, 2017 at 2:34 pm GMT

Cynical me, you may say, but I can't help suspecting that if the White Helmets had been on the same side as Vladimir Putin, there would be no crticism of them on the American internet. After all, when was the last time you saw an article criticising the Ukrainian "rebels"?

annamaria > , July 5, 2017 at 3:27 pm GMT

@Ludwig Watzal It's not surprising that the largest fake-factory on earth, Hollywood, awarded an OSCAR to a fake documentary. The "White Helmets" are nothing but terrorists disguised as paramedics. After the terrorists had to leave Aleppo, the "White Helmets" also disappeared. Wherever there is a terrorist attack, the phony helpers appear. Foreign powers created the White Helmets, and with the collaboration of the mainstream media, they could succeed till they finally landed in Hollywood where they belong. Unsurprisingly, Hillary Clinton and George Clooney liked these hoodlums, which should not surprise anybody. At least, Hillary and her husband belong behind bars.

http://ahtribune.com/world/north-africa-south-west-asia/syria-crisis/1531-white-helmets-oscar.html Thank you for the link. More on the same: https://consortiumnews.com/2017/02/24/syrian-war-propaganda-at-the-oscars/
"The White Helmets were initiated by the British military contractor James LeMesurier and is funded (about $100 million) by the different Western governments… It's a NATO ghost organization…
The "White Helmets" have no telephone number in Syria. If one wants to get in touch with them, one has to contact Al-Qaida. Their headquarter is alongside Al-Qaida's. The Real Syria Civil Defence can be reached by dialing 113 inside Syria.

… most of the group's heavy funding goes to marketing, which is run by "The Syria Campaign" based in New York. The campaign is based in New York City, and the manager is an Irish-American woman, named Anna Nolan , who has never been to Syria. Even their website is fake. They beefed it up with video footage from a documentary produced by the BBC in 2010 that showed dancing kids and education under the Assad government."

What does Mrs. Clooney do? – defending human rights? Alongside with Clintons? – Then it should be very "humanitarian."

More on the amazing Al Qaeda affiliate known as White Helmets:
"The film is as fraudulent as the group it tries to turn into heroes. The filmmakers never set foot in Syria. Their video footage takes place in southern Turkey where they show White Helmet trainees in a hotel and talking on cell phones…
The original video has the logo of Aleppo Media Center (AMC), which was created by the Syrian Expatriates Organization. Their address on K Street in Washington DC suggests this is yet another Western-funded operation similar to the Iraqi National Congress that lobbied and lied on behalf of the 2003 invasion of Iraq."

The infamous AMC: "Aleppo Media Centre' Funded By French Foreign Office, EU and US" http://21stcenturywire.com/2016/09/20/exclusive-aleppo-media-centre-funded-by-french-foreign-office-eu-and-us/

annamaria > , July 5, 2017 at 3:36 pm GMT

@Corporal Clegg "Believing pro-Assad proaganda that is false on its face…"
Do you have facts to prove your statement? – otherwise you are exercising in slander on behalf of the empire of Fed. Reserve (MIC, banksters, oilmen, Israel-firsters).
No need in parroting the MSM lies on UNZ.

Man on the street > , July 5, 2017 at 4:20 pm GMT

@Priss Factor I remember vividly during the Bush attempts to invade Iraq, his neocon surrogates on TV used the terms HE DID NOT SELL IT YET TO THE AMERICA PEOPLE. In other words, the propaganda and lies to the American stupid population did not reach a critical mass. "Selling" the war? What a concept. Do you think if you ask any idiot on the street if the US was invaded by a foreign power, should the president sell to the American people on the fact that our military should attack and repel the invaders? Of course not. But, in order that a President brain wash the sheeple into sending their kids to die for Israel by invading Iraq, the president must paint the Iraqi president as evil, and of course our presstitude will never tell the sheeple that our president is the evil one for invading a sovereign nation that never attacked us.

annamaria > , July 5, 2017 at 6:29 pm GMT

@Man on the street

"In August, families of the British soldiers killed in the Iraq War crowd-funded £150,000 (US$194,000) to bring a case for Blair's prosecution."

This is a proper step to address the terrible injustice. The US citizenry needs to collects its courage and initiate a case against Cheney & Co, i.e., against the mega-war profiteers & ziocons. https://www.rt.com/uk/395371-tony-blair-prosecution-iraq/

annamaria > , July 5, 2017 at 7:00 pm GMT

@SolontoCroesus First exposures seem to have a powerful impact.

In Jan 2012 Emma Alberici interviewed Sergey Lavrov, Russian foreign minister, on Australia TV. He laid out the reasons the Russian government opposed US/UN intervention in Syria, the most significant reason being the sovereignty of Syria and its government. United Nations conventions proscribe interference in the domestic affairs of member states. It was a straightforward judgment.

US claims to be the nation that "preserves the international order" by adhering to the "rule of law," but in fact, Russia seems to have been the state sustaining that value.

Lavrov and the Russian government he represents gained credibility with that interview, and nothing I have seen him or Putin say in the 5 years subsequent, has significantly contradicted that policy laid out in 2012. "US claims to be the nation that "preserves the international order" by adhering to the "rule of law…"

It does claim this fiction, but the fraud has been exposed and there is no way to "fix" the problem:

"Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall,
Humpty Dumpty had a great fall.
All the king's horses and all the king's men
Couldn't put Humpty together again"

"Over 500,000 Syrian Refugees Return To Government-Controlled Areas Of Syria" http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-05/over-500000-syrian-refugees-return-government-controlled-areas-syria

"Crucial to the Western narrative of the Syrian conflict is the assertion that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is a brutal dictator who has taken to killing his own people over the course of Syria's six-year-long conflict. … While this narrative has been pervasive in media coverage of the Syrian conflict, it is now being debunked by the very Syrian refugees.

According to a recent statement from Andrej Mahecic, a spokesman for the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, an estimated 440,000 displaced Syrians who remained in the country have returned to their homes since the year began. In addition, 31,000 refugees in neighboring countries also returned to Syria in the first half of the year, with 260,000 having returned to Syria from other nations since 2015."

The Syrians literally vote with their feet, thus exposing the US/Israeli lies.

annamaria > , July 5, 2017 at 7:03 pm GMT

@Authenticjazzman She's a deranged leftist flunky working for GS towards the goal of a one-world, no borders, marxist looney-bin, such as her idiot husband and the entire ilk to which they belong: BO, BC, HRC, all of hollywood, academia, the media, clergy, justistia, etc.
I guess this sort of sums it up, without the effort of a huge research project.

Authenticjazzman "Mensa" society member since 1973, airborne qualified US Army vet, and pro jazz artist. Obama and Hillary are leftists and marxists? – Don't they love money more than anything else?

annamaria > , July 5, 2017 at 8:13 pm GMT

US-Israeli love fest with Daesh: http://www.voltairenet.org/article196903.html

"…since the accession to power in Beijing by President Xi Jinping, bearer of the project for the two Silk Roads, Washington has been pushing for the creation of a " Sunnistan " straddling Iraq and Syria. In order to acheive this goal, it [the US] has financed, armed and supervised Daesh in order to cut the communication route between Beirut-Damascus-Baghdad-Teheran and Beijing.
… since the beginning of the Qatar crisis, the Iraqi and Syrian armies have suddenly advanced. They have liberated the frontier territories previously held by Daesh and are now on the verge of establishing their junction (in other words, reconnecting the Silk Road). The two armies are now separated only by two hundred metres of land controlled illegally by the US army ."

The bloodshed could be ended any time if not the Israel-occupied US Congress. They need more human meat & blood. Here, James LeMesurier and Anna Nolan come up handy, fed from the $100 million fund allocated by the US/EU "deciders" to spread propaganda against Syrian sovereignty. That was a backdrop for the opportunistic Orlando von Einsiedel and Joanna Natasegara (neither of them ever visited Syria) getting happily their shekels for propagandizing fakery of "White Helmets," never mind the human cost of Daesh for Syria.

L.K > , July 5, 2017 at 9:45 pm GMT

Let's be clear;

The "white helmets" are a propaganda operation backed by those countries trying to effect regime change in Syria, such as the ZUSA & ZUK, and they are also Al Qaeda's "civil defense".

I have seen various photos of their operatives in white helmet uniforms & in other photos the same individuals armed & in combat fatigues.

Independent British journalist, Vanessa Beeley, who has been to Syria has helped unmask these criminals;
SYRIA WHITE HELMETS HAND IN HAND WITH AL QAEDA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBkn78q_t_Q
In this vid, we can see the white helmets together with Al Qaeda, participating in executions, etc;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLyZkPfLoG0

Priss Factor > , Website July 5, 2017 at 10:09 pm GMT

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/when-fake-countries-go-to-war/

Some nations are real nations with deep roots of history, ethnicity, and territory.

Other nations are fake nations, recently constructed by foreign imperialists who drew lines on the map to maximize exploitation of natural resources and labor.

Globalism seeks to weaken historical roots, ethnic ties, and territorial claims for the whole world(except for Israel) and turn even real nations into fake nations like those of Middle East and Africa.

If Soros can help it, Hungary, Czech Republic, and Poland will also become country clubs of globalist elites who replace native folks with foreign minions.

There are plenty of turncoat comprador elites even in real nations who'd gladly take 30 pieces of silver to rub shoulders with the glamorites of the world.

Montag > , July 5, 2017 at 10:28 pm GMT

@exiled off mainstreet You just described exactly what is the subject matter of an independent movie and graphic novel that I'm trying in vain to get funded. Besides the obvious reasons that 95% of my media-related friends are ultra liberals (anti-truth) and the general cognitive dissonance of our society to the abject poverty of education to university debt-financed amongst young people that verges on state sponsored sleep entrainment depicted in Brave New World.

Anyway, my project has been shunned officially and unofficially; a known Hollywood actor asked me upon reading the script whether I thought it would be controversial? Hell, yes! Except why do you say that? Well you kind of lay out the plan.. It is definitely an awareness thing via social media amongst millenials recorded by Mark Dice; in short, they don't read books, they have no idea of world events, founding fathers, constitution, can't tell you what DC means in Washington, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. One young white man knew a lot; another 40 year old white woman quoted verbatim the Declaration of Independence. The rest didn't know what he was talking about.

Anyway, have a look. I don't expect you to contribute because it's DOA but wouldn't mind honest feedback, i.e., am I living in a bubble I created for myself?

https://igg.me/at/chasm-project-url/x/16732400

dcite > , July 5, 2017 at 11:58 pm GMT

@Alister

Funded by USAID……it's clear they are nothing more than a CIA front…. why no one does an in depth review of the links between USAID and the CIA…..they will find they are one and the same. It's time for UNZ to uncover the real USAID

Now that would be journalism worth its salt. Absolutely. USAID started as a CIA front in Vietnam during the 60s. Ruth Paine, "friend" of Marina Oswald, had a father named William Avery Hyde, who worked at USAID at least partly because it was tied in with the CIA So did other members of her family. I know someone who worked briefly at USAID, and would get questions from the public asking for info on projects from the 1960s. There were almost no records. We'r talking the 1960s, not the last century. There should have been the usual memos, advance reports, technical briefs, assessments, etc. Nearly nada, at least among the non-top-secret documents and archives. Only from the mid-70s on, around the time the CIA and various assassinations were looked at critically by Congress, did this agency keep good records of its activities.

RobinG > , July 6, 2017 at 12:17 am GMT

@Montag DOA? Killed my interest with reference to ZioNazi Roseanne Barr as "truth teller." Get a grip.

Erebus > , July 6, 2017 at 12:19 am GMT

For those who may remain unconvinced, Insurge Intelligence (self-described as "a crowdfunded investigative journalism project for people and planet") has acquired 1000s of documents that lift the veil on just how deeply the USM and CIA are embedded in its productions. In a word, very.

https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/exclusive-documents-expose-direct-us-military-intelligence-influence-on-1-800-movies-and-tv-shows-36433107c307

We live in a simulacrum created by others, in accordance with an agenda they too are following blindly.

Lawrence Fitton > , July 6, 2017 at 3:56 am GMT

isn't it rich, isn't strange, that hollywood types influence naive americans. ill-informed and over-respected types such as george clooney and justin timberlake inflate a narrative of good in the evil of the syrian war crime. why hasn't america demanded an end to extended war-making? the media. that's why.
steppenwolf sang goddam the pusher.
of thee i sing.

Ben_C > , July 6, 2017 at 3:58 am GMT

@L.K Yep…

https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/video-white-helmets-clean-following-rebel-execution-southern-syria-18-graphic/

Don't forget this little incident:

https://rachelblevins.com/2017/06/21/gruesome-video-white-helmets-beheading-dumping-syrian-army-bodies/

Priss Factor > , Website July 6, 2017 at 6:07 am GMT

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwGRvsSGbuM

ROTFL. These guys says the US policy has been anti-Iran but its follies keep aiding Iran inadvertently.

Delinquent Snail > , July 6, 2017 at 7:19 am GMT

Just because we on UNZ are not idiots (most of us) and can dismiss this bs for what it is, doesn't mean the vast majority of americans arent. People nowadays don't read anything besides social media. This country's populace just doesn't care anymore, they've given up fighting to be free. Most just want to trust big brother and uncle sam to have their back, when in reality, nothing could be further from the truth. Years and years of tv programming (the actual shows and the subliminal messages) have robbed most americans of the will power needed to keep an out of controll government in check. They just dont care anymore. And if they start to question whats going on, they are called crazy or delusional, or (my personal favorite) a conspiracy theorist.

We need to do something. Organize and take back our nation. Remove our out of controll spy agencies, stop funding every third world nation in africa (if they cant support them selves, let them die or be someone elses problem. The money could go to so many more important things stateside), no more Foreign Military financing to other nations (if they want to buy our weapons, great! Pay US in cash, gold, silver, whatever. Just pay us. No more freebies(im looking at the 5 billion a year to isreal and Egypt)), we need to bring our soldiers home, and have them do what we pay other nations do do with the training we also provide (border security), we need to dismantle our lobbyist political environment by having all elected officials have all finacial transactions and property become public record (all of it).

We desperately need to STAND UP as a United group. I know im not the only one who feels this way, but alone i can only do so much. I've tried to spread awareness to people i know IRL, but it always spins back to either they dont care, the MSM told them the "truth" of the matter, or im crazy for not wanting perpetual war with nations 95% of americans couldnt find on a map. Thats why we as a group, the politically aware on sites such as this, need to start grouping up and using our wits and weight ro make an impact.

We all don't agree on the finer specifics of why this nation is broken, but we all agree its broken.

annamaria > , July 6, 2017 at 11:21 am GMT

@dcite

Funded by USAID……it's clear they are nothing more than a CIA front…. why no one does an in depth review of the links between USAID and the CIA…..they will find they are one and the same. It's time for UNZ to uncover the real USAID
Now that would be journalism worth its salt. Absolutely. USAID started as a CIA front in Vietnam during the 60s. Ruth Paine, "friend" of Marina Oswald, had a father named William Avery Hyde, who worked at USAID at least partly because it was tied in with the CIA So did other members of her family. I know someone who worked briefly at USAID, and would get questions from the public asking for info on projects from the 1960s. There were almost no records. We'r talking the 1960s, not the last century. There should have been the usual memos, advance reports, technical briefs, assessments, etc. Nearly nada, at least among the non-top-secret documents and archives. Only from the mid-70s on, around the time the CIA and various assassinations were looked at critically by Congress, did this agency keep good records of its activities. The "1984″ has been a conduit for the US "deciders" for so long that they have lost a sense of reality (whereas a sense of decency is not familiar for them at all). Here is an amazing sample of official idiocy: http://www.globalresearch.ca/fake-news-us-backed-forces-blast-through-8th-century-syrian-wall-to-fight-isis/5597701

"The Rafiqah Wall, first constructed in the 8th century by the Abbasid dynasty, is reported to be over 12 feet high, over a meter thick and stretches over 3 miles around the old city.

… the advancement of Syrian troops made the wall a trap that could have allowed the ISIS fighters to be completely wiped out. The US-backed forces, fronted by the so-called "Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF)", appeared to come to ISIS's rescue. According to a July 3, 2017 TIME article(1), ISIS fighters had taken positions there "to defend the city [sic]" and planted explosive devices at what the article described as "breaks in the wall."

On the night of July 3rd, the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), claimed that SDF had "found a way" through the historic wall at "the most heavily-fortified portion of Raqqa"; two 25 meter-long breaches had been blasted through it. The article claimed that the two "small" - almost 100-foot - gaps "will help preserve the remainder of the overall 2,500-meter wall…"

A fine example of ZUSA reasoning: call the ISIS supporters the "moderate" jihadis (SDF) and call the blast of an ancient monument a "preservation."

[Jul 06, 2017] Quatar did not fold: the conflect between countries_supporting juhadists continues unabated

Notable quotes:
"... Seeing the Saudis walk out of this dispute with a big black eye is good news. However, I find it difficult in the extreme to root for the MB. They are the ones who had strong organizations in Homs and Aleppo at the beginning of the Syrian "Arab Spring" and pushed the conflict into military violence. And didn't Morsi call for Egyptian volunteers to go to Syria to fight against the Assad government? That was three days before Sisi orchestrated the coup to remove Morsi. I think that was a good move as much as anyone would detest military dictatorship over a democratically elected government. ..."
"... I see much of what the Sauds have done since 1990 as a huge wastage of wealth and deep indulgence in debauchery displaying absolutely no future foresight. I thought Twilight in the Desert would have jarred them awake, but it didn't as far as I can see. ..."
"... Egypt. My understanding at the time was 2 reasons for Morsi to be tossed. For one thing he tried to gather more power for the MB and people resumed their protests since they had not bargained for that. And second, Morsi wanted to jump into the war in Syria. Those are surface reasons that made it to MSM but were not emphasized. Since social media (by many outside parties) played a big role, western interests were present (maybe including via Abedin). The anti-MB Egypt joined with the anti-Qatar states in Riyadh. Looking back I wonder if al Sisi's speech against Gulf funders of terrorism targeted Qatar or included the Saudis. ..."
Jul 06, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

As MoA predicted on June 7, two days after the spat started, Qatar did not fold. It has hundreds of billions in monetary reserves, international support from its liquefied gas customers and allies, and it secured supplies and support from Turkey and Iran. It simply did not response to the "offer" in time for the ultimatum's end.

The Saudis blinked first. On Sunday the ultimatum was prolonged for two days. Yesterday Qatar responded with its own demands which were, like the "offer", designed to be refused. It also announced that it would increase its liquefied gas exports by a third which threatens to take market share and income away from the Saudis. It reminded the UAE that 80% of its electricity supplies depend on natural gas delivered from Qatar.

Today the Saudis, the UAE, Egypt and Bahrain met to discuss further consequences and new measures against Qatar. The Gulf media predicted more sanctions .

But the gang of four decided to do ... nothing :

The foreign ministers of four Arab countries, meeting in Cairo, said they regretted Qatar's "negative" response to their list of demands.
...
The Saudi foreign minister said further steps would be taken against Qatar at the appropriate time , and would be in line with international law.
...
The meeting came as the deadline for Qatar to accept the list of demands or face further sanctions expired.

This is a huge embarrassment for the clown princes of the UAE and Saudi Arabia. They, Mohammad bin Zayed and Mohammad bin Salman, are the instigators of the campaign against Qatar. The meeting today had to deliver some penalty against Qatar for not giving in to any demand: some additional significant sanctions , a more intense blockade, some threat of military strikes. But the meeting came up with ... nothing.

The clown princes had shot their wad on the very first day. They could not come up with any new measures that were agreeable. Kuwait and Oman reject to push Qatar out of the Gulf Cooperation Council, the UAE would lose all its international businesses in Dubai should the Qatari gas supplies, and thereby its electricity, shut down. An additional blockade of Qatar is impossible without the agreement of the U.S. Russia and other big states.

Such a huge loss of face will have consequences. When the Saudi clown prince launched the war against Yemen he expected, and announced, that Sanaa would fall within days. Two years later Sanaa has not fallen and the Saudis are losing the war. Qatar was expected to fold within days. But it has enough capital and income to sustain the current situation for many years to come. The war against Yemen and the sanctions against Qatar were indirectly aimed against Iran- the Saudis' cpsen arch-enemy. But without investing even a dime Iran is now the winner from both conflicts. MbS, the Saudi clown prince, has twice proven to be a terrible strategist who endangers his country.

The Saudi King Salman and his son said that neither of them will take part in the upcoming G-20 meeting in Hamburg. Rumors have it that they fear an imminent coup should one of them leave the country.

No one should be surprised if the Salman era finds a bloody end within the next week or month.

R Winner | Jul 5, 2017 3:12:20 PM | 2
The US Regime is currently:
  • Actively supporting its terrorist proxies in Syria
  • Playing chicken with China in the South China Sea
  • Getting closer and closer to war with a new nuclear power, North Korea
  • The never ending Afghanistan fiasco

Can the Saudi dictatorship be dumb enough to think the US Regime is ready or even capable of coming to the aid of a coup? One would think the US Regime would be desperate to quickly stage a coup just to get these clowns out of power and someone reliable as dictator of Saudi Arabia so they can get back to the myriad other wars they are waging or on the verge of waging.

Jackrabbit | Jul 5, 2017 3:51:38 PM | 5
Do you think the Americans are telling the Saudis to end their support for terrorism and the Saudis are just ignoring that to engaging in futile, internecine conflict? If true, I would think that the US is misguiding or angling for an opportunity to over-throw Saudi rulers (as has been mooted at MoA several times). But I read an plausible analysis (linked at MoA, I think) that speculated on MbS recognition for Israel - reasoning that that is why US supported his elevation to crown prince. In that case, I would think that US would want to guide KSA to better outcomes. Seems suspicious for this to occur just before the G-20.

Putin-Trump at G-20: Birth of Sunnistan?

Thoughts?

Mark2 | Jul 5, 2017 4:02:52 PM | 6
The clownprince can only recognize Israel if there's no opponent voice in the Arab world, Qatar wont give in but neither will Israel with their big plans. So the prince and his buddy the presidents son in law got himself in another mess just to be the next king, but people died for less, and i dont underestimate the militairy, financial and mediapower of this new alliance.
ToivoS | Jul 5, 2017 4:06:48 PM | 7
Seeing the Saudis walk out of this dispute with a big black eye is good news. However, I find it difficult in the extreme to root for the MB. They are the ones who had strong organizations in Homs and Aleppo at the beginning of the Syrian "Arab Spring" and pushed the conflict into military violence. And didn't Morsi call for Egyptian volunteers to go to Syria to fight against the Assad government? That was three days before Sisi orchestrated the coup to remove Morsi. I think that was a good move as much as anyone would detest military dictatorship over a democratically elected government.

This current conflict is producing some strange alliances but I would be very hesitant to support the MB in any case. I can see why Iran will enter an alliance of convenience with Qatar but that is for the iranians to work out, not for us to cheer on.

hopehely | Jul 5, 2017 4:09:01 PM | 8
@3
I think it is safe to assume Trump had no clue there was a large US military base in Qatar.
Well that should not be a problem, as long as his adviser knows that...that's what advisers are for after all. His adviser is IIRC general McMaster. Therefore, is it safe to assume that Mr General had no clue about it, or that Trump did not seek his advice?
the pair | Jul 5, 2017 4:09:52 PM | 9
i've been hoping for anything to take the saud family down...either a few notches or all the way. they seem headed down that path for all the reasons you mentioned here and others (e.g. being BFFs with israel is short sighted, arrogant and beyond stupid in that part of the world).

i've also wondered if the - artificial due to saudi overproduction - low price of oil will backfire...usually the only reason major events and disruptions don't occur in the "middle east" is fear of a spike in oil and gas prices. at this point even saudi "allies" would like to see that happen (and it would have the hilarious unintended effect of boosting russia to "screw your little sanctions" levels).

we'll see. it's hard to predict what will happen in a family with 100,000,000 members and a collective ingrained mental illness on the level of wahhabism.

Laguerre | Jul 5, 2017 4:32:29 PM | 10
re 1

"Unless the Saudis can reconfigure their economy and train their populous to do actual work, their kingdom will sink into the sands and die by 2100. " This is impossible. There are no other resources, and the loyalty of the people is very stretched, as b indicates.

Willy2 | Jul 5, 2017 4:35:30 PM | 11
  • But the coupe is likely to come from the ruling clan inside the Saudi "government".
  • Who will guarantee that the Muslim brotherhood who have been supported by Qatar will not turn on the government in Doha ?
Willy2 | Jul 5, 2017 4:38:45 PM | 12
I would use different words: The Saudis are NOT winning the war. A victory is not in sight. Even after a war that lasted for 2 (??) years. Indeed, highly embarrasing for the new "king" Salman and his minister of "defense".
somebody | Jul 5, 2017 4:48:17 PM | 13
Posted by: hopehely | Jul 5, 2017 4:09:01 PM | 8

Presumably the adviser was Jared Kushner and he had no clue about it or did not care.

Willy2 | Jul 5, 2017 4:51:09 PM | 14
- Also think of the embarrasment of the people in the US who have supported the saudis. Think: Jared Kushner & Steve Bannon (??).
- There's talk that the generals in the Pentagon "don't like" a new "intervention" in the Middle East.

Source:
https://www.libertarianinstitute.org/scotthortonshow/062817-mark-perry-jared-kushners-middle-east-mess/

Pvp | Jul 5, 2017 4:54:56 PM | 15
Just after the venerable Henry Jackson society named the Saudis as the prime sponsor of terrorism. Next stage in stirring a little neocon chaos in the Arab world? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40496778
Jackrabbit | Jul 5, 2017 5:22:17 PM | 17
b:
The MB do not accept the primacy of the Arab absolute monarchs. They provide an alternative way of governing by adopting some democratic participation of the people.
Yet their main support come from Qataris Wahhabi-infused Monarchy and a Sultan wannabe? Wikipedia tells me that MB believes in Jihad and Sharia Law. What a swell bunch of community organizers./sarc
somebody | Jul 5, 2017 5:33:36 PM | 18
By the way, there is a LNG price war between Qatar and the United States .
brian | Jul 5, 2017 5:41:50 PM | 19
'The military dictator of Egypt, which joined the Saudis on the issue, had led a coup against the elected MB government of his '

the reference here is to Morsi , a member of MB who ended diplomatic relations with syria, backed jihadhis flocking TO syria to kill syrians, wanted to send egypts army to invade syria and finally made governmor of Luxor a man who belonged to a party that masacred foreign tourists in 1997.

so did i miss something in Bernies umbrage at Sisi??

karlof1 | Jul 5, 2017 6:05:13 PM | 20
Laguerre @10--

Yes, I agree, but that doesn't negate the challenge to the al-Sauds if they wish to continue in control. I see much of what the Sauds have done since 1990 as a huge wastage of wealth and deep indulgence in debauchery displaying absolutely no future foresight. I thought Twilight in the Desert would have jarred them awake, but it didn't as far as I can see.

Other news of import: Press statements by Putin and Xi after their summit, http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/54979 Joint statement by Russia and China on North Korea, http://www.mid.ru/en/web/guest/maps/kr/-/asset_publisher/PR7UbfssNImL/content/id/2807662 and discussion of that statement, http://theduran.com/russian-chinese-joint-statement-korea/

Also, Pepe Escobar gives us insight as to Hong Kong's role in OBOR, http://www.atimes.com/article/hks-role-next-20-years-silk-road-super-connector/

And a very good article on Russia's Far East land giveaway, http://www.atimes.com/article/russia-great-land-giveaway-far-east/

virgile | Jul 5, 2017 6:08:08 PM | 21
Trump did a good "coup". Trump pumped Saudi Arabia and the UAE by assuring them of US support whatever they decide to do about stopping the funding of Al Qaeda and ISIS. Saudi Arabia thought they could get away by making tiny Qatar the scapegoat for the Islamist terrorists in the region and abroad.

They fell in one more trap that the US has been pushing them into: Libya, Syria, Yemen. All ending by weakening further the Sunni kingdom to the point that it may consider a deal with Israel in exchange of US tough measures against Shia Iran. The US has been backstabbing Saudi Arabia under Obama and under Trump for years and they don't even notice.

Of course Qatar will not yield and the pathetic MBS looks dumber than ever. Yes a coup is needed in Saudi Arabia and Abu Dhabi.. The collapse of the GCC is next.

Anonymous | Jul 5, 2017 6:14:36 PM | 22
The Saudis tried to make a public IPO of Aramco a while back. This has fizzled, probably in recognition of the fact that Saudi is almost running on empty. One reason behind the Qatar lunacy might be a wish to take over Qatar's resources to keep Saudi solvent for a while at least.
fast freddy | Jul 5, 2017 6:30:01 PM | 24
Redirect perhaps, if I may be so bold: there exists no evidence that the amalgamated USUKIS and its string of subservient allies intend to do anything to eradicate any brand of "rebel" head choppers. They snipe at them around the margins, but they also pay them, arm them, and permit them to do (oil) business and much more.

Also: The new SA Clown Prince is still entitled to all the membership benefits of the U.N. Human Rights Council even as he slaughters civilians in Yemen and publicly chops off the hands and heads of his own citizens.

mauisurfer | Jul 5, 2017 7:33:04 PM | 30
interview with Chas Freeman last week: Qatar Crisis Could Lead to War: Veteran US Diplomat

if you don't know who Chas is, please wiki was ambassador to Saudi, was Nixon's interpreter in China, that's right, he speaks mandarin and arabic not just knowledgeable, also very funny remember when AIPAC vetoed his appointment by Obama?

https://lobelog.com/qatar-crisis-could-lead-to-war-veteran-us-diplomat/

more Chas here: http://chasfreeman.net/category/speeches/

Curtis | Jul 5, 2017 8:08:35 PM | 34
@ToivoS 7

Egypt. My understanding at the time was 2 reasons for Morsi to be tossed. For one thing he tried to gather more power for the MB and people resumed their protests since they had not bargained for that. And second, Morsi wanted to jump into the war in Syria. Those are surface reasons that made it to MSM but were not emphasized. Since social media (by many outside parties) played a big role, western interests were present (maybe including via Abedin). The anti-MB Egypt joined with the anti-Qatar states in Riyadh. Looking back I wonder if al Sisi's speech against Gulf funders of terrorism targeted Qatar or included the Saudis.

MB/Morsi ran on a plank of moderation but al Sisi attacked and prosecuted them as terrorists. Sadly mucho details of this are lacking in US MSM.

Grieved | Jul 5, 2017 9:26:42 PM | 35
@18 somebody

Yes, that's exactly how that Reuters story reads to me too. The prime target is the US. Extraordinarily powerful move by Qatar, using a weapon that it knows and owns completely and in massive scale, and with an understanding of the damage it can do to its enemies. Asymmetrical warfare indeed. Priceless.

~~

I'm really hoping that over the years, as Qatar rubs shoulders with the multi-polar world, it will reform itself to renounce and atone for its former support of terrorism. As I watch its moves in this situation I'm struck with a certain admiration. It would be nice to be able to root for it someday as one of the good guys.

karlof1 | Jul 5, 2017 10:04:01 PM | 37
Here's last year's NatGas industrial review, so you can determine just how sane Qatar's move is. The link is to a modestly sized pdf file, http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwit-fbqxPPUAhVSxmMKHRY1CyAQFggiMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.igu.org%2Fdownload%2Ffile%2Ffid%2F2123&usg=AFQjCNHNu-nmLpatVthD04g0UWtOuREDMw

The report's loaded with info. Production can certainly be increased, but it's all the other infrastructure that's required for the market to expand, particularly regasification terminals.

ProPeace | Jul 5, 2017 10:51:17 PM | 38
Right on time Russian-made S-300 air defense missile systems assume combat duty in Iran
Temporarily Sane | Jul 6, 2017 12:51:57 AM | 39
@17 Jackrabbit
Wikipedia tells me that MB believes in Jihad and Sharia Law. What a swell bunch of community organizers.

Well, they are Islamists after all. The Shariah (the "law" is redundant as it means God's law) and Jihad (righteous struggle) are core tenets of Islam and a practicing Muslim must follow the former and practice the latter (if and when required) or he or she isn't much of a Muslim. What these terms encompass depends on who you ask. Scholars representing the main schools of Islamic jurisprudence (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i and Hanbali for Sunni Muslims and Twelver, Zaidiyyah, and Isma'ili for Shia Muslims) differ in their interpretations of these concepts as do traditionalists and reformers and there is no one size fits all version.

In the west these are extremely loaded terms and anyone who has a quick and easy answer as to what they "mean" likely doesn't know what they are talking about. Thankfully, we have the interwebz and a curious mind will find a wealth of information pertaining to these and other aspects of Islamic jurisprudence.

jfl | Jul 6, 2017 2:41:28 AM | 41
Erdogan: Saudi list of demands from Qatar not acceptable
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has stressed that his country will remain loyal to Qatar and that a list of demands by Saudi Arabia and its allies from the Persian Gulf country are under no circumstances acceptable.

"When it comes to this list of 13 items... it's not acceptable under any circumstances," said Erdogan in an interview with France 24 television on Wednesday.

He added that such demands are the equivalent of "stripping" Qatar of its statehood.

The closing down of a Turkish military base in Qatar is one of the demands on the list. Erdogan stated the he was willing to close the base if Doha requested to do so.

"The Americans are also there, with 9,000 soldiers, and so are the French... Why are the Saudis disturbed by us and not by that? This is unacceptable," he added.

speaking to the french, not to those nasty germans ... 'Why are the Saudis disturbed by us and not by that? This is unacceptable ...' mentioning the saudis by name ... the 'loyal' erdogan lumps turkish forces with the us' forces, smells saudi blood in the water?
james | Jul 6, 2017 2:50:37 AM | 42
thanks b....

i can't believe these folks are so crazy to make unreasonable demands on others like this.. i guess it goes with the role of being clown princes or something. al a kazzam... they are supposed to snap their fingers and everyone does accordingly...

the saudi arabia regime can't die soon enough for my liking... they can take the usa regime down the toilet with them while they are at it too..

Perimetr | Jul 6, 2017 4:07:56 AM | 43
Non-negotiable, unreasonable demands are often made when war is planned and a pretext is desired.
hayder | Jul 6, 2017 4:14:35 AM | 44
"Clown Prince" - great description, fantastic.
somebody | Jul 6, 2017 8:50:46 AM | 45
17/42

b. should not use the word democratic. Neither Islam nor political Islam has a central authority, the only authority is the Koran, which is contradictory in many respects, in that sense the Muslim Brotherhood are as democratic as protestants or evangelicals whose only authority is the bible.

But you are at the mercy of the interpretation of theologians if you are one of the "people of the book" i.e. Jewish or Christian, or worse an "unbeliever". Whilst the early part of the Koran preaches some kind of religious tolerance, the latter part dating from the time of Islam's power struggles condones oppression and annihilation.

Egyptian liberals/left felt threatened by a Muslim Brotherhood power grap so they teamed up with the army. Turkish liberals/left decided against the coup and it costs them dearly in prison terms. The last elections for the referendum were in all likelyhood forged, whether Turkish people will ever again get a clean election is doubtful.

Political Islam is very much a top down affair by the "Supreme Guide" who is elected for life by his equals. So you might vote for Muslim Brotherhood officials, but the official answer to the Supreme Guide, not to you. Same applies for Iran where Khamenei controls who can stand for elections and who cannot.

Theocracy would be the word. Saudi is - still - a monarchy legitimized by theology.

virgile | Jul 6, 2017 9:18:49 AM | 46
@somebody

Sunnis and Shias differ greatly on the leadership. Sunnis have no religious hierarchy and do not look for a religious 'supreme leader'. Historically the king or the Sultan took that role. We see this in all Sunni lead countries. That is the main reason of Sunnis worldwide internal disunity and conflicts as each group decide on his leader. The Shias have always accepted the leadership of a religious man who is from the line of the prophet. Because of the unity behind a religious leader, Koran is constantly re-interpreted in the light of the modern life, while Sunnis consider the Koran as a final law and reject any interpretation as a heresy. In that sense Shias are more democratic as they accept that the country be lead by multiple entities with various authorities , president,parliament, Guardian council and a supreme leader in a complex check and balance system.
Guide: How Iran is ruled
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8051750.stm

Mina | Jul 6, 2017 12:08:15 PM | 47
Hollande and the Fr neocons have been moved to shelves. Nice speakers in this program on the KSA Qatar rivalry http://www.rfi.fr/emission/20170701-qatar-arabie-saoudite-rivalite-consequences-crise-golfe-trump
Mina | Jul 6, 2017 12:14:11 PM | 48
The Egyptians have a long memory. When the puppet Faruq was put on a throne and considered the Egyptian nationalists as his enemies more than the British, the Muslim Brothers sided with Faruq against the Nationalists.
Mina | Jul 6, 2017 12:32:49 PM | 49
Same vein, new guys get invited to radio programs https://www.franceculture.fr/emissions/du-grain-moudre-dete/que-devient-letat
Cost of getting rid of 1 djihadist for the French army: 1 million dollar per head. Frankish genius.
Noirette | Jul 6, 2017 1:48:27 PM | 50
Unless the Saudis can reconfigure their economy and train their populous to do actual work, their kingdom will sink ..
karlof1 at 1

This is impossible. Laguerre at 10. > see also response from karlof1 at 20.

The curse of black gold + a rentier economy coupled with an authoritarian repressive State that enslaves the 'people.' The two are often soldered: dominating class capts the profits and co-opts slave labor, and pays off citizens with 'stipends.' Escaping or changing such a template is imho incredibly difficult or impossible in the case of KSA.

The rentier class, aka Royals and hangers-on is several tens of thousands of ppl, not detailed on wiki. (Comp. with US not the 1%, but the 20%..) In fact it is one of the problems of such arrangements, some gang of 'hangers on' has to be appeased and maintained, they have quite some power. Because the 'authoritarian' schema deploys in a clear top-down, to down further, a fixed ladder - way, and once some lower layer is stiffed, objections and obstructions may fly and richochet to the top. For the system to endure, these HAVE to be appeased.

A power sharing scheme like this also mandates that women are kept from acting in any way. The easiest and cheapest way to control half the population, plus all children, ask the MB, the Taliban, KSA.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-26/saudi-arabia-cancels-bonus-payment-for-state-employees-spa-says

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-39683592 (reverses pay cuts)

The crazed moves of the new Prince are vain attempts to escape the self-constructed trap. Floundering, flailing, about, considering that killing others, war, (e.g. Yemen), engaging in aggro (Qatar) might help - as that might please the USA, who encourages all aggro and sells arms, etc. Won't end well for KSA for sure all Internationals are wondering who will grab what when collapse it is.

karlof1 | Jul 6, 2017 2:29:59 PM | 51
Big Time loss of face for Saudis as neither MBS or father will attend G-20, http://theduran.com/following-qatar-rebuff-saudi-king-crown-prince-stay-away-g20-summit/

Noirette @50--

Agree with your description, but think there are still ways for the Sauds to escape if they look to past examples of how authoritarians appeased their masses to stay in power--Russia's emancipation of its Serfs and Bismarck's giving Commoners a stake in the system are two that come to mind.

somebody | Jul 6, 2017 3:06:57 PM | 52
Posted by: virgile | Jul 6, 2017 9:18:49 AM | 46

My assumption is that "sunnis" and "shias" as in "religion" are independent from "political Islam".

Wilayat al-Faqih was Khomeini's idea and he was connected to the tradition of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood plus a few Iranian ideas .

Indeed, ties between the Brotherhood and Iran predate 1979. Hassan al Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, believed that Sunnis and Shiites should overcome their differences to face their common enemies. So, too, did Ayatollah Khomeini, who openly advocated an alliance between the two main branches of Islam. Al Banna and Khomeini were also linked by a prominent Iranian scholar named Nawab Safawi. Khomeini was close to Safawi and al Banna also embraced the Iranian cleric. As others have written, Safawi introduced Khomeini to the Brotherhood and its political ideology.
somebody | Jul 6, 2017 3:10:21 PM | 53
add to 46)

Iranian liberals/the left did not survive the Iranian revolution, at least not in Iran.

Noirette | Jul 6, 2017 3:46:12 PM | 54
Well karlof idk one can hope, i doubt it though. To veer off, but important imho:

Another aspect that is little taken into account, is that the KSA 'export' and funding of terrorism, seen by the West as religious extremist propaganda and action (wahabism..) and/or as furnishing bodies to fight in several proxy wars - mostly against Iran, fulfills a very important function at home.

It props up the clergy - one of the pillars that control the population - giving them a 'force' to project, radiate, far, and thus keeping them quiet and on board. More importantly it provides an outlet, paid and sanctioned, for 'rebels' who are violently inclined. Rather than contest the powers at home, they can go, and be paid, to fight elsewhere. In the name of Allah (or whatever) and meanwhile their wives and children will not be punished.

In a way, the poor volunteers in the US army are in a similar spot. Outcasts at home, no future, they attain some kind of pay and status, even the possibility of marriage and children, and citizenship, to fight - for the US and 'against' various savages, infidels (aka not democratic), tow-heads, terrorists, scoundrels, etc.

Potentially dangerous, explosive, and effective young men are co-opted and paid to 'fight abroad.'

karlof1 | Jul 6, 2017 4:22:14 PM | 55
Noirette @54--

Thanks for your reply. I see most of the Saudi populous as victims of an enforced ignorance, as is the fate of far too many people globally, thanks to the Saud's rigorous Indoctrination, Propaganda, and Enforcement Systems. Absolutism is easy to maintain when zero dissent is allowed. Yet, the populous must be appeased lest it revolt because the boot cannot constantly stay pressed to the face.

What I find amusing in my old age is that Russia or China are lest likely to become Police States, while that's the exact direction the Outlaw US Empire and its vassal states are headed as their elite will never willingly cede their power or ill-gotten wealth -- it will literally need to be wrested from their cold, dead hands.

Lea | Jul 6, 2017 5:36:29 PM | 56
Posted by: somebody | Jul 6, 2017 3:10:21 PM | 53
Iranian liberals/the left did not survive the Iranian revolution, at least not in Iran.

If you're talking about the pro-Western librul "left-wing", yes, it was defeated in Iran. Bona fide Socialism, not so much. https://thesaker.is/iran-socialisms-ignored-success-story/

Peter AU | Jul 6, 2017 6:29:44 PM | 57
Looking at the wording of this, it seems the US or an American advisor is now trying to get the Saudi's out of their own mess. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-gulf-qatar-statement-idUSKBN19R356?il=0 ....Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Bahrain released a joint statement carried by the countries' state media saying their initial list of 13 demands was now void and that they would take political, economic and legal steps against Qatar.

The Qatari government sabotaged diplomatic efforts to solve the rift, the four states said, and its refusal affirmed its continuing sabotage of the region's stability and security. The measures taken by the four states were aimed at the Qatari government but not its people, they said.

Chauncey Gardiner | Jul 6, 2017 7:02:26 PM | 58
"Washington Post's Disgusting Guest List At Hamptons Party"

https://youtu.be/DBIfHyjrjkU

Curtis | Jul 6, 2017 8:41:02 PM | 59
Chauncy Gardiner 58 Birds of a feather. Strange bedfellows. etc.

[Jul 04, 2017] I Sure Hope That I am Wrong, But by saker

Notable quotes:
"... Missile Crisis. Not only are Russian and US servicemen now deployed in the same war zone (the Americans totally illegally), but unlike what happened during the Cuban Missile Crisis we have a US President who terminally lacks the willpower to deal with the crazies on the US side, I am talking about the Neocons, of course. ..."
"... In fact, under Kennedy there were no real Neocons to tackle to begin with. Now they are running the White House ..."
"... Second, it is absolutely clear that the US Ziomedia and Congress will declare any, any, positive outcome from the meeting as "Trump caved in to Putin" and try to get a pound of political flesh out of Trump for it. So for Trump any external success will mean an internal disaster. And we already know that the man does not have what it takes to deal with such attacks. Frankly, his only "tactic", so to speak, to deal with the Neocons has been to try to appease them. So short of Trump asking for political asylum in Russia and joining Snowden somewhere in Russia, I don't see him ever taking any independent action. ..."
"... Third, if we look at the people around Trump it is pretty clear that the only intelligent and rational person in the White House is Rex Tillerson. The rest of them are lunatics, maniacs and imbeciles – the current US what shall I call it-"actions" (can't call it a "policy") towards Syria clearly prove that the Executive Branch is completely out of control. ..."
"... We now can clearly see that Mattis and McMaster are not these military geniuses presented to us by the Ziomedia but that, in fact, they are both phenomenally incompetent and that their views of the conflicts in Syria and even Afghanistan can only be characterized as totally lacking anything remotely resembling any kind of vision. ..."
"... For all his intelligence, Tillerson can't even rein in this Nikki idiot at the United Nations. ..."
"... Please don't buy this sanctions canard. The damage these sanctions could do they have already done. The simple truth is that Russia has already survived the sanctions and come out even stronger, this is confirmed by international organizations and by the private sector . In fact, removing the sanctions right now would hurt the Russian economy far more, especially the agricultural sector, which has greatly benefited from the de-facto protectionist protection provided to the Russian economy by these sanctions. ..."
"... Besides, since Congress and UN Nikki have made it pretty darn clear that sanctions will remain in place until Russia agrees to return Crimea to the Ukraine, nothing will change until the current Ukraine finally breaks into three or four parts. ..."
"... As for the Ukraine, the situation there is so bad that an increasing number of specialists are saying that even the US has lost control of Banderastan and that now it's going to be all about intra-Ukie power plays: the social, political, military, cultural and economic disaster has reached what I would call an "escape velocity" when the various processes taking place are basically chaotic, unpredictable and unmanageable. I am personally very dubious that the Americans would have anything to offer the Russians. ..."
Jul 04, 2017 | www.unz.com

First, we should all stop kidding ourselves, Russia and the USA do not have "disagreements". The sad and frightening reality is that we are now closer to war than during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Not only are Russian and US servicemen now deployed in the same war zone (the Americans totally illegally), but unlike what happened during the Cuban Missile Crisis we have a US President who terminally lacks the willpower to deal with the crazies on the US side, I am talking about the Neocons, of course.

In fact, under Kennedy there were no real Neocons to tackle to begin with. Now they are running the White House while Trump serves them coffee or watches TV in another room (I am joking of course, but just barely). In this context, to meet on the "sidelines" of a G20 conference is bordering on the criminally irresponsible. What the world would need is for Trump and Putin to meet in a "Camp David" like format for at least 3-5 days with all their key advisors and officials. Even if we assume 100% good will on both sides, meeting on the "sidelines" of an already big conference just won't make it possible to get anything done. In the very best of cases Lavrov and Tillerson could have done most of the hard work away from the public eye, but the truth is that the Russians say that so far the two sides have not even agreed upon an agenda.

Second, it is absolutely clear that the US Ziomedia and Congress will declare any, any, positive outcome from the meeting as "Trump caved in to Putin" and try to get a pound of political flesh out of Trump for it. So for Trump any external success will mean an internal disaster. And we already know that the man does not have what it takes to deal with such attacks. Frankly, his only "tactic", so to speak, to deal with the Neocons has been to try to appease them. So short of Trump asking for political asylum in Russia and joining Snowden somewhere in Russia, I don't see him ever taking any independent action.

Third, if we look at the people around Trump it is pretty clear that the only intelligent and rational person in the White House is Rex Tillerson. The rest of them are lunatics, maniacs and imbeciles – the current US what shall I call it-"actions" (can't call it a "policy") towards Syria clearly prove that the Executive Branch is completely out of control.

We now can clearly see that Mattis and McMaster are not these military geniuses presented to us by the Ziomedia but that, in fact, they are both phenomenally incompetent and that their views of the conflicts in Syria and even Afghanistan can only be characterized as totally lacking anything remotely resembling any kind of vision. Yet these two "geniuses" seem to be in charge.

For all his intelligence, Tillerson can't even rein in this Nikki idiot at the United Nations. We should stop kidding ourselves and stop pretending like there is anybody to talk to for the Russians. At best, they are dealing with a Kindergarten. At worst, they are dealing with an evil Kindergarten. But either way, there is nobody to talk to on the US side, much less so somebody to begin solving the many issues that need solving.

I will admit that I did have high hopes for Trump and his apparent willingness to sit down and have an adult conversation with the Russians. I was especially inspired by Trump's repeated rejection of the Ziomedia's narrative about Russia and by what appeared to me as his "no nonsense" approach towards getting things done. I wrote many articles for this blog saying that having hopes (not expectations!) for Trump was the right thing to do. And, frankly, I think that at the time it was. Last Fall I even wrote an entire chapter on this topic in the book " Russian Military Power 2017 " report. Since it is pretty well written, I actually recommend that you download and read it: it is a mix of pretty good information about the Russian Armed Forces and the garden variety nonsense about Russian hackers and their cyber-threat to US and its allies. Just set aside the clearly politically-induced nonsense and you are left with a rather well made summary of what the Russian Armed Forces are up to these days.

I have to thank the DIA for this report: it made me feel young again, like I was in the 1980s when all the students of warfare and of the Soviet military were reading these annual "Soviet Military Power" reports with great interest. But other than making some of us feel young, the real purpose of this document is clear and it is the very same one behind the Cold War era "Soviet Military Power" series: to justify an increase in "defense" (i.e. "aggression") spending by showing how scary these evil Commies/Russkies were/are.

This would all be rather funny, and nostalgic in a way, if it did not show the total lack of imagination of the folks at the Pentagon. Far from coming up with anything novel or interesting, they are bringing back into service stuff which for years had been collecting dust in the memories of now mostly retired Cold Warriors. It is rather pathetic, really.

Over the past 30 years or so, Russia went from being the Soviet Union, to being a Somalia-like "democratic hell" during the 1990s, to becoming a completely new entity – a "New Russia" which is dramatically different from the Soviet Union of the 1980s. In contrast, the US got completely stuck in its old patterns, except for this time they are "the same, but even worse". If the US did not have nukes that would almost be okay (after all, the world can let "Uncle Sam" slowly lose his sclerotic brain, who cares?) but when a nuclear superpower is acting like an out-of-control rogue state, this is very, very, scary.

So back to our G20 meeting again. The first thing which needs to be said is that Trump is weak, extremely weak: he goes in with the Ziomedia and Congress hating him and with a basically treacherous White House team clearly controlled by Pence, Kushner and the rest of the Neocon crazies. To make things worse, Trump can offer the Russians absolutely nothing they would want or need.

Please don't buy this sanctions canard. The damage these sanctions could do they have already done. The simple truth is that Russia has already survived the sanctions and come out even stronger, this is confirmed by international organizations and by the private sector . In fact, removing the sanctions right now would hurt the Russian economy far more, especially the agricultural sector, which has greatly benefited from the de-facto protectionist protection provided to the Russian economy by these sanctions. Likewise, the Russian defense industry has successfully adapted to the total severance by the Ukronazi regime of all the defense contracts with Russia and now 100% Russian military systems and parts are being produced in Russia at a cheaper price and of a higher quality. Besides, since Congress and UN Nikki have made it pretty darn clear that sanctions will remain in place until Russia agrees to return Crimea to the Ukraine, nothing will change until the current Ukraine finally breaks into three or four parts.

Trump could, in theory, offer the Russians to stop sabotaging the peace process in Syria and the Russians would surely welcome that. But since the US policy of illegal air and missile strikes combined with a deployment of US forces on the ground in Syria is failing anyway, see here and here , the Russians are going to get what they want whether the US wants it or not.

As for the Ukraine, the situation there is so bad that an increasing number of specialists are saying that even the US has lost control of Banderastan and that now it's going to be all about intra-Ukie power plays: the social, political, military, cultural and economic disaster has reached what I would call an "escape velocity" when the various processes taking place are basically chaotic, unpredictable and unmanageable. I am personally very dubious that the Americans would have anything to offer the Russians.

Mao Cheng Ji, July 3, 2017 at 8:07 pm GMT

In Syria, the only problem the Pentagon has is no air superiority. Without air superiority the Pentagon is helpless. Russia could give them that, maybe partially at least, in some areas. And Ukraine - without regular cash infusions Kiev is dead. And that's what Trump could offer (maybe. He would have to grow some balls). And that's a possible deal.

Anatoly Karlin, Website July 3, 2017 at 8:30 pm GMT

Yes, this sounds about right.

Russia should use this window of opportunity to aggressively push its geopolitical interests, including in Ukraine (it is most assuredly not going to break "into three or four parts" by itself).

If Trump 2016 wins out, great. If the neocons fully reassert control, Russia is gonna get squeezed further regardless.

Dod, July 4, 2017 at 3:23 am GMT

I find it unsettling that someone whom I trusted can see "Nikki" as a person, with personal ideas. She doesn't recall her real name and her religion; how could she give a damn about whatever she spouts on orders from whoever is the object of her sycophancy?

fnn, July 4, 2017 at 5:23 am GMT

The real enemy of the US is domestic. Ex-CIA analyst Michael Scheuer thinks he is waging war against them with his tweets:

http://non-intervention.com/2789/pour-it-on-mr-trump-tweet-the-lying-bastards-and-bitches-straight-to-hell/

He may be giving Trump too much credit, but I'm in no position to judge. Nevertheless, we know who the consistent warmongers have been.

[Jul 03, 2017] Mohammed ben Salmane takes power at Riyadh

Notable quotes:
"... Mohammed ben Nayef Al Saoud was considered as the US's man. He has been trained first in Oregon, then later by the FBI and Scotland Yard. He obtained results in struggles against Al-Qaeda dissidents. With his removal, the hopes of the Nayef branch coming to the throne have come to an end. ..."
"... Mohammed ben Salmane does not have an academic training. At the very most, he is the holder of a baccalaureate awarded by a local school, and we do not know if you actually need to study to obtain this qualification. ..."
"... Washington had approved the chosen solution to the issue of succession. This solution had been adopted by 31 of 34 members of the allegiance council (the Family Council). It skips two generations. Henceforth, Mohammad ben Salmane is placing young people at the head of different administrations of the country, a country where the average age of the population is 27 years. ..."
Jul 03, 2017 | www.voltairenet.org

King Salmane ben Abdelaziz Al Saoud (81 years old) has removed from office 57 year old Emir Mohammed ben Nayef Al Saoud. The latter was the Crown Prince, Vice-Prime Minister and the Minister of Home Affairs, all at the same time.

De facto, the King's son, Prince Mohammed ben Salmane Al Saoud (31 years), will become the new Crown Prince.

Mohammed ben Nayef Al Saoud was considered as the US's man. He has been trained first in Oregon, then later by the FBI and Scotland Yard. He obtained results in struggles against Al-Qaeda dissidents. With his removal, the hopes of the Nayef branch coming to the throne have come to an end.

Mohammed ben Salmane does not have an academic training. At the very most, he is the holder of a baccalaureate awarded by a local school, and we do not know if you actually need to study to obtain this qualification. He made his political debut as the assistant to his father, first the Governor of Riyadh and then the Minister of Defense. When Salmane becomes king in 2015, Mohammed succeeded his father as the Minister of Defense and engaged his country's troops in the disastrous conflict in Yemen. Having royal power at his disposition, he launched a vast project for economic reform (Vision 2030), which ushered in the privatization of Aramco (the country's only source of revenue) and his country's development beyond the oil sector. He is particularly well known for his jet-set life-style and for buying a yacht, Serene, for half a billion euro.

It seems that King Salmane should shortly abdicate, leaving his son in charge. Thus the difficult question of succession is provisionally settled, in a country where up until now was governed by a rule requiring the oldest son of the dynasty's founder to accede to power. Thus the current king, King Salmane, is the 25th of Abdelaziz ben Abderrahmane Al Saoud's 53 sons.

At King Abdallah's death (January 2015), his half brother, Prince Moukrine ben Abdelaziz Al Saoud, had been appointed Crown Prince. But three months later (April 2015), he had been rudely cut out of the order of succession, something quite unprecedented. He was replaced by Prince Mohammed ben Nayef, who in turn has just been removed from the picture.

As a consolation prize, the Nayefs secured that a son-in-law of Prince Mohammed ben Nayef replaces him at the Ministry of Home Affairs. It would be a son-in-law and not a son, because Prince Mohammed ben Nayef did not have male progeny.

The next king, Mohammed, could rule for about fifty years. But were he to die, then his eldest son, also a minor, would succeed him.

Washington had approved the chosen solution to the issue of succession. This solution had been adopted by 31 of 34 members of the allegiance council (the Family Council). It skips two generations. Henceforth, Mohammad ben Salmane is placing young people at the head of different administrations of the country, a country where the average age of the population is 27 years.

[Jul 03, 2017] Erdogans Silent Backers Who Egged Turkish Leader to Attack Su24

Notable quotes:
"... Was the downing of the Russian Su-24 Erdogan's "oil revenge" for Turkey's losses from the destruction of oil smugglers' truck fleet bombed by the Russian Air Force in Syria? Or maybe it is just the tip of a very big iceberg, F. William Engdahl asks. ..."
"... Still, whatever profits Erdogan is purportedly receiving from oil smuggling it is highly unlikely that the Turkish President would sacrifice Russo-Turkish relations for some fishy business. ..."
"... My masculine intuition tells me that Recep Erdogan would never risk such a dangerous bold and illegal action against Russia on whom Turkey depends for 50% of her natural gas imports and a huge part of her tourism dollar earnings merely because the family ISIS oil business was being bombed away by Russian jets," the researcher underscores." ..."
"... Engdahl expresses his confidence that there were "clearly serious silent backers" encouraging Erdogan to launch an attack on the Russian Su-24 plane. ..."
"... Indeed, despite Ankara's hardly convincing explanation of the treacherous attack, almost all NATO leaders have sided with Turkey, justifying its "act of self-defense." ..."
"... Interestingly enough, US warmongering neocons have repeatedly called for "shooting down" Russian planes. ..."
Nov 30, 2015 | sputniknews.com

Was the downing of the Russian Su-24 Erdogan's "oil revenge" for Turkey's losses from the destruction of oil smugglers' truck fleet bombed by the Russian Air Force in Syria? Or maybe it is just the tip of a very big iceberg, F. William Engdahl asks.

... ... ...

Engdahl calls attention to reports saying that Israel's IDF was spotted messing with ISIL in the Golan Heights region. Engdahl also refers to Israeli media outlets narrating that since June 2014, Israel imported about 75 percent of its oil needs from Iraq. It still remains unclear whether the oil was transported from the Kurdish area of Iraq. Still, some independent sources claim that Iraqi oil is being smuggled by ISIL to Turkey and then redistributed to Israel via Turkey's Mediterranean port of Ceyhan.

Engdahl cites Chris Dalby, an analyst with Oilprice.com, who characterized ISIL as "a largely independent financial machine" due to its numerous oil fields in Iraq and Syria.

Still, whatever profits Erdogan is purportedly receiving from oil smuggling it is highly unlikely that the Turkish President would sacrifice Russo-Turkish relations for some fishy business.

​"My masculine intuition tells me that Recep Erdogan would never risk such a dangerous bold and illegal action against Russia on whom Turkey depends for 50% of her natural gas imports and a huge part of her tourism dollar earnings merely because the family ISIS oil business was being bombed away by Russian jets," the researcher underscores."

Engdahl expresses his confidence that there were "clearly serious silent backers" encouraging Erdogan to launch an attack on the Russian Su-24 plane.

Indeed, despite Ankara's hardly convincing explanation of the treacherous attack, almost all NATO leaders have sided with Turkey, justifying its "act of self-defense."

Interestingly enough, US warmongering neocons have repeatedly called for "shooting down" Russian planes.

[Jul 03, 2017] The demise of the Caliph and the origin of the Islamic State

Notable quotes:
"... In actual fact, Daesh is a tool created by the former US National Director of Intelligence, John Negroponte, from armed groups controlled by the British MI6. While the Obama Administration had charged Negroponte with creating a "Sunnistan" to disrupt the silk route linking China to the Mediterranean via Teheran, Baghdad and Damascus, the Trump Administration denies that this entity has the trappings of a State. Operations led against the two main cities - Mosul (Iraq) and Raqqa (Syria) - should have the effect of making the devil retreat into the bottle and reducing the terrorist system to what it was at the time of Al Qaeda. ..."
Jul 03, 2017 | www.voltairenet.org

The Military Chief of the Iraqi army has announced the forthcoming liberation of Mosul. The media, tightly muzzled by strict military censorship, emphasizes the captured ruins of the Al-Nouri Mosque where the Caliph, Abou Bakr al-Baghdadi, had announced his victory. This led Prime Minister, Haider al-Abadi to the conclusion that essentially, Daesh was no more.

In actual fact, Daesh is a tool created by the former US National Director of Intelligence, John Negroponte, from armed groups controlled by the British MI6. While the Obama Administration had charged Negroponte with creating a "Sunnistan" to disrupt the silk route linking China to the Mediterranean via Teheran, Baghdad and Damascus, the Trump Administration denies that this entity has the trappings of a State. Operations led against the two main cities - Mosul (Iraq) and Raqqa (Syria) - should have the effect of making the devil retreat into the bottle and reducing the terrorist system to what it was at the time of Al Qaeda.

Such unexpected declarations made by Iraqi officials seem to be in response to Washington's concern to off-set the announcement made by Moscow, that Daesh's caliph, Abou Bakr al-Baghdadi, was dead, having been killed by the Russian army.

[Jul 03, 2017] Internal Communications Show Syrian War Is a Lie, Russia Could Crush US Military

Jul 03, 2017 | www.ascertainthetruth.com
We know this with a degree of certainty, thanks to award-winning investigative journalist, Seymour Hersh, obtained perhaps the most naked evidence of hapless government duplicity resulting in an unknowable number of deaths and, astonishingly, even a preposterously harrowing likelihood of world war.

Communications between an active duty U.S. soldier and a security adviser, both unnamed by Hersh, prove the narrative proffered by corporate media and establishment politicians for months - that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad had carried out a horrific and deadly chemical weapons attack against Syrian civilians in Khan Sheikhoun - was a lie.

Should that not seem impactful enough, consider it was the assertion of a gruesome chemical attack by Assad against his own civilian populace which provided the putative impetus for U.S. retaliation in the firing of 59 missiles into the sovereign nation of Syria near Khan Sheikhoun, also resulting in a wholly unjustified number of civilian casualties.

Ineffectively destroying parts of a mostly-dormant airbase and killing innocents indeed, at the time, seemed a peculiar mission accomplished as broadcast news belched repetitively - and for good reason.

Beyond the determination Assad had not gassed his own, the U.S. knew there had been no chemical weapons incident, at all - and had been privy to cooperative intelligence among the warring parties that an airstrike would be carried out against a cache of weapons - characterized as a "legitimate military target" by the active duty soldier chat protocol with the adviser.

On April 6, 2017 - Hersh reported for German outlet, Die Welt - the American soldier seemed near panic in a communiqué to the security adviser, imploring,

"We got a fuckin' problem."

"What happened?" the adviser asks. "Is it the Trump ignoring the Intel and going to try to hit the Syrians? And that we're pissing on the Russians?"

Soldier: "This is bad Things are spooling up."

Adviser: "You may not have seen trumps press conference yesterday. He's bought into the media story without asking to see the Intel. We are likely to get our asses kicked by the Russians. Fucking dangerous. Where are the godamn adults? The failure of the chain of command to tell the President the truth, whether he wants to hear it or not, will go down in history as one of our worst moments."

Soldier: "I don't know. None of this makes any sense. We KNOW that there was no chemical attack. The Syrians struck a weapons cache (a legitimate military target) and there was collateral damage. That's it. They did not conduct any sort of a chemical attack [ ]

"And now we're shoving a shit load of TLAMs (tomahawks) up their ass."

Adviser: "There has been a hidden agenda all along. This is about trying to ultimately go after Iran. What the people around Trump do not understand is that the Russians are not a paper tiger and that they have more robust military capability than we do."

Soldier: "I don't know what the Russians are going to do. They might hang back and let the Syrians defend their own borders, or they might provide some sort of tepid support, or they might blow us the fuck out of the airspace and back into Iraq. I honestly don't know what to expect right now. I feel like anything is possible. The Russian air defense system is capable of taking out our TLAMs. this is a big fucking deal we are still all systems go

Adviser: "You are so right. Russia is not going to take this lying down.

"Who is pushing this? Is it coming from [General Joseph L. Votel, Commander of United States Central Command]?"

Soldier: "I don't know. It's from someone big though. . . . This is a big fucking deal.

"It has to be POTUS.

"They [the Russians] are weighing their options. Indications are they are going to be passive supporters of Syria and not engage their systems unless their own assets are threatened..in other words, the sky is fucking blue.'"

***

In case you missed it, the unnamed security adviser brazenly suggests feckless U.S. military aggression in Syria pertains to a murky, but penultimate, goal with Iran - that, and the altogether foreboding indication Russia, a foe who should not be and the object of Western provocation, would outperform American forces should hostilities flare.

Communications between the pair of insiders continued the following day, April 7:

Adviser: "What are the Russians doing or saying Am I correct that we did little real damage to Russia or Syria?"

Soldier: "We didn't hit a damn thing, thankfully. They retrograded all their aircraft and personnel. We basically gave them a very expensive fireworks display.

"They knew where ships were and watched the entire strike from launch to end game.

"The Russians are furious. Claiming we have the real Intel and know the truth about the weapons depot strike.

"They are correct.

"I guess it really didn't matter whether we elected Clinton or Trump. Fuck.

"No one is talking about the entire reason we're in Iraq and Syria in the first place. That mission is fucked now."

Adviser: "Are any of your colleagues pissed or is everyone going along with it and saying this is OK."

Soldier: "It's a mad house. . . .Hell we even told the Russians an hour before impact."

Adviser: "But they clearly knew it was coming."

Soldier: "Oh of course.

"Now Fox is saying we chose to hit the Syrian airfield because it is where the chemical attacks were launched from. Wow. Can't make this shit up."

Adviser: "They are. I mean, making it up."

Soldier: "It's so fuckin evil."

Adviser: "Amen!!!"

And, again, on April 8:

Soldier: "Russians are being extremely reasonable. Despite what the news is reporting they are still trying to deconflict and coordinate the air campaign."

Adviser: "I don't think the Russia yet understands how crazy Trump is over this. And I don't think we appreciate how much damage the Russians can do to us."

Adviser: "But I get the get the feeling are simply trying this approach for as long as they feel it might work. If we keep pushing this current aggressive stance they're going to hit back."

***

Die Welt ostensively withheld only information considered sensitive, including details pertaining to precise location and nature of operations - but, considering Hersh' itinerant adherence to journalistic principles, the report should be examined with more than a grain of salt.

If, indeed, the communications prove true, the documents could reveal more about censorship, a possibly-rogue media establishment, and an undeniable foolishness - and, more keenly, helplessness - in the haphazard rush to many wars in the fulfillment of anachronistic goals.

We don't need to be at war in Syria - nor should we be. And these communications prove, above all, those of us sounding the alarm for a year this addled Syrian conundrum would befall the U.S. had not done so in alarm - rather, in a growing awareness of the unscrupulous tactics possessed by an imperialist State circling the drain.

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/syria-war-world-war-media/

[Jul 03, 2017] Adjustements in the Middle East by Thierry Meyssan

Notable quotes:
"... The Golan question will be particularly difficult because the Netanyahu administration - not without provocation – has declared its total annexation, while the United States and Russia reacted violently to the expulsion of the UN forces tasked with observing the disengagement (FNUOD) and its substitution by al-Qaïda [ 6 ]. However, it is not impossible that during the war on Syria, Washington or Moscow may have promised Tel-Aviv that they would not modify the status quo in the Golan. ..."
"... This project of general settlement reflects the method of businessmen Donald Trump and Jared Kushner – creating an economic situation which imposes political change. It will of necessity run into the opposition of the Muslim Brotherhood (Hamas), and the triangle of political Islam - Iran, Qatar and Turkey. ..."
"... All of the region's actors agree that today, Iraq and Syria form one single battlefield. But the Western powers, who are still clinging to the lies of the Bush Jr. administration (even though they admit the stupidity of the weapons of mass destruction charge against Saddam Hussein) and the romantic narrative of the " Arab Springs " (even though they admit that this movement never made any attempt to bring freedom, but on the contrary, to impose political Islam), stubbornly persist in considering them as separate. ..."
"... What is obvious for everyone in the region is that since the accession to power in Beijing by President Xi Jinping, bearer of the project for the two Silk Roads, Washington has been pushing for the creation of a "Sunnistan" straddling Iraq and Syria. In order to achieve this goal, it has financed, armed and supervised Daesh in order to cut the communication route between Beirut-Damascus-Baghdad-Teheran and Beijing. ..."
"... To make a long story short, if the Pentagon follows the orders from the White House, most of the conflict should end. There would only remain the Turkish occupation of Iraq and Syria, on the model of the Turkish occupation of Cyprus, which the European Union finally accepted. The United States and Saudi Arabia, who were the enemies of Iraq and Syria, will once again become their allies. ..."
Jun 20, 2017 | www.voltairenet.org

As the Middle Eastern States split between the partisans and adversaries of clericalism, Washington, Moscow and Beijing are negotiating a new deal. Thierry Meyssan evaluates the impact of this earthquake on the Palestinian, Iraqi-Syrian and Yemeni conflicts.

The diplomatic crisis around Qatar has frozen several regional conflicts and disguised the attempts at resolution by others. No-one knows when the curtain will rise, but it should reveal a region which has been profoundly transformed.

1- The Palestinian conflict

Since the expulsion of the majority of Palestinians from their homes (the Nakhba, 15 May 1948) and the refusal by the Arab peoples to accept this ethnic cleansing, only the separate Israëlo-Egyptian peace treaty of Camp David (1978) and the promise of a two-state solution at the Oslo agreements (1993) have partially modified the situation.

However, when the secret negotiations between Iran and the United States were revealed, Saudi Arabia and Israël decided to talk in their turn. After 17 months of secret meetings, an agreement was reached between the Custodian of the two Holy Mosques and the Jewish state [ 1 ]. Israël made this a reality by the participation of Tsahal in the war in Yemen [ 2 ] and the transfer of tactical atomic bombs [ 3 ].

Let's remember that this agreement anticipated the evolution of Saudi Arabia so that its society would remain Salafist and its institutions would become secular. It also anticipated the independence of Iraqi Kurdistan (which will be the subject of a referendum in September) and the exploitation of the gas fields in the " Empty Quarter " (which straddles Saudi Arabia and Yemen, thus explaining the currrent war) and those of Ogaden (thus explaining this week's withdrawal of Qatari troops from the Djibouti frontier).

Finally, Egypt has decided to hand over the islands of Tiran and Sanafir to Saudi Arabia, as she had promised to do last year. By doing so, Riyadh has recognised de facto the Camp David agreements, which specifically manage the status of these territories. Israël confirms that it has obtained the Saudi guarantees.

Let us observe that the Egyptian decision was not taken under Saudi pressure (Riyadh had attempted, in vain, to block deliveries of oil and then a loan of 12 billion dollars), but because of the Gulf crisis. The Saudis have officialised their break with the Muslim Brotherhood, a decision which had been brewing since the transmission by President al-Sissi of documents attesting to a project for a coup d'etat by certain members of the Brotherhood against them. At first, Arabia believed it could differentiate between the good and bad Muslim Brothers. It had already accused Qatar of supporting the putschists, but the situation evolved peacefully on that occasion. As from now, Riyadh intends to fight the Brotherhood in its entirety, which will force it to review its position concerning Syria.

The transfer of these islands, which have been Egyptian since the London Convention of 1840, makes little sense other than to allow Saudi Arabia to implicitly recognise, 39 years after the fact, the Egypto-Israëli agreements of Camp David.

From its own side, Teheran has extended a welcome to the political directorate of Hamas (which is mainly composed of members of the Muslim Brotherhood) both in the name of solidarity with the Palestinian cause, and because it shares the same concept of political Islam.

The next step will be the establishment of public commercial relations between Riyadh and Tel-Aviv, as announced in The Times of 17 June (Israëli companies will be permitted to work in Arabia, and the airline company El-Al will be allowed to use Saudi airspace) [ 4 ], then the recognition of the peace initiative of Prince Abdallah (Arab League, 2002) and the establishment of diplomatic relations (Prince Walid ben Talal would become their ambassador) [ 5 ].

This project could bring peace in Palestine (recognition of a Palestinian state and compensation for the refugees), in Lebanon (withrawal from the Shebaa farms), and in Syria (cessation of support for the jihadists and withdrawal from the Golan).

The Golan question will be particularly difficult because the Netanyahu administration - not without provocation – has declared its total annexation, while the United States and Russia reacted violently to the expulsion of the UN forces tasked with observing the disengagement (FNUOD) and its substitution by al-Qaïda [ 6 ]. However, it is not impossible that during the war on Syria, Washington or Moscow may have promised Tel-Aviv that they would not modify the status quo in the Golan.

This project of general settlement reflects the method of businessmen Donald Trump and Jared Kushner – creating an economic situation which imposes political change. It will of necessity run into the opposition of the Muslim Brotherhood (Hamas), and the triangle of political Islam - Iran, Qatar and Turkey.

2- The Iraqi-Syrian conflict

All of the region's actors agree that today, Iraq and Syria form one single battlefield. But the Western powers, who are still clinging to the lies of the Bush Jr. administration (even though they admit the stupidity of the weapons of mass destruction charge against Saddam Hussein) and the romantic narrative of the " Arab Springs " (even though they admit that this movement never made any attempt to bring freedom, but on the contrary, to impose political Islam), stubbornly persist in considering them as separate.

We refer our readers to my book Right Before our Eyes for information on how the war began [ 7 ]. Nonetheless, from the beginning of the Qatar crisis, the war in Iraq and Syria is limited to

  • the fight against Daesh (Mossul and Rakka) and
  • the fight against Turkey (Baachiqa and Al-Bab) [ 8 ].

What is obvious for everyone in the region is that since the accession to power in Beijing by President Xi Jinping, bearer of the project for the two Silk Roads, Washington has been pushing for the creation of a "Sunnistan" straddling Iraq and Syria. In order to achieve this goal, it has financed, armed and supervised Daesh in order to cut the communication route between Beirut-Damascus-Baghdad-Teheran and Beijing.

For four months, the Trump administration has been studying and negotiating the ways in which they might modify these policies and conclude a partnership with Pekin instead of continuing the current confrontation [ 9 ].

While on the ground we see a series of contradictory events – since the beginning of the Qatar crisis, the Iraqi and Syrian armies have suddenly advanced. They have liberated the frontier territories previously held by Daesh and are now on the verge of establishing their junction (in other words, reconnecting the Silk Road). The two armies are now separated only by two hundred metres of land controlled illegally by the US army [ 10 ].

As for the combats in Southern Syria, they have miraculously come to a halt. A cease-fire has been unilaterally proclaimed by Damascus in Deraa. In reality, Moscow and Washington have given the assurance to Tel-Aviv that Syria will only allow the deployment of Russian troops, and not the Iranians or the Lebanese Hezbollah.

To make a long story short, if the Pentagon follows the orders from the White House, most of the conflict should end. There would only remain the Turkish occupation of Iraq and Syria, on the model of the Turkish occupation of Cyprus, which the European Union finally accepted. The United States and Saudi Arabia, who were the enemies of Iraq and Syria, will once again become their allies.

3- The Yemeni conflict

The Yemenis could be the ones who pay for this current evolution. While it is apparent that Saudi Arabia entered the war in order to set up a government favorable to the joint exploitation of the oil fields of the " Empty Quarter ", and for the personal glory of Prince Mohamed Ben Salman, it seems that the help given by Iran to the Houthis and to ex-President Saleh diverts the gaze of the Arab countries and the "international community" from the crimes for which they are responsible.

It's a time for taking sides, and almost everyone has opted for Saudi Arabia and against Qatar and its Turkish and Iranian allies. What was positive in Palestine, Iraq and Syria proves to be negative in Yemen.

Conclusion

Since 5 June and the rupture of diplomatic relations between Riyadh and Doha, the chancelleries are all preparing for a possible war, even if Germany is the only country to have spoken of this publicly. This situation is all the more surprising because Qatar - and not Saudi Arabia – is the observer for NATO [ 11 ].

Resignations come one after the other in Doha, from the US ambassador Dana Shell Smith to the selector of the national football team Jorge Fossati. Not only have the states aligned with Riyadh broken off their commercial relationships with the emirate, but numerous companies without any particular links with the Gulf have done the same in the face of the risk of war. This is, for example, the case of COSCO, the largest Chinese maritime company.

In any case, and despite justified historical claims, it would seem impossible for Saudi Arabia to annex Qatar when it was opposed to the annexation of Kuwaït by Iraq for the same reasons. One rule has been imposed on the world since British decolonisation – no-one has the right to touch boundaries laid by London. The unique aim of this rule is to maintain the insoluble problems for the new independent states. In this way, London maintains de facto the perpetual dependency of these states on British rule. Indeed, the pending arrival of 43,000 Pakistani and Turkish soldiers to defend Qatar should reinforce its position.

Thierry Meyssan

[Jul 02, 2017] It would seem that the CIA control of the USA media is complete

It not simply that CIA exert influence via some imbedded operatives. A more fundamental fact is that NYT and WaPo agenda is identical to CIA agenda.
Also it looks like that thanks to neocons dominance, the USA succumbs to war mentality and the press adopted the rule of war coverage for the peice time.
Notable quotes:
"... The outcome is predictable. The stories the journalists ..."
"... The mainstream media want their readers to believe that their narratives from war zones are genuine reporting. The above examples show that they are not. Their journalists ..."
"... Richard Pyle, Associated Press Saigon bureau chief during the war, described the [military press] briefings as, "the longest-playing tragicomedy in Southeast Asia's theater of the absurd." ..."
"... It would seem that the CIA control of the media is complete. What are the key phrases to bring them in and out of their trances? ..."
"... "...50 tons of flour...." Wow, how generous. And ~500.000 tons of weaponry for the Death Squads. David Gordon isn't he the one along with Judith Miller two chief propagandist of Bush'r regime for Iraq war? ..."
"... Ah, good old Michael Gordon. If memory serves, he was also as culpable for the NYT stories boosting the Iraq War as Miller was. Yet she was the only one to get fired ..."
"... Its not simply that the media is somehow being taken advantage of by a sly military, nor that there are CIA assets in the NYT and Wapo, its that both media outfits (with CNN and other companies) actively collaborate at the highest levels with AIPAC and the CIA to promote their agreed upon interpretation of current events. ..."
"... Monied interests rule and corrupt everything in order to secure their positions. So, they infiltrate government, corporations, academia. They all speak the same language and derive their belief systems from each other. To paraphrase John Ralston Saul, reality is not in the world, it's in the measurements made by professional bureaucrats. That's why you can see people bouncing between government service, board directorships, the CIA and then becoming pundits on the MSM. ..."
"... It's a circle jerk where each of the individuals know their roles, and their first rule is never turn on the system itself. ..."
"... Everything (and I mean everything) is a racket. ..."
"... The vaunted SDF is totally reliant on US support. Once that goes, so does their effectiveness. From experience, the US does not train foreign militaries to be anything more capable than a police force. The Russians on the other hand train foreign militaries to be fully capable and self supporting. ..."
"... "Syrian engineers have been trying to get one or two turbines running by cannibalizing parts from the wreckage. But with no Soviet-era parts on hand, nobody seems to think that the structure will be generating power in the months ahead, and the hazards of working in and around the dam are still significant: Last week, one newly trained Syrian demining expert was killed when he triggered an improvised explosive device. But the question foremost in the minds of Tabqa's residents is how they are going to return their lives to some semblance of normal. "There is no electricity, no food, no bread, and we need fuel for our trucks," said Khalid Mohammed Ali Tata, 54. "Also, there are no jobs." ..."
"... The unwritten story from the articles is that, had it not been for the pesky Russians interfering, the good ole' US fightin' boys would have defeated ISIS ages ago - and many of the commentators fall for this BS. ..."
"... Some time ago I ran onto a map showing oil fields and grain silos in Syria. The grain silos wre mostly in what is now the US/SDF held territory. I take it this is the main grain growing region of Syria. Now the US propaganda writers are saying they have no bread? ..."
"... Castellio - no CIA Assets at WaPo? You Sure about that? Amazon & The CIA ..."
"... The public is so inured to military action going on somewhere that the only thing that captures their attention is American casualties. People who read the NYT and Washpo know that these are fluff pieces and are aware and probably concerned that America's meddling in Syria might end badly. ..."
"... There's no groundswell of support for American involvement in Syria's civil war and the implications of an incident with Russian forces. Far from it. ..."
"... This is standard US military propaganda. It's a PR show, no doubt, but somehow I find it less reprehensible than the anonymously sourced anti-Russian and anti-Syrian pieces that dominate the NYT and WaPo on a daily basis. ..."
"... There is nothing new about this, BTW. Edward Bernays had already pulled it in 1953 in Guatemala, prior to the coup against Arbenz: journos who were walked in the "exotic jungles" with "brooding and submissive Indians", and could wear ridiculous pith helmets, ride horses through miles of plantations and drink White Label scotch served by pretty señoritas on some chosen veranda in the evening, while they watched the sunset. ..."
"... This is a most precise description of neocon U.S. foreign policy post-Libya. If the little people have grown skeptical of your fake WMD claims and they've grown inured to your cartoonish demonization of leaders you don't like, then replace the government to be regime-changed with an evil of your own creation (the Afghanistan Plan). ..."
"... Congress won't let the Pentagon attack and occupy Syria directly at Saudi's/Israel's behest? Solution: Create fake ISIS to conquer Syrian land/resources first, then get blanket Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) allowing Pentagon to kick them out any time, any where. ..."
"... Then justify endless occupation thereafter with the need for humanitarian aid, training local police forces and offering follow-on U.S. military protection until things stabilize. Except they never stabilize. ..."
"... The U.S. created Mujahedin in Pakistan training camps and the Afghan Liberation Front for that exact purpose in 1978. Someone to kick the Soviets out, but evil enough to justify the U.S. going after them. Whatever the Mujahedin were in 1978 morphed into something much darker by 2001, i.e., al Qaeda and the Taliban. ..."
"... it's not simply that the military coordinates with the press, and its not simply that there are CIA assets writing for the WaPo and the NYT, it's also the case that both media outfits (with CNN and other companies) actively collaborate at the highest levels with AIPAC and the CIA to promote their agreed upon interpretation of current events. ..."
Jul 02, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
When the U.S. military takes a bunch of journalists on a press junket to a foreign country it has a certain intention and prepares every detail in advance. There will be witnesses and local people who are briefed for their two minute talk with the journalists to convey exactly what the military wants them to convey. After enjoying local flair , for ten minutes max, some U.S. diplomatic official or a general will treat the journos to some good whiskey and a genuine local steak. The official will speak a few prepared lines on the record that will reinforce the story the locals were tasked to tell.

The outcome is predictable. The stories the journalists will write will be the same.

Michael Gordon in yesterday's New York Times and David Ignatius in yesterday's Washington Post both report of their latest junket, a visit of Tabqa in Syria.

Gordon's piece: In a Desperate Syrian City, a Test of Trump's Policies

The young man unburdened himself about the dark years of living under the Islamic State as a crowd of curious onlookers gathered in front of a weathered storefront in the town marketplace. The militants, said the man, a 22-year-old named Abdul Qadir Khalil , killed many residents, doled out precious jobs and severely limited travel to and from the city. ...

He ticked off a list of the things Tabqa needs: electricity, water, fuel and a sizable bakery . Then, laughing about his new freedom to openly denounce the militants, he said, "If they ever come back, they will slaughter all of us."

The Ignatius' piece: As the Islamic State falls in Syria, one city offers a preview of the country's future

A boisterous group of young Syrian men is gathered outside a tire and vehicle-parts shop across from the warehouse. American military advisers aren't sure at first that it's safe to talk with them, but the men press eagerly toward two visiting reporters. Abdul-Qadr Khalil, 22 , dressed in a bright blue-nylon jacket, speaks for the group. He complains that there's not enough food, water, gas or bread , and there are no jobs. But he dismisses the idea that the Islamic State will ever take hold here again.

"No, never!" says Khalil, and the young men around him nod in unison. "It will be impossible to live if they come back. They will kill all of us."

... ... ...

I agree with the British general. The reporting in the Washington Post and New York Times from this military press junket is not a work of beauty but pragmatism . These highly paid journalists do not want to get their new desert dress dirty. They pragmatically repeat what the well briefed (and bribed) locals say, picture the children that make V-signs (and receive the promised candy) and they stenograph whatever the military or some diplomats say. No real reporting, no thinking and no dirty boots are required for their job.

The military wanted to convey that nearly everything is fine now in Tabqa. The people love the U.S. occupation and all that is needed now are a few billion $$$ for some minor nation building. The journalists ate up the prepared bites and transmit exactly what the military wanted them to say.

The mainstream media want their readers to believe that their narratives from war zones are genuine reporting. The above examples show that they are not. Their journalists are simple recording highly choreographed shows the Pentagon and State Department press advisors made up and the local press officers prepared in advance. A modern version of the Vietnam war's five o'clock follies .

Richard Pyle, Associated Press Saigon bureau chief during the war, described the [military press] briefings as, "the longest-playing tragicomedy in Southeast Asia's theater of the absurd."

Back then most media did not fell for the nonsense. Now they willingly join in.

JSonofa | Jul 2, 2017 3:25:32 PM 1

It would seem that the CIA control of the media is complete. What are the key phrases to bring them in and out of their trances?

Trancesentintomedication.

dh | Jul 2, 2017 3:41:08 PM | 3
Great post b. It's all orchestrated. As for "Back then most media did not fell for the nonsense" ...back then there was a protest movement.
Chauncey Gardiner | Jul 2, 2017 3:41:33 PM | 4
"...50 tons of flour...." Wow, how generous. And ~500.000 tons of weaponry for the Death Squads. David Gordon isn't he the one along with Judith Miller two chief propagandist of Bush'r regime for Iraq war?
P Walker | Jul 2, 2017 3:44:27 PM | 5
Ah, good old Michael Gordon. If memory serves, he was also as culpable for the NYT stories boosting the Iraq War as Miller was. Yet she was the only one to get fired.
Chauncey Gardiner | Jul 2, 2017 3:47:29 PM | 6
let me see...
September 8, 2002
New York Times

U.S. Says Hussein Intensifies Quest for A-Bomb Parts
By Michael R. Gordon and Judith Miller

WASHINGTON, Sept. 7 - More than a decade after Saddam Hussein agreed to give up weapons of mass destruction, Iraq has stepped up its quest for nuclear weapons and has embarked on a worldwide hunt for materials to make an atomic bomb, Bush administration officials said today.

In the last 14 months, Iraq has sought to buy thousands of specially designed aluminum tubes, which American officials believe were intended as components of centrifuges to enrich uranium. American officials said several efforts to arrange the shipment of the aluminum tubes were blocked or intercepted but declined to say, citing the sensitivity of the intelligence, where they came from or how they were stopped.

The diameter, thickness and other technical specifications of the aluminum tubes had persuaded American intelligence experts that they were meant for Iraq's nuclear program, officials said, and that the latest attempt to ship the material had taken place in recent months.

http://www.realdemocracy.com/abomb.htm

What can I say, Goebbels would be proud of him.

Castellio | Jul 2, 2017 3:51:04 PM | 8
Its not simply that the media is somehow being taken advantage of by a sly military, nor that there are CIA assets in the NYT and Wapo, its that both media outfits (with CNN and other companies) actively collaborate at the highest levels with AIPAC and the CIA to promote their agreed upon interpretation of current events.
P Walker | Jul 2, 2017 3:57:20 PM | 10
Monied interests rule and corrupt everything in order to secure their positions. So, they infiltrate government, corporations, academia. They all speak the same language and derive their belief systems from each other. To paraphrase John Ralston Saul, reality is not in the world, it's in the measurements made by professional bureaucrats. That's why you can see people bouncing between government service, board directorships, the CIA and then becoming pundits on the MSM.

It's a circle jerk where each of the individuals know their roles, and their first rule is never turn on the system itself.

Everything (and I mean everything) is a racket.

Anonymous | Jul 2, 2017 4:14:02 PM | 11
The Gordon piece reveals some interesting details of how the Taqba dam operation worked.

"The Tabqa operation was proposed in mid-March to Lt. Gen. Stephen Townsend, the commander of the American-led task force that is battling the Islamic State, by the top commander of the Syrian Democratic Forces, the combination of Syrian Kurds and Arab fighters who would provide the ground troops for the battle. It was approved without a single White House meeting. Just one week later, hundreds of Arab and Kurdish fighters, including many who had never flown before, were airlifted on American helicopters and Osprey planes to the southern banks of Lake Assad, across from Tabqa. Barges ferried their vehicles across the azure water while another group of Syrian fighters to the east hopped from island to island as they zipped along the Euphrates on American fast boats."

The vaunted SDF is totally reliant on US support. Once that goes, so does their effectiveness. From experience, the US does not train foreign militaries to be anything more capable than a police force. The Russians on the other hand train foreign militaries to be fully capable and self supporting.

The Taqba dam is also a poisoned chalice for the Amerians. They now 'own it':

"Syrian engineers have been trying to get one or two turbines running by cannibalizing parts from the wreckage. But with no Soviet-era parts on hand, nobody seems to think that the structure will be generating power in the months ahead, and the hazards of working in and around the dam are still significant: Last week, one newly trained Syrian demining expert was killed when he triggered an improvised explosive device. But the question foremost in the minds of Tabqa's residents is how they are going to return their lives to some semblance of normal. "There is no electricity, no food, no bread, and we need fuel for our trucks," said Khalid Mohammed Ali Tata, 54. "Also, there are no jobs."

No electricity, no food, no bread, no jobs ...

This has all the makings of a typical US tactical victory and strategic defeat.

Yonatan | Jul 2, 2017 4:22:30 PM | 12
The unwritten story from the articles is that, had it not been for the pesky Russians interfering, the good ole' US fightin' boys would have defeated ISIS ages ago - and many of the commentators fall for this BS.

I, for one, look forward to the glorious Hollywood blockbusters detailing exactly how the US defeated ISIS all on its own.

Peter AU | Jul 2, 2017 4:28:36 PM | 13
Some time ago I ran onto a map showing oil fields and grain silos in Syria. The grain silos wre mostly in what is now the US/SDF held territory. I take it this is the main grain growing region of Syria. Now the US propaganda writers are saying they have no bread?

Presidential envoy Brett McGurk visits Tabqa with two of his best/most trusted propaganda writers.... Aircraft carrier arrived off Israel... plus the recent CW crap from Spicer and UN. Yanks seem to be cooking something up.

JSonofa | Jul 2, 2017 4:47:27 PM | 15

Castellio - no CIA Assets at WaPo? You Sure about that? Amazon & The CIA

peter | Jul 2, 2017 5:03:21 PM | 16
No body bags. No problem. That's the only thing that matters to the hoi polloi in the US. That and the draft.

The public is so inured to military action going on somewhere that the only thing that captures their attention is American casualties. People who read the NYT and Washpo know that these are fluff pieces and are aware and probably concerned that America's meddling in Syria might end badly. It's hardly surprising that two different reporters at the same event posted similar accounts.

Obviously their minder explained the concerns about young minds being warped by ISIS indoctrination and it was duly reported. That's not fake news. Child soldiers in the DR Congo come to mind.

I'm sure when the SAA liberates a village there's some coverage of happy residents. I'm sure they spring for some flour too. I mean, no matter who gets those ISIS fuckers out of your hair, you're going to be happy to see them. These are filler pieces. They don't mean anything. They don't shape opinion. There's no groundswell of support for American involvement in Syria's civil war and the implications of an incident with Russian forces. Far from it.

Any embedded reporter expects and gets a high degree of skepticism from the readers. Besides, the readers are much more interested in watching Trump's meltdown in real time. They watch their healthcare under assault and somehow Syria matters fade to black. They will pay attention to any new shootdowns but don't give a fuck about the feel-good stories.

WorldBLee | Jul 2, 2017 5:27:28 PM | 18
This is standard US military propaganda. It's a PR show, no doubt, but somehow I find it less reprehensible than the anonymously sourced anti-Russian and anti-Syrian pieces that dominate the NYT and WaPo on a daily basis.
Clueless Joe | Jul 2, 2017 5:32:35 PM | 19
If that's the best that freedom of the press can bring us, then fuck freedom of the press. Mainstream media fully deserves to live the rest of the century under Stalin's rule, with the people cheering when they're shipped to gulag.
Lea | Jul 2, 2017 5:36:40 PM | 20
Cheers for your "spot the difference" piece, B. Great job.

There is nothing new about this, BTW. Edward Bernays had already pulled it in 1953 in Guatemala, prior to the coup against Arbenz: journos who were walked in the "exotic jungles" with "brooding and submissive Indians", and could wear ridiculous pith helmets, ride horses through miles of plantations and drink White Label scotch served by pretty señoritas on some chosen veranda in the evening, while they watched the sunset.

Upon return, they "knew the situation on the ground" in Guatemala.

Do these people ever read history? I mean, it's not as if a ton of books had not been published on this kind of subject. You can pull the same trick on them over and over, and do they notice a pattern or something? No.

Who are these geniuses?

PavewayIV | Jul 2, 2017 5:39:12 PM | 21
"...I mean, no matter who gets those ISIS fuckers out of your hair, you're going to be happy to see them..."

This is a most precise description of neocon U.S. foreign policy post-Libya. If the little people have grown skeptical of your fake WMD claims and they've grown inured to your cartoonish demonization of leaders you don't like, then replace the government to be regime-changed with an evil of your own creation (the Afghanistan Plan).

Congress won't let the Pentagon attack and occupy Syria directly at Saudi's/Israel's behest? Solution: Create fake ISIS to conquer Syrian land/resources first, then get blanket Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) allowing Pentagon to kick them out any time, any where.

The RoboCop AUMF. Then justify endless occupation thereafter with the need for humanitarian aid, training local police forces and offering follow-on U.S. military protection until things stabilize. Except they never stabilize.

The U.S. created Mujahedin in Pakistan training camps and the Afghan Liberation Front for that exact purpose in 1978. Someone to kick the Soviets out, but evil enough to justify the U.S. going after them. Whatever the Mujahedin were in 1978 morphed into something much darker by 2001, i.e., al Qaeda and the Taliban. I can't believe that wasn't without the help of the U.S. - we needed to create an evil, cartoonish enemy to justify military action (with or without U.S. Congressional approval). 9/11 - whether it was staged or not - ushered in the RoboCop AUMF to go after the evil guy in an Afghani cave because he orchestrated 9/11.

A long time from now, someone is going to read about this in a history book and just laugh - nobody could be so stupid as to fall for such a preposterous ruse, and certainly not over and over again.

Castellio | Jul 2, 2017 5:57:56 PM | 22
@15 JSonofa

I'm sorry I wasn't clear. There are certainly CIA assets writing both for WaPo and the NYT, and the editors and owners are aware.

It would have been better if I had written - it's not simply that the military coordinates with the press, and its not simply that there are CIA assets writing for the WaPo and the NYT, it's also the case that both media outfits (with CNN and other companies) actively collaborate at the highest levels with AIPAC and the CIA to promote their agreed upon interpretation of current events.

Jackrabbit | Jul 2, 2017 7:08:45 PM | 23
As @3 ...back then there was a protest movement.

There was a protest movement mostly because there was a draft.

[Jul 01, 2017] Deception Inside Deception The Alleged Sarin Gas Attack by Paul Craig Roberts

Jun 30, 2017 | www.unz.com

Seymour Hersh, America's most famous investigative reporter, has become persona non grata in the American Propaganda Ministry that poses as a news media but only serves to protect the US government's war lies. Among his many triumphs Hersh exposed the American My Lai massacre in Vietnam and the Abu Ghraib torture prison run by the Americans in Iraq. Today his investigative reports have to be published in the London Review of Books or in the German Media.

From Hersh's latest investigative report, we learn that President Trump makes war decisions by watching staged propaganda on TV. The White Helmets, a propaganda organization for jihadists and the "Syrian opposition," found a gullible reception from the Western media for photographs and videos of alleged victims of a Syrian Army sarin gas attack on civilians in Khan Sheikhoun. Trump saw the photos on TV and despite being assured by US intelligence that there was no Syrian sarin gas attack, ordered the US military to strike a Syrian base with Tomahawk missiles. Under international law this strike was a war crime, and it was the first direct aggression against Syria by the US which previously committed aggression via proxies called "the Syrian opposition."

Reporting on his sources, Hersh writes: "In a series of interviews, I learned of the total disconnect between the president and many of his military advisers and intelligence officials, as well as officers on the ground in the region who had an entirely different understanding of the nature of Syria's attack on Khan Sheikhoun. I was provided with evidence of that disconnect, in the form of transcripts of real-time communications, immediately following the Syrian attack on April 4."

The belief that sarin gas was involved in the attack comes from what appears to be a gas cloud. Hersh was informed by US military experts that sarin is oderless and invisible and makes no cloud. What appears to have happened is that the explosion from the air attack on ISIS caused a series of secondary explosions that produced a toxic cloud formed by fertilizers and chlorine disinfectants that were stored in the building that was hit.

US officials spoke with Hersh, because they are distrubed that President Trump based a war decision on TV propaganda and refused to listen to the detailed counter-assessments of his intelligence and military services. A national security source told Hersh: "Everyone close to him knows his proclivity for acting precipitously when he does not know the facts. He doesn't read anything and has no real historical knowledge. He wants verbal briefings and photographs. He's a risk-taker. He can accept the consequences of a bad decision in the business world; he will just lose money. But in our world, lives will be lost and there will be long-term damage to our national security if he guesses wrong. He was told we did not have evidence of Syrian involvement and yet Trump says: 'Do it."'

Concerns about Trump's purely emotional reaction to TV propaganda persist. Hersh reports that a senior national security adviser told him: "The Salafists and jihadists got everything they wanted out of their hyped-up Syrian nerve gas ploy" (the flare up of tensions between Syria, Russia and America). The issue is, what if there's another false flag sarin attack credited to hated Syria? Trump has upped the ante and painted himself into a corner with his decision to bomb. And do not think these guys are not planning the next faked attack. Trump will have no choice but to bomb again, and harder. He's incapable of saying he made a mistake."

As we know, the White House has already released a statement predicting that Assad is preparing another chemical attack, for which, the White House promises, he will "pay a heavy price." Clearly, a false flag attack is on the way. https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/06/30/washington-new-threat-against-syria-russia-iran-invitation-false-flag-operation.html

By all means, read Hersh's report: https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article165905578/Trump-s-Red-Line.html It reveals a president who makes precipitious decisions likely to cause a war with Russia.

I do not doubt Sy Hersh's integrity. I accept that he has accurately reported what he was told by US officials. My suspicions about this story do not have to do with Hersh. They have to do with what Hersh was told.

Hersh's report puts Trump in a very bad light, and it puts the military/security complex, which we know has been trying to destroy Trump, in a very good light. Moreover, the story strikes me as inconsistent with the subsequent attack on the Syrian fighter-bomber by the US military. If the Tomahawk attack on the Syrian base was unjustified, what justified downing a Syrian war plane? Did Trump order this attack as well? If not, who did? Why?

If national security advisers gave Trump such excellent information about the alleged sarin gas attack, completely disproving any such attack, why was he given such bad advice about shooting down a Syrian war plane, or was it done outside of channels? The effect of the shootdown is to raise the chance of a confrontation with Russia, because Russia's response apparently has been to declare a no-fly zone over the area of Russian and Syrian operations.

How do we know that what Hersh was told was true? What if Trump was encouraged to order the Tomahawk strike as a way of interjecting the US directly into the conflict? Both the US and Israel have powerful reasons for wanting to overthrow Assad. However, ISIS, sent to do the job, has been defeated by Russia and Syria. Unless Washington can somehow get directly involved, the war is over.

The story Hersh was given also serves to damn Trump while absolving the intelligence services. Trump takes the hit for injecting the US directly into the conflict.

Hersh's story reads well, but it easily could be a false story planted on him. I am not saying that the story is false, but unless we learn more, it could be.

What we do know is that the story given to Hersh by national security officials is inconsistent with the June 26 White House announcement that the US has "identified potential preparations for another chemical attack by the Assad regime." The White House does not have the capability to conduct its own foreign intelligence gathering. The White House is informed by the national security and intelligence agencies.

In the story given to Hersh, these officials are emphatic that not only were chemical weapons removed from Syria, but also that Assad would not use them or be permitted by the Russians to use them even if he had them. Moreover, Hersh reports that he was told that Russia fully informed the US of the Syrian attack on ISIS in advance. The weapon was a guided bomb that Russia had suppied to Syria. Therefore, it could not have been a chemical weapon.

As US national security officials made it clear to Hersh that they do not believe Syria did or would use any chemical weapons, what is the source for the White House's announcement that preparations for another chemical attack by the Assad regime have been identified?

Who lined up UN ambassador Nikki Haley and the UK Defence Minister Michael Fallon to be ready with statements in support of the White House announcement? Haley says: "Any further attacks done to the people of Syria will be blamed on Assad, but also on Russia & Iran who support him killing his own people." Fallon says: "we will support" future US action in response to the use of chemical weapons in Syria.

How clear does an orchestration have to be before people are capable of recognizing the orchestration?

The intelligence agencies put out the story via Hersh that there were no chemical attacks, so what attacks is Niki Haley speaking about?

A reasonable conclusion is that Washington's plan to use ISIS to overthrow Syria and then start on Iran was derailed by Russian and Syrian military success against ISIS. The US then tried to partition Syria by occupying part of it, but were out-manuevered by the Russians and Syrians. This left direct US involvement as the only alternative to defeat. This direct US military involvement began with the US attack on the Syrian military base and was followed by shooting down a Syrian war plane. The next stage will be a US-staged false flag chemical attack or alleged chemical attack, and this false flag, as has already been announced, will be the excuse for larger scale US military action against Syria, which, unless the Russians abandon Syria, means conflict with Russia, Iran, and perhaps China.

http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/us-military-put-alert-washington-waiting-excuse-attack

[Jul 01, 2017] The dogs of war are still barking

Notable quotes:
"... Russia -- Syria's most powerful ally in the six-year conflict -- described the OPCW report as politically motivated and grounded in "doubtful data obtained from opposition" and "notorious NGOs like the White Helmets." Moscow also criticized the watchdog's methodology for gathering samples and eyewitness statements in a "neighboring country" and "not at the site of the tragedy." ..."
Jul 01, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

Posted by: michaelj72 | Jul 1, 2017 1:49:11 AM | 45

the dogs of war are barking

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/30/middleeast/syria-khan-sheikhoun-chemical-attack-sarin/index.html

International chemical weapons inspectors have confirmed that the nerve agent sarin was used in April's deadly chemical attack in Syria's Idlib province.

...The OPCW report comes the same week the White House issued a public warning that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad would pay a "heavy price" for using chemical weapons.

....But Russia -- Syria's most powerful ally in the six-year conflict -- described the OPCW report as politically motivated and grounded in "doubtful data obtained from opposition" and "notorious NGOs like the White Helmets." Moscow also criticized the watchdog's methodology for gathering samples and eyewitness statements in a "neighboring country" and "not at the site of the tragedy."

[Jul 01, 2017] Ukraine A New Plan by Hall Gardner

Some parts of US political elite is now really afraid of Russian China alliance forged by Clinton, Bush Ii and Obama adventurism. It might be too late.
Notable quotes:
"... In 1998, as the Clinton administration took steps to enlarge NATO beyond eastern Germany, George Kennan forewarned: "In trying to place NATO ahead of the EU as the focal point of European unity, and at the same time in looking to Germany to be, together with the U.S., the greatest military power on the European continent, the NATO leaders are, as I see it, making a mistake of historical dimensions. They are trying to revive all the disturbing ghosts of the modern European past." 26 . ..."
"... In retrospect, the largely uncoordinated and overextended enlargements of NATO and the EU have both provoked the ghosts of European nationalism and Russian revanchist backlash. 27 ..."
Jul 01, 2017 | americanaffairsjournal.org

The fighting in the Donbass region of eastern Ukraine has moreover proved very costly for all sides, and rebuilding the region will prove very difficult. The specter of more intense fighting in the years ahead has been raised in the aftermath of Kiev's "creeping offensive" into the Donbass region since mid-December 2016. Kiev's military move was ostensibly intended to check supplies going to the Russian-backed autonomists (who in turn have begun to expropriate Ukrainian businesses in the Donetsk and Lugansk regions), but has nonetheless stepped deeper into the gray zone between the two sides. 6

A collapsed Donbass region that is potentially separated from a partitioned Ukraine could soon become a much larger and unstable version of Russian-backed Transnistria, South Ossetia, and Abkhazia combined. Such political and economic instability will continue to pollute the whole area with black marketeering, weapons smuggling, and other forms of criminality. A failed "state" in eastern Ukraine would not only prove very troublesome for an essentially bankrupt Kiev and the rest of the region, but for Moscow as well-as the latter, for example, will need to deal with refugees fleeing to Russia. Some 1.5 million people have already fled the country, with the vast majority (1.2 million) going to the Russian Federation-which has not necessarily accepted them with open arms. Roughly 150,000 have gone to Belarus.

7 The cost of reconstruction and development in the aftermath of the conflict will be considerable. So it should be in the common interest to bring this conflict to a close as soon as possible.

The Question of Western Europe

A general settlement between the United States, European countries, Ukraine, and Russia is crucial to prevent the further destabilization of eastern Europe that could, in turn, further antagonize western Europe. Such a destabilization would deepen the divisions between pro-NATO and pro-EU sociopolitical movements and anti-NATO and anti-EU movements on both the right and the left. In general, both left-wing and right-wing political parties in states closest to Russia (Poland, Finland, Sweden, and the Baltic states) tend to take a strong anti-Russian position, no matter whether they are for or against NATO or EU membership. But left-wing and right-wing parties in both France and Germany-the two countries that now form the core of the European Union after the UK's exit from the EU (Brexit)-tend to oppose both EU and NATO membership.

During the ongoing process of Brexit, which could take several years to complete, it is not at all clear where the European Union is heading. European financial instability means that a number of states could, in the not too distant future, opt to drop out of the European Union and even out of NATO. Here, for example, sanctions placed on Russia in the agricultural sector (coupled with a Russian ban on European imports) have ironically been hurting the Europeans much more than the Americans. The impact of EU and Russian sanctions, along with general impact of regional deindustrialization and delocalization, has been pressing agricultural producers and workers, as well as small business owners, to turn toward anti-EU anti-NATO parties on both the right and the left, particularly in France. 9

In Search of a U.S.-Russia Policy

In apparent contrast to Trump's campaign promises to forge a general rapprochement with Moscow, the United States and NATO are now backing Kiev's claims to eastern Ukraine and to the Crimea-while still keeping the door open to Kiev's membership in NATO. This policy has reversed Trump's stance during his presidential campaign, when he warned in August 2016 that U.S. efforts to regain Crimea on behalf of Ukraine against Russia could result in World War III.

On the one hand, in arguing against Trump's proclaimed efforts to make amends with Moscow, Senator John McCain and others have feared that U.S. secretary of state Rex Tillerson, the former CEO of ExxonMobil, could use his connections with Putin for the benefit of ExxonMobil. He might, they suggest, try to put an end to sanctions that had been placed by Washington on the Russian energy sector since July 2014. Eliminating sanctions would then safeguard ExxonMobil's considerable joint investment deals and potential profitability given the size of Russian reserves in the Arctic Kara Sea, western Siberia, Sakhalin island, and in the Black Sea that had been reached with Rosneft, the Russian government energy company, in 2012–13.11 The concern of those like McCain who want to sustain maximum political-economic pressure on Moscow, is that "sectoral sanctions" impacting major energy companies and banks are due to expire in December 2017-unless extended by Congress.12

On the other hand, Trump's "America First" policies are actually ideologically opposed to ExxonMobil's investments in Moscow. Trump's "economic nationalists" hope to return U.S. multinational corporate investments abroad back to the United States itself-while seeking to export U.S. shale oil and gas to Europe, for example. In effect, U.S. shale oil exporters hope to supply Poland, Ukraine, and other European countries so that these countries will be less dependent on Russian energy; Russia would have to lower prices to compete. Kiev, for example, is still dependent upon Moscow for about half of its natural gas needs.13 As opposed to the argument that the United States needs to sustain positive political and economic "linkage" with Moscow (as Henry Kissinger would argue), the United States could soon fully antagonize Moscow by becoming a direct rival for Russia's energy export markets-in a sector in which Moscow derives significant national revenues.14

The major dilemma lies in the fact that U.S. diplomacy under President Barack Obama did not go far enough to "reset" the general crisis in U.S.-Russian relations. Prior to Obama's first term, neither the United States nor the EU picked up and developed two significant proposals that might have prevented the escalation of tensions since 2014. The first proposal was Russian president Dmitri Medvedev's June 2008 call in Berlin for a new European security pact and the second was Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan's call in Moscow for a new Caucasus Stability and Cooperation Pact in the aftermath of the August 2008 Georgia-Russia War. President Obama did try to reach out to Moscow once he came to power in January 2009, yet the fact that U.S.-Russia discussions did not address the issue of the uncoordinated NATO and EU "double enlargement" into the Russian-defined "near abroad" could only doom reset talks to failure.

Had the United States and EU reached out to address the issues impacting the Black Sea and Caucasus raised by both Russia and NATO-member Turkey, this crisis might not have escalated. Instead, the general attitude since the end of the Cold War was that NATO and the EU could somehow manage these regions without the involvement of Russia-in the false assumption that Russia would do nothing to defend its interests in its "near abroad." In effect, the general U.S. and EU attitude has been that there was no need to create a new, jointly managed, regional peace and development community under OSCE auspices that would incorporate the interests of Russia, Turkey, and other regional states.1

...the 2014 Minsk II accords between Germany, France, Ukraine, and Russia (in which the United States is not a participant) were not designed to address the two elephants in the room: the questions concerning NATO membership for Georgia and Ukraine, plus Ukrainian demands for the return of Crimea from Russia. The focus of the Minsk discussions has been on the conflict in eastern Ukraine only-in which a total ceasefire, Ukrainian "decentralization," and direct negotiations between Kiev and the Donbass "autonomists" have been considered essential to success. Yet Kiev's promises of "decentralization" have not been constitutionally implemented and the March 2017 decision of the Ukrainian Poroshenko government to support the blockade on the Donbass region basically puts a dagger into the heart of the Minsk II accords.16 It now appears politically impossible for the government in Kiev to recognize the autonomist factions in the Donbass region, while Moscow has continued to supply autonomists with weaponry.

Given the gravity of the situation, the Minsk discussions over eastern Ukraine will soon need to be widened to include at least the United States and Turkey. This step would broaden the negotiations to include issues impacting the Black Sea and Caucasus regions, plus the Crimea. NATO-member Turkey-despite its deep domestic instability and President Erdogan's steps toward implementing an "illiberal democracy"-would need to play a key role. Given Turkey's central position in the Black Sea region, Ankara could potentially help to mediate between the United States and NATO, the EU, Ukraine, and Russia. Moscow is not the only "illiberal democracy" that Washington needs to talk to. Turkey must be included as well.17

...A general settlement with Moscow that results in Ukrainian neutrality, but allows self-defense forces and permits Moscow to retain sovereignty over Crimea, will not necessarily result in a full "capitulation"-even if Washington must lower its sights as to what can and cannot be negotiated in Moscow's view. Despite renewed conflict in eastern Ukraine since mid-December 2016, President Trump has promised to "work with Ukraine, Russia, and all other parties involved to help them restore peace along the (Russian-Ukrainian) border." 19 Yet Trump's promise to work for peace has not yet fully addressed the question of the Crimea. It has, however, been alleged that Trump officials may have been secretly attempting to make a deal with Moscow over Crimea and eastern Ukraine. That deal, somewhat like the negotiated settlement that George Kennan had sought in 1949, was leaked to the press, leading to allegations of Trump administration collusion with Moscow.

...

Even if the Minsk II accords collapse, or if the Donbass region separates from Ukraine in a future partition, the United States, Europeans, and Russia will need to find ways to limit the damage. The deployment of international peacekeepers in the Donbass region under a general OSCE mandate (going beyond OSCE observers) could help ameliorate the situation considerably, once a political settlement can be reached. At the same time, the United States, EU, Russia, and Ukraine would need to begin reconstruction efforts through the implementation of a regional peace and development community backed by U.S./NATO, EU, and Russian security supports under a general OSCE mandate.

Much like Kennan's "Plan A" with respect to Germany in 1949, a new approach to Euro-Atlantic security through engaged negotiations with Moscow would accordingly seek to establish Ukraine as a formally neutral state with limited self-defense capabilities. Both Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski have likewise called for establishing Ukraine as a formally neutral country that is not a member of NATO or the Russian-led CSTO. For his part, Kissinger has also argued that Ukraine should have the right to choose freely its economic and political associations, including with the European Union. Yet full EU membership is not a viable option either, as even the EU association accords require that Kiev gradually adopt Common Security and Defense policies and European Defense Agency policies. The problem is that the EU Eastern Partnership program has not yet been able to develop a formula that can balance Russian security, defense, political-economic, financial, and energy interests with those of the post-Soviet eastern European countries and of the EU itself. It is therefore essential that the European Union begin to think more strategically, in cooperation with the United States, as the two coordinate their rapprochement with Moscow. 21

NATO efforts to deploy rotating forces in the Baltic states and Poland are, as noted earlier, being met by a buildup of Russian nuclear and conventional forces in northwest Russia and Kaliningrad, plus major military maneuvers planned for September 2017. Despite the fact that President Putin's proposal to restart military-to-military relations and to increase intelligence cooperation between the United States and NATO was rejected in mid-February 2017 by Trump's new defense secretary, James Mattis, a step-by-step normalization of U.S.-European-Russia relations should be considered. 22 This could be accomplished by means of setting up joint security exercises and overflights in the Baltic region and Kaliningrad, and in the Black Sea region, and in joint U.S., EU, and Russian peacekeeping operations in Donbass and the Caucasus under a general OSCE mandate, for example. The establishment of NATO-Russian confidence-building measures as soon as possible is absolutely crucial if peace is to be maintained.

Once there is progress in these areas, the United States and EU could then begin to lift sanctions on Russia, while also looking for ways to bring the United States, EU, and Russia into greater political-economic, financial, and energy cooperation. One possibility would be a three-way trade and financial commission between Ukraine, the European Union, and Russia. Another step would be to bring Moscow back into the G-8 discussions after Russian membership was suspended in March 2014. Both G-8 and EU-Russian-Ukrainian discussions could likewise lead the EU to work out a political-economic association accord that better balances Russian and Ukrainian financial, political-economic, energy, and ecological interests-after the EU's abysmal failure to do so in 2013–14.

After sanctions on Russia are put to an end, offering Russia American and European investment, as well as joint military and security cooperation, could help to draw Moscow away from too great a financial and economic dependence on Beijing. It could likewise prevent the formation of a closer Sino-Russian military alliance, somewhat reminiscent of the 1950s, but in which Russia plays a role as a junior partner. Such a strategy must not, however, alienate China, which is the main indirect beneficiary of U.S.-European-Russian-Ukrainian conflict.

The United States is no longer locked into an existential war with the Soviet Union, and it should cooperate with the Russian Federation in order to sustain peace in a number of key areas: Ukraine, Iran's nuclear program, Syria/Iraq, Islamic State, and North Korea. All these areas, among many others, need to be addressed as soon as possible through multiple forums, including the UN Security Council, the OSCE, the NATO-Russia Council, the G-8, and Contact Groups, as well as through international conferences and bilateral U.S.-Russia, U.S.-China meetings. The United States, Europeans, Japan, and Russia will also need to channel China's rise to major power status in such a way that it does not harm Russian, Japanese, or American interests.

The dilemma is that it is the rise of China with its burgeoning global political-economic influence and increasingly powerful military capabilities-combined with a close alignment with Russia as a junior partner-that now represents the primary concern causing tremors in the United States and throughout the world. Washington will need to fully engage in both bilateral and multilateral negotiations with both Beijing and Moscow if the global system is not to soon polarize into two contending alliance systems: a U.S./NATO-EU-Japanese alliance of essentially democratic states vs. a Russia/CSTO-Chinese-Iranian alliance of "illiberal democracies"-with democratic India soon forced to choose sides. 23

... ... ...

The danger is that U.S. domestic pressure to prevent the Trump administration from engaging in more substantial negotiations with Putin could lead to an even deeper crisis. The Russian Federation sees itself as being walled off in Europe, with its "near abroad" penetrated by the NATOEU "double enlargement" which, Putin fears, could lead to the breakup of the Russian-led CSTO. The breakup of the CSTO could, in turn, lead to the disaggregation of the Russian Federation itself. Certain regions in Russia are nearly bankrupt, a fact which once again caused protests in March 2017 against corruption and economic stagnation throughout the country. The fears of a potential breakup of the Russian Federation (as occurred during World War I) have led Putin to seek out strong political-economic and military ties with China in the effort to form a Eurasian Union, if not a military alliance. But unlike the relatively peaceful disaggregation of the Soviet Union, the feared disaggregation of the Russian Federation and concurrent civil war could lead to full scale Russian backlash.

In this regard, the Syrian crisis could provide the spark for an even greater conflagration. This is because Moscow fears that the potential collapse of the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad will result in the loss of Russia's position in the Middle East, while permitting pan-Sunni movements to destabilize the immediate region as well as the northern Caucasus and other predominately Muslim regions inside the Russian Federation itself. The April 2017 Trump administration decision to engage in unilateral cruise missile strikes as a means to punish the Assad regime for its use of chemical weaponry against its own population has been denounced by Moscow as yet another illegal unilateral U.S. attack against a sovereign state.

In 1998, as the Clinton administration took steps to enlarge NATO beyond eastern Germany, George Kennan forewarned: "In trying to place NATO ahead of the EU as the focal point of European unity, and at the same time in looking to Germany to be, together with the U.S., the greatest military power on the European continent, the NATO leaders are, as I see it, making a mistake of historical dimensions. They are trying to revive all the disturbing ghosts of the modern European past." 26 .

In retrospect, the largely uncoordinated and overextended enlargements of NATO and the EU have both provoked the ghosts of European nationalism and Russian revanchist backlash. 27

... ... ...

This article originally appeared in American Affairs Volume I, Number 2 (Summer 2017): 166–83.

[Jul 01, 2017] Ex-Weapons Inspector: Trumps Sarin Claims Built on Lie

Jul 01, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
h | Jun 30, 2017 2:35:00 PM | 5
Ex-Weapons Inspector: Trump's Sarin Claims Built on 'Lie' by Scott Ritter - http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/ex-weapons-inspector-trumps-sarin-claims-built-on-lie/

This is an excellent, excellent read which puts the propaganda BS OPCW report to shame. A must read...

james | Jun 30, 2017 2:37:15 PM | 6
@4 chet... israel is now al nusra/al qaeda air force.. that is part of it..

opcw basis is thanks the white helmets... i guess the usa/uk want some results from all the money they have given this lovely ngo who always seem imbedded with the moderate headchopper cult..

scott ridder discusses this and more here here..

Ghostship | Jun 30, 2017 2:50:01 PM | 9
Why America is killing people around the world .
h | Jun 30, 2017 3:00:03 PM | 10
Two more articles folks might be interested in -

Paul Craig Roberts has an article titled 'Washington Has Been At War For 16 Years: Why?' -

Snippet -

"There are three reasons for Washington's war, not America's war as Washington is not America, on Syria. The first reason has to do with the profits of the military/security complex."

"The military/security complex is a combination of powerful private and governmental interests that need a threat to justify an annual budget that exceeds the GDP of many countries. War gives this combination of private and governmental interests a justification for its massive budget, a budget whose burden falls on American taxpayers whose real median family income has not risen for a couple of decades while their debt burden to support their living standard has risen."

"The second reason has to do with the Neoconservative ideology of American world hegemony. According to the Neoconservatives, who most certainly are not conservative of any description, the collapse of communism and socialism means that History has chosen "Democratic Capitalism," which is neither democratic nor capitalist, as the World's Socio-Economic-Political system and it is Washington's responsibility to impose Americanism on the entire world. Countries such as Russia, China, Syria, and Iran, who reject American hegemony must be destabilized and desroyed as they stand in the way of American unilateralism."

"The Third reason has to do with Israel's need for the water resources of Southern Lebanon. Twice Israel has sent the vaunted Israeli Army to occupy Southern Lebanon, and twice the vaunted Israeli Army was driven out by Hezbollah, a militia supported by Syria and Iran."

I'd add a couple of more reasons starting with OIL! Interesting read, however.

After 16 years of offering the same amendment before House Appropriations, Del Barbara Lee was a bit surprised her amendment to sunset the 2001 AUMF easily passed out of the House Appropriations committee yesterday - http://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/29/congress-vote-authorize-war-islamic-state-240095

Of course the House Leadership is going to do whatever to stop such a move, but it's looking more and more like some are readying for such a challenge.

For any who are sick to death of U.S. wars/proxy wars or CIA special ops wars, this includes all who read this blog from abroad, I might suggest getting organized and to start a massive letter writing campaign to the leadership in both the House and Senate. This presents a huge opening for the citizenry of the world to allow their voices to be heard. It would be a truly beautiful, hell, who am I kidding, it would be a truly MAGNIFICENT step made by the People of the World to tell the U.S. Congress to Repeal the 2001 AUMF.

Yeah, I realize they want to replace it with some other God Awful authorization, but that can be stopped if the masses of the world flood congress with letters and postcards. Emails won't work for numerous reasons with most important being you can't 'SEE' stacks of emails but you can 'SEE' stacks and stacks and stacks of letters.

Just a thought...

nmb | Jun 30, 2017 3:24:40 PM | 12
CIA examined the possibility of assassination of the Iranian PM Mohammad Mosaddegh before the 1953 coup

[Jun 30, 2017] More clumsy comedy from the Exceptional Nation; America announces that it believes Syria has backed away from its diabolical plan to murder more women and children in another Assad-signature chemical attack

Jun 30, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com
marknesop , June 30, 2017 at 12:09 pm
More clumsy comedy from the Exceptional Nation; America announces that it believes Syria has backed away from its diabolical plan to murder more women and children in another Assad-signature chemical attack – thanks, of course, to the fact that the United States of America has the Syrian airbase from which he planned to launch it under constant surveillance, and ample punishing forces on a hair-trigger alert. Have a care, Assad, you murderer!!!

So now the absence of evidence that a chemical attack is in progress is proof that there was such a plan. In other news, Donald Trump has had to abandon his plan to sodomize the neighbours' dog. Thanks to my having the pooch under constant surveillance.

https://ads.pubmatic.com/AdServer/js/showad.js#PIX&kdntuid=1&p=156204

Pavlo Svolochenko , June 30, 2017 at 7:25 pm
The blond moron has hit upon a solid tactic – issue warning, declare victory when nothing happens.

If he wants to keep this up for the rest of the war, I don't see a problem.

[Jun 30, 2017] Make No Mistake, We Are Already at War in Syria by Philip Giraldi

Jun 30, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com
Something peculiar happens to American presidents after they take office on January 20.

Campaign promises to right the easily perceived misdirections in foreign policy are abandoned, and the new program for dealing with the rest of the world winds up looking very much like the old one. Bill Clinton was an anti-Vietnam War draft dodger who preached the moral high ground for going to war before he turned around and got involved in the Balkans while also bombing Sudan and Afghanistan. George W. Bush promised non-interference and no nation-building overseas, but 9/11 converted him into an exemplar of how to do everything wrong as he sank into the quagmires of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Barack Obama's margin of victory in 2008 was likely due to the perception that he was the peace candidate, particularly in contrast to his opponent Senator John McCain, but he wound up deeper in Afghanistan, out of, and then back into Iraq, interfering in Syria, and bringing about disastrous regime change in Libya while also allowing relations with Moscow to deteriorate. Donald Trump has surrounded himself with generals after promising no deeper involvement in foreign wars and the generals are telling him that winning wars only requires more soldiers on the ground and just a little more time and effort to stabilize things, all of which are self-serving formulae for policies that have already failed.

And then there are the perennial enemies, with Iran at the top of the list while Russia and China play supporting roles. Some would blame the foreign policy orientation on the Deep State, which certainly is suggestive, but I rather suspect that the flip-flops of recent presidents are also based on some other elements. First, none of them has been a veteran who experienced active duty, which makes war an abstraction observed second hand on PowerPoint in a briefing room rather than a reality. And second, the shaping of their views can be directly attributed to the pervasiveness of the establishment view on the appropriate role for the United States in the world.

Sometimes referred to as America's "civil religion," one can also call it "American exceptionalism" or the "leadership of the free world" or even "responsibility to protect" but the reality is that a broad consensus has developed in the United States that enables serial interventionism with hardly a squeak of protest coming from the American people.

Donald Trump has been in office for five months and it would appear that at least some of the outlines of his foreign policy are beginning to take shape, though that may be exaggeration as no one seems to be in charge. The "America First" slogan seemingly does not apply to what is developing, as actual U.S. interests do not appear to be driving what takes place, and there does not seem to be any overriding principle that shapes the responses to the many challenges confronting Washington worldwide.

The two most important observations that one might make are both quite negative. First, lamentably, the promised détente with Russia has actually gone into reverse, with the relationship between the two countries at the lowest point since the time of the late, lamented Hillary Rodham Clinton as Secretary of State. Second, we are already at war with Syria even though the media and Congress seem blissfully unaware of that fact. We are also making aggressive moves intended to create a casus belli for going to war with Iran , and are doubling down in Afghanistan with more troops on the way, so Donald Trump's pledge to avoid pointless wars and nation-building were apparently little more than glib talking points intended to make Barack Obama look bad.

The situation with Russia can be repaired as Vladimir Putin is a realist head of state of a country that is vulnerable and willing to work with Washington, but it will require an end to the constant vituperation being directed against Moscow by the media and the Democratic Party. That process could easily spin out for another year with all parties now agreeing that Russia intervened in our election even though no one has yet presented any evidence that Russia did anything at all.

Syria is more complicated. Senators Tim Kaine and Rand Paul have raised the alarm over American involvement in that country, declaring the U.S. military intervention to be illegal . Indeed it is, as it is a violation of the United Nations Charter and the American Constitution. No one has argued that Syria in any way threatens the United States, and the current policy is also an affront to common sense: like it or not Syria is a sovereign country in which we Americans have set up military bases and are supporting "rebels" (including jihadis and terrorists) who are seeking to overthrow the legitimate government. We have also established a so-called "de-confliction" zone in the southeast of the country to protect our proxies without the consent of the government in Damascus. All of that adds up to what is unambiguously unprovoked aggression, an act of war.

The war began in earnest when the Obama administration began building bases and sending Special Ops into Syria in the late summer of 2015, after the White House announced that it would "allow airstrikes to defend Syrian rebels trained by the U.S. military from any attackers, even if the enemies hail from forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad."

That policy guaranteed escalation and direct American involvement in the conflict. In the last month, for the first time since the civil war in Syria began in 2011, the United States has directly attacked Syrian government forces or proxies four times, including two air attacks against Iranian militiamen allied to Damascus. Those moves were preceded by the April U.S. Navy launch of 59 cruise missiles in an attack directed against a Syrian air base. The recent escalation has produced a response from Russia, which decried in the strongest terms the latest of these incidents, in which a U.S. F-18 Hornet shot down a Syrian SU-22 fighter-bomber.

Moscow has now threatened to act against any U.S.-led coalition aircraft flying over western Syria, a step that could in short order lead to a Russian-U.S. war in the Middle East.

Syria is currently under attack from the air forces of sixteen nations operating within its airspace loosely affiliated with the U.S. effort to bring about regime change. When Syria resists, it is routinely accused of using "forbidden" weapons by the mouthpieces of the terrorist groups operating inside the country under the American umbrella. Currently, the White House is warning that it has "identified potential preparations for another chemical weapons attack by the Assad regime." UN Ambassador Nikki Haley elaborated in a tweet, " further attacks will be blamed on Assad but also on Russia and Iran who support him "

Syria will "pay a very heavy price" if a chemical attack takes place, according to the White House statement. The U.S. warning will inevitably motivate the so-called rebels to stage an attack themselves and blame it on Damascus, as they have done in the past. It also dangerously escalates the conflict by directly targeting both Russia and Iran as Syrian "accomplices" in war crimes. It is a very dangerous move by the Trump Administration and one that apparently was not coordinated with the Defense and State Departments, which were caught flat footed by the White House announcement. The nature and credibility of the information implicating Syria has not been revealed and is being regarded as an "intelligence matter."

Much of this acting against actual U.S. interests has come about due to the "worthless ally" syndrome which has been prevalent in Washington for several decades. In the Middle East, where many of the problems begin, there is no coherent policy that has evolved beyond unconditional support for local "allies" Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey and Israel. This has meant in practical terms that the U.S. defers to Riyadh, Ankara, Cairo, and Tel Aviv in nearly all regional matters while it is also the guarantor of a feckless Afghan government.

So in spite of pledges to disengage from the cycle of warfare in the Middle East, the United States seems to be on course for direct involvement in a series of local conflicts with no clear "victory" and exit policy in place. Remove al-Assad and what comes next? What will the Russians do? Will America's so-called allies Turkey, Israel, and Saudi Arabia be satisfied with dismemberment of the Syrian state or will they insist on pushing on to Tehran? Who would fill that vacuum?

There are certainly other foreign policy black holes, to include the awful decision to rollback normalization with Cuba and the hot-then-cold moves against North Korea. Venezuela, a major U.S. oil supplier, is about to implode and it is not clear if the State Department has any contingency plan in place to deal with the crisis. But Russia and Syria are in a class by themselves as they have the potential to turn into Class A disasters, like Iraq or possibly even worse. And then there is Iran lurking, apparently hated by all the talking heads in Washington and inextricably linked to what is happening in Syria. It is more than capable of becoming the next catastrophe for a White House that is apparently staggering from crisis to crisis. What will Trump do? I am afraid that the lesson learned from the cruise missile attack on a Syrian base in April was that using force is popular, repeat as necessary. That would be a major mistake, but there is every sign that some of the people around Trump have their eyes on escalating and "doing something" in Syria and also against Iran for starters, and if Russia gets in the way we can deal with them too.

Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer, is executive director of the Council for the National Interest.

[Jun 30, 2017] After Hersh Investigation, Media Connive in Propaganda War on Syria

Notable quotes:
"... But, in fact, the western media were supremely uninterested in the story. Hersh, once considered the journalist's journalist, went hawking his investigation around the US and UK media to no avail. In the end, he could find a home for his revelations only in Germany, in the publication Welt am Sonntag. ..."
"... His story has spawned two clear "spoiler" responses from those desperate to uphold the official narrative. Hersh's revelations may have been entirely uninteresting to the western media, but strangely they have sent Washington into crisis mode. Of course, no US official has addressed Hersh's investigation directly, which might have drawn attention to it and forced western media to reference it. Instead Washington has sought to deflect attention from Hersh's alternative narrative and shore up the official one through misdirection. That alone should raise the alarm that we are being manipulated, not informed. ..."
"... The first spoiler, made in the immediate wake of Hersh's story, were statements from the Pentagon and White House warning that the US had evidence Assad was planning yet another chemical attack on his people and that Washington would respond extremely harshly if he did so. ..."
"... And then on Friday, the second spoiler emerged. Two unnamed diplomats " confirmed " that a report by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) had found that some of the victims from Khan Sheikhoun showed signs of poisoning by sarin or sarin-like substances. ..."
"... There are also well-known problems with the findings. There was no "chain of custody" – neutral oversight – of the bodies that were presented to the organisation in Turkey, as Scott Ritter, a former weapons inspector in Iraq, has noted . Any number of interested parties could have contaminated the bodies before they reached the OPCW. For that reason, the OPCW has not concluded that the Assad regime was responsible for the traces of sarin. In the world of real news, only such a finding – that Assad was responsible – should have made the OPCW report interesting again to the media. ..."
"... In fact, the US threats increase, rather than reduce, the chances of a new chemical weapons attack. Other, anti-Assad actors now have a strong incentive to use chemical weapons in false-flag operation to implicate Assad, knowing that the US has committed itself to intervention. On any reading, the US statements were reckless – or malicious – in the extreme and likely to bring about the exact opposite of what they were supposed to achieve. ..."
"... Jonathan Cook won the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His latest books are " Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East" (Pluto Press) and " Disappearing Palestine: Israel's Experiments in Human Despair " (Zed Books). His website is www.jkcook.net . ..."
Jun 30, 2017 | www.counterpunch.org

If you wish to understand the degree to which a supposedly free western media are constructing a world of half-truths and deceptions to manipulate their audiences, keeping us uninformed and pliant, then there could hardly be a better case study than their treatment of Pulitzer prize-winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh.

All of these highly competitive, for-profit, scoop-seeking media outlets separately took identical decisions: first to reject Hersh's latest investigative report, and then to studiously ignore it once it was published in Germany last Sunday. They have continued to maintain an absolute radio silence on his revelations, even as over the past few days they have given a great deal of attention to two stories on the very issue Hersh's investigation addresses.

These two stories, given such prominence in the western media, are clearly intended to serve as "spoilers" to his revelations, even though none of these publications have actually informed their readers of his original investigation. We are firmly in looking-glass territory.

So what did Hersh's investigation reveal? His sources in the US intelligence establishment – people who have helped him break some of the most important stories of the past few decades, from the Mai Lai massacre by American soldiers during the Vietnam war to US abuse of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib in 2004 – told him the official narrative that Syria's Bashar Assad had dropped deadly sarin gas on the town of Khan Sheikhoun on April 4 was incorrect. Instead, they said, a Syrian plane dropped a bomb on a meeting of jihadi fighters that triggered secondary explosions in a storage depot, releasing a toxic cloud of chemicals that killed civilians nearby.

It is an alternative narrative of these events that one might have assumed would be of intense interest to the media, given that Donald Trump approved a military strike on Syria based on the official narrative. Hersh's version suggests that Trump acted against the intelligence advice he received from his own officials, in a highly dangerous move that not only grossly violated international law but might have dragged Assad's main ally, Russia, into the fray. The Syrian arena has the potential to trigger a serious confrontation between the world's two major nuclear powers.

But, in fact, the western media were supremely uninterested in the story. Hersh, once considered the journalist's journalist, went hawking his investigation around the US and UK media to no avail. In the end, he could find a home for his revelations only in Germany, in the publication Welt am Sonntag.

There are a couple of possible, even if highly improbable, reasons all English-language publications ignored Hersh's story. Maybe they had evidence that his inside intelligence was wrong. If so, they have yet to provide it. A rebuttal would require acknowledging Hersh's story, and none seem willing to do that.

Or maybe the media thought it was old news and would no longer interest their readers. It would be difficult to sustain such an interpretation, but at least it has an air of plausibility – except for everything that has happened since Hersh published last Sunday.

His story has spawned two clear "spoiler" responses from those desperate to uphold the official narrative. Hersh's revelations may have been entirely uninteresting to the western media, but strangely they have sent Washington into crisis mode. Of course, no US official has addressed Hersh's investigation directly, which might have drawn attention to it and forced western media to reference it. Instead Washington has sought to deflect attention from Hersh's alternative narrative and shore up the official one through misdirection. That alone should raise the alarm that we are being manipulated, not informed.

The first spoiler, made in the immediate wake of Hersh's story, were statements from the Pentagon and White House warning that the US had evidence Assad was planning yet another chemical attack on his people and that Washington would respond extremely harshly if he did so.

Here is how the Guardian reported the US threats:

The US said on Tuesday that it had observed preparations for a possible chemical weapons attack at a Syrian air base allegedly involved in a sarin attack in April following a warning from the White House that the Syrian regime would 'pay a heavy price' for further use of the weapons.

And then on Friday, the second spoiler emerged. Two unnamed diplomats " confirmed " that a report by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) had found that some of the victims from Khan Sheikhoun showed signs of poisoning by sarin or sarin-like substances.

There are obvious reasons to be mightily suspicious of these stories. The findings of the OPCW were already known and had been discussed for some time – there was absolutely nothing newsworthy about them.

There are also well-known problems with the findings. There was no "chain of custody" – neutral oversight – of the bodies that were presented to the organisation in Turkey, as Scott Ritter, a former weapons inspector in Iraq, has noted . Any number of interested parties could have contaminated the bodies before they reached the OPCW. For that reason, the OPCW has not concluded that the Assad regime was responsible for the traces of sarin. In the world of real news, only such a finding – that Assad was responsible – should have made the OPCW report interesting again to the media.

Similarly, by going public with their threats against Assad, the Pentagon and White House did not increase the deterrence on Assad, making it less likely he would use gas in the future. That could have been achieved much more effectively with private warnings to the Russians, who have massive leverage over Assad. These new warnings were meant not for Assad but for western publics, to bolster the official narrative that Hersh's investigation had thrown into doubt.

In fact, the US threats increase, rather than reduce, the chances of a new chemical weapons attack. Other, anti-Assad actors now have a strong incentive to use chemical weapons in false-flag operation to implicate Assad, knowing that the US has committed itself to intervention. On any reading, the US statements were reckless – or malicious – in the extreme and likely to bring about the exact opposite of what they were supposed to achieve.

But beyond this, there was something even more troubling about these two stories. That these official claims were published so unthinkingly in major outlets is bad enough. But what is unconscionable is the media's continuing blackout of Hersh's investigation when it speaks directly to the two latest news reports.

No serious journalist could write up either story, according to any accepted norms of journalistic practice, and not make reference to Hersh's claims. They are absolutely relevant to these stories. In fact, more than that, the intelligence sources he cites are are not only relevant but are the reason these two stories have been suddenly propelled to the top of the news agenda.

Any publication that has covered either the White House-Pentagon threats or the rehashing of the OPCW report and has not mentioned Hersh's revelations is writing nothing less than propaganda in service of a western foreign policy agenda trying to bring about the illegal overthrow the Syrian government. And so far that appears to include every single US and UK mainstream newspaper and TV station. Join the debate on Facebook More articles by: Jonathan Cook

Jonathan Cook won the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His latest books are " Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East" (Pluto Press) and " Disappearing Palestine: Israel's Experiments in Human Despair " (Zed Books). His website is www.jkcook.net .

[Jun 30, 2017] What we see at present in Syria is war between USA and collaborators, as Israel, Germany, France and the Netherlands, against Russia, Assad and Iran,

Jun 30, 2017 | www.unz.com

jilles dykstra Show Comment Next New Comment June 29, 2017 at 7:18 am GMT

" about how a military confrontation between Russia and the United States would play out. "

Funny sentence, Syria IS a military confrontation between USA and Russia, as the Spanish Civil War was a military confrontation between Germany and Italy, with tacit USA and GB support, on the one hand, and the USSR on the other. The USA rebellion against GB long ago also was a world war, in the end the list of countries supporting the Yankees became very long.

What we see at present in Syria is war between USA and collaborators, as Israel, Germany, France and the Netherlands, against Russia, Assad and Iran, with Turkey sitting on the fence. Both sides know that all out war will be the end of the world, both sides do not want to give up.

So this may be going on indefinitely, the only solution I see is that Trump creates a normal relationship with Russia, thereafter they can divide the ME between them, as Sykes and Picott already did in 1916. In order to create a normal relationship with Russia Trump first has to win his war with Deep State.

Three CNN journalists were fired, or resigned. If this is the beginning of the end of CNN, I hope so, but am not at all sure.

peterAUS Show Comment Next New Comment June 29, 2017 at 8:20 am GMT

@Avery {The willpower, courage and determination of the Russian solider is stronger than his US counterparts by many orders of magnitude.}

By many orders of magnitude?

    One order of magnitude is 10. Two orders of magnitude is 100. Many is .....what 1,000?

Russian warriors are at the minimum 10X better than American warriors?

You don't actually believe that, do you?

Their leaders - both military and civilian - may be incompetent, corrupt, treasonous (e.g. USS Liberty betrayal by their Commander in Chief),etc, etc.....but American professional warriors lack neither willpower, nor courage, nor determination.

One example: the "Black Hawk Down"/Battle of Mogadishu firefight.

Their leaders sent them into a harebrained Globalist mission without proper support, but once all Hell broke loose, Americans fought with great courage and determination. Fought like lions, in fact.

The notion that Russian pros are, quote, 'many orders of magnitude' stronger in warrior quality (...and skills) is truly delusional on Saker's part. Agree, up to a point.
These debates are like those "which is better, AK or M-16 platform' .good for amateurs.

Now, it is a fact that the West, since Iraq, hasn't fought conventional war and even that was against much weaker opponent. COIN only.
Russians have fought decent conventional wars Georgia and Ukraine, against similar opponent.
I'd hazard a guess that, on operational level, Russian Command and Control is better than US.

The problem, for Russians, is quality of support/logistics and on tactical level (from division to including a battalion or, better, battlegroup).

Anyway that's all actually besides the point.

I believe we'll be looking at 'border clashes' from '1984′, done by special forces and contractors. Teams killing each other under the radar.
For a starter.

But, I believe, WHEN push comes to shove Russians will step back and mark another line in sand.
And another.
The Empire will be pushing, carefully, and Russians will be retreating, slowly ..

annamaria Show Comment Next New Comment June 29, 2017 at 1:01 pm GMT

@Sergey Krieger

Imho if US indeed ever decides to strike Russian forces in Syria it would constitute the act of war and war is not limited to no theater of operations. Considering USA huge superiority in this area I do not think Russia would invest heavily over there, but instead would use this to strike where it is more important for Russia security. USA anti missiles installations around Russia borders would have been a good important targets. Around Syria as Sacker mentioned US has a lot of bases which would make fair game for Russian missile capabilities amptly shown in Syrian campaign and which imho are just a tip of the iceberg. Hopefully it won't come to this because no one knows where it may end. "USA anti missiles installations around Russia borders would have been a good important targets."
Particularly because of that: "Putin: Foreign intel services support terrorist groups on Russia's borders" https://www.rt.com/news/394518-putin-foreign-spies-support-terrorism/

If "US indeed ever decides to strike Russian forces in Syria" the first response should be towards Israel. The more clarity in this regard the better. There should be the time of "harvest" for the ziocons.

Rurik Show Comment Next New Comment June 29, 2017 at 1:24 pm GMT

not good

https://www.rt.com/usa/394474-haley-no-place-for-assad/

the zio-deepstate must be showing Trump how easily they JFK'd JFK

I suspect that Trump doesn't want to play along with their 'seven countries' narrative, and would prefer peace and prosperity as his legacy

but he's forced to play a razor's edge game as he slowly and methodically inserts personnel loyal to the US vs. the deepstate, without triggering a "heart attack" or however they'd do it.

If he can survive a year or two, and get his own people in, without causing a full-on hot war with Russia, perhaps he can prevail. But this new development is a very bad sign.

Kilo 4/11 Show Comment Next New Comment June 29, 2017 at 12:47 pm GMT

@Sergey Krieger Imho if US indeed ever decides to strike Russian forces in Syria it would constitute the act of war and war is not limited to no theater of operations. Considering USA huge superiority in this area I do not think Russia would invest heavily over there, but instead would use this to strike where it is more important for Russia security. USA anti missiles installations around Russia borders would have been a good important targets. Around Syria as Sacker mentioned US has a lot of bases which would make fair game for Russian missile capabilities amptly shown in Syrian campaign and which imho are just a tip of the iceberg. Hopefully it won't come to this because no one knows where it may end. Why does Russia get to strike out of theater if the U.S. hits them in Syria? We did not get to strike out of theater when Russia was supplying our enemy in North Viet Nam. Russia has no more right to be in Syria than the U.S. Russia had better think twice and think again before going down that road.

Tom Welsh Show Comment Next New Comment June 29, 2017 at 2:23 pm GMT

@Kilo 4/11 Why does Russia get to strike out of theater if the U.S. hits them in Syria? We did not get to strike out of theater when Russia was supplying our enemy in North Viet Nam. Russia has no more right to be in Syria than the U.S. Russia had better think twice and think again before going down that road. Your comment brilliantly illustrates the problems that the rest of the world has with Americans. Beyond the slightest shadow of a doubt, Russia has every right to be in Syria where the legitimate government has invited its help. The USA has no right at all to set a single foot inside Syria without the Syrian government's permission, which it emphatically does not have.

By attacking Syria – as it has done persistently for the past six years and more, through US forces, NATO forces, Israeli forces, Daesh and dozens of other alphabet terrorist soup organizations – the USA has flagrantly disobeyed the UN Charter, the Nuremberg Principles, the whole body of international law, and – more often than not – the very US Constitution.

That any American doesn't know these things – or, knowing them, sees fit to pretend he doesn't – is an appalling testimonty to American arrogance, ignorance and stupidity.

Tom Welsh Show Comment Next New Comment June 29, 2017 at 2:35 pm GMT

@Priss Factor How is that US and EU get to do this to a nation and still give sermons about peace and human rights to the world?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cbBXk4iW5Q

When Japan bombed Pearl Harbor to neutralize the US navy, it got punished with total destruction.

US and EU totally wrecks a nation that did NOTHING to either, but they go around promoting themselves as defenders of freedom and 'liberal global order'. "When Japan bombed Pearl Harbor to neutralize the US navy, it got punished with total destruction".

When Japan launched a sneak surprise attack on the Russian fleet in Port Arthur in 1904, it succeeded brilliantly. The Russian East fleet was crippled and Russia had to resort to sending its Baltic fleet halfway round the world – where it too was promptly sunk.

Theodore Roosevelt, who was US president at the time, was jubilant. He saw the Japanese – whom he had recently dignified with the title of "honorary Aryans" – as the essential US proxy for the conquest of Asia. And he hated the Russians.

But what of FDR – who was 22 at the time, and such a fanatic about all matters naval that he boasted of having collected thousands of books on the subject? Are we to believe he was oblivious to the highly successful tactic of launching a surprise naval attack before declaring war? Hardly.

Yet 37 years later, we are supposed to believe that, having deliberately driven Japan into a corner with the specific intention of forcing it to declare war, it never occurred to him that the Japanese – facing a far more powerful enemy than Russia in 1904, whose main fleet was hanging out halfway across the Pacific simply asking to be sunk – would use the same trick.

If so, I have a fleet of very old battleships to sell you.

annamaria Show Comment Next New Comment June 29, 2017 at 2:35 pm GMT

@headrick So what if the US does launch this massive air campaign, -- then what? Is the US
army ready to occupy Syria - on the ground.- forever? IN 2006 Hezbollah kicked the
Israeli's out of Lebanon border areas. Imagine the pain inflicted on a US occupation
force who can't handle Afghanistan. And if the Russian air base is hit, they can I believe
sink a US capital ship or two, and announce, any further direct action against Russian forces in Syria will call for a full nuclear strategic response against the US. Then what does the US do? Suck up the loss of carrier or Ageis warship, of face world war III. This whole act would produce a domestic firestorm in the US, and it would not be controllable. Shiite Allies in Bahrain would attack
US assets and Bases there and in Bahrain, and they would not need Russian coaching to do it.
Hezbollah would probably begin to attacks on Israel and Israel knows how that turned out. Just more pain for Team USA. There is no follow up strategy for such a US air action against Syria/Russia/Iran. Just huge pain and an ignominious back down -or upon unchecked escalation, world war III.
Air power, without a plan for follow up ground action, is worse than pointless. It is suicidal. If the US just wants Chaos in the region, and thinks they can find Muslim proxies to do the ground work, well that was the ISIS plan, and soon there will be no ISIS, so how does the US find proxies on the ground to occupy the country? https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/06/29/the-next-world-war-wont-just-be-over-there/

"The Next World War Won't Just Be "Over There," by BILL WILLERS
" with every hostile American denigration of Russia, every aggressive push against Russia's borders, every move that imperils Russia's place on the world stage, the prospect of massive world war becomes increasingly plausible. And in this world made so small by terrifying, sophisticated weaponry, any powerful adversary of the US would make certain that "over there" was shared, so as to become "over here" from the US point of view, with major east coast cities certain to be prime targets. The Russians understand very well from agonizing experience what modern, catastrophic war on one's homeland is like, while we in the US do not, although we are on a path to find out. It is a path of our own creation."
Sigh.

Rurik Show Comment Next New Comment June 29, 2017 at 3:13 pm GMT

@Kilo 4/11 Why does Russia get to strike out of theater if the U.S. hits them in Syria? We did not get to strike out of theater when Russia was supplying our enemy in North Viet Nam. Russia has no more right to be in Syria than the U.S. Russia had better think twice and think again before going down that road.

when Russia was supplying our enemy in North Viet Nam.

do you realize that the Soviet Union is dead and gone?

and that Russia today is acting like the only adult on the world's stage with any respect for international law, (or what's left of it, since the Z US has been waging illegal wars of aggression all over the planet, destroying nation after nation, all based on lies).

Today Russia is the last great hope of the planet as a bulwark against the rabid dog that is the ZUSA, slaughtering and displacing millions upon millions of people even as its causing the permanent destruction of Europe and N. America for all time.

what kind of future do your American grandchildren have in the ZUSA, as the immigrants pour in and the future is bankrupted to slaughter people and destroy nations that Israel doesn't like?

At least Putin's Russia is trying to protect some kind of future for the Russian people and their progeny, as the ZUSA is like a drooling beast on the world's stage, and doing all it can do destroy Western civilization in the process, and your nation's (and grandchildren's) future with it.

how anyone here at the Unz Review could still look at Russia today and see the Soviet Union!, is beyond me.

annamaria Show Comment Next New Comment June 29, 2017 at 3:51 pm GMT

The dying empire:
"The elephants did not climb up the trees. Warning them off was successful," they say." http://www.moonofalabama.org
And then they exhibit a very special Nikki Haley who was generously"cued" by Israel: https://www.commondreams.org/views/2017/06/21/israel-vs-united-nations-nikki-haley-doctrine .
Syrian update: http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2017/06/syrian-update-ttg.html
My sympathies for the competent American patriots shoved away from all positions of influence in the US government by ziocons (abetted by war profiteers of all stripes). http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2017/06/harper-mattis-walks-back-from-syria-cw-claims.html#comments
See the story of a honorable and superbly competent Col. Lang and the dumb Douglas Feith (the Idiot of a ziocon stock): http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2003/05/12/selective-intelligence

anonymous Show Comment Next New Comment June 29, 2017 at 4:58 pm GMT

I'd hate to see the Trump presidency go down in the smoke of a Syrian/Russian military conflict. Voters did not want the confrontation promised by Clinton and voted for domestic issues such as re-industrialization, population stability and so on. There are just way too many unknowns involved with this potential clash for the US to risk intruding itself any more than it already has. We really don't know how all these weapon systems would work out in an actual war, short and intense or drawn out. Then there's the prospect of Americans getting killed and taken prisoner in a very public way which would drive them to ratchet things up yet higher. Same for the Russians. It's hard to see what the American endgame really is. Perhaps it's just to deny Russia and Iran any allies so perhaps chaos and the destruction of Syria as a state is a goal rather than a result.
Putin is a legalistic moderate. Were Russia to suffer a humiliating defeat directly from the Americans then it's probable he'll be succeeded by a hardliner seeking to even the score. Wars always have unintended consequences so we could end up having Cold War II for the next fifty years. Of course this might be desired since it would tie Europe to the US due to this 'threat'.

annamaria Show Comment Next New Comment June 29, 2017 at 5:02 pm GMT

@Kilo 4/11 No, I don't recognize that the USSR is gone, because the SAME FUCKING TROGLODYTES THAT RAN IT are running Russia today, starting with Putin, the mope that weeps over its demise. As we said in the Marines "Payback is a motherfucker" and you're finding that out aren't you.

"Today Russia is the last great hope of the planet" is one of the most pathetic memes currently hiding in the guise of received wisdom. Tell that to the besieged Ukrainians of occupied Ukraine, who only want to keep their country intact, but due to Russia's total incapability of recognizing Ukrainians as a separate people with a right to self-determination and Russians' desperation to continue seeing themselves as a world power, no matter what other nation has to be crushed, continue getting killed every day by Russians and their proxies. And you talk of respecting international law! Hold your horses, Kilo 4/12. Nobody needs Ukraine but ZUSA, for the supposedly "defensive" purposes. Look at the amazing transformation of the "liberated" Ukraine after the 2014 coup d'etat: The neo-Nazis are openly in the Ukrainian government, Banderites parade Nazi collaborator Bandera in Kiev and L'viv; a proposal for federalization of Ukraine (you know, federalism, similar to the US) has been criminalized by Kiev government; a new prime-minister is certain Mr. Groysman, and the index of Ukrainian corruption is staying stubbornly high.
Considering that the USSR had amassed the neighboring lands (Polish, Rumanian, and Hungarian) to make the modern state of Ukraine, you need to decide whether you want to continue with the Soviet tradition and keep the Soviet territories or you should finally return the annexed territories to the proper owners.
It seems that you still didn't get it – in 2014, Ukraine had become a protectorate of ZUSA. There is no independent Ukraine anymore.
This is what your thuggish government in Kiev has rejected: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalism_in_the_United_States

Che Guava Show Comment Next New Comment June 29, 2017 at 5:02 pm GMT

@David Great article. I would be interested to read some knowledgeable reflections on the US Navy ship running into a Japanese cargo ship a week or so ago. It seems that a lot of things would have to go wrong to make that possible, indicating considerable rot in the US Navy. We haven't even heard of the ship's commander losing his commission. The container ship was going to Japan, not Japanese, Philippines flag, mainly (or all) Philippino crew.

That ship ran imto the US ship, not vice versa.

However, according to Japanese news and the captain of the cargo ship, they sounded the foghorn, tried signals, radio contact. Those giant ships are not at all agile, not designed to be. Turning radii are huge.

From the sounds of the captain's injuries, he was asleep.

The interesting question is, what the fuck were the bridge duty officer(s) and crew doing at the time, that they noticed nothing? Playing video games? Engrossed in Twit or Faescesbook? Little party? Having or seeking sex?

Even if the reports of warnings from the cargo giant are false (which I strongly doubt), if the bridge people were not behaving stupidly at the time, they would have spotted it on radar and with eyes.

I did a quick search, as said earlier, must sleeping soon, I was finding the captain's name, but not the name of whoever was in charge on the bridge. Interesting.

It is such a shame for the seven dead, I am not a fan of US imperialism, but I like many US people. Their deaths were very sad and pointless.

The clear and tragic incompetence on the bridge has some connection with the Saker's article.

Randal Show Comment Next New Comment June 29, 2017 at 5:14 pm GMT

No sale and kiss my ass with the "stupidity" remark. Russia is playing its old imperial grand chessboard game and it matters not that Assad "invited" him. Think Putin was going to stay out of Syria w/o this "invitation"?

If you really believe that Russia would have any significant military involvement in Syria today in the absence of its longstanding alliance with that country and its consequent interest in protecting it from regime change then you are either profoundly stupid or profoundly ignorant. Or both, of course.

the SAME FUCKING TROGLODYTES THAT RAN IT are running Russia today, starting with Putin

Again, you merely highlight your own lack of knowledge and pig-headed refusal to recognise any change in the world from that (presumably) of your youth.

And you talk of respecting international law!

The simple fact is that (as has been pointed out to you by several people) Russia's military presence in Syria is perfectly legal, being at the invitation of Syria's government, while the US has a long track record of contempt for international law, from the attack on Yugoslavia to the invasion of Iraq and on down to its recent murders of Syrian servicemen without even an attempt to pretend to any legal justification.

No sale and kiss my ass with the "stupidity" remark

No "stupidity" remark that I can see in the comment by Rurik to which you claim to be replying, but your subsequent determination to insist that black is in fact white on several points suggest he would have been justified in such a personal criticism.

Sean Show Comment Next New Comment June 29, 2017 at 5:25 pm GMT

Russia has made a bad mistake in appearing to side with Iran in Syria.

jacques sheete Show Comment Next New Comment June 29, 2017 at 7:02 pm GMT

@Kilo 4/11 No, I don't recognize that the USSR is gone, because the SAME FUCKING TROGLODYTES THAT RAN IT are running Russia today, starting with Putin, the mope that weeps over its demise. As we said in the Marines "Payback is a motherfucker" and you're finding that out aren't you.

"Today Russia is the last great hope of the planet" is one of the most pathetic memes currently hiding in the guise of received wisdom. Tell that to the besieged Ukrainians of occupied Ukraine, who only want to keep their country intact, but due to Russia's total incapability of recognizing Ukrainians as a separate people with a right to self-determination and Russians' desperation to continue seeing themselves as a world power, no matter what other nation has to be crushed, continue getting killed every day by Russians and their proxies. And you talk of respecting international law!

As we said in the Marines "Payback is a motherfucker" blah blah blah

Looks like you could use a dose of Marine MG Butler's wisdom.

Knock yerself out toughie

" I spent most of my [33 years in the Marine Corps] being a high class muscle- man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers.

In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for [crony] capitalism."

Major General Butler USMC, War is a Racket, 1935

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html

Elder Show Comment Next New Comment June 29, 2017 at 7:52 pm GMT

@Kilo 4/11 Why does Russia get to strike out of theater if the U.S. hits them in Syria? We did not get to strike out of theater when Russia was supplying our enemy in North Viet Nam. Russia has no more right to be in Syria than the U.S. Russia had better think twice and think again before going down that road.

Russia has no more right to be in Syria than the U.S.

The Russians are in Syria at the request of the sovereign nation of Syria.
The USA is in Syria as an illegal invading force providing support to Al-Qaeda and ISIS.
I never would have guessed that the rot in the USA would have progressed to the point where the Russians would be 100% in the right, both legally and morally, and the USA would be 100% in the wrong, both legally and morally, but here we are.

Randal Show Comment Next New Comment June 29, 2017 at 9:46 pm GMT

@Erebus It seems to me that if the US delivers either an ultimatum, or a direct attack on Russian assets in Syria, Russia's response will depend primarily on what it believes its allies can and will deliver. The SAA, Hezbollah, and Iraqi PMUs are already doing yeoman's service and probably can't do much more. In any case, the boots-on-the-ground part would come some time after a stand-off weapon exchange.
Can Iran be depended on to commit, knowing they're next if the American gambit succeeds? Hard to tell. They could do a lot of damage to US assets around the Gulf in very short order. Doha and Manama are but a few minutes away as the missile flies, and those missiles could fly from anywhere along a mountainous 2500km coastline. If Iran can be counted on, the Russians can play much harder ball than on their own.

The big question mark is China. Not for any military contribution, obviously, but for the fact that it can cripple the U$ system on which American military power rests, and they can do it almost instantly. There's some pain in it for China, though not nearly as much as is sometimes assumed, but it would make any military "victory" the USM might be dreaming of Pyrrhic. In addition to losing a bunch of hardware and expensive personnel, they'd be staring at an economic catastrophe. With that, they'd also be staring at the "Decline and Fall" moment in the Zempire's timeline.

In its present domestic socio-political state, the US could simply fly apart from the combined shock. From where I sit, that looks all but inevitable.

Be that all as it may, the Kremlin had surely gamed all the possible variations to exhaustion before making their move into Syria. They committed, and since Sept 31, 2015 they've been driving, not reacting to, events. They went in fully committed to success, and they knew what ramifications their success could trigger. They must have had viable contingency Plans A thru Z in place before the ever cautious, meticulous Putin would have been confident enough that he had all bases covered to sign off on it. I'm pretty sure that none of Plans A thru Z included turning tail and running away when the American started barking.

Putin would have been confident enough that he had all bases covered to sign off on it. I'm pretty sure that none of Plans A thru Z included turning tail and running away when the American started barking.

Yes, seems to me this was a calculated gamble for the highest stakes by Putin, and I think he must have known that once he went all in there would be no further option to fold under US presure that wouldn't be disastrous for Russia and for him, personally. I suspect he decided at the time that he would take it all the way if necessary.

But that doesn't mean, of course, that he and the Russians thought they couldn't lose. Just that they thought the situation was serious enough to justify such a move, which inevitably involves a degree of risk and the highest of stakes.

What they did know, and still know, is that the costs to the US of even a "victory" in Syria could be made high enough that the US leadership would almost certainly blink first (rightly, given that the whole regime change attempt in Syria involves no vital US interests and serves the purposes of foreigners, wealthy business cliques and issue obsessives).

And so it has come to pass, so far, fortunately for humanity and for both the US and Russia. Who knows if that would still be the case if Clinton had won the election? Who really knows if it will remain the case under the highly suspect Trump?

Can Iran be depended on to commit, knowing they're next if the American gambit succeeds?

Difficult to predict in such a dramatic situation, but Iran obviously knows that it is next in the firing line after Syria goes down and Hezbollah is targeted (as the plans of the regime changers hope for). However Iran really adds little to Russia's strength overall, though as you point out they can contribute substantially in the region. On the other hand, Iran's involvement would ensure far more enthusiastic cooperation with the US by Israel and Saudi Arabia, who might otherwise balk at a direct attack on Russian forces.

The big question mark is China. Not for any military contribution, obviously, but for the fact that it can cripple the U$ system on which American military power rests, and they can do it almost instantly.

I think the record suggests China would be far too cautious to intervene directly in that way in such a situation, though I'm sure they would give Russia plenty of indirect support.

Randal Show Comment Next New Comment June 29, 2017 at 9:56 pm GMT

@Sean Russia has made a bad mistake in appearing to side with Iran in Syria.

Russia has made a bad mistake in appearing to side with Iran in Syria.

Yes that's right because history demonstrates clearly that appeasement and passive acceptance is the best way to protect yourself against ongoing lawless aggression by a major power. If nothing else, there's always that faint, fading hope that if you are meek enough you might at least be left for last, eh?

If only the Russians had had the patience and strength of mind to continue with the wisdom of the Yeltsin years, in kowtowing to the US declaration of a global US sphere of influence and a universal US right, nay duty, of regime changing interventionism

sad and scared Show Comment Next New Comment June 29, 2017 at 11:49 pm GMT

This sucker (the Syrian conflict) could take all sorts of twists and turns, acquire a life of its own, and do who knows what. Since there seems to be no rational motive at play, at least on the US side, this mess defies rational analysis. What is the US objective in Syria, after all? I doubt anyone can answer that. What benefit will accrue if Assad ends up going? It simply seems to be a psychopathic game of power, more power, and yet more power ("full spectrum dominance" – not a Hitler statement that, but officially stated US policy) Full dominance to what aim? (try raising that on mass media, good luck) To stand tall in a graveyard of humanity as the last human survivor? To add to the already long list of countries and peoples destroyed? To be acknowledged as the toughest and meanest kid on the block? I think all bets are off, this sucker could go any way, any time.

SimplePseudonymicHandle Show Comment Next New Comment June 29, 2017 at 11:55 pm GMT

The Saker

makes a basic mistake, he assumes that the [Americans] will act like idiots and fight the kind of war the [Russia] would want to impose upon them.

And he does so in nearly every article he writes. It would be amusing except for quotes like this.

There are good points to be made. The US will have certain habits that must be deliberately deviated from. The US deploys too much and exposes its fighting style too much.

But the Saker is silly, Capital S, silly, to think that the US would fight Russia the way he imagines it.

Just the same: we must not fight. Russia and the US, must, not fight. It must not happen.

The silliest thing is all the imagining of it. We should steel all our efforts to assure this never, ever happens.

Mongrel Show Comment Next New Comment June 30, 2017 at 12:37 am GMT

IMO, a massive US attack to gain air superiority in Syria is completely unrealistic for the following reasons among others:

1. If an aircraft carrier takes part in the attack, if could be sunk by the Russians with moral justification. Sinking an aircraft carrier would cause the dollar to plummet by revealing the phony nature of American military might.

2. The Russians could lose their entire Syrian forces and the larger military balance would not be affected in the short run, nor would the Russian regime be threatened by internal revolution. If the US lost significant numbers of aircraft, especially F-35's and/or F-22's, it would be a US disaster. There would be no hiding from the US public that we are at war for no discernable purpose. The sleepwalking goyim could very well take their eyes off Kim Kardashian's ass and the Trump circus and wake up. The political effects are utterly unpredictable.

3. Russia and China could announce an international gold standard, effectively removing a major source of US income via dollar creation. With US inflation raging, military cutbacks would ensue, kicking off a downward spiral for the ZUSA empire.

4. War in Syria would precipitate a US financial crisis, because US markets are held aloft with smoke and mirrors. We have runaway federal debt, states about to default, a pension crisis, and a consumer debt crisis. When this thing blows, the 2000 crash will look like a picnic. Unemployment will skyrocket from an already high level, and the deep state will be fighting off multiple Occupy Wall Street-like movements. Sure hope those new surveillance tools work well, 'cause the deep state is gonna need 'em.

Of course, empires often show the brains of a dinosaur. Did the Ottoman, Austro-Hungarian, Russian and German empires plan to disappear when they entered WWI?

peterAUS Show Comment Next New Comment June 30, 2017 at 12:47 am GMT

@sad and scared This sucker (the Syrian conflict) could take all sorts of twists and turns, acquire a life of its own, and do who knows what. Since there seems to be no rational motive at play, at least on the US side, this mess defies rational analysis. What is the US objective in Syria, after all? I doubt anyone can answer that. What benefit will accrue if Assad ends up going? It simply seems to be a psychopathic game of power, more power, and yet more power ("full spectrum dominance" - not a Hitler statement that, but officially stated US policy) Full dominance to what aim? (try raising that on mass media, good luck) To stand tall in a graveyard of humanity as the last human survivor? To add to the already long list of countries and peoples destroyed? To be acknowledged as the toughest and meanest kid on the block? I think all bets are off, this sucker could go any way, any time.

What is the US objective in Syria, after all? I doubt anyone can answer that.

Maybe .just .CONSTANT low level chaos as it is now.
Just to keep that region unstable and unusable for anyone.
Serves a couple of purposes, one of them is weakening Russia.

What benefit will accrue if Assad ends up going?

The same.
But even with Assad not going, just keeping things as they are now is good for The Empire.
Or, it is better for The Empire than it is for Russia.
Or it is less worse for The Empire than it is for Russia.

utu Show Comment Next New Comment June 30, 2017 at 12:56 am GMT

@Rurik


allows one a glimmer of hope
I'm clinging to it for now

he didn't do much damage to that Syrian airfield he bombed and he warned everyone over there that he was going to do it, and by doing so, he completely shut up the snake-pit, from John McBloodstain to Chucky Schumer to the length and breath of the zio-msm.

I sense he's trying to play them, and it seems at times like he's playing them like a fine fiddle.

Saying 'Assad has to go' will cause tingles and chills up their legs, and cut him some slack with the Republicucks, so perhaps he can get more of his people appointed.

So long as he has a back-door channel to Putin, they can pretend like they're enemies, while mollifying the Fiend and its minions as ISIS is routed and Syria's sovereignty and border integrity becomes more and more a reality on the ground.

At least that's my hope. Of course I could be wrong. So long as he has a back-door channel to Putin

Putin receives former U.S. diplomat Kissinger in Kremlin

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-usa-kissinger-idUSKBN19K2QN

U.S. Retreats From Al-Tanf – Gives Up On Occupying South East Syria

http://www.moonofalabama.org

Mikel Show Comment Next New Comment June 30, 2017 at 1:05 am GMT

Could anyone kindly explain how the Israeli planes manage to avoid the Syrian Pantsirs and S-300s every time they enter Syrian air space and take out some target? (and one presumes that the Syrians must be waiting for the next Israeli incursion 24×7).

Thanks.

KenH Show Comment Next New Comment June 30, 2017 at 2:44 am GMT

Girly man Sean Spicer's pronouncement that the U.S. possesses "intelligence" to the effect that Assad is planning a chemical attack on innocents is just a bogus pretext for war. It's Iraqi weapons of mass destruction all over again.

It's designed to soften Americans up for greater illegal and unilateral military action in Syria. And if my fellow countrymen fall for it yet again just because they're enamored with Trump's hollow promises and circus like rallies then I will have absolutely no sympathy for them when the economy implodes and if somehow the war comes to U.S. soil.

Gee, who gets all the refugees when we bring hell to Syria? Not Saudi Arabia or Israel. Oh no, princess Ivanka will see to it that we get our share just as long as they're nowhere near her, Jared or any other Manhattan millionaire liberal.

Putin should announce the sale of long range nuclear missiles to the People's Republic of N. Korea. Hopefully this would give Nimrata Haley and Trump aneurysms along with the rest of the American likudniks. Then he should follow up and begin supplying the Taliban with surface to air missile batteries, anti-drone technology and advanced weaponry for combat operations.

in the middle Show Comment Next New Comment June 30, 2017 at 1:37 am GMT

@Sean Russia has made a bad mistake in appearing to side with Iran in Syria. NO! The Zios-Anglos made the mistake of siding with the terrorists in Syria.

[Jun 28, 2017] Bashar al-Assad visits Russian air base in Syria after US warning

Notable quotes:
"... "I am not aware of any information about a threat that chemical weapons can be used," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told a conference call with reporters on Tuesday. "Certainly, we consider such threats to the legitimate leadership of the Syrian Arab Republic unacceptable." ..."
"... Russian officials have privately described the war in Syria as the biggest source of tension between Moscow and Washington, and the cruise missile strike ordered by Trump in April raised the risk of confrontation between them. ..."
Jun 28, 2017 | telegraph.co.uk
T he White House said late on Monday the preparations in Syria were similar to actions before an April 4 chemical attack which killed dozens of civilians and prompted US President Donald Trump to order a missile strike on a Syrian air base. B ut Russia challenged the US intelligence.

"I am not aware of any information about a threat that chemical weapons can be used," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told a conference call with reporters on Tuesday. "Certainly, we consider such threats to the legitimate leadership of the Syrian Arab Republic unacceptable."

Russian officials have privately described the war in Syria as the biggest source of tension between Moscow and Washington, and the cruise missile strike ordered by Trump in April raised the risk of confrontation between them.

[Jun 28, 2017] Trump Has Been Continuing Obamas Syria-Policy by Eric Zuesse

Jun 27, 2017 | off-guardian.org

U.S. President Donald Trump, who during the election-campaign ferociously condemned Barack Obama's foreign policies, while asserting nothing concrete of his own, has, as the U.S. President, committed himself quite clearly to continuing Obama's publicly stated policy on Syria, which policy was to place, as the first priority, the elimination of ISIS, and as the policy to follow that, the elimination and replacement of Syria's government. I have previously indicated that on June 19th "Russia Announces No-Fly Zone in Syria - War Against U.S. There" , and that the early indications are that Trump has changed his Syria-policy to accommodate Russia's demands there; but, prior to June 19th, Trump was actually following Obama's publicly stated Syria-policy.

As also will be shown here, Obama's publicly stated policy - to destroy ISIS and then to overthrow Syria's President Bashar al-Assad - was actually less extreme than his real policy, which was to overthrow Assad and to use the jihadist forces in Syria (especially Al Qaeda in Syria) to achieve that objective. Trump, at least until 19 June 2017, has been adhering to Obama's publicly stated policy. Russia's warning was for him not to adopt and continue Obama's actual policy (to overthrow Assad).

Here is the part, of the by-now-famous 12 August 2012 Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) analysis of the intelligence regarding Iraq and in Syria, that the press (despite its extensive reporting about the document) has not yet reported from the Judicial Watch FOIA disclosures (which had included that document and many others), but which part of it shows even more than the part that has been reported from the document, Obama's having made an informed choice actually to protect Al Qaeda in Syria, so as to bring down and replace the Syrian government - Obama's actual prioritization (contrary to his publicly stated one) of overthrowing Assad, even above defeating the jihadists in Syria; and this was clearly also a warning by the DIA to the Commander-in-Chief, that he can have either an overthrow of Assad, or else a non-jihadist-controlled Syria, but not both, and that any attempt to bring down Assad by means of using the jihadists as a proxy army against him, would ultimately fail:

http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/JW-v-DOD-and-State-14-812-DOD-Release-2015-04-10-final-version.pdf

page 69 of 100:

D. AQI [Al Qaeda in Iraq], through spokesman of the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI) Abu Muhammed Al Adnani, declared the Syrian regime as the spearhead of what he is naming Jibha Al Ruwafdh (forefront of the Shiites) because of its (the Syrian regime) declaration of war on the Sunnis. Additionally, he is calling on the Sunnis in Iraq, especially the tribes in the border regions (between Iraq and Syria), to wage war against the Syrian regime, regarding Syria as an infidel regime for its support to the infidel party Hezbollah, and other regimes he considers dissenters like Iran and Iraq.

E. AQI considers the Sunni issue in Iraq to be fatefully connected to the Sunni Arabs and Muslims.

page 70:

A. The [Syrian] regime will survive and have control over Syrian territory.

page 71:

B. Development of the current events into a proxy war: with support from Russia, China, and Iran, the regime is controlling the areas of influence along coastal territories (Tartus and Latakia), and is fiercely defending Homs, which is considered the primary transportation route in Syria. On the other hand, opposition forces are trying to control the eastern areas (Hasaka and Der Zor), adjacent to the western Iraqi provinces (Mosul and Anbar), in addition to neighboring Turkish borders. Western countries, the Gulf states and Turkey are supporting these [jihadist] efforts

And here is from the part that the press did report:

https://www.facebook.com/ayssar.midani/posts/10152479627582395

Ayssar Midani, May 23, 2015 · Paris, France:

"C: If the situation unravels there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in eastern Syria (Hasaka and Der Zor), and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime."

The "supporting powers" are: western countries, the Gulf States and Turkey The DIA warns that the creation of such an Salafist principality would have "dire consequences" for Iraq and would possibly lead to the creation of an Islamic State and: create the ideal atmosphere for AQI to return to its old pockets in Mosul and Ramadi.
These DIA folks really earned their salary.

The Obama administration, together with other supporter of the Syrian "opposition", knew that AQ was a large part of that "opposition" from the very beginning. The U.S. and others wanted a Salafist [i.e., fundamentalist Sunni] principality in east Syria to cut Syria and Lebanon off from a land route to Iran. It was warned that such a principality would create havoc in Iraq and to the return of AQ in Iraq (today the Islamic State) to Mosul and Ramadi.

I quoted from that part in December 2016 , which was the time when the two Presidents, Obama and Turkey's Erdogan, began their joint effort to relocate ISIS from Mosul Iraq, into Der Zor Syria, in order to culminate their (and the Sauds') joint plan to use ISIS so as to bring down Assad. Then, I headlined, on 30 April 2017, that they had actually completed this task of moving Iraq's ISIS into Syria, "How Obama & Erdogan Moved ISIS from Iraq to Syria, to Weaken Assad" . That's why the Syrian government is now fighting to take Der Zor back from ISIS control.

Other portions of the Judicial Watch FOIA disclosures which received little or no press-coverage (and that little being only on far-right blogs - not mainstream 'news' sites) add still further to the evidence that Obama was using Al Qaeda and its friends, as a proxy army of jihadists to overthrow Syria's President Bashar al-Assad and replace him by a jihadist regime that would be loyal to America's fundamentalist-Sunni 'allies', the Sauds who own Saudi Arabia, and the Thanis who own Qatar. (Of course, now, the Sauds are trying to destroy the Thanis, too.)

These unpublished or little-published portions from the Judical Watch disclosures, also add to the ample published evidence that the Obama regime was transporting (as these documents acknowledged on page 4) "weapons from the former Libya military stockpiles located in Benghazi, Libya" which "were shipped from the port of Benghazi, Libya to the ports of Banias and the Port of Borj Islam, Syria," for use by Obama's 'moderate rebels' (a.k.a.: jihadists) in Syria. Specifically:

page 4:
18 Sep 2012

2. During the immediate aftermath of, and following the uncertainty caused by, the downfall of the ((Qaddafi)) regime in October 2011 and up until early September of 2012, weapons from the former Libya military stockpiles located in Benghazi, Libya were shipped from the port of Benghazi, Libya to the ports of Banias and the Port of Borj Islam, Syria. The Syrian ports were chosen due to the small amounts of cargo traffic transiting these two ports. The ships used to transport the weapons were medium-sized and able to hold 10 or less shipping containers of cargo.

3. The weapons shipped from Libya to Syria during late-August 2012 [i.e., the period immediately prior to this memo] were sniper rifles, RPGs, and 125mm and 155mm howitzers missiles. The numbers for each weapon were estimated to be: 500 sniper rifles, 100 RPG launchers with 300 total rounds, and approximately 400 howitzers missiles.

It's now clear that Trump (at least until June 19th) has been continuing Obama's stated policy of killing ISIS and then overthrowing Assad. But of course no one can yet know whether or not he would be continuing it in precisely the way that Hillary Clinton made clear that she would do, which is to announce a no-fly zone in Syria and thus grab control over some portion of the sovereign nation of Syria. That way would result, now after 19 June 2017 ( Russia's warning to shoot down U.S. aircraft that attack Syrian government-allied forces ), either in U.S. retreat or else shooting down Russian planes in Syria, and war between U.S. and Russia, ending in nuclear war.

When I presented, in my December 2016 report, what I referred to above as "the part of the 12 August 2012 DIA analysis of the intelligence regarding Iraq and in Syria that the press has not yet reported from the Judicial Watch FOIA disclosures," I didn't mention then that one news-medium did report a part of that section, and it was a rabidly pro-Republican site, Glenn Beck and his "The Blaze," which headlined about this matter, very appropriately, "'It Is Damn Near Criminal': Glenn Beck Says the U.S. Is Using Islamic State as a 'Pawn'," which point, Beck presented rather well in the video accompanying it. Unfortunately, however, closed-minded 'liberals' and 'progressives' paid no attention to this and to the other evils perpetrated by Obama ( such as these ). Regardless of how untrustworthy Beck is, his statements about that particular matter were actually spot-on.

Obama was using ISIS in this way, but after Russia started bombing ISIS in Syria on 30 September 2015, Obama joined in so as not to make obvious to the world that he had been protecting and even arming ISIS until that date, and that prior to Russia's bombing ISIS, the U.S. had actually ignored ISIS.

Now that ISIS in Syria seems to be on its last legs there, only Kurds and Al Qaeda in Syria ( and their backers especially the U.S. and Sauds ) remain as big threats to Syria's sovereignty, and the evidence at least till June 19th, has been that Trump definitely backs the Kurds there, and might also be backing Al Qaeda there as well. If he continues backing the Kurds and Al Qaeda there, after Russia's warning on June 19th (which the neoconservative Washington Post called only "bluffing" and the neoconservative CNBC called "bluster" ), then the U.S. will be at war not only against Russia, but also against Turkey, and also against Iran, and it would be World War III because it would be U.S.-v.-Russia. Turkey is already at war against the Kurds; and, if America is fighting for the Kurds, to break up Syria, then Turkey - a member of the NATO anti-Russia alliance - will paralyze NATO; and the U.S. will then be waging its war without NATO's support.

Trump would need to be very stupid to do such a thing. It would be an intelligence test which, if Trump fails, the world will end, in nuclear winter - with or without support from the rest of NATO. But, nonetheless, some in the American 'elite' and its employees, say that it would merely be a recognition of Russia's "bluffing" and "bluster." One wonders what objective this 'elite' believes to be worthy of taking the risk that they're wrong. What do they actually hope to 'win', fighting on the side of the Sauds (and their Israeli agents), in order to conquer Syria? Why are they so desperate, to do that?

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They're Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010 , and of CHRIST'S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity .

Eric Blair says June 27, 2017

Moon of Alabama commented yesterday on the US and its allies defeat (so far) in S.E. Syria. At an MSM ignored DoD press conference the US military admitted as much. From MoA's article:

Q: [ ] [W]hat potential threat do you believe these Iranian backed militias and regime forces continue to pose to your forces and your partner forces in the At Tanf - Abu Kamal area?

COL. DILLON: Well if the Syrian regime - and it looks like they are making a concerted effort to move into ISIS held areas. And if they show that they can do that, that is not a bad sign. We are here to fight ISIS as a coalition, but if others want to fight ISIS and defeat them, then we absolutely have no problem with that. And as they move eastward toward Abu Kamal and to Deir Ezzour, if we - as long as we can de-conflict and make sure that we can focus on what it is we're there to do, without having any kind of strategic mishaps with the regime or with pro-regime forces or with Russians, then that is - we're perfectly happy with that.

In a later part the spokesperson also concedes that the forces in al-Tanf are now very constricted in their movement:

if the regime is - has moved into an area that is towards Abu Kamal, then we are going to be limited to how far out we do patrols [from al-Tanf] with our partner forces.

Somewhat later the point is made again and even clearer – al-Tanf is now useless and the Syrian army is free to do what it does:

COL. DILLON: So what I was saying about that is that, out of the At Tanf area, we have used that to train our partner forces and to continue to - to fight ISIS, you know, if they are in and around that area.

You know, now that the regime has moved in, and they have made some significant, you know, progress, as it looks, towards moving to Abu Kamal and perhaps Deir Ezzour, if they want to fight ISIS in Abu Kamal and they have the capacity to do so, then, you know, that - that would be welcome.

We as a coalition are not in the land-grab business. We're in the killing ISIS business, and that is what we want to do. And if - if the Syrian regime wants to do that, and they are going to, again, put forth a concerted effort and show that they are - are doing just that in Abu Kamal or Deir Ezzour or elsewhere, that means that we don't have to do that in those locations.

So I guess that - what I'm saying is, in the At Tanf area, we will continue to train our partner forces. We will continue to do patrols in and around At Tanf in the Hamad desert. But if our access to Abu Kamal is shut off because the regime is there, that's okay.

Hmm the US military standing down? I haven't looked at the entire transcript yet but this seems almost too good to be true. Of course these press conference proclamations need to be washed down with a generous helping of delicious salt. Even if the statements are sincere, the interventionists, their media "partners" and think tank propagandists will keep on pushing for "regime change" (a coup by any other name ) and the destruction of Syria.

On the bright side US/NATO uncontested domination of the globe was stopped in its tracks by the Russian military in Syria on 30.09.2015 and there is simply no way Washington can bribe, threaten or beat every nation in the world into submission.

bevin says June 26, 2017
This is a culture at the end of its tether: it simply cannot put up with dissent or contradiction, so brittle is it. It is all part of a refusal to face ugly reality, symptomatic of which is the relegation-to Die Welt's Sunday edition- of Seymour Hersh's latest investigation of US state mendacity its irresponsibility in the matter if the recent "Sarin" attack blamed on Assad.
Ray McGovern has a piece at Counterpunch today in which he reveals that "Even the London Review of Books, which published Hersh's earlier debunking of the Aug. 21, 2013 sarin-gas incident, wouldn't go out onto the limb this time despite having paid for his investigation.

"According to Hersh, the LRB did not want to be "vulnerable to criticism for seeming to take the view of the Syrian and Russia governments when it came to the April 4 bombing in Khan Sheikhoun." So much for diversity of thought in today's West."
https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/06/26/hershs-big-scoop-bad-intel-behind-trumps-syria-attack/

captain Swing says June 27, 2017
Very interesting article from Counterpunch. Thanks.
Jerry Alatalo says June 27, 2017
bevin,
The facts Seymour Hersh's article lays out pushes one in the direction that Trump – totally ignoring his intelligence and military experts telling him their was no certainty Assad was responsible – had knowledge the event was a false flag. Trump couldn't be so stupid as to not understand what his experts were telling him. After launching the 50 Tomahawk missiles, he lied through his teeth to the world, saying "we know we have the evidence..", then UN Ambassador Nikki Haley (like Colin Powell, before the illegal Iraq War) blasted Assad falsely, held up pictures at the Security Council of dead children which were quickly plastered on the front pages of newspapers globally,, and literally warned Syria's Bashar al-Jaafari of impending war.

Hersh's article shows Trump, Haley and the U.S. administration, UK/France and other United Nations representatives were lying about "we have the evidence", and owe their citizens and the world an explanation, plus an apology. These psychopath liars are extremely dangerous and must become held to account for their deceptions.

archie1954 says June 26, 2017
If the US were to persist in this dangerous dance with the devil, I could imaging NATO being split by Turkey, refusing to get involved any further and even separately protecting Europe from Russian retaliation by entering into a defense treaty with Russia. The US then would be shouldering the whole foolish confrontation by itself and perhaps having to deal with China and North Korea at the same time. Now that would be an interesting scenario.
Michael Leigh says June 26, 2017
I think the worthy Historian, Eric Zuesse has not considered the possibility that a new midlle East regional grouping, offers the best chance of allowing the USA to gracefully avoid the ultimate failure of its Middle East policy by conceding to the combined alliance, of the major traditional Nations and their forces of the Middle East; being Egypt, Iran and Turkey.

Currently divided by a false religious and secular division, posed by primarily Great Britain and the USA, it was the British who over 100 years ago financed and invented the Sunni Wahhabi division which sunni division represents the most murderous of the current Islamic terrorist outrages financed also by the USA and Saudi Arabia throughout the region and globe.

Similarly, the Anglo-Franco financed and hosting of the Muslim Brotherhood to further frustrate and end Turkey's leadership of the declining Otterman Empire, formally lead by Turkey.

The most important factor against a new alignment of those three aforementioned regional leaders; is the current illegimate counter-alliance of " the lawless Hebrew State of Israel " and the Teflon-guarded deep state, which appears to own and really run the also infamous North America State?

[Jun 27, 2017] What this strange USa annoncemnt about forthcoming chemical attack from Sirian foverment on ISI (althout in the past reverse was true) might mean

Notable quotes:
"... For me, this "pre blame" statement is meant to act as a blanket covering up numerous bad news erupting ..."
"... And a host of other bad news could be listed as well, one being that CNN has finally admitted that Russiagate was totally contrived to increase "ratings," with 3 key staff members either resigning or fired. It's hard to gauge how deep domestic resistance to the Republican agenda is currently given Trump's entire set of campaign points are now proven lies faster than any previous president's. ..."
"... Funny how the emphasis on children is a common thread -- yes, the media needs to shock the reader and violence against children is clearly the lever of choice. The WH statement almost sounds like a threat. ..."
"... Note the coincidence with the 3 CNN dipshits resigning over, of all things, fake news. Hopefully it spreads to the WaPo and PBS and their global equivalents. ..."
"... Or is Trump's team looking for a PR surge by attacking Syria in its typical symbolic whilst ineffective way? ..."
"... Looks like their game is lost in Syria. Unless ally Israel wants to push across the Golan and take Damascus on its own, I smell desperation too. ..."
"... Things get more partisan during elections, sanity partially returns after. Hillary not elected, mission accomplished. We'll never know if this clusterfuck is worse than what could have been. ..."
"... "This little game has been going on for 68 years. Specifically, the U.S.government has been trying to replace the Syrian government with folks who will be subservient to America since 1949 3 years after Syria became an independent nation. ..."
"... The CIA succeeded in carrying out a coup in Syria 1949. In 1957, the American president and British prime minister agreed to launch regime change again in Syria using a false flag. (False flags are not only historically documented, but presidents, prime ministers, congressmen, generals, spooks, soldiers and police have ADMITTED to planning and carrying out false flag attacks). ..."
"... In 1983, 1986, 1991, 2001, 2009 and 2012, American officials again schemed about regime change in Syria." from Zerohedge. ..."
"... So, what's happening on the battlefront to provoke this extremely clumsy false flag threat? Well, it's not good for the Outlaw US Empire and its terrorist proxies. Here's the very latest from Canthama: ..."
"... you wil find that US also orhestrated GHOUTA attack, as it used that as an excuse to attack damascus.. but such planning to manouvre the navy takes time ..."
Jun 27, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 | Jun 27, 2017 4:04:52 PM | 63

For me, this "pre blame" statement is meant to act as a blanket covering up numerous bad news erupting: Trump Care being proven to be Death Care as thousands will die prematurely when their mediocre heath care insurance gets cancelled and Medicare gets gutted, "The best estimate based on scientific studies is that about 29,000 Americans would die each year as a result," https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2017/06/26/new-comprehensive-review-finds-recent-studies-strengthen-conclusions-landmark

New Pew International Study shows 74% have No Confidence in Trump, which would likely be even more if the survey were taken today, http://www.pewglobal.org/2017/06/26/u-s-image-suffers-as-publics-around-world-question-trumps-leadership/

The recent admission covered here that the Outlaw US Empire has lost in Syria and is making the alt-media rounds.

A new study shows global carbon sinks are filled and essentially backing-up with CO2 concentrations still rapidly rising despite the leveling of emissions, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/26/climate/carbon-in-atmosphere-is-rising-even-as-emissions-stabilize.html

And a host of other bad news could be listed as well, one being that CNN has finally admitted that Russiagate was totally contrived to increase "ratings," with 3 key staff members either resigning or fired. It's hard to gauge how deep domestic resistance to the Republican agenda is currently given Trump's entire set of campaign points are now proven lies faster than any previous president's.

stumpy | Jun 27, 2017 4:19:44 PM | 64

Q @ 55
Chemical weapons kill babies, none of the other kinds do. P.S. Macron to craft by half.

Funny how the emphasis on children is a common thread -- yes, the media needs to shock the reader and violence against children is clearly the lever of choice. The WH statement almost sounds like a threat.

stumpy | Jun 27, 2017 4:38:23 PM | 66
Note the coincidence with the 3 CNN dipshits resigning over, of all things, fake news. Hopefully it spreads to the WaPo and PBS and their global equivalents.

Trump has some domestic victories under his belt, the Supreme Court upholding his travel ban, the CNN 3 little pigs, Modi's cameo, Obama administration under fire for allowing alleged Russian hacking to go unpunished, booming stock market, et alia...

So, thinking sideways, suppose all this good news for Trump are gifts from the PTB in advance of another retaliatory strike against the Syrian windmill? If State and DOD are not parties to the new chemical strike project, then the source is exclusive to the WH? Or is Trump's team looking for a PR surge by attacking Syria in its typical symbolic whilst ineffective way?

Looks like their game is lost in Syria. Unless ally Israel wants to push across the Golan and take Damascus on its own, I smell desperation too.

Not only in the US -- UK needs a distraction from the burning tower/£1BN bribe to Irish MPs, France has a new pretty boy who needs to prove himself a badass -- all in the face of the Qatari divorce that appears to solidify the R+6 (7?) platform for the new silk road.

stumpy | Jun 27, 2017 4:46:39 PM | 67
peter @ 65

Things get more partisan during elections, sanity partially returns after. Hillary not elected, mission accomplished. We'll never know if this clusterfuck is worse than what could have been. I don't think the term "snowflake" has been used here for weeks.

james | Jun 27, 2017 4:47:50 PM | 68
@55 quentin / @64 stumpy... i agree quentin.. it has ran thru my mind many times before.. why make this special status for chemical weapons.. all of the shit that kills people is bad.. and yeah - the combo of chemical attack murdering innocent children - that one two punch that the usa and it's headchopping friends in the west trot out gets very tiring... if any of them actually cared, they would put a stop to all their war making and leave syria alone.. alas, they are too into making war to stop.. one day this will stop but the lying msm will be long gone by then...
Hoarsewhisperer | Jun 27, 2017 4:51:32 PM | 69
Which people do you mean? Soros? Rothschild?
Come on, the politicians themselves are guilty as hell and must be brought for war tribunals.
Bush jr., Blair, Sarkozy, Obama, Hillary and so on.
Posted by: From The Hague | Jun 27, 2017 1:55:50 PM | 50

I'm not fussy. I mean every person/entity which "donates" to political parties in the West. No exceptions.

Allowing donations to political parties should be illegal because it facilitates the privateisation (Private ownership) of the parties. It has led to the delegitimisation, in the eyes of The Public, by the MSM skunks & weasels, of candidates who have not been nominated by a large, corrupt, Privately Owned, political party.

In the interim, donations to political parties should be made through a single Central Clearing House, with Rules.

1. No anonymous donations.

2. Every donor must have a valid name, address & 24/7 phone number.

3. A donor making multiple, frequent, small donations, shall be prosecuted for devious humbuggery and banned from ANY political activity for 3years and get 2 years in the jug if caught cheating on the ban.

4. The Central Clearing House shall keep a Publicly Accessible, searchable Register of each and every donation. The Register will be updated each Monday, Wednesday and Friday, and sworn to be fully up to date in the first week of every month.

etc, etc.

Peter AU | Jun 27, 2017 5:01:38 PM | 70
69 have a read through this recent article. I have often thought about the legalised corruption that is called sponsorship and consultancies, but this article stunned me as to how open the US is to all this shit.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-koch-idUSKBN19I137

jawbone | Jun 27, 2017 5:04:04 PM | 71
From @21 -- AP also running stories about the US military seeing indications of a chemical weapon being prepared. How would the US military "see" such preparations? Are there 3 witches around a boiling kettle? Would not anyone preparing poison attacks do it out of sight?
Peter AU | Jun 27, 2017 5:07:07 PM | 72
The article I linked to @70 is about the Koch organisation putting its people into the Trump government to influence policy. What stunned me is how they are openly proud of their achievement in getting their people into the admin after Trump won and how open they are on doing this purely for the purpose of influencing government policy.
karlof1 | Jun 27, 2017 5:17:54 PM | 73
james @68--

Thanks for all your replies; they're nice to read! As for chemical weapons, I once argued that all weapons are chemical in their makeup and ought to be banned--isn't that what the Periodic Table qualifies, that all elements are chemical in their nature? The onset of life is now understood as a series of chemical processes (still ongoing) that allowed for complete replication and thus regeneration, which is why chemical pollutants are such a threat to life's structure. And as usual, the greatest abuser/user of chemical weapons is the accuser itself--The Outlaw US Empire.

frances | Jun 27, 2017 6:03:37 PM | 74
"This little game has been going on for 68 years. Specifically, the U.S.government has been trying to replace the Syrian government with folks who will be
subservient to America since 1949 3 years after Syria became an independent nation.

The CIA succeeded in carrying out a coup in Syria 1949. In 1957, the American president and British prime minister agreed to launch regime change again in Syria using a false flag. (False flags are not only historically documented, but presidents, prime ministers, congressmen, generals, spooks, soldiers and police have ADMITTED to planning and carrying out false flag attacks).

In 1983, 1986, 1991, 2001, 2009 and 2012, American officials again schemed about regime change in Syria." from Zerohedge.

Peter AU | Jun 27, 2017 6:18:24 PM | 75
According to a few news articles, Pentagon spokesman Naval Captain Jeff Davis has also made a statement to the press. Nothing Showing at the DOD website so I tried the US navy website.

At the moment the US navy seems pre-occupied with LGBT events.

Three latest US navy news articles...

  • Naval Intelligence Commander Keynotes LGBT Pride Event (27 June 2017)
  • Rear Adm. Robert Sharp, director of the National Maritime Intelligence-Integration Office and commander of Office of Naval Intelligence, jumped at the opportunity to speak at this year's Sixth Annual Intelligence Community (IC) Pride Summit held at FBI Headquarters.
  • Truxtun Sailors Celebrate Pride Month (26 June 2017)
  • The Cultural Diversity Education Team (CDET) aboard USS Truxtun (DDG 103) hosted a program on the ship's mess decks to celebrate Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender (LGBT) Pride Month, June 23.
  • NAVSUP Headquarters Celebrates LGBT Pride Month 2017 (26 June 2017)
  • Naval Supply Systems Command (NAVSUP) Headquarters recognized Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Pride Month during an event with Nicole Miller, director, TransCentralPa Family, June 26.

http://www.navy.mil/listStories.asp?x=2

karlof1 | Jun 27, 2017 6:19:12 PM | 76
So, what's happening on the battlefront to provoke this extremely clumsy false flag threat? Well, it's not good for the Outlaw US Empire and its terrorist proxies. Here's the very latest from Canthama:

"News that you won't hear before few days from the two key battle fields at the moment:

"1) Ithriyah-Resafa – The situation is the following:

– ISIS defending fiercely the last 10 kms of road, the use of TOWs and VBIEDs has been huge, way higher than ISIS using at Raqqa city.
– The amount of mines and IEDs has been also a key reason for the delay in closing the gap.
– The pocket in eastern Khanaser is not defended by a large amount of ISIS terrorists, though they do have the fire power to deliver unnecessary KIA for the SAA and allies.
– Not surprisingly the final showdown is at the Ithriyah oil & gas field and the Zakia crossroad, last

"In few days we will hear from the MoD that the road is 100% safe, with that, the whole pocket will be ISIS free, and the battle for Northeastern Hama and Central Homs will seriously kick off, everything is timed and coordinated at this point, event the Desert Hawks are moving to the NE Hama area, this offensive will happen as soon as the MoD declares the road safe.

http://wikimapia.org/#lang=pt&lat=35.454937&lon=38.063507&z=13&m=b&gz=0;380056571;354423513;0;0;1155281;241908

"2) T3-T2 road and the shortest way to Der ez Zor

"The Syrian desert is seeing a classic warfare in the past few weeks, tanks battling tanks, impressive CAS and the incredible amount of TOWs use. So far the SAA and its allies have done an amazing job.

"As reported in the last few days, the Syrian High Command made the call to go for the kill on T3-T2 without clearing Bir al Jafeef pocket that was somehow slowing the advance down.

"Once the decision was made, the SAA advanced 70-90 kms and basically took control of the road up to Hamaymah village, leaving the pocket to be dealt latter, which happened today in fact. The whole area around T3 is now 100% safe, and the implications are many:
– The SAA is about to declare 100% liberated the Hail gas field.
– The SAA has now control of part of a desert road that can lead to Der ez Zor

http://wikimapia.org/#lang=pt&lat=34.996254&lon=39.583740&z=9&m=b&gz=0;389245605;345190041;0;0;10025024;3534076;12387084;6761296

"The current situation around T3-T2 is as following:
– Humaymah is reported safe, though we wont hear from MoD.
– Fight is around T2, but the critical aspect is the cut off on many desert roads from al Bukamal to T2, Iraq border and to Mayaden.

http://wikimapia.org/#lang=pt&lat=34.377446&lon=40.158119&z=12&m=b

"Future battle will toward the desert village of Faydat Bin Muwaynah.

http://wikimapia.org/#lang=pt&lat=34.564818&lon=39.975815&z=11&m=b&gz=0;397869873;344796749;0;0;1977539;2108582

"The next key component of the offensive to Der ez Zor will be inside the red triangle below, the T2 is a key corner, Faydat Bin Muwaynah is a frontline against crazy suicidal ISIS coming from Mayaden, al Hail and Doubayat gas fields are another important component, as well as the possibility to control multiple roads that reach Der ez Zor, from the busy highway bypassing al Sukhanah or desert roads.

http://wikimapia.org/#lang=pt&lat=34.655804&lon=39.803467&z=9&m=b&gz=0;389163208;343593089;13815307;0;7717895;7055401;0;3586021

"With all the above plus the real unreported progress by the SAA, there is good reason to hope for the SAA and allies to reach Der ez Zor in very few weeks and not months.

"There is no doubt that the US is struggling to adapt to this new situation, minimum to zero control of the Iraq border, the loss of initiative to control al Bukamal, the loss of initiative to delay the SAA to reach Der ez Zor.

"There is no doubt that the last possible alternative for the US to delay the SAA and allies is to use another murderous false flag in Syria so the use of cruise missiles and air attacks are wide spread on all fronts, but then they may find it harder to face AAs and RuAF/SAAF, the allied force is indeed waiting for the US to make another bad decision.

"The SAA and allies can not and will not be distracted with what the US may try to do, they will continue to press forward at high speed toward Der ez Zor while killing as many as US backed ISIS as possible."

https://syrianperspective.com/2017/06/isis-nihilists-destroy-iconic-mosul-mosque-syrian-army-enters-east-dayr-el-zor-saa-crushes-nusra-zionist-attack-on-golan-saa-separates-east-derah-from-the-west.html#6dp0wEUMB3p6l767.99

At this juncture, I don't know of anything the Evil Empire can do to thwart defeat of its plans.

Quadriad | Jun 27, 2017 6:19:23 PM | 77
#25 off mainstreet

That second paragraph about the Welt allowing this to come out mirrors my own thoughts. Furthermore, what if Macron's main assigned role is to simply keep an eye on Merkel and on her successor?

Giap | Jun 27, 2017 6:36:14 PM | 78
Melville's, Moby Dick , understood well that the United States was a mslignant enttity.
fast freddy | Jun 27, 2017 6:44:13 PM | 79
Chemicals - White Phosphorus can be used "legally" according to the doctrine of assholes whom deem it so - for ILLUMINATION purposes.

Of course, Israel and the US have blasted human beings (civilians, of course, including women and children) with it in any case using the bullshit ILLUMINATION fig leaf cover story.

It is horribly disfiguring and often deadly when it lands on someone.

ragehead | Jun 27, 2017 7:17:25 PM | 80
Thank you for the comments and thought-provoking analysis, all. My 2 cents:

I am still not sure whether the spat between KSA/Qatar is all it seems, especially now. We know that Turkey has moved troops and F-16s towards Qatar, under the pretext of defending against any KSA aggression towards Qatar. There are also several reports of Israel moving its jets to the KSA, under the pretext of defending against a possible coup (if these reports are to be believed).

My gut instinct at the time was that this was a ruse, designed to give approprite cover for moving these chess pieces towards the Persian Gulf. Erdogan flips on a dime, and I wouldn't rule out the possibility of the US giving him something he couldn't possibly refuse in exchange for some ground/air support. Qatar's opinion on that matter would be irrelevant, I think - Turkey can be either an ally or an enemy, depending on who makes the best offer.

With this recent WH announcement, I am reminded of a commentator here from a thread way back (maybe 2-3 months ago), who suggested that Trump's style involved utilizing "asymmetrical leadership to wage asymmetrical warfare". Who's behind this most recent announcement? Is the US going after Syria? Or is it Iran? Syria again? It could very well be both.

Apologies if I am ill-informed on some of my statements/assumptions here; please feel free to correct me. I am short on time these days and generally do not go outside MoA/Facebook/Reddit for news anymore.

Bless you all for doing God's work. The oft-unwritten history of the world both fascinates and terrifies me.

brian | Jun 27, 2017 7:22:30 PM | 81
you wil find that US also orhestrated GHOUTA attack, as it used that as an excuse to attack damascus.. but such planning to manouvre the navy takes time
jawbone | Jun 27, 2017 7:34:19 PM | 82
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-usa-chemicalweap-idUSKBN19I1SP?mod=related&channelName=worldNews
The United States saw what appeared to be active Syrian preparations for a possible chemical weapons attack at Shayrat airfield, the same Syrian airfield the United States struck in April, Pentagon spokesman Captain Jeff Davis said on Tuesday.

"This involved specific aircraft in a specific hangar, both of which we know to be associated with chemical weapons use," Davis said, speaking by phone from Washington.

Really? CBS Evening News also said US military reported heavy activity at air field bombed in April and overheard communications to SAA chemical weapons group.

karlof1 | Jun 27, 2017 7:35:37 PM | 83
I asked Canthama about al-Bukamal and Iraq's PMU being hindered by Iraq PM. What follows is his answer:

"Al Bukamal-al Qaim has been US point to exchange weapons, money and goods with ISIS for a long time. This is the place where most of the US/UK/Israhell weapons supply came to ISIS, visually checked by hundreds of Iraqis and widely reported since 2014. The US has also abused its luck with dozens of Helis landing and taking off near al Bukamal, all reported as covert ops but they were not.

"Iraq has a delicate situation, it curved to the US regime back in 2014, to hold ISIS in Iraq. By them US decided to push ISIS to Syria while reducing ISIS footprint in Iraq, a lot of things went wrong and ISIS became bigger than initially intended.

"Abadi has been navigating under tremendous pressure, the financial State of Iraq has difficulties due to the lower oil prices, the US manipulates weapons/hardware deliveries and last but not least the US has a strong influence in the Iraq Army.

"Having said that, the PMU has a strong influence of Iran and Hizballah, while now it belongs to the Iraq Army influence, it has no to minimum relationship with the US inside Iraq, it has been targeted by the USAF many times, the last major one near al Qaim/al Bukamal, interesting coincidence right ?

"The situation with the PMU is excellent, it is getting more power, like the IRGC in Iran, and Abadi is doing that, besides, it has so many branches that people simply can not follow it as a whole unit, several of the PMU branches are heavily present in Syria, many thousands are in fact in the Syrian desert and is supporting the border clean up process from the Syrian side, and the US can not do a thing about that.

"Abadi knows it has to balance the US pressure with the Iranian one, but it is Iraq that has a C&C in Baghdad with Syria, Russia, Iran and Hizballah.

"So, yes, Abadi says thing to calm the US down, but the PMU has life of its own, the US can not stop the PMU in cleaning up all the the Syrian-Iraqi border, it will happen in the next months for sure, up to Sinja.

"Keep in mind Mosul will be ISIS free in few days, Tal Afar will be also liberated in a month or so, than there is Hawija pocket, it will be held by the Iraqi Army, mostly, so the PMU will have the Iraq desert to play wilth, meaning Nineveh and Anbar.

"Folks are wrong to think the PMU is only a Shia force, it is primarily Shia due to the larger population in Iraq, but is has a lot of Sunnis, Yazidis, Kurds and Christians. They have turned into a formidable force, and will be used in easing down the situation with the Kurds up north later on."

https://syrianperspective.com/2017/06/isis-nihilists-destroy-iconic-mosul-mosque-syrian-army-enters-east-dayr-el-zor-saa-crushes-nusra-zionist-attack-on-golan-saa-separates-east-derah-from-the-west.html#TAovGBaUmCXfmTOl.99

[Jun 27, 2017] US may preempt an Assad chemical strike in Syria

Notable quotes:
"... USS George H.W. Bush ..."
Jun 27, 2017 | app.debka.com

Signs were gathering in Washington and the Middle East Tuesday, June 26 that the Trump administration was preparing a substantial military operation against the Syrian army and Bashar Assad's allies, such as the foreign pro-Iranian Shiite militias and Hizballah. Some US military sources suggested that an American preemptive strike was in store in the coming hours to prevent Assad's army from again resorting to chemical warfare against his people.

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said Monday night that the US "has identified potential preparations for another chemical weapons attack by the Assad regime that would likely result in the mass murder of civilians, including innocent children." He said the activities were similar to preparations taken before an April 2017 attack that killed dozens of men, women and children, and warned that if "Mr. Assad conducts another mass murder attack using chemical weapons, he and his military will pay a heavy price."

On April 4, the Syrians launched a chemical weapons attack, which killed 87 people, including 30 children, following which the Trump administration fired scores of Tomahawk missiles against a Syrian air base.

The US ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley then futher stoked the tensions by declaring on Twitter that any chemical weapons attack by Bashar-Assad's Syrian government "will be blamed on Assad but also on Russia and Iran who support him killing his own people."

Haley's tweet ended with the cliffhanger: "Stay tuned for more tomorrow."

debka file 's military sources add: An American attack on Syria, whether preemptive or punitive, may be launched from the aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush in the eastern Mediterranean.

It was from the decks of this vessel that US Navy fighter jets took off on June 18 to down a Syrian SU-22 fighter bomber over eastern Syrian. A repetition of a US carrier-based attack on Syria would challenge the warning Moscow issued to Washington on June 24 after the Syrian warplane was shot down:

"From now on, in areas where Russian aviation performs combat missions in the skies of Syria, any airborne objects found west of the Euphrates River, including aircraft and unmanned vehicles belonging to the international coalition, tracked by means of Russian land and air anti-aircraft defense, will be considered air targets."

That warning was intended to mark a red line against US flights crossing through central and western Syria. Posted at Latakia, on Syrian's Mediterranean coast in the west are advanced Russian anti-air S-400 and S-300 missiles.

[Jun 27, 2017] In case you did not have time to look for the widely available information on how the US has been supplying certain forces in Syria with various weaponry, including anti aircraft weapons

Jun 27, 2017 | www.unz.com

MarkinLA June 25, 2017 at 10:01 pm GMT

@annamaria In case you did not have time to look for the widely available information on how the US has been supplying certain "forces" in Syria with various weaponry, including anti aircraft weapons, here is a summary: "How America Armed Terrorists in Syria: Another Middle East debacle" By GARETH PORTER • June 22, 2017
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-america-armed-terrorists-in-syria/

"The Obama administration's Syria policy effectively sold out the U.S. interest that was supposed to be the touchstone of the "Global War on Terrorism"-the eradication of al Qaeda and its terrorist affiliates... In October 2012, U.S. officials acknowledged off the record for the first time to the New York Times that "most" of the arms that had been shipped to armed opposition groups in Syria with U.S. logistical assistance during the previous year had gone to "hardline Islamic jihadists"- obviously meaning al Qaeda's Syrian franchise, al Nusra. ...

In early March 2015, the Harakat Hazm Aleppo branch dissolved itself, and al Nusra Front promptly showed off photos of the TOW missiles and other equipment they had captured from it. ... But that wasn't the only way for al Nusra Front to benefit from the CIA's largesse.

The non-jihadist armed groups getting advanced weapons from the CIA assistance were not part of the initial assault on Idlib City. After the capture of Idlib the U.S.-led operations room for Syria in southern Turkey signaled to the CIA-supported groups in Idlib that they could now participate in the campaign to consolidate control over the rest of the province. According to Lister, the British researcher on jihadists in Syria who maintains contacts with both jihadist and other armed groups, recipients of CIA weapons, such as the Fursan al haq brigade and Division 13, did join the Idlib campaign alongside al Nusra Front without any move by the CIA to cut them off. As the Idlib offensive began, the CIA-supported groups were getting TOW missiles in larger numbers, and they now used them with great effectiveness against the Syrian army tanks. That was the beginning of a new phase of the war, in which U.S. policy was to support an alliance between "relatively moderate" groups and the al Nusra Front."

And more of the same CIA judged to be "relatively moderate" anti-Assad groups

These CIA assessments are always loaded with weasel words and half truths like some child admitting he stuck his hand in the cookie jar but didn't actually take one. It is all designed as a silly whitewash of their actions. Admit just enough but stop short of something illegal.

When the CIA finally had to admit they were aware of the drug dealing during the Reagan administration by the Contras, they came out with some lame report where they admitted they were aware that some elements were trafficking drugs but the CIA wasn't directly involved. Of course, the pilots flying the arms in and drugs out all had CIA connections. The DEA also never made any significant arrests.

The CIA knows there are no "relatively moderates".

Priss Factor Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 10:25 pm GMT

What is happening in Syria is an Extreme Steroidal version of what is happening in the West.

Westerners are told 'diversity' and 'inclusion' are highest values.

Well, Syria wouldn't have been such a powder keg if it weren't so diverse filled with so many resentments. And it was the weakening of borders and 'inclusion' of Jihadis and foreign military that made things much worse. So, much for blessings of diversity and inclusion(euphemism for intrusion and invasion).

Two sicknesses of the globalized world: Diversease and Incluenza.

[Jun 27, 2017] MoA - White House Says It Will Fake Chemical Weapon Attack In Syria

Looks like after Hersh story was published trump decided to double down.
Notable quotes:
"... The lunatic US ambassador to the UN jumped in to make it clear that it does not matter who commits whatever crime in Syria, Takfiris, the U.S. or Israel, it will be the Syrian, Russian and Iranian governments who will held guilty of it: ..."
"... Trump has to make a deal (or war) with Russia and the announced fake "chemical attack" will be the pressure point against Putin. The neoconservatives in his administration want to break up Syria and Trump is tasked to get the Russian agreement for that (... or else.) ..."
"... Don't you think that if the Americans really intended to make a false flag, they would never issue this warning? For me, looks like the White House, knowing of the possibility of a Pentagon faction to provoke a false flag, issued this warning as an alert to Russians and Syrians and as a vaccin, to avoid this operation. ..."
"... Right after Khan Sheikhoun preparations were being made in the media for another false flag. Several embarrassingly weak "think" pieces were published in the NYT attempting to rationalize why Syria would use chemical weapons when it weakened the country's defenses. ..."
"... i'd look to the CIA for false flags, not the pentagon. the pentagon sees itself on the receiving end of the cia's 'fun and games'. ..."
"... It is Trump, and his direct handlers, who have the bit in their teeth now. no one else - state, nor defense, nor the 'analysis' false-front at the CIA - wants to go near this. Trump wants to watch himself evolve as something bigger-than-life on TV, and whatever happens in what we quaintly call 'the real world' has no place in his 'thinking'. ..."
"... What is in maddog's peace pipe? i guess he didn't get the memo on the upcoming retaliation for the - so far, virtual - new 'sarin attack' - which is known to be aimed at babies? not entirely clear which comes first, the attack or the 'retaliation' for it. The russians are not interested in 'deconflicting' with a lying/out-of-the-loop bunch such as the american general command. And those same generals are pushing the turks into russia's lap ... i guess when you have a crack outfit - outfit on crack? - like the saudis for allies you don't need anyone else. The kurds have sold ALL their bona fides down the euphrates with their us/saudi no-matter-what alliance. ..."
"... Ah, that old chestnut again...typical Zionist Hollywood formula...the good cop, bad cop routine. Trump is actually perfect for this shit, his background in shithouse primetime T.V. makes for the perfect dummy agent. ..."
"... I guess this is why Sy Hersh's most recent effort didn't get published in the US or UK...it just didn't suit the upcoming singular MSM narrative. ..."
"... Trump is even more of a idiot than I previously thought. Now he plays patsy for the neo con's hegemonic Empire agenda in taking the blame for the Syrian air base strike on information the intelligence community now claims they had that was inconclusive that Assad did it. ..."
"... If the neo cons narrative on their story of the Assad forces having used gas AGAIN hadn't fallen apart so quickly, even after their MSM backed the story to the hilt, they wouldn't be back tracking with this new line of bovine by product that Trump ordered the strike against the spy agencies best advice. ..."
"... The neo cons are getting desperate, like a scene from Hitler's last days in the bunker when the illusion is dissolved that any further military ability is all but crushed. ..."
"... After Seymour Hersh ridiculed the White House for having 'punished' Bashar al Assad, for a crime he has not committed, it was necessary for the White House to show how 'intelligent' they are in preventing 'another' attacks. Fake face saving! ..."
"... This wreaks of propaganda that is designed to counter the Sy Hersh story and leaks that just came out regarding trump ignoring Intel and attacking Syria anyway. The White House changed the narrative from did trump Le to watch out for a cutout chemo attack and its statement about future chemical strikes claims there was a first strike - it seeks to make a fallacy assumed as true. ..."
"... I go along with comments 14 and 15 and see it actually as a response intended to defend against the inference from the Hersh piece that Trump revealed himself to be a moron for succumbing despite the evidence to media propaganda. I think that the problem is that Trump is less than fully in control of elements of his government, possibly even Spicer, as evidenced by the failure to inform the state dept, military and others of the statement, which may not have been fully vetted. I wouldn't be surprised if Spicer's time as press secretary is limited. ..."
"... The fact that the Hersh piece was published in one of Germany's ueber-establishment organs, Die Welt, is significant. It means that Germany is no longer on board, and I don't see Macron, though he is an empty suit, doing a 180 like some fear, since he takes many of his orders from Merkel. ..."
"... Meanwhile, the Russia conspiracy stories in the US seem to be in the early stages of blowing up, with a CNN official being exposed as admitting it was all propaganda, and Loretta Lynch, the ex-Justice Minister, appearing to be becoming a target based on her defence of the Harpy from criminal liability for the email server during the 2016 campaign. ..."
"... It's got to be a bitch for all the former Trumpsters around here who have seen their main man morph from a swamp-draining non-interventionist into a world class warmonger with a cabinet full of world class swamp creatures. ..."
"... Things certainly didn't work out as planned. Assad is in the cross hairs as is Iran and Hezbollah. It's maybe time to hope that Mueller gets enough dirt, and fast, to dethrone this dangerous president even if it leaves some egg on the face of certain Russian officials and businessmen. ..."
"... thanks b.. no proof needed with the west... lies and insinuation of responsibility is all that is needed... ..."
Jun 27, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

The White House claims that the Syrian government is preparing "chemical weapon attacks". This is clearly not the case. Syria is winning the war against the country. Any such attack would clearly be to its disadvantage. The White House announcement must thereby be understood as preparation for another U.S. attack on Syria in "retaliation" for an upcoming staged "chemical weapon attack" which will be blamed on the Syrian government.

In August 2013 Syria invited inspectors of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons to investigate chemical weapons attacks on the Syrian army. As soon as the inspectors arrived in Damascus a "chemical attack" was staged in Ghouta near Damascus. Lots of Jihadist video coverage of killed children was published and the "western" media blamed the incident on the Syrian government. It never explained why targeting a militarily irrelevant area with chemical weapons at the same time as inspectors arrived would have been a rational decision for a Syrian government that was just regaining control and international standing.

The "attack" was clearly staged by the opposition of the Syrian government and its foreign supporters. The Obama administration had planned to use it to launch U.S. attacks on the Syrian government but refrained from this when Russia arranged to remove Syria's strategic chemical weapons, aimed at Israel, instead.

In early 2017 the new U.S. president Trump made positive comments about the Syrian government. Assad can stay, he said. The Syrian military and its allies had gained the upper hand and were victorious on all fronts. Two days later another "chemical attack" was staged in the al-Qaeda held town of Khan Sheikhun. Lots of Jihadi video coverage of killed children, likely prepared in advance, was spilled onto the "western" public. U.S. intelligence knew that no chemical attack by the Syrian government had taken place. But the Trump administration used the incident to launch a volley of cruise missiles against a Syrian military airport. The neoconservatives were delighted. They finally had Trump where they wanted him. The media coverage changed from damming Trump for his alleged "Russian connections" to lauding his decisiveness in response to the faked attack.

Late May the new French president Macron ostensibly changed his position towards the Syrian government. The hostile position of France (and other EU countries) against the Syrian president Assad that had been eminent throughout the last six years changed on a dime :

Macron said that on Syria: "My profound conviction is that we need a political and diplomatic roadmap. We won't solve the question only with military force. That is a collective error we have made. The real change I've made on this question, is that I haven't said the deposing of Bashar al-Assad is a prerequisite for everything. Because no one has introduced me to his legitimate successor!

But Macron also added:

"I have red lines on chemical weapons and humanitarian corridors. I said it very clearly to Vladimir Putin. I will be uncompromising on that. So the use of chemical weapons will be met with a response, and even if France acts alone."

This immediately set off my warning lights:

Moon of Alabama @MoonofA - 4:28 PM - 29 May 2017
You like fakes? Tune in to Macron announcing the next False Flag chemical weapon attack in Syria.

Like all "red lines" this one Macron set was an invitation to the Takfiris to launch more fake incidents. Others had a similar reaction to Macron's (fake) turnaround.

The end of the war on Syria is in sight . One can start to tabulate the winners and losers . The U.S. military conceded that it had lost the race to occupy south-east Syria. All these turns in favor of Syria show that the war is practically won unless some of the outside sponsors of the Takfiri "rebels" again escalate.

Such an escalation is now happening. The White House claims to have information that the Syrian government is preparing a chemical weapon attack to kill "innocent children":

In an ominous statement issued with no supporting evidence or further explanation , Press Secretary Sean Spicer said the U.S. had "identified potential preparations for another chemical weapons attack by the Assad regime that would likely result in the mass murder of civilians, including innocent children."

He said the activities were similar to preparations taken before an April 2017 attack that killed dozens of men, women and children, and warned that if "Mr. Assad conducts another mass murder attack using chemical weapons, he and his military will pay a heavy price."

Several State Department officials typically involved in coordinating such announcements said they were caught completely off guard by the warning, which didn't appear to be discussed in advance with other national security agencies. Typically, the State Department, the Pentagon and U.S. intelligence agencies would all be consulted before the White House issued a declaration sure to ricochet across foreign capitals.

The White House claim is of course nonsense and not supported by any evidence or logic at all. No one but the White House, not the State Department nor the Defense Department, seems to be informed about this (though that could be a ruse):

Five US defense officials said they did not know where the potential chemical attack would come from and were unaware the White House was planning a statement.

The lunatic US ambassador to the UN jumped in to make it clear that it does not matter who commits whatever crime in Syria, Takfiris, the U.S. or Israel, it will be the Syrian, Russian and Iranian governments who will held guilty of it:

Nikki Haley‏ @nikkihaley - 2:36 AM - 27 Jun 2017
Any further attacks done to the people of Syria will be blamed on Assad, but also on Russia & Iran who support him killing his own people.

A U.S. bomb attack on an Islamic State used building in Mayadin, Syria, just killed 57 prisoners of the Islamic State. Will Nikki Halley hold the Syrian government responsible for this?

Take note of Trump's schedule today:

Laura Rozen‏ @lrozen 8:56 AM - 27 Jun 2017

Trump has call with France's Macron first thing this morning, before intel brief. Then meeting w Nat. Sec. adviser McMaster

Intense U.S. military reconnaissance takes place along the Syrian coast. The UK Defense Minister just announced that his government is "in full agreement" with any U.S. "retaliation" for a chemical attack in Syria. U.S. Secretary of Defense Mattis announced that the U.S. will continue to arm its Kurdish proxies in Syria even after ISIS is defeated.

During the last three days Al-Qaeda attacks on Syrian army position near the Israeli occupied Golan heights were supported by Israeli air attacks .

This all is clearly a coordinated operation by the "western" supporters of the Takfiris in Syria. Their aim is to prevent the victory of Syria and its allies. The U.S. wants to split up the country.

The announced fake "chemical attack" and the "retaliation" it is supposed to justify will likely happen in the south-west of Syria around Deraa where all recent attempts by Israel and the U.S. supported Takfiris to dislodge the Syrian government forces have failed. The provocation, now prepared and announced by Macron and the White House and supported by the UK, is probably planned to happen shortly before or during the upcoming G-20 meeting in Hamburg:

President Trump and members of his administration are requesting a full bilateral meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin at the G-20 summit in Germany next month.

...

While some administration officials have pressed for a quick "pull-aside" meeting at the Group of 20 summit or lower officials talking privately instead of the heads of state, Trump wants an event that includes the media and time for work sessions, according to one government official.

Trump has to make a deal (or war) with Russia and the announced fake "chemical attack" will be the pressure point against Putin. The neoconservatives in his administration want to break up Syria and Trump is tasked to get the Russian agreement for that (... or else.)

Syria insists that its has no chemical weapons nor any intention to use any indiscriminate weapon. Russia warns of any further military aggression and calls such U.S. threats unacceptable .

Posted by b on June 27, 2017 at 07:49 AM | Permalink

Dario | Jun 27, 2017 7:56:49 AM | 1
Don't you think that if the Americans really intended to make a false flag, they would never issue this warning? For me, looks like the White House, knowing of the possibility of a Pentagon faction to provoke a false flag, issued this warning as an alert to Russians and Syrians and as a vaccin, to avoid this operation.

just impressions, ideas, ideas...

Anon | Jun 27, 2017 8:01:03 AM | 2
Intresting b,- on the France connection, perhaps France are the ones feeding the false info to bomb Syria, the sleazy Macron needs a war to get some support? Anyway, check EU, Western nations, Media these days and see the ugly propaganda being played out, once again the west plan, threat with illegal wars and their media is right there to help them.

Russia is quite uninterested in defending Syria it seems, I think at least they could have shipped Syria S300 and put them right in Damascus by know.

Because, after Syria, Russia like Iran and North Korea will also sooner or later be bombed. Be sure about that. These are sick lunatics ruling the American military.
Remember who rule America these days, its not Trump:

Bannon: Trump's strategy is 'let the warfighters fight the war'

http://thehill.com/policy/defense/339301-bannon-trumps-strategy-is-let-the-warfighters-fight-the-war

Laguerre | Jun 27, 2017 8:15:03 AM | 3
the sleazy Macron needs a war to get some support
Really? He's just won the elections massively. What sort of support does he need?
R Winner | Jun 27, 2017 8:17:46 AM | 4
The US Regime is obviously in panic mode. The SAA is rapidly advancing on three fronts:

1. Raqqa - The SAA is quickly moving around the hapless Kurds and moving to the area south of Raqqa. Ensuring IS is unable to execute their agreement with the US Regime to evacuate towards Deir ez-Zur.

2. Deir ez-Zur - Huge numbers of SAA are quickly approaching the defenders in Deir ez-Zur. Once Deir ez-Zur is secure, the SAA will move north to link up with the SAA forces in al Hasakah.

3. al Bukamal - The SAA and Iraq PMU are working as a unified force on both sides of the border and are preparing to surround the border city.

What this means is:

  1. The US Regime partion dreams are dead. There is no viable Kurdish 'state' other than a bunch of clowns pretending to be a new 'government' in Raqqa.
  2. The Iraq PMU are increasingly working side by side with the SAA. Any attack by the US Regime puts their bases in Iraq open to attack.
  3. The absurd threats from Saudi Arabia towards Qatar now have the various terror groups still alive in Syria attacking each other.
  4. Syria is close to a decisive military victory against the foreign terrorists. Once the SAA secures the bulk of the Eurphrates only Idlib and Daraa remain as security problems.
  5. Every day the SAA advances and IS or terrorist pockets are cleared, more and more troops are freed up and being moved to the major fronts in either Daraa or the Eurphrates.
  6. Turkey and Russia are in complete agreement on preventing any sort of Kurdish state in the north of Syria. Any attempts by the US Regime to establish some sort of giant military base backed by Kurds is going to have to fight Turkey, the SAA, Russia, and quite possibly Iraq.
  7. The success of the de-escalation zone means that the US Regime is greatly hamstrung in coming up with further faked chemical attacks. The only real options now are Idlib and Daraa.

IS is being wiped out in the eastern Syrian desert by the SAA and in the western desert of Iraq by the PMU. Those giant grey IS areas on battle maps are evaporating and at the same time the entire pretext for the US Regime to be attacking Syria.

Mike Maloney | Jun 27, 2017 8:23:41 AM | 5
Right after Khan Sheikhoun preparations were being made in the media for another false flag. Several embarrassingly weak "think" pieces were published in the NYT attempting to rationalize why Syria would use chemical weapons when it weakened the country's defenses.

Now almost three months later the White House is actually staging a roll out of the false flag. Incredible. Legacy media can't raise a ruckus because their complicit in previous false flags.

Russia on the other hand can't back down this time. To do so would be to invite perpetual rape and plunder by the U.S. and its various clients. Russia needs to make a very clear statement right now -- paratroopers dropped around Deraa -- to prevent the false flag from going forward.

blues | Jun 27, 2017 8:24:04 AM | 6
The US military generals got caught with their pants down. They are losing the war -- everything but the wastelands. For the military/intel, losing is FAILURE. They basically get fired. So they will pull any stunt to not "fail". Of course, the Russians are going to make them fail despite all their "valiant" efforts. Trump better wake up and smell the coffee, or he will wake up to a brilliant flash.
jfl | Jun 27, 2017 8:26:42 AM | 7
@1 d

i'd look to the CIA for false flags, not the pentagon. the pentagon sees itself on the receiving end of the cia's 'fun and games'.

@2 a, 'Russia is quite uninterested in defending Syria it seems, I think at least they could have shipped Syria S300 and put them right in Damascus by know'

i think so too, every time. but I've been wrong everytime so far. it's finally occurred to me that there's more going on than what i know about, and that the Russians are dealing with a fuller deck than i am. And that they've spent their lifetimes at this kind of high pressure stuff and have a far better understanding of it all than i do. but don't take my word for it ... look at the results they've gotten.

It is Trump, and his direct handlers, who have the bit in their teeth now. no one else - state, nor defense, nor the 'analysis' false-front at the CIA - wants to go near this. Trump wants to watch himself evolve as something bigger-than-life on TV, and whatever happens in what we quaintly call 'the real world' has no place in his 'thinking'.

Anon | Jun 27, 2017 8:33:44 AM | 8
Laguerre

Massivly won? Sleazy Macron won an election where huge part of France didnt even vote not only in the prez. election but in the parliamentary election.
Or please tell us why this sleazy Macron threat Syria with war all of a sudden? For what reason? This guy is globalist 101% this is what people like himself do to get support.

This guy for crying out loud just warned some weeks ago that France will respond to a chemical attack! What more proof do you need?

jfl | Jun 27, 2017 8:48:06 AM | 9
Mattis: US arms for Syrian Kurds will continue after Raqqa
U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said Tuesday that America will continue to provide weapons to Syrian Kurdish fighters after the battle to oust Islamic State militants from Raqqa, Syria, is over.

Mattis said the de-confliction talks continue and are happening at several military levels, to insure that aircraft and ground forces are safe.

What is in maddog's peace pipe? i guess he didn't get the memo on the upcoming retaliation for the - so far, virtual - new 'sarin attack' - which is known to be aimed at babies? not entirely clear which comes first, the attack or the 'retaliation' for it. The russians are not interested in 'deconflicting' with a lying/out-of-the-loop bunch such as the american general command. And those same generals are pushing the turks into russia's lap ... i guess when you have a crack outfit - outfit on crack? - like the saudis for allies you don't need anyone else. The kurds have sold ALL their bona fides down the euphrates with their us/saudi no-matter-what alliance.

it's hard to believe the us wehrmacht is in such obvious disarray. if the Russians wait it out, the Americans will defeat themselves in Syria. Looks like in short order, too.

MadMax2 | Jun 27, 2017 8:59:47 AM | 10
Ah, that old chestnut again...typical Zionist Hollywood formula...the good cop, bad cop routine. Trump is actually perfect for this shit, his background in shithouse primetime T.V. makes for the perfect dummy agent.
mls | Jun 27, 2017 9:07:09 AM | 11
Trump does not need a chemical weapons attack to actually take place in Syria. He may be planning to preempt such an incident. This way there will be no phony White Helmets video footage to dissect. Listen to what the British Defense Minister has to say:
British Defense Minister Michael Fallon said London would support U.S. action to prevent a chemical weapons attack but that it had not seen the intelligence on which Washington based Monday's statement.
according to Reuters here
I guess this is why Sy Hersh's most recent effort didn't get published in the US or UK...it just didn't suit the upcoming singular MSM narrative.

MadMax2 | Jun 27, 2017 9:11:09 AM | 12

Moon is precisely right. The implied assumption of WH/intel Junta is that Ivan is coward and will not stand. The implied action is that WH/intel intends attack RuF/Sy?Ir/+ forces. Assumes Iran etc will not stand. Is this an incorrect assumption set? Failure of WH strategy is thus proximate.
BRF | Jun 27, 2017 9:19:38 AM | 14
Trump is even more of a idiot than I previously thought. Now he plays patsy for the neo con's hegemonic Empire agenda in taking the blame for the Syrian air base strike on information the intelligence community now claims they had that was inconclusive that Assad did it.

Hersh is again the go to mouth piece on this one for the neo cons. If the neo cons narrative on their story of the Assad forces having used gas AGAIN hadn't fallen apart so quickly, even after their MSM backed the story to the hilt, they wouldn't be back tracking with this new line of bovine by product that Trump ordered the strike against the spy agencies best advice.

This whole show is a cock and bull offering. The neo cons are getting desperate, like a scene from Hitler's last days in the bunker when the illusion is dissolved that any further military ability is all but crushed.

So desperate they US neo con brain trust is willing to go to the poison gas well again and again with their 'tell the big lie often' meme....after all it is only the Syrian civilian population and innocent beautiful babies that will have to die this time around again. I'll give the Israelis some credit for at least having the better excuse for their aggression against the Syrian nation and people.

virgile | Jun 27, 2017 9:24:49 AM | 15
After Seymour Hersh ridiculed the White House for having 'punished' Bashar al Assad, for a crime he has not committed, it was necessary for the White House to show how 'intelligent' they are in preventing 'another' attacks. Fake face saving!
plantman | Jun 27, 2017 9:26:31 AM | 16
Mattis is clearly working secretly with the White House on a plan to counter the steady progress of the SAA. He seems strangely unprepared for recent developments on the ground. There is still a good possibility he will try something foolhardy like sending his militia at al Tanf north thru SAA lines to join the fight at Deir Ezzor.
The SAA probably won't take Raqqa, but will focus on Deir Ezzor which is only 75 miles away.

Expect the chemical attack to be in the vicinity of deir ezzor.

Amanita Amanita | Jun 27, 2017 9:33:14 AM | 17
Surely this Assad prepares killer tomatoes fairytale is a feint...more likely the spark comes from the Balts or the Balks...so much kindling.

http://app.debka.com/n/article/26116/US-may-preempt-an-Assad-chemical-strike-in-Syria

virgile | Jun 27, 2017 9:33:52 AM | 18
The recent series of failures of the US in Syria, together with a shift of Turkey on the side of Bashar al Assad's army and France's u-turn on Bashar Assad necessitated a big noise: The threat of a 'new' chemical attack that would united the "friends of Syria" again.

Another infantile drama from desperate Pentagon to show the US relevance in the region! France will not buy it and Russia will make sure that false flag wont happen again.

jfl | Jun 27, 2017 9:34:02 AM | 20
@15 virgile

yeah, but they have to pose in their photo-ops themselves. no one else wants to be seen in pictures with them in the imagined future. the rump loves it ... 'larger than life'.

well, if they shut up now and wait a bit, they can announce that they were successful in preventing the dastardly attack on the babies by 'assad' ...

on the other hand, they may well have to figure out what to do after al-cia-duh 'surprises' them with some dead babies ... they'll be shocked! never imagined that might happen! wasn't in their copy of the script ... it's all a sit-com to them ...

Out of Istanbul | Jun 27, 2017 9:54:40 AM | 21
Looks like Assad is taking a "tour" of Russia's airbase... https://twitter.com/AliHa_97/status/879685253878734849 Looks like the time frame has been moved up dramatically since b's report... AP also running stories about the US military seeing indications of a chemical weapon being prepared.
Hoarsewhisperer | Jun 27, 2017 10:12:05 AM | 22
I've got a quibble with the intro to this post. It should say...

The White House claims that the Syrian government is preparing " another chemical weapon attack".

"another" is the presumptuous, Hollywood-ish weasel word intended to pre-emptively legitimise the false and unproven Yankee allegations that the Syrian Govt has conducted ANY chemical attacks. In fact, one could go farther and point out the measures taken by the Christian Colonial Clowns to AVOID producing evidence to support their past claims.

Julian | Jun 27, 2017 10:21:28 AM | 23
G20 G20 G20. If Putin wants to avoid WW3 he must get the leaders of countries like China, Germany, Turkey, Italy, Indonesia, Korea, who else? to stand up behind him and condemn this rush to war. The time has come for Merkel to make a decision - and it happens to be at her home G20 Summit. Does Mutti have the cojones???
Alaric | Jun 27, 2017 10:32:35 AM | 24
I agree with the posters of 15 and 22.

This wreaks of propaganda that is designed to counter the Sy Hersh story and leaks that just came out regarding trump ignoring Intel and attacking Syria anyway. The White House changed the narrative from did trump Le to watch out for a cutout chemo attack and its statement about future chemical strikes claims there was a first strike - it seeks to make a fallacy assumed as true.

It's the same tactc he is using regarding Russian interference. He is redirected there as well to Obama. "Why didn't Obama do anything about the leaks."

That said you can't put anything beyond the empire. SAA, Russia and friends need to be ready.

exiled off mainstreet | Jun 27, 2017 10:33:18 AM | 25
I go along with comments 14 and 15 and see it actually as a response intended to defend against the inference from the Hersh piece that Trump revealed himself to be a moron for succumbing despite the evidence to media propaganda. I think that the problem is that Trump is less than fully in control of elements of his government, possibly even Spicer, as evidenced by the failure to inform the state dept, military and others of the statement, which may not have been fully vetted. I wouldn't be surprised if Spicer's time as press secretary is limited.

The fact that the Hersh piece was published in one of Germany's ueber-establishment organs, Die Welt, is significant. It means that Germany is no longer on board, and I don't see Macron, though he is an empty suit, doing a 180 like some fear, since he takes many of his orders from Merkel.

It is seriously disconcerting that the neocons still seem to be able to rule the roost. If any "chemical" attack occurs within a few days or longer away, it will be extremely suspect.

Meanwhile, the Russia conspiracy stories in the US seem to be in the early stages of blowing up, with a CNN official being exposed as admitting it was all propaganda, and Loretta Lynch, the ex-Justice Minister, appearing to be becoming a target based on her defence of the Harpy from criminal liability for the email server during the 2016 campaign.

In light of these facts, I think the whole thing more likely shows weakness and disarray, not a serious conspiratorial threat of armageddon, though it could end up blowing up in that direction.

JaimeInTexas | Jun 27, 2017 10:38:50 AM | 27
@21

Hmmm. If the preemptive strike against an alleged chemical attack preparation takes out Assad? Just serendipity, icing on the cake? Any chance that the message is that these uSA has intelligence on Assad's movements?

x | Jun 27, 2017 10:45:17 AM | 28
And when this same old gas story loses traction it will be back to 'Barrel Bombs'...

peter | Jun 27, 2017 11:04:14 AM | 30
I suppose now that CNN has fired three journalists that Special Council Mueller will give notice to his investigators to pack it in and go home. Yep, nothing to see here folks. Sorry for wasting your time. Fat fucking chance. This cat's on a mission and won't be deterred.

It's got to be a bitch for all the former Trumpsters around here who have seen their main man morph from a swamp-draining non-interventionist into a world class warmonger with a cabinet full of world class swamp creatures.

Things certainly didn't work out as planned. Assad is in the cross hairs as is Iran and Hezbollah. It's maybe time to hope that Mueller gets enough dirt, and fast, to dethrone this dangerous president even if it leaves some egg on the face of certain Russian officials and businessmen.

jfl | Jun 27, 2017 11:27:12 AM | 31
US has seen chemical weapons activity at Syrian airbase: Pentagon
The U.S. regime has recently seen chemical weapons activity at the Shay'rat Airbase in the Homs Governorate, the Pentagon claimed, as reported by Matt Lee of the Associated Press.
this seems pretty whack. the syrians will say hey, come have a look? the us will go and say ... oops, our mistake? what's going on here? i guess it's the pentagon giving the rump a way to climb down? he can say he 'forced' an inspection? or something?
XLemming | Jun 27, 2017 11:27:39 AM | 32
@29 HW

A good start would be hanging all those responsible for war crimes... But until that happens, evil will proceed unabated

Christian Chuba | Jun 27, 2017 11:44:25 AM | 34
Since we know that Trump gets his info from his favorite cable TV programs and a select few websites and doesn't use the vast resources of the U.S. Intel community, has anyone found the original source for the new Assad allegation? It would be interesting to see what The Donald is reading nowadays.
james | Jun 27, 2017 11:49:58 AM | 35
thanks b.. no proof needed with the west... lies and insinuation of responsibility is all that is needed...

ditto many comments here..

@ 22 Hoarsewhisperer.. yeah - 'another' when they haven't verified any previously... more lies and insinuation of responsibility absent any facts... who needs facts when you want to destroy another country?

@29 quote "If people in the West don't want WW3 they're going to have to do something about the people who bribe, and own, their politicians." but hoarsewhisperer - that is what all these lies and deception are meant to do - keep the people in the west completely ignorant of the facts and reality.. dontcha know that lying to your people in the msm regularly keeps the sheeple quiet and passive? us freaks here at moa are in a real minority..

@34 chuba - they just make this shit up man... the first source i saw was from yesterday spicer idiot..

[Jun 26, 2017] The Soft Coup Under Way In Washington by David Stockman

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... "They made up a phony collusion with the Russians story, found zero proof, so now they go for obstruction of justice on the phony story. Nice You are witnessing the single greatest WITCH HUNT in American political history – led by some very bad and conflicted people!" ..."
"... If Donald Trump had any kind of presidential strategy and propensity to take command, he would have had all the intercepts of Russian chatter gathered up weeks ago. He would then have had them declassified and made public, even as he launched a criminal prosecution against Obama's hit squad­-John Brennan, Susan Rice and Valerie Jarrett for illegally unmasking and leaking classified information. ..."
"... Such a course of action would have crushed the Russian interference hysteria in the bud. At bottom, the latter was a rearguard invention of the Deep State and Democratic partisans. They became literally shocked and desperate for a scapegoat early last fall by the prospect that the unthinkable was happening. ..."
"... That became more than evident­-and more than pathetic, too­-when earlier this morning he tweeted out an attack on his own Deputy Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein. At least Nixon fired Elliot Richardson (his Attorney General) and Bill Ruckelshaus (Deputy AG): ..."
"... Mueller is a card-carrying apparatchik of the Deep State, who was there at the founding of today's surveillance monster as Director of the FBI in the aftermath of 9/11. Since the whole $75 billion apparatus that eventually emerged was based on a vastly exaggerated threat of global Islamic terrorism that doesn't exist, Russia had to be demonized into order to keep the game going­-a transition that Mueller fully subscribed to. ..."
"... To wit, Mueller's #1 hire was the despicable Andrew Weissmann. The latter had led the fraud section of the department's Criminal Division, served as general counsel to the F.B.I. when Mueller was its director, and, more importantly, was the driving force behind the Enron task force the most egregious exercise in prosecutorial abuse and thuggery since the Palmer raids of 1919. ..."
"... Exactly four years ago in June 2013, no one was seriously demonizing Putin or Russia. In fact, the slicksters of CNN were still snickering about Mitt Romney's silly claim during the 2012 election campaign that Russia was the greatest security threat facing America. ..."
"... But then came the Syrian jihadist false flag chemical attack in the suburbs of Damascus in August 2013 and the US intelligence community's flagrant lie that it had proof the villain was Bashar Assad. To the contrary, it subsequently became evident that the primitive rockets that had carried the deadly sarin gas, which killed upwards of 1500 innocent civilians, could not have been fired from regime-held territory; the rockets examined by UN investigators had a range of only a few kilometers, not the 15-20 kilometers from the nearest Syrian base. ..."
"... Needless to say, in the eyes of the neocon War Party, this constructive act of international statesmanship by Putin was the unforgivable sin. It thwarted the next target on their regime change agenda­-removal of the Assad government in Syria as a step toward an ultimate attack on its ally, the Shiite regime of Iran. ..."
"... So it did not take long for the Deep State to retaliate. While Putin was basking in the glory of the 2014 winter Olympics at Sochi, the entire apparatus of Imperial Washington ­– the CIA, the National Endowment for Democracy, the State Department and a long string of Washington funded NGOs ­- was on the ground in Kiev midwifing the putsch that overthrew Ukraine's constitutionally elected President and Russian ally. ..."
"... Indeed, given the Stalin-era animosity between the Russian-speaking Donbas and Crimean regions of the confected state of Ukraine and the virulent anti-Russian populations elsewhere­ – including descendants of the Nazi collaborators with Hitler during WWII -- there could have been no other outcome. And that was especially the case after Washington designated "Yats", a neo-Nazi sympathizer named Arseniy Yatseniuk, as the guy to takeover the Ukrainian government at the time of the Kiev uprising. ..."
"... There is nothing like a demonized enemy to keep the $700 billion national security budget flowing and the hideous Warfare State opulence of the Imperial City intact. So why not throw in an allegedly "stolen" US election to garnish the case? ..."
"... In a word, the Little Putsch in Kiev is now begetting a Great Big Coup in the Imperial City. This is a history-shattering development, but don't tell the boys and girls and robo-machines on Wall Street. ..."
Jun 22, 2017 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

This article was first published by Contra Corner

Bull's eye!

"They made up a phony collusion with the Russians story, found zero proof, so now they go for obstruction of justice on the phony story. Nice You are witnessing the single greatest WITCH HUNT in American political history – led by some very bad and conflicted people!"

The Donald has never spoken truer words but also has never sunken lower into abject victimhood. Indeed, what is he waiting for -- handcuffs and a perp walk?

Just to be clear, "he" doesn't need to be the passive object of a "WITCH HUNT" by "they".

If Donald Trump had any kind of presidential strategy and propensity to take command, he would have had all the intercepts of Russian chatter gathered up weeks ago. He would then have had them declassified and made public, even as he launched a criminal prosecution against Obama's hit squad­-John Brennan, Susan Rice and Valerie Jarrett for illegally unmasking and leaking classified information.

Such a course of action would have crushed the Russian interference hysteria in the bud. At bottom, the latter was a rearguard invention of the Deep State and Democratic partisans. They became literally shocked and desperate for a scapegoat early last fall by the prospect that the unthinkable was happening.

Namely, the election by the unwashed masses of an outsider and insurrectionist who could not be counted upon to serve as a "trusty" for the status quo; and whose naïve but correct instinct to seek a rapprochement with Russia was a mortal threat to the very modus operandi of the Imperial City.

Moreover, from the very beginning, the Russian interference narrative was rooted in nothing more than standard cyber noise from Moscow that pales compared to what comes out of Langley (CIA) and Ft. Meade (NSA). And we do mean irrelevant noise.

After all, it didn't take a Kremlinologist from the old Soviet days to figure out that Putin did not favor Clinton, who had likened him to Hitler. And that he welcomed Trump, who had correctly said NATO was obsolete, that he didn't want to give lethal aid to the Ukrainians, and had expressed a desire to make a deal with Putin on Syria and numerous other areas of unnecessary confrontation.

So let's start with two obvious points. Namely, that there is no "there, there" and that the president not only has the power to declassify secret documents at will but in this instance could do so without compromising intelligence community (IC) "sources and methods" in the slightest.

The latter is the case because after Snowden's revelations in June 2013, the whole world was put on notice and most especially Washington's adversaries­–that it collects in raw form every single electronic digit that passes through the worldwide web and related communications grids. It boils down to universal and omniscient SIGINT (signals intelligence), and acknowledgment of that fact by publishing the Russia-Trump intercepts would provide new knowledge to exactly no one.

Nor would it jeopardize the lives of any American spy or agent (HUMINT); it would just document the unconstitutional interference in the election process that had been committed by the US intelligence agencies and political operatives in the Obama White House.

Yes, we can hear the boxes on the CNN screen harrumphing and spinning noisily that declassifying the "evidence" would amount to obstruction of justice! That is to say, since Trump's "crime" is axiomatic (i.e. his occupancy of the Oval Office), anything that gets in the way of his conviction and removal therefrom amounts to "obstruction".

Given that he is up against a Deep State/Dem/Neocon/ mainstream media prosecution, the Donald has no chance of survival short of an aggressive offensive of the type described above.

But that's not happening because the man is clueless about what he is doing in the White House and is being advised by a cacophonous coterie of amateurs and nincompoops. So he has no action plan except to impulsively reach for his Twitter account.

That became more than evident­-and more than pathetic, too­-when earlier this morning he tweeted out an attack on his own Deputy Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein. At least Nixon fired Elliot Richardson (his Attorney General) and Bill Ruckelshaus (Deputy AG):

"I am being investigated for firing the FBI Director by the man who told me to fire the FBI Director! Witch Hunt"

So alone with his Twitter account, clueless advisors and pulsating rage, the Donald is instead laying the groundwork for his own demise. Were this not the White House, it would normally be the point at which they send in the men in white coats with a straight jacket.

Indeed, that's essentially what Donald's ostensible GOP allies on the Hill are actually doing. RussiaGate is self-evidently a witch-hunt like few others in American political history. Yet as the mainstream cameras and microphones were thrust at one Congressional Republican after another yesterday afternoon following Donald's outburst quoted above, there was nary an echo of the agreement.

Even Senator John Thune, an ostensible Swamp-hating conservative, had nothing but praise for Special Counsel Robert Mueller while affecting an earnest confidence that he would fairly and thoroughly get to the bottom of the matter.

No he won't!

Mueller is a card-carrying apparatchik of the Deep State, who was there at the founding of today's surveillance monster as Director of the FBI in the aftermath of 9/11. Since the whole $75 billion apparatus that eventually emerged was based on a vastly exaggerated threat of global Islamic terrorism that doesn't exist, Russia had to be demonized into order to keep the game going­-a transition that Mueller fully subscribed to.

So he will "find" extensive Russian interference in the 2016 election and bring the hammer down on the Donald for seeking to prevent it from coming to light. The clock is now ticking and his investigatory team is being loaded up with prosecutorial killers who have proven records of thuggery when it comes to finding crimes that make for the fame and fortune of the prosecutors­-even if the crime itself never happened.

To wit, Mueller's #1 hire was the despicable Andrew Weissmann. The latter had led the fraud section of the department's Criminal Division, served as general counsel to the F.B.I. when Mueller was its director, and, more importantly, was the driving force behind the Enron task force the most egregious exercise in prosecutorial abuse and thuggery since the Palmer raids of 1919.

Meanwhile, as we said the other day, the GOP elders especially could also not be clearer about what is coming down the pike.

They are not defending Trump with even a modicum of the vigor and resolve that we recall from the early days of Tricky Dick's ordeal, and, of course, he didn't survive anyway. Instead, it's as if Ryan, McConnell, et al. have offered to hold his coat, while the Donald pummels himself with a 140-character Twitter Knife that is visible to the entire world.

So there should be no doubt. A Great Big Coup is on the way. But here's the irony of the matter.

Exactly four years ago in June 2013, no one was seriously demonizing Putin or Russia. In fact, the slicksters of CNN were still snickering about Mitt Romney's silly claim during the 2012 election campaign that Russia was the greatest security threat facing America.

But then came the Syrian jihadist false flag chemical attack in the suburbs of Damascus in August 2013 and the US intelligence community's flagrant lie that it had proof the villain was Bashar Assad. To the contrary, it subsequently became evident that the primitive rockets that had carried the deadly sarin gas, which killed upwards of 1500 innocent civilians, could not have been fired from regime-held territory; the rockets examined by UN investigators had a range of only a few kilometers, not the 15-20 kilometers from the nearest Syrian base.

In any event, President Obama choose to ignore his own red line and called off the bombers. That, in turn, paved the way for Vladimir Putin to step into the breach and persuade Assad to give up all of his chemical weapons commitment he fully complied with over the course of the next year.

Needless to say, in the eyes of the neocon War Party, this constructive act of international statesmanship by Putin was the unforgivable sin. It thwarted the next target on their regime change agenda­-removal of the Assad government in Syria as a step toward an ultimate attack on its ally, the Shiite regime of Iran.

So it did not take long for the Deep State to retaliate. While Putin was basking in the glory of the 2014 winter Olympics at Sochi, the entire apparatus of Imperial Washington ­– the CIA, the National Endowment for Democracy, the State Department and a long string of Washington funded NGOs ­- was on the ground in Kiev midwifing the putsch that overthrew Ukraine's constitutionally elected President and Russian ally.

From there, the Ukrainian civil war and partition of Crimea inexorably followed, as did the escalating campaign against Russia and its leader.

Indeed, given the Stalin-era animosity between the Russian-speaking Donbas and Crimean regions of the confected state of Ukraine and the virulent anti-Russian populations elsewhere­ – including descendants of the Nazi collaborators with Hitler during WWII -- there could have been no other outcome. And that was especially the case after Washington designated "Yats", a neo-Nazi sympathizer named Arseniy Yatseniuk, as the guy to takeover the Ukrainian government at the time of the Kiev uprising.

So as it turned out, the War Party could not have planned a more fortuitous outcome -- especially after Russia moved to protect its legitimate interests in its own backyard resulting from the Washington-instigated civil war in Ukraine, including protecting its 200-year old Naval base at Sevastopol in Crimea. The War Party simply characterized these actions falsely as acts of aggression by a potential sacker of the peace and territorial integrity of its European neighbors.

There is nothing like a demonized enemy to keep the $700 billion national security budget flowing and the hideous Warfare State opulence of the Imperial City intact. So why not throw in an allegedly "stolen" US election to garnish the case?

In a word, the Little Putsch in Kiev is now begetting a Great Big Coup in the Imperial City. This is a history-shattering development, but don't tell the boys and girls and robo-machines on Wall Street.

Pathetically, they still think its game on.

David Alan Stockman is an author, former businessman and U.S. politician who served as a Republican U.S. Representative from the state of Michigan and as the Director of the Office of Management and Budget under President Ronald Reagan.

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Information Clearing House.

[Jun 26, 2017] Saudi Hijinks, US Policy Stinks

Notable quotes:
"... Trump is capricious, ignorant and impetuous. His understanding of international relations and history seems woefully inadequate. He also appears to be unscrupulous and reckless. It's all about making money that matters to him. ..."
"... From the earliest opportunity, the Saudi prince wheedled his way into Trump's court. He was greeted in the White House back in March, one of the first foreign leaders to do so. Then two months later, Trump ventured on his maiden foreign trip as president in which he made Saudi Arabia his first stop. ..."
"... The power-struggle antics among the absolute rulers of the House of Saud have promoted a prince who has a reckless outsized ego and lust for dominance. President Donald Trump seems cut from the same cloth. ..."
"... · 5 days ago ..."
marknesop.wordpress.com
The United States' decades-long "special relationship" with Saudi Arabia has always carried major downsides. Yes, the Saudis are a pillar in maintaining the American petrodollar system to prevent the collapse of the US economy; and, yes, the Saudi rulers are lavish spenders on US weapons, which props up the Pentagon military-industrial complex – another lifeline for American capitalism.

However, the Saudi rulers are also longtime sponsors of Wahhabi fundamentalism which has injected deadly sectarian poison into the Middle East region and beyond. Washington is complicit in fomenting sectarianism through its relationship with Saudi Arabia, and the price for that Faustian pact is a world in turmoil from terrorism.

Donald Trump's presidency is an unfortunate marriage of interests with Saudi Arabia. Trump is capricious, ignorant and impetuous. His understanding of international relations and history seems woefully inadequate. He also appears to be unscrupulous and reckless. It's all about making money that matters to him.

From the earliest opportunity, the Saudi prince wheedled his way into Trump's court. He was greeted in the White House back in March, one of the first foreign leaders to do so. Then two months later, Trump ventured on his maiden foreign trip as president in which he made Saudi Arabia his first stop. Trump was royally received by the House of Saud with sword-waving ceremony . And then the Saudis signed record arms deal with the US worth up to $350 billion – the biggest ever in history.

It was during Trump's Saudi visit that the policy of increased hostility towards Iran and isolation of erstwhile Saudi and American ally Qatar was hatched. This reckless, clueless embrace of Saudi Arabia by Trump has led to a dangerous escalation in tensions across the Middle East, which are seen playing out in Syria and towards Iran and Russia.

Trump the tycoon and the Saudi upstart-prince are a duo who are plunging the world into danger of all-out war. The pair are a match made in hell, both being rash and irresponsible in their behavior.

Nobody outside Saudi Arabia had heard of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman until his father become king in January 2015 on the death of King Abdullah. In the space of two years, the young prince has been made defense minister and de facto chief of Saudi's oil economy. Now, this week he has been shunted into becoming heir to the throne, sidelining his elder cousin and nephew to the king.

The precocious prince has only enjoyed this meteoric rise in the House of Saud because of his father's favoritism. Other more senior royals feel ousted and see the new Crown Prince as undeserving of his assigned authority. In short, he is out of his depth.

In the Saudi succession rules, the royal line is supposed to pass from brother to brother. There are still surviving brothers of the Saudi founding king, Ibn Saud, who have been removed from the succession. The present King Salman first broke the rules when he made his nephew Mohammed bin Nayef the Crown Prince back in April 2015. Now he has broken the rules again by making his own son the heir and unceremoniously pushing bin Nayef to the side. Such are the hijinks of despots.

Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is the architect behind the disastrous war in Yemen, which is turning into a Vietnam-style quagmire for Saudi Arabia, costing the kingdom billions of dollars every month. He is also reportedly the architect behind the policy of renewed hostility towards Iran. In an interview before Trump's Saudi trip, Mohammed bin Salman said he would never talk to Iran and even threatened to unleash violence on Iranian territory. That threat was followed by the deadly terror attack in Tehran on June 7 in which up to 17 people were killed by Daesh suicide squads.

The hiked-up hostile policy towards Iran has, in turn, led to Saudi Arabia blockading Qatar and causing a bitter rift in the Persian Gulf because Qatar is perceived as being too soft on Iran.

The power-struggle antics among the absolute rulers of the House of Saud have promoted a prince who has a reckless outsized ego and lust for dominance. President Donald Trump seems cut from the same cloth. Courting the young Saudi heir may be lucrative for American weapons-dealing and no doubt the Trump business brand in the oil-rich region. But the consequences of such capricious and clueless "leadership" are throwing the region and the world into increasing conflict.

This week the US State Department flatly contradicted Trump's policy of supporting the Saudi-led blockade on Qatar . It said it was mystified that the Saudis had not presented any evidence to justify the blockade. This is just one example where Trump is being made to look a total fool by following stupid Saudi policy – policy that is made by a prince who has gathered a record for disaster in several other spheres.

What a double act. Saudi despotism marries Trump cluelessness. And the world is reaping the calamity of clowns.

This article was first published by Sputnik

Gustavo Caldas · 5 days ago

An attack from Saudi Arabia to Iran will mean the demise of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia . And the intervention of the USA in support of Saudi Arabia would mean a war of the USA against the SCO (Shangai Cooperation Organization). Those are BAD odds.

guest01 · 5 days ago

Quote from article: "America's deepening and reckless military involvement in Syria is a result of Trump cozying up with the Saudi despots."

America's deepening and reckless military involvement in Syria is a result of Trump obeying Israel's orders. America's military was recklessly involved in Syria long before Trump became president. The chaos in Syria was instigated by USA. US military trained, armed and supported terrorists, bombed Syrian military and civilians and established military base in Syria during Obama presidency.

Trump is "cozying up with the Saudi despots" because he got his orders from Netanyahu and Israelis. Before he began "cozying up with the Saudi despots", Trump ordered shooting missiles into Syrian military airport because his Zionist Jewish daughter and son-in-law told him to do so. If Netanyahu and/or his Zionist Jew son-in-law Jared Kushner were to order Trump to bomb Saudi Arabia, Trump would bomb Saudi Arabia.

All along, Trump was blaming Saudis for 9/11 inside job attacks and was threatening Saudis that they should be coming up with more money to USA just as he expected NATO members to pay for US wars costs. He was badmouthing Saudis until he got his orders from Netanyahu and Israel.

Saudis are puppets of USA; Saudis do exactly what USA wants them to do and USA does exactly what Israel wants it to do. Note that the Saudi demands against Qatar are to distance itself from all who resist Israel, namely, Lebanese Hezbollah, Hamas, Iran and Syria. Also, Israel was very pleased that Trump signed billions of dollars worth of weapons agreement with Saudi Arabia because these weapons will be used against Israel's perceived enemies and some will be given to terrorists Israel supports in that region.

Israel rules and Trump wants to make Israel great.

[Jun 26, 2017] The Middle East back in the 1950s under the Baathists was not infected with islamic fundamentalism. It took multi-year and multi-billion Us efforts to propel politicla islam to the level of ISIS

Looks like the USA played Islam in best British "divide and conquer" traditions.
Jun 26, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com

kirill , June 23, 2017 at 2:12 pm

The Middle East back in the 1950s under the Baathists.

<video>

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TN9_qmOekI

Compare to today under head chopping Wahabbi scum. Thanks America...

Cortes , June 23, 2017 at 4:54 pm
Truly depressing, Kirill.

I'd seen that before but thanks for re-posting.

The effort to produce the current clusterfuck has had a decades-long gestation. If one accepts that premise then the argument put forward by The Saker, for example, regarding the short term focus of western MSM in service of the long term goals of the elite becomes more comprehensible. No reason to consider thinking people in "the West " as somehow less savvy than the elites of the RF or the PRC. Short term focus is merely throwing coloured paper into the air for the distraction of the masses.

The western long term strategy has been sussed, I think.

Jen , June 24, 2017 at 5:31 am
Actually that's Egyptian President Gamal Nasser. Egypt didn't officially adopt Ba'athism as a political philosophy though I can imagine Nasser and other Egyptian politicians of his time may have been sympathetic towards it or parts of it. It was Arab nationalist and secular in character and preached religious tolerance. Ba'athism was mainly important in Syria and Iraq in the 1950s and 1960s. Of course what confuses the issue of Ba'athism is that there was a time when Egypt and Syria agreed to form a short-lived union called the United Arab Republic.
yalensis , June 24, 2017 at 10:23 am
The trend was clear, though. All the big, important Arab nations were evolving towards being modern, more secular states.
The Soviet Union was also a player at that time, supporting secular, moderate Arab nationalism.

Then the trend turned backwards toward medievalism. I believe the turning point was in the mid-1970's. A Combination of Israeli triumphalism and the U.S. (under Jimmy Carter and Zbigniew Brzezinski) placing their stake on Saudi Wahhabism, to counter Soviet influence.

Northern Star , June 24, 2017 at 12:14 pm
It's not only in the ME that a change has come:

Apparently in 1958 there was a high level of awareness of USA duplicity and deceit wrt the well being of the mostly impoverished masses of SA as opposed to the USA's hegemonic agenda that reflected its struggle against the 'evil commie aggressor' .at least in Venezuela

"Nixon and his wife, Patricia, had arrived in Venezuela in the course of their Latin American "goodwill tour." At the time, relations were strained between the Republican administration in Washington and Latin Americans on the left side of the political spectrum. They charged that President Dwight D. Eisenhower, in focusing on cold war rivalries with the Soviet Union, had failed to address pressing economic needs in the Western Hemisphere while extending his backing to anti-communist dictatorial regimes."
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/05/vice-president-nixons-motorcade-attacked-in-venezuela-may-13-1958-106584 "

Good description of events:
https://carlosagaton.blogspot.com/2015/06/venezuela-en-1958-el-criminal-richard.html

Some of the footage is worth a look.but mostly jingoistic American propaganda :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Richard_Nixon%27s_motorcade#The_attack

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Kc2ZdQLrSXg?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent


http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/vice-president-nixon-is-attacked

Northern Star , June 24, 2017 at 12:24 pm
In Dire Straits food and medicine shortages

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/venezuelans-suffer-deadly-scarcity-food-medicine/

Jen , June 24, 2017 at 2:56 pm
One other turning point could also have been when Egypt under Nasser nationalised the Suez Canal after British, French and Israeli attempts to seize it and use the invasion as cover to assassinate Nasser in 1956.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Crisis

Among other things the war that followed and Nasser's crackdown on civil liberties of the Egyptian Jewish community led to thousands of those people fleeing to Israel (and perhaps giving Israel fuel for planning future attacks on the Sinai peninsula).

Another turning point was in 1973 when Arab countries imposed an oil embargo and raised oil prices after the US supported Israel in the Yom Kippur war. This was in the wake of the collapse of the 1944 Bretton Woods agreement in 1971 when the US went off the gold standard (due in part to US spending on the Vietnam War). The depreciation of the US dollar (with the price of oil tied to that) Also meant that for Middle Eastern oil producers, imports (especially food imports) became more expensive and raising the price of oil was one way of dealing with the increase in the price of grain and other global food staples.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis

kirill , June 24, 2017 at 10:24 am
Thanks for the correction. I recall that Iran was also secular and democratic (not Baathist) until Americans foisted regime change on it in 1953. America has been subverting independent democracies around the world for decades. They do this while screaming about spreading democracy. The de facto one-party state USA has a perverted idea of democracy.

[Jun 25, 2017] The 6-year-long US intervention in Syria failed to achieve its goals, while causing death of thousand of civilians

Notable quotes:
"... Once they create a supply line Iran-Iraq-Syria-Lebanon, and if they can hold it, that's the game-over, the 6-year-long US intervention in Syria will have lost. ..."
www.moonofalabama.org

Mao Cheng Ji June 16, 2017 at 1:40 pm

Jun 25, 2017 | www.unz.com

as for Syria, I think I saw in the news a few days ago that SAA has reached the Iranian border.

It probably doesn't constitute a supply line yet, but that's a huge advance.

Once they create a supply line Iran-Iraq-Syria-Lebanon, and if they can hold it, that's the game-over, the 6-year-long US intervention in Syria will have lost.

[Jun 25, 2017] Syria Trumps Red Line by Seymour M. Hersh

Notable quotes:
"... New York Times ..."
"... The target was struck at 6:55 a.m. on April 4, just before midnight in Washington. A Bomb Damage Assessment (BDA) by the U.S. military later determined that the heat and force of the 500-pound Syrian bomb triggered a series of secondary explosions that could have generated a huge toxic cloud that began to spread over the town, formed by the release of the fertilizers, disinfectants and other goods stored in the basement, its effect magnified by the dense morning air, which trapped the fumes close to the ground. ..."
"... e reference, as those in the American intelligence community understood, and many of the inexperienced aides and family members close to Trump may not have, was to a Russian-supplied bomb with its built-in guidance system. "If you've already decided it was a gas attack, you will then inevitably read the talk about a special weapon as involving a sarin bomb," the adviser said. "Did the Syrians plan the attack on Khan Sheikhoun? Absolutely. Do we have intercepts to prove it? Absolutely. Did they plan to use sarin? No. But the president did not say: 'We have a problem and let's look into it.' He wanted to bomb the shit out of Syria." ..."
"... There was irony in America's rush to blame Syria and criticize Russia for its support of Syria's denial of any use of gas in Khan Sheikhoun, as Ambassador Haley and others in Washington did. "What doesn't occur to most Americans" the adviser said, "is if there had been a Syrian nerve gas attack authorized by Bashar, the Russians would be 10 times as upset as anyone in the West. Russia's strategy against ISIS, which involves getting American cooperation, would have been destroyed and Bashar would be responsible for pissing off Russia, with unknown consequences for him. Bashar would do that? When he's on the verge of winning the war? Are you kidding me?" ..."
"... Within hours of viewing the photos, the adviser said, Trump instructed the national defense apparatus to plan for retaliation against Syria. "He did this before he talked to anybody about it. The planners then asked the CIA and DIA if there was any evidence that Syria had sarin stored at a nearby airport or somewhere in the area. Their military had to have it somewhere in the area in order to bomb with it." "The answer was, 'We have no evidence that Syria had sarin or used it,'" the adviser said. "The CIA also told them that there was no residual delivery for sarin at Sheyrat [the airfield from which the Syrian SU-24 bombers had taken off on April 4] and Assad had no motive to commit political suicide." Everyone involved, except perhaps the president, also understood that a highly skilled United Nations team had spent more than a year in the aftermath of an alleged sarin attack in 2013 by Syria, removing what was said to be all chemical weapons from a dozen Syrian chemical weapons depots. ..."
"... The national security advisers understood their dilemma: Trump wanted to respond to the affront to humanity committed by Syria and he did not want to be dissuaded. They were dealing with a man they considered to be not unkind and not stupid, but his limitations when it came to national security decisions were severe. "Everyone close to him knows his proclivity for acting precipitously when he does not know the facts," the adviser said. "He doesn't read anything and has no real historical knowledge. He wants verbal briefings and photographs. He's a risk-taker. He can accept the consequences of a bad decision in the business world; he will just lose money. But in our world, lives will be lost and there will be long-term damage to our national security if he guesses wrong. He was told we did not have evidence of Syrian involvement and yet Trump says: 'Do it."' ..."
"... On April 6, Trump convened a meeting of national security officials at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida. The meeting was not to decide what to do, but how best to do it – or, as some wanted, how to do the least and keep Trump happy. ..."
"... "It was a totally Trump show from beginning to end," the senior adviser said. "A few of the president's senior national security advisers viewed the mission as a minimized bad presidential decision, and one that they had an obligation to carry out. But I don't think our national security people are going to allow themselves to be hustled into a bad decision again. If Trump had gone for option three, there might have been some immediate resignations." ..."
"... New York Times ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
"... Wall Street Journal ..."
"... "The Salafists and jihadists got everything they wanted out of their hyped-up Syrian nerve gas ploy," the senior adviser to the U.S. intelligence community told me, referring to the flare up of tensions between Syria, Russia and America. ..."
"... The White House did not answer specific questions about the bombing of Khan Sheikhoun and the airport of Shayrat. These questions were send via e-mail to the White House on June 15 and never answered. ..."
Jun 25, 2017 | www.welt.de
President Donald Trump ignored important intelligence reports when he decided to attack Syria after he saw pictures of dying children. Seymour M. Hersh investigated the case of the alleged Sarin gas attack.

O n April 6, United States President Donald Trump authorized an early morning Tomahawk missile strike on Shayrat Air Base in central Syria in retaliation for what he said was a deadly nerve agent attack carried out by the Syrian government two days earlier in the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun. Trump issued the order despite having been warned by the U.S. intelligence community that it had found no evidence that the Syrians had used a chemical weapon.

The available intelligence made clear that the Syrians had targeted a jihadist meeting site on April 4 using a Russian-supplied guided bomb equipped with conventional explosives. Details of the attack, including information on its so-called high-value targets, had been provided by the Russians days in advance to American and allied military officials in Doha, whose mission is to coordinate all U.S., allied, Syrian and Russian Air Force operations in the region.

Some American military and intelligence officials were especially distressed by the president's determination to ignore the evidence. "None of this makes any sense," one officer told colleagues upon learning of the decision to bomb. "We KNOW that there was no chemical attack ... the Russians are furious. Claiming we have the real intel and know the truth ... I guess it didn't matter whether we elected Clinton or Trump."

Within hours of the April 4 bombing, the world's media was saturated with photographs and videos from Khan Sheikhoun. Pictures of dead and dying victims, allegedly suffering from the symptoms of nerve gas poisoning, were uploaded to social media by local activists, including the White Helmets, a first responder group known for its close association with the Syrian opposition.

The provenance of the photos was not clear and no international observers have yet inspected the site, but the immediate popular assumption worldwide was that this was a deliberate use of the nerve agent sarin, authorized by President Bashar Assad of Syria. Trump endorsed that assumption by issuing a statement within hours of the attack, describing Assad's "heinous actions" as being a consequence of the Obama administration's "weakness and irresolution" in addressing what he said was Syria's past use of chemical weapons.

To the dismay of many senior members of his national security team, Trump could not be swayed over the next 48 hours of intense briefings and decision-making. In a series of interviews, I learned of the total disconnect between the president and many of his military advisers and intelligence officials, as well as officers on the ground in the region who had an entirely different understanding of the nature of Syria's attack on Khan Sheikhoun. I was provided with evidence of that disconnect, in the form of transcripts of real-time communications, immediately following the Syrian attack on April 4. In an important pre-strike process known as deconfliction, U.S. and Russian officers routinely supply one another with advance details of planned flight paths and target coordinates, to ensure that there is no risk of collision or accidental encounter (the Russians speak on behalf of the Syrian military). This information is supplied daily to the American AWACS surveillance planes that monitor the flights once airborne. Deconfliction's success and importance can be measured by the fact that there has yet to be one collision, or even a near miss, among the high-powered supersonic American, Allied, Russian and Syrian fighter bombers.

Russian and Syrian Air Force officers gave details of the carefully planned flight path to and from Khan Shiekhoun on April 4 directly, in English, to the deconfliction monitors aboard the AWACS plane, which was on patrol near the Turkish border, 60 miles or more to the north.

The Syrian target at Khan Sheikhoun, as shared with the Americans at Doha, was depicted as a two-story cinder-block building in the northern part of town. Russian intelligence, which is shared when necessary with Syria and the U.S. as part of their joint fight against jihadist groups, had established that a high-level meeting of jihadist leaders was to take place in the building, including representatives of Ahrar al-Sham and the al-Qaida-affiliated group formerly known as Jabhat al-Nusra. The two groups had recently joined forces, and controlled the town and surrounding area. Russian intelligence depicted the cinder-block building as a command and control center that housed a grocery and other commercial premises on its ground floor with other essential shops nearby, including a fabric shop and an electronics store.

"The rebels control the population by controlling the distribution of goods that people need to live – food, water, cooking oil, propane gas, fertilizers for growing their crops, and insecticides to protect the crops," a senior adviser to the American intelligence community, who has served in senior positions in the Defense Department and Central Intelligence Agency, told me. The basement was used as storage for rockets, weapons and ammunition, as well as products that could be distributed for free to the community, among them medicines and chlorine-based decontaminants for cleansing the bodies of the dead before burial. The meeting place – a regional headquarters – was on the floor above. "It was an established meeting place," the senior adviser said. "A long-time facility that would have had security, weapons, communications, files and a map center." The Russians were intent on confirming their intelligence and deployed a drone for days above the site to monitor communications and develop what is known in the intelligence community as a POL – a pattern of life. The goal was to take note of those going in and out of the building, and to track weapons being moved back and forth, including rockets and ammunition.

One reason for the Russian message to Washington about the intended target was to ensure that any CIA asset or informant who had managed to work his way into the jihadist leadership was forewarned not to attend the meeting. I was told that the Russians passed the warning directly to the CIA "They were playing the game right," the senior adviser said. The Russian guidance noted that the jihadist meeting was coming at a time of acute pressure for the insurgents: Presumably Jabhat al-Nusra and Ahrar al-Sham were desperately seeking a path forward in the new political climate. In the last few days of March, Trump and two of his key national security aides – Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and UN Ambassador Nikki Haley – had made statements acknowledging that, as the New York Times put it, the White House "has abandoned the goal" of pressuring Assad "to leave power, marking a sharp departure from the Middle East policy that guided the Obama administration for more than five years." White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer told a press briefing on March 31 that "there is a political reality that we have to accept," implying that Assad was there to stay.

Russian and Syrian intelligence officials, who coordinate operations closely with the American command posts, made it clear that the planned strike on Khan Sheikhoun was special because of the high-value target. "It was a red-hot change. The mission was out of the ordinary – scrub the sked," the senior adviser told me. "Every operations officer in the region" – in the Army, Marine Corps, Air Force, CIA and NSA – "had to know there was something going on. The Russians gave the Syrian Air Force a guided bomb and that was a rarity. They're skimpy with their guided bombs and rarely share them with the Syrian Air Force. And the Syrians assigned their best pilot to the mission, with the best wingman." The advance intelligence on the target, as supplied by the Russians, was given the highest possible score inside the American community.

The Execute Order governing U.S. military operations in theater, which was issued by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, provide instructions that demarcate the relationship between the American and Russian forces operating in Syria. "It's like an ops order – 'Here's what you are authorized to do,'" the adviser said. "We do not share operational control with the Russians. We don't do combined operations with them, or activities directly in support of one of their operations. But coordination is permitted. We keep each other apprised of what's happening and within this package is the mutual exchange of intelligence. If we get a hot tip that could help the Russians do their mission, that's coordination; and the Russians do the same for us. When we get a hot tip about a command and control facility," the adviser added, referring to the target in Khan Sheikhoun, "we do what we can to help them act on it." "This was not a chemical weapons strike," the adviser said. "That's a fairy tale. If so, everyone involved in transferring, loading and arming the weapon – you've got to make it appear like a regular 500-pound conventional bomb – would be wearing Hazmat protective clothing in case of a leak. There would be very little chance of survival without such gear. Military grade sarin includes additives designed to increase toxicity and lethality. Every batch that comes out is maximized for death. That is why it is made. It is odorless and invisible and death can come within a minute. No cloud. Why produce a weapon that people can run away from?"

The target was struck at 6:55 a.m. on April 4, just before midnight in Washington. A Bomb Damage Assessment (BDA) by the U.S. military later determined that the heat and force of the 500-pound Syrian bomb triggered a series of secondary explosions that could have generated a huge toxic cloud that began to spread over the town, formed by the release of the fertilizers, disinfectants and other goods stored in the basement, its effect magnified by the dense morning air, which trapped the fumes close to the ground.

According to intelligence estimates, the senior adviser said, the strike itself killed up to four jihadist leaders, and an unknown number of drivers and security aides. There is no confirmed count of the number of civilians killed by the poisonous gases that were released by the secondary explosions, although opposition activists reported that there were more than 80 dead, and outlets such as CNN have put the figure as high as 92.

A team from Médecins Sans Frontières, treating victims from Khan Sheikhoun at a clinic 60 miles to the north, reported that "eight patients showed symptoms – including constricted pupils, muscle spasms and involuntary defecation – which are consistent with exposure to a neurotoxic agent such as sarin gas or similar compounds." MSF also visited other hospitals that had received victims and found that patients there "smelled of bleach, suggesting that they had been exposed to chlorine."

In other words, evidence suggested that there was more than one chemical responsible for the symptoms observed, which would not have been the case if the Syrian Air Force – as opposition activists insisted – had dropped a sarin bomb, which has no percussive or ignition power to trigger secondary explosions. The range of symptoms is, however, consistent with the release of a mixture of chemicals, including chlorine and the organophosphates used in many fertilizers, which can cause neurotoxic effects similar to those of sarin.

The internet swung into action within hours, and gruesome photographs of the victims flooded television networks and YouTube. U.S. intelligence was tasked with establishing what had happened. Among the pieces of information received was an intercept of Syrian communications collected before the attack by an allied nation. The intercept, which had a particularly strong effect on some of Trump's aides, did not mention nerve gas or sarin, but it did quote a Syrian general discussing a "special" weapon and the need for a highly skilled pilot to man the attack plane. The reference, as those in the American intelligence community understood, and many of the inexperienced aides and family members close to Trump may not have, was to a Russian-supplied bomb with its built-in guidance system. "If you've already decided it was a gas attack, you will then inevitably read the talk about a special weapon as involving a sarin bomb," the adviser said. "Did the Syrians plan the attack on Khan Sheikhoun? Absolutely. Do we have intercepts to prove it? Absolutely. Did they plan to use sarin? No. But the president did not say: 'We have a problem and let's look into it.' He wanted to bomb the shit out of Syria."

At the UN the next day, Ambassador Haley created a media sensation when she displayed photographs of the dead and accused Russia of being complicit. "How many more children have to die before Russia cares?" she asked. NBC News, in a typical report that day, quoted American officials as confirming that nerve gas had been used and Haley tied the attack directly to Syrian President Assad. "We know that yesterday's attack was a new low even for the barbaric Assad regime," she said. There was irony in America's rush to blame Syria and criticize Russia for its support of Syria's denial of any use of gas in Khan Sheikhoun, as Ambassador Haley and others in Washington did. "What doesn't occur to most Americans" the adviser said, "is if there had been a Syrian nerve gas attack authorized by Bashar, the Russians would be 10 times as upset as anyone in the West. Russia's strategy against ISIS, which involves getting American cooperation, would have been destroyed and Bashar would be responsible for pissing off Russia, with unknown consequences for him. Bashar would do that? When he's on the verge of winning the war? Are you kidding me?"

Trump, a constant watcher of television news, said, while King Abdullah of Jordan was sitting next to him in the Oval Office, that what had happened was "horrible, horrible" and a "terrible affront to humanity." Asked if his administration would change its policy toward the Assad government, he said: "You will see." He gave a hint of the response to come at the subsequent news conference with King Abdullah: "When you kill innocent children, innocent babies – babies, little babies – with a chemical gas that is so lethal ... that crosses many, many lines, beyond a red line . ... That attack on children yesterday had a big impact on me. Big impact ... It's very, very possible ... that my attitude toward Syria and Assad has changed very much."

Within hours of viewing the photos, the adviser said, Trump instructed the national defense apparatus to plan for retaliation against Syria. "He did this before he talked to anybody about it. The planners then asked the CIA and DIA if there was any evidence that Syria had sarin stored at a nearby airport or somewhere in the area. Their military had to have it somewhere in the area in order to bomb with it." "The answer was, 'We have no evidence that Syria had sarin or used it,'" the adviser said. "The CIA also told them that there was no residual delivery for sarin at Sheyrat [the airfield from which the Syrian SU-24 bombers had taken off on April 4] and Assad had no motive to commit political suicide." Everyone involved, except perhaps the president, also understood that a highly skilled United Nations team had spent more than a year in the aftermath of an alleged sarin attack in 2013 by Syria, removing what was said to be all chemical weapons from a dozen Syrian chemical weapons depots.

At this point, the adviser said, the president's national security planners were more than a little rattled: "No one knew the provenance of the photographs. We didn't know who the children were or how they got hurt. Sarin actually is very easy to detect because it penetrates paint, and all one would have to do is get a paint sample. We knew there was a cloud and we knew it hurt people. But you cannot jump from there to certainty that Assad had hidden sarin from the UN because he wanted to use it in Khan Sheikhoun." The intelligence made clear that a Syrian Air Force SU-24 fighter bomber had used a conventional weapon to hit its target: There had been no chemical warhead. And yet it was impossible for the experts to persuade the president of this once he had made up his mind. "The president saw the photographs of poisoned little girls and said it was an Assad atrocity," the senior adviser said. "It's typical of human nature. You jump to the conclusion you want. Intelligence analysts do not argue with a president. They're not going to tell the president, 'if you interpret the data this way, I quit.'"

The national security advisers understood their dilemma: Trump wanted to respond to the affront to humanity committed by Syria and he did not want to be dissuaded. They were dealing with a man they considered to be not unkind and not stupid, but his limitations when it came to national security decisions were severe. "Everyone close to him knows his proclivity for acting precipitously when he does not know the facts," the adviser said. "He doesn't read anything and has no real historical knowledge. He wants verbal briefings and photographs. He's a risk-taker. He can accept the consequences of a bad decision in the business world; he will just lose money. But in our world, lives will be lost and there will be long-term damage to our national security if he guesses wrong. He was told we did not have evidence of Syrian involvement and yet Trump says: 'Do it."'

On April 6, Trump convened a meeting of national security officials at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida. The meeting was not to decide what to do, but how best to do it – or, as some wanted, how to do the least and keep Trump happy. "The boss knew before the meeting that they didn't have the intelligence, but that was not the issue," the adviser said. "The meeting was about, 'Here's what I'm going to do,' and then he gets the options."

The available intelligence was not relevant. The most experienced man at the table was Secretary of Defense James Mattis, a retired Marine Corps general who had the president's respect and understood, perhaps, how quickly that could evaporate. Mike Pompeo, the CIA director whose agency had consistently reported that it had no evidence of a Syrian chemical bomb, was not present. Secretary of State Tillerson was admired on the inside for his willingness to work long hours and his avid reading of diplomatic cables and reports, but he knew little about waging war and the management of a bombing raid. Those present were in a bind, the adviser said. "The president was emotionally energized by the disaster and he wanted options." He got four of them, in order of extremity.

  1. Option one was to do nothing. All involved, the adviser said, understood that was a non-starter.
  2. Option two was a slap on the wrist: to bomb an airfield in Syria, but only after alerting the Russians and, through them, the Syrians, to avoid too many casualties. A few of the planners called this the "gorilla option": America would glower and beat its chest to provoke fear and demonstrate resolve, but cause little significant damage.
  3. The third option was to adopt the strike package that had been presented to Obama in 2013, and which he ultimately chose not to pursue. The plan called for the massive bombing of the main Syrian airfields and command and control centers using B1 and B52 aircraft launched from their bases in the U.S.
  4. Option four was "decapitation": to remove Assad by bombing his palace in Damascus, as well as his command and control network and all of the underground bunkers he could possibly retreat to in a crisis.

"Trump ruled out option one off the bat," the senior adviser said, and the assassination of Assad was never considered. "But he said, in essence: 'You're the military and I want military action.'" The president was also initially opposed to the idea of giving the Russians advance warning before the strike, but reluctantly accepted it. "We gave him the Goldilocks option – not too hot, not too cold, but just right." The discussion had its bizarre moments. Tillerson wondered at the Mar-a-Lago meeting why the president could not simply call in the B52 bombers and pulverize the air base. He was told that B52s were very vulnerable to surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) in the area and using such planes would require suppression fire that could kill some Russian defenders. "What is that?" Tillerson asked. Well, sir, he was told, that means we would have to destroy the upgraded SAM sites along the B52 flight path, and those are manned by Russians, and we possibly would be confronted with a much more difficult situation. "The lesson here was: Thank God for the military men at the meeting," the adviser said. "They did the best they could when confronted with a decision that had already been made."

Fifty-nine Tomahawk missiles were fired from two U.S. Navy destroyers on duty in the Mediterranean, the Ross and the Porter , at Shayrat Air Base near the government-controlled city of Homs. The strike was as successful as hoped, in terms of doing minimal damage. The missiles have a light payload – roughly 220 pounds of HBX, the military's modern version of TNT. The airfield's gasoline storage tanks, a primary target, were pulverized, the senior adviser said, triggering a huge fire and clouds of smoke that interfered with the guidance system of following missiles. As many as 24 missiles missed their targets and only a few of the Tomahawks actually penetrated into hangars, destroying nine Syrian aircraft, many fewer than claimed by the Trump administration. I was told that none of the nine was operational: such damaged aircraft are what the Air Force calls hangar queens. "They were sacrificial lambs," the senior adviser said. Most of the important personnel and operational fighter planes had been flown to nearby bases hours before the raid began. The two runways and parking places for aircraft, which had also been targeted, were repaired and back in operation within eight hours or so. All in all, it was little more than an expensive fireworks display.

"It was a totally Trump show from beginning to end," the senior adviser said. "A few of the president's senior national security advisers viewed the mission as a minimized bad presidential decision, and one that they had an obligation to carry out. But I don't think our national security people are going to allow themselves to be hustled into a bad decision again. If Trump had gone for option three, there might have been some immediate resignations."

After the meeting, with the Tomahawks on their way, Trump spoke to the nation from Mar-a-Lago, and accused Assad of using nerve gas to choke out "the lives of helpless men, women and children. It was a slow and brutal death for so many ... No child of God should ever suffer such horror." The next few days were his most successful as president. America rallied around its commander in chief, as it always does in times of war. Trump, who had campaigned as someone who advocated making peace with Assad, was bombing Syria 11 weeks after taking office, and was hailed for doing so by Republicans, Democrats and the media alike.

One prominent TV anchorman, Brian Williams of MSNBC, used the word "beautiful" to describe the images of the Tomahawks being launched at sea. Speaking on CNN, Fareed Zakaria said: "I think Donald Trump became president of the United States." A review of the top 100 American newspapers showed that 39 of them published editorials supporting the bombing in its aftermath, including the New York Times , Washington Post and Wall Street Journal .

Five days later, the Trump administration gathered the national media for a background briefing on the Syrian operation that was conducted by a senior White House official who was not to be identified. The gist of the briefing was that Russia's heated and persistent denial of any sarin use in the Khan Sheikhoun bombing was a lie because President Trump had said sarin had been used. That assertion, which was not challenged or disputed by any of the reporters present, became the basis for a series of further criticisms:

  • The continued lying by the Trump administration about Syria's use of sarin led to widespread belief in the American media and public that Russia had chosen to be involved in a corrupt disinformation and cover-up campaign on the part of Syria.
  • Russia's military forces had been co-located with Syria's at the Shayrat airfield (as they are throughout Syria), raising the possibility that Russia had advance notice of Syria's determination to use sarin at Khan Sheikhoun and did nothing to stop it.
  • Syria's use of sarin and Russia's defense of that use strongly suggested that Syria withheld stocks of the nerve agent from the UN disarmament team that spent much of 2014 inspecting and removing all declared chemical warfare agents from 12 Syrian chemical weapons depots, pursuant to the agreement worked out by the Obama administration and Russia after Syria's alleged, but still unproven, use of sarin the year before against a rebel redoubt in a suburb of Damascus.

The briefer, to his credit, was careful to use the words "think," "suggest" and "believe" at least 10 times during the 30-minute event. But he also said that his briefing was based on data that had been declassified by "our colleagues in the intelligence community." What the briefer did not say, and may not have known, was that much of the classified information in the community made the point that Syria had not used sarin in the April 4 bombing attack.

The mainstream press responded the way the White House had hoped it would: Stories attacking Russia's alleged cover-up of Syria's sarin use dominated the news and many media outlets ignored the briefer's myriad caveats. There was a sense of renewed Cold War. The New York Times , for example – America's leading newspaper – put the following headline on its account: "White House Accuses Russia of Cover-Up in Syria Chemical Attack." The Times ' account did note a Russian denial, but what was described by the briefer as "declassified information" suddenly became a "declassified intelligence report." Yet there was no formal intelligence report stating that Syria had used sarin, merely a "summary based on declassified information about the attacks," as the briefer referred to it.

The crisis slid into the background by the end of April, as Russia, Syria and the United States remained focused on annihilating ISIS and the militias of al-Qaida. Some of those who had worked through the crisis, however, were left with lingering concerns. "The Salafists and jihadists got everything they wanted out of their hyped-up Syrian nerve gas ploy," the senior adviser to the U.S. intelligence community told me, referring to the flare up of tensions between Syria, Russia and America.

"The issue is, what if there's another false flag sarin attack credited to hated Syria? Trump has upped the ante and painted himself into a corner with his decision to bomb. And do not think these guys are not planning the next faked attack. Trump will have no choice but to bomb again, and harder. He's incapable of saying he made a mistake."

The White House did not answer specific questions about the bombing of Khan Sheikhoun and the airport of Shayrat. These questions were send via e-mail to the White House on June 15 and never answered.

M. Hersh exposed the My Lai Massacre in Vietnam 1968. He uncovered the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and many other stories about war and politics

[Jun 25, 2017] Macron Breaks With Previous French Policy, Says Sees No Legitimate Successor to Syria's Assad

Notable quotes:
"... "The new perspective that I have had on this subject is that I have not stated that Bashar Assad's departure is a pre-condition for everything because nobody has shown me a legitimate successor," Macron said in an interview to eight European newspapers. ..."
"... He said Assad was an enemy of the Syrian people, but not of France and that Paris' priority was a total commitment to fighting terrorist groups and ensuring the country did not become a failed state. ..."
Jun 25, 2017 | www.haaretz.com

'Assad is the enemy of the Syrian people, not of France,' Macron says in interview with European newspapers

President Emmanuel Macron said in remarks published on Wednesday that he saw no legitimate successor to Syrian President Bashar Assad and that France no longer considered his departure a pre-condition to resolving the six-year conflict.

"The new perspective that I have had on this subject is that I have not stated that Bashar Assad's departure is a pre-condition for everything because nobody has shown me a legitimate successor," Macron said in an interview to eight European newspapers.

He said Assad was an enemy of the Syrian people, but not of France and that Paris' priority was a total commitment to fighting terrorist groups and ensuring the country did not become a failed state.

His comments are in stark contrast to the previous French administration and echo Moscow's stance that there was no viable alternative to Assad.

[Jun 25, 2017] Locked Into Al-Tanf U.S. Military Concedes It Lost The Race To Occupy South-East Syria

Notable quotes:
"... SAA was supposed to be short of troops too, so the recent offensive along Iraqi border is hard to understand. I would guess the forces there are mostly PMU, as observed by the commander of Quds force of IRG. Obama, ever perceptive, tried to prevent it two years ago, but the wily Persians simply proceeded step by step. Is Obama like Aetius of American Empire? ..."
"... Again, thank you for your coverage of this war you have been, over the years, the most accurate source of information that I know of. It is impossible to get any realistic view of actual conditions in Syria from a mainstream media that now has tied itself to pure mythology. ..."
"... While your analysis is good we have to understand that the security services are deeply divided on the Syrian operation and policy in general. The key to understanding Washington is to understand the word "corrupt." Foreign policy is now made on the basis of how much money can be made by a Star Wars' cafe full of operators most of which profit from war and conflict in general and that war specifically. Unfortunately some of these characters are genuine fanatics of various stripes and that's where the danger lies. One hopes the corrupt win out. The military officers directly involved are generally usually of a different breed--they are more pragmatic and mostly interested in avoiding death. ..."
"... Kinda off topic but not sure if folks have seen this article by Seymour Hersh titled 'Trump's Red Line' - https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article165905578/Trump-s-Red-Line.html It's about the alleged sarin attack by Syrian forces in Khan Sheikhoun several months back and Trump's response to it. ..."
"... ... bugger me sideways!!!... Just came across this announcement. This "Assad can stay" thing seems to have legs after all... . Macron Breaks With Previous French Policy ..."
"... This war is far from over, but Putin is certainly winning the bigger strategic game, which is burnishing his reputation as a sober, reliable partner who can be trusted to defend allies' security interests. Everywhere Putin is replacing the NWO with something new, a Eurasian world order. ..."
"... Erdogan faints after morning prayers in Istanbul As crazy as it sounds, I hope the scumbag mini-Sultan isn't about to die. The driving force that is blocking any neocon dreams of partitioning Syria is Putin and Erdogan 100 percent in agreement on no Kurdish state. If Erdogan takes a dirt nap, the US Regime could very well manage to get one of their stooges put in power and everything would go to hell again. ..."
"... The tried and true regime-change recipe is a combination of terrorism/civil unrest and economic hardship. For Iran, that likely entails Kurdish unrest/terror in western Iran and ISIS attacks from Afghanistan plus tightening economic sanctions against Iran plus rising tensions with US+allies. ..."
Jun 25, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
Curtis | Jun 25, 2017 10:29:45 AM | 7
The official US tone from the DoD seems to have changed ... not that one would see that much in US MSM. I was surprised to read in a link posted by an MoA commenter a statement that said US coalition had no intentions to attack Syrian forces. If the US is backing away from regime change, what is next?

I just read this bit at American Conservative:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-america-armed-terrorists-in-syria/
(It's a narrative of how US, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar worked to put tons of arms into Syria. Old news, I know. Maybe they hoped for a destroyed state like Libya. Thankfully, Assad and the Syrian Army/People foiled those plans.)

Piotr Berman | Jun 25, 2017 10:46:40 AM | 10
Pentagon put some impressive military hardware in Tanf, but they lack the boots. They could recruit jihadists from Dara'a area and refugee camps in Jordan, but the number of those who would be "genuinely moderate" (which can be translated as "plausibly pro-American") AND would like to fight is small. If you compare to the campaign against Qaddafi, in Libya most of the army disintegrated, and rather disunited militia had at least numeric parity if not better. The terrain was very conducive to air support, and the bases in Sicily were close. EVEN in those conditions it was a prolonged affair. I guess that Americans perceived one chance, SDF. A lot of troops with reasonable performance, the ideology of the leadership "far from perfect (Communists? Agrarian anarchists?) but not the type of fanatics that starts chopping heads or stab each other the minute you look in a different direction.

SDF showed admirable attitude to inducements, but only up to a point. The goals of YPD which forms the core are not American goals. And those goals contradict core interests of Turkish government -- which is avoiding "painful concessions to PKK". Such concession could lead to a peace, but the fruits would be most probably enjoyed by a subsequent government. Kurds proved themselves to be atrocious ingrates, forming a party with expansive plans of extending popularity beyond Kurdish population and open to a coalition with other opponents of Erdogan. "Sunnistan" dominated by YPG is a "no, no, no!" for Erdogan. Thus when SDF, as instructed, jostled for the territory with the Tiger Force and got air support for that, they got into hot water.

  1. SAA negotiates for the release of their pilot, and the negotiator is ... Brigadier General Suheil al-Hassan. Or perhaps it is a tweet. I suspect that it will take a while, but the pilot will be in good health.
  2. In the meantime, Turks and their puppet force attacks the isolated Afrin, and SAA + Russians assist by joining in the blockade of Afrin. Russians play a particularly deft game, when Turks attacked Afrin before, Russians installed, by invitation, an observer post on Syrian/Turkish border. One can point to other Russian movements to prove that they have the ability to lift the blockade, but, well, they must have some reasons to do it. As Russians are not in the position to replace completely American funding and supplies, they probably will force SDF to put forth only a token effort to compete with SAA for the territory.
  3. Concentrating on the siege of Raqqa and CLOSING completely the siege is a good step in this direction. (4) Plans to send SDF troops to Tanf -- not exactly a summer holiday destination -- had to be cut short as SDF needs to maintain enough troops positioned against ISIS and also against the Turks, and possibly, against SAA and allies.

SAA was supposed to be short of troops too, so the recent offensive along Iraqi border is hard to understand. I would guess the forces there are mostly PMU, as observed by the commander of Quds force of IRG. Obama, ever perceptive, tried to prevent it two years ago, but the wily Persians simply proceeded step by step. Is Obama like Aetius of American Empire?

Banger | Jun 25, 2017 10:53:05 AM | 12
Again, thank you for your coverage of this war you have been, over the years, the most accurate source of information that I know of. It is impossible to get any realistic view of actual conditions in Syria from a mainstream media that now has tied itself to pure mythology.

While your analysis is good we have to understand that the security services are deeply divided on the Syrian operation and policy in general. The key to understanding Washington is to understand the word "corrupt." Foreign policy is now made on the basis of how much money can be made by a Star Wars' cafe full of operators most of which profit from war and conflict in general and that war specifically. Unfortunately some of these characters are genuine fanatics of various stripes and that's where the danger lies. One hopes the corrupt win out. The military officers directly involved are generally usually of a different breed--they are more pragmatic and mostly interested in avoiding death.

On the Washington side the situation

h | Jun 25, 2017 10:53:17 AM | 13
Kinda off topic but not sure if folks have seen this article by Seymour Hersh titled 'Trump's Red Line' - https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article165905578/Trump-s-Red-Line.html It's about the alleged sarin attack by Syrian forces in Khan Sheikhoun several months back and Trump's response to it.
guidoamm | Jun 25, 2017 10:55:47 AM | 14
Am I mistaken in believing that the CIA and the State Department, if not NATO, may not necessarily go along with the Pentagon on this?
guidoamm | Jun 25, 2017 11:00:28 AM | 15
... bugger me sideways!!!... Just came across this announcement. This "Assad can stay" thing seems to have legs after all...
. Macron Breaks With Previous French Policy
plantman | Jun 25, 2017 11:11:56 AM | 16
Excellent, excellent coverage, but way too optimistic. I guess we'll see what happens at Deir Ezzor which I think will be the decisive battle of the war. The US needs Deir Ezzor to consolidate its terrirtorial claims in the east and to establish a Sunni-Kurdish area of control. I don't think we can exclude the possibility that the militia at al Tanf might still split Syrian army lines and head north. The there's the problem of getting the Kurds and Turks to relinquish control of the land they've captured.

This war is far from over, but Putin is certainly winning the bigger strategic game, which is burnishing his reputation as a sober, reliable partner who can be trusted to defend allies' security interests. Everywhere Putin is replacing the NWO with something new, a Eurasian world order.

Brad | Jun 25, 2017 11:12:47 AM | 17
It's still all about Iran. FSA and Kurd labeled Shia Militias as threat. US has annexed a huge chunk of Syria via Kurd and what FSA holds.
Israel appears to be gaining more of the Golan via the safe zone. Game which Putin/Lavrov are conceding.

Lots of Wahhabist Takfiri kooks run off by US from Fallujah and Sunni Triangle in Iraq which US can re organize to trouble Baghdad for years....cut out a new Takfiri kook world in Iraq
West which gives US contract to train Iraqi army Neocon Media Backing.... Maybe go back to the Al Qeada playbook now that ISUS are fleeing. Getting Sunni and Kurd to attack Shia and then blame Iran for sponsoring terror in the Mid east. The Media and Generals have already stated the agenda.

R Winner | Jun 25, 2017 11:26:39 AM | 20
Erdogan faints after morning prayers in Istanbul As crazy as it sounds, I hope the scumbag mini-Sultan isn't about to die. The driving force that is blocking any neocon dreams of partitioning Syria is Putin and Erdogan 100 percent in agreement on no Kurdish state. If Erdogan takes a dirt nap, the US Regime could very well manage to get one of their stooges put in power and everything would go to hell again.

Jackrabbit | Jun 25, 2017 11:41:03 AM | 21
I wouldn't discard your popcorn maker just yet.
  1. Seems to me that the Colonel is merely repeating what people in the military and the US public have been told: we are in Syria to fight ISIS NOT to fight the Syrian government or the Russians.
  2. Remember: Obama didn't threaten war, he threatened "costs" and a quagmire. I don't think anyone in the US wants direct conflict with Russia. USA+allies have made tremendous gains without direct conflict with Russia. Doesn't control of al Tanf mean control of a major roadway? Doesn't that impose a "cost"? Isn't that reason enough for USA to remain at al Tanf indefinitely?
  3. I can't see the US carving out a salafist principality. That was the wishes of "allies in the region" (I think that was the phrasing). Yeah, US would help, but not want to be seen as the major cause of establishing it. Now, if peace is made between Saudis and Israel, then all bets are off. Being guarantor of 'Salafist Principality' might then be positioned as part of the deal for a peace in the ME (which has supposedly been a decades-long effort). This would be negotiated with the Russians - if they balk, they would be depicted as standing in the way of ME peace.
  4. We should remember that the 'Assad must go!' effort was part of an overall anti-Iranian effort. Russia's support for Syria has blocked Syrian regime-change (for now) so the Zionist-Whabbi Alliance will adjust to this reality. I expect the focus has shifted to Iran itself (only after having tested Russian resolve) . The Zionist-Whabbi's goal is likely to regime-change Iran before it can join SCO.

The tried and true regime-change recipe is a combination of terrorism/civil unrest and economic hardship. For Iran, that likely entails Kurdish unrest/terror in western Iran and ISIS attacks from Afghanistan plus tightening economic sanctions against Iran plus rising tensions with US+allies.

[Jun 25, 2017] The Latest Escalation in Syria – What Is Really Going On - The Unz Review

Jun 25, 2017 | www.unz.com

By now most of you have heard the latest bad news of out Syria: on June 18 th a US F/A-18E Super Hornet (1999) used a AIM-120 AMRAAM (1991) to shoot down a Syrian Air Force Su-22 (1970). Two days later, June 20 th , a US F-15E Strike Eagle shot down an Iranian IRGC Shahed 129 drone. The excuse used each time was that there was a threat to US and US supported forces. The reality is, of course, that the US are simply trying to stop the advance of the Syrian army. This was thus a typical American "show of force". Except that, of course, shooting a 47 year old Soviet era Su-22 fighter-bomber is hardly an impressive feat. Neither is shooting a unmanned drone. There is a pattern here, however, and that pattern is that all US actions so far have been solely for show: the basically failed bombing of the Syria military airbase, the bombing of the Syrian army column, the shooting down of the Syrian fighter-bomber and of the Iranian drone – all these actions have no real military value. They do, however, have a provocative value as each time all the eyes turn to Russia to see if the Russians will respond or not.

Russia did respond this time again, but in a very ambiguous and misunderstood manner. The Russians announced, amongst other measure that from now on " any airborne objects, including aircraft and unmanned vehicles of the [US-led] international coalition, located to the west of the Euphrates River, will be tracked by Russian ground and air defense forces as air targets " which I reported as " Russian MoD declares it will shoot down any aircraft flying west of the Euphrates river ". While I gave the exact Russian quote, I did not explain why I paraphrased the Russian words the way I did. Now is a good time to explain this.

First, here is the exact original Russian text :

"В районах выполнения боевых задач российской авиацией в небе Сирии любые воздушные объекты, включая самолёты и беспилотные аппараты международной коалиции, обнаруженные западнее реки Евфрат, будут приниматься на сопровождение российскими наземными и воздушными средствами противовоздушной обороны в качестве воздушных целей"

A literal translation would be:

"In areas of the combat missions of Russian aviation in the skies of Syria any airborne objects, including aircraft and unmanned aerial vehicle of the international coalition discovered to the West of the Euphrates river, will be tracked by Russian ground based an airborne assets as air targets"

So what does this exactly mean in technical-military terms?

A quick look inside a US fighter's cockpit

When an F/A-18 flies over Syria the on-board emission detectors (called radar warning receivers or RWR) inform the pilot of the kind of radar signals the aircraft is detecting. Over Syria that means that the pilot would see a lot of search radars looking in all directions trying to get a complete picture of what is happening in the Syrian skies. The US pilot will be informed that a certain number of Syrian S-300 and Russian S-400 batteries are scanning the skies and most probably see him. So far so good. If there are deconfliction zones or any type of bilateral agreements to warn each other about planned sorties then that kind of radar emissions are no big deal. Likewise US radars (ground, sea or air based) are also scanning the skies and "seeing" the Russian Aerospace Forces' aircraft on their radars and the Russians know that. In this situation neither side is treating anybody as "air targets". When a decision is made to treat an object as an "air target" a completely different type of radar signal is used and a much narrower energy beam is directed at the target which can now be tracked and engaged. The pilot is, of course, immediately informed of this. At this point the pilot is in a very uncomfortable position: he knows that he is being tracked, but he has no way of knowing if a missile has already been launched against him or not. Depending on a number of factors, an AWACS might be able to detect a missile launch, but this might not be enough and it might also be too late.

The kind of missiles fired by S-300/S-400 batteries are extremely fast, over 4,000mph (four thousand miles per hour) which means that a missile launched as far away as 120 miles will reach you in 2 minutes or that a missile launched 30 miles away will reach you in 30 seconds. And just to make things worse, the S-300 can use a special radar mode called "track via missile" where the radar emits a pulse towards the target whose reflection is then received not by the ground based radar, but by the rapidly approaching missile itself, which then sends its reading back to the ground radar which then sends guidance corrections back to the missile. Why is that bad for the aircraft? Because there is no way to tell from the emissions whether a missile has been launched and is already approaching at over 4,000mph or not. The S-300 and S-400 also have other modes, including the Seeker Aided Ground Guidance (SAGG) where the missile also computes a guidance solution (not just the ground radar) and then the two are compared and a Home On Jam (HOJ) mode when the jammed missile then homes directly on the source of the jamming (such as an onboard jamming pod). Furthermore, there are other radar modes available such as the Ground Aided Inertial (GAI) which guides the missile in the immediate proximity of the target where the missile switches on its own radar just before hitting the target. Finally, there is some pretty good evidence that the Russians have perfected a complex datalink system which allows them to fuse into one all the signals they acquire from their missiles, airborne aircraft (fighter, interceptor or AWACS) and ground radars and that means that, in theory, if a US aircraft is outside the flight envelope (reach) of the ground based missiles the signals acquired by the ground base radars could be used to fire an air-to-air missile at the US aircraft (we know that their MiG-31s are capable of such engagements, so I don't see why their much more recent Su-30/Su-35 could not). This would serve to further complicate the situational awareness of the pilot as a missile could be coming from literally any direction. At this point the only logical reaction would be for the US pilot to inform his commanders and get out, fast. Sure, in theory, he could simply continue his mission, but that would be very hard, especially if he suspects that the Syrians might have other, mobile, air defense on the way to, or near, his intended target.

Just try to imagine this: you are flying, in total illegality, over hostile territory and preparing to strike a target when suddenly your radar warning receiver goes off and tells you "you got 30 seconds or (much?) less to decide whether there is a 300lbs (150kg) warhead coming at you at 4000mph (6400kmh) or not". How would you feel if it was you sitting in that cockpit? Would you still be thinking about executing your planned attack?

The normal US strategy is to achieve what is called "air superiority/supremacy" by completely suppressing enemy air defenses and taking control of the skies. If I am not mistaken, the last time the US fighters operated in a meaningfully contested air space was in Vietnam

By the way, these technologies are not uniquely Russian, they are well known in the West, for example the US Patriot SAM also uses TVM, but the Russians have very nicely integrated them into one formidable air defense system.

The bottom line is this: once the US aircraft is "treated like a target" he has no way of knowing if the Syrians, or the Russians, are just being cheeky or whether has has seconds left to live. Put differently, "treating like a target" is tantamount to somebody putting a gun to your head and letting you guess if/when he will pull the trigger.

So yes, the Russian statement most definitely was a "threat to shoot down"!

Next, a look into the Russian side of the equation

To understand why the Russians used the words "treat like an air target" rather than "will shoot down" you need to remember that Russia is still the weaker party here. There is nothing worse than not delivering on a threat. If the Russians had said "we will shoot down" and then had not done so, they would have made an empty threat. Instead, they said "will treat as an air target" because that leaves them an "out" should they decided not to pull the trigger. However, for the US Navy or Air Force pilot, these considerations are all irrelevant once his detectors report to him that he is being "painted" with the beam of an engagement radar!

So what the Russians did is to greatly unnerve the US crews without actually having to shoot down anybody. It is not a coincidence that the Americans almost immediately stopped flying West of the Euphrates river while the Australians officially decided to bow out from any further air sorties .

It cannot be overemphasized that the very last thing Russia needs is to shoot down a US aircraft over Syria which is exactly what some elements of the Pentagon seem to want. Not only is Russia the weaker side in this conflict, but the Russians also understand the wider political consequences of what would happen if they took the dramatic step to shoot down a US aircraft: a dream come true for the Neocons and a disaster for everybody else.

A quick look from the US Neoconistan and the quest for a "tepid war"

The dynamic in Syria is not fundamentally different from the dynamic in the Ukraine: the Neocons know that they have failed to achieve their primary objective: to control the entire country. They also know that their various related financial schemes have collapsed. Finally, they are fully aware that they owe this defeat to Russia and, especially, to Vladimir Putin. So they fell back on plan B. Plan B is almost as good as Plan A (full control) because Plan B has much wider consequences. Plan B is also very simple: trigger a major crisis with Russia but stay short from a full-scale war. Ideally, Plan B should revolve around a "firm" "reaction" to the Russian "aggression" and a "defense" of the US "allies" in the region. In practical terms this simply means: get the Russians to openly send forces into Novorussia or get the Russians to take military actions against the US or its allies in Syria. Once you get this you can easily see that the latest us attacks in Syria have a minor local purpose – to scare or slow down the Syrians- and a major global purpose – to bait the Russians into using forces against the US or an ally. It bears repeating here that what the Neocons really want is what I call a "tepid" war with Russia: an escalation of tensions to levels not even seen during the Cold War, but not a full-scale "hot" WWIII either. A tepid war would finally re-grant NATO at least some kind of purpose (to protect "our European friends and allies" from the "Russian threat"): the already terminally spineless EU politicians would all be brought into an even more advanced state of subservience, the military budgets would go even higher and Trump would be able to say that he made "America" "great" again. And, who knows, maybe the Russian people would *finally* rise against Putin, you never know! (They wouldn't – but the Neocons have never been deterred from their goofy theories by such minor and altogether irrelevant things as facts or logic).

[Sidebar: I noticed this time again that each time the US tries to bait Russia into some kind of harsh reaction and Russia declines to take the bait, this triggers in immediate surge into the number of comments which vehemently complain that Russia is acting like a pussy, that Putin is a fake, that he is "in cahoots" with the US and/or Israel and that the Russians are weak or that they have "sold out". I am getting a sense that we are dealing with paid US PSYOP operatives whose mission is to use the social media to try to put the Kremlin under pressure with these endless accusations of weakness and selling-out. Since I have no interest in rewarding these folks in any way, I mostly send their recriminations where they belong: to the trash]

Does the Russian strategy work?

To reply to this, don't look at what the Russians do or do not do in the immediate aftermath of a US provocation. Take a higher level look and just see what happens in the mid to long term. Just like in a game of chess, taking the Gambit is not always the correct strategy.

I submit that to evaluate whether Putin's policies are effective or not, to see whether he has "sold out" or "caved in" you need to, for example, look at the situation in Syria (or the Ukraine, for that matter) as it was 2 years ago and then compare with what it is today. Or, alternatively, look at the situation as it is today and come back to re-visit it in 6 months.

One huge difference between the western culture and the way the Russians (or the Chinese for that matter) look at geostrategy is that westerners always look at everything in the short term and tactical level. This is basically the single main reason why both Napoleon and Hitler lost their wars against Russia: an almost exclusive focus on the short term and tactical. In contrast, the Russians are the undisputed masters of operational art (in a purely military sense) and, just like the Chinese, they tend to always keep their eyes on the long-term horizon. Just look at the Turkish downing of a Russian Su-24: everybody bemoaned the lack of "forceful" reaction from Moscow. And then, six months later – what do we have? Exactly.

The modern western culture is centered on various forms of instant gratification, and that is also true for geopolitics. If the other guy does something, western leaders always deliver a "firm" response. They like to "send messages" and they firmly believe that doing something, no matter how symbolic, is better than even the appearance of doing nothing. As for the appearance of doing nothing, it is universally interpreted as a sign of weakness. Russians don't think that way. They don't care about instant gratification, they care only about one thing: victory. And if that means to look weak, that is fine. From a Russian perspective, sending "messages" or taking symbolic actions (like all 4 of the recent US attacks in Syria) are not signs of strength, but signs of weakness. Generally, the Russians don't like to use force which they consider inherently dangerous. But when they do, they never threaten or warn, they take immediate and pragmatic (non-symbolic) action which gets them closer to a specific goal.

Conclusion

The Russian reaction to the latest US attack on Syria was not designed to maximize the approval of the many Internet armchair strategists. It was designed to maximize the discomfort of the US lead "coalition" in Syria while minimizing the risks for Russia. It is precisely by using an ambiguous language which civilians would interpret in one way, and military personnel in another, that the Russians introduced a very disruptive element of unpredictability into the planning of US air operations in Syria.

The Russians are not without their own faults and bad habits and they make mistakes (recognizing the Ukronazi junta in Kiev after the coup was probably such a mistake), but it is important to differentiate between their real weaknesses and mistakes and their very carefully designed strategies. Just because they don't act in the way their putative "supporters" in the West would does not mean that they have "caved in", "blinked first" or any other such nonsense. The first step towards understanding how the Russians function is to stop expecting that they would act just like Americans would.

P.S: By the way, the Syrian pilot shot down made it out alive. Here is a photo of him following his rescue by Syrian special forces:

Andrei Martyanov Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2017 at 2:35 pm GMT

The modern western culture is centered on various forms of instant gratification , and that is also true for geopolitics. If the other guy does something, western leaders always deliver a "firm" response. They like to "send messages"

Excellent point. That is why "West" (US mostly) can not win a single war in 70 years.

anonymous Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2017 at 2:42 pm GMT

A good, interesting article. Much of what's gone on is rather opaque and it's difficult to understand what the meaning of some of these actions are such as in this shoot-down of the Syrian plane. People scratch their heads and try to come up with plausible explanations. Plain stupidity or rashness on the part of some military people? Are there American special forces disguised and embedded with some of these 'rebel' groups that they wanted to protect? Or, more sinisterly and as suggested, there's a plan afoot to ratchet up US-Russian tensions by engineering incidents that could be used to fan war hysteria and panic. A new cold war, properly managed, could be good for business and divert money into the connected people's bank accounts, funneling tax money upwards. It's a racket that kills the expendables. At any rate we'll need a few more pieces of the puzzle to see what the American game plan happens to be.

Exiled off mainstreet Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2017 at 3:35 pm GMT

An excellent article, but a depressing situation. What happens if the Turks start bombing the Kurdish forces supported by the yankee imperium?

TipTipTopKek Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2017 at 4:26 pm GMT

@Andrei Martyanov It's been far more than 70 years since the West won a war. The Soviets won WWII, not the West.

Andrei Martyanov Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2017 at 4:59 pm GMT

@TipTipTopKek But at least it was, without denigrating a decisive role of the Soviet Union, a formal coalition victory. Plus, let's not deny US Navy its well deserved victory in the Pacific. Pacific was largely an American victory, even considering Red Army's crushing defeat of Kwantung Army in 1945. Yet, uncritical and triumphalist lessons of WW II on European Theater in WW II played as tricky of a role in US post-WW II history as did a turkey shoot against third rate Saddam's force in the Gulf in 1990-91. One can not learn properly when the lessons are wrong.

Quartermaster Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2017 at 5:23 pm GMT

Because there is no way to tell from the emissions whether a missile has been launched and is already approaching at over 4,000mph or not.

How little you know.

Just try to imagine this: you are flying, in total illegality, over hostile territory and preparing to strike a target when suddenly your radar warning receiver goes off and tells you "you got 30 seconds or (much?) less to decide whether there is a 300lbs (150kg) warhead coming at you at 4000mph (6400kmh) or not".

Hilarious. You need to give some thought to what you post.

More Saker. To paraphrase Mencken, If you don't read him, your uninformed. If do, you're misinformed.

Quartermaster Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2017 at 5:25 pm GMT

@TipTipTopKek Right. Only Ivan was fighting the Germans. The Rooskis got a lot of war material from the US. The Red Army would have starved to death if not for the us. And that is far from the only thing that went from the US to Stalin.

anon Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2017 at 6:09 pm GMT

"Pakistan's Foreign Office has issued a statement today warning that they will not tolerate drone strikes inside their territory"

Russia should lure Pak away from US orbit , get Taliban on its side and remove Iran from Indian influence- thus getting them rid of US. Russia can engineer a new reality against Saudi Israel US . Russia can prove Afghanistan as the tomb where empire comes to rest

Philip Owen Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2017 at 7:32 pm GMT

So just how cunning is Trump?

Andrei Martyanov Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2017 at 7:38 pm GMT

@anon

Russia should lure Pak away from US orbit

Pakistan (together with India) became full member of Shanghai Cooperation Organization last week or two. This is very significant, to put it mildly, and it is certainly some long way from "US orbit".

Begemot Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2017 at 7:44 pm GMT

@Quartermaster It is true that the Soviets got a lot of Lend-Lease from the US. Britain got much more (about 2/3′s of the total). The Red Army would not have starved to death without the US. American lend-lease made the Soviet victory over Germany easier. It didn't make it possible. Since about 2/3′s of the German army was engaged on the Russian front the Americans should be forever grateful that those German divisions weren't waiting for the Americans in Normandy. The desperate need of many Americans to appear to be indispensable is pathetic.

Thirdeye Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2017 at 8:14 pm GMT

@Quartermaster So please enlighten us, O Wise One.

Sean Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2017 at 8:36 pm GMT

The oh so subtle Russian triumph in Syria that Saker keeps telling us about is apparently not understood by the US forces in Syria. The Assad regieme advances is 100% due to the US not supplying the popular forces with anti aircraft weapons. Assad's pilots are brave when they know there is nothing to fear, but now know they are going to be shot out of the sky over US backed forces, so the Assad advance will halt.

Mikel Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2017 at 8:55 pm GMT

once the US aircraft is "treated like a target" he has no way of knowing if the Syrians, or the Russians, are just being cheeky or whether has has seconds left to live.

It doesn't look like the Israeli pilots feel that way when they bomb their targets inside Syria, which they successfully do on a regular basis.

Thirdeye Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2017 at 9:06 pm GMT

@Quartermaster Through 1944, 80% of German losses were on the eastern front. That's from German records.

anon Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2017 at 9:09 pm GMT

@Sean Yes you rae correct US has not used the Nuclear bomb on Syria . That would ahve sealed Assad's fate and advanced IS if US wanted !!!!!1

Your assertion only stirs a big LOL !!

US has supplied more than enough way more than you can imagine

https://www.libertarianinstitute.org/articles/western-plot-overthrow-assad/

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-america-armed-terrorists-in-syria/

Enlighten yourself.

Romil Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2017 at 10:19 pm GMT

@TipTipTopKek Not true, the USA won a war with Grenada, Panama (Noriega), etc.

Admittedly these wars were a little lopsided.

What is clear since Vietnam is that the USA military/ Political System is not very good at occupying a country after initial battlefield success.

Unless the chaos in Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq etc is the intended result.

dearieme Show Comment Next New Comment June 23, 2017 at 11:42 pm GMT

@Philip Owen Cunning as a TV celebrity.

Macon Richardson Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2017 at 6:32 am GMT

@Mikel You don't say where Israel is bombing in Syria and the conceits of Israel are so boring to me I don't wish to research the topic. Based on history, I assume that Israeli bombing is in the Golan area, extreme south-west Syria.

Israeli "he-man" tactics in the Golan will have no effect on the defense of Syria against ISIS and the USA. Therefore, why should the Russians or the Syrians pay any attention at all to the little circus side show the Israelis present?

As to the Ũbermenschen Israeli pilots flying kamakazi missions into Syria, ho-hum? Write up an outline of a script and we'll send it to Hollywood.

mh505 Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2017 at 10:51 am GMT

@Thirdeye Who gives a damn what the "Quartermaster" thinks?

Rurik Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2017 at 4:06 pm GMT

the Syrian pilot shot down made it out alive.

good!

Mikel Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2017 at 5:16 pm GMT

@Macon Richardson As should be evident, all I did was provide a fact that seems to be in direct contradiction with Saker's technical explanations in this column.

That you don't have any clue of where the Israelis have been bombing, even though it has been widely reported in the media and recognized by both sides, is your problem. And, talking about soporific subjects, discussions over the Israelis/Jews being evil, good, heroic or cowards could hardly be further away from my interest.

I really have no idea about radar systems but the fact that nobody offered an explanation for this contradiction suggests that Saker may be, once again, exaggerating the Russian capabilities.

Carlton Meyer Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2017 at 6:15 pm GMT

While Russia may want caution, Syrian and Iranian militias don't care. ISIS is almost gone from SE Syria, so there is no need for an American base there to train anti-ISIS units. Americans have illegally invaded Syria, and the international community agrees. These militias have mortars and artillery, so can fire away and wait to see if the Americans dare counterattack by air. If they do, Russian missiles are ready for self-defense. Imagine a downed American pilot captured by ISIS.

Meanwhile, Russia shows restraint to enjoy the Qatar situation, with new Saudi demands that compensation is due and the Turkish troops must leave. These dictators have long tolerated American military bases under the assumption it meant American protection. If the USA back stabs Qatar, what will the other Gulf State tyrants think? What if Iranian troops are invited to defend Qatar?

And what about the Turks? They are itching for chance to reclaim NE Syria and its oil fields, which they say the Brits and French stole a hundred years ago. They can wipe out the Kurd forces there at the same time. They are building up forces in Syria for this move. They are just waiting for an excuse to attack.

El Dato Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2017 at 6:39 pm GMT

@Andrei Martyanov Let's call it a American / National-Chinese victory then.

Binding a few hundred thousands imperial troops on the mainland sure counts for something, doesn't it?

El Dato Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2017 at 7:01 pm GMT

@Mikel Why should the Russians anatagonize the Israelis? It costs a lot and is politically inconvenient. Israel is nearby, Russia is not. The minute-long rush of adrenaline would certainly not be worth it.

The clusterfuck is currently such that waiting & waltzing & carrying a stick, any stick, is likely to be the best policyless policy. ( Asterixian Wars come to mind, sorry for the juvenile reference)

A writeup in Haaretz (is this a premium page that is accessible via the print menu? well, I don't care)

http://www.haaretz.com/misc/article-print-page//.premium-1.797481

"We're working productively with Jordan, as we are working with Israel, and I'm not hiding anything from you," Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoygu told his country's parliament late last month. Shoygu even noted his "productive talks" with Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman, with whom he speaks on the phone regularly. Arab media outlets report on continuous communication between Russian and Israeli fighter pilots, who coordinate planned flights, just as Israel coordinates its aerial and other actions in Syria with Russian command headquarters.

The "other actions" include Israel's shipments of humanitarian and military aid to the militias operating in the Syrian side of the Golan Heights, and in the Daraa area nearby. An intense battle has been underway in recent weeks in Daraa as the Syrian army tries to advance with Shi'ite militias and Iranian-backed Hezbollah to suppress the rebels. These efforts are at the heart of coordination talks between Jordan, Russia, the United States and Saudi Arabia. In some of the talks that took place in Jordan, Israelis were on hand, and in other cases coordination was by phone or through emissaries who visited Israel.

Russian1 Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2017 at 10:51 pm GMT

@Quartermaster Americans are criminals killing all over the planet. Raped many girls during the war in many countries did American soldiers and nothing has changed they did the same on Vietnam and Iraq. Just savage animals with a penchant for war and buggery.
Also Eisenhower starved to death 1.2million German soldiers and proof of that is he rerouted supplies and let them die in the open air prisons without food. A cruel nation of barbarians.
The world is at the mercy of American mafia thugs and Russia is the savior behaving with principles.

SYRIA: Faced With Massive US Escalation, How Would Russia Respond? – #WW3 – Infinite Unknown Show Comment Next New Comment June 24, 2017 at 11:35 pm GMT

[ ] The Saker The Unz Review [ ]

nickels Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 12:18 am GMT

The old western Shane is an example where Americans used to be able to take one on the chin for the bigger picture.
But neocons are just animals. I remember in Josephus description of the sacking of Jerusalem, the Israelis were so out of their minds that they not only burnt their own grain during the siege, but their own temple as well.

The Scalpel Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 12:35 am GMT

Certain sources state that a Russian S-300 shot down a US Global Hawk drone over the Mediterranean.

Avery Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 4:24 am GMT

@Begemot {Since about 2/3′s of the German army was engaged on the Russian front}

It was not 2/3rds or ~67%: it was about 80%.
Also, about 80% of Wehrmacht's best, toughest divisions were ground up on the Eastern front. At a terribly high cost to the Red Army men and materiel.

{ . that those German divisions weren't waiting for the Americans in Normandy. }

Even the completely bled out Wehrmacht put American troops through the ringer at the Battle of the Bulge in 1944. With notable exceptions, e.g. the heroic defense of Bastogne, GIs mostly ran as Germans advanced. The disaster was averted when skies cleared and USAF came in and saved the day.

{The desperate need of many Americans to appear to be indispensable is pathetic.}

Indeed.

Russia's Response to Downed Jet and Drone – Site Title Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 5:17 am GMT

[ ] http://www.unz.com/tsaker/the-latest-escalation-in-syria-what-is-really-going-on/ [ ]

Intelligent Dasein Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 6:32 am GMT

@anonymous

A new cold war, properly managed, could be good for business and divert money into the connected people's bank accounts, funneling tax money upwards.

A lot of people around the internet express similar opinions, and the more obtuse of them even festoon their delivery with the same Smedley Butler quote we've all read a million times already, as if there were no limit to the number of occasions upon we needed to be re-informed that "war is a racket."

The problem is, it just isn't true. Nobody-not even the Neocons, not even government bureaucrats, not even the sleaziest defense contractor-could possibly look at America's fiscal predicament and conclude that a new Cold War is financially beneficial to anybody. Something else has to be motivating this, and that something is Boomer vanity.

These guys are just itching for one last game of Cowboys & Indians against the Russians. I find the whole thing quite embarrassing but also rather alarming, considering how serious the consequences could be.

However, I think it's time to retire the "war is a racket" meme. It has no explanatory power in today's world. The age of imperial expansion, of making Latin America safe for fruit companies or whatever Smedley Butler was on about, is well behind us. There is no longer any tincture of geopolitical or economic rationale in Washington's war-making. Every war we fight makes us weaker and poorer, whereas Butler's wars, however ignoble he thought the motives behind them, at least made us stronger and richer. The imperialists of yore knew what they were doing; they could point to some measure of worldly success as justification for their exploits. But nowadays we have only failures; and our imperialists, lacking the dignity even to be robber barons, have instead become dreamers and peddlers of ideology.

The Age of the Neocon Wars, c. 1990-present, is all about vanity. These are "existential" wars in the Sartrian sense, i.e. they are deliberate fabrications and extensions of identity. The Boomers are going on their penultimate journey of self-discovery, predictably wrecking everything in their path as they make burnt offerings to their insatiable egos.

jilles dykstra Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 7:07 am GMT

If 'peaceful' countries want war the trick is to provoke the country you want to attack to make the first move.
Hitler ran into the trap when he attacked Poland in Sept 1939, after Polish provocations since the British guarantee of March 1939.
Japan ran into the trap of Roosevelt's oil boycott.
Saddam did nothing stupid enough to excuse war, therefore Sept 11 was created.
Putin is not stupid, he knows quite well that the western war mongers are waiting for the excuse to attack Russia.
Heightened tensions in Syria in my opinion have but one goal: getting an excuse to attack Russia.
Some kind of Liberty 'accident' would be great.

jilles dykstra Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 7:12 am GMT

@Quartermaster An explanation on why it is hilarious would be great.

Miro23 Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 7:23 am GMT

@Philip Owen

So just how cunning is Trump?

Maybe he's too cunning/clever by half – as in a neo-con collaborator. He was given a mandate to get out of ME conflicts and if he had done what he was elected to do, the US could be getting on with domestic affairs rather than evaluating the possibility of WW3.

Greg Bacon Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 9:55 am GMT

From an April 2003 Haaretz article.

The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservative intellectuals, most of them Jewish, who are pushing President Bush to change the course of history. Two of them, journalists William Kristol and Charles Krauthammer, say it's possible.

This is a war of an elite. [Tom] Friedman laughs: I could give you the names of 25 people (all of whom are at this moment within a five-block radius of this office) who, if you had exiled them to a desert island a year and a half ago, the Iraq war would not have happened.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/features/white-man-s-burden-1.14110

Then it was onto Libya, now Syria, then it will be onto Iran, all the glory of Apartheid Israel.

El Dato Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 10:23 am GMT

@Avery

Even the completely bled out Wehrmacht put American troops through the ringer at the Battle of the Bulge in 1944. With notable exceptions, e.g. the heroic defense of Bastogne, GIs mostly ran as Germans advanced. The disaster was averted when skies cleared and USAF came in and saved the day.

That's in the movies.

"GIs" did not "run", indeed Patton mounted a skillfull counterattack on the move. This last show of the Wehrmacht and Party Armed Forces (who didn't let the occasion to "clean up" in the re-occupied territories pass them by) had little chance of success in any case. Germans ran out of fuel, manpower and maintained equipment while trying to get this Hitler-fairyland-push towards Anvers rolling. The Meuse was never even crossed. Yes, control of the air helped, and the extraordinarily harsh winter did the rest. It was too late in any case.

(Also, in WWII, the US air wing was the "Army Air Forces", the USAF was created 1947, but that's just nitpicking)

Now, if you want to consider a senseless WWI-style grind-war that can be considered Allied failure: Battle of Hürtgen Forest : "The over-all cost of the Siegfried Line Campaign in American personnel was close to 140,000."

El Dato Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 10:25 am GMT

@The Scalpel US hasn't confirmed. They would if true.

El Dato Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 10:42 am GMT

@El Dato Asterixian Wars from the Comic

The Alarmist Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 10:47 am GMT

@TipTipTopKek I once had a pretty young Russian lady ask me (in a bar in Germany, of all places) why we celebrate VE day on 8 May, to which I replied, "That's the day we (she knew I meant Americans, and by that Americans alone) won the war with a bit of help from you guys, of course." If I hadn't said it with a light-hearted smile, I probably would have been run through with a broken vodka bottle on the spot, not to send a message, but, as Saker notes, as a pragmatic response to an arrogant Westerner.

jacques sheete Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 10:48 am GMT

@TipTipTopKek

It's been far more than 70 years since the West won a war. The Soviets won WWII, not the West.

Actually, the Soviet leadership and the Western bankers did any "winning." The rest of us lost, big time, and are still paying.

jacques sheete Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 11:03 am GMT

Very interesting article with too many great points to comment on all.

Some of the best points are:

Plan B is also very simple: trigger a major crisis with Russia

It helps keep dollars flowing to the Pentagon and its Israeli masters.

a dream come true for the Neocons and a disaster for everybody else.

As always.

It bears repeating here that what the Neocons really want is what I call a "tepid" war with Russia:

This also keeps the dollars flowing, keeps the usual nut cases in power and provides a huge source of distraction from the continued hosing of the American goyim,

One huge difference between the western culture and the way the Russians (or the Chinese for that matter) look at geostrategy is that westerners always look at everything in the short term and tactical level.

I've noticed that as a teen and it's still true today. Seems to have worked for the thugs in power, but not so much for the rest of us cattle. Apparently the American doofi (aka doofusses) will remain content to prance around waving their corny flags and proclaiming their "heroism" or whatever BS is fashionable at the time.

The Alarmist Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 11:07 am GMT

@Romil

"Not true, the USA won a war with Grenada ."

Urgent Fury was hardly a war. Been there, done that, and hit the break at Cherry Hill for a little surfing on day 4, 'cos the Rafters and Ivan don't surf.

The Alarmist Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 11:23 am GMT

@Intelligent Dasein

"Nobody-not even the Neocons, not even government bureaucrats, not even the sleaziest defense contractor-could possibly look at America's fiscal predicament and conclude that a new Cold War is financially beneficial to anybody."

Oh you dear, sweet, but misguided soul. The war-profiteers and neo-cons know that when things get fiscally tight they can simply print more of the World's Indispensible Currency TM, and if it gets really bad they will simply do a cram down of the debt, because the ROW doesn't really have a say in the matter. When you owe the world $20T, it's the world that has the problem.

Max Havelaar Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 11:29 am GMT

The Russians are far better victory-strategists (long-term) than the US maddogs Trump/Mattis/McMaster. They are for show and fireworks (white-phosphorous bombs) and show theiir Satanic nature.

The final Victory strategy = turn your ennemies into friends/partners in trade.

Putin has turned Erdogan into a partner with the south-stream pipeline.
And even Qatar may join the East front (Putin gave them majort shares in Russian energy companies).

The Al Sauds and Likudi's, the Jewish extremists on Golan, are the only problems left. But even with Netanyahu, Putin is trying to get a solution, using the Russian Leviathan basin suppport.

Putin may get there in the end.

chris Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 12:04 pm GMT

@Rurik It's amazing how rude the reporting of the incident in the MSM has been in not reporting the fate of the pilot. The point is to underscore his insignificance; they would have much preferred he was killed.

Imperial Circular. 25/06/17. – IMPERIAL ENERGY Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 12:06 pm GMT

[ ] Saker is mistaken: [ ]

headrick Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 12:07 pm GMT

There is no site than can come close to Saker for this ego-political military analysis.
Thanks Vin.

The Scalpel Website Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 12:28 pm GMT

@El Dato US hasn't confirmed. They would if true. They did acknowledge it in a sideways manner

Blogschätzchen des Tages 25.6.2017 | narrenspeise Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 12:31 pm GMT

[ ] dritten Mal innerhalb weniger Wochen möchte ich auf einen Beitrag von The Saker zu Syrien / Russland / USA hinweisen. Er macht [ ]

anonymous Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 1:43 pm GMT

@Intelligent Dasein


A new cold war, properly managed, could be good for business and divert money into the connected people's bank accounts, funneling tax money upwards.
A lot of people around the internet express similar opinions, and the more obtuse of them even festoon their delivery with the same Smedley Butler quote we've all read a million times already, as if there were no limit to the number of occasions upon we needed to be re-informed that "war is a racket."

The problem is, it just isn't true. Nobody---not even the Neocons, not even government bureaucrats, not even the sleaziest defense contractor---could possibly look at America's fiscal predicament and conclude that a new Cold War is financially beneficial to anybody. Something else has to be motivating this, and that something is Boomer vanity.

These guys are just itching for one last game of Cowboys & Indians against the Russians. I find the whole thing quite embarrassing but also rather alarming, considering how serious the consequences could be.

However, I think it's time to retire the "war is a racket" meme. It has no explanatory power in today's world. The age of imperial expansion, of making Latin America safe for fruit companies or whatever Smedley Butler was on about, is well behind us. There is no longer any tincture of geopolitical or economic rationale in Washington's war-making. Every war we fight makes us weaker and poorer, whereas Butler's wars, however ignoble he thought the motives behind them, at least made us stronger and richer. The imperialists of yore knew what they were doing; they could point to some measure of worldly success as justification for their exploits. But nowadays we have only failures; and our imperialists, lacking the dignity even to be robber barons, have instead become dreamers and peddlers of ideology.

The Age of the Neocon Wars, c. 1990-present, is all about vanity. These are "existential" wars in the Sartrian sense, i.e. they are deliberate fabrications and extensions of identity. The Boomers are going on their penultimate journey of self-discovery, predictably wrecking everything in their path as they make burnt offerings to their insatiable egos.

that something is Boomer vanity.

These guys are just itching for one last game of Cowboys & Indians

is all about vanity

insatiable egos.

What a dumb comment. It's all reducible to the personal psychology of a particular generation, it's "all about vanity", all about "insatiable egos". We're trying to have a serious discussion about important issues and random comic book reading commenters insist on projecting their weird Freudian fantasies onto everything.
Yeah, if everyone weren't so darn vain.

El Dato Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 2:09 pm GMT

@The Scalpel But this is in California.

If it was shot down in Syria, ysure that neocons would take to the Sunday morning TV programme and basically spoil eveyone's breakfast.

Plus, Russia would certainly recount the why & wherefore of this shootdown. It would be a "message".

After all, it's not as if you could sic an S-300 missile onto a Global Hawk under a sudden panicky impulse. The Good Drone would be readily identifiable as such (high-altitude, slow, possibly with a transponder on)

KenH Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 2:29 pm GMT

@The Alarmist More like the Russians would not have won had the U.S. not opened up a second front via the D-Day invasion. Stalin had been pestering Roosevelt and Churchill to do so for a long time and they both eventually complied with good ole "uncle Joe's" demand. Germany's army group center in Russia began disintegrating shortly after the Normandy invasion and allowed Russia to permanently stay on the offensive for the remainder of the war.

Without the D-Day invasion the Russo-German war would have likely resulted in a stalemate with Germany still holding on to some Russian territory.

jilles dykstra Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 2:46 pm GMT

@Max Havelaar http://luftpost-kl.de/luftpost-archiv/LP_16/LP10517_250617.pdf

The document begins in german, the english original is after the german version.

jilles dykstra Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 2:49 pm GMT

@KenH Churchill never agreed, he wanted an invasion in the Adriatic.
For FDR Stalin was Uncle Joe, never for Churchill.
FDR died before Uncle Joe showed his real nature through the Berlin blockade.
The obliteration of Dresden had not impressed him enough.

for-the-record Show Comment Next New Comment June 25, 2017 at 3:11 pm GMT

@KenH More like the Russians would not have won had the U.S. not opened up a second front via the D-Day invasion. Stalin had been pestering Roosevelt and Churchill to do so for a long time and they both eventually complied with good ole "uncle Joe's" demand. Germany's army group center in Russia began disintegrating shortly after the Normandy invasion and allowed Russia to permanently stay on the offensive for the remainder of the war.

Without the D-Day invasion the Russo-German war would have likely resulted in a stalemate with Germany still holding on to some Russian territory.

More like the Russians would not have won had the U.S. not opened up a second front via the D-Day invasion. . . Germany's army group center in Russia began disintegrating shortly after the Normandy invasion and allowed Russia to permanently stay on the offensive for the remainder of the war.

On D-Day the Red Army was already beyond the frontiers of Russia, having entered northern Romania and (pre-War) Poland.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:1944-06-01GerWW2BattlefrontAtlas.jpg

[Jun 25, 2017] If Russia Wants the Syria Mess, Let Them Have It by Ted Galen Carpente

Jun 25, 2017 | nationalinterest.org

U.S. leaders are-to put it mildly-indifferent to Moscow's concerns. But while Russia's Syria policy is straightforward and coherent, U.S. policy is a contradictory, incoherent mess. The Obama administration made it clear that Bashar al-Assad could not be part of any future Syrian government. At first, the Trump administration seemed inclined to reconsider that approach. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson initially indicated that Washington would no longer demand Assad's removal. But just days later, a chemical attack occurred in rebel-held town. Trump immediately blamed Assad's forces (despite conflicting evidence ) and ordered cruise-missile strikes against the Syrian air base that Washington alleged was the source of the attack. Tillerson subsequently stated that Assad must leave office before any political settlement could occur (essentially a return to the Obama policy), only to say days later that the Trump administration's policy had not changed and that regime change was not part of the agenda. By this time, intelligent observers could be excused if they were totally confused.

That is hardly the only manifestation of U.S. policy incoherence regarding Syria. Washington's attempt to calibrate support so that it strengthens so-called Syrian moderates has led to multiple embarrassing episodes. The Obama administration's program to identify and train moderate military units was a $500 million fiasco that produced only a handful of fighters-most of whom were promptly captured by or surrendered to their adversaries. Other ventures fared little better. At one point a CIA-backed Syrian faction apparently engaged in combat against another faction that the Pentagon supported . More recently, Washington has been caught in a dilemma as fellow NATO member Turkey attacked Syrian Kurdish units that were battling ISIS with American assistance.

Russia is especially mystified at the U.S. flirtation with factions that are anything but secular moderates. One of those groups is the Nusra Front, at one time Al Qaeda's affiliate in Syria. Former CIA Director David Petraeus openly advocated U.S. military cooperation with that organization. Other de facto U.S. rebel allies display more than few signs of being Islamists rather than moderates-even given a broad definition of the latter term. Moscow's fury reached a new level in the past few weeks as the United States has launched air strikes against militias allied with the Assad regime in southeastern Syria. Russia asserts that those forces were battling ISIS and other militant factions, and that Washington's actions play into the hands of Islamic terrorists.

Both the Kremlin and the White House need to make serious moves to defuse growing tensions before a potentially cataclysmic clash takes place between Russian and American forces in Syria. The bulk of the changes must come from the American side.

The United States should defer to Russia regarding Syria policy. Moscow has far more significant security interests at stake in Syria and the broader Middle East. Northern Syria lies barely 600 miles from the Russian frontier. Syria is some 6,000 miles from America's homeland. In the process of deferring to Russia, Washington would also off-load the responsibility and risks onto the Kremlin.

It is doubtful that any outside power can truly bring an end to the fighting in Syria, much less restore a stable, united country. Such intervention thus far has bred only resentment and terrorist retaliation. It is better if Russia incurs the risks and suffers the negative consequences of geopolitical meddling than if the United States does so. Syria could well become another Afghanistan for Russia. That would be tragic, but it is preferable to Syria becoming another Vietnam or Iraq for America. And continued U.S. meddling in Syria certainly is not worth triggering a new cold war -and perhaps a hot war-with Russia. Yet that is the perilous path our nation is following.

Ted Galen Carpenter, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and a contributing editor at the National Interest, is the author of ten books, the contributing editor of ten books, and the author of more than 650 articles on international affairs.

[Jun 25, 2017] US Army Preparing to Occupy Large Part of Syria

Jun 24, 2017 | en.farsnews.com

"Now that the ISIL is on the verge of full collapse and has only small parts under its hold in Raqqa and Mosul cities, the Pentagon has taken the opportunity and increased its forces in Syria to seize control of ISIL's lost lands," Andrey Kushkin said.

"The move, is exactly the one that happened in World War II. The US army delayed in opening the second front and then opened it after disintegration of territories was possible, that is why Washington has increased its forces to disintegrate the country and bring large parts of it under its control," Kushkin added.

He further added that the US, meantime, has deployed High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) in Southern Syria in order to cover vast areas of land in the region, adding that the US decision to deploy the missile systems is a clear warning to the Damascus government.

Kushkin went on to say that the US will not hesitate to use the HIMARS to show its power and underline its objectives in Syria.

He underscored that the US is serious to turn Syria into a new Afghanistan or Iraq.

Last week, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, commenting on the US military moves, pointed to the near absence of ISIL or other terrorist groups in the vicinity of the HIMARS' staging area.

Earlier this month, the United States transferred two HIMARS multiple-launch rocket systems from Jordan. The systems were deployed at the US special operations forces base near al-Tanf located 11 miles from the Jordanian border, Sputnik reported.

Lavrov said the Russian military was analyzing the US deployment of artillery systems in Southern Syria where terrorist groups were said to be virtually absent.

"The Russian military is naturally analyzing everything that is happening in this country, including taking into account the channel that we have with the US to prevent unintentional incidents," Lavrov added.

"In this area, there are practically no Daesh (ISIL or ISIS) units and the deployment there of such serious weapons, which are not particularly suitable to combat Daesh will not ensure the stability of communication channels between government and pro-government forces in Syria and their partners in neighboring Iraq," he stressed.

[Jun 25, 2017] Everyone is focused on the war in Syria and the turmoil in Yemen and not on the going Israeli land grabs.

Notable quotes:
"... Those despicable Americans think they can enter a sovereign state, occupy it, kill Syrian soldiers and civilians with total impunity... ..."
"... Imagine if Syria invade US and occupied an area in Texas near Mexico ., then killed Americans soldiers and civilians....how would Americans and the 'international community react? ..."
"... Everyone is focused on the war in Syria and the turmoil in Yemen and not on the going Israeli land grabs. ..."
www.theamericanconservative.com
brian | Jun 25, 2017 6:21:19 PM | 50'

When Syrian government forces moved towards the al-Tanf area the U.S. military bombed them and unilaterally claimed a "deconfliction-zone", i.e occupied territory, around the station.'

Those despicable Americans think they can enter a sovereign state, occupy it, kill Syrian soldiers and civilians with total impunity...

Imagine if Syria invade US and occupied an area in Texas near Mexico ., then killed Americans soldiers and civilians....how would Americans and the 'international community react?

hose202 | Jun 25, 2017 10:05:52 PM | 59

Everyone is focused on the war in Syria and the turmoil in Yemen and not on the going Israeli land grabs.

the I hate you anti morality acts of religious groups, and the inter Muslim conflicts, but the true driver in this chaos may be the LNG business.

Investors at Sabine Pass bid to replace Russian gas sales and ramping up Iranian gas sales in European Markets with USA produced liquefied Natural Gas, which is concentrated at Sabine Pass for transport via globally capable LNG transport vessels.

Disappointing LNG market shares in Europe thus far, coupled to strong Russian competition from its under sea pipeline to Germany & NORD2 and the growing strength of SCO and Brics..may explain the next few years.

Its about competition in natural gas.. not oil..

[Jun 25, 2017] How America Armed Terrorists in Syria

Jun 25, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com
Three-term Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii, a member of both the Armed Services and Foreign Affairs committees, has proposed legislation that would prohibit any U.S. assistance to terrorist organizations in Syria as well as to any organization working directly with them. Equally important, it would prohibit U.S. military sales and other forms of military cooperation with other countries that provide arms or financing to those terrorists and their collaborators.

Gabbard's "Stop Arming Terrorists Act" challenges for the first time in Congress a U.S. policy toward the conflict in the Syrian civil war that should have set off alarm bells long ago: in 2012-13 the Obama administration helped its Sunni allies Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar provide arms to Syrian and non-Syrian armed groups to force President Bashar al-Assad out of power. And in 2013 the administration began to provide arms to what the CIA judged to be "relatively moderate" anti-Assad groups-meaning they incorporated various degrees of Islamic extremism.

That policy, ostensibly aimed at helping replace the Assad regime with a more democratic alternative, has actually helped build up al Qaeda's Syrian franchise al Nusra Front into the dominant threat to Assad.

The supporters of this arms-supply policy believe it is necessary as pushback against Iranian influence in Syria. But that argument skirts the real issue raised by the policy's history. The Obama administration's Syria policy effectively sold out the U.S. interest that was supposed to be the touchstone of the "Global War on Terrorism"-the eradication of al Qaeda and its terrorist affiliates. The United States has instead subordinated that U.S. interest in counter-terrorism to the interests of its Sunni allies. In doing so it has helped create a new terrorist threat in the heart of the Middle East.

The policy of arming military groups committed to overthrowing the government of President Bashar al-Assad began in September 2011, when President Barack Obama was pressed by his Sunni allies-Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar-to supply heavy weapons to a military opposition to Assad they were determined to establish. Turkey and the Gulf regimes wanted the United States to provide anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons to the rebels, according to a former Obama Administration official involved in Middle East issues.

Obama refused to provide arms to the opposition, but he agreed to provide covert U.S. logistical help i n carrying out a campaign of military assistance to arm opposition groups. CIA involvement in the arming of anti-Assad forces began with arranging for the shipment of weapons from the stocks of the Gaddafi regime that had been stored in Benghazi. CIA-controlled firms shipped the weapons from the military port of Benghazi to two small ports in Syria using former U.S. military personnel to manage the logistics, as investigative reporter Sy Hersh detailed in 2014 . The funding for the program came mainly from the Saudis.

A declassified October 2012 Defense Intelligence Agency report revealed that the shipment in late August 2012 had included 500 sniper rifles, 100 RPG (rocket propelled grenade launchers) along with 300 RPG rounds and 400 howitzers. Each arms shipment encompassed as many as ten shipping containers, it reported, each of which held about 48,000 pounds of cargo. That suggests a total payload of up to 250 tons of weapons per shipment. Even if the CIA had organized only one shipment per month, the arms shipments would have totaled 2,750 tons of arms bound ultimately for Syria from October 2011 through August 2012. More likely it was a multiple of that figure.

The CIA's covert arms shipments from Libya came to an abrupt halt in September 2012 when Libyan militants attacked and burned the embassy annex in Benghazi that had been used to support the operation. By then, however, a much larger channel for arming anti-government forces was opening up. The CIA put the Saudis in touch with a senior Croatian official who had offered to sell large quantities of arms left over from the Balkan Wars of the 1990s. And the CIA helped them shop for weapons from arms dealers and governments in several other former Soviet bloc countries.

Flush with weapons acquired from both the CIA Libya program and from the Croatians, the Saudis and Qataris dramatically increased the number of flights by military cargo planes to Turkey in December 2012 and continued that intensive pace for the next two and a half months. The New York Times reported a total 160 such flights through mid-March 2013. The most common cargo plane in use in the Gulf, the Ilyushin IL-76 , can carry roughly 50 tons of cargo on a flight, which would indicate that as much as 8,000 tons of weapons poured across the Turkish border into Syria just in late 2012 and in 2013.

One U.S. official called the new level of arms deliveries to Syrian rebels a "cataract of weaponry." And a year-long investigation by the Balkan Investigative Reporting Network and the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project revealed that the Saudis were intent on building up a powerful conventional army in Syria. The "end-use certificate" for weapons purchased from an arms company in Belgrade, Serbia, in May 2013 includes 500 Soviet-designed PG-7VR rocket launchers that can penetrate even heavily-armored tanks, along with two million rounds; 50 Konkurs anti-tank missile launchers and 500 missiles, 50 anti-aircraft guns mounted on armored vehicles, 10,000 fragmentation rounds for OG-7 rocket launchers capable of piercing heavy body armor; four truck-mounted BM-21 GRAD multiple rocket launchers, each of which fires 40 rockets at a time with a range of 12 to 19 miles, along with 20,000 GRAD rockets.

The end user document for another Saudi order from the same Serbian company listed 300 tanks, 2,000 RPG launchers, and 16,500 other rocket launchers, one million rounds for ZU-23-2 anti-aircraft guns, and 315 million cartridges for various other guns.

Those two purchases were only a fraction of the totality of the arms obtained by the Saudis over the next few years from eight Balkan nations. Investigators found that the Saudis made their biggest arms deals with former Soviet bloc states in 2015, and that the weapons included many that had just come off factory production lines. Nearly 40 percent of the arms the Saudis purchased from those countries, moreover, still had not been delivered by early 2017. So the Saudis had already contracted for enough weaponry to keep a large-scale conventional war in Syria going for several more years.

By far the most consequential single Saudi arms purchase was not from the Balkans, however, but from the United States. It was the December 2013 U.S. sale of 15,000 TOW anti-tank missiles to the Saudis at a cost of about $1 billion-the result of Obama's decision earlier that year to reverse his ban on lethal assistance to anti-Assad armed groups. The Saudis had agreed, moreover, that those anti-tank missiles would be doled out to Syrian groups only at U.S. discretion. The TOW missiles began to arrive in Syria in 2014 and soon had a major impact on the military balance.

This flood of weapons into Syria, along with the entry of 20,000 foreign fighters into the country-primarily through Turkey-largely defined the nature of the conflict. These armaments helped make al Qaeda's Syrian franchise, al Nusra Front (now renamed Tahrir al-Sham or Levant Liberation Organization) and its close allies by far the most powerful anti-Assad forces in Syria- and gave rise to the Islamic State .

By late 2012, it became clear to U.S. officials that the largest share of the arms that began flowing into Syria early in the year were going to the rapidly growing al Qaeda presence in the country. In October 2012, U.S. officials acknowledged off the record for the first time to the New York Times that "most" of the arms that had been shipped to armed opposition groups in Syria with U.S. logistical assistance during the previous year had gone to "hardline Islamic jihadists"- obviously meaning al Qaeda's Syrian franchise, al Nusra.

Al Nusra Front and its allies became the main recipients of the weapons because the Saudis, Turks, and Qataris wanted the arms to go to the military units that were most successful in attacking government targets. And by the summer of 2012, al Nusra Front, buttressed by the thousands of foreign jihadists pouring into the country across the Turkish border, was already taking the lead in attacks on the Syrian government in coordination with "Free Syrian Army" brigades.

In November and December 2012, al Nusra Front began establishing formal "joint operations rooms" with those calling themselves "Free Syrian Army" on several battlefronts, as Charles Lister chronicles in his book The Syrian Jihad . One such commander favored by Washington was Col. Abdul Jabbar al-Oqaidi, a former Syrian army officer who headed something called the Aleppo Revolutionary Military Council. Ambassador Robert Ford, who continued to hold that position even after he had been withdrawn from Syria, publicly visited Oqaidi in May 2013 to express U.S. support for him and the FSA.

But Oqaidi and his troops were junior partners in a coalition in Aleppo in which al Nusra was by far the strongest element. That reality is clearly reflected in a video in which Oqaidi describes his good relations with officials of the "Islamic State" and is shown joining the main jihadist commander in the Aleppo region celebrating the capture of the Syrian government's Menagh Air Base in September 2013.

By early 2013, in fact, the "Free Syrian Army," which had never actually been a military organization with any troops, had ceased to have any real significance in the Syria conflict. New anti-Assad armed groups had stopped using the name even as a "brand" to identify themselves, as a leading specialist on the conflict observed.

So, when weapons from Turkey arrived at the various battlefronts, it was understood by all the non-jihadist groups that they would be shared with al Nusra Front and its close allies. A report by McClatchy in early 2013, on a town in north central Syria, showed how the military arrangements between al Nusra and those brigades calling themselves "Free Syrian Army" governed the distribution of weapons. One of those units, the Victory Brigade, had participated in a "joint operations room" with al Qaeda's most important military ally, Ahrar al Sham, in a successful attack on a strategic town a few weeks earlier. A visiting reporter watched that brigade and Ahrar al Sham show off new sophisticated weapons that included Russian-made RPG27 shoulder-fired rocket-propelled anti-tank grenades and RG6 grenade launchers.

When asked if the Victory Brigade had shared its new weapons with Ahrar al Sham, the latter's spokesman responded, "Of course they share their weapons with us. We fight together."

Turkey and Qatar consciously chose al Qaeda and its closest ally, Ahrar al Sham, as the recipients of weapons systems. In late 2013 and early 2014, several truckloads of arms bound for the province of Hatay, just south of the Turkish border, were intercepted by Turkish police. They had Turkish intelligence personnel on board, according to later Turkish police court testimony . The province was controlled by Ahrar al Sham. In fact Turkey soon began to treat Ahrar al Sham as its primary client in Syria, according to Faysal Itani , a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council's Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East.

A Qatari intelligence operative who had been involved in shipping arms to extremist groups in Libya was a key figure in directing the flow of arms from Turkey into Syria. An Arab intelligence source familiar with the discussions among the external suppliers near the Syrian border in Turkey during those years told the Washington Post's David Ignatius that when one of the participants warned that the outside powers were building up the jihadists while the non-Islamist groups were withering away, the Qatari operative responded, "I will send weapons to al Qaeda if it will help."

The Qataris did funnel arms to both al Nusra Front and Ahrar al Sham, according to a Middle Eastern diplomatic source. The Obama administration's National Security Council staff proposed in 2013 that the United States signal U.S. displeasure with Qatar over its arming of extremists in both Syria and Libya by withdrawing a squadron of fighter planes from the U.S. airbase at al-Udeid, Qatar. The Pentagon vetoed that mild form of pressure, however, to protect its access to its base in Qatar.

President Obama himself confronted Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan over his government's support for the jihadists at a private White House dinner in May 2013, as recounted by Hersh. "We know what you're doing with the radicals in Syria," he quotes Obama as saying to Erdogan.

The administration addressed Turkey's cooperation with the al Nusra publicly, however, only fleetingly in late 2014. Shortly after leaving Ankara, Francis Ricciardone, the U.S. ambassador to Turkey from 2011 through mid-2014, told The Daily Telegraph of London that Turkey had "worked with groups, frankly, for a period, including al Nusra."

The closest Washington came to a public reprimand of its allies over the arming of terrorists in Syria was when Vice President Joe Biden criticized their role in October 2014. In impromptu remarks at Harvard University's Kennedy School, Biden complained that "our biggest problem is our allies." The forces they had supplied with arms, he said, were "al Nusra and al Qaeda and the extremist elements of jihadis coming from other parts of the world."

Biden quickly apologized for the remarks, explaining that he didn't mean that U.S. allies had deliberately helped the jihadists. But Ambassador Ford confirmed his complaint, telling BBC , "What Biden said about the allies aggravating the problem of extremism is true."

In June 2013 Obama approved the first direct U.S. lethal military aid to rebel brigades that had been vetted by the CIA By spring 2014, the U.S.-made BGM-71E anti-tank missiles from the 15,000 transferred to the Saudis began to appear in the hands of selected anti-Assad groups. But the CIA imposed the condition that the group receiving them would not cooperate with the al Nusra Front or its allies.

That condition implied that Washington was supplying military groups that were strong enough to maintain their independence from al Nusra Front. But the groups on the CIA's list of vetted "relatively moderate" armed groups were all highly vulnerable to takeover by the al Qaeda affiliate. In November 2014, al Nusra Front troops struck the two strongest CIA-supported armed groups, Harakat Hazm and the Syrian Revolutionary Front on successive days and seized their heavy weapons, including both TOW anti-tank missiles and GRAD rockets.

In early March 2015, the Harakat Hazm Aleppo branch dissolved itself, and al Nusra Front promptly showed off photos of the TOW missiles and other equipment they had captured from it. And in March 2016, al Nusra Front troops attacked the headquarters of the 13th Division in northwestern Idlib province and seized all of its TOW missiles. Later that month, al Nusra Front released a video of its troops using the TOW missiles it had captured.

But that wasn't the only way for al Nusra Front to benefit from the CIA's largesse. Along with its close ally Ahrar al Sham, the terrorist organization began planning for a campaign to take complete control of Idlib province in the winter of 2014-15. Abandoning any pretense of distance from al Qaeda, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar worked with al Nusra on the creation of a new military formation for Idlib called the "Army of Conquest," consisting of the al Qaeda affiliate and its closest allies. Saudi Arabia and Qatar provided more weapons for the campaign, while Turkey facilitated their passage . On March 28, just four days after launching the campaign, the Army of Conquest successfully gained control of Idlib City.

The non-jihadist armed groups getting advanced weapons from the CIA assistance were not part of the initial assault on Idlib City. After the capture of Idlib the U.S.-led operations room for Syria in southern Turkey signaled to the CIA-supported groups in Idlib that they could now participate in the campaign to consolidate control over the rest of the province. According to Lister , the British researcher on jihadists in Syria who maintains contacts with both jihadist and other armed groups, recipients of CIA weapons, such as the Fursan al haq brigade and Division 13, did join the Idlib campaign alongside al Nusra Front without any move by the CIA to cut them off.

As the Idlib offensive began, the CIA-supported groups were getting TOW missiles in larger numbers, and they now used them with great effectiveness against the Syrian army tanks. That was the beginning of a new phase of the war, in which U.S. policy was to support an alliance between "relatively moderate" groups and the al Nusra Front.

The new alliance was carried over to Aleppo, where jihadist groups close to Nusra Front formed a new command called Fateh Halab ("Aleppo Conquest") with nine armed groups in Aleppo province which were getting CIA assistance. The CIA-supported groups could claim that they weren't cooperating with al Nusra Front because the al Qaeda franchise was not officially on the list of participants in the command. But as the report on the new command clearly implied , this was merely a way of allowing the CIA to continue providing weapons to its clients, despite their de facto alliance with al Qaeda.

The significance of all this is clear: by helping its Sunni allies provide weapons to al Nusra Front and its allies and by funneling into the war zone sophisticated weapons that were bound to fall into al Nusra hands or strengthen their overall military position, U.S. policy has been largely responsible for having extended al Qaeda's power across a significant part of Syrian territory. The CIA and the Pentagon appear to be ready to tolerate such a betrayal of America's stated counter-terrorism mission. Unless either Congress or the White House confronts that betrayal explicitly, as Tulsi Gabbard's legislation would force them to do, U.S. policy will continue to be complicit in the consolidation of power by al Qaeda in Syria, even if the Islamic State is defeated there.

Gareth Porter is an independent journalist and winner of the 2012 Gellhorn Prize for journalism. He is the author of numerous books, including Manufactured Crisis: The Untold Story of the Iran Nuclear Scare (Just World Books, 2014).

  • Stewart , says: June 22, 2017 at 3:26 pm
    America has been doing the same thing in Syria that it did in Afghanistan in the 80s when they armed and trained Bin Laden and the Mujahideen to create Al Qaeda and look what that led to 9/11 only this time their criminal actions of arming Jihadists have led to terrorist attacks in Europe.
    Centralist , says: June 22, 2017 at 4:17 pm
    I think the largest problem with US Foreign Policy is we are rather ignorant of any aspect of the Middle East or its politics even after all that time in Iraq. It is almost embarrassing the fact we are a society that seem to reward and encourage ignorance at all levels of it. At one point in time many politicians lacked formal education yet they were all highly self educated. Lincoln was a self trained lawyer from a humble background. I

    Ignorance is not a virtue unless you are Orwellian in thought.

    Johann , says: June 23, 2017 at 10:03 am
    Cutting through all the propaganda, Assad is the least bad realistic option for syria. If Assad falls, there will be true genocide.
    Steve Diamond , says: June 23, 2017 at 10:21 am
    "ostensibly aimed at helping replace the Assad regime with a more democratic alternative" – That is the smartest insight of this story. US policy in the region strongly favors relatively secular dictators. Democracy is seen as a total threat to "stability," brutal US-allied regimes. The US should either stop meddling, or genuinely support democratic reform, but not lie to the American people by meddling in the name of democracy.
    Stephen J,Gray , says: June 23, 2017 at 11:26 am
    Here is an excerpt from Tulsi Gabbard's Press release.
    Why don't you publish it?

    "Under U.S. law it is illegal for any American to provide money or assistance to al-Qaeda, ISIS or other terrorist groups. If you or I gave money, weapons or support to al-Qaeda or ISIS, we would be thrown in jail. Yet the U.S. government has been violating this law for years, quietly supporting allies and partners of al-Qaeda, ISIL, Jabhat Fateh al Sham and other terrorist groups with money, weapons, and intelligence support, in their fight to overthrow the Syrian government.[i] Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, December 8, 2016,Press Release.

    https://gabbard.house.gov/news/press-releases/video-rep-tulsi-gabbard-introduces-legislation-stop-arming-terrorists

    Peter , says: June 23, 2017 at 12:49 pm
    Could it get much worse? American wars in the Middle East have been a total disaster. For a while it looked as if Trump might be the game changer, someone who would finally pull us out. Instead, the situation is getting worse. ISIS is spreading like a cancer in Europe, with a flood of refugees changing the character of Europe permanently perhaps. Meanwhile, the non-Islamist groups were withering away" according to this article, because the US of all people are arming the terrorists. Geez, I wonder if that makes the US a terrorist nation? (Sadly we recently had a choice of partnering with Russia to wipe out ISIS, but we decided to play the sinister game of power politics instead. Clearly the Turks, Saudis other Sunis have been aiding and abetting ISIS in various ways. We should switch allegiance to Russia and Iran, IMO.)
    EK , says: June 23, 2017 at 12:53 pm
    So, the State Department's objective in the Middle East is to create a Sunnistan between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers controlled by radical Sunni Islamists of whatever name they chose to call themselves.

    It seems Israel has signed off on this.

    It also seems the Russians are saying "fine." But still the war goes on. Why?

    Is it absolutely necessary that Syria be destroyed as well?

    Why; is it because of Iran and it's puppets the rump of Iraq east of the Euphrates and Syria?

    If this is the final outcome envisioned of what possible relevance is Afghanistan?

    Skeptic , says: June 23, 2017 at 1:17 pm
    Peter: It already is worse.

    It would be wonderful to see some follow-on reporting by Gareth Porter. For example, on whether there was any relation between Gen. Flynn's apparent opposition to this 'strategy' and the campaign to get him out of the White House. Yeah, I know. He spoke with the Russian ambassador. Besides that.

    mark , says: June 23, 2017 at 3:23 pm
    Every terrorist attack, every child that is killed in the UK and Europe, is just a case of terrorism coming home, pigeons coming home to roost. What goes around comes around. It would be no more than justice if London/ Paris/ Brussels, let alone Riyadh and Doha, one day looked like Damascus does today. We have armed/ bankrolled/ trained this filth. They always bite the hand that feeds them.
    Sothguard , says: June 23, 2017 at 3:42 pm
    Yes. We know. The whole reason I voted for Trump, is because he looked as though he would end this conflict. But it didn't happen. And what did I really expect? No morality, no promise is solid.

    We should have banned travel and withdrawn every US and NATO force from the area, down to the last rifle. We are weakened from years of fighting and our enemies know it.

    It's time we elected a non-rich, non-politician, common man to the office of President. Somebody with outstanding morality and nothing to lose.

    Trump doesn't seem to be delivering what I want. And he's not the leader I want.

    I know what the leader I'm looking for is like. Wherever this man is, it's time he step forward. If he doesn't, then I will, but chances are it will be too late by the time I am ready. So how about one of millions of experienced adults show up for once. I'm tired of living my life, ruled by lesser men. Give me somebody to support, for God's sake.

  • [Jun 25, 2017] Iran's Missile Launch and U.S. Downing a Syrian Jet - Explained

    Notable quotes:
    "... ...On Sunday the Wall Street Journal reported that Israel has been broadly supporting local militias near the Golan border, paying salaries and aiding with arms and ammunition. The stated purpose is to establish a buffer that keeps the Assad regime and its supporters away from the border. Israel has always called the aid to the rebels humanitarian and says it amounts to supplying drugs, food and clothing to residents, and in giving medical care to the wounded and sick. But Jerusalem hasn't bothered to deny the new reports, which could indicate that the gamble at stake, not only on the Syrian-Iraqi border but in the Golan too, continues to increase. ..."
    economistsview.typepad.com
    Iran's missile fire toward Syria targets is a show of strength and a message to U.S., Russia and Israel

    ...The war in Syria, which has now lasted longer than World War II, continues to metamorphose. The only thing that stays the same is that Syria remains an arena for regional and world powers fighting over status, image and influence.

    ...The Iranian missile fire on ISIS should be seen as a demonstration of power, a signal by Tehran to the Americans, Russians and also the Israelis that Iran is prepared to escalate the gamble in Syria in order to protect what it has already invested in defending its strategic interests there: support for Assad and establishing its influence in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.

    ...Now the U.S. has also become caught up in this tension, without precision planning and perhaps without giving it enough thought. The Trump administration has no policy for Syria beyond being prepared to act more assertively than Obama did when America's might is challenged. Thus, Trump approved the Cruise missile attack on a Syrian air base two months ago, after Assad used chemical weapons in Idlib province, and Americans shot down a Syrian jet on Sunday. Trump seems not to know or care about the details. Last week he relegated the responsibility for another arena, Afghanistan, to the Pentagon, which now gets to decide how many troops are needed to strengthen the forces there.

    ...Americans are always worried about mission creep, as happened in Vietnam in the 1960s. The concern is that tactical decisions, mainly made to defend specific interests here and there, will ultimately bog America down in a major war that it doesn't want. With Trump, this is a real possibility.

    ...On Sunday the Wall Street Journal reported that Israel has been broadly supporting local militias near the Golan border, paying salaries and aiding with arms and ammunition. The stated purpose is to establish a buffer that keeps the Assad regime and its supporters away from the border. Israel has always called the aid to the rebels humanitarian and says it amounts to supplying drugs, food and clothing to residents, and in giving medical care to the wounded and sick. But Jerusalem hasn't bothered to deny the new reports, which could indicate that the gamble at stake, not only on the Syrian-Iraqi border but in the Golan too, continues to increase.

    Pierre Anonymot  | 2017-06-19 13:46

    syria/America & ISIS

    [Jun 25, 2017] Trump vision might crystallized as a fight against the Muslim Brotherhood and support for Izrael. While Obama supported it and tolerated its agents in the government, such as Huma Abedin

    Notable quotes:
    "... Trump's vision which was spelled out during the campaign: an end to Islamic terrorism, thus détente with Russia who is fighting same, plus support for Isr. Imho, somehow this all cristallized into "against the Muslim Brotherhood." (See DT's speech in KSA. And that is why he first tweeted his approval of the crack-down on Qatar, cos MB.) ..."
    "... The MB was declared a 'terrorist organisation' by Russia (2003), Syria and Egypt (2013), KSA, Bahrein, UAE (2014.) ..."
    "... Ted Cruz (USA) tried to effect same and failed, though I didn't really follow that (?) The opposition was Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, the Clinton machine, (Dems - muslims are cute bunnies), various Muslim 'inclusive' orgs etc. McCain was/is pro-MB?, the cut is not uniquely along pol. partisan lines. The tribes need to be better defined. A gingerly neo-con-neo lib marriage. France is also split on this matter, but in another way, with Socialists, or what used to be the Socialists, against the MB ( go figure >see Laguerre at 14.) ..."
    "... Momo - Mohamed bin Salman is kind of a stupid crazy fool, and also the type who does not see things through, it is busy work for show etc. His rise to power is a prototypcial symptom of a 'failed state/régime.' And Qatar knows where its red line is. ..."
    www.moonofalabama.org

    Noirette | Jun 24, 2017 1:44:23 PM | 83

    Trump's vision which was spelled out during the campaign: an end to Islamic terrorism, thus détente with Russia who is fighting same, plus support for Isr. Imho, somehow this all cristallized into "against the Muslim Brotherhood." (See DT's speech in KSA. And that is why he first tweeted his approval of the crack-down on Qatar, cos MB.)

    The MB was declared a 'terrorist organisation' by Russia (2003), Syria and Egypt (2013), KSA, Bahrein, UAE (2014.)

    Ted Cruz (USA) tried to effect same and failed, though I didn't really follow that (?) The opposition was Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, the Clinton machine, (Dems - muslims are cute bunnies), various Muslim 'inclusive' orgs etc. McCain was/is pro-MB?, the cut is not uniquely along pol. partisan lines. The tribes need to be better defined. A gingerly neo-con-neo lib marriage. France is also split on this matter, but in another way, with Socialists, or what used to be the Socialists, against the MB ( go figure >see Laguerre at 14.)

    The rapprochement between Isr. and KSA which will soon become official -- it will be strong -- (I believe they have been meeting in secret for at least a year) hinges on this point as well. (Many of these changes pre-date Trump, or rather stem from similar causes that saw Trump elected.)

    All this gets very complicated, cracks and fissures and new alliances, new compositions, but as b writes "but there is also danger in such a fight."

    Imho, though, this major Gulfies acrimonious upset will be absorbed and resolved soonish.

    Momo - Mohamed bin Salman is kind of a stupid crazy fool, and also the type who does not see things through, it is busy work for show etc. His rise to power is a prototypcial symptom of a 'failed state/régime.' And Qatar knows where its red line is.

    In fact the US priority has been to weaken the GCC so they stop funding Sunni Islamists in the region. - virgile at 76 post is sorta along this line as well.

    [Jun 25, 2017] The story about about the legendary Qatari pipeline is probably British fake

    Notable quotes:
    "... A pipeline through Syria would have been a great boost to national economy for a number of years & could raise a port of the country to one of global importance, just at a time that Turkey started turning the spigot of Euphrates off ..."
    "... Consider that Qatar would have been a captive ally for Syria, a commodity rather in short supply for that country. The best part of it is, perhaps, that Syria presumably had a natural aversion to the transit fees. ..."
    "... There is another interesting story in this regard, which is to do with (at least) three rounds of exploration for gas in Saudi Arabia, all failed, and the special need for gas to service its petrochemical industry. If memory serves, the reason is they want to upgrade the heavy crude portion of their production, which has steadily been growing, and which the Saudis might have to sell as bunker oil at great discount, if they fail to find gas. ..."
    "... the Qataris were told in no uncertain terms that their gas 'had to remain in the peninsula' (Arabian subcontinent) for consumption, to serve the oil sector. ..."
    "... If this is right (honestly, I do not know), it might explain quite a bit about the rivalries of the extremist Moslem clergy, and their activities both within the Moslem world and abroad, why not, even developments in Europe & the States. ..."
    Jun 25, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

    atVec | Jun 23, 2017 10:14:39 PM 52

    |Jen@31 writes about the legendary Qatari pipeline. That story made its appearance early in the conflict, and if anybody knows its origin, I would be keen to be let know.
    That story goes that Assad would not let Qatar have its pipeline because, presumably, Russians wanted to retain their stranglehold on European gas supplies.

    The subtext is that those Russians must be very hard task masters and Assad, the lowliest of low lives, a terrified thug. And when the troubles started, Assad did not go back to the Qataris to discuss the matter over.

    Sorry, I cannot square that.

    A pipeline through Syria would have been a great boost to national economy for a number of years & could raise a port of the country to one of global importance, just at a time that Turkey started turning the spigot of Euphrates off (this is a sense I have, do not know if it is right) & a protracted drought and economic hardship all hit the country at the same time.

    Consider that Qatar would have been a captive ally for Syria, a commodity rather in short supply for that country. The best part of it is, perhaps, that Syria presumably had a natural aversion to the transit fees.

    There is another interesting story in this regard, which is to do with (at least) three rounds of exploration for gas in Saudi Arabia, all failed, and the special need for gas to service its petrochemical industry. If memory serves, the reason is they want to upgrade the heavy crude portion of their production, which has steadily been growing, and which the Saudis might have to sell as bunker oil at great discount, if they fail to find gas.

    The story was run in the English papers of the Gulf circa 2012, whereby the Qataris were told in no uncertain terms that their gas 'had to remain in the peninsula' (Arabian subcontinent) for consumption, to serve the oil sector.

    Once I chanced on an article on the educational proclivities of the thousands of the Saudi princes. Any guess? Yes, a good portion of them goes in for religious studies! Somehow I do not think they aspire to be lowly priests; but if not, where might they wish to have their sees? What if the other principalities of the Gulf have nobilities with similar outlooks & hopes?

    If this is right (honestly, I do not know), it might explain quite a bit about the rivalries of the extremist Moslem clergy, and their activities both within the Moslem world and abroad, why not, even developments in Europe & the States.

    Regards, Vec.

    Lozion | Jun 23, 2017 10:24:34 PM | 53

    @36 & @31 I think you are both right. The Pipelinistan angle is a major part of this feud.

    A probable change of heart from Qatar who has seen the light that no regime change will happen in Syria therefore making a Fars --> Iraq --> Syria -> Lebanon LNG pipeline a realistic endeavor is causing panic in KSA/US/IS who are trying to pressure Qatar to back-off from any deals with Iran..

    If Turkey is firm on protecting Qatar then the ultimatum will come to pass and be null and void..

    Don Bass | Jun 24, 2017 1:34:34 AM | 57

    @ Vic

    Y'know, when I read a comment such as yours: "~ I don't reckon its got anything to do with a pipeline ~" I immediately think of that old trope: Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open ones mouth and remove all doubts"

    Vic: instead of visiting here to blatantly display your ignorance, how about more usefully spending that typing time to research the topic, hmmm?

    The Imperial drive to crush Syria has been in play since the early 1980s, when Assad senior was in power.

    Here's a link: http://www.globalresearch.ca/1983-cia-document-reveals-plan-to-destroy-syria-foreshadows-current-crisis/5577785

    And another http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/07/57-years-ago-u-s-britain-approved-use-islamic-extremists-topple-syrian-government.html

    And another http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/03/05/the-redirection

    And here's your bonus link, cause I'm feeling the karma burst of sharing http://humansarefree.com/2014/09/exposing-covert-origins-of-isis.html

    Now, go and do your homework: you may be able to raise your F to a C, for a pass grade, once you've done some actual reading on the topic.

    [Jun 24, 2017] The Saudi-Qatar spat - the reconciliation offer to be refused>. Qater will move closer to Turkey

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... "In my view this is a deep power struggle between Qatar and Saudi Arabia that has little to do with stated reasons regarding Muslim Brotherhood and Iran. The action to isolate Qatar was clearly instigated during US President Trump's recent visit in Riyadh where he pushed the unfortunate idea of a Saudi-led "Arab NATO" to oppose Iranian influence in the region. ..."
    "... Moreover, Qatar was acting increasingly independent of the heavy Wahhabite hand of Saudi Arabia and threatening Saudi domination over the Gulf States. Kuwait, Oman, as well as non-Gulf Turkey were coming closer to Qatar and even Pakistan now may think twice about joining a Saudi-led "Arab NATO". Bin Salman has proven a disaster as a defense strategist, as proven in the Yemen debacle. ..."
    "... Kuwait and Oman are urgently trying to get Saudi to backdown on this, but that is unlikely as behind Saudi Arabia stands the US and promises of tens of billions of dollars in US arms. ..."
    "... This foolish US move to use their proxy, in this case Riyadh, to discipline those not "behaving" according to Washington wishes, could well be the turning point, the point of collapse of US remaining influence in the entire Middle East in the next several years." ..."
    "... KSA could not have taken this course of action all by itself. Someone somewhere must be egging them on. But who? The US seems to have no interest in a Saudi-Qatari conflict. Israel might, but only if said conflict is resolved in Saudi favor. ..."
    "... I am therefore coming to the conclusion that there is no longer clear leadership of US policy and there are different factions within the US government. The white house and CIA are supporting the Saudis while the Pentagon supports Qatar. This is just a hunch, but it seems like it could make sense. Perhaps this is what happens when a government is in a state of decompensation. ..."
    "... It is mind boggling that a fundamental reshaping of the Middle East was most likely put in motion by Trump completely oblivious of what he was doing shooting from the hip on his Saudi trip. ..."
    "... Outside of an outright invasion of Qatar by Saudi Arabia, it is hard to see this as a once in a life time geopolitical gift to Russia, Iran, Turkey, Syria, and Iran. ..."
    "... Now when July 3 comes and goes, Saudi Arabia will look completely impotent in the eyes of the countries in the region. ..."
    "... Gaddafi's speech to the Arab League in Syria 2008 was so prescient ..."
    "... "We [the Arabs] are the enemies of one another I'm sad to say, we deceive one another, we gloat at the misfortune of one another, and we conspire against one another, and an Arab's enemy is another Arab's friend. ..."
    "... I quite like the WWI parallel. Trump as Kaiser Wilhelm? There certainly are some striking similarities in character. ..."
    "... "...gifted, with a quick understanding, sometimes brilliant, with a taste for the modern,-technology, industry, science -- but at the same time superficial, hasty, restless, unable to relax, without any deeper level of seriousness, without any desire for hard work or drive to see things through to the end, without any sense of sobriety, for balance and boundaries, or even for reality and real problems, uncontrollable and scarcely capable of learning from experience, desperate for applause and success, -- as Bismarck said early on in his life, he wanted every day to be his birthday-romantic, sentimental and theatrical, unsure and arrogant, with an immeasurably exaggerated self-confidence and desire to show off, a juvenile cadet, who never took the tone of the officers' mess out of his voice, and brashly wanted to play the part of the supreme warlord, full of panicky fear of a monotonous life without any diversions, and yet aimless, pathological in his hatred against his English mother." ..."
    "... It also stands to reason if you simply consider Saudi's importance regionally: A lot is made of Iran's threat to Saudi influence, but Turkey - thanks in part to considerable investment by Qatar currently while investment from elsewhere has reduced massively -- is also very threatening to Saudi's influence, especially on the religious front. ..."
    "... Iran representing Shia interests in the region and Turkey representing Sunni interests is not a difficult future to imagine. It would of course grate with Saudi Arabia given that it had poured vast amounts of money into the Turkish economy and the diyanet. ..."
    "... Hassan Nasrallah has given his annual International Al-Quds Day speech with plenty of fire aimed at the usual suspects. The Daily Star reports: 'Nasrallah accused Saudi Arabia of "paving way for Israel" in the region. ..."
    "... Actually, I hope for many more benefits will show up from this quarrel than improved profits for Iranian produce growers. It is worthwhile to observe that Dubai, a component emirate of UAE, has gigantic economic links with Iran, which must be tolerated by overlords from Abu Dhabi: they had to bail out their cousins after real estate collapse, so they have big money stake in Dubai being prosperous. Potentially, Dubai and especially the hapless vegetable and dairy producers in KSA can lose a bundle (the latter had to invest a lot in farms for Qatari market, it is not like letting cows graze on abundant grasslands plus planting cucumbers and waiting for the rain to water them). Aljazeera and Muslim Brotherhood are more irritating to KSA and UAE than an occasional polite missive to Iran. ..."
    "... Qatar opened the Middle East's first centre for clearing transactions in the Chinese yuan on Tuesday, saying it would boost trade and investment between China and Gulf Arab economies. ..."
    "... The only hope for Saudi Arabia is to re-denominate oil sales in multiple currencies such as the WTO drawing rights, of course based on another formula, perhaps based on the countries that purchase the most oil. This would be the only way for the royalty to gain longevity as rulers of the country. Any other scenario spells disaster. ..."
    Jun 23, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
    Pft | Jun 23, 2017 8:43:28 PM | 45
    William Engdahls views. "In my view this is a deep power struggle between Qatar and Saudi Arabia that has little to do with stated reasons regarding Muslim Brotherhood and Iran. The action to isolate Qatar was clearly instigated during US President Trump's recent visit in Riyadh where he pushed the unfortunate idea of a Saudi-led "Arab NATO" to oppose Iranian influence in the region.

    The Saudi move, clearly instigated by Prince Bin Salman, Minister of Defense, was not about going against terrorism. If it were about terrorism, bin Salman would have to arrest himself and most of his Saudi cabinet as one of the largest financiers of terrorism in the world, and shut all Saudi-financed madrasses around the world, from Pakistan to Bosnia-Herzgovina to Kosovo. Another factor according to informed sources in Holland is that Washington wanted to punish Qatar for seeking natural gas sales with China priced not in US dollars but in Renminbi. That apparently alarmed Washington, as Qatar is the world's largest LNG exporter and most to Asia.

    Moreover, Qatar was acting increasingly independent of the heavy Wahhabite hand of Saudi Arabia and threatening Saudi domination over the Gulf States. Kuwait, Oman, as well as non-Gulf Turkey were coming closer to Qatar and even Pakistan now may think twice about joining a Saudi-led "Arab NATO". Bin Salman has proven a disaster as a defense strategist, as proven in the Yemen debacle.

    As to the future, it appears that Qatar is not about to rollover and surrender in face of Saudi actions. Already Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani is moving to establish closer ties with Iran, with Turkey that might include Turkish military support, and most recently with Russia.

    Kuwait and Oman are urgently trying to get Saudi to backdown on this, but that is unlikely as behind Saudi Arabia stands the US and promises of tens of billions of dollars in US arms.

    This foolish US move to use their proxy, in this case Riyadh, to discipline those not "behaving" according to Washington wishes, could well be the turning point, the point of collapse of US remaining influence in the entire Middle East in the next several years."

    lysander | Jun 23, 2017 7:43:17 PM | 42
    KSA could not have taken this course of action all by itself. Someone somewhere must be egging them on. But who? The US seems to have no interest in a Saudi-Qatari conflict. Israel might, but only if said conflict is resolved in Saudi favor.

    I am therefore coming to the conclusion that there is no longer clear leadership of US policy and there are different factions within the US government. The white house and CIA are supporting the Saudis while the Pentagon supports Qatar. This is just a hunch, but it seems like it could make sense. Perhaps this is what happens when a government is in a state of decompensation.

    R Winner | Jun 23, 2017 1:41:04 PM | 4

    It is mind boggling that a fundamental reshaping of the Middle East was most likely put in motion by Trump completely oblivious of what he was doing shooting from the hip on his Saudi trip.

    Outside of an outright invasion of Qatar by Saudi Arabia, it is hard to see this as a once in a life time geopolitical gift to Russia, Iran, Turkey, Syria, and Iran.

    Juggs | Jun 23, 2017 2:24:33 PM | 9
    Now when July 3 comes and goes, Saudi Arabia will look completely impotent in the eyes of the countries in the region.

    I wonder if there is some sort of interest between Russia, Turkey, Qatar, and Iran on a coup in Saudi Arabia. I can't imagine it would be that difficult. I know it is not Putin's policy to play these types of games like the US Regime, but one has to assume that people are just fucking done with the clowns running Saudi Arabia.

    harrylaw | Jun 23, 2017 2:36:39 PM | 10
    Gaddafi's speech to the Arab League in Syria 2008 was so prescient..

    "We [the Arabs] are the enemies of one another I'm sad to say, we deceive one another, we gloat at the misfortune of one another, and we conspire against one another, and an Arab's enemy is another Arab's friend.

    Along comes a foreign power, occupies an Arab country [Iraq] and hangs its President,and we all sit on the sidelines laughing. Any one of you might be next, yes.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZZvPlGCt_8

    okie farmer | Jun 23, 2017 2:37:39 PM | 11
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/23/close-al-jazeera-saudi-arabia-issues-qatar-with-13-demands-to-end-blockade
    Qatar given 10 days to meet 13 sweeping demands by Saudi Arabia
    Gulf dispute deepens as allies issue ultimatum for ending blockade that includes closing al-Jazeera and cutting back ties with Iran
    Juggs | Jun 23, 2017 2:41:55 PM | 13
    Peter AU "Is Qatar, like Turkey, already heading for a multi-polar world? For 25 years, the US was the only game in town, but with Russia's move into Syria there are now options."

    Hard to see the world heading in that direction:

    • Russia and China will no longer allow the US Regime to use the same tactics to start wars against Iraq and Libya anymore.
    • China is methodically closing off the South China Sea to the US Regime
    • The Shanghai Cooperation Organization is starting to increase their shared defense
    • Europe is openly talking about creating its own independent defense force

    I wonder if Qatar is already in talks with China about joining the Silk Road Initiative now that it is openly moving into the Russia and Iran sphere.

    karlof1 | Jun 23, 2017 3:06:36 PM | 16
    Juggs 13--

    "I wonder if Qatar is already in talks with China about joining the Silk Road Initiative..."

    You'll find the answer's yes as Pepe explains, https://sputniknews.com/columnists/201706161054701807-west-cannot-smell-what-eurasia-cooking/ and http://www.atimes.com/article/blood-tracks-new-silk-roads/

    dh | Jun 23, 2017 3:20:35 PM | 19
    @17 The best is yet to come. There's a chance Netanyahu will fly into Riyadh to tell everybody what to do. I'm sure he wants what's best for the region.
    L'Akratique | Jun 23, 2017 3:29:54 PM | 20
    I quite like the WWI parallel. Trump as Kaiser Wilhelm? There certainly are some striking similarities in character.

    Quote from Thomas Nipperdey:

    "...gifted, with a quick understanding, sometimes brilliant, with a taste for the modern,-technology, industry, science -- but at the same time superficial, hasty, restless, unable to relax, without any deeper level of seriousness, without any desire for hard work or drive to see things through to the end, without any sense of sobriety, for balance and boundaries, or even for reality and real problems, uncontrollable and scarcely capable of learning from experience, desperate for applause and success, -- as Bismarck said early on in his life, he wanted every day to be his birthday-romantic, sentimental and theatrical, unsure and arrogant, with an immeasurably exaggerated self-confidence and desire to show off, a juvenile cadet, who never took the tone of the officers' mess out of his voice, and brashly wanted to play the part of the supreme warlord, full of panicky fear of a monotonous life without any diversions, and yet aimless, pathological in his hatred against his English mother."

    cankles | Jun 23, 2017 4:05:49 PM | 25
    @Laguerre #23
    I have difficulty in seeing a relationship with the Silk Road Initiative, other than that Qatar exports a lot of LNG to China.

    China Eyes Qatar in its Quest to Build a New Silk Road

    Last month at the China-Arab Cooperation Forum in Doha, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi postulated that Qatar should take part in the realization of China's Silk Road Initiatives.
    Laguerre | Jun 23, 2017 4:42:05 PM | 27
    @cankles | Jun 23, 2017 4:05:49 PM | 25

    Yeah, you're right. I hadn't looked into the question sufficiently. Of course the Chinese are looking for more external finance for the project. They don't want to be the only ones who pay. Fat chance, though. The Qataris have been in austerity since the decline in the oil price. Someone I know who works in the Qatar Museum has seen all her colleagues let go. And now the crisis with Saudi.

    The Qataris may even have signed contracts with China. But if you know anything about the Gulf, there's a wide gap between signing a contract, and actually getting paid. It depends upon how the prince concerned feels about the project when the question of payment comes up. A company I worked for in the 80s took two years to get payment, even though they were experts in Gulfi relations.

    AtaBrit | Jun 23, 2017 4:51:40 PM | 28
    Great piece.

    The issue of the threat regarding the Turkish base didn't surprise me much, though. I think it's clear that if MB is the target, then of course Turkey has to become a target, and Qatar - Turkey ties have to be broken. It stands to reason.

    It also stands to reason if you simply consider Saudi's importance regionally: A lot is made of Iran's threat to Saudi influence, but Turkey - thanks in part to considerable investment by Qatar currently while investment from elsewhere has reduced massively -- is also very threatening to Saudi's influence, especially on the religious front.

    Iran representing Shia interests in the region and Turkey representing Sunni interests is not a difficult future to imagine. It would of course grate with Saudi Arabia given that it had poured vast amounts of money into the Turkish economy and the diyanet.

    On a slightly different note there's a scandal going on in western Turkey, in Duzce, at the moment because the local authority has unveiled a statue of Rabia - the four fingered Muslim Brotherhood salute! :-)

    Mina | Jun 23, 2017 5:09:45 PM | 29
    http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/2/8/271450/World/Region/UN-blames-warring-sides-for-Yemens-cholera-catastr.aspx
    let's blame underfed guys in skirts for fun
    karlof1 | Jun 23, 2017 5:16:47 PM | 30
    Hassan Nasrallah has given his annual International Al-Quds Day speech with plenty of fire aimed at the usual suspects. The Daily Star reports: 'Nasrallah accused Saudi Arabia of "paving way for Israel" in the region.

    '"It's unfortunate that Saudi Arabia is the head of terrorism and today it's holding its neighbors accountable for supporting terrorism," Nasrallah said, hinting to the recent economic sanctions against Qatar.' https://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Lebanon-News/2017/Jun-23/410688-nasrallah-says-regional-conflicts-seek-to-serve-israel-interest.ashx

    Al-Manar provides this report, http://english.almanar.com.lb/292250

    Unfortunately, I cannot locate an English language transcript, although one might become available eventually as is usually the case.

    Piotr Berman | Jun 23, 2017 6:42:14 PM | 36
    Piotr Berman

    Aljazeera evil? Are you joking? ....

    @Anon | Jun 23, 2017 3:47:56 PM | 24

    You did not address the argument I made, namely, that Aljazeera editors apparently belong to "Muslims, who immediately set out to support it [Darwinian theory of evolution] unaware of the blasphemy and error in it." These guys pretend to be nice Wahhabis, dressing in dishdashas, their womenfolks in abayas, but in fact they spread heretical and blasphemous doctrines. However, I am more of a Khazar than a Wahhabi and I do not treat this argument seriously.

    It is the fact that compared to other government supported TV/online venues, say RT or PressTV, Aljazeera is well written and edited, has plenty of valuable material, etc. It is a worthwhile place to check when you want to get a composite picture on some issues. And it irritates KSA potentates in a myriad of ways, precisely because it targets "politically engaged Muslim".

    It is a good example that pluralism has inherent positive aspects, devils that quarrel are better than "One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them, One Ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."

    ====

    Actually, I hope for many more benefits will show up from this quarrel than improved profits for Iranian produce growers. It is worthwhile to observe that Dubai, a component emirate of UAE, has gigantic economic links with Iran, which must be tolerated by overlords from Abu Dhabi: they had to bail out their cousins after real estate collapse, so they have big money stake in Dubai being prosperous. Potentially, Dubai and especially the hapless vegetable and dairy producers in KSA can lose a bundle (the latter had to invest a lot in farms for Qatari market, it is not like letting cows graze on abundant grasslands plus planting cucumbers and waiting for the rain to water them). Aljazeera and Muslim Brotherhood are more irritating to KSA and UAE than an occasional polite missive to Iran.

    One pattern in Syrian civil war were persistent and bloody feuds between jihadists that formed roughly four groups:

    1. "salafi", presumably funded by KSA,
    2. "brothers", presumably funded by Qatar and Turkey,
    3. al-Qaeda/al-Nusra/something new that was forcing the first two groups to surrender some weapons (and money?),
    4. and ISIS that had more complex sources (or more hidden).

    Medium term strategy of Syrian government and allies for the near future is to "de-escalate" in the western part of the country and finish off ISIS, partitioning hitherto ISIS territories in some satisfactory way, while maintaining some type of truce with the Kurds. Then finish off the jihadists, except those most directly protected by Turkey. Finally, take care of the Kurds. Some sufficiently safe federalism can be part of the solution, but nothing that would lead to enclaves with their own military forces and their own foreign policy, like Iraqi Kurdistan.

    That requires the opposing parties to exhibit somewhat suicidal behavior. A big time official feud between "brothers" and "salafi + Kurds" (a pair that shares some funding but with scant mutual affection" can help a lot. Most of all, a big time feud between Turkey and KSA can stabilize the situation in which jihadists from Idlib and northern Hama observe a truce/de-escalation, while their colleagues from south Syria get clobbered, and definitely will induce them to refrain from attacking Syrian government while it is busy against ISIS. After Erdogan was prevented from marching onto Raqqa, he has two options: "Sunnistan" in eastern Syria under domination of YPG or a much smaller YPG dominated territory that can be subsequently digested. Option one is a true nightmare for Erdogan, more than a mere paranoia. However, Erdogan is also "pan-Sunni" Islamist, so he could be tempted to backstab infidels from Damascus, as he was doing before. An open feud with Sunnistan sponsors should help him to choose.

    likklemore | Jun 23, 2017 6:49:14 PM | 37
    Cankles @ 25 Is that really you? If so, you should know -

    Look behind the curtain. This has to do with maintaining the price of oil in US$.

    Qatar launches first Chinese yuan clearing hub in Middle East .

    Qatar opened the Middle East's first centre for clearing transactions in the Chinese yuan on Tuesday, saying it would boost trade and investment between China and Gulf Arab economies.

    "The launch of the region's first renminbi clearing center in Doha creates the necessary platform to realise the full potential of Qatar and the region's trade relationship with China," Qatar's central bank governor Sheikh Abdullah bin Saud al-Thani said at a ceremony.

    "It will facilitate greater cross-border renminbi investment and financing business, and promote greater trade and economic links between China and the region, paving the way for better financial cooperation and enhancing the pre-eminence of Qatar as a financial hub in MENA (Middle East and North Africa)."
    Industrial and Commercial Bank of China's (ICBC) Doha branch is the clearing bank for the centre, which intends to serve companies from around the Middle East.

    A clearing bank can handle all parts of a currency transaction from when a commitment is made until it is settled, reducing costs and time taken for trading.

    The centre "will improve the ease of transactions between companies in the region and China by allowing them to settle their trade directly in renminbi, drawing increased trade through Qatar and boosting bilateral and economic collaboration between Qatar and China," said ICBC chairman Jiang Jianqing.

    At present, Qatar and the Gulf's other wealthy oil and gas exporters use the U.S. dollar much more than the yuan. Most of their currencies are pegged to the dollar, and most of their huge foreign currency reserves are denominated in dollars.

    Laguerre @27

    Date of article April 24, 2017

    In April 2015, Qatar opened Qatar Renminbi Centre (QRC), the region's first clearing centre for the Chinese currency. This allows for trades priced in RMB to be cleared locally in Qatar rather than in other centres such as Shanghai or Hong Kong.ICBC has since become the designated clearance bank servicing the QRC, which has handled more than 350bn yuan ($52.6bn) since its inception.
    http://emerge85.io/blog/the-middle-kingdoms-big-four-and-the-gulf

    ~ ~ ~ ~
    Trending and not very far to seeing what is now held under the table. Oil will also be priced in RMB because KSA, to maintain their share of exports to China, will need to get on board. For now, it's been reaffirmed, SA does the whipping and USA protects the Royals.

    rawdawgbugfalo | Jun 23, 2017 6:54:19 PM | 38
    Well said, I still think this is all dreamlike. Having natural gas and sharing it with Iran is a mf.

    Qatar: Is it about Trump, Israel or Nascent Influence? http://wsenmw.blogspot.com/2017/06/qatar-is-it-about-trump-israel-or.html

    Piotr Berman | Jun 23, 2017 7:34:43 PM | 40
    About Sunni-Shia split. My impression is that this is mostly KSA + UAE obsession. For example, there is a substantial Shia minority in Pakistan, but the dominant thinking among the Sunnis seems to be "Muslim solidarity". There is a minority that is virulently anti-Shia, but they are politically isolated and despised exactly on the account of breaking that solidarity. After all, Pakistan forms the boundary of the Umma with non-Muslim India. I base that opinion on comments in online Pakistani newspapers, and what I have heard from an acquaintance who was a religiously conservative Sunni Pakistani. To him, the attack on Yemen by KSA was wrong "because they are Muslim". So even if Pakistan is to a certain extend in Saudi pocket, and its deep state has an extremist Sunni component, overt siding against "fellow Muslim" is out of the question.

    Egypt is another case. One can find rather isolated anti-Shia outbursts, like writings of some fossils in Al-Azhar (who are responsible for the state religion), but the government steers away from that, and in spite of hefty subsidies, it joined Yemen war only symbolically and for a very short time (unlike Sudan that really needs the cash for its mercenaries). As you move further away from the Persian Gulf, the indifference to the "split" increases. As far as Qatar and Aljazeera are concerned, probably no one detests them more than Egyptian elite, as they were valiantly fighting Muslim Brotherhood for the sake of progress with some occasional large massacres (killing several hundreds of protesters, issuing hundreds of death penalties to participants in a single protest, in absentia! incredible idiocy+cruelty). That explains why al-Sisi joined KSA against Qatar.

    However, the civil war in Libya that embroils Egypt is a classic case of unexpected alliances. Egypt with a help from Russia, KSA and UAE supports the "eastern government" that bases legitimacy on democratic parliament re-assembled in Tobruq on Egyptian border, and dominated by military strongman Haftar. The latter has the best chance of all people to become a military strongman of all Libya, but apparently has meager popularity and thus, too few troops. He patched that problem by an alliance with a Salafi group that had a numerous militia, currently partitioned into smaller units and incorporated into Haftar's brigades. Even with that, his progress on the ground is very, very gradual. Against him is the government in Tripolis, legitimized by a more fresh parliament and UN/EU, plus a military force that includes several militias. Part of the parliamentary support stems from Muslim Brotherhood, and some part of military support comes from Salafi militias. There are also aspects of a "war of all against all", seems that Saharan tribes collected a lot of fresh blood feuds.

    Thus Qatari+Turkish support for Tripoli government is aligned with EU, and Egyptian support for Tobruq government is aligned with Russia and KSA.

    Dusty | Jun 23, 2017 7:38:26 PM | 41
    I thought I might just throw this out there and see what sticks. US policy is based on power and control. Saudi Arabia has been a good ally but it does not serve use policy or strategic goals any longer. Not really. I think the grand prize for destabilizing the middle east is Saudi Arabia. It would be the only way to truly control the development of other nations or more specifically, to control their rivalries and save the the US from complete economic breakdown. The Saudi's are being plumbed by the best of them, telling them they are you friends, we have your back and so long as Saudi Arabia loses more money and keeps lossing money in needless wars etc.

    The only hope for Saudi Arabia is to re-denominate oil sales in multiple currencies such as the WTO drawing rights, of course based on another formula, perhaps based on the countries that purchase the most oil. This would be the only way for the royalty to gain longevity as rulers of the country. Any other scenario spells disaster. Of course, it would be a rough go for them for a while, but in the end, a slight change in outlook and the unfair advantage given to the US would go a long way, economically to stabilizing large blocks of countries. They also could of course change their outlook on the world, but that is certainly a difficult challenge. If the Muslim world came together based on their similarities, they could be a very powerful block.

    The US no longer has the financial velocity it once maintained and this is much more due to insane ideas about being a hegemon. I never thought revolution would be possible in the US, but it is coming and it won't take much. The country does not appear to have intelligence peddle back a number of policies, drunk on its own poison, it makes capitalism look disgusting. A new business model is needed, one that developes mutual trade based on respect from within the exchange itself. Saudi Arabia needs to cultivate multi-channel support for its biggest resource so that when the returns are no longer there, they will have also developed multiple avenues to prosperity. Just a thought.

    [Jun 24, 2017] US invaded Syria conducting military operations in sovereign land and airspace of Syria without the permission of the Syrian government. Unlike Russia, from which Syria officially requested military assistance.

    Jun 24, 2017 | www.unz.com

    Avery

    { .. the Russian invasion of Ukraine,}

    There was no so-called 'invasion' of Ukraine by Russia.
    There was however an illegal invasion of the sovereign state of Iraq – 7,000 away from US – by US and UK ( .admitted as being illegal by Lord Prescott), resulting in its total destruction as a functioning State, and causing the deaths of something like 500,000 Iraqis, most of them civilians. The bloody aftermath of that criminal, illegal act by US&UK continues to this day. Death, destruction, dislocation.

    US has also invaded another sovereign State, Syria: US troops and air force are present and conducting military operations in sovereign land and airspace of Syria. All without the permission of the Syrian government. Unlike Russia, from which Syria officially requested military assistance.

    So stop lecturing anybody about the so-called 'invasion' of Ukraine by RF.

    { after the deceitful land grab by Russia of Crimea }

    You can't, quote, 'grab' something that belongs to you.
    Crimea has been part of Russia for 200+ years.
    In 1954 Soviet dictator Khrushchev "gave" Crimea to Ukraine SSR, without asking the residents of Crimea.

    After the dissolution of USSR, residents of Crimea held declarations and referendums:

    1992: Crimea declared Independence. Kiev ignored it.
    1994: Autonomy referendum. Passed by ~80%. Kiev ignored it.

    After the 2014 neo-Nazi putsch in Kiev, the neo-Nazi Azov battalion and other neo-Nazi gangs started murdering ethnic Russians, e.g. the Odessa Massacre. Not wanting a replay of Operation Barbarossa in Crimea, its residents held a referendum in 2014 to re-join Russia: passed by 96%+.
    Done. Thank you very much.

    By comparison, BREXIT passed 52% to 48%.
    So that somehow has more "legality" ?

    btw: most of so-called 'Ukraine' are Russian lands attached* to Ukraine by various Russian Tsars and dictators. In time, they will all be promptly returned to Mother Russia.

    Say, do you remember when US deceitfully grabbed the territory of Hawaii?

    _______

    *

    http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2014/05/20140504

    Cyrano June 22, 2017 at 10:17 pm GMT • 100 Words
    @Mr. Hack
    The only thing that Russia wanted from Ukraine is not to allow themselves to become threat to Russia by joining NATO. Ukraine, having wasted all other options for normal development, couldn't resist taking the offer of cashing in on becoming a threat to Russia. Ukraine tries to justify this based on some past historical grievances from the 1930's.
    What total lunacy and hippocracy. Do I really need to remind you that before 2014 and the Russian invasion of Ukraine, NATO membership was not a popular option for most Ukrainians. But now, after the deceitful land grab by Russia of Crimea and three years of proxy directed war in Donbas orchestrated in Moscow, most Ukrainians now look favorably towards NATO membership. Latest polls show that 55.9% o Ukrainians now favor NATO integration (I think that pre 2014 it was less than 15%) and 66.4% now favor EU integration. You reap what you sew, Putinista fanboys. Bye, bye 'NovoRossiya'!

    http://www.pravda.com.ua/news/2017/06/17/7147228/

    How can you steal something that's yours? Think of Crimea as the wedding ring. Once the marriage was dissolved – the ring goes back to its rightful owner. At the time Khruschev gifted Crimea to Ukraine, no one in their wildest dreams imagined that Russia and Ukraine would one day go their separate ways. Crimea was to be part of Ukraine only as long as Ukraine was part of the same country as Russia. Otherwise, Russia would have never agreed to cede Crimea. I guess following the marriage analogy, NovoRossiya would be the dowry. Ukraine can lose that too if they don't smarten up.

    [Jun 23, 2017] Highly Graphic Video's – White Helmets Film Themselves Participating in Beheading's of Syrian Soldiers

    www.moonofalabama.org

    Liam | Jun 22, 2017 10:49:07 AM | 15

    Highly Graphic Video's – White Helmets Film Themselves Participating in Beheading's of Syrian Soldiers

    https://clarityofsignal.com/2017/06/21/highly-graphic-videos-white-helmets-film-themselves-participating-in-beheadings-of-syrian-soldiers/

    Direct Terrorist Collusion: Over One Dozen Videos Capture White Helmets Working Side-By-Side With Terrorist Groups in Syria

    [Jun 23, 2017] King Faisal, supporter of Palestine, became too demanding in 1974. He was killed in 1975

    Notable quotes:
    "... The CIA As Organized Crime ..."
    "... It's pretty obvious that Trump is picking his friends in the ME based on his attitude towards Iran and a seeming desire to do Israel's bidding. For all his faults Obama chose to keep Israel at arm's length and ramrodded a nuclear deal with Iran that was intended to bring that country in from the cold and open opportunities for commerce that had been shut down by years of sanctions. ..."
    "... In his zeal to undo all of Obama's initiatives Trump has placed the US in an intractable position in the ME. The scope of his long term plans will become more evident as the IS is driven out of Raqqa and Mosul. A lot of posters have postulated that he intends to grab a chunk of eastern Syria and western Iraq and engineer the geography so that Iranian influence in Syria and Lebanon is minimized. They are very likely right. ..."
    "... The saving grace might be Mueller and his posse of investigators. They are going to forensically break down any dealings that Trump and Kushner had with foreign entities before and during the presidential campaign. There may be reasons for transition type meetings with foreign diplomats but the meetings with bankers and businessmen that were so blithely left off the required documentation when applying for security clearances will come under full scrutiny in a very focused way. This focus on his foreign dealings is apparently what has been causing Trump to act in such an unhinged fashion. He's too frazzled by his domestic problems to concentrate on his foreign policy. That's because he's corrupt and it's going to be fully exposed. ..."
    "... That was a good point that Putin raised with Kelly in her interview. It's one thing to point a finger at any Russian affects on elections when the US does it on such a massive scale. I wish he would release a white paper documenting this especially US efforts in Ukraine as well as Russia (to include NED and IRI). ..."
    Jun 23, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
    fastfreddy | Jun 22, 2017 9:49:27 AM | 10
    King Faisal, supporter of Palestine, became too demanding in 1974. He was killed in 1975. Official story - One of Faisal's nephews, after returning to SA from a trip to the US, shot and killed his uncle king. Official Story - nephew was beheaded.

    This craven batch of successors are kin and they do what is required of them by the west.

    Of course, human rights issues are a sick joke. SA is member of the UN Human Rights Committee!

    jfl | Jun 22, 2017 9:50:11 AM | 11
    @8

    that's a farsnews article i saw at sf ...

    Nearly 3.3 million Yemeni people, including 2.1 million children, are currently suffering from acute malnutrition. The Al-Saud aggression has also taken a heavy toll on the country's facilities and infrastructure, destroying many hospitals, schools, and factories.

    The WHO now classifies Yemen as one of the worst humanitarian emergencies in the world alongside Syria, South Sudan, Nigeria and Iraq.

    humanitarian emergency? where's the r2p nato crowd? right 2 protect/resources 2 plunder - either way it's got saudi arabia written all over it. so how come nato hasn't bombed saudi arabia yet? syria, south sudan, nigeria, and iraq ... at least 3 of the four are directly attributable to the usofa. so who's the world's leading terrorist?
    Don Wiscacho | Jun 22, 2017 10:37:05 AM | 12
    Set the clock ticking on the al-Saud clan

    Universally, every citizen of Saudi Arabia that I've ever talked to has unreserved hatred for "their" royals. I assume that only members of that family feel differently. Even people from the elite who have benefited from the monarchy harbor no love. The masses of poor in the country absolutely despise these clowns.

    Let's run down a quick list of MSB's achievements:

    1. Cakewalk war in Yemen to reinstall compliant dictator -- current clusterfuck
    2. 'Prosperity by Austerity' economic plan -- incipient clusterfuck
    3. Cutting in the Royal Line -- probable clusterfuck
    4. Hoes before Bros coddling up to Israel against Iran -- guaranteed clusterfuck

    I'm not sure it's popcorn time just yet, but if I were a Saudi Prince, I'd be moving all my non-earned cash to Swiss accounts

    Ghostship | Jun 22, 2017 10:42:47 AM | 13
    One man becomes ill for some unknown reason while imprisoned in a foreign country, is repatriated on "compassonate grounds" and then dies, and the whole world is supposed to be shocked and upset. What b reports above..............

    karlof1 | Jun 22, 2017 11:01:24 AM | 16
    I see the Sauds as trashmen: Their job is to take US trash-cash in payment for their hydrocarbons and recycle it via weapons and T-bond purchases--which are also trash.
    political fiction | Jun 22, 2017 11:12:12 AM | 18
    @8
    There is also a possibility that Israel is preparing an attack against Iran. The whole situation around Qatar and Saudi Arabia is quite suspicious. Dispute among family members? Gulf states are infiltrated by the CIA, they have no an independent foreign policy. So, what is going on? Maybe a big war is coming. Qatar is located near Iran so Iran can heavily damage Qatari infrastructure if war break out. Because of that Qatar pretends to be Saudi's enemy.

    It can be a really big war. Turkish army at the same time could try to attack Aleppo. US troops from bases in Jordan can move towards Deir Ezzor. At the end of the day Turkey seizes Aleppo and Idlib Governorate (Ottoman Empire), Kurdistan is created (from Raqqa through Deir Ezzor to Kirkuk and Iran), Iranian facilities and plants don't exist anymore (regime change also possible), the Golan Height and part of Syria are under Israeli control. The dissolution of Syria - that was the plan from the very beginning. Today this sounds rather as a political fiction (because of Russia), nonetheless something strange is looming on the horizon there.

    Michael | Jun 22, 2017 11:14:18 AM | 20
    @Don Wiscacho | Jun 22, 2017 10:37:05 AM | 12

    If you've been following the "economic stimulation" plan in US infrastructure, Orange One may provide the Wahabis a stake in the privatized road and infrastructure in the US. As he flees the desert wasteland after the oil markets crash, he will be able to own a "piece of the rock" and continue to bilk Americans out of their livelihood in into perpetuity via tolls, and could retire in splendor in Beverly Hills or Palm Beach. It's the "free market" at work.

    xxx 21
    @ karlof1 | Jun 22, 2017 11:01:24 AM | 16

    Exactly. I would add that they also use some of that "trash-cash" to pay idiots all over the world to follow their satanic wahabi cult.

    Anonymous | Jun 22, 2017 11:34:05 AM | 22
    A report of the Russians using an S-300 to shoot down a US Global Hawk over the eastern Med. US and Russian military are silent. There is a report that a Global Hawk has crashed .... in California.

    https://z5h64q92x9.net/proxy_u/ru-en.en/colonelcassad.livejournal.com/3497216.html

    Anonymous | Jun 22, 2017 11:39:17 AM | 23
    Normally the US comes to the rescue of ISIS in Syria. Now it looks like ISIS is coming to the rescue of US forces. There is a report that ISIS is trying to break the recently created SAA/Hezbollah/Iranian buffer zone east of the US base near al Tanf. The US forces were there supposedly to attack ISIS. The buffer zone removed that and effectively any need for the forces to be there in the first place. ISIS trying to break the buffer in order to allow the US forces to attack ISIS - a self-licking kebab.

    https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/pictures-isis-storms-iraqi-border-crossing-near-us-military-base-map-update/

    Anonymous | Jun 22, 2017 11:46:17 AM | 24
    Back in the days, the Syrians offered to interrogate (presumably at 'enhanced' level) some people renditioned from Afghanistan that were sold to the US as members of whichever Islamic group the US was supposed to be fighting at the time. The Syrians presumably did this to try to get in the good books of the US (as did Iran when it captured al Qaeda operatives escaping Afghanistan into Iran). The Syrians interrogated these people and concluded they were innocent. I believe the US still has these innocent people in their Gulag at Guantanamo.
    Laguerre | Jun 22, 2017 11:52:38 AM | 25
    I have a strong feeling that it's Saudi that will go bang first. Austerity on the Saudis just doesn't work. It's only the money which is keeping the tribes loyal to the Najdis. If Al Saud can't pay (or if the Kinsey consultants are advising him not to pay (as if they would understand the politics of Saudi)), why should all the others stick with the Sauds? I was very struck by the photo of what the Saudis have down to the Shi'ite town of Awamiyyah in the Eastern Province. They've walled it off with those 4m high concrete blocks, with only one checkpoint for going in or out. It's a complete siege. MbS must be getting more and more paranoiac, and now he's carried out his coup to take over the King.
    james | Jun 22, 2017 12:15:53 PM | 28
    the usa as torture supporter? why am i not surprised? they have been torturing the planet literally and figuratively for quite a few years... the revelations of manning was enough of an eye opener for anyone paying attention.. the thought that they would change their ways is a joke...

    @25 laguerre... yeah, those pics of the shite town in saudi arabia stuck in my mind as well.. things ain't well in the saudi headchopper/torture paradise that the usa/isael and etc have sidled up with.. this new kid as the head of the saudi money dictatorship ain't all that inspiring either..

    Jackrabbit | Jun 22, 2017 12:16:05 PM | 29
    As perceptive as he is, b stll can't bring himself to see that Trump is a Clinton protege and Sanders was a Clinton sheep-dog.
    >> How Things Work: Betrayal by Faux Populist Leaders

    >> Taken In: Fake News Distracts Us From Fake Election

    Martin Finnucane | Jun 22, 2017 12:18:53 PM | 30
    @karlof1 #16

    Their job is to take US trash-cash in payment for their hydrocarbons and recycle it via weapons and T-bond purchases--which are also trash.

    Sounds like you may appreciate a tidying up. I will be happy to take any such trash off your hands. I will collect any such cash and Treasury notes that you may have in your possession or about your premises. I will be in-and-out in a flash, so that you and your family will barely know that I was there. Then neither I nor your trash will be a nuisance in any way. I provide this service free of charge. (And even if I did charge, what form would payment take?) How's that for trash man?

    Don Wiscacho | Jun 22, 2017 12:22:52 PM | 31
    Michael @20

    I haven't heard about cutting the Wahhabis in on road privatization in the US but it wouldn't surprise me in the least. Donald and MBS in many ways are cut from a similar cloth. Birds of a feather...

    Thucydides | Jun 22, 2017 12:33:49 PM | 32
    @18 @political fiction

    They need Idlip and Aleppo if they want a land connection between Israel and the EU. Lebanon will be fragmentized and Hezbollah destroyed (Balkanization).

    Jackrabbit | Jun 22, 2017 12:35:34 PM |
    political fiction @18

    Yes, there is something fishy with the Qatar-Saudi spat. It may well be that they want to remove themselves as a target as you speculate.

    My first thought was that (any) conflict in the Gulf is an excuse to add military resources. Also, Iran's support for the Qatari's could be spun as "aggression" and used to unite Sunnis under Saudi leadership (we see the setting up of a false choice all the time: your with *us* or you're with the 'terrorists') . I wrote about it here: Saudi-Qatar: Gambit du Roi .

    nonsense factory | Jun 22, 2017 1:05:53 PM | 34
    That WSJ-UAE-CIA arms deal story is pretty enlightening:
    Two other Denx partners - ex-CIA employees Gary Bernsten and Scott Modell - told the AP that Solomon was involved in discussing proposed deals with Azima at the same time he continued to cultivate the businessman as a source for his stories for the Journal. . .

    In an April 2015 email, Azima wrote to Solomon about a proposal for a $725 million air-operations, surveillance and reconnaissance support contract with the United Arab Emirates that would allow planes to spy on activity inside nearby Iran. Solomon was supposed to ferry the proposal to UAE government representatives at a lunch the following day, the email said.

    "We all wish best of luck to Jay on his first defense sale," Azima wrote to Solomon, Bernsten and Modell.

    Under the proposed UAE deal, Azima's firms were to manage specially equipped surveillance planes to monitor activity in Iran, Syria, Iraq and Yemen.

    UAE has long-standing ties to various covert and overt U.S.-led operations in the region. Just another puppet client state of the empire. See 2003-2010, Wikileaks (search for "MbZ", State Department code for UAE's clown prince)
    2003 UAE POISED FOR IRAQ RECONSTRUCTION OPPORTUNITIES"

    This one in particular:
    2010 https://search.wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/10ABUDHABI69_a.html

    (S/NF) The UAE is one of our closest partners in the Middle East and one of our most useful friends worldwide.
    -- Al-Dhafra Air Force Base is the high altitude ISR hub for the AOR, and supports 50 percent of aerial refueling in the AOR.
    -- Ports in Dubai and Fujairah are the logistics backbone for the U.S. Fifth. Jebel Ali (Dubai) is the most frequented USN liberty port after Norfolk.
    -- Minhad Air Base is a critical hub for Coalition/ISAF partners in Afghanistan, including the Australians, Dutch, Canadians, Brits and Kiwis.
    -- The UAE is a cash customer with FMS [foreign military sales] sales in excess of $11 billion. Commercial sales have an equivalent value. An additional $12 billion of FMS cases are in development with approximately the same volume of commercial sales in the works.
    -- The UAE recently purchased nine Patriot batteries, and expects to move forward on the purchase of THAAD as the first non US customer.
    -- The UAE currently commands CJTF-152 (Arabian Gulf) and maintains an active exercise schedule with U.S. (Red Flag) and other multi-lateral partners.
    -- The UAE recently hosted an AFCENT survey team to consider U.S. access to Liwa (Safran) Air Base in support of contingency operations.
    -- Additionally, the UAE is considering hosting the Regional Integrated Air and Missile Defense Center of Excellence.
    Mina | Jun 22, 2017 1:33:32 PM | 35
    http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/2/8/271442/World/Region/Erdogan-spokesman-says-Turkey-and-Russia-to-deploy.aspx
    BRF | Jun 22, 2017 1:48:47 PM | 36
    Not really much new about CIA instigated torture, the purpose of which as Orwell truly determined is only to torture. The rest of western intrigue in the Middle East and various other locales around the world is all part of the business plan. That plan "is to inventory and control: all finances, land, water, plants, animals, minerals, energy, means of production, construction, transportation, information, education, policing, human habitation and all humans on this planet" - Rosa Koire

    karlof1 | Jun 22, 2017 2:12:22 PM | 39
    Martin Finnucane @30--

    "Sounds like you may appreciate a tidying up." Certainly, but not the sort you proposed. More like a complete game-changer of the sort outlined in this fine overview, https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/06/20/leading-multipolar-revolution-how-russia-china-creating-new-world-order.html

    ex-SA @21--

    I refrained from mentioning the Wahhabbi trash cult; but yes, like Hitlerism, it too must go into the dustbin. It appears that trash cult is interwoven into Zionist and Outlaw US Empire philosophies since all three promote a terroristic, oligarchic elite rule and policy toward neighbors and share their own version of Manifest Destiny stemming from their common Abrahamic roots.

    The author of the linked article easily presumes the Outlaw US Empire will continue to use terrorists as its preferred foreign policy tool for the foreseeable future since it shows no signs of terminating its announced goal of Full Spectrum Domination, a policy energetically opposed by the SCO and suite of other organizations the author lists. Just as Hitlerian Germany and Tojo's Japan were doomed to failure in WW2 due to the overwhelming amount of resources available to United Nations forces, the Outlaw US Empire is doomed to defeat thanks to the overwhelming resource base of the Multipolar Alliance and its superior Win-Win philosophy of relations.

    Brad | Jun 22, 2017 2:30:13 PM | 40
    Old Saudi King and Queen oil fields are water/gas injection. The coastal desalination plants are key to keeping these old Fields producing.

    Iran's Ballistic Missile strike on ISUS in Deir Ezzor from 100s klms away - Iran to Syria. ...proves Iran can strike Gulf states along with ships in the Persian Gulf.

    If Saudi go to war with Iran...they can kiss the desalination and power plants goodbye. The old oil fields would collapse, the end of Idiot Arabia.

    Hoarsewhisperer | Jun 22, 2017 2:50:04 PM | 41
    In a thread with the the word "Torture" in its title, shouldn't we be exploring the role torture plays in radicalising Ter'rists? Wasn't one of History's recent Ter'rist masterminds water-boarded umpteen dozen times to tip him over the edge? The only thing we know for certain about torture is that it's a great way to extract false confessions. Can it also be used to inspire false beliefs - keeping in mind that torture is conducted in a Totally Controlled Environment in which the victim "knows" only what the torturer wants/needs him to know?

    I don't buy all the Jew-controlled MSM's horseshit about people being radicalised by hare-brained hokum on the www, or the ravings of a local imam.
    There's got to be more to it...

    karlof1 | Jun 22, 2017 3:42:22 PM | 46
    Hoarsewhisperer @40--

    Yes, very valid points. Given the vast amount of torture that allegedly occurred in Vietnam during its very long war for independence, what became of all the potential terrorists? What of all those tortured within Afghanistan, Pakistan and India. Then of course, we have the longstanding Gulag System begun by Tsars and expanded by War Communism; Solzhenitsyn never mentions anyone being radicalized by their Gulag time in his trilogy on the subject. If torture breeds terrorists, then South America ought to be awash with them thanks to the decades of Outlaw US Empire directed torture there.

    In a very high-profile film seen by many millions, Luke Skywalker gets radicalized by the presumed torture and subsequent immolation of his kin and becomes what the Galactic Empire/ Outlaw US Empire would consider a terrorist. His own personal torture is knowing his father is his enemy, yet he cannot kill him since he senses redemption within him. More Hollywood; the Outlaw Josey Wales continues his fight against what he perceives as terrorist Red Legs well after the Civil War ends, while the Red Legs and their government connections consider Josey to be a terrorist--radicalized twice through massacres.

    So, is the torture something seen/witnessed, personally experienced, or both? Can a system be terroristic, such as slavery, colonialism, debt peonage, apartheid, and thus provide the required radicalization to resist/destroy them--such resistance being seen by the system's controllers as terrorism? Just how fine a line is there between the genuine Freedom Fighter and Terrorist? Within the Outlaw US Empire, the Black Panther Movement certainly sew themselves as genuine Freedom Fighters, but Hoover, Nixon, and such clearly saw them as terrorist threats to their system of control--Nelson Mandela was named a terrorist for that very reason by Reagan while calling al-Ciada Freedom Fighters.

    As a former teacher, I like to fallback on a truism brought forth by Rodgers, Hammerstein, and Logan in the Broadway musical South Pacific tune You've Got to Be Carefully Taught, which the Powers That Be tried to get them to drop, thus providing further incentive to include it--lyrics here, http://www.metrolyrics.com/youve-got-to-be-carefully-taught-lyrics-south-pacific.html So, unless you can become enlightened like Lt. Cable in the musical or myself, you're very likely to hate/stigmatize those you were socialized--taught, indoctrinated, through delivery systems like church, school, propaganda, etc. Yet another question: What differs between a Banzai Charge and a coordinated assault by several people wearing bomb belts--are they both terrorist acts or just one?

    Peter AU | Jun 22, 2017 3:47:20 PM | 48
    Part of the Saudi Qatar spat seems to be a re-alignment of Saudi and GCC behind the SDF-Kurd plus ISIS with haircut - and whatever the US call their proxies in the south. Moving from outing the Syrian government to a land grab for whatever they can, with a land bridge to Jordan and a focus on Iran?
    Laguerre | Jun 22, 2017 4:37:53 PM | 49
    I am not sure that I want to do a Debs-style rant on Saudi Arabia (not to criticise Debs, whose rants I greatly appreciate), but I increasingly think that Saudi is in serious danger of implosion.

    Passing over the 18th century Saudi empire, the point where the Saudis made the alliance with Muhammad ibn Abd ul-Wahhab, the real Saudi state began in 1908, when Ibn Saud, Abd al-Aziz Al Sa'ud, took the Dasmak fort in Riyadh. After the WW1, where he was not particularly supported by the Brits, he launched a successful war of conquest, supported by a bunch of jihadis, called muhajirun. These jihadis were later suppressed by violence in the 1930s. In 1925 they took Mecca from the Hussainis (Faisal and Lawrence's lot), and spread out to the borders of Yemen, including Najran by 1935. Note that the state was, and is, called in Arabic, al-mamlaka al-'arabiyya al-sa'udiyya, the Arab Kingdom of Al Sa'ud. There is no sense of nationality; it is what the Saudi family has conquered. They've since tried to introduce the notion of nationality, with doubtful success.

    In the old days, that is late antiquity and medieval Islamic times, the way you got the loyalty of the tribes was by simply paying them in gold. Which has only been repeated in the oil-rich today.

    What you have today in what is called Saudi Arabia, is a number of peoples who haven't been integrated into a nation, but been paid to keep quiet, under the domination of the Najdis from Riyadh. The Hijazis in the west aren't particularly wahhabi, but accept the situation. The Najranis are Isma'ilis,and had a small revolt in 2000 according to the War Nerd. The Shi'a in the east are sitting on the only oil-fields, and are the greatest problem for the Saudi regime, as mentioned above.

    However we now have the new young punk, Muhammad ibn Salman, who now has control of his father (who has perhaps dementia), and has appointed himself crown prince. He has already launched one war against Yemen, and a second quasi-war against Qatar, apart from the Saudi activities in Syria. He's quite like Saddam, it can't end well. The weak point is the loyalty of the Saudi people. Why stick with Riyadh if they're not paying? Mbs wants to introduce efficiency savings, under the advice of Kinsey, without apparently any idea of how Saudi works.

    karlof1 | Jun 22, 2017 4:41:01 PM | 50
    A new twist may soon allow SCO and CSTO members Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan troops into Syria in the form of Peace Keepers. From Ria Novosti--Sputnik in Russian:

    "The head of the State Duma Defense Committee, Vladimir Shamanov, confirmed to RIA Novosti that Russia is negotiating with Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan to send their military to Syria." SCO and CSTO have a heavy anti-terrorism emphasis, and including troops from those nations would provide excellent training for the new Daesh offensive likely to emerge from Afghanistan. Apparently, Turkey agrees with the proposal and has provided its own related to Idlib, https://ria.ru/syria/20170622/1497104098.html

    fast freddy | Jun 22, 2017 4:48:38 PM | 51
    If you are born into a society wherein headchopping is the standard for capital punishment, then it would seem to be a normal act to you. (Also the chopping off of hands, noses, etc.) Now if you are also very poor (which is generally the case) then a representative of the CIA, for example could entice you with a fat paycheck like you've never seen ($400 per month). You might also be inclined to perform other tasks for bonus money. Further - important inspiration is derived from religious and cultural differences btw you and your designated foes.

    The extraction of false confessions does serve to legitimize torture, because a false confession is as good as a legitimate confession when the goal from the start is to uphold a pre-determined false narrative.

    karlof1 | Jun 22, 2017 4:53:07 PM | 52
    Laguerre @48--

    Andrew Korybko has a different view of what MBS's rise means for Russia and China, https://sputniknews.com/columnists/201706211054852980-saudi-shake-up-russia-china/ The ties already made between the three make it a curious dance to watch.

    Alaric | Jun 22, 2017 4:55:40 PM | 53
    Hmm..

    I wonder how long it will be before we see a provocation against Iran or against the SAA in Syria by the new King to be. I suspect even neocons would be delighted if the Russians or Syrians shot down a UAE, Kuwaiti or Saudi plane. That makes we wonder if Iran will not reply to the new idiot king via more support for the houthi.

    brian | Jun 22, 2017 6:36:57 PM | 56
    Amnesty and its mouthpiece Kreasechan try to outdo HRW & Ken in their support for the jihadis war on syrians
    kristyan benedict‏Verified account @KreaseChan 11h11 hours ago

    In an alternative universe, Russia slams Syrian warplane's attacks on civilians as violation of international law

    http://tass.com/politics/952763 https://twitter.com/tassagency_en/status/877853678908182528

    Curtis | Jun 22, 2017 7:33:57 PM | 57
    The Yemen program sounds like the one run in Afghanistan sort of like a dragnet run by corrupt allies who may be paid "per head." And it's cheaper than paid trip to Gitmo.
    ben | Jun 22, 2017 7:36:49 PM | 58
    Hoarsewhisper @ 40 speculated:"There's got to be more to it..."

    Bingo! This might have something to do with it..

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/military-coups-regime-change-the-cia-has-interfered-in-over-81-foreign-elections/5567422

    jfl | Jun 22, 2017 8:36:41 PM | 60
    @40 hoarse, 'keeping in mind that torture is conducted in a Totally Controlled Environment in which the victim "knows" only what the torturer wants/needs him to know?'

    that's always struck me about the caliph of the islamic state, abu bakr al-baghdadi . He is acknowledged to have been held by the cia - after his stint at abu ghraib - in a prison camp in iraq ... camp bucca, 'along with other future leaders of ISIL' ... that's where he 'got the idea' of the islamic state itself.

    I think al-Baghdadi and isis are much more closely tied to the usofa than is generally acknowledged.

    jfl | Jun 22, 2017 8:48:12 PM | 61
    @54 karlof

    i've never taken Korybko - or sputnik - as anything other than a propaganda trumpet. he does remind of 'inconvenient' facts from time to time ...

    [T]he $65 billion in deals that King Salman signed in Beijing include a plan to construct a Chinese drone factory in the Kingdom, which shows that Saudi Arabia's August 2016 purchase of this technology from China was successful in serving as the foundation for an expanded military partnership.
    what the hell is china doing, selling drones ... building factories to build drones, and 65 billion worth of other projects ... in saudi arabia?

    doing a takeover ... via chinese 'entrepreneurs', xi's cronies ... a la greece?

    China has long begun an investment plan for Greece that allows Athens to pay salaries, maintain the infrastructures and sustain the impact of debt repayment plans as well as interests. China has capital to invest, trade empowerments to be created and a new Silk Road to be implemented, with Greece being one of the terminals where to channel Beijing's global investments. In 2015, the Chinese giant Cosco bought most of the Piraeus port for a total of 368.5 million Euros, 280 million of which were cashed in Athens for 51% of the port area and the other 88 million will be delivered after five years for the acquisition of a further 6%, but only for completed compulsory infrastructure investments. On June 17, with reference to the port of Piraeus, Cosco, the Piraeus port authority, and the port of Shanghai concluded an agreement that provides for a great collaboration between the Chinese and the Greek ports, effectively transforming Piraeus in a freight hub from the gigantic port of the Far East.

    China's interests in Greece are several and multi-faceted, and the crisis can only help investments by lowering their costs. The Beijing funds are interested in strategic sectors of the Greek economy, which – for Chinese companies – are very attractive assets, by reason of the weak local competition due to the devastation of the Greek state system and the impoverishment of local entrepreneurship. Beijing's interests span from boating, tourism, road and port networks to real estate – anywhere big Chinese companies and funds from the central state can find a place to become sector leaders.

    Dalian Wanda, one of the Chinese investment giants, is interested in many areas of the Greek economy, and is ready to invest in less strategic, but equally profitable sectors such as football. The same fund owns a third of Atletico Madrid.

    jfl | Jun 22, 2017 9:38:58 PM | 62
    @40 hoarse

    there's a review of douglas valentine's The CIA As Organized Crime at The Criminal 'Laws' of Counterinsurgency

    The U.S. "deep state" – of which the CIA is an integral part – is an open secret now and the Phoenix Program (assassinations, death squads, torture, mass detentions, exploitation of information) has been its means of controlling populations. Consequently, knowing the deep state's methods is the only hope of building a democratic opposition to the deep state and to restore as much as possible the Constitutional system we had in previous centuries, as imperfect as it was.
    douglas valentine has apparently tied the historical knot between today's assassinations, death squads, torture, mass detentions, exploitation of information and that of vietnam. that's important. the fact that it's been going on for so long points to it's structural significance : it's built-in to the us system at this point, and will remain so, unless and until it's 'built-out' by ordinary americans, ourselves.

    the present structure is rotten, incapable of reform

    Talleyrand is credited with saying, "They have learned nothing and forgotten nothing." Reportedly, that was borrowed from a 1796 letter by a French naval officer, which stated, in the original language: Personne n'est corrigé; personne n'a su ni rien oublier ni rien appendre. In English:

    "Nobody has been corrected; no one has known to forget, nor yet to learn anything."

    That sums up the CIA leadership entirely.

    smuks | Jun 22, 2017 10:25:17 PM | 63
    @Laguerre 48, jfl 60

    I was equally pessimistic about Saudi A. for years, but have become somewhat doubtful now.

    Beijing and Riyadh have a long-running (hidden) strategic partnership, with the Saudis buying Chinese missiles, China investing, and both (together with Russia) engineering the fall of the oil price in 2014.

    Europe and Russia don't want the kingdom to implode, as this would destabilize the entire region, uproot millions more and probably cause jihadis everywhere to run amok. China & other Asian states don't want oil to rise dramatically. The only major power which wouldn't be affected by the turmoil, and would benefit from a higher oil price, is the US.

    If both China/ Russia and Europe support MbS in his attempts to reform the country, shouldn't this be enough for him to have a chance of success? I sure hope so, though it's hard to tell. At the very least we should see some serious efforts to modernize KSA society and economy.

    Greece seems to be increasingly swarming with Chinese tourists. The country has basically nothing but logistics and tourism to offer, and China has seized the crisis opportunity to get a foot in the European door. A bit vulture fund style I guess, but Athens had little choice, and Tsipras & colleagues had this planned long before coming to power imo.

    Ghostship | Jun 22, 2017 10:34:19 PM | 64
    Alaric | Jun 22, 2017 4:55:40 PM | 52
    ...if Iran will not reply to the new idiot king via more support for the houthi.

    What support for the Houthi? You give too much credence to the MSM and their sources in Washington and you're expecting other cultures to be as arrogant, ignorant and stupid as the American one.

    Hoarsewhisperer | Jun 23, 2017 12:50:22 AM | 65
    Thanks to james, karlof1, ben, jfl et al for broadening the spectrum of a torture discussion; and fast freddy for making sure that the $$$ factor isn't overlooked...

    Posted by: jfl | Jun 22, 2017 8:36:41 PM | 59
    (Totally Controlled Environment)

    I threw that in because the torturers have control over the range and mix of techniques to be used. Good Cop / Bad Cop is a successful and evergreen interrogation style. And in a TC Environment, with psychiatrists and psychologists on the team, it's possible that the geniuses have developed a production-line method of fast-tracking and exploiting the onset of Stockholm Syndrome to enhance the Good Cop / Bad Cop experience.

    jfl | Jun 23, 2017 1:51:08 AM | 66
    @62 smuks
    Beijing and Riyadh have a long-running (hidden) strategic partnership, with the Saudis ... [and chinese] ... both (together with Russia) engineering the fall of the oil price in 2014.
    have you got any proof at all, even speculation as to why, the russians engineered the fall of the oil price in 2014? i think it was the saudis and us who engineered the fall of the oil price in 2014, to the detriment of russia.
    If both China/ Russia and Europe support MbS in his attempts to reform the country, shouldn't this be enough for him to have a chance of success?
    The country has basically nothing but ... [oil] ... to offer, and China has seized the crisis opportunity to get a foot in the ... [middle eastern oilpatch] ... door. A bit vulture fund style I guess, but ... [riyadh] ... had little choice, ... [mbs] & colleagues had [not had] this planned ... before coming to power, imo.
    Mina | Jun 23, 2017 4:22:01 AM | 68
    sovereignty? what sovereignty? http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-40378221 KSA asks Qatar to become a province just like Bahrein was force to some years ago!
    harrylaw | Jun 23, 2017 5:14:47 AM | 69
    Who are the idiots here.... The United States has told Turkey it will take back weapons supplied to the Kurdish YPG militia in northern Syria after the defeat of Islamic State, Ankara said on Thursday, seeking to address Turkish concerns about arming Kurds on its border.

    Turkish defense ministry sources said U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis also promised his Turkish counterpart to provide a monthly list of weapons handed to the YPG, saying the first inventory had already been sent to Ankara. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-turkey-usa-idUSKBN19D10J
    It beggars belief that an arrangement like this could be thought about, let alone work.

    The US to the Kurds 'you fight and die for our objectives, then we throw you under the bus' the Kurds 'OK boss'. This is what US policy in the Middle East consists of. You could not make it up.

    Mina | Jun 23, 2017 6:25:47 AM | 70
    A Marshall plan spend on Afghanistan. Not on hunger in Africa. http://www.atimes.com/article/fear-loathing-afghan-silk-road/
    jfl | Jun 23, 2017 7:48:06 AM | 75
    i now it's been published here many times before, but it should be periodically published here, i think ...

    Overthrowing other people's governments: The Master List

    by William Blum – Published February 2013

    Instances of the United States overthrowing, or attempting to overthrow, a foreign government since the Second World War. (* indicates successful ouster of a government)

    1. 1949-1960s China
    2. 1949-53 Albania
    3. 1950s East Germany
    4. 1953 Iran *
    5. 1954 Guatemala *
    6. mid-1950s Costa Rica
    7. 1956-7 Syria
    8. 1957 Egypt
    9. 1957-8 Indonesia
    10. 1953-64 British Guiana *
    11. 1963 Iraq *
    12. 1945-73 North Vietnam
    13. 1955-70 Cambodia *
    14. 1958-60 Laos * * *
    15. 1960-63 Ecuador *
    16. 1960 Congo *
    17. 1965 France
    18. 1962-64 Brazil *
    19. 1963 Dominican Republic *
    20. 1959-present Cuba
    21. 1964 Bolivia *
    22. 1965 Indonesia *
    23. 1966 Ghana *
    24. 1964 Chile-73 *
    25. 1967 Greece *
    26. 1970-71 Costa Rica
    27. 1971 Bolivia *
    28. 1973-75 Australia *
    29. 1975, 1980s Angola
    30. 1975 Zaire
    31. 1974-76 Portugal *
    32. 1976-80 Jamaica *
    33. 1979-81 Seychelles
    34. 1981-82 Chad *
    35. 1983 Grenada *
    36. 1982-84 South Yemen
    37. 1982-84 Suriname
    38. 1987 Fiji *
    39. 1980 Libyas
    40. 1981-90 Nicaragua *
    41. 1989 Panama *
    42. 1990 Bulgaria *
    43. 1991 Albania *
    44. 1991 Iraq
    45. 1980 Afghanistans *
    46. 1993 Somalia
    47. 1999-2000 Yugoslavia *
    48. 2000 Ecuador *
    49. 2001 Afghanistan *
    50. 2002 Venezuela *
    51. 2003 Iraq *
    52. 2004 Haiti *
    53. 2007-present Somalia
    54. 2009 Honduras
    55. 2011 Libya *
    56. 2012 Syria
    57. 2014 Ukraine *

    37 of 57 'successful', 65% (counting all 3 of the 'victories' over lao)

    is there a year since 1945 that the usofa has not been engaged in overthrowing other peoples' politics somewhere around the world ?

    i don't see one.

    Piotr Berman | Jun 23, 2017 10:40:01 AM | 80
    ex-SA @77

    stile (noun) an arrangement of steps that allows people but not animals to climb over a fence or wall

    What does it have to do with substance?

    More seriously, I do not see the Canadian exercise in rhetoric as brainwashing. Kids should know that there is no connection between the validity of an argument and the polish in its presentation. OTOH, this is information that should be withheld from the future sheeple, so it should be restricted to special programs for the future helpers of the ruling class.

    peter | Jun 23, 2017 11:52:16 AM | 82
    It's pretty obvious that Trump is picking his friends in the ME based on his attitude towards Iran and a seeming desire to do Israel's bidding. For all his faults Obama chose to keep Israel at arm's length and ramrodded a nuclear deal with Iran that was intended to bring that country in from the cold and open opportunities for commerce that had been shut down by years of sanctions.

    In his zeal to undo all of Obama's initiatives Trump has placed the US in an intractable position in the ME. The scope of his long term plans will become more evident as the IS is driven out of Raqqa and Mosul. A lot of posters have postulated that he intends to grab a chunk of eastern Syria and western Iraq and engineer the geography so that Iranian influence in Syria and Lebanon is minimized. They are very likely right.

    Because of his problems at home Trump has delegated his ME and other foreign policy to his generals. It's probably a good thing that there are old Pentagon hands that deal with reality and recognize that there's only so much the US can do given the circumstances. It's not so long ago that the "surge" in Iraq resulted in stop-loss reenlistment and numerous deployments of state reserves that must have come as the rudest of shocks to enlistees who thought they were joining to go play with tanks at some base every other weekend. These Pentagon folks realize that to fully meet the expectations of the Saudis and Israelis they would have to instigate a buildup that would mirror those of the two Iraq Wars. With the possibility of hostilities in the far western Pacific the options for the ME aren't very appealing. The American people don't give a fuck about Syria and might get irate if they see the country moving towards war.

    The saving grace might be Mueller and his posse of investigators. They are going to forensically break down any dealings that Trump and Kushner had with foreign entities before and during the presidential campaign. There may be reasons for transition type meetings with foreign diplomats but the meetings with bankers and businessmen that were so blithely left off the required documentation when applying for security clearances will come under full scrutiny in a very focused way. This focus on his foreign dealings is apparently what has been causing Trump to act in such an unhinged fashion. He's too frazzled by his domestic problems to concentrate on his foreign policy. That's because he's corrupt and it's going to be fully exposed.

    if his dodgy business dealings abroad weren't enough the emoluments clause is waiting to bite him in the ass. There are already several lawsuits in the works and more to come. His brazen milking of his position will be the end of him if the Russian connection isn't. Other presidents would at least wait till their terms were over to cash in on on multi-million dollar book deals and 400 grand speeches. With the sole exception of Jimmy Carter. Trump couldn't wait even months before he started leveraging his position for personal gain.

    But still the focus of this and most threads is what a despicable evil man Obama was and how Trump's shortcomings all have their roots in the can of worms left by the previous administrations. Well, Obama is gone now and so is Clinton and the Chief Executive has the power to set things right. It ain't happening and it's time to put responsibility where it belongs. Trump's made Iran the new Public Enemy #1 and speaks of cancelling the nuclear deal. He's called climate change a hoax and and pulled out of the Paris Accord. He's taking away healthcare for the hoi polloi because it was Obama that provided it. He's undone the Cuba initiative. The joke in DC is that he's going to hunt down the Thanksgiving turkeys that Obama pardoned and kill them. But still whenever the subject of American impropriety rises the peanut gallery starts in with how it was all Obama and Trump's not so bad. Well, guess what sport fans, Trump is a crooked son of a bitch who wants to run a kleptocracy and can't understand why all these people are gunning for him. He will find out though when Flynn starts to testify. Because that motherfucker has flipped. Flynn is the key and will bring down the whole rotten structure.

    Curtis | Jun 23, 2017 11:58:59 AM | 83
    ben 57
    That was a good point that Putin raised with Kelly in her interview. It's one thing to point a finger at any Russian affects on elections when the US does it on such a massive scale. I wish he would release a white paper documenting this especially US efforts in Ukraine as well as Russia (to include NED and IRI).
    CarlD | Jun 23, 2017 12:16:25 PM | 85
    @74

    Quite a few missing 1949 Haiti*, 1986 Haiti*, 1989*Haiti,, 1992

    hopehely | Jun 23, 2017 12:40:59 PM | 87
    @85
    Torture and suffering is the crucial and integral part of Christianity. Do you realize that the cross is a torture device? And that the word 'passion' in Passion of Christ means a suffering, not a lust or a drive? Not to mention the Inquisition....

    Penelope | Jun 23, 2017 7:24:15 PM | 91
    Regarding torture. It's been persistently reported in booklength works for more than a decade that the purpose is not to elicit information. This makes sense. Really, can you imagine that so many people have such valuable info? Rather, we're told that they're tortured to see if they can be made to confess to falsity-- that is, as a way to further the technology of breaking people down. Also, sometimes individuals can be made into "split personalities"-- that is, they can be programmed to commit acts not of their own volition, upon receiving a stimulus-- like Sirhan Sirhan or like the 1962 version of the Manchurian Candidate with Laurence Harvey.

    Ah, who knows what evil can lurk in the minds of oligarchs and their lackeys? It makes me feel unclean to contemplate it.

    [Jun 21, 2017] Accept it. Syria will never get Golan back. Its not right. Its not fair. But sometimes the bad guys win and there is nothing anybody can do about it.

    Jun 21, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Køn | Jun 20, 2017 12:55:31 AM | 99 Taxi | Jun 20, 2017 1:05:18 AM | 100

    @95 Taxi
    If the Syrians did try to liberate the occupied Golan by force, the only thing that would delay the nuclear annihilation of Damascus is if the wind happened to be blowing from the north-east. The Israelis wouldn't want any of the radioactive fallout blowing back into Israel.

    Accept it. Syria will never get Golan back. It's not right. It's not fair. But sometimes the bad guys win and there is nothing anybody can do about it.

    XXX:
    @Køn,

    You're not getting it pal: nuke Damascus or not, israel is easily and quickly destroyable now. A nuke will NOT DEFEND israeli territory. Nothing can.

    And they won't dare nuke Damascus anyway: too close to the Golan.

    It's time you faced it: there WILL BE a confrontation on the Golan and israel will pull back: unable to sacrifice tel aviv for the Golan.

    I refer you also to my earlier comment here: (comment # 47)

    http://www.moonofalabama.org/2017/06/syria-summary-us-attack-fails-to-disrupt-push-to-deir-ezzor.html#c6a00d8341c640e53ef01bb09a70369970d

    [Jun 21, 2017] Resist This the United States is at War With Syria

    Notable quotes:
    "... Sixteen countries ..."
    "... Americans, and certainly self-identified "progressives," have to be crystal clear about this: American armed forces have no right to be in Syria, have no right to restrict the Syrian government from using any of its airspace, or to prevent it from regaining control of any of its own territory from foreign-backed jihadi armies. ..."
    "... The Syrian state and its allies (Iran and Russia), on the other hand, are engaged in the legitimate self-defense of a sovereign state, and have the right to respond with full military force to any attack on Syrian forces or any attempt by the United States to balkanize or occupy Syrian territory, or to overthrow the Syrian government. ..."
    "... precisely because it has been defeating ISIS ..."
    "... such a war is the objective ..."
    "... which is already underway, ..."
    Jun 21, 2017 | www.counterpunch.org
    June 21, 2017 Resist This: the United States is at War With Syria

    by Jim Kavanagh

    Photo by Debra Sweet | CC BY 2.0

    The United States is at war with Syria. Though few Americans wanted to face it, this has been the case implicitly since the Obama administration began building bases and sending Special Ops, really-not-there, American troops, and it has been the case explicitly since August 3, 2015, when the Obama administration announced that it would "allow airstrikes to defend Syrian rebels trained by the U.S. military from any attackers, even if the enemies hail from forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad." With the U.S. Air Force-under Trump, following Obama's declared policy-shooting down a Syrian plane in Syrian airspace, this is now undeniable. The United States is overtly engaged in another aggression against a sovereign country that poses no conceivable, let alone actual or imminent, threat to the nation. This is an act of war.

    As an act of war, this is unconstitutional, and would demand a congressional declaration. Will Trump ask for this? Will any Democratic or Republican congresscritter demand it? Is the Pope a Hindu?

    Would it make any difference? Why should Trump bother? Obama set the stage when he completely ignored the War Powers Act, the Constitution, Congress, and his own Attorney General and legal advisers, and went right ahead with a war on Libya, under the theory that, if we pretend no American troops are on the ground, it isn't really a war or "hostilities" at all. Which I guess means if the Chinese Air Force starts shooting down American planes in American airspace in defense of Black Lives Matter's assault on the White House, it wouldn't really be engaging in an act of war.

    It's impossible to overstate the danger in these executive war-making prerogatives that Obama normalized-with the irresponsible connivance of his progressive groupies, who pretend not to know where this would lead: In 2012, referring to the precedent of Obama's policies, Mitt Romney said : "I don't believe at this stage, therefore, if I'm president that we need to have a war powers approval or special authorization for military force. The president has that capacity now." Following Obama, for Trump, and every Republican and Democratic president, it now goes without saying.

    As an aggressive, unprovoked war, this is also illegal under international law, and all the political and military authorities undertaking it are war criminals, who would be prosecuted as such, if there were an international legal regime that had not already been undermined by the United States.

    Syria is now under explicit attack by the armed forces of the U.S., Turkey, and other NATO states. Sixteen countries have combat aircraft buzzing around Syrian airspace under the effective command of the United States, and a number of them have attacked Syria's army.

    Americans, and certainly self-identified "progressives," have to be crystal clear about this: American armed forces have no right to be in Syria, have no right to restrict the Syrian government from using any of its airspace, or to prevent it from regaining control of any of its own territory from foreign-backed jihadi armies.

    The Syrian state and its allies (Iran and Russia), on the other hand, are engaged in the legitimate self-defense of a sovereign state, and have the right to respond with full military force to any attack on Syrian forces or any attempt by the United States to balkanize or occupy Syrian territory, or to overthrow the Syrian government.

    So please, do not pretend to be shocked, shocked, if Syria and its allies fight back, inflicting American casualties. Don't pose as the morally superior victim when Americans are killed by the people they are attacking. And don't be preaching about how everyone has to support our troops in a criminal, unconstitutional, aggressive attack on a country that has not threatened ours in any way. American soldiers and pilots executing this policy are not heroes, and are not fighting to protect America or advance democracy; they are criminal aggressors and legitimate targets. In response to American aggression, the Syrian Army has every right to strike back at the American military apparatus, everywhere. Every casualty of this war, however big it gets, is the ethico-political responsibility of the attacking party – US. The first responsibility of every American is not to "support our troops," but to stop this war. Right now. Before it gets worse

    It's quite obvious, in fact, that the United States regime is deliberately making targets of its military personnel, in the hopes of provoking a response from Syrian or allied armed forces that will kill some Americans, and be used to gin up popular support for the exactly the kind of major military attack on Syria and/or Russia and/or Iran that the American people would otherwise reject with disgust. Anyone who professes concern for "our troops" should be screaming to stop that.

    It's also quite clear now, that the War on ISIS is a sham, that ISIS was always just a pretext to get the American military directly involved in attacking the Syrian army and destroying the coherence of the Syrian state. If the U.S. wanted to defeat ISIS, it could do so easily by coordinating their actions with, and not against, the forces who have been most effectively fighting it: the Syrian Arab Army, Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah.

    Instead, it's attacking the Syrian army precisely because it has been defeating ISIS and other jihadi forces, and regaining its own territory and control of its own border with Iraq. The U.S. does not want that to happen. At the very least-if it cannot immediately engender that massive offensive to overthrow the Baathist government-the U.S. wants to control part of the border with Iraq and to occupy a swath of eastern Syria. It wants to establish permanent bases from which to provision and protect jihadi armies, achieving a de facto partitioning of the Syrian state, maintaining a constant state of armed attack against the Damascus government, and reducing Syria to a weakened, rump state that can never present any effective resistance to American, Israeli, or Saudi designs on the region.

    This is extremely dangerous, since the Syrians, Russians, and Iranians seem determined not to let this happen. Trump seems to have abrogated authority to his generals to make decisions of enormous political consequence. Perhaps that's why aggressive actions like the shoot-down of the Syrian plane have been occurring more frequently, and why it's not likely they'll abate. There's a dynamic in motion that will inevitably lead each side to confront a choice of whether to back down, in a way that's obvious, or escalate. Generals aren't good at backing down. A regional or global war is a real possibility, and becomes more likely with every such incident.

    Though most American politicians and media outlets do not want to say it (and therefore, most citizens cannot see it clearly enough), such a war is the objective of a powerful faction of the Deep State which has been persistent and determined in seeking it. If the generals are loathe to back down in a battle, the neocons are adamant about not backing down on their plans for the Middle East. They will not be stopped by anything less than overwhelming popular resistance and international pushback.

    The upside of these attacks on Syrian forces is that they wipe the lipstick off the pig of the American project in Syria. Everyone-European countries who profess concern for international law and stability, and the American people who are fed up with constant wars that have no benefit for them-can see exactly what kind of blatant aggression is unfolding, and decide whether they want to go along with it.

    In that regard, any self-identified "liberal" or "progressive" American-and particularly any such American politician-who spent (and may still spend) their political energy attacking Bush, et. al ., for that crazy war in Iraq, and who goes along with, or hesitates to immediately and energetically denounce this war, which is already underway, is a political hypocrite, resisting nothing but the obvious. Join the debate on Facebook

    [Jun 21, 2017] US Attack Fails To Disrupt Push To Deir Ezzor

    Jun 21, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
    Grieved | Jun 20, 2017 1:34:43 PM | 157

    One thing I wanted to add about Russian methodology in Syria.

    The principal reason that Russia escalates in such thin layers, I suspect, is that Russia has a very well defined military doctrine - updated last year I think - that prescribes what must happen in response to various conditions. I'm no expert in any of this, but what seems clear is that Russia as a nation understands very well what lies further down the escalation trail.

    Russia has been improving its military ever since Putin came in, but in the last year or two she has very seriously geared for real war, including global nuclear conflict. According to people like Dmitri Orlov and the Saker, who understand Russian mentality, Russians don't bluff. At best, they give a fair warning, once. Then when they decide it's necessary, they act. And as Putin has said, when you know a fight is unavoidable, get the first punch in.

    So while the US is living in a Hollywood dream world, Russia is in an entirely real world, watching the US escalate as if there would be no consequences. We don't actually know what the full suite of Russian red lines are in Syria, but it seems that the Pentagon has learned enough of them to fear direct conflict. The point is precisely that Russia is not bluffing, and so she is no hurry to move along the escalation line, because there's no going back, and when she reaches a certain point, she WILL act. And the US will not like it, and the world may not survive the traumas that come out of that.

    Putin has even taken the desperate step in the last two years if addressing western news people and scolding them for not being awake to the dangers to their own populations of US actions, trying to get them to pay attention. I believe now the fight in Syria is not just against the terrorists - killing them outside Russia's borders rather than inside - but also a very real one happening with the US, greater than is really obvious. The US expected to fight Russia in Ukraine, but Russia declined the venue chosen by the enemy, and chose its own venue instead.

    It's almost discouraging to read the many comments on some of the sites out there, where people rooting for Russia actually want her to shoot down a US plane or something dramatic. They think Russia sends a message of weakness by not acting in the approved US hero manner. They fail to understand that an entirely different mind-set is at work here - one that is completely lethal beyond certain bounds, which the US keep pushing and probing.

    [Jun 21, 2017] A quick reminder, a reality check... the utter stupidity, the illegality of US Syria policy

    www.moonofalabama.org

    michaelj72 | Jun 20, 2017 2:26:54 PM | 10

    a quick reminder, a reality check... the utter stupidity, the illegality of it all

    but even talking about that only raises yawns in DC and the West, though Australia has been smart enough to stop flying in the coalition of the bribed and the bludgeoned in Syria this week

    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/u-s-planes-at-risk-after-downing-of-syrian-jet/

    .....No one in Washington will care, but it is worth remembering that the U.S. has no authority to be engaged in hostilities anywhere in Syria, and our government certainly has no authority to attack Syrian government forces operating inside their own country in support for anti-regime insurgents. Obama had no right to expand the war on ISIS into Syria, and Trump has no right to involve us in a war with the Syrian government. Our Syria policy is unwise and divorced from U.S. security interests, and it is also illegal.

    [Jun 21, 2017] There is no shortage of tiresome Neocons but Lt. Col, Ralph Peterson wrote a particularly vile piece for the NY Post

    Jun 21, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
    Christian Chuba | Jun 20, 2017 1:48:32 PM | 5
    There is no shortage of tiresome Neocons but Lt. Col, Ralph Peterson wrote a particularly vile piece for the NY Post
    http://nypost.com/2017/06/19/the-stakes-in-syria-now-include-us-russia-war/
    " a Syrian aircraft struck our allies. An American jet shot it down."
    [^ not especially vile but even the Pentagon's own press release said that the Syrian aircraft was bombing NEAR SDF forces. So he is lying even if you just use Pentagon sources. ^]
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "In reality, Bashar al-Assad and his backers cynically dumped the burden of wrecking ISIS on us and our local allies to concentrate on slaughtering civilians, exterminating freedom fighters and torturing thousands of prisoners to death. Now that we've done the anti-ISIS heavy lifting, they want to exclude us from the endgame and crush our Kurdish and Arab allies."
    [^ Now this IS truly vile ^]

    The NY Post is one of the cowardly who don't allow comments, I'll at least give the National Review and FOX credit for allowing online comments. I don't know if they ever read them, it doesn't look like it. Is there an infinite amount of demand for Neocon drivel? I only saw this because I see articles linked through realclearworld.com which occasionally has some articles of value along with the sewage.

    Anon | Jun 20, 2017 2:17:20 PM | 8
    mischi

    Yes of course Russians are the provoking the US in.... the Baltic sea! . Facepalm.
    The western media is so deep in its own lies and disinformation its disgusting.

    michaelj72 | Jun 20, 2017 2:26:54 PM | 10
    a quick reminder, a reality check... the utter stupidity, the illegality of it all.

    but even talking about that only raises yawns in DC and the West, though Australia has been smart enough to stop flying in the coalition of the bribed and the bludgeoned in Syria this week

    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/u-s-planes-at-risk-after-downing-of-syrian-jet/

    .....No one in Washington will care, but it is worth remembering that the U.S. has no authority to be engaged in hostilities anywhere in Syria, and our government certainly has no authority to attack Syrian government forces operating inside their own country in support for anti-regime insurgents. Obama had no right to expand the war on ISIS into Syria, and Trump has no right to involve us in a war with the Syrian government. Our Syria policy is unwise and divorced from U.S. security interests, and it is also illegal.

    james | Jun 20, 2017 3:42:13 PM | 11
    ny post.. bought and paid for by zion idiots... not worth the cost for firestarter... humour maybe, lol..

    john helmer has another post up here on the freak freeland for any canucks reading here... new info from poland shows her grandfathers connections to nazi germany and how they were looking for him into the 80's... canuck gov't and media response? silence so far...

    [Jun 21, 2017] More Details Appear About US Attack Against Syrian Su-22

    Jun 20, 2017 | southfront.org

    jfl | Jun 20, 2017 7:25:08 PM | 17

    Ali Fahd's mission was to strike ISIS fighters and vehicles attempting to withdrew from Rusafah in the province of Raqqah towards Sukhnah in the province of Homs and Oqerbat in the eastern Hama countryside – near Ali Fahd's home town of Salamyiah. Connection with Ali Fahd was lost after reaching the operation area over Rusafah.

    SF was not able to receive info if Ali Fahd preformed any airstrike against ISIS before being hit. As connection was jammed it may mean Ali Fahd's warplane was downed even before dropping a single bomb. This supports the version provided by the Syrian government and the pro-opposition Syrian Observatory for Human Rights that said Ali Fahd's Su-22M4 never attacked positions of the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).

    According to Ali Fahd's relative Al-Masdar News reporter, Majd Fahed, Ali Fahd was captured by the SDF and Tiger Forces Leader General Suheil Al-Hassan is negotiating with SDF in order to free Ali Fahd.

    Chauncey Gardiner | Jun 20, 2017 9:12:03 PM | 22

    @jfl | Jun 20, 2017 7:25:08 PM | 17

    It seems to me the only this guy has this information about the Syrian pilot.

    https://twitter.com/maytham956/status/876801735477559296

    Al-Masdar do not have it.

    [Jun 21, 2017] The Problem with Kurdish Independence by Daniel Larison

    Notable quotes:
    "... When I was a student at Chapel Hill in the early 70's I heard a lecture by a professor of Azeri background who predicted that the next great war, one which had the potential to be more than a regional conflict and could become a world war, would be the war for Kurdish independence. I don't believe this is a problem which will go away. The world will have to make room for an independent Kurdistan or conflict in the region will continue. ..."
    "... See what we let loose with Kosovo! On what basis can the West now deny this and refuse recognition when we stripped Serbia's heartland away from Serbia? If it does come down to war, it might be good for the Kurd's neighbors to remember that Saladin was a Kurd. ..."
    "... The US has enough problems certainly these days with the internal politics in their own country. They sure fail or make worse with neocon social engineering experiments with other countries they don't understand or have no interests in. Negative and long lasting and worse off unintended consequences abound whenever US military acting as the foreign policy arm of US affairs goes into action. ..."
    Jun 20, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com
    Kurdistan4all / cc Iraqi Kurdistan will hold an independence referendum on September 25, and there is no international support for that:

    On Monday, the European Union joined the United Nations, the United States, Turkey, and Iraq to discourage Iraqi Kurds from holding an independence referendum on Sept. 25.

    That was to be expected, and won't deter regional government authorities in Erbil, said Bayan Sami Abdul Rahman, the Kurdistan Regional Government representative in Washington.

    The broad international opposition to a Kurdish independence referendum underscores the problem with trying to create an independent Kurdistan: the new state would be immediately isolated, it would lack recognition from most other governments, and would face intense disapproval from all of its new neighbors. Iraqi Kurdistan would forfeit the benefits of its current semi-autonomous status in exchange for a formal independence that would impose numerous costs on it. Iran isn't mentioned in the article, but their government has likewise expressed opposition to the referendum.

    Supporters of the referendum say that a vote in favor of independence isn't a declaration of independence, but for the many regional opponents of a Kurdish state it might be taken as one. It is doubtful that the Turkish and Iraqi governments would limit their opposition to rhetoric, so a new Kurdish state would find itself besieged and under attack very early on, and Iran would presumably aid the Baghdad in trying to prevent the separation of the region. The last thing the region needs is even more instability and violence, and a push for Kurdish independence would produce more of both. Contrary to the hopes of Western partition fans, Kurdish independence would spark new conflicts and complicate existing ones. It would resolve none of them.

    Pennzy SW , says: June 20, 2017 at 9:34 am
    "Contrary to the hopes of Western partition fans, Kurdish independence would spark new conflicts and complicate existing ones. It would resolve none of them. "

    You may be right about the hopes of Western partition fans, but our parasitic "friends" in the region (the Israelis and Saudis in particular) would be overjoyed to see us permanently bogged down in regional conflicts created by an independent Kurdistan.

    All the more reason for us to have nothing to do with it.

    William Dalton , says: June 20, 2017 at 10:49 am
    When I was a student at Chapel Hill in the early 70's I heard a lecture by a professor of Azeri background who predicted that the next great war, one which had the potential to be more than a regional conflict and could become a world war, would be the war for Kurdish independence. I don't believe this is a problem which will go away. The world will have to make room for an independent Kurdistan or conflict in the region will continue.
    Will Harrington , says: June 20, 2017 at 1:09 pm
    See what we let loose with Kosovo! On what basis can the West now deny this and refuse recognition when we stripped Serbia's heartland away from Serbia? If it does come down to war, it might be good for the Kurd's neighbors to remember that Saladin was a Kurd.
    jk , says: June 20, 2017 at 8:13 pm
    The US has enough problems certainly these days with the internal politics in their own country. They sure fail or make worse with neocon social engineering experiments with other countries they don't understand or have no interests in. Negative and long lasting and worse off unintended consequences abound whenever US military acting as the foreign policy arm of US affairs goes into action.

    [Jun 21, 2017] Somewhat interesting reports the Syrian plane had only been airborne about 15 minutes when it was shot down, reportedly without having delivered its bomb load

    Notable quotes:
    "... That means the American plane took off from a carrier (George HW Bush), flew over all of Russia's radar and missile sites in western Syria, shot down the Syrian Su-22 in Raqqa, and then flew right back over all the Russian anti-air sites.'; ..."
    "... Coming late to this party but everything looks very good for the balance of power to me. Iran shows not only what it can do but implies strongly what it will do, if the prompts so indicate. Russia comes down hard with Lavrov and diplomacy telling the world that international law has been broken consciously and cynically by the US, and MOD and Russian soldiers set further red lines. Syria meanwhile has not been goaded into any unwise move by this latest provocation, and continues on its campaign. With the pilot now safe - rescued from behind enemy lines by the Tigers, no less - Syria only lost one plane, while the US lost its deconflict back-channel. ..."
    "... The loss of the back channel seriously concerns the US military, because it means that they run a lethal risk of making a wrong move. Bluster is one thing but facing Russian soldiers in a real fight is their worst nightmare. This is a military event, so in this information space across the web we see additional troll forces mustered into discussion threads to cast doubt on Russia's resolve, but underneath the smoke, Russia has now parlayed its de-escalation zones - which have worked beautifully to further Syria's military edge - into all of Syria west of the Euphrates. ..."
    "... More provocations and blunders from the US will result in even more strategic losses exacted by Russia. As b has treated at length, and as commented here already, the US persists in tactics to the detriment of its strategy. It is throwing away its cards one by one in each round of betting. ..."
    Jun 21, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
    brian | Jun 19, 2017 6:53:12 PM | 77
    Somewhat interesting reports the Syrian plane had only been airborne about 15 minutes when it was shot down, reportedly without having delivered its bomb load. The super hornet from an aircraft carrier had to enter and cross Syria to shoot down the Syrian bomber. This has all the appearance of premeditation, opportunistic predatory attack, starting in flight operations on the carrier, aided and abetted by AWACS identification and control assets. Seemingly the pilot has been recovered. What a story he may have to tell. The rats are leaving the regime change coalition as it flounders in their sea of lies; good thing that. Time will tell how correct these reports are.

    Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Jun 20, 2017 8:52:43 AM | 138

    The US plane which shot down the Syrian Su-22 over Raqqa province yesterday was a carrier-based F/A-18.

    That means the American plane took off from a carrier (George HW Bush), flew over all of Russia's radar and missile sites in western Syria, shot down the Syrian Su-22 in Raqqa, and then flew right back over all the Russian anti-air sites.';
    http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/has-russia-just-grounded-all-americas-carrier-based-aircraft-coast-syria/ri20148#.WUfp5CeZs9o.facebook

    Grieved | Jun 19, 2017 8:27:24 PM | 84
    Coming late to this party but everything looks very good for the balance of power to me. Iran shows not only what it can do but implies strongly what it will do, if the prompts so indicate. Russia comes down hard with Lavrov and diplomacy telling the world that international law has been broken consciously and cynically by the US, and MOD and Russian soldiers set further red lines. Syria meanwhile has not been goaded into any unwise move by this latest provocation, and continues on its campaign. With the pilot now safe - rescued from behind enemy lines by the Tigers, no less - Syria only lost one plane, while the US lost its deconflict back-channel.

    The loss of the back channel seriously concerns the US military, because it means that they run a lethal risk of making a wrong move. Bluster is one thing but facing Russian soldiers in a real fight is their worst nightmare. This is a military event, so in this information space across the web we see additional troll forces mustered into discussion threads to cast doubt on Russia's resolve, but underneath the smoke, Russia has now parlayed its de-escalation zones - which have worked beautifully to further Syria's military edge - into all of Syria west of the Euphrates.

    More provocations and blunders from the US will result in even more strategic losses exacted by Russia. As b has treated at length, and as commented here already, the US persists in tactics to the detriment of its strategy. It is throwing away its cards one by one in each round of betting.

    What's remarkable to me is how thinly sliced this game of chicken can be played. Accustomed as I am to US culture, and black-white dichotomies with their shoot-em-up resolutions, I would never have thought there were so many delicate countermoves available in a structure of escalation. Russia is playing this hand out with supreme elegance, to my mind. It seems possible now that Syria can move all the way to total victory, with the US out of the country, without the Pentagon realizing it has lost - simply, it will wake up to zero cards in its hand, while Russia still holds some.

    ~~

    ps..no expert on radar either, but I gather being locked onto is being "painted", and it's what pilots dread - because there's no escape from whatever the owner of the radar decides to throw at you. Well, they wanted to play chicken, but this will cause some serious frayed nerves in USAF.

    jfl | Jun 19, 2017 8:31:57 PM | 85
    Pentagon changes disposition of US-led coalition aircraft in Syria

    DAMASCUS, SYRIA (9:40 P.M.) – The United States decided to re-position fighter jets belonging to the US-led international coalition, Pentagon's spokesman Adrian Rankine-Galloway told reporters on Monday.

    "As a result of recent clashes with Syrian pro-regime and Russian forces, we took precautions to change the disposition of the aircraft in Syria in order to continue fighting Islamic State, while maintaining safety of our pilots – considering the known threats on the battlefield," he told Interfax agency.


    can it be true that the hornet came all the way from the mediterranean and shot sown the syrian plane? how did they know it would be there when they got there? are the us now going to fly out of qatar?

    In the meantime, the U.S. are going to work with Russia through diplomatic and military channels in order to restore the incident prevention direct line, head of Joint Chiefs of Staff, Joseph Dunford, told the press on Monday speaking at the conference of National Press club.

    is that how the us knew the where and when on the syrian plane?

    Peter AU | Jun 19, 2017 9:01:04 PM | 86
    When Russia first moved into Syria, Obama said something about Russia getting bogged down in a quagmire.
    Now it seems it is the US in a quagmire and Russia standing on solid ground. All Russia has to do is keep poking the US back into the quagmire if they try to climb out. The area east of the Euphrates seems to be the quagmire.
    While US is bogged down in that part of the world, and focusing on Russia, China, strategic partner to Russia and the only economic threat to the US is forging ahead.

    Lozion | Jun 19, 2017 9:04:38 PM | 87
    @84 Agreed.. The US's achilles heel as always been that it cannot be perceived as the aggressor under any circumstances. Russia exploits this weakness by constantly exposing its acts when breaching Intl law or conventions.
    This is a slow game but the benefits are a shifting of alliances and potential end of the status of vassalage of nations wising up to the state of dereliction of the Empire..

    Peter AU | Jun 19, 2017 11:09:39 PM | 92
    smuks | Jun 19, 2017 9:39:48 PM | 89 Sounds plausible enough and fits the maps. So technically speaking, the US excuse 'they bombed close to the SDF, endangering our allies' is even correct...

    Endangering allies? Nope. Shooting down a Syrian aircraft targeting an ISIS held town perhaps one or two k's from the Kurd frontlines is not self defence.

    Lozion | Jun 19, 2017 11:53:36 PM | 93
    Very good analysis by Mercouris of the @TheDuran_com CONFIRMED: US backs down as Russia targets US aircraft in Syria:

    http://theduran.com/us-backs-down-russia-targets-us-aircraft-syria/

    NemesisCalling | Jun 20, 2017 12:20:41 AM | 94
    @93 Lozion

    I'be been noticing that the Russian collusion narrative is losing steam here in the states. Maybe teeth are unclenching among the plebians to warrant less reckless enticement of Russia's AA systems. Among the blogospheres and message boards, I see more of a shrugged "meh" at the sight of the term "Russia" and a general acknowledgment that the narrative of the msm on Syria is completely unintelligible to the layman and therefore probably doesn't warrant getting into a war with Russia for. And let me say kudos to Oliver Stone to putting out the Putin interview. He was on that turd Colbert's Hate Show and was mocked for merely offering what he hoped was an unbiased view on Russia and what makes Putin tick. Let's hope a lot of people watch it.

    How many times have we all said, "This is it! Russia has to act now!" Strafing runs on Deir Ezzor giving way to ISIS assaults; RuF plane shot down over northern Syria; bombing runs in Syrian territory by the US. Each new incident has invoked a sudden panic, followed by breathless monitoring of current events for some days after. Meanwhile, Putin and Russia have convinced their allies to play the smart, long game, letting the event air out in the light of day so that cooler heads always seem to prevail.

    Taxi | Jun 20, 2017 12:27:20 AM | 95
    Our actions in Syria are based on israeli defense policies NOT American ones. That's why our actions in Syria are dumber than dumb as far as US interests are concerned. And if you haven't caught on why the jewish MSM and the zionist bipartisan War Party remain in a 'Russia' frenzy some six months after Trump moved into the WH, then you've been had. The whole jewish ploy is to keep up tensions with Putin so that Trump is forced to work the israel angle in Syria, an angle that is anti-Russian presence in the Levant and pro ISIS Caliphate.

    The whole point is to prevent USA working with Russia on cleaning up Syria because soon as the 'cleaning' is done, the Syrian army is heading towards the Golan to legitimately liberate it from israeli occupation - a fight that will see israel losing as tel aviv will be immediately targeted. The israelis know this and are delaying the inevitable confrontation in the Golan, in the hope that they can figure out the impossible in the meantime - the impossible being that unlike the past, the anti-israel axis in the Levant now and for the first time ever has the ability to destroy every inch of israel while taking the hits. Israel might have superior offensive weaponry, but defensively, they stand naked on the battlefield.

    Grieved | Jun 20, 2017 12:47:27 AM | 97
    without threatening to treat unauthorized planes as targets, the US markedly scaled back its flights, and publicly announced this. So the Russians have very clearly understood for months that this is an escalation that the US cannot afford to match.

    And now it has gone even further. This time the Russians have flipped the same switch of turning off the deconflict hotline, but this time they've promised to "paint" any plane that enters without authorization - to lock on it with targeting radar systems - reserving the right to take whatever action is deemed appropriate against that plane, depending on its actions.

    And the US is very scared:


    ...the US is frantically signalling to the Russians its urgent wish to de-escalate the situation. Note for example the markedly conciliatory language of White House spokesman Sean Spicer, and how he repeatedly passed up opportunities to utter words of defiance against Russia or to threaten the Russians with counter-measures during the latest White House press briefing
    [...]
    What that means is that though the Russians must act carefully so as not to provoke the US into an unnecessary confrontation which would serve no-one's interests, ultimately it is the Russians who in Syria have the whip hand.
    -- CONFIRMED: US backs down as Russia targets US aircraft in Syria

    So there we have it. As good as any laboratory test. Observation, theory, prediction and result all line up to prove the case: the US is full of bluster, playing a cowardly game of bullying, and yet cannot pass the test of being called out to fight in reality. Will not fight. Will not fight.

    And generals around the world take note of this.

    ~~

    By the way, Mercouris at the Duran often cites the excellent analysis by b at Moon of Alabama, as does Pepe Escobar in his Facebook page of important stories, for that matter. Just a note to say that we all read each other and between us we're putting together a really good picture of what's going on. I am impressed, and grateful. The truth is winning.

    sejomoje | Jun 20, 2017 12:50:04 AM | 98
    And yes, as much as Israel wishes to remain on the sidelines ideologically, they are 100% all in, behind the thinktank assessments that lead to military/CIA policy.

    It's absolutely ABSURD that Israel can bomb Syria sans scrutiny, but it is has been happening since the false "civil" war's start. Prima facie proof of the machination and its source.

    AtaBrit | Jun 20, 2017 5:33:40 AM | 130
    @frances | 49
    The West of the Euphrates comment is an interesting one. It seems that Russia is unwilling to show its hand on the Syrian Kurdish issue as yet. That they have a long history of supporting different Kuridsh factions implies that they will be happy to come to some arrangement but maybe they see the Kurds as being in too strong a negotiating position at the moment to agree to maintaining Syrian territorial integrity. So, let the US game play out a little longer and wait for the US to betray them thus weakening their stance and making them more amenable to Russian and Syrian proposals?


    @Romanoff| 124
    Yep. I saw the same. It doesn't surprise me in that I do not believe that the coalition partners have the stomach for all out war in Syria or elsewhere regionally.
    To be honest I think yet further splintering will occur especially when Germny finally moves from Incirlik to Jordan in the next couple of months.
    There are also fractures appearing on the Russian sanctions front with Germany unhappy about US's latest attempts to impose energy sanctions particularly against Nord Stream 2.

    Piotr Berman | Jun 20, 2017 7:40:38 AM | 134
    When Russia first moved into Syria, Obama said something about Russia getting bogged down in a quagmire.
    Now it seems it is the US in a quagmire and Russia standing on solid ground.

    Posted by: Peter AU | Jun 19, 2017 9:01:04 PM | 86

    This is indeed a textbook case when an intervention is "bogged down" and when it is not, and inability of "smart Americans" to tell the difference (non-smart Americans have a more obvious excuse for being clueless). To excuse Obama and parrots in the sophisticated liberal media like NYT, Russian intervention did not start very auspiciously. SAA was collapsing, slowly surrendering various positions and territories, and direct Russian help merely froze that collapse. Also, in the past USSR got bogged down in Afghanistan, and "even USA" got bogged down here and there. What would make the intervention in Syria any different?

    Superficially, Putin actually has long term strategy, and even "inept moves" are either improved or fit that strategy, while Obama for all his high IQ and cosmopolitan education did not (Trump has so-so IQ, and his knowledge of other cultures, while extensive, seems limited to casinos, luxury apartments, golf courses etc). More deeply, the conditions in Syria were more conducive for receiving outside help than in Afghanistan and Iraq. Baath party retains unshakable core support and is not riven by internal backstabbing. Majority of population prefers their rule over the alternatives that are present (as they are neither idiots nor fanatics). Thus even if Syrian military etc. was a basket full of problems, there were enough people who were fighting sufficiently well to stop the collapse after getting some help, and who could be trusted, armed and trained. And Russians knew how to do it, who can be trusted, and how to arm and train. Americans did not have such positive elements in Afghanistan and Iraq.

    There will be future books on the topic, but I would like to elaborate about inept tactics that fit long term strategy. Initial targets of Russian bombardments were making superficial sense, but did not work out. They enabled SAA attacks that turned to be futile. However, at least according to a lengthy and plausible article in Rusnext.ru, they were selected by Syrian command, and Russia made a decision of not overruling them, especially by selecting other targets. There is a whiff of excuses there, but it matches the events. And it touches a core requirement for a successful intervention: you must work through the people there, and those people must collaborate with sufficient enthusiasm to risk their lives. So you cannot treat them like dirt, savages etc. But in American thinking, how possibly you can treat savages not like savages? And you get a spiral of mutual hatred that splits the foreign helpers and local beneficiaries (interventionists and collaborators?) from top to bottom.

    Kumben | Jun 20, 2017 8:01:59 AM | 135
    Another card in the sleeve of the pro-Syria forces is the build-up of PMU on the Iraqi side of the border. Should the SDF start to advance south on the left side of the Euphrates, the PMU may roll in Syria and block any advance to the Omar oil fields and DeZ territory east of the river. For now they are just hanging over there, widening the area under Iraqi gov control, but imv their presence serves to block and eventually deal a mortal blow to the blacks from the east direction. Very interesting developments and configuration of forces during the last few weeks.

    Anon | Jun 20, 2017 11:40:38 AM | 146
    News report that US now have shot down an Iranian drone inside Syria!

    Unless Russia, Syria, Iran shoot back at these sick americans, the same sick americans will bomb Assad sooner or later.

    smuks | Jun 20, 2017 12:23:44 PM | 150

    Anon | Jun 20, 2017 12:29:40 PM | 151
    CarlD

    Yes unfortunately (Damascus will be bombed), there is no stop to the blood lust of the americans apparently, and the propaganda of the west help them justify that.

    Its clear also that Trump have zero power over these crazy generals, Mattis etcetera.
    He must have some friggin advisors that could tell him that this cant go on!

    Anon | Jun 20, 2017 12:40:56 PM | 152
    These people really are sick,
    US working to restore 'deconfliction' line with Russia over Syria
    http://217.218.67.231/Detail/2017/06/20/525953/US-Russia-deconfliction-Dunford/

    I raped your wife, but please we must keep in touch-logic!

    Well, yet more blowback from the shooting down of the Su-22, the Australians have stopped air operations over Syria for the time being . If the Russians really wanted to send a message to the Americans about how shooting down Syrian aircraft is unacceptable, then what better than to shoot down an aircraft of a lesser member of the US coalition, preferably one without nuclear weapons like the UK.
    BTW, it used to be that a NATO Article 5 response didn't cover events much outside of Europe and Turkey and I haven't heard that that's been changed.

    Posted by: Ghostship | Jun 20, 2017 12:50:52 PM | 153

    Well, yet more blowback from the shooting down of the Su-22, the Australians have stopped air operations over Syria for the time being . If the Russians really wanted to send a message to the Americans about how shooting down Syrian aircraft is unacceptable, then what better than to shoot down an aircraft of a lesser member of the US coalition, preferably one without nuclear weapons like the UK.
    BTW, it used to be that a NATO Article 5 response didn't cover events much outside of Europe and Turkey and I haven't heard that that's been changed.

    Posted by: Ghostship | Jun 20, 2017 12:50:52 PM | 153

    harrylaw | Jun 20, 2017 1:04:22 PM | 154
    This is the guy Trump has put in charge of war and peace between nuclear powers.
    "I come in peace. I didn't bring artillery. But I'm pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you fuck with me, I'll kill you all."
    more mad dog quotes here.. http://freebeacon.com/national-security/the-best-from-mad-dog-mattis/

    Grieved | Jun 20, 2017 1:34:43 PM | 157
    One thing I wanted to add about Russian methodology in Syria.

    The principal reason that Russia escalates in such thin layers, I suspect, is that Russia has a very well defined military doctrine - updated last year I think - that prescribes what must happen in response to various conditions. I'm no expert in any of this, but what seems clear is that Russia as a nation understands very well what lies further down the escalation trail.

    Russia has been improving its military ever since Putin came in, but in the last year or two she has very seriously geared for real war, including global nuclear conflict. According to people like Dmitri Orlov and the Saker, who understand Russian mentality, Russians don't bluff. At best, they give a fair warning, once. Then when they decide it's necessary, they act. And as Putin has said, when you know a fight is unavoidable, get the first punch in.

    So while the US is living in a Hollywood dream world, Russia is in an entirely real world, watching the US escalate as if there would be no consequences. We don't actually know what the full suite of Russian red lines are in Syria, but it seems that the Pentagon has learned enough of them to fear direct conflict. The point is precisely that Russia is not bluffing, and so she is no hurry to move along the escalation line, because there's no going back, and when she reaches a certain point, she WILL act. And the US will not like it, and the world may not survive the traumas that come out of that.

    Putin has even taken the desperate step in the last two years if addressing western news people and scolding them for not being awake to the dangers to their own populations of US actions, trying to get them to pay attention. I believe now the fight in Syria is not just against the terrorists - killing them outside Russia's borders rather than inside - but also a very real one happening with the US, greater than is really obvious. The US expected to fight Russia in Ukraine, but Russia declined the venue chosen by the enemy, and chose its own venue instead.

    It's almost discouraging to read the many comments on some of the sites out there, where people rooting for Russia actually want her to shoot down a US plane or something dramatic. They think Russia sends a message of weakness by not acting in the approved US hero manner. They fail to understand that an entirely different mind-set is at work here - one that is completely lethal beyond certain bounds, which the US keep pushing and probing.

    Formerly T-Bear | Jun 20, 2017 2:04:39 PM | 158
    @ Grieved | Jun 20, 2017 1:34:43 PM | 157

    Thank you for that statement, all too often such things are ignored because they do not measure up to the favoured Hollywood scriptwriter's product. Not once have any spokesperson from the Russian Federation ever used demeaning or perjoritive remarks about any party in conflict. This is simply the mark of adults, not perpetual children and their demeaning or demonisation of those they emotionally haven't taken a liking to. Again this shows Amerikkka has ceased to be a country and has instead become a pathology, a pathology of children. Russia is showing the patience an adult shows to children, trying to avoid any action that may cause harm.

    Anon | Jun 20, 2017 2:29:55 PM | 159
    Grieved

    You cover one side very well and I agree but its also a different side that you dont touch.
    What do you think will happen if Russia, Syria, Iran dont respond to this question?
    Its like, what would you do if your neighbour keep threatening you years after years and have a history of murdering other people? Well if you do not do anything about it, you will end up dead yourself sooner or later.
    But I agree its a tough call but one shouldnt be naive that this bombing by the US will stop before they get their regime change in Syria.
    We should just accept this rouge behavior year and year? Its time someone deal with these bullies in one way or another.

    hopehely | Jun 20, 2017 3:00:09 PM | 160
    Posted by: Anon | Jun 20, 2017 1:15:42 PM | 156
    That system will not help with telling if the jet is British, Australian or American.
    Ghostship was saying that for Russians is safer to shoot down Australian than American plane.

    james | Jun 20, 2017 3:08:32 PM | 161
    @150 smuks quote "I wonder: When that happens, will Russia seek a UNSC vote to confirm that the USAF has no business in Syria?" the usa and it's puppy dog followers fall back on the un resolution to go after ISIS... that is the justification.. personally i find it a load of bs, but that is how they are justifying murdering 100 SAA members in deiz ezzor, shooting down syrian planes, iran drones and etc. etc... just a coincidence all that, i am sure, lol... fortunately russia and friends are playing the long game here.. however an accident can happen in this environment very quickly.. that is also what the west and their bullshit lies are hoping for here as well... so, we are very close to ww3 as i see it... stooge trump is essentially out of the picture too... some freak who was responsible for fallujah has his hand on the us military.. these folks are fucked in the head..

    @157 grieved... thanks for your comments... unfortunately at some point russia and friends will have to step up to the plate.. the west under the guidance of the usa - warmonger central - are not going to back down here... they don't understand the concept... a time is going to come and it is coming soon as i see it.

    Anon | Jun 20, 2017 3:20:06 PM | 162
    hophely

    You dont think modern military radar give the info of which nation a certain airplane on a map belongs to?

    james | Jun 20, 2017 3:37:24 PM | 163
    once russia shoots anything belonging to the 'coalition of isis/moderate headchoppers' the west will be '''all in'''.. doesn't matter what gets shot down... west will go on full war mode... russia and any sane individual knows this..
    somebody | Jun 20, 2017 4:41:54 PM | 164
    Posted by: ex-SA | Jun 20, 2017 11:04:41 AM | 145

    I think the problem in all the ex- "countries with central economic planning" - was the realization of the upper management that owning state property could make them rich - much richer than the 3 times the wage of a worker they got before.

    somebody | Jun 20, 2017 4:41:59 PM | 165
    Posted by: ex-SA | Jun 20, 2017 11:04:41 AM | 145

    I think the problem in all the ex- "countries with central economic planning" - was the realization of the upper management that owning state property could make them rich - much richer than the 3 times the wage of a worker they got before.

    [Jun 20, 2017] James Mattiss Role in Fallujah Haditha Massacre

    Jun 20, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Anonymous | Jun 19, 2017 7:48:37 AM | 3

    Another aggression by the US but what could you expect by an old sick f'ck warmonger like this as secretary of defence?

    "James Mattis's Role in Fallujah & Haditha Massacre,"
    https://www.democracynow.org/2017/1/12/part_2_did_defense_secretary_nominee

    Its time Syria get to buy russian air-defense, US will keep bombing - they're not sane, like what happens next week? They'll bomb Assad's palace?

    And please look at the western media these days, and see the naked propaganda being typed when US once again bomb another country, illegally and then the western media backs it like the lackeys in the EU, Nato.
    Shameful being from the west days like these.

    Absolutely shameful!

    [Jun 20, 2017] General James Mattiss Role in Fallujah Haditha Massacre

    Notable quotes:
    "... The very important legal doctrine in the United States of America and around the world is the doctrine of command responsibility. If you have a large-scale atrocity that takes place, the commanding general of the operation is held responsible. ..."
    "... my hope that in his confirmation hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, and perhaps in follow-on hearings in the House, if they occur, regarding the waiver that he's going to need to get to become secretary of defense, that James Mattis be asked to explain himself regarding the actions that we've been discussing. ..."
    news.antiwar.com

    Transcript

    This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

    NERMEEN SHAIKH : President-elect Donald Trump's pick for defense secretary, James "Mad Dog" Mattis, faces his Senate confirmation hearing today. This comes as House Democrats are threatening to revolt over the waiver needed for Mattis to serve as defense secretary, after the Trump transition team blocked him from testifying before the House Armed Services Committee. Mattis only retired from the military in 2013, meaning he needs Congress to waive rules requiring defense secretaries to be civilians for seven or more years after leaving the military. New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has said she'll vote against the waiver for General Mattis, saying, quote, "Civilian control of our military is a fundamental principle of American democracy, and I will not vote for an exception to this rule."

    AMY GOODMAN : James Mattis reportedly received his nickname "Mad Dog" Mattis after leading U.S. troops during the 2004 battle of Fallujah in Iraq. He enlisted in the Marines at 19, fought in the Persian Gulf War, in Afghanistan, in Iraq, where he served as major general. In May 2004, Mattis ordered an airstrike in a small Iraqi village that hit a wedding, killing about 42 people who were attending the wedding ceremony. Mattis went on to lead the U.S. Central Command from 2010 to 2013, but the Obama administration cut short his tour over concerns General Mattis was too hawkish on Iran, reportedly calling for a series of covert actions there. Mattis has drawn criticism over his apparent celebration of killing, including saying in 2005 about the Taliban, quote, "It's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them," unquote.

    For more, we go to Washington, D.C., where we're joined by Aaron Glantz, senior reporter for Reveal from The Center for Investigative Reporting. His latest investigation , "Did defense secretary nominee James Mattis commit war crimes in Iraq?"

    If you could summarize, Aaron, again, your major findings in this piece, that we will link to, where you are asking if the defense secretary nominee is responsible for, is guilty of, should be tried for, war crimes?

    AARON GLANTZ : The very important legal doctrine in the United States of America and around the world is the doctrine of command responsibility. If you have a large-scale atrocity that takes place, the commanding general of the operation is held responsible. We held General Yamashita, who was the commanding general in the Japanese Army of a number of operations in the Philippines, under this standard back in World War II, and we executed him. And his execution was upheld by the Supreme Court. Legal scholars that I've talked to said the same standard applies to General Mattis. And so we have to look very closely at his command of the U.S. Marine Corps in Fallujah, which is an event that I covered in 2004 as an unembedded journalist. And in that battle, U.S. marines, under his command, killed so many people-one U.N. estimate says 90 percent of them were civilians-that the municipal football stadium of the city had to be turned into a graveyard. Marines shot at ambulances. Marines shot at aid workers. Marines posed with trophy photos with the dead that they had killed. All of these are things that Mattis could be tried for, potentially, for war crimes. And he is Donald Trump's nominee for secretary of defense.

    In addition, we also spoke about his role as the convening authority of trials for marines in other cases-the Haditha massacre, the Hamdania massacre-where he wiped away or granted clemency to people who were already convicted, freeing them from prison, for atrocities. And if a person in his kind of command responsibility allows others to get off the hook for war crimes, that's also something that he could be held culpable for, held accountable for. And, you know, it would be my hope that in his confirmation hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, and perhaps in follow-on hearings in the House, if they occur, regarding the waiver that he's going to need to get to become secretary of defense, that James Mattis be asked to explain himself regarding the actions that we've been discussing.

    NERMEEN SHAIKH : Well, is it the case that Mattis is still seen as a strong proponent of the Geneva Conventions and as an anti-torture advocate?

    AARON GLANTZ : Absolutely, absolutely. He has been very vocal in saying that he supports the Geneva Convention. He has been an advocate against torture. Donald Trump emerged from a meeting with him and began to back off his support for the practice of waterboarding, after listening to General Mattis. But you also have to look at what happens when General Mattis is in the field. And what we saw in Fallujah and in other instances in Iraq is that when General Mattis is in the field, often he allows his marines to go well beyond what is normally permitted in the law of war.

    AMY GOODMAN : Explain what you mean.

    AARON GLANTZ : Well, we've been talking about Fallujah. You mentioned a wedding party that was bombed on his call in western Iraq not long after that, where he later told a Marine historian, Bing West, that he deliberated less than 30 seconds over whether to carry it out, simply because it was in the middle of the desert. And then, you know, the Associated Press later obtained footage that showed that there was indeed a wedding party, where dozens of civilians were killed. Later, as James Mattis moved up the chain of command, was no longer a field commander in Iraq, he became a convening authority in a number of tribunals involving war crimes committed by marines in the country, including the most famous massacre that occurred during the Iraq War, the Haditha massacre, where a number of marines went on a killing spree in the town of Haditha after one of their comrades was killed. They killed dozens of people in a number of houses, and charges were brought. And as the general overseeing the entire court-martial process, General Mattis dismissed charges against three of the perpetrators, and ultimately no one charged with that massacre of dozens of Iraqis was-spent a single day in prison.

    AMY GOODMAN : Let's go to-go back a few years to 2008. Democracy Now! spoke with McClatchy journalist Leila Fadel , who traveled to Haditha to interview survivors of the massacre. I want to turn to a short video posted on the McClatchy website based on her reporting.

    LEILA FADEL : Yousef Aid Ahmed has memorized the places where his four brothers' bodies laid after they were killed by U.S. marines, he said. The family recounts that November day in 2005 and says it was a massacre of the brothers, along with 20 other people, following a roadside bomb in Haditha. Marines raided the house and shot the unarmed men in their heads in this back bedroom, the family said. Now they are angry that no one is being held accountable. Charges against six of the eight marines accused in the case were dismissed, and one marine was found not guilty on all charges.

    WIDOW : [translated] I'm angry at those who sent them innocent. They were not supposed to sent innocent.

    LEILA FADEL : The reminders of their deaths are everywhere: the white plaster that filled in the bullet holes in the wall, the dried blood that are now just faded gray spots under a new paint job on the ceiling, and the closet where one brother was shot inside and the other's corpse leaned up against the wardrobe.

    AMY GOODMAN : That's McClatchy journalist Leila Fadel. If you could take it from there, Aaron Glantz?

    AARON GLANTZ : Well, I mean, maybe the first important thing to point out is that when that massacre happened in 2005, nobody on the ground reported it. And it wasn't until the story was broken sometime later by Time magazine that the Marine Corps even investigated what happened. Then, following the investigation, charges were brought against the Marine squad that committed the crimes that were described in the video. She mentioned that charges were dismissed against six of the accused. Mattis himself was responsible for three of those dismissals. Ultimately, only one person was convicted, who was the supposed ringleader of the operation, and he did not serve one day behind bars, although he did tell the court that he regretted telling the other marines to shoot first and ask questions later.

    NERMEEN SHAIKH : Well, Aaron, what kinds of questions do you think Mattis should be asked today at his confirmation hearing?

    AARON GLANTZ : I think he should be asked about what his marines did in Fallujah. I think that he should be asked if he was aware of the scale of civilian casualties-over 600 people killed, and, you know, official Marine Corps estimate is 220 civilians in just the first two weeks of the fighting, there was a U.N. official at the time who estimated that 90 percent of the people killed were civilians-if he's aware of those deaths, if he thinks they're proportional, if he thinks the destruction of the city was proportional to the killing of the four Blackwater security contractors. I think he should be asked about the other activities that I described-the shooting at ambulances, the shooting at aid workers, if he was aware of it. If he was aware of it, you know, how does he justify it? If he wasn't aware of it as the military commander in the field with command responsibility, does he think he should have been?

    And in these other cases-we talked about the wedding party, we talked about the Haditha massacre-there's another massacre where he was also the convening authority, the Hamdania massacre, which was broken by The Washington Post , where a group of marines pulled a disabled Iraqi out of his house, shot him four times in the face and then framed him by planting a shovel and a machine gun next to him to make him look like an insurgent. In that case, General Mattis intervened to free some of the marines from prison, granting them clemency. I think he should be asked to explain himself for his actions and how all of the actions that we've been discussing comport with his well-known advocacy for the Geneva Conventions and international law.

    AMY GOODMAN : Can you explain what's going on in the House, this kind of revolt that's taking place? Not that the Democrats are in charge, but it was announced that he was going to be visiting the House committee today before he went to his Senate confirmation hearing, and then that was canceled. There's been apparently some reports of some animosity between Mattis and the Trump transition team. Have you been following all of this?

    AARON GLANTZ : James Mattis needs to be confirmed by the Senate, right? In our system of government, presidential appointees need to be confirmed by the Senate. But because he has not been out of the military for seven years, he needs Congress to change a law-and, you know, which is something that hasn't been done since the Korean War-and allow a recently retired general to become head of the Defense Department, make an exception to our long-held belief in civilian control of the military, for him. The Democrats on the House Armed Services Committee were expecting that he would testify before the House Armed Services Committee on a hearing over whether Congress should grant that waiver. The Trump administration pulled him back, and now the members of the House on the Democratic side are very upset and saying that they may try to hold up his waiver, which would also hold up his confirmation.

    NERMEEN SHAIKH : Well, can you explain, Aaron, the context in which this law was formulated? Why is it important that the military fall under civilian control?

    AARON GLANTZ : If you look at somebody like General Mattis, he's incredibly well respected within the military community. He's a marine's marine. They call him a warrior monk. I've received a lot of backlash for my article from members of the military who revere him. There is an idea, though, that we have in our government, that somebody like General Mattis, who, you know, as we've been talking about, in Fallujah, is a good soldier and will do anything possible to get the job done, no matter how many people end up dead, that there should be a civilian check on that in a democracy. We have made exceptions to this before. General Marshall was appointed by Harry Truman during the Korean War, and Congress granted that waiver. But it has not happened since then. And it is a big deal for Congress to consider. And the Democrats in the House said, "Look, before we approve this waiver for General Mattis, we would at least like to hear from him and be able to ask him questions."

    And there are some other questions that Democrats want to ask General Mattis, and may be asked in the Senate confirmation hearing today, that have nothing to do with the issues that we've been discussing around war crimes. He has expressed an opposition to allowing women in combat roles. He expressed opposition to allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military at one point.

    AMY GOODMAN : Well, let's go to that. General Mattis co-edited the book of essays, Warriors and Citizens: American Views of Our Military . In it, he claims the 2011 repeal of "don't ask, don't tell" has had a harmful impact on the military. Mattis and his co-author, Kori Schake, write, quote, "We fear that an uninformed public is permitting political leaders to impose an accretion of social conventions that are diminishing the combat power of our military." Mattis and his co-author also claim the majority of soldiers were in favor of keeping LGBT military members in the closet. However, a Gallup poll shows that the repeal of the '94 "don't ask, don't tell" law was widely popular, with two-thirds supporting the right of gay men and lesbians to serve openly. Mattis has also questioned, as you pointed out, if women should be allowed to participate in active combat, saying he believes they're unsuited for, quote, "intimate killing," and, quote, "The idea of putting women in there is not setting them up for success." So, can you respond to all of that?

    AARON GLANTZ : Well, these are the sorts of things that Democrats and, you know, perhaps some Republicans will want to know more about, you know, whether he still believes these statements. But as you pointed out, the book that he co-edited came out very recently. The comments about women in combat also happened very recently, were given in a speech in the Marines' Memorial in San Francisco. So, these are not statements that he made in the 1980s. You know, these are statements that he made during the Obama administration. And also, you know, we have to remember that President Obama removed him early, as you mentioned at the outset, as the commanding general of Central Command because of his very hawkish position on Iran. And it's rare, you know, for a president to remove a general from a command before his term is up in that way. So, I would imagine that we might hear members of the Senate today, and perhaps, if he does appear before the House, members of the House also, asking him about, you know, some of his hawkish beliefs.

    Of course, all of this is mollified by the fact that some of the same Democrats who are very concerned about him are even more concerned about General Michael Flynn, who is Donald Trump's national security adviser designee, who doesn't have to be confirmed at all and has said that, you know, ISIS wants to drink our blood and that we're already involved in a Third World War. So, Mattis looks pretty conservative by comparison to Flynn. And that's just the world that we live in.

    NERMEEN SHAIKH : And what is-Aaron, just to go back to what you said on Iran, what is Mattis's position on the Iran nuclear deal?

    AARON GLANTZ : It's been a little bit unclear. You know, he was-he's critical of it in general. The more important question, I think, for us now is, going forward-and it's the same question that we have for the Trump administration in general-you know, Donald Trump, as with many agreements signed by President Obama, has criticized it mightily. But now, you know, we're hearing that General Mattis might be of the opinion that we might want to just hold them to it very, very aggressively, rather than throwing it out. And perhaps we'll get some clarity on that during his confirmation hearing.

    AMY GOODMAN : Finally, we only have a minute, but Donald Trump has tapped physician David Shulkin to lead the Department of Veterans Affairs, currently serving in the Obama adminstration as VA undersecretary. If confirmed, he'll be the first head of the Department of Veterans Affairs to have never served in the military. Your specialty over the last years has been covering veterans, Aaron. Can you talk about Dr. Shulkin?

    AARON GLANTZ : I think the veterans' community breathed a huge sigh of relief with the appointment of Mr. Shulkin as VA secretary. This is a man who was appointed to the position of undersecretary of VA for healthcare by President Obama. He is a well-respected doctor. He's well respected in the veterans' community. As you mentioned, he's not a veteran. But veterans' groups were extremely concerned about the possibility, given Trump's campaign rhetoric, of a wholesale privatization of the VA. And they were concerned, many of them, about the floating of the name of Pete Hegseth, who founded a group funded by the Koch brothers called Concerned Veterans of America, which was advocating towards privatization. And, you know, by and large, the opinion of veterans' groups is, while some private care is welcome, especially when you can't get into the VA, that a privatization of the VA system would be a disaster for veterans. And so, with the appointment of Shulkin, it seems like Trump-you know, it's likely private care will be expanded, but possibly not at the expense of the core mission of the Department of Veterans Affairs.

    AMY GOODMAN : Aaron Glantz, we want to thank you so much for being with us, senior reporter at Reveal from The Center for Investigative Reporting. We'll link to your latest piece , "Did defense secretary nominee James Mattis commit war crimes in Iraq?" This is Democracy Now! , democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report . I'm Amy Goodman, with Nermeen Shaikh. The original content of this program is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License . Please attribute legal copies of this work to democracynow.org. Some of the work(s) that this program incorporates, however, may be separately licensed. For further information or additional permissions, contact us.

    [Jun 20, 2017] Investigation Did Trumps Defense Secretary Nominee James Mattis Commit War Crimes in Iraq Democracy Now!

    Transcript
    Notable quotes:
    "... Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has said she'll vote against the waiver for General Mattis, saying, quote, "Civilian control of our military is a fundamental principle of American democracy, and I will not vote for an exception to this rule." ..."
    "... James Mattis reportedly received his nickname "Mad Dog" Mattis after leading U.S. troops during the 2004 battle of Fallujah in Iraq. He enlisted in the Marines at 19, fought in the Persian Gulf War, in Afghanistan, in Iraq, where he served as major general. In May 2004, Mattis ordered an airstrike in a small Iraqi village that hit a wedding, killing about 42 people who were attending the wedding ceremony. Mattis went on to lead the U.S. Central Command from 2010 to 2013, but the Obama administration cut short his tour over concerns General Mattis was too hawkish on Iran, reportedly calling for a series of covert actions there. Mattis has drawn criticism over his apparent celebration of killing, including saying in 2005 about the Taliban, quote, "It's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them," unquote. ..."
    "... Well, as you mentioned, James Mattis got the nickname "Mad Dog" for his command responsibility as a general during the April 2004 siege of Fallujah. This was a battle that I covered as an unembedded journalist, where the U.S. Marine Corps killed so many people, so many civilians, that the municipal soccer stadium of that city had to be turned into a graveyard. U.S. Marines there shot at ambulances. They shot at aid workers. They cordoned off the city and prevented civilians from fleeing. Some marines posed for trophy photos with the people that they killed. ..."
    "... And what we say in the story is that all of these events that occurred in Fallujah when James Mattis was the commanding general are the same sort of events that other commanders in other countries have been convicted of war crimes for, including General Yamashita, who was a general in World War II for the Japanese, who was tried and executed by a U.S. military tribunal, and his execution was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. We found that James Mattis likely committed similar war crimes. ..."
    "... He, when that assault happened-and, importantly, he argued against the attack beforehand. And he said, very presciently, that so many civilians would be killed, that it would be ultimately damaging to the U.S. military's overall occupation effort. But once that attack was launched, that's exactly what happened. There was massive outcry across the Arab world, including in Iraq, a rise of insurgency across the country and a complete devastation of the city. I remember walking through the city shortly after the Marines pulled out, and there were rotting bodies all over the streets, because during the actual siege, U.S. Marine snipers would shoot at anyone who was outside, so people were afraid to go and bury the dead. Shopping centers were destroyed. And this gets to an important issue of disproportionality. ..."
    thesaker.is
    This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form. AMY GOODMAN : We move now to a hearing that's expected to happen today. Nermeen?

    NERMEEN SHAIKH : President-elect Donald Trump's pick for defense secretary, James "Mad Dog" Mattis, faces his Senate confirmation hearing today. This comes as House Democrats are threatening to revolt over the waiver needed for Mattis to serve as defense secretary, after the Trump transition team blocked him from testifying before the House Armed Services Committee. Mattis only retired from the military in 2013, meaning he needs Congress to waive rules requiring defense secretaries to be civilians for seven or more years after leaving the military. New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has said she'll vote against the waiver for General Mattis, saying, quote, "Civilian control of our military is a fundamental principle of American democracy, and I will not vote for an exception to this rule."

    AMY GOODMAN : James Mattis reportedly received his nickname "Mad Dog" Mattis after leading U.S. troops during the 2004 battle of Fallujah in Iraq. He enlisted in the Marines at 19, fought in the Persian Gulf War, in Afghanistan, in Iraq, where he served as major general. In May 2004, Mattis ordered an airstrike in a small Iraqi village that hit a wedding, killing about 42 people who were attending the wedding ceremony. Mattis went on to lead the U.S. Central Command from 2010 to 2013, but the Obama administration cut short his tour over concerns General Mattis was too hawkish on Iran, reportedly calling for a series of covert actions there. Mattis has drawn criticism over his apparent celebration of killing, including saying in 2005 about the Taliban, quote, "It's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them," unquote.

    For more, we go to Washington, D.C., where we're joined by Aaron Glantz, senior reporter for Reveal from The Center for Investigative Reporting. His latest investigation , "Did defense secretary nominee James Mattis commit war crimes in Iraq?"

    Aaron Glantz, what did you learn?

    AARON GLANTZ : Well, as you mentioned, James Mattis got the nickname "Mad Dog" for his command responsibility as a general during the April 2004 siege of Fallujah. This was a battle that I covered as an unembedded journalist, where the U.S. Marine Corps killed so many people, so many civilians, that the municipal soccer stadium of that city had to be turned into a graveyard. U.S. Marines there shot at ambulances. They shot at aid workers. They cordoned off the city and prevented civilians from fleeing. Some marines posed for trophy photos with the people that they killed.

    And what we say in the story is that all of these events that occurred in Fallujah when James Mattis was the commanding general are the same sort of events that other commanders in other countries have been convicted of war crimes for, including General Yamashita, who was a general in World War II for the Japanese, who was tried and executed by a U.S. military tribunal, and his execution was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. We found that James Mattis likely committed similar war crimes.

    AMY GOODMAN : You covered the siege of Fallujah yourself as an unembedded reporter, Aaron. We're going to do Part 2 of this conversation after the broadcast and post it at democracynow.org. But what came of what he did there?

    AARON GLANTZ : He, when that assault happened-and, importantly, he argued against the attack beforehand. And he said, very presciently, that so many civilians would be killed, that it would be ultimately damaging to the U.S. military's overall occupation effort. But once that attack was launched, that's exactly what happened. There was massive outcry across the Arab world, including in Iraq, a rise of insurgency across the country and a complete devastation of the city. I remember walking through the city shortly after the Marines pulled out, and there were rotting bodies all over the streets, because during the actual siege, U.S. Marine snipers would shoot at anyone who was outside, so people were afraid to go and bury the dead. Shopping centers were destroyed. And this gets to an important issue of disproportionality.

    AMY GOODMAN : Ten seconds.

    AARON GLANTZ : This whole assault was launched because of the killing of four Blackwater security contractors. And, you know, in response, James Mattis leveled the city.

    AMY GOODMAN : We have to leave it there now, but we're going to continue to cover this with our web exclusive.

    [Jun 20, 2017] After the ISIS War, a US-Russia Collision - Antiwar.com Original

    Notable quotes:
    "... what we may be witnessing now are the opening shots of its next phase - the battle for control of the territory and population liberated by the fall of Raqqa and the death of the ISIS "caliphate." ..."
    "... The question before us: After Raqqa and Mosul fall and the caliphate disappears, who inherits the ISIS estate? ..."
    Jun 20, 2017 | original.antiwar.com
    After the ISIS War, a US-Russia Collision?

    by Patrick J. Buchanan Posted on June 20, 2017 June 19, 2017 Sunday, a Navy F-18 Hornet shot down a Syrian air force jet, an act of war against a nation with which Congress has never declared or authorized a war.

    Washington says the Syrian plane was bombing U.S.-backed rebels. Damascus says its plane was attacking ISIS.

    Vladimir Putin's defense ministry was direct and blunt:

    "Repeated combat actions by U.S. aviation under the cover of counterterrorism against lawful armed forces of a country that is a member of the U.N. are a massive violation of international law and de facto a military aggression against the Syrian Arab Republic."

    An ABC report appears to back up Moscow's claims:

    "Over the last four weeks, the U.S. has conducted three air strikes on pro-regime forces backed by Iran that have moved into a deconfliction zone around the town of Tanf in southwestern Syria, where there is a coalition training base for local forces fighting ISIS."

    Russia has now declared an end to cooperation to prevent air clashes over Syria and asserted an intent to track and target aerial intruders in its area of operations west of the Euphrates.

    Such targets would be U.S. planes and surveillance drones.

    If Moscow is not bluffing, we could be headed for U.S.-Russian collision in Syria.

    Sunday's shoot-down of a hostile aircraft was the first by U.S. planes in this conflict. It follows President Trump's launch of scores of cruise missiles at a Syrian airfield in April. The U.S. said the airfield was the base of Syrian planes that used chemical weapons on civilians.

    We are getting ever deeper into this six-year sectarian and civil war. And what we may be witnessing now are the opening shots of its next phase - the battle for control of the territory and population liberated by the fall of Raqqa and the death of the ISIS "caliphate."

    The army of President Bashar Assad seeks to recapture as much lost territory as possible and they have the backing of Russia, Iranian troops, Shiite militia from Iraq and Afghanistan, and Hezbollah.

    Assad's and his allied forces opposing ISIS are now colliding with the U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic Forces opposing ISIS, which consist of Arab rebels and the Syrian Kurds of the PYD.

    But if America has decided to use its air power to shoot down Syrian planes attacking rebels we support, this could lead to a confrontation with Russia and a broader, more dangerous, and deadly war for the United States. How would we win such a war, without massive intervention? Is this where we are headed? Is this where we want to go?

    For, again, Congress has never authorized such a war, and there seems to be no vital U.S. interest involved in who controls Raqqa and neighboring lands, as long as ISIS is expelled. During the campaign, Trump even spoke of U.S.-Russian cooperation to kill ISIS.

    While in Saudi Arabia, however, he seemed to sign on to what is being hyped as an "Arab NATO," where the U.S. accepts Riyadh as the principal ally and leader of the Gulf Arabs in the regional struggle for hegemony with Shiite Iran.

    Following that Trump trip, the Saudis - backed by Egypt, the UAE and Bahrain - sealed their border with Qatar, which maintains ties to Iran. And though Qatar is also host to the largest U.S. air base in the region, al-Udeid, Trump gave the impression its isolation was his idea.

    President Trump and his country seem to be at a decision point.

    If, after the fall of ISIS in Raqqa, we are going to use U.S. power and leverage to solidify the position of Syrian rebels and Kurds, at the expense of Damascus, we could find ourselves in a collision with Syria, Russia, Hezbollah, Iran and even Turkey. For Turkish President Erdogan looks on our Kurdish allies in Syria as Kurdish allies of the terrorist PKK inside his own country.

    During the campaign, candidate Trump won support by pledging to work with Russia to defeat our common enemy. But if, after ISIS is gone from Syria, we decide it is in our interests to confront Assad, we are going to find ourselves in a regional confrontation.

    In Iraq, the U.S. and Iran have a common foe, ISIS, and a common ally, the government in Baghdad. In Syria, we have a common foe, ISIS. But our allies are opposed by Assad, Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah. The question before us: After Raqqa and Mosul fall and the caliphate disappears, who inherits the ISIS estate?

    The U.S. needs now to delineate the lines of advance for Syria's Kurds, and to talk to the Russians, Syrians and Iranians.

    We cannot allow our friends in the Middle East and Persian Gulf to play our hand for us, for it is all too often in their interests to have us come fight their wars, which are not necessarily our wars.

    Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of Churchill, Hitler, and "The Unnecessary War": How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World . To find out more about Patrick Buchanan and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Web page at www.creators.com .

    [Jun 20, 2017] My guess is that the Americans are trying very hard to push the SDF/Kurds into conflict with the SAA, by any means necessary

    Jun 20, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

    My guess is that the Americans are trying very hard to push the SDF/Kurds into conflict with the SAA, by any means necessary. They start by singling out SDF/YPG commanders who they can hopefully manipulate into taking an openly anti-Assad stance. Perhaps encouraging them to seek Saudi contacts. The Americans will be offering money and power to these commanders. If they can find just one Barzani-like character in the YPG/SDF that might be enough.
    Failing that, the Americans can try to provoke the SAA into attacking the SDF. They might perhaps shoot down SAAF jets on the pretext of 'defending' SDF forces. The Americans will hope that the SAA will respond by attacking SDF forces in retaliation.
    It is also likely that the American 'advisors' will assemble SDF groups to venture out and hold strategic positions that are just about to be overrun by SAA. Presumably the SDF relies heavily on American intelligence about the battlefield, what with the Americans having drones, sats and planes covering the greater area. So if the Americans direct SDF to move to a location because it is supposedly free of hostiles then the SDF probably complies. They may not be aware that they are being moved directly into the way of the SAA as sacrificial lambs. But they will most likely respond with fire if fired upon, at least that is what the Americans will be counting on.

    The only way to foil the Americans is for both the SAA and SDF/YPG to make it abundantly and openly clear to each other that they will not shoot at each other no matter what.

    [Jun 19, 2017] Syria and Our Illegal Acts of War The American Conservative

    Notable quotes:
    "... Where is the "Resistance" now? Are they fighting against this stupid war in Syria? Protesting stupid sanctions against Cuba? Complaining about the record arms sale with Saudi Arabia (home of the 9/11 terrorists?)? Second guessing themselves with the latest bought of Russian sanctions that managed to piss off Germany and Austria and put European energy security at risk? No, they are all on MSNBC or CNN dragging out a stupid investigation all the while pushing Russia to war. ..."
    "... I'm curious if the US shoots down a Syrian jet inside Syria on behalf of "moderate rebels" it's called self defense, what Orwellian term describes if Syria or Russia shoots down of US jet inside Syria? ..."
    "... Trump's laziness/stupidity delegating all strategic aspects to the military with no higher level executive guidance to his generals along his the neocon push to war with Russia made this event inevitable in some ways. ..."
    "... Russia cannot lose face too much, nor can the US. ..."
    Jun 19, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com
    I mentioned the illegality of U.S. actions in Syria in an earlier post , but I wanted to say a bit more on that point. There has never been a Congressional vote authorizing U.S. military operations in Syria against anyone, and there has been scant debate over any of the goals that the U.S. claims to be pursuing there. The U.S. launches attacks inside Syria with no legal authority from the U.N. or Congress, and it strains credulity that any of these operations have anything to do with individual or collective self-defense. The U.S. wages war in Syria simply because it can.

    Obama expanded the war on ISIS into Syria over two years ago, and the U.S. was arming the opposition for at least more than a year before that. The U.S. has been a party to the war in Syria in one form or another for more than four years, but the underlying assumption that it is in our interest to take part in this war has not been seriously questioned by most members of Congress. The president had no authority to take the U.S. to war in Syria, and the current president still has no such authority. We are so accustomed to illegal warfare that we barely notice that the policy has never really been up for debate and has never been put to a vote. If this illegal warfare eventually leads us into a larger conflict, we will finally notice, but by then it will be too late.

    The latest episode with the Syrian jet shows the dangers that come from conducting a foreign policy unmoored from both the national interest and representative government. The Syrian jet was shot down because it was threatening rebels opposed to the Syrian government, and the U.S. is supporting those rebels up to and including destroying regime forces that attack them. The U.S. has no business supporting those rebels, and it has no right to have its military forces operating inside Syria. Shooting down a Syrian plane inside its own country under these circumstances is nothing less than an unprovoked act of war against another state. 14 Responses to Syria and Our Illegal Acts of War

  • K Street Loiterer , says: June 19, 2017 at 1:02 pm
    Along with a lot of other people who voted for Trump, I don't want us involved in the Syrian civil war. I have no idea what Trump thinks he's doing over there. Or why he is spending so much of his time and focus (and our money) on these worthless hellholes. He was supposed to get us out of there and focus on America.

    Yes, Congress should tell him to get out and stay out.

    liberal , says: June 19, 2017 at 1:14 pm
    Great, timely post. Tangling with another nuclear-armed power makes anyone with a brain in their head nervous.

    I've seen comments to the effect that "well, the Russian reaction to the cruise missile strike launched by Trump didn't involve much." Or that we ourselves wouldn't launch a nuclear attack over such small stakes, nor would Putin.

    Such commentary misses the real danger-slow escalation into a confrontation neither side is willing to back down from.

    I have kids, and while I care about (e.g.) the people in Yemen (and am sickened by both Trump's and Obama's actions there), I (like most humans) care even more about my own children. This nonsense puts them directly at risk, which really makes me angry (as if I wasn't angry enough at the blood on my hands with our actions re Yemen, etc).

    Chris Chuba , says: June 19, 2017 at 1:19 pm
    I know that Larison's point remains unchanged even if the Pentagon's account is 100% accurate but it is worth noting that it is likely fiction.

    The author of this website does a good job of coalescing sources from other locations to produce a timeline that shows that the Pentagon's account is largely fiction. Try to get over that he calls himself 'Moon of Alabama'
    http://www.moonofalabama.org/2017/06/syria-summary-us-attack-fails-to-disrupt-push-to-deir-ezzor.html

    Our MSM has not seriously questioned a Pentagon press release in 30yrs, so this gives them license to go further astray. Just look at how many times they revised the simply failed Yemeni raid story.

    We are playing a dangerous game here, I believe that our Generals really believe that the Russians will never respond to what we do. I believe that the Russians will eventually conclude that there is no point in showing restraint because it only invites further aggression.

    I just watched Oliver Stone's 'Putin' and one thing that I found striking was that Putin maintains that there is very little difference between U.S. Administrations but that he always maintains a little hope. Personally, I agree with his observation and think that he is being naive if he believes that anything will change. If he ever comes to the same conclusion then our military will be in for yet another surprise.

    Xenia Grant , says: June 19, 2017 at 2:36 pm
    The US is an imperialist country. In the days of the Cold War, the one good thing the USSR did was to be a barrier to American outreach. Too bad we don't have a good enough thorn sticking our paws and saying 'lay off and nation builders your own country!'
    No to neos , says: June 19, 2017 at 3:19 pm
    Maybe, to be good sports, the US government will allow the Russians to shoot down an American military plane over the US?
    No to neos , says: June 19, 2017 at 3:20 pm
    Whoops, should have written "Syrians to shoot down an American military plane over the US?"
    John Newman , says: June 19, 2017 at 4:18 pm
    I eagerly await the Democrat Resistance anti-war march tomorrow! Has anyone heard where it will be?
    Ken Zaretzke , says: June 19, 2017 at 4:37 pm
    Does the Defense Department have any idea of how dangerous this is? Will the ongoing demonization of Russia and Putin in the American media ensure that our military leaders will be blind to the danger? Let's hope Trump follows his Putin-respecting instincts rather than the crazy neocons who populate his administration and the Defense Department.
    jk , says: June 19, 2017 at 5:43 pm
    Where is the "Resistance" now? Are they fighting against this stupid war in Syria? Protesting stupid sanctions against Cuba? Complaining about the record arms sale with Saudi Arabia (home of the 9/11 terrorists?)? Second guessing themselves with the latest bought of Russian sanctions that managed to piss off Germany and Austria and put European energy security at risk? No, they are all on MSNBC or CNN dragging out a stupid investigation all the while pushing Russia to war.

    I'm curious if the US shoots down a Syrian jet inside Syria on behalf of "moderate rebels" it's called self defense, what Orwellian term describes if Syria or Russia shoots down of US jet inside Syria?

    Trump's laziness/stupidity delegating all strategic aspects to the military with no higher level executive guidance to his generals along his the neocon push to war with Russia made this event inevitable in some ways.

    Russia cannot lose face too much, nor can the US.

    Viriato , says: June 19, 2017 at 6:06 pm
    What's the point of a congressional vote? What difference would it make? Would Congress vote against war? No. When Congress took its war-making power seriously, did it ever once vote against war? No.
    KevinS , says: June 19, 2017 at 6:38 pm
    "I have no idea what Trump thinks he's doing over there."

    And I am sure Trump has no idea either. If a knowledgable interviewer quizzed him for more than 10 minutes about the conflict, he would melt into a mishmash of incoherent nonsense.

    oath? what oath? , says: June 19, 2017 at 7:27 pm
    "Where is the "Resistance" now? Are they fighting against this stupid war in Syria?"

    The "resistance" is more concerned with letting men use women's bathrooms and letting foreigners take our jobs than it is about civilians being killed or starved to death, or new waves of terror attacks, or a few more trillion down the toilet as Trump lets these incompetent generals take over US policy in the Middle East.

    philadelphialawyer , says: June 19, 2017 at 8:09 pm
    Trump has even less authority under international law for this latest action than he had for the missile strike after the alleged chemical weapons incident, and much less than he and Obama have for the attacks on ISIS.

    In the case of the missile strike, Trump's lawyers could at least point to the the Convention against the use of chemical weapons, and to the UNSC Resolution which threatened the use of force for repeat violations that was passed in 2013 during the first Syrian chemical warfare event. Of course, neither of those rationales really holds water without a specific UNSC Resolution authorizing the use of force, which was absent. But at least there was something.

    ISIS presents a case where a terrorist organization is using the territory of a nation, Syria, which is unable to prevent it from doing so. In such a case, the right of self defense does allow for attacks against the terrorist organization in that nation. Also, ISIS uses Syrian territory to attack Iraq, and Iraq has actually specifically "invited" the US to help it resist those attacks. There is also a case to be made, I suppose, that Syria itself has invited the US and other nations to help it defeat ISIS. And there is some UNSC language arguably authorizing such actions as well.

    But there is nothing, that I can see, in any UNSC resolution, or international law in general, remotely justifying the US in brazenly waging war against the recognized government of Syria. The Syrian air force was fighting folks in open, military rebellion against its authority. That the US supports these folks, in various ways, does not mean that the US has any kind of international legal case for taking military action against the Syrian air force.

    Similarly, Trump has very little authority under domestic US law either for this latest attack either. Both Trump and Obama stretched the AUMFs against Al Qaeda and Saddam to include attacks on ISIS. But neither of those AUMFs even remotely authorizing attacking the Syrian government.

    This case really is a new overreach for US presidents.

    Syria is not doing anything remotely "wrong," even under new-fangled notions of "R2P" and human rights interventions. No WMD is being used. The Syrian air strikes are against armed rebels, not civilians. There is not even the fake rationale of preventing a "bloodbath" that was ginned up for the UNSC against Libya. On the domestic legal front, Trump has nothing more than a bald, bare assertion of the "national interest," and raw executive authority. He has no Congressional authorization of any kind, that I can see.

    It now seems as if the POTUS can simply make war, against whomever he chooses, whenever he chooses

    Anthony Hinds , says: June 19, 2017 at 8:36 pm
    Trump promised to defeat ISIS. He said he would do this and you still voted for him. These are his quotes:

    "I would bomb the s**t out of 'em. I would just bomb those suckers. I'd blow up the pipes, I'd blow up the refineries, I'd blow up every single inch-there would be nothing left." Then he followed that with saying he'd have Exxon go in there and take the oil, although the Russians and Syrians are currently making good headway toward those oil fields. That may lead to a showdown, but I think we'll end up holding short of stealing the oil.

    "The other thing with the terrorists is you have to take out their families, when you get these terrorists, you have to take out their families. They care about their lives, don't kid yourself. When they say they don't care about their lives, you have to take out their families,"

  • [Jun 19, 2017] Russia Threatens to Attack U.S. Planes in Syria Following Assad Jet Fighter Shootdown - Breitbart

    Jun 19, 2017 | www.breitbart.com
    Russia warned that planes from the U.S.-led coalition will be "tracked by the Russian ground and air anti-aircraft defense systems as air targets in the areas where Russian aviation is on combat missions in the Syrian sky." The threat came up just short of promising to fire on those targets.

    The Russians claimed the U.S. did not use the de-confliction hotline to warn them before shooting down the Syrian jet, and said Russian planes operating in the area could have been jeopardized. According to the Russian Defense Ministry's statement, it will no longer participate in the de-confliction hotline.

    The Associated Press notes that it made the same threat after the U.S. missile attack on a Syrian airbase in April, which would raise the question of whether anyone on Russia's end picked up the phone, literally or figuratively speaking, when the U.S. used the de-confliction system on Sunday.

    On Monday, the Syrian Democratic Forces said they will retaliate against any further attack from the Assad regime or its allies.

    "The regime's forces have mounted large-scale attacks using planes, artillery, and tanks since June 17," an SDF spokesman said, as quoted by Reuters . "If the regime continues attacking our positions in Raqqa province, we will be forced to retaliate and defend our forces."

    Reuters notes that the Syrian government has previously suggested it would focus its efforts on other parts of Raqqa during the drive to liberate it from the Islamic State, so the attack on SDF forces appears to mark a change in policy. SDF units have reportedly liberated four districts of the city from ISIS and is fighting over another three, so the Syrian attack may have been meant to stall out the SDF offensive and prevent the Kurdish-led coalition from controlling a large portion of the city.

    [Jun 19, 2017] MoA - Syria Summary - U.S. Attack Fails To Disrupt Push To Deir Ezzor

    Notable quotes:
    "... Weekend Warrior ..."
    Jun 19, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
    Syria Summary - U.S. Attack Fails To Disrupt Push To Deir Ezzor

    Our last summary said that the end of the war in Syria is now in sight :

    Unless the U.S. changes tact and starts a large scale attack on Syria with its own army forces the war on Syria is over.

    There are a few civilian lunatics in the White House who push for widening the war on Syria into an all out U.S.-Iran war. The military leadership is pushing back. It fears for its forces in Iraq and elsewhere in the larger area. But there are also elements within the U.S. military and the CIA that take a more aggressive pro-war position.

    Yesterday a U.S. F-18 jet shot down a Syrian air force bomber near the city of Raqqa. The U.S. Central Command ludicrously claims that this was in "self defense" of its invading forces and its Kurdish proxies (Syria Democratic Forces - SDF) within a "deconflicting zone" in the town of Jardin.

    This is a lie. Neither is there any agreed upon "deconflicting zone" in the area nor was the town of Jardin held by SDF forces at the time of the attack.

    The Syrian government as well as witnesses on the ground refute the U.S. claims. The Syrian Observatory in Britain, often cited as authoritative about events in Syria, says the U.S. jets attacked the Syrian one in support of Islamic State forces:

    A regime warplane was targeted and dropped in the skies of the al-Resafa area [...] the warplane was shot down over Al-Resafa area of which the regime forces have reached to its frontiers today, and sources suggested to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights that warplanes of the International Coalition targeted it during its flight in close proximity to the airspace of the International Coalition's warplanes, which caused its debris to fall over Resafa city amid an unknown fate of its pilot, the sources confirmed that the warplane did not target the Syria Democratic Forces in their controlled areas located at the contact line with regime forces' controlled areas in the western countryside of Al-Tabaqa to the road of Al-Raqqah – Resafa.

    Here is an overview of the situation in south-east Syria:


    Map via Peto Lucem - bigger

    On the bottom left is the area of Palmyra on the right is Deir Ezzor, at the top is Raqqa. The dark areas are occupied by the Islamic State. A hundred thousand civilians and a small Syrian army garrison in Deir Ezzor is besieged by the Islamic State. The Syrian army is moving east from two directions to relieve the city. One thrust is from the Palmyra area along the road towards the north-east to Deir Ezzor. The distance still to go is about 130 kilometer and a major Islamic State held city, Al-Sukhnah, will have to be taken before the advance can proceed.

    A second thrust is from the south of Raqqa.

    UPDATE: The evil_SDOC aka Weekend Warrior created this excellent map of what reminds him of World War II "island hopping". The eastern Syrian desert has few inhabited places connected by roads which are of upmost important to control the huge areas in between. It shows the potential of the thrust axes and the importance of Resafa which was the focus of yesterday's incident.


    Map via Weekend Warrior - bigger

    [End update]

    Raqqa is currently besieged by the U.S. supported Kurdish forces of the SDF. Those forces (yellow) have taken parts of the southern bank of the Euphrates around the city of Tabqa. The Syrian army is moving to the south of these forces from west towards the east. Its current target is the town of Resafa at the crossing of road 6 and road 42. If it takes the crossing it can move south-east along the major roads towards Deir Ezzor. It will also cut off a retreat route for Islamic State forces who are fleeing south to escape the Kurdish Raqqa attack. The distance to go to Deir Ezzor is about 100 kilometer and there are no major impediments along the way. Taking the crossing is immensely important for the relieve operation of the besieged eastern city.


    bigger

    Raqqa is to beyond the upper right of this detail map of the Tabqa area. The Kurdish forces are marked in yellow, the Syrian army in red. The Syrian army was moving very fast towards the east to capture the three-way crossroads at Resafa (mid-right on the map). A few hours before the Syrian jet was shot down it had already taken the town of Jardin :

    Yusha Yuseef 🇸🇾‏Verified account @MIG29_
    Breaking , SAA Tiger Forces liberate Jaadeen جعيدين village North of Al-Easawii South #Raqqa CS
    3:36 PM - 18 Jun 2017

    The U.S. killing of the Syrian jet occurred hours later :

    Dr Abdulkarim Omar‏ abdulkarimomar1
    International coalition drops a military aircraft to the Syrian regime in the Raqqa after bombing the sites of S D Forces In the Tabqa area
    5:18 PM - 18 Jun 2017

    ---

    Yusha Yuseef 🇸🇾‏Verified account @MIG29_
    I can confirm that we lost Syrian Jet East of Rassafeh and Far of SDF Points
    No more info if US do it
    6:14 PM - 18 Jun 2017

    The U.S. now claims that the Syrian jet attacked Kurdish forces in Jardin. But there were none left there when the incident happened. The town was already confirmed to be in the hands of the Syrian army. The Syrian jet attacked Islamic State forces near Resafa. The Syrian army was in the process of taking the town Resafa from the Islamic State and to reach the crossroad that would allow it to proceed to the ISIS besieged Deir Ezzor. The Syrian air forces jet bombed Islamic State forces in Resafa. The U.S. shot the jet down falsely claiming that it attacked its Kurdish proxy forces.

    One can only interpret this as an attempt by the U.S. to prevent or hinder the Syrian forces from reliefing Deir Ezzor as soon as possible. The U.S. is, willingly or not, helping the Islamic State forces who are engaged in heavy attacks on the besieged Deir Ezzor garrison. The Russian government called the U.S. attack an "act of aggression" in "breach of international law" and in "assistance for the terrorists" of the Islamic State. It will halt its air space coordination with the U.S. operations command in Syria. Additionally:

    In the areas of combat missions of Russian air fleet in Syrian skies, any airborne objects, including aircraft and unmanned vehicles of the [US-led] international coalition, located to the west of the Euphrates River, will be tracked by Russian ground and air defense forces as air targets," the Russian Ministry of Defense stated.

    If I were a U.S. pilot, I would try to avoid the area ...

    Whatever the U.S. intent was it did not stop the Syrian army. Resafa has just now been taken (map) by the Syrian army forces. The shot down pilot, Ali Fahed, has been extracted from behind enemy lines by a team of the Syrian Tiger Force.

    ---

    Independent of the events near Raqqa the Iranian Revolutionary Guard launched medium range ballistic missiles from within Iran on Islamic State forces near Deir Ezzor in Syria. The distance was about 600 kilometers. The launch was billed as revenge for the June 7 terrorist attacks on the parliament in Tehran, Iran. The missiles hit their targets .

    The message sent with them was larger than just a pure revenge act. Iran demonstrated that it can reliable hit far away targets from within its own state. The Wahhabi Persian Golf states and all U.S. forces in the area will have to take note of this. They are not safe from Iranian retaliation even when no Iranian forces are nearby. Iran emphasized that it can repeat such attacks whenever needed:

    "The Saudis and Americans are especially receivers of this message." Said [Revolutionary Guard Gen. Ramazan] Sharif. "Obviously and clearly, some reactionary countries of the region, especially Saudi Arabia, had announced that they are trying to bring insecurity into Iran."

    ---

    As described in our last summary U.S. forces are occupying the border station of al-Tanf between Syria and Iraq in the south-east of Syria. The station and the U.S. trained Arab "rebels" there were stopped from moving further north by a Syrian army push towards the border with Iraq. From the Iraqi side militia under the command of the Prime Minister joined in and al-Tanf is now isolated. Several reports yesterday claimed that the U.S. has flown in Kurdish proxy forces from the north-east of Syria to defend al-Tanf. It obviously does not trust the Arab "rebel" forces it had trained for occupying south-east Syria. A few hundred Kurdish forces do not change the tactical situation. There is no reasonable use for those forces and the U.S. (supported) contingent will eventually have to move out and retreat towards Jordan.

    ---

    Israel has long supported al-Qaeda "rebels" in the south-west of Syria near and on the Golan heights. This has been known at least since 2014 and the Israeli support was even documented by UN observer forces in the area. But somehow U.S. media "forgot" to report it and the Israelis were reluctant to comment on it.

    That has changed. There is now a flood of reports about Israeli support and payments to "rebels" in the Golan next to the Israeli occupied parts of Syria. Few mention though that the forces Israel supports are al-Qaeda terrorists . There are also Islamic State groups in the area who "apologized" to Israel after a clash with Israeli forces. It is clear that Israel is now openly supporting the terrorists.

    Someone is intentionally pushing out these reports. I presume that Israel does this in preparation of the political landscape for an even large occupation of Syrian land. The reports compare the Israeli maneuvers with the Israeli occupation of south Lebanon in the 1980s and 90s. They neglect to tell the whole story. The Israeli occupation of south-Lebanon led to the growth of Hizubullah and the eventually defeat of the Israeli forces. By the year 2000 they had to retreat from the occupied land and Hizbullah is now Israels most feared enemy. It seems that Israel wants to repeat that experience.

    Posted by b on June 19, 2017 at 07:16 AM | Permalink

    1
    Russia MoD posted this one minute ago.

    https://www.facebook.com/Ministry-of-Defence-of-the-Russian-Federation-1492252324350852/
    ...In areas of combat missions of Russian aircraft in the skies of Syria any airborne targets, including aircraft and unmanned vehicles international coalition discovered to the West of the Euphrates river, will be accepted in support of Russian ground and air defense as air targets"...

    Out of Istanbul | Jun 19, 2017 7:44:09 AM | 2
    RT is also carrying that story as well. Every time I imagine that this hellish war and ISIS scum has a chance of coming to an end with six months, something like this happens.

    I guess the next form of posturing from the Russian side might be the downing of a US drone.

    I really hope that this doesn't snowball...

    Anonymous | Jun 19, 2017 7:48:37 AM | 3
    Another aggression by the US but what could you expect by an old sick f'ck warmonger like this as secretary of defence?

    "James Mattis's Role in Fallujah & Haditha Massacre,"
    https://www.democracynow.org/2017/1/12/part_2_did_defense_secretary_nominee

    Its time Syria get to buy russian air-defense, US will keep bombing - they're not sane, like what happens next week? They'll bomb Assad's palace?

    And please look at the western media these days, and see the naked propaganda being typed when US once again bomb another country, illegally and then the western media backs it like the lackeys in the EU, Nato.
    Shameful being from the west days like these.

    Absolutely shameful!

    jfl | Jun 19, 2017 7:50:12 AM | 4
    it does sound like russia is taking a hard line right from the beginning of this new, maddog stage of now open us aggression against syria. i can't figure the wsj and the israeli report ... maybe they are trying to sprinkle israeli pixie dust - anyone the israelis help are by definition 'good guys', even if they 'were' associated with al-qaeda - and al-qaeda are the ksa's boys, israel and the ksa are reciprocally new best friends now ... but i can't see anyone but the israelis 'believing' that ... just as i cannot see anyone but maddog 'believing' that us aggression is 'defense'. and not even sohr can believe it either.

    the us is over the abyss and into the 'dark side' bigtime now, and openly so. will they send some targets for the russians to shoot down? and then what, if they do?

    Anon @ 1 nabbed it before I did. Let's see if the Russians allow the US to weasel it's way back into another deconfliction agreement. Amannews hasn't backed off the reporting about the SAA and the SDF going at it full bore, with tanks and atgms in the mix, I'm still waiting for some confirmation on that one.

    Posted by: wwinsti | Jun 19, 2017 7:51:13 AM | 5

    Anon @ 1 nabbed it before I did. Let's see if the Russians allow the US to weasel it's way back into another deconfliction agreement. Amannews hasn't backed off the reporting about the SAA and the SDF going at it full bore, with tanks and atgms in the mix, I'm still waiting for some confirmation on that one.

    Posted by: wwinsti | Jun 19, 2017 7:51:13 AM | 5

    jfl | Jun 19, 2017 7:52:51 AM | 6
    @4

    and i should add - with no effective civilian control of the us military at this point at all.

    Dean | Jun 19, 2017 8:11:59 AM | 7
    Anon@1,

    Thanks for the link. The other interesting part of the MOD announcement is that they are also resuspending the memorandum regarding flight deconfliction. The US will now be blind again to the Russian / Syrian Air forces operations. This will create a abit of panic I'm sure.

    Anonymous | Jun 19, 2017 8:16:40 AM | 8
    Dean

    Quite stupid by Russia though to claim they might shoot down the planes now, if they dont, well then US will keep bombing
    and if they do, then the snowball is rolling and Russia will get all the blame thus a conflict between Russia, US might occur, just like the ugly clientele at ISIS, Nato, EU wants though..

    jfl | Jun 19, 2017 8:24:00 AM | 9
    @8 dean 'Russia will get all the blame'

    russia will 'get all the blame' no matter what happens. has been getting all the blame for all the monstrous, inhuman acts of the 'us-coalition' since they cam to the aid of syria, at syria's request.

    the rump will 'get all the blame' when the first american zoomie bites the dust in syria, having attacked the syrians in syria. why was that again? exactly? good opportunity to try out his 'you're fired' act on the maddog. see if there's still a few miles left in that one. the us is misplaying this, not the russians.

    jfl | Jun 19, 2017 8:24:38 AM | 10
    sorry, that's @8 anonymous

    Ghostship | Jun 19, 2017 8:39:18 AM | 11

    Anonymous | Jun 19, 2017 7:48:37 AM | 3
    Its time Syria get to buy russian air-defense, US will keep bombing - they're not sane, like what happens next week? They'll bomb Assad's palace?

    Wrong. That is exactly what the US military want the Syrians to do. As soon as the Syrians use it, the Pentagon will cry aggression and the western MSM will go along with it regardless of how ridiculous that will sound to any knowledgeable person. The United States has one advantage at the moment that no other country has - the ability to reset history - through their control of global media. The aggressive acts of the US military prior to Syria shooting down an American will disappear from the pages of history and the Washington Borg will get their war with Iran and its allies and the American public will go along because Syria shooting down an American aircraft is the next "Pearl Harbour".
    Far better for the Syrians to ignore this aggression and get on and complete the task of liquidating the ISIS Caliphate as soon as possible and reveal the Washington Borg and its gangs of thugs as the ISIS supporters they are and allow them no reason to remain in Syria.
    And stop thinking like most Americans do - you don't necessarily win wars by winning battles - as any businessman will tell you, you win wars by achieving your (political) objectives. The Washington Borg/United States' objectives are regime change in Syria and war with Iran and it's possible to ensure they achieve neither but picking a fight with the US is not the way.

    Igor Bundy | Jun 19, 2017 8:45:04 AM | 12
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCo-cyWXoAAtZd4.jpg

    Syrian forces do not need to take The ISIS forcs at Al-Sukhnah, it is trapped and can be blocked from both sides, but the desert needs to be cleared off some small bands of terrorists and tribal sympathizers.. Both forces are almost 50KM from DZ and some huge operations are now in progress.. Maybe to sweep any remnants of ISIS forces that can attack the flanks.

    Mina | Jun 19, 2017 8:51:04 AM | 13
    Might be they promessed the Jordanians for big refugee camps and 'land for the Palestinians' in this area. This was a topic of breaking up UN led negociations at some point.

    Igor Bundy | Jun 19, 2017 8:57:27 AM | 14
    Okay so this is understandable since the crews for the S300 just graduated and returned to Syria, The crews for the pantzir's also graduated from the Syrian academy and the equipment was delivered many months ago..

    The big question is will Russia give the Syrians the ok to shoot unauthorized aggressor planes inside its air space.. Which means anything that is not supposed to be there.. What about tanif? Since the US like Israel uses missiles to attack a target and not bombs which also means they can hit targets inside Syria from upto 100km outside...

    snoopy007 | Jun 19, 2017 8:57:42 AM | 15
    what about this
    http://217.218.67.231/Detail/2017/06/19/525758/IRGC-Syria-Daesh
    why is no one talking about it.. including your website and comments
    is it also fake news?

    Anonymous | Jun 19, 2017 9:08:51 AM | 16
    Ghostship

    I agree mostly (Russia, Syria will be blamed no doubt) at the same time - if Syria and Russia doesnt do anything, US will keep bombing... until Assad is gone.
    Just look at North Korea, US backed off because they let US know past months that they arent putting up with this bullying and the result is pretty clear. No attack, invasion.

    stonebird | Jun 19, 2017 9:09:38 AM | 17
    The group supported by Israel are supposed to be Al-Nusra (Al Quaida offshoot anyway). This fits in with the "Newly named" HTS group that is formed around Al-Zinki (beheaders of children) who are NOT on a terrorist "watch list" and are armed by the US, "(also with Canadian "approval"). Thus ALL of them can be supplied by the US as "moderate" (headcutters) without crossing any "legal" barrier. Includes Al-Quaida I believe.

    Talking about "arms" - the ISIS members who are moving towards Deir Ezzor were reported several days ago to have "new" artillery and anti-tank missiles. Wonder where they got those? They were also seen but not attacked by US impregnated SDF forces when leaving Raqqua. The latest Syrian attack was on a second (or later) convoy of ISIS militants.

    The whole ISIS-Tabqah set up is filled with "anomalies". 1- The dam pumping area was vacated by ISIS and de-mined in exchange for a "safe" route out. The US then bombed them to hell after they were in the middle of the desert. (tell no tales?) 2- The Airbase at Tabqah, which is now only 2 km from the new Syrian lines, was apparently very quickly "useable", as the runways were only blocked by easily removable earth mounds. Not ditches. 3- The first "landing" there, was by real US forces in helicopters accompanied by some representatives of the SDF. (There have been unconfirmed reports of helicopters to evacuate "assets" from Raqqah - but I don't know if that is true or sour-grapes)
    --------
    The Israel part seems to be part of a carefully comprehensive scenario; Qatar to be isolated,(as a supporter of Palestinians and Hamas). UN and Nicky Haley. there have been three recent "reports" from UN bodies (Extrajudicial killings etc) which Israel is trying to block. Plus pressure on the UN NOT to use the word "occupation". Total media blackout.

    The "sanctions" on Iran and Russia by the US are probably designed to push for a new war. (This was mentioned as being planned for July 18 - for those who want to believe the "sooth-sayers".)

    smuks | Jun 19, 2017 9:10:08 AM | 18
    @Ghostship 11

    Agreed. With one exception: I don't think Washington/ the Neocons want to wage war against Iran *themselves* - if possible, they want to remain in second line while someone else does.

    @snoopy007 15

    It was mentioned in the comments, but not thoroughly discussed. What- or whoever was hit, the Neocons/ Saudis sure aren't happy about it.

    stonebird | Jun 19, 2017 9:21:43 AM | 19
    @Igor Bundy 12
    Al-Sukhnah
    Since the Russian have been "active" in the planning of offensives in Syria - I very much doubt that they will leave a major bloc of ISIS behind their advances. They "clean" before moving on. It might take longer but it is much surer.

    The Palmyra "front" is large (N-S) and is to prevent any lateral attacks. A previous attempt to reach Deir Ezzor by the SAA alone, ended with them retreating rapidly so avoid being cut off.

    Morongobill | Jun 19, 2017 9:30:19 AM | 20
    How has that "war to meeting political objectives" thingie been working out for the USA since after the end of WW2?

    Seems to me we just can't help ourselves, start shit and not being able to finish it, who cares seems to be the attitude as long as some make money out of it.

    Like a washed up fighter still having a good record, due to the cherry picked "tomato cans" he fights. A real opponent would
    knock his f--king ass out for all to see.

    smuks | Jun 19, 2017 9:30:24 AM | 21
    Read the Russian statement carefully:

    It says "aircraft and unmanned vehicles international coalition discovered to the West of the Euphrates river will be accepted ... as air targets" - not "shot down". This means spotted and targeted by AD radar systems, without any further action. Which can be considered an 'unfriendly act', but not a casus belli.

    I'm also wondering what's going on between SAA and SDF in the Taqba area. Surely, Damascus & allies would love to see the Kurds withdraw beyond the Euphrates, no...?

    Lea | Jun 19, 2017 9:38:37 AM | 22
    The US has done this various times: down a plane or go into some other stupid provocation, see the Russians retaliate by cutting the communication channel, then backtrack, lay low, plead to re-open the "communication channel" in "the framework of the Memorandum on the Prevention of Incidents and Ensuring Air Safety in Syria" until Russia caves, then wait some weeks and re-launch some other provocation, and so on. I hope this time, Russia has understood the US has never had the smallest intention of keeping its word. For that, you need honour. What they are trying to do is demoralize the Syrian military and the Russians.

    Meanwhile, nobody, not even the Russians bother to explain why the US should be backing "moderate rebels" (or any other kind) in a sovereign nation anyway. I mean, how much can the US get away with before it is called its real name to its face: the world's prime sponsor of terrorism?

    les7 | Jun 19, 2017 9:52:55 AM | 23
    At some point, in Syria, Putin must show that he will not be mocked. the absence of response in the face of gross, repeated intimidation does not bode well in light of the fact that the same forces that did this also advocate the possibility of a nuclear first strike on russian military facilities. they trust in they myth of American superiority and their 'sheild' to be an effective spoiler to intimidate and contain Russia. If Putin does not demonstrate in Syria or Ukraine that it will not be intimidated, then he has set up our whole world for a nuclear confrontation

    Igor Bundy | Jun 19, 2017 9:54:18 AM | 24
    stonebird , The problem with Deir Ezzor is the lack of heavy weapons and logistics like gas.. A large enough force with enough supplies to last a few weeks can easily reach DZ now and attack the small ISIS forces around the city. Once reinforcements have reached the city they can hold on indefinitely. Over 10,000 men are moving in the border region, you dont need a large force to block ISIS from Sukhnah attacking anyone and they are now behind the ISIS lines while another force is facing the front. I think we will see some multiple vector moves here to block many areas of attack. Unlike the previous attempts which were made with very few men and stretching of supply lines inside hostile areas. ISIS dont have sufficient forces anywhere else they can mass for an attack with so many areas to defend.. We will know in a few days.. I do think they will make a big push to DZ before cleansing the area as that can be done slowly without frontal attacks now that they can use 2 or 3 routes to DZ.

    Igor Bundy | Jun 19, 2017 9:59:01 AM | 25
    Lea it has to do with the Russian desire to back the rebels in the donbas.. Although it was done covertly and only small amounts of supplies, now Russia can overtly do it in a big way, by the time it is over we can see most of Ukraine minus ukiestan become another country.. Russia used the same legal standing to break up Yugoslavia to annex Crimea. Although Crimea itself was illegally annexed by Ukraine and federal cities in Crimea were never part of Ukraine ever.. To get a legal precedent started...

    Igor Bundy | Jun 19, 2017 10:01:44 AM | 26
    The Syrian army just rescued the pilot of the jet downed cowardly by NATO-ISIS coalition yesterday.

    AlaBill | Jun 19, 2017 10:09:44 AM | 27
    Great news on the rescue of the pilot. I recently saw photos of his three kids.

    jawbone | Jun 19, 2017 10:18:29 AM | 28
    Ghostship @ 11 -- The US believes in its con game: Heads US wins, tails you lose.

    So, it's simple: The US can send military forces anywhere it wishes, as it is THE Hegemon and it has a Security Council veto. No other country, other than those which act in the US interests, can do military invasions. Unless the US tricks the Sec Council into giving its permission for invasions, aka R2P, Responsibility to Protect. AKA, Right to Plunder.

    stonebird | Jun 19, 2017 10:26:46 AM | 29
    Igor Bundy
    Beg to differ, but we will see. DZ area; The key is how many people each camp has in each area. Plus how much transport they have.
    Desert warfare is; either small "guerrila" highly mobile groups such as the UK has in Syria, or larger "convoys" which can be used for frontal offensives or static defensive positions.
    Both offense and defense are vulnerable to air. (Including "drones" as used by ISIS.)

    It is likely that the US will make another attempt to define an "US occupied" area, in order to block bridges and any means for the SAA of crossing the Euphrates. On a map in "US central command" this probably looks interesting.

    Leaving the Kurds with most of the best agricultural land to the North, ISIS as a permanent guerrila force south of the Euphrates and the US in command of the crossings with strategically placed bases/airfields from which to supply them.

    The bunker mentality of the Pentagon is visible (bases) and they are working to "planning" on large maps" where their suckers (assets) can be placed.
    Assets other than fighters; The US has made a mess of the infrastructure necessary for Syria to function independently. This is clear from before Alleppo (Power plants and pumping stations, bombed by US). How will they try to "neutralise or hold oil and gas wells?

    somebody | Jun 19, 2017 10:53:15 AM | 30
    21

    SDF and SAA are clearly fighting .

    Don't know how Russian radars work, switching them on to track without action would defeat the object, no? Like making known where they are?

    Don't think necessarily Russia will shoot down the plane. Probably will be some non state actor.

    I am pretty sure SDF has lost their air force.

    RT | Jun 19, 2017 11:14:01 AM | 31
    Rather than fighting to the death in Raqqa, ISIS, who realize that their days are numbered, are being given an escape route and are most likely now embedded with SDF fighters, US advisers and surplus SDF uniforms for the moment when they are finally "defeated" (per CNN et al) by the US coalition in Dier Ezzor. Would you expect anything less from the US?

    smuks | Jun 19, 2017 11:17:58 AM | 32
    @somebody

    Quite possible they lost it. In any case, the US' room for manoeuvre is getting smaller and smaller; more and more regions and actions are 'off-limits' for it.

    I'm most certainly no 'radar expert'. In my understanding, the target radar locks on to any jets or drones west of the Euphrates now - if this direct threat to 'coalition' forces goes unchallenged, they'll have to withdraw. In which case the river would become the demarcation line again, as I had previously thought.

    Which begs the question: Is it plausible to assume that the Syrian air force may have indeed attacked SDF positions near Taqba? The Kurdish presence there is a thorn in SAA-controlled territory after all...
    (of course, the 'coalition' is so discredited now that nobody believes their claims anyway)

    smuks | Jun 19, 2017 11:22:00 AM | 33
    @RT 31

    Please remember that the SAA does the same to avoid fighting in cities and minimize civilian casualties, e.g. in Deir Hafer or Maskaneh. It's sensible to leave escape routes from urban areas.
    'Embedded with the SDF' after years of at times bitter fighting? I doubt it. If anything, ISIS fighters could change their uniforms to become part of the New FSA/ NSyA in the south.

    BraveNewWorld | Jun 19, 2017 11:24:08 AM | 34
    @13 "Might be they promessed the Jordanians for big refugee camps and 'land for the Palestinians' in this area."

    The ethnic cleansing of the Plestinians is strictly an Israeli wet dream. First it was Sinai now apparently Syria. That would be a violation of the UN Charter and abot 50 UBSC resolutions. Jordan would never go along with it because they wouldn't stab the Palestinians in the back and it would certainly mean the loss of the haram al sharif which belongs to Jordan not the Israelis or the Palestinians. It would also mean the loss of many, many other holy sites and make the Palestinians targets in Syria. But the Jews keep stroking it.

    RT | Jun 19, 2017 11:54:36 AM | 35
    @SMUKS 33

    Good point regarding escape routes, but I wonder if a significant # of loyalists still exist in Raqqa - certainly none whom the Kurds would care to save. Generally caution against underestimating the Kurd's pragmatism and strategic flexibility.

    Ghostship | Jun 19, 2017 12:04:28 PM | 36
    Anonymous | Jun 19, 2017 9:08:51 AM | 16

    It's too late for the Americans in Syria because we're now in the deep operations phase of the battle for Deir Ez-zor, which means it should be over in a few weeks and it would take the US several months to do all the SEAD crap which would most likely trigger a global war anyway and put in place the heavy forces they'd need to do anything which would be pointless because the cockroaches would have already won.
    Any diversions to deal with the Americans would increase the length of the operation and the risk of failure at this point so for now it's far better for the Russians and Syrians to ignore the Americans in their baby-buggies. Perhaps once the situation has stabilised there will be a chance for the Syrians and Russians to do something. But how long will Trump allow US forces to remain in Syria once the ISIS Caliphate is liquidated? Not long if his base have any say in the matter and as president he could remove US forces in a matter of days. After the ISIS Caliphate is liquidated, the only reason for US forces to remain in Syria is if they become involved in the fight to liquidate Al Qaeda. ROFLOL.

    TG | Jun 19, 2017 12:10:31 PM | 37
    Something else to consider: if Russia really does try to shoot down US jets, there is a big risk for Russia not just in terms of escalating a conflict with the US, but in the possibility of their vaunted air defense systems not working.

    You can read all the technical specifications you want - NOBODY knows for certain how well a complicated system operates until it is actually used in combat agains another system. Russia has been getting a lot of press about their S400 etc. anti-aircraft missile systems. Prestige, power, foreign sales... if Russia really tries to use these systems for real, and they don't work as advertised against US systems, that would be a massive loss of prestige and influence for Russia. But if they do work, then the opposite.

    Either way, if Putin does decide to 'pull the trigger,' it will be a massive gamble with repercussions far beyond what's going in in Syria. I would think that a lot of the hesitation of Russia to respond to US provocations is tied up with this matter.

    b | Jun 19, 2017 12:15:30 PM | 38
    @snoopy007

    why is no one talking about it.. including your website and comments
    is it also fake news?

    You link to a Press TV report about the Iranian missile attack on Deir Ezzor.

    "No one talks about that" except the piece here you commented on without having read it. Fuck off.

    james | Jun 19, 2017 12:26:10 PM | 39
    thanks b.. excellent post! you articulate all the key ingredients here that have yet to come to a conclusion.. the main thrust is on... the shit is hitting the fan..

    @11 ghostship.. concur fully..

    @15 snoopy007.. read much? it was discussed in this article!

    @17 stonebird quote "The "sanctions" on Iran and Russia by the US are probably designed to push for a new war." that is what all of these ''sanctions'' from the west are always designed for - war, regime change and etc... they are ongoing and early steps in the process and typically backed up by a pile of steaming bullshite..

    @22 lea... yes, to your last paragraph.. anyone paying attention can see that as clear as day..

    @23 lea.. that moment is coming fast.. i wouldn't be in a hurry for it.. and i have never gotten the sense that putin can be intimidated... crimea? what happened their? usa got caught with their pants down, as usual...

    james | Jun 19, 2017 12:27:45 PM | 40
    @37 tg.. fully agree with your last sentence..

    Just Sayin' | Jun 19, 2017 1:10:20 PM | 41
    Dean

    Quite stupid by Russia though to claim they might shoot down the planes now, if they dont, well then US will keep bombing
    and if they do, then the snowball is rolling and Russia will get all the blame thus a conflict between Russia, US might occur, just like the ugly clientele at ISIS, Nato, EU wants though..

    Posted by: Anonymous | Jun 19, 2017 8:16:40 AM | 8

    Most likely they will start with drones, publicly and loudly announcing take-outs of US drones as they occur, while ignoring ISIS-AF craft (***previously known as USAF) for the moment. Then they will probably re-iterate, each time, their determination to strictly enforce the No-Fly Zone they just announced.

    Letting everyone know what is in store, so they can't say they weren't warned.

    Starting to look even more Quagmire-ish than it was already

    Just Sayin' | Jun 19, 2017 1:11:44 PM | 42
    Quagmire - See Definition #2.

    Definition of quagmire

    1 : soft miry land that shakes or yields under the foot

    2: a difficult, precarious, or entrapping position

    Just Sayin' | Jun 19, 2017 1:15:58 PM | 43
    Either way, if Putin does decide to 'pull the trigger,' it will be a massive gamble with repercussions far beyond what's going in in Syria. I would think that a lot of the hesitation of Russia to respond to US provocations is tied up with this matter.

    Posted by: TG | Jun 19, 2017 12:10:31 PM | 37


    NATO forces currently surrounding Kaliningrad on 3 sides
    From a Murdoch rag:


    Russia lets fly over nuclear war games as Nato surrounds Baltic fleet in Kaliningrad
    Bojan Pancevski

    June 18 2017, 12:01am, The Sunday Times

    All three types of US strategic nuclear bomber, including the B-52, will be deployed
    ALAMY

    Russia's western exclave of Kaliningrad was surrounded on three sides by Nato forces yesterday at the start of an unprecedented set of summer war games.

    Operation Sabre Strike 2017 includes the first full deployment of America's strategic nuclear bombers and a simulated air assault by the Royal Marines in the Baltics.

    Russia's Baltic fleet is based in Kaliningrad and the territory also plays host to a deployment of Iskander short-range ballistic missiles with a 300-mile reach capable of carrying nuclear warheads.

    Krollchem | Jun 19, 2017 1:47:51 PM | 44
    More on the long term Israeli efforts in support of terrorists in Southern Syria front:

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-19/israel-has-been-secretly-funding-syrian-rebels-years

    fast freddy | Jun 19, 2017 1:56:52 PM | 45
    The deployment - is to show American commitment to "ready and posture forces focused on deterring conflict", said Lieutenant-General Richard Clark, a US airforce commander.

    Operation Sabre Strike seems more likely to create conflict than to deter it.

    Kindergarten-level mentality.

    One little slip up and it's off to the races.

    fast freddy | Jun 19, 2017 2:03:12 PM | 46
    American commitment to "ready and posture forces focused on deterring conflict"

    Of course, No one could come up with this line of shit spontaneously. Not even a US Airforce commander.

    Written by the Pentagon's PR Marketing Department, no doubt.

    Not unlike "One small step for man. One giant (squelch) leap for mankind".

    Taxi | Jun 19, 2017 2:09:15 PM | 47
    I really don't think the Axis of Evil dares expand the war in Syria beyond a certain 'safe' point: Tel Aviv is irrevocably in the Axis of Resistance's cross-hairs and Iran threatened that it can destroy Tel Aviv in 8 minutes. The first sure casualty of any war expansion will be israel itself.

    All that's going on right now from the Axis of Evil's side is tactical delaying of the 'cleansing' of terrorists from Syria before the Syria army turns its full attention to liberate the Golan, as indeed Bashar and his generals have already stated. It's all tactical delays by the US (on the behest of israel) before the inevitable Golan stand-off between Syria and israel hits up.

    Even if israel sets up another 9/11 on US soil and pins it on Iran and Syria, 'touching' Damascus or Tehran in any serious way will still result in the wholesale destruction of israel and its capital, regardless of the power of israel's offensive capabilities. Israel, my friends, has an unsolvable defense problem - and all the 'David Slings' in the world will not be able to protect israel, especially that the Dimona too is high on the target list of the Axis of Resistance.

    Once the Axis of Evil runs out of proxy terrorists in Syria, that will be that. And the next battle stage will be sharply focused on the Golan. And here, again, I can't see israel going into a full thrust war over the Golan because again, Tel Aviv is the target and israel will never sacrifice Tel Aviv for the Golan. Whomever is ruling israel at the time will find some way to pull back, with security guarantees and a big fat dollars package, taking the political hit etc instead of losing tel aviv. They withdrew from Sinai, also from Lebanon, and they did it in Gaza too. They'll do it with the Golan to 'save' israel.

    An all out war over the Golan is what the Axis of Resistance wants because they know that israel will lose this war in the first 8 minutes.

    Gone are the days when Israel can start border wars, smash up what it wants then go home and take a shower. Them days are finito-Benito and forever gone.

    frances | Jun 19, 2017 2:34:21 PM | 48
    B "Someone is intentionally pushing out these reports. I presume that Israel does this in preparation of the political landscape for an even large occupation of Syrian land."
    This could explain why Trump's son-in-law is off to Israel, supposedly to work on Israel/Palestinian peace. Syrian land grabs by Israel may be a more likely topic.

    frances | Jun 19, 2017 2:38:00 PM | 49
    ""...In areas of combat missions of Russian aircraft in the skies of Syria any airborne targets, including aircraft and unmanned vehicles international coalition discovered to the West of the Euphrates river, will be accepted in support of Russian ground and air defense as air targets"...
    Posted by: anon | Jun 19, 2017 7:28:29 AM | 1

    "West of the Euphrates river" this is really troubling, to me anyway, is Russia accepting Kurdistan as a done deal?? It would be the end of Russia's control of the EU gas market...among many other things.

    James | Jun 19, 2017 2:49:19 PM | 50
    Hi b, thanks for this update


    Would be interested in what you think of the view expressed by MK Bhadrakum - that the USA /pentagon is steadily escalating its attacks on the SAA and looking to expand the war and draw in Iran and Russia. He takes the opposite view to that expressed in today's article

    http://blogs.rediff.com/mkbhadrakumar/2017/06/19/us-ratchets-up-syrian-intervention-pokes-russia-and-iran/


    Thank you :-)

    CarlD | Jun 19, 2017 2:58:48 PM | 51
    Ygor Bundy

    "Russia used the same legal standing to break up Yugoslavia to annex Crimea."

    Mein Gott! Yugoslavia never had anything to do with Crimea. So why would Russia need to break up Yugoslavia to annex Crimea?

    Yugoslavia was dismembered by the US and NATO under the guidance of Frau Madeline Albright in a bid to divide and conquer. US über alles.

    [Jun 18, 2017] Turning to Occupied Syria.

    Jun 18, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com

    ilsm , June 17, 2017 at 02:51 AM

    Turning to Occupied Syria.

    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/middle-east/saudi-qatar-crisis-puts-syria-rebels-in-tricky-position/articleshow/59188782.cms

    The outsider Sunni insurgency looks like Yemen 1963 as the Saudi terror sponsors are backed into the corner.

    The Wahhabis, and Trump pursuing Obama's plot, in Riyadh are supporting radical Sunnis not blushing at their al Qaeda links.

    Opposing the Wahhabis are Russia an ally to a loose confederation of legitimate government, moderated radicals, and minorities whom would be cut off by the Sunnis, as playing Nasser/Egypt in Yemen.

    Doha's sin against Wahhab is criticizing the Sunni demolition of Arab Spring and Egypt's military dictatorship.

    While as in 1964 the Wahhabis are on the same pole as Israel.

    ilsm - , June 17, 2017 at 03:06 PM
    Given 37 years of US blundering in the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean region, China don't need to worry if the dominant power [and its pentagon trough filler] were to decide to get violent.

    I read a lot of "Thucydides Trap" type fiction emanating from novelists purporting to "analyze" aspects of US foreign policy issues.

    Fiction many deliberate obfuscations and cherry picked evidence.

    I now read such tracts to sharpen my skill at observing and naming types of logical fallacy.

    Case studies, the world is not in the image of the HBS universe.

    ilsm - , June 17, 2017 at 06:54 PM
    There are problems in the world, and they suggest Einstein's observation:

    to the effect: "you cannot solve problems with the mind that created them".

    The hegemon is misguided on many levels: errant goals, strategies (cannot be good if goals wrong), and expensive tactics which goatherd can defeat. Worse the allies kept.

    [Jun 18, 2017] New video footage exposes US military helping ISIS fighters escape Syrian city of Raqqa

    Jun 18, 2017 | theduran.com
    A post via The Anti Media written by Darius Shahtahmasebi , exposes what many following the Syria "civil war" narrative have known for some time now that no civil war is really taking place, but rather a US-Saudi regime change invasion against the Assad government.

    The proxy army being used to force an Assad regime change is the Islamic State (ISIS).

    The following video, and accompanying post, shows the US military providing ISIS jihadists with a safe escape form the Syrian city of Raqqa. Needless to say it would have been drop dead simple to have bombed the convoy of ISIS jihadists as seen in the video, but this was not the goal. The goal was safe passage out of Raqqa.

    Where are the ISIS fighters escaping to?

    We venture to guess that these ISIS fighters are being sent, by US and Saudi military commanders, to territory under the control of the legally recognized government of Syria, where they will continue to fight against Assad.

    With numerous distractions unfolding on the newly released reality TV show that is "Keeping Up with the Trump Administration," it may surprise readers to learn that the U.S. is using the terror group ISIS as a pawn in its depraved foreign policy.

    Video footage obtained by Al-Masdar appears to show convoys of ISIS fighters fleeing the Syrian city of Raqqa untouched by the U.S. military, which is currently bombing that exact location. As Al-Masdar notes, despite having Kurdish and American drones hovering around the city of Raqqa, U.S. bombs are nowhere to be seen as hundreds of fighters pass safely. The release of this footage comes on the heels of accusations from both Russia and Iran that the U.S. is colluding with ISIS to allow the group's safe passage into areas controlled by the Syrian government.

    Iran claims to have direct proof but thus far has not released it. Even if Russia and Iran don't have any secret documents that directly expose this collusion, the fact remains that we don't necessarily need them .

    After all, this is exactly how ISIS grew exponentially in Syria in the first instance – as a direct result of U.S. foreign policy strategy. In 2012, a classified Defense Intelligence Agency report predicted the rise of ISIS, something actively encouraged by the U.S. establishment. The report stated :

    "If the situation unravels, there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in eastern Syria and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime."

    Further, leaked audio of former Secretary of State John Kerry shows he knew ISIS was gaining momentum in Syria, and that in turn, the U.S. hoped this would bring Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to the negotiating table.

    In recent times, the safe passage of ISIS fighters to areas under the control of the Syrian government has been an unspoken but official strategy and has been the reality on the ground in Iraq and Syria.

    Late last year, Anti-Media reported on an anonymous military-diplomatic official's claims that the United States was allowing safe passage to Syria for ISIS fighters exiting Mosul, Iraq – even though the U.S. was supposedly waging an offensive to defeat ISIS in the area. As we noted, acknowledging the admittedly undesirable, questionable nature of the anonymous source:

    " An anonymous source claiming to a Russian newspaper something as conspiratorial as the U.S. directly aiding ISIS militants may seem a bit dubious, but since the offensive was launched on Monday of this week , this has been the reality on the ground .

    " According to Army Lieutenant General Talib Shaghati , as reported by anti-Russian newspaper , the Guardian, ISIS militants are already fleeing Mosul to Syria. This was further confirmed by the Saudi foreign minister, Adel al-Jubeir, who said that if ISIS were forced out of Mosul, they would likely go on to Syria ."

    Not long after, ISIS launched an offensive into a very strategic area in Syria called Deir ez-Zor, battling through Syrian government defenses. The most horrifying part of this offensive was the fact that, as noted by the Guardian , the ISIS fighters who successfully broke through government defense lines in Syria were "primarily reinforcements coming over the border from Iraq's Anbar province."

    Deir ez-Zor is not outside the U.S. military's strike range capacity. This is the same city that was attacked by the American-led coalition in September of last year – an attack that targeted Syrian troops for over an hour, paving the way for a timely ISIS offensive. Yet when it comes to hundreds of reinforcements raging through the Iraqi border into Syria, the U.S. military is on a brief vacation.

    We were told Raqqa was to be ISIS' last stronghold in Syria, but this is clearly not true. In order for the U.S. to ultimately put pressure on the Syrian government, the real prize is not Raqqa but a combination of two very strategic locations that are very heavily interlinked.

    As explained by Gulf News :

    "There, a complex confrontation is unfolding, with far more geopolitical import and risk. Daesh [ISIS] is expected to make its last stand not in Raqqa but in an area that encompasses the borders with Iraq and Jordan and much of Syria's modest oil reserves, making it important in stabilising Syria and influencing its neighbouring countries.

    "Whoever lays claim to the sparsely populated area in this 21st-century version of the Great Game not only will take credit for seizing what is likely to be Daesh's last patch of a territorial caliphate in Syria, but also will play an important role in determining Syria's future and the post-war dynamics of the region."

    And this is ultimately the problem for the U.S.-led coalition of anti-Assad (and anti-Iranian) nations. The behind-closed-doors official rationale for targeting Syria's government for regime change was to undermine Iranian influence in the region, according to Hillary Clinton's email archive. Countries such as Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, and the other Gulf States have long feared that a fully dominated Shia-led bloc of Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon could completely overthrow the regional balance of power. They have opposed such a development at all costs.

    As Gulf News explains, the Iranians are in the process of fully implementing this Shia bridge, known as the "Shia Crescent":

    "The contested area also includes desert regions farther south with several border crossings, among them the critical highway connecting Damascus and Baghdad - coveted by Iran as a land route to Lebanon and its ally, the Hezbollah militia."

    This is why the U.S. military has set up a training base at the Aal-Tanf border crossing. If the Syrian government were to retake the area and open it up under its control, they would be able to directly link Iran to Syria and the rest of its allies, including Iraq and Lebanon.

    This is also why the U.S. military has been engaging in illegal acts of aggression against Iranian-backed militias operating in the area - to defend this position.

    Further, the Syrian government's outpost in Deir ez-Zor is isolated , hence why these two offensives are running in tandem. They both rely on the liberation of the other to have any real value to the Syrian government and its Russian and Iranian allies.

    As fascinating as the Comey testimony spectacle has been (don't forget to tune in for tomorrow's scandal of anonymous leaks and misspelled tweets), the real scandal lies in the fact that the U.S. is now openly siding with ISIS while allowing the terrorists safe passage into parts of Syria so that these extremists can battle a secular government . The U.S. is moments away from an all-out confrontation with Iran (and Russia , a nuclear power).

    Don't expect the corporate media to report on these damning facts anytime soon, as the public continues to sleepwalk into a global powder keg of deceit, death, and destruction.

    [Jun 17, 2017] The Collapsing Social Contract by Gaius Publius

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Until elites stand down and stop the brutal squeeze , expect more after painful more of this. It's what happens when societies come apart. Unless elites (of both parties) stop the push for "profit before people," policies that dominate the whole of the Neoliberal Era , there are only two outcomes for a nation on this track, each worse than the other. There are only two directions for an increasingly chaotic state to go, chaotic collapse or sufficiently militarized "order" to entirely suppress it. ..."
    "... Mes petits sous, mon petit cri de coeur. ..."
    "... But the elite aren't going to stand down, whatever that might mean. The elite aren't really the "elite", they are owners and controllers of certain flows of economic activity. We need to call it what it is and actively organize against it. Publius's essay seems too passive at points, too passive voice. (Yes, it's a cry from the heart in a prophetic mode, and on that level, I'm with it.) ..."
    "... American Psycho ..."
    "... The college students I deal with have internalized a lot of this. In their minds, TINA is reality. Everything balances for the individual on a razor's edge of failure of will or knowledge or hacktivity. It's all personal, almost never collective - it's a failure toward parents or peers or, even more grandly, what success means in America. ..."
    "... unions don't matter in our TINA. Corporations do. ..."
    "... our system promotes specialists and disregards generalists this leads to a population of individualists who can't see the big picture. ..."
    "... That social contract is hard to pin down and define – probably has different meanings to all of us, but you are right, it is breaking down. We no longer feel that our governments are working for us. ..."
    "... Increasing population, decreasing resources, increasingly expensive remaining resources on a per unit basis, unresolved trashing of the environment and an political economy that forces people to do more with less all the time (productivity improvement is mandatory, not optional, to handle the exponential function) much pain will happen even if everyone is equal. ..."
    "... "Social contract:" nice Enlightment construct, out of University by City. Not a real thing, just a very incomplete shorthand to attempt to fiddle the masses and give a name to meta-livability. ..."
    "... Always with the "contract" meme, as if there are no more durable and substantive notions of how humans in small and large groups might organize and interact Or maybe the notion is the best that can be achieved? ..."
    "... JTMcFee, you have provided the most important aspect to this mirage of 'social contract'. The "remedies" clearly available to lawless legislation rest outside the realm of a contract which has never existed. ..."
    "... Unconscionable clauses are now separately initialed in an "I dare you to sue me" shaming gambit. Meanwhile the mythical Social Contract has been atomized into 7 1/2 billion personal contracts with unstated, shifting remedies wholly tied to the depths of pockets. ..."
    "... Here in oh-so-individualistic Chicago, I have been noting the fraying for some time: It isn't just the massacres in the highly segregated black neighborhoods, some of which are now in terminal decline as the inhabitants, justifiably, flee. The typical Chicagoan wanders the streets connected to a phone, so as to avoid eye contact, all the while dressed in what look like castoffs. Meanwhile, Midwesterners, who tend to be heavy, are advertisements for the obesity epidemic: Yet obesity has a metaphorical meaning as the coat of lipids that a person wears to keep the world away. ..."
    "... My middle / upper-middle neighborhood is covered with a layer of upper-middle trash: Think Starbucks cups and artisanal beer bottles. ..."
    "... The class war continues, and the upper class has won. As commenter relstprof notes, any kind of concerted action is now nearly impossible. Instead of the term "social contract," I might substitute "solidarity." Is there solidarity? No, solidarity was destroyed as a policy of the Reagan administration, as well as by fantasies that Americans are individualistic, and here we are, 40 years later, dealing with the rubble of the Obama administration and the Trump administration. ..."
    "... The trash bit has been linked in other countries to how much the general population views the public space/environment as a shared, common good. Thus, streets, parks and public space might be soiled by litter that nobody cares to put away in trash bins properly, while simultaneously the interior of houses/apartments, and attached gardens if any, are kept meticulously clean. ..."
    "... The trash bit has been linked in other countries to how much the general population views the public space/environment as a shared, common good. ..."
    "... There *is* no public space anymore. Every public good, every public space is now fair game for commercial exploitation. ..."
    "... The importance of the end of solidarity – that is, of the almost-murderous impulses by the upper classes to destroy any kind of solidarity. ..."
    "... "Conditions will only deteriorate for anyone not in the "1%", with no sight of improvement or relief." ..."
    "... "Four Futures" ..."
    "... Reminds me of that one quip I saw from a guy who, why he always had to have two pigs to eat up his garbage, said that if he had only one pig, it will eat only when it wants to, but if there were two pigs, each one would eat so the other pig won't get to it first. Our current economic system in a nutshell – pigs eating crap so deny it to others first. "Greed is good". ..."
    "... Don't know that the two avenues Gaius mentioned are the only two roads our society can travel. In support of this view, I recall a visit to a secondary city in Russia for a few weeks in the early 1990s after the collapse of the USSR. Those were difficult times economically and psychologically for ordinary citizens of that country. Alcoholism was rampant, emotional illness and suicide rates among men of working age were high, mortality rates generally were rising sharply, and birth rates were falling. Yet the glue of common culture, sovereign currency, language, community, and thoughtful and educated citizens held despite corrupt political leadership, the rise of an oligarchic class, and the related emergence of organized criminal networks. There was also adequate food, and critical public infrastructure was maintained, keeping in mind this was shortly after the Chernobyl disaster. ..."
    Jun 16, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
    Yves here. I have been saying for some years that I did not think we would see a revolution, but more and more individuals acting out violently. That's partly the result of how community and social bonds have weakened as a result of neoliberalism but also because the officialdom has effective ways of blocking protests. With the overwhelming majority of people using smartphones, they are constantly surveilled. And the coordinated 17-city paramilitary crackdown on Occupy Wall Street shows how the officialdom moved against non-violent protests. Police have gotten only more military surplus toys since then, and crowd-dispersion technology like sound cannons only continues to advance. The only way a rebellion could succeed would be for it to be truly mass scale (as in over a million people in a single city) or by targeting crucial infrastructure.

    By Gaius Publius , a professional writer living on the West Coast of the United States and frequent contributor to DownWithTyranny, digby, Truthout, and Naked Capitalism. Follow him on Twitter @Gaius_Publius , Tumblr and Facebook . GP article archive here . Originally published at DownWithTyranny

    "[T]he super-rich are absconding with our wealth, and the plague of inequality continues to grow. An analysis of 2016 data found that the poorest five deciles of the world population own about $410 billion in total wealth. As of June 8, 2017 , the world's richest five men owned over $400 billion in wealth. Thus, on average, each man owns nearly as much as 750 million people."
    -Paul Buchheit, Alternet

    "Congressman Steve Scalise, Three Others Shot at Alexandria, Virginia, Baseball Field"
    -NBC News, June 14, 2017

    "4 killed, including gunman, in shooting at UPS facility in San Francisco"
    -ABC7News, June 14, 2017

    "Seriously? Another multiple shooting? So many guns. So many nut-bars. So many angry nut-bars with guns."
    -MarianneW via Twitter

    "We live in a world where "multiple dead" in San Francisco shooting can't cut through the news of another shooting in the same day."
    -SamT via Twitter

    "If the rich are determined to extract the last drop of blood, expect the victims to put up a fuss. And don't expect that fuss to be pretty. I'm not arguing for social war; I'm arguing for justice and peace."
    - Yours truly

    When the social contract breaks from above, it breaks from below as well.

    Until elites stand down and stop the brutal squeeze , expect more after painful more of this. It's what happens when societies come apart. Unless elites (of both parties) stop the push for "profit before people," policies that dominate the whole of the Neoliberal Era , there are only two outcomes for a nation on this track, each worse than the other. There are only two directions for an increasingly chaotic state to go, chaotic collapse or sufficiently militarized "order" to entirely suppress it.

    As with the climate, I'm concerned about the short term for sure - the storm that kills this year, the hurricane that kills the next - but I'm also concerned about the longer term as well. If the beatings from "our betters" won't stop until our acceptance of their "serve the rich" policies improves, the beatings will never stop, and both sides will take up the cudgel.

    Then where will we be?

    America's Most Abundant Manufactured Product May Be Pain

    I look out the window and see more and more homeless people, noticeably more than last year and the year before. And they're noticeably scruffier, less "kemp,"​ if that makes sense to you (it does if you live, as I do, in a community that includes a number of them as neighbors).

    The squeeze hasn't let up, and those getting squeezed out of society have nowhere to drain to but down - physically, economically, emotionally. The Case-Deaton study speaks volumes to this point. The less fortunate economically are already dying of drugs and despair. If people are killing themselves in increasing numbers, isn't it just remotely maybe possible they'll also aim their anger out as well?

    The pot isn't boiling yet - these shootings are random, individualized - but they seem to be piling on top of each other. A hard-boiling, over-flowing pot may not be far behind. That's concerning as well, much moreso than even the random horrid events we recoil at today.

    Many More Ways Than One to Be a Denier

    My comparison above to the climate problem was deliberate. It's not just the occasional storms we see that matter. It's also that, seen over time, those storms are increasing, marking a trend that matters even more. As with climate, the whole can indeed be greater than its parts. There's more than one way in which to be a denier of change.

    These are not just metaphors. The country is already in a pre-revolutionary state ; that's one huge reason people chose Trump over Clinton, and would have chosen Sanders over Trump. The Big Squeeze has to stop, or this will be just the beginning of a long and painful path. We're on a track that nations we have watched - tightly "ordered" states, highly chaotic ones - have trod already. While we look at them in pity, their example stares back at us.

    Mes petits sous, mon petit cri de coeur.

    elstprof , June 16, 2017 at 3:03 am

    But the elite aren't going to stand down, whatever that might mean. The elite aren't really the "elite", they are owners and controllers of certain flows of economic activity. We need to call it what it is and actively organize against it. Publius's essay seems too passive at points, too passive voice. (Yes, it's a cry from the heart in a prophetic mode, and on that level, I'm with it.)

    "If people are killing themselves in increasing numbers, isn't it just remotely maybe possible they'll also aim their anger out as well?"

    Not necessarily. What Lacan called the "Big Other" is quite powerful. We internalize a lot of socio-economic junk from our cultural inheritance, especially as it's been configured over the last 40 years - our values, our body images, our criteria for judgment, our sense of what material well-being consists, etc. Ellis's American Psycho is the great satire of our time, and this time is not quite over yet. Dismemberment reigns.

    The college students I deal with have internalized a lot of this. In their minds, TINA is reality. Everything balances for the individual on a razor's edge of failure of will or knowledge or hacktivity. It's all personal, almost never collective - it's a failure toward parents or peers or, even more grandly, what success means in America.

    The idea that agency could be a collective action of a union for a strike isn't even on the horizon. And at the same time, these same students don't bat an eye at socialism. They're willing to listen.

    But unions don't matter in our TINA. Corporations do.

    Moneta , June 16, 2017 at 8:08 am

    Most of the elite do not understand the money system. They do not understand how different sectors have benefitted from policies and/or subsidies that increased the money flows into these. So they think they deserve their money more than those who toiled in sectors with less support.

    Furthermore, our system promotes specialists and disregards generalists this leads to a population of individualists who can't see the big picture.

    jefemt , June 16, 2017 at 9:45 am

    BAU, TINA, BAU!! BOHICA!!!

    Dead Dog , June 16, 2017 at 3:09 am

    Thank you Gaius, a thoughtful post. That social contract is hard to pin down and define – probably has different meanings to all of us, but you are right, it is breaking down. We no longer feel that our governments are working for us.

    Of tangential interest, Turnbull has just announced another gun amnesty targeting guns that people no longer need and a tightening of some of the ownership laws.

    RWood , June 16, 2017 at 12:24 pm

    So this inheritance matures: http://www.nature.com/news/fight-the-silencing-of-gun-research-1.22139

    willem , June 16, 2017 at 2:20 pm

    One problem is the use of the term "social contract", implying that there is some kind of agreement ( = consensus) on what that is. I don't remember signing any "contract".

    Fiery Hunt , June 16, 2017 at 3:17 am

    I fear for my friends, I fear for my family. They do not know how ravenous the hounds behind nor ahead are. For myself? I imagine myself the same in a Mad Max world. It will be more clear, and perception shattering, to most whose lives allow the ignoring of gradual chokeholds, be them political or economic, but those of us who struggle daily, yearly, decadely with both, will only say Welcome to the party, pals.

    Disturbed Voter , June 16, 2017 at 6:33 am

    Increasing population, decreasing resources, increasingly expensive remaining resources on a per unit basis, unresolved trashing of the environment and an political economy that forces people to do more with less all the time (productivity improvement is mandatory, not optional, to handle the exponential function) much pain will happen even if everyone is equal.

    Each person does what is right in their own eyes, but the net effect is impoverishment and destruction. Life is unfair, indeed. A social contract is a mutual suicide pact, whether you renegotiate it or not. This is Fight Club. The first rule of Fight Club, is we don't speak of Fight Club. Go to the gym, toughen up, while you still can.

    JTMcPhee , June 16, 2017 at 6:44 am

    "Social contract:" nice Enlightment construct, out of University by City. Not a real thing, just a very incomplete shorthand to attempt to fiddle the masses and give a name to meta-livability.

    Always with the "contract" meme, as if there are no more durable and substantive notions of how humans in small and large groups might organize and interact Or maybe the notion is the best that can be achieved? Recalling that as my Contracts professor in law school emphasized over and over, in "contracts" there are no rights in the absence of effective remedies. It being a Boston law school, the notion was echoed in Torts, and in Commercial Paper and Sales and, tellingly, in Constitutional Law and Federal Jurisdiction, and even in Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure. No remedy, no right. What remedies are there in "the system," for the "other halves" of the "social contract," the "have-naught" halves?

    When honest "remedies under law" become nugatory, there's always the recourse to direct action of course with zero guarantee of redress

    sierra7 , June 16, 2017 at 11:22 am

    "What remedies are there in "the system," for the "other halves" of the "social contract," the "have-naught" halves?" Ah yes the ultimate remedy is outright rebellion against the highest authorities .with as you say, " zero guarantee of redress."

    But, history teaches us that that path will be taken ..the streets. It doesn't (didn't) take a genius to see what was coming back in the late 1960's on .regarding the beginnings of the revolt(s) by big money against organized labor. Having been very involved in observing, studying and actually active in certain groups back then, the US was acting out in other countries particularly in the Southern Hemisphere, against any social progression, repressing, arresting (thru its surrogates) torturing, killing any individuals or groups that opposed that infamous theory of "free market capitalism". It had a very definite "creep" effect, northwards to the mainstream US because so many of our major corporations were deeply involved with our covert intelligence operatives and objectives (along with USAID and NED). I used to tell my friends about what was happening and they would look at me as if I was a lunatic. The agency for change would be "organized labor", but now, today that agency has been trashed enough where so many of the young have no clue as to what it all means. The ultimate agenda along with "globalization" is the complete repression of any opposition to the " spread of money markets" around the world". The US intends to lead; whether the US citizenry does is another matter. Hence the streets.

    Kuhio Kane , June 16, 2017 at 12:33 pm

    JTMcFee, you have provided the most important aspect to this mirage of 'social contract'. The "remedies" clearly available to lawless legislation rest outside the realm of a contract which has never existed.

    bdy , June 16, 2017 at 1:32 pm

    The Social Contract, ephemeral, reflects perfectly what contracts have become. Older rulings frequently labeled clauses unconscionable - a tacit recognition that so few of the darn things are actually agreed upon. Rather, a party with resources, options and security imposes the agreement on a party in some form of crisis (nowadays the ever present crisis of paycheck to paycheck living – or worse). Never mind informational asymmetries, necessity drives us into crappy rental agreements and debt promises with eyes wide open. And suddenly we're all agents of the state.

    Unconscionable clauses are now separately initialed in an "I dare you to sue me" shaming gambit. Meanwhile the mythical Social Contract has been atomized into 7 1/2 billion personal contracts with unstated, shifting remedies wholly tied to the depths of pockets.

    Solidarity, of course. Hard when Identity politics lubricate a labor market that insists on specialization, and talented children of privilege somehow manage to navigate the new entrepreneurism while talented others look on in frustration. The resistance insists on being leaderless (fueled in part IMHO by the uncomfortable fact that effective leaders are regularly killed or co-opted). And the overriding message of resistance is negative: "Stop it!"

    But that's where we are. Again, just my opinion: but the pivotal step away from the jackpot is to convince or coerce our wealthiest not to cash in. Stop making and saving so much stinking money, y'all.

    Moneta , June 16, 2017 at 6:54 am

    The pension system is based on profits. Nothing will change until the profits disappear and the top quintile starts falling off the treadmill.

    Susan the other , June 16, 2017 at 1:01 pm

    and there's the Karma bec. even now we see a private banking system synthesizing an economy to maintain asset values and profits and they have the nerve to blame it on social spending. I think Giaus's term 'Denier' is perfect for all those vested practitioners of profit-capitalism at any cost. They've already failed miserably. For the most part they're just too proud to admit it and, naturally, they wanna hang on to "their" money. I don't think it will take a revolution – in fact it would be better if no chaos ensued – just let these arrogant goofballs stew in their own juice a while longer. They are killing themselves.

    roadrider , June 16, 2017 at 8:33 am

    There's a social contract? Who knew?

    Realist , June 16, 2017 at 8:41 am

    When I hear so much impatient and irritable complaint, so much readiness to replace what we have by guardians for us all, those supermen, evoked somewhere from the clouds, whom none have seen and none are ready to name, I lapse into a dream, as it were. I see children playing on the grass; their voices are shrill and discordant as children's are; they are restive and quarrelsome; they cannot agree to any common plan; their play annoys them; it goes poorly. And one says, let us make Jack the master; Jack knows all about it; Jack will tell us what each is to do and we shall all agree. But Jack is like all the rest; Helen is discontented with her part and Henry with his, and soon they fall again into their old state. No, the children must learn to play by themselves; there is no Jack the master. And in the end slowly and with infinite disappointment they do learn a little; they learn to forbear, to reckon with another, accept a little where they wanted much, to live and let live, to yield when they must yield; perhaps, we may hope, not to take all they can. But the condition is that they shall be willing at least to listen to one another, to get the habit of pooling their wishes. Somehow or other they must do this, if the play is to go on; maybe it will not, but there is no Jack, in or out of the box, who can come to straighten the game. -Learned Hand

    DJG , June 16, 2017 at 9:24 am

    Here in oh-so-individualistic Chicago, I have been noting the fraying for some time: It isn't just the massacres in the highly segregated black neighborhoods, some of which are now in terminal decline as the inhabitants, justifiably, flee. The typical Chicagoan wanders the streets connected to a phone, so as to avoid eye contact, all the while dressed in what look like castoffs. Meanwhile, Midwesterners, who tend to be heavy, are advertisements for the obesity epidemic: Yet obesity has a metaphorical meaning as the coat of lipids that a person wears to keep the world away.

    My middle / upper-middle neighborhood is covered with a layer of upper-middle trash: Think Starbucks cups and artisanal beer bottles. Some trash is carefully posed: Cups with straws on windsills, awaiting the Paris Agreement Pixie, who will clean up after these oh-so-earnest environmentalists.

    Meanwhile, I just got a message from my car-share service: They are cutting back on the number of cars on offer. Too much vandalism.

    Are these things caused by pressure from above? Yes, in part: The class war continues, and the upper class has won. As commenter relstprof notes, any kind of concerted action is now nearly impossible. Instead of the term "social contract," I might substitute "solidarity." Is there solidarity? No, solidarity was destroyed as a policy of the Reagan administration, as well as by fantasies that Americans are individualistic, and here we are, 40 years later, dealing with the rubble of the Obama administration and the Trump administration.

    JEHR , June 16, 2017 at 11:17 am

    DJG: My middle / upper-middle neighborhood is covered with a layer of upper-middle trash: Think Starbucks cups and artisanal beer bottles. Some trash is carefully posed: Cups with straws on windsills, awaiting the Paris Agreement Pixie, who will clean up after these oh-so-earnest environmentalists.

    Yes, the trash bit is hard to understand. What does it stand for? Does it mean, We can infinitely disregard our surroundings by throwing away plastic, cardboard, metal and paper and nothing will happen? Does it mean, There is more where that came from! Does it mean, I don't care a fig for the earth? Does it mean, Human beings are stupid and, unlike pigs, mess up their immediate environment and move on? Does it mean, Nothing–that we are just nihilists waiting to die? I am so fed up with the garbage strewn on the roads and in the woods where I live; I used to pick it up and could collect as much as 9 garbage bags of junk in 9 days during a 4 kilometer walk. I don't pick up any more because I am 77 and cannot keep doing it.

    However, I am certain that strewn garbage will surely be the last national flag waving in the breeze as the anthem plays junk music and we all succumb to our terrible future.

    jrs , June 16, 2017 at 1:09 pm

    Related to this, I thought one day of who probably NEVER gets any appreciation but strives to make things nicer, anyone planning or planting the highway strips (government workers maybe although it could be convicts also unfortunately, I'm not sure). Yes highways are ugly, yes they will destroy the world, but some of the planting strips are sometimes genuinely nice. So they add some niceness to the ugly and people still litter of course.

    visitor , June 16, 2017 at 1:04 pm

    The trash bit has been linked in other countries to how much the general population views the public space/environment as a shared, common good. Thus, streets, parks and public space might be soiled by litter that nobody cares to put away in trash bins properly, while simultaneously the interior of houses/apartments, and attached gardens if any, are kept meticulously clean.

    Basically, the world people care about stops outside their dwellings, because they do not feel it is "theirs" or that they participate in its possession in a genuine way. It belongs to the "town administration", or to a "private corporation", or to the "government" - and if they feel they have no say in the ownership, management, regulation and benefits thereof, why should they care? Let the town administration/government/corporation do the clean-up - we already pay enough taxes/fees/tolls, and "they" are always putting up more restrictions on how to use everything, so

    In conclusion: the phenomenon of litter/trash is another manifestation of a fraying social contract.

    Big River Bandido , June 16, 2017 at 1:47 pm

    The trash bit has been linked in other countries to how much the general population views the public space/environment as a shared, common good.

    There *is* no public space anymore. Every public good, every public space is now fair game for commercial exploitation.

    I live in NYC, and just yesterday as I attempted to refill my MetroCard, the machine told me it was expired and I had to replace it. The replacement card doesn't look at all like a MetroCard with the familiar yellow and black graphic saying "MetroCard". Instead? It's an ad. For a fucking insurance company. And so now, every single time that I go somewhere on the subway, I have to see an ad from Empire Blue Cross/Blue Shield.

    visitor , June 16, 2017 at 2:39 pm

    There *is* no public space anymore. Every public good, every public space is now fair game for commercial exploitation.

    And as a result, people no longer care about it - they do not feel it is their commonwealth any longer.

    Did you notice whether the NYC subway got increasingly dirty/littered as the tentacles of privatization reached everywhere? Just curious.

    DJG , June 16, 2017 at 9:37 am

    The importance of the end of solidarity – that is, of the almost-murderous impulses by the upper classes to destroy any kind of solidarity. From Yves's posting of Yanis Varoufakis's analysis of the newest terms of the continuing destruction of Greece:

    With regard to labour market reforms, the Eurogroup welcomes the adopted legislation safeguarding previous reforms on collective bargaining and bringing collective dismissals in line with best EU practices.

    I see! "Safeguarding previous reforms on collective bargaining" refers, of course, to the 2012 removal of the right to collective bargaining and the end to trades union representation for each and every Greek worker. Our government was elected in January 2015 with an express mandate to restore these workers' and trades unions' rights. Prime Minister Tsipras has repeatedly pledged to do so, even after our falling out and my resignation in July 2015. Now, yesterday, his government consented to this piece of Eurogroup triumphalism that celebrates the 'safeguarding' of the 2012 'reforms'. In short, the SYRIZA government has capitulated on this issue too: Workers' and trades' unions' rights will not be restored. And, as if that were not bad enough, "collective dismissals" will be brought "in line with best EU practices". What this means is that the last remaining constraints on corporations, i.e. a restriction on what percentage of workers can be fired each month, is relaxed. Make no mistake: The Eurogroup is telling us that, now that employers are guaranteed the absence of trades unions, and the right to fire more workers, growth enhancement will follow suit! Let's not hold our breath!

    Daniel F. , June 16, 2017 at 10:44 am

    The so-called "Elites"? Stand down? Right. Every year I look up the cardinal topics discussed at the larger economic forums and conferences (mainly Davos and G8), and some variation of "The consequences of rising inequality" is a recurring one. Despite this, nothing ever comes out if them. I imagine they go something like this:

    • "-Oh hi Mark. Racism is bad.
    • -Definitely. So is inequality, right, Tim?
    • -Sure, wish we could do something about it. HEY GUYS, HAVE YOU HEARD ABOUT MY NEW SCHEME TO BUY OUT NEW AND UPCOMING COMPANIES TO MAKE MORE MONEY?"

    A wet dream come true, both for an AnCap and a communist conspiracy theorist. I'm by no means either. However, I think capitalism has already failed and can't go on for much longer. Conditions will only deteriorate for anyone not in the "1%", with no sight of improvement or relief.

    I'd very much like to be proven wrong.

    Bobby Gladd , June 16, 2017 at 12:01 pm

    "Conditions will only deteriorate for anyone not in the "1%", with no sight of improvement or relief." Frase's Quadrant Four. Hierarchy + Scarcity = Exterminism (From "Four Futures" )

    Archangel , June 16, 2017 at 11:33 am

    Reminds me of that one quip I saw from a guy who, why he always had to have two pigs to eat up his garbage, said that if he had only one pig, it will eat only when it wants to, but if there were two pigs, each one would eat so the other pig won't get to it first. Our current economic system in a nutshell – pigs eating crap so deny it to others first. "Greed is good".

    oh , June 16, 2017 at 12:10 pm

    Our country is rife with rent seeking pigs who will stoop lower and lower to feed their greed.

    Vatch , June 16, 2017 at 12:37 pm

    In today's Links section there's this: https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/2017/jun/14/tax-evaders-exposed-why-super-rich-are-even-richer-than-we-thought which has relevance for the discussion of the collapsing social contract.

    Chauncey Gardiner , June 16, 2017 at 1:00 pm

    Don't know that the two avenues Gaius mentioned are the only two roads our society can travel. In support of this view, I recall a visit to a secondary city in Russia for a few weeks in the early 1990s after the collapse of the USSR. Those were difficult times economically and psychologically for ordinary citizens of that country. Alcoholism was rampant, emotional illness and suicide rates among men of working age were high, mortality rates generally were rising sharply, and birth rates were falling. Yet the glue of common culture, sovereign currency, language, community, and thoughtful and educated citizens held despite corrupt political leadership, the rise of an oligarchic class, and the related emergence of organized criminal networks. There was also adequate food, and critical public infrastructure was maintained, keeping in mind this was shortly after the Chernobyl disaster.

    Here in the US the New Deal and other legislation helped preserve social order in the 1930s. Yves also raises an important point in her preface that can provide support for the center by those who are able to do so under the current economic framework. That glue is to participate in one's community; whether it is volunteering at a school, the local food bank, community-oriented social clubs, or in a multitude of other ways; regardless of whether your community is a small town or a large city.

    JTMcPhee , June 16, 2017 at 1:21 pm

    " Yet the glue of common culture, sovereign currency, language, community, and thoughtful and educated citizens held despite corrupt political leadership, the rise of an oligarchic class, and the related emergence of organized criminal networks."

    None of which applies to the Imperium, of course. There's glue, all right, but it's the kind that is used for flooring in Roach Motels (TM), and those horrific rat and mouse traps that stick the rodent to a large rectangle of plastic, where they die eventually of exhaustion and dehydration and starvation The rat can gnaw off a leg that's glued down, but then it tips over and gets glued down by the chest or face or butt

    I have to note that several people I know are fastidious about picking up trash other people "throw away." I do it, when I'm up to bending over. I used to be rude about it - one young attractive woman dumped a McDonald's bag and her ashtray out the window of her car at one of our very long Florida traffic lights. I got out of my car, used the mouth of the McDonald's bag to scoop up most of the lipsticked butts, and threw them back into her car. Speaking of mouths, that woman with the artfully painted lips sure had one on her

    [Jun 17, 2017] What would US foreign policy look like under President Pence by Hady Amr and Steve Feldstein

    May 25, 2017 | thehill.com
    Among the Republican establishment, particularly the neoconservative wing, Pence has an impeccable reputation. Many describe him as a " hawk's hawk ." He was a strong proponent of the Iraq War, has vigorously stood up for a strong military and "American values" and, as vice president, has taken on an informal role as an emissary to NATO and other alliances. All of this contrasts starkly to what candidate Trump said on the campaign trail.

    Likewise, Pence's evangelical Christian faith is central to his identity. He has proudly built up a reputation as one of the most conservative lawmakers in the country and frequently describes himself as "a Christian, a conservative and a Republican, in that order." There is a high probability that Pence would explicitly embed religious morals in U.S. foreign policy and push an activist social conservative agenda.

    For example, as the governor of Indiana, Pence signed one of the strictest abortion provisions in the country and approved a controversial law intended to allow businesses to deny services to members of the LGBT community for religious reasons (only after intense blowback did he backtrack). Translated into the foreign policy realm, it is not hard to imagine Pence defending Christian minorities around the world, possibly to the exclusion of other religious groups.

    He will undoubtedly continue Trump's expansion of the " global gag rule ," and it is possible he may try to push a " clash of civilizations " strategy, primarily seeking alliances with countries that have a "Judeo-Christian" character.

    But a Pence presidency could also mean re-adopting a "values agenda," with a greater emphasis on human rights, democracy and development that would be closer in line with President George W. Bush's policies. Under Bush, funding for development - particularly global health programs - expanded, bringing together an unlikely coalition of secular development advocates and faith-based stakeholders.

    It is not hard to envision a similar coalition coming together under Pence's watch. A Pence presidency also may lead to a shoring-up of security and economic alliances. Just as Trump has cast the free-trade regime into jeopardy, castigated NATO (at least before an abrupt about-face last month) and signaled massive funding cuts to the Bretton Woods Institutions, Pence may reverse many of these pronouncements.

    In the current configuration of the Trump administration, three separate groups tangle for foreign policy primacy: the economic nationalists/populists led by Stephen Bannon, the military pragmatists represented by Secretary of Defense James Mattis and National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster and the economic globalists fronted by National Economic Council Director Gary Cohn and Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin.

    Under Pence, the Bannon wing would likely make a quick and graceless exit. The economic globalists and the military pragmatists would stay entrenched in strong positions, but old groups would likely return, such as the neoconservatives and religious faith leaders.

    A Pence presidency would bring big style changes. Gone would be the late night tweets and blustery rhetoric. More than likely, "America First" would gradually disappear, with a return to a more traditional form of American exceptionalism. The impulsivity, erratic swings of policy and casual disregard for intelligence and briefing material would also likely pass.

    These changes alone would considerably ease fears about an accidental stumble into a major war or nuclear confrontation. On the other hand, the divisive culture wars that have framed Pence's political career would presumably return in a major way and likely spill over into the foreign policy arena.

    [Jun 17, 2017] Qatar-Saudi Catfight Unveils Western Terrorist Propaganda Outlets

    Notable quotes:
    "... Al Jazeera probably intensified the production of dirty laundry, for example about Yemen, and they have pretty good journalism -- stories are well written, illustrated, and with videos if you want to watch and listen. ..."
    "... Yemen war is bloody and totally doomed enterprise, and the best our establishment can do is to ignore it to the largest extend possible, and to resort to glib locutions like "internationally recognized government of Yemen". The importance of that phrase is that no one tries to promote "democratically elected government of Yemen" ..."
    "... But they have some less dramatic dirty laundry on Libya. There UAE and Egypt support armed opponents of the "internationally recognized government". Which is supported by Libyan Muslim Brotherhood and the West. ..."
    Jun 17, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

    The spat between Saudi Arabia and Qatar gives us some amusing entertainment. Both countries spent billions to arm and supply tens of thousands of brutal Takfiris to fight the Syrian government and people. They also spent millions to buy this or that "western" think-tank and/or writer. Now that the two Wahhabi dictatorships are fighting each other they spill the beans over each others nefarious deeds. Various "western" think-tanks and media, who avidly supported al-Qaeda, ISIS and other criminals in Syria, are the well deserved collateral casualties in this fight.

    10
    ... "dirty laundry" will not be seen by the still orthodox-neoliberal media ... Pnyx | Jun 16, 2017 7:07:03 PM | 8

    True, they would rather dwell on terrible repressions in Russia where demonstrators can get ... three weeks of jail. And in nearby Poland they are threaten with three years. While the actual jailing seems less frequent, other aspects are more disturbing, IMHO, than in Russia. However, Al Jazeera probably intensified the production of dirty laundry, for example about Yemen, and they have pretty good journalism -- stories are well written, illustrated, and with videos if you want to watch and listen.

    Which let me think about one aspect of both Yemen war and KSA-Qatar brouhaha. A while ago there were elections in Yemen and a party supportive of Hadi got most votes. However, this party is viewed as a branch of Muslim Brotherhood, and there were scant sign of Sunnis of northern Yemen supporting the invasion (I actually did not read about any). For decades KSA was funneling money to the leaders of Yemeni tribes that they view sympathetic, i.e. the Sunni tribes, but apparently the division between northern and southern Arabs (in the Arabian peninsula) is much deeper than any religious difference between the sects.

    Yemeni Sunnis are just a bit less hostile to KSA and UAE than Shia Zaidites, after all those years of being bribed.

    The south-north division of the Arabian peninsula was already noted by Roman cartographers, and persists till today. Note that southern country of Oman steers very clear of any alliance with KSA.

    Yemen war is bloody and totally doomed enterprise, and the best our establishment can do is to ignore it to the largest extend possible, and to resort to glib locutions like "internationally recognized government of Yemen". The importance of that phrase is that no one tries to promote "democratically elected government of Yemen"

    Of course, Qatar is not implicated in atrocities there, can easily get some influence if GCC war is lost (because of Islah party), unlike the situation in Syria.

    But they have some less dramatic dirty laundry on Libya. There UAE and Egypt support armed opponents of the "internationally recognized government". Which is supported by Libyan Muslim Brotherhood and the West.

    james | Jun 16, 2017 8:11:41 PM | 11
    on a related note, i see Turkey's religious affairs head slams Gulf countries' decision to add Qatar-based Egyptian Islamic theologian al-Qaradawi to terror list... meanwhile, a 1 minute interview / video here of Yusuf al-Qaradawi: Killing Of Apostates Is Essential for Islam to survive..

    i suppose this explains more on the turkey - qatar relationship... headchopper cult unites under the banner of saving islam?? too bad someone can't save islam from itself, if this is what islam amounts to.. nothing like putting a religion in the hands of religious nut jobs..

    jfl | Jun 16, 2017 9:55:00 PM | 14
    Unmentioned of course is

    1. the CIA's role of distributing the money from Qatar in cash or in form of weapons and ammo,
    2. the Turkish role as transit and safe haven country for the Jihadis and
    3. Israel's own support, with artillery and medical services, for al-Qaeda in the Golan heights.
    4. The Saudi financing of the Islamic State, claimed by several U.S. officials in various Wikileaks documents, is not mentioned at all.

    but they all will be now. maybe even some of the folks in the usa will hear about same. whether it will make any difference or not remains to be seen ... the 'strategy' of late has been to 'embrace and extend' the 'dark side'. americans seem wed to the 'long war' ... something to do with the jobs of those not working at mikey d's depending on war ... to fix that is not even on the radar screen, see the discussion of bernie sanders elsewhere. not even the 'socialist savior' can divorce himself from what is the fundamental problem.

    wasn't it mussolini who is said to have said that fascism is the fusion of the corporate and governmental spheres? someone linked to an article from 2015 from nafeez ahmed yesterday, the title does not say it all - How the CIA made Google ... it's across the board, or around the triangle ... 'intelligence', corporate vendors, policy 'makers' ... those are the people whose income is seen to be 'on the line' and who are therefore supporting the 'long war' ... the never-ending war, according to their impossible calculations.

    jfl | Jun 17, 2017 5:23:15 AM | 18
    Turkey Tries to Calm Saudi Arabia Down as the Latter Prepares a List of Grievances Against Qatar

    During his visit in London, Al Jubeir said Saudi Arabia is working with Bahrain, the UAE and Egypt to prepare a list of complaints and documented violations and then submit it to Qatar, adding he expects a positive response from Doha and that the latter will eventually realize its mistakes and will cease all forms of support for terrorism.

    i imagine that qatar is preparing its own little list on ksa, bahrain, the uae, and egypt to present at the same time?

    they're like the dirty old men in raincoats, and nothing else, in back alleys 'downtown'.

    jfl | Jun 17, 2017 6:56:58 AM | 23
    @22, '1. the CIA's role of distributing the money from Qatar [, ksa, uae, ...] in cash or in form of weapons and ammo'

    yeah, turkey's role is diverting ... but we need to keep our eyes on the prime mover, number 1, above. none of this would have gone down ... afghanistan, iraq, libya, syria, ukraine, yemen ... none of it ... if it hadn't been for number one. and number one is the engine behind it all still.

    u-s-a! u-s-a! we're number one! we're number one!

    BRF | Jun 17, 2017 9:27:47 AM | 24
    This 'spat' is typical psychological scapegoating and blame gaming among allies when their defeat is looming. The only card left to play by the western plutocrats is the Kurdish desire for nationhood which goes against the desires of the local nations. Turkey is not amused. Look to see Iraq, possibly with Syrian and Iranian help, to push back against the Israeli supported Iraqi Kurdish enclave in Iraq when the time is right.

    Anonymous | Jun 17, 2017 10:03:55 AM | 26
    "Both countries spent billions to arm and supply tens of thousands of brutal Takfiris to fight the Syrian government and people."

    Not quite true. The great majority of fighters are of Saudi Wahabbist inclination, indoctrinated by Saudi 'clerics.' And how did the weapons arriving in Qatar get to Syria? Some were probably transferred directly to al Ubeid airbase for direct air-drop by the ISIS/Kurd airforce. The great majority would go overland through ... tada ...Saudi Arabia (then Iraq/Jordan). Qatar, Jordan and Turkey are bit players/patsies. The organ grinders are the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia.

    CNN and some its journalists are now exposed as sponsors of terrorism. What is the US government going to do about it?

    Of course, our esteemed Senator John McCain has his picture taken colluding with terrorists.

    Jackrabbit | Jun 17, 2017 10:58:08 AM | 30
    Anyone else having cognitive dissonance over this 'spat'?
    - KSA and Qatar both supported the anti-Assad jihadis

    - KSA and Qatar are both whabbi;

    - KSA previously supported Muslim Brotherhood;

    - Muslim brotherhood supports sharia law and jihad;

    - MB's democracy agenda? MB is chiefly supported by Qatar (monarchy) and Turkey (dictatorship).

    When you see Bernie, Hillary, and Trump effortlessly spouting BS, you start to question everything .

    More here: Saudi-Qatar: Gambit du Roi

    okie farmer | Jun 17, 2017 11:01:11 AM | 31
    Brotherly Qatari and Saudi members of the GCC engage in a fist fight today
    https://youtu.be/u17sHeqswf4

    virgile | Jun 17, 2017 11:04:12 AM | 32
    Turkey has fallen in yet another trap set by the USA to weaken Erdogan.
    Turkey has no more 'neighbors' friends, no more European friends, little american sympathy, and now it is about to loose his rich Gulf friends.
    Erdogan's foreign policy is close to total disaster.
    The AKP success came from the economical reforms stimulated by the EU promises of adhesion and to the smart and peaceful influence of Gulen in Turkey's institutions and foreign policy.
    Now Gulen and his allies are enemies. Turkey has gradually become a rogue state controlled exclusively by a megalomaniac man blinded by religion and money.
    After the Syria quagmire, the Qatar-Saudi conflict and its impact on Turkey's economy, may turn to be fatal to Erdogan ruling.

    Noirette | Jun 17, 2017 4:06:12 PM | 36
    Trump paid off, bribed, KSA to stop terrorism , by selling arms to them, plus investment into KSA, idk the details - KSA accepted and will obey.

    --remake with some diffs. of Roosevelt + Ibn Saud. Two pix I like:

    historic pic, 1945

    Trump on tarmac, 2017

    From the KSA pov, Wahabi crazies being all stiched up around the globe doin' the terrorist gig (plus the proxies, the poor from other places) with suicidal fanfare, rushing about, is useful .now how? Terrorists, not doing well these days, ppl are fed up w. that BS..

    When powerful forces (US..) will support you by selling you bigly blast-power, to decimate, heh, poor starving peasants in Yemen?

    The temptation then to pick a scapegoat who 'supports terrorism' is just too great, some piddling islet / group / org. has to be targetted, gotta make a show, don't cha know? Fight the 'terra' away from home.

    Qatar, with its creation of Al-Jaz, showing it is far too big for its mini-boots, a traditional smirking upstart, strutting about with impunity, with a great gas bounty, all gung-ho with the Muslim Bros, intl' acclaim, investments galore etc., splashing moolah about, more welcomed than KSA (e.g. in France, as position of women, etc.) - heh. What better target?

    frances | Jun 17, 2017 7:44:31 PM | 39
    Although unlikely, it would be amusing if support for Qatar led to an improvement in the Iran/Turkey relationship.
    Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jun 17, 2017 3:00:24 PM | 34

    I agree Turkey is having its problems, but the Russian pipeline is moving along and managed by Russia; Syria, Iraq and Iranian gas could all become clients of the pipeline, generating significant revenue and jobs for Turkey as its hub. Far better that Turkey looks to Russia with its sane international policies than to the the US's EU puppet.

    [Jun 17, 2017] As Secretary of State Tillerson rightly said: The U.S. has no legal authority to attack Syrian, Iranian or Russian forces. None at all. It is invading Syria with no legitimate reason. Syria, in contrast, has the legal authority to throw the U.S. troops out

    Notable quotes:
    "... This is the caliber of the US generals. It is almost - but not quite - beyond belief. ..."
    www.unz.com
    Grieved | Jun 15, 2017 9:10:10 PM | 23

    @1, 3, 5, 8, 9 et al

    Regarding that artillery the US moved into Syria. b wrote an UPDATE to his post of 6/13 [Syria Summary - The End Of The War Is Now In Sight] offering the best analysis I've seen anywhere. Worth a quote:

    HIMARS has a range of 300 kilometers. It makes no difference from a tactical perspective if its fires from Jordan or from al-Tanf in Syria some 12 kilometers east of the border line. It is a symbolic move to "show flag" in al-Tanf but it exposes the system to a legitimate attack by Syrian, Russian and Iranian forces.

    As Secretary of State Tillerson rightly said: The U.S. has no legal authority to attack Syrian, Iranian or Russian forces. None at all. It is invading Syria with no legitimate reason. Syria, in contrast, has the legal authority to throw the U.S. troops out.

    To move the HIMARS to al-Tanf is utterly stupid grandstanding.

    This is the caliber of the US generals. It is almost - but not quite - beyond belief.

    I can only think that military officers around the world are astounded every day at the sheer incompetence of the Pentagon. It calls for a whole new take on strategy and tactics, and this new take will come back to attack the US in all the days that follow, in all the theaters into which it intrudes, from all the forces that exist, in all the world.

    [Jun 17, 2017] Pentagon Trained Syrias Al Qaeda Rebels in the Use of Chemical Weapons

    Jun 12, 2017 | www.unz.com

    Mike K. Show Comment Next New Comment June 12, 2017 at 12:44 pm GMT

    a few links I'd suggest are worth a look

    Agent76 Show Comment Next New Comment June 12, 2017 at 12:46 pm GMT

    'No More' the video shows actual confirmation of the false flag and the video footage from the scene of the staged gas attack event in Syria.

    Apr 9, 2017 No More

    April 07, 2017 Pentagon Trained Syria's Al Qaeda "Rebels" in the Use of Chemical Weapons

    The Western media refutes their own lies

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/pentagon-trained-syrias-al-qaeda-rebels-in-the-use-of-chemical-weapons/5583784

    [Jun 17, 2017] Russia, Syria and allies severed the Jordan-Daesh supply route to Deir Ezzor by restoring government control over al-Bawdah north-east of al-Tanf and bordering Iraq

    Notable quotes:
    "... Wonder what vile provocation US and its proxy armies will now dig out their sleeve. The GCC infighting also hampers the information war as Al-Jazeera is a major source for desinformation in the Arab world but also in the West. Its focus will now lay more on the co-terrorist sponsors like KSA en UAE. ..."
    Jun 09, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

    xor | Jun 9, 2017 1:23:51 PM | 12

    Russia, Syria and allies severed the Jordan-Daesh supply route to Deir Ezzor by restoring government control over al-Bawdah north-east of al-Tanf and bordering Iraq.

    Wonder what vile provocation US and its proxy armies will now dig out their sleeve. The GCC infighting also hampers the information war as Al-Jazeera is a major source for desinformation in the Arab world but also in the West. Its focus will now lay more on the co-terrorist sponsors like KSA en UAE.

    https://southfront.org/russian-military-syrian-government-forces-reached-border-with-iraq/

    [Jun 17, 2017] Iran Claims Proof Of Direct US Support For ISIS Days After Congressman Dana Rohrabacher Floats The Idea Zero Hedge

    Jun 14, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
    Iran Claims Proof Of 'Direct US Support" For ISIS Days After Congressman Dana Rohrabacher Floats The Idea ZeroPointNow Jun 12, 2017 5:19 AM 0 SHARES Content originally generated at iBankCoin.com

    Last Thursday, Congressman Dana Rohrabacher praised ISIS for coordinated terrorist attacks in Tehran which left 17 civilians dead - then suggested that the United States should support the terrorist organization in their endeavors to bring regime change to Iran, comparing the situation to working with Stalin's Russia to get Hitler.

    Rohrabacher: Isn't it a good thing for us to have Untied States finally backing up Sunnis who will attack Hezbollah and the Shiite threat to us? Isn't that a good thing? And if so, maybe this is a Trump strategy of actually supporting one group against another considering that you have terrorist organizations.

    Dr. Asher : Having coordinated the economic warfare plan against the Islamic State, I would not condone an attack by the Islamic State. I would be determined to destroy them.

    Three days later, Iran says that's exactly what's happening...

    Iran's Fars news agency reports that Iran possess documents claiming to prove that the United States provides "Direct" support to ISIS. According to deputy Chief of Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces - Major General Mostafa Izadi, Iran is "facing a proxy warfare in the region as a new trick by the arrogant powers against the Islamic Republic."

    As the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution (Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei) said, we possess documents and information showing the direct supports by the US imperialism for this highly disgusting stream (the ISIL) in the region which has destroyed the Islamic countries and created a wave of massacres and clashes - Fars

    As ZeroHedge notes , Izadi's statement echoed remarks made by Iranian politician Ali Larijani last Friday - who pointed a finger directly at the United States for last week's terrorist attacks in Tehran. At a funeral ceremony for the victims, Larijani said "The United States has aligned itself with the ISIL in the region,"

    Turkey's Erdogan claimed that the US supports ISIS

    In December 2016 , Turkish President Erdogan said "he has evidence that the US supported terrorists in Syria, including ISIS."

    They were accusing us of supporting Daesh [Islamic State]," he told a press conference, according to Reuters.

    "Now they give support to terrorist groups including Daesh, YPG, PYD. It's very clear. We have confirmed evidence, with pictures, photos and videos. - Erdogan

    For years, anyone saying US UK had backed IS terror was branded a 'conspiracy theorist'. Now, Erdogan says it's true https://t.co/qE9SFBkPoQ

    - Charles Shoebridge (@ShoebridgeC) December 27, 2016

    And in July of 2016, Julian Assange made a similar claim. Additionally - according to Wikileaks and the Podesta emails, Saudi Arabia and Qatar have been supporting ISIS as well.

    Hillary Clinton email reveals she knew of Saudi & Qatar government funding for ISIL (ISIS) by August 2014 https://t.co/tlWxkEZ8FN pic.twitter.com/RmaFi9lQQP

    - WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) June 5, 2017

    Iran hasn't said if or when they will release proof of US support for ISIS/ISIL. Better not be trolling...

    In the meantime, perhaps US politicians would be wise not to cheerlead for support of one of the most brutal organizations on the planet. If the USA is in fact funding ISIS - that entire operation needs to be shut down and those responsible held to account.

    Follow on Twitter @ZeroPointNow

    Calculus99 , Jun 12, 2017 11:08 AM

    Terrorism = good for a government.

    Don't you think the US and its allies with all their weapons, spying ability and cash would have been able to swat it away by now?

    Look at them with their 20 year old AK47s and 125,000 mile Toyota pickups...

    Same with the 'war' on drugs. Good for them, not good for us.

    MrBoompi , Jun 12, 2017 10:58 AM

    ISIS is not a "new trick". Formation of a rebel force to oust Assad was conceptualized around 2013, maybe earler. Since Britain was in on it, rest assured the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia were on board from the beginning. The US, having sold ISIS as a major threat for all this time throught the use of MSM propaganda, can't really admit they were lying all along, even though anyone with half a brain and a keyboard knows the truth.

    Mango327 ,

    The program is not working anymore... *SYSTEM FAILURE*

    ZIONISM, ISLAM, & THE NEW ROMAN EMPIRE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_f_HlS6bSP4&list=PL0PjRD0h0gUA2juWTZINke...

    apberusdisvet , Jun 12, 2017 10:14 AM

    It was obvious going back to code-named Tim Osman (Osama Bin Laden for all you proles) who was the CIA funded leader for the afgan rebels against the Russkies. Further proof was shown by USA soldiers "guarding" the poppy fields from the Taliban. Then of course, there are the many videos of the 3 day convoy of armed yellow Toyotas that, in spite of the most sophisticated satellite surveillance available, were never attacked by US planes or warships sitting just miles away off the coast.

    SoDamnMad - apberusdisvet , Jun 12, 2017 10:36 AM

    I saw a Live Leak of a long convoy of Toyotas flying the black ISIS flag while a US Army helicopter, Apache or Kiowa, flew in the opposite direction with no attack by anything. That told me years ago that we supported them to topple the Syrian governent so the Qatar pipeline could go through. All since was just bullshit by our government. Pop3y3too , Jun 12, 2017 9:29 AM

    "Isn't it a good thing to have Untied States finally backing up Sunnis"....

    Untied? More like unhinged.

    SummerSausage , Jun 12, 2017 9:19 AM

    Obama and Hillary supported ISIS with money and arms. That, after all, was why the CIA and State Department were in Benghazi - with Qatar supposedly paying for the arms shipments.

    Obama was sure to send pallets of cash to Iran before he left office.

    Iran was a secular country before the return of the exiles Islamic extremists - who, by the way, lived in Paris during their exile.

    Women wore western dress and enjoyed the freedom of western societies.

    President Trump is telling the Arab states to clean up their own mess with increasingly less help from the US. Good for Trump. Good for us.

    Evil Liberals - SummerSausage , Jun 12, 2017 10:58 AM

    "President Trump is telling the Arab states to clean up their own mess with increasingly less help from the US. Good for Trump. Good for us."

    Bullshit - SA is biggest terrorist in MENA next to US. The arms deal Trump executed with SA (who has been supporting ISIS) is an indication that Regime Change for Syria is still working.

    The US is on the Syrian border with troops and Jordanian troops and Tanks/Arty and attacking SAA affiliates - this is more proof US is helping ISIS and SA.

    Reaper , Jun 12, 2017 8:50 AM

    Why weren't any US officers punished for "mistaken" drops of supplies to ISIS? How did ISIS get all those new Toyotas? How come the US doesn't destroy ISIS convoys of oil?

    Hate Iran is an emotional argument. No true American trusts Iran is the No True Scotsman argument. Anything from Iran is bad is a genetic argument. All are fallacious. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/poster

    Truth has no ethnic origin. Please, Iran, for the betterment of America reveal any duplicitous acts of our leaders.

    gordo53 , Jun 12, 2017 8:37 AM

    The US has been covertly funding ISIS for years. ISIS is the US proxy for regime change in Syria. Remember videos of all those white Toyota pickup trucks ISIS was running around in? Guess who funded those. None other than US intelligence with a little help from our NATO friends in Turkey.

    Northern Flicker , Jun 12, 2017 7:55 AM

    Tulsi Gabbard's Stop Arming Terrorists Act has about 10 backers in Congress

    "For years, the U.S. government has been supporting armed militant groups working directly with and often under the command of terrorist groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda in their fight to overthrow the Syrian government.

    https://gabbard.house.gov/news/press-releases/gabbards-stop-arming-terrorists-act-introduced-senate

    deoxy - Northern Flicker , Jun 12, 2017 8:51 AM

    from the first hyperlink in your post, "The legislation is cosponsored by Reps. Peter Welch (D-VT-AL), Barbara Lee (D-CA-13), Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA-48), and Thomas Massie (R-KY-04), and supported by the Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) and the U.S. Peace Council."

    I never thought I'd see Barbara Lee and Dana Rohrabacher on the same side of anything.

    Gunga , Jun 12, 2017 7:30 AM

    We know the Obama administration and Hillary state department facilitated the rise of ISIS and nurtured it's growth. One question of many as we consider this crime against humanity ,,did they consider the Christian genocide in the middle east perpetrated by their ISIS project a feature or a bug ?

    RagaMuffin , Jun 12, 2017 7:19 AM

    Dana Rohrabacher is trying to legitimize prior, previously denied, US support of ISIS. Simple as that?

    . . . _ _ _ . . . , Jun 12, 2017 6:41 AM

    "If the USA is in fact funding ISIS..."

    If?

    And what about Turkey? Erdogan started the Syrian conflict with mercs.

    Got The Wrong No - . . . _ _ _ . . . , Jun 12, 2017 7:09 AM

    Wasn't ISIS Oil Convoys going in and out of Turkey?

    . . . _ _ _ . . . - Got The Wrong No , Jun 12, 2017 7:49 AM

    From Turkey to Israel. Yup.

    ross81 , Jun 12, 2017 6:11 AM

    "Isn't it a good thing for us to have United States finally backing up Sunnis who will attack Hezbollah and the Shiite threat to us?" By "us" he means Israel of course. if Washington wasn't occupied by the Jewish lobby, the likes of Hezbollah, Iran and Syria would be natural allies of the US against Wahhabi/Salafist terror and their state sponsors

    [Jun 17, 2017] Langleys Jihadists: From the Mujaheddin to ISIL

    Jun 09, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

    x | Jun 9, 2017 10:47:10 AM | 6

    Trump has large investments in KSA including golf courses; Obama used 'ISIL' (rather than 'ISIS') to piss off Netanyahu, and Trump admin revered it immediately on gaining office; Benghazi '9/11' (9:40 p.m., September 11, 2012) was a botched gun running exercise by the then US 'Ambassador'; ...

    "Langleys Jihadists: From the Mujaheddin to ISIL - Wayne Madsen , #369"

    langleys-jihadists-from-the-mujaheddin-to-isil-wayne-madsen

    [Jun 15, 2017] Mattis Attacks on Syrian Forces Were Self-Defense by Jason Ditz

    Jun 13, 2017 | news.antiwar.com
    Says US Will Continue to Protect Troops Inside Syria

    Speaking about a number of recent US attacks on pro-government forces in Syria, Secretary of Defense James Mattis insisted that the attacks were simply "self-defense" aimed at protecting US ground troops positioned inside Syria, and that the US would continue to do so.

    The US has launched multiple attacks, mostly targeting Shi'ite militias in southern Syria's Daraa Province, who they accused of getting too close to a base belonging to the rebels at al-Tanf, a base at which some US forces are deployed. The militias have mostly been fighting al-Qaeda and ISIS in the area, but the US insists they were a threat to American ground troops.

    Syria's government has already addressed this claim, noting that the US troops were never invited into Syria in the first place and aren't authorized to hold that base, let alone to attack anti-ISIS forces for getting too close to their base. They've accused the US of using the strikes to prevent ISIS from losing ground to the government.

    The claims that the US are just reacting defensively ring hollow at any rate, as the Pentagon has openly confirmed in recent weeks that the US have been building up their troop numbers in southern Syria explicitly to confront the Shi'ite militias.

    [Jun 15, 2017] Pentagon Agrees To Sell $12 Billion In F-15s To Qatar Zero Hedge

    Notable quotes:
    "... Read Starikov... All these recent weapons deals, and many before is nothing more than what's called Reparations and Contributions. ..."
    "... It's an old deal http://defense-update.com/20141222_qatari_patriots.html ..."
    "... You know I am not a fan of the military industrial complex but you have to be in awe of these people. Trump sells 350 billion to SA which includes the best automatic self destruct fighter every engineered by the U.S. and then sells F15s to their obvious rivals in Quatar lol. ..."
    Jun 14, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
    Pentagon Agrees To Sell $12 Billion In F-15s To Qatar Tyler Durden Jun 14, 2017 4:35 PM 0 SHARES Remember when Trump called on Qatar to stop funding terrorism, claiming credit for and endorsing the decision of Gulf nations to isolate their small neighbor (where the most important US airbase in the middle east is located),even as US Cabinet officials said their blockade is hurting the campaign against ISIS. You should: it took place just 5 days ago.

    "We had a decision to make," Trump said, describing conversations with Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries. "Do we take the easy road or do we finally take a hard but necessary action? We have to stop the funding of terrorism." Also last week, Trump triumphantly announced on twitter that "during my recent trip to the Middle East I stated that there can no longer be funding of Radical Ideology. Leaders pointed to Qatar - look!"

    Well, Qatar funding terrorism apparently is not a problem when it comes to Qatar funding the US military industrial complex , because just two weeks after Trump signed a record, $110 billion weapons deal with Saudi Arabia, moments ago Bloomberg reported that Qatar will also buy up to 36 F-15 jets from the Pentagon for $12 billion .... even as a political crisis in the Gulf leaves the Middle East nation isolated by its neighbors and criticized by President Donald Trump for supporting terrorism, according to three people with knowledge of the accord.

    According to the Pentagon, the sale will give Qatar a "state of the art" capability, not to mention the illusion that it can defend itself in a war with Saudi Arabia.

    If nothing else, Uncle Sam sure is an equal-opportunity arms dealer, and best of all, with the new fighter planes, Qatar will be able to at least put on a token fight when Saudi Arabia invades in hopes of sending the price of oil surging now that every other "strategy" has failed.

    To be sure, the sale comes at an opportune time: just days after Qatar put its military on the highest state of alert, and scrambled its tanks . All 16 of them. Maybe the world's wealthiest nation realized it's time beef up its defensive capabilities?

    Qatar's defense minister will meet with Pentagon chief Jim Mattis on Wednesday to seal the agreement, Bloomberg reported citing people who spoke on condition of anonymity because the sale hasn't been announced. Last year, congress approved the sale of up to 72 F-15s in an agreement valued at as much as $21 billion but that deal took place before the recent political crisis in the region.

    It is unclear what the Saudi reaction will be to the news that Trump is arming its latest nemesis. If our thesis that Riyadh is hoping for Qatar to escalate the nest leg of the conflict is correct , then the Saudis should be delighted.

    nope-1004 - Alt RightGirl , Jun 14, 2017 4:43 PM

    Oh c'mon y'all. This is nothing new. These are the same synchophants that (somehow, oops!) created ISIS and then go in and bomb them. WTF did you expect? That they'd actually do what they say?

    Cognitive Dissonance - nope-1004 , Jun 14, 2017 4:52 PM

    A big shout out to Boeing Military. Hookers and blow tonight in the exec suite. BTW these planes aren't sitting in inventory ready to be delivered. So any conflict in the next few years won't have to worry about these planes.

    That is unless the US or some other buyer agrees to step aside and allow Qatar to take their place at the end of the assembly line.

    Ahmeexnal - Cognitive Dissonance , Jun 14, 2017 4:52 PM

    Classic Sun Tzu move by Trump.

    ParkAveFlasher - Ahmeexnal , Jun 14, 2017 4:56 PM

    Now, are these the planes already parked in that airbase in Qatar that should be evac'd?

    Mr. Universe - ParkAveFlasher , Jun 14, 2017 5:00 PM

    That should about wrap it up on who is in charge of the Deep state. Backing both sides of a potential conflict and making sure everyone has enough arms to blow each to smitherines. Sounds like the old Red Shield tricks are still the best ones. Long live central bankers, after they have been thrown into a burning pit of sulfer.

    PrayingMantis - ParkAveFlasher , Jun 14, 2017 5:06 PM

    ... >>> ... " ... " We had a decision to make ," Trump said ... " ...

    ... lest we forget, Trump's a businessman ... sell to all buyers ... the (((Red Shield))) way ... and voila ... #maga profits!!! ...

    HowdyDoody - Ahmeexnal , Jun 14, 2017 5:04 PM

    They did the same with Iran and Iraq - for some, a very profitable bloodbath.

    fx - HowdyDoody , Jun 14, 2017 5:37 PM

    Absolutely. But, oh, these damned Iranians. They simply resisted the USA's boy Saddam and fought back.

    That failure to comply with OUR orders sealed his faith.

    Weapons of mass destruction. Well, we delivered them to him. chemical weapons to kill all the Iranians. So we KNEW they must have been there. We just didn't expect that he really used them all up against Iran and later on (the remaining few) against the curds. What a bastard. After all that WE did for Saddam, he didn't deliver. Fuck him.

    Speaking of non-delivery, why has our newest boy, Poroshenko, not yet taken Moscow? So, fuck him, too! And fuck the EU.

    And speaking of that, where is Monica, when one needs her? And let's have some Pizza...

    FoggyWorld - Cognitive Dissonance , Jun 14, 2017 6:29 PM

    That could happen and did on many F-18 sales where we in the US in effect packed the parts into glorified Heath kits and sent them to the buying countries who did their own labor. Also sent them the testing equipment and every other thing they needed so all we got were a few spare piece parts at a slightly lower price. The labor went to the purchasing country.

    gmj - nuubee , Jun 14, 2017 4:47 PM

    That right there is some wizard-level salesmanship. And I can assure you that these weapons systems have "ALL" of the capabilities of the ones in our US arsenal, hahaha. And furthermore, they cannot be messed with by remote control by the boys at the Pentagon, just in case things get a little messy or embarassing. Nosiree. What you see is what you get. Yes, Lord.

    omi - nuubee , Jun 14, 2017 5:41 PM

    Read Starikov... All these recent weapons deals, and many before is nothing more than what's called Reparations and Contributions.

    11th_Harmonic - nuubee , Jun 14, 2017 7:29 PM

    I'm at a loss for words anymore, so I'll just greenie your post and move the fuck on...

    Great Deceivah - nuubee , Jun 14, 2017 7:45 PM

    War is our Business and Business is GOOD!!

    Nona Yobiznes , Jun 14, 2017 4:39 PM

    Destabilize, arm both sides, and... profit!

    yrad - Nona Yobiznes , Jun 14, 2017 4:42 PM

    Rothschild playbook

    logicalman - yrad , Jun 14, 2017 5:01 PM

    Can't beat supplying boh sides in a conflict if you want to make a 'killing'!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiN1xHaNDJ0

    Got The Wrong No - logicalman , Jun 14, 2017 5:34 PM

    This deal reminds me of the Chevy Chase movie Deal Of The Century.

    PhiBetaZappa , Jun 14, 2017 4:48 PM

    There's no business like war business, there's no business we know.......

    MIC ho's gotta earn to keep pimp daddy .gov in bling.

    logicalman - PhiBetaZappa , Jun 14, 2017 5:03 PM

    Arms companies can make more money in a day of war than in a year of peace.

    serotonindumptruck , Jun 14, 2017 4:41 PM

    "By way of deception, thou shalt do war"

    --Mossad

    TheDude1224 , Jun 14, 2017 4:43 PM

    This quick money grab from Qatar is just what the government needed to help with our infrastructure problems, Obamacare, and subsidizing Elon Musk.

    Soph , Jun 14, 2017 4:43 PM

    Looks like Trump is just selling to whoever want to buy. What the hell, why not, he's shown himself to be a sell out. Might as well be the best damn arms dealer you can buy.

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0399295/

    Nightjar , Jun 14, 2017 4:44 PM

    It's an old deal http://defense-update.com/20141222_qatari_patriots.html

    Zepper , Jun 14, 2017 4:44 PM

    You know I am not a fan of the military industrial complex but you have to be in awe of these people. Trump sells 350 billion to SA which includes the best automatic self destruct fighter every engineered by the U.S. and then sells F15s to their obvious rivals in Quatar lol.

    I personally think the F15s will utterly destroy the f35s because all they have to do to down an f35 is keep it flying, it will eventual blow up on its own.

    Well like I said before, let the body count be super high... and let all the fucking crazy suicide bombers head back home to kill themselves.

    As Bernie, the man behind the man that shot up a bunch of congressmen said... Its going to be HUUUUUGE... the war thats coming that is... I wonder how many oil tankers will be sunk?

    Volaille de Bresse , Jun 14, 2017 4:50 PM

    Saudis not happy, tearing the contracts they signed with Trump in 10 9 8s... I'm sure Putin and China are gonna profit from Trump 12-bil blunder.

    decentralisedsc... , Jun 14, 2017 4:52 PM

    Almost all the world's economic and political problems revolve around the hegemony of a global corporate cartel, which is headquartered in the US because this is where their dominant military force resides. The US Constitution is therefore the "kingpin" of an all-inclusive global financial empire. These fictitious entities now own the USA and command its military infrastructure by virtue of the Federal Reserve Corporation, regulatory capture, MSM propaganda, and congressional lobbying.

    The Founders had to fight a bloody Revolutionary War to win our right to incorporate as a nation – the USA. But then, for whatever reason, our Founders granted the greediest businessmen among them unrestricted corporate charters with enough potential capital & power to compete with the individual states, smaller sovereign nations, and eventually to buy out the USA itself. The only way The People can regain our sovereignty as a constitutional republic now is to severely curtail the privileges of any corporation doing business here. To remain sovereign we have to stop granting corporate charters to just any "suit" that comes along without fulfilling a defined social value in return. The "Divine Right Of Kings" should not apply to fictitious entities just because they are "Too Big To Fail". We can't afford to privatize our Treasury to transnational banks anymore. Government must be held responsible only to the electorate, not fictitious entities; and banks must be held responsible to the government if we are ever to restore sanity, much less prosperity, to the world.

    It was a loophole in our Constitution that allowed corporate charters to be so easily obtained that a swamp of corruption inevitably flooded our entire economic system. It is a swamp that can't be drained at this point because the Constitution doesn't provide a drain. This 28 th amendment is intended to install that drain so Congress can pull the plug ASAP. As a matter of political practicality we must rely on the Article 5 option to do this, for which the electorate will need overwhelming consensus beforehand. Seriously; an Article 5 Constitutional Convention is rapidly becoming our only sensible option.

    This is what I think it will take to save the world; and nobody gets hurt: 28 th Amendment

    28 th Amendment:

    Corporations are not persons in any sense of the word and shall be granted only those rights and privileges that Congress deems necessary for the well-being of the People. Congress shall provide legislation defining the terms and conditions of corporate charters according to their purpose; which shall include, but are not limited to:

    1, prohibitions against any corporation; a, owning another corporation; b, becoming economically indispensable or monopolistic; or c, otherwise distorting the general economy;

    2, prohibitions against any form of interference in the affairs of; a, government, b, education, c, news media; or d, healthcare, and

    3, provisions for; a, the auditing of standardized, current, and transparent account books; b, the establishment of state and municipal banking; and c, civil and criminal penalties to be suffered by corporate executives for violation of the terms of a corporate charter.

    [Jun 14, 2017] Are We Nearing Civil War by Patrick J. Buchanan

    Notable quotes:
    "... As Newt Gingrich said Sunday: "Look at who Mueller's starting to hire. (T)hese are people that look to me like they're setting up to go after Trump including people, by the way, who have been reprimanded for hiding from the defense information into major cases. "This is going to be a witch hunt." ..."
    "... Another example. According to Daily Kos, Trump planned a swift lifting of sanctions on Russia after inauguration and a summit meeting with Vladimir Putin to prevent a second Cold War. The State Department was tasked with working out the details. Instead, says Daniel Fried, the coordinator for sanctions policy, he received "panicky" calls of "Please, my God, can you stop this?" Operatives at State, disloyal to the president and hostile to the Russia policy on which he had been elected, collaborated with elements in Congress to sabotage any detente. They succeeded. ..."
    "... Trump will deal with it by bombing Iran and Syria thereby starting a war with Russia. It was always about the Democrats not being sure that Donald Trump had the vigor and enthusiasm to destroy Christian Russia and Shia Muslim Iran for Greater Israel. Honestly, why is Trump worth defending? ..."
    "... since they've only found Reality Winner thus far either they are progressing slowly or the people in charge of the investigation are actively sabotaging it and protecting some of the leakers. ..."
    "... Trump doesn't even have the good sense or guts to tell his air-head daughter to shut up and knit some mittens for her kids, or to have his shyster son in law get out of government, and mind his own business, which is apparently shady financial and real estate deals and supporting zion. Trump was useful to defeat Hillary, and now that he has served his purpose, the search for a real American patriot and nationalist leader needs to intensify. Trump was never that person. ..."
    "... It is hard to believe how naive or stupid Trump has been. He should have fired Comey and hundreds of others in the deep state when he raised his hand from the bible. ..."
    "... His involvement in world affairs is stupid and dangerous. He is belligerent and menacing to Russia, Iran, China and middle-eastern countries that Israel doesn't like. This country's existence is at stake and needs all the attention of this administration. Our entanglement in world affairs is not warranted. ..."
    "... "Trump has had many accomplishments since his election." None of significance. ..."
    "... I want him to stop tweeting and pay attention to the consequences of his actions. I don't think he had any idea that the country he was bragging about ostracizing is the host to the largest US military base in the Middle East. Rex Tillerson had to remind him of that. ..."
    "... So far, Trump has not shown the requisite amount of intelligence or courage, necessary to take on, let alone defeat, the forces arrayed against him. ..."
    "... His first 100 days may have sealed his fate. Rather than take the initiative, and launch investigations into Mrs. Clinton's criminal empire, keep all his promises on immigration i.e. end DACA and reinstitute internal immigration enforcement, begin building the wall, etc. He gave up all of his potential leverage and got nothing in return. So much for the Art of the Deal. ..."
    "... Trump would have to be a canny, electrifying, compelling and savvy figure to have even a chance. He's not. We never thought he would be, mind you; we just knew he'd be better than Hillary. Meanwhile, the Empire Strikes Back. It's not going to be pretty. ..."
    "... The people of the Swamp are hostage to the Devil. ..."
    Jun 14, 2017 | www.unz.com

    President Trump may be chief of state, head of government and commander in chief, but his administration is shot through with disloyalists plotting to bring him down.

    We are approaching something of a civil war where the capital city seeks the overthrow of the sovereign and its own restoration.

    Thus far, it is a nonviolent struggle, though street clashes between pro- and anti-Trump forces are increasingly marked by fistfights and brawls. Police are having difficulty keeping people apart. A few have been arrested carrying concealed weapons.

    That the objective of this city is to bring Trump down via a deep state-media coup is no secret. Few deny it.

    Last week, fired Director of the FBI James Comey, a successor to J. Edgar Hoover, admitted under oath that he used a cutout to leak to The New York Times an Oval Office conversation with the president. Goal: have the Times story trigger the appointment of a special prosecutor to bring down the president. Comey wanted a special prosecutor to target Trump, despite his knowledge, from his own FBI investigation, that Trump was innocent of the pervasive charge that he colluded with the Kremlin in the hacking of the DNC.

    Comey's deceit was designed to enlist the police powers of the state to bring down his president. And it worked. For the special counsel named, with broad powers to pursue Trump, is Comey's friend and predecessor at the FBI, Robert Mueller.

    As Newt Gingrich said Sunday: "Look at who Mueller's starting to hire. (T)hese are people that look to me like they're setting up to go after Trump including people, by the way, who have been reprimanded for hiding from the defense information into major cases. "This is going to be a witch hunt."

    Another example. According to Daily Kos, Trump planned a swift lifting of sanctions on Russia after inauguration and a summit meeting with Vladimir Putin to prevent a second Cold War. The State Department was tasked with working out the details. Instead, says Daniel Fried, the coordinator for sanctions policy, he received "panicky" calls of "Please, my God, can you stop this?" Operatives at State, disloyal to the president and hostile to the Russia policy on which he had been elected, collaborated with elements in Congress to sabotage any detente. They succeeded.

    "It would have been a win-win for Moscow," said Tom Malinowski of State, who boasted last week of his role in blocking a rapprochement with Russia. State employees sabotaged one of the principal policies for which Americans had voted, and they substituted their own.

    Not in memory have there been so many leaks to injure a president from within his own government, and not just political leaks, but leaks of confidential, classified and secret documents. The leaks are coming out of the supposedly secure investigative and intelligence agencies of the U.S. government.

    The media, the beneficiaries of these leaks, are giving cover to those breaking the law. The real criminal "collusion" in Washington is between Big Media and the deep state, colluding to destroy a president they detest and to sink the policies they oppose.

    Yet another example is the unfolding "unmasking" scandal.

    While all the evidence is not yet in, it appears an abnormal number of conversations between Trump associates and Russians were intercepted by U.S. intelligence agencies.

    On orders higher up, the conversations were transcribed, and, contrary to law, the names of Trump associates unmasked. Then those transcripts, with names revealed, were spread to all 16 agencies of the intel community at the direction of Susan Rice, and with the possible knowledge of Barack Obama, assuring some would be leaked after Trump became president. The leak of Gen. Michael Flynn's conversation with the Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, after Obama imposed sanctions on Russia for the hacking of the DNC, may have been a product of the unmasking operation. The media hit on Flynn cost him the National Security Council post.

    ... ... ...

    Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, "Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever."

    FusionPoweredMeatstick June 13, 2017 at 5:45 am GMT

    Comey wanted Mueller in there, and Mueller is doing what he will, because Mueller is there primarily to PROTECT Obama and Clinton and their vast left wing cabal, just like Comey did before he was canned.

    Mucking up Trump's life and those of Trump's people in the process is merely a sweet bonus. Not to mention the excellent distraction/diversion value that provides.

    exiled off mainstreet June 13, 2017 at 6:16 am GMT

    Trump needs to go after the deep state and quit attempting to mollify it with actions such as support of Saudi terrorists. It is a fight to the finish and if the power structure wins, our days are numbered.

    Realist June 13, 2017 at 7:29 am GMT

    Most people in this country don't know what is going on and wouldn't care if they did. Trump and this country are experiencing democracy's waning time in action. And it ain't pretty.

    MEexpert June 13, 2017 at 8:09 am GMT

    Trump is surrounded by judases. His own hand-picked people are not loyal to him, including his vice-president. Trump hasn't shown any cojones that every one expected from him. One little crisis and he has surrendered himself to the neocons. Session is a weak man. He couldn't even stand up to his old buddies who showed no respect to a fellow senator.

    We are approaching something of a civil war where the capital city seeks the overthrow of the sovereign and its own restoration.

    We already have a civil war. It may be bloodless but it is a civil war which it appears Trump is destined to lose unless he shows some courage and brains to turn the scale against the insurgents.

    He should start by firing Rosenstein (sp) and Mueller and dare the congress to impeach him. He should take his case to the voters that had elected him and urge them to call on congress, especially, the Republicans to support him. He should go back to his pre-election agenda and start pulling the US out of the Middle East and make friendly overtures towards Russia. He also needs to rein in the intelligence commmunity and tell them to get off the Iran case and do some real intelligence work. Stop supporting all insurgents in the Middle East no matter what their affiliation.

    From the beginning I have posted on this site that Trump should cancel Obama's executive order allowing NSA to share its intelligence with other agencies unless they officially request it. I can't believe he hasn't done this.

    Finally, I thought by now he should have learned that he cannot govern through the Tweeter. He needs to get off of that binge and get serious. So far he does not have any coherent domestic or foreign policy. Bowing down to Israel and Saudi Arabia and do their bidding does not make a foreign policy. One is threatening him while the other is bribing him, neither is a true friend to the US. Except for the supreme court justice position, Trump has nothing to show for his domestic achievements. Republicans need to act as the majority party. They cannot let the Democrats run the congressional business.

    This cannot last for ever.

    hammerfist June 13, 2017 at 9:36 am GMT

    Great article succinct overview. It's a coup we are witnessing

    War for Blair Mountain June 13, 2017 at 9:47 am GMT

    Pat

    Trump will deal with it by bombing Iran and Syria thereby starting a war with Russia. It was always about the Democrats not being sure that Donald Trump had the vigor and enthusiasm to destroy Christian Russia and Shia Muslim Iran for Greater Israel. Honestly, why is Trump worth defending?

    War for Blair Mountain June 13, 2017 at 10:04 am GMT

    @War for Blair Mountain

    Moreover Donald Trump is hellbent on using the Native Born White Working Class Teeanage Male Population as canon fodder Greater Israel in the Middle East. Trump is a vile, evil creature who will rot in hell for an eternity for doing this .

    The Alarmist June 13, 2017 at 11:24 am GMT

    " will not relent until they see him impeached or resigning in disgrace."

    As if they're going to stop there. Those breaches of WH security a while back were the Deep State's warning shot, and you see how quickly Trump about-faced in the ME.

    KenH June 13, 2017 at 11:41 am GMT

    @MEexpert

    From the beginning I have posted on this site that Trump should cancel Obama's executive order allowing NSA to share its intelligence with other agencies unless they officially request it. I can't believe he hasn't done this.

    I agree, but I believe he's kept the EO in place since it's easier to find the leakers this way. But since they've only found Reality Winner thus far either they are progressing slowly or the people in charge of the investigation are actively sabotaging it and protecting some of the leakers.

    Trump better cancel the EO if and when the find all the leakers and if he doesn't he'll unmask himself as a fraud who's smitten by absolute government power. Defense of civil liberties has never been his strong suit.

    Anonymous June 13, 2017 at 2:52 pm GMT

    @exiled off mainstreet

    Kill Deep State by shutting off funding. Unclassify the whole intelligence budget. Then shut it down. Move the civilian intelligence functions to the military. Return FBI to a domestic agency covering federal crimes, not working closely with CIA or accompanying U.S. military in raids in Afghanistan and Middle East.

    OilcanFloyd June 13, 2017 at 4:16 pm GMT

    Trump doesn't even have the good sense or guts to tell his air-head daughter to shut up and knit some mittens for her kids, or to have his shyster son in law get out of government, and mind his own business, which is apparently shady financial and real estate deals and supporting zion. Trump was useful to defeat Hillary, and now that he has served his purpose, the search for a real American patriot and nationalist leader needs to intensify. Trump was never that person.

    I think the nation could come unglued, but I don't see the military joining in, at least not on the side of nationalists against the government. The average American soldier seems to be a PC brainwashed, globalist stooge, and the officer class appears to be made up of weak-minded careerists and yes men, little different from the soldiers, so I don't see much help coming from them. Add that to the fact that the government is trying to pass laws giving amnesty to illegals who will join a U.S. military that already has many soldiers of foreign birth or roots, and I don't see much help coming from the military, which seems to become more distant from the population as time goes by.

    Realist June 13, 2017 at 4:21 pm GMT

    It is hard to believe how naive or stupid Trump has been. He should have fired Comey and hundreds of others in the deep state when he raised his hand from the bible.

    He should have confronted those in his party that are out to destroy him Why did he waste his time interviewing loser like Romney? Was he serious about their possible usefulness? Trump doesn't seem to know that he is under assault. He needs to start some serious ass kicking.

    His involvement in world affairs is stupid and dangerous. He is belligerent and menacing to Russia, Iran, China and middle-eastern countries that Israel doesn't like. This country's existence is at stake and needs all the attention of this administration. Our entanglement in world affairs is not warranted.

    "Trump has had many accomplishments since his election." None of significance.

    Realist June 13, 2017 at 4:26 pm GMT

    @Corvinus "Idiot."

    At least now you are signing your comments.

    gda June 13, 2017 at 5:50 pm GMT

    @MEexpert If you think he has "nothing to show for his domestic achievements" and that he "does not have any coherent domestic or foreign policy" it suggests to me that you're either a Democratic troll, not paying attention, or just plain ignorant.

    One example – by pulling out of the Paris "Accord" he has saved the US around $100 trillion over the next 8o years, as well as at least one, if not more, percentage points in GDP growth over those years. Not to speak of millions of jobs. In 10 years time, this will no doubt be recognized as his signature achievement.

    You can easily find the myriad of other domestic and foreign policy achievements if you really want. But its clear you really don't want.

    I find it amusing that you would side with the enemy in recommending he stop tweeting. How many before you said he would never win the nomination, then he would never win the Presidency, BECAUSE he couldn't stop tweeting. They ALL were just as wrong as you are now.

    bluedog June 13, 2017 at 6:46 pm GMT

    @Corvinus

    And of course your guessing or assuming when you really don't know war is hell so they say, and we are masters at starting them killing little children, what was the count in Iraq 100,000 500,000 thousand and the masters said it was worth it the problem with the American people including you is its alright as long as it happens in some other country but cry a river at the thoughts it could happen here, now who's the idiot?

    MEexpert June 13, 2017 at 11:53 pm GMT

    @gda

    How many before you said he would never win the nomination, then he would never win the Presidency,

    I don't know, because I never said it. LOL. I voted for Trump. So much for your insight into my motives.

    One example – by pulling out of the Paris "Accord" he has saved the US around $100 trillion over the next 8o years, as well as at least one, if not more, percentage points in GDP growth over those years. Not to speak of millions of jobs. In 10 years time, this will no doubt be recognized as his signature achievement.

    All this is in the future and unknown. $100 trillions sounds great but who came up with this outrageous number. I am talking about now. If he ends the war, the payoff will be immediate with savings in material cost and lives.

    I want him to stop tweeting and pay attention to the consequences of his actions. I don't think he had any idea that the country he was bragging about ostracizing is the host to the largest US military base in the Middle East. Rex Tillerson had to remind him of that.

    Sandy Berger's Socks June 14, 2017 at 12:50 am GMT

    So far, Trump has not shown the requisite amount of intelligence or courage, necessary to take on, let alone defeat, the forces arrayed against him.

    His first 100 days may have sealed his fate. Rather than take the initiative, and launch investigations into Mrs. Clinton's criminal empire, keep all his promises on immigration i.e. end DACA and reinstitute internal immigration enforcement, begin building the wall, etc. He gave up all of his potential leverage and got nothing in return. So much for the Art of the Deal.

    Trump created a vacuum by failing to keep his promises, and his enemies are now using it as a snipers nest.

    Mika-Non June 14, 2017 at 6:00 am GMT

    @Travis That's the essence of it. We can't and won't have a civil war because a civil war requires at least two sides to fight it, and both political parties, all of the institutions, government apparatus, mass media, corporations, and the ruling tribe are on the same side.

    Opposing this is (or was) maybe half the population on a very good day, but what we're seeing is that even half of the population is pretty much powerless in the face of the Empire's juggernaut.

    In my view, the Republicans deserve our special ire because they were in a position to help bring about real change, with this singular opportunity, and they wanted no part of it. Fortunately, their party is toast and we'll enjoy a cataclysm before anyone takes their place. The Democrats? We knew what to expect from them, and still do. They are wrecking this nation systematically.

    Trump would have to be a canny, electrifying, compelling and savvy figure to have even a chance. He's not. We never thought he would be, mind you; we just knew he'd be better than Hillary. Meanwhile, the Empire Strikes Back. It's not going to be pretty.

    anonymous June 14, 2017 at 12:06 pm GMT

    The evil empire owes the world a cold refreshing glass of schadenfreude. So, on with it then!!

    anonymous June 14, 2017 at 12:27 pm GMT
    @exiled off mainstreet Super-Mega-Evil Imperial terrorists supporting terror from all sides. You think the imperial terrorists can be defeated?

    anonymous June 14, 2017 at 12:32 pm GMT
    @MEexpert " neither is a true friend to the US" You imply that the evil empire can actually be a true friend to others which would be laughable, right? If not, how do you expect others to be just that??

    The people of the Swamp are hostage to the Devil.

    [Jun 13, 2017] After US intevertions the entire Middle East situation is now a gigantic mess

    Notable quotes:
    "... I know the Saudi's are running out of oil (peak oil for them). I don't know what the Israelis are trying to do, since they have little more than a huge dessert. When the oil runs out, the Oil Kings will no longer be able to provide their subjects with a miserable "basic income". ..."
    "... For the US, it really looks like "War Is Our Only Product". It would be much nicer if the Oil Kings would just cash in their chips and get out. But NO: They have to trash the whole place first. ..."
    "... Like James says, it ain't over yet. The west employs some sneaky and nefarious trickery and, when that fails, an all-out show of R2P fireworks. Let's hope that the Pentagon can rein in the CIA and Trump can see the writing on the wall and DO THE RIGHT THING, which is really the only option. ..."
    "... I feel like my understanding of the world and the nature of empires has come of age during the Syrian War. Much like the Iran-Iraq War, it has left generations of Arabs and Persians and Druze and Kurds utterly depleted yet, in the end, hopeful for their future, having, hopefully, defeated a great evil. It doesn't mean much, but one day I hope that I can visit Syria's Monument to their fallen and offer my most grave and sincere apology as a westerner. ..."
    "... Simple version: There were many non-Syrian Kurd economic immigrants in the early 1960's that were trying to settle in Syria - no different than the millions of illegal Mexican, South American and Asian immigrants in the U.S. today. A heavy-handed Kurd census by the Syrian government in 1962 attempted to identify legal Syrian citizen Kurds from illegal immigrant Kurds. That left about 20% of the (then) Syrian Kurdish population - about 300K - stateless non-citizens. ..."
    "... Syria made a sort of botched effort in 2011 to rectify the problem for the legitimate Syrian Kurds (of the 300K) previously considered undocumented, but the status of only a few thousand was ever settled. Far more needs to be done. Despite that, there are still several hundred thousand or more illegal Kurdish immigrants inside Syria today that Syria had no legal obligation to grant citizenship. A moral obligation perhaps, but that's up to the Syrian people to decide. ..."
    "... It was western MSM that painted this as widespread Kurdish oppression by Assad's cruel regime, denying any and all Kurds their Syrian citizenship. The same western MSM that is shocked that Trump won't automatically declare citizenship to the eight million or so illegal, undocumented immigrants currently in the U.S. ..."
    "... The west has also exaggerated the Kurdish rights issues by repeatedly saying that Kurds could not use Kurdish or teach in Kurdish in schools. This is no different than Spanish-speaking immigrants in the U.S. demanding that schools teach them in Spanish and all government services be made available to them in Spanish because that's the language they want to speak, not English. Kurds were never prohibited from opening their own schools and teaching their kids in Kurdish. They wanted the Syrian government to provide these services and the Syrian government refused. ..."
    Jun 13, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
    blues | Jun 13, 2017 3:18:02 PM | 3

    Really the entire Middle East situation, everything there except perhaps Iran, is one gigantic mess that makes no sense. I know the Saudi's are running out of oil (peak oil for them). I don't know what the Israelis are trying to do, since they have little more than a huge dessert. When the oil runs out, the Oil Kings will no longer be able to provide their subjects with a miserable "basic income".

    For the US, it really looks like "War Is Our Only Product". It would be much nicer if the Oil Kings would just cash in their chips and get out. But NO: They have to trash the whole place first.

    plantman | Jun 13, 2017 4:22:05 PM | 7

    Excellent report, but a bit too optimistic, I think.

    The US will be forced to move North from al Tanf in order to connect their forces and create one large landmass consistent with the US plan to balkanize Syria and establish a giant safe zone in the east. That means the possibility of a clash between Russia and the US is now greater than ever.

    The Kurds don't really want Raqqa as part of their future homeland. It is just part of the deal they made with Washington. What they want is a contiguous state along the Turkish border.

    In a reasonable world, the end would be in sight (as you say) Unfortuantely, this is going to drag on for some time. It's not Syria's future that is playing out before our eyes, but the Empire's. That's gonna take a while.

    NemesisCalling | Jun 13, 2017 4:32:53 PM | 9
    Like James says, it ain't over yet. The west employs some sneaky and nefarious trickery and, when that fails, an all-out show of R2P fireworks. Let's hope that the Pentagon can rein in the CIA and Trump can see the writing on the wall and DO THE RIGHT THING, which is really the only option.

    I feel like my understanding of the world and the nature of empires has come of age during the Syrian War. Much like the Iran-Iraq War, it has left generations of Arabs and Persians and Druze and Kurds utterly depleted yet, in the end, hopeful for their future, having, hopefully, defeated a great evil. It doesn't mean much, but one day I hope that I can visit Syria's Monument to their fallen and offer my most grave and sincere apology as a westerner.

    May history continue to sing their praises and so let us always tell the truth about Syria.

    Thanks to b, too, for laying the truth down with great care.

    AtaBrit | Jun 13, 2017 4:46:17 PM | 11
    No one wants a Kurdish state in the region despite support from several fronts, and the Kurds are aware of this. The Syrian Kurds are in a very difficult position and not one that will be easily resolved, but they have a good negotiating hand, in my opinion. That their fate has been sealed on the basis of a tweet claiming support for Saudi (US ally) against Qatar (Jihadist financier (kurdish enemy) and ex-US ally) is stretching it ... Isn't it the case that everyone is being pressured by either the US or Saudi into showing support?
    Igor Bundy | Jun 13, 2017 5:31:50 PM | 13
    What food negotiating position does the kurds have? They hold the dams built by the Syrian state. The hold a lot of land which are not theirs only reinforcing the notion to most Syrians that the kurds are invaders. The kurds are almost the same number of other minorities in the area. And this is after ethnic cleansing the areas and driving off most CHRISTIANS from the area. If the kurds play with the dams, there will be open hostilities.. Other wise they will just sit there.. SAA just took over some of the most valuable oil and gas fields inside Syria. Syrian border guards left the buffer zone and there is hostilities between turkish fsa and ypg..

    So where would kurdish children get their certificates from? How about government services.. aka passports.. crossing borders, trade, health care, transportation... unlike the oil stealing Iraqi kurds, syrian kurds have no income or the resources to sustain a state and they have a large arab contingency inside their so called state that they failed to cleanse..

    karlof1 | Jun 13, 2017 5:41:54 PM | 14
    This isn't quite correct: "Qatari, Saudi and Turkish proxy forces, directed by the CIA, have waged a six year long war against Syria and its people."

    The Truth is this: The Outlaw US Empire waged a war of aggression against Syria by utilizing "Qatari, Saudi and Turkish proxy [terrorist] forces directed by the CIA" as its invasion forces in order to fulfill the longstanding Zionist Yinon Plan while also undermining Russia and China's Eurasian development operations in its pursuit of Unipolar Full Spectrum Domination. Every nation that supported the illegal invasion of Syria is guilty of complicity in the #1 War Crime--Waging Aggressive War--and owe Syria several Trillon$$ as reparations, while the main criminal cabal needs to be imprisoned for the remainder of their lives--although many would argue they deserve to suffer the fate of so many victims of their terrorists: beheading, immolation, or drowning. But just how far back in time do we assess guilt--GHW Bush, Carter's forming of al-Ciada, British creation of the House of Saud, Muslim Brotherhood and Israel, or ?

    But I urge caution to those thinking Daesh will be destroyed in Syria as it's already moved Eastward. The Outlaw US Empire hasn't given up on its goal to establish Full Spectrum Dominance, which is why it will never leave Afghanistan unless forced militarily (barring regime change in Depravity Central). This article by Korybko provides good background on Daesh's most likely first target--Tajikistan, http://theduran.com/tajikistan-the-next-front-in-the-iranian-saudi-proxy-war/

    Piotr Berman | Jun 13, 2017 5:47:39 PM | 15
    A remark: a "deal" to let the enemy leave the town is the standard feature of this war, and SAA uses it "all the time", most recently, in Maskaneh area as they were approaching Tabqa. It is a no-brainer: if you want to use the town, it is more valuable if it is not totally destroyed, destroying a town also consumes a lot of ammunition, and lots of lives, attackers, defenders and civilians. And it is slow.

    It becomes more problematic in the context of the end game. ISIS fighters will need to be kept in prisoners' camp at least for few years, Vietnamese "reeducation camps" come to mind. Iraq, Iran, Syria and Russia are all afraid that Americans and allies want to recycle ISIS veterans into "democratically minded troublemakers". There is also a more immediate problem of Deir ez Zor. Syria needs all the desert south of Euphrates to have a stab at some territorial integrity.

    Second remark: it is not like Wahhabi government of KSA is averse to working with Marxists. Their puppet president of Yemen was high in the hierarchy of the marxist party that ruled southern Yemen before the country was forcibly united. That said, it is not a match made in heaven. But KSA + YPG can nicely cooperate in smuggling weapons to Turkey, which is a nice ploy to close al-Jazeera. And if they are not totally pleased with each other, they do not have to be monogamous.

    PavewayIV | Jun 13, 2017 8:50:57 PM | 23
    "...As a starter the Syrian Kurds...do not have ID or passport. Damascus denied them these documents. So what would you do? They have every right to fight for its dignity...."

    Not the way I understand it - someone correct me if I am wrong, here.

    Simple version: There were many non-Syrian Kurd economic immigrants in the early 1960's that were trying to settle in Syria - no different than the millions of illegal Mexican, South American and Asian immigrants in the U.S. today. A heavy-handed Kurd census by the Syrian government in 1962 attempted to identify legal Syrian citizen Kurds from illegal immigrant Kurds. That left about 20% of the (then) Syrian Kurdish population - about 300K - stateless non-citizens.

    Many of those Kurds were, in fact, illegal economic immigrants - others were legitimate Syrian citizens but couldn't prove it. But no documented Syrian Kurds were 'stripped' of their Syrian citizenship or refused passports or IDs merely because they were Kurdish. A couple of million Kurds were recognized as legal Syrian citizens in 1962.

    Syria made a sort of botched effort in 2011 to rectify the problem for the legitimate Syrian Kurds (of the 300K) previously considered undocumented, but the status of only a few thousand was ever settled. Far more needs to be done. Despite that, there are still several hundred thousand or more illegal Kurdish immigrants inside Syria today that Syria had no legal obligation to grant citizenship. A moral obligation perhaps, but that's up to the Syrian people to decide.

    It was western MSM that painted this as widespread Kurdish oppression by Assad's cruel regime, denying any and all Kurds their Syrian citizenship. The same western MSM that is shocked that Trump won't automatically declare citizenship to the eight million or so illegal, undocumented immigrants currently in the U.S.

    The west has also exaggerated the Kurdish rights issues by repeatedly saying that Kurds could not use Kurdish or teach in Kurdish in schools. This is no different than Spanish-speaking immigrants in the U.S. demanding that schools teach them in Spanish and all government services be made available to them in Spanish because that's the language they want to speak, not English. Kurds were never prohibited from opening their own schools and teaching their kids in Kurdish. They wanted the Syrian government to provide these services and the Syrian government refused.

    Syrian Kurds DO have a lot of legitimate grievances with the Syrian government, but those are different from the problem of immigrant non-Syrian stateless Kurds. The U.S. will have every right to bitch about Assad when we 'solve' the exact same problem that eight million stateless U.S. residents have today.

    [Jun 13, 2017] As early as 2011, the U.S. was arming Syrian dissidents from the arsenals in Libya, flying in weapons to Turkey to hand over to the rebels.

    Notable quotes:
    "... And the ultimate irony is that when it comes to terrorism the United States itself does not emerge without fault. As early as 2011, the U.S. was arming Syrian dissidents from the arsenals in Libya, flying in weapons to Turkey to hand over to the rebels. Many of the weapons, as well as those provided to Iraqi forces, have wound up in the hands of ISIS and al-Nusrah. U.S. advisers training rebels have conceded that it is impossible to determine the politics of many of those receiving instruction and weapons, an observation that has also been made by the Obama White House and by his State Department. ..."
    Jun 13, 2017 | www.unz.com

    A war against Iran would be very popular both with the U.S. congress and the mainstream media, so it would be easy to sell to the American public. The terrorist attack in Tehran on June 6 th that killed 17 is being blamed in some Iranian circles on the Saudis, a not unreasonable assumption. ISIS has claimed responsibility for the attack but it must also be observed that both the Saudis and Israelis have good connections with the terrorist group. But if the possibility of a possible Saudi hand is true or even plausibly so, it guarantees a rise in tension and an incident at sea could easily be contrived by either side to escalate into a shooting war. The United States would almost inevitably be drawn in, particularly in light of Trump's ridiculous comment on the tragedy, tweeting that Iran is"falling victim to the evil they promote."

    There is also other considerable collateral damage to be reckoned with as a consequence of the Trump intervention even if war can be avoided. Qatar hosts the al-Udeid airbase, the largest in the Middle East, which is home to 10,000 U.S. servicemen and serves as the Combined Air and Space Operations Center for Washington and its allies in the region and beyond. Now the United States finds itself squarely in the middle of a fight between two alleged friends that it doesn't have to involve itself in, an intervention that will produce nothing but bad results. Backing Saudi Arabia in this quarrel serves no conceivable American interest, particularly if the ultimate objective is to strike at a non-threatening Iran. So the fallback position is to lie about what the support for the aggressive Saudi posturing really means – it is alleged to be about terrorism, which is always a popular excuse for government overreach.

    And the ultimate irony is that when it comes to terrorism the United States itself does not emerge without fault. As early as 2011, the U.S. was arming Syrian dissidents from the arsenals in Libya, flying in weapons to Turkey to hand over to the rebels. Many of the weapons, as well as those provided to Iraqi forces, have wound up in the hands of ISIS and al-Nusrah. U.S. advisers training rebels have conceded that it is impossible to determine the politics of many of those receiving instruction and weapons, an observation that has also been made by the Obama White House and by his State Department.

    So watch the lies if you want to know when the next war is coming. If the House of Saud, the Israelis and Donald Trump are talking trash and seem to agree about something then it is time to head for the bomb shelter. Will it be Iran or an escalating catastrophe in Syria? Anything is possible.

    [Jun 12, 2017] Trump Just Dropped Chemical Weapons in a Major City, 100,000 Civilians Trapped

    www.moonofalabama.org

    Anonymous June 12, 2017 at 3:05 pm GMT

    Jun 12, 2017 | www.unz.com

    Trump Just Dropped Chemical Weapons in a Major City, 100,000 Civilians Trapped

    The Kurds are complicit in this crimes against humanity:

    Multiple reports are confirming that a US-led Coalition used white phosphorus-loaded ammunitions in heavily populated cities of Iraq and Syria. Thousands of civilians are known to be in the areas where the weapons were used according to The Washington Post.

    According to Airwars:

    "As many as 100,000 civilians trapped inside the Islamic State-held city of Raqqa are being given conflicting evacuation instructions according to Coalition statements and local reports, as US-backed ground forces finally assault the city supported by air and artillery strikes.

    Kurdish-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) started their slow encirclement of Raqqa last November. Artillery and airstrikes have rained down since then killing hundreds of civilians in the near region according to monitors, though the final operation to take the city commenced officially only on June 6th. In a press release published that day, the Coalition stressed that "The SDF have encouraged civilians to depart Raqqah so that they do not become trapped, used as human shields or become targets for ISIS snipers.",,,

    [Jun 12, 2017] When the US regime wants to overthrow the goverment of the next country, they are not going to be able to get the UN to go along with their plans

    Notable quotes:
    "... The US regime can 'declare' all they want. Doesn't mean shit. Anymore than the US regime making 'declarations' in the eastern Syrian desert. The facts on the ground are what matter. The pipe dream of splitting up Syria is over. Syria, Russia, Turkey, Iran, and Iraq all are united in keeping Syria 100 percent intact. What the US regime wants in northern Syria is irrelevant. ..."
    "... ISIS is the prototype of an created "enemy". It's plain, simple Hegelian dialectic: create the problem - control the reaction - implement the solution. ..."
    "... It's not inability but intention what happens in this region and soon everywhere in the world. ISIS is and was always an imperial tool in the hand of the banksters! Capice? ..."
    "... The El Qaida was a CIA asset under President Carter; El Qaida has been an asset in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Egypt and elsewhere as needed since; El Qaida is a CIA asset today under many differing names; El Qaida will continue to be a CIA asset as long as there is a need to use that asset against any other entity (yet to be determined). How simple is that? It's government business, get accustomed to the blowback. ..."
    "... Terror is a construct designed and used to execute an agenda. To ignore the history of terror and terror groups and the lockstep MSM broadcasting of disinformation in convoluted and disjointed pieces - confusing name changes, amalgamation of major and minor groups; the history of the CIA and its known acts - is disinformation in and of itself. Regardless of the zeal they may have for their beliefs, it would be impossible to amass a group of mercenaries if they weren't getting a regular paycheck. You don't have to pay them much, when they come from economies where $3 per day is the typical wage for unskilled labor (if you can get it). Here's our old friend Brzezinski, inspiring peasants in 1977: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYvO3qAlyTg ..."
    "... Saudi Arabia is allowed to finance it with the benediction of many Western agencies who believe they can use it as a justification to occupy more lands. During 150 years of colonization, there was no ISIS/Al Qaeda. It started to emerged after the collapse of USSR because it was impossible back those days to invade country X and Y without risking a war with USSR. ..."
    "... Many of these analyses ignore the funding that ISIS receives from KSA and Qatar, and logistical support from CIA, MI6 and Mossad. Unless we eliminate these factors ISIS will indeed be impossible to defeat. ..."
    "... Face it, armies do not just appear in the desert, they cannot survive without immense funds, supplies, logistics. The photos in German newspapers that documented the huge convoys of arms, etc, passing daily over the Turkish borders, ..."
    "... Of course there will be insurgent groups here and there (Sinai, north-east Nigeria, Marawi, Afghanistan, Yemen, Libya, Mali, ...) that will keep on fighting with a Daesh hat on but only as long as KSA and some other (ex-)GCC countries keep paying them for it. ..."
    Jun 12, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

    R Winner | Jun 11, 2017 3:29:25 AM | 4

    The problem for the US in trying to cultivate or create the next IS to be used as a pretext for further invasions and regime change in the Middle East is there is increasing fatigue and unwillingness from more and more countries of putting up with the US playing these sickening games.

    The US regime got away with it in Libya.

    The US regime has been mostly neutred in Syria.

    The next country the US regime wants to overthrow, they aren't going to be able to get the UN to go along with their plans. No one on the Security Council is going to let the US regime get away with creating or fostering the next IS and then sending in mercenaries and terrorists to 'fight IS' again.

    The US regime has to know this is now the case and, hence, the rise of the next IS is probably less likely because it would be a waste of time. Any UN supported action will be narrowly focused on quickly and efficiently destroying any new IS.

    ALAN | Jun 11, 2017 7:14:28 AM | 16
    The issue should be seen as a component of US foreign policy, that is, the possibility of using terrorism in the wars of America against rival and hostile states. I expect Russia and China to do creative work to neutralize risks in this context.

    Today it has become a reality, with Russia and China leading the world economy and politics, while one only hears the chatter from behind the Atlantic.
    Do not occupy yourself Mr E. Maganier! You are not the only one awake.

    Harry | Jun 11, 2017 7:33:15 AM | 17
    @ R Winner | 3
    E.J. Magnier is still spouting BS about Syria being split apart

    He is right, and you must have skipped last... decades? It was always a plan to Balkanize Syria and Iraq by "regime changers." The plan is not even recent, it dates decades back, just US is making it official now, they in press conference declared Raqqa after "liberation" wont be returned to Syria but ruled by the "vetted locals".

    US puppets Iraqi Barzani kurds are going to vote for independence soon, and its expected Syria's kurds will follow. Some hope the latter will come to their senses, but facts speak otherwise, and US with its proxies are quickly establishing facts on the ground. The only question now whether it will be full independence or federalized Syria with Kurds having full autonomy, i.e. de-facto independence (Russia proposed cultural autonomy, but kurds rejected). US is still pushing for Sunnistan too, but this part of plan is not going so well, but not for the lack of trying.

    Everywhere IS has been defeated, it has been permantly extinquished.

    When did Terror axis EVER permanently defeated their terrorists? Name ONE example, I'm all ears. They are useful tools, and will continue to be used as Magnier said, whether under one name or another. Its not just his opinion either, its about knowing the history and Modus operandi of terror states from the West and arab monarchies.

    R Winner | Jun 11, 2017 7:41:43 AM | 18
    @17

    The US regime can 'declare' all they want. Doesn't mean shit. Anymore than the US regime making 'declarations' in the eastern Syrian desert. The facts on the ground are what matter. The pipe dream of splitting up Syria is over. Syria, Russia, Turkey, Iran, and Iraq all are united in keeping Syria 100 percent intact. What the US regime wants in northern Syria is irrelevant.

    And feel free to name a single area in either Syria or Iraq that has been cleared of IS that has organically regenerated IS.

    Guest #4711 | Jun 11, 2017 8:13:09 AM | 19
    "Still today the US and Europe have not learned from history and still want to occupy territory"

    And do they do instead? Isn't it exactly that? Occupying?

    Sorry, Mr. Elijah J. Magnier-Ignorance, they do it the same way today like they did it in the past. They create their own "enemy" or what so ever to have a pretext to invade other countries or do what so ever.

    • You want total control over all slaves? Create some terror events.
    • You want to get rid of cash (to get total control of ALL financial transactions)? Let rob some people by night.
    • You want to flood Europe with invaders? Create war and terror outside Europe.

    ISIS is the prototype of an created "enemy". It's plain, simple Hegelian dialectic: create the problem - control the reaction - implement the solution.

    One reason why we run always again against the wall and into the same trap is that so many "experienced" experts are not able to see through the curtain recognizing the hidden black hand. They tell us the same bullshit since decades.

    It's not inability but intention what happens in this region and soon everywhere in the world. ISIS is and was always an imperial tool in the hand of the banksters! Capice?

    Oliver K | Jun 11, 2017 8:28:07 AM | 20
    The really dangerous people come to isis only because of money and power -- take that away, only the idiots remain, and that can be managed.

    The article of Magnier seems to use the typical strategy of "ontologisation" of a conflict, in order to divert attention from the real interests.

    Sure, once the real interests (imperialism in various forms) is taken away (to a good degree at least), we still have the zombies which were created: a good dose of killing will cure that.

    Formerly T-Bear | Jun 11, 2017 8:34:41 AM | 21
    The El Qaida was a CIA asset under President Carter; El Qaida has been an asset in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Egypt and elsewhere as needed since; El Qaida is a CIA asset today under many differing names; El Qaida will continue to be a CIA asset as long as there is a need to use that asset against any other entity (yet to be determined). How simple is that? It's government business, get accustomed to the blowback.
    fast freddy | Jun 11, 2017 10:12:56 AM | 27
    Terror is a construct designed and used to execute an agenda. To ignore the history of terror and terror groups and the lockstep MSM broadcasting of disinformation in convoluted and disjointed pieces - confusing name changes, amalgamation of major and minor groups; the history of the CIA and its known acts - is disinformation in and of itself. Regardless of the zeal they may have for their beliefs, it would be impossible to amass a group of mercenaries if they weren't getting a regular paycheck.

    You don't have to pay them much, when they come from economies where $3 per day is the typical wage for unskilled labor (if you can get it).

    Here's our old friend Brzezinski, inspiring peasants in 1977: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYvO3qAlyTg

    Noirette | Jun 11, 2017 10:44:06 AM | 28
    I was said to see Corbyn -bravely! huh!- spew the argument that terrorist attacks 'at home' can only be stopped / will only cease when the W puts a halt to its invasive policies in Syria (Lybia, etc. ..)

    The argument is morally repugnant, is/was promoted by US pundits (Dems, Iraq..) as 'blowback'.

    In essence it states 'well if we annihilate millions' (and it is millions) of 'them' is natural that at least a very few of them should retaliate / seek revenge, even if they are weak and not very successful! Seems to plead, not worth it to kill millions - better not! baad! - IF it leads to a few deaths on London Bridge!

    The argument is also pragmatically beyond idiotic, as E. M. shows in his piece (though that isn't his primary aim) by following the path, quote -- ISIS ideology seems coherent and powerful, capable of recruiting and reviving itself -- - Yes, for the moment, as there is money in it. Yet he slips close to the 'if the W stops attacking ' pov, if in a more realistic and subtle form, > ISIS (Daesh..) exists only as a reaction to the all-powerful US-uk-isr and allies and if these *change* the reaction will change as well!

    As for 'terrorist' attacks in the W, any reasonable grasp and analysis has to consider and try to sort out, not exhaustive:

    a) if it happened at all or was just pure flim-flam security TV theatre (some do profit / benefit)

    b) if it was the regular type of false flag (state or para-s ordered and organised, the MSM waiting in the wings)

    c) was realised thru some skewed and complicated collaboration and money channels between some gangsters, patsy dupes, or willing participants, corrupt 'security' personnel, and creative types hanging about, all in it for the money or obscure reasons

    d) was the exploitation and manipulation and guidance of 'psychotic' crazies, then claimed by X

    e) was actually non-terrorist (e.g. a train accident) but hyped as such by all the parties as that may bring fame, fortune if you stick with it (e.g. compensation from the State for your mom being killed in a terrorist plot.)

    f) other

    jfb | Jun 11, 2017 10:52:12 AM | 30
    This guy seems to ignore completely that if ISIS exists, it's because Saudi Arabia is allowed to finance it with the benediction of many Western agencies who believe they can use it as a justification to occupy more lands. During 150 years of colonization, there was no ISIS/Al Qaeda. It started to emerged after the collapse of USSR because it was impossible back those days to invade country X and Y without risking a war with USSR.
    Fidelios Automata | Jun 11, 2017 11:55:14 AM | 35
    Many of these analyses ignore the funding that ISIS receives from KSA and Qatar, and logistical support from CIA, MI6 and Mossad. Unless we eliminate these factors ISIS will indeed be impossible to defeat.
    james | Jun 11, 2017 11:59:44 AM | 36
    example of zionist money, or usa leadership - not sure what to call this - support for isis.. "United States Representative Dana Rohrabacher expressed gratitude that Islamic State radical elements assaulted the Iranian Parliament alongside Khomeini's Mausoleum in Tehran."
    can't get any more bald faced then that..
    Mina | Jun 11, 2017 12:22:31 PM | 37
    Most MSM discussing the Gulf crisis mention the WSJ article about the 1 billion dollar paid for the release of the Qatari hunter group that included royals... but no one wants to recall the actual time line.

    There was a planned swap of populations, unblockading some rebel areas in exchange for unblockading some Shiite villages. The swap started, but the buses were stopped for 24 hours and then the additional hunter group started to be part of the deal. During the time when the Shiite buses were stopped, an attack was made on these exhausted people and their kids. Maybe more details will emerge?

    Perimetr | Jun 11, 2017 12:31:38 PM | 38
    I agree with those who maintain that ISIS is essentially a mercenary construct. I like the statement by Fast Freddy @27: "Terror is a construct designed and used to execute an agenda. . . Regardless of the zeal they may have for their beliefs, it would be impossible to amass a group of mercenaries if they weren't getting a regular paycheck."

    Face it, armies do not just appear in the desert, they cannot survive without immense funds, supplies, logistics. The photos in German newspapers that documented the huge convoys of arms, etc, passing daily over the Turkish borders, these were not the works of " doctors, engineers, university degree holders and many from all walks of life". The real "credi"t goes to Langley, Qatar, and Riyadh, not "immeasurable experiences of sympathisers who chose to join the ranks".

    xor | Jun 11, 2017 12:47:19 PM | 41
    Daesh aka IS will persist but not in its current form as something that resembles a state with armies and armored vehicles. When Daesh is defeated in Syria and Iraq it will go underground and assume a role similar to what is referred to as Al Qaida with here and there suicide attacks.

    In Syria it can only be defeated with the help of Russia and Iran because the US (and its partners in crime Israel, KSA, ...) depends on it for its long term goals and also lay at the source of its inception with for example Baghdadi groomed in US prisons, the organization receiving military help with so called accidental droppings, intelligence as well as its opponents bombed by US war planes both in Syria and Iraq.

    Of course there will be insurgent groups here and there (Sinai, north-east Nigeria, Marawi, Afghanistan, Yemen, Libya, Mali, ...) that will keep on fighting with a Daesh hat on but only as long as KSA and some other (ex-)GCC countries keep paying them for it.

    PavewayIV | Jun 11, 2017 1:10:50 PM | 42
    Robert Michels and the Iron Law of Oligarchy (1911)
    "He who says organization, says oligarchy."

    Paraphrasing Lobaczewski c. 1959:

    "Organizations and oligarchies are self-reinforcing psychopath magnets."

    PavewayIV's Magic Box of Death:

    Put a few oligarchs in a box and set on floor. Soon, hundreds of 'little people' will be attracted inside. Close box and shake vigorously. Torrents of dead 'little people' will pour out, but never any oligarchs. Repeat as often as desired. It's magic!
    Mina | Jun 11, 2017 1:13:04 PM | 43
    I am not sure it is about being paid. In the Middle East, this was indeed part of the game: most men have huge families to feed, not necessarily their own children but siblings, parents etc.

    In Europe, most attacks are not money related. Algerian and Moroccans have a number of grievances against France, to take one example. More and more in sub Saharian West Africa the same resentment is emerging: without France cozying up dictatorial states and let the tyrants have buildings in Paris richest areas, bank accounts in Switzerland, normal people would have at least enough to live. The result is that once in a while, someone just breaks down and goes for a random killing under the djihad banner.

    Chauncey Gardiner | Jun 11, 2017 5:04:07 PM | 52
    E.M. is always interesting read, although he (perhaps) is over-analyzing whole situation. Numerous commentators mentioned the role of money flowing from the KSA and the GCC. Once that flow stop no more ideology, although Andre Andre Vltchek in his last piece claim and depict different picture, namely stupidity of people.

    Now money is important but not everything. Political support and legitimization of the Death Squads is also very important. The West like to play with somebody else money, flesh and blood, while P5+1 is sitting in New York, Geneva and elsewhere and their envoys rising their hand according to realpolitiks.

    This article is penned 2013, and explains everything, i.e. the role of the US.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/25/opinion/sunday/in-syria-america-loses-if-either-side-wins.html


    Maintaining a stalemate should be America's objective. And the only possible method for achieving this is to arm the rebels when it seems that Mr. Assad's forces are ascendant and to stop supplying the rebels if they actually seem to be winning.

    This strategy actually approximates the Obama administration's policy so far. Those who condemn the president's prudent restraint as cynical passivity must come clean with the only possible alternative: a full-scale American invasion to defeat both Mr. Assad and the extremists fighting against his regime.


    jfl | Jun 11, 2017 5:20:37 PM | 53
    @28 noirette

    apparently your 'beef' is that none of the terrorist attacks in the 'West' are real? that it is all the doing of the evil western state-terrorists who have killed the millions outside the W themselves?

    well, the proxy terrorists have killed plenty outside the west, too. the nobel peace prize laureate's boys have killed 4 or 500,000 in syria, directly or indirectly.

    whether or not the terrorist attacks in the west - which have killed a 'negligible' number of people - are attributable to western state-terrorists themselves or to their proxies, either under their direction or 'free lancing', seems immaterial to me : all the deaths are the result of western state-sponsored terror, directly or indirectly.

    so i think we agree : it is all the fruit of western state-terrorism. that's what corbyn was pointing out. i think you've discovered a distinction without a difference.

    jfl | Jun 11, 2017 5:20:37 PM | 53
    jfl | Jun 11, 2017 5:27:26 PM | 54
    @52 cg

    that's certainly the neocon, zionist, nytimes position on the never-ending war, be it in iraq or iran or wherever. and it will continue for as long as the usofa has the wherewithal to pursue it, it seems. and has seemed throughout the nobel peace prize laureate's administration. nothing seems to have changed under trump, except its intensification.

    it looks like we're in for more of the same until the defeat/collapse of the usofa.

    Jackrabbit | Jun 11, 2017 5:39:08 PM | 55
    mina:
    ... lots of poor and non poor (but poor of minds) flock on friday noon to listen for an hour or more to guys telling them that djihad is the ultimate heroic life! One doesn't exist without the other.

    Religion can calm or incite. There is much evidence to suggest that religious leaders, political leaders, and oligarchs play off each other.

    I wrote about this at MoA in September 2015 :

    'Whatever-it-takes' thinking of oligarchs and fundamentalists is too prevalent and those that support them behind Mr. Reasonable(tm) facades are dangerous.

    . . .

    A new age has dawned for humanity. We are connected to each other as never before. But oligarchs and fundamentalist 'whatever-it-takes' manipulators and their assorted puppets, sycophants, acolytes, and hangers-on would turn that promise into a nightmare for most of us as they insist on supremacy for their cult/class/race/sect/cause/etc. This is what I call The Greatest Headfake of All Time .

    fast freddy | Jun 11, 2017 5:49:05 PM | 56
    Wesley Clark seven countries in five years:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RC1Mepk_Sw

    overlaps Yinon Plan for Greater ISrael.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/

    greater-israel-the-zionist-plan-for-the-middle-east/5324815

    Note that Israel has not been attacked by ISIS, IS ISIL, etc.
    Note that a number of these seven countries have already been balkanized.
    (Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen currently under way.)

    Note that "Islamic Terror" events staged or otherwise keep the public on board.

    jfl | Jun 11, 2017 5:51:48 PM | 57
    @56 ff

    succinct, straight-forward analysis.

    Chauncey Gardiner | Jun 11, 2017 5:56:50 PM | 58
    "....and it will continue for as long as the usofa has the wherewithal to pursue it...."

    This call for an end of dollar hegemony as the world's official payment currency. The pillars of the US' edifice is the dollar. It seems to me that Trump's fake weapons deals are also in direction of maintain dollar's position. Unfortunately heavy weight players in int. trade such as China, plays by the IMF rules.

    Chauncey Gardiner | Jun 11, 2017 5:59:34 PM | 59
    Putin wants to ax dollar from Russian trade

    https://www.rt.com/business/319938-putin-dollar-oil-trade/

    VietnamVet | Jun 11, 2017 6:03:57 PM | 60
    Anyone who reads Moon of Alabama and the comments are not too far from the truth. Seeing the big picture is hard. It is purposefully hidden. Oligarchs pay good money to their staff to manipulate information to keep the money flowing in their direction. In the West, the nation states are secondary to corporations and oligarch families. Russia and Iran are still sovereign nations. They are literally in a war of survival. If they can they will encourage natural rivalries between plutocrats and buy as many Boeing airplanes as they can.

    The West's biggest failing is that it believes its own propaganda. Without a conscription army, it cannot possibly win the eight wars it is fighting. The proxy forces and military contractors that the West uses instead are unreliable and dangerous. The Elite will not restore the draft because that would empower the little people and they would have to restore free education and public healthcare. Instead as democratic governments and enlightenment wither away, people are forced back to their tribal roots to survive and fundamental Abrahamic and Hindu religions take over. This assures that the world will splinter apart into ethnic tribes if the prophesized apocalypse doesn't happen first.

    An Islamic State will exist as long as the forces that gave it birth continue to exploit human beings.

    Jackrabbit | Jun 11, 2017 6:14:31 PM | 61
    ff @56

    Second jfl on your "succinct, straight-forward analysis" but I would add Sy Hersh's "The Redirection" (published in 2007!!) to your list of "must reads" because it adds the Israeli-Saudi connection AND it demonstrates real planning among states (which matched what later occurred):

    The policy shift has brought Saudi Arabia and Israel into a new strategic embrace, largely because both countries see Iran as an existential threat. They have been involved in direct talks ...

    Nasr went on, "The Saudis have considerable financial means, and have deep relations with the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafis"-Sunni extremists who view Shiites as apostates...

    Nasr compared the current situation to the period in which Al Qaeda first emerged. In the nineteen-eighties and the early nineties, the Saudi government offered to subsidize the covert American CIA proxy war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. Hundreds of young Saudis were sent into the border areas of Pakistan ... Among them, of course, were Osama bin Laden and his associates, who founded Al Qaeda, in 1988.

    This time, the U.S. government consultant told me, Bandar and other Saudis have assured the White House that "they will keep a very close eye on the religious fundamentalists. Their message to us was 'We've created this movement, and we can control it.' It's not that we don't want the Salafis to throw bombs; it's who they throw them at-Hezbollah, Moqtada al-Sadr, Iran, and at the Syrians, if they continue to work with Hezbollah and Iran."

    Diana | Jun 11, 2017 6:26:28 PM | 62
    I don't know where Magnier gets his absurdly low figures for foreign fighters in Afghanistan. One study says that more than 10,000 foreigners were recruited, mainly by Pakistan. His article is very flawed in other aspects as well, mainly because he talks about personnel while ignoring the indispensable weapons, munitions, equipment and supplies such an army needs. These have been facilitated by state actors; however, those providers will likely see no benefit in continuing as long as ISIS continues to lose the military campaign.

    "Azzam's grassroots efforts and abundant war materiel attracted foreign fighters from the Middle East, North Africa, South Asia, Europe, and the United States to wage war against the infidels (nonbelievers) occupying Afghanistan.14 There is no consensus as to how many people traveled to Afghanistan, but estimates range from 10,000 to 35,000.15 Those who did travel to the battle were largely supported by private donations or nongovernmental Islamic organizations.16" http://foreignfighters.csis.org/history/case-studies.html

    Chauncey Gardiner | Jun 11, 2017 6:38:20 PM | 63
    British liberal/fascists Winston Churchill on Wahhabism.

    https://crimesofbritain.com/2016/12/07/winston-churchill-on-wahhabism/

    "Just like Zionism, Wahhabism was facilitated by Britain in establishing itself in the 'Middle East'. And the British continue to use both for their own ends."


    R Winner | Jun 11, 2017 7:07:22 PM | 64
    Jordanian Army shoots dead five US-backed rebels who tried to evade the Syrian Army
    In a rare development, the Jordanian Army and Syrian rebels operating under the Free Syrian Army (FSA) banner came in direct conflict with one another over the weekend on the desert border between Jordan and Syria.

    Too many other links to post of the Saudi, US regime, Turkish, and Qatar terror groups turning on each other.

    The pipelines and partion phase of Syria's war against foreign terror has ended and now the various foreign powers are starting to dispose of their proxies before they start attacking the wrong countries.

    Brian | Jun 11, 2017 7:08:20 PM | 65
    Isis will persist because the religion of peace provides a large and excellent recruitment base for terrorism
    ben | Jun 11, 2017 7:23:21 PM | 66
    V V @ 60 said:"Oligarchs pay good money to their staff to manipulate information to keep the money flowing in their direction. In the West, the nation states are secondary to corporations and oligarch families. Russia and Iran are still sovereign nations. They are literally in a war of survival".

    Great post, this excerpt stands out.

    jfl | Jun 11, 2017 7:24:46 PM | 67
    @61

    you've linked sy hersh's redirection at least 100 times by now jr, i think those who might read it have by now :)

    ben | Jun 11, 2017 7:30:58 PM | 68
    CG 2 59: Thanks for the link, an excerpt:

    "I would like to mention one crucial issue in the development of the energy industry, and the economy as a whole. It is a question of finally stopping the use of foreign currency in internal trade," said Putin at the fuel and energy presidential commission on Tuesday."

    The above is a quote from Putin, which, IMO, is critical in hobbling the Western Corporate Empire ( U$A/NATO) With those kinds of statements, he better watch his back..

    jfl | Jun 11, 2017 7:43:23 PM | 69
    @62 diana

    thanks for the link(s).

    Willy2 | Jun 11, 2017 9:05:33 PM | 70
    - The US (and "the West") (wrongfully) think(s) that by building military bases in the Middle East they're able to control events in that same Middle East.
    Lozion | Jun 11, 2017 9:07:30 PM | 71
    Daeshbags persist because of US inaction against it: Huge convoy leaves Raqqah unmolested..


    https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/video-humongous-isis-convoy-allowed-escape-raqqa-fight-syrian-army-instead/


    jfl | Jun 11, 2017 9:26:49 PM | 72
    @69

    Center for Strategic and International Studies


    The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) is a Washington, D.C. think tank. It was founded in 1962, by Admiral Arleigh Burke and David Abshire, "at the height of the Cold War, dedicated to the simple but urgent goal of finding ways for America to survive as a nation and prosper as a people."

    it's a cold war operation ... well, there's a lot of info there anyway ...
    jfl | Jun 11, 2017 9:52:03 PM | 73
    @72

    Maria Galperin


    Program Coordinator and Research Assistant, Transnational Threats Project

    Maria Galperin is the research assistant and program coordinator for the CSIS Transnational Threats (TNT) Project, where she researches global terrorism with a primary focus on Eurasian and Middle Eastern asymmetric warfare. Prior to her duties at TNT, Ms. Galperin interned for TNT and the Cato Institute, where she focused on Russian economic history and policy. Ms. Galperin is a native Russian speaker and holds a B.A. in international relations from Anglo-American University in Prague, where she concentrated on Central Asian insurgency and terrorism.

    DavidC | Jun 11, 2017 10:08:10 PM | 74
    You can tell me he has decades of experience but I stopped reading 3 sentences in.
    psychohistorian | Jun 11, 2017 11:05:51 PM | 75
    I am encouraged by reading all the commenters that point out the obvious terrorism for money world we are allowing ourselves to live in. The elite are in a battle to maintain/expand the control of private finance controlled economies and people. I would add China North Korea to Iran and Russia that seem to be clearly support geopolitical agendas different than the West.

    And to previous thread commenters that seem to think that TINA (There Is No Alternative) to the private finance based "capitalism myth", I encourage you to study the 13 5-year plans that communist in name country, China, has executed.

    Can we at least try something other than the elite led tragedy humanity is playing out before we go extinct?

    dni | Jun 11, 2017 11:30:12 PM | 76
    digitalization not Internet. Internet is merely the messenger.. digitalization is the enabling technology.. and digitalization is a part of all communications, now days. ISIS subscribers were rarely exposed to competing propaganda; worse domestic audiences likewise were rarely exposed to competing propaganda, nearly all journalistic competition to the Intelligence Community supported agendas which seek to justify intervention, take over, invasion, regime change, privatization and the like have been drown out by the oligarch-owned media. After all the oligarchs are the customers of the IC. Conducting government in Secret and drowning out (many journalist were killed trying to cover the other side) one side of the discourse is what gave Al Queda and ISIS its access to the minds of the young.. The Internet is merely one of the many digital messengers..
    nonsense factory | Jun 12, 2017 12:42:46 AM | 77
    What would probably do the most to disrupt ISIS is if the GCC monarchies were replaced by elected local parliamentary democracy systems as quickly as possible.

    Just asking questions about that causes a crisis at the State Department, though - it's like asking them about Israeli nuclear weapons, they get all quiet.
    . . .middleeasteye.net/news/question-saudi-democracy-gives-us-state-department-pause-707102084

    Just say what you think, forget about protecting your career!

    jfl | Jun 12, 2017 1:13:51 AM | 78
    @77 nf, ' forget about protecting your career! '

    at the state department ... that's a joke, right?

    reading that article i noticed they cited mother jones ...


    In a headline to a blog post, the progressive news magazine Mother Jones quipped: "At the state department, sometimes silence speaks volumes."

    ... i don't read mother jones regularly, but i saw a piece about 'her' just this morning, When 'Mother Jones' Wasn't Russia-Bashing . apparently mother has sold out to the dnc/cia/state herself.

    not so 'progressive' any longer.

    ejm | Jun 12, 2017 1:19:51 AM | 79
    wow, all these new posters suddenly appearing to attack Magnier. hmmmm....
    Jackrabbit | Jun 12, 2017 1:57:40 AM | 80
    Wow new poster "ejm" shows up to defend Magnier. Offers nothing more than innuendo.
    paul | Jun 12, 2017 2:50:37 AM | 81
    In a way, of course, this article is right on: western colonial and neo-colonial policies are the fundamental cause of Islamic terrorism - not just western policies of regime change, but policies promoting war devastation, followed by desperate poverty and social chaos, particularly in nations like Libya and Iraq that once were relatively well off. But really, for the author to claim, as a precursor idea, that there were few international jihadists in Afghanistan? So far as I know, this claim is utter nonsense. There were many many foreign fighters in that war. The constant stream of foreign fighters into that war was one of its particular qualities, leading ultimately to the evolution of Al Queda.

    And that leads to another absurdity about this article: no acknowledgement at all that the jihadi wars (as in Syria) are basically proxy wars?!! Perhaps the author felt that to acknowledge the hidden hand of the neo-colonial West and its regional allies would be to deny the motivations of the many thousands of muslim people involved, via an analysis that takes away from them their misguided attempts to be somehow authors of their own fates and NOT mere puppets. One can understand such hesitance to see and state that the people trying not to be puppets of the West by joining ISIS are even more puppets of the west - but painful as they are, such sick ironies are essential to acknowledge.

    The West has many centuries of accumulated know-how in the craft of pulling off these kinds of divide-and-conquer manipulations, double manipulations, triple manipulations and so on. At this point in history, we global citizens - regardless of our locations and religions - are all enmeshed in a drama that is as deeply dishonest as it is horrible.

    Both Al Queda and ISIS are tools in the sick game of fostering proxy wars. When you come right down to it, so are Republicans and Democrats. Maybe the Corbyn-led Labour party can break away from this paradigm. If so that might change the world.

    Mina | Jun 12, 2017 2:53:07 AM | 82
    Jackrabbit
    Thanks for the link. I m not blaming all the imams but the use of religions by the state (hard to avoid?) And more specifically many in the middle east wonder why friday imams are not speaking of the concrete problems they have there in daily life: drugs, thefts, violence. The sense of authority in patriarchal societies is...self evident and we also havd to take into account that some persons who ve never received a minimal education are easy to convince of fantasies and manipulate.
    paul | Jun 12, 2017 3:05:24 AM | 83
    But really, at this time in history, for people to continue to claim that the consequences of Western neocolonial manipulations (such as propping up despotic regimes, using international economic institutions and policies to immiserate, etc.) and of regime change operations that leave behind writhing oceans of social chaos and violence, which in turn become breeding grounds for waves of jihadis - to claim that this is all "unintended consequences" is inane. If such a claim was ever valid (I doubt it ever was), it can't be valid now. The patterns have been too obvious for too long.

    It's like deliberately hitting your head with a hammer and then claiming that the resulting headache is an 'unintended consequence'. That could conceivably be true the first time you do it. Not thereafter.

    Happy Fathers Day 2017 Wishes | Jun 12, 2017 4:52:19 AM | 84
    Happy Father's Day means More than flowers and gifts It means saying Thank You It means saying I Love You You are the best dad, and my best friend Today is your day. Happy Fathers Day 2017 Messages
    Fathers Day Messages from Daughter
    Happy Fathers Day Quotes Images
    Happy Fathers Day 2017 Quotes | Jun 12, 2017 4:53:00 AM | 85
    You were always by my side, and I will always be by your side. Happy Father's Day to you. Funny Happy Fathers Day Images
    Best Happy Fathers Day Status
    Fathers Day Quotes from Wife for Husband
    Fathers Day Messages from Wife to Husband
    Dark side | Jun 12, 2017 7:29:25 AM | 86
    Mina #52
    Are you talking about Republican or Democrat's constituency or Americans in general?
    Dark side | Jun 12, 2017 7:30:27 AM | 87
    Ups at Mina #82
    Amanita Amanita | Jun 12, 2017 8:37:03 AM | 88
    Dear Moon

    Northen Ireland Home Rule constitutional arrangements have it that UK parliament adjudicates disputes between Sinn Fein and DUP in the Northern Ireland Assembly. If the Tories rely on DUP for confidence the UK parliament can't discharge its duties in Northern Ireland with clean hands...it will have a clear conflict of interest. May is going to be legally prevented from forming government by way of DUP favour.

    The UK is therefore facing a constitutional crisis...the likes of which it has never known.

    Mina | Jun 12, 2017 9:06:17 AM | 89
    Amanita
    ..and that's wonderful news. Even the Queen has to delay her post-election speech. And the government is supposed to meet the EU in Brussels next week to start putting the divorce in practice...
    cresty | Jun 12, 2017 9:13:26 AM | 90
    @Diana | Jun 11, 2017 6:26:28 PM | 62
    My guess is that he just made a mental error and conflated the number of al qaeda in Afghanistan with the number of foreign fighters total. Or there was a mistranslation and he was talking about foreigners currently fighting for either branch of al qaeda now and back then.
    Thucydides | Jun 12, 2017 9:23:28 AM | 91
    Why did they legalize marihuana in the USA? The Pentagon is being crippled from methamphetamine epidemic raging on the middle of the USA which makes the young men unfit to serve as MEAT in the armies of the Pentagon.

    Add all the gayness to the USA.
    Add all the multiculturalism to the USA.
    Add the IPhone/Jackass generation to the USA.
    Add the fact intelligent men understand the Rothschild-Zionists their game.
    Add 100% corrupt military leaders that stay away from any battle themselves.
    Add 100% homosexual military staff that are used to take other men in the behind.
    Add 100% military leaders who are part of secret boys clubs and only promoted after homosexual sexual favors to those higher up.

    The Armies of the Pentagon have GROWN WEAK. Bring it on suckers! No one is afraid of these wimps/sissy boys.

    Looks like the Rothschild-Zionists in control of the USA made some strategic mistakes. They wanted the men in the USA to be stupid and divided. Now look at the armies of the Pentagon and start to laugh very loudly!

    james | Jun 12, 2017 11:20:43 AM | 92
    @77 nonsense factory quote "Just say what you think, forget about protecting your career!"

    that's it! unfortunately being trained to lie or obfuscate 24/7 is the critical ingredient for job applicants at the usa state dept..

    @88 Amanita Amanita.. fascinating if true.. thanks..

    fast freddy | Jun 12, 2017 12:04:31 PM | 93
    Ben 68 "It is a question of finally stopping the use of foreign currency in internal trade," said Putin."

    No matter that trillions are printed, given away, and "lost", the dollar is the supreme paper and the supreme digit. It is backed by the full faith and credit of (the extremely moral, honest and incorruptible) USofA.

    It is backed by nothing more than magical faith and magical credit.

    Anyone who disagrees has always faced dire consequences.

    There's a new rail bridge that China built which connects with Russia.
    They don't seem to understand the value of the dollar.

    nobody | Jun 12, 2017 12:12:39 PM | 94
    ISIS benefited from immeasurable experiences of sympathisers who chose to join the ranks; doctors, engineers, university degree holders and many from all walks of life, including experts with large competence in propaganda. Those served ISIS and managed to create a regular magazine, radios and short films in many languages. They integrate the widespread electronic games with pictures of battles and killing in real life. An abundance of informative materials emanates daily from ISIS through the Internet to deliver ideas and messages to every home and continent no group ever had access to before. ...

    if you run servers pushing bits of a media company they hunt you down and shut down the site, but if you are "ISIS" then you get a presence on "social media" and no one bothers you. what a strange world.

    So OP's article is addressing the obvious question of "who is helping these head choppers?" and assures us it is not "experts" of Western intelligence services but actually "sympathisers who join the ranks".

    https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai

    That could easily be a spook resume.

    fast freddy | Jun 12, 2017 12:46:16 PM | 95
    Strange that doctors, engineers and University graduates become inclined to throw away their careers and risk their lives so they can join ISIS.

    Most would come from upper class (wealthy) families with all the comfort and "indoctrination" that comes with that.

    I suppose if they were educated in the west, seeing all flat screen tv's and Wal-Marts would really piss them off.

    Mina | Jun 12, 2017 1:19:24 PM | 96
    A lot of them were educated in the West!!
    MSimon | Jun 12, 2017 1:28:22 PM | 97
    Why isn't the Israel-Europe gas pipeline not included as a driver of current events?

    I discuss that here: https://www.spartareport.com/2017/06/its-a-gas/

    MSimon | Jun 12, 2017 1:34:58 PM | 98
    Thucydides | Jun 12, 2017 9:23:28 AM

    Why is the US legalizing pot? Because Prohibition is a price support mechanism for criminals.

    We learned that from Alcohol Prohibition.

    I guess Americans are tired of its government supporting criminals.

    And then there is this.

    https://acestoohigh.com/2017/05/02/addiction-doc-says-stop-chasing-the-drug-focus-on-aces-people-can-recover/
    Addiction doc says: It's not the drugs. It's the ACEs – adverse childhood experiences

    So why are we making war on abused kids? It seems immoral to me. But that could be a personal defect.

    [Jun 10, 2017] Krugman is a political hack for Clinton wing of Democratic Party and as such can not see was is wrong with Dems and what needs to be done after Hillary Fiasco

    Jun 10, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com

    libezkova June 10, 2017 at 03:22 PM

    There are several problems with Krugman both as an economist and as a political commentator.

    First he does not understand that neoliberal system is inherency unstable and prone to periodic bubbles and crashes. FED plays destabilizing role by attempting to save large banks. It essentially provided insurance for reckless behaviour. This is very "Minsky" -- "stability is destabilizing". If we believe Jim Rogers, FED policies created a situation in which the next crash is a real possibility and might happen within a year, or two:

    http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/jim-rogers-the-worst-crash-in-our-lifetime-is-coming/ar-BBCl6BS?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=ientp

    Politically Krugman switched to neocon views and sometimes is undistinguishable from Wolfowitz : " And consider his refusal to endorse the central principle of NATO, the obligation to come to our allies' defense... What was that about? Nobody knows..."

    NATO became obsolete with the dissolution of the USSR and now serves only as an instrument of the US foreign policy -- a tool for expansion and maintenance of neoliberal empire and keeping our European vassals in check.

    He also got into Russiagate trap, which is a sign of weak intellect (dementia in cases of Hillary and McCain), or of a neocon political hack. As Krugman does not have dementia, I suspect the latter.

    The standards he tries to apply to Trump would put in jail all three previous presidents starting from "change we can believe in" bait and switch artist.

    In other words his column is highly partisan and as such represents interest only for Hillary Bots and DemoRats (which are still plentiful and control MSM).

    For people who try to find a real way out of the current difficult situation (a crisis of confidence and, possibly, the start of revolt against neoliberal elite due to side effects of globalization) the USA now have find itself, this is just a noise. Nothing constructive.

    Trump position "get what you want with the brute force; f*ck diplomacy, UN and decency" is actually an attempt to find a solution for the problems we face. Abhorrent as it is. Kind of highway robbery policy.

    The key problem is whether we should start dismantling neoliberalism before it is too late, and what should be the alternative. Krugman is useless in attempts to answer those two key questions.

    And it is unclear whether it is possible by peaceful means. Those neolib/neocon guys like Bolsheviks in the past want to cling to power at all costs.

    Another question is whether the maintenance of global neoliberal empire led by the USA is now too costly for US taxpayers and need to be reconsidered. This is the same question British empire faced in the past. Do we really need 500 or so foreign bases? Do we really need to spend half a trillion dollars annually on military? Do we need all those never ending wars as in Orwellian "war is the health of the state" quote (actually this quote is not from 1984, this is the subtitle of the essay by Randolph Bourne (1918))

    What is the real risk of WWIII with such policies? Because there is a chance that nor only the modern civilization, but all higher forms of life of Earth in general seize to exists after it.

    Concentrating of Trump "deficiencies" Krugman does not understand that Trump is just a Republican Obama -- another "clean plate" offering to the US electorate, another "bait and switch" artist.

    With just different fake slogan "Make America great again" instead of "Change we can believe in".

    And as such any critique of Trump is an implicit critique of Obama presidency, which enabled Trump election.

    Teleprompter personally was a dangerous and unqualified political hack, not that different from Trump (no foreign policy experience whatsoever; almost zero understanding of economics), who outsourced foreign policy to the despicable neocon warmonger Clinton and got us into Libya, Ukraine and Syria wars in addition to existing war in Afghanistan.

    Continuing occupation of Afghanistan (which incorrectly called war) and illegal actions in Syria (there was no UN resolution justifying the USA presence in Syria) are now becoming too costly.

    Afghan people definitely want the USA out and will fight for their freedom. Taliban has supporters in Pakistan and possibly in other Islamic countries.

    In Syria the USA now clashed with Russian interests which make it a real power keg. Add to this sociopaths in CIA like Mike "Kill-Russians" Morell and the fact that CIA is not under complete control of federal government and actually represent "state within the state" force in this conflict, and the situation looks really dangerous.

    And please note that Russia protects a secular government, and the USA supports Islamic fundamentalists in Syria, to make Israel even greater. Instead of "Making America great again". Such a betrayal of elections promises... The same policy that Hillary would adopt if she sits on the throne.

    So to say that Trump is idiot in foreign policy without saying that Obama was the same dangerous idiot, who pursued the same neocon policies is hypocritical, because they are manipulated by the same people in dark suits and are just marionettes, or, at best, minor players. Other people decide for them what is good for America.

    The US army is pretty much demoralized and even with advanced weapons and absolute air superiority can't achieve much because solders understand that they are just cannon fodder and it is unclear what they fighting for in Afghanistan.

    Because in Syria the USA support the same Islamic fundamentalists it is fighting in Afghanistan. Or even worse than those -- head choppers like guys from Al Nusra.

    So we fight secular government in Syria supporting Sunni fundamentalists (often of worst kind as KSA supported Wahhabi fighters) and simultaneously are trying to protect secular government in Afghanistan against exactly the same (or even slightly more moderate) Islamic fundamentalist forces. Is not this a definition of split personality?

    Reply Saturday, June 10, 2017 at 03:22 PM

    [Jun 10, 2017] In Europe, right-wing parties are preaching herrenvolk social democracy, a welfare state but only for selected groups. In America, however, Trump_vs_deep_state is faux populism that appeals to white identity but actually serves plutocrats

    Jun 10, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
    Christopher H. June 09, 2017 at 11:09 AM https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2017/03/14/populism-and-the-politics-of-health/

    Populism and the Politics of Health
    MARCH 14, 2017 1:43 PM
    by Paul Krugman

    ...

    This ties in with an important recent piece by Zack Beauchamp on the striking degree to which left-wing economics fails, in practice, to counter right-wing populism; basically, Sandersism has failed everywhere it has been tried. Why?

    The answer, presumably, is that what we call populism is really in large degree white identity politics, which can't be addressed by promising universal benefits. Among other things, these "populist" voters now live in a media bubble, getting their news from sources that play to their identity-politics desires, which means that even if you offer them a better deal, they won't hear about it or believe it if told. For sure many if not most of those who gained health coverage thanks to Obamacare have no idea that's what happened.

    That said, taking the benefits away would probably get their attention, and maybe even open their eyes to the extent to which they are suffering to provide tax cuts to the rich.

    In Europe, right-wing parties probably don't face the same dilemma; they're preaching herrenvolk social democracy, a welfare state but only for people who look like you. In America, however, Trump_vs_deep_state is faux populism that appeals to white identity but actually serves plutocrats. That fundamental contradiction is now out in the open." Reply Friday, Christopher H. - , June 09, 2017 at 11:12 AM

    There has been a silence from the center left during the Corbyn campaign and now after it is over. Luckily they have Comey to talk about. I will be curious to hear from Chris Dillow.
    libezkova - , June 09, 2017 at 10:22 PM
    "In Europe, right-wing parties probably don't face the same dilemma; they're preaching herrenvolk social democracy, a welfare state but only for people who look like you. In America, however, Trump_vs_deep_state is faux populism that appeals to white identity but actually serves plutocrats. That fundamental contradiction is now out in the open"

    this is an interesting observation.

    [Jun 09, 2017] Saudi Arabias Coalition Could Accidentally Unleash Iran

    Diplomatically the support of KAS was alrea albatros around the Us neck. It poratiens the USA as hyprocritical and brutal opportunist, devoid of any pronciple other then desire to establish and preseve the world hegemony.
    Jun 09, 2017 | nationalinterest.org
    The Iran-Syria alliance has endured the test of war and time. In the early 1980s, Iraq and Iran were engrossed in a brutal conflict that Baghdad portrayed as a war against Iranian expansionism. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq and the United States formed a coalition to isolate Tehran from the Hafez al-Assad regime and invite a swift victory for Baghdad. The Syria-Iran alliance never broke, even as Syria became entrenched in its own conflict in Lebanon. In his book chronicling the alliance , Jubin Goodarzi even asserted that Hafez al-Assad turned down $2 billion offered to him by the Saudis if he reopened the trans-Syrian pipeline to Iraq. Despite intense economic and military pressure, this strategy only solidified the nascent alliance between Tehran and Damascus. This alliance has remained durable and transcended significant strategic disagreements between the two countries over the last three decades.

    Iran chooses its alliances and conflicts pragmatically, rather than ideologically. For example, the Islamic Republic historically ignored the plights of Shia minorities in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan in favor of maintaining semi-cordial relations with Riyadh and Islamabad. Western analysts often portray Iran's most important alliance with Syria as that of a client and patron state. In reality, it is much closer to a genuine partnership rooted in common strategic goals, despite widely diverging ideologies. Both countries see themselves as unique partners in the "resistance" against Israel. Both also portray themselves as tolerant of religious minorities and sects in a region enveloped by Salafi extremism. Most importantly, Damascus and Tehran have always viewed a strong Arab bloc and Arab detente with Israel as an existential threat. This was true when Egypt and Syria cut diplomatic relations after the Camp David Accord, and when Arab states formed an alliance against the new Islamic Republic in Iran. Thus Tehran and Damascus see themselves as partners in a fight against an Arab bloc that is increasingly dictated by a U.S.-Saudi alliance. No amount of pressure on Iran will make the cost of Tehran's intervention in Syria too high to bear.

    Iran's experience of relative isolation during the war imposed on it by Saddam Hussein's Iraq inspired a frenzied race to develop domestic defensive and ballistic-missile capabilities. In a 2016 interview , Iran's Foreign Minister Javad Zarif asked, "What do you expect, Iran to lie dead? You've covered the Iran–Iraq war, you remember missiles pouring on Iranian cities with chemical weapons. You remember that we didn't have any to defend ourselves." The harsh realities of the Iran-Iraq War quelled revolutionary Iran's ambitions to export its revolution and ideology. Ever since the end of the war, Tehran has instead placed an emphasis on developing strategic alliances outside of the Middle East and developing a domestic military-industrial complex. President Trump's calls to isolate Iran during his recent speech in Riyadh will only provoke a surge in Iranian military development.

    Three contemporary developments also demonstrate why an "Arab NATO" will fail at its mission: Arab Shia communities view Saudi and Wahhabi hegemony as an existential threat, the Saudi-coalition is already fractured, and China and Russia have every reason to tilt towards Tehran.

    The main threat that the Saudi-led coalition seeks to combat is the rise of Arab Shia movements and militias that it believes are loyal to Iran, especially in Iraq and Syria. As I have written before , Shia movements are not nearly as loyal to Iranian interests as often believed, but the existence of an "Arab NATO" will likely result in driving vulnerable Shia communities closer to Tehran. Powerful cleric and warlord Muqtada al-Sadr has called on Assad to resign as president, and expelled fighters found to have fought in Syria in direct opposition to Iranian policy. Several high-ranking Shia clerics in Iraq have issued fatwas forbidding their followers to participate in Syrian operations. The most senior of these clerics, Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who himself is of Iranian extraction, has long been the darling of Western analysts due to his rejection of theocracy. In 2005, Thomas Friedman called for Sistani to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his quietist inclinations and role in legitimizing the new Iraqi government in the eyes of Shia. However, the rise of U.S.-backed Sunni coalitions will likely push Iraqi Shia toward institutionalized militancy if they feel their communities are under attack by Saudi-funded Sunni extremists.

    Qatari emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani allegedly stated that "there is no wisdom in harboring hostility toward Iran," but Qatar quickly claimed unconvincingly that the story was fabricated. This led Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Egypt, Yemen's Western-backed government and Libya to cut off relations with Qatar and put in place an aggressive blockade on its population. Doha's open support for the Muslim Brotherhood and Riyadh's allegation that Qatar provides support for ISIS-and, more importantly, Shia protesters in Saudi Arabia's Eastern Province-were used as the official excuse for severing ties. But this is clearly intended by Saudi Arabia to escalate tensions with Iran and send the message that lukewarm partners in the proxy war will not be accepted.

    ... ... ...

    An "Arab NATO" will provide little deterrence, and instead result in an arms race and a deepening of sectarian conflict in the region. It also risks dragging U.S. forces into a sectarian conflict. As former secretary of defense Robert Gates pointed out, the Saudis always want to "fight the Iranians to the last American."

    Adam Weinstein is a policy associate at the National Iranian American Council. He is a veteran of the Marine Corps where he served in Afghanistan. He has contributed to Foreign Policy, The Diplomat, CNN, and other outlets .

    John Doe • 10 hours ago

    SA is trying tp preserve waning hegemony by picking fights with anyone in sight but failing to defeat Yemen , now it's Qatar's turn with the hopes of it developing into an Iran - USA war.It won't help. The Saudis are TERRIFIED of a diplomatic rapprochement between Washington & Tehran and would start any war to prevent it.

    SweatnSteel • 4 hours ago

    As if this whole kerfuffle was strictly Riyadh's idea... Hmm.. Who else has been screaming "Iran, Iran, Iran"??

    Who else is mortified by the expansion and reinforcement of the Shia crescent now stretching from Pakistan to the Mediterranean?

    Who else indeed.. Riiiiight...


    youyeg • 39 minutes ago

    I think the best solution for Arab state is to provide more cooperation and not relying on the US and money. Nothing could come out of tension, but rise of opportunists who seek profit out of chaos.

    [Jun 06, 2017] US-led coalition destroys Syrian government forces within de-confliction zone - Pentagon

    Jun 06, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

    OJS | Jun 6, 2017 2:46:54 PM | 70

    Breaking News!

    RT just reported: "US-led coalition destroys Syrian government forces within de-confliction zone" - Pentagon. Published time: 6 Jun, 2017 18:35. Edited time: 6 Jun, 2017 18:43

    You just cannot trust the US.

    [Jun 04, 2017] Syrian Madness: Neocons The Anti-Realists by Robert Parry

    Notable quotes:
    "... Though the mainstream U.S. media blamed almost everything on Syrian President Assad, many Syrians recognized that the Sunni extremists who emerged as the power behind the opposition were a grave threat to other Syrian religious groups, including the Shiites, Alawites and Christians - and that Assad's authoritarian but secular regime represented their best hope for survival ..."
    "... But instead of looking for a realistic political solution, the neocons and the liberal interventionists insisted on a U.S. military intervention, either covertly by arming the opposition or overtly by mounting a Libyan-style bombing campaign to destroy Assad's armed forces and open the gates of Damascus to the rebels. ..."
    "... the neocon/liberal-interventionist coalition saw a great chance to push Obama into a bombing campaign after a Sarin gas attack outside Damascus on Aug. 21, 2013. The war hawks and the U.S. media immediately blamed Assad despite doubts among some U.S. intelligence analysts who suspected a provocation by the rebels. ..."
    Jan 17, 2015 | consortiumnews.com

    Originally from: Neocons The 'Anti-Realists' By Robert Parry

    In Syria, which had long been near the top of the neocon/Israeli hit list for "regime change," U.S., Western and Sunni support for another "moderate opposition" led to a civil war. Soon, what "moderates" there were blended into the ranks of Islamic extremists, either the Nusra Front, the al-Qaeda affiliate, or the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria or simply the Islamic State, which evolved from Zarqawi's Al-Qaeda in Iraq, continuing Zarqawi's hyper-brutality even after his death.

    Though the mainstream U.S. media blamed almost everything on Syrian President Assad, many Syrians recognized that the Sunni extremists who emerged as the power behind the opposition were a grave threat to other Syrian religious groups, including the Shiites, Alawites and Christians - and that Assad's authoritarian but secular regime represented their best hope for survival.[See Consortiumnews.com's " Syrian Rebels Embrace al-Qaeda. "]

    But instead of looking for a realistic political solution, the neocons and the liberal interventionists insisted on a U.S. military intervention, either covertly by arming the opposition or overtly by mounting a Libyan-style bombing campaign to destroy Assad's armed forces and open the gates of Damascus to the rebels. Under pressure from the likes of Ambassador Power and Secretary of State Clinton, Obama bowed to the demand to ship weapons to the rebels, although the CIA later discovered that many US weapons ended up in extremist hands.

    Still, with Obama dragging his feet on a larger-scale commitment, the neocon/liberal-interventionist coalition saw a great chance to push Obama into a bombing campaign after a Sarin gas attack outside Damascus on Aug. 21, 2013. The war hawks and the U.S. media immediately blamed Assad despite doubts among some U.S. intelligence analysts who suspected a provocation by the rebels.

    Those doubts and Obama's fear of an extremist victory led him to call off the planned bombing at the last minute, and he accepted a deal brokered by Russian President Vladimir Putin to arrange for Assad to surrender all Syria's chemical weapons, while Assad continued to deny any role in the Sarin attack. The neocons and liberal interventionists were furious at both Obama and Putin.

    [Jun 04, 2017] MUHAYSINI BOOTED OUT OF JARJANAAZ BY ENRAGED CITIZENS; SYRIAN ARMY GRINDS ISIS INTO DUST IN ALEPPO; ADRIFT IN THE NEAR EAST

    Jun 04, 2017 | syrianperspective.com

    Ziad Fadel points to After Riyadh summit, Sunni unity crumbles which informs us that kuwait, qatar, and dubai - the last the most populous of the uae, are none of them on board with the saudi leadership, or anti-iran. and somewhere i encountered a link to the intercept discussing the uae ambassador to the us' contacts with sheldon adelson's Foundation for Defense of Democracies. that can't make him - or the saudi rapprochement with zion - more popular on the arab street.

    is there a split forming in the gcc? can kuwait, qatar, and dubai see the handwriting on the wall? are they ready follow iranian pipeline routes through syria to the mediterranean and europe?

    i keep remembering - talk at least - of a turkish base in qatar. anything ever happen with that?

    Posted by: jfl | Jun 3, 2017 8:40:32 PM | 14 @14 jfl

    I know very little about the Gulf dictatorships.

    With that stated, I have been hearing over and over again about how Saudi Arabia is on the verge of collapse and the Eastern half of the country is mostly Shia and are on the verge of uprising.

    If there was a time to rise up against the Saudi dictatorship it would be now with the pathetic Saudi troops getting humiliated in Yemen.

    For an event that would upturn the entire Middle East almost overnight, I am shocked it hasn't happened.

    If the Eastern Shia half of Saudi Arabia rose up and even just made the Eastern half of the country a no go zone for the current dictorship troops:

    * The Saudi regime troops would have to be immediately pulled back from Yemen.

    * Yemen would most likely take over big chunks of Southern Saudi Arabia

    * Support and funding for the Saudi backed terrorists would go away almost immediately

    * There would be no "Shia Cresent' but 'Sunni Islands' in the Middle East

    * The decades of the US regime's fostering of Sunni violent sectarianism will have been a waste and no longer viable

    * The Israeli regime would be completely isolated

    * The other Gulf dicatatorships would almost certainly immediately side with Iran

    * The huge number of US regime bases in Gulf region would have to be abanoned

    Posted by: sandra_m | Jun 3, 2017 8:59:46 PM | 18

    [Jun 04, 2017] NATO votes to start by getting waist deep into the mess in Syria and Iraq to appease the US

    Jun 04, 2017 | al-monitor.com

    BraveNewWorld said...

    >"the chief member of the EU says that automatic agreement with Washington is no longer a given"

    NATO votes to start by getting waist deep into the mess in Syria and Iraq to appease the US.

    http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2017/05/turkey-syria-nato-joining-anti-isis-coalition.html

    [May 31, 2017] Blowing things and people up is seen as a demonstration of clarity and resolve (unless someone is doing it to us, in which case its correctly recognized as cowardly and evil) by John Quiggin

    Notable quotes:
    "... Reading the news, I find a lot of items demonstrating a scale of values that makes no sense to me. ..."
    "... The most striking recent example (on "our" side) was the instant and near-universal approval of Trump's bombing of an airfield in Syria ..."
    May 28, 2017 | crookedtimber.org

    Reading the news, I find a lot of items demonstrating a scale of values that makes no sense to me. Some are important in the grand scheme of things, some are less so, but perhaps more relevant to me. I think about writing posts but don't find the time. So here are a few examples, which you are welcome to chew over.

    • Blowing things and people up is seen as a demonstration of clarity and resolve (unless someone is doing it to us, in which case it's correctly recognized as cowardly and evil). The most striking recent example (on "our" side) was the instant and near-universal approval of Trump's bombing of an airfield in Syria , which had no effect at all on events there.

      In this case, there was some pushback , which is a sign of hope, I guess.

    • ... ... ...

    [May 30, 2017] It is estimated that over 120 ISIS rats were killed in the air raids. Over 500 are reported wounded or missing. Of the 39 pickups traveling in the convoy, 32 were confirmed destroyed.

    May 30, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com

    Blanco Diablo , May 30, 2017 10:21 PM

    Bad Vlad strikes Again!!

    "Impressive, was the Russian Air Force's stunning annihilation of a huge convoy of ISIS rats leaving Al-Raqqa in order to further a plan drawn up by the United States to open highway access from Al-Raqqa to Palmyra. The plan was not to destroy more Roman ruins at the ancient city. No, all of this was a part of the project to install a vassal state that would be controlled by Kurd allies of the U.S. in order to prevent the extension of the natural gas pipeline from Iran to Syria.

    The ISIS force departed Al-Raqqa on May 25, 2017 at approximately 3:00 a.m. local time. Russia had received a heads-up from SAA-MI about both human intelligence reports and intercepted communications between American, British and Jordanian terrorist enablers in the MOK HQ near Al-Naseeb. According to my sources, the U.S. promised to keep the SAAF at bay as the large ISIS force moved south toward Palmyra. An agreement was drawn up between the RuAF and the Syrian High Command to permit only Russian aircraft to fly since Syrian aircraft could be shot down by the Americans if they were interfering in some farfetched and typically idiotic plan hatched in Jordan. With the aircraft carrying Russian insignia, there was no conceivable way the U.S. could interdict Moscow's airpower.

    That left ISIS, on May 27, 2017, as an open target on the highway south just before Qal'at Jabal Jaabir. Russian Sukhoi bombers unloaded thousands of tons of ordnance on a densely packed convoy carrying not only rodents, but large quantities of resupplies for besieged cannibals in areas, like Khunayfis, soon to be liberated by the SAA. Aerial assessments and intercepted calls by ISIS rodent officers told a story of utter devastation and complete American/British failure. It is estimated that over 120 ISIS rats were killed in the air raids. Over 500 are reported wounded or missing. Of the 39 pickups traveling in the convoy, 32 were confirmed destroyed. All pickups were armed with 23mm cannons.

    It is highly unlikely that ISIS will cooperate again with such imbeciles such as those degenerates in Jordan. It has also become quite obvious that James "Mad Dog" Mattis is a pathological liar when he states that his war against ISIS is one of "annihilation". ": Ziad@SyrPer

    [May 29, 2017] Jared Kushner Reportedly Discussed Setting Up Secret Communication Channel With Moscow by Mary Papenfuss

    Is really Russian ambassador so negligent that he posted such an information over open channel? I doubt it. that means that Hayden may be lying and this is just a part of Purple revolution campaign of discreditation of Trump administration. Otherwise he reveals that the NSA broke Russian diplomatic communication cipher, which is biog NO-NO.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Without specifically mentioning the report about Kushner, Trump tweeted Sunday in an apparent response to a number of recent stories about his administration that "leaks coming out of the White House are fabricated lies." ..."
    "... Kushner's reported plan is evidence of an extreme cynicism about "organs of the state," said Hayden, and a belief that government institutions only serve the self-interests of the president currently in power. The apparent implication of such a Kremlin link was that the Trump team trusted Russian agents more than the outgoing Obama administration or the U.S. intelligence community. ..."
    May 29, 2017 | www.huffingtonpost.com

    Kushner's reported actions suggest "we are in a really dark place as a society," Michael Hayden said.

    Former CIA Director General Michael Hayden said that the reported plan by chief White House adviser Jared Kushner's to arrange secret communications with the Russians during President Donald Trump's transition was "off the map" and like nothing he has seen in his lifetime.

    Hayden wants to chalk up the stunning plan to "naivete" rather than evil intentions - but that's not reassuring, he said in an interview on CNN.

    "Right now, I'm going with naivete, and that's not particularly comforting for me," he said. "What manner of ignorance, chaos, hubris, suspicion, contempt would you have to have to think that doing this with the Russian ambassador was a good or an appropriate idea?"

    Hayden was commenting on reports, which first appeared in The Washington Post Friday, that Kushner discussed last December establishing a secret communication channel with the Kremlin - using Russian facilities - without any monitoring by the U.S.

    Kushner discussed the idea in Trump Tower with Sergei Kislyak, Russia's ambassador to the U.S., who was surprised by the request, the Post reported, because of security risks such an arrangement would pose to both countries.

    Kushner emerged last Thursday as a person of interest in the FBI's investigation of Russian interference in the U.S. presidential election.

    Without specifically mentioning the report about Kushner, Trump tweeted Sunday in an apparent response to a number of recent stories about his administration that "leaks coming out of the White House are fabricated lies."

    Kushner's reported plan is evidence of an extreme cynicism about "organs of the state," said Hayden, and a belief that government institutions only serve the self-interests of the president currently in power. The apparent implication of such a Kremlin link was that the Trump team trusted Russian agents more than the outgoing Obama administration or the U.S. intelligence community.

    "What degree of suspicion of the existing government, what degree of contempt for the administration they were replacing would be required again to think this was an acceptable course of action?" he asked.

    Hayden added: "It says an awful lot about us as a society that we could actually harbor those kinds of feelings that the organs of the state would be used by my predecessor to come after me or ... to disrupt my administration in a way that made it seem legitimate to me to use the secure communications facilities of a foreign power - a foreign power that some in government alleged you were cooperating with to affect the American election."

    It's evidence, he added, that "we are in a really dark place as a society."

    [May 29, 2017] Stephen Cohen Will Syrian State Collapse Fall into More Chaos If Assad Is Toppled Democracy Now! by Stephen Cohen

    Apr 13, 2017 | www.democracynow.org

    AMY GOODMAN : Finally, Stephen Cohen, how likely do you think there is right now of a direct confrontation between the U.S. and Russia?

    STEPHEN COHEN : If I knew the answer to that, I'd go to the racetrack and redeem a lot of the money I lost over the years. But I would say way too close, way too possible. The other new Cold War fronts are heating up. That's the North Baltic area, the small Baltic states and Poland, where NATO is building up beyond reason, Ukraine, where the American-supported government in Kiev is melting down. But, of course, in Syria. We have a lot of troops there. We don't know how many. They call it special op troops. But there's probably more than they've told us. American airplanes are flying. The battle for Raqqa, which is the symbolic, or real, Islamic State capital in Syria, is coming up. Both sides want to take it-the American coalition, the Russian-Syrian-Iranian coalition. Ideally, they'd cooperate and take the city together. But if they compete to take the city, you're going to have American and Russian aircraft flying in a very close area.

    Do we have 30 seconds for a final word? Jonathan was right about the Russian unwillingness to abandon Assad. But I believe, in the Russian mind-and I believe it's correct-it's a broader, more profound issue. They're not interested in Assad as a person. And they have said repeatedly, Assad can go, eventually. And they say leave it to the Syrian people. And, by the way, that's what Tillerson said about it a week ago, until he flipped-leave it to the Syrian people.

    For Russia-and try to think about this-Assad is the Syrian state. These are highly personalized states in these regions of the world. If you kill Assad-and that's what they're talking about-or arrest him, the Syrian state will collapse, just as it did in Iraq and in Libya, when we basically assassinated the leaders of those countries.

    If the Syrian state collapses, it means the Syrian Army, which is doing most of the fighting on the ground against the Islamic State, will collapse. Many will desert to the Syrian Army.

    So I would ask you, I would ask all these Americans who vilify Assad, I would ask all your listeners and viewers: If you destroy the Syrian state, who's going to do the fighting against terrorists in Syria? Do you ask-are you going to ask Russia to send troops? Are we going to send troops?

    So, for Russia-and this is the point-it's not Assad. They could give a hoot about what happens to him and their family. It's what happens to the Syrian state. And that's why they will stand with Assad until there is some kind of military victory, and then a so-called political peace process begins, and then Assad is on his own.

    NERMEEN SHAIKH : Well, one last question, Stephen Cohen. As you say, if, like the Russians say, that Syrians will be able to decide, or should be able to decide, what happens to Assad-well, first of all, Assad has not ceded power to his own people for many, many years.

    STEPHEN COHEN : Yes, right.

    NERMEEN SHAIKH : There's no reason to think that his position will change. And second, I mean, it's an argument that's commonly made by the U.S. government when supporting dictatorial regimes, that that regime is the only thing standing between them and an Islamist, terrorist, extremist government.

    STEPHEN COHEN : Well, it's an old American habit. I'm older than you guys. But during the Cold War, we supported a lot of very bad leaders and said they stood between us and communism. I think-but we don't get this clarity out of Washington, we didn't get it under Obama, not getting today-that the number one threat to all of us in the world today is international terrorism.

    You know, couple weeks ago, there was the tragedy in St. Petersburg, where folks going to work, kids going to school were blown up and killed in a St. Petersburg, Russian subway.

    That could happen here very easily. You can't protect subways. You simply can't.

    The one thing the Russians have is immense experience in dealing with terrorism, inside their own country and abroad. They've had more, outside the Middle East, casualties of terrorism than any country in the world. We need an alliance with Russia. That's what this is all about. Are we going to make an alliance with Russia to war against terrorism in Syria and elsewhere, or not? That's the issue today.

    AMY GOODMAN : Well, we want to thank you, Stephen Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at New York University and Princeton University. And thanks so much to Jonathan Steele, former Moscow correspondent for The Guardian , chief reporter at the website Middle East Eye .

    [May 28, 2017] Trump Dancing with Wolves on the Titanic - The Unz Review

    May 28, 2017 | www.unz.com
    With Trump now officially joining this ugly alliance, the US will contribute the military "expertise" of a country which can't even take Mosul, mostly because its forces are hiding, literally, behind the backs of Kurdish and Arab Iraqis. To think that these three want to take on Hezbollah, Iran and Russia would be almost comical if it wasn't for the kind of appalling bloodshed that this will produce.

    Alas, just look at what the Saudis are doing to Yemen, what the Israelis did to Gaza or Lebanon or what the US did to Iraq and you will immediately get a sense of what the formation of this nefarious alliance will mean for the people of Syria and the rest of the region. The record shows that a military does not need to be skilled at real warfare to be skilled at murdering people: even though the US occupation of Iraq was, in military terms, a total disaster, it did result in almost one and a half million dead people .

    What is also clear is who the main target of this evil alliance will be: Iran, the only real democracy in the Middle-East . The pretext? Why – weapons of mass destruction, of course: the (non-existing) chemical weapons of the Syrians and the (non-existing) nuclear weapons of the Iranians. In Trump's own words : " no civilized nation can tolerate the massacre of innocents with chemical weapons " and " The United States is firmly committed to keeping Iran from developing a nuclear weapon and halting their support of terrorists and militias that are causing so much suffering and chaos throughout the Middle East ". Nothing new here. As for how this evil alliance will fight when it does not have any boots worth putting on the ground? Here, again, the solution as simple as it is old: to use the ISIS/al-Qaeda takfiri crazies as cannon fodder for the US, Israel and the KSA. This is just a re-heated version of the "brilliant" Brzezinski plan on how to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. Back to the future indeed. And should the "good terrorists" win, by some kind of miracle, in Syria, then turn them loose against against Hezbollah in Lebanon and against the Shias in Iraq and Iran. Who knows, with some (a lot) of luck, the Empire might even be able to re-kindle the "Caucasus Emirate" somewhere on the southern borders of Russia, right?

    Wrong.

    For one thing, the locals are not impressed. Here is what the Secretary General of Hezbollah, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, had to say about this :

    "The Israelis, are betting on Isis and all this takfiri project in the region but in any case they know, the Israelis, the Americans, and all those who use the takfiris, that this is a project without any future. I tell you, and I also reassure everyone through this interview. This project has no future."

    He is right, of course. And the newly re-elected President of Iran, Hassan Rouhani, openly says that the Americans are clueless :

    The problem is that the Americans do not know our region and those who advise US officials are misleading them

    It is pretty clear who these 'advisors' are: the Saudis and the Israelis. Their intentions are also clear: to get the Americans to do their dirty work for them while remaining as far back as possible. You could say that the Saudis and Israelis are trying to get the Americans to do for them what the Americans are trying to get the Kurds to do for them in Iraq: be their cannon fodder. The big difference is that the Kurds at least clearly understand what is going on whereas the Americans are, indeed, clueless.

    Not all Americans, of course. Many fully understand what is happening. A good example of this acute awareness is what b had to say on Moon of Alabama after reading the transcript of the press briefing of Secretary of Defense Mattis, General Dunford and Special Envoy McGurk on the Campaign to Defeat ISIS:

    My first thought after reading its was: "These people live in a different world. They have no idea how the real word works on the ground. What real people think, say, and are likely to do." There was no strategic thought visible. Presented were only some misguided tactical ideas.

    A senior British reporter, the Secretary General of Hezbollah, the President of Iran and a US blogger all seem to agree on one thing: there is no real US "policy" at work here, what we are seeing is a dangerous exercise in pretend-strategy which cannot result in anything but chaos and defeat.

    So why is the Trump administration plowing ahead with this nonsense?

    The reasons are most likely a combination of internal US politics and a case of " if all you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail ". The anti-Trump color revolution cum coup d'état which the Neocons and the US deep state started even before Trump actually got into the White House has never stopped and all the signs are that the anti-Trump forces will only rest once Trump is impeached and, possibly, removed from office. In response to this onslaught, all that Trump initially could come up with was to sacrifice his closest allies and friends (Flynn, Bannon) in the vain hope that this would appease the Neocons. Then he began to mindlessly endorse their "policies" . Predictably this has not worked either. Then Trump even tried floating the idea of having Joe Lieberman for FBI director before getting 'cold feet' and chaning his position yet again . And all the while while Trump is desperately trying to appease them, the Neocons are doubling-down, doubling-down again and then doubling-down some more. It is pretty clear by now that Trump does not have what it takes in terms of allies or even personal courage to tackle the swamp he promised to drain. As a result what we are seeing now looks like a repeat of the last couple of years of the Obama administration: a total lack of vision or even a general policy, chaos in the Executive Branch and a foreign policy characterized by a multiple personality disorder which see the Pentagon, Foggy Bottom, the CIA and the White House all pursuing completley different policies in pursuit of completely different goals. In turn, each of these actors engages in what (they think) they do best: the Pentagon bombs, the State Department pretends to negotiate, the CIA engages in more or less covert operation in support of more or less "good terrorists" while the White House focuses its efforts on trying to make the President look good or, at least, in control of something.

    Truth be told, Trump has nothing at all to show so far:

    Russia : according to rumors spread by the US, former corporate executive Rex Tillerson was supposed to go to Moscow to deliver some kind of ultimatum. Thank God that did not happen. Instead Tillerson spent several hours talking to Lavrov and then a couple more talking to Putin. More recently, Lavrov was received by Tillerson in the US and, following that meeting, he also met with Trump. Following all these meetings no tangible results were announced. What does that mean? Does that mean that nothing was achieved? Not at all, what was achieved is that the Russians clearly conveyed to the Americans two basic thing: first, that there were not impressed by their sabre-rattling and, second, that as long as the US was acting as a brain-dead elephant in a porcelain store there was no point for Russian to work with the US. To his credit, Trump apparently backed down and even tried to make a few conciliatory statements. Needless to say, the US Ziomedia crucified him for being "too friendly" with The Enemy. The outcome now is, of course, better than war with Russia, but neither is it some major breakthrough as Trump had promised (and, I believe, sincerely hoped for) during his campaign.

    DPRK/PRC : what had to happen did, of course happen: all the sabre-rattling with three aircraft carriers strike groups ended up being a gigantic flop as neither the North Koreans nor the Chinese were very impressed. If anything, this big display of Cold War era hardware was correctly interpreted not as a sign of strength, but a sign of weakness. Trump wasted a lot of money and a lot of time, but he has absolutely nothing to show for it. The DPRK tested yet another intermediate range missile yesterday. Successfully, they say.

    The Ukraine : apparently Trump simply does not care about the Ukraine and, frankly, I can't blame him. Right now the situation there is so bad that no outside power can meaningfully influence the events there any more. I would argue that in this case, considering the objective circumstances, Trump did the right thing when he essentially "passed the baby" to Merkel and the EU: let them try to sort out this bloody mess as it is primarily their problem. Karma, you know.

    So, all in all, Trump has nothing to show in the foreign policy realm. He made a lot of loud statements, followed by many threats, but at the end of the day somebody apparently told him "we can't do that, Mr President" (and thank God for that anonymous hero!). Once this reality began to sink in all which was left is to create an illusion of foreign policy, a make-believe reality in which the US is still a superpower which can determine the outcome of any conflict. Considering that the AngloZionist Empire is, first and foremost, what Chris Hedges calls an " Empire of Illusions " it only makes sense for its President to focus on creating spectacles and photo opportunities. Alas, the White House is so clueless that it manages to commit major blunders even when trying to ingratiate itself with a close ally. We saw that during the recent Trump trip to Saudi Arabia when both Melania and Ivanka Trump refused to cover their heads while in Riyadh but did so when they visited the Pope in the Vatican . As the French say, this was "worse than a crime, it was a blunder" which speaks a million words about the contempt in which the American elites hold the Muslim world.

    There is another sign that the US is really scraping the bottom of the barrel: Rex Tillerson has now declared that " NATO should formally join the anti-Daesh coalition ". In military terms, NATO is worse than useless for the US: the Americans are much better off fighting by themselves than involving a large number of "pretend armies" who could barely protect themselves in a real battlefield. Oh sure, you can probably scrape a halfway decent battalion here, maybe even a regiment there, but all in all NATO forces are useless, especially for ground operations. They, just like the Saudis and Israelis, prefer to strike from the air, preferably protected by USAF AWACs, and never to get involved in the kind of ugly infantry fighting which is taking place in Syria. For all their very real faults and problems, at least the Americans do have a number of truly combat capable units, such as the Marines and some Army units, which are experienced and capable of giving the Takfiris a run for their money. But the Europeans? Forget it!

    It is really pathetic to observe the desperate efforts of the Trump Administration to create some kind of halfway credible anti-Daesh coalition while strenuously avoiding to look at the simple fact that the only parties which can field a large number of combat capable units to fight Daesh are the Iranians, Hezbollah and, potentially, the Russians. This is why Iranian President Rouhani recently declared that

    "Who fought against the terrorists? It was Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and Russia. But who funded the terrorists? Those who fund terrorists cannot claim they are fighting against them" and "Who can say regional stability can be restored without Iran? Who can say the region will experience total stability without Iran?"

    In truth, even the Turks and the Kurds don't really have what it would take to defeat Daesh in Syria. But the worst mistake of the US generals is that they are still pretending as if a large and experienced infantry force like Daesh/ISIS/al-Qaeda/etc could be defeated without a major ground offensive. That won't happen.

    So Trump can dance with the Wahabis and stand in prayer at the wailing wall, but all his efforts to determine the outcome of the war in Syria are bound to fail: far from being a superpower, the US has basically become irrelevant, especially in the Middle East. This is why Russia, Iran and Turkey are now attempting to create a trilateral "US free" framework to try to change the conditions on the ground. The very best the US are still capable of is to sabotage those efforts and needlessly prolong the carnage in Syria and Iraq. That is both pathetic and deeply immoral.

    * * *

    When I saw Trump dancing with his Saudi pals I immediately thought of the movies "Dances with Wolves" and "Titanic". Empires often end in violence and chaos, but Trump has apparently decided to add a good measure of ridicule to the mix. The tragedy is that neither the United States nor the rest of the planet can afford that kind of ridicule right now, especially not the kind of ridicule which can very rapidly escalate in an orgy of violence. With the European politicians paralyzed in a state subservient stupor to the Rothschild gang, Latin America ravaged by (mostly US-instigated) crises and the rest of the planet trying to stay clear from the stumbling ex-superpower, the burden to try to contain this slow-motion train wreck falls upon Russia and China.

    As for Trump, he made a short speech before NATO leaders today. He spoke about the " threats from Russia and on NATO's eastern and southern borders ". QED.

    Avery , May 27, 2017 at 2:35 pm GMT

    {Tillerson was supposed to go to Moscow to deliver some kind of ultimatum.}

    What kind of so-called 'ultimatum' could Tillerson possibly deliver to Moscow? What hasn't Washington already 'ultimatumed' to Russia that has failed to force Russia to submit to Washington's will:
    1) Assault on the Ruble: failed.
    2) Engineered oil price collapse: failed.
    3) Sanctions: failed.
    4) Syria: failed.
    5) ..

    {Thank God that did not happen.}

    And as Mr. Spock said to Dr. Bones in one of the episodes " ..the Deity had nothing to do with it: it was my cross-linking to B that did it ..": Deity had nothing to do with it. It was thems 8,000 or so nuclear warheads that Russia has that did it. US issues ultimatums only to countries that can't bite back, like telling Saddam he has 48 hours to get, and then promptly invading.

    Avery , May 27, 2017 at 2:44 pm GMT

    @Avery {Tillerson was supposed to go to Moscow to deliver some kind of ultimatum.}

    What kind of so-called 'ultimatum' could Tillerson possibly deliver to Moscow? What hasn't Washington already 'ultimatumed' to Russia that has failed to force Russia to submit to Washington's will:
    1) Assault on the Ruble: failed.
    2) Engineered oil price collapse: failed.
    3) Sanctions: failed.
    4) Syria: failed.
    5) ........

    And as Mr. Spock said to Dr. Bones in one of the episodes ".....the Deity had nothing to do with it: it was my cross-linking to B that did it.....": Deity had nothing to do with it. It was thems 8,000 or so nuclear warheads that Russia has that did it. US issues ultimatums only to countries that can't bite back, like telling Saddam he has 48 hours to get,...and then promptly invading.

    mh505 , May 27, 2017 at 2:59 pm GMT

    Just a little clarification: As far as is known, "b" from Moon of Alabama is not an American, nor does he live there.

    Apparently, he is a former officer of the German Bundeswehr.

    Si1ver1ock , May 27, 2017 at 3:46 pm GMT

    Sadly, all too true.

    I've been waiting for someone to point out the silliness of asking Russia and China to sanction North Korea, when the US currently has sanctions on Russia and is threatening China in the South China sea. Maybe that is what Lavrov talked about with Trump.

    Seems schizophrenic somehow.

    neutral , May 27, 2017 at 10:39 pm GMT

    @Sean

    krollchem , May 28, 2017 at 1:11 am GMT

    Here is Jack Perry's take on the war against ISIS Inc:

    "If there's one thing Democrats and Republicans can agree upon, it's war. Both of them never saw a war they didn't like unless the other party started it, it's going badly, and it's an election year."

    "They want to declare war this time as opposed to just start bombing and worry about legality later. Okay, but who will they send the declaration of war to? ISIS is a non-state entity. What, will they just Twitter it out and hope ISIS cadre picks it up? In reality, what they better understand is this: When it's a non-state entity, you can't sign a cease-fire with them, either. Therefore, how will the U.S. exit this war, since cease-fires are its preferred route to getting someone else to take over the payments?"

    "let's keep in mind the U.S. government has technically been fighting ISIS via an air war for a few years now and we haven't seen the "For Sale" sign up at ISIS, Inc. so far. Let's also not forget the United States government could not find Osama bin Laden for several years, has not defeated al-Qaida for these 15 years plus since 9/11, and didn't even defeat the Taliban over in Afghanistan where the U.S. military still remains today. And now they want to mortgage our future in order to buy the ISIS Boardwalk piece on the World Monopoly board?! Excuse me, but say what?! "

    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/05/jack-perry/warning-were-overdue/

    The real answer is to stop supporting the fanatical Wahhabism of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf state and shutdown their religious schools that export radical Islam:

    http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/2014/11/wahhabism-isis-how-saudi-arabia-exported-main-source-global-terrorism

    See how Ramzan Kadyrov the President of Chechnya successfully reeducates Muslims who lose their way and make the mistake of listening to Wahhabist Imams:

    http://thesaker.is/ramzan-kadyrov-on-takfiri-terrorism/

    Likewise it is important to stop supporting Israel and their radical Jewish doctrine and close down their concentration camp, eliminate their chemical, biological and radiological weapons stockpiles, and close down their support for Al Qaeda and their allies including ISIS.

    Providing an apology to the sailors of the USS Liberty for their sacrifice and abandonment by the US government for the last 50 years is also in order. This shameful treatment of these US military is a major stain on America.

    Johan Nagel , Website May 28, 2017 at 6:31 am GMT

    A useful article, as is always the case with our fine Saker.

    Though I cannot understand why writers continue to follow the trawler like the seagulls waiting for the sardines, (a nod in the direction of King Eric!). Trump has been proven, as Obama was proven, and many before him, to be nominally a script reader, a totem for the masses to look towards as their 'leader' when the reality is that the government of the US especially and most obviously is merely tangible facet of a much bigger group. In short, Trump is a businessman given the chance to make a few extra millions and go down in history as a President. All he has to do is try to keep his mouth shut, make these visits to other countries for effect, make speeches given to him by others and he gets more gold and his place in history. It is all theatre

    The real power is so obviously in Israel, alongside old and new money, the military industrial complex which is spearheaded by the US and UK with the mass media another major power group and connected. Pharmaceutical and Agricultural corporations have also risen to huge prominence. Essentially, the 'government' is mainly for show.

    Trump has forged no new alliance. The KSa is run by immensely dodgy fiends who might even be Jews themselves. The two countries are an axis or seat of power in the region with the same aims, the same MO, the same funding, arming and support of the same militant groups. Anyway, much of this is outlined by the Saker.

    However, as I have seen elsewhere, this idea of the europeans being so weak and offering nothing on the power stage is either very poor reporting or some form of racism. The secret services of the Uk are involved in likely every theatre of war around the globe. They simply do not allow themselves to be so easily seen as the CIA or other military facets of the US death machine.

    I suspect the French also are very well connected and hugely involved. Behind the scenes. Mainly the Brits though. Always have been, always will be. Their bread and butter is serving interests well beyond the government, nothing to do with the people. I would also add that some of the special forces at least in the motherland (England to me) are revered as much as feared across the globe this has been confirmed to me by soldiers, not just what I have read.

    Also, still on Europe, well at least the UK Unlike the US, which managed to elect a racist, misogynist, bigot, the UK voted in enough numbers for their independence. They also have provided enough support from the people, not the Establishment to present to the world a candidate of decency, purity of heart and integrity, the likes of which have not been seen in the US, at such a high level, not anywhere else a handful of latin american countries, for many moons indeed.

    The witch hunt against him from his own party, from the Conservatives, from the mass media, from his so called 'friends' is a disgrace, yet the mere fact the people have caused such a tidal wave to even give such a man a chance, brings me pride and a slither, fast fading as it will prove, of hope

    Too many writers generalize Europe too much for me to conclude anything other than their experience of Europe comes from words on a screen rather than practical living in the countries and peoples they write of.

    NB. Also, for a bit of fun, I used a couple of introductions of characters from Dostoyevsky's The Devils, as I watched interviews with Corbyn and May last night, and tailored the text to provide Fyodor's analysis of the candidates!>> http://thedissolutefox.com/profiling-the-candidates-uk-elections-corbyn-and-may/ )

    jilles dykstra , May 28, 2017 at 7:11 am GMT

    The Dutch university professors Laslo Maracs and Wolfferen agree, Trump understands that eight years Obama cannot be continued, leads the USA to political and economic ruin.
    China and Russia were driven together, the economic centre of the world moved from the Atlantic to Central Asia.
    John Maynard Keynes already knew, 'ideas are the most powerful in the world', even obsolete ideas as the west controlling the world.
    This is the obstruction by CNN, Washpost and NYT, they do not understand that their world no longer exists.
    Trump, in the view of the mentioned profs, and in mine, is manoevring cautiously in order to change history, as Roosevelt needed some seven years to get the USA people in the mood for war, Trump maybe needs as many years to remove the mood for war from the USA.
    Trump has to move cautiously, I do not think he believes the Oswald story about the murder of Kennedy.

    animalogic , May 28, 2017 at 9:23 am GMT

    @krollchem

    Sergey Krieger , May 28, 2017 at 10:18 am GMT

    Lol, it is more like dancing with jackals.

    DanCT , May 28, 2017 at 11:00 am GMT

    Trump may be influenced by the MIC and major industry groups, but they are not the deep state, which should be narrowly defined as Israel itself, its fifth column, and those elements in gov and the media who succeeded in pulling off and covering up 911, without which we wouldn't be dealing with any of this.

    What I find alarming is Conservativism Inc's willingness to accept the preposterous official narrative about 911 while "bravely" challenging gov data and narratives in all other respects. Conservatives such as Pat Buchanan on down are willing to throw out over one thousand years of Western development regarding the rational relationship between evidence and conclusion, and not least the scientific method, to support what amounts to fantastical storytelling.

    I find it helpful to pull up Google images of these conservative opposition voices, almost invariably cowardly looking little nerds, to understand why we are being neutralized instead of organized to fight the deep state and in our efforts to restore order.

    Seamus Padraig , May 28, 2017 at 12:25 pm GMT

    @Johan Nagel A useful article, as is always the case with our fine Saker.

    Though I cannot understand why writers continue to follow the trawler like the seagulls waiting for the sardines, (a nod in the direction of King Eric!). Trump has been proven, as Obama was proven, and many before him, to be nominally a script reader, a totem for the masses to look towards as their 'leader' when the reality is that the government of the US especially and most obviously is merely tangible facet of a much bigger group. In short, Trump is a businessman given the chance to make a few extra millions and go down in history as a President. All he has to do is try to keep his mouth shut, make these visits to other countries for effect, make speeches given to him by others and he gets more gold and his place in history. It is all theatre...

    The real power is so obviously in Israel, alongside old and new money, the military industrial complex which is spearheaded by the US and UK...with the mass media another major power group and connected. Pharmaceutical and Agricultural corporations have also risen to huge prominence. Essentially, the 'government' is mainly for show.

    Trump has forged no new alliance. The KSa is run by immensely dodgy fiends who might even be Jews themselves. The two countries are an axis or seat of power in the region with the same aims, the same MO, the same funding, arming and support of the same militant groups. Anyway, much of this is outlined by the Saker.

    However, as I have seen elsewhere, this idea of the europeans being so weak and offering nothing on the power stage is either very poor reporting or some form of racism. The secret services of the Uk are involved in likely every theatre of war around the globe. They simply do not allow themselves to be so easily seen as the CIA or other military facets of the US death machine.

    I suspect the French also are very well connected and hugely involved. Behind the scenes. Mainly the Brits though. Always have been, always will be. Their bread and butter is serving interests well beyond the government, nothing to do with the people. I would also add that some of the special forces at least in the motherland (England to me) are revered as much as feared across the globe...this has been confirmed to me by soldiers, not just what I have read.

    Also, still on Europe, well at least the UK...Unlike the US, which managed to elect a racist, misogynist, bigot, the UK voted in enough numbers for their independence. They also have provided enough support from the people, not the Establishment to present to the world a candidate of decency, purity of heart and integrity, the likes of which have not been seen in the US, at such a high level, not anywhere else a handful of latin american countries, for many moons indeed.

    The witch hunt against him from his own party, from the Conservatives, from the mass media, from his so called 'friends' is a disgrace, yet the mere fact the people have caused such a tidal wave to even give such a man a chance, brings me pride and a slither, fast fading as it will prove, of hope...

    Too many writers generalize Europe too much for me to conclude anything other than their experience of Europe comes from words on a screen rather than practical living in the countries and peoples they write of.

    NB. Also, for a bit of fun, I used a couple of introductions of characters from Dostoyevsky's The Devils, as I watched interviews with Corbyn and May last night, and tailored the text to provide...Fyodor's analysis of the candidates!>> http://thedissolutefox.com/profiling-the-candidates-uk-elections-corbyn-and-may/ )

    WJ , May 28, 2017 at 1:22 pm GMT

    @Sean

    WJ , May 28, 2017 at 1:27 pm GMT

    @Sherman

    Hey Andrei

    Your beloved Russians are wasting money and resources they don't have propping up a despised dictator in Syria.

    This is no doubt causing anti-Russian resentment throughout the Arab world that will last for years.

    Hezbollah is also bogged down and bleeding and weakened in this fight. Ditto for their Iranian backers.

    There is no end in sight to this war and it seems like it's a bunch of bad guys killing each other off.

    annamaria , May 28, 2017 at 2:26 pm GMT

    @Sean

    Z-man , May 28, 2017 at 3:37 pm GMT

    @Robert Magill

    [May 27, 2017] Neoliberals tears about Hillary loss might create dragons teeth effect

    Notable quotes:
    "... One thing we don't need are "progressives" who whine about irregularities (without proof) when they lose a close election. That will help the right wing more than anything they themselves can do. She is clearly not mature enough to take any leadership role anywhere. ..."
    "... "neoliberal tears" about Hillary loss might create "dragon's teeth" effect... For example look at the Twit: "Fmr Kasich Supporter: Hostile Media Makes Me Support Trump " Chinese torture of Trump using well timed leaks also can have the same effect. ..."
    "... sections of Trump voters and population in general now harbored "a uniform distrust of the national news media." ..."
    "... There are still a lot of morons who voted for Trump and are sure he will do the part of his promises they listened to and believed. He is brilliant at the short con. That is how he made his money (or is it failed to loss his inheritance). He promises whatever he sense that the costumer want to hear and get a signature on the deal. Then as soon as the costumer have handed over their money (votes) he runs away from what he promised. ..."
    "... That (short) con works in real estate where he really don't need to do another deal with people after he conned them. In politics he will be faced with the voters he conned in the first place, so either he chose to be a one-term president or he will realize why a one-trick pony shouldn't try to do a new trick. ..."
    May 27, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com

    DeDude - , May 26, 2017 at 02:41 PM

    One thing we don't need are "progressives" who whine about irregularities (without proof) when they lose a close election. That will help the right wing more than anything they themselves can do. She is clearly not mature enough to take any leadership role anywhere.
    libezkova - , May 26, 2017 at 07:47 PM
    "One thing we don't need are "progressives" who whine about irregularities (without proof) when they lose a close election"

    That's a very good point. I would say more: "neoliberal tears" about Hillary loss might create "dragon's teeth" effect... For example look at the Twit: "Fmr Kasich Supporter: Hostile Media Makes Me Support Trump " Chinese torture of Trump using well timed leaks also can have the same effect.

    that all means that it's not only just former #NeverHillary types who still stand by the president. Other sections of Trump voters and population in general now harbored "a uniform distrust of the national news media."

    see also http://reason.com/blog/2017/05/24/trump-nixon-watergate-culture-war

    from which this quote was taken.

    Christopher H. - , May 26, 2017 at 01:24 PM
    https://twitter.com/StephanieKelton/status/868131695215738880

    Stephanie Kelton‏ @StephanieKelton

    Stephanie Kelton Retweeted Pedro da Costa

    There should be less pushback on Trump's growth forecast, per se, and more focus on the question Growth For Whom?

    8:48 AM - 26 May 2017

    DeDude - , May 26, 2017 at 02:32 PM
    There are still a lot of morons who voted for Trump and are sure he will do the part of his promises they listened to and believed. He is brilliant at the short con. That is how he made his money (or is it failed to loss his inheritance). He promises whatever he sense that the costumer want to hear and get a signature on the deal. Then as soon as the costumer have handed over their money (votes) he runs away from what he promised.

    That (short) con works in real estate where he really don't need to do another deal with people after he conned them. In politics he will be faced with the voters he conned in the first place, so either he chose to be a one-term president or he will realize why a one-trick pony shouldn't try to do a new trick.

    But it will almost certainly take at least a year before a large number of the Trump voters realize that they have been conned. It is very difficult for people to admit that they made a stupid mistake - especially difficult for stupid people.

    libezkova - , May 26, 2017 at 08:00 PM
    "But it will almost certainly take at least a year before a large number of the Trump voters realize that they have been conned."

    Not true. I know many who already "get it " ;-)

    "That (short) con works in real estate where he really don't need to do another deal with people after he conned them. In politics he will be faced with the voters he conned in the first place, so either he chose to be a one-term president or he will realize why a one-trick pony shouldn't try to do a new trick."

    But both Bush II an Barack Obama were reelected. So "bait and switch" game might not be that fatal for politicians in the USA as it is in some other countries.

    I agree that shortermism is the name of the game.

    "It is very difficult for people to admit that they made a stupid mistake"

    Large part of "alt-right" (anti war right) already abandoned Trump. Those did it first. Paleoconservatives followed and now are one just step from open hostility mostly because of media attacks on Trump.

    Libertarians, especially former Ron Paul supporters, now are openly hostile and their critique is really biting.

    Do not know about evangelicals and other fringe groups, but I doubt that any of them still have illusions about Trump.

    IMHO, the only factor that still allows Trump to maintain his base is unending attacks of neoliberal media and this set of well coordinated leaks.

    [May 25, 2017] EconoSpeak Some Saudi-US History

    May 25, 2017 | econospeak.blogspot.com
    Given Donald Trump's new commitment to support military adventurism by Saudi Arabia in Yemen and more generally against Iran, it might be worth reconsidering how this alliance developed.

    The beginning for Saudi Arabia was in 1744 when a wandering radical cleric, Mohammed bin Abdel-Wahhab met up with a local chieftain, Mohammed bin Saud in the village of Diriyah, whose ruins are now located in the suburbs of the current Saudi Arabian capital, Riyadh. Wahhab converted Saud to his cause of spreading the strictest of the four Sunni shari'as, the Hanbali code, throughout the world, and this remains to this day the ideology of the House of Saud, the ruling family of Saudi Arabia, with this ideology widely known as Wahhabism. The territory ruled by the early Saudis expanded to cover a fair amount of the Nejd, the central portion of the Arabian peninsula, but when they threatened control of Mecca in 1818, ruled by Egyptians under the Ottomans who collected the moneys gained from pilgrims visiting there, the Egyptian leader, Muhammed Ali, invaded the Nejd and destroyed Diriyah. The Saud family moved to the next village over, Riyadh, and reconstructed their small state, which expanded again in the mid-1800s, although near the end of the century they were defeated and exiled to Kuwait by the rival Rashid family from Hail to the north of Riyadh.

    In 1902 the 27 year old family leader, Abdulaziz bin al-Rahman bin Faisal al Saud, reconquered Riyadh and would eventually establish the modern Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) through marital and martial conquests, with its modern boundaries established in 1932, and Abdulaziz (known in the West as "Ibn Saud") bearing the title of King and Protector of the Two Holy Places (Mecca and Medina), which he had conqurered in 1924. He would have 43 sons, and today's king, 81-year old Salman, is one of the last of them, and Abdulaziz would die in 1953. It should be noted that Saudi Arabia was independent of the Ottoman Empire, and was one of the few parts of the Muslim world that did not fall under the rule of a European power, along with Turkey, Persia/Iran, and Afghanistan.

    In the early years, especially in the 1920s, he sought outside advice and support from the British, especially St-John Philby, the rival at Whitehall of T.E. Lawrence, and the first European to cross the Empty Quarter of the Arabian peninsula. Philby was especially helpful during the revolt by the combined forces of the Rashidi and the Ikhwan (Muslim Brotherhood) whom Abdulaziz managed to defeat in 1929, with the rebels pushing an ultra-fundamentalist line against Abdulaziz (an replay of this revolt occurred 50 years later in 1979, with the Ikhwan seizing control of the Grand Mosque in Mecca for a time). Philby would convert to Islam and take several wives. He was also the father of later Soviet spy, Kim Philby.

    The first interest by anybody in the US came out of two agreements in 1928 and 1929, the Red Line Agreement that gave the territories of the former Ottoman Empire to a set of British and French companies, and then the As Is agreement of 1929 between Sir Henri Deterding of Royal Dutch Shell, Baron John Cadman of Anglo-Persian (now BP), and Walter Teagle of New Jersey Standard (now Exxon Mobil) at Deterding's Achnacarry Castle in Scotland. These agreements amounted to an early effort to divide up the oil producing world in a cartel. Out of this, Jersey Standard got Saudi Arabia, although at the time oil had not been discovered there. It would be in 1938 by geologists from Jersey Standard, and agreements for production with cash payments for Abdulaziz in gold bars were made. In 1948, Abdulaziz would become the first leader of an oil-producing nation to succeed in getting a 50-50 profit sharing agreement, and as oil production surged there in the 1950s and after, the money would begin to flow into Saudi Arabia providing the basis for its modernization, even as it retained its highly traditional and strict version of Wahhabist Islam and Hanbali shari'a law code.

    While Saudi Arabia initially favored Nazi Germany at the beginning of World War II, much like Iran then, it gradually shifted to the Allied side, with FDR declaring the protection of Saudi oil reserves a US national interest in 1943, and the Saudis officially declaring war on Germany in early 1945. It is widely viewed in KSA that the alliance was sealed in 1945 when FDR was returning from Yalta shortly before his death and met briefly on a boat in the Suez Canal with King Abdulaziz, producing a famous photograph of the two of them smiling and shaking hands, shortly before FDR's death. And indeed, despite some ups and downs, the alliance has held since, with oil at its center.

    Given that, the nature of the relationship has changed substantially over time. One major change, signaled initiallly by that 50-50 profit sharing agreement in 1948, was an increase in Saudi control over the oil aspect of it, with OPEC founded in 1960, which would impose a quadrupling of oil prices in 1973 in the wake of the Saudi oil export embargo against the US for the US supporting Israel in the Yom Kippur war of that year. Prior to that embargo, KSA had managed to nationalize ARAMCO, the Arabian-American Oil Company, which produced the oil in Saudi Arabia, the original owners of ARAMCO being Jersey Standard, New York Standard (Mobil, now merged with Exxon), Texaco, and California Standard (now Chevron). These companies, especially Exxon Mobil, continue to have an active relationship with ARAMCO, but the Saudis have been in control of their oil and their oil industry since the beginning of the 1970s. This shifted the relationship to being one more of the US becoming the protector of KSA, providing it with arms as the petrodollars poured in, and this aspect of the relationship has reached a new height with this latest visit and arms deal, arranged by former Exxon Mobil CEO and now SecState, Tillerson.

    It is worth noting also that for most of the postwar period probably the major irritant in the Saudi-US relationship has been Israel, which even now KSA does not recognize, and Trump's flight from Riyadh to Tel Aviv was the first such direct flight on that route ever. Israel supporters for many years complained about "Arabists" in the US State Department who were more oriented to worrying US oil interests in the Middle East and especially in Saudi Arabia. But today there is now an alliance of convenience between KSA and Israel in their mutual dislike of Iran.

    Which brings us to the current situation. I personally think that the current Saudi leadership has gone off the rails in their anti-Iran attitudes. The differences are both sectarian and ethnic, Sunni versus Shi'i Islam and Semitic Arabs versus Indo-European Iranians, with this manifesting itself in a regional power struggle. But this is a relatively recent conflict, only getting going since the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran, and only getting really hot with the overthrow of Saddam Hussein by the US under George W. Bush. It was the Saudis who convinced Bush's dad not to go to Baghdad to overthrow Saddam in the 1991 Gulf War, arguing that he kept a balance of power as a Sunni Arab leader against Iran. And they argued with Bush, Jr. not to go in for the same reason, although they would support the US effort modestly once it happened, even though it aggravated Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda against the Saudi monarchy for supporting the US so openly (even though the US had supported the decision by then Saudi intel chief, Turki bin Faisal, to send bin Laden to Pakistan to aid in the anti-Soviet campaign in Afghanistan). But the replacement of a Sunni-led regime in Iraq by a Shi'i led one supported by Iran has upset the Saudis greatly. They also do not like Iranian support of Assad in Syria, who appears to have won his war against largely Sunni rebels, many of them supported by KSA, and now the Saudis are bogged down in a war in Yemen against local Zaydi Shi'a, whom they claim (not with full credibility) are being supported by Iran. So they, and the Israelis, want the US to join them in an anti-Iran crusade.

    I think we are at a dangerous moment here. The nuclear deal with Iran is the most importantdeal that Obama made, and even the Saudis and Israelis know it. What they do not like about it is that it meant that the economic sanctions on Iran were relaxed. But most of those sanctions were only put on to get Iran to the nuclear negotiating table. There is no way they can be reimposed without Iran returning to having a nuclear program. The most influential person in KSA now appears to be the son of King Salman, 31-year old Mohammed bin Salman, Deputy Crown Prince and Defense Minister, who gets lots of good press in the US. But for all the talk of reform, he has not moved to let women drive or to desegregate workplaces by gender. He seems to be a warmongering hothead who has pushed this so far fruitless and destructive war in Yemen, which has led to incipient famine in that nation as well as its likely falling apart into pieces. He has even talked about "taking the war to Iran," which we can only hope that he will not be tempted to do with all those fancy arms that he is buying from the US. Trump, or whoever is in charge of US foreign policy in the near term, will really have to both defend the nuclear deal with Iran and resist this warmongering push by our longtime erstwhile ally. Let us hope that this is done.

    Barkley Rosser Posted by [email protected] at Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Pinterest 6 comments:

    Peter T said...
    I'm not sure what the drivers of the US hate on Iran are, beyond beltway irritation at a smallish country that refuses to acknowledge US supremacy. War is, I think, unlikely - Iraq nearly broke the US army, and Iran would be much worse; Iran has an open backer in Russia, and a silent one in China, and reasonable relations with all its neighbours (so nowhere to base an invading force). It's also quite careful diplomatically - it does what it feels to be in its interests, but does not go out of its way to provoke.

    KSA could panic as the Shi'a consolidate power in Iraq and Syria and their prestige rises across the Islamic world but, again, they lack the access, forces and local allies to do much - and can they afford a defeat?

    btw, Iran did not have a nuclear weapons program, and is unlikely to start one even if the US reneges on the deal. Aside from religious objections, Russia and China would not approve, and it would deprive Iran of a chance to split the EU from the US.

    All that said, Bush II was staffed by some of the dumbest fucking guys on the planet, and they were geniuses compared to Trump's picks.

    May 24, 2017 at 6:14 AM
    bbk said...
    Good stuff. But while Ikhwan means "Brethren" or "Brotherhod" and the Muslim Brotherhood's name in Arabic contains the word "Ikhwan", I don't think the Saudi Ikhwan is related to the modern Muslim Brotherhood in any way other than both using the word in their name.

    The Ikhwan was the part of the Al-Saud military forces in the early 20th century who eventually revolted against the Saudi regime when the Ikhwan felt the Saudi's had gone too "soft" in their religion and refused to spread the Wahhabi creed via Jihad to the Trans-Jordan, Kuwait, and other areas controlled by the British. When the Ikhwan raided British areas the Brits retaliated and the Saudis didn't want trouble with the British so they fought the Ikhwan with the help of the British. The Ikhwan were defeated with the help of British airplanes and military vehicles.

    According to wikipedia the remnants of the Ikhwan formed what is today the Saudi Arabian National Guard which is apparently tasked with protecting the royal family and crushing internal dissent.

    May 24, 2017 at 11:25 AM
    [email protected] said...
    Actually they had a nuclear weapons program that dated to the time of the Shah and that was initially supported by, well, the US. It was shut down after the Islamic Revolution. Then it was started up again under Rafsanjani in the late 1990s, only to be shut down about the time the US invaded Iraq, arguably one of the few positive things to come out of that invasion. Official US National Intelligence Estimates (NIE)s after then agreed that there was no active Iranian nuclear weapons program. In effect what the Iran nuclear deal did was to scale back their capability to have one, although they still have such a capability, and, of course, they have a civilian nuclear power program that is very popular in Iran.
    May 24, 2017 at 11:27 AM
    Peter T said...

    No argument - although I think the program under Rafsanjani was more exploration than active development. Iranians are touchy about the civil nuclear program because for them it's a touchstone for respect for their rights as an independent nation. In their view, they joined the IAEA, signed up to the NPT, abided by all the rules and got sanctions, theft of frozen money and threats.

    If the US priority were fighting terrorism, then Iran (and even Syria) would be better allies than Saudi (or Pakistan). But history has its own inertia...

    May 24, 2017 at 9:37 PM
    Unknown said...
    Total agreement with Peter T that if fighting terrorism is a priority, hostility to Iran makes little sense. All the major terror groups are Shia with the exception of Hezbollah, but it not a threat to the US or Europe.
    May 25, 2017 at 8:22 AM
    Elwailly said...
    Unknown said...
    ... All the major terror groups are Shia with the exception of Hezbollah, but it not a threat to the US or Europe.

    He means they are all Sunni with the exception of Hezbollah, which is Shia.

    (In reality Hezbollah was never a terrorist group in the traditional sense of fostering attacks against civilians. Their sin was fighting the Israelis.)

    May 25, 2017 at 6:07 PM

    [May 24, 2017] Can Trump Salvage His Presidency in Syria s War by Shamus Cooke

    May 24, 2017 | www.counterpunch.org
    The political noose is tightening around Trump's neck, and he's got only one way out: war. The U.S. involvement in the Syrian war is accelerating as Trump's talons dig deeper into the conflict. If he successfully clutches his prey he stands a chance of clinging to the presidency.

    The Democrats, now circling a wounded Trump, will happily feast instead on a rotting Syria: the only thing that can keep the Democrats from destroying Trump is if Trump destroys Syria.

    Trump's strategy is based on how Democrats reacted after his first attack on the Syrian government onApril 6th: they paused their toothless "resistance" to celebrate his bombing. Trump, at his most dangerous, exposed the Democrats at their weakest.

    Now Trump has struck the Syrian government again: on May 18th U.S. fighter jets attacked the Syrian military in Eastern Syria, from a new U.S. military base functioning inside Syrian territory controlled by the Syrian Kurds, where there are at least 1,000 U.S. active troops.

    Although the U.S. media underplayed Trump's recent attack -- or ignored it completely - legendary U.K. Middle East journalist Robert Fiskexplained the significance:

    " what was described by the Americans as a minor action was part of a far more important struggle between the US and the Syrian regime for control of the south-eastern frontier of Syria "

    Yes, the U.S. is already at war with the Syrian government for control of Syrian territory. The U.S. war on ISIS in Syria was never about ISIS, but about gaining a foothold directly inside Syria. Many pundits dismissed Trump's initial attack on the Syrian government as "symbolic," when in fact it began a new war. The New York Times confirms the motive of Trump's war:

    "Two competing coalitions that aim to defeat the Islamic State - one [Kurdish and U.S. fighters] backed by American air power, the other [the Syrian government] by Russian warplanes - are racing to the same goal."

    What is this goal?

    " [there is an] urgency among the competing coalitions fighting the Islamic State to be the first in southeast Syria to defeat the group [ISIS] and to occupy the power vacuum that its defeat would leave .Eastern Syria and the area around Deir al-Zour are mostly unpopulated desert, but they have Syria's modest oil reserves The area is strategically important to the United States, which wants to stabilize Iraq where it has a long-term military and political investment, and to Russia, which wants to strengthen the Syrian government's control of as much territory as possible."

    In summary: the U.S. military wants to "occupy" the "power vacuum" left by ISIS, because Syrian territory is "strategically important" to the United States.

    The war isn't about ISIS because the U.S. military isn't needed to defeat ISIS in Syria, since the group was doomed the day that Turkey decided to close ranks against them - by sealing their border with Syria - instead of openly supporting them as they had for several years.

    Consequently, the Syrian government - with Russian and Iranian support - has no problem mopping up ISIS in Syria, and they're racing to do it first before the U.S.-Kurdish alliance claims the territory for itself.

    Establishment Democrats are cheer-leadingTrump's war goals in private, which is why they're not denouncing them in public. The Democrat-friendly New York Times published a revealing op-ed entitled" A Trump Doctrine for the Middle East ?" In it the writer applauds Trump's war aims:

    "Despite the controversies at home, Mr. Trump may come away with a legacy-cementing achievement: a Trump Doctrine for the Middle East it is false that American 'soft power' is the key to stabilizing the [middle east] region. Our ideals, such as promoting democracy, will work to our advantage only if we first restore order - a project that rests on American hard power [military intervention]. What's more, the use of force is not inherently counterproductive "

    The article explains that Obama's "soft power" (the Syrian proxy war) failed and that Trump aims to "restore order" with "hard power" (direct military intervention).As Trump's bombs fall heavier Democrats will scramble to support a wider war that, crazily, increasingly threatens direct confrontation with Russia. The Russian government loudly denounced Trump's most recent bombing against the Syrian government, and sent more Russian troops to the region in response.

    The U.S. war against ISIS in Syria has always been a pretext to undermine the Syrian and Iranian governments. Robert Fisk explains:

    "Cutting Syria off from Iraq – and thus from Iran – appears to be a far more immediate operational aim of US forces in Syria than the elimination of the [ISIS] Sunni 'Caliphate' cult that Washington claims to be its principal enemy in the Middle East."

    How might this "race to defeat ISIS" end? Trump's ominous trip to Saudi Arabia gives some insight into the Trump Doctrine. Trump made an enormous arms deal with Saudi Arabia worth $350 billion over 10 years, and wants the Saudis to use the money to co-lead an "Arab NATO" [military alliance]. Who will this alliance be aimed against? The Trump administration made it known that Iran was the main target, and thus Syria is the appetizer.

    In a separate article Robert Fisk discussed Trump's Saudi visit:

    "The aim, however, is simple: to prepare the Sunni Muslims [the gulf monarchy U.S. allies and others] of the Middle East for war against the Shia Muslims [Iran, Syria, Hezbollah]. With help from Israel, of course."

    This is the real reason Trump prioritized Saudi Arabia as the always-important first stop on his initial trip abroad: Trump is clearly stating his commitment to the totalitarian monarchies, who main priorities are the destruction of its regional enemies: Yemen, Syria, and Iran.

    This "Arab NATO" is meant to act as a U.S. puppet army in the way that 'official' NATO does in Europe, and the African Union's "Standby Force" does in Africa, where U.S. allies share the responsibility of repressing neighbor states who defy U.S. interests, i.e. they refuse to abandon their political-economic self determination.

    A U.S.-led "Arab NATO" wasn't previously impossible because the U.S. is universally hated across the Middle East, for its longstanding alliance with Israel combined with its recent annihilation of Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya. The openness in which the Gulf monarchies are trying to form this alliance shows just how distanced from and hated by their own residents, who are prevented from expressing their hatred through elections or public protest.

    The Trump-led alliance is especially foreboding because U.S. allies in the region feel deeply betrayed by Obama's Middle East approach; they want concrete assurances the betrayal won't be repeated, since U.S. allies risked a lot in regime change in Syria after Obama ensured them that regime change would be a safe bet. Trump's visit means, in practice, a fresh commitment to Assad's downfall and renewed hostilities with Iran, nuclear deal be damned.

    Trump's current war strategy in Syria is similar to President Bush Sr.'s experiment in Iraq after the 1991 Gulf War: he used a no-fly zone in Kurdish-majority northern Iraq that de-facto partitioned the country, allowing the Kurds to take power where they remain in power today, as an important U.S. puppet. The partitioning of Iraq helped weaken the country prior to the 2003 U.S. invasion.

    The Syrian Kurds are now being armed with U.S. weaponry and given similar promises as their Iraqi counterparts received, but the Syrian Kurds are rightfully nervous about their new alliance.

    In their desperate fight against ISIS the Kurds have accepted an alliance with the world's military superpower: the Kurdish homeland is infested with rats and they invited a tiger to deal with the problem; but once the rats are dead the tiger will stay hungry. The Kurds also live next to another starving Tiger, the Turkish Government.

    The history of the Kurds is one of constant betrayals by larger powers. And now they are pleading on the pages of The New York Times not to be betrayed again, since they see the writing on the wall:

    " [President Trump] give us your word that evenafter Raqqa's liberation [in Syria] you will prevent attempts by Turkey to destroy what we've built here."

    Of course Trump's "word" is meaningless (and even this he won't give publicly). The Kurds are being used as battlefield pawns in a greater game. As Trump aligns with the Kurds in Syria, he simultaneously calls the Turkish Kurds "terrorists," even though the Turkish and Syrian Kurds are closely aligned ideologically and militarily.

    Like all "boots on the ground," the Kurds are most useful to the U.S. as cannon fodder, while more powerful people profit from the fighting. The political power of the Kurds pales in comparison to their enemy Turkey, whose government has long-term interests (the destruction of the Kurds) that will outlast the short-term military objectives Trump.

    The above contradictions are sharpening across the Middle East, nearing the point of yet another explosion. The Trump Doctrine is a flamethrower at a gas station that can instantly spark an even greater conflagration, beyond the horrors we've already witnessed across the Middle East. If the Trump resistance movement in the United States doesn't quickly prioritize a real anti war strategy, there will be little resistance left to speak of as we descend into war.

    [May 23, 2017] Are they really out to get Trump by Philip Girald

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Ray suggests that Brennan and also Comey may been at the center of a "Deep State" combined CIA-NSA-FBI cabal working to discredit the Trump candidacy and delegitimize his presidency. Brennan in particular was uniquely well placed to fabricate the Russian hacker narrative that has been fully embraced by Congress and the media even though no actual evidence supporting that claim has yet been produced. As WikiLeaks has now revealed that the CIA had the technical ability to hack into sites surreptitiously while leaving behind footprints that would attribute the hack to someone else, including the Russians, it does not take much imagination to consider that the alleged trail to Moscow might have been fabricated. If that is so, this false intelligence has in turn proven to be of immense value to those seeking to present "proof" that the Russian government handed the presidency to Donald Trump. ..."
    "... Robert Parry asked in an article on May 10 th whether we are seeing is "Watergate redux or 'Deep State' coup?" and then followed up with a second Piece "The 'Soft Coup' of Russia-gate" on the 13 th . In other words, is this all a cover-up of wrongdoing by the White House akin to President Richard Nixon's firing of Watergate independent special prosecutor Archibald Cox and the resignations of both the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General or is it something quite different, an undermining of an elected president who has not actually committed any "high crimes and misdemeanors" to force his removal from office. ..."
    "... Parry sees the three key players in the scheme as John Brennan of CIA, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and James Comey of the FBI. Comey's role in the "coup" was key as it consisted of using his office to undercut both Hillary Clinton and Trump, neither of whom was seen as a truly suitable candidate by the Deep State. He speculates that a broken election might well have resulted in a vote in the House of Representatives to elect the new president, a process that might have produced a Colin Powell presidency as Powell actually received three votes in the Electoral College and therefore was an acceptable candidate under the rules governing the electoral process. ..."
    "... Yes, the scheme is bizarre, but Parry carefully documents how Russiagate has developed and how the national security and intelligence organs have been key players as it moved along, often working by leaking classified information. ..."
    "... anyone even vaguely connected with Trump who also had contact with Russia or Russians has been regarded as a potential traitor. Carter Page, for example, who was investigated under a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant, was under suspicion because he made a speech in Moscow which was mildly critical of the west's interaction with Russia after the fall of communism. ..."
    "... Parry's point is that there is a growing Washington consensus that consists of traditional liberals and progressives as well as Democratic globalist interventionists and neoconservatives who believe that Donald Trump must be removed from office no matter what it takes. ..."
    "... The interventionists and neocons in particular already control most of the foreign policy mechanisms but they continue to see Trump as a possible impediment to their plans for aggressive action against a host of enemies, most particularly Russia. ..."
    "... Ray has been strongly critical of the current foreign policy, most particularly of the expansion of various wars, claims of Damascus's use of chemical weapons, and the cruise missile attack on Syria. Robert in his latest article describes Trump as narcissistic and politically incompetent. But their legitimate concerns are that we are moving in a direction that is far more dangerous than Trump. A soft coup engineered by the national security and intelligence agencies would be far more dangerous to our democracy than anything Donald Trump can do. ..."
    "... Brennan is a particularly unsavory character. There has been some baying-at-the-moon speculation that he is a Moslem convert! ..."
    "... The coup, if successful, would probably mean the end of what would traditionally be considered to be a republican form of government in the US and its replacement by a deep state dictatorship. ..."
    "... The USA is not different from other western countries, such as GB, France, Austria, Italy, Greece, Netherlands. In each of these countries the battle is going on between the establishment, and those who want to rid themselves of this establishment. ..."
    "... The battle is between trying to dominate the world, neoliberalism, destruction of nation states, power of money, on the one hand, and nationalism, more or less certain jobs, rejection of wars, power of governments, on the other hand. ..."
    "... What is amazing is that Mr Giraldi still believes the USA is a democracy. Maybe if one compares it with China. Anyway, "a soft coup" has already happened in you history -- Kennedy's assassination by the deep state- and life just went on in the "greatest democracy" in the earth. ..."
    "... Perhaps this is the indication of where Trump and DOJ are going: Monday during the 10 p.m. ET news broadcast on Fox's Washington, D.C. affiliate WTTG, correspondent Marina Marraco said an investigation by former D.C. homicide detective Rod Wheeler found that the now-deceased Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich had been emailing with WikiLeaks. ..."
    "... Despite the TV image, it is rare for a CEO to outright sack one of his top executives. The story of dinners where Comey made his pitch to stay rings true to what I have seen in real life. Trump probably asked Comey if he wouldn't be happier returning to private business where he made a boatload more money, and Comey, drunk on the power of high public office just wouldn't pull the trigger for him. ..."
    "... Having just noticed the latest by-line in Antiwar.com, I am forced to raise the question we should all be asking ourselves "Was it Russia or was it .. Seth Rich ? " ..."
    "... If there was indeed a "soft coup" in our country, did it not occur at the DNC convention when our back room oligarchs decided to "putsch" Bernie Sanders out of the race, and gift the nomination to Hillary ? ..."
    "... Was it not Bernie Sanders who was igniting the young progressive liberal base by the tens of millions ? Was it not Bernie who was gaining enormous momentum as the race for the nomination went on ? Was it not Bernie's "message" that began to ring true for so many voters across the country ? ..."
    "... The homicide detective hired by the family , also pointed out, after doing some rudimentary due diligence, that word had come down through the DC mayor's office to stymie its own detectives in the murder investigation of Mr. Rich. Strange thing, especially when we are dealing with a homicide .No, Mr Giraldi ? If the Seth Rich murder was a "botched robbery" as is claimed, why won't the DC police release Seth's laptop computer to his family ? ..."
    "... I would be very interested in your take on the latest impeachable "scandal", that Trump revealed unrevealable top secrets to Lavrov and Kislyak during their recent White House meeting. Among other things, how would the Washington Post know the specifics of the Trump-Lavrov conversation? Is the White House bugged? And if an intelligence source was somehow really compromised, is advertising that fact in the Washington Post (presumably on the front page) really the wisest course? ..."
    "... "A soft coup engineered by the national security and intelligence agencies would be far more dangerous to our democracy than anything Donald Trump can do." Until further notice, that is absolutely correct. It needs to be recalled – ad nauseam – that Russia-gate, or whatever rubbish its called, is a LIE. There is NO, repeat NO evidence of ANY wrong-doing by Trump re the Russians. The MSM & various elements of the "establishment" should suicide NOW from pure SHAME. ..."
    "... Trump was right in firing Comey. An open ended investigation that hasn't yielded a scintilla of evidence of collusion with Russia after one year is not acceptable. Such an investigation would not have been tolerated if the target was a Marxist mulatto by the name of Barack Hussein Obama. Blacks would have rioted in response while the media cheered them on. ..."
    "... If there's a Constitutional crisis then it's that the deep state apparatus in the form of the various alphabet soup intelligence agencies have the power to plot a coup against a duly elected president. They need to be stripped of much of their power and reformed but it's probably already too late for that. ..."
    "... I thought since Trump went from advocating a humble, non-interventionist foreign policy to loud and proud neo-conservative (in less than 100 days) that that would buy him protection from deep state machinations and endear him to the corrupt Washington, D.C. establishment. ..."
    "... The only thing I can think of is that even though Trump's picking up where Dubya and Obama left off on foreign policy, the deep state knows that Trump can be totally unpredictable and change on a dime. So he could go off the establishment reservation at a moment's notice which makes them apoplectic. Hence, their attempts to get him out of the way and install someone more pliant and predictable like Tom Pence. ..."
    "... Deepstate has been sustaining and expanding its conspiracies for 100 years. (There is always a 'deep state' of some kind, but the current well-organized structure was created by Wilson.) A conspiracy AGAINST Deepstate is hard to sustain because Deepstate owns and monitors all public communications. ..."
    "... While the collusion story is an obvious canard there is another level to this "Russian thing" which may prove to be extremely damaging to Trump. And that is Trump's participation in a money-laundering operation with the Russo-jewish mafia going back decades. ..."
    "... The money-laundering angle is already all over the Web (ex. google: Bayrock Trump) and, one must assume, in the hands of various intelligence agencies. .This may be the basis for Trump's increasingly frantic attempts to shut down the "Russian thing" investigation.(Comey firing??) ..."
    "... I don't think, however, the notion of the "establishment" is a problem in itself. Our country has always had powerful elites, so have many other countries. The problem which presents itself today is our elites seem determined to perpetuate endless wars that cost obscene amounts of money, and do not seem to produce positive results in any of the places the wars are being fought. ..."
    "... The short answer is yes! March 31, 2017 The Surveillance State Behind Russia-Gate. Although many details are still hazy because of secrecy – and further befogged by politics – it appears House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes was informed last week about invasive electronic surveillance of senior U.S. government officials and, in turn, passed that information onto President Trump. ..."
    "... The people pushing the big lie about Trump and Russia are legion. And they are not stupid. They are evil. They are the same people who are preparing a preemptive nuclear attack against Russia and China. They are the globalists who would institute a universal Feudalism from which there would be no escape. I have no further use for Trump. But his enemies remain enemies of the people. ..."
    May 16, 2017 | www.unz.com
    And what if there really is a conspiracy against Donald Trump being orchestrated within the various national security agencies that are part of the United States government? The president has been complaining for months about damaging leaks emanating from the intelligence community and the failure of Congress to pay any attention to the illegal dissemination of classified information. It is quite possible that Trump has become aware that there is actually something going on and that something just might be a conspiracy to delegitimize and somehow remove him from office.

    President Trump has also been insisting that the "Russian thing" is a made-up story, a view that I happen to agree with. I recently produced my own analysis of the possibility that there is in progress a soft, or stealth or silent coup, call it what you will, underway directed against the president and that, if it exists, it is being directed by former senior officials from the Obama White House. Indeed, it is quite plausible to suggest that it was orchestrated within the Obama White House itself before the government changed hands at the inauguration on January 20 th . In line with that thinking, some observers are now suggesting that Comey might well have been party to the conspiracy and his dismissal would have been perfectly justified based on his demonstrated interference in both the electoral process and in his broadening of the acceptable role of his own Bureau, which Trump has described as "showboating."

    Two well-informed observers of the situation have recently joined in the discussion, Robert Parry of Consortiumnews and former CIA senior analyst Ray McGovern of the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. McGovern has noted, as have I, that there is one individual who has been curiously absent from the list of former officials who have been called in to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee. That is ex-CIA Director John Brennan, who many have long considered an extreme Obama/Hillary Clinton loyalist long rumored to be at the center of the information damaging to Team Trump sent to Washington by friendly intelligence services, including the British.

    • Ray suggests that Brennan and also Comey may been at the center of a "Deep State" combined CIA-NSA-FBI cabal working to discredit the Trump candidacy and delegitimize his presidency. Brennan in particular was uniquely well placed to fabricate the Russian hacker narrative that has been fully embraced by Congress and the media even though no actual evidence supporting that claim has yet been produced. As WikiLeaks has now revealed that the CIA had the technical ability to hack into sites surreptitiously while leaving behind footprints that would attribute the hack to someone else, including the Russians, it does not take much imagination to consider that the alleged trail to Moscow might have been fabricated. If that is so, this false intelligence has in turn proven to be of immense value to those seeking to present "proof" that the Russian government handed the presidency to Donald Trump.
    • Robert Parry asked in an article on May 10 th whether we are seeing is "Watergate redux or 'Deep State' coup?" and then followed up with a second Piece "The 'Soft Coup' of Russia-gate" on the 13 th . In other words, is this all a cover-up of wrongdoing by the White House akin to President Richard Nixon's firing of Watergate independent special prosecutor Archibald Cox and the resignations of both the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General or is it something quite different, an undermining of an elected president who has not actually committed any "high crimes and misdemeanors" to force his removal from office.

    Like Parry, I am reluctant to embrace conspiracy theories, in my case largely because I believe a conspiracy is awfully hard to sustain. The federal government leaks like a sieve and if more than two conspirators ever meet in the CIA basement it would seem to me their discussion would become public knowledge within forty-eight hours, but perhaps what we are seeing here is less a formal arrangement than a group of individuals who are loosely connected while driven by a common objective.

    Parry sees the three key players in the scheme as John Brennan of CIA, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and James Comey of the FBI. Comey's role in the "coup" was key as it consisted of using his office to undercut both Hillary Clinton and Trump, neither of whom was seen as a truly suitable candidate by the Deep State. He speculates that a broken election might well have resulted in a vote in the House of Representatives to elect the new president, a process that might have produced a Colin Powell presidency as Powell actually received three votes in the Electoral College and therefore was an acceptable candidate under the rules governing the electoral process.

    Yes, the scheme is bizarre, but Parry carefully documents how Russiagate has developed and how the national security and intelligence organs have been key players as it moved along, often working by leaking classified information. And President Barack Obama was likely the initiator, notably so when he de facto authorized the wide distribution of raw intelligence on Trump and the Russians through executive order. Parry notes, as would I, that to date no actual evidence has been presented to support allegations that Russia sought to influence the U.S. election and/or that Trump associates were somehow coopted by Moscow's intelligence services as part of the process. Nevertheless, anyone even vaguely connected with Trump who also had contact with Russia or Russians has been regarded as a potential traitor. Carter Page, for example, who was investigated under a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant, was under suspicion because he made a speech in Moscow which was mildly critical of the west's interaction with Russia after the fall of communism.

    Parry's point is that there is a growing Washington consensus that consists of traditional liberals and progressives as well as Democratic globalist interventionists and neoconservatives who believe that Donald Trump must be removed from office no matter what it takes.

    The interventionists and neocons in particular already control most of the foreign policy mechanisms but they continue to see Trump as a possible impediment to their plans for aggressive action against a host of enemies, most particularly Russia. As they are desirous of bringing down Trump "legally" through either impeachment or Article 25 of the Constitution which permits removal for incapacity, it might be termed a constitutional coup, though the other labels cited above also fit.

    The rationale Trump haters have fabricated is simple: the president and his team colluded with the Russians to rig the 2016 election in his favor, which, if true, would provide grounds for impeachment. The driving force, in terms of the argument being made, is that removing Trump must be done "for the good of the country" and to "correct a mistake made by the American voters."

    The mainstream media is completely on board of the process, including the outlets that flatter themselves by describing their national stature, most notably the New York Times and Washington Post.

    So what is to be done? For starters, until Donald Trump has unambiguously broken a law the critics should take a valium and relax. He is an elected president and his predecessors George W. Bush and Barack Obama certainly did plenty of things that in retrospect do not bear much scrutiny. Folks like Ray McGovern and Robert Parry should be listened to even when they are being provocative in their views. They are not, to be sure, friends of the White House in any conventional way and are not apologists for those in power, quite the contrary. Ray has been strongly critical of the current foreign policy, most particularly of the expansion of various wars, claims of Damascus's use of chemical weapons, and the cruise missile attack on Syria. Robert in his latest article describes Trump as narcissistic and politically incompetent. But their legitimate concerns are that we are moving in a direction that is far more dangerous than Trump. A soft coup engineered by the national security and intelligence agencies would be far more dangerous to our democracy than anything Donald Trump can do. Are They Really Out to Get Trump? Sometimes paranoia is justified

    Philip Giraldi May 16, 2017 1,600 Words

    Dan Hayes , May 16, 2017 at 4:18 am GMT

    Brennan is a particularly unsavory character. There has been some baying-at-the-moon speculation that he is a Moslem convert!

    exiled off mainstreet , May 16, 2017 at 5:26 am GMT

    The coup, if successful, would probably mean the end of what would traditionally be considered to be a republican form of government in the US and its replacement by a deep state dictatorship.

    In light of what is being used, a phony claim of Russian interference with the US political system, the danger that nuclear war might be the outcome of this coup is real.

    utu , May 16, 2017 at 5:36 am GMT

    I don't know who Robert Parry is but to me this Colin Powell stuff is pure nonsense. At the same time my answer to the question "Are They Really Out to Get Trump?" is affirmative. Republicans and Democrats want Trump out and Pence in. The operation with Flynn who allegedly deceived Pence was part of this plan. That Trump fired Flynn was his greatest mistake in this game. It was not fatal yet. This was Their plan since the election or even earlier since Republican convention: have Trump step down and have Pence take over. After April 4th it seemed that They got Trump where They wanted him to be. Trump even became presidential. The escalation of rhetoric against North Korea over following weekend and week reinforced this perception until it turned out that it was all fake. There was no fleet steaming to Korea. Media realized they were played by Trump. During this time Trump and Tillerson in particular got some breathing space. The pre-April 4 policy of agreeing with Russia on Syria continued. Apparently Russia understood that the missile attack on Syria was just part of the game. It was not personal. More recently the US agreed to safe zones plan by Russia, Syria, Iran and Turkey. One should expect a false flag of gas attack or accidental bombing by US air force of Syrian forces to happen soon – broadcasted all night before the start of the US media news cycle by BBC, so US media, all talking heads memorize all talking points.

    While it is possible that Trump behaves erratically w/o well thought out plans we must give him a benefit of doubt and assume that there is a deep reason for firing Comey. Trump is fighting for his life. While he would prefer to be presidential and enjoy easy going times and provide peace and safety for his family by know he knows that nothing will satisfy Them. They want him out! Erratic Trump and confused and chaotic WH is a meme which They and Their media want to plant and reinforce. That's why we hear about it all the time. But how to explain the firing of Comey? I would look for the answer at DOJ. Initially their hands were tied up but slowly they showed that there is new leadership at DOJ that was working for Trump for a change. Their independence of the Deep State was demonstrated by forcing Israel police to arrest Mossad operative/patsy for the wave of world wide anti-semitic hoaxes that were meant to undermine and compromise Trump. This is the proof that DOJ and part of FBI finally is strong enough and working for Trump. What next do they want to do? If they want to squash this "collusion with Russia" false narrative that is paralyzing the administration and in fact all belt way they must hit at those who originated this narrative, meaning Hillary Clinton and Obama. To do it they need to have a full control of FBI. Comey is gone. McCabe must go next. Will DOJ and new FBI go after Susan Rice, Sally Yates and Loretta Lynch? If they do this will lead to Obama. Will they go after Hillary Clinton and her emails? Will they secure Anthony Weiner computer? Does it still exist? Who will be nominated to replace Comey? What Trump will have to promise GOP to have him approved?

    The bottom line is that Trump is fighting for his life.

    jilles dykstra , May 16, 2017 at 5:51 am GMT

    Of course they are. The USA is not different from other western countries, such as GB, France, Austria, Italy, Greece, Netherlands. In each of these countries the battle is going on between the establishment, and those who want to rid themselves of this establishment.

    GB is the first country where maybe this succeeded, but, as in the USA, the GB establishment and the EU establishment do anything to prevent that things really change.

    The battle is between trying to dominate the world, neoliberalism, destruction of nation states, power of money, on the one hand, and nationalism, more or less certain jobs, rejection of wars, power of governments, on the other hand.

    In France one sees that once again the establishment won, 60% of the French still support the establishment, 40% rejects it.

    In other countries more or less the same.

    The opposing views make governing increasingly difficult, two months after the Dutch elections the efforts to contrue a government are a failure. Belgium was more than a year without a government. In Spain one government after another. The establishment now fears that Austria will turn around. Until now Brussels, by threats and cajoling, prevented a rebellion against Brussels in Poland and Hungary. The Greek rebellion failed completely.

    Anon , May 16, 2017 at 6:05 am GMT

    White House Leaks and the "Muh Russia" Seesaw

    utu , May 16, 2017 at 6:08 am GMT

    Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov had sought to sneak a recording device into the White House during last week's visit.

    John Brown , May 16, 2017 at 6:09 am GMT

    "A soft coup engineered by the national security and intelligence agencies would be far more dangerous to our democracy than anything Donald Trump can do" concludes the writer.

    What is amazing is that Mr Giraldi still believes the USA is a democracy. Maybe if one compares it with China. Anyway, "a soft coup" has already happened in you history -- Kennedy's assassination by the deep state- and life just went on in the "greatest democracy" in the earth.

    A "soft coup" against Donald Trump will be in fact an improvement. The "narcissist" president won't be killed. It will be a soft clean coup. Progress.

    utu , May 16, 2017 at 6:52 am GMT

    Perhaps this is the indication of where Trump and DOJ are going: Monday during the 10 p.m. ET news broadcast on Fox's Washington, D.C. affiliate WTTG, correspondent Marina Marraco said an investigation by former D.C. homicide detective Rod Wheeler found that the now-deceased Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich had been emailing with WikiLeaks.

    http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/05/15/report-investigator-says-evidence-showing-deceased-dnc-staffer-seth-rich-emailing-wikileaks/

    But the Deep State respond with: Deep State Leaks Highly Classified Info to Washington Post to Smear President Trump

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/05/15/deep-state-leaks-highly-classified-info-to-washington-post-to-smear-president-trump/

    The Alarmist , May 16, 2017 at 8:23 am GMT

    Despite the TV image, it is rare for a CEO to outright sack one of his top executives. The story of dinners where Comey made his pitch to stay rings true to what I have seen in real life. Trump probably asked Comey if he wouldn't be happier returning to private business where he made a boatload more money, and Comey, drunk on the power of high public office just wouldn't pull the trigger for him.

    Comey was a goner in November he just wouldn't go quietly and on his own accord, no doubt for the reasons suggested in this piece a so-called higher calling and his own inflated sense of service to his country.

    alexander , May 16, 2017 at 8:52 am GMT

    Dear Mr. Giraldi,

    Thanks for another fine article.

    Certainly writers like Robert Parry and Ray Mcgovern, as well as yourself, have earned the highest of marks from internet readers around the globe, anxious for some integrity of analysis , as they seek to understand our nation's policy decisions. As long as gentlemen like you, as well as others, keep writing , you will find your readership growing at an exponential rate.

    Having just noticed the latest by-line in Antiwar.com, I am forced to raise the question we should all be asking ourselves "Was it Russia or was it .. Seth Rich ? "

    If there was indeed a "soft coup" in our country, did it not occur at the DNC convention when our back room oligarchs decided to "putsch" Bernie Sanders out of the race, and gift the nomination to Hillary ?

    Was it not Bernie Sanders who was igniting the young progressive liberal base by the tens of millions ? Was it not Bernie who was gaining enormous momentum as the race for the nomination went on ? Was it not Bernie's "message" that began to ring true for so many voters across the country ?

    Was it not Bernie Sanders who may well have swept the DNC nomination, were it not for the "dirty pool" being played out in the back room ?.

    According to the retired homicide detective, hired by the family of Seth Rich to investigate their son's bizarre murder, it was Seth Rich who WAS in contact with Wikileaks.

    (For all those who don't know who Seth Rich was , he was the 27 year old "voter data director" at the DNC, shot to death on july 10, 2016, in the Bloomingdale neighborhood of Washington D.C.)

    In an interview three days after Seth Rich was found dead, Julian Assange intimated, too, that Seth Rich HAD contacted Wikileaks .NOT Russia.

    The homicide detective hired by the family , also pointed out, after doing some rudimentary due diligence, that word had come down through the DC mayor's office to stymie its own detectives in the murder investigation of Mr. Rich. Strange thing, especially when we are dealing with a homicide .No, Mr Giraldi ? If the Seth Rich murder was a "botched robbery" as is claimed, why won't the DC police release Seth's laptop computer to his family ?

    We are all aware there were "shenanigans" going on in the DNC that put the kibosh on the Bernie nomination.(we all know this)

    This makes sense too, given the fact that the DNC party bosses and their oligarchs, wanted Bernie running in the general election against the Donald like they wanted a "hole in the head". What we "cannot" see ..is how decisive Bernie's margin of victory might have been, Nor can we see what "crimes" were committed to ensure Hillary's run at the W. H. It is not much of a stretch to assume Seth Rich had hard evidence, perhaps of multiple counts of treasonous fraud and other sorted felonies that would have brought down "the back room" of the DNC.

    Not good for the party..not good for its oligarchs .and not good for their Hillary anointment.

    "Russia-gate" may prove to be the most concerted effort, by the powers that be, to DEFLECT from an investigation into their OWN "real"criminality .

    How savvy and how clever they are to manipulate the public's perceptions, through Big Media, by grafting the allegations of the very crimes they may well have committed .onto Russia, the Donald, and Vladimir Putin.

    Clever, clever, clever.

    Can any of us imagine, how cold a day in hell it will be before Rachel Maddow(or any MSM "journalist") asks some basic questions about the Seth Rich laptop .or what was on it ?

    Sub zero.

    for-the-record , May 16, 2017 at 8:53 am GMT

    Mr. Giralidi,

    I would be very interested in your take on the latest impeachable "scandal", that Trump revealed unrevealable top secrets to Lavrov and Kislyak during their recent White House meeting. Among other things, how would the Washington Post know the specifics of the Trump-Lavrov conversation? Is the White House bugged? And if an intelligence source was somehow really compromised, is advertising that fact in the Washington Post (presumably on the front page) really the wisest course?

    mp , May 16, 2017 at 9:29 am GMT

    Trump has turned out to be very weak. Maybe he just doesn't believe in anything, so it doesn't matter to him. Or maybe he has some ideas, but has no clue about implementation. He's going to see the Tribe next week. That will tell us a lot, I'm thinking. But it's a lot that we probably already know or at least can guess.

    animalogic , May 16, 2017 at 10:10 am GMT

    "A soft coup engineered by the national security and intelligence agencies would be far more dangerous to our democracy than anything Donald Trump can do."
    Until further notice, that is absolutely correct. It needs to be recalled – ad nauseam – that Russia-gate, or whatever rubbish its called, is a LIE. There is NO, repeat NO evidence of ANY wrong-doing by Trump re the Russians. The MSM & various elements of the "establishment" should suicide NOW from pure SHAME.

    geokat62 , May 16, 2017 at 11:08 am GMT

    A soft coup engineered by the national security and intelligence agencies would be far more dangerous to our democracy than anything Donald Trump can do.

    For more dangerous to American democracy has been the ZOG engineered by the "Friends of Zion," but, unfortunately, there is little chance there will ever be a Zion-gate investigation.

    KenH , May 16, 2017 at 11:10 am GMT

    Trump was right in firing Comey. An open ended investigation that hasn't yielded a scintilla of evidence of collusion with Russia after one year is not acceptable. Such an investigation would not have been tolerated if the target was a Marxist mulatto by the name of Barack Hussein Obama. Blacks would have rioted in response while the media cheered them on.

    If there's a Constitutional crisis then it's that the deep state apparatus in the form of the various alphabet soup intelligence agencies have the power to plot a coup against a duly elected president. They need to be stripped of much of their power and reformed but it's probably already too late for that.

    I thought since Trump went from advocating a humble, non-interventionist foreign policy to loud and proud neo-conservative (in less than 100 days) that that would buy him protection from deep state machinations and endear him to the corrupt Washington, D.C. establishment. For a time he was even making "never Trumper" little (((William Kristol))) coo with delight which is no small feat. Moreover, he's a lickspittle of Israel which seems a prerequisite for a presidential candidate.

    The only thing I can think of is that even though Trump's picking up where Dubya and Obama left off on foreign policy, the deep state knows that Trump can be totally unpredictable and change on a dime. So he could go off the establishment reservation at a moment's notice which makes them apoplectic. Hence, their attempts to get him out of the way and install someone more pliant and predictable like Tom Pence.

    jilles dykstra , May 16, 2017 at 11:32 am GMT

    @animalogic "A soft coup engineered by the national security and intelligence agencies would be far more dangerous to our democracy than anything Donald Trump can do."

    Until further notice, that is absolutely correct.

    It needs to be recalled - ad nauseam - that Russia-gate, or whatever rubbish its called, is a LIE. There is NO, repeat NO evidence of ANY wrong-doing by Trump re the Russians.

    The MSM & various elements of the "establishment" should suicide NOW from pure SHAME.

    polistra , May 16, 2017 at 11:56 am GMT

    Conspiracies are NOT hard to sustain. That's an absurd statement. Deepstate has been sustaining and expanding its conspiracies for 100 years. (There is always a 'deep state' of some kind, but the current well-organized structure was created by Wilson.) A conspiracy AGAINST Deepstate is hard to sustain because Deepstate owns and monitors all public communications.

    Hobo , May 16, 2017 at 12:16 pm GMT

    While the collusion story is an obvious canard there is another level to this "Russian thing" which may prove to be extremely damaging to Trump. And that is Trump's participation in a money-laundering operation with the Russo-jewish mafia going back decades.

    Some of the investigations have expanded their scope to include careful scrutiny of Trump's business dealings in relation to Russia. Recently FinCEN, which specializes in fighting money laundering, agreed to turn over records to the Senate Intelligence Committee in this regard. Even Sen. Linsey Graham recently stated he wanted to know more about Trump's business dealings with Russia. The possibility that this may result in a criminal investigation cannot be ruled out. The money-laundering angle is already all over the Web (ex. google: Bayrock Trump) and, one must assume, in the hands of various intelligence agencies. .This may be the basis for Trump's increasingly frantic attempts to shut down the "Russian thing" investigation.(Comey firing??)

    Dutch Public Broadcasting has recently broadcast a two part series exploring some of the connections involving Trump's business dealings with Russia.

    THE DUBIOUS FRIENDS OF DONALD TRUMP: THE RUSSIANS

    More detail and background is provided in this informative article by James S. Henry, a reputable investigative journalist:

    The Curious World of Donald Trump's Private Russian Connections

    https://www.the-american-interest.com/2016/12/19/the-curious-world-of-donald-trumps-private-russian-connections/

    p.s.: Regarding the term Russo-jewish mafia, should you watch the videos and read the article you will find the players involved are almost exclusively of a certain 'tribal' persuasion. (A number have direct links to the infamous Mogilevich crime syndicate (top 10 FBI's most wanted list) and one of the principals of Bayrock was named as a major Israeli organized crime figure by the Turkish media following his arrest there.)

    Chris Bridges , May 16, 2017 at 12:39 pm GMT

    Phil,

    As you know, Brennan is an extreme liberal Democrat, a creature of both Clinton and Obama. He is an utterly unprincipled old fool. He failed as a CIA operations officer and went back to Langley with his tail between his legs to become analyst. Nothing wrong with that but he nursed bitter resentment at the Clandestine Service during his whole career. He was finally allowed to go out as chief in, of all places, Riyadh. He promptly destroyed the station with his incompetence, though he earned the praise of the ambassador, as such toadies usually do. Brennan is perfectly capable of the things you describe. Washington is awash in these kinds of traitors. If Trump does not have a plan to arrest them all some dark night then he is a fool himself.

    MEexpert , May 16, 2017 at 1:19 pm GMT

    And President Barack Obama was likely the initiator, notably so when he de facto authorized the wide distribution of raw intelligence on Trump and the Russians through executive order.

    I repeat, why hasn't Trump issued an executive order cancelling Obama's executive order? He needs to stop this information sharing if he expects to remain President.

    Phil, is there any one who has Trump's ear? The mainstream media are hell bent in destroying anyone close to Trump. First, Flynn, then Steve Bannon and now Kellyanne Conway. Trump must stop these leaks from the White House. He should fire all Obama holdovers.

    utu , May 16, 2017 at 1:21 pm GMT

    @Hobo While the collusion story is an obvious canard there is another level to this "Russian thing" which may prove to be extremely damaging to Trump. And that is Trump's participation in a money-laundering operation with the Russo-jewish mafia going back decades.

    ... ... ... ...

    p.s.: Regarding the term Russo-jewish mafia, should you watch the videos and read the article you will find the players involved are almost exclusively of a certain 'tribal' persuasion. (A number have direct links to the infamous Mogilevich crime syndicate (top 10 FBI's most wanted list) and one of the principals of Bayrock was named as a major Israeli organized crime figure by the Turkish media following his arrest there.)

    Sam Shama , May 16, 2017 at 1:39 pm GMT

    I recently produced my own analysis of the possibility that there is in progress a soft, or stealth or silent coup, call it what you will, underway directed against the president and that, if it exists, it is being directed by former senior officials from the Obama White House. Indeed, it is quite plausible to suggest that it was orchestrated within the Obama White House itself before the government changed hands at the inauguration on January 20th. In line with that thinking, some observers are now suggesting that Comey might well have been party to the conspiracy and his dismissal would have been perfectly justified based on his demonstrated interference in both the electoral process and in his broadening of the acceptable role of his own Bureau , which Trump has described as "showboating."

    It's quite difficult to accept this line of thought when Comey practically scuppered Hillary's bid, something strongly endorsed by Obama. Going with this narrative requires Obama to have engineered Hillary's departure followed by a concerted plan to unseat Trump as well, both objectives utilizing Comey! To what end? Paint chaos on the American political canvas?

    RadicalCenter , May 16, 2017 at 2:07 pm GMT

    @Colleen Pater This " theory " isnt a theory its not debatable and its clear both parties and every power node in the world are signalling they will do whatever they can to help. Its really a good thing they are not fooling anyone but some maroon prog snowflakes. Trump was the howard beale last option before civil war candidate, he won fair and square , actually despite massive cheating by the other side and now they are overthrowing him in full view of the american people.Its good as long as idiots on the right still believed in democracy, that getting their candidate in would change war was averted. after thirty years of steady leftism no matter who was in power they voted trump now trumps being overthrown. They will see we dont live in a democracy we live in the matrix democracy is diversionary tactic to prevent us from killing them all. And kill them all is what we must do.

    jilles dykstra , May 16, 2017 at 2:28 pm GMT

    @alexander Some fine points here, Mr, Dykstra,

    I don't think, however, the notion of the "establishment" is a problem in itself. Our country has always had powerful elites, so have many other countries. The problem which presents itself today is our elites seem determined to perpetuate endless wars that cost obscene amounts of money, and do not seem to produce positive results in any of the places the wars are being fought.

    The "establishment" does not seem to care. It is now wholly unthinkable for our "establishment" to consider "making peace"and ending our wars. There is an addiction to "war spending" and "war profiteering" which has consumed the Deep State Apparatus, especially since 9-11, and operates almost completely independently of any administration in office.

    Its an insatiable appetite...that grows larger every year. Any President, elected by the people today,to end our wars will simply not be tolerated by the establishment class and the deep state it lords over. The problem is not that we have an "establishment", the problem is our establishment is addicted to war.

    Only "war" will do for them, full time, all the time..... end of story. Today, any President is given two choices once in office....make WAR..... or be impeached.

    anonymous , May 16, 2017 at 2:33 pm GMT

    @Anon Trump Heads to Saudi Arabia - Target Iran and Iraq?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIYy10NJcMI

    Agent76 , May 16, 2017 at 2:33 pm GMT

    The short answer is yes! March 31, 2017 The Surveillance State Behind Russia-Gate. Although many details are still hazy because of secrecy – and further befogged by politics – it appears House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes was informed last week about invasive electronic surveillance of senior U.S. government officials and, in turn, passed that information onto President Trump.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-surveillance-state-behind-russia-gate/5582211

    Mar 9, 2017 BADA BING! NSA Whistleblower Confirms Trump Was Tapped!

    They're wire tapping President Trump, and Kim Kardashian, and Hulk Hogan, and you and EVERYBODY!

    https://youtu.be/tWOCLMJRQ7I

    John Jeremiah Smith , May 16, 2017 at 2:33 pm GMT

    It is now wholly unthinkable for our "establishment" to consider "making peace"and ending our wars. There is an addiction to "war spending" and "war profiteering" which has consumed the Deep State Apparatus, especially since 9-11, and operates almost completely independently of any administration in office.

    Precisely. Frankly, I suspect 90% of the daily brouhaha of conspiracies and collusion theories is a product solely of tawdry greed. The rich will do anything for money . anything.

    John Jeremiah Smith , May 16, 2017 at 2:41 pm GMT

    Reopening the investigation in a dramatic public manner (I guess we do tell who is under investigation) and then coming back to announce, "We were correct the first time; there is no case" might convince a few thousand staggling doubters. It was very close.

    Quite so. Comey's election-eve announcement was a calculated risk, with the intention of making the "investigation" of Clinton look legitimate and professional, not just lip service to troublesome legalities. It was intended to produce a public reaction like "Oh, they double-checked like good investigators, and sure enough, Hillary's email operation was completely legit."

    Done clumsily, and it backfired.

    Aaron Burr , May 16, 2017 at 2:55 pm GMT

    At what point does political infighting cross the line into treason?

    There's a line somewhere between the two, obviously. Perhaps its when you break the law? Perhaps its when you leak classified documents? Or details of a key diplomatic meeting?

    John Jeremiah Smith , May 16, 2017 at 2:56 pm GMT

    @utu There will be no open coup. Trump will resign for health reason or in the worst case scenario will be declared unfit for health reasons. And Pence will give a speech how great Trump was and how great his ideas were and that now he as president will continue his vision. And many people will believe it.

    Sam Shama , May 16, 2017 at 2:56 pm GMT

    @iffen It's quite difficult to accept this line of thought when Comey practically scuppered Hillary's bid

    There is reason to believe that Clinton's email troubles were having a major impact. Many were unconvinced by Comey's first pronouncement that there was no case there. (I thought this was the prosecutor's job anyway. People would have been skeptical of a compromised Lynch saying that there was no case, but might be persuaded by Comey.)

    Reopening the investigation in a dramatic public manner (I guess we do tell who is under investigation) and then coming back to announce, "We were correct the first time; there is no case" might convince a few thousand staggling doubters. It was very close.

    Philip Giraldi , May 16, 2017 at 3:33 pm GMT

    @Sam Shama I need to understand why Phil Giraldi thinks she was considered a flawed candidate from the Deep State's perspective .

    In the minds of non-mainstream writers who constantly viewed her as the embodiment of the Establishment, one wouldn't have wagered "their" perfect candidate to be marked for removal.

    Joe Hide , May 16, 2017 at 3:42 pm GMT

    It looks to me as though the "deep state" is getting progressive dementia. While inhabited by many high I.Q. players, their moves are increasingly insane. They had assumed their "Surveillance State" would become all intrusive, giving them ever greater control over us peasants. The reverse has happened, where most of the 7 billion of us have cell phones that record and display all their nefarious deeds. We have a million times more high I.Q. people than them, that increasingly are waking up and exposing those psychopaths for the pieces of garbage that they are.

    iffen , May 16, 2017 at 3:59 pm GMT

    @Sam Shama I need to understand why Phil Giraldi thinks she was considered a flawed candidate from the Deep State's perspective .

    In the minds of non-mainstream writers who constantly viewed her as the embodiment of the Establishment, one wouldn't have wagered "their" perfect candidate to be marked for removal.

    John Jeremiah Smith , May 16, 2017 at 4:03 pm GMT

    @utu

    Comey's election-eve announcement was a calculated risk, with the intention of making the "investigation" of Clinton look legitimate and professional, not just lip service to troublesome legalities.
    No. They knew then that election could not be stolen (for whatever reasons) for Clinton. The 28th October announcement by Comey was the signal to press to change the fake narrative of huge advantage in polls by Hillary and prepare the eventual excuse for Hillary why she lost.
    Boris M Garsky , May 16, 2017 at 5:03 pm GMT

    Comey was abruptly and unceremoniously fired after he stated that Clinton had forwarded thousands of e-mails containing classified information on an unsecured server to wiener and friends. Hardly covering Clintons back. The FBI investigates -- it does not prosecute -- that is the function of the attorney generals office. The AG solely has the power to convene a grand jury, not the FBI. The deputy attorney general Rosenstein writes a scathing report and recommendation to fire Comey. Trump, probably on Kushner's urging fires Comey. Comey redacts his prior statement.

    My guess is that the FBI were very close to the neocons hidden secret -- Clinton and its foundation are foreign assets and not of Russia, hence, we have the Russia-gate diversion. Unfortunately, Comey;s replacement will be toothless, merely a shelf ornament. And what happened? We hear no more of Kushners? omitting his relationship to the Rothchilds enterprises. Flynn was fired for far less. Is/ are Kushner? and/ or Rosenstein the leak(s)?

    WorkingClass , May 16, 2017 at 5:52 pm GMT

    The people pushing the big lie about Trump and Russia are legion. And they are not stupid. They are evil. They are the same people who are preparing a preemptive nuclear attack against Russia and China. They are the globalists who would institute a universal Feudalism from which there would be no escape. I have no further use for Trump. But his enemies remain enemies of the people.

    [May 23, 2017] Trump Backs Sunni Radical Islam over Moderate Shi'ism

    May 23, 2017 | www.strategic-culture.org

    Ironically, as Trump was praising Saudi Arabia's "efforts" against jihadist terrorism, Iran overwhelmingly re-elected moderate President Hassan Rouhani. Rouhani ran on a platform of bestowing more freedoms on the Iranian people and opening the country to the rest of the world. A day after Trump's anti-Iran speech in Riyadh, reformists won all 21 seats in Tehran's municipal election. Across the board, Iranians, particularly women and minority religious groups, enjoy many more rights than do the Saudi Arabs. Whereas in Iran, Christians, Jews, and Zoroastrians can worship openly and even enjoy representation in parliament, across the Persian Gulf, Christians, Hindus, and Buddhists are banned from constructing churches or temples and displaying religious symbols. Donald Trump's ignorance of Middle Eastern religions is a severe and dangerous handicap for an American president.

    While the Saudi princelings are free to get drunk, use drugs, and heinously abuse women behind their palace walls, standing immune to the whims of the mutawa religious police, the rank and file of Saudi Arabia live in a country governed by centuries-old laws embracing misogyny, public beheadings, and religious persecution. While women are banned from driving vehicles and movie theaters are prohibited in Saudi Arabia, across the Persian Gulf in Iran, women drive freely and Iran has a vibrant movie industry and numerous theaters as attested to by that nation's winning of several international film awards, including Hollywood's Oscar.

    Trump waxed on about moderate Islam in the capital city of the country that gave birth to Wahhabism. Saudi Arabia has nurtured with its financing, propaganda, government-subsidized clerics, and other support jihadist groups from Morocco to Indonesia and Fiji to Trinidad. Trump had the gall and audacity to accuse Iran of funding terrorists and promoting a "craven ideology," i.e., Shi'ism.

    Trump's speech was largely written by Stephen Miller, a right-wing strongly pro-Israel creature of Santa Monica, California and an acolyte of the Islamophobe extremist David Horowitz. Trump's speech in Riyadh did nothing to bridge the differences between Islam and his administration and everything to do with laying down a gauntlet to not only Shi'ism but the Alawite, Zaidi, Sufi, Alevi, Ibadi, Ahmadiyya, and Ismaili sects of Islam. Trump even managed to slip the phrase "Islamic extremism" into his speech rather than the less offensive "Islamist extremism". Even though a committed Islamophobe, Miller, wrote the speech, Trump's spokespeople in Saudi Arabia insisted that the president was merely "exhausted" from his trip and that is why he said "Islamic extremism".

    Trump called for the end of the Iranian and Syrian "regimes" and the international isolation of both. Trump's speech, if it had not been written by Miller, could have easily been written by any Saudi or Israeli government propagandist.

    [May 23, 2017] Partitioning Syria is now on US agenda

    May 23, 2017 | www.strategic-culture.org
    In our mind, the issue is really about the formulation of "new guidelines" for the US strategy in the Middle East. The latest changes being proposed are truly dangerous. In particular, one could point to the April 2017 report by a team established by the Congressional Bipartisan Policy Center to submit recommendations for addressing the crises in the Middle East. (Seeking Stability at Sustainable Cost: Principles for a New U.S. Strategy in the Middle East. Report of the Task Force on Managing Disorder in the Middle East. April 2017).

    That paper recommends that Congress recognize that Russia's engagement in the Middle East is at odds with US interests. The Trump administration is invited to relinquish its illusions of a partnership with the Kremlin in the fight against international terrorism and to abandon its hope of sowing dissent between Moscow and Tehran.

    And the most incendiary recommendation from the Congressional Bipartisan Policy Center's Task Force on Managing Disorder in the Middle East states: "If stability proves impossible within Syria and Iraq's current cartography, the U.S. government should no longer regard questioning of national borders as a strict taboo".

    And this raises the question - directed neither toward the tacticians on the "task force" nor to Paul Ryan or Eliot Engel, but rather toward President Trump and his team - how large a component of US foreign-policy strategy is this refusal to recognize the existing state borders in the Middle East? The answer to this question will determine the potential for any real cooperation between the US and Russia in this region

    [May 23, 2017] Talking Tactics, Lacking Strategy - The Generals On Syria And Iraq

    May 23, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
    LXV | May 21, 2017 4:54:59 PM | 8
    Thank you b,

    Russia has reportedly already deployed its specops units (consultants and trainers in imperial vocabulary) to Al-Sweida region, embedding them with the SAA troops headed to Al-Tanf. Hence, reading the 3 rabid animals' press conference statement regarding "de-confliction" with Russia in Southern Syria sounds more like an entreatment to me.

    Let's hope Norway grows a pair and recalls all its units from the conflict line. If the Empire wants that border crossing so badly, then they can place the ZATO generals' children to defend it!

    Ghostship | May 21, 2017 5:10:48 PM | 9
    >>>> james | May 21, 2017 3:47:28 PM | 3
    usa policy in syria is delusional

    James, you are not even close - just about the whole fucking country is delusional!
    • The Clintonists: that Comey and the Russians cost her the election - when it is all too obvious that it was her record as a politician. her policies, her campaign and greed that were responsible.
    • The Sanderists: because unless the Clintonists are put up against the proverbial wall there isn't a chance in hell that the Democrats will improve their position in the next elections.
    • The Trumpists: that Trump will deliver any real decent jobs or will adhere to a non-interventionist foreign policy although as he is a grifter he might do what he said he would.
    • The regular Republicans: well, because they're Republicans.

    jfl | May 21, 2017 5:20:34 PM | 11
    a full transcript of the rump's declaration of jihad against iran from al-CIA-duh central is available from information clearing house. unbelievable. with the chameleon rump, the changes in 'protective' coloration just keep flashing. it seems to me that every possible projected member of his audience has been sickened by this performance.

    Mina | May 21, 2017 6:28:04 PM | 22
    Nice Iranian answer to Trump's stupid lies and provocation.they nicely underlined his total ignorance of diplomacy since it is usually not considered appropriate to criticize a country while in official visit somewhere. The richest man turned into a beggar and a lackey of the Saudis bowing for 370 billion dollars worth contracts...


    Where is "Iranian terrorism" in Libya and Boko Haram?

    jfl | May 21, 2017 6:56:36 PM | 24
    McGurk at the Pentagon Press Briefing Room

    During my recent trip, I again witnessed how our diplomats are fully integrated with our military colleagues around the whole of government effort to fulfill President Trump's charge to destroy ISIS and ensure it can never return. ...

    When Secretary Tillerson hosted all 68 members of our coalition in March, it was significant that he was joined throughout parts of the day by Secretary Mattis, by Secretary Mnuchin, Director Pompeo, Director Coats, and other representatives from across our interagency. This demonstrated to the coalition and to the world our united whole of government approach as directed by the president.

    Such cooperation is enabling an anaconda-like approach to suffocate ISIS of its territory, finances, propaganda and ability to move foreign fighters. ...


    ... the state department has been integrated into the wehrmacht : state, war, treasury, CIA, director of national intelligence ... one big anaconda to crush the life and breath out of those who have yet to 'see the light' ... the 'extremists', i guess, in the new salafist doctrine of the shining city on the hill in ac/dc ...

    This cooperation has enabled closer political coordination between local, regional, and national governments to help return people to their homes after the battles are won through an innovative post-conflict approach based on empowering people at the local level to restore life to their communities. And we call this stabilization ...

    Stabilization is not nation-building. ... nor is it long-term reconstruction [with] projects ... costing and often wasting billions of dollars. Instead, stabilization is a low-cost, sustainable, citizen-driven effort to identify the key projects that are essential to returning people to their homes such as water pumps, electricity nodes, grain silos, and local security structures, local police.

    This is not glamorous work, but it's working. In Iraq, 1.7 million Iraqis are now back in their homes; no longer displaced, no longer refugees or migrants seeking to flee. ...


    ... death, devastation, destruction, and deceit ... and leave it that way. let the locals cobble together what they can to keep themselves alive ... and able to extract the regions' resources for the city on the hill.

    that's the 'vision' - the 'united whole of government approach' of the usofa and its vassals in its coalition to the new american century ... at 16 or 17 years of age, now long in tooth, by the 12 year rule of the last thousand year reich.

    i think those iraqis and syrians, moving back into their homes after the usofa's firestorm has been extinguished are going to join hands and, together with the lebanese and iranians, drive the empire and it minions out of their northern half of the middle east for once and for all. and that then the ordinary arabs who've suffered under the rule of the kings and emirs and sultans, infuriated by the alliance of their rulers with the oppressors of the whole region, will do the same in the region's south.

    Debsisdead | May 21, 2017 6:58:59 PM | 25
    As sociopathic as flooding the ME with $200 billion worth of high tech armaments is, I cannot help but think that this crazy stunt will spell the end of the al-Sauds.

    They may have enough family members to man every red button on their new toys and succeed in blowing all their immediate neighbours to hell, but they don't have anything like enough trained and committed human beings to occupy the territories they will believe they have conquered. As we all know half a dozen khat fuelled Yemenis fighting with 'borrowed' munitions can run through a saudi armoured unit and still have enough left over for a good old death to israel singalong.

    I cannot see even those sunni citizens from other tribes feeling sufficiently 'proud' to join the army and help since in all likelihood the 'deal' will contain conditions that the market for crude continue to be flooded, prices kept low and Saudi austerity on target.

    This is a more like a recipe for a revolution than a strategy to dominate the region.

    Hopefully the zionists will also be flushed down the gurgler in the backwash.

    Hoarsewhisperer | May 21, 2017 8:29:27 PM | 27
    My first thought after reading its was: "These people live in a different world. They have no idea how the real word works on the ground. What real people think, say, and are likely to do." There was no strategic thought visible. Presented were only some misguided tactical ideas.

    Yep. You hit that nail squarely on the head, b.

    Clusterfucks R Us has completely lost the plot. The Yankees want everyone to start singing Happy Days Are Here Again, but 'everyone' wants an answer to the questions
    "What TF do you retards think you're doing?"

    and

    "Who TF do you think you're kidding?"

    Putin decided to let them know that he doesn't give a rat's ass what they're pretending to believe, last week, when he made an unsolicited offer to provide the Trump 'investigators' with a transcript of Trump's WH conversation with Lavrov. i.e. Vlad knew they'd ignore the offer because Yankees prefer to believe their own bullshit.
    Helluva way to win a war though.

    And I couldn't help noticing that Vlad actually chuckled when he was making the offer...

    stumpy | May 22, 2017 2:53:14 AM | 29
    james @28

    It's all a sad sad media melodrama. You may get a similar barrage of crap entertainment in the northern territories, but here it's beyond a religion. We are three or so generations into the systematic dismantling of the educational system coupled with a salacious-minded culture of gossip and under-the-table deals. The citizenry is all pretty much irrelevant to policy now, as their understanding is by and large an inch deep and a mile wide. The bright souls are few and far between, and stay down. Heroin and recreational drug use is rampant. Schools are crumbling. News is not news. People are getting sick and dying younger, and the maternal mortality rate is on par with a third-world republic. Nobody really knows what is going on. Iraq and Afghanistan vets are suiciding on a daily basis.

    Now follow the lights over the skies of Riyadh.

    Knowing how the ME is so trade-oriented, since the days of the caravanserai, the Saudi contract may easily be an economic strategy for the KSA to diversify into arms trade, so not free guns for terrorists but a new shopping mall for US hardware. Plenty of action in Africa and the Caucasus, and operates beyond US arms trade control. Business as usual, but with a large new distributor/underwriter.

    Whatever Clinton promised the Saudi princes in exchange for their generosity for the Clinton "charities", it was probably expanded with fewer strings attached by Trump, which really matters if you want to pursue influence by foreign governments on US policy and trade. The horror is that it probably sets up the endgame whereby Yemen, Syria and Iran are destroyed. Unless the R+6 get real, which they are.

    There is talk of a Russian air-assault brigade coming into the Syrian theatre to fight in the #OpLavender campaign, as well as hired guns from the Caucasus firming up in the Syrian ranks around Hama, the Turan. Iraqs PMUs look to control the Deir Ezzor-Mosul axis. Syria has friends and they all showed up for the fight.

    Trump cannot hope to juggle the moving parts on both sides here, and my guess that the Zionaudis revenge in case of betrayal will be pitted against the R+6 commitments to keep Syria intact. Trump made the deal with KSA, but also wants to party with Lavrov and Putin. Who's he gonna piss off first? Probably Russia, as his trip to Israel will complete the brainwash.

    As tortured as the Trump team is in the homeland, I would suspect a lowered tolerance for kids coming home wearing a flag under Trump, as clueless as the warmakers appear to be, as you and others have said. The cassus belli is a tough sell after Iraq and Afghanistan. No twin towers have recently collapsed. Terror in the skies is mostly authored by Delta and United.

    somebody | May 22, 2017 3:38:04 AM | 30
    Posted by: james | May 22, 2017 1:11:28 AM | 28

    There might be some truth in what they are saying

    It is a family thing. When Muslim women represent upper class families they are equal (something the Trump family can relate to). Benazir Bhutto could do it in Pakistan.

    Womens' rights in Saudi are of course abysmal. But should the Saudi economy need them they will be emancipated .

    Women's rights in Iran are not good either, by the way .

    Generally speaking, you can do a lot of things as a women in a Muslim country if your family supports you. If not, you have a big problem.

    Anon | May 22, 2017 4:25:59 AM | 31
    So Trump blast Iran while arming the ISIS-supporting sunni states, and hail women progress in the region - you cant make this up. This is yet another proof that Trump is unfortunately, really stupid and a neocon warmonger.
    He now just have to drop Russia and there is no discussion needed anymore to judge him.

    Laguerre | May 22, 2017 5:42:22 AM | 34
    There is no attack on Raqqa, because there are insufficient forces available to do it, surely? The YPG are not going to do it, much as the Peshmerga haven't entered Mosul. Nice Kurdish boys and girls are not going to die fighting their way through Raqqa and Mosul, just to hand them back to the local Arabs. It's not really about what the US might or not not be offering - genuine independence can't be offered by the US, and Turkish recalcitrance is just one of the factors.

    There is of course a Sunni Arab tribal element in the SDF, but it's not very numerous (I forget the number). And they're likely to go back to supporting Asad, once this is all over. Curious that, isn't it, Sunni Arabs supporting Asad, though not actually rare. I remember a video with interviews with some of them. They were quite clear about their views.

    blues | May 22, 2017 7:18:53 AM | 35
    "Trump & 55 Muslim-majority states sign pact pledging 34,000 troops to fight ISIS in Iraq & Syria" -- RT -- 5/22/17
    https://www.rt.com/news/389152-trump-muslim-leaders-terrorism/

    jfl | May 22, 2017 8:25:26 AM | 36
    @3, blues

    more likely 34,000 isis replacements to fight assad, hezbollah, iraqis, and iranians.

    it's all on paper. believe it when they show up.

    Laguerre | May 22, 2017 12:24:41 PM | 43
    Well, they certainly aren't going to find 34,000 troops. If they couldn't do it before, they can't now.

    In any case, the only source is the poor countries, Sudan, Somalia, Djibouti, Pakistan, and several others. The trouble here is that they're Sunnis supposed to be fighting ISIS. Fight the heretical Shi'a they might, though in fact attempts to recruit Sudanese and Pakistanis to fight the Houthis haven't worked out.

    And who's supposed to be picking up the tab? THe Saudis and Gulfis, I imagine. I can see that happening. Wahhabis fighting Wahhabis.

    Better to take the agreement as a dead letter, to be forgotten as soon as he is home in Trump Tower, or Mar-a-lago.

    by: Laguerre | May 22, 2017 12:24:41 PM | 43

    by: Laguerre | May 22, 2017 12:24:41 PM | 43

    Christian Chuba | May 22, 2017 12:46:38 PM | 44
    GEN. DUNFORD: We don't have a government to work with and we will never work with the Assad regime.

    So when you talk to particularly the folks who will be involved n the Raqqa operation, the post-Raqqa phase, unanimously nobody wants the Syrian regime to come back , regime symbols, regime military forces. ... But as you, kind of, lift the lid over Syria, you see a lot of this happening in areas even where the opposition controls. Teacher salaries, basic worker salaries oftentimes paid by the government because it's a very centralized state. So these are things that have to be worked out, but what -- what they are unanimous about is no return of the regime.

    Fascinating.

    1. We let it slip out that the monster Assad is helping to subsidize Syrians living in rebel held areas. I thought he was starving them.

    2. We also just declared that we are annexing Raqqa on behalf of the SDF.

    3. If you read that quote it is pretty heartless. It basically says that there will be no international reconstruction money for Syria unless Assad goes. So the Syrians better do what we say or we will make them pay for the destruction of their country.

    stumpy | May 22, 2017 12:55:22 PM | 46
    Debsisdead @40

    Dead on.

    Maybe we could call it MEATO.

    50-50 odds the EU Army forms first.

    james | May 22, 2017 1:04:52 PM | 47
    @29 stumpy.. it is so sad really... the level of apathy, combined with depravity and etc. etc. that the usa has dropped to.. it might have once been a great country, but that time is now long past.. canada isn't far behind either, but at least no one was looking at us as a role model for anything other then on a humanitarian level.. and on that level we continue to disappoint as well..

    we seem to be coming down to high noon in the okay corral with regard to syria. i don't think russia is going to back down here and if as it seems the us military is in the hands of these same whack jobs who have been responsible for the deaths of syrian army people, the usa and russia are going to be meeting in syria very soon and ww3 is just around the corner... such a shame the usa has a jack in the box for president..

    @30 somebody.. i am sure there are exceptions at the top end, but generally the saudi culture is medieval or worse by the sounds of it.. iran is obviously better, but the same deal applies with regard to men having control over their wives lives in important ways.. this is an islamic thing?

    @31 anon.. i agree with you about it is over for trump...

    @36 jfl.. yeah - that is it!

    @38 ghostship.. i will grant you that the usa is in terrible shape.. they just haven't turned off the lights yet.. websites that had some shred of relevancy are typically bought out to the highest bidder and taken over as another propaganda shop.. huffington post, democracy now - they are all susceptible to this now..

    jfl | May 22, 2017 7:04:28 PM | 50
    b points up the split between the saudi-backed salafists and those backed by turkey, above.

    erdogan still dreams in technicolor, just like a saudi royal, apparently.

    strangely, this split is verified by ... john mccain ...

    on returning to the turkish embassy in ac/dc after face-time with the rump, erdogan found protestors in front thereof, and ordered his goons in suits to punish them. they did ... bad press ... erdogan now attempts to turn it around, in true neo-con fashion - not for nothing has he been watching the much admired israelis of late ...

    Ankara Summons US Ambassador Over Washington Incident


    Already last week, Washington expressed "grave concern" about the Turkish behaviour.

    The US Senator John McCain even went as far as to demand the expulsion of the Turkish ambassador.


    ... the last sentence is the tell. it's officially goodbye turkey, hello saudi arabia in ac/dc, and that goes for their respective salafist proxies as well. especially, rather.

    stumpy | May 22, 2017 9:08:23 PM | 53
    @48 Lozion, RE: Russian Forces in Syria

    Mentioned over on sst -- also:

    https://twitter.com/warsmonitoring/status/866307127777931268
    https://twitter.com/WaelHussaini/statuses/866054742430056449
    http://scofieldinstitute.org/russian-forces-arrive-southern-syria/

    People with better sources than I could probably elucidate.

    [May 22, 2017] Making this event even more scandalous than the war crime which it all ready objectively is, is the fact that the attack occurred inside one of the de-escalation zones

    May 18, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

    harrylaw | May 18, 2017 4:20:26 PM | 48

    According to Syria, the casualties of the attack are as follows: A convoy of five T-62 tanks were hit by the U.S. Coalition. Two tanks were destroyed
    A Shilka was damaged. Six military personnel were killed and another three were wounded. Convoy consisted of soldiers from the Syrian Arab Army (SAA), National Defence Forces (NDF), Hezbollah, and Imam Al-'Ali Battalions

    Previously under the Obama administration, the US Air Force killed 62 Syrian Arab Army soldiers near Deir ez-Zor airport in a horrific war crime.

    Making this event even more scandalous than the war crime which it all ready objectively is, is the fact that the attack occurred inside one of the 'de-escalation zones' (aka safe zones) established in Syria according to the Astana Memorandum. Russia, Turkey and Iran are guarantors of the agreement which has the backing of the United Nations, Syrian government and the apparent tacit approval of the United States. http://theduran.com/confirmed-america-attacks-syrian-arab-army-and-its-allies-a-crime-and-blunder/

    [May 22, 2017] U.S. Attacks Syrian Government Forces - It Now Has To Make Its Choice

    Notable quotes:
    "... We know from the Wesley Clark revelations from 2003 that Syria is just one of 7 countries surrounding Israel that were targeted for either government take over or invasion. Iran is the bigger fish than Syria so Syria is the nut that needs to be cracked first. ..."
    "... If we look at the synchronized western propaganda it is also clear how each of these countries has become a target and then was forced into becoming IMF/One Bank slave states while their country was looted and their infrastructure destroyed. ..."
    "... looks like the rump is being led by neo-cons, with a ring in his nose. ..."
    "... "For the second time in as many months, the U.S. military has conducted airstrikes against pro-Assad forces in Syria," said Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.). "The Trump Administration does not have congressional authorization to carry out military strikes against the Assad regime..." ..."
    "... From a legal point of view, you're perfectly right, as is terril. ..."
    "... But (intl.) politics isn't as sober and neutral, I'm afraid. What would happen if the Syrian govt. was given enough air defense systems and shot down those planes, or if Russia did it? Who would win the upper hand in DC, those urging restraint & negotiations or those saying 'To hell with UN & rules, they attacked our guys so we'll teach them a lesson!'? ..."
    "... International law is a good thing for sure, but it's important to know its limits and act accordingly. As Carl Schmitt said, 'the sovereign is he who decides on the state of exception' - at the global level, great powers decide themselves whether or not they honour international law. There's some incentive for them to do so most of the time, but once a conflict touches on their core interests... ..."
    "... The US is like a sociopath. It behaves badly and opportunistically when it can. The leadership of Russia, Iran, Syria and Hezbollah know this. B wrote this in his last analysis too. ..."
    "... The past years, US has attacked Iraqi troops and para military on a regular basis whenever they were taking actions the US didn't like. For example when they were heading to Ramadi to liberate it, the US simply bombed and killed a couple of dozen para military as only some supposedly 'sunni-fighers' were allowed to participate. ..."
    "... It has also regularly dropped supplies to Daesh. ..."
    "... To everyone that screams for the Russians to shoot down US planes, etc. etc. You have to realize the minute the Russians do that they will face a full court press from the US media for direct confrontation and war. Trump will be called a coward and a pawn and he'll end up being forced to start attacking Russian assets in Syria. ..."
    "... The way to look at it is 'Russian efforts are restraining the US from its desired course of action' (Libya style intervention). Instead the US is stuck trying to goad the Russians into giving them a pretext to intervene on a large scale. The Russians/Iranians/Syrians just need to keep going, take the occasional 'provocation' attempt by the US and turn the other cheek. Eventually like 'b' says, the US will simply have to leave. ..."
    "... Here's the thing. US has struck twice with total impunity in the current stage of the crisis, once here and once with the tomahawks. Russia doesn't seem to be shooting back. They can bang their shoes all day at the UN or make these grandiose proclamations about US war crimes, but they're starting to look like puppies keeping their powder dry. ..."
    "... I'm absolutely not saying that international law is meaningless, just that it has limits. If a great power (and esp. the US) violates it, there will not be any direct consequences, *but* the rest of the world will still see the act for what it is. If this happens regularly, the great power will find it ever harder to find allies on the global scene, ..."
    "... The prime example for this is the 2003 Iraq war: The US & UK govts thought that they could act with impunity. They may have been right in the short run, but in the longer run this blatant violation of the most fundamental intl. law was their downfall. Talk about a leader losing all his followers. ..."
    "... The Russians, Syrians, Iraqis and Iranians know the US/UK forces are protecting that supply corridor. They know the US is reluctant to use Iraq (as much as possible) for those convoys. If the SAA wants to take Deir EzZor and al Bukamal, then it has to cut the ISIS supply lines along the southeast border from al Tanf to al Bukamal. ..."
    "... Like I said before, the U.S. are sore losers. CJTF-OIR doesn't like anyone messing with their ISIS supply corridors or their US/UK ISIS corridor 'guards'. They are running out of options, which makes them very dangerous. ..."
    "... the United States, with the help of Jordan and Turkey, was running a training base for Syrian rebels in Jordan. http://www.australiannationalreview.com/isis-members-trained-cia ..."
    "... Historically, the region (upper Mesopotamia) has always been valuable and contested, as this is where the roads running from west to east cross those running from north to south. It is the heartland of the Middle East, so to say. ..."
    "... i guess the usa has an idiot for defense secretary.. that or a very bad liar.. if someone murders mattis, it can be claimed it's self defense.. sorta like a variant on peter-logic.. "Defense Secretary James Mattis described the targeted fighters as Iran-backed, rather than backed by the Syrian government, and called the airstrike "self-defense of our forces." ..."
    May 22, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
    Addendum added below
    ---

    The Syrian army is on the way to liberate the ISIS besieged city of some 100,000 and garrison of Deir Ezzor in the east of the country. The U.S. has trained a few thousand "New Syrian Army" insurgents in Jordan and is reportedly prepared to march these and its own forces from Jordan through the east-Syrian desert all the way up to Raqqa and Deir Ezzor. About a year ago it occupied the al-Tanf (al-Tanaf) border station which consists of only a few buildings in the mid of the desert. The station between Syria and Iraq near the Jordan border triangle was previously held by a small ISIS group.

    A U.S. move from the south up towards the Euphrates would cut off the Syrian government from the whole south-east of the country and from its people in Deir Ezzor. While that area is sparsely populated it also has medium size oil and gas fields and is the land connection to the Syrian allies in Iraq.

    With the western part of the country relatively quiet, the Syrian government and its allies decided to finally retake the south-eastern provinces from ISIS. They want to lift the ISIS siege on Deir Ezzor and close the border between Syria and Iraq with its own forces. The move will also block any potential U.S. invasion from the south by retaking the road to al-Tanf and the Syrian-Iraqi border (red arrows). The sovereign Syrian state will not give up half of the country to an illegal occupation by ISIS or the U.S. At the same time as the eastern operations are running consolidation and clearing operations against ISIS in the middle and west of the countries will take place (green arrows).


    Map by OZ_Analysis (modified by MoA) - bigger

    Yesterday a small battalion size force (~2-300 men) of the regular Syrian army, Syrian National Defense Organization volunteers and Iraqi Popular Mobilization Forces ( PMF/PMU of the Kata'ib al-Imam Ali ) marched on the road from the west towards al-Tanf. They were about 23 kilometers away from the border station when they were attack by U.S. aircraft coming in low from Jordan. The U.S. jets directly fired at the convoy, allegedly after earlier giving some "warning shots". At least one Syrian tank and several other vehicles were destroyed. Six Syrian government forces were reported killed and more were wounded.

    The U.S. command claimed that this was a "defensive" move to "protect" its soldiers at the al-Tanf station. There are U.S. and British special forces stationed near the station who lead and train the NSA contingent - all together a few 100 men.

    The U.S. attack was clearly a willful, illegal attack on Syrian ground against legitimate forces of the sovereign Syrian government. (The Iraqi PMU contingent in Syria is a legitimate allied force under control of the Iraqi prime minister.) There is no clause in international law, no UNSC resolution or anything similar, that could justify such an attack. The U.S. military has no right at all to be at al-Tanf or anywhere else in Syria. There is nothing to "defend" for it. If it dislikes regular Syrian and Iraqi forces moving in their own countries towards their own border station and retaking it from Jihadi "rebels", it can and should move out and go home. Moreover - the U.S. claims it is "fighting ISIS" in Syria. Why then is it attacking the Syrian government forces while these launch a large operation against the very same enemy?

    The coalition led by the U.S. military claimed it asked Russia to intervene and that Russia tried to deter the Syrian force to move towards al-Tanf. I am told that this claim is incorrect. Russia supports the Syrian move to the east and the retaking of the border. The move will be reinforced and continue. The revamped Syrian air defense will actively protect it. Russia will support it with its own forces if needed.

    The illegitimate occupation forces, the U.S. and British forces and their proxies, will have to move out of al-Tanf or they will have to directly fight the Syrian government forces and all its allies. They have no right to be there at all. The Iraqi PMU in Syria, some of which were hurt in yesterday's U.S. attack, are an active part of the coalition against ISIS in Iraq. If the U.S. fights it in Syria it will also have to fight it in Iraq (and elsewhere). Russia is able and willing to reinforce its own contingent in Syria to help the government to regain the Syrian east.

    The U.S. has no legitimate aim in Syria. It is somewhat tolerated in the north-east where it helps Syrian-Kurdish forces to fight ISIS and to liberate Raqqa. That does not give it ANY right to occupy Syria's east or to attack Syrian government forces. When Raqqa is done all U.S. forces in the north-east will have to again move out.

    Together with its many subordinate NATO and Gulf allies the U.S. has the military and economic power to destroy the Syrian military. It can eliminate the Syrian government under President Assad and occupy the whole country. That would be a large war which would probably escalate into a global fight against Russia, Iran and other countries. It would necessitate a several decades long follow-up occupation for "nation building" while constantly fighting against a large al-Qaeda aligned Takfiri insurgency in Syria and all its neighboring countries (especially in Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey where U.S. friendly governments would fall). The war would cost several trillion U.S. dollars, a large number of casualties and cause decades long chaos in a geo-politically sensitive region.

    The U.S. has a simple choice: Either go in with full force and bear the above consequences, or concede to the sovereign Syrian government and its allies and coordinate with them to retake the country from ISIS and al-Qaeda. This will have to be done as they, not the U.S., see it proper to do. To believe that the U.S. can take the east and convert into some peaceful vassal statelet is pure fantasy. Way too many regional forces and interests are strung against that. There is little grey between these black and white alternatives.

    The only tactically thinking U.S. military and intelligence services will try to avoid to choose between these. They will use their Jihadist proxy forces in west-Syria to break their current ceasefire with the Syrian government side and launch a diversion for their moves into the Syrian east. The Syrian government would then probably have to delay its larger operations in the east.

    But that would not change the strategic situation. The choice the U.S. people and their government have to make will still be the same. The point in time to finally accept it may move out a few month while the fighting escalates and causes more damage on all sides. The choice would still be the same. It is all-in or out. The best time to take it is now.

    Addendum (6:00am):

    There are some maps flowing around which assert that Iran is seeking a military land communication route via Iraq into Syria and beyond. They show some fantasy route up north through Iraqi and Syrian Kurdish territory as the "current route" and the roads between Damascus and Baghdad as "future route". The claim is that military equipment moves along these roads.

    It is nonsense. Iran did not and does not need such land routes for military exchanges with its allies in Syria and Lebanon. Where was that Iranian land route in 2006 when the U.S. occupied Iraq while Israel attacked Lebanon? Where was that land route when ISIS occupied half of Iraq and Syria? There was no such route and Iranian support still reached Hizbullah in 2006 and later Syria. It came by air, by ship and, most important, by other means.

    By holding up such fantasy maps certain interests want to insinuate that the area is "strategically important" for the U.S. and that the U.S. must therefore occupy south-east Syria. It is true that the road network between Syria and Iraq has some economical importance. Like all roads these are used for local commerce. But history demonstrates that they are not militarily strategic asset in the sense of an essential, overarching need.

    Posted by b on May 19, 2017 at 04:02 AM | Permalink

    Mina | May 19, 2017 4:19:25 AM | 1

    White Helmets helping Hama civilians with correct application of Shari'a law (KSA/UK guaranteed?)
    https://twitter.com/BenjaminNorton/status/865033499950145538/video/1

    Anon | May 19, 2017 4:35:27 AM | 4
    And as usual, the western MSM, politicians wont condemn this violation of international law. Isnt this amazing? This really show how the propaganda in the works in the west. Really disgusting.
    harrylaw | May 19, 2017 4:43:26 AM | 5
    The US government have made it clear many times that they hardly see a difference between Islamic State fighters and the Assad "regime". That being the case it is not surprising that this incident happened.

    Could John McCains recent silence on Trump's investigation have anything to do with it? Not long ago McCain and Grayham wanted an Arab force aligned with the US to invade Syria, when asked what would happen in the event of Russia intervening he replied "they will do nothing".

    As b points out there are few options, either the Russians back Assads troops or they do nothing, thereby conceding vast swaths of Syrian territory to the terrorists, which is what General Flynn said [in a recorded interview with Mehdi Hasan https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SG3j8OYKgn4 the US and its allies have wanted all along. Putin must now decide is he with the US and their partition of Syria or with Assad?

    From The Hague | May 19, 2017 5:22:06 AM | 6
    The choice the U.S. people and their government have to make will still be the same.

    The U.S. people have nothing to say. And b, what do you mean with "their government"? The president? No one with power takes him seriously. The House of Representatives? Their opinion is clear:

    For six years, we have watched the Syrian regime launch wave after wave of unrelenting destruction on the people of Syria. Airstrikes, chemical weapons attacks, forced starvation, industrial-scale torture, and the deliberate targeting of hospitals, schools and marketplaces with precision bombs and crude barrel bombs are what Syrians suffer every day.

    Just last month we saw footage of entire families snuffed out by sarin gas – a chemical weapon that Assad supposedly gave up under a deal brokered by Russia and the Obama Administration.

    The number of dead is estimated at close to 500,000. Another 14 million have been driven from their homes.

    And while ISIS plays a role in the violence in Syria, it is Bashar al-Assad and his backers – among them Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah – who are the main drivers of this death and destruction. ISIS has no airplanes. No, it is Russian and Syrian fighter planes and helicopters that drop bombs on hospitals and schools. It is Hezbollah and IRGC fighters who attack cities, burn crops and prevent food, water and medical supplies from reaching vulnerable civilians.

    https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/press-release/house-passes-syria-sanctions-bill/

    Their choice will be: all-in

    Greg Bacon | May 19, 2017 5:46:03 AM | 7
    The Syrian Army was getting too close to the Pentagon's ISIS buddies and Israel was getting nervous that peace was breaking out in a part of Syria, so they just had to bomb the Syrians!!
    Perimtr | May 19, 2017 5:49:51 AM | 8
    The Russians will make it clear they are not going to quietly step out of the way for the US. Only delusional neocons are capable of convincing themselves that this would be a likely outcome in such circumstances.

    The US picked this latest point of attack because it far from Russian air defenses and it seemed likely they could get away with it. Similar interventions may continue but if so, sometime in the not too distant future, US planes will be shot down. The MSM media campaign has probably already been prepared to announce the event.

    Perimtr | May 19, 2017 5:56:43 AM | 9
    Here's the Russian response to the attack . . . "Absolutely unacceptable"
    terril | May 19, 2017 6:13:07 AM | 10
    I think everyone knows what the Russian response will be other than the non-response they have already given: nothing. The US regime knows this. The Russians know this. The Russians will not attack the terrorists invading eastern Syria as long as they have US regime clowns riding along as human shields. Putin/Lavrof: "Our American partners...blah, blah, blah..."

    The real questions is what is Iraq going to do. They have already stated that they plan on kicking the US regime troops out of Iraq. While US regime figures have talked about essentially turning Iraq into a massive US military outpost.

    Forget Putin, there is no way he is going to start bombing US regime troops.

    But the Iraqi moment of truth is what is the key question. Will they roll over and let the US start carving up Syria and next Iraq? Or will they finally show some backbond and start grounding US regime aircraft, shutting down US regime military outposts, confinging regime troops to barracks and bases, and finally kicking the US out.

    If Iraq steps up and forges ahead with Syria on securing their common border it doesn't matter what Putin and Lavrov do pussyfooting around their "American partners".

    Igor Bundy | May 19, 2017 6:19:26 AM | 11
    Americans are so arrogant and stupid that they have a hard time understanding when they have nothing to gain. Or that they have lost. That they got their asses whooped. So like a retard you have to show it multiple times before they get it. In many instances they do something because they have nothing else better to do. Does not matter the harm it does. Mostly to themselves. Didn't neaopline say when the enemy is doing stupid, dont interrupt them.

    And by the way how the US lost all its gold to France. Now it survives on faith. The world is far stupider to believe in that faith cause as those who went before them learnt, that faith got them all slaughtered.

    harrylaw..

    Hey if you want to die for Al Qaeda and ISIS so be it.. This war will take much longer but the and end result will be the same. Syrians have shown themselves to not be as stupid as americans thought they are. The last war won by Americans was ??? against people with bows and arrows..

    Heros | May 19, 2017 6:56:41 AM | 14
    We know from the Wesley Clark revelations from 2003 that Syria is just one of 7 countries surrounding Israel that were targeted for either government take over or invasion. Iran is the bigger fish than Syria so Syria is the nut that needs to be cracked first.

    If we look at the synchronized western propaganda it is also clear how each of these countries has become a target and then was forced into becoming IMF/One Bank slave states while their country was looted and their infrastructure destroyed.

    This entire IMF/BIS/WB/Central Bank controlled western "democratic" world are nothing but Rothschild's vassal states. Nato is actually Zato and is little more than the Rothschild's army.

    When we look at the situation in South East Syria, and consider that it was Jordanian jets that bombed the convoy, then we are forced to realize that this is not about carving out a US statelet, it is about carving off a big chunk of Syria for "lebensraum" for Israel.

    This is why Assad was forced to send his forces east, because attacking south towards Golan would have instantly lead to retribution by Israel, and north into Idlib would have lead to retribution from Erdogan.

    So Assad sent his army east and got spanked by Israel through her vassal Jordan anyway. The message is very clear, Assad's push to Al-Tanf would have boxed in the Israeli/Rothschild vassal armies staging in Jordan along the border and preparing to occupy south-eastern Syria on behalf of Israel.

    So all of south east Syria to the Jordanian/Iraqi border is now "reserved" by Israel for future growth. Any further attack by Assad in this region, just like his shooting down of an Israeli F16, will lead to disproportionate response by Israel's vassals. There are certainly dozens of war mongering US naval officers chomping at the bits to be the ones allowed to send in another 60 cruise missiles to take out another airfield that threatens Israel's expansion into Syria and its ultimate conquest.

    Assad will be forced to head straight to Del Ezzor leaving a long line of communications exposed to the Israel's vassal army heading north. Once this happends Assad will be boxed in in the west and will slowly be bled to death by the money changers.

    Mina | May 19, 2017 7:03:04 AM | 15
    The way French gov radio reported it yesterday was "50 pro-regime fighters killed in a IS attack"

    This is perhaps the most efficient description of the American condition that I've read here at MofA. And, in some industries at least, there's some profit made behind bankable, predictable, retarded strategy.

    One side are genocidal maniacs proven by repeated attempts at erasing history and ethnic cleansing...for the other side it's an existential war with more honourable and capable allies. With any luck, Syria, Iraq AND nato ally Turkey will be turned against ill-conceived US desires for the region.

    jfl | May 19, 2017 7:09:27 AM | 17
    so whose jets - f15s? - were they? the us' or jordan's? and whose will they be next time? does syria have the gear to defend its airspace? i imagine it requires anti-aircraft missiles. i can't imagine syrian-american 'dog fights'. or does it require the russians to do it for them?

    thanks b, for a solid summary of where we are now. looks like the rump is being led by neo-cons, with a ring in his nose. is he in ksa today? or tel aviv? betraying the american people?

    hell, murdering the syrian people! signing their death warrant.

    hillary would have done the same. sooner.

    Laguerre | May 19, 2017 7:11:09 AM | 18
    My immediate reaction to this event was that the US-funded fighters were in imminent danger of destruction and expulsion from Syria. The air-strike was intended to stop what was otherwise likely to be a victorious advance of the Syrian army. I suppose it was a red-line for the US. They weren't willing to see their so expensively trained recruits destroyed.

    Though I quite agree that it was completely illegal.

    jfl | May 19, 2017 7:18:02 AM | 20
    @10 terril

    i agree with you on the invincibility of a combined syria-iraq and with hezbollah-iranian support ... i just don't see the leadership in iraq. they're going to have a have revolution there - at least one, maybe one in iraqi kurdistan, too - first. or at the same time. I pity the iraqis, the syrians ... all the blood spilled by american neocons, for nearly 15 years in the new american century, and for that long on the other side of 2000 in iraq. There must be a war crimes tribunal for the us at the end of all this. it cannot be allowed to just walk away from crimes of this magnitude.

    Laguerre | May 19, 2017 7:19:23 AM | 21
    re Mina 1

    The video says Daraa, not Hama. I find it odd that White Helmets, even if in cahoots with Nusra, would actually allow themselves to be videoed picking up bodies executed by Nusra. It happened once before in Idlib; I would have thought they would have learned and stayed out of it. A complicated form of false flag? One faction getting back at another? I don't know.

    Mina | May 19, 2017 7:27:07 AM | 22
    The strike is a nicety made to KSA and its summit http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/donald-trump-saudi-arabia-iran-iraq-kurdish-population-shia-muslims-a7742276.html I bet they will announce they want peace with Israel, just to corner Syria and Lebanon.
    jfl | May 19, 2017 7:28:17 AM | 23
    @4 anon

    this is beyond propaganda ... the un, the eu/nato ... this is complicity. this is as surely aggression as the german invasion of poland. qualitatively no different. the quantity is on the way, i imagine.

    Mina | May 19, 2017 7:30:13 AM | 24
    Sorry, Daraa not Hama. The red keffiehs correspond indeed with the Beduin you find in Daraa. The WH have aknowledged their humanitarian part in it (it is in the comments posted under the video):
    http://syriacivildefense.org/sites/syriacivildefense.org/files/18%20May%202017.pdf
    They are very proud to help the local tribal customs, they tell us. Just the way KSA would argue, isn't it?
    Mina | May 19, 2017 7:31:55 AM | 25
    And just as KSA would twist it, it ends with a semi-apologize and an admonition ("2 guys have been punished for 3 months")
    jfl | May 19, 2017 7:39:49 AM | 26
    where is there any 'payoff' at all to the us for this whole brutal, vicious operation? what can possibly be gained by it? i don't see anything at all. all i can see is what is being lost by absolutely everyone.
    juliania | May 19, 2017 8:02:27 AM | 27
    I am wondering if this event could not become part of a legitimate consideration of impeachable offenses. I laud commondreams.org for featuring a prominent article this morning containing the following information:

    "For the second time in as many months, the U.S. military has conducted airstrikes against pro-Assad forces in Syria," said Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.). "The Trump Administration does not have congressional authorization to carry out military strikes against the Assad regime..."

    The article goes on to enlarge the indictment to include the illegitimate presence of the US in Syria as often pointed out by commenters here, and as was a factor in the election of Trump to the presidency, (and therefore also of Pence as Vice President).

    Let's create a new precedent (different from but not excluding the term 'president') and have a Brit style snap election -

    I'm voting for Congressman Lieu!

    smuks | May 19, 2017 8:08:32 AM | 28

    I'm not too keen on that, and I think neither are Putin and Lavrov.

    We can be absolutely sure that Russia et al will react, but not the blunt & brutal way. Their victimhood gives them the moral high ground, and since the US/ coalition attack was obviously illegal, they can now improve air defences, threaten retaliation in the case of a repeat and reinforce their stand in the area.

    Strategically, the attack may prove a major advantage for Damascus, just as the Hasakah incident was a tactical defeat, but a strategic gain. So let's not jump to conclusions too quickly, and wait till the dust has settled.

    Yeah, Right | May 19, 2017 8:27:39 AM | 29
    I find it so depressing to read the comments sections in MSM articles on this latest bit o' USA! USA! USA! lawlessness.

    None of the comments show even the slightest sign of registering the fact that US forces are inside Syrian territory and, as such, it is the Syrian army that is reacting defensively by marching towards those interlopers.

    al-Tanaf is on the border between Syria, Iraq and Jordan.
    It is inside Syrian territory.

    Nobody disputes either fact.

    Then this is also indisputable: the only legal response that US forces inside al-Tanaf can take on the approach of Syrian forces is to pick up their packs and take a few steps over the border into Jordan.

    Or into Iraq. Whichever takes their fancy, I don't really care either way.

    But if they insist on staying where they are then THEY are the aggressors, and any air strikes they call in is an act of aggression AGAINST the SAA and its allies. Such air strikes are not in any way, shape or form a "defensive" act.

    After all, whose f**cking country is it?

    Cousin Jack | May 19, 2017 8:29:09 AM | 30
    Fisk's take on this: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/us-syria-airstrikes-why-bashar-al-assad-militia-convoy-iraq-border-training-camp-rebels-a7744091.html
    jfl | May 19, 2017 8:30:41 AM | 31
    Another US airstrike targets pro-government forces near Syrian crossing: video
    The U.S. Coalition carried out another airstrike against a group of pro-government Iraqi paramilitary fighters near the Syrian border-crossing, Iraq's Afaq TV reported yesterday.

    The report added that at least one Sayyed Al-Shuhada fighter was killed and another six were badly injured by the U.S. attack near Albukamal.

    The Sayyed Al-Shuhada Regiment is part of the Popular Mobilization Units (Hashd Al-Sha'abi); they have participated in several offensives that have been backed by the U.S. military.

    This attack was under reported because of the large strike by the U.S. Coalition on a Syrian military convoy near the Tanf Border-Crossing in southeast Homs.

    so was it a us plane or a 'coalition' plane. they used the danes the first time, at deir ezor, didn't they? and the brits, was it? people say they're using the jordanians this time. anyone know?
    blues | May 19, 2017 8:32:03 AM | 32
    There is absolutely no reason to assume that Russia will back down. What will the US do if Russia starts shooting down these US planes? Think the Russians are going to let the US creep through Syria into Iran, and then into Russia?
    jfl | May 19, 2017 8:35:41 AM | 33
    @28 smuks

    one would think that there'd be a call for a unsc meeting on this right away, wouldn't you? i think terril was encouraging the syrians and iraqis to meet this invasion together. they are perfectly in the right to do so. the russians need to make sure that the syrians have the means to protect themselves. the us/nato must be opposed in their invasion of syria. the us is the one trying to start ww iii, not the people trying to defend themselves from us aggression. or was it the poles who started ww ii?

    xor | May 19, 2017 8:48:04 AM | 34
    Nice piece. I do have the idea that Al Tanaf is of little strategic importance to Russia and that's why it's keeping quite (except for a condemnation by the defence ministry). Still it should be brought to UNSC (where everybody knows it will be bouced by FUKUS (and demonstrate once more FUKUS' moral deficit)).
    NemesisCalling | May 19, 2017 9:10:45 AM | 35
    Yep, it's either play the hand you're dealt and be thwarted by the emerging multi-polar world, or turn the whole table over because, Damn the consequences, "We are true believers!" I pegged Hillary as being in the latter camp. I pegged Donald as a grifter who enjoys the epicurean pleasures too much (be real: could Hillary even enjoy anything sensually other than the thrill of murderous conquest?).

    Thanks b for laying it out for us. They will stall the outcome, for sure, but these are the only choices.

    Perimtr | May 19, 2017 10:05:22 AM | 36
    jfl @20 "there must be a war crimes tribunal for the us at the end of all this. it cannot be allowed to just walk away from crimes of this magnitude."

    Who will hold the tribunal? As Paul Craig Roberts says, Washington is Sauron, and Saurin rules his minions in the West. Unless a real revolution takes place, the only way that such a judgement can come will be via a host of Russian or Chinese ICBMs/SLBMs

    Banger | May 19, 2017 10:21:49 AM | 37
    Whoever is in charge (in reality) of the U.S. military is setting policy in Syria. Who knows what the motivation is at this point except more war equals more funding. As for legality of the strike, let's be clear here, the U.S. does not accept international law and therefore there is no international law--that era is over. What we have in Syria is a strategy of tension. No side will back down, no side can negotiate because, fundamentally, the U.S. has no interest in negotiation as far as I can see. It wants continued war forever wherever it can find war. The current ruling class cannot stand without permanent war and thus the U.S. cannot afford to allow peace in the region or anywhere for that matter.
    smuks | May 19, 2017 10:39:22 AM | 38
    @jfl 33
    From a legal point of view, you're perfectly right, as is terril.

    But (intl.) politics isn't as sober and neutral, I'm afraid. What would happen if the Syrian govt. was given enough air defense systems and shot down those planes, or if Russia did it? Who would win the upper hand in DC, those urging restraint & negotiations or those saying 'To hell with UN & rules, they attacked our guys so we'll teach them a lesson!'?

    International law is a good thing for sure, but it's important to know its limits and act accordingly. As Carl Schmitt said, 'the sovereign is he who decides on the state of exception' - at the global level, great powers decide themselves whether or not they honour international law. There's some incentive for them to do so most of the time, but once a conflict touches on their core interests...

    My first (or second) thought was that Moscow would call for a UNSC emergency meeting. But maybe it wouldn't help much or even do more harm than good, since there obviously wouldn't be any resolution. This would make the attack appear 'somewhat legal', whereas as things stand it's seen as a pure and blatantly open aggression...

    The US was forced to publicly admit the presence of SF at al-Tanf. Damascus and Moscow will call for their withdrawal, which they very probably won't. For the moment this doesn't change anything, but the obvious illegality of the invasion will further reduce the US military's room for manoeuvre, so their presence inside Syria will be of little use, just as their military overweight in the region is of little use.

    Let's see if I'm right... Many folks (not only on MoA) make the mistake of overrating the importance of individual military actions, and not seeing their political-strategic implications. Russians do like playing chess, and sacrificing important pieces is among the most sophisticated moves...

    jawbone | May 19, 2017 10:49:40 AM | 39
    From the RT article linked to by Perimter @ 9 ==
    Earlier, the US-led coalition admitted striking a militia group fighting alongside Syrian government forces in southern Syria on Thursday. They said in a statement that the Syrian forces "posed a threat" to US and allied troops at Tanf base near the Syria-Iraq-Jordan border.

    The incident took place as pro-government forces reportedly entered one of the recently implemented de-escalation zones in Homs province, where they allegedly clashed with the US-backed Maghawir Al-Thawra militant group (formerly known as 'New Syrian Army').

    "We notified the coalition that we were being attacked by the Syrian Army and Iranians in this point and the coalition came and destroyed the advancing convoy," Reuters cited a militant representative as saying.

    I thought the US did not accept the de-escalation zones? So, along with their illegally just being inside Syrian borders, the US now adds to its duplicity with such hypocritial statements.

    harrylaw | May 19, 2017 10:58:07 AM | 40
    Banger@37 You are right there is no International law, at least not for the five veto wielding members of the UNSC AND their friends notably [Saudi Arabia and Israel].
    "Academic lawyers in their thousands may protest that taking military action against Iraq was illegal because it lacked proper authorisation by the Security Council, but it is of no consequence in the real world when there is no possibility of the UK, or its political leadership, being convicted for taking such action. It is meaningless to describe an action as illegal if there is no expectation that the perpetrator of the action will be convicted by a competent judicial body. In the real world, an action is legal unless a competent judicial body rules that it is illegal".

    If the other members ganged up on the US and introduced a Resolution condemning this US aggression, the US would simply veto it, and send it down the memory hole. http://www.david-morrison.org.uk/iraq/ags-legal-advice.pdf

    Bill Person | May 19, 2017 10:59:09 AM | 41
    Roll on the day, Perimtr (#36). I for one would gladly accept extinction of H. sapiens, secure in the knowledge that the cancerous US were finally eradicated from the map.
    aaaa | May 19, 2017 10:59:30 AM | 42
    @28 Putin has not been 100% right all of the time on Syria. Iran had to outmaneuver them once, their non-support of an earlier Raqqa campaign created huge problems later, and now this.

    I guess he can't be blamed for this one as USA basically violated international law to spring this 'trap', which also exposes a potential agenda (southern invasion), but I just wonder how things would be if he was more like USSR leaders, who, at least until Afghanistan, were far less murky about their strategic support.

    Mina | May 19, 2017 11:00:31 AM | 43
    What does the US get of this? Pleasing its allies, in the Gulf and in the south of Syria. Embarrassing the diplomats. Claim to be the boss.
    Petri Krohn | May 19, 2017 11:01:39 AM | 44
    DECONFLICTION ZONE ≠ DE-ESCALATION ZONE

    There seems to be a mix-up between the "deconfliction zones" and de-escalation zones, as defined in the Astana Memorandum.

    The claim that the U.S. attack on Syrian forces happened in a "deconfliction zone" comes from U.S officials. See this article on Sputnik.

    US Coalition Strike on Syrian Army Occurred Within Deconfliction Zone

    A US defense official told Sputnik that the US-led coalition struck the pro-Syrian government forces near the town of At Tanf in the area of an established deconfliction zone with Russia.

    This is not a reference to the four de-escalation zones defined in the Astana Memorandum. The "established deconfliction zone" only means that Russian and U.S. forces have agreed to not shoot at each other.

    aaaa | May 19, 2017 11:04:07 AM | 45
    @42 I'll just add that I concede that international relations are probably different now as we are entering a post-unipolar stage.
    jawbone | May 19, 2017 11:10:13 AM | 46
    Re: jfl @ 31 -- and yet another US airstrike, this time on Iraqi fighters who are...considered allies of the US in its fight against ISIS, right?

    Interesting that the US government and/or military think they can just kill willy-nilly, both friend and declared foe. Do they think this is going to create goodwill among Iraqis?

    Sheesh.

    Also, hasn't Trump proclaimed that he essentially has left strategy and tactics to the US military commanders? How far down the chain of command does that go?

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/13/politics/donald-trump-moab-afghanistan/

    ...President Donald Trump declined to say whether he personally signed off on the use of the GBU-43/B MOAB, also known as the "mother of all bombs," in a strike on ISIS militants in Afghanistan.

    "Everybody knows exactly what happens. So, what I do is I authorize our military," Trump said when asked whether he authorized the strike. "We have given them total authorization and that's what they're doing.

    Sources told CNN that Gen. John Nicholson, commander of US forces in Afghanistan, signed off on the use of the bomb. The White House was informed of the plan before the MC-130 aircraft delivered its 21,600-pound payload.

    Trump has given military commanders broader latitude to act independently on several battlefields where US forces are involved, which Trump touted as making a "tremendous difference" in the fight against ISIS.

    MadMax2 | May 19, 2017 11:18:21 AM | 47
    After all, whose f**cking country is it?
    Posted by: Yeah, Right | May 19, 2017 8:27:39 AM | 29

    Yes, the US and Nato, their media hounds, and their unmistakeable brand of effortless superiority . It is as if a nation never owned the right to defend itself.

    jawbone | May 19, 2017 11:18:31 AM | 48
    Yeah Right @ 29 -- Seems that the State Dept.'s rather amazing claim of a crematorium and about 50 hangings a day at that prison site might be tied to this new aggressiveness, altho', again, how does attacking its own ally's fighters fit into this?

    However, there seems to be a new aggressiveness in the US MCM (Mainstream Corporate Media), helpfully beating ever more loudly the drums of war. And many Americans seem to think anything is A-OK if the military force is being used "for good." Thus, the Dastardly Dictator of whatever country the US wants to invade next, etc.

    somebody | May 19, 2017 11:19:59 AM | 49
    Posted by: smuks | May 19, 2017 10:39:22 AM | 38

    The US will find it difficult to decide on ">whom to bomb .

    It seems that the assembly wants to erect bodies in support of the Syrian Regime in the province because both parties' interests overlap, with both being supported by Tehran. The leader in the Assembly and the head of "Badr Organization", Hadi Al-Amiri, insisted on this by saying that "the Syrian Government, headed by Bashar Al-Assad, invited the leaders of the Assembly to enter Syria after the emancipation of Iraq".

    The Iraqi Prime Minister, Haider Al-Abadi, issued early last March orders to his forces to attack ISIS camps within Syria He announced: "we ordered the air forces to attack the terrorist sites of ISIS in Husaibah and Al Bukamal inside the Syrian territory, which were responsible for the recent bombings in Baghdad".

    Deir ez-Zor is considered as a major strategic asset, for the one who dominates it shall hold the key to the eastern region of Syria and supplement his capital with huge oil reserves and establishes checkpoints on the road from Tehran to Damascus.

    This Daily Telegraph article from before the airstrike Syrian troops advancing towards US and British special forces

    The US has sent a clear message that any government advance towards their base will not be accepted. However, it is unclear how the special forces will react to any serious provocation.

    Russia bombed the garrison in June 2016, however no injures were reported. US jets were scrambled in response, but failed to stop the aerial raid.

    The Telegraph article is interesting for a lot of reasons - it calls Syria and Iraq "allies" which is a new development.

    Alaric | May 19, 2017 11:21:25 AM | 50
    The US is like a sociopath. It behaves badly and opportunistically when it can. The leadership of Russia, Iran, Syria and Hezbollah know this. B wrote this in his last analysis too.

    Those troops should have been accompanied by air defenses and support. Why was there none? Perhaps they were probing to see the US reaction. Perhaps this was a message from the R+3 . A US claim of self defense is an even bigger joke now if they come under attack in Syria.

    I suspect the Russians will simply provide air defenses and air support next time. I look forward to Syrian gov control of Al Tanf.

    karlof1 | May 19, 2017 11:29:01 AM | 51
    SAA isn't stopping its advance and has Truth on its side, although I now expect the commanders of the advance to be more prudent when it comes to its AAA deployment. IMO, the Outlaw US Empire will pull a Turkey and use artillery deployed in Jordan to support its terrorists across the border in Syria--"State Terrorism" as proclaimed by Syria's Jaafari, https://sputniknews.com/politics/201705191053773132-jaafari-us-strike-syria-government-terrorism/

    Sputnik has compiled all its stories on this crime under one url, https://sputniknews.com/trend/al_tanaf_us_strike_syrian_army/

    The latest cites Lavrov saying it's unclear if the deconfliction protocol was followed by Outlaw US Empire since it cited a deconfliction zone in its official lies about the crime.

    somebody | May 19, 2017 11:32:24 AM | 52
    add

    Syrian President Assad, Iraqi security advisor discuss 'direct' military cooperation

    President Assad and Fayadh discussed "practical and operational steps for military cooperation between the two armies on both sides of the border," in light of the advances made by the Iraqi forces in Mosul.

    President Assad was also quoted as saying that the progress made by both countries militarily is an "important" step towards returning "security and stability" to the region, adding that they have a common war and enemy that seeks to "divide the states of the region" through what he called terrorist groups.

    The two countries, along with Russia and Iran, share what has been called Baghdad Operation Room where they share intelligence in between them.

    xor | May 19, 2017 11:34:34 AM | 53
    @46 jawbone

    The past years, US has attacked Iraqi troops and para military on a regular basis whenever they were taking actions the US didn't like. For example when they were heading to Ramadi to liberate it, the US simply bombed and killed a couple of dozen para military as only some supposedly 'sunni-fighers' were allowed to participate.

    It has also regularly dropped supplies to Daesh. These supposed 'accidents' are well known facts for what they are in Iraq. Time will tell when they will stop sucking it up.

    From The Hague | May 19, 2017 11:37:23 AM | 54
    A UNSCR is International Law
    The Security Council determined today that the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant/Sham (ISIL/ISIS) constituted an "unprecedented" threat to international peace and security, calling upon Member States with the requisite capacity to take "all necessary measures" to prevent and suppress its terrorist acts on territory under its control in Syria and Iraq.

    Unanimously adopting resolution 2249 (2015), the Council unequivocally condemned the terrorist attacks perpetrated by ISIL - also known as Da'esh - on 26 June in Sousse, on 10 October in Ankara, on 31 October over the Sinaï Peninsula, on 12 November in Beirut and on 13 November in Paris, among others. It expressed its deepest condolences to the victims and their families, as well as to the people and Governments of Tunisia, Turkey, Russian Federation, Lebanon and France.

    https://www.un.org/press/en/2015/sc12132.doc.htm

    Ghostship | May 19, 2017 11:45:51 AM | 55
    >>>> Cousin Jack | May 19, 2017 8:29:09 AM | 30
    Fisk's take on this:
    Does Iran really need a land route to Syria? It can send material by ship avoiding the Suez Canal and nobody can legally stop it. The Straits of Gibraltar are covered by UNCLOS so civilian ships can't be touched and military ships have the right of innocent passage regardless of what they're carrying. Given how obsessed the United States is with freedom of navigation elsewhere, they can hardly support the Moroccans or Spanish intercepting any Iranian military ships passing through the Straits although that doesn't mean they won't try to come up with some feeble excuse to justify it, but I'm sure PLAN would give the Iranians a helping hand.

    This is more about stopping the New Syrian Army getting anywhere near Deir Ez-zor and attacking the SAA. If the NSA does attack the SAA are their US/UK advisers going to want to be involved?

    As for Al Tanf itself, what is to stop the Russians/Syrians/Iraqis/Iranians driving a new road across the desert from south west of Palmyra across the border into Iraq once they've secured the territory? A 180 km dirt road is all that would be needed for the summer and working from both ends it could be complete in a couple of weeks and it could be all-weather before winter.

    LXV | May 19, 2017 11:45:54 AM | 56
    Re: Addendum

    This is the prime source (sic!) of the twitted map: ...an Israeli-based political risk consultancy... Move on, nothing to see here except for a few Likudniks .

    Grieved | May 19, 2017 12:09:18 PM | 57
    Excellent article, b. World-class commentary. It captures the situation perfectly.

    Did Russia try to halt the SAA to try to prevent the US aggression? Apparently this news only comes from the US, according to the Sputnik story karlof1 linked @51. Perhaps, perhaps not. One story today at Fort Russ declares "No Such Thing as Russia Halting our Progress": Syria Slams False US Accusations, Confirms new Anti-ISIS Coordination Agreement with Russia and Iran CAVEAT: this only comes from a "Syrian security source", it's not a formal Syria announcement.

    One would have to be much closer to the chains of command (and to understand these things, which I don't), but it's an interesting question here of who blinked in this game of chicken? Did Russia counsel a small sidestep, and Syrian command not get the memo in time? Or was it a face-off all the way to the air attack? And will the response from Russia be direct or asymmetrical? I half-expect US assets to be killed on the ground one day pretty soon, without using air strikes to do it. Just the quiet over-running of an illegal presence here or there. This is the kind of message the US understands, and doesn't have to acknowledge publicly.

    Trump gave his generals free rein to act as they will. Enough rope to hang themselves? We've been waiting for the inevitable charge into a quagmire somewhere. Maybe it happens here.

    ben | May 19, 2017 12:10:11 PM | 58
    Some day maybe, we'll all be able to clearly see if the Empire and Russia are playing " Good Cop, Bad Cop" as political strategy, and behind the scenes their Oligarchs are forming an alliance. If the Russians truly want a Multi-polar world, and not just a understanding between Oligarchs, they'll have to confront the Empire's aggressions.

    We'll see...

    WG | May 19, 2017 12:14:20 PM | 59
    I think the Russian strategy for dealing with the US in Syria is similar to Muhammad Ali when he fought George Foreman in 'the rumble in the jungle'. In that fight, Ali constantly leaned on him, tiring him while he allowed Foreman to exhaust himself by absorbing his attacks and being very defensive. In the end there won't be a 'knockout' in Syria, the US is simply going to get pushed out of the ring and be forced to pack up and go home.

    In my mind this is the approach Russia has taken vs the US:

    • Keep up the diplomatic pressure
    • Keep building momentum throughout the country
    • Peel away US allies and proxies
    • Pursue stalemate in some areas while concentrating your forces elsewhere, then repeat

    To everyone that screams for the Russians to shoot down US planes, etc. etc. You have to realize the minute the Russians do that they will face a full court press from the US media for direct confrontation and war. Trump will be called a coward and a pawn and he'll end up being forced to start attacking Russian assets in Syria.

    The way to look at it is 'Russian efforts are restraining the US from its desired course of action' (Libya style intervention). Instead the US is stuck trying to goad the Russians into giving them a pretext to intervene on a large scale. The Russians/Iranians/Syrians just need to keep going, take the occasional 'provocation' attempt by the US and turn the other cheek. Eventually like 'b' says, the US will simply have to leave.

    Perimtr | May 19, 2017 12:19:01 PM | 60
    re smuks @38
    You say (I agree) that international law is meaningless given that the US considers itself to be above it. So I am a bit confused when you say "the obvious illegality of the invasion will further reduce the US military's room for manoeuvre". If the US cares nothing for illegalities, why would it be hindered by them? Not trying to pick a fight, just find this inconsistent.

    re Petri Krohn's observation at 44
    Lately I have begun to wonder about Sputnik, if it has been co-opted by Atlanticists? There seems to be an increasing number of stories being run that don't seem to serve Russian interests. The "confusion" noted by Petri may be deliberate, as this narrative muddies the waters in favor of the US.

    Gesine Hammerling | May 19, 2017 12:26:22 PM | 62

    @54: It is not. A SCR might try to interpret IL, but it does not create it. That's the job of the permanent IL commission of the UN.

    smuks | May 19, 2017 12:51:50 PM | 65
    @somebody

    That's actually a somewhat funny thing about this war: Who's allied with whom depends on which side of the border we're talking about. Shortly after the Russian air force got involved, there was a US-Russia meeting in which they basically agreed on zones of influence, with Russia keeping out of Iraq.

    So while the USAF (reluctantly) supports the ISF in its campaign against ISIS, at the same time it's an open secret(?) that both Baghdad and Damascus are allied with Tehran. I didn't know that the PMU is already inside Syria, but it makes perfect sense - and (unlike in Iraq) they're certainly not on the coalition's side there...

    @Ghostship

    So you're saying the whole Syrian war is much ado about nothing? Having a land connection is of paramount strategic importance. There's no such thing as 'freedom of navigation' for other states in waters controlled by the USN (or the PLAN, or the Russian navy for that matter), at least not when it really counts. Building another road takes time, and its border crossing would be blocked just the same.

    ben | May 19, 2017 12:53:03 PM | 66
    Wg @ 59: Good take, hope your scenario plays out..

    Also stated: "Eventually like 'b' says, the US will simply have to leave." On the other hand, maybe Russia will simply leave. The Empire has the financial resources to stay there forever, if it chooses to. Does Russia? IMO, the only thing that keeps the Empire going, is it's ability, being the reserve currency of the world, to make an unlimited pile of dollars whenever it chooses to. No other nation in the world can do that.

    stumpy | May 19, 2017 12:55:54 PM | 67
    Here's the thing. US has struck twice with total impunity in the current stage of the crisis, once here and once with the tomahawks. Russia doesn't seem to be shooting back. They can bang their shoes all day at the UN or make these grandiose proclamations about US war crimes, but they're starting to look like puppies keeping their powder dry.

    Much as we'd like the Russkies or anyone for that matter to get the US out of the AO, circumstances in the US are such that events will probably overcome the POTUS and he will be neutered of not totally neutralized. Comey was the bait. Or the deep inner meaning of all this is that Putin and Trump are in on the joke. They are the joke. Deep state has them surrounded. What a stupid time to go to Saudi Arabia.

    From The Hague | May 19, 2017 1:15:34 PM | 68
    #62 Yes, by interpreting UNSCR 2249 the US led coalition could claim they acted according to International Law. That's the reason they said that their goal of bombing pro-Syrian regime forces was: to aid the fight against ISIS.

    smuks | May 19, 2017 1:19:08 PM | 69

    @Perimetr 60 (lost an e?)

    I'm absolutely not saying that international law is meaningless, just that it has limits. If a great power (and esp. the US) violates it, there will not be any direct consequences, *but* the rest of the world will still see the act for what it is. If this happens regularly, the great power will find it ever harder to find allies on the global scene, and instead will provoke the formation of (formal or informal) coalitions among its opponents. No country is an island - all the aircraft carriers in the world don't mean much if you can't use them for lack of political support.

    The prime example for this is the 2003 Iraq war: The US & UK govts thought that they could act with impunity. They may have been right in the short run, but in the longer run this blatant violation of the most fundamental intl. law was their downfall. Talk about a leader losing all his followers.

    @WG 59, ben 66
    Nice comparison! And pretty much how I see it too. ben - no reserve currency lasts forever, and this on is on the way out.

    ALAN | May 19, 2017 1:58:49 PM | 71
    /they said that their goal of bombing pro-Syrian regime forces was: to aid the fight against ISIS/ that is why all the planet knows how US regularly dropped supplies to ISIS...
    karlof1 | May 19, 2017 2:00:03 PM | 72
    Sputnik now has a story sourced by local Syrians detailing the nature of the attack. The enemy jet did take AAA and apparently S-200s were also launched. Please go to link for the play-by-play, https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201705191053788687-syrian-convoy-airstrike-damage/

    Southfront has an article complete with maps saying the Outlaw US Empire has created its own deconfliction zone--b, you'll want to borrow the de-escalation zone map and post it as an update, https://southfront.org/us-military-declares-own-de-confliction-zone-along-syrian-iraqi-border/

    Ghostship | May 19, 2017 2:19:38 PM | 73
    >>> Alaric | May 19, 2017 11:21:25 AM | 50
    Those troops should have been accompanied by air defenses and support.
    Why? Does ISIS have an air force beyond a few quadricopter drones? The Syrians are better off without air defences because if they were ever tempted to use them and shot down an American aircraft the response would be swift and catastrophic for the Syrian forces involved, if not the Syrian state. Far better to accept the casualties as the cost of doing business and get on with the task in hand of defeating ISIS, Al Qaeda and other jihadists and preserving the Syrian state which would be the ultimate finger in the eye for the Americans. Every time a state as powerful as the United States attacks a weak state, it loses automatically in the battle for public perception, and because Putin is not going to give up on Syria the United States has lost the war for regime change already but Washington is too stupid to realise that because they only deal with the elites in certain states, the ones that have attacked the United States and its interests more than the Syrians ever have. How stupid is that?
    Køn | May 19, 2017 2:29:52 PM | 74
    When the NSA 'New-Syrian-Army' falls apart, might I suggest that the Americans name the next puppet army they try to set up 'The Completely Independent Army'... The CIA
    From The Hague | May 19, 2017 2:30:20 PM | 75
    73 the United States has lost the war for regime change already

    The United States war industry is still winning the war for power and profits.

    PavewayIV | May 19, 2017 2:48:20 PM | 76
    Funny with all this attention on al Tanf that nobody is pointing out the BS maps being circulated about. One of the major supply lines for ISIS (not FSA) is from Jordan, along the Syrian border just south of at Tanf and continuing up to al Bukamal and Deir EzZor.

    Here's a U.S. Coalition fantasy map (wishful thinking) of the situation. It shows the FSA holding everything next to the border almost up to the al Qaim border crossing - where the Euphrates crosses into Iraq. Truth is that the U.S. and their tiny FSA contingent are not present at all near the border there. It's sort of a no-man's land. They probably won't get attacked if they drive along the border, but neither will ISIS (or Jordanian supply convoys TO ISIS in al Bukamal and Deir EzZor. The U.S. and U.K. SOF presence in al Tanf is to protect that ISIS supply corridor. They don't 'fight' ISIS - they never have. There were a few fake reports of battles, but most involved transferring a huge amount of ammo and supplies to ISIS.

    The U.S. and U,K. SOF and FSA are protecting the ISIS supply corridor from Jordan, nothing eles. For obvious political reasons, they don't want to cross very far into Iraq to do this, so they can't just move the corridor across the southern border and move eastward that way.

    You can get a better idea of what I'm talking about if you look at more realistic (non-US-propaganda) maps of the area. This one linked shows ISIS controlling all the southeastern border to al Bukamal/Euphrates. Again, not completely accurate because it's more of a no-man's land. You can bet that the U.S. has constant surveillance on this area though and knows exactly when the ISIS supply convoys from Jordan are moving through that area. Now, ever hear of the U.S. bombing ANYTHING there? Of course not. Almost without exception, CJTF-OIR has ONLY been bombing oil infrastructure around Deir EzZor and al Bukamal. They have NEVER hit an ISIS supply convoy.

    The Russians, Syrians, Iraqis and Iranians know the US/UK forces are protecting that supply corridor. They know the US is reluctant to use Iraq (as much as possible) for those convoys. If the SAA wants to take Deir EzZor and al Bukamal, then it has to cut the ISIS supply lines along the southeast border from al Tanf to al Bukamal. The PMUs will be cleaning house along the Euphrates right up to al Qaim/al Bukamal, so there will be no chance for a supply from that side. The US/UK knows this and was planning on a move on al Bukamal from al Tanf out of desperation. The SAA saw the build-up and decided to close down that op AND the ISIS supply corridor once and for all before moving to Deir EzZor.

    Like I said before, the U.S. are sore losers. CJTF-OIR doesn't like anyone messing with their ISIS supply corridors or their US/UK ISIS corridor 'guards'. They are running out of options, which makes them very dangerous. They can't very well bomb the SAA in Deir EzZor again. They've run out of fake ISIS to attack the fast-moving SAA forces heading to Deir EzZor. And they don't have much international sympathy for their al Tanf occupation. Sarin false flags won't work down there. There's a huge refugee camp near there that the US/UK use to recruit and house jihadis, so they might use some kind of fake SAA attack on that to justify military action.

    The original plan of mounting an al Bukamal campaign from al Tanf isn't going to work since they can't leave al Tanf with just a few guards - they would lose it to the SAA. They are going to lose the ISIS supply corridor unless they do something drastic, so expect the worse. And rememeber: the ISIS supply corridor is really just a placeholder for the future FSA supply corridor to the Euphrates. Only other option is to have the SDF ignore Raqqa and try to take Deir EzZor/al Bukamal from the north and supply them from Kurd territory.

    Ghostship | May 19, 2017 2:58:35 PM | 77
    >>>> smuks | May 19, 2017 12:51:50 PM | 65
    So you're saying the whole Syrian war is much ado about nothing?

    Where do I say that?

    Having a land connection is of paramount strategic importance.
    Why? A land connection requires protection from everybody, even the lowest terrorist, particularly when it's so exposed crossing a desert. Just look how often ISIS block the land connection into Aleppo. It doesn't do them much good because the SAA/SAAF/RuAF are fairly proficient at cleaning them out and killing them now. The USAF could close a land connection without even raising a sweat and combined with the US Army they could put in road blocks that nobody could remove without going for full on war.
    There's no such thing as 'freedom of navigation' for other states in waters controlled by the USN (or the PLAN, or the Russian navy for that matter), at least not when it really counts.
    Once the USN oppose FON, any attempts at enforing it elsewhere are compromised. The USN could announce it's going to blockade Syria but that is an act of war that I reckon the Russians would oppose. The Russian should be to run a convoy through the blockade and see if the USN have the guts to sink the defending ships. I doubt it.
    Building another road takes time, and its border crossing would be blocked just the same.
    Are you a trained highway engineer? Well I was and building a multi-lane highway with multi-level interchanges, etc. does take time. A two-lane haul road, which is what I was thinking about over that distance in a desert working from both ends would take a couple of weeks at most. How could its border crossing be blocked since the SAA would control one side and the Iraqi army the other and unless they fall out(unlikely) there would be no reason for the border to close.

    dh | May 19, 2017 3:37:06 PM | 80
    @44 I'm thinking this recent attack had a lot to do with the de-escalation/deconfliction zones. The US got sidelined at Astana. The attack at al-Tanaf could be the US saying...'you want deconfliction?....try that for size.'

    It's probably a one off though. US/UK special forces are starting to look very exposed.

    ALAN | May 19, 2017 4:16:51 PM | 81
    the United States, with the help of Jordan and Turkey, was running a training base for Syrian rebels in Jordan. http://www.australiannationalreview.com/isis-members-trained-cia
    VietnamVet | May 19, 2017 4:22:02 PM | 82
    There is nothing at Al-Tanf except desert and the Damarcus Baghdad Road and the borders of Syria, Jordon and Iraq nearby. The probe is an attempt to reopen a Shiite landline. At the behest of Israel and the Gulf Monarchies, the Empire set up the forward operating base at Al-Tanf to keep the road cut and bombed the militias as a warning to halt. An Abrahamic regional Holy War is the most apt description of the blood flowing onto concrete and sand there. An Apocalypse is a self-fulfilling prophecy. A guarantee with an Empire that learns nothing and remembers everything.
    Curtis | May 19, 2017 4:56:27 PM | 83
    CNN's article included this:
    "The strike marks the first time that the Pentagon has offered aerial protection to its Arab proxies under assault from pro-Syrian militias -- and only the second time in the history of the six-year conflict that American warplanes have intentionally targeted Iranian proxies in Syria."

    Arab proxies? Not Syrian? Not "opposition" fighters?

    But then they add this:
    "The convoy appears to have consisted not of regular Syrian army soldiers but of international Shia militiamen."

    And later in the article, CNN repeats claims that the CIA is training "vetted" Syrian rebels.
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/19/politics/us-syria-airstrikes-russia/

    And our MSM is okay with this proxy-on-proxy fight that is destroying Syria.

    smuks | May 19, 2017 5:55:51 PM | 86
    Please don't feed the troll who's trying to destroy an interesting thread. Thanks.

    @Ghostship

    The war is all about who controls eastern Syria and thus establishes a strategic axis, either West-East or North-South. If you say that doesn't matter, the war makes no sense whatsoever.

    You probably know more about road construction than I do, but very little about geostrategy it seems. Whoever controls a transport corridor holds a knife to the (economic) throat of those who depend on it. It's a prime strategic asset.
    The USN controls most sea lanes - for now; or what do you think the entire South China Sea issue is about? The Eurasian land routes on the other hand are mostly controlled by Russia and China through their armies, air force and AD. Sure, they can still be bombed, but that's only temporary and comes at a huge political cost. And here we also have the deeper reason for China's 'New Silk Road'.

    It's the old story of 'sea power vs. land power' which repeats itself throughout history, e.g. Athens/ Sparta.

    smuks | May 19, 2017 6:10:32 PM | 87
    @Paveway 76

    Actually the two maps aren't that different imho, since as you say it's mostly empty desert anyway so 'zone of control' is rather relative. But I get your point: It's all about securing the ISIS supply line from Jordan. I remember a 'New Syrian Army' attack on al-Bukamal some while back, which looked very much like a resupply op, same with the RuAF bombing of an SF base in the region.

    Actually at times I've been sitting looking at maps, thinking how nice it would be to have real-time satellite or drone pictures and see the trucks heading north...

    Now that the (illegal) presence of SF in al-Tanf has been exposed, can they still remain there, or do they have to leave? This war is strange: All warring parties know what's going on on the ground, but it doesn't really matter - what's important is only what is or isn't on the worldwide news.

    sandra_m | May 19, 2017 6:53:52 PM | 88
    Syria: Syrian forces seen in al-Tanf outskirts day after US airstrike
    karlof1 | May 19, 2017 7:03:57 PM | 89
    The advance toward al-Tanf continues. Southfront has a new article detailing SAA within 20K with aircover from RuAF Su-30s. Also provided are some unconfirmed he-said/she-said that seem semi-plausible, https://southfront.org/syrian-army-is-in-20-km-from-al-tanf-town-controlled-by-us-led-forces-reports/

    After everything the Outlaw US Empire has done over the past 6 years -- and over several decades prior--to Syria and its people -- actions very close to Genocidal in nature -- I very much doubt SAA will relent. And it appears Iraqi politicos have grown another backbone and are as resolved as their Syrian and Iranian neighbors to defeat the US/NATO/Zionist/GCC terrorists, force them to retreat from the region, thus regaining 100% sovereignty, while putting further pressure for a solution for Palestine.

    As pointed out by PavewayIV @76, the Empire has zero positive options other than complete withdrawal, which it doesn't view as positive either. It would seem the Neocons are being chocked by Trump's vow to destroy their terrorist creations. King PlayStation better watch out or he'll risk losing his kingdom.

    jfl | May 19, 2017 8:27:06 PM | 91
    @76 pw, '... the U.S. are sore losers ...'

    yeah. at home and abroad ... a coup is shaping up at home, apparently. at least the foghorns at the nytimes are sounding one out ... not the 'good guys' you had in mind ...

    Kristof notes approvingly that during the 1974 Watergate crisis, President Richard Nixon's defense secretary, James Schlesinger, ordered the military not to obey orders from the White House unless he signed off on them. Schlesinger also, in the words of Kristof, "prepared secret plans to deploy troops in Washington in the event of problems with the presidential succession."

    Kristof concludes, "This was unconstitutional. And wise." He declares that similar "unconstitutional" acts of insubordination by military officials may be justified in the present crisis. "We don't know how Trump will respond in the coming months, and let's all hope for smooth sailing. But as with Schlesinger's steps, it's wise to be prepared," he writes.

    thanks for the background. very informative. more people need to understand the DIRECT support of the usa for isis in deir ezor. i know i didn't.

    smuks | May 19, 2017 8:37:30 PM | 92
    @b - just see your addendum, and as expressed before have strong doubts.

    I don't know how supplies reached Hezbollah in 2006, probably small quantities did pass through occupied Iraq. But there's a huge strategic difference between such 'ant trails' and a fully secured (land) trade route.

    Historically, the region (upper Mesopotamia) has always been valuable and contested, as this is where the roads running from west to east cross those running from north to south. It is the heartland of the Middle East, so to say.

    Of course there's ships and planes, but they are easily spotted and intercepted, and carry high costs. A 'land bridge' is cheap and secure, and therefore a huge strategic advantage & instrument of power/ hegemony.

    Yeah, Right | May 19, 2017 8:44:26 PM | 93
    @84 Paul, the time to call out an AA system as "trash" is when it is fired and... misses. Like when the Syrians fired S-200s at some Israeli jets and... missed. Obvious trash. It is pointless calling out an AA system as "trash" merely because the operator refuses to fire the missile. There are, after all, many very good reasons why you don't want to fire your best weapon, and not just "it doesn't work".

    After all, the USA doesn't use its nukes. Neither does Russia, nor China, nor France, Britain, India, Israel, Pakistan or North Korea.

    I suppose, by Peter-logic, that must mean those nukes are "trash". PR-nonsense, and no threat to anyone.

    That must be true, because it is a demonstrable fact that since the end of WW2 nobody has used a nuke no matter how destructive they are purported to be...

    james | May 19, 2017 8:54:26 PM | 94
    i guess the usa has an idiot for defense secretary.. that or a very bad liar.. if someone murders mattis, it can be claimed it's self defense.. sorta like a variant on peter-logic.. "Defense Secretary James Mattis described the targeted fighters as Iran-backed, rather than backed by the Syrian government, and called the airstrike "self-defense of our forces."
    PavewayIV | May 19, 2017 8:55:40 PM | 95
    smuks@87 "...same with the RuAF bombing of an SF base in the region." That SF base was, in fact, (one of) the al Tanf SOF training bases for the rebranded FSA in those parts: the New Syrian Army(NSyA). Russia was pissed about the apparent support/supply lines to ISIS and previous NSyA 'visits' to the Euphrates, so bombed the al Tanf base when they knew the Americans and Brits were off somewhere else. There are several bases/camps used in the general vicinity of the al Tanf border crossing. There is no functional or occupied town of al Tanf - it was more like a farm when it existed, and is just ruins now.

    Most of the original New Syrian Army actually disbanded last year because CIA support sucked. The current invocation of the NSyA is a U.S. CIA/Saudi-created merc army. Mostly ex-FSA Syrian and Arab mercs and assorted Palestinian refugees (recruited from the nearby Jordanian camp) looking for paying work. They call themselves the Revolutionary Commando Army, but nobody else does. They're just 'the CIA mercs' to everyone else - cannon fodder for the scheduled replacement of ISIS in al Bukamal and Deir EzZor (if the U.S. can pull it off).

    Most 'members' are trained and stay in Jordan, not Syria. The forward base in al Tanf gets busy whenever they need to show how 'the rebels' are in control down there. The actual al Tanf border crossing is several km away - mostly manned by U.S./U.K and Mossad spooks. Probably a handful of NSyA hanging around for show. The crossing is officially closed, but there has always been truck traffic going back and forth. The Iraqis have their own border crossing checkpoint a few km inside their border at al Waleed.

    "...Now that the (illegal) presence of SF in al-Tanf has been exposed, can they still remain there, or do they have to leave?"

    They've been there for about a year now, since the old NSyA took the border crossing and surrounding area from ISIS. The U.S./U.K. SOF have never made a secret of being in camps there to train the NSyA or whoever they are now. Keep in mind that the tiny U.S./U.K. presence is pretty much to ward off Syrian and Russian bombing, i.e., human shields for the NSyA. MOST of the SOF guys and training facilities and logistics are in Jordan and always have been. And the idea of 'legal' presence there is kind of a toss-up. The U.S. used weasel-worded U.N. resolutions to authorize them to go anywhere on earth to fight ISIS. So 'illegal' by Syrian law and global common sense sovereignty, but perfectly legal and authorized by U.S.'s made-up UN 'laws'. In any case, the SOF guys their are CIA merc trainers and have no intention of defending al Tanf with their lives. They'll leave if too many Syrians show up - Jordan is only a ten-minute drive away.

    "...All warring parties know what's going on on the ground, but it doesn't really matter - what's important is only what is or isn't on the worldwide news..."

    You just gave all the guys in 8th PsyOps (CENTCOM) a boner - a though which I find disturbing on several levels.

    PavewayIV | May 19, 2017 9:12:20 PM | 97

    karlof1@89 "...the Empire has zero positive options other than complete withdrawal, which it doesn't view as positive either..."

    The Empire is 1) run by psychopaths and 2) beholden to their Israeli and Saudi masters - 'positive' is relative. For instance, the U.S. objective is to own the Syrian Euphrates. They can still blow the Tabqa/Euphrates dam and blame it on 'ISIS IEDs' or some such nonsense. That would pretty much clean out Raqqa, Deir EzZor and al Bukamal as well as give all the U.S. proxies an excuse to move in. Likewise, they can use the SDF to take Deir EzZor and al Bukamal. All they have to do is secretly greenlight Turkey moving on Raqqa, which would free up (at least the Arab part of) the SDF. That would make the eventual U.S. Syrian Kurd back-stabbing seem less obvious.

    Then there's always some other 'big' distraction to otherwise occupy the SAA's time. Do you think they would keep moving on Deir EzZor if, say, Israel armor crossed the Golan border steal more land on the Houran Plateau? I'm sure a suitable fake casus belli could be arranged.

    Never underestimate evil.

    From The Hague | May 19, 2017 9:15:43 PM | 98
    @96
    So the UN isn't international and a UNSCR is not an order. And UNSCR 2249 wasn't unanimously adopted?
    From The Hague | May 19, 2017 10:43:58 PM |
    @99 I mean, get real, dude.

    Say that to yourself. On reality you can learn from smuks and PavewayIV:

    "...All warring parties know what's going on on the ground, but it doesn't really matter - what's important is only what is or isn't on the worldwide news..."

    You just gave all the guys in 8th PsyOps (CENTCOM) a boner - a though which I find disturbing on several levels.

    Posted by: PavewayIV | May 19, 2017 8:55:40 PM | 95

    For your information:

    Psychological operations (PSYOP) are planned operations to convey selected information and indicators to audiences to influence their emotions, motives, and objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_Operations_(United_States)

    Applied to that UNSCR:

    The US-led coalition will no doubt claim that resolution 2249 implicitly validates or confirms the legality of their current actions.
    https://www.ejiltalk.org/the-constructive-ambiguity-of-the-security-councils-isis-resolution/

    [May 21, 2017] What Obsessing About Trump Causes Us To Miss by Andrew Bacevich

    Highly recommended!
    Interesting questions ! But one can sleep soundly tonight safe in the knowledge that not even the pretense of a reply to Bacevich's questions will be forthcoming for the US MSM.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Yet the U.S. maintains nuclear strike forces on full alert, has embarked on a costly and comprehensive trillion-dollar modernization of its nuclear arsenal, and even refuses to adopt a no-first-use posture when it comes to nuclear war. The truth is that the United States will consider surrendering its nukes only after every other nation on the planet has done so first. How does American nuclear hypocrisy affect the prospects for global nuclear disarmament or even simply for the non-proliferation of such weaponry? ..."
    "... How much damage Donald Trump's presidency wreaks before it ends remains to be seen. Yet he himself is a transient phenomenon. To allow his pratfalls and shenanigans to divert attention from matters sure to persist when he finally departs the stage is to make a grievous error. It may well be that, as the Times insists, the truth is now more important than ever. If so, finding the truth requires looking in the right places and asking the right questions. ..."
    "... Declassified CIA leaks from the DNC indicate these trees actively made maple syrup for terrorists. This gives terrorists big muscles, like Popeye, and reduces urges to eat human organs. ..."
    "... The conflict commonly referred to as the Afghanistan War is now the longest in U.S. history - having lasted longer than the Civil War, World War I, and World War II combined. What is the Pentagon's plan for concluding that conflict? When might Americans expect it to end? ..."
    "... Well, looks like I missed the war ending .but with the war ended, one would think we wouldn't have to be dropping the world's biggest bomb ..."
    "... I'm thinking the bigMFing bomb was more a marketing theater driven initative rather than Afgan Strategic Theatre driven. ..."
    "... Some great questions here. Recently I was at a Town Hall with my representative to Congress and asked him if our government, or even just the Democrats, had a long term strategy for peace in the Middle East. The answer was basically, No. ..."
    "... Bacevitch needs to be a little more critical about all the claims about US energy. The US may be exporting some oil and oil products, but it is importing more. We have no prospect of "energy independence" in the forseeable future, unless there is a drastic cutback in consumption. When it comes to energy forecasting, top governmental agencies have had an abysmal record. Independent experts like David Hughes and Art Berman regularly expose the wishful thinking and poor analysis of the economists at these agencies. ..."
    "... Instead he invites us all to assume the Soviets were acting and the West was reacting. In my view this genuinely childish view of international relations is the template for American exceptionalism and, unless we break free of it, a logic of privileged exceptionalism will continually assert itself. The Trump era offers us a chance to raze this mythology and seriously confront how market-oriented imperatives, not devils and angels, drive international conflict. ..."
    "... Is it because a self-perpetuating top-heavy military bureaucracy was never properly demobilized after the Second World War, and only promotes the sort of sociopathic, narcissistic, borderline personalities who are relentlessly able to bully the groveling toadies and wussies who make up our perpetually campaigning political-climber class? ..."
    "... Andrew Bacevich needs to study more deeply about Syrian history and politics, since his description of Syrian president Bashar Assad as a brutal dictator fits as a description of Bashar's father Hafez Assad but is inaccurate in relation to Bashar Assad, who seems to have a rather gentle personality and is actually one of the more benign leaders in the Middle East. ..."
    "... Under that new constitution, in 2014 he ran in a free election observed by international observers against two other politicians and was reelected president. He has promised that if he loses the next election he will step down. ..."
    "... Nevertheless Assad has been systematically demonized by the governments and MSM of the US, UK, and France, as well as by Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. Demonization is a technique that is often used to prepare the way for regime change, and it is not based on objective analysis. ..."
    "... Similar tactics were used in Ukraine in February 2014 by ultranationalist Right Sector sharpshooters, who were seen shooting Maidan demonstrators. The deaths of the demonstrators were then blamed on the police. ..."
    "... Also see Gowans' well-researched 2016 book 'Washington's Long War on Syria.' The US has been demonizing and trying to overthrow the Syrian government for several decades now, above all because it is the only remaining semi-socialist nation in the Middle East and has single-payer national health insurance, support for the elderly, and free college education for all. Assad is no saint, but he is one of the more democratic and forward-looking leaders in the Middle East today. ..."
    May 08, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
    May 8, 2017 by Yves Smith By Andrew J. Bacevich, a TomDispatch regular , is the author of America's War for the Greater Middle East: A Military History , now out in paperback . His next book will be an interpretive history of the United States from the end of the Cold War to the election of Donald Trump. Originally published at TomDispatch

    If only it were so. How wonderful it would be if President Trump's ascendancy had coincided with a revival of hard-hitting, deep-dive, no-holds-barred American journalism. Alas, that's hardly the case. True, the big media outlets are demonstrating both energy and enterprise in exposing the ineptitude, inconsistency, and dubious ethical standards, as well as outright lies and fake news, that are already emerging as Trump era signatures. That said, pointing out that the president has (again) uttered a falsehood, claimed credit for a nonexistent achievement, or abandoned some position to which he had previously sworn fealty requires something less than the sleuthing talents of a Sherlock Holmes. As for beating up on poor Sean Spicer for his latest sequence of gaffes - well, that's more akin to sadism than reporting.

    Apart from a commendable determination to discomfit Trump and members of his inner circle (select military figures excepted, at least for now), journalism remains pretty much what it was prior to November 8th of last year: personalities built up only to be torn down; fads and novelties discovered, celebrated, then mocked; "extraordinary" stories of ordinary people granted 15 seconds of fame only to once again be consigned to oblivion - all served with a side dish of that day's quota of suffering, devastation, and carnage. These remain journalism's stock-in-trade. As practiced in the United States, with certain honorable (and hence unprofitable) exceptions, journalism remains superficial, voyeuristic, and governed by the attention span of a two year old.

    As a result, all those editors, reporters, columnists, and talking heads who characterize their labors as "now more important than ever" ill-serve the public they profess to inform and enlighten. Rather than clearing the air, they befog it further. If anything, the media's current obsession with Donald Trump - his every utterance or tweet treated as "breaking news!" - just provides one additional excuse for highlighting trivia, while slighting issues that deserve far more attention than they currently receive.

    To illustrate the point, let me cite some examples of national security issues that presently receive short shrift or are ignored altogether by those parts of the Fourth Estate said to help set the nation's political agenda. To put it another way: Hey, Big Media, here are two dozen matters to which you're not giving faintly adequate thought and attention.

    1. Accomplishing the "mission" : Since the immediate aftermath of World War II, the United States has been committed to defending key allies in Europe and East Asia. Not long thereafter, U.S. security guarantees were extended to the Middle East as well. Under what circumstances can Americans expect nations in these regions to assume responsibility for managing their own affairs? To put it another way, when (if ever) might U.S. forces actually come home? And if it is incumbent upon the United States to police vast swaths of the planet in perpetuity, how should momentous changes in the international order - the rise of China, for example, or accelerating climate change - affect the U.S. approach to doing so?

    2 . American military supremacy : The United States military is undoubtedly the world's finest. It's also far and away the most generously funded , with policymakers offering U.S. troops no shortage of opportunities to practice their craft. So why doesn't this great military ever win anything? Or put another way, why in recent decades have those forces been unable to accomplish Washington's stated wartime objectives? Why has the now 15-year-old war on terror failed to result in even a single real success anywhere in the Greater Middle East? Could it be that we've taken the wrong approach? What should we be doing differently?

    3. America's empire of bases : The U.S. military today garrisons the planet in a fashion without historical precedent. Successive administrations, regardless of party, justify and perpetuate this policy by insisting that positioning U.S. forces in distant lands fosters peace, stability, and security. In the present century, however, perpetuating this practice has visibly had the opposite effect. In the eyes of many of those called upon to "host" American bases, the permanent presence of such forces smacks of occupation. They resist. Why should U.S. policymakers expect otherwise?

    4. Supporting the troops : In present-day America, expressing reverence for those who serve in uniform is something akin to a religious obligation. Everyone professes to cherish America's "warriors." Yet such bountiful, if superficial, expressions of regard camouflage a growing gap between those who serve and those who applaud from the sidelines. Our present-day military system, based on the misnamed All-Volunteer Force, is neither democratic nor effective. Why has discussion and debate about its deficiencies not found a place among the nation's political priorities?

    5. Prerogatives of the commander-in-chief : Are there any military actions that the president of the United States may not order on his own authority? If so, what are they? Bit by bit, decade by decade, Congress has abdicated its assigned role in authorizing war. Today, it merely rubberstamps what presidents decide to do (or simply stays mum ). Who does this deference to an imperial presidency benefit? Have U.S. policies thereby become more prudent, enlightened, and successful?

    6. Assassin-in-chief : A policy of assassination, secretly implemented under the aegis of the CIA during the early Cold War, yielded few substantive successes. When the secrets were revealed, however, the U.S. government suffered considerable embarrassment , so much so that presidents foreswore politically motivated murder. After 9/11, however, Washington returned to the assassination business in a big way and on a global scale, using drones. Today, the only secret is the sequence of names on the current presidential hit list , euphemistically known as the White House "disposition matrix." But does assassination actually advance U.S. interests (or does it merely recruit replacements for the terrorists it liquidates)? How can we measure its costs, whether direct or indirect? What dangers and vulnerabilities does this practice invite?

    7. The war formerly known as the "Global War on Terrorism" : What precisely is Washington's present strategy for defeating violent jihadism? What sequence of planned actions or steps is expected to yield success? If no such strategy exists, why is that the case? How is it that the absence of strategy - not to mention an agreed upon definition of "success" - doesn't even qualify for discussion here?

    8. The campaign formerly known as Operation Enduring Freedom : The conflict commonly referred to as the Afghanistan War is now the longest in U.S. history - having lasted longer than the Civil War, World War I, and World War II combined. What is the Pentagon's plan for concluding that conflict? When might Americans expect it to end? On what terms?

    9. The Gulf : Americans once believed that their prosperity and way of life depended on having assured access to Persian Gulf oil. Today, that is no longer the case. The United States is once more an oil exporter . Available and accessible reserves of oil and natural gas in North America are far greater than was once believed . Yet the assumption that the Persian Gulf still qualifies as crucial to American national security persists in Washington. Why?

    10. Hyping terrorism : Each year terrorist attacks kill far fewer Americans than do auto accidents , drug overdoses , or even lightning strikes . Yet in the allocation of government resources, preventing terrorist attacks takes precedence over preventing all three of the others combined. Why is that?

    11. Deaths that matter and deaths that don't : Why do terrorist attacks that kill a handful of Europeans command infinitely more American attention than do terrorist attacks that kill far larger numbers of Arabs? A terrorist attack that kills citizens of France or Belgium elicits from the United States heartfelt expressions of sympathy and solidarity. A terrorist attack that kills Egyptians or Iraqis elicits shrugs. Why the difference? To what extent does race provide the answer to that question?

    12. Israeli nukes : What purpose is served by indulging the pretense that Israel does not have nuclear weapons?

    13. Peace in the Holy Land : What purpose is served by indulging illusions that a "two-state solution" offers a plausible resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? As remorselessly as white settlers once encroached upon territory inhabited by Native American tribes, Israeli settlers expand their presence in the occupied territories year by year. As they do, the likelihood of creating a viable Palestinian state becomes ever more improbable. To pretend otherwise is the equivalent of thinking that one day President Trump might prefer the rusticity of Camp David to the glitz of Mar-a-Lago.

    14. Merchandizing death : When it comes to arms sales, there is no need to Make America Great Again. The U.S. ranks number one by a comfortable margin, with long-time allies Saudi Arabia and Israel leading recipients of those arms. Each year, the Saudis (per capita gross domestic product $20,000) purchase hundreds of millions of dollars of U.S. weapons. Israel (per capita gross domestic product $38,000) gets several billion dollars worth of such weaponry annually courtesy of the American taxpayer. If the Saudis pay for U.S. arms, why shouldn't the Israelis? They can certainly afford to do so.

    15. Our friends the Saudis (I) : Fifteen of the 19 hijackers on September 11, 2001, were Saudis. What does that fact signify?

    16. Our friends the Saudis (II) : If indeed Saudi Arabia and Iran are competing to determine which nation will enjoy the upper hand in the Persian Gulf, why should the United States favor Saudi Arabia? In what sense do Saudi values align more closely with American values than do Iranian ones?

    17. Our friends the Pakistanis : Pakistan behaves like a rogue state. It is a nuclear weapons proliferator . It supports the Taliban. For years, it provided sanctuary to Osama bin Laden. Yet U.S. policymakers treat Pakistan as if it were an ally. Why? In what ways do U.S. and Pakistani interests or values coincide? If there are none, why not say so?

    18. Free-loading Europeans : Why can't Europe, " whole and free ," its population and economy considerably larger than Russia's, defend itself? It's altogether commendable that U.S. policymakers should express support for Polish independence and root for the Baltic republics. But how does it make sense for the United States to care more about the wellbeing of people living in Eastern Europe than do people living in Western Europe?

    19. The mother of all "special relationships" : The United States and the United Kingdom have a "special relationship" dating from the days of Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill. Apart from keeping the Public Broadcasting Service supplied with costume dramas and stories featuring eccentric detectives, what is the rationale for that partnership today? Why should U.S. relations with Great Britain, a fading power, be any more "special" than its relations with a rising power like India? Why should the bonds connecting Americans and Britons be any more intimate than those connecting Americans and Mexicans? Why does a republic now approaching the 241st anniversary of its independence still need a "mother country"?

    20. The old nuclear disarmament razzmatazz : American presidents routinely cite their hope for the worldwide elimination of nuclear weapons. Yet the U.S. maintains nuclear strike forces on full alert, has embarked on a costly and comprehensive trillion-dollar modernization of its nuclear arsenal, and even refuses to adopt a no-first-use posture when it comes to nuclear war. The truth is that the United States will consider surrendering its nukes only after every other nation on the planet has done so first. How does American nuclear hypocrisy affect the prospects for global nuclear disarmament or even simply for the non-proliferation of such weaponry?

    21. Double standards (I) : American policymakers take it for granted that their country's sphere of influence is global, which, in turn, provides the rationale for the deployment of U.S. military forces to scores of countries. Yet when it comes to nations like China, Russia, or Iran, Washington takes the position that spheres of influence are obsolete and a concept that should no longer be applicable to the practice of statecraft. So Chinese, Russian, and Iranian forces should remain where they belong - in China, Russia, and Iran. To stray beyond that constitutes a provocation, as well as a threat to global peace and order. Why should these other nations play by American rules? Why shouldn't similar rules apply to the United States?

    22. Double standards (II) : Washington claims that it supports and upholds international law. Yet when international law gets in the way of what American policymakers want to do, they disregard it. They start wars, violate the sovereignty of other nations, and authorize agents of the United States to kidnap, imprison, torture, and kill. They do these things with impunity, only forced to reverse their actions on the rare occasions when U.S. courts find them illegal. Why should other powers treat international norms as sacrosanct since the United States does so only when convenient?

    23. Double standards (III) : The United States condemns the indiscriminate killing of civilians in wartime. Yet over the last three-quarters of a century, it killed civilians regularly and often on a massive scale. By what logic, since the 1940s, has the killing of Germans, Japanese, Koreans, Vietnamese, Laotians, Cambodians, Afghans, and others by U.S. air power been any less reprehensible than the Syrian government's use of "barrel bombs" to kill Syrians today? On what basis should Americans accept Pentagon claims that, when civilians are killed these days by U.S. forces, the acts are invariably accidental, whereas Syrian forces kill civilians intentionally and out of malice? Why exclude incompetence or the fog of war as explanations? And why, for instance, does the United States regularly gloss over or ignore altogether the noncombatants that Saudi forces (with U.S. assistance ) are routinely killing in Yemen?

    24. Moral obligations : When confronted with some egregious violation of human rights, members of the chattering classes frequently express an urge for the United States to "do something." Holocaust analogies sprout like dandelions. Newspaper columnists recycle copy first used when Cambodians were slaughtering other Cambodians en masse or whenever Hutus and Tutsis went at it. Proponents of action - typically advocating military intervention - argue that the United States has a moral obligation to aid those victimized by injustice or cruelty anywhere on Earth. But what determines the pecking order of such moral obligations? Which comes first, a responsibility to redress the crimes of others or a responsibility to redress crimes committed by Americans? Who has a greater claim to U.S. assistance, Syrians suffering today under the boot of Bashar al-Assad or Iraqis, their country shattered by the U.S. invasion of 2003? Where do the Vietnamese fit into the queue? How about the Filipinos, brutally denied independence and forcibly incorporated into an American empire as the nineteenth century ended? Or African-Americans, whose ancestors were imported as slaves? Or, for that matter, dispossessed and disinherited Native Americans? Is there a statute of limitations that applies to moral obligations? And if not, shouldn't those who have waited longest for justice or reparations receive priority attention?

    Let me suggest that any one of these two dozen issues - none seriously covered, discussed, or debated in the American media or in the political mainstream - bears more directly on the wellbeing of the United States and our prospects for avoiding global conflict than anything Donald Trump may have said or done during his first 100 days as president. Collectively, they define the core of the national security challenges that presently confront this country, even as they languish on the periphery of American politics.

    How much damage Donald Trump's presidency wreaks before it ends remains to be seen. Yet he himself is a transient phenomenon. To allow his pratfalls and shenanigans to divert attention from matters sure to persist when he finally departs the stage is to make a grievous error. It may well be that, as the Times insists, the truth is now more important than ever. If so, finding the truth requires looking in the right places and asking the right questions.

    DH , May 8, 2017 at 11:36 am

    Kahneman's "Thinking Fast and Slow" has many of the answers to the questions about why the MSM is the way it is. People are hard-wired to react to sound bites, especially potential pleasure or terror. The MSM is very good at that. Populist politicians feed off of the same.

    B.J.M. , May 8, 2017 at 2:58 pm

    "What would be far more useful than a specialised list of inadequately reported topics would be to analyze this MSM behaviour, explore how it comes about and how it has evolved, to reveal some of the darker connections to power, and put up some strategies for slowly reversing it."

    Sorry MoiAussie, but the analysis has already been done, unfortunately nobody really cares.

    Propaganda and the Public Mind
    Necessary Illusions

    witters , May 8, 2017 at 6:01 pm

    "What would be far more useful than a specialised list of inadequately reported topics would be to analyze this MSM behaviour, explore how it comes about and how it has evolved, to reveal some of the darker connections to power, and put up some strategies for slowly reversing it. In a nutshell, how to foster thriving independent media with broad reach that expose MSM stenography and resist censorship?"

    Well, yes. Except the behaviour you are analysing is, presumably, among other things, the behaviour involved in inadequately addressing these topics.

    cat's paw , May 8, 2017 at 1:57 am

    One can sleep soundly tonight safe in the knowledge that not even the pretense of a reply to Bacevich's questions will be forthcoming.

    oho , May 8, 2017 at 8:45 am

    stop fighting about identity politics (i'm not holding my breath for either side)

    elements of both sides want to return to a non-interventionist US foreign policy, except there is always a fight about something else that serves as a distraction.. like cats and shiny toys.

    Norb , May 8, 2017 at 9:18 am

    The only thing one can do is persistently bring important issues forward to friends and colleagues. In other words, become in many respects a social pariah. Challenging the status quo by definition makes you an outsider.

    The strategic effectiveness of this dissent becomes manifest when you actually change how you live your life. You become an example for others to follow.

    Any successful movement building must follow this path. The strategic plan is to live and think like a socialist in a crumbling capitalist world. The rising levels of inequality must surely bring this about, one way or another.

    Socialism or Barbarism. How many working people could disagree with that? It needs to be repeated over and over. That spirit needs to be reflected in individual life in order to survive.

    B.J.M. , May 8, 2017 at 2:47 pm

    " But it raises the question, what can individuals do to change the behavior of the media?"

    We can continue to ignore them and opt for the following: Naked Capitalism, CounterPunch, ZeroHedge, Liberty Blitzkreig, ContraCorner, Truthout, Consortium News, The Unz Review, Tom Dispatch, Democracy Now, Pando Daily, The Intercept, etc, etc. That is the mainstream media's worst nightmare.

    The only reason to check the NYT or Washington Post is to see what meme is being promoted by the deep state; then you know what not to believe.

    I find this whole debate about fake news to be somewhat laughable. Americans have been subject to fake news for decades, they just didn't know it. Noam Chomsky has been writing about this for 40 years. His books: Propaganda and the Public Mind, Deterring Democracy, Manufacturing Consent and Necessary Illusions are all excellent and contain extensive research and details to support his claims. Of course part to the fake news strategy has been to ignore people like Chomsky. Instead we get intellectual clowns like Tom Friedman telling us how the world works.

    Now that we have some real news, the fake news mainstream media has gone into panic mode and its strategy is to label the real new as fake news. Orwell and Huxley must be rolling in their graves with laughter.

    Enjoy the show!

    optimader , May 8, 2017 at 11:18 am

    True, the big media outlets are demonstrating both energy and enterprise in exposing the ineptitude, inconsistency, and dubious ethical standards, as well as outright lies and fake news, that are already emerging as Trump era signatures. That said, pointing out that the president has (again) uttered a falsehood, claimed credit for a nonexistent achievement, or abandoned some position to which he had previously sworn . "uttered a falsehood, claimed credit for a nonexistent achievement, or abandoned some position.." a new development in POTUS behavior ushered in by DTrump??

    craazyboy , May 8, 2017 at 2:05 am

    Ok, so the USG has 24 issues. Let's not be nit-picky.

    On this one, we've had a bit of progress.

    "8. The campaign formerly known as Operation Enduring Freedom: The conflict commonly referred to as the Afghanistan War is now the longest in U.S. history - having lasted longer than the Civil War, World War I, and World War II combined. What is the Pentagon's plan for concluding that conflict? When might Americans expect it to end? On what terms?"

    We dropped a $30 million BMF'ing bomb on an undefensible, open plain. Killed 67 trees and terrified Afgan flora from border to border. Egyptian cotton kids refuse to migrate there on their little parachute thingies because they are terrified --

    Declassified CIA leaks from the DNC indicate these trees actively made maple syrup for terrorists. This gives terrorists big muscles, like Popeye, and reduces urges to eat human organs.

    This is appreciated by other terrorists in camp and they sleep better , too.

    However, the Fava Beans and Olive Oil have been spilled. Unemployed tree hugger reporters report that the BMF'ing bomb caused the tree sap to instantly turn to maple sugar candies and the candies are now enclosed in a depleted uranium candy tins. Fake research scientists believe the bomb casing was made of the depleted uranium. Could happen, opines Krugman, now minority owner of the NYT, and seconded by Chelsea, whom did the secret HS science project back in the 90s in Yugoslavia. She drew a cute picture of Daddy on the bomb's belly, but a lot of Very Serious Men In Black Suits did everything else.

    As to when the entire Afgan issue ends, we know the war becomes fiscally irresponsible when the USG runs out of new trees to bomb and the maple sugar candies no longer can fund the onslaught.

    Krugman is working on the macro analysis and will send the Noble Prize people an advanced copy for editing, puffing up, and general focus grouping. One area of neglect is developing a universal political correctness language – the semantics are daunting and definitions have to be dynamic, yet synchronized with meanings according to domestic needs. That's a tough one.

    Then people have to learn it, instead of lazily doing what they do now. Which I think may involve much use of sign language.

    An advance against the reward money is expected, and a pic of the statues with Kruggies name on it would signal good faith and seal the deal. Bully to Trump!

    fresno dan , May 8, 2017 at 11:12 am

    craazyboy
    May 8, 2017 at 2:05 am

    "The conflict commonly referred to as the Afghanistan War is now the longest in U.S. history - having lasted longer than the Civil War, World War I, and World War II combined. What is the Pentagon's plan for concluding that conflict? When might Americans expect it to end?"

    Apparently, the Afghanistan war has ended. It makes me feel a little less stupid, although I have a lot of excess stupid in reserve, to know others missed it as well ..

    fresno dan

    After dropping its largest conventional bomb ever used in combat in Afghanistan on 13 April, the US military said the massive ordnance air blast, or Moab, was a "very clear message to Isis" that they would be "annihilated".

    Defence secretary Jim Mattis said the bomb was "necessary to break Isis". The Afghan government claimed the bomb killed 94 Isis militants, while harming no civilians.

    ======================================================================= http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/pentagon/2014/12/29/afghanistan-war-officially-ends/21004589/

    Well, looks like I missed the war ending .but with the war ended, one would think we wouldn't have to be dropping the world's biggest bomb

    optimader , May 8, 2017 at 11:22 am

    its now a police action!

    fresno dan , May 8, 2017 at 2:26 pm

    optimader
    May 8, 2017 at 11:22 am

    the military takes more and more "police actions" while the police use more and more military equipment and tactics ..
    Considering all the "surplus" stuff that goes to the police, how soon before the police drop the biggest "anti-criminal suppression device" i.e., the mother of all bombs???

    optimader , May 8, 2017 at 4:43 pm

    how soon before the police drop the biggest "anti-criminal suppression device" i.e., the mother of all bombs???

    low yield Neutron bomb.. don't damage what left of the domestic infrastructure, the REIT managers would go crazy!

    The backhanded criticism that the MFing bomb didn't do enough damage is related to where it was used.
    Try a barometric pressure bomb in a place like Manhattan and it would be a much different outcome than say on the other end of the spectrum, at a latitude/longitude in Nevada where the before and after pics would be identical.

    A dark side of the media criticism of the MFing Bomb is that it may well goad the MIC/Pentagon Product Managers into a do-over. Afterall, who likes their handiwork criticized?

    DTrump told them I want something big and flashy while Xi is in town and that's what they came up with..

    Back to the Product Development Group. Just need to tweak the neutron emission!
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_(nuclear_device)

    DH , May 8, 2017 at 2:29 pm

    They are just suppressing protests. In the US they are limited to tear gas but in Afghanistan they can use MOAB since the ACLU is weak there.

    DH , May 8, 2017 at 2:38 pm

    "The guerrilla must move amongst the people as a fish swims in the sea." Mao Zedong

    The cool thing about guerilla warfare is it largely eliminates the concept of civilians since anybody could be a soldier, even children. That is why civilian casualties are frequently so low, because pretty much anybody over the age of 6 is a combatant. it also increases the enemy combatant body count which makes it clear that the government forces are winning, as was so ably shown in the Vietnam War.

    optimader , May 8, 2017 at 12:09 pm

    I'm thinking the bigMFing bomb was more a marketing theater driven initative rather than Afgan Strategic Theatre driven.

    It was so DTrump could be at the breakfast table before the President of China and to greet him with.. Wow, sorry I had to cut out before Dessert last night, had some things to take care of, how was the Chocolate cake.. the Cake?" ( he like to repeat things)

    DH , May 8, 2017 at 2:32 pm

    I view the use of MOAB on ISIS as the equivalent of giving an antibiotic shot so that the in-country Taliban immune system can wipe out the remaining ISIS bacteria. I don't think the Taliban wants ISIS there since it focuses too much US attention on the area, so they may be willing to mop up the remaining ISIS fighters.

    Dick Burkhart , May 8, 2017 at 2:21 am

    Some great questions here. Recently I was at a Town Hall with my representative to Congress and asked him if our government, or even just the Democrats, had a long term strategy for peace in the Middle East. The answer was basically, No. A few weeks later I actually got a phone call from his office on this very question, yet the answer was still basically No. He did say that Kerry had sought a UN brokered regime change in Syria (opposed by Russia), after I suggested something like this.

    However Bacevitch needs to be a little more critical about all the claims about US energy. The US may be exporting some oil and oil products, but it is importing more. We have no prospect of "energy independence" in the forseeable future, unless there is a drastic cutback in consumption. When it comes to energy forecasting, top governmental agencies have had an abysmal record. Independent experts like David Hughes and Art Berman regularly expose the wishful thinking and poor analysis of the economists at these agencies.

    DanB , May 8, 2017 at 7:49 am

    "Independent experts like David Hughes and Art Berman regularly expose the wishful thinking and poor analysis of the economists at these agencies." Thanks for pointing this out.

    Toolate , May 8, 2017 at 2:24 am

    This truly is an appalling list. One wonders how many Americans have ever considered even one of these ?

    Temporarily Sane , May 8, 2017 at 2:42 am

    It's great to see people from across the ideological spectrum who served in the military, intelligence services and in various administrations, speaking out. Hindsight is 20/20as the cliche goes. Now if only people who are currently serving in those institutions would step up to the plate and speak truth to power. At what point does it become unconscionable for good people to do nothing? Or, rather, when does critical mass kick in and make resisting the insanity that reigns in our institutions more than just a flash in the pan and career suicide?

    John Wright , May 8, 2017 at 10:55 am

    The past is not encouraging, war hero Eisenhower could only warn of the MIC as he was exiting.

    The economic footprint of the MIC + think tanks + academia + security agencies is huge (maybe a trillion/year)

    A lot of people depend on the defense budget staying large as the MIC is a jobs program throughout much of the USA,.

    I remember CA Senator Boxer, one of the few senators who voted against the AUMF in Iraq, fighting to keep the local (to me) Mare Island Naval Shipyard from closing in 1996.

    The adjacent city, Vallejo, subsequently went through bankruptcy.

    One illustrative MIC family is the Kagan-Nuland family,

    Victoria Nuland was Hillary Clinton's Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs and seemed to be in charge of stirring up trouble in the Ukraine.

    Her husband is noted neocon (he prefers "liberal interventionist") Robert Kagan of the Bookings Institution, and his brother, Frederick, is at the American Enterprise institute.

    Frederick's wife, Kimberly, heads up the "Institute for the Study of War" funded by Raytheon, General Dynamics, DynCorp and others.

    One might suggest this family gets meaning, purpose and income through USA military action.

    One could posit there many other similar families.

    It is difficult to be optimistic that much can be done.

    Mel , May 8, 2017 at 8:46 am

    These aren't independent issues (and, ultimately, there's no reason they have to be.)
    Like, what's preventing the solution of #1 (expecting nations in these regions to assume responsibility for managing their own affairs?) #17. When the Pakistanis have to deal with huge problems on the other side of the invisible line, they aren't so reliable about sticking to the script. Especially a script that has written out all the huge problems.

    I guess that is the point. 45 seconds with this list pastes two items together and makes the framework for a story. But the run of stories that appear are like Captain America saw a bad guy and punched him in the face. Makes a good comic panel, and, when the press has been taught the true meaning of "profitable", it makes a good newspaper page too. Right.

    A working State Department could do interesting things with this list too, but - Captain America.

    oho , May 8, 2017 at 8:50 am

    the US hasn't fought a peer nation since 1945-even then the USSR did a lot of the heavy lifting. the US still hasnt beaten the Taliban.

    US full spectrum dominance could be propaganda for all we know--with our vaunted carriers and fighters sitting ducks to swarms of cheap first-world missiles.

    in any fight with China or Russia, theyd only have to play defense. The US would be the ones without home field advantage, likely in a war with limited domestic support as the fight probablyt would not be about an existential issue to the US homeland

    DH , May 8, 2017 at 11:46 am

    If a group like the Taliban has indigenous support, then you pretty much are left with destroying the village in order to save it as the only military option. Putting a corrupt mafia in charge of the country is not the appropriate alternate civilian political approach to win hearts and minds.

    In the 1990s nobody cared about the Taliban except when they were blowing up big Buddhas. Their fatal error was allowing bin-Laden to launch major attacks against the US home soil. My guess at this time is that the Taliban have been inoculated against spreading terror overseas. If the US left Afghanistan, the Taliban would probably take many of the valleys back and kick ISIS out so that they don't have to worry about the US coming back in to deal with 9/11 terrorists again. Afghanistan would probably be fairly "peaceful" at that point in a fundamental Muslim way, kind of like the fundamental Christian utopia that Mike Pence tried to create in Indiana.

    hemeantwell , May 8, 2017 at 8:55 am

    Bacevich's indictment suffers from an inability to explain how this genuflecting celebration of American intentions degenerated into what he goes on to elaborate.

    Accomplishing the "mission": Since the immediate aftermath of World War II, the United States has been committed to defending key allies in Europe and East Asia. Not long thereafter, U.S. security guarantees were extended to the Middle East as well.

    The beginning of the Cold War continues to be shrouded in assumptions about Soviet aggressiveness and American and British benevolence. Otherwise critical thinkers become kool aid dispensers when they are obliged to reference it. Bacevich skates over questions such as the division of Germany - was it because the US wanted to allow Germany to quickly reindustrialize and the Soviets were afraid of yet another invasion? - and whether city-destroying nuclear weapons would be internationally controlled or remain a US monopoly.

    Instead he invites us all to assume the Soviets were acting and the West was reacting. In my view this genuinely childish view of international relations is the template for American exceptionalism and, unless we break free of it, a logic of privileged exceptionalism will continually assert itself. The Trump era offers us a chance to raze this mythology and seriously confront how market-oriented imperatives, not devils and angels, drive international conflict.

    Whine Country , May 8, 2017 at 10:16 am

    You must have missed this yesterday:

    http://www.counterpunch.org/2017/05/05/war-and-empire-the-american-way-of-life/

    Some are trying to deal with the issue you raise. Oliver Stone had a lot to say on the subject in his "Untold History of the United States".

    JEHR , May 8, 2017 at 9:10 am

    I would like to see CNN or any other channel begin a series of TV presentations where each one of these items is discussed by the relevant people. (When no officials show up for the program, then the producers will know they are on the right track.) A great idea for a series of investigative reports by journalists also.

    However, would such a program make any difference in how things are done?

    DH , May 8, 2017 at 11:48 am

    It might if the Kardashians were invited to participate in the debate.

    Lil'D , May 8, 2017 at 9:24 am

    It's systemic. Journalism is a business of delivering eyeballs to advertisers. These important issues don't sell. Get more flashy drama in the framing of the story and you might have a chance

    B.J.M. , May 8, 2017 at 3:03 pm

    exactly, it is "systemic"! Until one understands that the mainstream media's core business is not news; it is selling audiences to advertisers, one will never properly understand the problem.

    Felix_47 , May 8, 2017 at 11:29 am

    Could it be that our leadership in Washington has no idea why we are still in Afghanistan either? Could it be that our allies, Israel and Saudi Arabia, like the idea of the US military sitting at the back door to Iran? Could it be that we are getting the best foreign policy Saudi and Israeli money can buy? And the MIC is glad to oblige.

    Art Eclectic , May 8, 2017 at 1:41 pm

    My assumption is that everything inexplicable is ultimately explained by money if you dug deep enough.

    JTMcPhee , May 8, 2017 at 3:34 pm

    String theory? Dark matter? Why my dog still pees right inside the patio door?

    witters , May 8, 2017 at 6:42 pm

    Why not? See Richard Rorty's "Consequences of Pragmatism".

    Susan the other , May 8, 2017 at 12:05 pm

    Well we can certainly speculate on 1 – 24. In almost every case there is an implied answer: We aren't quite finished yet establishing and maintaining our control. Over finance and power.

    And even though war is too expensive and we have resorted to a kind of high-tech guerrilla warfare, we still need boots on the ground. That is because we live in a material world and goods are manufactured, transported and trafficked.

    An even more stubborn war is going on in international finance (Hudson) – that's the one I'd like to see reporters understand. Colonel Wilkerson said it is all about finance and power and we will be in Afghanistan for 50 years. What's going on right now really seems like never ending pointlessness. So maybe we should discuss exactly what we want to achieve control for – what's the plan? In detail. Starting with the health of the planet and sustainable civilization.

    Tom Stone , May 8, 2017 at 12:07 pm

    Y U H8 'Murika?

    templar555510 , May 8, 2017 at 2:35 pm

    Andrew could have headed his piece " Analysis of an Empire ' and then added the sub-heading ' A Tale of Vested Interests ' because that is surely why these atrocities ( yes that's right ) continue ad infintum, ad nauseum . And these same interests are those that sell us soap, automobiles, liquor etc, etc, maybe not directly, but the interconnections are now so complete as to make distinctions irrelevant.

    Sluggeaux , May 8, 2017 at 4:23 pm

    Is it because a self-perpetuating top-heavy military bureaucracy was never properly demobilized after the Second World War, and only promotes the sort of sociopathic, narcissistic, borderline personalities who are relentlessly able to bully the groveling toadies and wussies who make up our perpetually campaigning political-climber class?

    Gen Dau , May 8, 2017 at 7:55 pm

    Andrew Bacevich needs to study more deeply about Syrian history and politics, since his description of Syrian president Bashar Assad as a brutal dictator fits as a description of Bashar's father Hafez Assad but is inaccurate in relation to Bashar Assad, who seems to have a rather gentle personality and is actually one of the more benign leaders in the Middle East.

    Bashar Assad had planned to be a doctor, and he studied medicine for two years in the UK before being ordered to return to Syria by his father after his elder brother died in an accident. Although there were some excesses by the police in 2011, Bashar Assad quickly relaxed some old security laws and pushed for a new democratic constitution, which was promulgated in 2012. Under that new constitution, in 2014 he ran in a free election observed by international observers against two other politicians and was reelected president. He has promised that if he loses the next election he will step down.

    Nevertheless Assad has been systematically demonized by the governments and MSM of the US, UK, and France, as well as by Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. Demonization is a technique that is often used to prepare the way for regime change, and it is not based on objective analysis. Although Assad is often called a butcher who gasses his own people, experts such as Theodore Postol of MIT and others have shown that not a single allegation of gassing by the Syrian government under Assad has ever been proven. In addition, many of the excesses by the Syrian police against demonstrators in 2011 seem to have been initiated by armed members of the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda in Syria, who quickly infiltrated the demonstrations.

    There have even been allegations that jihadi sharpshooters on rooftops shot demonstrators in false-flag attacks.

    Similar tactics were used in Ukraine in February 2014 by ultranationalist Right Sector sharpshooters, who were seen shooting Maidan demonstrators. The deaths of the demonstrators were then blamed on the police. In the case of Syria:

    "Syrian-based Father Frans van der Lugt was the Dutch priest murdered by a gunman in Homs . His involvement in reconciliation and peace activities never stopped him from lobbing criticisms at both sides in this conflict. But in the first year of the crisis, he penned some remarkable observations about the violence – this one in January 2012:

    "'From the start the protest movements were not purely peaceful. From the start I saw armed demonstrators marching along in the protests, who began to shoot at the police first. Very often the violence of the security forces has been a reaction to the brutal violence of the armed rebels.'

    "In September 2011 he wrote: 'From the start there has been the problem of the armed groups, which are also part of the opposition The opposition of the street is much stronger than any other opposition. And this opposition is armed and frequently employs brutality and violence, only in order then to blame the government.'"

    https://www.rt.com/op-edge/157412-syria-hidden-massacre-2011/

    For an objective overview of the context of the events of 2011 in Syria that led to the international war against the elected Syrian government, see Stephen Gowans, "The Revolutionary Distemper in Syria That Wasn't."

    https://gowans.wordpress.com/2016/10/22/the-revolutionary-distemper-in-syria-that-wasnt/

    Also see Gowans' well-researched 2016 book 'Washington's Long War on Syria.' The US has been demonizing and trying to overthrow the Syrian government for several decades now, above all because it is the only remaining semi-socialist nation in the Middle East and has single-payer national health insurance, support for the elderly, and free college education for all. Assad is no saint, but he is one of the more democratic and forward-looking leaders in the Middle East today.

    Westley Wood , May 8, 2017 at 8:12 pm

    Thugs committing heinous acts "and some had opportunity to squeal " S. Crane

    [May 21, 2017] WhateverGate -- The Crazed Quest To Find Some Reason (Any Reason!) To Dump Trump by John Derbyshire

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... One of Steve Sailer's many clever commenters has brilliantly named it WhateverGate-the frantic legalistic churning about who said what to whom in President Trump's circle, and whether the thing that was or was not said warrants impeachment. Or whatever. But impeachment. ..."
    "... Instead of registering under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, Flynn reported his income through the Lobbying Disclosure Act! ..."
    "... There's a grain of truth in that. The Watergate affair was a media witch-hunt against a president the Establishment elites disliked. Nixon's offenses were of a kind the Main Stream Media had never bothered about, nor even reported, when done by Democrat presidents-like Lyndon Johnson's bugging of Barry Goldwater in 1964. ..."
    "... It's pretty plain by now that the Republican Party Establishment is not going to forgive Donald Trump for humiliating them last year. They'll be just as happy as Democrats to see him go, if they can somehow help the Democrats force him out without showing too much outward enthusiasm. ..."
    "... Sixty-three million Americans rejected establishment politics last November. They took a chance on an outsider. From a field of seventeen seasoned Republican politicians, GOP primary voters selected the one un-seasoned guy. Then sixty-three million of us voted for him in the general. ..."
    "... The GOP leadership would like to go back anyway. They think if they can get rid of Trump, that will get rid of Trump_vs_deep_state. They yearn to get back to the futile wars, the free trade sucker economy, the open borders and multiculturalism. ..."
    "... They really think that, the McCains and Grahams and McConnells and Ryans . Get rid of Trump, you get rid of Trump_vs_deep_state, they believe. Then we can all go back to what Orwell called "the dear old game of scratch-my-neighbor." Yep, this is the Stupid Party. ..."
    "... But whether Donald Trump is actually the right person to give us Trump_vs_deep_state is more and more in doubt. ..."
    "... Those are small mercies, though. Where's the really big, bold swamp -draining exercise, like the one I just described? Why are we still issuing work permits to illegal aliens? Why no federal legislation to slam a mandatory ten-year sentence on any illegal who, after being deported, comes back in ? Why no request to Congress on funding for the border Wall? For an end to the visa lottery and restrictions on chain migration? When do we start testing the constitutionality of birthright citizenship? Why are we still in NATO ? Why are we still at war with North Korea ( which technically we are , since there hasn't been a peace treaty, only an armistice)? ..."
    "... I like Ann Coulter's analogy: It's as if we're in Chicago, and Trump says he can get us to L.A. in six days; and then for the first three days we're driving towards New York. He can still turn around and get us to L.A. in three days. But, says Ann , she's getting nervous. ..."
    May 21, 2017 | www.unz.com

    One of Steve Sailer's many clever commenters has brilliantly named it WhateverGate-the frantic legalistic churning about who said what to whom in President Trump's circle, and whether the thing that was or was not said warrants impeachment. Or whatever. But impeachment.

    Every week, I think things can't get any crazier-the hysteria has to burn itself out, the temperature can't get any higher, the fever has to break-and every week it's worse. Boy, they really want to get this guy. That just gives us more reasons to defend him.

    I don't even bother much any more to focus on the actual thing that President Trump or one of his colleagues is supposed to have said or done. Every time, when you look closely, it's basically nothing.

    I've been reading news and memoirs about American presidents since the Kennedy administration. I swear that every single damn thing Trump is accused of, warranting special counsels, congressional enquiries, impeachment-every single thing has been done by other recent presidents, often to a much greater degree, with little or no comment.

    Remember Barack Obama's hot-mike blooper in the 2012 campaign, telling the Russian President that, quote, "After my election I have more flexibility"? [ Obama tells Russia's Medvedev more flexibility after election , Reuters, March 26, 2012] Can you imagine how today's media would react if footage showed up of Trump doing that in last year's campaign? Can you imagine ? I can't.

    We are a big, important country with big, important things that need doing-most important of all, halting the demographic transformation that's tugging us out of the Anglosphere into the Latino-sphere and filling our country with low-skill workers just as robots are arriving to take their jobs.

    Those big, important things aren't getting done. Instead, our news outlets are shrieking about high crimes and misdemeanors in the new administration–things that, when you read about the actual details, look awful picayune.

    Sample, from today's press, concerning Michael Flynn , the national security advisor President Trump fired for supposedly lying to the Vice President about a phone conversation he'd had with the Russian Ambassador last December. To the best of my understanding, the root issue was just a difference of opinion over the parsing of what Flynn remembered having said, and the precise definition of the word "substantive," but Trump fired him anyway.

    Well, here's Eli Lake at Bloomberg News on the latest tranche of investigations into Flynn's activities:

    Flynn's legal troubles come from his failure to properly report foreign income. One source close to Flynn told me that the Justice Department had opened an investigation into Flynn after the election in November for failing to register his work on behalf of a Turkish businessman, pursuant to the Foreign Agents Registration Act. Flynn had instead reported this income through the more lax Lobbying Disclosure Act. After his resignation, Flynn registered as a foreign agent for Turkey.

    The Special Counsel Who Just Might Save Trump's Presidency, by Eli Lake, May 18, 2017

    Did you get that? Instead of registering under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, Flynn reported his income through the Lobbying Disclosure Act!

    High crimes! Treason! Special Prosecutor! Congressional inquiry! The Republic is in danger! Suspend habeas corpus -- This must not stand!

    And then, the whole silly Russia business. The Bloomberg guy has words about that, too:

    Flynn also failed to report with the Pentagon his payment in 2015 from Russia's propaganda network, RT, for a speech in Moscow at the network's annual gala. As I reported last month, Flynn did brief the Defense Intelligence Agency about that trip before and after he attended the RT gala. The Pentagon also renewed his top-secret security clearance after that trip.

    So obviously the rot goes deep into the Pentagon. They're covering for him! Let's have a purge of the military! Special prosecutor!

    Oh, we have a special prosecutor? Let's have another one!

    Russia, Russia, Russia. For crying out loud , Russia's just a country . We have no great differences of interest with them . What, are they trying to reclaim Alaska? First I've heard of it.

    You could make an argument, I suppose-I don't myself think it's much of an argument, but you could make it-that Russia's a military threat to Europe.

    Once again , with feeling: Europe has a population three and a half times greater than Russia's and a GDP ten times greater. Europe's two nuclear powers, Britain and France, have more than five hundred nuclear weapons between them. If the Euros can't defend themselves against Russia, there's something very badly wrong over there, beyond any ability of ours to fix–even if you could show me it's in our national interest to fix it, which you can't.

    At this point, in fact, reading the news from Europe, I think a Russian invasion and occupation of the continent would be an improvement. A Russian hegemony might at least put up some resistance to the ongoing invasion of Europe from Africa and the Middle East . It doesn't look as though the Euros themselves are up to the job.

    That aside, American citizens are free to visit Russia and talk to Russians, including Russian government employees, just as free as we are to talk to Australians, Brazilians, or Cambodians. As the Lion said on his blog :

    Do liberals who are making a big deal about the Trump-Russia thing really believe that no one involved in a presidential campaign should have ever talked to anyone from another country? How would an administration ever conduct any foreign policy if no one in the administration has ever left the United States or ever talked to a foreigner?

    And again, these standards have never been applied to other Presidents. Bill Clinton took campaign donations from the Chinese army . [ Chinagate and the Clintons, By Robert Zapesochny, American Spectator, October 6, 2016] Barack Obama groveled to the Saudis . Where were the calls for special prosecutors?

    Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, with whom Flynn had that December phone conversation, is, says the New York Post , "a suspected Kremlin spy." [ Michael Flynn won't honor subpoena to provide documents, By Bob Fredericks, May 18, 2017] Is he? Why should I care?

    I bet ol' Sergey does all the spying he can. So, I'm sure, do the ambassadors of China, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Botswana. That's what ambassadors do. That's what we do in their countries. Does anyone not know this?

    "A Kremlin spy"? What is this, 1957 ? Russia's just a country . And as our own James Kirkpatrick has pointed out here at VDARE.com , it's a country run by people who hate us-the American people- less than our own elites do.

    As James also points out, if it's interference in our elections that bothers you, consider what Mexico's been doing for the last forty years: encouraging mass immigration of its own underclass into the U.S.A., lobbying through its consulates and Spanish-language TV channels for voter registration, using Mexican-owned outlets like the New York Times to demonize and discredit national conservatives.

    The founder of Christianity scoffed at those who strain at a gnat but swallow a camel. In the matter of foreign interference in our elections, the gnat here is Russia; the camel is Mexico. Our media and opinion elites have swallowed the camel.

    Unless, of course, just down the road a few months, there's going to be a hysteria-storm about Mexican interference in our elections. My advice would be: Don't hold your breath.

    All the shouting and swooning is just the rage of a dispossessed class-our political class.

    Our political and government class, I think I should say. There are tens of thousands of federal functionaries who have never stood for election to anything, but whose loyalty is to the political Establishment. Great numbers of these people settled in to their comfortable seats during the eight years of Barack Obama's administration; so to the degree that they care about party affiliation, they prefer the Democratic Party. Washington, D.C. voted 91 percent for Mrs. Clinton last November.

    Obama Holdovers, Vacant Posts Still Plague Trump - Administration housecleaning is long overdue to get agenda in motion, end damaging leaks, by Thomas Richard, LifeZette.com, May 18, 2017] Draining the swamp means getting rid of those people. They should be fired -en masse, in their hundreds and thousands, and marched out the office door by security guards before they can trash files.

    Still, a big majority of federal politicians are helping to drive the hysteria; and their rage against Trump is, as they say in D.C., bipartisan. Senator John McCain told CNN on Tuesday that President Trump's troubles are, quote , "of Watergate size and scale."

    There's a grain of truth in that. The Watergate affair was a media witch-hunt against a president the Establishment elites disliked. Nixon's offenses were of a kind the Main Stream Media had never bothered about, nor even reported, when done by Democrat presidents-like Lyndon Johnson's bugging of Barry Goldwater in 1964.

    So yes: When the political and media establishment try to drive from office a president they dislike, it is kinda like Watergate.

    It's pretty plain by now that the Republican Party Establishment is not going to forgive Donald Trump for humiliating them last year. They'll be just as happy as Democrats to see him go, if they can somehow help the Democrats force him out without showing too much outward enthusiasm.

    Last August, after Trump had clinched the Republican nomination, I reproduced a remark Peggy Noonan made in one of her columns. Here's the remark again, quote :

    From what I've seen there has been zero reflection on the part of Republican leaders on how much the base's views differ from theirs and what to do about it. The GOP is not at all refiguring its stands.

    Has there been any reflection among GOP leaders in the nine months since, about the meaning of Trump's victory? Not much that I can see.

    Sixty-three million Americans rejected establishment politics last November. They took a chance on an outsider. From a field of seventeen seasoned Republican politicians, GOP primary voters selected the one un-seasoned guy. Then sixty-three million of us voted for him in the general.

    Does the GOP get this? Have they learned anything from it? Not that I can see.

    With some exceptions, of course. GOP elder statesman Pat Buchanan spelled it out in an interview with the Daily Caller this week:

    The GOP leadership would like to go back anyway. They think if they can get rid of Trump, that will get rid of Trump_vs_deep_state. They yearn to get back to the futile wars, the free trade sucker economy, the open borders and multiculturalism.

    If they can just pull off an impeachment, the Republican party bosses believe, and install some donor-compliant drone in the White House, then we sixty-three million Trump voters will smack our foreheads with our palms and say: "Jeez, we are so dumb! Why did we let ourselves get led astray like that? Why didn't we vote for Marco Rubio or Jeb Bush in the primaries, as you wise elders wanted us to? We're sorry! We promise to follow your advice in future!"

    They really think that, the McCains and Grahams and McConnells and Ryans . Get rid of Trump, you get rid of Trump_vs_deep_state, they believe. Then we can all go back to what Orwell called "the dear old game of scratch-my-neighbor." Yep, this is the Stupid Party.

    But whether Donald Trump is actually the right person to give us Trump_vs_deep_state is more and more in doubt.

    I am of course grateful for the small mercies. Thank you for Jeff Sessions; thank you for the work you're doing on trade; thank you somewhat for Neil Gorsuch, who may yet turn and cuck on us.

    Those are small mercies, though. Where's the really big, bold swamp -draining exercise, like the one I just described? Why are we still issuing work permits to illegal aliens? Why no federal legislation to slam a mandatory ten-year sentence on any illegal who, after being deported, comes back in ? Why no request to Congress on funding for the border Wall? For an end to the visa lottery and restrictions on chain migration? When do we start testing the constitutionality of birthright citizenship? Why are we still in NATO ? Why are we still at war with North Korea ( which technically we are , since there hasn't been a peace treaty, only an armistice)?

    I like Ann Coulter's analogy: It's as if we're in Chicago, and Trump says he can get us to L.A. in six days; and then for the first three days we're driving towards New York. He can still turn around and get us to L.A. in three days. But, says Ann , she's getting nervous.

    Me too.

    John Derbyshire [ email him ] writes an incredible amount on all sorts of subjects for all kinds of outlets. (This no longer includes National Review, whose editors had some kind of tantrum and fired him. ) He is the author of We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism and several other books . He's had two books published by VDARE.com: FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT ( also available in Kindle ) and From the Dissident Right II: Essays 2013 . His writings are archived at JohnDerbyshire.com .

    [May 21, 2017] Speech of Lavrov at the Military Academy of the General Staff

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Unilateral economic sanctions are definitely a declaration of war, no doubt about it. An information war is underway when slander becomes a mandatory condition for the media. This is an objective fact. These days we talk a lot about Syria. Allegedly, there is a non-governmental organisation called the White Helmets funded by several Western countries and countries in the Persian Gulf. ..."
    "... A film about this organisation won the Oscar for best documentary this year. They present themselves as a humanitarian agency helping people attacked by bombs – particularly, in Syria. On several occasions, they were caught lying and showing staged video clips. For one such clip, they painted a girl with red paint and on camera she was sitting down and allegedly suffering from Russian and Syrian bombs. Several days ago in Geneva, an American journalist presented research in which he proved that the White Helmets are fake and that they only deal with developing falsified and provocative news, while dragging Russia, Iran, the Syrian government and armed forces through the mud. ..."
    "... He also proved that they are providing direct assistance to terrorists and extremists, including medical supplies and equipment, and treating injured members of extremist groups. ..."
    "... Those dealing with information and sharing experience are trying to convince each other that the media must be used not for provocation but to reconcile people. When it comes to the economy, it should be understood – and many have come to realise this – that unilateral sanctions will come back like a boomerang and hit the countries that joined them, especially small countries ..."
    Apr 02, 2017 | thesaker.is
    Speech of Lavrov at the Military Academy of the General Staff The Vineyard of the Saker

    Question: The traditional definition of war is "war is nothing more than an extension of state policy by alternate means." We usually understand "alternate means" as military violence and therefore claim that war always involves military action. Do you think it would be correct to say that the nature of war has changed in contemporary circumstances, that is, now the term includes measures for information, economic, political and psychological impact?

    Sergey Lavrov: You know, in the West they coined the term 'hybrid war.' As a matter of fact, this is the concept they seem to be forming based on their experience. Unilateral economic sanctions are definitely a declaration of war, no doubt about it. An information war is underway when slander becomes a mandatory condition for the media. This is an objective fact. These days we talk a lot about Syria. Allegedly, there is a non-governmental organisation called the White Helmets funded by several Western countries and countries in the Persian Gulf.

    A film about this organisation won the Oscar for best documentary this year. They present themselves as a humanitarian agency helping people attacked by bombs – particularly, in Syria. On several occasions, they were caught lying and showing staged video clips. For one such clip, they painted a girl with red paint and on camera she was sitting down and allegedly suffering from Russian and Syrian bombs. Several days ago in Geneva, an American journalist presented research in which he proved that the White Helmets are fake and that they only deal with developing falsified and provocative news, while dragging Russia, Iran, the Syrian government and armed forces through the mud.

    He also proved that they are providing direct assistance to terrorists and extremists, including medical supplies and equipment, and treating injured members of extremist groups. This is just one example. But anywhere you go, when I just try talking to my Western colleagues, the White Helmets are exempt from any criticism and seem to have a monopoly on the truth. There are many other tricks like that. Certainly, in a wider perspective, cyberspace is an area where there is a material possibility to inflict potentially very serious harm. Cyber forces were created and, apparently, they have some significance. This is exactly why we need forums where these things can be discussed as a single package. The military discusses purely military issues, which now extends to cyberwars.

    Those dealing with information and sharing experience are trying to convince each other that the media must be used not for provocation but to reconcile people. When it comes to the economy, it should be understood – and many have come to realise this – that unilateral sanctions will come back like a boomerang and hit the countries that joined them, especially small countries. It is very short-sighted to impose unilateral sanctions on a country like Russia, with its huge potential, human and natural resources. By encouraging dialogue in each of these areas to build a general understanding, mutually beneficial and generally acceptable approaches, we need a forum where all these issues can be considered in their relation to each other because they all affect the general status of international relations. Except for the UN, there is no other framework like this. This is a very topical issue and we have no doubt that it will be in the centre of very heated and engaging debates for the foreseeable future.

    [May 20, 2017] Still Chasing the Wrong Rainbows by Andrew Bacevich

    Notable quotes:
    "... Today, in the era of Donald Trump, that confusion has returned with a vengeance. Trump for his part vows to "Make America Great Again," with greatness measured in quantitative terms: jobs, income, profits, stock prices, and trade balances. For those ordinary Americans left behind or dispossessed by the economic and social changes that have swept the United States in recent decades, the appeal of Trump's promise of greatness restored is understandable. Their resentment handed him the White House. ..."
    "... Yet Trump's first hundred days in residence there offer precious little evidence that he will deliver on that promise. Neither he nor anyone else in the Republican leadership has demonstrated the requisite competence or political savvy. Furthermore, nothing that Trump has said or done since taking office suggests that he possesses the capacity or even the inclination to articulate a unifying conception of a common good . The real, although unarticulated slogan of his presidency, is one that looks to "Deepen American Divisions," with members of the fiercely anti-Trump Left, his ironic collaborators. On all sides, resentment grows. ..."
    "... Trump assured his supporters that he was going to break the hold of the foreign-policy establishment. In fact, he has embraced the establishment's penchant for "using our power for whatever we happen at the moment to want, or against whatever at the moment we do not like." ..."
    "... To align foreign policy with American values and with "the realities of the world," Williams believed, offered a first step toward something even bigger. Williams understood the intimate linkage between the way the United States acts abroad and what it is at home-each expressing the other. To correct the defects in U.S. foreign policy, especially its misuse of force, could "generate the kind of changes that could transform America into a more humane and creative country." ..."
    May 20, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com
    So the remarks that Williams made some fifty-two years ago included the following reflection, worth pondering by present-day conservatives. "If we justify our intervention in Vietnam on the grounds that it is crucial to our national security," he said, "we will soon be able to justify using our power for whatever we happen at the moment to want, or against whatever at the moment we do not like." Furthermore, "That kind of moral arrogance-that kind of playing at being God-will destroy any chance we have to construct a good society." Then Williams added:

    Notice that I said good society. We already have a great society, and I think that may be the source of much of the trouble with our leaders. For greatness has primarily to do with size, strength, and power. But we citizens who are gathered here are primarily concerned with quality, equity, and with honoring our potential for becoming more fully and truly human.

    In 1965, confusion about the distinction between great and good found American leaders "following the wrong rainbow." President Johnson was promising Americans a "Great Society." What he was actually delivering was an unnecessary war destined to cost the country dearly and leave it bitterly divided.

    Today, in the era of Donald Trump, that confusion has returned with a vengeance. Trump for his part vows to "Make America Great Again," with greatness measured in quantitative terms: jobs, income, profits, stock prices, and trade balances. For those ordinary Americans left behind or dispossessed by the economic and social changes that have swept the United States in recent decades, the appeal of Trump's promise of greatness restored is understandable. Their resentment handed him the White House.

    Yet Trump's first hundred days in residence there offer precious little evidence that he will deliver on that promise. Neither he nor anyone else in the Republican leadership has demonstrated the requisite competence or political savvy. Furthermore, nothing that Trump has said or done since taking office suggests that he possesses the capacity or even the inclination to articulate a unifying conception of a common good . The real, although unarticulated slogan of his presidency, is one that looks to "Deepen American Divisions," with members of the fiercely anti-Trump Left, his ironic collaborators. On all sides, resentment grows.

    Meanwhile, to judge by Trump's one-and-done missile attack on Syria and the fatuous deployment of the "Mother of All Bombs" in Afghanistan, our president's approach to statecraft makes Lyndon Johnson look circumspect by comparison. Trump assured his supporters that he was going to break the hold of the foreign-policy establishment. In fact, he has embraced the establishment's penchant for "using our power for whatever we happen at the moment to want, or against whatever at the moment we do not like." U.S. national-security policy has become monumentally incoherent, with the man in charge apparently doing whatever his gut or his latest visitor at Mar-a-Lago tells him to do.

    This defines the nation's current predicament: Whatever agreement once existed on what it means to be either great or good has pretty much disappeared from American political culture. Our fragmented society pursues any number of illusory rainbows. Restoring some semblance of a common culture thereby poses a daunting challenge, even larger today than back in the Sixties when everything seemed to be coming apart at the seams. I will refrain from offering any glib advice for how to promote that restoration.

    If hardly less challenging, imparting a modicum of coherence to U.S. policy abroad may actually qualify as more urgent. After all, the impetuous Trump appears more likely than Lyndon Johnson to blow up the world.

    In that regard, the views expressed by Professor Williams back in 1965 in explaining the rationale for the "teach-ins" offer at least a place to begin. "We are trying to bring our Government back into a dialogue with its own citizens," he explained.

    We are trying to encourage Congress to meet its responsibilities and to function as a full partner in governing the country. We are trying to change our foreign policy so that it will be closer to the realities of the world and far more in keeping with our best traditions and highest ideals-and thereby make it pragmatically more effective.

    To align foreign policy with American values and with "the realities of the world," Williams believed, offered a first step toward something even bigger. Williams understood the intimate linkage between the way the United States acts abroad and what it is at home-each expressing the other. To correct the defects in U.S. foreign policy, especially its misuse of force, could "generate the kind of changes that could transform America into a more humane and creative country."

    As a place to begin, it was good advice then. It remains good advice today.

    Andrew J. Bacevich is TAC's writer-at-large.

    [May 19, 2017] The US hit a combination of Syrian and Iraqi Shia forces, not the SAA alone. The fact is that Syria and Iraq are attempting to reestablish road contacts with another in southern Syria territory

    Notable quotes:
    "... The US hit a combination of Syrian / Iraqi Shi'a forces, not the SAA alone. The fact is that Syria and Iraq are attempting to re-establish road contacts with another in southern Syria territory. ..."
    May 19, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com

    karl1haushofer , May 18, 2017 at 2:45 pm

    Once again the US Air Force bombs the Syrian military while Russian S-400 remains silent:

    http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/us-coalition-bombs-pro-government-forces-southern-syria/ri19878

    karl1haushofer , May 18, 2017 at 2:46 pm
    I thought Russia was supposed to "strengthen" Syria's air defense capabilities after Trump bombed Syrian troops for the first time?
    Moscow Exile , May 18, 2017 at 10:19 pm
    Yeah, supposed to do

    Clear evidence, if any more were needed, of Russia's weakness and the fact that, despite all its bluster, the place is just a Third World shithole compared with the mighty West under the avuncular leadership of "Uncle Sam".

    Thanks for the timely reminder of the reality of the situation as regards Russian capabilities!

    Jen , May 18, 2017 at 3:31 pm
    Karl, please read that article properly. The US hit a combination of Syrian / Iraqi Shi'a forces, not the SAA alone. The fact is that Syria and Iraq are attempting to re-establish road contacts with another in southern Syria territory. We should be glad that the SAA has got this far in the war that it can plan for and carry out this particular project to secure Syria's southeastern borders. Russian help was absent because the Syrians did not ask for it, they believed they and the Iraqis could do it themselves. They would have prepared for the possibility of being attacked. Please give the Syrians and Iraqis some credit for having got this far despite being under US-coalition attack. (But of course you won't because Ay-rabs are brown people of low IQ in your estimation.)
    Jen , May 18, 2017 at 4:13 pm
    Plus it is not just the US involved in hitting joint Syrian-Iraqi forces at al-Tanf – there are British and Jordanian special forces there as well. So this is a major operation to clean out not just ISIS and other jihadi fighters but the foreigners embedded with them.

    Drutten , May 18, 2017 at 3:05 pm

    Be realistic for once, Russia isn't going to shoot down US (or Israeli, for that matter) aircraft unless Russia's own personnel on site are being threatened. The Russian air defense assets are there to protect Russian troops, not to cover Assads ass everywhere in every way.

    In practice, this means that they're basically never going to be used because both Israel and the US are actively discussing things with Russia and when they strike Syrian regime targets on occasion they pretty much do so with tacit Russian approval, and it means little to the Russian plan.

    Russia isn't there to provide some kind of unconditional full-on support for Assad, again, they're there to kill jihadis from the Caucasus and the Central Asian republics, help the Syrian armed forces just enough so that they do not succumb, and provide Syria with a lot of international diplomatic support in the UNSC and so on, all this in order to get some kind of political solution rolling. Russia has done Assad an incredible favor in this regard, and continue to do so despite increasingly venomous attacks from the West and the other jihadi backers. But Russia can't be expected to do everything for Assad, and they have explicitly said so.

    Drutten , May 18, 2017 at 3:21 pm
    In short, helping Syria stay afloat in the midst of this jihadi-Western onslaught is all good but Russia has its own interests to consider as well, and they have made this abundantly clear from the very beginning. The support is not unconditional and it's not something Russia's going to spend everything it has on, but the fact that they're keeping up the present level of support despite the aforementioned political/diplomatic/economical attacks that grow more vicious by the day shows that they're taking that commitment seriously.

    Now, what follows is some wishful thinking on my part Barring some kind of international agreement on a political solution soon (sounds unlikely even though there's been progress), considering the sheer amount of Chinese Uyghur jihadists in the Idlib region (some say they number in the tens of thousands!) and that China's already taken a lot of steps to stop them from returning, perhaps China could get involved and "relieve" Russia ahead. China's already been helpful in the UNSC on Syria, and their other activities seem to suggest they're somewhat interested in some kind of foreign adventure. Russia can't go on forever on its own fighting the good fight trying to stop or at least slow down the Western wrecking ball It has other issues that require a lot of attention.

    https://ads.pubmatic.com/AdServer/js/showad.js#PIX&kdntuid=1&p=156204
    et Al , May 19, 2017 at 2:46 am
    It's a lesson that the West has taken a long time learning. Again: Aircraft don't take and hold territory, soldiers do.

    It is the special foreskins who are in a weak position here so attacking the Syrian/I-racki guys is a sign of this weakness. If the sf's were heavily manned and supported they wouldn't be bothered. Instead they have to rely on the ever reliable kurds. No wonder they are skittish.

    [May 16, 2017] The Real Meaning of Sensitive Intelligence by Philip Giraldi

    Notable quotes:
    "... what astonished me was how quickly the media interpreted its use in the hearings to mean that the conversations and emails that apparently were recorded or intercepted involving Trump associates and assorted Russians as "sensitive contacts" meant that they were necessarily inappropriate, dangerous, or even illegal. ..."
    "... The Post is unfortunately also providing ISIS with more information than it "needs to know" to make its story more dramatic, further compromising the source. ..."
    "... McMaster described the report as "false" and informed the Post that "The president and the foreign minister reviewed common threats from terrorist organizations to include threats to aviation. At no time were any intelligence sources or methods discussed and no military operations were disclosed that were not already known publicly." Tillerson commented that "the nature of specific threats were (sic) discussed, but they did not discuss sources, methods, or military operations." ..."
    "... The media will no doubt be seeking to magnify the potential damage done while the White House goes into damage control mode. ..."
    "... In this case, the intelligence shared with Lavrov appears to be related to specific ISIS threats, which may include planned operations against civilian aircraft, judging from Trump's characteristically after-hours tweets defending his behavior, as well as other reporting. ..."
    "... The New York Times , in its own reporting of the story, initially stated that the information on ISIS did not come from an NSA or CIA operation, and later reported that the source was Israel. ..."
    "... And President Trump has one more thing to think about. No matter what damage comes out of the Lavrov discussion, he has a bigger problem. There are apparently multiple leakers on his National Security Council. ..."
    "... You have McMaster himself who categorically denies any exposure of sources and methods – he was there in person and witness to the talks – and a cloud of unknown witnesses not present speculating, without reference to McMaster or Tillerson's testimony, about what might have happened. This is the American Media in a nutshell, the Infinite Circle Jerk. ..."
    "... I am more disturbed how this story got into the press. While, not an ally, I think we should in cooperation with other states. Because the Pres is not familiar with the protocols and language and I doubt any executive has been upon entering office, I have no doubt he may be reacting or overreacting to the overreaction of others. ..."
    "... Here's a word. We have no business engaging n the overthrow of another government that is no threat to the US or her allies, and that includes Israel. Syria is not. And we should cease and desist getting further entangled in the messes of the previous executive, his Sec of State and those organizations who seem to e playing with the life blood of the US by engaging if unnecessary risks. ..."
    "... And if I understand the crumbs given the data provided by the Post, the Times and this article, if one had ill will for the source of said information, they have pretty good idea where to start. ..."
    "... In general I agree with you, but the media was NEVER concerned about the treatment of sensitive material from HRC! ..."
    "... I think he needs to cut back on intelligence sharing with Israel. They do just what the hell they want to do with anything. ..."
    May 16, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com
    Intelligence agencies and senior government officials tend to use a lot of jargon. Laced with acronyms, this language sometimes does not translate very well into journalese when it hits the media.

    For example, I experienced a sense of disorientation two weeks ago over the word "sensitive" as used by several senators, Sally Yates, and James Clapper during committee testimony into Russiagate. "Sensitive" has, of course, a number of meanings. But what astonished me was how quickly the media interpreted its use in the hearings to mean that the conversations and emails that apparently were recorded or intercepted involving Trump associates and assorted Russians as "sensitive contacts" meant that they were necessarily inappropriate, dangerous, or even illegal.

    When Yates and Clapper were using "sensitive" thirteen times in the 86 page transcript of the Senate hearings, they were referring to the medium rather than the message. They were both acknowledging that the sources of the information were intelligence related, sometimes referred to as "sensitive" by intelligence professionals and government insiders as a shorthand way to describe that they are "need to know" material derived from either classified "methods" or foreign-liaison partners. That does not mean that the information contained is either good or bad or even true or false, but merely a way of expressing that the information must be protected because of where it came from or how it was developed, hence the "sensitivity."

    The word also popped up this week in a Washington Post exclusive report alleging that the president had, in his recent meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, gone too far while also suggesting that the source of a highly classified government program might be inferred from the context of what was actually revealed. The Post describes how

    The information Trump relayed had been provided by a U.S. partner through an intelligence-sharing arrangement considered so sensitive that details have been withheld from allies and tightly restricted even within the U.S. government, officials said. The partner had not given the United States permission to share the material with Russia, and officials said that Trump's decision to do so risks cooperation from an ally that has access to the inner workings of the Islamic State.

    The Post is unfortunately also providing ISIS with more information than it "needs to know" to make its story more dramatic, further compromising the source. Furthermore, it should be understood that the paper is extremely hostile to Trump, the story is as always based on anonymous sources, and the revelation comes on top of another unverifiable Post article claiming that the Russians might have sought to sneak a recording device into the White House during the visit.

    No one is denying that the president discussed ISIS in some detail with Lavrov, but National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, both of whom were present at the meeting, have denied that any sources or methods were revealed while reviewing with the Russians available intelligence. McMaster described the report as "false" and informed the Post that "The president and the foreign minister reviewed common threats from terrorist organizations to include threats to aviation. At no time were any intelligence sources or methods discussed and no military operations were disclosed that were not already known publicly." Tillerson commented that "the nature of specific threats were (sic) discussed, but they did not discuss sources, methods, or military operations."

    So the question becomes to what extent can an intelligence mechanism be identified from the information that it produces. That is, to a certain extent, a judgment call. The president is able on his own authority to declassify anything, so the legality of his sharing information with Russia cannot be challenged. What is at question is the decision-making by an inexperienced president who may have been showing off to an important foreign visitor by revealing details of intelligence that should have remained secret. The media will no doubt be seeking to magnify the potential damage done while the White House goes into damage control mode.

    The media is claiming that the specific discussion with Lavrov that is causing particular concern is related to a so-called Special Access Program , or SAP, sometimes referred to as "code word information." An SAP is an operation that generates intelligence that requires special protection because of where or how it is produced. In this case, the intelligence shared with Lavrov appears to be related to specific ISIS threats, which may include planned operations against civilian aircraft, judging from Trump's characteristically after-hours tweets defending his behavior, as well as other reporting.

    There have also been reports that the White House followed up on its Lavrov meeting with a routine review of what had taken place. Several National Security Council members observed that some of the information shared with the Russians was far too sensitive to disseminate within the U.S. intelligence community. This led to the placing of urgent calls to NSA and CIA to brief them on what had been said.

    Based on the recipients of the calls alone, one might surmise that the source of the information would appear to be either a foreign-intelligence service or a technical collection operation, or even both combined. The Post claims that the originator of the intelligence did not clear its sharing with the Russians and raises the possibility that no more information of that type will be provided at all in light of the White House's apparent carelessness in its use. The New York Times , in its own reporting of the story, initially stated that the information on ISIS did not come from an NSA or CIA operation, and later reported that the source was Israel.

    The Times is also reporting that Trump provided to Lavrov "granular" information on the city in Syria where the information was collected that will possibly enable the Russians or ISIS to identify the actual source, with devastating consequences. That projection may be overreach, but the fact is that the latest gaffe from the White House could well damage an important intelligence liaison relationship in the Middle East while reinforcing the widely held impression that Washington does not know how to keep a secret. It will also create the impression that Donald Trump, out of ignorance or hubris, exhibits a certain recklessness in his dealing with classified information, a failing that he once attributed to his presidential opponent Hillary Clinton.

    And President Trump has one more thing to think about. No matter what damage comes out of the Lavrov discussion, he has a bigger problem. There are apparently multiple leakers on his National Security Council.

    Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer, is executive director of the Council for the National Interest.

    This article has been updated to reflect news developments.

    Thymoleontas, says: May 16, 2017 at 12:33 pm

    " The latest gaffe from the White House could well damage an important intelligence liaison relationship in the Middle East "

    On the other hand, it also represents closer collaboration with Russia–even if unintended–which is an improvement on the status quo ante and, not to mention, key to ending the conflict in Syria.

    Dies Irae , says: May 16, 2017 at 12:38 pm
    You have McMaster himself who categorically denies any exposure of sources and methods – he was there in person and witness to the talks – and a cloud of unknown witnesses not present speculating, without reference to McMaster or Tillerson's testimony, about what might have happened. This is the American Media in a nutshell, the Infinite Circle Jerk.
    MM , says: May 16, 2017 at 12:44 pm
    Out of my depth, but was Trump working within the framework, maybe a bit outside if the story is true, of the Joint Implementation Group the Obama administration created last year with Russia?

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/r/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2016/07/13/Editorial-Opinion/Graphics/terms_of_reference_for_the_Joint_Implementation_Group.pdf?tid=a_inl

    Also, I recall reading that the prior administration promised Russia ISIS intel. Not sure if that ever happened, but I doubt they'd have made it public or leak anything to the press.

    Brian W , says: May 16, 2017 at 12:57 pm
    Apr 21, 2017 Ike and McCarthy: Dwight Eisenhower's Secret Campaign against Joseph McCarthy

    Author David A. Nichols reveals how President Dwight D. Eisenhower masterminded the downfall of the anti-Communist demagogue Senator Joseph McCarthy.

    https://youtu.be/FAY_9aQMVbQ

    EliteCommInc , says: May 16, 2017 at 12:57 pm
    Avoiding the minutia.

    I think it should go without saying that intelligence is a sensitive business and protecting those who operate in its murky waters is important to having an effective agency.

    Of course the Pres of the US has a duty to do so.

    I have not yet read the post article. But I am doubtful that the executive had any intention of putting anyone in harms way. I am equally doubtful that this incident will. If the executive made an error in judgement, I am sure it will be dealt wit in an appropriate manner.

    I do wish he'd stop tweeting, though I get why its useful to him.

    I am more disturbed how this story got into the press. While, not an ally, I think we should in cooperation with other states. Because the Pres is not familiar with the protocols and language and I doubt any executive has been upon entering office, I have no doubt he may be reacting or overreacting to the overreaction of others.

    Here's a word. We have no business engaging n the overthrow of another government that is no threat to the US or her allies, and that includes Israel. Syria is not. And we should cease and desist getting further entangled in the messes of the previous executive, his Sec of State and those organizations who seem to e playing with the life blood of the US by engaging if unnecessary risks.

    Just another brier brushfire of a single tumble weed to add to the others in the hope that setting fires in trashcans will make the current exec go away or at least engage in a mea culpa and sign more checks in the mess that is the middle east policy objective that remains a dead end.

    __________

    And if I understand the crumbs given the data provided by the Post, the Times and this article, if one had ill will for the source of said information, they have pretty good idea where to start.

    Cachip , says: May 16, 2017 at 1:12 pm
    How do you know it wasn't intended as pure misdirection?
    Brian W , says: May 16, 2017 at 1:20 pm
    January 10, 2014 *500* Years of History Shows that Mass Spying Is Always Aimed at Crushing Dissent

    No matter which government conducts mass surveillance, they also do it to crush dissent, and then give a false rationale for why they're doing it.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/500-years-of-history-shows-that-mass-spying-is-always-aimed-at-crushing-dissent/5364462

    Johann , says: May 16, 2017 at 1:54 pm
    Politics is now directly endangering innocent civilians. Because of the leaks and its publication, ISIS for sure now knows that there is an information leak out of their organization. They will now re-compartmentalize and may be successful in breaking that information leak. Innocent airline passenger civilians, American, Russian, or whoever may die as a result. Russia and the US are both fighting ISIS. We are de facto allies in that fight whether some people like it or not. Time to get over it.
    EliteCommInc. , says: May 16, 2017 at 2:44 pm
    Having read the article, uhhh, excuse me, but unlike personal secrets. The purpose of intel is to use to or keep on hand for some-other date. But of that information is related to the security of our interests and certainly a cooperative relationship with Russia is in our interest. Because in the convoluted fight with ISIS/ISIL, Russia is an ally.

    What this belies is the mess of the intelligence community. If in fact, the Russians intend to take a source who provided information that was helpful to them, it would be a peculiar twist of strategic action. The response does tell us that we are in some manner in league with ISIS/ISIL or their supporters so deep that there is a need to protect them, from what is anybody's guess. Because if the information is accurate, I doubt the Russians are going to about killing the source, but rather improving their airline security.

    But if we are in fact attempting to remove Pres Assad, and are in league with ISIS/ISIL in doing so - I get why the advocates of such nonsense might be in a huff. So ISIS/ISISL our one time foe and now our sometimes friend . . .

    Good greif . . .

    Pres Trump is the least of muy concerns when it coes to security.

    Some relevant material on intel:

    http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/the-administration/327413-how-the-intel-community-was-turned-into-a-political

    http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/intelligence-failures-more-profound-than-president-admits/

    But if I were Pres Trump, I might steer clear of Russia for a while to stop feeding the beast.

    Kurt Gayle , says: May 16, 2017 at 3:28 pm
    Philip, back on July 23, 2014, you explained in "How ISIS Evades the CIA" "the inability of the United States government to anticipate the ISIS offensive that has succeeded in taking control of a large part of Iraq." You explained why the CIA had to date had no success in infiltrating ISIS.

    You continued: "Given U.S. intelligence's probable limited physical access to any actual terrorist groups operating in Syria or Iraq any direct attempt to penetrate the organization through placing a source inside would be difficult in the extreme. Such efforts would most likely be dependent on the assistance of friendly intelligence services in Turkey or Jordan. Both Turkey and Jordan have reported that terrorists have entered their countries by concealing themselves in the large numbers of refugees that the conflict in Syria has produced, and both are concerned as they understand full well that groups like ISIS will be targeting them next. Some of the infiltrating adherents to radical groups have certainly been identified and detained by the respective intelligence services of those two countries, and undoubtedly efforts have been made to 'turn' some of those in custody to send them back into Syria (and more recently Iraq) to report on what is taking place. Depending on what arrangements might have been made to coordinate the operations, the 'take' might well be shared with the United States and other friendly governments."

    You then describe the difficulties faced by a Turkish or Jordanian agent trying to infiltrate ISIS: "But seeding is very much hit or miss, as someone who has been out of the loop of his organization might have difficulty working his way back in. He will almost certainly be regarded with some suspicion by his peers and would be searched and watched after his return, meaning that he could not take back with him any sophisticated communications devices no matter how cleverly they are concealed. This would make communicating any information obtained back to one's case officers in Jordan or Turkey difficult or even impossible."

    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-isis-evades-the-cia/

    Notwithstanding how "difficult or even impossible" such an operation would be - and using the New York Times as your only source for a lot of otherwise completely unsubstantiated information – and admitting that "this is sheer speculation on my part" – you say that "it is logical to assume that the countries that have provided numerous recruits for ISIS [Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia] would have used that fact as cover to carry out a seeding operation to introduce some of their own agents into the ISIS organization."

    Back to the New York Times as your only source, you say that "the Times is also reporting that Trump provided to Lavrov 'granular' information on the city in Syria where the information was collected that will possibly enable the Russians or ISIS to identify the actual source, with devastating consequences."

    But having ventured into the far reaches of that line of speculation, you do admit that "that projection may be overreach." Indeed!

    You go on to characterize the events of the White House meeting with the Russians as "the latest gaffe from the White House" – even though there is absolutely no evidence (outside of the unsubstantiated reports of the Washington Post and the New York Times) that anything to do with the meeting was a "gaffe" – and you further speculate that "it could well damage an important intelligence liaison relationship in the Middle East."

    That is, again, pure speculation on your part.

    One valuable lesson that you've taught TAC readers over the years, Philip: That we need to carefully examine the sources of information – and the sources of dis-information.

    KennethF , says: May 16, 2017 at 3:33 pm
    Yet again from Giraldi: the problem isn't that the POTUS is ignorant and incompetent; we should all be more concerned that the Deep State is leaking the proof.
    collin , says: May 16, 2017 at 4:12 pm
    In general I agree with you, but the media was NEVER concerned about the treatment of sensitive material from HRC!
    charley , says: May 16, 2017 at 4:51 pm
    I think he needs to cut back on intelligence sharing with Israel. They do just what the hell they want to do with anything.
    Brad Kain , says: May 16, 2017 at 5:03 pm
    Trump has now essentially confirmed the story from the Post and contradicted the denials from McMaster – he shared specific intelligence to demonstrate his willingness to work with the Russians. Moreover, it seems that Israel was the ally that provided this intelligence. The author and others will defend this, but I can only see this as a reckless and impulsive decision that only causes Russia and our allies to trust the US less.

    [May 16, 2017] Trump facing shark tank feeding frenzy from military industrial media

    Notable quotes:
    "... o start with, again, this is from the Washington Post and an unnamed source. So you do have to doubt the accuracy of the information knowing the vendetta the Washington Post and other mainstream media have against the Trump administration and against President Trump personally and how much they want to disrupt any kind of cooperation with Russia against the terrorist threat. ..."
    "... There is a whole structure of what people call the 'Deep State' establishment, the oligarchy – whatever you want to call it. Of course, the mainstream media is part of this. It includes all the Democrats, who were very easy on the Soviet Union when it was Communist. But now that it is not Communist under Russia, they have a deep, very deep hatred of Russia, and they don't want any kind of rapprochement with Russia. ..."
    "... Let's not play the game of dividing the so-called mainstream media from its owners. The mainstream media of the US is owned lock, stock, and barrel by the military industrial complex. If you want to call it anything, you can call it the 'military media.' The military makes money by making war; they buy the media to promote war. They use the media to promote propaganda in favor of war. And that is where we get into the mess we're in today. Because we have a president who is a businessman and would prefer to make money, and would prefer to put people to work in any industry other than war. The military industrial media in the United States is depending on being able to speak to a captive audience of uninformed viewers The military controls the media because they own them. ..."
    May 16, 2017 | www.rt.com
    There are elements of the 'Deep State' here who are very opposed to the things Donald Trump said during the campaign. They don't want to cooperate with Russia, Jim Jatras, former US diplomat, told RT.

    Political analyst John Bosnitch joins the discussion. US President Trump said his White House meeting last week with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov ranged from airline safety to terrorism. A Washington Post story, however, has accused the American leader of revealing classified information to Russian officials.

    RT: What's your take on it? Is the media on to something big here?

    Jim Jatras: To start with, again, this is from the Washington Post and an unnamed source. So you do have to doubt the accuracy of the information knowing the vendetta the Washington Post and other mainstream media have against the Trump administration and against President Trump personally and how much they want to disrupt any kind of cooperation with Russia against the terrorist threat. I would say that was the first thing.

    'I was in the room. It didn't happen' - National Security Advisor H.R. #McMaster https://t.co/gVIHigqXaT

    - RT America (@RT_America) 15 мая 2017 г.

    Second, as Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Deputy of National Security Adviser Dina Powell, who were both in the meeting, have stated since the Washington Post article appeared – there was nothing discussed with Mr. [Sergey] Lavrov and Mr. [Sergey] Kislyak that compromised what they call "sources and methods" that would lead to any kind of intelligence vulnerability on the part of the US. But rather this was all part of a discussion of common action against ISIS. Those are the first things to be noted

    Let's remember that there are elements of what we call the 'Deep State' here who are very opposed to the things Donald Trump said during the campaign. They don't want to cooperate with the Russians; they don't want improved relations with Moscow. And let's be honest, they have a very strong investment in the various jihadist groups that we have supported for the past six years trying to overthrow the legitimate government in Damascus. I am sure there are people – maybe in the National Security Council, maybe in the Staff, maybe in the State Department – who are finding some way to try and discredit the Trump administration. The question is where is the investigation into these leaks? Who is going to hold these people accountable?

    RT: The mainstream media is going on little more than 'anonymous sources.' Could it have a hidden agenda here?

    JJ: Of course. In fact, I would even go further. I wouldn't be at all surprised if President Trump timed his firing with the FBI Director James Comey – what some people even pointed out – he himself in one of his tweets says "drain the swamp." One of the first elements was getting rid of the principals of the Deep State who have been trying to hijack his policy; that he did this precisely because he was meeting with Mr. Lavrov and Mr. Kislyak the next day. He's shoving it in their face, saying: "I am moving forward with my program." And I think that's the reason we're getting this hysteria building around the Russians, the Russians, the Russians when what we need is to move forward on an America First national security policy.

    'US policy today: Aircraft, where co-pilots try to override pilots' (Op-Edge) https://t.co/x153yPtqVS

    - RT (@RT_com) 16 мая 2017 г.

    RT: Do you think mainstream media is a part of something big and controlled all over from the top?

    JJ: Absolutely. There is a whole structure of what people call the 'Deep State' establishment, the oligarchy – whatever you want to call it. Of course, the mainstream media is part of this. It includes all the Democrats, who were very easy on the Soviet Union when it was Communist. But now that it is not Communist under Russia, they have a deep, very deep hatred of Russia, and they don't want any kind of rapprochement with Russia.

    And unfortunately, there are Republicans who sympathize with this agenda, as well. I think we can say at this point that Mr. Trump is only partially in control of the apparatus of government. He does not yet have complete control and that there is a frantic effort by these elements to make sure he is not able to get control of the American government and carry out the policies he talked about.

    #Trump says he had 'absolute right' to share data on flight safety & terrorism with Russia https://t.co/U6h9FW2ZKy pic.twitter.com/eFBIRhVaI3

    - RT (@RT_com) 16 мая 2017 г.
    The 'military industrial media'

    The mainstream media of the US is owned lock, stock, and barrel by the military industrial complex. If you want to call it anything, you can call it the 'military media,' John Bosnitch , political analyst, told RT.

    RT: The media has run with this. Are they on to something big here?

    John Bosnitch: I wouldn't say so. I've worked in this field for three decades. I don't see a scrap of evidence here. But I do see like a shark tank of media feeding – no evidence.

    RT: Trump attacked Hillary Clinton as being unreliable with state secrets. Can the same now be said of him?

    JB: Trump is the chief executive officer of the United States of America. As the chief executive officer of the country, he has full legal and constitutional authority to use state secrets in the conduct of diplomacy. He's also the chief diplomat of the country. So there is a big difference between the chief executive officer deciding what information he can share in conducting of state policy, and Hillary Clinton deciding as a cabinet minister which laws she chooses to obey, and which ones she doesn't.

    'You cannot reset:' No way for US & Russia to start over 'with clean slate' – #Tillerson https://t.co/vC71YbLpQL

    - RT (@RT_com) 15 мая 2017 г.

    RT: The mainstream media is going on little more than 'anonymous sources'... could it have a hidden agenda here?

    JB: I don't see any other possibility, whatsoever. Let's not play the game of dividing the so-called mainstream media from its owners. The mainstream media of the US is owned lock, stock, and barrel by the military industrial complex. If you want to call it anything, you can call it the 'military media.' The military makes money by making war; they buy the media to promote war. They use the media to promote propaganda in favor of war. And that is where we get into the mess we're in today. Because we have a president who is a businessman and would prefer to make money, and would prefer to put people to work in any industry other than war. The military industrial media in the United States is depending on being able to speak to a captive audience of uninformed viewers The military controls the media because they own them.

    The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

    [May 16, 2017] The Real Meaning of Sensitive Intelligence by Philip Giraldi

    Notable quotes:
    "... what astonished me was how quickly the media interpreted its use in the hearings to mean that the conversations and emails that apparently were recorded or intercepted involving Trump associates and assorted Russians as "sensitive contacts" meant that they were necessarily inappropriate, dangerous, or even illegal. ..."
    "... The Post is unfortunately also providing ISIS with more information than it "needs to know" to make its story more dramatic, further compromising the source. ..."
    "... McMaster described the report as "false" and informed the Post that "The president and the foreign minister reviewed common threats from terrorist organizations to include threats to aviation. At no time were any intelligence sources or methods discussed and no military operations were disclosed that were not already known publicly." Tillerson commented that "the nature of specific threats were (sic) discussed, but they did not discuss sources, methods, or military operations." ..."
    "... The media will no doubt be seeking to magnify the potential damage done while the White House goes into damage control mode. ..."
    "... In this case, the intelligence shared with Lavrov appears to be related to specific ISIS threats, which may include planned operations against civilian aircraft, judging from Trump's characteristically after-hours tweets defending his behavior, as well as other reporting. ..."
    "... The New York Times , in its own reporting of the story, initially stated that the information on ISIS did not come from an NSA or CIA operation, and later reported that the source was Israel. ..."
    "... And President Trump has one more thing to think about. No matter what damage comes out of the Lavrov discussion, he has a bigger problem. There are apparently multiple leakers on his National Security Council. ..."
    "... You have McMaster himself who categorically denies any exposure of sources and methods – he was there in person and witness to the talks – and a cloud of unknown witnesses not present speculating, without reference to McMaster or Tillerson's testimony, about what might have happened. This is the American Media in a nutshell, the Infinite Circle Jerk. ..."
    "... I am more disturbed how this story got into the press. While, not an ally, I think we should in cooperation with other states. Because the Pres is not familiar with the protocols and language and I doubt any executive has been upon entering office, I have no doubt he may be reacting or overreacting to the overreaction of others. ..."
    "... Here's a word. We have no business engaging n the overthrow of another government that is no threat to the US or her allies, and that includes Israel. Syria is not. And we should cease and desist getting further entangled in the messes of the previous executive, his Sec of State and those organizations who seem to e playing with the life blood of the US by engaging if unnecessary risks. ..."
    "... And if I understand the crumbs given the data provided by the Post, the Times and this article, if one had ill will for the source of said information, they have pretty good idea where to start. ..."
    "... In general I agree with you, but the media was NEVER concerned about the treatment of sensitive material from HRC! ..."
    "... I think he needs to cut back on intelligence sharing with Israel. They do just what the hell they want to do with anything. ..."
    May 16, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com
    Intelligence agencies and senior government officials tend to use a lot of jargon. Laced with acronyms, this language sometimes does not translate very well into journalese when it hits the media.

    For example, I experienced a sense of disorientation two weeks ago over the word "sensitive" as used by several senators, Sally Yates, and James Clapper during committee testimony into Russiagate. "Sensitive" has, of course, a number of meanings. But what astonished me was how quickly the media interpreted its use in the hearings to mean that the conversations and emails that apparently were recorded or intercepted involving Trump associates and assorted Russians as "sensitive contacts" meant that they were necessarily inappropriate, dangerous, or even illegal.

    When Yates and Clapper were using "sensitive" thirteen times in the 86 page transcript of the Senate hearings, they were referring to the medium rather than the message. They were both acknowledging that the sources of the information were intelligence related, sometimes referred to as "sensitive" by intelligence professionals and government insiders as a shorthand way to describe that they are "need to know" material derived from either classified "methods" or foreign-liaison partners. That does not mean that the information contained is either good or bad or even true or false, but merely a way of expressing that the information must be protected because of where it came from or how it was developed, hence the "sensitivity."

    The word also popped up this week in a Washington Post exclusive report alleging that the president had, in his recent meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, gone too far while also suggesting that the source of a highly classified government program might be inferred from the context of what was actually revealed. The Post describes how

    The information Trump relayed had been provided by a U.S. partner through an intelligence-sharing arrangement considered so sensitive that details have been withheld from allies and tightly restricted even within the U.S. government, officials said. The partner had not given the United States permission to share the material with Russia, and officials said that Trump's decision to do so risks cooperation from an ally that has access to the inner workings of the Islamic State.

    The Post is unfortunately also providing ISIS with more information than it "needs to know" to make its story more dramatic, further compromising the source. Furthermore, it should be understood that the paper is extremely hostile to Trump, the story is as always based on anonymous sources, and the revelation comes on top of another unverifiable Post article claiming that the Russians might have sought to sneak a recording device into the White House during the visit.

    No one is denying that the president discussed ISIS in some detail with Lavrov, but National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, both of whom were present at the meeting, have denied that any sources or methods were revealed while reviewing with the Russians available intelligence. McMaster described the report as "false" and informed the Post that "The president and the foreign minister reviewed common threats from terrorist organizations to include threats to aviation. At no time were any intelligence sources or methods discussed and no military operations were disclosed that were not already known publicly." Tillerson commented that "the nature of specific threats were (sic) discussed, but they did not discuss sources, methods, or military operations."

    So the question becomes to what extent can an intelligence mechanism be identified from the information that it produces. That is, to a certain extent, a judgment call. The president is able on his own authority to declassify anything, so the legality of his sharing information with Russia cannot be challenged. What is at question is the decision-making by an inexperienced president who may have been showing off to an important foreign visitor by revealing details of intelligence that should have remained secret. The media will no doubt be seeking to magnify the potential damage done while the White House goes into damage control mode.

    The media is claiming that the specific discussion with Lavrov that is causing particular concern is related to a so-called Special Access Program , or SAP, sometimes referred to as "code word information." An SAP is an operation that generates intelligence that requires special protection because of where or how it is produced. In this case, the intelligence shared with Lavrov appears to be related to specific ISIS threats, which may include planned operations against civilian aircraft, judging from Trump's characteristically after-hours tweets defending his behavior, as well as other reporting.

    There have also been reports that the White House followed up on its Lavrov meeting with a routine review of what had taken place. Several National Security Council members observed that some of the information shared with the Russians was far too sensitive to disseminate within the U.S. intelligence community. This led to the placing of urgent calls to NSA and CIA to brief them on what had been said.

    Based on the recipients of the calls alone, one might surmise that the source of the information would appear to be either a foreign-intelligence service or a technical collection operation, or even both combined. The Post claims that the originator of the intelligence did not clear its sharing with the Russians and raises the possibility that no more information of that type will be provided at all in light of the White House's apparent carelessness in its use. The New York Times , in its own reporting of the story, initially stated that the information on ISIS did not come from an NSA or CIA operation, and later reported that the source was Israel.

    The Times is also reporting that Trump provided to Lavrov "granular" information on the city in Syria where the information was collected that will possibly enable the Russians or ISIS to identify the actual source, with devastating consequences. That projection may be overreach, but the fact is that the latest gaffe from the White House could well damage an important intelligence liaison relationship in the Middle East while reinforcing the widely held impression that Washington does not know how to keep a secret. It will also create the impression that Donald Trump, out of ignorance or hubris, exhibits a certain recklessness in his dealing with classified information, a failing that he once attributed to his presidential opponent Hillary Clinton.

    And President Trump has one more thing to think about. No matter what damage comes out of the Lavrov discussion, he has a bigger problem. There are apparently multiple leakers on his National Security Council.

    Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer, is executive director of the Council for the National Interest.

    This article has been updated to reflect news developments.

    Thymoleontas, says: May 16, 2017 at 12:33 pm

    " The latest gaffe from the White House could well damage an important intelligence liaison relationship in the Middle East "

    On the other hand, it also represents closer collaboration with Russia–even if unintended–which is an improvement on the status quo ante and, not to mention, key to ending the conflict in Syria.

    Dies Irae , says: May 16, 2017 at 12:38 pm
    You have McMaster himself who categorically denies any exposure of sources and methods – he was there in person and witness to the talks – and a cloud of unknown witnesses not present speculating, without reference to McMaster or Tillerson's testimony, about what might have happened. This is the American Media in a nutshell, the Infinite Circle Jerk.
    MM , says: May 16, 2017 at 12:44 pm
    Out of my depth, but was Trump working within the framework, maybe a bit outside if the story is true, of the Joint Implementation Group the Obama administration created last year with Russia?

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/r/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2016/07/13/Editorial-Opinion/Graphics/terms_of_reference_for_the_Joint_Implementation_Group.pdf?tid=a_inl

    Also, I recall reading that the prior administration promised Russia ISIS intel. Not sure if that ever happened, but I doubt they'd have made it public or leak anything to the press.

    Brian W , says: May 16, 2017 at 12:57 pm
    Apr 21, 2017 Ike and McCarthy: Dwight Eisenhower's Secret Campaign against Joseph McCarthy

    Author David A. Nichols reveals how President Dwight D. Eisenhower masterminded the downfall of the anti-Communist demagogue Senator Joseph McCarthy.

    https://youtu.be/FAY_9aQMVbQ

    EliteCommInc , says: May 16, 2017 at 12:57 pm
    Avoiding the minutia.

    I think it should go without saying that intelligence is a sensitive business and protecting those who operate in its murky waters is important to having an effective agency.

    Of course the Pres of the US has a duty to do so.

    I have not yet read the post article. But I am doubtful that the executive had any intention of putting anyone in harms way. I am equally doubtful that this incident will. If the executive made an error in judgement, I am sure it will be dealt wit in an appropriate manner.

    I do wish he'd stop tweeting, though I get why its useful to him.

    I am more disturbed how this story got into the press. While, not an ally, I think we should in cooperation with other states. Because the Pres is not familiar with the protocols and language and I doubt any executive has been upon entering office, I have no doubt he may be reacting or overreacting to the overreaction of others.

    Here's a word. We have no business engaging n the overthrow of another government that is no threat to the US or her allies, and that includes Israel. Syria is not. And we should cease and desist getting further entangled in the messes of the previous executive, his Sec of State and those organizations who seem to e playing with the life blood of the US by engaging if unnecessary risks.

    Just another brier brushfire of a single tumble weed to add to the others in the hope that setting fires in trashcans will make the current exec go away or at least engage in a mea culpa and sign more checks in the mess that is the middle east policy objective that remains a dead end.

    __________

    And if I understand the crumbs given the data provided by the Post, the Times and this article, if one had ill will for the source of said information, they have pretty good idea where to start.

    Cachip , says: May 16, 2017 at 1:12 pm
    How do you know it wasn't intended as pure misdirection?
    Brian W , says: May 16, 2017 at 1:20 pm
    January 10, 2014 *500* Years of History Shows that Mass Spying Is Always Aimed at Crushing Dissent

    No matter which government conducts mass surveillance, they also do it to crush dissent, and then give a false rationale for why they're doing it.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/500-years-of-history-shows-that-mass-spying-is-always-aimed-at-crushing-dissent/5364462

    Johann , says: May 16, 2017 at 1:54 pm
    Politics is now directly endangering innocent civilians. Because of the leaks and its publication, ISIS for sure now knows that there is an information leak out of their organization. They will now re-compartmentalize and may be successful in breaking that information leak. Innocent airline passenger civilians, American, Russian, or whoever may die as a result. Russia and the US are both fighting ISIS. We are de facto allies in that fight whether some people like it or not. Time to get over it.
    EliteCommInc. , says: May 16, 2017 at 2:44 pm
    Having read the article, uhhh, excuse me, but unlike personal secrets. The purpose of intel is to use to or keep on hand for some-other date. But of that information is related to the security of our interests and certainly a cooperative relationship with Russia is in our interest. Because in the convoluted fight with ISIS/ISIL, Russia is an ally.

    What this belies is the mess of the intelligence community. If in fact, the Russians intend to take a source who provided information that was helpful to them, it would be a peculiar twist of strategic action. The response does tell us that we are in some manner in league with ISIS/ISIL or their supporters so deep that there is a need to protect them, from what is anybody's guess. Because if the information is accurate, I doubt the Russians are going to about killing the source, but rather improving their airline security.

    But if we are in fact attempting to remove Pres Assad, and are in league with ISIS/ISIL in doing so - I get why the advocates of such nonsense might be in a huff. So ISIS/ISISL our one time foe and now our sometimes friend . . .

    Good greif . . .

    Pres Trump is the least of muy concerns when it coes to security.

    Some relevant material on intel:

    http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/the-administration/327413-how-the-intel-community-was-turned-into-a-political

    http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/intelligence-failures-more-profound-than-president-admits/

    But if I were Pres Trump, I might steer clear of Russia for a while to stop feeding the beast.

    Kurt Gayle , says: May 16, 2017 at 3:28 pm
    Philip, back on July 23, 2014, you explained in "How ISIS Evades the CIA" "the inability of the United States government to anticipate the ISIS offensive that has succeeded in taking control of a large part of Iraq." You explained why the CIA had to date had no success in infiltrating ISIS.

    You continued: "Given U.S. intelligence's probable limited physical access to any actual terrorist groups operating in Syria or Iraq any direct attempt to penetrate the organization through placing a source inside would be difficult in the extreme. Such efforts would most likely be dependent on the assistance of friendly intelligence services in Turkey or Jordan. Both Turkey and Jordan have reported that terrorists have entered their countries by concealing themselves in the large numbers of refugees that the conflict in Syria has produced, and both are concerned as they understand full well that groups like ISIS will be targeting them next. Some of the infiltrating adherents to radical groups have certainly been identified and detained by the respective intelligence services of those two countries, and undoubtedly efforts have been made to 'turn' some of those in custody to send them back into Syria (and more recently Iraq) to report on what is taking place. Depending on what arrangements might have been made to coordinate the operations, the 'take' might well be shared with the United States and other friendly governments."

    You then describe the difficulties faced by a Turkish or Jordanian agent trying to infiltrate ISIS: "But seeding is very much hit or miss, as someone who has been out of the loop of his organization might have difficulty working his way back in. He will almost certainly be regarded with some suspicion by his peers and would be searched and watched after his return, meaning that he could not take back with him any sophisticated communications devices no matter how cleverly they are concealed. This would make communicating any information obtained back to one's case officers in Jordan or Turkey difficult or even impossible."

    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-isis-evades-the-cia/

    Notwithstanding how "difficult or even impossible" such an operation would be - and using the New York Times as your only source for a lot of otherwise completely unsubstantiated information – and admitting that "this is sheer speculation on my part" – you say that "it is logical to assume that the countries that have provided numerous recruits for ISIS [Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia] would have used that fact as cover to carry out a seeding operation to introduce some of their own agents into the ISIS organization."

    Back to the New York Times as your only source, you say that "the Times is also reporting that Trump provided to Lavrov 'granular' information on the city in Syria where the information was collected that will possibly enable the Russians or ISIS to identify the actual source, with devastating consequences."

    But having ventured into the far reaches of that line of speculation, you do admit that "that projection may be overreach." Indeed!

    You go on to characterize the events of the White House meeting with the Russians as "the latest gaffe from the White House" – even though there is absolutely no evidence (outside of the unsubstantiated reports of the Washington Post and the New York Times) that anything to do with the meeting was a "gaffe" – and you further speculate that "it could well damage an important intelligence liaison relationship in the Middle East."

    That is, again, pure speculation on your part.

    One valuable lesson that you've taught TAC readers over the years, Philip: That we need to carefully examine the sources of information – and the sources of dis-information.

    KennethF , says: May 16, 2017 at 3:33 pm
    Yet again from Giraldi: the problem isn't that the POTUS is ignorant and incompetent; we should all be more concerned that the Deep State is leaking the proof.
    collin , says: May 16, 2017 at 4:12 pm
    In general I agree with you, but the media was NEVER concerned about the treatment of sensitive material from HRC!
    charley , says: May 16, 2017 at 4:51 pm
    I think he needs to cut back on intelligence sharing with Israel. They do just what the hell they want to do with anything.
    Brad Kain , says: May 16, 2017 at 5:03 pm
    Trump has now essentially confirmed the story from the Post and contradicted the denials from McMaster – he shared specific intelligence to demonstrate his willingness to work with the Russians. Moreover, it seems that Israel was the ally that provided this intelligence. The author and others will defend this, but I can only see this as a reckless and impulsive decision that only causes Russia and our allies to trust the US less.

    [May 14, 2017] Turkish-American relations at crossroads by M.K. Bhadrakumar

    May 14, 2017 | www.atimes.com

    When President Donald Trump receives President Recep Erdogan on Tuesday at the White House, his legendary deal-making prowess will be on trial.

    Trump has not been in a tearing hurry to receive Erdogan. During the first 100 days of his presidency, Trump received the leaders of Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Jordan (twice), Iraq and Palestine. Yet, none of them belongs to a NATO member country and or is a crucial "swing" state in Trump's messianic war against the ISIS, as Turkey is.

    Could it be Erdogan's dalliance with the ISIS in the past that put a dampened Trump's enthusiasm for this "strongman"? But then, Saudi Arabia too was promoting al-Qaeda groups in Syria.

    Or, was it Erdogan's growing friendship with Russian President Vladimir Putin that discouraged Trump? But then, Trump greeted Egypt's President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi in the White House as an old ally.

    Clearly, the only good reason could be that Trump deliberately decided that there is a time for everything – even for meeting Erdogan. Trump thoughtfully let the Turkish referendum on constitutional reform run its course first. Trump now has the answer.

    Erdogan extracted a 'yes' vote in the referendum alright, and is set to concentrate executive power in his hands, but, paradoxically, he is a wounded man, having lost the referendum vote in all major cities, especially Istanbul, which has been his citadel in living memory. Erdogan barely scraped through.

    On the other hand, an invigorated German-French axis following the magnificent election victory of Emmanuel Macron means that a consolidated EU pressure is building on Erdogan to curb his authoritarian drift. Erdogan knows that a rupture of Turkey's ties to the West would have grave economic and political consequences.

    Meanwhile, if Erdogan had calculated that he could play off the US and Russia, that is also not to be. Trump simply outflanked him by opening a line to Putin regarding Syria before he met Erdogan.

    Erdogan has been naïve. The Kremlin won't risk annoying Trump. Détente with the US is an overriding concern for Russia.

    All things taken into account, therefore, Trump did the right thing to meet Erdogan in the fullness of time. Trump's decision to sign the executive order allowing the Pentagon to transfer heavy weapons to the Kurdish militia right on the eve of Erdogan's visit underscores it.

    Trump is looking for a quick victory in Raqqa. The liberation of Raqqa will be prime time news in America. Who'd pay attention anymore to "a showboat" like James Comey when the pictures are beamed from Raqqa into the living rooms in America?

    The Pentagon commanders estimate that the Kurdish militia with US air support will liberate Raqqa successfully and swiftly. Indeed, latest reports suggest that the Kurdish militia has reached within two kilometers of Raqqa city limits.

    Simply put, Erdogan who was hoping to dissuade Trump from aligning with the Kurds will now have to discuss concerns over post-liberation Raqqa. The ground beneath Erdogan's feet has dramatically shifted.

    He still can resort to strategic defiance by resorting to air strikes against the Kurdish militia, similar to the attacks staged by Turkish Air Force on April 25 on the town of Sinjar (Iraqi Kurdistan) and on targets in the Karachok Mountains (north-eastern Syria).

    However, the US and Russian deployments to the Kurdish cantons in northern Syrian show that both Washington and Moscow have factored in such a possibility and have a tacit understanding that only their physical presence might act as a deterrent against Erdogan's adventurism.

    This opens up a tantalizing prospect – US and Russia having an unwritten division of labor to "tame" Erdogan. The Russian diplomacy has shown masterly skill in shepherding Turkish policies away from covert backing for extremist groups towards new directions that help to end the fighting in Syria. The Russia-US cooperation in Syria drastically curbs Erdogan's elbow room.

    What are Erdogan's options? Trump has put him out of business since the US is no longer using Turkish proxies to push the 'regime change' agenda in Syria. The US' retrenchment affects Saudi and Qatari policies, too.

    Will Erdogan retaliate by shutting down Incirlik air base? Such a possibility exists but is unlikely. At any rate, Washington is focused on the liberation of Raqqa, and access to Incirlik is a secondary issue at the moment.

    Besides, Erdogan will be wary of provoking Trump. Apart from the discord over the extradition of Islamist preacher Fetullah Gulen, US is keeping under detention the top executive of Halkbank Mehmet Hakan Attila whom it implicates in the sensational criminal case (which is also linked to Erdogan's immediate family members) regarding abuse of the US financial system to conduct fraudulent transactions on behalf of Iranian entities.

    The bottom line is that Erdogan is running out of options and may be coming under compulsion, finally, to (re)open his own channels to the Kurdish groups. Indeed, Turkey got along well with the leadership of Iraqi Kurdistan and a similar deal can be worked out with Syrian Kurds.

    Being the consummate pragmatist that he is, Erdogan may well decide to pick up the threads of the peace process with Kurds from where he summarily left them in 2015 due to compulsions over forthcoming electoral battles culminating in the March referendum to transform Turkey into a presidential system.

    Significantly, Erdogan has reacted with extraordinary restraint to the Pentagon move to arm Kurds in Syria. He is brooding over his options. Trump can encourage him to seek a deal with Kurds. It may not be the mother of all deals, but a historic deal nonetheless, which will go a long way to stabilizing Syria and the Middle East.

    [May 10, 2017] Will Trumps Firing of FBI Director James Comey Be His Saturday Night Massacre? (Updated)

    Notable quotes:
    "... More specifically, whether true or not, the Democrats are likely to use this move to claim that Comey was fired for digging too hard into Trump-Russia connections ..."
    "... The official story is that attorney general Jeff Session and his deputy attorney general Rosenstein wanted Comey's head. And since the FBI does report to the Department of Justice, Sessions is within his rights to demand the firing of the head of the FBI and expect the President to respect his request. So if this proves to have been a reckless move, it will reflect Trump's poor judgment in selecting Sessions as his AG, who was a controversial pick from the outset. ..."
    "... I support the firing of Comey, and would have supported it if done by Clinton, Obama, Sanders or Trump. His actions wrt "intent" in handling classified information, and his unilateral (in public at least) decision on leveling charges against Clinton (which was not his job) render him unfit for office. ..."
    "... Both the Right and the Left are disinclined to believe in or care about any scandal involving Russia. And it was actually the Clinton partisans who demanded Comey's head in the first place–and we all know the Clinton history with independent prosecutors. So the Democrats who whine about this or call for an independent prosecutor just end up looking like the partisan hypocrites they are. ..."
    "... What this does, after a few days, is get the Russian hacking investigation out of the news, so everyone can focus firmly on debating how many people need to lose their health care to satisfy the tax-cut gods. ..."
    "... I'm already seeing Twitter Dems doubling down on the Russia stuff. The Russia hysteria is setting us up so that there will be absolutely no political incentive for future Presidents to be friendly with Russia. I wonder if they don't know (or just don't care) that they aren't going to be able to put this genie back in the bottle after Trump is gone. ..."
    "... All it does is reinforce existing bias. Dems are even more convinced about Russian ties, Reps are even more concerned the wheels are off, TrumpNation is even more convinced there's an evil plot out to get their guy. And the media has a click frenzy to drive ad rates. ..."
    "... being anti Russian is in the very DNA of the repubs. Would the repubs turn on Trump because Trump isn't fervently anti Russian enough? I very much think so .they have a good repub vice president that I am sure ALL of them much prefer .. ..."
    "... Its important to remember the disdain the country has for Versailles in general. Trump became President despite universal support for Hillary and to a lesser extent Jeb on the shores of the Potomac.The Republican Id is dedicated to hating Democrats. Bill Clinton and Obama could play Weekend at Bernie's with Reagan corpse and kill Social Security, and Republicans would still hate them. ..."
    "... Communists and other boogeymen of the past are secondary to this drive. The Versailles Republicans, a different breed, could never deliver Republican votes outside of Northern Virginia for one simple reason their base despises Democrats more than they might hate Stalin. They will never give credit to a Democrat. Remember the liberal whining about how Republicans never gave Obama credit for his right wing policy pushes. ..."
    "... The other key point to the GOP voter relationship is Trump WON. He beat Jeb and his sheepdogs and then he beat Hillary (Hillary and the Dems lost). Trump is the their winner so to speak. As long as Trump is denounced by the usual suspects for bizarre reasons, Trump will maintain his hold. ..."
    "... fbi sorta sat on gulen charter school investigation and it would certainly help emperor trompe and prince erdo relationship if Fethu found his old self on an express flight to Ankara considering the bean "kurd" thing recently added on the takeout menu ..."
    "... People are fed up. Savings & Loan mess & Iran Contra & & & & yawn Wall Street destroys the economy & no one goes to jail, Medical Industrial Complex management bloodsuckers insure that sickness leads to penury ..."
    "... I am no fan of Comey. I think his self-righteousness makes him a dangerous FBI Director and a loose cannon. However, people who think this is going to hurt Trump are likely wrong. If Trump knows there's nothing in the Russia story, but he continues to string out the Democrats with it, then they're the ones who are going to look foolish after having invested so much political capital in it. ..."
    "... Since you can't prove a negative, the innuendo can continue ad nauseam. ..."
    "... I suspect the Democrats are unaware they are indirectly insulting the Trump voters by the Russian influence story.. They are in effect saying Trump voters were played by the "evil" Russians into voting for Trump, despite the 1Billion spend by Clinton and her considerable support in the US media. I don't imagine the Trump voters like this message. ..."
    "... If Trump indirectly destroys both the Democratic and Republican parties, he might rank as one of our more important Presidents, quite unintentionally. ..."
    "... Why doesnt he fire the top 10 layers of CIA instead? They are wreaking havoc for real everywhere domestically and abroad. ..."
    "... If this government ever became a tyranny, if a dictator ever took charge in this country, the technological capacity that the intelligence community has given the government could enable it to impose total tyranny, and there would be no way to fight back because the most careful effort to combine together in resistance to the government, no matter how privately it was done, is within the reach of the government to know. Such is the capability of this technology. ( ) ..."
    May 09, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
    Posted on May 9, 2017 by Yves Smith Trump's sudden and unexpected firing of FBI director James Comey is likely to damage Trump. The question is whether this move will simply serve as the basis for sowing further doubts in the mainstream media against Trump, or will dent Trump's standing with Republicans.

    Comey made an odd practice of making moves that were arguably procedurally improper in his handling of the Clinton e-mail investigation, but some favored Clinton while others were damaging, given an impression of impartiality to the general public via getting both parties riled with Comey at various points in time. And regardless of what one thinks of his political and legal judgment, Comey had a reputation of being a straight shooter.

    And more generally, the director of the FBI is perceived to be a role above the partisan fray. Firing him is fraught with danger; it has the potential of turning into in a Nixonian Saturday Night Massacre, where the firing of special prosecutor Archibald Cox led the press and public to see Nixon as desperate to stymie an investigation into Watergate charges. It was the archetypal "the coverup is worse than the crime".

    To minimize risk, Trump's would have needed to have engaged in a whispering campaign against Comey, or least have notified some key figures in Congress that this was about to happen and give the rationale for the turfing out. And it appears he did do that to at least a degree, in that (as you will see below), Lindsay Graham, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, made a statement supporting the firing. But given the surprised reaction in the press, it looks like any ground-sowing for this move was minimal. Caution and preparation don't rank high as Trump Administration priorities.

    More specifically, whether true or not, the Democrats are likely to use this move to claim that Comey was fired for digging too hard into Trump-Russia connections .

    We'll know more in the coming hours and days. The official story is that attorney general Jeff Session and his deputy attorney general Rosenstein wanted Comey's head. And since the FBI does report to the Department of Justice, Sessions is within his rights to demand the firing of the head of the FBI and expect the President to respect his request. So if this proves to have been a reckless move, it will reflect Trump's poor judgment in selecting Sessions as his AG, who was a controversial pick from the outset.

    From the Wall Street Journal :

    In a letter to Mr. Comey, the president wrote, "It is essential that we find new leadership for the FBI that restores public trust and confidence in its vital law enforcement mission."

    Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, a top member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, in a statement thanked Mr. Comey for his years of service to the country but said that a change in leadership at the bureau might be the best possible course of action.

    "Given the recent controversies surrounding the director, I believe a fresh start will serve the FBI and the nation well. I encourage the President to select the most qualified professional available who will serve our nation's interests," said Mr. Graham, a South Carolina Republican.

    Note that Sessions himself had been fired from the attorney general's office in the Clinton Administration. Clinton's attorney Janet Reno, who was the first to engage in large-scale firings of attorneys in the Department of Justice, also fired the head of the FBI. From Bloomberg :

    Comey, who has led an investigation into Russia's meddling during the 2016 election and any possible links to Trump aides and associates, is only the second FBI chief to have been fired. In 1993, President Bill Clinton and Attorney General Janet Reno dismissed William Sessions.

    Trump's decision means that he will get to nominate Comey's successor while the agency is deep into the Russia inquiry. The move quickly intensified Democratic calls for a special prosecutor.

    Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, a member of the Judiciary Committee, said in a statement that Trump "has catastrophically compromised the FBI's ongoing investigation of his own White House's ties to Russia. Not since Watergate have our legal systems been so threatened, and our faith in the independence and integrity of those systems so shaken."

    The Financial Times confirms that the Trump Administration didn't lay much groundwork with Congress :

    Mr Comey's sudden dismissal shocked Republicans and Democrats. Brendan Boyle, a Democratic congressman, said the "stunning" action "shows why we must have a special prosecutor like our nation did in Watergate".

    The proof of the pudding is whether Trump and Sessions will be able to ride out demands for a special prosecutor. Given how much noise and how little signal there has been, I would have though it was possible for Trump to tough this out. With the Democrats having peripheral figures like Carter Page as their supposed smoking guns, all they had was innuendo, amplified by the Mighty Wurlitzer of the media. But that may have gotten enough to Trump and his team to distort their judgment. Stay tuned.

    Update 5/10, 12:15 AM . The Hill reports Dems ask Justice Dept, FBI to 'preserve any and all files' on Comey firing / Despite much howling for blood in the comments section, some readers there were able to provide what I was looking for, which is whether Congress had any basis for getting the info. Here are the two key remarks:

    cm , May 9, 2017 at 7:42 pm

    I support the firing of Comey, and would have supported it if done by Clinton, Obama, Sanders or Trump. His actions wrt "intent" in handling classified information, and his unilateral (in public at least) decision on leveling charges against Clinton (which was not his job) render him unfit for office.

    Anyone opposing this firing should note they share opinions w/ John McCain, which ought to give any non-neocon pause

    WeakendSquire , May 9, 2017 at 7:44 pm

    Both the Right and the Left are disinclined to believe in or care about any scandal involving Russia. And it was actually the Clinton partisans who demanded Comey's head in the first place–and we all know the Clinton history with independent prosecutors. So the Democrats who whine about this or call for an independent prosecutor just end up looking like the partisan hypocrites they are.

    What this does, after a few days, is get the Russian hacking investigation out of the news, so everyone can focus firmly on debating how many people need to lose their health care to satisfy the tax-cut gods.

    Jim Haygood , May 9, 2017 at 8:01 pm

    The Scream:

    Senate Minority Whip Richard Durbin (D-IL) made the biggest impression, going to the Senate floor about an hour after the announcement to clearly outline the stakes.

    "Any attempt to stop or undermine this FBI investigation would raise grave constitutional issues," he told colleagues.

    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/congress/article149589289.html#storylink=cpy

    Constitutional issues ? HA HA HA HA

    What is "Senator" Durbin doing about the war escalation in Afghanstan and Syria? My point exactly.

    We've got a problem in politics
    So few Richards, so many dicks

    screen screamer , May 9, 2017 at 8:02 pm

    Interestingly, Fed directors have a term of ten years and since Hoover, there has been only one to make it the full term. That would be Mr. Mueller who went twelve years as director directly following 911.

    I must confess that I do not know why the others were let go or retired. I think it would make an interesting study.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Director_of_the_Federal_Bureau_of_Investigation

    NotTimothyGeithner , May 9, 2017 at 11:02 pm

    FBI Director is one of those jobs where if you do a good job you should suffer burnout regardless of who you are. A 10 year term is bizarre if you expect a quality job. I would expect resignation and early retirement if the job is being taken seriously. Then you have to consider the quality of staff and team work arrangements at any given time and how much workload a FBI Director or Cabinet Secretary has to deal with.

    Matt , May 9, 2017 at 8:06 pm

    I'm already seeing Twitter Dems doubling down on the Russia stuff. The Russia hysteria is setting us up so that there will be absolutely no political incentive for future Presidents to be friendly with Russia. I wonder if they don't know (or just don't care) that they aren't going to be able to put this genie back in the bottle after Trump is gone.

    jo6pac , May 9, 2017 at 8:29 pm

    Thanks I love it and they just don't care and hoping the lame stream corp. owned media will carry their propaganda. Demodogs message is we didn't fail but those looser didn't vote for us the party of corp. Amerika. Double down

    John Zelnicker , May 9, 2017 at 9:51 pm

    @Matt – I don't think the Twitter Dems can conceive of the notion that there is a genie or even a bottle in this situation. They are so caught up in the Russia!, Russia! hysteria that there is no room in their thinking for any kind of rational thought or any consideration of consequences.

    Matt , May 9, 2017 at 10:39 pm

    You're more hopeful that I am. I think the more militaristic among them are so cavalier about conflict with Russia because of the Hitler-level delusions many of them have about the military capacity of Russia.

    "Just kick in the door, and the whole rotten structure will come down"

    "We'll be greeted as liberators when we defeat the tyrant Putin!"

    Just look at that SNL sketch that aired a few months ago. They think these people are frozen, ignorant peasants.

    marym , May 9, 2017 at 8:08 pm

    Nixon Library weighs in: https://twitter.com/NixonLibrary/status/862083605081862145

    RichardNixonLibrary‏2Verified account? @NixonLibrary
    FUN FACT: President Nixon never fired the Director of the FBI #FBIDirector #notNixonian

    MyLessThanPrimeBeef , May 9, 2017 at 8:37 pm

    Nixon was smart enough to avoid Russia and the USSR, and instead, worked with China that would help suppress US wages for decades.

    AbateMagicThinking but Not mone y , May 9, 2017 at 8:39 pm

    Personally I would be no good at power. My reading has led me to believe that you need a very strong stomach to endure what you have to deal with, whether it be human gore, hypocrisy, or the dark side of any civilization. I don't have that stomach, and if you take Comey's words at face value neither does he.

    So I think you can take that as a thumbs-up.

    JTMcPhee , May 9, 2017 at 10:40 pm

    Nah, ask Obomber. Once you get past a little queasiness, getting "pretty good at killing folks" is a piece of cake. It's just business as usual. Ask any Civil War or WW I general officer, or Bomber Harris, or Lemay or the young guy, farm boy from Iowa who was a door gunner I knew on Vietnam. Just no problem killing gooks. His moral line was killing the water buffalo. "I know how I'd feel if someone blew away my John Deere."

    AbateMagicThinking but Not money , May 9, 2017 at 11:39 pm

    Re: The youg guy with the agricultural machinery sensibilities:

    Although he was the manipulator of terrible power, I see him as a victim (in the scheme of things), not a member of the power-elite. And the other military you mention, were they in the power-elite? Eisenhower should have been on your list, as he straddled the divide.

    Occasional Delurker , May 9, 2017 at 8:49 pm

    I'm curious how this will be interpreted by people who get their news mostly via headlines. (I also wonder what proportion of the voting population that is.)

    The headlines I've seen so far, if they give a reason, just make reference to the Clinton email investigation. I sort of think this will be interpreted by many mostly-headline news gatherers as meaning that Trump fired Comey because he did not, in fact, lock her up. Indeed, even those who dig deeper may still believe that this is the real reason.

    So, like so many things raged about in the media, I'm not sure this really hurts Trump amongst his voters. Probably helps, really.

    And for something completely different, Snowden is not a fan:

    https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/862069019301601281

    Art Eclectic , May 9, 2017 at 9:00 pm

    All it does is reinforce existing bias. Dems are even more convinced about Russian ties, Reps are even more concerned the wheels are off, TrumpNation is even more convinced there's an evil plot out to get their guy. And the media has a click frenzy to drive ad rates.

    Something for everyone.

    fresno dan , May 9, 2017 at 8:54 pm

    "Trump's sudden and unexpected firing of FBI director James Comey is likely to damage Trump."

    How neutral or unconcerned with what the Establishment views as the requisite dogma regarding Russia is Trump? Articles about Trump being unhappy about McMaster gives the impression that Trump still believe he (Trump) is the boss.

    Yes, the dems have ridiculous notions about Russians as an excuse for Hillary. But being anti Russian is in the very DNA of the repubs. Would the repubs turn on Trump because Trump isn't fervently anti Russian enough? I very much think so .they have a good repub vice president that I am sure ALL of them much prefer ..

    Huey Long , May 9, 2017 at 9:00 pm

    You're right, the red party is a virulently anti-red outfit. I can see the die hard GOPers turning on the Trumpster, but will his base stand for it? The Trumpster does have a bit of a cult of personality going on in some circles.

    NotTimothyGeithner , May 9, 2017 at 10:25 pm

    Its important to remember the disdain the country has for Versailles in general. Trump became President despite universal support for Hillary and to a lesser extent Jeb on the shores of the Potomac.The Republican Id is dedicated to hating Democrats. Bill Clinton and Obama could play Weekend at Bernie's with Reagan corpse and kill Social Security, and Republicans would still hate them.

    Communists and other boogeymen of the past are secondary to this drive. The Versailles Republicans, a different breed, could never deliver Republican votes outside of Northern Virginia for one simple reason their base despises Democrats more than they might hate Stalin. They will never give credit to a Democrat. Remember the liberal whining about how Republicans never gave Obama credit for his right wing policy pushes.

    The other key point to the GOP voter relationship is Trump WON. He beat Jeb and his sheepdogs and then he beat Hillary (Hillary and the Dems lost). Trump is the their winner so to speak. As long as Trump is denounced by the usual suspects for bizarre reasons, Trump will maintain his hold.

    Carolinian , May 9, 2017 at 10:13 pm

    They still have to have a case to make and there is none. Impeachment is just as much a fantasy as it was several months ago. In fact they no longer even have the argument that Trump must be stifled and prevented from doing all his crazy promises since they don't seem to be happening anyway.

    Frankly I say good for Trump rather than letting Comey go all Janet Reno on him. If this country is going to be run by the NYT and the WaPo and CNN then we are truly sunk. He had it right when he was attacking this bunch rather than kowtowing to them.

    Huey Long , May 9, 2017 at 8:57 pm

    Although the Mighty Wurlitzer is going to take this firing and run with it, I wonder if anyone's really going to care outside of folks that watch a ton of CNN and MSNBC. I think scalping him at this point in his administration is likely to generate more protests and demonstrations than not scalping him.

    Alex Morfesis , May 9, 2017 at 9:00 pm

    Well don trumpioni may have stepped in it although, maybe this has less to do with russia perhaps fbi sorta sat on gulen charter school investigation and it would certainly help emperor trompe and prince erdo relationship if Fethu found his old self on an express flight to Ankara considering the bean "kurd" thing recently added on the takeout menu

    Can easily imagine potus & his not ready for prime time players wanting to use the hoover building as a bludgeon against people who dont fall in line the blob counterforce

    comey the straight shooter methynx is a bit of a "legend" but even the most slick and corrupt have certain lines they wont cross

    Huey Long , May 9, 2017 at 9:39 pm

    Can easily imagine potus & his not ready for prime time players wanting to use the hoover building as a bludgeon against people who dont fall in line the blob counterforce

    The FBI would be the preferred outfit for this sort of thing due to their many decades of experience bludgeoning those who don't fall in line.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO

    alex morfesis , May 10, 2017 at 1:49 am

    oh come one now that stuff never happened all you have is proof how can that stand up to narratives

    oho , May 9, 2017 at 9:18 pm

    "Will Trump's Firing of FBI Director James Comey Be His Saturday Night Massacre?'

    It would be interesting to take a poll on what percentage of citizens know that "Saturday Night Massacre" is not a horror film.

    I'd be willing to bet a beer that this kerfuffle will be confined to the Beltway media and Sunday talk shows and will fade from the news cycle/Facebook feeds rather quickly.

    People are tapped out mentally with political talk.

    seabos84 , May 9, 2017 at 9:41 pm

    People are fed up. Savings & Loan mess & Iran Contra & & & & yawn Wall Street destroys the economy & no one goes to jail, Medical Industrial Complex management bloodsuckers insure that sickness leads to penury

    1973 was 28 years after 1945. 1973 was 44 years ago. The post WW2 psuedo consensus is looooooooong gone.

    I thought we hated Comey cuz of what he did to HRC? Today we hate Trump cuz Comey was going after the Russians? Crap I hate missing the 2 minute hate.

    rmm

    Anonymous , May 9, 2017 at 10:23 pm

    I am no fan of Comey. I think his self-righteousness makes him a dangerous FBI Director and a loose cannon. However, people who think this is going to hurt Trump are likely wrong. If Trump knows there's nothing in the Russia story, but he continues to string out the Democrats with it, then they're the ones who are going to look foolish after having invested so much political capital in it. It may be the Russian story will be proven to be nonsense about October, 2018.

    DJPS , May 9, 2017 at 11:02 pm

    Since you can't prove a negative, the innuendo can continue ad nauseam.

    John Wright , May 10, 2017 at 12:30 am

    I suspect the Democrats are unaware they are indirectly insulting the Trump voters by the Russian influence story.. They are in effect saying Trump voters were played by the "evil" Russians into voting for Trump, despite the 1Billion spend by Clinton and her considerable support in the US media. I don't imagine the Trump voters like this message.

    It is truly remarkable, the Russians spend about 10% of what the USA does on "Defense" and are able to influence a US electorate that is largely unaware and unconcerned about world affairs.

    I believe enough voters know that Clinton played fast and loose with the email server to avoid FOIA and the Clinton Foundation pulled in a lot of money from foreign governments as payment in advance to President Hillary Clinton..

    The harping on the "Russia influenced the election enough to elect Trump" will bite the Democrats as they avoid the jobs, medical and economic issues that actually influenced the voters for Trump.

    If Trump indirectly destroys both the Democratic and Republican parties, he might rank as one of our more important Presidents, quite unintentionally.

    Loblolly May 10, 2017 at 1:11 am

    That would require us to be rational actors rather than the cartoon idiots the media portrays us as.

    djrichard , May 10, 2017 at 1:25 am

    I've taken to using doge speak in my comments on Yahoo articles and WaPo articles. I figure that's about as much intelligence the publishers are investing into the articles and into the audience, that I therefore tune my intelligence accordingly.

    Kim Kaufman , May 9, 2017 at 10:41 pm

    CNN exclusive: Grand jury subpoenas issued in FBI's Russia investigation

    By Evan Perez, Shimon Prokupecz and Pamela Brown, CNN

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/09/politics/grand-jury-fbi-russia/index.html

    What seems to me to be most problematic for Flynn is not so much Russia but that he was getting paid by Turkey as a lobbyist while heading the NSA.

    Art Eclectic , May 9, 2017 at 10:52 pm

    Nice. Team Trump managed to get out ahead of that story with their own. That's some ninja level media mastery.

    readerOfTeaLeaves , May 9, 2017 at 11:53 pm

    The plot thickens.

    juliania , May 9, 2017 at 11:04 pm

    If it has to do with the Russian electorial witch hunt stupidity, then yes, I think Comey ought to have been fired. For crying out loud, enough already! Delicate matters are being attempted in the Middle East, and there is no sense in pursuing that craziness. I don't understand why that shouldn't be a perfectly acceptable reason to change direction and start attending to real issues with someone in the office who would support Trump's legitimate claim (and Putin's) that there was no there there.

    Wrong Letters , May 9, 2017 at 11:12 pm

    Why doesnt he fire the top 10 layers of CIA instead? They are wreaking havoc for real everywhere domestically and abroad.

    Huey Long , May 10, 2017 at 1:26 am

    I would imagine the CIA/Intel guys are way harder to get rid of. To quote the late, great Sen. Frank Church:

    If this government ever became a tyranny, if a dictator ever took charge in this country, the technological capacity that the intelligence community has given the government could enable it to impose total tyranny, and there would be no way to fight back because the most careful effort to combine together in resistance to the government, no matter how privately it was done, is within the reach of the government to know. Such is the capability of this technology. ( )

    Toolate , May 9, 2017 at 11:27 pm

    So not one poster here thinks the Russia story has any merit whatsoever? With those odds, the contrarian in me says hmmm

    Yves Smith Post author , May 10, 2017 at 12:31 am

    Because people here are smart enough to be skeptical of hysterical MSM headlines with no real goods, you act as if you are some sort of smart contrarian, when you are just echoing a Democratic party/media narrative?

    You do not seem to recognize that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. The idea that billionaire, who was already famous in the US by virtue (among other things) of having a TV show that ran for 14 years and got billions of free media coverage during his campaign, is somehow owned by Putin, is astonishing on its face. Trump had to have been the focus of extensive Republican and Democratic party opposition research while he was campaigning.

    And perhaps most important, the night he won, Trump clearly did not expect to win. His longstanding friend Howard Stern stated a view similar to ours, that Trump ran because it would be good PR and the whole thing developed a life of its own. And before you try saying politics doesn't work that way, the UK is now on a path to Brexit for the same reasons.

    All the Dems and the media have come up with are some kinda-sorta connections to Russia. Trump as a very rich man who also has assembled a large team of political types in short order, would have people who knew people in all corners of the world. "X has done business with Y" is hardly proof o of influence, particularly with a guy like Trump, who is now famous for telling people what they want to hear in a meeting and backstabbing them the next day.

    We've been looking at this for months. The best they can come up with is:

    1. Manafort, who worked for Trump for all of four months and was fired. Plus his Russia connections are mainly through Ukraine. Podesta has strong if not stronger Russia ties, is a much more central play to Clinton and no one is making a stink about that. And that's before you get to the Clinton involvement in a yuuge uranium sale to Russia, which even the New York Times confirmed (but wrote such a weedy story that you have to read carefully to see that).

    2. Carter Page, who was even more peripheral

    3. Flynn, again not a central player, plus it appears his bigger sin involved Turkey

    4. The conversation with the Russian ambassador, which contrary to the screeching has plenty of precedent (in fact, Nixon and Reagan did far more serious meddling)

    5. The various allegations re Trump real estate and bank loans. Trump did have a really seedy Russian involved in a NYC development. One should be more worried that the guy was a crook than that he was Russian. Third tier, not even remotely in the oligarch class. There are also vague allegations re money laundering. The is crap because first, every NYC real estate player has dirty money in high end projects (see the big expose by the New York Times on the Time Warner Center, developed by the Related Companies, owned by Steve Ross). But second, the party responsible for checking where the money came from, unless it was wheelbarrows of cash, is the bank, not the real estate owner. Since the NYT expose there have been efforts to make developers/owners responsible too, but those aren't germane to Trump since they aren't/weren't in effect.

    So please do not provide no value added speculation. If you have something concrete, that would be interesting, but I've been looking and I've seen nothing of any substance.

    Huey Long , May 10, 2017 at 1:07 am

    +1 on the Time Warner Center

    Very few condos there are occupied for more than a few days per year, and most of the residents I encountered during my tenure there were not US citizens.

    We were all very entertained when the Times broke the story.

    Just FYI, Ross does not own the TWC outright, he only has a stake in the place albeit a sizable one since aquiring TIme Warner's office/studio unit.

    LT , May 10, 2017 at 1:50 am

    Trump a crook, but not any other oligarchs? The old saying goes something like behind every great fortune is a great crime.

    They clean up the image with a few rewrites and something like public office or foundations. The Presidency is Trump's ca-ching. And the pauses on the promises and the falling in line (bombs away!). He'll be right in the club.

    George Phillies , May 10, 2017 at 12:40 am

    Mr Comey also made some statements recently about Clinton emails and Mr Wiener, statements that seemed to be in need of significant reinterpretation. That might also have been the cause.

    VietnamVet , May 10, 2017 at 12:56 am

    Corporate Government messaging has fallen apart. The description of Anthony Weiner's laptop went from "explosive" to "careless but not criminal" to "just several" Clinton e-mails on it.

    Democrats are generally supported by Wall Street, GOP by military contractors; but, together they are one war party. The new Saturday Night Massacre shows that with Donald Trump's triumph, the government has split apart into nationalist and globalist factions. No doubt the James Comey firing buries the Russian interference investigation. However, with the wars in Syria and Afghanistan re-surging; this episode shows that nothing the government says or the media reports is near the truth.

    Loblolly , May 10, 2017 at 1:25 am

    This is ostensibly the full memo from Deputy AG Rosenthal recommending the removal of Director Comey.

    Link is to an imgur album consisting of three images.

    <

    [May 08, 2017] Before calling this an act of deliberate betrayal think about bad cop/good cop ploy. DNC democrats gave us deregulation, killed GlassSteagall, refused to prosecute banksters, gave us a hokey republican health insurance plan, tried to give us TPP, continued more ME wars, screw with Russia

    Notable quotes:
    "... The wreckage that you see every day as you tour this part of the country is the utterly predictable fruit of the Democratic party's neoliberal turn. Every time our liberal leaders signed off on some lousy trade deal, figuring that working-class people had "nowhere else to go," they were making what happened last November a little more likely. ..."
    "... What we need is for the Democratic party and its media enablers to alter course. It's not enough to hear people's voices and feel their pain; the party actually needs to change. They need to understand that the enlightened Davos ideology they have embraced over the years has done material harm to millions of their own former constituents. The Democrats need to offer something different next time. And then they need to deliver. ..."
    "... Andrew Bacevich offers 24 things that the media and their very knowledgeable talking heads could be talking about instead of obsessing about Trump 24/7: ..."
    "... Our courtier press is worse than useless. The days of Walter Cronkite are but a distant memory. ..."
    May 08, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com

    JohnH -> pgl... , May 08, 2017 at 07:35 AM

    Vinyl records are back in vogue...apparently broken records are back, too, as Krugman reminds us in virtually every one of his columns these days.

    What Krugman could be writing about: "Another thing that is inexcusable from Democrats: surprise at the economic disasters that have befallen the midwestern cities and states that they used to represent.

    The wreckage that you see every day as you tour this part of the country is the utterly predictable fruit of the Democratic party's neoliberal turn. Every time our liberal leaders signed off on some lousy trade deal, figuring that working-class people had "nowhere else to go," they were making what happened last November a little more likely.

    Every time our liberal leaders deregulated banks and then turned around and told working-class people that their misfortunes were all attributable to their poor education was a lot of student loans and the right sort of college degree ... every time they did this they made the disaster a little more inevitable.

    Pretending to rediscover the exotic, newly red states of the Midwest, in the manner of the New York Times, is not the answer to this problem. Listening to the voices of the good people of Ohio, Wisconsin, and Michigan is not really the answer, either. Cursing those bad people for the stupid way they voted is an even lousier idea.

    What we need is for the Democratic party and its media enablers to alter course. It's not enough to hear people's voices and feel their pain; the party actually needs to change. They need to understand that the enlightened Davos ideology they have embraced over the years has done material harm to millions of their own former constituents. The Democrats need to offer something different next time. And then they need to deliver. "

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/may/07/obama-biography-stirs-controversy-with-tales-of-politics-sex-and-a-rising-star

    JohnH -> pgl... , May 08, 2017 at 08:22 AM
    Six ways the New York Times could make is op-ed page more representative...starting with space for supporters for the most popular politician in America: Bernie Sanders.
    https://theintercept.com/2017/05/08/six-ways-the-new-york-times-could-genuinely-make-its-op-ed-page-more-representative-of-america/

    Andrew Bacevich offers 24 things that the media and their very knowledgeable talking heads could be talking about instead of obsessing about Trump 24/7:
    https://theintercept.com/2017/05/08/six-ways-the-new-york-times-could-genuinely-make-its-op-ed-page-more-representative-of-america/

    Krugman is a broken record...

    mulp -> JohnH...

    , May 08, 2017 at 08:22 AM

    "Andrew Bacevich offers 24 things that the media and their very knowledgeable talking heads could be talking about instead of obsessing about Trump 24/7:"

    "But hiring another prominent writer whose ideology hems close to that of the nation's elites - in this case, fossil fuel corporations who are polluting the world and advocates of Western military might - is hardly adding intellectual diversity to the pages of the Times."

    So, the liberal elites are the Appalachian coal miners?

    Trump won because he appealed to the NY Times elites?

    "It could change that by hiring some of his prominent backers: philosopher Cornel West, Jacobin editor Bhaskar Sunkara, civil rights scholar Michelle Alexander, labor organizer Jonathan Tasini, and former Nevada Assemblywoman and organizer Lucy Flores could all make strong additions."

    These people are effective because they have convinced voters to elect socialists across the
    US, just like Bernie, easily defeating the right-wingers the NY Times has attacked, like Cruz, Perry, Trump, et al?

    "The Times could fix this by hiring some of the more thoughtful Trump backers, or at least writers who have documented his appeal. For instance, there is Dilbert creator Scott Adams, who admires Trump's powers of persuasion and correctly predicted that he would be elected."

    So, if one admires the Chinese leadership for their economic policies of spreading the wealth by creating hundreds of millions of jobs paying high wages (for China) paid for with high taxes and high prices (for China), does that mean you want to live under Chinese rule?

    I admire the Chinese authoritarians for embracing Keynes and FDR and Galbraith, something you give lip service to, but actually oppose in policy.

    You are just as free lunch as Cato and Heritage and AEI and the Kochs, just picking different winners from unsustainable explosion of debt.

    BTW, I like Bacevich, except he argues that Obama had as much power as the Chinese authoritarians, and the Congress, the people, the Constitution are irrelevant.

    He argued that Obama had the power to ignore all the laws passed by Congress, and had the power to ignore all the voters, because Obama's problem was failing to do what the small number of elites wanted, elites who can't get any one elected in even the liberal elite enclaves.

    "The Times could break real ground by hiring talented millennial writers like the Washington Post's Elizabeth Bruenig or Demos's Sean McElwee. The Times could also go even younger, including the voices of Americans who are rarely heard: high-schoolers."

    Hmm, so WaPo is now in touch with the masses?

    What about NPR and PBS which has programs to train and give recording equipment to to kids so they can do reporting, and then get their stories aired? Are public broadcasting really dominating youth markets?

    As a liberal, I automatically seek to falsify claims by anyone regardless of policy position.

    I'm a Keynesian in the Galbraith mode, but I will criticize Keynesian arguments just like conservative figured out how to do, but in reducio absurdim to illustrate the weak argument by the Keynesian and logical fallacy of the conservative critique.

    "They could hire, for instance, leading climatologist James Hansen or environmental lawyer Erin Brockovich."

    Again, to people who utterly failed to get anyone elected, local, State, or Federal, to get anything done.

    Hansen has been a disaster in that he helped speed Trump into the White House by being a Don Quinto talking at oil pipelines, by inspiring tens of thousands of young people to drive gas guzzlers to anti oil pipeline protests.

    Hey, Hansen and Bernie promise the free lunch of no oil and gas wells and pipelines, but plenty of cheap gasoline for cars and trucks and SUVs and cheap heating for homes.

    Soul Super Bad -> anne... , May 08, 2017 at 07:04 AM

    The hidden persuaders exposed by Vance Packard!

    We got to get our Proud Nation back into gear; got to put the brakes on special interest; got to issue SNAP Card to each citizen; got to stop

    gaming the system -- !

    anne -> anne... , May 08, 2017 at 09:54 AM
    Proper context:

    https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/o/orwell/george/o79n/chapter1.1.html

    1949

    Nineteen Eighty-four
    By George Orwell

    The Ministry of Truth-Minitrue, in Newspeak [Newspeak was the official language of Oceania. For an account of its structure and etymology see Appendix. * ]-was startlingly different from any other object in sight. It was an enormous pyramidal structure of glittering white concrete, soaring up, terrace after terrace, 300 metres into the air. From where Winston Smith stood it was just possible to read, picked out on its white face in elegant lettering, the three slogans of the Party:

    WAR IS PEACE

    * https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/o/orwell/george/o79n/appendix.html

    The Ministry of Truth contained, it was said, three thousand rooms above ground level, and corresponding ramifications below. Scattered about London there were just three other buildings of similar appearance and size. So completely did they dwarf the surrounding architecture that from the roof of Victory Mansions you could see all four of them simultaneously. They were the homes of the four Ministries between which the entire apparatus of government was divided. The Ministry of Truth, which concerned itself with news, entertainment, education, and the fine arts. The Ministry of Peace, which concerned itself with war. The Ministry of Love, which maintained law and order. And the Ministry of Plenty, which was responsible for economic affairs. Their names, in Newspeak: Minitrue, Minipax, Miniluv, and Miniplenty....

    anne , May 08, 2017 at 06:12 AM
    https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/o/orwell/george/o79n/chapter1.1.html

    1949

    Nineteen Eighty-four
    By George Orwell

    The Ministry of Truth - Minitrue, in Newspeak [Newspeak was the official language of Oceania. For an account of its structure and etymology see Appendix. * ]- was startlingly different from any other object in sight. It was an enormous pyramidal structure of glittering white concrete, soaring up, terrace after terrace, 300 metres into the air. From where Winston stood it was just possible to read, picked out on its white face in elegant lettering, the three slogans of the Party:

    WAR IS PEACE

    * https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/o/orwell/george/o79n/appendix.html

    pgl -> DrDick... , May 08, 2017 at 07:52 AM
    The problem is that they get away with this lying. Reporters - hello?!
    DrDick -> pgl... , May 08, 2017 at 08:46 AM
    Our courtier press is worse than useless. The days of Walter Cronkite are but a distant memory.

    [May 05, 2017] Jared a billionaire arch-Zionist trust-fund baby

    Some comments are over top, but the term "Kosher Nostra" is pretty interesting. Jared's father sevred a jail term...
    Notable quotes:
    "... 'Jewish-American organized crime emerged within the American Jewish community during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It has been referred to variously in media and popular culture as the Jewish Mob, Jewish Mafia, Kosher Mafia, Kosher Nostra, or Undzer Shtik (Yiddish: אונדזער שטיק‎). The last two of these terms refer to the Italian Cosa Nostra (Italian pronunciation: [kɔza nɔstra]); the former is a play on the word kosher, referring to Jewish dietary laws, while the latter is a direct translation of the phrase (Italian for "our thing") into Yiddish, which was at the time the predominant language of the Jewish diaspora in the United States ..."
    "... In more recent years, Jewish-American organized crime has reappeared in the forms of both Israeli and Jewish-Russian mafia criminal groups, and Orthodox kidnapping gangs ..."
    "... Several notable Jewish American mobsters provided financial support for Israel through donations to Jewish organizations since the country's creation in 1948. Jewish-American gangsters used Israel's Law of Return to flee criminal charges or face deportation ..."
    "... Even the staff at his own Jewish day school were surprised he was accepted at Harvard. ..."
    "... He was described as a lacklustre student his father bought his entry, and they were disappointed that more qualified students from his school didn't make the cut. ..."
    "... They have good reason to hide him – he and his family have some shady business dealings – his father is a x-convict. How did he come into billions of dollars? They say that Jared inherited his money – how did that happen when his father is still living – did they get special tax treatment? ..."
    "... p.s. Jared Kushner is 100% Zionist ..."
    May 05, 2017 | ...

    wayfarer , April 20, 2017 at 10:12 pm GMT

    The problem with fiat money is that if one has enough of it, one can buy just about anything under the sun that they please, including even large parts of a country's political system and government.

    Take for example, Jared (a.k.a. billionaire arch-Zionist trust-fund baby) Kushner

    source: https://www.sott.net/article/348461-The-controversy-of-Jared-Kushner-A-suspected-gangster-within-the-Trump-White-House

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vtf6TgQgWr4

    Seraphim , April 20, 2017 at 11:52 pm GMT
    @Talha Kosher Nostra!!!

    Oh man - that was awesome!!!

    Peace. It is not my invention. All From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

    "Jewish-American organized crime":

    'Jewish-American organized crime emerged within the American Jewish community during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It has been referred to variously in media and popular culture as the Jewish Mob, Jewish Mafia, Kosher Mafia, Kosher Nostra, or Undzer Shtik (Yiddish: אונדזער שטיק‎). The last two of these terms refer to the Italian Cosa Nostra (Italian pronunciation: [kɔza nɔstra]); the former is a play on the word kosher, referring to Jewish dietary laws, while the latter is a direct translation of the phrase (Italian for "our thing") into Yiddish, which was at the time the predominant language of the Jewish diaspora in the United States

    In more recent years, Jewish-American organized crime has reappeared in the forms of both Israeli and Jewish-Russian mafia criminal groups, and Orthodox kidnapping gangs .

    Several notable Jewish American mobsters provided financial support for Israel through donations to Jewish organizations since the country's creation in 1948. Jewish-American gangsters used Israel's Law of Return to flee criminal charges or face deportation "

    Anonymous , April 21, 2017 at 3:31 am GMT

    @wayfarer

    Even the staff at his own Jewish day school were surprised he was accepted at Harvard.

    He was described as a lacklustre student his father bought his entry, and they were disappointed that more qualified students from his school didn't make the cut.

    Art , April 21, 2017 at 6:56 pm GMT
    @Alden

    I just read the latest ADL diktat.

    As of today any mention of Jared Kushner is deemed anti Semitic. Consequences will be severe. I just read the latest ADL diktat. As of today any mention of Jared Kushner is deemed anti Semitic. Consequences will be severe.

    They have good reason to hide him – he and his family have some shady business dealings – his father is a x-convict. How did he come into billions of dollars? They say that Jared inherited his money – how did that happen when his father is still living – did they get special tax treatment?

    Hmm?

    Peace - Art

    p.s. Jared Kushner is 100% Zionist

    [May 05, 2017] Wag The Dog - How Al Qaeda Played Donald Trump And The American Media

    May 05, 2017 | www.huffingtonpost.com

    ...Once upon a time, Donald J. Trump, the New York City businessman-turned-president, berated then-President Barack Obama back in September 2013 about the fallacy of an American military strike against Syria. At that time, the United States was considering the use of force against Syria in response to allegations (since largely disproven) that the regime of President Bashar al-Assad had used chemical weapons against civilians in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta. Trump, via tweet, declared "to our very foolish leader, do not attack Syria – if you do many very bad things will happen & from that fight the U.S. gets nothing!"

    ...This new policy direction lasted barely five days. Sometime in the early afternoon of April 4, 2017, troubling images and video clips began to be transmitted out of the Syrian province of Idlib by anti-government activists, including members of the so-called "White Helmets," a volunteer rescue team whose work was captured in an eponymously-named Academy Award-winning documentary film. These images showed victims in various stages of symptomatic distress, including death, from what the activists said was exposure to chemical weapons dropped by the Syrian air force on the town of Khan Sheikhoun that very morning.

    Images of these tragic deaths were immediately broadcast on American media outlets, with pundits decrying the horrific and heinous nature of the chemical attack, which was nearly unanimously attributed to the Syrian government, even though the only evidence provided was the imagery and testimony of the anti-Assad activists who, just days before, were decrying the shift in American policy regarding regime change in Syria.

    ...Such a reversal in policy fundamentals and direction in such a short period of time is stunning; Donald Trump didn't simply deviate slightly off course, but rather did a complete 180-degree turn. The previous policy of avoiding entanglement in the internal affairs of Syria in favor of defeating ISIS and improving relations with Russia had been replaced by a fervent embrace of regime change, direct military engagement with the Syrian armed forces, and a confrontational stance vis-à-vis the Russian military presence in Syria.

    Normally, such major policy change could only be explained by a new reality driven by verifiable facts. The alleged chemical weapons attack against Khan Sheikhoun was not a new reality; chemical attacks had been occurring inside Syria on a regular basis, despite the international effort to disarm Syria's chemical weapons capability undertaken in 2013 that played a central role in forestalling American military action at that time. International investigations of these attacks produced mixed results, with some being attributed to the Syrian government (something the Syrian government vehemently denies), and the majority being attributed to anti-regime fighters, in particular those affiliated with Al Nusra Front, an Al Qaeda affiliate.

    ...A critical piece of information that has largely escaped the reporting in the mainstream media is that Khan Sheikhoun is ground zero for the Islamic jihadists who have been at the center of the anti-Assad movement in Syria since 2011. Up until February 2017, Khan Sheikhoun was occupied by a pro-ISIS group known as Liwa al-Aqsa that was engaged in an oftentimes-violent struggle with its competitor organization, Al Nusra Front (which later morphed into Tahrir al-Sham, but under any name functioning as Al Qaeda's arm in Syria) for resources and political influence among the local population.

    ...In Aleppo, the Russians discovered crude weapons production laboratories that filled mortar shells and landmines with a mix of chlorine gas and white phosphorus; after a thorough forensic investigation was conducted by military specialists, the Russians turned over samples of these weapons, together with soil samples from areas struck by weapons produced in these laboratories, to investigators from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons for further evaluation.
    ( Collapse )
    Al Nusra has a long history of manufacturing and employing crude chemical weapons; the 2013 chemical attack on Ghouta made use of low-grade Sarin nerve agent locally synthesized, while attacks in and around Aleppo in 2016 made use of a chlorine/white phosphorous blend. If the Russians are correct, and the building bombed in Khan Sheikhoun on the morning of April 4, 2017 was producing and/or storing chemical weapons, the probability that viable agent and other toxic contaminants were dispersed into the surrounding neighborhood, and further disseminated by the prevailing wind, is high.

    The counter-narrative offered by the Russians and Syrians, however, has been minimized, mocked and ignored by both the American media and the Trump administration. So, too, has the very illogic of the premise being put forward to answer the question of why President Assad would risk everything by using chemical weapons against a target of zero military value, at a time when the strategic balance of power had shifted strongly in his favor. Likewise, why would Russia, which had invested considerable political capital in the disarmament of Syria's chemical weapons capability after 2013, stand by idly while the Syrian air force carried out such an attack, especially when their was such a heavy Russian military presence at the base in question at the time of the attack?

    Such analysis seems beyond the scope and comprehension of the American fourth estate. Instead, media outlets like CNN embrace at face value anything they are told by official American sources, including a particularly preposterous insinuation that Russia actually colluded in the chemical weapons attack; the aforementioned presence of Russian officers at Al Shayrat air base has been cited as evidence that Russia had to have known about Syria's chemical warfare capability, and yet did nothing to prevent the attack.

    To sustain this illogic, the American public and decision-makers make use of a sophisticated propaganda campaign involving video images and narratives provided by forces opposed to the regime of Bashar al-Assad, including organizations like the "White Helmets," the Syrian-American Medical Society, the Aleppo Media Center, which have a history of providing slanted information designed to promote an anti-Assad message.

    ...Even slick media training, however, cannot gloss over basic factual inconsistencies. Early on, the anti-Assad opposition media outlets were labeling the Khan Sheikhoun incident as a "Sarin nerve agent" attack; one doctor affiliated with Al Qaeda sent out images and commentary via social media that documented symptoms, such as dilated pupils, that he diagnosed as stemming from exposure to Sarin nerve agent. Sarin, however, is an odorless, colorless material, dispersed as either a liquid or vapor; eyewitnesses speak of a "pungent odor" and "blue-yellow" clouds, more indicative of chlorine gas.

    And while American media outlets, such as CNN, have spoken of munitions "filled to the brim" with Sarin nerve agent being used at Khan Sheikhoun, there is simply no evidence cited by any source that can sustain such an account. Heartbreaking images of victims being treated by "White Helmet" rescuers have been cited as proof of Sarin-like symptoms, the medical viability of these images is in question; there are no images taken of victims at the scene of the attack. Instead, the video provided by the "White Helmets" is of decontamination and treatment carried out at a "White Helmet" base after the victims, either dead or injured, were transported there.

    The lack of viable protective clothing worn by the "White Helmet" personnel while handling victims is another indication that the chemical in question was not military grade Sarin; if it were, the rescuers would themselves have become victims (some accounts speak of just this phenomena, but this occurred at the site of the attack, where the rescuers were overcome by a "pungent smelling" chemical – again, Sarin is odorless.)

    ...Moreover, if Al Nusra was replicating the type of low-grade Sarin it employed at Ghouta in 2013 at Khan Sheikhoun, it is highly likely that some of the victims in question would exhibit Sarin-like symptoms. Blood samples taken from the victims could provide a more precise readout of the specific chemical exposure involved; such samples have allegedly been collected by Al Nusra-affiliated personnel, and turned over to international investigators (the notion that any serious investigatory body would allow Al Nusra to provide forensic evidence in support of an investigation where it is one of only two potential culprits is mindboggling, but that is precisely what has happened). But the Trump administration chose to act before these samples could be processed, perhaps afraid that their results would not sustain the underlying allegation of the employment of Sarin by the Syrian air force.

    Mainstream American media outlets have willingly and openly embraced a narrative provided by Al Qaeda affiliates whose record of using chemical weapons in Syria and distorting and manufacturing "evidence" to promote anti-Assad policies in the west, including regime change, is well documented. These outlets have made a deliberate decision to endorse the view of Al Qaeda over a narrative provided by Russian and Syrian government authorities without any effort to fact check either position. These actions, however, do not seem to shock the conscience of the American public; when it comes to Syria, the mainstream American media and its audience has long ago ceded the narrative to Al Qaeda and other Islamist anti-regime elements.

    The real culprits here are the Trump administration, and President Trump himself. The president's record of placing more weight on what he sees on television than the intelligence briefings he may or may not be getting, and his lack of intellectual curiosity and unfamiliarity with the nuances and complexities of both foreign and national security policy, created the conditions where the imagery of the Khan Sheikhoun victims that had been disseminated by pro-Al Nusra (i.e., Al Qaeda) outlets could influence critical life-or-death decisions.

    That President Trump could be susceptible to such obvious manipulation is not surprising, given his predilection for counter-punching on Twitter for any perceived slight; that his national security team allowed him to be manipulated thus, and did nothing to sway Trump's opinion or forestall action pending a thorough review of the facts, is scandalous. History will show that Donald Trump, his advisors and the American media were little more than willing dupes for Al Qaeda and its affiliates, whose manipulation of the Syrian narrative resulted in a major policy shift that furthers their objectives.

    [May 04, 2017] Jared Kushner fired me over Israel ten years ago by Philip Weiss

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... This couldn't last. In February 2007 Kaplan closed his office door and said he was a Zionist, Kushner was a Zionist, Kempner was a Zionist, and the janitor was a Zionist, too, and the newspaper would not pay for me to blog, as I was demanding (at that time I was only paid for published columns). It was fitting; I was gone. ..."
    "... Kushner reminds me of a few bosses I have had. They only know what they know which means SFA . Zero interest in the wider world. He probably knows loads about NY real estate and not much else ..."
    "... Very good profile, Phil. One thing struck me, as it did Keith. The only "peace" that Kushner and people like him want for Israel is the "peace" of total domination and rule over others with no disturbance. So, talking about him bringing "peace" makes no sense whatsoever. That's not at all what he or anyone around him wants. ..."
    "... Israelis and their supporters are forever talking about peace, when anyone of sound mind knows that the issue is not peace but justice for the Palestinians who have had their land stolen by European colonists. ..."
    "... Israel pushes the peace line because it knows the issue is not about peace and that a subjugated people like the Palestinians have not a snowball's chance in hell of wielding any sort of power which might contribute to peace. ..."
    "... While the appointment of Kushner is clearly nepotistic, it does not seem much worse than JFK's appointment of his brother. The historical record indicates that Robert Kennedy was if anything much more vile on Israel Palestine issues than Jared Kushner is. ..."
    www.unz.com

    Donald Trump has now named his son-in-law Jared Kushner as a senior adviser, notably on Middle East/Israel issues, and as Kushner fired me ten years ago over these issues, it seemed a good time to review my memories of our (limited) interactions and do what journalists do, make a prognosis about his future efforts.

    Kushner was 25 when he bought the New York Observer from investment banker/artist Arthur Carter in 2006, and as all such transactions do, the move set off panic on the editorial side of the paper. The editor, my dear friend Peter Kaplan, now deceased, was at once engaged in a struggle with his new boss over the paper's news budget and independence. For my part I had been a columnist for a few years, protected against attacks and my own ineptitude by my Harvard chum Kaplan (yes, Virginia, that's how media works), and had lately started Mondoweiss there as a personal blog, and because I was vehemently against the Iraq war and beginning to connect that tragedy to the US relationship to Israel in my postings, I was apprehensive about Kushner's view of the blog and me. I knew that he had been a big supporter of the orthodox Jewish Chabad House at Harvard and had lauded Alan Dershowitz there. Not a good sign - when I was discovering Rachel Corrie and The Israel Lobby.

    Peter Kaplan was a great student of character; it was his chief delight in life (after a cigar, a turkey leg, and a Preston Sturges film in the middle of the night); and my understanding of Kushner's character was formed by closed-door conversations with Peter. He told me that Kushner was smart, ambitious, and full of hubris. The two statements Peter made that resonate down through the years are: "Jared has ice in his veins." And: "He doesn't know what he doesn't know."

    For a little while the clear-skinned young owner took Kaplan on as his grizzled guide to the world of journalism, but that interval was short-lived. It was somewhat shocking to Kaplan that a guy who had no experience of journalism, and was a boob about literature, wasn't a very good reader, had spent his college years doing real estate deals, etc., was eager to make decisions about the paper's values. But such is the way of the world, and after an agonizing couple of years Peter went back to Conde Nast.

    I didn't last as long. Jared and I had a few polite conversations in the year that we cohabited on Broadway, and two very uncomfortable meetings over Israel and Palestine. One was before I went out there in July 2006 on his dime to see the country for the first time, during the Lebanon War, and the second one was after I got back that August. In the first, Kushner told me about his Holocaust background, his grandparents who barely survived , and his regard for Israel. When I got back, Kushner and Brian Kempner, the newspaper's publisher who had worked at the Israel lobby group AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee), couldn't wait to hear what I had seen out there, they said. But when I started talking about the occupation, the room went cold as the poles, and Kushner gazed right through me with those unsmiling dark little eyes. Kaplan was even more uncomfortable than I was, and thankfully brought the tortuous meeting to a close.

    But I managed to get a frank description of apartheid in Hebron into the pages of the Observer .

    This couldn't last. In February 2007 Kaplan closed his office door and said he was a Zionist, Kushner was a Zionist, Kempner was a Zionist, and the janitor was a Zionist, too, and the newspaper would not pay for me to blog, as I was demanding (at that time I was only paid for published columns). It was fitting; I was gone.

    My interactions with Jared were limited, but they don't give me hope about his ability to achieve peace in the Middle East. He lived in a deeply-Zionist-patriarchal mental space then; I never saw him take a step out of it. There was a provincial element to his commitment. As Peter said, he didn't know what he didn't know. The guy who replaced Kaplan was even more of a Zionist than Kaplan, while the nimble-footed Kempner went on to work in the Kushner real estate firm. Kushner's ambition and political shrewdness were evident to us, but I never saw any worldliness or largeness of spirit. He was very impressed by his own family. The big asterisk is that he was 25 and 26. I wouldn't want anyone to judge me on the basis of stuff I said at that age . . .

    Lastly, I bear no ill will to Jared Kushner. He paid for my first trip to Israel and Palestine (at 50!); he paid for me to see the occupation. My firing was also a blessing; he cut me loose from the paternalist mainstream media, and I was forced to sink or swim on the internet. To some smaller or bigger degree, I can thank Jared for this website, and the wonderful relationships I have formed through the internet with people of strong hearts and principle, qualities prestige media culture does not select for. For the sake of all of us, I can only hope Kushner gets to enter a larger world too.

    Maghlawatan January 10, 2017, 5:09 pm
    Kushner reminds me of a few bosses I have had. They only know what they know which means SFA . Zero interest in the wider world. He probably knows loads about NY real estate and not much else
    Mivasair January 10, 2017, 9:37 pm
    Very good profile, Phil. One thing struck me, as it did Keith. The only "peace" that Kushner and people like him want for Israel is the "peace" of total domination and rule over others with no disturbance. So, talking about him bringing "peace" makes no sense whatsoever. That's not at all what he or anyone around him wants.
    echinococcus January 11, 2017, 1:52 am

    I suppose the peace of cemeteries is the best quality of peace if you're the undertaker.

    eljay January 11, 2017, 7:30 am

    Kushner likely desires the same sort of Zionist "peace" that jon s advocates, one which:

    • allows Israel to remain a religion-supremacist "Jewish State";
    • allows Israel to keep as much as possible of what it has stolen;
    • absolves Israel of responsibility and accountability for its past and on-going (war) crimes; and
    • absolves Israel of its obligations under international law (including RoR).
    rosross January 11, 2017, 5:29 pm
    Israelis and their supporters are forever talking about peace, when anyone of sound mind knows that the issue is not peace but justice for the Palestinians who have had their land stolen by European colonists.

    Justice first and then peace is possible. Israel pushes the peace line because it knows the issue is not about peace and that a subjugated people like the Palestinians have not a snowball's chance in hell of wielding any sort of power which might contribute to peace.

    hungrydave January 14, 2017, 2:44 am Brilliant.

    I will remember this. I've had the same thoughts but never realised how to enunciate it so clearly.

    Marnie January 11, 2017, 1:04 am

    I read somewhere that the soon to be FLOTUS (ivanka kushner) is scared s#%&less of israel. That's good. I don't imagine her husband has any plans to make it one of his homes.

    Lack of experience/knowledge in the positions being filled is the hallmark of the tRUMP administration, especially wrt tRUMP himself. I have no idea what the next 4 years are going to be like, but i imagine the worst.

    http://pre04.deviantart.net/5b05/th/pre/f/2016/272/2/7/end_of_the_world_by_alexiuss-dajaesc.jpg

    Pixel January 11, 2017, 5:27 pm

    " [Ivanka} is scared s#%&less of israel."

    Marnie, can you say more? I'm not sure what you mean

    Marnie January 12, 2017, 12:39 am

    No, I can't find the article I'd read about her fear for husband traveling to zioland. I shouldn't have brought it up without backup. Sorry everybody.
    YoniFalic January 11, 2017, 1:28 pm
    While the appointment of Kushner is clearly nepotistic, it does not seem much worse than JFK's appointment of his brother. The historical record indicates that Robert Kennedy was if anything much more vile on Israel Palestine issues than Jared Kushner is.

    [May 01, 2017] Here is Why We Should not Laugh at Donald Trumps 100-Day Faceplant by Jon Schwarz

    Notable quotes:
    "... incredibly wrong ..."
    Apr 29, 2017 | theintercept.com

    But their elections have one critical thing in common: They both came out of NOWHERE to become president, with characteristics that previously would have throttled their chances before they delivered their first speech in Iowa.

    There's no need to recount everything from Trump's florid life and campaign that sensible people were sure disqualified him. But we've forgotten how the sensible people at first saw Obama in much the same way, and for reasons that went far beyond him being African American. He'd been a senator for just two years when he started running and would have to beat the entire party establishment. His father was Muslim. He wasn't just not named Henry Smith, his middle name was Hussein. He'd even used cocaine, and openly admitted it.

    Yet both Obama and Trump vaulted over everyone and everything into the White House. Tens of millions of Americans were willing to place their lives in the hands of political anomalies whose central pitch was that they would deliver profound change. The rise of Bernie Sanders, who's proven that you can become the most popular politician in the country without owning a comb, demonstrates the same thing.

    What does this mean?

    I'd say it means that something has gone incredibly wrong with this country's political system, that large numbers of us are desperate, and are willing to hand over power to absolutely anyone. That's brings us to the peculiar reality that it's not just Obama and Trump's elections that had something significant in common, it's likely their presidencies.

    Obama said American healthcare was in crisis and that "plans that tinker and halfway measures now belong to yesterday." Obama was also outraged by pharmaceutical companies gouging Medicare.

    According to Trump , "People all across the country are devastated" by the healthcare system, but if we put him in charge , "Everybody's going to be taken care of much better than they're taken care of now." Trump was also infuriated by Big Pharma and just like Obama vowed to crush them.

    Yet Obama delivered a halfway measure that tinkered with the problem, and never went after drug manufacturers. Trump is now poised to give America literally the same thing.

    Obama called NAFTA "devastating" and "a big mistake" in 2008. In 2016 Trump said NAFTA had caused "devastation" and was "the worst trade deal maybe ever signed." But Obama didn't renegotiate NAFTA. Trump just announced he's not going to pull out of it, and it seems clear the odds of any real renegotiation are slim.

    Obama attacked Wall Street, and so did Trump. Both then stocked their administrations with bankers.

    And Obama and Trump both ran against the Iraq War, and both of their constituencies understood them to mean they would rethink our entire policy toward the Middle East. Both Obama and Trump then faithfully continued the Afghanistan War, bombed Syria, and helped Saudi Arabia starve Yemen.

    ... ... ...

    "Now that we have vanquished the Dhimmicrats and cuckservatives," Steve Bannon proclaimed, "we shall -" and then tripped on his shoelaces and fell down 97 flights of stairs.

    [Apr 28, 2017] I seem to recall Ivanka telling Leslie Stahl she would be just a daughter and stay in NY. Now shes ordering up missile strikes.

    Apr 28, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
    Carolinian , April 26, 2017 at 2:35 pm

    Ivanka booed in Germany.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/04/25/germany-booed-ivanka-trump-and-america-doesnt-think-she-should-be-in-the-white-house/

    I seem to recall Ivanka telling Leslie Stahl she would be "just a daughter" and stay in NY. Now she's ordering up missile strikes.

    Indrid Cold , April 26, 2017 at 3:08 pm

    Princess Ivanka is just part of a cosmopolitan global aristocracy. She can change her mind anytime she likes and what are you going to do about it? Zip. Same with the Lady Chelsea.

    [Apr 28, 2017] The Final Stage of the Machiavellian Elites Takeover of America by Paul Fitzgerald & Elizabeth Gould

    Notable quotes:
    "... The true irony of today's late-stage efforts by Washington to monopolize "truth" and attack alternate narratives isn't just in its blatant contempt for genuine free speech. ..."
    "... the entire "Freedom Manifesto" employed by the United States and Britain since World War II was never free at all, but a concoction of the CIA's Psychological Strategy Board 's (PSB) comprehensive psychological warfare program waged on friend and foe alike. ..."
    "... The CIA would come to view the entire program, beginning with the 1950 Berlin conference, to be a landmark in the Cold War, not just for solidifying the CIA's control over the non-Communist left and the West's "free" intellectuals, but for enabling the CIA to secretly disenfranchise Europeans and Americans from their own political culture in such a way they would never really know it. ..."
    "... The modern state is an engine of propaganda, alternately manufacturing crises and claiming to be the only instrument that can effectively deal with them. ..."
    "... PSB D-33/2 foretells of a "long-term intellectual movement, to: break down world-wide doctrinaire thought patterns" while "creating confusion, doubt and loss of confidence" in order to "weaken objectively the intellectual appeal of neutralism and to predispose its adherents towards the spirit of the West." The goal was to "predispose local elites to the philosophy held by the planners," while employing local elites "would help to disguise the American origin of the effort so that it appears to be a native development." ..."
    "... Burnham's Machiavellian elitism lurks in every shadow of the document. As recounted in Frances Stoner Saunder's "The Cultural Cold War," "Marshall also took issue with the PSB's reliance on 'non-rational social theories' which emphasized the role of an elite 'in the manner reminiscent of Pareto, Sorel, Mussolini and so on.' ..."
    "... With "The Machiavellians," Burnham had composed the manual that forged the old Trotskyist left together with a right-wing Anglo/American elite. ..."
    "... The political offspring of that volatile union would be called neoconservatism, whose overt mission would be to roll back Russian/Soviet influence everywhere. Its covert mission would be to reassert a British cultural dominance over the emerging Anglo/American Empire and maintain it through propaganda. ..."
    "... Rarely spoken of in the context of CIA-funded secret operations, the IRD served as a covert anti-Communist propaganda unit from 1946 until 1977. According to Paul Lashmar and James Oliver, authors of " Britain's Secret Propaganda War ," "the vast IRD enterprise had one sole aim: To spread its ceaseless propaganda output (i.e. a mixture of outright lies and distorted facts) among top-ranking journalists who worked for major agencies and magazines, including Reuters and the BBC, as well as every other available channel. It worked abroad to discredit communist parties in Western Europe which might gain a share of power by entirely democratic means, and at home to discredit the British Left." ..."
    "... The mandate of his Institute for the Study of Conflict (ISC) set up in 1970 was to expose the supposed KGB campaign of worldwide subversion and put out stories smearing anyone who questioned it as a dupe, a traitor or Communist spy. Crozier regarded "The Machiavellians" as a major formative influence in his own intellectual development, and wrote in 1976 "indeed it was this book above all others that first taught me how [emphasis Crozier] to think about politics." ..."
    "... Crozier was more than just a strategic thinker. Crozier was a high-level covert political agent who put Burnham's talent for obfuscation and his Fourth International experience to use to undermine détente and set the stage for rolling back the Soviet Union. ..."
    "... Crozier's cooperation with numerous "able and diligent Congressional staffers" as well as "the remarkable General Vernon ('Dick') Walters, recently retired as Deputy Director of Central Intelligence," cemented the rise of the neoconservatives. When Carter caved in to the Team B and his neoconservative National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski's plot to lure the Soviets into their own Vietnam in Afghanistan, it fulfilled Burnham's mission and delivered the world to the Machiavellians without anyone being the wiser. ..."
    "... As George Orwell wrote in his "Second Thoughts on James Burnham": "What Burnham is mainly concerned to show [in The Machiavellians] is that a democratic society has never existed and, so far as we can see, never will exist. Society is of its nature oligarchical, and the power of the oligarchy always rests upon force and fraud. Power can sometimes be won and maintained without violence, but never without fraud." ..."
    www.truthdig.com

    Editor's note: This article is the last in a four-part series on Truthdig called "Universal Empire" -- an examination of the current stage of the neocon takeover of American policy that began after World War ll. Read Part 1 , Part 2 and Part 3 .

    The recent assertion by the Trump White House that Damascus and Moscow released "false narratives" to mislead the world about the April 4 sarin gas attack in Khan Shaykhun, Syria, is a dangerous next step in the "fake news" propaganda war launched in the final days of the Obama administration. It is a step whose deep roots in Communist Trotsky's Fourth International must be understood before deciding whether American democracy can be reclaimed.

    Muddying the waters of accountability in a way not seen since Sen. Joe McCarthy at the height of the Red Scare in the 1950s, the " Countering Disinformation and Propaganda Act " signed into law without fanfare by Obama in December 2016 officially authorized a government censorship bureaucracy comparable only to George Orwell's fictional Ministry of Truth in his novel "1984." Referred to as " the Global Engagement Center ," the official purpose of this new bureaucracy is to "recognize, understand, expose, and counter foreign state and non-state propaganda and disinformation efforts aimed at undermining United States national security interests." The real purpose of this Orwellian nightmare is to cook the books on anything that challenges Washington's neoconservative pro-war narrative and to intimidate, harass or jail anyone who tries. As has already been demonstrated by President Trump's firing of Tomahawk missiles at a Syrian government airbase, it is a recipe for a world war, and like it or not, that war has already begun.

    This latest attack on Russia's supposed false narrative takes us right back to 1953 and the beginnings of the cultural war between East and West. Its roots are tied to the Congress for Cultural Freedom, to James Burnham's pivot from Trotsky's Fourth International to right-wing conservatism and to the rise of the neoconservative Machiavellians as a political force. As Burnham's " The Struggle for the World " stressed, the Third World War had already begun with the 1944 Communist-led Greek sailors' revolt.

    In Burnham's Manichean thinking, the West was under siege. George Kennan's Cold War policy of containment was no different than Neville Chamberlain's policy of appeasement. Détente with the Soviet Union amounted to surrender. Peace was only a disguise for war, and that war would be fought with politics, subversion, terrorism and psychological warfare. Soviet influence had to be rolled back wherever possible. That meant subverting the Soviet Union and its proxies and, when necessary, subverting Western democracies as well.

    The true irony of today's late-stage efforts by Washington to monopolize "truth" and attack alternate narratives isn't just in its blatant contempt for genuine free speech. The real irony is that the entire "Freedom Manifesto" employed by the United States and Britain since World War II was never free at all, but a concoction of the CIA's Psychological Strategy Board 's (PSB) comprehensive psychological warfare program waged on friend and foe alike.

    The CIA would come to view the entire program, beginning with the 1950 Berlin conference, to be a landmark in the Cold War, not just for solidifying the CIA's control over the non-Communist left and the West's "free" intellectuals, but for enabling the CIA to secretly disenfranchise Europeans and Americans from their own political culture in such a way they would never really know it.

    As historian Christopher Lasch wrote in 1969 of the CIA's cooptation of the American left,

    "The modern state is an engine of propaganda, alternately manufacturing crises and claiming to be the only instrument that can effectively deal with them. This propaganda, in order to be successful, demands the cooperation of writers, teachers, and artists not as paid propagandists or state-censored time-servers but as 'free' intellectuals capable of policing their own jurisdictions and of enforcing acceptable standards of responsibility within the various intellectual professions."

    Key to turning these "free" intellectuals against their own interests was the CIA's doctrinal program for Western cultural transformation contained in the document PSB D-33/2 . PSB D-33/2 foretells of a "long-term intellectual movement, to: break down world-wide doctrinaire thought patterns" while "creating confusion, doubt and loss of confidence" in order to "weaken objectively the intellectual appeal of neutralism and to predispose its adherents towards the spirit of the West." The goal was to "predispose local elites to the philosophy held by the planners," while employing local elites "would help to disguise the American origin of the effort so that it appears to be a native development."

    While declaring itself as an antidote to Communist totalitarianism, one internal critic of the program, PSB officer Charles Burton Marshall, viewed PSB D-33/2 itself as frighteningly totalitarian, interposing "a wide doctrinal system" that "accepts uniformity as a substitute for diversity," embracing "all fields of human thought -- all fields of intellectual interests, from anthropology and artistic creations to sociology and scientific methodology." He concluded: "That is just about as totalitarian as one can get."

    Burnham's Machiavellian elitism lurks in every shadow of the document. As recounted in Frances Stoner Saunder's "The Cultural Cold War," "Marshall also took issue with the PSB's reliance on 'non-rational social theories' which emphasized the role of an elite 'in the manner reminiscent of Pareto, Sorel, Mussolini and so on.' Weren't these the models used by James Burnham in his book the Machiavellians? Perhaps there was a copy usefully to hand when PSB D-33/2 was being drafted. More likely, James Burnham himself was usefully to hand."

    Burnham was more than just at hand when it came to secretly implanting a fascist philosophy of extreme elitism into America's Cold War orthodoxy. With "The Machiavellians," Burnham had composed the manual that forged the old Trotskyist left together with a right-wing Anglo/American elite.

    The political offspring of that volatile union would be called neoconservatism, whose overt mission would be to roll back Russian/Soviet influence everywhere. Its covert mission would be to reassert a British cultural dominance over the emerging Anglo/American Empire and maintain it through propaganda.

    Hard at work on that task since 1946 was the secret Information Research Department of the British and Commonwealth Foreign Office known as the IRD.

    Rarely spoken of in the context of CIA-funded secret operations, the IRD served as a covert anti-Communist propaganda unit from 1946 until 1977. According to Paul Lashmar and James Oliver, authors of " Britain's Secret Propaganda War ," "the vast IRD enterprise had one sole aim: To spread its ceaseless propaganda output (i.e. a mixture of outright lies and distorted facts) among top-ranking journalists who worked for major agencies and magazines, including Reuters and the BBC, as well as every other available channel. It worked abroad to discredit communist parties in Western Europe which might gain a share of power by entirely democratic means, and at home to discredit the British Left."

    IRD was to become a self-fulfilling disinformation machine for the far-right wing of the international intelligence elite, at once offering fabricated and distorted information to "independent" news outlets and then using the laundered story as "proof" of the false story's validity. One such front enterprise established with CIA money was Forum World Features, operated at one time by Burnham acolyte Brian Rossiter Crozier . Described by Burnham's biographer Daniel Kelly as a "British political analyst," in reality, the legendary Brian Crozier functioned for over 50 years as one of Britain's top propagandists and secret agents .

    If anyone today is shocked by the biased, one-sided, xenophobic rush to judgment alleging Russian influence over the 2016 presidential election, they need look no further than to Brian Crozier's closet for the blueprints. As we were told outright by an American military officer during the first war in Afghanistan in 1982, the U.S. didn't need "proof the Soviets used poison gas" and they don't need proof against Russia now. Crozier might best be described as a daydream believer, a dangerous imperialist who acts out his dreams with open eyes. From the beginning of the Cold War until his death in 2012, Crozier and his protégé Robert Moss propagandized on behalf of military dictators Francisco Franco and Augusto Pinochet, organized private intelligence organizations to destabilize governments in the Middle East, Asia, Latin America and Africa and worked to delegitimize politicians in Europe and Britain viewed as insufficiently anti-Communist.

    The mandate of his Institute for the Study of Conflict (ISC) set up in 1970 was to expose the supposed KGB campaign of worldwide subversion and put out stories smearing anyone who questioned it as a dupe, a traitor or Communist spy. Crozier regarded "The Machiavellians" as a major formative influence in his own intellectual development, and wrote in 1976 "indeed it was this book above all others that first taught me how [emphasis Crozier] to think about politics." The key to Crozier's thinking was Burnham's distinction between the "formal" meaning of political speech and the "real," a concept which was, of course, grasped only by elites. In a 1976 article, Crozier marveled at how Burnham's understanding of politics had spanned 600 years and how the use of "the formal" to conceal "the real" was no different today than when used by Dante Alighieri's "presumably enlightened Medieval mind." "The point is as valid now as it was in ancient times and in the Florentine Middle Ages, or in 1943. Overwhelmingly, political writers and speakers still use Dante's method. Depending on the degree of obfuscation required (either by circumstances or the person's character), the divorce between formal and real meaning is more of less absolute."

    But Crozier was more than just a strategic thinker. Crozier was a high-level covert political agent who put Burnham's talent for obfuscation and his Fourth International experience to use to undermine détente and set the stage for rolling back the Soviet Union.

    In a secret meeting at a City of London bank in February 1977, he even patented a private-sector operational intelligence organization known at the Sixth International (6I) to pick up where Burnham left off: politicizing and privatizing many of the dirty tricks the CIA and other intelligence services could no longer be caught doing. As he explained in his memoir "Free Agent," the name 6I was chosen "because the Fourth International split. The Fourth International was the Trotskyist one, and when it split, this meant that, on paper, there were five Internationals. In the numbers game, we would constitute the Sixth International, or '6I.' "

    Crozier's cooperation with numerous "able and diligent Congressional staffers" as well as "the remarkable General Vernon ('Dick') Walters, recently retired as Deputy Director of Central Intelligence," cemented the rise of the neoconservatives. When Carter caved in to the Team B and his neoconservative National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski's plot to lure the Soviets into their own Vietnam in Afghanistan, it fulfilled Burnham's mission and delivered the world to the Machiavellians without anyone being the wiser.

    As George Orwell wrote in his "Second Thoughts on James Burnham": "What Burnham is mainly concerned to show [in The Machiavellians] is that a democratic society has never existed and, so far as we can see, never will exist. Society is of its nature oligarchical, and the power of the oligarchy always rests upon force and fraud. Power can sometimes be won and maintained without violence, but never without fraud."

    Today, Burnham's use of Dante's political treatise "De Monarchia" to explain his medieval understanding of politics might best be swapped for Dante's "Divine Comedy," a paranoid comedy of errors in which the door to Hell swings open to one and all, including the elites regardless of their status. Or as they say in Hell, " Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate ." Abandon hope all ye who enter here.

    This poart 4 of the series. For previous parts see

    1. Part 1: American Imperialism Leads the World Into Dante's Vision of Hell
    2. Part 3: How the CIA Created a Fake Western Reality for 'Unconventional Warfare'

    Paul Fitzgerald and Elizabeth Gould are the authors of " Invisible History: Afghanistan's Untold Story ," " Crossing Zero: The AfPak War at the Turning Point of American Empire " and " The Voice ." Visit their websites at invisiblehistory.com and grailwerk.com .

    [Apr 28, 2017] The US is at last facing the neocon captivity

    The new term is ZOC -- "AngloZionists occupied country."
    Notable quotes:
    "... Why did we invade Iraq ..."
    "... For years. Paul Wolfowitz and other members of the neocon movement had talked about getting rid of Iraq and there would be democracy throughout the region that would help Israel and they came to believe actually a very bizarre conspiracy theory that al Qaeda didn't matter, that Saddam Hussein was behind all the acts of violence ..."
    "... They have a consistent impulsive desire to make war on Arab and Islamic states in a neverending campaign, almost like an Orwellian campaign they will never outlive, that's why I have a problem with that thinking ..."
    "... We invaded Iraq because a powerful group of pro-Israel ideologues - the neoconservatives - who had mustered forces in Washington over the previous two decades and at last had come into the White House were able to sell a vision of transforming the Middle East that was pure wishful hokum but that they believed: that if Arab countries were converted by force into democracies, the people would embrace the change and would also accept Israel as a great neighbor. ..."
    "... all of whom would go into the Bush administration ..."
    "... It is in the PNAC letter written to George W. Bush early in 2002 urging him to "accelerate plans for removign Saddam Hussein from power" for the sake of Israel. ..."
    "... It is in Wolfowitz saying that the road to peace in the Middle East runs through Baghdad. (Possibly the stupidest thing anyone has ever said in the history of the world, including Douglas Feith.) ..."
    "... of suicide bombers in Tel Aviv ..."
    "... Many writers, including Joe Klein , Jacob Heilbrunn, and Alan Dershowitz , have said the obvious, that neoconservatism came out of the Jewish community. And I have long written that the Jewish community needs to come to terms with the degree to which it has harbored warmongering neoconservatives, for our own sake. ..."
    "... But America needs to come to terms with the extent to which it allowed rightwing Zionists to dominate discussions of going to war. ..."
    "... This matter is now at the heart of the Republican embrace of the war on Iran. There is simply no other constituency in our country for that war besides rightwing Zionists. They should be called out for this role, so that we don't make that terrible mistake again. ..."
    May 19, 2015 | mondoweiss.net t

    The best thing about this political moment in the U.S. (if not for the good people of Iraq) is that the rise of ISIS and the Republican candidates' embrace of the Iraq war is posing that deep and permanent question to the American public, Why did we invade Iraq ?

    Last night Chris Matthews asked that question again and David Corn said it was about the neoconservative desire to protect Israel. Both men deserve kudos for courage. Here's part of the exchange:

    Matthews: Why were the people in the administration like [Paul] Wolfowitz and the others talking about going into Iraq from the very beginning, when they got into the white house long before there was a 911 long before there was WMD. It seemed like there was a deeper reason. I don't get it. It seemed like WMD was a cover story.

    Corn: I can explain that. For years. Paul Wolfowitz and other members of the neocon movement had talked about getting rid of Iraq and there would be democracy throughout the region that would help Israel and they came to believe actually a very bizarre conspiracy theory that al Qaeda didn't matter, that Saddam Hussein was behind all the acts of violence

    Matthews: The reason I go back to that is there's a consistent pattern: the people who wanted that war in the worst ways, neocons so called, Wolfowitz, certainly Cheney.. it's the same crowd of people that want us to overthrow Bashar Assad, .. it's the same group of people that don't want to negotiate at all with the Iranians, don't want any kind of rapprochement with the Iranians, they want to fight that war. They're willing to go in there and bomb. They have a consistent impulsive desire to make war on Arab and Islamic states in a neverending campaign, almost like an Orwellian campaign they will never outlive, that's why I have a problem with that thinking . we've got to get to the bottom of it. Why did they take us to Iraq, because that's the same reason they want to take us into Damascus and why they want to have permanent war with Iran.

    What a great exchange. And it shows up Paul Krugman, who mystifies this very issue in the New York Times. (" Errors and Lies ," which poses the same question that Matthews does but concludes that Bush and Cheney "wanted a war," which is just a lie masquerading as a tautology.)

    Here are my two cents. We invaded Iraq because a powerful group of pro-Israel ideologues - the neoconservatives - who had mustered forces in Washington over the previous two decades and at last had come into the White House were able to sell a vision of transforming the Middle East that was pure wishful hokum but that they believed: that if Arab countries were converted by force into democracies, the people would embrace the change and would also accept Israel as a great neighbor. It's a variation on a neocolonialist theory that pro-Israel ideologues have believed going back to the 1940s: that Palestinians would accept a Jewish state if you got rid of their corrupt leadership and allowed the people to share in Israel's modern economic miracle.

    The evidence for this causation is at every hand.

    It is in the Clean Break plan written for Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu in 1996 by leading neocons Richard Perle, Douglas Feith and David Wurmser - all of whom would go into the Bush administration - calling for the removal of Saddam Hussein and the export of the Palestinian political problem to Jordan.

    It is in the Project for a New American Century letters written to Clinton in 1998 telling him that Saddam's WMD were a threat to Israel. (A letter surely regretted by Francis Fukuyama, who later accused the neocons of seeing everything through a pro-Israel lens.)

    It is in the PNAC letter written to George W. Bush early in 2002 urging him to "accelerate plans for removign Saddam Hussein from power" for the sake of Israel.

    the United States and Israel share a common enemy. We are both targets of what you have correctly called an "Axis of Evil." Israel is targeted in part because it is our friend, and in part because it is an island of liberal, democratic principles - American principles - in a sea of tyranny, intolerance, and hatred.

    It is in Netanyahu testifying to Congress in 2002 t hat he promised there would be "enormous positive reverberations" throughout the region if we only removed Saddam.

    It is in Wolfowitz saying that the road to peace in the Middle East runs through Baghdad. (Possibly the stupidest thing anyone has ever said in the history of the world, including Douglas Feith.)

    It is in all the neocon tracts, from Perle and Frum's An End to Evil, to Kristol and Kaplan's The War Over Saddam, to Berman's Terror and Liberalism, saying that Saddam's support for suicide bombers in Israel was a reason for the U.S. to topple him.

    It is in war-supporter Tom Friedman saying that we needed to invade Iraq because of suicide bombers in Tel Aviv - and the importance of conveying to Arabs they couldn't get away with that.

    It is in the head of the 9/11 Commission, former Bush aide Philip Zelikow, saying Israel was the reason to take on Iraq back in 2002 even though Iraq was no threat to us:

    "Why would Iraq attack America or use nuclear weapons against us? I'll tell you what I think the real threat (is) and actually has been since 1990 – it's the threat against Israel," Zelikow told a crowd at the University of Virginia on Sep. 10, 2002. "And this is the threat that dare not speak its name, because the Europeans don't care deeply about that threat, I will tell you frankly. And the American government doesn't want to lean too hard on it rhetorically, because it is not a popular sell."

    It is in Friedman saying that "elite" neoconservatives created the war in this interview with Ari Shavit back in 2003:

    It's the war the neoconservatives wanted, Friedman says. It's the war the neoconservatives marketed. Those people had an idea to sell when September 11 came, and they sold it. Oh boy, did they sell it. So this is not a war that the masses demanded. This is a war of an elite. Friedman laughs: I could give you the names of 25 people (all of whom are at this moment within a five-block radius of this office) who, if you had exiled them to a desert island a year and a half ago, the Iraq war would not have happened.

    It is in Tony Judt's statement about the Israel interest in the war back in 2003:

    For many in the current US administration, a major strategic consideration was the need to destabilize and then reconfigure the Middle East in a manner thought favorable to Israel.

    And yes this goes back to rightwing Zionism. It goes back to Norman Podhoretz and Irving Kristol launching neoconservatism in the 1970s because they said that the dovish policies of the Democratic Party were a direct threat to Israel– an analysis continued in this day by Norman Braman, Marco Rubio's leading supporter, who says that the U.S. must be a military and economic power in order to "sustain" Israel.

    An Economist blogger wrote several years ago that if you leave out the Zionism you won't understand the Iraq war:

    Yes, it would be ridiculous, and anti-semitic, to cast the Iraq war as a conspiracy monocausally driven by a cabal of Jewish neocons and the Israeli government. But it's entirely accurate to count neoconservative policy analyses as among the important causes of the war, to point out that the pro-Israeli sympathies of Jewish neoconservatives played a role in these analyses, and to note the support of the Israeli government and public for the invasion. In fact any analysis of the war's causes that didn't take these into account would be deficient.

    Many writers, including Joe Klein , Jacob Heilbrunn, and Alan Dershowitz , have said the obvious, that neoconservatism came out of the Jewish community. And I have long written that the Jewish community needs to come to terms with the degree to which it has harbored warmongering neoconservatives, for our own sake.

    But America needs to come to terms with the extent to which it allowed rightwing Zionists to dominate discussions of going to war.

    This matter is now at the heart of the Republican embrace of the war on Iran. There is simply no other constituency in our country for that war besides rightwing Zionists. They should be called out for this role, so that we don't make that terrible mistake again. And yes: this issue is going to play out frankly in the 2016 campaign, thanks in good measure to Matthews.

    [Apr 28, 2017] Former President Obama Has a New Job Control the Official Narrative of American Exceptionalism - Truthdig

    Apr 28, 2017 | www.truthdig.com
    The ruling class is seriously rattled over its loss of control over the national political narrative-a consequence of capitalism's terminal decay and U.S. imperialism's slipping grip on global hegemony. When the Lords of Capital get rattled, their servants in the political class are tasked with rearranging the picture and reframing the national conversation. In other words, Papa Imperialism needs a new set of lies, or renewed respect for the old ones. Former president Barack Obama, the cool operator who put the U.S. back on the multiple wars track after a forced lull in the wake of George Bush's defeat in Iraq, has eagerly accepted his new assignment as Esteemed Guardian of Official Lies.

    At this stage of his career, Obama must dedicate much of his time to the maintenance of Official Lies, since they are central to his own "legacy." With the frenzied assistance of his first secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, Obama launched a massive military offensive-a rush job to put the New American Century back on schedule. Pivoting to all corners of the planet, and with the general aim of isolating and intimidating Russia and China, the salient feature of Obama's offensive was the naked deployment of Islamic jihadists as foot soldiers of U.S. imperialism in Libya and Syria. It is a strategy that is morally and politically indefensible-unspeakable!-the truth of which would shatter the prevailing order in the imperial heartland, itself.

    Thus, from 2011 to when he left the White House for a Tahiti yachting vacation with music mogul David Geffen and assorted movie and media celebrities, Obama orchestrated what the late Saddam Hussein would have called "The Mother of All Lies": that the U.S. was not locked in an alliance with al-Qaida and its terrorist offshoots in Syria, a relationship begun almost 40 years earlier in Afghanistan.

    Advertisement Square, Site wide He had all the help he needed from a compliant corporate media, whose loyalty to U.S. foreign policy can always be counted on in times of war. Since the U.S. is constantly in a (self-proclaimed) state of war, corporate media collaboration is guaranteed. Outside the U.S. and European corporate media bubble, the whole world was aware that al-Qaida and the U.S. were comrades in arms. (According to a 2015 poll, 82 percent of Syrians and 85 percent of Iraqis believe the U.S. created ISIS .) When Vladimir Putin told a session of the United Nations General Assembly that satellites showed lines of ISIS tankers stretching from captured Syrian oil fields "to the horizon," bound for U.S.-allied Turkey, yet untouched by American bombers, the Obama administration had no retort. Russian jets destroyed 1,000 of the tankers , forcing the Americans to mount their own, smaller raids. But, the moment soon passed into the corporate media's amnesia hole-another fact that must be shed in order to avoid unspeakable conclusions.

    Presidential candidate Donald Trump's flirtation with the idea of ending U.S. "regime change" policy in Syria-and, thereby, scuttling the alliance with Islamic jihadists-struck panic in the ruling class and in the imperial political structures that are called the Deep State, which includes the corporate media. When Trump won the general election, the imperial political class went into meltdown, blaming "The Russians"-first, for warlord Hillary Clinton's loss, and soon later for everything under the sun. The latest lie is that Moscow is sending weapons to the Taliban in Afghanistan, the country where the U.S., Saudi Arabia and Pakistan spent billions of dollars to create the international jihadist network. Which shows that imperialists have no sense of irony, or shame. (See BAR: " The U.S., Not Russia, Arms Jihadists Worldwide .")

    After the election, lame duck President Obama was so consumed by the need to expunge all narratives that ran counter to "The Russians Did It," he twice yammered about " fake news " at a press conference in Germany with Chancellor Angela Merkel. Obama was upset, he said, "Because in an age where there's so much active misinformation and its packaged very well and it looks the same when you see it on a Facebook page or you turn on your television. If everything seems to be the same and no distinctions are made, then we won't know what to protect."

    Although now an ex-president, it is still Obama's job to protect the ruling class, and the Empire, and his role in maintaining the Empire: his legacy. To do that, one must control the narrative-the subject uppermost in his mind when he used Chicago area students as props, this week, for his first public speech since leaving the White House.

    "It used to be that everybody kind of had the same information," said Obama, at the University of Chicago affair. "We had different opinions about it, but there was a common base line of facts. The internet has in some ways accelerated this sense of people having entirely separate conversations, and this generation is getting its information through its phones. That you really don't have to confront people who have different opinions or have a different experience or a different outlook."

    Obama continued:

    "If you're liberal, you're on MSNBC, or conservative, you're on Fox News. You're reading The Wall Street Journal or you're reading The New York Times, or whatever your choices are. Or, maybe you're just looking at cat videos [laughter].

    "So, one question I have for all of you is, How do you guys get your information about the news and what's happening out there, and are there ways in which you think we could do a better job of creating a common conversation now that you've got 600 cable stations and you've got all these different news opinions-and, if there are two sets of opinions, then they're just yelling at each other, so you don't get a sense that there's an actual conversation going on. And the internet is worse. It's become more polarized."

    Obama's core concern is that there should be a "common base line of facts," which he claims used to exist "20 or 30 years ago." The internet, unregulated and cheaply accessed, is the villain, and the main source of "fake news" (from publications like BAR and the 12 other leftwing sites smeared by the Washington Post, back in November, not long after Obama complained to Merkel about "fake news").

    However, Obama tries to dress up his anti-internet "fake news" whine with a phony pitch for diversity of opinions. Is he suggesting that MSNBC viewers also watch Fox News, and that New York Times readers also peruse the Wall Street Journal? Is he saying that most people read a variety of daily newspapers "back in the day"? It is true that, generations ago, there were far more newspapers available to read, reflecting a somewhat wider ideological range of views. But most people read the ones that were closest to their own politics, just as now. Obama is playing his usual game of diversion. Non-corporate news is his target: "...the internet is worse. It's become more and more polarized."

    The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, MSNBC and Fox News all share the "common base line of facts" that Obama cherishes. By this, he means a common narrative, with American "exceptionalism" and intrinsic goodness at the center, capitalism and democracy as synonymous, and unity in opposition to the "common" enemy: Soviet Russians; then terrorists; now non-Soviet Russians, again.

    Ayanna Watkins, a senior at Chicago's Kenwood Academy High School, clearly understood Obama's emphasis, and eagerly agreed with his thrust. "When it comes to getting information about what's going on in the world, it's way faster on social media than it is on newscasts," she said.

    "But, on the other hand, it can be a downfall because, what if you're passing the wrong information, or the information isn't presented the way it should be? So, that causes a clash in our generation, and I think it should go back to the old school. I mean, phones, social media should be eliminated," Ms. Watkins blurted out, provoking laughter from the audience and causing the 18-year-old to "rephrase myself."

    What she really meant, she said, was that politicians should "go out to the community" so that "the community will feel more welcome."

    If she was trying to agree with Obama, Ms. Watkins had it right the first time: political counter-narratives on the internet have to go, so that Americans can share a "common base line" of information. All of it lies.

    Black Agenda Report executive editor Glen Ford can be contacted at [email protected].

    [Apr 27, 2017] Wall Street Journal Reports on Appearance of Private Equity Self-Dealing at Blackstone and Other Firms Nearly Four Years After We Broke the Story

    Notable quotes:
    "... iLevel gives PE firms unprecedented ability to cook the books of their portfolio companies while maintaining a facade of compliance. ..."
    "... refrain from self- dealing, usurpation of corporate opportunity and any acts that would permit them to receive an improper personal benefit or injure their constituencies ..."
    "... Fraud is the basis of the economic system in Western society in 21st Century. It is now so accepted that no prosecutions take place except for those who publicise the fact. ..."
    "... We are well aware that most corporate bankruptcies result from Fraud and so did the Greenspan Bust after 2006 which followed on from the Great Greenspan Orgy after 1999 ..."
    "... Private Equity a Formula for Fraud. Abuses in the private equity structure have long been alleged. Finally a research study adds evidence to this issue. Read the entire White Paper on Addressing financial fraud in the private equity industry. ..."
    "... Certain characteristics of the private equity industry may make it more susceptible to allegations of fraudulent activities, such as relatively long lockup periods, illiquid investments, complex transactions, broad partnership agreements, a perceived lack of transparency, inherent conflicts of interest and activist investors. ..."
    "... The corporate press seems to be embracing a "distraction first/pooh pooh later" approach. So they can say "we covered it" and "it was no big deal" at the same time. Oh, look, what is that sparkly thing over there?! ..."
    "... and just to imagine the future: PE will be in a good position, without scrutiny, to buy/invest in corporations that have won bids to go into cozy infrastructure PPPs with the government so just think of all the write-offs the LPs will get when all of those corporations downsize or go bankrupt after the government stops propping them up and after PE has taken all its up-front fees and in-house loans. ..."
    Apr 27, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
    Posted on April 27, 2017 by Yves Smith This is priceless. Naked Capitalism beat the Journal by nearly four years reporting a "new" story.

    On top of that, the Journal isn't terribly exercised about conflicts of interest involving executives with clear legal duties to investors engaged in what looks uncomfortably like self-dealing. This complacency stands in stark contrast to press hysteria about Ivanka Trump selling schamattes out of the White House.

    From the opening paragraphs of an above-the-fold story on the front page of the Wall Street Journal today, Wall Street's New Problem: When Fund Titans Invest on the Side :

    In 2010, a firm called Swift River Investments LLC put money into a software company developed by private-equity giant Blackstone Group LP. Five years later, a company Blackstone co-owned acquired the software firm, at a price that gave Swift River a fat profit.

    Blackstone's back-and-forth involving Swift River wouldn't be notable but for one thing: Swift River invests personal wealth for Blackstone's president and chief operating officer, Hamilton "Tony" James. A brother of his runs it.

    Wall Street billionaires, their fortunes built by investing other people's money, increasingly are putting some of their own in sideline investment ventures, while continuing to operate their hedge funds or private-equity funds for clients

    In the Blackstone/Swift River matter, Blackstone said its transactions involving Mr. James's family investment firm were cleared by Blackstone's conflicts committee, and Mr. James wasn't involved in the decisions. He declined to be interviewed.

    This is far from a "new problem". We wrote specifically about Blackstone's Tony James and Swift River in 2013 in How Private Equity Executives Like Blackstone's Tony James Engage in Dubious Side Deals , as an example of the more general problem of possible self dealing. From that post :

    Today, we'll examine conflicts of interest involving principals at the private equity firms themselves. Here our object lesson is private equity kingpin Blackstone Group.

    Tony James is the chief operating officer of the Blackstone Group, overseeing the entire firm across its large range of asset management and investment banking services. James also runs the Blackstone private equity investment business, meaning he sets policy and is the final decision-maker on its day-to-day activities.

    One would expect these dual roles at Blackstone to keep James busy and give him an adequate income. But he also has a side business that he owns with his two brothers, called Swift River Investments, a "family private equity firm". In other words, James is a substantial principal in a business that could theoretically compete with Blackstone. And, while it is unlikely that Swift River has enough capital to bid against Blackstone for deals, it is nevertheless clear in one case that Swift River is deeply involved with Blackstone. Moreover, in other cases, there is considerable potential for conflicts of interest between Swift River and Blackstone and investors are powerless to police them.

    These actual and potential conflicts are particularly troublesome from a corporate governance perspective, since as a corporate officer of Blackstone, James has a duty of loyalty to Blackstone

    Let's look at the situation where we know that James put himself into a conflict of interest.

    Blackstone developed a software application internally called iLevel Solutions. Blackstone spun it out and, lo and behold, it wound up in the hands of the James brothers through Swift River. Blackstone shareholders have every reason to be concerned about possible self-dealing here. After all, why does it make any sense to sell a corporate asset to a top executive and his family members? And how could the board ever be satisfied that the price of the transaction was fair?

    But it's not just Blackstone shareholders who have reason to be troubled by an arrangement that looks an awful lot like self-dealing. Blackstone's private equity fund investors – institutions like the NYC pension system – have reason to be concerned about Swift River's investment activities.

    Of the 10 investments Swift River lists having made, five of them are privately-held oil field services companies (and the sixth is the iLevel related-party deal with Blackstone). So the James brothers like oil services companies. What's the big deal?

    Well, it turns out that Blackstone has recently gotten into the energy investment business in a big way. In August 31, 2012 SEC filing, Blackstone disclosed that it had raised $2,074,621,000 for a new fund called "Blackstone Energy Partners L.P." A clear focus of this fund is investment in energy exploration companies, as shown in a Blackstone press release issued shortly after the fund's closing, where Blackstone announced an investment in an offshore drilling company. Now, you can see where this is going. Tony James is buying oil exploration companies with his investors' money, and he happens to own a bunch of companies personally that service exploration companies.

    On the one hand, there is no evidence that James is using his Blackstone position to have the Blackstone Energy Partners companies do business with the companies he owns. On the other hand, his iLevel deal with Blackstone shows that neither James nor Blackstone appear to have any reluctance to engage in related party transactions. Moreover, independent of any oil services transactions between Blackstone and Swift River, there are other ways that James and his family benefit from the shared interests and may cross the line into "improper personal benefit". All of the information that James gets in his formal day job, such as contract, industry intelligence, and deal flow, can also be used to help Swift River. In fact, it's hard to see how James could stop that from happening even if he wanted to. How can he erect a Chinese wall in his brain?

    What makes these dealings particularly troubling is that Blackstone's fund investors are absolutely powerless to even begin to monitor any of these potential related party transactions or resource-sharing in order to ensure that they are not abusive. In fact, private equity LP investors almost always sign up to fund terms (in the super-secret limited partnership agreements that are the only state and local government contracts not subject to FOIA) where the investors agree to let the PE firm executives compete against the funds they manage. This is undoubtedly the case with Blackstone's funds, which demonstrates just how dysfunctional the entire ecosystem of private equity actually is. And remember, the dominant LP investors in private equity are your state and local governments, the universities you attended that constantly hound you for donations, and the mutual insurance companies that you theoretically own as policy holders.

    We also discussed the software company at issue, iLevel Solutions. This was the focus of that post:

    We will see that this company is built from the ground up as a vehicle to convince PE investors and the SEC that Blackstone and other PE firms have implemented robust financial controls over the companies they own. The reality, however, is the opposite: by design, iLevel gives PE firms unprecedented ability to cook the books of their portfolio companies while maintaining a facade of compliance.

    In passing, we discussed additional conflicts of interest that escaped the Journal's attention :

    iLevel has also been ingenious in its implementation of the "Wall Street Rule" – the idea that bad practices are most untouchable by regulators when they become industry standard. In that spirit, iLevel in late 2011 announced that the Carlyle Group had become a part owner of the company. This is presumably in addition to the continuing partial ownership of the Blackstone COO. Nominally, Carlyle and Blackstone are competitors, yet they teamed up on iLevel. Working together, they have been able to promote the product's adoption among a large portion of large private equity firms, including Apollo, TPG, and Cerberus, and more than 30 other firms, in addition to Blackstone and Carlyle.

    And finally, in a coup de grace of seediness, around the same time as the Carlyle deal, iLevel brought in another investor in the form of Hamilton Lane . This firm is the dominant "gatekeeper" performing due diligence and making recommendations to pension funds and other institutional investors on private equity funds. So, in its fiduciary role advising pension funds, Hamilton Lane sits in judgment of Blackstone and Carlyle. But on the side, Hamilton Lane is also in a deal with the Blackstone COO and Carlyle. Though this appears to be a material conflict of interest, it is worth noting that the conflict does not appear to be disclosed in the "Conflicts of Interest" section of Hamilton Lane's Form ADV filed with the SEC.

    The Journal's new information is that a company Blackstone "co-owned," presumably but not necessarily a portfolio company bought back ILevel from Swift River, in 2015, for $75 million. From the story:

    Blackstone said in regulatory filings that it had talked to about 20 potential investors before selecting Swift River as one of the primary 2010 buyers. It said negotiations were led by an outside investor not linked to the James family.

    If you think this "outside investor" was operating independently, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you. Anyone with an operating brain cell would understand which buyer was preferred and would know full well it was in their economic best interest to curry favor with Tony James.

    The other conflict of interest that was disclosed in regulatory filings involved oil-field services companies, which we flagged in 2013 as problematic. Again from the Journal:

    In the other potential conflict it cited in filings as linked to Swift River, a Blackstone business-development affiliate provided financing to an oilfield-services company in which Swift River indirectly owned a stake. Blackstone filings said Mr. James didn't work on the financing for the oilfield company, Allied-Horizontal Wireline Services LLC.

    The Journal does discuss other of private equity fund principals having their own private equity businesses on the side. Apollo founder Marc Rowan's real estate venture is supposedly kosher by virtue of him being involved only in strategy and "intended to have different durations and risk-return profiles than those made by Apollo's funds." TPG Chairman Eric Bonderman has both his own side investment firm, Wildcat Capital Management, and is also an investor in company started by a former TPG employee, Dragoneer. One result of these incestuous relationships: "Mr. Bonderman invested in Spotify both through funds that TPG manages for clients and through Dragoneer." Fortress has "handful of employees work solely on the personal financial matters of co-founders, who reimburse Fortress." That almost certainly means they get lots of free intelligence. Query also whether full overheads, like office space and the cost of admin support, are being allocated pro-rata to these staffers.

    Despite Fortress' bromides about employees being forbidden to get into conflict of interest with clients along with supposed further oversight of top people, the Journal discusses at length a "tangled situation" involving a donation pledge by a Fortress entity to Milwaukee just the Milwaukee Bucks were seeing funding from the city to help fund a new arena. The wee ethical and optical problem? Fortress Fortress co-founder and co-chairman Wesley Edens was also a co-owner of the Bucks.

    Here are some additional shortcomings with this story:

    Failure to discuss why these conflicts of interest are serious and troubling . The title of this story in the print edition is anodyne: "Fund Kings Open 'Family Offices'". The message of the entire piece is: "These firms had to reveal they have these cozy arrangements. But they all swear they have robust internal procedures, so this must be OK." Notice the failure to get a reading from an independent expert or even to consult corporate governance standards, as we did in 2013:

    From the American Bar Association (emphasis ours):

    Generally, officers owe the same fiduciary duties as directors .Officers with greater knowledge and involvement may be subject to higher standard of scrutiny and liability

    Under state corporate law, directors of solvent corporations have two basic "fiduciary" duties, the duty of care and the duty of loyalty. The duty of care, which is governed by statute in most states, usually requires that directors discharge their duties in good faith and with the care that an ordinarily prudent person in a like position would exercise under similar circumstances and in a manner the director reasonably believes to be in the best interests of the corporation. See, e.g., Or. Rev. Stat. § 60.357 (1). In some states, including Delaware, the standard of care, though essentially the same, is established by judicial decision. See, e.g., Graham v. Allis-Chalmers Mfg. Co., 188 A.2d 125, 130 (Del. 1963). The duty of loyalty requires that directors act on behalf of the corporation and its shareholders and refrain from self- dealing, usurpation of corporate opportunity and any acts that would permit them to receive an improper personal benefit or injure their constituencies . See, e.g., Guth v. Loft, Inc., 5 A.2d 503, 510 (Del. 1939).

    Failure to consider whether investor disclosure was inadequate . As we indicated in 2013, limited partnership agreements have broad language waiving conflicts of interest which legitimates the mind-boggling notion of fund managers competing with their own investors. However, the SEC, which now oversees private equity firms as investment managers thanks to Dodd Frank, has taken a dim view of marketing materials that are misleading, irrespective of what the fine print in the contracts actually says. So it's not inconceivable, given that some vintage 2006 and 2007 funds are still in business, that some fund managers may have made airy assurances that are at odds with their current behavior.

    And on a common-sense basis, any limited partner ought to be upset at the idea of a personal wealth management business of private equity principals getting anywhere near their investments, given how private equity firms have been caught cheating investors in just about every creative way imaginable.

    Put it another way: if the general partners were even semi-serious about making sure everything looked kosher, they'd review these insider deals with the limited partner advisory committees of the appropriate funds. As we've discussed, the limited partner advisory committees are captured; the members are chosen so that the general partner has a large majority of friendly investors who would never cross them. But the one thing the minority of non-captured advisory committee members can do is vote with their feet on the next fundraising. But that is clearly more than the private equity kingpins are willing to hazard.

    Failure to mention that some, perhaps most, of these disclosures came about thanks to Dodd Frank, which Trump is threatening to kill . All private equity fund managers over a not-large size are required to file an annual disclosure form ADV with the SEC. Many firms have revealed in these documents that they are engaged in practices that alert parties can ascertain are not permitted by their contracts with investors. Yet even this weak protection is likely to be scotched if Trump and House Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling get their way.

    The Wall Street Journal exemplifies why limited partners are complacent in the face of private equity self-dealing and embezzlement. The reporters dug up some troubling material, called up the private equity firms for comment, and took their reassurances at face value. This is Potemkin journalism masquerading as the real deal. The rapid rise of a plutocracy means we need the Fourth Estate to help curb its power. Unfortunately, for the most part, vigorous journalism has become a relic.

    Paul Greenwood , April 27, 2017 at 6:07 am

    Fraud is the basis of the economic system in Western society in 21st Century. It is now so accepted that no prosecutions take place except for those who publicise the fact.

    We are well aware that most corporate bankruptcies result from Fraud and so did the Greenspan Bust after 2006 which followed on from the Great Greenspan Orgy after 1999

    rich , April 27, 2017 at 8:53 am

    Private equity refresher .

    Private Equity a Formula for Fraud. Abuses in the private equity structure have long been alleged. Finally a research study adds evidence to this issue. Read the entire White Paper on Addressing financial fraud in the private equity industry.

    "This paper addresses the more prevalent areas where private equity firms, brokers and other advisers may be subject to accusations of manipulation or fraud. Certain characteristics of the private equity industry may make it more susceptible to allegations of fraudulent activities, such as relatively long lockup periods, illiquid investments, complex transactions, broad partnership agreements, a perceived lack of transparency, inherent conflicts of interest and activist investors. Investors are scrutinizing the performance and activities of their portfolio managers, financial advisers, agents and the portfolio companies themselves. Limited partners are increasingly more critical of disclosure materials supplied by general partners and are demanding more detailed performance data.

    Stakeholders must be prepared to respond to issues that may arise at both the fund management and portfolio company level. Stakeholders must also provide careful oversight of their outside financial advisers, brokers and other agents."

    For those with brave hearts and deep pockets, joining a private equity fund as a limited partner carries with it the ultimate disclaimer, caveat emptor. The standard 2 and 20 Private Equity Fee Structure is being challenged. However, the gimmicks and tricks used to siphon off the top costs to fund a crony insider get rich scheme is expected from the "Masters of the Universe".

    http://www.batr.org/corporatocracy/061715.html

    Keep believing .wait til they start FEEding on your SS$.

    Stephen P Ruis , April 27, 2017 at 9:31 am

    Re "This complacency stands in stark contrast to press hysteria about Ivanka Trump selling schamattes out of the White House." The corporate press seems to be embracing a "distraction first/pooh pooh later" approach. So they can say "we covered it" and "it was no big deal" at the same time. Oh, look, what is that sparkly thing over there?!

    Susan the other , April 27, 2017 at 10:55 am

    and just to imagine the future: PE will be in a good position, without scrutiny, to buy/invest in corporations that have won bids to go into cozy infrastructure PPPs with the government so just think of all the write-offs the LPs will get when all of those corporations downsize or go bankrupt after the government stops propping them up and after PE has taken all its up-front fees and in-house loans.

    jerry , April 27, 2017 at 10:58 am

    "This complacency stands in stark contrast to press hysteria about Ivanka Trump selling schmattes out of the White House."

    hahaha i died at that one

    shinola , April 27, 2017 at 11:59 am

    New (to me) word learned today: "schmatte(s) – an article of clothing; garment

    jerry , April 27, 2017 at 12:38 pm

    More like low quality rags, perfect yiddish word :D

    [Apr 26, 2017] Trumps Aggressions in Syria Will Have Long-Term Consequences

    Hat tip to antiwar.com.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Trump's national security and "defense" advisors are just as bad, and worse. Matthew McCaffrey at the Mises Institute explains how Trump's "economic worldview could only ever have led to militarism and conflict." So the new warmongering should be of no surprise. ..."
    "... Although while he has suggested some hints of non-interventionist thought during the campaign, now we can see the kind of influence that his entourage of military generals can have on his "thinking." ..."
    "... Reuters ..."
    "... Guardian ..."
    "... The American Conservative ..."
    "... But, James Bovard noted in this article how during that first 1991 war the U.S. military went on to intentionally bomb Iraqi civilian water and sewage treatment centers. Those illicit actions were followed by the U.S. government's sanctions to prevent the Iraqis from rebuilding that infrastructure. That was for the stated purpose of disabling the society as a whole as well as subverting "civilian morale," as the Air Force Col. John Warden put it, who was quoted in that Bovard article ..."
    "... The destruction of Iraqi water treatment centers and the sanctions during the 1990s led to high rates of cholera, typhoid and infant mortality, and the deaths of hundreds of thousands by the mid-1990s, from the U.S. government's first war on Iraq that then-President George H.W. Bush claimed would not be "another Vietnam." ..."
    Apr 26, 2017 | www.activistpost.com

    As I have noted in response to the latest U.S. government aggressions in the Middle East, Donald Trump's short-sighted military actions in Syria are not based on rational thought but on emotionalism, his feeling terrible about the children and other innocent victims of the chemical attack in Syria this week. But this is purely selective emotionalism, given that he doesn't seem so concerned about all the innocent victims of his own drone bombings that he has been authorizing since he was sworn in as President.

    Trump is also not concerned for the probable long-term results of his warmongering now. History indicates that the situation will only get worse from here, as we have seen with Iraq.

    And there are other examples of Trump's selective emotionalism and concern for Syrians. For example, where is Trump's concern for the innocent victims of the head-choppers and thousand-lashers in Saudi Arabia? Should he bomb the Royal Saudi King's palace? What about the starving victims of Venezuela's Maduro? Should Trump bomb Caracas? (But since when is U.S. foreign policy ever consistent?)

    As with his terrible economic advisors who have been advising Trump to support ObamaCare Lite and trillion-dollar infrastructure squandering, Trump's national security and "defense" advisors are just as bad, and worse. Matthew McCaffrey at the Mises Institute explains how Trump's "economic worldview could only ever have led to militarism and conflict." So the new warmongering should be of no surprise.

    Although while he has suggested some hints of non-interventionist thought during the campaign, now we can see the kind of influence that his entourage of military generals can have on his "thinking."

    According to Reuters , a " U.S. intelligence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity ," said that "[Syria's Bashar] Assad has repeatedly shown that he is willing to use whatever chemical weapons he has retained or reconstituted to attack and terrorize his own people," even though those who have made that assertion have not presented any evidence of it.

    In a statement rationalizing his military strikes on Syria, Trump said, "Using a deadly nerve agent, Assad choked out the life of innocent men, women and children," as a matter of proven fact. Yet, there has been no evidence provided by anyone. And the government groupies of the mainstream media do not seem to be asking why Assad would intentionally gas his own people? What did he have to gain from that? What proof has there been that Assad is the true culprit?

    Although, there have been claims of evidence made mainly by the Islamist anti-Assad rebels as pointed out by Justin Raimondo , who lists some of the hoaxes committed by those "rebels." So really, there is no reliable evidence against Assad on this recent chemical weapons attack.

    And what about the Trump drones terrorizing innocents in Yemen, Syria, Iraq and elsewhere? According to the U.K. Guardian , the Tuaiman family in Yemen is typical of people in those areas who now experience the terror of Trump's escalation of drones from once a week to every day, especially given Trump's campaign threat to kill "terrorists" (in a total absence of due process), as well as their families. Trump's bombs in Syria and Iraq have already resulted in a huge increase in numbers of civilians murdered .

    And speaking of chemical warfare, I guess Trump has not learned from, or perhaps doesn't even know about all the terrible things that the U.S. military did to the people of Iraq over these past 15 years, actually 26 years now, since 1991 . As Eric Margolis referred to , the U.S. military used white phosphorus in its invasions and bombings in Iraq, especially Fallujah.

    The people of Iraq have suffered not only from the U.S. military's use of chemical weapons but from depleted uranium and other contaminants which have polluted the Iraqis' water supply since the first U.S. government war on Iraq in 1991. Kelley Beaucar Vlahos wrote for The American Conservative of "babies born with two heads, one eye in the middle of the face, missing limbs, too many limbs, brain damage, cardiac defects, abnormally large heads, eyeless, missing genitalia, riddled with tumors," and a doubled rate of childhood leukemia.

    The bombing during the 1991 first war on Iraq also negatively affected U.S. soldiers , many of whom complain of health problems now as well.

    In the current bombing of Syria that Donald Trump has initiated, the U.S. military claims that their Tomahawk missiles, profitably produced by Raytheon, have pinpoint precision, so that they will not harm civilians.

    That precision bombing technology is what we witnessed from the proud warmongers of the U.S. government's first war on Iraq in 1991:

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/V30vSPFLeoE

    But, James Bovard noted in this article how during that first 1991 war the U.S. military went on to intentionally bomb Iraqi civilian water and sewage treatment centers. Those illicit actions were followed by the U.S. government's sanctions to prevent the Iraqis from rebuilding that infrastructure. That was for the stated purpose of disabling the society as a whole as well as subverting "civilian morale," as the Air Force Col. John Warden put it, who was quoted in that Bovard article.

    The destruction of Iraqi water treatment centers and the sanctions during the 1990s led to high rates of cholera, typhoid and infant mortality, and the deaths of hundreds of thousands by the mid-1990s, from the U.S. government's first war on Iraq that then-President George H.W. Bush claimed would not be "another Vietnam."

    Scott Lazarowitz is a libertarian writer and commentator. Please visit his blog .

    [Apr 26, 2017] Did Assad Order the Syrian Gas Attack

    So it looks we ended with the same neocons in Department of Defense and national security Council that would be appointed by Hillary. Paul Wolfowitz friends no more, no less.
    Which converted Trump slogan "make America great again" into standard neocons idea of "Full spectrum domination".
    Notable quotes:
    "... We also know that the Russians used a "hotline" prior to the attack to alert the United States military that the strike would be taking place against what was apparently described as an arms depot. ..."
    "... The White House also reversed itself regarding possible Syrian peace talks, declaring that Bashar al-Assad must be removed as a condition for any political settlement of the ongoing crisis. It also described Russia as complicit in protecting the Syrian president. Secretary of State Tillerson declared that bilateral relations with Moscow cannot improve as long as Russia is supporting al-Assad. The relationship with Russia is, according to President Trump , at an "all-time low." ..."
    "... Bear in mind that nearly all the information and physical evidence available from the attack site in Syria has come from anti-Assad sources linked to al-Qaeda affiliate al-Nusra, which controls the area. This includes the so-called White Helmets, who are opposition surrogates . The established narrative derives from this material as well as from bipartisan assertions of Assad's "certain" guilt, even from normally liberal Democrats , which are being presented as fact. ..."
    "... The four-page White House report is supplemented by commentary provided by McMaster and Secretary of Defense James Mattis (also a former general) on the day of the U.S. attack, as well as a more recent interview with CIA Director Mike Pompeo, which describes the decision-making process and the military options. Each official, as well as President Trump, took it as a given that Syria had carried out the attack. Regarding the motive for such an attack, the report claims that Damascus was seeking to halt a rebel advance. ..."
    "... "Make America Great Again" == "Full Spectrum Dominance"? ..."
    "... It does seem true that political survival demanded the about face. The only way to prove in our hysterical political climate engendered by the fury of the Clinton loss, that the President is not a Russian agent, demands a war with Russia. ..."
    "... Maybe the North Vietnamese were responsible for whatever actually happened in the Gulf of Tonkin, eh? ..."
    "... I was astonished by the speed of the US response given the fact that intel on the ground is notoriously complex. The White House coulda shoulda woulda waited two days to verify. It now may be a case of acute and toxic need to save face. ..."
    "... Great analytical piece that puts the main stream journalists to shame. Let me add one instance of suspicious reports by Al-Qaedhe affiliate: the supposed attack happened at night or early morning, according to rebel reports. "when people slept" , it was repeatedly said. Then, there is talk of "we saw a bomb dropping", or "a mushroom cloud", etc. Obviously, these observations could not happen in dark. ..."
    "... as noted in other thread (re: North Korea), this feels like Iraq v2.0, and we all know the 45th POTUS has no problem throwing the CIA and "the generals" under the bus. the phrase 'pressure from the white house' is particularly chilling. then again, when the Commander-in-Chief is a member of the Pro Wrestling Hall of Fame, and reality TV game show host, who tweets and yammers incessantly about "fake news" (the ultimate false flag operation), should we not expect him "value" fake intelligence and/or alternative "facts" when it comes to waging war? who could have imagined a person of this ilk would actually be a neocon in populist/anti-establishment clothing? or maybe he is just a patsy being handled deftly by "agents" of the Military-Industrial establishment? ..."
    "... Remember WMD and Saddam? What did the top papers say after Colin Powell's speech to the UN "proving" that Iraq had WMD? ..."
    "... "It does seem true that political survival demanded the about face. The only way to prove in our hysterical political climate engendered by the fury of the Clinton loss, that the President is not a Russian agent, demands a war with Russia." ..."
    "... And it was a mistake. A deep mistake. He was winnning the Russia Manchurian candidate issue. The tide was turning even among democrats and it was beginning to sour faster each day. He should have fought it. The short term gain of turning the tables in this manner has now hemmed into the camp of interventionists. And what worse gained him but momentary praise unless he continues to bend. ..."
    "... It's pressure not from the white house, but that band of interventionists that the current executive has surrounded himself with. And it may prove his undoing.A cadre of Mr. Wolfitzs and Vice Pres Cheneys. ..."
    "... the safety of striking those munition storage bunkers without releasing sarin everywhere, why aren't they more specific about the weapon supposedly released from the aircraft? They say: ..."
    "... People who can fight a conventional army with an air force to a standstill over a period of years might have been able to capture a few poison gas munitions along the way. Not saying this happened. I am saying that given our sources of info, most of the time we don't really know what is happening. ..."
    "... ISIS and "the rebels" are rumored to be receiving chemical weapons from Turkey and perhaps Saudi Arabia. So their inability to manufacture Sarin or other chemical weapons doesn't vindicate them when they appear to have access to it via state actors. ..."
    "... They have used various chemical agennts 52 times according to the NYT. ..."
    "... Did Assad Order the Syrian Gas Attack? I really doubt. Chemical weapons are inefficient, indiscriminate, provocative ..."
    "... the "White Helmets" are a known propaganda operation by the British foreign office. ..."
    Apr 25, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    On the morning of April 4, a Syrian Air Force Russian-made Sukhoi-22 fighter bomber dropped or fired something at a target in rebel-held Idlib Governorate. A cloud of some chemical substance subsequently materialized and drifted to the adjacent inhabited village of Khan Shaykhun, where it killed between 50 and 100 people. We also know that the Russians used a "hotline" prior to the attack to alert the United States military that the strike would be taking place against what was apparently described as an arms depot.

    We also know about what might be considered collateral damage. The deaths and alleged use of chemical weapons were described by President Donald Trump as a "vital national-security interest" and served as the pretext for a strike by 59 U.S. cruise missiles two days later, which was directed against the Syrian air base at al-Shayrat. The U.S. attack did little damage and the base was soon again operational.

    The White House also reversed itself regarding possible Syrian peace talks, declaring that Bashar al-Assad must be removed as a condition for any political settlement of the ongoing crisis. It also described Russia as complicit in protecting the Syrian president. Secretary of State Tillerson declared that bilateral relations with Moscow cannot improve as long as Russia is supporting al-Assad. The relationship with Russia is, according to President Trump , at an "all-time low."

    The U.S. government, in support of its narrative justifying the cruise-missile attack, has issued a four-page assessment entitled "The Assad Regime's Use of Chemical Weapons on April 4, 2017." The report was issued by the National Security Council, which is part of the White House, and was authored by Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, the national-security advisor, rather than Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats. The provenance suggests that it might not be what it is touted as, a "Summary of the U.S. Intelligence Community's Assessment " It makes a number of claims, some of which might be considered fact-based, while others seem questionable.

    Bear in mind that nearly all the information and physical evidence available from the attack site in Syria has come from anti-Assad sources linked to al-Qaeda affiliate al-Nusra, which controls the area. This includes the so-called White Helmets, who are opposition surrogates . The established narrative derives from this material as well as from bipartisan assertions of Assad's "certain" guilt, even from normally liberal Democrats , which are being presented as fact.

    The four-page White House report is supplemented by commentary provided by McMaster and Secretary of Defense James Mattis (also a former general) on the day of the U.S. attack, as well as a more recent interview with CIA Director Mike Pompeo, which describes the decision-making process and the military options. Each official, as well as President Trump, took it as a given that Syria had carried out the attack. Regarding the motive for such an attack, the report claims that Damascus was seeking to halt a rebel advance. Others in the media have claimed that it was done to "test" the United States or intimidate the Syrian population, but some other observers find those explanations elusive. After all, Bashar al-Assad would have had no good reason to stage a chemical attack when he was winning the war, while the rebels theoretically had plenty of motivation to stage a "false flag" attack to alienate Damascus from Western Europe and the Americans.

    There is considerable repetition in the White House report describing Syrian involvement, rebel inability to mount a chemical attack, physical remains, and symptoms of the dead and injured. It says that the U.S. government is "confident" that the Syrian government carried out a chemical attack using "a neurotoxic agent like sarin against its own people" on the morning of April 4, and that it would have been impossible for the rebels to fabricate the incident because it would be too complicated for them to do so. The alleged U.S. intelligence relating to understanding the attack included Sigint, geospatial monitoring, and physiological examination. Plus "Credible open source reporting tells a clear and consistent story." This included commercial-satellite imagery, which shows the impact sites of the weapons used, and opinions registered by civilian agencies like Medecins Sans Frontieres and Amnesty International.

    The U.S. government report also maintains that Syria has violated its international obligations by retaining chemical-weapons capabilities even though it agreed to destroy all stocks in 2013. The narrative also insists that the still highly controversial attack made on Ghouta in 2013 was, in fact, carried out by Damascus. Syrian chemical-weapons experts were probably "involved in planning the [current] attack." Symptoms of the victims were consistent with exposure to sarin.

    Since the attack, per the report, the Russians and Syrians have been spinning out "false narratives" employing "multiple, conflicting accounts [of what took place] in order to create confusion and sow doubt within the international community."

    As noted above, beyond the bare bones of the Syrian attack, the U.S. retaliation, and the casualties, there is little in the incidents and the surrounding analysis that can be regarded as hard fact. Little in the National Security Council report is unassailable, and one should note that almost none of it is based on U.S. intelligence resources. The possibility that a Syrian chemical-weapons expert was "probably" involved expresses uncertainty, suggesting that an intercepted telephone call is being generously interpreted. And the geospatial monitoring is either a satellite (or even a drone) overhead, or possibly an AWACS plane operating along the nearby Turkish border, which would register the flight path of the Su-22 and the subsequent explosion(s), hardly conclusive evidence of anything beyond what we already know to be true.

    The thinness of the U.S. intelligence came through in an April 13 talk by CIA Director Mike Pompeo, who described the pressure from the White House to come up with an "assessment." As a bottom line, he commented that "Everyone saw the open-source photos, so we had reality on our side." One might observe that that reality was derived from Google satellite photography possibly adjusted by the rebels and freely interpreted by the media, not from the $80 billion per year intelligence community.

    Observers should also reexamine the assumption that rebels would be unable to either mount a chemical attack or create a "false flag" operation. There have been numerous instances of ISIS and al-Nusra use of chemicals both in Syria and Iraq, the most recent being just this past week in western Mosul. And the similar Ghouta "false flag" in 2013 almost succeeded , apparently aided by Turkish intelligence , stopped only when Director of National Intelligence James Clapper paid a surprise visit to President Obama in the Oval Office to tell him that the case against Damascus was not a "slam dunk."

    And the physical evidence that the Syrians launched a chemical attack from the air has been challenged. The only eyewitness to surface , a 14-year-old, has described how she saw a bomb drop from an airplane and hit a nearby building, which produced a mushroom cloud. It is just as the Russians and Syrians described the incident and rules out sarin, which is colorless. And then there is the testimony of Professor Theodore Postol, professor emeritus of science, technology, and national-security policy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Postol has examined the evidence in the photos and concluded that the toxin was fired from the ground, not from the air, adding that no competent analyst would believe otherwise-suggesting that there was a rush to judgment. Postol concluded that "it can be shown, without doubt, that the document does not provide any evidence whatsoever that the U.S. government has concrete knowledge that the government of Syria was the source of the chemical attack."

    Former weapons inspector Scott Ritter has also disputed the findings in the White House report, noting that what evidence there is points to the use of conventional weapons by the Syrians. He also notes that the Su-22's available weapons cannot deliver a chemical or gas attack from the air, something which Donald Trump and his advisers might not have been aware of.

    And then there are the victims. The tests confirming the presence of sarin were carried out in Turkish hospitals and Ankara is far from a neutral party, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan having demanded repeatedly that al-Assad be removed.

    It is all too easy to forget that the rebels and their associates are killers, with little to differentiate them from the crimes that are being laid at Bashar al-Assad's door. Two recent examples of rebel brutality include the beheading of a child and the recent bombing of Syrian refugees waiting to cross into government-controlled territory. The latter attack killed more people-including women, children, and babies-than the incident at Khan Shaykhun, but it was not so much as mentioned by President Trump. It was only briefly reported in the U.S. media before being dropped down the memory hole, presumably because it did not fit the prevailing narrative.

    Other videos and pictures of Khan Shaykhun victims cited by the White House show survivors being assisted by alleged medical personnel, who appear not be wearing any protective garb. If the chemical agent had actually been sarin, they too would have been affected. And the symptoms of sarin are similar to the symptoms experienced with exposure to other toxins, including chlorine and smoke munitions. One survivor noted a smell of rotten food and garlic. Sarin is, in addition to being colorless, odorless.

    And then there is the question of al-Assad's chemical-weapons supply. It is now being asserted by the White House that the Syrians retained a significant capability, but that is not what Secretary of State John Kerry said in July 2014, when he claimed everything was destroyed : "We struck a deal where we got 100 percent of the chemical weapons out." The United States, working with Russia, was instrumental in destroying the Syrian chemical stockpile.

    It certainly appears that there was a rush to judgment on the part of the White House and the top presidential advisors. It is possible that al-Assad did what he has been accused of, but the Trump administration decided to assign guilt to the Syrians before they could have known with any clarity what had happened. As in the case of Iraq, the available intelligence was made to fit the preferred narrative. All that remained was to call a meeting of top advisors to determine exactly how to punish Damascus. The truth about what occurred in Syria on April 4 remains to be discovered, and is almost certainly possessed by many in the U.S. intelligence community. Perhaps someday, someone who understands what happened will feel compelled to reveal what he or she knows.

    Meanwhile, the fallout from the incident and the U.S. retaliation is severe and potentially catastrophic. As Princeton Professor Stephen Cohen, America's leading expert on Russia, put it recently :

    I think this is the most dangerous moment in American-Russian relations, at least since the Cuban missile crisis. And arguably, it's more dangerous, because it's more complex. So the question arises, naturally: Why did Trump launch 50 Tomahawk missiles at a Syrian Air Force base, when, God help us, he did kill some people, but was of no military value whatsoever? Was this meant to show 'I'm not a Kremlin agent?' Because, normally, a president would have done the following. You would go to the United Nations and ask for an investigation about what happened with those chemical weapons. And then you would decide what to do. But while having dinner at Mar-a-Lago with the leader of China, who was deeply humiliated, because he's an ally of Russia, they rushed off these Tomahawk missiles.

    Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer, is executive director of the Council for the National Interest.

    EliteCommInc. , says: April 24, 2017 at 10:21 pm

    If there's a slam dunk here, it's that the US is constantly being played.
    MEOW , says: April 24, 2017 at 11:05 pm
    Who benefits? Not Syria. Not the US?
    Lee , says: April 24, 2017 at 11:11 pm
    Exactly, when was the last time US Intelligence proved valid on ANYTHING where a high level decision was made?

    Fran Macadam , says: April 25, 2017 at 3:40 am
    "Make America Great Again" == "Full Spectrum Dominance"?

    Another guy in the WH who prefers his "gut" and thereby believes he creates reality ex nihilo?

    But

    He was prescient some weeks back when he said he knew it wasn't to his political benefit to get along with Russia and that people would applaud firing on a Russian ship off the east coast, but that it wouldn't be great at all, but terrible.

    It does seem true that political survival demanded the about face. The only way to prove in our hysterical political climate engendered by the fury of the Clinton loss, that the President is not a Russian agent, demands a war with Russia.

    Since the applause for this is so great across the political spectrum, excluding present company, that is what we will get.

    bacon , says: April 25, 2017 at 3:42 am
    When did US government lying to justify some action come to be seen as unusual? Maybe the Assad government did carry out this chemical attack, but our record of being casual with the truth raises doubts. Maybe the North Vietnamese were responsible for whatever actually happened in the Gulf of Tonkin, eh?
    Douglas Burton , says: April 25, 2017 at 4:06 am
    This is a welcome contribution to the reportage of what appears to be a tragic rush to judgment. Well done!

    I was astonished by the speed of the US response given the fact that intel on the ground is notoriously complex. The White House coulda shoulda woulda waited two days to verify. It now may be a case of acute and toxic need to save face.

    Hassan , says: April 25, 2017 at 7:26 am
    Great analytical piece that puts the main stream journalists to shame. Let me add one instance of suspicious reports by Al-Qaedhe affiliate: the supposed attack happened at night or early morning, according to rebel reports. "when people slept" , it was repeatedly said. Then, there is talk of "we saw a bomb dropping", or "a mushroom cloud", etc. Obviously, these observations could not happen in dark.
    Daath , says: April 25, 2017 at 8:07 am
    There is no hard proof one way or another, but the circumstantial arguments here for the false flag theory aren't very strong.

    1. Assad is winning, so why would he have done this? This is the exact same argument that was repeatedly given after Ghouta attack, and yet the war goes on. The government won an important victory in Aleppo, but most of Syria is outside its control. Its own forces are also weak and often disloyal, so it depends on Russia, Hizbollah and Iran. These allies don't necessarily care that much about total Assad victory.

    2. Rebel chemical weapons. ISIS and apparently Jabhat Fatah al-Sham (ex-Nusra) have used chlorine and mustard gas, yes. These are considerably easier to manufacture than nerve agents. In any case, Guardian's Kareem Shaheen's on-ground report referred to meeting with Ahrar al-Sham's officials there, and that's a different bunch of Islamists. They cooperate with other throat cutters, though.

    3. Testimonies. Eyewitness accounts are notoriously unreliable (was there really a mushroom cloud or just some billowing dust?). Postol's is more interesting, but also seems compatible with air attack not using a dedicated chemical weapon dispersion device. Syrian air force's signature weapon is the barrel bomb, so assuming the use of another improvised device here isn't illogical.

    4. First responders not affected. Locals claim they were. AFAIK sarin degrades fast in heat and sunlight, so by the time photos were taken later in the day, the danger would have been much lower. This would have also been a reason to launch the attack in early morning – and the airstrike did indeed happen at 6:30am.

    5. Odorless sarin. In theory it is, yes. Impurities can impart strong smells to it, and binary sarin mixed within delivery device doesn't necessarily mix perfectly.

    6. Kerry's statement. Well, duh. Of course he said that. It was a somewhat embarrassing episode, and the deal saved face, so of course it had to be 100% successful, even if it wasn't.

    Joe the Plutocrat , says: April 25, 2017 at 8:32 am
    as noted in other thread (re: North Korea), this feels like Iraq v2.0, and we all know the 45th POTUS has no problem throwing the CIA and "the generals" under the bus. the phrase 'pressure from the white house' is particularly chilling. then again, when the Commander-in-Chief is a member of the Pro Wrestling Hall of Fame, and reality TV game show host, who tweets and yammers incessantly about "fake news" (the ultimate false flag operation), should we not expect him "value" fake intelligence and/or alternative "facts" when it comes to waging war? who could have imagined a person of this ilk would actually be a neocon in populist/anti-establishment clothing? or maybe he is just a patsy being handled deftly by "agents" of the Military-Industrial establishment?
    Jim Bovard , says: April 25, 2017 at 8:33 am
    Great piece – best thing I have seen yet on the latest Syrian uproar.
    collin , says: April 25, 2017 at 9:28 am
    Does this truth really matter in the Trump Presidency?

    He got to his sugar bombing of empty fields next to airstrips that the Russian & Syrians knew in advance of the bombing. Cable News got their fireworks show and Trump got be President. It seemed like everybody benefited except Syria.

    Hanna Khayyat , says: April 25, 2017 at 10:29 am
    Remember WMD and Saddam? What did the top papers say after Colin Powell's speech to the UN "proving" that Iraq had WMD?
      New York Times: "[Powell's speech] may not have produced a 'smoking gun," but it left little question that Mr. Hussein had tried hard to conceal one." Wall Street Journal: "The Powell evidence will be persuasive to anyone who is still persuadable. The only question remaining is whether the U.N. is going to have the courage of Mr. Powell's convictions." Washington Post: "To continue to say that the Bush administration has not made its case, you must now believe that Colin Powell lied in the most serious statement he will ever make "

    Different year; different country, but for the msm in the USA, some things never change.

    EliteCommInc. , says: April 25, 2017 at 11:46 am
    "It does seem true that political survival demanded the about face. The only way to prove in our hysterical political climate engendered by the fury of the Clinton loss, that the President is not a Russian agent, demands a war with Russia."

    And it was a mistake. A deep mistake. He was winnning the Russia Manchurian candidate issue. The tide was turning even among democrats and it was beginning to sour faster each day. He should have fought it. The short term gain of turning the tables in this manner has now hemmed into the camp of interventionists. And what worse gained him but momentary praise unless he continues to bend.

    Further it plays the other edge of that sword, that he is easily turned, cowed frightened and more, he will betray those he befriends for support to so as to avoid criticism by noise makers. The fact, that we should not be in Syria in the first place should have been his foundational stance as it was during the campaign.

    That he should have weighed evidence based on disinterested parties. Because what was presented was dubious on its face. We have been down this road before and nothing about this charge made any more sense than the previous attempt to bait US involvement. As for the nonsense about the rebels not having the capabilities - excuse me - but if you have a chemical weapon on a canister all one need do is open it - these arguments are, I agree familiar to the Iraq advances for war - as if developed by a class of high school students. Photos of explosions – you have got to be kidding.

    I have some responses to the 6 counters presented.

    a. The Syrian government is winning. And the reason there is still war is because the US and others continue to foment and encourage the rebels, Known as terrorists by any other name.

    b. Rebels and chem weapons, their availability is far wider than suggested. No they could have easily released said chemicals and they didn't have to manufacture them - they were provided (a brief history):

    c. So the first respondents waited leaving people to die. I don't buy it. In addition, the gas would have spread immediately, not later in the day. As reported in drifted into the communities yet the impact is very slight.

    The entire advance here gets thinner with each defense. Oddly no one is putting those blood tests on the table. As for people choking since all bomb munitions are designed to cease life function by direct hit or secondary reaction, I have no doubt that people experienced shortness of breath.

    But most importantly, no one is disputing the Russian claim. Because if they were they would accuse Russia of using chemical weapons, after all, it was a Russian mission. That what this charge ought to be, that Russia knowingly used a chemical compound forbidden by international law.

    Make that charge and I might begin to take the advance as having some sincerity.

    It's pressure not from the white house, but that band of interventionists that the current executive has surrounded himself with. And it may prove his undoing.A cadre of Mr. Wolfitzs and Vice Pres Cheneys.

    Winston , says: April 25, 2017 at 12:01 pm
    1. The small crater in an asphalt road which you can find an image of online looks exactly like the craters left by a very common, surface-to-surface (note – NOT air-to-surface) 122mm unguided artillery rocket. 122mm debris is specifically mentioned in reports about the debris left in the crater.

    2. The US report makes no mention of the type of munition used while it claims to be certain about the specific type of aircraft used. A 122mm rocket fired from the aircraft would have been extremely obvious for many miles around. WHY no mention of the specific munition type used – rocket or gravity (dumb) bomb? A 122m surface-to-surface artillery missile SOMEHOW fired from an aircraft when a much simpler dumb bomb attack which would have been more appropriate is both unusual and suspicious.

    3. Only if the sarin weapon used was of the binary type would an attack on the airbase which launched the supposedly guilty aircraft not released sarin when all of the munition storage bunkers were destroyed as they were. If the US was that certain of even the specific sarin device type used and, therefore, the safety of striking those munition storage bunkers without releasing sarin everywhere, why aren't they more specific about the weapon supposedly released from the aircraft? They say:

    "A significant body of pro-opposition social media reports indicate that the chemical attack began in Khan Shaykhun at 6:55 a.m. local time on 4 April. Our information indicates that the chemical agent was delivered by regime Su-22 fixed-wing aircraft that took off from the regime-controlled Shayrat Airfield. These aircraft were in the vicinity of Khan Shaykhun approximately 20 minutes before reports of the chemical attack began and vacated the area shortly after the attack. Additionally, our information indicates personnel historically associated with Syria's chemical weapons program were at Shayrat Airfield in late March making preparations for an upcoming attack in Northern Syria, and they were present at the airfield on the day of the attack."

    Delivered HOW, by what kind of weapon? A 122mm rocket made only for surface-to-surface weapons systems? If they are so certain about the chemical weapons personnel at the airbase how would they not know at least that? Did the "pro-opposition" tell them about those personnel, the same people who would be most likely to launch a false flag attack?

    Donald , says: April 25, 2017 at 12:20 pm
    Daath–the point is not that we know it was a false flag attack. The point is or should be that we don't know it wasn't. We don't know much of anything besides people dying. And some of your claims are debatable anyway. Could sarin be stolen from an Assad stockpile? Why not? The rebels have done amazingly well, killing at least 100,000 armed opponents (with an amazingly low civilian death count according to the anti-Assad reporters, which as some have pointed out, means the Al Qaeda forces are among the most humane fighters in history.) People who can fight a conventional army with an air force to a standstill over a period of years might have been able to capture a few poison gas munitions along the way. Not saying this happened. I am saying that given our sources of info, most of the time we don't really know what is happening.
  • Bridger , says: April 25, 2017 at 6:37 pm
    @DAATH

    ISIS and "the rebels" are rumored to be receiving chemical weapons from Turkey and perhaps Saudi Arabia. So their inability to manufacture Sarin or other chemical weapons doesn't vindicate them when they appear to have access to it via state actors.

    They have used various chemical agennts 52 times according to the NYT.

    Dr.Diprospan , says: April 25, 2017 at 11:36 pm
    As always, a good question from Mr. Giraldi, but I would have looked at the event differently. Did Assad Order the Syrian Gas Attack? I really doubt. Chemical weapons are inefficient, indiscriminate, provocative

    Let's look at the event in the context of other events of April 2017:

    Another Russian American crew flew into space. The Exxon-Mobil oil company is negotiating with Russian partners to explore oil reserves in the Black Sea.

    The Russian national currency is rapidly strengthening. Finally, a group of Russian students whom I know well get an American visa without obstacles with the program "work and travel."

    For several years in Russia, international competitions in military equipment have been popular. Every year, the Russian military before the competitions in "Tank biathlon" and "Air darts" send an invitation to their American colleagues, but Americans always ignore the invitations.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FQdAYM4bOA
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wh6ORlaURso
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r55i7Y3MkbE

    For the US military there are more interesting contests with the Russians – those that are 90 percent close to real combat conditions.

    A good excuse is already available. So 2 destroyers in the Mediterranean are ready to attack the airfield. The US warns Russia 2 hours before the launch of cruise missiles. The first destroyer fires 40 missiles and they fall unexploded in the Syrian deserts. Thus Russia demonstrates new system of EW – "Lever".

    Then the Russian military disconnects the device and allows 20 missiles from the 2nd destroyer to hit hangars with decommissioned aircraft.

    Why did Xi Jin Pinge smile so good-naturedly, tasting Donald Trump's gorgeous chocolate cake? He probably anticipated that if the Russian EW facilities prove themselves well, then, at the meeting with Putin in Moscow this summer, they will discuss a new multibillion-dollar military order while trying Russian ice cream with tea.

    EliteCommInc. , says: April 26, 2017 at 2:58 am
    "The White Helmets are among the only humanitarian workers who are able to operate in the region."

    Unfortunately Amnesty International has become an advocacy group or the rebels. They are not neutral. After Iraq, they have abandoned their neutrality for choosing sides.

    "Assad used chemical weapons in 2013."

    The rebels have been caught with their pants down on the use of chemical weapons. In fact, Turkey arrested rebels with chemical weapons. The cases of 2013 have been thoroughly dissected, fine tooth combed and it leaves advocates wanting and naked.

    In the articles I noted its clear that death is no stranger to those who prefer Pres Assad admin. Death camps, battle is always a death camp.

    Just a reminder: should advocates desire less death perhaps that y should start by advocating less unnecessary war.

    DedBrian , says: April 26, 2017 at 7:03 am
    Alex
    April 25, 2017 at 5:35 pm
    "Scott Ritter is wrong, Su-22 has B-13L rocket pod capable of delivering S-13 or similar 122mm rockets including ones with chemical warheads."

    Is that an intentional lie? No one ever heard about S-13 with chemical warhead. Not mentioning that there were never any airplane-carried rockets with chemical warheads invented in the USSR or for Soviet planes. And not mentioning that there are no B-13L on Syrian SU-22, they are equipped only with UB-32 pods with 57mm S-5 rockets.
    They are beautifully seen on many pictures including the ones from Khan Shaykhun:
    https://twitter.com/SyrianMilitary/status/830960348391948288

    Winston Snith , says: April 26, 2017 at 7:07 am
    Mary,

    the "White Helmets" are a known propaganda operation by the British foreign office.

    As for your attacks on the Syrian government – "Assad"- why do you repeat your own regime's demonization propaganda ?

    The use of poison gas is a characteristic of the American regime under Obama – check the news items – and the Jihadist paramilitaries that work for it.

    bill , says: April 26, 2017 at 8:24 am
    im pretty sure that its established that the tweets by the Jihadist " doctor"- thats the guy where the case of kidnapping against him was stopped as witnesses had vanished-were made 19 hours BEFORE the alleged attack case closed ..
    Where i live i have personal knowledge of 2 people intimately involved 1) the Syrian Observatory of Human Rights often used as a source!! by the BBC is one man who hasnt been to Syria for over a decade for this reason alone anything he says should be treated with real suspicion 2) Rev Andrew Ashdown travelled to Aleppo to see how he could help,and to comfort the ordinary people caught up in this terror- his reports from there ( and he is a friend of the local bishop) show that everything being pushed out by the mainstream media with a few occasional exceptions from Fisk et al is more or less the opposite of what is reported,THAT INDEED SYRIANS support their army,have great regard for Assad and his wife,were imprisoned in Aleppo, suffered great deprivation,torture,murder, theft,rape, kidnapping etc etc from their terrorist captors and are deeply grateful to Russia and Putin for coming to their rescue, and have never heard of the White Helmets who like the SOHR are responsible for much of the propaganda

    [Apr 26, 2017] Ron Paul on New Syria Sanctions and Still Unproven Gas Attack Claim

    With such friends like Paul Wolfowitz Defense Secretary Mattis and National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster belong to Hillary team. And Trump are strongly advised to perform sex change operation.
    Notable quotes:
    "... How to explain this sudden embrace of the neocon line on Syria and elsewhere? It might be telling that according to recent press reports the architect of the disastrous Iraq war, Paul Wolfowitz, is lending advice on the Middle East to Defense Secretary Mattis and National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster. They have all apparently been friends for years. More in today's Ron Paul Liberty Report: ..."
    "... If you are interested, I wrote a very detailed blog post , in which I examine the evidence about the recent chemical attack and compare the situation with what happened after the chemical attack in Ghouta in August 2013 ..."
    "... Wolfowitz? The same jackass who thought Iraq could be conquered by 10,000 troops in under one hour? One of the biggest reason why US foreign policy is so recalcitrant and feckless is that former F-ups are continually called upon to lend an opinion just because they have putative experience. ..."
    "... If you do not think a concerted conspiracy is taking place, I suggest you visit the Atlantic Council website and others pushing almost identical stories -- And yes - they cover events in the Ukraine as well -- Conspiracy -- They just SUPPORT each other -- What's WRONG with that ? ..."
    Apr 25, 2017 | www.antiwar.com

    President Trump has yet to provide any credible evidence that the gas attack in Syria earlier this month was carried out by Assad, and in the meantime very serious questions about the veracity of White House claims are arising from very credible experts. Yet the Administration seems ever more determined now that it has done a 180 degree turn and demanded regime change for Syria. Late last week the White House announced sanctions on 271 Syrian scientists who Trump claims are working on chemical weapons. The proof? None.

    How to explain this sudden embrace of the neocon line on Syria and elsewhere? It might be telling that according to recent press reports the architect of the disastrous Iraq war, Paul Wolfowitz, is lending advice on the Middle East to Defense Secretary Mattis and National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster. They have all apparently been friends for years. More in today's Ron Paul Liberty Report:

    Bill In Montgomey , a day ago

    Their last point is important: Whistleblowers needed, perhaps now more than ever.

    Kitty Antonik Wakfer , a day ago

    Virtually all those in USGov leadership roles are not interested in peace; MIC makes for favors to dispense & $contributions for re-election. But wars can't be waged if few are willing to join military & work for Dept of Defense (what a truth-twisted name!). Depopularize both military participation & "support the troops" mania.

    BrotherJonah Kitty Antonik Wakfer , 8 hours ago

    Take a day off from sanity and watch TV all day. The advertising for just about every commercial product is being taken over by militarism. Toys, breakfast cereals, restaurants, cars, beer commercials, good thing we don't have tobacco commercials anymore, or we'll have a campaign like Lucky Strike GREEN is going to War! (the tobacco company changed the color on the packets because the red dye had a lot of chromium in it and chromium was needed for aircraft parts) Rice Krispies cereal was touted as "Shot from Guns!" (Let's get the kids involved!) That last one was courtesy of my Mom and her sisters, they were kids at the time. The Recruiters are getting worse.

    Philippe Lemoine , 20 hours ago

    If you are interested, I wrote a very detailed blog post , in which I examine the evidence about the recent chemical attack and compare the situation with what happened after the chemical attack in Ghouta in August 2013.

    I argue that, in the case of the attack in Ghouta, the media narrative had rapidly unravelled and that, for that reason, we should be extremely prudent about the recent attack and not jump to conclusions. Among other things, I discuss the ballistic analysis produced by Postol and Lloyd at the time, which showed that both the much-touted NYT/HRW analysis and the US intelligence were mistaken.

    I also show that, despite the fact that a lot of evidence came out that undermined the official narrative, the media never changed their stance and continued to talk as if there was no doubt that Assad's regime was responsible for the attack.

    It's more than 5,000 words long and I provide a source for every single factual claim I make. The post has already been widely shared and some people have criticized it, so I will soon post a follow-up where I reply to critics and say more about the evidence that bears on the attack in Khan Sheikhoun.

    Bill In Montgomey Philippe Lemoine , 8 hours ago

    Thanks for this work.

    mdb , 18 hours ago

    Wolfowitz? The same jackass who thought Iraq could be conquered by 10,000 troops in under one hour? One of the biggest reason why US foreign policy is so recalcitrant and feckless is that former F-ups are continually called upon to lend an opinion just because they have putative experience.

    The truth about the gas attack might take some time to wiggle to the surface, especially if claims made by the administration turn out bankrupt. They will likely bury it as long as possible. The media will likely be reticent to dig, having all thrown roses at Trump's feet for a little "shock and awe". Never underestimate either the willful ignorance or the ignominious glorification (by the media) of reckless bombing under the guise of humanitarian concerns. It seems they learned not a damned thing from the debacle of Iraq. They have simply gone back to sleep since then.

    Paul talks about "sensibility and a better policy". It seems he was yet another "believer" who was duped by a man who tells lies faster than his lips can move. They had about 16 months to watch Trump put truth in a dumpster fire, and yet they STILL believed that his election would herald some utopian, isolationist, wet-dream fantasy-land where the MIC would fold up overnight and bring all the boys back home. How's that working out for the "believers"? Trust a man with no core at your own peril. The messiah complex (as a projection) really needs to die in this country...before we do some REAL damage to ourselves.

    Bill In Montgomey mdb , 9 hours ago

    Nice post. In defense of Paul, I never saw any statement of his that he was a supporter of Trump. He did say he liked SOME of the things he was saying on the campaign trail (like bring the troops home). Also, it didn't take him long to publicly criticize Trump. Contrast these critical/skeptical statements to those of other public figures. I suspect Paul's attacks on Trump will accelerate (they already have).

    Also, Paul did cite "red flags" about Trump during the campaign. I saw him on one interview criticize the proclivity of Trump to propose executive actions that seemed imperial in nature, certainly outside of the confines of a president's Constitutional role.

    Ron Paul's voice and views are more important than mine as they get heard and read by far more people. Thank goodness he is still around to offer his contrarian views.

    I'm sure Trump already doesn't like Ron Paul, and that Trump's antagonism for Paul will only grow as events transpire.

    peter brooker , 13 hours ago

    For all those deluded conspiracy theorists out there -- The mainstream news almost without exception supports accusations that Syria uses Sarin gas and that Assad kills his own citizens --

    They all agree that the 'moderate' opposition, 'free speech' community service activists, with only peaceful intentions, as they are deserve both our support and protection - but I am beginning to wonder who it is doing the fighting ? Oh, sorry -- Assad -- Sorry for my foolish mistake !

    If you do not think a concerted conspiracy is taking place, I suggest you visit the Atlantic Council website and others pushing almost identical stories -- And yes - they cover events in the Ukraine as well -- Conspiracy -- They just SUPPORT each other -- What's WRONG with that ? Just pass the hymn-sheet around -- Please feel welcome to join in the singing --

    [Apr 24, 2017] The Honeymoon of the Generals

    Notable quotes:
    "... As the 100-day mark of his presidency approaches, there's been no serious reassessment of America's endless wars or how to fight them (no less end them). Instead, there's been a recommitment to doing more of the familiar, more of what hasn't worked over the last decade and a half. ..."
    "... Like those generals, he's a logical endpoint to a grim process, whether you're talking about the growth of inequality in America and the rise of plutocracy – without which a billionaire president and his billionaire cabinet would have been inconceivable – or the form that American war-making is taking under him. ..."
    "... As the chameleon he is, he promptly took on the coloration of the militarized world he had entered and appointed "his" three generals to key security posts. Anything but the norm historically, such a decision may have seemed anomalous and out of the American tradition. That, however, was only because, unlike Donald Trump, most of the rest of us hadn't caught up with where that "tradition" had actually taken us. ..."
    "... Hence, Steve Bannon, his dream strategist while on the campaign trail, is now reportedly on the ropes ..."
    "... Think of Trump as a chameleon among presidents and much of this makes more sense. ..."
    "... Donald Trump isn't either a politician or a trendsetter. If anything, he's a trend-senser. (In a similar fashion, he didn't create reality TV, nor was he at its origins. He simply perfected a form that was already in development.) ..."
    "... What happens, then? What happens when the war honeymoon is over and the generals keep right on fighting their way? The last two presidents put up with permanent failing war, making the best they could of it. That's unlikely for Donald Trump. When the praise begins to die down, the criticism starts to rise, and questions are asked, watch out. ..."
    Apr 24, 2017 | antiwar.com
    Institutionalizing War and Its Generals

    Above all, President Trump did one thing decisively. He empowered a set of generals or retired generals – James "Mad Dog" Mattis as secretary of defense, H.R. McMaster as national security adviser, and John Kelly as secretary of homeland security – men already deeply implicated in America's failing wars across the Greater Middle East. Not being a details guy himself, he's then left them to do their damnedest. "What I do is I authorize my military," he told reporters recently. "We have given them total authorization and that's what they're doing and, frankly, that's why they've been so successful lately."

    As the 100-day mark of his presidency approaches, there's been no serious reassessment of America's endless wars or how to fight them (no less end them). Instead, there's been a recommitment to doing more of the familiar, more of what hasn't worked over the last decade and a half. No one should be surprised by this, given the cast of characters – men who held command posts in those unsuccessful wars and are clearly incapable of thinking about them in other terms than the ones that have been indelibly engrained in the brains of the U.S. military high command since soon after 9/11.

    That new ruling reality of our American world should, in turn, offer a hint about the nature of Donald Trump's presidency. It should be a reminder that as strange okay, bizarre as his statements, tweets, and acts may have been, as chaotic as his all-in-the-family administration is proving to be, as little as he may resemble anyone we've ever seen in the White House before, he's anything but an anomaly of history. Quite the opposite. Like those generals, he's a logical endpoint to a grim process, whether you're talking about the growth of inequality in America and the rise of plutocracy – without which a billionaire president and his billionaire cabinet would have been inconceivable – or the form that American war-making is taking under him.

    When it comes to war and the U.S. military, none of what's happened would have been conceivable without the two previous presidencies. None of it would have been possible without Congress's willingness to pump endless piles of money into the Pentagon and the military-industrial complex in the post-9/11 years; without the building up of the national security state and its 17 (yes, 17!) major intelligence outfits into an unofficial fourth branch of government; without the institutionalization of war as a permanent (yet strangely distant) feature of American life and of wars across the Greater Middle East and parts of Africa that evidently can't be won or lost but only carried on into eternity. None of this would have been possible without the growing militarization of this country, including of police forces increasingly equipped with weaponry off America's distant battlefields and filled with veterans of those same wars; without a media rife with retired generals and other former commanders narrating and commenting on the acts of their successors and protégés; and without a political class of Washington pundits and politicians taught to revere that military.

    In other words, however original Donald Trump may look, he's the curious culmination of old news and a changing country. Given his bravado and braggadocio, it's easy to forget the kinds of militarized extremity that preceded him.

    After all, it wasn't Donald Trump who had the hubris, in the wake of 9/11, to declare a "Global War on Terror" against 60 countries (the " swamp " of that moment). It wasn't Donald Trump who manufactured false intelligence on the weapons of mass destruction Iraq's Saddam Hussein supposedly possessed or produced bogus claims about that autocrat's connections to al-Qaeda, and then used both to lead the United States into a war on and occupation of that country. It wasn't Donald Trump who invaded Iraq (whether he was for or against tht invasion at the time). It wasn't Donald Trump who donned a flight suit and landed on an aircraft carrier off the coast of San Diego to personally declare that hostilities were at an end in Iraq just as they were truly beginning, and to do so under an inane " Mission Accomplished " banner prepared by the White House.

    It wasn't Donald Trump who ordered the CIA to kidnap terror suspects (including totally innocent individuals) off the streets of global cities as well as from the backlands of the planet and transport them to foreign prisons or CIA " black sites " where they could be tortured. It wasn't Donald Trump who caused one terror suspect to experience the sensation of drowning 83 times in a single month (even if he was inspired by such reports to claim that he would bring torture back as president).

    It wasn't Donald Trump who spent eight years in the Oval Office presiding over a global " kill list ," running " Terror Tuesday " meetings, and personally helping choose individuals around the world for the CIA to assassinate using what, in essence, was the president's own private drone force, while being praised (or criticized) for his "caution."

    It wasn't Donald Trump who presided over the creation of a secret military of 70,000 elite troops cossetted inside the larger military, special-ops personnel who, in recent years, have been dispatched on missions to a large majority of the countries on the planet without the knowledge, no less the consent, of the American people. Nor was it Donald Trump who managed to lift the Pentagon budget to $600 billion and the overall national security budget to something like a trillion dollars or more, even as America's civilian infrastructure aged and buckled .

    It wasn't Donald Trump who lost an estimated $60 billion to fraud and waste in the American "reconstruction" of Iraq and Afghanistan, or who decided to build highways to nowhere and a gas station in the middle of nowhere in Afghanistan. It wasn't Donald Trump who sent in the warrior corporations to squander more in that single country than was spent on the post-World War II Marshall Plan to put all of Western Europe back on its feet. Nor did he instruct the U.S. military to dump at least $25 billion into rebuilding, retraining, and rearming an Iraqi army that would collapse in 2014 in the face of a relatively small number of ISIS militants, or at least $65 billion into an Afghan army that would turn out to be filled with ghost soldiers .

    In its history, the United States has engaged in quite a remarkable range of wars and conflicts. Nonetheless, in the last 15 years, forever war has been institutionalized as a feature of everyday life in Washington, which, in turn, has been transformed into a permanent war capital. When Donald Trump won the presidency and inherited those wars and that capital, there was, in a sense, no one left in the remarkably bankrupt political universe of Washington but those generals.

    As the chameleon he is, he promptly took on the coloration of the militarized world he had entered and appointed "his" three generals to key security posts. Anything but the norm historically, such a decision may have seemed anomalous and out of the American tradition. That, however, was only because, unlike Donald Trump, most of the rest of us hadn't caught up with where that "tradition" had actually taken us.

    The previous two presidents had played the warrior regularly, donning military outfits – in his presidential years, George W. Bush often looked like a G.I. Joe doll – and saluting the troops, while praising them to the skies, as the American people were also trained to do. In the Trump era, however, it's the warriors (if you'll excuse the pun) who are playing the president.

    It's hardly news that Donald Trump is a man in love with what works. Hence, Steve Bannon, his dream strategist while on the campaign trail, is now reportedly on the ropes as his White House counselor because nothing he's done in the first nearly 100 days of the new presidency has worked (except promoting himself ).

    Think of Trump as a chameleon among presidents and much of this makes more sense. A Republican who had been a Democrat for significant periods of his life, he conceivably could have run for president as a more nativist version of Bernie Sanders on the Democratic ticket had the political cards been dealt just a little differently. He's a man who has changed himself repeatedly to fit his circumstances and he's doing so again in the Oval Office.

    In the world of the media, it's stylish to be shocked, shocked that the president who campaigned on one set of issues and came into office still championing them is now supporting quite a different set – from China to taxes, NATO to the Export-Import Bank. But this isn't faintly strange. Donald Trump isn't either a politician or a trendsetter. If anything, he's a trend-senser. (In a similar fashion, he didn't create reality TV, nor was he at its origins. He simply perfected a form that was already in development.)

    If you want to know just where we are in an America that has been on the march toward a different sort of society and governing system for a long time now, look at him. He's the originator of nothing, but he tells you all you need to know. On war, too, think of him as a chameleon. Right now, war is working for him domestically, whatever it may be doing in the actual world, so he loves it. For the moment, those generals are indeed "his" and their wars his to embrace.

    Honeymoon of the Generals

    Normally, on entering the Oval Office, presidents receive what the media calls a "honeymoon" period. Things go well. Praise is forthcoming. Approval ratings are heart-warming.

    Donald Trump got none of this. His approval ratings quickly headed for the honeymoon cellar or maybe the honeymoon fallout shelter ; the media and he went to war; and one attempt after another to fulfill his promises – from executive orders on deportation to repealing Obamacare and building his wall – have come a cropper. His administration seems to be in eternal chaos, the cast of characters changing by the week or tweet, and few key secondary posts being filled.

    In only one area has Donald Trump experienced that promised honeymoon. Think of it as the honeymoon of the generals. He gave them that "total authorization," and the missiles left the ships, the drones flew, and the giant bomb dropped. Even when the results were disappointing, if not disastrous (as in a raid on Yemen in which a U.S. special operator was killed, children slaughtered , and nothing of value recovered), he still somehow stumbled into highly praised "presidential" moments .

    So far, in other words, the generals are the only ones who have delivered for him, big-league . As a result, he's given them yet more authority to do whatever they want, while hugging them tighter yet.

    Here's the problem, though: there's a predictable element to all of this and it doesn't work in Donald Trump's favor. America's forever wars have now been pursued by these generals and others like them for more than 15 years across a vast swath of the planet – from Pakistan to Libya (and ever deeper into Africa) – and the chaos of failing states, growing conflicts, and spreading terror movements has been the result. There's no reason to believe that further military action will, a decade and a half later, produce more positive results.

    What happens, then? What happens when the war honeymoon is over and the generals keep right on fighting their way? The last two presidents put up with permanent failing war, making the best they could of it. That's unlikely for Donald Trump. When the praise begins to die down, the criticism starts to rise, and questions are asked, watch out.

    What then? In a world of plutocrats and generals, what coloration will Donald Trump take on next? Who will be left, except Jared and Ivanka?

    Tom Engelhardt is a co-founder of the American Empire Project and the author of The United States of Fear as well as a history of the Cold War, The End of Victory Culture . He is a fellow of the Nation Institute and runs TomDispatch.com . His latest book is Shadow Government: Surveillance, Secret Wars, and a Global Security State in a Single-Superpower World .

    Follow TomDispatch on Twitter and join us on Facebook . Check out the newest Dispatch Book, John Dower's The Violent American Century: War and Terror Since World War II , as well as John Feffer's dystopian novel Splinterlands , Nick Turse's Next Time They'll Come to Count the Dead , and Tom Engelhardt's Shadow Government: Surveillance, Secret Wars, and a Global Security State in a Single-Superpower World .

    [Apr 24, 2017] Debunking Trumps Casus Belli

    "Many intelligence officials have concluded that the White House is lying and concealing what it knows." this is pretty damning statement which reminds of the Bush Ii administration Dick Cheney mafia of neocons which conrolled Bush II almost completely. Actually key figures are Trump administration such as Secretary of Defense and the head of national security council are friend of Paul Wolfowitz
    Notable quotes:
    "... Recently, with the cruise missile attacks on a Syrian airfield, there has been a considerable loosening of the normal restraints that employees exercise regarding their duties. Even more than the invasion of Iraq, which was viewed skeptically by many in the community, the decision by President Trump to retaliate with force against Damascus has been met with dismay among many of those closest to the action in the Middle East. ..."
    "... The insiders note that no evidence has been produced to demonstrate convincingly that Syrian forces dropped a chemical bomb on a civilian area. ..."
    "... Many intelligence officials have concluded that the White House is lying and concealing what it knows. ..."
    "... Some employees have even expressed a desire that a whistleblower might step forward to demolish the administration's casus belli , though none has yet offered to do so. Most of all, those on the ground are alarmed over ongoing preparations for expanding the war, including seemingly active plans to establish no-fly zones and safe havens. The uncompromising demand that al-Assad must go will lead, in their opinion, to a rapid escalation of military activity that inevitably will result in conflict with Russia. ..."
    Apr 24, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    Recently, with the cruise missile attacks on a Syrian airfield, there has been a considerable loosening of the normal restraints that employees exercise regarding their duties. Even more than the invasion of Iraq, which was viewed skeptically by many in the community, the decision by President Trump to retaliate with force against Damascus has been met with dismay among many of those closest to the action in the Middle East.

    Many officers have expressed frustration and anger over what has taken place-not to challenge national-security policy, which they leave up to the politicians, but because they are perceiving a tissue of lies, as in Iraq. They have expressed their concerns in very specific ways to former fellow officers and friends. For the first time, people on the inside of the process are really talking. And we have been listening, astonished at the level of anger.

    The insiders note that no evidence has been produced to demonstrate convincingly that Syrian forces dropped a chemical bomb on a civilian area. U.S. monitors, who had been warned by the Russians that an attack was coming, believe they saw from satellite images something close to the Russian account of events, with a bomb hitting the targeted warehouse, which then produced a cloud of gas. They also note that Syria had absolutely no motive for staging a chemical attack. In fact, it was quite the contrary, as Washington had earlier that week backed off from the U.S. position that President Bashar al-Assad should be removed from office. The so-called rebels, however, had plenty of motive. Many intelligence officials have concluded that the White House is lying and concealing what it knows.

    Some employees have even expressed a desire that a whistleblower might step forward to demolish the administration's casus belli , though none has yet offered to do so. Most of all, those on the ground are alarmed over ongoing preparations for expanding the war, including seemingly active plans to establish no-fly zones and safe havens. The uncompromising demand that al-Assad must go will lead, in their opinion, to a rapid escalation of military activity that inevitably will result in conflict with Russia.

    Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer, is executive director of the Council for the National Interest.

    [Apr 24, 2017] Trump and the Thucydides Trap The American Conservative

    Apr 24, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com
    Speaking of Zen takes, check out my latest column at The Week , which is about how Trump's sloth and incompetence could wind up saving us from war with China:

    Students of international affairs who take the long view have for some time been worried about the trajectory of U.S.-China relations. While in theory a cooperative relationship would be most beneficial to both parties, in practice dominant powers and rising challengers rarely are able to work out a fruitful accommodation. Instead, most often the two stumble into a conflict that devastates both countries' interests.

    Graham Allison calls the underlying theory - detailed in his new book - the Thucydides Trap. So long as both powers rationally assume that the dominant power aims to maintain its supremacy, even accommodative policies will be interpreted as a way to get the rising power to settle for less than it might achieve by revisionist agitations. So if the dominant power is accommodative, the rising power will take advantage, provoking a reversal by the dominant power and a confrontation. But if the dominant power is confrontational and tries to encircle the rising power, it will provoke the rising power to break out - and in the meantime the dominant power will exhaust its resources more quickly than the rising power does, accelerating the power transition.

    So how can war be avoided?

    Allison's prescription is for robust communication along with a willingness on the part of the dominant power to think big in terms of how the international order will have to change to accommodate the rising power. Rather than try to prevent or limit the power transition, the dominant power has to facilitate it, get the rising power to understand that this is in fact the policy, and thereby forge a cooperative path through the transition that gives both powers an appropriate role to their new relative power position. I've argued in this space before that Korea would be a perfect place to try to achieve those twin goals.

    The Obama administration's much-touted but never-completed "pivot" to Asia could be understood as an effort to preserve America's position within the context of partnership with China - or as an effort to contain China and maintain American supremacy. Strengthened alliances with countries like Australia and Vietnam were intended to discourage China from adventurism in its near-abroad, while the Trans-Pacific Partnership was designed to counter Chinese economic leadership in the region. On the other hand, the TPP did not explicitly exclude China, and it is plausible to think that its ultimate purpose was more to keep America in than to keep China out. Obama clearly saw a value in working with the Chinese rather than merely against them, but he also recognized that China intended to challenge America's interests in the western Pacific and aimed to counter it.

    We'll never know whether the Obama strategy would have been a way out of the Thucydides Trap, or whether it would have led us right into it. We'll never know because President Trump has trashed the strategy entirely, pulling out of the TPP , musing about abandoning the one-China policy , threatening unilateral action in Korea , and calling for tariffs on Chinese manufacturers. His initial policy mix looked like it was premised on the assumption that war was inevitable, so we might as well make it happen on our terms.

    But a funny thing happened on the way to the battlefield: The Chinese realized we were bluffing.

    Our military options in Korea aren't really viable , and Trump has proved that he knows they aren't by his eagerness to get the Chinese to handle the problem - eagerness so overwhelming it has already led him to abandon a core campaign theme, confronting the Chinese on trade . Trump has already reaffirmed the one-China policy. And he has not only gratuitously insulted key allies , but demonstrated tactical incompetence in his communications about the mission of the aircraft carrier Carl Vinson . Watching Trump, America's Asian allies surely are questioning our reliability and basic competence, while the Chinese surely are far less worried that America will be able to restrain their rise even if we desire to do so.

    Normally, this would provoke the rising power to be more confrontational. But if the Chinese really understand Trump, they'll see that they could get far more by picking his pocket than by mugging him. Trump is transparently eager for a deal - almost any deal. The Chinese could probably ask for the moon and the stars - or control of the South China Sea - in exchange for minor promises - to let their currency rise a bit (which has already happened), to build a few manufacturing plants in Ohio, to get North Korea to restrain itself for a few months. Why wouldn't the Chinese try to get what they want at the table rather than taking the risk of a confrontation?

    Of course, normally a political leader would pay a gruesome price for cutting a terrible deal with a key rival. If Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton had rolled over for the Chinese, the Republican Party would go ballistic. But Donald Trump's brand is all about making America great again. His most vocal liberal critics, meanwhile, are more concerned that he's going to stumble into World War III than that he is going to be insufficiently firm in defending America's interests. While, as with Syria, they may support any military actions he does take, they are unlikely to provoke him into backing up his blustery threats with actual shows of force.

    Paradoxically, Trump could achieve by sloth and incompetence what is very difficult for dominant powers to accept: a transition out of that dominant position.

    Read the whole thing there .

    [Apr 21, 2017] Trump has lost control over the Pentagon

    thesaker.is

    On April 17th, Scott Humor, the Research Director at the geostrategic site "The Saker," headlined "Trump has lost control over the Pentagon", and he listed (and linked-to) the following signs that Trump is following through with his promise to allow the Pentagon to control U.S. international relations:

    1. March 14th, the US National Nuclear Security Administration field tested the modernized B61-12 gravity nuclear bomb in Nevada.
    2. April 7, Liberty Passion, loaded with US military vehicles, moored at Aqaba Main Port, Jordan
    3. On April 7th the Pentagon US bombed Syria's main command center in fight against terrorists
    4. April 10, United States Deploying Forces At Syrian-Jordanian Border
    5. April 11, The US Air Force might start forcing pilots to stay in the service against their will, according to the chief of the military unit's Air Mobility Command.
    6. April 12, President Donald Trump has signed the US approval for Montenegro to join NATO
    7. April 13, NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg announced the alliance's increased deployment in Eastern Europe
    8. On April 13th, the Pentagon bombed Afghanistan. The US military has bombed Afghanistan with its GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast Bomb (MOAB)
    9. April 13, the US-led coalition bombed the IS munitions and chemical weapons depot in Deir ez-Zor killing hundreds of people
    10. April 14, The Arleigh Burke-class, guided-missile destroyer USS Stethem (DDG 63) has been deployed to the South China Sea
    11. April 14, the US sent F-35 jets to Europe
    12. April 14, Washington failed to attend the latest international conference hosted by Moscow, where 11 nations discussed ways of bringing peace to Afghanistan. The US branded it a "unilateral Russian attempt to assert influence in the region".
    13. April14, the US has positioned two destroyers armed with Tomahawk cruise missiles close enough to the North Korean nuclear test site to act preemptively
    14. April 16th, the US army makes largest deployment of troops to Somalia since the 90s.

    [Apr 21, 2017] West does not want to investigate incident in Idlib, Russian diplomat says

    Apr 21, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
    RGC , April 20, 2017 at 05:36 AM
    West does not want to investigate incident in Idlib, Russian diplomat says

    Russian Politics & Diplomacy April 20, 8:28 UTC+3


    "We guess that Americans probably have something to hide, since they persistently want to take the Shayrat airport out of the investigation," the diplomat said


    THE HAGUE, April 20. /TASS/ Western countries do not want to properly investigate the incident with the possible use of chemical weapons in the Syrian province of Idlib, Alexander Shulgin, Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) told TASS.

    On Wednesday, the meeting of the OPCW Executive Council took place. During that meeting Russia and Iran submitted a revised draft proposal for the investigation of the incident in the Syrian province of Idlib.

    However, the United States opposed the visit of the Syrian Chemical Weapons Detection Mission to the Shayrat airfield, since it "has nothing to do with the situation," the diplomat said.


    The US delegation "spoke out against the involvement of any national experts in the work of the mission, they accused Russia of trying to "mix tracks and lead the investigation to a dead end."

    "But the connection between the incident in Idlib and the airfield of Shayrat was established by the Americans themselves, who stated that the Syrian planes had flown from this airfield," the Permanent Representative stressed. "Therefore, it is absolutely necessary to determine if sarin or other chemical munitions were stored there or not," he stressed.

    "Our view is that the Western countries are acting extremely inconsistently," the Russian diplomat said.

    "We guess that Americans probably have something to hide, since they persistently want to take the Shayrat airport out of the investigation. Maybe they knew from the start there was no chemical weapons there, and all this was used only as an excuse?" he added.


    On April 7, US President Donald Trump ordered a strike on Syria's Shayrat military air base located in the Homs Governorate. The attack, involving 59 Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles (TLAM), came as a response to the alleged use of chemical weapons in the Idlib Governorate on April 4. The US authorities believe that the airstrike on Idlib was launched from the Shayrat air base.

    http://tass.com/politics/942237

    pgl -> RGC... , April 20, 2017 at 05:51 AM
    TASS is the Russian News Agency. Somehow I do not find them all that credible.
    RGC -> pgl... , April 20, 2017 at 06:01 AM
    When the New York Times and Washington Post offer you fake news or no news, you might want to see what other sources say.

    It might be wise to check one against the other and then decide which is the more credible.

    pgl -> RGC... , April 20, 2017 at 06:08 AM
    Does other news sources include Faux News and Billo? Oh wait - Billo just got canned.

    BTW - we know sarin gas was used on the citizens of Syria. I guess you want to blame the French or something.

    RGC -> pgl... , April 20, 2017 at 06:24 AM
    People other than Russians have questioned the story.

    Like a prof at MIT:

    The Nerve Agent Attack that Did Not Occur:

    Analysis of the Times and Locations of Critical Events in the Alleged Nerve Agent Attack at 7 AM on April 4, 2017 in Khan Sheikhoun, Syria

    By Theodore A. Postol, professor emeritus of science, technology, and national security policy at MIT.

    http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2017/04/67102.html

    pgl -> RGC... , April 20, 2017 at 06:32 AM
    Read more carefully:

    "The conclusion of this summary of data is obvious – the nerve agent attack described in the WHR did not occur as claimed. There may well have been mass casualties from some kind of poisoning event, but that event was not the one described by the WHR."

    He is not saying attack did not occur. He is only saying the way the White House reported it was not entirely accurate. Yuuuge difference. Like Sean Spicer gets the details right every time - not.

    RGC -> pgl... , April 20, 2017 at 06:42 AM
    "This means that the allegedly "high confidence" White House intelligence assessment issued on April 11 that led to the conclusion that the Syrian government was responsible for the attack is not correct.

    For such a report to be so egregiously in error, it could not possibly have followed the most simple and proven intelligence methodologies to determine the veracity of its findings.

    Since the United States justified attacking a Syrian airfield on April 7, four days before the flawed National Security Council intelligence report was released to the Congress and the public, the conclusion that follows is that the United States took military actions without the intelligence to support its decision."

    RGC -> pgl... , April 20, 2017 at 06:27 AM
    NYT Mocks Skepticism on Syria-Sarin Claims
    April 18, 2017

    Exclusive: The New York Times and other major media have ruled out any further skepticism toward the U.S. government's claim that Syrian President Assad dropped a sarin bomb on a town in Idlib province, reports Robert Parry.
    ................
    Today, however, particularly on foreign policy issues, the major U.S. news outlets, such as The New York Times and The Washington Post, apparently believe there is only one side to a story, the one espoused by the U.S. government or more generically the Establishment.
    .....................
    https://consortiumnews.com/2017/04/18/nyt-mocks-skepticism-on-syria-sarin-claims/

    pgl -> RGC... , April 20, 2017 at 06:35 AM
    Facts on the ground in Assad's brutal regime are confusing? Stop the presses. I blame Assad. And no - I still do not trust the Russians.
    RGC -> pgl... , April 20, 2017 at 06:44 AM
    And I would never trust your judgement.
    pgl -> RGC... , April 20, 2017 at 06:48 AM
    Likewise! BTW it is judgment (only 1 e).
    RGC -> pgl... , April 20, 2017 at 07:02 AM
    This source says G_d is on my side:

    "judgement is the form sanctioned in the Revised Version of the Bible, & the OED prefers the older & more reasonable spelling. Judgement is therefore here recommended –Fowler p. 310."

    http://www.dailywritingtips.com/judgement-or-judgment/

    RGC -> RGC... , April 20, 2017 at 02:29 PM
    And of course, that means the devil is on your side.

    Just as I suspected.

    JohnH -> pgl... , April 20, 2017 at 07:02 AM
    What facts on the ground? There has been no investigation...only assertions made by the usual suspects.

    A nice summary of the story:
    https://youtu.be/rkj9UCHO0Tc

    As in economics, pgl is a staunch supporter of the dominant narrative and the conventional wisdom...one of those who believed that Saddam had WMDs.

    pgl -> JohnH... , April 20, 2017 at 07:29 AM
    The dominant narrative in Moscow is TASS. I guess you work for them now. BTW - I was doubting the Saddam WMD tale back in 2002. So take your usual lies somewhere else troll.
    JohnH -> pgl... , April 20, 2017 at 08:08 AM
    The dominant narrative among NY elites is the NY Times, whose reporting they swallow hook, line and sinker.

    Yet you won't see any mention Theodore Postol's critique of Trump's allegations about the Syrian chemical attack. When it comes to foreign affairs, the NY Times salutes and follows the party line...as do virtually all American news outlets.
    http://fair.org/home/out-of-46-major-editorials-on-trumps-syria-strikes-only-one-opposed/

    pgl is happy to join into the groupthink no questions asked...

    pgl -> JohnH... , April 20, 2017 at 07:35 AM
    Did you check your source here? The James Corbett Report? Featured here at American Loons:

    http://americanloons.blogspot.com/2013/06/584-james-corbett.html

    Even The Onion would not go here.

    JohnH -> pgl... , April 20, 2017 at 08:10 AM
    Question is, what facts in the Corbett Report were wrong? Seems to me that they pretty much nailed the contradictions and hypocrisy of the trumped up charges against Syria.
    pgl -> JohnH... , April 20, 2017 at 08:36 AM
    See below. The news today sort of debunks your apologist attitude toward Assad the Butcher.
    JohnH -> pgl... , April 20, 2017 at 12:26 PM
    Well, now we have the room and may have the weapon. But who done it? Colonel Mustard, Professor Plum, or Miss Scarlet?

    It is well known that the Syrian rebels also use chemical weapons.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10039672/UN-accuses-Syrian-rebels-of-chemical-weapons-use.html

    But that doesn't dissuade pgl from believing everything that Trump the compulsive liar says! Until Trump bombed Syria, libruls like pgl didn't believe a word Trump said. Now they'll believe anything!!!

    After a lifetime of watching the US start pointless and futile wars under false pretenses (Vietnam, Iraq, Libya, etc.), pgl has no hesitation about gulping down the kool aid as fast as he can! In fact, libruls like pgl seem absolutely delighted when money that could be used for socially useful purposes like education and healthcare get diverted to fight phantom enemies abroad.

    anne -> pgl... , April 20, 2017 at 06:33 AM
    http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2017/04/krugman-elizabeth-warren-lays-out-the-reasons-democrats-should-keep-fighting.html#comment-6a00d83451b33869e201bb09927277970d

    April 19, 2017

    "Bernie Sanders was of course a civil rights activist in the 1960s..."

    A couple of marches does not make on Martin Luther King or John Lewis. I spent more time in the trenches than Sanders did back then...

    http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2017/04/links-for-04-20-17.html#comment-6a00d83451b33869e201b8d279eb0e970c

    April 20, 2017

    I guess you want to blame the French or something....

    ilsm -> pgl... , April 20, 2017 at 03:24 PM
    Like VOA which had a long agitprop piece today.

    Do you think the Sarin was stored near the planes that could get to Idlib? Or maybe those cruise missiles damaged a Sarin site?

    Why not find the igloo that help the Sarin?

    Or do you want to believe the staged vids and pix?

    OPCW said to was Sarin...... or such!

    And French are selling the US' tale like they sold killing Qaddafi and that unneeded involvement in Europe 100 years ago.

    [Apr 21, 2017] First Transgender President Trump Becomes Hillary by Fred Reed

    Apr 20, 2017 | unz.com

    Oh Lord, it's happening–the remanufacture of Trump by the Establishment. During the campaign, Trump and the Basilisk had nothing in common but their hair dye. Now, almost daily, he looks more like her.

    He gets embarrassing. Regarding the alleged gassing in Syria, quoth Donald:

    "When you kill innocent children, innocent babies - babies, little babies - with a chemical gas that crosses many, many lines, beyond a red line. And I will tell you, that attack on children yesterday had a big impact on me my attitude toward Syria and Assad has changed very much."

    God almighty. Who wrote this–a middle school girl with C's in English, or the President of the United States? Did he retire to his bedroom for a good cry?

    Apparently he ordered his missile strike without bothering to find out what happened. The usual suspects are driving him like a sports car.

    The election was a choice between fetor and a lunatic. We chose the lunatic. Whether this was better than the alternative, we will never know, but Trump is going from bad to worse, or as the Mexicans say, de Guatemala a Guatepeor.

    Does he believe this stuff? Is he naive enough to think that there was something unusually horrible about the attack? Horrible, yes, but not in the least unusual. Do you know what everyday, boring artillery does to children? Five-hundred-pound bombs? Hellfire rockets? Daily Mr. Trump's military and his allies daily drop shrapnel-producing explosives on people, cities, towns, adults, children, weddings and goatherds in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. Good draft-dodger that he was, he probably has never seen any of this. Good psychopath that he may be, he may not care.

    This whole gas-attack business smells to high heaven. It looks nicely calculated to force him to attack Assad. Gas was important: Killing babies, little babies with explosives is so routine that no one cares, but we have been programmed to shudder at the thought of Gas!

    Actually artillery has killed several orders of magnitude more people, but never mind.

    Targeting children was a nice touch. Definitely a PR bonus. So Donald goes into his Poor-widdle-fings weep, while Americans weekly kill more children in three to seven countries, depending on the date.

    Is the man consciously a liar? Hasn't got sense enough to think before operating his mouth? Actually believes what he says when he says it?

    Glance at a small part of the record and focus on his changing his tune, not on whether you agree with a particular policy. Erratic, erratic, erratic. He was going to run out the illegals within two years, absurd but he said it. Going to put high tariffs on Mexican goods. Didn't. On Chinese goods. Isn't. Tear up the Iran treaty. Didn't. Declare China a currency-manipulator. Isn't. Ban Muslims. Hasn't. Promote good relations with Russia. Isn't. Get the US out of Syria. Ha. Make NATO pay for itself. Isn't. The man has the steely determination one associates with bean curd. You cannot trust anything the man says.

    Having been reprogrammed as a good neocon, bombing places he promised to get out of, looking for a fight with Russia, he is now butting heads with Fat Thing in North Korea. He his said things closely resembling, "We have run out of strategic patience with the North. If nobody else will take care of it, we will." Grrrr. Bowwow. Woof.

    The problem with growly ultimata made for television is that somebody has to back down–that is, lose face and credibility. If Trump had quietly told Fat Thing, "If you crazy bastards scrap your nuke program, we will drop the sanctions," it might have worked. But no. Negotiations would imply weakness. Thus an ultimatum.

    So now either (a) Fat Thing knuckles under, humiliating himself and possibly endangering his grasp on power or (b) Trump blinks in a humiliating display of the Empire's impotence, possibly endangering his grasp on power.

    Kim Jong Il, or Il Sung Jong, or whatever the the hell the latest one of them is called, shows not the slightest sign of backing down. So does the Donald start an utterly unpredictable war, as usual in somebody else's country, or does he weasel off, muttering, and hope nobody notices?

    Fred's Third Law of International Relations: Never butt heads with a country that has a missile named the No Dong.

    Many of us favored Trump, slightly daft though he was, because he wasn't yet Hillary, wasn't yet a neocon robot, and didn't want war with every country he had heard of, apparently meaning a good half dozen. At least he said he didn't, not yet having been told that he did. In particular, he didn't want war with Russia. But when the neocons control the media and Congress, they can convince a naive public of anything and, apparently, the President.

    Why is the Hillarification of Trump important? The necessary prior question: What is the greatest threat to the neocons' American Empire? Answer: The ongoing integration of Eurasia under Chinese hegemony. The key countries in this are China, Iran, and Russia. (Isn't it curious that, apart from the momentary distraction of North Korea, these countries have been the focus of New York's hostility?) In particular if Russia and, through it, China develop large and very profitable trade with Europe, there goes NATO and with it the Empire.

    Oops.

    Thus the eeeeeeeeeeek! furor about Russia as existential threat and so on. Thus sending a few troops to Baltic countries to "deter" Russia. This was theater. The idea that a thousand garrison troops can stop the Russian army, which hasn't gone silly as ours has, on its doorstep is loony.

    Hillary was on board with the Russia hysteria and the globalization and the immigration and so on. Trump could have screwed the whole pooch by getting along with Russia, so he had to be reconfigured. And was. A work in progress, but going well.

    ORDER IT NOW

    Too much is being asked of him. One man cannot overcome the combined hostility of the media, the political establishment, the neocons, the myriad other special interests that he has threatened. Mass immigration is a done deal. China develops and America, already developed, cannot keep up. The country disintegrates socially. Washington, always depending on war and its threat, faces a new world in which trade is the weapon, and doesn't know what to do. The culture courses. The world changes.

    Yet if only Trump showed some sign of knowing what he is doing, and could remember from day to day, if only he realized that wars are more easily started than predicted, if only he were not becoming an unbalanced Hillary.

    Yet, apparently, he is.

    (Reprinted from Fred on Everything by permission of author or representative)

    [Apr 20, 2017] Only Chlorine, Not Sarin, Involved In The Khan Sheikhun Incident

    Apr 20, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Those who blame the Syrian government for the allegedly chemical incident in Khan Sheikhun are now pushing the analysis of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to the front. But the results of the OPCW tests are inconsistent with the observed technical and medical facts of the incident.

    The OPCW Director General Ambassador Üzümcü, a Turk, yesterday released its first results of his organization:

    The bio-medical samples collected from three victims during their autopsy were analysed at two OPCW designated laboratories. The results of the analysis indicate that the victims were exposed to Sarin or a Sarin-like substance . Bio-medical samples from seven individuals undergoing treatment at hospitals were also analysed in two other OPCW designated laboratories. Similarly, the results of these analyses indicate exposure to Sarin or a Sarin-like substance .

    Director-General Üzümcü stated clearly: "The results of these analyses from four OPCW designated laboratories indicate exposure to Sarin or a Sarin-like substance .

    That's "Sarin or Sarin- like substance" three times a row. Sarin is also mentioned in the headline. Someone is pushing that meme hard.

    But the OPCW did not conclude that a chemical attack occurred in Khan Sheikhun. It suggested nothing about the incident itself. Instead it talked about bio-medical samples - nothing more, nothing less.

    A "Sarin like substances" could be a different chemical weapon than sarin - soman is possible. But many general insecticides belong to the same chemical class as sarin and soman. They are organophosphorus compounds. (Sarin was originally developed as insecticide). All of such compounds could be a source of the exposure found by by the OPCW. These chemicals tend to degrade within hours or days. A forensic analysis will not find the original substance but only decomposition products of some organophosporus compound. That is the reason why the OPCW result is not fixed on sarin but also mentions "sarin like substances".

    The question is now where those samples come from? And what is the chain of evidence that connects the samples to the incident in question. The OPCW has not send an investigation team to Khan Sheikhun. No samples were taken by its own inspectors. While Russia and Syria have asked for OPCW inspections on the ground, Tahrir al-Sham, the renamed al-Qaeda in Syria which controls the area, has not asked for inspectors. Without its agreement any investigation mission is simply too dangerous. None of the OPCW inspectors are interested in literally losing their heads to those terrorists.

    Immediately after the incident bodies of dead and wounded were brought to Turkey where they were taken into hospital. Al-Qaeda or al-Qaeda aligned personal must have transported these. It is a three hour trip from Khan Sheikhun to the Turkish border. Unless we trust the words of al-Qaeda operatives we can not be sure that the corpses delivered were indeed from Khan Sheikhun.

    The incident happened on April 4. An immediate OPCW statement on April 4 referred to chlorine, not sarin or similar:

    The OPCW is investigating the incident in southern Idlib under the on-going mandate of the Fact-Finding Mission (FFM), which is "to establish facts surrounding allegations of the use of toxic chemicals, reportedly chlorine , for hostile purposes in the Syrian Arab Republic".

    The UN Security Council convened on April 6 to discuss the incident. The Turkish newspaper Hurriyet reported :

    Turkey sent a report to the United Nations just before a U.N. Security Council meeting to address accusations that the Syrian government staged a chemical weapons attack on April 4, stating that the gas used in the attack was chlorine gas .

    Turkey's Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear teams (KBRN) prepared an initial report over the possible material of the alleged chemical attack, relying on the symptoms of and tests conducted on the victims and their testimonies.

    The report stated that the initial findings of the tests conducted on around 30 victims brought to Turkey for treatment pointed to a chlorine gas attack .

    Thirty victims were immediately brought to Turkey after the incident. But the Turkish doctors and CBRN specialist did not consider sarin, but chlorine gas -a much less potent chemical- to be involved. (Chlorine is not designated a chemical weapon under the various chemical warfare regulations. This fact is often obfuscated for pure propaganda reasons. ) The symptoms of chlorine ingestion and the effects of sarin exposure are quite different. It is extremely unlikely that the emergency doctors and chemical weapon specialists have misdiagnosed the issue when the patients arrived and were taken care of. The 30 casualties arriving in Turkey were not the casualties of a sarin incident.

    But the Turkish Health Ministry told a different story:

    The poison used in the deadly chemical bomb attack in a rebel-held part of northern Syria this week was the banned nerve agent sarin, the Turkish Health Ministry said in a statement on Thursday.
    ...
    "According to the results of preliminary tests," the statement said, "patients were exposed to chemical material (Sarin)."
    ...
    The Turkish statement did not elaborate on how the sarin had been identified in the assault on Tuesday, but it said some of the telling symptoms seen in the victims included " lung edema , increase in lung weight and bleeding in lungs."

    From the CDC Emergency Response Database:

    At high exposure levels, irritation of the upper respiratory tract and accumulation of fluid in the lungs (pulmonary edema) contribute to a sensation of choking.

    But that is from the CDC entry for Chlorine .

    The CDC entry for Sarin mentions "fluid accumulation in the airways" as one symptom among many more conspicuous ones. It does not mention an edema of the lungs.

    Contradicting the first Turkish reports the Turkish Health Ministry claimed "sarin" (in parenthesis?!). But the symptom it described as proof was not of sarin but of chlorine exposure.

    The Turkish Justice Minister also made a statement but that did not mention sarin at all

    Turkish Justice Minister Bekir Bozdag told reporters that "Autopsies were carried out on three of the bodies after they were brought from Idlib. The results of the autopsy confirms that chemical weapons were used," quoted by state-run Anadolu news agency.

    "This scientific investigation also confirms that Assad used chemical weapons," Bozdag added, without giving further details.
    ...
    Bozdag said autopsies were conducted with the "participation" of officials from the World Health Organization (WHO) in the southern province of Adana together with officials from Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).

    But WHO immediately countered Bozdag's claims that it was involved in the postmortem, saying the organisation did not conduct autopsies, adding: "It is not our mandate."
    ...
    [It] also stressed that no samples or swabs had been taken by WHO despite claims by the Adana prosecutor that "examples" had been sent to the organisation and the OPCW.

    The Justice Minister claimed that samples had been given to the WHO and OPCW from the very first autopsies. But the WHO clearly denies that. I find no OPCW statement on this.

    In 2013 a Turkish court, under Justice Minister Bozdag, set one suspected Ahrar al Sham member free after he was caught with sarin precursors. The person was later sentenced in absentia as he had fled back to Syria. Ahrar al Sham, while not in charge, has a presence in Khan Sheikhun.

    The neuroscientist and neuro-pharmacologist Denis O'Brien, a Ph.D. with a research and teaching career in that field, analyzed the symtoms of the casualties that were depicted in the various videos coming out of Khan Sheikhun. His diagnostics and chemical-biological explanations are humorously titled Top Ten Ways to Tell When You're Being Spoofed by a False-Flag Sarin Attack .

    O'Brian notes the total absence of feces, urine, vomit and cyanosis (turning blue) in the videos. Sarin exposure causes, according to the CDC database "Nausea, vomiting (emesis), diarrhea, abdominal pain, and cramping." Sarin effected patients would spontaneously shit, peed and vomited all over. But the casualties in the videos, even the "dead" ones, have clean undies. The "clinic" in the videos has clean floors. The patients show red skin color, not oxygen deprived blue. The patients in the videos were not effected by sarin.

    Medical personal and rescue workers in the videos ( example ) and pictures also show none of the typical sarin symptoms. Sarin degrades relatively fast. Half of the potency will be gone within five hours after release (depending on environmental factors). But these rescue workers and medical personal were immediately involved with the casualties. They do not wear any reasonable protection. They would have been dead or at least effected if sarin would have been involved in any relevant concentration.

    The Turkish doctors and chemical weapon specialists who received the first patients diagnosed chlorine exposure, not sarin. The first Turkish reports to the UN speak of chlorine, not sarin. It is only the Turkish Health Minister who mentions sarin - in parentheses, but then lists a symptom of severe chlorine exposure as one of sarin. Neither the casualties nor the unprotected medical personal involved in the incident show any effect of sarin exposure.

    Fifteen days after the incident the OPCW say that samples it was given(!) "indicate exposure to Sarin or a Sarin-like substance".

    Turkey has been the supply and support lifeline for Ahrar al Sham as well as for al-Qaeda in Syria. The samples given to the OPCW were taken by Turkish personal in Turkey. The current head of the OPCW is a Turkish citizen. It is in the interest of Turkey and its terrorist clients in Syria to blame the Syrian government for chemical weapon use.

    The medical and technical evidence is not consistent with a sarin attack by the Syrian government. All of the videos and pictures of the incident were taken in al-Qaeda controlled territory. All witnesses were under al-Qaeda control. How much of the incident was staged for videos (see al-Qaeda doctor video linked above) or how many of the witnesses were told to lie is not testable under current circumstance. The Syrian government insist that it has given up all its chemical weapons. The Russian government also asserts that no chemical weapon attack took place.

    The OPCW analysis may well have found that samples it received indicated organophosphorus exposure. But the chain of evidence for these samples is very dubious.

    The observable facts of the incident on the ground do not support the conclusion that sarin was present in the Khan Sheikhun incident.

    Note: Part of the above is based on the work and tweets of Ali Ornek

    Posted by b on April 20, 2017 at 03:26 PM | Permalink

    Comments Sneed | Apr 20, 2017 3:59:29 PM | 1
    What in the world do facts have to do with it?

    xor | Apr 20, 2017 4:21:49 PM | 2
    Nice report. Although facts didn't matter with the incubator babies, Benghazi black mercenaries, WMD, ... it's good to set the record straight for those who are interested in the truth. It also proves again and again that big party politicians and main stream media are a bunch of whoring liars.

    wwinsti | Apr 20, 2017 5:09:04 PM | 3
    The Foreign minister of France is promising to release supposedly 'undeniable evidence' of Assad's involvement in the sarin gas attack.

    http://www.newstalk.com/France-to-release-evidence-Assad-ordered-chemical-attack

    There's a slight chance that this might be the radio intercept the Israeli's claim to have.

    (Hint, easily faked)

    Igor Bundy | Apr 20, 2017 5:28:52 PM | 4
    Oh I do believe the bodies will show sarin.. But they would be christian or alawite bodies.. Just like the bodies shown in ghouta who were kidnapped victims of al queda.

    Who is going to verify the bodies are actual people and who they say they are.. In many decades of knowing multi racial couples I have never seen blonde white babies as shows in al queda photos. No woman would be stupid enough to go live in such freedom loving hell hole like idlib unlike kids who think screwing dozens of jihadis are actually fun.

    karlof1 | Apr 20, 2017 5:29:07 PM | 5
    Today, TASS published a rather damning article aimed at the OPCW, http://tass.com/world/942326

    The Swedish Doctors for Human Rights whose text and video were used at the UNSC presentation on the topic report: "The response of Western media journalists have also in occasions taken a bizarre, seemingly desperate character ... Le Figaro indulges in a series of libellous statements ad-hominem against the messenger of the objective research-conclusions they dislike," which is a sure sign the Doctors are correct, http://theindicter.com/libellous-attack-by-mainstream-journalists-angered-by-swedhr-denounce-of-unethical-anti-syria-propaganda/

    The Indicter also published a witness account of the big refugee massacre bombing, testifying that at least 4 Turkish ambulances were on-site prior to the explosion, were filled with the children's bodies and took them away, probably for their organs. Canthama at SyrPers observes: "There is a REAL RISK of children organ trafficking, this has been a very common sad aspect of the war of aggression against the Syrians, many children and adults (thousands) were kidnaped and had their organs removed in Turkey and either for use inside Turkey or shipped to terrorist friendly UK, France, Germany, US, KSA, Qatar and Israhell. The UN is well aware of this illegal trade and crime, but as usual double standard is applied as if Syrians are no humans."
    [sic]

    Putin was right to publicly announce the "attack" to be a False Flag, and it looks ever more likely the Turkish government played a role and is complicit in a number of other Syria related crimes of the most vilest.

    karlof1 | Apr 20, 2017 5:33:27 PM | 6
    Igor @4--

    I wanted to post the Javad Zarif‏ statement you posted at SyrPers because of its strong condemnation of the Outlaw US Empire's alliance with terrorists, but it's not yet listed at the Iranian Foreign Ministry's website. Perhaps you could post a link to where you found it?

    Peter AU | Apr 20, 2017 5:40:50 PM | 7
    karlof1 5

    The white helmet actor that played the part of father of twins in the bombing very quickly appeared for photo shoot with Erdogan. Also Bana the seven year old tweeting from Aleppo, who miraculously escaped Aleppo and then appeared for photo shoot with Erdogan.
    It seems Turkey does play a very direct role, Erdogan personally, working directly with AQ.
    Not forgetting the direct links between Erdogan and the ISIS oil convoys.

    dh | Apr 20, 2017 5:41:52 PM | 8
    @4 Bodies Igor? You'll never know who they were or where they came from. You think some human rights group is going to Idlib to dig them up?

    jfl | Apr 20, 2017 5:49:11 PM | 9
    the us election was hacked! => the russians are coming! => assad gasses his own people!

    all have in common their shrill hysteria and faith-based appeal. they are diammetrically opposed to reality. but the people who want us to believe this nonsense will not be denied! the people who want us all to believe include all the western trans-national corporate mainstream media and, of course, the minority neo-cons for whom they shill.

    this shrill minority is bent on continuing their terrorism in syria, ukraine, libya and elsewhere. the governments of the us/nato/eu and their gcc/il proxies comprise the early 21st-century axis of evil. they will be defeated by the alliance of the rest of the countries of the world free of their dominion as the 21st-century unfolds, but their horrid reign of death, devastation, destruction, and deceit around the world, and in ukraine and mena especially, will live on in infamy, just as has that of the third reich and its axis.

    james | Apr 20, 2017 6:00:10 PM | 10
    thanks b, for articulating what the msm will not.. it doesn't serve there bosses agenda.

    look, when someone is going for your jugular, it is a case of surviving however you can.. the west is like a heroin addict looking for it's next fix. the fix is making war openly, and if they can't do that - silently.. the msm is just a stooge for them at this point..

    as for the turk throwing this out - if he hasn't gotten a promotion from king erdogan yet, i would be surprised.. what an embarrassment the turk establishment is at this point.. that means they will be used more by the west and i do wonder what this means for the turkey relationship with russia and iran at this point..

    already looks questionable when there is no chain of custody, no samples taken from the site, and no samples from the air force base that was attacked.

    Posted by: Toxik | Apr 20, 2017 6:58:50 PM | 11

    already looks questionable when there is no chain of custody, no samples taken from the site, and no samples from the air force base that was attacked.

    Posted by: Toxik | Apr 20, 2017 6:58:50 PM | 11

    karlof1 | Apr 20, 2017 7:00:22 PM | 12
    james @10--

    It may take awhile, but Erdogan and the Turks will experience blowback in a big way when the SAA and allies push the terrorists back over the border into Turkey. Hard to fathom what Putin and Lavrov think about Erdogan at this point as little is being written or said, other than the MoD's statement on the OPCW report covered by the TASS link above and Putin's call regarding the election victory on the 18th about which little was said, http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/54330 And unfortunately, the remarks by Russia's OPCW rep are fully posted at the Foreign Affairs Ministry's website, although they will sometime, http://www.mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/2732765

    sejomoje | Apr 20, 2017 7:21:02 PM | 13
    re: the "Blonde" babies, it looks like peroxide...or perhaps super-strong chlorine. Too orange/yellow to be real. Also the "father" isn't one of those light-eyed Syrians iykwim.

    What really clinched it for me though was the video of the already-dead children, showing no signs of chemical poisoning, lined up in a row to be filmed. As the cell phone camera panned over them, the guy realizes one of their heads is lolled to the side, not facing the camera. Instead of simply repositioning the head, he slaps it into place, very roughly.

    These dead are not mourned by the living who were there to document the event.

    sejomoje | Apr 20, 2017 7:23:01 PM | 14
    The word of the day is "organ donors".

    [Apr 20, 2017] Oliver Stone Rages Against The Deep States Wonderful Job Of Throwing America Into Chaos

    Notable quotes:
    "... I confess I really had hopes for some conscience from Trump about America's wars, but I was wrong -- fooled again! -- as I had been by the early Reagan, and less so by Bush 43. Reagan found his mantra with the "evil empire" rhetoric against Russia, which almost kicked off a nuclear war in 1983 -- and Bush found his 'us against the world' crusade at 9/11, in which of course we're still mired. ..."
    "... It seems that Trump really has no 'there' there, far less a conscience, as he's taken off the handcuffs on our war machine and turned it over to his glorified Generals ..."
    "... well, he got my generation started/up to speed with JFK truth, and took a beating for it. in the eyes of the entertainment media, he was a patriotic steven spielberg before jfk, he was conspiracy theorist with a good director of photography and editing team after. ..."
    "... his general analysis for 9/11 and who benefited from it, (<<cui bono, project for new american century>>) was pointing in the right direction. he might have done more harm than good if he started speaking about thermite or whatever, or would have been dismissed as a nut out of hand. ..."
    "... Stone is right enough is enough. Anyone who doesn't believe that countries use psychological warfare and propaganda to sway the opinions of people both in and outside of their country should be considered naive. ..."
    "... Americans have every reason to be concerned and worried considering revelations of just how big the government intelligent agencies have grown since 9-11 and how unlimited their spying and surveillance operations have become. The article below explores this growth and questions whether we have lost control. ..."
    "... We were all deceived by a great, maybe brilliant, actor. ..."
    Apr 20, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
    In March of last year, Academy Award-winning director Oliver Stone warned the world :

    "we're going to war - either hybrid in nature...or a hot war (which will destroy our country). Our citizens should know this, but they don't because our media is dumbed down in its 'Pravda'-like support for our 'respectable', highly aggressive government."

    And strongly rejected the establishment's "the Russians are coming" narrative shortly after the election and correctly forecast that it wouldn't be long before the deep state pushed Trump into an anti-Kremlin position...

    "As much as we may disagree with Donald Trump (and I do) he's right now target number one of the MSM propaganda -- until, that is, he changes to the anti-Kremlin track over, God knows, some kind of petty dispute cooked up by CIA, and in his hot-headed way starts fighting with the Russians ...

    I never thought I'd find myself at this point in time praying for the level-headedness of a Donald Trump . "

    Stone was correct and in a Facebook post tonight expresses his disappointment at Trump and disgust for The Deep State (and America's wilful ignorance).

    "So It Goes"

    I confess I really had hopes for some conscience from Trump about America's wars, but I was wrong -- fooled again! -- as I had been by the early Reagan, and less so by Bush 43. Reagan found his mantra with the "evil empire" rhetoric against Russia, which almost kicked off a nuclear war in 1983 -- and Bush found his 'us against the world' crusade at 9/11, in which of course we're still mired.

    It seems that Trump really has no 'there' there, far less a conscience, as he's taken off the handcuffs on our war machine and turned it over to his glorified Generals -- and he's being praised for it by our 'liberal' media who continue to play at war so recklessly. What a tortured bind we're in. There are intelligent people in Washington/New York, but they've lost their minds as they've been stampeded into a Syrian-Russian groupthink, a consensus without asking -- 'Who benefits from this latest gas attack?' Certainly neither Assad nor Putin. The only benefits go to the terrorists who initiated the action to stave off their military defeat.

    It was a desperate gamble, but it worked because the Western media immediately got behind it with crude propagandizing about murdered babies , etc. No real investigation or time for a UN chemical unit to establish what happened, much less find a motive. Why would Assad do something so stupid when he's clearly winning the civil war?

    No, I believe America has decided somewhere, in the crises of the Trump administration, that we will get into this war at any cost, under any circumstances -- to, once again, change the secular regime in Syria, which has been, from the Bush era on, one of the top goals -- next to Iran -- of the neoconservatives. At the very least, we will cut out a chunk of northeastern Syria and call it a State.

    Abetted by the Clintonites, they've done a wonderful job throwing America into chaos with probes into Russia's alleged hacking of our election and Trump being their proxy candidate (now clearly disproved by his bombing attack) -- and sadly, worst of all in some ways, admitting no memory of the same false flag incident in 2013, for which again Assad was blamed (see Seymour Hersh's fascinating deconstruction of this US propaganda, 'London Review of Books' December 19, 2013, "Whose sarin?"). No memory, no history, no rules -- or rather 'American rules.'

    No, this isn't an accident or a one-off affair. This is the State deliberately misinforming the public through its corporate media and leads us to believe, as Mike Whitney points out in his brilliant analyses, "Will Washington Risk WW3" and "Syria: Where the Rubber Meets the Road," that something far more sinister waits in the background .

    Mike Whitney, Robert Parry, and former intelligence officer Phil Giraldi all comment below. It's well worth 30 minutes of your time to read. Lastly, below is a link to Bruce Cumings's "Nation" analysis of North Korea, as he again reminds us of the purposes of studying history.

    Can we wake up before it's too late? I for one feel like the John Wayne veteran (of war) character in "Fort Apache," riding with the arrogant Custer-like General (Henry Fonda) to his doom. My country, my country, my heart aches for thee.

    FIAT CON -> knukles •Apr 19, 2017 8:22 PM

    Everything is finite on this planet except the US$, I can't see how believing this will cause any trouble. /s

    gregga777 -> SallySnyd •Apr 19, 2017 7:44 PM

    "One has to wonder how many fronts Congress thinks that the American military complex can fight and win wars?"

    The truth is that America, as a deliberate policy, does not win wars. Dragging out wars (e.g., Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, etc.) produces far greater revenues and profits for the War Profiteers and Merchants of Death that control United States foreign policy. They all deserve bullets to the back of the neck for their evil takeover of the United States and their willingness to sacrifice the lives of millions of people to their evil, illegal and Unconstitutional Wars of Aggression.

    VIS MAIOR -> gregga777 •Apr 19, 2017 7:53 PM

    135 000 http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/vietnam-american-holocaust/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War_casualties ... 1000 years ban for usa on OL games and other + forever ban on all --

    they kill own 135 000 + thousand more after in usa from depresions, alchdrugs.. + 4 milions !!!! asians what fuckretard nations cancer is usa ..

    please delete usa from this planet ..PLEASE

    Tothguy1948 -> Savyindallas •Apr 19, 2017 11:43 PM

    well, he got my generation started/up to speed with JFK truth, and took a beating for it. in the eyes of the entertainment media, he was a patriotic steven spielberg before jfk, he was conspiracy theorist with a good director of photography and editing team after.

    yeah, i've come to see him as a bit of fatuous idiot in some interviews, he sure has got his own achille's heel and hasn't offered every last truth on the subject, but who has done more to popularize critical thinking and research on it than him? i'm forever grateful for that

    his general analysis for 9/11 and who benefited from it, (<<cui bono, project for new american century>>) was pointing in the right direction. he might have done more harm than good if he started speaking about thermite or whatever, or would have been dismissed as a nut out of hand.

    Let it Go •Apr 19, 2017 8:12 PM

    Stone is right enough is enough. Anyone who doesn't believe that countries use psychological warfare and propaganda to sway the opinions of people both in and outside of their country should be considered naive. To many people America is more than a little hypocritical when they criticize other countries for trying to gain influence considering our history of meddling in the affairs of other countries.

    Americans have every reason to be concerned and worried considering revelations of just how big the government intelligent agencies have grown since 9-11 and how unlimited their spying and surveillance operations have become. The article below explores this growth and questions whether we have lost control.

    http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2017/04/psychological-warfare-and-propaganda.html

    peterk •Apr 19, 2017 8:50 PM

    trump is perhaps the best president for the deep state...... a president who doesn't really care about anything too much.

    he has been a carefree billionaire playboy all his life, never gets to involved in any fight, as he isnt all that bright, so he just

    moves along when things get tough.

    he betrayed the USA

    Anonymous IX •Apr 19, 2017 9:46 PM

    A very simple question.

    Why has Trump completely reneged on his promise to stay out of foreign wars and regime change? Not only Syria but Yemen. Why has Trump placed the U.S. in a needless confrontation with Russia? Before the election, he spoke about establishing strong economic relations with other countries in favor of the U.S.

    Part of making "American Great Again" involves staying out of foreign wars which do not concern us and using our monies to re-educate and protect the diminishing American worker.

    Mr. Stone is right.

    Akhenaten II -> Anonymous IX •Apr 20, 2017 12:44 AM

    Trump works for Israel and the jewish mob. Always has.

    We were all deceived by a great, maybe brilliant, actor. The only saving grace is that this play is nearing its last act before they knock the entire theatre down, to be abandoned like the Coliseum.

    [Apr 19, 2017] Bannons Worldview Dissecting the Message of The Fourth Turning

    This four seasons theory looks to me like some king of amateur dialectics...
    80 years is close to Kondratiev cycles length.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Stephen K. Bannon has great admiration for a provocative but disputed theory of history that argues that the United States is nearing a crisis that could be just as disruptive and catastrophic as the most seminal global turning points of the last 250 years. ..."
    "... This prophecy, which is laid out in a 1997 book, "The Fourth Turning," by two amateur historians, makes the case that world events unfold in predictable cycles of roughly 80 years each that can be divided into four chapters, or turnings: growth, maturation, entropy and destruction. Western societies have experienced the same patterns for centuries, the book argues, and they are as natural and necessary as spring, summer, fall and winter. ..."
    "... In an interview with The Times, Mr. Bannon said, "Everything President Trump is doing - all of it - is to get ahead of or stop any potential crisis." But the magnitude of this crisis - and who is ultimately responsible for it - is an unknown that Mr. Trump can use to his political advantage. This helps explain Mr. Trump's tendency to emphasize crime rates, terrorist attacks and weak border control. ..."
    "... We should shed and simplify the federal government in advance of the Crisis by cutting back sharply on its size and scope but without imperiling its core infrastructure. ..."
    "... One of the authors' major arguments is that Western society - particularly American culture - has denied the significance of cyclical patterns in history in favor of the more palatable and self-serving belief that humans are on an inexorable march toward improvement. They say this allows us to gloss over the flaws in human nature that allow for bad judgment - and bad leaders that drive societies into decline. ..."
    "... The authors envision a return to a more traditional, conservative social order as one outcome of a crisis. They also see the possibility of retribution and punishment for those who resist or refuse to comply with the new expectations for conformity. Mr. Trump's "with us or against us" attitude raises questions about what kind of leader he would be in such a crisis - and what kind of loyalty his administration might demand. ..."
    Apr 19, 2017 | www.nytimes.com

    Stephen K. Bannon has great admiration for a provocative but disputed theory of history that argues that the United States is nearing a crisis that could be just as disruptive and catastrophic as the most seminal global turning points of the last 250 years.

    This prophecy, which is laid out in a 1997 book, "The Fourth Turning," by two amateur historians, makes the case that world events unfold in predictable cycles of roughly 80 years each that can be divided into four chapters, or turnings: growth, maturation, entropy and destruction. Western societies have experienced the same patterns for centuries, the book argues, and they are as natural and necessary as spring, summer, fall and winter.

    Few books have been as central to the worldview of Mr. Bannon, a voracious reader who tends to see politics and policy in terms of their place in the broader arc of history.

    But what does the book tell us about how Mr. Bannon is approaching his job as President Trump's chief strategist and what he sees in the country's future? Here are some excerpts from the book, with explanations from The New York Times.

    'Winter Is Coming,' and We'd Better Be Prepared

    History is seasonal, and winter is coming. The very survival of the nation will feel at stake. Sometime before the year 2025, America will pass through a great gate in history, one commensurate with the American Revolution, Civil War, and twin emergencies of the Great Depression and World War II. The risk of catastrophe will be high. The nation could erupt into insurrection or civil violence, crack up geographically, or succumb to authoritarian rule.

    The "Fourth Turning" authors, William Strauss and Neil Howe, started using that phrase before it became a pop culture buzzword courtesy of HBO's "Game of Thrones." But, as the authors point out, some winters are mild. And sometimes they arrive late. The best thing to do, they say, is to prepare for what they wrote will be "America's next rendezvous with destiny."

    In an interview with The Times, Mr. Bannon said, "Everything President Trump is doing - all of it - is to get ahead of or stop any potential crisis." But the magnitude of this crisis - and who is ultimately responsible for it - is an unknown that Mr. Trump can use to his political advantage. This helps explain Mr. Trump's tendency to emphasize crime rates, terrorist attacks and weak border control.

    The 'Deconstruction of the Administrative State,' and Much More, Is Inevitable

    The Fourth Turning will trigger a political upheaval beyond anything Americans could today imagine. New civic authority will have to take root, quickly and firmly - which won't be easy if the discredited rules and rituals of the old regime remain fully in place. We should shed and simplify the federal government in advance of the Crisis by cutting back sharply on its size and scope but without imperiling its core infrastructure.

    The rhythmic, seasonal nature of history that the authors identify foresees an inevitable period of decay and destruction that will tear down existing social and political institutions. Mr. Bannon has famously argued that the overreaching and ineffective federal government - "the administrative state," as he calls it - needs to be dismantled. And Mr. Trump, he said, has just begun the process.

    As Mr. Howe said in an interview with The Times: "There has to be a period in which we tear down everything that is no longer functional. And if we don't do that, it's hard to ever renew anything. Forests need fires, and rivers need floods. These happen for a reason."

    'The American Dream Is Dead'

    James Truslow Adams (wrote) of an 'American Dream' to refer to this civic faith in linear advancement. Time, they suggested, was the natural ally of each successive generation. Thus arose the dogma of an American exceptionalism, the belief that this nation and its people had somehow broken loose from any risk of cyclical regress . Yet the great weakness of linear time is that it obliterates time's recurrence and thus cuts people off from the eternal - whether in nature, in each other, or in ourselves.

    One of the authors' major arguments is that Western society - particularly American culture - has denied the significance of cyclical patterns in history in favor of the more palatable and self-serving belief that humans are on an inexorable march toward improvement. They say this allows us to gloss over the flaws in human nature that allow for bad judgment - and bad leaders that drive societies into decline.

    Though he probably did not intentionally invoke Mr. Strauss and Mr. Howe, Mr. Trump was channeling their thesis when he often said during his campaign, "The American dream is dead." One of the scenarios the book puts forward is one in which leaders who emerge during a crisis can revive and rebuild dead institutions. Mr. Trump clearly saw himself as one of these when he said his goal would be to bring back the American dream.

    Conform, or Else

    In a Fourth Turning, the nation's core will matter more than its diversity. Team, brand, and standard will be new catchwords. Anyone and anything not describable in those terms could be shunted aside - or worse. Do not isolate yourself from community affairs . If you don't want to be misjudged, don't act in a way that might provoke Crisis-era authority to deem you guilty. If you belong to a racial or ethnic minority, brace for a nativist backlash from an assertive (and possibly authoritarian) majority.

    The authors envision a return to a more traditional, conservative social order as one outcome of a crisis. They also see the possibility of retribution and punishment for those who resist or refuse to comply with the new expectations for conformity. Mr. Trump's "with us or against us" attitude raises questions about what kind of leader he would be in such a crisis - and what kind of loyalty his administration might demand.

    [Apr 19, 2017] Wikileaks Hillary Clinton Told Al Qaeda Is On Our Side

    Apr 19, 2017 | www.eutimes.net
    Wikileaks posted an unclassified email to Hillary Clinton from her foreign policy advisor, Jake Sullivan dated February 2012 saying, 'AQ is on our side in Syria'.

    The other part of the email published by Wikileaks read:

    UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05789138 Date: 10/30/2015 AL-ZAWAHIRI URGES MUSLIM SUPPORT FOR OPPOSITION (U) Al-Qaida leader al-Zawahiri called on Muslims in Turkey and the Middle East to aid rebel forces in their fight against supporters of Syrian President Asad in an interne video recording. Al-Zawahiri also urged the Syrian people not to rely on the AL, Turkey, or the United States for assistance.Reuters)

    Read the full chain of unclassified emails in that document published by Wikileaks here .

    Source

    [Apr 19, 2017] Russia should be persistent and keep pressuring UNSC for investigation. This must not be swept under the rug.

    Notable quotes:
    "... Will the UN hold U$, Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, France, the UK responsible for this attack which was carried out by their takfiri, jihadist terrorist clients in Syria? ..."
    "... I agree. And if the OPCW refuses to do anything, have Bolivia, and other neutral third parties do the testing. Importantly, let's call those so-called White Helmet guys. Interview them and take the blood samples. ..."
    "... Agree. It's about keeping the momentum going. The more the warmedia avoids the blatant truth, the more people are going to be turned off by their crap. This story among many, must never be buried. Cheers from New Zealand. ..."
    "... Dead children shown only on white helmets videos, not one "rescuer" had correct protective clothing and nobody was affected by poison gas, so there was no gas? But children are dead? Assad was blamed immediately for what reason? The airport was back in use, one day after the attack. 23 Tomahawks hit the airport, 36 Tomahawks went missing? The US media was celebrating this attack which cost the lives of at least 6 people. Surrealistic psychopath behavior - That is the only real fact in this story. ..."
    "... The US is allowed to rain down as many Tomahawks/ Hellfires as they want wherever they want as long as they can get away with it. It is called the law of the jungle. If you are weak don' t complain about it. Get nukes, a strong army and be happy about a favourable geography and maybe a strong ally next to you (as North Korea is/was). ..."
    "... "It is called the law of the jungle". And it works out very satisfactorily as long as you are on top. Less so when someone else turns out to be more powerful, or unscrupulous, or sneaky. ..."
    "... I just have ten fingers so I give up counting the nations the US is having war like actions with. But technically the US has not declared war so it must be at peace right now? ..."
    Apr 19, 2017 | theduran.com
    Melotte 22 , 16 hours ago

    Russia should be persistent and keep pressuring UNSC for investigation. This must not be swept under the rug.

    christianblood Melotte 22 , 14 hours ago

    Well-said!

    In an another note: Will the UN and its so-called 'security council' condemn the horrific and barbaric attack on that took the lives of 126 mainly women and children refugee being evacuated from their villages?

    Will the UN hold U$, Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, France, the UK responsible for this attack which was carried out by their takfiri, jihadist terrorist clients in Syria?

    Tarciso Ribeiro Melotte 22 , 15 hours ago

    yeah, I agree ,if they don't they will keep using and talking about this fake attack even without any proof.

    Toxik Melotte 22 , 5 hours ago

    I agree. And if the OPCW refuses to do anything, have Bolivia, and other neutral third parties do the testing. Importantly, let's call those so-called White Helmet guys. Interview them and take the blood samples.

    Tahau Taua Melotte 22 , 4 hours ago

    Agree. It's about keeping the momentum going. The more the warmedia avoids the blatant truth, the more people are going to be turned off by their crap. This story among many, must never be buried. Cheers from New Zealand.

    Cale , 16 hours ago

    Dead children shown only on white helmets videos, not one "rescuer" had correct protective clothing and nobody was affected by poison gas, so there was no gas? But children are dead? Assad was blamed immediately for what reason? The airport was back in use, one day after the attack. 23 Tomahawks hit the airport, 36 Tomahawks went missing? The US media was celebrating this attack which cost the lives of at least 6 people. Surrealistic psychopath behavior - That is the only real fact in this story.

    Robson Robson -> Cale , 15 hours ago

    The US is allowed to rain down as many Tomahawks/ Hellfires as they want wherever they want as long as they can get away with it. It is called the law of the jungle. If you are weak don' t complain about it. Get nukes, a strong army and be happy about a favourable geography and maybe a strong ally next to you (as North Korea is/was).

    If you let the NeoConNazis (or Israelis, if you are close by) take your nukes you are one step closer to get disposed of (see Lybia, Syria, Iraq). From the 7 countries (as in 7 countries in 5 years) several ones have been already attacked but progress was kinda slow and we haven't seen vibrant democracies yet:

    • -Iraq: broken apart into a US friendly Kurdish, an Iran friendly Shia and an ISIS territory
    • -Syria: Civial war being waged, divided into loyalist, AlQuaeda,ISIS and Kurdish part
    • -Lebanon: Civil war incited by Saudi Arabia, stopped by Hisbollah
    • -Libya: Complete clusterfuxx thanks to Hillary Clinton wanting to have a lasting moment as US secretary of foreign affairs
    • -Somalia: Who put that on a list? It was already a complete mess in 2001
    • -Sudan: Friends of China as well as Saudi Arabia - are allowed to butcher whomever they want as long as they are Christian
    • -Iran: Prevented attack by letting the US military bleed out in Iraq. Were already outflanked in Iraq and Afghanistan. No need to take actions in Afghanistan, as Pakistan's ISI made sure the US bleeds there too.

    Ah, let' s start war in a different country, why not in North Korea. What are the odds it could go south?

    tom -> Robson Robson , 14 hours ago

    Actually, the USA is still at war with North Korea, which it invaded in 1950, killing several million of its citizens.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

    Tommy Jensen -> tom , 13 hours ago

    The North Koreans killed 55000 American soldiers and marines in that war without mercy. McCain´s father was singing like a songbird but the rice eaters hanged him anyway because they were against freedom.

    Robson Robson -> Tommy Jensen , 12 hours ago

    55000 dead americans? Do you know that 55000 Americans are not a lot compared to a total of more then 3 million deaths, most of them civilians? Most north korean cities were leveled by US bomber attacks. There were many massacres with more then 10000 dead civilians - committed by South Korean troops supported by the US. And also many atrocities committed directly by US soldiers.

    Same thing was repeated in Vietnam, except that especially the northern part of Korea was well industrialized so there was a stark contrast when the got bombed back to the stone age.

    Have you ever been to Jeju-Do? It is a cute little island - many South Koreans have spent their honeymoon their. In 1948 the South Korean strongmen president (who has been in exile in the US) made sure that everybody with suspected communist ties went to a camp. And some of these internment camps became death camps and about 20000 Koreans lost their life. Way to go! USA! USA! USA!

    So you stupid racist pig, calling asians rice eaters and crying about 55000 souls while many more people died by their hand: have a look at history and when maybe to think before supporting any kind of stupid war that just benefits the MIC...

    tom -> Robson Robson , 15 hours ago

    "It is called the law of the jungle". And it works out very satisfactorily as long as you are on top. Less so when someone else turns out to be more powerful, or unscrupulous, or sneaky.

    If a major US city were to disappear in a thermonuclear explosion, or to be immersed in a cloud of poison gas or deadly virus, the USA would not have a leg to stand on in protest.

    International law and the UN Charter unambiguously state that the only justified reasons for attacking another country are a UN mandate to use force, or self-defence against a country that has already attacked you. There are no exceptions.

    So we must conclude that the USA is now at war with at least several dozen nations. Go on, count the nations that the USA has attacked with military force since (let's say) 1945.

    Any one (or more) of those nations has the right, under international law, to commit acts of war against the USA. Including (now I come to think of it) North Korea, with whom the USA never agreed a treaty of peace.

    Robson Robson -> tom , 12 hours ago

    I just have ten fingers so I give up counting the nations the US is having war like actions with. But technically the US has not declared war so it must be at peace right now?

    The only wars fought I personally remember are the war on the middle class and the war against Xmas. Maybe also the the war against free speech called political correctness, something I liked about Trump... ;-)

    Tommy Jensen , 13 hours ago

    But Trump succeeded to kill 4 children and 8 civilians in his Tomahawk attack on a Syrian Airport and related village as revenge for a staged fake, while he was crying Assad is "an animal who kill beautyful babies".

    [Apr 18, 2017] Tulsi Gabbard seems to be one of the few principled politicians in this case and for that she is marginalized for saying what few others have the moral courage to say. Many on the left are hoping she will run in 2020 for President.

    Notable quotes:
    "... What has happened is one of two things as far is Trump is concerned. Either he walked into a trap prepared for him by the Deep state, willingly or unwillingly. If willingly he knew he was set up and accepted it because he has no choice. He could not disobey the military. They have their own agenda in Syria which they had been pursuing for a while, that is carving out American zone of occupation in eastern Syria with the help of Sunny states. ..."
    "... Or Trump simply capitulated to the deep state as Obama did before him. ..."
    "... Did people like McMaster think it was real and report it to Trump as such? Did Trump believe it? Or did they know it was fake but pretended otherwise? Were they in on it from the beginning or were they forced to play along? ..."
    "... Trump has quickly shifted into being an establishment politician whose rhetoric has been bellicose and reckless. Next up, N Korea and then Iran? ..."
    Apr 18, 2017 | www.unz.com

    DB Cooper , April 18, 2017 at 4:13 am GMT

    100 Words This whole chemical weapon attack by Assad sounds fishy from the beginning. From what I read Assad is winning the civil war and things are turning for the better for him. What would he gain at this point to launch a chemical attack on the civilian populations? Things just doesn't add up. Check out this video:

    watch-v=g1VNQGsiP8M

    Carlton Meyer , Website April 18, 2017 at 4:21 am GMT
    Am I the only person who remembers news from a month ago? Trump ordered hundreds of regular American combat troops into Syria BEFORE this event, with no explanation. This was covered on all major networks, including CNN.

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/08/politics/marines-raqqa-assault-syria/

    And why? They've been trying to overthrow Assad since 2005:

    NoldorElf , April 18, 2017 at 5:01 am GMT
    100 Words I am forced to conclude that the neoconservatives and indeed all of Washington DC are eager to go to war. They are just itching for any excuse to start yet another war in a nation of their choosing.

    If there is no good reason, they will make one up. There is an eerie resemblance to what is happening now with Syria and what happened leading up to the 2003 Invasion of Iraq.

    I think the paleoconservative community also needs to come to terms with the fact that Trump has sold them out and is increasingly acting like a Washington insider neocon. Trump did to the paleoconservatives what Obama did to the left.

    It seems Trump will not put "America First" nor make any attempts to restore the American Middle Class nor American manufacturing to truly "Make American Great Again".

    Tulsi Gabbard seems to be one of the few principled politicians in this case and for that she is marginalized for saying what few others have the moral courage to say. Many on the left are hoping she will run in 2020 for President.

    Coming from the left, I'd say that the Sanders and Trump base have a lot more in common than we admit. We are both deeply unhappy with the way that Washington has handled things. They basically betrayed the American people and enriched themselves at public expense.

    The real question is, can the US be saved for the people or will it continue on its path to terminal decline?

    utu , April 18, 2017 at 6:16 am GMT
    100 Words Why'd there is no propaganda counter offensive coming from Putin and Assad? Where are their accounts of what happened there backed up by pictures and names of those who created this false flag? Don't they have their sources, intelligence and people on the ground? We are getting nothing. Instead Sputnik and RT is deferring to retired 71 old professor Postol who did his whole analysis based on single picture he found somewhere on social media. Do you think this will cause a dent in beliefs of people who are 24/7 being propagandized by Anglo-Zio media?
    Wizard of Oz , April 18, 2017 at 6:17 am GMT
    100 Words What is your view of David Kilcullen, what he knows about, and what his views are worth? No doubt "modified" or " qualified" respect but it is the qualifications and the reasons for them that I am interested in. When I've got round tobfinishing his article saying Assad is desperate and losing I'll probably be back.
    Anon , April 18, 2017 at 6:34 am GMT
    Get a load of this a ** hole who was responsible for disaster in Russia.

    He thinks he has the right to judge the mental health of others.

    But as long as super-rich globalists fund think-tanks and invite lunatics like him, he can posture as a 'voice of reason'.

    https://youtu.be/AhyD-fPS0vs

    And there is the other esteemed 'voice of reason', Thomas Friedman, who wants war in Syria to go on, even if ISIS kills more innocents.

    https://www.commondreams.org/views/2017/04/15/thomas-friedmans-perverse-love-affair-isis

    These academics are like mafia lawyers.

    The mafia sent some of their guys to study law or even enter legit institutions(like police, church, government, etc) and then had those guys serve the mafia. They had the sheen of respectability, dignity, and objective meritocracy, but their main loyalty was to the mafia.
    It's like Tom Hagen is an ace lawyer but serves the Mob.

    And there were other famous Mob Lawyers, the real ones.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Ragano

    So many of these journos and academics are really Mob Publicists and Mob Advocates.
    They serve the globalist mafia. Glob is their Mob.

    Sachs is a total shark. He's been a Glob Advocate forever. A real weasel.

    Brabantian , Website April 18, 2017 at 8:34 am GMT
    600 Words Proof of the false-flag nature of the 'chemical attack' in Syria absurdly ascribed to Assad's forces -

    Above all because of a very-censored explosive story – a distinguished group of Swedish doctors showed that the George Clooney & Western-backed 'White Helmets' in fact made a snuff film actually murdering children of this 'chemical attack' anyone can invite medical physicians they know to view this, to see the Swedish Doctors for Human Rights are absolutely correct in their accusations:

    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/04/06/swedish-medical-associations-says-white-helmets-murdered-kids-for-fake-gas-attack-videos/

    For an overview of the many wider points making clear the false flag, Aangirfan does an excellent job here as she very often does:

    http://aanirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/trump-at-war-with-assad-and-putin.html

    (1) Anti-Assad "reporter" Feras Karam tweeted about the gas attack in Syria 24 hours before it happened – Tweet , "Tomorrow a media campaign will begin to cover intense air raids on the Hama countryside & use of chlorine against civilians"

    (2) Gas masks were distributed 2 days before the attack

    (3) Rescue workers are not wearing protective gear as they would if severely-toxic gas attack had occurred

    (4) Pakistani British doctor promoting Syria gas attack story, "who at the time of attack was taking interview requests instead of helping injured flooding in" is Dr Shajul Islam, "used as source by US & UK media, despite facing terror charges for kidnapping & torturing two British journalists in Syria & being struck off the medical register"

    (5) The USA & CIA were previously documented as having approved a "plan to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria & blame it on Assad's regime' A 2013 article on this is deleted from the UK Daily Mail website, but is saved at Web Archive, a screenshot at Aangirfan's page above

    (6) Videos previously exposed as fraudulent are being recycled "A chemical weapons shipment run by Saudi mercenaries [is blown up] before it can be offloaded & used to attack the Syrian army in Hama [this story] has turned into Syrian aircraft dropping sarin gas on orphanages videos shot in Egypt with the smoke machines are dragged out again."

    (7) Gas attack story is supported by known Soros-funded frauds 'White Helmets' who had previously celebrated alongside Israeli-Saudi backed 'Al Qaeda' extremists after seizing Idlib from Syrian Army forces. White Helmets "have been caught filming their fake videos in places like Egypt & Morocco, using actors, smoke machines & fake blood".

    (8) The 2013 gas attack in Syria killing over 1000 people, was also proven to be an operation by USA & allies, with admissions to this effect by Turkish Members of Parliament The operation even involved the CIA's Google Inc monopoly search control internet domination tool, via their subsidiary Google Idea Groups & Jared Cohen:

    In 2014, the later-murdered journalist Serena Shim "stumbled upon a safehouse run by Jared Cohen & Google Idea Groups, a short distance from a border crossing into Syria between Hatay, Turkey & Aleppo province in Syria. In the safehouse were three Ukrainian secret service who had just buried a load of sarin gas shells from the Republic of Georgia. Chemical weapons used in the Ghouta war crime were trucked through Turkey to Gaziantep then taken from there to Aleppo by NGOs, hidden in ambulances or in trucks supposedly carrying relief aid. After Shim broke this story on PressTV the clumsily-staged 'accident' leading to her death only a few days later."

    By way of motive – Destruction of Syria & Assad serves the long-being-implemented 1980s Israeli Oded Yinon Plan to destroy & dismember all major countries surrounding mafia state Israel, in general service to the world oligarchs. Plus, there are major US-backed economics behind the campaign to destroy Syria – Assad's fall is sought for changing from the Russia-supported pipeline from Iran thru Iraq & Syria, to the USA-supported pipeline from Qatar thru Saudi Arabia, Jordan & Syria.

    Vlad , April 18, 2017 at 9:45 am GMT
    What has happened is one of two things as far is Trump is concerned. Either he walked into a trap prepared for him by the Deep state, willingly or unwillingly. If willingly he knew he was set up and accepted it because he has no choice. He could not disobey the military. They have their own agenda in Syria which they had been pursuing for a while, that is carving out American zone of occupation in eastern Syria with the help of Sunny states.

    Or Trump simply capitulated to the deep state as Obama did before him. If that is the case we know now how American is governed, by the military industrial complex that dictates its policy. The sad part is that the Constitution is disregarded once again, that the Liberals who used to be peaceniks, are now cheering for war, that the UN is marginalized, that Trump uses it just as Bush did to justify an illegal war.

    Sean , April 18, 2017 at 10:22 am GMT

    Sounds like we've heard it all before, because we have, back in August 2013, and that turned out to be less than convincing. Skepticism is likewise mounting over current White House claims that Damascus used a chemical weapon against civilians in the village of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province on April 4th.

    Quite. They maybe faked before and know how to in there was a overwhelming need. However, one wonders why they did not use the gas gambit when they were set to lose Aleppo. Using it now only when they have lost their big gains, seems like bolting the stable door after the horse is gone . So the motives for the rebels faking a gas attack at this juncture are even more puzzling as for the Assad regime having ordered it .

    Why Volatility Signals Stability, and Vice Versa
    By Nassim Nicholas Taleb and Gregory F. Treverton

    Even as protests spread across the Middle East in early 2011, the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria appeared immune from the upheaval. Assad had ruled comfortably for over a decade, having replaced his father, Hafez, who himself had held power for the previous three decades. Many pundits argued that Syria's sturdy police state, which exercised tight control over the country's people and economy, would survive the Arab Spring undisturbed. ]

    But appearances were deceiving: today, Syria is in a shambles, with the regime fighting for its very survival, whereas Lebanon has withstood the influx of Syrian refugees and the other considerable pressures of the civil war next door. Surprising as it may seem, the per capita death rate from violence in Lebanon in 2013 was lower than that in Washington, D.C. That same year, the body count of the Syrian conflict surpassed 100,000.

    Why has seemingly stable Syria turned out to be the fragile regime, whereas always-in-turmoil Lebanon has so far proved robust? The answer is that prior to its civil war, Syria was exhibiting only pseudo-stability, its calm façade concealing deep structural vulnerabilities. Lebanon's chaos, paradoxically, signaled strength. Fifteen years of civil war had served to decentralize the state and bring about a more balanced sectarian power-sharing structure. Along with Lebanon's small size as an administrative unit, these factors added to its durability. So did the country's free-market economy. In Syria, the ruling Baath Party sought to control economic variability, replacing the lively chaos of the ancestral souk with the top-down, Soviet-style structure of the office building. This rigidity made Syria (and the other Baathist state, Iraq) much more vulnerable to disruption than Lebanon.[...]

    The divergent tales of Syria and Lebanon demonstrate that the best early warning signs of instability are found not in historical data but in underlying structural properties. Past experience can be extremely effective when it comes to detecting risks of cancer, crime, and earthquakes. But it is a bad bellwether of complex political and economic events, particularly so-called tail risks-events, such as coups and financial crises, that are highly unlikely but enormously consequential. For those, the evidence of risk comes too late to do anything about it, and a more sophisticated approach is required.

    [...]

    Simply put, fragility is aversion to disorder. Things that are fragile do not like variability, volatility, stress, chaos, and random events, which cause them to either gain little or suffer. A teacup, for example, will not benefit from any form of shock. It wants peace and predictability, something that is not possible in the long run, which is why time is an enemy to the fragile. What's more, things that are fragile respond to shock in a nonlinear fashion. With humans, for example, the harm from a ten-foot fall in no way equals ten times as much harm as from a one-foot fall. In political and economic terms, a $30 drop in the price of a barrel of oil is much more than twice as harmful to Saudi Arabia as a $15 drop.

    THE CENTER CANNOT HOLD

    The first marker of a fragile state is a concentrated decision-making system.funds, at the price of increasing systemic risks, such as disastrous national-level reforms.

    This Administration has acted recklessly without care or consideration of the dire consequences of the United States attack on Syria

    A Russian build military base being used to attack urban areas is not "Syria"

    Assad and those around him hold concentrated centralised power and are already proven to be incredibly stupid, that is why he is in this position– he thought the people loved him, put up the price of basic commodities and the rebellion started. Assad perhaps believes the US is scared to get involved in Syria or to to cross the Russians . It seems silly but he and his advisors have a proven record of catastrophic misjudgements . Bringing in the Russians meant the US would be involved.

    I dare say the US has more advanced facilities for gathering intelligence it lets on about and than Syria, Russia or US media know about. Providing "evidence" gives away the hole card one might come in handy if the nuclear balloon starts going goes well and truly up. Any price would be worth paying for knowing Russia's intent. If people doubt Trump over this (and he warned the Russian it was going to be done so he didn't seek confrontation) it is the unfortunate price of maintaining secret intelligence facilities.

    The Trump Administration is threatening to do more to remove Bashar al-Assad and every American should accept that the inhabitant of the White House, when he is actually in residence, will discover like many before him that war is good business. He will continue to ride the wave of jingoism that has turned out to be his salvation, reversing to an extent the negative publicity that has dogged the new administration.

    For a great power seeing its rival use military force to crush a rebellion it has expressed sympathy is quite definitely a real defeat . It's a zero sum game for America and Russia (yes Russia is Jingoistic, and I think it is more centralised in decision making ) . The Russians took advantage of US passivity under Obama, and they were exultant at the way the US stood and watched, while Russia made all the successful initiatives, but really they couldn't be allowed to have it their own way any longer, for what they would have done next can be assumed to have been frightening to Europe.

    Sean , April 18, 2017 at 10:25 am GMT
    @Carlton Meyer Am I the only person who remembers news from a month ago? Trump ordered hundreds of regular American combat troops into Syria BEFORE this event, with no explanation. This was covered on all major networks, including CNN.

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/08/politics/marines-raqqa-assault-syria/

    And why? They've been trying to overthrow Assad since 2005:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pm8-vSo4Y4

    Russia was having too much success, they needed to understand that the US is not going to stand by any longer and wait to see. Read More

    AmericaFirstNow , Website April 18, 2017 at 11:19 am GMT
    Jewish AIPAC Israel firster Jared Kushner and his fellow Jewish AIPAC Israel first friends (like Reed Cordish who worked for Israel Lobby lackey Dick Cheney as well) whom he brought into the White House more than likely influenced Trump to push the Israel Lobby agenda vs Syria for regime change to weaken Iran:

    http://america-hijacked.com/2012/02/12/israel-lobby-pushes-for-us-action-against-the-syrian-government/

    More on Kushner and his fellow AIPAC Israel firster at the White House obviously influencing Trump to push the Israel Lobby agenda like he did with Syria as I heard Netanyahu praised the Syriaattack and Pence personally telephoned to thank him:

    http://forward.com/news/breaking-news/359120/jared-kushners-friend-picked-by-donald-trump-as-assistant/

    Hunsdon , April 18, 2017 at 12:07 pm GMT
    @Sean Russia was having too much success, they needed to understand that the US is not going to stand by any longer and wait to see. INORITE! I mean look, Russia has expanded its military to the very borders of NATO.

    Oh.

    Wait.

    anonymous , April 18, 2017 at 1:03 pm GMT
    It certainly appears to have been a manufactured event. The media was ready and swung into action immediately with pictures and a noisy campaign that the usual war-hawk politicians joined in with. The timing was just too good and seems to have been coordinated. Syria was bombed without bothering to investigate based on Trump's claim that the evidence was ironclad.

    Did people like McMaster think it was real and report it to Trump as such? Did Trump believe it? Or did they know it was fake but pretended otherwise? Were they in on it from the beginning or were they forced to play along?

    Trump has quickly shifted into being an establishment politician whose rhetoric has been bellicose and reckless. Next up, N Korea and then Iran?

    No matter how one votes they end up getting the same thing. It's very disheartening.

    Quartermaster , April 18, 2017 at 1:08 pm GMT
    @Anon Get a load of this a**hole who was responsible for disaster in Russia.

    He thinks he has the right to judge the mental health of others.

    But as long as super-rich globalists fund think-tanks and invite lunatics like him, he can posture as a 'voice of reason'.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhyD-fPS0vs

    And there is the other esteemed 'voice of reason', Thomas Friedman, who wants war in Syria to go on, even if ISIS kills more innocents.

    https://www.commondreams.org/views/2017/04/15/thomas-friedmans-perverse-love-affair-isis

    These academics are like mafia lawyers.

    The mafia sent some of their guys to study law or even enter legit institutions(like police, church, government, etc) and then had those guys serve the mafia. They had the sheen of respectability, dignity, and objective meritocracy, but their main loyalty was to the mafia.
    It's like Tom Hagen is an ace lawyer but serves the Mob.

    And there were other famous Mob Lawyers, the real ones.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Ragano

    So many of these journos and academics are really Mob Publicists and Mob Advocates.
    They serve the globalist mafia. Glob is their Mob.

    Sachs is a total shark. He's been a Glob Advocate forever. A real weasel. Putin is the real weasel, and problem in Russia. He's corrupt to his core and has his own vision for Russia which is quite destructive. His Soviet revanchism is a serious problem for Russia and has set the country up for a serious fall. Read More LOL: geokat62 Troll: L.K , Rurik

    Quartermaster , April 18, 2017 at 1:11 pm GMT
    @Brabantian Proof of the false-flag nature of the 'chemical attack' in Syria absurdly ascribed to Assad's forces -

    Above all because of a very-censored explosive story - a distinguished group of Swedish doctors showed that the George Clooney & Western-backed 'White Helmets' in fact made a snuff film actually murdering children of this 'chemical attack' ... anyone can invite medical physicians they know to view this, to see the Swedish Doctors for Human Rights are absolutely correct in their accusations:

    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/04/06/swedish-medical-associations-says-white-helmets-murdered-kids-for-fake-gas-attack-videos/

    For an overview of the many wider points making clear the false flag, Aangirfan does an excellent job here as she very often does:

    http://aanirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/trump-at-war-with-assad-and-putin.html

    (1) Anti-Assad "reporter" Feras Karam tweeted about the gas attack in Syria 24 hours before it happened - Tweet , "Tomorrow a media campaign will begin to cover intense air raids on the Hama countryside & use of chlorine against civilians"

    (2) Gas masks were distributed 2 days before the attack

    (3) Rescue workers are not wearing protective gear as they would if severely-toxic gas attack had occurred

    (4) Pakistani British doctor promoting Syria gas attack story, "who at the time of attack was taking interview requests instead of helping injured flooding in" is Dr Shajul Islam, "used as source by US & UK media, despite facing terror charges for kidnapping & torturing two British journalists in Syria & being struck off the medical register"

    (5) The USA & CIA were previously documented as having approved a "plan to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria & blame it on Assad's regime' ... A 2013 article on this is deleted from the UK Daily Mail website, but is saved at Web Archive, a screenshot at Aangirfan's page above

    (6) Videos previously exposed as fraudulent are being recycled "A chemical weapons shipment run by Saudi mercenaries [is blown up] before it can be offloaded & used to attack the Syrian army in Hama ... [this story] has turned into Syrian aircraft dropping sarin gas on orphanages ... videos shot in Egypt with the smoke machines are dragged out again."

    (7) Gas attack story is supported by known Soros-funded frauds 'White Helmets' who had previously celebrated alongside Israeli-Saudi backed 'Al Qaeda' extremists after seizing Idlib from Syrian Army forces. White Helmets "have been caught filming their fake videos in places like Egypt & Morocco, using actors, smoke machines & fake blood".

    (8) The 2013 gas attack in Syria killing over 1000 people, was also proven to be an operation by USA & allies, with admissions to this effect by Turkish Members of Parliament ... The operation even involved the CIA's Google Inc monopoly search control internet domination tool, via their subsidiary Google Idea Groups & Jared Cohen:

    In 2014, the later-murdered journalist Serena Shim "stumbled upon a safehouse run by Jared Cohen & Google Idea Groups, a short distance from a border crossing into Syria between Hatay, Turkey & Aleppo province in Syria. In the safehouse were three Ukrainian secret service who had just buried a load of sarin gas shells from the Republic of Georgia. Chemical weapons used in the Ghouta war crime were trucked through Turkey to Gaziantep then taken from there to Aleppo by NGOs, hidden in ambulances or in trucks supposedly carrying relief aid. After Shim broke this story on PressTV ... the clumsily-staged 'accident' leading to her death only a few days later."

    By way of motive - Destruction of Syria & Assad serves the long-being-implemented 1980s Israeli Oded Yinon Plan to destroy & dismember all major countries surrounding mafia state Israel, in general service to the world oligarchs. Plus, there are major US-backed economics behind the campaign to destroy Syria - Assad's fall is sought for changing from the Russia-supported pipeline from Iran thru Iraq & Syria, to the USA-supported pipeline from Qatar thru Saudi Arabia, Jordan & Syria. Sarin is a nerve agent and if that is what was used, gas masks are far less than what is needed to protect anyone.

    I don't see any motivation on Assad's part to stage such an attack. It simply was not in his interest to do so. Trump's action was a knee jerk reaction and stupid. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    Agent76 , April 18, 2017 at 2:12 pm GMT
    April 07, 2017

    Pentagon Trained Syria's Al Qaeda "Rebels" in the Use of Chemical Weapons

    The Western media refutes their own lies.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/pentagon-trained-syrias-al-qaeda-rebels-in-the-use-of-chemical-weapons/5583784

    Apr 9, 2017

    No More

    Wizard of Oz , April 18, 2017 at 2:21 pm GMT
    Here is ths David Kilcullen article I have been referring to. On the face of it he is a respectable analyst and authority like Mr Girardi with no hidden agenda:

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/fighting-islamic-state/sarin-attack-shows-assad-is-desperate-as-jihadist-rebels-gain-ground/news-story/5265dee03a779671aefa32ef8d1a2fb3

    There is no reason to suppose that either DK or PG have special knowledge of what gas attack actually occurred and by whom. However there seems to be an even more important division over the security of the Syrian government under attack from the Al Qaeda affiliate by whatever name it is now called in Syria. Kilcullen points to Assad having superior hardware but desperately lacking manpower.

    Does PG subscribe to the popular contrary view that Assad is so close to winning againt all rebels that he simply couldn't hsve hsd s motive to make the gss atttack?

    Clark Westwood , April 18, 2017 at 2:22 pm GMT
    Is it possible that Trump and Putin cooked up this little show simply to give Trump more credibility in his approaching confrontation with North Korea?
    Z-man , April 18, 2017 at 2:53 pm GMT
    @Anon Get a load of this a**hole who was responsible for disaster in Russia.

    He thinks he has the right to judge the mental health of others.

    But as long as super-rich globalists fund think-tanks and invite lunatics like him, he can posture as a 'voice of reason'.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhyD-fPS0vs

    And there is the other esteemed 'voice of reason', Thomas Friedman, who wants war in Syria to go on, even if ISIS kills more innocents.

    https://www.commondreams.org/views/2017/04/15/thomas-friedmans-perverse-love-affair-isis

    These academics are like mafia lawyers.

    The mafia sent some of their guys to study law or even enter legit institutions(like police, church, government, etc) and then had those guys serve the mafia. They had the sheen of respectability, dignity, and objective meritocracy, but their main loyalty was to the mafia.
    It's like Tom Hagen is an ace lawyer but serves the Mob.

    And there were other famous Mob Lawyers, the real ones.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Ragano

    So many of these journos and academics are really Mob Publicists and Mob Advocates.
    They serve the globalist mafia. Glob is their Mob.

    Sachs is a total shark. He's been a Glob Advocate forever. A real weasel. What's the common denominator to these two ??????

    Z-man , April 18, 2017 at 3:02 pm GMT
    "Democratic Party liberal interventionists have also joined with Senators John McCain, Lindsay Graham and Marco Rubio to celebrate the cruise missile strike and hardening rhetoric."

    All owned by the likes of http://www.haaretz.com/polopoly_fs/1.631441.1418390491!/image/412181903.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_640/412181903.jpg Repulsive no?

    Jeff Davis , April 18, 2017 at 3:15 pm GMT
    @utu Why'd there is no propaganda counter offensive coming from Putin and Assad? Where are their accounts of what happened there backed up by pictures and names of those who created this false flag? Don't they have their sources, intelligence and people on the ground? We are getting nothing. Instead Sputnik and RT is deferring to retired 71 old professor Postol who did his whole analysis based on single picture he found somewhere on social media. Do you think this will cause a dent in beliefs of people who are 24/7 being propagandized by Anglo-Zio media? " picture he found somewhere on social media."

    If you check closely, I think you will find that Postol took that photo from the White House issued document presenting the "evidence"(not!) of Syrian responsibility(not!) for the sarin(?) gas attack. Thus that photo represents the on-the-record official story w/official "evidence".

    Far from being some randomly acquired photo taken from social media and originating who knows where. And to take it one discrediting step further, it turns out the photo was provided by the al Qaeda terrorists - the CIA's client anti-Assad terrorists - who control that area.

    Bottom line: From the first, this was an ***OBVIOUS*** false flag. The only question remaining is whether the CIA coordinated with al Qaeda in planning this event.

    Sean , April 18, 2017 at 3:25 pm GMT
    @Hunsdon INORITE! I mean look, Russia has expanded its military to the very borders of NATO.

    Oh.

    Wait. Well they do not get to set the rules until they are the most powerful state in the world–like the US. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    JoaoAlfaiate , April 18, 2017 at 3:33 pm GMT
    100 Words Remember WMD and Saddam? What did the top papers say after Colin Powell's speech to the UN "proving" that Iraq had WMD?

    New York Times: "[Powell's speech] may not have produced a 'smoking gun," but it left little question that Mr. Hussein had tried hard to conceal one."

    Wall Street Journal: "The Powell evidence will be persuasive to anyone who is still persuadable. The only question remaining is whether the U.N. is going to have the courage of Mr. Powell's convictions."

    Washington Post: "To continue to say that the Bush administration has not made its case, you must now believe that Colin Powell lied in the most serious statement he will ever make "

    "Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play."
    Joseph Goebbels Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

    iffen , April 18, 2017 at 3:48 pm GMT
    @Hunsdon INORITE! I mean look, Russia has expanded its military to the very borders of NATO.

    Oh.

    Wait. Not only that they recently illegally annexed a prized warm water port. Read More

    alexander , April 18, 2017 at 4:13 pm GMT
    200 Words @Wizard of Oz Here is ths David Kilcullen article I have been referring to. On the face of it he is a respectable analyst and authority like Mr Girardi with no hidden agenda:

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/fighting-islamic-state/sarin-attack-shows-assad-is-desperate-as-jihadist-rebels-gain-ground/news-story/5265dee03a779671aefa32ef8d1a2fb3

    Thete is mo reason to suppose that either DK or PG have special knowledge of what gas attack actually occurred and by whom. However there seems to be an even more important division over the security of the Syrian government under attack from the Al Qaeda afiliate by whatever name it is now called in Syria. Kilcullen points to Assad having superior hardware but desperately lacking manpower.

    Does PG subscrtobe to the populsr contrary view that Assad is so close to winning againt all rebels that he simply couldn't hsve hsd s motive to make the gss atttack? Hi Wiz,

    I think it is quite clear, that with the assistance of the Russian military, the Syrian army has mounted multiple strategic victories against ISIS over the past year and a half.

    The entry of Russia into the fray, at the request of Syria, provided a very deep reservoir of enhanced military power which has shown to be highly effective in degraded both Al Qaeda and ISIS on multiple fronts.

    It seems as absurd now , as it did in 2013, that Assad would do the ONE THING that would force the hand of the US military to enter the fray against him.

    I also doubt the notion of the Syrian regimes "desperation" given the complete cooperation of Russia in providing any assistance the Syrian army might need , to achieve victory against ISIS.

    One could argue, however ,that Assad is truly "bonehead" stupid.

    You are certainly free to make that argument, Wiz , because, in this case, it seems to be the one that would make the most sense. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    The Alarmist , April 18, 2017 at 4:30 pm GMT
    100 Words @Sean

    Sounds like we've heard it all before, because we have, back in August 2013, and that turned out to be less than convincing. Skepticism is likewise mounting over current White House claims that Damascus used a chemical weapon against civilians in the village of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province on April 4th.
    Quite. They maybe faked before and know how to in there was a overwhelming need. However, one wonders why they did not use the gas gambit when they were set to lose Aleppo. Using it now only when they have lost their big gains, seems like bolting the stable door after the horse is gone . So the motives for the rebels faking a gas attack at this juncture are even more puzzling as for the Assad regime having ordered it .

    Why Volatility Signals Stability, and Vice Versa
    By Nassim Nicholas Taleb and Gregory F. Treverton
    Purchase Article
    Even as protests spread across the Middle East in early 2011, the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria appeared immune from the upheaval. Assad had ruled comfortably for over a decade, having replaced his father, Hafez, who himself had held power for the previous three decades. Many pundits argued that Syria's sturdy police state, which exercised tight control over the country's people and economy, would survive the Arab Spring undisturbed. ]...

    But appearances were deceiving: today, Syria is in a shambles, with the regime fighting for its very survival, whereas Lebanon has withstood the influx of Syrian refugees and the other considerable pressures of the civil war next door. Surprising as it may seem, the per capita death rate from violence in Lebanon in 2013 was lower than that in Washington, D.C. That same year, the body count of the Syrian conflict surpassed 100,000.

    Why has seemingly stable Syria turned out to be the fragile regime, whereas always-in-turmoil Lebanon has so far proved robust? The answer is that prior to its civil war, Syria was exhibiting only pseudo-stability, its calm façade concealing deep structural vulnerabilities. Lebanon's chaos, paradoxically, signaled strength. Fifteen years of civil war had served to decentralize the state and bring about a more balanced sectarian power-sharing structure. Along with Lebanon's small size as an administrative unit, these factors added to its durability. So did the country's free-market economy. In Syria, the ruling Baath Party sought to control economic variability, replacing the lively chaos of the ancestral souk with the top-down, Soviet-style structure of the office building. This rigidity made Syria (and the other Baathist state, Iraq) much more vulnerable to disruption than Lebanon.[...]


    The divergent tales of Syria and Lebanon demonstrate that the best early warning signs of instability are found not in historical data but in underlying structural properties. Past experience can be extremely effective when it comes to detecting risks of cancer, crime, and earthquakes. But it is a bad bellwether of complex political and economic events, particularly so-called tail risks-events, such as coups and financial crises, that are highly unlikely but enormously consequential. For those, the evidence of risk comes too late to do anything about it, and a more sophisticated approach is required.

    [...]

    Simply put, fragility is aversion to disorder. Things that are fragile do not like variability, volatility, stress, chaos, and random events, which cause them to either gain little or suffer. A teacup, for example, will not benefit from any form of shock. It wants peace and predictability, something that is not possible in the long run, which is why time is an enemy to the fragile. What's more, things that are fragile respond to shock in a nonlinear fashion. With humans, for example, the harm from a ten-foot fall in no way equals ten times as much harm as from a one-foot fall. In political and economic terms, a $30 drop in the price of a barrel of oil is much more than twice as harmful to Saudi Arabia as a $15 drop.

    THE CENTER CANNOT HOLD

    The first marker of a fragile state is a concentrated decision-making system.funds, at the price of increasing systemic risks, such as disastrous national-level reforms.


    This Administration has acted recklessly without care or consideration of the dire consequences of the United States attack on Syria
    A Russian build military base being used to attack urban areas is not "Syria"

    Assad and those around him hold concentrated centralised power and are already proven to be incredibly stupid, that is why he is in this position-- he thought the people loved him, put up the price of basic commodities and the rebellion started. Assad perhaps believes the US is scared to get involved in Syria or to to cross the Russians . It seems silly but he and his advisors have a proven record of catastrophic misjudgements . Bringing in the Russians meant the US would be involved.

    I dare say the US has more advanced facilities for gathering intelligence it lets on about and than Syria, Russia or US media know about. Providing "evidence" gives away the hole card one might come in handy if the nuclear balloon starts going goes well and truly up. Any price would be worth paying for knowing Russia's intent. If people doubt Trump over this (and he warned the Russian it was going to be done so he didn't seek confrontation) it is the unfortunate price of maintaining secret intelligence facilities.


    The Trump Administration is threatening to do more to remove Bashar al-Assad and every American should accept that the inhabitant of the White House, when he is actually in residence, will discover like many before him that war is good business. He will continue to ride the wave of jingoism that has turned out to be his salvation, reversing to an extent the negative publicity that has dogged the new administration.
    For a great power seeing its rival use military force to crush a rebellion it has expressed sympathy is quite definitely a real defeat . It's a zero sum game for America and Russia (yes Russia is Jingoistic, and I think it is more centralised in decision making ) . The Russians took advantage of US passivity under Obama, and they were exultant at the way the US stood and watched, while Russia made all the successful initiatives, but really they couldn't be allowed to have it their own way any longer, for what they would have done next can be assumed to have been frightening to Europe.

    "The Russians took advantage of US passivity under Obama, and they were exultant at the way the US stood and watched, while Russia made all the successful initiatives, but really they couldn't be allowed to have it their own way any longer, for what they would have done next can be assumed to have been frightening to Europe."

    Wow, we must have been observing two different worlds, because Russian actions in several theatres (Syria, Ukraine, Korea, ROW) have been relatively restrained to non-existent despite clear threats to their national interests, while the US has ratcheted up it military intervention pretty much globally over the same period. Then again, I live outside the US and am not blanketed with the propaganda that spills out of its MSM house organs, so we have indeed observed two different worlds. Read More

    Wally , April 18, 2017 at 4:45 pm GMT
    @Hunsdon INORITE! I mean look, Russia has expanded its military to the very borders of NATO.

    Oh.

    Wait. IOW, the Russians have their own military in their own county guarding their own borders. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    Wally , April 18, 2017 at 4:48 pm GMT
    @iffen Not only that they recently illegally annexed a prized warm water port. "Illegal" not.

    Russia was right to accept the legitimate Crimean vote.

    The Crimean voters overwhelmingly approved returning to Russia.

    Democracy personified, the will of the people.

    Leftists hate that. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    Ivy , April 18, 2017 at 4:50 pm GMT
    See the article by Gaius Publius at Naked Capitalism for a deeper dive.

    http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2017/04/gaius-publius-new-evidence-syrian-gas-story-fabricated-white-house.html Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

    Wally , April 18, 2017 at 4:56 pm GMT
    @utu Why'd there is no propaganda counter offensive coming from Putin and Assad? Where are their accounts of what happened there backed up by pictures and names of those who created this false flag? Don't they have their sources, intelligence and people on the ground? We are getting nothing. Instead Sputnik and RT is deferring to retired 71 old professor Postol who did his whole analysis based on single picture he found somewhere on social media. Do you think this will cause a dent in beliefs of people who are 24/7 being propagandized by Anglo-Zio media? You won't find it by looking at CNN / ZNN.

    Try:

    http://russia-insider.com/en Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    Philip Giraldi , April 18, 2017 at 4:58 pm GMT
    100 Words NEW! @Wizard of Oz Here is ths David Kilcullen article I have been referring to. On the face of it he is a respectable analyst and authority like Mr Girardi with no hidden agenda:

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/fighting-islamic-state/sarin-attack-shows-assad-is-desperate-as-jihadist-rebels-gain-ground/news-story/5265dee03a779671aefa32ef8d1a2fb3

    Thete is mo reason to suppose that either DK or PG have special knowledge of what gas attack actually occurred and by whom. However there seems to be an even more important division over the security of the Syrian government under attack from the Al Qaeda afiliate by whatever name it is now called in Syria. Kilcullen points to Assad having superior hardware but desperately lacking manpower.

    Does PG subscrtobe to the populsr contrary view that Assad is so close to winning againt all rebels that he simply couldn't hsve hsd s motive to make the gss atttack? Kilcullen is well compensated by those who support the Establishment narrative on Syria and everywhere else in the Middle East so he does indeed have an agenda. Most intel and military types that I have spoken to agree that after the retaking of Aleppo al-Assad is winning and will eventually win. Did he nevertheless stage the chemical attack on Idbil? I don't know. Let's see the evidence. Somebody obviously knows that happened. Read More

    Wally , April 18, 2017 at 5:01 pm GMT
    @Quartermaster Putin is the real weasel, and problem in Russia. He's corrupt to his core and has his own vision for Russia which is quite destructive. His Soviet revanchism is a serious problem for Russia and has set the country up for a serious fall. Putin is so bad for Russia that the Russians overwhelmingly support him.

    I suggest you quit digging. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    SolontoCroesus , April 18, 2017 at 5:05 pm GMT
    600 Words @Jeff Davis "...picture he found somewhere on social media."

    If you check closely, I think you will find that Postol took that photo from the White House issued document presenting the "evidence"(not!) of Syrian responsibility(not!) for the sarin(?) gas attack. Thus that photo represents the on-the-record official story w/official "evidence".

    Far from being some randomly acquired photo taken from social media and originating who knows where. And to take it one discrediting step further, it turns out the photo was provided by the al Qaeda terrorists -- the CIA's client anti-Assad terrorists -- who control that area.

    Bottom line: From the first, this was an ***OBVIOUS*** false flag. The only question remaining is whether the CIA coordinated with al Qaeda in planning this event. On Apr 13, 2017, Center for Strategic and International Studies hosted Mike Pompeo for his first public speaking appearance as CIA director.

    After Pompeo's prepared remarks, Juan Zarate queried the director on the Syria attack/s, starting his questions with comment on the rapidity with which "assessments were made."
    (Zarate is now at CSIS after proving his neoconservative bona fides as a charter member of Stuart Levey's Treasury Department "guerrillas in grey suits" - the gang that deploys financial blackmail to coerce international banks and corporations to join the US in constraining their commerce with states the USA does not like.)

    Pompeo responded to Zarate's request for "behind the scenes" description of how the assessments were made:

    "We were in short order able to deliver a high confidence assessment that it was the Syrian regime that had launched chemical attacks against its own people. Not me, Our Team, not just the CIA, the entire intelligence community was good and fast and we challenged ourselves. I can assure you we were challenged by the President and his team. We wanted to make sure we had it right. There's not much like when the president looks at you and says, Are you sure? When you know he's contemplating an action based on the analysis your organization has provided, and we got it right and I'm proud of the work that get to have the president have the opportunity to make a good decision about what he ought to do in the face of the atrocity that took place. "

    Zarate did not register dissatisfaction with this non-response; instead, he accepted the assessment as conclusive. Then he escalated the discussion:

    "What do you make of the Russian disputation of those conclusions? Bashar Al-Assad calling this a fabrication, the entire event. It's a battle of legitimacy and proof. How do you deal with that?"

    To which Pompeo delivered the money-quote:

    They're challenges. There are things we were able to use to form the basis of our conclusion that we cannot reveal. That is always tricky, but we've done our best and I think over time we can reveal a bit more. Everyone saw the open source photos, so we had reality on our side. "

    So apparently Pompeo and the "entire intelligence community" used the same photos that Dr. Postol examined exhaustively, but reached a different conclusion; they believe that the photos reflect "reality" and support their interpretation of events as fingering the Syrian government as perpetrators of the "red-line" "atrocity."

    Pompeo spent the next few minutes derogating Russia and Putin, stating that "Russia is on its sixth or seventh version of the story," and that "Putin is not a credible man . . . a man for whom veracity does not translate into English." (I think he meant "into Russian . . . .")

    -

    Recall that in 2013 Diane Feinstein also engaged the "rapid turnaround" efforts of the CIA to produce a video presentation of gassed children, which she claimed implicated the Syrian government, in her bid to drive the Obama administration across the "red line." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/07/cia-authenticates-13-videos-showing-syrian-gas-attack-aftermath-official-says.html
    and
    Lawmakers shown 'horrendous' video of alleged chemical attack in Syria Sept 05, 2013

    After extensive investigation by experts under the auspices of the United Nations, Ban Ki Moon declared that it was "indisputable" that a chemical attack had occurred, but those responsible for the attack were not conclusively identified. Samantha Power, however, insisted that "it must have been Assad." http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/un-report-confirms-use-of-chemical-weapons-in-syria-a-922746.html

    Same lies, different liars. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    joe webb , April 18, 2017 at 5:09 pm GMT
    The Theodor Postel report made it onto Yahoo News surprisinly, last night. JW Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
    Jeff Davis , April 18, 2017 at 5:18 pm GMT
    100 Words @Sean

    Sounds like we've heard it all before, because we have, back in August 2013, and that turned out to be less than convincing. Skepticism is likewise mounting over current White House claims that Damascus used a chemical weapon against civilians in the village of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province on April 4th.
    Quite. They maybe faked before and know how to in there was a overwhelming need. However, one wonders why they did not use the gas gambit when they were set to lose Aleppo. Using it now only when they have lost their big gains, seems like bolting the stable door after the horse is gone . So the motives for the rebels faking a gas attack at this juncture are even more puzzling as for the Assad regime having ordered it .

    Why Volatility Signals Stability, and Vice Versa
    By Nassim Nicholas Taleb and Gregory F. Treverton
    Purchase Article
    Even as protests spread across the Middle East in early 2011, the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria appeared immune from the upheaval. Assad had ruled comfortably for over a decade, having replaced his father, Hafez, who himself had held power for the previous three decades. Many pundits argued that Syria's sturdy police state, which exercised tight control over the country's people and economy, would survive the Arab Spring undisturbed. ]...

    But appearances were deceiving: today, Syria is in a shambles, with the regime fighting for its very survival, whereas Lebanon has withstood the influx of Syrian refugees and the other considerable pressures of the civil war next door. Surprising as it may seem, the per capita death rate from violence in Lebanon in 2013 was lower than that in Washington, D.C. That same year, the body count of the Syrian conflict surpassed 100,000.

    Why has seemingly stable Syria turned out to be the fragile regime, whereas always-in-turmoil Lebanon has so far proved robust? The answer is that prior to its civil war, Syria was exhibiting only pseudo-stability, its calm façade concealing deep structural vulnerabilities. Lebanon's chaos, paradoxically, signaled strength. Fifteen years of civil war had served to decentralize the state and bring about a more balanced sectarian power-sharing structure. Along with Lebanon's small size as an administrative unit, these factors added to its durability. So did the country's free-market economy. In Syria, the ruling Baath Party sought to control economic variability, replacing the lively chaos of the ancestral souk with the top-down, Soviet-style structure of the office building. This rigidity made Syria (and the other Baathist state, Iraq) much more vulnerable to disruption than Lebanon.[...]


    The divergent tales of Syria and Lebanon demonstrate that the best early warning signs of instability are found not in historical data but in underlying structural properties. Past experience can be extremely effective when it comes to detecting risks of cancer, crime, and earthquakes. But it is a bad bellwether of complex political and economic events, particularly so-called tail risks-events, such as coups and financial crises, that are highly unlikely but enormously consequential. For those, the evidence of risk comes too late to do anything about it, and a more sophisticated approach is required.

    [...]

    Simply put, fragility is aversion to disorder. Things that are fragile do not like variability, volatility, stress, chaos, and random events, which cause them to either gain little or suffer. A teacup, for example, will not benefit from any form of shock. It wants peace and predictability, something that is not possible in the long run, which is why time is an enemy to the fragile. What's more, things that are fragile respond to shock in a nonlinear fashion. With humans, for example, the harm from a ten-foot fall in no way equals ten times as much harm as from a one-foot fall. In political and economic terms, a $30 drop in the price of a barrel of oil is much more than twice as harmful to Saudi Arabia as a $15 drop.

    THE CENTER CANNOT HOLD

    The first marker of a fragile state is a concentrated decision-making system.funds, at the price of increasing systemic risks, such as disastrous national-level reforms.


    This Administration has acted recklessly without care or consideration of the dire consequences of the United States attack on Syria
    A Russian build military base being used to attack urban areas is not "Syria"

    Assad and those around him hold concentrated centralised power and are already proven to be incredibly stupid, that is why he is in this position-- he thought the people loved him, put up the price of basic commodities and the rebellion started. Assad perhaps believes the US is scared to get involved in Syria or to to cross the Russians . It seems silly but he and his advisors have a proven record of catastrophic misjudgements . Bringing in the Russians meant the US would be involved.

    I dare say the US has more advanced facilities for gathering intelligence it lets on about and than Syria, Russia or US media know about. Providing "evidence" gives away the hole card one might come in handy if the nuclear balloon starts going goes well and truly up. Any price would be worth paying for knowing Russia's intent. If people doubt Trump over this (and he warned the Russian it was going to be done so he didn't seek confrontation) it is the unfortunate price of maintaining secret intelligence facilities.


    The Trump Administration is threatening to do more to remove Bashar al-Assad and every American should accept that the inhabitant of the White House, when he is actually in residence, will discover like many before him that war is good business. He will continue to ride the wave of jingoism that has turned out to be his salvation, reversing to an extent the negative publicity that has dogged the new administration.
    For a great power seeing its rival use military force to crush a rebellion it has expressed sympathy is quite definitely a real defeat . It's a zero sum game for America and Russia (yes Russia is Jingoistic, and I think it is more centralised in decision making ) . The Russians took advantage of US passivity under Obama, and they were exultant at the way the US stood and watched, while Russia made all the successful initiatives, but really they couldn't be allowed to have it their own way any longer, for what they would have done next can be assumed to have been frightening to Europe. You have no idea what you're talking about. You don't source your quotes, and you're ideologically driven by a form of crypto anti-socialism revealed in you're basic premise that centralized planning created the vulnerability that brought down Saddam and now threatens Assad.

    Nonsense. What threatens all of the Mideast - what brought down Saddam, Gaddafi, and now threatens Assad - is US/Zionist covert and overt political and military violence. Dick Cheney turned the US Govt over to Israeli neocon subversion, resulting in Zionist control of US foreign policy and its conversion into a foreign policy in service to Israel: the implementation of the 7-country, Oded Yinon regime change program.

    The US has been turned into Israel's bjtch, its treasury looted, the lives of US miltary personnel sacrificed to benefit the Zionist criminal project. And you, are either a fool or an Israeli propagandist. Read More Agree: Z-man

    The Anti-Gnostic , Website April 18, 2017 at 6:20 pm GMT
    @utu Why'd there is no propaganda counter offensive coming from Putin and Assad? Where are their accounts of what happened there backed up by pictures and names of those who created this false flag? Don't they have their sources, intelligence and people on the ground? We are getting nothing. Instead Sputnik and RT is deferring to retired 71 old professor Postol who did his whole analysis based on single picture he found somewhere on social media. Do you think this will cause a dent in beliefs of people who are 24/7 being propagandized by Anglo-Zio media? How do we know it wasn't YOU? Prove it. I want pictures, names. Read More
    utu , April 18, 2017 at 6:43 pm GMT
    200 Words @The Anti-Gnostic How do we know it wasn't YOU? Prove it. I want pictures, names. It's not about proving things. It is about narrative control. However you look at it Russia (and Assad) lost the narrative. One amateurish report by retired professor from MIT that bases his finding on just one picture won't change it. Still it is this report that Russia's media like RT and Sputnik are citing instead of coming up with their own genuine stuff. One would think they have means, right? After all there are FSB, GRU, Assad's intelligence, assets on the ground in Syria, intercepted communications between Al Qaeda and their handlers. And Russian media can't come up with a good story and relies on 71 years old former MIT professor report. So what's going on there? Don't they want to win? Are they being sabotaged by inept and indolent staff? Or is Russia's fight in the Middle East just a make belief? Hey, Our American Partners, how much will you pay us for playing bad guys? And for being stupid guys you pay extra, right? Read More
    Sean , April 18, 2017 at 6:49 pm GMT
    100 Words @The Alarmist

    "The Russians took advantage of US passivity under Obama, and they were exultant at the way the US stood and watched, while Russia made all the successful initiatives, but really they couldn't be allowed to have it their own way any longer, for what they would have done next can be assumed to have been frightening to Europe."
    Wow, we must have been observing two different worlds, because Russian actions in several theatres (Syria, Ukraine, Korea, ROW) have been relatively restrained to non-existent despite clear threats to their national interests, while the US has ratcheted up it military intervention pretty much globally over the same period. Then again, I live outside the US and am not blanketed with the propaganda that spills out of its MSM house organs, so we have indeed observed two different worlds. http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/08/politics/marines-raqqa-assault-syria/

    Trump didn't wait for the gas attack, he was already laying the ground for getting involved in Syria, which is not a vital interest of Russia. Russians want to do stuff like support Assad and crush rebels the US has expressed sympathy for. they surely didn't expect to be left alone. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    Svigor , April 18, 2017 at 6:59 pm GMT
    600 Words

    Skepticism is likewise mounting over current White House claims that Damascus used a chemical weapon against civilians in the village of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province on April 4th.

    So far it's been a Big Media claim, too. To the point of at least one piece (in The Atlantic , IIRC) poo-pooing the idea that the Big Media Narrative could be wrong.

    even though Damascus had no motive to stage such an attack

    I'm tired of reading this and seeing no explanation. I'd like to see that assertion supported. I'd like it to come from you, Phil, because so far, in my experience, you seem to be the most reasonable US-skeptic writer at TUR.

    It isn't self-explanatory. Chemical weapons have their uses, like clearing out heavily fortified urban areas that would be costly to clear the old fashioned way. Weighed against Trump's ostensible goal to stay out of Syria and drop the insane "Assad must go" rhetoric of the previous administration, it might've been tempting. Which is why I would like to know more about the target area and circumstances. But nobody seems to give a shit. I suppose it might have a lot to do with the fact that there are (or were, last I heard) no journalists in Syria. But if we simply don't know much about the target area, maybe we should stop assuming hitting it with chemical weapons had no utility.

    Principled and eminently sensible Democratic Congressman Tulsi Gabbard

    Those principles being "don't invade the world, invite the world," I presume?

    There have been two central documents relating to the alleged Syrian chemical weapon incidents in 2013 and 2017, both of which read like press releases. Both refer to a consensus within the U.S. intelligence community (IC)and express "confidence" and even "high confidence" regarding their conclusions but neither is actually a product of the office of the Director of National Intelligence, which would be appropriate if the IC had actually come to a consensus. Neither the Director of National Intelligence nor the Director of CIA were present in a photo showing the White House team deliberating over what to do about Syria. Both documents supporting the U.S. cruise missile attack were, in fact, uncharacteristically put out by the White House, suggesting that the arguments were stitched together in haste to support a political decision to use force that had already been made.

    The American Security Apparatus can shove their consensus up their asses anyway. Why should the American public take their word for anything?

    Generally reliable journalist Robert Parry is reporting that the intelligence behind the White House claims comes largely from satellite surveillance, though nothing has been released to back-up the conclusion that the Syrian government was behind the attack, an odd omission as everyone knows about satellite capabilities and they are not generally considered to be a classified source or method.

    And there are huge, consistent gaps in satellite coverage (and always have been, last I heard) that everyone and their mother knows about, meaning, it would be trivial for anyone to plan an attack when the satellites can't see. If Parry is right, then it sounds like the administration has jack shit. "Satellite surveillance" is the last source I'd find persuasive or conclusive in this context.

    Parry also cites the fact that there are alternative theories on what took place and why, some of which appear to originate with the intelligence and national security community, which was in part concerned over the rush to judgment by the White House.

    So this really is shaping up to all be a bunch of "Wag The Dog/I bombed Serbia to distract from my kosher blowjob scandal" bullshit. Great.

    The al-Ansar terrorist group (affiliated with al-Qaeda) is in control of the area

    Meaning, this "innocent civilians" mantra we've been hearing from Big Media is bullshit. Read More

    bike-anarchist , April 18, 2017 at 7:04 pm GMT
    @utu It's not about proving things. It is about narrative control. However you look at it Russia (and Assad) lost the narrative. One amateurish report by retired professor from MIT that bases his finding on just one picture won't change it. Still it is this report that Russia's media like RT and Sputnik are citing instead of coming up with their own genuine stuff. One would think they have means, right? After all there are FSB, GRU, Assad's intelligence, assets on the ground in Syria, intercepted communications between Al Qaeda and their handlers. And Russian media can't come up with a good story and relies on 71 years old former MIT professor report. So what's going on there? Don't they want to win? Are they being sabotaged by inept and indolent staff? Or is Russia's fight in the Middle East just a make belief? Hey, Our American Partners, how much will you pay us for playing bad guys? And for being stupid guys you pay extra, right? Your comment reminds me of a conversation I had with a fence post. At least I found the the fence post truthful, unlike you. I can't imagine you to be able to make humanitarian decisions based on your impatience and impudence. Read More
    Z-man , April 18, 2017 at 7:12 pm GMT
    100 Words @Jeff Davis You have no idea what you're talking about. You don't source your quotes, and you're ideologically driven by a form of crypto anti-socialism revealed in you're basic premise that centralized planning created the vulnerability that brought down Saddam and now threatens Assad.

    Nonsense. What threatens all of the Mideast -- what brought down Saddam, Gaddafi, and now threatens Assad -- is US/Zionist covert and overt political and military violence. Dick Cheney turned the US Govt over to Israeli neocon subversion, resulting in Zionist control of US foreign policy and its conversion into a foreign policy in service to Israel: the implementation of the 7-country, Oded Yinon regime change program.

    The US has been turned into Israel's bjtch, its treasury looted, the lives of US miltary personnel sacrificed to benefit the Zionist criminal project. And you,... are either a fool or an Israeli propagandist.

    What threatens all of the Mideast - what brought down Saddam, Gaddafi, and now threatens Assad - is US/Zionist covert and overt political and military violence. Dick Cheney turned the US Govt over to Israeli neocon subversion, resulting in Zionist control of US foreign policy and its conversion into a foreign policy in service to Israel: the implementation of the 7-country, Oded Yinon regime change program.
    The US has been turned into Israel's bjtch, its treasury looted, the lives of US miltary personnel sacrificed to benefit the Zionist criminal project.

    Bares repeating. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    utu , April 18, 2017 at 7:18 pm GMT
    @bike-anarchist Your comment reminds me of a conversation I had with a fence post. At least I found the the fence post truthful, unlike you. I can't imagine you to be able to make humanitarian decisions based on your impatience and impudence. You found it impudent for me calling Russian media and Russia's propaganda machine inept and indolent? You must be one of those who drank Putin's Kool-Aid and is now patiently awaiting his 2nd coming and saving us all from the grips of the NWO, right? Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    Svigor , April 18, 2017 at 7:20 pm GMT
    400 Words I think the take-home point for anyone who does his own thinking is that Trump acted so quickly (36 hours) that the evidence should be overwhelming and incontrovertible. The evidence forthcoming has been shit. Ergo, it seems very clear that Trump had no valid reason to act as he did.

    What would he gain at this point to launch a chemical attack on the civilian populations?

    Either the area is full of innocent civilians, or it's an al-Qaeda stronghold.

    Why'd there is no propaganda counter offensive coming from Putin and Assad? Where are their accounts of what happened there backed up by pictures and names of those who created this false flag? Don't they have their sources, intelligence and people on the ground? We are getting nothing. Instead Sputnik and RT is deferring to retired 71 old professor Postol who did his whole analysis based on single picture he found somewhere on social media. Do you think this will cause a dent in beliefs of people who are 24/7 being propagandized by Anglo-Zio media?

    The Russians are going to need a lot more than counter-propaganda. I trust them even less than I trust western Big Media. Hard evidence or go home.

    Agent76, nobody who will trust globalresearch.ca needs to have their link cited, they'll know about it already, being Konspiracy Kooks. Nobody else is gonna buy that junk.

    Not only that they recently illegally annexed a prized warm water port.

    Illegal, schmellegal. It's perfectly legit realpolitik. If Ukraine didn't want Russia taking back what was hers, she shouldn't have jumped into bed with hostile powers. Seriously, if you'd asked a Ukrainian on independence day what would happen in the current circumstances, they could have painted you an accurate picture.

    "We were in short order able to deliver a high confidence assessment that it was the Syrian regime that had launched chemical attacks against its own people. Not me, Our Team, not just the CIA, the entire intelligence community was good and fast and we challenged ourselves. I can assure you we were challenged by the President and his team. We wanted to make sure we had it right. There's not much like when the president looks at you and says, Are you sure? When you know he's contemplating an action based on the analysis your organization has provided, and we got it right and I'm proud of the work that get to have the president have the opportunity to make a good decision about what he ought to do in the face of the atrocity that took place. "

    "Trust me, I'm a professional liar." Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

    alexander , April 18, 2017 at 7:21 pm GMT
    400 Words Dear Mr. Giraldi,

    Not withstanding our Presidents "rush to judgement" tomahawk strike against the Assad regime last week, there should be very strong indications to our main stream media, that they are being abandoned by tens of millions of Americans across our country who no longer accept the medias willingness to defraud us ,at nearly every turn.

    I was an avid reader of the the NY Times, for over 25 years, and I watched the nightly news all the time.

    When we were all told by these media outlets in the run up to the Iraq war, that Saddam had launched an anthrax attack against our news rooms and our capitol I believed it completely 100%..without any reason in my own mind why I shouldn't .

    Once the war began, and the attribution to Saddam of the anthrax attack quickly collapsed , I felt defrauded by those who I had always trusted to be honest, most especially on issues of war and peace.

    In 2013,when the Ghouta Sarin attack was attributed to Assad by these very same pundits, the memory of the phony Saddam anthrax attribution reared its ugly head, and with good reason.

    If they were lying then why aren't they lying now ?

    I think our media has proven itself, scores of times, over the last fifteen years, to be, at best, disingenuous and at worst complicit in acts of war fraud and terror fraud which have taken the lives of millions of innocent people and cost our country tens of trillions of dollars.

    There is no reason why I , nor any American, should be happy about this.

    Whats worse is they have displayed such enormous contempt for all the tens of millions of innocent families who have suffered on account of their deceits that they have lost an overwhelming amount of respect from me,as well as, I imagine, countless others.

    Our Big Media can only cry "wolf" so many times before they are greeted by everyone with the middle finger.

    This reality will not go away, but only get worse, until they start to shoot straight, and have proven to their viewers, that they are not seeking to manipulate, or defraud us . into War. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

    RobinG , April 18, 2017 at 7:25 pm GMT
    @iffen Not only that they recently illegally annexed a prized warm water port. Thanks, Wally.

    "iffen," the eff'n Israeli disinfo troll, is always trying to slip one in. Read More

    Biff , April 18, 2017 at 7:27 pm GMT
    With Trump's complete flip on foreign policy I'm starting to think(again) that U.S. Presidents are mere puppets for the real rulers of this world – who no doubt considered Obama to be just a corporate "house negro". Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
    Greg Bacon , Website April 18, 2017 at 7:34 pm GMT
    100 Words President KUSHNER and his faithful toady Trump sure are busy these days. In between bites of chocolate cake, they are arming the terrorists and bombing Syrian civilians.

    Over 50 Civilians Killed, Injured in US-Led Coalition Airstrikes in Eastern Syria

    http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13960129000960

    US Continues to Airdrop More Aid Packages to ISIL Terrorists in Northwestern Iraq

    http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13960129000900

    There's one reason the USA is stuck in endless ME wars, with no end in sight. American troops are fighting and dying for Apartheid Israel, and our wealth is being spent on the same.

    When Syria is toast, the MSM will start attacking Iran, and they'll have plenty of friends who think the same way in the WH and Congress. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

    iffen , April 18, 2017 at 7:37 pm GMT
    @RobinG Thanks, Wally.

    "iffen," the eff'n Israeli disinfo troll, is always trying to slip one in. always trying to slip one in

    Thanks to you RobinG I get a White House propaganda blurb "slipped" into my email every day or so. The decent thing for you to have done would have been to warn me not to use my actual email address.

    BTW. the commies have been trying to get a warm water port since the beginning of the Cold War. Read More

    Svigor , April 18, 2017 at 7:40 pm GMT
    200 Words https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_weapons

    There are three basic configurations in which these agents are stored. The first are self-contained munitions like projectiles, cartridges, mines, and rockets; these can contain propellant and/or explosive components. The next form are aircraft-delivered munitions. This form never has an explosive component.[41] Together they comprise the two forms that have been weaponized and are ready for their intended use. The U.S. stockpile consisted of 39% of these weapon ready munitions. The final of the three forms are raw agent housed in one-ton containers. The remaining 61%[41] of the stockpile was in this form.[56] Whereas these chemicals exist in liquid form at normal room temperature,[41][57] the sulfur mustards H, and HD freeze in temperatures below 55 °F (12.8 °C). Mixing lewisite with distilled mustard lowers the freezing point to −13 °F (−25.0 °C).[48]

    Higher temperatures are a bigger concern because the possibility of an explosion increases as the temperatures rise. A fire at one of these facilities would endanger the surrounding community as well as the personnel at the installations.[58] Perhaps more so for the community having much less access to protective equipment and specialized training.[59] The Oak Ridge National Laboratory conducted a study to assess capabilities and costs for protecting civilian populations during related emergencies,[60] and the effectiveness of expedient, in-place shelters.[61]

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
    Anon , April 18, 2017 at 7:41 pm GMT
    None of this would be an issue if the media did its job.

    But it doesn't.

    There is free media in the US, but Big Media is not free media. It is Bought Media and should be called as such. Read More

    RobinG , April 18, 2017 at 7:45 pm GMT
    @Svigor

    Skepticism is likewise mounting over current White House claims that Damascus used a chemical weapon against civilians in the village of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province on April 4th.
    So far it's been a Big Media claim, too. To the point of at least one piece (in The Atlantic , IIRC) poo-pooing the idea that the Big Media Narrative could be wrong.

    even though Damascus had no motive to stage such an attack
    I'm tired of reading this and seeing no explanation. I'd like to see that assertion supported. I'd like it to come from you, Phil, because so far, in my experience, you seem to be the most reasonable US-skeptic writer at TUR.

    It isn't self-explanatory. Chemical weapons have their uses, like clearing out heavily fortified urban areas that would be costly to clear the old fashioned way. Weighed against Trump's ostensible goal to stay out of Syria and drop the insane "Assad must go" rhetoric of the previous administration, it might've been tempting. Which is why I would like to know more about the target area and circumstances. But nobody seems to give a shit. I suppose it might have a lot to do with the fact that there are (or were, last I heard) no journalists in Syria. But if we simply don't know much about the target area, maybe we should stop assuming hitting it with chemical weapons had no utility.


    Principled and eminently sensible Democratic Congressman Tulsi Gabbard
    Those principles being "don't invade the world, invite the world," I presume?

    There have been two central documents relating to the alleged Syrian chemical weapon incidents in 2013 and 2017, both of which read like press releases. Both refer to a consensus within the U.S. intelligence community (IC)and express "confidence" and even "high confidence" regarding their conclusions but neither is actually a product of the office of the Director of National Intelligence, which would be appropriate if the IC had actually come to a consensus. Neither the Director of National Intelligence nor the Director of CIA were present in a photo showing the White House team deliberating over what to do about Syria. Both documents supporting the U.S. cruise missile attack were, in fact, uncharacteristically put out by the White House, suggesting that the arguments were stitched together in haste to support a political decision to use force that had already been made.
    The American Security Apparatus can shove their consensus up their asses anyway. Why should the American public take their word for anything?

    Generally reliable journalist Robert Parry is reporting that the intelligence behind the White House claims comes largely from satellite surveillance, though nothing has been released to back-up the conclusion that the Syrian government was behind the attack, an odd omission as everyone knows about satellite capabilities and they are not generally considered to be a classified source or method.
    And there are huge, consistent gaps in satellite coverage (and always have been, last I heard) that everyone and their mother knows about, meaning, it would be trivial for anyone to plan an attack when the satellites can't see. If Parry is right, then it sounds like the administration has jack shit. "Satellite surveillance" is the last source I'd find persuasive or conclusive in this context.

    Parry also cites the fact that there are alternative theories on what took place and why, some of which appear to originate with the intelligence and national security community, which was in part concerned over the rush to judgment by the White House.
    So this really is shaping up to all be a bunch of "Wag The Dog/I bombed Serbia to distract from my kosher blowjob scandal" bullshit. Great.

    The al-Ansar terrorist group (affiliated with al-Qaeda) is in control of the area
    Meaning, this "innocent civilians" mantra we've been hearing from Big Media is bullshit. " like clearing out heavily fortified urban areas.."

    Svigor, all parties seem to agree this was a small village and there were only civilian casualties. (Did I misread?) So, hardly a "tempting" target. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    Brewer , April 18, 2017 at 8:16 pm GMT
    100 Words @DB Cooper This whole chemical weapon attack by Assad sounds fishy from the beginning. From what I read Assad is winning the civil war and things are turning for the better for him. What would he gain at this point to launch a chemical attack on the civilian populations? Things just doesn't add up. Check out this video:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1VNQGsiP8M&t=22s It is established that the White Helmets delivered their film to Al Jazeera before 8am. on the 4th of April (the day of the Syrian Airstrike which occurred between 11.30am. and 12.30pm. It is simply impossible, given the elevation of the sun shown in the video, for that film to have been made before 8am. on the 4th. This is irrefutable evidence that the filming was done no later than the day before the Syrian Government forces attacked. Read More

    RobinG , April 18, 2017 at 8:32 pm GMT
    200 Words @Anon None of this would be an issue if the media did its job.

    But it doesn't.

    There is free media in the US, but Big Media is not free media. It is Bought Media and should be called as such. Right you are! The Big, Bought and Biased Media must be RELENTLESSLY exposed and discredited.

    Trump's airstrike was triggered by the latest Assad-Did-It-Again, "gassing his own people" story, that we first heard in 2013. Once again evidence is lacking, and worse, there is a total lack of interest in finding evidence, or in asking the obvious questions of motive, cui bono? In a replay of "Gulf of Tonkin," "WMDs in Iraq," and numerous other false provocations, the mainstream media has once again rushed to judgment with no penetrating questions asked.

    Since 2011, U.S. corporate media has acted as advocate for militant factions. Rather than reporting events as they occurred, our "journalists" have repeated stories selected by anti-Assad "sources" such as the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, i.e. Rami Abdul Rahman. Yes, the SOHR is one guy, an ex-pat member of the so-called "Syrian opposition" who operates out of his house in Coventry, England. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    Orville H. Larson , April 18, 2017 at 8:33 pm GMT
    100 Words @anonymous It certainly appears to have been a manufactured event. The media was ready and swung into action immediately with pictures and a noisy campaign that the usual war-hawk politicians joined in with. The timing was just too good and seems to have been coordinated. Syria was bombed without bothering to investigate based on Trump's claim that the evidence was ironclad. Did people like McMaster think it was real and report it to Trump as such? Did Trump believe it? Or did they know it was fake but pretended otherwise? Were they in on it from the beginning or were they forced to play along? Trump has quickly shifted into being an establishment politician whose rhetoric has been bellicose and reckless. Next up, N Korea and then Iran?
    No matter how one votes they end up getting the same thing. It's very disheartening. " . . . Trump has quickly shifted into being an establishment politician whose rhetoric has been bellicose and reckless. . . ."

    Yeah, it looks like it.

    I voted for Trump mainly for foreign policy reasons. I assumed–I hoped!–that Trump would be better than Our Lady of the Pantsuits, that Israel-controlled, neocon hack. Maybe the difference is this: With Clinton, the ICBMs would have been flying by now, but with Trump, it'll take a bit longer. . . . Read More

    anon , April 18, 2017 at 8:59 pm GMT
    200 Words How does the lie work? It survives . It always survives . King is dead! Long live the king! It come back. People ignore when they find it out . Same propel tweak the margins and support the new version to build another lie.

    That's why we hear that "Saddam did not have nukes but they found weapons they found this they found that they found gas chemical"

    I tell them " that is none of your and this Gov's Freaking business"

    Now these guys are busy saying "Assad sent refugees he doesn't want this or that or he poured chem s or make attack it possible"

    Mu answer is usually this " The Gov can go to war tomorrow because r the sky was not blue above the desert of Iran proving they are not compliant and is busy destroying the climate . You will accept that logic as well or shrug it off but will vote him or his surrogate next time " Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

    unseated , April 18, 2017 at 9:07 pm GMT
    @Philip Giraldi Kilcullen is well compensated by those who support the Establishment narrative on Syria and everywhere else in the Middle East so he does indeed have an agenda. Most intel and military types that I have spoken to agree that after the retaking of Aleppo al-Assad is winning and will eventually win. Did he nevertheless stage the chemical attack on Idbil? I don't know. Let's see the evidence. Somebody obviously knows that happened. I assume that someone called "Wizard of Oz" might, like myself, be a resident of Australia.
    What is surprising, then, is that he/she gives any credibility to a Murdoch rag and the Australian at that. Its political positions with respect to the Middle East in particular are well known. Read More
    SolontoCroesus , April 18, 2017 at 9:19 pm GMT
    100 Words @utu It's not about proving things. It is about narrative control. However you look at it Russia (and Assad) lost the narrative. One amateurish report by retired professor from MIT that bases his finding on just one picture won't change it. Still it is this report that Russia's media like RT and Sputnik are citing instead of coming up with their own genuine stuff. One would think they have means, right? After all there are FSB, GRU, Assad's intelligence, assets on the ground in Syria, intercepted communications between Al Qaeda and their handlers. And Russian media can't come up with a good story and relies on 71 years old former MIT professor report. So what's going on there? Don't they want to win? Are they being sabotaged by inept and indolent staff? Or is Russia's fight in the Middle East just a make belief? Hey, Our American Partners, how much will you pay us for playing bad guys? And for being stupid guys you pay extra, right?

    One amateurish report by retired professor from MIT that bases his finding on just one picture won't change it. Still it is this report that Russia's media like RT and Sputnik are citing instead of coming up with their own genuine stuff.

    According to newly minted director of CIA, that organization and the entire "intelligence community" relied on the "reality" of those photos, in addition to other things that "can't be revealed right now, maybe later."

    Maybe it will be revealed after Assad is safely dead or in exile in Moscow what the CIA's can't be revealed methods were. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    Philip Giraldi , April 18, 2017 at 9:24 pm GMT
    NEW! @unseated I assume that someone called "Wizard of Oz" might, like myself, be a resident of Australia.
    What is surprising, then, is that he/she gives any credibility to a Murdoch rag and the Australian at that. Its political positions with respect to the Middle East in particular are well known. Yes, Australian. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    alexander , April 18, 2017 at 9:34 pm GMT
    100 Words @Brewer It is established that the White Helmets delivered their film to Al Jazeera before 8am. on the 4th of April (the day of the Syrian Airstrike which occurred between 11.30am. and 12.30pm. It is simply impossible, given the elevation of the sun shown in the video, for that film to have been made before 8am. on the 4th. This is irrefutable evidence that the filming was done no later than the day before the Syrian Government forces attacked. Hi Brewer,

    Is there a link to the video ?

    Moreover, if what you are saying is true, then it would seem to indicate the White Helmets, as well as ISIS were leaked information as to the time of the Syrian strike so as to stage the chemical event well beforehand.

    This means there is a big leak in the shared information between the White House and Moscow.

    My understanding is Moscow shared advanced warning of the Syrian strike with D.C., as part of their non confrontation agreement.

    Somebody leaked that information to ISIS and Al Qaeda .I wonder who ?

    How else could ISIS obtain advanced knowledge about exactly when to plant their gas canister
    and stage the gas attack ? Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    Incitatus , April 18, 2017 at 9:39 pm GMT
    300 Words It should surprise none that Syria is simply a redux of Iraq 2002-03, minus Ahmed Chalabi or a reasonable facsimile. A "slam dunk." It worked then. The media loved it. All the players got to write memoirs and collect royalties on the same bogus narrative. OK, it was widened a bit to include how everyone, absolutely everyone had no doubt about the 'intelligence' and WMDs. Honest.

    GW Bush even did a clever PowerPoint mime for the Radio & Television Correspondent's Association Dinner 24 March 2004 in which he said "Those weapons of mass destruction must be somewhere! Nope, no weapons over there! Maybe under here?" while pretending to look for WMD under his desk. Few (if any) objected. That's when it was pretty clear the soul of the press, if not the Republic, was dead.

    The media loves it now. Easy stories – sensational, complete with dead infant/kiddy pics. Second only to porn. Better in a way, because you can inject moral indignation into the byline. Remember the Sabah's hawking 312 dead babies removed from incubators by Saddam in Kuwait in '90? Worked then too. No need to look further.

    Our Administration(s) insists Assad 'must go' without considering what will follow. It champions 'moderate rebels', despite their kinship to the most extreme barbarism. If Iraq 2003 was bad, this is even worse. We don't even bother to suggest reasonable succession or a viable alternative future. Too much effort?

    True corruption. There are no excuses.

    Did it all start with Truman's National Security Act of '47, which codified the CIA and changed the "Department of War' to the 'Department of Defense'?. We've waged war (clandestine and overt) ever since. If only for honesty, it should be changed back to' Department of War.' Read More

    utu , April 18, 2017 at 10:05 pm GMT
    100 Words @Brewer It is established that the White Helmets delivered their film to Al Jazeera before 8am. on the 4th of April (the day of the Syrian Airstrike which occurred between 11.30am. and 12.30pm. It is simply impossible, given the elevation of the sun shown in the video, for that film to have been made before 8am. on the 4th. This is irrefutable evidence that the filming was done no later than the day before the Syrian Government forces attacked.

    It is established that the White Helmets delivered their film to Al Jazeera before 8am.

    Why Russian media does not make the same point? Wouldn't it be nice if there was an article in Sputnik or even better, a video on rt.com that would argue that the video was made one day before? Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    Rurik , April 18, 2017 at 10:23 pm GMT
    200 Words @Orville H. Larson " . . . Trump has quickly shifted into being an establishment politician whose rhetoric has been bellicose and reckless. . . ."

    Yeah, it looks like it.

    I voted for Trump mainly for foreign policy reasons. I assumed--I hoped!--that Trump would be better than Our Lady of the Pantsuits, that Israel-controlled, neocon hack. Maybe the difference is this: With Clinton, the ICBMs would have been flying by now, but with Trump, it'll take a bit longer. . . .

    With Clinton, the ICBMs would have been flying by now, but with Trump, it'll take a bit longer. .

    Israel has a well known deterrent referred to as the 'Samson option'.

    I think it would be prudent, and I hope that the sane world has already made those in a position to force a major war between the zio-West vs. Russia (for instance)..

    .. that the first place to get glassed will be that shitty little country- as a kind of reverse Samson option

    I would like to hope that even now, all sane nations.. (Russia, China, India, Pakistan, et al) who have nukes, have them all trained at ground zero (T.A.) for the strife in the world.

    and I suppose to be effective, they'd have to be aimed at some of the snake pits in the Western world as well- I really don't think Rothschild, (Soros, Kristol, etc..) would care too much if most of Israel proper were glowing, so long as they and the diaspora would be able to take control of what ever was left after the fallout dispersed.

    the Fiend needs to know that he'd get it first, and there would be the peace

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn6Cf30HgNI Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    Rurik , April 18, 2017 at 10:43 pm GMT
    100 Words @Incitatus It should surprise none that Syria is simply a redux of Iraq 2002-03, minus Ahmed Chalabi or a reasonable facsimile. A "slam dunk." It worked then. The media loved it. All the players got to write memoirs and collect royalties on the same bogus narrative. OK, it was widened a bit to include how everyone, absolutely everyone had no doubt about the 'intelligence' and WMDs. Honest.

    GW Bush even did a clever PowerPoint mime for the Radio & Television Correspondent's Association Dinner 24 March 2004 in which he said "Those weapons of mass destruction must be somewhere!...Nope, no weapons over there!...Maybe under here?" while pretending to look for WMD under his desk. Few (if any) objected. That's when it was pretty clear the soul of the press, if not the Republic, was dead.

    The media loves it now. Easy stories - sensational, complete with dead infant/kiddy pics. Second only to porn. Better in a way, because you can inject moral indignation into the byline. Remember the Sabah's hawking 312 dead babies removed from incubators by Saddam in Kuwait in '90? Worked then too. No need to look further.

    Our Administration(s) insists Assad 'must go' without considering what will follow. It champions 'moderate rebels', despite their kinship to the most extreme barbarism. If Iraq 2003 was bad, this is even worse. We don't even bother to suggest reasonable succession or a viable alternative future. Too much effort?

    True corruption. There are no excuses.

    Did it all start with Truman's National Security Act of '47, which codified the CIA and changed the "Department of War' to the 'Department of Defense'?. We've waged war (clandestine and overt) ever since. If only for honesty, it should be changed back to' Department of War.'

    Our Administration(s) insists Assad 'must go' without considering what will follow.

    that's not specifically true. They've come right out and said they prefer Al Nursa and the cannibals and crucifying head slicers to a stable government with a viable middle class.

    "We always wanted Bashar Assad to go, we always preferred the bad guys who weren't backed by Iran to the bad guys who were backed by Iran,"

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-syria-crisis-israel-idUSBRE98G0DR20130917

    Israel wants in Syria what it got in Iraq and Libya.. a complete dystopian hell on earth. Old Testament vengeance and unimaginable suffering. It is written.

    They literally thrive on that shit

    Did it all start with Truman's National Security Act of '47

    nope

    it started in earnest with the Balfour Declaration and Wilson's war. A hundred years ago exactly to the day from Trump's attack on Syria.

    The attack on Syria on that notorious anniversary was sort of like a modern day Passover, when the kings of Europe slaughtered the new born of Europa, and the chosen were blessed with a country of their own out of the smoking ashes of Christendom Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    Bill , April 18, 2017 at 10:45 pm GMT
    100 Words @iffen always trying to slip one in

    Thanks to you RobinG I get a White House propaganda blurb "slipped" into my email every day or so. The decent thing for you to have done would have been to warn me not to use my actual email address.

    BTW. the commies have been trying to get a warm water port since the beginning of the Cold War. Pretty sure the Commies had Sevastopol at the start of the Cold War and all the way through it. Sevastopol doesn't really count as a warm water port in the way you mean since you have to go through two straits controlled by NATO before you are in the real ocean.

    [Apr 18, 2017] How the U.S. Government Spins the Story by Philip Giraldi

    Notable quotes:
    "... "Government Assessment of the Syrian Government's Use of Chemical Weapons on August 21, 2013," ..."
    "... The Assad Regime's Use of Chemical Weapons on April 4, 2017 ..."
    "... These academics are like mafia lawyers. The mafia sent some of their guys to study law or even enter legit institutions(like police, church, government, etc) and then had those guys serve the mafia. They had the sheen of respectability, dignity, and objective meritocracy, but their main loyalty was to the mafia. It's like Tom Hagen is an ace lawyer but serves the Mob. ..."
    "... So many of these journos and academics are really Mob Publicists and Mob Advocates. They serve the globalist mafia. Glob is their Mob. ..."
    "... Bottom line: From the first, this was an ***OBVIOUS*** false flag. The only question remaining is whether the CIA coordinated with al Qaeda in planning this event. ..."
    "... Recall that in 2013 Diane Feinstein also engaged the "rapid turnaround" efforts of the CIA to produce a video presentation of gassed children, which she claimed implicated the Syrian government, in her bid to drive the Obama administration across the "red line." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/07/cia-authenticates-13-videos-showing-syrian-gas-attack-aftermath-official-says.html ..."
    "... After extensive investigation by experts under the auspices of the United Nations, Ban Ki Moon declared that it was "indisputable" that a chemical attack had occurred, but those responsible for the attack were not conclusively identified. Samantha Power, however, insisted that "it must have been Assad." http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/un-report-confirms-use-of-chemical-weapons-in-syria-a-922746.html ..."
    "... Same lies, different liars. ..."
    "... Nonsense. What threatens all of the Mideast - what brought down Saddam, Gaddafi, and now threatens Assad - is US/Zionist covert and overt political and military violence. Dick Cheney turned the US Govt over to Israeli neocon subversion, resulting in Zionist control of US foreign policy and its conversion into a foreign policy in service to Israel: the implementation of the 7-country, Oded Yinon regime change program. ..."
    "... The US has been turned into Israel's bjtch, its treasury looted, the lives of US miltary personnel sacrificed to benefit the Zionist criminal project. And you, are either a fool or an Israeli propagandist. ..."
    "... Wow, we must have been observing two different worlds, because Russian actions in several theatres (Syria, Ukraine, Korea, ROW) have been relatively restrained to non-existent despite clear threats to their national interests, while the US has ratcheted up it military intervention pretty much globally over the same period. ..."
    "... Trump didn't wait for the gas attack, he was already laying the ground for getting involved in Syria, which is not a vital interest of Russia. Russians want to do stuff like support Assad and crush rebels the US has expressed sympathy for. they surely didn't expect to be left alone. ..."
    "... Not withstanding our Presidents "rush to judgement" tomahawk strike against the Assad regime last week, there should be very strong indications to our main stream media, that they are being abandoned by tens of millions of Americans across our country who no longer accept the medias willingness to defraud us ,at nearly every turn. ..."
    "... In 2013,when the Ghouta Sarin attack was attributed to Assad by these very same pundits, the memory of the phony Saddam anthrax attribution reared its ugly head, and with good reason. ..."
    "... I think our media has proven itself, scores of times, over the last fifteen years, to be, at best, disingenuous and at worst complicit in acts of war fraud and terror fraud which have taken the lives of millions of innocent people and cost our country tens of trillions of dollars. ..."
    "... Our Big Media can only cry "wolf" so many times before they are greeted by everyone with the middle finger. ..."
    "... It is established that the White Helmets delivered their film to Al Jazeera before 8am. on the 4th of April (the day of the Syrian Airstrike which occurred between 11.30am. and 12.30pm. It is simply impossible, given the elevation of the sun shown in the video, for that film to have been made before 8am. on the 4th. This is irrefutable evidence that the filming was done no later than the day before the Syrian Government forces attacked. ..."
    "... There is free media in the US, but Big Media is not free media. It is Bought Media and should be called as such. Right you are! The Big, Bought and Biased Media must be RELENTLESSLY exposed and discredited. ..."
    "... Trump's airstrike was triggered by the latest Assad-Did-It-Again, "gassing his own people" story, that we first heard in 2013. Once again evidence is lacking, and worse, there is a total lack of interest in finding evidence, or in asking the obvious questions of motive, cui bono? In a replay of "Gulf of Tonkin," "WMDs in Iraq," and numerous other false provocations, the mainstream media has once again rushed to judgment with no penetrating questions asked. ..."
    "... Since 2011, U.S. corporate media has acted as advocate for militant factions. Rather than reporting events as they occurred, our "journalists" have repeated stories selected by anti-Assad "sources" such as the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, i.e. Rami Abdul Rahman. Yes, the SOHR is one guy, an ex-pat member of the so-called "Syrian opposition" who operates out of his house in Coventry, England. ..."
    "... I voted for Trump mainly for foreign policy reasons. I assumed–I hoped!–that Trump would be better than Our Lady of the Pantsuits, that Israel-controlled, neocon hack. Maybe the difference is this: With Clinton, the ICBMs would have been flying by now, but with Trump, it'll take a bit longer. . . ..."
    "... According to newly minted director of CIA, that organization and the entire "intelligence community" relied on the "reality" of those photos, in addition to other things that "can't be revealed right now, maybe later." ..."
    "... My understanding is Moscow shared advanced warning of the Syrian strike with D.C., as part of their non confrontation agreement. Somebody leaked that information to ISIS and Al Qaeda .I wonder who ? How else could ISIS obtain advanced knowledge about exactly when to plant their gas canister and stage the gas attack ? ..."
    Apr 18, 2017 | www.unz.com

    Sounds like we've heard it all before, because we have, back in August 2013, and that turned out to be less than convincing. Skepticism is likewise mounting over current White House claims that Damascus used a chemical weapon against civilians in the village of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province on April 4th. Shortly after the more recent incident, President Donald Trump, possibly deriving his information from television news reports, abruptly stated that the government of President Bashar al-Assad had ordered the attack. He also noted that the use of chemicals had "crossed many red lines" and hinted that Damascus would be held accountable. Twenty-four hours later retribution came in the form of the launch of 59 cruise missiles directed against the Syrian airbase at Sharyat. The number of casualties, if any, remains unclear and the base itself sustained only minor damage amidst allegations that many of the missiles had missed their target. The physical assault was followed by a verbal onslaught, with the Trump Administration blaming Russia for shielding al-Assad and demanding that Moscow end its alliance with Damascus if it wishes to reestablish good relations with Washington.

    The media, led by the usual neoconservative cheerleaders, have applauded Trump's brand of tough love with Syria, even though Damascus had no motive to stage such an attack while the so-called rebels had plenty to gain. The escalation to a war footing also serves no U.S. interest and actually damages prospects for eliminating ISIS any time soon. Democratic Party liberal interventionists have also joined with Senators John McCain, Lindsay Graham and Marco Rubio to celebrate the cruise missile strike and hardening rhetoric. Principled and eminently sensible Democratic Congressman Tulsi Gabbard, has demanded evidence of Syrian culpability, saying "It angers and saddens me that President Trump has taken the advice of war hawks and escalated our illegal regime change war to overthrow the Syrian government. This escalation is short-sighted and will lead to more dead civilians, more refugees, the strengthening of al-Qaeda and other terrorists, and a direct confrontation between the United States and Russia-which could lead to nuclear war. This Administration has acted recklessly without care or consideration of the dire consequences of the United States attack on Syria without waiting for the collection of evidence from the scene of the chemical poisoning." For her pains, she has been vilified by members of her own party, who have called for her resignation .

    Other congressmen, including Senators Rand Paul and Tim Kaine, who have asked for a vote in congress to authorize going to war, have likewise been ignored or deliberately marginalized. All of which means that the United States has committed a war crime against a country with which it is not at war and has done so by ignoring Article 2 of the Constitution, which grants to Congress the sole power to declare war. It has also failed to establish a casus belli that Syria represents some kind of threat to the United States.

    What has become completely clear, as a result of the U.S. strike and its aftermath, is that any general reset with Russia has now become unimaginable, meaning among other things that a peace settlement for Syria is for now unattainable. It also has meant that the rebels against al-Assad's regime will be empowered, possibly deliberately staging more chemical "incidents" and blaming the Damascus government to shift international opinion farther in their direction. ISIS, which was reeling prior to the attack and reprisal, has been given a reprieve by the same United States government that pledged to eradicate it. And Donald Trump has reneged on his two campaign pledges to avoid deeper involvement in Middle Eastern wars and mend fences with Moscow.

    There have been two central documents relating to the alleged Syrian chemical weapon incidents in 2013 and 2017, both of which read like press releases. Both refer to a consensus within the U.S. intelligence community (IC)and express "confidence" and even "high confidence" regarding their conclusions but neither is actually a product of the office of the Director of National Intelligence, which would be appropriate if the IC had actually come to a consensus. Neither the Director of National Intelligence nor the Director of CIA were present in a photo showing the White House team deliberating over what to do about Syria. Both documents supporting the U.S. cruise missile attack were, in fact, uncharacteristically put out by the White House, suggesting that the arguments were stitched together in haste to support a political decision to use force that had already been made.

    The two documents provide plenty of circumstantial information but little in the way of actual evidence. The 2013 Obama version "Government Assessment of the Syrian Government's Use of Chemical Weapons on August 21, 2013," was criticized almost immediately when it was determined that there were alternative explanations for the source of the chemical agents that might have killed more than a thousand people in and around the town of Ghouta. The 2017 Trump version " The Assad Regime's Use of Chemical Weapons on April 4, 2017 ," is likewise under fire from numerous quarters. Generally reliable journalist Robert Parry is reporting that the intelligence behind the White House claims comes largely from satellite surveillance, though nothing has been released to back-up the conclusion that the Syrian government was behind the attack, an odd omission as everyone knows about satellite capabilities and they are not generally considered to be a classified source or method. Parry also cites the fact that there are alternative theories on what took place and why, some of which appear to originate with the intelligence and national security community, which was in part concerned over the rush to judgment by the White House. MIT Professor Theodore Postol, considered to be an expert on munitions, has also questioned the government's account of what took place in Khan Sheikhoun through a detailed analysis of the available evidence. He believes that the chemical agent was fired from the ground, not from an airplane, suggesting that it was an attack initiated by the rebels made to appear as if it was caused by the Syrian bomb.

    In spite of the challenges, "Trust me," says Donald Trump. The Russians and Syrians are demanding an international investigation of the alleged chemical weapons incident, but as time goes by the ability to discern what took place diminishes. All that is indisputably known at this point is that the Syrian Air Force attacked a target in Idlib and a cloud of toxic chemicals was somehow released. The al-Ansar terrorist group (affiliated with al-Qaeda) is in control of the area and benefits greatly from the prevailing narrative. If it was in fact the actual implementer of the attack, it is no doubt cleaning and reconfiguring the site to support the account that it is promoting and which is being uncritically accepted both by the mainstream media and by a number of governments. The United States will also do its best to disrupt any inquiry that challenges the assumptions that it has already come to. The Trump Administration is threatening to do more to remove Bashar al-Assad and every American should accept that the inhabitant of the White House, when he is actually in residence, will discover like many before him that war is good business. He will continue to ride the wave of jingoism that has turned out to be his salvation, reversing to an extent the negative publicity that has dogged the new administration.

    DB Cooper , April 18, 2017 at 4:13 am GMT \n

    • 100 Words This whole chemical weapon attack by Assad sounds fishy from the beginning. From what I read Assad is winning the civil war and things are turning for the better for him. What would he gain at this point to launch a chemical attack on the civilian populations? Things just doesn't add up. Check out this video:

    Read More
    Carlton Meyer , • Website April 18, 2017 at 4:21 am GMT \n
    Am I the only person who remembers news from a month ago? Trump ordered hundreds of regular American combat troops into Syria BEFORE this event, with no explanation. This was covered on all major networks, including CNN.

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/08/politics/marines-raqqa-assault-syria/

    And why? They've been trying to overthrow Assad since 2005:

    Read More
    NoldorElf , April 18, 2017 at 5:01 am GMT \n
    • 100 Words I am forced to conclude that the neoconservatives and indeed all of Washington DC are eager to go to war. They are just itching for any excuse to start yet another war in a nation of their choosing.

    If there is no good reason, they will make one up. There is an eerie resemblance to what is happening now with Syria and what happened leading up to the 2003 Invasion of Iraq.

    I think the paleoconservative community also needs to come to terms with the fact that Trump has sold them out and is increasingly acting like a Washington insider neocon. Trump did to the paleoconservatives what Obama did to the left.

    It seems Trump will not put "America First" nor make any attempts to restore the American Middle Class nor American manufacturing to truly "Make American Great Again".

    Tulsi Gabbard seems to be one of the few principled politicians in this case and for that she is marginalized for saying what few others have the moral courage to say. Many on the left are hoping she will run in 2020 for President.

    Coming from the left, I'd say that the Sanders and Trump base have a lot more in common than we admit. We are both deeply unhappy with the way that Washington has handled things. They basically betrayed the American people and enriched themselves at public expense.

    The real question is, can the US be saved for the people or will it continue on its path to terminal decline?

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
    utu , April 18, 2017 at 6:16 am GMT \n
    • 100 Words Why'd there is no propaganda counter offensive coming from Putin and Assad? Where are their accounts of what happened there backed up by pictures and names of those who created this false flag? Don't they have their sources, intelligence and people on the ground? We are getting nothing. Instead Sputnik and RT is deferring to retired 71 old professor Postol who did his whole analysis based on single picture he found somewhere on social media. Do you think this will cause a dent in beliefs of people who are 24/7 being propagandized by Anglo-Zio media? Read More
    Wizard of Oz , April 18, 2017 at 6:17 am GMT \n
    • 100 Words What is your view of David Kilcullen, what he knows about, and what his views are worth? No doubt "modified" or " qualified" respect but it is the qualifications and the reasons for them that I am interested in. When I've got round tobfinishing his article saying Assad is desperate and losing I'll probably be back. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
    Anon , April 18, 2017 at 6:34 am GMT \n
    • 100 Words Get a load of this a ** hole who was responsible for disaster in Russia.

    He thinks he has the right to judge the mental health of others.

    But as long as super-rich globalists fund think-tanks and invite lunatics like him, he can posture as a 'voice of reason'.

    And there is the other esteemed 'voice of reason', Thomas Friedman, who wants war in Syria to go on, even if ISIS kills more innocents.

    https://www.commondreams.org/views/2017/04/15/thomas-friedmans-perverse-love-affair-isis

    These academics are like mafia lawyers. The mafia sent some of their guys to study law or even enter legit institutions(like police, church, government, etc) and then had those guys serve the mafia. They had the sheen of respectability, dignity, and objective meritocracy, but their main loyalty was to the mafia.
    It's like Tom Hagen is an ace lawyer but serves the Mob.

    And there were other famous Mob Lawyers, the real ones.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Ragano

    So many of these journos and academics are really Mob Publicists and Mob Advocates. They serve the globalist mafia. Glob is their Mob.

    Sachs is a total shark. He's been a Glob Advocate forever. A real weasel.

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    Brabantian , • Website April 18, 2017 at 8:34 am GMT \n
    • 600 Words Proof of the false-flag nature of the 'chemical attack' in Syria absurdly ascribed to Assad's forces -

    Above all because of a very-censored explosive story – a distinguished group of Swedish doctors showed that the George Clooney & Western-backed 'White Helmets' in fact made a snuff film actually murdering children of this 'chemical attack' anyone can invite medical physicians they know to view this, to see the Swedish Doctors for Human Rights are absolutely correct in their accusations:

    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/04/06/swedish-medical-associations-says-white-helmets-murdered-kids-for-fake-gas-attack-videos/

    For an overview of the many wider points making clear the false flag, Aangirfan does an excellent job here as she very often does:

    http://aanirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/trump-at-war-with-assad-and-putin.html

    (1) Anti-Assad "reporter" Feras Karam tweeted about the gas attack in Syria 24 hours before it happened – Tweet , "Tomorrow a media campaign will begin to cover intense air raids on the Hama countryside & use of chlorine against civilians"

    (2) Gas masks were distributed 2 days before the attack

    (3) Rescue workers are not wearing protective gear as they would if severely-toxic gas attack had occurred

    (4) Pakistani British doctor promoting Syria gas attack story, "who at the time of attack was taking interview requests instead of helping injured flooding in" is Dr Shajul Islam, "used as source by US & UK media, despite facing terror charges for kidnapping & torturing two British journalists in Syria & being struck off the medical register"

    (5) The USA & CIA were previously documented as having approved a "plan to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria & blame it on Assad's regime' A 2013 article on this is deleted from the UK Daily Mail website, but is saved at Web Archive, a screenshot at Aangirfan's page above

    (6) Videos previously exposed as fraudulent are being recycled "A chemical weapons shipment run by Saudi mercenaries [is blown up] before it can be offloaded & used to attack the Syrian army in Hama [this story] has turned into Syrian aircraft dropping sarin gas on orphanages videos shot in Egypt with the smoke machines are dragged out again."

    (7) Gas attack story is supported by known Soros-funded frauds 'White Helmets' who had previously celebrated alongside Israeli-Saudi backed 'Al Qaeda' extremists after seizing Idlib from Syrian Army forces. White Helmets "have been caught filming their fake videos in places like Egypt & Morocco, using actors, smoke machines & fake blood".

    (8) The 2013 gas attack in Syria killing over 1000 people, was also proven to be an operation by USA & allies, with admissions to this effect by Turkish Members of Parliament The operation even involved the CIA's Google Inc monopoly search control internet domination tool, via their subsidiary Google Idea Groups & Jared Cohen:

    In 2014, the later-murdered journalist Serena Shim "stumbled upon a safehouse run by Jared Cohen & Google Idea Groups, a short distance from a border crossing into Syria between Hatay, Turkey & Aleppo province in Syria. In the safehouse were three Ukrainian secret service who had just buried a load of sarin gas shells from the Republic of Georgia. Chemical weapons used in the Ghouta war crime were trucked through Turkey to Gaziantep then taken from there to Aleppo by NGOs, hidden in ambulances or in trucks supposedly carrying relief aid. After Shim broke this story on PressTV the clumsily-staged 'accident' leading to her death only a few days later."

    By way of motive – Destruction of Syria & Assad serves the long-being-implemented 1980s Israeli Oded Yinon Plan to destroy & dismember all major countries surrounding mafia state Israel, in general service to the world oligarchs. Plus, there are major US-backed economics behind the campaign to destroy Syria – Assad's fall is sought for changing from the Russia-supported pipeline from Iran thru Iraq & Syria, to the USA-supported pipeline from Qatar thru Saudi Arabia, Jordan & Syria.

    Read More
    Vlad , April 18, 2017 at 9:45 am GMT \n
    • 200 Words What has happened is one of two things as far is Trump is concerned. Either he walked into a trap prepared for him by the Deep state, willingly or unwillingly. If willingly he knew he was set up and accepted it because he has no choice. He could not disobey the military. They have their own agenda in Syria which they had been pursuing for a while, that is carving out American zone of occupation in eastern Syria with the help of Sunny states. Or Trump simply capitulated to the deep state as Obama did before him. If that is the case we know now how American is governed, by the military industrial complex that dictates its policy. The sad part is that the Constitution is disregarded once again, that the Liberals who used to be peaceniks, are now cheering for war, that the UN is marginalized, that Trump uses it just as Bush did to justify an illegal war. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
    Sean , April 18, 2017 at 10:22 am GMT \n
    • 1,100 Words

    Sounds like we've heard it all before, because we have, back in August 2013, and that turned out to be less than convincing. Skepticism is likewise mounting over current White House claims that Damascus used a chemical weapon against civilians in the village of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province on April 4th.

    Quite. They maybe faked before and know how to in there was a overwhelming need. However, one wonders why they did not use the gas gambit when they were set to lose Aleppo. Using it now only when they have lost their big gains, seems like bolting the stable door after the horse is gone . So the motives for the rebels faking a gas attack at this juncture are even more puzzling as for the Assad regime having ordered it .

    Why Volatility Signals Stability, and Vice Versa
    By Nassim Nicholas Taleb and Gregory F. Treverton
    Purchase Article
    Even as protests spread across the Middle East in early 2011, the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria appeared immune from the upheaval. Assad had ruled comfortably for over a decade, having replaced his father, Hafez, who himself had held power for the previous three decades. Many pundits argued that Syria's sturdy police state, which exercised tight control over the country's people and economy, would survive the Arab Spring undisturbed. ]

    But appearances were deceiving: today, Syria is in a shambles, with the regime fighting for its very survival, whereas Lebanon has withstood the influx of Syrian refugees and the other considerable pressures of the civil war next door. Surprising as it may seem, the per capita death rate from violence in Lebanon in 2013 was lower than that in Washington, D.C. That same year, the body count of the Syrian conflict surpassed 100,000.

    Why has seemingly stable Syria turned out to be the fragile regime, whereas always-in-turmoil Lebanon has so far proved robust? The answer is that prior to its civil war, Syria was exhibiting only pseudo-stability, its calm façade concealing deep structural vulnerabilities. Lebanon's chaos, paradoxically, signaled strength. Fifteen years of civil war had served to decentralize the state and bring about a more balanced sectarian power-sharing structure. Along with Lebanon's small size as an administrative unit, these factors added to its durability. So did the country's free-market economy. In Syria, the ruling Baath Party sought to control economic variability, replacing the lively chaos of the ancestral souk with the top-down, Soviet-style structure of the office building. This rigidity made Syria (and the other Baathist state, Iraq) much more vulnerable to disruption than Lebanon.[...]

    The divergent tales of Syria and Lebanon demonstrate that the best early warning signs of instability are found not in historical data but in underlying structural properties. Past experience can be extremely effective when it comes to detecting risks of cancer, crime, and earthquakes. But it is a bad bellwether of complex political and economic events, particularly so-called tail risks-events, such as coups and financial crises, that are highly unlikely but enormously consequential. For those, the evidence of risk comes too late to do anything about it, and a more sophisticated approach is required.

    [...]

    Simply put, fragility is aversion to disorder. Things that are fragile do not like variability, volatility, stress, chaos, and random events, which cause them to either gain little or suffer. A teacup, for example, will not benefit from any form of shock. It wants peace and predictability, something that is not possible in the long run, which is why time is an enemy to the fragile. What's more, things that are fragile respond to shock in a nonlinear fashion. With humans, for example, the harm from a ten-foot fall in no way equals ten times as much harm as from a one-foot fall. In political and economic terms, a $30 drop in the price of a barrel of oil is much more than twice as harmful to Saudi Arabia as a $15 drop.

    THE CENTER CANNOT HOLD

    The first marker of a fragile state is a concentrated decision-making system.funds, at the price of increasing systemic risks, such as disastrous national-level reforms.

    This Administration has acted recklessly without care or consideration of the dire consequences of the United States attack on Syria

    A Russian build military base being used to attack urban areas is not "Syria"

    Assad and those around him hold concentrated centralised power and are already proven to be incredibly stupid, that is why he is in this position– he thought the people loved him, put up the price of basic commodities and the rebellion started. Assad perhaps believes the US is scared to get involved in Syria or to to cross the Russians . It seems silly but he and his advisors have a proven record of catastrophic misjudgements . Bringing in the Russians meant the US would be involved.

    I dare say the US has more advanced facilities for gathering intelligence it lets on about and than Syria, Russia or US media know about. Providing "evidence" gives away the hole card one might come in handy if the nuclear balloon starts going goes well and truly up. Any price would be worth paying for knowing Russia's intent. If people doubt Trump over this (and he warned the Russian it was going to be done so he didn't seek confrontation) it is the unfortunate price of maintaining secret intelligence facilities.

    The Trump Administration is threatening to do more to remove Bashar al-Assad and every American should accept that the inhabitant of the White House, when he is actually in residence, will discover like many before him that war is good business. He will continue to ride the wave of jingoism that has turned out to be his salvation, reversing to an extent the negative publicity that has dogged the new administration.

    For a great power seeing its rival use military force to crush a rebellion it has expressed sympathy is quite definitely a real defeat . It's a zero sum game for America and Russia (yes Russia is Jingoistic, and I think it is more centralised in decision making ) . The Russians took advantage of US passivity under Obama, and they were exultant at the way the US stood and watched, while Russia made all the successful initiatives, but really they couldn't be allowed to have it their own way any longer, for what they would have done next can be assumed to have been frightening to Europe.

    Read More
    Sean , April 18, 2017 at 10:25 am GMT \n
    @Carlton Meyer Am I the only person who remembers news from a month ago? Trump ordered hundreds of regular American combat troops into Syria BEFORE this event, with no explanation. This was covered on all major networks, including CNN.

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/08/politics/marines-raqqa-assault-syria/

    And why? They've been trying to overthrow Assad since 2005:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pm8-vSo4Y4 Russia was having too much success, they needed to understand that the US is not going to stand by any longer and wait to see. Read More

    AmericaFirstNow , • Website April 18, 2017 at 11:19 am GMT \n
    • 100 Words Jewish AIPAC Israel firster Jared Kushner and his fellow Jewish AIPAC Israel first friends (like Reed Cordish who worked for Israel Lobby lackey Dick Cheney as well) whom he brought into the White House more than likely influenced Trump to push the Israel Lobby agenda vs Syria for regime change to weaken Iran:

    http://america-hijacked.com/2012/02/12/israel-lobby-pushes-for-us-action-against-the-syrian-government/

    More on Kushner and his fellow AIPAC Israel firster at the White House obviously influencing Trump to push the Israel Lobby agenda like he did with Syria as I heard Netanyahu praised the Syriaattack and Pence personally telephoned to thank him:

    http://forward.com/news/breaking-news/359120/jared-kushners-friend-picked-by-donald-trump-as-assistant/

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
    Hunsdon , April 18, 2017 at 12:07 pm GMT \n
    @Sean Russia was having too much success, they needed to understand that the US is not going to stand by any longer and wait to see. INORITE! I mean look, Russia has expanded its military to the very borders of NATO.

    Oh.

    Wait.

    Read More
    anonymous , April 18, 2017 at 1:03 pm GMT \n
    • 100 Words It certainly appears to have been a manufactured event. The media was ready and swung into action immediately with pictures and a noisy campaign that the usual war-hawk politicians joined in with. The timing was just too good and seems to have been coordinated. Syria was bombed without bothering to investigate based on Trump's claim that the evidence was ironclad. Did people like McMaster think it was real and report it to Trump as such? Did Trump believe it? Or did they know it was fake but pretended otherwise? Were they in on it from the beginning or were they forced to play along? Trump has quickly shifted into being an establishment politician whose rhetoric has been bellicose and reckless. Next up, N Korea and then Iran?
    No matter how one votes they end up getting the same thing. It's very disheartening. Read More
    Quartermaster , April 18, 2017 at 1:08 pm GMT \n
    @Anon Get a load of this a**hole who was responsible for disaster in Russia.

    He thinks he has the right to judge the mental health of others.

    But as long as super-rich globalists fund think-tanks and invite lunatics like him, he can posture as a 'voice of reason'.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhyD-fPS0vs

    And there is the other esteemed 'voice of reason', Thomas Friedman, who wants war in Syria to go on, even if ISIS kills more innocents.

    https://www.commondreams.org/views/2017/04/15/thomas-friedmans-perverse-love-affair-isis

    These academics are like mafia lawyers.

    The mafia sent some of their guys to study law or even enter legit institutions(like police, church, government, etc) and then had those guys serve the mafia. They had the sheen of respectability, dignity, and objective meritocracy, but their main loyalty was to the mafia.
    It's like Tom Hagen is an ace lawyer but serves the Mob.

    And there were other famous Mob Lawyers, the real ones.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Ragano

    So many of these journos and academics are really Mob Publicists and Mob Advocates.
    They serve the globalist mafia. Glob is their Mob.

    Sachs is a total shark. He's been a Glob Advocate forever. A real weasel.

    Putin is the real weasel, and problem in Russia. He's corrupt to his core and has his own vision for Russia which is quite destructive. His Soviet revanchism is a serious problem for Russia and has set the country up for a serious fall. Read More • LOL: geokat62 • Troll: L.K , Rurik
    Quartermaster , April 18, 2017 at 1:11 pm GMT \n
    • 100 Words @Brabantian Proof of the false-flag nature of the 'chemical attack' in Syria absurdly ascribed to Assad's forces -

    Above all because of a very-censored explosive story - a distinguished group of Swedish doctors showed that the George Clooney & Western-backed 'White Helmets' in fact made a snuff film actually murdering children of this 'chemical attack' ... anyone can invite medical physicians they know to view this, to see the Swedish Doctors for Human Rights are absolutely correct in their accusations:
    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/04/06/swedish-medical-associations-says-white-helmets-murdered-kids-for-fake-gas-attack-videos/

    For an overview of the many wider points making clear the false flag, Aangirfan does an excellent job here as she very often does:
    http://aanirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/trump-at-war-with-assad-and-putin.html

    (1) Anti-Assad "reporter" Feras Karam tweeted about the gas attack in Syria 24 hours before it happened - Tweet , "Tomorrow a media campaign will begin to cover intense air raids on the Hama countryside & use of chlorine against civilians"

    (2) Gas masks were distributed 2 days before the attack

    (3) Rescue workers are not wearing protective gear as they would if severely-toxic gas attack had occurred

    (4) Pakistani British doctor promoting Syria gas attack story, "who at the time of attack was taking interview requests instead of helping injured flooding in" is Dr Shajul Islam, "used as source by US & UK media, despite facing terror charges for kidnapping & torturing two British journalists in Syria & being struck off the medical register"

    (5) The USA & CIA were previously documented as having approved a "plan to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria & blame it on Assad's regime' ... A 2013 article on this is deleted from the UK Daily Mail website, but is saved at Web Archive, a screenshot at Aangirfan's page above

    (6) Videos previously exposed as fraudulent are being recycled "A chemical weapons shipment run by Saudi mercenaries [is blown up] before it can be offloaded & used to attack the Syrian army in Hama ... [this story] has turned into Syrian aircraft dropping sarin gas on orphanages ... videos shot in Egypt with the smoke machines are dragged out again."

    (7) Gas attack story is supported by known Soros-funded frauds 'White Helmets' who had previously celebrated alongside Israeli-Saudi backed 'Al Qaeda' extremists after seizing Idlib from Syrian Army forces. White Helmets "have been caught filming their fake videos in places like Egypt & Morocco, using actors, smoke machines & fake blood".

    (8) The 2013 gas attack in Syria killing over 1000 people, was also proven to be an operation by USA & allies, with admissions to this effect by Turkish Members of Parliament ... The operation even involved the CIA's Google Inc monopoly search control internet domination tool, via their subsidiary Google Idea Groups & Jared Cohen:

    In 2014, the later-murdered journalist Serena Shim "stumbled upon a safehouse run by Jared Cohen & Google Idea Groups, a short distance from a border crossing into Syria between Hatay, Turkey & Aleppo province in Syria. In the safehouse were three Ukrainian secret service who had just buried a load of sarin gas shells from the Republic of Georgia. Chemical weapons used in the Ghouta war crime were trucked through Turkey to Gaziantep then taken from there to Aleppo by NGOs, hidden in ambulances or in trucks supposedly carrying relief aid. After Shim broke this story on PressTV ... the clumsily-staged 'accident' leading to her death only a few days later."

    By way of motive - Destruction of Syria & Assad serves the long-being-implemented 1980s Israeli Oded Yinon Plan to destroy & dismember all major countries surrounding mafia state Israel, in general service to the world oligarchs. Plus, there are major US-backed economics behind the campaign to destroy Syria - Assad's fall is sought for changing from the Russia-supported pipeline from Iran thru Iraq & Syria, to the USA-supported pipeline from Qatar thru Saudi Arabia, Jordan & Syria. Sarin is a nerve agent and if that is what was used, gas masks are far less than what is needed to protect anyone.

    I don't see any motivation on Assad's part to stage such an attack. It simply was not in his interest to do so. Trump's action was a knee jerk reaction and stupid.

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    Agent76 , April 18, 2017 at 2:12 pm GMT \n
    April 07, 2017 Pentagon Trained Syria's Al Qaeda "Rebels" in the Use of Chemical Weapons

    The Western media refutes their own lies.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/pentagon-trained-syrias-al-qaeda-rebels-in-the-use-of-chemical-weapons/5583784

    Apr 9, 2017 No More

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
    Wizard of Oz , April 18, 2017 at 2:21 pm GMT \n
    • 100 Words Here is ths David Kilcullen article I have been referring to. On the face of it he is a respectable analyst and authority like Mr Girardi with no hidden agenda:

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/fighting-islamic-state/sarin-attack-shows-assad-is-desperate-as-jihadist-rebels-gain-ground/news-story/5265dee03a779671aefa32ef8d1a2fb3

    Thete is mo reason to suppose that either DK or PG have special knowledge of what gas attack actually occurred and by whom. However there seems to be an even more important division over the security of the Syrian government under attack from the Al Qaeda afiliate by whatever name it is now called in Syria. Kilcullen points to Assad having superior hardware but desperately lacking manpower.

    Does PG subscrtobe to the populsr contrary view that Assad is so close to winning againt all rebels that he simply couldn't hsve hsd s motive to make the gss atttack?

    Read More
    Clark Westwood , April 18, 2017 at 2:22 pm GMT \n
    Is it possible that Trump and Putin cooked up this little show simply to give Trump more credibility in his approaching confrontation with North Korea? Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
    Z-man , April 18, 2017 at 2:53 pm GMT \n
    @Anon Get a load of this a**hole who was responsible for disaster in Russia.

    He thinks he has the right to judge the mental health of others.

    But as long as super-rich globalists fund think-tanks and invite lunatics like him, he can posture as a 'voice of reason'.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhyD-fPS0vs

    And there is the other esteemed 'voice of reason', Thomas Friedman, who wants war in Syria to go on, even if ISIS kills more innocents.

    https://www.commondreams.org/views/2017/04/15/thomas-friedmans-perverse-love-affair-isis

    These academics are like mafia lawyers.

    The mafia sent some of their guys to study law or even enter legit institutions(like police, church, government, etc) and then had those guys serve the mafia. They had the sheen of respectability, dignity, and objective meritocracy, but their main loyalty was to the mafia.
    It's like Tom Hagen is an ace lawyer but serves the Mob.

    And there were other famous Mob Lawyers, the real ones.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Ragano

    So many of these journos and academics are really Mob Publicists and Mob Advocates.
    They serve the globalist mafia. Glob is their Mob.

    Sachs is a total shark. He's been a Glob Advocate forever. A real weasel.

    What's the common denominator to these two ?????? Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    Z-man , April 18, 2017 at 3:02 pm GMT \n
    "Democratic Party liberal interventionists have also joined with Senators John McCain, Lindsay Graham and Marco Rubio to celebrate the cruise missile strike and hardening rhetoric."

    All owned by the likes of http://www.haaretz.com/polopoly_fs/1.631441.1418390491!/image/412181903.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_640/412181903.jpg Repulsive no?

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
    Jeff Davis , April 18, 2017 at 3:15 pm GMT \n
    • 100 Words @utu Why'd there is no propaganda counter offensive coming from Putin and Assad? Where are their accounts of what happened there backed up by pictures and names of those who created this false flag? Don't they have their sources, intelligence and people on the ground? We are getting nothing. Instead Sputnik and RT is deferring to retired 71 old professor Postol who did his whole analysis based on single picture he found somewhere on social media. Do you think this will cause a dent in beliefs of people who are 24/7 being propagandized by Anglo-Zio media? " picture he found somewhere on social media."

    If you check closely, I think you will find that Postol took that photo from the White House issued document presenting the "evidence"(not!) of Syrian responsibility(not!) for the sarin(?) gas attack. Thus that photo represents the on-the-record official story w/official "evidence".

    Far from being some randomly acquired photo taken from social media and originating who knows where. And to take it one discrediting step further, it turns out the photo was provided by the al Qaeda terrorists - the CIA's client anti-Assad terrorists - who control that area.

    Bottom line: From the first, this was an ***OBVIOUS*** false flag. The only question remaining is whether the CIA coordinated with al Qaeda in planning this event.

    Read More
    Sean , April 18, 2017 at 3:25 pm GMT \n
    @Hunsdon INORITE! I mean look, Russia has expanded its military to the very borders of NATO.

    Oh.

    Wait. Well they do not get to set the rules until they are the most powerful state in the world–like the US. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    JoaoAlfaiate , April 18, 2017 at 3:33 pm GMT \n
    • 100 Words Remember WMD and Saddam? What did the top papers say after Colin Powell's speech to the UN "proving" that Iraq had WMD?

    New York Times: "[Powell's speech] may not have produced a 'smoking gun," but it left little question that Mr. Hussein had tried hard to conceal one."

    Wall Street Journal: "The Powell evidence will be persuasive to anyone who is still persuadable. The only question remaining is whether the U.N. is going to have the courage of Mr. Powell's convictions."

    Washington Post: "To continue to say that the Bush administration has not made its case, you must now believe that Colin Powell lied in the most serious statement he will ever make "

    "Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play."
    Joseph Goebbels

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
    iffen , April 18, 2017 at 3:48 pm GMT \n
    @Hunsdon INORITE! I mean look, Russia has expanded its military to the very borders of NATO.

    Oh.

    Wait. Not only that they recently illegally annexed a prized warm water port. Read More

    alexander , April 18, 2017 at 4:13 pm GMT \n
    • 200 Words @Wizard of Oz Here is ths David Kilcullen article I have been referring to. On the face of it he is a respectable analyst and authority like Mr Girardi with no hidden agenda:

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/fighting-islamic-state/sarin-attack-shows-assad-is-desperate-as-jihadist-rebels-gain-ground/news-story/5265dee03a779671aefa32ef8d1a2fb3

    Thete is mo reason to suppose that either DK or PG have special knowledge of what gas attack actually occurred and by whom. However there seems to be an even more important division over the security of the Syrian government under attack from the Al Qaeda afiliate by whatever name it is now called in Syria. Kilcullen points to Assad having superior hardware but desperately lacking manpower.

    Does PG subscrtobe to the populsr contrary view that Assad is so close to winning againt all rebels that he simply couldn't hsve hsd s motive to make the gss atttack? Hi Wiz,

    I think it is quite clear, that with the assistance of the Russian military, the Syrian army has mounted multiple strategic victories against ISIS over the past year and a half.

    The entry of Russia into the fray, at the request of Syria, provided a very deep reservoir of enhanced military power which has shown to be highly effective in degraded both Al Qaeda and ISIS on multiple fronts.

    It seems as absurd now , as it did in 2013, that Assad would do the ONE THING that would force the hand of the US military to enter the fray against him.

    I also doubt the notion of the Syrian regimes "desperation" given the complete cooperation of Russia in providing any assistance the Syrian army might need , to achieve victory against ISIS.

    One could argue, however ,that Assad is truly "bonehead" stupid.

    You are certainly free to make that argument, Wiz , because, in this case, it seems to be the one that would make the most sense.

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    The Alarmist , April 18, 2017 at 4:30 pm GMT \n
    • 100 Words @Sean

    Sounds like we've heard it all before, because we have, back in August 2013, and that turned out to be less than convincing. Skepticism is likewise mounting over current White House claims that Damascus used a chemical weapon against civilians in the village of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province on April 4th.
    Quite. They maybe faked before and know how to in there was a overwhelming need. However, one wonders why they did not use the gas gambit when they were set to lose Aleppo. Using it now only when they have lost their big gains, seems like bolting the stable door after the horse is gone . So the motives for the rebels faking a gas attack at this juncture are even more puzzling as for the Assad regime having ordered it .

    Why Volatility Signals Stability, and Vice Versa
    By Nassim Nicholas Taleb and Gregory F. Treverton
    Purchase Article
    Even as protests spread across the Middle East in early 2011, the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria appeared immune from the upheaval. Assad had ruled comfortably for over a decade, having replaced his father, Hafez, who himself had held power for the previous three decades. Many pundits argued that Syria's sturdy police state, which exercised tight control over the country's people and economy, would survive the Arab Spring undisturbed. ]...

    But appearances were deceiving: today, Syria is in a shambles, with the regime fighting for its very survival, whereas Lebanon has withstood the influx of Syrian refugees and the other considerable pressures of the civil war next door. Surprising as it may seem, the per capita death rate from violence in Lebanon in 2013 was lower than that in Washington, D.C. That same year, the body count of the Syrian conflict surpassed 100,000.

    Why has seemingly stable Syria turned out to be the fragile regime, whereas always-in-turmoil Lebanon has so far proved robust? The answer is that prior to its civil war, Syria was exhibiting only pseudo-stability, its calm façade concealing deep structural vulnerabilities. Lebanon's chaos, paradoxically, signaled strength. Fifteen years of civil war had served to decentralize the state and bring about a more balanced sectarian power-sharing structure. Along with Lebanon's small size as an administrative unit, these factors added to its durability. So did the country's free-market economy. In Syria, the ruling Baath Party sought to control economic variability, replacing the lively chaos of the ancestral souk with the top-down, Soviet-style structure of the office building. This rigidity made Syria (and the other Baathist state, Iraq) much more vulnerable to disruption than Lebanon.[...]


    The divergent tales of Syria and Lebanon demonstrate that the best early warning signs of instability are found not in historical data but in underlying structural properties. Past experience can be extremely effective when it comes to detecting risks of cancer, crime, and earthquakes. But it is a bad bellwether of complex political and economic events, particularly so-called tail risks-events, such as coups and financial crises, that are highly unlikely but enormously consequential. For those, the evidence of risk comes too late to do anything about it, and a more sophisticated approach is required.

    [...]

    Simply put, fragility is aversion to disorder. Things that are fragile do not like variability, volatility, stress, chaos, and random events, which cause them to either gain little or suffer. A teacup, for example, will not benefit from any form of shock. It wants peace and predictability, something that is not possible in the long run, which is why time is an enemy to the fragile. What's more, things that are fragile respond to shock in a nonlinear fashion. With humans, for example, the harm from a ten-foot fall in no way equals ten times as much harm as from a one-foot fall. In political and economic terms, a $30 drop in the price of a barrel of oil is much more than twice as harmful to Saudi Arabia as a $15 drop.

    THE CENTER CANNOT HOLD

    The first marker of a fragile state is a concentrated decision-making system.funds, at the price of increasing systemic risks, such as disastrous national-level reforms.


    This Administration has acted recklessly without care or consideration of the dire consequences of the United States attack on Syria
    A Russian build military base being used to attack urban areas is not "Syria"

    Assad and those around him hold concentrated centralised power and are already proven to be incredibly stupid, that is why he is in this position-- he thought the people loved him, put up the price of basic commodities and the rebellion started. Assad perhaps believes the US is scared to get involved in Syria or to to cross the Russians . It seems silly but he and his advisors have a proven record of catastrophic misjudgements . Bringing in the Russians meant the US would be involved.

    I dare say the US has more advanced facilities for gathering intelligence it lets on about and than Syria, Russia or US media know about. Providing "evidence" gives away the hole card one might come in handy if the nuclear balloon starts going goes well and truly up. Any price would be worth paying for knowing Russia's intent. If people doubt Trump over this (and he warned the Russian it was going to be done so he didn't seek confrontation) it is the unfortunate price of maintaining secret intelligence facilities.


    The Trump Administration is threatening to do more to remove Bashar al-Assad and every American should accept that the inhabitant of the White House, when he is actually in residence, will discover like many before him that war is good business. He will continue to ride the wave of jingoism that has turned out to be his salvation, reversing to an extent the negative publicity that has dogged the new administration.
    For a great power seeing its rival use military force to crush a rebellion it has expressed sympathy is quite definitely a real defeat . It's a zero sum game for America and Russia (yes Russia is Jingoistic, and I think it is more centralised in decision making ) . The Russians took advantage of US passivity under Obama, and they were exultant at the way the US stood and watched, while Russia made all the successful initiatives, but really they couldn't be allowed to have it their own way any longer, for what they would have done next can be assumed to have been frightening to Europe.

    "The Russians took advantage of US passivity under Obama, and they were exultant at the way the US stood and watched, while Russia made all the successful initiatives, but really they couldn't be allowed to have it their own way any longer, for what they would have done next can be assumed to have been frightening to Europe."

    Wow, we must have been observing two different worlds, because Russian actions in several theatres (Syria, Ukraine, Korea, ROW) have been relatively restrained to non-existent despite clear threats to their national interests, while the US has ratcheted up it military intervention pretty much globally over the same period. Then again, I live outside the US and am not blanketed with the propaganda that spills out of its MSM house organs, so we have indeed observed two different worlds.

    Read More
    Wally , April 18, 2017 at 4:45 pm GMT \n
    @Hunsdon INORITE! I mean look, Russia has expanded its military to the very borders of NATO.

    Oh.

    Wait. IOW, the Russians have their own military in their own county guarding their own borders. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    Wally , April 18, 2017 at 4:48 pm GMT \n
    @iffen Not only that they recently illegally annexed a prized warm water port. "Illegal" not.

    Russia was right to accept the legitimate Crimean vote.

    The Crimean voters overwhelmingly approved returning to Russia.

    Democracy personified, the will of the people.

    Leftists hate that.

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    Ivy , April 18, 2017 at 4:50 pm GMT \n
    See the article by Gaius Publius at Naked Capitalism for a deeper dive.

    http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2017/04/gaius-publius-new-evidence-syrian-gas-story-fabricated-white-house.html

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
    Wally , April 18, 2017 at 4:56 pm GMT \n
    @utu Why'd there is no propaganda counter offensive coming from Putin and Assad? Where are their accounts of what happened there backed up by pictures and names of those who created this false flag? Don't they have their sources, intelligence and people on the ground? We are getting nothing. Instead Sputnik and RT is deferring to retired 71 old professor Postol who did his whole analysis based on single picture he found somewhere on social media. Do you think this will cause a dent in beliefs of people who are 24/7 being propagandized by Anglo-Zio media? You won't find it by looking at CNN / ZNN.

    Try:

    http://russia-insider.com/en

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    SolontoCroesus , April 18, 2017 at 5:05 pm GMT \n
    • 600 Words @Jeff Davis "...picture he found somewhere on social media."

    If you check closely, I think you will find that Postol took that photo from the White House issued document presenting the "evidence"(not!) of Syrian responsibility(not!) for the sarin(?) gas attack. Thus that photo represents the on-the-record official story w/official "evidence".

    Far from being some randomly acquired photo taken from social media and originating who knows where. And to take it one discrediting step further, it turns out the photo was provided by the al Qaeda terrorists -- the CIA's client anti-Assad terrorists -- who control that area.

    Bottom line: From the first, this was an ***OBVIOUS*** false flag. The only question remaining is whether the CIA coordinated with al Qaeda in planning this event.

    On Apr 13, 2017, Center for Strategic and International Studies hosted Mike Pompeo for his first public speaking appearance as CIA director.

    After Pompeo's prepared remarks, Juan Zarate queried the director on the Syria attack/s, starting his questions with comment on the rapidity with which "assessments were made."
    (Zarate is now at CSIS after proving his neoconservative bona fides as a charter member of Stuart Levey's Treasury Department "guerrillas in grey suits" - the gang that deploys financial blackmail to coerce international banks and corporations to join the US in constraining their commerce with states the USA does not like.)

    Pompeo responded to Zarate's request for "behind the scenes" description of how the assessments were made:

    "We were in short order able to deliver a high confidence assessment that it was the Syrian regime that had launched chemical attacks against its own people. Not me, Our Team, not just the CIA, the entire intelligence community was good and fast and we challenged ourselves. I can assure you we were challenged by the President and his team. We wanted to make sure we had it right. There's not much like when the president looks at you and says, Are you sure? When you know he's contemplating an action based on the analysis your organization has provided, and we got it right and I'm proud of the work that get to have the president have the opportunity to make a good decision about what he ought to do in the face of the atrocity that took place. "

    Zarate did not register dissatisfaction with this non-response; instead, he accepted the assessment as conclusive. Then he escalated the discussion:

    "What do you make of the Russian disputation of those conclusions? Bashar Al-Assad calling this a fabrication, the entire event. It's a battle of legitimacy and proof. How do you deal with that?"

    To which Pompeo delivered the money-quote:

    They're challenges. There are things we were able to use to form the basis of our conclusion that we cannot reveal. That is always tricky, but we've done our best and I think over time we can reveal a bit more. Everyone saw the open source photos, so we had reality on our side. "

    So apparently Pompeo and the "entire intelligence community" used the same photos that Dr. Postol examined exhaustively, but reached a different conclusion; they believe that the photos reflect "reality" and support their interpretation of events as fingering the Syrian government as perpetrators of the "red-line" "atrocity."

    Pompeo spent the next few minutes derogating Russia and Putin, stating that "Russia is on its sixth or seventh version of the story," and that "Putin is not a credible man . . . a man for whom veracity does not translate into English." (I think he meant "into Russian . . . .")

    -

    Recall that in 2013 Diane Feinstein also engaged the "rapid turnaround" efforts of the CIA to produce a video presentation of gassed children, which she claimed implicated the Syrian government, in her bid to drive the Obama administration across the "red line." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/07/cia-authenticates-13-videos-showing-syrian-gas-attack-aftermath-official-says.html

    and

    Lawmakers shown 'horrendous' video of alleged chemical attack in Syria Sept 05, 2013

    After extensive investigation by experts under the auspices of the United Nations, Ban Ki Moon declared that it was "indisputable" that a chemical attack had occurred, but those responsible for the attack were not conclusively identified. Samantha Power, however, insisted that "it must have been Assad." http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/un-report-confirms-use-of-chemical-weapons-in-syria-a-922746.html

    Same lies, different liars.


    joe webb , April 18, 2017 at 5:09 pm GMT \n
    The Theodor Postel report made it onto Yahoo News surprisingly, last night.
    Jeff Davis , April 18, 2017 at 5:18 pm GMT \n
    @Sean

    Sounds like we've heard it all before, because we have, back in August 2013, and that turned out to be less than convincing. Skepticism is likewise mounting over current White House claims that Damascus used a chemical weapon against civilians in the village of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province on April 4th.
    Quite. They maybe faked before and know how to in there was a overwhelming need. However, one wonders why they did not use the gas gambit when they were set to lose Aleppo. Using it now only when they have lost their big gains, seems like bolting the stable door after the horse is gone . So the motives for the rebels faking a gas attack at this juncture are even more puzzling as for the Assad regime having ordered it .
    Why Volatility Signals Stability, and Vice Versa
    By Nassim Nicholas Taleb and Gregory F. Treverton
    Purchase Article
    Even as protests spread across the Middle East in early 2011, the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria appeared immune from the upheaval. Assad had ruled comfortably for over a decade, having replaced his father, Hafez, who himself had held power for the previous three decades. Many pundits argued that Syria's sturdy police state, which exercised tight control over the country's people and economy, would survive the Arab Spring undisturbed. ]...

    But appearances were deceiving: today, Syria is in a shambles, with the regime fighting for its very survival, whereas Lebanon has withstood the influx of Syrian refugees and the other considerable pressures of the civil war next door. Surprising as it may seem, the per capita death rate from violence in Lebanon in 2013 was lower than that in Washington, D.C. That same year, the body count of the Syrian conflict surpassed 100,000.

    Why has seemingly stable Syria turned out to be the fragile regime, whereas always-in-turmoil Lebanon has so far proved robust? The answer is that prior to its civil war, Syria was exhibiting only pseudo-stability, its calm façade concealing deep structural vulnerabilities. Lebanon's chaos, paradoxically, signaled strength. Fifteen years of civil war had served to decentralize the state and bring about a more balanced sectarian power-sharing structure. Along with Lebanon's small size as an administrative unit, these factors added to its durability. So did the country's free-market economy. In Syria, the ruling Baath Party sought to control economic variability, replacing the lively chaos of the ancestral souk with the top-down, Soviet-style structure of the office building. This rigidity made Syria (and the other Baathist state, Iraq) much more vulnerable to disruption than Lebanon.[...]


    The divergent tales of Syria and Lebanon demonstrate that the best early warning signs of instability are found not in historical data but in underlying structural properties. Past experience can be extremely effective when it comes to detecting risks of cancer, crime, and earthquakes. But it is a bad bellwether of complex political and economic events, particularly so-called tail risks-events, such as coups and financial crises, that are highly unlikely but enormously consequential. For those, the evidence of risk comes too late to do anything about it, and a more sophisticated approach is required.

    [...]

    Simply put, fragility is aversion to disorder. Things that are fragile do not like variability, volatility, stress, chaos, and random events, which cause them to either gain little or suffer. A teacup, for example, will not benefit from any form of shock. It wants peace and predictability, something that is not possible in the long run, which is why time is an enemy to the fragile. What's more, things that are fragile respond to shock in a nonlinear fashion. With humans, for example, the harm from a ten-foot fall in no way equals ten times as much harm as from a one-foot fall. In political and economic terms, a $30 drop in the price of a barrel of oil is much more than twice as harmful to Saudi Arabia as a $15 drop.

    THE CENTER CANNOT HOLD

    The first marker of a fragile state is a concentrated decision-making system.funds, at the price of increasing systemic risks, such as disastrous national-level reforms.

    This Administration has acted recklessly without care or consideration of the dire consequences of the United States attack on Syria
    A Russian build military base being used to attack urban areas is not "Syria"

    Assad and those around him hold concentrated centralised power and are already proven to be incredibly stupid, that is why he is in this position-- he thought the people loved him, put up the price of basic commodities and the rebellion started. Assad perhaps believes the US is scared to get involved in Syria or to to cross the Russians . It seems silly but he and his advisors have a proven record of catastrophic misjudgements . Bringing in the Russians meant the US would be involved.

    I dare say the US has more advanced facilities for gathering intelligence it lets on about and than Syria, Russia or US media know about. Providing "evidence" gives away the hole card one might come in handy if the nuclear balloon starts going goes well and truly up. Any price would be worth paying for knowing Russia's intent. If people doubt Trump over this (and he warned the Russian it was going to be done so he didn't seek confrontation) it is the unfortunate price of maintaining secret intelligence facilities.


    The Trump Administration is threatening to do more to remove Bashar al-Assad and every American should accept that the inhabitant of the White House, when he is actually in residence, will discover like many before him that war is good business. He will continue to ride the wave of jingoism that has turned out to be his salvation, reversing to an extent the negative publicity that has dogged the new administration.
    For a great power seeing its rival use military force to crush a rebellion it has expressed sympathy is quite definitely a real defeat . It's a zero sum game for America and Russia (yes Russia is Jingoistic, and I think it is more centralised in decision making ) . The Russians took advantage of US passivity under Obama, and they were exultant at the way the US stood and watched, while Russia made all the successful initiatives, but really they couldn't be allowed to have it their own way any longer, for what they would have done next can be assumed to have been frightening to Europe. You have no idea what you're talking about. You don't source your quotes, and you're ideologically driven by a form of crypto anti-socialism revealed in you're basic premise that centralized planning created the vulnerability that brought down Saddam and now threatens Assad.

    Nonsense. What threatens all of the Mideast - what brought down Saddam, Gaddafi, and now threatens Assad - is US/Zionist covert and overt political and military violence. Dick Cheney turned the US Govt over to Israeli neocon subversion, resulting in Zionist control of US foreign policy and its conversion into a foreign policy in service to Israel: the implementation of the 7-country, Oded Yinon regime change program.

    The US has been turned into Israel's bjtch, its treasury looted, the lives of US miltary personnel sacrificed to benefit the Zionist criminal project. And you, are either a fool or an Israeli propagandist.

    Agree: Z-man
    Sean , April 18, 2017 at 6:49 pm GMT \n
    @The Alarmist
    "The Russians took advantage of US passivity under Obama, and they were exultant at the way the US stood and watched, while Russia made all the successful initiatives, but really they couldn't be allowed to have it their own way any longer, for what they would have done next can be assumed to have been frightening to Europe."
    Wow, we must have been observing two different worlds, because Russian actions in several theatres (Syria, Ukraine, Korea, ROW) have been relatively restrained to non-existent despite clear threats to their national interests, while the US has ratcheted up it military intervention pretty much globally over the same period. Then again, I live outside the US and am not blanketed with the propaganda that spills out of its MSM house organs, so we have indeed observed two different worlds. http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/08/politics/marines-raqqa-assault-syria/

    Trump didn't wait for the gas attack, he was already laying the ground for getting involved in Syria, which is not a vital interest of Russia. Russians want to do stuff like support Assad and crush rebels the US has expressed sympathy for. they surely didn't expect to be left alone.

    bike-anarchist , April 18, 2017 at 7:04 pm GMT \n
    @utu It's not about proving things. It is about narrative control. However you look at it Russia (and Assad) lost the narrative. One amateurish report by retired professor from MIT that bases his finding on just one picture won't change it. Still it is this report that Russia's media like RT and Sputnik are citing instead of coming up with their own genuine stuff. One would think they have means, right? After all there are FSB, GRU, Assad's intelligence, assets on the ground in Syria, intercepted communications between Al Qaeda and their handlers. And Russian media can't come up with a good story and relies on 71 years old former MIT professor report. So what's going on there? Don't they want to win? Are they being sabotaged by inept and indolent staff? Or is Russia's fight in the Middle East just a make belief? Hey, Our American Partners, how much will you pay us for playing bad guys? And for being stupid guys you pay extra, right? Your comment reminds me of a conversation I had with a fence post. At least I found the the fence post truthful, unlike you. I can't imagine you to be able to make humanitarian decisions based on your impatience and impudence. Read More
    Z-man , April 18, 2017 at 7:12 pm GMT \n
    • 100 Words @Jeff Davis You have no idea what you're talking about. You don't source your quotes, and you're ideologically driven by a form of crypto anti-socialism revealed in you're basic premise that centralized planning created the vulnerability that brought down Saddam and now threatens Assad.

    Nonsense. What threatens all of the Mideast -- what brought down Saddam, Gaddafi, and now threatens Assad -- is US/Zionist covert and overt political and military violence. Dick Cheney turned the US Govt over to Israeli neocon subversion, resulting in Zionist control of US foreign policy and its conversion into a foreign policy in service to Israel: the implementation of the 7-country, Oded Yinon regime change program.

    The US has been turned into Israel's bjtch, its treasury looted, the lives of US miltary personnel sacrificed to benefit the Zionist criminal project. And you,... are either a fool or an Israeli propagandist.

    What threatens all of the Mideast - what brought down Saddam, Gaddafi, and now threatens Assad - is US/Zionist covert and overt political and military violence. Dick Cheney turned the US Govt over to Israeli neocon subversion, resulting in Zionist control of US foreign policy and its conversion into a foreign policy in service to Israel: the implementation of the 7-country, Oded Yinon regime change program.
    The US has been turned into Israel's bjtch, its treasury looted, the lives of US miltary personnel sacrificed to benefit the Zionist criminal project.

    Bares repeating.

    utu , April 18, 2017 at 7:18 pm GMT \n
    @bike-anarchist Your comment reminds me of a conversation I had with a fence post. At least I found the the fence post truthful, unlike you. I can't imagine you to be able to make humanitarian decisions based on your impatience and impudence. You found it impudent for me calling Russian media and Russia's propaganda machine inept and indolent? You must be one of those who drank Putin's Kool-Aid and is now patiently awaiting his 2nd coming and saving us all from the grips of the NWO, right? Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    alexander , April 18, 2017 at 7:21 pm GMT \n
    Dear Mr. Giraldi,

    Not withstanding our Presidents "rush to judgement" tomahawk strike against the Assad regime last week, there should be very strong indications to our main stream media, that they are being abandoned by tens of millions of Americans across our country who no longer accept the medias willingness to defraud us ,at nearly every turn.

    I was an avid reader of the the NY Times, for over 25 years, and I watched the nightly news all the time.

    When we were all told by these media outlets in the run up to the Iraq war, that Saddam had launched an anthrax attack against our news rooms and our capitol I believed it completely 100%..without any reason in my own mind why I shouldn't .

    Once the war began, and the attribution to Saddam of the anthrax attack quickly collapsed , I felt defrauded by those who I had always trusted to be honest, most especially on issues of war and peace.

    In 2013,when the Ghouta Sarin attack was attributed to Assad by these very same pundits, the memory of the phony Saddam anthrax attribution reared its ugly head, and with good reason.

    If they were lying then why aren't they lying now ?

    I think our media has proven itself, scores of times, over the last fifteen years, to be, at best, disingenuous and at worst complicit in acts of war fraud and terror fraud which have taken the lives of millions of innocent people and cost our country tens of trillions of dollars.

    There is no reason why I , nor any American, should be happy about this.

    Whats worse is they have displayed such enormous contempt for all the tens of millions of innocent families who have suffered on account of their deceits that they have lost an overwhelming amount of respect from me,as well as, I imagine, countless others.

    Our Big Media can only cry "wolf" so many times before they are greeted by everyone with the middle finger.

    This reality will not go away, but only get worse, until they start to shoot straight, and have proven to their viewers, that they are not seeking to manipulate, or defraud us . into War.

    RobinG , April 18, 2017 at 7:25 pm GMT \n
    @iffen Not only that they recently illegally annexed a prized warm water port. Thanks, Wally.

    "iffen," the eff'n Israeli disinfo troll, is always trying to slip one in.

    Read More
    Biff , April 18, 2017 at 7:27 pm GMT \n
    With Trump's complete flip on foreign policy I'm starting to think(again) that U.S. Presidents are mere puppets for the real rulers of this world – who no doubt considered Obama to be just a corporate "house negro". Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
    Greg Bacon , • Website April 18, 2017 at 7:34 pm GMT \n
    • 100 Words President KUSHNER and his faithful toady Trump sure are busy these days. In between bites of chocolate cake, they are arming the terrorists and bombing Syrian civilians.

    Over 50 Civilians Killed, Injured in US-Led Coalition Airstrikes in Eastern Syria

    http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13960129000960

    US Continues to Airdrop More Aid Packages to ISIL Terrorists in Northwestern Iraq

    http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13960129000900

    There's one reason the USA is stuck in endless ME wars, with no end in sight. American troops are fighting and dying for Apartheid Israel, and our wealth is being spent on the same.

    When Syria is toast, the MSM will start attacking Iran, and they'll have plenty of friends who think the same way in the WH and Congress.

    Anon , April 18, 2017 at 7:41 pm GMT \n
    None of this would be an issue if the media did its job.

    But it doesn't.

    There is free media in the US, but Big Media is not free media. It is Bought Media and should be called as such.

    Brewer , April 18, 2017 at 8:16 pm GMT \n
    @DB Cooper This whole chemical weapon attack by Assad sounds fishy from the beginning. From what I read Assad is winning the civil war and things are turning for the better for him. What would he gain at this point to launch a chemical attack on the civilian populations? Things just doesn't add up. Check out this video:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1VNQGsiP8M&t=22s

    It is established that the White Helmets delivered their film to Al Jazeera before 8am. on the 4th of April (the day of the Syrian Airstrike which occurred between 11.30am. and 12.30pm. It is simply impossible, given the elevation of the sun shown in the video, for that film to have been made before 8am. on the 4th. This is irrefutable evidence that the filming was done no later than the day before the Syrian Government forces attacked.

    RobinG , April 18, 2017 at 8:32 pm GMT \n
    @Anon None of this would be an issue if the media did its job.

    But it doesn't.

    There is free media in the US, but Big Media is not free media. It is Bought Media and should be called as such. Right you are! The Big, Bought and Biased Media must be RELENTLESSLY exposed and discredited.

    Trump's airstrike was triggered by the latest Assad-Did-It-Again, "gassing his own people" story, that we first heard in 2013. Once again evidence is lacking, and worse, there is a total lack of interest in finding evidence, or in asking the obvious questions of motive, cui bono? In a replay of "Gulf of Tonkin," "WMDs in Iraq," and numerous other false provocations, the mainstream media has once again rushed to judgment with no penetrating questions asked.

    Since 2011, U.S. corporate media has acted as advocate for militant factions. Rather than reporting events as they occurred, our "journalists" have repeated stories selected by anti-Assad "sources" such as the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, i.e. Rami Abdul Rahman. Yes, the SOHR is one guy, an ex-pat member of the so-called "Syrian opposition" who operates out of his house in Coventry, England.

    Orville H. Larson , April 18, 2017 at 8:33 pm GMT \n
    @anonymous It certainly appears to have been a manufactured event. The media was ready and swung into action immediately with pictures and a noisy campaign that the usual war-hawk politicians joined in with. The timing was just too good and seems to have been coordinated. Syria was bombed without bothering to investigate based on Trump's claim that the evidence was ironclad. Did people like McMaster think it was real and report it to Trump as such? Did Trump believe it? Or did they know it was fake but pretended otherwise? Were they in on it from the beginning or were they forced to play along? Trump has quickly shifted into being an establishment politician whose rhetoric has been bellicose and reckless.

    Next up, N Korea and then Iran?

    No matter how one votes they end up getting the same thing. It's very disheartening. " . . . Trump has quickly shifted into being an establishment politician whose rhetoric has been bellicose and reckless. . . ."

    Yeah, it looks like it.

    I voted for Trump mainly for foreign policy reasons. I assumed–I hoped!–that Trump would be better than Our Lady of the Pantsuits, that Israel-controlled, neocon hack. Maybe the difference is this: With Clinton, the ICBMs would have been flying by now, but with Trump, it'll take a bit longer. . . .

    anon , April 18, 2017 at 8:59 pm GMT \n
    How does the lie work? It survives . It always survives . King is dead! Long live the king! It come back. People ignore when they find it out . Same propel tweak the margins and support the new version to build another lie.

    That's why we hear that "Saddam did not have nukes but they found weapons they found this they found that they found gas chemical"

    I tell them " that is none of your and this Gov's Freaking business"

    Now these guys are busy saying "Assad sent refugees he doesn't want this or that or he poured chem s or make attack it possible"

    Mu answer is usually this " The Gov can go to war tomorrow because r the sky was not blue above the desert of Iran proving they are not compliant and is busy destroying the climate . You will accept that logic as well or shrug it off but will vote him or his surrogate next time "

    unseated , April 18, 2017 at 9:07 pm GMT \n
    @Philip Giraldi Kilcullen is well compensated by those who support the Establishment narrative on Syria and everywhere else in the Middle East so he does indeed have an agenda.

    Most intel and military types that I have spoken to agree that after the retaking of Aleppo al-Assad is winning and will eventually win.

    Did he nevertheless stage the chemical attack on Idbil? I don't know. Let's see the evidence. Somebody obviously knows that happened. I assume that someone called "Wizard of Oz" might, like myself, be a resident of Australia.

    What is surprising, then, is that he/she gives any credibility to a Murdoch rag and the Australian at that. Its political positions with respect to the Middle East in particular are well known. Read More

    SolontoCroesus , April 18, 2017 at 9:19 pm GMT \n
    @utu It's not about proving things. It is about narrative control. However you look at it Russia (and Assad) lost the narrative. One amateurish report by retired professor from MIT that bases his finding on just one picture won't change it. Still it is this report that Russia's media like RT and Sputnik are citing instead of coming up with their own genuine stuff. One would think they have means, right? After all there are FSB, GRU, Assad's intelligence, assets on the ground in Syria, intercepted communications between Al Qaeda and their handlers. And Russian media can't come up with a good story and relies on 71 years old former MIT professor report. So what's going on there? Don't they want to win? Are they being sabotaged by inept and indolent staff? Or is Russia's fight in the Middle East just a make belief? Hey, Our American Partners, how much will you pay us for playing bad guys? And for being stupid guys you pay extra, right?

    One amateurish report by retired professor from MIT that bases his finding on just one picture won't change it. Still it is this report that Russia's media like RT and Sputnik are citing instead of coming up with their own genuine stuff.

    According to newly minted director of CIA, that organization and the entire "intelligence community" relied on the "reality" of those photos, in addition to other things that "can't be revealed right now, maybe later."

    Maybe it will be revealed after Assad is safely dead or in exile in Moscow what the CIA's can't be revealed methods were.

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    alexander , April 18, 2017 at 9:34 pm GMT \n
    • 100 Words @Brewer It is established that the White Helmets delivered their film to Al Jazeera before 8am. on the 4th of April (the day of the Syrian Airstrike which occurred between 11.30am. and 12.30pm. It is simply impossible, given the elevation of the sun shown in the video, for that film to have been made before 8am. on the 4th. This is irrefutable evidence that the filming was done no later than the day before the Syrian Government forces attacked. Hi Brewer,

    Is there a link to the video ?

    Moreover, if what you are saying is true, then it would seem to indicate the White Helmets, as well as ISIS were leaked information as to the time of the Syrian strike so as to stage the chemical event well beforehand.

    This means there is a big leak in the shared information between the White House and Moscow.

    My understanding is Moscow shared advanced warning of the Syrian strike with D.C., as part of their non confrontation agreement. Somebody leaked that information to ISIS and Al Qaeda .I wonder who ? How else could ISIS obtain advanced knowledge about exactly when to plant their gas canister and stage the gas attack ?

    Incitatus , April 18, 2017 at 9:39 pm GMT \n
    It should surprise none that Syria is simply a redux of Iraq 2002-03, minus Ahmed Chalabi or a reasonable facsimile. A "slam dunk." It worked then. The media loved it. All the players got to write memoirs and collect royalties on the same bogus narrative. OK, it was widened a bit to include how everyone, absolutely everyone had no doubt about the 'intelligence' and WMDs. Honest.

    GW Bush even did a clever PowerPoint mime for the Radio & Television Correspondent's Association Dinner 24 March 2004 in which he said "Those weapons of mass destruction must be somewhere! Nope, no weapons over there! Maybe under here?" while pretending to look for WMD under his desk. Few (if any) objected. That's when it was pretty clear the soul of the press, if not the Republic, was dead.

    The media loves it now. Easy stories – sensational, complete with dead infant/kiddy pics. Second only to porn. Better in a way, because you can inject moral indignation into the byline. Remember the Sabah's hawking 312 dead babies removed from incubators by Saddam in Kuwait in '90? Worked then too. No need to look further.

    Our Administration(s) insists Assad 'must go' without considering what will follow. It champions 'moderate rebels', despite their kinship to the most extreme barbarism. If Iraq 2003 was bad, this is even worse. We don't even bother to suggest reasonable succession or a viable alternative future. Too much effort?

    True corruption. There are no excuses.

    Did it all start with Truman's National Security Act of '47, which codified the CIA and changed the "Department of War' to the 'Department of Defense'?. We've waged war (clandestine and overt) ever since. If only for honesty, it should be changed back to' Department of War.'

    Rurik , April 18, 2017 at 10:23 pm GMT \n
    • 200 Words @Orville H. Larson " . . . Trump has quickly shifted into being an establishment politician whose rhetoric has been bellicose and reckless. . . ."

    Yeah, it looks like it.

    I voted for Trump mainly for foreign policy reasons. I assumed--I hoped!--that Trump would be better than Our Lady of the Pantsuits, that Israel-controlled, neocon hack. Maybe the difference is this: With Clinton, the ICBMs would have been flying by now, but with Trump, it'll take a bit longer. . . .

    With Clinton, the ICBMs would have been flying by now, but with Trump, it'll take a bit longer. .

    Israel has a well known deterrent referred to as the 'Samson option'.

    I think it would be prudent, and I hope that the sane world has already made those in a position to force a major war between the zio-West vs. Russia (for instance)..

    .. that the first place to get glassed will be that shitty little country- as a kind of reverse Samson option

    I would like to hope that even now, all sane nations.. (Russia, China, India, Pakistan, et al) who have nukes, have them all trained at ground zero (T.A.) for the strife in the world.

    and I suppose to be effective, they'd have to be aimed at some of the snake pits in the Western world as well- I really don't think Rothschild, (Soros, Kristol, etc..) would care too much if most of Israel proper were glowing, so long as they and the diaspora would be able to take control of what ever was left after the fallout dispersed.

    the Fiend needs to know that he'd get it first, and there would be the peace

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn6Cf30HgNI

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    Rurik , April 18, 2017 at 10:43 pm GMT \n
    @Incitatus It should surprise none that Syria is simply a redux of Iraq 2002-03, minus Ahmed Chalabi or a reasonable facsimile. A "slam dunk." It worked then. The media loved it. All the players got to write memoirs and collect royalties on the same bogus narrative. OK, it was widened a bit to include how everyone, absolutely everyone had no doubt about the 'intelligence' and WMDs. Honest.

    GW Bush even did a clever PowerPoint mime for the Radio & Television Correspondent's Association Dinner 24 March 2004 in which he said "Those weapons of mass destruction must be somewhere!...Nope, no weapons over there!...Maybe under here?" while pretending to look for WMD under his desk. Few (if any) objected. That's when it was pretty clear the soul of the press, if not the Republic, was dead.

    The media loves it now. Easy stories - sensational, complete with dead infant/kiddy pics. Second only to porn. Better in a way, because you can inject moral indignation into the byline. Remember the Sabah's hawking 312 dead babies removed from incubators by Saddam in Kuwait in '90? Worked then too. No need to look further.

    Our Administration(s) insists Assad 'must go' without considering what will follow. It champions 'moderate rebels', despite their kinship to the most extreme barbarism. If Iraq 2003 was bad, this is even worse. We don't even bother to suggest reasonable succession or a viable alternative future. Too much effort?

    True corruption. There are no excuses.

    Did it all start with Truman's National Security Act of '47, which codified the CIA and changed the "Department of War' to the 'Department of Defense'?. We've waged war (clandestine and overt) ever since. If only for honesty, it should be changed back to' Department of War.'

    Our Administration(s) insists Assad 'must go' without considering what will follow.

    that's not specifically true. They've come right out and said they prefer Al Nursa and the cannibals and crucifying head slicers to a stable government with a viable middle class.

    "We always wanted Bashar Assad to go, we always preferred the bad guys who weren't backed by Iran to the bad guys who were backed by Iran,"

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-syria-crisis-israel-idUSBRE98G0DR20130917

    Israel wants in Syria what it got in Iraq and Libya.. a complete dystopian hell on earth. Old Testament vengeance and unimaginable suffering. It is written.

    They literally thrive on that shit

    Did it all start with Truman's National Security Act of '47

    nope

    it started in earnest with the Balfour Declaration and Wilson's war. A hundred years ago exactly to the day from Trump's attack on Syria.

    The attack on Syria on that notorious anniversary was sort of like a modern day Passover, when the kings of Europe slaughtered the new born of Europa, and the chosen were blessed with a country of their own out of the smoking ashes of Christendom

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    Bill , April 18, 2017 at 10:45 pm GMT \n
    • 100 Words @iffen always trying to slip one in

    Thanks to you RobinG I get a White House propaganda blurb "slipped" into my email every day or so. The decent thing for you to have done would have been to warn me not to use my actual email address.

    BTW. the commies have been trying to get a warm water port since the beginning of the Cold War.

    Pretty sure the Commies had Sevastopol at the start of the Cold War and all the way through it. Sevastopol doesn't really count as a warm water port in the way you mean since you have to go through two straits controlled by NATO before you are in the real ocean.

    [Apr 18, 2017] NSC has been filled with McMaster loyalists aka Neocon preemptive strikers

    Apr 18, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    XXX

    Ok, dunno the official Naked Capitalism stance on Mike Cernovich. So if all links to him are verboten, no probs . (from April 8)

    Given that above link citing a McMaster aide, throwing out this Cernovich article on his observation on how the NSC has been filled w/McMaster loyalists (aka Neocon/preemptive-strikers) versus the Flynn/Bannon camp (aka pragmatic-realists).

    https://medium.com/@Cernovich/h-r-mcmaster-manipulating-intelligence-reports-to-trump-wants-150-000-ground-soldiers-in-syria-83346c433e99

    "Petraeus' influence in the NSC remains strong.

    McMaster was called Petraeus' golden child by some commenters, noting the strong influence Petraeus had over McMaster. Petraeus was considered for the position of NSA, but withdrew his name from consideration once McMaster's name was included on the short-list. McMaster's appointment allowed Petraeus to maintain control over the NSC without bringing his considerable baggage to the position ."

    fresno dan , April 17, 2017 at 9:33 am

    oho
    April 17, 2017 at 9:00 am

    oho, I used to look at a lot of right wing stuff and be very skeptical of it. Than my skepticism of "mainstream" has gone up to be equivalent to my skepticism of the right wing stuff.
    You just have to read the stuff and decide for yourself if it is credible AND relevant. I have found very few "reporters" really are even trying to be objective. I carry no water for Trump or for Obama – its a very lonely place other than at NC .

    EXAMPLE: Napolitano of Fox is suspended because of the article about Obama admin using foreign intelligence sources.

    Now the mediamatters article I link below is critical of Napolitano. I link to it specifically to distinguish between facts in an article and spin. In my view the article is trying to "spin" (or emphasize – I'm really not trying to "spin" my comment) the story as to it being about discredited "wiretapping" and that foreign surveillance was specifically ORDERED by the Obama admin – now, I AGREE that is a very, very important point that Obama did not order specifically foreign searches (at least that we know of now) and that as far as that is concerned, the mediamatters point appears CORRECT.

    But in my view, it is NOT THE ONLY POINT. The real point to me is that surveillance on US citizens can occur without a warrant when it happens overseas, that this is happening constantly, and apparently this information can come back to the US, again, apparently without any safegrards***. I leave it to people's own sense of skepticism if this arrangement is ever used to circumvent getting a warrant on a US citizen (HECK, I leave it to people's skepticism if the FISA court is nothing but a circumlocution of the US constitution)
    The FACT is that there are FACTS out there, and certain people have FACTS they want to emphasize, and other FACTS they want to de-emphasize ..

    https://mediamatters.org/research/2017/04/14/pro-trump-outlets-and-fake-news-purveyors-misinterpret-new-reports-vindicate-foxs-napolitano/216031

    ***does anyone know when the British have surveillance of US citizens and they send it to the US, what procedures or constraints on those conversations are???

    dontknowitall , April 17, 2017 at 12:17 pm

    I believe the controlling law is section 702 of the Patriot Act and Executive Order 16333. To be sure you should check out Emptywheel's website because she has done a thorough analysis of all of this and it is all archived in her website.

    a different chris , April 17, 2017 at 9:35 am

    Petraeus for President 2024! Seriously, you know it's coming. :p

    Pat , April 17, 2017 at 10:51 am

    Unfortunately you are probably right. And a certain portion of the so-called liberal intelligentsia aka Clinton wing I am exposed to, loves them some General Petraeus. Scary, I know.

    Susan the other , April 17, 2017 at 11:41 am

    Chernovich is considered by NC to be a very reliable source, I think. And his analysis of McMaster's push for more troops is accurate. I didn't like the article because I felt it failed to account for the difference in Mattis and McMaster in any coherent way. And Trump just gave the Pentagon the ability to make its best decisions and follow through on them. (this was reported after Chernovich's article). Amazing really. But that puts Mattis in charge and he would rather work with the other interests fighting in Syria than unilaterally. McMaster, it was implied by Chernovich, was all for sending 150,000 troops in to finish the job. So there is a huge leeway of possibilities according to Chernovich. Maybe the military is softening up the public to accept what seems to be an attitude of having had enough and wanting to just go in and take care of business. They all seem to agree on that.

    Susan the other , April 17, 2017 at 11:54 am

    Also today's link from Reuters re McMaster getting down to business with Russia. McMaster wants to have the tough talks to sort it all out. Because "Syria's government has got to go." OK, and McMaster thought Tillerson's trip to Moscow and his meeting with Lavrov was a good start because relations are so bad right now that there's "nowhere to go but up." I think my compass is pointing to an agreement with the Russians to remove Assad. But they will never say it. If I were Assad, I'd want to get out – Syria is rubble, there's not much left to govern; even if his enemies would leave him alone. They're all just positioning themselves for the best deal they can get. And the threat of 150K troops on the ground is saying loud and clear that we will be the ones to decide the new direction for Syria. To my thinking.

    tgs , April 17, 2017 at 1:07 pm

    You may be right. But that will be the end of Syria. The country is still filled with foreign backed jihadis who really want to establish an islamic state. The US may think it can take someone currently residing in France or the US and install them. But there is no one available with any popular support that I know of. Things almost definitely will get worse for Syria – the carnage will continue.

    And Putin must realize that those insisting that Assad must go also want Putin out as well. Surely, he sees that he has to draw a line somewhere.

    Susan the other , April 17, 2017 at 2:06 pm

    maybe, but I've come to suspect that we like and want Putin there, but we don't want Russian nationalists to know it it's so convoluted you can almost read anything into it so the best way to grok it is to imagine the most useful and beneficial solutions. Which are few.

    Mark P. , April 17, 2017 at 3:00 pm

    In 2017 Putin has become the reliable constant in international affairs, especially next to the idiots who've been doing U.S. foreign policy.

    People will miss him when he's gone.

    Olga , April 17, 2017 at 4:43 pm

    IMHO, you could not be more wrong. Russians went into Syria in Sept. 2015 – after notifying the whole world via a UN speech. The decision must have taken months to complete. What makes you think that after all the work and effort this took, Russians would suddenly reverse course? If they were to give up on Assad so quickly, why go in in the first place? Remember – they have a VERY LONG-TERM VIEW (just like the Chinese). The problem with demonising Assad (and anyone, for that matter) is that the US public ends up with a totally unrealistic view of the subject at hand (and not just a negative one). Just like with Putin – the story is not just about one man. There is a large power structure connected to each man. Neither one makes decisions in a vacuum. Russians and Iranians understand that if they give up on a unified Syria- which is what Assad represents – they would be next (Chechnya war, anyone?). One must assess these things from the perspective of the other – not from what the US would like.

    anonymous , April 17, 2017 at 9:32 pm

    Isn't the greater Damascus area relatively unscathed? Granted other vast areas are in ruins

    Christopher Fay , April 17, 2017 at 6:32 pm

    The army is scattered to the four winds. Can McMaster render up 150,000 soldiers? 150 k means 450,000. one third in the field, one third recovering, and one third on stand by according to the Shinseki ratio.

    [Apr 18, 2017] NSC has been filled w/McMaster loyalists aka Neocon/preemptive-strikers versus the Flynn/Bannon camp aka pragmatic-realists

    Notable quotes:
    "... Given that above link citing a McMaster aide, throwing out this Cernovich article on his observation on how the NSC has been filled w/McMaster loyalists (aka Neocon/preemptive-strikers) versus the Flynn/Bannon camp (aka pragmatic-realists). ..."
    "... "Petraeus' influence in the NSC remains strong. McMaster was called Petraeus' golden child by some commenters, noting the strong influence Petraeus had over McMaster. Petraeus was considered for the position of NSA, but withdrew his name from consideration once McMaster's name was included on the short-list. McMaster's appointment allowed Petraeus to maintain control over the NSC without bringing his considerable baggage to the position . ..."
    "... maybe, but I've come to suspect that we like and want Putin there, but we don't want Russian nationalists to know it. It's so convoluted you can almost read anything into it so the best way to grok it is to imagine the most useful and beneficial solutions. Which are few. ..."
    "... In 2017 Putin has become the reliable constant in international affairs, especially next to the idiots who've been doing U.S. foreign policy. People will miss him when he's gone. ..."
    "... The problem with demonising Assad (and anyone, for that matter) is that the US public ends up with a totally unrealistic view of the subject at hand (and not just a negative one). Just like with Putin – the story is not just about one man. ..."
    "... The army is scattered to the four winds. Can McMaster render up 150,000 soldiers? 150k means 450,000. one third in the field, one third recovering, and one third on stand by according to the Shinseki ratio. ..."
    Apr 18, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    Ok, dunno the official Naked Capitalism stance on Mike Cernovich. So if all links to him are verboten, no probs . (from April 8)

    Given that above link citing a McMaster aide, throwing out this Cernovich article on his observation on how the NSC has been filled w/McMaster loyalists (aka Neocon/preemptive-strikers) versus the Flynn/Bannon camp (aka pragmatic-realists).

    https://medium.com/@Cernovich/h-r-mcmaster-manipulating-intelligence-reports-to-trump-wants-150-000-ground-soldiers-in-syria-83346c433e99

    "Petraeus' influence in the NSC remains strong. McMaster was called Petraeus' golden child by some commenters, noting the strong influence Petraeus had over McMaster. Petraeus was considered for the position of NSA, but withdrew his name from consideration once McMaster's name was included on the short-list. McMaster's appointment allowed Petraeus to maintain control over the NSC without bringing his considerable baggage to the position ."

    fresno dan , April 17, 2017 at 9:33 am

    @oho April 17, 2017 at 9:00 am

    oho, I used to look at a lot of right wing stuff and be very skeptical of it. Than my skepticism of "mainstream" has gone up to be equivalent to my skepticism of the right wing stuff.
    You just have to read the stuff and decide for yourself if it is credible AND relevant. I have found very few "reporters" really are even trying to be objective. I carry no water for Trump or for Obama – its a very lonely place other than at NC .

    EXAMPLE: Napolitano of Fox is suspended because of the article about Obama admin using foreign intelligence sources.

    Now the mediamatters article I link below is critical of Napolitano. I link to it specifically to distinguish between facts in an article and spin. In my view the article is trying to "spin" (or emphasize – I'm really not trying to "spin" my comment) the story as to it being about discredited "wiretapping" and that foreign surveillance was specifically ORDERED by the Obama admin – now, I AGREE that is a very, very important point that Obama did not order specifically foreign searches (at least that we know of now) and that as far as that is concerned, the mediamatters point appears CORRECT.

    But in my view, it is NOT THE ONLY POINT. The real point to me is that surveillance on US citizens can occur without a warrant when it happens overseas, that this is happening constantly, and apparently this information can come back to the US, again, apparently without any safegrards***. I leave it to people's own sense of skepticism if this arrangement is ever used to circumvent getting a warrant on a US citizen (HECK, I leave it to people's skepticism if the FISA court is nothing but a circumlocution of the US constitution)
    The FACT is that there are FACTS out there, and certain people have FACTS they want to emphasize, and other FACTS they want to de-emphasize ..

    https://mediamatters.org/research/2017/04/14/pro-trump-outlets-and-fake-news-purveyors-misinterpret-new-reports-vindicate-foxs-napolitano/216031

    ***does anyone know when the British have surveillance of US citizens and they send it to the US, what procedures or constraints on those conversations are???

    dontknowitall , April 17, 2017 at 12:17 pm

    I believe the controlling law is section 702 of the Patriot Act and Executive Order 16333. To be sure you should check out Emptywheel's website because she has done a thorough analysis of all of this and it is all archived in her website.

    a different chris , April 17, 2017 at 9:35 am

    Petraeus for President 2024! Seriously, you know it's coming. :p

    Pat , April 17, 2017 at 10:51 am

    Unfortunately you are probably right. And a certain portion of the so-called liberal intelligentsia aka Clinton wing I am exposed to, loves them some General Petraeus. Scary, I know.

    Susan the other , April 17, 2017 at 11:41 am

    Chernovich is considered by NC to be a very reliable source, I think. And his analysis of McMaster's push for more troops is accurate. I didn't like the article because I felt it failed to account for the difference in Mattis and McMaster in any coherent way. And Trump just gave the Pentagon the ability to make its best decisions and follow through on them. (this was reported after Chernovich's article). Amazing really. But that puts Mattis in charge and he would rather work with the other interests fighting in Syria than unilaterally. McMaster, it was implied by Chernovich, was all for sending 150,000 troops in to finish the job. So there is a huge leeway of possibilities according to Chernovich. Maybe the military is softening up the public to accept what seems to be an attitude of having had enough and wanting to just go in and take care of business. They all seem to agree on that.

    Susan the other , April 17, 2017 at 11:54 am

    Also today's link from Reuters re McMaster getting down to business with Russia. McMaster wants to have the tough talks to sort it all out. Because "Syria's government has got to go." OK, and McMaster thought Tillerson's trip to Moscow and his meeting with Lavrov was a good start because relations are so bad right now that there's "nowhere to go but up." I think my compass is pointing to an agreement with the Russians to remove Assad. But they will never say it. If I were Assad, I'd want to get out – Syria is rubble, there's not much left to govern; even if his enemies would leave him alone. They're all just positioning themselves for the best deal they can get. And the threat of 150K troops on the ground is saying loud and clear that we will be the ones to decide the new direction for Syria. To my thinking.

    tgs , April 17, 2017 at 1:07 pm

    You may be right. But that will be the end of Syria. The country is still filled with foreign backed jihadis who really want to establish an islamic state. The US may think it can take someone currently residing in France or the US and install them. But there is no one available with any popular support that I know of. Things almost definitely will get worse for Syria – the carnage will continue.

    And Putin must realize that those insisting that Assad must go also want Putin out as well. Surely, he sees that he has to draw a line somewhere.

    Susan the other , April 17, 2017 at 2:06 pm

    maybe, but I've come to suspect that we like and want Putin there, but we don't want Russian nationalists to know it. It's so convoluted you can almost read anything into it so the best way to grok it is to imagine the most useful and beneficial solutions. Which are few.

    Mark P. , April 17, 2017 at 3:00 pm

    In 2017 Putin has become the reliable constant in international affairs, especially next to the idiots who've been doing U.S. foreign policy. People will miss him when he's gone.

    Olga , April 17, 2017 at 4:43 pm

    IMHO, you could not be more wrong. Russians went into Syria in Sept. 2015 – after notifying the whole world via a UN speech. The decision must have taken months to complete.

    What makes you think that after all the work and effort this took, Russians would suddenly reverse course? If they were to give up on Assad so quickly, why go in in the first place? Remember – they have a VERY LONG-TERM VIEW (just like the Chinese).

    The problem with demonising Assad (and anyone, for that matter) is that the US public ends up with a totally unrealistic view of the subject at hand (and not just a negative one). Just like with Putin – the story is not just about one man. There is a large power structure connected to each man. Neither one makes decisions in a vacuum. Russians and Iranians understand that if they give up on a unified Syria- which is what Assad represents – they would be next (Chechnya war, anyone?). One must assess these things from the perspective of the other – not from what the US would like.

    anonymous , April 17, 2017 at 9:32 pm

    Isn't the greater Damascus area relatively unscathed? Granted other vast areas are in ruins

    Christopher Fay , April 17, 2017 at 6:32 pm

    The army is scattered to the four winds. Can McMaster render up 150,000 soldiers? 150k means 450,000. one third in the field, one third recovering, and one third on stand by according to the Shinseki ratio.

    [Apr 18, 2017] Russian Defence Minsitry No one has asked for antidotes or medicines around location of alleged Idlib chemical attack

    Notable quotes:
    "... Thus far, the only video of the alleged attack's aftermath have been provided by the White Helmets, an organisation widely exposed as fraudulent , comprising known and open supporters of al-Qaeda factions in Syria. ..."
    "... "The impact zone in Khan Shaykhun, from where locals had to be evacuated, has not been identified. The town is living its life. Neither locals nor pseudo-rescuers have even asked for medicines, antidotes, (nor) decontaminants. ..."
    "... It is clear that, as in Iraq and Libya, there are simply no plans to carry out a qualified investigation in Khan Shaykhun by the current 'schemers' of the chemical attack". ..."
    Apr 18, 2017 | theduran.com
    A puzzling new development has emerged in the aftermath of the alleged chemical weapons incident in Syria's Idlib Governorate from the 4th of April.

    Since the incident, apparently no one in the Khan Shaykhun area in question has asked for any antidotes for exposure to toxic sarin gas, the chemical allegedly deployed on the 4th of April.

    Many have consequently questioned whether the images presented of sarin gas victims were entirely inauthentic.

    Thus far, the only video of the alleged attack's aftermath have been provided by the White Helmets, an organisation widely exposed as fraudulent , comprising known and open supporters of al-Qaeda factions in Syria.

    Russian Defence Ministry spokesman Major General Igor Konashenkov has described the rather strange and incongruous developments at the location of the alleged attack over the last weeks,

    "The impact zone in Khan Shaykhun, from where locals had to be evacuated, has not been identified. The town is living its life. Neither locals nor pseudo-rescuers have even asked for medicines, antidotes, (nor) decontaminants.

    It is clear that, as in Iraq and Libya, there are simply no plans to carry out a qualified investigation in Khan Shaykhun by the current 'schemers' of the chemical attack".

    Konashenkov continued,

    "It has been exactly two weeks after the incident with the alleged use of chemical weapons in Khan Shaykhun. However, the only 'proof' of the use of chemical weapons remain only two White Helmets videos".

    The Russian Defence Ministry spokesman also stated,

    "At the same time, every day the number of unbiased experts grows, especially in Western countries, who ask these evident questions. These specialists, who have the knowledge and experience, cannot explain how these representatives of the White Helmets could work in the contamination zone for so long remaining alive without any gas masks and special uniform".

    These revelations may indicated that the incident was more than even a false flag, it may have been a false attack in totality.

    [Apr 18, 2017] Attack Against Syria and the Region Speaking Up

    Apr 18, 2017 | www.informationclearinghouse.info
    By Andre Vltchek

    April 18, 2017 " Information Clearing House " - Beirut - As the US Tomahawk missiles were raining on Syria, the entire Middle East was shaken to its core. Here, even the name itself – Syria – triggers extremely complex and often contradictory sets of emotions. To some, Syria is synonymous with pride and a determined struggle against Western imperialism, while others see it as an uncomfortable reminder of how low their own rulers and societies have managed to sink, serving foreign interests and various neo-colonialist designs.

    Many people are hiding their heads in the sand, obediently repeating the official Western narrative, while others are gradually resorting to the alternative sources of information that are coming from outlets such as RT Arabic, Al-Mayadeen and Press TV.

    Here in the Middle East and, in fact, all over the entire Arab world, feelings towards the Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad are always 'strong'; no one appears to be 'neutral'. But even the divisions are often 'pre-defined', carved along pan-Arab versus pro-Western, or Sunni versus Shi'a lines. It is rarely being mentioned that the Syrian state is constructed mainly on secular and socialist principles.

    The recent opportunistic statements by certain badly informed and biased Western 'progressive' intellectuals, calling the Syrian system "disgraceful" has confused things even further.

    *****

    Overall, in the countries encircling Syria, there is very little support among the general population as well as among the intellectuals, for the Western assaults on the country, conducted directly, and indirectly by proxies. Pro-Western regimes and governments are currently governing Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey, and all of them are officially supporting the Western military actions. So is, naturally, Israel. The leaders of both Turkey and Israel would actually like to see more military actions, and more attacks against one of the last Arab countries, which is still upholds its independence.

    But ask the thinkers from all over the region, and the reaction is near unanimously against the assaults that are being conducted by the West.

    Ms Zeinab Al-Saffar (Photo: Andre Vltchek)

    An Iraqi educationalist, prominent journalist and researcher, Ms Zeinab Al-Saffar explained:

    I believe that the attacks against Syria that we are now witnessing, are a pre-orchestrated flagrant imperialist violation of a sovereign state, a flexing of muscles which is supposed to prove that the US is still the global power. Why on earth would the Syrian government perform a chemical attack knowing that the fingers would be immediately pointed at it, consequently thwarting an ongoing political process? Only fools could buy such narratives that are reminiscent of the 2003 US-led aggression to destroy the WMDs in Iraq, which only resulted in the devastation of Iraq, in the ruining of its people, and wiping out of its culture.

    After the US missile assault on Syria, the Bolivian Ambassador to the United Nations, Sacha Llorenti, lashed out at Trump's decision, which he defined as, "an extremely serious violation of international law."

    Llorenti reminded the Council of February 5th, 2003, when the then US secretary of State Colin Powell, "came to this room to present to us, according to his own words, convincing proof that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq."

    Incirlik NATO air base in Turkey near Syria (Photo: Andre Vltchek)

    Such views are not held in Iraq only; I encountered fairly similar logic and recollection of the events even in Turkey, from where a well-known columnist Feryal Çeviköz wrote to me:

    The real question is: "who orchestrated that chemical attack?" It seems that only the US could benefit from this chemical assault. The US had finally found the 'reason', the pretext for its direct attack against Syria. There were already many similar incidents in the region and in other parts of the world, and the screenplay is always the same. It seems that only the players, the actors keep changing.

    In Latin America, Russia, China, much of Africa and, of course, in the neighboring Iran, people are beginning to see clearly both the pattern and predictability of the Western foreign policy.

    A young prominent Iranian researcher, columnist and filmmaker, Hamed Ghashghavi, gave me his opinion on the recent developments:

    It seems to me that the US behaves like an injured wolf that is close to its death, but before vanishing is trying to hurt others. The more aggressively the US behaves, the closer, it appears to be at its end. The recent attack against Syria, whatever the reasons and consequences, has symbolically proven how and why the so-called US Empire is declining. What the US did is also sending a strong signal to Iran and its project of the military base near the Syrian town of Khmeimim, but it is also a message to an anti-Trump wing of neocons who have been accusing him of being too much 'pro-Putin' and 'pro-Assad'.

    What is now clearly detectable in the region is not just a condemnation of the US and Western actions, it is also a deep fatigue of having to endure the same type aggression which brings absolutely nothing except misery to the people of the Middle East and the world.

    In Syria, the sentiments are clear. My friend, a Syrian educator Ms. Fida Bashour summarized it all, I believe:

    I feel sad and worried. I want this war to finally stop, no blood any more, I want peace and to have my safe existence. I don't want others to interfere in our life. Why doesn't Trump let us live as we want to; why is he doing this to us?

    Andre Vltchek is a philosopher, novelist, filmmaker and investigative journalist. He has covered wars and conflicts in dozens of countries. Three of his latest books are revolutionary novel "Aurora" and two bestselling works of political non-fiction: " Exposing Lies Of The Empire " and " Fighting Against Western Imperialism " . View his other books here . Andre is making films for teleSUR and Al-Mayadeen. Watch Rwanda Gambit , his groundbreaking documentary about Rwanda and DRCongo. After having lived in Latin America, Africa and Oceania, Vltchek presently resides in East Asia and the Middle East, and continues to work around the world. He can be reached through his website and his Twitter .

    First published by NEO

    The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Information Clearing House.

    [Apr 18, 2017] Putin Syria Chemical Attack Was 'False Flag,' More 'Provocations' Coming

    Notable quotes:
    "... Independent ..."
    Apr 18, 2017 | www.breitbart.com
    At a Tuesday press conference, Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed last week's chemical weapons attack in the Idlib province of Syria was a "false flag" – a phony operation staged by enemies of Russia and Syria to discredit them. He said more such false flag operations were on the way.

    "We have reports from multiple sources that false flags like this one – and I cannot call it otherwise – are being prepared in other parts of Syria, including the southern suburbs of Damascus. They plan to plant some chemical there and accuse the Syrian government of an attack," said Putin, as reported by Russia's RT.com .

    "President Mattarella and I discussed it, and I told him that this reminds me strongly of the events in 2003, when the US representatives demonstrated at the UN Security Council session the presumed chemical weapons found in Iraq," Putin continued, referring to Italian President Sergio Mattarella, who appeared with him at the press conference in Moscow.

    "The military campaign was subsequently launched in Iraq and it ended with the devastation of the country, the growth of the terrorist threat and the appearance of Islamic State [IS, formerly ISIS] on the world stage," Putin declared.

    According to RT.com, the Russian General Staff has prepared a report that claims "militants" among the Syrian rebellion are "transporting toxic agents into several parts of Syria."

    "These actions are aimed at creating a new pretext for accusing the government of Syria of more chemical weapons attacks and provoking more strikes by the US," said Colonel-General Sergey Rudskoy, head of operations for the General Staff.

    The Associated Press reports that Russia's General Staff has expressed a willingness to allow international inspectors to examine the Sharyat airbase in Syria for traces of chemical weapons, and offered to provide military security for the inspectors. Putin said he would appeal to the United Nations to investigate the incident.

    The UK Independent reports that Putin more specifically accused the United States of planning to drop chemical weapons on Damascus and then blame the incident on Assad, although it does not provide a translation of the Russian president's precise words to that effect.

    On Monday, Russia and Iran declared the United States "crossed red lines" by attacking Sharyat airbase, borrowing a phrase made infamous by former President Barack Obama. U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has accused the Russians of either being "complicit" in the Syrian chemical weapons deployment, or "incompetent" for allowing it to happen. The Pentagon is investigating the possibility that Russia actually participated in the chemical weapons attack, and/or the bombing of a hospital where victims were receiving treatment afterward.

    [Apr 18, 2017] Apparently, we only care when "beautiful, beautiful babies" are killed.

    Notable quotes:
    "... Al-Qaeda Suicide Attack Kills 100+ Children, Women ..."
    "... An MoA commentor reports that the group Nour al Din al Zenki which is is financed, armed and promoted by NATO, is responsible for this latest atrocity in Syria. IOW, another NATO war crime. ..."
    "... Apparently, we only care when "beautiful, beautiful babies" are killed. Quick, do an air lift of American cosmetics so that we can extend our concern / sarc ..."
    Apr 18, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
    MoiAussie , April 17, 2017 at 7:57 am

    Al-Qaeda Suicide Attack Kills 100+ Children, Women

    An MoA commentor reports that the group Nour al Din al Zenki which is is financed, armed and promoted by NATO, is responsible for this latest atrocity in Syria. IOW, another NATO war crime.

    fresno dan , April 17, 2017 at 8:54 am

    MoiAussie
    April 17, 2017 at 7:57 am

    Apparently, we only care when "beautiful, beautiful babies" are killed. Quick, do an air lift of American cosmetics so that we can extend our concern / sarc

    mle detroit , April 17, 2017 at 9:31 am

    Good idea. But they gotta be cosmetics from Ivanka's brand.

    craazyboy , April 17, 2017 at 10:25 am

    They can get 'em on Overstock.com now! Just package 'em up on the pallets stacked with $100 bills and air drop them wherever we know there are friendly terrorists. It'll all work out. Helicopter money always does.

    [Apr 17, 2017] US Attack on Syria Cements Kremlins Embrace of Assad

    Apr 17, 2017 | www.nytimes.com

    By championing Mr. Assad and condemning American "aggression," President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia seemed to be burying the idea that he could somehow cooperate with the Trump administration to end the conflict on his terms.

    The solidarity with Damascus is likely to cause problems for Russia in the long run, analysts said, although Mr. Putin probably cannot be persuaded to loosen his embrace any time soon.

    The Russian government often takes its time to react to major world events, but the Kremlin issued a prompt statement early Friday castigating the United States for the missile strike on Al Shayrat airfield in retaliation for Syria's chemical weapons attack.

    The Russian Ministry of Defense vowed to strengthen Syria's air defense systems, sent a frigate on a port call and froze an agreement with the United States to coordinate activity in Syrian air space.

    [Apr 17, 2017] The pot calling the kettle black

    Notable quotes:
    "... As soon as I turned on a television here I wondered if I had arrived through an alt-right wormhole. ..."
    "... On the popular Russian television program "Vesti Nedeli," the host, Dmitry Kiselyov, questioned how Syria could have been responsible for the attack. After all, he said, the Assad government had destroyed all of its chemical weapons. It was the terrorists who possessed them, said Mr. Kiselyov, who also heads Russia's main state-run international media arm. ..."
    "... One of Mr. Kiselyov's correspondents on the scene mocked "Western propagandists" for believing the Trump line, saying munitions at the air base had "as much to do with chemical weapons as the test tube in the hands of Colin Powell had to do with weapons of mass destruction in Iraq." ..."
    "... RT, the Russian-financed English-language news service, initially translated Mr. Putin as calling it a "false flag. ..."
    "... As the pro-Kremlin newspaper Izvestia put it, "Apparently it was for good reason Donald Trump called unverified information in the mass media one of the main problems in the U.S." ..."
    "... The author asserts that those who questioned the Assad-did-it narrative were only on the alt-right "fringe". But this is absurd, as anyone who looks at a non-alt right site like https://consortiumnews.com/ can easily confirm. And of course a highly respected MIT scientist, Theodore Postol, has published not one but two notes effectively showing that the White House "Intelligence Report" about the incident was rubbish ("obviously false, misleading and amateurish") - but you are unlikely to read about this in the NYT. ..."
    "... The US media should have learned something about the Iraq war, but it still hasn't. It blindly supports every stupid foreign policy decision wrapped in humanitarian clothes while being unwilling to honestly tell the American people that its a proxy war where all the actors in it are evil. That no one knows for sure what happened because it wasn't investigated. The media in Russia may be a tool of the Kremlin but the US media is the tool of the war profiteers. There is no way to get around that no matter how Rutenberg tries to frame it around what he thinks is the correct opinion. ..."
    "... Israel wants the Syrian war to go on forever. The Saudi and Iranian proxies aren't saints. There are no good guys yet removing Assad is the preferred outcome for the US media. ..."
    "... The good thing about the US corporate media is that it is being put behind paywalls. I just use software to block these sites so I don't even bother wasting my time by clicking and then having to click back. I get "the line" from sources not behind a paywall. Only an idiot would pay to be lied to on behalf of groups that do not have the US interest at heart. ..."
    Apr 16, 2017 | www.nytimes.com

    From: A Lesson in Moscow About Trump-Style 'Alternative Truth' - The New York Times by Jim Rutenberg >

    Mr. Trump had just ordered a Tomahawk strike against Syria's Shayrat air base, from which, the United States said, President Bashar al-Assad of Syria had launched the chemical weapons attack that killed more than 80 and sickened hundreds.

    As soon as I turned on a television here I wondered if I had arrived through an alt-right wormhole.

    Back in the States, the prevailing notion in the news was that Mr. Assad had indeed been responsible for the chemical strike. There was some "reportage" from sources like the conspiracy theorist and radio host Alex Jones - best known for suggesting that the Sandy Hook school massacre was staged - that the chemical attack was a "false flag" operation by terrorist rebel groups to goad the United States into attacking Mr. Assad. But that was a view from the fringe.

    Here in Russia, it was the dominant theme throughout the overwhelmingly state-controlled mainstream media.

    On the popular Russian television program "Vesti Nedeli," the host, Dmitry Kiselyov, questioned how Syria could have been responsible for the attack. After all, he said, the Assad government had destroyed all of its chemical weapons. It was the terrorists who possessed them, said Mr. Kiselyov, who also heads Russia's main state-run international media arm.

    One of Mr. Kiselyov's correspondents on the scene mocked "Western propagandists" for believing the Trump line, saying munitions at the air base had "as much to do with chemical weapons as the test tube in the hands of Colin Powell had to do with weapons of mass destruction in Iraq."

    That teed up Mr. Putin to suggest in nationally televised comments a couple of days later that perhaps the attack was an intentional "provocation" by the rebels to goad the United States into attacking Mr. Assad. RT, the Russian-financed English-language news service, initially translated Mr. Putin as calling it a "false flag." The full Alex Jones was complete.

    When Trump administration officials tried to counter Russia's "false narratives" by releasing to reporters a declassified report detailing Syria's chemical weapons stockpiles - and suggesting to The Associated Press without proof that Russia knew of Mr. Assad's plans to use chemical weapons in advance - the Russians had a ready answer borrowed from Mr. Trump himself.

    As the pro-Kremlin newspaper Izvestia put it, "Apparently it was for good reason Donald Trump called unverified information in the mass media one of the main problems in the U.S."

    It was the best evidence I've seen of the folly of Mr. Trump's anti-press approach. You can't spend more than a year attacking the credibility of the "dishonest media" and then expect to use its journalism as support for your position during an international crisis - at least not with any success.

    While Mr. Trump and his supporters may think that undermining the news media serves their larger interests, in this great information war it serves Mr. Putin's interests more. It means playing on his turf, where he excels.

    Integral to Mr. Putin's governing style has been a pliant press that makes his government the main arbiter of truth.

    While talking to the beaten but unbowed members of the real journalism community here, I heard eerie hints of Trumpian proclamations in their war stories.

    Take Mr. Trump's implicit threat to the owner of The Washington Post, Jeff Bezos, during the election campaign. In case you've forgotten, while calling The Post's coverage of him "horrible and false," Mr. Trump warned that if he won the presidency Mr. Bezos's other business, Amazon, would have "such problems." (The Post was undaunted, and the issue hasn't come up again.)

    ... ... ...

    Alexandra Odynova contributed research.

    for-the-record , April 17, 2017 at 6:16 pm GMT \n
    300 Words Is this parody or for real? Everything he cites the Russian press as saying seems to me far more believable than the "alternative" version purveyed by the NYT and other such "respectable" sources.

    To put it mildly, anyone with half a brain would be willing to accept that it was far more likely that the alleged chemical attack was the work of the not-so-moderate rebels, rather than the Syrian Government which had nothing to gain, and everything to lose, from such an attack (assuming that it still had chemical weapons, which even the US previously admitted was no longer the case). That those fighting Assad do indeed possess stocks of chemical weapons is no secret. Regarding Isis, for example, you can learn from Newsweek today (April 17) via Yahoo News:

    ISIS Militants Launch Multiple Chemical Weapons Attacks On Iraqi Troops

    The author tells us that

    Back in the States, the prevailing notion in the news was that Mr. Assad had indeed been responsible for the chemical strike.

    Of course this was and is the prevailing view, a convincing testimony to the effect of the "fake news" that is reported as "fact" by the mainstream media.

    The author asserts that those who questioned the Assad-did-it narrative were only on the alt-right "fringe". But this is absurd, as anyone who looks at a non-alt right site like https://consortiumnews.com/ can easily confirm. And of course a highly respected MIT scientist, Theodore Postol, has published not one but two notes effectively showing that the White House "Intelligence Report" about the incident was rubbish ("obviously false, misleading and amateurish") - but you are unlikely to read about this in the NYT.

    I live outside the US and also have the time and energy to investigate alternative sources. What amazes and pains me is that many friends of mine (US, UK) have swallowed hook, line and sinker the official story, not only about this incident but the general story about what is going on in Syria (and elsewhere, notably vis-à-vis Russia).

    Altai , April 17, 2017 at 8:29 pm GMT \n
    400 Words @for-the-record Is this parody or for real? Everything he cites the Russian press as saying seems to me far more believable than the "alternative" version purveyed by the NYT and other such "respectable" sources.

    To put it mildly, anyone with half a brain would be willing to accept that it was far more likely that the alleged chemical attack was the work of the not-so-moderate rebels, rather than the Syrian Government which had nothing to gain, and everything to lose, from such an attack (assuming that it still had chemical weapons, which even the US previously admitted was no longer the case). That those fighting Assad do indeed possess stocks of chemical weapons is no secret. Regarding Isis, for example, you can learn from Newsweek today (April 17) via Yahoo News:


    ISIS Militants Launch Multiple Chemical Weapons Attacks On Iraqi Troops
    The author tells us that

    Back in the States, the prevailing notion in the news was that Mr. Assad had indeed been responsible for the chemical strike.
    Of course this was and is the prevailing view, a convincing testimony to the effect of the "fake news" that is reported as "fact" by the mainstream media.

    The author asserts that those who questioned the Assad-did-it narrative were only on the alt-right "fringe". But this is absurd, as anyone who looks at a non-alt right site like https://consortiumnews.com/ can easily confirm. And of course a highly respected MIT scientist, Theodore Postol, has published not one but two notes effectively showing that the White House "Intelligence Report" about the incident was rubbish ("obviously false, misleading and amateurish") -- but you are unlikely to read about this in the NYT.

    I live outside the US and also have the time and energy to investigate alternative sources. What amazes and pains me is that many friends of mine (US, UK) have swallowed hook, line and sinker the official story, not only about this incident but the general story about what is going on in Syria (and elsewhere, notably vis-à-vis Russia).

    many friends of mine (US, UK) have swallowed hook, line and sinker the official story, not only about this incident but the general story about what is going on in Syria (and elsewhere, notably vis-à-vis Russia).

    It's unreal to me after everything that has happened the last 15 years that anyone who lived through it could not have learned a thing. It seems to be getting more blatant too. Now the BBC is pushing neocon talking points harder than most US outlets.

    Don't ever trust a western news outlet whenever it goes on a months long crusade to 'expose' a certain regime that is alleged to be doing exactly what our 'allies' do and get no coverage about. I knew little about what was going on in Syria years ago but when the BBC started telling me how horrible 'barrel bombs' were over and over, night after night, making sure to mention Assad in every sentence, my bullshit detector sprang up and I looked at the alt media I trusted. (Which I trusted as taking the narrative from them I was able to better predict and understand the world and this simply can't be said for mainstream media)

    I know a guy who thinks of himself as worldly but reads WaPo and Der Speigel daily. He doesn't understand how I can't believe how good Obama handled the US economy and how low US unemployment is. Any attempt to explain that US unemployment numbers post-1994 are not what he thinks it is is met with a dismissive as though I am full of bullshit.

    I think it might also be generational. I grew up in my teens with Iraq and the explosion of alt middle east commentators and journalists who posted to the net what they'd never get cleared in the MSM. You know exactly the deal with everybody, the anti-war left, the 'alt-right', the counter jihadis and the important motivations and differences between them that colour their commentary on different events, but it still didn't change the fact that what they were posting was news and information that was being deliberately obscured. But for a lot of people in their 40s and older everything non-MSM looks like InfoWars and is scary.

    It must be scary to be plugged into the MSM today. A kind of learned helplessness like this.

    WorkingClass , April 17, 2017 at 9:28 pm GMT \n
    I know it's bullshit. I read it in the New York Times.

    The NYT is an enemy of the human race.

    Assad didn't do it. Just like he didn't do it last time. Just like he will not have done it next time.

    El Dato , April 17, 2017 at 10:19 pm GMT \n
    300 Words @Altai

    many friends of mine (US, UK) have swallowed hook, line and sinker the official story, not only about this incident but the general story about what is going on in Syria (and elsewhere, notably vis-à-vis Russia).
    It's unreal to me after everything that has happened the last 15 years that anyone who lived through it could not have learned a thing. It seems to be getting more blatant too. Now the BBC is pushing neocon talking points harder than most US outlets.

    Don't ever trust a western news outlet whenever it goes on a months long crusade to 'expose' a certain regime that is alleged to be doing exactly what our 'allies' do and get no coverage about. I knew little about what was going on in Syria years ago but when the BBC started telling me how horrible 'barrel bombs' were over and over, night after night, making sure to mention Assad in every sentence, my bullshit detector sprang up and I looked at the alt media I trusted. (Which I trusted as taking the narrative from them I was able to better predict and understand the world and this simply can't be said for mainstream media)

    I know a guy who thinks of himself as worldly but reads WaPo and Der Speigel daily. He doesn't understand how I can't believe how good Obama handled the US economy and how low US unemployment is. Any attempt to explain that US unemployment numbers post-1994 are not what he thinks it is is met with a dismissive as though I am full of bullshit.

    I think it might also be generational. I grew up in my teens with Iraq and the explosion of alt middle east commentators and journalists who posted to the net what they'd never get cleared in the MSM. You know exactly the deal with everybody, the anti-war left, the 'alt-right', the counter jihadis and the important motivations and differences between them that colour their commentary on different events, but it still didn't change the fact that what they were posting was news and information that was being deliberately obscured. But for a lot of people in their 40s and older everything non-MSM looks like InfoWars and is scary.

    It must be scary to be plugged into the MSM today. A kind of learned helplessness like this.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8moePxHpvok Nice short film. However, I cannot agree that people are in some kind of "oh dear" mindset. On the contrary, they are easily instrumented into supporting any random "something must be (militarily) done" call for action. Maybe a direct consequence of post-Gulf War 1 triumphalism, when the US was great again and apparently had left behind of trauma of Vietnam for good (that was an actual talking point, believe it or not!). With the Soviet Union no more, poised to rework the world in its own image, the US was!

    It all went south of course. We got the Yougoslavia catastrophe. Taking sides along with Europeans acting according to reflexes harking back to 1914 and dropping bombs didn't go all that well. When bombing started, Serbia was as MSM-tarred as Syria is today. We got 10 years of suppressing Mr. Hussein. Something was happening in Russia and maybe Chechnya and Georgia but no-one was all too certain what or why. We got the surprise Hutu-on-Tutsi massacre after which liberventionists were clamoring that "something should have been done". There was some "cruise missile diplomacy" (i.e. Clinton bombs Sudan). There were noises from Afghanistan with military commanders in particular Ahmad Shah Massoud fighting someone called "Taliban" but nobody cared about that. There was the marginally interesting Israel-Palestinian conflict with neverending talks and the Israelis starting to behave like jerks after the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin. We got first "hard" terrorism hits: A bombing in the WTC basement, a sarin gas attack in Tokyo, a diplomatic mission in Africa and of course the OKC bombing. Well, I guess those years of practically pre-Internet chaos were when "liberventionism" gelled.

    After the 9/11-Anthrax events it was of course full neocon time and everyone was on the same track for foreign land adventurism. By hook or by crook. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    Johnny F. Ive , April 17, 2017 at 11:13 pm GMT \n
    The US media should have learned something about the Iraq war, but it still hasn't. It blindly supports every stupid foreign policy decision wrapped in humanitarian clothes while being unwilling to honestly tell the American people that its a proxy war where all the actors in it are evil. That no one knows for sure what happened because it wasn't investigated. The media in Russia may be a tool of the Kremlin but the US media is the tool of the war profiteers. There is no way to get around that no matter how Rutenberg tries to frame it around what he thinks is the correct opinion.

    Also VIPS had American intelligence contacts in the Middle East who said the Syrians hit something that had chemicals in it. Everyone has their anonymous intelligence sources. Assad isn't going anywhere there could have been a proper investigation. The US media salivated at the bombing of Syria. The US media is the American Empire's id. It tells it to do stupid stuff that is going to get it killed. The US media loves to play nuclear chicken with Russia. I suppose psychopaths need a lot of stimulation and what could be more stimulating than a risk of nuclear war.

    If the US media was doing its job it would not just be after Trump's relationship with Russia. It would be after the whole American establishments cozy relationship with Israel and Saudi Arabia. They've turned the US into a banana empire. Of course the US media is tied to weapons producers and Israel gets a welfare check to buy American arms and Saudi Arabia buys American arms. Also Israel no matter what it does is protected because of guilt (which will be its undoing because its bad behavior is not being checked). If Russia bought American arms I bet the US media would love Putin. The US media then would take it upon themselves to support Putin against his enemies.

    Israel wants the Syrian war to go on forever. The Saudi and Iranian proxies aren't saints. There are no good guys yet removing Assad is the preferred outcome for the US media. Its irrational unless you realize who its working for. Its not the American people. Its not even working to keep the US Empire in a position of strength. It demands obedience to the whims of the Empire's global subjects and its domestic war industry. That is what this Russian crap was about Trump. Maybe they tried to interfere. People were going to vote the way they voted anyway because Trump struck an emotional cord with his larger than life personality and the Democrats conspired against the candidate that could have beaten him (Bernie) while making sure no one that could win would run for the Democrat nomination. Also the Israelis are right wing and they get away with stuff the Alt-right could never get away with in the US (and I hope wouldn't want to engage in). What they do to the Palestinians is straight out of Nazi Germany before the holocaust (which is coming for the Palestinians). They loved Trump and voted for him. US media doesn't make a big deal about this. Any reporter who did would risk losing their job.

    The good thing about the US corporate media is that it is being put behind paywalls. I just use software to block these sites so I don't even bother wasting my time by clicking and then having to click back. I get "the line" from sources not behind a paywall. Only an idiot would pay to be lied to on behalf of groups that do not have the US interest at heart. By being whores for war profiteers and their global allies the US media makes Russian government controlled media seem great in comparison. There is no reason why the US should be a whore for unsavory governments and organizations across the world. Its 20 trillion in debt and the US media uses verbal abuse and praise to manipulate the President into making war, while framing the war into simplistic and cartoonish terms. There are some that are extremely wealthy. The Europeans could handle their own security but manipulating the US to do it is easy because of the US media and easily malleable politicians.

    How about the US media find some poor defenseless country and harp up a war and bleed the US Empire dry of its wealth in a fruitless quagmire and call it a day? Some of us do have a self preservation instinct and fighting Russia for the mess in Syria is stupid. If it was me I'd try to get the defense companies to focus on space and space mining. Whoever controls outer space will control humanity's destiny. But go ahead bleed the US dry on these short sided money grabbing crusades so other countries can take over outer space instead.

    [Apr 17, 2017] Trump is escalating foreign conflicts

    Notable quotes:
    "... "I think it is clear to all of us that the reign of the Assad family is coming to an end, but the question of how that ends, and the transition itself, could be very important, in our view, to the durability, the stability inside of a unified Syria. We are not presupposing how that occurs," the more measured Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was quoted by The Washington Post as saying in Italy before he flew to Russia. http://www.denverpost.com/2017/04/12/trump-is-escalating-foreign-conflicts/ ..."
    Apr 17, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

    okie farmer | Apr 15, 2017 3:40:13 AM | 149

    Trump is escalating foreign conflicts

    So we're not going into Syria, but neither are we going to tolerate the tactics Assad has been using for six years. Where exactly is the "red line" in Syria? The president's spokesman, Sean Spicer, further muddied the waters, making similar statements about barrel bombs.

    This kind of confusion doesn't help American allies or even our foes like Syria, Russia and Iran who are trying to navigate this conflict. Trump needs to take a page from the book of his cabinet members who have been talking with more clarity about Syria and Russia.

    "I think it is clear to all of us that the reign of the Assad family is coming to an end, but the question of how that ends, and the transition itself, could be very important, in our view, to the durability, the stability inside of a unified Syria. We are not presupposing how that occurs," the more measured Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was quoted by The Washington Post as saying in Italy before he flew to Russia. http://www.denverpost.com/2017/04/12/trump-is-escalating-foreign-conflicts/

    [Apr 17, 2017] The Syria Strikes A Conspiracy Theory

    Nice satire... almost Gavlin style...
    Notable quotes:
    "... This is the 100% true story of the #SyriaStrikes, and if you support sites like The Corbett Report that question it in any way you are a moonbeam fake news tyrant-loving hippy pinko Russian agent and should commit ritual suicide immediately. ..."
    Apr 17, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
    Anoncommentator | Apr 15, 2017 12:31:18 AM | 130
    This is going viral and so it should!!! corbettreport

    The Syria Strikes A Conspiracy Theory

    TRANSCRIPT AND SOURCES: https://www.corbettreport.com/syriast...

    On the morning of April 4th 2017, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, on the verge of a military victory against the terrorist insurgency in his country and on the eve of peace talks that would secure his position as president, decided to use chemical weapons he didn't have against a target of no military significance in front of as many cameras as possible to cross the one red line that would insure his own government's downfall.

    Soon after, the Academy Award-winning White Helmets –noted for their Oscar-worthy performances , persistent proximity to Al Qaeda , and financial dependence on USAID –bravely risked their lives, handling Sarin victims barehanded against every protocol in the book.

    Without presenting a shred of evidence, President Donald Trump boldly launched a military strike against Shayrat airfield because "national security interest," promising to help the "beautiful children" (*offer does not apply to babies in Gaza , Yemen , Pakistan , or basically anywhere else).

    That military strike, a volley of 59 Tomahawk land attack missiles of which 23 actually made it to their target, failed to take out a single runway or even keep the airbase from operating for even 24 hours , but was a complete success for ExxonMobil , Raytheon and Donald Trump .

    No one could question the wisdom of striking Syria ( except Donald Trump ). And no one could oppose such a move ( except Russia ).

    The Trump Train, still convinced by candidate Trump (" dropping bombs on Assad " and " look what happened after Gaddafi ") concluded that this was 7th dimensional backgammon to make China afraid of the US' willingness to spend $100 million in a fearsome show of failing to destroy a single airfield.

    Throughout the world people rejoice as a horrible secular regime in the Middle East is replaced by yet another peace-loving band of ragtag human rights campaigners and child beheaders motivated by a desire to subdue the armies of Rome in an apocalyptic confrontation in Dabiq. (* actual ISIS belief )

    The chemicals for the previous "red line" attack in Syria have since been proven to come from Libya with US approval , but that's probably not relevant to this case.

    The CIA has released declassified report after declassified report showing that the plan to topple Syria's government has been in the works for decades, but this just shows that they were right all along.

    The mainstream media unquestioningly asserts that the story is true because the US government says so, but that's OK because we all know the msm is full of unbiased truthtellers and dig hard to get the raw facts on every story. (" beauty of our weapons ")

    Even members of congress think the story is a load of hogwash , but that's OK because they're probably crazy.

    Meanwhile the White House has released a report on its intelligence about the chemical attack that refutes its own version of the story , but that's OK because when has the White House ever lied people into war?

    This man doesn't exist, and if you think he does you're an enemy of humanity who should apologize for having been born. Likewise him , her , her , him and him . And him and her .

    This is the 100% true story of the #SyriaStrikes, and if you support sites like The Corbett Report that question it in any way you are a moonbeam fake news tyrant-loving hippy pinko Russian agent and should commit ritual suicide immediately.

    If you love your country and/or liberty, NASCAR, supermodels, TV, water slides or your mother you will not question this story in any way. Ever.

    This message has been brought to you by the Friends of the Brookings Institute , Raytheon , Genie Oil , Oded Yinon , I-CIA-SIS and The New York Times .

    Because IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH!

    [Apr 17, 2017] The cruise missile attack was planned several days before it actually happened. Most likely, the attack was decided on before the Ross left Rota on April 3

    Notable quotes:
    "... "Regarding the US cruise missile strike against the Shirat airbase, the USS Ross was at its forward base, Rota, southern Spain on April 3. The launch area for the cruise missile attack was some 4000 km away at the far east end of the Mediterranean. Even steaming at top speed for 24 hours a day, it would have taken the Ross 3 days to get to the launch area. ..."
    "... For it to have travelled at top speed from the get go, it suggests a specific time-critical mission was planned from before it sailed. If the ship had travelled at a lower cruising speed, it would have taken say 4.5 days to get there, ie sometime between midday 7th (for an early departure on the 3rd) to midday on the 8th (for a late departure at the end of the 3rd). ..."
    Apr 14, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
    karlof1 | Apr 14, 2017 6:01:32 PM | 100
    Although somewhat OT to this thread's topic, the following info just shared relates to the planning and prepositioning of assets prior to an attack, albeit on a small scale. Re, the USS Ross's participation in the supposedly off-the-cuff retaliatory attack for the Idlib False Flag courtesy of Anonymous at SyrPers:

    "Regarding the US cruise missile strike against the Shirat airbase, the USS Ross was at its forward base, Rota, southern Spain on April 3. The launch area for the cruise missile attack was some 4000 km away at the far east end of the Mediterranean. Even steaming at top speed for 24 hours a day, it would have taken the Ross 3 days to get to the launch area.

    For it to have travelled at top speed from the get go, it suggests a specific time-critical mission was planned from before it sailed. If the ship had travelled at a lower cruising speed, it would have taken say 4.5 days to get there, ie sometime between midday 7th (for an early departure on the 3rd) to midday on the 8th (for a late departure at the end of the 3rd).

    Even if the Ross departed at cruise and received an attack order in route, there would have been a narrow window where it was possible to get there with a combination of cruise and full speed.

    This strongly suggests the cruise missile attack was planned several days before it actually happened rather than the Ross fortuitously being on station before the order was made. Most likely, the attack was decided on before the Ross left Rota on April 3." https://syrianperspective.com/2017/04/dia-officer-declares-attack-in-idlib-to-be-fake-usa-slaughters-hundreds-of-civilians-in-dayr-el-zor-tillerson-rebuffed-in-russia-over-illegal-attack-on-syrian-base-kafarayyaa-and-al-fawa.html#comments

    [Apr 17, 2017] Meanwhile, overwhelming majority of US political elite is generally an office plankton with law or political science (or journalism--which is not a profession or a skill)

    Notable quotes:
    "... overwhelming majority of US political "elite" is generally an office plankton with law or political "science" (or journalism--which is not a profession or a skill) degrees from Ivy League "humanities" departments and their comprehension of the war is limited to Hollywood. Most difficulties in life they ever experienced was, most likely, being overbooked for the first class seats on the flight to Hawaii (or any other resort). ..."
    Apr 17, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

    SmoothieX12 | Apr 14, 2017 2:10:57 PM | 49

    No one has forgotten the near genocide and no one in Korea, north or south, wants to repeat the experience.

    Meanwhile, overwhelming majority of US political "elite" is generally an office plankton with law or political "science" (or journalism--which is not a profession or a skill) degrees from Ivy League "humanities" departments and their comprehension of the war is limited to Hollywood. Most difficulties in life they ever experienced was, most likely, being overbooked for the first class seats on the flight to Hawaii (or any other resort).

    [Apr 17, 2017] Did Al Qaeda Fool The White House Again

    Notable quotes:
    "... Bannon is anti-intervention, so Trump had to kick him out of the NSA planning room. General Kushner is now in charge. Love to send General Kushner to the Syrian front lines, where he could dazzle us all with his acts of supreme bravery. ..."
    "... The key in that conflict with the Soviets was giving AQ shoulder fired anti aircraft missiles , Stingers, which were needed to enable freedom of movement against the Hind attack helicopters. That worked great. ..."
    "... If they're talking about giving what, MANPADS? to the Al Nusras or ISIS holy fuck that's stupid. But it worked before, remember? That's how they'll think. ..."
    "... I believe we have to go back to some of the first Big Lies told to the worldwide populace and their subsequent success, (at least as viewed by the purveyors of those Big Lies) and then we can understand why this metric is not changing. ..."
    "... "The American way of life is not negotiable", Dick Cheney. The dye is already cast for WWIII, and the timetable is set by the construction of the Sino Russian energy pipelines. By its recent actions the USA is now viewed by it enemies as a non rational player in the game of MAD (mutually Assured Destruction,just in case you went to a US public School). ..."
    "... For the threat of MAD to deter, each player must be convinced of the rationality of the other players, if they're not, a first strike makes the only logical move. Its better to give than recieve it IOW.. The USA has become a suicidal death cult. ..."
    "... I am afraid we have squandered, so much money on defense, that our civilian economy is permanently damaged. ..."
    "... Fool the White House again? No, you moron. ... The White House, CIA AND ISIS fooled (or attempted to fool) the USSA tax payers............AGAIN! ..."
    "... No actual "American" - the true and prophesied "Chosen of God," the "El-ectorate" - is a "caretaker of truth" until JFK's and MLK's known assassins and their satanic ruling false-elite "Deep State" faction are brought to Justice ..."
    "... Everybody knew it was a false flag, but they spun it as Assad. Now they've painted themselves into a corner and can never walk it back. ..."
    Apr 17, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
    by bamawatson -> chunga , Apr 16, 2017 3:30 PM

    https://steemit.com/pizzagate/@rebelskum/pizzagate-wiki-gets-even-more-on-the-ties-between-max-maccoby-laura-silsby-and-james-alefantis

    Manthong -> bamawatson , Apr 16, 2017 5:21 PM

    The deep state "advisors" knew damn well the "intelligence" was at the least thin and at the most bogus.

    Trump, his still wet-behind-the ears son-in-law and his bleeding heart daughter are probably just not seasoned enough to see through the bad advice.

    It is likely still going on.

    Draining the swamp with a soda straw won't work.

    evoila -> Manthong , Apr 16, 2017 5:35 PM

    they didn't get fooled. they were trying to trick the populace.

    http://thesaker.is/how-to-bring-down-the-elephant-in-the-room/

    Paul Kersey -> flaminratzazz , Apr 16, 2017 3:58 PM

    Bannon is anti-intervention, so Trump had to kick him out of the NSA planning room. General Kushner is now in charge. Love to send General Kushner to the Syrian front lines, where he could dazzle us all with his acts of supreme bravery.

    TheLastTrump -> Future Jim , Apr 16, 2017 4:31 PM

    Well, blame Reagan, because that's when we built Al Qaida in Afghanistan.

    The key in that conflict with the Soviets was giving AQ shoulder fired anti aircraft missiles , Stingers, which were needed to enable freedom of movement against the Hind attack helicopters. That worked great.

    If they're talking about giving what, MANPADS? to the Al Nusras or ISIS holy fuck that's stupid. But it worked before, remember? That's how they'll think.

    BorisTheBlade -> Normalcy Bias , Apr 16, 2017 3:53 PM

    Precisely, if you want evidence, it's out there. And if you want a balanced position, you ought to examine every possibility to determine which one ultimately makes more more sense.

    Additionally, we live in an age where obtaining and studying evidence is streamlined and one could find a killer who committed a crime 20 years ago just by studying some residue of his hair on victim's shoulder [exageration obviously, but not that far fetched]. However, manufacturing evidence progressed as well and it is easier to do it given a certain [geo]political momentum.

    Bad_Sushi , Apr 16, 2017 3:25 PM

    I believe we have to go back to some of the first Big Lies told to the worldwide populace and their subsequent success, (at least as viewed by the purveyors of those Big Lies) and then we can understand why this metric is not changing.

    IOW...

    They got away with it before, they are sure they will get away with it again.

    Business as usual boys and girls, business as usual.

    Winston Churchill , Apr 16, 2017 3:50 PM

    "The American way of life is not negotiable", Dick Cheney. The dye is already cast for WWIII, and the timetable is set by the construction of the Sino Russian energy pipelines. By its recent actions the USA is now viewed by it enemies as a non rational player in the game of MAD (mutually Assured Destruction,just in case you went to a US public School).

    For the threat of MAD to deter, each player must be convinced of the rationality of the other players, if they're not, a first strike makes the only logical move. Its better to give than recieve it IOW.. The USA has become a suicidal death cult.

    williambanzai7 , Apr 16, 2017 3:32 PM

    Friedman is a fucking used globalist donkey condom.

    sgt_doom -> williambanzai7 , Apr 16, 2017 3:51 PM

    Well, sometimes you are right!

    Deep Snorkeler , Apr 16, 2017 3:33 PM

    I am afraid we have squandered, so much money on defense, that our civilian economy is permanently damaged.

    I sip absinthe, a grain of sand on the Beach of Lost Prosperity.

    besnook , Apr 16, 2017 3:38 PM

    al Qaeda is the USA so we fooled ourselves or just the people?

    DuneCreature , Apr 16, 2017 3:45 PM

    Fool the White House again? No, you moron. ... The White House, CIA AND ISIS fooled (or attempted to fool) the USSA tax payers............AGAIN!

    What fucking planet do hail from, Spanky? ... Did you just wake up from your little nap? ... You sound like you received a big dose of colorless, odorless stupid in your sleep.

    Live Hard, The Press Is STUXNET On Burnt Toast And Smoking Up The Room, Die Free

    ~ DC v5.0

    iamerican4 , Apr 16, 2017 3:56 PM

    No actual "American" - the true and prophesied "Chosen of God," the "El-ectorate" - is a "caretaker of truth" until JFK's and MLK's known assassins and their satanic ruling false-elite "Deep State" faction are brought to Justice

    Snípéir_Ag_Obair -> TheLastTrump , Apr 16, 2017 4:13 PM

    http://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/iran-the-destabilizer/

    Parry is great - but he will never point out the heavy role of Zionist Jews in the media and government in advocating for war on Syria and Iran, using naked lies and a Jewish dominated media to control the narrative - and all to benefit Israel.

    Goldberg is a Jewish Supremacist Zionist, and about as dishonest a person as Bill Kristol and Alan Pedo Dershowitz.

    It is not 'the Jews' nor are all or even most of DC's warmongers Jewish.

    But the Goldbergs and Friedmans, and on and on, are Israel Firster Jews, and they are motivated by Israel, and they play a major, and perhaps predominant role in both the lies/propaganda and the political impetus.

    It's fair, and necessary, to say so.

    Snípéir_Ag_Obair -> IranContra , Apr 16, 2017 4:25 PM

    You sure are trying real hard to vilify Iran even using Orwellian reversals of the facts and naked lies - as hasbara trolls do.

    The problem is your claims have no real support, while evidence to the contrary is abundant and essentially incontrovertible re the hostility of the Zionists ergo Deep State to a free and independent Iran which can support the Lebanese resistance, sell oil for gold, have its own central bank, etc.

    Why not stop straining to make 2+2 = 5?

    Serve Truth, and serve God.

    Serve Likud, and serve 'Satan'

  • http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2011/02/brookings-which-path-to-persia...
  • https://consortiumnews.com/2015/03/16/a-neocon-admits-the-plan-to-bomb-i...
  • http://lobelog.com/neocons-who-brought-you-the-iraq-war-endorse-aipacs-i...
  • http://mondoweiss.net/2015/05/facing-neocon-captivity/
  • https://theintercept.com/2015/03/02/brief-history-netanyahu-crying-wolf-...
  • https://theintercept.com/2016/01/13/us-media-condemns-irans-aggression-i...
  • mc888 , Apr 16, 2017 4:47 PM

    Instead, Official Washington's propaganda bubble will stay firmly in place allowing its inhabitants to go happily about their business believing that they are the caretakers of "truth."

    mc888 smoked Robert Parry when he wrote: most entertaining is the mainstream US-cum-Soviet media spinning out of control about the chemical attacks.

    Everybody knew it was a false flag, but they spun it as Assad. Now they've painted themselves into a corner and can never walk it back.

    <snip>

    Any proper investigation must be delegitimized.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-11/joe-scarborough-giddy-over-sour...

    [Apr 17, 2017] News became propaganda when alternative viewpoints are not fairly represented or worse, supressed

    This is how the US MSM covered Niki Haley demise by Bolivian representative. " Nikki Haley forces public UN meeting to put Assad's defenders in 'full public view '"
    Apr 17, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
    reason

    I made a comment that was swallowed?

    I think Simon Wren-Lewis When journalism becomes propaganda - mainly macro
    missed the main point here.

    Propaganda is when:

    1. Alternative viewpoints are not fairly represented

    2. News and opinion are not clearly delinearated (as Dean Baker tirelessly points out).

    We need a good discussion of how to de-propagandize and de-polarize society. Getting rid of winner-take-all politics would sure help.

    [Apr 16, 2017] Joe Scarborough Giddy Over Souring Russian-US Relations, Says Russia is Helpless to Protect Syria

    All wars are bankers wars
    Notable quotes:
    "... After the USSR collapsed Russia is as good as an ally to have as any like UK or Australia for US as a nation. But lets face it, this is bank wars, not political wars, just like the other world wars were. This is Putin vs. Goldman Sachs and nothing less. And gullible fools like Trump just love being the pawn if you use the code word "child" for some reason. Wow. ..."
    "... Politics in banking means hundreds of millions dead last century. Could well be billions of dead this century. All Putin really has to say is this: "My message to Goldman Sach's is that your bank will be in rubble if you stop getting Trump to side with terrorists. We won't talk to Trump as he is not in power any more." Free advice to Putin there, no charge. ..."
    "... All I've seen from Assad is him doing battle with the Sunni rebels who are from Al Qaeda their ISIS allies. Assad is the only leader not perpetrating genocide against non-Muslim or different Muslim sects currently in Syria. ..."
    "... End-game in Syria? Same as the end-game in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen and Libya: US Global Hegemony engineered by complete annihilation throughout the whole region... complete chaos is the plan ..."
    "... Scarborough's utterings are just a desperate attempt to maintain his fantasy. He is in a panic because the façade of American Exceptionalism ® is falling from his eyes. His words are the braggadocio of a coward. ..."
    Apr 16, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com

    tangent , Apr 11, 2017 4:37 PM

    After the USSR collapsed Russia is as good as an ally to have as any like UK or Australia for US as a nation. But lets face it, this is bank wars, not political wars, just like the other world wars were. This is Putin vs. Goldman Sachs and nothing less. And gullible fools like Trump just love being the pawn if you use the code word "child" for some reason. Wow.

    Politics in banking means hundreds of millions dead last century. Could well be billions of dead this century. All Putin really has to say is this: "My message to Goldman Sach's is that your bank will be in rubble if you stop getting Trump to side with terrorists. We won't talk to Trump as he is not in power any more." Free advice to Putin there, no charge.

    Was Trump really pretending to be on the side of common sense or was that a charade he was playing to get in power?

    True Blue , Apr 11, 2017 4:46 PM

    "you go into these places that you're not going to face a show of force"

    Um; "people in glass houses" much? Places like what? Grenada? Panama (remember Manuel Noriega?*) Iraq? Afghanistan? 15 years of the mightiest armed force in the world fighting "cavemen" and the "JV Team" retakes half of that territory in a few months (in tennis shoes and Toyota pickups.)

    *Should also watch out for the precedents you set, invading a foreign nation in order to kidnap their leader and put him on trial for violating the provincial laws of 'your' nation just might not have been such a brilliant idea; especially when charges of "war crimes" start floating around.

    TemporarySecurity , Apr 11, 2017 2:39 PM

    Everybody is giddy over going to war and destroying Syria and the bad guy.

    What exactly is the end solution? Put one of the nice Islamist ex-Al Qaeda rebel leaders in charge? Chances are anybody we can find will be a Sunni Islamist who will finish killing other sects of Muslims and all Christians in the area. A slaughter worse than anything we've seen so far.

    All I've seen from Assad is him doing battle with the Sunni rebels who are from Al Qaeda their ISIS allies. Assad is the only leader not perpetrating genocide against non-Muslim or different Muslim sects currently in Syria.

    Personally I think we are witnessing the decline and fall of the American Empire.

    Posa -> TemporarySecurity , Apr 11, 2017 4:19 PM

    End-game in Syria? Same as the end-game in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen and Libya: US Global Hegemony engineered by complete annihilation throughout the whole region... complete chaos is the plan

    shortonoil , Apr 11, 2017 4:12 PM

    Between the media, the intelligence services, and the cheap self serving politicians the US is a basket case. With a faltering industrial base, dying financial system, and withering energy sector the Russians only have to wait for the clowns in charge to complete its destruction. The only reason that Scarborough believes that this is funny is because he hasn't figured out yet that the joke is on him.

    Shemp 4 Victory , Apr 11, 2017 3:17 PM

    As shown by Scarborough and the yapping poodle Brzezinski, US citizenism rewards well propagandists and fantasists. But they are becoming fearful. Propaganda is losing in quality because the level of reality that propagandists use to back their propaganda is growing more and more adverse to them.

    Scarborough's utterings are just a desperate attempt to maintain his fantasy. He is in a panic because the façade of American Exceptionalism ® is falling from his eyes. His words are the braggadocio of a coward.

    moneybots , Apr 11, 2017 2:52 PM

    "Russian foreign policy since Christmas 1991 has been all about resentment, resentment of losing the cold war."

    I don't recall Yeltsin being that way. In fact, TIME ran a cover story about the secret U.S. plan to get Yeltsin elected in 1996.

    onthedeschutes , Apr 11, 2017 12:27 PM

    Not surprised one bit. Joe's teammate, Mika, is also giddy as is her father, Zbigniew Brzezinski. Look at this evil bastard.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GO2U9jJoWsM

    Buck Johnson -> onthedeschutes , Apr 11, 2017 2:13 PM

    Hey Joe, lets talk about Lori Klausutis!!!!!!

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/12/21/1613261/-What-Really-Happened-to-Lori-Klausutis-Everything-Joe-Scarborough-Does-NOT-Want-Viewers-To-Know

    MalteseFalcon -> yttirum , Apr 11, 2017 2:40 PM

    Yeah Joe, the neocons and Trump launched cruise missiles into Syria and half of them actually landed somewhere in Syria.

    You can't conquer a country from the air. You need boots on the ground for that.

    So we'll see.

    This is a tremendous policy error and not in America's interest. Even if Syria is toppled.

    [Apr 16, 2017] Trumps Beautiful Syria Airstrike and What It Means Opinion teleSUR English

    Apr 16, 2017 | www.telesurtv.net
    With Trump's inauguration, policy in Syria has begun to take a different direction. After having failed at regime-change, with the Syrian insurgency badly defeated, on the defensive and fighting amongst themselves , it appeared the rebels' international sponsors had realized the futility of their efforts and started to discontinue their support.

    The Trump administration reportedly ended the CIA's train-and-equip program. This represents a long-standing feud between the Pentagon and the CIA The Pentagon had vehemently opposed the CIA's rebel program on the grounds that it was empowering radical extremists which would eventually turn their guns toward Americans, and if successful would turn Syria into a country of chaos ruled by warring factions of jihadists, similar to Libya.

    However, the sectors of power that Obama represented largely centered around the financial institutions and the intelligence apparatus, and therefore the CIA won the tug-of-war and the rebel program continued. Under Trump, the program was ended and the CIA's control over foreign policy was diminished , while the generals and military officials were largely granted discretion to conduct overseas operations with little oversight from the chief executive. The interests steering foreign policy are largely those of the weapons and defense contractors and the profit incentives of the military industrial complex as a whole.

    Given this, instead of covertly funneling aid to al-Qaeda, Trump began increasing the coalition's bombing of the group and adopted a different regional strategy. This increased bombing only materialized, however, after al-Qaeda had been routed on the battlefield .

    Nevertheless, the strategy became one of overt military occupation and a partitioning of Syrian territory.

    The purpose of the U.S.-led "anti-ISIS" campaign had up to this point been to project the image that the U.S. was fighting the group while simultaneously allowing them to prosper and militarily bleed out Iran and Russia. In this way, the presence of ISIS was redirected into a useful pretext which legitimized an illegal military presence in Syria which otherwise would not have been possible. The universally despised attitude toward ISIS could conveniently be transformed into a mandate for annexing and occupying Syrian territory. The strategy could shift from "Assad must go" to "defeating ISIS."

    Signaling this shift, the Trump administration had announced that it "accepts" the "political reality with respect to Assad," and that "foremost among its priorities" from here on out would be "the defeat of ISIS."

    Concurrent with this was an agreement reached between Trump and the Saudi king after their meeting in mid-March, where it was decided that the Gulf would reopen supply channels to their proxies and occupy Russia on the battlefield, allowing the U.S. to concentrate on dividing northern Syria and establishing their occupation.

    Within this environment, it appeared that some kind of negotiated settlement might have materialized, wherein Russia would agree to the U.S. annexation in return for certain concessions. Powerful factions within the U.S. were vehemently opposed to this, however, and were determined to reverse it.

    The chemical weapons incident in Khan Sheikhoun effectively accomplished that and upended all previous hopes for a settlement.

    After the horrendous attack, killing upwards of 70 people, procedures were underway for a thorough UN investigation to determine culpability. Without having completed that process, and without any evidence presented, the Trump administration launched a barrage of cruise missiles and attacked a Syrian military installation which was being used to fight ISIS . The timing of the attack prevented the investigation from going forward.

    This was a clear violation of international law and a blatant act of unjustified aggression against another state, which according to the Nuremberg Tribunals represents the "supreme international crime." The pain and suffering of the victims was cynically exploited as a pretext for such an aggression, unsurprisingly to the high moral acclaim of Western officials and media personalities. The attack, hailed as a " beautiful " display of our weapons, which revealed the " heart " and compassion of President Trump, reportedly murdered half a dozen Syrian soldiers , as well as four children .

    Who cares? It was our moral duty to punish Assad for killing children, by killing other children, albeit through the justified and morally honorable way, with U.S. bombs.

    Even more egregious, the attack was almost certainly carried out by the rebels, dominated by al-Qaeda and a rabble of other sectarian extremists. Washington would have you believe that Assad, having given up all of his chemical weapons in 2013 and barely escaping a Libya-style overthrow, after now having devastated the rebels on the battlefield, would on the eve of important international congregations aimed at ending the war launch a militarily insignificant attack with the kind of weapons that are literally the one thing that could endanger his rule and lead to a U.S. invasion. Assad may be a brutal autocrat, but he has never displayed any signs of being insane .

    The opposition, however, has everything to gain from this. Desperate, staring at defeat and a reduction in supplies, along with a U.S. administration abandoning its former "Assad must go" policy, the last recourse they had was for a "red-line" to be crossed which could justify a U.S. invasion. It has also been widely reported that they, in fact, have access to chemical weapons and have utilized them in the past.

    Not surprisingly then, the U.S. intelligence community largely holds the Russian explanation, that Assad's forces bombed a rebel storage facility containing chemical weapons, to be true , and the official U.S. line to be false. Sources from the CIA have stated that it was their belief that "Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was likely not responsible for the lethal poison gas incident in northern Syria." One intelligence source said "the most likely scenario" was "a staged event by the rebels intended to force Trump to reverse a policy that the U.S. government would no longer seek 'regime change' in Syria."

    War is a Racket

    In the aftermath of the attack, it has become apparent that the entire motivation behind the Democratic Party's antagonism toward Trump, along with the CIA, the neocons and the rest of the liberal interventionists, had absolutely nothing to do with opposition towards Trump's racism, xenophobia, attacks against civil rights, or even any connection with Putin, the accusations of course lacking any foundation in evidence. Instead, these were pretexts used to wage an all-out campaign of manipulation with a single goal in mind: pressuring him to continue carrying out the previous administration's strategy of overthrowing the Syrian government and maintaining a war-footing against Russia.

    This is why the liberal resentment was solely focused on undermining the one aspect of his platform which was actually worth pursuing , cooperation with Russia and a détente of the increasingly dangerous confrontation that had been festering between the two nuclear powers. By portraying Trump as nothing more than a spy for Putin, the liberal establishment was able to guarantee that business-as-usual against Russia would be resumed, under threat that their efforts would be directed toward undermining the presidency if it did not.

    Explaining the situation , the Wall Street Journal reported that "in Washington, probes by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Congress into possible connections between Mr. Trump's associates and Russia have restricted the new administration's ability to cut deals seen as conciliatory to the Kremlin in the near term without provoking an outcry from both Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill."

    Exposing this antagonism for the opportunistic warmongering that it was, following Trump's attack, in reality a war-crime for which Trump should be impeached and tried, all of his most forceful opponents of only a few days prior are now simply fawning in praise at their "great commander-in-chief." The pressure has effectively been called off, though Trump will realize why that is and will remember again in the future when it is reapplied. After having found such an effective mechanism for ensuring that the proper course is maintained, it will continue to be utilized.

    In addition to having mitigated domestic opposition, the attack will likely remedy the problem of Trump's approval ratings , which were below that of any comparable president. Nothing more effectively rallies a country around their leader like a war. In this sense, being a celebrity personality whose foremost concerns are seemingly how others view him, the incident was largely orchestrated around boosting the president's national image. Trump will now be seen as the "strong" leader who attacked the evil Assad and wasn't afraid of Russian threats, while Obama was the "weak" president who wouldn't do the same even without Russia protecting him. It appears that such a reckless attack was largely the result of one man's ego.

    However, it also represented the increased power and influence of the military, Trump having vowed to listen to his generals in the same way that Obama did not. When it comes to military officials, every solution resembles a nail, and are "solved" through military means such as missile strikes. The power of the military-industrial base to secure profit-making interests through state policy was also on display. Most notably the defense contractor Raytheon, who manufactures the missiles that were used in the attack, and thereby stands to gain when the government resupplies its arsenal. Their stock instantly surged following the incident, adding nearly five billion dollars to its overall market value. Even more to the point are the reports which suggest that Trump still holds shares in Raytheon , and therefore will directly profit from this and from similar decisions in the future. Oil stocks as well have precipitously increased .

    History, it seems, is repeating itself, with Smedley Butler's classic " War is a Racket " coming to mind.

    The attack is also related to the Trump administration's strong ties with Israel and the AIPAC lobby. Shortly before the chemical incident took place, Israeli jets had interfered on the side of the Islamic State and targeted Syrian army positions . Syria shot at the jets violating their airspace and forced them to retreat. The same airbase that Trump attacked was the one from which the Israeli jets were targeted, Trump giving his friend Bibi a gift in the form of retribution.

    In a similar vein, the order was given during Trump's dinner with the President of China, and comes with a message in mind. The message is that "my threats aren't hollow," and carry force behind them, referring to recent bellicose statements directed towards China if it refuses to "solve" the situation in North Korea. This, unsurprisingly, has only further encouraged North Korea and others to continue acquiring nuclear capabilities to deter American aggression. After all, this is what the North Korean nuclear program is all about , at least according to US military intelligence .

    Nevertheless, Trump now has immense incentives to continue pursuing confrontation with Russia and Syria.

    For what it was worth though, the actual attack represents a small-scale and largely symbolic accomplishment. It did not greatly damage Syria's military capabilities, the airbase reportedly already being back in operation. It does, however, carry with it extraordinarily dangerous and potentially unforeseeable consequences.

    A Lifeline for the Jihadists

    The situation in Syria was already extremely precarious. For the first time in the modern period fighter jets of two nuclear powers were circling each other within the bounds of a single state in defense of opposing ground forces; one false move could've potentially sparked a WWIII scenario. Trump's careless actions have only further hurdled the world toward possible catastrophe, further strengthening the opinion of the world's population that the U.S. is by far the greatest threat to world peace , with constantly-invoked official adversaries trailing far behind.

    Directly after the attack, Russia severed the communication channels between itself and the US military. The agreed upon "deconfliction" precautions have been abandoned while the memorandum of understanding used to prevent military confrontations and air accidents has been tabled . US jets are now operating in Syria under constant threat of being targeted by the Russian air force and the Syrian army. Given this, former members of the US-led coalition have suspended their involvement and evacuated their aircraft, saying it is no longer safe to remain. Others are likely to follow. One false move could bring us to the brink of a cataclysmic confrontation. Wasn't this decision just wonderful?

    On top of all this, the maneuver has greatly damaged Russia's credibility. The US effectively called the Russian narrative a lie and exposed Putin's "protection" of his allies to be hollow. The Russian military has been discredited and their already strained relations with Syria and Iran have only further been maligned. Unsurprisingly the Russian's are furious .

    Importantly, however, it seems likely that some kind of an agreement was reached when the US notified the Russians and warned them of the attack. Important military equipment and personnel were evacuated from the site. The question, however, is what concession Russia received in return for allowing Trump to save face after his "red line" comments and what will be the Russian response. Already a Russian warship is steaming toward the Mediterranean while further steps are being taken to increase Syria's air defenses.

    The other direct consequence was the strengthening of ISIS and al-Qaeda, who unsurprisingly exploited the attack to launch their own offenses. The military installation that was hit was one of the main bases from which attacks against ISIS were carried out. It was instrumental in keeping nearby ISIS militants at bay and protected the surrounding inhabitants from an ISIS attack. Following the incident residents say they now fear an assault, stating that "women and children have already started to leave Shayrat to go to Homs city. We're not afraid of airstrikes. Our fear is the [ISIS] attack from the east." For the residents, all these airstrikes amount to is "proof that the U.S. helps Daesh." Perhaps this is what the New York Times meant when they said , "It was hard not to feel some sense of emotional satisfaction, and justice done, when American cruise missiles struck an airfield in Syria on Thursday."

    All of the most reactionary forces on the ground praised and welcomed the strikes, and its main beneficiaries were ISIS and al-Qaeda. How glorious.

    Furthermore, the implicit message that Trump has sent to the jihadists is that the international media and the US administration will not attempt to deliberate over evidence and demonstrate factual culpability, but instead will automatically blame Assad for any chemical weapons attacks. This effectively gives them a mechanism by which to call in US airstrikes should they ever need to improve their battlefield positions or gain the support of foreign intervention. Far from deterring dangerous weapon use, this provides an overwhelming incentive for chemical weapons to continue to be deployed, especially in terms of the Gulf monarchies should they ever need to redirect Trump towards an explicit "Assad must go" policy.

    Leaked memos from Saudi Arabia say that Assad must be overthrown at all costs, because if he is not then Syria's primary goal will be "taking revenge on the countries that stood against it, with the Kingdom coming at the top of the list," which represents "a high degree of danger for the Kingdom." The Saudi rulers make clear their view that the main stumbling block in the way of achieving this is the "lack of 'desire' and not a lack of 'capability' to take firm steps" on the part of the United States, and therefore they "must seek by all means available and all possible ways to overthrow the current regime in Syria." (emphasis added)

    Isn't it wonderful how we taught Assad a lesson?

    Given all of this, the pressures leading towards war and destruction will continue, as will the strategy of occupying northern Syria while denying the Syrian government from controlling the totality of its former territories. Rebel jihadi supply lines through Turkey will continue fueling the conflict, and with it the innocent deaths, while the money and weapons from the Gulf will continue to be forthcoming in an attempt to sink Russia down into the Syrian quagmire. This course of action, based on motivations of regional dominance, will continue to be the largest stumbling block towards peace that will further prolong the already 6-year long conflict.

    Obstacles to Peace

    Russia still has a fresh memory of the debacle in Afghanistan during the 1980s and desperately fears another repeat in Syria, especially given the newfound influence they have now been able to establish with the buildup of their military presence around the Mediterranean. The conflict in Syria provided them the opportunity to accomplish this. It is therefore within their interests for a quick political settlement to be reached and for a termination of the conflict, along with a cleanup of the Russian-nationals fighting in the ranks of the jihadists, and to further consolidate and exploit its newfound position as an influencer in regional Middle Eastern affairs. This comes into stark conflict with their Iranian and Syrian partners who are urging Russia to continue the offensive and reclaim the totality of Syrian territory.

    Because of this, Russia would likely be willing to exert the pressure necessary to force its allies to accept a settlement which includes extraordinary concessions. For this reason, too, Russia will likely acquiesce to the US-backed balkanization effort in some form in order to freeze the conflict.

    At the same time, the Americans and Europeans desperately want to see Russia get bogged down in another Afghanistan scenario, not the least of which because Russia was instrumental in preventing their regime-change efforts. It is for this reason that the US and the EU do not have a coherent plan to end the conflict, but do have a strategy of partitioning Syrian territory which will likely result in an all-out corporate resource-grab afterwards, allowing Western investors access to exploit the area and obtain the rebuilding contracts that will then be signed. This being paramount in their calculations, the reactionary al-Qaeda forces on the ground again become a useful asset rather than an enemy to be destroyed, while the ISIS pretext justifies the annexations.

    Following the completion of partition, the strategy will shift directly back toward regime change, only with newly acquired territories and levers of pressure from which to exert such demands. The eventual goal is a complete eviction of Russia from the Mediterranean and from its ability to frustrate Western ambitions for regional hegemony.

    Fueling this is the embedded and institutional nature of an American policy of regime change toward all non-compliant states, euphemistically referred to as the "axis of evil." These policies are not at all related to the changing personalities which happen to occupy the White House from time to time. This is because government policy is representative of the very narrow class interests of those which dominate the socio-economic hierarchy. That is, the dominant plutocracy made up of the individuals and interests who own the private economy and enjoy control over vast consolidations of wealth and resources. It is from this dominant business-class that the top level positions within the executive are filled, and from these interests that policy is crafted and legislated. This has been shown in prominent political science studies which explain "economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence." Or, in other words, "the preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy," while decision-making is confined almost exclusively to the top 1%.

    This is why prominent political analysts have concluded since the 1950s that "at every level of the administration of the American state, domestically and internationally, business serves as the fount of critical assumptions or goals and strategically placed personnel." Policy, therefore, stemming from "the most powerful class interests" which inform the "nature and objectives of American power at home and abroad." It is the "ideology and the interest and material power of the physical resources of the ruling class of American capitalism" which determine courses of action, "the latter [the material power of their physical resources] being sufficient should consensus break down." This "economic ruling elite" being "the final arbiter and beneficiary of the existing structure of American politics and of United States power in the world."

    This the reason why US policy towards Syria has remained consistent for nearly a century. The CIA has been attempting, since its inception, to overthrow the Syrian government since the middle of the 20th century , through countless administrations and countless fluctuations between Democrats and Republicans. The core policy remains the same, so it should be no wonder that the current incumbent would opportunistically seize upon an opportunity to attack the Syrian state. These actions cannot solely be laid at the feat of the liberals nor domestic political concerns.

    Instead, the overthrow of non-compliant regimes is a staple of US policy because doing so secures the economic and material interests of the dominant ruling class within America. It is within their interests for governments to allow their economies to be penetrated by Western corporations seeking to exploit their markets, and to denationalize state assets and coveted resources for the exploitation of foreign investors. Furthermore, these interests are further secured through regional support for US military aggressions and occupations. This is why so much emphasis was put upon securing control over Iraqi oil and the establishment of US military bases in Iraq, and why similar aggressions are not pursued against client states which comply with these developments. Syria, although it began to allow Western economic penetration, has on the whole frustrated attempts for greater access. In addition, Syria has opposed US military aggression in the region, such as their attempts to undermine the occupation of Iraq.

    The Logic of Imperialism

    The other major issue is the pipeline war between the US and Russia over the natural gas field which bisects Iranian and Qatari territory, the largest in the world. Qatar's attempts to connect their holdings directly to European markets was denied by Assad, while an Iranian and Russian-backed pipeline was put into motion. It is only after the ball began rolling for the Russian-Iranian-Syria pipeline that the insurgency was fostered against Assad.

    This is why Trump has used this opportunity to further aggress upon the Syrian state, now writing up a new batch of sanctions to apply under the pretext of chemical weapons use. The sanctions, after all, are an economic siege against the entirety of the country, and are fueling much of the suffering and the fleeing of refugees. These new ones will continue a tactic of brutalization of the civilian population with little effect against the government, the strategy being to force massive economic suffering as a means to pressure the current regime. This is also why the US again is demanding Assad's ouster , saying "There's not any sort of option where a political solution is going to happen with Assad at the head of the regime."

    As self-righteous pundits, officials, and intellectuals who should know better wax poetically and bask in their own self-righteousness over how moral and justified this immoral act of aggression was, it is not hard to see why the world considers the US the leading threat to peace and a leading terrorist rogue state.

    The US and its clients, who have all hailed Trump's belligerent attacks on moralistic grounds, are the only states rampaging through the region attacking countries at will while destroying any that stand in their way. The US now, and the British before them, have consistently opposed and overthrown any truly progressive, democratic, and secular movement or government that has emerged in the Middle East while at the same time propping up the forces of extremist-Islam and fueling the spread of violent jihadism throughout the region. This is because the US has, since the 1950s, pursued an agenda of global domination and has insisted on securing its ambitions through tyranny and oppression .

    Imagine, for an instance, that Syria manufactured a false claim and said the US military used chemical weapons against them, and used that pretext to launch a cruise missile assault on an American base in American territory, murdering the innocent civilians living nearby, including four children. Now imagine that on top of that, the officials and intellectuals from Syria didn't apologize, but instead hailed the intolerable injustice as being a display of " justice done ," something that was " beautiful ," which elicited a "sense of emotional satisfaction" and was righteous and good, showing how heartfelt and compassionate they are.

    How malicious and sociopathic would we view those officials?

    Yet we all carry on, blind and drunk off the desire to dominate and control.

    The logic of imperialism is truly wondrous to behold .

    RELATED:

    How 'Anti-Trump' Liberal Media Cheered Syria Attack

    China Blasts Syria Attacks

    Stupid Trump Move in Syria Raises Global Tensions

    Chile to Welcome at Least 60 Syrian Refugees

    Syria Crisis

    US Imperialism Attacks Syria, Venezuela Based on Lies

    [Apr 16, 2017] Bolivia UN Envoy on Syria Attack History Teaches Us that US Lies to Justify Wars

    See also Bolivian Ambassador to UN Sacha Llorenti Gives a History Lesson YouTube 360p - YouTube
    Notable quotes:
    "... Holding up an enlarged photo of Colin Powell's "weapons of mass destruction" speech, Llorenti made an impassioned plea to hold the U.S. to account for Thursday's unprovoked attack on Syria, noting the U.S. history of imperialist interventions in other nations, including Latin America. ..."
    "... "Now the United States believe that they are investigators, they are attorneys, judges and they are the executioners. That's not what international law is about ..."
    "... "I believe it's vital for us to remember what history teaches us and on this occasion (in 2003), the United States did affirm, they affirmed that they had all the proof necessary to show that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction but they were never found never were they found," the Bolivian envoy told the emergency Security Council meeting on Friday ..."
    "... On Feb. 5, 2003, Secretary Powell presented fabricated "proof" that Saddam Hussein's government in Iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction, including deadly nerve agents. The presentation has since been widely discredited, as no evidence of a weapons program was ever discovered. Powell himself expressing regret over what he termed "a great intelligence failure" - a failure that originated in his own exaggerated and doctored interpretation of intercepted Iraqi communications ..."
    "... Arguing that the U.S. acted unilaterally and in flagrant violation of the U.N. charter, the Bolivian envoy called for a closed-door meeting of the U.N. Security Council ..."
    "... United States Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley denied the request. The U.S. holds the presidency of the Security Council this month. ..."
    Apr 07, 2017 | telesurtv.net

    "I believe it's vital for us to remember what history teaches us," the Bolivian envoy told the U.N. Security Council. | Photo: United Nations

    "Now the U.S. believe that they are investigators, they are attorneys, judges and they are the executioners," the Bolivian ambassador said.

    Lambasting the United States' aggression against Syria, Bolivian Ambassador to the United Nations Sacha Llorenti compared the basis for the unilateral move to former U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell's infamous 2003 presentation to the body, when fraudulent evidence of an alleged Iraqi weapons program was presented to justify the U.S. war on Iraq.

    Holding up an enlarged photo of Colin Powell's "weapons of mass destruction" speech, Llorenti made an impassioned plea to hold the U.S. to account for Thursday's unprovoked attack on Syria, noting the U.S. history of imperialist interventions in other nations, including Latin America.

    "Now the United States believe that they are investigators, they are attorneys, judges and they are the executioners. That's not what international law is about."

    The Andean nation currently holds a non-permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council.

    "I believe it's vital for us to remember what history teaches us and on this occasion (in 2003), the United States did affirm, they affirmed that they had all the proof necessary to show that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction but they were never found never were they found," the Bolivian envoy told the emergency Security Council meeting on Friday.

    On Feb. 5, 2003, Secretary Powell presented fabricated "proof" that Saddam Hussein's government in Iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction, including deadly nerve agents. The presentation has since been widely discredited, as no evidence of a weapons program was ever discovered. Powell himself expressing regret over what he termed "a great intelligence failure" - a failure that originated in his own exaggerated and doctored interpretation of intercepted Iraqi communications.

    The U.S. launched dozens of tomahawk cruise missiles at the Shayrat air base in Homs Thursday night. The Russian Defense Ministry claims that only 23 of 59 missiles reached the intended target, with the remainder landing in nearby villages. Syrian media sources are reporting that nine civilians died in the attack, four children.

    The attack was a response to an alleged Sarin gas attack on the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun. The incident claimed 89 lives, including 33 children and 18 women, according to local opposition authorities.

    Syrian government representatives have denied that it would use such weapons, stating that the alleged proof of a Syrian military role is, in fact, propaganda fabricated by opposition groups like Jabhat al-Nusra. Russian President Vladimir Putin's spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, said that Putin considers the strikes to be "aggression against a sovereign state in violation of international law, and under a false pretext."

    Arguing that the U.S. acted unilaterally and in flagrant violation of the U.N. charter, the Bolivian envoy called for a closed-door meeting of the U.N. Security Council.

    "The United States was preparing once again and carried out a unilateral attack," Llorenti said. "The missile attack, of course, is a unilateral action. They represent a serious threat to international peace and security."

    United States Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley denied the request. The U.S. holds the presidency of the Security Council this month.

    [Apr 15, 2017] The Nerve Agent Attack in Khan Shaykhun, Syria (+Addendum) - The Unz Review

    Apr 15, 2017 | www.unz.com
    Dear Larry:

    I am responding to your distribution of what I understand is a White House statement claiming intelligence findings about the nerve agent attack on April 4, 2017 in Khan Shaykhun, Syria. My understanding from your note is that this White House intelligence summary was released to you sometime on April 11, 2017.

    I have reviewed the document carefully, and I believe it can be shown, without doubt, that the document does not provide any evidence whatsoever that the US government has concrete knowledge that the government of Syria was the source of the chemical attack in Khan Shaykhun, Syria at roughly 6 to 7 a.m. on April 4, 2017.

    In fact, a main piece of evidence that is cited in the document points to an attack that was executed by individuals on the ground, not from an aircraft, on the morning of April 4.

    This conclusion is based on an assumption made by the White House when it cited the source of the sarin release and the photographs of that source. My own assessment, is that the source was very likely tampered with or staged, so no serious conclusion could be made from the photographs cited by the White House.

    However, if one assumes, as does the White House, that the source of the sarin was from this location and that the location was not tampered with, the most plausible conclusion is that the sarin was dispensed by an improvised dispersal device made from a 122 mm section of rocket tube filled with sarin and capped on both sides.

    The only undisputable facts stated in the White House report is the claim that a chemical attack using nerve agent occurred in Khan Shaykhun, Syria on that morning. Although the White House statement repeats this point in many places within its report, the report contains absolutely no evidence that this attack was the result of a munition being dropped from an aircraft. In fact, the report contains absolutely no evidence that would indicate who was the perpetrator of this atrocity.

    The report instead repeats observations of physical effects suffered by victims that with very little doubt indicate nerve agent poisoning.

    The only source the document cites as evidence that the attack was by the Syrian government is the crater it claims to have identified on a road in the North of Khan Shaykhun.

    I have located this crater using Google Earth and there is absolutely no evidence that the crater was created by a munition designed to disperse sarin after it is dropped from an aircraft.

    The Google Earth map shown in Figure 1 at the end of this text section shows the location of that crater on the road in the north of Khan Shaykhun, as described in the White House statement.

    The data cited by the White House is more consistent with the possibility that the munition was placed on the ground rather than dropped from a plane. This conclusion assumes that the crater was not tampered with prior to the photographs. However, by referring to the munition in this crater, the White House is indicating that this is the erroneous source of the data it used to conclude that the munition came from a Syrian aircraft.

    Analysis of the debris as shown in the photographs cited by the White House clearly indicates that the munition was almost certainly placed on the ground with an external detonating explosive on top of it that crushed the container so as to disperse the alleged load of sarin.

    Since time appears to be of the essence here, I have put together the summary of the evidence I have that the White House report contains false and misleading conclusions in a series of figures that follow this discussion. Each of the figures has a description below it, but I will summarize these figures next and wait for further inquiries about the basis of the conclusions I am putting forward herein.

    Figure 1 shows a Google Earth image of the northeast corner of Khan Shaykhun where the crater identified as the source of the sarin attack and referred to in the White House intelligence report is located.

    Also shown in the Google Earth image is the direction of the wind from the crater. At 3 AM the wind was going directly to the south at a speed of roughly 1.5 to 2.5 m/s. By 6 AM the wind was moving to the southeast at 1 to 2 m/s. The temperature was also low, 50 to 55°F near the ground. These conditions are absolutely ideal for a nerve agent attack.

    When the temperature near the ground is low, and there is no sun and very slow winds, the dense cool air stays close to the ground and there is almost no upward motion of the air. This condition causes any particles, droplets, or clouds of dispersed gas to stay close to the ground as the surrounding air moves over the ground. We perceive this motion as a gentle breeze on a calm morning before sunrise.

    One can think of a cloud of sarin as much like a cloud of ink generated by an escaping octopus. The ink cloud sits in the water and as the water slowly moves, so does the cloud. As the cloud is moved along by the water, it will slowly spread in all directions as it moves. If the layer of water where the ink is embedded moves so as to stay close to the ocean floor, the cloud will cover objects as it moves with the water.

    This is the situation that occurs on a cool night before sunrise when the winds move only gently.

    Figures 5 and 6 show tables that summarize the weather at 3 hour intervals in Khan Shaykun on the day of the attack, April 4, the day before the attack, April 3, and the day after the attack, April 5. The striking feature of the weather is that there were relatively high winds in the morning hours on both April 3 and April 5. If the gas attack were executed either the day before or the day after in the early morning, the attack would have been highly ineffective. The much higher winds would have dispersed the cloud of nerve agent and the mixing of winds from higher altitudes would have caused the nerve agent to be carried aloft from the ground. It is therefore absolutely clear that the time and day of the attack was carefully chosen and was no accident.

    Figure 2 shows a high quality photograph of the crater identified in the White House report as the source of the sarin attack. Assuming that there was no tampering of evidence at the crater, one can see what the White House is claiming as a dispenser of the nerve agent.

    The dispenser looks like a 122 mm pipe like that used in the manufacture of artillery rockets.

    As shown in the close-up of the pipe in the crater in Figure 3 , the pipe looks like it was originally sealed at the front end and the back end. Also of note is that the pipe is flattened into the crater, and also has a fractured seam that was created by the brittle failure of the metal skin when the pipe was suddenly crushed inward from above.

    Figure 4 shows the possible configuration of an improvised sarin dispersal device that could have been used to create the crater and the crushed carcass of what was originally a cylindrical pipe. A good guess of how this dispersal mechanism worked (again, assuming that the crater and carcass were not staged, as assumed in the White House report) was that a slab of high explosive was placed over one end of the sarin-filled pipe and detonated.

    The explosive acted on the pipe as a blunt crushing mallet. It drove the pipe into the ground while at the same time creating the crater. Since the pipe was filled with sarin, which is an incompressible fluid, as the pipe was flattened the sarin acted on the walls and ends of the pipe causing a crack along the length of the pipe and also the failure of the cap on the back end. This mechanism of dispersal is essentially the same as hitting a toothpaste tube with a large mallet, which then results in the tube failing and the toothpaste being blown in many directions depending on the exact way the toothpaste skin ruptures.

    If this is in fact the mechanism used to disperse the sarin, this indicates that the sarin tube was placed on the ground by individuals on the ground and not dropped from an airplane.

    Figure 8 shows the improvised sarin dispenser along with a typical 122 mm artillery rocket and the modified artillery rocket used in the sarin attack of August 21, 2013 in Damascus.

    At that time (August 30, 2013) the Obama White House also issued an intelligence report containing obvious inaccuracies. For example, that report stated without equivocation that the sarin carrying artillery rocket used in Damascus had been fired from Syrian government controlled areas. As it turned out, the particular munition used in that attack could not go further than roughly 2 km, very far short of any boundary controlled by the Syrian government at that time. The White House report at that time also contained other critical and important errors that might properly be described as amateurish. For example, the report claimed that the locations of the launch and impact of points of the artillery rockets were observed by US satellites. This claim was absolutely false and any competent intelligence analyst would have known that. The rockets could be seen from the Space-Based Infrared Satellite (SBIRS) but the satellite could absolutely not see the impact locations because the impact locations were not accompanied by explosions. These errors were clear indicators that the White House intelligence report had in part been fabricated and had not been vetted by competent intelligence experts.

    This same situation appears to be the case with the current White House intelligence report. No competent analyst would assume that the crater cited as the source of the sarin attack was unambiguously an indication that the munition came from an aircraft. No competent analyst would assume that the photograph of the carcass of the sarin canister was in fact a sarin canister. Any competent analyst would have had questions about whether the debris in the crater was staged or real. No competent analyst would miss the fact that the alleged sarin canister was forcefully crushed from above, rather than exploded by a munition within it. All of these highly amateurish mistakes indicate that this White House report, like the earlier Obama White House Report, was not properly vetted by the intelligence community as claimed.

    I have worked with the intelligence community in the past, and I have grave concerns about the politicization of intelligence that seems to be occurring with more frequency in recent times – but I know that the intelligence community has highly capable analysts in it. And if those analysts were properly consulted about the claims in the White House document they would have not approved the document going forward.

    I am available to expand on these comments substantially. I have only had a few hours to quickly review the alleged White House intelligence report. But a quick perusal shows without a lot of analysis that this report cannot be correct, and it also appears that this report was not properly vetted by the intelligence community.

    This is a very serious matter.

    President Obama was initially misinformed about supposed intelligence evidence that Syria was the perpetrator of the August 21, 2013 nerve agent attack in Damascus. This is a matter of public record. President Obama stated that his initially false understanding was that the intelligence clearly showed that Syria was the source of the nerve agent attack. This false information was corrected when the then Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, interrupted the President while he was in an intelligence briefing. According to President Obama, Mr. Clapper told the President that the intelligence that Syria was the perpetrator of the attack was "not a slamdunk."

    The question that needs to be answered by our nation is how was the president initially misled about such a profoundly important intelligence finding? A second equally important question is how did the White House produce an intelligence report that was obviously flawed and amateurish that was then released to the public and never corrected? The same false information in the intelligence report issued by the White House on August 30, 2013 was emphatically provided by Secretary of State John Kerry in testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee!

    We again have a situation where the White House has issued an obviously false, misleading and amateurish intelligence report.

    The Congress and the public have been given reports in the name of the intelligence community about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, technical evidence supposedly collected by satellite systems that any competent scientists would know is false, and now from photographs of the crater that any analyst who has any competent at all would not trust as evidence.

    It is late in the evening for me, so I will end my discussion here.

    I stand ready to provide the country with any analysis and help that is within my power to supply. What I can say for sure herein is that what the country is now being told by the White House cannot be true and the fact that this information has been provided in this format raises the most serious questions about the handling of our national security.

    Sincerely yours,

    Theodore A. Postol

    Professor Emeritus of Science, Technology, and National Security Policy
    Massachusetts Institute of Technology
    Email: [email protected]
    Cell Phone: 617 543-7646

    ... ... ... ...

    A lot of interesting and detailed information omitted

    ... ... ...

    Philippe Lemoine , Website April 13, 2017 at 5:53 am GMT \n

    200 Words I was really hoping that Prof. Postol would share his thoughts about the attack in Khan Sheikhoun. If you are interested, I wrote a very detailed blog post , in which I examine the evidence about the recent chemical attack and compare the situation with what happened after the chemical attack in Ghouta in August 2013. I argue that, in the case of the attack in Ghouta, the media narrative had rapidly unravelled and that, for that reason, we should be extremely prudent about the recent attack and not jump to conclusions. Among other things, I discuss the ballistic analysis produced by Postol and Lloyd at the time, which showed that both the much-touted NYT/HRW analysis and the US intelligence were mistaken. I also show that, despite the fact that a lot of evidence came out that undermined the official narrative, the media never changed their stance and continued to talk as if there was no doubt that Assad's regime was responsible for the attack. It's more than 5,000 words long and I provide a source for every single factual claim I make. The post has already been widely shared and some people have criticized it, so I will soon post a follow-up where I reply to critics and say more about the evidence that bears on the attack in Khan Sheikhoun.
    Diversity Heretic , April 13, 2017 at 7:35 am GMT \n
    100 Words This just gets weirder and weirder. Is the position of the Trump Administration and the intelligence community that the Syrian Air Force went through all the trouble to launch an aerial attack and drop one bomb? Handling chemical munitions is inherently dangerous. Syrian Air Force personnel loading the nerve agent into the bomb and then fitting it on the plane would have to wear protective clothing and receive special training, and might even then suffer some exposure casualties. And my recollection is that chemical weapons, even nerve gas, generally have to be used in massive quantities to achieve any military result.

    The chances that the gassing was as a result of a Syrian Air Force attack are vanishingly small. Other forces are in play here. The American people are being deceived. Read More

    Mao Cheng Ji , April 13, 2017 at 7:58 am GMT \n
    100 Words Technical stuff is interesting, but from the layman's perspective it's really straightforward: means, motive, opportunity.

    Opportunity: yes.
    Means: seems doubtful, due to the 2013-14 OPCW cleanup of the government-controlled territory.
    Motive: not just absent, but manifestly counterproductive, under the circumstances.

    There's also ample evidence of the government desperately trying to avoid antagonizing the population. In the territories they they liberate, they routinely – and that's a fact – transport anti-government militants and their families, and even with their light weapons, into rebel-controlled territories, that same Idlib province. In government-supplied buses. Even though they could easily kill them all, right on the spot. How does it square with with the supposed indiscriminate gassing? Read More

    Anon , April 13, 2017 at 8:39 am GMT \n
    A courageous and honorable man indeed. This is putting America first! Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
    The Scalpel , Website April 13, 2017 at 9:20 am GMT \n
    100 Words Much "evidence" can be faked. This is just an example of that fact. Looking at that tube, it is obvious that it did not explode. If it is very difficult to determine if evidence is real or faked, then one must be very careful reaching conclusions based on said evidence. At that point, motives must be taken into consideration.

    The argument that the Syrian government had any motive whatsoever to carry out this attack is very,very weak. Also, I have heard the claim that the US government believes only one chemical weapon was used. Assuming that the Syrian government carried out the attack, which I do not believe, why would they use just one chemical weapon?

    So what we have here is very weak evidence, very weak motive, and an illogical and inefficient proposed mechanism. This does not pass the smell test at all.

    Avery , April 13, 2017 at 12:37 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @Mao Cheng Ji Technical stuff is interesting, but from the layman's perspective it's really straightforward: means, motive, opportunity.

    Opportunity: yes.
    Means: seems doubtful, due to the 2013-14 OPCW cleanup of the government-controlled territory.
    Motive: not just absent, but manifestly counterproductive, under the circumstances.

    There's also ample evidence of the government desperately trying to avoid antagonizing the population. In the territories they they liberate, they routinely - and that's a fact - transport anti-government militants and their families, and even with their light weapons, into rebel-controlled territories, that same Idlib province. In government-supplied buses. Even though they could easily kill them all, right on the spot. How does it square with with the supposed indiscriminate gassing? You make good points.

    {How does it square with with the supposed indiscriminate gassing?}

    It doesn't.
    Particularly a chemical attack, to kill, what, 100 people?
    Assad knows very well what that would mean: even Russia would not let it slide.
    As you said, SAA could easily kill hundreds of terrorists and their sympathizers with conventional bombs if they wanted to kill indiscriminately.

    On the other hand it squares 100% with enemies of Syria.
    SAA is winning, albeit at a very slow pace, and Neocons clearly are panicking and desperate to prevent the breakout of peace in Syria at any cost.

    Xander USMC , April 13, 2017 at 12:54 pm GMT \n
    200 Words I was a demo guy in the Marine Corps, so I am familiar with the effect of explosive charges. There is no question that the photo, if accurate, is consistent with a charge placed above rather than within. There may be other explanations for the compression but definitely not an internal charge. I would note that the diagram in the article suggests some sort of "pipe bomb" type charge on top, but I do not see any sort of fragments from that type of device. If it was a charge on top it would have needed to be a simple explosive charge, probably tamped with dirt or sand. In any case, there would be explosive residue on the outside of the pipe which could easily be identified. Obviously, if this pipe was source of the agent someone should have preserved this evidence and turned it over to the UN or whoever.
    Ivan , April 13, 2017 at 2:04 pm GMT \n
    @Diversity Heretic This just gets weirder and weirder. Is the position of the Trump Administration and the intelligence community that the Syrian Air Force went through all the trouble to launch an aerial attack and drop one bomb? Handling chemical munitions is inherently dangerous. Syrian Air Force personnel loading the nerve agent into the bomb and then fitting it on the plane would have to wear protective clothing and receive special training, and might even then suffer some exposure casualties. And my recollection is that chemical weapons, even nerve gas, generally have to be used in massive quantities to achieve any military result.

    The chances that the gassing was as a result of a Syrian Air Force attack are vanishingly small. Other forces are in play here. The American people are being deceived. Gilad Atzmon had another question: if the US really did believe that air force base had chemical weapons stores then launching a Tomahawk strike would in all likelihood release those same gases . Duh.

    El Dato , April 13, 2017 at 3:07 pm GMT \n
    @Ivan Gilad Atzmon had another question: if the US really did believe that air force base had chemical weapons stores then launching a Tomahawk strike would in all likelihood release those same gases . Duh. Which is why

    https://www.rt.com/news/384042-shayrat-probe-chemical-weapons/

    and also

    https://southfront.org/debunking-rumors-about-chemical-weapons-containers-in-syrias-shayrat-airbase/

    Anon , April 13, 2017 at 3:09 pm GMT \n
    200 Words @Chris Mallory

    Does this mean that Abe Lincoln was a ruthless thug responsible for the deaths of a half a million Americans during our civil war?
    Yes

    Who is worse, Assad or Lincoln?
    Lincoln wins that race in a blowout. Lincoln was one of the most evil monsters to ever walk the earth. Well, President Asad is trying to prevent the destruction of his nation, the probable partitioning of it, the crushing of any institutions reflecting the Arab consensus that has always bound the nation together and made its institutions work, as well as preventing openly genocidal barbarians from achieving victory, erasing Earth's oldest Christian communities and other religious minorities. President Lincoln was facing a foe that just wanted slavery and separatism. The Confederates were not genocidal, although the cruelties of the slave trade and the plantation system often reached the same level of inhumanity. So, overall, from the perspective of a CNN/MSNBC believer, or a Trumpian nouveau-neocon, Asad is much worse worse than Hitler, in fact, as Sean Spicer was trying to say. Here's a tip: Keep it simple, Sean. Don't bring up the Holocaust, just say he's worse than Hitler. Some will question that, but those who matter will let it slide.
    Agent76 , April 13, 2017 at 3:29 pm GMT \n
    April 07, 2017 Pentagon Trained Syria's Al Qaeda "Rebels" in the Use of Chemical Weapons

    The Western media refutes their own lies.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/pentagon-trained-syrias-al-qaeda-rebels-in-the-use-of-chemical-weapons/5583784

    Apr 9, 2017 No More

    utu , April 13, 2017 at 4:38 pm GMT \n
    500 Words Where is Russia's propaganda machine? 71 years old, retired American professors does amateurish analysis using one pict obtained from social media and Sputnik and Russia Today will publish it, right? But where are the Russians? What did they do to support the belief that the gas attack was a false flag? Apparently nothing. Lavrov calls of UN investigation. That's about all. But what about the assets they have in Syria? Couldn't they release some information pointing to the real culprits?

    Inept, indolent losers!

    Why Russia's media are so pathetically weak? For some years already I follow some Russian media outfits and I am amazed why they are so inept and indolent. Their approach is totally inadequate when targeted with Anglo-Zio media aggressive anti-Russia narratives.

    This time when Russia and Putin were smacked in the face in Syria the best Russia came up with was to claim that it did not hurt that much, that only 23 out of 59 missiles reached the target and that the damage to the airport was minimal. And next day they doubled down on it by having planes taking off from the airport. Whether the claims are factual or not it does not matter. The opposite approach should have be used: exaggerate the pain and loss you have suffered. Keep showing dead bodies and damage even if invented. Do not pretend that it rains when they are spitting in your face. Show your hurt, your weakness. Be more like Anglo-Zio propaganda that will accuse every drop a real rain of aggressive intent or even of being anti-semitic. Be proactive not reactive.

    So why Russia's propaganda machine is so weak? Is it because Russians are proud people or that their journalists and propagandists have moral scruples and won't engage in lies and manipulations? Obviously not. They just do not know because they are conditioned by the working of propaganda in the authoritarian regime just like during Tsars and Bolsheviks. In the authoritarian regime the chief objective of propaganda is to convince the subjects of the regime that the regime knows what it is doing and that it is strong. The propaganda is not really directed for the foreign enemies but for the domestic friends. For this reason any setbacks or losses will be hidden from the populace or minimized. No disasters and no catastrophes ever happened in the Soviet Union if you just read Pravda or Izvestia. Towards the end of WWII Goebbels was disappointed with inability of German propaganda to produce sympathy around the world for Germans suffering due to American and British bombing of German civilian population that was killing children women, and elders. But this was a consequence of years of hiding these losses from German population because the regime wanted to project its strengths. And that was a mistake. So if Russia wants to confront Anglo-Zio media they must shape up and change the approach. So far they are failing though I am sure they are doing a wonderful job for people like Smoothie (if you ask him) and other clumsy and ineffective agents of influence on behalf of Russia.

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
    El Dato , April 13, 2017 at 4:54 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @reiner Tor Thanks, that's useful to know.

    Are you sure it's true of sarin? I read that about sarin specifically. It seems creating the sarin generates either hydrochloric acid or hydrofluoric acid as byproduct (especially the latter is Very Not Good), so keeping sarin even in glass bottles is bound to be fraught with difficulties over the long run (instant expert via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarin )

    In particular the US had capabilities to fire sarin precursors in a single shell that are reacting in-flight to avoid the storage problems. I'm not sure Syria had that, but even for the Ghouta attack there was talk about "our intelligence services picked up the order for mixing" (however debatable that is), so I don't suppose they did. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    Astuteobservor II , April 13, 2017 at 5:03 pm GMT \n
    just another false flag. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
    Alfa158 , April 13, 2017 at 5:07 pm GMT \n
    100 Words What was the date of the image from Google Earth showing the supposed bomb crater? Google Earth is not a real time satellite reconnaissance system. You can get the date of the image from the display options, and they are usually months or years old.
    Is it possible that this crater was already there prior to the gas attack? Read More
    MarkinLA , April 13, 2017 at 5:08 pm GMT \n
    100 Words And on CNN this morning there was a claim that the US intercepted Syrian military people interacting with chemical weapons specialists or some garbage like that. Just when the story is about to explode in the US's face, out comes a convenient claim that doesn't make any sense to people with IQs above room level. I am sure if there was such a dubious communication it was created by Mossad or Saudi secret services.

    This is like all our intercepted communiques. Like that one just before we invaded Iraq. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

    bjondo , April 13, 2017 at 5:15 pm GMT \n
    @Carlton Meyer Let me add that Jimmy Dore made a great point in that video. Many blame Assad for the half million Syrians who have died in this civil war; yet it was mostly caused by an invasion of outside Islamic mercs paid for by the Saudis and Qatar.

    Does this mean that Abe Lincoln was a ruthless thug responsible for the deaths of a half a million Americans during our civil war? The confederate rebels weren't even trying to conquer the north, they just wanted to be left to run their own affairs.

    Who is worse, Assad or Lincoln? Wouldnt compare Old Abe to President Assad
    Pres Assad doesn't deserve the very questionable "who is worse" comparison.
    Assad is GOOD. Period. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    El Dato , April 13, 2017 at 5:34 pm GMT \n
    100 Words Everybody has Sarin Fever, soon there will be Sarin Pokemons, Sarin with your ice cream, Sarin pillows, a George Lucas movie called "Sarin!" and voucher for Sarin holidays I'm sure:

    http://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/13/asia/north-korea-missiles-japan/

    "North Korea may be able to arm missiles with sarin, Japan PM says Abe did not provide any evidence why he felt North Korea had the capability to equip missiles with chemical weapons. "

    Well, one might totally suppose the Norks are not total peasants. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

    El Dato , April 13, 2017 at 5:47 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @Alfa158 What was the date of the image from Google Earth showing the supposed bomb crater? Google Earth is not a real time satellite reconnaissance system. You can get the date of the image from the display options, and they are usually months or years old.
    Is it possible that this crater was already there prior to the gas attack? It's just to show the location:

    The Google Earth map shown in Figure 1 at the end of this text section shows the location of that crater on the road in the north of Khan Shaykhun, as described in the White House statement.

    That warehouse is a bit bombed-out by now.

    See:

    http://syria.liveuamap.com/en/2017/7-april-pentagons-location-of-impact-crater-linked-to-the

    It's right here, a lonely crater of a single chemical munition:

    https://www.google.com/maps/place/35%C2%B026'59.7%22N+36%C2%B038'55.6%22E/@35.449907,36.6478998,353m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0×0!8m2!3d35.449907!4d36.648767 Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    JPTravis , Website April 13, 2017 at 5:53 pm GMT \n
    100 Words Sadly, the way these things work, the evidence as it stands will henceforth be irrelevant. Now that the Trump administration has staked its reputation on a cruise missile attack to punish Assad for using chemical warfare, they will NEVER admit they were wrong. Just like Obama will never admit he royally screwed up Libya and his amateurish machinations got a U.S. ambassador dragged through the streets like a dead cat. We seem to live in a world where truth no longer matters. What matters is whether you can get the idiots in the media to buy your version of events rather than your political enemy's version of events. Personally, I never thought Assad was responsible for this atrocity. Why risk something like that when everybody agreed he was finally winning this thing?
    El Dato , April 13, 2017 at 6:32 pm GMT \n
    300 Words Olive branch extension and face-saving in progress?

    https://www.rt.com/uk/384592-ambassador-brenton-russia-syria/

    Russia 'horrified at chemical attacks' in Syria, says former UK ambassador to Moscow

    Russia has been badly mishandled by Western powers, which fail to realize the Kremlin is not fond of the Syrian leadership and is horrified at recent chemical attacks, former British diplomat Tony Brenton has told the BBC.

    Speaking to the BBC 'Today' program on Thursday, Brenton, who served as ambassador to Moscow from 2004 to 2008, said it is important to understand Syria from the Russian perspective.

    "The Russian view of the situation in Syria is very clear. They don't much like [Syrian President Bashar] Assad and they must be horrified at the chemical weapons attack last week.

    But the question they ask themselves is, 'if we get rid of Assad, what comes after?'" Brenton said.

    "Their answer to that question is that 'we get some of Islamic fundamentalism which is worse for us than Assad' so we put up with the nasty dictator that we've got rather than admitting fundamentalism which is a direct threat to us."

    Asked if the Russians need "help" to move away from Assad, Brenton said: "I think that is exactly it. I think if we can get together with the Russians they have a real interest in moving away from Assad as well."

    Understanding the domestic political situation in Russia is also vital in order to grapple with the question of how the country operates in the world, he said.

    "They are dealing with a population which doesn't really understand why they are in Syria at all.

    "If we could move towards an after-Assad regime in Syria which guaranteed the non-intervention of Islamic fundamentalism, [Russia] would be delighted to work in that direction."

    Agent76 , April 13, 2017 at 7:00 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @Carlton Meyer A Congressman and Iraq war vet suggests an investigation and the Dems denounce her:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1oECQ6r6do This is what the Bankster puppet's do when they have been outed!

    Dec 8, 2016 Rep. Tulsi Gabbard Introduces Bill to Stop Arming Terrorists

    December 08, 2016 Bipartisan Bill Would Forbid US Funding ISIS, al-Qaeda Affiliates

    Gabbert-Rohrabacher Bill Would Effectively End CIA Program Arming Syrian Rebels. The Stop Arming Terrorists Act (SATA) has been introduced today in the House of Representatives by Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D – HI).

    http://news.antiwar.com/2016/12/08/bipartisan-bill-would-forbid-us-funding-isis-al-qaeda-affiliates/

    Art , April 13, 2017 at 8:13 pm GMT \n
    100 Words The Jew keep their eye on the price – a busted up Syria. They have the Kushner White House, all the rest of Stockholm DC, and their MSM all pumping out the "Assad did it" lie.

    The world's two major nuke powers are at loggerheads – but what the hell – Israel is happy and getting its way.

    You Stockholmers must never forget what the Jew terrorists tell you – "Jews are the eternal victims" – so suck it up you 7,000,000,000 fools – you must always defer to us!

    Laugh in your face! Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

    RobinG , April 13, 2017 at 8:15 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @Ivan Gilad Atzmon had another question: if the US really did believe that air force base had chemical weapons stores then launching a Tomahawk strike would in all likelihood release those same gases . Duh. Gilad's whole argument is flawed. The US has not said that chem. weapons were stored there. [If anyone has official statement to contrary, please correct me.] The US only claimed that chem. attacks were launched from there.

    Then, as to targeting, US said it was targeting below-ground fuel storage, perhaps munitions also, but not chem. Again, anyone have better info? Official, not MSM who will say anything.

    anon , April 13, 2017 at 8:33 pm GMT \n
    100 Words the Wall Street Journal's right wing neocon-in-residence Brett Stephens loudly called for "regime change" in North Korea two weeks ago.

    And then there's Iran, which the Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol is once again saying is the ultimate "prize" for regime change, now that Trump is directly bombing Assad's forces.

    Weeks ago, Trump's defense secretary James Mattis was reportedly planning a brazen and incredibly dangerous operation to board Iranian ships in international waters. " https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/apr/10/not-just-syria-trump-ratcheting-up-wars-world

    One day they or their children will move to Israel or to another country and use North Korean or Iranian to do terrorism against America or even use the entire country using this history of what is happening today to invade America . Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

    Steve Rendall , April 13, 2017 at 8:36 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @Carlton Meyer Let me add that Jimmy Dore made a great point in that video. Many blame Assad for the half million Syrians who have died in this civil war; yet it was mostly caused by an invasion of outside Islamic mercs paid for by the Saudis and Qatar.

    Does this mean that Abe Lincoln was a ruthless thug responsible for the deaths of a half a million Americans during our civil war? The confederate rebels weren't even trying to conquer the north, they just wanted to be left to run their own affairs.

    Who is worse, Assad or Lincoln? I like Dore, but if he said that he's almost surely wrong.

    Assad was bombing Syria for quite a while before Jihadis were much of a factor. He had the only Air Force and mechanized army in Syria from 2011 to 2014. For all of that time his bombing was the primary driver of the refugee crisis. It is impossible to say how many refugees Assad is responsible for, but it's likely he has caused the lion's share. Read More

    anon , April 13, 2017 at 8:45 pm GMT \n
    100 Words do not ignore these guys -

    "Susannah Sirkin from the Soros-funded Physicians for Human Rights claimed, "We know that sarin has been used before by the Assad regime." But that has NOT been confirmed by any credible organization. On the contrary, the most thorough investigations point to sarin being used by the armed opposition, NOT the Syrian government.

    The other guest was Andrew Tabler from the neoconservative Israeli-associated Washington Institute for Near East Policy. His editorial from last fall makes clear what he wants: "The case for (finally) bombing Assad." So, the viewers of the publicly funded network got one of their usual doses of "Assad must go" propaganda"

    https://consortiumnews.com/2017/04/10/how-media-bias-fuels-syrian-escalation/ Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

    m___ , April 13, 2017 at 8:46 pm GMT \n
    100 Words Higher intelligence individuals, moral integrity, ethical overview, physical courage.

    Since even the detailed and easy language above analysis leaves the world at large clueless, the few with necessary perception within the public, having no trouble understanding as outsiders what is meant, speak about what is the quality of the Washington power structures.

    The harnessed 'elites', including universities, are corrupted, cater to superficial riches, the short term, in equivalents of family and clan. Washington is a dump, where high quality individuals that by definition need less structure have no place.

    Since the public needs elites, since elites carry responsibility, "noblesse obligue", the essence of our de facto society can be concluded rotten to the core. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

    Randal , April 13, 2017 at 9:29 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @Steve Rendall I like Dore, but if he said that he's almost surely wrong.

    Assad was bombing Syria for quite a while before Jihadis were much of a factor. He had the only Air Force and mechanized army in Syria from 2011 to 2014. For all of that time his bombing was the primary driver of the refugee crisis. It is impossible to say how many refugees Assad is responsible for, but it's likely he has caused the lion's share.

    Assad was bombing Syria for quite a while before Jihadis were much of a factor. He had the only Air Force and mechanized army in Syria from 2011 to 2014.

    You have a rather unrealistically late idea of when foreign groups started backing the terrorists in Syria.

    Qatar, to name just one, is on the record as having actively supported the rebels militarily since at least April 2012, and the FT reported in May 2013 it had already spent $1-3 billion backing the rebels:

    How Qatar seized control of the Syrian revolution

    Turkey started providing support to the "Free Syria Army" in 2011, and jihadist groups such as Al Qaeda were openly calling for volunteers to fight in Syria by February 2012.

    This is all information in the public domain. It's likely covert interference started long before that. Read More

    MarkinLA , April 13, 2017 at 9:33 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @RobinG Gilad's whole argument is flawed. The US has not said that chem. weapons were stored there. [If anyone has official statement to contrary, please correct me.] The US only claimed that chem. attacks were launched from there.

    Then, as to targeting, US said it was targeting below-ground fuel storage, perhaps munitions also, but not chem. Again, anyone have better info? Official, not MSM who will say anything. I think you are right about US claims but they really don't make any sense if the aim was to punish someone using chemical weapons. At least Bush pretended to be looking for the WMD even though he likely knew they didn't exist.

    Where else would they be stored unless you think Assad has a secret stash someplace and pulls them out, now and then, to do some gassing. If that was the case, wouldn't it make more sense to bomb the stash and prove to the rest of the world Assad had them rather than just bomb an airfield and leave yourself open to the kind of criticism Trump is getting? The idea that we can track everything the Syrian military does but they have a secret chemical weapons store that Mossad, Turkey, the CIA, FSB, and Saudi intelligence agencies don't know about seems incredible. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    D Trump , April 13, 2017 at 10:33 pm GMT \n
    @El Dato Why is there a neatly printed red panel with a death's head next to the "incriminating tube"? Do White Helmets (or whoever did the photographing, maybe our undeclared "boots on the ground"?) carry these with them? My arabic reading skills are not so good, what does it say? Ivanka tells me – she does all my reading for me – that it says "Danger. Unexploded weapon" Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    RobinG , April 13, 2017 at 10:40 pm GMT \n
    @Steve Rendall I like Dore, but if he said that he's almost surely wrong.

    Assad was bombing Syria for quite a while before Jihadis were much of a factor. He had the only Air Force and mechanized army in Syria from 2011 to 2014. For all of that time his bombing was the primary driver of the refugee crisis. It is impossible to say how many refugees Assad is responsible for, but it's likely he has caused the lion's share. "It's likely covert interference started long before that." Yes, Randal. About 2006.

    Steve Randall, where do you think all those weapons and Jihadis went when Ambassador Chris Stevens arranged their passage out of Libya? Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    Anon , April 13, 2017 at 10:48 pm GMT \n
    300 Words Considering everything that's been happening recently, I think there is a strong possibility that this was either a false flag or they were simply waiting for an excuse to attack Syria – anything would do. In fact, Mattis had cooked up a plan to illegally board Iranian ships in international waters as a kind of Gulf of Tonkin provocation. The plan was only scrapped because it was leaked. Now, these maniacs are sending more troops to Afghanistan, concealing the numbers of troops they are deploying to the Middle East, dropping MOABs to scare other nations into submission, and threatening to attack North Korea.

    "Weeks ago, Trump's defense secretary James Mattis was reportedly planning a brazen and incredibly dangerous operation to board Iranian ships in international waters. This would have effectively been an act of war. Apparently, the only reason the Trump administration didn't carry it out was because the plan leaked and they were forced to scuttle it – at least temporarily. But that hasn't stopped the ratcheting up of tensions towards Iran ever since he took office

    On top of all this madness, 16 years after America's longest war in history started, a top general has already testified to Congress that the military wants more troops in Afghanistan to break the "stalemate" there. Well before the end of the Trump administration, there will be troops fighting and dying in Afghanistan who weren't even born when the 9/11 attacks occurred.
    To further shield the public from these decisions, the Trump administration indicated a couple weeks ago they have stopped disclosing even the amount of additional troops that they are sending overseas to fight. The numbers were already being downplayed by the Obama administration and received little attention as the numbers continually creeped up over the last two years. Now, the public will have virtually no insight into what its military is doing in those countries."

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/apr/10/not-just-syria-trump-ratcheting-up-wars-world Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

    Steve Rendall , April 13, 2017 at 11:20 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @Randal

    Assad was bombing Syria for quite a while before Jihadis were much of a factor. He had the only Air Force and mechanized army in Syria from 2011 to 2014.
    You have a rather unrealistically late idea of when foreign groups started backing the terrorists in Syria.

    Qatar, to name just one, is on the record as having actively supported the rebels militarily since at least April 2012, and the FT reported in May 2013 it had already spent $1-3 billion backing the rebels:

    How Qatar seized control of the Syrian revolution

    Turkey started providing support to the "Free Syria Army" in 2011, and jihadist groups such as Al Qaeda were openly calling for volunteers to fight in Syria by February 2012.

    This is all information in the public domain. It's likely covert interference started long before that. Anon does not reposed to my argument. Early on, Jihadi fighters were not much of a factor in driving the flight of refugees. And long term covert machinations, which I agree there was plenty of, don't matter if those it supports are not terrorizing people to leave the country. See how that works?

    See how Assad sacked major parts of Homs, with artillery, tanks, and an Air Force, while opposition had little more than mortars to fight back with.

    I dare you to find me an independent Syria expert who says the rebels are responsible for most of the refugee problem. Read More Troll: L.K

    JoaoAlfaiate , April 13, 2017 at 11:23 pm GMT \n
    Am I the only guy who finds it strange that the "bomb" explored exactly in the middle of a road? Read More
    Contraviews , Website April 13, 2017 at 11:25 pm GMT \n
    100 Words Dear Mr.Postol,
    What I did miss in your excellent analysis are comments on White Helmets and other rescuers handling sarin contaminated victims with bare hands and no protective clothing. As you know sarin is a highly toxis chemical, targeting the muscles and nervous system. Rescuers would have been contaminated themselves and died probably within hours.
    It's my take that these images were staged and filmed already before the "attack". Could you please comment on this aspect?
    Also listening to a chemical expert on Rt he stated that delivering sarin or chlorine from the air would be totally ineffective. Could you possibly elaborate on this as well?
    Tom Van Meurs
    New Zealand
    I will pubish your article on my Facebook Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
    anon , April 14, 2017 at 12:09 am GMT \n
    200 Words @Steve Rendall Anon does not reposed to my argument. Early on, Jihadi fighters were not much of a factor in driving the flight of refugees. And long term covert machinations, which I agree there was plenty of, don't matter if those it supports are not terrorizing people to leave the country. See how that works?

    See how Assad sacked major parts of Homs, with artillery, tanks, and an Air Force, while opposition had little more than mortars to fight back with.

    I dare you to find me an independent Syria expert who says the rebels are responsible for most of the refugee problem. Refugees s been pouring in Jordan and Turkey before moving to EU. Refugees eas expected by saudi They put barbed wire I think to stop.

    Syria initially saw a peaceful demonstration and before government started using arms or ammunition , demonstration got violent with assassination and killing of government forces Soon UK and USA were demanding that Assad needed to surrender. Assad started using air force to stem the tide of the violence .Assad offered amnesty and reconciliation s All were discarded at the behest of Western ad Saudi and Turkey Before that the 'Rat line" from Libya flooded the country with weapons Long before that French FM exposed the plans of destabilizing Syria . in 2007 Cheney was planning with Rice to start a civil war in Syria and western Iraq. Arms were in plenty already

    Assad had no choice but use all powers he had .
    Why did refugees go to EU?

    No one knows.

    But one thing is sure that this fallout and aftermath were in-built in the projects cooked in DC Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    Brewer , April 14, 2017 at 12:51 am GMT \n
    100 Words @Alfa158 What was the date of the image from Google Earth showing the supposed bomb crater? Google Earth is not a real time satellite reconnaissance system. You can get the date of the image from the display options, and they are usually months or years old.
    Is it possible that this crater was already there prior to the gas attack? There is a glaring anomaly in that there appears to be a 5-hour time difference between the gas release and the Syrian air attack – the former at around 6am, the latter at 11am. This should be easy enough to ascertain if one has the proper resources. If so it clears the SAA of responsibility.
    Xander USMC , April 14, 2017 at 1:10 pm GMT \n
    200 Words White House Explanation of Alleged Syrian Strategy is Utter Nonsense.

    I have not really seen much comment on the White House explanation for why the Syrians supposedly did this. The Paper discussed claims that the Syrian government did this attack in "southern Idlib province" in response to a threat "in response to an opposition offensive in northern Hamah province that threatened key infrastructure." This explanation is utterly nonsensical. If key infrastructure is being threatened in one part of the country why did the government have an airstrike in another area of the country–much less an entirely insignificant single rocket attack that does not appear to have accomplished anything militarily. If they were going to use gas why didn't they use it in Hamah where the "key infrastructure" was allegedly being threatened?

    Of course, there may be times when you can strike your enemies' supply lines, (like MacArthur wanted to take out the bridge over the Yalu River) but in any event I wish someone would ask the White House to explain this statement. No one has yet to offer any coherent explanation for the alleged actions of the Syrian government. Read More

    Xander USMC , April 14, 2017 at 1:29 pm GMT \n
    200 Words @Brewer There is a glaring anomaly in that there appears to be a 5-hour time difference between the gas release and the Syrian air attack - the former at around 6am, the latter at 11am. This should be easy enough to ascertain if one has the proper resources. If so it clears the SAA of responsibility. If there is a time gap that merely is evidence that it was someone on the ground. The U.S. claims a Syrian Sukoi-22 (an airplane so old the Russians don't use it anymore) dropped ordinance (the alleged chemicals) at the time of the attack. So if there was an airstrike by an Su-22 using high explosives that could well have damaged chemicals on the ground.

    There are also many possible explanations for a delay–we don't really know very much so its is pure speculation, but for example, if a warehouse storing chemical weapons by the rebels was damaged they may have tried to remove the chemicals from the warehouse hours after the attack and it was the attempt to move the damaged containers that resulted in an "accident." It is also consistent with a set-up as it would take time for rebels after the airstrike to engineer a chemical attack. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    alexander , April 14, 2017 at 3:00 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @Xander USMC White House Explanation of Alleged Syrian Strategy is Utter Nonsense.

    I have not really seen much comment on the White House explanation for why the Syrians supposedly did this. The Paper discussed claims that the Syrian government did this attack in "southern Idlib province" in response to a threat "in response to an opposition offensive in northern Hamah province that threatened key infrastructure." This explanation is utterly nonsensical. If key infrastructure is being threatened in one part of the country why did the government have an airstrike in another area of the country--much less an entirely insignificant single rocket attack that does not appear to have accomplished anything militarily. If they were going to use gas why didn't they use it in Hamah where the "key infrastructure" was allegedly being threatened?

    Of course, there may be times when you can strike your enemies' supply lines, (like MacArthur wanted to take out the bridge over the Yalu River) but in any event I wish someone would ask the White House to explain this statement. No one has yet to offer any coherent explanation for the alleged actions of the Syrian government. Xander,

    Let us assume, for arguments sake, you are President Assad.

    Over the past year, with the assistance of Russian forces, you have been able to mount decisive, significant victories against ISIS using conventional weapons, and you are on the verge of reclaiming your country from the assorted Jihadist's who are fragmenting it and destroying it.

    If you are well aware the ONE action you could take, which might force the hand of the most powerful military on the planet to descend upon you Wouldn't you avoid it like the plague ?

    Is there any strategic or tactical value for you to attempt it ?

    If there is .What is it ? Read More

    Randal , April 14, 2017 at 3:36 pm GMT \n
    200 Words @Steve Rendall Anon does not reposed to my argument. Early on, Jihadi fighters were not much of a factor in driving the flight of refugees. And long term covert machinations, which I agree there was plenty of, don't matter if those it supports are not terrorizing people to leave the country. See how that works?

    See how Assad sacked major parts of Homs, with artillery, tanks, and an Air Force, while opposition had little more than mortars to fight back with.

    I dare you to find me an independent Syria expert who says the rebels are responsible for most of the refugee problem.

    Anon does not reposed to my argument. Early on, Jihadi fighters were not much of a factor in driving the flight of refugees.

    The comment to which you responded referred to deaths, not refugees.

    But with regard to refugees, the UNHCR figures show that the number of registered Syrian refugees was still below 1m at the end of March 2013 (it's now over 5 million), whereas as I pointed out above, the external backing for the rebels that prevented the government restoring order and really ratcheted up the fighting had markedly increased during 2012.

    The blame for the devastation in Syria belongs with those who have perpetuated the rebellion and prevented the Syrian government restoring order, as Assad's father restored order following the uprising in 1982. Primarily with the US as the global hegemon, and with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey and Israel who have directly or indirectly interfered to seek regime change in Syria regardless of the human cost.

    Those who have a genuine humanitarian concern and are not motivated by ulterior strategic or political interests, should direct their criticism and their pressure appropriately. Read More

    bluedog , April 14, 2017 at 3:37 pm GMT \n
    @Steve Rendall Anon does not reposed to my argument. Early on, Jihadi fighters were not much of a factor in driving the flight of refugees. And long term covert machinations, which I agree there was plenty of, don't matter if those it supports are not terrorizing people to leave the country. See how that works?

    See how Assad sacked major parts of Homs, with artillery, tanks, and an Air Force, while opposition had little more than mortars to fight back with.

    I dare you to find me an independent Syria expert who says the rebels are responsible for most of the refugee problem. Well one would think it would be who ever started the dance not what happened after the lights went out..

    Xander USMC , April 14, 2017 at 8:48 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @alexander Xander,

    Let us assume, for arguments sake, you are President Assad.

    Over the past year, with the assistance of Russian forces, you have been able to mount decisive, significant victories against ISIS using conventional weapons, and you are on the verge of reclaiming your country from the assorted Jihadist's who are fragmenting it and destroying it.

    If you are well aware the ONE action you could take, which might force the hand of the most powerful military on the planet to descend upon you...Wouldn't you avoid it like the plague ?

    Is there any strategic or tactical value for you to attempt it ?


    If there is....What is it ? Right, but that is the strategic lack of sense, but I'm pointing out the strike would make no sense tactically either. If something was being threatened arguably it would make tactical sense to gas the area under attack–but not a minor attack 50 miles away that does not appear to have any relation to the alleged threat elsewhere. I haven't even seen any confirmation of any threat to "key infrastructure." Not to mention Syria retook Aleppo without the need for chemicals–wasn't that a lot more key than this unidentified "key infrastructure"?

    alexander , April 14, 2017 at 10:28 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @Xander USMC Right, but that is the strategic lack of sense, but I'm pointing out the strike would make no sense tactically either. If something was being threatened arguably it would make tactical sense to gas the area under attack--but not a minor attack 50 miles away that does not appear to have any relation to the alleged threat elsewhere. I haven't even seen any confirmation of any threat to "key infrastructure." Not to mention Syria retook Aleppo without the need for chemicals--wasn't that a lot more key than this unidentified "key infrastructure"? Yes ,

    It would make the most sense were one to use chemical weapons as a TACTIC, to use them in areas and situations where (as you suggest) one would get the most "bang for their buck".

    It is very clear to you,based on its location, this chemical attack was almost meaningless tactically.

    Right ?

    So if this chemical assault was tactically absurd and strategically suicidal, then what would be Assad's thinking by attempting it ?

    Is there some "rationale" that escapes us ?

    L.K , April 14, 2017 at 10:49 pm GMT \n
    200 Words @Steve Rendall I like Dore, but if he said that he's almost surely wrong.

    Assad was bombing Syria for quite a while before Jihadis were much of a factor. He had the only Air Force and mechanized army in Syria from 2011 to 2014. For all of that time his bombing was the primary driver of the refugee crisis. It is impossible to say how many refugees Assad is responsible for, but it's likely he has caused the lion's share. Everything you wrote is pure BS. But I guess that is your purpose here.

    Even Robert Fisk admitted there were Salafi jihadis involved from day one. Al-Ciada in Iraq was involved from day one, etc.
    There were and there are NO moderate 'rebels'. This ain't fucking star wars.
    Since early 2012, the Al-Nusra Front & co have been the main fighting force trying to topple the Syrian government . They are actually a more serious threat to Syria than Daesh/is.
    Increasingly from 2012 the Jihadis have been ever more heavily armed.
    The key Jihadi groups all have armored forces, artillery, ATGMs, the only thing they don't have is an air-force. Robert Fisk reported from the front lines in 2013/14/15 re how oftentimes the Syrian army faced militants that were as well armed and, in some cases, even better armed.
    Armored Assault by Al-Nusra in Aleppo, Caught on Nusra Drone Camera

    L.K , April 14, 2017 at 11:05 pm GMT \n
    200 Words @El Dato Syria may be an autocratic shithole where women must know their place and you better kowtow to the friendly state employee (or face a guided tour of a dungeon) with the Assad family in power (indeed we have https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_Hama_massacre under daddy already) but

    I dare you to find me an independent Syria expert who says the rebels are responsible for most of the refugee problem.
    This is just jumping the shark.

    People just don't like to stay in warzones and flattened cities, yes. Your view of Syria is a grotesque caricature. Here's what former US marine, Brad Hoff, found in Syria before the war:

    DURING MY FIRST WEEKS in Damascus, I was pleasantly shocked. My preconceived notions were shattered: I expected to find a society full of veiled women, mosques on every street corner, religious police looking over shoulders, rabid anti-American sentiment preached to angry crowds, persecuted Christians and crumbling hidden churches, prudish separation of the sexes, and so on. I quickly realized during my first few days and nights in Damascus, that Syria was a far cry from my previous imaginings, which were probably more reflective of Saudi Arabian life and culture. What I actually encountered were mostly unveiled women wearing European fashions and sporting bright makeup - many of them wearing blue jeans and tight fitting clothes that would be commonplace in American shopping malls on a summer day. I saw groups of teenage boys and girls mingling in trendy cafes late into the night, displaying expensive cell phones. There were plenty of mosques, but almost every neighborhood had a large church or two with crosses figured prominently in the Damascus skyline.

    A Marine in Syria

    https://medium.com/news-politics/a-marine-in-syria-d06ff67c203c

    As for the 'Hama massacre', it was actually a battle between the army and a sectarian islamic insurgency.

    [Apr 15, 2017] Syria Where the Rubber Meets the Road - The Unz Review

    Notable quotes:
    "... lives in Washington state. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press). Hopeless is also available in a Kindle edition . He can be reached at [email protected] . ..."
    Apr 15, 2017 | www.unz.com

    contacts in the area have told us this is not what happened. There was no Syrian 'chemical weapons attack.' Instead, a Syrian aircraft bombed an al-Qaeda-in-Syria ammunition depot that turned out to be full of noxious chemicals and a strong wind blew the chemical-laden cloud over a nearby village where many consequently died ..This is what the Russians and Syrians have been saying and – more important –what they appear to believe happened."

    - Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, 20 former members of the US Intelligence Community (names below)

    You don't have to be a genius to figure out that the case against Syrian President Bashar al Assad is extremely weak. The chemical weapons attack in Khan Shaykhun, has produced no smoking gun, no damning evidence, in fact, no evidence at all. Similar to the Russia hacking fiasco, (not a shred of evidence so far) the western media and the entire political class has made the case for attacking a sovereign country on the thin gruel of a few videos of an incident that took place in a location that is currently under the control of militant groups connected to al Qaida. That's pretty shaky grounds for a conviction, don't you think?

    And it's not up to Assad to prove his innocence either. That's baloney. The burden of proof rests with the prosecution. If Trump and his lieutenants have evidence that the Syrian President used chemical weapons, then– by all means– let's see it and be done with it. If not, we have to assume that Assad is innocent, not because we like Assad, but because these are the legal precedents that one follows to establish the truth. And that's what we want, we want to know what really happened.

    Neither Trump nor the media care about the truth, what they care about is regime change, which is the driving force behind Washington's six year-long war on Syria. The fact that Washington has concealed its support by secretly arming-and-training Sunni militias, does not absolve it from responsibility. The US is totally responsible for the mess in Syria. Without Washington's support none of this would have happened. 7 million Syrians wouldn't have fled their homes, 400,000 Syrians wouldn't have been killed, and the country would not be the anarchic wastelands it is today. The United States is entirely is responsible for the death and destruction of Syria. These are Washington's killing fields.

    As we said earlier, there is no evidence that Assad used chemical weapons against his people nor has there been any investigation to substantiate the claims. The Trump administration launched its Tomahawk missile barrage before consulting with the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons which essentially preempted the organization from doing its job. The administration's rejection of the normal investigative procedures and rush to judgement reinforces the belief that they know they have no case and are just peddling pro-war BS in the mad pursuit of their geopolitical objectives.

    Since we don't have an organization like the OPCW to conduct an investigation, we should at least consider the informed opinions of professionals who have some background in intelligence. This doesn't provide us with iron-clad proof one way or another, but at least it gives us an idea of some probable scenarios. Here's a quote from former CIA officer and Director of the Council for the National Interest, Philip Giraldi, who stated last week on the Scott Horton show:

    "I am hearing from sources on the ground, in the Middle East, the people who are intimately familiar with the intelligence available are saying that the essential narrative we are all hearing about the Syrian government or the Russians using chemical weapons on innocent civilians is a sham. The intelligence confirms pretty much the account the Russians have been giving since last night which is that they hit a warehouse where al Qaida rebels were storing chemicals of their own and it basically caused an explosion that resulted in the casualties. Apparently the intelligence on this is very clear, and people both in the Agency and in the military who are aware of the intelligence are freaking out about this because essentially Trump completely misrepresented what he should already have known - but maybe didn't–and they're afraid this is moving towards a situation that could easily turn into an armed conflict." (The Impending Clash Between the U.S. and Russia, Counterpunch)

    We hear a very similar account from retired Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, who was former chief of Staff to General Colin Powell. Here's what he said in a recent interview on the Real News Network:

    "I personally think the provocation was a Tonkin Gulf incident .. Most of my sources are telling me, including members of the team that monitors global chemical weapons –including people in Syria, including people in the US Intelligence Community–that what most likely happened was that they hit a warehouse that they had intended to hit and this warehouse was alleged to have to ISIS supplies in it, and some of those supplies were precursors for chemicals .. conventional bombs hit the warehouse, and due to a strong wind, and the explosive power of the bombs, they dispersed these ingredients and killed some people." (" Lawrence Wilkerson: Trump Attack on Syria Driven by Domestic Politics ", Real News Network)

    Finally, we have the collective judgement of 20 former members of the US Intelligence Community (names below) the so-called Steering Group of the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. Here's what they say:

    "Our U.S. Army contacts in the area have told us this is not what happened. There was no Syrian "chemical weapons attack." Instead, a Syrian aircraft bombed an al-Qaeda-in-Syria ammunition depot that turned out to be full of noxious chemicals and a strong wind blew the chemical-laden cloud over a nearby village where many consequently died ..This is what the Russians and Syrians have been saying and – more important –what they appear to believe happened."

    So, why is the administration so eager to jump to conclusions? Why do they want to use such a sketchy incident to justify an attack on sovereign nation that poses no threat to US national security? What's really going on here?

    ORDER IT NOW

    To answer tha, we need to review an interview with President Trump's new National Security Advisor, Lt. General H.R. McMaster, that took on place on Sunday on Fox News. McMaster– you may recall– recently replaced General Michael Flynn at the same position. Flynn's failing was that he wanted to "normalize" relations with Russia which the behind-the-scenes powerbrokers rejected out-of-hand and worked to have him replaced with far-right wing militarist-neocon McMaster. Now, McMaster is part of the one-two combo that decides US foreign policy around the world. Trump has essentially dumped Syria in the laps of his two favorite generals, McMaster and James "Mad Dog" Mattis who have decided to deepen Washington's military commitment in Syria and intensify the conflict even if it means a direct confrontation with Russia.

    In the Fox interview, McMaster was asked a number of questions about Trump's missile attack. Here's part of what he said:

    "The objective (of the strikes) was to send a very strong political message to Assad. And this is very significant because . this is the first time the United States has acted directly against the Assad regime, and that should be a strong message to Assad and to his sponsors .

    He added,

    "Russia should ask themselves, what are we doing here? Why are we supporting this murderous regime that is committing mass murder of its own population and using the most heinous weapons available .Right now, I think everyone in the world sees Russia as part of the problem." (Fox News with Chris Wallace)

    Can you see what's going on? Trump's missile attack was not retaliatory, not really. It was a message to Putin. McMaster was saying as clearly as possible, that 'the US military is coming for Assad, and you'd better stay out of the way if you know what's good for you.' That's the message. It has nothing to do with chemical weapons or the suffering of innocent people. McMaster was delivering a threat. He was putting Putin 'on notice'.

    Like McMaster said, "this is the first time the United States has acted directly against the Assad regime, and that should be a strong message to Assad and to his sponsors ."

    In other words, McMaster wants Putin to know that he's prepared to attack the Syrian government and its assets directly and, that, if Putin continues to defend Assad, Russian forces will be targeted as well.

    There was some confusion about this in the media because UN ambassador Nikki Haley and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson got their talking-points mixed up and botched their interviews. But the Washington Post clarified the policy the next day by stating bluntly:

    "Officials in the Trump administration on Sunday demanded that Russia stop supporting the Syrian government or face a further deterioration in its relations with the United States."

    Bingo. That's the policy in a nutshell. The issue isn't chemical weapons. The issue is Russia's support for Assad, the leader who remains the target of US regime change plans. We are seeing a fundamental shift in the policy from mainly covert support for CIA-backed Sunni militias to overt military intervention. This is just the first volley in that new war.

    The media wants the American people to believe that President Trump impulsively ordered the missile attacks in response to the use of chemical weapons. But there's reason to suspect that the attacks had been planned for some time in advance. As one blogger pointed out:

    "In the weeks before the missile strikes, Trump met with the Saudis, the president of Egypt, and the King of Jordan, while Secretary of State met with Turkish President Erdogan. In other words, the administration met with the entire Middle East 'Sunni alliance' just days before ordering the missile strikes. Coincidence?

    Probably not. They were probably tipped off and asked for their continued support.

    Also, Trump waited until the evening that he was having dinner with President Xi Jinping to launch the attacks. How's that for timing?

    Do you think that the announcement that Trump just attacked Syria would have an impact on the two leaders' conversation about North Korea? Do you think Xi might have seen the announcement as a not-so-subtle threat of violence against the North unless China forces its ally to make concessions?

    Of course, he did. The man wasn't born yesterday.

    It seems unlikely that Trump's attack was a snap decision made by an impulsive man. Instead, it looks like there was a significant amount of planning that went on beforehand, including the deploying of 400 additional Special Ops to Syria and 2,500 combat troops to nearby Kuwait. It appears as though Washington had been building up its troop-strength for some time before it settled on the right pretext for taking things to the next level. As journalist Bill Van Auken noted at the World Socialist Web Site:

    "We have been here so many times before that it is hardly worth wasting the time required to refute the official story. It is now 14 years since the US launched its invasion of Iraq over similar lies about weapons of mass destruction, setting into motion a vast slaughter that has claimed the lives of over one million people and turned millions more into refugees ..

    Once again, as in the air war against Serbia in 1999, the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003, and the attack on Libya in 2011, the United States has concocted a pretext to justify the violation of another country's sovereignty " ("The Bombing of Syria, Bill Van Auken, World Socialist Web Site)

    I have no way of knowing whether Assad used chemical weapons or not, but I found Russian President Vladimir Putin's analysis particularly interesting. Reporters asked Putin - "What is your view about the use of chemical weapons in Syria?"

    Putin answered-:

    "You all know that the Syrian government has repeatedly asked the international community to come and inspect the sites where the rebels used chemical weapons. But they always ignored those requests. The only time the international community has responded, was to this last incident. So, what do I think?

    I think we can figure out what's going on by just using a little common sense. The Syrian army was winning the war, in some places they had the rebels completely surrounded. For them to throw it all away and give their trump card to the people who have been calling for regime change is, frankly, a crock of shit.". ( Russian President Vladimir Putin. )

    Putin's response to Trump's missile attack has been subdued to say the least. He did issue a perfunctory presidential press statement on the incident, but the tone of the statement was neither incendiary or belligerent. If anything, it sounded like he found the whole matter irritating, like the man who sits down to a picnic lunch and finds he has to deal with pesky mosquito before he can eat. But, of course, this is the way that Putin handles most matters. He's a master of understatement who is not easily given to emotional outbursts or displays of rage. He's more apt to scratch himself, roll his eyes and give a shrug of the shoulders, than wave his fist and issue threats.

    But from a strategic point of view, Putin's measured response makes perfect sense, after all, the real battle isn't going to be won or lost in Syria. It's much bigger than that. Putin is challenging the present world order in which a disproportionate amount of political and economic power has accrued to one unipolar center of authority, a global hegemon that imposes its economic model wherever it goes and topples sovereign states with a wave of the hand. Putin's task is to build resistance among the vassals, form new alliances, and strengthen the collective resolve for a different world where national sovereignty and borders are guaranteed under an impartial set of international laws that protect the weak as well as the strong.

    That's Putin's real objective, to rebuild the system of global security based on a solid foundation of respect for the vital interests of each and every country. To accomplish that, Putin must seem like a reasonable and trustworthy ally who honors his commitments and stands by his friends even when they are under attack. That's why Putin won't abandon Assad. It's because he can't.

    Syria is the battlefield where competing visions of the future meet head on. It's where the rubber meets the road.

    MIKE WHITNEY lives in Washington state. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press). Hopeless is also available in a Kindle edition . He can be reached at [email protected] .

    Anon , April 12, 2017 at 1:44 pm GMT \n

    100 Words

    Can you see what's going on? Trump's missile attack was not retaliatory, not really. It was a message to Putin. McMaster was saying as clearly as possible, that 'the US military is coming for Assad, and you'd better stay out of the way if you know what's good for you.' That's the message.

    It's not only that. He adds that everyone else in the world sees it that way.
    That's an essential element to bully speak, and it's never missing from it.

    They love to receive validation from their serfs (you could consider this the "alpha's dessert", from a certain anthropological perspective, to be tasted after every meal).

    After the missile barrage, European "leaders" all took part in a bowing down competition. The good general's expectations about them didn't go unrealized.

    The choir of serfs may be seem a scenic element, nevertheless it is essential scenery. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc.

    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are only available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also only be used once per hour. Email Comment Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/mwhitney/syria-where-the-rubber-meets-the-road/#comment-1834576 Tweet More... This Commenter Display All Comments
    WorkingClass , April 12, 2017 at 6:48 pm GMT \n
    Trump attacked Syria because he wants to rule the world by force of arms. He pretended to prefer peace to war in order to get elected. He is not Hitler. He is Dubya and Kushner is his Cheney.
    FKA Max , April 13, 2017 at 4:06 am GMT \n

    You don't have to be a genius to figure out that the case against Syrian President Bashar al Assad is extremely weak.

    Maybe you do have to be one

    Ann Coulter, whom I believe to be a female genius

    http://www.unz.com/jthompson/iq-does-not-exist-lead-poisoning-aside/#comment-1833752

    ANN COULTER FULL ONE-ON-ONE EXPLOSIVE INTERVIEW WITH TUCKER CARLSON (4/12/2017)

    Read More

    Anon , April 13, 2017 at 5:33 am GMT \n
    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
    Anon , April 13, 2017 at 6:19 am GMT \n
    Kinzer says 'left' and 'right' are breaking down in foreign policy.

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

    Diversity Heretic , April 13, 2017 at 6:54 am GMT \n
    @WorkingClass

    If you want a world whereby the US lives in perpetual peace you want a world in which the US is too weak to invade other countries.
    Yup. That's what I want. In one of his last books, Around the Cragged Hill , George Kennan advocated the dissolution of the United States in its present form for precisely this reason. You're in good company. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    Ram , April 13, 2017 at 9:30 am GMT \n
    @nsa Under 2% of the population.....over 50% of the Trump cabinet. The Anglos lack the "genetic" qualification to "serve" the US. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    El Dato , April 13, 2017 at 10:28 am GMT \n
    100 Words

    Probably not. [Sunni/Wahabbi/Army of Conquest actors] were probably tipped off and asked for their continued support.

    In which case the "accidental release of warehoused chemicals" makes only sense if it was a "lucky strike". Seeing how this went down, so totally perfectly, I would say "fully engineered 'incident' with actors on the ground" is the likely explanation. See also http://www.unz.com/author/theodore-a-postol/ of course.

    It's just a matter of degree but the US went from not-too-deadly-to-civilians false flags (some 60′s CIA "communist bombings" in South Vietnam notwithstanding) to do-not-care-about-civilians false flags, and I would say that happened under Obama.

    In the long run. these people are all dead of course, but it's still a hardening of the veins. Read More

    Karl , April 13, 2017 at 10:54 am GMT \n
    > The US is totally responsible for the mess in Syria

    darn, those jolly peaceful people in Syria got pushed off-course of a history of thousands of years without a single internal conflict . by the Americans. Everything by the Americans.

    > waited until the evening that he was having dinner with President Xi Jinping to launch the attacks. How's that for timing?

    whatever it takes to make sure that Arabella gets good reviews in the Beijing papers Read More

    KenH , April 13, 2017 at 12:21 pm GMT \n
    200 Words I saw a red flag when Trump & the Pentagon inserted troops into Syria without asking for permission from Bashar Al Assad. It seemed to me that the regime change writing was on the wall and it was only a matter of time before they found the right pretext or created a false flag (or fell for one staged by the "rebels"). And lo and behold they found one straight out of a Hollywood movie script where a real life Dr. Evil type dictator "gasses" innocent women and children.

    Then it was the usual faux outrage by the president, his cabinet members, Congress and the fake, lapdog media while repeating unfounded allegations 24/7 as established truths.

    "In the weeks before the missile strikes, Trump met with the Saudis, the president of Egypt, and the King of Jordan, while Secretary of State met with Turkish President Erdogan.

    Those are all the wrong people to consult with since they are Sunni and Assad is a member of the Alawite sect of Shia Islam. Of course they'd like to see Assad deposed and a pliant Sunni stooge in his stead.

    As for Israel, they prefer the bad guys not backed by Iran which would be ISIS and other Wahabi cutthroats and who we now seem to be supporting given Trump's radical shift on Syria.

    http://www.jpost.com/Syria-Crisis/Oren-Jerusalem-has-wanted-Assad-ousted-since-the-outbreak-of-the-Syrian-civil-war-326328 Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

    Miro23 , April 13, 2017 at 1:10 pm GMT \n
    100 Words Really a very good article putting beyond doubt that Syria is being set up for "Regime Change" and the Russians are being warned to keep out.

    .. To accomplish that, Putin must seem like a reasonable and trustworthy ally who honors his commitments and stands by his friends even when they are under attack. That's why Putin won't abandon Assad. It's because he can't.

    Well, maybe he could, rather than risk was WWIII. And at least the US public would know for sure that their "No More ME Wars" candidate had defected to the Neo-cons, with the American Establishment being the War Party rather than the Russians. Read More

    Robert Magill , April 13, 2017 at 1:48 pm GMT \n
    100 Words My scenario is a little different. I cannot believe that Donald Trump who has demonstrated such spot on political instincts has suddenly lost his touch. Consider: Premier Xi comes to visit. Deals are done. Russia and Syria are notified during lunch the number of missiles and their intended destination. This is all a show for Xi and Putin. After lunch the missiles go off and about half reach the target.

    Main runway undamaged, Syrian planes resume flights next day. Mission accomplished! Target practice for the Russians. Now we know and they know how many missiles they can scratch in a cluster.
    War hawks salivate. Everybody else has the vapors. Xi goes to Alaska for the next big thing. Train service from the old world to the new.

    http://robertmagill.wordpress.com Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

    anonymous , April 13, 2017 at 2:04 pm GMT \n
    200 Words The world must attack the criminal China by serving the interest of the imperialism/Zionism and the Trump regime for few petty bones.

    China abstained from the UN vote on Syria, where Trump regime bombed Syrian people and frame Assad for the chemical attack where CIA trained terrorists in Syria staged.

    {President Donald Trump has praised China for its decision to abstain from voting on a UN Security Council resolution condemning last week's chemical attack on civilians in Syria, terming it an honour for the US.}

    China is a criminal state a petty colony. Its leaders are cowards and cannot be trusted. They are traitors to humanity. Everyone and every country must BOYCOTT anything Chinese.
    You don't want to help petty people.

    Long live Russia for time being. China and Russia SOLD Libya and open the road for the criminal West into Syria. China bears very big responsibility for the survival of evil for
    petty concessions.
    Down with China, Down with its petty 'leaders' with mafia hear style. Shame on China.

    Please boycott all goods made in China. Petty Chinese have close relation with Zionist entity because Chinese are enemies of Muslims as well. Down with China. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

    jacques sheete , April 13, 2017 at 2:14 pm GMT \n
    @Fran Macadam I'd say, it's more like "where the rubble meets the road."

    I'd say, it's more like "where the rubble meets the road."

    Or where the rabble bombed the road. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    Bill , April 13, 2017 at 3:11 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @Karl > The US is totally responsible for the mess in Syria

    darn, those jolly peaceful people in Syria got pushed off-course of a history of thousands of years without a single internal conflict.... by the Americans. Everything by the Americans.

    > waited until the evening that he was having dinner with President Xi Jinping to launch the attacks. How's that for timing?


    whatever it takes to make sure that Arabella gets good reviews in the Beijing papers

    darn, those jolly peaceful people in Syria got pushed off-course of a history of thousands of years without a single internal conflict . by the Americans. Everything by the Americans.

    Your claim is that the war would have happened even without the US and its allies starting it? What's the evidence for this claim? Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    bluedog , April 13, 2017 at 3:21 pm GMT \n
    @Miro23 Really a very good article putting beyond doubt that Syria is being set up for "Regime Change" and the Russians are being warned to keep out.

    ..... To accomplish that, Putin must seem like a reasonable and trustworthy ally who honors his commitments and stands by his friends even when they are under attack. That's why Putin won't abandon Assad. It's because he can't.
    Well, maybe he could, rather than risk was WWIII. And at least the US public would know for sure that their "No More ME Wars" candidate had defected to the Neo-cons, with the American Establishment being the War Party rather than the Russians. No Putin can't throw away Syria for if he does then the rest of the world would judge him the same as they judge us "everyone knows the word of America is no good" and neither Putin or the Russia people would go for that Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    Agent76 , April 13, 2017 at 3:39 pm GMT \n
    Sep 3, 2013 The Syrian War What You're Not Being Told

    What's really going on in Syria? Let's look at the evidence.

    Read More

    Tom Welsh , April 13, 2017 at 3:55 pm GMT \n
    100 Words If the Americans intend to attack Syria, and attack the Russians if they defend Syria, the Americans are going to get a bloody nose (and perhaps a broken jaw).

    What really annoys me is that the fatuous stuffed shirts in Washington get off scot-free every time their ludicrous adventures go haywire.

    Wouldn't it be nice if Congress could pass a law requiring that, whenever an American military aggression fails, all those responsible must commit seppuku in the traditional Japanese way? Read More

    Agent76 , April 13, 2017 at 4:27 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @Tom Welsh If the Americans intend to attack Syria, and attack the Russians if they defend Syria, the Americans are going to get a bloody nose (and perhaps a broken jaw).

    What really annoys me is that the fatuous stuffed shirts in Washington get off scot-free every time their ludicrous adventures go haywire.

    Wouldn't it be nice if Congress could pass a law requiring that, whenever an American military aggression fails, all those responsible must commit seppuku in the traditional Japanese way? It would be better if most of the world knew this instead. *All Wars Are Bankers' Wars*

    I know many people have a great deal of difficulty comprehending just how many wars are started for no other purpose than to force private central banks onto nations, so let me share a few examples, so that you understand why the US Government is mired in so many wars against so many foreign nations. There is ample precedent for this.

    https://youtu.be/5hfEBupAeo4 Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    bjondo , April 13, 2017 at 5:20 pm GMT \n
    100 Words

    Can you see what's going on? Trump's missile attack was not retaliatory, not really. It was a message to Putin. McMaster was saying as clearly as possible, that 'the US military is coming for Assad, and you'd better stay out of the way if you know what's good for you.' That's the message. It has nothing to do with chemical weapons or the suffering of innocent people. McMaster was delivering a threat. He was putting Putin 'on notice'.

    BS

    US will not touch President Assad.

    And US not putting President Putin on notice. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

    Rurik , April 13, 2017 at 5:37 pm GMT \n
    at least it wasn't in Damascus

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/13/politics/afghanistan-isis-moab-bomb/index.html Read More

    El Dato , April 13, 2017 at 6:02 pm GMT \n
    @Rurik at least it wasn't in Damascus

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/13/politics/afghanistan-isis-moab-bomb/index.html

    First on CNN: US drops largest non-nuclear bomb in Afghanistan

    Yes, I would LOVE it if the largest non-nuclear bomb was dropped first on CNN. As long as everybody were in the building at that time. Read More Agree: Rurik Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    Sean , April 13, 2017 at 6:55 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @Eustace Tilley (not) How he yearns for Imperial Dawn,
    Our doubleplusgood-speaking Sean!
    He bleats and he chatters
    Of "kindly" cruel matters
    While playing the Government pawn. You are much too high minded for this world of filth and worms and lies. But never mind–
    [MORE]

    Evil wings in ether beating;
    Vultures at the spirit eating;

    Things unseen forever fleeting
    Black against the leering sky.
    Ghastly shades of bygone gladness,
    Clawing fiends of future sadness,
    Mingle in a cloud of madness
    Ever on the soul to lie.

    Thus the living, lone and sobbing,
    In the throes of anguish throbbing,
    With the loathsome Furies robbing
    Night and noon of peace and rest.
    But beyond the groans and grating
    Of abhorrent Life, is waiting
    Sweet Oblivion, culminating
    All the years of fruitless quest.

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    RobinG , April 13, 2017 at 7:17 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @El Dato

    Probably not. [Sunni/Wahabbi/Army of Conquest actors] were probably tipped off and asked for their continued support.
    In which case the "accidental release of warehoused chemicals" makes only sense if it was a "lucky strike". Seeing how this went down, so totally perfectly, I would say "fully engineered 'incident' with actors on the ground" is the likely explanation. See also http://www.unz.com/author/theodore-a-postol/ of course.

    It's just a matter of degree but the US went from not-too-deadly-to-civilians false flags (some 60's CIA "communist bombings" in South Vietnam notwithstanding) to do-not-care-about-civilians false flags, and I would say that happened under Obama.

    In the long run. these people are all dead of course, but it's still a hardening of the veins. EXACTLY. From Postol:

    "This mechanism of dispersal is essentially the same as hitting a toothpaste tube with a large mallet, which then results in the tube failing and the toothpaste being blown in many directions depending on the exact way the toothpaste skin ruptures.

    If this is in fact the mechanism used to disperse the sarin, this indicates that the sarin tube was placed on the ground by individuals on the ground and not dropped from an airplane ." Read More

    utu , April 13, 2017 at 8:39 pm GMT \n
    200 Words @RobinG EXACTLY. From Postol:

    "This mechanism of dispersal is essentially the same as hitting a toothpaste tube with a large mallet, which then results in the tube failing and the toothpaste being blown in many directions depending on the exact way the toothpaste skin ruptures.

    If this is in fact the mechanism used to disperse the sarin, this indicates that the sarin tube was placed on the ground by individuals on the ground and not dropped from an airplane ." Publishing Postol's article may serves a disinfo purpose that people will start endless discussion how sarin was dispersed and start arguing about wind direction and humidity on that day. The picture of the alleged shell on which Postol's bases his whole analysis has no credibility whatsoever. Is he that naive and stupid not too think about it or is he a tool of those who do not want us think of other alternatives?

    Shouldn't we ask ourselves what the head choppers and their sponsors (CIA, MOSSAD, Saudi Arabia, Qatar) are really capable of? Can they kill some civilians they rounded up somewhere by gas or whatever? Sure they can? Do they have priors? Sure they have. Are they media savvy and know how to create the event and report it? Sure they do.

    Her is an example of some very media savvy operators in Iraq:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRZyHUr9YWM

    Have they done it before (see bad acting 2:37 min)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p54hHhlLjRk Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    paraglider , April 13, 2017 at 9:33 pm GMT \n
    200 Words Syria is the battlefield where competing visions of the future meet head on. It's where the rubber meets the road.

    actually syria is now the battlefield where the american neocon vision of the future is dying for all to see irrespective what trump wants or doesn't want.

    the war there is, strategically speaking, over, all that remains are the tactical battles needed to finish off whatever the rebels calls themselves this week.

    washington/israels neocon vision of the middle east is finished.

    the russians do not want a war with the usa but i wager they are preparing for one at all levels as i write this. washington likes to fight but mostly against those who can not fight back and is wholly unprepared to battle a russian enemy every bit as technically advanced as the us military.

    the 'real' us military knows fighting russia is suicide and a fools errand and is surely counseling trump on this fact. if he doesn't listen he potentially ends most life on earth or if he stops short of that the us military suffers a humiliating defeat for all the world to see.

    his presidency ends forthwith and the integrity of the nation is at risk.

    i will wager the syrian showdown between dc and russia goes no further. Read More

    RadicalCenter , April 13, 2017 at 10:13 pm GMT \n
    @paraglider Syria is the battlefield where competing visions of the future meet head on. It's where the rubber meets the road.

    actually syria is now the battlefield where the american neocon vision of the future is dying for all to see irrespective what trump wants or doesn't want.

    the war there is, strategically speaking, over, all that remains are the tactical battles needed to finish off whatever the rebels calls themselves this week.

    washington/israels neocon vision of the middle east is finished.

    the russians do not want a war with the usa but i wager they are preparing for one at all levels as i write this. washington likes to fight but mostly against those who can not fight back and is wholly unprepared to battle a russian enemy every bit as technically advanced as the us military.

    the 'real' us military knows fighting russia is suicide and a fools errand and is surely counseling trump on this fact. if he doesn't listen he potentially ends most life on earth or if he stops short of that the us military suffers a humiliating defeat for all the world to see.

    his presidency ends forthwith and the integrity of the nation is at risk.

    i will wager the syrian showdown between dc and russia goes no further. God I hope you're right. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    Mike Johnson , April 13, 2017 at 10:53 pm GMT \n
    700 Words So funny, as Israeli ass licking as Bannon was, it wasn't even an afterthought to have this nuisance removed from Trump's inner circle by Kushner. I feel bad for those of you Americans who thought that your Savior was gonna really pursue some sort of populist agenda once he was elected to the White House. I know the Breitbart types figured that achieving something akin to what Israel has achieved for Jews could happen here for white Americans but the reality is that the Jews who run your country end up not respecting you for letting them do it, and hoping that they might let you have a seat at what should be your table is pathetic lol, these people are your enemies .

    "Also, of interest was the ouster of controversial Trump strategist Steve Bannon from the National Security Council (NSC), taking place only days before the administration's dramatic reversal on Syria. Incidentally, Bannon's fall from grace – which has only accelerated in the week since his removal from the NSC – was due to his in-fighting with Kushner, proving that Kushner's influence in his father-in-law's administration is much more powerful than previously thought. While it remains unknown exactly why Kushner and Bannon were fighting, the drastic policy change in "national security" days later seems to speak volumes.
    While Bannon is hardly anti-war or anti-Israel, it seems that Kushner's commitment to radical Zionism and neo-conservative ideas put him at odds with Bannon – who considers himself a "populist" and is a long-time conservative, unlike Kushner. Indeed, Kushner – until 2012 – was a key supporter of Democrats, much like his father, the notoriously corrupt Charles Kushner, and donated thousands to Democrats like Hillary Clinton and Charles Schumer.

    Israel First

    White House Senior Adviser Jared Kushner, takes his seat to watch Vice President Mike Pence administer the oath of office to U.S. Ambassador to Israel David M. Friedman, March 29, 2017. (AP/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
    However, Kushner had no problem changing parties as his political leanings have been shown to only change in regard to one issue – Israel. In 2012, it was Kushner's stalwart support for Israel, particularly Israel's far-right, that ultimately led him to reject the Democrat Party and support Mitt Romney's candidacy. "Rather than strengthen the nation's relationship with Israel as the Arab world imploded, Mr. Obama treated Jerusalem as less a friend than a burden," said the Kushner-owned New York Observer's endorsement, summing up Kushner's view on the matter in language that Trump would later echo.
    Kushner's unwavering support for Israel is obvious as any cursory examination of his background reveals. Kushner was raised in a wealthy Zionist family and met powerful Israeli politicians including now Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu in his teenage years. As an adult, Kushner has overseen the finances of his family's "charitable" foundation which has donated thousands to illegal Israeli settlements as well as thousands more to the Israeli Defense Force (IDF).

    This Oct. 24, 2016 photo, shows part of the Israeli settlement of Beit El, near the West Bank city of Ramallah. Tax records show the family of U.S. president-elect Donald Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, has donated tens of thousands of dollars to Israeli settlement institutions in the West Bank in recent years. (AP/Nasser Nasser)
    Of particular interest among these donations was the $20,000 donation in 2013 to American Friends of Beit El Yeshiva, which supports one of the more extremist illegal settlements in the West Bank. The chairman of this organization, David Friedman, has been Trump's real estate lawyer for the past 15 years and was selected by the Trump administration to serve as the U.S. ambassador to Israel. Friedman is noticeable for being against the two-state solution, a position that Kushner also shares according to journalist Robert Parry and others.
    With Kushner's "Israel first" mentality clear and his commitment to Zionism obvious, it is hardly surprising that Kushner, and his wife Ivanka, would push for a different approach to Syria than that promised by Trump during the 2016 election."

    https://www.mintpressnews.com/the-prodigal-son-in-law-jared-kushner-and-the-rise-of-the-neo-cons-in-the-trump-admin/226794/ Read More Agree: Kiza Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

    alexander , April 13, 2017 at 10:55 pm GMT \n
    200 Words @paraglider Syria is the battlefield where competing visions of the future meet head on. It's where the rubber meets the road.

    actually syria is now the battlefield where the american neocon vision of the future is dying for all to see irrespective what trump wants or doesn't want.

    the war there is, strategically speaking, over, all that remains are the tactical battles needed to finish off whatever the rebels calls themselves this week.

    washington/israels neocon vision of the middle east is finished.

    the russians do not want a war with the usa but i wager they are preparing for one at all levels as i write this. washington likes to fight but mostly against those who can not fight back and is wholly unprepared to battle a russian enemy every bit as technically advanced as the us military.

    the 'real' us military knows fighting russia is suicide and a fools errand and is surely counseling trump on this fact. if he doesn't listen he potentially ends most life on earth or if he stops short of that the us military suffers a humiliating defeat for all the world to see.

    his presidency ends forthwith and the integrity of the nation is at risk.

    i will wager the syrian showdown between dc and russia goes no further. Some really good points here, paraglider.

    I believe a nations army will always fight hardest to defend itself against an aggressive invasion An entire nation (every man ,woman and child) will rally to the call when an existential threat is upon them

    They will make every sacrifice to survive ..

    When its balls to the walls do or die .Ordinary people have shown a mountain of courage where none would expect it.

    When an aggressor army enter the fray, under false or dubious claims, no matter how well disciplined its soldiers are, the integrity of rationale, or lack there of, impinges on the hearts and minds of its warriors.

    How can it not ?

    We are human beings, after all ?

    Cannot any of us imagine how potent and deadly a warrior Pat Tillman might have been, defending OUR country..from an attacking invader ?

    One deadly , vicious , Motherf#cker I can tell you that now .God rest his soul.

    There is nothing WORSE for a nation than to engage in aggressive war under false or bogus pretenses..

    Nothing WORSE --

    It undermines the fighting spirit.. because deep down, every soldier doesn't REALLY believe they have the RIGHT to win ..

    and they are right --

    They understand, somewhere deep in their belly .there is NO victory in winning when the very reason they are laying down their lives is a LIE. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    joe webb , April 13, 2017 at 11:46 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @FKA Max

    You don't have to be a genius to figure out that the case against Syrian President Bashar al Assad is extremely weak.
    Maybe you do have to be one...

    ...Ann Coulter, whom I believe to be a female genius...
    - http://www.unz.com/jthompson/iq-does-not-exist-lead-poisoning-aside/#comment-1833752

    ANN COULTER FULL ONE-ON-ONE EXPLOSIVE INTERVIEW WITH TUCKER CARLSON (4/12/2017)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45c408-s58A It would be so nice if Ann Coulter stopped tossing her hair around and bobbing her head generally, and Smiling all the time .of course, girlie behavior can be forgiven since she is a girl, but

    arguably she could be more effective if the skin factor was reduced not necessarily eliminated and she was better prepared with a few facts, numbers, etc. Carlson is great given the need to keep his job, not for his money, but for Fox viewers who are subject to Hannity and O'Reilly emotionalism. The other guy, is not as bad, but he too starts to dance a bit Lou Dobbs.

    Thank god for Tucker, his brilliance, his limits-pushing, his skepticism right now about Syria Story per the Usuals. Evidence! he keeps on saying .Yup.

    Joe Webb Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    KenH , April 14, 2017 at 1:13 am GMT \n
    400 Words Eric Bolling is filling in for the great O'Reilly and interviewing the wise Sebastian Gorka on the Syrian and N. Korea situation. Based on this and other interviews and coverage over the last week by the neocon smart set I've learned the following:

    1) Assad is evil, almost indescribably so, and he periodically uses chemical weapons against innocent people for pure sport. Don't challenge this or you are condoning evil, stupid, a liberal pussy, or not a true patriot. Besides, our intelligence agencies are second to none and wouldn't lie or mislead us and how dare you question the narrative.

    2) Assad and his allies are quaking in their boots. Iran and Russia better think long and hard about supporting Assad. We may use additional force. We may not. We like to keep people guessing and our options open. It's all part of Trump's unpredictability and brilliance.

    3) The use of WMD's will not be tolerated by this administration unless we're the ones using them since we are exceptional. If we use them then we have a right to and are killing really evil people who threaten innocent people, Israel and the change of seasons on earth.

    4) The Chinese premier thought the tomahawk missile strike before dessert was cool and scary at the same time. Xi Jinpeng was so impressed by Trump's "resolve" and the dessert was so delectable that he will probably invade or nuke N. Korea for us. That's the art of the deal!

    5) Our actions are legal and moral even though nobody can say where we derive the power to bomb nations we are not at war with or who don't pose an imminent threat. Trump, Tillerson, Nikki Haley, Israel, CNN, FOX and Rush Limbaugh think we have this power and that's all that matters. If you disagree then you are a traitor or phony patriot and should leave the exceptional American nation NOW (yes, you alt-right, Tulsi Gabbard and Rand Paul).

    6) The only thing preventing John McCainiac's permanent man crush on Trump is the latter's unwillingness to commit 500,000 troops for a ground invasion. He should also consider invading Iran while we're in the neighborhood since Assad's evil is only matched by the mullahs. Of course, if Trump follows through with McCain's wish then Lindsay Graham will fall in love, too and have a hard on for the ages. Read More

    Ivy , April 14, 2017 at 2:02 am GMT \n
    @RobinG EXACTLY. From Postol:

    "This mechanism of dispersal is essentially the same as hitting a toothpaste tube with a large mallet, which then results in the tube failing and the toothpaste being blown in many directions depending on the exact way the toothpaste skin ruptures.

    If this is in fact the mechanism used to disperse the sarin, this indicates that the sarin tube was placed on the ground by individuals on the ground and not dropped from an airplane ." The drone delivery theory sounds intriguing. There may be a screenplay in that. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    krollchem , April 14, 2017 at 6:08 am GMT \n
    @KenH Eric Bolling is filling in for the great O'Reilly and interviewing the wise Sebastian Gorka on the Syrian and N. Korea situation. Based on this and other interviews and coverage over the last week by the neocon smart set I've learned the following:

    1) Assad is evil, almost indescribably so, and he periodically uses chemical weapons against innocent people for pure sport. Don't challenge this or you are condoning evil, stupid, a liberal pussy, or not a true patriot. Besides, our intelligence agencies are second to none and wouldn't lie or mislead us and how dare you question the narrative.

    2) Assad and his allies are quaking in their boots. Iran and Russia better think long and hard about supporting Assad. We may use additional force. We may not. We like to keep people guessing and our options open. It's all part of Trump's unpredictability and brilliance.

    3) The use of WMD's will not be tolerated by this administration unless we're the ones using them since we are exceptional. If we use them then we have a right to and are killing really evil people who threaten innocent people, Israel and the change of seasons on earth.

    4) The Chinese premier thought the tomahawk missile strike before dessert was cool and scary at the same time. Xi Jinpeng was so impressed by Trump's "resolve" and the dessert was so delectable that he will probably invade or nuke N. Korea for us. That's the art of the deal!

    5) Our actions are legal and moral even though nobody can say where we derive the power to bomb nations we are not at war with or who don't pose an imminent threat. Trump, Tillerson, Nikki Haley, Israel, CNN, FOX and Rush Limbaugh think we have this power and that's all that matters. If you disagree then you are a traitor or phony patriot and should leave the exceptional American nation NOW (yes, you alt-right, Tulsi Gabbard and Rand Paul).

    6) The only thing preventing John McCainiac's permanent man crush on Trump is the latter's unwillingness to commit 500,000 troops for a ground invasion. He should also consider invading Iran while we're in the neighborhood since Assad's evil is only matched by the mullahs. Of course, if Trump follows through with McCain's wish then Lindsay Graham will fall in love, too and have a hard on for the ages. Your dry humor may not be understood my most readers. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    Rurik , April 14, 2017 at 2:42 pm GMT \n
    @KenH Eric Bolling is filling in for the great O'Reilly and interviewing the wise Sebastian Gorka on the Syrian and N. Korea situation. Based on this and other interviews and coverage over the last week by the neocon smart set I've learned the following:

    1) Assad is evil, almost indescribably so, and he periodically uses chemical weapons against innocent people for pure sport. Don't challenge this or you are condoning evil, stupid, a liberal pussy, or not a true patriot. Besides, our intelligence agencies are second to none and wouldn't lie or mislead us and how dare you question the narrative.

    2) Assad and his allies are quaking in their boots. Iran and Russia better think long and hard about supporting Assad. We may use additional force. We may not. We like to keep people guessing and our options open. It's all part of Trump's unpredictability and brilliance.

    3) The use of WMD's will not be tolerated by this administration unless we're the ones using them since we are exceptional. If we use them then we have a right to and are killing really evil people who threaten innocent people, Israel and the change of seasons on earth.

    4) The Chinese premier thought the tomahawk missile strike before dessert was cool and scary at the same time. Xi Jinpeng was so impressed by Trump's "resolve" and the dessert was so delectable that he will probably invade or nuke N. Korea for us. That's the art of the deal!

    5) Our actions are legal and moral even though nobody can say where we derive the power to bomb nations we are not at war with or who don't pose an imminent threat. Trump, Tillerson, Nikki Haley, Israel, CNN, FOX and Rush Limbaugh think we have this power and that's all that matters. If you disagree then you are a traitor or phony patriot and should leave the exceptional American nation NOW (yes, you alt-right, Tulsi Gabbard and Rand Paul).

    6) The only thing preventing John McCainiac's permanent man crush on Trump is the latter's unwillingness to commit 500,000 troops for a ground invasion. He should also consider invading Iran while we're in the neighborhood since Assad's evil is only matched by the mullahs. Of course, if Trump follows through with McCain's wish then Lindsay Graham will fall in love, too and have a hard on for the ages. Eric Bolling called Assad "the butcher of Damascus"

    can't get more 'Hitler of the month' than that Read More

    Agent76 , April 14, 2017 at 5:06 pm GMT \n
    100 Words April 14, 2017 The Trump/Syria conundrum Will Trump deliver Deep State's world war?

    In appearance, Trump's April 6, 2017, missile attack on Syria is the first step towards a regime change, a massive regional conquest, and World War 3. In appearance, the event marked a point of no return for Trump's presidency.

    http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/20880 Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

    El Dato , April 14, 2017 at 5:25 pm GMT \n
    @KenH Eric Bolling is filling in for the great O'Reilly and interviewing the wise Sebastian Gorka on the Syrian and N. Korea situation. Based on this and other interviews and coverage over the last week by the neocon smart set I've learned the following:

    1) Assad is evil, almost indescribably so, and he periodically uses chemical weapons against innocent people for pure sport. Don't challenge this or you are condoning evil, stupid, a liberal pussy, or not a true patriot. Besides, our intelligence agencies are second to none and wouldn't lie or mislead us and how dare you question the narrative.

    2) Assad and his allies are quaking in their boots. Iran and Russia better think long and hard about supporting Assad. We may use additional force. We may not. We like to keep people guessing and our options open. It's all part of Trump's unpredictability and brilliance.

    3) The use of WMD's will not be tolerated by this administration unless we're the ones using them since we are exceptional. If we use them then we have a right to and are killing really evil people who threaten innocent people, Israel and the change of seasons on earth.

    4) The Chinese premier thought the tomahawk missile strike before dessert was cool and scary at the same time. Xi Jinpeng was so impressed by Trump's "resolve" and the dessert was so delectable that he will probably invade or nuke N. Korea for us. That's the art of the deal!

    5) Our actions are legal and moral even though nobody can say where we derive the power to bomb nations we are not at war with or who don't pose an imminent threat. Trump, Tillerson, Nikki Haley, Israel, CNN, FOX and Rush Limbaugh think we have this power and that's all that matters. If you disagree then you are a traitor or phony patriot and should leave the exceptional American nation NOW (yes, you alt-right, Tulsi Gabbard and Rand Paul).

    6) The only thing preventing John McCainiac's permanent man crush on Trump is the latter's unwillingness to commit 500,000 troops for a ground invasion. He should also consider invading Iran while we're in the neighborhood since Assad's evil is only matched by the mullahs. Of course, if Trump follows through with McCain's wish then Lindsay Graham will fall in love, too and have a hard on for the ages. Fukken printed! Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    El Dato , April 14, 2017 at 5:29 pm GMT \n
    @Rurik Eric Bolling called Assad "the butcher of Damascus"

    can't get more 'Hitler of the month' than that Well, Assad Jr. used to run a halal meat shop when he was not busy learning the basics of totalitarian governance. It was rather famous throughout Damascus. Read More

    MEexpert , April 14, 2017 at 7:00 pm GMT \n
    @El Dato Well, Assad Jr. used to run a halal meat shop when he was not busy learning the basics of totalitarian governance. It was rather famous throughout Damascus. You are a moron. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    MEexpert , April 14, 2017 at 7:07 pm GMT \n
    100 Words Since the neocons are so interested in partitioning every other country, we should give them a partitioned country right here. We should break up the United States into several countries. California and Texas already want to secede. We should make New York as a separate country for the neocons and the MSM. They can run it to ground anyway they like. Read More
    Miro23 , April 14, 2017 at 10:01 pm GMT \n
    @MEexpert Since the neocons are so interested in partitioning every other country, we should give them a partitioned country right here. We should break up the United States into several countries. California and Texas already want to secede. We should make New York as a separate country for the neocons and the MSM. They can run it to ground anyway they like. There' s already plan for this at red-blue county level: https://www.amazon.com/Restoring-America-Dr-Michael-Hart/dp/1312875704/ref=cm_cr-mr-title Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
    jacques sheete , April 14, 2017 at 10:08 pm GMT \n
    @Agent76 Sep 3, 2013 The Syrian War What You're Not Being Told

    What's really going on in Syria? Let's look at the evidence.

    https://youtu.be/dkamZg68jpk What's the message?

    I pretty much avoid vids because I can read much faster. Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    bluedog , April 14, 2017 at 11:13 pm GMT \n
    @MEexpert Since the neocons are so interested in partitioning every other country, we should give them a partitioned country right here. We should break up the United States into several countries. California and Texas already want to secede. We should make New York as a separate country for the neocons and the MSM. They can run it to ground anyway they like. Wait a second I live in N.Y. AND WE DON'T WANT THE BASTARDS HERE EITHER. Read More
    MEexpert , April 15, 2017 at 12:21 am GMT \n
    @bluedog Wait a second I live in N.Y. AND WE DON'T WANT THE BASTARDS HERE EITHER. I feel sorry for you. You are going to have hard time getting rid of those cockroaches.

    [Apr 15, 2017] 3-31-17 Arnaldo Claudio on National Security Advisor Gen. H.R. McMasters human rights violations of Iraqis in 2005

    Apr 15, 2017 | www.libertarianinstitute.org

    Arnaldo Claudio, a retired senior US Military Police officer, discusses his 2005 investigation of human rights abuses of detainees in Tal Afar, in a camp commanded by then-Colonel H.R. McMaster, whom Claudio threatened to arrest. According to Claudio, detainees were kept in overcrowded conditions, handcuffed, deprived of food and water, and soiled by their own urine and feces. A so-called "good behavior program" was implemented by McMaster, that held detainees indefinitely (beyond a rule requiring release after 2 weeks) unless they provided "actionable intelligence."

    [Apr 15, 2017] Man made political and economic institutions underlie economic success or lack of it

    Notable quotes:
    "... The World Economic Forum has called for "reimagining" and "reforming" capitalism. To what extent is this need for reform the result of disruption brought by technological change, globalization, and immigration and to what extent is it the effect of rent-seeking and regulatory capture? ..."
    "... "Martin Hellwig and I discuss "global competitiveness" and THE PARTICULARLY HARMFUL SYMBIOSIS BETWEEN BANKS AND GOVERNMENTS in our book The Bankers' New Clothes: What's Wrong with Banking and What to Do about It." ..."
    "... Private/public arrangements are often a way for private parties to bleed wealth from society. Our current banking system is the most egregious example of this. ..."
    "... With the same idea that the "vanguard" recruited mainly from "Intelligentsia" will drive sheeple to the "bright future of all mankind" using bullets for encouragement, if needed. And this "bright future of all mankind" is the global neoliberal empire led by the USA. ..."
    "... Including full scale use of three letter agencies. Also like Bolshevism before, neoliberalism created its own "nomenklatura" -- the privileged class which exists outside the domain of capital owners, which along with high levels management and professionals include neoclassical economists. They are integral and important part of neoliberal nomenklatura and are remunerated accordingly. ..."
    "... Because you can't be half-pregnant -- it is difficult to try anything else when neoliberalism still dominates globally and try to enforce its will via global financial institutions. They do not hesitate to punish detractors for Washington consensus. ..."
    "... It is difficult to survive trying to find alternatives to neoliberalism on the continent with Uncle Sam and his extremely well financed three letter agencies which operate with impunity. And it does not cost too much money to implement more moderate variant of Chile Pinochet coup model -- create economic difficulties and then bring neoliberals back to power on the wave of dissatisfaction with the current government due to economic difficulties. ..."
    "... Difficulties of finding the right balance avoid sliding into opposite extreme -- "over-regulating" the economy. In view of sabotage experienced (and encouraged), which produces natural (and damaging) counteraction, this is almost impossible. Looks like a real trap -- the efforts of the USA to undermine the economy of countries with left wing governments produce a counteraction which helps to undermine the economy and pave the way for restoration of neoliberal regime ..."
    "... In this sense Trump is just Obama II -- neoliberal "bait and switch" artist, who capitalized on pre-existing discontent using fake slogans and then betrayed the electorate. ..."
    "... "Class dictatorship. Raw or refined" ..."
    "... My interpretation is that it's a class project, now masked by a lot of rhetoric about individual freedom, liberty, personal responsibility, privatisation and the free market. ..."
    "... That rhetoric was a means towards the restoration and consolidation of class power, and that neoliberal project has been fairly successful ..."
    Apr 15, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
    From a ProMarket interview with Anat Admati:
    ... Q: The World Economic Forum has called for "reimagining" and "reforming" capitalism. To what extent is this need for reform the result of disruption brought by technological change, globalization, and immigration and to what extent is it the effect of rent-seeking and regulatory capture?

    Acemoglu and Robinson argued in Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty that "man-made political and economic institutions underlie economic success (or lack of it)." Technological developments have highlighted the immense power associated with controlling information. The business of investigative reporting is in a crisis. Corporations often play off governments, shopping jurisdictions and making bargains. For capitalism to work, the relevant institutions must work effectively and avoid excessive rent extraction. The governance challenge of the global economy is daunting.

    RGC said...

    "Martin Hellwig and I discuss "global competitiveness" and THE PARTICULARLY HARMFUL SYMBIOSIS BETWEEN BANKS AND GOVERNMENTS in our book The Bankers' New Clothes: What's Wrong with Banking and What to Do about It."

    [Private/public arrangements are often a way for private parties to bleed wealth from society. Our current banking system is the most egregious example of this.]

    libezkova , April 15, 2017 at 01:53 PM

    "Acemoglu and Robinson argued in Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty that "man-made political and economic institutions underlie economic success (or lack of it)."

    Neoliberalism is the second after Marxism social system that was "invented" by a group of intellectuals (although there was no any single dominant individual among them) and implemented via coup d'état. From above. Much like Bolshevism.

    Looks like it is more resilient then Marxism based economic systems and it demonstrated staying power even after 2008 -- when the ideology itself was completely discredited and became a joke.

    Neoliberalism survived the demise of neoliberal ideology and entered zombie stage. Much like many sects with discredited predictions like the Second Coming.

    Neoliberalism borrowed quite a lot from Marxism. Actually analogies with Marxism are too numerous to list. But one is very important: neoliberalism replaced "Dictatorship of proletariat" with the dictatorship of "free markets" and proletariat itself with so called "creative class".

    With the same idea that the "vanguard" recruited mainly from "Intelligentsia" will drive sheeple to the "bright future of all mankind" using bullets for encouragement, if needed. And this "bright future of all mankind" is the global neoliberal empire led by the USA.

    They also demonstrated the same ruthlessness in the best style of "end justifies means". Killed are mainly "brown people" (is we do not count ten thousand Ukrainians)

    In short, neoliberalism is a kind of "Trotskyism for rich." Gore Vidal once famously said that the neoliberal economic system is "free enterprise for the poor and socialism for the rich." As unforgettable Bush II said "I'm a free market guy. But I'm not gonna let this economy crater in order to preserve the free market system" – George W. Bush, December 17, 2008, William Simon, President Nixon's Treasury Secretary, once famously observed of those who preach free markets typically are simultaneously rushing to the public treasury: "I watched with incredulity as businessmen ran to the government in every crisis, whining for handouts or protection from the very competition that has made this system so productive always, such gentlemen proclaimed their devotion to free enterprise and their opposition to the arbitrary intervention into our economic life by the state. Except, of course, for their own case, which was always unique and which was justified by their immense concern for the public interest."

    And neoliberalism uses the same repressive tactics including dominance in MSM and the control of the university education to get and stay in power, which were invented by Bolsheviks/Trotskyites.

    Including full scale use of three letter agencies. Also like Bolshevism before, neoliberalism created its own "nomenklatura" -- the privileged class which exists outside the domain of capital owners, which along with high levels management and professionals include neoclassical economists. They are integral and important part of neoliberal nomenklatura and are remunerated accordingly.

    That fact the deification of markets is a "fools gold" was know from the Great Recession (and Karl Polanyi famous book), but when 50 years passed and generation changed they manage to shove it down throat. Because the generation which experienced horrors of the Great Depression at this point was gone (and that include cadre of higher level management which still have some level of solidarity with workers against capital owners). The new generation switched camps and allied with capital owners against the working class.

    When the old generation was replaced with HBS and WBS graduates -- ready made neoliberals -- quite coup (in Simon Johnson terms) naturally followed ( https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/05/the-quiet-coup/307364/ ) and we have hat we have.

    In this sense the ascendance of neoliberalism and Managerialism ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Managerialism ) are closely related.

    Both treat the country the same way as bacteria treat a squirrel carcass.

    Typically, these countries are in a desperate economic situation for one simple reason-the powerful elites within them overreached in good times and took too many risks. Emerging-market governments and their private-sector allies commonly form a tight-knit-and, most of the time, genteel-oligarchy, running the country rather like a profit-seeking company in which they are the controlling shareholders. When a country like Indonesia or South Korea or Russia grows, so do the ambitions of its captains of industry. As masters of their mini-universe, these people make some investments that clearly benefit the broader economy, but they also start making bigger and riskier bets. They reckon-correctly, in most cases-that their political connections will allow them to push onto the government any substantial problems that arise.

    As Paine noted neoliberalism in zombie state (which it entered after 2008) remains dangerous and is able to counterattack -- the US sponsored efforts of replacement of left regimes in LA with right wing neoliberal regimes were by-and-large successful.

    Among them are two key LA countries -- Brazil and Argentina. That happened despite that this phase of neoliberal era has been marked by slower growth, greater trade imbalances, and deteriorating social conditions. In Latin America the average growth rate was lower by 3 percent per annum in the 1990s than in the 1970s, while trade deficits as a proportion of GDP are much the same.

    Contrary to neoliberal propaganda the past 25 years (1980–2005) have also characterized by slower rate of improvement of key social indicators for the vast majority of low- and middle-income population of LA countries [compared with the prior two decades ]

    In an effort to keep growing trade and current account deficits manageable, third world states, often pressured by the IMF and World Bank, used austerity measures (especially draconian cuts in social programs) to slow economic growth (and imports). They also deregulated capital markets, privatized economic activity, and relaxed foreign investment regulatory regimes in an effort to attract the financing needed to offset the existing deficits. While devastating to working people and national development possibilities, these policies were, as intended, responsive to the interests of transnational capital in general and a small but influential sector of third world capital. This is the reality of neoliberalism.

    As for the question "Why?" there might be several reasons.

    1. Because you can't be half-pregnant -- it is difficult to try anything else when neoliberalism still dominates globally and try to enforce its will via global financial institutions. They do not hesitate to punish detractors for Washington consensus.
    2. This is LA specific part. It is difficult to survive trying to find alternatives to neoliberalism on the continent with Uncle Sam and his extremely well financed three letter agencies which operate with impunity. And it does not cost too much money to implement more moderate variant of Chile Pinochet coup model -- create economic difficulties and then bring neoliberals back to power on the wave of dissatisfaction with the current government due to economic difficulties.
    3. Difficulties of finding the right balance avoid sliding into opposite extreme -- "over-regulating" the economy. In view of sabotage experienced (and encouraged), which produces natural (and damaging) counteraction, this is almost impossible. Looks like a real trap -- the efforts of the USA to undermine the economy of countries with left wing governments produce a counteraction which helps to undermine the economy and pave the way for restoration of neoliberal regime.

    My impression is that before the next oil crisis (defined as oil price crossing $150 mark or so) attempts to displace financial oligarchy are bound to fail.

    So, in some "mutated" form, like Trump's "bastard neoliberalism" ( aka neoliberalism without globalization, limited to a single country) it will stay put.

    In this sense Trump is just Obama II -- neoliberal "bait and switch" artist, who capitalized on pre-existing discontent using fake slogans and then betrayed the electorate.

    paine -> libezkova... April 15, 2017 at 06:17 PM

    Class dictatorship

    Raw or refined .

    libezkova -> paine... April 16, 2017 at 06:08 PM

    "Class dictatorship. Raw or refined"

    That's David Harvey's view:

    http://www.redpepper.org.uk/Their-crisis-our-challenge

    "Does this crisis signal the end of neoliberalism? My answer is that it depends what you mean by neoliberalism. My interpretation is that it's a class project, now masked by a lot of rhetoric about individual freedom, liberty, personal responsibility, privatisation and the free market.

    That rhetoric was a means towards the restoration and consolidation of class power, and that neoliberal project has been fairly successful."

    [Apr 15, 2017] Report issued on April 11 consciously use false claims for justifying a war of aggression act against Syria supporting ISIS:

    www.moonofalabama.org

    Kassandra | Apr 15, 2017 3:27:01 PM | 9

    Proof that the alleged Syrian Government chemical weapons attack on April 5 was staged, and that the White House either did not care for a professional intelligence check on their draft for the White House Intelligence

    Report issued on April 11 consciously use false claims for justifying a war of aggression act against Syria supporting ISIS:

    http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2017/04/video-evidence-of-false-claims-made-in-the-white-house-intelligence-report-of-april-11-2017-by-ted-p.html

    [Apr 15, 2017] Top Ten Reasons To Doubt Official Story On Assad Poison-Gas Attack

    Notable quotes:
    "... The sarin-gas attack story prompted the US missile strike on a Syrian runway. Here are the top ten reasons for doubting that story, and instead calling it a convenient pretext: ..."
    Apr 15, 2017 | www.globalresearch.ca

    The sarin-gas attack story prompted the US missile strike on a Syrian runway. Here are the top ten reasons for doubting that story, and instead calling it a convenient pretext:

    ONE: Photos show rescue workers treating/decontaminating people injured or killed in the gas attack. The workers aren't wearing gloves or protective gear. Only the clueless or crazy would expose themselves to sarin residue, which can be fatal.

    TWO: MIT professor Thomas Postol told RT,

    "I believe it can be shown, without doubt, that the [US intelligence] document does not provide any evidence whatsoever that the US government has concrete knowledge that the government of Syria was the source of the chemical attack in Khan Shaykhun Any competent analyst would have had questions about whether the debris in the crater was staged or real. No competent analyst would miss the fact that the alleged sarin canister was forcefully crushed from above, rather than exploded by a munition within it." How would a canister purportedly dropped from an Assad-ordered plane incur "crushing from above?"

    THREE: Why would President Assad, supported by Russia, scoring victory after victory against ISIS, moving closer to peace negotiations, suddenly risk all his gains by dropping sarin gas on his own people?

    FOUR: In an interview with Scott Horton, ex-CIA officer Philip Giraldi states that his intelligence and military sources indicate Assad didn't attack his own people with poison gas.

    FIVE: Ex-CIA officer Ray McGovern states that his military sources report an Assad air strike did hit a chemical plant, and the fallout killed people, but the attack was not planned for that purpose. There was no knowledge the chemicals were lethal.SIX: At consortiumnews.com , journalist Robert Parry writes,

    "There is a dark mystery behind the White House-released photo showing President Trump and more than a dozen advisers meeting at his estate in Mar-a-Lago after his decision to strike Syria with Tomahawk missiles: Where are CIA Director Mike Pompeo and other top intelligence officials?"

    "Before the photo was released on Friday, a source told me that Pompeo had personally briefed Trump on April 6 about the CIA's belief that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was likely not responsible for the lethal poison-gas incident in northern Syria two days earlier - and thus Pompeo was excluded from the larger meeting as Trump reached a contrary decision."

    "After the attack, Secretary of State Tillerson, who is not an institutional intelligence official and has little experience with the subtleties of intelligence, was the one to claim that the U.S. intelligence community assessed with a 'high degree of confidence' that the Syrian government had dropped a poison gas bomb on civilians in Idlib province."

    "While Tillerson's comment meshed with Official Washington's hastily formed groupthink of Assad's guilt, it is hard to believe that CIA analysts would have settled on such a firm conclusion so quickly, especially given the remote location of the incident and the fact that the initial information was coming from pro-rebel (or Al Qaeda) sources."

    "Thus, a serious question arises whether President Trump did receive that 'high degree of confidence' assessment from the intelligence community or whether he shunted Pompeo aside to eliminate an obstacle to his desire to launch the April 6 rocket attack."

    SEVEN: As soon as the Assad gas attack was reported, the stage was set for a US missile strike. No comprehensive investigation of the purported gas attack was undertaken.

    EIGHT: There are, of course, precedents for US wars based on false evidence-the missing WMDs in Iraq, the claims of babies being pushed out of incubators in Kuwait, to name just two.

    NINE: Who benefits from the sarin gas story? Assad? Or US neocons; the US military-industrial complex; Pentagon generals who want a huge increase in their military budget; Trump and his team, who are suddenly praised in the press, after a year of being pilloried at every turn; and ISIS?

    TEN: For those who doubt that ISIS has ever used poison gas, see the NY Times (11/21/2016). While claiming that Assad has deployed chemical attacks, the article also states that ISIS has deployed chemical weapons 52 times since 2014.

    I'm not claiming these ten reasons definitely and absolutely rule out the possibility of an Assad-ordered chemical attack. But they do add up to a far more believable conclusion than the quickly assembled "Assad-did-it" story.

    These ten reasons starkly point to the lack of a rational and complete investigation of the "gas attack."

    And this lack throws a monkey wrench into Trump's claim that he was ordering the missile strike based on "a high degree of confidence."

    [Apr 15, 2017] Why Is Trump Fighting ISIS in Syria

    A "chicken hawk" is a person "who strongly supports war or other military action, yet who actively avoids or avoided military service when of age." And, according to Wikipedia, "generally the implication is that chicken hawks lack the moral character to participate in war themselves, preferring to ask others to support, fight and perhaps die in an armed conflict." Why would the NYT run a column suggesting the US should support ISIS "the same way we encouraged the mujahedeen... this is "tantamount to saying that the US should have reduced pressure on the Nazis to keep the Soviets bleeding" back in the 1940's. In Friedman's defense, ORB International (an American research firm) revealed in 2015 how 85 percent of Iraqis and 82 percent of Syrians believe the US created ISIS. With The New York Times publishing columns like this, this just became better proven.
    Apr 12, 2017 | www.nytimes.com
    ... ... ...

    Let's go through the logic: There are actually two ISIS manifestations.

    One is "virtual ISIS." It is satanic, cruel and amorphous; it disseminates its ideology through the internet. It has adherents across Europe and the Muslim world. In my opinion, that ISIS is the primary threat to us, because it has found ways to deftly pump out Sunni jihadist ideology that inspires and gives permission to those Muslims on the fringes of society who feel humiliated - from London to Paris to Cairo - to recover their dignity via headline-grabbing murders of innocents.

    The other incarnation is "territorial ISIS." It still controls pockets in western Iraq and larger sectors of Syria. Its goal is to defeat Bashar al-Assad's regime in Syria - plus its Russian, Iranian and Hezbollah allies - and to defeat the pro-Iranian Shiite regime in Iraq, replacing both with a caliphate.

    Challenge No. 1: Not only will virtual ISIS, which has nodes all over the world, not go away even if territorial ISIS is defeated, I believe virtual ISIS will become yet more virulent to disguise the fact that it has lost the territorial caliphate to its archenemies: Shiite Iran, Hezbollah, pro-Shiite militias in Iraq, the pro-Shiite Assad regime in Damascus and Russia, not to mention America.

    Challenge No. 2: America's goal in Syria is to create enough pressure on Assad, Russia, Iran and Hezbollah so they will negotiate a power-sharing accord with moderate Sunni Muslims that would also ease Assad out of power. One way to do that would be for NATO to create a no-fly safe zone around Idlib Province, where many of the anti-Assad rebels have gathered and where Assad recently dropped his poison gas on civilians. But Congress and the U.S. public are clearly wary of that.

    So what else could we do? We could dramatically increase our military aid to anti-Assad rebels, giving them sufficient anti-tank and antiaircraft missiles to threaten Russian, Iranian, Hezbollah and Syrian helicopters and fighter jets and make them bleed, maybe enough to want to open negotiations. Fine with me.

    What else? We could simply back off fighting territorial ISIS in Syria and make it entirely a problem for Iran, Russia, Hezbollah and Assad. After all, they're the ones overextended in Syria, not us. Make them fight a two-front war - the moderate rebels on one side and ISIS on the other. If we defeat territorial ISIS in Syria now, we will only reduce the pressure on Assad, Iran, Russia and Hezbollah and enable them to devote all their resources to crushing the last moderate rebels in Idlib, not sharing power with them.

    I don't get it. President Trump is offering to defeat ISIS in Syria for free - and then pivot to strengthening the moderate anti-Assad rebels. Why? When was the last time Trump did anything for free? When was the last real estate deal Trump did where he volunteered to clean up a toxic waste dump - for free - before he negotiated with the owner on the price of the golf course next door?

    This is a time for Trump to be Trump - utterly cynical and unpredictable. ISIS right now is the biggest threat to Iran, Hezbollah, Russia and pro-Shiite Iranian militias - because ISIS is a Sunni terrorist group that plays as dirty as Iran and Russia.

    Trump should want to defeat ISIS in Iraq. But in Syria? Not for free, not now. In Syria, Trump should let ISIS be Assad's, Iran's, Hezbollah's and Russia's headache - the same way we encouraged the mujahedeen fighters to bleed Russia in Afghanistan.

    --> Sharon5101 Rockaway Beach Ny April 12, 2017

    How is this administration supposed to 'fix" the chaos that is engulfing and devouring Syria when it's woefully unprepared to host the annual Easter Egg Roll?

    Cathy Hopewell Junction April 12, 2017

    Mr. Friedman is thinking that Trump is a chess player, all strategy and end-game.

    Trump is a checkers player. King Me!

    He has a very simple set of ideas. ISIS bad. Iran bad. Russia good except when bad. Assad bad when gasses babies. He isn't thinking of hegemony and spheres of influence. He isn't thinking of a Hydra that grows a few more heads when you cut one off. He isn't thinking six moves ahead.

    Syria is an intractable, long term problem. Sunni ideologues are an intractable long term problem and a Hydra. Iran is a long term problem, but maybe not totally intractable. And Russia is self interested and big on hegemony.

    Trump has no plan to deal with all that. Just ISIS bad. So that's why he is fighting in Syria.

    Patrick Stevens Mn April 12, 2017

    Your question has an obvious answer. Why did Reagan invade Grenada? Why did Bush attack Panama? Why did Bush II assault Iraq after being struck by Saudis?
    Republican Presidents have learned that flexing military might wins elections for them and their party. It costs a lot, but has a huge pay off. Trump is just doing what he thinks he needs to do to improve his odds of staying in office. It is a calculated risk, but given his poll numbers, and the likely collusion of his people with the Russians during the election, this was a perfect plan.
    That is the answer to your question.

    Jack Hartman Douglas, Michigan April 12, 2017

    The question should not be why are we fighting ISIS in Syria but why are we fighting in the literal sense at all? The U.S. is the strongest economic, political and military country in the world by far and yet we seem to rely on military solutions rather than using our economic and political assets.

    In the Middle East, at least, the answer is not that complicated. Using our political and economic assets would put us squarely at odds with some of our so-called allies, particularly the Sunni Saudis who are primarily responsible for the rise of militant Islam in recent decades. We'd have to call them out on moral grounds, which would be embarrassing for them, as well as on economic grounds, which might cause us and our other allies some economic pain.

    Instead, we use only our military assets to go after what Saudi Arabia's support of radical Islam has produced, extremists who see terror as their best weapon. Furthermore, our economic and political assets would be much more effective against both Iran and Russia than essentially the empty threat of knocking out a Syrian air base for a few hours.

    That is, remember, how we brought down the USSR and got Iran to agree to stop their nuclear arms development. Nary a shot was fired in what were two of our most important victories in the past few decades. Compare that to our "military solution" in Iraq which still plagues us.

    Bruce Rozenblit is a trusted commenter Kansas City, MO April 12, 2017

    This editorial is based upon a false premise. It assumes that Trump has a Syrian strategy. There is no Syrian strategy. There is no why. There is no goal. There is no policy team. There is only Trump and he only does what makes him look good at any given moment. The attack on the Syrian airport was such an event. It is still in operation but Trump got a big boost in the polls from it.

    Mr. Friedman is trying to make sense of the senseless. Trump is a never ending contradiction. His positions flip flop from day to day. This is exactly how he spoke during the campaign. He would contradict himself from one minute to the next. This is how his mind works. This is how he is governing. Why is anyone surprised?

    M.I. Estner Wayland MA April 12, 2017

    Sometimes when people appear to be doing illogical things, we strain to try to understand the logic behind them, i.e., what we are missing. But oftentimes people doing apparently illogical things are just being illogical.

    In terms of substantive policy and strategy in Syria, Trump is being illogical. The most logical thing is to leave the fighting to others and just to help all Syrians who want to emigrate to do so and then help then to resettle including in the US.

    But Trump does not act in the interests of substance. For him, there is no substance. There is only appearance, his image, that concerns him. He wants that image to be that of a strong leader protecting the US from terrorism in the form of ISIS.

    Attacking the virulent form of ISIS has no optics. It cannot be shown on TV. Attacking territorial ISIS has optics, and Trump can manipulate the media to show these attacks and thus further his desired image.

    One of Trump's many problems is his obsession with his image. A subsidiary part of that problem is he wants to project the wrong image. If he could only get past his overwhelming narcissism to understand that he'd actually be much better liked if people felt that he actually cared about other people.

    Lawrence Kucher Morritown NJ April 12, 2017

    Since it is always all about Him, my guess is that He's going
    to start a war, maybe two, because war time presidents do well
    in the polls. He doesn't have a plan for Syria, remember the
    "secret plan to defeat ISIS?" Where's that plan??
    This Country is not going to survive 4 years of this.
    Everybody is on edge and loosing sleep, but Trump plays
    golf on the taxpayer dime at the cost of 3 mill a week end.
    Mexico, will you take us when Canada turns us down?
    Maybe California and Massachusetts could secede?
    (I'm grasping for answers and a new place to live)

    Larry Eisenberg is a trusted commenter New York City April 12, 2017

    Commenting on Trump is degrading
    All logic and sense he's evading,
    Bankruptcy's his gambit
    Illogic his ambit
    His ego growth isn't abating.

    A TV reality show
    Is about the one thing he does know
    A statesman he's not
    The POTUS we've got
    As a learner? Egregiously slow.

    Dan Welch East Lyme, CT April 12, 2017

    Your questions are valid absolutely provided that "Defeating Isis" is really some kind of serious issue rather than a campaign soundbite. This administration hasn't yet figured out the difference. So "Defeating Isis" is simply the backbeat to an incoherent set of practices.

    Christine McM is a trusted commenter Massachusetts April 12, 2017

    "I don't get it. President Trump is offering to defeat ISIS in Syria for free - and then pivot to strengthening the moderate anti-Assad rebels. Why? When was the last time Trump did anything for free?"

    Good points. I don't think Trump gives one hoot about Syria. Nor do I believe would have done anything like he did last week if his daughter hadn't spoken up. That blew my mind: it takes a daughter to convince her father that banned chemical gassing is criminal?

    As to your main point, that ISIS is a state of mind that can't be simply eliminated, I say yes, yes, and yes. Virtually all recent ISIS attacks on American soil were committed by naturalized Americans converted to jihadism online.

    The Trump administration seems unconcerned about the more powerful online ISIS while territorial ISIS has so many players it's a wonder they all know who they're shooting at.

    Syria is going the way of Lebanon, stripped down to rubble. Trump should do some hard thinking (not easy for him) as to what his objective is in Syria, if any. It's a complex dilemma that risks focusing on the easier aspects of war ( troops and treasure) over the near impossible task of eliminating online jihadism made worse by administration policies like the "Muslim ban," all Trump's (and Bannon's) anti-Islam rhetoric.

    soxared, 04-07-23 Crete, Illinois April 12, 2017

    "Assad, Iran, Russia and Hezbollah."

    Nine times in your essay, Mr. Friedman, you employ this construction. Here's the problem: Donald Trump doesn't understand any of them. Why do you think he hasn't resorted to his go-to move, the tweet? He doesn't know what to do.

    Had he bothered to attend daily security briefings and acquaint himself with the regional problems after Nov. 8 it wouldn't be "gee, who knew fighting ISIS would be so complex?" But no; he embarked upon victory laps, post-Nov. 8 campaign rallies, retreats with good ole boys to Philly when he should have been assembling a team and a policy and demanding briefing papers. The foreign policy professionals could have told him that ISIS is like a bad smell after an even worse dinner and "deal with it."

    It says here that if Trump were at all smart (which he is not) he would allow Bashar al-Assad to remain Vladimir Putin's headache. Let his Russian pal prop up a regime that destroys "babies...beautiful babies...children." Israel should have some skin in this game; they're all neighbors.

    I disagree with you, Mr. Friedman, when you write that ISIS has two manifestations; they have as many as they have willing warriors. They're like flies at a picnic; you can wave them away and maybe kill some, but they'll always return. They will always be there. ISIS isn't so much a fighting force as it is an idea. Trump can't destroy the Internet.

    He'll soon learn what his predecessor did: ISIS may be defeated but not destroyed.

    Mark Thomason is a trusted commenter Clawson, Mich April 12, 2017

    "The Trump foreign policy team"

    Stop right there. That is not what we are seeing. It is not a "team."

    There are various isolated factions, vying for the favor of a man who does not really know what he's doing. They slash at each other.

    So far, they've drawn a lot of blood internally, but there is not semblance of any accepted outcome yet. They are in mid-brawl.

    My money is on people with experience, discipline, and hard fists. But we'll see. Meanwhile, there is no "foreign policy team."

    Hal Donahue Scranton April 12, 2017

    Following the 911 attacks, the United States misidentified the enemy and never stepped back. The media was as complicit as Congress in not demanding answers or questioning rationales prior to sending this nation to endless war. The enemy was identified as terrorism (a license to attack any group anywhere deemed too hostile to US goals). Conservatives and republicans, with major media approval, began identifying terrorists as 'Islamic'.
    Media and political leaders never stepped forward to identify the specific enemy as extremist Muslims influenced and often supported by the Sunni Wahhabi and Salafi sects, not all of Islam and most certainly not the Shia Islam practiced by much of Iran and Iraq. Why?

    Perhaps the answer is that Saudi Arabia is the global promulgator of Wahhabism, the sect most often fueling terrorist attacks in the region and abroad. It is Saudi Arabia and Israel who worked together in defiance of the US to block constitutional government in Egypt and install a Salafi influenced military dictatorship. As I type this the Trump gang is working with the Saudis to restore order in Syria – a recipe for disaster and long term terrorism.

    Trump has no knowledge; the least this paper can do is attempt to educate him.

    Hugh CC Budapest April 12, 2017

    I understand the urge to write about Trump as if he has a plan, a strategy or even thinks in depth with intelligence about anything. Americans are yearning for a president, not someone who sets foreign policy based on what he sees on Fox and Friends or what his handbag selling daughter whispers in his ear. We want to think that there is something in Trump that is redeemable. But Mr. Friedman, there isn't.

    Five months after the election and he still refers to Hillary Clinton as "crooked Hillary" in a NYT interview. The man is irredeemable. Give up trying to make something of him and let's just figure out how to run him from office.

    Michael California April 12, 2017

    Mr. Friedman: I agree with your strategy: let the Russians and Iranians deal with ISIS on the ground. I also agree with your assessment of Trump; that he should be unpredictable so our adversaries don't know what he will do next. But there is one fundamental place where your logic seems to fall short:

    "And those will only emerge if there are real power-sharing deals in Syria and Iraq"

    Show me a single Arab country where Sunni and Shi'a factions have a working power sharing arrangement without one side dominating the other, and I'll agree that this is a reasonable goal. The only formulas that seem to work in that part of the world are to put a strongman in place to force compliance, or to divide the place up, Sunni here, Shi'a there.

    IMHO if you could help the locals develop a federal method of power sharing that works for all parties, you could clean up the whole Middle East. There must be enough of them that want the fighting to stop, but each group is terrified of being subjugated by the other, and for good reason, because their history shows them that this is inevitable. That is the true knot that must be untangled before there will be peace in the Middle East.

    John LeBaron MA April 12, 2017

    The problem, it seems to me, is that if "moderate" Sunni movements exist in Iraq and Syria in the first place, they lack the military power and brutal drive of an ISIS that observes no humanitarian boundry moral limitation to its behavior.

    Obscene brutalization has become so endemic in Syria and the territory around it that it has become normalized colective behavior. Russia is fully complicit, but the US carries its own oversized share of the blame. Absent Bush's misguided Iraq debacle, we would be facing a completely different Middle East today.

    These are the consequences of brain-dead, knee-jerk decision-making where the world's greatest military power resides.

    john.jamotta Hurst, Texas April 12, 2017

    Mr Friedman, I am steadily losing all hope that POTUS and DC politicians have the capability and the caliber to lead and inspire America through the many and varied challenges we face.

    To me, politicians ask citizens for their votes based on a fantasy world where complexity is never recognized and Americans have the God given right to expect a world where they receive more of everything without the sacrifice or payment needed to secure these benefits.

    Although I am inherently optimistic about life, I think we are facing challenges that will only be solved by the next generation because our generation is failing to defend our fragile democracy.

    Joseph Huben Upstate NY April 12, 2017

    Wahhabism is an essential part of the ISIS problem, but is often overlooked, or hidden. Saudi Arabia and the Gulf monarchs are responsible for the global reach of ISIS through their support of Wahhabi schools and preachers. Fighting ISIS in Syria is foolish, for all of the reasons given here and because America and Europe have failed to tell the truth about the Wahhabi basis of ISIS.
    The war in Iraq and Syria is a war between Sunni Wahhabi extremists and Shiites. For propaganda purposes our government and our pundits have implied that world terrorism is related to Shiites, knowing all the while that it is and has always been a Sunni Wahhabi terror. Russia's Muslim population ranges between 6% and 15% of it's population, with 1 million Muslims living in Moscow. 90% of Russia's Muslim population is Sunni. Chechnya is a Sunni state under Russian sway. Russia is under threat by ISIS. Why should we fight ISIS in Syria. Friedman is correct. America and the EU have no interest in defeating ISIS in Syria. We do have an interest in preventing the use of poison gas.

    Bos is a trusted commenter Boston April 12, 2017

    ISIL in Syria v. ISIL in Iraq? Does terrorism have a border?

    Syria is a can of worms. By now, people should appreciate what President Obama. Just as President Clinton before President Bush the 43rd, Mr Obama navigated the rapid by minimizing damages. But both Messrs. Clinton and Obama are followed by two simpletons whose one-dimensional thinking will inevitably lead the U.S. into quagmire. Well, we really don't know what is in Trump's head. His Syrian excursion might very well be a sleight of hand light show - how else can you explain the facts that he pre-warned Russia before the raid and little damage was done to an airbase after 59 tomahawks dropped there? If that is a light show for N Korea, then it is doubtful Trump would do anything more. For all we know, Trump-Russia rift may very well be a charade

    While one could argue Syria now is Iraq before Bush's invasion, Syria is too far gone. Everyone is at risk. Trump is riding the tiger now. There is only one certainty: his bombing of Syria is as inexplicable as his saying the U.S. no longer cares if Assad wanted to stay. Either there are ulterior motives in both situations or Trump's ADHD acting up, neither of the scenarios bodes well to the world's future

    Joseph Thomas Reston, VA April 12, 2017

    The situation in Syria is exactly why our unfit and unstable president is such a danger to our country and the world.

    He doesn't know the history of Syria, he doesn't know the current situation in Syria and he has no desire to learn either. His missile attack came days after his administration seemed to be willing to accept Assad as president. It accomplished nothing except to confuse both our allies and our adversaries.

    Now you want him to distinguish between the territorial ICIS and the virtual ICIS, between the ICIS in Syria and the ICIS in Iraq, and to implement a strategy that involves long term thinking while Tweeting about something other than himself. It's not going to happen, he doesn't have the intelligence or the vision to follow through on such a plan.

    Nice idea, though.

    roarofsilence North Carolina April 12, 2017

    There are no moderates in Syria, it is a fantasy created in the minds of John McCain and other neoconservatives who seem to be blind to the disasters they have created in Libya, Iraq and Yemen. Syria is in the midst of a Sunni-Shia civil war.

    DanC Massachusetts April 12, 2017

    Once again there is the usual mistake of thinking that Trump can stick to a plan, any plan. He is impulsive through and through, in a compulsive way. He has neither a complete functioning brain nor a complete functioning personality. That is why he needs his daughter-wife-and-second-first-lady and Kushner as advisers. He does not look for information that experts can provide but to the family members who serve as a collective nanny to more or less try to keep him in line and to clean up the messes he makes. Understanding Trump is easier when one thinks of his White House as an extension of his dysfunctional family relations.

    Aubrey Alabama April 12, 2017

    Just because someone has a lot of money doesn't make them smart.

    Trump could have been a good President -- we sure could use a fresh look at many policies and programs but his lack of basic knowledge (enough to select good people and work with them to develop strategies/plans, which he would then follow) has created chaos. Our adversaries, other governments, our own government -- nobody knows what our foreign policy is.

    silver bullet Warrenton VA April 12, 2017

    In answer to your question, this administration has no coherent military strategy to fight ISIS at all. The president was all campaign talk and no action. He has yet to lay a glove on ISIS. He knew more about ISIS than his generals, so his unilateral strike last week was carried out without the need to consult his military brass or Congress. Just trust him, his actions said.

    The missile strike was, in your words, a "headline-grabbing" ploy to distract attention away from the investigations into his ties to Russia last year. His act of war produced a spike in his popularity, especially among Republicans and his base who joyfully celebrated the awakening of the sleeping American giant who finally had enough of Middle East terrorism. The bully was thumping his chest and braying "bring it on, radical Islam".

    Syria, like Viet Nam, is a no-win proposition. Any protracted military involvement there will cost many American lives and Treasury spending will go through the roof. Mr. President and erstwhile draft dodger, don't raid the war chest and let your mouth write out a check that your behind can't cash.

    James Landi Salisbury, Maryland April 12, 2017

    "Where's that Trump when we need him?" Geez Tom, you're asking Trump to think five steps ahead of today--- you''re talking strategy, Tom? The man is incapable of putting a complex sentence together with a qualifying clause, and you're asking the Trump we know to "think"--to plot strategy... never happen.

    [Apr 15, 2017] Russia Says Evidence Growing Syria Chemical Attack Was Staged

    The fact that the crater is on the road is another indicator that the attack was staged. as in this case it looks like it was Syrian rebels who provided artillery shell with sarin (or other toxic agent) and explosives to create the gas cloud.
    Notable quotes:
    "... The U.S. hasn't shown evidence that Assad was responsible for the April 4 attack in Idlib, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters Friday in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan, where Putin was attending a collective-defense meeting of former Soviet republics. ..."
    "... Russia says Syrian forces struck a building where terrorists kept the internationally banned chemical. The U.S. says it has images proving the bomb left a crater in a road rather than hitting a building. ..."
    Apr 15, 2017 | www.bloomberg.com
    More stories by Stepan Kravchenko @world_reporter More stories by Ilya Arkhipov ‎April‎ ‎14‎, ‎2017‎ ‎7‎:‎51‎ ‎AM
    • U.S. actions in Syria seek regime change, Lavrov says
    • Foreign ministers of Russia, Iran, Syria meet in Moscow
    Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said a chemical-weapons attack in Syria that provoked U.S. missile strikes on the Middle Eastern country may have been orchestrated.

    "There's growing evidence that this was staged," Lavrov said at a Moscow news conference with his Iranian and Syrian counterparts on Friday. Publications including in the U.S. and the U.K. have highlighted "many inconsistencies" in the version of events in Syria's Idlib province that was used to justify the American airstrikes, he said.

    Russia, Iran and Syria want an independent investigation and those opposed to the call "don't have a clear conscience," Lavrov said. Russia vetoed a United Nations Security Council resolution on Wednesday that demanded the Syrian government cooperate with an inquiry into the suspected sarin-gas attack that killed dozens of people.

    U.S. President Donald Trump ordered cruise-missile strikes on an airbase in Syria last week after his administration accused Russia of trying to cover up Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad's role in the chemical-weapons attack. Russia contends the chemicals belonged to terrorists. Lavrov called on the U.S. not to repeat the airstrikes, which he said were part of efforts to oust Assad that won't succeed.

    'Nerve Agent'

    The crisis dominated Moscow talks between U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Russian President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday as the Kremlin rebuffed demands to abandon its ally Assad. Putin's military backing of Assad has been crucial in keeping the regime in power after six years of civil war.

    The U.S. hasn't shown evidence that Assad was responsible for the April 4 attack in Idlib, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters Friday in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan, where Putin was attending a collective-defense meeting of former Soviet republics.

    The U.S. "is confident that the Syrian regime conducted a chemical weapons attack, using the nerve agent sarin, against its own people," according to a four-page document published by officials in Washington on Tuesday that contained evidence including satellite images, reports from the scene and details of exposure gathered from victims.

    Russia says Syrian forces struck a building where terrorists kept the internationally banned chemical. The U.S. says it has images proving the bomb left a crater in a road rather than hitting a building.

    [Apr 13, 2017] Neocons Have Trump on His Knees

    Notable quotes:
    "... Kagan, who cut his teeth in the Reagan administration running a State Department propaganda shop on Central America, has never been particularly interested in nuance or truth, so he wouldn't care that Obama pulled back from attacking Syria in summer 2013, in part, because his intelligence advisers told him they lacked proof that Assad was responsible for a mysterious sarin attack. (Since then, the evidence has indicated that the attack was likely a provocation by Al Qaeda's Syrian affiliate with help from Turkish intelligence.) ..."
    "... But groupthinks die hard – and pretty much every Important Person in Official Washington just knows that Assad did carry out that sarin attack, just like they all knew that Iraq's Saddam Hussein was hiding WMDs in 2003. So, it follows in a kind of twisted logical way that they would build off the fake history regarding the 2013 Syria-sarin case and apply it to the new groupthink that Assad has carried out this latest attack, too. Serious fact-finding investigations are not needed; everyone just "knows." ..."
    "... But Kagan is already looking ahead. Having pocketed Trump's capitulation last week on Syria, Kagan has shifted his sights onto the much juicier targets of Russia and Iran. ..."
    "... America's Stolen Narrative, ..."
    Apr 10, 2017 | consortiumnews.com

    Exclusive: The Democrats' Russia-made-Hillary-lose hysteria has pushed a weakened President Trump into the arms of the neocons who now have a long list of endless-war ideas for him to implement, reports Robert Parry.

    After slapping Donald Trump around for several months to make him surrender his hopes for a more cooperative relationship with Russia, the neocons and their liberal-interventionist allies are now telling the battered President what he must do next: escalate war in the Middle East and ratchet up tensions with nuclear-armed Russia.

    Donald Trump speaking with supporters at a campaign rally at Fountain Park in Fountain Hills, Arizona. March 19, 2016. (Flickr Gage Skidmore)

    Star neocon Robert Kagan spelled out Trump's future assignments in a column on Sunday in The Washington Post, starting out by patting the chastened President on the head for his decision to launch 59 Tomahawk missiles at an airstrip in Syria supposedly in retaliation for a chemical weapons attack blamed on the Syrian government (although no serious investigation was even conducted).

    Trump earned widespread plaudits for his decisive action and his heart-on-the-sleeve humanitarianism as his voice filled with emotion citing the chemical-weapons deaths on April 4 of "small children and even beautiful little babies." The U.S. media then helpfully played down reports from Syria that Trump's April 6 retaliatory missile strike had killed about 15 people, including nine civilians, four of whom were children.

    However, for Kagan, the missile strike was only a good start. An advocate for "regime change" in Syria and a co-founder of the Project for the New American Century which pushed for the Iraq War, Kagan praised Trump "for doing what the Obama administration refused to do," i.e. involve the U.S. military directly in attacks on the Syrian government.

    "But," Kagan added, "Thursday's action needs to be just the opening salvo in a broader campaign not only to protect the Syrian people from the brutality of the Bashar al-Assad regime but also to reverse the downward spiral of U.S. power and influence in the Middle East and throughout the world. A single missile strike unfortunately cannot undo the damage done by the Obama administration's policies over the past six years."

    Kagan continued: "Trump was not wrong to blame the dire situation in Syria on President Barack Obama. The world would be a different place today if Obama had carried out his threat to attack Syria when Assad crossed the famous 'red line' in the summer of 2013. The bad agreement that then-Secretary of State John F. Kerry struck with Russia not only failed to get rid of Syria's stock of chemical weapons and allowed the Assad regime to drop barrel bombs and employ widespread torture against civilian men, women and children. It also invited a full-scale Russian intervention in the fall of 2015, which saved the Assad regime from possible collapse."

    A Seasoned Propagandist

    Kagan, who cut his teeth in the Reagan administration running a State Department propaganda shop on Central America, has never been particularly interested in nuance or truth, so he wouldn't care that Obama pulled back from attacking Syria in summer 2013, in part, because his intelligence advisers told him they lacked proof that Assad was responsible for a mysterious sarin attack. (Since then, the evidence has indicated that the attack was likely a provocation by Al Qaeda's Syrian affiliate with help from Turkish intelligence.)

    Prominent neocon intellectual Robert Kagan. (Photo credit: Mariusz Kubik, http://www.mariuszkubik.pl)

    But groupthinks die hard – and pretty much every Important Person in Official Washington just knows that Assad did carry out that sarin attack, just like they all knew that Iraq's Saddam Hussein was hiding WMDs in 2003. So, it follows in a kind of twisted logical way that they would build off the fake history regarding the 2013 Syria-sarin case and apply it to the new groupthink that Assad has carried out this latest attack, too. Serious fact-finding investigations are not needed; everyone just "knows."

    But Kagan is already looking ahead. Having pocketed Trump's capitulation last week on Syria, Kagan has shifted his sights onto the much juicier targets of Russia and Iran.

    "Russia has greatly expanded its military presence in the eastern Mediterranean," Kagan wrote. "Obama and Kerry spent four years panting after this partnership, but Russia has been a partner the way the mafia is when it presses in on your sporting goods business. Thanks to Obama's policies, Russia has increasingly supplanted the United States as a major power broker in the region. Even U.S. allies such as Turkey, Egypt and Israel look increasingly to Moscow as a significant regional player.

    "Obama's policies also made possible an unprecedented expansion of Iran's power and influence. If you add the devastating impact of massive Syrian refugee flows on European democracies, Obama's policies have not only allowed the deaths of almost a half-million Syrians but also have significantly weakened America's global position and the health and coherence of the West."

    Trump's Probation

    Yes, all that was Obama's fault for not invading Syria with a couple of hundred thousand U.S. troops because that's what would have been required to achieve Kagan's "regime change" goal in Syria. And there's no reason to think that the Syrian invasion would have been any less bloody than the bloody Kagan-advocated invasion of Iraq. But Kagan and the neocons never take responsibility for their various bloodbaths. It's always someone else's fault.

    President Barack Obama, with Vice President Joe Biden, attends a meeting in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, Dec. 12, 2013. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

    And now Kagan is telling Trump that there is still much he must do to earn his way back into the good graces of the neocons.

    Kagan continued, "Trump, of course, greatly exacerbated these problems during his campaign, with all the strong rhetoric aimed at allies. Now he has taken an important first step in repairing the damage, but this will not be the end of the story. America's adversaries are not going to be convinced by one missile strike that the United States is back in the business of projecting power to defend its interests and the world order.

    "The testing of Trump's resolve actually begins now. If the United States backs down in the face of these challenges, the missile strike, though a worthy action in itself, may end up reinforcing the world's impression that the United States does not have the stomach for confrontation."

    And confrontation is surely what Kagan has in mind, adding:

    "Instead of being a one-time event, the missile strike needs to be the opening move in a comprehensive political, diplomatic and military strategy to rebalance the situation in Syria in America's favor. That means reviving some of those proposals that Obama rejected over the past four years: a no-fly zone to protect Syrian civilians, the grounding of the Syrian air force, and the effective arming and training of the moderate opposition, all aimed at an eventual political settlement that can bring the Syrian civil war, and therefore the Assad regime, to an end.

    "The United States' commitment to such a course will have to be clear enough to deter the Russians from attempting to disrupt it. This in turn will require moving sufficient military assets to the region so that neither Russia nor Iran will be tempted to escalate the conflict to a crisis, and to be sure that American forces will be ready if they do.

    "Let's hope that the Trump administration is prepared for the next move. If it is, then there is a real chance of reversing the course of global retreat that Obama began. A strong U.S. response in Syria would make it clear to the likes of Putin, Xi Jinping, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Kim Jong Un that the days of American passivity are over."

    On His Knees

    To put this message in the crude terms that President Trump might understand, now that the neocons have forced him to his knees, they are demanding that he open his mouth. They will not be satisfied with anything short of a massive U.S. military intervention in the Middle East and a full-scale confrontation with Russia (and perhaps China).

    Former Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland during a press conference at the U.S. Embassy in Kiev, Ukraine, on Feb. 7, 2014. (U.S. State Department photo)

    This sort of belligerence is what the neocons and liberal hawks had expected from Hillary Clinton, whom Kagan had endorsed. Some sources claim that a President Hillary Clinton planned to appoint Kagan's neocon wife, Victoria Nuland, as Secretary of State.

    As Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs under Obama, Nuland oversaw the U.S.-backed putsch that overthrew Ukraine's elected President Viktor Yanukovych in 2014, replacing him with a fiercely anti-Russian regime, the move that touched off civil war in Ukraine and sparked the New Cold War between the U.S. and Russia. [For more on Kagan clan, see Consortiumnews.com's " A Family Business of Perpetual War ."]

    Clinton's defeat was a stunning setback but the neocons never give up. They are both well-organized and well-funded, dominating Official Washington's think tanks and media outlets, sharing some power with their junior partners, the liberal interventionists, who differ mostly in the rationales cited for invading other countries. (The neocons mostly talk about global power and democracy promotion, while the liberal hawks emphasize "human rights.")

    In dealing with the narcissistic and insecure Trump, the neocons and liberal hawks conducted what amounted to a clever psychological operation. They rallied mainstream media personalities and Democrats horrified at Trump's victory. In particular, Democrats and their angry base were looking for any reason to hold out hope for Trump's impeachment. Hyping alleged Russian "meddling" in the election became the argument of choice.

    Night after night, MSNBC and other networks competed in their Russia-bashing to boost ratings among Trump-hating Democrats. Meanwhile, Democratic politicians, such as Rep. Adam Schiff of California, saw the Russia-gate hearings as a ticket to national glory. And professional Democratic strategists could evade their responsibility for running a dismal presidential campaign by shifting the blame to the Russians.

    However, besides creating a convenient excuse for Clinton's defeat, the anti-Russian hysteria blocked Trump and his team from any move that they might try to make regarding avoidance of a costly and dangerous New Cold War. The Russia-hating frenzy reached such extremes that it paralyzed the formulation of any coherent Trump foreign policy.

    Now, with the neocons regaining influence on the National Security Council via NSC adviser Gen. H.R. McMaster, a protégé of neocon favorite Gen. David Petraeus, the neocon holding action against the New Détente has shifted into an offensive to expand the hot war in Syria and intensify the New Cold War with Russia. As Kagan recognized, Trump's hasty decision to fire off missiles was a key turning point in the reassertion of neocon/liberal-hawk dominance over U.S. foreign policy.

    It's also suddenly clear how thoroughly liberal Democrats were taken for a ride on the war train by getting them to blame Russia for Hillary Clinton's defeat. The liberals (and even many progressives) hated Trump so much that they let themselves be used in the service of neocon/liberal-hawk endless war policies. Now, it may be too late to turn the train around.

    Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America's Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com ).

    [Apr 13, 2017] Syria Accuses US Of Hitting ISIS Chemical Weapons Depot Killing Hundreds; Russia Sends Drones Zero Hedge

    Apr 13, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
    Syria Accuses US Of Hitting ISIS Chemical Weapons Depot Killing Hundreds; Russia Sends Drones

    Catullus , Apr 13, 2017 8:49 AM

    Radar will confirm that Putin actually put them chemical weapons there

    no1wonder -> Catullus , Apr 13, 2017 8:51 AM

    Pentagon will claim they were Russian planes with US markings..

    90's Child -> Looney , Apr 13, 2017 8:56 AM

    ISIS chemical weapons depo?

    More like CIA / Israel / Saudi chemical weapons depo.

    More wasted tax payers money.

    PrayingMantis -> Lumberjack , Apr 13, 2017 10:33 AM

    ... >>> "US Kills Hundreds in Chemical Strike on Der Ezzor or US Bombs Hit Chemical Warehouse, Will Russia Hit US Base, Ask Questions Later?"

    ... ... [VT]"Editor's note: Without a video done by the White Helmets distributed by Qatar's intelligence agency and their al Jazeera organization, the cheerleaders of ISIS, Ivanka Trump is silent though hundreds lie dead, most of them children. Without White Helmets to murder the babies on camera, jabbing them with cardiac needles and digging around until their hearts are torn to shreds and their eyes go dim, the satanic witch queen, Ivanka, will not be ordering military retaliation and pushing for Armageddon."

    >>> http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/04/13/us-kills-hundreds-in-chemical-strike-on-der-ezzor/

    ... continued from >>> "Breaking: VT Investigators Startling Discovery at Khan Sheikhoun ... Busted: We know who did it, we name them and we have caught them trying it again" >>> http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/04/11/idlib-vt-investigators-startling-discovery-at-khan-sheikhoun/

    and >>> "Busted: White House Syria Report Obviously False (updated/video)" >>> http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/04/12/busted-white-house-syria-report-obviously-false/

    ... the best part of waking up is opening your eyes ...

    SoilMyselfRotten -> PrayingMantis , Apr 13, 2017 11:32 AM

    This story can't be true. The bastions of truth, CNN, MSNBC and FOX all have breaking news coverage of the UAL lawyers press conference. No mention of gas bombings. They must know what's fake news or sumpin.

    MsCreant -> tmosley , Apr 13, 2017 10:48 AM

    Still holding out hope for the Trump, I see. The change was so bizarre, I am too, a tiny bit. Maybe .01%. Would be happy to see it. It isn't going to happen. Something happened that you and I are never going to know about. It was bad, really bad. And Trump changed.

    Also, too much pivot is it's own problem.

    We are not getting the same guy tweeting, self-absorbed, doing his own thing, any more.

    Putrid -> MsCreant , Apr 13, 2017 11:38 AM

    Hope only serves to prolong suffering. Hegel identified with fear, he thought it was the agent that drove progress toward self knowledge.

    Actually, I've come to realize that the limit placed upon self knowledge is the absence of virtue, namely the absence of Courage. It takes courage to deal with Reality. To see it for what it is, in its naked form.

    The System Result is extinction which is quite clear to see. Either you change the System or you'll be killed by it. And since the entire System has now been modeled, the central question becomes whether it can be changed and then whether it would be worthwhile doing so.

    I don't think change is possible, Marx gave it his level best and he failed. It's the lack of courage that keeps everyone in the cave and I can't see that changing. It's to do with how the Mind forms.

    Putrid www.beforethecollapse.com/about

    Took Red Pill -> Manthong , Apr 13, 2017 9:34 AM

    "The Pentgaon has admitted to the airstrikes"

    So far MSM isn't saying the truth. They are saying that only Syrian & Russian jets were in the area.

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/08/middleeast/syria-strikes-russia-donald-tru...

    http://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/syria/1.783270

    kochevnik -> new game , Apr 13, 2017 11:17 AM

    We are not fascist, simply. USA became fascist with Clinton in stealth mode, and publicly with baby Bush who advertised neoconservatism. Neocon is simply a euphemism for fascist. Sadly a simple name change is enough to satisfy most people that you're not a fucking NAZI from Strangelove's bunker

    new game -> kochevnik , Apr 13, 2017 1:12 PM

    his country is under attach and he seemed like an accountant.

    jeff montanye -> kochevnik , Apr 13, 2017 1:17 PM

    neocon is not, imo, simply a euphemism for fascist pure and simple. as daddy bush said to baby bush, when the latter asked what neoconservatism was, "israel".

    check out tbraton in the comments: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/2011/06/23/whats-a-neoconservativ...

    google is becoming more and more neocon and is making finding things that don't cast israel in the best light (true things not wild anti-jew ravings) harder and harder.

    that might make an interesting story zh, especially since they translate between languages (but can't translate english into english).

    try googling most dangerous jewish organizations then compare it to most dangerous white organizations (even given the inaccuracies that invites).

    toady -> 90's Child , Apr 13, 2017 9:25 AM

    Exactly. People seem to forget that isis is fighting with U.S. weapon systems.... that they "stole" from Iraq.... that they appear to be able to "steal" ammunition for on a regular basis.. and the MIC is NOT making a single dolla on!

    SoDamnMad -> 90's Child , Apr 13, 2017 9:41 AM

    "This is old news, the Turks delivered the sarin, read Seymour Hersch's "The Red Line and the Rat Line," which was published in the London Review. No publisher in USA would touch it, so much for free press in America. A gas attack is a war crime and the 2011 sarin attack was a red flag operation. One thing have to give to Obummer, he didn't fall for this when they tried to blame it on Asad. "

    Don't forget our NATO partner, TURKEY.

    chubbar -> no1wonder , Apr 13, 2017 2:31 PM

    Looks like the US had previous knowledge of the strike that was blamed on Syria as a gas attack. Looks like the US either planted gas at the site or the site was a chemical storage facility of some type, not sarin gas though.

    " ANALYSIS by retired Col. Patrick LANG

    Donald Trump's decision to launch cruise missile strikes on a Syrian Air Force Base was based on a lie. In the coming days the American people will learn that the Intelligence Community knew that Syria did not drop a military chemical weapon on innocent civilians in Idlib. Here is what happened.

    1. The Russians briefed the United States on the proposed target. This is a process that started more than two months ago. There is a dedicated phone line that is being used to coordinate and deconflict (i.e., prevent US and Russian air assets from shooting at each other) the upcoming operation.
    2. The United States was fully briefed on the fact that there was a target in Idlib that the Russians believes was a weapons/explosives depot for Islamic rebels.
    3. The Syrian Air Force hit the target with conventional weapons. All involved expected to see a massive secondary explosion. That did not happen. Instead, smoke, chemical smoke, began billowing from the site. It turns out that the Islamic rebels used that site to store chemicals, not sarin, that were deadly. The chemicals included organic phosphates and chlorine and they followed the wind and killed civilians.
    4. There was a strong wind blowing that day and the cloud was driven to a nearby village and caused casualties.
    5. We know it was not sarin. How? Very simple. The so-called "first responders" handled the victims without gloves. If this had been sarin they would have died. Sarin on the skin will kill you. How do I know? I went through "Live Agent" training at Fort McClellan in Alabama.

    There are members of the U.S. military who were aware this strike would occur and it was recorded. There is a film record. At least the Defense Intelligence Agency knows that this was not a chemical weapon attack. In fact, Syrian military chemical weapons were destroyed with the help of Russia.

    This is Gulf of Tonkin 2. How ironic. Donald Trump correctly castigated George W. Bush for launching an unprovoked, unjustified attack on Iraq in 2003. Now we have President Donald Trump doing the same damn thing. Worse in fact. Because the intelligence community had information showing that there was no chemical weapon launched by the Syrian Air Force.

    Here's the good news. The Russians and Syrians were informed, or at least were aware, that the attack was coming. They were able to remove a large number of their assets. The base the United States hit was something of a backwater. Donald Trump gets to pretend that he is a tough guy. He is not. He is a fool.

    This attack was violation of international law. Donald Trump authorized an unjustified attack on a sovereign country. What is even more disturbing is that people like Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, CIA Director Mike Pompeo and NSA Director General McMaster went along with this charade. Front line troops know the truth. These facts will eventually come out. Donald Trump will most likely not finish his term as President. He will be impeached, I believe, once Congress is presented with irrefutable proof that he ignored and rejected intelligence that did not support the myth that Syria attacked with chemical weapons.

    It should also alarm American taxpayers that we launched $100 million dollars of missiles to blow up sand and camel shit. The Russians were aware that a strike was coming. I'm hoping that they and the Syrians withdrew their forces and aircraft from the base. Whatever hope I had that Donald Trump would be a new kind of President, that hope is extinguished. He is a child and a moron. He committed an act of war without justification. But the fault is not his alone. Those who sit atop the NSC, the DOD, the CIA, the Department of State should have resigned in protest. They did not. They are complicit in a war crime."

    greenskeeper carl -> Oldwood , Apr 13, 2017 9:45 AM

    Thats the problem with the way our MSM works. It prints info tha turns out to be false on the front page, in huge letters, with dramatic photos. The TV media reports on it breathlessly. Later, when the story is proven to be false, like the 2013 nonsense, a retraction might be printed in a tiny column at the back of the paper, if at all. But, years later, they still talk about it as if thats how it happened, since it 'fits that pattern'. Most people don't see anything other than the big 'breaking news' story, so thats their new reality.

    You know, kinda like the 'wiretappped data used in inquiry of trump aids' being a headline ON ELECTION DAY and then a few months later, the author of that same story says trump is a crazy person for claiming obama had his 'wires tapped'.

    TwelveOhOne -> UnschooledAustrianEconomist , Apr 13, 2017 11:33 AM

    As an 80's comedian asked, "Why did they put our oil under their sand ??!?"

    Clashfan -> Dr. Engali , Apr 13, 2017 7:40 PM

    Clashfan -> Clashfan , Apr 13, 2017 7:45 PM

    Okay and water, sure--and oil in the Golan Heights.

    nachochan , Apr 13, 2017 9:01 AM

    Both sides Russian and American are spewing out propoganda that shouldnt be listened too or at least taken with a grain of salt. Don't trust the intel from either party as it pertains to this mess. We need to get the hell out of Syria now unfortunately Donald fucked that up with his damn hard on for the Tomohawk waroom. We couldve gotten concessions on the way out had he choose his detente that he campaigned on but now he has nothing to gain politically from backing out because Russia will not tolerate concecssions.

    nardami -> nardami , Apr 13, 2017 9:12 AM

    The Syrian MOD claims were reported on Al Masdar News...Sputnik picked it up.

    https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/breaking-civilians-killed-us-jets-bomb-isis-chemical-depot-deir-ezzor-syrian-mod/

    Son of Captain Nemo , Apr 13, 2017 9:04 AM

    Tex "blinked"!

    The tragedy of it is that the Russians and the U.S. made a deal to cover up the embarrassment for the U.S. military and it's "head chopper" proxies without Syria invited to that "PARTY"!

    NOT a very good way to dispose of chemical weapons... But hey?... They ain't Russian or Americans right?!!!

    If I were Assad I'd be raising a "MIDDLE DIGIT" in Putin's direction along with the Iranians!!!

    Sick Underbelly -> cherry picker , Apr 13, 2017 11:33 AM

    If most of the Trumptards on here had half an ass and applied their brains to a study of the balance of Freedom, Liberty and Inalienable Rights, and started with the premise "Pursue whatever until and unless you encroach upon the Rights and Freedom of others, or the Law subjugating you both" we wouldn't have to ask "Why don't Americans...mind their own business".

    We could have a long discussion about the " War Powers Resolution ", but don't you think 535 people involved would SLOW DOWN the hasty actions to just send ~$100 million worth of missiles to a remote air field? Don't you think being able to pull the lever to initiate non-nuclear launch sequence of attacks, without deliberation, violates some basic principle of logical sanity?

    If Congress had to vote to declare war on Syria to then authorize the lame-ass attack, don't you think we would have had a different outcome?

    Aside from all of that, on principle alone:

    a) The US is deliberately pushing for regime change, and we have funded the opposition to and the overthrow of the currently-elected President of Syria. This, alone, is reason enough to not be involved. We are encroaching upon their Freedoms, their Liberty, and their Rights to self-govern and self-efficacy. To this, I say we are the war criminals, the guilty party, the treasonous-bitch, unwelcome outsiders.

    b) Syria asked Russia for help. Syria has not asked us for help. We are unwelcome. If you are in a town, and the asshole "window washer" comes up and just starts spraying and scrubbing, expecting something in return...you're starting to get the feeling.

    Now, say asshole window washer comes brandishing an AR-15, he's strapped with ballistic helmet and plate carrier, and you know he wants your shit, but all you have is a t-shirt, some sunglasses and a pocket knife? You wanna fight, but the prospect of running that red light looks best, while calling for backup.

    The US is the loaded, asshole window washer going to steal Syria's stuff. They sped off and got help from Russia, and the US is still in the dust, firing helplessly at the shit that's getting away.

    c) Common sense and decency says that if one sovereign nation wants access to another sovereign nation's resources, the seeking nation proposes terms to enter into agreement with the possessing nation. They both respect each others' right to self-govern, and their right to deal with whomever on whatever terms are agreeable. The US has fucked this up beyond belief. I'm not sure any people in the State Department or at the decision-making levels abides by, believes and/or lets that simple maxim drive the way they approach the world.

    On principle alone, the US should be chained up, set in the corner, and given a detox of whatever megalomaniac-influencing drugs and thoughtforms it has been consuming...24/7 classical music, readings from classic texts, a diet of bread, water and occasional soup, and a comforting, fluffy blanket, so as not to be too harsh. =)

    Stinkytofu , Apr 13, 2017 9:29 AM

    according to RT

    Today 12:37 GMT

    US coalition denies airstrikes in area of alleged chemical leak in Syria

    The US-led coalition against Islamic State on Thursday denied a Syrian army report it had carried out an airstrike that had hit poison gas supplies belonging to IS and caused the deaths of hundreds of people. "The coalition conducted no strikes in that area at that time. The Syrian claim is incorrect and likely intentional misinformation," US Air Force Colonel John Dorrian, a coalition spokesman, told Reuters.

    perkunas , Apr 13, 2017 9:30 AM

    Trump says NATO obsolete, now its good=fail

    Trump says America 1st, stay out of Syria, Iraq=fail

    Trump says drain the swamp, fills it Goldman Sachs=fail

    Trump says get rid off TPP then hires the guy that wrote it, to negotiate NAFTA=fail

    Trump says to fight ISIS, them bombs Assad the guy fighting them=fail

    Trump says we need to get along with Russia so we can solve things=fail

    Trump now openly lying=fail

    Trump=fail

    no1wonder , Apr 13, 2017 9:35 AM

    via Xinhua China News:

    #BREAKING: U.S. military says airstrike in northern Syria mistakenly killed 18 allied fighters

    ( i.e. 18 Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) soldiers)

    https://twitter.com/XHNews/status/852512891290796032

    Rebel yell , Apr 13, 2017 9:54 AM

    The cost of the tomahawk bombing on April 11 just for the tomahawks alone was $50,268,000. Fifty nine tomahawk missiles at $852,000 a piece.

    Of course all of that is minutiae compared to the international crisis and loss of life that has resulted in it!

    TemporarySecurity -> Rebel yell , Apr 13, 2017 10:35 AM

    If Syria did the attack it was a war crime under the UN. That is a big if.

    Under the UN an unprovoced non-defensive attack is a war crime also.

    Rebel yell -> TemporarySecurity , Apr 13, 2017 8:39 PM

    But it did not. Even if it did, where does it say in the UN charter that if any country violates war crime laws, of which the US is by far the most guilty of doing, that it is up to the US to bomb them? International law also prohibits countries from ousting leaders of countries. It is why George HW Bush did not remove Sadaam houssein in desert storm. He specifically stated that too.

    British reporter in Syria says that the Syrian army attacked al nousra chemical plant in Syria. The US countinues to lie about Assad -- The only Americans telling the truth are Rand Paul Tulsi Gabbard and who the dnc establishment has demonized! https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xjOSZ6QgGgY

    falak pema , Apr 13, 2017 9:54 AM

    A constant theme in the way the US fights is to use "shock n awe"; aka massive overkill.

    As a result the collateral damage is just beyond belief; nothing pin pointed about it. Witness Nam, Laos and now Afghan and Iraq etc. etc. etc.

    In Iraq 1-- Desert Storm-- the Italians and Brits lost a lot of their personnel against friendly fire by the US troops.

    The frogs played safe; Mitterrand ordered his troops to keep a perimeter of 45 km minimun from the advancing US army on its march to Basra and Baghdad. Result : No collateral damage to the frog regiments.

    Why should anything be different in Syria and Mosul today ?

    Apart from operation "trojan horse" type false flag scams; which is standard CIA/special ops. pratice.

    DuneCreature , Apr 13, 2017 10:02 AM

    I can't wait to hear the CIA, errrrrr, I meant CNN spin on this shit.

    Freaky Fraeed will need to do some fancy footwork to get this blamed on Assad and the Russians.

    Live Hard, A Pouch Of Magic Indian Nose Hair Says He Will Give It His Best Shot, Die Free

    ~ DC v5.0

    Uncle Tupelo -> DuneCreature , Apr 13, 2017 10:24 AM

    CNN @CNN

    US intelligence intercepted communications between Syrian military and chemical experts, a senior US official says cnn.it/2oaNZrq

    DuneCreature -> Uncle Tupelo , Apr 13, 2017 11:01 AM

    Yes, yes, they can fabricate any signals intercepts they want. ....... If I know the Langley crowd they will even screw up that air tight psyop with sloppy execution.

    Let's give it about 48 hours and see if I'm right.

    Duff is a little 'out there' BUT about this he is dead on the money at 300 yds.

    http://journal-neo.org/2017/04/04/the-nasty-truth-about-the-cia/

    Live Hard, USSA Intelligence Gathering Is A Side Business For Today's New And Degraded CIA Pirate Gang, Die Free

    ~ DC v5.0

    JesusUp -> DuneCreature , Apr 13, 2017 11:48 AM

    this is mossad's specialty

    adonisdemilo , Apr 13, 2017 10:04 AM

    If there is proven evidence of this fuckup can we expect appologies en-masse from the UK's UN representative, one two faced little shit called Matthew Rycroft.

    I get the urge to throw something very heavy at the TV every time he starts spouting his propaganda BS.

    He makes me ashamed to admit I'm a brit.

    Greed is King -> adonisdemilo , Apr 13, 2017 10:27 AM

    Me too, and the British media has the bare arsed cheek to accuse the Russian envoy who shouted at Matt (the Brat with a face begging to be slapped) Rycroft of "unprofessional" behaviour; unlike the Anti-Russian rantings of Boris the bumbling buffoon, he`s really professional, he`s the best Foreign Secretary and top Diplomat any country has had since Ulrich Friedrich Wilhelm Joachim von Ribbentrop graced the corridors of the Reichstagg in Berlin during the reign of dear old Adolph. #realdonaldtrump

    Deep Snorkeler , Apr 13, 2017 10:12 AM

    Everything Will Be OK

    1. Americans will easily accept wage cuts, when the military victories start to pile up.

    2. Trump employs the age-old John Wayne Doctrine of Mindless Aggression, with great success.

    Whopper Goldberg , Apr 13, 2017 10:12 AM

    RT Worlds Apart interview with another American bullshit artist

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KME9Uz54Hsg

    DuneCreature , Apr 13, 2017 10:14 AM

    What ever happened to real war correspondents and fearless camera crews?

    I want to see the gas victims writhing around on the ground in agony, damn it!

    If I'm going to pay for all of this CIA gas and distress I want to see how my tax dollars are being spent.

    Live Hard, Let's Bring All The War Refugees We Just Bombed And Gassed Back To Have A Block Party And Cook Out. Maybe Get In A Few Games Of Softball, Horseshoes Or Corn Hole And Drink Some Near Beer With Mohammad And His Six Or Seven Wives, Die Free

    ~ DC v5.0

    Smedley's Butler -> DuneCreature , Apr 13, 2017 10:36 AM

    War correspondents and fearless camera crews... Why do we need them? Is this not the job of the White Helmets? I have no doubt they are en route to rescue children covered in talcom powder and ketchup? Right? any moment now.

    Greed is King , Apr 13, 2017 10:14 AM

    "Update 1: Russia has reportedly dispatched drones to the area to confirm Syria's reports. The Russian military said that it has no information confirming the reports of death as a result of the US-led coalition's strike."

    "The Russian Defense Ministry does not possess information confirming reports of deaths and the type of the destriction as a result of the US-led coalition's bombing near Deir ez-Zor."

    "Unmanned aerial vehicles have been sent to the area to monuitor the situation," the ministry added.

    What ?, go and investigate ?, why ?, come on Putin, get with the program, do what Donny would do, NUKE EVERYBODY. #realdonaldtrump

    SMC , Apr 13, 2017 10:30 AM

    Without a formal declaration of war this is murder.

    Karl Marxist -> SMC , Apr 13, 2017 11:02 AM

    Media doesn't care. They exist not to play to moral outrage but to lull viewers to sleep. Local news full of blood and guts. National and international news void of all realities on the ground. No bloody stumps of baby carcases shown there. Unnamed sources only. Their mission: bury the magnitude of crimes by power and wealth. But Hynduai is pen Easter Sunday. Free hot dogs and ballons for the kids! Get a gas guzzling cn't see around one Bulgemobile for only $189/mo. Comes with inside TV while you drive! No credit? Bad credit? No prblem. Habla Espanol.

    Cordeezy , Apr 13, 2017 10:30 AM

    Why is trump such a sell out? I should have known that voting for either candidate would lead to this. Www.escapeamazon.com

    Cutter , Apr 13, 2017 10:40 AM

    Sputnik should be read cautiously.

    johnnycanuck -> Cutter , Apr 13, 2017 11:13 AM

    As should NYT, Wapo, Guardian and all other western majors. CNN, FOX and the rest of the Cables should be ignored completely.

    Cutter -> johnnycanuck , Apr 13, 2017 1:03 PM

    Agree. Wouldn't watch CNN, if they paid me. Fox is right leaning,but way better than the majors or CNN.

    Bottom line is these days almost no media is impartial, they are all spinning. The only outlet that's impartial, is Consortium News. So you have to read them all with a jaundiced eye, and try and divine the truth from the fog.

    Not saying Sputnik shouldn't be read, but it, like all the others, has its own spin.

    dltff-ya , Apr 13, 2017 10:41 AM

    It is sad to witness the controlled media and lack of free speech even amount the best media sites. It's not actually their fault sometimes. It is self preservation. They don't want to be crucified for speaking the unspeakable. Visitors from Russia and China often say that in Russia people blurt out their opinions now days. politically correct or not. Point: Tucker Carlson, a decent fellow and probably agrees with me, has to navigate the direction of the discussion with guests that agree with me (and Tucker almost certainly) about the nature of the Syrian problem. Tucker was discussing with some Russian expert about what is the cause of the left wanting war with Russia so much. Well Tucker has to feign wonderment about why, and he asks the expert, who also has to orbit around the truth without speaking the words. Why the animosity - hostility, and belligerence towards Russia and Syria? Tucker has to ask out loud- He and his guest and most of the viewers know the answer which can't be articulated by anyone on the air. The secret---- unveiled for Tucker----

    Israel hates Hezbollah, Syria, and Russia because their position in Syria interferes with their local Hegemony in Lebanon in particular, in 2006. http://www.counterpunch.org/2006/10/13/how-hezbollah-defeated-israel-2/ This is a proxy war fought to support Israeli regional supremacy, and their ability to strike Syria and Assad and Hezbollah at will, any time and anywhere they like, in the Golan Heights or in Damascus, or anywhere in Lebanon they choose. The American neocons and the left for the most part is in bed with these guys, and will cause the US to go to war if they have to, and even with Russia if they have to go that far, because Russia is the power behind this triumvirate. This is why Israel supports el Nusra (ISIS) and their stooge John McCain has no trouble with that.These are they guys with the Sarin, and the lack of scruples to use it to blame Assad. This is the only picture that makes any sense from the Syrian point of view. Somehow, poor Tucker can't blurt out the truth. He must stand there in his shoes and wonder outloud, why do the Left and necons want a war with Russia. Very very sad state of view for free speech in the US. It's gone.

    Soph -> dltff-ya , Apr 13, 2017 10:55 AM

    I think you're waaay off the mark. Yes, Isreal is obviously a factor in region, and they have their hands in the pie, no question.

    This, however, is first and foremost about pipelines. Russia has an iron grip on the petro market in Europe. Syria is key to maintaining that monopoly simply because they are the land-route for fast, cheap, pipelines from the middle east.

    The Saudis, Qatari's, and their US, er, ally, need to control Syria to build those pipelines. With Assad in power, that will never happen. That is why the Saudi's/Qatari's backed the various opposition groups in the area (including ISIS), and that is why they simply will not let this one go.

    It is, as is often the case, all about petro dollars.

    Whopper Goldberg -> Soph , Apr 13, 2017 11:04 AM

    Bullshit, its all about Israel and their Oded Yinon plan.

    Russia' iron grip? Get real

    They have been selling gas to Europe for decades even during the days of the USSR/

    never a problem

    ClickNLook -> Whopper Goldberg , Apr 13, 2017 11:28 AM

    This time Quatar/US want their share in EU gas market.

    Assad depositing is a key to get that going.

    tsuki , Apr 13, 2017 10:50 AM

    Last paragraph of a Seymour Hersh article published in the London Review of Books on December 19, 2013:

    "The UN resolution, which was adopted on 27 September by the Security Council dealt indirectly with the notion that rebel forces such as an-Nusra would also be obliged to disarm .No group was cited by name. While the Syrian regime continues the process of eliminating its chemical arsenal, the irony is that, after Assad's stockpile of precursor agents is destroyed, al-Nusra and its Islamist allies could end up as the only faction inside Syria with access to the ingredients that can create sarin, a strategic weapon that would be unlike any other in the war zone."

    Interesting.

    Robert Trip , Apr 13, 2017 10:58 AM

    Suddenly Syria is just chock full of chemical weapons.

    Depots and manufacturing facilities are all over the place.

    Whopper Goldberg -> Robert Trip , Apr 13, 2017 11:02 AM

    Thaniks to the USA backed terrorists who the USA says they are ''fighting''.

    They have been arming them all along ..

    MrBoompi -> Whopper Goldberg , Apr 13, 2017 12:09 PM

    The trail of chemical weapons in Syria leads directly to Obama and Clinton. George Webb has done some good work on this subject.

    Free Spirit , Apr 13, 2017 11:00 AM

    This news is on SANA´swebsite thus it is probably true.

    http://sana.sy/en/?p=104229

    Mzhen , Apr 13, 2017 11:29 AM

    These deaths of beautiful babies are lost in the chemical fog of war because the White Helmets and a film crew were not ready on scene to record the event for US media.

    Son of Captain Nemo , Apr 13, 2017 11:33 AM

    Can you say "Amerikansky Bitch"?... I knew that you could!

    https://southfront.org/us-shifts-strategy-in-syria-amid-tensions-with-ru...

    https://www.rt.com/usa/384633-trump-russia-lasting-peace/

    joego1 , Apr 13, 2017 11:43 AM

    Remember that after bombing Libya chemical weapons where transferred to Syria. It was Hillbilly that did it with Trumps help. When will they learn that there is no "winning" anything in this morass.

    Mzhen , Apr 13, 2017 11:54 AM

    Deir ez-Zor is the location where "coalition" airstrikes killed and wounded a couple hundred Syrian soldiers last September. The US claims that they were mistaken for ISIS. Before the airstrike, the Syrian army was winning the battle for control of the area. This strike, and another phony incident in the western part of the country days later, blamed on the Assad government, resulted in derailing the ceasefire that had been negotiated between Kerry and Lavrov.

    Rubicon727 , Apr 13, 2017 11:59 AM

    RT.com reports the issue as: "US-led coalition airstrike mistakenly killed 18 SDF ally fighters in Syria on April 11 – Pentagon" Yup. Just like the US mistakenly murdered Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, one million+ in Iraq, and Viet Nam. A nation you can really believe in.

    MrBoompi , Apr 13, 2017 12:03 PM

    Evidently, even in the face of insurmountable evidence to the contrary, the US will be playing this "ISIS is our enemy" psyop to the bitter fucking end. It seems ISIS would be easy to eliminate, using both military and financial methods. But we focus on getting rid of Assad and when we kill his supporters we claim it was just an accident. I don't think these people in DC and their allies realize how many people around the globe are not falling for their lies.

    Falconsixone , Apr 13, 2017 12:05 PM

    Must have been their 18 best special forces.

    I wonder how mossads isis got the gas away from the Syrian airport?

    I'm thinking they (mossad/cia/pentagram/mi6/etc.) had the whole tomahawk thing planned weeks in advance and made the gas thing up with clumsier counterpart mossad isis (soon to be deadmen) that just killed some kids and waited for the next air strike then made a movie and gave it to jew boy kushners crying fool wife and the rest is now jew history of murders (to be proud I'm sure). News Flash: You jew perverts are losing more everyday and soon will be destroyed forever.

    Mzhen , Apr 13, 2017 12:07 PM

    "Deir ez-Zor is perhaps best known for its oilfields, and previously much of the fighting around the city involved fighting for control over these strategically important objectives. As the oilfields used to provide much of the fuel for the Syrian Arab Army, the Republican Guard, the National Defence Force and Suqur al-Sahara (Desert Falcons), their takeover about a year ago was a serious blow to all forces loyal to Assad and endangered the fuel supply badly needed to mount new offensives."

    http://spioenkop.blogspot.com/2014/12/battlefront-syria-deir-ez-zor.html

    Pitchman , Apr 13, 2017 12:10 PM

    Bomb, bomb, bomb; Bomb, bomb Syria.

    Treason: Were John McCain, McMaster And Brennan Behind The Syrian Gas Attack?

    adamas -> Dre4dwolf , Apr 13, 2017 1:31 PM

    Unfortunately you're the I'll informed lunatic. Dr Assad was a medical Dr based in London prior to the death of his father. He is totally secular and has a British wife. His country has been set upon by terrorist fighters trained and funded by the USA, Qatar and Saudi Arabia (ISIS) the reason for the assault on Syria and the devastation on the country is that the USA wants to pump Qatari natural gas through Syrian territory to Europe in order to break the Russian stranglehold on European gas supplies. Syria is a long standing Russia partner and ally and has resisted the construction of the pipeline. This entire mess is entirely the fault of the western oil majors pulling strings in Washington and London. We have no right to be there, we have no right to be funding terrorism and we have caused the decimation of the Coptic Christian community in Syria as the jihadi conscripts in ISIS have committed horrific slaughter on all of these communities under cover of the US military umbrella. Please stop talking shit.

    personal109 , Apr 13, 2017 12:30 PM

    The US and its allies, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, started this war in Syria in a disastrous attempt to get rid of Assad and snake an oil pipeline through the country. They funneled massive numbers of armaments to Sunni groups with direct affiliations to Al Quada. In the power vacuum they created ISIS and the ensuring refugee crisis. Ask Angela Merkel, she agrees! The Russians, Iran and Assad won the Syrian civil war. But these same clowns, US, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar are doing whatever they can through their FAKE news media outlets to stir the pot one more time. Pathetic.

    rosiescenario , Apr 13, 2017 12:57 PM

    How is Quagmire spelled?.............SYRIA

    It is amazing that we do not learn from our very large and very recent mistakes in the Middle East......if we actually succeed in getting Assad removed there will be a power vacuum which will then be filled by some crazy extremist religious fanatic who will then proceed to further de-stabilize the region, thus requiring our further efforts to corral the problem.

    We should get out now.....let Russia and Assad deal with ISIS.

    While we are diverting our resources and energy to the ME, we do not take care of our own citizens here at home. The Mexican drug cartels are far more of a threat to us than ISIS or its ilk have ever been. Our infrastructure is crumbling, our inner cities are more dangerous than ME war zones, and our deficits are out of control.

    I really believed that Trump would put America first.....now it appears we are putting Syria first. Just the same old shit.

    Vageling -> rosiescenario , Apr 13, 2017 1:19 PM

    Same for DPRK. Events in the past thaught us the vacuum can't be controlled. Meet the new boss. Even more insane than the previous.

    It is very obvious there is no consensus within the Trump administration just like there is no solid forgein policy. Other than the lame old shit they do not admit to. The chilrun!

    Good news. More instability and the "status quo" under review. Good! Nothing last forever and every empire crumbles eventually. Lets review western alliances as well. Genie is out the bottle anyway.

    Hannibal , Apr 13, 2017 1:17 PM

    Coalition Strikes Daesh Depot With Chemical Weapons in Deir ez-Zor

    The Syrian General Staff said that the US-led coalition struck a Daesh depot storing chemical weapons in Deir ez-Zor on Wednesday. The Syrian military said that this fact proves that terrorists possess chemical weapons.

    "The jets of the so-called US-led coalition launched a strike at about 17:30-17:50 Download Video on a Daesh warehouse where many foreign fighters were present. First a white cloud and then a yellow one appeared at the site of the strike, which points at the presence of a large number of poisonous substances. A fire at the site continued until 22:30 [19:30 GMT]," the Syrian army's command statement obtained by Sputnik said.

    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/04/13/us-kills-hundreds-in-chemical-st...

    johnnycanuck , Apr 13, 2017 1:22 PM

    If true, looks like New yawk Don's Wild Wild West tomahawk show merely got Assad an upgrade for his airforce;

    Syria gains more upgraded Su-24M2 bombers

    Posted 13 April 2017 ·

    "The Syrian Arab Armed Forces are receiving 10 examples of the Sukhoi Su-24M2 'Fencer-D' attack aircraft from Russia, augmenting an unknown number of existing 'Fencers'. Jon Lake reports."

    http://www.arabianaerospace.aero/syria-gains-more-upgraded-su-24m2-bombe...

    SU 17s out, SU 24s in. When life gives you a lemon....

    Genby , Apr 13, 2017 1:26 PM

    Wikilieaks: Clinton was informed that Al-Qaida leader al-Zawahiri called to support US in Syria

    https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/23225

    Internet-is-Beast , Apr 13, 2017 2:05 PM

    The chemical weapons had plenty of time to get to those warehouses during the Obama era. They probably came in through the Jarablus Corridor. It is possible that ISIS recently moved them to that warehouse and then made sure the US got the message they were there. ISIS made sure they were placed near a vulnerable population where many children would be killed. The blame will be placed on Assad once again. Sure sounds like a neocon plot.

    Trump is way out of his depth and should probably just resign. He should have thought twice about this obviously contrived setup. I hope for his sake and the sake of his family he quits. No job is worth having innocent blood on your hands. I pity the guy. Everything is going to hell for him.

    If it turns out Jared leaned on him to do this deed, things are even worse. Using his kids as his advisors shows that he really is not fit to be president. The fact that he is better than Hillary and that if he leaves, some evil neocon will replace him is not enough of a reason for him to stay. He is being bled like a stuck pig by the neocons and should think about saving himself and his family.

    Bad_Sushi -> Internet-is-Beast , Apr 13, 2017 3:56 PM

    Its too late for quiting now.

    quax , Apr 13, 2017 2:05 PM

    Surprisingly balanced reporting by the Tylers. Usually the Russian/Syrian stories have been presented as the literal truth.

    deplorable nation , Apr 13, 2017 2:08 PM

    What happened to the Susan Rice story?

    rwe2late -> deplorable nation , Apr 13, 2017 3:23 PM

    Replaced by Trump accusations that the Russians

    "must have" known beforehand (and by insinuation therefore approved)

    the Syrian government murdering children.

    All of this without any evidence or credible motive.

    TheMagician , Apr 13, 2017 2:19 PM

    Technically the russkies can send a squadron of SU-24 bombers flanked by some Mig-35s or even Sukhoi T-50s, and kill every last US trooper in a convoy of assumed ..cough...ISIS scumbags, on the M4 road in Syria that goes all the way into Iraq.

    If Trump starts complaining over dead American soldiers through his sidekick Spicer, he has to explain what they were doing there without congressional approval (which he won´t, unless he is completely insane).

    Putin can further, through his faithful mouthpiece Lavrov, declare that we have the official blessings from the sovereign state of Syria to bomb any invading enemy or said state if we find proof of such invasion...and so on...

    This is a game of chess between war crazy neocons that want to see how far they can push their war agenda until the Russians and Chinese starts killing off American soldiers and navy men on live TV for all to see what happens when a war-mad puppet in the WH starts believing he can take on the entire world without repercussions.

    Internet-is-Beast , Apr 13, 2017 2:37 PM

    I bet ISIS has warehouses full of sarin gas all over western Europe. Read Samuel Laurent's book, Al Qaida en France. He actually visited, several years ago, one of their warehouses in France, though at the time, even though they had many advanced weapons, no mention was made of chemical and biological weapons. But you know the probability is 100% that they now have ample stocks of those weapons, which they will definitely use for acts of terror when they decide the time is right for bringing Europe to its knees.

    Al Qaida actually wants people to know of their capabilities, which is why they granted a weapons depot tour to Laurent. They made sure that he would never know the location of the depot.

    Needless to say, the vast majority of Europeans are insouciant.

    sinbad2 -> Internet-is-Beast , Apr 13, 2017 5:09 PM

    The US/Israel usually keeps a pretty tight leash on the gas it supplies to al Qaeda, I guess they are scared that the moozies might bite the hand that feeds them.

    [Apr 13, 2017] The Escalating War on Syria and Need for International Law Opinion teleSUR English

    Notable quotes:
    "... "Yesterday's chemical attack in Syria [was] against innocent people including women, small children and even beautiful little babies. Their deaths was an affront to humanity. These heinous actions by the Assad regime cannot be tolerated my attitude toward Syria and Assad has changed very much." ..."
    "... "The only plausible scenario that fits the evidence is an attack by opposition forces." ..."
    "... Faulty intelligence could have led to an unjustified US military action." ..."
    "... Coverage of the Syrian war will be remembered as one of the most shameful episodes in the history of the American press." ..."
    "... What the U.S. government is doing in Syria is tantamount to a war of aggression, which, according to the Nuremberg Tribunal, is the worst possible crime a State can commit against another State." ..."
    "... Rick Sterling is an investigative journalist. He lives in the SF Bay Area and can be contacted at [email protected] ..."
    Apr 13, 2017 | www.telesurtv.net
    Opinion > Articles The Escalating War on Syria and Need for International Law --> By: Rick Sterling
    • U.S. Navy guided-missile destroyer USS Porter conducts strike operations against Syria while in the Mediterranean Sea. U.S. Navy guided-missile destroyer USS Porter conducts strike operations against Syria while in the Mediterranean Sea. | Photo: Reuters
    Published 7 April 2017
    • span span < fb-xfbml-state="rendered" data-href="http://www.telesurtv.net/english/opinion/The-Escalating-War-on-Syria-and-Need-for-International-Law-20170407-0008.html"> 0 Comments
    • Comments
    Increases text size - Decreases text size Follow us TheWorldToday International law has been undermined and replaced by "humanitarian law,"contributing to the current disastrous situation whereby a war is being waged under a humanitarian pretext. On Tuesday, April 4, there were reports of children and other civilians killed by chemical poisoning in the town of Khan Sheikhoun, Syria. There were contradictory reports, some saying they smelled the gas; others claiming it caused immediate death like odorless sarin.

    RELATED: US Attacks Syrian Base with 59 Missiles After Chemical Attack

    On Wednesday, April 5, President Trump blamed the Syrian government despite conflicting reports and contradictory information and accusations. He said, "Yesterday's chemical attack in Syria [was] against innocent people including women, small children and even beautiful little babies. Their deaths was an affront to humanity. These heinous actions by the Assad regime cannot be tolerated my attitude toward Syria and Assad has changed very much."

    On Thursday, April 6, Trump ordered a 'targeted military strike' on Syria with 50 tomahawk missiles attacking the primary Syrian air base near Homs. This base is used to support the combat with ISIS in eastern Syria and Nusra / al Qaida in Idlib province.

    As I will show below, it is likely the deaths in Khan Sheikhoun were caused by an armed opposition faction, not the Syrian government. The goal was precisely what has happened: a media firestorm leading to direct U.S. aggression against Syria.Syria.

    What Happened and How?

    On April 4 news broke of a 'chemical weapon' attack in Syria. Western media and governments quickly blamed the Syrian government. Just as quickly, neoconservatives such as Sen. John McCain recalled the 2013 crisis when Pres Obama ultimately decided not to attack Syria. Israeli PM Netanyahu chimed in with a not-too-subtle renewed call for war on Syria. He tweeted that it's time for the international community to "fulfill its obligations from 2013."

    Basic facts include:

    - On March 22, the government-controlled town of Khattab was over-run by militants with some civilians kidnapped and taken to the nearby opposition-controlled town of Khan Sheikhoun.

    - On April 4, up to 80 persons, including many children, died at Khan Sheikhoun. Some showed signs of chemical poisoning. Photographs, videos, analyses and other sources are documented at "A Closer Look At Syria" .

    - one of the videos features the UK born and raised Dr. Shajul Islam . He received his UK medical license in 2012 but had the license suspended due to reports he was involved in the kidnapping in Syria of journalist John Cantlie.

    - Many of the video scenes depict an area set into a limestone quarry with apparent caves and storage depots. There are flatbed trucks with bodies scattered on the ground in this semi-industrial area. Other video show scenes in a medical clinic.

    - Photographs show "White Helmet" individuals handling bodies without gloves which is very strange if they died or were dying from chemical poison.

    Who is responsible?

    There are three theories about what happened:

    - The western government narrative is that the Syrian "regime" is responsible. They fired illegal chemical weapons into the town, primarily killing innocent civilians and many children.

    - The Syrian army acknowledges firing air strikes but denies using chemical weapons at this or anytime. This area was the base for militant attacks against government areas in Hama province in the preceding weeks. The Russian Ministry of Defense says that militants had a weapons production factory including chemical weapon ingredients, and that may have been hit and caused the chemical weapon deaths.

    - A third theory is the kidnapped civilians from Khattab were killed or poisoned by the militants as part of a staged event.

    Evidence Pointing to the Militants

    Looking at the facts, history and overall circumstances, it is far more likely the armed opposition is responsible for this event. Here is why:

    (1) The incident and publicity help the opposition and hurt the government.

    Crime investigations usually begin with the question: Who has a motive? In this case, it's strikingly clear that the armed opposition and their supporters benefit from this event. They have used the story to further demonize the Assad government and make renewed calls for the United States and "the world" to intervene.

    The Syrian government is making steady advances in many parts of the country. They have no reason to use chemical weapons; they have every reason to NOT use chemical weapons. They know very well that the armed opposition has immediate access to major media.

    RELATED: US Attacks on Syria Constitutes International Armed Conflict: Red Cross

    Accusations that the Syrian government intentionally attacks civilians is contradicted by their policies and actions. As demonstrated last Decembers in Aleppo, civilians are welcomed from opposition areas into government controlled areas. Even Syrian militants are welcomed after they sign an agreement to lay down arms.

    It is also relevant to consider timing. There is a pattern of sensational events helpful to the armed opposition occurring simultaneously with critical international meetings or actions. In this case, the events in Khan Sheikhoun occurred the day before an important conference on Syria in Brussels. The conference titled "Supporting the future of Syria and the region" has been effectively sidetracked by news about the chemical weapons attack and the Syrian government being blamed.

    (2) Extremists were responsible for the August 2013 Chemical Weapon attack in Damascus.

    Western supporters of the armed opposition were quick to blame the Syrian government for the chemical attack in Ghouta on August 21, 2013. However, subsequent investigations by the most credible investigative journalists and researchers concluded the Syrian government was probably NOT responsible. Seymour Hersh and Robert Parry concluded the attack was most likely carried out by militants with support from Turkey. The in-depth examination titled WhoGhouta concluded , "The only plausible scenario that fits the evidence is an attack by opposition forces." An MIT study made a detailed trajectory analysis, concluded that the missile could not have been fired from government territory and warned: " Faulty intelligence could have led to an unjustified US military action."

    (3) Armed Opposition Groups have a history of Staging Incidents

    From the start, the Syrian conflict has included an information war. Hillary Clinton boasted of "training for more than a thousand activists, students and independent journalists." In December 2012, NBC journalist Richard Engel was reportedly kidnapped and abused by "shabiha" supporters of the Syrian government. Engel and his film crew were "liberated" by Free Syrian Army rebels after a gunfight with the Assad supporting kidnappers. In reality, the entire episode from kidnapping to rescue was a hoax designed to demonize Assad supporters and glorify the "rebels". The true story emerged years later after the actual events were leaked. When it was going to be made public, Engel finally admitted the truth.

    (4) Supporters of the armed opposition have a history of fabricating stories which demonize the Syrian Government.

    In February 2014, it was announced that a defecting Syrian military photographer, who was anonymous but code-named "Caesar", had 55,000 photos showing the torture and murder of 11,000 innocent Syrian civilians. This news received sensational media attention with live interviews on CNN and front page coverage throughout the western world. The news relied on the judgment of legal prosecutors who "verified" the story and produced a "Caesar Report". This was released the day before the start of Geneva negotiations. It effectively disrupted the talks and facilitated the "rebels" refusal to negotiate and walk away. In reality, the "verification" and report was commissioned by the government of Qatar which has been a major funder of the armed opposition. Since then it has been discovered that nearly half the 55,000 photos show the opposite of what was claimed: they show dead Syrian soldiers and victims of explosions NOT tortured civilians. That is just one of the findings confirming the fraud involved in this sensational story. A concise expose of "Caesar" is here .

    How the Public has been Misinformed on Syria

    Historian and journalist Stephen Kinzer has said , " Coverage of the Syrian war will be remembered as one of the most shameful episodes in the history of the American press." Here are a few examples showing the bias, half-truths and outright false statements regarding the events at Khan Sheikhoun:

    Trump Syria

    - The PBS Newshour typically features two guests who are questioned by the host. The problem is that their guests consistently share the same basic viewpoint. On April 4, one guest was from the Soros-funded Physicians for Human Rights. She claimed, "We know that sarin has been used before by the Assad regime." In fact, that has NOT been confirmed by any credible organization. On the contrary, the most thorough investigations point to sarin being used by the armed opposition NOT the Syrian government. The other guest was Andrew Tabler from the neoconservative Israeli associated "Washington Institute". His editorial from last Fall makes clear what he wants: " The case for (finally) bombing Assad ." The discussion on Syria at PBS Newshour is consistently biased.

    - The New York Times feature story on April 4 was " Worst Chemical Attack in Years in Syria; U.S. Blames Assad" . One of the authors, Michael Gordon, was an influential proponent for "weapons of mass destruction in Iraq" that justified the 2003 invasion. But that has apparently not hurt his career. In this story on Syria, he and co-author Anne Barnard claim that "American intelligence agencies concluded" the 2013 attack was carried out by the Syrian government. That is false. The intelligence agencies did NOT agree and the "assessment" came from the White House not the intelligence agencies. It is astounding that they either do not know this or they are intentionally misleading the public. Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity explained the significance in their memorandum "A Call for Syria - Sarin Proof" .

    - DemocracyNow is a popular television/radio show. It is widely considered to be "progressive" but is also highly biased in its presentation on Syria. It almost solely promotes the perspective of those who support the armed opposition and/or western intervention in Syria. On April 5, they interviewed Dr. Rola Hallam. She is infamous for being the key player in the documentary "Saving Syria's Children" which purports to show a chemical weapon attack in Aleppo but was actually staged . The "documentary" was then broadcast at a critical time trying to influence the 2013 vote in British parliament for an attack on Syria. On April 6, DemocracyNow interviewed another "Syrian" who lives in the West and promotes western intervention: Lina Sergie Attar. Viewers of DemocracyNow have no idea that the majority of Syrians support the government and especially the national Army in their struggle against invasion and terrorism.

    Public understanding about what's happening in Syria has been seriously confused by the bad analysis of prominent analysts. Some have suggested that Israel was content to live with Assad. Former Israeli Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren clarified the truth as he said "we always wanted Bashar Assad to go, we always preferred the bad guys who weren't backed by Iran to those who were backed by Iran." In short, Israel prefers al Qaida or ISIS or, better yet, the conflict to continue so that both sides are destroyed.

    Before the conflict began, in 2010, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made demands to Damascus that all revolved around Israeli interests. She wanted Syria to end its alliance with Hezbollah, to reduce its interactions with Iran and to come to an agreement with Israel. In contrast to what some analysts have said, Israeli interests have been a major factor driving and maintaining the conflict. With the liberation of Aleppo and prospect of a victory by Syria and allies, Israeli demands to escalate the war have probably increased.

    Some of the world's most famed political analysts have contributed to the confusion and lack of resistance as the war on Syria has continued. For example, Noam Chomsky on DemocracyNow two days ago said "The Assad regime is a moral disgrace, the Russians with them." Evidently, he believes all or most of the accusations which have said about the 'regime'. In sharp contrast with Chomsky's assessment, it's remarkable that Syria has held together as well as it has in the face of attack by some of the most powerful and rich countries on earth. Over 100,000 Syrians have given their lives defending their country against the onslaught. Russia has supported their ally in compliance with international law, continually trying to work with the U.S. coalition as a "partner" against terrorism. Evidently, Chomsky is unaware or does not believe the extent of lies that have been created around Syria. Evidently, he does not recognize the distorted and shameful media coverage mentioned by Kinzer. Everyone makes mistakes but Chomsky's poor analysis here is a whopper. If he was to visit Syria and talk with real Syrians I think his perception would be dramatically changed just as described by the PBS Frontline crew here . With consummate hypocrisy, both Syrian and Russian governments are now demonized by western neoconservatives and liberals who have done little or nothing to stop their own government's collusion with terrorists raining havoc and destruction in Syria.

    The need to restore International Law

    International law has been undermined and replaced by "humanitarian law". This has contributed to the current disastrous situation whereby the U.S. and NATO are waging aggression under a humanitarian pretext.

    International law regarding attacks on sovereign states is clear: it is illegal unless authorized by the UN Security Council or in legitimate self-defense. It is clear that Syria poses no threat to any of its neighbors or any other nation. It is also clear that Syria has been the victim for six long years of aggression by foreign states which have funded and promoted a proxy army of fanatics and mercenaries from around the world.

    As the former Nicaraguan Foreign Minister and President of the UN General Assembly, Father Miguel D'Escoto, has said: " What the U.S. government is doing in Syria is tantamount to a war of aggression, which, according to the Nuremberg Tribunal, is the worst possible crime a State can commit against another State."

    RELATED: Syria Wants Turkey 'Invasion Forces' Out, US, Russia Cooperate

    There has been a sustained attempt to derail Trump's campaign pledge to stop the US "regime change" policy. This has been accompanied by a semi-hysterical demonization of Syria's ally Russia. Liberals have been willing accomplices in this campaign which serves the interests of the U.S. military-security complex, Israel and Saudi Arabia.

    It looks like the foreign policy hawks and neocons have succeeded. Yesterday's attacks on Syria mark an escalation in the war of aggression and violation of international law against Syria. This could lead to WW3 unless there is sufficient outcry and opposition.

    Rick Sterling is an investigative journalist. He lives in the SF Bay Area and can be contacted at [email protected]

    [Apr 13, 2017] Simply no incentive for the SAF to launch a chemical weapons attack.

    Notable quotes:
    "... Trump is throwing the haters a bone to gnaw on while he completes the rest of his agenda. Then he'll get back to the likely fake news of chemical weapons use and debunk it. ..."
    "... Fake news. Fake. news. You think this was fake news? Not only that, but you think it was fake news and that the only person able to determine reality is Donald Trump? Good lord. ..."
    "... It is not an accident that chemical poisoning happened a day after Trump decided not to remove Assad. Rebel-terrorists supported by the West want Assad removed, they arranged that chemical spill ... and not for the first time. ..."
    Apr 13, 2017 | www.theguardian.com
    Rob Saunders , 6d ago

    This article alludes to the "merits of western intervention in Syria". It is therefore nonsensical.

    green_forest -> Rob Saunders , 6d ago

    Yip. Simply no incentive for the SAF to launch a chemical weapons attack.

    Robert Fisk's most recent article on the pummeling of Nusra and ISIS is here:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-deir-hafer-syria-army-soldiers-town-village-death-muder-islamic-state-daesh-murder-killing-army-a7660481.html

    Els Bells , 6 Apr 2017 14:20

    Trump is throwing the haters a bone to gnaw on while he completes the rest of his agenda. Then he'll get back to the likely fake news of chemical weapons use and debunk it.
    petesire Els Bells , 6 Apr 2017 15:03
    Fake news. Fake. news. You think this was fake news? Not only that, but you think it was fake news and that the only person able to determine reality is Donald Trump? Good lord.
    DillyDit2 petesire , 6 Apr 2017 15:29
    I know, right? Check out comments on any Brietbart news story, though, and you'll how typical of a select minority of Americans that kind of thinking represents (suggest you wear earphones to block out the cacophony of thousands of bleeting sheep).
    fanUS , 6 Apr 2017 14:20
    It is not an accident that chemical poisoning happened a day after Trump decided not to remove Assad. Rebel-terrorists supported by the West want Assad removed, they arranged that chemical spill ... and not for the first time.

    [Apr 13, 2017] Is it hard to wonder why Syrians might hold a grudge against the US?

    Apr 13, 2017 | discussion.theguardian.com
    johnbonn , 2h ago Russia has to move quickly to secure a 100 year lease for the Latakia port and airbase. Otherwise the US will soon attempt to render it useless as well, regardless of which of the moderate rebel factions it decides to install.

    ... Spirits die hard, and those of the Arab spring and the Orange Revolution are still alive in the halls of the Pentagon.

    .... A controlled cold war however, is the only way to a avoid a larger mess than what the West has already inflicted on the innocent Syrian people by using the most abortive war design that has ever been conceived by the war college or any other war commander.

    ...... At the current rate there will be more Syrians in Germany than those remaining in Syria.

    ......... Is it hard to wonder why Syrians might hold a grudge against the US?

    BlueCollar , 2h ago

    Regime change ? All in the name of democracy as we see it.Why not try it in the Kingdom of family owned country KSA or why not another family owned enterprises called UAE.

    Pier16 , 12 Apr 2017 15:58

    The Americans have a fetish with regime change. Up until recently they were discrete about it and did it in secret, now they are all in the open. People who are against regime change are considered anti-Americans and tools of the Soviets...ahm.... Russia. The amazing thing is Tillerson said Assad's faith should be left with the Syrian people, the American establishment in unison said how could he says such a terrible thing, "we should decide what Syrian people want." These are the same people who elected Trump, maybe they should let Syrian people select the US president. The result may end up better.
    freeandfair , 12 Apr 2017 15:53
    > Bashar al-Assad is not a good person. He has reduced once great Syrian cities such as Homs and Aleppo to rubble. All six of Syria's Unesco world heritage sites have been damaged. Worse still, more than 500,000 Syrian civilians have been killed in the civil war, 6.1 million have been internally displaced and another 4.8 million are seeking refuge abroad.

    Yes, Assad is not a good person. But what about American politicians such as Hillary Clinton, who armed "moderate rebels" and supported the opposition in pursuit of regime change?
    And Syria is not the only country were this happened.
    Will there ever any responsibility taken for their actions by the US and NATO?

    First, they make a manageable problem into a huge problem, then just hightail back home, living local people to pick up the pieces.

    Those half millions of deaths - are they all responsibility of Assad or do the sponsors of jihadists and jihadists themselves have some responsibility as well?

    Tom1982 , 12 Apr 2017 15:35
    The choice as I see it is this:

    A. A horrible authoritarian regime that tortures and murders it's opponents...........but women can wear what they like in public, get a good education courtesy of the State, and embark on a career.

    B. A horrible authoritarian regime that tortures and murders it's opponents...........where women are denied education, made virtual prisoners in their own homes, and have acid flung in their faces for having the temerity to appear unveiled when they do go out in public.

    It's not a great choice, but one is definitely better than the other.

    [Apr 13, 2017] Former CIA Analyst Ray McGovern debunks the alleged Syria 'Chemical Attack'

    Apr 09, 2017 | gosint.wordpress.com
    Posted on April 9, 2017 by L

    "A source told me that Pompeo had personally briefed Trump on April 6 about the CIA's belief that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was likely not responsible for the lethal poison-gas incident in northern Syria two days earlier - and thus Pompeo was excluded from the larger meeting as Trump reached a contrary decision."

    Robert Parry – Consortium News

    Former CIA Analyst Ray McGovern

    Former CIA Analyst Ray McGovern explains what he has learned from his sources about how the Syrian "chemical attack" actually went down. Follow us on Twitter: @INTEL_TODAY

    The Facts

    On 4 April 2017, the town of Khan Shaykhun in the Idlib Governorate of Syria, was struck by a heavy airstrike followed by massive civilian chemical poisoning.

    At the time of the attack the town was under the control of Tahrir al-Sham,formerly known as the al-Nusra Front.

    The President of the United States, Donald Trump, as well as the UK Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson, blamed the attack on the forces of Syrian President Bashar Assad, while the Russian and Syrian governments said it was caused by the Syrian Air Force's destruction of a nearby rebel-operated chemical weapons warehouse.

    In response, the United States launched 59 cruise missiles at Shayrat Air Base, which U.S. Intelligence believed was the source of the attack.

    Ray McGovern

    According to the former CIA Analyst:

    "Syrian aircraft 'knew' there was a weapons cache in this particular rebel-held area. That was correct, and the Syrian aircraft bombed it.

    What seems not to have been known was the existence nearby of a large storage facility for chemicals. That too was damaged, releasing a cloud of chemicals that the wind blew south and poisoned those villagers."

    The most likely scenario

    As I reported recently, here is what most likely happened:

    The Russians briefed the United States on the proposed target. This is a process that started more than two months ago. There is a dedicated phone line that is being used to coordinate and deconflict (i.e., prevent US and Russian air assets from shooting at each other) the upcoming operation.

    The United States was fully briefed on the fact that there was a target in Idlib that the Russians believes was a weapons and explosives depot for Islamic rebels.

    The Syrian Air Force hit the target with conventional weapons. All involved expected to see a massive secondary explosion. That did not happen. Instead, smoke, chemical smoke, began billowing from the site. It turns out that the Islamic rebels used that site to store chemicals, not sarin, that were deadly. The chemicals included organic phosphates and chlorine and they followed the wind and killed civilians.

    There was a strong wind blowing that day and the cloud was driven to a nearby village and caused casualties.

    We know it was not sarin. How? Very simple. The so-called "first responders" handled the victims without gloves. If this had been sarin they would have died. Sarin on the skin will kill you.

    RELATED POST: Former DIA Colonel: "US strikes on Syria based on a lie"

    Where is CIA Director Mike Pompeo?

    As President Trump was launching his missile strike against Syria, CIA Director Pompeo and other intelligence officials were nowhere in sight.

    Back row from left: Deputy chief of staff Joe Hagin, senior adviser Jared Kushner, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, Sean Spicer, President Trump, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, chief strategist Steve Bannon, senior adviser Stephen Miller, national security official Michael Anton. Front from left: Chief of staff Reince Priebus, national security adviser HR McMaster, chief economic adviser Gary Cohn, deputy national security adviser Dina Powell.

    According to Spicer's tweet, the people present are looking at a screen showing Vice-President Mike Pence, Defence Secretary James Mattis and Joseph Dunford, chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

    Robert Parry - from Consortium News - reports the following:

    "Before the photo was released on Friday (April 7 2017), a source told me that Pompeo had personally briefed Trump on April 6 about the CIA's belief that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was likely not responsible for the lethal poison-gas incident in northern Syria two days earlier - and thus Pompeo was excluded from the larger meeting as Trump reached a contrary decision."

    "You don't see Pompeo or Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats or any other intelligence official. Even The New York Times noted the oddity in its Saturday editions, writing: "If there were CIA and other intelligence briefers around, they are not in the picture." [Robert Parry – Consortium News]

    RELATED POST: CIA Director Mike Pompeo - Who Is Who in World Intelligence and Security Agencies?

    ABOUT Ray McGovern

    Ray McGovern served as a CIA analyst from the administration of John Kennedy to that of George H.W. Bush, and prepared the President's Daily Brief for Nixon, Ford, and Reagan. He is a member of the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

    RELATED POST: Former CIA Analyst Ray McGovern: "Michael Morell's Comments are Reckless and Vapid"

    Interview

    REFERENCES

    Khan Shaykhun chemical attack - Wikipedia

    Decoding the Trump 'war room' photograph - BBC News

    Where Was CIA's Pompeo on Syria? - Consortium News

    =

    Former CIA Analyst Ray McGovern debunks the alleged Syria 'Chemical Attack'

    [Apr 13, 2017] Former DIA Colonel: "US strikes on Syria based on a lie"

    Apr 07, 2017 | gosint.wordpress.com
    Posted on April 7, 2017 by L

    "In the coming days the American people will learn that the [US]Intelligence Community knew that Syria did not drop a military chemical weapon on innocent civilians in Idlib."

    Patrick Lang - a former DIA Colonel - does not mince words about the US attacks on Syria. Lang claims that Donald Trump's decision to launch cruise missile strikes on a Syrian Air Force Base was based on a lie. Follow us on Twitter: @INTEL_TODAY

    Patrick Lang is truly a top expert on the Middle-East. The former DIA Colonel is highly respected for his deep knowledge and absolute honesty.

    [NOTE: Many years ago, Lang helped me to understand a very 'murky' dossier regarding Libya. I trust his analysis 100%. Last week - knowing full well that 'the shit was going to hit the fan' - I asked him permission to reproduce his posts on my blog. Colonel Lang kindly agreed.]

    RELATED POST: Veteran Intelligence Professionals: "Trump Should Rethink Syria Escalation"

    RELATED POST: Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson: "The Syrian chemical attack story is a hoax."

    RELATED POST: Former CIA Analyst Ray McGovern debunks the alleged Syria 'Chemical Attack'

    ANALYSIS by retired Col. Patrick LANG

    Donald Trump's decision to launch cruise missile strikes on a Syrian Air Force Base was based on a lie. In the coming days the American people will learn that the Intelligence Community knew that Syria did not drop a military chemical weapon on innocent civilians in Idlib. Here is what happened.

    1. The Russians briefed the United States on the proposed target. This is a process that started more than two months ago. There is a dedicated phone line that is being used to coordinate and deconflict (i.e., prevent US and Russian air assets from shooting at each other) the upcoming operation.
    2. The United States was fully briefed on the fact that there was a target in Idlib that the Russians believes was a weapons/explosives depot for Islamic rebels.
    3. The Syrian Air Force hit the target with conventional weapons. All involved expected to see a massive secondary explosion. That did not happen. Instead, smoke, chemical smoke, began billowing from the site. It turns out that the Islamic rebels used that site to store chemicals, not sarin, that were deadly. The chemicals included organic phosphates and chlorine and they followed the wind and killed civilians.
    4. There was a strong wind blowing that day and the cloud was driven to a nearby village and caused casualties.
    5. We know it was not sarin. How? Very simple. The so-called "first responders" handled the victims without gloves. If this had been sarin they would have died. Sarin on the skin will kill you. How do I know? I went through "Live Agent" training at Fort McClellan in Alabama.

    There are members of the U.S. military who were aware this strike would occur and it was recorded. There is a film record. At least the Defense Intelligence Agency knows that this was not a chemical weapon attack. In fact, Syrian military chemical weapons were destroyed with the help of Russia.

    This is Gulf of Tonkin 2. How ironic. Donald Trump correctly castigated George W. Bush for launching an unprovoked, unjustified attack on Iraq in 2003. Now we have President Donald Trump doing the same damn thing. Worse in fact. Because the intelligence community had information showing that there was no chemical weapon launched by the Syrian Air Force.

    Here's the good news. The Russians and Syrians were informed, or at least were aware, that the attack was coming. They were able to remove a large number of their assets. The base the United States hit was something of a backwater. Donald Trump gets to pretend that he is a tough guy. He is not. He is a fool.

    This attack was violation of international law. Donald Trump authorized an unjustified attack on a sovereign country. What is even more disturbing is that people like Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, CIA Director Mike Pompeo and NSA Director General McMaster went along with this charade. Front line troops know the truth. These facts will eventually come out. Donald Trump will most likely not finish his term as President. He will be impeached, I believe, once Congress is presented with irrefutable proof that he ignored and rejected intelligence that did not support the myth that Syria attacked with chemical weapons.

    It should also alarm American taxpayers that we launched $100 million dollars of missiles to blow up sand and camel shit. The Russians were aware that a strike was coming. I'm hoping that they and the Syrians withdrew their forces and aircraft from the base. Whatever hope I had that Donald Trump would be a new kind of President, that hope is extinguished. He is a child and a moron. He committed an act of war without justification. But the fault is not his alone. Those who sit atop the NSC, the DOD, the CIA, the Department of State should have resigned in protest. They did not. They are complicit in a war crime.

    About Patrick Lang

    Walter Patrick "Pat" Lang, Jr. (born May 31, 1940) is a commentator on the Middle East, a retired US Army officer and private intelligence analyst, and an author. After leaving uniformed military service as a Colonel, he held high-level posts in military intelligence as a civilian. He led intelligence analysis of the Middle East and South Asia for the Defense Department and world-wide HUMINT activities in a high-level equivalent to the rank of a lieutenant general. [ WIKIPEDIA ]

    REFERENCES

    Donald Trump Is An International Law Breaker by Publius Tacitus - P. Lang FaceBook Page

    =

    Former DIA Colonel: "US strikes on Syria based on a lie"

    [Apr 13, 2017] The problem with handing an ultimatum, is what will the US do when Russia rejects and ignores the ultimatum? More harsh words? More name calling? More sanctions. I think Russia is prepared for any eventuality.

    The problem for Russia is that Trump secured China neutrality in voting in Security council beforehand.
    Notable quotes:
    "... The individual sources may each have to be taken with a grain of salt, but a number of different outlets, including Robert Parry, seem to collaborate each other. Namely, U. S. intelligence analysts knew that Russia's account of the matter was accurate, and that it was also a false flag. ..."
    "... I was confused by the fact that Syria and Russia are sticking to their statement that it was a conventional Syrian airstrike on a rebel warehouse, which, unknown to the SAA or the Russians, contained chemical substances. It didn't seemed to mesh with the numerous and obvious signs of the entire incident being a prearranged false flag. The Saker, too, in his analysis, felt that this version of the events would require one to "believe in coincidence". However, it doesn't have to be coincidence at all, considering what one source claims: ..."
    "... There US and its coalition of lap dogs were supposedly fighting ISIL/Daesh but missed the massive convoys of oil to Turkey that propped them up. ..."
    "... In short, the US is exceptional and no-one is going to succeed bringing it the International Criminal Court because it is not a member and no-one would dare (not even those fearsome fighters for humanitarian law, the Spanish – sic, how are you dealing with Franco's widespread crimes?). The US will continue to ignore anything it doesn't like, but for everyone else particularly in Europe, nope. Even the Brits would be a lot more cautious. ..."
    "... Even if it were true – so what? The United States has intervened any number of times to keep leaders in power in various countries, against the demonstrated will of their populations, so long as it suited American interests. My favourite example is Hosni Mubarak; the Egyptian people loved him so much that they tried to assassinate him six times to show their adoration. ..."
    "... The group which benefited most immediately and strongly was the Muslim Brotherhood, and look what a peaceful and prosperous western-leaning market democracy Egypt is now . ..."
    "... I don't buy for a minute that Russia's primary motive is to keep Assad in power – my take is that Russia's focus is on stopping the United States from carrying out another of its regime-change colour revolutions. It so happens that keeping Assad in power accomplishes that endeavour, and he remains the choice of the majority in Syria. That's where Russian 'intervention' and American meddling differ – Washington does not care if the leader it wants is popular with the people or not. ..."
    Apr 13, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com

    et Al , April 12, 2017 at 4:52 am

    Neuters: Putin says trust erodes under Trump, Moscow icily receives Tillerson
    http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-usa-russia-idUKKBN17E1AD?il=0

    Just as Tillerson sat down for talks, a senior Russian official assailed the "primitiveness and loutishness" of U.S. rhetoric, part of a volley of statements that appeared timed to maximize the awkwardness during the first visit by a member of Trump's cabinet.

    "One could say that the level of trust on a working level, especially on the military level, has not improved but has rather deteriorated," Putin said in an interview broadcast on Russian television moments after Tillerson sat down with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in an ornate hall .

    Moments earlier, Lavrov greeted Tillerson with unusually icy remarks, denouncing the missile strike on Syria as illegal and accusing Washington of behaving unpredictably.

    "I won't hide the fact that we have a lot of questions, taking into account the extremely ambiguous and sometimes contradictory ideas which have been expressed in Washington across the whole spectrum of bilateral and multilateral affairs," Lavrov said.

    "And of course, that's not to mention that apart from the statements, we observed very recently the extremely worrying actions, when an illegal attack against Syria was undertaken."

    Lavrov also noted that many key State Department posts remain vacant since the new administration took office - a point of sensitivity in Washington.

    One of Lavrov's deputies was even more undiplomatic.

    "In general, primitiveness and loutishness are very characteristic of the current rhetoric coming out of Washington. We'll hope that this doesn't become the substance of American policy," Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told Russia's state-owned RIA news agency.

    "As a whole, the administration's stance with regards to Syria remains a mystery. Inconsistency is what comes to mind first of all."
    ####

    I don't see the point of Trump firing TLAMS only to play nicey-nicey with Moscow in public. So in short, are the public and private messages the same? As for Russia, their message should be clear (and it is) " No more 'fun' or WE are done ". The only role the West can play is that of a spoiler , particularly in Syria. They have absolutely nothing to gain even if their tame media claims they do. Everyone should keep their pants on and not be rude – including you NS!

    marknesop , April 12, 2017 at 6:06 pm
    Trump seems to have reasoned that all he had to do was release the dreaded American cruise missiles and Putin would roll over submissively and expose his belly. He has a hell of a lot to learn about foreign policy, and I don't think he's going to have the time to learn it.
    Moscow Exile , April 12, 2017 at 6:12 am
    Her impudence pales into insignificance when compared with that of Tillerson, who has flown to Russia in order to issue an ultimatum to the Russians on their own territory.

    When he finished his speech, Lavrov politely said in English to the impolite United States journalist : "You may shout now".

    It was reported in Russian that he said to her: "Теперь можете кричать, если хотите", which literally translates as "Now you can shout if you want to", which in English sounds less polite (it does to me, anyway) than what he actually said politely but with irony, in that he politely invited someone to continue to act in an uncultured fashion.

    I am pretty sure Mr. Lavrov is aware of the adage that Americans "don't do irony".

    Warren , April 12, 2017 at 2:29 pm
    The problem with handing an ultimatum, is what will the US do when Russia rejects and ignores the ultimatum? More harsh words? More name calling? More sanctions. I think Russia is prepared for any eventuality.

    As regards the impudent US hack that was shouting; I think she is your typical loud, ignorant and obnoxious US hack.

    et Al , April 12, 2017 at 6:46 am
    The Daily Caller: Pentagon Casts Doubt On AP Report Claiming Russia Knew About Syrian Chemical Attack
    http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/10/dod-discredits-associated-press-report-claiming-russia-knew-about-syrian-chemical-attack-in-advance/

    A Department of Defense spokesman discounted an Associated Press report that claimed Russia knew in advance about the chemical weapons attack in Syria last week that left more than 80 people dead.

    "I've seen nothing that corroborates this definitive statement," Major Jamie Davis told the Daily Caller in a statement Monday. "We continue to review the available intelligence surrounding this incident."

    Though Davis noted that the DOD is continuing to assess the details of the situation, he noted they have found nothing so far that could verify the AP story .

    A senior administration official in the White House also cast doubt on the AP report.
    ####

    So unlike the anonymous intelligence source that did not have ' authorization to speak to the media ' quoted by AP, here we have an official sources calling BS. Does that make the AP piece Fake News or 'in the interests of the American public'? F/tards.

    I think it is fairly clear that sensationalist leaking is part of the strategy balanced by later rowing back or dismissing, knowing that the Pork Pie News Networks cannot resist it. It's a balance of sorts that is aimed to keep the PPNN and others off-balance. Again, these are just words, not actions. We also see the same method over the earlier reports that a USN CVBG was steaming towards North Korea, now we are being told that it is not and is just in the general area. It's a pattern:

    Antiwar.com: Mattis: Navy Strike Group Not Headed to North Korea for Any Reason
    http://news.antiwar.com/2017/04/11/mattis-navy-strike-group-not-headed-to-north-korea-for-any-reason/
    ####

    How long it will take the PPNN to cotton on is anybody's guess, but it don't see how this strategy can work in the medium to long term.

    et Al , April 12, 2017 at 6:48 am
    Antiwar.com: Mattis: US-Russia Tensions Won't Spiral Out of Control
    http://news.antiwar.com/2017/04/11/mattis-us-russia-tensions-wont-spiral-out-of-control/

    Secretary of Defense James Mattis sought to downplay the situation, however, saying that he was certain the situation "will not spiral out of control,"* a belief he appeared to rest on the idea that Russia wouldn't dare retaliate against further US attacks against Syria, as they have threatened to.

    "I'm confident the Russians will act in their own best interests," Mattis insisted. Yet he also threatened further US strikes on Syria, and Russia has made clear in recent days that they would respond with force to any additional such US strikes .

    * http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-russia-mattis-idUSKBN17D2L1

    marknesop , April 12, 2017 at 7:02 pm
    Yes, the USA is so firmly in control of global events. I totally believe him.
    et Al , April 12, 2017 at 6:53 am
    Antiwar.com: US Officials Can't Explain Reason for Syria 'Chemical Attack'
    http://news.antiwar.com/2017/04/11/us-officials-cant-explain-reason-for-syria-chemical-attack/

    Administration officials are trying to manufacture one, with an unnamed "senior official" today delivering a briefing* to the media claiming that the Syrian military was afraid of a rebel offensive in the Hama Province, and launched the attack against the rebels' rear support areas for operational purposes

    On top of this, the US narrative's initial premise is faulty, as the Hama offensive had already ground to a halt two weeks prior to the putative Syrian attack, and Syrian forces appeared well on their way to recovering lost territory from the rebels
    ####

    I'm surprise they even bothered with a new narrative. The PPNN had it already well covered with their numerous conspiracy theories so the Administration has only unnecessarily muddied the waters here.

    Chinese American , April 12, 2017 at 6:53 am
    Interesting collection of reports on what happened with the chemical weapons attack on April 4, including Robert Perry, citing sources within U. S. intelligence and military:

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-11/intelligence-and-military-sources-who-warned-about-wmd-lies-iraq-war-now-say-assad-d

    The individual sources may each have to be taken with a grain of salt, but a number of different outlets, including Robert Parry, seem to collaborate each other. Namely, U. S. intelligence analysts knew that Russia's account of the matter was accurate, and that it was also a false flag.

    I was confused by the fact that Syria and Russia are sticking to their statement that it was a conventional Syrian airstrike on a rebel warehouse, which, unknown to the SAA or the Russians, contained chemical substances. It didn't seemed to mesh with the numerous and obvious signs of the entire incident being a prearranged false flag. The Saker, too, in his analysis, felt that this version of the events would require one to "believe in coincidence". However, it doesn't have to be coincidence at all, considering what one source claims:

    1. The Russians briefed the United States on the proposed target. This is a process that started more than two months ago. There is a dedicated phone line that is being used to coordinate and deconflict (i.e., prevent US and Russian air assets from shooting at each other) the upcoming operation.

    2. The United States was fully briefed on the fact that there was a target in Idlib that the Russians believes was a weapons/explosives depot for Islamic rebels.

    The dedicated phone line would have been part of the deconfliction agreement between Russia and the U. S., started soon after the Russian began military intervention in fall 2015. If it is true that the U. S. knew about the planned target long ahead of time, then the fact that McCain took a secret trip to Syria recently becomes even more sinister.

    Whatever chemicals (not sarin) were used were planted at the warehouse, or simply released nearby at the time of the airstrike. As for the photos and videos from the White Helmets, etc., those were probably produced ahead of time, on a Saudi or Qatari or Turkish production stage, for all we know.

    This theory would give another dimension to the fact that Russia suspended the deconfliction agreement immediately after the Tomahawk attack.

    Fern , April 12, 2017 at 7:39 am
    This is what I'm inclined to think – that some element(s) within the Trump Administration ensured those charming basket-weaving, flowers-in-the-hair-wearing, kumbaya-singing 'moderate' rebells knew an air-strike was planned and left it to them to arrange the chemical exposure.
    Cortes , April 12, 2017 at 4:47 pm
    Thierry Meyssan apparently agrees:

    http://www.voltairenet.org/article195904.html

    kirill , April 12, 2017 at 8:07 pm
    Exactly. There US and its coalition of lap dogs were supposedly fighting ISIL/Daesh but missed the massive convoys of oil to Turkey that propped them up.

    In fact, the US was bombing to disrupt SAA operations and really protecting ISIL. I do not know why Russia agreed to share any such operational details. This looks like an epic fail by Russia. They just needed real time coordination to prevent collisions in the air.

    et Al , April 12, 2017 at 7:00 am
    Deutscher's Willy: US missile strike on Syria 'a violation of international law'
    http://www.dw.com/en/us-missile-strike-on-syria-a-violation-of-international-law/a-38389950

    The US has called its attack on an airbase in Syria "a strong signal" for the Assad regime. Legal experts, however, criticized the action. In an interview with DW, international law expert Stefan Talmon explains why.
    ####

    More at the link.

    In short, the US is exceptional and no-one is going to succeed bringing it the International Criminal Court because it is not a member and no-one would dare (not even those fearsome fighters for humanitarian law, the Spanish – sic, how are you dealing with Franco's widespread crimes?). The US will continue to ignore anything it doesn't like, but for everyone else particularly in Europe, nope. Even the Brits would be a lot more cautious.

    et Al , April 12, 2017 at 7:05 am
    Neuters: U.S. asks G7 ministers why it should care about Ukraine conflict
    http://www.reuters.com/article/g7-foreign-ukraine-idUSKBN17D1P6

    U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson asked his European counterparts on Tuesday why American voters should care about the conflict in Ukraine, France's foreign minister said .

    French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault said Tillerson had openly questioned why "American taxpayers" should be concerned about Ukraine, which has been racked by a separatist conflict for the last three years
    ####

    Another PR stunt designed for domestic consumption.

    marknesop , April 12, 2017 at 7:19 pm
    If God had any sort of a sense of humour at all, G7 leaders would break out in painful boils every time one of them used the phrase 'rules-based international order' in a manner which implied the G7 nations give a flying fuck about obeying international rules which do not permit them to act as they please.
    et Al , April 12, 2017 at 10:19 am
    I just made the mistake of watching 'BBC World News'. There was a report by their Moscow Correspondent Steve Rosenberg who said "Russia intervened in Syria to keep Assad in power". No nuance, no other details such as I-rack, Libya etc. descending into chaos and spreading terrorists, weapons & refugees in to Europe, let alone Chechen and other terrorists who would head back to Russia fully trained or that the IS/ISIS/ISIL/DAESH was allowed to grow on the West watch and Russia intervened long after Syria descended in to hell.

    That the BBC continues to employ a tabloid correspondent like Rosenberg all these years shows how seriously they take their reporting of Russia. Very poorly, very poorly indeed. He's the Luke Harding of the broadcasting news. A f/kwit. And f/k the BBC too.

    marknesop , April 12, 2017 at 7:30 pm
    Even if it were true – so what? The United States has intervened any number of times to keep leaders in power in various countries, against the demonstrated will of their populations, so long as it suited American interests. My favourite example is Hosni Mubarak; the Egyptian people loved him so much that they tried to assassinate him six times to show their adoration.

    Yet the USA propped him up over and over, and no attempts to unseat him enjoyed any kind of success until Washington decided he was no longer useful. Then suddenly the winds of (regime) change began to blow, and *poof*, we had the 'Arab Spring', and all American politicians of whatever stripe suddenly became conscious that the dictator they had propped up for 30 years 'must step down'.

    The group which benefited most immediately and strongly was the Muslim Brotherhood, and look what a peaceful and prosperous western-leaning market democracy Egypt is now .

    I don't buy for a minute that Russia's primary motive is to keep Assad in power – my take is that Russia's focus is on stopping the United States from carrying out another of its regime-change colour revolutions. It so happens that keeping Assad in power accomplishes that endeavour, and he remains the choice of the majority in Syria. That's where Russian 'intervention' and American meddling differ – Washington does not care if the leader it wants is popular with the people or not.

    et Al , April 12, 2017 at 11:34 am
    Vladimir Safronkov rips Matthew Rycroft at the UNSC

    Warren , April 12, 2017 at 2:23 pm
    Hilarious, the Russian Deputy Ambassador doesn't mince words! I look forward to hearing more from him.
    Northern Star , April 12, 2017 at 4:47 pm
    War Crimes and Remembrance

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-has-killed-more-than-20-million-people-in-37-victim-nations-since-world-war-ii/5492051

    [Apr 12, 2017] Regime change in Syria? That would be a mistake by Prof Michael John Williams

    Notable quotes:
    "... The intervention triggers resentment and hostility at the new government, the legitimacy of which is reduced through the participation of an outside government. ..."
    "... In late 2015, Eren Erdem, a Turkish MP, said in Parliament that the Turkish state was permitting Da'esh to send sarin precursors to Syria. He had a file of evidence, so was accused of treason for accessing and publicizing confidential material. The investigation into the people responsible for the transfer of toxic chemicals was shut down. ..."
    "... Al-Assad is certainly capable of murdering opponents, and not bothering too much about collateral damage, but strategically it makes no sense for him to do this now, when peace talks under the aegis of Russia and Iran have begun, and the world is watching. Also, Assad has been engaged in a reconciliation process, allowing members of the FSA to return to the Syrian army, and Aleppans remain in Damascus if they didn't wish to go to Idlib. At such a juncture, using chemical weapons would be counter-productive. If Sarin was used at his command, he should be properly prosecuted: but bombing a Syrian air base merely assists Da'esh and its cronies. ..."
    "... I have just watched the press conference in which Trump labelled Assad a butcher, and went on again about dead babies. I just wish that someone at one of these conferences would have the guts to point out to Trump his own butchery. ..."
    "... Anyone watching this performance would think that US forces had never been responsible for killing innocent civilians, men, women, children and babies. To listen to Trump, you wouldn't think that US forces had ever killed over 150 civilians in Mosul, dozens in Raqqa, or had bombed hospitals in Afghanistan, or schools in Iraq, or were supporting the Saudi blockade of Yemen resulting in the starvation of children and babies, or had destroyed wedding parties with drones,.....I could go on. ..."
    "... If Assad is a butcher, he is only a junior, apprentice, corner-shop butcher. Trump is the real thing, the large-scale, wholesale, expert butcher. ..."
    "... Gotta get that pipeline in for the Saudi's, eh, no matter how many children's carcasses it crosses, yay, regime change again, yay, and a heap of new terrorists for our kids in the west to dodge and duck, yay. ..."
    "... Despite the several misrepresentations, the facts are that Britain has been one of the main protagonists in prosecuting this war against Syria , which is a proxy war against Iran. ..."
    "... Britain was at the forefront in setting up the Al Nusra Front and in hosting the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights to disseminate deeply negative propaganda about the Syrian Government and armed forces. ..."
    "... Every step of this including the media campaign which has comprised a major part of the military campaign against Syria, has been an attempt to delegitimize the Sovereign government and its institutions and to gain consensus from the somnambulistic British and US public for yet another direct military campaign against another Middle Eastern country. ..."
    "... Assad's removal would be catastrophic. There would be no stable government in Syria, it would be controlled by warlords backed by Saudi Arabia, al-Qaeda or ISIS and millions of refugees would have no country to return to or to live in. This will mean more refugees in Europe, more destabilisation and more money drained from our treasuries. ..."
    Apr 12, 2017 | www.theguardian.com

    The intervention triggers resentment and hostility at the new government, the legitimacy of which is reduced through the participation of an outside government.

    Soon, the new regime is considered a "puppet" and its existence is questioned by the people. Interestingly, the Middle East has proven particularly resistant to durable regime change and democratization, further making the success of any US-led intervention doubtful.

    The situation will be even more fraught if other external actors turn any attempt at regime change into a proxy war, as Russia and Iran are likely to do. The US experienced the downside of this during the ill-conceived war in Vietnam. During the Soviet-led war in Afghanistan, the US played the spoiler of Soviet efforts, funnelling money and weapons to the anti-Soviet mujahideen, turning the USSR's intervention into a protracted, bloody war.

    Prof Michael John Williams is Director of the International Relations Program at New York University.

    ID4352889 , 12 Apr 2017 17:57
    Those interested in how the MSM fell in love with terrorists in Syria should go back and check out Charlie Skelton's illuminating piece from The Guardian 2012 .
    Ciarán Here , 12 Apr 2017 17:48
    The Gulf of Tonkin, WMD in Iraq...
    Ciarán Here , 12 Apr 2017 17:46
    Did the USA bomb war planes that they said had been used to carry chemical weapons - a chemical attack!
    Robert Rudolph , 12 Apr 2017 17:40
    Instead, the western powers have followed the example cited by Machiavelli: "in order to prove their liberality, they allowed Pistoia to be destroyed."

    ... ... ..

    1Cedar , 12 Apr 2017 17:39
    In late 2015, Eren Erdem, a Turkish MP, said in Parliament that the Turkish state was permitting Da'esh to send sarin precursors to Syria. He had a file of evidence, so was accused of treason for accessing and publicizing confidential material. The investigation into the people responsible for the transfer of toxic chemicals was shut down.

    That surely ought to make us at least ask evidence-seeking questions about the Idlib gas attack before yet again demanding regime change.

    Al-Assad is certainly capable of murdering opponents, and not bothering too much about collateral damage, but strategically it makes no sense for him to do this now, when peace talks under the aegis of Russia and Iran have begun, and the world is watching. Also, Assad has been engaged in a reconciliation process, allowing members of the FSA to return to the Syrian army, and Aleppans remain in Damascus if they didn't wish to go to Idlib. At such a juncture, using chemical weapons would be counter-productive. If Sarin was used at his command, he should be properly prosecuted: but bombing a Syrian air base merely assists Da'esh and its cronies.

    unsouthbank , 12 Apr 2017 17:32
    I have just watched the press conference in which Trump labelled Assad a butcher, and went on again about dead babies. I just wish that someone at one of these conferences would have the guts to point out to Trump his own butchery.

    Anyone watching this performance would think that US forces had never been responsible for killing innocent civilians, men, women, children and babies. To listen to Trump, you wouldn't think that US forces had ever killed over 150 civilians in Mosul, dozens in Raqqa, or had bombed hospitals in Afghanistan, or schools in Iraq, or were supporting the Saudi blockade of Yemen resulting in the starvation of children and babies, or had destroyed wedding parties with drones,.....I could go on.

    If Assad is a butcher, he is only a junior, apprentice, corner-shop butcher. Trump is the real thing, the large-scale, wholesale, expert butcher.

    Ruthie Riegler , 12 Apr 2017 17:21
    ...Indeed, Richard Spencer last week protested outside the White House against the airstrikes on the regime airbase carrying a sign that read "No more wars 4 Israel."
    NezPerce macmarco , 12 Apr 2017 17:37

    There are two possible regimes, the Assad fascists, or the rebel jihadist

    The Syrian government is Baathist, it was elected.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Socialist_Ba%27ath_Party_–_Syria_Region

    http://www.france24.com/en/20160417-syria-bashar-assad-baath-party-wins-majority-parliamentary-vote

    Latest update : 2016-04-17

    Syria's ruling Baath party and its allies won a majority of seats in parliamentary elections last week across government-held parts of the country, the national electoral commission announced late Saturday.

    Who are the rebels supported by Washington and Westminster?

    http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/aleppo-falls-to-syrian-regime-bashar-al-assad-rebels-uk-government-more-than-one-story-robert-fisk-a7471576.html

    And we're going to learn a lot more about the "rebels" whom we in the West – the US, Britain and our head-chopping mates in the Gulf – have been supporting.

    They did, after all, include al-Qaeda (alias Jabhat al-Nusra, alias Jabhat Fateh al-Sham), the "folk" – as George W Bush called them – who committed the crimes against humanity in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania on 11 September 2001. Remember the War on Terror? Remember the "pure evil" of al-Qaeda. Remember all the warnings from our beloved security services in the UK about how al-Qaeda can still strike terror in London?

    jimbo2000M , 12 Apr 2017 16:55
    Gotta get that pipeline in for the Saudi's, eh, no matter how many children's carcasses it crosses, yay, regime change again, yay, and a heap of new terrorists for our kids in the west to dodge and duck, yay.
    unsouthbank , 12 Apr 2017 16:40
    I agree that Bashar al-Assad is not a "good person". It is impossible to be an authoritarian leader, struggling to maintain the unity, or even existence, of a nation state, and at the same time be a kind and gentle person. However, I do not believe him to be the psychopathic monster that he is portrayed as being, either. He is almost certainly not personally responsible for the chemical attack in Idlib province.

    Presidents do not normally make detailed decisions on what sort of weapons should be used on every airstrike made by their aircraft. He may be a dictator, but he is not a complete imbecile. Even the dimmest of politicians could have foreseen that this chemical attack would end up being a massive own-goal. Nobody as cynically calculating as Assad is supposed to be, would be that stupid. My own hunch, (and that is all it is) is that sarin was used due to a blunder by a low or medium ranking Syrian airforce officer.

    Yes, of course Assad bears responsibility for overall strategy in this vicious war of survival, and as such, has blood on his hands. But, so does Trump, so does Obama, so does Putin so does Erdogan, so does May, and so do all the leaders who have supplied the numerous rebel groups with billions of pounds worth of weapons, and have therefore kept the pot boiling.

    Last year, Theresa May stood up in parliament and proudly proclaimed her willingness to commit mass indiscriminate murder on a scale that would make Syria look like a pinprick. She declared her willingness to press the nuclear button and therefore slaughter hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of completely innocent men, women, children and babies. She not only has blood on her hands, she is proud of it. Perhaps we should remember that, when she comes out with one of her sanctimonious, nauseatingly hypocritical statements about Syria.

    martinusher , 12 Apr 2017 16:35
    Assad was democratically elected more than once so he must be doing something right. (OK, so they're democracy might not be our democracy but 'our' democracy has brought us Trump, Brexit and the like so its really six to one, a half dozen to the other). Syria until we started messing with it -- creating, supporting and even arming opposition groups -- was stable, wasn't messing with its neighbors and had significant religious and cultural freedoms compared to other countries in the area. (Our actions might suggest that we really don't want stable, peaceful, countries in that region, we need them to be weak and riven by internal factions.)

    Anyway, given our outstanding track record of success with regime change in that part of the world we should probably adopt a hands-off approach -- all we seem to do is make an unsatisfactory situation dire. Hardly the way to win friends and influence people.

    KhalijFars , 12 Apr 2017 16:07
    Despite the several misrepresentations, the facts are that Britain has been one of the main protagonists in prosecuting this war against Syria , which is a proxy war against Iran.

    Britain was at the forefront in setting up the Al Nusra Front and in hosting the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights to disseminate deeply negative propaganda about the Syrian Government and armed forces.

    Every step of this including the media campaign which has comprised a major part of the military campaign against Syria, has been an attempt to delegitimize the Sovereign government and its institutions and to gain consensus from the somnambulistic British and US public for yet another direct military campaign against another Middle Eastern country.

    The whole which has visited terrible and incalculable suffering, on the Syrian people. Syria was a paradise before the British and US did their usual work. The journalists, government and security services in Britain who have wrought this mess , I'm sure will not escape the consequences of their actions. One hopes they experience a 1000 times of the hell they have visited on Syria. These actions are truly despicable acts of cowardice and absolute wickedness.

    TomasStedron KhalijFars , 12 Apr 2017 16:27
    Syria was a paradise for those who rule Syria........ the Assad regime brutally repressed any opposition to their rule. In 1982 Assad´s father killed probably more than 30,000 in the siege of Hama. As well as sheltering a number of terrorist organisations who have their headquarters in Damascus....... he also armed and supported the fledgling Al-Quaeda resistance to the coalition in Iraq, giving them asylum in Syria........now the IS ....... I can think of Paradise in different ways......
    MacMeow KhalijFars , 12 Apr 2017 17:30

    Britain has been one of the main protagonists in prosecuting this war against Syria

    Link please. Because without evidence the rest of your post collapses.

    KhalijFars MacMeow , 12 Apr 2017 17:50
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jun/01/trial-swedish-man-accused-terrorism-offences-collapse-bherlin-gildo

    The prosecution of a Swedish national accused of terrorist activities in Syria has collapsed at the Old Bailey after it became clear Britain's security and intelligence agencies would have been deeply embarrassed had a trial gone ahead, the Guardian can reveal.

    His lawyers argued that British intelligence agencies were supporting the same Syrian opposition groups as he was, and were party to a secret operation providing weapons and non-lethal help to the groups, including the Free Syrian Army.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2013/aug/30/syria-chemical-attack-war-intervention-oil-gas-energy-pipelines

    Leaked emails from the private intelligence firm Stratfor including notes from a meeting with Pentagon officials confirmed US-UK training of Syrian opposition forces since 2011 aimed at eliciting "collapse" of Assad's regime "from within."

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-23/secret-pentagon-report-reveals-us-created-isis-tool-overthrow-syrias-president-assad

    http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/03/05/the-redirection

    Jermaine Charles , 12 Apr 2017 16:02
    More guff from the guardian/ Mr Williams, with just a little realistic sense, but who can replace Assad and in Syria he remains very popular, despite the western media like lies!
    johnbonn , 12 Apr 2017 16:00
    Russia has to move quickly to secure a 100 year lease for the Latakia port and airbase. Otherwise the US will soon attempt to render it useless as well, regardless of which of the moderate rebel factions it decides to install.

    ... Spirits die hard, and those of the Arab spring and the Orange Revolution are still alive in the halls of the Pentagon.

    .... A controlled cold war however, is the only way to a avoid a larger mess than what the West has already inflicted on the innocent Syrian people by using the most abortive war design that has ever been conceived by the war college or any other war commander.

    ...... At the current rate there will be more Syrians in Germany than those remaining in Syria.

    ......... Is it hard to wonder why Syrians might hold a grudge against the, US?

    BlueCollar , 12 Apr 2017 15:59
    Regime change ? All in the name of democracy as we see it.Why not try it in the Kingdom of family owned country KSA or why not another family owned enterprises called UAE.
    stratplaya , 12 Apr 2017 15:58
    History tells us replacing Assad would be a bad idea. We should have learned the lesson with Hussain and Iraq, but didn't. We would go on to replace Gaddafi of Libya and boom, it trigged ISIS.

    The hard lesson here is that for some reason Muslim majority countries have a strong central authoritarian leader. No matter if that leaders is called president, king, prime minister, or whatever. When that strong leaders is deposed, chaos ensues.

    Pier16 , 12 Apr 2017 15:58
    The Americans have a fetish with regime change. Up until recently they were discrete about it and did it in secret, now they are all in the open. People who are against regime change are considered anti-Americans and tools of the Soviets...ahm.... Russia. The amazing thing is Tillerson said Assad's faith should be left with the Syrian people, the American establishment in unison said how could he says such a terrible thing, "we should decide what Syrian people want."

    These are the same people who elected Trump, maybe they should let Syrian people select the US president. The result may end up better.

    freeandfair , 12 Apr 2017 15:53
    > Bashar al-Assad is not a good person. He has reduced once great Syrian cities such as Homs and Aleppo to rubble. All six of Syria's Unesco world heritage sites have been damaged. Worse still, more than 500,000 Syrian civilians have been killed in the civil war, 6.1 million have been internally displaced and another 4.8 million are seeking refuge abroad.

    Yes, Assad is not a good person. But what about American politicians such as Hillary Clinton, who armed "moderate rebels" and supported the opposition in pursuit of regime change? And Syria is not the only country were this happened. Will there ever any responsibility taken for their actions by the US and NATO?

    First, they make a manageable problem into a huge problem, then just hightail back home, living local people to pick up the pieces.

    Those half millions of deaths - are they all responsibility of Assad or do the sponsors of jihadists and jihadists themselves have some responsibility as well?

    GlozzerBoy1 , 12 Apr 2017 15:40
    Absolutely, stay the hell out, we should have no footprint in that awful part of the world.
    Tom1982 , 12 Apr 2017 15:35
    The choice as I see it is this:

    A. A horrible authoritarian regime that tortures and murders it's opponents...........but women can wear what they like in public, get a good education courtesy of the State, and embark on a career.

    B. A horrible authoritarian regime that tortures and murders it's opponents...........where women are denied education, made virtual prisoners in their own homes, and have acid flung in their faces for having the temerity to appear unveiled when they do go out in public.

    It's not a great choice, but one is definitely better than the other.

    Weefox Tom1982 , 12 Apr 2017 15:43
    Also worth remembering that under Assad people are allowed religious freedom. I know two Syrian Christians who are terrified of what will happen if the rebels take control of their country.
    Tom1982 Weefox , 12 Apr 2017 15:46
    I'd imagine the Shia feel the same.
    freeandfair Tom1982 , 12 Apr 2017 16:06
    Choice B also includes Sharia law, full extermination of other faiths and death sentence for rejection of Islam. Basically Choice B is another Saudi Arabia, but a lot of people will have to die first.
    oddballs , 12 Apr 2017 15:35
    Assad would stand a good chance of winning a fair and honest election,

    Still waiting for evidence by forensic experts over the chemical weapons , who did what and where.

    Until proof is given hat prove otherwise the rebels are the most likly suspects. --> normankirk , 12 Apr 2017 15:35

    SHA2014 , 12 Apr 2017 14:24
    The world's biggest superpower is willing to risk a nuclear war with mass destruction of billions and possible extinction of life on earth on an unproven assertion made by Al Qaeda sympathisers that the Syrian government bombed them with sarin? OBL must be laughing in his grave.
    aleph SHA2014 , 12 Apr 2017 14:45
    1. Who is threatening a nuclear war? The Russians? I haven't heard them threaten that. Probably because no-one would seriously believe them.

    2. An intellectually honest person should not describe young children as terrorist sympathisers. Let alone imply they somehow deserve to be deliberately targeted by nerve gas as a result.

    Fort Sumpter aleph , 12 Apr 2017 14:54
    If you have the evidence of a nerve gas agent being present please supply it forthwith.

    I keep asking you guys, who must be on the ground in Idlib such is your certainty, to provide the proof but you always refuse. Why is that?

    SHA2014 aleph , 12 Apr 2017 14:56
    An intellectually honest person should question the veracity of a report that is unverified by a terrorist organisation. The children were never described by me as 'terrorist sympathisers' so you make a dishonest accusation, the terrorist sympathisers are those who produced the report on which the whole story is based. It is not about the death of the children which is of course a crime, but they are being used by the terrorists for thier purposes.

    An intellectually honest person would also show outrage about the mass murder of civilians, including children in Mosul and by a US bombing in Syria that seem to not arouse the same outrage.

    SHA2014 , 12 Apr 2017 14:13
    Regime change by US has been used at least three times against democracies, in Chili, in Iran and in Ukraine. Attempted regime change has also been used often in South America to oust populist rulers because of US interests. Although the above analysis raises the very good point that change has to come from the bottom up, it starts with the same fallacies of assuming that all of the death and destruction in Syria comes from one person which is an extremely flawed point to start from. The point that is to be made is that there is no military solution to the conflict except in an anti terrorist capacity. The problem is that all of those against the Syrian government in the current conflict are either outright terrorists or those who collaborate heavily with terrorists making it difficult to have a conventional peace process.
    Imperialist , 12 Apr 2017 14:07
    America should not be the one who decides who is an acceptable government, and sends soldiers to enforce its will.

    The UN should have done that long ago. To Assad. To Kim. Stopped the Khmer Rouge. Or Rwanda.

    Yet the only time they ever have actually fought is in the Korean War.

    Fort Sumpter Imperialist , 12 Apr 2017 14:55
    *cough* The US supported the Khmer Rouge *cough*
    Mauryan , 12 Apr 2017 13:55
    America engaged in regime changes to suit American interests during the cold war and the New world order drive. The fact that they supported dictatorships worldwide and helped them overthrow democratically elected governments tells clearly that imposing democracy forcibly was not their intention. Intervention in global conflicts is mainly for controlling pathways for resources and gaining ground for business opportunities for their multinational giant corporations.
    diddoit Mauryan , 12 Apr 2017 13:58
    It's all about what's best for the US and the incredibly powerful(in the US) Israel lobby. The UK just goes along with it.
    NezPerce , 12 Apr 2017 13:52
    The West's narrative has fallen apart, nobody believes that the Syrian rebels are peace loving democrats. We have ample evidence that they are infinitely worse than Assad.

    We also have plenty of evidence that the Western deep state, not the public, wants another regime change in the middle east and will stop at nothing to achieve its end including false flag gas attacks. This article goes into detail.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-08/false-flag-how-us-armed-syrian-rebels-set-excuse-attack-assad

    False Flag: How the U.S. Armed Syrian Rebels to Set Up an Excuse to Attack Assad

    Evidence suggests a false flag chemical weapons attack on the Syrian people was initiated by Syrian rebels with the help of the United States in order to justify Thursday night's U.S. Military attack on a Syrian base.

    The Left is very opposed to war in Syria, the Libertarian right is very opposed to war in Syria but a hugely powerful Deep State will stop at nothing to achieve its ends.

    Nat-Nat aka Kyl Shinra , 12 Apr 2017 13:50
    "Worse still, more than 500,000 Syrian civilians have been killed in the civil war, 6.1 million have been internally displaced and another 4.8 million are seeking refuge abroad. "

    well, you cannot put the blame on Assad only. He never asked for that war for a start and a lot of the refugees you're talking about may very well be pro-Assad.

    This said, I agree, leave Assad and Syria alone.

    Jayesh Iyer , 12 Apr 2017 13:48
    Finally an article which still sticks to logical thinking when it comes to Syria. Assad is a terrible leader but atleast with him, most of the factions within the country can be sorted. The West's obsession with stuffing democracy down the throats of every oil producing country in the Middle East has resulted in the Mad Max wasteland i.e. Libya and the unsolvable puzzle i.e. Iraq. Both Gaddafi and Saddam were terrible human beings but removing them left a vacuum which has cost the lives of thousands and displaced millions. The West must make its peace with Assad for now, stop supporting the rebels and try to find common ground with Russia against the real enemy - ISIS.
    diddoit Jayesh Iyer , 12 Apr 2017 13:55
    The west - as the US/UK like to themselves, couldn't give a damn about democracy . They want compliance , not democracy. A good(brutal) dictator is better than a 'difficult' democratically elected leader , look at events in Egypt for example.

    Our own democracies are pretty ropey, certainly not up there with the Scandinavian best practice.

    dusktildawn Jayesh Iyer , 12 Apr 2017 13:55
    You're kidding right? The West stuffing democracy down the throats of the Gulf countries. More like defending them against the threat of democracy by arming them to the teeth and stationing troops there. Have you heard of Bahrain?
    diddoit Jayesh Iyer , 12 Apr 2017 13:55
    call themselves. -typo
    dusktildawn , 12 Apr 2017 13:47
    The only plausible solution to this conflict is partition assuming of course the imminent defeat of Isis.

    While getting rid of Assad would create a dangerous power vacuum and is in any case perhaps impossible given Russias backing, the sheer scale of the killing he's done and destruction he's unleashed on his own people - of a totally different scale to Saddam Hussein and even his father, from whom he seems to have inherited his psychopathic tendencies -renders the idea that he could continue to rule a "united" Syria or even the majority of it, laughable.

    Mauryan dusktildawn , 12 Apr 2017 13:52
    Partition would create more Assads.
    Jemima15 , 12 Apr 2017 13:46
    If you get rid of Assad, whoever replaces him is going to have a very difficult task. How on Earth do you enforce any sort of civilized law and order in a country which has some of the worst terrorist organizations the world has ever known. With organizations like ISIS around, a government is gong to need to take a firm hand somewhere. It's not as if you can send Jihadists on community service and expect them to come back as reformed characters.
    DanielDee , 12 Apr 2017 13:46
    Regime change? Why not?

    Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi would make a fine statesman!

    Pipcosta DanielDee , 12 Apr 2017 14:03
    Until he turns on his mater
    IamDolf , 12 Apr 2017 13:45
    Fact is that Assad still enjoys considerable support among Syrians. In particular among those who have no problem with a woman going to the beach in a bikini and driving a car to work. He is not giong anywhere soon. And if he did, the situation would be worse. As in the case of the butcher Saddam Hussein and the crazy dictator Khadaffi, who also were supposedly removed in an attempt to bring "freedom and democracy to the people."
    diddoit IamDolf , 12 Apr 2017 13:49
    Syria was one of the few countries in the ME where you could drink alcohol. Does anyone believe whoever follows Assad be it someone picked by the US/Israel/KSA/Qatar will be quite so tolerant?
    Patin , 12 Apr 2017 13:43
    Why can't world leaders be held to account for their crimes against humanity? Is it not about time that they are compelled to comply with international law and for the United Nations Assembly to make them so by enforceable resolutions passed by a majority vote?

    Assad is a tyrant who should be removed from office and held accountable for his crimes against humanity. Syrians should be entitled to a government that is respectful of their human rights.

    The UN should take responsibility for enforcing a permanent ceasefire and brokering talks to secure Syria's future. It should require as a condition of UN membership compliance with and adherence to international law protecting human rights. Non compliance should be met with expulsion and the economic isolation of the country concerned from the rest of the world.

    freeandfair Patin , 12 Apr 2017 16:19
    > Why can't world leaders be held to account for their crimes against humanity?

    You should start with American leaders like Bush. If you are serious about this.

    roachclip , 12 Apr 2017 13:42

    There is no shortcut to lasting peace. As uncomfortable as it is, the best that western governments can do is provide aid and assistance to those in distress, while pressuring those countries that continue to feed money and weapons to the combatants to change their positions.

    You are absolutely right.

    Such a pity then that the western governments in question, the UK, America and to a lesser extent, France, are in fact the same entities, via their surrogate power in the middle east, Saudi Arabia, who are the ones providing the weapons and money.

    Just as they did in Iraq and Libya, and always for the same reason, to achieve regime change against the Middle Eastern leaders who were threatening their control of the oil market.

    This situation is nothing new, these Western Powers have been attacking various parts of the Middle East for nigh on a century. Winston Churchill was responsible for bombing Iraq in the 1920's. That also was to achieve regime change.

    All of the deaths and the destruction in the Middle East can ultimately be laid at the door of the 'Western Powers' and their willingness to do anything to protect their oil interests.

    Taku2 , 12 Apr 2017 13:35
    One of the most despicable thing about the West's attempts to bribe, entice and force Russia into abandoning the Syrian Government, so that America, France, Britain and Saudi Arabia can rush in, like hyenas to finish off a wounded animal, is how patronising they have been towards the Russians and Iranians. Granted that their racism towards the Russians might not be what it is towards the Syrian state, which they want to deny a voice and disrespect to the extent of talking to the Russians, and ignoring the Syrian government.

    Yes, the West is behaving towards the Syrian state as if it is just something for it to manipulate, as it does with the global economy. Not having made any progress in manipulating the Syrian proxy conflict into the outcomes it wants, the West has now resorted to making merciless and unjustified attacks on Russian and the Iranians. Despite the fact that it is Russia and the Syrian government forces and their Hezbollah allies who have broken the impasse in this terrible war.

    It is scurrilous that there should now be this coordinated media and political campaign to make Russia out to be 'the bad guy', the 'devil', as it were.

    As for 'the liberals', well, guess what, if you want to do something constructive. Then stop blaming Russia and demonising the Russians, the Syrian Government and their allies. Look closer to home, to America, To Britain, to France and Saudi Arabia. There you will find more demons disguised as 'humanitarians' and 'angels' than probably in all of Russia and Syria.

    The guys in the West who are posturing as angels are no less culpable than the Syrian government.

    Of course the West should not destroy the Syrian state and government. But, since when has logic prevented this cartel from exercising its destructive force? As Libya, Iraq and Yemen have proven? The liberals need to grow up and stop being allied to the right.

    Arapas Taku2 , 12 Apr 2017 13:42

    so that America, France, Britain and Saudi Arabia can rush in, like hyenas to finish off a wounded animal

    Your point is of great importance.

    Now that Russia has done the dirty work at great cost, pushing them out of the way.........................

    That will not happen, Rex was told by Sergei.

    Arapas , 12 Apr 2017 13:34
    robust belief in a supposed American ability to fix what is wrong.

    Is meant to be the joke of the month.

    What did they ever fix ? Just look what the Korean war has lead to.

    Vietnam, where the Americans were defeated, is now a united and peaceful country.

    On the other hand, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and other regime change candidates have been reduced to failed states.

    In Syria, the fate of the Alwites will be the same of that of women and children cowering in St Sophia in 1453.

    Utter slaughter!

    ganaruvian , 12 Apr 2017 13:32
    Firstly, we have yet to see the results of any impartial investigation checking out the Syrian/Russian version of events about the gas in Idlib province, which could be true. Nobody that I can see is 'supporting' the use of gas against civilians, but it is known that the bigger terrorist organisations such as ISIS and al Qaeda do have stocks of poison gas. Secondly,so many uninformed commentators have not understood that Syria's 6 year war has been and remains a religious war! Asad's Shiite/ Alawite/Christian/ Druse/ Ismaili communities and other minorities supported by Iran and Lebanon's Shiites, fighting for their very survival against Saudi/ Qatari/Gulf States' extremist Wahhabi fighters, who via ISIS ,Al Qaeda and similar Islamists, want to wipe them off the face of the earth (with Turkey playing a double game). At this very moment people are condemning Assad for bombing civilians, whilst the US-led coalition including our own RAF, is doing exactly the same thing in the ISIS held city of Mosul -for the same reasons. The rebels take over and then surround themselves in cities, with civilians, hoping that these horrors will raise western public opinion against the government forces trying to defeat them. The 'half- informed' public opinion is now behaving in exactly this predictable way against the Syrian government, trying to deal with its own religious extremist rebels, many of whom are not even Syrians. It was always a war that the west should stay out of -other peoples religious wars are incomprehensible to non-believers in that particular faith. To talk now of replacing Asad is juvenile and mischievous - maybe that's why Boris is so engaged?
    Nolens , 12 Apr 2017 13:20
    Assad is the lesser of two evils. Those who are hailed as rebels pose an enormous threat to our security.
    jonnyross Nolens , 12 Apr 2017 13:44
    There is an equality of evil between Assad and ISIS. That said, Assad's forces and their Shia allies have slaughtered the vast majority of the victims.

    Both Assad and ISIS will lose eventually. How many Syrians are slaughtered in the meantime is anyone's guess.

    Why murderous dictators are so popular btl is a mystery.

    john evans , 12 Apr 2017 13:20
    Syria is finished.

    According to Wikipedia Estimates of deaths in the Syrian Civil War, per opposition activist groups, vary between 321,358 and 470,000.

    On 23 April 2016, the United Nations and Arab League Envoy to Syria put out an estimate of 400,000 that had died in the war.

    Also,according to Wikipedia I n 2016, the United Nations (UN) identified 13.5 million Syrians requiring humanitarian assistance, of which more than 6 million are internally displaced within Syria, and over 4.8 million are refugees outside of Syria. In January 2017, UNHCR counted 4,863,684 registered refugees.

    Turkey is the largest host country of registered refugees with over 2.7 million Syrian refugees.

    Before the troubles,Syria had a population of 23 million.

    No country could go back to normality after that upheaval.

    Arapas john evans , 12 Apr 2017 13:37

    No country could go back to normality after that upheaval.

    It can --

    Look at Chechnya! A newly rebuilt Grosny, living in peace.

    Bearing in mind Iraq, Libya etc who wants to see that --

    NativeBornTexan Arapas , 12 Apr 2017 14:08
    Chechnya is ruled by a Russian puppet dictator who executes gay men.
    Shad O NativeBornTexan , 12 Apr 2017 15:13
    That's because politics is heartlessly, ruthlessly, compassionlessly pragmatic. If having a pet local petty king in the area keeps it stable and does not a politically costly military operation, everything else is seen as "acceptable collateral damage".

    It's funny but western foreign policy is fundamentally the same in the methods, just different in goals. If the goal of regime change is achieved and political points collected, everything else is completely irrelevant. Opposition can become "moderately islamist", "democratic" rebels may implement sharia law, "precision strikes" may cause tens of thousands of civilian casualties, but it's all for the greater good.

    Pipcosta , 12 Apr 2017 13:18
    Why do we send a sewer rat to the UN as our ambassador
    brianboru1014 , 12 Apr 2017 13:14
    Every time the West especially the Anglo west of the USA and Britain intervene in another countries affairs, the end product is a disaster so for that reason alone these two societies which can only communicate in English should leave this to the Russians.
    Ruby4 , 12 Apr 2017 13:13
    "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

    Albert Einstein

    Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/alberteins133991.html

    Chilcot report: Findings at-a-glance:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36721645

    FFC800 , 12 Apr 2017 13:08
    This almost manages to achieve sense, and it's good to see an article not promoting regime change for once, but it still falls short of stating the truth that the correct policy in Syria is to help Assad win the war, and then impose conditions on his conduct in the peace.

    He has reduced once great Syrian cities such as Homs and Aleppo to rubble. All six of Syria's Unesco world heritage sites have been damaged.

    Most of that was done by rebels.
    jackrousseau , 12 Apr 2017 13:03
    I must now begrudgingly thank the Trump Administration for causing me to realize a profound and universal truth. History doesn't rhyme at all; it parodies.

    The build up to our inevitable Syria invasion is essentially an SNL parody of our Iraq invasion. All the way down to allegations of to "hidden stockpiles of WMDs", "gassing own citizens", "violation of no WMD agreement", "weapons inspectors not doing job", and most recently "Assad/Saddam is Hitler". All that's left is the final piece of evidence to tip public opinion in...the holy grail, "yellowcake uranium".

    Of course, 6 months ago --with full knowledge of Saddam's gassing of the Kurds--Trump said toppling Hussein was a "uge" mistake and defended him as an "efficient killer of terrorists". "Efficient" indeed... https://cnn.com/cnn/2016/07/05/politics/donald-trump-saddam-hussein-iraq-terrorism/index.html

    I'm not sure exactly what comes next (presumably Trump declaring an "Axis of Evil" consisting of Syria, ISIS, Iran, N.Korea...and perhaps Russia and/or China or both...thus setting the stage for a hilarious parody of WWII).

    Who knows...I guess at least it's interesting.

    John Smythe , 12 Apr 2017 13:03
    Perhaps dear Boris should have had more talks with the British government to find out what is the political position of the conservative government over Syria, and more importantly with Russia. So far the American have by the look of things, telling the British Government in what they want, not bothering to ask what Britain thinks what is important.

    There is actually no point in swapping one master the EU, to handcuff ourselves to the a far more right wing America.

    bemusedfromdevon , 12 Apr 2017 13:00
    I find the commments on here quite confusing...

    Take Isil and jihadists out of the equation and what you're left with are people that want to oust a tyrannical and unelected leader who clearly has nothing but disdain for his people (groups of at least).

    Those rebels (or freedom fighters) are being seen as the bad guys it seems to me...?

    The only reason I can see for this is that they have slight support from the United States.

    Had the boot been on the other foot and the US we're supporting Assad and Russia,the rebels (freedom fighters) I'm quite sure public opinion (Guardian readers at least) would be quite different.

    So what do the Syrian rebels who are looking to overthrow a dictator have to do to be put on a pedestal of righteousness as Castro was for effectively trying to achieve the same end goal....

    Oh, that's right, Castro was trying to stick it to the Yanks.... now I get it.

    dusktildawn bemusedfromdevon , 12 Apr 2017 13:34
    I think there's a definite strain of anti-Americanism on display however cautiously we have to view their actions after Iraq and give their closeness to the Gulf States. A quarter of the country has fled Assad, some 10 million internally displaced not to mention the incredible numbers of dead and wounded.

    And yet there's a close minded reflex to say that things will be better off with him in charge ignoring even the possibility of partition, which strikes me as the most plausible option. The idea that Assad can now after all he's done rule a united country indefinitely putting a lid on refugees and terrorism strikes me as utterly preposterous.

    bemusedfromdevon dusktildawn , 12 Apr 2017 14:11
    My sentiments entirely and it shocks me that there are a considerable number of Assad apologists commenting on here as he is clearly seen as a better 'devil' than Trump...

    I'm just very pleased I don't live in Syria and I think the run of the mill Syrian dying in their droves due to gas, bombs or simply drowning in the Med would be horrified to read a large number of comments on here in relation to this article and how Assad 'isn't such a bad old stick!'

    I'm embarrassed to be honest....

    Shad O bemusedfromdevon , 12 Apr 2017 15:25

    Take Isil and jihadists out of the equation and what you're left with

    what you are left is nothing. This was the big point since 2013, when Nusra began taking over the last remnants of the FSA. Since then Cameron (or was it Hammond) had to coin the term "relatively hardline islamists" to make some of the jihadi groups somewhat acceptable.

    In its latest iteration, Nusra (now rebranded yet againTahrir al-Sham) has formally absorbed several other "rebel" group, including the Nour al-Din al-Zenki, who were in the past equipped by the US, and were quoted by various agencies (including this paper) as "opposition" during the recapture of Aleppo.

    Ah, yes, you also have the Kurds, who are building their own state. But if there is something all the local powers agree on (Russia, US, Turkey, Syria, Iraq...) is that they don't want an independent Kurdish state.

    NezPerce , 12 Apr 2017 12:58

    President Obama was heavily criticized for not doing more in Syria, but he made a difficult decision that was in many ways the right on.

    Obama required cover from the British Parliament. Bombing Syria was incredibly unpopular with the UK public from right to left. David Miliband listened to the public and stopped the bombing of Syria. Nobody expected a Labour politician to dare to oppose the US war machine, it took them all by surprise.

    Bombing Syria was incredibly unpopular with the US public and the European public, Miliband saved us from ISIS and Al Nusra both al Qaeda franchises running Syria.

    The BBC routinely portrays the Libertarian right wing in the USA as Isolationists but if you hear it from them they are anti-war. The American working class understands what war is like in the middle east because many of them have experienced it. They are clearly anti another war in the middle east. proof:

    https://www.infowars.com/exclusive-michael-savage-begs-trump-to-stop-wwiii/

    In this off the cuff interview Michael Savage begs Donald Trump to not plunge the world into another world war that could destroy life as we know it

    .

    Trump has been subjugated by the deep state, his base is outraged and in despair.

    dusktildawn , 12 Apr 2017 12:58
    You could argue this isn't about regime change per se but prosecuting a dictator for targeting and massacring civilians. And surely the same rationale can be used against Isis. In other words you don't allow mass murderers to take. Over but prosecute them as well.
    Mates Braas dusktildawn , 12 Apr 2017 15:05
    You can start proceedings against your own war criminals. There is a long list of them, stretching from, Paris, London, Washington and Tel Aviv.
    freeandfair dusktildawn , 12 Apr 2017 16:41
    In that case North Korea and Saudi Arabia should be on top of the list.
    Trekkie555 , 12 Apr 2017 12:57
    Good article. Hits the nail on the head. Regime change may be required for Syria the G7 and Arab countries must come together to carefully plan what happens afterwards.
    Nolens , 12 Apr 2017 12:54
    This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards . Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs .
    diddoit , 12 Apr 2017 12:54
    'Monster' Assad was courted by western leaders: Remember the Assads pictured taking tea at Buckingham Palace with the Queen(google it) , Blair all smiles in Damascus. The Kerry family pictured in Damascus enjoying a late evening supper with the Assads(google it).

    But Bashar al-Assad is a stubborn man , he wouldn't distance himself from Iran and their proxies such as Hezbollah, thus his fate was sealed.

    zolotoy diddoit , 12 Apr 2017 12:59
    Nope, wrong. Assad wouldn't give the USA, Qatar, and Turkey a nice pipeline to kneecap Russian natural gas sales in Europe.

    It's all about oil and money, petrodollars and ensuring American worldwide hegemony.

    sokkynick zolotoy , 12 Apr 2017 13:07
    +1
    diddoit zolotoy , 12 Apr 2017 13:42
    Well it's all tied in . People talk about Israel wanting the Golan Heights permanently in part due to oil interests, they talk about Qatar and the gas pipeline to Europe Assad refuses. They talk about the KSA being unnerved by Iran's growing influence in the region after the Iraq war, and how it would suit KSA , Israel and the US for Sunni leadership to emerge in Syria to rebalance the region.

    I think it's all of the above . Which isn't what US/UK populations are being told.

    Ilan Klinger , 12 Apr 2017 12:53
    A regime changing in Syria?

    Can someone here try and convince me that the State of Syria still exists?

    And change it from what to what?From a Murderouscracy to a Oppressionocracy?

    peterwiv , 12 Apr 2017 12:52
    The West learns nothing from its mistakes. Can't we understand that our real enemy is ISIS and that springs directly from our disastrous invasion of Iraq? Assad may be pretty awful but surely we should be able to comprehend that he is an ally in the fight against ISIS just as the far more horrible Stalin was an ally against the Nazis.

    Just because Trump suddenly talks about "beautiful babies", we all go mad again.

    aleph , 12 Apr 2017 12:51
    Syria is going to need serious amounts of aid and foreign investment to recover when peace starts to take hold. But Assad cannot travel internationally because he will be subject to arrest. At least in any civilised country. So he will be gone one way or antithetical. Putin has backed the wrong horse. It's too handicapped to run.
    elaine naude aleph , 12 Apr 2017 15:43
    Who should he have backed? - Isis?
    algae64 , 12 Apr 2017 12:47
    Until the Saudis, US & UK decide that enough is enough, then this idiocy will continue. Assad is a better leader for Syria than Isis, Al Qaeda, or the other Saudi-backed groups would be.

    Syria was secular and religiously tolerant under Assad. It won't be either of those things if Assad is deposed. More than likely, it would end up as a Saudi-style Islamic theocracy with the harshest head-chopping, hand-chopping version of sharia law.

    BorisMalden , 12 Apr 2017 12:46
    He has reduced once great Syrian cities like Homs and Aleppo to rubble

    Did Assad deliberately bring his country into civil war? When his forces are being attacked by rebels sponsored by foreign groups, he really only has two choices: give up leadership and allow the rebels to take over the country, or fight back. Given that you're arguing that a regime change is a bad idea it logically follows that you support the second option, so it hardly seems fair to criticise him for the consequences of that resistance. You might do better to blame the rebels and those who sponsor them for bringing war to what was previously a (relatively) peaceful country.

    Oldfranky , 12 Apr 2017 12:46
    This Regime Change Policy adopted by the US and in many, if not all cases, supported by the UK, whilst in some case toppling Dictators, has left nothing but chaos in its wake.

    We need to consider the case of Syria, very carefully, as we may well find ourselves handing the Country to ISIL on a plate.

    Better to help Assad stabilise the Country, and then discuss political change.

    The rhetoric coming from the Foreign and Defence Secretaries, can do nothing to help, but make the UK look stupid.

    aleph Oldfranky , 12 Apr 2017 12:56
    "Better to help Assad stabilise the Country"

    Hahahahaha, collude with crimes against humanity in the name of stability and call it progress because after six years we cannot think of an alternative. Great.

    Oldfranky aleph , 12 Apr 2017 13:58
    Are you sure it's only Assad, laugh all you will.
    BorisMalden , 12 Apr 2017 12:46
    He has reduced once great Syrian cities like Homs and Aleppo to rubble

    Did Assad deliberately bring his country into civil war? When his forces are being attacked by rebels sponsored by foreign groups, he really only has two choices: give up leadership and allow the rebels to take over the country, or fight back. Given that you're arguing that a regime change is a bad idea it logically follows that you support the second option, so it hardly seems fair to criticise him for the consequences of that resistance. You might do better to blame the rebels and those who sponsor them for bringing war to what was previously a (relatively) peaceful country.

    Oldfranky , 12 Apr 2017 12:46
    This Regime Change Policy adopted by the US and in many, if not all cases, supported by the UK, whilst in some case toppling Dictators, has left nothing but chaos in its wake.

    We need to consider the case of Syria, very carefully, as we may well find ourselves handing the Country to ISIL on a plate.

    Better to help Assad stabilise the Country, and then discuss political change.

    The rhetoric coming from the Foreign and Defence Secretaries, can do nothing to help, but make the UK look stupid.

    aleph Oldfranky , 12 Apr 2017 12:56
    "Better to help Assad stabilise the Country"

    Hahahahaha, collude with crimes against humanity in the name of stability and call it progress because after six years we cannot think of an alternative. Great.

    Oldfranky aleph , 12 Apr 2017 13:58
    Are you sure it's only Assad, laugh all you will.
    Foracivilizedworld , 12 Apr 2017 12:44

    Regime change in Syria? That would be a mistake

    Absolutely no... it will be a colossal disaster... and would explode the entire region affecting not only all ME countries including Israel, but will extend to Europe and NA, You can't keep it all "Over There"

    And I think Trump would do it.

    SaracenBlade , 12 Apr 2017 12:43
    Regime change, evidently the US has n't learned from the past experience. Look at Iraq, Lybia, regime change has resulted in complete chaos, instability, and perpetual conflict. Syrian population is strictly divided on sectarian line - Sunnis, Shias, Christians, Kurds. Who is going to make a cohesive government capable of running the affairs of the state? Bashar Assaad's father, Hafiz Assaad ruled Syria with an iron grip, he understood Syrian sectarian divide.
    notDonaldTrump SaracenBlade , 12 Apr 2017 12:49
    'regime change has resulted in complete chaos, instability, and perpetual conflict.'

    If one tried to think impartially the evidence might lead one to think that was the plan all along.

    BlueCollar notDonaldTrump , 12 Apr 2017 15:50
    If any country needs regime change, it is Saudi Arabia. All important positions are controlled by hundreds of Royals of Al Saud, even honest criticism of royals brings you closer to the back swing of executioner .
    timefliesby , 12 Apr 2017 12:42
    Have we learnt nothing?
    zolotoy timefliesby , 12 Apr 2017 12:54
    Some of us have learned to be very comfortable with scraps from the war machine table -- Western legacy media in particular.
    moreorless2 , 12 Apr 2017 12:42
    My newsagent loves Assad. Why because he's a Syrian Christian. Assad is the only hope for the minority's in Syria. All of the opposition groups are some variation on Islamic nationalists. They will all happily slaughter anyone not of their faith. Assad is a murdering bastard but he kills those that threaten him. In Middle Eastern terms he's a liberal.
    Terra_Infirma , 12 Apr 2017 12:39
    Quite right. What the people of Syria need is stability and an end to the fighting. All else is secondary. In particular, the greatest crime that the West has committed in recent decades is the attempt to foist democracy on countries like Syria and Iraq, where it simply does not work. Even now, Western liberals dream of sitting Sunni, Shia, Alevi, Kurds, secularists and Islamic militants around a table to talk through to a democratic and mutually acceptable future for Syria. This is a fantasy - as democracy always is in heavily tribalised societies. It can only end in renewed civil war and inevitable dictatorship. I often wonder whether the West is just naive in these attempts at liberal cultural imperialism, or whether they are in fact a cynical front to mask the equally egregious aim of checkmating Russian influence in the region. Either way, shame on us.
    StrongMachine Terra_Infirma , 12 Apr 2017 12:47
    Are you calling George W Bush a liberal?
    PSmd Terra_Infirma , 12 Apr 2017 13:07
    It's not liberal cultural imperialism. It's painted as that to sell to domestic audiences.

    It's liberal economic imperialism.

    sokkynick , 12 Apr 2017 12:36
    Now to be fair, no one knows really what the president is thinking, not even apparently his chief diplomat or his UN envoy, who have sent conflicting messages. But let's cut to the chase – this is a very, very bad idea.

    WW3 is definately a very very bad idea.

    The idea that the US can change the government of another country for the better is born of US arrogance and lying manipulation.

    juster , 12 Apr 2017 12:36
    It's a bit funny that we just casually mention that the country harping on about the respect of the international rule book sinc 2014 vaiolate one of the core UN charter principles 72 times and is openly speaking of braking it the 73th time.

    Jsut picture China saying openly their goal is to change the Abe regime in Tokio or Russia to change the regime in Kiev. They can't even have a pefered presidential candidate without mass interference hysteria and we just feel like it's A OK to go around the world changing who's in charge of countries.

    freeandfair juster , 12 Apr 2017 16:58
    > They can't even have a pefered presidential candidate without mass interference hysteria and we just feel like it's A OK to go around the world changing who's in charge of countries.

    An excellent point.

    bemusedfromdevon , 12 Apr 2017 12:35
    There are two main choices... Regime change... which hasn't worked out well where it's been attempted or just let the despots get on with it...

    There are no easy answers but perhaps the only way is to let dictators crush and annihilate their opposition, utilise death squads to make dissenters disappear in the dead of night and, outwardly at least pretend everything is rosey....

    If we, as a civilised society are able to 'look the other way' then that might be the simple answer... just hope everyone can sleep well at night and be grateful that, however much you hate our present government they aren't out gassing (allegedly) Guardian readers.

    Jared Hall bemusedfromdevon , 12 Apr 2017 12:42
    Not gassing people no, but still killing plenty of "innocent little babies" bombing hospitals and helping the Saudis cluster bomb fishing villages. Why don't we see pictures on TV of Yemeni kids mutilated by American bombs? How do we sleep with that?
    bemusedfromdevon Jared Hall , 12 Apr 2017 12:44
    We're pulling the trigger??

    And that makes supporting a tyrant who will do anything a satisfactory solution to you?

    Sounds like crocodile tears to me.

    SterlingPound Jared Hall , 12 Apr 2017 13:11
    Well, we saw the aftermath of a deliberate attack by Saudis planes on a clearly demarcated Yemeni hospital on the BBC last year. The first rocket hit an arriving ambulance with civilian casualties and a doctor on board. The response of the Saudi shills in the Commons - what is it about the British upper class and the Arabs, I wonder - was to demand forcefully that the Saudis set up an inquiry to examine the evidence of a war crime.

    It should have been sadly obvious from the get-go that we had to back Assad before he attempted to beat his father's record for murder and repression, the whole family's fucking insane, but it's long past too late now. He's soiled goods and Tillerson's untutored idea of elections is surely farcical.

    Muzzledagain , 12 Apr 2017 12:35
    Fair article, although ISI and rebels actively participated in the destruction of Syria. If Assad falls, anarchy due to vacuum will follow, guaranteed. Agree with the last paragraph in particular and still wondering why they (the West) don't do it especially pressuring the countries that feed the rebels, and they are not so moderate, with money and weapon. Unless this is because of the infamous pipeline. Tragic state of affair indeed.
    Aethelfrith , 12 Apr 2017 12:31
    Decade after decade, the west has interfered or overthrown government after governemnt , all over the world , mainly for the benefit of capitalist puppeteers . America has been the worst , one only has to look at the CIA's track record in South America when legitimately elected governments were ousted by force so that "American business" interest were looked after.

    This same vested self interest has been the driving force over the last few years. The interventions in Iraq , Libya, Afghanistan have all been total disasters fro the regions and resulted in more deaths than any tin pot dictator could have achieved. Backing so called "moderate" terrorists seems to be the excuse to get involved.

    More moral achievement and good could have been achieved by widespread dropping of food around the world , or even the cost of the military hegemony being given as cash handouts to poor people , but this simplistic altruism does not allow for the geopolitical control games that is the true beating heart of western aggression.

    austinpratt , 12 Apr 2017 12:30
    And it will serve as a welcome distraction from the lack of domestic achievements by the U.S. govt.
    Fort Sumpter austinpratt , 12 Apr 2017 12:36
    Theresa could also do with some distraction from her shambolic government and the whole Brexit disaster.
    timefliesby austinpratt , 12 Apr 2017 12:44
    Got to agree. Dead cat. Nobody is talking about links and the FBI any more and Putin is mentioned on a new context.

    Approval ratings from US voters?

    Moo1234 Fort Sumpter , 12 Apr 2017 12:45
    We are all Brexiteers now. I voted remain, but accept the democratic will of the people. Blame David Cameron and get on with the job of making a success of it, rather than whining about it....
    dusktildawn , 12 Apr 2017 12:30
    What if this was Apartheid era South Africa and the white minority were bombing the hell out of the majority black civilians who wanted them out?
    duthealla dusktildawn , 12 Apr 2017 12:49
    Nobody intervened in South Africa despite massacres like Sharpeville....perhaps it would've let to full on racial war though?
    dusktildawn duthealla , 12 Apr 2017 12:55
    I'm just saying people making the case for the West to back off would probably be saying the opposite in that case if the white minority were massacring black people on the scale of Syria. Isn't that hypocrisy?
    Fort Sumpter dusktildawn , 12 Apr 2017 13:04
    It isn't hypocrisy because your South African scenario bears little resemblance to what is happening in Syria. Simple as that.
    Moo1234 , 12 Apr 2017 12:28
    Boris obviously has a more pressing engagement over Easter.
    BeanstalkJack , 12 Apr 2017 12:27
    Regime change - a phrase that reminds us imperialism is alive and well.
    Gandalf66 BeanstalkJack , 12 Apr 2017 12:47
    The successful regime changes mentioned in the article such as Poland and the rest of the Eastern bloc were initiated by the people themselves, rather than the the "help" of a foreign power.
    BeanstalkJack Gandalf66 , 12 Apr 2017 13:03
    The people did it all by themselves did they? So nothing to do with the economic collapse of the Soviet Union caused by an arms race ramped up by President Reagan. Nothing to do with a very costly war in Afghanistan?
    sokkynick , 12 Apr 2017 12:27
    Given the situation, it is understandable why some people may think ousting Assad is necessary. Such thinking has a long pedigree in the United States, where there is a robust belief in a supposed American ability to fix what is wrong.

    I think the word is arrogance rather than belief.

    Mates Braas sokkynick , 12 Apr 2017 14:51
    I think the word is arrogance rather than belief...............and exceptionalism.
    brucebaby , 12 Apr 2017 12:26
    Trump is the new boy on the block, trying to use missiles as a penis substitute.

    Sorry, but simple definitions are sometimes correct.

    yshani brucebaby , 12 Apr 2017 13:19
    Would you have said the same thing in 1917 and 1940. Would you have said the same thing in the duration of the cold war. If US did not have a bigger penis then you would not be around to comment about it.

    Long live the US penis and may it grow longer and stronger.

    brucebaby yshani , 12 Apr 2017 13:26
    WW2 was won principally by the USSR, who suffered many more casualties than the western alliances. The cold war would not have happened if not for the USA.

    Sorry, the USA is more of a threat to the planet than any country, and Trump is unintelligent, a real threat to the world.

    MacMeow brucebaby , 12 Apr 2017 17:01

    WW2 was won principally by the USSR

    That old clunker again, it's like the war in the Pacific never happened.

    Sorry4Soul , 12 Apr 2017 12:26
    Why it would be a mistake ?

    Libya was such a success story.

    Trumbledon , 12 Apr 2017 12:24
    Finally, at long last, some sense.

    I agree wholeheartedly; by far the best analysis I've read in this paper.

    sokkynick , 12 Apr 2017 12:24
    If the US wants Assad ousted, they should support a UN investigation to find out WHO was at fault. Shoot first questions later? Hollywood Wild West thinking. The US has zero credibility. You simply cannot blame someone without having the facts independently checked out. Yet they didn't wait and decided to break interantional law instead.
    joAnn chartier , 12 Apr 2017 12:23
    There seems to be a crucial component of reality lacking in this opinion piece: rather than bombing and droning and etc, why does the 'world order' not stop the manufacture and distribution of weapons of mass destruction like barrel bombs, nuclear warheads etc etc -- where profits are made by arms manufacturers and their investors--oh, could that be the reason?
    Fakecharitybuster , 12 Apr 2017 12:20
    Quite. Assad is awful, but he is less awful that the Islamist alternatives, which are the only realistic alternatives. We should stop posturing and accept this unpalatable reality.
    ganaruvian Fakecharitybuster , 12 Apr 2017 13:40
    Spot-on!
    Viva_Kidocelot , 12 Apr 2017 12:20
    Much more level reporting, but still is framing the narrative as a brutal gas attack and is still a rush to judgement when the case is that bombs were dropped on a supply of toxic gas, most likely Phosgene.
    Moo1234 , 12 Apr 2017 12:19
    At last, some common sense. like Saddam and Gaddafi, Assad is a ruthless tyrant. What the West, including the petulant Boris Johnson need to realise is that Syria ISN'T the West. Don't impose your values on a country that isn't ready for them. The sickening hypocrisy of the British government would look very foolish if Putin pulled out and allowed Syria to fall to isis. Would Boris and Theresa put British troops on the ground to keep the extremists out of Turkey?
    Gandalf66 Moo1234 , 12 Apr 2017 12:51
    Why isn't Syria ready for Western values? After what the country has been through the people would probably leap at the chance of free elections. Prior to the conflict Syria was a multi-ethnic patchwork. Whatever happens to the country needs to be decided by the Syrians themselves.
    Mates Braas Gandalf66 , 12 Apr 2017 14:50
    "Why isn't Syria ready for Western values?"

    The geopolitical status quo in the Middle East is unstable, and tribal affiliations/religious/ ethnic allegiances need to be carefully balanced and controlled. Something Lebanon, Libya, Syria and Iraq achieved reasonably peacefully for many years before all the US led interventions.

    There is no evidence that the terrorists are fighting for democracy, although if westerners ask them that is what they will likely say.

    shockolat1 , 12 Apr 2017 12:18
    So Trump is unfit to govern because of his locker room humour and possible antics, but gas a few thousand people and hey presto! A darling of the left.
    bemusedfromdevon shockolat1 , 12 Apr 2017 12:22
    That's how it seems...
    Fort Sumpter shockolat1 , 12 Apr 2017 12:25
    Not the left. These writers are pro-British Establishment, pro mixed economy liberals. Soft right if anything.
    zolotoy Fort Sumpter , 12 Apr 2017 12:51
    You're talking about this rag. Take a look at what's coming out of Howard Dean's mouth, or Bernie Sanders's, or practically any Democrat in Washington not named Tulsi Gabbard.

    Or, if you have a really strong stomach, take a look at Daily Kos.

    They're what passes for "left" in America, unfortunately, because the number of SWP and Green Party members is statistically insignificant.

    richmanchester , 12 Apr 2017 12:17
    "Given the situation, it is understandable why some people may think ousting Assad is necessary"

    The Guardian reported that in Libya, the last country to benefit from US and "our" attempts at regime change there are now open air slave auctions.

    So yeah, why not do the same in Syria; what is there to lose?

    Mates Braas , 12 Apr 2017 12:16
    Regime change is illegal under international law, except to the rogues of course found in western capitals, and their Gulf vassals. These are the only group of people in the entire planet who talk openly about overthrowing sovereign governments of other countries.

    Imperial hubris knows no bounds.

    tjt77 Mates Braas , 12 Apr 2017 12:44
    The unfortunate truth is that, along with the ongoing decline of western civilization, one 'by-product' is that International Law is continually disdained. The USA, having lack of insightful leadership, does as it wants, when it wants .. the result is that perpetual wars seem to be a given .. meanwhile, Asia continues to rise and is growing real and genuine wealth by producing and exporting the goods the rest of the world consumes and is doing it very well..
    jman57 , 12 Apr 2017 12:16
    President Trump didn't do enough (yet) by bombing an air base at night. The people of Syria need weapons, tanks, missiles, air support, etc. from a country like the USA that stands for freedom and human rights. Assad, who lives by the sword should also die by the sword. For the U.S. to stand by and watch these atrocities unchallenged would simply be not who we are. I don't agree with President Trump on a lot of things, but on this point he is right. I have changed from not liking him at all to liking him just a bit more.
    sceptic64 jman57 , 12 Apr 2017 12:24
    And what comes after?
    duthealla sceptic64 , 12 Apr 2017 12:54
    That'd be a problem for the EU. We cook , you clean - as some neocon asshat said about Iraq.
    richmanchester duthealla , 12 Apr 2017 13:14
    Well the Guardian was reporting on open air slave auctions in

    Libya this week.

    So clearly arming "the people" and supplying air support worked well there.

    Obviously the same course should be followed in Syria.

    richmanchester , 12 Apr 2017 12:15
    "All six of Syria's Unesco world heritage sites have been damaged. "

    And that's Assad'd fault?

    Or is it the fault of the originally US and still Gulf states/Turkey backed Wahhabis that have damaged them?

    Trumbledon richmanchester , 12 Apr 2017 12:36
    All Assad's fault, if he hadn't tried to liberate Palmyra, it'd still be standi... Oh wait.
    richmanchester , 12 Apr 2017 12:14
    "The logic is that by removing and replacing an undesirable leader, the political situation in the country will change. "

    Absolute tosh.

    The logic behind nearly all attempts at cold war regime change was to replace a regime which aligned itself with the USSR with one that aligned itself with the USA.

    The internal situation, politically or otherwise was of no concern

    Elinore richmanchester , 12 Apr 2017 12:23
    It would work in the USA.
    Nietzschestache , 12 Apr 2017 12:13
    Good piece. Regime change has been such a resounding success, you only have to look at Iraq and Libya to see that. Nor does a country which has a history of using napalm and carcinogenic defoliants any room to take the moral high ground.
    sokkynick , 12 Apr 2017 12:13
    If Assad, is so bad, how come most of the civilian population prefer his areas to those of the rebels? The one certainty in all of this is that the MSM has sold its credibility. Most of what I see is vested interest propaganda.
    pete8s sokkynick , 12 Apr 2017 12:21
    Isn't the main reason that people prefer Assad's areas because he doesn't bomb them.

    There is no love of Assad anywhere.

    If the US were to limit itself to punishing strikes against Assad whenever his forces committed war crimes – bombing hospitals using poison gas etc then a minor at the level of civilisation creeps back into the equation.

    bemusedfromdevon sokkynick , 12 Apr 2017 12:25
    Perhaps because the rebel areas are getting the shit bombed out of them by the Russians and Assad...

    How many heavy bombers and fighters do those fighting Assad have...?

    Just think about it a little....

    Fort Sumpter pete8s , 12 Apr 2017 12:26

    There is no love of Assad anywhere.

    How many Syrians do you know and how many times have you been there?

    scipioafricanus , 12 Apr 2017 12:10
    The situation will be even more fraught if other external actors turn any attempt at regime change into a proxy war, as Russia and Iran are likely to do.

    A proxy war between the United States and Russia is the thing we all have to fear. In Trump and Putin you have two leaders who use brinkmanship to get what they want and who will never back down from any position no matter what the consequences. They'd rather pursue a misguided policy rathen than lose face. I'd like to think the recent war of words between the two countries is just bluster, but as each day goes by I'm no longer sure anymore.

    Amanzim , 12 Apr 2017 12:10
    Regime change should work if all parties believe in democracy and respect each other. That does not seem likely in the middle east. We have seen what that means forcing that idea in Iraq, Egypt and Libya. A secular SOB is better than somebody who believes in laws of yesteryears.
    zankaon , 12 Apr 2017 12:09
    Another way: reducing accidental use of chemical weapons?

    Always drop 2 bombs; one from each side of ammunition dump. That way, one of such unmarked ordinance is likely to be conventional explosives. The latter would further disperse, and dilute (reduce density) of the chemical gas; hence lessening lethality.

    Elinore , 12 Apr 2017 12:08
    You could put Assad in the White House and Trump in Syria and and nothing would change except that the White House might be a tad more intelligent.
    Gandalf66 Elinore , 12 Apr 2017 12:59
    Assad is actually a qualified doctor so he's pretty intelligent. Strange that he's ignoring the Hippocratic Oath on a daily basis.
    jman57 , 12 Apr 2017 12:08
    So we agree on the final result (need for regime change which by the way the article conflicts with its own title), but we disagree on the method. Many bottoms-up revolutions would not have been successful without outside help. The French helped America achieve freedom although their reason was somewhat revengeful. The people of Syria have no chance against an army and tanks ruled by a ruthless evil dictator like Assad without outside assistance. If you think they are not shedding enough blood for their freedom, then you are living in a hole in the ground.
    Mickmarrs jman57 , 12 Apr 2017 12:18
    Yeah and the guys that get in are head loppers
    ProfJake , 12 Apr 2017 12:05
    Well said. Worth taking a look at Global Peace Index, which is produced annually by the Sydney-based Institute for Economics and Peace:

    http://visionofhumanity.org/indexes/global-peace-index /

    In the latest iteration for 2016, the bottom ten places in the Index, reserved for the least peaceful countries on earth, include Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya: four countries where "regime change" has been brought about – or, in Syria's case, where there is arguably an ongoing attempt to bring it about – by the use of military force.

    The evidence so far is that the use of force to topple regimes does not make things better, even when the behaviour of those regimes is/was objectionable in many ways.

    Fort Sumpter , 12 Apr 2017 12:05

    He has reduced once great Syrian cities such as Homs and Aleppo to rubble. All six of Syria's Unesco world heritage sites have been damaged.

    Nope. Most of Homs and Aleppo are intact. The areas occupied by foreign Jihadists using the local populace as human shields were heavily bombed but now they have been liberated.

    Who was it who destroyed these heritage sites? Not the SAA. The Jihadists even filmed themselves doing it and posted the videos online for goodness sake.

    mp66 , 12 Apr 2017 12:04
    Bashar al-Assad is not a good person. He has reduced once great Syrian cities like Homs and Aleppo to rubble. All six of Syria's Unesco World Heritage sites have been damaged.

    So thousands of mostly foreign jihadists occupying parts of those cities had nothing to do with it? Did the US led forces in now n Mosul, or before that in Fallujah find the way to dislodge terrorists from urban strongholds without devastation of the city? Also for all world heritage sites in Syria, they were defended by Syrian troops, and everything that could be moved was moved to safe place. It was exclusively jihadists that were destroying temples, churches, shrines, even muslim graveyards when they found the funeral momunent "too tall". In all of these efforts to save the history of the humanity, syrian govermnent got no help nor acknowledgment. To add insult to injury, the western "cultural" response was touring 3D model of Palmyra gates through western capitals but while Daesh was methodically blowing it up under clear desert skies, there was interestingly not a single american drone to be found anywhere. It was syrian, iranian and russian blood spilled to liberate it twice from the death cult.

    ID1941743 , 12 Apr 2017 12:02
    Yep. There isn't a solution to this problem, but the one thing I'm 99.999% convinved will not work is 'the west' dusting off it's world policeman uniform and bombing the heck out of Syria.
    ariaclast , 12 Apr 2017 12:01
    This is precisely why the west has largely stayed out of the Syrian conflict; despite having a policy favouring the removal of Assad there hasn't been an attempt (or even the suggestion of an attempt at a policy level) at regime change.

    One does wonder, though, at what point the conflict becomes so abhorrent and the civilian casualties so grotesque that our intervention could scarcely make things any worse

    Vetinary ariaclast , 12 Apr 2017 12:13
    Are you actually blind?
    ariaclast Vetinary , 12 Apr 2017 12:15
    Who said that?
    LucyandTomDog , 12 Apr 2017 12:00
    The US?

    Syria?

    Regime change?

    Moi?

    It seems that Spicer, the White House Press Secretary, whilst putting all his cerebral energy into attempting to apologise for his jaw-droppingly ignorant statement that Hitler never used chemical weapons on his own people, failed to stop his mouth making yet another gaffe;

    "I needed to make sure that I clarified, and was not in any shape or form any more of a distraction from the president's decisive action in Syria and the attempts that he is making to destabilise the region and root out ISIS out of Syria."

    (my emphasis)

    Spicer speaks about the president's attempts to destabilise the region in a CNN television interview too.

    As people are beginning to ask, does Spicer actually know what distabilise means?

    zolotoy LucyandTomDog , 12 Apr 2017 12:44
    I'm sure it was an unintentional but very revealing Freudian slip.

    The advantage of letting dunces speak is that they're not very good at hiding what they think.

    LucyandTomDog LucyandTomDog , 12 Apr 2017 13:21
    Typo

    'As people are beginning to ask, does Spicer actually know what distabilise means?'

    Should be destabilise

    Guy1ncognito , 12 Apr 2017 11:59

    Bashar al-Assad is not a good person.

    Don't hold back...

    Moo1234 Guy1ncognito , 12 Apr 2017 12:22
    Daesh/ isis are even less good people......
    Gandalf66 Guy1ncognito , 12 Apr 2017 13:00
    More like Assad is the least worst.
    davshev , 12 Apr 2017 11:56
    It bothers me that Trump is suddenly showing such concern toward innocent Syrians. Yet, at the same time he wants a ban on immigration from seven predominantly Muslim countries, including Syria.
    sceptic64 davshev , 12 Apr 2017 12:15
    Don't you think the timing here is - for Trump - rather convenient? Just when he is under pressure for being a Russian patsy, something happens to allow him to portray himself as 'standing up to Putin'.

    This whole thing stinks.

    davshev sceptic64 , 12 Apr 2017 12:26
    Right. Also, the question should be...if Putin is sleazy enough to be complicit with Syria, then why wouldn't they be sleazy enough to be involved in trying to swing the American election?
    zolotoy davshev , 12 Apr 2017 12:42
    Good question. How sleazy is it to be complicit with Al Qaeda, the only entity on the planet that the USA is semiofficially at war with?
    scipioafricanus , 12 Apr 2017 11:56
    In essence there must be incremental change in the political climate and culture of a state amongst the masses before it culminates in regime change at the top.

    The political climate is no longer there because Assad has systematically murdered everyone who could have formed a credible oppostion to his regime; opposition activitsts, aid workers, doctors and nurses, journalists - all have either been killed, have fled to Europe, or are currently being tortured in one of his detention centres. There is no one left to rise up against him.

    The intervention triggers resentment and hostility at the new government whose legitimacy is reduced through the participation of an outside government. Soon the new regime is considered a 'puppet' and its own existence is questioned by the people.

    This is indeed true. However backing Assad also has its costs; where is the legitimacy of someone who is now merely a "puppet" for Russia and Iran's ambitions in the region?

    As uncomfortable as it is the best western governments can do is to provide aid and assistance to those in distress, whilst pressuring those countries that continue to feed money and weapons to the combatants to change their positions.

    As reasonable as this sounds, I'm afraid this is just wishful thinking.

    Mates Braas scipioafricanus , 12 Apr 2017 14:37
    "The political climate is no longer there because Assad has systematically murdered everyone who could have formed a credible oppostion to his regime;"

    There is a credible position inside Syria which has been largely ignored by the western MSM and governments, because it does not support the uprisisng or the violent overthrow of the Syrian government. It was refused participation when the first peace talks were arranged.

    lemonsuckingpedant , 12 Apr 2017 11:56
    Wow, a Guardian article I can finally wholeheartedly agree with. Does this Professor chap have a hotline to Trump and the rest of the Western leaders itching for a fight with Assad?
    zolotoy , 12 Apr 2017 11:53
    Why do I get the feeling this is just another one of those "Now that Trump is in charge, we shouldn't do regime change" pieces? I note that the author nowhere comes out against fighting an eternal war in Syria -- he just doesn't want Trump doing the "regime change."

    Yeah, he blabbers on about "aid and assistance" and "pressuring those countries that continue to feed money and weapons to the combatants to change their positions" -- obviously choosing to ignore how several western governments provide money and weapons to the combatants (should they be "pressuring" themselves?) But the pinnacle of his cluelessness -- or his agenda -- is reached with this whopper:

    The situation will be even more fraught if other external actors turn any attempt at regime change into a proxy war, as Russia and Iran are likely to do.

    --as if this hadn't been a proxy war for years already, one in which his own country has been quite actively engaged.
    Janeira1 zolotoy , 12 Apr 2017 12:13
    Didn't notice Iraq faring too well the last time the US intervened in regime change.
    jamie evans , 12 Apr 2017 11:50
    Trump told him over some cake?

    This idiot has got to go, he is not rational. He clearly has not an inkling of the gravity of his actions. Nor does he care. How did we get to this? We always thought that a rogue state would be the end of us all. We were wrong. This moron is doing it all by himself. Some one needs to step in, take back control. This is frightening stuff.

    Assad's removal would be catastrophic. There would be no stable government in Syria, it would be controlled by warlords backed by Saudi Arabia, al-Qaeda or ISIS and millions of refugees would have no country to return to or to live in. This will mean more refugees in Europe, more destabilisation and more money drained from our treasuries.

    Russia would also be far from pleased and if the conflict erupted into a confrontation between NATO affiliated forces in Syria against Russia, the Eastern European front will become a lot more precarious (at a time when Britain is cutting back on military spending and very few European countries adequately contribute towards NATO). Do we really want a repeat of tensions from the pre-1991 era? I don't think so, especially with the combined threat of domestic Islamic terrorism throughout Europe and with the continental debt crisis that cannot afford more wars that are not in its interests. Russia will quickly mobilise its forces into the non-Russian caucuses, already closely aligned with Armenia and potentially link up with Iran territoriality. And what about Turkey? They cannot be relied upon.

    So what benefit exactly is it to create anarchy in Syria for Britain's immediate and long-term interests? The destruction of Libya has created nothing but chaos and a stream of migrants from across Africa. Why Boris Johnson is waltzing around the world demanding hard action against Russia when we are cutting back on our armed forces is startling. A better question would be in whose immediate economic and geopolitical interests is the destruction of Assad beneficial? Well... there's two countries in the Middle East which come to mind... not hard to guess.

    dusktildawn Jack1R , 12 Apr 2017 12:25
    That's fair enough but what if Assad stays in power? Will the refugees, who mainly fled him, return? Will anyone invest in rebuilding the country? WIll anyone deal with the country other than Russia or Iran? Above all will the hatred of Assad, terrorism or indeed the conflict as a whole recede?
    Jack1R dusktildawn , 12 Apr 2017 13:02
    They didn't flee him... they fled the war. Most people, in any country, are apolitical. I expect the refugees in the Middle East and Anatolia will return to Syria and those in the West must be forced to return back.

    The problem with Syria now is that it has become such a hot plate. If the West concedes to Russia and allows Syria to survive under the rule of Assad then we will lose face internationally... and it would be domestically embarrassing. No doubt Saudi Arabia, Israel and the Gulf monarchies would be less than pleased, and we depend on them for a lot of our oil.

    It's a difficult question but what we do know is that there are no other credible groups that can rule Syria at the moment, other than Assad's Alawite minority. If we decide to nation-build, that will cost billions, possibly even trillions with no concrete result as our attempt in Iraq shows and we have no idea who we would put in charge. The Christians have about as much legitimacy as the Alawites. Perhaps the only conceivable outcome would be the breakup of Syria. The Christian and Alawite regions go towards Lebanon, the Kurdish regions are given independence and the Sunni areas are also given an independent state. But of course, the Sunni and Christian areas are intertwined and many Sunni's support Assad, or at least do not oppose him. And Turkey, as well as Iran, would never allow an independent Kurdistan. Iran would be less than pleased with the breakup of Syria as well.

    I want to see a post-Assad plan. We all know what happens to non-Sunni minorities when a secular Arab leader is toppled. No one has yet to provide a coherent post-Assad state-structure. Unless of course they want Turkey to territoriality expand... we want to preserve the post-Ottoman borders and state-system yet at the same time we're waging war against the forces actively preserving it.

    There is no simple answer. Assad is a pawn of Russia and Iran, yet the other options are either Turkish expansion (which, the last time they did that, they had sizeable European territories) or Saudi expansion (which I hope everyone agrees is less than desirable). We have no friends in the Middle East, other than Jordan, Egypt and Israel. But they all have their own interests and I suspect their friendships are determined upon those interests. I think our aim is to maintain the balance of power. Perhaps only the growth of Israel could act as a counter-weight to Sunni and Shia interests.

    Alderbaran Jack1R , 12 Apr 2017 13:04
    Would you support another leader from perhaps the same party taking over as an interim measure whilst different factions are brought together to defeat ISIS?

    In an ideal world, I would love to see this happening, along with a form of truth and reconciliation commission, and a commitment from the international community and other bodies independent of the Syrian government to assist in tackling issues such as warlordism and corruption. The dogmatic belief that there can be no leader other than Assad is one that might have ultimately cost millions of lives and it would be wrong to use the old dictator's mantra of 'me or chaos'. And to be fair, Assad does not have a great track record in Syria.

    And a final question - do you believe Russia should be doing more to put pressure on Assad or do you think it will be happy to put its international credibility on the line for him? (There is something pathological I believe in Putin's willingness to support other dictators)

    Laurence Bury , 12 Apr 2017 11:50
    How can one call for 'peaceful transition to a new society' when the original opposition to Assad was sponsored by multifarious power-hungry foreign actors? They exploited the Arab Spring pro-democracy utopianism then messed up their insurrectional strategy disastrously. The country now needs to be made a protectorate of an international peace-keeping force until a representative transitional government is agreed upon.
    WellmeaningBob Laurence Bury , 12 Apr 2017 12:11
    A little contradictory, no? Oh we fucked up, so you need to be colonised anyway.
    Laurence Bury WellmeaningBob , 12 Apr 2017 12:19
    No, that sounds like the pseudo-leftist neo-colonial discourse that Obama was so fond of.

    The counter-argument to regime change is more that by now Assad controls most cities again, the opposition are awful sectarians who should be let nowhere near power and it may still be possible to contain IS to a manageable extent while Assad maintains a dictatorship indefinitely.

    WellmeaningBob Laurence Bury , 12 Apr 2017 12:27
    Not quite sure what you mean. Just saying that the "man on the street" would more likely than not understand "protectorate" pretty much the same as e.g. the Moroccans did.
    Mates Braas elan , 12 Apr 2017 12:25
    Civil war means that both sides are killing their own people.
    zolotoy jonnyross , 12 Apr 2017 11:57
    Only because his opposition is even more barbaric.
    Fort Sumpter jonnyross , 12 Apr 2017 12:09
    'indiscriminate weapons'

    Oh dear, are they rally still pushing this 'our weapons don't kill civilians' BS?

    No need for evidence of chlorine gas bombs apparently.

    And anyone who questions the MSM narrative and who is sickened by endless war is an 'apologist'. What are you but an apologist for war?

    Mates Braas jonnyross , 12 Apr 2017 12:23
    Unfortunately, there is no way to make war nice.
    SeeNOevilHearNOevil , 12 Apr 2017 11:42
    Regime change in Syria was being talked directly since 9/11 and it never stopped. It's on the record. So is john Kerry, on record on TV, stating gulf states offered to cover part of the costs of a US invasion in Syria at least twice way before the so called ''civil war'' even started.

    They prepared it for years but the poor taste Iraq/Libya left on the US public meant the US pulled out of the deal (all because of the planed gas pipelines from Qatar to Europe that has to go through Syria).

    The Saudis along with Qatar, Turkey and Israel believed they could force the hand of the US and acted alone initiating the takeover. This is why despite the intel, organisation and provision of what is estimated to be 300k(german estimates) foreign jihadists eventually came to a standstill without direct US support.

    The Jihadists then prematurely jumped the gun fragmented creating ISIS (something meant to take place behind the scenes after they defeated Assad)

    The point is of course...it's all about oil...nothing about democracy or Gas or any of that crap

    hpe974 SeeNOevilHearNOevil , 12 Apr 2017 16:26
    Of course it is!! The USA is truly the biggest sponsor of terror and mayhem and destruction in the M.E.
    namjodh , 12 Apr 2017 11:38
    Yes, this is all quite true. What the USA almost always seems to do is create a power vacuum in the countries it attempts to "save" and, inevitably it seems, the USA always chooses the wrong damn party or person to support in said vacuum. A stunning misreading and proof of the failure of American foreign policy "experts" and CIA strategists to grasp the realities on the ground.
    HuckelburryPin namjodh , 12 Apr 2017 11:46

    Yes, this is all quite true. What the USA almost always seems to do is create a power vacuum in the countries it attempts to "save" and, inevitably it seems, the USA always chooses the wrong damn party or person to support in said vacuum.

    Like in Japan. Just that Japan is ... Shinto. Or something. Not M.........

    WellmeaningBob namjodh , 12 Apr 2017 12:04
    I'm sure its fair to say that for many instability, disorder, mayhem and the like are entirely desirable. Witness Kissinger who out-and-out advocated/advocates looking after US long-term interests through war, disease and starvation.
    ID4352889 , 12 Apr 2017 11:37
    Scott Ritter has been commenting on the alleged Assad gas attacks . Unlike the MSM the former Iraq weapons inspector seems far from convinced.
    Levant1998 ID4352889 , 12 Apr 2017 13:46
    Former UN weapons inspector Richard Lloyd, and Professor Theodore Posto of MIT also authored a piece:

    http://m.dw.com/en/is-assad-to-blame-for-the-chemical-weapons-attack-in-syria/a-38330217

    jadamsj ID4352889 , 12 Apr 2017 17:12

    Scott Ritter has been commenting on the alleged Assad gas attacks. Unlike the MSM the former Iraq weapons inspector seems far from convinced.

    What that before or after Russia blocked an investigation into it?

    ploughmanlunch , 12 Apr 2017 11:35
    'The on-going devastation in Syria cries out for a response, 'do something' is the inherent plea.'

    Might I suggest sending generous quantities of bubble wrap to each of the 'something must be done' brigade. Popping those bubbles is relaxing and calming. They will otherwise impatiently agitate for some ineffective, or more likely counter-productive measure that makes things drastically worse.

    zolotoy ID4352889 , 12 Apr 2017 11:46
    Not very sensible, actually -- see the comment by capatriot above (or below, if you do "newest first"). Rather appalling that someone with academic credentials would (1) engage in a comic book-style analysis of world politics (big bad nearly omnipotent supervillain!) and (2) put all the blame for the carnage and destruction on one side.
    EdmundLange , 12 Apr 2017 11:29
    We tried to change the leader in Iraq. It didn't work, and now the country is a hotbed of terrorism and incredibly corrupt and ineffectual government. We tried to change the leader in Libya. It didn't work, and now the country is a hotbed of terrorism and incredibly corrupt and ineffectual government. I guess we could try to change the leader in Syria, if we really, really want.
    EdmundLange jonnyross , 12 Apr 2017 11:58
    Excellent, I'm glad we're going to topple Assad so the Jihadists can take control. Just what we needed.
    capatriot , 12 Apr 2017 11:26

    He has reduced once great Syrian cities like Homs and Aleppo to rubble.

    What, he, personally? What is he, superman? And I wonder why he'd choose to do that to his own nation's cities?

    But wait, you mean that there was a rebellion against the recognized government which developed into a civil war, aided and abetted by sectarian outsiders and terrorists and the United States/West, with political and religious/ethnic overtones? And that later, as it looked like the recognized govt was going to fail, other interested outsiders like Russia and Iran intervened to help it?

    Gosh, I wonder what the least worst outcome for the people of Syria actually is here ... perhaps we should leave it to them?

    zolotoy jonnyross , 12 Apr 2017 11:56
    It's actually a very serious question. How much control does Assad have over his government, let alone his armed forces? He's a trained dentist, ferchrissakes, and his older brother was the one groomed for the <strike>throne</strike> presidency. It makes sense to assume that his powers over an entrenched nomenklatura, to say nothing of all of the different armed factions nominally serving him, aren't limitless.

    [Apr 12, 2017] Outraged Ivanka influenced Donald Trumps decision to strike Syria, Eric Trump says

    Apr 12, 2017 | watoday.com.au

    He also confirmed that President Trump's decision to bomb a Syrian airbase to punish President Bashar al-Assad for a nerve gas attack last week was influenced by the reaction of his sister Ivanka, who said she was "heartbroken and outraged" by the atrocity.

    [Apr 12, 2017] Did Assad Really Use Sarin

    Notable quotes:
    "... Paul Gottinger ..."
    "... is a journalist based in Madison, WI whose work focuses on the Middle East. He can be reached via Twitter @paulgottinger or email: [email protected] ..."
    Apr 12, 2017 | www.counterpunch.org

    Almost immediately after video of the alleged chemical weapons attack in Idlib hit Western media, Assad was declared guilty by US news networks and political commentators. The front page of the New York Times on April 5 th showed a heartbreaking image of a child wounded in the alleged chemical attack with a headline claiming Assad was responsible.

    By the afternoon of April 7, a US attack seemed inevitable as both Rex Tillerson and Trump said action would be taken.

    Between Democrats and Republicans, a bipartisan consensus emerged, rare in the Trump presidency, whereby Assad was deemed guilty and Trump was goaded on to attack. The few voices of dissent seemed mostly concerned with the lack of constitutional approval for the strike

    The night of the strike, US media snapped into DPRK-style, state media mode. TV pundits fell into a trance while expressing the " beauty " of American power being unleashed on a country already destroyed by 6 years of war.

    Pundits described the attack as "surgical" despite the pentagon quietly admitting one of the missiles missed its target and they don't know where it landed. My questions to both CENTCOM and the Secretary of Defense Office on the missing cruise missile have thus far gone unanswered. However, Syrian sources claim civilians were killed in the missile strike.

    Trump justified the attack by invoking religiously themed buzzwords and unconvincing blather on the "beautiful babies" murdered in the chemical attack.

    Following the attack, Trump officials' statements indicated there was a shift towards regime change. UN ambassador Nikki Haley said Sunday that removing Assad is now a priority.

    The Neocon sharks have started circling too. Bill Kristol tweeted that these strikes should be used to move towards regime change in Iran. Marco Rubio, Lindsey Graham, and John McCain have all joined in too, their mouths watering at the thought of ousting Assad.

    But was Assad really responsible for the attack?

    To ask such a question is to be deemed an "Assadist" by pundits and discourse police across the political spectrum.

    Neither the lack of an independent investigation, nor the fact that nearly all the information on the alleged attack has come from rebel sources, who stand to benefit from a US response, is deemed sufficient cause for skepticism.

    In a civilized society an actor is be presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. If guilt is determined, a legally justified course of action is taken. In the US however, if the accused is a US enemy, no evidence is needed, and even deranged conspiracies are given play in mainstream media coverage.

    The best recent example of this is the US media's conspiracy about Russia stealing the US election and working for Trump. The US media has stooped so low as to even push bizarre conspiracies by Louise Mensch . She recently claimed the 2014 uprising in Ferguson was a Russian plot.

    In the case of the alleged attack on Khan Sheikhun, US officials and pro-war experts immediately declared Assad's guilty and then cheered on an illegal use of force. This is all very reminiscent of the lead up to the Iraq war.

    In an eerie coincidence, Michael R. Gordon, who with Judith Miller helped sell the Iraq WMD story to Americans, coauthored the New York Times April 4th article on Assad's alleged sarin attack at Khan Sheikhun.

    To help sell the sarin narrative, the US media brought on a doctor to describe the alleged attack that has been accused of helping kidnap journalists in his work with extremists.

    When the US investigated its own airstrike in Mosul this March, it took a number of days before it admitted it had killed hundreds of civilians. Yet, guilt was immediately assigned in the Khan Sheikhun attack.

    In 2013, the US media also rushed to the conclusion Assad used sarin in a horrific incident in Ghouta. The US was on the verge of attacking Assad then, but Obama decided against it. Obama claimed he held off because US intelligence voiced skepticism about Assad's guilt.

    The UN investigation on the Ghouta attack took almost a month and even its conclusions have been disputed.

    In December of 2013, Seymour Hersh published a lengthy investigation into the 2013 attack in Ghouta and found reason to doubt Assad's responsibility for attack. He was forced to publish it in the London Review of Books after the New York Times and the Washington Post refused to run it.

    He reported that classified US reports claimed that Syria's al Qaeda affiliate had "mastered the mechanics of creating sarin".

    A month after Hersh's piece appeared, a MIT study cast further doubt on the US government's story by demonstrating that the rockets used in the Ghouta attack couldn't have flown as far as the US government claimed.

    Ted Postol, one of the authors of the study said, "We were within a whisker of war based on egregious errors."

    In this latest alleged gas attack, a few individuals have dared question the state narrative.

    The journalist Robert Parry has recently claimed there is much to be made of the fact that Mike Pompeo, the CIA Director, wasn't among those helping sell this latest sarin story to the American people. He believes it indicates doubt in the CIA over Assad's involvement.

    Scott Ritter, a former UN weapons inspector in Iraq, has raised skepticism over Assad's involvement. He says rebels have had chemical weapons facilities in Syria and some of the witnesses' statements describe a strong smell during the attack, which indicates something other than sarin was used.

    The Canadian government originally called for an investigation and stopped short of blaming Assad at the UN, but then later championed Trump's strikes.

    Groups like Organizations for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and Human Rights Watch are still investigating the alleged attack in Khan Sheikhun.

    Whether these groups or others will be able to conduct an independent investigation is not known. But in usual fashion, the US had no interest in investigating facts, which may provide the wrong answers.

    It's possible that Assad carried out the attack, but just because he's a reprehensible figure doesn't mean there is no need to present evidence and conduct an independent investigation.

    What's clear now is that the US attack benefitted jihadi groups, has made further US military action more likely, and has increased the chances of a direct military confrontation with Russia. All of these results are very dangerous.

    Future US military action in Syria should be resisted with popular pressure. History shows we can't count on the media or pundits to act as the voice of reason. Join the debate on Facebook

    Paul Gottinger is a journalist based in Madison, WI whose work focuses on the Middle East. He can be reached via Twitter @paulgottinger or email: [email protected]

    [Apr 12, 2017] With Bannon and Kushner not getting along, well, it's a slam dunk that Bannon's out.

    Serial betrayer...
    Notable quotes:
    "... Oldtimers from the 1980 remember reading China, Russia and Iran were the great enemies of USA and to keep boss Israel safe her neighbors had to be splintered into mini statelets. Warring is a racket and lunacy obfuscates the racket; makes for good profits. So "sanity" will not be restored. ..."
    "... Jane Meyer wrote in the New Yorker recently about the wealthy hedge funder, Robert Mercer, and his daughter Rebekah, who are big sponsors of Breitbart. They backed Cruz in the Primary, but once he lost to Trump, they began to back Trump with lots of money. For their "donations," they more or less demanded that Trump take on Bannon as an advisor. Meyer posits that it's largely due to the Mercers and Bannon that Trump won. They started working with Trump in August when Trump was seriously lagging in the poles. Although many criticized and/or jeered Trump's hiring of Bannon, the rest, as they say, is history. It is believed that Bannon and the Mercer's are largely behind and responsible for his success. ..."
    "... I have read somewhere that Bannon always said he'd be out within a year. I don't believe that Trump had much loyalty to Bannon beyond whatever "good" Bannon did for him on any given day. So it's not all that surprising that Bannon is out, as are most of Trump's other initial picks as his "inside" advisors. ..."
    "... Clearly and quite simply, it can't unless something majorly serious happens. We all had some slim hope that Trump could be the disrupter who made at least some levels of serious change. Clearly, that ain't gonna happen. ..."
    "... Syria's just some sort of side show distraction. US citizens - at least a certain siginificant percentage of them - can be relied on to rally 'round the Flag, boys, just one more time if the tomahawks are flying at brown people "over there." ..."
    "... Frankly ALL of the media here, as everyone knows, is insanely corrupt and complete and ridiculous propaganda 24/7/365. Otherwise reasonably "sane" friends of mine knee-jerked into saluting the flag and frothing at the mouth about the horrors of Assad - about whom they know bupkiss - because they listened to propaganda about it. It's pretty frightening - really - at how George Orwell it all is. I definitely keep FAR AWAY from any tvs and radios when this crap is happening. I listened to about 3 sentences that some propagandist on NPR was spewing out. It was so over the top evident that they were propagandizing the listeners that I had to turn it off immediately. It's pretty appalling. ..."
    www.moonofalabama.org

    x | Apr 12, 2017 10:28:48 AM | 3

    Elvis has (almost) left the building...

    quote
    ----
    Goodwin says he asked Trump if he still has confidence in Bannon, who is reportedly feuding with Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner. And Trump didn't exactly disabuse Goodwin of the idea that Bannon is embattled. In fact, he did quite the opposite.

    "I like Steve, but you have to remember he was not involved in my campaign until very late," Trump said. "I had already beaten all the senators and all the governors, and I didn't know Steve. I'm my own strategist, and it wasn't like I was going to change strategies because I was facing crooked Hillary."

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/04/11/trump-just-made-some-very-strange-comments-about-stephen-k-bannon

    likklemore | Apr 12, 2017 10:56:15 AM | 7
    Thanks b,
    Lunacy has truly taken over the White House but even more so the U.S. media. How can sanity be brought back to town?

    Oldtimers from the 1980 remember reading China, Russia and Iran were the great enemies of USA and to keep boss Israel safe her neighbors had to be splintered into mini statelets. Warring is a racket and lunacy obfuscates the racket; makes for good profits. So "sanity" will not be restored.

    I am reading the release of an ex see-i-aye officer that McCain, McMaster, Brennan are in a huddle and Bannon is out. Somewhat confirming Where is Trump's loyalty? I was winning before he rescued me: In an interview with Michael Goodwin of NYPOST

    Trump won't definitively say he still backs Bannon

    "I like Steve, but you have to remember he was not involved in my campaign until very late," Trump said. "I had already beaten all the senators and all the governors, and I didn't know Steve. I'm my own strategist and it wasn't like I was going to change strategies because I was facing crooked Hillary."
    He ended by saying, "Steve is a good guy, but I told them to straighten it out or I will."

    ~ ~ ~ ~
    My take is Trump has given too much of his presidential responsibility to Jared. Israel and Family are always First.

    RUKidding | Apr 12, 2017 12:20:29 PM | 26
    Vis Trump and Bannon in terms of Bannon apparently being tossed out:

    Jane Meyer wrote in the New Yorker recently about the wealthy hedge funder, Robert Mercer, and his daughter Rebekah, who are big sponsors of Breitbart. They backed Cruz in the Primary, but once he lost to Trump, they began to back Trump with lots of money. For their "donations," they more or less demanded that Trump take on Bannon as an advisor. Meyer posits that it's largely due to the Mercers and Bannon that Trump won. They started working with Trump in August when Trump was seriously lagging in the poles. Although many criticized and/or jeered Trump's hiring of Bannon, the rest, as they say, is history. It is believed that Bannon and the Mercer's are largely behind and responsible for his success.

    I have read somewhere that Bannon always said he'd be out within a year. I don't believe that Trump had much loyalty to Bannon beyond whatever "good" Bannon did for him on any given day. So it's not all that surprising that Bannon is out, as are most of Trump's other initial picks as his "inside" advisors.

    With Bannon and Kushner not getting along, well, it's a slam dunk that Bannon's out.

    "How can sanity be brought to town?"

    Clearly and quite simply, it can't unless something majorly serious happens. We all had some slim hope that Trump could be the disrupter who made at least some levels of serious change. Clearly, that ain't gonna happen.

    Syria's just some sort of side show distraction. US citizens - at least a certain siginificant percentage of them - can be relied on to rally 'round the Flag, boys, just one more time if the tomahawks are flying at brown people "over there."

    Frankly ALL of the media here, as everyone knows, is insanely corrupt and complete and ridiculous propaganda 24/7/365. Otherwise reasonably "sane" friends of mine knee-jerked into saluting the flag and frothing at the mouth about the horrors of Assad - about whom they know bupkiss - because they listened to propaganda about it. It's pretty frightening - really - at how George Orwell it all is. I definitely keep FAR AWAY from any tvs and radios when this crap is happening. I listened to about 3 sentences that some propagandist on NPR was spewing out. It was so over the top evident that they were propagandizing the listeners that I had to turn it off immediately. It's pretty appalling.

    How will this end? No doubt, not well, especially if you're brown skinned in the ME. The dog help us all.

    [Apr 12, 2017] White House Intelligence Assessment Is No-Such-Thing - Shows Support for Al-Qaeda

    Notable quotes:
    "... Several of the released video were introduced and commented by "Dr. Shajul Islam" who has been removed from the British medical registry and had been indicted in the UK for his role in kidnapping "western" journalists in Syria. He fled back to Syria. ..."
    "... Other videos and photos are by the White Helmets "rescuers", a U.S./UK financed propaganda prop , which is so neutral that it works with ISIS (vid) and al-Qaeda but not in government held areas where the actual Syrian population lives. ..."
    "... The Hama offensive by the "opposition" was personally planned and directed by the head of al-Qaeda in Syria al-Joliani. Photos of the planing sessions were published by "opposition" agencies and widely distributed. ..."
    "... How can there be an "intelligence assessment" (and reporting about it) that does not note that the incident in question took place in an area where AL-QAEDA rules and that the allegedly related (but defeated) offensive was launched by AL-QAEDA. Is AL-QAEDA now officially the "Syrian opposition" the U.S. supports? The neocon former General Petraeus lobbied for a U.S. alliance with al-Qaeda since 2015. The new National Security Advisor to Trump, General McMaster, is a Petraeus protege. He, together with Petraeus, screwed up Iraq . Is the Petraeus alliance now in place= ..."
    "... Postol finds nothing in the White House assessment that lets him believe the incident was from an air attack. He finds signs that the incident that was launched on the ground by intentional exploding the container of 122mm ammunition with some other explosives. ..."
    "... He calls the White House assessment amateurish and not properly vetted by competent intelligence analysts who, Postol says, would not have signed off on it in is current form (just as I said above.) ..."
    "... Postol presumes that the incident was with Sarin. He makes no analysis of that White House claim (it is not his field). I don't agree with the Sarin claim. Many other organophosphate substances (pesticides) would be "consistent with" the symptoms displayed or played in the videos and pictures. Some symptoms expected with Sarin, for example heavy cramps, spontaneous defecation, are no visible in any of the videos or pictures. ..."
    "... "A critical piece of information that has largely escaped the reporting in the mainstream media is that Khan Sheikhoun is ground zero for the Islamic jihadists who have been at the center of the anti-Assad movement in Syria since 2011. Up until February 2017, Khan Sheikhoun was occupied by a pro-ISIS group known as Liwa al-Aqsa that was engaged in an oftentimes-violent struggle with its competitor organization, Al Nusra Front (which later morphed into Tahrir al-Sham, but under any name functioning as Al Qaeda's arm in Syria) for resources and political influence among the local population." ..."
    "... To sum this bunch of crap up - in less than 48 hours we are to believe the DOD's use of friggin social GD media proved beyond reasonable doubt that Assad chemed his own people in a town that is known worldwide as 'ground zero' for jihadi's, filmed by a doc who was brought to trial on terror charges (lest we forget about the UK/US financed White Helmets at $100M playing pretend propaganda chit) with the bad ass retired general now in charge of all of the militaries toys and humans stating as fact, FACT, this violation of U.S. law and international law was a one time deal b/c Assad is bad, bad, bad - I looked at the evidence and was convinced beyond doubt blah, blah blah F'ing bullshit! ..."
    "... It's just worthless verbage , unclassified, unattributed, unaddressed, unstructured, unprofessional, unreferenced, unformatted (re standards), etc, etc, nebulous raw text. So now some staffer in the WH does their childish version of the puerile #Fake 'Dossier', the 'Intelligence Report' on Trump, that never was ? Fucking surreal. Amateur hour at the WH, the, 'Executive' arm of government. This insanity is apparently only going to get worse. Might have to strap in for this ride and consider taking up alcohol again. FFS! :( ..."
    "... To quote b, "Well, maybe because, you know, that mujahedeen thing worked out so well that nearly forty years later the U.S. is mulling again to send additional troops to Afghanistan to defeat them." ..."
    "... It worked just great. More military expenditure, without even talking about the poppy fields guarded by US and NATO troops in Afghanistan. The USA wouldn't want to lose such a golden business, would it? Not right when they have an amazing, fantastic heroin epidemic that lines so many pockets back at home... http://www.cbsnews.com/news/heroin-use-in-u-s-reaches-alarming-20-year-high/ ..."
    "... The whole things reeks doesn't it? So amateurish. And those BGMs had to have gone somewhere, this is a terrible failure rate or the number launched was a lie. Either way it doesn't bode well that the 'stand off' weapons are less than 50% effective. Also, We never found out how many failed in the Gulf War because the media was locked in. This and the failure of the Trident. ..."
    "... The west is already allied-using al-Qaida isis so any acknowledgement would just be an official declaration, most likely with another name change for their proxy forces. This has been a active tactic since the west began using Islamic fundamentalists in the aftermath of WW II and to effect in defeating the Soviets in Afghanistan, destroying the progressive government then there because is was not in the orbit or under the control of the western fascists. The west thought they had it all in the bag with the collapse of the Soviet Union until an old cold war warrior saved the Russian culture and people from complete devastation at the hands of the western globalists....and here we are today. ..."
    "... friedman and the nyt - suggesting they align with isis to take down assad was essentially what obama openly stated previously.. someone had this script written down some time ago.. nyt is just the servant to all the propaganda that is fit to print. isis is a creation of the war party, as is the divide and conquer strategy of creating a sunni/shite conflict and all the rest of the madness that continues to unfold from all of the madness... ..."
    "... The hegemon won't recognise a multipolar world until the multipolar world talks to it in the only language it has grown to understand: Violence ..."
    "... "How can sanity be brought back to town?" Is That Armageddon Over The Horizon? http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/04/12/is-that-armageddon-over-the-horizon/ ..."
    Apr 12, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
    White House "Intelligence Assessment" Is No-Such-Thing - Shows Support for Al-Qaeda

    UPDATED at the end of the post

    The Trump White House published three and a half pages of accusations against the governments of Syria and Russia. These are simple white pages with no header or footer, no date, no classification or declassification marks, no issuing agency and no signatures. It is indiscernible who has written them.

    U.S. media call this a Declassified U.S. Report on Chemical Weapons Attack . It is no such thing.

    It starts with "The United States is confident that the Syrian government conducted a chemical weapon attack, ..."

    The U.S. "is confident", it does not "know", it does not have "proof" - it is just "confident".

    The whole paper contains only seven paragraphs that are allegedly a "Summary of the U.S. intelligence community assessment" on the issue. The seven paragraphs are followed by eight(!) paragraphs that try to refute the Russian and Syrian statements on the issue. Some political fluff makes up the sorry rest.

    That "intelligence community assessment" chapter title is likely already a false claim. Even a fast tracked, preliminary National Intelligence Assessment, for which all seventeen U.S. intelligence agencies must be heard, takes at least two to three weeks to create. A "long track" full assessment takes two month or more. These are official documents issued by the Director of National Intelligence. The summary assessment the White House releases has no such heritage. It is likely a well massaged fast write up of some flunky in the National Security Council.

    The claimed assessment starts with a definitely false claim: "We assess that Damascus launched this chemical attack in response to an opposition offensive in Hama province that threatened key infrastructure."

    The Hama offensive had failed two weeks ago. Since then the Syrian army has regained all areas the al-Qaeda "opposition" had captured during the first few days. Key infrastructure had never been seriously threatened by it. Over 2,000 al-Qaeda fighters were killed in the endeavor.

    Peto Lucem, a well known and reliable source for accurate maps of the war on Syria, posted on March 31 , four days before the chemical incident:

    Peto Lucem @PetoLucem

    NEW MAP: "Rebel" frontline in #Hama is collapsing, #SAA reverses most #AlQaeda gains made in first days of their failed offensive. #Syria


    bigger

    The attack in Hama had already failed days before the chemical incident in Khan Shaykhun happened. Khan Shaykhun is far from the front line. The incident and the failed al-Qaeda attack in Hama can not possibly be related. It would make no sense at all to launch a militarily useless incident in a place far away "in response" to a defeat of the enemy elsewhere. (The Defense Intelligence Agency likely never signed off on such an objectively false claim.)

    The following paragraphs of the released paper reveal that the assessment is largely based on a "significant body" of "open source reporting" which "indicates" something. This means that the White House relied on pictures and videos posted by people who are allowed to operate freely in the al-Qaeda ruled Khan Shaykhun. (The town had been in the hands of an Islamic State associated group Liwa Al-Aqsa until mid February . The group moved out after fighting al-Qaeda and killing some 150 of its fighters .)

    Several of the released video were introduced and commented by "Dr. Shajul Islam" who has been removed from the British medical registry and had been indicted in the UK for his role in kidnapping "western" journalists in Syria. He fled back to Syria. The videos he distribute of "rescue" of casualties of the chemical incidents were not of real emergencies but staged. One of the journalists kidnapped with the help of Dr. Shajul Islam, James Foley, was later murdered on camera by the Islamic State.

    Other videos and photos are by the White Helmets "rescuers", a U.S./UK financed propaganda prop , which is so neutral that it works with ISIS (vid) and al-Qaeda but not in government held areas where the actual Syrian population lives.

    The Hama offensive by the "opposition" was personally planned and directed by the head of al-Qaeda in Syria al-Joliani. Photos of the planing sessions were published by "opposition" agencies and widely distributed.


    bigger

    How can there be an "intelligence assessment" (and reporting about it) that does not note that the incident in question took place in an area where AL-QAEDA rules and that the allegedly related (but defeated) offensive was launched by AL-QAEDA. Is AL-QAEDA now officially the "Syrian opposition" the U.S. supports? The neocon former General Petraeus lobbied for a U.S. alliance with al-Qaeda since 2015. The new National Security Advisor to Trump, General McMaster, is a Petraeus protege. He, together with Petraeus, screwed up Iraq . Is the Petraeus alliance now in place=

    The next step then will be for the U.S. to ally with the Islamic State. The New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman is already arguing for that :

    We could simply back off fighting territorial ISIS in Syria and make it entirely a problem for Iran, Russia, Hezbollah and Assad. After all, they're the ones overextended in Syria, not us. Make them fight a two-front war - the moderate rebels on one side and ISIS on the other. If we defeat territorial ISIS in Syria now, we will only reduce the pressure on Assad, Iran, Russia and Hezbollah and enable them to devote all their resources to crushing the last moderate rebels in Idlib, not sharing power with them.

    The U.S., Friedman says, should let ISIS run free so it can help al-Qaeda which is ruling in Idleb governate. Friedman talks of "moderate rebels in Idleb" but these are unicorns. They do not exist. There is al-Qaeda and there is Ahrar al Sham which compares itself with the Taliban . All other opposition fighters in Idleb have joined these two or are now dead.

    But why not use these gangs of sectarian mass murderers against the Syrian government and others? Hey, Israel wants us to do just that . And why don't we hand out anti-air missiles to them, Friedman asks, and lend them air-support at the same time. Surely the combination will do well.

    In Syria, Trump should let ISIS be Assad's, Iran's, Hezbollah's and Russia's headache - the same way we encouraged the mujahedeen fighters to bleed Russia in Afghanistan.

    Well, maybe because, you know, that mujahedeen thing worked out so well that nearly forty years later the U.S. is mulling again to send additional troops to Afghanistan to defeat them.

    Lunacy has truly taken over the White House but even more so the U.S. media. How can sanity be brought back to town?

    UPDATE:

    Professor emeritus at MIT Theodor Postol, a former science adviser to U.S. Navy command and missile expert, has analyzed the "evidence" the White House presented. The short, preliminary report is available here .

    Postol finds nothing in the White House assessment that lets him believe the incident was from an air attack. He finds signs that the incident that was launched on the ground by intentional exploding the container of 122mm ammunition with some other explosives.

    He calls the White House assessment amateurish and not properly vetted by competent intelligence analysts who, Postol says, would not have signed off on it in is current form (just as I said above.)

    Postol presumes that the incident was with Sarin. He makes no analysis of that White House claim (it is not his field). I don't agree with the Sarin claim. Many other organophosphate substances (pesticides) would be "consistent with" the symptoms displayed or played in the videos and pictures. Some symptoms expected with Sarin, for example heavy cramps, spontaneous defecation, are no visible in any of the videos or pictures.

    I do not concur with Postol on the picture of the alleged impact crater of the "attack". I have seen several "versions" of the impact crater on social nets with different metal parts, or none, placed in it. Postol seems to have only seen one version. His conclusions from that version seem right. But the crater "evidence" is tainted and to make overall conclusions from it is not easy. I concur though that the crater is not from an air impact but from a ground event. I am not sure though that it is related to the incident at all.

    Lysander | Apr 12, 2017 10:16:29 AM | 1

    "How can sanity be brought back to town?" Sadly, only a very strong punch in the face can stop a bully. It's a very hard and dangerous thing to do but one is amazed how quickly it works.
    Ray Fox | Apr 12, 2017 10:16:34 AM | 2
    Sanity has nothing to do with this. Remember what countries General Wesley Clark was told at the Pentagon after 9/11 were going to be destroyed. The plan will not stop, no matter what. Alexander Solzhenitsyn wrote the most banned book in the world, " 200 Years Together ".

    quantums | Apr 12, 2017 10:31:31 AM | 4
    Monsters who are responsible for the death of millions in Iraq are trying to teach others about human rights? Syria was peaceful country before US started flooding the country with arms and money to their proxy armies. Assad's Syria is a shelter to near two million Palestinians that fled from Israeli "democracy". Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Somalia, Sudan... You know, seems that people from the US lost touch with reality. You are the real monsters, not Assad.
    h | Apr 12, 2017 10:35:58 AM | 5
    b - I posted this yesterday which mirrors many of the details in your post. There is one factoid missing, that is Mattis stated at his press conference yesterday (link below) the bombing at Shayrat air base was a 'supposed' one time military campaign and not a part of the U.S. overall strategy regarding the ISIS campaign. He also stated way more loss at Shayrat than Syria/Russia has offered.

    WH Lays Out Evidence that Syria was behind deadly attack...

    "A senior administration official laid out evidence that the Syrian regime was behind the chemical attack in the country that killed at least 80 people last week."

    "The official said intelligence gathered from social media accounts, open source videos, reporting, imagery, and geospatial intelligence showed that the chemical attack was a regime attack."

    "I don't think there's evidence to the contrary at all," an official who briefed reporters on background Tuesday said."

    FUNNY THAT...

    Intelligence and Military Sources Who Warned About Weapons Lies Before Iraq War Now Say that Assad Did NOT Launch Chemical Weapon Attack

    "A critical piece of information that has largely escaped the reporting in the mainstream media is that Khan Sheikhoun is ground zero for the Islamic jihadists who have been at the center of the anti-Assad movement in Syria since 2011. Up until February 2017, Khan Sheikhoun was occupied by a pro-ISIS group known as Liwa al-Aqsa that was engaged in an oftentimes-violent struggle with its competitor organization, Al Nusra Front (which later morphed into Tahrir al-Sham, but under any name functioning as Al Qaeda's arm in Syria) for resources and political influence among the local population."

    FUNNIER THAT, NOT AS IN A HAHA, BUT RATHER IRONY -

    UK-trained doctor hailed a hero for treating gas attack victims in Syria stood trial on terror offences 'and belonged to the group that kidnapped British reporter John Cantlie'

    "Dr Shajul Islam, from East London, published a video of the patients on his Twitter account after the attack. He said his hospital took care of three victims all with narrow, pinpoint pupils that did not respond to light."

    "The University of London graduate was arrested and charged with kidnapping two journalists - Mr Cantlie and Dutch reporter Jeroen Oerlemans - in 2012 but was released after the trial collapsed when neither of the prosecution's witnesses were able to give evidence."

    THIS WOULDN'T BE COMPLETE WITHOUT MAD DOG'S LOUSY TWO CENTS -

    "The goal right now in Syria and the military campaign is focused on accomplishing that is breaking ISIS, destroying ISIS in Syria. This was a separate issue that arose in the midst of that campaign. The use by the Assad regime of chemical weapons and we addressed that militarily but the rest of the campaign stays on track"...

    To sum this bunch of crap up - in less than 48 hours we are to believe the DOD's use of friggin social GD media proved beyond reasonable doubt that Assad chemed his own people in a town that is known worldwide as 'ground zero' for jihadi's, filmed by a doc who was brought to trial on terror charges (lest we forget about the UK/US financed White Helmets at $100M playing pretend propaganda chit) with the bad ass retired general now in charge of all of the militaries toys and humans stating as fact, FACT, this violation of U.S. law and international law was a one time deal b/c Assad is bad, bad, bad - I looked at the evidence and was convinced beyond doubt blah, blah blah F'ing bullshit!

    Sick of it. Just sick and tired of all of it! I loathe being lied to and that SOB lied today. LIED LIED LIED.

    My rant is done.

    Links:

    1. http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/11/white-house-lays-out-evidence-that-syria-was-behind-deadly-chemical-attack/

    2. http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2017/04/intelligence-military-sources-warned-iraq-war-say-assad-not-launch-chemical-weapon-attack.html

    3. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4388780/Doctor-Syria-stood-trial-terror-offences.html

    4. Mattis presser https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgvnvvIoyEE

    Gravatomic | Apr 12, 2017 10:58:22 AM | 8
    It's staggering that western MSM is trying to play everyone again with a WMD false flag and an agenda that hasn't wavered since 2011. They want to partition these areas of northern Syria and create 'safe zones'. We all rebuked Hillary Clinton's call for 'no-fly-zones' and Americans voted Trump with a hope that things would be different. Fat Chance! The drip dripping US troops into Syria and the taking of airfields shows that they have no intention of leaving anytime soon. They want that conduit up the Euphrates. Trump, Clinton same difference.

    The big question is when the inevitable happens and it will, probably before summer, what will Russia do? Go along with the break up of the country or maintain the entirety of the country under rule from Damascus?

    JC | Apr 12, 2017 10:59:12 AM | 9
    You may want to look at T. Meyssan's assessment of the operation for an entirely different perspective:

    http://www.voltairenet.org/article195904.html

    jfl | Apr 12, 2017 11:02:34 AM | 10
    b, '"How can sanity be brought back to town?"'

    catastrophic failure of the maniacs' 'plans'. they've been at it for 15+ years and are just a mad as ever. they won't stop until they're forced to stop.

    If russia can bring syria's air defenses up to par, if, for instance, tee-rump lets the cruise missiles fly at north korea and china sinks his fleet ... then sanity may return. nothing short of a catastrophic us defeat will do it, in my estimation. my fellow americans will remain catatonic, on their couches, until something happens that they didn't expect. endless us wars - and endless us 'victories' - are their expectation. and their paychecks depend on it. when did it finally occur to the germans that it wasn't exactly the way der führer said it was.

    Outraged | Apr 12, 2017 11:03:02 AM | 11
    Jebus wept.

    It's just worthless verbage , unclassified, unattributed, unaddressed, unstructured, unprofessional, unreferenced, unformatted (re standards), etc, etc, nebulous raw text. So now some staffer in the WH does their childish version of the puerile #Fake 'Dossier', the 'Intelligence Report' on Trump, that never was ? Fucking surreal. Amateur hour at the WH, the, 'Executive' arm of government. This insanity is apparently only going to get worse. Might have to strap in for this ride and consider taking up alcohol again. FFS! :(

    Lea | Apr 12, 2017 11:12:04 AM | 13
    To quote b, "Well, maybe because, you know, that mujahedeen thing worked out so well that nearly forty years later the U.S. is mulling again to send additional troops to Afghanistan to defeat them."

    It worked just great. More military expenditure, without even talking about the poppy fields guarded by US and NATO troops in Afghanistan. The USA wouldn't want to lose such a golden business, would it? Not right when they have an amazing, fantastic heroin epidemic that lines so many pockets back at home... http://www.cbsnews.com/news/heroin-use-in-u-s-reaches-alarming-20-year-high/

    Gravatomic | Apr 12, 2017 11:14:42 AM | 14
    @JC

    The whole things reeks doesn't it? So amateurish. And those BGMs had to have gone somewhere, this is a terrible failure rate or the number launched was a lie. Either way it doesn't bode well that the 'stand off' weapons are less than 50% effective. Also, We never found out how many failed in the Gulf War because the media was locked in. This and the failure of the Trident.

    BRF | Apr 12, 2017 11:16:16 AM | 15
    The west is already allied-using al-Qaida isis so any acknowledgement would just be an official declaration, most likely with another name change for their proxy forces. This has been a active tactic since the west began using Islamic fundamentalists in the aftermath of WW II and to effect in defeating the Soviets in Afghanistan, destroying the progressive government then there because is was not in the orbit or under the control of the western fascists. The west thought they had it all in the bag with the collapse of the Soviet Union until an old cold war warrior saved the Russian culture and people from complete devastation at the hands of the western globalists....and here we are today.

    james | Apr 12, 2017 11:19:10 AM | 17
    thanks b. good break down and analysis..

    friedman and the nyt - suggesting they align with isis to take down assad was essentially what obama openly stated previously.. someone had this script written down some time ago.. nyt is just the servant to all the propaganda that is fit to print. isis is a creation of the war party, as is the divide and conquer strategy of creating a sunni/shite conflict and all the rest of the madness that continues to unfold from all of the madness...

    russia can't back down, even though it is facing a rabid mad dog here.. i am sure they know this. it's embarrassing the amount of propaganda being paid for on all this with my dupe prime minister trudeau falling in line with it all.. sad times..

    WG | Apr 12, 2017 11:33:04 AM | 20
    Only one thing will stop this. The dollar losing its status as world reserve currency.
    psychohistorian | Apr 12, 2017 11:58:41 AM | 21
    @ WG who I want to thank for writing: "Only one thing will stop this. The dollar losing its status as world reserve currency."

    Only one thing will stop this. The dollar losing its status as world reserve currency.

    Only one thing will stop this. The dollar losing its status as world reserve currency.

    Only one thing will stop this. The dollar losing its status as world reserve currency.

    Only one thing will stop this. The dollar losing its status as world reserve currency.

    This is all about the power and control that owning private finance brings. Eliminate private finance and you kill the God of Mammon and the evil social incentives that are attendant to it.

    Phodges | Apr 12, 2017 12:00:59 PM | 22
    "How can sanity be brought back to town?"

    The coming humiliating defeathe may ring a few bells. And as stated above, the failure of the dollar. The empire is based more on the dollar as global reserve than on military might.

    LXV | Apr 12, 2017 12:01:59 PM | 23
    Thanks for coming back to your senses, b, I would've missed your precious reports!

    Regarding your last Q, there are 2 solutions to the issue - either the US electorate grows a pair and throws the crooks out of public office or we all get to kill each other a-la Hobbes until blood fatigue sets in and we call a time-out for the next 60-80 years (2 generations is all the time needed for a society to forget the horrors of war and destruction )

    MadMax2 | Apr 12, 2017 12:06:21 PM | 24
    The hegemon won't recognise a multipolar world until the multipolar world talks to it in the only language it has grown to understand: Violence
    Perimetr | Apr 12, 2017 12:09:29 PM | 25
    "How can sanity be brought back to town?" Is That Armageddon Over The Horizon? http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/04/12/is-that-armageddon-over-the-horizon/

    Mina | Apr 12, 2017 12:25:22 PM | 27
    A diplomat recently was saying on a radio programme that there is no one to talk to at the State Department, because the Trump team is not even complete, with hundreds of jobs not filled!

    Today in Le Monde, Hollande gave a big interview about Syria.
    He has a general strike going on in French Guyana (no internet! only at Kourou spatial base) and a movement in the 200% overpopulated prisons (1 guard for 100 prisonners in Fleury-Merogis) but it's easier to bomb Syria.

    Posted by: Mina | Apr 12, 2017 12:41:54 PM | 28

    Today in Le Monde, Hollande gave a big interview about Syria.
    He has a general strike going on in French Guyana (no internet! only at Kourou spatial base) and a movement in the 200% overpopulated prisons (1 guard for 100 prisonners in Fleury-Merogis) but it's easier to bomb Syria.

    Posted by: Mina | Apr 12, 2017 12:41:54 PM | 28

    Former 11B | Apr 12, 2017 12:46:03 PM | 29
    "How can sanity be brought back to town?"

    Firing squads

    Perimetr | Apr 12, 2017 12:55:09 PM | 30
    I agree with Former 11B, firing squads might do the trick.

    The discussion of how to reform Washington kind of reminds me of Chapter 5 in Huckleberry Finn, when Huck's father was taken in by the new judge in town, in an attempt to reform him:

    "When he got out the new judge said he was agoing to make a man of him. So he took him to his own house, and dressed him up clean and nice, and had him to breakfast and dinner and supper with the family, and was just old pie to him, so to speak. And after supper he talked to him about temperance and such things till the old man cried, and said he'd been a fool, and fooled away his life; but now he was agoing to turn over a new leaf and be a man nobody wouldn't be ashamed of, and he hoped the judge would help him and not look down on him. The judge said he could hug him for them words; so he cried, and his wife she cried again; pap said he'd been a man that had always been misunderstood before, and the judge said he believed it. The old man said that what a man wanted that was down, was sympathy; and the judge said it was so; so they cried again. And when it was bedtime, the old man rose up and held out his hand, and says:

    "Look at it, gentlemen and ladies all; take ahold of it; shake it. There's a hand that was the hand of a hog; but it ain't so no more; it's the hand of a man that's started in on a new life, and 'll die before he'll go back. You mark them words- don't forget I said them. It's a clean hand now; shake it- don't be afeard."

    So they shook it, one after the other, all around, and cried. The judge's wife she kissed it. Then the old man he signed a pledge- made his mark. The judge said it was the holiest time on record, or something like that. Then they tucked the old man into a beautiful room, which was the spare room, and in the night sometime he got powerful thirsty and clumb out onto the porch-roof and slid down a stanchion and traded his new coat for a jug of forty-rod, and clumb back again and had a good old time; and towards daylight he crawled out again, drunk as a fiddler, and rolled off the porch and broke his left arm in two places and was most froze to death when somebody found him after sun-up. And when they come to look at that spare room, they had to take soundings before they could navigate it.

    The judge he felt kind of sore. He said he reckoned a body could reform the ole man with a shot-gun, maybe, but he didn't know no other way."

    Les | Apr 12, 2017 12:57:46 PM | 31
    It sounds like some, if not many, in the intelligence community won't stand behind it. It either came out of the White House or the Pentagon. Given the publicly available news reporting entirely sourced from the government-funded pro-opposition media entities, anyone with a search engine and a heavily slanted viewpoint could've produced the essay.

    chu teh | Apr 12, 2017 12:59:22 PM | 32
    "How can sanity be brought to town?"

    How can there be sanity without justice, also known as unfairness?

    Unfairness leads to chaos. Chaos disrupts any workable system/ordering of life.

    Sanity depends on a workable system/ordering that is known and has predictable results.

    Circe | Apr 12, 2017 1:03:01 PM | 33
    Here's what I think; my honest opinion so don't jump all over me as I've been calling it like I see it from day one.

    Trump is a fraud and an opportunist. Trump will always do what benefits him and the family dynastic ambitions first and foremost. Look at the pattern; you canot ignore or dismiss a pattern of behavior. Example, Trump will throw anyone under the bus who he imagines has become or will become a liability for his interests.

    Here's the pattern on this: After Carter Page was dismissed from the campaign; to paraphrase: I hardly knew Carter Page, Carter Page was never part of the campaign; after Manafort was dismissed; Manafort was with the campaign for a very short time; after Flynn was dismissed; Flynn made false statements to Pence and couldn't remember what he spoke about with the Russian Ambassador, just the fact that he couldn't remember is not good for someone in his position; now today we got the excuse for Bannon; I like Steve, BUT you have to remember he was not involved in my campaign until very late. I had already beaten all the senators and all the governors, and I didn't know Steve. I'm my own strategist.

    And of course, there was Christie and Lewandowski - all thrown under the bus.

    After the comment he just made regarding Bannon, which borders on an indignity considering the level of Bannon's support; I'd say Bannon's days are numbered.

    Let's face it, Jared Kushner has been the real Campaign Manager, the real Vice-President and even acting President here, wearing several hats. Jared Kushner, a Zionist, is running the Trump show and Bannon is the next head to roll and stay tuned, there will be more.

    Jared Kushner is being groomed to be the first Zionist President, no doubt about it, and he's probably influencing policy. This is a very ambitious agenda. Trump was merely the stepping stone in all this and he's a willing participant.

    Policy is morphing as was planned all along. Trump fleeced the dumb sheeple; that's all that mattered.

    Because there is yet no transparency regarding the Syria file; after the strike, some people around here were STILL apologizing for Trump endlessly on yesterdays thread when the writing on the wall couldn't be clearer at this stage.

    Endless bullshit has been coming out of this White House, and this intelligence assessment is par for the course.

    It's just a continuation of the previous administration, and in some cases, word for word.

    Look there is only one way; either the only honest politicians left in Washington that aren't Zionist bribed and co-opted start a serious third party option OR the people must storm the Washington palace and drag the traitors on both sides out of there.

    I hope Putin is reading Tillerson the riot act. There is no doubt, there is conclusive evidence, there is a criminal pattern that proves that the Empire has committed war crimes in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and assisted in their commission in Lebannon, Palestine and Yemen.

    Syria, as Tulsi Gabbard had the guts to state forthrightly, was a proxy war started by operatives from the U.S., Israel, and mercenaries supported by the latter and the KSA and Turkey. These countries are solely responsible for the massive humanitarian tragedy that has unfolded from their murderous complicity on Syria and failed attempt at regime change. The U.S. under Zionist foreign policy direction has committed a multitude of WAR CRIMES all over the Middle East and should be condemned for these crimes by people everywhere in all parts of the globe. Period. There is no more to see here. Every tragedy suffered by the people of Syria can be laid at the feet of the Zio-Anglo Empire!

    It's time for the U.N. to condemn the fabrications that brought about this monumental crime against humanity in the Middle East and haul all criminals responsible for Yinon=Clean Break=PNAC before a Nuremburg-calibre court. It's time for the Empire to pay for all its crimes!

    andoheb | Apr 12, 2017 1:03:59 PM | 34
    21

    Dollar role as key reserve currenvy depends heavily on perceptions of US military strength. If a US carrier was sunk or severely damaged while attacking someone, dollar and stock market would CRASH.

    Susan Sunflower | Apr 12, 2017 1:04:01 PM | 35
    For a better understanding of the narrative being sold by the Iraqi OG (2011) rebels, the second half of new Intercepted podcast, Murtaza Hussain lays it out more clearly than I have heard/read elsewhere. Claiming, among other things that ISIS's role/threat has been exaggerated (but not discussing the Salafi jihadists who violently wrenched control from the nationalist rebels back in ~2012-13). He suggests -- which I doubt -- that Syria might have used chemical weapons to drive a wedge between impending American/Russian coordination.

    I'm going to have to re-listen, take notes and do homework because I think the cohesion of and future political strength the non-jihadi rebels is being overstated and, as a refutation of some derided "enemy of my enemy" assumed support for Assad (because he is the USA's crosshairs), I understand some folks "buying" into this narrative (particular if, as has become common, expressing support for an Assad mediated "peace" is labeled condoning and abetting war crimes and war criminals). There's a bit of "everything you know is wrong" to the second half that's annoying.

    Dennis Kuchinch is in the first half, ably explaining his "support" for allowing an Assad mediated peace.

    No one talks -- as usual -- about the Rebels refusing to be seated at the negotiating table "as long as Assad is in power" ... which has been an "evergreen" demand even as the Rebels have lost territory and momentum.

    I have no insight into what "the Syrian people" want and with more than half the population either internally displaced or out-of-country in refugee camps, I'm doubtful "polls" can be meaningfully conducted until a meaningful ceasefire has been in place ... good luck with that.

    I'm not endorsing the contents, but I understand better how and why these people keep being given airtime/page-space that to me has seemed to be disproportionate and an effort to justify "a seat" at some future negotiating table. (i.e. "we're still players in this conflict")

    podcast page at the Intercept .

    Sorry so long. Eager for others' impressions.

    Kalen | Apr 12, 2017 1:10:47 PM | 36
    I wonder when b finally has his mental breakdown trying to use reason to explain behavior of murderous mental patients, delusional psychopaths in the US government lusting for money and fame.

    The true power of Deep State finally completely detached itself from politics, politicians and all the facade of any governance, democratic or not, concocted for show and to herding the American sheeple to their appropriate real and political slaughterhouses in calm and order of condemned convicts.

    Before, the so-called facade of governmentality (WH, Congress, SCOTUS, MEDIA) and its puppets were at least told what to do and somewhat consulted about how to lie to the sheeple about it so riots would not immediately ensue. Now it is no longer done which is turning all of this political spectacle from a simple lowbrow farce to an Ionesco Theater of Absurd.

    In fact the US so-called government is not told what actually is going on but scrambles to explaining something they are totally ignorant about, knowing no more than oblivious media and fake terrorist reality show on YT let them "know" leaving them in a role of clueless apologists for whatever Deep State is doing or they suspect or guess is doing or trying to do.

    WH, Congress, SCOTUS, MEDIA by loosing a lot of its manipulative influence on the American sheeple, now struggling for their own relevance in eyes of Deep State, showing their utter stupidity and abhorrent opportunism and political hubris thinking that their privileges were safe even if they lost the ability to effectively lie and induce people attitudes and acts.

    What we are observing are chaotic desperate rants of screaming maggots from Media to WH and Congress pleading for mercy before being fed to the birds of pray of Depp State that no longer needs them.

    dumbass | Apr 12, 2017 1:19:38 PM | 37
    Gravatomic @ 8

    >> It's staggering that western MSM
    >> is trying to play everyone again
    >> with a WMD false flag and an agenda
    >> that hasn't wavered since 2011.

    Yes.. Oh, whoa. Since "2011"? The Wolfowitz Doctrine was in the early 90's. All of Oceania's aggression in the ME should at least be seen with the early 90's as the "latest possible choice of 'starting point'", because the idea of "colonize all of it" was articulated by then.

    I'd entertain much earlier starting points, going back to before the nation's "founding".

    dumbass | Apr 12, 2017 1:22:52 PM | 38
    "How can sanity be brought back to town?"

    As "Formerly T-Bear" said in the prior thread: "There is absolutely no evidence of the assumed hegemon self correcting - ever."

    Circe | Apr 12, 2017 1:23:43 PM | 39
    I just want to add to my 32: The War Crimes of the Empire have been committed with total impunity not with any benevolent motive/end justifying the cruel, destructive and murderous means, but to spread a culture enslaved by the almighty U.S. Dollar and to expand control over the region benefitting Zionism/Zionists exclusively, because all this was done with the pretense of benefitting the American people when nothing could be further from the truth.

    kgw | Apr 12, 2017 1:28:37 PM | 40
    @34

    "...impending American/Russian coordination."

    Haha....Not a chance in Hell

    ALberto | Apr 12, 2017 1:32:18 PM | 41
    Moderate Treason aka Sedition Lite

    Robert Steele - Inside Source Says Brennan, McCain & McMaster Responsible for Syrian False Flag

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8n6VCL5D7A

    Susan Sunflower | Apr 12, 2017 1:40:59 PM | 42
    Posted by: kgw | Apr 12, 2017 1:28:37 PM | 40

    I agree ... this is one of those post-events rationales where Putin failing to disown Assad is shown as some vast expression of support ... and the objective "all along"

    While I completely understand the remnants of the original pre-Jihadi rebels (y'know the ones likely "encouraged" into some sort of Arab Spring/Color Revolution by the CIA, etc) wanting a place at the table ... "who wouldn't?" ... their inability -- for example -- to force "rebels" to share the food in besieged "rebel held territory" while apparently being the "voices from the crisis" on BBC speaks of a certain self-serving theatricality, particularly in the absence (AFAICT) of the sort of ex-pat Syrian centers, a potential locus of some new COHERENT post-Assad political power (like what the Iraqis and others achieved, even if that turned our really badly) -- but have no fear, I suspect we will see "just that" aided and funded by the usual forces ... will they be in Paris and London, per usual?

    Scotch Bingeington | Apr 12, 2017 1:43:38 PM | 43
    1) Thanks for the precious insights & analysis, especially regarding the real "who is who"

    2) It doesn't make a difference, but even so: I don't think Khan Shaykhun is actually far from the front-line. It's roughly 15 kms inland from government territory. Still, there couldn't have been any benefit for the SAA from using chemical weapons there (or anywhere else in their own country, for that matter). Maybe the guys in Khan Shaykhun were just mistaken, anticipating their losing the town to government forces any time soon, and decided to make use of the chemicals facility there (whatever shape or purpose it had) in a deranged way before having to abandon it eventually.

    3) Unfortunately I don't see the SAA making any headway on the ground, despite the fact that Russian and Syrian air forces are attacking anything that's potentially a target. Nowhere on the map, not near the border crossing to Jordan, not outside of Damascus, not around Homs and certainly not north of Hama, which is where Khan Shaykhun is situated. The only exception seems to be their fight against ISIS in the Palmyra pocket. Sure, they do have the initiative, but are they really gaining anything for the future instead of just managing to keep FSA forces down? I believe the legitimate Syrian government re-establishing control over as much of Syrian territory as possible is really the only way to bring this gang-rape victim of a country back to peace and normalcy. But they seem to lack manpower very, very much.

    ALberto | Apr 12, 2017 1:47:49 PM | 44
    @41

    Interest statement attached to video link I post @41

    Published on Apr 10, 2017

    "From Robert Steele - We do now know (I did not know this at the time the below video was recorded and I have no link for this, it comes to me from an inside source) that former CIA Director John Brennan plotted this false flag attack, which may have involved some real sarin allegedly destroyed during the Obama Administration, with Senator John McCain and National Security Advisor Herbert McMaster. Brennan got the Saudis to pay half and McCain got Israel to pay half. They blind-sided – this is clearly treason – not only the Director of the CIA, but the President, the Secretary of State, and the Secretary of Defense. In my personal view, both John McCain and Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should be impeached by their respective legislative bodies. Whether true or not I cannot certify – it is consistent with my evaluation of each of these people, and a good starting point for an international investigation. I have long felt that John Brennan should be standing before the International Court of Justice as a war criminal, not least because of the CIA's drone assassination program that I recently denounced in a book review article for Intelligence and National Security."

    xor | Apr 12, 2017 2:11:23 PM | 45
    Niece piece b. I wasn't even aware that MSM presstitutes are so open in calling for cooperation with terrorists who they used to justify the military presensence in all these countries and take away all our liberties, all in the name of fighting terrorism. With the Al Qaeda rescue workers White Helmets they at least pretend but here not even that.

    zzz | Apr 12, 2017 2:15:10 PM | 46
    "if russia can bring syria's air defenses up to par, if, for instance, tee-rump lets the cruise missiles fly at north korea and china sinks his fleet ... then sanity may return. nothing short of a catastrophic us defeat will do it, in my estimation."
    It's definitely attractive, obvious problem with this line of thought is limits of escalation can be too high. nuclear strikes back and forth kind of thing. Let it burn instad this bullshit can be attractive but egoistically because everything what is going on is not realy nessesary.

    Gravatomic | Apr 12, 2017 2:22:22 PM | 47
    @dumbass

    The agenda that is a part of was of course is there, Wolfowitz doctrine >> contain Russia and Iran, do not allow Russia to rise to status again. We can see that with Nato encircling Russia. I was pointing out that since the 'uprising' in 2011 in Damascus the US policy hasn't changed, they've just worded if differently and given the actors new names. They want a puppet in there answerable to Washington. I know the agenda is nothing new and goes back decades.

    Hoarsewhisperer | Apr 12, 2017 2:35:15 PM | 48
    Live Zio Jazeera broadcast of press conference after Tillerson/Lavrov talks....
    US/Russia couldn't be further apart. Tillerson is lying his ass off about Assad. Lavrov says Assad is irrelevant and Syrians will choose their own president. Lavrov listed Christian Colonial (NATO) crimes against numerous countries commencing with Yugoslavia and pointing out that in every case these R2P interventions produced the opposite result from the pre-intervention promises.

    I think Russia's patience with US-NATO is on the threshold of expiry.

    Mike Maloney | Apr 12, 2017 2:41:54 PM | 49
    From Robert Parry's assessment of the four-page NSC white paper, Trump Withholds Syria-Sarin Evidence :
    In the case of the April 4 chemical-weapons incident in the town of Khan Sheikhoun, which reportedly killed scores of people including young children, I was told that initially the U.S. analysts couldn't see any warplanes over the area in Idlib province at the suspected time of the poison gas attack but later they detected a drone that they thought might have delivered the bomb.

    According to a source, the analysts struggled to identify whose drone it was and where it originated. Despite some technical difficulties in tracing its flight path, analysts eventually came to believe that the flight was launched in Jordan from a Saudi-Israeli special operations base for supporting Syrian rebels , the source said, adding that the suspected reason for the poison gas was to create an incident that would reverse the Trump administration's announcement in late March that it was no longer seeking the removal of President Bashar al-Assad.

    Curtis | Apr 12, 2017 2:42:04 PM | 50
    Sanity? Not going to happen except from within from a critical mass of Americans woken up and mad about the agenda. And that's not going to happen either.
    "We assess." CIA said that about Russian hacking. And yet they did not talk to the guy who hosted the server. "Open source?" What open source? Or are we talking about White Helmets? It sounds like the CIA is backing the White House in a lying/propaganda campaign just like Tenet did with Cheney/Bush.
    "We are certain that the opposition could not have fabricated all of the videos and other reporting of chemical attacks. Doing so would have required a highly organized campaign to deceive multiple media outlets and human rights organizations while evading detection."
    Really? But you're depending on them and have been for a while. And did Doctors Without Borders and Amnesty International do a full analysis of the bombs, where they struck, etc or just check out the patients.

    james | Apr 12, 2017 2:42:31 PM | 51
    @20 wg quote "Only one thing will stop this. The dollar losing its status as world reserve currency."

    yeah, but that will be the end result and it is going to take a while to get their, unless as someone else pointed out some major event happens to shift perception of the military supremacy of the usa.. even then, it won't happen quickly.. in the meantime it will be business as usual... all the poodles and lapdogs for the continuation of this system, will continue to be poodles and lapdogs for the continuation of what we have.. wish it could happen sooner and we didn't have to go thru hell to get their, but the planet will go thru hell on the way..

    likklemore | Apr 12, 2017 2:44:31 PM | 52
    MIT Professor Postol's review:

    White House claims on Syria chemical attack 'obviously false' 12 Apr, 2017

    [.]

    "I believe it can be shown, without doubt, that the document does not provide any evidence whatsoever that the US government has concrete knowledge that the government of Syria was the source of the chemical attack in Khan Shaykhun," wrote Postol.
    A chemical attack with a nerve agent did occur, he said, but the available evidence does not support the US government's conclusions.

    [/]
    "Any competent analyst would have had questions about whether the debris in the crater was staged or real," he wrote. "No competent analyst would miss the fact that the alleged sarin canister was forcefully crushed from above, rather than exploded by a munition within it."
    Instead, "the most plausible conclusion is that the sarin was dispensed by an improvised dispersal device made from a 122mm section of rocket tube filled with sarin and capped on both sides."

    We again have a situation where the White House has issued an obviously false, misleading and amateurish intelligence report," he concluded, recalling the 2013 situation when the Obama administration claimed Assad had used chemical weapons against the rebels in Ghouta, near Damascus.
    "What the country is now being told by the White House cannot be true," Postol wrote, "and the fact that this information has been provided in this format raises the most serious questions about the handling of our national security."

    RT Link


    Curious bubbling: why US would reject the OPCW investigating the alleged attack.

    FF, yesterday listened to an interview with a clip of Gen. Mattis confirming his intelligence on the event was supported by what he read on social media.

    Honestly, searching for the clip did not dream this.
    Social media!! where is Lucy and Charlie Brown?

    There is not enough outrage

    Curtis | Apr 12, 2017 2:45:30 PM | 53
    "Russia's allegations fit with a pattern of deflecting blame from the regime and attempting to undermine the credibility of its opponents."
    That sounds very familiar.

    Jackrabbit | Apr 12, 2017 2:46:24 PM | 54
    Is Trump pushing back on neocons or joining them?

    Cold War Messaging Yields Insight into US-Russian Conflict

    dumbass | Apr 12, 2017 2:51:34 PM | 55
    Gravatomic @ 47

    Sorry for nitpicking your statement and effectively misinterpreting it.

    ALberto | Apr 12, 2017 2:56:05 PM | 56
    State Department Employee Arrested and Charged With Concealing Extensive Contacts With Foreign Agents

    A federal complaint was unsealed today charging Candace Marie Claiborne, 60, of Washington, D.C., and an employee of the U.S. Department of State, with obstructing an official proceeding and making false statements to the FBI, both felony offenses, for allegedly concealing numerous contacts that she had over a period of years with foreign intelligence agents.

    The charges were announced by Acting Assistant Attorney General Mary B. McCord for National Security, U.S. Attorney Channing D. Phillips of the District of Columbia and Assistant Director in Charge Andrew W. Vale of the FBI's Washington Field Office.

    source - https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/state-department-employee-arrested-and-charged-concealing-extensive-contacts-foreign-agents

    Mina | Apr 12, 2017 3:00:08 PM | 57
    Nato chief visiting Trump today
    Ksa blackmail certainly has to do with oil prices and threats to rise them, no?

    jayc | Apr 12, 2017 3:11:28 PM | 58
    The reliance on "open-source" pictures and video and circumstantial presumption - i.e. regime planes were in the area so they must be responsible - is very similar to MH-17. I don't know that many persons outside of those whose job depends on believing these reports, actually believes these reports.

    One claim made during the "unnamed senior official" backgrounder yesterday was that the "rebels" do not have access to sarin (which was later qualified as "rebels in that area" do not have access). That does not seem factual. Has there not been connections established between rebels and sarin, and beyond what was reported by Hersch?

    karlof1 | Apr 12, 2017 3:24:08 PM | 59
    "open source"

    I know of at least a dozen such that provide evidence-backed analysis proving the Outlaw US Empire's assertions to be 100% false, and one of the more important sites owners/contributors have been issued death threats, https://sputniknews.com/europe/201704121052568643-white-helmets-video-fabricated-noli-swedhr/ And that source-- The Indicter --used the same open sources to arrive at its verdict because it actually watched with critical eyes.

    dumbass | Apr 12, 2017 3:27:40 PM | 60
    Maybe the people in Washington act insane because -- like HAL 9000 -- they can't mentally personally reconcile conflicting overall goals, marching orders, propaganda, and whatever morsel of morality they might still possess.

    If Washington's choices are shaped at least in part on behalf of planners in Jerusalem, then perhaps Putin primarily should negotiate (with carrot and stick) directly with Bibi and skip the confused middlemen.

    It's worth trying. Indeed, well prior to Israel seemingly acquiring a "controlling stake" in American influence, America was quite genocidal and untrustworthy (like all other empires, I imagine). Negotiating more with Israel has a better chance of peaceful outcome as any. Try that and hope Israel really does -- as some Israelis have noted -- control American policy.

    Just brainstorming some ideas for a peace plan:

    - Give Israel the Golan Heights. (We know they're not going to give it up anyway.)

    - Combined US/Russian/Chinese troop presence in the region, for stability. (We know those powers or outsiders won't stop meddling until they dot the region with bases anyway. Any semblance of "independent" Syria or Kurdistan or Jordan is pure pretense.)

    - Cut the MIC in order for the US to make multi-trillion war reparation payouts -- not "loans" or earmarks for NATZO contractors -- to Syria and to any Palestinians willing to resettle out of apartheid Israel (helps Israel remain a reservation / homeland for a frequently persecuted group and also help them return to being an actual democracy) into neighboring Syria.

    - US pays war reparations to Libya, too.

    - KSA should pay huge war reparations, too, and be forced to hold elections. "Royal" family wealth should be repatriated to the new democratic state.

    If you offer Israel the Golan and to remove Palestinians by enticing the victims to resettle with huge financial incentives (instead of "persuading" them with bullets and starvation), could we finally see peace in the region?

    Alternatively, if America isn't and can't be controlled, then really there's no hope but war or surrender for Assad and, eventually, everyone.

    What would a peace plan look like, to you?

    mrr52 | Apr 12, 2017 3:33:48 PM | 61
    I believe recent events indicate the initial stages of a US invasion of eastern Syria. The US is moving troops into eastern Syria from Iraq and Jordan and increasing troop numbers in Afghanistan. Another telltale is Erdogan flipping again back to the US camp.

    Other reports may be related. Allegedly, significant amounts of military equipment were offloaded in Lebanon. Also, Israel appears to be in final stages of preparation for an incursion into Lebanon. Likely, Israel hopes to capture at least the Litani River region in Lebanon, openly claimed by Israel as Israeli water since before the Iraq invasion of 2003.

    I believe McCain and Graham control US foreign policy and probably have done so since the Trump inauguration. In this respect, the Trump presidency was dead on arrival. The current plan for Syria is the original neocon plan, the McCain and Graham plan. Israel heartily approves.

    Most likely, the contrived chemical weapon "event" in Khan Sheikhoun was ordered by McCain and Graham in order to send a message via a missile strike on Shu'ayraat Airbase.

    The message is this: the US is serious about taking control of eastern Syria, and will not be deterred by Russia or China.

    The strike was intentionally weak and avoided killing Russians in order to allow Russia an opportunity to "get on board." I no longer believe there was any other deal. If correct, Tillerson probably delivered another message today to Lavrov that effectively states: we will not stop; you can work with us, you get out of the way, or you can get run over. Most likely, Trump delivered the same message to Xi while in Florida. The timing was not coincidental.

    Reports of Chinese troops operating in the border region of Afghanistan as of several weeks ago have been posted. The additional US troops requested now for Afghanistan may be intended to discourage any further Chinese advance.

    All of this is quintessential McCain and Graham. Essentially, McCain and Graham are betting the farm that Russia (and China) will accede to US demands for Syria. As of March 28, 2017, political analyst A. Korybko seems to concur:

    "It's very rare for any war nowadays (key word) to be concluded without some degree of compromises, concessions, and trade-offs taking place between all sides, and in a very complicated and quagmire-prone situation where Russia has wisely opted to seek a political – and not military – solution to the conflict (just as all sides have officially done, at least), it's clear that Moscow lacks the will to commit itself to advancing Damascus' preferred outcome of retaining the country's unity."

    ( http://21stcenturywire.com/2017/03/28/syria-approaching-the-finishing-line-geopolitical-jockeying-for-position-intensifies/)

    The US has no intention of reversing course. Therefore, Russia's reply to Tillerson will determine whether the strike on Shu'ayraat marks the beginning of WWIII or the dismemberment of Syria.

    Anon1 | Apr 12, 2017 3:39:01 PM | 62
    More evidence what a neocon lover Trump is:

    Trump Meets NATO Head, Confirm Commitment to Alliance
    read more: http://www.haaretz.com/us-news/1.783133

    karlof1 | Apr 12, 2017 3:56:56 PM | 63
    Results of the Tillerson-Lavrov-Putin talkfest are emerging, https://sputniknews.com/europe/201704121052568643-white-helmets-video-fabricated-noli-swedhr/

    Tillerson says: "We both believe in a stable and unified Syria," which presumably means no partitioning. But as jas commented, Tillerson's just repeating talking points while Lavrov is trying to deal with real issues. I didn't read much that would persuade me to be reassured, particularly sine the Assad must go cannard is still point #1: "We [US and Vassals]think its important that Assad's departure is done in an orderly way ... the final outcome in our view does not provide a role for Assad or the Assad family. We will not accept that, we don't believe the world will accept that," except that the world already does accept Assad as Syria's legitimate leader.

    Here's the link to TASS's recap. Both sites provide video, http://tass.com/world/941043

    ruralito | Apr 12, 2017 3:58:13 PM | 64
    @61, page not found.

    Russia just vetoed a resolution that called for military action if Syria didnt follow the resolution. Backed by the US and its pathetic lackeys.

    Posted by: Anon1 | Apr 12, 2017 3:59:18 PM | 65

    Russia just vetoed a resolution that called for military action if Syria didnt follow the resolution. Backed by the US and its pathetic lackeys.

    Posted by: Anon1 | Apr 12, 2017 3:59:18 PM | 65

    dh | Apr 12, 2017 4:03:00 PM | 66
    @64 Did you try without the brackets?

    Circe | Apr 12, 2017 4:11:10 PM | 67
    @65

    ...and China abstained . WTF??? China should have voted a firm NO. China wants Iran's oil and gas and in return gutless support.

    RUKidding | Apr 12, 2017 4:13:19 PM | 68
    @mrr52

    I believe McCain and Graham control US foreign policy and probably have done so since the Trump inauguration. In this respect, the Trump presidency was dead on arrival. The current plan for Syria is the original neocon plan, the McCain and Graham plan. Israel heartily approves.

    I agree that it at least seems like McCain & Graham control US foreign policy and possibly have done so since Trump was inaugurated. They certainly had a hand in US foreign policy during ObamaCo - at least they really tried hard to have power, sway & influence and probably did.

    Never forget when McCain ran for POTUS in 2008 he sang about "Bomb bomb bombing Iran." A word to the wise... no doubt that old demented fool has that back on his radar. McCain's never forgiven or forgotten that he lost to "that one," the darkie, and has had revenge fantasies ever since.

    Merasmus | Apr 12, 2017 4:13:55 PM | 69
    b, I just want to note again that the video you link supposedly showing White Helmets wandering freely in ISIS controlled territory was taken in East Aleppo. ISIS never had much presence there. It seems more likely that it's just further evidence of them working with/being Al-Qaeda, and the person who runs that YouTube channel doesn't understand, or can't be bothered with, the difference between AQ and ISIS.

    Circe | Apr 12, 2017 4:15:11 PM | 70
    Even Bolivia had the guts to vote AGAINST. Hey XI grow a fucking spine!!!

    karlof1 | Apr 12, 2017 4:15:48 PM | 71
    dumbass @60--

    "What would a peace plan look like, to you?"

    A proper peace plan would provide justice for regional events since 1945, which would entail the defanging of the Zionist Entity and establishemnt of a single state: Palestine. Something would need to be done about Saudi/GCC/Turkish terrorist sponsoring as well as Outlaw US Empire/NATO for same. Personally, I'd prefer the establishment of a multiethnic state comprising the territories of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, and Kurdish zones, with Turkey ceding most of its Kurdish lands as punishment for its support of terrorism. Essentially, taking Yinon and turning it inside-out.

    virgile | Apr 12, 2017 4:20:33 PM | 72
    When it comes to recognize their mistakes that cost human lives, the American presidents are deaf and dumb.
    There is no other reply to persistent bullying than violence. When it reaches the USA, no one should be surprised.

    hopehely | Apr 12, 2017 4:20:47 PM | 73
    Posted by: Circe | Apr 12, 2017 4:15:11 PM | 70
    Hey XI grow a fucking spine!!!

    That chocolate cake was really yummy I guess.

    dh | Apr 12, 2017 4:22:28 PM | 74
    Russia vetos UN resolution clearly designed to use force.

    ""The result of the vote is as follows: ten votes in favor, two votes against, three abstentions. The draft resolution has not been adopted owing to the negative vote of a permanent member of Council," US Ambassador and current Security Council President Nikki Haley stated."

    https://www.rt.com/news/384534-un-resulution-syria-chemical/

    virgile | Apr 12, 2017 4:24:54 PM | 75
    Is Trump Enlisting in the War Party?
    Pat Buchanan
    Are we certain Assad personally ordered a gas attack on civilians?

    For it makes no sense. Why would Assad, who is winning the war and had been told America was no longer demanding his removal, order a nerve gas attack on children, certain to ignite America's rage, for no military gain?

    Like the gas attack in 2013, this has the marks of a false flag operation to stampede America into Syria's civil war.

    Anon1 | Apr 12, 2017 4:28:13 PM | 76
    Circe

    Re: China abstained.

    Indeed, thats what I have been saying too here past week, China is naive, they will sell out North Korea too, I didnt expect this but it seems China got great trade deals by Trump and now becoming a puppet to the neocon agenda on Syria, North Korea and sooner or later China itself.

    aaaa | Apr 12, 2017 4:31:36 PM | 77
    My goodness, the gesturing style of Stoltenberg makes him look very skeezy

    aaaa | Apr 12, 2017 5:09:38 PM | 78
    the attack on Syria was to warn Assad not to reach Idlib. Because in Idlib there are many westerners, western paid proffesional killers.

    so trump wants to give time to the western paid killers to escape from Syria and not to change sides, because this will be a desaster for the picture the USa has painted untill now.

    harrylaw | Apr 12, 2017 5:24:20 PM | 79
    Russia was correct to use its veto at the UNSC. The purpose of the Resolution was to use chapter 7 in the event of the Resolution not being implemented the way the US wanted. Remember the way Resolution 1441 was used against Iraq, which only said Iraq would face 'consequences' if it did not disarm, similarly a Resolution not vetoed by Russia and China for a limited no fly zone over Libya was used for regime change by the West, to the fury of Russia and China [they were conned].The West are not going to give up its regime change machinations, anyone including Lavrov who think they can do a deal with the US are delusional. Russia, Iran and Hezbollah need to prosecute the war to its conclusion on their own, and expect the US to interfere at every turn. An earlier poster said the army did not have the manpower, if that's the case Iran has a huge army and reserves, surely they could make up any shortfall, even if only taking up defensive duties, thereby relieving the Syrian army to concentrate on more offensive duties elswhere.

    [Apr 12, 2017] Those interested in how the MSM fell in love with terrorists in Syria should go back and check out Charlie Skeltons illuminating piece from The Guardian 2012

    Notable quotes:
    "... In late 2015, Eren Erdem, a Turkish MP, said in Parliament that the Turkish state was permitting Da'esh to send sarin precursors to Syria. He had a file of evidence, so was accused of treason for accessing and publicizing confidential material. The investigation into the people responsible for the transfer of toxic chemicals was shut down. ..."
    "... Al-Assad is certainly capable of murdering opponents, and not bothering too much about collateral damage, but strategically it makes no sense for him to do this now, when peace talks under the aegis of Russia and Iran have begun, and the world is watching. Also, Assad has been engaged in a reconciliation process, allowing members of the FSA to return to the Syrian army, and Aleppans remain in Damascus if they didn't wish to go to Idlib. At such a juncture, using chemical weapons would be counter-productive. If Sarin was used at his command, he should be properly prosecuted: but bombing a Syrian air base merely assists Da'esh and its cronies. ..."
    "... I have just watched the press conference in which Trump labelled Assad a butcher, and went on again about dead babies. I just wish that someone at one of these conferences would have the guts to point out to Trump his own butchery. ..."
    "... Anyone watching this performance would think that US forces had never been responsible for killing innocent civilians, men, women, children and babies. To listen to Trump, you wouldn't think that US forces had ever killed over 150 civilians in Mosul, dozens in Raqqa, or had bombed hospitals in Afghanistan, or schools in Iraq, or were supporting the Saudi blockade of Yemen resulting in the starvation of children and babies, or had destroyed wedding parties with drones,.....I could go on. ..."
    "... If Assad is a butcher, he is only a junior, apprentice, corner-shop butcher. Trump is the real thing, the large-scale, wholesale, expert butcher. ..."
    "... Gotta get that pipeline in for the Saudi's, eh, no matter how many children's carcasses it crosses, yay, regime change again, yay, and a heap of new terrorists for our kids in the west to dodge and duck, yay. ..."
    "... Despite the several misrepresentations, the facts are that Britain has been one of the main protagonists in prosecuting this war against Syria , which is a proxy war against Iran. ..."
    "... Britain was at the forefront in setting up the Al Nusra Front and in hosting the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights to disseminate deeply negative propaganda about the Syrian Government and armed forces. ..."
    "... Every step of this including the media campaign which has comprised a major part of the military campaign against Syria, has been an attempt to delegitimize the Sovereign government and its institutions and to gain consensus from the somnambulistic British and US public for yet another direct military campaign against another Middle Eastern country. ..."
    Apr 12, 2017 | www.theguardian.com
    ID4352889 , 12 Apr 2017 17:57
    Those interested in how the MSM fell in love with terrorists in Syria should go back and check out Charlie Skelton's illuminating piece from The Guardian 2012 .
    Ciarán Here , 12 Apr 2017 17:48
    The Gulf of Tonkin, WMD in Iraq...
    Ciarán Here , 12 Apr 2017 17:46
    Did the USA bomb war planes that they said had been used to carry chemical weapons - a chemical attack!
    Robert Rudolph , 12 Apr 2017 17:40
    Instead, the western powers have followed the example cited by Machiavelli: "in order to prove their liberality, they allowed Pistoia to be destroyed."

    ... ... ..

    1Cedar , 12 Apr 2017 17:39
    In late 2015, Eren Erdem, a Turkish MP, said in Parliament that the Turkish state was permitting Da'esh to send sarin precursors to Syria. He had a file of evidence, so was accused of treason for accessing and publicizing confidential material. The investigation into the people responsible for the transfer of toxic chemicals was shut down.

    That surely ought to make us at least ask evidence-seeking questions about the Idlib gas attack before yet again demanding regime change.

    Al-Assad is certainly capable of murdering opponents, and not bothering too much about collateral damage, but strategically it makes no sense for him to do this now, when peace talks under the aegis of Russia and Iran have begun, and the world is watching. Also, Assad has been engaged in a reconciliation process, allowing members of the FSA to return to the Syrian army, and Aleppans remain in Damascus if they didn't wish to go to Idlib. At such a juncture, using chemical weapons would be counter-productive. If Sarin was used at his command, he should be properly prosecuted: but bombing a Syrian air base merely assists Da'esh and its cronies.

    unsouthbank , 12 Apr 2017 17:32
    I have just watched the press conference in which Trump labelled Assad a butcher, and went on again about dead babies. I just wish that someone at one of these conferences would have the guts to point out to Trump his own butchery.

    Anyone watching this performance would think that US forces had never been responsible for killing innocent civilians, men, women, children and babies. To listen to Trump, you wouldn't think that US forces had ever killed over 150 civilians in Mosul, dozens in Raqqa, or had bombed hospitals in Afghanistan, or schools in Iraq, or were supporting the Saudi blockade of Yemen resulting in the starvation of children and babies, or had destroyed wedding parties with drones,.....I could go on.

    If Assad is a butcher, he is only a junior, apprentice, corner-shop butcher. Trump is the real thing, the large-scale, wholesale, expert butcher.

    Ruthie Riegler , 12 Apr 2017 17:21
    ...Indeed, Richard Spencer last week protested outside the White House against the airstrikes on the regime airbase carrying a sign that read "No more wars 4 Israel."
    NezPerce macmarco , 12 Apr 2017 17:37

    There are two possible regimes, the Assad fascists, or the rebel jihadist

    The Syrian government is Baathist, it was elected.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Socialist_Ba%27ath_Party_–_Syria_Region

    http://www.france24.com/en/20160417-syria-bashar-assad-baath-party-wins-majority-parliamentary-vote

    Latest update : 2016-04-17
    Syria's ruling Baath party and its allies won a majority of seats in parliamentary elections last week across government-held parts of the country, the national electoral commission announced late Saturday.

    Who are the rebels supported by Washington and Westminster?

    http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/aleppo-falls-to-syrian-regime-bashar-al-assad-rebels-uk-government-more-than-one-story-robert-fisk-a7471576.html

    And we're going to learn a lot more about the "rebels" whom we in the West – the US, Britain and our head-chopping mates in the Gulf – have been supporting.

    They did, after all, include al-Qaeda (alias Jabhat al-Nusra, alias Jabhat Fateh al-Sham), the "folk" – as George W Bush called them – who committed the crimes against humanity in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania on 11 September 2001. Remember the War on Terror? Remember the "pure evil" of al-Qaeda. Remember all the warnings from our beloved security services in the UK about how al-Qaeda can still strike terror in London?

    jimbo2000M , 12 Apr 2017 16:55
    Gotta get that pipeline in for the Saudi's, eh, no matter how many children's carcasses it crosses, yay, regime change again, yay, and a heap of new terrorists for our kids in the west to dodge and duck, yay.
    unsouthbank , 12 Apr 2017 16:40
    I agree that Bashar al-Assad is not a "good person". It is impossible to be an authoritarian leader, struggling to maintain the unity, or even existence, of a nation state, and at the same time be a kind and gentle person. However, I do not believe him to be the psychopathic monster that he is portrayed as being, either. He is almost certainly not personally responsible for the chemical attack in Idlib province.

    Presidents do not normally make detailed decisions on what sort of weapons should be used on every airstrike made by their aircraft. He may be a dictator, but he is not a complete imbecile. Even the dimmest of politicians could have foreseen that this chemical attack would end up being a massive own-goal. Nobody as cynically calculating as Assad is supposed to be, would be that stupid. My own hunch, (and that is all it is) is that sarin was used due to a blunder by a low or medium ranking Syrian airforce officer.

    Yes, of course Assad bears responsibility for overall strategy in this vicious war of survival, and as such, has blood on his hands. But, so does Trump, so does Obama, so does Putin so does Erdogan, so does May, and so do all the leaders who have supplied the numerous rebel groups with billions of pounds worth of weapons, and have therefore kept the pot boiling.

    Last year, Theresa May stood up in parliament and proudly proclaimed her willingness to commit mass indiscriminate murder on a scale that would make Syria look like a pinprick. She declared her willingness to press the nuclear button and therefore slaughter hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of completely innocent men, women, children and babies. She not only has blood on her hands, she is proud of it. Perhaps we should remember that, when she comes out with one of her sanctimonious, nauseatingly hypocritical statements about Syria.

    martinusher , 12 Apr 2017 16:35
    Assad was democratically elected more than once so he must be doing something right. (OK, so they're democracy might not be our democracy but 'our' democracy has brought us Trump, Brexit and the like so its really six to one, a half dozen to the other). Syria until we started messing with it -- creating, supporting and even arming opposition groups -- was stable, wasn't messing with its neighbors and had significant religious and cultural freedoms compared to other countries in the area. (Our actions might suggest that we really don't want stable, peaceful, countries in that region, we need them to be weak and riven by internal factions.)

    Anyway, given our outstanding track record of success with regime change in that part of the world we should probably adopt a hands-off approach -- all we seem to do is make an unsatisfactory situation dire. Hardly the way to win friends and influence people.

    KhalijFars , 12 Apr 2017 16:07
    Despite the several misrepresentations, the facts are that Britain has been one of the main protagonists in prosecuting this war against Syria , which is a proxy war against Iran.

    Britain was at the forefront in setting up the Al Nusra Front and in hosting the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights to disseminate deeply negative propaganda about the Syrian Government and armed forces.

    Every step of this including the media campaign which has comprised a major part of the military campaign against Syria, has been an attempt to delegitimize the Sovereign government and its institutions and to gain consensus from the somnambulistic British and US public for yet another direct military campaign against another Middle Eastern country.

    The whole which has visited terrible and incalculable suffering, on the Syrian people. Syria was a paradise before the British and US did their usual work. The journalists, government and security services in Britain who have wrought this mess , I'm sure will not escape the consequences of their actions. One hopes they experience a 1000 times of the hell they have visited on Syria. These actions are truly despicable acts of cowardice and absolute wickedness.

    TomasStedron KhalijFars , 12 Apr 2017 16:27
    Syria was a paradise for those who rule Syria........ the Assad regime brutally repressed any opposition to their rule. In 1982 Assad´s father killed probably more than 30,000 in the siege of Hama. As well as sheltering a number of terrorist organisations who have their headquarters in Damascus....... he also armed and supported the fledgling Al-Quaeda resistance to the coalition in Iraq, giving them asylum in Syria........now the IS ....... I can think of Paradise in different ways......
    MacMeow KhalijFars , 12 Apr 2017 17:30

    Britain has been one of the main protagonists in prosecuting this war against Syria

    Link please. Because without evidence the rest of your post collapses.

    KhalijFars MacMeow , 12 Apr 2017 17:50
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jun/01/trial-swedish-man-accused-terrorism-offences-collapse-bherlin-gildo

    The prosecution of a Swedish national accused of terrorist activities in Syria has collapsed at the Old Bailey after it became clear Britain's security and intelligence agencies would have been deeply embarrassed had a trial gone ahead, the Guardian can reveal.

    His lawyers argued that British intelligence agencies were supporting the same Syrian opposition groups as he was, and were party to a secret operation providing weapons and non-lethal help to the groups, including the Free Syrian Army.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2013/aug/30/syria-chemical-attack-war-intervention-oil-gas-energy-pipelines


    Leaked emails from the private intelligence firm Stratfor including notes from a meeting with Pentagon officials confirmed US-UK training of Syrian opposition forces since 2011 aimed at eliciting "collapse" of Assad's regime "from within."

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-23/secret-pentagon-report-reveals-us-created-isis-tool-overthrow-syrias-president-assad

    http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/03/05/the-redirection

    Jermaine Charles , 12 Apr 2017 16:02
    More guff from the guardian/ Mr Williams, with just a little realistic sense, but who can replace Assad and in Syria he remains very popular, despite the western media like lies!
    johnbonn , 12 Apr 2017 16:00
    Russia has to move quickly to secure a 100 year lease for the Latakia port and airbase. Otherwise the US will soon attempt to render it useless as well, regardless of which of the moderate rebel factions it decides to install.

    ... Spirits die hard, and those of the Arab spring and the Orange Revolution are still alive in the halls of the Pentagon.

    .... A controlled cold war however, is the only way to a avoid a larger mess than what the West has already inflicted on the innocent Syrian people by using the most abortive war design that has ever been conceived by the war college or any other war commander.

    ...... At the current rate there will be more Syrians in Germany than those remaining in Syria.

    ......... Is it hard to wonder why Syrians might hold a grudge against the, US?

    BlueCollar , 12 Apr 2017 15:59
    Regime change ? All in the name of democracy as we see it.Why not try it in the Kingdom of family owned country KSA or why not another family owned enterprises called UAE.
    stratplaya , 12 Apr 2017 15:58
    History tells us replacing Assad would be a bad idea. We should have learned the lesson with Hussain and Iraq, but didn't. We would go on to replace Gaddafi of Libya and boom, it trigged ISIS.

    The hard lesson here is that for some reason Muslim majority countries have a strong central authoritarian leader. No matter if that leaders is called president, king, prime minister, or whatever. When that strong leaders is deposed, chaos ensues.

    Pier16 , 12 Apr 2017 15:58
    The Americans have a fetish with regime change. Up until recently they were discrete about it and did it in secret, now they are all in the open. People who are against regime change are considered anti-Americans and tools of the Soviets...ahm.... Russia. The amazing thing is Tillerson said Assad's faith should be left with the Syrian people, the American establishment in unison said how could he says such a terrible thing, "we should decide what Syrian people want."

    These are the same people who elected Trump, maybe they should let Syrian people select the US president. The result may end up better.

    freeandfair , 12 Apr 2017 15:53
    > Bashar al-Assad is not a good person. He has reduced once great Syrian cities such as Homs and Aleppo to rubble. All six of Syria's Unesco world heritage sites have been damaged. Worse still, more than 500,000 Syrian civilians have been killed in the civil war, 6.1 million have been internally displaced and another 4.8 million are seeking refuge abroad.

    Yes, Assad is not a good person. But what about American politicians such as Hillary Clinton, who armed "moderate rebels" and supported the opposition in pursuit of regime change? And Syria is not the only country were this happened. Will there ever any responsibility taken for their actions by the US and NATO?

    First, they make a manageable problem into a huge problem, then just hightail back home, living local people to pick up the pieces.

    Those half millions of deaths - are they all responsibility of Assad or do the sponsors of jihadists and jihadists themselves have some responsibility as well?

    GlozzerBoy1 , 12 Apr 2017 15:40
    Absolutely, stay the hell out, we should have no footprint in that awful part of the world.
    Tom1982 , 12 Apr 2017 15:35
    The choice as I see it is this:

    A. A horrible authoritarian regime that tortures and murders it's opponents...........but women can wear what they like in public, get a good education courtesy of the State, and embark on a career.

    B. A horrible authoritarian regime that tortures and murders it's opponents...........where women are denied education, made virtual prisoners in their own homes, and have acid flung in their faces for having the temerity to appear unveiled when they do go out in public.

    It's not a great choice, but one is definitely better than the other.

    Weefox Tom1982 , 12 Apr 2017 15:43
    Also worth remembering that under Assad people are allowed religious freedom. I know two Syrian Christians who are terrified of what will happen if the rebels take control of their country.
    Tom1982 Weefox , 12 Apr 2017 15:46
    I'd imagine the Shia feel the same.
    freeandfair Tom1982 , 12 Apr 2017 16:06
    Choice B also includes Sharia law, full extermination of other faiths and death sentence for rejection of Islam. Basically Choice B is another Saudi Arabia, but a lot of people will have to die first.
    oddballs , 12 Apr 2017 15:35
    Assad would stand a good chance of winning a fair and honest election,
    Still waiting for evidence by forensic experts over the chemical weapons , who did what and where.
    Until proof is given hat prove otherwise the rebels are the most likly suspects. --> normankirk , 12 Apr 2017 15:35
    SHA2014 , 12 Apr 2017 14:24
    The world's biggest superpower is willing to risk a nuclear war with mass destruction of billions and possible extinction of life on earth on an unproven assertion made by Al Qaeda sympathisers that the Syrian government bombed them with sarin? OBL must be laughing in his grave.
    aleph SHA2014 , 12 Apr 2017 14:45
    1. Who is threatening a nuclear war? The Russians? I haven't heard them threaten that. Probably because no-one would seriously believe them.

    2. An intellectually honest person should not describe young children as terrorist sympathisers. Let alone imply they somehow deserve to be deliberately targeted by nerve gas as a result.

    Fort Sumpter aleph , 12 Apr 2017 14:54
    If you have the evidence of a nerve gas agent being present please supply it forthwith.

    I keep asking you guys, who must be on the ground in Idlib such is your certainty, to provide the proof but you always refuse. Why is that?

    SHA2014 aleph , 12 Apr 2017 14:56
    An intellectually honest person should question the veracity of a report that is unverified by a terrorist organisation. The children were never described by me as 'terrorist sympathisers' so you make a dishonest accusation, the terrorist sympathisers are those who produced the report on which the whole story is based. It is not about the death of the children which is of course a crime, but they are being used by the terrorists for thier purposes.
    An intellectually honest person would also show outrage about the mass murder of civilians, including children in Mosul and by a US bombing in Syria that seem to not arouse the same outrage.
    SHA2014 , 12 Apr 2017 14:13
    Regime change by US has been used at least three times against democracies, in Chili, in Iran and in Ukraine. Attempted regime change has also been used often in South America to oust populist rulers because of US interests. Although the above analysis raises the very good point that change has to come from the bottom up, it starts with the same fallacies of assuming that all of the death and destruction in Syria comes from one person which is an extremely flawed point to start from. The point that is to be made is that there is no military solution to the conflict except in an anti terrorist capacity. The problem is that all of those against the Syrian government in the current conflict are either outright terrorists or those who collaborate heavily with terrorists making it difficult to have a conventional peace process.
    Imperialist , 12 Apr 2017 14:07
    America should not be the one who decides who is an acceptable government, and sends soldiers to enforce its will.

    The UN should have done that long ago. To Assad. To Kim. Stopped the Khmer Rouge. Or Rwanda.

    Yet the only time they ever have actually fought is in the Korean War.

    Fort Sumpter Imperialist , 12 Apr 2017 14:55
    *cough* The US supported the Khmer Rouge *cough*
    Mauryan , 12 Apr 2017 13:55
    America engaged in regime changes to suit American interests during the cold war and the New world order drive. The fact that they supported dictatorships worldwide and helped them overthrow democratically elected governments tells clearly that imposing democracy forcibly was not their intention. Intervention in global conflicts is mainly for controlling pathways for resources and gaining ground for business opportunities for their multinational giant corporations.
    diddoit Mauryan , 12 Apr 2017 13:58
    It's all about what's best for the US and the incredibly powerful(in the US) Israel lobby. The UK just goes along with it.
    NezPerce , 12 Apr 2017 13:52
    The West's narrative has fallen apart, nobody believes that the Syrian rebels are peace loving democrats. We have ample evidence that they are infinitely worse than Assad.

    We also have plenty of evidence that the Western deep state, not the public, wants another regime change in the middle east and will stop at nothing to achieve its end including false flag gas attacks. This article goes into detail.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-08/false-flag-how-us-armed-syrian-rebels-set-excuse-attack-assad

    False Flag: How the U.S. Armed Syrian Rebels to Set Up an Excuse to Attack Assad

    Evidence suggests a false flag chemical weapons attack on the Syrian people was initiated by Syrian rebels with the help of the United States in order to justify Thursday night's U.S. Military attack on a Syrian base.

    The Left is very opposed to war in Syria, the Libertarian right is very opposed to war in Syria but a hugely powerful Deep State will stop at nothing to achieve its ends.

    Nat-Nat aka Kyl Shinra , 12 Apr 2017 13:50
    "Worse still, more than 500,000 Syrian civilians have been killed in the civil war, 6.1 million have been internally displaced and another 4.8 million are seeking refuge abroad. "

    well, you cannot put the blame on Assad only. He never asked for that war for a start and a lot of the refugees you're talking about may very well be pro-Assad.

    This said, I agree, leave Assad and Syria alone.

    Jayesh Iyer , 12 Apr 2017 13:48
    Finally an article which still sticks to logical thinking when it comes to Syria. Assad is a terrible leader but atleast with him, most of the factions within the country can be sorted. The West's obsession with stuffing democracy down the throats of every oil producing country in the Middle East has resulted in the Mad Max wasteland i.e. Libya and the unsolvable puzzle i.e. Iraq. Both Gaddafi and Saddam were terrible human beings but removing them left a vacuum which has cost the lives of thousands and displaced millions. The West must make its peace with Assad for now, stop supporting the rebels and try to find common ground with Russia against the real enemy - ISIS.
    diddoit Jayesh Iyer , 12 Apr 2017 13:55
    The west - as the US/UK like to themselves, couldn't give a damn about democracy . They want compliance , not democracy. A good(brutal) dictator is better than a 'difficult' democratically elected leader , look at events in Egypt for example.

    Our own democracies are pretty ropey, certainly not up there with the Scandinavian best practice.

    dusktildawn Jayesh Iyer , 12 Apr 2017 13:55
    You're kidding right? The West stuffing democracy down the throats of the Gulf countries. More like defending them against the threat of democracy by arming them to the teeth and stationing troops there. Have you heard of Bahrain?
    diddoit Jayesh Iyer , 12 Apr 2017 13:55
    call themselves. -typo
    dusktildawn , 12 Apr 2017 13:47
    The only plausible solution to this conflict is partition assuming of course the imminent defeat of Isis.

    While getting rid of Assad would create a dangerous power vacuum and is in any case perhaps impossible given Russias backing, the sheer scale of the killing he's done and destruction he's unleashed on his own people - of a totally different scale to Saddam Hussein and even his father, from whom he seems to have inherited his psychopathic tendencies -renders the idea that he could continue to rule a "united" Syria or even the majority of it, laughable.

    Mauryan dusktildawn , 12 Apr 2017 13:52
    Partition would create more Assads.
    Jemima15 , 12 Apr 2017 13:46
    If you get rid of Assad, whoever replaces him is going to have a very difficult task. How on Earth do you enforce any sort of civilized law and order in a country which has some of the worst terrorist organizations the world has ever known. With organizations like ISIS around, a government is gong to need to take a firm hand somewhere. It's not as if you can send Jihadists on community service and expect them to come back as reformed characters.
    DanielDee , 12 Apr 2017 13:46
    Regime change? Why not?
    Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi would make a fine statesman!
    Pipcosta DanielDee , 12 Apr 2017 14:03
    Until he turns on his mater
    IamDolf , 12 Apr 2017 13:45
    Fact is that Assad still enjoys considerable support among Syrians. In particular among those who have no problem with a woman going to the beach in a bikini and driving a car to work. He is not giong anywhere soon. And if he did, the situation would be worse. As in the case of the butcher Saddam Hussein and the crazy dictator Khadaffi, who also were supposedly removed in an attempt to bring "freedom and democracy to the people."
    diddoit IamDolf , 12 Apr 2017 13:49
    Syria was one of the few countries in the ME where you could drink alcohol. Does anyone believe whoever follows Assad be it someone picked by the US/Israel/KSA/Qatar will be quite so tolerant?
    Patin , 12 Apr 2017 13:43
    Why can't world leaders be held to account for their crimes against humanity? Is it not about time that they are compelled to comply with international law and for the United Nations Assembly to make them so by enforceable resolutions passed by a majority vote?

    Assad is a tyrant who should be removed from office and held accountable for his crimes against humanity. Syrians should be entitled to a government that is respectful of their human rights.

    The UN should take responsibility for enforcing a permanent ceasefire and brokering talks to secure Syria's future. It should require as a condition of UN membership compliance with and adherence to international law protecting human rights. Non compliance should be met with expulsion and the economic isolation of the country concerned from the rest of the world.

    freeandfair Patin , 12 Apr 2017 16:19
    > Why can't world leaders be held to account for their crimes against humanity?

    You should start with American leaders like Bush. If you are serious about this.

    roachclip , 12 Apr 2017 13:42

    There is no shortcut to lasting peace. As uncomfortable as it is, the best that western governments can do is provide aid and assistance to those in distress, while pressuring those countries that continue to feed money and weapons to the combatants to change their positions.

    You are absolutely right.

    Such a pity then that the western governments in question, the UK, America and to a lesser extent, France, are in fact the same entities, via their surrogate power in the middle east, Saudi Arabia, who are the ones providing the weapons and money.

    Just as they did in Iraq and Libya, and always for the same reason, to achieve regime change against the Middle Eastern leaders who were threatening their control of the oil market.

    This situation is nothing new, these Western Powers have been attacking various parts of the Middle East for nigh on a century. Winston Churchill was responsible for bombing Iraq in the 1920's. That also was to achieve regime change.

    All of the deaths and the destruction in the Middle East can ultimately be laid at the door of the 'Western Powers' and their willingness to do anything to protect their oil interests.

    Taku2 , 12 Apr 2017 13:35
    One of the most despicable thing about the West's attempts to bribe, entice and force Russia into abandoning the Syrian Government, so that America, France, Britain and Saudi Arabia can rush in, like hyenas to finish off a wounded animal, is how patronising they have been towards the Russians and Iranians. Granted that their racism towards the Russians might not be what it is towards the Syrian state, which they want to deny a voice and disrespect to the extent of talking to the Russians, and ignoring the Syrian government.

    Yes, the West is behaving towards the Syrian state as if it is just something for it to manipulate, as it does with the global economy. Not having made any progress in manipulating the Syrian proxy conflict into the outcomes it wants, the West has now resorted to making merciless and unjustified attacks on Russian and the Iranians. Despite the fact that it is Russia and the Syrian government forces and their Hezbollah allies who have broken the impasse in this terrible war.
    It is scurrilous that there should now be this coordinated media and political campaign to make Russia out to be 'the bad guy', the 'devil', as it were.

    As for 'the liberals', well, guess what, if you want to do something constructive. Then stop blaming Russia and demonising the Russians, the Syrian Government and their allies. Look closer to home, to America, To Britain, to France and Saudi Arabia. There you will find more demons disguised as 'humanitarians' and 'angels' than probably in all of Russia and Syria.
    The guys in the West who are posturing as angels are no less culpable than the Syrian government.
    Of course the West should not destroy the Syrian state and government. But, since when has logic prevented this cartel from exercising its destructive force? As Libya, Iraq and Yemen have proven? The liberals need to grow up and stop being allied to the right.

    Arapas Taku2 , 12 Apr 2017 13:42

    so that America, France, Britain and Saudi Arabia can rush in, like hyenas to finish off a wounded animal

    Your point is of great importance.
    Now that Russia has done the dirty work at great cost, pushing them out of the way.........................
    That will not happen, Rex was told by Sergei.

    Arapas , 12 Apr 2017 13:34
    robust belief in a supposed American ability to fix what is wrong.

    Is meant to be the joke of the month.
    What did they ever fix ? Just look what the Korean war has lead to.
    Vietnam, where the Americans were defeated, is now a united and peaceful country.
    On the other hand, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and other regime change candidates have been reduced to failed states.

    In Syria, the fate of the Alwites will be the same of that of women and children cowering in St Sophia in 1453.
    Utter slaughter!

    ganaruvian , 12 Apr 2017 13:32
    Firstly, we have yet to see the results of any impartial investigation checking out the Syrian/Russian version of events about the gas in Idlib province, which could be true. Nobody that I can see is 'supporting' the use of gas against civilians, but it is known that the bigger terrorist organisations such as ISIS and al Qaeda do have stocks of poison gas. Secondly,so many uninformed commentators have not understood that Syria's 6 year war has been and remains a religious war! Asad's Shiite/ Alawite/Christian/ Druse/ Ismaili communities and other minorities supported by Iran and Lebanon's Shiites, fighting for their very survival against Saudi/ Qatari/Gulf States' extremist Wahhabi fighters, who via ISIS ,Al Qaeda and similar Islamists, want to wipe them off the face of the earth (with Turkey playing a double game). At this very moment people are condemning Assad for bombing civilians, whilst the US-led coalition including our own RAF, is doing exactly the same thing in the ISIS held city of Mosul -for the same reasons. The rebels take over and then surround themselves in cities, with civilians, hoping that these horrors will raise western public opinion against the government forces trying to defeat them. The 'half- informed' public opinion is now behaving in exactly this predictable way against the Syrian government, trying to deal with its own religious extremist rebels, many of whom are not even Syrians. It was always a war that the west should stay out of -other peoples religious wars are incomprehensible to non-believers in that particular faith. To talk now of replacing Asad is juvenile and mischievous - maybe that's why Boris is so engaged?
    Nolens , 12 Apr 2017 13:20
    Assad is the lesser of two evils. Those who are hailed as rebels pose an enormous threat to our security.
    jonnyross Nolens , 12 Apr 2017 13:44
    There is an equality of evil between Assad and ISIS. That said, Assad's forces and their Shia allies have slaughtered the vast majority of the victims.

    Both Assad and ISIS will lose eventually. How many Syrians are slaughtered in the meantime is anyone's guess.

    Why murderous dictators are so popular btl is a mystery.

    john evans , 12 Apr 2017 13:20
    Syria is finished.
    According to Wikipedia Estimates of deaths in the Syrian Civil War, per opposition activist groups, vary between 321,358 and 470,000.
    On 23 April 2016, the United Nations and Arab League Envoy to Syria put out an estimate of 400,000 that had died in the war.

    Also,according to Wikipedia I n 2016, the United Nations (UN) identified 13.5 million Syrians requiring humanitarian assistance, of which more than 6 million are internally displaced within Syria, and over 4.8 million are refugees outside of Syria. In January 2017, UNHCR counted 4,863,684 registered refugees.
    Turkey is the largest host country of registered refugees with over 2.7 million Syrian refugees.

    Before the troubles,Syria had a population of 23 million.
    No country could go back to normality after that upheaval.

    Arapas john evans , 12 Apr 2017 13:37

    No country could go back to normality after that upheaval.

    It can --
    Look at Chechnya! A newly rebuilt Grosny, living in peace.
    Bearing in mind Iraq, Libya etc who wants to see that --

    NativeBornTexan Arapas , 12 Apr 2017 14:08
    Chechnya is ruled by a Russian puppet dictator who executes gay men.
    Shad O NativeBornTexan , 12 Apr 2017 15:13
    That's because politics is heartlessly, ruthlessly, compassionlessly pragmatic. If having a pet local petty king in the area keeps it stable and does not a politically costly military operation, everything else is seen as "acceptable collateral damage".

    It's funny but western foreign policy is fundamentally the same in the methods, just different in goals. If the goal of regime change is achieved and political points collected, everything else is completely irrelevant. Opposition can become "moderately islamist", "democratic" rebels may implement sharia law, "precision strikes" may cause tens of thousands of civilian casualties, but it's all for the greater good.

    Pipcosta , 12 Apr 2017 13:18
    Why do we send a sewer rat to the UN as our ambassador
    brianboru1014 , 12 Apr 2017 13:14
    Every time the West especially the Anglo west of the USA and Britain intervene in another countries affairs, the end product is a disaster so for that reason alone these two societies which can only communicate in English should leave this to the Russians.
    Ruby4 , 12 Apr 2017 13:13
    "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

    Albert Einstein

    Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/alberteins133991.html

    Chilcot report: Findings at-a-glance:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36721645

    FFC800 , 12 Apr 2017 13:08
    This almost manages to achieve sense, and it's good to see an article not promoting regime change for once, but it still falls short of stating the truth that the correct policy in Syria is to help Assad win the war, and then impose conditions on his conduct in the peace.

    He has reduced once great Syrian cities such as Homs and Aleppo to rubble. All six of Syria's Unesco world heritage sites have been damaged.

    Most of that was done by rebels.
    jackrousseau , 12 Apr 2017 13:03
    I must now begrudgingly thank the Trump Administration for causing me to realize a profound and universal truth. History doesn't rhyme at all; it parodies.

    The build up to our inevitable Syria invasion is essentially an SNL parody of our Iraq invasion. All the way down to allegations of to "hidden stockpiles of WMDs", "gassing own citizens", "violation of no WMD agreement", "weapons inspectors not doing job", and most recently "Assad/Saddam is Hitler". All that's left is the final piece of evidence to tip public opinion in...the holy grail, "yellowcake uranium".

    Of course, 6 months ago --with full knowledge of Saddam's gassing of the Kurds--Trump said toppling Hussein was a "uge" mistake and defended him as an "efficient killer of terrorists". "Efficient" indeed... https://cnn.com/cnn/2016/07/05/politics/donald-trump-saddam-hussein-iraq-terrorism/index.html

    I'm not sure exactly what comes next (presumably Trump declaring an "Axis of Evil" consisting of Syria, ISIS, Iran, N.Korea...and perhaps Russia and/or China or both...thus setting the stage for a hilarious parody of WWII).

    Who knows...I guess at least it's interesting.

    John Smythe , 12 Apr 2017 13:03
    Perhaps dear Boris should have had more talks with the British government to find out what is the political position of the conservative government over Syria, and more importantly with Russia. So far the American have by the look of things, telling the British Government in what they want, not bothering to ask what Britain thinks what is important.
    There is actually no point in swapping one master the EU, to handcuff ourselves to the a far more right wing America.
    bemusedfromdevon , 12 Apr 2017 13:00
    I find the commments on here quite confusing...

    Take Isil and jihadists out of the equation and what you're left with are people that want to oust a tyrannical and unelected leader who clearly has nothing but disdain for his people (groups of at least).

    Those rebels (or freedom fighters) are being seen as the bad guys it seems to me...?

    The only reason I can see for this is that they have slight support from the United States.

    Had the boot been on the other foot and the US we're supporting Assad and Russia,the rebels (freedom fighters) I'm quite sure public opinion (Guardian readers at least) would be quite different.

    So what do the Syrian rebels who are looking to overthrow a dictator have to do to be put on a pedestal of righteousness as Castro was for effectively trying to achieve the same end goal....

    Oh, that's right, Castro was trying to stick it to the Yanks.... now I get it.

    dusktildawn bemusedfromdevon , 12 Apr 2017 13:34
    I think there's a definite strain of anti-Americanism on display however cautiously we have to view their actions after Iraq and give their closeness to the Gulf States. A quarter of the country has fled Assad, some 10 million internally displaced not to mention the incredible numbers of dead and wounded.

    And yet there's a close minded reflex to say that things will be better off with him in charge ignoring even the possibility of partition, which strikes me as the most plausible option. The idea that Assad can now after all he's done rule a united country indefinitely putting a lid on refugees and terrorism strikes me as utterly preposterous.

    bemusedfromdevon dusktildawn , 12 Apr 2017 14:11
    My sentiments entirely and it shocks me that there are a considerable number of Assad apologists commenting on here as he is clearly seen as a better 'devil' than Trump...

    I'm just very pleased I don't live in Syria and I think the run of the mill Syrian dying in their droves due to gas, bombs or simply drowning in the Med would be horrified to read a large number of comments on here in relation to this article and how Assad 'isn't such a bad old stick!'

    I'm embarrassed to be honest....

    Shad O bemusedfromdevon , 12 Apr 2017 15:25

    Take Isil and jihadists out of the equation and what you're left with

    what you are left is nothing. This was the big point since 2013, when Nusra began taking over the last remnants of the FSA. Since then Cameron (or was it Hammond) had to coin the term "relatively hardline islamists" to make some of the jihadi groups somewhat acceptable.

    In its latest iteration, Nusra (now rebranded yet againTahrir al-Sham) has formally absorbed several other "rebel" group, including the Nour al-Din al-Zenki, who were in the past equipped by the US, and were quoted by various agencies (including this paper) as "opposition" during the recapture of Aleppo.

    Ah, yes, you also have the Kurds, who are building their own state. But if there is something all the local powers agree on (Russia, US, Turkey, Syria, Iraq...) is that they don't want an independent Kurdish state.

    NezPerce , 12 Apr 2017 12:58

    President Obama was heavily criticized for not doing more in Syria, but he made a difficult decision that was in many ways the right on.

    Obama required cover from the British Parliament. Bombing Syria was incredibly unpopular with the UK public from right to left. David Miliband listened to the public and stopped the bombing of Syria. Nobody expected a Labour politician to dare to oppose the US war machine, it took them all by surprise.

    Bombing Syria was incredibly unpopular with the US public and the European public, Miliband saved us from ISIS and Al Nusra both al Qaeda franchises running Syria.

    The BBC routinely portrays the Libertarian right wing in the USA as Isolationists but if you hear it from them they are anti-war. The American working class understands what war is like in the middle east because many of them have experienced it. They are clearly anti another war in the middle east. proof:

    https://www.infowars.com/exclusive-michael-savage-begs-trump-to-stop-wwiii/

    In this off the cuff interview Michael Savage begs Donald Trump to not plunge the world into another world war that could destroy life as we know it

    .

    Trump has been subjugated by the deep state, his base is outraged and in despair.

    dusktildawn , 12 Apr 2017 12:58
    You could argue this isn't about regime change per se but prosecuting a dictator for targeting and massacring civilians. And surely the same rationale can be used against Isis. In other words you don't allow mass murderers to take. Over but prosecute them as well.
    Mates Braas dusktildawn , 12 Apr 2017 15:05
    You can start proceedings against your own war criminals. There is a long list of them, stretching from, Paris, London, Washington and Tel Aviv.
    freeandfair dusktildawn , 12 Apr 2017 16:41
    In that case North Korea and Saudi Arabia should be on top of the list.
    Trekkie555 , 12 Apr 2017 12:57
    Good article. Hits the nail on the head. Regime change may be required for Syria the G7 and Arab countries must come together to carefully plan what happens afterwards.
    Nolens , 12 Apr 2017 12:54
    This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards . Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs .
    diddoit , 12 Apr 2017 12:54
    'Monster' Assad was courted by western leaders: Remember the Assads pictured taking tea at Buckingham Palace with the Queen(google it) , Blair all smiles in Damascus. The Kerry family pictured in Damascus enjoying a late evening supper with the Assads(google it).

    But Bashar al-Assad is a stubborn man , he wouldn't distance himself from Iran and their proxies such as Hezbollah, thus his fate was sealed.

    zolotoy diddoit , 12 Apr 2017 12:59
    Nope, wrong. Assad wouldn't give the USA, Qatar, and Turkey a nice pipeline to kneecap Russian natural gas sales in Europe.

    It's all about oil and money, petrodollars and ensuring American worldwide hegemony.

    sokkynick zolotoy , 12 Apr 2017 13:07
    +1
    diddoit zolotoy , 12 Apr 2017 13:42
    Well it's all tied in . People talk about Israel wanting the Golan Heights permanently in part due to oil interests, they talk about Qatar and the gas pipeline to Europe Assad refuses. They talk about the KSA being unnerved by Iran's growing influence in the region after the Iraq war, and how it would suit KSA , Israel and the US for Sunni leadership to emerge in Syria to rebalance the region.

    I think it's all of the above . Which isn't what US/UK populations are being told.

    Ilan Klinger , 12 Apr 2017 12:53
    A regime changing in Syria?
    Can someone here try and convince me that the State of Syria still exists?
    And change it from what to what?From a Murderouscracy to a Oppressionocracy?
    peterwiv , 12 Apr 2017 12:52
    The West learns nothing from its mistakes. Can't we understand that our real enemy is ISIS and that springs directly from our disastrous invasion of Iraq? Assad may be pretty awful but surely we should be able to comprehend that he is an ally in the fight against ISIS just as the far more horrible Stalin was an ally against the Nazis.
    Just because Trump suddenly talks about "beautiful babies", we all go mad again.
    aleph , 12 Apr 2017 12:51
    Syria is going to need serious amounts of aid and foreign investment to recover when peace starts to take hold. But Assad cannot travel internationally because he will be subject to arrest. At least in any civilised country. So he will be gone one way or antithetical. Putin has backed the wrong horse. It's too handicapped to run.
    elaine naude aleph , 12 Apr 2017 15:43
    Who should he have backed? - Isis?
    algae64 , 12 Apr 2017 12:47
    Until the Saudis, US & UK decide that enough is enough, then this idiocy will continue. Assad is a better leader for Syria than Isis, Al Qaeda, or the other Saudi-backed groups would be.

    Syria was secular and religiously tolerant under Assad. It won't be either of those things if Assad is deposed. More than likely, it would end up as a Saudi-style Islamic theocracy with the harshest head-chopping, hand-chopping version of sharia law.

    BorisMalden , 12 Apr 2017 12:46
    He has reduced once great Syrian cities like Homs and Aleppo to rubble

    Did Assad deliberately bring his country into civil war? When his forces are being attacked by rebels sponsored by foreign groups, he really only has two choices: give up leadership and allow the rebels to take over the country, or fight back. Given that you're arguing that a regime change is a bad idea it logically follows that you support the second option, so it hardly seems fair to criticise him for the consequences of that resistance. You might do better to blame the rebels and those who sponsor them for bringing war to what was previously a (relatively) peaceful country.

    Oldfranky , 12 Apr 2017 12:46
    This Regime Change Policy adopted by the US and in many, if not all cases, supported by the UK, whilst in some case toppling Dictators, has left nothing but chaos in its wake.
    We need to consider the case of Syria, very carefully, as we may well find ourselves handing the Country to ISIL on a plate.
    Better to help Assad stabilise the Country, and then discuss political change.
    The rhetoric coming from the Foreign and Defence Secretaries, can do nothing to help, but make the UK look stupid.
    aleph Oldfranky , 12 Apr 2017 12:56
    "Better to help Assad stabilise the Country"

    Hahahahaha, collude with crimes against humanity in the name of stability and call it progress because after six years we cannot think of an alternative. Great.

    Oldfranky aleph , 12 Apr 2017 13:58
    Are you sure it's only Assad, laugh all you will.
    BorisMalden , 12 Apr 2017 12:46
    He has reduced once great Syrian cities like Homs and Aleppo to rubble

    Did Assad deliberately bring his country into civil war? When his forces are being attacked by rebels sponsored by foreign groups, he really only has two choices: give up leadership and allow the rebels to take over the country, or fight back. Given that you're arguing that a regime change is a bad idea it logically follows that you support the second option, so it hardly seems fair to criticise him for the consequences of that resistance. You might do better to blame the rebels and those who sponsor them for bringing war to what was previously a (relatively) peaceful country.

    Oldfranky , 12 Apr 2017 12:46
    This Regime Change Policy adopted by the US and in many, if not all cases, supported by the UK, whilst in some case toppling Dictators, has left nothing but chaos in its wake.
    We need to consider the case of Syria, very carefully, as we may well find ourselves handing the Country to ISIL on a plate.
    Better to help Assad stabilise the Country, and then discuss political change.
    The rhetoric coming from the Foreign and Defence Secretaries, can do nothing to help, but make the UK look stupid.
    aleph Oldfranky , 12 Apr 2017 12:56
    "Better to help Assad stabilise the Country"

    Hahahahaha, collude with crimes against humanity in the name of stability and call it progress because after six years we cannot think of an alternative. Great.

    Oldfranky aleph , 12 Apr 2017 13:58
    Are you sure it's only Assad, laugh all you will.
    Foracivilizedworld , 12 Apr 2017 12:44

    Regime change in Syria? That would be a mistake

    Absolutely no... it will be a colossal disaster... and would explode the entire region affecting not only all ME countries including Israel, but will extend to Europe and NA, You can't keep it all "Over There"

    And I think Trump would do it.

    SaracenBlade , 12 Apr 2017 12:43
    Regime change, evidently the US has n't learned from the past experience. Look at Iraq, Lybia, regime change has resulted in complete chaos, instability, and perpetual conflict. Syrian population is strictly divided on sectarian line - Sunnis, Shias, Christians, Kurds. Who is going to make a cohesive government capable of running the affairs of the state? Bashar Assaad's father, Hafiz Assaad ruled Syria with an iron grip, he understood Syrian sectarian divide.
    notDonaldTrump SaracenBlade , 12 Apr 2017 12:49
    'regime change has resulted in complete chaos, instability, and perpetual conflict.'

    If one tried to think impartially the evidence might lead one to think that was the plan all along.

    BlueCollar notDonaldTrump , 12 Apr 2017 15:50
    If any country needs regime change, it is Saudi Arabia. All important positions are controlled by hundreds of Royals of Al Saud, even honest criticism of royals brings you closer to the back swing of executioner .
    timefliesby , 12 Apr 2017 12:42
    Have we learnt nothing?
    zolotoy timefliesby , 12 Apr 2017 12:54
    Some of us have learned to be very comfortable with scraps from the war machine table -- Western legacy media in particular.
    moreorless2 , 12 Apr 2017 12:42
    My newsagent loves Assad. Why because he's a Syrian Christian. Assad is the only hope for the minority's in Syria. All of the opposition groups are some variation on Islamic nationalists. They will all happily slaughter anyone not of their faith. Assad is a murdering bastard but he kills those that threaten him. In Middle Eastern terms he's a liberal.
    Terra_Infirma , 12 Apr 2017 12:39
    Quite right. What the people of Syria need is stability and an end to the fighting. All else is secondary. In particular, the greatest crime that the West has committed in recent decades is the attempt to foist democracy on countries like Syria and Iraq, where it simply does not work. Even now, Western liberals dream of sitting Sunni, Shia, Alevi, Kurds, secularists and Islamic militants around a table to talk through to a democratic and mutually acceptable future for Syria. This is a fantasy - as democracy always is in heavily tribalised societies. It can only end in renewed civil war and inevitable dictatorship. I often wonder whether the West is just naive in these attempts at liberal cultural imperialism, or whether they are in fact a cynical front to mask the equally egregious aim of checkmating Russian influence in the region. Either way, shame on us.
    StrongMachine Terra_Infirma , 12 Apr 2017 12:47
    Are you calling George W Bush a liberal?
    PSmd Terra_Infirma , 12 Apr 2017 13:07
    It's not liberal cultural imperialism. It's painted as that to sell to domestic audiences.

    It's liberal economic imperialism.

    sokkynick , 12 Apr 2017 12:36
    Now to be fair, no one knows really what the president is thinking, not even apparently his chief diplomat or his UN envoy, who have sent conflicting messages. But let's cut to the chase – this is a very, very bad idea.

    WW3 is definately a very very bad idea.
    The idea that the US can change the government of another country for the better is born of US arrogance and lying manipulation.

    juster , 12 Apr 2017 12:36
    It's a bit funny that we just casually mention that the country harping on about the respect of the international rule book sinc 2014 vaiolate one of the core UN charter principles 72 times and is openly speaking of braking it the 73th time.

    Jsut picture China saying openly their goal is to change the Abe regime in Tokio or Russia to change the regime in Kiev. They can't even have a pefered presidential candidate without mass interference hysteria and we just feel like it's A OK to go around the world changing who's in charge of countries.

    freeandfair juster , 12 Apr 2017 16:58
    > They can't even have a pefered presidential candidate without mass interference hysteria and we just feel like it's A OK to go around the world changing who's in charge of countries.

    An excellent point.

    bemusedfromdevon , 12 Apr 2017 12:35
    There are two main choices... Regime change... which hasn't worked out well where it's been attempted or just let the despots get on with it...

    There are no easy answers but perhaps the only way is to let dictators crush and annihilate their opposition, utilise death squads to make dissenters disappear in the dead of night and, outwardly at least pretend everything is rosey....

    If we, as a civilised society are able to 'look the other way' then that might be the simple answer... just hope everyone can sleep well at night and be grateful that, however much you hate our present government they aren't out gassing (allegedly) Guardian readers.

    Jared Hall bemusedfromdevon , 12 Apr 2017 12:42
    Not gassing people no, but still killing plenty of "innocent little babies" bombing hospitals and helping the Saudis cluster bomb fishing villages. Why don't we see pictures on TV of Yemeni kids mutilated by American bombs? How do we sleep with that?
    bemusedfromdevon Jared Hall , 12 Apr 2017 12:44
    We're pulling the trigger??

    And that makes supporting a tyrant who will do anything a satisfactory solution to you?

    Sounds like crocodile tears to me.

    SterlingPound Jared Hall , 12 Apr 2017 13:11
    Well, we saw the aftermath of a deliberate attack by Saudis planes on a clearly demarcated Yemeni hospital on the BBC last year. The first rocket hit an arriving ambulance with civilian casualties and a doctor on board. The response of the Saudi shills in the Commons - what is it about the British upper class and the Arabs, I wonder - was to demand forcefully that the Saudis set up an inquiry to examine the evidence of a war crime.
    It should have been sadly obvious from the get-go that we had to back Assad before he attempted to beat his father's record for murder and repression, the whole family's fucking insane, but it's long past too late now. He's soiled goods and Tillerson's untutored idea of elections is surely farcical.
    Muzzledagain , 12 Apr 2017 12:35
    Fair article, although ISI and rebels actively participated in the destruction of Syria. If Assad falls, anarchy due to vacuum will follow, guaranteed. Agree with the last paragraph in particular and still wondering why they (the West) don't do it especially pressuring the countries that feed the rebels, and they are not so moderate, with money and weapon. Unless this is because of the infamous pipeline. Tragic state of affair indeed.
    Aethelfrith , 12 Apr 2017 12:31
    Decade after decade, the west has interfered or overthrown government after governemnt , all over the world , mainly for the benefit of capitalist puppeteers . America has been the worst , one only has to look at the CIA's track record in South America when legitimately elected governments were ousted by force so that "American business" interest were looked after.
    This same vested self interest has been the driving force over the last few years. The interventions in Iraq , Libya, Afghanistan have all been total disasters fro the regions and resulted in more deaths than any tin pot dictator could have achieved. Backing so called "moderate" terrorists seems to be the excuse to get involved.
    More moral achievement and good could have been achieved by widespread dropping of food around the world , or even the cost of the military hegemony being given as cash handouts to poor people , but this simplistic altruism does not allow for the geopolitical control games that is the true beating heart of western aggression.
    austinpratt , 12 Apr 2017 12:30
    And it will serve as a welcome distraction from the lack of domestic achievements by the U.S. govt.
    Fort Sumpter austinpratt , 12 Apr 2017 12:36
    Theresa could also do with some distraction from her shambolic government and the whole Brexit disaster.
    timefliesby austinpratt , 12 Apr 2017 12:44
    Got to agree. Dead cat. Nobody is talking about links and the FBI any more and Putin is mentioned on a new context.
    Approval ratings from US voters?
    Moo1234 Fort Sumpter , 12 Apr 2017 12:45
    We are all Brexiteers now. I voted remain, but accept the democratic will of the people. Blame David Cameron and get on with the job of making a success of it, rather than whining about it....
    dusktildawn , 12 Apr 2017 12:30
    What if this was Apartheid era South Africa and the white minority were bombing the hell out of the majority black civilians who wanted them out?
    duthealla dusktildawn , 12 Apr 2017 12:49
    Nobody intervened in South Africa despite massacres like Sharpeville....perhaps it would've let to full on racial war though?
    dusktildawn duthealla , 12 Apr 2017 12:55
    I'm just saying people making the case for the West to back off would probably be saying the opposite in that case if the white minority were massacring black people on the scale of Syria. Isn't that hypocrisy?
    Fort Sumpter dusktildawn , 12 Apr 2017 13:04
    It isn't hypocrisy because your South African scenario bears little resemblance to what is happening in Syria. Simple as that.
    Moo1234 , 12 Apr 2017 12:28
    Boris obviously has a more pressing engagement over Easter.
    BeanstalkJack , 12 Apr 2017 12:27
    Regime change - a phrase that reminds us imperialism is alive and well.
    Gandalf66 BeanstalkJack , 12 Apr 2017 12:47
    The successful regime changes mentioned in the article such as Poland and the rest of the Eastern bloc were initiated by the people themselves, rather than the the "help" of a foreign power.
    BeanstalkJack Gandalf66 , 12 Apr 2017 13:03
    The people did it all by themselves did they? So nothing to do with the economic collapse of the Soviet Union caused by an arms race ramped up by President Reagan. Nothing to do with a very costly war in Afghanistan?
    sokkynick , 12 Apr 2017 12:27
    Given the situation, it is understandable why some people may think ousting Assad is necessary. Such thinking has a long pedigree in the United States, where there is a robust belief in a supposed American ability to fix what is wrong.

    I think the word is arrogance rather than belief.

    Mates Braas sokkynick , 12 Apr 2017 14:51
    I think the word is arrogance rather than belief...............and exceptionalism.
    brucebaby , 12 Apr 2017 12:26
    Trump is the new boy on the block, trying to use missiles as a penis substitute.

    Sorry, but simple definitions are sometimes correct.

    yshani brucebaby , 12 Apr 2017 13:19
    Would you have said the same thing in 1917 and 1940. Would you have said the same thing in the duration of the cold war. If US did not have a bigger penis then you would not be around to comment about it.

    Long live the US penis and may it grow longer and stronger.

    brucebaby yshani , 12 Apr 2017 13:26
    WW2 was won principally by the USSR, who suffered many more casualties than the western alliances. The cold war would not have happened if not for the USA.

    Sorry, the USA is more of a threat to the planet than any country, and Trump is unintelligent, a real threat to the world.

    MacMeow brucebaby , 12 Apr 2017 17:01

    WW2 was won principally by the USSR

    That old clunker again, it's like the war in the Pacific never happened.

    Sorry4Soul , 12 Apr 2017 12:26
    Why it would be a mistake ?
    Libya was such a success story.
    Trumbledon , 12 Apr 2017 12:24
    Finally, at long last, some sense.

    I agree wholeheartedly; by far the best analysis I've read in this paper.

    sokkynick , 12 Apr 2017 12:24
    If the US wants Assad ousted, they should support a UN investigation to find out WHO was at fault. Shoot first questions later? Hollywood Wild West thinking. The US has zero credibility. You simply cannot blame someone without having the facts independently checked out. Yet they didn't wait and decided to break interantional law instead.
    joAnn chartier , 12 Apr 2017 12:23
    There seems to be a crucial component of reality lacking in this opinion piece: rather than bombing and droning and etc, why does the 'world order' not stop the manufacture and distribution of weapons of mass destruction like barrel bombs, nuclear warheads etc etc -- where profits are made by arms manufacturers and their investors--oh, could that be the reason?
    Fakecharitybuster , 12 Apr 2017 12:20
    Quite. Assad is awful, but he is less awful that the Islamist alternatives, which are the only realistic alternatives. We should stop posturing and accept this unpalatable reality.
    ganaruvian Fakecharitybuster , 12 Apr 2017 13:40
    Spot-on!
    Viva_Kidocelot , 12 Apr 2017 12:20
    Much more level reporting, but still is framing the narrative as a brutal gas attack and is still a rush to judgement when the case is that bombs were dropped on a supply of toxic gas, most likely Phosgene.
    Moo1234 , 12 Apr 2017 12:19
    At last, some common sense. like Saddam and Gaddafi, Assad is a ruthless tyrant. What the West, including the petulant Boris Johnson need to realise is that Syria ISN'T the West. Don't impose your values on a country that isn't ready for them. The sickening hypocrisy of the British government would look very foolish if Putin pulled out and allowed Syria to fall to isis. Would Boris and Theresa put British troops on the ground to keep the extremists out of Turkey?
    Gandalf66 Moo1234 , 12 Apr 2017 12:51
    Why isn't Syria ready for Western values? After what the country has been through the people would probably leap at the chance of free elections. Prior to the conflict Syria was a multi-ethnic patchwork. Whatever happens to the country needs to be decided by the Syrians themselves.
    Mates Braas Gandalf66 , 12 Apr 2017 14:50
    "Why isn't Syria ready for Western values?"

    The geopolitical status quo in the Middle East is unstable, and tribal affiliations/religious/ ethnic allegiances need to be carefully balanced and controlled. Something Lebanon, Libya, Syria and Iraq achieved reasonably peacefully for many years before all the US led interventions.

    There is no evidence that the terrorists are fighting for democracy, although if westerners ask them that is what they will likely say.

    shockolat1 , 12 Apr 2017 12:18
    So Trump is unfit to govern because of his locker room humour and possible antics, but gas a few thousand people and hey presto! A darling of the left.
    bemusedfromdevon shockolat1 , 12 Apr 2017 12:22
    That's how it seems...
    Fort Sumpter shockolat1 , 12 Apr 2017 12:25
    Not the left. These writers are pro-British Establishment, pro mixed economy liberals. Soft right if anything.
    zolotoy Fort Sumpter , 12 Apr 2017 12:51
    You're talking about this rag. Take a look at what's coming out of Howard Dean's mouth, or Bernie Sanders's, or practically any Democrat in Washington not named Tulsi Gabbard.

    Or, if you have a really strong stomach, take a look at Daily Kos.

    They're what passes for "left" in America, unfortunately, because the number of SWP and Green Party members is statistically insignificant.

    richmanchester , 12 Apr 2017 12:17
    "Given the situation, it is understandable why some people may think ousting Assad is necessary"

    The Guardian reported that in Libya, the last country to benefit from US and "our" attempts at regime change there are now open air slave auctions.

    So yeah, why not do the same in Syria; what is there to lose?

    Mates Braas , 12 Apr 2017 12:16
    Regime change is illegal under international law, except to the rogues of course found in western capitals, and their Gulf vassals. These are the only group of people in the entire planet who talk openly about overthrowing sovereign governments of other countries.

    Imperial hubris knows no bounds.

    tjt77 Mates Braas , 12 Apr 2017 12:44
    The unfortunate truth is that, along with the ongoing decline of western civilization, one 'by-product' is that International Law is continually disdained. The USA, having lack of insightful leadership, does as it wants, when it wants .. the result is that perpetual wars seem to be a given .. meanwhile, Asia continues to rise and is growing real and genuine wealth by producing and exporting the goods the rest of the world consumes and is doing it very well..
    jman57 , 12 Apr 2017 12:16
    President Trump didn't do enough (yet) by bombing an air base at night. The people of Syria need weapons, tanks, missiles, air support, etc. from a country like the USA that stands for freedom and human rights. Assad, who lives by the sword should also die by the sword. For the U.S. to stand by and watch these atrocities unchallenged would simply be not who we are. I don't agree with President Trump on a lot of things, but on this point he is right. I have changed from not liking him at all to liking him just a bit more.
    sceptic64 jman57 , 12 Apr 2017 12:24
    And what comes after?
    duthealla sceptic64 , 12 Apr 2017 12:54
    That'd be a problem for the EU. We cook , you clean - as some neocon asshat said about Iraq.
    richmanchester duthealla , 12 Apr 2017 13:14
    Well the Guardian was reporting on open air slave auctions in
    Libya this week.

    So clearly arming "the people" and supplying air support worked well there.

    Obviously the same course should be followed in Syria.

    richmanchester , 12 Apr 2017 12:15
    "All six of Syria's Unesco world heritage sites have been damaged. "

    And that's Assad'd fault?

    Or is it the fault of the originally US and still Gulf states/Turkey backed Wahhabis that have damaged them?

    Trumbledon richmanchester , 12 Apr 2017 12:36
    All Assad's fault, if he hadn't tried to liberate Palmyra, it'd still be standi... Oh wait.
    richmanchester , 12 Apr 2017 12:14
    "The logic is that by removing and replacing an undesirable leader, the political situation in the country will change. "

    Absolute tosh.

    The logic behind nearly all attempts at cold war regime change was to replace a regime which aligned itself with the USSR with one that aligned itself with the USA.

    The internal situation, politically or otherwise was of no concern

    Elinore richmanchester , 12 Apr 2017 12:23
    It would work in the USA.
    Nietzschestache , 12 Apr 2017 12:13
    Good piece. Regime change has been such a resounding success, you only have to look at Iraq and Libya to see that. Nor does a country which has a history of using napalm and carcinogenic defoliants any room to take the moral high ground.
    sokkynick , 12 Apr 2017 12:13
    If Assad, is so bad, how come most of the civilian population prefer his areas to those of the rebels? The one certainty in all of this is that the MSM has sold its credibility. Most of what I see is vested interest propaganda.
    pete8s sokkynick , 12 Apr 2017 12:21
    Isn't the main reason that people prefer Assad's areas because he doesn't bomb them.
    There is no love of Assad anywhere.
    If the US were to limit itself to punishing strikes against Assad whenever his forces committed war crimes – bombing hospitals using poison gas etc then a minor at the level of civilisation creeps back into the equation.
    bemusedfromdevon sokkynick , 12 Apr 2017 12:25
    Perhaps because the rebel areas are getting the shit bombed out of them by the Russians and Assad...

    How many heavy bombers and fighters do those fighting Assad have...?

    Just think about it a little....

    Fort Sumpter pete8s , 12 Apr 2017 12:26

    There is no love of Assad anywhere.

    How many Syrians do you know and how many times have you been there?

    scipioafricanus , 12 Apr 2017 12:10
    The situation will be even more fraught if other external actors turn any attempt at regime change into a proxy war, as Russia and Iran are likely to do.

    A proxy war between the United States and Russia is the thing we all have to fear. In Trump and Putin you have two leaders who use brinkmanship to get what they want and who will never back down from any position no matter what the consequences. They'd rather pursue a misguided policy rathen than lose face. I'd like to think the recent war of words between the two countries is just bluster, but as each day goes by I'm no longer sure anymore.

    Amanzim , 12 Apr 2017 12:10
    Regime change should work if all parties believe in democracy and respect each other. That does not seem likely in the middle east. We have seen what that means forcing that idea in Iraq, Egypt and Libya. A secular SOB is better than somebody who believes in laws of yesteryears.
    zankaon , 12 Apr 2017 12:09
    Another way: reducing accidental use of chemical weapons?

    Always drop 2 bombs; one from each side of ammunition dump. That way, one of such unmarked ordinance is likely to be conventional explosives. The latter would further disperse, and dilute (reduce density) of the chemical gas; hence lessening lethality.

    Elinore , 12 Apr 2017 12:08
    You could put Assad in the White House and Trump in Syria and and nothing would change except that the White House might be a tad more intelligent.
    Gandalf66 Elinore , 12 Apr 2017 12:59
    Assad is actually a qualified doctor so he's pretty intelligent. Strange that he's ignoring the Hippocratic Oath on a daily basis.
    jman57 , 12 Apr 2017 12:08
    So we agree on the final result (need for regime change which by the way the article conflicts with its own title), but we disagree on the method. Many bottoms-up revolutions would not have been successful without outside help. The French helped America achieve freedom although their reason was somewhat revengeful. The people of Syria have no chance against an army and tanks ruled by a ruthless evil dictator like Assad without outside assistance. If you think they are not shedding enough blood for their freedom, then you are living in a hole in the ground.
    Mickmarrs jman57 , 12 Apr 2017 12:18
    Yeah and the guys that get in are head loppers
    ProfJake , 12 Apr 2017 12:05
    Well said. Worth taking a look at Global Peace Index, which is produced annually by the Sydney-based Institute for Economics and Peace:

    http://visionofhumanity.org/indexes/global-peace-index /

    In the latest iteration for 2016, the bottom ten places in the Index, reserved for the least peaceful countries on earth, include Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya: four countries where "regime change" has been brought about – or, in Syria's case, where there is arguably an ongoing attempt to bring it about – by the use of military force.
    The evidence so far is that the use of force to topple regimes does not make things better, even when the behaviour of those regimes is/was objectionable in many ways.

    Fort Sumpter , 12 Apr 2017 12:05

    He has reduced once great Syrian cities such as Homs and Aleppo to rubble. All six of Syria's Unesco world heritage sites have been damaged.

    Nope. Most of Homs and Aleppo are intact. The areas occupied by foreign Jihadists using the local populace as human shields were heavily bombed but now they have been liberated.

    Who was it who destroyed these heritage sites? Not the SAA. The Jihadists even filmed themselves doing it and posted the videos online for goodness sake.

    mp66 , 12 Apr 2017 12:04
    Bashar al-Assad is not a good person. He has reduced once great Syrian cities like Homs and Aleppo to rubble. All six of Syria's Unesco World Heritage sites have been damaged.

    So thousands of mostly foreign jihadists occupying parts of those cities had nothing to do with it? Did the US led forces in now n Mosul, or before that in Fallujah find the way to dislodge terrorists from urban strongholds without devastation of the city? Also for all world heritage sites in Syria, they were defended by Syrian troops, and everything that could be moved was moved to safe place. It was exclusively jihadists that were destroying temples, churches, shrines, even muslim graveyards when they found the funeral momunent "too tall". In all of these efforts to save the history of the humanity, syrian govermnent got no help nor acknowledgment. To add insult to injury, the western "cultural" response was touring 3D model of Palmyra gates through western capitals but while Daesh was methodically blowing it up under clear desert skies, there was interestingly not a single american drone to be found anywhere. It was syrian, iranian and russian blood spilled to liberate it twice from the death cult.

    ID1941743 , 12 Apr 2017 12:02
    Yep. There isn't a solution to this problem, but the one thing I'm 99.999% convinved will not work is 'the west' dusting off it's world policeman uniform and bombing the heck out of Syria.
    ariaclast , 12 Apr 2017 12:01
    This is precisely why the west has largely stayed out of the Syrian conflict; despite having a policy favouring the removal of Assad there hasn't been an attempt (or even the suggestion of an attempt at a policy level) at regime change.


    One does wonder, though, at what point the conflict becomes so abhorrent and the civilian casualties so grotesque that our intervention could scarcely make things any worse

    Vetinary ariaclast , 12 Apr 2017 12:13
    Are you actually blind?
    ariaclast Vetinary , 12 Apr 2017 12:15
    Who said that?
    LucyandTomDog , 12 Apr 2017 12:00
    The US?
    Syria?
    Regime change?
    Moi?
    It seems that Spicer, the White House Press Secretary, whilst putting all his cerebral energy into attempting to apologise for his jaw-droppingly ignorant statement that Hitler never used chemical weapons on his own people, failed to stop his mouth making yet another gaffe;

    "I needed to make sure that I clarified, and was not in any shape or form any more of a distraction from the president's decisive action in Syria and the attempts that he is making to destabilise the region and root out ISIS out of Syria."


    (my emphasis)

    Spicer speaks about the president's attempts to destabilise the region in a CNN television interview too.
    As people are beginning to ask, does Spicer actually know what distabilise means?

    zolotoy LucyandTomDog , 12 Apr 2017 12:44
    I'm sure it was an unintentional but very revealing Freudian slip.

    The advantage of letting dunces speak is that they're not very good at hiding what they think.

    LucyandTomDog LucyandTomDog , 12 Apr 2017 13:21
    Typo
    'As people are beginning to ask, does Spicer actually know what distabilise means?'
    Should be destabilise
    Guy1ncognito , 12 Apr 2017 11:59

    Bashar al-Assad is not a good person.

    Don't hold back...

    Moo1234 Guy1ncognito , 12 Apr 2017 12:22
    Daesh/ isis are even less good people......
    Gandalf66 Guy1ncognito , 12 Apr 2017 13:00
    More like Assad is the least worst.
    davshev , 12 Apr 2017 11:56
    It bothers me that Trump is suddenly showing such concern toward innocent Syrians. Yet, at the same time he wants a ban on immigration from seven predominantly Muslim countries, including Syria.
    sceptic64 davshev , 12 Apr 2017 12:15
    Don't you think the timing here is - for Trump - rather convenient? Just when he is under pressure for being a Russian patsy, something happens to allow him to portray himself as 'standing up to Putin'.

    This whole thing stinks.

    davshev sceptic64 , 12 Apr 2017 12:26
    Right. Also, the question should be...if Putin is sleazy enough to be complicit with Syria, then why wouldn't they be sleazy enough to be involved in trying to swing the American election?
    zolotoy davshev , 12 Apr 2017 12:42
    Good question. How sleazy is it to be complicit with Al Qaeda, the only entity on the planet that the USA is semiofficially at war with?
    scipioafricanus , 12 Apr 2017 11:56
    In essence there must be incremental change in the political climate and culture of a state amongst the masses before it culminates in regime change at the top.

    The political climate is no longer there because Assad has systematically murdered everyone who could have formed a credible oppostion to his regime; opposition activitsts, aid workers, doctors and nurses, journalists - all have either been killed, have fled to Europe, or are currently being tortured in one of his detention centres. There is no one left to rise up against him.

    The intervention triggers resentment and hostility at the new government whose legitimacy is reduced through the participation of an outside government. Soon the new regime is considered a 'puppet' and its own existence is questioned by the people.

    This is indeed true. However backing Assad also has its costs; where is the legitimacy of someone who is now merely a "puppet" for Russia and Iran's ambitions in the region?

    As uncomfortable as it is the best western governments can do is to provide aid and assistance to those in distress, whilst pressuring those countries that continue to feed money and weapons to the combatants to change their positions.

    As reasonable as this sounds, I'm afraid this is just wishful thinking.

    Mates Braas scipioafricanus , 12 Apr 2017 14:37
    "The political climate is no longer there because Assad has systematically murdered everyone who could have formed a credible oppostion to his regime;"

    There is a credible position inside Syria which has been largely ignored by the western MSM and governments, because it does not support the uprisisng or the violent overthrow of the Syrian government. It was refused participation when the first peace talks were arranged.

    lemonsuckingpedant , 12 Apr 2017 11:56
    Wow, a Guardian article I can finally wholeheartedly agree with. Does this Professor chap have a hotline to Trump and the rest of the Western leaders itching for a fight with Assad?
    zolotoy , 12 Apr 2017 11:53
    Why do I get the feeling this is just another one of those "Now that Trump is in charge, we shouldn't do regime change" pieces? I note that the author nowhere comes out against fighting an eternal war in Syria -- he just doesn't want Trump doing the "regime change."

    Yeah, he blabbers on about "aid and assistance" and "pressuring those countries that continue to feed money and weapons to the combatants to change their positions" -- obviously choosing to ignore how several western governments provide money and weapons to the combatants (should they be "pressuring" themselves?) But the pinnacle of his cluelessness -- or his agenda -- is reached with this whopper:

    The situation will be even more fraught if other external actors turn any attempt at regime change into a proxy war, as Russia and Iran are likely to do.

    --as if this hadn't been a proxy war for years already, one in which his own country has been quite actively engaged.
    Janeira1 zolotoy , 12 Apr 2017 12:13
    Didn't notice Iraq faring too well the last time the US intervened in regime change.
    jamie evans , 12 Apr 2017 11:50
    Trump told him over some cake?
    This idiot has got to go, he is not rational. He clearly has not an inkling of the gravity of his actions. Nor does he care. How did we get to this? We always thought that a rogue state would be the end of us all. We were wrong. This moron is doing it all by himself. Some one needs to step in, take back control. This is frightening stuff.
    terests, Assad's removal would be catastrophic. There would be no stable government in Syria, it would be controlled by warlords backed by Saudi Arabia, al-Qaeda or ISIS and millions of refugees would have no country to return to or to live in. This will mean more refugees in Europe, more destabilisation and more money drained from our treasuries.
    Russia would also be far from pleased and if the conflict erupted into a confrontation between NATO affiliated forces in Syria against Russia, the Eastern European front will become a lot more precarious (at a time when Britain is cutting back on military spending and very few European countries adequately contribute towards NATO). Do we really want a repeat of tensions from the pre-1991 era? I don't think so, especially with the combined threat of domestic Islamic terrorism throughout Europe and with the continental debt crisis that cannot afford more wars that are not in its interests. Russia will quickly mobilise its forces into the non-Russian caucuses, already closely aligned with Armenia and potentially link up with Iran territoriality. And what about Turkey? They cannot be relied upon.

    So what benefit exactly is it to create anarchy in Syria for Britain's immediate and long-term interests? The destruction of Libya has created nothing but chaos and a stream of migrants from across Africa. Why Boris Johnson is waltzing around the world demanding hard action against Russia when we are cutting back on our armed forces is startling. A better question would be in whose immediate economic and geopolitical interests is the destruction of Assad beneficial? Well... there's two countries in the Middle East which come to mind... not hard to guess.

    dusktildawn Jack1R , 12 Apr 2017 12:25
    That's fair enough but what if Assad stays in power? Will the refugees, who mainly fled him, return? Will anyone invest in rebuilding the country? WIll anyone deal with the country other than Russia or Iran? Above all will the hatred of Assad, terrorism or indeed the conflict as a whole recede?
    Jack1R dusktildawn , 12 Apr 2017 13:02
    They didn't flee him... they fled the war. Most people, in any country, are apolitical. I expect the refugees in the Middle East and Anatolia will return to Syria and those in the West must be forced to return back.

    The problem with Syria now is that it has become such a hot plate. If the West concedes to Russia and allows Syria to survive under the rule of Assad then we will lose face internationally... and it would be domestically embarrassing. No doubt Saudi Arabia, Israel and the Gulf monarchies would be less than pleased, and we depend on them for a lot of our oil.

    It's a difficult question but what we do know is that there are no other credible groups that can rule Syria at the moment, other than Assad's Alawite minority. If we decide to nation-build, that will cost billions, possibly even trillions with no concrete result as our attempt in Iraq shows and we have no idea who we would put in charge. The Christians have about as much legitimacy as the Alawites. Perhaps the only conceivable outcome would be the breakup of Syria. The Christian and Alawite regions go towards Lebanon, the Kurdish regions are given independence and the Sunni areas are also given an independent state. But of course, the Sunni and Christian areas are intertwined and many Sunni's support Assad, or at least do not oppose him. And Turkey, as well as Iran, would never allow an independent Kurdistan. Iran would be less than pleased with the breakup of Syria as well.

    I want to see a post-Assad plan. We all know what happens to non-Sunni minorities when a secular Arab leader is toppled. No one has yet to provide a coherent post-Assad state-structure. Unless of course they want Turkey to territoriality expand... we want to preserve the post-Ottoman borders and state-system yet at the same time we're waging war against the forces actively preserving it.

    There is no simple answer. Assad is a pawn of Russia and Iran, yet the other options are either Turkish expansion (which, the last time they did that, they had sizeable European territories) or Saudi expansion (which I hope everyone agrees is less than desirable). We have no friends in the Middle East, other than Jordan, Egypt and Israel. But they all have their own interests and I suspect their friendships are determined upon those interests. I think our aim is to maintain the balance of power. Perhaps only the growth of Israel could act as a counter-weight to Sunni and Shia interests.

    Alderbaran Jack1R , 12 Apr 2017 13:04
    Would you support another leader from perhaps the same party taking over as an interim measure whilst different factions are brought together to defeat ISIS?

    In an ideal world, I would love to see this happening, along with a form of truth and reconciliation commission, and a commitment from the international community and other bodies independent of the Syrian government to assist in tackling issues such as warlordism and corruption. The dogmatic belief that there can be no leader other than Assad is one that might have ultimately cost millions of lives and it would be wrong to use the old dictator's mantra of 'me or chaos'. And to be fair, Assad does not have a great track record in Syria.

    And a final question - do you believe Russia should be doing more to put pressure on Assad or do you think it will be happy to put its international credibility on the line for him? (There is something pathological I believe in Putin's willingness to support other dictators)

    Laurence Bury , 12 Apr 2017 11:50
    How can one call for 'peaceful transition to a new society' when the original opposition to Assad was sponsored by multifarious power-hungry foreign actors? They exploited the Arab Spring pro-democracy utopianism then messed up their insurrectional strategy disastrously. The country now needs to be made a protectorate of an international peace-keeping force until a representative transitional government is agreed upon.
    WellmeaningBob Laurence Bury , 12 Apr 2017 12:11
    A little contradictory, no? Oh we fucked up, so you need to be colonised anyway.
    Laurence Bury WellmeaningBob , 12 Apr 2017 12:19
    No, that sounds like the pseudo-leftist neo-colonial discourse that Obama was so fond of.
    The counter-argument to regime change is more that by now Assad controls most cities again, the opposition are awful sectarians who should be let nowhere near power and it may still be possible to contain IS to a manageable extent while Assad maintains a dictatorship indefinitely.
    WellmeaningBob Laurence Bury , 12 Apr 2017 12:27
    Not quite sure what you mean. Just saying that the "man on the street" would more likely than not understand "protectorate" pretty much the same as e.g. the Moroccans did.
    elan , 12 Apr 2017 11:50
    One day spent in assad's syria and Michael williams would be calling for regime change as well. Idiots thousands of miles living in comfortable lives have no idea the horror the syrian people have been going through for the last 7 years under this cruel barbaric regime of assad.

    Assad has killed more arabs than israel in only three years

    jonnyross elan , 12 Apr 2017 11:57
    "Assad has killed more arabs than israel in only three years"

    By a factor of 10, or so.

    Fort Sumpter elan , 12 Apr 2017 12:07

    Assad has killed more arabs than israel in only three years

    Ah, you let the mask slip.

    Mates Braas elan , 12 Apr 2017 12:25
    Civil war means that both sides are killing their own people.
    ApfelD , 12 Apr 2017 11:48

    It is entirely understandable that a liberal heart wants to see justice done


    Are you kidding?
    Vendange ApfelD , 12 Apr 2017 11:54
    This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards . Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs .
    Snaga ApfelD , 12 Apr 2017 13:43
    You don't understand the desire for justice??
    jonnyross , 12 Apr 2017 11:44
    "He uses indiscriminate weapons such as 'barrel bombs' and chlorine gas on a regular basis against his own citizens."

    Not to mention the thousands tortured to death in his prisons, the use of starvation as a weapon, the denial of aid and the deliberate targeting of hospitals and medical staff. All carefully documented.

    Yet, strangely, he has no shortage of apologists prepared to deny his crimes.

    zolotoy jonnyross , 12 Apr 2017 11:57
    Only because his opposition is even more barbaric.
    Fort Sumpter jonnyross , 12 Apr 2017 12:09
    'indiscriminate weapons'

    Oh dear, are they rally still pushing this 'our weapons don't kill civilians' BS?

    No need for evidence of chlorine gas bombs apparently.

    And anyone who questions the MSM narrative and who is sickened by endless war is an 'apologist'. What are you but an apologist for war?

    Mates Braas jonnyross , 12 Apr 2017 12:23
    Unfortunately, there is no way to make war nice.
    ToffeeDan1 , 12 Apr 2017 11:43
    Send them a Chocolate Bombe
    SeeNOevilHearNOevil , 12 Apr 2017 11:42
    Regime change in Syria was being talked directly since 9/11 and it never stopped. It's on the record. So is john Kerry, on record on TV, stating gulf states offered to cover part of the costs of a US invasion in Syria at least twice way before the so called ''civil war'' even started.
    They prepared it for years but the poor taste Iraq/Libya left on the US public meant the US pulled out of the deal (all because of the planed gas pipelines from Qatar to Europe that has to go through Syria).
    The Saudis along with Qatar, Turkey and Israel believed they could force the hand of the US and acted alone initiating the takeover. This is why despite the intel, organisation and provision of what is estimated to be 300k(german estimates) foreign jihadists eventually came to a standstill without direct US support.
    The Jihadists then prematurely jumped the gun fragmented creating ISIS (something meant to take place behind the scenes after they defeated Assad)

    The point is of course...it's all about oil...nothing about democracy or Gas or any of that crap

    hpe974 SeeNOevilHearNOevil , 12 Apr 2017 16:26
    Of course it is!! The USA is truly the biggest sponsor of terror and mayhem and destruction in the M.E.
    namjodh , 12 Apr 2017 11:38
    Yes, this is all quite true. What the USA almost always seems to do is create a power vacuum in the countries it attempts to "save" and, inevitably it seems, the USA always chooses the wrong damn party or person to support in said vacuum. A stunning misreading and proof of the failure of American foreign policy "experts" and CIA strategists to grasp the realities on the ground.
    HuckelburryPin namjodh , 12 Apr 2017 11:46

    Yes, this is all quite true. What the USA almost always seems to do is create a power vacuum in the countries it attempts to "save" and, inevitably it seems, the USA always chooses the wrong damn party or person to support in said vacuum.

    Like in Japan. Just that Japan is ... Shinto. Or something. Not M.........

    WellmeaningBob namjodh , 12 Apr 2017 12:04
    I'm sure its fair to say that for many instability, disorder, mayhem and the like are entirely desirable. Witness Kissinger who out-and-out advocated/advocates looking after US long-term interests through war, disease and starvation.
    ID4352889 , 12 Apr 2017 11:37
    Scott Ritter has been commenting on the alleged Assad gas attacks . Unlike the MSM the former Iraq weapons inspector seems far from convinced.
    Levant1998 ID4352889 , 12 Apr 2017 13:46
    former UN weapons inspector Richard Lloyd, and Professor Theodore Posto of MIT also authored a piece:

    http://m.dw.com/en/is-assad-to-blame-for-the-chemical-weapons-attack-in-syria/a-38330217

    jadamsj ID4352889 , 12 Apr 2017 17:12

    Scott Ritter has been commenting on the alleged Assad gas attacks. Unlike the MSM the former Iraq weapons inspector seems far from convinced.

    What that before or after Russia blocked an investigation into it?

    ploughmanlunch , 12 Apr 2017 11:35
    'The on-going devastation in Syria cries out for a response, 'do something' is the inherent plea.'

    Might I suggest sending generous quantities of bubble wrap to each of the 'something must be done' brigade. Popping those bubbles is relaxing and calming. They will otherwise impatiently agitate for some ineffective, or more likely counter-productive measure that makes things drastically worse.

    ID4352889 , 12 Apr 2017 11:33
    Good grief. A sensible piece about Syria in The Guardian. I think i need a lie down.
    namjodh ID4352889 , 12 Apr 2017 11:35
    Quite
    zolotoy ID4352889 , 12 Apr 2017 11:46
    Not very sensible, actually -- see the comment by capatriot above (or below, if you do "newest first"). Rather appalling that someone with academic credentials would (1) engage in a comic book-style analysis of world politics (big bad nearly omnipotent supervillain!) and (2) put all the blame for the carnage and destruction on one side.
    lemonsuckingpedant ID4352889 , 12 Apr 2017 11:54
    I know, me too! Most disorientating.
    EdmundLange , 12 Apr 2017 11:29
    We tried to change the leader in Iraq. It didn't work, and now the country is a hotbed of terrorism and incredibly corrupt and ineffectual government. We tried to change the leader in Libya. It didn't work, and now the country is a hotbed of terrorism and incredibly corrupt and ineffectual government. I guess we could try to change the leader in Syria, if we really, really want.
    jonnyross EdmundLange , 12 Apr 2017 11:53
    Eventually Assad will lose. He started a sectarian bloodbath he simply can't win. The Russians and the Iranian-backed Shia jihadists will only delay the inevitable outcome.
    If Assad is lucky, he and his family may escape with their lives.
    EdmundLange jonnyross , 12 Apr 2017 11:58
    Excellent, I'm glad we're going to topple Assad so the Jihadists can take control. Just what we needed.
    ponderwell EdmundLange , 12 Apr 2017 12:00
    There are no solid beneficial choices...
    a recent familiar political theme in the US.
    capatriot , 12 Apr 2017 11:26

    He has reduced once great Syrian cities like Homs and Aleppo to rubble.

    What, he, personally? What is he, superman? And I wonder why he'd choose to do that to his own nation's cities?

    But wait, you mean that there was a rebellion against the recognized government which developed into a civil war, aided and abetted by sectarian outsiders and terrorists and the United States/West, with political and religious/ethnic overtones? And that later, as it looked like the recognized govt was going to fail, other interested outsiders like Russia and Iran intervened to help it?

    Gosh, I wonder what the least worst outcome for the people of Syria actually is here ... perhaps we should leave it to them?

    jonnyross capatriot , 12 Apr 2017 11:47
    "What, he, personally? What is he, superman? "

    Are you being obtuse deliberately?

    zolotoy jonnyross , 12 Apr 2017 11:56
    It's actually a very serious question. How much control does Assad have over his government, let alone his armed forces? He's a trained dentist, ferchrissakes, and his older brother was the one groomed for the <strike>throne</strike> presidency. It makes sense to assume that his powers over an entrenched nomenklatura, to say nothing of all of the different armed factions nominally serving him, aren't limitless.
    Social36 capatriot , 12 Apr 2017 12:18
    It's clearly ALL Obama's fault!

    [Apr 12, 2017] Mattis US-Russia Tensions Wont Spiral Out of Control by Jason Ditz

    There were rumors that the USA military brass is less hawkish then neocon chickenhawks. After all they say death with their own eyes. But those rumors seems to be greatly exaggerated. People who rise to the level of the top level military brass those days are mostly unprincipled sycophants and careerists (or worse sociopaths) that might be even more dangerous the civial neocon chickenhawks.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Two weeks ago, the Kremlin expressed major concern about US-Russia relations, describing them as "maybe even worse" than they had been during the Cold War. Since that time, they've gotten dramatically worse, with US missile attacks on Syria fueling soaring acrimony. ..."
    "... "I'm confident the Russians will act in their own best interests," Mattis insisted. Yet he also threatened further US strikes on Syria, and Russia has made clear in recent days that they would respond with force to any additional such US strikes. ..."
    Apr 12, 2017 | news.antiwar.com

    Mattis: US-Russia Tensions Won't Spiral Out of Control Insists Russia Won't Act Against Their 'Best Interests' , April 11, 2017

    Two weeks ago, the Kremlin expressed major concern about US-Russia relations, describing them as "maybe even worse" than they had been during the Cold War. Since that time, they've gotten dramatically worse, with US missile attacks on Syria fueling soaring acrimony.

    Secretary of Defense James Mattis sought to downplay the situation, however, saying that he was certain the situation "will not spiral out of control," a belief he appeared to rest on the idea that Russia wouldn't dare retaliate against further US attacks against Syria, as they have threatened to.

    "I'm confident the Russians will act in their own best interests," Mattis insisted. Yet he also threatened further US strikes on Syria, and Russia has made clear in recent days that they would respond with force to any additional such US strikes.

    [Apr 12, 2017] If Assad is removed, Iran is the next and then Russia

    Notable quotes:
    "... If Assad is removed, Syria falls and Iran is next. Russia absolutely cannot afford to have Iran destroyed by the Anglo-Zionists because after Iran, she will next. Everybody in Russia understands that. But, as I said, the problem with military responses is that they can lead to military escalations which then lead to wars which might turn nuclear very fast. ..."
    "... So here is my central thesis: You don't want Russia to stop the USA by purely military means as this places the survival of of mankind at risk. ..."
    "... I realize that for some this might be counter-intuitive, but remember that deterrences only works with rational actors . Russia has already done a lot, more than everybody else besides Iran. And if Russia is not the world's policeman, neither is she the world savior. The rest of mankind also needs to stop being a silent bystander and actually do something! ..."
    "... Russia and China can stop the US, but they need to do that together. And for that, Xi needs to stop acting like a detached smiling little Buddha statue and speak up loud and clear. ..."
    "... So far China has been supporting Russia, but only from behind. This is very nice and very prudent, but Russia is rapidly running out of resources. ..."
    "... The Russians are afraid of war. The Americans are not. The Russians are ready for war. The Americans are not. ..."
    "... The problem is that every sign of Russian caution and every Russian attempt to de-escalate the situation (be it in the Ukraine, with Turkey or in Syria) has always been interpreted by the West as a sign of weakness. ..."
    "... This is what happens when there is a clash between a culture which places a premium on boasting and threatening and one which believes in diplomacy and negotiations. ..."
    "... Russia is in a very difficult situation and a very bad one. And she is very much alone. European are cowards. Latin Americans have more courage, but no means to put pressure on the USA. India hopes to play both sides. Japan and the ROK are US colonies. Australia and New Zealand belong to the ECHELON / FIVE EYES gang. Russia has plenty of friends in Africa, but they more or less all live under the American/French boot. Iran has already sacrificed more than any other country and taken the biggest risks. It would be totally unfair to ask the Iranians to do more. The only actor out there who can do something in China. If there is any hopes to avoid four more years of "Obama-style nightmare" it is for China to step in and tell the US to cool it. ..."
    "... Maybe an impeachment of Trump could prove to be a blessing in disguise. If Mike Pence becomes President, he and his Neocons will have total power again and they won't have to prove that they are tough by doing stupid and dangerous things? Could President Pence be better than President Trump? I am afraid that it might. Especially if that triggers a deep internal crisis inside the USA. ..."
    Apr 12, 2017 | thesaker.is

    But the two countries which really need to step up to the plate are Russia and China. So far, it has been Russia who did all the hard work and, paradoxically, it has been Russia which has been the object of the dumbest and most ungrateful lack of gratitude (especially from armchair warriors). This needs to change. China has many more means to pressure the USA back into some semi-sane mental state than Russia. All Russia has are superb military capabilities. China, in contrast, has the ability to hurt the USA where it really matters: money. Russia is in a pickle: she cannot abandon Syria to the Takfiri crazies, but neither can she go to nuclear war with the USA over Syria. The problem is not Assad. The problem is that he is the only person capable, at least at this point in time, to protect Syria against Daesh.

    If Assad is removed, Syria falls and Iran is next. Russia absolutely cannot afford to have Iran destroyed by the Anglo-Zionists because after Iran, she will next. Everybody in Russia understands that. But, as I said, the problem with military responses is that they can lead to military escalations which then lead to wars which might turn nuclear very fast.

    So here is my central thesis: You don't want Russia to stop the USA by purely military means as this places the survival of of mankind at risk.

    I realize that for some this might be counter-intuitive, but remember that deterrences only works with rational actors . Russia has already done a lot, more than everybody else besides Iran. And if Russia is not the world's policeman, neither is she the world savior. The rest of mankind also needs to stop being a silent bystander and actually do something!

    Russia and China can stop the US, but they need to do that together. And for that, Xi needs to stop acting like a detached smiling little Buddha statue and speak up loud and clear. That is especially true since the Americans show even less fear of China than of Russia.

    [Sidebar: the Chinese military is still far behind the kind of capabilities Russia has, but the Chinese are catching up really, really fast. Just 30 years ago the Chinese military used to be outdated and primitive. This is not the case today. The Chinese have done some tremendous progress in a record time and their military is now a totally different beast than what it used to be.

    I have no doubt at all that the US cannot win a war with China either, especially not anywhere near the Chinese mainland. Furthermore, I expect the Chinese to go full steam ahead with a very energetic military modernization program which will allow them to close the gap with the USA and Russia in record time.

    So any notions of the USA using force against China, be it over Taiwan or the DPRK, is an absolutely terrible idea, sheer madness. However, and maybe because the Americans believe their own propaganda, it seems to me like the folks in DC think that we are in the 1950s or 1960 and that they can terrify the "Chinese communist peasants" with their carrier battle groups.

    What the fail to realize is that with every nautical mile the US carriers make towards China, the bigger and easier target they make for a military which has specialized in US carrier destruction operatons. The Americans ought to ask themselves a simple question: what will they do if the Chinese either sink or severely damage one (or several) US Navy carriers?

    Go to nuclear war with a nuclear China well capable of turning many US cities into nuclear wastelands? Really? You would trade New York or San Francisco for the Carl Vinson Strike Group? Think again.]

    So far China has been supporting Russia, but only from behind. This is very nice and very prudent, but Russia is rapidly running out of resources. If there was a sane man in the White House, one who would never ever do something which might result in war with Russia, that would not be a problem. Alas, just like Obama before him, Trump seems to think that he can win a game of nuclear chicken against Russia. But he can't. Let me be clear he: if pushed into a corner the Russian will fight, even if that means nuclear war. I have said this over and over again, there are two differences between the Americans and the Russians

    The Russians are afraid of war. The Americans are not. The Russians are ready for war. The Americans are not.

    The problem is that every sign of Russian caution and every Russian attempt to de-escalate the situation (be it in the Ukraine, with Turkey or in Syria) has always been interpreted by the West as a sign of weakness.

    This is what happens when there is a clash between a culture which places a premium on boasting and threatening and one which believes in diplomacy and negotiations.

    [Sidebar. The profound cultural differences between the USA and Russia are perfectly illustrated with the polar difference the two countries have towards their most advanced weapons systems. As soon as the Americans declassify one of their weapon systems they engage into a huge marketing campaign to describe it as the "bestest of the bestest" "in the world" (always, "in the world" as if somebody bothered to research this or even compare). They explain at length how awesome their technology is and how invincible it makes them. The perfect illustration is all the (now, in retrospect, rather ridiculous) propaganda about stealth and stealth aircraft. The Russians do the exact opposite. First, they try to classify it all. But then, when eventually they declassify a weapons system, they strenuously under-report its real capabilities even when it is quite clear that the entire planet already knows the truth!

    There have been any instances when Soviet disarmament negotiators knew less about the real Soviet capabilities than their American counterparts!

    Finally, when the Russian export their weapons systems, they always strongly degrade the export model, at least that was the model until the Russians sold the SU-30MKI to India which included thrust vectoring while the Russian SU-30 only acquired later with the SU-30SM model, so this might be changing.

    Ask yourself: did you ever hear about the Russian Kalibr cruise missile before their first use in Syria? Or did you know that Russia has had nuclear underwater missiles since the late 1970 s capable of "flying under water" as speeds exceeding 230 miles per hour?]

    Russia is in a very difficult situation and a very bad one. And she is very much alone. European are cowards. Latin Americans have more courage, but no means to put pressure on the USA. India hopes to play both sides. Japan and the ROK are US colonies. Australia and New Zealand belong to the ECHELON / FIVE EYES gang. Russia has plenty of friends in Africa, but they more or less all live under the American/French boot. Iran has already sacrificed more than any other country and taken the biggest risks. It would be totally unfair to ask the Iranians to do more. The only actor out there who can do something in China. If there is any hopes to avoid four more years of "Obama-style nightmare" it is for China to step in and tell the US to cool it.

    In the meantime Russia will walk a very fine like between various bad options. Her best hope, and the best hope of the rest of mankind, is that the US elites become so involved into fighting each other that this will leave very little time to do any foreign policy. Alas, it appears that Trump has "figured out" that one way to be smart (or so he thinks) in internal politics is to do something dumb in external politics (like attack Syria). That won't work.

    Maybe an impeachment of Trump could prove to be a blessing in disguise. If Mike Pence becomes President, he and his Neocons will have total power again and they won't have to prove that they are tough by doing stupid and dangerous things? Could President Pence be better than President Trump? I am afraid that it might. Especially if that triggers a deep internal crisis inside the USA.

    [Apr 12, 2017] Look at what the Bolivian representative at the UNSC dared to do:

    Notable quotes:
    "... Bolivia: a profile in courage ..."
    "... Your long explanation of current reality in Europe, which seemingly contradicts Saker's sentence you quoted, says exactly the same. There is no dignity. What you listed are excuses. None of the European countries condemned the obvious aggression on Syria in UN. Where is dignity in that? Nowhere and is it a shame. I am from EU and I find the EU's position shameful as well. ..."
    "... Bolivia mercilessly trolls US over Iraq WMD lie in front of UN Security Council (VIDEO) https://www.rt.com/viral/383979-bolivia-un-syria-us-wmd/ ..."
    "... Exactly rigth, well said. There is nothing to admire about EU, but plenty to despise. From its Russophobic mentality to spineless following of orders from their masters in Washington. ..."
    "... Not a single one of these puppets have criticised obvious crime of aggression by US against sovereign state of Syria. Not a single one. But they all bark at Russia and follow lies and spread fake news. Like a pack of hyenas. ..."
    Apr 12, 2017 | thesaker.is
    Some countries, however, are showing an absolutely amazing level of courage. Look at what the Bolivian representative at the UNSC dared to do:

    Bolivia: a profile in courage

    And what a shame for Europe: a small and poor country like Bolivia showed more dignity that the entire European continent. No wonder the Russians have no respect for the EU whatsoever.

    What Bolivia did is both beautiful and noble.

    Anonymous on April 11, 2017 , · at 10:21 am UTC
    Your long explanation of current reality in Europe, which seemingly contradicts Saker's sentence you quoted, says exactly the same. There is no dignity. What you listed are excuses. None of the European countries condemned the obvious aggression on Syria in UN. Where is dignity in that? Nowhere and is it a shame. I am from EU and I find the EU's position shameful as well.

    Bolivia clearly condemned the strikes. Speaking at the emergency meeting to discuss the United States' missile strikes against Syria on Thursday, Bolivian Ambassador to the United Nations, Sacha Llorenti, criticized the Trump's decision to take unilateral action against Syria, which he described as being "an extremely serious violation of international law."

    Bolivia mercilessly trolls US over Iraq WMD lie in front of UN Security Council (VIDEO)
    https://www.rt.com/viral/383979-bolivia-un-syria-us-wmd/

    Melotte 22 on April 11, 2017 , · at 11:35 am UTC
    Exactly rigth, well said. There is nothing to admire about EU, but plenty to despise. From its Russophobic mentality to spineless following of orders from their masters in Washington.

    Not a single one of these puppets have criticised obvious crime of aggression by US against sovereign state of Syria. Not a single one. But they all bark at Russia and follow lies and spread fake news. Like a pack of hyenas.

    [Apr 12, 2017] US Threatens Further Attacks on Syria

    Apr 12, 2017 | news.antiwar.com

    US Threatens Further Attacks on Syria
    Despite Threats, Mattis Insists US Policy 'Unchanged'

    by Jason Ditz, April 11, 2017

    Print This | Share This


    With the region still reeling after last week's US missile attacks on Syria, top administration officials continue to threaten further attacks against the Syrian military, with the White House saying President Trump retains the option to attack Syria whenever he thinks it's "in the national interest."

    Defense Secretary James Mattis concurred, adding that any use of chemical weapons would draw US attacks against the Syrian government. The US claimed last week's attacks were a response to an accused Syrian "gas attack" against rebel-held Idlib.

    Since then, US officials have repeatedly talked up thew idea of further missile attacks against Syria, though at the same thing Mattis once again insisted today that US military policy in Syria is totally unchanged in the wake of the attacks.

    That's demonstrably untrue, of course, as Pentagon officials have confirmed changes inside Syria designed to protect US ground troops from potential retaliation, and have confirmed that US airstrikes against ISIS targets have decreased significantly since the attack, again fearing Syrian air defense will target the US warplanes as potential hostiles.

    Officials have sent conflicting messages on their exact position on Syria since then, insisting that ISIS remains their "priority," but continuing to pick fights with the Syrian government, and needle Russia in such a way as to greatly diminish the US ability to operate against ISIS.

    [Apr 12, 2017] White House claims on Syria chemical attack 'obviously false' – MIT professor

    Notable quotes:
    "... "contains absolutely no evidence that this attack was the result of a munition being dropped from an aircraft," ..."
    "... "I believe it can be shown, without doubt, that the document does not provide any evidence whatsoever that the US government has concrete knowledge that the government of Syria was the source of the chemical attack in Khan Shaykhun," ..."
    "... "I have only had a few hours to quickly review the alleged White House intelligence report. But a quick perusal shows without a lot of analysis that this report cannot be correct," ..."
    "... "very clear who planned this attack, who authorized this attack and who conducted this attack itself," ..."
    "... "doubting the entire international reporting crew documenting this." ..."
    "... "a wide body of open-source material" ..."
    "... "social media accounts" ..."
    "... "Any competent analyst would have had questions about whether the debris in the crater was staged or real," ..."
    "... "No competent analyst would miss the fact that the alleged sarin canister was forcefully crushed from above, rather than exploded by a munition within it." ..."
    "... "the most plausible conclusion is that the sarin was dispensed by an improvised dispersal device made from a 122mm section of rocket tube filled with sarin and capped on both sides." ..."
    "... "We again have a situation where the White House has issued an obviously false, misleading and amateurish intelligence report," ..."
    "... "What the country is now being told by the White House cannot be true," ..."
    "... "and the fact that this information has been provided in this format raises the most serious questions about the handling of our national security." ..."
    Apr 12, 2017 | www.rt.com
    A professor who challenged the 2013 claims of a chemical attack in Syria is now questioning the Trump administration's narrative blaming the Assad government for the April 4 attack in the Idlib province town of Khan Shaykhun. On Tuesday, the White House released a declassified intelligence brief accusing Syrian President Bashar Assad of ordering and organizing the attack, in which Syrian planes allegedly dropped chemical ordnance on civilians in the rebel-held town.

    The report "contains absolutely no evidence that this attack was the result of a munition being dropped from an aircraft," wrote Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Professor Theodore Postol, who reviewed it and put together a 14-page assessment, which he provided to RT on Wednesday.

    Leading CW expert Theodor Postol of MIT just published a 14-page document questioning WH claims that Sarin was dropped from #Syrian AF plane pic.twitter.com/kMJgxwsN8Z

    - EHSANI2 (@EHSANI22) April 12, 2017

    "I believe it can be shown, without doubt, that the document does not provide any evidence whatsoever that the US government has concrete knowledge that the government of Syria was the source of the chemical attack in Khan Shaykhun," wrote Postol.

    A chemical attack with a nerve agent did occur, he said, but the available evidence does not support the US government's conclusions.

    Read more US accuses Moscow of 'sowing doubt' over narrative of Assad's culpability in chemical attack

    "I have only had a few hours to quickly review the alleged White House intelligence report. But a quick perusal shows without a lot of analysis that this report cannot be correct," Postol wrote.

    It is "very clear who planned this attack, who authorized this attack and who conducted this attack itself," Defense Secretary James Mattis told reporters at the Pentagon on Tuesday.

    Earlier in the day, White House spokesman Sean Spicer also said that doubting the evidence would be "doubting the entire international reporting crew documenting this."

    The report offered by the White House , however, cited "a wide body of open-source material" and "social media accounts" from the rebel-held area, including footage provided by the White Helmets rescue group documented to have ties with jihadist rebels, Western and Gulf Arab governments.

    Postol was not convinced by such evidence.

    "Any competent analyst would have had questions about whether the debris in the crater was staged or real," he wrote. "No competent analyst would miss the fact that the alleged sarin canister was forcefully crushed from above, rather than exploded by a munition within it."

    Instead, "the most plausible conclusion is that the sarin was dispensed by an improvised dispersal device made from a 122mm section of rocket tube filled with sarin and capped on both sides."

    "We again have a situation where the White House has issued an obviously false, misleading and amateurish intelligence report," he concluded, recalling the 2013 situation when the Obama administration claimed Assad had used chemical weapons against the rebels in Ghouta, near Damascus.

    "What the country is now being told by the White House cannot be true," Postol wrote, "and the fact that this information has been provided in this format raises the most serious questions about the handling of our national security."

    Report by White House Alleging Proof of Syria as the Perpetrator of the Nerve Agent Attack in Khan Shaykhun... by RT America on Scribd

    [Apr 12, 2017] Did Assad Really Use Sarin

    Notable quotes:
    "... is a journalist based in Madison, WI whose work focuses on the Middle East. He can be reached via Twitter @paulgottinger or email: [email protected] ..."
    Apr 12, 2017 | www.counterpunch.org

    Almost immediately after video of the alleged chemical weapons attack in Idlib hit Western media, Assad was declared guilty by US news networks and political commentators. The front page of the New York Times on April 5 th showed a heartbreaking image of a child wounded in the alleged chemical attack with a headline claiming Assad was responsible.

    By the afternoon of April 7, a US attack seemed inevitable as both Rex Tillerson and Trump said action would be taken.

    Between Democrats and Republicans, a bipartisan consensus emerged, rare in the Trump presidency, whereby Assad was deemed guilty and Trump was goaded on to attack. The few voices of dissent seemed mostly concerned with the lack of constitutional approval for the strike

    The night of the strike, US media snapped into DPRK-style, state media mode. TV pundits fell into a trance while expressing the " beauty " of American power being unleashed on a country already destroyed by 6 years of war.

    Pundits described the attack as "surgical" despite the pentagon quietly admitting one of the missiles missed its target and they don't know where it landed. My questions to both CENTCOM and the Secretary of Defense Office on the missing cruise missile have thus far gone unanswered. However, Syrian sources claim civilians were killed in the missile strike.

    Trump justified the attack by invoking religiously themed buzzwords and unconvincing blather on the "beautiful babies" murdered in the chemical attack.

    Following the attack, Trump officials' statements indicated there was a shift towards regime change. UN ambassador Nikki Haley said Sunday that removing Assad is now a priority.

    The Neocon sharks have started circling too. Bill Kristol tweeted that these strikes should be used to move towards regime change in Iran. Marco Rubio, Lindsey Graham, and John McCain have all joined in too, their mouths watering at the thought of ousting Assad.

    But was Assad really responsible for the attack?

    To ask such a question is to be deemed an "Assadist" by pundits and discourse police across the political spectrum.

    Neither the lack of an independent investigation, nor the fact that nearly all the information on the alleged attack has come from rebel sources, who stand to benefit from a US response, is deemed sufficient cause for skepticism.

    In a civilized society an actor is be presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. If guilt is determined, a legally justified course of action is taken. In the US however, if the accused is a US enemy, no evidence is needed, and even deranged conspiracies are given play in mainstream media coverage.

    The best recent example of this is the US media's conspiracy about Russia stealing the US election and working for Trump. The US media has stooped so low as to even push bizarre conspiracies by Louise Mensch . She recently claimed the 2014 uprising in Ferguson was a Russian plot.

    In the case of the alleged attack on Khan Sheikhun, US officials and pro-war experts immediately declared Assad's guilty and then cheered on an illegal use of force. This is all very reminiscent of the lead up to the Iraq war.

    In an eerie coincidence, Michael R. Gordon, who with Judith Miller helped sell the Iraq WMD story to Americans, coauthored the New York Times April 4th article on Assad's alleged sarin attack at Khan Sheikhun.

    To help sell the sarin narrative, the US media brought on a doctor to describe the alleged attack that has been accused of helping kidnap journalists in his work with extremists.

    When the US investigated its own airstrike in Mosul this March, it took a number of days before it admitted it had killed hundreds of civilians. Yet, guilt was immediately assigned in the Khan Sheikhun attack.

    In 2013, the US media also rushed to the conclusion Assad used sarin in a horrific incident in Ghouta. The US was on the verge of attacking Assad then, but Obama decided against it. Obama claimed he held off because US intelligence voiced skepticism about Assad's guilt.

    The UN investigation on the Ghouta attack took almost a month and even its conclusions have been disputed.

    In December of 2013, Seymour Hersh published a lengthy investigation into the 2013 attack in Ghouta and found reason to doubt Assad's responsibility for attack. He was forced to publish it in the London Review of Books after the New York Times and the Washington Post refused to run it.

    He reported that classified US reports claimed that Syria's al Qaeda affiliate had "mastered the mechanics of creating sarin".

    A month after Hersh's piece appeared, a MIT study cast further doubt on the US government's story by demonstrating that the rockets used in the Ghouta attack couldn't have flown as far as the US government claimed.

    Ted Postol, one of the authors of the study said, "We were within a whisker of war based on egregious errors."

    In this latest alleged gas attack, a few individuals have dared question the state narrative.

    The journalist Robert Parry has recently claimed there is much to be made of the fact that Mike Pompeo, the CIA Director, wasn't among those helping sell this latest sarin story to the American people. He believes it indicates doubt in the CIA over Assad's involvement.

    Scott Ritter, a former UN weapons inspector in Iraq, has raised skepticism over Assad's involvement. He says rebels have had chemical weapons facilities in Syria and some of the witnesses' statements describe a strong smell during the attack, which indicates something other than sarin was used.

    The Canadian government originally called for an investigation and stopped short of blaming Assad at the UN, but then later championed Trump's strikes.

    Groups like Organizations for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and Human Rights Watch are still investigating the alleged attack in Khan Sheikhun.

    Whether these groups or others will be able to conduct an independent investigation is not known. But in usual fashion, the US had no interest in investigating facts, which may provide the wrong answers.

    It's possible that Assad carried out the attack, but just because he's a reprehensible figure doesn't mean there is no need to present evidence and conduct an independent investigation.

    What's clear now is that the US attack benefitted jihadi groups, has made further US military action more likely, and has increased the chances of a direct military confrontation with Russia. All of these results are very dangerous.

    Future US military action in Syria should be resisted with popular pressure. History shows we can't count on the media or pundits to act as the voice of reason. Join the debate on Facebook

    Paul Gottinger is a journalist based in Madison, WI whose work focuses on the Middle East. He can be reached via Twitter @paulgottinger or email: [email protected]

    [Apr 12, 2017] Putin Will Not Meet Tillerson In Russia, As Confusion Grows Over US Policy Toward Syria

    Putin changed he mind :-)
    Notable quotes:
    "... Once again reiterating the policy confusion over Syria, Tillerson said at the weekend that the defeat of Islamic State remained the U.S. priority, while the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley said that "regime change" in Syria was also a priority for Trump. ..."
    "... "The Americans say they agree, but there's nothing to show for it behind (the scenes). They are absent from this and are navigating aimlessly in the dark," said a senior European diplomat, who declined to be named. ..."
    "... They will also discuss Libya. Italy is hoping for vocal support for a United Nations-backed government in Tripoli which has struggled to establish its authority even in the city, let alone in the rest of the violence-plagued north African country. ..."
    www.zerohedge.com
    Apr 10, 2017 | http://www.zerohedge.com/print/592878

    While the US ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, and US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson seem unable to agree on what the right policy is regarding Syria and specifically Assad, with the former saying a top priority of Trump is to oust Assad, while the latter claimed over the weekend that the Islamic State is the key concern while Assad's fate and that the people of Syria should decide Assad's fate, Russia is not waiting for clarification.

    On Monday morning, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters that U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was not due to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin when he visits Moscow later this week. He will meet Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov however, Peskov said.

    "So far there is no meeting with Tillerson on the president's schedule," Peskov told reporters in a phone call. "We never announce such meetings, whether they will take place or not – we won't announce it."

    The Kremlin spokesman assured reporters though that if there is such a plan, media would be "properly notified."

    Commenting on U.S. missile strikes against Syria last week, Peskov said the action had shown Washington's total unwillingness to cooperate on Syria. He said renewed calls for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to step down would not help to resolve the crisis.

    "The US side thus has demonstrated a complete unwillingness to somehow cooperate on Syria and take into account each others' interests and concerns," Peskov said, while commenting on the suspension of the Memorandum on Air Safety in the aftermath of the US missile strike on Syrian military airfield overnight on Thursday.

    "There is no other alternative," to peace talks in Geneva and Astana, Peskov said.

    Meanwhile Tillerson, who on Monday was in Italy for a meeting of G7 foreign ministers in Tuscany, said the United States will hold responsible anyone who commits crimes against humanity, just days after the U.S. military unexpectedly attacked Syria. We assume US drone operators, whose actions have caused thousands of innocents deaths over the past decade, will be exempts from this "responsibility."

    While prior to the April 7 missile strikes President Donald Trump had indicated he would be less interventionist than his predecessors and willing to overlook human rights abuses if it was in U.S. interests, Tillerson said the United States would not let such crimes go unchallenged. "We rededicate ourselves to holding to account any and all who commit crimes against the innocents anywhere in the world," he told reporters while commemorating a 1944 German Nazi massacre in Sant'Anna di Stazzema.

    As Reuters adds, European ministers are eager to hear whether Washington is now committed to overthrowing Assad, who is backed by Russia. They also want the United States to put pressure on Moscow to distance itself from Assad.

    Once again reiterating the policy confusion over Syria, Tillerson said at the weekend that the defeat of Islamic State remained the U.S. priority, while the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley said that "regime change" in Syria was also a priority for Trump.

    The mixed messages have confused and frustrated European allies, who are eager for full U.S. support for a political solution based on a transfer of power in Damascus.

    "The Americans say they agree, but there's nothing to show for it behind (the scenes). They are absent from this and are navigating aimlessly in the dark," said a senior European diplomat, who declined to be named.

    Italy, Germany, France and Britain have invited foreign ministers from Turkey, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Jordan and Qatar to sit down with the G7 group on Tuesday morning to discuss Syria. All oppose Assad's rule.

    The foreign ministers' discussions in Tuscany will prepare the way for a leaders' summit in Sicily at the end of May where foreign ministers will also talk about growing tensions with North Korea, as the United States moves a navy strike group near the Korean peninsula amid concerns over Pyongyang's nuclear ambitions.

    They will also discuss Libya. Italy is hoping for vocal support for a United Nations-backed government in Tripoli which has struggled to establish its authority even in the city, let alone in the rest of the violence-plagued north African country. The Trump administration has not yet defined a clear policy and Rome fears Washington may fall into step with Egypt and Russia, which support general Khalifa Haftar, a powerful figure in eastern Libya.

    [Apr 12, 2017] Arnaldo Claudio on National Security Advisor Gen. H.R. McMasters human rights violations of Iraqis in 2005

    Mar 31, 2017 | www.libertarianinstitute.org

    Arnaldo Claudio, a retired senior US Military Police officer, discusses his 2005 investigation of human rights abuses of detainees in Tal Afar, in a camp commanded by then-Colonel H.R. McMaster, whom Claudio threatened to arrest.

    According to Claudio, detainees were kept in overcrowded conditions, handcuffed, deprived of food and water, and soiled by their own urine and feces.

    A so-called "good behavior program" was implemented by McMaster, that held detainees indefinitely (beyond a rule requiring release after 2 weeks) unless they provided "actionable intelligence."

    [Apr 12, 2017] The Verifiable Information Vacuum From Syria

    Apr 12, 2017 | original.antiwar.com

    It is hard to underestimate the paucity of objective information coming from Syria.

    Wars always have their propaganda machine feeding media sources, from the Israeli Army's largely false assertions that Hamas used human shields during the 2014 Gaza War to Robert McNamara's claim that American campaigns were leading to success in Vietnam. But rarely has the public been fed and believed information from a rebel opposition dominated by terrorist groups, as is the case in the Syrian Civil War. The lack of the civil war's neutral information may be the case in the recent images we saw from apparent chemical attacks in Khan Sheikhoun, Idlib province, Syria, where Al-Nusra is the most powerful opposition group.

    The Syrian opposition has been trying to get the US to overthrow Syrian President Bashar al-Assad since the beginning of the conflict. After the US's "leading from behind" in the NATO-led overthrow of Libyan ruler Muammar Gaddafi, the Syrian opposition assumed that Assad's head would be next on the US's chopping block. But this would not come to pass.

    It should be remembered that these initial anti-Assad protests were certainly legitimate acts of dissent and the Assad regime overreacted with disproportionate violence. In response, protesters grew in number and the regime increased its violence, leading to the development of an armed opposition, shortly after which the US, Europe and Gulf States called for Assad to step down. Though receiving arms and funding from its international supporters, the rebel opposition had trouble coalescing and remained highly disorganized, during which time terrorist groups, such as al-Nusra, ISIS and Ahrar al Sham, established themselves in Syria. These terrorist groups were far more organized and effective at fighting than the discombobulated opposition and soon became the principal anti-regime actors in Syria. Thousands of disaffected fighters from the "moderate" opposition joined these terrorist groups, as they proved to be the most effective fighting forces against Assad.

    This brings us back to the informational vacuum that is the Syrian Civil War. On the one hand, Russian, Syrian and Iranian state news continuously depicting Assad's war on "terrorists," which is not entirely true – the opposition is not fully composed of jihadists. Interestingly, Assad and his supporters used the same "terrorist" designation early in the conflict, when there were few terrorist groups involved, as there are now. On the other side, there is rebel media, consisting of White Helmets (pro-Assad media shows members of the White Helmets holding weapons next to ISIS members and the White Helmets cinematographer had been previously barred from entering the United States under Obama) and other partisans supporting the ouster of Assad.

    While some non-mainstream Western journalists are occasionally based with the Assad regime, it suffices to say that they usually only present one side of the story – the pro-regime one – and tend to already be partial towards the regime. In opposition-held territory, journalists rarely, if ever, dare to venture. This is due to safety concerns of reporting from regions where "moderate" opposition groups often ally and commingle with more powerful terrorist groups. The result is an absence of verifiable, unbiased information emerging from the Syrian conflict.

    Rather than acknowledging this complexity and the difficulty of discerning the veracity of information emerging from Syria, the Western media often plays footage it receives from the opposition; an opposition that even US government officials have long acknowledged is terrorist-dominated.

    This level of gullibility that the Western media has towards rebel footage is quite astounding. For instance, it would be like relying on propaganda footage taken by Bin Laden and spreading it as though it were factual.

    With the recent chemical weapons attack footage, there is a significant chance that we're being played by al-Nusra, or even by the "moderate" opposition. Then again, reality could be closer to what we are told/shown: a brutal chemical attack by the Syrian regime was orchestrated on the people of Khan Sheikhoun.

    Even if the latter were true, brutal as this maybe, it is far less harrowing than the totality of the Syrian Civil War that has killed approximately a half million people. The goal should be stopping the war, rather reacting to what amounts to less than a pinprick that took less than 100 lives.

    It should also make us question how we respond to digital information that we receive today, amidst a cacophony of news images. How does it affect us?

    If one recalls, the events which seemed to push the West into beginning the campaign against ISIS in September 2014, were the horrible images fed to the media by terrorists (again?) showing the decapitation of journalist James Foley and other Americans. Should video recordings that are designed to incite us, the viewer, have their intended effect? Obama's airstrikes seemed to serve ISIS's purpose, increasing their popularity and allure for young disaffected Muslim men, who were often marginalized in Western societies.

    This has happened against in April 2017, after President Donald Trump viewed images from the Khan Sheikhoun attack and immediately reversed his more realistic policy of not supporting regime change, through launching 59 Tomahawk missiles at the Syrian government airbase of Shayrat. Should we reflexively react to images that emotionally move us? Or would a clear, concise strategy towards terrorism and peacebuilding in the region serve us better?

    Trump's strike on Syria government forces also makes us consider how American politicians and the public react to military strikes – worryingly, it is with utmost reverence. While Democrats and even some Republicans have compulsively criticized Trump for alleged Russia ties and seeking US-Russia rapprochement; orchestrating a military strike receives support from an overwhelming majority.

    Whether this is a "one-off" strike against the Syrian government or may escalate into further conflict with Syria, and potentially Russia, remains to be seen. One thing is for certain, it has temporarily increased the popularity of a failing administration, helped coalesce a fractured Republican Party and neutered the hostile Democratic opposition.

    The question of whether this Tomahawk strike will prove to be a kind of Gulf of Tonkin event, leading the US to a path of embroiled long-term conflict in Syria – that question remains open.

    Whatever the future may hold, we should try to remember this simple fact: when there are no independent observers on the ground in a conflict, one should be wary of the information presented.

    Peter Crowley is a recent graduate from the Northeastern University Global Studies' Conflict Resolution MS program. He works as a Workflow Coordinator for a prominent library science company. His writings can be found in Boston Literary Magazine, Mint Press News, (several publications in) Wilderness House Literary Review, Mondoweiss, Green Fuse Press, Inquiries Journal, and a periodical publication of the Brookline, MA Historical Society.

    [Apr 12, 2017] US Officials Cant Explain Reason for Syria Chemical Attack

    Apr 12, 2017 | news.antiwar.com

    While it wouldn't be unusual for Syria to bomb targets belonging to al-Qaeda's Nusra Front in the Idlib Province with airstrikes, a big hole in the US-backed allegations of a "chemical weapons attack" by the Syrian military is that there was no reason for such a strike.

    Administration officials are trying to manufacture one, with an unnamed "senior official" today delivering a briefing to the media claiming that the Syrian military was afraid of a rebel offensive in the Hama Province, and launched the attack against the rebels' rear support areas for operational purposes.

    This new narrative, that the strike was done for operational reasons,, seemingly contradicts previous claims that Syria attacked civilians with chemical weapons for no reason at all, and when pressed by reporters, the US official was clearly shaken, insisting the attacks were for operational purposes, but not against militarily significant targets, which of course wouldn't make sense.

    On top of this, the US narrative's initial premise is faulty, as the Hama offensive had already ground to a halt two weeks prior to the putative Syrian attack, and Syrian forces appeared well on their way to recovering lost territory from the rebels.

    Small tit-for-tat offensives and counteroffensives on the frontier between government and rebel forces are common enough at any rate, that the losing a handful of villages in northern Hama would not have sparked such an act of desperation, meaning the US claim is not credible.

    If anything, the underlying assumptions make Russia's own narrative of conventional attacks against al-Qaeda's Nusra Front make even more sense, since the US apparently assessed the area targeted as having operational significance to the jihadist rebels.

    [Apr 12, 2017] Tillerson Meets Putin; Visit Polite But Major Differences Remain

    Apr 12, 2017 | news.antiwar.com
    The tone of the conference was polite, with both sides emphasizing current problems with bilateral relati ons and the need to improve on the current "low point," but in addressing questions from reporters, the answers almost exclusively needled the other side, underscoring how deeply divided the nations are.

    Tillerson continued to hype accusations of a Syrian "gas attack" last week, though he admitted when pressed that his repeated accusations of Russian involvement or at least complicity in the incident weren't based on any "firm" information that the US possesses.

    On top of that, Tillerson complained of Syria's use of cluster bombs in the civil war, arguing they are "designed to maim." The US, of course, also has rejected the global cluster munition ban, and has routinely used them in their various wars.

    But the most tense moment was likely the talk of interference in the 2016 US elections, with Tillerson insisting that Russia had done so, and that more sanctions might be warranted. Lavrov fired back that the allegations were slanderous, and pushed for actual evidence.

    The demand for evidence of US accusations was a big talking point for Lavrov, who urged an impartial, international investigation into the putative gas attack, instead of just drawing conclusions and reacting before the information is all in.

    Lavrov went on to criticize the US impulse to impose regime change in general, citing a long list of US failures dating back to Serbia, the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the NATO regime change in Libya, and culminating with the establishment of, and virtually immediate collapse of, South Sudan.

    [Apr 12, 2017] Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson: The Syrian chemical attack story is a hoax

    Notable quotes:
    "... However, it is now quite obvious that "a number of intelligence sources have made contradictory assessments, saying the preponderance of evidence suggests that Al Qaeda-affiliated rebels were at fault, either by orchestrating an intentional release of a chemical agent as a provocation or by possessing containers of poison gas that ruptured during a conventional bombing raid." [Robert Parry - Trump's 'Wag the Dog' Moment ] ..."
    "... According to Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson's well informed sources, the explanation presented by the Russians is the most likely scenario. ..."
    "... I would probably have missed the meaning of these few words if it was not for the fact that a well informed source has told me last night that the US will indeed seek a no-fly zone on the entire part of Syria West of the Euphrates. ..."
    Apr 10, 2017 | gosint.wordpress.com

    "Assad's military has gained a decisive advantage over the rebels and he had just scored a major diplomatic victory with the Trump administration's announcement that the U.S. was no longer seeking 'regime change' in Syria. The savvy Assad would know that a chemical weapon attack now would likely result in U.S. retaliation and jeopardize the gains that his military has achieved with Russian and Iranian help. ( ) But logic and respect for facts no longer prevail inside Official Washington, nor inside the mainstream U.S. news media."

    Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson - Former Chief of Staff to Colin Powell - does not believe the official narrative of the 'Syrian chemical attack'. Former CIA officer Philip Giraldi agrees and describes the story as nothing short of a "sham". Follow us on Twitter: @INTEL_TODAY

    Last Thursday, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson claimed the U.S. Intelligence Community had assessed with a "high degree of confidence" that the Syrian government forces had unleashed a toxic chemical bomb against innocent civilians in Khan Sheikhoun in Syria's Idlib Governate.

    However, it is now quite obvious that "a number of intelligence sources have made contradictory assessments, saying the preponderance of evidence suggests that Al Qaeda-affiliated rebels were at fault, either by orchestrating an intentional release of a chemical agent as a provocation or by possessing containers of poison gas that ruptured during a conventional bombing raid." [Robert Parry - Trump's 'Wag the Dog' Moment ]

    According to Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson's well informed sources, the explanation presented by the Russians is the most likely scenario. Wilkerson also confirmed that the intelligence on this ISIS depot had been shared prior to the strike with both US and Russian Military.

    "In fact most of my sources are telling me - including members of the team that monitor global chemical weapons, including people in Syria, including people in the US Intelligence community - that what most likely happened (and this intelligence was shared with the US by Russia in accordance with the de-conflicting agreement) is that they hit a warehouse that they intended to hit and had told both sides, Russia and the US, that they were going to hit. This is a serious air force, of course. And this warehouse was alleged to have ISIS supply in it and indeed it probably did. And some of these supplies were precursors for chemicals (or possibly an alternative they were phosphates for fertilizing) Conventional bombs hit the warehouse and the wind dispersed these ingredients and killed some people."

    RELATED POST: Former CIA Analyst Ray McGovern debunks the alleged Syria 'Chemical Attack'

    Former CIA officer Philip Giraldi

    Giraldi told Scott Horton's Webcast :

    "I'm hearing from sources on the ground in the Middle East, people who are intimately familiar with the intelligence that is available who are saying that the essential narrative that we're all hearing about the Syrian government or the Russians using chemical weapons on innocent civilians is a sham."

    "The intelligence confirms pretty much the account that the Russians have been giving which is that they hit a warehouse where the rebels – now these are rebels that are, of course, connected with Al Qaeda – where the rebels were storing chemicals of their own and it basically caused an explosion that resulted in the casualties. Apparently the intelligence on this is very clear."

    RELATED POST: Former CIA Analyst Philip Giraldi: "Morell's bluster deserves a bit of a fact check"

    Former DIA Colonel Pat Lang

    Yesterday, the former DIA officer posted the following analysis:

    "The American media and many American political leaders, Republicans and Democrats, are a complete disgrace as they have cheered Donald Trump's illegal and unjustified order to launch of cruise missiles against a backwater Syrian Air Force outpost. The American public are being sold a profound and dangerous lie via a massive propaganda campaign that, without one shred of empirical evidence, insists that the Air Force of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad dropped a chemical weapon for the express purpose of killing civilians. That did not happen. There is no intelligence supporting this claim by the Trump Administration." [ Where Are the Heroes?]

    RELATED POST: Former DIA Colonel: "US strikes on Syria based on a lie"

    A cryptic statement around the 5′ mark, Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson drops a strange comment:

    "Assad has a number of ways to achieve this - Including artillery - which by the way a no-fly zone would not stop "

    I would probably have missed the meaning of these few words if it was not for the fact that a well informed source has told me last night that the US will indeed seek a no-fly zone on the entire part of Syria West of the Euphrates.

    About Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson

    Lawrence B. "Larry" Wilkerson (born 15 June 1945) is a retired United States Army Colonel and former chief of staff to United States Secretary of State Colin Powell. Wilkerson has criticized many aspects of the Iraq War, including his own preparation of Powell's presentation to the UN.

    "My participation in that presentation at the UN constitutes the lowest point in my professional life. I participated in a hoax on the American people, the international community and the United Nations Security Council."

    RELATED POST: TURKEY - Former US Secretary chief of staff: "The CIA knew about the coming coup "

    Interview: "Trump Attack on Syria Driven by Domestic Politics"

    Lawrence Wilkerson - Wikipedia

    Ex-CIA Agent: The Official Story of Syria Govt "Gassing Innocent Civilians is a Sham"

    =

    Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson: "The Syrian chemical attack story is a hoax."

    Related

    [Apr 12, 2017] US-Russia relations at a low, says Tillerson after meeting with Putin

    Notable quotes:
    "... "The perspective from the US is supported by facts we have that are conclusive that the chemical attack was planned and directed and executed by Syrian regime forces," Tillerson said, adding that the "reign of the Assad family is coming to an end" and "Russia perhaps has the best means of helping the Assad regime recognise this reality". ..."
    Apr 12, 2017 | www.theguardian.com

    Tillerson stuck to the Trump administration insistence that a chemical weapons attack that killed more than 80 people last week in Syria was the work of -> Bashar al-Assad , and that the Syrian president could play no part in the country's long-term future.

    "The perspective from the US is supported by facts we have that are conclusive that the chemical attack was planned and directed and executed by Syrian regime forces," Tillerson said, adding that the "reign of the Assad family is coming to an end" and "Russia perhaps has the best means of helping the Assad regime recognise this reality".

    [Apr 12, 2017] A multi-level analysis of the US cruise missile attack on Syria and its consequences The Vineyard of the Saker

    Apr 12, 2017 | thesaker.is
    The pretext:

    I don't think that anybody seriously believes that Assad or anybody else in the Syrian government really ordered a chemical weapons attack on anybody. To believe that it would require you to find the following sequence logical: first, Assad pretty much wins the war against Daesh which is in full retreat . Then, the US declares that overthrowing Assad is not a priority anymore (up to here this is all factual and true). Then, Assad decides to use weapons he does not have . He decides to bomb a location with no military value, but with lots of kids and cameras. Then, when the Russians demand a full investigation, the Americans strike as fast as they can before this idea gets any support. And now the Americans are probing a possible Russian role in this so-called attack . Frankly, if you believe any of that, you should immediately stop reading and go back to watching TV. For the rest of us, there are three options:

    a classical US-executed false flag a Syrian strike on a location which happened to be storing some kind of gas, possibly chlorine, but most definitely not sarin. This option requires you to believe in coincidences. I don't. Unless, the US fed bad intelligence to the Syrians and got them to bomb a location where the US knew that toxic gas was stored.

    What is evident is that the Syrians did not drop chemical weapons from their aircraft and that no chemical gas was ever stored at the al-Shayrat airbase. There is no footage showing any munitions or containers which would have delivered the toxic gas. As for US and other radar recordings, all they can show is that an aircraft was in the sky, its heading, altitude and speed. There is no way to distinguish a chemical munition or a chemical attack by means of radar.

    Whatever option you chose, the Syrian government is obviously and self-evidently innocent of the accusation of having used chemical weapons. This is most likely a false flag attack.

    Also, and just for the record, the US had been considering exactly such a false flag attack in the past. You can read everything about this plan here and here .

    The attack:

    American and Russian sources both agree on the following facts: 2 USN ships launched 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles at the Al Shayrat airfield in Syria. The US did not consult with the Russians on a political level, but through military channels the US gave Russia 2 hours advance warning. At this point the accounts begin to differ.

    The Americans say that all missiles hit their targets. The Russians say that only 23 cruise missiles hit the airfield. The others are "unaccounted for". Here I think that it is indisputable that the Americans are lying and the Russians are saying the truth: the main runway is intact (the Russian reporters provided footage proving this) and only one taxiway was hit. Furthermore, the Syrian Air Force resumed its operations within 24 hours. 36 cruise missiles have not reached their intended target. That is a fact.

    It is also indisputable that there were no chemical munitions at this base as nobody, neither the Syrians nor the Russian reporters, had to wear any protective gear.

    The missiles used in the attack, the Tomahawk, can use any combination of three guidance systems: GPS, inertial navigation and terrain mapping. There is no evidence and even no reports that the Russians shot even a single air-defense missile. In fact, the Russians had signed a memorandum with the USA which specifically comitting Russia NOT to interfere with any US overflights, manned or not, over Syria (and vice versa). While the Tomahawk cruise missile was developed in the 1980s, there is no reason to believe that the missiles used had exceeded their shelf live and there is even evidence that they were built in 2014 . The Tomahawk is known to be accurate and reliable. There is absolutely no basis to suspect that over half of the missiles fired simply spontaneously malfunctioned. I therefore see only two possible explanations for what happened to the 36 missing cruise missiles:

    Explanation A: Trump never intended to really hit the Syrians hard and this entire attack was just "for show" and the USN deliberately destroyed these missiles over the Mediterranean. That would make it possible for Trump to appear tough while not inflicting the kind of damage which would truly wreck his plans to collaborate with Russia. I do not believe in this explanation and I will explain why in the political analysis below.

    Explanation B: The Russians could not legally shoot down the US missiles. Furthermore, it is incorrect to assume that these cruise missiles flew a direct course from the Mediterranean to their target (thereby almost overflying the Russian radar positions). Tomahawk were specifically built to be able to fly tangential courses around some radar types and they also have a very low RCS (radar visibility), especially in the frontal sector. Some of these missiles were probably flying low enough not to be seen by Russian radars, unless the Russians had an AWACS in the air (I don't know if they did). However, since the Russians were warned about the attack they had plenty of time to prepare their electronic warfare stations to "fry" and otherwise disable at least part of the cruise missiles. I do believe that this is the correct explanation. I do not know whether the Russian were technically unable to destroy and confuse the 23 missiles which reached the base or whether a political decision was taken to let less than half of the cruise missiles through in order to disguise the Russian role in the destruction of 36 missiles.

    [Apr 11, 2017] Is There A New U.S. Syria Policy? Is There One At All?

    Notable quotes:
    "... It appears that US foreign policy is in turmoil and no longer well managed. The key goal has been to keep the US dollar as a reserve currency and every state in-line with their privately owned central bank. ..."
    "... The petrol dollar is no longer working and debts are out-of-control. Libya and Operation Odyssey Dawn helped bring down a functional government but remember the first thing they did was establish a new private central bank and get rid of an independent one. Cuba, North Korea, Syria, and Sudan still have an independent bank and people at the top don't like that. What a coincidence that having an independent central bank and being an enemy of America are the same. ..."
    "... everybody's fed up with the neocons... the prospect of war with Russia makes americans sick to their stomachs, jared and ivanka have three little kids and they probably love them ..."
    "... world leaders are fed up, including xi ..."
    "... what makes you so sure Trump isn't Stupid? He is way over his head, he has no idea of policy, process nor much else. Our one hope was that he was isolationist, but I think that ship has sailed... ..."
    "... I think at least part of this is because some of the things he naively thought were problems are actually dilemmas. Problems can be worked out or smoothed over by methods he's familiar with and comfortable with; dilemmas, not so much. ..."
    "... As I see it little of the Syria policy has much to do with Syria policy. We see a naked struggle for power in Washington. This struggle has been brewing at least since the Syria operation started came out more in the open, more or less, in the 2013 false flag gas attack. ..."
    "... You saw there the marriage of both Democrats and Republicans in pushing for War. ..."
    "... This was the first time I've seen such an open and obvious soft coup within the National Security State and Obama was stripped of his power. Part of why Carter did this is because everyone knew that Trump could not win so Clinton would hit the ground running and go into full-tilt war. Washington was held by the War Party and when Trump entered Washington he entered a town bent on War! Inc. all the way every day. ..."
    "... I'm guessing that the War Party made Trump an offer he could not refuse and he complied ..."
    "... The office of the President does not grant you automatic rule over the Washington establishment as many people falsely believe--that power must be seized and few Presidents have been able to do that. ..."
    "... Just so you know--by "Washington" I mean the entire apparatus of the Deep State which includes major corporations, foreign oligarchs, and governments like Saudi Arabia, Israel and the EU all who favor the War Party. This way they can utterly ignore the interests and prefernces of the American people whose interests are of no account in Washington. ..."
    "... The current US foreign policy depends on who last spoke to the president? Oh wait, wasn't that Ronnie 'Shoot first, ask questions later' Raygun? ..."
    "... Or Trump was just another Obama: a tabula rasa on which a frustrated American public could project their desires, but who in reality was just another sell-out. ..."
    "... A bipartisan group called the war party now has control of the presidency and executive powers. The major flip flops in policy recently is the outward signs of the coup. Policy will soon steady to that of a tafiri suicide bomber. ..."
    "... On further thoughts, it is clear that there is no coherent persistent US foreign policy. Therefore Russia cannot trust a word the US says, especially in relation to issues concerning Russia's national security. ..."
    "... If the rumored deal is serious, it shows the west has either no concept of what Russia has been saying for years or they believe all leaders can be bought off for the right price. ..."
    "... Would Russia trade Assad for the removal of the supposed 'missile defense' (actually nuke-capable first strike) systems in Poland and Romania? I doubt it as those systems can be dealt with in other ways without compromising the prime mission of defeating the terrorists in Syria. ..."
    "... There is nothing the US can say now. It has totally destroyed its negotiating credibility in the eyes of Russia. All it can do is act. It either really supports the removal of all terrorists in Syria (no chance now?) or it tries to prevent Russia and allies destroying them. And that will mean military intervention. ..."
    "... US is pushing to launch strikes against Syrian gov. Much propaganda build up now in prep for next chemical false flag attacks. These nuts are ready to go to war against Syria Air strikes, missile strikes) to destroy the Syrian government even with Russia in Syria. ..."
    "... I suggest there are multiple agenda with one over-riding (or perhaps underwriting) theme that joins them all -- follow the money and it leads to the Saudi Regime (and other related gas stations in the region) ..."
    "... Media: silence when necessary -- 9/11; Yemen, little prince-lings delivering ISIS 'go' drugs in private jets via Lebanon; the weekly beheading and hand removal medieval style -- noise when necessary, "Assad Must Go!" at EVERY opportunity etc. I suggest it highly likely that all globalist politicians get a $kickback for the words sprouted in accord with the main themes. Easy to test the theory: just nuke Riyadh and see how quickly the ex-goat herders from the 11th century STFU. The war on Syria (and Islamic modernity) would end over night. ..."
    "... Neocons and enough rope: there may be a bit of that as well, but I suggest it is 3rd to the previous listed. What does the U.S. administration want with regards to Syria? -- Whatever the $money wants, and with an Economic Depression underway, the money wants distraction most of all. Bread and circus. ..."
    "... In ancient Rome they crowded the Colosseum to watch the blood sports -- now they just tune in on CNN & Co for their daily dose of fact-less Hollywood narrative. Syrian kid gassed, and it's the end of the world snowflake sobbing stupor; Yemen, Gaza, Iraqi, Afghani, (and the list goes on) and it's the big yawn if it even gets a mention between the sponsor's adverts. ..."
    "... Nations don't exist anymore, in practical terms -- as George Carlin said... the owners ... https://youtu.be/rsL6mKxtOlQ ..."
    "... Trumps rush to judgment instead of attacking fake news, as he has in the past, shows that the 'fix is in'. In that light, Trump's business dealings with Qataris, Turks, etc. are suspect. ..."
    "... b, "Whatever one might say about Trump, he is not stupid. He must have some kind of plan." Everone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth" [ ..."
    "... All your answers can be found in Oded Yinon's 1982 plan to bust up the ME so Israel would be the only remaining dominant influence, and make it easier for that Apartheid nightmare to steal more land. ..."
    "... The US policy is to install a pro-Western leader in Syria. An impossibility IMO but they won't stop trying. Tillerson is going to Moscow to deliver an ultimatum. ..."
    "... Difficult to guess, what is rolling inside Trumps brains. Author William Engdhal thinks, that " Trumps´s Job is to Prepare America for War ." ..."
    "... I'll elaborate later why I "hate the game, not the players". But, thanks to reading strategic policy plans (Yinon Plan, Wolfowitz Doctrine, PNAC policy document) and the "news" cohesively (rather than as unrelated events the way Big Brother Media frames them), the grand story arc in the ME seems to be unfolding in a manner consistent with Yinon's vision. Is the consistency due to (a) causation or (b) correlation? ..."
    "... I'm afraid Trumps commitment to a non-interventionist agenda was only superficial. As a businessman he saw a niche in the political market (the interests of working class people, so against illegal immigration, offshoring jobs and neocon interventions) and he played it for what it's worth. An additional benefit is that it was contra Obama who he hates. ..."
    "... Now that Bannon is downsized too, there is only the same neoliberal-neocon administration left that we had with Obama, Bush and Clinton. ..."
    "... It looks like there is no deep strategy behind the sudden switch concerning Syria. Trump just wants to look good and he saw an opportunity to get it in an easy way. ..."
    "... I've never thought that Trump was capable of formulating his own plans. I thought it was clear from the campaign that he didn't have mastery of the details of any of his businesses or government policies to fend off attacks. He appeared to be the type of executive who left the details and the decision-making to his VP's. If you can surround him with the right people on his staff, they would essentially run the ship. ..."
    "... Was Obama 'forced' to give up his populist progressive agenda? No. He proved to be a servant of TPTB. His progressiveness was a shame. Obama barely tried to fight back, but his adoring fans made excuses for him at every turn. 11-dimension chess became a joke. ..."
    "... Trump has now proven to be the Republican Obama. He wasn't 'forced' to abandon 'America First'. That is a canard. And he is/will reap financial benefits from serving wealthy ME interests. ..."
    "... The plan is to throw the neocon controlled media off their track. The momentum against Trump was strong - led partly hysteria around the Russia election meddling propaganda. Even Flynn had to be sacrificed. For Trump to survive, he knows he has to throw the media off its track and being the master of media manipulation that he is, he has just managed that. Look at the headlines in NYT or WaPo or the other neocon controlled media in the last few days. The round the clock negative coverage of Trump has been stopped in its tracks. In fact, in WaPo Robert Kagan recently wrote a post praising Trump and saying more is needed. Of course, he wants more bloodshed in the mideast. ..."
    "... In my opinion, there will be no escalation from here on. Trump has been silent on Syria. His various officials will go off in different directions and everyone (especially the neocons) will believe what they want to - just look at that Kagan article - it's so dripping with hope. That gives him the time to consolidate and carry on his own strategy. He just needs time and with this gambit, he has got it. ..."
    "... Greg Bacon - I agree with you 100% (the Yinon Plan is the key). The Zionist influence in the US is scary ... I recently watched a video (youtube) / watch?v=hUJHA9VhUZE where Roger Mattson talked about his book "Stealing the Bomb" - how Israel acquired the knowledge and material to build their nuclear arsenal in the US ... what I found extremely disturbing is the fact, that after the AEC, found that 94 kg of HEU (highly enriched uranium) was "missing" in 1965, what happened? Nothing. ..."
    "... In 1968, the Tel Aviv CIA-station chief collected some samples outside Dimona and sent them to a forensic lab. Result: definitely of US origin, they could even tell from which plant because the unusual enrichment level (97,7%) did exactly match. So finally, the FBI starts to investigate .. (meanwhile Israel is producing plenty of plutionium...)and finds clear evidence of who did it and why ... ..."
    "... LBJ pretended it did not happen (he also knew what the Zionists had done to the USS Liberty but ordered it a "state secret" after the Zionists told him, if he spilled the beans, Jewish money would dry up for the Dems).. the relevant documents were classified for 50 yrs ..all this "frustrates US democracy" says Mattson ... (you bet) ..."
    "... So the Zionists did exactly what they accuse Iran of ... they do this all the time and then play the moral outrage card ... Zionism is a perfidious form of fascism ... the "Neo-cons" are all Zionists (or supporters of Zionism) so in reality fascism is driving US foreign policy ... (Allan Dulles did not bring all these Nazi-war criminals to the US for nothing ....) ..."
    Apr 11, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
    "Trump was grab by is pussy by the deep state, now we are in a deep shit :)"

    What does the U.S. administration want with regards to Syria?

    The elements were clear just a few days ago. The U.S. would split off the east and set up a Kurdish enclave which it would then occupy with the help of proxy forces. It would use the leverage to push for political regime change in western Syria. Israel would occupy another piece of the Golan.

    While that looked somewhat favorable for the U.S. in the short term it was bad long term strategy. U.S. forces in the east would be surrounded by hostiles, cut off from the sea and under permanent guerilla attack from various opposing forces. But it looked at least like a viable short term way forward.

    The new strategy, which may not be one at all, and the new U.S. commitment is all over the place :

    As various officials have described it, the United States will intervene only when chemical weapons are used - or any time innocents are killed. It will push for the ouster of President Bashar al-Assad of Syria - or pursue that only after defeating the Islamic State. America's national interest in Syria is to fight terrorism. Or to ease the humanitarian crisis there. Or to restore stability.

    I don't get it. The cacophony of the last days does not make any sense. There is no viable endgame I see here that would be advantageous for Trump or general U.S. borg policy - neither internationally nor domestically - neither short term nor long term. Trump is now losing the "America First" followers he will need to win another election.

    Due to the anti-Russian panic Trump surrendered to the neocons . Suddenly the borg is lauding him for a senseless escalation. The neocons want chaos but chaos is not a plan. There seems to be no plan that will help any cause.

    There is no chance that the U.S. can split Syria from its allies, Hizbullah, Iran and Russia. While Russia is under pressure in Kaliningrad, Crimea and Syria it has lived through way worse situation and these have always increased its determination. I don't see how or why it would fold now.

    Trump had an intelligent strategy when he won against Clinton. He deftly use his advantages. There are few advantages that he has and can play with regards to Middle East policy. Use pure military force? That's not a strategy, just tactical game play. Though the generals who run his cabinet may not be capable to see that. If he destroys Syrian then Lebanon and Jordan will also fall to radicals. Other countries will follow. Iraq would again throw out all U.S. troops. Would the U.S., or Israel, want that? Why?

    Whatever one might say about Trump, he is not stupid. He must have some kind of plan.

    Help me out. What are his thoughts behind this. Or are there really none at all.

    david | Apr 11, 2017 7:19:55 AM | 1
    Deep state.

    It's the only viable explanation, it also appears Trumps lost his twitter password. Lost the offhand style and is now being managed.
    His plan is survive, i think that's as far as it gets now, he cannot control US foreign policy under any circumstances.

    unn | Apr 11, 2017 7:26:37 AM | 2
    Talked about fake news. victim of fake news or now the generator of it? lies from the beginning to the end. that is the bread and butter.
    flickervertigo | Apr 11, 2017 7:32:56 AM | 3
    trump and putin are setting a trap for theneocons
    Outraged | Apr 11, 2017 7:39:50 AM | 4
    Touched on it somewhat in the open thread discussions, b.

    The administrations motivations appear to be purely domestic political, defensive, under siege, and extremely short term reactionary.

    The leaders of the Empires various vassal States openly declare they're just as confused, too.

    Should this incoherent non doctrine, of ' Make it up as you go along from day-to-day ', be formally christened, the 'Trump Doctrine', perhaps ?

    Ah, we're the world's sole remaining superpower, supposedly, displaying our true colors, deep omnipotence and thorough deliberative forward planning, for all the world to see ... /snark

    @ Posted by: flickervertigo | Apr 11, 2017 7:32:56 AM | 3

    Hoarsewhisperer suspects a similar possibility ... have my doubts.

    jfl | Apr 11, 2017 7:44:38 AM | 5
    b, 'Whatever one might say about Trump, he is not stupid. He must have some kind of plan. Help me out. What are his thoughts behind this. Or are there really none at all.'

    tee-rump is stupid. he has no plan. he's reacting. everyone who thinks he/she has a plan is pushing it as tee-rump's plan. tee-rump lets them all go forward - probably isn't even aware of them all - will 'fire' those that fail, 'adopt' any that might not, that at least give him 'topical relief'.

    the fools - the evil clowns - are in power in ac/dc.

    meshpal | Apr 11, 2017 7:46:36 AM | 6
    It appears that US foreign policy is in turmoil and no longer well managed. The key goal has been to keep the US dollar as a reserve currency and every state in-line with their privately owned central bank.

    The petrol dollar is no longer working and debts are out-of-control. Libya and Operation Odyssey Dawn helped bring down a functional government but remember the first thing they did was establish a new private central bank and get rid of an independent one. Cuba, North Korea, Syria, and Sudan still have an independent bank and people at the top don't like that. What a coincidence that having an independent central bank and being an enemy of America are the same.

    In any case, it looks like the US is just winging it in Syria; anything to stop Russia, Iran, and Syria working together in peace. And make sure that central bank ownership is changed. Chaos may not be great, but it seems to generate profits and achieve goals for people at the top of the food chain. I do not hear much complaining about Libya. Why not the same for Syria?

    Eugene | Apr 11, 2017 7:50:20 AM | 7
    Whether or not Trump has a plan, he does have a trump card, Nuclear. After all, the Congress used it with the conformation process the other day. They might be similar in name only, but the fact 1/2 was used - i.e. the congress - means the U.S. might use the other 1/2. One has to wonder, just whose side are the pooh-baas really on?
    Mina | Apr 11, 2017 7:52:50 AM | 8
    G7 in Italy today; French FM says it is just the calendar chance, but they spoke mainly about Syria (Tillerson was there before he flies to Moscow). Ayrault says they are 100 percent in agreement on the plan for Syria with ARAB and TURKISH allies...

    i.e. they saved the Merkel-Turkey deal about the million Syrians in Turkey. No question about Erdogan's policies will be taken. Business as usual.

    Ox | Apr 11, 2017 7:52:54 AM | 9
    "Whatever one might say about Trump, he is not stupid. He must have some kind of plan."

    Absolutely, a "very stupid plan"....... Or he had a plan and that plan was blown away by the Deep Forces that Trump, obviously ,will not dare to challenge . So much for the "Good All USA Swamp Cleaning"

    So, where is everybody now? On the streets? No, watching TV and eating Burritos.

    Edward | Apr 11, 2017 7:53:41 AM | 10
    The new Syria policy seems to be the plan of Kushner, who resembles/is a neocon:

    nomoremister.blogspot.com/2017/04/in-trump-white-house-democrats-and.html

    I don't see this plan working. The question is at what point does Trump give up and try something else, hopefully before igniting WWIII. Trump is in a real jam. He doesn't really have any ideas/solutions of his own, his advisors lack any real solutions, and he lacks institutional or public support. Will he end up surrendering to the borg? He may want to resign. He will try to blame others.

    Jen | Apr 11, 2017 7:54:42 AM | 11
    The US attack on Sha'riat airbase turned out to be much less than it was portrayed by the corporate presstitutes. As we know already, 23 of the 59 Tomahawk missiles reached their targets. Of the others, about 5 or 6 might have gone astray and the rest could have been intercepted and redirected by Russian forces near Latakia. The missiles fell around the perimeter of Sha'riat airbase, the main runway was not damaged and Syrian jets were using it not long after the attack. Russia was pre-warned of the US attack and managed to evacuate most personnel (as did the Syrians). The Russians also knew the US attack had been pre-planned even before the Syrian airforce dropped a conventional bomb on the terrorist warehouse storing sarin gas and chlorine gas components in Idlib.

    The whole incident may have been staged in part to buy Trump time and to trick the neocon establishment on Capitol Hill into believing it has Trump by the short and curlies. Trump has a good opportunity to gauge the loyalty or treachery of his cabinet and administration, and of Congress, by observing how they react to the Tomahawk attack.

    Also, is it necessarily a given that after the Sha'riat airbase attack, the US will engage in further attacks on Syrian territory? There's been some news that since the attack, US bombing flights over Syria have decreased. Perhaps there was some deal-making that we don't know about.

    Outraged | Apr 11, 2017 7:55:02 AM | 12
    @ mesphal
    ... looks like the US is just winging it in Syria; anything to stop Russia, Iran, and Syria working together in peace.

    Though the actual effect appears to actually be very much the opposite, as well as disrupting vassal State cohesion/alignment and stiffening resolve among the non-aligned States re blatant, outright, 'Rogue' conduct.

    flickervertigo | Apr 11, 2017 7:57:12 AM | 13
    "trump and putin are setting a trap for the neocons"

    the logic runs like this...

    everybody's fed up with the neocons... the prospect of war with Russia makes americans sick to their stomachs, jared and ivanka have three little kids and they probably love them

    world leaders are fed up, including xi

    so putin and trump will terrorize americans into doing some thinking, and xi is in on the gag

    McCain and graham will go down in flames, along with the main media

    that is admittedly the bright side... the dark side is: Richard Perle has the negative of trump and that burro

    Outraged | Apr 11, 2017 8:09:17 AM | 14
    @ Jen

    Given the RF promptly cancelled the de-confliction MOU and communication channel, that means any US/coalition aircraft in flight over Syria within ~250Km+ of Latakia or Tartus (S400/300+ complexes) are at extreme risk.

    This is because those aircraft fly at mid to high altitudes to avoid possible engagement by numerous Syrian AD SAM/Gun systems captured and in known use by ISIS/AQ & various moderate head-choppers ...

    if true US/Coalition have ceased overflights, may not necessarily indicate anything more than that for now, simple force protection measure in the interim, perhaps.

    somebody | Apr 11, 2017 8:16:13 AM | 16
    Posted by: Jen | Apr 11, 2017 7:54:42 AM | 11

    Russia stopped to communicate on airstrikes - the deconflicting. It is the opposite of a deal, US planes risk running into accidents.

    harrylaw | Apr 11, 2017 8:22:36 AM | 17
    It is all about who will be the hegemon in the middle east, Apartheid Israeli expansionism in the West Bank, Golan Heights and beyond, not forgetting Israels claims on the Litani river. Plus Israels ability to influence the US electoral process through bundlers like Sheldon Adelson and Haim Saban etc, plus the almost 100% support of Israel in Congress, winning US elections is what it is all about. Saudi Arabia also has good friends in Congress, just so long as they continue to use the petro dollar and continue purchasing 100's of billions of dollars on US arms.

    Both countries are coming together in their fear of Iran, thinking that Israels military power and Saudi money will fix everything is delusional. US thinking has it that the 'arc of resistance' must be defeated and that Syria 'the low hanging fruit' of that coalition shall be the first to fall, followed by Hezbollah then Iran.

    The US realize their hegemony in the region is at stake, that is why they are thrashing about with futile gestures accusing Syria and Russia in turn of war crimes. In my opinion the 'arc' will prevail, such is the existential nature of the struggle, the US, Israel/Saudi Arabia and the head choppers are on the wrong side of history.

    flickervertigo | Apr 11, 2017 8:24:44 AM | 18
    that blackwater guy met with Russians in the sychelles, set up a back-channel communications link between trump and Putin

    Jared's been meeting with Russians, a fact he "forgot" to put on his job application

    meanwhile, McCain is making a leaping gaping asshole of himself, and so is the main media

    it's a risky strategy, it may backfire, it may not even exist, but...

    hope springs eternal, doesn't it?

    scottindallas | Apr 11, 2017 8:26:25 AM | 19
    what makes you so sure Trump isn't Stupid? He is way over his head, he has no idea of policy, process nor much else. Our one hope was that he was isolationist, but I think that ship has sailed...
    PhilK | Apr 11, 2017 8:33:26 AM | 21
    Whatever one might say about Trump, he is not stupid. He must have some kind of plan.

    I think at least part of this is because some of the things he naively thought were problems are actually dilemmas. Problems can be worked out or smoothed over by methods he's familiar with and comfortable with; dilemmas, not so much.

    Banger | Apr 11, 2017 8:34:13 AM | 22
    As I see it little of the Syria policy has much to do with Syria policy. We see a naked struggle for power in Washington. This struggle has been brewing at least since the Syria operation started came out more in the open, more or less, in the 2013 false flag gas attack.

    You saw there the marriage of both Democrats and Republicans in pushing for War.

    Against this newly united faction realists in the military and other national security agencies opposed drastic military action and for three years there was a back and force--sometimes the War Party held some advantage and sometimes the realists dragged their feet.

    In late September of 2016 the realists seemed to have some momentum and the Kerry/Lavrov agreement was signed. With stunning swiftness the agreement was condemned by the War mongers and SecDef Carter mutinied and scuttled the agreement within a week.

    This was the first time I've seen such an open and obvious soft coup within the National Security State and Obama was stripped of his power. Part of why Carter did this is because everyone knew that Trump could not win so Clinton would hit the ground running and go into full-tilt war. Washington was held by the War Party and when Trump entered Washington he entered a town bent on War! Inc. all the way every day.

    I'm guessing that the War Party made Trump an offer he could not refuse and he complied and probably convinced himself that he was doing the right thing--what else could he do? The office of the President does not grant you automatic rule over the Washington establishment as many people falsely believe--that power must be seized and few Presidents have been able to do that.

    I have no idea if Trump is playing possum and waiting to fight another day or if he is merely content in being Head of State and letting the bureaucracy (Deep State) run the government without interference.

    Just so you know--by "Washington" I mean the entire apparatus of the Deep State which includes major corporations, foreign oligarchs, and governments like Saudi Arabia, Israel and the EU all who favor the War Party. This way they can utterly ignore the interests and prefernces of the American people whose interests are of no account in Washington.

    Yonatan | Apr 11, 2017 8:35:35 AM | 23
    The current US foreign policy depends on who last spoke to the president? Oh wait, wasn't that Ronnie 'Shoot first, ask questions later' Raygun?

    Given the scary way things are going, so light relief may be in order, so here is a link I came across of Russian press call in which Lavrov expertly trolls Tillerson.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hl8126Iy6gM&t=4m40s

    CasualObserver | Apr 11, 2017 8:36:46 AM | 24
    I think Trump (Bannon) gave a piece of rope to neocon guys in his house and they used it to make this current mess. Bannon excused himself so other guys can hang themselves without him being burn. They wanted a fire, they got one.

    DS is not stupid enough to really start WW3 and fireplaying guys will ultimately burn at some moment this whole Bannon stratagem plays out. It looks risky as hell, but given precision of other guys strategic arms nobody is crazy enough to play too far.

    Other side knows this, and just makes fire hotter an hotter - while helping SAA to became more and more of A and many other steps all around the world. Once this plays out somebody will pay and I think Trump will not be one paying. He will get out of this a winner, an empathic and wise leader. And Putin will still be smiling one.

    TG | Apr 11, 2017 8:37:33 AM | 25
    What are Trump's thoughts? Good question.

    I really have no idea. It does look as if he was finally beaten down by the so-called 'deep state' (more properly, the oligarchy).

    Or Trump was just another Obama: a tabula rasa on which a frustrated American public could project their desires, but who in reality was just another sell-out.

    So sad.

    flickervertigo | Apr 11, 2017 8:41:18 AM | 26
    one last little thing, here...

    google: fake chemical attack Syria: About 5,350,000 results

    https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=fake+chemical+attack+syria&spf=1020

    *shrug*

    guidoamm | Apr 11, 2017 8:42:40 AM | 27
    You are assuming that anyone elected to office has the power to do anything. Politics is merely a sideshow.

    Take Europe as a typical case in point. In the past 40 years, Europe has experienced all manners of political ideology. From the Marxists and the military in Portugal and Greece to the Fascists in Spain and all manner of "Democrats" elsewhere.

    Yet, the result is exactly the same across the board. We have stagnating wages, a sky rocketing cost of living, decrepit infrastructure that all result in increasing fiscal and legislative pressure.

    Clearly, politics has absolutely no bearing on our quality of life.

    Marxists, Fascists and Democrats all subscribe to a policy of perpetual fiscal deficits. No exception.

    Regardless the underlying condition of the economy, Western governments run fiscal deficits and rack up sovereign debt perpetually.

    But in a closed system where there is an entity that has been anointed as the owner of the currency and where the unit of account is imposed under penalty of law, perpetual deficits have arithmetical ramifications.

    The ramification is the migration of profit towards the owner of the currency.

    As profit migrates, so does title and political power.

    Essentially, the central bank has been allowed to draw a boundary around society. The central bank doesn't care what happens within the boundary because their sole role is to push credit into the system.

    Central banks have no other role.

    In this regard, the central bank has the most to gain when the economy is faltering.

    In this regard too, the roles of the World Bank, the IMF or the UN should become clearer. Hence the reason, for example, that the UN always, always, alway disburses funds even when corruption has been proven beyond reasonable doubt. Hence the reason that despite subsequent damning reports by SIGAR, USAid still spends hundreds of millions on white elephants in war zones.

    Syria is but a side show. As is Yemen, Iraq, Libya and many other theatres prior.

    The end game the transfer of title.

    Title is transferred by precipitating chaos.

    As you precipitate chaos, the fiscal strain compels the political construct to tighten the fiscal and legislative screws on people.

    In a first instance, this monetary system can only result in the political construct having to, eventually, fight against the people.

    Shortly after that, the political construct will have to fight against the owners of the currency too. This arrangement however, also builds up and nourishes an increasingly necessary security apparatus to ensure its own survival.

    As the fiscal situation worsens however, the Praetorians will, though gradually, inevitably take over. The Praetorian Guard has now taken over. That is what is happening in Syria

    g

    Peter AU | Apr 11, 2017 8:43:26 AM | 28
    A bipartisan group called the war party now has control of the presidency and executive powers. The major flip flops in policy recently is the outward signs of the coup. Policy will soon steady to that of a tafiri suicide bomber.
    terry | Apr 11, 2017 8:52:56 AM | 29
    I am thinking that the Putin plan of a stalemate is going well ...Most plebs in the west want the US out of the ME and most in the ME want the US out so its looking like a win win . >)
    Yonatan | Apr 11, 2017 9:17:01 AM | 31
    On further thoughts, it is clear that there is no coherent persistent US foreign policy. Therefore Russia cannot trust a word the US says, especially in relation to issues concerning Russia's national security.

    There are rumors in the British press that Tillerson is going to make Russia an offer, presumably one seen by the US as something Russia cannot possibly refuse. The deal in question - give up Assad in favor of returning to the G7.

    This is totally laughable for several reasons.

    • i) The G7 probably has zero merit to the Russian government. At best, sanctions will be lifted, but they are actually of benefit to Russia.
    • ii) Assad per se is not important to Russia. The west really doesn't get that - they are so trapped in their own made-up world. The Russians are in Syria to kill the terrorists so they can't be used against Russia sometime later and to preserve the concept of the primacy of national territorial integrity / self-determination. However, it Assad was replaced before the terrorists are rmeoved, the possible pro-west replacement could kick Russia out of Syria before the key part is done. So in that sense, Russia's default is Assad stays.

    If the rumored deal is serious, it shows the west has either no concept of what Russia has been saying for years or they believe all leaders can be bought off for the right price.

    Would Russia trade Assad for the removal of the supposed 'missile defense' (actually nuke-capable first strike) systems in Poland and Romania? I doubt it as those systems can be dealt with in other ways without compromising the prime mission of defeating the terrorists in Syria.

    There is nothing the US can say now. It has totally destroyed its negotiating credibility in the eyes of Russia. All it can do is act. It either really supports the removal of all terrorists in Syria (no chance now?) or it tries to prevent Russia and allies destroying them. And that will mean military intervention.

    Peter AU | Apr 11, 2017 9:36:12 AM | 32
    best place to find out what US is up to is perhaps Russian intelligence.

    https://www.rt.com/news/384333-putin-idlib-attack-provocation/

    (Putin)..."We have reports from multiple sources that false flags like this one – and I cannot call it otherwise – are being prepared in other parts of Syria, including the southern suburbs of Damascus. They plan to plant some chemical there and accuse the Syrian government of an attack,"...

    ..."President Mattarella and I discussed it, and I told him that this reminds me strongly of the events in 2003, when the US representatives demonstrated at the UN Security Council session the presumed chemical weapons found in Iraq. The military campaign was subsequently launched in Iraq and it ended with the devastation of the country, the growth of the terrorist threat and the appearance of Islamic State [IS, formerly ISIS] on the world stage," ....

    ...A separate report of a potential false flag operation in Syria came from the Russian General Staff, which said militants were transporting toxic agents into several parts of Syria...

    US is pushing to launch strikes against Syrian gov. Much propaganda build up now in prep for next chemical false flag attacks. These nuts are ready to go to war against Syria Air strikes, missile strikes) to destroy the Syrian government even with Russia in Syria.

    x | Apr 11, 2017 9:39:48 AM | 33
    "Help me out. What are his thoughts behind this. Or are there really none at all."
    ---

    I suggest there are multiple agenda with one over-riding (or perhaps underwriting) theme that joins them all -- follow the money and it leads to the Saudi Regime (and other related gas stations in the region).

    Media: silence when necessary -- 9/11; Yemen, little prince-lings delivering ISIS 'go' drugs in private jets via Lebanon; the weekly beheading and hand removal medieval style -- noise when necessary, "Assad Must Go!" at EVERY opportunity etc. I suggest it highly likely that all globalist politicians get a $kickback for the words sprouted in accord with the main themes. Easy to test the theory: just nuke Riyadh and see how quickly the ex-goat herders from the 11th century STFU. The war on Syria (and Islamic modernity) would end over night.

    Trump: he looks bored already. Suggest he's just pressed the whiz button on the DC food processor -- Republicans are acting like they won the election. Wrong, Trump and Bannon and Flynn won the election. Payback will be the mid-term in 2018 where all 435 seats in the United States House of Representatives and 34 of the 100 seats in the United States Senate will be contested.

    He's moving to hand these parasites back to 'the people' in one fine mess.

    Neocons and enough rope: there may be a bit of that as well, but I suggest it is 3rd to the previous listed. What does the U.S. administration want with regards to Syria? -- Whatever the $money wants, and with an Economic Depression underway, the money wants distraction most of all. Bread and circus.

    In ancient Rome they crowded the Colosseum to watch the blood sports -- now they just tune in on CNN & Co for their daily dose of fact-less Hollywood narrative. Syrian kid gassed, and it's the end of the world snowflake sobbing stupor; Yemen, Gaza, Iraqi, Afghani, (and the list goes on) and it's the big yawn if it even gets a mention between the sponsor's adverts.

    The only way this system of systemic corruption and abomination is going to stop is if/when the Russians/Chinese and any others simply target their "10,000" nukes on the GPS readings of the 0.01% cohort of individuals and start the countdown.

    Nations don't exist anymore, in practical terms -- as George Carlin said... the owners ... https://youtu.be/rsL6mKxtOlQ

    David | Apr 11, 2017 9:41:02 AM | 34
    In regards to the Trumpet's middle east mess I submit this link from Brandon Smith (Alt-market.com)

    Economic End Game

    An interesting blog. Brandon seems like someone willing to look beyond normal stereotypes and has a unique take on current affairs. I'd suggest checking-out some of his other blog post about the election. He also has information on making a ghillie suit which defeats thermal imaging (FLIR) – I'm sure this is something all MoA folks will be wearing come summer (snark).

    Thanks to the patrons and especially b for keeping this place open and interesting. As a side note I prefer the commenters who comment on news and not bash each other.

    I've been reading aleksandr solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago, but I find I can't finish it. Too stark and too many moments that make me think the folks in the USA are about to experience the book first hand. Sigh.

    Peace

    Jackrabbit | Apr 11, 2017 9:46:23 AM | 35
    Trumps rush to judgment instead of attacking fake news, as he has in the past, shows that the 'fix is in'. In that light, Trump's business dealings with Qataris, Turks, etc. are suspect.

    Trump's NY-sized ego forces him to seek to dominate. In Trump's world, that means $$$$$. By servicing wealthy ME interests, he can leverage his business to make billions.

    Obama only got a $60m book deal. Trump's 'take' will rival the Clinton Foundation pay-to-play scheme.

    Jackrabbit | Apr 11, 2017 9:48:01 AM | 36
    The weak attack on Shayrat was a 'shot across the bow'. Trump sent a signal that further R+6 advances will not be tolerated. It is a 'one off' only if Putin agrees to a deal.
    FecklessLeft | Apr 11, 2017 9:48:12 AM | 37
    @34 thanks for the blog recommendation - looks interesting at a first glance.

    And I wholeheartedly agree with your statement: "Thanks to the patrons and especially b for keeping this place open and interesting. As a side note I prefer the commenters who comment on news and not bash each other."

    never mind | Apr 11, 2017 9:49:22 AM | 38
    I don't really see this one unified front when it comes to US foreign policy, one might view this administration, going forward, as schizophrenic as the last one.

    Which shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone, after all, the US is considered to be an oligarchy , there are too many influental people, corporations and institutions pulling the strings of the empire.

    The question is, how does one deal with the US considering its mental health issues?

    mireille | Apr 11, 2017 9:51:29 AM | 39
    ... ... ...
    2. Trump controls nothing and never will. When Peter Dale Scott began talking about the Deep State many years ago he made it clear that the term derived from the Turkish "Donmeh". The donmeh has always been strpngly crypto Jewish and was the decisive force behind Kemal Attaturk that put the secular Turkish government in place. The donmeh includes Turkish, Israeli, and Saudi power factions with differing but allied agendas. The Syria situation is confused because the Turks are deeply confused about what would be acceptable to them.
    ... ... ...
    Peter AU | Apr 11, 2017 9:54:14 AM | 40
    36
    The deal is, Putin pulls support of Syria totally. No weapons, no ammunition into Syria, no support whatsoever so AQ can get the upper hand.
    Though I doubt the strike is a one off. The decision has already been made to hit Syria, Russia or no Russia.
    harrylaw | Apr 11, 2017 10:02:41 AM | 41
    b, "Whatever one might say about Trump, he is not stupid. He must have some kind of plan." Everone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth" [Mike Tyson ]

    That punch... The Russian, Iranian and Hezbollah's acceptance of the Syrian invitation to help them defeat the headchoppers.Game set and match to Syria.

    Greg Bacon | Apr 11, 2017 10:10:35 AM | 43
    All your answers can be found in Oded Yinon's 1982 plan to bust up the ME so Israel would be the only remaining dominant influence, and make it easier for that Apartheid nightmare to steal more land.

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/pdf/The%20Zionist%20Plan%20for%20the%20Middle%20East.pdf

    After Syria is destroyed, it will be on to Iran and the MSM will be more than happy to oblige in killing another nation.

    dh | Apr 11, 2017 10:18:20 AM | 44
    The US policy is to install a pro-Western leader in Syria. An impossibility IMO but they won't stop trying. Tillerson is going to Moscow to deliver an ultimatum.
    Outraged | Apr 11, 2017 10:19:14 AM | 45
    Syria war: G7 fails to agree sanctions on Russia after 'chemical attack'
    BBC News - 14 minutes ago

    The BBC's Steve Rosenberg in Moscow says experience shows that Russia does not take well to threats or ultimatums. If Mr Tillerson thinks he can weaken Moscow's support for President Assad, he may need to re-think, our correspondent says, adding that ...

    Tillerson Gives Russia Ultimatum: Side With The US Or Iran
    International Business Times - 25 minutes ago
    U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was scheduled to meet with Russian diplomats this week to discuss Russia's obligation to drain Syria of chemical weapons under a 2013 agreement. Tillerson gave Russia an ultimatum Tuesday to side with the U.S ...

    maningi | Apr 11, 2017 10:20:48 AM | 46
    B

    Difficult to guess, what is rolling inside Trumps brains. Author William Engdhal thinks, that " Trumps´s Job is to Prepare America for War ."
    But maybe we should better ask Kissinger, who once said:
    "No one knows, what he (Trump) is going to do. So we can make of him anything we want to.
    He is what we want to make him
    .

    Guess that was the big, somehow erratic plan right from the beginning - I am afraid.

    Anyway, most likely its a waste of time trying to find out, what big plans Trumps will be pulling out of the wizards hat.
    On the other hand, it could be live saving to start to thing about the plan WE should come up to get us out of this mess.

    mfg,

    dumbass | Apr 11, 2017 10:37:34 AM | 48
    I'll elaborate later why I "hate the game, not the players". But, thanks to reading strategic policy plans (Yinon Plan, Wolfowitz Doctrine, PNAC policy document) and the "news" cohesively (rather than as unrelated events the way Big Brother Media frames them), the grand story arc in the ME seems to be unfolding in a manner consistent with Yinon's vision. Is the consistency due to (a) causation or (b) correlation?

    (a) If "causation", then the US will likely keep increasing its activities and presence until Syria is partitioned and the US has permanent bases.

    For us peaceniks, potential upside is to mitigate militant Israeli rulers lack of confidence in their long-term survivability:

    • Permanent US bases in southern Syria place a buffer between Israel and Muslim countries. US would more directly guarantee Israel's security.
    • With Israel's newest land grab, they'll secure substantial long-term energy supplies.

    Once they feel substantially less threatened, then maybe a later generation of people living in the region will not know war so intimately.

    (Still on their "to do" list is "relocate the Palestinians somewhere". Maybe relocate the Palestinians to a re-partitioned Syria or Libya, now that part of those populations has been sent to Europe as refugees?? Again, gotta wonder about causation versus correlation.)

    About "hate the game, not the players", I understand why Israeli militant rulers feel the way they do. If they choose not to play brutal geopolitcal games, others will. Indeed, when you observe the ease with which they and others successfully excited Christian sheeple into becoming attack dogs, you can see they have no choice but to do so, because other irrational rulers could and would eventually come along and turn those same sheeple against them. The world is cruel and you cannot safely "choose not to play".

    (If most self-professed "Christians" weren't so easily goaded into supporting killing people, then maybe they wouldn't need to be "wagged". But, I don't see that day coming. Especially with the way history is (not) taught.)

    (b) It could simply be "correlation". After all, imperialist but self-professed "Christian" hordes have been killing each other, Muslims, and Jews with abandon for millenia. (What's that about "religion of peace"?? In recent memory, "Christianity as practiced" is far less a "religion of peace" than Islam.) What we see in the ME could simply be more ordinary US/UK/Western European imperialism, like the kind we've seen historically and continuing to present day everywhere else around the world.

    The "light at the end of the tunnel" is that general artificial intelligence is coming soon. If it doesn't kill us, there's some "hope" the hegemon that emerges within 10 years will use its omniscience and omnipotence to impose/guarantee safety to all of us in the panopticon.

    dumbass | Apr 11, 2017 10:45:09 AM | 50
    guidomann @ 27

    >> Clearly, politics has absolutely no bearing on our quality of life.

    Not true. Capitalist colonies that transformed from capitalist to Marxist experiences giant improvements in literacy and longevity within just a few years. That in spite of a constant state of war imposed on them by their former and future masters.

    Compare Cuba people's fortunes with any and every other tiny nation in Oceania's direct shadow. Heck, Cuba's biggest export was doctors. Better than "the world's greatest purveyor of violence" by a long shot.

    Jerry | Apr 11, 2017 10:46:38 AM | 51
    I'm afraid Trumps commitment to a non-interventionist agenda was only superficial. As a businessman he saw a niche in the political market (the interests of working class people, so against illegal immigration, offshoring jobs and neocon interventions) and he played it for what it's worth. An additional benefit is that it was contra Obama who he hates.

    So when Obama starts wars all over the Middle East, Trump claimed to want peace. When Obama struck a deal with Iran, Trump wanted to nuke it. Same with TPP, Obama care etc. In the same way I suspect that Trumps hatred for Mexico comes from several botched businessdeals in Mexico that cost him a lot of money.

    Now that Trump has what he wants (the White House and giving Obama the finger), he is only interested in 'winning'. So when the Bannon-Flynn wing couldn't give him victories, he started to go with the Kushner-Cohn wing. Trump seems to be very opportunistic without any commitment to a principled policy. And with people he acts the same: anyone remember how he dropped Christy and Gingrich after they campaigned for him? Same with Flynn: he dropped him for no good reason. Now that Bannon is downsized too, there is only the same neoliberal-neocon administration left that we had with Obama, Bush and Clinton.

    It looks like there is no deep strategy behind the sudden switch concerning Syria. Trump just wants to look good and he saw an opportunity to get it in an easy way. And he did get it: the MSM is suddenly loving him, the Trump-is-Putin-meme has all but disappeared, his approval rate just bumped up and the Israel-lobby is elated. It is not even that Trump sold out his voter-base. He was never committed to them in the first place and now they're in for a rude awakening - how sad!

    dumbass | Apr 11, 2017 10:51:37 AM | 52
    Team Chaos has found the perfectly inscrutable figurehead in Trump. Confusing the hell out of their contrived adversaries 24x7.
    Pislyak | Apr 11, 2017 11:04:07 AM | 53
    Trump buckling under to these policies (from neocon Robert Kagan Washington Post, Sunday, April 9)reported by Consortium News:

    "The testing of Trump's resolve actually begins now. If the United States backs down in the face of these challenges, the missile strike, though a worthy action in itself, may end up reinforcing the world's impression that the United States does not have the stomach for confrontation."

    "Instead of being a one time event, the missile strike needs to be the opening move in a comprehensive political, diplomatic and military strategy to re-balance the situation in Syria in America's favor."

    "Thursday's action needs to be just the opening salvo in a broader campaign not only to protect the Syrian people from the brutality of the Assad regime but also to reverse the downward spiral of US power and influence in the Middle East and throughout the world. A single missile strike unfortunately cannot undo the damage done by the Obama administration over the past six years."

    "The United States' commitment to such a course will have to be clear enough to deter the Russians from attempting to disrupt it. This in turn will require moving sufficient assets to the region so that neither Russia nor Iran will be tempted to escalate the conflict to a crisis, and be sure that the American forces will be ready if they do . . ."

    "Let's hope that the Trump administration is prepared for the next move. If it is, then there is a real chance of reversing the course of global retreat that Obama began. A strong response in Syria will make it clear to the likes of Putin, Xi Jinping, Ayatollah Khamenei and Kim Jong Un that the days of American passivity are over."

    https://consortiumnews.com/2017/04/10/neocons-have-trump-on-his-knees/

    juliania | Apr 11, 2017 11:06:48 AM | 54
    What Trump hasn't seen but Putin does see is that in order to become a leader recognized by history as great and ultimately able himself to face himself, one has to stand by what he has told the people he will do. In that illusory state of blindness he resembles Obama greatly and resides within a bubble of immediate, transitory acclaim. Our hope was that, in his later years now, he would have realized, with our support, what a sham that attitude has been - Obama has yet to realize it, but he eventually will, and his declining years will face him with that reality. It's a huge shame for both men that they seem unable to appreciate that they both had the potential to be great and have both shunned the prospect.

    Putin will now turn away. Not belligerently, but with great sadness. Tillerson is taking, RT says, an ultimatum from the G7 which Putin will not accept. If he, Tillerson, presents this, he will quickly be shown the door. Politely, but quickly. Russia will not, cannot, accept any 'deal'. The best we can hope for is that they will ignore us and concentrate on the real tragedies of people under siege and lives lost. The best we can hope for is that our blustering 'leader' will find some other distraction that doesn't get in the way, for whatever sort of time he still wants to spend pretending to be president. Because that he is not. If Russia can manage without us, they will have to do so, and I really don't know how the US is going to be able to manage.

    Movies and tv shows maybe. Movies and tv shows. And blue jeans. We could go back to making blue jeans; we were good at that.

    Les | Apr 11, 2017 11:10:45 AM | 55
    I've never thought that Trump was capable of formulating his own plans. I thought it was clear from the campaign that he didn't have mastery of the details of any of his businesses or government policies to fend off attacks. He appeared to be the type of executive who left the details and the decision-making to his VP's. If you can surround him with the right people on his staff, they would essentially run the ship.
    Jackrabbit | Apr 11, 2017 11:12:53 AM | 56
    Jerry @51

    Was Obama 'forced' to give up his populist progressive agenda? No. He proved to be a servant of TPTB. His progressiveness was a shame. Obama barely tried to fight back, but his adoring fans made excuses for him at every turn. 11-dimension chess became a joke.

    We are failing to learn from that history.

    Trump has now proven to be the Republican Obama. He wasn't 'forced' to abandon 'America First'. That is a canard. And he is/will reap financial benefits from serving wealthy ME interests.

    Hannibal | Apr 11, 2017 11:14:55 AM | 57
    Trump does not have a plan, he's a clueless eco-centric blowhard bully. He's dangerous!
    ancient archer | Apr 11, 2017 11:15:14 AM | 58
    "Whatever one might say about Trump, he is not stupid. He must have some kind of plan."

    The plan is to throw the neocon controlled media off their track. The momentum against Trump was strong - led partly hysteria around the Russia election meddling propaganda. Even Flynn had to be sacrificed. For Trump to survive, he knows he has to throw the media off its track and being the master of media manipulation that he is, he has just managed that. Look at the headlines in NYT or WaPo or the other neocon controlled media in the last few days. The round the clock negative coverage of Trump has been stopped in its tracks. In fact, in WaPo Robert Kagan recently wrote a post praising Trump and saying more is needed. Of course, he wants more bloodshed in the mideast.

    Is it a wonder that in the age of fake news the master media manipulator won the elections??

    In my opinion, there will be no escalation from here on. Trump has been silent on Syria. His various officials will go off in different directions and everyone (especially the neocons) will believe what they want to - just look at that Kagan article - it's so dripping with hope. That gives him the time to consolidate and carry on his own strategy. He just needs time and with this gambit, he has got it.

    Also, with the war crazy neocons flocking to his banner, they have proved that they are neither republicans nor are they democrats. they just support whoever seems ablest to sow more war and chaos. A blight on their houses!

    john | Apr 11, 2017 11:28:34 AM | 59
    Whatever one might say about Trump, he is not stupid. He must have some kind of plan

    well, if he's not stupid the idea that he's been 'captured' doesn't really hold up. unless, of course, the man with no name put the old luger to his temple and talked to him softly about the well-being of his beautiful wife and children.

    after all these years, decades really, the aggregate of lies, betrayals, and deceptions, criminality of the vilest nature, has sucked all the oxygen out of strategic thinking . off-the-cuff accusations of gas attacks without a shred of evidence, or even a sham investigation, followed hours later by a cruise missile bombardment pretty much confirms this. now it looks like raw imperialism on steroids.

    of course the only viable plan would be to pack up and go home, start a political reconciliation process, and pay a massive reparations bill.

    fat chance.

    Miss Marple | Apr 11, 2017 11:32:57 AM | 60
    Greg Bacon - I agree with you 100% (the Yinon Plan is the key). The Zionist influence in the US is scary ... I recently watched a video (youtube) / watch?v=hUJHA9VhUZE where Roger Mattson talked about his book "Stealing the Bomb" - how Israel acquired the knowledge and material to build their nuclear arsenal in the US ... what I found extremely disturbing is the fact, that after the AEC, found that 94 kg of HEU (highly enriched uranium) was "missing" in 1965, what happened? Nothing.

    In 1968, the Tel Aviv CIA-station chief collected some samples outside Dimona and sent them to a forensic lab. Result: definitely of US origin, they could even tell from which plant because the unusual enrichment level (97,7%) did exactly match. So finally, the FBI starts to investigate .. (meanwhile Israel is producing plenty of plutionium...)and finds clear evidence of who did it and why ...

    End result: huge cover-up .... according to Mattson:

    "CIA-information withheld from NRC and FBI" ... "FBI did not look until too late" .. "FBI & CIA feared Israel's pushback" (!)

    LBJ pretended it did not happen (he also knew what the Zionists had done to the USS Liberty but ordered it a "state secret" after the Zionists told him, if he spilled the beans, Jewish money would dry up for the Dems).. the relevant documents were classified for 50 yrs ..all this "frustrates US democracy" says Mattson ... (you bet)

    So the Zionists did exactly what they accuse Iran of ... they do this all the time and then play the moral outrage card ... Zionism is a perfidious form of fascism ... the "Neo-cons" are all Zionists (or supporters of Zionism) so in reality fascism is driving US foreign policy ... (Allan Dulles did not bring all these Nazi-war criminals to the US for nothing ....)

    Heliopause | Apr 11, 2017 11:40:51 AM | 61
    Trump undoubtedly has a plan, such as it is, but the competing plans from the many different major actors make it difficult to discern or execute. Imagine a football game where a dozen teams are all playing one another at the same time. Obama's plan was to kinda sorta do something, hoping nobody would notice the dearth of morality or coherence, and Trump may be falling into the same trap.
    Flavius | Apr 11, 2017 11:49:01 AM | 64
    Ockham: every appearance points to no plan, ergo, until evidence directs otherwise, the hypothesis that there is no plan best explains the circumstances. Trump, like our past 3 Presidents, appears to be over his head, unable to reconcile streams of advice into a coherent policy, and close to flailing. He has thrown away his cover on the intelligent right; he has defaulted into cover from the borg where he is despised. If/when evidence is presented that the Syria 'gas attack' was a false flag, he is through. Better lucky than smart, but it sure looks time has run out on Trump with respect to both.
    Backdoor | Apr 11, 2017 12:00:18 PM | 65
    Still funny how so many people fall for the "Trump is an idiot" scheme, go on underestimating him, that's what he wants.
    Personally I think it's important to look at the "military action" he took. Sending a bunch of tomahawks on an unimportant target, all with a prior warning, is hardly a heavy retaliation, which makes sense since Assad did nothing worthy of retaliation, and Trump most certainly knew that. But look what happend, everyone is loosing their shit, complaining about how Trump will start WW3, and all the while, the warhawks flook to trump and endorse his actions, actions that the majority of the population condems because they're either pro-Trump, and hold him to his campaign promise of "america first", or are against Trump, and therefore condem absolutly everything he does. Imagine Hilary doing the same thing, her followers would have hailed her as a hero for fighting this Evil-Monster-Assad™. We will have to see how this situation plays out, but to toss in my two cents, I suspect that the war tension will get seriously hyped up by the media and Trump will play his part in that aswell, either by remaining silent or by resorting to vague politically meaningless statements. Once the public is outraged and people are frigthend enough Trump can handle syria without appearing weak or being attacked as a russian ploy. Afterall Trump has nothing to win by starting a war in syria, it wouldn't make sense for him to suddenly outobama Obama, for what reason? Money? Power? Sure the deepstate could blackmail him, but I'm honestly sure that after all these baseless attacks they could have a video of him in full SS-Garb shooting a bunch of puppies and the public wouldn't give a shit.
    Hoarsewhisperer | Apr 11, 2017 12:00:50 PM | 66
    Whatever one might say about Trump, he is not stupid.
    He must have some kind of plan.

    Welcome to the club.
    Given his inaugural drain the swamp declaration, and the inherent hazards and complexities, there was no chance at all that His presidency would be anything other than a perpetual guessing game. Imo, Trump seems to be the first POTUS in modern times to fully comprehend, and exploit, the outer limits of the power and respect that the position confers on the incumbent. Everyone who matters on the World Stage is obliged to listen when POTUS speaks, and at least pretend to take him seriously, whether they agree or not.
    ----------------------
    As Outraged has alluded to above, the G8-1 wank-fest was as anti-climactic as Xi's meeting with Trump. Perhaps someone stayed sober enough to suggest they all take a cold shower and stop talking a load of drivel that even they, themselves, were having trouble pretending to believe.
    Howzat?!
    Putin won, in absentia!

    Susan Sunflower | Apr 11, 2017 12:04:16 PM | 67
    Trump's "plan" seems to be to rush the net and provoke a sense of crisis, "danger" (to whom by what?) and "chaos" (no coherent storyboard or "message discipline" as many have mentioned).

    No, I don't think Trump is "smart" ... pre-inauguration (even) he was described as a person whose opinion is most formed by the person he last spoke to ... and he appears to be an easily distracted, never-shuts-up (talking about himself), poor listener. He may not be "stupid" but he's not smart or disciplined either. He's impressed by his own mythology wrt flying by the seat of his pants through crisis after crisis, with multiple spinning plates ... he's a plate-spinner of some skill.

    The G7 has declined to impose additional sanctions on Putin -- OR -- Syria, meaning, I hope, they recognize how overblown and opportunistically exploited this alleged use of chemical weapons incident has become. Guardian .

    The US secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, had hoped to underscore the US position with a unified message from the G7, which condemned the chemical attack at a summit in Italy on Tuesday. However, G7 foreign ministers were divided over possible next steps and refused to back a UK call for fresh sanctions.

    (It's likely not of much too much significance, but does represent at least detour or delay as opposed to an Anti-Putin and Anti-Assad rubber stamp)

    Is R2P even part of Trump's vocabulary? Yes, sentence first, trial after (if anyone can be forced to remember the incident is disputed and the investigation is incomplete)

    Anon1 | Apr 11, 2017 12:15:44 PM | 68
    Bernie Sanders on Syria Strikes: Assad Is a War Criminal and a Child-Killer
    https://medium.com/@pplswar/bernie-sanders-on-syria-strikes-assad-is-a-war-criminal-and-a-child-killer-6be6c1e32cb9
    ToivoS | Apr 11, 2017 12:17:17 PM | 69
    Banger | Apr 11, 2017 8:34:13 AM | 22

    I have to agree with these comments. In 2002 the Bush admin had a plan for Iraq. We all know what that was. The problem for Bush was that he started losing the resulting war. After 2004 just about every decision was some ad hoc fix and compromise after another to avert a more obvious defeat. Obama inherited that situation and his policies, if they can be called that, were unchanged. The only initiative Obama has shown was to extend Bush's plan to Libya and Syria but without massive use of US troops on the ground. This has resulted in the destruction of the Libyan state and the Syrian War. Again Obama's wars have failed just as Bush's. Like Bush, Obama resorted to ad hoc fixes and compromises that led directly to the incoherent policies pursued by Kerry.

    What Trump has added is a quantitative change, not qualitative. The frequency of incoherent and contradictory moves has just increased. Even the open split in current policy where Nikki openly contradicts Tillerson was seen in the Obama admin when Ash Carter shot down Kerry's efforts at a Syrian deal.

    It is pointless to try to define a policy from this mess. It should be obvious that the incoherence is the result of some serious divisions inside the deep state and what is likely stirring the current crisis in US policy is an effort by part of the deep state to overthrow or neuter the Trump admin. Identifying the competing factions is not that difficult. Assessing the relative power of those factions and what policies those faction's prefer are more difficult.

    Mina | Apr 11, 2017 12:19:40 PM | 70
    Bhadhrakumar was poitint to Erdogan has not wanting an international enquiry on the chemical used. Who need an enquiry when you can provide the result you want?
    http://www.rfi.fr/contenu/ticker/syrie-analyses-confirment-desormais-utilisation-sarin-ministre-turc-sante
    We all have to believe the Turkish authorities...
    While the Sweden attacker travelled to Syria (via Turkey) and one of the two EGyptians who blew themselves in Egyptian churches last sunday was expelled from Kuwait for links with IS (as tipped by.. the Egyptian authorities...), the EU probably think that they will manage to control the flood of former IS recruits (from Idlib to the rest of the world) by occupying Syria? i doubt it works.
    http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/64/262728/Egypt/Politics-/Alexandria-bombing-suspect-was-extradited-from-Kuw.aspx

    More demonstration of Arab solidarity and ethics
    http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/2/9/262777/World/International/African-migrants-seeking-Europe-sold-as-slaves-for.aspx
    http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/2/8/262773/World/Region/Lebanon-army-order-evicts-,-Syria-refugees-from-ca.aspx we enforce by selling them billions of dollars of weapons have nothing to say about that...
    But the "moral authorities"

    PavewayIV | Apr 11, 2017 12:20:58 PM | 71
    This:

    https://twitter.com/PavewayIV/status/851830282164555776

    Susan Sunflower | Apr 11, 2017 12:21:21 PM | 72
    So many folks breathlessly anticipating mushroom clouds in our future, I fear we are being manipulated into gratitude and relief at anything less ... which also seems to have become a recognizable Trump (and MSM) tactic ...

    Team Trump has apparently failed to "normally" and effectively stage-manage the annual White House Easter Egg hunt -- a logistical nightmare that a hotelier and beauty pageant magnate and staff might have been expected to ace... diminished expectations ... many fewer participants, military bands rather than A-list acts (Bieber apparently was a past entertainer 2010 to an onsite audience of 30,000 mentioned). Commemorative "eggs" ordered late, local schools still have not received their invitations. Apparently, they have only half the "normal" number of volunteers to staff the event

    Washington-area public schools that normally receive blocks of tickets for as many as 4,000 children have yet to hear from the White House, according to representatives for school systems in the District of Columbia; Arlington, Va.; and Alexandria, Va. Several groups representing military families, who have accounted for as many as 3,000 guests in recent years, also said they had yet to be contacted.

    This should have been a gimme --

    NYT .

    WG | Apr 11, 2017 12:29:29 PM | 73
    Look what's happened with Trumps initial moves in the whitehouse in some detail:

    -Appoints Michael Flynn
    -Flynn appoints Ezra-Cohn Watnik to senior director of intelligence at National Security Council
    -Flynn alters national security council January 28
    -removes director national intelligence
    -removes chairman of joint chiefs of staff
    -removes director of the CIA
    -removes US chief representative to the UN (state department?)
    -removes secretary of energy (nuclear weapons complex)
    -adds chief strategist to the president (Bannon)

    -Flynn gets removed by Vice President leaking that Flynn lied to him about Russia, Trump asks for Flynn resignation.
    -Ezra-Cohn Watnik discovers who unmasked Flynn during Obama admin, leaks info to Nunes.
    -NYT reveals Watnik is the leaker
    -McMaster tries to transfer Watnik out of NSC, Trump and Jared intervene.
    -April 4 McMaster succeeds in altering National Security Council back to original pre Trump configuration, removing Bannon's position and reinstating all of the others.
    -within days of that move, events unfold in Syria and US policy shifts 180 degrees, both in Syria and apparently in North Korea.

    -----
    It's clear that Flynn's departure was the beginning of the end, it's just taken a little bit of time. Bannon, Watnik and Nunes were working to try and maintain control however they've clearly been crippled as Bannon's now off of NSC and Nunes recused himself from the probe into Russia.
    There is no Trump master plan in motion, the people who he originally hired to enact his vision are either sidelined or fired.

    TG | Apr 11, 2017 12:35:19 PM | 74
    Some have suggested that Trump is practicing "Mad Dog" diplomacy, wherein an appearance of being dangerously unpredictable can be useful in getting your way.

    Perhaps.

    I do point out, however, that to be long-term effective "Mad Dog" diplomacy requires that one not actually BE a mad dog.

    Lea | Apr 11, 2017 12:39:56 PM | 75
    @Posted by: guidoamm | Apr 11, 2017 8:42:40 AM | 27

    Quote, "In the past 40 years, Europe has experienced all manners of political ideology. From the Marxists and the military in Portugal and Greece to the Fascists in Spain and all manner of "Democrats" elsewhere.
    Yet, the result is exactly the same across the board. We have stagnating wages, a sky rocketing cost of living, decrepit infrastructure that all result in increasing fiscal and legislative pressure.
    Clearly, politics has absolutely no bearing on our quality of life. "

    I am not sure things are like that because of some sort of natural decline. I have a link that tells a whole different story, one of occupation of Europe by the USA since right after WW2.
    That US occupation came most at the same time as the end of the European colonies (pushed by the USA with the Atlantic Charter). Unable to carry on plundering its colonies, the post-war, destroyed and impoverished Europe was left well-nigh totally dependent on US investments.
    The US occupation of Europe (and Japan) was economic, military and cultural. And we are still ruled by the USA swamp creatures (I am French).
    http://www.entelekheia.fr/how-did-europe-become-an-american-turf/

    I also recommend the blog of the author, where I found historical absolute pearls of wisdom.
    http://www.lpthe.jussieu.fr/~roehner/

    Peter AU | Apr 11, 2017 12:52:41 PM | 76
    Paveway 71

    The blue pipeline in your link - why the need for it to skirt around Iraq? Why not up through US controlled Iraq and into Turkey?

    xor | Apr 11, 2017 1:00:50 PM | 77
    Trump's plan is to stay in the presidential seat and try to deliver on at least 1 of his promises which he will so desperately cling to just like Obama clung so desperately to 1 of his promises, health care, that eventually became an abomination. Trump has no power over the chain of events occurring in Syria or beyond and is just there to give it legitimacy, to keep the illusion allive as if the pursued policy is being led by someone people voted for. It's like in Europe when NATO first bombed Libya and then the parliaments voted for the military action giving their approval while it should have been the other way round so it was just to give the impression that there is some democratic veneer to the pursued policies.

    The policy of the US deep state/borg is chaos and fragmentation like Yugoslavia, Libya, Somalia, ... resulting in weak meaningless pliable statelets.

    dh | Apr 11, 2017 1:08:24 PM | 78
    A lot depends on Tillerson's reception in Moscow. It will be interesting to see how the Russians handle him.

    It could be that the inconclusive result he got from the G7 has caused some second thoughts.

    LXV | Apr 11, 2017 1:08:29 PM | 79
    Congratulations b, for your on-the-record giving in to Tavistock's smoke and mirrors .

    Lest you forget, propaganda is still legal in the US of A, courtesy of the Patriot Act. You too must have noticed the Trump administration's decision to double down on their predecessors' efforts in spreading the 'fog of war' far and wide, by disseminating contradictory reports and opinions by .gov officials, "anonymous sources" and various psy-ops projects. Simultaneously Trump decides to black out all info regarding US troops deployment in the ME (as opposed to Obama's most.transparent.administration.ever. that at least reported some 'numbers') and send more boots on the ground in Jordan and with the Kurds.

    Now all we have to do is just sit back, relax and wait for the next "barrel bombing by Assad's regime" to (not) take place and be "reported" by zionist presstitutes, the rest is a question of simple math...

    chu teh | Apr 11, 2017 1:09:36 PM | 80
    "Trump is now losing the "America First" followers he will need to win another election. "...

    Neither Trump nor his minders have need nor great desire for "must have" a 2nd-Pres. term. The deed is already done and more deeds are works in progress.

    The DeepState, SecretTeam, DarkSide, 5thColumn and other clichés for CovertActions are the continuation of plans at least going back to Federal Reserve creation 1913 [which arguably involved blackmail-control of Woodrow Wilson via his alleged, late-stage syphilis].
    So a 2nd pres term is a distraction.

    When considering global movers-and-shakers, understand that old-wealth families have the privileges of generation-to-generation , continuous communication networks and accumulated implanted agents
    and mutual benefits that are vital to continuing their wealth status, with its growing control networks that span generations.

    Any "new money" lacks such time-honed privileges. BTW, "they" know all about assassination; there is no tech that rivals assassination when it becomes necessary to maintain old-wealth status.
    The removal of the Russian Czar system and its 300-year old Romanov family reign, threatened and terrified all other old-wealth families and established an all-out war to maintain the status of the remaining "families". If you were looking for the real movers-and-shakers, you might start here.

    ToivoS | Apr 11, 2017 1:13:49 PM | 81
    Peter AU | Apr 11, 2017 12:52:41 PM | 76

    " Why not up through US controlled Iraq and into Turkey? "

    Well maybe because the US does not control Iraq (at least to the level to secure a pipeline) and probably does not control Turkey either.

    These pipeline stories as an explanation for every twist and turn in US actions in the ME are becoming tedious. Oil and gas are not the drivers of US policy in the ME. Maybe it was in the 1950s but it is not today. A much simpler explanation is the infiltration of the neocons (i.e. Zionist) into US foreign policy circles.

    B. Nathanael | Apr 11, 2017 1:15:46 PM | 82
    Here's why:

    http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=1201

    Netanyahu visits Trump; IsraHell bombs Syria; Netanyahu demands buffer zones into the Golan Heights; Tillerson says Assad can stay; 'Sarin gas' (fake news) explodes in Idlib; The Jew-owned media blames Assad sans any proof; War criminals Mattis and McMaster concur and Trump buys the JEW LIE; Tillerson caves; Trump BOMBS Syria; Tillerson reverses and says Assad must go and Russia is complicit; Jews applaud!

    Peter AU | Apr 11, 2017 1:16:12 PM | 83
    Add to WG's list that Trump now has a fully legal impeachment hanging over his head.

    For the past twelve months or so, US has been building up forces on Russia's borders. Not enough for any sort of attack - apart from Kaliningrad perhaps - but enough that Russia must maintain sufficient forces in place to face that threat. The build up of US forces in Europe seems to have begun some time after Russia moved into Syria for the purpose of tying up Russian forces.

    Syria - outraged has posted links to a couple of relevant articles further back in the thread.
    Add to that what Putin has said to reporters -
    https://www.rt.com/news/384333-putin-idlib-attack-provocation/

    Russian MoD http://eng.mil.ru/en/news_page/country/more.htm?id=12118216@egNews
    ...Moreover, according to the information, insurgents are delivering toxic substances to the areas of Khan Sheikhoun, Jira airport, East Ghouta and to the west from the Aleppo city.
    The purpose of these actions is making another reason to accuse Syrian government of chemical weapons use and provocation of new US attacks.
    The Russian party warns against making such steps.

    Russia are now beefing up Syrian air defences and apparently other measures.

    Has the decision to attack Syria already been made?
    Was the Tomahawk attack a warning for Russia to get out before the main attack comes?

    chris m | Apr 11, 2017 1:18:53 PM | 84
    his "base" is beginning to turn against him.
    all of a sudden, the Dems and Liberals are cock-a whoop for him
    while those who actually supported him are turning against him.
    i think he's probably lost it.


    jayc | Apr 11, 2017 1:19:59 PM | 85
    I would say the bombing of the Syrian airfield served the function of a valve - opened to relieve pressure. The pressure was the intense hysteria in the USA media and political culture over the "chemical attack" with the additional context of alleged Russian meddling in favour of the new administration.

    As to the end of the de-confliction communications, I suspect this will be reinstated at some point. Based on statements by Russian military soon after the "chemical attack" - to the effect that the flight plan of the plane, which conducted a mission in the area at the same time as the alleged attack, had been shared with the Americans ahead of time, as routine, and the Russians assume this information was passed to the rebel groups who staged the attack so the theatrical presentation could be timed to coincide with the presence of that plane.

    Pnyx | Apr 11, 2017 1:44:51 PM | 86
    "Whatever one might say about Trump, he is not stupid. He must have some kind of plan."
    His plan is to survive as Potus. That's all. He has pretty strong fascistoid beliefs, but of course surviving is more important. So the nihilistic neocons are on the march again.
    ben | Apr 11, 2017 1:56:44 PM | 87
    Could we all just grab a clue please? Mr. Trump, in the role of Reagan, is nothing more than a salesperson selling whatever the corporate giants have to sell. He is here to sell his brand, and by way of that, the empire's goals also. Global hegemony is the game for the empire/NATO. This modern empire will not tolerate competition of any kind. So regime change is in store for any nation that will not comply.

    Mr. Trump is a spoiled rich brat, but is is a superb "snake oil salesman". Like Reagan, perfect for the empire's needs.

    harrylaw | Apr 11, 2017 2:02:19 PM | 88
    TG@74 We already have a mad dog on the Trump team 'Mad dog Mattis. here are some of his quotes.
    "The first time you blow someone away is not an insignificant event. That said, there are some assholes in the world that just need to be shot."
    (Business Insider)
    3. "I come in peace. I didn't bring artillery. But I'm pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you fuck with me, I'll kill you all."
    (San Diego Union Tribune)
    4. "Find the enemy that wants to end this experiment (in American democracy) and kill every one of them until they're so sick of the killing that they leave us and our freedoms intact."

    "Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet."

    Outraged | Apr 11, 2017 2:04:50 PM | 89
    Perhaps we should take a deep breath and exhale slowly ... a short take on the G8-1 love-in:

    After two days of the usual, a supplementary joint position/statement was sought, the primary driver being Perfidious Albion, UK, with US, Tillerson in support, the response of the Foreign Ministers of Italy, France, Germany, Canada & Japan, whilst diplomatic observers of Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Qatar & Turkey stand around looking on sternly:

    1. We should all agree to launch action against Russkies to teach 'em a lesson: No.
    2. Well what about agreeing to take action against Syria and that demon-head Assad: No.
    3. Alright, lets agree to new sanctions against Russia then: No.
    4. Can we at least agree to new sanctions against Evil Assads Syria: No.
    5. What about we agree the chemical incident was a bad bad thing and it should be thoroughly investigated: Yes.

    Righy-O then, says Tillerson, with that unanimous ringing endorsement and steadfast explicit backing & support I'm off to Moscow to present my credentials and on arrival immediately thereafter issue an Ultimatum to Evil Beelzebubic(sic) Putin and put him in his place --

    Meanwhile Putin and the President of Italy are meeting and declare the reported chemical incident should be thoroughly investigated ...

    The corporate owned MSM is hyping all this to the max and beyond ... meanwhile, later this week the foreign ministers of Syria and Iran will meet in Moscow ...

    WG | Apr 11, 2017 2:06:20 PM | 90
    @Peter AU

    Exactly! Trump has traded threatened impeachment over groundless accusations for the threat of impeachment (if he doesn't play along) over legitimate impeachable offences. Seems at best a decision made in panic to buy time, and at worst an acknowledgement of capitulation.

    I fear they've already decided to attack they're just not sure when. Perhaps they're just going to keep pushing until US soldiers are killed and then there will be the congressional vote for war.

    Christophe Douté | Apr 11, 2017 2:08:54 PM | 91
    I suggest listening to Dr. Pieczenik on the Alex Jones Show... especially his appearance there on April 10th explains it probably pretty well... it is less than 20 minutes long.
    Or even shorter, this report on that interview: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-10/pieczenik-explodes-issues-warning-trump-mathis-and-mcmaster-about-going-war-syria
    Pat Bateman | Apr 11, 2017 2:10:13 PM | 92
    Something is brewing. For Putin to publicly call the Americans out today during a press conference with the Italian President by stating US plans to bomb Damascus, is exceptional.
    Matt | Apr 11, 2017 2:10:55 PM | 93
    Of course Israel wants it. Having backwards salafist principalities on the Israeli border will be no threat at all.
    ruralito | Apr 11, 2017 2:11:21 PM | 94
    @82, Brother Nate is here! Not all "Jews applaud", Bro Nate. Neturei Karta for one. http://www.nkusa.org/
    Love your videos, you got a fire under you, and it shows. But your suggestion that Jews are born evil contradicts science AND Jesus whom you claim to venerate.
    somebody | Apr 11, 2017 2:20:08 PM | 95
    Posted by: Peter AU | Apr 11, 2017 1:16:12 PM | 83

    "Has the decision to attack Syria already been made?
    Was the Tomahawk attack a warning for Russia to get out before the main attack comes?"

    The US never had the power to do this - see Cuban missile crisis. Both militaries are careful not to get involved in any tit for tat that would finally lead to nuclear war. So Ukrainians and Syrians have to go to a proxy war against each other with outside support. It was better in the cold war when lines were drawn who was allowed to support which government.

    The G7 countries have just refused further sanctions for Russia and are asking for proof.

    The truth will come out, probably via Turkey, especially if Erdogan loses the referendum.

    Peace would be easy if everybody took regime change from the table - the US, Iran, Saudi.

    Trump means the end of US influence if he combines an aggressive foreign policy with a trade war. Countries just have no reason left to ally with the US.

    Quentin | Apr 11, 2017 2:28:17 PM | 96
    Idlib province borders on Turkey. Yes, Turkey.
    Curtis | Apr 11, 2017 2:39:17 PM | 97
    David 34
    Thanks for the interesting link. The US banking holiday of 1933, the Cyprus haircut of 2013, the Indian demonetization of 2017. There are precendents for the banking systems to take dramatic/drastic steps either as the result of economic change or precipitously/preemptively. Will TPTBs do such a thing to the US? Hopefully not anytime soon. But it does fit in with their stated overall game plan.

    jayc 85
    Perhaps Trump released the valve. It's sad that that's the best we can hope for. Meanwhile, Trump can now relish that - like his predecessors going back for decades - he is officially a wartime president.(with the associated madness that entails)
    http://theweek.com/articles/691356/dcs-war-madness

    Susan Sunflower | Apr 11, 2017 2:40:54 PM | 98
    Unfortunately for everyone, the United States is utterly opposed to "peace" ... couldn't find it in the dictionary, much less the encyclopedia, much less draw a picture of it, except maybe one that has a tripartite Syria to match the tripartite several times proposed and rejected for Iraq and now apparently also to Libya. Balkanization or Bosnification appears to be one unifying "plan" under the pretense of dividing the pie "fairly" -- but, at least as proposed for Iraq, was absurdly unfair, in addition to having (IIRC) zero popular support and hitting the re-set button when it comes to reducing governmental legitimacy back to near-zero.
    Mina | Apr 11, 2017 2:42:58 PM | 99
    89 outraged
    French journalists are on another (qatari) planet. They report that evryone stand with the us, no mention ofthe Italian president talking with putin and give as a fact that the Turks have published the results of the analysis. Well yesterday they were convinced that the us strike had destroyed "20% of syrian aviation".
    Mina | Apr 11, 2017 2:48:24 PM | 100 Posted by b at | Comments (152)
    Former prez of msf ( doctors without borders) stated that use of chlorine in bombing is not forbidden... and that even if the bombed chemicals belonged to the rebels it is a warcrime to bomb that knowingly!
    the pair | Apr 11, 2017 2:56:47 PM | 101
    he might not be stupid but i don't think he's particularly intelligent either. a few things that lined up:

    - professional dumb hick nikki haley (who, by the way, is actually indian and from a sikh family so who knows if ingrained islamophobia is part of her "deal") and dick cheney's idiot brother tillerson started off the confusion. maybe hanging out with the saudis and israelis at UN HQ made her want to sit at the cool kids' table. tillerson is just an oil tard...but maybe he has other agendas. just doesn't seem that sharp to me.

    - chief of meritocracy jared kushner took some time off from being the jewish patrick bateman to run around the globe with the same kind of psycho generals that are currently badgering his dad-in-law into stupid decisions. they went to iraq and israel and all the fun places that make you wish the US would just collapse already.

    that and his public feud with bannon line up nicely and it seems obvious the globalists further infected his tiny little yuppie mind with nonsense and shiny weapons and tales of anecdotal tragedies that could have been averted if only the people had been bombed by us instead of shot by syrians. trump for some reason thinks this kid has a mind of his own ("well, he did score my hot daughter...noice!") and will definitely choose him over bannon cementing not only his closet globalism but his increasing tendency to crap on anyone who got him elected, even the mercers with their piles of cash and love of bannon's politics.

    - the neocons/israel-firsters have lost patience now that the russians and syrians and their allies have started to reach a plainly visible victory. not only did they stage (probably with help from turkey) a blatantly fake attack and then had their media lackeys turn the Screech Factor to 11, but they've seen how easy it was and simply cannot help themselves. i guess they haven't gotten it out of their system with a full scale slaughter of gazans lately so they need to let off steam by grabbing golan and any other territory they can grasp in their slimy claws (and people thought west bank settlements were cheeky).

    - "veterans today" is a bit of an odd site but they claim to have actually gone to the area and confirmed the (possibly chlorine but definitely not sarin) attack was a turkey/al nusra joint. they also claim that another is being filmed and planned with the white helmets and even a few guys from reuters nearby. if they're not full of it (the article had no pictures or video and was a bit rushed looking) then the next one will be the true "never again" moment that leads to boots on the ground.

    - speaking of which, sure it's a TOTAL coincidence that flynn was sacked for his pro-diplomacy outlook vis a vis russia only to be replaced by an obvious lunatic like mcmaster. word on the street is he's blatantly cooking intelligence before showing it to trump and wants 150k troops on the ground by june for a full scale invasion. he's a real "jack d. ripper" type and looks like he loves the taste of netanyahu's bum. watch out for this psycho.

    so tl;dr = lots of moving parts and it would resemble keystone cops if it wasn't so terrifying.

    somebody | Apr 11, 2017 2:57:38 PM | 102
    95 plus Trump's team is completely incompetent - they can't even get their Assad = Hitler stuff right.
    Ops1 | Apr 11, 2017 3:00:00 PM | 103
    Trump was grab by is pussy by the deep state, now we are in a deep shit :)
    james | Apr 11, 2017 3:00:54 PM | 104
    thanks b.. good question and many interesting responses to your question.

    i think the empire is coming apart personally.. trump will be the fall guy, but it will probably hang in their for longer then his term, if he makes his term. the usa approach at this point seems very chaotic at best.. unfortunately all hell could break lose at any moment, thanks the war party that continues to guide the world into a ditch..

    i don't believe trump and putin have got together to hatch a brilliant plan...that just doesn't ring true to me. i do believe we continue to be in trouble on the planet and this is just the latest installment we have to work thru. so much can go wrong, but one thing for sure - many folks are going to wake up fast, if at all..

    Kalen | Apr 11, 2017 3:04:48 PM | 105
    As long as b ignores central role of Israel in the Syrian War, he will continue to be lost in seemingly chaotic developments, which to his defense is a bread and butter of MENA politics of global proxies.

    What if chaos was the real goal of this war?

    Already Israel is safe from Syria and Egypt and even of war ends will be safe for decades. If this war last another decade Iran will be exhausted, substantially weakened.

    Of course this assumes US imperial dominance to continue while this is the biggest risk in the entire mess, what makes Bibi a drunken gambler with the fate of Israeli nation which may not even see celebration of 70.

    Alaric | Apr 11, 2017 3:05:52 PM | 106
    Trump has entered political survival mode. From here on I'd expect an erdogan style play all sides strategy. That means some concessions will be made to neocons.
    PavewayIV | Apr 11, 2017 3:23:23 PM | 107
    ToivoS@81 - "Oil and gas are not the drivers of US policy in the ME. Maybe it was in the 1950s but it is not today. A much simpler explanation is the infiltration of the neocons (i.e. Zionist) into US foreign policy circles."

    Your second sentence contradicts your first one if I'm reading that right. I agree, there is little direct benefit to the US regarding access to oil and gas. But I would disagree the direct interests of the US in the Middle East have any bearing here. Everything happening in the Middle East (at least the view from under my tin-foil visor) seems to benefit Israel and Saudi Arabia (and Gulf cronies). Even the laughable claims of trying to "fight Islamic extremism" are not a rational goal when Islamic extremists are being funded IN ORDER TO keep the US there. Israeli and Saudi interests have an inordinate amount of influence on my government's foreign policy. I like to throw around the word 'treason' but that's just useless. When the US population is brainwashed into thinking Israeli and Saudi/GCC interests ARE US interests, then it seems like we (the US) are somehow vaguely serving our own interests there when in reality we have - or should have - none.

    When some power-drunk delusional bastards think they're the world's cop, then you can manipulate them with little effort by providing a suitable evil criminal gang that must be eliminated. You know what suckers Americans are for demonization - it's almost cartoonish in it's effect.

    Peter AU@76 - "Why not up through US controlled Iraq and into Turkey?"

    I think that was the plan at one time, but the Saudis/Qataris are pretty much hated by Iraq today - something about funding head-choppers. I think they would have a much better luck running it up through Syrian head-chopperistan and whatever Rojava is called today. That's why I keep harping about the entire purpose of any 'government' in partitioned east Syria must have the authority to sign oil and pipeline contracts that supersedes the authority of the Syrian government. If that is not explicitly obtained, then the US. will simply assume it's there (like in Barzanistan) and have their fake partition governments sign anyway. And since the Saudis already have a gas pipeline and compressor stations nearly all the way to Jordan, it will be cheapier/easier to run it up through Syria. That also benefits Israel - they do not want to pay for an underwater Leviathan pipeline and want Leviathan gas intermingled with Qatari gas as far back in the pipeline as possible (BDS and all). Jordan will support both - it will enjoy cheap, plentiful gas either way. Jordan needs it for power generation.

    ALberto | Apr 11, 2017 3:36:29 PM | 108
    NEW IRAN SYRIA 2.DOC

    https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/18328

    If previously posted please excuse

    karlof1 | Apr 11, 2017 3:42:35 PM | 109
    Outlaw US Empire Imperial Policy hasn't changed; the clue is to look at the rest of the world situation, and there it's easy to see that Full Spectrum Dominance is still the #1 policy goal. By very openly declaring the Idlib incident to be a false flag with more expected, Putin torpedoed anything Tillerson might have said of substance, while Iran and Russia escalate their military efforts.

    The US "strategy" reminds me of the fire bases they set up deep in VC territory and serviced via UH-1s & CH-47s that proved to be a total failure. The Empire lacks the required number of boots to properly occupy/pacify Syraq and eventually will be forced to completely withdraw; as with Vietnam, it's just a matter of time. But will US military openly stand and fight with Daesh and al-Ciada, or will such a choice provoke mutiny?

    sTrumpet reminds me of W, but lacking the boots needed to fulfill the same policy goal mapped out decades ago--Yinon. IMO, at the moment, the real, dangerous, conflict point is Korea. And the wild card still remains China.

    Vollin | Apr 11, 2017 3:43:27 PM | 110
    Suspect US warmongering may tone down quite a bit if military starts to take significant casualties. neocons seem to implicitly assume that US losses will always be trivial.
    Ghostship | Apr 11, 2017 3:57:38 PM | 111
    Yet again the United States will be playing catch-up with the Russians and Syrians yet again. The Syrians are removing the last block to an offensive against Idlib - the populations of Al-Fou'aa and Kafraya are being exchanged for the populations of Madaya and Al-Zabadani, and rebel prisoners currently in SAG prisons. Once the exchange is complete, there'll be no reason for the SAA not to attack the rebels in Idlib.

    From AMN :

    The first batch of buses sent by the Syrian Government have arrived in besieged Madaya and Al-Zabadani, Damascus Now reported this afternoon.

    The buses are prepared to transport more than 2,500 residents and militants from the besieged towns in rural Damascus to the Idlib Governorate, as part of the deal set forth by the Qatari and Iranian governments.

    In exchange for the 2,500 residents of Madaya and Al-Zabadani, more than 1,500 civilians from besieged Al-Fou'aa and Kafraya will be transported from their villages to Damascus.

    Once this exchange is made, the second phase of the agreement will reportedly begin with the release of rebels from the Syrian government's prisons and the transportation of another 1,500 residents of Al-Fou'aa and Kafraya from jihadist-held territory.

    The first phase of this agreement is expected to commence in the coming hours, a government source told Al-Masdar

    Maybe Trump's policy for Syria just became irrelevant.

    Ghostship | Apr 11, 2017 3:58:15 PM | 112
    End quote
    Steve | Apr 11, 2017 4:00:42 PM | 113
    "Whatever one might say about Trump, he is not stupid."
    Uhmm... I wouldn't bet on that.
    mischi | Apr 11, 2017 4:08:01 PM | 114
    this is my $.02

    Trump is used to having brainstorming sessions to run his business and he welcomes many different opinions. However, he allows these people to speak to the press and they give a wildly varying position for the Administration.

    He has allowed himself to be persuaded to have a strike on Syria but now it remains to be seen how he will deal with other gas attacks because you know there will be many. He has painted himself into a corner.

    somebody | Apr 11, 2017 4:12:33 PM | 115
    Posted by: ALberto | Apr 11, 2017 3:36:29 PM | 108

    The correct date of that is 2012 according to Wikileaks.

    Thanks.

    Russia's intervention was not part of the calculus.

    \flickervertigo | Apr 11, 2017 4:22:40 PM | 116

    for the time being, I'm sticking to the theory that trump,
    putin and xi are working together to discredit the neocons

    what would force trump, putin and xi to cooperate?

    ...the realization that the neocons are the worst thing to come
    down the pike since the Nazis?

    that theory is intolerable --and very scary-- to our resident
    kommissars... but in terms of human survival, it makes sense,
    and that scares our kommissars even more

    .

    what can our kommissars do to eliminate the possibility that
    trump, putin and xi are cooperating?

    ...keeping in mind that it ought to be something that is televised
    live, like the second impact at the twin towers

    .

    Kmart | Apr 11, 2017 4:56:16 PM | 117
    "for the time being, I'm sticking to the theory that trump,
    putin and xi are working together to discredit the neocons"

    I don't see how that is even possible.

    Where and how would this coordination have taken place? Every single bit of communication by Trump has been monitored by the US intellegence agencies. If there was anything remotely close to some sort of behind the scenes coordination with China and/or Russia Trump would be sititng in jail with wackjob Hillary in the Oval Office.

    The much simpler explanation is:

    1. Trump, like anyone who knows nothing about Syria, sees reports of the US funding and aiding jihadist terror groups. He makes completely reasonable comments about stopping those types of activities with his administration

    2. Trump being a political outsider lacks the army of political lackeys presidential cannidates have when they take office

    3. This lack of support has left Trump completley vunerable to the long time Washington players.

    4. The neocons have relentless taken out Trumps political amateurs one by one to the point we are now where he is almost entirely surrounded by them

    5. The neocons are now feeding him a continuous stream of fake intel about Syria and other hotspots around the world

    I don't think it is because Trump is dumb. He simply is completely out of his leage in his ability to take on the long time Washington powers. Previous administrations have come in with an army of lackeys to defend the president and enforce the president's will upon the so called deep state.

    flickervertigo | Apr 11, 2017 5:00:13 PM | 118
    Kmart has never heard of showbiz
    Peter AU | Apr 11, 2017 5:00:51 PM | 119
    Another 'Dossier' out

    https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-04-11/what-reset-white-house-to-call-out-russia-s-fake-news-on-syria
    "The Syrian regime and its primary backer, Russia, have sought to confuse the world community about who is responsible for using chemical weapons against the Syrian people in this and earlier attacks," the dossier says. Another passage says Moscow's response to the April 4 incident "follows a familiar pattern of Russia's response to egregious actions; it spins out multiple, conflicting accounts in order to create confusion and sow doubt within the international community." The dossier also derided a "drumbeat of nonsensical claims" from Syria and its allies, a clear reference to Russia....

    flickervertigo | Apr 11, 2017 5:06:00 PM | 120
    google: fake chemical attack Syria

    About 7,070,000 results

    https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=fake+chemical+attack+syria&spf=548

    .

    the propaganda campaign isn't working so pretty good

    .

    thecelticwithinme | Apr 11, 2017 5:10:48 PM | 121
    Since everyone is throwing their hat into the ring, here is my take:

    US military has a thing about initiating conflict when world leaders are in close proximity. If you recall, at the start of the Georgia-Russia conflict, world leaders (including Bush and Putin) were gathered in China for the summer Olympics. Putin immediately left and returned to Moscow to administer to the engagement while Bush stayed behind to get in close with the women's beach volleyball team.

    The decision to initiate combat was not made by Saakashvili alone. He was operating under the umbrella of the world's only super power, i.e., with US blessing. Putin knew that Bush knew, but put an overwhelming stop to all that. Never the less, combat was commenced at the time when world leaders were gathered together in China.

    Now we have a situation in which the Chinese leader is visiting with Trump (all off the record) with the hope of coming to some kind of understanding perhaps, and US military initiates attack against Syria. There is a message US is sending here with regard to US intensions. The timing is not coincidental but intentional. I haven't put my finger on it.

    And I don't believe Trump (at this time) is thinking about re-election. He's too busy hoping to make it through this first year.

    Syria claims they were monitoring a warehouse thought to belong to ISIS. It observed increase in amount of traffic coming and going, into and out of said facility. It decides to attack and explodes CW being stored there.

    But there was some thing else going on there important enough that the US thought it had to retaliate. I don't believe it was CW alone nor do I believe it was pics of innocent children.

    It's not the act but the message it sends that one must discern with care. From what I've read, US intelligence is lacking in the ME in that much of what gets reported as classified is not much more that paper clippings. Little in the way of person-to-person contacts.

    I don't know where I'm going with all of this but it appears that increased chaos is indeed the end game.

    The people crying out for more strikes are delusional.

    telescope | Apr 11, 2017 5:13:34 PM | 122
    Syria will be partitioned, it's simply not a viable country anymore, given Arabs' clannishness, susceptibility to foreign intrigue and the existing animosity between the various groups. Now is the time for the West to insert 50k soldiers into the ISIS country (the mooted 150 000 US soldiers is a pie in the sky - America doesn't have those) and start bleeding - and negotiating the contours of the partition. Russians already got what they came for, and now they wait the rest of the gang to stake their claims. People in the West should listen to what the King of Jordan - a very good personal friend of Putin - had said recently, namely that in Moscow's mind the issue of Syria is inextricably linked to the issue of Crimea and the Ukraine. He knows how it works. And Trump did 180 on Syria during his visit. The West will resist Syria-Ukraine linkage, but it can't do it forever. Russia simply won't agree to anything until that's achieved. What's good for the goose (Syria) must be good for the gander (Ukraine). The issues are similar, whatever others may say.
    As for Trump, he wants to put his soldiers into the Syrian desert (Latakia, Tartus and Damascus are in the Russian domain), but can't because US public opinion is hostile to the idea. The latter can be gradually molded by the mounting hysteria, which is exactly what's happening.


    motive464 | Apr 11, 2017 5:20:15 PM | 123
    I think the plan is to up the ante on what was proposed in backchannels during the transition/flynn debacle - supposedly they were trying to make a deal of good relations with Russia and sanctions removal in exchange for russia abandoning support for Syria and Iran. Of course, that failed.
    So now I think the chem weapons pretense is like some face-saving 'opportunity', or politial excuse for putin to back out from supporting assad, and at the same time a thinly veiled threat, that more sanctions could come "if" its determined Russia facilitated or had some foreknowledge since they were "responsible" for ensuring that Assad's stockpiles were destroyed. They've been careful not to vindicate or blame Russia, to keep the door open, they are waiting for their next move.

    Thats entirely ludicrous of course, but from the mirrored exceptionalist bubble that the US establishment operates out of, I'm sure its 'the dealmaker's most brilliant idea ever.

    It seems they have more false flag attacks like this scheduled to occur as Putin stated, and as one could almost read from Mathis' nervous lips during his press conference today.

    Peter AU | Apr 11, 2017 5:24:02 PM | 124
    "Help me out. What are his thoughts behind this. Or are there really none at all."

    The common theme with Trump, Tillerson, Haley is that the US is prepared to act bilaterally. Self appointed sheriff. Above the UN.

    President Trump‏Verified account @POTUS 7h7 hours ago
    More
    North Korea is looking for trouble. If China decides to help, that would be great. If not, we will solve the problem without them! U.S.A.

    Tillerson.. "Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said on Monday that the U.S. will stand up to anyone who commits crimes against innocent people"

    Haley .. "When the U.N. consistently fails in its duty to act collectively, there are times in the life of states that we are compelled to take our own action,"

    Peter AU | Apr 11, 2017 5:28:20 PM | 125
    ...US is prepared to act unilateraly..

    Forgot to check the spell checker.. maybe 'unilateraly' is not even a word?

    Lochearn | Apr 11, 2017 5:49:56 PM | 126
    As james said good question.

    I think Trump works on hunches. I think he goes to bed with a question and wakes up with an answer. Israel Shamir wrote about the hunch aspect of Trump. Nothing is thought out logically. It is the opposite of the academic approach and appears to have yielded much success for him in his business and TV life. But international politics and economics is vast and requires years of study. There is no easy way. The people who really control things have covered up their moves and each one has to be uncovered through much research. Trump relies on people rather than books. He relied on Bannon for election strategy and was smack on. But now he is up against masters like Putin, Netanyahu and Xi Jinping and he is lost. So he goes back to ratings; what gets good ratings as a sort of feel-good factor like a drinker with his bottle, like a baby with its milk.

    One thing that stuck in my mind about FDR was a long period of illness in the 1920s and how he devoured books, the better to prepare him for the massive changes he was about to bring in.

    swmcl | Apr 11, 2017 6:38:21 PM | 127
    Here's my take ...

    Trump allows the neocons to advise hime to strike and to celebrate the strike.
    Slowly, the world comes to realise the Syrians did not have the chemicals and did not use them against their own people.
    As this slowly is being realised, various others who are against Trump on the inside are exposed.
    Then Trump can get up and say he was misinformed and the various traitors and mis-informers will have to go.
    This would include a massive re-alignment of intelligence agencies (abolish the CIA).
    It would also expose the media who have been complicit in their support of the strife for many decades.
    All pre-organised with Russian help to identify a airbase that had no significant assets ...

    Take all the piss-clowns down in one stroke.

    Ops1 | Apr 11, 2017 6:43:27 PM | 128
    http://theweek.com/articles/691356/dcs-war-madness


    Interested reding for all!

    Kmart | Apr 11, 2017 6:51:54 PM | 129
    "Kmart has never heard of showbiz"

    Yeah, keep telling yourself that.

    The reality is that God Emporer master 5d chess player is nothing more than an experienced businessman who is completely out of his element in Washington politics and is in the process of being eaten alive by the neocon establisment.

    Trump's failure and capture by the Washington establishment is a perfect example of the folly of populists screaming for term limits. You get politcal amateurs who get chewed up and spit out by the unelected state actors who have had decades of experience.

    flickervertigo | Apr 11, 2017 6:59:19 PM | 130
    the Chinese and Russian are not concerned about the neocons' published ambition to establish "benevolent
    global hegemony"...

    and they aren't alarmed that the neocons apparently
    intend to achieve their hegemony by killing anyone
    who resists their benevolence

    .

    world leaders, according to Kmart's theory, are too stupid
    to recognize mental illness when they see it and are threatened by it


    *shrug*

    Ann | Apr 11, 2017 7:00:02 PM | 131
    Trump seems to be keen on taking Intelligence away from civilians like Susan Rice, and letting those who know what a battlefield looks like advise him. He is essentially depriving foreign banks and multinational corporations to use the US for their Nation Building, i.e. to have us pay for it with our taxes, and use our soldiers as cannon fodder.

    So he made a bold stroke. Some chats with the presidents of Russia, China, Syria, and the King of Jordan, for instance, but not our so-called allies in NATO. It also allows him to smoke out the snakes here and elsewhere. Of course for the trick to work, various leaders had to talk tough and condemn Trump's action.

    Websites which address some of these issues:
    http://www.voltairenet.org/article195862.html
    http://www.voltairenet.org/article195904.html
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NU2TapgWl-A

    jfl | Apr 11, 2017 7:02:46 PM | 132
    @89 or

    thanks for the bullet list from the g7

    @95 sb, 'Trump means the end of US influence if he combines an aggressive foreign policy with a trade war. Countries just have no reason left to ally with the US.'

    we've all said that for some time now ... but if the g7 meeting means that the countries ... other than the poodles in the uk, of course ... are seeing themselves as the accomplices of the usofa in the crytal ball, and not liking it at all, then maybe 'Countries [have really, finally come to understand that they] just have no reason left to ally with the US'.

    somebody | Apr 11, 2017 7:05:39 PM | 133
    Posted by: Ops1 | Apr 11, 2017 6:43:27 PM | 128

    Yep, it is a good read. It is like with old people where the brain has not adapted to what the body can no longer do.

    flickervertigo | Apr 11, 2017 7:07:56 PM | 134
    can you establish benevolent global hegemony by killing anyone who resists?

    so far, the neocon project has wrecked country after country, caused hundreds of thousands of needless deaths, and millions of refugees

    where's the benevolence in that?

    .

    and don't people like Russians and Chinese have a right to
    be alarmed? ...especially in light of the US's nuclear primacy policy, which is based on nuke first strikes so
    overwhelming that Russia and china are unable to retaliate

    it's no wonder, considering the neocpns' ambitions, performance and policies, that world leaders would cooperate to rid the world of neocons, is it?

    .

    flickervertigo | Apr 11, 2017 7:12:27 PM | 135
    here's the consolation prize...

    if humanity is stupid and crazy enough to exterminate itself in a fit on mental illness, then they are a failed species

    that's kinda cold consolation, isn't it?

    .

    Perimetr | Apr 11, 2017 7:15:00 PM | 136

    I don't think Trump has a plan or a clue. Can't wait for the Armada to arrive at North Korea.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-11/trump-were-sending-very-powerful-armada-north-korea

    BARTIROMO: You redirected navy ships to go toward the Korean Peninsula. What we are doing right now in terms of North Korea?

    TRUMP: You never know, do you? You never know.

    BARTIROMO: That's all (INAUDIBLE)...

    TRUMP: You know I don't think about the military.

    BARTIROMO: Yes.

    TRUMP: I'm not like Obama, where they talk about in four months we're waiting -- we're going to hit Mosul.

    BARTIROMO: Right.

    TRUMP: And in the meantime, they get ready and like you've never seen -- look, they're still fighting. Mosul was supposed to last for a week and now they've been fighting it for many months and so many more people died. I don't want to talk about it. We are sending an armada, very powerful. We have submarines, very powerful, far more powerful than the aircraft carrier, that I can tell you. And we have the best military people on Earth. And I will say this. He is doing the wrong thing. He is doing the wrong thing.

    BARTIROMO: Do you...

    TRUMP: He's making a big mistake.

    BARTIROMO: -- do you think he's mentally fit?

    TRUMP: I don't know. I don't know. I don't know him. But he's doing the wrong thing.

    I think the shit is going to hit the fan. Maybe we will find out if the North Korean satellites that orbit over the US every day are actually EMP weapons? http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/expert-north-korea-threatens-emp-nuke-attack-on-u.s./article/2614739

    But why not just attack Damascus while were at it? The neocons seem quite sure that "Russia will back down".

    Julian | Apr 11, 2017 7:18:50 PM | 137
    Why is escalation in Syria happening now?

    Ie, why was the go-ahead given on the CW False Flag in terms of it's timing.

    It could be as simple as trying to swing the French Election.

    Pro NATO (Macron & Fillon) against Anti-NATO (Le Pen & Melenchon).

    If either of the Anti-NATO candidates were to become President there's absolutely no doubt they would split NATO at the first sign of conflict with Russia - which could be imminent.

    What better way to tie their hands than attack Syria until there is a forceful Russian military response, Article 5 is invoked, and Hollande goes along with it full boar as one of his last acts.

    The hands of the next French President are essentially tied at that point - even better (from that point of view) if some French soldiers are inserted into the conflict and perhaps killed).

    How could a new President possibly climb down from that policy position? How could Le Pen or Melenchon argue that France should not go along with the invoking of Article 5?

    Would this really play well with the French voting public to be seen as "abandoning" long-held NATO allies in their time of need?

    Surely it would torpedo their candidatures - unless of course they are the two in the run-off - which is possible.

    Speaking to young French voters recently (in their early 20s) - they do not like Macron - they see him as a fake, a phony, a creep. They won't be voting for him - and they're from Paris.

    james | Apr 11, 2017 7:19:19 PM | 138
    @122 telescope.. some of what you say i agree with and some not!

    @ 124 peter au.. i think what you point out is all a given.. the exceptional warmongering nation will not be deterred regardless just how effective the propaganda machine is... this is why i believe we are in a more dangerous place now then ever before. even when the propaganda is breaking apart, all parties opposed to the war party will have to remain fully prepared for more war..lousy actors playing a bad hand with the 'exceptional warmongering' status on shaky ground..

    @132 jfl... those poodles are looking into something more like a crystal meth ball, then an actual crystal ball.. if they weren't so hooked on the crack, they would have been calling it quits on their bad habit of aligning with the exceptional warmongering nation, but alas - they are too addicted to the crack..

    jfl | Apr 11, 2017 7:40:14 PM | 139
    @106 alaric, 'From here on I'd expect an erdogan style play all sides strategy.'

    i think viewing tee-rump as an american erdogan is quite apt. except that he's not as smart as erodogan, certainly not as observant or well-studied.

    @127 swmel

    that's quite an agile acrobatic performance. i think you're right as far as tee-rump's letting his 'apprentices' try 'their' plans and then blaming and firing those whose efforts don't work out. but trump works on the 31st floor . and he very well knows there are people at work on the floors above him - the bankers, in his business career - whom he must please in order to be allowed to continue. and his plan is to continue. business career, political career ... same thing.

    Vor | Apr 11, 2017 7:43:38 PM | 140
    The mainstream media more or less gave us an explanation of what the US cruise missile attack on Syria was all about - to be regarded as a 'player' in the Syrian theatre. That may seem trivial & petty on the surface, but think again, things are often not what they appear. The attack was a demonstration effect, which many US bombing attack often are, they are sending a message that the US deployment with the Kurds (YPG/SDF) in the North is the beginning of Syria's partition. This will be backed up by more heavy US military engagement, hence the cruise missile attack. That's why Russia responded so vociferously, they know this was not for show as Thierry Meyssan & others have suggested, it was just made to look that way because for starters the US has chosen not to escalate, but to warn. That is why they have followed up with threats of further attacks, because the first was just a taste, but the next will be more strategic & will target the SAA &/or vital state infrastructure. Partition of Syria is key, because at the heart of all of this is the dissolution of all Middle Eastern states so as to facilitate Israeli expansion.
    peter | Apr 11, 2017 7:49:54 PM | 141
    Trump has told Fox that he's not going into Syria in an interview that airs in the morning. I hope that Tillerson got the memo before he talks to Lavrov.

    Putin has publicly made the case for a false flag. The G7 boys have denied Tillerson the kind of wholehearted support he was hoping for by wanting an investigation before any punitive actions are taken against Syria or Russia. It's been put out there while the world is totally focused on events so there's no chance the MSM can ignore it. There will be no UN sanctioned attack on Syria or Assad without doing the dance. Unless Trump goes rogue.

    The response to the Tomahawks was mostly positive in the West. Trump finally got some positive press and Russiagate was like it never happened. I think even Putin was perfectly happy to let him have one kick at the cat so he didn't look like a pussy. But the followup babel of tweets and sound bytes about everything from Russian involvement to the necessity of removing Assad was sure to up the ante. I think the Tillerson-Lavrov meeting is critical. I hope that Putin finds time to meet with Tillerson.

    The business on the Korean Peninsula is the more worrisome of the two crises. Now there's two unpredictable leaders fixin' to kick ass and take names. There can't be any winners over there. It blows my mind that these vaunted generals have allowed Trump and the US to find themselves at loggerheads with so many enemies at once. I thought these fucking clowns went to West Point. It's been a hell of a ride from non-intervention to taking on half the world. And we only just got started.

    There used to be a pool of seasoned diplomats to try to see if there were ways to avoid sabre-rattling and confrontation. But they're all gone. All that's left is generals and CEOs. And the generals seem to be in the catbird seat.

    There's some that are still carrying water for Trump. They say the deep state has him snookered. Well, Trump is the deep state or trying very hard to be part of it. He owns this debacle. Lets hope he's not the fucking antichrist, I'm not up for getting raptured.

    Rapier | Apr 11, 2017 7:58:34 PM | 142
    I'll help you out. Syria doesn't matter. Whatever happened with the gas and its aftermath doesn't matter. Forget Syria.

    Instead think about Iran. Trump is going to destroy Iran and in so doing will put an end to China's New Silk Road and will also take out a large marginal supplier of oil to the world market and so oil prices will recover. Now if Trump is thinking in such strategic terms I have no clue. It matters not.

    jfl | Apr 11, 2017 8:02:43 PM | 143
    @136 perimetr

    the talk of 'submarines, very powerful, far more powerful than the aircraft carrier' on their way towards north korea is interesting. the Syrian Tomahawk Strike review had an interesting line ...


    This should also tell us how useful (or useless, as the case may be) our Virginia class submarines that carry only 12 Tomahawks will be – not very. It would have required five subs to carry out this attack and this was only a partial attack against a small airfield. Those who believe that our subs will constitute a significant land strike capability are mistaken. The subs are more likely to be used as snipers, taking out smaller, undefended targets. The retirement without replacement of our four SSGNs which each carried 154 Tomahawks may come to be viewed as a mistake.

    ... i wonder if those 'four SSGNs' ( Ohio, Michigan, Florida, and Georgia ?) is a done deal, or whether one or more might be sailing beneath waves toward north korea?

    fresh from his 'triumph' and accompanying great reviews from his syrian cruise missle performance, is he about the try an encore, on a much larger scale, in north korea?

    silly to point out that it's irrational. the play's the thing! think of the curtain calls for this one!

    h | Apr 11, 2017 8:03:40 PM | 144
    WH Lays Out Evidence that Syria was behind deadly attack...

    "A senior administration official laid out evidence that the Syrian regime was behind the chemical attack in the country that killed at least 80 people last week."

    "The official said intelligence gathered from social media accounts, open source videos, reporting, imagery, and geospatial intelligence showed that the chemical attack was a regime attack."

    "I don't think there's evidence to the contrary at all," an official who briefed reporters on background Tuesday said."

    FUNNY THAT...

    Intelligence and Military Sources Who Warned About Weapons Lies Before Iraq War Now Say that Assad Did NOT Launch Chemical Weapon Attack

    "A critical piece of information that has largely escaped the reporting in the mainstream media is that Khan Sheikhoun is ground zero for the Islamic jihadists who have been at the center of the anti-Assad movement in Syria since 2011. Up until February 2017, Khan Sheikhoun was occupied by a pro-ISIS group known as Liwa al-Aqsa that was engaged in an oftentimes-violent struggle with its competitor organization, Al Nusra Front (which later morphed into Tahrir al-Sham, but under any name functioning as Al Qaeda's arm in Syria) for resources and political influence among the local population."

    FUNNIER THAT, NOT AS IN A HAHA, BUT RATHER IRONY -

    UK-trained doctor hailed a hero for treating gas attack victims in Syria stood trial on terror offences 'and belonged to the group that kidnapped British reporter John Cantlie'

    "Dr Shajul Islam, from East London, published a video of the patients on his Twitter account after the attack. He said his hospital took care of three victims all with narrow, pinpoint pupils that did not respond to light."

    "The University of London graduate was arrested and charged with kidnapping two journalists - Mr Cantlie and Dutch reporter Jeroen Oerlemans - in 2012 but was released after the trial collapsed when neither of the prosecution's witnesses were able to give evidence."

    THIS WOULDN'T BE COMPLETE WITHOUT MAD DOG'S LOUSY TWO CENTS -

    "The goal right now in Syria and the military campaign is focused on accomplishing that is breaking ISIS, destroying ISIS in Syria. This was a separate issue that arose in the midst of that campaign. The use by the Assad regime of chemical weapons and we addressed that militarily but the rest of the campaign stays on track"...

    To sum this bunch of crap up - in less than 48 hours we are to believe the DOD's use of friggin social GD media proved beyond reasonable doubt that Assad chemed his own people in a town that is known worldwide as 'ground zero' for jihadi's, filmed by a doc who was brought to trial on terror charges (lest we forget about the UK/US financed White Helmets at $100M playing pretend propaganda chit) with the bad ass retired general now in charge of all of the militaries toys and humans stating as fact, FACT, this violation of U.S. law and international law was a one time deal b/c Assad is bad, bad, bad - I looked at the evidence and was convinced beyond doubt blah, blah blah F'ing bullshit!

    Sick of it. Just sick and tired of all of it! I loathe being lied to and that SOB lied today. LIED LIED LIED.

    My rant is done.

    Links:

    1. http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/11/white-house-lays-out-evidence-that-syria-was-behind-deadly-chemical-attack/

    2. http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2017/04/intelligence-military-sources-warned-iraq-war-say-assad-not-launch-chemical-weapon-attack.html

    3. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4388780/Doctor-Syria-stood-trial-terror-offences.html

    4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgvnvvIoyEE

    jfl | Apr 11, 2017 8:06:01 PM | 145
    @143, i wonder if the retirement of those 'four SSGNs' (Ohio, Michigan, Florida, and Georgia?) is a done deal?
    dh | Apr 11, 2017 8:06:20 PM | 146
    @141 "I hope that Putin finds time to meet with Tillerson."

    Putin will certainly be able to find the time. It depends what message Tillerson has come to deliver. Putin will need to know that before he agrees to any meeting. Tillerson must first have a friendly chat with Lavrov. Putin will probably be listening in.

    Ron | Apr 11, 2017 8:06:41 PM | 147
    No, there isn't a new policy in place. The target has been the Iranian hegemonic ambition, not Assad. It's the same policy as before. The plan is the same: break up Syria (and Iraq). The break-up takes places in stages and all the players attempt to force each other's hand, hence the ever-expanding chaos. The north of Syria is going to be a part of the future Kurdistan, the east is going to be part of an independent Sunni state. Finally, the west was destined to shape the new Syria, which would include most of the country's territory, but this plan was botched after the rise of Daesh and the Russian intervention in Assad's favor. What I describe is a slight amendment on the borders proposed here ; the blue-colored "Sunni Iraq" state between Baghdad and the (still current) Syrian border and the Kurds will have more Syrian territory than the map depicts. As you will notice, the map is American-made. That's the plan, broadly speaking and Trump's bombing of Assad's airfield is another move in the framework defined by this plan.

    Trump has chosen to use the opportunity offered by the sad event of last week, the actual origin of which is hotly debated, to unleash a warning strike to Iran. Israel is the only US ally which is not openly opposed to the plan I describe above, because it will guarantee to a large extent its security. In fact Israel wants an independent Kurdistan; such a country will provide strategic depth to Israel. The Turks don't like it for obvious reasons, as well as the Saudis. The Iranians will be affected too by an independent Kurdistan, but they have not shied from the opportunity to extend their sphere of influence to Iraq and to cement and broaden their pre-existent influence in the Mediterranean.

    A relevant digression: The reason the Saudis invaded Yemen is that they want to foil the Iranian attempt to establish strategic maritime connection between Iran and its Mediterranean proxies by controlling the entrance to the Red Sea. Remember that the plan is to have a Sunni state and Kurdistan between Shiite-controlled Iraq and Assad's territories and Lebanon, so land is a no-go for the Iranians at this point.

    The Israelis do not want Iran to have so much influence that the obstacles placed deliberately in its path will not foil its hegemonic tendencies. Of course, the Israelis need any Sunni hegemonic tendencies to be in check, too. Remember, the map provides for territorial interruption to the perpendicular Sunni axis starting from Turkey and ending at the Gulf of Aden (which is Kurdistan), as well as for an interruption of the horizontal Shia axis of the region (the Sunni state and Kurdistan). Apparently the Persians have been doing rather well for themselves in Syria and Trump was in all probability advised to grasp the opportunity to remind them that the reality that is taking shape in that part of the world will have to follow the provisions of the mentioned map. This account also explains why the Israelis were fast to declare that it was Assad's Syrian Arab Republic which was behind the attacks with chemical weapons: the Israelis want to see the American plan implemented, not foiled. It also explains Russia's gift to Israel: it was a message of the type "we respect your concerns, but keep out of this". You see, if Israel accepted the Russian gift, it would de facto enter the current Syrian fray (as a beneficiary); this is not what Israel should want and this is also not what the US have planned for Israel (in order to keep it safe). For the US Israel and Palestine are a different matter. This is depicted in the map of the new Middle East as no radical border changes; by accepting Russia's gift the Israelis would show themselves to be rather short-sighted, something which would cause the US to discipline it.

    So there is no new policy, just a different way of moving the pieces on the chessboard - Obama's way was far subtler.

    Peter AU | Apr 11, 2017 8:21:15 PM | 148
    jfl 139

    Trump is pleasing the bankers right now
    https://twitter.com/search?q=Trump%20Frank%20Dodd&src=typd

    At 1.40 in this video of his speech he actually says the bankers will be very happy.
    https://twitter.com/Forever_Lucid/status/851840956915748865

    Pft | Apr 11, 2017 8:27:39 PM | 149
    There is no fundamental change in Syria or the Middle East. The basic plan is to break everyone up into small competing pieces. Divide and Rule. The essense of the Odin Plan and the long proven tactic of British Colonialism.

    Trumps a puppet. Compromised and controlled asset of the neocon faction of the Deep State. He may have been forced to run or face losing all to the Rico Act due to his many mob connections. Surveillance in the 21st century means pretty much anyone is vulnerable, but Trump especially. Russians call it Kompromat,

    In any case, we cant say his turn around is real or not. Perhaps just scripted. Said what he needed to say to get elected with help from Comey. Needed a valid reason to explain the turnaround other than gross deception which was anticipated , so we had this Putin connection which was manufactured and engineered by the Deep State , and Trump willingly went along calling for Putin to help get the emails and appointing some pro-russian cabinet members who would be sacrificed. All a sham. He does have Russian connections but its the Russian Mafia and not Putin. Some of these guys deal with Putin out of self preservation but all want him gone. Many are Isreali as well or have ties to Israel.

    US is strongly allied with British and Israeli interests in the region. This alliance is so strong one may consider the trio as one entity. Its been that way since 1917 when we went to War for the British and the future Israel.

    Now how does the script read for Syria in coming years?. Perhaps only Hollywood knows. In the long term Syria, Lebanon, Iran will be carved up with regime changes in Egypt and Turkey. Outside the region conflict with China over North Korea and Russia over Ukraine/Crimea is possible but I doubt anyone is foolish enough to allow escalation to WWIII

    And obviously there are many more false flags to come since people refuse to believe in them unless MSM spells it out for them, and they won't.

    jfl | Apr 11, 2017 8:28:21 PM | 150
    @148, never stopped pleasing the banksters. been working for them his whole life long.
    Pespi | Apr 11, 2017 8:33:20 PM | 151
    Theory 1: Obama deftly played the CIA/State and DoD against each other, limiting their lust for bloodshed and chaos in Syria by putting their proxies at odds with each other. Trump, in his clumsiness thought giving the DoD a free hand would speed up the Defeat of ISIS and make him look good.

    But the CIA and Neocons kept pushing the Russia angle, and he's too petty a person to sweat out the false accusations, so he "does something."

    Theory 2: The US has gone full North Korea, "rabid dog" mode where they just lash out violently at random to make it appear as if they have more power and control of a situation, when in truth they are at the mercy of many layers of facts and realities.

    Sad Canuck | Apr 11, 2017 8:35:38 PM | 152
    We know little about the relationship between actors moving in the shadows and anything revealed is increasingly cartoonish and staged for public consumption. That Assad would use WMD at this point is as ridiculous as the damage caused by the supposed launch of 59 tomahawks. In that sense it looks like this is a wag the dog moment to distract from domestic issues. But there are also likely connections with recent events in Syria. IDF jets have been bombing Syria more lately for some reason and one or more jets may have been downed a few weeks ago. The progress against ISIS in eastern Allepo seems to have unnerved Assad's opponents who have been doing everything possible to draw key resources like Tiger Forces away from this front and down to Hama. Russian Kalibr cruise missiles were launched with little fanfare and no announced targets a couple of weeks ago (I think I have my timing right). The Russians never scream about their targets or successes with these cruise missile attacks, but it seems they reserve these for serious targets. If this weeks events were not a wag the dog distraction then something valuable certainly seems to have been lost or about to be lost to set off this reaction. Connecting sparse dots is difficult but the dots are there to be connected.

    [Apr 11, 2017] Vladimir Putin claimed ISIS planned false-flag chemical weapon attacks to justify further US missile strikes.

    Notable quotes:
    "... Putin said Russia had information that the US was planning to launch new missile strikes on Syria , and that there were plans to fake chemical attacks there. ..."
    "... "We have information that a similar provocation is being prepared in other parts of Syria, including in the southern Damascus suburbs where they are planning to again plant some substance and accuse the Syrian authorities of using [chemical weapons]," ..."
    "... In his remarks Putin said Russia would ask the UN to carry out an investigation into the attack, and accused unnamed western countries of supporting the US strikes in a bid to curry favour with Donald Trump. ..."
    Apr 11, 2017 | www.theguardian.com

    Vladimir Putin has deepened his support of the Syrian regime, claiming its opponents planned false-flag chemical weapon attacks to justify further US missile strikes.

    The Russian president's predictions on Tuesday of an escalation in the Syrian war involving more use of chemical weapons came as US officials provided further details of what they insist was a sarin attack by Bashar al-Assad's forces against civilians on 4 April, and accused Moscow of a cover-up and possible complicity.

    The hardening of the Kremlin's position, and its denial of Assad's responsibility, accelerated a tailspin in US-Russian relations, just as the US secretary of state, Rex Tillerson , arrived in Moscow for direct talks.

    Analysis What's Trump's plan for Syria? Five different policies in two weeks Until late last month, Donald Trump was fine with Bashar al-Assad remaining in power. Since then, his administration has struggled to articulate a clear plan

    Tillerson had hoped to underscore the US position with a unified message from the G7, which condemned the chemical attack at a summit in Italy on Tuesday. However, G7 foreign ministers were divided over possible next steps and refused to back a British call for fresh sanctions.

    Putin said western and Turkish accusations that Syria's government dropped the nerve agent that killed dozens of civilians in Idlib earlier this month were comparable to the now-discredited claim that Saddam Hussein had stockpiled weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

    "It reminds me of the events in 2003 when US envoys to the security council were demonstrating what they said were chemical weapons found in Iraq," the president told reporters on Tuesday. "We have seen it all already."

    Putin said Russia had information that the US was planning to launch new missile strikes on Syria , and that there were plans to fake chemical attacks there.

    He insisted that Assad was not behind the alleged sarin attack in Khan Sheikhun, saying Moscow had information "from different sources" that it was carried out by rebel groups intent on dragging the US into the conflict.

    "We have information that a similar provocation is being prepared in other parts of Syria, including in the southern Damascus suburbs where they are planning to again plant some substance and accuse the Syrian authorities of using [chemical weapons],"

    he said, without offering any proof for the assertion. Putin predicted such fake attacks would be used to justify further US missile strikes on the regime, like the attack on Shayrat air force base on Friday.

    Senior White House officials said that Syrian military officers involved in the regime's chemical weapons programme were at the Shayrat base ahead of and on the day of the Khan Sheikhun attack, which they claimed was carried out by a Syrian air force Su-22 warplane, dropping at least one munition containing sarin nerve agent.

    One official said that there was "no consensus based on the information we have" of direct Russian complicity, but pointed out that the Russian and Syrian military had a long history of close cooperation and that Russian troops were at Shayrat base at the time of the attack.

    In his remarks Putin said Russia would ask the UN to carry out an investigation into the attack, and accused unnamed western countries of supporting the US strikes in a bid to curry favour with Donald Trump.

    [Apr 11, 2017] Chuck Todd Interviewes Nikki Haley On NBCs Meet The Press

    Notable quotes:
    "... "Ambassador" what a joke, warmongering, disrespectful, hateful representative. All without a single shred of proof. ..."
    Apr 09, 2017 | www.youtube.com

    ytfp 1 day ago

    "Ambassador" what a joke, warmongering, disrespectful, hateful representative. All without a single shred of proof.

    [Apr 11, 2017] The road to war and the death of millions is paved with dead baby propaganda

    Notable quotes:
    "... In fact, western authorities are well aware that Assad was not to blame for the Ghouta massacre, and know as well – or should – that there is every chance the sarin gas used was supplied by Turkey. ..."
    "... When Erdogan consolidated his power following the failed coup attempt to oust him, one of the first things his administration did was shut down Today's Zaman ..."
    "... What's the cost to the West of being proved wrong over the latest 'chemical attack'? Absolutely nothing. ..."
    "... They will simply say that they acted on the information on the time and it was a reasonable action to take, and that it was unfortunate that it turned out to be more complicated. The US is not going to be dragged in front of the ICJ because it is not a member and is certainly not going to pay any reparations. USS Vincennes v. Iran Air 310 anyone? They simply don't care, whether it is Trump or some other President. Facts are Scrotums (to modify a former claim used by the Guardian's old 'Comment is Free' opinion section). ..."
    "... So why? Because they can? Like a bear in woods? Or is it to show that it is still some sort of player and save face from the fact that Assad, with the backing of Russia, Hezbollah & I-ran have been very effective in fighting IS/ISIS/ISIL/DAESH/Whatever whereas the West had simply ignored it for years? ..."
    "... je ne sais quoi ..."
    "... I don't know if one should believe this 100%, and in the comments, there are people who quote opposing reports but Cernovich does have sources. Basically, Trump's new national security adviser McMaster is the one pushing for war, and wants 150,000 US ground troops in Syria. Currently, there is still some resistance in the Trump administration against this. ..."
    "... I think Trump's 'strategy', if you can call it as such, is to shake the tree to see who folds under pressure. It's likely it will blow up in his face, but as we have seen with the TLAM strike in Syria, even the Dems were on board and congratulating him so they own the consequences too. ..."
    Apr 11, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com
    Analysis of evidence contradicts allegations on Syrian gas attacks kirill , April 9, 2017 at 3:04 pm
    The road to war and the death of millions is paved with dead baby propaganda. Time for humans to change their idiotic values. Even thousands of dead babies are not worth millions of dead from large scale wars. Initiation of war as retaliation for some alleged atrocity must fall under war crime. Alleged good intentions are not enough. Unfortunately the Nuremberg principles are useless to cover these cases.
    marknesop , April 9, 2017 at 10:39 pm
    That is truly depressing. It is plain the leaders of the western powers are willfully ignoring exculpatory evidence in order to push a narrative they know, or ought to know, is false.
    Moscow Exile , April 8, 2017 at 11:00 pm
    Russia is to blame for "every civilian death" in the chemical weapons attack last week in Syria, Defence Secretary Sir Michael Fallon has claimed.

    A really, really annoyed Fallon: "Russia must show the resolve necessary to bring this regime to heel."

    See: Russia to blame for Syria deaths – Sir Michael Fallon – BBC

    kirill , April 9, 2017 at 6:35 am
    Yeah, sure, whatever US regime elements claim. The same regime that excuses itself with "shit happens" when it slaughters civilians by the hundred.
    Hoffnungstirbtzuletzt , April 9, 2017 at 12:12 am
    https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2017/04/09/1373821/trump-following-netanyahu-s-footsteps-in-syria-russian-analyst

    "Along these lines, the message being delivered to President Xi is that Trump might even launch limited strikes against North Korea next, and it's no surprise that both leaders came out of their meeting with a supposedly new strategy for responding to Pyongyang.

    The other point that Trump was conveying is that he is the "alpha male" not only over President Putin (whom he feels that he embarrassed by the strike), but also President Xi, who apparently seems to need Trump more than the reverse and therefore didn't walk away from the dinner in spite of Trump's aggression in Syria.

    It's true that China needn't get directly involved in Mideast affairs nor take on the responsibility of being Syria's protector (a duty which it has no mandate or obligation to perform), but the optics surrounding the fact that President Xi dined with Trump after the latter ordered a military strike against the SAA are nonetheless uncomfortable and negative."

    Tasnim: Do you believe that the US and Russia are on road to a final collision? Do you think that the US is beating the drum for World War III?

    Korybko: No, the two sides will not enter into a conventional war with one another, let alone over Syria, for the reasons which I thoroughly explained in my article for Geopolitika.Ru, "How The Neocons Are Tempting Trump On Syria".

    I released it Thursday night before the attack took place and accurately forecast that Russia wouldn't militarily intervene to stop Trump because its mandate only covers anti-terrorist activities, not supporting President Assad, the SAA, or Syria's sovereignty.

    The global perception, however, is that Russia has tacitly taken on these responsibilities, though this myth was painfully shattered the moment that Russia's state-of-the-art anti-air defense systems stood silent and weren't ordered to fire at the Tomahawks.

    Having said that, however, the two sides are definitely engaged in a New Cold War which is being advanced through the US' Color Revolutions, Unconventional Wars, Hybrid Wars, and Conventional Wars in third-party states, all of which are examples of strategic warfare and represent a new era of proxy conflict.

    More at the link.

    niku , April 9, 2017 at 2:16 am
    "President Xi, [] apparently seems to need Trump more than the reverse and therefore didn't walk away from the dinner in spite of Trump's aggression in Syria. [The Optics is] uncomfortable and negative."

    I think it is a mistake to imagine that diplomacy's goal is to produce headlines for the newspapers. The goal is to get something you want. There should be some meaning in the act of walking away - just "showing displeasure" is meaningless. Would President Xi not cooperate with President Trump henceforth? Why not, if it suits China's interest? Russia too has not recalled or expelled Ambassadors after many provocations, because it would be meaningless.

    Anyway, China hasn't stood up to the US till now, and it has served it quite well. China keeps on downplaying the news reports that it is now world's largest economy - because there is nothing to gain from this distinction, and only something to lose. (Such a distinction will bring the spotlight onto China, and people will notice bad things about it, e.g. environmental pollution. While it is an "underdog", all is forgiven!).

    Lao Tzu:

    In order to contract a thing, one should surely expand it first.
    In order to weaken, one will surely strengthen first.
    In order to overthrow, one will surely exalt first.
    "In order to take, one will surely give first."
    This is called subtle wisdom.

    Thanks, Jen and Mark for the article(s)! I am from India, by the way.

    Jen , April 9, 2017 at 5:34 am
    Thanks Niku – yes, to walk away just to show displeasure is an almost empty gesture. Xi would need to have something in reserve to support that gesture, that at the same time is a warning to Trump. Also the context matters: Xi was dining at Trump's resort at Mar-a-Lago while the Tomahawk airstrikes were under way, and for this guest to walk out on his host would make him look petulant and potentially embarrass him and China.
    Hoffnungstirbtzuletzt , April 9, 2017 at 10:46 am
    According to Pepe Escobar Xi's delegation left Mar-a-Lago exactly six minutes after the first missiles started hitting Syria. I haven't found any other information about this.
    marknesop , April 9, 2017 at 10:48 pm
    Thank you, Niku, and welcome! Your perspective is an interesting one. It remains to be seen if China's behavior will continue on this course, but its thinking is hard to predict using a western template and assuming it will act in its own interest seems a safe one. However, China must also be aware that Washington plans for China to either be a vassal, or an enemy who must be demonized and destroyed as it intends for Russia. The USA will not acknowledge any other world power as an equal.
    niku , April 11, 2017 at 1:21 am
    Beijing calls for preserving Syria's sovereignty and opposes the use of military force in the conflict, China's Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying said on 10th April.

    "China has always called against using military force in international relations and for preserving territorial sovereignty," the diplomat said, noting that the Syrian crisis can be only resolved by political means.

    "It is up to the Syrian people to decide on Syria's future," the spokesperson said, stressing that China is ready to "work with all the sides for resolving the crisis as soon as possible."
    http://tass.com/world/940435

    Moscow Exile , April 9, 2017 at 3:53 am

    You have been warned "We are taking names". https://www.youtube.com/embed/BfS5ZWiaPiQ

    The Empire has spoken! What a plonker she is!

    karl1haushofer , April 9, 2017 at 3:56 am
    And a big Ha Ha to those Trump voters who thought he would bring a change.

    As I said, move out of the Babylon (America, Australia, Canada, Britain etc.).

    yalensis , April 9, 2017 at 5:46 am
    OMG! This is the first time I heard this c**t talk.

    She sounds half hockey mom and half corporate bigmouth announcing the formation of some big new project team to the assembled slaves while simultaneously bullying her immediate underlings.
    These people have no clue how to act on the world stage!

    et Al , April 9, 2017 at 11:20 am
    Look like Tina Fey to me.
    Jen , April 9, 2017 at 6:37 pm
    She's Sarah Palin Version 2.0.
    kirill , April 9, 2017 at 6:33 am
    Evidence how deluded the US elites are. They think they are already ruling the world.

    yalensis , April 9, 2017 at 6:04 am

    Very good clip. The interlocutors make the point that Trump's true target is Iran.
    This is what Netanyahu is pushing him to: bomb bomb bomb Iran .

    Other point they make: America Deep State at war with itself.

    • FBI was pro-Trump.
    • The CIA is hostile to Trump.

    My thoughts: I think it goes without saying that the CIA could have Trump assassinated any time of their choosing. Or harm his family. Trump is most likely aware of this by now. Although Trump himself is evil, his family truly does seem like lovely people, and, in retrospect, he never should have dragged them into this.

    marknesop , April 9, 2017 at 10:57 pm
    That's probably why Washington flipped its lid when Russia initially announced sales of the S-400 system to Iran.
    yalensis , April 9, 2017 at 6:10 am
    My latest post on Russian reaction to the Trump rocket strike.

    While on my blog, please check out Lyttenburgh's "Futurology" essay , if you haven't started reading it yet. We're about halfway through with the installments. Well worth reading, so please take the time to catch up, if you haven't already!

    kirill , April 9, 2017 at 6:10 am
    http://russia-insider.com/en/breaking-trumps-national-security-adviser-wants-full-scale-war-syria/ri19516

    So Uncle Scumbag couldn't bait Russia into a war in Ukraine and will now instigate a direct confrontation in Syria. Russia needs to ratchet up the rhetoric at the UN that any non-sanctioned US deployment in Syria is the action of a rogue state that authorizes a Russian response. NATzO is trying to destroy the basis of international relations and norms. (Forget about law.) This is a clear neo-colonial agenda where some cheesy false flag can "authorize" NATzO to regime change at leisure. No investigation by independent bodies, just ad hoc response by the pack of hyenas. A wall needs to be placed for this agenda and Syria is the do or die moment.

    Cortes , April 9, 2017 at 7:17 am
    In contrast to the inane Sir Michael Fallon, David Habakkuk at the Turcopolier site provides a lengthy, detailed account of the behaviour of grownup people dealing with the mad neocon kids and their jihadi besties who conjured up the Ghouta incident:

    http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2017/04/sentence-first-verdict-afterwards.html#more

    Well worth taking the time to read, I think.

    marknesop , April 9, 2017 at 8:10 am
    In fact, western authorities are well aware that Assad was not to blame for the Ghouta massacre, and know as well – or should – that there is every chance the sarin gas used was supplied by Turkey.

    When Erdogan consolidated his power following the failed coup attempt to oust him, one of the first things his administration did was shut down Today's Zaman newspaper, and replace it with a Turkish-language alternate which parroted the Erdogan line. Our erstwhile former-intelligence-professional colleague Ronald Thomas West did an excellent story on the article which appeared in the doomed paper before its demise, reporting that the Turkish government shut off an investigation which would prove Turkey was involved at the state level and that the sarin was provided by a group of Turkish businessmen with the collusion of Turkey's intelligence services. The story was widely unreported elsewhere, but I am still on RTW's mailing list.

    NATO would be wise to remember the strangling of opposing voices like this when it is whooping and strutting and screaming about Putin crushing opposition news media and the horrible climate of censorship which prevails in Russia, because Saakashvili did just the same thing with the Georgia Media Center.

    et Al , April 9, 2017 at 11:39 am
    What's the cost to the West of being proved wrong over the latest 'chemical attack'? Absolutely nothing.

    They will simply say that they acted on the information on the time and it was a reasonable action to take, and that it was unfortunate that it turned out to be more complicated. The US is not going to be dragged in front of the ICJ because it is not a member and is certainly not going to pay any reparations. USS Vincennes v. Iran Air 310 anyone? They simply don't care, whether it is Trump or some other President. Facts are Scrotums (to modify a former claim used by the Guardian's old 'Comment is Free' opinion section).

    So why? Because they can? Like a bear in woods? Or is it to show that it is still some sort of player and save face from the fact that Assad, with the backing of Russia, Hezbollah & I-ran have been very effective in fighting IS/ISIS/ISIL/DAESH/Whatever whereas the West had simply ignored it for years?

    As for Erdogan, I expect another change of wind once he becomes Prez for Life.

    Moscow Exile , April 9, 2017 at 7:54 am
    Syria crisis: Russia raises prospect of war if it is given G7 ultimatum as it mocks Boris Johnson's no-show

    Russia has raised the prospect of war with the West as it mocked Boris Johnson for cancelling a trip to Moscow in the wake of the Syrian nerve gas attack.

    The Russian Embassy in London posted a series of provocative tweets on its official account in which it suggested that "a conventional war" could be one outcome if the G7 group of nations presents it with an ultimatum later this week.

    Oh tut tut! How dreadful of those Russians are to pen such scurrilous messages in the social media Such uncultured louts!

    Note how the Telegraph accuses Russia of sabre rattling.

    cartman , April 9, 2017 at 1:03 pm
    Big girl shirt, he is.
    marknesop , April 10, 2017 at 6:15 pm
    Excellent. You have a certain je ne sais quoi .
    Warren , April 9, 2017 at 2:16 pm
    Fallon has particular axe to grind with respect to Russia.

    Visibly drunk Michael Fallon forcibly separated from attractive Russian spy by minder

    https://tompride.wordpress.com/2016/12/11/visibly-drunk-michael-fallon-had-to-be-forcibly-separated-from-attractive-russian-spy-by-a-minder/

    marknesop , April 10, 2017 at 7:55 pm
    Dear God. Are there no responsible adults left at all?
    marknesop , April 10, 2017 at 5:29 pm
    Ha, ha!!! The proposal is said to contain a tacit offer to Russia to rejoin the G7 if it plays nice, withdraws all its military forces from Syria and drops its backing for Assad – after which the west would be in there like stink and ISIS would be running the joint before the next Ramadan.

    And a flood of Syrian refugees would be fleeing sectarian prosecution or death. As the west so often makes me say, fuck off. And when you get there, fuck off a bit further. Russia prefers the G20 forum to the G8, and an offer to rejoin the cash-strapped G7 is not an enticement.

    Drutten , April 9, 2017 at 11:14 am
    Nothing new here, but a well written essay nonetheless:

    Patrick Cockburn: Who supplies the news?
    London Review of Books, vol 39, no. 3.
    https://www.lrb.co.uk/v39/n03/patrick-cockburn/who-supplies-the-news

    Chinese American , April 9, 2017 at 1:44 pm
    A new report by Mike Cernovich:

    I don't know if one should believe this 100%, and in the comments, there are people who quote opposing reports but Cernovich does have sources. Basically, Trump's new national security adviser McMaster is the one pushing for war, and wants 150,000 US ground troops in Syria. Currently, there is still some resistance in the Trump administration against this.

    Pavlo Svolochenko , April 9, 2017 at 2:15 pm
    Oh, nothing to worry about then – he's shown such fortitude in the face of pressure so far.

    There is no way this ends in any way but WWIII – these fellows either think they're invincible or they'd truly rather see Syria and Russia destroyed than see their grandchildren grow up.

    Either way, the Russian government's options are decreasing to a singular course.

    et Al , April 10, 2017 at 1:21 am
    Like Whatever -- Trump likes to have people with strongly conflicting views around him, which I suspect is to make it easier to divide & rule but also maintain an element of uncertainty (like Hitler!) abroad. It plays well to the Pork Pie News Networks but we keep coming back to the fundamental issue that large numbers of Americans voted for Trump on America first, not more war – which would require a coalition and all those complications.

    Does anyone see European militaries putting significant boots on ground? No. So far only Special Foreskins. Would the US seek to emulate the succes of Russia by using local forces? Saudi & Qatari troops? Even Jordanian troops? They're beof tartar people put in their sandwiches before they get eaten. All the known unknowns say that that the potential blowback(s) from another such a mission could be considerable, and yet again it would be Europe who would pay the price.

    Chinese American , April 9, 2017 at 3:28 pm
    Another good link, detailed analysis of the videos "Dr. Shajul Islam" (a documented terrorist) that supposedly document the chemical weapons attack at Khan Sheikhoun:
    http://logophere.com/Topics2017/17-04/17_015-BLA-ShajulIslam.htm
    (Also older detailed articles on the 2013 Ghouta attack at the site.)

    The Western MSM is trying to slip the idea of sarin into the public consciousness, counting on the idea that the uninformed public would mentally conflate "sarin" and "chemical weapons". For instance the BBC talking head going on about how the Russian/Syrian story was that an airstrike hit a rebel "sarin" warehouse, which I am fairly sure was not what Russia and Syria said.

    Warren , April 9, 2017 at 3:50 pm

    Published on 5 Apr 2017
    When you serve imperialism you get burned by imperialism.
    https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/
    https://www.rt.com/news/371250-aleppo

    et Al , April 10, 2017 at 7:11 am
    Asia Times: The West bashes Russia while China is busy bridging the gap to Europe
    http://www.atimes.com/west-bashes-russia-china-builds-rail-roads/

    By Jan Krikke

    Russia-bashing has become the staple of the Western mainstream media in recent months. Some headlines suggest a level of paranoia not seen since the Cold War: "Russia is the world's biggest threat to democracy." "Our freedom under assault." "Nato must strengthen its defenses." It is unlikely that Russian tanks will be rolling into Western Europe any time soon. Instead, a steady stream of Chinese freight trains is rolling in from the Far East. They make a 12,000-kilometer journey across the Eurasian Land Bridge to Germany, where they unload Chinese flat-screen TVs, notebooks, and tablets. European consumers will use them to watch the news with its daily dose of Russia-bashing.

    As the sun rises in the United States, a new day of Russia-demonizing begins. There are new revelations about Russian super hackers, spying Russian diplomats and "bad actors with connections to Putin." The ostensibly liberal media and formerly dovish Democratic senators have suddenly turned into hawks while repeating a now-familiar mantra: Putin stole the US presidential election from Hillary Clinton. The Democrats had a billion-dollar war chest and overwhelming support from the media, yet a handful of Russian hackers and Internet trolls were able to steal the election. A look at recent history suggests the anti-Russia hysteria is part of a failing attempt to isolate Russia and derail the Eurasian Land Bridge .

    Northern Star , April 10, 2017 at 3:54 pm
    • warmonger Check
    • psycho .Check
    • moron CHECK:

    http://www.duffelblog.com/2014/12/hr-mcmaster-injured-army/

    Northern Star , April 10, 2017 at 4:38 pm
    Throughout history words of war have often been antecedent to eventual actual combat.
    The words written in Mein Kampf or the rantings of the Nazi maniac's speeches led straight to to WW2. (see link infra)
    Some of you stooges have tried to downplay the significance of the current crisis following the alleged gas attack and the following cruise missile retaliation. You seem to think that the rhetoric spewing from the rotten Sikh whore or that bonehead war criminal McMaster isn't necessarily probative of how close we are to the edge of a nuclear holocaust abyss. You are surprisingly foolish and naive in tha assumption.

    "The airstrikes in Syria and the war drive of American imperialism

    10 April 2017

    In the aftermath of last week's cruise missile attack on Syria, the relentless logic of military escalation is driving decisions in Washington. The US political establishment and media are demanding that the action be followed up by a "comprehensive strategy" to overthrow Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and escalate the confrontation with Russia.
    The Trump administration's ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, declared on Sunday that "regime change [in Syria] is something that we think is going to happen." As for Russia and Iran, she said, "We're calling them out. But I don't think anything is off the table at this point You're going to continue to see the United States act when it needs to act."
    Republican Senator Lindsey Graham called on Sunday for the deployment of "five to six thousand" US troops to Syria and for economic sanctions against Russia. Assad, he said, is making a "serious mistake because if you are an adversary of the United States and you don't worry about what Trump may do on any given day, then you're crazy."
    The chorus of calls for action against the Russian government came from both Democrats and Republicans. "They're accomplices," Republican Senator Marco Rubio said. "Vladimir Putin is a war criminal who is assisting another war criminal." His colleague, Democrat Ben Cardin, declared the UN Security Council should set up a tribunal to indict both Assad and Russian President Vladimir Putin for war crimes.

    *****Such rhetoric is the language of war. The denunciation of one or another foreign leader as a war criminal is the standard prelude to military action.*** "
    http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2017/04/10/pers-a10.html

    The fascists and psychopaths in DC,Brussels and London are livid and panic stricken with rage and frustration that the other whore wasn't elected and their schemes to implement global hegemony have been thwarted by Russia.

    http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2017/04/07/pers-a07.html
    "The claim that this attack is a response to the Syrian government's use of poison gas is a transparent lie. Once again, as in the air war against Serbia in 1999, the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003, and the attack on Libya in 2011, the United States has concocted a pretext to justify the violation of another country's sovereignty.
    The bombing of Syria is a unilateral abrogation by the US of the agreement negotiated with Russia in 2013, which resulted in the calling off of a long-planned direct military intervention by the US in the on-going civil war.
    As the International Committee of the Fourth International warned in September 2013, "The postponement of war does not lessen the likelihood, indeed, the inevitability, of the outbreak of a major war. As the bellicose statements emanating from Washington make clear, the 'military option' remains on the table. Nor is Syria the only target for military attack. US operations against Syria would set the stage for a clash with Iran. And, still further, the logic of US imperialism's drive for global dominance leads to a confrontation with Russia and China. Nor can it be excluded that the conflict of interests among the major imperialist powers-for example, the United States and Germany-might under certain conditions metastasize into armed conflict." [1]
    This warning has been substantiated.
    Moreover, the attacks signify at least a partial resolution of the bitter conflict over foreign policy that has been raging within the highest echelons of the American state since last November's presidential election. With the support of the most powerful factions of the Pentagon and Central Intelligence Agency, the Democratic Party's demand for war against Syria and intensified confrontation with Russia has prevailed. The Trump White House has been compelled to execute an astonishing about-face from the policy that it had publicly announced only days earlier"

    We are headed to a nuclearr September 3 ,1939..sure as fuck and some stooges ..however brilliant ..don't seem to get that through your heads..

    Moscow Exile , April 10, 2017 at 9:41 pm
    Well wadya know!

    NYT wins Pullitzer Prize for reporting on " attempts by the Russian government to assert its power".

    See 2017 Pulitzer Prize Winners

    In "Russia's Dark Arts," a team of New York Times journalists across two continents chronicled the covert and sometimes deadly actions taken by President Vladimir V. Putin's government to grow Russian influence abroad. The series, which began last spring, explored the rise of online "troll armies," the strategic spreading of disinformation and Russia's unprecedented - and politically consequential - cyberattack on the 2016 American presidential election.

    No prize awarded for use of English though: "to grow influence abroad" in a similar way as one grows potatoes in one's garden, for example?

    I should imagine that the verb "to grow" used in the passive voice with "influence" would sound better:"Russian influence is growing abroad", or in the subjunctive mood: actions taken by President Vladimir V. Putin's government so that Russian influence grow abroad – but "to grow influence"?

    marknesop , April 10, 2017 at 10:44 pm
    The Times is just a tabloid now, blowing with the political wind and seeking sensationalist stories which it reports in hyperbolic terms. Just that one line, "The series, which began last spring, explored the rise of online "troll armies," the strategic spreading of disinformation and Russia's unprecedented - and politically consequential - cyberattack on the 2016 American presidential election" is enough to tell you what the Pulitzer is worth these days. Just like the Nobel Peace Prize, it's a political pat on the head for being a good doggie.
    Moscow Exile , April 10, 2017 at 9:50 pm
    Shitwit Hague pontificating again:

    Russia is a nation in decline, stuck with a Cold War KGB mindset – the West must treat it as such

    There are three reasons why Donald Trump was right to launch a cruise missile strike against the Syrian Air Force facilities responsible for the chemical weapons attack last week on a town in northern Syria.

    First, the use of such weapons, in this case against civilians including children, is an abhorrent crime that is internationally outlawed and was generally avoided even in the Second World War. There has to be a response to such a crime. In August 2013, Ed Miliband's Labour Party and some rebel Conservatives prevented any retaliation, which has only led to further atrocities.

    Second, Trump acted quickly, which is crucial to making a clear connection between the crime and the response. Obama initially intended to do this four years ago, but then became bogged down in the decision-making, accepting instead a Russian plan to disarm Assad of chemical agents – a plan we can now see was not

    All based on the irrefutable evidence of, amongst other impeccable sources, the "White Helmets" and a bloke who lives in a Birmingham council house in the UK and a host of objective reporters at the Guardian, NYT etc.that the crime was committed by the Assad "regime".

    Moscow Exile , April 10, 2017 at 9:58 pm
    DISTURBING IMAGES: White Helmets BUSTED killing babies in PR stunt to start war in Syria
    marknesop , April 10, 2017 at 10:51 pm
    Ah, but you see, the Russians are dumb, like dogs. When your dog pees on the floor, you have to rap him on the nose with your rolled-up newspaper right away, rather than investigating to see if perhaps it was the wife who pissed on the carpet and not the dog, because punishment delayed merely confuses the poor animal – what have I done? You have to strike immediately, so the dumb creature can make the connection between offense and punishment. No time for investigation, old chappie, old bean.

    Logic like that is demonstrative of a nation of halfwits. I daresay Trump will be pleased, because he is a halfwit as well, and he will certainly make the connection between using the military and international approbation, as people who yesterday would not cross the street to spit on him if he was on fire today praise him as a decisive leader.

    Maybe a nuclear holocaust that cracks the planet in two like a plate is just what the doctor ordered; the human race isn't worth saving.

    Fern , April 11, 2017 at 10:47 am
    Quite extraordinary the number of people prepared to go to war on the basis of youtube videos filmed by an anti-Assad propaganda outfit funded by, amongst others, the US State Department and the UK government. Goebbels, thou shoulds't be living at this hour

    As far as Hague's comments on Russia are concerned, I think he's forgotten the golden rule .it's a really, really bad idea to start believing your own propaganda.

    Cortes , April 11, 2017 at 4:28 pm
    Hague is the original white helmet.
    marknesop , April 11, 2017 at 5:00 pm
    Actually, he's a purple helmet.


    Fucking idiot of a British foreign minister at the same table as his beaming Canadian Svidomite counterpart at G7 meeting yesterday.

    Boris Johnson threatens Russia with fresh sanctions over support for 'toxic' Assad regime in Syria

    Moscow Exile , April 11, 2017 at 11:28 am
    Boris Johnson fails to secure backing of the G7 nations for swift sanctions against Russia and Syria

    Boris Johnson has failed to secure the backing of the G7 nations for swift sanctions against Russia and Syria, leaving the US-UK plan to pressurise Vladimir Putin in tatters.

    Germany and Italy vetoed the idea of targeting Russian and Syrian military leaders until an investigation has been carried out into who was to blame for last week's nerve gas attack in Idlib province.

    The Italian Foreign Minister Angelino Alfano said Mr Putin "must not be pushed into a corner", suggesting Italy may not support extra sanctions even if an investigation proves Assad was to blame.

    Moscow Exile , April 11, 2017 at 11:28 am
    G7 not stronk!
    marknesop , April 11, 2017 at 5:24 pm
    It's a circle-jerk of debtor nations, among whom – when it was a member – Russia held the lowest debt level by far. Russia is better off out of it, and the sooner it replaces the IMF and other western institutions in its daily dealings and ceases its capitalization of them, the better off Russia will be. Choose between America and Assad, indeed. What fool would choose to publicly seek the friendship of a country that spits on it all day long, every day, week in, week out? Even if Assad were actually guilty of all the horrible things know-nothing Washington claims he is, he would still be a better choice.
    Cortes , April 11, 2017 at 12:14 am
    The Saker on the Tomahawk strike:

    http://thesaker.is/a-multi-level-analysis-of-the-us-cruise-missile-attack-on-syria-and-its-consequences/

    Includes detail on how Russian misdirection of the 36 AWOL missiles may have been done plus loads more. Apologies if linked to earlier.

    et Al , April 11, 2017 at 3:21 am
    The Charlotte Observer: US Official: Russia knew Syrian chemical attack was coming
    http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/national-politics/article143893739.html

    By ROBERT BURNS and LOLITA C. BALDOR Associated Press

    The United States has made a preliminary conclusion that Russia knew in advance of Syria's chemical weapons attack last week, but has no proof of Moscow's involvement, a senior U.S. official says.

    The official said Monday that that a drone operated by Russians was flying over a hospital as victims of the attack were rushing to get treatment. Hours after the drone left, a Russian-made fighter jet bombed the hospital in what American officials believe was an attempt to cover up the usage of chemical weapons

    couldn't have been a coincidence, and that Russia must have known The official, who wasn't authorized to speak publicly on intelligence matters and demanded anonymity, didn't give precise timing for when the drone was in the area, didn't provide details for the military and intelligence information

    Another U.S. official cautioned official wasn't authorized to speak about internal administration deliberations and spoke on condition of anonymity

    Until Monday, U.S. officials had said they weren't sure whether Russia or Syria operated the drone. The official said the U.S. is now convinced Russia controlled the drone. The official said it still isn't clear who was flying the jet that bombed the hospital, because the Syrians also fly Russian-made aircraft
    ####

    Purlitzer here please! I wonder what a judge would say to the Prosecution in a criminal case if they said that they don't have the actual evidence but that they are 'convinced' the defendant is guity?

    I don't really know why AP is needed at all here as all this can be put straight out by US officials. Who says main steam establishment journalism is dead? I do. All that remains is establishment piss stream journalism.

    Moscow Exile , April 11, 2017 at 3:49 am
    "Who the fuck invited him to speak???" they must have been screaming in the BBC Breakfast TV studio control room.

    BBC with egg on its face during a breakfast TV interview with former UK ambassador to Syria, Peter Ford, on April 7, 2017:

    Love it at the end when the interviewer asks:

    "Well, how will his [Assad's] behaviour change now he knows President Trump is prepared to launch cruise missile attacks?"

    [Classic "begging of the question", it being taken as a given by the interviewer that Assad was responsible for the CW attack in Ibidem and, therefore, suffered the consequences in the form of a cruise missile attack by the Exceptional Nation.]

    Ford replies:

    "But he probably didn't do it in the first place, so it can't change his behaviour if he didn't do it in the first place "

    Moscow Exile , April 11, 2017 at 5:57 am
    AP:

    Tillerson: Russia must choose between Assad and the US

    Hmmmm ..

    Tough choice!

    Moscow Exile , April 11, 2017 at 6:17 am
    "Two Russian servicemen were killed in the Syrian Arab Republic as a result of an attack by militants A mine explosion killed the two Russian servicemen. Military medics are struggling for the life of a wounded Russian serviceman" – Russia MoD.

    This news cannot have reached Finland yet.

    See: Militants Kill Two Russian Servicemen in Syria, Medics Fighting for Third's Life
    14:04 11.04.2017(updated 14:32 11.04.2017)

    Warren , April 11, 2017 at 7:24 am
    Boris Johnson: Russia will want a way out on Syria

    UK Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, predicts Russia will want "a way out" of its current position on Syria and says that the G7 meeting has proposed measures which offer a way forward.

    Mr Johnson was speaking to the BBC diplomatic correspondent James Robbins.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39563637

    BoJo continues to embarrass himself, how presumptuous of him to think he knows what Russia wants. What on Earth makes BoJo think that "Russia wants an way out"? Russia's relationship with Syria contrary to his erroneous assertion is not an "albatross around Russia's neck". BoJo got one thing right, Russia's intervention in September 2015, absolutely "changed the game", the threat of direct NATO aggression along the lines of what occurred in Libya was neutered.

    kirill , April 11, 2017 at 6:27 pm
    Russia is in Syria until the battle is won. It is rather obvious that Russia decide to take the fight to the Wahabbis near their home turf instead of having the Wahabbis set the agenda along its border. It diverted Wahabbi resources from Chechnya and elsewhere in the process. Good job!
    Warren , April 11, 2017 at 7:54 am
    What is behind Toshiba's financial crisis?

    11 April 2017 Last updated at 01:12 BST

    Toshiba is currently trying to sell off its prized computer chips unit in an attempt to cover losses from its troubled US nuclear unit Westinghouse.

    But it's not the only Japanese firm to struggle in recent years.

    The BBC's Tokyo correspondent Rupert Wingfield-Hayes looks at some of the reasons why.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39557757

    Looks like the Japanese corporate model is coming to an end. I wonder if revelations will emerge that Toshiba has committed fraud and hid its losses in shell companies, in the same way Olympus had done?

    kirill , April 11, 2017 at 6:25 pm
    So Westinghouse was a black hole to the extent that it practically broke Toshiba. Wow. How much of the rest of the US super duper ubermenschen power house hyper economy nothing more than a rotten facade?
    Northern Star , April 11, 2017 at 1:18 pm
    The only appropriate Russian response to Tillerson';s ultimatum would be along the lines of:

    You fascist vermin have two options:

    1) All of North America ,Western Europe and Western Russia wiil be turned into sheets of glass serving as the mass tombs of a billion or so putrefying radioactive corpses.

    2) You will immediately completely cease and desist from fucking -IN ANY WAY WHATSOEVER- with Russia or any sovereign nation with which Russia is allied

    Your call motherfuckers

    The fact that this cocksucker Tillerson would give an ultimatum to the Russians IN RUSSIA no less speaks to the unbounded psycho arrogance of the rabid vermin in the Western elite.

    et Al , April 11, 2017 at 1:26 pm
    I think Trump's 'strategy', if you can call it as such, is to shake the tree to see who folds under pressure. It's likely it will blow up in his face, but as we have seen with the TLAM strike in Syria, even the Dems were on board and congratulating him so they own the consequences too.
    Northern Star , April 11, 2017 at 1:39 pm

    "even the Dems were on board " Exactly .see my post infra We have ZERO fuckin' leadership of substance-moral and intellectual- in this country(America)-whatsoever the Congressional Black Caucus is as full of spineless dogshit as the white dominated DNC black vermin political opportunists white vermin political opportunists..all cut from the same bolt.

    Jen , April 11, 2017 at 3:19 pm
    The people who say that Adolf Hitler refused to use sarin gas because of his own experiences during WW1 when he was gassed with mustard gas will have to juggle their belief with the fact that Zyklon B and carbon monoxide gas were used on people in concentration / death camps in Poland or on people travelling packed sardines-in-tin style in the backs of trucks travelling to the camps. Saying that Hitler or his government would not have used gas comes dangerously close to denying the use of gas in camps like Treblinka, Chelmno, Sobibor and Auschwitz-Birkenau to kill people.

    As Lina Arabi says, people like Hannon and Simon are completely lost and totally ignorant.

    et Al , April 11, 2017 at 1:20 pm
    Al Beeb s'Allah GONAD (God's Own News Agency Direct): Syria: Boris Johnson denies defeat over sanctions call
    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-39563640

    ####

    There's a job waiting for him as a spokesman for the US Government.

    He'll have to top this though.

    Huff Blow: Sean Spicer Says Hitler 'Never Used Chemical Weapons' As If He's Never Heard Of The Holocaust
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/sean-spicer-chemical-weapons-holocaust_uk_58ed23e9e4b0df7e20460dc3

    Northern Star , April 11, 2017 at 1:29 pm
    To the stooges who have Chamberlain Syndrome:

    "Pseudo-left endorses imperialist onslaught against Syria
    11 April 2017
    Nearly 16 years after the beginning of the "war on terror" and more than a quarter-century after the first Gulf War in 1991, the unending imperialist war drive is entering a new and more dangerous stage. In the aftermath of the Trump administration's air strikes against Syria, the US media and political establishment, parroting the official propaganda line used to justify the attacks, is demanding even more aggressive action against Syria and Russia. There is the very real danger of a direct military conflict between the US and nuclear-armed Russia, with incalculable consequences.
    And yet, fourteen years after the mass protests against the Iraq war in 2003, there does not exist any organized anti-war movement. With each successive war, accompanied by ever more brazen propaganda and lies, the level of organized popular protest has diminished. This is despite the fact that among broad sections of the population there is profound disquiet and hostility to the warmongering of the government. How is this to be explained?
    It is impossible to answer this question without analyzing the role of the nominally "left" political parties and publications that have become vocal cheerleaders of US regime-change operations. Included among them are the International Socialist Organization (Socialist Worker) and the Pabloite International Viewpoint."

    Spot on comment:

    "Blaine • 7 hours ago
    The article makes it sound as if the Left political establishment has any sort of control over citizens with left leaning tendencies.

    I believe the real reason for anti-war silence is that it does no good to speak up and rally. This was learned from Iraq.

    You will also be arrested and beaten and nothing will come of it – learned from Occupy.

    Whoever you put into office will continue on a war footing, learned from Obama.

    Unless one is ready and committed to playing smash mouth with LE in large numbers and really dragging this thing into a genuine national crisis, how you feel or vote or whether you speak up or peaceably assemble will not have any effect.

    People are waking up but at a very slow pace. Too slowly. The anti-war movement has no leaders to galvanize it, no eloquent speeches to incite the spirit, no folk singers wondering where the flowers have gone."

    http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2017/04/11/pers-a11.html

    To which I would add to the above :'Half measures' don't work. Learned from DonBass and now Syria

    [Apr 11, 2017] After Trumps Syria Attack, What Comes Next

    Trump probably has a horse head in his bed
    Notable quotes:
    "... From the moment the chemical attack was blamed on Assad, however, I expressed my doubts about the claims. It simply makes no sense for Assad to attack civilians with a chemical weapon just as he is winning his war against ISIS and al-Qaeda and has been told by the US that it no longer seeks regime change. On the verge of victory, he commits a suicidal act to no strategic or tactical military advantage? More likely the gas attack was a false flag by the rebels -- or perhaps even by our CIA -- as a last ditch effort to forestall a rebel defeat in the six year war. ..."
    "... The gas attack, which took some 70 civilian lives, was horrible and must be condemned. But we must also remember that US bombs in Syria have killed hundreds of civilians. Just recently, US bombs killed 300 Iraqi civilians in one strike! Does it really make a difference if you are killed by poison gas or by a US missile? ..."
    "... Donald Trump's attack on Syria was clearly illegal. However, Congress shows no interest in reining in this out-of-control president. We should fear any US escalation and must demand that our Representatives prohibit it. If there ever was a time to flood the Capitol Hill switchboard demanding an end to US military action in Syria, it is now! ..."
    Apr 10, 2017 | ronpaulinstitute.org

    Thursday's US missile attack on Syria must represent the quickest foreign policy U-turn in history. Less than a week after the White House gave Assad permission to stay on as president of his own country, President Trump decided that the US had to attack Syria and demand Assad's ouster after a chemical attack earlier in the week. Trump blamed Assad for the attack, stated that "something's going to happen" in retaliation, and less than two days later he launched a volley of 59 Tomahawk missiles (at a cost of $1.5 million each) onto a military airfield near where the chemical attack took place.

    President Trump said it is in the "vital national security interest of the United States" to attack Syria over the use of poison gas. That is nonsense. Even if what Trump claims about the gas attack is true – and we've seen no evidence that it is – there is nothing about an isolated incident of inhuman cruelty thousands of miles from our borders that is in our "vital national security interest." Even if Assad gassed his own people last week it hardly means he will launch chemical attacks on the United States even if he had the ability, which he does not.

    From the moment the chemical attack was blamed on Assad, however, I expressed my doubts about the claims. It simply makes no sense for Assad to attack civilians with a chemical weapon just as he is winning his war against ISIS and al-Qaeda and has been told by the US that it no longer seeks regime change. On the verge of victory, he commits a suicidal act to no strategic or tactical military advantage? More likely the gas attack was a false flag by the rebels -- or perhaps even by our CIA -- as a last ditch effort to forestall a rebel defeat in the six year war.

    Would the neocons and the mainstream media lie to us about what happened last week in Syria? Of course they would. They lied us into attacking Iraq, they lied us into attacking Gaddafi, they lied us into seeking regime change in Syria in the first place. We should always assume they are lying.

    Who benefits from the US attack on Syria? ISIS, which immediately after the attack began a ground offensive. Does President Trump really want the US to act as ISIS's air force?

    The gas attack, which took some 70 civilian lives, was horrible and must be condemned. But we must also remember that US bombs in Syria have killed hundreds of civilians. Just recently, US bombs killed 300 Iraqi civilians in one strike! Does it really make a difference if you are killed by poison gas or by a US missile?

    What's next for President Trump in Syria? Russia has not backed down from its claim that the poison gas leaked as a result of a conventional Syrian bomb on an ISIS chemical weapons factory. Moscow claims it is determined to defend its ally, Syria. Will Trump unilaterally declare a no fly zone in parts of Syria and attempt to prevent Russian air traffic? Some suggest this is his next move. It is one that carries a great danger of igniting World War Three.

    Donald Trump's attack on Syria was clearly illegal. However, Congress shows no interest in reining in this out-of-control president. We should fear any US escalation and must demand that our Representatives prohibit it. If there ever was a time to flood the Capitol Hill switchboard demanding an end to US military action in Syria, it is now!


    Copyright © 2017 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.
    Please donate to the Ron Paul Institute

    [Apr 11, 2017] Idlib chemical attack was false flag to set Assad up, more may come – Putin - RT News

    Notable quotes:
    "... "We have reports from multiple sources that false flags like this one – and I cannot call it otherwise – are being prepared in other parts of Syria, including the southern suburbs of Damascus. They plan to plant some chemical there and accuse the Syrian government of an attack," ..."
    "... "President Mattarella and I discussed it, and I told him that this reminds me strongly of the events in 2003, when the US representatives demonstrated at the UN Security Council session the presumed chemical weapons found in Iraq. The military campaign was subsequently launched in Iraq and it ended with the devastation of the country, the growth of the terrorist threat and the appearance of Islamic State [IS, formerly ISIS] on the world stage," ..."
    "... "The sight of people being gassed and blown away by barrel bombs ensures that if we see this kind of action again, we hold open the possibility of future action," ..."
    "... "We are planning to address the corresponding UN structure in The Hague and call on the international community to thoroughly investigate all those reports and take appropriate action based on the results of such a probe," ..."
    "... "These actions are aimed at creating a new pretext for accusing the government of Syria of more chemical weapons attacks and provoking more strikes by the US," ..."
    Apr 11, 2017 | www.rt.com
    Russia has information of a potential incident similar to the alleged chemical attack in Idlib province, possibly targeting a Damascus suburb, President Vladimir Putin said. The goal is to discredit the government of Syrian President Assad, he added. https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FRTvids%2Fvideos%2F1533173910026190%2F&show_text=0&width=560" name="I1">

    "We have reports from multiple sources that false flags like this one – and I cannot call it otherwise – are being prepared in other parts of Syria, including the southern suburbs of Damascus. They plan to plant some chemical there and accuse the Syrian government of an attack," he said at a joint press conference with Italian President Sergio Mattarella in Moscow.

    Damascus denied the allegations, noting that the targeted area may have been hosting chemical weapons stockpiles belonging to Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) or Al-Nusra Front jihadists.

    The incident has not been properly investigated as yet, but the US fired dozens of cruise missiles at a Syrian airbase in a demonstration of force over what it labeled a chemical attack by Damascus.

    "President Mattarella and I discussed it, and I told him that this reminds me strongly of the events in 2003, when the US representatives demonstrated at the UN Security Council session the presumed chemical weapons found in Iraq. The military campaign was subsequently launched in Iraq and it ended with the devastation of the country, the growth of the terrorist threat and the appearance of Islamic State [IS, formerly ISIS] on the world stage," he added.

    Read more Future strikes on Syria a 'possibility'– White House

    It was the first time the US had targeted Syrian troops deliberately. The White House says it will repeat military action in response to any possible new chemical weapon attacks.

    "The sight of people being gassed and blown away by barrel bombs ensures that if we see this kind of action again, we hold open the possibility of future action," spokesman Sean Spicer said Monday.

    Putin reiterated the call to properly investigate what happened in Khan Sheikhoun, saying that the alleged use of chemical weapons demands one.

    "We are planning to address the corresponding UN structure in The Hague and call on the international community to thoroughly investigate all those reports and take appropriate action based on the results of such a probe," he said.

    A separate report of a potential false flag operation in Syria came from the Russian General Staff, which said militants were transporting toxic agents into several parts of Syria, including Eastern Ghouta, the site of the 2013 chemical weapons incident.

    "These actions are aimed at creating a new pretext for accusing the government of Syria of more chemical weapons attacks and provoking more strikes by the US," said Colonel General Sergey Rudskoy, the head of Operations.

    [Apr 11, 2017] Chuck Todd Interviewes Bernie Sanders On NBCs Meet The Press

    Apr 09, 2017 | www.youtube.com

    It is easier to get into the war that to get out of war

    14 years of Afghan war did not teach those neocons much.

    > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

    [Apr 11, 2017] John McCain interview On CBSs Face the Nation with John Dickerson (4-9-2017)

    McCain is making a fool of himself, and so is the main media
    Apr 11, 2017 | www.youtube.com
    Sebastian Ionescu 2 days ago

    YOU CAN SEE JOHN MCCAIN, BUT ALL YOU HEAR IS ISRAEL AND ZIONISM. McCain should be rotting in a jail cell waiting for execution by SAWED OFF SHOTGUN FIRING SQUAD. This jew owned whore deserves nothing less than to have his fucking head blown off by an American appointed execution squad supported by the American people and put in place to deter : 1.) LOYALTY TO ISRAEL OVER AMERICA. 2.) THE ENRICHMENT OF PRIVATE WAR PORTFOLIOS. 3.) THE WARMONGERING AND DESTABILIZATION OF THE MIDDLE EAST.

    The American people know that this is nothing more than a war for ISRAEL. NOTHING BUT ISRAEL.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/israel-grants-illegal-oil-rights-inside-syria-to-murdoch-and-rothschild/5517488

    [Apr 11, 2017] Robert Steele - Inside Source Says Brennan, McCain McMaster Responsible for Syrian False Flag

    Does Donald Trump switched from "America first" to "Israeli firsts" ?
    Apr 10, 2017 | www.youtube.com

    From Robert Steele - We do now know (I did not know this at the time the below video was recorded and I have no link for this, it comes to me from an inside source) that former CIA Director John Brennan plotted this false flag attack, which may have involved some real sarin allegedly destroyed during the Obama Administration, with Senator John McCain and National Security Advisor Herbert McMaster.

    Brennan got the Saudis to pay half and McCain got Israel to pay half. They blind-sided – this is clearly treason – not only the Director of the CIA, but the President, the Secretary of State, and the Secretary of Defense. In my personal view, both John McCain and Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should be impeached by their respective legislative bodies.

    Whether true or not I cannot certify – it is consistent with my evaluation of each of these people, and a good starting point for an international investigation. I have long felt that John Brennan should be standing before the International Court of Justice as a war criminal, not least because of the CIA's drone assassination program that I recently denounced in a book review article for Intelligence and National Security.

    If you appreciate what we do here at VL, consider supporting us on Patreon.. Thank you :-)

    https://www.patreon.com/victuruslibertas

    [Apr 11, 2017] Mattis Syria Will Not Spiral Out Of Control

    Apr 11, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
    SgtShaftoe , Apr 11, 2017 3:30 PM

    Fuck you Pentagram demons. Haven't you yet tasted enough death and human suffering?

    Looney -> SgtShaftoe , Apr 11, 2017 3:31 PM

    Barking orders works well with the UK, Germany, France, and the rest of the EU.

    This shit doesn't fly with the Russians or the Chinese.

    Dubya tried it, although very carefully. 0bama tried it, not so carefully.

    Now, Trump wants to "make deals" by giving orders to Xi (on N. Korea) and Putin (on Syria).

    Is this how he used to "make deals" with the Unions, NY regulators, or byers/sellers of Real Estate?

    Looney

    Raffie -> Ghost of Porky , Apr 11, 2017 3:43 PM

    Mad Dog says "We believe Assad attacked..." Believe, not Know... big difference.

    pods -> Raffie , Apr 11, 2017 3:51 PM

    They don't even BELIEVE that cause they KNOW who really did.

    pods

    NoDecaf -> pods , Apr 11, 2017 4:03 PM

    If this goes all the way...I mean ALL the way.

    It'll be open season on neocons

    44magnum -> NoDecaf , Apr 11, 2017 4:22 PM

    American revolution 2.0

    Chupacabra-322 -> 44magnum , Apr 11, 2017 4:54 PM

    These ZioNeoConFascist have crossed The American Patriots "Red Line."

    These Pure Evil War Criminal Treasonous Deep State Psychopaths have been & are "Going All In."

    This is Irrefutably, Absolutely the Last chance of Peacefully, Diplomatically walking away from a Situational Inter National Crises of which the CIA / Deep State Dept is Gulty of causing.

    The Global Criminal Oligarch Cabal Bankster Intelligence Crime Syndicate has been exposed for all the World to See.

    The Emperor is Stark Naked & the World doesn't seen to Care.

    The Deception that was once "Hidden in plain view" is now Globally Tyrannically Lawlessly open for all the World to See.

    Pure Unadulterated Evil.

    SoilMyselfRotten -> Chupacabra-322 , Apr 11, 2017 5:01 PM

    Can you imagine how much shit the Pentagon is into if it cant account for $6 trillion?

    http://nation.foxnews.com/2016/08/18/trillions-go-missing-military-penta...

    john doeberg -> SoilMyselfRotten , Apr 11, 2017 5:31 PM

    ONLY if US stops helping ISIS

    Donald Trump -> john doeberg , Apr 11, 2017 5:36 PM

    Slim chance of that happening.

    ISIS got MORAL support now, and even if US will take longer to react to their COMING false flags, they are already embolden by the missile attack.

    They now know they can summon Trump whenever they do some stunt.

    By Bombing the Syrian Government, Trump Turned the U.S. into ISIS' Air Force

    http://dailywesterner.com/news/2017-04-11/by-bombing-the-syrian-governme...

    MillionDollarButter -> bob_bichen , Apr 11, 2017 5:40 PM

    Proof that the dysfunctional element is the controlling element . But don't assume the other players will not turn dysfunctional. They know the endgame goes all the way to Iran. They will have to draw a line sooner or later.

    Donald Trump -> MillionDollarButter , Apr 11, 2017 5:41 PM

    Trump is losing face, and might bactrack on his warmongering.

    Maybe he's still juggling the pros (and cons) he might get from the Swamp.

    [Apr 11, 2017] If US succeeds in regime change future bands of terrorists attacking the infidel will be trained in Aleppo

    Apr 11, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
    ilsm -> Lee A. Arnold ... , April 10, 2017 at 02:01 PM
    War [leaving Syria to 9/11 terrorists who want to do what they were not doing in Iraq in 2002, that is build a terror states to compete with Libya and Afghanistan] is the life of the US state in the 'American Century'.

    If US succeeds in regime change future bands of terrorists attacking the infidel will be trained in Aleppo!

    [Apr 11, 2017] The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity Why Does Assad Have To Go -- With Lew Rockwell

    Apr 11, 2017 | ronpaulinstitute.org

    Why Does Assad Have To Go? -- With Lew Rockwell

    It was supposed to be different with Trump. Dozens of times as candidate and even early on as president, he stated that it would be a big mistake to go into Syria. He also finally cancelled Obama's "Assad must go" policy. Then came reports of a gas attack in Syria which was blamed on Assad with no evidence given. Suddenly missiles are flying, US boots are on the ground, and again we hear "Assad must go."

    Is it our role to determine who can and cannot rule foreign countries? We are joined in-studio today by Mises Institute founder Lew Rockwell to discuss:

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/n7nQaXyvowA

    Copyright © 2017 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given. Please donate to the Ron Paul Institute

    [Apr 11, 2017] US Bolsters Protection of Ground Troops in Syria as Tensions Rise Growing Concerns Last Week's Strikes Could Fuel Retaliation

    Apr 11, 2017 | news.antiwar.com

    by Jason Ditz, April 10, 2017
    Last week's US missile strikes against Syria have been something of a game-changer in US policy across the region. Nowhere is the concern greater than among the US ground troops stationed in Syria, however, as if the strikes ultimately provoke a retaliation, they're in the line of fire.

    While they're not offering details on exactly what they're doing, US officials have confirmed that they have made adjustments since the attacks, seeking to increase the protection of US forces in Syria in case they do come under attack in the course of their operations.

    The ground troops are deployed in Syria overwhelming in anti-ISIS operations, and this is the second time in as many days officials have confirmed anti-ISIS operations were changed because of last week's attack, after confirming yesterday they'd cut back on airstrikes against ISIS for fear of coming under attack from Syrian air defense.

    At this point, retaliation appears unlikely unless the US launches further attacks, with Russia making it clear that any future attacks are a "red line" for them. US officials continue to talk up potential justifications for such strikes, however, which might mean they're hoping they can call Russia's bluff, assuming it is a bluff.

    [Apr 11, 2017] Donald Trump surrendered to neocons and sacrificed his Syrian policy in hope to squash Russian-ties witch hunt against him and his close allies

    Apr 11, 2017 | www.theguardian.com

    The president has just swaggered his way into the single most complex civil war in living memory – and he does so with little credibility or legitimacy

    It may be hard to believe, but Donald Trump is even more simplistic than George W Bush in matters of war. George W Bush enjoyed all the certainty of a very simple man: you were either with us or against us, good or evil, marching for democracy or plotting terrorist attacks.

    Yet Donald Trump manages to make Bush look like Baron von Metternich. He just launched military strikes against a brutal Syrian regime he used to describe as "NOT our problem".

    Yes, Donald Trump is a great big bag of contradictions and he just swaggered his way into the single most complex civil war in living memory – a war that is even more complicated than raising a high-rise hotel in a foreign capital.


    At least Bush took more than a year after 9/11 before he invaded Iraq. Trump hasn't reached the 100-day mark and he's already walking into his own quagmire.

    seedeevee , 7 Apr 2017 15:25
    It would have been nice if the Guardian wasn't such a cheerleader for this warfare.
    ID1720063 , 7 Apr 2017 15:27
    Going from dangerous to lethal - he's graduated to blindly lobbing bombs at foreign countries for reasons he doesn't fully understand and causing consequences he'll never comprehend.
    Gwion Williams LetsBeClear , 7 Apr 2017 15:45
    Helping to further destabilise one of the most dangerous regions in terms of international terrorism is a good thing? If Assad is toppled today the people placed to fill the vacuum are some of the most abhorrent Wahhabist nutters you could imagine. The secular rebels such as they were have either been killed or surpassed in power and influence, several years ago by now. Atrocities committed by Assad need to be dealt with by international courts following the managed conclusion of the war.
    ThumbSprain , 7 Apr 2017 15:27
    Remember "Hillary will start a war over Syria"? Oh well.

    On the up side for him I suppose that's the investigation in collusion with Russia nixed, Cui Bono eh? Share Facebook Twitter

    littlebillykershaw ThumbSprain , 7 Apr 2017 15:42
    "Cui Bono eh?"

    Don't be getting him involved :)

    Muzzledagain , 7 Apr 2017 15:31
    What Trump did was totally illegal, and you won't find anyone to tell him so. All the ones that hated him before are at his feet now for further collaboration in destroying Syria and thus prolonging the suffering of the Syrian people.
    GuyPeron , 7 Apr 2017 15:31
    I am still troubled by the Guardian editorial line and journalists unquestioningly concluding that the Syrian regime was responsible for the chemical attacks in question. I of course cannot say it is not, but I have also not been presented with any evidence anywhere that it was. I certainly haven't seen any convincing evidence presented in the Guardian. Most troubling for me is that I haven't seen any Guardian journalists asking what benefit the Assad regime thought it would gain from carrying out these chemical attacks (if it did). Who is to benefit from these attacks? That is what I would be asking as that is a long way to discovering who is guilty. Share
    AndyMcCarthy GuyPeron , 7 Apr 2017 15:44
    If Trump says Assad is responsible Assad is responsible. Trump doesn't need evidence. Not even a dodgy dossier.

    [Apr 11, 2017] Russian MoD US Missile Attack on Syrian Airbase was Prepared Long Time Ago

    Notable quotes:
    "... I am a Chinese American, I voted for trump. I feel betray after the missile strike. Trump seems just like another puppet by the Zionist Jew to eliminate Syria then Iran ..."
    Apr 11, 2017 | www.youtube.com

    Russian view: This attack as a blatant violation of Memorandum.

    Attack was prepared for long time and the event in sevred just a trigger for already prepared attack.

    george washington 3 days ago

    I am a Chinese American, I voted for trump. I feel betray after the missile strike. Trump seems just like another puppet by the Zionist Jew to eliminate Syria then Iran

    kentucky fried 3 days ago (edited)

    so trump clearly has no choice in things it's soo clear. everything that happens is decided by the zionists. so let me get this straight, the CIA provide chemical weapons like sarin gas to terrorists groups and when the Syrian army bombs the factory it explodes the gas killing the civilians in the area, America proceeds to Launch 60 tomahawk missiles(and only half land) at a Syrian air base and terrorist groups just happen to launch a quick offensive soon after.

    didn't the trump administration say getting rid of assad is no longer on the agenda?

    then who is pushing the buttons?

    [Apr 11, 2017] Something about typical narrow-minded, provincial neocon chichenhawks

    Apr 11, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
    Peter K. April 10, 2017 at 09:22 AM
    "But the liberal Democrat, who was one of then-Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders' few supporters in Congress last year, explained she wanted to engage in dialogue with Assad."

    If you support peace, you work for Russia. McCarthyism.

    sanjait -> Peter K.... , April 10, 2017 at 01:40 PM
    McCarthyism is indeed a bad thing, but the only ones I see complaining about it recently are useful idiots, and useful idiocy is also a bad thing. So I'm left only to despair at the state of political thought in the United States today.
    ilsm -> sanjait... , April 10, 2017 at 02:21 PM
    If you question malarkey you are a "useful idiot". War is the Life of the Deep State. eh.
    libezkova -> sanjait... , April 10, 2017 at 05:22 PM
    "McCarthyism is indeed a bad thing, but the only ones I see complaining about it recently are useful idiots, and useful idiocy is also a bad thing."

    Nothing is worse then being McCarthyist. Nothing. That's the bottom: they are real intellectual bottom feeders. Think about this.

    Even being useless "neoliberal idiot", essentially a shill of financial oligarchy, the role that you played before in this forum, is much, much better.

    And please stop treating ilsm as if he is subpar to you just because you are "politically correct".

    Please understand that your post pretty well attest that you are just a typical narrow-minded, provincial neocon chichenhawk.

    Brainwashed by propaganda to the extent that you lost any ability to think independently and skeptically. Capable only regurgitating CNN.

    sanjait -> libezkova... , April 10, 2017 at 05:55 PM
    "Brainwashed by propaganda to the extent that you lost any ability to think independently and skeptically."

    Says the 9/11 truther... lolz. Go ahead and insult me. If people like you thought I made sense, I would have a serious problem.

    ilsm -> sanjait... , April 10, 2017 at 05:32 PM
    You should to go in to that area in north Syria where the chemical attack/false flag was staged, ask for hard evidence and see how long you live.

    The propaganda is "Assad is a brute", jihadi shell loyal sections of Syria every day but no one run pictures of those casualties, just like none from Sanaa or Gaza.

    The guys who were going to replace Qaddafi? Where are the liberals?

    sanjait -> ilsm... , April 10, 2017 at 05:56 PM
    Sure, because inability to investigate a war zone without danger indicates it all MUST be false flag operations. That's very logical ... for me to poop on.
    libezkova -> sanjait... , April 10, 2017 at 05:56 PM
    Looks like in addition to having zero knowledge of physics, you have zero knowledge of chemistry. Congratulations. Looks like you might seek the job as MSM political commentator.

    But now a little bit chemistry:

    == quote ==
    Sarin, or GB (G-series, 'B'), is a colorless, odorless liquid,[5] used as a chemical weapon due to its extreme potency as a nerve agent.
    ... ... ...
    People who absorb a non-lethal dose, but do not receive immediate medical treatment, may suffer permanent neurological damage.
    == end of quote ==

    Syrian revels were already producing sarin in 2013 and injured several US solders with it in Iraq (using artillery shell delivery system).

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tn22Pfmw85A
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMSU6A6UCcI

    This is a really diabolic substance which is probably 10 to 100 times more dangerous then cyanide. Poor man weapon of mass destruction, if you wish. BTW that's why Assad had have it -- to counterbalance Israeli nuclear weapons as such bombs/rockets would wipe out country population. Not so much because he was such an evil dictator who enjoys collecting dangerous staff.

    Lethal concentration is so low that if a person touches the victim with bare hands he/she essentially touches dispersed cyanide power. And has reasonably high chances to absorb a non-lethal doze to be injured for life, if this was a military grade sarin.

    This was not the case. And that raises a very important question: what if this was not a military grade sarin. And the most plausible answer is: no it was not. Oops...

    What was is the most plausible source of not military grade sarin with primitive systems of delivery (artillery shells). Right. Rebels. Such product is an amateur product typical for rebel's underground labs. So if you shell the territory that is bombed by Assad forces with your shell with sarin warhead you get what? Right. A very potent false flag with no witnesses and difficulties to find the truth.

    If one compare how Japanese dealt with sarin attack in the subway with the way first responders in Syria treated victims the hypothesis that it was military grade chemical weapon promoted by the MSM instantly becomes much less convincing and their level of indignation start looking somewhat phony.

    Some even suggest that this was phosgene -- a much easier synthesized (phosgene can be produced by passing purified carbon monoxide and chlorine gas through a bed of porous activated carbon, which serves as a catalyst -- undertaking simple enough for any rebel group) or it was sarin, but in "amateur concentration" with simplistic warhead: less lethal then "military grade" with sophisticated dispersion via bomblets

    Again sarin is a really diabolical substance even in comparison with phosgene -- that is very important to understand.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTZI2lS6MYo

    "Phosgene is the chemical compound with the formula COCl2. This colorless gas gained infamy as a chemical weapon during World War I where it was responsible for about 85% of the 100,000 deaths caused by chemical weapons. It is also a valued industrial reagent and building block in synthesis of pharmaceuticals and other organic compounds. In low concentrations, its odor resembles freshly cut hay or grass"

    After some research, this incident to me looks more and more like a successful repetition of previous false flag operation conducted in the same province in 2013 with the same explicit goal: to implicate Assad and provoke the USA for invasion of the country with the goal of regime change.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghouta_chemical_attack

    With the same players and the same suspiciously hysterical reaction of neocon dominated MSM -- the reaction which occurred before any investigation.

    Which means this is a propaganda campaign, not a natural reaction for the tragedy.

    And Trump reaction in the best cowboy style increased my suspicions even more: that means that he folded: "Russian links" neo-McCarthyism smear got him (it is incorrectly to call it McCarthysim as "classic" ten year campaign was about communists as a political movement, not only about a particular country -- the USSR ).

    Now anti-war right is typically blamed with anti-Semitism, which is less potent weapon. Anti-Russian smear was the invention of Hillary Clinton campaign staff.

    And "last but not least." Nikki Haley is a pretty clever, fast learning politician, so when she imitates Colin Powell in the UN (suicidal, career limiting move), condemning Assad, Russia and Iran before any investigation of chemical attack in Syria ( 'They defied the conscience of the world' ) additional questions arise about the USA motives and the level of cooperation with the al Nusra rebels on the level of government agencies.

    She got "all in" without any second thought. Politicians don't do that unless forced or convinced that this is "slam dunk".

    To me her behavior was a real red flag -- the smell of Iraqi WDMs -- the smell of government operation -- the signal that something is really fishy here: after listening to her I assumed "false attack" as the primary hypothesis.

    Because of cuo bono principle.

    And started looking at those sites which the provide alternative hypothesis and information, mainly British. I now wonder if all victims were locals, or some of them were hostages, "human shields" and did people died exactly from air attack and subsequent release of chemicals ("Russian hypotheses") or the area was shelled in parallel with the air attack with shells that carry chemical warheads.

    Another unanswered but troubling question: Why such a disproportional number of children ? Was this staged to increase the level of anger against Assad government (which worked) ?

    But I am a skeptic by nature, so your mileage may vary.

    My impression is that CNN is good enough for your intellectual level, so you can continue in your typical, already well learned, standard brainwashed way. I do not see any desire to dig in the substance in your political-related posts. You just regurgitate CNN and happy about it.

    Which has a definite advantage of being always "politically correct".

    And what is important is that you seems to enjoy this position so much that you just can't stop from reminding me about this your advantage on each and every occasion, especially if you have no valid arguments ;-).

    [Apr 11, 2017] The US should have supported a through UN investigation and international law in regard to the gas attacks in Syria.

    Apr 11, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
    RGC , April 10, 2017 at 08:19 AM
    Five major US newspapers-the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, Wall Street Journal and New York Daily News-offered no opinion space to anyone opposed to Donald Trump's Thursday night airstrikes.

    By contrast, the five papers ran a total of 18 op-eds, columns or "news analysis" articles (dressed-up opinion pieces) that either praised the strikes or criticized them for not being harsh enough:

    http://www.alternet.org/media/five-top-papers-run-18-opinion-pieces-praising-syria-strikes-zero-are-critical-0

    RGC -> RGC... , April 10, 2017 at 08:51 AM
    A pair of veteran leaders on the left, former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean and Center for American Progress President Neera Tanden, called on Hawaiians to vote Rep. Tulsi Gabbard out of office after the Democrat questioned whether Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was responsible for last week's chemical attack.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/09/politics/democratic-leaders-gabbard-syria/

    anne -> RGC... , April 10, 2017 at 10:01 AM
    "A pair of veteran leaders on the left, former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean and Center for American Progress President Neera Tanden, called on Hawaiians to vote Rep. Tulsi Gabbard out of office after the Democrat questioned whether Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was responsible for last week's chemical attack."

    [ Astonishing, Neera Tanden and Howard Dean are wildly intolerant of dissent by Democrats from the dictates of the Clintons but I would not have imagined they were this intolerant. Tulsi Gabbard is an elected official of conscience, but evidently conscience is intolerable for the likes of Tanden and Dean.

    The point I suppose is for "leading" Democrats to clear the party of those who are not suitably dogma intimidated. ]

    anne -> anne... , April 10, 2017 at 04:46 PM
    https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/850478090887319552

    Tulsi Gabbard @TulsiGabbard

    The US should have supported a through UN investigation and international law in regard to the gas attacks in Syria.

    3:39 PM - 7 Apr 2017

    [ Such a statement strikes me as completely reasonable, and for any prominent Democrat to find the statement intolerable is to me lacking in tolerance and judiciousness. Then again, the implied or lightly veiled criticism of President Obama for failing to intervene forcefully enough in Syria has startled me. ]

    [Apr 10, 2017] If US succeeds in regime change future bands of terrorists attacking the infidel will be trained in Aleppo

    Notable quotes:
    "... The main accomplishment of bombing Syria was the sabotage of Trumps stated goal of corporation with Russia. I wonder which of his advisers convinced Trump to fock himself? Peter K. -> pgl... , April 10, 2017 at 11:44 AM As Krugman points out it wouldn't have mattered anyway. Trump has no long-term strategy. A one-off of destroying some planes and a Syrian janitor wouldn't matter in the long run. It's like Bill Clinton's strategy with Iraq. Launch some missiles at them to distract attention. ..."
    "... Of course there is a long term strategy, it is to use Saudis and the GCC to keep permanent war going. ..."
    "... How could shooting insanely from the hip further weaken US 'credibility'? How can continuously repeating unsubstantiated allegations as fact be any different than Goebbels' propaganda? ..."
    "... The US is defender of Sunni terror, you know the kind behind 9/11/01, against Shiite Muslims and Middle East Christians living in places controlled by US' oil sheiks or their jihadi clients! ..."
    "... To 96% of the people in the world the US is either a conscienceless, heavily armed thug or a dog with half the world's war spending to be unleashed by any thug with resources or banks. ..."
    "... Defeating ISIS is priority to no one. The Saudis, Turkey, etc like ISIS exactly where they are. ..."
    "... While the staged "fight" for Raqqah is malarkey, an excuse to deliver heavy weapons to jihadists. The US' jihadis moved south to 'grab the dam', so that ISIS' logistics road from turkey was not cut! How ISIS has not been starved out in Mosul and Raqqa is beyond imagining. ..."
    Apr 10, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
    ilsm -> Lee A. Arnold ... , April 10, 2017 at 02:01 PM
    War [leaving Syria to 9/11 terrorists who want to do what they were not doing in Iraq in 2002, that is build a terror states to compete with Libya and Afghanistan] is the life of the US state in the 'American Century'.

    If US succeeds in regime change future bands of terrorists attacking the infidel will be trained in Aleppo!

    anne -> ilsm... , April 10, 2017 at 05:49 PM
    This series of laments and explanations are remarkably interesting, and I am grateful for them. I have found these last days discouraging, though foolishly so no doubt. So the laments help and can be most informative even though outlines.
    DeDude , April 10, 2017 at 03:39 AM
    The main accomplishment of bombing Syria was the sabotage of Trumps stated goal of corporation with Russia. I wonder which of his advisers convinced Trump to fock himself?
    Peter K. -> pgl... , April 10, 2017 at 11:44 AM
    As Krugman points out it wouldn't have mattered anyway. Trump has no long-term strategy. A one-off of destroying some planes and a Syrian janitor wouldn't matter in the long run. It's like Bill Clinton's strategy with Iraq. Launch some missiles at them to distract attention.
    ilsm -> Peter K.... , April 10, 2017 at 02:06 PM
    Of course there is a long term strategy, it is to use Saudis and the GCC to keep permanent war going.

    " .and weaken American credibility .."

    How could shooting insanely from the hip further weaken US 'credibility'? How can continuously repeating unsubstantiated allegations as fact be any different than Goebbels' propaganda?

    The US is defender of Sunni terror, you know the kind behind 9/11/01, against Shiite Muslims and Middle East Christians living in places controlled by US' oil sheiks or their jihadi clients!

    To 96% of the people in the world the US is either a conscienceless, heavily armed thug or a dog with half the world's war spending to be unleashed by any thug with resources or banks.

    Defeating ISIS is priority to no one. The Saudis, Turkey, etc like ISIS exactly where they are.

    While the staged "fight" for Raqqah is malarkey, an excuse to deliver heavy weapons to jihadists. The US' jihadis moved south to 'grab the dam', so that ISIS' logistics road from turkey was not cut! How ISIS has not been starved out in Mosul and Raqqa is beyond imagining.

    [Apr 10, 2017] That was roundly 30 tons of weight.

    Apr 10, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com

    ilsm -> DrDick... April 10, 2017 at 02:04 PM

    That was roundly 30 tons of weight.

    In Vietnam US exploded 10's of millions of tons and got nothing!

    Bombing does not work, which is the conclusion of the suppressed minority including JK Galbraith of the bombings in WW II.

    Except the A bomb which scared the emperor.

    [Apr 10, 2017] The Sarin Gas Attack In Syria Ignited an Information Battle

    Apr 10, 2017 | www.defenseone.com

    The Russian Defense Ministry wrote a Facebook post to that effect: "According to the objective monitoring data, yesterday, from 11:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. (local time) the Syrian aviation made a strike on a large terrorist ammunition depot and a concentration of military hardware in the eastern outskirts of the Khan Sheikhun town. On the territory of the depot, there were workshops, which produced chemical warfare munitions.Terrorists had been transporting chemical munitions from this largest arsenal to the territory of Iraq. Both international organizations and the authorities of the country had repeatedly proved their usage by terrorists." FedUpWithWelfareStates 2 days ago I tend to go with the 'Logical' Russian version of the incident...

    ONE, Syria had NO reason to throw away all of the gains made.

    TWO, the Pentagon & State Department has LIED so much to the American people, that they are NO longer believable...

    Max South 2 days ago
    There are no "denials" of the warehouse explanation that would even remotely make sense.
    Also, there is not only no evidence of the use of chemical weapons by Syrian air force, but there is no even a motive. Assad is expanding the control of his territory, he is winning almost everywhere. Why he would all of sudden decide to use chemical weapons (which he does not even have as the UN inspection got full access to any and all facilities that stored them or could manufacture, and certified that all of the chemical weapons were destroyed).
    Max South Kingfish 2 days ago
    The "evidence" comes from Al-Qaeda that controls the city, and from one of its doctors who as tweeting all day during the "emergency" on how he will receive videocalls and interviews. The doctor has been implicated in kidnapping of UK citizens, and was disbarred.
    Way more sane evidence has been to very well in a YouTube video called "Evidence Suggests S-Y-R-I-A G-A-S ATTACK Is False Flag".

    [Apr 09, 2017] Who is responsible for the chemical attack in Syria

    Previous false flag
    Sep 08, 2013 | www.salon.com
    The early morning assault in a rebel-held Damascus suburb known as Ghouta was said to be the deadliest chemical weapons attack in Syria's 2 1/2-year civil war. Survivors' accounts, photographs of many of the dead wrapped peacefully in white sheets and dozens of videos showing victims in spasms and gasping for breath shocked the world and moved President Barack Obama to call for action because the use of chemical weapons crossed the red line he had drawn a year earlier.

    Yet one week after Secretary of State John Kerry outlined the case against Assad, Americans – at least those without access to classified reports – haven't seen a shred of his proof.

    There is open-source evidence that provides clues about the attack, including videos of fragments from the rockets that analysts believe were likely used. U.S. officials on Saturday released a compilation of videos showing victims, including children, exhibiting what appear to be symptoms of nerve gas poisoning. Some experts think the size of the strike, and the amount of toxic chemicals that appear to have been delivered, make it doubtful that the rebels could have carried it out.

    What's missing from the public record is direct proof, rather than circumstantial evidence, tying this to the regime.

    The Obama administration, searching for support from a divided Congress and skeptical world leaders, says its own assessment is based mainly on satellite and signals intelligence, including intercepted communications and satellite images indicating that in the three days prior to the attack that the regime was preparing to use poisonous gas.

    But multiple requests to view that satellite imagery have been denied, though the administration produced copious amounts of satellite imagery earlier in the war to show the results of the Syrian regime's military onslaught. When asked Friday whether such imagery would be made available showing the Aug. 21 incident, a spokesman referred The Associated Press to a map produced by the White House last week that shows what officials say are the unconfirmed areas that were attacked.

    The Obama administration maintains it intercepted communications from a senior Syrian official on the use of chemical weapons, but requests to see that transcript have been denied. So has a request by the AP to see a transcript of communications allegedly ordering Syrian military personnel to prepare for a chemical weapons attack by readying gas masks.

    The U.S. administration says its evidence is classified and is only sharing details in closed-door briefings with members of Congress and key allies.

    Yet the assessment, also based on accounts by Syrian activists and hundreds of YouTube videos of the attack's aftermath, has confounded many experts who cannot fathom what might have motivated Assad to unleash weapons of mass destruction on his own people – especially while U.N. experts were nearby and at a time when his troops had the upper hand on the ground.

    Rebels who accuse Assad of the attack have suggested he had learned of fighters' plans to advance on Damascus, his seat of power, and ordered the gassing to prevent that.

    [Apr 09, 2017] Biden No doubt Syria unleashed chemical attack, must pay price

    So warmonger Biden was trying to unleash the US invasion against Syria but failed...
    Notable quotes:
    "... He said rebel forces were to blame for security concerns near the suspected chemical sites, arguing that Western leaders are using the claims as an excuse to go after al-Assad's regime. ..."
    "... "We all hear the drums of war," Moallem said. "They want to attack Syria. I believe to use chemical weapons as a pretext is not a right." ..."
    Aug 28, 2013 | www.cnn.com

    Saying "there is no doubt who is responsible for this heinous use of chemical weapons attack in Syria: the Syrian regime," Vice President Joe Biden signaled Tuesday that the United States -- with its allies -- was ready to act.

    "Those who use chemical weapons against defenseless men, women and children should and must be held accountable," Biden said in a speech to the American Legion.

    The vice president's remarks echo those made by other U.S. officials in recent days, as well as many of the nation's foremost allies.

    French President Francois Hollande said his administration was "ready to punish those who made the decision to gas these innocent people," adding that "everything leads us to believe" that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's forces are responsible.

    British Prime Minister David Cameron -- who talked Tuesday with U.S. President Barack Obama -- called lawmakers back from their summer vacations to consider a response to Syria, as the UK military prepares contingency plans.

    And U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel told the BBC on Tuesday that U.S. forces are "ready to go" if ordered to strike Syria by President Barack Obama.

    "The options are there. The United States Department of Defense is ready to carry out those options," Hagel said.

    Western leaders were reacting to a growing consensus that the Syrian regime was responsible for an August 21 attack that killed more than 1,300 people, most of them dying from exposure to toxic gases, according to rebel officials. The opposition -- which has said it's been targeted by chemical weapons attacks in the past as well -- backed up its latest allegations with gruesome video of rows of dead bodies, including women and children, with no visible wounds.

    Opinion: For U.S., Syria is truly a problem from hell

    Syrian officials, though, have steadfastly denied using chemical weapons in this or other cases.

    Foreign Minister Walid Moallem said Tuesday that his government would never use such munitions against its own people, daring those who disagree to present evidence publicly.

    He said rebel forces were to blame for security concerns near the suspected chemical sites, arguing that Western leaders are using the claims as an excuse to go after al-Assad's regime.

    "We all hear the drums of war," Moallem said. "They want to attack Syria. I believe to use chemical weapons as a pretext is not a right."

    And if foreign powers do strike the Middle Eastern nation, its foreign minister said the government and its forces will fight back.

    "Syria is not easy to swallow," said Moallem. "We have the materials to defend ourselves. We will surprise others."

    [Apr 09, 2017] Tucker Carlson Takes on Sen Graham After Syrian Strikes

    Notable quotes:
    "... So basically the Neoconservatives haven't learned a goddamn thing! ..."
    www.youtube.com

    Donal Lenehan

    I don't trust that Lindsey Graham any more than Obama

    Alexander Solzhenitsyn

    Graham is a fucking asshole. The man is despicable FILTH.

    Yanin Rodriguez

    Disappointing questions Tucker with all due respect. Fact - Syrians support Assad up to 82%. Fact #2 - Rebels in Syria are by most accounts not even Syrian. Follow up on "liberating the Syrians" - with that mentality what about the Saudis?????

    War is profits and comprises of the highest % of employment in the US - so until we transfer that sector of the economy to more peaceful endeavors - we will be permanently be in illegal wars. Lastly - where are any of these wars constitutional?

    Why has congress relinquished this responsibility???

    We know the answers but never hear the questions asked...

    Josh Hempfleng

    The strike in Syria really made the Military industrial complex show themselves. The media, Democrats and Rhino's all cheering on the attack now that they see a chance to make some money off war.

    Rumi900

    +Josh Hemplfeng - You say '... Democrats and Rhino's all cheering ...' Why Democrats and Rhino's?

    I'd be okay with you saying Democrats and Republicans, but you seem to be letting the bulk of Republicans off the hook. Or, are you saying all the Republican elite are Rhinos? If so, I agree. The point is, surely, that much of Washington (on both sides) is bought and paid for by the wealthiest elites, through their lobbyists.

    This isn't a partisan issue. I wish people would stop making it one! Republicans and Democrats are all equally culpable.

    There are Democrats and Republicans who are not just shills for the elite. And those are the politicians we should be championing.

    Trump talked about it during the election - 'draining the swamp'. The 'swamp' is not some secret power, some nefarious underground that is controlling things.

    The 'swamp' is bought and paid for politicians - politicians bought and paid for by massive donations that can now hide behind the opaque screens of the SuperPACs. It's not just politicians on the 'other' side. Both sides are equally involved.

    I don't believe Trump is serious about 'draining the swamp'. If he is, he should be going after things like the Citizen's United decision. The Supreme Court bounced that back to the House, because it's the House that makes the law. The Supreme Court is there to say whether the law is Constitutional. They don't make law. it's up to Congress to do that.

    But politicians in the house, Republicans and Democrats alike, are happy with Citizen's United and SuperPACs and the opportunities for massive secret donations it has allowed. It's how they all get rich.

    If Trump was serious about draining the swamp, he'd be tackling those issues. But he's not. Just look at his appointees! I didn't vote for Trump. Because I didn't believe his rhetoric. I still don't.

    It's you guys, his ardent supporters, who should be holding his feet to the fire! And unfortunately, I see way too much adulation, mindless hero worship, and not enough demanding accountability.

    Joanne K

    They don't want us to know that ISIS is in Syria (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) and that is what Assad is fighting, along with other Islamic groups. The L in ISIL stands for Levant. Leave Syria out so that overthrowing Assad will only leave the amorphous oppressed rebels (really ISIS or Al Nusra or Al Qaeda).

    They are deceivers.

    Zack Edwards

    So basically the Neoconservatives haven't learned a goddamn thing!

    [Apr 09, 2017] You would hope that our independent media might ask some important questions, rather than simply swallow the narrative our governments feed them

    Notable quotes:
    "... In fact there are already reports that ISIS has launched an offensive in the Homs region sure in the knowledge that the Syrian regime has lost its air cover in that region. Consequently do US actions like this help ISIS? ..."
    "... Why did Al Qaeda attack Homs at the same time as the US strikes? ..."
    "... And what about Turkey now riling up everybody and wanting to invade Syria and asking for more strikes from the US? ..."
    "... American people: never forget the pretext that put you into this mess in Iraq in the first place! Be critical of your government. Don't jump to conclusions based on photos from sources that can't prove their authenticity! Don't be the sheep! ..."
    "... The world does not need another full scale war! ..."
    "... Maybe he's someone who questions overt propaganda pushing wars. ..."
    "... This last bombing is very much in line with Trump steaks and Trump vodka, just a hell of a lot uglier. ..."
    "... And so we see once again that it does not matter who the American president is, what he/she wants or plans for their foreign policy - when the real masters whistle, the interchangeable White House puppet rolls over and bombs anyone who endangers the corporate profits*. ..."
    "... Where's the actual proof that Assad did this?. The whole thing stinks of another Gulf of Tonkin incident. ..."
    "... Just goes to show, how dangerous Trump actually is. We need to be given the 'clear' evidence, that Trump vindicated his action on. ..."
    "... Unless, 'experts' can investigate the bombed area, there is, as yet, no unequivocal evidence, that Syrian forces we're responsible, and Assad's and Russian explanations, could be just as valid. ..."
    "... Let's face it, the only one's to benefit from this, is Isis and the other extreme Islamist rebel factions, and Trump himself, who could be attempting to shore up his failing presidency at home. ..."
    "... Trump is doing exactly what the Establishment has told him to do. ..."
    "... I can't be the only person who's thinking false flag here. Something doesn't add up. Clearly there has been a chemical attack - it just doesn't make any sense why the Syria regime are behind it. How do they benefit? ..."
    "... I too can't believe that Assad would shot himself in the foot by using chemical weapons. The most plausible explanation is the one being advanced by the Russians. ..."
    "... But whatever the truth, and no one seems to know, unless you swallow the false-news regularly advanced by this newspaper, everybody as seized on the news to advance their own agenda. ..."
    "... And the the Guardian and BBC jump to use it as propaganda to steer the UK government to a foreign policy of which the Guardian and BBC approve. ..."
    "... We are fed, lie, after lie, after lie, and they expect us to swallow it - it is insulting. ..."
    "... The US is above international law. Plus they have just destroyed the crime scene. ..."
    "... In a single day, we've gone from Assad's air force being 'suspected' of the war crime, to an air base 'believed to be' that from which the attack was launched, to both being established facts, reported as such by the media - with no investigation or proof in between. ..."
    "... But if Trump has decided to get Assad out, who is the US going to put in to replace him? ..."
    "... Loathed though I am to contemplate it on this occasion it is possible that Assad has been framed. Only evidence can clear this up. ..."
    "... The absolute worst aspect of all, and we do know this for sure, is that the bastard claims god is his guide. ..."
    "... As he escalates on behalf of the Military Industrial Complex, which is desperately in need of profit and growth. ..."
    "... Liberals want the Wahhabis to be in charge. ..."
    "... Dec 2016 - Erdogan confirms Turkey has evidence that the US coalition is supporting ISIS and rebels in Syria ..."
    "... It almost seems too perfect doesn't it? Could be another false flag.. ..."
    "... America is simply showing it stays one step or 10 ahead and can and will act with impunity - anywhere. ..."
    "... It's not even proved that Assad used gas. In fact it's not proved what gas it was...Thanks to media and political spin its a cert is was Sarin. So, the US launches yet another military intervention without evidence or legality. ..."
    "... There is no deliberation in Syria, there is only violence. An uprising has morphed into a major proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran based on sectarian lines, with Turkey tilting the scales a bit for the Saudis and Russian the same for the Iran-backed side. ..."
    "... A similar situation in Germany 400 years ago has become labelled 'the 30 years war', although with modern munitions that seems unlikely. ..."
    "... Meanwhile Syrian children will continue to be murdered by all comers. None of the international parties taking an "interest" in Syria is innocent or guileless in this respect. We don't know for certain yet who carried out the chemical attack - it could well have been ISIS or other "rebels", or it could have been the "regime". But let's remember that Trump has said publicly that America created ISIS. ..."
    "... Trump's recent action doesn't just reveal a lack of understanding about what's going on in Syria. (And let's face it, which of us really knows what is going on there? There is no news source whose credibility is beyond question concerning that conflict). No, far more worryingly, Trump's recent action reveals a cynical willingness to act regardless of his understanding of the situation in order to refute a critical narrative (against himself) or promote a more favourable narrative (towards himself). In other words, not that different than any other politician has been regarding acts of war in the past few decades. ..."
    "... An interesting year ahead. We will see soon what Putin really has in his Trump file. We might see one or the other interesting picture or video this year. ..."
    "... Who's warmonger now? ..."
    "... A UK ex-Ambassador to Syria, Peter Ford, describes how Jihadi opposition in Syria were storing chemical weapons in schools, and that Western journalists saw this. ..."
    "... With no evidence that the Syrian military actually has dropped chemical munitions on people, the rush to attack the Syrian installation speaks volumes. ..."
    "... According to the Guardian headline, after the gas attack killed 70, "'The dead were wherever you looked': ..In the botched US airstrike 230 were killed ( 'ours' are just collateral damage)... ..."
    "... Tomahawk diplomacy ..."
    "... IMO there are only two options now. ..."
    "... Trump and his neolibcons plan to escalate this to the brink of WWIII, and possibly over the brink, or ..."
    "... He has been blackmailed with the lives of his nearest ones, so winning the 2020 doesn't feel that important anymore ..."
    "... The man's a total fool. He's taken Syria down the same road as his predecessors did with Libya and Iraq. Remove the leaders, just contend with hordes of warring tribals. By that time the incumbent President of the USA has moved on, leaving his mess for others to clean up. ..."
    "... Along with the fact that ONLY THE SYRIAN GOV COULD POSSIBLY LOSE BY SUCH AN ATTACK -- and would have ZERO to gain , is a compelling reason for investigation : NOT blanket repetition of what ISIS say -- according to the Guardian itself . ..."
    "... Anyway, the least actions of US in Syria, which can be qualified as an agression against a sovereign state from any point of view, shows that US, as a drunk cowboy, firing at bottles in a saloon, understand only a policy of superior force and is negotiable only when you put a colt to his head. ..."
    "... BTW: 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles at $1,590,000 each [Wiki] is $93,810,000. Or the annual income of 4,690 people making $10/hr spent within a few minutes... to send a message to a vacated airbase? If 80 people killed in Syria is senseless, then what is 210 people shot in America on the first day of 2017? Should we send 2.5 times as many Tomahawk cruise missiles to ORD and LAX? Will the NRA get the "message"? Rattel , 7 Apr 2017 09:48 So the answer to the question 'Cui bono' appears to be Donald Trump. ..."
    "... Last time I saw the guardian posting pic of the vehicles carrying humanitarian aid that were allegedly attacked by syrian planes...and they were full of visible small arms bullet holles with is impossible to come from planes. The scenes had been staged! ..."
    "... Further escalation of this mess is terrifying - especially now we've seen how easy Trump is to manipulate. ..."
    "... "Hitting one airbase is not enough, there are 26 airbases that target civilians," a key figure in the Army of Islam faction, Mohamed Alloush, said on his Twitter account. "The whole world should save the Syrian people from the clutches of the killer Bashar (al-Assad) and his aides." Siding with a group called the Army of Islam - what could possibly go wrong? beren56 , 7 Apr 2017 09:50 Sadam and Gadaffi were removed from power and it only created a vacuum. Getting rid of Assad will likely do the same. The dictators kept radical Islam in check. It's not like they will thank America if they did get rid of Assad-they would still hate America ..."
    "... As soon as the current Assad regime fall, it will bring chaos, instability and death to Syria and indeed the ME on a unprecedented scale. The West should should be very careful. Assad is many times more preferable than a post Assad situation with various religious nutters wielding power. ..."
    "... ''Now that Obama's poll numbers are in tailspin - watch for him to launch a strike in Libya or Iran. He is desperate.'' Donald Trump on Twitter, 9 October 2012. ..."
    "... "Meanwhile, the heart of the problem is that the United States seems always to have only one solution to war: make more war. " ..."
    "... In my youth a frequent moniker said "fighting for peace is like fu.king for virginity" - it hasn't changed ..."
    Apr 09, 2017 | discussion.theguardian.com
    ajcook , 2d ago

    You would hope that our "independent" media might ask some important questions, rather than simply swallow the narrative our government's feed them...

    For instance, where is the evidence that the Syrian regime did this? Only on Wednesday the UN stated that it could not say with any certainty that the chemicals were delivered by air.

    Indeed the UN investigation has barely started, so if the US have information that Assad did this surely they should present it?

    What about motive, why would Assad who everyone agrees is on the brink of winning this war give the US a reason to intervene against him? Besides didn't we also oversee the distruction of his chemical weapons stockpile 4 years ago?

    We know ISIS have chemical weapons because our ally Turkey has let them import them over their border.

    Also, even if we ignore the legality of last night's strike, what has it done to help the situation in Syria?

    In fact there are already reports that ISIS has launched an offensive in the Homs region sure in the knowledge that the Syrian regime has lost its air cover in that region. Consequently do US actions like this help ISIS?

    I don't know about anyone else but it is pretty standard for me that when someone is accused of something I look for the evidence and motives. It seems unfortunately that our media have long stopped asking any difficult questions, as we sleepwalk into yet another middle eastern war...

    hewasrightabout42 , 7 Apr 2017 09:14
    The number of countries not bombed by the USA grows smaller all the time. It is a foreign policy based on high explosives - mindless, cruel and bound to create more enemies.
    12inchPianist , 7 Apr 2017 09:14
    What the hell exactly is the message? Don't use chemical weapons on the beautiful babies, stick to blowing them to pieces and mutilating them with conventional weapons like civilized people?
    Muzzledagain , 7 Apr 2017 09:14
    Asking again: where is the toxic chemical cloud from the airbase the US attacked overnight that was allegedly the base from where chemical air raids were launched and thus presumably where the toxic material was in storage?

    Why did Al Qaeda attack Homs at the same time as the US strikes?

    Joăo Paulo Caron , 7 Apr 2017 09:14
    There is simply NO REASON at all that Assad would go out of his way to gas 100 people including children KNOWING the backlash that would follow right after. Assad does not strike me as an idiot. Specially being so close to end this mess once and for all.

    Doesn't the UN has a organisation that was in charge of the inspection and removal of all chemical weapons from Syria back in 2013/14 ?

    And what about Turkey now riling up everybody and wanting to invade Syria and asking for more strikes from the US?

    Something fundamental changed on the ground in this past days to make so many heads of states turn 180 on this issue. Fishy at best!

    American people: never forget the pretext that put you into this mess in Iraq in the first place! Be critical of your government. Don't jump to conclusions based on photos from sources that can't prove their authenticity! Don't be the sheep!

    The world does not need another full scale war!

    KeithNJ -> Joăo Paulo Caron , 7 Apr 2017 09:16
    I see from your photo that you are a Russian propagandist. Does it pay well?
    dopamineboy KeithNJ , 7 Apr 2017 09:19
    Maybe he's someone who questions overt propaganda pushing wars.
    maguro , 7 Apr 2017 09:16
    Trump's actions aren't but a dirt cheap smokescreen. He might as well have ponded sand.

    Little babies, the president said, tiny little babies.

    Where does this concern for the Syrian civilians suddenly come from?

    Not even three weeks ago, the US bombed a school near Raqqa, killing 33 civilians, and shortly before that, a mosk in al Jinah, kiliing 49.

    This last bombing is very much in line with Trump steaks and Trump vodka, just a hell of a lot uglier.

    F this.

    nishville , 7 Apr 2017 09:16
    And so we see once again that it does not matter who the American president is, what he/she wants or plans for their foreign policy - when the real masters whistle, the interchangeable White House puppet rolls over and bombs anyone who endangers the corporate profits*.

    International laws are ignored, pretexts hastily fabricated (did you notice they don't pay so much attention to detail anymore?) and people die to be used as an excuse for yet another war crime in the perpetual quest for more and more and more money.

    *If they refuse, they are shown the footage of Kennedy assassination taken from a yet unseen angle (RIP Bill Hicks).

    fran terion , 7 Apr 2017 09:16
    Islamic state takes advantage of US attack on government to storm western Palmyra

    BEIRUT, LEBANON (9:40 A.M.) – Not long after the U.S. attacked the Shayrat Airbase in eastern Homs, the Islamic State (ISIL) launched two separate attacks on the Syrian Arab Army's (SAA) defenses in the Palmyra.

    Ottomanboi , 7 Apr 2017 09:17
    USA ...the rogue state whose name no one dares mention.
    United Europe needed more than ever.
    BigWeedge , 7 Apr 2017 09:17
    I struggle to see why bombs are almost universally accepted way of solving foreign problems, even by most of the left.

    It might seem like standing by and doing nothing in the face of appalling horrors, but enlightenment and revolution has to come naturally and from the people, and dropping foreign bombs is just going to confuse the issue.

    There are so many non-violent, more effective options that we never seem to use. Why not open borders to allow show refugees compassion and that the rest of the world is not like their home country? Why not charter warships to peacefully collect those seeking refuge, removing them from the conflict rather than raining down more conflict on them? Why not do low fast flybys as a show of not only vast force, but restraint, responsibility, compassion? Why not remove military force peacefully, by cutting off arms trade? Why not drop thousands of flowers? Why not drop information? Food? Teddy bears?

    Why not?

    Making war doesn't end war.

    StrangerInParadise , 7 Apr 2017 09:18
    Well the liberal elite finally got what they wanted. A shooting war in the Middle East. I hope The Guardian, BBC and Vauxhall Cross are all very proud of themselves this morning.
    dopamineboy StrangerInParadise , 7 Apr 2017 09:20
    At least Hillary is smiling in her mansion.
    tsonga , 7 Apr 2017 09:18

    Russia has suspended the memorandum of understanding on flight safety in Syria with the United States amid the US missile strike on Syria's Shayrat military airfield, according to the Russian Foreign Ministry's statement.

    And there is more to come. Now, US (and UK) aircrafts can be freely knocked down from the sky.
    Greg38585 , 7 Apr 2017 09:19
    Where's the actual proof that Assad did this?. The whole thing stinks of another Gulf of Tonkin incident.

    Also whenever the media just blindly report something as fact without any concrete evidence, without any critical thought, investigation & examination etc then I'm always highly suspicious

    (just like tthe last chemical attack, where they were eagerly stating that Assad did it, there was video footage etc etc yet it turned out that it was the "Rebels" who were behind the attack all along.

    Of course the media never told us that, as soon as it became apparent that Assad did not do it they dropped the story so fast, swept under the rug never to be reported ever again).

    I mean it really doesn't add up as Assad has no reason to use chemical weapons (he's winning the war(and would've won along time ago if it wasn't for the West proping up the supposed "Rebels & Moderates" more like Isis and AQ), he benifets in no way, and only brings about international scorn) risking the advantage he has), the whole thing comes across as very fishy.

    All too convenient & very contrived. I think we're being had by the powers that be, and unfortunately too many people aren't smart enough, don't possess the critical thinking to see that and will fall for it hook, line and sinker, will take it all at face value.

    volkswin Greg38585 , 7 Apr 2017 09:22
    You would expect a gas attack using a nerve agent dropped by a plane to be far more effective than it was.
    ardvark2 , 7 Apr 2017 09:19
    Just goes to show, how dangerous Trump actually is. We need to be given the 'clear' evidence, that Trump vindicated his action on.

    So far, the information available, is not irrefutable i.e. that Assad's forces were involved in a deliberate gas attack, and in fact he would be mad to do so, knowing it couldn't be concealed, and the consequences are what we're seeing now.

    At the moment, we are told that planes took off from that airfield, were logged on US radar to the town, on which explosives were dropped, and that the military base, might have had stocks of chemical weapons, in 2013.

    Unless, 'experts' can investigate the bombed area, there is, as yet, no unequivocal evidence, that Syrian forces we're responsible, and Assad's and Russian explanations, could be just as valid.

    Let's face it, the only one's to benefit from this, is Isis and the other extreme Islamist rebel factions, and Trump himself, who could be attempting to shore up his failing presidency at home.

    Of course, if Assad is directly to blame, and that can be demonstrated without doubt, then by all means, retaliate, and very hard, but until then, a more measured and circumspect appraisal is now necessary.

    DT48 ardvark2 , 7 Apr 2017 09:21
    Trump is doing exactly what the Establishment has told him to do.
    diddoit , 7 Apr 2017 09:19
    I think we in the west need to be very careful and set an example by respecting international law, for one day the Anglo world might not be the world's dominant military powers. There needed to be a proper investigation before any action. Working with Russia to find out exactly what happened.

    How would we like to be struck at will with a total inability to respond by a militarily superior foe wherever & whenever that foe feels like it? It could be a superior Chinese military floating off our coast one day , with us screaming about international law.

    Chris Farouk Hussain , 7 Apr 2017 09:19
    I can't be the only person who's thinking false flag here. Something doesn't add up. Clearly there has been a chemical attack - it just doesn't make any sense why the Syria regime are behind it. How do they benefit?

    Why use chemical weapons when the US said it was the "line"? Who does benefit from this? Have false flag operations happened before (with proof)? It's extremely dangerous to believe what has been said in the US and UK since this attack, and not answered these questions as well. Something clearly is amiss here.

    ID629977 , 7 Apr 2017 09:20
    I too can't believe that Assad would shot himself in the foot by using chemical weapons. The most plausible explanation is the one being advanced by the Russians.

    But whatever the truth, and no one seems to know, unless you swallow the false-news regularly advanced by this newspaper, everybody as seized on the news to advance their own agenda.

    For the Trump administration it was a great moment to show China and North Korea that the USA is capable of delivering a knock-out blow to the North Koreans nuclear ambitions.

    And the the Guardian and BBC jump to use it as propaganda to steer the UK government to a foreign policy of which the Guardian and BBC approve.

    We are fed, lie, after lie, after lie, and they expect us to swallow it - it is insulting.

    cygnetborn , 7 Apr 2017 09:20
    This seems so coordinated - alleged chemical attack, universal condemnation of Assad, US missile strike and then within hours ISIS are attacking Syrian army bases.

    Shame so little condemnation here when US killed 100s if not 100s recently in Iraq, but seems most here are now disgusting Trump supporters so no surprise.

    dopamineboy cygnetborn , 7 Apr 2017 09:23
    It's all a convenient set up - ever since Trump announced he was pulling back from confronting Assad - the war machine went into overdrive - and sucked Don in.
    madeiranlotuseater , 7 Apr 2017 09:22
    Another knee jerk reaction from the USA. Next thing we know the west can add Syria to its list of disastrous military campaigns that will sink another country into even bigger chaos. Greater loss of life and like Libya, a breeding ground for Daesh.
    But still, think of the profit for the manufacturer of Cruise missiles. Another twenty six and a half million dollars of missiles to be replaced. One wonders if top brass are on a commission from the arms manufacturers?
    TracyJavid , 7 Apr 2017 09:22
    Don't get me wrong, I loathe Assad. But I don't get why he would have launched a chemical attack now. He's winning. He knows he loses by doing something like that. Are we sure he did it? If he goes who's next? Are they worse? Why aren't we airlifting kids out of these areas, we could do that. We moved kids during WW2, and we didn't have the technology we have now. If we can use a drone to drop a missille, why can't it drop food and medications on people who need it. We are morally bankrupt. In the face of all this immorality we sit here and order another Starbucks and type with impotent rage. How can we get this to stop?
    Nathaniel Gould , 7 Apr 2017 09:22
    When was the investigation into the alleged chemical weapons attack concluded? Did I miss that news?
    anonym101 -> Nathaniel Gould , 7 Apr 2017 09:26
    The US is above international law. Plus they have just destroyed the crime scene.
    liberalexpat , 7 Apr 2017 09:23
    This is frightening: policy replaced by a knee-jerk reaction based on Trump's moods. The atrocity was unspeakable, Assad is a vicious despot, Russia's backing for him is purblind. But..

    In a single day, we've gone from Assad's air force being 'suspected' of the war crime, to an air base 'believed to be' that from which the attack was launched, to both being established facts, reported as such by the media - with no investigation or proof in between.

    And still US policy on Syria is a mystery, not to say non-existent: the strike raises more questions than it answers. If this was limited action, was it anything more than gesture politics? But if Trump has decided to get Assad out, who is the US going to put in to replace him?

    Marika Whitfield -> liberalexpat , 7 Apr 2017 09:34
    Good to see an intelligent comment. Share Facebook Twitter
    Shaker56 -> liberalexpat , 7 Apr 2017 09:34
    Good comment - as mentioned elsewhere today Trump seems to be rapidly reversing his policy on Syria - re Assad and refugees allowed entry to America etc. Might this airstrike action usefully get him off the hook with regard to the Puppet of Russia accusations and define him in a "good" light with his home audience in juxtaposition to Obama's reluctance to strike?
    Sowester , 7 Apr 2017 09:24
    The Americans have surveillance that should be able to prove Assad was guilty. Time to show it.

    Or maybe the Russians are right and Trump has been played by the jihadists who are quite capable of gassing civilians to provoke a response against Assad.

    Loathed though I am to contemplate it on this occasion it is possible that Assad has been framed. Only evidence can clear this up.

    Felipe1st , 7 Apr 2017 09:24
    The absolute worst aspect of all, and we do know this for sure, is that the bastard claims god is his guide.

    As he escalates on behalf of the Military Industrial Complex, which is desperately in need of profit and growth.

    All psychopaths and bullies avoid direct responsibility for what they unleash.

    martybishop , 7 Apr 2017 09:24
    The worrying issue to me is that Trump seems to be capable of knee-jerk reactions with very little diplomacy or forethought as to the inevitable consequences. The chemical raids were undoubtedly a ghastly act by whoever perpetrated them, but in this particular conflict, like so many in that troubled part of the world, it is virtually impossible to distinguish the good guys from the bad. Now Trump wades in with unilateral air strikes - gunboat diplomacy at its worst that could spark wider conflict. Now where did I put those instructions on how to build my nuclear shelter?
    ruffledfeathers , 7 Apr 2017 09:24
    So many people want Assad gone. Who will be put in his place? The result of removing brutal dictators from the Middle East is all too clear to see, not only across the Middle East, but across Europe and across the world.

    Where is the proof that it was Assad?

    A year back Saudi smuggled weapons to Turkey supposedly in relation to the Syrian conflict, but which the Turks would have used against the Kurds.

    There is too much that isn't known in this instance to take action. I can't see Russia and Assad now backing away. North Korea might even offer them a helping hand (whether that hand would be taken might be unlikely, but backed into a corner - who knows).

    Nathaniel Gould -> ruffledfeathers , 7 Apr 2017 09:28
    Liberals want the Wahhabis to be in charge.
    SubjectiveSubject , 7 Apr 2017 09:25
    Dec 2016 - Erdogan confirms Turkey has evidence that the US coalition is supporting ISIS and rebels in Syria .

    Jan 2017 - May visits Erdogan and signs major trade deal and supplies arms to the regime. Erdogan now backs the strike on Syria.

    Joăo Paulo Caron , 7 Apr 2017 09:26
    There is simply NO REASON at all that Assad would go out of his way to gas 100 people including children KNOWING the backlash that would follow right after. Assad does not strike me as an idiot. Specially being so close to end this mess once and for all.

    Doesn't the UN has a organisation that was in charge of the inspection and removal of all chemical weapons from Syria back in 2013/14 ?

    And what about Turkey now riling up everybody and wanting to invade Syria and asking for more strikes from the US?

    Something fundamental changed on the ground in this past days to make so many heads of states turn 180 on this issue. Fishy at best!

    American people: never forget the pretext that put you into this mess in Iraq in the first place! Be critical of your government. Don't jump to conclusions based on photos from sources that can't prove their authenticity! Don't be the sheep!

    The world does not need another full scale war!

    Dyler Turdan , 7 Apr 2017 09:26
    Wasn't a week ago US decided change policy on removing Assad..the Turks and the terrorists couldn't have that so they made up this gas attack because its a red line, some of those filming those horrific pictures were terrorists..the hawks used it and Trump fell for it.
    HerbGuardian , 7 Apr 2017 09:26
    The West wants to topple Syria in order to get closer to Iran and do the same thing there ( send in and supply the murderous cut throats to collapse it from the inside) therefore anything about Assad being this and the Syrian Government being that, as per the Western Media , is just Bull ....as far as I am concerned.
    disqusagain , 7 Apr 2017 09:27
    Personality related impulsive behaviour? Seems Trump feels a need for power without reflection of the consequences of his actions and consultation with the leaders of other nations. abuse of his position of power? If he makes these decisions what else will follow?
    blairsnemesis disqusagain , 7 Apr 2017 09:38
    Trump is not capable of reflection or even forethought. He acts in the way he speaks, i.e. whatever is passing through his head is the next thing to do/say. He is the most clueless US president I've heard of, and that includes Reagan.
    Timelord421 , 7 Apr 2017 09:27
    Orwell predicted a machine that would churn out garbage music to satisfy the proles. Does the Guardian have such a machine simply attach a name before publishing?

    6 years of hand-wringing? Let's have some more of that.

    Mark Dawson , 7 Apr 2017 09:27
    Amazing how many people, on both sides of the argument, are ready with hard and fast opinions so rapidly. Might be an idea to wait until a few more facts are in, and the ramifications begin to reveal themselves. But I guess that's not how the internet (or commentary) works.
    ConCaruthers Mark Dawson , 7 Apr 2017 09:35
    Regime change of Syria was on Wesley Clarke's list 16 years ago after 9/11.

    Assad had only just come to power, so it's clearly an orchestrated exercise and the US is frankly running out of time and excuses not to get in and get the job done, ironically for the Swamp creatures that Donald said he wanted to get rid of, what a complete numskull.

    Raptorius , 7 Apr 2017 09:28
    I thought Trump wasn't the warmonger and would focus on the USA, which would only concern itself with other countries if there was something to gain from it. First he doesn't care and now that he has seen dead children it is suddenly different? How rash and unpredictable.
    BreqJustice Raptorius , 7 Apr 2017 09:31
    The USA are the best are creating dead children - nobody can come close ...
    StrongMachine Raptorius , 7 Apr 2017 09:37
    That's right - we were warned Hillary was the warmonger. Goodness only know what she would have done!

    (She was also supposed to be in hock to Goldman Sachs - Trump cut out the middleman and brought them directly into his administration).

    mugsey Raptorius , 7 Apr 2017 09:41
    Well, dead children that HE didn't kill.
    Forthestate , 7 Apr 2017 09:28
    This from the Guardian this morning:

    Friday briefing: Assad's atrocity answered with hail of Tomahawks

    It appears that the Guardian doesn't think it necessary to wait for the conclusion of any investigation into the chemical attack before pronouncing Assad responsible. I take it this approach is an example of what the Guardian considers to be "quality journalism". Most people would consider quality journalism to rely upon evidence, rather than an editorial agenda.
    dopamineboy Forthestate , 7 Apr 2017 09:31
    Not when Dr Strangelove is in charge.
    Forthestate Forthestate , 7 Apr 2017 09:31
    And then again this:

    The chemical attack had in all likelihood been carried out by the Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad.

    Seems they want it both ways.
    Grantbarking , 7 Apr 2017 09:29
    FALSE FLAG FALSE FLAG FALSE FLAG The only thing which could derail Assad's total victory in Syria is if he uses chemical weapons. Then he uses chemical weapons. Whatever you think of Assad he isn't mad. This is clearly a con and Trump has fallen for it. Share Facebook Twitter
    Sowester Grantbarking , 7 Apr 2017 09:33
    Not clearly but I would like to see some evidence.
    Zetenyagli , 7 Apr 2017 09:29

    Donald Trump, the man who just over a month ago wanted to bar entry of all Syrian refugees into the United States, now wants us to think that he cares deeply about Syrian children. I don't believe it

    Neither do I. I think he is trying to save his job. With Trump if you can't baffle them with brains baffle them with BS. This attack is a distraction from the Russian/Flynn investigation.

    What it achieves for Trump is the following:
    1. Makes him look anti Russian. This is important because of the investigation into his cronies connections with Russia.
    2. Proves he has given up on Ukraine, so no removal of sanctions and therefore no big oil deal with Russia.
    3. Encourages ISIS and Al-Quaeda.
    4. Has committed an act of war against Syria so America is now at war with Syria. A war with no strategy like Iraq, Libya.
    5. Makes Trump look like a leader.
    6. Has probably alienated many of his supporters.

    Most of all he thinks this action will save his job.

    StrangerInParadise Zetenyagli , 7 Apr 2017 09:32
    Bannon was obviously against this. I doubt Trump will do anymore yuge rallies.
    anonym101 , 7 Apr 2017 09:29
    Assad was winning. Turkey and the US needed a circuit breaker. Petty the real culprits could show up in Paris or Sydney in a few months time.
    jonmac65 , 7 Apr 2017 09:30
    I see the international context as secondary to the US-domestic one. Since taking office Trump has been made to look a twat by judges, demonstrators and his own legislature. And so the Syrian chemical attacks previded him with a wonderful opportunity to do something military which is always the fall-back of poor leaders. He can now say he is strong, America is strong, we'll take on the bad guys, etc etc.
    To be honest nobody really cares much about Assad (I doubt even the Russians do beyond his country's strategic usefulness) so it was a target that while championed at home was always going to win approval abroad (even if muttered under the breath).
    It also allowed Trump to do the hard-man/big-swinging-dick act right in the Chinese leader's face - again a 'win' for him.
    I think he is calculating that he has just saved his presidency. Given the lunacy of US politics at the moment he is probably right.
    Raptorius jonmac65 , 7 Apr 2017 09:35
    It almost seems too perfect doesn't it? Could be another false flag..
    pfg2powell jonmac65 , 7 Apr 2017 09:35
    I think your are probably exactly right.
    garedelyons , 7 Apr 2017 09:31
    If there is anyone out there who would really think that Assad would be stupid enough to use chemical weapons, he/she (Trump/May) must be, well, stupid.

    Mr Trump admitted that US had done "bad things". This is just another example. What he has done plays wholly into the hands of some very questionable regimes and IS.

    The tomahawk was an offensive weapon. What is offensive about white USA adopting it to name its modern killer is that the original carriers, defending their land, were mown down using the latest weapon of the time - the Gatling gun.

    America is simply showing it stays one step or 10 ahead and can and will act with impunity - anywhere.

    hugodegauche , 7 Apr 2017 09:31
    When reading articles like this I fear ultimately there will be no possible compromise with globalists who want it all but at all costs open borders.
    Johnny Kent , 7 Apr 2017 09:31
    It's not even proved that Assad used gas. In fact it's not proved what gas it was...Thanks to media and political spin its a cert is was Sarin. So, the US launches yet another military intervention without evidence or legality.
    KeithNJ , 7 Apr 2017 09:31
    There is no deliberation in Syria, there is only violence. An uprising has morphed into a major proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran based on sectarian lines, with Turkey tilting the scales a bit for the Saudis and Russian the same for the Iran-backed side.

    Civil wars come to end either with defeat of one party or all sides becoming exhausted of violence. The proxy backers ensure that defeat for their side is impossible, and the sectarian aspect makes exhaustion a far off prospect since each side fears genocide should it lose. Nonetheless, it might be over by now if Russia has not intervened to prop up Assad, reducing his need to compromise.

    A similar situation in Germany 400 years ago has become labelled 'the 30 years war', although with modern munitions that seems unlikely.

    As for the American air strike, a negative spin would be it made no difference (but the Russian reaction suggest that is not the case) while a positive spin was that it tilted the balance back towards a compromise ending (since Assad can no longer assume the Russian presence gives him immunity from serious harm).

    No one knows, and all arguments are propaganda.

    unbritannia , 7 Apr 2017 09:31
    Isn't this exactly the kind of action that The Guardian and CNN etc have been goading Trump towards since he took office? With every article accusing Trump of being a Russian stooge or a Manchurian candidate, the "liberal" media has pushed him ever closer to sending this message .

    The "message" isn't intended for Assad, and it's quite clearly marked with sheepish apologies to Russia - which aren't going to wash, as Trump possibly guesses, but he had more urgent priorities than Russia, such as proving that he isn't their "man" to domestic critics. This was all done for the benefit of US and European audiences. Those in the media who clamored for it, must have lost all sense of irony, not to say integrity, to come out with umbrage now that Trump as reacted precisely as should have been predictable in order to defend his reputation against their jibes.

    The only redeeming feature of Trump's campaign was that he didn't seem to want to keep America (and with it so much of the globe) embroiled in endless war. That broad instinct for a bit less less war, if translated into actual policy, was the one Trump offering that you'd think the "liberal" media could get behind.

    But no. Trump was working for "the Russians", don't you know, and now he's prepared to push us all one step closer to war with them just to disprove the playground taunts.

    Meanwhile Syrian children will continue to be murdered by all comers. None of the international parties taking an "interest" in Syria is innocent or guileless in this respect. We don't know for certain yet who carried out the chemical attack - it could well have been ISIS or other "rebels", or it could have been the "regime". But let's remember that Trump has said publicly that America created ISIS.

    Trump's recent action doesn't just reveal a lack of understanding about what's going on in Syria. (And let's face it, which of us really knows what is going on there? There is no news source whose credibility is beyond question concerning that conflict). No, far more worryingly, Trump's recent action reveals a cynical willingness to act regardless of his understanding of the situation in order to refute a critical narrative (against himself) or promote a more favourable narrative (towards himself). In other words, not that different than any other politician has been regarding acts of war in the past few decades.

    When will the media accept the role they play in this? It is frankly grueling to read these "outraged" reports while none of that goes acknowledged.

    chrisu2012 , 7 Apr 2017 09:31
    An interesting year ahead. We will see soon what Putin really has in his Trump file. We might see one or the other interesting picture or video this year.
    dopamineboy , 7 Apr 2017 09:33
    Trump tweet 2013 - What will we get from bombing Syria besides more debt and a possible long term conflict. Do not attack Syria. Very many bad things will happen and US gets nothing!
    Nathaniel Gould , 7 Apr 2017 09:34
    I remember sitting in front of my TV watching the horror of the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Centre. Fast forward 16 years and leader of the so called free world has bombed Syria on the say so of Al-Qaeda while liberals cheer! What's going on?
    wullieg , 7 Apr 2017 09:34
    This is a smokescreen, it has more to do with Trump giving a message to Xi face to face. He (Trump) is telling Xi that if he doesn't deal with North Korea this is what he is capable of. Now watch this drive.
    abecedadeda , 7 Apr 2017 09:34
    Who's warmonger now?
    Bert9000 , 7 Apr 2017 09:34
    I utterly despise how the narrative has just moved on and no one seems concerned with seeing any proof of whether Assad is actually responsible for these attacks.

    This is a sobering read http://www.dw.com/en/is-assad-to-blame-for-the-chemical-weapons-attack-in-syria/a-38330217

    Assad probably had nothing to do with the attacks in 2013, and he has literally zero motive for these attacks. Yet a vast majority of people just accept it because they trust the media to do their job instead of act as a mouthpiece for warmongering assholes.

    Shame on you Guardian, shame on all the journalists not questioning and demanding facts.

    Clearly the chemical weapons attack was horrendous, not something we ever want to see repeated. But i fear what we have done here, by jumping to unsubstantiated conclusions, is ensured that the real perpetrator of these attacks is now emboldened and considering the whole thing a great success. You'll note it is Al Qaeda (Al Nusra) and ISIS who are celebrating these US led attacks on Syria. Think about that for a second. Are you really convinced they didn't carry out the chemical attacks, in territory they held? They had everything to gain by doing so and casting the blame on Assad, and given their defeat is currently almost certain, they had everything to gain.

    Their ability to use such weapons is well documented in US intelligence reports.

    Why are we so quick to jump to conclusions, when our chosen suspect has literally ZERO motive for doing something like this.

    Think people. Your journalists won't do it for you unfortunately.

    dopamineboy Bert9000 , 7 Apr 2017 09:37
    In an interview conducted on April 5, 2017, Damian Walker, a former army bomb disposal officer, made these observations: When I initially read that sarin nerve agent had been used in an attack on Idlib, I was surprised that the chemical warfare agent had been identified so quickly. On watching the video of the incident, I quickly concluded that it was unlikely a sarin attack. If it was the first responders would also have been killed, and the victims' symptoms appeared to be the result of a "choking agent", and not a military grade agent.
    ID3121651 , 7 Apr 2017 09:34
    "largely ineffective bombing does little but make US lawmakers feel good".

    Grateful for this insight. I think your last line covers what Trump actually intended. To look to his own people, that he is acting decisively and those that supported him will see this action as doing that. I think he intends no more than the appearance of looking like a decisive leader. That can only be short lived as the reality impinges on his projected image to his supporters.

    We have to vane men at the head of large countries - what could go wrong?!

    diddoit , 7 Apr 2017 09:34
    If it was a false flag Trump will probably be the last to find out.
    thejerk2 , 7 Apr 2017 09:35
    We knew this new regime wanted war, Syria being it's first target, who knows north Korea and the Russia.
    The yanks need war to fuel and feed it's inhabitants, it simply can't resist without it.
    Scary times to be a living in a world with mad yanks and that man controlling them.
    God bless the people that suffer daily in Syria at the hands of American funded terror.
    ID4104389 , 7 Apr 2017 09:35
    I'm quite suspicious that it happened at all. Syria denies responsibility and it seems logical to question why they'd do the "chemical massacre" when it could only harm their own position. May was in Saudi Arabia pretty quickly after Brexit was triggered to talk "trade" etc. It seems that everybody hates Iran. Support for Trump's "targeted" attack is being quickly announced by the apparent current alliance states, have there actually been any pictures released of the "chemical massacre" of dead bodies? Just graves being dug, and graves already filled in with neatly placed headstones - tidy. And, yes, children with oxygen masks on, but isn't sarin gas pretty quick acting, being "26 times more deadly than cyanide" and leading to death by losing your insides to the outside, basically.
    Down2dirt , 7 Apr 2017 09:36
    I see that the war criminal McCain and the rest of the relic Cold War establishment couldn't be happier.
    DT48 , 7 Apr 2017 09:36
    A UK ex-Ambassador to Syria, Peter Ford, describes how Jihadi opposition in Syria were storing chemical weapons in schools, and that Western journalists saw this.

    With no evidence that the Syrian military actually has dropped chemical munitions on people, the rush to attack the Syrian installation speaks volumes.

    *If* there was actual evidence that Syria committed that crime, do you who favour military action in Syria not think that most people would back attacking them with full force?

    The rush to attack with no evidence says it all - it says there is none, the same MO as before.

    anonym101 DT48 , 7 Apr 2017 09:39
    Unfortunately no one cares about fact. The media is excited by the prospect of a war with Syria and they possibly with Iran in the future.
    Wirplit , 7 Apr 2017 09:36
    Even the NY Times hardly a fan of Assad has backed down on the endless repeated assertions that it was Assad forces that caused the 2O13 Ghouta chemical attack. https://consortiumnews.com/2017/04/06/nyt-retreats-on-2013-syria-sarin-claims/that the BBC does not even seem to question. This is the notorious Red line case that Obama allegedly fudged. The reason was the evidence pointed clearly to it being a Rebel False Flag as Seymour Hersh the guy who broke the Mai Lai massacre in Vietnam first opined to near universal silence . https://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line
    On this much every Guardian reader needs to at least assess the evidence and they won't get much help from the MSN
    But who needs evidence? And don't think for one moment Intelligence services not capable of doing this. We all know about the WMD claims that were enough, despite being completely baseless, to launch a war while the State Dept scrambled desperately to prove a non existent connection between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda.
    This is the Age of The Big Lie... the technique so ably initiated by Goebbels. Better than repeat opinions at least research the evidence.
    expats11 , 7 Apr 2017 09:36
    According to the Guardian headline, after the gas attack killed 70, "'The dead were wherever you looked': ..In the botched US airstrike 230 were killed ( 'ours' are just collateral damage)...

    Can someone/ anyone explain why, when he is winning on all fronts, Assad would use chemical weapons?

    StillAbstractImp , 7 Apr 2017 09:36
    Tomahawk diplomacy
    Trouble cementing authoritarianism at home?
    Let the foreign diversions begin!
    StillAbstractImp , 7 Apr 2017 09:38
    He's already got two war crimes
    20 dead in Yemen
    200 dead in Mosul
    ...next?
    piebeansMontrachet , 7 Apr 2017 09:38
    When the other bad guys...isis twist of as a reaction...hope Trump will take them to court. Of course such does not apply to USA...them not having signed up to ICC. An alleged isis in your back garden gives them licence to bomb you. Happy days...for American arms industry
    emma linnery , 7 Apr 2017 09:40
    The issues in Syria are due to both uk and usa acting like mercenary in the first place, i see it that obama is guilty of war crimes all due to been a puppet of saudi.
    Its when we look at the bigger picture we can begin to realise what is causing all this..... The UK is the world's second biggest arms exporter with a market share of about 20% and directly employs 350,000 people spread over 11,000 firms, with as many as 1.2 million people relying on it for a living, now at the same time, then we must look back to when 2013, Wahhabism was identified by the European Parliament in Strasbourg as the main source of global terrorism, we must ask ourselves as to why the UK is still selling weapons to saudi...as for Assad, the Syrian government of Assad supports a secular regime and lifestyle while Saudi Arabia supports a conservative and religious world view. The rebels supported by the Saudi Arabian government are religious extremists. In this fight, UK and the usa are supporting the side of religious extremism against a secular state for financial gain. Disgraceful really,
    magila_cutty , 7 Apr 2017 09:40
    Trump saw some pictures of the victims of this chemical attack so he launches. The same people have been killed in their hundreds of thousands with reports of same coming in regularly. The written reports have no impact on him as he doesn't /can't read but the pictures..
    A clear demonstration of how easily he could be manipulated.
    anonym101 , 7 Apr 2017 09:41
    I think Trump just lost 50 million votes. And he knows it.

    IMO there are only two options now.

    1) Trump and his neolibcons plan to escalate this to the brink of WWIII, and possibly over the brink, or
    2) He has been blackmailed with the lives of his nearest ones, so winning the 2020 doesn't feel that important anymore

    Davelad , 7 Apr 2017 09:41
    The man's a total fool. He's taken Syria down the same road as his predecessors did with Libya and Iraq. Remove the leaders, just contend with hordes of warring tribals. By that time the incumbent President of the USA has moved on, leaving his mess for others to clean up.
    THKMTL , 7 Apr 2017 09:44
    There is as per , no investigation in the Guardian's coverage . The ultimate in unethical journalism being the quoting of ' sources ' and "' the Syrian opposition ' ( ISIS ) say ......"
    The credibility of the Syrian Gov. s claim that :

    a) It was bombing ' opposition ' ( ISIS ) occupied enclave and

    b) The chemicals were contained on the ground there and were released only by bombing the fact of Syrian bombing :

    Is not even mentioned let alone investigated . Yet it is an infinitely logical , credible and likely claim .

    Along with the fact that ONLY THE SYRIAN GOV COULD POSSIBLY LOSE BY SUCH AN ATTACK -- and would have ZERO to gain , is a compelling reason for investigation : NOT blanket repetition of what ISIS say -- according to the Guardian itself .

    Trumbledon , 7 Apr 2017 09:44
    It'll be interesting to see how the media reacts when Al Qaeda launch their next chemical attack on civilians and blame it on the 'Regime' (Or 'government', if we're using correct terminology): will they still insist it's the regime doing it, even now it's clear that using chemical weapons will bring immediate retaliation from the USA? Yes, they probably will.

    This whole thing stinks. Assad is a wanker but he is not stupid, there's no way he'd deliberately lose a war he's currently certain to win, by doing the only thing that could possibly result in western interference.

    The only way I can see the chemical attack having been the work of Assad would be if the whole Trump/Russia business goes deeper than we realise, and this whole episode has been premeditated, I.E. Assad used chemical weapons with the express agreement of Trump, who could then be seen as standing up for civilised values and in defiance of Russia by launching retaliatory strikes, after which no more chemical attacks occur, making Trump look like the good guy and taking some of the heat off him regarding his links to Russia, with Assad losing a couple of planes and a handful of soldiers - no great loss in the grand scheme of things.

    Other than that slightly far-fetched conspiracy theory, I can think of no reason of any sort why Assad would seek to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

    ploughmanlunch , 7 Apr 2017 09:44
    The US attack was carried out in retaliation for what they believe was a chemical attack initiated by Assad's forces. The US has not waited for a thorough and unbiased investigation.

    Inevitably this means that blame for any subsequent incidents involving chemical weapons will automatically be ascribed to Assad - not to do so would call into question the justification of the US action carried out overnight. The rebels have a Trump card. If hard pressed they can manufacture a chemical atrocity and call in the cavalry. Haley won't even have to hold up pictures of wounded children.

    marc80 , 7 Apr 2017 09:44
    A bit confused here. And I'm not trying to be ironic.

    1) Doesn't this attack help ISIS in the current war in Syria?

    2) How sure are we that it was the Al-Assad regime who used chemical weapons in the attack?

    3) Final question. Is there a third choice other than Al-Assad or ISIS?

    justapleb , 7 Apr 2017 09:44
    While the western powers seem to have made up their mind that Assad was guilty of the poison gas attack, serious doubts must remain. The explanation of the Assad government and Russia seem credible to me. The dismissal of those explanations is very lightweight indeed. This amounts to two arguments.

    1. Bombing a sarin gas chemical weapons store would not release the gas. Really? That defies logic.

    2. The rebels do not possess sarin gas? How do we know that?

    Apart from the lack of a credible motive for the use of chemical weapons, Assad, like Sadam Hussein before him claims he does not possess such weapons. As in 2003 this has not prevented a US missile attack on a foreign state. Back in 2003, Sadam Hussein was eventually proved right and we all know what happened after that.

    What is the evidence that Assad's air force carried out this attack? This seems to rely on the fact of the gas poisoning (which no-one is disputing) and witness statements from the area under attack from the Syrian air force. This is Idlib, to where the allegedly murderous Assad allowed free passage to armed jihadist terrorists humanely ejected (rather than killed or taken prisoner) from other parts of Syria including East Aleppo, from where skilled propaganda outlets fed the appetites of Western media including the disgraceful Ch4 News, which has again been agitating for military action against the Syrian government.

    It will clearly be very hard to find independent witnesses amongst such a population, heavily controlled by Jihadist fighters well used to targeting civilian areas of government controlled Syria.

    This development is sinister indeed. That Trump has shown such willingness to take such extreme action so quickly, without firm evidence, should make us all very, very afraid.

    nic , 7 Apr 2017 09:45
    Due to the USAs long history of making shit up to start wars, I dont believe a fucking word of it.
    vivazapata38 , 7 Apr 2017 09:46
    The Guardian reports "Syrian rebels have welcomed the attack" but want more. Job done and it was so easy for them. They also have a, UN proven, history of setting off chemical weapons in order to get the US etc involved.
    AfinaPallada , 7 Apr 2017 09:46
    Trimp's actions show that US policy never changes. It is defined not by US President, but by US establishment. It can change it's forms but never cnages in essence. Republicans and Demoсrats in US are two wings of one bird.

    It seems, that Trump, had he had noble intensions to change it's policy for the good was swallowed by establishment the same as it happened with any US president, from Kennedy to Nixon. Otherwise, it again shows that he is a talanted populist which perfectly played at protest spirits against messiah tensions and nepotism in US (the Clinton and Bush dynasties).

    Anyway, the least actions of US in Syria, which can be qualified as an agression against a sovereign state from any point of view, shows that US, as a drunk cowboy, firing at bottles in a saloon, understand only a policy of superior force and is negotiable only when you put a colt to his head.

    And even in this case, you should beware of a shot in back when you put this colt off. This is how the world now feels the US.

    doctuscumlibro , 7 Apr 2017 09:46
    one Tomahawk costing 1,59 milion $ , so the US last night spend around 100 million $ .....Enjoying the world s reserve currency and print as much as you want of it is comfy innit ? Attacking yet another nation without irrefutable justification reminds me of the Iraq debacle and its WMD, the US of course can get away with similar acts of war being the world s "stabilizer", diverting at the same time the attention from the civilian bloodshed in Mosul and Yemen. Thank you US of A, the world is happy to have you around the world.
    Jackhammer1 Andrew Terhorst , 7 Apr 2017 09:50
    I notice the "army of Islam" very happy about the strike. US/UK now explicitly supporting Islamic extremism.
    BevanBoyAus Andrew Terhorst , 7 Apr 2017 09:50
    Whereas the US using chemical Napalm bombs is humane and caring and only targeted at the military and 'terrorist'?
    Aryu Gaetu , 7 Apr 2017 09:48
    BTW: 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles at $1,590,000 each [Wiki] is $93,810,000. Or the annual income of 4,690 people making $10/hr spent within a few minutes... to send a message to a vacated airbase?

    If 80 people killed in Syria is senseless, then what is 210 people shot in America on the first day of 2017? Should we send 2.5 times as many Tomahawk cruise missiles to ORD and LAX? Will the NRA get the "message"?

    Rattel , 7 Apr 2017 09:48
    So the answer to the question 'Cui bono' appears to be Donald Trump.
    SeeNOevilHearNOevil , 7 Apr 2017 09:49
    Its not bloody Trump that is the problem, is it? He didn't want to attack Syria, we did. All these fucking news agencies spouting propaganda coming straight from Al Qaida and their supporters. The Guardian like all the others have completely forgotten the fake evidence of WMDs in Iraq and are actually egging on for war. First they say Trump is dangerous to get into war and then the same bloody people are demanding Trump to attack Syria!

    This whole gas attack is the clearest red flag attack ever and every god damn main steam reporter goes along with it, no questions asked.

    Just look every single time an attack like this has occured just happens to be in what would be the most illogical time for the Syrian government. Are you seriously saying that they are so stupidly insane to think killing 100 people with gas is worth the diplomatic losses and military wrath of the west? They could kill 1000 with conventional weapons, it makes zero sense.

    Where is the god damn basic logic of looking at the beneficiaries to deduce the real motive in what look like a murky issue.

    The guardian quoting 'experts' saying a facility creating and stockpiling chemicals would not leaked if bombed? Are you kidding me? You need incendiary napalm to burn the gas, but napalm is porhibited and was NOT used in the alleged attack. Jeasus, use your god damn brain for once.

    Last time I saw the guardian posting pic of the vehicles carrying humanitarian aid that were allegedly attacked by syrian planes...and they were full of visible small arms bullet holles with is impossible to come from planes. The scenes had been staged! Go back and look at them. There are cars that look crumpled up, not burned and without any glass at all. That is impossible to be as part of an attack by planes

    FrankLeeSpeaking SeeNOevilHearNOevil , 7 Apr 2017 09:53
    Well said. The Guardian and other MSM are complicit in war. Share Facebook Twitter
    Picasso82 , 7 Apr 2017 09:49
    Recruiting now! Western Dictator to run oil rich country in the Middle East. No experience necessary, but must have a basic knowledge of civilian oppression, creating vacuums to religious extremists and oil sales.
    ID776729 , 7 Apr 2017 09:49
    Why would Assad use chemical weapons on civilians when:

    A) It's almost sure to provoke a reaction from Trump, an unpredictable and untested US President.
    B) Assad has almost won the war using conventional weapons.
    C) It increases pressure from the World community to displace him.
    D) It will piss of his major ally Russia, who just had to effectively run from American missiles and have zero will for direct conflict with the US. This is a proxy war.

    It makes zero sense. None whatsoever and I'm sorry I'm having a hard time believing it.

    I'm no fan of Assad - his barrel bombs are disgusting enough. I'm no fan of Putin or the USA/Trump/the Jihadi rebel extremists they've armed: So I'm taking no sides other than to say that this stinks and looks exactly as if it was designed to escalate the conflict and get what a lot of people want - US involvement in toppling Assad and sending a message to Russia and Iran.

    Further escalation of this mess is terrifying - especially now we've seen how easy Trump is to manipulate.

    ShanksArmitage , 7 Apr 2017 09:50
    "Hitting one airbase is not enough, there are 26 airbases that target civilians," a key figure in the Army of Islam faction, Mohamed Alloush, said on his Twitter account.

    "The whole world should save the Syrian people from the clutches of the killer Bashar (al-Assad) and his aides."

    Siding with a group called the Army of Islam - what could possibly go wrong?

    beren56 , 7 Apr 2017 09:50
    Sadam and Gadaffi were removed from power and it only created a vacuum. Getting rid of Assad will likely do the same. The dictators kept radical Islam in check. It's not like they will thank America if they did get rid of Assad-they would still hate America
    Nolens , 7 Apr 2017 09:51
    As soon as the current Assad regime fall, it will bring chaos, instability and death to Syria and indeed the ME on a unprecedented scale. The West should should be very careful. Assad is many times more preferable than a post Assad situation with various religious nutters wielding power.
    Raptorius , 7 Apr 2017 09:51
    ''Now that Obama's poll numbers are in tailspin - watch for him to launch a strike in Libya or Iran. He is desperate.'' Donald Trump on Twitter, 9 October 2012.
    Telvannah Raptorius , 7 Apr 2017 09:56
    LOL - well picked up
    kirby1 , 7 Apr 2017 09:51
    A purely political act by Trump to show that he's not beholden to Putin in the face of mounting concern about his campaign and the election. Red meat for the rednecks who backed him. Doesn't bode well for the future - in flagrant breach of international law.

    ...

    "There can be no dispute that Syria used banned chemical weapons, violated its obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention, and ignored the urging of the UN security council," Trump said on Thursday night.

    The challenge for this all-new season of Trump is that his first and biggest test is credibility. The world needs to trust the United States: that these bombing targets are legitimate, that the Syrian regime is indeed responsible, and that the president has the legal authority and political support of the international community and Congress.

    DanielDee, 7 Apr 2017 09:53

    The strikes were senseless in that there is no proof of Syrian involvement in the chemical attacks beyond information coming from Al Quaeda controlled territory.
    Motive is important and Assad is no fool. Why on earth would he risk it all for no gain in using chemical weapons when the war is all but won.
    Trumps been hoodwinked by the neocons and war hungry establishment

    Nathaniel Gould , 7 Apr 2017 09:53
    The CDC says:

    Sarin is combustible. The agent may burn but does not ignite readily. Fire may produce irritating, corrosive, and/or toxic gases. If a tank, rail car, or tank truck is involved in a fire, isolate it for 0.5 mi (800 m) in all directions; also, consider initial evacuation for 0.5 mi (800 m) in all directions.

    Small spills (involving the release of approximately 52.83 gallons (200 liters) or less), when sarin (GB) is used as a weapon.

    https://www.cdc.gov/NIOSH/ershdb/EmergencyResponseCard_29750001.html

    An air strike could have hit an al-Qaeda depot storing sarin, some could have burnt releasing toxic gasses, some may have been dispersed .

    Telvannah , 7 Apr 2017 09:54
    I can see the trolls are out in force, but thank you so much for an interesting article.

    "Meanwhile, the heart of the problem is that the United States seems always to have only one solution to war: make more war. "

    In my youth a frequent moniker said "fighting for peace is like fu.king for virginity" - it hasn't changed

    [Apr 09, 2017] The re bels will now have an incentive to fake another chemical attack and bring the US fully into the war with Syria and Russia. Syria will then be left to the warring factions to fight it out just like Libya and Iraq.

    Notable quotes:
    "... At last !..this is the act that show to the entire world that the USA is backing Daesh from the beginning and all the way ..."
    Apr 09, 2017 | discussion.theguardian.com
    , Phil Gollin

    , 7 Apr 2017 08:31
    .

    Well, definitely an act of aggression and hence illegal under the UN Charter - now, who will bring a condemning Resolution in the Security Council ? And who will vote against it, or even veto it ?

    I see the UK Government has already mindlessly agreed with the aggressive act.

    But what will the US's military strike – a barrage of at least 59 (offensively named) Tomahawk cruise missiles aimed at a lone airfield – really accomplish?

    , 12inchPianist , 7 Apr 2017 08:33
    It's pretty clear that this is Trump just being the lunatic amateur that he is, you know the one we all worried because he had his finger on the button. He authorised the fatally flawed Yemen raid only days after assuming office. This is Dr Trumplove in action, there's nothing the public and his sycophantic fans would enjoy more than a reprise of the missiles down elevator chutes that lit up our televisions in '92. This time the war will not be televised...it will be on twitter. Share
    , ID236207 , 7 Apr 2017 08:33
    Interesting that America claims to care about Arab children, while it recently killed over 150 civilians in Iraq.

    Having said that, I find it difficult not to support a targeted strike at Assad's military bases. I would never however support an invasion or occupation of another Arab country as we all know that would be a huge mistake; the tens of thousands of Arabs that would die, Western military personnel put at risk and financial cost.

    Assad must be stopped, but only the Syrians themselves must take the lead in forming a new government without continued interference from the outside. Formation of a new government at any point must be home-grown alone.

    , clematlee ID236207 , 7 Apr 2017 08:37
    Why must Assad be stopped he is fighting the same demented loonies who have done attacks all over Europe, including the UK. Are you saying its ok for us to kill these loonies but not Syria.Get real.
    , brotherJAK , 7 Apr 2017 08:33
    Using gas was a terrorist attack, not a military one.
    In that case, why on earth would Assad do it. It weakens his case in all respects and strengthens his enemies.
    But of course such an argument flies in the face of hawks worldwide.
    , Mongolikecandy , 7 Apr 2017 08:33
    The whole thing is a sad sorry affair. I'm not sure I can trust anything any side is saying. One thing is certain is this proxy wars between Russia and the US will continue in all shapes and form first the next 20 years at least.
    One question though. Those US air strikes that killed over 100 civilians last week. Why have they not got the same coverage as the chemical weapons? Isn't killing, killing?
    , pittens , 7 Apr 2017 08:34
    Well, the deep state always wins. The idea that assad used chemical weapons (which the country was declared free of a fee years ago) immediately after trump declared a policy of non regime change beggars belief.

    This article is calling for the grounding of Russian and syrian planes. The first action could cause WWIII. The second would allow isis to invade Damascus.

    , Derryclare pittens , 7 Apr 2017 08:57
    I suppose the use of chemical weapons in 2013 in Syria was doen to the CIA and Obama? You are probably yet another conspiracy "nut" who thinks that the gassing of the Kurds in northern Iraq by Assad's chum Saddam was Fake News. Share Facebook Twitter
    , pittens Derryclare , 7 Apr 2017 09:25
    It probably was.

    https://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n24/seymour-m-hersh/whose-sarin

    , Catona , 7 Apr 2017 08:34
    Are we sure it wasn't the so called rebels? It would make no sense for Assad to do this now. Who financed the whole coup in the first place arming the 'rebels'? They are responsible for the whole mess.
    , SeventhOne Catona , 7 Apr 2017 08:44
    Yes, Syrian and Russian forces are striking ISIS, Al-Queda and Al-Nusra, while the US strikes Syria. Sums up the whole thing really.
    , queequeg7 , 7 Apr 2017 08:35
    According to a poll this morning between 41% and 51% of British voters would support an escalation even if it meant conflict with Russia. We're being turned into a country of gurning imbeciles and if I die because of all this bollocks I'll be really pissed off.
    , Alan Urdaibay , 7 Apr 2017 08:35
    It depends what you mean by 'accomplish nothing.'

    The chances are that there will be no response of any kind. Will this drive a President, having an unhealthy mix of behavioral problems and frustrated by failure in his domestic policy, to take further dramatic action in order to attract attention in the style of his spoilt brat counterpart in North Korea, Kim Jong-un? Share Facebook Twitter

    , brotherJAK Alan Urdaibay , 7 Apr 2017 08:58
    Trump will feel emboldened by this move. A frighening thought indeed.
    , AusterityAspirant , 7 Apr 2017 08:35
    I am sure that Netanyahu will be pleased that America has finally agreed to remove another Arab leader.
    , PaulDLion , 7 Apr 2017 08:35
    This is a set up by the criminal regime in Washington and their servile allies in London. I don't believe their propaganda claims about this chemical attack, and in any case they are not interested in waiting for any evidence. They must be made to pay a heavy price for this criminal act. Share Facebook Twitter
    , LiberalTory PaulDLion , 7 Apr 2017 08:40
    "They must be made to pay a heavy price for this criminal act."

    As long as "they" does not include the innocent UK/US population.

    , PaulDLion LiberalTory , 7 Apr 2017 09:03
    No, certainly not. I would never advocate terrorist acts against anybody. But this action will do the US and the Western alliance no good at all and will diminish their standing in the world. The US/UK population must hold their leaders to account over this nonsense, and demand proof of the dubious claims over the supposed chemical attack.
    , torhan , 7 Apr 2017 08:35
    This was a failed US aggression based on propaganda. A repetition of the invented story about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq Syrian style.

    The rebels will get an advantage if they use chemical weapons and blames Assad. Assad has nothing to gain from using such weapons.

    It's simply not logical and believable that Assad. used chemical weapons. What happened to information based decisions and critical journalism?

    , Muzzledagain , 7 Apr 2017 08:35
    So here we go, nothing really changes in the land of the free. Warmongers they will remain. Al Qaeda rejoices.
    , goodtable , 7 Apr 2017 08:36
    I actually feel that Trump may have got this just about right. If we actually believe that a plane from this airbase delivered a Sarin attack, then it was necessary to prevent a repetition. But equally it was necessary to avoid the US being dragged into a war against Assad, which so many are desperate to see happen, and it was necessary to avoid World War 3 by avoiding killing Russians.

    If the Russians, as they probably did, warned the Syrians and few people were actually killed by this strike, then maybe it will all calm down now, the Syrian air force won't ever use Sarin again and can concentrate on defeating the rebels instead which, like it or not, is probably the quickest route to peace.

    , Daniel Kells goodtable , 7 Apr 2017 08:39
    I have to question whether or not it was actually Assad who committed the attack, why would he risk retaliation from the US when he is currently winning the Syrian Civil war
    , MalcolmsPond , 7 Apr 2017 08:36
    Agreed the main thing it shows is a kneejerk reaction. Incredibly dangerous from a US president but perhaps not unexpected.

    Even if Assad needs to be removed the idea as well that Trump has a post regime plan to do that is laughable.

    We have seen what happened in Iraq and Libya when bad dictators were overthrown and a bad situation ended up much worse in terms of a replacement by militant Islamist groups.

    Unfortunately what we have here is ISIS 1 (Trump o.g), Commonsense and sanity 0

    , Muzzledagain CABHTS , 7 Apr 2017 08:42
    But if the alleged planes carrying chemical weapons came from Homs that just got 59 bombs, where was the topic cloud? Weren't they suppose to have a chemical stock in this airbase ? Strange that no chemical in sight.
    , scalatorOverTheHill , 7 Apr 2017 08:39
    Trump – Russia...Trump – Russia...Trump – Russia...

    Oh, wait a minute...

    1. Susan Rice – mother lode for all the Trump-Russia conspiracy theories via her unmasking of names and wide dispersal of same, but "nothing to see here".

    2. "Donald Trump's Syrian air-strike 'significant blow to US-Russia relations', says Kremlin" (Guardian headline).

    I would have posted this comment below said title but, of course, no comments are possible, just as they aren't below most of, for example, David Smith's execrable anti-Trump 'output'.

    , clematlee , 7 Apr 2017 08:39
    This attack is an act of war against Syria. North Korea has nuclear weapons will the usa warmongers risk a nuclear war.
    , Angular Greek FrankRoberts , 7 Apr 2017 08:51
    "Lavrov, please release some pictures from the videos of Trump with the prostitutes!"
    , Prasad Iyer , 7 Apr 2017 08:40
    Five months ago: http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/02/politics/donald-trump-terrorists-families/

    "The other thing with the terrorists is you have to take out their families, when you get these terrorists, you have to take out their families. They care about their lives, don't kid yourself. When they say they don't care about their lives, you have to take out their families," Trump said.

    Now:

    "I will tell you that attack on children had a big, big impact on me," he said. "That was a horrible, horrible thing."

    Eh?

    , SeventhOne , 7 Apr 2017 08:41
    Assad has absolutely no motive to order this attack. His forces, with Russia's assistance have gained the upper hand in the protracted conflict with US and UK backed terrorists. Why on earth would he do something that he knows would bring international condemnation and likely military action from the US?

    Stinks to high heaven of a false flag- the fact that global MSM had solved the crime and broadcast the perpertrators all over global media within an hour is enough proof for me - the stories would have had to have been pre-packaged.

    , Manners01 , 7 Apr 2017 08:41
    Breaking news, Assad has Sarin tipped long-range missiles that can hit the UK in 30 mins. We need to go in and destroy these WMDs immediately.

    "S**t, we've used that one before, any ideas?"

    , geniusofmozart , 7 Apr 2017 08:41
    Spot-on.

    Perhaps you could tell that to the Guardian writers (the "liberal interventionists") who have been beating the war drums for years, failing to learn any lessons from Iraq and Libya. I see no plan for the aftermath, and I see no real consideration given to the threat of a further decline in relations with Russia.

    And, do these people seriously want Trump overseeing a regime change? It would be more chaotic than when Bush tried it in Iraq.

    , PekkaRoivanen , 7 Apr 2017 08:42
    There are at likely two parties that are very happy about the USA attack on Syrian airfield. They are Syrian al-Qaeda which governs Idlib province where the alleged chemical attack happened and ISIS.

    Both can count that alleging Assad for chemical attacks may get Donald Trump´s USA to become their air force. If there is a red line, cross it and blame Assad. I think that may be how al-Qaeda and ISIS leaders are interpreting the events.

    , neocomments95 , 7 Apr 2017 08:43

    a barrage of at least 59 (offensively named) Tomahawk cruise missiles aimed at a lone airfield – really accomplish?

    That's $70 million down the drain JUST on missiles.
    .
    Made a certain group of shareholders owning a certain military company trading in NYSE slightly wealthier.
    .
    Also, a participatory certificate for participating in a virility contest.

    , Bambawap , 7 Apr 2017 08:43
    I thought Russian air defences were supposed to be able to shoot down tomahawk missiles. They don't travel all that fast. Perhaps they wanted to put pressure on Assad and let them pass.
    , Sorry4Soul
    , Phil Gollin , 7 Apr 2017 08:31
    .

    Well, definitely an act of aggression and hence illegal under the UN Charter - now, who will bring a condemning Resolution in the Security Council ? And who will vote against it, or even veto it ?

    I see the UK Government has already mindlessly agreed with the aggressive act.

    But what will the US's military strike – a barrage of at least 59 (offensively named) Tomahawk cruise missiles aimed at a lone airfield – really accomplish?

    , 12inchPianist , 7 Apr 2017 08:33
    It's pretty clear that this is Trump just being the lunatic amateur that he is, you know the one we all worried because he had his finger on the button. He authorised the fatally flawed Yemen raid only days after assuming office. This is Dr Trumplove in action, there's nothing the public and his sycophantic fans would enjoy more than a reprise of the missiles down elevator chutes that lit up our televisions in '92. This time the war will not be televised...it will be on twitter. Share
    , ID236207 , 7 Apr 2017 08:33
    Interesting that America claims to care about Arab children, while it recently killed over 150 civilians in Iraq.

    Having said that, I find it difficult not to support a targeted strike at Assad's military bases. I would never however support an invasion or occupation of another Arab country as we all know that would be a huge mistake; the tens of thousands of Arabs that would die, Western military personnel put at risk and financial cost.

    Assad must be stopped, but only the Syrians themselves must take the lead in forming a new government without continued interference from the outside. Formation of a new government at any point must be home-grown alone.

    , clematlee ID236207 , 7 Apr 2017 08:37
    Why must Assad be stopped he is fighting the same demented loonies who have done attacks all over Europe, including the UK. Are you saying its ok for us to kill these loonies but not Syria.Get real.
    , brotherJAK , 7 Apr 2017 08:33
    Using gas was a terrorist attack, not a military one.
    In that case, why on earth would Assad do it. It weakens his case in all respects and strengthens his enemies.
    But of course such an argument flies in the face of hawks worldwide.
    , Mongolikecandy , 7 Apr 2017 08:33
    The whole thing is a sad sorry affair. I'm not sure I can trust anything any side is saying. One thing is certain is this proxy wars between Russia and the US will continue in all shapes and form first the next 20 years at least.
    One question though. Those US air strikes that killed over 100 civilians last week. Why have they not got the same coverage as the chemical weapons? Isn't killing, killing?
    , pittens , 7 Apr 2017 08:34
    Well, the deep state always wins. The idea that assad used chemical weapons (which the country was declared free of a fee years ago) immediately after trump declared a policy of non regime change beggars belief.

    This article is calling for the grounding of Russian and syrian planes. The first action could cause WWIII. The second would allow isis to invade Damascus.

    , Derryclare pittens , 7 Apr 2017 08:57
    I suppose the use of chemical weapons in 2013 in Syria was doen to the CIA and Obama? You are probably yet another conspiracy "nut" who thinks that the gassing of the Kurds in northern Iraq by Assad's chum Saddam was Fake News. Share Facebook Twitter
    , pittens Derryclare , 7 Apr 2017 09:25
    It probably was.

    https://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n24/seymour-m-hersh/whose-sarin

    , Catona , 7 Apr 2017 08:34
    Are we sure it wasn't the so called rebels? It would make no sense for Assad to do this now. Who financed the whole coup in the first place arming the 'rebels'? They are responsible for the whole mess.
    , SeventhOne Catona , 7 Apr 2017 08:44
    Yes, Syrian and Russian forces are striking ISIS, Al-Queda and Al-Nusra, while the US strikes Syria. Sums up the whole thing really.
    , queequeg7 , 7 Apr 2017 08:35
    According to a poll this morning between 41% and 51% of British voters would support an escalation even if it meant conflict with Russia. We're being turned into a country of gurning imbeciles and if I die because of all this bollocks I'll be really pissed off.
    , Alan Urdaibay , 7 Apr 2017 08:35
    It depends what you mean by 'accomplish nothing.'

    The chances are that there will be no response of any kind. Will this drive a President, having an unhealthy mix of behavioral problems and frustrated by failure in his domestic policy, to take further dramatic action in order to attract attention in the style of his spoilt brat counterpart in North Korea, Kim Jong-un? Share Facebook Twitter

    , brotherJAK Alan Urdaibay , 7 Apr 2017 08:58
    Trump will feel emboldened by this move. A frighening thought indeed.
    , AusterityAspirant , 7 Apr 2017 08:35
    I am sure that Netanyahu will be pleased that America has finally agreed to remove another Arab leader.
    , PaulDLion , 7 Apr 2017 08:35
    This is a set up by the criminal regime in Washington and their servile allies in London. I don't believe their propaganda claims about this chemical attack, and in any case they are not interested in waiting for any evidence. They must be made to pay a heavy price for this criminal act. Share Facebook Twitter
    , LiberalTory PaulDLion , 7 Apr 2017 08:40
    "They must be made to pay a heavy price for this criminal act."

    As long as "they" does not include the innocent UK/US population.

    , PaulDLion LiberalTory , 7 Apr 2017 09:03
    No, certainly not. I would never advocate terrorist acts against anybody. But this action will do the US and the Western alliance no good at all and will diminish their standing in the world. The US/UK population must hold their leaders to account over this nonsense, and demand proof of the dubious claims over the supposed chemical attack.
    , torhan , 7 Apr 2017 08:35
    This was a failed US aggression based on propaganda. A repetition of the invented story about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq Syrian style.

    The rebels will get an advantage if they use chemical weapons and blames Assad. Assad has nothing to gain from using such weapons.

    It's simply not logical and believable that Assad. used chemical weapons. What happened to information based decisions and critical journalism?

    , Muzzledagain , 7 Apr 2017 08:35
    So here we go, nothing really changes in the land of the free. Warmongers they will remain. Al Qaeda rejoices.
    , goodtable , 7 Apr 2017 08:36
    I actually feel that Trump may have got this just about right. If we actually believe that a plane from this airbase delivered a Sarin attack, then it was necessary to prevent a repetition. But equally it was necessary to avoid the US being dragged into a war against Assad, which so many are desperate to see happen, and it was necessary to avoid World War 3 by avoiding killing Russians.

    If the Russians, as they probably did, warned the Syrians and few people were actually killed by this strike, then maybe it will all calm down now, the Syrian air force won't ever use Sarin again and can concentrate on defeating the rebels instead which, like it or not, is probably the quickest route to peace.

    , Daniel Kells goodtable , 7 Apr 2017 08:39
    I have to question whether or not it was actually Assad who committed the attack, why would he risk retaliation from the US when he is currently winning the Syrian Civil war
    , MalcolmsPond , 7 Apr 2017 08:36
    Agreed the main thing it shows is a kneejerk reaction. Incredibly dangerous from a US president but perhaps not unexpected.

    Even if Assad needs to be removed the idea as well that Trump has a post regime plan to do that is laughable.

    We have seen what happened in Iraq and Libya when bad dictators were overthrown and a bad situation ended up much worse in terms of a replacement by militant Islamist groups.

    Unfortunately what we have here is ISIS 1 (Trump o.g), Commonsense and sanity 0

    , Muzzledagain CABHTS , 7 Apr 2017 08:42
    But if the alleged planes carrying chemical weapons came from Homs that just got 59 bombs, where was the topic cloud? Weren't they suppose to have a chemical stock in this airbase ? Strange that no chemical in sight.
    , scalatorOverTheHill , 7 Apr 2017 08:39
    Trump – Russia...Trump – Russia...Trump – Russia...

    Oh, wait a minute...

    1. Susan Rice – mother lode for all the Trump-Russia conspiracy theories via her unmasking of names and wide dispersal of same, but "nothing to see here".

    2. "Donald Trump's Syrian air-strike 'significant blow to US-Russia relations', says Kremlin" (Guardian headline).

    I would have posted this comment below said title but, of course, no comments are possible, just as they aren't below most of, for example, David Smith's execrable anti-Trump 'output'.

    , clematlee , 7 Apr 2017 08:39
    This attack is an act of war against Syria. North Korea has nuclear weapons will the usa warmongers risk a nuclear war.
    , Angular Greek FrankRoberts , 7 Apr 2017 08:51
    "Lavrov, please release some pictures from the videos of Trump with the prostitutes!"
    , Prasad Iyer , 7 Apr 2017 08:40
    Five months ago: http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/02/politics/donald-trump-terrorists-families/

    "The other thing with the terrorists is you have to take out their families, when you get these terrorists, you have to take out their families. They care about their lives, don't kid yourself. When they say they don't care about their lives, you have to take out their families," Trump said.

    Now:

    "I will tell you that attack on children had a big, big impact on me," he said. "That was a horrible, horrible thing."

    Eh?

    , SeventhOne , 7 Apr 2017 08:41
    Assad has absolutely no motive to order this attack. His forces, with Russia's assistance have gained the upper hand in the protracted conflict with US and UK backed terrorists. Why on earth would he do something that he knows would bring international condemnation and likely military action from the US?

    Stinks to high heaven of a false flag- the fact that global MSM had solved the crime and broadcast the perpertrators all over global media within an hour is enough proof for me - the stories would have had to have been pre-packaged.

    , Manners01 , 7 Apr 2017 08:41
    Breaking news, Assad has Sarin tipped long-range missiles that can hit the UK in 30 mins. We need to go in and destroy these WMDs immediately.

    "S**t, we've used that one before, any ideas?"

    , geniusofmozart , 7 Apr 2017 08:41
    Spot-on.

    Perhaps you could tell that to the Guardian writers (the "liberal interventionists") who have been beating the war drums for years, failing to learn any lessons from Iraq and Libya. I see no plan for the aftermath, and I see no real consideration given to the threat of a further decline in relations with Russia.

    And, do these people seriously want Trump overseeing a regime change? It would be more chaotic than when Bush tried it in Iraq.

    , PekkaRoivanen , 7 Apr 2017 08:42
    There are at likely two parties that are very happy about the USA attack on Syrian airfield. They are Syrian al-Qaeda which governs Idlib province where the alleged chemical attack happened and ISIS.

    Both can count that alleging Assad for chemical attacks may get Donald Trump´s USA to become their air force. If there is a red line, cross it and blame Assad. I think that may be how al-Qaeda and ISIS leaders are interpreting the events.

    , neocomments95 , 7 Apr 2017 08:43

    a barrage of at least 59 (offensively named) Tomahawk cruise missiles aimed at a lone airfield – really accomplish?

    That's $70 million down the drain JUST on missiles.
    .
    Made a certain group of shareholders owning a certain military company trading in NYSE slightly wealthier.
    .
    Also, a participatory certificate for participating in a virility contest.

    , Bambawap , 7 Apr 2017 08:43
    I thought Russian air defences were supposed to be able to shoot down tomahawk missiles. They don't travel all that fast. Perhaps they wanted to put pressure on Assad and let them pass.
    , Sorry4Soul , 7 Apr 2017 08:43
    As the missile strike have already happened ('justice' before investigation) so will there be an independent investigation about what was the cause of the gas leakage ?
    , BloodyNora49 , 7 Apr 2017 08:43
    The usual suspects, those actually responsible for false flag unleashing chemical weapons, have apparently achieved only a limited response from el trumpo... and one unlikely to satisfy their lust ultimately to bring down the Syrian government. This action designed as a stage to that end to uncouple trumpo and putin...
    , Ruth Boulton , 7 Apr 2017 08:43
    This will improve his ratings! Share Facebook Twitter
    , kronfeld Ruth Boulton , 7 Apr 2017 08:45
    That is all he cares about.
    , whitesnake , 7 Apr 2017 08:44
    Trump bowed to NeoCon pressure. He was supposed to be different. But then so was Obama. 300,000 people have died! Were those killed by bombs any less tragic? Who is funding, arming and supporting ISIS? It's not about these children it's about anti Assad/Iran/Russia influence in the region. Again, 300,000 have died already!
    As the missile strike have already happened ('justice' before investigation) so will there be an independent investigation about what was the cause of the gas leakage ?
    , BloodyNora49 , 7 Apr 2017 08:43
    The usual suspects, those actually responsible for false flag unleashing chemical weapons, have apparently achieved only a limited response from el trumpo... and one unlikely to satisfy their lust ultimately to bring down the Syrian government. This action designed as a stage to that end to uncouple trumpo and putin...
    , Ruth Boulton , 7 Apr 2017 08:43
    This will improve his ratings! Share Facebook Twitter
    , kronfeld Ruth Boulton , 7 Apr 2017 08:45
    That is all he cares about.
    , whitesnake , 7 Apr 2017 08:44
    Trump bowed to NeoCon pressure. He was supposed to be different. But then so was Obama. 300,000 people have died! Were those killed by bombs any less tragic? Who is funding, arming and supporting ISIS? It's not about these children it's about anti Assad/Iran/Russia influence in the region. Again, 300,000 have died already!
    , ustard Banjo , 7 Apr 2017 08:45
    At the moment there's a big fat Chinese elephant in the room. All this goes on as he hosts the Chinese delegation in Florida. I wonder how much Trumps decision to bomb Syria was to do with showing the Chinese he means business. Share Facebook Twitter
    , Pinkie123 , 7 Apr 2017 08:45
    So is Trump now part of the Western, globalist order of space lizards?

    This is getting confusing.

    , LostInEu , 7 Apr 2017 08:45
    Donald is trying to regain support at home. Wag the dog. Share Facebook Twitter
    , dopamineboy , 7 Apr 2017 08:45
    Interesting timing as Trump first says hands off Syria, then suddenly a sarin gas attack by Assad, the world goes omg he must go, Hillary gives a speech we must bomb their airfields, and whammy some 30 minutes later we hear the missiles went flying. Talk about a set up.
    , Gloi , 7 Apr 2017 08:45
    What if the chemical attack was done by the other side as a sacrificial way to ensure the US attacked Assad. Share Facebook Twitter
    , diddoit Gloi , 7 Apr 2017 08:49
    If that's the case don't expect any apology from the UK , US or the guardian.
    , expats11 , 7 Apr 2017 08:45
    Trump in trouble at home and resorts to a pointless military gesture in Syria... The Guardian, which spends most of it's editorial time blaming Assad for Syria's problems, and demanding action, will now bemoan the deaths at the airfield...

    , 12inchPianist , 7 Apr 2017 08:46
    All some prankster needs to do to unleash armageddon is to photoshop a nuclear bomb going off over California and post it to Trump's twitter feed with a fake @VladPutin account and we'd all better hide under a table, tuck our heads between our legs and kiss our asses goodbye.
    , Sam_Buca , 7 Apr 2017 08:46
    The military industrial complex are laughing all the way to the bank with this one. Trump is one hell of a puppet.
    , toptierwannabes , 7 Apr 2017 08:47
    This could be a comment section on the daily mail, such is the vitriolic posts, there is not one shred of evidence that these weapons were used by forces loyal to Assad, and Turkey acting as a go between Russia and Syria against the rebels and western forces stinks of the highest hypocrisy, as for sending China a message over Korea this will just reinforce the ties between China and Russia and who wants to take them on, thank fuck we're leaving hopefully after we've left our politicians wont be so gung ho in the future when it comes to foreign policy and sticking our noses in every conflict going
    , Big Jobs , 7 Apr 2017 08:47
    Assad knows the Americans are watching every move he is making and he knows chemical weapons are a red line for them. He may be bad enough to carry out such an attack but is he mad enough? I seriously doubt it, either way Trump is now acting as the air-force for ISIS
    , Ronny White , 7 Apr 2017 08:48
    Trump showing how easy he is to manipulate. We've seem false intelligence reports and outright doctored fake attacks/incidents, often alleging gas/chemical weapons, used time and again to justify acts of aggression
    , NezPerce , 7 Apr 2017 08:48
    The Guardian has always pushed for war, War in Iraq based on lies, war in Libya based on lies and now war in Syria. We will see a massive effort to stop any proper investigation of the chemical attack.

    Trump appeared to be for ramping down tensions, he was mercilessly attacked by the Guardian (and the entire mainstream media. Now Trump has caved in, a unilateral attack with no proper investigation. The word of the Syrian terrorists, the very same people who attack us on our streets, has been taken as truth.

    , torquemadascodpiece , 7 Apr 2017 08:49
    Trump's foreign policy: shoot-first-ask-questions-later
    , CharlesBradlaugh , 7 Apr 2017 08:50
    The problem is incoherence , inconsistency and idiocy. There is no policy just the mad reactions of a bloated narcissist.
    , mrpants , 7 Apr 2017 08:50
    Assad was winning the war against opposition forces. He has the backing of the most ruthlessly efficient fighting force in existence. Why was he so stupid as to use chemical weapons?
    , SmartestRs mrpants , 7 Apr 2017 09:02
    No. I think that you will find that the USA is on the opposing side.
    , 5abi Jomper , 7 Apr 2017 08:55
    Putin is helping Syria, because a dictator wants to help another dictator........

    By that logic why are the NATO countries supporting and arming Saudi Arabia?
    Why have the Americans and their NATO lapdogs been supporting Al Nusra in Syria?

    , danubemonster Jomper , 7 Apr 2017 08:56
    What is the evidence that Assad was using chemical weapons? Numerous parties in the Middle East have access to sarin. And as many have said, there is no motive for Assad to used chemical weapons - he was winning the war. I know, people construct a motive, but really, it's a case of cui bono - and it's not Assad.
    , lochinverboy , 7 Apr 2017 08:50
    Mission accomplished for the Pentagon hawks. Trump was minded to wind down the mission on Iraq and end the vilification of Russia. One unverified "chemical attack", in the mould of Chemical Ali and the glove puppet Trump turns full circle. Russia will be drawn into this, so it's two birds with one stone. US regime change in Syria can continue as can the pressure on oil and gas rich Russia.
    , ALI Alsaad , 7 Apr 2017 08:50
    Is it proven that it was the syrian air force which carried out the attack in the first place? Or is this another WMD lie that we are supposed to act upon?! How many times did we watch videos of murdered children only to find out that they were made and staged and paid for by the western-backed rebels.
    I simply don't buy any of this manipulation anymore.
    , sustaingbr , 7 Apr 2017 08:50
    Very bad mistake to wipe out the base and many of its occupants on an unproven assumption that the Syrian armed air force dropped the chemical weapons. To discount the fact that ISIS (who use chemical attacks) may have set off the chemical attacks after/during the air strike is plain stupid.
    Now USA has has given ISIS an assist and deeply damaged relations with Russia...
    , jack mira , 7 Apr 2017 08:51
    Recently in Washington there has been a clear shift away from the non globalist Bannon to the mainstream McMaster/Mathhis orbit of influence. The writer has missed the point of the strike. It was meant for Putin not Assad.
    , Aquarius9 , 7 Apr 2017 08:51
    Sorry, there is no evidence that Assad used chemical weapons, yes someone did and it could have been IS or anyone else who wants to get rid of Saddam. Many including IS have drones, and they could possible have dropped the chemical weapons, they could also have made the chemical weapons - whose to say there is no chemist in such groups? All the chemical weapons in Syria were removed by the UN. The west, and particularly the US, which loves war, has over the years been quick to condemn people, and countries without having any evidence. It about time people got back to finding out the facts, before making statements.
    , dopamineboy Aquarius9 , 7 Apr 2017 08:55
    A lot of so called factual information coming out of Syria is by the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, which turns out to be a guy who lives in Coventry, who is funded by a certain EU country.
    , Kalumba , 7 Apr 2017 08:52
    Unfortunately Trump's action was a total success from his point of view: it will play very well with his domestic ratings, it appears to have surgically executed, he has received immediate affirmation from key western allies and the Russians were shown 'consideration', he broken international law and done his own thing the one time he could get away with it, it does not matter to him that he has no after plan.

    Of course the danger is what happens if the stakes escalate ...

    I hate to say and I regret that he had an opportunity to thrive.

    , derek strange , 7 Apr 2017 08:53
    This is a tragic situation with no obvious easy solutions, but, it seems as far as this paper is concerned, Trump is screwed whatever he does.
    Also, small point, why is it offensive to call a missile " tomahawk? What difference does it make, its a weapon ffs.
    , Bluejil , 7 Apr 2017 08:53
    Despicable and the UK standing shoulder to shoulder, even more so. Is there a sane politician in the world? Humanity has really taken a wrong turn.
    , mrpants , 7 Apr 2017 08:54
    Our political masters never learn. More regime change on the cards. More instability and the return of those most horrific murdering savages, ISIS
    , clematlee , 7 Apr 2017 08:54
    The article basically agrees with the MSM that Syria is guilty. Why would Syria use chemical weapons when it winning the war against the heart eating demented lunatics. The west has a history of framing up countries it does not like. And why is ok for Saudi arabia to bomb children in Yemen on a daily basis.
    , clematlee FrankRoberts , 7 Apr 2017 09:05
    The Doctor who twitted reports of the alleged chemical attack was once on trail for kiddnapping, check out UKs daily Mail.
    , missuswatanabe , 7 Apr 2017 08:54
    I don't really understand all the fuss about chemical weapons. Killing is killing. The numbers matter more than the methods. The United States Empire has been racking up a pretty high score in the last decade. Trump said he was going to work with Russia and pacify the situation in Syria. Sadly it looks like he going down the same tragic route as his predecessors.
    , danubemonster missuswatanabe , 7 Apr 2017 08:58
    The worst chemical attack by one country on another in the history of warfare was the US's use of agent orange in Vietnam.
    , Charmant_mais_fou missuswatanabe , 7 Apr 2017 09:01
    As soon as states start ignoring the Geneva Convention, then humanity's full potential for barbarity would be unleashed.
    , TeddyJensen danubemonster , 7 Apr 2017 09:10
    You can't blame Trump for that, as he dodged military service.
    , kritter , 7 Apr 2017 08:54
    I absolutely hate Trump. But I think for once he listened to some experts, because this doesn't seem that bad a response to me. As the author says, it was actually very limited - won't significantly degrade Assad's capabilities and for obvious reasons they avoided hitting the Russians.
    That said, it will probably be a big enough deterrent to stop Assad using chemical weapons on civilians again in the near future - which is obviously a good thing. Share
    , ildfluer kritter , 7 Apr 2017 08:56
    It violates both US and International Law. There's many a precedent in the ME already showing that the locals don't like it when we in the West try to influence their politics.
    , kodicek , 7 Apr 2017 08:55
    It makes no sense - Assad has almost cleaned out Isis - knowing full well that a gas attack would incur the wrath of the US. Why would he do this now? Under Obama it was too blatant to intervene, as they'd been caught doing this. Total set up. Neo-cons now salivating at the prospect that they can bully Trump into this.

    Syria was a moderate Muslim country - before funded Isis moved in. Turkey have a plan for this too, and will flood Europe with the proceeds of these 'interventions'

    , Bolowski kodicek , 7 Apr 2017 09:18
    Yes: all very suspicious.

    It is difficult to see what benefit Assad hoped to gain from a small-scale (compared to what is possible with these weapons) chemical-weapon attack on civilians in rebel-held territory.

    Conclusions regarding the gas attack have been made and military action has been taken before an exhaustive investigation by credible independent and responsible authorities. At best, this is unwise.

    Assad is horrendous, but is not the only monster in Syria. And some of those other monsters might indeed be well-served by a chemical-weapons attack that could lead to US military action against Assad.

    And the bigger question is just what are US objectives here? What, exactly, have those 59 cruise missiles achieved, other than getting Trump some more air-time?

    Indeed, without the stomach for a much wider and bloody engagement with Syria, with US troops in the line of fire, what contribution can the US actually make to this terrible conflict?

    And at the end of the day, who would be the monster that would replace Assad?

    , Dode74 , 7 Apr 2017 08:56
    Why would Assad launch a chemical attack in a war he is winning? Why would Russia want him to? He doesn't stand to benefit from it.

    Regardless, if Assad didn't launch the strikes I wonder if such a precipitate attack without investigation isn't an attempt to improve domestic support by Trump.

    , Coordinateur , 7 Apr 2017 08:56
    These missiles cost nearly 1.5 million USD each.
    Wouldn't this money be better spent helping the displaced and refugee civilian population.
    Unfortunately the "defense and arms" industry are very good at lobbying......
    , diddoit , 7 Apr 2017 08:57
    Trump was talking about 'beautiful little babies' , are kids in Yemen and Mosul in Iraq not beautiful enough or something? And why no graphic images from those places in the aftermath of our strikes?

    Do our MS media even realise how much they are being manipulated by warmongers? Do they care?

    , Dode74 , 7 Apr 2017 08:58
    60 tomahawks vs S400. Were any shot down or did they all reach the target? If none were shot down, and if no S400 were fired, that puts an interesting spin on things presuming Russia still has operational control over those systems. US/Russia teaming up to put Assad back in his box? Share Facebook Twitter
    , Deckard99 Dode74 , 7 Apr 2017 09:11
    It does to an extent.

    The US notified the Russians first of the attack, I would guess at pretty short notice, however it would still enable russians to take out a good proportion of tomahawks.

    They, seemingly, did not attempt to try.

    At best, I think the actions could be interpreted as - we will back you Assad, but within reason.
    I doubt Putin really gives a shit about using chemical weapons but he is smart enough to know he has to play the game in front of an international audience.

    , whomightyoube , 7 Apr 2017 08:59
    When a crime has been committed , one has to look at who has the motive as well as means and opportunity. The Syrian Rebels stand to gain hugely from US air support, Assad stands to lose. He was already winning the civil war, why would he need to use chemical weapons?

    The US Hawks have been itching for an excuse to indulge in yet another regime change which would result in the same mess as Libya and Iraq. The hopes for an end to this awful civil war have just been dealt a huge blow by the US.

    , 5abi , 7 Apr 2017 09:00
    It has nothing to do with Assad. Trump is in trouble at home and he desperately needed a diversion.
    Whether Assad actually provided Trump with that opportunity with this chemical attack or 'this attack' is another of the Iraq WMD type of lie we will never know.
    One thing is clear that America has just proved again it is a rogue State.
    , Weefox , 7 Apr 2017 09:00
    The main issue for me, and many others including the ex-UK ambassador to Syria (just interviewed on BBC), is that there is absolutely no evidence that Assad committed this chemical atrocity.

    He also (the ex-ambassoary) added that the Jihadi groups would be jubilant that the USA has lined up with them and that women and minority groups in Syria will be terrified. However evil Assad is he has protected the rights of women and minorities.

    This knee-jerk attack from Trump has echoes of Blair and the dodgy dossier and of course the way we messed up Lybia.

    , LeCochon , 7 Apr 2017 09:00
    Trump is an imbecile.
    Neocons never left office in the US
    I feel sorry for those still in the UK- your government is just as bad and it will be civilians who end up paying the price.
    , SubjectiveSubject , 7 Apr 2017 09:00
    Cameron attempted to rush war against Syria through Parliament and that was stopped in its tracks. Subsequently, fake news and inaccurate reporting presented a story that Assad used chemical weapons and that transpired to be false and the UN investigation concurs it was not Assad. We've now had Boris Johnson and American counterparts cranking up the rhetoric against Syria all week leading up to this new chemical attack of which there is no evidence that it was Assad but, America strikes without proper investigation. This seems to be a reaction that can only cause tensions and flame anti-west sentiment.
    , SubjectiveSubject cartidge , 7 Apr 2017 09:07
    Iraq 2.0 was inevitable. There has never been a US President in my lifetime that has not started a war on the assumption of chemical weapons. The US and UK Foreign Secretaries have both been asked to clarify evidence and both have failed to produce.
    , NezPerce , 7 Apr 2017 09:01
    Remember "Catch 22"?
    Usarian drops his bombs in the sea rather than bomb an Italian town.
    The military have a big problem and do what the often do in such a situation rather than court marshalling Usarian they give him a medal for dropping a perfect square pattern in the sea.

    Lets hope this attack is a Usarian moment from Trump, a perfect square pattern on the Homs run way.

    The West can now walk away or go for a potential fight with a nuclear power based on evidence from Al Nusra front, a branch of al Qaeda.

    , paisleymachine , 7 Apr 2017 09:01
    Syrian rebels will be emboldened to start full scale war again. If Trump wishes to remove Assad would he support Isis. Could Isis and the rebels form an anti Assad alliance. This is probably the level of thinking going on at the Pentagon.
    , Sceptical Walker , 7 Apr 2017 09:02
    Politically the strike was aginst Putin, not Assad. Militarily it will probably not change much on the ground.
    , diddoit Sven Tyler , 7 Apr 2017 09:07
    Trump's inviting the law of the jungle in that case. You can just go around settling scores militarily with anyone who you feel has 'taunted' you. Any more than you can go around town punching anyone you believe has looked at you in a strange way.
    , Graham Taylor , 7 Apr 2017 09:02
    Nothing like a few bombs to divert attention away from difficulties at home.

    A ploy used many times in history e.g. Thatcher and The Fauklands.

    , fumanshoe , 7 Apr 2017 09:03
    if Syrian forces are not guilty of using gas, then who supplied the Jihadi rebels stocks of this terrible weapon Share Facebook Twitter
    , Pinkie123 fumanshoe , 7 Apr 2017 09:05
    Some people would say the CIA
    , Tamurello , 7 Apr 2017 09:03
    Doesnt make sense assad used chemical weapons.. For what? There is something else going on here.
    , whomightyoube , 7 Apr 2017 09:03
    Western policy in the Middle East is a mess.

    The rebels will now have an incentive to fake another chemical attack and bring the US fully into the war with Syria and Russia. Syria will then be left to the warring factions to fight it out just like Libya and Iraq.

    Innocent children have to die just to further US destabilisation policy.

    , ScanDiscNow whomightyoube , 7 Apr 2017 09:44
    Don´t you think there could be somebody else´s fingerprints involved too. Third parties, who never abandoned their goal of toppling Assad for "a noble cause, that justifies any means".
    , DavidRL1954 , 7 Apr 2017 09:03
    More US bombastic looney-ness. This is nothing to do with the US. All it does is spread dissatisfaction to the US and Europe endangering lives in those countries. This has absolutely nothing to do with US security, it is Trump trying to show what a great warmongering guy he is to satisfy the US gun-lobby and those who voted for him. Clearly it is better for the US to kill "women, children and beautiful babies" with bombs than for Syria to kill them with gas.
    , ScanDiscNow DavidRL1954 , 7 Apr 2017 09:38
    Trump risks now losing widely of his voter support, because the presidential campaign promised less military interference in ME.. Many voters are outraged now and feel cheated. Another thing will be, is he now going gain enough lib neocon support the compensate his lost credibility. If he does not, he is just done, judging to an angry tune in many media reader´s comments.
    , factgasm , 7 Apr 2017 09:03
    This from Wednesday:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/apr/05/global-britain-brexit-financier-arms-merchant-brutal-dictators#comment-96147144

    , Kithou , 7 Apr 2017 09:03
    So where's the evidence showing that Assad was behind the gas attack? Share Facebook Twitter
    , volkswin Kithou , 7 Apr 2017 09:18
    It comes from the same sources that claimed Iraqi soldiers killed babies in incubators during the first Gulf war and same sources again that claimed the Iraqi's had mountain's of weapons of mass destruction.
    , Ottomanboi , 7 Apr 2017 09:04
    US comes to aid of Islamic State?
    , Taku2 Ottomanboi , 7 Apr 2017 09:17
    You are most probably right, although, in his haste to respond to this alleged chemical attack by the Syria government, Donald Trump and his EU allies will not have properly consider the implications. We have seen that from Bush and Blair in the Iraq debacle, and now we are seeing it from Donald Trump. Bomb first and ask questions later, is their guiding principle.
    Of course Daesh/ISIS stands to gain most from this emerging disaster. The lesson of Iraq and Afghanistan have still not been learnt, and, sadly, as far as western imperialism is concerned, never will!
    , Ivan7K , 7 Apr 2017 09:05
    Who stands to gain from using chemical weapons in Syria? Assad, whose forces were winning the war & who previously Trump was sympathetic to? Or CIA-backed extremists who needed to drag US forces into the conflict?

    Unfortunately, we have an incompetent, mentally unbalanced fake in the White House, who, whenever he fails to deliver on his bluster of pie-in-the-sky promises on the home front, seems likely to only escalate global conflict.

    US & indeed most military action invariably has ulterior motives. Here it suits the extreme right-wing Trump administration & Steve Bannon well as it also distracts the masses from the series of embarrassments surrounding Trump's presidency so far. Probably NK gets bombed later, which will only provoke China & so on. We live in dangerous times.

    , vammyp , 7 Apr 2017 09:05
    Nothing saves lives like US bombs explosions.
    , Mongolikecandy , 7 Apr 2017 09:05
    Michael Fallon was just on LBC.
    Presenter: So what's the solution
    Fallon: So, we would like to see a situation develop like Iraq where it is now a democracy where sunni and Shia can come together. The Iraqi government is slowing rebuilding the country with our help.
    Presenter: So Iraq is the blueprint?
    Fallon: No

    What a crock of shit. First of all well done to the presenter for saying straight after the interview "the defence secretary says that Iraq is the blueprint for Syria" ha ha.

    Seriously though how can Fallon he say that with a straight face. 100 Civilians including 10s of children were killed last week by US strikes. They just ignore these facts and pursue their own narrative.

    , Nathaniel Gould Mongolikecandy , 7 Apr 2017 09:09

    Seriously though how can Fallon he say that with a straight face.

    Because we don't have a free press. Share Facebook Twitter

    , volkswin Mongolikecandy , 7 Apr 2017 09:13
    I was listening to R4 on the way to work and they had the ex British ambassador to Syria on, He quickly stated that he believed that it was not Assad explaining what would Assad expect to achieve by using chemical weapons etc, as soon as the BBC interviewer realised that the Ambassador was not giving the usual Anti Assad lines they quickly pulled the interview.
    , juascar , 7 Apr 2017 09:05
    At last !..this is the act that show to the entire world that the USA is backing Daesh from the beginning and all the way ...
    , billforsyth , 7 Apr 2017 09:06
    Trump's motives for bombing Syria may well be questionable, to say the least, but if the result is to make any power think twice about using chemical weapons as a legitimate form of war then that is surely a good thing.Chemical agents cannot be uninvented but their use can be if those contemplating their deployment are in no doubt that they will not go unpunished.There has to be a point at which barbarism has to be declared unacceptable. Share
    , Peter Gunn billforsyth , 7 Apr 2017 09:13

    if the result is to make any power think twice about using chemical weapons surely a good thing

    We managed to be responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands in Iraq with no need for chemical weapons.People will continue to die regardless.

    The US is attacking a sovereign country as a show of strength whilst the Chinese are in town. That is what is happening

    , JimVxxxx , 7 Apr 2017 09:06
    No big fan of Donald Trump. But the question you have to ask yourself is "should the international community accept the use of chemical weapons against civilians?"
    The rest is just hair-splitting. Share Facebook Twitter
    , Nathaniel Gould JimVxxxx , 7 Apr 2017 09:08
    If al-Qaeda carried out the attack then the ''international community'' has sided with the jihadists. Share Facebook Twitter
    , ildfluer JimVxxxx , 7 Apr 2017 09:08
    There's a law against chemical weapons use. It's a war crime, yes. But at the same time, no country is allowed to attack another without getting UN approval.
    , Peter Gunn JimVxxxx , 7 Apr 2017 09:09

    No big fan of Donald Trump. But

    And there it is. But . The guy unleashed 50 m worth of ordinance to impress the Chinese and people here think it is something to do with saving Syrias children..we are finished as a species...

    , Nathaniel Gould , 7 Apr 2017 09:06
    Total madness, US and UK liberals, Turkey, Saudi Arabia,al-Qaeda all praising Trump's attack on Syria!
    , gidrys , 7 Apr 2017 09:06
    so whilst Trump's just attacked Syria, he also continues to obliterate Yemen; in doing so he continues a fine tradition upheld by successive US President's: "we can and will bomb who ever we choose, with impunity".
    some recent headlines:
    New Evidence Contradicts Pentagon's Account of Yemen Raid, But General Closes the Case
    .
    Aid Officials Beg Congress to Help Yemen, While Trump Sends More Bombs
    .
    U.S. Launched More Airstrikes in Yemen Last Month Than in All of 2016
    .
    Media Silent As Saudi Arabia Devastates Yemen Into Famine
    .
    The Last 5 Presidents Have This One Thing in Common

    https://theintercept.com/2017/03/09/new-evidence-contradicts-pentagons-account-of-yemen-raid-but-general-closes-the-case/
    https://theintercept.com/2017/03/22/aid-officials-beg-congress-to-help-yemen-while-trump-sends-more-bombs/
    http://anonhq.com/u-s-launched-airstrikes-yemen-last-month-2016/
    http://anonhq.com/media-silent-saudi-arabia-devastates-yemen-famine/
    http://anonhq.com/last-5-presidents-one-thing-common/

    , Ziontrain , 7 Apr 2017 09:06
    Tried and tested tactic of all US presidents is when your domestic poll numbers are running low, fire bombs away abroad.

    And that's before considering Trump's standard MO of distractions for the dimwitted media and public:

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-trump-diversion-tactics-media-20170126-story.html

    http://www.decodedc.com/news-analysis-trumps-tested-tactic-distract-deceive-deny /

    -> https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/mar/21/donald-trump-distraction-technique-media

    -> https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/18/donald-trump-media-manipulation-tactics

    , Robzview2 , 7 Apr 2017 09:07
    There are still and video records of the so called white hats handling alleged sarin gas victims BARE HANDED and wearing paper masks. The "doctor" in the "hospital" is on video sending tweets and taking video calls while supposedly overwhelmed with victims. This "doctor" has been struck off the British medical register and is sought by British police in relation to extremist links. That town and that part of
    Idlib is completely under the control of heart eating head choppers. The US has stated that terrorists in Iraq have carried out chemical weapons attacks. The party line on the august 13 attack in Ghouta has long since fallen apart. The NYT published a " missile vector " proving the missiles came from SAA positions 9km away- unfortunately the missile with traces of sarin had a maximum range of 2km. UN inspector Carla del Ponte stated that the attack was probably carried out by the terrorists. The US and its toadys including Australia have no people in that area- unless the are "embedded" with the terrorists- so how is it they immediately concluded it was an aerial attack? Have bomb fragments been tested for sarin? Having fired a barrage of cruise missiles in "retaliation" is there any prospect that conclusive proof that EITHER a govt or terrorist act has occurred when the conclusion has been reached before a credible inquiry?
    , DavidWRyan , 7 Apr 2017 09:07
    I have half a feeling that one day this will turn out to be a false flag event in order to bring the USA into the conflict against the Syrian regime.

    Trump might have played it well though. A pre warned attack against a Syrian airfield causing very little damage and no Russian casualties while telling Putin what he was up to for his own domestic media needs.

    Or it could have been an act of sheer madness by Assad's regime. Who knows the truth these days.

    , ConCaruthers DavidWRyan , 7 Apr 2017 09:20
    Looks like a classic FF to me. Shameful.
    , LeCochon , 7 Apr 2017 09:07
    All too convenient for the Neocon Trump admin.
    The question is: what is the world going to do about the US/UK rogue states?
    , fd56356 , 7 Apr 2017 09:07
    I wonder who the Chinese will bomb when they have Trump round for dinner in return?

    They've started a new tradition. Anoint good relations with some human sacrifice.

    , ContrarianRW , 7 Apr 2017 09:07
    Congratulations Donald.

    The only saving grace that you had was that you were so vehemently against the US getting involved in military strikes against Syria.

    Now even that is gone and Trump has proven that he is as much a neocon warmongering shill as the rest of them.

    , Wirplit , 7 Apr 2017 09:08
    When Seymour Hersh's original report https://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line is ignored and when the subsequent research on this http://whoghouta.blogspot.co.uk/search?updated-min=2014-01-01T00:00:00Z&updated-max=2015-01-01T00:00:00Z&max-results=7 is also ignored and the idea of False Flag operations is not even mentioned on the BBC while all the mouthpieces line up to repeat non evidence or dubious assertions as Certain Facts, despite the known history of lies going back to the notorious WMD charade which was enough to launch a war shows that its not False News that is the major problem but Lies of Omission.
    On the BBC ex UK ambassador Peter Ford gets 3mins to counteract the Deluge of " Certainty" that it was the Regime responsible. None with new or real evidence of the standard that destroyed the WMD lie.
    It nearly worked in Ghouta in 2O13... it was inevitable to be tried again and Trump jumps straight in. The Deep State in the US is back in business
    , ConCaruthers Wirplit , 7 Apr 2017 09:15
    Quite right, the idea this was a Sarin attack is ludicrous, watching the discredited Al Qaeda/Al Nusra front, 'White Helmet's' video.
    , Prydain , 7 Apr 2017 09:08
    Has the situation w.r.t. access to and use of chemical weapons by the various agents in Syria, or the US political use of intelligence in this area, changed since Obama in 2013?

    https://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n24/seymour-m-hersh/whose-sarin

    I thought Trump was bringing a new approach?

    , jadawin , 7 Apr 2017 09:08
    During this war against Daesh, an Arab country, Syria, formed for the first time a strong and effective army, which will be a threat to Israel after the war. Visibly, in Tel Aviv as in Washington it was decided to quickly destroy it ...
    , Frontinus77 , 7 Apr 2017 09:09
    The brainwashed, bloodthirsty warmongering on this thread is quite simply astonishing.
    , morisy , 7 Apr 2017 09:09
    I'm also a bit skeptical of the explanation of why Assad would do such a thing, particularly at this time. What on earth could he hope to gain?

    That 'he's a madman' or 'he's just evil' have never struck me as anything but mindlessly simplistic responses. I've watched interviews with the man, and he struck me as neither hopelessly daft or completely bonkers. Evil, perhaps. But stupidly impulsive? I'm not so easily persuaded, especially by such one dimensional -- and stereotypical -- characterizations.

    Frankly, much as I hate to say it, I find the Russian explanation to be the most plausible. And it's a sad day for Western media when the Russians look like the grown-ups in the room.

    , oldgit47 , 7 Apr 2017 09:10
    Getting rid of Assad will solve the problem?, I can remember being told getting rid of someone called Saddam would solve the problem. But it only made it worse, very much worse, for the little people in that part of the world that is, who are now considered a threat in their abject destitution.
    Perhaps if the death and destruction had happened across the US, Russia or Europe we'd be rid of the macho men and have someone who put little people before politics.
    , VladimirM , 7 Apr 2017 09:10
    The strike seems to be more symbolic, rather than of any practical significance. It violated international law, of course, and dealt a blow to the US-Russia relations, but Trump had found himself in a sort of zugzwang and he had to make his choice after weighing it out. So he shows that America is back in the ME game, he proves himself not being Putin's agent silensing critics a bit and easing the pressure on him, he shows he is not Obama, he gets approval from the Nato allies who are praising him for the first time ever, he does a bit of muscle flexing bearing in mind his meeting with Putin. On the down side are the violation of international law (has never been an obstacle for the US), fuelling tentions with Russia once again (no big deal though), sparking the reaction from Iran (no big deal either). But long-term effect seems not to be on the table. What if Russia scraps the air security memorandum in Syria?
    , Alex Hughes VladimirM , 7 Apr 2017 09:13
    Russia is a big deal and the air security memorandum was scrapped today. Do keep up.
    , Roger Bingham , 7 Apr 2017 09:11
    We don't know who is responsible for the sarin attack.

    Based on accusations and allegations from "activists" the Syrian government are blamed once again for the use of chemical weapons.
    No evidence - not a shred - no independent enquiry or investigation - nothing.

    The Syrian forces together with the Kurds in the East and Russia in the West were attacking and crippling the capability of daesh.

    The illegal missile attack by US weakens the Syrians so that both daesh and the so-called "moderate rebels" (insurgents) will have an advantage.

    What was Syria's motive to use gas?
    They are winning.
    They knew that the use of gas would provoke outrage and a military response by US

    On the other hand the insurgents are losing.
    They have everything to gain by involving the US to weaken Assad
    There are documented cases where the insurgents have bought sarin gas
    The insurgents overran and looted government ammunition depots
    They knew that the use of gas would provoke outrage and a military response by US

    , Alexander Bach , 7 Apr 2017 09:11
    It makes perfect sence that Assad used chemical bombs (that he doesn't even have) just a couple of days after Trump said removing Assad is not a priority any more, just to destroy a village he could have more effectively destroy with ordinary bombs, doesn't it?
    Back in 2013 when Assad actually had chemical weapons the US made a mistake. They accused him of having what he actually had thus giving him a chance to give it in. More reliable scenario is to accuse someone of having what he doesn't have, like with Saddam in 2003. He probably would be happy to give in the WMD but he didn't have it. Today we see the same old scenario is being played.
    The problem is that the Russians will not let it go that way anymore. We are as close to the WWIII as never before.
    , anyonelistening , 7 Apr 2017 09:11
    The only reason that Trump bombed Assad was to try to show that he was not elected by Putin and other Russians.But for that,the most he would have done was say a few bad things about Assad and even say he was happy if some of the victims were members of ISIS.
    By the way what happened about his promise to deal with ISIS from day one,and all the other promises he made.It even took that idiot GOP senator to invoke the NUCLEAR option to get his Supreme Court nominee approved.Trump does love that WORD.
    , ID1299813 , 7 Apr 2017 09:11
    You would think a country that has caused nothing but disaster in the ME, nothing but more deaths and sufferings, a country whose army got their arses kicked in Iraq, and still now in Afghanistan, a country that gave us ISIS would have learned by now to stop interfering in ME

    Even a dog learns quicker than the US

    , Taku2 , 7 Apr 2017 09:11
    Well, not quite; it does accomplish the fruits of stupidity. Which is disaster.

    Never have I seen the leaders of nations which consider themselves to be civilise, be so insistent on goading themselves and others to go to war. A senseless war, professedly with the intention of killing hundreds, if not thousands, and destroying their livelihoods, under the premis of seeking revenge for the deaths of a hundred people, purportedly by a chemical attack by the Syrian government.

    It is absolute madness. So, who will protect the people from the folly and madness of their leaders, who refuse to make peace, choosing war instead?

    , Peter Grimes , 7 Apr 2017 09:11
    It is all so predictable. All the terrorist rebels have got to do from now on is release gas during any air strike by Russian or Syrian forces, kill as many children as possible, photograph the result and sit back and wait for the US missiles to be launched in 'retaliation'.
    Rather than saving lives, Trump has condemned more to die.

    [Apr 09, 2017] Miilitary brass notes only 40% of Tomahawk missiles fired hit targeted Syrian base

    Apr 09, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
    Damson , April 7, 2017 at 2:04 pm

    And yet more:

    Russian radar data show that the Tomahawk missiles were fired from the US destroyers Porter and Ross in the Mediterranean between 03:42 and 03:56 Moscow time, the general said.
    The Syrian army's air defense system will be reinforced in the near future to protect the most important infrastructure facilities, Konashenkov assured.
    In 2016, several batteries of Russia's air defense system S-300 were moved to the naval logistic facility at Tartus to provide protection for the base and Russian ships off Syria's shores. Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu said a multi-tier defense system had been created around Tartus and the Hmeymim air base. At the end of November the newest air defense system S-400 was delivered to Syria after a Turkish F-18 fighter shot down Russia's Sukhoi-24 bomber.
    Pantsir systems protect Russian military facilities from low-flying aircraft and missiles. Also, the defense of Russian facilities incorporates the system Bastion, capable of hitting naval and ground targets 350-450 kilometers away. Russia has helped Syria to restore the operation of its S-200 air defense systems that protect Russian bases from potential attacks from the east. Also, the Syrian army uses air defense systems Buk.

    The chemical attack

    The US missile strike in Syria had been planned in advance, while the chemical weapons incident was used just as a pretext, Konashenkov has noted.

    "It is nakedly clear that the attack on a Syrian air base with US cruise missiles had been planned well beforehand," he said.
    "For any specialist it is clear that the decision to conduct the missile strike on Syria had been made in Washington long before the events at Khan Shaykhun, which were used a far-fetched pretext.
    The show of military muscle stemmed exclusively from internal political reasons," the ministry's spokesman added.

    Cooperation with Pentagon
    The Russian Defense Ministry has suspended cooperation with Pentagon on prevention of incidents in Syria.
    "We consider these steps taken by the United States to be a blatant violation of the 2015 Memorandum on preventing military incidents and ensuring security during operations in Syria's air space," the ministry's spokesman said.
    "The Russian Defense Ministry is suspending cooperation with Pentagon aimed at the implementation of the memorandum."
    "To protect the most sensitive facilities of the Syrian infrastructure, a set of measures will be taken in the immediate future to reinforce and raise the effectiveness of the Syrian armed forces' air defense system," he added.

    Syria' losses
    US strikes on military airfield in Homs province leave six dead - Syrian armed forces.
    "According to the air base command, two Syrian servicemen went missing, while four were killed and six sustained burn injuries while combating the fire," Konashenkov said.
    At the same time, according to the Syrian army command, the attack killed six people.
    According to the Russian Defense Ministry, six Mikoyan MiG-23 fighter jets, a radar station and other equipment have been destroyed.
    "The strike destroyed a logistics warehouse, a training building, a canteen, six MiG-23 planes in the repair hangars and also a radar station."
    "The runway, taxiways and parked planes of the Syrian Air Force have not been damaged," the spokesman said.

    Trump admits he issued order for missile strike on Syrian airbase

    On Thursday night, at the direction of US President Donald Trump, the US forces fired 59 Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles on a Syrian military air base located in the Homs Governorate. The attack came as a response to the alleged use of chemical weapons in the Idlib Governorate on April 4. The US authorities believe that the airstrike on Idlib was launched from that air base.

    [Apr 09, 2017] The Syrian military denies using chemical weapons

    Apr 09, 2017 | www.jacobinmag.com
    The Syrian military denies using chemical weapons. Their international backer, Russia, claims that the Syrian military did drop bombs in the affected area but that the chemical effect was not in the bombs dropped but rather from the explosion of an alleged chemical warehouse under the control of unnamed rebel forces. The same report by the United Nations and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons that found Syrian government responsibility for chlorine attacks also found that ISIS had used another chemical weapon, mustard gas, and investigated at least three other chemical weapons attacks whose perpetrators could not be identified. So that could be possible as well.

    For a variety of reasons, some of these possibilities don�'t hold up so well if the chemical used this week was the sarin nerve agent � but we don�'t know yet what it was.

    There are some other, perhaps even more important things, that we do know. We know that in 2013, at the time of an earlier, even more deadly chemical weapon attack, similar accusations against the Syrian regime were widely made, assumed to be true, and used as the basis for calls for direct US military intervention in the civil war. And we know those accusations were never proved, and that it remains uncertain even now, almost four years later, who was actually responsible.

    And we know that the bombing of Syria in 2013 was averted, despite President Obama�'s �red line� being crossed, because an enormous US and global campaign against such a disastrous escalation made it politically too costly to launch a new US war. This was a president willing but not eager, or driven, to go to war. When Obama turned decision-making over to Congress, hundreds of thousands of people across the United States called and wrote and emailed their representatives, urging them to prevent a new war. In some offices calls were running six or seven hundred to one against a new bombing campaign.

    And we know that President Obama turned it over to Congress in the first place because the British parliament, facing massive public opposition, made clear that the UK would not join its US ally in going to war against Syria. And eventually, when Congressional opposition became undeniable, Russia provided the US with a way out, arranging for international collection and destruction of Syria�s chemical weapons arsenal. Chlorine was not included, and it is certainly possible that Syria didn�'t declare all of its weapons, or perhaps the precursor chemicals to make them, and but that claim was never proven. Ultimately, though, a US attack was averted.

    [Apr 09, 2017] If Trump says Assad is responsible Assad is responsible. Trump doesnt need evidence. Not even a dodgy dossier.

    Apr 09, 2017 | www.theguardian.com
    Muzzledagain , 7 Apr 2017 15:31
    What Trump did was totally illegal, and you won't find anyone to tell him so. All the ones that hated him before are at his feet now for further collaboration in destroying Syria and thus prolonging the suffering of the Syrian people. Share Facebook Twitter
    MadJackMacMadd Muzzledagain, 7 Apr 2017 15:45

    Yes, you're right. It was 'unconstitutional' for a start in that he didn't get Congressional approval, he didn't get the approval of the UN and he committed an act of war against a sovereign nation (also a UN member).

    Is anyone going to hazard a guess as to what happened to the 36 cruise missiles that didn't find their target?

    GuyPeron, 7 Apr 2017 15:31
    I am still troubled by the Guardian editorial line and journalists unquestioningly concluding that the Syrian regime was responsible for the chemical attacks in question. I of course cannot say it is not, but I have also not been presented with any evidence anywhere that it was. I certainly haven't seen any convincing evidence presented in the Guardian. Most troubling for me is that I haven't seen any Guardian journalists asking what benefit the Assad regime thought it would gain from carrying out these chemical attacks (if it did). Who is to benefit from these attacks? That is what I would be asking as that is a long way to discovering who is guilty. Share
    AndyMcCarthy GuyPeron, 7 Apr 2017 15:44
    If Trump says Assad is responsible Assad is responsible. Trump doesn't need evidence. Not even a dodgy dossier.
    Elinjo, 7 Apr 2017 15:33
    "Fools rush in, where angels fear to tread".
    His impetuosity makes me fear, that should he fail to convince China to put pressure on North Korea, he will carry out his threats to take matters into his own hands.
    GeeDeeSea, 7 Apr 2017 15:34
    The US targeted 59 cruise missiles on the airfield which is supposedly storing chemical bombs and yet no chemical weapons are blown-up!

    Another US intelligence failure. Share Facebook Twitter

    MadJackMacMadd GeeDeeSea, 7 Apr 2017 15:36
    They didn't all reach the target.
    sean7889 7 Apr 2017 15:37
    Chemical attack or no chemical attack it doesn't change the fact that Assad is the lesser of two evils.

    We have a choice between a broadly secular evil, or fundamentalist Islam evil.

    I know which one I would rather be dealing with. You only have to look at what's happening in Libya now we have disposed of Gaddaffi.

    KoreyD sean7889, 7 Apr 2017 15:57
    The major evil is the Americans arming and supporting the Jihadsists since day one of the civil war and using their propaganda machine to demonize Assad. Russia and Iran are the only 2 countries legally in Syria at it's request. America is an invader and shows absolutely no regard for international law. After all who would enforce it? Without America's intervention this civil war would have been over 6 months after it started, 400,000 more people would be alive and there would be 7 million less refugees million what gives the US the right to do this in Syria, never mind Afghanistan, Iraq, Lybia, Yemen, Ukraine?
    tc2011 7 Apr 2017 15:37
    Dutiful little lapdogs. Nothing like some hot military action to get our war-loving establishment back into bed with the Donald, eh?

    When push comes to shove, we scratch a liberal and find a Trumpist.

    Let's just pretend that Donald Trump has undergone a conversion of biblical proportions on the road to Damascus.


    Let's pretend that the vast majority of you really wanted to oppose him in the first place.
    sustaingbr 7 Apr 2017 15:38
    What if this was rebel jihadists who set off the chemical attack? Or the bombs fell on to a rebel chemical storage site?
    The US has jumped to a very dangerous conclusion here - it took them 6 days to confirm that US bombs had dropped in Mosul but 1 day to confirm a Syrian government aircraft had specifically dropped a chemical bomb!?
    ColinMay sustaingbr, 7 Apr 2017 15:49
    CNN reported that the US tracked a flight from the base to the area that was gassed. Share Facebook Twitter
    HarrytheHawk ColinMay, 7 Apr 2017 16:04
    There is no question that they bombed the area.

    There is no evidence that the sarin came from those bombs.

    Jack Rowse , sustaingbr, 7 Apr 2017 16:54
    I'm just going to repeat the comment, as no-one has brought it up in this thread...

    They wrote an article about it. They sent "journalists" to the town. According to the journalists and photos that they took, the 'warehouse' was empty and the gas had radiated from a canister that was dropped from the air:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/06/the-dead-were-wherever-you-looked-inside-syrian-town-after-chemical-attack

    ort Sumpter Joss_Wynne_Evans, 7 Apr 2017 15:53

    scuppered the Clinton Project

    Clinton wanted to bomb Syria.

    MrConservative2016 , 7 Apr 2017 15:39
    I certainly hope those strikes were a one-off

    Trump should not repeat the mistakes of the previous administrations and drag the USA into even more prolonged conflict; even more so in view of the fact that we know the so-called 'opposition' to be a motley of Islamist terror groups

    [Apr 09, 2017] The USA and its allies such as Turkey and KSA invested six billions or so building insurgency supplying them with weapons (including some from Lybia)

    Apr 09, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
    pgl , April 07, 2017 at 01:12 PM
    General Wesley Clark just asked what is Trump's policy towards Assad. As in is it OK for Assad to kill his own people the regular way just so he does not use chemical weapons. Harsh commentary but the key question.
    libezkova -> pgl... , April 07, 2017 at 05:44 PM
    "..is it OK for Assad to kill his own people the regular way".

    That's a great question. and the answer is that he is doing it with some help and the USA is complicit.

    The USA and its allies such as Turkey and KSA invested six billions or so building insurgency supplying them with weapons (including some from Lybia).

    Repeating my old post:

    libezkova -> Chris G...

    "an uneasy alliance of foreign-funded jihadists, Western intelligence, and NGOs like Doctors Without Borders" is a fact in Syria too.

    Another good read is Sy Hersh story of the previous "false flag" sarin poisoning operation during Obama term:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PS5DOg-_XXE

    I like how MSM honchos picked up sarin story this time. As if somebody kicked them in the butt.

    BTW both Turkey and KSA had bet all cards on Syrian insurgency. In the past Turkey's intelligence service MIT was supporting not only the Free Syrian Army but also Al-Nusra, which produced sarin from components bought in Turkey.

    ilsm -> libezkova... , April 07, 2017 at 05:55 PM
    If it were "sarin" there would be large pieces of debris from the delivery hardware........

    No pix, no sarin!

    Or the Syrian super pilots flew crop dusters 200 miles one way!

    ilsm -> pgl... , April 07, 2017 at 05:53 PM
    For the US it is okay to supply oil rich Sunnis to kill Shi'a.

    Toady asks the wrong question......

    Clark got his 4th star from Bill Clinton. Clark is a DNC toady.

    [Apr 09, 2017] No evidence of air attack using low or no explosive type cluster munitions which are needed for this type of ordinance

    Apr 09, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com

    ilsm -> libezkova... April 09, 2017 at 09:02 AM

    Delivering sarin requires low to no explosive type cluster munitions. Cannot be done from barrel bomb!

    There would be many dozens of UXB 'containers' and shells of the ones that worked.

    If there were any evidence the propagandists would not use pix of supposedly decontaminated casualties with "rescue workers" unprotected. And using garden hoses when a solvent is needed to neutralize sarin.

    The 2013 staged example was never proved either.

    [Apr 09, 2017] False flag or not ?

    Apr 09, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
    Damson , April 7, 2017 at 2:10 pm

    Note:

    The attack was 'reported' TWENTYFOUR HOURS before it happened as a 'chemical attack' by journo working for Saudi/ Gulf agencies in a tweet.

    So how did he spin it before the depot was targetted by SAA?

    False flag – absolutely.

    Aumua , April 7, 2017 at 3:45 pm

    How about a link? Anything? Bueller?

    DJPS , April 7, 2017 at 6:40 pm

    They may have been talking about this? https://twitter.com/sahouraxo/status/849720967781863425

    Aumua , April 7, 2017 at 8:39 pm

    Yeah. It's not that I don't think some kind of 'false flag' or falsehood in general is possible here. I certainly wouldn't put it past them. I simply don't know. It's just that I see so many loudly proclaiming that they know for SURE that it definitely IS a false flag, while providing only the flimsiest evidence, if any.

    People who are doing that are doing the same thing 'they' are when they say they know for SURE that Assad is behind the attack. I don't trust either side, and I don't recommend anyone else does either. There's a lot of agendas flying around, both personal and interpersonal.

    [Apr 09, 2017] This is Colin Powell's justification for Iraq war all over again

    Apr 09, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
    Fred C. Dobbs -> Fred C. Dobbs... , April 08, 2017 at 10:14 AM
    US vows to keep up pressure on Syria after missile strikes
    http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/world/2017/04/08/vows-keep-pressure-syria-after-missile-strikes/SxuJkb18xGmO2HPKeY1MTK/story.html?event=event25 via @BostonGlobe

    Julie Pace - AP - April 8, 2017

    PALM BEACH, Fla. - The United States is vowing to keep up the pressure on Syria after the intense nighttime wave of missile strikes from U.S. ships, despite the prospect of escalating Russian ill will that could further inflame one of the world's most vexing conflicts.

    Standing firm, the Trump administration on Friday signaled new sanctions would soon follow the missile attack, and the Pentagon was even probing whether Russia itself was involved in the chemical weapons assault that compelled President Donald Trump to action. The attack against a Syrian air base was the first U.S. assault against the government of President Bashar Assad.

    Much of the international community rallied behind Trump's decision to fire the cruise missiles in reaction to this week's chemical weapons attack that killed dozens of men, women and children in Syria. But a spokesman for Russian President Vladimir Putin warned that the strikes dealt ''a significant blow'' to relations between Moscow and Washington.

    A key test of whether the relationship can be salvaged comes next week when Secretary of State Rex Tillerson becomes the first Trump Cabinet member to visit Russia.

    British Foreign Minister Boris Johnson also had planned to visit Russia this coming week, but decided Saturday to cancel the trip because of the fast moving events in Syria. Johnson, who condemned Moscow's continued defense of Assad, said Tillerson will be able to give a ''clear and coordinated message to the Russians.''

    At the United Nations on Friday, Russia's deputy ambassador, Vladimir Safronkov, strongly criticized what he called the U.S. ''flagrant violation of international law and an act of aggression'' whose ''consequences for regional and international security could be extremely serious.'' He called the Assad government a main force against terrorism and said it deserved the presumption of innocence in the chemical weapons attack.

    The U.S. ambassador to the U.N., Nikki Haley, said the world is waiting for the Russian government ''to act responsibly in Syria'' and ''to reconsider its misplaced alliance with Bashar Assad.'' ...

    libezkova -> Fred C. Dobbs... , April 08, 2017 at 08:02 PM
    "The U.S. ambassador to the U.N., Nikki Haley, said the world is waiting for the Russian government ''to act responsibly in Syria'' and ''to reconsider its misplaced alliance with Bashar Assad.'' ..."

    Summary: "This is Colin Powell's justification for Iraq war all over again"

    In two years or so most of the evidence will probably be discredited. But what is done is done. Shoot first and ask questions later is the most noble tradition in the USA foreign policy.

    The USA now gave rebels and their allies such as Turkey and KSA a huge incentive to fake another chemical attack in order to bring the US ground troops into Syria.

    Syria will then be left to the warring Islamist factions to fight it out just like in Libya and Iraq."

    [Apr 09, 2017] Even the liberals were all over this -- Bill Maher disgusted by the cable news response to Syria

    An interesting feature of comments in WaPo -- only one suggest the possibility of false flag attack. all other take "Assad gassed people" at face value. Acouple of comments suggest that was "Monica-style" bombing: "Wow. So Trump is willing to kill to get the discussion off of him being a Russian puppet.".
    www.washingtonpost.com

    FergusonFoont, 9:17 AM EDT

    Hey, Bill. I'm a liberal and I am not "all over this." I absolutely hate it.

    What Bashir Assad does in the country he heads is not our responsibility. Atroticities happen all over the world nearly every day, particularly in Africa, and we don't police their actions.

    StreetPhD, 9:15 AM EDT [Edited]

    Very predictable. When political popularity is in desperate need of a fix, blowing stuff up is a routine fallback ploy. The trick is tuning and timing the roll out script:
    > Video: innocent victims of Evil Boogeyman's barbarism
    > Video: Avenging Angel strikes back with thrilling nighttime missile launch
    > Reaction: Drooling media does back flips; polls might improve
    > Recharge & Repeat: Loop launch video on Jumbotron as pop singer screeches Anthem at televised sport events - audience gets big dose of sticky britches - loves diversion from real concerns

    > Outcome: Over inflated right wing sends eagle into tailspin.

    hereandnow100, 8:41 AM EDT

    Red lines??? We just crossed one. And talk about shooting from the hip!! The little man said it himself: I don't think, or read. Little trump has got, what was it, gut instinct? Will he just trust his gut all the way to armageddon? He just might.

    maverick13, 8:37 AM EDT

    Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York called it "the right thing to do." Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California called the military response "a limited, and I think an important strike, and it accomplished its purpose and sent a message."

    Rex Block, 8:36 AM EDT [Edited]

    Brian Williams is an idiot. Without that pretty-boy face, he is nothing.

    Lurker_no_Longer, 8:44 AM EDT

    I really can't believe that NBC put that liar back on the air. Trust of him was gone long ago, and I have to change the channel whenever I see him.

    garythomaszeman 8:32 AM EDT
    Another nice little war. The CIA, raising hell around the world since 1948. "Democracy Dies in Darkness."
    ReasonableDiscourse 8:35 AM EDT
    Col Jack Jacobs on the strike "What are we trying to accomplish?"

    We seem to have no thoughtful answer to that question. Only talking points and and cliched babble about being "presidential".

    Dr--Bob 7:54 AM EDT
    
    Kilgore: Smell that? You smell that?  
    Lance: What?  
    Kilgore: Napalm, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that.  
    [kneels]  
    Kilgore: I love the smell of napalm in the morning. You know, one time we had a hill bombed, for 12 hours. When it was all over, I walked up. We didn't find one of 'em, not one stinkin' dink body. The smell, you know that gasoline smell, the whole hill. Smelled like  
    [sniffing, pondering]  
    Kilgore: victory. Someday this war's gonna end...  
    [suddenly walks off]  
    -----Apocalypse Now (1979)  
    
    KingJethro 7:54 AM EDT
    Hey, now! Nobody does wag-the-dog better than the U.S. This is why we are so exceptional!!!
    rabrophy 7:43 AM EDT
    MISSION ACCOMPLISHED

    Trump wanted to distract the Media and it worked! Wolf Blitzer got wood for the first time in years.

    And this keeps happening over and over - Some empty military gesture that has no effect or another Savior-General who will make all thing right ( are we at Savior 15 or 16 now?) All we need next is an Op Ed in the Times by Hillary commending Trump's stupid trick.

    alfa67 7:51 AM EDT
    Wolf Blitzer thought the illegal US attack was great because he ALWAYS stays on script with AIPAC. You people DO know that Blitzer used to work for AIPAC don't you? See my comment below and give it some thought. It's pretty obvious really.
    alfa67 7:38 AM EDT
    I think that there is a pretty good chance that the Israelis used the poison gas in Syria.

    The Israelis have been trying for at least 30 years to get the US to do a regime change in Iraq.

    The Israelis have hinted on a number of occasions that that they have stockpiles of the full range of chemical and biological weapons. The Israelis have shown before (for example in Iraq and Libya) that they can pressure/manipulate (using AIPAC et al) a US president into conducting regime change against someone the Israelis don't like. Conversely why would Assad do something stupid like killing some civilians with poison gas? It's not going to win anything for him and would bring down the wrath of the world on him. This use of poison gas reeks of an Israeli operation to get the US involved in getting rid of Assad. Remember the USS Liberty affair where the Israelis shot up an American ship (killing and wounding dozens of Americans) and tried to blame it on the Egyptians in order to get the Americans into their war? And what about the "Lavon affair" where the Israelis blew up an American library and information center in Cairo and tried to blame it on the Egyptians in order to get the US into a war with Egypt? And, of course, the Israelis easily get ALL of the US media to jump in with both feet saying what a horrible thing Assad has done and the US has to start bombing and sending in troops RIGHT NOW! You need to do some reading and thinking , folks, and not let the Israelis railroad us into YET ANOTHER DISASTER!

    17B 7:47 AM EDT
    Brian Williams had his Iraq, Hillary had her Bosnia, and Trump had 'My Vietnam' in the form of sexual promiscuity in the 60s (his Howard Stern interview).

    There's a pattern here. Perhaps Fox can have Ollie North have all three on his War Stories show.

    trytobenice 7:28 AM EDT
    The easily swayed television media, without scruples, is why we have trump in the white house. They promoted his campaign and now this. Everything for ratings. Disgusting.
    Javalin2016 7:26 AM EDT
    Why is Brian Williams even considered a journalist and why is he still on air?

    As for the other comments, we went down this rabbit hole before with W., and look where it got us.

    The media hasn't learned a thing in 16 years, so don't expect anything different when the Punk in Chief attacks a country that didn't attack us. Sounds familiar?

    edbyronadams 7:25 AM EDT
    The liberals sat on their hands when Obama ordered the firing of more than one hundred cruise missiles at Libya with less justification. They haven't got the credibility to complain now. Holding the "other party" accountable while ignoring the transgressions of your own won't carry much weight.
    michaelanncb 6:59 AM EDT
    Comp[letely agree. Anybody remember weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? And why should Trump be so sympathetic to those poor children but he won;t let them in the U.S. and cuts foreign aid which will affect refugee camps? What were the media thinking to jump on this bandwagon? Can't ANYBODY be trusted?
    LeonDeZurich 6:19 AM EDT
    Who would have thought that all Trump needed to do to convince his critics was to throw some bombs around? What's Brian Williams going to call it if Trump uses nukes - a spectacular show? Count me among the disgusted.
    broaddusromu 3:13 AM EDT
    Sick, sick, and sicker. The United States is run by a sick and bloodthirsty collection of imbeciles who can only get their kicks by attacking and killing people who have done nothing to this country. Look at Iraq, and look at Libya. And their bloodthirsty dumbed-down constituents robotically cheer them on.

    This is what this land of liberty is truly about. My country, 'tis of thee.

    Eilis Nic Ionmhain 3:32 AM EDT
    It's not just the U.S. The international media and politicians are pleased with President Trump for the first time since he took office -or was even elected. "Getting along with people" or negotiating solutions, obviously didn't appeal to them. It seems that risking conflict with Russia, or plunging Syria into further difficulty, is a better deal.

    RT are the only source of criticism I've encountered, but that's from Moscow.

    If a show of strength is needed to extract a better settlement for the Syrian people, that's fine, but the comfortable reaction of President Trump's opponents creates worry as to what really drives them, and how that will impact in the Middle East, or in relations with Russia.

    51fordf2 1:49 AM EDT
    @Outofshape: Chemical weapons are not "outlawed" but are banned by an international treaty. But this treaty is only binding on the nations that ratify it. Three nations have not ratified and one has signed but not ratified. The treat took effect in 1997, not 100 years ago. This augments the Geneva Protocol which took effect in 1925, also not 100 years ago.
    Get real people, 4/8/2017 10:17 PM EDT [Edited]
    Trump succeeded AGAIN. The discussion of his ties to Russia have been pushed off the front page.

    Wow. So Trump is willing to kill to get the discussion off of him being a Russian puppet.

    Who will need to die when the Senate hearings get back underway?

    Mark Sparkman 4/8/2017 9:40 PM EDT
    The MSM is reliving the attacks on Baghdad - when the world and the American public was transfixed on the bombing and the anti-aircraft counters that night. They - the MSM - can't get over the drama of the night and the visual impact it had. They are continuously looking for a repeat performance.
    Andromeda5 4/8/2017 9:33 PM EDT [Edited]
    This strike was three-quarters distraction from the Russian collusion story and one quarter little man/baby itching to play with his big toys. Yeah, inching towards war, just what so many people feared when this moron got into power. I hope all the other morons who voted him into power will be happy with the US going to war all over the place and dragging everyone else into it ... yeah, the world thanks you *sarcasm* for those moron voters because you probably missed it being the morons that you are.
    DoNotEnterYourDisplayName 4/8/2017 10:04 PM EDT
    And yet the liberals are soiling themselves in delight over this bombing. In fact, Hillary Clinton has done several speeches/interviews in the last 48 hours calling for a full-scale bombing campaign against all Syrian military targets, even the ones embedded in civilian neighborhoods. Maybe stop shilling for a moment and realize that the MIC has its money sunk deep in the pockets of warmongers in both parties. Recognize that the problem transcends party. And, when you realize the scope of the problem, be glad that Trump isn't as trigger-happy as the rest of these clowns.

    [Apr 09, 2017] Former CIA Officer The Intelligence Confirms The Russian Account On Syria

    Apr 09, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
    Authored by Robert Parry via ConsortiumNews.com,

    President Trump earned neocon applause for his hasty decision to attack Syria and kill about a dozen Syrians, but his rash act has all the earmarks of a "wag the dog" moment.

    Just two days after news broke of an alleged poison-gas attack in northern Syria, President Trump brushed aside advice from some U.S. intelligence analysts doubting the Syrian regime's guilt and launched a lethal retaliatory missile strike against a Syrian airfield.

    Trump immediately won plaudits from Official Washington, especially from neoconservatives who have been trying to wrestle control of his foreign policy away from his nationalist and personal advisers since the days after his surprise victory on Nov. 8.

    There is also an internal dispute over the intelligence. On Thursday night, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said the U.S. intelligence community assessed with a "high degree of confidence" that the Syrian government had dropped a poison gas bomb on civilians in Idlib province.

    But a number of intelligence sources have made contradictory assessments, saying the preponderance of evidence suggests that Al Qaeda-affiliated rebels were at fault, either by orchestrating an intentional release of a chemical agent as a provocation or by possessing containers of poison gas that ruptured during a conventional bombing raid.

    One intelligence source told me that the most likely scenario was a staged event by the rebels intended to force Trump to reverse a policy, announced only days earlier, that the U.S. government would no longer seek "regime change" in Syria and would focus on attacking the common enemy, Islamic terror groups that represent the core of the rebel forces.

    The source said the Trump national security team split between the President's close personal advisers, such as nationalist firebrand Steve Bannon and son-in-law Jared Kushner, on one side and old-line neocons who have regrouped under National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster, an Army general who was a protégé of neocon favorite Gen. David Petraeus.

    White House Infighting

    In this telling, the earlier ouster of retired Gen. Michael Flynn as national security adviser and this week's removal of Bannon from the National Security Council were key steps in the reassertion of neocon influence inside the Trump presidency. The strange personalities and ideological extremism of Flynn and Bannon made their ousters easier, but they were obstacles that the neocons wanted removed.

    Though Bannon and Kushner are often presented as rivals, the source said, they shared the belief that Trump should tell the truth about Syria, revealing the Obama administration's CIA analysis that a fatal sarin gas attack in 2013 was a "false-flag" operation intended to sucker President Obama into fully joining the Syrian war on the side of the rebels - and the intelligence analysts' similar beliefs about Tuesday's incident.

    Instead, Trump went along with the idea of embracing the initial rush to judgment blaming Assad for the Idlib poison-gas event. The source added that Trump saw Thursday night's missile assault as a way to change the conversation in Washington, where his administration has been under fierce attack from Democrats claiming that his election resulted from a Russian covert operation .

    If changing the narrative was Trump's goal, it achieved some initial success with several of Trump's fiercest neocon critics, such as neocon Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, praising the missile strike, as did Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The neocons and Israel have long sought "regime change" in Damascus even if the ouster of Assad might lead to a victory by Islamic extremists associated with Al Qaeda and/or the Islamic State.

    Wagging the Dog

    Trump employing a "wag the dog" strategy, in which he highlights his leadership on an international crisis to divert attention from domestic political problems, is reminiscent of President Bill Clinton's decision to attack Serbia in 1999 as impeachment clouds were building around his sexual relationship with intern Monica Lewinsky.

    President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at joint press conference on Feb. 15. 2017. (Screen shot from Whitehouse.gov)

    Trump's advisers, in briefing the press on Thursday night, went to great lengths to highlight Trump's compassion toward the victims of the poison gas and his decisiveness in bombing Assad's military in contrast to Obama's willingness to allow the intelligence community to conduct a serious review of the evidence surrounding the 2013 sarin-gas case.

    Ultimately, Obama listened to his intelligence advisers who told him there was no "slam-dunk" evidence implicating Assad's regime and he pulled back from a military strike at the last minute – while publicly maintaining the fiction that the U.S. government was certain of Assad's guilt.

    In both cases – 2013 and 2017 – there were strong reasons to doubt Assad's responsibility. In 2013, he had just invited United Nations inspectors into Syria to investigate cases of alleged rebel use of chemical weapons and thus it made no sense that he would launch a sarin attack in the Damascus suburbs, guaranteeing that the U.N. inspectors would be diverted to that case.

    Similarly, now, Assad's military has gained a decisive advantage over the rebels and he had just scored a major diplomatic victory with the Trump administration's announcement that the U.S. was no longer seeking "regime change" in Syria. The savvy Assad would know that a chemical weapon attack now would likely result in U.S. retaliation and jeopardize the gains that his military has achieved with Russian and Iranian help.

    The counter-argument to this logic – made by The New York Times and other neocon-oriented news outlets – essentially maintains that Assad is a crazed barbarian who was testing out his newfound position of strength by baiting President Trump. Of course, if that were the case, it would have made sense that Assad would have boasted of his act, rather than deny it.

    But logic and respect for facts no longer prevail inside Official Washington, nor inside the mainstream U.S. news media.

    Intelligence Uprising

    Alarm within the U.S. intelligence community about Trump's hasty decision to attack Syria reverberated from the Middle East back to Washington, where former CIA officer Philip Giraldi reported hearing from his intelligence contacts in the field that they were shocked at how the new poison-gas story was being distorted by Trump and the mainstream U.S. news media.

    Giraldi told Scott Horton's Webcast : "I'm hearing from sources on the ground in the Middle East, people who are intimately familiar with the intelligence that is available who are saying that the essential narrative that we're all hearing about the Syrian government or the Russians using chemical weapons on innocent civilians is a sham."

    Giraldi said his sources were more in line with an analysis postulating an accidental release of the poison gas after an Al Qaeda arms depot was hit by a Russian airstrike.

    "The intelligence confirms pretty much the account that the Russians have been giving which is that they hit a warehouse where the rebels – now these are rebels that are, of course, connected with Al Qaeda – where the rebels were storing chemicals of their own and it basically caused an explosion that resulted in the casualties. Apparently the intelligence on this is very clear."

    Giraldi said the anger within the intelligence community over the distortion of intelligence to justify Trump's military retaliation was so great that some covert officers were considering going public.

    "People in both the agency [the CIA] and in the military who are aware of the intelligence are freaking out about this because essentially Trump completely misrepresented what he already should have known – but maybe he didn't – and they're afraid that this is moving toward a situation that could easily turn into an armed conflict," Giraldi said before Thursday night's missile strike. "They are astonished by how this is being played by the administration and by the U.S. media."

    One-Sided Coverage

    The mainstream U.S. media has presented the current crisis with the same profound neocon bias that has infected the coverage of Syria and the larger Middle East for decades. For instance, The New York Times on Friday published a lead story by Michael R. Gordon and Michael D. Shear that treated the Syrian government's responsibility for the poison-gas incident as flat-fact. The lengthy story did not even deign to include the denials from Syria and Russia that they were responsible for any intentional deployment of poison gas.

    The article also fit with Trump's desire that he be portrayed as a decisive and forceful leader. He is depicted as presiding over intense deliberations of war or peace and displaying a deep humanitarianism regarding the poison-gas victims, one of the rare moments when the Times, which has become a reliable neocon propaganda sheet, has written anything favorable about Trump at all.

    According to Syrian reports on Friday, the U.S. attack killed 13 people, including five soldiers at the airbase.

    Gordon, whose service to the neocon cause is notorious, was the lead author with Judith Miller of the Times' bogus "aluminum tube" story in 2002 which falsely claimed that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was reconstituting a nuclear-weapons program, an article that was then cited by President George W. Bush's aides as a key argument for invading Iraq in 2003.

    Regarding this week's events, Trump's desperation to reverse his negative media coverage and the dubious evidence blaming Assad for the Idlib incident could fit with the "Wag the Dog" movie from 1997 in which an embattled president creates a phony foreign crisis in Albania.

    A fake war scene in the dark 1997 comedy "Wag the Dog," which showed a girl and her cat fleeing a bombardment in Albania.

    In the movie, the White House operation is a cynical psychological operation to convince the American people that innocent Albanian children, including an attractive girl carrying a cat, are in danger when, In reality, the girl was an actor posing before a green screen that allowed scenes of fiery ruins to be inserted as background.

    Today, because Trump and his administration are now committed to convincing Americans that Assad really was responsible for Tuesday's poison-gas tragedy, the prospects for a full and open investigation are effectively ended. We may never know if there is truth to those allegations or whether we are being manipulated by another "wag the dog" psyop.

    [Apr 09, 2017] Russian FM US Secretary of State discuss US strike on Syria in phone call

    Apr 09, 2017 | www.rt.com
    A thorough and impartial investigation must be launched following the alleged chemical attack in Idlib, which the US cited as the reason for its missile strike, Lavrov told the American official.

    The US attack ordered by President Trump only played into terrorists' hands, Russia's top diplomat told Tillerson.

    US missile strike killed people fighting terrorists – top Assad adviser to RT

    The US Secretary of State is set to travel to Moscow next week and hold meetings with a number of Russian officials, including Lavrov.

    Experts should be sent to Syrian airbase attacked by US to carry out chemical probe – Russian MoD https://t.co/DKcy06LHNm pic.twitter.com/F4OXX2tDrA

    - RT (@RT_com) April 8, 2017

    Earlier Saturday, British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson canceled his planned trip to Moscow. Citing the recent events in Syria, the UK official pulled out of the Russia trip just hours before he was supposed to depart. Russia's Foreign Ministry spokeswoman has described the cancellation as "absurd."

    [Apr 09, 2017] Trump now supports removal of Assad and another American led genocide

    Notable quotes:
    "... This shit makes no sense and I am certain in years to come we will find out that this attack was instigated by the supposed allies of the US. ..."
    "... Where have all the little orange Trumpsters that were calling Clinton " Killary" and Obama warmonger gone now? ..."
    Apr 09, 2017 | discussion.theguardian.com
    pittens -> tonystoke , 2d ago
    Replaced by isis and a another American led genocide.
    Phil Gollin -> tonystoke , 2d ago

    No, the USA is just being mindlessly violent. It has spent years supporting terrorist groups in Syria (both directly and via Saudi Arabia) - it is just a demonstration of US aggression and hypocrisy.

    Harvey North -> tonystoke, 2d ago

    Yeah, it would have been all sweetness and light, like Libya and Iraq if this action had been taken by Obama

    Peter Gunn -> tonystoke , 2d ago

    If this action had been taken by Obama

    The history of the post WW2 world is that the US has been on the wrong side on every big conflict although I will give you Serbia was complicated.

    Anything they do is wrong. This is a display of his prowess and to consider it as anything else is simplistic tosh

    roccov -> tonystoke , 7 Apr 2017 08:54

    finally there is a US president that doesn't ignore his own red lines.

    That's laughable. Trump crossed his own red line about not intervening in foreign wars. Also read this:

    Even more confounding was Trump's declaration that the Idlib gas attack crossed "many, many lines – beyond a red line". The comment came only hours after the president had lambasted Barack Obama for laying down the original red line on Assad's use of chemical weapons in 2012 and then not attacking when the line was crossed in August 2013.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/05/syria-chemical-attack-trump-administration-response-assad

    ThomasPaine3 -> FatCat08 , 7 Apr 2017 09:45
    The US were never bombing ISIL in all seriousness. If they were, they would have joined forces with Assad and Russia and ISIS would have been vaporized. The truth is rather more complex. ISIL is funded, supported and directed in its operations by Israeli, Saudi, Qatari and US assets on the ground in Syria. This was discovered after Aleppo fell. 18 members of the command structure of Al Nusra/ISIL were discovered in a bunker in East Aleppo while the Syrian army were evacuating the town. The 'rebels' to whom they gave safe passage - teamed up with those in Idlib and were responsible for another false flag operation to draw international outrage and US direct attacks on the Syrian armed forces.

    The only people laughing this morning are the head-chopping fascists, that the West hypocritically claims we must defeat. If anyone can't see that this chemical attack only benefitted Al Nusra they are either lying or stupid.

    jondonnis2000 , 7 Apr 2017 08:26
    I get the feeling he's only done it to say "Look, see, I'm not in bed with Russia". To devert the attention from the ongoing Russian links investigation.
    Earl_Grey , 7 Apr 2017 08:27
    It certainly appears to be a decision made on the run catching US allies off guard.

    Rather dangerous to have someone like this with the ability to start a nuclear war. Probably a good idea to stock up on non perishable food items.

    HHeLiBe , 7 Apr 2017 08:28
    Assad was finally at the point where he was ready to make his peace with the international community and continue ruling with their support.
    But he somehow managed to snatch failure from the jaws of success.
    No wonder the bumbling fool has left his nation in such disarray. Share Facebook Twitter
    Phil Gollin HHeLiBe , 7 Apr 2017 08:35
    .

    Errrrr. . . . . I think you mean Trump there.

    londonhongkong1 HHeLiBe , 7 Apr 2017 08:36
    care to explain why he would launch an attack which has not brought the US into direct involvement in the conflict? Ah yes, he's a "bumbling fool"....that must be it.

    This shit makes no sense and I am certain in years to come we will find out that this attack was instigated by the supposed allies of the US.

    MABKenward -> MajorHumpage , 7 Apr 2017 08:53
    Oh look! Oil prices have jumped. Now, can you remind who's in Trump's team? Share Facebook Twitter
    Ranger75th -> MajorHumpage , 7 Apr 2017 09:25
    $800,000 * 59 = a lot of money.

    But this has been the policy of the US and UK for the last 25 years. Perpetual war in middle east. Surely we cannot blame trump. Trump did not even want to be involved there. But it must be difficult to be the POTUS and having dozens of lobbyists, advisors, generals all day remidning you that bombs is the only solution, you end up getting convinced

    Joe Dert -> ChrisD58 , 7 Apr 2017 08:43
    "Trump finally does something right"

    According to himself he didn't. There's a 2013 tweet where Trump told Obama to "save his powder" and not get involved in Syria over chemical weapons. Of course now he has the gall to criticize Obama for leaving a mess when Obama just did what Trump said. Consistently and clearness isn't exactly Trump's strong suit.

    Where have all the little orange Trumpsters that were calling Clinton " Killary" and Obama warmonger gone now?

    nishville -> hoytred , 7 Apr 2017 09:34
    A passenger plane is shot down by someone, before the last piece hits the ground Russia is hit with the sanctions - evidence of the crime substituted by orchestrated media shrieks. Someone uses poisonous gas on civilians and Russian ally is attacked with cruise missiles - evidence of the crime is substituted by statements given by the only people who were caught using chemical weapons in Syria and yet another media lynch mob.

    We are pushed into war by a bunch of greedy murderous liars. None of them give two fucks about the Syrians or their children, they want their pipeline through Syria and it will be built even if it takes a murder of thousands of people. Do you realize what kind of monsters we allow to rule our lives?

    somebody_stopme , 7 Apr 2017 08:30
    Nothing is strong word. It accomplices demand for defence industries which they wanted. Share Facebook Twitter
    UrinalShuvinsky -> somebody_stopme , 7 Apr 2017 09:24
    Trump's meeting the Chinese premiere this week, so no doubt he thinks this will send the message that he's not to be messed with, a man of action etc. Of course the Chinese will be thinking things like 'idiotic, hasty, premature,' etc. But yes, guided cruise missiles cost a few million a pop, so spunking a 59 on a dusty Syrian airfield full of (mostly inoperative) ancient rusting Migs will do the arms suppliers no harm.
    Commentator6 , 7 Apr 2017 08:30
    Assad with Russian help has pretty much won this war so why would he use WMD's at this point?

    The US must provide proof of this use of WMD ... chucking 59 cruise missiles into the mix without checking your facts seems somewhat careless.

    [Apr 09, 2017] Trump, Syria, and Chemical Weapons What We Know, What We Dont, and the Dangers Ahead naked capitalism

    Notable quotes:
    "... I can't verify the symptoms of sarin, but if you watch the videos posted you will note the people walking among the victims and those picking up and carrying victims are not wearing any protective gear. No gas masks, no protective suits, no protective footwear, and no gloves. ..."
    "... I'd say this pretty well rules out sarin, because sarin can be absorbed through the skin. ..."
    Apr 09, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
    Damson , April 7, 2017 at 2:00 pm

    More ( repost of comment on Moon of Alabama):

    This best way to see immediately that the victims have not died from sarin intoxication is that in almost every case their skin is red/pink. Sarin turns people blue - always. Sarin makes people puke on themselves, urinate on themselves, shit themselves. Show me the evidence of sarin. Scores and scores of "sarin victims," not a single one has the constellation of symptoms produced by sarin. Not a single one.

    The red/pink color of the victims in the vids suggests the people were executed with cyanide or carbon monoxide, which, in turn, suggests these scenes are staged after the executions. The evidence for KS is just now being collected. The evidence for Ghouta is very, very strong: those people were gassed by the terrorists using, probably, CO.

    Please quit spreading the lie that these are sarin victims and sarin attacks. They are false flags and now that there is a moron in the WH we see how effective those false flags will be unless the public understands what is going on biologically.

    My PhD is in pharmacology, specializing in neuropharmacology, University of Virginia. My postdoc was at Harvard in neurosciences. I am a lawyer. I know bullshit when I smell it. This sarin bullshit has to stop. " (Posted by: Denis | Apr 7, 2017 8:09:40 AM | 47)

    Procopius , April 8, 2017 at 10:23 am

    I can't verify the symptoms of sarin, but if you watch the videos posted you will note the people walking among the victims and those picking up and carrying victims are not wearing any protective gear. No gas masks, no protective suits, no protective footwear, and no gloves.

    I'd say this pretty well rules out sarin, because sarin can be absorbed through the skin.

    If you thought someone was the victim of sarin you would not want to expose your bare skin to possible residue. I say this based on the CBR training I got in the Army thirty years ago. Maybe current doctrine is different.

    [Apr 09, 2017] Russia condemns US missile strike on Syria, suspends key air agreement by David Filipov

    Apr 09, 2017 | www.washingtonpost.com

    President Vladimir Putin's spokesman said the risk of confrontation between aerial assets of the U.S.-led coalition and Russia has "significantly increased" after President Trump ordered the launch of 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles at a Syrian air base in retaliation for a chemical attack that killed scores of civilians.

    Later Friday, the Russian Defense Ministry announced that it has officially informed the United States that it is suspending its obligations under the memorandum at midnight.

    Under the pact, the two countries have traded information about flights by a U.S.-led coalition targeting the Islamic State and Russian planes operating in Syria in support of the Assad government. Moscow was taking its action, the Defense Ministry said, because it sees the U.S. strike "as a grave violation of the memorandum."

    During a special U.N. Security Council session on the airstrikes Friday, Russia's United Nations envoy condemned what he called an "illegitimate action by the United States."

    "The consequences of this for regional and international stability could be extremely serious," Deputy Ambassador Vladimir Safronkov said. "The U.S. has often talked about the need to combat international terrorism," he said, yet it attacked the Syrian air force, which he claimed is leading that fight in Syria.

    "It's not difficult to imagine how much the spirits of terrorists have been raised by this action from the United States," Safronkov said.

    ... ... ...

    The council has set aside for now a separate discussion of whether to condemn the Assad government for Tuesday's chemical attack. Russia is expected to veto a resolution supported by the United States, Britain and France.

    Putin's spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, earlier claimed that the Syrian government had no chemical weapons and dismissed the Trump administration's explanation as an excuse to enter the conflict.

    "President Putin considers the American strikes against Syria an aggression against a sovereign government in violations of the norms of international law, and under a far-fetched pretext," Peskov told reporters. "This step by Washington is causing significant damage to Russian-American relations, which are already in a deplorable state."

    ... ... ..

    Konashenkov said the attack destroyed a warehouse, classrooms, a cafeteria, six Mig-23 fighter jets that were being repaired and a radar station. The runway and other aircraft were not affected, he said.

    ... ... ...

    Maria Zakharova, a spokeswoman for Russia's Foreign Ministry, also dismissed the U.S. assertion that the attacks were a response to this week's chemical weapon attack in northern Syria, which left scores dead in a village in Idlib province - one of the last strongholds of anti-Assad factions.

    "It is obvious that the strike by U.S. cruise missiles was prepared well in advance," Zakharova said on Russian state television. "It is clear to any specialist that the decision to deliver the strikes was made in Washington before the Idlib events, which were simply used as a pretext for demonstrating force."

    Putin's spokesman said the Russian president considered the attack an attempt to distract attention from the heavy civilian casualties caused by a U.S.-backed offensive to capture the northern Iraqi city of Mosul from the Islamic State group.

    Dan Lamothe and David Nakamura in Washington and Andrew Roth in Moscow contributed to this report.

    Jeff Black, 4/8/2017 3:46 AM EDT [Edited]

    You Liberals lost the election because you had a failed candidate. This led you to your safe rooms where you thumb sucked and did your bed wetting while playing with your tinker toys and dreamed of a Russian conspiracy between Putin and Trump. Got any evidence on the Russian deal? I didn't think so.

    3August, 4/7/2017 9:52 PM EDT

    For a British diplomatic official to call Assada a war criminal is beyond reason. He is a duly elected leader of a sovereign country who is fighting not only opposition rebels but also international terrorist within his country. He is not attacking other countries as is the West. Who has destroyed Yemen with the help of the US, Saudia Arabia. They are the true war criminals!

    georgex9 4/7/2017 9:31 PM EDT
    The U.S. policy of trying change dictatorships has not been working in the Middle East. And, yet, here we are in Syria trying to oust this brutal dictator who now has support from Russia. Our objective in Syria ought to be limited to defeating radical religious fanatics like ISIS. If Assad is replaced who knows what subsequent turmoil will follow. Of course, the warmongers in Congress are happy with this missile attack in Syria. This means more profits for the makers of the cruise weapons.
    whatthe---- 4/7/2017 10:39 PM EDT
    What's to complain about, more jobs now available in the munitions industry.

    ezpaddler, 4/7/2017 8:18 PM EDT [Edited]

    The President is prohibited from starting a war without the approval of Congress unless we are under the threat of impending attack. This of course is not the case.

    Once again Trump ignores the Constitution.

    NS Bingo, 4/7/2017 8:32 PM EDT

    Just like Bill Clinton bombed an Aspirin factory without approval from congress.

    ezpaddler, 4/7/2017 8:50 PM EDT

    Why do neocons always try to defend the crimes of NOW by referencing the past?
    Weak, pathetic, Sad.

    BostonCommon, 4/7/2017 7:43 PM EDT

    Why not Trump in front of the Hague for crimes against humanity? With 3 military actions he has killed over 150 children.. Mosul 300 civilians, mostly children.. Syria attack last night 6 children... And the Navy Seal engagement a few days after his Inaugural.. 7 children.
    And he hasnt even been office 100 days..

    supermoe88, 4/7/2017 7:38 PM EDT

    While the use of chemical weapons is abhorrent and should be condemned, since when was the U.S. the globally elected policeman of the world? No country has the right to attack another sovereign country, which has not initiated an attack on it, without an approved UN resolution. This is an illegal act and a blatant violation of international law, as Putin rightly states. If Trump is so concerned by the killing of babies then why has he not condemned the killing of babies by the U.S. bombing of innocent civilians and babies in Iraq last week?? What a double standard!

    Vladdie Luvs Donnie, 4/7/2017 7:39 PM EDT

    We're the biggest Suckers.

    BostonCommon, 4/7/2017 7:23 PM EDT

    biggest winners today? ISIS.. That airfield launched bombing raids on them, as well.

    AMR56 4/7/2017 6:53 PM EDT
    I've been watching "Platoon" and "Full Metal Jacket" recently. It's clear to me that history is repeating itself in East Ukraine and Syria.

    America is the world's most powerful country. It needs to make the right decisions about which side to back...otherwise defeat beckons. Again.

    sasha59 4/7/2017 6:44 PM EDT
    So MAGA hat wearing Trump lovers, are you or your kids ready to take off that hat, put on a helmet and some Kevlar, and go fight in Donny's new war if this escalates?

    [Apr 09, 2017] Is Assad to blame for the chemical weapons attack in Syria?

    Apr 09, 2017 | www.dw.com

    More than 80 people were killed by suspected chemical weapons in Khan Sheikhoun . That is about the only thing certain about the attack. Western statements place blame at the feet of Syria's President Bashar al-Assad, an accusation Damascus and Moscow contest .

    The Syrian regime may not have had a compelling motive, believes Günther Meyer, the director of the Research Center for the Arab World at the Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz. "Only armed opposition groups could profit from an attack with chemical weapons," he told DW. "With their backs against the wall, they have next to no chance of opposing the regime militarily. As President [Donald] Trump's recent statements show, such actions make it possible for anti-Assad groups to receive further support."

    Former President Barack Obama famously drew a "red line" in 2012. "We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus," he said at the time. Meyer views the statement as an "invitation for Assad's opponents to use chemical weapons and make the Assad regime responsible for it."

    Rebels' chemical weapons

    In 2014, investigative journalist Seymour Hersh reported on opposition forces' ability to use chemical weapons. In an article for the "London Review of Books," Hersh obtained documents from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the Pentagon's own spy organization. They suggested that the Nusra Front, a Syrian offshoot of al Qaeda, had access to the sarin nerve agent. A chemical weapons attack on the Damascus suburb of Ghouta in August 2013, which was blamed on Assad, was carried out by rebels, according to Hersh's article. They wanted Washington to presume Assad had crossed Obama's "red line" and draw the US into a war.

    Syrien UN Inspektoren Untersuchung Giftgas Einsatz Sarin Damaskus (AFP/Getty Images)

    There are doubts over whether the suspected chemical weapons strike in Ghouta came from Assad's forces

    The Ghouta attack

    Obama's Director of National Intelligence at the time, James Clapper, was able to dissuade Obama from ordering a cruise missile strike, according to a newly-published book by Mideast expert Michael Lüders. Presumably, a deciding factor was an analysis of the chemical weapons used in Ghouta, conducted by a British military lab, which found the gas to be of a different composition than the Syrian army possessed.

    The attack took place while UN weapons inspectors were in the country, on Assad's invitation, said Meyer. Assad had asked them to investigate a chemical weapons attack from March 2013 outside Aleppo, which killed Syrian soldiers.

    "It makes no sense that the regime would carry out an attack with inspectors in the country," he said.

    [Apr 08, 2017] Was Trumps Syria Strike Illegal?

    Apr 08, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
    Fred C. Dobbs -> Fred C. Dobbs... , April 08, 2017 at 10:29 AM
    Was Trump's Syria Strike Illegal? Explaining
    Presidential War Powers https://nyti.ms/2oaFfoB
    NYT - CHARLIE SAVAGE -mAPRIL 7, 2017

    WASHINGTON - President Trump ordered the military on Thursday to carry out a missile attack on Syrian forces for using chemical weapons against civilians. The unilateral attack lacked authorization from Congress or from the United Nations Security Council, raising the question of whether he had legal authority to commit the act of war.

    Mr. Trump and top members of his administration initially justified the operation as a punishment for Syria's violating the ban on chemical weapons and an attempt at deterrence. But they did not make clear whether that was a legal argument or just a policy rationale.

    The strike raises two sets of legal issues. One involves international law and when it is lawful for any nation to attack another. The other involves domestic law and who gets to decide - the president or Congress - whether the United States should attack another country.

    Did Trump have clear authority under international law to attack Syria?

    No. The United Nations Charter, a treaty the United States has ratified, recognizes two justifications for using force on another country's soil without its consent: the permission of the Security Council or a self-defense claim. In the case of Syria, the United Nations did not approve the strike, and the Defense Department justified it as "intended to deter the regime from using chemical weapons again," which is not self-defense.

    Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson, in a briefing with reporters, invoked Syria's violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention and a related Security Council resolution from 2013, saying, "The use of prohibited chemical weapons, which violates a number of international norms and violates existing agreements, called for this type of a response, which is a kinetic military response."

    However, while the resolution said the Security Council would impose "measures" if anyone used chemical weapons in Syria in the future, it did not directly authorize force. The chemical weapons treaty does not provide an enforcement mechanism authorizing other parties to attack violators as punishment.

    Mr. Trump's attack was different from the United States' bombings targeting the Islamic State in rebel-held areas of Syria. The United States has justified those airstrikes as part of the collective self-defense of Iraq, which asked for help against the group. But Syria did not use its chemical weapons against the United States or an ally like Iraq.

    Could the strike be justified as a humanitarian intervention?

    Some human rights advocates have argued that customary international law, which develops from the practices of states, also permits using force to stop an atrocity. Others worry that accepting such a doctrine could create a loophole that would be subject to misuse, eroding important constraints on war. The United States has not taken the position that humanitarian interventions are lawful absent Security Council authorization.

    Still, in 1999, the United States participated in NATO's air war to stop the Serbian ethnic-cleansing campaign in Kosovo, even though the operation lacked a Security Council authorization. The Clinton administration never offered a clear explanation for why that operation complied with international law. Instead, it cited a list of "factors" - like the threat to peace and stability and the danger of a humanitarian disaster - without offering a theory for why those factors made that war lawful. In a seeming acknowledgment that this was dubious, the administration said the Kosovo intervention should not serve as a precedent.

    Did Trump have domestic legal authority to attack Syria?

    The answer is murky because of a split between the apparent intent of the Constitution and how the country has been governed in practice. Most legal scholars agree that the founders wanted Congress to decide whether to go to war, except when the country is under an attack. But presidents of both parties have a long history of carrying out military operations without authorization from Congress, especially since the end of World War II, when the United States maintained a large standing army instead of demobilizing.

    In the modern era, executive branch lawyers have argued that the president, as commander in chief, may use military force unilaterally if he decides a strike would be in the national interest, at least when its anticipated nature, scope and duration fall short of "a 'war' in the constitutional sense," as a Clinton administration lawyer wrote in the context of a contemplated intervention in Haiti. ...

    Fred C. Dobbs -> Fred C. Dobbs... , April 08, 2017 at 10:35 AM
    The War Powers Resolution (also known as the War Powers Resolution of 1973 or the War Powers Act) (50 U.S.C. 1541–1548) is a federal law intended to check the president's power to commit the United States to an armed conflict without the consent of the U.S. Congress. The Resolution was adopted in the form of a United States Congress joint resolution. It provides that the U.S. President can send U.S. Armed Forces into action abroad only by declaration of war by Congress, "statutory authorization," or in case of "a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."

    The War Powers Resolution requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30-day withdrawal period, without a Congressional authorization for use of military force (AUMF) or a declaration of war by the United States. The resolution was passed by two-thirds of Congress, overriding a presidential veto. ... (Wikipedia)

    (That is, IN THE SHORT TERM, the President
    can do 'as necessary', i.e., as he pleases,
    with US armed forces, overseas at least.)

    Fred C. Dobbs -> Fred C. Dobbs... , April 08, 2017 at 11:12 AM
    War without an endgame in Syria
    http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/editorials/2017/04/07/esyria/YAuy4QnGZYGsCvWC8PGNdN/story.html?event=event25
    via @BostonGlobe - editorial - April 8

    'The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory," wrote Sun Tzu in his book "The Art of War."

    That's good advice - and advice that the author of "The Art of the Deal" should take to heart when thinking about the act of war that he unilaterally ordered this week against the Syrian regime. A cruise missile fusillade is an efficient way to wreck an airbase. But it is only a military tactic, not a strategy for victory.

    To be sure, there won't be any victors in the years-long human tragedy unfolding in Syria. The poison gas used against civilians there is a stark reminder of man's capacity for indiscriminate cruelty as well as the international community's inability or unwillingness to restrain it.

    Restraint is important when it comes to waging war. It is the reason our constitution prevents the president from launching one alone. Congress restrains the executive by approving or rejecting war. Donald Trump certainly thought so when he tweeted, on August 30, 2013: "The President must get congressional approval before attacking Syria - big mistake if he does not!" Just so. Congress considered military action in Syria after a poison gas attack and opposed it.

    Trump must seek immediate congressional approval for continued conflict in Syria. The idea that the Authorization for the Use of Military Force passed in the wake of the 9/11 attacks is somehow applicable here is farcical. The Assad regime is not Al Qaeda.

    One of the first questions that legislators will - or should - ask, and which the president must explain, is this: What are US goals in Syria, and how will these particular military actions help achieve them? There may indeed be answers to those questions, but they have yet to be brought before the American people, in whose name those missiles are being fired.

    Articulating a coherent strategy and the way that strategy will be implemented is critical, because it forces a unity of effort between military, diplomatic, humanitarian, and intelligence efforts, which have often been at cross purposes.

    The Trump administration is coming late to the war in Syria. Yet it seems keen to fight first and afterwards look for a victory. What they should also be looking for is an exit strategy from one of the world's bloodiest quagmires.

    (Indeed, given that there ARE US troops on the
    ground in Syria, and have been for some time,
    an AUMF would seem to be necessary.)

    ilsm -> Fred C. Dobbs... , April 08, 2017 at 11:50 AM
    The US has not listened to Sun Tsu since 1945.

    In Syria US is bin Laden's heirs and assigns' Air Force.

    While no one sees pictures of starving Shiite kids in Yemen. Or the results of cluster munitions on civilians in Sanaa.

    ilsm -> Fred C. Dobbs... , April 08, 2017 at 11:47 AM
    There is no evidence for the national government of Syria to have done the 2013 or last week's supposed sarin attacks.

    http://www.dw.com/en/is-assad-to-blame-for-the-chemical-weapons-attack-in-syria/a-38330217

    Unless I see evidence of ordnance that delivered the volatile liquefied sarin, and there would be plenty, I will not accept the unsubstantiated fake news from NYT.

    To say Assad had nothing to lose is mind reading.

    US will bomb away toward regime change and another Yemen for less truth than this.

    And passing jihadi propaganda as reason for becoming their air support is insane.

    Fred C. Dobbs -> ilsm... , April 08, 2017 at 12:37 PM
    ... Victims of a suspected chemical attack in Syria appeared to show symptoms consistent with reaction to a nerve agent, the World Health Organization said on Wednesday.

    "Some cases appear to show additional signs consistent with exposure to organophosphorus chemicals, a category of chemicals that includes nerve agents," WHO said in a statement, putting the death toll at at least 70.

    The United States has said the deaths were caused by sarin nerve gas dropped by Syrian aircraft. Russia has said it believes poison gas had leaked from a rebel chemical weapons depot struck by Syrian bombs.

    Syria attack symptoms consistent with nerve agent
    use: WHO http://reut.rs/2nWTdZo via @Reuters

    (It is the Trump admin that says Assad is to blame.)

    ilsm -> Fred C. Dobbs... , April 08, 2017 at 01:28 PM
    Symptoms are not evidence that the agent, whether sarin or bug spray from a plant trying to make sarin (see Bhopal), was delivered the by government.

    If by jets, or helos the canisters and bomblet debris would be just as easy to show as distraught fathers who support terrorists.

    Or, the government could have flown a crop duster....... with sprayer bars...... at night and caught by US radar!!!

    Too much innuendo to justify shooting 59 cruise missiles to shut the runway for a few hours and destroy a few broken, old jets

    [Apr 08, 2017] Theyre terrified that peace was going to break out – Ron Paul on US Syria strike

    Notable quotes:
    "... "I don't think the evidence is there, at least it hasn't been presented, and they need a so-called excuse, they worked real hard, our government and their coalition." ..."
    "... "If any of this was true, I don't know why they couldn't wait and take a look at it. In 2013, there were similar stories that didn't go anywhere, because with a little bit of a pause, there was a resistance to it built in our Congress and in the American people. They thought that it was a fraud and nothing like that was happening, and right now, I just can't think of how it could conceivably be what they claim, because it's helping ISIS, because it's helping Al-Qaeda." ..."
    "... "From my point of view, there was no need to rush. There was no threat to national security. They have to give a reason to do these things," ..."
    "... The Syrian situation now is "a victory for neo-conservatives, who've been looking for Assad to go," ..."
    "... "I don't believe that our people or the American government should be the policemen of the world, it makes no sense, it causes us more trouble and more grief, it causes us more financial problems, and it's hardly a way that we could defend our constitutional liberty." ..."
    "... "The peace talks have ended now. They're terrified that peace was going to break out! Al-Qaeda was on the run, peace talks were happening, and all of a sudden, they had to change, and this changes things dramatically! I don't expect peace talks anytime soon or in the distant future." ..."
    Apr 08, 2017 | www.rt.com

    "A victory of neo-conservatives" – that's how Ron Paul, a former member of the US House of Representatives and three-time presidential candidate, described the US strike on Syria, adding that he does not expect peace talks to resume any time soon. Speaking to RT, Ron Paul said that there is no proof of Damascus' guilt that could trigger such a rash and violent response from the US.

    "I don't think the evidence is there, at least it hasn't been presented, and they need a so-called excuse, they worked real hard, our government and their coalition."

    This is not the first time something like this has happened in Syria or elsewhere, Paul said, but now it is convenient to pay attention and react immediately.

    "If any of this was true, I don't know why they couldn't wait and take a look at it. In 2013, there were similar stories that didn't go anywhere, because with a little bit of a pause, there was a resistance to it built in our Congress and in the American people. They thought that it was a fraud and nothing like that was happening, and right now, I just can't think of how it could conceivably be what they claim, because it's helping ISIS, because it's helping Al-Qaeda."

    "From my point of view, there was no need to rush. There was no threat to national security. They have to give a reason to do these things," Paul added.

    A factor that contributed to the speedy reaction was of course the US president, the politician told RT.

    "I have no idea what his purpose was. Maybe he just didn't want to hear the debate, because the last time they debated it, they lost. And this time, it was necessary for them to jump onto this, before people came to know what was really going on."

    The Syrian situation now is "a victory for neo-conservatives, who've been looking for Assad to go," Paul said.

    "They want to get rid of him, and you have to look for who is involved in that. Unfortunately, they are the ones who are winning out on this, and the radicals, too! There is a bit of hypocrisy going on here, because at one minute we say, well, maybe Assad has to stay, the next day he has to go, and we're there fighting ISIS and Al-Qaeda. At the same time, what we end up doing is we actually strengthen them! It is a mess.

    "I don't believe that our people or the American government should be the policemen of the world, it makes no sense, it causes us more trouble and more grief, it causes us more financial problems, and it's hardly a way that we could defend our constitutional liberty."

    This policy clearly does not lead to peace, Paul told RT.

    "The peace talks have ended now. They're terrified that peace was going to break out! Al-Qaeda was on the run, peace talks were happening, and all of a sudden, they had to change, and this changes things dramatically! I don't expect peace talks anytime soon or in the distant future."

    Last but not least, the politician spoke out about the deeper reasons – and potential disastrous consequences – of the latest attack's timing.

    "I was wondering about the fact that the announcement came when Trump was talking to Xi [Jinping, the Chinese president]. And of course, [North] Korea's high on the list of targets for our president and our administration. It might be a warning: this is what's going to happen to you if you don't do what we tell you. I just don't like us being involved in so many countries, in their internal affairs; I think it's so detrimental."

    READ MORE:

    [Apr 08, 2017] US just flew tomahawk land attack missile (TLAM) in order to support al Qaeda, acting essentially as Al Qaeda air force.

    Apr 08, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
    ilsm -> Chris G ... , April 07, 2017 at 05:23 PM
    We could have Hillary in the oval office. Trump applied Obama doctrine of 'unjust peace has to be stopped by just cruise missiles aiding terrorists'.

    Soviet cluster munitions (CBUs)in Afghanistan were evil. Saudi cluster munitions killing Shi'a kids in Yemen are "leadership". CBU's artillery shells dispensing bomblets and land mines are banned by other treaties the US does not follow.

    Pix of dead kids only matter in Syria. US double standard.

    US just flew tomahawk land attack missile (TLAM) support for al Qaeda!

    [Apr 07, 2017] US Launches Airstrikes Against Syria (Updated)

    Notable quotes:
    "... Trump supporters aka the "deplorables" are flipping out and feel incredibly betrayed. Bipartisanship at last–ex-the neocons. ..."
    "... The Deplorables are mostly against the war. They are probably the only real anti-war faction in the US, as the anti-war Left tends to dissappear whenever a Democrat is in power. Deplorables actually are angry at Trump for this. ..."
    "... According to Wikipedia, the last country the USA declared war on was Hungary (during WW2). ..."
    "... With Flynn gone and Bannon marginalized, Trump has suddenly transformed into another GW Bush!!!! ..."
    "... This attack seems to be sending a very clear US message to Syria: We will not let you defeat our rebels and our terrorists. We will intervene every time you get close and ensure the conflict continues. We need no justification for our actions, we can create one whenever required (thanks Turkey). Do not stand in the way of our interests. ..."
    "... I was thinking the same thing. Just like Hill/Bill bombing Yugoslavia without Congressional approval in order to direct attention from Monica among other reasons. ..."
    "... If memory serves me correct Bill Clinton launched a volley of cruise missiles at targets in Iraq the night before his Congressional impeachment vote. Dan Rather was on the scene in Baghdad to report the attack "LIVE!" so there was a great deal of coordination and preplanning that took place with the media. ABC had to interrupt their specially scheduled programing for the evening to report on the attack. A television special on John F Kennedy who was portrayed as the nation's greatest president who incidentally was a serial philander that just couldn't keep his d*%k in his pants- what a coincidence! Remind you of anybody you know America? (Nudge, nudge, wink) Wow look at those pretty explosions. Serious manly-man stuff right there. Pretty darn grown-up and Presidential eh? ..."
    "... I highly doubt this was Trump's call. I believe the powers that be done got to old Donnie and helped him get his mind right. ..."
    "... My initial take on Trump was that he would be taken into a room and shown something needed to bring him around. Where that is remains to be seen. Obama, W and others likely got a similar treatment. How else would nonsensical 180s be explained, even by DC standards? ..."
    "... Who is pulling all those strings? ..."
    "... It could be he's being manipulated but maybe he and his team are taking a page from Clinton's triangulation playbook, especially with Clinton having called for the exact same strike just yesterday. ..."
    "... In the longer term, it could serve his purposes for the Russians and Chinese and North Koreans and Iranians to think they are dealing with a man capable of any impulsive lunacy ..."
    "... Introduced by McDonnell Douglas in the 1970s, it was initially designed as a medium to long-range, low-altitude missile that could be launched from a surface platform. It has been improved several times, and after corporate divestitures and acquisitions , is now made by Raytheon . Some Tomahawks were also manufactured by General Dynamics (now Boeing Defense, Space & Security) ..."
    "... So that's what, another $150 or $200 million out the launch tubes, to do what again, to "make America safe?" ..."
    "... . I think that Trump's Presidency will be a disaster, because he was not the man that he campaigned to be. ..."
    "... It's interesting to note that the Paleoconservatives have broken ranks. ..."
    "... I think it's more complicated than that. You ignore that the utter hysteria of the "evil Rooskies" campaign has revealed how deeply committed the military industrial complex has been about getting its Russian war. ..."
    "... It is now looking like Eisenhower was right, the military industrial complex could and has usurped democracy. A better President might have been able to check and contain it on its Russia campaign. Maybe a great President could have figured out how to stymie them but name names as to who we have now who could have done that. ..."
    "... In his book The Brothers ..."
    "... I guess breakdown in command is always a possibility, but Assad would be wacko beyond belief to sacrifice whatever ties he has with Putin to kill 100 – even if they all were ISIS. I hate false flag arguments, but it sure seems to fit here. Plus it worked on the trigger happy target, if it indeed was one. ..."
    "... Trump thinks he's staged a propaganda coup against the Clintonites and to some degree he has. But by acting out their plans in a wild man format he's showing how crazy and vicious they all are. There's going to be a drive to play their hand out, and there will be scads of opportunities to overreact. How is this going to effect Russian support for US efforts in Afghanistan, for example? ..."
    "... The entire group of voters who figured his rhetoric (scam/con) was proof that he was the lesser of the evils is frustratingly naive. ..."
    "... It certainly was an argument that was repeated ad nauseam around here by certain individuals (not necessarily the majority) as a pat answer to any question of the correctness of voting Trump. Unwarranted optimism about Trump's motives, plans, and/or capabilities will continue to look more and more absurd as we go forward, I predict. ..."
    "... Hillary was out today, before the missiles, advocating for EXACTLY what Trump did. The only consistent, morale choice between Hillary and Trump was NOT VOTING FOR EITHER ONE. ..."
    "... I still think it was reasonable to vote for Trump as the lesser evil, in order to stop Hillary. Trump was a wild card. Hillary had both the record of interventionism and the rhetoric. Trump talked out of both sides of his mouth, but he was at least pretty consistent in opposing hostility toward Russia. And he hadn't been intimately involved in planning or supporting the invasion and destruction of multiple countries. Of course, that might just be because he had no record as a public official at all. ..."
    "... The USA is a rogue nation in the world community. Dying Empires are at their most dangerous when they begin to loose control of events. ..."
    "... Anyone with a functioning brain cell can immediately identify the sequence of recent events in Syria as a false flag attack staged to provide the pretext for an unconstitutional act of war. ..."
    "... In previous administrations false flag attacks have been orchestrated by brilliant Machiavellians like Cheney, who was able to sell an illogical fabrication like the Official 911 Report to a gullible public. ..."
    "... congratulations, america, you are once again al-qaeda's airforce. make america gullible again! ..."
    "... Trump is such an interesting and frightening phenomenon because he is ultimately the continuation of the status quo but puts such a naked face on the bullshit that has always been there. ..."
    "... The way he spoke when decrying the horrors of the gas attacks, about all the babies that died, in his perversely hilarious cold and off-putting way, the US always does this type of crocodile tears, but with Trump it is incredibly on the nose. ..."
    "... Channeling my inner Scott Adams: "What's the best way for Trump to prove that he isn't a Russian stooge ? To attack Russia !" ..."
    "... Tulsi Gabbard: "It angers and saddens me that President Trump has taken the advice of war hawks and escalated our illegal regime change war to overthrow the Syrian government. This escalation is short-sighted and will lead to more dead civilians, more refugees, the strengthening of al-Qaeda and other terrorists, and a direct confrontation between the United States and Russia-which could lead to nuclear war. ..."
    "... "This Administration has acted recklessly without care or consideration of the dire consequences of the United States attack on Syria without waiting for the collection of evidence from the scene of the chemical poisoning. If President Assad is indeed guilty of this horrible chemical attack on innocent civilians, I will be the first to call for his prosecution and execution by the International Criminal Court. However, because of our attack on Syria, this investigation may now not even be possible. And without such evidence, a successful prosecution will be much harder." ..."
    Apr 07, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
    Posted on April 6, 2017 by Yves Smith So the military/surveillance state got its war against Russia after all. My, that was fast. Merely implementing a no-fly zone was widely seen as tantamount to instigating a war with Russia, and this move is far more provocative.

    Perhaps the US thinks it can engage in a show of muscle and stop there. But as Lambert has pointed out, some things can't be unsaid. Even if this attack was meant as an over-the-top message to Russia regarding its support of Assad, some things can't be undone either.

    Another line of thought is that this airstrike was meant as a warning shot to Xi Jinping regarding North Korea, that the US is willing to take aggressive, precipitous actions. Unlike Syria, North Korea would be a bona fide threat to the US if it succeeds in its efforts to build long-range missiles.

    ... ... ...

    Ryan Grim of the Huffington Post points out via an e-mailed alert that:

    Donald Trump does not have the legal authority to launch airstrikes against Syria, yet he has done so tonight, multiple news outlets are reporting, and confirmed by an intelligence community source

    Update 10:15 PM . From the Wall Street Journal :

    The U.S. military launched a series of strikes against a Syrian air base Friday, a response to mounting calls for a display of force in the wake of this week's suspected chemical weapons attack in Syria.

    The strikes represented the first time a U.S. military operation deliberately targeted the regime of President Bashar al-Assad and came a day after President Donald Trump said the chemical attack in Idlib province earlier this week , blamed on Syrian forces, had changed his thinking on Mr. Assad ..

    U.S. lawmakers had urged Mr. Trump to strike the Assad regime. There is a growing consensus that the regime used banned chemical weapons in the attack, which killed at least 85 people, including 27 children, and injured about 550.

    CNN reports that Trump will address the nation shortly.

    This is from Howard Beale IV, but I don't have the images to confirm his take. Readers? Note that the US did give Russia a head's up before the bombing .

    If you see the press pictures of the runway damage of the Syrian airfields, the amount of damage is so minimal they'll be back in operation in under a week. IOW, it was just a very expensive fireworks demonstration.

    Had Hair Furor really wanted to send a message, they would have had to actually destroy the runway with a bombing mission-that's a very high-risk move, but would have sent a far more serious message that we're not fucking around.

    This may be giving Team Trump way more credit than is due. However, any action against Syria, even if Trump was sold on the idea that this was a warning shot disguised as an apparent act of war, it is first very risk and second has the effect of committing Trump psychologically against Assad, when before he was pretty indifferent.

    ... ... ...

    MyLessThanPrimeBeef , April 6, 2017 at 10:21 pm

    The ending of his speech was somber.

    Is there a power greater than the president that is moving world events invisibly?

    Aumua , April 6, 2017 at 10:31 pm

    Of course there is. Very unfortunate for humanity.

    Transcript here .

    Fred , April 6, 2017 at 10:33 pm

    Yes, fake news.

    craazyboy , April 6, 2017 at 10:47 pm

    "There is a growing consensus ." God speaks in quite whispers to the faithful ..

    So now we get the calls to depose Bad Guy Assad. Our good guys are Al-Qaeda and ISIS, so I guess they take the helm, then. Jolly good, olde chaps. I'm glad I don't have to explain that to Putin.

    craazyboy , April 6, 2017 at 11:12 pm

    crap. "quite" s/b quiet.

    miles , April 7, 2017 at 2:39 am

    Yes, it is the evil that invokes God's name to justify acts of violent aggression. It is the worldwide religion of warmongering and profiteering that rules the hearts of our leaders. The exact sort of evil the Bible warns about. Think: who did Jesus condemn while on earth? The self righteous Jewish religious elders. And summarily they fought for his execution.

    Isn't it evident? God does not have to move world events. The evil in human hearts, throughout history, has slowly but steadily led us to the brink of total annihilation. That is the price of free will.

    The question then is: does it stop there? Or is there a God that will redeem the earth at the end of it all?

    Personally I believe the Bible, the principle of resurrection bringing eternal life out of death, and the promise that we will be judged by our works, not merely our "religious" "faith."

    I hope that we can all find some sliver of hope to keep our heads up in these times, whatever that means for you personally, because despair is a bottomless pit.

    grayslady , April 6, 2017 at 10:05 pm

    I just tried calling my so-called Congressional representatives. I can't even leave a message after business hours. I am so angry right now I am seeing red! Who are these people that think they can declare war on a sovereign nation–with a legally elected government–when we haven't been attacked or threatened? We've just experienced a military coup if Congress no longer has the right to declare war. Insanity!

    Thanks for the out-of-cycle post, Yves. NC continues to be my first source for real, accurate news.

    oho , April 6, 2017 at 10:08 pm

    Trump supporters aka the "deplorables" are flipping out and feel incredibly betrayed. Bipartisanship at last–ex-the neocons.

    jrs , April 7, 2017 at 1:12 am

    their candidate certainly proved deplorable enough. Bunch of dead Syrians killed by U.S. missiles, are they deplorable or just dead? Yea the deplorables that aren't lucky enough to live in the U.S. get murdered outright and not slowly either.

    And then Trump won't even allow the refugees this war will create into this country. F the man.

    tony , April 7, 2017 at 3:24 am

    The Deplorables are mostly against the war. They are probably the only real anti-war faction in the US, as the anti-war Left tends to dissappear whenever a Democrat is in power. Deplorables actually are angry at Trump for this.

    Dead Dog , April 6, 2017 at 10:11 pm

    Yes, anger and despair.

    Re declaring war, I think the previous two pressies already crossed over that line, consequence free

    jrs , April 7, 2017 at 1:14 am

    I don't think it's been declared since the Korean war actually, so some 70 years of undeclared wars?

    JerseyJeffersonian , April 7, 2017 at 1:39 am

    jrs,

    Not even then, as it was characterized by Truman as merely a "police action". Sure it was, Harry. Oh, and thanks for authorizing the Security State, too.

    Jeff , April 7, 2017 at 5:17 am

    According to Wikipedia, the last country the USA declared war on was Hungary (during WW2).

    JohnnyGL , April 6, 2017 at 10:52 pm

    Both Senators and my Congressional Reps are getting a call tomorrow morning! NO MORE WAR!!!

    Lots of people in DC want impeachment, now I'm on board.

    With Flynn gone and Bannon marginalized, Trump has suddenly transformed into another GW Bush!!!!

    Tom , April 6, 2017 at 11:02 pm

    Funny how there's always money for lobbing endless flights of Tomahawk missles at countries on the other side of the world, but never enough to fund things at home like healthcare, education, environmental protection and infrastructure. I guess you go with the priorities you have, not the ones you wish you had.

    Carla , April 6, 2017 at 11:20 pm

    I guess you go with the state you have, the Deep State, not the one you wish you had that, uhm, democratic thingy

    Sandler , April 6, 2017 at 11:37 pm

    How many US children died this week from lack of access to adequate healthcare, food, safe roads, safe neighborhoods, etc?

    Harry , April 6, 2017 at 11:55 pm

    Or Yemeni kids, or Mosul kids.

    Dead Dog , April 6, 2017 at 10:08 pm

    Just gobsmacked.

    This isn't a game of bluff ffs A major war affects everyone on the planet. How f'ing selfish and blind to the destruction and the killing of human beings.

    What's next, North Korea? Cut off the head?

    Nuts

    MoiAussie , April 7, 2017 at 12:40 am

    This is not (yet) a major war. In fact, it's less than I expected, which was a US/Israeli attack on Damascus to try to take out Assad. It's not the first direct US attack on Syrian forces, and it won't be the last. There have been plenty of US boots on the ground for some time now. You can start worrying when coalition forces try to take out Syria's air defenses.

    This attack seems to be sending a very clear US message to Syria: We will not let you defeat our rebels and our terrorists. We will intervene every time you get close and ensure the conflict continues. We need no justification for our actions, we can create one whenever required (thanks Turkey). Do not stand in the way of our interests.

    MoiAussie , April 7, 2017 at 1:24 am

    The message can be seen as a direct response to Assad's statement, reported yesterday , that there is no "option except victory" in the country's civil war.

    "If we do not win this war, it means that Syria will be deleted from the map. We have no choice in facing this war, and that's why we are confident, we are persistent and we are determined."

    Buck Eschaton , April 6, 2017 at 10:10 pm

    I wonder how many Hillaryites/McResistance people will be defending Trump now how many brains will explode???

    marym , April 6, 2017 at 10:35 pm

    Clinton speech today: https://twitter.com/CNN/status/850w124602886037505

    "Hillary Clinton calls on the US to take out Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad's air fields"

    (Tweet links to a CNN story too, but too slow to load.)

    Apparently Neera hadn't heard the speech:

    Neera Tanden‏Verified account @neeratanden
    I'm not saying we should have a year long debate on use of force but perhaps more than 24 hrs btwn Trump doing a 180 on an issue and bombing

    MSNBC:
    https://twitter.com/adamjohnsonNYC live tweeting MSNBC coverage. Summary:

    Adam H. Johnson‏Verified account @adamjohnsonNYC · 2m2 minutes ago

    Six consecutive MSNBC guest praising Trump for airstrikes, the only dissent on MSNBC concern trolling over Congressional authority.

    Carolinian , April 7, 2017 at 12:09 am

    There ya go. And to the WaPo, the NYT, the Blob and Mrs. Clinton: beware of what you ask for, you may get it.

    Will the Left finally and at last regain it's anti-war soul? Or will they stay glued to MSNBC?

    different clue , April 6, 2017 at 11:17 pm

    Many. Millions. This is exactly what the Clintonite Shitocrat Scum were voting FOR when they voted FOR Clinton. They must be surprised and delighted to get the Assad Must Go from Trump that they thought only their preciousss Mommy Wokest would have delivered unto them.

    Yves Smith Post author , April 7, 2017 at 12:06 am

    The Hillbots on Twitter are apparently claiming that Trump followed what Hillary recommended.

    Marina Bart , April 7, 2017 at 12:11 am

    Not all of them. I haven't been on for a couple of hours, but I saw quite a few trying to say this proves Trump was always the real warmonger and Hillary is the dove of peace.

    They have remarkable minds.

    Marco , April 7, 2017 at 4:47 am

    The standard view for most good "liberals" regarding Hillary's militarism was that it was merely a cynical ploy in currying favor with the MIC in her attempt to gain the Presidency. After entry to the White House she would be a good little diplomatic internationalist and dial back the iron-lady persona. So why is she calling for air-strikes NOW when she has NO CHANCE IN HELL of ever gaining any real power in the few remaining years she has left on this sorry planet? What does it matter to her now and who does she need to please? Also doesn't this kinda neutralize any anti-Trump / anti-war push by Team Blue.

    Tom , April 6, 2017 at 10:11 pm

    Well, that will certainly knock the Susan Rice scandal off the front page, won't it now? Wag that f**king dog, you bastards.

    HopeLB , April 6, 2017 at 10:47 pm

    I was thinking the same thing. Just like Hill/Bill bombing Yugoslavia without Congressional approval in order to direct attention from Monica among other reasons.

    https://off-guardian.org/2016/03/28/theres-a-special-place-in-hell-for-madeleine-albright/

    Possibly these;

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1514131/posts

    JerryDenim , April 7, 2017 at 2:03 am

    If memory serves me correct Bill Clinton launched a volley of cruise missiles at targets in Iraq the night before his Congressional impeachment vote. Dan Rather was on the scene in Baghdad to report the attack "LIVE!" so there was a great deal of coordination and preplanning that took place with the media. ABC had to interrupt their specially scheduled programing for the evening to report on the attack. A television special on John F Kennedy who was portrayed as the nation's greatest president who incidentally was a serial philander that just couldn't keep his d*%k in his pants- what a coincidence! Remind you of anybody you know America? (Nudge, nudge, wink) Wow look at those pretty explosions. Serious manly-man stuff right there. Pretty darn grown-up and Presidential eh?

    The more things change in Washington the more they stay the same. I hope this little cruise missile stunt blows over without a major escalation of the Syrian proxy war, but given the recent glimpses of behind-the-scenes crazy emanating from the power struggle in Washington I have a bad feeling about this. Who the hell is driving the ship at the moment?

    ChiGal in Carolina , April 6, 2017 at 10:18 pm

    The ignorance, sentimentality, and impulsivity of this man is astounding.

    What does Scott Adams have to say now, I wonder.

    And what rough beast ? Trump is the very embodiment of the Ugly American.

    Tom , April 6, 2017 at 10:55 pm

    I highly doubt this was Trump's call. I believe the powers that be done got to old Donnie and helped him get his mind right.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CBqjZX6FjE

    pretzelattack , April 6, 2017 at 11:01 pm

    didn't take long, i must say.

    St Jacques , April 6, 2017 at 11:08 pm

    Did anybody think it would be otherwise? Just be grateful he killed the TPP. That's one nice wrench thrown into the machine.

    Dirk77 , April 6, 2017 at 11:18 pm

    I hoped it would be. Civilization was sure nice while it lasted.

    Marina Bart , April 7, 2017 at 12:17 am

    I think the TPP zombie is still out there, unkilled. But Trump slowed all this down. If Hillary had been elected, drafting women would already be law, and we'd already be on the Russian front.

    We did throw a wrench in, but if the machinery is strong enough, it will still grind that wrench down. We need a nice acid bath, or maybe a pool of molten lead. Isn't that what finally took out that last piece of the Terminator?

    Aumua , April 6, 2017 at 11:04 pm

    Maybe someone with an ego like he has is just easily manipulated. All you have to do is push the right buttons, in the right order. We all signed up to find out what was under the smirk, and now we are finding out. Fun times ahead.

    Yves Smith Post author , April 7, 2017 at 12:10 am

    Oh, it was his call. He got up and made a speech. He's got too much ego to do anything like that if he wasn't on board.

    But what this says is the people around him are increasingly figuring out how to manipulate him. Even if they can only drive him in a direction for a short vector of action, as in make isolated decisions, that's enough for them. A series of short vectors in the direction they want will get them to their destination, even if the path is herky-jerky.

    grayslady , April 7, 2017 at 12:26 am

    That's a very frightening thought, since Trump's advisors do not inspire confidence.

    sad American , April 7, 2017 at 1:13 am

    My initial take on Trump was that he would be taken into a room and shown something needed to bring him around. Where that is remains to be seen. Obama, W and others likely got a similar treatment. How else would nonsensical 180s be explained, even by DC standards?

    Who is pulling all those strings?

    ilpalazzo , April 7, 2017 at 5:00 am

    Bill Hicks Puppet Show

    voxhumana , April 7, 2017 at 1:44 am

    It could be he's being manipulated but maybe he and his team are taking a page from Clinton's triangulation playbook, especially with Clinton having called for the exact same strike just yesterday. It puts approving establishment Dems in the awkward position of having to "normalize" Trump for carrying out the same neocon agenda Clinton campaigned on – the worst possible thing for their version of the party's future. And I bet that if someone who has his confidence explained it to him that way he'd have signed on in a heartbeat.

    Now, the dems also know there are Trump voters who believed his campaign's pro-detente, anti-regime change rhetoric but they aren't going to morph into a peace party just to win back a few misguided old hippies. Most dems* will ultimately have to support, in some way, Trump's action at the same time they're kissing goodbye all the establishment GOP and neocon endorsements Hillary got. The Dems will never get those again. Trump may have just coopted the bellicose center/right space that Clintonism aspired to.

    I bet his approval ratings go up.

    Meanwhile, the doomsday clock inches ever closer to armageddon.

    *I will be particularly interested to read what Gabbard and Sanders have to say

    PlutoniumKun , April 7, 2017 at 2:54 am

    Only time will tell, but I've been wondering the last week or so if Trump has decided to take the Kissenger line on Vietnam, as in 'don't do anything, Nixon is crazy enough to do something stupid'. In the longer term, it could serve his purposes for the Russians and Chinese and North Koreans and Iranians to think they are dealing with a man capable of any impulsive lunacy. In the mind of Trump and his crew, they may feel this gives them cover for achieving broader aims. For a man obsessed with 'the deal', playing the crazy card while someone else (Kushner?), plays the good guy would make a lot of sense. Trump is not intelligent in the conventional sense, but I think he has some grasp of his limitations, long term diplomacy and strategy being one of them.

    Matt , April 6, 2017 at 10:19 pm

    If he thinks some missile strikes are going to get the anti-Russia fanatics off his back, he's mistaken. They won't be satisfied until the U.S. starts killing Russian soldiers. But McCain's not worried https://twitter.com/LoopEmma/status/850097784816586752

    JTMcPhee , April 6, 2017 at 11:16 pm

    McCain, even inside his protective bubble, is a lot closer to "passing on" from natural causes than the people who are going to have to try to make their way, on a screwed-up planet, and in a screwed-up political economy.

    Tillerson says "we know Assad did it." Really? Proof? How Fooking dumb do he and the rest think we all are? Wait, wait, don't tell me

    I've written before about a sci-fi story from 1962, originally titled "A Sense of Obligation," re-titled "Planet of the Damned" to boost sales. The framing is that the rulers of a hot desert planet are planning to launch nuclear weapons at a larger, cooler world, regardless of the ability of the people of the other planet being able to destroy the desert world if they try. Turns out the desert planet's rulers, the "magter," actually have a brain symbiote/parasite that's turned them all "neocon," so they do not give a sh!t about the consequences, and apparently do not even understand why they are going ahead with the attack, other than something like the Dalek's motivational chant: "KILL! KILL! KILL!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWED5zcgnxM&ytbChannel=MrHarrisonChase Here's the whole book, read it for free: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/35204?msg=welcome_stranger Here's the wiki article, for a short version: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_of_the_Damned

    We naked apes on Planet Earth don't, unfortunately, have a wise, honorable, fortuitous hero and his fortuitous native sidekick in place, able to take action and stop the MADness All the institutions and incentives and rewards and shibboleths and hair triggers are in place, just waiting for the magters (the epitome of credentialed monomaniacs) to start the dance of death . Part of what it's about: "more than 50" Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles [have to include the obligatory, "I'm in the know" acronym, (TLAM)], 1,000 pounds, 550 mph, range 1,500 miles, warhead W-80 thermonuclear ("retired" – what does that mean?), or 1,000 lb high explosive, or "submunition dispense,r" or PBX (see this for detail, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymer-bonded_explosive ). And most important, to "our" political economy,

    Introduced by McDonnell Douglas in the 1970s, it was initially designed as a medium to long-range, low-altitude missile that could be launched from a surface platform. It has been improved several times, and after corporate divestitures and acquisitions , is now made by Raytheon . Some Tomahawks were also manufactured by General Dynamics (now Boeing Defense, Space & Security) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomahawk_(missile)

    And the most important subset consideration is that, per "FY 2017 currently budgeted", each TLAM (not including the launch platform, a billion dollar "destroyer" or many-billion submarine) costs the political economy $2,981,000 each. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomahawk_(missile)

    So that's what, another $150 or $200 million out the launch tubes, to do what again, to "make America safe?"

    Will there be special medals handed out to the Navy crews and contractors who ran this attack? Maybe the kinds of gold stars handed out to kids who graduate from pre-K to K? "Participation awards," "earned" from far out to sea, beyond the range of anticipated Syrian defenses and counterattacks (in the hope that "the Russians," who do have the ready means to "reach out and touch them," will continue to "exercise restraint" since we gave them a phone call warning the attack was on the way?

    I got the sinking feeling that tonight I'm going to have one of those horrific recurring dreams I mostly have mislaid, hangovers from the war thing I was dumb enough to enlist in

    We who participate here at NC can jaw and perceive and understand and parse all we want - too bad that does nothing, can apparently do nothing, to stop those "magters" from launching this set of missiles, and going ahead with all the other stuff they have in hand, to complete the Fokking up of the planet

    John Zelnicker , April 7, 2017 at 1:16 am

    @JTMcPhee – Thanks for that. Your analysis is spot on, and the details on the Tomahawk are quite interesting.

    I'm not sure they think we're dumb, however. I think they either believe that we are too busy trying to live our oppressed lives to pay attention, or they don't think about it at all and just do what they damn well please and Fokk the rest of the world.

    jrs , April 7, 2017 at 1:28 am

    There's likely layers to it, their lies do keep the propagandized and poorly informed on board (yes everyone is propagandized to a degree but it really is a matter of degree, I mean the folks that never woke up from the American dream and American exceptionalism). Meanwhile those who see right through the ever repeating BS, well what can they really DO about it anyway? And yes survival keeps people poorly informed and even when not it keeps them too busy.

    If I was conspiratorial, I'd almost say this is why we can't have nice things, like really basic things like the rest of the world has, because a more secure population might actually oppose the empire that purports to represent them.

    Anyway at least TWICE they have already LIED about Assad being behind gassings, and now we are supposed to believe them. Yes indeed what rubbish.

    Altandmain , April 6, 2017 at 10:31 pm

    This is a very serious mistake. I think that Trump's Presidency will be a disaster, because he was not the man that he campaigned to be. If he were remotely serious, he would end the wars abroad, bring the US troops home and then use the money on rebuilding America's infrastructure.

    This could easily spill over into other nations, lead to a large refugee crisis, and get a lot of people killed needlessly.

    It's interesting to note that the Paleoconservatives have broken ranks.

    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/the-incredibly-bad-arguments-for-intervening-in-syria/

    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/the-case-against-another-intervention-in-syria/

    No U.S. interests are threatened by the Syrian government, and at present the Syrian government's patrons are to some degree on the same side as our government in their hostility to ISIS. Attacking the Syrian government would be a boon to jihadists, the start of a new and unnecessary war for the U.S., possible direct confrontation with Iran and its proxies in Iraq and Syria, and a potentially disastrous provocation of a nuclear-armed major power. Trump is always emphasizing how the U.S. gets nothing from its foreign wars, so it bears repeating that the U.S. would most certainly get nothing from picking another fight in the region except increased costs and new enemies.

    If Trump were half the realist or even the 'Jacksonian' that some of his supporters have claimed him to be, this intervention would not be under consideration, but then Trump is first and foremost a militarist and seems inclined to favor military options to the exclusion of everything else. If Trump were remotely serious about his "America first" rhetoric, the obvious lack of any threat to American interests would ensure that there would be no U.S. military action taken against Syria's government, but his use of that phrase has always been opportunistic and it has never meant that he is interested in staying out of foreign wars or minding our own business.

    Deeper intervention in Syria seemed to be something that Trump was unlikely to do as president based on what he said during the campaign, but he could never be trusted to do what he said and his foreign policy views have always been unformed (and uninformed) and can be easily changed. Trump's lack of foreign policy experience and knowledge make him much more susceptible to bad advice, and his lack of any firm convictions means that he is more likely than most to yield to demands that he "do something" in response to an ongoing conflict.

    I think that ideologically the left has more in common with the Paleoconservatives these days than we do with the Clinton Liberal faction, which also wanted to go to war. They are pretty much neoconservatives.

    We disagree with the Paleocons on social issues and they are a lot more free market oriented, but when push comes to shove, they seem to be a lot more ideologically honest than the rest of the political spectrum. They also seem to be pro-middle class.

    We should also pay a very close eye on which Democrats choose to vote for this war. Who is going to play bad cop this time around? Everyone knows that like Iraq, this is going to be a disaster. Washington seems determined to not learn from its past mistakes perhaps to make the military industrial complex very rich.

    I'm thinking that in 2020, if there is a Sanders like President, they could criticize this decision and go from there.

    Luke , April 6, 2017 at 11:22 pm

    So did you believe Trump during the campaign then? That he was for curtailing the Empire and its maneuvers? One of the most frustrating parts of this entire debacle has been smart minded folk deciding Trump was the lesser evil based on what he said. As if what he said meant anything at all or was related to what he might do. Ever.

    Altandmain , April 7, 2017 at 12:15 am

    I thought there was a 90% chance that he would screw up and a 100% chance Clinton would. I guess we lose nothing since Clinton clearly was itching to go to war.

    Some things he might do are good, but some things will be bad. If he actually makes a serious attempt at trying to crackdown the H1B, that's step forward in my book. So is any attempt to rebuild infrastructure and manufacturing. That said, some things are awful like his selling of private surfing data.

    I wanted Sanders to win.

    Yves Smith Post author , April 7, 2017 at 12:29 am

    I think it's more complicated than that. You ignore that the utter hysteria of the "evil Rooskies" campaign has revealed how deeply committed the military industrial complex has been about getting its Russian war.

    Trump was pretty consistent on not wanting to escalate in the Middle East, although he seemed to believe you could fight Muslim terrorists we had helped create surgically and that was naive.

    But he knows even less about foreign affairs than he does about domestic policy, and because he was such an outsider, his team has lots of people from various fringes because either no one would join even after he won and some marginal types were willing to sign on early and Trump felt he owed them. So his team never embodied a consistent view, even on the issues where Trump kinda sorta had them.

    And the the Borg went really hard to get out the folks who were not fully on board with neocon orthodoxy and get more warmogers in.

    Put it another way: Trump is obviously over his head in DC. I've been stunned at the willingness of the CIA to attempt openly to unseat a President. Even if he were deeply committed to not escalating in the Middle East and/or versus Russia, how long do you think he could have held out even if he were seriously committed, a seasoned bureaucratic infighter and had a loyal, aligned core team?

    It is now looking like Eisenhower was right, the military industrial complex could and has usurped democracy. A better President might have been able to check and contain it on its Russia campaign. Maybe a great President could have figured out how to stymie them but name names as to who we have now who could have done that.

    Oregoncharles , April 7, 2017 at 12:34 am

    Eisenhower. But that was a long time ago. (Actually, I think he presided over the initial growth of the CIA and the National Security State. But even I was a kid then, so I'm not real sure.)

    Yves Smith Post author , April 7, 2017 at 2:33 am

    And he had been the Commander in Chief of the Allies in Europe WWII. He could have stared anyone down.

    Secretary of State Dean Rusk did in a more limited way in the Cuban missile crisis. JFK had ordered a naval blockage and Rusk asked the Chief Admiral what would happen as Khrushchev 's ships approached. The Admiral said first they'd make a warning shot. Rusk then asked what would happen if they didn't change course. The naval officer gets angry and starts to tell Rusk the Navy has been running blockades since 1812.

    Rusk cut him off and berated him along these lines:

    This is not about your pettifogging Navy traditions. This is a communication between the President and Khrushchev. You will not take a single action unless it has been explicitly authorized. Have I made myself clear?

    solipsist , April 7, 2017 at 3:30 am

    That was McNamara that berated Admiral George Anderson. And here's a great link of the scene from the movie 13 Days.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYRCTHj7k8Y

    Yves Smith Post author , April 7, 2017 at 4:15 am

    You made me dig up my book Humanity, which is based on extensive archival research, by Jonathan Glover, and it was indeed McNamara. However, that scene takes a lot of artistic liberties. The Navy was leashed and collared before the blockade was put in place.

    I might as well write up the exchange as recounted by McNamara:

    "We'll send a shot across the bow," he said.

    "Then what, if that doesn't work?"

    "Then we'll fire into the rudder," he said, by now clearly very annoyed.

    "What kind of ship is it?" I asked.

    "A tanker, Mr. Secretary," he said.

    "You're not going to fire anything without my express permission, is that clear?" I said. That's when he made his famous remark about how the Navy had been running blockades since the days of John Paul Jones and if I would leave them alone they would run this one successfully as well. I rose from my chair and said this was not a blockade but a means of communication between Kennedy and Khruschchev; no force would be applied without my permission; and that would not be given without discussion with the President. "Was that understood?" I said. The tightlipped response was, "Yes."

    ex-PFC Chuck , April 7, 2017 at 5:55 am

    In his book The Brothers , Stephen Kinzer asserts that John Foster and Allen Dulles coordinated with each other beforehand to present a united front during meetings on national security issues with Ike, and this usually crowded out other viewpoints on whatever was being discussed.

    Altandmain , April 7, 2017 at 12:17 am

    I'm aware of healthcare, although I had been hoping that Trump would have the guts to actually fight or not have his ego pushed around.

    As for healthcare well I"m in Canada so I do know about how terrible US healthcare is (lived in the USA for 5 years). We need universal dental care, but yeah American healthcare looks to be in even worse shape!

    http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/08/the-link-between-health-spending-and-life-expectancy-the-us-is-an-outlier.html

    I suppose Mr. Trump may be afraid of ending up like Kennedy?

    https://www.thenation.com/article/are-we-witnessing-a-coup-operation-against-the-trump-white-house/

     President Kennedy fired the Deep State's godfather in 1961, after the Bay of Pigs calamity and Dulles's never-acknowledged support for a failed coup against de Gaulle (believe it, the French president). Taking this to the ultimate, Talbot, who founded Salon 20-odd years ago, makes a persuasive case that Dulles retreated to Georgetown, gathered his loyalists, and probably architected JFK's assassination two years later. Talbot's book does not include this incident, but I have it from a former spook of great integrity, now noted for blowing whistles: A few years into Barack Obama's presidency supporters asked at a fundraiser, "Where's our progressive foreign policy, Mr. President?" Obama's reply: "Do you want me to end up another JFK?"

    Yeah something is going on behind closed doors for sure that we need to know about.

    mpalomar , April 6, 2017 at 10:34 pm

    Has NC linked to this interview with Seymour Hersh regarding his story on the first Sarin attacks in Syria? It has implications regarding what is happening now.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTeZitRDhk0

    The NYT is floating a story from unnamed intelligence officials about how the Russians connived to elect Trump. It is terribly disturbing to watch the manipulation of the mechanisms of thought control contrive the grounds for yet another war.

    So far the US missiles seem to be landing on Syrian air bases and not Russian targets but a very dangerous game. It must be hoped that the Russians, who seem to be the rational actors, will seek to avoid confrontation with the US war machine.

    bob , April 6, 2017 at 11:08 pm

    Turkey votes - 2017

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_constitutional_referendum,_2017

    "A constitutional referendum will be held in Turkey on Sunday, 16 April 2017.[1] Voters will vote on a set of 18 proposed amendments to the Constitution of Turkey."

    This is all about Turkey. The photo they released of Turkish soldiers running with a litter, dressed in full heavy haz mat suits, within Turkey proper, is over the top.

    Quentin , April 7, 2017 at 2:40 am

    Yes, Bob, thanks for pointing this out. Turkey! Who let arms and men cross into Syria unobstructed from their territory for years? Turkey. Where did the endless lines of oil tankers travel to from Isis held-territory. Turkey. Which country wants to put an end to any Kurdish political aspirations. Turkey. Which country demanded Assad's removal on basically religious grounds Turkey. And on and on. Erdogan will win his referendum by hook or by crook. Donald Trump could never get this in a thousand years. Most people could't, so I can't fault him for being especially thick. Turkey is NATO's heartthrob who has taken over the place. And Turkey receives 'victims of the chemical attack' to public acclaim, proving its case against Syria. Long live the nostalgia for the Ottoman Empire. Long live the utter stupidity and callousness of the US government towards its own people and the world.

    ewmayer , April 6, 2017 at 10:35 pm

    I still await a shred of credible evidence that it was in fact the regime which used said weapons. But the neocons talking heads on the TeeVee sure like it! All we need is another Hillaryesque 'we came, we saw, he died [chortle, smirk]' soundbite.

    Watching the coverage on RT right now to get the taste of paid MIC shills like George Stephanopopopopopopoulos out of my mouth seems the admin. called the Rooskies to give them advance notice, and strikes were on just 1 airfield. The wild-eyed optimist in me hopes this was a staged 'show of force' to assuage the domestic-side warmongers, but said optimist is currently being roundly shouted down by the 'this is nuts!' voices.

    NotTimothyGeithner , April 6, 2017 at 10:43 pm

    Putin and Xi have domestic audiences too. The Kennedy boys acted aggressively because they believed the Russians would know the were only kidding. The Politburo had to react to the street as much as any government, and the street hated how the US treated Cuba. Obama didn't understand this either.

    It was ludicrous when Democrats claimed Obama played 853rd dimensional chess, and it's ludicrous when people try to make excuses for Trump.

    pretzelattack , April 6, 2017 at 10:52 pm

    both parties, rotten to the core. i thought there was a possibility trump meant it when he repudiated the iraq war. or maybe he just meant it at that minute.
    the maine and the tonkin gulf and iraqi wmd's, and now this shit. i never really got why it was necessary to risk ww3 in cuba; still less here.

    oho , April 6, 2017 at 10:55 pm

    from my POV, literally no one in the rank-and-file deplorable crowd is happy. At the very best, people are confused and tow the "maybe he knows something we don't" line.

    jrs , April 7, 2017 at 1:37 am

    "maybe he knows something we don't" is a sure sign of authoritarian thinking if ever there was one.

    tony , April 7, 2017 at 3:31 am

    Not really. Reserving judgement is completely reasonable, especially when this attack looks more like theatre than anything else.

    ChrisPacific , April 6, 2017 at 11:24 pm

    I've been reading the comments on Sic Semper Tyrannis. Lots of speculation and not too much consensus, but a few things seem clear:

    1. It wasn't sarin that was used (lack of hazmat suits/protective precautions from medical personnel in the videos, who were not falling down/dying in consequence)
    2. It would have been extremely counterproductive for Assad to order this and give the US an excuse to intervene, given the current political/military situation.

    Point #2 doesn't rule out him having done it as a big middle finger to the US if he thought he could get away with it, but I don't find that idea particularly credible.

    At this point I think all Syrian sources should be regarded as highly suspect pending verification and evidence. Alternatively you could just pass on the whole evidence thing and just conclude that if it's bad then Assad done it. This seems to be the line the US government is taking (I've yet to even see an acknowledgement from them that evidence is needed, much less that they have any).

    IDontKnow , April 6, 2017 at 10:41 pm

    One wonders what Republican Congressman Massie thinks about his statements on CNN that he thought it very unlikely Assad authorized any gas attack. Will he stick to his opinion, or fall in line and follow the money. Anyone, are there any component makers for Drones/Cruise Missiles in Kentucky?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6SnIvQKN1Y

    CNN's Bolduan, visibly taken aback by what the man is saying - as though it were inconceivable a U.S. lawmaker might have an original opinion on matters - fumbled for words a few moments before managing a simple: "Who do you think is behind it?"

    Massie began to answer, but Bolduan cut him off. Unsurprisingly, she asked him directly if he was saying he believes what the Russians are saying - that Assad had nothing to do with the attack that killed dozens in Syria on Tuesday. Reuters reported Wednesday that the attack has sparked renewed calls to oust the country's president.

    craazyboy , April 6, 2017 at 11:00 pm

    I saw some news stating the gas attack area was "in rebel held territory". But Syrian military stated it was a civilian part. So I would think someone should check the bodies for guns first then there was the baby pictures.

    I guess breakdown in command is always a possibility, but Assad would be wacko beyond belief to sacrifice whatever ties he has with Putin to kill 100 – even if they all were ISIS. I hate false flag arguments, but it sure seems to fit here. Plus it worked on the trigger happy target, if it indeed was one.

    zapster , April 6, 2017 at 11:14 pm

    https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201704051052330649-syria-chemical-attack-idlib/
    http://acloserlookonsyria.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Talk:Alleged_Chemical_Attack_Khan_Sheikhoun_4_April_2017 This one is a running collection of details.

    Matt , April 6, 2017 at 11:46 pm

    Thank you for posting the second website, it's an excellent resource. Be sure to read the discussion pages as well.

    oho , April 6, 2017 at 10:41 pm

    I believe that establishment neo-con DC thinks that Trump supporters really are like this guy.. https://mobile.twitter.com/Stevenwhirsch99/status/850168562643849217

    in reality Trump lost a lot of goodwill today. I'll even dare say, solidly on the path to Jimmy Carter status. as Yves predicted. all in less than 100 days!

    pretzelattack , April 6, 2017 at 10:43 pm

    carter didn't start ww3, and brokered a peace process in the middle east, which lasted longer than most there.

    NotTimothyGeithner , April 6, 2017 at 10:51 pm

    http://www.counterpunch.org/1998/01/15/how-jimmy-carter-and-i-started-the-mujahideen/

    Are you sure about Carter? WW1 and WW2 are representative of European core attacking the European periphery, but the current World War is about U.S. hegemony.

    Both Seven Years Wars and the Napoleonic Wars were world wars.

    pretzelattack , April 6, 2017 at 11:00 pm

    yes, reagan did far more to arm the middle east, and push the cause of us hegemony. giving saddam wmd's in the first place, after giving iran weapons for holding the hostages till inauguration day. the roots of us hegemony seeking in the middle east go back at least to ike. carter wove one strand in a large rug, but there was pushback against the us in the form of hijacked planes well before carter, and because of our interference in the middle east in the 50's and our support of israel in the 40's, 50's and 60's. jfk almost got us into ww3, and johnson of course may have been even more militaristic than kennedy.

    oho , April 6, 2017 at 10:51 pm

    as I don't watch cable news I can't verify this tweet but sounds like MSNBC is doing a great job as the voice of the "Resistance" (gallows humour sarcasm)

    Sam Sacks
    @SamSacks
    49m
    Guest after guest is gushing. From MSNBC to CNN, Trump is receiving his best night of press so far. And all he had to do was start a war.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/SamSacks/status/850166028738973696?p=v

    flora , April 6, 2017 at 11:07 pm

    There was an emergency meeting of UN Security Council to address Syria chem weapons. Looks like it was US, UK, and France on one side vs Russia and Syria in the meeting. After the the meeting ended without a vote the US took military action.

    From aljazeera:

    "Haley hinted that in light of a UN failure to prevent such attacks, certain states may be "compelled to act" on their own. .
    "The Security Council meeting was adjourned without a vote scheduled as ambassadors continued negotiations privately."
    http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/04/security-council-meets-syria-gas-attack-170405142736085.html

    Any vote is now moot.

    Swamp Yankee , April 6, 2017 at 11:08 pm

    I don't think Maddow et al. quite know what their position ought to be. Like that moment in 1984 when the speaker switches the war from Eurasia to Eastasia. The bought courtier press is confused. Based on about 25 minutes on MSNBC, I noticed:

    - Maddow sounded her first cautious, not-hysterically-Russophobic notes in months. If Trump's for war, she will once more become "anti-war" as she was when first climbing the greasy pole. (Rachel, those of us actually opposed to war and empire notice you're only against it when it's not your Party doing it). Then as the evening goes on it seems she may be warming up to the idea.

    - Matthews is stuck in Cold War mode. Makes numerous references to "the Soviets." Seems to worry about intervention on the one hand, worry about failing confidence in us by our client states (al-Sisi he mentions) if we don't do something, on the other;

    - Brian Williams references "The American President", seems to think we are in an Aaron Sorkin script.

    - Not on MSNBC, but on NBC Nightly News tonight, Hallie Jackson intones breathlessly about "the ULTimate test of a Commander in Chief", is clearly dazzled by the prospect of a war nobody she knows will have to fight.

    Empire is a religion for these people.

    akz , April 7, 2017 at 12:22 am

    Sisi huh? Not that anyone here doesn't know but the USPTB/MSM are truly the worst kid of shitbirds. On 14 August 2013 Egyptian security forces raided two camps of protesters in Cairo: one at al-Nahda Square and a larger one at Rabaa al-Adawiya Square. The two sites had been occupied by supporters of ousted President Mohamed Morsi, who had been removed from office by the military a month earlier, following mass street protests against him. The camps were raided after initiatives to end the six week sit-ins failed and as a result of the raids the camps were cleared out within hours.The raids were described by Human Rights Watch as "one of the world's largest killings of demonstrators in a single day in recent history". According to Human Rights Watch, a minimum of 817 people and more likely at least 1,000 were killed in Rabaa Square on August 14

    SeanL , April 6, 2017 at 11:08 pm

    Far more important is the optics of this while Xi was in the US.

    What is the value of hitting the same spot with 60 cruise missiles?

    Can't help but think this was more about warning North Korea (and China) than Assad.

    As the Chinese saying goes: chop off a chicken's head to scare the monkeys.

    hemeantwell , April 6, 2017 at 11:12 pm

    I'm reminded of Bill Clinton using cruise missiles to try to resolve domestic political problems in 1998.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Shifa_pharmaceutical_factory

    The Somalis did not have the geopolitical heft of the Syrians, however. Repercussions will not be so contained this time around.

    hemeantwell , April 7, 2017 at 6:29 am

    With further sleepless thought, I'm also reminded of Truman at Potsdam. Xi is in town, and Trump is doing a war dance. This can only have the result of driving the Russians and Chinese closer together. Let's throw in Iran as well.

    Trump thinks he's staged a propaganda coup against the Clintonites and to some degree he has. But by acting out their plans in a wild man format he's showing how crazy and vicious they all are. There's going to be a drive to play their hand out, and there will be scads of opportunities to overreact. How is this going to effect Russian support for US efforts in Afghanistan, for example?

    bob , April 6, 2017 at 11:17 pm

    Locally, they had a WaPo react piece published on the news site, before they had a story about the strikes.

    http://www.syracuse.com/us-news/index.ssf/2017/04/russia_usa_syria_response_chemical_attack_trump_assad_putin.html

    gov doesn't declare war, they just let it happen after the media gets it going.

    This also, what one week? after syria was 'confirmed' to have had its stockpile destroyed.

    Luke , April 6, 2017 at 11:17 pm

    I'm through giving leeway to the Trump apologists who said during the campaign that he was less likely to start a war or drop the big one and that this alone was reason enough to not support his opponent. Totally absurd. Nothing he said meant anything in the real world. He will do what he wants in the moment and that is all. The entire group of voters who figured his rhetoric (scam/con) was proof that he was the lesser of the evils is frustratingly naive.

    Aumua , April 6, 2017 at 11:33 pm

    It certainly was an argument that was repeated ad nauseam around here by certain individuals (not necessarily the majority) as a pat answer to any question of the correctness of voting Trump. Unwarranted optimism about Trump's motives, plans, and/or capabilities will continue to look more and more absurd as we go forward, I predict.

    On the other hand, I don't think he's really doing what he wants either. More like he's along for the ride at this point, as are we all. It's possible that Trump still thinks otherwise.

    Fiery Hunt , April 6, 2017 at 11:38 pm

    Hillary was out today, before the missiles, advocating for EXACTLY what Trump did. The only consistent, morale choice between Hillary and Trump was NOT VOTING FOR EITHER ONE.

    Carolinian , April 7, 2017 at 12:41 am

    Right. And let's not forget that the media as well as the Clinton and Obama people have been doing everything in their power to scandal Trump into not changing course on foreign policy. Clearly they've succeeded and now say look, toldja, just the same.

    Yves probably sized up Trump best at the very beginning–all hat, no cattle. There's yet to be any indication that he knows what he's doing and I strongly believe he never expected to win in the first place. Election night he seemed a bit stunned.

    But for Clinton supporters you can't say aha Trump doesn't know what he is doing when he has just done what she recommended that he do.

    RudyM , April 7, 2017 at 1:58 am

    I still think it was reasonable to vote for Trump as the lesser evil, in order to stop Hillary. Trump was a wild card. Hillary had both the record of interventionism and the rhetoric. Trump talked out of both sides of his mouth, but he was at least pretty consistent in opposing hostility toward Russia. And he hadn't been intimately involved in planning or supporting the invasion and destruction of multiple countries. Of course, that might just be because he had no record as a public official at all.

    JohnnyGL , April 6, 2017 at 11:18 pm

    Now that I'm getting my head around this .there's a couple of minor rays of hope .

    1) When I heard "tomahawk cruise missiles", I flashed back to the plans that Obama drew up in 2013 to basically destroy the ability of Syria to function as a state. They were going to take out bridges, airfields, fueling stations, and tons of important infrastructure. It would have had the potential to provoke a Libyan-style collapse.

    Thankfully, this is NOT that plan. Just a limited attack on one airbase and surrounding infrastructure.

    2) At least they gave the Russians a heads up.

    Beyond that, this is a complete nightmare. Iran's going to be bullshit mad, Russians are going to be bullshit mad. Chinese won't be happy, either. Egypt will run straight into the arms of the Russians and the Chinese. They all know Assad is the only thing standing between them and the jihadi head-choppers.

    As far as Yves' comparison with Clinton's stated views. I could easily envision her doing something similar after a staged chemical incident like this.

    Thor's Hammer , April 6, 2017 at 11:30 pm

    The USA is a rogue nation in the world community. Dying Empires are at their most dangerous when they begin to loose control of events.

    Anyone with a functioning brain cell can immediately identify the sequence of recent events in Syria as a false flag attack staged to provide the pretext for an unconstitutional act of war. The one participant with the strongest motive to not stage a poison gas attack was Assad-but the MSM immediately started a coordinated chorus of blame, the "intelligence" agency warmongers called to the Presidential briefing room read from a script prepared during the Obama administration, and our Idiot-in-Chief started searching his desk for the cruise missile launch codes

    In previous administrations false flag attacks have been orchestrated by brilliant Machiavellians like Cheney, who was able to sell an illogical fabrication like the Official 911 Report to a gullible public. After a success like that, the deep state Overlords have obviously concluded that they don't even need to try to cover their tracks. As well they might, having acquired full control of propaganda organizations like the Washington Post, NY Times, and Google News. And now they have as a front man an individual so mentally deficient that he can believe almost anything as long as he thinks it is his own idea.

    Some voters concluded that placing an egotist like Trump in the Presidency was preferable to having a wholly-owned Neo-Con like Clinton at the helm of the Defcon button, but it hasn't taken long to prove them wrong. Trump has shown himself to be nothing but a bloated ego with a delusional pea sized brain hiding under a rag of fake hair.

    So the immediate fate of the world rests upon the diplomatic skills of Russia's chief oligarch, Vladimir Putin. One can only pray that there is a way to escape from the rush toward the cliff of Nuclear war.

    sierra7 , April 6, 2017 at 11:31 pm

    One of these days we will lose our perceived/real impunity to retaliation to those ships of ours who conduct these cruise missile attacks .then all hell will break loose.

    I can't imagine anyone believing that this president, or possibly any other will slow down the march to Armageddon that we are on and willing to provoke to achieve, "Full Spectrum Dominance" of the world, especially of the ME.

    We are becoming crazier and crazier by the minute.

    Aumua , April 7, 2017 at 1:16 am

    I'm not. Are you? Is the American, Russian, or Syrian man on the street, just making their way through life, on a crazy train to murder and Armageddon? It's just a handful of people, a minuscule minority, who cannot be content until they have everything. ALL of the wealth. ALL of the power. They stand and point around to everyone else on Earth and say "You all owe us! Bow down to us, or else.." They're afraid. They know there is an awakening going on. They know we're coming, so they have to immanetize the echaton, push things over the edge. Push everyone into hating and fighting each other, and those who won't? There are plans for them too, I'm sure.

    JohnnyGL , April 6, 2017 at 11:36 pm

    CNN's Don Lemon and Fareed Zakaria are singing Trump's praises, it's obnoxious. Cruise missile launch video is on a loop. Not sure how much I can take .

    NotTimothyGeithner , April 6, 2017 at 11:37 pm

    https://mobile.twitter.com/nycwomensmarch/status/850180421077929984?p=p If you are in New York. My guess is Hillary won't be there.

    Walter Sobchak , April 6, 2017 at 11:41 pm

    https://youtu.be/ks072waMayk

    frosty zoom , April 6, 2017 at 11:44 pm

    maybe mr. trump will get a gold-plated white helmet when this is all done.

    congratulations, america, you are once again al-qaeda's airforce. make america gullible again!

    jrs , April 7, 2017 at 1:45 am

    Make American great was always BS, I want to make America good FOR THE FIRST TIME. Although clearly it just gets more and more evil. I suppose it is just in the nature of empire.

    Darthbobber , April 6, 2017 at 11:45 pm

    Depending on what happens going forward this could also turn out to be one of those "gotta look resolute" nothingburgers. We gave the Russians some degree of advance notice through the "deconfliction" channels, knowing they'd pass that on to the Syrians, which probably minimized casualties at the airfield. And if this is a one-off, whose main purpose is to make the Donald look resolute, his people could be aiming to just go back to the track they were on.

    If not well, we have people on the ground in known locations all over the place, and "accidents" do happen.

    Tim , April 6, 2017 at 11:45 pm

    Provocative in the truest sense of the word. our best hope is his tipoff to the Russians is seen as an olive branch of some strange kind.

    Trump is not deep and plays things how he sees them in tit for tat increments. The big concern is standard diplomacy does​ not view things that way. Diplomacy must adapt or we are doomed.

    SBW , April 6, 2017 at 11:45 pm

    Well I wrote in Bernie so I can't say I regret my vote. I figured Trump would be hooking up his business buddies and gutting worker interests, but at the same time I had hope he could resurrect some old style business-first isolationism - the former would have been a price I would gladly pay for the latter.

    I could care less about Russia or being friends or enemies of Russia. Chemical attacks in a far region of the world are not my concern - no matter how cruel that statement is. That war is a regional concern, not my concern.

    Trump, America First indeed. What a piece of %$#!.

    NotTimothyGeithner , April 6, 2017 at 11:49 pm

    I've noticed we haven't been inundated with polls for kinetic action. I suspect there will be domestic blow back. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/28/syria-poll_n_3832395.html

    Jerry , April 6, 2017 at 11:54 pm

    1. How do we know assad actually did this and isnt being framed a la bush/cheney and wmd's? What motive would assad have for doing this?

    2. Is ww3 the only way to get the domestic spending needed to fix our economy in the age of austerity and the freedom caucus?

    Edward E , April 7, 2017 at 12:05 am

    Day 77: the neocons fear Trump, NAFTA is scrapped, ISIS has been destroyed, the swamp has been drained, repealed Obamacare, Mexico made to pay for the wall, Muslims banned, wiretapping evidence presented, nobody lied, nobody seeking immunity, nobody recused themselves, no FBI winning streak continues

    John , April 7, 2017 at 12:05 am

    Swarms of drones, suicide speed boats, subs and mines will sink the whole US Navy. Just check the pathetic war gaming exercises since 2002 all structured to make the empire appear victorious. Karma gonna come a calling to the US of A and it ain't gonna be pretty.

    George Lane , April 7, 2017 at 12:42 am

    Trump is such an interesting and frightening phenomenon because he is ultimately the continuation of the status quo but puts such a naked face on the bullshit that has always been there.

    The way he spoke when decrying the horrors of the gas attacks, about all the babies that died, in his perversely hilarious cold and off-putting way, the US always does this type of crocodile tears, but with Trump it is incredibly on the nose. I have to say I am surprised at the speed at which this unfolded but of course in retrospect in makes sense I suppose. Some think this may be a one-off show of strength, a position I sympathize with but I am much more of a pessimist.

    One of the few things I truly credited Obama in a positive way with was the fact that he avoided direct "boots on the ground" involvement in Syria (thanks in part of course to Russia), how swiftly and brutally it was undone.

    Paul Greenwood , April 7, 2017 at 1:53 am

    He is totally in thrall to Ivanka who tweets before he does. He donated in the past to Schumer and McCain and Clinton. He was a Democrat. His daughter and President-elect Kushner are both Democrats. Kushner was funded by Soros to the tune of $250 million

    Lambert Strether , April 7, 2017 at 7:09 am

    > Some think this may be a one-off show of strength, a position I sympathize with

    Trump may think that, or have been sold on the idea –giving the Russians a heads-up, for example - but that doesn't mean it will turn out that way. We're getting volatility, alright. Just internationally!

    Kalen , April 7, 2017 at 12:44 am

    Brace yourself.

    Those who voted Trump ( I was not one of them) have been vindicated tonight. Trump one way or another delayed the neocon war with Syria for at least two months. Only after being blackmailed by CIA he was put on leash and submitted. And all those on the phony left, touchy feely peace loving snowflakes who hate Bannon as reincarnated evil have been fatally discredited since it seems that Flynn and Bannon were the very few who opposed open war with Syria and Russia.

    The air base in Homs that was attacked was also Russian training and Repair base for Syria aircraft, first causalities reported. Are those first shots of WWIII?

    Here is PCR take on the beginning of new War with Russia and China since Xi was ambushed in Florida and Chinese never forget it:
    http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/04/06/trump-surrendered-will-putin-next-surrender/

    George Lane , April 7, 2017 at 1:01 am

    Let's hope we see the same anti-war sentiment as we did popularly with the first gas attacks, which, we should all keep in mind was shown by Seymour Hersh to be essentially a false flag operation mainly conducted by Turkey with the Syrian opposition: https://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line

    Anti-war is the most important thing right now, and can be a rallying cry to unite leftists, liberal progressives, blacks, browns, white Trump voters (such as this one, https://mobile.twitter.com/undefined/status/850070150594351105/video/1 ). There is no hope if we insist on dividing amongst each other. There's the rich and there's the rest of us. That's it. The only thing that can unite us is a common struggle, anti-war can be a site of that common struggle, given that class politics in the Marxist sense won't ever really catch on in the United States.

    jrs , April 7, 2017 at 2:00 am

    Oh I get caring about war as an issue, even one's primary issue (though I would probably say caring about the survival of the biosphere is mine). I get that emotionally and even intellectually entirely, and am in great sympathy.

    However I do think we can DO more about economic and even environmental issues than we can about the issues of empire (locally if nowhere else, but also even nationally). It's not just about what plays in Peoria to the masses, but about what the masses actually CAN influence. And I don't put the empire itself high on that list. They are never ever going to let us have a say in that! And the masses being united and having no power doesn't accomplish much unless it then shifts it's focus to somewhere it might have some power. Basically what bones we can get even though we are ruled by sadists.

    George Lane , April 7, 2017 at 2:20 am

    I certainly agree with you that much can be done with popular organization with regards to economy and the environment, and I also agree of course that the planet is the most pressing threat to human life, but I think you underestimate the possibilities of anti-war movements and their central importance. The military-industrial complex is constitutively tied to capitalist expansion and environmental destruction, and therefore must be fought with the same virulence. This is why Bernie, even in the bizarro world where he was elected, would have ultimately fallen into line just as Trump did. There was a large anti-war voice back in 2013 when the mainstream media was beating the war drums, and thankfully we avoided intervention. Now though paradoxically Trump is able to do this unilaterally. Paradoxical because one would think the mainstream liberal center-"left" could be anti-war again given all the Trump hate, but on the contrary this will be great PR for Trump with the likes of CNN, as this is precisely what Hillary would have done back in february.

    Sluggeaux , April 7, 2017 at 1:19 am

    President Assad and his regime were WINNING the civil war - there is no reason that they would launch a gas attack against a non-strategic target when they have more than sufficient conventional force directed against armed fighters. This alleged "gas attack" only makes logical sense as some sort of false flag incident intended to provoke a reaction from the thin-skinned ignoramus in the White House.

    It worked. WW III is the extremists' wet dream

    Fiery Hunt , April 7, 2017 at 1:57 am

    It's just so insane the tribalism, the psychopaths in charge, the dumb public swallowing every lie..

    "How did we get here?" -old Talking Heads song

    dcblogger , April 7, 2017 at 1:31 am

    Protest: Stop Trump's War against Syria - 5:00 p.m. Friday
    http://www.answercoalition.org/protest_stop_trumps_war_against_syria

    Jen , April 7, 2017 at 5:08 am

    "It is noteworthy that in the hours before Trump ordered military strikes on Syria, Hillary Clinton emerged back into the public spotlight to demand that Trump carry out military strikes against Syria. Again, following a tried and true script, U.S. imperialist military actions against an independent, sovereign Middle Eastern government takes place under the pretext of protecting civilians from weapons of mass destruction."

    Happy now?

    Frenchguy , April 7, 2017 at 1:36 am

    Channeling my inner Scott Adams: "What's the best way for Trump to prove that he isn't a Russian stooge ? To attack Russia !"

    Anyway, I'm taking confort in the fact that it seemed the mildest things he could do: bomb an airfield with missiles after having warned the other side (pretty sure the US has already intervened much more decisively in Syria, even if it wasn't official ). The Blob will be so pleased he could almost make a deal with Assad now. Of course, I'm just trying to convince myself that the Hair is not crazy.

    MoiAussie , April 7, 2017 at 1:43 am

    Yes. So far, nothing substantial, just "perpetual war as usual". The question is what happens next, in any of Syria, DPRK, Iran, the Baltics, and Ukraine.

    Frenchguy , April 7, 2017 at 1:48 am

    To wit: "So how does a Master Persuader respond to a fake war crime? He does it with a fake response, if he's smart. "

    http://blog.dilbert.com/post/159264981001/the-syrian-gas-attack-persuasion

    @MoiAussie Not saying I'm happy about this, far from it But in military terms, it does seem it could end up pretty innocuous if it stops there.

    MoiAussie , April 7, 2017 at 1:55 am

    I'm agreeing with you, not being sarcastic. See my comment here upthread. The big unknown is of course, does it escalate? It won't stop, in the sense of cease completely.

    Frenchguy , April 7, 2017 at 2:10 am

    Ah yes. If I read you correctly, you say this attack is a message to Assad. That's where I don't agree. This is way too public and ineffective so it looks more like a PR operation aiming at a domestic audience (based on the fragments of info we have, so this is very speculative). Trump needed to kill the gas attack story and he did. I'm sure Putin would understand.

    On the other hand, I agree that it creates very bad incentives. If I'm a Syrian "rebel", I know what I have to do now The best case scenario is that escalation (fake or not) creates finally the conditions for a settlement. Worst case well

    Paul Greenwood , April 7, 2017 at 1:51 am

    President of China visits USA and President Kushner causes huge embarrassment to him with Chinese Military elites. That is major disrespect. The US has used nuclear weapons on Asians and now deploys THAAD radar solely on the approval of a Korean President now under arrest who sought no Cabinet approval, a radar that offers Seoul no protection whatsoever.

    China and Russia and Iran know there can be NO agreements with USA that will last more than hours. the ABM treaty was torn up just like Hitler's German-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact of 24. Aug 1939.

    Russia knows war is coming from the USA. China is planning a 500 ship Navy and clearly needs more submarines and more bases near the equator. The US has chosen the path of global war and permanent warfare

    Lambert Strether , April 7, 2017 at 7:13 am

    Unless Trump gave Xi a heads-up!

    George Lane , April 7, 2017 at 2:28 am

    Assange on Trump and Syria from a few weeks ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0ki9zuNfMI

    makedoanmend , April 7, 2017 at 2:35 am

    "There must be war. God wills it."

    It is not the USA deep state. It is a Western 'blob'. The USA just happens to have the biggest stick and so they use it when they see fit. The European states add the "moral" texture for US actions when they condone or ignore the use of the stick, as they have consistently done for the last few decades. (The UK, god bless, sends out a few ill-equipped soldiers and does the annoying yapping noises. Le Monde went into neo-liberal reporting mode before the attack [Assad is evil] and has basically sanctioned the actions since then.)

    Obama (the hallow man) was horrible but he had one "virtue". He knew how to analyse a situation, and he knew that every situation has an upside and downside potential. (Of course, he only did this analysis on how it affected his view of himself and what others might think of him – ego analysis, if you like.) He decide Syria wasn't giving enough upside to provide a good PR opportunity – probably too many unknowns and too many variables.

    Trump seems to have a sales rep type of personality. The only goal is to close the deal. These rep types know, at some level, that the deal might have negative consequences but they ignore these in order to get the deal done. They hope to collect their commission now and that a dodgy deal derails at some far off date. (Trump often reminds me of the Crazy Eddie[?] TV commercials I watched in NYC in the 80s.) Therefore, when confronted with a situation, the main focus becomes on the immediate action.

    Trump is not evil incarnate. He's just basically does what a sales rep does, imho.

    Couple of PSs – did the neoliberals of the USA and the EU do an inventory of Russian resources during their tenure in the 1990s? Is the allure of easy Russian resource lucre just too much of a temptation? Will the Chinese see the USA's actions as a slap in the diplomatic face – launching the attack when their Premier is in the USA? Did the USA/EU just cement the ties between Russian and China?

    The times are just about getting too interesting.

    LT , April 7, 2017 at 2:45 am

    Are the uranium depleted bombs the US has used in the ME considered chemical weapons?

    cripes , April 7, 2017 at 3:56 am

    Trump did us a favor by breaking the Clinton and Bush dynastic ambitions. And disrupting the real ruler's electoral illusions. But they're fast reasserting their power.

    Tossed out the TPP after it was a dead letter anyway and "saved" a couple hundred air conditioner jobs in Indiana–until they get un-saved.

    That's about it.

    Anyone imagining he would be transformational, in a good way, was delusional. I hope you're over it.

    All he just did was prove–again–the executive can attack sovereign nations without a shred of legality or authorization from Congress or the UN. They'll give their own emasculation a standing ovation at the next possible opportunity. Not sure if they'll bow or bob for apples. Sanders and Warren will try to lay low, but when pushed will support it. Their scribblers are working on it right now.

    Tweaking Russia and supporting our terrist twoops in Al Nusra is always a bonus. McCain must have wet his diapers.

    Trump's out of his depth, with a thin bench of Kushner and Ivanka, and will do what the spooks tell him. He might even believe all the posturing about the "babies."

    WTF is this, 1917?

    vlade , April 7, 2017 at 4:01 am

    Trump's problem always was, and is, his ego and the related thin skin. I wonder how much was this 180 driven by the constant "worst approval ever" messaging by the media, which now are gushing over Trump left right and centre, an ego massage he hasn't got for a while. He's now also disocvering the old truism that solving domestic problems is hard, and failyure

    TBH, what I'm really surprised on, is that no-one bombed one of "Trump hotels", as that I suspect would lead him around very nicely thank you very much. Personally, I think it's only a matter of time..

    Kevin Smith , April 7, 2017 at 4:05 am

    Matt Stoller @matthewstoller
    "That awkward moment when Trump notifies Russia he's about to strike Syria, but not the US Congress." pic.twitter.com/mRwX7ESZgg
    11:10 PM – 6 Apr 2017

    financial matters , April 7, 2017 at 7:24 am

    :). Russia is probably a more reliable ally.

    The Rev Kev , April 7, 2017 at 4:26 am

    I wonder how the United States Navy feels about becoming the tactical support group for Al-Qaeda and ISIS in Syria? Are their fellow Americans to thank them for that particular 'service' when they eventually come back home? Gaacchhh!
    If Trump thinks that he has gotten the Deep State off his back by fulfilling one of their wishes, he is much mistaken. All this means is that the Deep State has found that all they have to do is pile on the pressure and Trump will fold like a lawn-deck chair and give them what they want. Trump has just paid his first installment of Danegeld.

    financial matters , April 7, 2017 at 7:20 am

    Actually I thought the 'man on the ground' military would be most confused by Trump changing course in Syria and working with the Russians counter to what has been going on for several years.

    Other than some top brass it seems that most of the military are also subjectable to the onslaught of the neocon mainstream media.

    Christopher (Dale) Rogers , April 7, 2017 at 4:31 am

    As none of the noble commentators has yet to link in the Sic Semper Tyrannis's latest take on events in Syria and Trumps capitulation to the Borg in DC, here's SST's latest summation, namely, not only has Trump acted in a crass manner, but his actions are all but illegal: http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2017/04/donald-trump-is-an-international-law-breaker.html

    Je , April 7, 2017 at 5:38 am

    Tulsi Gabbard: "It angers and saddens me that President Trump has taken the advice of war hawks and escalated our illegal regime change war to overthrow the Syrian government. This escalation is short-sighted and will lead to more dead civilians, more refugees, the strengthening of al-Qaeda and other terrorists, and a direct confrontation between the United States and Russia-which could lead to nuclear war.

    "This Administration has acted recklessly without care or consideration of the dire consequences of the United States attack on Syria without waiting for the collection of evidence from the scene of the chemical poisoning. If President Assad is indeed guilty of this horrible chemical attack on innocent civilians, I will be the first to call for his prosecution and execution by the International Criminal Court. However, because of our attack on Syria, this investigation may now not even be possible. And without such evidence, a successful prosecution will be much harder."

    https://gabbard.house.gov/news/press-releases/rep-tulsi-gabbard-trump-s-military-strikes-syria-are-reckless-and-short-sighted

    Alex , April 7, 2017 at 7:06 am

    I agree with most of what she says, but the ICC can't hand down death sentences ..

    Sad the "peace" politicians call for even more blood in this way.

    financial matters , April 7, 2017 at 7:12 am

    Thank you Tulsi. We need more like you.

    [Apr 07, 2017] This Fishy Smell of Sarin, or Was It Chlorine?

    Apr 07, 2017 | www.unz.com
    Anatoly Karlin April 5, 2017 400 Words 206 Comments Reply RSS To Top To Bottom Bookmark ToC List of Bookmarks

    There are so many problems with the propaganda campaign against Assad getting unrolled now.

    (1) You can't treat exposure to sarin with your bare hands without falling ill/dead yourself, as the White Helmets were apparently doing in the aftermath of the Idlib attack.

    (2) As Syrian war reporter @Partisangirl noticed, some journalists were apparently discussing a chlorine sarin attack before it actually happened.

    (3) It is eerily reminescent of the aftermath of the 2013 Gouta attacks, in which the Western media and neocon and neocon-in-all-but-name politicians and punditry parroted the official line that Assad's troops were responsible even though consequent journalistic work by Sermour Hersh and MIT raised serious doubts over the veracity of that allegation.

    (4) The "moderate rebels" have themselves resorted to poison gas on various occasions.

    (5) Unlike in 2013, Assad is now winning. Why on Earth now, of all times, would he resort to poison gas – one of the few things he can do to that is capable of provoking a strong Western reaction – just to kill all of 75 civilians ?

    It just makes no sense.

    So one can't help but treat Nikky Haley's melodramatic performance at the UN with skepticism. The idea that the poisoning was due to a bomb hitting a chemical weapons manufactory seems more plausible.

    Trump's initial non-interventionist rhetoric on assuming the Presidency was encouraging, as was his promotion of other anti-war figures such as Tulsi Gabbard . However, the latest response of the US administration, including Trump himself, is not giving any cause for optimism:

    I will tell you that attack on children yesterday had a big impact on me, big impact. That was a horrible, horrible thing. And I've been watching it, and seeing it, and it doesn't get any worse than that And I will tell you it's already happened, that my attitude toward Syria and Assad has changed very much.

    To be sure, one might view this as a merely ritualistic expression of outrage, but also coming on as it does on the eve of Steve Bannon's dismissal from the National Security Council one can't help but start having dark thoughts on whether the deep state might be triumphing after all.

    michael dr , April 6, 2017 at 12:02 am GMT \n

    On Trump – the less he intends to do, the more strongly he positions himself.
    So one way to interpret his remarks is that he is occupying a position that fully takes advantage of anti-Assad sentiment, but with no intent to act on it at all.
    Chuck , April 6, 2017 at 12:22 am GMT \n
    So Trump the hard-headed America Firster morphs into weepy bleeding heart interventionist?

    The Empire needs better writers.

    Anatoly Karlin , Website April 6, 2017 at 12:51 am GMT \n
    100 Words NEW! @Chuck So Trump the hard-headed America Firster morphs into weepy bleeding heart interventionist?

    The Empire needs better writers. I've been pretty solid in my Trump support, despite occasional "zradas" (defeats/betrayals).

    This is the first time however that I am genuinely questioning his intentions and goodwill.

    If Trump in the end does goes down the path of corporatist neocon warmongering, he will lose and the vision he outlined at his inauguration speech will die as well. Very sad!

    El Dato , April 6, 2017 at 12:57 am GMT \n
    100 Words Gee, I wonder who could be behind this offensively low-brow and loud theater performance to give a "casus belli" and a "reason for responsibility to protect".

    100% repeat of Obama's "redline" performance. Maybe it will go through now, it depends on the levels of sellout.

    The always-reliable yuropeans are onboard, same as with the Lybian "Ghadaffi is distributing Viagra to rape his own people" somewhat-liberating free-for-all. Clearly the cheques have arrived.

    Meanwhile, the bombing of Yemen on behalf of the Saudis, which in a sane world would result in US military personnel and politicians getting acquainted with the wrong end of firing squads, is merrily ongoing.

    Felix Keverich , April 6, 2017 at 1:02 am GMT \n
    100 Words Well, let's see: Tillerson makes a statement that overthrowing Assad is no longer a priority. Neocons disagree. And within days this "chemical attack" happens, the biggest chemical attack in Syria – we are told – since 2013.

    Coincidence? I don't think so.

    I think it's possible that chemical attack did happen, and it was the CIA or its terrorist buddies that arranged to poison these children. Unlike Assad, these actually have a plausible motive – manipulating Trump and influencing his policy.

    Backwoods Bob , April 6, 2017 at 1:34 am GMT \n
    @Anatoly Karlin I've been pretty solid in my Trump support, despite occasional "zradas" (defeats/betrayals).

    This is the first time however that I am genuinely questioning his intentions and goodwill.

    If Trump in the end does goes down the path of corporatist neocon warmongering, he will lose and the vision he outlined at his inauguration speech will die as well. Very sad! I have become disheartened.

    Hillary was the end of America as we knew it. But Trump is far too much of an Empire First, not America First president at the moment.

    El Dato , April 6, 2017 at 1:44 am GMT \n
    Also, "White Helmets"

    https://consortiumnews.com/2016/10/23/the-white-helmets-controversy/

    anonymous1 , April 6, 2017 at 2:33 am GMT \n
    200 Words It's WMD and false flag attacks all over again. How short is the public's memory? I suppose Trump is caught in a pincer movement here, false flag or provocation carried out by the 'deep state' or parts of the so-called 'intelligence community' on the one hand, coordinated with the mass media on the other who publicize it and beat the drums demanding that something must be done, it's a crisis, etc. They're trying to force his hand. It'll be interesting to see how he handles this. On the face of it, for a person who's shown a healthy level of skepticism he's coming across as a bit too credulous. The UN ambassador Haley is a really embarrassing idiot who is undermining the very person that gave her this wonderful platform for her to be a star of. People gave her adulating coverage in the past as an up-and-coming talent but has been revealed to be merely a blabbering airhead. The pool of talent for Trump to pick from is apparently quite thin so finding some good people is looking to shape up as a major challenge.
    Yevardian , April 6, 2017 at 3:01 am GMT \n
    100 Words @Anatoly Karlin I've been pretty solid in my Trump support, despite occasional "zradas" (defeats/betrayals).

    This is the first time however that I am genuinely questioning his intentions and goodwill.

    If Trump in the end does goes down the path of corporatist neocon warmongering, he will lose and the vision he outlined at his inauguration speech will die as well. Very sad! As I thought at the time, and Ron Unz also noted here, Trump was either an utter moron or completely indifferent to actual policy to promote a facelesss POS like Mike Pence to VP.
    I think it should be increasingly obvious that he's a gauche blowhard who's merely a weathervein for whomever advised him last.

    jimbojones , April 6, 2017 at 3:30 am GMT \n
    100 Words Trump should watch out. He was voted in exactly because people were profoundly disgusted by the Obama/Clinton Libyan monstrosity, and because people wanted Washington to stop funding terrorists to topple the legitimate government of Syria.

    Assad didn't gas civilians. The very idea is moronic. He has won the war. Trump can use Assad as an ally in the fight against everybody's common enemy ISIS. Or Trump can betray his electorate and ruin his presidency by doing something stupid in Syria.

    The choice is his.

    WorkingClass , April 6, 2017 at 3:56 am GMT \n
    It's a false flag attack. Just like before. Assad didn't do it. But the victims died in earnest. The evil accrues to Imperial Washington.

    If Trump thinks Assad did this he is a fool. Somebody needs to tell Trump the deplorables are drifting away.

    utu , April 6, 2017 at 4:43 am GMT \n
    300 Words @Anatoly Karlin I've been pretty solid in my Trump support, despite occasional "zradas" (defeats/betrayals).

    This is the first time however that I am genuinely questioning his intentions and goodwill.

    If Trump in the end does goes down the path of corporatist neocon warmongering, he will lose and the vision he outlined at his inauguration speech will die as well. Very sad! This betrayal is for real and final. Stop projecting your wishful thinking on Trump. He never was the man many of us were imagining. This were just our projections. Projections of people who wanted to have some hope. The most important is that Bannon is out or on his way out. W/o Bannon there is nobody else. Just your usual dumb and vile republicans are all what is left plus some soft hearted libs in Ivanka faction. That's all. It's over!

    Besides what a great opportunity for Trump. Just do the Syria and everything will be forgiven and forgotten. Including Susan Rice, OK? We will not have to impeach you and replace with Pence.

    Not sure about this guy but he claimed 2 days ago:

    Published on Apr 3, 2017

    Is the US Preparing to Invade Damascus?
    As absurd as this may sound the evidence seems to stack up in favor of this scenario of a US led invasion of Damascus, Syria. The movement of US desert Camo military equipment was done in a way to avoid detection by Russia. First to Germany to make it appear as a buildup on Russia's border, then to Poland final to a port in Romania, then reloaded at set sail to Beirut Lebanon where Damascus comes into view. All the while Israeli US Italian and UAE military work in Greece to overcome Russia s300 air defense system. Israel moves their forces into the Golan for supposed drills. All troops in position Damascus to be hit next.

    If so, the staged gas attack is just a part of a much bigger scheme that was planned months ago with Trump knowledge. No more talking about hat the Deep Sate is boxing Trump in. No, Trump is on it.

    Cyrano , April 6, 2017 at 4:56 am GMT \n
    200 Words If there were 3 million parallel universes out there, then I guess maybe in one of them Assad would have been responsible for the chemical attack on the Syrian civilians, but even then I doubt it. For the sake of argument, let's say he did it and as a result almost a hundred people died. So then I guess it's justifiable to go in and kill thousands and thousands of civilians to punish Assad for killing less than a hundred of them.

    When "dictator" like Assad kills people, he does it in an undemocratic way – with chemical weapons, which is inhumane. When the greatest democracy does it – it's ok, because it's for a just cause and with weapons approved by the Geneva Convention. And if at the end of the carnage awaits the prospect of democracy – then no price in civilian lives is too high. Something that Madeleine Albright would call a price worth paying.

    When a democracy kills people – it doesn't use chemical weapons, it uses bombs, bullets and rockets and that's what really makes a difference. I think most people would find it very objectionable to be killed by chemical weapons, but with bullets – it's almost a breeze, and then when you factor in that you are possibly dying in order to bring democracy to your country, I am surprised that they actually don't volunteer for such an honor.

    Seraphim , April 6, 2017 at 5:20 am GMT \n
    100 Words @Anatoly Karlin I've been pretty solid in my Trump support, despite occasional "zradas" (defeats/betrayals).

    This is the first time however that I am genuinely questioning his intentions and goodwill.

    If Trump in the end does goes down the path of corporatist neocon warmongering, he will lose and the vision he outlined at his inauguration speech will die as well. Very sad! Not everyone was fooled by the supposed intentions and goodwill of Trump.

    F. William Engdahl, "The Dangerous Deception Called The Trump Presidency"

    http://journal-neo.org/2016/11/25/the-dangerous-deception-called-the-trump-presidency/

    The exact repetition of Colin Powell's vial of anthrax performance shows that nobody gives a hoot about 'making sense'. Assad must go! Nah, hang. And those who 'back' him and 'would not escape responsibility for this'. Be concerned, very concerned. The Petersburg attack just missed the 'real culprit'.

    Seamus Padraig , April 6, 2017 at 5:21 am GMT \n
    Well, people, it's all over. I had a bad feeling back when Trump let go of Gen. Flynn. Now my worst suspicions have been confirmed: the deep state has won. The Trump we elected is no more ..
    Seraphim , April 6, 2017 at 7:09 am GMT \n
    300 Words It is known that the apparition of Haley's Comet presage wars. Do we have it? No, but we have Nikki Haley.

    U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley, Feb. 16, 2017:
    ""I just put out to the members of the Seucrity Council to help me understand: When we have so much going on in the world, why is it that every single month we're going to sit down and have a hearing where all they do is obsess over Israel?
    The Security Council is supposed to discuss how to maintain international peace and security. But at our meeting on the Middle East, the discussion was not about Hizballah's illegal build-up of rockets in Lebanon. It was not about the money and weapons Iran provides to terrorists. It was not about how we defeat ISIS. It was not about how we hold Bashar al-Assad accountable for the slaughter of hundreds and thousands of civilians. No, instead, the meeting focused on criticizing Israel, the one true democracy in the Middle East. I am new around here, but I understand that's how the Council has operated, month after month, for decades.
    I'm here to say the United States will not turn a blind eye to this anymore. I am here to underscore the ironclad support of the United States for Israel. I'm here to emphasize the United States is determined to stand up to the UN's anti-Israel bias. We will never repeat the terrible mistake of Resolution 2334 and allow one-sided Security Council resolutions to condemn Israel. Instead, we will push for action on the real threats we face in the Middle East
    It is the UN's anti-Israel bias that is long overdue for change. The United States will not hesitate to speak out against these biases in defense of our friend and ally, Israel".

    What are the 'real threats'? Assad, Russia, Iran, Sarin gas. Understood?

    Ilyana_Rozumova , April 6, 2017 at 7:15 am GMT \n
    100 Words Always check the timing. Now Globalists did realize that they cannot impeach Trump.
    So?????????????????
    They decided with this false flag to reeducate him.
    Some people claim that US wars in Levant are for israel.
    I am not sure of anything.
    But I do think that real power is hiding behind of the curtain.
    Dana Thompson , April 6, 2017 at 7:25 am GMT \n
    100 Words On every occasion like this when a chemical weapons atrocity causes a stir, discussion always neglects the question I find most interesting, which is: we all know that traditional methods, like bullets that make heads explode like overripe melons, and shrapnel that flings entrails into picturesque sausage-like festoons are licit and acceptable to enlightened humanity, but use of chemicals is outside the pale of decency. But why is that? I think this article contains clues to the answer, but I can't seem to follow the exact line of reasoning:
    J.B.S. Haldane on chemical warfare
    German_reader , April 6, 2017 at 7:38 am GMT \n
    100 Words I don't know, maybe Assad/his government felt they could now get away with it and could use chemical weapons to terrorize and punish the opposition. But even if Assad's military is responsible, how does this incident really change anything? Tbh I don't care if Assad's military gasses a few dozen children, and no remotely sane person would regard this as legitimate reason for intervention. And the outrage is absurdly hypocritical given what's going on in Yemen with direct US support.
    Really disappointing how Trump seems to be preparing an intervention, total madness.
    Sergey Krieger , April 6, 2017 at 8:22 am GMT \n
    @Anatoly Karlin I've been pretty solid in my Trump support, despite occasional "zradas" (defeats/betrayals).

    This is the first time however that I am genuinely questioning his intentions and goodwill.

    If Trump in the end does goes down the path of corporatist neocon warmongering, he will lose and the vision he outlined at his inauguration speech will die as well. Very sad! He had vision? Doubtfully. Just wanted to win elections and thus was pressing all right buttons.
    I had no doubt for a second it was all for show.
    American history starting with Indian treaties is one of broken promises and lies.

    karl1haushofer , April 6, 2017 at 9:55 am GMT \n
    100 Words @JL The difference between now and 2013 is that Russia is in Syria. So, attacking the Assad regime now would be tantamount to war with Russia. Similarly, going after North Korea, where the US has also been saber rattling recently, would be very bloody and could very well go nuclear. I think the first comment on this thread maybe had it right, this is the opposite of "talk soft and carry a big stick". If I'm wrong, well, it's been a good run for humanity and sorry to everyone with children and hopes and plans for the future.

    AK, maybe it's time to dust off and update your nuclear war post? "The difference between now and 2013 is that Russia is in Syria. So, attacking the Assad regime now would be tantamount to war with Russia. "

    The problem is that there have been too many cases where Russia has not responded accordingly to an aggression against it. Many people think – whether justified or unjustified – that if Russian military, or a close Russian ally, is attacked Russia will not respond.

    Hopefully there are people in deciding roles in the Russian military and political circles who have the guts to act if it ever gets to this. I mean, those US bases in the Middle East are within the distance of Russian cruise missiles from Caspian and Black Sea

    animalogic , April 6, 2017 at 10:00 am GMT \n
    100 Words @jimbojones Trump should watch out. He was voted in exactly because people were profoundly disgusted by the Obama/Clinton Libyan monstrosity, and because people wanted Washington to stop funding terrorists to topple the legitimate government of Syria.

    Assad didn't gas civilians. The very idea is moronic. He has won the war. Trump can use Assad as an ally in the fight against everybody's common enemy ISIS. Or Trump can betray his electorate and ruin his presidency by doing something stupid in Syria.

    The choice is his. Will this be the final test of trump. ? If he follows the neo-con's into this minefield can anyone doubt - WHATEVER the EXACT reasons why - that his independence from the deep state is basically neglible ?
    I feel sorry for those who "believed" (they did have good reason to believe, given the putrid alternative .)
    If my fears are realized, I just hope that the millions who supported him reject BOTH of the major (sides of the same business) party.
    SOMETHING has to push Americans out of the unholy rut they have been in for decades now .

    animalogic , April 6, 2017 at 10:08 am GMT \n
    @Cyrano If there were 3 million parallel universes out there, then I guess maybe in one of them Assad would have been responsible for the chemical attack on the Syrian civilians, but even then I doubt it. For the sake of argument, let's say he did it and as a result almost a hundred people died. So then I guess it's justifiable to go in and kill thousands and thousands of civilians to punish Assad for killing less than a hundred of them.

    When "dictator" like Assad kills people, he does it in an undemocratic way – with chemical weapons, which is inhumane. When the greatest democracy does it – it's ok, because it's for a just cause and with weapons approved by the Geneva Convention. And if at the end of the carnage awaits the prospect of democracy – then no price in civilian lives is too high. Something that Madeleine Albright would call a price worth paying.

    When a democracy kills people – it doesn't use chemical weapons, it uses bombs, bullets and rockets and that's what really makes a difference. I think most people would find it very objectionable to be killed by chemical weapons, but with bullets – it's almost a breeze, and then when you factor in that you are possibly dying in order to bring democracy to your country, I am surprised that they actually don't volunteer for such an honor.

    Excellent response. Don't forget though, depleted uranium, cluster bombs, napham & Daisy cutters are also symbols of our humanity & love of democracy.
    It just makes you feel so warm, even gooey, inside, doesn't it ?
    Diversity Heretic , April 6, 2017 at 10:31 am GMT \n
    100 Words Whether or not the attack was a false flag, that picture of Nikki Haley with the photo of the dead child ought to be very high on the list of "Why Women Should Not Be Allowed Anywhere Near Diplomacy." First, Angela Merkel consents to the massive invasion of her country because of a dead Syrian child. Now Nikki Haley wants Americans to be put at risk to kill more Syrians because of another dead Syrian child. Otto von Bismarck was right, women's roles should be confined to children (their own), the church and the kitchen.
    annamaria , April 6, 2017 at 10:31 am GMT \n
    100 Words @Ram Reminiscent of the bombing of Deir Az Zohr by the US in support of ISIS when Kerry stepped out of the path laid out for him by the NeoCons. " the path laid out for him by the NeoCons."
    Agree.

    Paul Craig Roberts' invective against ziocons: "The entire history of the 21st century is the history of Washington's wars instigated by Zionist neoconservatives and the state of Israel against Muslim countries. So far Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Afghanistan, Yemen, and parts of Syria and Pakistan, have been destroyed by gratuitous military attacks that are, without any doubt, war crimes under the Nuremberg Standard established by the United States. The hoax "war on terror" has not only murdered and dislocated millions of peoples, producing waves of Muslim immigration over the Western World, but also destroyed Western civil liberty." http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/04/05/germany-rip/

    Mrs. Haley and other non-Jewish warriors like McCain and Lindsey Graham are indeed the whores in service of the "chosen" and mega war profiteers, from weaponry peddlers to the financial "great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity:"

    annamaria , April 6, 2017 at 10:37 am GMT \n
    @karl1haushofer "The difference between now and 2013 is that Russia is in Syria. So, attacking the Assad regime now would be tantamount to war with Russia. "

    The problem is that there have been too many cases where Russia has not responded accordingly to an aggression against it. Many people think - whether justified or unjustified - that if Russian military, or a close Russian ally, is attacked Russia will not respond.

    Hopefully there are people in deciding roles in the Russian military and political circles who have the guts to act if it ever gets to this. I mean, those US bases in the Middle East are within the distance of Russian cruise missiles from Caspian and Black Sea... Russian federation has been trying to avoid a full-blown military conflict that the ziocons have been provoking with the vicious audacity. The lying, thieving, criminal congress, run by the CIA /Mossad, is not an honest partner. Russia is cornered.

    Joe Wong , April 6, 2017 at 10:46 am GMT \n
    100 Words @michael dr On Trump - the less he intends to do, the more strongly he positions himself.
    So one way to interpret his remarks is that he is occupying a position that fully takes advantage of anti-Assad sentiment, but with no intent to act on it at all. The only guy used chemical weapons in wars against civilians on record is the USA during the Vietnam War; Agent Orange, Agent White and Agent Rainbow are still wrecking havoc in Vietnam. The only guy conduct false flag ops to blame the victims for violating human rights via its NED sponsored NGOs then wage reckless wars against the victims on the moral high ground is the USA and its NATO partners.

    This poisonous gas attack on Syria civilians bears too many similarities to the past records of the USA and its NATO partners' behaviour.

    JL , April 6, 2017 at 10:48 am GMT \n
    100 Words @karl1haushofer "The difference between now and 2013 is that Russia is in Syria. So, attacking the Assad regime now would be tantamount to war with Russia. "

    The problem is that there have been too many cases where Russia has not responded accordingly to an aggression against it. Many people think - whether justified or unjustified - that if Russian military, or a close Russian ally, is attacked Russia will not respond.

    Hopefully there are people in deciding roles in the Russian military and political circles who have the guts to act if it ever gets to this. I mean, those US bases in the Middle East are within the distance of Russian cruise missiles from Caspian and Black Sea... You realize you're talking about nuclear war, right? Why any rational person would hope for that truly escapes me. No, the only thing we can hope for is that there are people in deciding roles in the American military and political circles who still remember about the concept of MAD.

    Anatoly Karlin , Website April 6, 2017 at 11:03 am GMT \n
    100 Words NEW! @JL The difference between now and 2013 is that Russia is in Syria. So, attacking the Assad regime now would be tantamount to war with Russia. Similarly, going after North Korea, where the US has also been saber rattling recently, would be very bloody and could very well go nuclear. I think the first comment on this thread maybe had it right, this is the opposite of "talk soft and carry a big stick". If I'm wrong, well, it's been a good run for humanity and sorry to everyone with children and hopes and plans for the future.

    AK, maybe it's time to dust off and update your nuclear war post? Heh.

    I had an outline of a post in my drafts on how a US-Russian clash in Syria might escalate, which I expected to write if HRC won. I might brush that off.

    I disagree that attacking Syria automatically means war, at least so long as the Russian military isn't directly targetted. Russia doesn't have any formal military alliances with Syria, so a lack of retaliation in Syria proper will be justifiable – and well-advised, considering massive American aeronaval dominance in the region.

    Of course this would be a humiliation for Putin on at least the order of Euromaidan if not greater, so he will probably be forced to respond somehow, somewhere.

    Brabantian , Website April 6, 2017 at 11:09 am GMT \n
    400 Words Key items showing false-flag nature of the Syrian gas attack absurdly attributed to Assad

    (1) Anti-Assad "reporter" Feras Karam tweeted about the gas attack in Syria 24 hours before it happened – Tweet , "Tomorrow a media campaign will begin to cover intense air raids on the Hama countryside & use of chlorine against civilians"

    (2) Gas masks were distributed 2 days before the attack

    (3) Rescue workers are not wearing protective gear as they would if severely-toxic gas attack had occurred, as Anatoly Karlin notes above

    (4) Pakistani British doctor promoting Syria gas attack story, "who at the time of attack was taking interview requests instead of helping injured flooding in" is Dr Shajul Islam, "used as source by US & UK media, despite facing terror charges for kidnapping & torturing two British journalists in Syria & being struck off the medical register"

    (5) Videos previously exposed as fraudulent are being recycled "A chemical weapons shipment run by Saudi mercenaries [is blown up] before it can be offloaded & used to attack the Syrian army in Hama [this story] has turned into Syrian aircraft dropping sarin gas on orphanages videos shot in Egypt with the smoke machines are dragged out again."

    (6) Gas attack story is supported by known Soros-funded frauds 'White Helmets' who had previously celebrated alongside Israeli-Saudi backed 'Al Qaeda' extremists after seizing Idlib from Syrian Army forces. White Helmets "have been caught filming their fake videos in places like Egypt & Morocco, using actors, smoke machines & fake blood".

    Very regrettably, Russia & its potentially powerful media, are playing their traditional Israeli-serving role of being inexcusably timid in denouncing blatant false-flag deception & fraud Just as Russia signed off on killing Qaddafi & hurling Libya into mass death & chaos

    Destruction of Syria & Assad serves long-being-implemented 1980s Israeli Oded Yinon Plan to destroy & dismember all major countries surrounding mafia state Israel

    Also, major US-backed economics behind the campaign to destroy Syria -
    Map of pipeline alternatives thru Syria:
    (a) Russia-supported pipeline from Iran thru Iraq & Syria
    (b) US-supported pipeline from Qatar thru Saudi Arabia, Jordan & Syria

    http://oil-price.net/cartoons/iran-iraq-syria-pipeline.jpg

    Hunsdon , April 6, 2017 at 11:12 am GMT \n
    200 Words @Anatoly Karlin Heh.

    I had an outline of a post in my drafts on how a US-Russian clash in Syria might escalate, which I expected to write if HRC won. I might brush that off.

    I disagree that attacking Syria automatically means war, at least so long as the Russian military isn't directly targetted. Russia doesn't have any formal military alliances with Syria, so a lack of retaliation in Syria proper will be justifiable - and well-advised, considering massive American aeronaval dominance in the region.

    Of course this would be a humiliation for Putin on at least the order of Euromaidan if not greater, so he will probably be forced to respond somehow, somewhere. Please bear in mind, O our host, that Gen. Dunford, chairman of the JCS, said (in October?) that for the US to set up no fly zones in Syria would mean that we are at war with Syria and Russia. The next day in a NBC radio interview Lady MacBeth once more advocated for such no fly zones.

    Unlike the Obama administration, I somehow think the Trump administration will actually listen to military men like Dunford, Kelly and Mattis. For the last generation, the US has stalked more or less unopposed on the world stage, throwing its weight around as it pleases. No one, we think, can oppose us! Well, that's nice and all, but I haven't forgotten the Cold War and the threat of nuclear confrontation with the USSR/Russia, and I'll bet you a meal of shashlik, lepeshki and vodka that Mattis, Dunford and Kelly haven't either.

    Maybe my faith is naive, we'll have to wait and see.

    Timur The Lame , April 6, 2017 at 11:47 am GMT \n
    400 Words Gordian Knot time. I don't know for sure what it is about politics that turns knowledgeable people of different stripes into Revusky's Hi IQ Idiots. They have done controlled tests on this phenomena with brain wiring and visual stimuli to show that an emotional element interferes with (or dominates) logical thinking when political themes or visuals are invoked. The big boys must have known this through other wisdom when they allowed for universal suffrage but that is an argument for another day.

    Just as the leftist intellectuals were urinating with glee onto their Birkenstocks when Buckwheat won in 2008, so did the intellectual right over their Red Wings when Drumpf prevailed. Emotions.

    I hold ALL politicians in extreme contempt and thereby reflexively limit my exposure to the reality show charade of elections. Needless to say, no emotions invoked. Then inevitably I get to roll my eyes when real and honest intellectuals on the left gnashed their teeth when the Nobel Peace prize laureate doubled up on foreign wars and reneged on domestic issues and likewise get do so when otherwise intelligent writers such as Mr. Karlin reveal surprise and disappointment with Trump.

    It is all so painfully obvious that a system which has been hijacked and has steadily degenerated for over 200 years cannot be fixed through the same (but negatively expanded) rules by simply producing new personality. Einstein's definition of insanity fully displayed.

    When asked what I think of Trump from election day +1 until the present, my answer remains the same. The upside is that his success did a monumental job in exposing 'professional' politicians of all stripes as being corrupt and worthless beyond words and that he exposed the media as being bought and paid for whores who walk in lockstep from the highest perch of the 'gray lady'
    right down to the local community papers even in foreign countries.

    The downside is that he will inevitably deflate and disappoint those people who arguably might have made a difference. Apathy and cynicism will ensue, resulting in a reversion to the status quo. It has always been the mob's destiny when the mob supposedly gets to decide. So after some possibly honest Trumpian burps it will be business as usual (Syria as just one example).

    Leviathan will not be dislodged by a mere mortal.

    Cheers-

    karl1haushofer , April 6, 2017 at 11:51 am GMT \n
    @JL You realize you're talking about nuclear war, right? Why any rational person would hope for that truly escapes me. No, the only thing we can hope for is that there are people in deciding roles in the American military and political circles who still remember about the concept of MAD. Are you saying that Russia should allow its forces in Syria to be attacked or bombed without retribution? Read More
    The Scalpel , Website April 6, 2017 at 11:51 am GMT \n
    100 Words @The Scalpel Trump is losing the plot It is quite possible that this ENTIRE incident is a staged production. Film and special effects people are certainly capable of it. Assuming any of this is credible before seeing objective evidence only reinforces the narrative. On the surface of things, it seems illogical and obviously self-defeating and unnecessary for the Syrian government to have done this. One should withold any judgement until the facts are in
    Jim Christian , April 6, 2017 at 11:51 am GMT \n
    300 Words @Seamus Padraig Well, people, it's all over. I had a bad feeling back when Trump let go of Gen. Flynn. Now my worst suspicions have been confirmed: the deep state has won. The Trump we elected is no more .. Either that, or there's "real estate" at Arlington Trump has been offered, say a 6′LX4′WX6′D up there on that hill above the Shining City in Arlington Cemetery. Up there next to Jack and Bob Kennedy who, whatever ELSE you think of them were the last two to say No to a bullshit war.

    Real estate in Arlington is what those who oppose wars earn for themselves. You may have silver and gold or you may have lead. Pick one. And so he has.

    Rule #1 is, war for profit goes on. Or else.
    Rule #2 is, Presidents (or candidates as we saw with RFK) will never change Rule #1 and survive the attempt. This is our country for the past century and a half. I'm sure the armorers made themselves a pretty penny during the civil war. Ok, ok, so half a million died, millions maimed, all White Americans (don't want to hear about the Black squads, sorry). but cannon balls and black powder makes good money. Nothing has changed since. And they'll risk lots of casualties toying with a nuclear confrontation without blinking an eye. Lots of money in rebuilding cities, too.

    I really hate our ruling classes these days. If they do this with Syria, start in on Russia with skirmishes and outright war, we'll know we're ruled by evil. There's no need for any of it. We "won". We leveled the Middle East in response to 9/11. You'd think it's enough from looking at the carnage and destruction we've wrought on them. But it's never enough, not anymore.

    JL , April 6, 2017 at 12:27 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @karl1haushofer Are you saying that Russia should allow its forces in Syria to be attacked or bombed without retribution? What I'm saying is that I can't envision a scenario whereby an American attack on Russian forces in Syria doesn't lead to all out nuclear war and I sincerely hope it doesn't come to that. Otherwise, we can continue this discussion in the afterlife. Mr. Karlin seems to have different ideas and I would very much like to read the post on various escalation scenarios that he had worked up in case of a Clinton victory. As it is and even before any escalations, US and Russian forces operating in such close vicinity seems to me extremely dangerous.
    karl1haushofer , April 6, 2017 at 12:34 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @JL What I'm saying is that I can't envision a scenario whereby an American attack on Russian forces in Syria doesn't lead to all out nuclear war and I sincerely hope it doesn't come to that. Otherwise, we can continue this discussion in the afterlife. Mr. Karlin seems to have different ideas and I would very much like to read the post on various escalation scenarios that he had worked up in case of a Clinton victory. As it is and even before any escalations, US and Russian forces operating in such close vicinity seems to me extremely dangerous. But don't you realize that this type of thinking gives America a leeway to attack Russia whenever it pleases?

    Your way of thinking goes something like this: "America can attack Russia because it knows that Russia cannot retaliate because it would start WW3″.

    May I ask that why shouldn't America worry about starting WW3 if it attacks Russia?

    Tom Welsh , April 6, 2017 at 12:39 pm GMT \n
    100 Words That tweet certainly is a classic.

    "Persons with knowledge believe "

    You could write a book about deception based on those four words alone. "Persons with knowledge" is a phrase calculated to inspire envy and respect in the great unwashed, who of course have no knowledge. But wait a moment! Who are those "persons with knowledge"? They seem to be unnamed and undefined – could that be deliberate?

    And then we learn that those "persons with knowledge" *believe* something. But wait a moment! If they have knowledge, why would they be reduced to "believing"? Wouldn't they actually, well, *know* ?

    So the tweet tells us that some undefined people, who may or may not exist, know something and believe presumably, something else that they don't know about.

    And I would care about this why?

    annamaria , April 6, 2017 at 1:22 pm GMT \n
    100 Words When ignoramuses like Morell (a pampered villain) get power over resources of an empire like the US, the whole humanity becomes endangered. The greatest danger is a rule of the opportunistic incompetent. It is doubtful that the all-powerful CIA has any knowledgeable and principled persons left among its rank anymore, after the years of careful selection for opportunists/profiteers. At least there is no way the ziocons, war profiteers and their families will be able to survive the next world war.
    Psychopaths are anti-life by definition.
    JL , April 6, 2017 at 1:31 pm GMT \n
    300 Words @karl1haushofer But don't you realize that this type of thinking gives America a leeway to attack Russia whenever it pleases?

    Your way of thinking goes something like this: "America can attack Russia because it knows that Russia cannot retaliate because it would start WW3".

    May I ask that why shouldn't America worry about starting WW3 if it attacks Russia? Ah, I see the misunderstanding here. My point was simply that any discussion of how Russia would respond to an attack on its forces by the US is moot because it will respond in kind, and the whole thing will go nuclear in 3,2,1. Specifically, it very much is the US that should be worrying about starting WW3 in this case, not Russia.

    During the Cold War, both sides realized the ramifications of direct military conflict and acted accordingly. The US is behaving as if something has changed in that respect and I find it terrifying. What is different now is that there is a huge asymmetry in forces that perhaps has instilled unwarranted confidence in the Americans that they can win a war with Russia.

    I think you maybe overestimate Russia's strength, in somewhat the same way as the US may be underestimating it. I noticed in another conversation you thought that Russia should have vetoed the UN resolution allowing the US to go into Afghanistan. To me, this is a complete misjudgment of Russia's situation at that moment in time, while ignoring, or forgetting, the resolve of the US immediately following September 11. Not to mention, there was probably a geopolitical calculation that having the US bogged down in Afghanistan, something the Russians could envision all too well, would allow Russia some breathing room to get back on its feet and claw back some influence in the near abroad.

    Look, I'm all for Russia's resistance to the empire, I'd just like it to happen without WW3.

    SmoothieX12 , Website April 6, 2017 at 1:33 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @annamaria Russian federation has been trying to avoid a full-blown military conflict that the ziocons have been provoking with the vicious audacity. The lying, thieving, criminal congress, run by the CIA /Mossad, is not an honest partner. Russia is cornered.

    Russia is cornered.

    I think it is exactly the other way around. Russia has options, US doesn't, apart from the fact that it lost all international subjectivity and is now nothing more than Israel's "subsidiary". Russia is not desperate, US establishment is and that is why it is so desperate to start "war" with Russia, whatever that means. Russia will always avoid war–it is her MO for decades. US desperation for this "war" with Russia has very logical explanations, granted that some of the factors in all this US insanity are, indeed, irrational (and hysterical) and metaphysical in nature.

    DanFromCt , April 6, 2017 at 1:55 pm GMT \n
    200 Words @Felix Keverich Well, let's see: Tillerson makes a statement that overthrowing Assad is no longer a priority. Neocons disagree. And within days this "chemical attack" happens, the biggest chemical attack in Syria - we are told - since 2013.

    Coincidence? I don't think so.

    I think it's possible that chemical attack did happen, and it was the CIA or its terrorist buddies that arranged to poison these children. Unlike Assad, these actually have a plausible motive - manipulating Trump and influencing his policy. The timing is more than suspicious so I tuned in Fox News for straight up false flag narrative, and sure enough there was Sen. Bob Corker saying Assad was a monster gassing his people and cutting off their genitals, with Corker calling for Putin to repudiate Assad to the thanks of Bill Hemmer–end of script. Incidentally, has anyone else noticed that Corker more resembles that stuttering, court-appointed lawyer in My Cousin Vinny than any statesman?

    The entire history of the development of the rules of evidence in law, science, and politics, a signature achievement of Western Civilization, is being thrown away and hardly anyone notices or cares. Today a canned, identical, and obviously pre-scripted narrative available within minutes of these events goes unquestioned, even when, as in this latest theater, at least one announcement was made before the event.

    I'm also sickened by the concurrent Wounded Warriors theater at the White House because this empty jingoistic stunt may signal that our military may become active on the ground over there and therefore Trump's neo handlers are already selling the inevitable loss of limbs as a sign of our righteousness instead of the reality, which is that our soldiers lose their lives and limbs so good Isrseli boys need not.

    cali , April 6, 2017 at 2:03 pm GMT \n
    600 Words Clearly the false flag committed by none other than the Deep State not only against Assad but also against the boogeyman for all that is wrong – the Putin government – continues.
    Here are a couple of facts unknown to many since the US Pravda the outlet for the Deep State to report only approved 'news' is hard at work to frame Assad.
    During HRC term as SOS she licensed Marc Turi the arms dealer to funnel weapons into Syria via Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Marc Turi also stated that she funneled Sarin gas from the Ghaddafi arsenal after his assassination to the US sponsored rebels Al Nusra and others making up ISIS into Syria as a means to overthrow, accuse and frame Assad as the culprit using Sarin gas against his own people to stay in power.
    HRC and Obama et al attempted to railroad Marc Turi after his services ended as a means to silence him. The out-of-the-blue charges against him via the Loretta Lynch DOJ accusing him of being an arms smuggler without license nearly put him in prison ergo Turi threaten Hillary and Obama to expose their treacherous actions in Benghazi that was used to set up the overthrow of Assad in Syria. His threats of exposure of the arming of ISIS in Syria as well as the Sarin gas provided to ISIS murdering Syrian civilians while plasing the blame on Assad ended the prosecution and charges against him by the DOJ who suddenly and without explanation dropped all charges against him.
    The saber rattling against Assad and Putin continues unabated as we see here.
    Nicki Haley – member of the #NeverTrump 'performs' her role as planned namely to continue the anti-Assad and anti-Putin agenda. I'm sure traitor McCain the Soros and CFR stooge is whispering into her ear.
    Trump made a big mistake when appointing her into this position simply because her agenda as part of Trump's republican enemies within while placing trust in her she has not earned and is contrary to the DT agenda.
    On a sidenote: In October 2016 the UK Parliament published their final investigative report of Hillary and her actions in Libya/Benghazi accusing her of war crimes. The US Pravda did not inform American voters about this investigation.
    Shortly after that the Syrian president Assad and Vladimir Putin submitted a dossier to the ICC that described the Deep State and its agents Obama and HRC about their war crimes in Syria detailing all the findings including the use of Sarin gas provided to ISIS to be used on innocent civilians while blaming it on Assad. The ICC studied this dossier and accepted said dossier for a future trial against HRC and Obama et al among others having participated in the attempt to overthrow his government and the slaughter of over 250,000+ Syrians as a means to justify their coup.
    Lastly – the recent report of the Russian government spokesperson with reporters in regard to Tillerson's planned visit to Russia included this statement: "If the disinformation, accusations and lies in the US via the Deep State propaganda media continues accusing Russia having hacked the election etc the Russian president may expose Obama about various issues and actions that her begged Vladimir Putin to keep secret. All bets are off!"

    Assad was not the one ordering the use of Sarin gas to attack his own citizens but the Deep State and it's agents like Qatar, Saudi Arabia, McCain, HRC and Obama et al using Ghaddafi's chemical weapons after his assassination.

    Anatoly Karlin , Website April 6, 2017 at 2:06 pm GMT \n
    100 Words NEW! @SmoothieX12

    What is different now is that there is a huge asymmetry in forces that perhaps has instilled unwarranted confidence in the Americans that they can win a war with Russia.
    It is not as huge as you might think. In fact, one of the reasons for a hysteria is precisely a sense (and very rarely--a rational understanding) of the fact of a complete failure in forecasting what Russia is both economically and militarily. Considering an atrocious incompetence of American so called "Russia expertdom" there is nothing surprising here.

    I think you maybe overestimate Russia's strength, in somewhat the same way as the US may be underestimating it. I noticed in another conversation you thought that Russia should have vetoed the UN resolution allowing the US to go into Afghanistan.
    1. Russia of early 2000s and Russia of 2017 are two very different countries in every single respect.

    2. Some people in US military are beginning to understand that US can not win conventional conflict with Russia in Russia's immediate vicinity, it will be defeated and will sustain casualties which will make Vietnam look like a week at the spa. My view on things is informed by two key assumptions/observations:

    (1) The US can wipe the floor with Russia in Syria or anywhere in the Middle East.

    (2) Russia can wipe the floor with NATO east and north of the Suwalki gap.

    If things really go south in Syria – as in, actual Russian forces coming under sustained attack from the USAF – I would expect either:

    (a) If they decide on a military response –> it will be either in Ukraine (e.g. ranging from recognition of the LDNR to resurrection of the Novorossiya project) or even the Baltics;

    (b) If they decide on a negotiated surrender-in-all-but-name in Syria with the US allowing Russia its forces intact in exchange for abandoning Assad –> a domestic clampdown to contain the mass outrage that this humiliation will doubtless elicit.

    annamaria , April 6, 2017 at 2:13 pm GMT \n
    200 Words @SmoothieX12

    Russia is cornered.
    I think it is exactly the other way around. Russia has options, US doesn't, apart from the fact that it lost all international subjectivity and is now nothing more than Israel's "subsidiary". Russia is not desperate, US establishment is and that is why it is so desperate to start "war" with Russia, whatever that means. Russia will always avoid war--it is her MO for decades. US desperation for this "war" with Russia has very logical explanations, granted that some of the factors in all this US insanity are, indeed, irrational (and hysterical) and metaphysical in nature. "Russia is not desperate, US establishment is and that is why it is so desperate to start "war" with Russia, whatever that means. Russia will always avoid war–it is her MO for decades. "

    Agree. You are right. Russia will always try to avoid the war. But the US needs desperately a war, both to patch the enormous holes in economy (the $20 trillion debt and counting, crumbling welfare system, loss of manufacture and such), and create new sources of mineral riches from newly subdued countries. Instead of revamping the internal system (a painful and highly strenuous process for a society), the US wants to solve the problem by the old ways, externally. Since the US is unable to reform (do you see any signs, any hope for the internal reforms? – I do not), the deciders will go, most likely, for the jugular against Russia. Only in this respect Russia is cornered.

    The RF government has a task of politely (but painfully) reminding the "deciders" that Russia will not capitulate to the "chosen," fed reserve, and mega-war profiteers (all of them are most likely under a total surveillance and "guidance" by the CIA). In the absence of the painful aspect of reminding, the deciders are not able to come to their senses. Barring an internal coup d'etat led by American patriots, the US is rolling towards US-made global catastrophe.

    Randal , April 6, 2017 at 2:13 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @Hunsdon Please bear in mind, O our host, that Gen. Dunford, chairman of the JCS, said (in October?) that for the US to set up no fly zones in Syria would mean that we are at war with Syria and Russia. The next day in a NBC radio interview Lady MacBeth once more advocated for such no fly zones.

    Unlike the Obama administration, I somehow think the Trump administration will actually listen to military men like Dunford, Kelly and Mattis. For the last generation, the US has stalked more or less unopposed on the world stage, throwing its weight around as it pleases. No one, we think, can oppose us! Well, that's nice and all, but I haven't forgotten the Cold War and the threat of nuclear confrontation with the USSR/Russia, and I'll bet you a meal of shashlik, lepeshki and vodka that Mattis, Dunford and Kelly haven't either.

    Maybe my faith is naive, we'll have to wait and see.

    Unlike the Obama administration, I somehow think the Trump administration will actually listen to military men like Dunford, Kelly and Mattis.

    Being military is certainly no guarantee against making misjudgements of this kind.

    Here's what Lang at SST has to say and he has both directly relevant experience and contacts:

    " Some of the retired military people whom McMaster inherited on the NSC staff think that of the US intervenes against the Syrian government, Russia will back away from, us. I do not agree with this. "

    This moment is where Trump succeeds or fails, imo.

    KA , April 6, 2017 at 2:17 pm GMT \n
    100 Words Tell me how this works , how it happens. Carl Bidt says same thing NYT says before any investigation . So does Hailey at UN . Max Boot on MSNBC ,and GOP Representative from Oklhaoma on FOX . Is there an universal subsonic dog whistle that brings the howling out of the rabid mad poisonous vipers from the hidden pit ? How do they start slithering out of the rock together?

    I guess I should include Bob Corker as well .
    How does the other wailing from Israel that Iran is more dangerous than ISIS synch with this dog whistle ?

    Randal , April 6, 2017 at 2:43 pm GMT \n
    200 Words @JL Ah, I see the misunderstanding here. My point was simply that any discussion of how Russia would respond to an attack on its forces by the US is moot because it will respond in kind, and the whole thing will go nuclear in 3,2,1. Specifically, it very much is the US that should be worrying about starting WW3 in this case, not Russia.

    During the Cold War, both sides realized the ramifications of direct military conflict and acted accordingly. The US is behaving as if something has changed in that respect and I find it terrifying. What is different now is that there is a huge asymmetry in forces that perhaps has instilled unwarranted confidence in the Americans that they can win a war with Russia.

    I think you maybe overestimate Russia's strength, in somewhat the same way as the US may be underestimating it. I noticed in another conversation you thought that Russia should have vetoed the UN resolution allowing the US to go into Afghanistan. To me, this is a complete misjudgment of Russia's situation at that moment in time, while ignoring, or forgetting, the resolve of the US immediately following September 11. Not to mention, there was probably a geopolitical calculation that having the US bogged down in Afghanistan, something the Russians could envision all too well, would allow Russia some breathing room to get back on its feet and claw back some influence in the near abroad.

    Look, I'm all for Russia's resistance to the empire, I'd just like it to happen without WW3.

    I noticed in another conversation you thought that Russia should have vetoed the UN resolution allowing the US to go into Afghanistan.

    There was no UN resolution allowing the US attack on Afghanistan, which was another deliberately lawless act by the US regime.

    The Bush regime probably could have got one if it had felt it needed it, given the almost universally supportive climate immediately after 9/11. Instead it chose to rely on a shamelessly spurious and wilfully dishonest mis-application of the supposed right of self defence after 9/11, knowing that nobody important was going to question it. That produced a much more useful precedent for the US regime than meekly complying with the law and the US's treaty obligations would have.

    Likewise, the Bush regime probably could have had Bin laden produced for trial somewhere by the Taliban if it had wanted that, but the political and brute power needs of the moment required the US regime to be seen to be kicking some foreign butt aggressively and promptly.

    Verymuchalive , April 6, 2017 at 3:22 pm GMT \n
    200 Words @Anatoly Karlin My view on things is informed by two key assumptions/observations:

    (1) The US can wipe the floor with Russia in Syria or anywhere in the Middle East.

    (2) Russia can wipe the floor with NATO east and north of the Suwalki gap.

    If things really go south in Syria - as in, actual Russian forces coming under sustained attack from the USAF - I would expect either:

    (a) If they decide on a military response --> it will be either in Ukraine (e.g. ranging from recognition of the LDNR to resurrection of the Novorossiya project) or even the Baltics;

    (b) If they decide on a negotiated surrender-in-all-but-name in Syria with the US allowing Russia its forces intact in exchange for abandoning Assad --> a domestic clampdown to contain the mass outrage that this humiliation will doubtless elicit. The safest way to defang America lies in any future economic collapse. Faced with an imploding economy and a choice between minimal social welfare measures or a grotesquely expanded military, the choice is obvious. I still think it will happen later this decade, if there is any humanity left to witness it.
    The Neocons and the other warmongers seem to realise this, too, hence their increasing recklessness in seeking ever more dangerous wars. As if one more country to loot will somehow stave off the inevitable.
    I have felt for some years now that other major powers ( Russia, China ) should have precipitated this collapse, since the longer they remain in power – and both Houses are still overwhelmingly Neocon – the more dangerous they become.
    Philip Giraldi occasionally mentions a choke point near Dhahran where over 60% of Saudi Arabia's oil is processed. He regards it as the World's biggest engineering weak spot. I suggest Mr Putin arranges a nasty accident there ASAP, thereby preventing production for months and months. The panic alone should be enough to trigger the collapse.

    Anonymous , April 6, 2017 at 3:23 pm GMT \n
    300 Words Does anyone know if parathion (E-605) and other similar organophosphate pesticides are still being used in Syrian agriculture or are still present in some form there? This class of chemicals are typically incredibly toxic to people and they used to be widespread in Africa and the Middle East up until very recently, and there were reports of tons of annual deaths from accidental exposure in for example Syria.

    The reason I'm asking is because according to some of the geolocation efforts, the alleged bomb impacts occured in and around an old agricultural facility with large buildings and rows of silos, and several of the reported properties of the alleged chemical match those of parathion and similar pesticides.

    Parathion smells horrible, like steaming sewage slush, and it causes acute respiratory difficulties, constricted pupils, horrifying convulsions and ultimately death. Many symptoms are somewhat similar to those of weaponized nerve agents such as Sarin and VX (they're also organophosphates) but unlike the pesticides these lack any noticeable odor and they don't form visible clouds.

    Now, from what I can see Damascus decided to get rid of these things after a parliamentary decision in 1999. This basically meant just burying it in the ground or in some locked basement somewhere. Later on, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) set off to help Syria actually destroy these giant stashes and a program to this end was initiated about ten years ago. They dug up close to a thousand tons of it from all over the country, but it seems like the civil war got in the way before they were finished, and who knows what the jihadist "authorities" are up to in regards to that.

    Just one possible theory among many, I suppose. I do think it's a tad far fetched myself, but it was just something that popped into my head immediately upon reading about this.

    SmoothieX12 , Website April 6, 2017 at 3:34 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @annamaria "Russia is not desperate, US establishment is and that is why it is so desperate to start "war" with Russia, whatever that means. Russia will always avoid war–it is her MO for decades. "

    Agree. You are right. Russia will always try to avoid the war. But the US needs desperately a war, both to patch the enormous holes in economy (the $20 trillion debt and counting, crumbling welfare system, loss of manufacture and such), and create new sources of mineral riches from newly subdued countries. Instead of revamping the internal system (a painful and highly strenuous process for a society), the US wants to solve the problem by the old ways, externally. Since the US is unable to reform (do you see any signs, any hope for the internal reforms? - I do not), the deciders will go, most likely, for the jugular against Russia. Only in this respect Russia is cornered.
    The RF government has a task of politely (but painfully) reminding the "deciders" that Russia will not capitulate to the "chosen," fed reserve, and mega-war profiteers (all of them are most likely under a total surveillance and "guidance" by the CIA). In the absence of the painful aspect of reminding, the deciders are not able to come to their senses. Barring an internal coup d'etat led by American patriots, the US is rolling towards US-made global catastrophe.

    Instead of revamping the internal system (a painful and highly strenuous process for a society), the US wants to solve the problem by the old ways, externally. Since the US is unable to reform (do you see any signs, any hope for the internal reforms? – I do not), the deciders will go, most likely, for the jugular against Russia. Only in this respect Russia is cornered.

    Current US "elites" across the whole spectrum of state's activity–from economic, to military, to intelligence, to diplomacy are simply not competent to deal with global realities. In terms of statesmen–US does not produce statesmen anymore, times of FDR, Ike or even Nixon are long gone. US "elite" production are mostly Ivy League boys and girls who are only conditioned for navigating system, which gets out only politicians who only know how to get elected.

    AP , April 6, 2017 at 3:42 pm GMT \n
    300 Words @JL Ah, I see the misunderstanding here. My point was simply that any discussion of how Russia would respond to an attack on its forces by the US is moot because it will respond in kind, and the whole thing will go nuclear in 3,2,1. Specifically, it very much is the US that should be worrying about starting WW3 in this case, not Russia.

    During the Cold War, both sides realized the ramifications of direct military conflict and acted accordingly. The US is behaving as if something has changed in that respect and I find it terrifying. What is different now is that there is a huge asymmetry in forces that perhaps has instilled unwarranted confidence in the Americans that they can win a war with Russia.

    I think you maybe overestimate Russia's strength, in somewhat the same way as the US may be underestimating it. I noticed in another conversation you thought that Russia should have vetoed the UN resolution allowing the US to go into Afghanistan. To me, this is a complete misjudgment of Russia's situation at that moment in time, while ignoring, or forgetting, the resolve of the US immediately following September 11. Not to mention, there was probably a geopolitical calculation that having the US bogged down in Afghanistan, something the Russians could envision all too well, would allow Russia some breathing room to get back on its feet and claw back some influence in the near abroad.

    Look, I'm all for Russia's resistance to the empire, I'd just like it to happen without WW3.

    My point was simply that any discussion of how Russia would respond to an attack on its forces by the US is moot because it will respond in kind, and the whole thing will go nuclear in 3,2,1.

    I doubt either country will directly attack the other. In the extremely unlikelihood of such an attack, an escalation to nuclear would be even more unlikely, given that this will result in the end of both civilizations and annihilation of both peoples. It is silly to think that it's even possible.

    Let's look at (remotely) plausible scenarios. Would Russia want to wipe its own civilization off the face of the Earth over getting its troops killed in Syria? Would America do the same because a few thousand of its troops were killed in the Baltics, or Poland? Not going to happen. In fact, I would put the odds of a nuclear response to American troops installing a puppet government and occupying Moscow at below 50%. Because as in the case of Napoleon's or the Polish occupation, Russia can come back from that. It's never coming back from a nuclear war.

    I agree with Karlin that the USA taking out Russian troops in Syria (really doubt this would happen) will result in a high likelihood of Russia occupying the Baltics (taking out American troops in the process) and parts of Ukraine. Russia likes to reciprocate. That's not going to lead to nuclear war, though I imagine Russia would be out of swift and total sanctions would be imposed.

    AP , April 6, 2017 at 3:53 pm GMT \n
    100 Words If we are going to make wild speculations, perhaps it's a Russian operation designed to get America sucked into a Syrian quagmire as Russia exits, so Russia can do more in its backyard while the USA is preoccupied in the Middle East. Georgia happened while the USA was in Iraq.

    I think there is basically a zero chance of Assad having ordered this. It may be a US false-flag operation, Which would be stupid and unlikely. Given how heavily Russia is involved there, this could be probably uncovered rather easily given the competence of Russian intelligence.

    Most likely – some local commander acting for who knows what reason or local resistence doing a false flag operation withot American orders. Assad's forces are apparently not very centralized. Incompetence by Assad's forces or desperation by resistence makes more sense than does a conspiracy.

    SmoothieX12 , Website April 6, 2017 at 3:58 pm GMT \n
    200 Words @AP

    I doubt either country will directly attack the other. In the extremely unlikelihood of such an attack, an escalation to nuclear would be even more unlikely, given that this will result in the end of both civilizations and annihilation of both peoples. It is silly to think that it's even possible.

    US "needs" any kind of military success after de facto lost wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. US military record of the last 70 years is rather unimpressive–not a single war with first rate opponent, only extolled ad nauseam "victory" over third rate Saddam forces. A lot of psychology comes into this. Not only many US generals sleep and dream how to fight Russia, they desperately crave it. In conventional war with Russia this will be US, not Russia, who will initiate nuclear exchange. The reasons for that are numerous, including massive reputational military losses – from losing one or two aircraft carriers, to sustaining (which is highly likely) massive casualties which will lead to impossibility of attaining any political objectives.

    Russia is also completely capable of conventionally striking US proper. By about 2021-2023 this capability will grow exponentially, including the ability (which US currently doesn't have and most likely will not have) to field missile and other technologies which completely zero-down US military potential. Pentagon knows this.

    utu , April 6, 2017 at 4:04 pm GMT \n
    Just few years ago:

    BBC News Caught Staging FAKE Chemical Attack In Syria

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/videoseries?list=PLcRxDfqBg9aDYiI13PRimygPjn0EZVYRG

    Look at hilarious acting straight from The Walking Dead at 2:37 min.

    hyperbola , April 6, 2017 at 4:14 pm GMT \n
    300 Words Maybe all this is about putting Obama and Trump through exactly the same "do as we say or else" deep state scenario? Remember that Obama knew that the case for blaming Assad for Ghouta was at best not certain.

    Seymour M. Hersh · Whose sarin? · LRB 19 December 2013

    https://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n24/seymour-m-hersh/whose-sarin

    . In the months before the attack, the American intelligence agencies produced a series of highly classified reports, culminating in a formal Operations Order – a planning document that precedes a ground invasion – citing evidence that the al-Nusra Front, a jihadi group affiliated with al-Qaida, had mastered the mechanics of creating sarin and was capable of manufacturing it in quantity. When the attack occurred al-Nusra should have been a suspect, but the administration cherry-picked intelligence to justify a strike against Assad .

    There was a lot of very loud rhetoric from Obama, but no direct attack in response. One might almost say that Obama and Putin "cooperated" to allow the situation to defuse. That was heavily criticized by the strongest ZionCon fanatics in the US government and media.

    Now we have an almost identical repeat of the very same scenario and Trump must know that real intelligence suggests the same situation Obama faced. Trump´s choices seem to be three-fold: (1) denounce the deep state treason in the US government, (2) kowtow to the deep state and have the US military directly attack Syria, or (3) do the same as Obama and let the situation defuse with time (w/wo help from Putin).

    I would guess Trump will choose option (3) just like Obama. The real question is whether the ZionCon control of the US government includes both the Pentagon and the CIA or whether the US military still resists the country being ruled by a foreign sect. The media is clearly 100% ZionCon and this restricts Trump's freedom to choose option (1).

    utu , April 6, 2017 at 4:19 pm GMT \n
    200 Words @SmoothieX12

    The movement of US desert Camo military equipment was done in a way to avoid detection by Russia. First to Germany to make it appear as a buildup on Russia's border, then to Poland final to a port in Romania, then reloaded at set sail to Beirut Lebanon where Damascus comes into view.
    Yeah, sure--you know, those stupid Russians who are still using spyglasses and arithmometers in their intelligence efforts, how can they possibly notice the movement of a brigade size units.

    "Yeah, sure–you know, those stupid Russians who are still using spyglasses and arithmometers in their intelligence efforts, how can they possibly notice the movement of a brigade size units."

    I do not know how is the mighty Russia military intelligence after the major shakeups by Putin and Shoygu in 2010/11 doing? Where is your mighty all knowing GRU? They did not not know that something is being cooked up and the chemical weapon provocation was being prepared? Just few years in proper places few days ago could avert it. But nothing happened. Did bombing in St. Petersburg divert their attention?

    At least in 2013 there was a leak that apparently stopped Obama from going all the way:

    Remember WHY Obama Didn't Act on the Red Line Violation? Leaked Document Suggested Obama Greenlighted Chemical Weapon False Flag Attack

    https://willyloman.wordpress.com/2017/04/06/remember-why-obama-didnt-act-on-the-red-line-violation-leaked-document-suggested-obama-greenlighted-chemical-weapon-false-flag-attack/

    However you spin it does not look good. Russia is outplayed on every turn.

    Mr. Hack , April 6, 2017 at 4:22 pm GMT \n
    200 Words @AP

    My point was simply that any discussion of how Russia would respond to an attack on its forces by the US is moot because it will respond in kind, and the whole thing will go nuclear in 3,2,1.
    I doubt either country will directly attack the other. In the extremely unlikelihood of such an attack, an escalation to nuclear would be even more unlikely, given that this will result in the end of both civilizations and annihilation of both peoples. It is silly to think that it's even possible.

    Let's look at (remotely) plausible scenarios. Would Russia want to wipe its own civilization off the face of the Earth over getting its troops killed in Syria? Would America do the same because a few thousand of its troops were killed in the Baltics, or Poland? Not going to happen. In fact, I would put the odds of a nuclear response to American troops installing a puppet government and occupying Moscow at below 50%. Because as in the case of Napoleon's or the Polish occupation, Russia can come back from that. It's never coming back from a nuclear war.

    I agree with Karlin that the USA taking out Russian troops in Syria (really doubt this would happen) will result in a high likelihood of Russia occupying the Baltics (taking out American troops in the process) and parts of Ukraine. Russia likes to reciprocate. That's not going to lead to nuclear war, though I imagine Russia would be out of swift and total sanctions would be imposed.

    I agree with Karlin that the USA taking out Russian troops in Syria (really doubt this would happen) will result in a high likelihood of Russia occupying the Baltics (taking out American troops in the process) and parts of Ukraine.

    I could definitely foresee more involvement in Ukrainian affairs, but Baltic aggression seems over the top to me. By invading any of the Baltic countries, Russia will provoke the ire of European countries, especially those within NATO, and a likely counterattack. A war against the US in Syria and one against NATO in the Balts is way too much to envision. Things in Ukraine would undoubtedly unwind too. Wars on three fronts for Russia would be suicide. I think that what Karlin states here makes sense, and would preempt this sort of a scenario from occuring:

    I disagree that attacking Syria automatically means war, at least so long as the Russian military isn't directly targetted. Russia doesn't have any formal military alliances with Syria, so a lack of retaliation in Syria proper will be justifiable – and well-advised, considering massive American aeronaval dominance in the region

    SmoothieX12 , Website April 6, 2017 at 4:36 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @utu

    "Yeah, sure–you know, those stupid Russians who are still using spyglasses and arithmometers in their intelligence efforts, how can they possibly notice the movement of a brigade size units."
    I do not know how is the mighty Russia military intelligence after the major shakeups by Putin and Shoygu in 2010/11 doing? Where is your mighty all knowing GRU? They did not not know that something is being cooked up and the chemical weapon provocation was being prepared? Just few years in proper places few days ago could avert it. But nothing happened. Did bombing in St. Petersburg divert their attention?

    At least in 2013 there was a leak that apparently stopped Obama from going all the way:

    Remember WHY Obama Didn't Act on the Red Line Violation? Leaked Document Suggested Obama Greenlighted Chemical Weapon False Flag Attack
    https://willyloman.wordpress.com/2017/04/06/remember-why-obama-didnt-act-on-the-red-line-violation-leaked-document-suggested-obama-greenlighted-chemical-weapon-false-flag-attack/

    However you spin it does not look good. Russia is outplayed on every turn.

    However you spin it does not look good.

    My spin on it is for you to take some kind of calming medicine (try Valerian Root) and start learning about real world outside. Stopping projecting your (very wrong) perceptions of how complex military-intelligence machines work onto something which needs more than just reading a bunch of media outlets, may also help.

    Russia is outplayed on every turn.

    May be yes, may be no. However you try to spin it, but it is US which is hysterical, not Russia.

    Ilyana_Rozumova , April 6, 2017 at 4:40 pm GMT \n
    US most enjoyable hobby always was to beat up small South American countries.
    Jooz only redirected this valuable US passion to Middle East.
    There is nothing wrong with that.
    Randal , April 6, 2017 at 4:46 pm GMT \n
    300 Words @AP

    My point was simply that any discussion of how Russia would respond to an attack on its forces by the US is moot because it will respond in kind, and the whole thing will go nuclear in 3,2,1.
    I doubt either country will directly attack the other. In the extremely unlikelihood of such an attack, an escalation to nuclear would be even more unlikely, given that this will result in the end of both civilizations and annihilation of both peoples. It is silly to think that it's even possible.

    Let's look at (remotely) plausible scenarios. Would Russia want to wipe its own civilization off the face of the Earth over getting its troops killed in Syria? Would America do the same because a few thousand of its troops were killed in the Baltics, or Poland? Not going to happen. In fact, I would put the odds of a nuclear response to American troops installing a puppet government and occupying Moscow at below 50%. Because as in the case of Napoleon's or the Polish occupation, Russia can come back from that. It's never coming back from a nuclear war.

    I agree with Karlin that the USA taking out Russian troops in Syria (really doubt this would happen) will result in a high likelihood of Russia occupying the Baltics (taking out American troops in the process) and parts of Ukraine. Russia likes to reciprocate. That's not going to lead to nuclear war, though I imagine Russia would be out of swift and total sanctions would be imposed.

    I doubt either country will directly attack the other. In the extremely unlikelihood of such an attack, an escalation to nuclear would be even more unlikely, given that this will result in the end of both civilizations and annihilation of both peoples. It is silly to think that it's even possible ..In fact, I would put the odds of a nuclear response to American troops installing a puppet government and occupying Moscow at below 50%. Because as in the case of Napoleon's or the Polish occupation, Russia can come back from that. It's never coming back from a nuclear war.

    That's not how anybody really expects a superpower confrontation to lead to nuclear war, though.

    Most escalation scenarios since mutually assured destruction became generally accepted involve a repeated series of escalations, each assuming the other side will step back from the brink in response, or a loss of command and control giving rise to uncontrolled or mistaken releases, until at some point one side is faced, or thinks it is faced, with a stark "use it or lose it" choice with only a few minutes to decide.

    It's not that likely that even open war would lead to an uncontrolled nuclear exchange. but how much risk are you prepared to accept when the consequences are that serious?

    The real concern today, though, is that there might be American politicians and military men who actually believe that their first strike counterforce capabilities combined with missile defences to mop up surviving attacks actually could limit damage to the continental US to acceptable levels.

    Anatoly Karlin , Website April 6, 2017 at 4:47 pm GMT \n
    200 Words NEW! @AP If we are going to make wild speculations, perhaps it's a Russian operation designed to get America sucked into a Syrian quagmire as Russia exits, so Russia can do more in its backyard while the USA is preoccupied in the Middle East. Georgia happened while the USA was in Iraq.

    I think there is basically a zero chance of Assad having ordered this. It may be a US false-flag operation, Which would be stupid and unlikely. Given how heavily Russia is involved there, this could be probably uncovered rather easily given the competence of Russian intelligence.

    Most likely - some local commander acting for who knows what reason or local resistence doing a false flag operation withot American orders. Assad's forces are apparently not very centralized. Incompetence by Assad's forces or desperation by resistence makes more sense than does a conspiracy.

    Incompetence by Assad's forces or desperation by resistence makes more sense than does a conspiracy.

    That's one /pol/ack's idea: http://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/119714121

    >implying Arabs are competent enough to keep strict tabs on all their chemical warfare agents
    > implying they can tell the difference between a regular bomb and a gas bomb when they load them up in their planes
    > implying Arabs haven't used nerve agents as recently as 1988 in warfare
    > implying there is a strategic ammo dump full of sarin that they bombed despite literally no evidence pointing to any such thing
    > implying even if they did bomb this imaginary depot full of sarin agents that the agents don't dissipate quickly enough due to sarin's high evaporation rate which is sped up intensely by the dry Syrian desert

    It certainly could have also been a rogue element within the Syrian military. It's not exactly a secret there are too many Islamist sympathizers within it, which partly explains why it has such low effectiveness.

    I agree that one or the other of these is probably likelier than a specifically American inspired false flag, which in turn is likelier than Assad having ordered it directly.

    Anonymous , April 6, 2017 at 5:10 pm GMT \n
    200 Words The purpose of this False Flag chemical attack by the CIA trained terrorists who are called 'rebel' by the illiterate zionist salesman, is to create No Fly Zone, modified a 'save zone' by the illiterate 'president' to partition Syria and Iraq to erect kurdistan. Kurds are trained CIA terrorists spying for Israel and US. The axis of evil US – Israel- Britain CANNOT topple Assad, so the illiterate 'president' is trying the false flag operation to establish NFZ, the US/Hillary project with the help of the YOUNG zionist Kushner in the business of illegal settlements.

    The illiterate zionist salesman in the business of escort and hotel with a help of his escort at the UN is trying to fool the ignorant American people AGAIN to commit more crimes against humanity to help his son in law. Shame on America that goes sooooooooooo low to implement Zionist policy.

    The people of the region NEVER allow a second Israel in Syria or Iraq. YOU, the criminal mass murderers must get lost from Syria and the region NOW.

    Down with China and Russia if they sell another country to mass murderers, like Libya, for two bones called concessions. Shame on China if betrays humanity AGAIN.

    bjondo , April 6, 2017 at 5:31 pm GMT \n
    The smell neither sarin nor chlorine but BS
    utu , April 6, 2017 at 5:56 pm GMT \n
    300 Words @reiner Tor To be honest, I can't even imagine how this apparent complete U-turn could happen without him being blackmailed. "without him being blackmailed" – One resorts to blackmail with people who have integrity and stand for some higher principles. Trump is an opportunist. He will do whatever. He is not the man of your own projections that you casted on him. This commenter I think got him right

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/video-bannon-tries-to-advise-trump-on-getting-involved-in-syria/#comment-1825893

    Trump has balls but he's no political philosopher. He's not coherent on anything.

    "I love Wikileaks! I'm being surveilled!/Edward Snowden is a traitor!"

    "Iraq was a mistake. Libya was a mistake. America First!/We're gonna get rid of Isis! Assad's gas attack changes things."

    "Drain the swamp!/ Get behind the establishment's healthcare bill!"

    "Build the wall and have Mexico pay for it/Mitt Romney lost because his self deportation comment was mean and it lost him the Latino vote"

    The guy watches Fox and Friends and Judge Jeanine-two of the most mind numbingly stupid shows on cable news and seems to genuinely enjoy them. The guy has a few good instincts but he doesn't have a coherent worldview and you can bet the people whispering in his ear who can actually get stuff done in Washington do. Problem is, they tend to be Bill Kristol. Rand "hey let's actually talk about this before we commit ourselves to more wars" Paul is a lonely "wacko bird." Trump is beyond ideology. He wants results. He want accomplishments. He wants his ego flattered. And there are plenty of rats ready to exploit that situation and play Iago to his Othello.

    Who has access to his ear now counts. It ain't Bannon anymore who helped to save his campaign by doubling down on the original Trump message that Trump was ready to dilute or even discard. It will be Ivanka, Kushner and many Iagos. Art at #114 above put it really well in terms of Steve the Baptist metaphor. W/o Bannon it's over.

    utu , April 6, 2017 at 6:13 pm GMT \n
    200 Words @AP

    "I agree with Karlin that the USA taking out Russian troops in Syria (really doubt this would happen) will result in a high likelihood of Russia occupying the Baltics (taking out American troops in the process) and parts of Ukraine. "

    I could definitely foresee more involvement in Ukrainian affairs, but Baltic aggression seems over the top to me. By invading any of the Baltic countries, Russia will provoke the ire of European countries, especially those within NATO, and a likely counterattack.

    In my comment I assumed not some Russians killed as collateral damage by the USA assaulting Assad, but a US direct attack on and destruction of Russian military forces in Syria such as the naval base at Tartus. I think the odds of this happening are basically zero, but if the USA did this I suspect Russia would retaliate by taking out the nearest and most convenient American bases, which would be in the Baltics (Russia couldn't really retaliate in the Middle East). This would save face at home, demonstrate to the world that Russia does retaliate and that attacks on Russia have consequences, and perhaps end NATO, because the Western powers, as in 1939, would probably not want to really fight for the sake of some eastern European countries.

    "I suspect Russia would retaliate by taking out the nearest and most convenient American bases, which would be in the Baltics (Russia couldn't really retaliate in the Middle East). "

    Russia has no conventional means of retaliating in the Middle East. All Russian forces in Middle East can be swarmed and overwhelmed by USA, Turkey and Israel within few hours. Russia will not go nuclear for the sake of Syria. In the end it is all about saving face. Funny, isn't it? There is nothing tangible there. Saving face for Russian people sake only because beyond Russia nobody really cares about Russia's face which in the West they think is beyond salvaging anyway. The end of it will be a coup d'etat in Russia by those who think that Russia's face was not saved enough or by those who think that saving Russia's face may lead to Russia's destruction. It will be the latter who pretend to be the former for the people's sake.

    SmoothieX12 , Website April 6, 2017 at 6:17 pm GMT \n
    500 Words @AP I agree with most of what you say, and can't dispute your military assessment because it is beyond my expertise. But -

    In conventional war with Russia this will be US, not Russia, who will initiate nuclear exchange. The reasons for that are numerous, including massive reputational military losses–from losing one or two aircraft carriers, to sustaining (which is highly likely) massive casualties which will lead to impossibility of attaining any political objectives.
    I find the idea of America's military/political leaders choosing to commit national suicide under such a scenario (Russia destroying America's military capability and ability to project power outside the USA through conventional means) to be extremely unlikely. Leader may be foolish or short-sighted, but I really doubt they have a Nazi-like or Islamic-like mentality of preferring total national destruction if they don't have their way. I doubt even the fanatic neocons would feel this way.

    I find the idea of America's military/political leaders choosing to commit national suicide under such a scenario (Russia destroying America's military capability and ability to project power outside the USA through conventional means) to be extremely unlikely.

    I don't. Without going deep into, now firmly established, dysfunctionality of the US State, which is horrendously dangerous in itself, the war, and I am not being original here, has the mind of its own once it starts. The war with Russia, if it happens either in Syria or, let alone, in and around Ukraine, will have a very different military and political logic.

    1. Casualties sustained will be massive in a very short period of time.
    2. US will have a major political crisis at home.
    3. Reputational losses will be huge.
    4. Geopolitical dynamics will change drastically and in a very short time
    5. This point is for US further internal US contingencies and here one can only imagine what it may be and what political forces may emerge. Military-intelligence coup? Easily.
    6.

    So,

    Leader may be foolish or short-sighted, but I really doubt they have a Nazi-like or Islamic-like mentality of preferring total national destruction if they don't have their way.

    But this is a defining feature of, at least, most neocon cabal. But let's forget about Korea, where MacArthur was forced by Truman out of his position because he wanted to use nukes, same goes for Vietnam, where nuking it was considered. US is a no stranger to this kind of military thinking. What happens if Russia destroys a single Carrier Battle Group, and probability of this is not a zero at all? Do you know what the loss of even single carrier means for US as a whole, forget US Navy. Do not listen to me, read what Admiral Elmo Zumwalt thought about it during and after his tenure as CNO. We can only imagine what pressures will arise. While it is true that neocons are cowards, it is also true that we really do not know what is their threshold of rationality. You have to understand, for decades now US political and military "elite" was formed by this ad nauseam mantra of American exceptionalism in everything. Are you ready to predict the results of this "parting syndrome"? I am not. I can only discuss contingencies and one of them, and I guarantee you–it is being considered in Russia, is precisely of US "top" going completely rogue and insane, not that it is not happening as I type this. This contingency can not and must not be excluded from serious elaborations.

    P.S. Lowlife Albright's desire to sacrifice 500,000 Iraqi children for "democracy" was not an accidental misspeak–this is how many in D.C. think and live. In the end, if not for courageous British General Sir. Jackson, Wesley Clark would start killing Russian paratroopers at Slatina airfield. He issued the orders. Since then things only got worse.

    El Dato , April 6, 2017 at 6:39 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @anon Trump got burned on the Yemen raid.

    Why is the military going along with this one? The last one didn't happen because no one wanted to sign off on it. That is, Obama drew the line (stupidly). But then decided to make Congress vote for it. Everyone wanted someone else to be the designated 'leader'.

    Syria is no less a loser today. Does Congress want to vote for this? The only thing that is utterly predictable about Trump is he doesn't want to lose. But even more so, he doesn't want to be blamed.

    He was quite convincing today as the sucker.

    But really?

    The military and public mostly seem OK with bombing. So maybe we bomb some stuff. It's disgusting but its just killing military on one side or another along with a lot of collateral damage, dead women and children, etc. But no boots on the ground.

    I'd like to think that he won't do it. Like how could he be so stupid? But it hasn't stopped anyone sine the 2000 election.

    So maybe we bomb some stuff.

    That's going to be quite interesting.

    - Nusra Front will rebound.
    - ISIS will be back (remember them?)
    - USA will lose a few planes to S-300 anti-air.
    - There will be dead Russians. This won't go down well.
    - There will be dead Iranian cleaner teams, and thus angry Iranians. Hardcore Mullahs will be happy (sounds like feature because a War on Iran is exactly what the satanic union of Saudi-Arabia and you-know-who wants.)
    - Turkey will flow into the "bombed stuff" area to attack Kurds.

    God knows where that will all end up.

    Remember little Serbia and August 1914.

    iffen , April 6, 2017 at 6:48 pm GMT \n
    @SmoothieX12

    I doubt either country will directly attack the other. In the extremely unlikelihood of such an attack, an escalation to nuclear would be even more unlikely, given that this will result in the end of both civilizations and annihilation of both peoples. It is silly to think that it's even possible.
    US "needs" any kind of military success after de facto lost wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. US military record of the last 70 years is rather unimpressive--not a single war with first rate opponent, only extolled ad nauseam "victory" over third rate Saddam forces. A lot of psychology comes into this. Not only many US generals sleep and dream how to fight Russia, they desperately crave it. In conventional war with Russia this will be US, not Russia, who will initiate nuclear exchange. The reasons for that are numerous, including massive reputational military losses--from losing one or two aircraft carriers, to sustaining (which is highly likely) massive casualties which will lead to impossibility of attaining any political objectives. Russia is also completely capable of conventionally striking US proper. By about 2021-2023 this capability will grow exponentially, including the ability (which US currently doesn't have and most likely will not have) to field missile and other technologies which completely zero-down US military potential. Pentagon knows this. US military record of the last 70 years is rather unimpressive

    Right, no way that they match Soviet/Russia's impressive list of successes like ripping those Afghans a new one for example.

    Art , April 6, 2017 at 6:55 pm GMT \n
    100 Words Just cannot believe that Assad is that stupid as to do a gas attack at this time. It is beyond comprehension, after staying in power for five years of vicious civil war, and about ready to declare victory, he would never knowingly do this.

    This was either a tragic unintended error or a false flag by another party – most likely Israel.

    Whatever, the globalist Jews are going to use this tragedy to achieve their long-held goal of breaking up Syria.

    Jared and Ivanka Kushner will lead the way.

    SmoothieX12 , Website April 6, 2017 at 6:58 pm GMT \n
    200 Words @iffen US military record of the last 70 years is rather unimpressive

    Right, no way that they match Soviet/Russia's impressive list of successes like ripping those Afghans a new one for example. "There is a literature and a common perception that the Soviets were defeated and driven from Afghanistan. This is not true. When the Soviets left Afghanistan in 1989, they did so in a coordinated, deliberate, professional manner, leaving behind a functioning government, an improved military and an advisory and economic effort insuring the continued viability of the government. The withdrawal was based on a coordinated diplomatic, economic and military plan permitting Soviet forces to withdraw in good order and the Afghan government to survive. The Democratic Republic of Afghanistan (DRA)managed to hold on despite the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Only then, with the loss of Soviet support and the increased efforts by the Mujahideen (holy warriors) and Pakistan, did the DRA slide toward defeat in April 1992. The Soviet effort to withdraw in good order was well executed and can serve as a model for other disengagements from similar nations."

    http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/documents/Withdrawal.pdf

    All questions to US Army Command And General Staff College in Leavenworth, KS. Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

    German_reader , April 6, 2017 at 7:05 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @iffen US military record of the last 70 years is rather unimpressive

    Right, no way that they match Soviet/Russia's impressive list of successes like ripping those Afghans a new one for example. Compared to Vietnam, the Soviet record in Afghanistan wasn't really that bad (and at least the Soviets realized early on that they needed to get out and left behind a friendly regime that lasted some time, and might have lasted longer if not for the dissolution of the Soviet Union – what has NATO achieved so far in Afghanistan, after 15 years?).
    And I'd actually go farther than Smoothie, US triumphalism is way overdone even in regard to the 2nd world war, at least concerning the European theatre.

    jconsley , April 6, 2017 at 7:40 pm GMT \n
    100 Words @Seraphim It is known that the apparition of Haley's Comet presage wars. Do we have it? No, but we have Nikki Haley.

    U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley, Feb. 16, 2017:
    ""I just put out to the members of the Seucrity Council to help me understand: When we have so much going on in the world, why is it that every single month we're going to sit down and have a hearing where all they do is obsess over Israel?...
    The Security Council is supposed to discuss how to maintain international peace and security. But at our meeting on the Middle East, the discussion was not about Hizballah's illegal build-up of rockets in Lebanon. It was not about the money and weapons Iran provides to terrorists. It was not about how we defeat ISIS. It was not about how we hold Bashar al-Assad accountable for the slaughter of hundreds and thousands of civilians. No, instead, the meeting focused on criticizing Israel, the one true democracy in the Middle East. I am new around here, but I understand that's how the Council has operated, month after month, for decades.
    I'm here to say the United States will not turn a blind eye to this anymore. I am here to underscore the ironclad support of the United States for Israel. I'm here to emphasize the United States is determined to stand up to the UN's anti-Israel bias. We will never repeat the terrible mistake of Resolution 2334 and allow one-sided Security Council resolutions to condemn Israel. Instead, we will push for action on the real threats we face in the Middle East...
    It is the UN's anti-Israel bias that is long overdue for change. The United States will not hesitate to speak out against these biases in defense of our friend and ally, Israel".

    What are the 'real threats'? Assad, Russia, Iran, Sarin gas. Understood? Poor Nikki - what about Resolution 242? Is it now 69 U.N. Resolutions that Israel has ignored along with all international law? Does the United States recognize international law Nikki?

    Thus far, your comments and representation display you total lack of knowledge. At least consider the pros and cons of situations before forming an opinion. It seems you are regurgitating whatever lies you are told.

    Perhaps Trump selected you because you only watch TV and never read books, magazines, etc. You no doubt make Trump feel comfortable with your TV knowledge. It may help to read some State Department cables and emails to learn about United States' policies. Try not to be discouraged by the fact that most policies are hypocritical where Israel is involved.

    John Gruskos , April 6, 2017 at 7:48 pm GMT \n
    @Tulip Why would Assad do it, assuming he is winning the civil war?

    First, Assad requires political backers to stay in power, and if his backers dessert, he will fall.

    Second, during the civil war, his political backers have no choice but to back Assad, or otherwise their faction could fall from power.

    Third, after the civil war, his political backers could very well consider new leadership.

    Fourth, by using poison gas, a clear violation of the Geneva Conventions, Assad and his backers are now international war criminals.

    Fifth, if his backers move against Assad, they could all end up in front of the Hague.

    Sixth, its a nice FU to Donald Trump and America, as Assad doesn't need their support.

    Seventh, it either brings the Donald into an unwinnable quagmire, weakening America, or Donald looks more like Ronald (McDonald).

    If it looks like he is going to win the war, and Russia and Iran have his back (in terms of money and arms), gassing these people helps cement the support of his backers, at the expense of pissing off some nations he neither needs nor likes. This theory doesn't hold up. Assad and his backers already have blood on their hands. He doesn't need a new atrocity to cement their loyalty.

    [Apr 07, 2017] Syria The Toxic Meltdown

    Notable quotes:
    "... Donald Trump – and/or the alphabet soup of US intelligence agencies, with no detailed investigation – are convinced that the Russian Ministry of Defense is simply lying. ..."
    "... Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Major-General Igor Konashenkov, stressing "fully objective and verified" information, identified a Syrian Air Force strike launched against a "moderate rebel" warehouse east of the town of Khan Sheikhoun used to both produce and store shells containing toxic gas. ..."
    "... Konashenkov added the same chemicals had been used by "rebels" in Aleppo late last year, according to samples collected by Russian military experts. ..."
    "... And Western public opinion conveniently forgot that before Barack Obama's theoretically trespassed red line on chemical weapons, a secret US intelligence report had made it clear that Jabhat al-Nusra, a.k.a. al-Qaeda in Syria, had mastered the sarin gas-making cycle and was capable of producing it in quantity. ..."
    "... So those toxic weapons that "disappeared" – en masse - from Gaddafi's arsenals in 2011 ended up upgrading al-Qaeda in Syria (not the Islamic Stare/Daesh), re-baptized Jabhat Fatah al-Sham and widely described across the Beltway as "moderate rebels". ..."
    "... Trump's ambassador to the UN, Heritage Foundation asset Nikki Haley, predictably went ballistic, monopolizing the whole Western news cycle. Lost in oblivion, also predictably, was Russia's deputy UN ambassador Vladimir Safronkov shattering to bits the West's "obsession with regime change" in Syria, which is "what hinders this Security Council." ..."
    "... Idlib Chemical Attack: West Blames Assad Even Before Probe Launched Safronkov stressed the chemical attack in Idlib was based on "falsified reports from the White Helmets", an organization that has been "discredited long ago". Indeed; but now the Helmets are Oscar winners , and this pop culture badge of honor renders them unassailable – not to mention immune to the effects of sarin gas. ..."
    "... The dead "children of Syria" are now pawns in a much larger, perverse game. The US government may have killed a million men, women and children in Iraq – and there was no serious outcry among the "elites" across the NATO spectrum. A war criminal still at large admitted , on the record, that the snuffing out, directly and indirectly, of 500,000 Iraqi children was "justified." ..."
    "... For his part, Nobel Peace Prize Barack Obama instrumentalized the House of Saud to fund – and weaponize - some 40 outfits "vetted" by the CIA in Syria. Several of these outfits had in fact already merged with, or were absorbed by, Jabhat al-Nusra, now Jabhat Fatah al-Sham. And they all engaged in their own massacres of civilians. ..."
    "... The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Sputnik. ..."
    Apr 07, 2017 | sputniknews.com
    Syria: The Toxic Meltdown © AFP 2017/ Omar haj kadour Columnists 19:29 06.04.2017 Get short URL Pepe Escobar 6 3147 52 0

    "These heinous acts by the Assad regime cannot be tolerated." Thus spoke the President of the United States.

    Instant translation;

    Donald Trump – and/or the alphabet soup of US intelligence agencies, with no detailed investigation – are convinced that the Russian Ministry of Defense is simply lying.

    Using Chemical Weapons Against Civilians? Assad 'Would Never Make Such a Crazy Move' That's a pretty serious charge.

    Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Major-General Igor Konashenkov, stressing "fully objective and verified" information, identified a Syrian Air Force strike launched against a "moderate rebel" warehouse east of the town of Khan Sheikhoun used to both produce and store shells containing toxic gas.

    Konashenkov added the same chemicals had been used by "rebels" in Aleppo late last year, according to samples collected by Russian military experts.

    Still, Trump felt compelled to telegraph what is now his own red line in Syria; "Militarily, I don't like to say when I'm going and what I'm doing. I'm not saying I won't do anything one way or another, but I certainly won't be telling you [the media]."

    By his side at the White House lawn, the pathetic King Playstation of Jordan praised Trump's "realistic approach to the challenges in the region." This might pass as a Monty Python sketch. Unfortunately, it's reality.

    What's at stake in Idlib

    Washington 'Knows Damascus Has No Chemical Weapons', But Still Blames Assad Hysteria unleashed – once again -, Western public opinion conveniently forgot that declared chemical weapons held by Damascus had been destroyed way back in 2014 on board of a US maritime vessel, no less, under UN supervision.

    And Western public opinion conveniently forgot that before Barack Obama's theoretically trespassed red line on chemical weapons, a secret US intelligence report had made it clear that Jabhat al-Nusra, a.k.a. al-Qaeda in Syria, had mastered the sarin gas-making cycle and was capable of producing it in quantity.

    Not to mention that the Obama administration and its allies Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar had made a secret pact in 2012 to set up a sarin gas attack and blame Damascus, setting the scene for a Shock and Awe replay. Funding for the project came from the NATO-GCC connection coupled with a CIA-MI6 connection, a.k.a. rat line , of transferring all manner of weapons from Libya to Salafi-jihadis in Syria.

    So those toxic weapons that "disappeared" – en masse - from Gaddafi's arsenals in 2011 ended up upgrading al-Qaeda in Syria (not the Islamic Stare/Daesh), re-baptized Jabhat Fatah al-Sham and widely described across the Beltway as "moderate rebels".

    'Red Line' Revisited? What's Behind Trump Accusing Damascus of Reported Chemical Attack in Syria Cornered in Idlib province, these "rebels" are now the top target of the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) and the Russian Air Force. Damascus and Moscow, unlike Washington, are bent on smashing the whole Salafi-jihadi galaxy, not only Daesh. If the SAA continues to advance, and if these "rebels" lose Idlib, it's game over.

    So the offensive by Damascus had to be smeared, no holds barred, in full view of global public opinion.

    Yet it does not make any sense whatsoever that only two days before another international conference on Syria, and immediately after the White House was forced to admit that "the Syrian people should choose their destiny" and "Assad must go" is over and done with, Damascus should launch a counterproductive gas attack antagonizing the whole NATO universe.

    This walks – and talks - more like the tsunami of lies that predated Shock and Awe on Iraq in 2003, and certainly walks and talks like the renewed turbo-charging of an "al-CIAda" campaign. Jabhat al-Nusra never ceased to be the CIA's babies in the preferred Syrian regime change scenario.

    Your kids are not toxic enough

    Trump's ambassador to the UN, Heritage Foundation asset Nikki Haley, predictably went ballistic, monopolizing the whole Western news cycle. Lost in oblivion, also predictably, was Russia's deputy UN ambassador Vladimir Safronkov shattering to bits the West's "obsession with regime change" in Syria, which is "what hinders this Security Council."

    Idlib Chemical Attack: West Blames Assad Even Before Probe Launched Safronkov stressed the chemical attack in Idlib was based on "falsified reports from the White Helmets", an organization that has been "discredited long ago". Indeed; but now the Helmets are Oscar winners , and this pop culture badge of honor renders them unassailable – not to mention immune to the effects of sarin gas.

    Whatever Trump and the Pentagon may eventually come up with an independent US intel analyst, averse to groupthink, is adamant; "Any air attack on Syria would require coordination with Russia, and Russia will not allow any air attack against Assad to take place. Russia has the defensive missiles there that can block the attack. This will be negotiated out. There will be no attack as an attack can precipitate a nuclear war."

    The dead "children of Syria" are now pawns in a much larger, perverse game. The US government may have killed a million men, women and children in Iraq – and there was no serious outcry among the "elites" across the NATO spectrum. A war criminal still at large admitted , on the record, that the snuffing out, directly and indirectly, of 500,000 Iraqi children was "justified."

    For his part, Nobel Peace Prize Barack Obama instrumentalized the House of Saud to fund – and weaponize - some 40 outfits "vetted" by the CIA in Syria. Several of these outfits had in fact already merged with, or were absorbed by, Jabhat al-Nusra, now Jabhat Fatah al-Sham. And they all engaged in their own massacres of civilians.

    Meanwhile, the UK keeps merrily weaponizing the House of Saud in its quest to reduce Yemen to a vast famine wasteland pinpointed by "collateral damage" graveyards. The NATO spectrum is certainly not crying for those dead Yemeni children. They are not toxic enough.

    The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Sputnik.

    [Apr 07, 2017] Ron Paul Zero Chance Assad Behind Chemical Weapons Attack In Syria; Likely A False Flag Zero Hedge

    The first question to be asked in such cases is " Cue bono " "Commonly the phrase is used to suggest that the person or people guilty of committing a crime may be found among those who have something to gain, chiefly with an eye toward financial gain. The party that benefits may not always be obvious or may have successfully diverted attention to a scapegoat , for example."
    Notable quotes:
    "... According to former Congressman Ron Paul, the chemical weapons attack in Khan Sheikhoun that killed 30 children and has led to calls for the Trump administration to intervene in Syria could have been a false flag attack. ..."
    "... "It's the neo-conservatives who are benefiting tremendously from this because it's derailed the progress that has already been made moving toward a more peaceful settlement in Syria," said Paul. ..."
    "... Many have questioned why Assad would be so strategically stupid as to order a chemical weapons attack and incite the wrath of the world given that he is closer than ever to winning the war against ISIS and jihadist rebels. ..."
    "... Just five days before the attack, U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said, "The longer-term status of President Assad will be decided by the Syrian people," implying a definite shift in U.S. foreign policy away from regime change in Syria. ..."
    "... Why would Assad put such assurances in jeopardy by launching a horrific chemical attack, allowing establishment news outlets like CNN to once against use children as props to push for yet another massive war in the Middle East? ..."
    "... The propaganda is so prevalent, the indoctrinated so blinded, there is no way at this point for the populace to have any idea of "what is truth?". ..."
    "... Trump is too sharp not to sense something smells fishy. It's a deliberate ignorance. ..."
    "... You mean like lacing ammunition with depleted Uranium, U.S. style? Or showing up, undeclared, and initiating aggressive war in other countries, violating international law, U.S. style? Or gunning down civilians and children rendering aid, U.S. style like that Manning/Collateral Murder video showed, exclaiming, "Well, the kids shouldn't be in a war zone." Everyone within earshot, muttering, "Yep." ..."
    "... Let's not forget using DU weapons in populated areas. Also no problem. Babies getting incinerated by thermobarics? No problem either. Illegal use of the double tap, targeting first responders using the specious argument that if you dig the body parts out of a building or attempt to help those unlucky enough to be in the blast radius of one of our thermobarics? Nope, no problem. ..."
    "... If it was sarin, these White Helmet fraudsters would be dead: https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/jumping-conclusions-something-not-a... ..."
    "... Japanese first responders dealing with a real sarin attack in Tokyo. Those handling the victims are wearing positive-pressure hazmat suits. The White Helmets? Sneakers, no gloves and a generic gas mask. http://jto.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/n-sarin-b-2015032... ..."
    "... Like the US government has no clue about what is going on here in the US, regarding to politics, IRS Scandals, Clinton scandals, Trump scandals, Obamacare, Obama scandals.... but some how, some way, they always know everything that was happening in Syria and always confirm everything within 24 hours and telling the world what really went on in Syria... ..."
    "... So 'follow the money', who wins from this chemical attack - US deep state, neocons, MIC and media lapdogs. ..."
    "... Deep state and their legacy media pawns are using Syria to manipulate and get control of Trump. With media all parroting 'Assad did it' Trump has played to their tune and deep state sucks Trump deeper into their swamp. ..."
    "... No bomb blast kids. No burned kids. No adults. I guess the kids were in a field of clover, wearing orange vests and pilots were just flying crop dusters, wearing full nerv agent proof suits and sprayed them. ..."
    "... Looking deeper, Israel has been pushing this hard. Putin to Netanyahu: Unacceptable to Make 'Groundless Accusations' on Syria Chemical Attack http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.782007 ..."
    Apr 06, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
    Ron Paul: "Zero Chance" Assad Behind Chemical Weapons Attack In Syria; Likely A False Flag

    According to former Congressman Ron Paul, the chemical weapons attack in Khan Sheikhoun that killed 30 children and has led to calls for the Trump administration to intervene in Syria could have been a false flag attack.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/LULzvg1gA5U

    As Paul Joseph Watson details, pointing out that the prospect of peace in Syria was moving closer before the attack , with ISIS and Al-Qaeda on the run, Paul said the attack made no sense.

    "It looks like maybe somebody didn't like that so there had to be an episode," said Paul, asking, "who benefits?"

    " It doesn't make any sense for Assad under these conditions to all of a sudden use poison gases – I think there's zero chance he would have done this deliberately, " said Paul.

    The former Congressman went on to explain how the incident was clearly being exploited by neo-cons and the deep state to enlist support for war.

    "It's the neo-conservatives who are benefiting tremendously from this because it's derailed the progress that has already been made moving toward a more peaceful settlement in Syria," said Paul.

    Many have questioned why Assad would be so strategically stupid as to order a chemical weapons attack and incite the wrath of the world given that he is closer than ever to winning the war against ISIS and jihadist rebels.

    Just five days before the attack, U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said, "The longer-term status of President Assad will be decided by the Syrian people," implying a definite shift in U.S. foreign policy away from regime change in Syria.

    Why would Assad put such assurances in jeopardy by launching a horrific chemical attack, allowing establishment news outlets like CNN to once against use children as props to push for yet another massive war in the Middle East?

    Manthong -> auricle •Apr 6, 2017 11:07 AM

    If President Trump does not fire and publicly humiliate any of those who told him that the Syrians attacked civilians with chemical weapons, he will lose a lot of respect from those of us who know better.

    Mr. Universe -> Manthong •Apr 6, 2017 12:10 PM

    Tulsi Gabbard's Twitter is ablaze with "shame on you Tulsi, you know who is responsible as you met with him a few months ago. "

    The propaganda is so prevalent, the indoctrinated so blinded, there is no way at this point for the populace to have any idea of "what is truth?".

    beemasters -> Comtrend Apr 6, 2017 3:46 PM

    Every president has always been elected for the purpose of benefiting the very few at the expense of the many.

    X22Report on this false flag... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0mS_z50A_w&t=19m40s

    Trump is too sharp not to sense something smells fishy. It's a deliberate ignorance.

    Arnold -> Ghost of Porky , Apr 6, 2017 11:04 AM

    You are a good discriminator of legal and illegal war.

    Ghost of Porky -> Arnold , Apr 6, 2017 11:45 AM

    Oh, did congress declare war? Must have missed that.

    Stranger_in_a_S... -> Arnold , Apr 6, 2017 2:45 PM

    You mean like lacing ammunition with depleted Uranium, U.S. style? Or showing up, undeclared, and initiating aggressive war in other countries, violating international law, U.S. style? Or gunning down civilians and children rendering aid, U.S. style like that Manning/Collateral Murder video showed, exclaiming, "Well, the kids shouldn't be in a war zone." Everyone within earshot, muttering, "Yep."

    So I guess Assad should just utter, "Kids shouldn't have been in a war zone," and the rest of the world would go, "Oh, yeah, that's how it works because that is what the U.S. explained to us about those kids riddled with .50 calibers during the slaughter of those Reuters reporters went. Everything's OK then."

    Or they should have had more responsible father's, like the 16 year old Awlaki kid. That works too, because that's how the U.S. rolls.

    Besides, Assad could also just tell us how it's all worth it, kids dying, because that is another acceptable rationalization per Albright.

    In essence, there is a laundry list of 'acceptable' excuses Assad could use, because the U.S. uses them all the time. Would save him a lot of trouble and this recent fakery wouldn't even have to be denied.

    greenskeeper carl -> Ghost of Porky , Apr 6, 2017 11:26 AM

    Let's not forget using DU weapons in populated areas. Also no problem. Babies getting incinerated by thermobarics? No problem either. Illegal use of the double tap, targeting first responders using the specious argument that if you dig the body parts out of a building or attempt to help those unlucky enough to be in the blast radius of one of our thermobarics? Nope, no problem.

    lets say we give most of the government their war they seem to want so desperately. How many babies will we kill when we invade Syria? Children killed by our bombs are just as dead as babies killed by gas.

    Shemp 4 Victory -> Mtnrunnr , Apr 6, 2017 10:36 AM

    You can't stockpile what kind of gas? I haven't heard anything specific regarding even the cause of death of the victimized stage props used in this Made-For-TV drama.

    Shemp 4 Victory -> Mtnrunnr , Apr 6, 2017 10:49 AM

    No, you're fucking wrong.

    If it was sarin, these White Helmet fraudsters would be dead: https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/jumping-conclusions-something-not-a...

    HowdyDoody -> Shemp 4 Victory , Apr 6, 2017 2:03 PM

    Japanese first responders dealing with a real sarin attack in Tokyo. Those handling the victims are wearing positive-pressure hazmat suits. The White Helmets? Sneakers, no gloves and a generic gas mask. http://jto.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/n-sarin-b-2015032...

    Yog Soggoth -> Mtnrunnr , Apr 6, 2017 8:30 PM

    You are such a tard.

    Army: Disposal Of Sarin Containers To Begin Next Spring When was that? What did the ASS press say? Sarin is very soluble in water whereas other nerve agents are more sparingly soluble. VX has the unexpected property of being soluble in cold water but sparingly soluble in warm water (>9.5 °C). What did we see this morning? People in warm weather spraying down children without real protection from Sarin.

    abyssinian -> nyse , Apr 6, 2017 10:13 AM

    Thanks Ron for pointing out the obvious! But you are the only MAN brave enough to say it.

    Like the US government has no clue about what is going on here in the US, regarding to politics, IRS Scandals, Clinton scandals, Trump scandals, Obamacare, Obama scandals.... but some how, some way, they always know everything that was happening in Syria and always confirm everything within 24 hours and telling the world what really went on in Syria...

    stilletto2 -> nyse , Apr 6, 2017 11:12 AM

    So 'follow the money', who wins from this chemical attack - US deep state, neocons, MIC and media lapdogs. So CIA set their terrorist buddies to release chems in the vacinity of a syrian bombing - easy to plan and do and then feed the brain dead media and Trump is ambushed - textbook CIA

    Deep state and their legacy media pawns are using Syria to manipulate and get control of Trump. With media all parroting 'Assad did it' Trump has played to their tune and deep state sucks Trump deeper into their swamp.

    Offthebeach -> nyse , Apr 6, 2017 11:53 AM

    Gee, the Syrian do one, single nerve agent bomb.....and they just hit kids. How accurate.

    My fking ass. No bomb blast kids. No burned kids. No adults. I guess the kids were in a field of clover, wearing orange vests and pilots were just flying crop dusters, wearing full nerv agent proof suits and sprayed them. Do the kids look like those Palestinian kids that are supposedly shot, then get up and run away.

    Of course the poor saps that we support would never stage a fake attack. ?

    Fake News ( is there any other? )

    bmore -> nyse , Apr 6, 2017 2:13 PM

    Looking deeper, Israel has been pushing this hard. Putin to Netanyahu: Unacceptable to Make 'Groundless Accusations' on Syria Chemical Attack http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.782007

    Bill of Rights , Apr 6, 2017 10:09 AM

    Nuff said

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2dpyR1kEP4

    Consuelo -> Bill of Rights , Apr 6, 2017 10:36 AM

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oQTWn1JfeA

    NFLX...?

    BigFatUglyBubble , Apr 6, 2017 10:10 AM

    This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill - the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill - you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes.

    [ to Neo who is choosing the red pill ] Remember... all I'm offering is the truth. Nothing more.

    Morpheus

    Dangerclose , Apr 6, 2017 10:11 AM

    Trump jumped like a trained dog when he answered the reporter's question about Syria yesterday. Someone like Ron Paul has to help this man and by all means lets keep the laser pointers away from him!! GEESCH!!

    Ward no. 6 -> Dangerclose , Apr 6, 2017 10:58 AM

    i am not pro-trump but i would think that there is extreme pressure for him to do as he is told

    truthseeker69 , Apr 6, 2017 10:11 AM

    >Swap Creature Transformation Complete

    >Commening 'Syria Propaganda' sequence.

    I just can't help but wonder what the trumpsters are going to do with thier 'MAGA' hats?

    [Apr 07, 2017] Trump took Hillary Clintons advice to bomb Assad Air Bases

    Apr 07, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
    anne, April 06, 2017 at 06:38 PM
    https://twitter.com/jacklgoldsmith/status/850081192376500224

    Jack Goldsmith‏ @jacklgoldsmith

    My arg that military action in Syria in response to chem weapons would've been illegal in 2013 still applies today.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/31/opinion/what-happened-to-the-rule-of-law.html

    What Happened to the Rule of Law?

    1:22 PM - 6 Apr 2017

    libezkova -> anne... , April 06, 2017 at 10:29 PM
    Looks like it took only 100 days for Trump to metamorphose into Hillary Clinton in foreign policy area.

    Ron Paul Institute thinks that ground invasion of Syria is imminent. More dead and more destruction in already war torn country. Will Damascus be captured without a fight or not ? This is one of oldest cities in the world.

    This rush to military actions reminds me Colin Powell performance in the UN. A million or more Iraqis are dead now.

    https://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2012/05/colin-powell-discusses-wmd-blot-his-record

    Aside from legality (and Trump does not care about legality as long it is not directed against him) there are some common sense questions to neocons who successfully captured Trump administration and manipulated Trump into action (on April 5th Bannon was removed from National Security Council):

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-06/cnn-anchor-speechless-after-congressman-questions-syria-chemical-attack-narrative


    1. Gassed by whom? Was there any investigation? What type of gas was used ? ""It's hard to know exactly what's happening in Syria right now. I'd like to know specifically how that release of chemical gas, if it did occur - and it looks like it did - how that occurred," Representative Thomas Massie told CNN's Kate Bolduan."

    2. Was the gas released by weapons from airplanes (but there is no bomblets on the scene) or as a result of the attack on chemical munitions factory producing shells with chemical warheads?

    3. Is there a possibility that attack was staged specifically to get USA actions ("false flag operation")

    4. Cue Bono ? "Ahrar Al-Sham, Tahrir Al-Sham (#AlQaeda) and #ISIS private Telegram channels praising #UnitedStates attack tonight..." as Representative Thomas Massie told CNN's Kate Bolduan. "Because frankly, I don't think Assad would have done that. It does not serve his interests. It would tend to draw us into that civil war even further."... "I don't think it would've served Assad's purposes to do a chemical attack on his people It's hard for me to understand why he would do that - if he did."

    Essentially the USA verdict was instant -- Assad needs to go. But no information was shared with public.

    Ron Paul thoughts:

    http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2017/april/06/syria-crisis-update-us-attack-imminent-and-what-you-can-do/

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-06/ron-paul-zero-chance-assad-behind-chemical-weapons-attack-syria-likely-false-flag

    im1dc , April 06, 2017 at 06:40 PM
    McConnell started something today that he may not get tomorrow but if he does the GOP will regret it, imo.
    im1dc , April 06, 2017 at 07:08 PM
    Trump took Hillary Clinton's advice to bomb Assad's Air Bases

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-idUSKBN1782S0

    "Trump unleashes military strikes against Assad airbase in Syria"

    "PALM BEACH, Fla. - The U.S. military launched cruise missile strikes ordered by President Donald Trump against a Syrian airbase controlled by President Bashar al-Assad's forces in response to a deadly chemical attack in a rebel-held area, a U.S. official said on Thursday."

    [Apr 07, 2017] Tillerson Warns Russia Coalition Steps Are Underway To Remove Assad

    Apr 07, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
    VIX was being crushed and stocks were leaking higher just as planned, until Secretary of State Rex Tillerson hit the tape beating war drums and announcing a new US policy on Syria, just a week after he said the US had no interest in removing the Syrian president.

    Specifically, Tillerson said that steps are underway to remove Syrian President Bashar al- Assad, and that the U.S. is considering an "appropriate response" to the Syrian government's alleged use of chemical weapons.

    "The process by which Assad would leave is something that requires an international community effort both to first defeat ISIS within Syria, to stabilize the Syrian country to avoid further civil war and then to work collectively with our partners around the world through a political process that would lead to Assad leaving," Tillerson said at the news conference in Palm Beach, Fla.

    Tillerson on Assad: "Clearly with the acts that he has taken it would seem there would be no role for him to govern the Syrian people." pic.twitter.com/Nr5BcHJmz1

    - ABC News (@ABC) April 6, 2017

    Tillerson also called into question Assad's future in Syria, saying there would be "no role" for authoritarian ruler in Syria, and said that there is no doubt the Assad regime was reponsible for the Syria attack.

    As a result, Tillerson said that "Assad's role in the future is uncertain clearly, and with the acts that he has taken it would seem that there would be no role for him to govern the Syrian people"

    Acknowledging that a conflict with Syria would involve Russia, Tillerson said that " it's very important that the Russian government consider carefully their continued support of the Assad regime."

    All of which was a quick U-turn from last Thursday's comments when Tillerson said that "I think the longer term status of President Assad will be decided by the Syrian people," a statement which as we reported infuriated John McCain .

    The reaction in the market was quick:

    VD -> SenselessPanic , Apr 6, 2017 3:12 PM

    voted for Trump in no small part for his promised detente while simultaneously voting against neocon Hitlery criminal muderding sociopathic warmonger and now we're still pushing into WW3.

    just another BTFD opportunity off the thermonuclear war (rumor)... .. . ..

    dogsandhoney2 -> Shemp 4 Victory , Apr 6, 2017 6:36 PM

    let's see... bannon out, fakenews pesticide bomb, assad from evil to neutral to evil, more war in middle east.

    mic taking the reins, again.

    no woof.

    Comtrend -> Killer the Buzzard , Apr 6, 2017 4:32 PM

    Deep State got to Rex:

    Deep State pulls on Tillerson's Strings: "No Role for Assad"

    and they move FAST

    US Official: Pentagon in Detailed Discussions with White House on Military Options in Syria

    I bet the 2 neocohens McCain and Graham are in on this, maybe conditioning Gorsuch vote on having their war.

    tmosley -> bob_bichen , Apr 6, 2017 7:54 PM

    You guys have really gone full retard. Step one is to remove ISIS. Step two is to stabilize Syria. Only after that is finished would they turn to removing Assad, ie years from now when everyone has forgotten all about this incident and he can just not do it and no-one will care.

    Big question here: why does the ZH comment section hate Trump with such a vengence? Many, if not most here seem to have wanted him to fail from the start, or for him to suddenly turn evil for some reason, and every time there is a new bit of data to feed that confirmation bias, they are screaming "I told you so's" from the rooftops, and after the "scandal" dies down, everyone else still likes Trump and they are back looking for the next sign of the coming of the anti-Christ.

    Is it just the doomboner crowd having withdrawals, or what?

    chunga -> wildbad , Apr 6, 2017 3:27 PM

    Me too. I hope the Russians have evidence of this "attack" by Assad and release it to the world.

    Beyond that I wish them well in their fight against the monsters calling the shots in this govt, even if I become collateral damage.

    strannick -> chunga , Apr 6, 2017 3:46 PM

    Sociopaths dont regard evidence. They just screech their lies louder in the MSM

    EuroPox -> hoyeru , Apr 6, 2017 3:46 PM

    Well here is the proof it wasn't Assad - a tweet (from an anti-Assad reporter) warning about a sarin attack in Idlib 24 hours before it happened...

    https://twitter.com/sahouraxo/status/849635794994286592

    Laddie -> VD , Apr 6, 2017 4:00 PM

    Well I thought compared to Hyena Rodthem Clinton that Trump was superb. He is still better than that creature, but he has sadly disappointed me.

    Roger Stone Tells AJ Jared Kushner Leaking Anti-Bannon Information to MSNBC Andrew Anglin April 5, 2017 Start at about 9:00 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAap1rM0Dq4

    Greasy Whore Nimrata Randhawa Threatens Invasion of Syria US Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley strongly condemned Russia and the Syrian government Wednesday over the chemical weapons attack on civilians, suggesting that the US is open to using military action to solve the country's ongoing civil war."

    Stranahan: Kushner Forcing Out Bannon? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibmiTrvKVQE

    Soros backed Trump son-in-law, Jared Kushner, in real estate venture with $259 MILLION: George Soros was the man who provided Cadre with a $259 million line of credit. "Soros has had a long and productive relationship with the Kushner family."

    Dr. Duke had British author and activist Mark Collett as his guest for the hour. They talked about the prominent role being played in the Trump administration by first son-in-law Jared Kushner, who is being put "in charge" of everything from reinventing the government to bringing peace to the Middle East. Dr. Duke points out that Kushner, who is an orthodox Jew, has a close association with the Chabad Lubavich movement, which embraces a theology that elevates Jews to divine status while denigrating the goyim as beasts.

    Kushner's family has given large sums of money to Chabad Lubavich, and has been very active in its events. They also discussed the bombing incident in St. Petersburg, which is more evidence of the cultural enrichment white countries are benefiting from, among other benefits of vibrant multiculturalism. AUDIO April 3, 2017 Photo: Kushner- Zarchi

    But if we consider such things from the standpoint of the race, not from the standpoint of the individual Jew who battens on us, is it not likely that the material profit counts for much less than the spiritual satisfaction? And if we consider some of the Jews' work, I cannot see how it could conceivably yield a net profit. What monetary gain can they have obtained, or intended to obtain, by spending vast sums to incite the (blacks) to rape, murder, and arson? What profit from destroying civilization in Rhodesia and making that land again a land of savages? What can the Jews in South Africa gain in material terms from their present intensive effort to destroy the white population and make of that country another Rhodesia? Is it not obvious that they could squeeze much more money out of the White population by peaceful parasitism and without inciting the racial hatreds that disrupt the economy and could conceivably bring retribution upon themselves? The only explanation, it seems to me, is that with their race as a whole spiritual considerations are paramount, paramount over profit and even over self-preservation. One can foresee the logical end in a future that may not be too distant: one can see the last Jews dying with exultation on the surface of a planet from which they have exterminated all other human beings, all animals, all vegetation, all life -- a planet of which they have made "a desolation of desolations."

    THE YELLOW PERIL (1983) Revilo P. Oliver, late Professor of the Classics, University of Illinois at Urbana

    rodocostarica -> VD , Apr 6, 2017 4:21 PM

    Call White house switchboard. Someone answers. They hang up on you when you call Trump a Neocon but hopefully the message gets through. CALL NOW>>>

    202-456-1414

    N0TME -> Snípéir_Ag_Obair , Apr 6, 2017 4:48 PM

    Also on mintpress: http://www.mintpressnews.com/russia-reports-discovery-rebel-held-chemica...

    meditate_vigorously -> EuroPox , Apr 6, 2017 3:13 PM

    We need to assemble coalition forces to regime change Washington D.C.

    BlindMonkey -> meditate_vigorously , Apr 6, 2017 3:42 PM

    It is absolutely time for a regime change in DC. I was watching a video on this and the announcer had the best summary of this:

    "Summing up the events in few sentences, the whole story pushed to the public looks this way: The bloody Assad regime took back Aleppo city and wide areas in its countryside, the Western Ghouta region, the Wadi Barada region, once again recaptured Palmyra from ISIS, and repelled a powerful rebel advance in northern Hama. The US even declared that the toppling of Assad was no longer the main priority in Syria.

    Then, the military leadership of the regime decided that was not enough and ordered a Su-22 warplane to use chemical weapons against people in Khan Sheikhoun. Some kind of small Soviet unguided rockets hit a road in the village and inflicted mass poisoning of civilians in the nearby areas. Fortunately, members of the Syrian Civil Defense and local journalists nearby were equipped with dust respirators. They filmed the incident and saved some people."---Harold Hoover
    Dr. Engali -> EuroPox , Apr 6, 2017 3:16 PM

    Trump never had a grip. He has been a tool of the deep state from the beginning. His purpose is to act as a lightning rod and distract attention from the real owners of this country while they continue to rape and pillage in the back ground. He also gave the red team faith that the system still works so they can continue the charade a little while longer.

    chicken_goose , Apr 6, 2017 3:03 PM

    Great more unnecessary wars for the MIC and cabal of international bankers.

    chunga -> chicken_goose , Apr 6, 2017 3:05 PM

    Trump goes from populist champion to fraudulent zio war criminal fraud in what...12 weeks?

    Lady Jessica , Apr 6, 2017 3:04 PM

    Isn't there the option of the Trump administration pretending to fight Assad, much as the Obama administration pretended to fight ISIS/ISIL/whatever?

    What's that called in psyop speak?

    directaction , Apr 6, 2017 3:08 PM

    Trump is shaping up to be as crazy as Obama and Bush II.

    zeroboris -> directaction , Apr 6, 2017 4:02 PM

    Trump is far more dangerous than Obama, as he pretends to be a tough-guy.

    HowdyDoody -> zeroboris , Apr 6, 2017 4:43 PM

    So did Obomber in September 2013

    "Obama is pursueing limited strikes against Syria as punishment for the alleged use of chemical weapons"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPhIPT9yOu8

    Meet the new flase flag, same as the old false flag.

    blue51 , Apr 6, 2017 3:11 PM

    This is sickening .Putin is in a jam , now . BIG decisions coming soon .

    sheikurbootie , Apr 6, 2017 3:29 PM

    Remember, this could be a negotiation tactic. We have not done anything to remove Assad...yet. I agree with Ron Paul. It makes no sense for Assad to use chemical weapons.

    Same with NK. We have not done ANYTHING but threaten a military option.

    We could pull bring the troops home from S.Korea too. We're not wanted their by half the population. Understandably so, we've been there for 70 fucking years. How much did that shit cost us?

    Before everyone plays armchair general, let's see what ACTUALLY happens.

    FBaggins , Apr 6, 2017 3:45 PM

    Fake News About Syria Exposed by Real Journalist Eva Bartlett

    December 14, 2016

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YANWFzMG9sU

    Nothing has changed even with the election of Trump. Tillerson's aim is to ensure control of oil/gas resources and pipeline routes in the middle east. As a CEO of Exxon what does anyone expect.

    As soon as he was elected, Trump opened the WH doors to let in the slime of the swamp and he is now drowning in their crarp.

    man of Wool , Apr 6, 2017 3:46 PM

    Removing Assad is a politically bad move. Assad keeps the country's many factions together.

    Remove Assad and replace with brutal American puppet?

    The one good thing i can see coming out of this long term is a Kurdistan country.

    [Apr 07, 2017] Trump Orders Strikes Against Syrian Regime Airbase in Response to Chemical Attack

    Apr 07, 2017 | www.breitbart.com

    WASHINGTON –President Trump has ordered cruise missile strikes against a Syrian regime military airbase, a defense official said late Thursday.

    A U.S. official said "more than 50" Tomahawk cruise missiles were launched at the airbase, located in Western Syria. That base, called Shayrat, was where the U.S. believes the Assad regime carried out a chemical weapons attack on Syrian civilians this week that killed at least 70 people.

    The strikes were carried out from two U.S. destroyers in the Mediterranean Sea, the official said. The attack occurred between 8 and 9 p.m. ET, according to CNN.

    Trump had hinted on Wednesday that he would take action against the chemical weapons attack during a Rose Garden briefing with the King of Jordan.

    The U.S. military has not yet completed a battle damage assessment, the official said.

    He said the attack had crossed "many, many lines, beyond a red line - many, many lines."

    "That attack on children yesterday had a big impact on me. Big impact," Trump had said. "That was a horrible, horrible thing, and I've been watching it and seeing it, and it doesn't get any worse than that."

    It was reported earlier in the day that Trump was considering military options against the Syrian regime.

    Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) called on the president to come to Congress to obtain congressional authorization for military action in Syria.

    "While we all condemn the atrocities in Syria, the US was not attacked," he said in a statement.

    "The President needs congressional authorization for military action and I call on him to come to Congress for a proper debate on our role. Our prior interventions in this region have done nothing to make us safer and Syria will be no different. – Senator Rand Paul

    Meanwhile, Republican defense hawks praised the airstrikes.

    "Unlike the previous administration, President Trump confronted a pivotal moment in Syria and took action," said Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC).

    "I think it was an important step," Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) said on CNN. "This was not some symbolic measure."

    In a statement, President Trump explained the urgency behind the strikes:

    My fellow Americans, on Tuesday, Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad launched a horrible chemical weapons attack on innocent civilians. Using a deadly nerve agent, Assad choked out the lives of helpless men, women and children. It was a slow and brutal death for so many, even beautiful babies were cruelly murdered in this very barbaric attack. No child of God should ever suffer such horror.

    Tonight, I ordered a targeted military strike on the airfield in Syria from where a chemical attack was launched. It is in the vital, national security interest of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons. There can be no dispute that Syria used banned chemical weapons, violated its obligations under the chemical weapons convention and ignored the urging of the U.N. Security Council.

    Years of previous attempts at changing Assad's behavior have all failed, and failed very dramatically. As a result, the refugee crisis continues to deepen and the region continues to destabilize, threatening the United States and its allies. Tonight I call on all civilized nations to join us in seeking to end the slaughter and bloodshed in Syria and also to end terrorism of all kinds and all types.

    We ask for God's wisdom as we face the challenge of our very troubled world. We pray for the lives of the wounded and for the souls of those who have passed and we hope that as long as America stands for justice, that peace and harmony will, in the end, prevail. Good night and God bless America and the entire world. Thank you.

    [Apr 07, 2017] Missile strike demonstrates American leadership. Always bipartisan support for that

    Notable quotes:
    "... Trump is no longer the dove it seems. But he is an incompetent hawk. ..."
    "... Incompetent hawks are awful. We can at least take some comfort that Schumer and Pelosi called out Trump for acting recklessly... Oh, wait, that was in an alternate reality where they did that. @#$%. If it weren't for incompetence and belligerence we would have any foreign policy at all. ..."
    "... "an uneasy alliance of foreign-funded jihadists, Western intelligence, and NGOs like Doctors Without Borders" is a fact in Syria too. ..."
    "... Another good read is Sy Hersh story of the previous "false flag" sarin poisoning operation during Obama term: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PS5DOg-_XXE ..."
    "... I like how MSM honchos picked up sarin story this time. As if somebody kicked them in the butt. ..."
    "... BTW both Turkey and KSA had bet all cards on Syrian insurgency. In the past Turkey's intelligence service MIT was supporting not only the Free Syrian Army but also Al-Nusra, which produced sarin from components bought in Turkey. ..."
    Apr 07, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
    Chris G -> Peter K....

    Missile strike demonstrates American leadership. Always bipartisan support for that. Death chemical warfare agents unacceptable so must do something. Didn't I read a Syrian quoted the other day "I buried my family today. If they had been killed by barrel bombs I could have given Assad a pass but death by chemical weapons is unacceptable."? Did I not read that? That aside, clearly there are acceptable and unacceptable ways to kill civilians. Assad crossed that line and we had to do something.

    PS Real men don't consult Congress before ordering missile strikes on sovereign nations. It'd be un-American to question the wisdom of bombing a butcher like Assad. What downside could there be?

    pgl -> Chris G ... April 07, 2017 at 07:34 AM

    Trump is no longer the dove it seems. But he is an incompetent hawk. He told Russia ahead of time. And of course Russia tipped off Syria. Which is why most of their planes got away.

    The Russian military today is mocking us.

    An incompetent hawk is the worst kind.

    Chris G -> pgl... April 07, 2017 at 09:02 AM

    Incompetent hawks are awful. We can at least take some comfort that Schumer and Pelosi called out Trump for acting recklessly... Oh, wait, that was in an alternate reality where they did that. @#$%. If it weren't for incompetence and belligerence we would have any foreign policy at all.

    Chris G -> Chris G ... April 07, 2017 at 09:36 AM

    Worth reading over at Jacobin - https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/09/when-humanitarianism-became-imperialism/

    Consider political interests and potential outcomes before deciding whether or not to engage. Choosing to act based on emotional reactions does not set the stage for good outcomes.

    libezkova -> Chris G ...

    Thank you --

    "an uneasy alliance of foreign-funded jihadists, Western intelligence, and NGOs like Doctors Without Borders" is a fact in Syria too.

    Another good read is Sy Hersh story of the previous "false flag" sarin poisoning operation during Obama term: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PS5DOg-_XXE

    I like how MSM honchos picked up sarin story this time. As if somebody kicked them in the butt.

    BTW both Turkey and KSA had bet all cards on Syrian insurgency. In the past Turkey's intelligence service MIT was supporting not only the Free Syrian Army but also Al-Nusra, which produced sarin from components bought in Turkey.

    [Apr 07, 2017] MoA - WMDs In The UNSC - History Repeats Itself, First As Tragedy, Second As Farce

    Notable quotes:
    "... So finally Trump got slapped in the face and started to regurgitate psychotic delusions of his MIC and Wall Street masters.Now he is ready for war with Russia while his face stil sours. ..."
    "... Here I found a prophetic post about Trump from just a week before his election 2016. https://syrianwarupdate.wordpress.com/2016/10/31/us-elections-a-farcical-spectacle-of-blood-and-imperial-hubris/ ..."
    "... Standard operating procedure of right-wing politicians: When you don't get anything accomplished domestically, distract with some foreign policy 'adventure'/ escalation and watch them rally around the flag. Trump's yielding to Neocon interventionist demands was just a matter of time, as it was obvious that he wouldn't be able to 'deliver' on economic issues etc. ..."
    Apr 07, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Pic: April 5 2017 - U.S. Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley during an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council

    Nikki Haley, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, on Wednesday strongly condemned the Syrian government in the wake of an alleged chemical weapons attack perpetrated on its own civilians this week. "When the UN consistently fails in its duty to act collectively, there are times in the life of states that we are compelled to take our own action," Haley said. She added that if the UN doesn't take collective action, "we may."
    Greg Bacon | Apr 5, 2017 1:54:17 PM | 3
    Hackers Expose U.S. False Flag to Frame Syria

    Hacked emails from a British mercenary company were posted online, leading to claims Washington was backing a dirty war against Syria in which a chemical attack on Syria could be blamed on the Syrian regime, thereby strengthening the case for immediate intervention on the part of the United States military.

    One of the hacked emails that has resulted in the most embarrassment for the U.S. government concerned Syria. The email reads as follows:

    Phil, we've got a new offer. It's about Syria again. Qataris propose an attractive deal and swear that the idea is approved in Washington. We'll have to deliver a CW to Homs, a Soviet origin g-shell [sic] from Libya similar to those that Assad should have. They want us to deploy our Ukrainian personnel that should speak Russian and make a video record. Frankly, I don't think it is a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous. Your opinion?

    Kind regards,

    David

    http://americanfreepress.net/hackers-expose-u-s-false-flag-to-frame-syria/

    Brian | Apr 5, 2017 2:39:58 PM | 8
    Yet another US spokes person pretends to a humanitarianism she doesn't feel ot is overridden by a report she too readily believes . Syria has no Chem weapons and US change of govt more illusion than reality
    https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201704051052321244-unsc-russia-syria-idlib/

    Kalen | Apr 5, 2017 2:40:36 PM | 9
    So finally Trump got slapped in the face and started to regurgitate psychotic delusions of his MIC and Wall Street masters.Now he is ready for war with Russia while his face stil sours.

    Here I found a prophetic post about Trump from just a week before his election 2016. https://syrianwarupdate.wordpress.com/2016/10/31/us-elections-a-farcical-spectacle-of-blood-and-imperial-hubris/

    Petri Krohn | Apr 5, 2017 2:40:44 PM | 10
    THERE WAS NO GAS ATTACK ON KHAN SHEIKHOUN!

    If dead children are paraded in front of cameras, it does not show a chemical weapons attack. It is proof of murder, someone massacred these children and their families.

    To claim a gas attack , you have to show photos and videos of the attack site; dead families in or outside their homes. Dead animals. Rescue workers breaking into houses and discovering the bodies.

    The Western press is buying the hoax narrative. I have heard hysterical screaming on the radio all day. No one ever asked or answered the essential questions: When and where did the attack happen? How was the chemical delivered? What neighborhoods were affected? Where was the wind blowing from? How were the victims taken to the place where they were first filmed? Who did the rescue work? Where where the White Helmets and their camera crews when this happened?

    The White Helmets did not exist in 2013. Today they are an Oscar-winning film crew, with GoPro action cams attached to their signature helmets. They film each and every real and fake rescue operation they take part in. So why no video of the Khan Sheikhoun rescue and recovery work?

    This is just another staged hoax, like the Ghouta chemical massacre of August 2013. Hostages were kept in cellars and then gassed with chlorine when the time came to make propaganda videos and call for a No-Fly Zone.

    Brian | Apr 5, 2017 2:41:39 PM | 11
    @7
    Shows how easy it is to manipulate simple minds. Post any image of children and you can twist people to do what ever you wAnd

    Madeira | Apr 5, 2017 2:44:42 PM | 12
    Two good articles on the gas attack:

    https://consortiumnews.com/2017/04/05/another-dangerous-rush-to-judgment-in-syria/

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/46801.htm

    The Stephen Miller Band | Apr 5, 2017 2:45:01 PM | 13
    Actually, if Trump really does sneak attack Damascus and take on Putin if he tries to intervene it would prove his Russian connections are meaningless and he's not a quisling afterall, therefore, the news spectacle surrounding this issue and the investigation by the Senate can be dropped even though there will be no one left to set the record straight except a few cockroaches and last time I checked they don't have opposable thumbs so therefore they aren't up to the task if they were so inclined.

    My what tangled webs we weave.

    Jackrabbit | Apr 5, 2017 2:55:53 PM | 15
    Petri Krohn @10:
    The Western press is buying the hoax narrative.
    I think we know enough by now to know that they are not dupes. They are complicit.

    likklemore | Apr 5, 2017 3:22:57 PM | 19
    Over the last days I recall reading the UN-OPCW had taken ALL Syria's chemical weapon on ship out to sea for destruction. Was I dreaming?

    Here is a report for you

    4 September 2014

    Ninety-six percent of Syria's declared chemical weapons destroyed – UN-OPCW mission chief
    UN Link

    The Special Coordinator for the Joint Mission of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and the United Nations (OPCW-UN) told the Security Council today that 96 percent of Syria's declared stockpile, including the most dangerous chemicals, had been destroyed and preparation were underway to destroy the remaining 12 production facilities.

    "This is a chemical weapons disarmament process, it's been unique," said Sigrid Kaag after her final briefing to the Security Council in her capacity as the head of the joint mission dealing with Syria's chemical weapons, which is winding up its work at the end of September.

    "At the same time, we reiterate our strong hope that if this is achieved, that conditions for peace and security and the political process will be centre stage for the benefit of the people of Syria and that of the region, particularly in these days of profound crisis."

    Ms. Kaag told a press conference at UN Headquarters following her closed-door briefing to the Council that the mission had overseen that destruction of 100 percent of "priority chemicals" and 96 percent of Syria's chemical weapons stockpile, but the good offices of the UN Secretary-General on this issue, discussions on monitoring verification, and accurate reporting to the Council will be continued [.]

    See..I did not dream that ship, it's real AND it was a U.S. vessel

    "UN chief welcomes destruction of Syrian chemical weapons aboard U.S. vessel"
    UN Link

    The Secretary-General welcomes the destruction of the declared chemical weapons material on board the United States Maritime Vessel Cape Ray. This marks a significant achievement in the international community's efforts to eliminate the chemical weapons programme of the Syrian Arab Republic following the framework agreement between the Russian Federation and the United States of America.

    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
    The USUKEU should stop throwing sh**T. Propaganda Fatigue has taken root. There is the Net for instant recall. As b observed, if it was sarin, how is it those timely "rescuers" were not affected?

    Intelligence insulted.

    Alaric | Apr 5, 2017 3:34:46 PM | 20
    Every time Assad is winning, we have a chemical attack or humanitarian trajedy. Oh sure, I believe it. The propaganda and false flags will continue until the SAA finally wins. Putin best have his EW and S-400s ready and both Russia and Iran need to send more troops to help Assad win already.

    Les | Apr 5, 2017 3:36:44 PM | 21
    The Syrian opposition has stated their motive for the attack. Suspicions of who's responsible lies strongly with the opposition.

    A suspected Syrian government chemical attack in Syria was a "direct consequence" of recent U.S. statements that it was not now focused on making Syrian President Bashar al-Assad leave power, a Syrian opposition member said on Tuesday.

    "The first reaction from Syrians is that this is a direct consequence of American statements about Assad not being a priority and giving him time and allowing him to stay in power," Basma Kodmani told Reuters in Washington.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-opposition-idUSKBN1762QC

    smuks | Apr 5, 2017 4:04:11 PM | 22
    Just checked comments & likes in a major conservative European newspaper: Roughly 5% seem to believe that Assad is to blame.

    Nikki Haley is as Neocon as Samantha Power, now who would've guessed. As I've been saying for a year: Even if Trump has a different foreign policy agenda (which I doubt), he's far too weak to stand up to them. In times of crisis, a country needs a strong president, not a narcissist showmaster.

    Pnyx | Apr 5, 2017 4:05:54 PM | 23
    2:15:04 PM | 5

    "Jesus, these people are insane, why on earth do Trump that have spoken out against useless war put this stupid woman in the UN?"
    Well , I think this is Tronalds way out of the pressure he's under. Start a war, then they will unite behind their Führer.

    Lozion | Apr 5, 2017 4:39:46 PM | 24
    Bannon is replaced by Rick Perry at the NSC? Neoconia rules..

    Wonder what those flyboys in Quatar are up to today?

    aniteleya | Apr 5, 2017 4:52:30 PM | 27
    smuks - 22

    I fear you may be right. Neo-cons on a roll again. This chemical farce is clearly designed to put pressure on Trump to see which way he turns. Looks like he may move away from his 'America First' isolationist rhetoric in a desperate bid to say something meaningful. Loads of Neo-cons on his back to push for more mayhem in the Middle East. Things aren't the way they were in 2003 tho', so probably won't go for the invasion. Cantonisation of Syria is probably what the neo-cons are after. Shit crazy.

    canuck | Apr 5, 2017 4:54:07 PM | 29
    If Trump is going all teary eyed over this unclear, suspect, plausibly 'WMD' false flag, he is a child, an ignoramus, or too near the raw onions; or he is being fed hogwash. If he is posturing 'tactically' to justify making more war, he is a fiend and war criminal. One might hope that this was merely a random neural-tweet-impulse by force of habit, signifying nothing much.

    rm | Apr 5, 2017 5:04:37 PM | 31
    "Well , I think this is Tronalds way out of the pressure he's under. Start a war, then they will unite behind their Führer." 23

    Yep. that's what it feels like to me. The abject snivel of his response serves that purpose absolutely. God. How STUPID people can be! Kidnap then murder then staging with the dead..fcking white helmets necrophilia ..

    Susan Sunflower | Apr 5, 2017 5:56:46 PM | 32
    ere's an alarming "hey, batter, batter" heckling "what'za matta, you chicken??" quality to the media war drums. I can't tell if people actually want Trump to "do something" (as they are demanding) or hoping that he punts or walks, this time at bat. It's (presidenting) "harder than it looks" has been a popular refrain for weeks and the still insulted Obama crowd seems more interested in seeing Trump shamed, than that anything be "done" about Assad or Syria ... coming within two weeks of our 200 dead in Mosul, Trump's self-proclaimed change of heart wrt Assad (of course undefined) seems right out of PT Barnum ... The timing really couldn't be better for something showy, given China's Xi Jinping's imminent arrival at Mar-A-Lago ... want's to top the theatrical show they he put-on Abe of Japan (on the event ot a Korean missle launch) ... I am and have been nauseated with anxiety

    Scotch Bingeington | Apr 5, 2017 6:04:44 PM | 33
    These photos and videos that we saw of Khan Sheikhoun, some of them showed a site with white rock in the background and sleazy white mud on the ground (like here: https://youtu.be/fGPa0k3J4vI). Some have described it as a rebel dugout.
    Maybe it was hit by the Syrian Airforce, though almost certainly not with any chemical ammunitions. I think that the hit on said site could be in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYOMEDK_uVs - third impact on the right, where much brighter dust is rising, but much slower than from the other impact sites, plus the height and shape of the cloud is very different.
    I'm saying "maybe" it was hit by the Syrian Airforce because to me, it seems equally likely that something was set off on the ground there - by rebels, in that case. It would explain the strikingly different appearance of this one cloud that I mentioned (and there has to be an explanation for it).
    This whitish rock background that I mentioned in the beginning looks very much like limestone or chalk to my eyes. Maybe it's a limestone quarry turned rebel hideout. Anyway, for any makeshift Sarin production or storage facility a limestone/chalk surrounding would be the perfect setting. Short of a state-of-the-art chemical plant, you couldn't make up any better location, and there's two reasons for that.
    One concerns possible manufacturing of Sarin. Whatever process you use, there will be leftover acids in your end product. You have to get rid of those in order for your product to have an acceptable shelf life. Even the most masterfully created Sarin will be usable for only about 5 years. This time is strongly reduced if you don't purify it by eliminating the excess acids in the product. This can only be done with a nice base or alkaline substance, and limestone/chalk is the perfect raw material to create such an alkaline (namely lye or brine or whatever you want to call it), large scale.
    The other reason a limestone surrounding such as seen in Khan Sheikhoun is a perfect match for Sarin has to do with safeguarding against the obvious hazards of dealing with Sarin – accidental spilling and poisoning. For decontamination and neutralizing purposes any strong and simple alkaline is, again, the go-to substance. While Sarin victims need to have atropine injected asap to even have the slightest chance for survival, their clothes and the body have to be thoroughly rinsed with an alkaline solution, too.
    And even if you don't use the limestone for anything at all, just moving in a "limy" environment when having to deal with Sarin release will help, and would have helped the White Helmets in this case. This might help to explain why so many of them were able to "do their thing" there and then without wearing any protective gear. As it happens, limestone/chalk will also help with destroying any Sarin-related evidence.
    We could also see some kind of tanker truck in the pictures. People were sprayed with liquid coming from this truck. It's not just water that comes to mind here, it could also have been ready-made lye solution in that tank.
    But whatever had been going on in this place prior to the incident, I'm also wondering what all those children and young people were doing there. Why would they gather (or be gathered) right there , of all places? I know this will sound gross, but some of the bodies I saw didn't look so "recently deceased" either.
    This whole thing, it's just All the BS we're getting from western politicians and the MSM right now - nothing adds up, nothing makes sense here, and yet it's cheered as a pretext for more war?

    jfl | Apr 5, 2017 7:19:32 PM | 37
    Unknown airstrikes reportedly hit Army positions in southern Syria

    "It's very, very possible, and I will tell you it has already happened, that my attitude toward Syria and Assad, has changed very much," Mr. Trump said

    all aboard! the train is leaving the station.

    FecklessLeft | Apr 5, 2017 7:20:42 PM | 38
    "If Trump is going all teary eyed over this unclear, suspect, plausibly 'WMD' false flag, he is a child, an ignoramus, or too near the raw onions; or he is being fed hogwash. If he is posturing 'tactically' to justify making more war, he is a fiend and war criminal. One might hope that this was merely a random neural-tweet-impulse by force of habit, signifying nothing much."

    Posted by: canuck | Apr 5, 2017 4:54:07 PM | 29

    While I agree with your sentiment, war crimes are not defined by the perpetrators' states of minds. Threatening the UNSC to go with the US 'or else' is a war crime already, full stop. I'm sure many thought launching a war of aggression on Iraq and Afghanistan was the 'right' or 'moral' position at the time (however deluded that may be), but they are still war criminals.

    I think many of us need to separate any actions in question from intent and reasons when it comes to war crimes. It's like the US saying "well we bombed a hospital by accident sorry but we thought we were striking a weapons cache. Terrible tragedy and it won't happen again" - even if every they said was true it doesn't make it any less of a war crime. Maybe easier for us as individuals to sympathise with but that should be another question as a whole.

    I think people would be well served to read a little about the subject (not directing this at you cancuck so don't get me wrong). There's a lot of misconceptions I see held by many, including here and other similar forums.

    Regardless of all that, to threaten the security council to do what they want - coming only hours after initial reports and with no confirmation for much of the official western state sanctioned story - it doesn't look good. I follow developments in Syria awful closely and I really am blown away and would never have expected such a development. Really came out of no where. I had few if any hopes for change from Trump re foreign policy but goddamn I def didn't expect this. I really hope its just further bluster and big talk, but i doubt it would do that job effectively. Just seems counterproductive towards western goals (unless goal is overt aggression and occupation). Crazy day.

    I implore everyone here to keep Syria and its people in your thoughts and/or prayers these coming days. I suppose that goes for basically the entire MENA region the way it'd go up like tinder if another US occupation force entered.

    Piotr Berman | Apr 5, 2017 8:05:43 PM | 40
    I may be biased, but Powell's performance at UN is a tough act to follow. Steady delivery, deep baritone, and the gaze so straight that it could drill brain of any doubter. That said, Tony Blair was a clear champion in the tenor class. While Powell was all experience of a principled elder, Blair was in his own words "passionate", like a 9 year old boy describing how he was personally instructed by Our Lady of Fatima (together with two pre-teen girls, now we have 100-th anniversary*). Which gives pointers to soprano section.

    Condoleeza Rice was a total miscast in that role. Shifty eyes, unsteady diction, twitching head. Perhaps I will check a video of Nikki Halley.

    Piotr Berman | Apr 5, 2017 8:17:21 PM | 41
    I regret to say that Nikki is from the Condi school. But at least she looks better than Ms. Powell, and boys, she has guts: fuchsia business suit!!

    Piotr Berman | Apr 5, 2017 8:24:48 PM | 42
    Petri Krohn | Apr 5, 2017 2:40:44 PM | 10: To claim a gas attack, you have to show photos and videos of the attack site;

    The Guardian shows a photo : a bomb was apparently so powerful that it made a pothole in the street pavement.

    Tobin Paz | Apr 5, 2017 8:31:44 PM | 43
    The "War and Peace Report" strikes again:

    Syria Has Become a Circus of Death: Doctor Warns of Growing Humanitarian Crisis as War Rages On

    AMY GOODMAN: Let me go to a clip from the 2013 BBC documentary Saving Syria's Children, where the filmmakers traveled with you, Dr. Rola Hallam, inside Syria to reveal how children are impacted by the war. This is Dr. Hallam describing the aftermath of an airstrike at a school playground, as patients pour into a hospital in Aleppo.

    Hermius | Apr 5, 2017 8:33:50 PM | 44
    The US doesnt want a military conflict with Russia over the Syria Crisis. Trumps stance has changed towards Assad. Therefore expect a US response to events (as aluded to at the UNSC). The only way to achieve all three of the above is a precision strike against Assad personally.

    mischi | Apr 5, 2017 8:34:47 PM | 46
    it looks like someone was tweeting about the gas attack before it happened.

    https://twitter.com/sahouraxo/status/849635794994286592

    h | Apr 5, 2017 10:52:08 PM | 56
    SYRIAN AVIATION AIRSTRIKE IN IDLIB TARGETED CHEMICAL ARMS LAB - RUSSIAN DEFENSE MINISTRY -

    "MOSCOW, April 5. /TASS/. A Syrian aviation airstrike on the eastern outskirts of Khan Sheikhun on Tuesday targeted workshops to produce chemical-laden projectiles, a spokesman for the Russian Defense Ministry said Wednesday.

    "According to Russian airspace monitoring systems, yesterday between 11.30 and 12.30 local time the Syrian aviation carried out an airstrike on the eastern outskirts of Khan Sheikhun, targeting a major ammunition storage facility of terrorists and a cluster of military hardware. The territory of this storage facility housed workshops to produce projectiles stuffed with toxic agents," Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov said.

    "From this major arsenal, chemical-laden weapons were delivered by militants to Iraq. Their use by terrorists was confirmed on numerous occasions by international organizations and official authorities of the country," he said.

    The spokesman added that these projectiles were similar to those used by militants in Syria's Aleppo, where their use was recorded by Russian military specialists.

    [...]

    h | Apr 5, 2017 11:08:24 PM | 57
    Of course Trump knows this. No question. If he takes any kind of military action whatsoever in Syria against sovereign troops, over a really lame propaganda campaign all of us can see through, well, that's about as dumb as it gets. If I know this, a lowly news aggregator blogger, you can damn well be sure Trump knows this.

    Anyone and everyone who can read or talk or see knows for a fact that the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA'S military has not been invited into Syria by Syria nor has the U.S. Congress passed a WAR RESOLUTION. Thus, if the U.S. Military takes aim at Syria and her government it will be under the extremely nimble CIA article whatever for covert action. And no lawyer worth chit can, not even Gonzalez, twist the law into the pretzel necessary to take 'legal' covert military action.

    If I'm wrong please feel free to inform me with the facts. I'm happy to be wrong...

    Circe | Apr 6, 2017 1:38:40 AM | 66
    And I will tell you, it's already happened that my attitude toward Syria and Assad has changed very much. [notice he says: it already happened therefore the plan for Syria was already in the works and the chemical attack was like 9/11 for justifying the plan] Syrian chemical attack crossed a lot of lines for me...beyond a red line. I now have responsibility. [translation: I now have the excuse, cover to expand this war] That responsibility could be made a lot easier if it was handled years ago. [don't blame me for what I'm about to unleash; blame the other guy who hesitated to put boots on the ground and kicked the can to me.]

    I'm not saying I'm doing anything one way or another, but I'm certainly not going to be telling you. [sneaky, opaque agenda]

    Trump Neocon-speak in italics.

    Sigh...if only Obama had put boots on the ground and expanded this war, then Trump man-god wouldn't have to burst the bubble of his adoring followers here and we could all keep on pretending we don't see the Emperor's naked ass and keep blaming Obama for all Trump's screw-ups. Trump and Mattis met with the Saudi Defense Minister and blacked-out the press on that meeting, but we're supposed to believe that a plan wasn't in the works and that Trump is moved solely to defend the innocent in Syria, while he helps the Saudis slaughter children on the brink of starvation in Yemen.

    Every day I'm vindicated more and more.

    Hoarsewhisperer | Apr 6, 2017 1:56:10 AM | 68
    In the Various Issues thread, 'maningi' at #101 points out that young children don't usually stray far from their mothers. This makes images depicting lots of dead young children, but no dead mothers, smell a bit fishy.

    How selective is sarin?

    ThatDamnGood | Apr 6, 2017 2:02:55 AM | 69
    no country for Trumpsters

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-05/suddenly-both-obamacare-repeal-and-trump-tax-reform-are-dead

    Translation: both healthcare and tax reform are now indefinitely dead, which means that a suddenly pivoting Trump, who earlier today said he had "changed his mind" on Syria, may have no choice but to begin war with Assad to distract from everything else that is going on in the US.

    Cream rises till its sours. Trump looks really out of his league atm.

    Hoarsewhisperer | Apr 6, 2017 2:05:33 AM | 70
    The only woman I've seen in any of the MSM's 'news' was alive and purported to be recovering in a hospital in Turkey which, imo, could be any hospital, anywhere, on the planet.

    Julian | Apr 6, 2017 4:34:45 AM | 75
    Tillerson to meet Lavrov in Moscow next week
    By MADELINE CONWAY 04/05/17 11:09 AM EDT

    Secretary of State Rex Tillerson will travel to Moscow next Wednesday for a meeting with Russian officials, including the Kremlin's foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov.

    Tillerson plans to discuss issues including Ukraine, North Korea, Syria, and counterterrorism with the officials while in Moscow, according to the State Department.

    The "trip is part of our effort to maintain direct lines of communication with senior Russian officials and to ensure U.S. views are clearly conveyed, including on next steps in Minsk implementation," the department said in a statement.

    http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/rex-tillerson-moscow-trip-236906

    I'll be interested to see what comes out of this - meeting on Wednesday April 12, 2017 .

    Julian | Apr 6, 2017 4:36:01 AM | 76
    Re: Posted by: john | Apr 6, 2017 4:07:00 AM | 72

    Tulsi Gabbard. Being roundly ignored by the MSM of course.

    They won't be having her on anytime soon (except to try and make her look stupid of course).

    neocon butcher | Apr 6, 2017 4:57:32 AM | 78
    The pathetic Tillerson shows what a weak person he is

    Russia must stop support for Syria
    http://presstv.ir/Detail/2017/04/06/516934/Tillerson-calls-on-Russia-to-rethink-support-for-Syrian-government

    Yonatan | Apr 6, 2017 6:11:34 AM | 81
    Matthew Rycroft , the barking UK UN representative, once worked with NATO and also Tony Blair. He was the author of the infamous secret memo about the lead up to the Iraq war in which he said words to the effect that 'facts' and 'intelligence' were being fixed to comply with policy. Nothing has changed. 'Facts' and 'intelligence' are still being fixed to policy.

    harrylaw | Apr 6, 2017 6:18:44 AM | 82
    Nice to see you Taxi. This mass hysteria from Western Politicians and MSM against Assad 'Sentance first, verdict afterwards' should only serve to instruct Putin and Assad that regime change [by any means necessary] are the ultimate goals of the West, and formulate their policies accordingly. Many in the West like neo con John McCain think US aggression against Assad will not receive push back from Russia. Now might be the right time for Putin to quietly disabuse the US of that notion.

    Curtis | Apr 6, 2017 8:57:14 AM | 92

    smuks | Apr 6, 2017 8:59:35 AM | 93
    @aniteleya 27

    Standard operating procedure of right-wing politicians: When you don't get anything accomplished domestically, distract with some foreign policy 'adventure'/ escalation and watch them rally around the flag. Trump's yielding to Neocon interventionist demands was just a matter of time, as it was obvious that he wouldn't be able to 'deliver' on economic issues etc.

    There won't be a 'full-scale' invasion like 2003, but an increased use of SF embedded with the regional (or foreign jihadi) allies. To make sure the war goes on for as long as possible, hopefully get Russia and Iran drawn deeper into that quagmire, or at least prevent them from securing their positions.

    There's no international support whatsoever (apart from the GCC), but Trump is not the one who'd care. So it seems the only thing that could stop this would be the US running out of money...

    Note that a couple of days ago, the US govt stopped disclosing the number of troops deployed:
    http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-trump-deployment-20170330-story.html

    trumpobamabush | Apr 6, 2017 9:44:24 AM | 102
    Turkey sent a report to the United Nations just before a U.N. Security Council meeting to address accusations that the Syrian government staged a chemical weapons attack on April 4, stating that the gas used in the attack was chlorine gas.

    http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/turkey-sends-report-to-un-over-possible-chlorine-gas-attack-.aspx?pageID=238&nID=111675&NewsCatID=359

    somebody | Apr 6, 2017 11:03:57 AM | 106
    100/101

    The significant fact is that they say chlorine gas, not sarin. Chlorine gas is dual use, easy to obtain and manufacture, and the "rebels" are known for using it. It was not on the list of chemical weapons Syria was supposed to destroy.

    The Russian version of hitting a warehouse where chlorine gas was stored is very likely depending on how the wind blows. There are accidents with chlorine gas all over the world.

    It is industrally used and produced - as simple as that.

    Actually first reporting in German media was chlorine gas, I was surprised to hear it was switched to sarin.

    Turkish medics seem to have diagnozed "gas poisoning" - they keep it as unspecific as that.

    Scotch Bingeington | Apr 6, 2017 11:35:44 AM | 109
    Posted by: hopehely | Apr 6, 2017 2:38:06 AM | 70

    It is absorbed through skin, one drop is enough to kill.
    If that was indeed sarin attack, there would be scores of dead people, dogs, cats, rats, sheep, cows, chicken and white helmets littered all around in all kinds of contorted positions.
    Oxygen masks on vicims are pointless. The affected are in neural shock, muscles twitching and spasming over all body. There is no coughing, because coughing reflex is disrupted.
    Only treatment is atropine injection straight to the muscle. You need gas mask and full hazmat overall and gloves to enter the contaminated zone. Surgical mask over face will help you nil.

    You're spot-on.
    Skin, any mucous membrane, Sarin will enter the body even through the eyeballs.
    And even if you had full protective gear, you'd have to thoroughly decontaminate that before you could even think about taking it off again.

    To think that hordes of college-educated, well paid, experienced people in politics, in the media everywhere should be impressed by such a cheap stunt by the White Helmet freaks, who are effectively using corpses for props - it just makes me scream inside.

    CarlD | Apr 6, 2017 12:20:14 PM | 112
    I have been reading the following article: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8b63/5e885486c0672aaaa962afe500ca65e1a8a1.pdf

    It is a scholarly article about nerve agents Sarin, Soman , Tabun and VX.

    Throughout the article, reference is made to the actual application of these substances to actual living human beings!

    It doesn't mention if these guinea pigs were volunteers or unwilling participants. But does indicate that research was being willfully conducted.

    Was this the work of some Dr. Mengele? Apparently not. Real Western scientists no less.

    canuck | Apr 6, 2017 12:20:24 PM | 113
    One might wonder what Trump actually understood when he declared ISIS the great enemy:

    Was he aware that ISIS was a PTB creature, and that his beloved Israel's IDF have been low profile participants in ISIS?
    For example: www.globalresearch.ca/israel-supports-isis/5492807

    "Dec. 2, 2015 – Israel Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon admitted Israel support for ISIS"

    somebody | Apr 6, 2017 12:32:37 PM | 114
    Doctors without Borders assume two toxins have been involved
    A number of victims of the April 4 attack on the town of Khan Sheikhoun were brought to the hospital, located about 60 miles to the north, near the Turkish border. Eight people who were examined by MSF staff displayed symptoms consistent with exposure to an agent such as sarin gas or similar compounds, including constricted pupils, muscle spasms and involuntary defecation.

    The MSF team provided drugs and antidotes to treat patients, and distributed protective clothing to medical staff in the hospital's emergency room.

    MSF medical teams also visited other hospitals treating victims of the attack, and reported that they smelled of bleach, indicative of possible exposure to chlorine.

    These reports strongly suggest that victims of the attack on Khan Sheikhoun were exposed to at least two different chemical agents.

    somebody | Apr 6, 2017 12:52:50 PM | 117
    add to 112

    Actually a lot of legitimate stuff can be neurotoxic

    Pesticides for example.

    Khan Sheikhoun is an agricultural place with cotton farming. Pesticides will be freely available there.

    jawbone | Apr 6, 2017 12:55:30 PM | 118
    Nikki Haley barks very loudly and may be getting on Trump's nerves. He must regret not having chosen Bolton at the UN. At least he was predictable and would have submitted to Trump's authority.

    Nikki is a wild goose.

    Posted by: virgile | Apr 5, 2017 2:57:47 PM | 16

    Nikki is the front for The Heritage Foundation. Trump seems to have outsourced US foreign policy (along with most of domestic policy) the Heritage.

    frances | Apr 6, 2017 1:00:54 PM | 119
    There was an interesting post on Zero Hedge:
    ""A day prior to the attack, Gulf-based Orient TV announced "Tomorrow we are launching a media campaign to cover the airstrikes on Hama country side including the usage of chemical warfare against civilians." This shows clear foreknowledge that the rebels were going to stage an attack by Orient TV."
    As Taxi 105 noted, If Trump attacks Syria he will lose the Independents and Dems that rejected HC et al and voted for him. But more than losing them he may turn them against him and they may well support the current Dem's Impeach Him effort. People are tired of being lied to, they will not take much more IMO, from either side.

    somebody | Apr 6, 2017 1:47:15 PM | 123
    Posted by: jawbone | Apr 6, 2017 12:55:30 PM | 115

    Well, the Heritage Foundation is recommending more of the same in Syria .

    virgile | Apr 6, 2017 2:06:25 PM | 127
    @Grieved

    I agree with you. Trump always say that he will not reveal what he intends to do and when.

    In this case he will watch the current. There already voices in the congress doubting that the Syrian president actually ordered a chemical attack that goes against his interests. Why would the Syrian army be interested to randomly kill dozens of civilians when it has to fight ten of thousands of well armed Islamist terrorists.

    Trump will come to his senses and do nothing. The neocons will certainly come up with something else because they only want an Israel-friendly Sunni leader in Syria, not an Iran-friendly leader.

    Trump has a VERY tough fight against the Dems and the Neocons. It will be bloody and the USA will weaken even further in the next 4 years.

    lysias | Apr 6, 2017 2:24:53 PM | 128
    Nunes taking himself off the investigation (presumably under White House orders) is another sign that the Trump administration is surrendering to the Russophobes.

    karlof1 | Apr 6, 2017 3:11:42 PM | 131
    Pepe Escobar, as usual, posts a very potent riposte to the sTrumpet's cries, https://sputniknews.com/columnists/201704061052371707-syria-toxic-meltdown/

    By the sTrumpet's own criteria, every nation on the planet has 100% justification to attack his Outlaw US Empire anywhere and everywhere until it's completely devastated.

    AtaBrit | Apr 6, 2017 3:51:43 PM | 133
    Erdogan stating in an interview this evening that Trump should put his words into action and that Turkey is willing to do anything it takes to support the US militarily in Syria AND Iraq!! "Let's pull together all the strength of the coalition with the US at its head..."

    Erdogan also stated that he had spoken to Putin, but that Putin was still questioning whether Assad had done it or not ...
    This looks very much like Turkey seeing how far it can push Trump.

    Is this really it?

    Top link - Turkish; bottom link - English.

    http://www.t24.com.tr/haber/trumptan-suriyeye-askeri-mudahale-sinyali-erdogandan-destek,397829

    https://www.komnews.com/turkey-will-support-us-operation-syria-takes-place-president-erdogan/

    karlof1 | Apr 6, 2017 4:11:56 PM | 135
    Southfront has posted an article first published by Veterans Today (yes, I know about its unreliable nature) that is essentially an attempt to provide wider distribution of a very damning report about the White Helmet terrorists by the Swedish Doctors for Human Rights organization: "The doctors found that the videos were counterfeit, where even Arabic stage directions were overheard, and that the alleged "Rescue" in actuality is a murder." https://southfront.org/swedish-medical-associations-says-white-helmets-murdered-kids-for-fake-gas-attack-videos/

    Southfront provides a video featuring Russia's Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova wher she cites a report by a new (to me) publication, The Indicter , which provided the basis for the VT report. Here's the link to its article an imbedded videos, http://theindicter.com/white-helmets-movie-updated-evidence-from-swedish-doctors-confirm-fake-lifesaving-and-malpractices-on-children/ And that's not their only report indicting the White Helmets as frauds and terrorists. The site warrants further investigation as it appears to be another member of the Multipolar Alliance, http://theindicter.com/

    Curtis | Apr 6, 2017 5:53:28 PM | 136
    Just caught Deutche Welle news on PBS World channel. They interviewed Abdullah with White Helmets. The announcer said the Syrian government claimed it had hit a base with illegal weapons. Then he asked Abdullah about this. HA HA HA!. Right! As if the ones reporting the incident would ever reverse themselves. So Mr. White Helmet reiterated the earlier strikes and govt denial and then said who would have such weapons. Geeeeee, maybe those opposed to Assad who have a lot of outside help?

    Petri Krohn | Apr 6, 2017 9:57:31 PM | 146
    DID WORLD WAR 3 JUST BREAK OUT?

    The United States tried to launch a war of aggression against Syria in August 2013, following the #ChemicalHoax massacre in Ghouta. It was prevented from doing so by the Russian Navy, which had taken control of the Eastern Mediterranean.

    The plan in 2013 was to coordinate the missile strike with al-Qaeda forces, so that Islamist would quickly overrun the government bases and capture Damascus. I believed at the time that Russia would respond to the attack, the secret orders to the fleet were to sink any U.S. ship launching an illegal attack.

    Will Russia respond this time? (Or has it already retaliated?) I do not think so. The difference is that the Syrian government is no longer in a mortal danger. The missiles are mainly symbolic. There is no al-Nusra army waiting for the signal to launch their coordinated attack.

    Trump Orders Military Strike in Syria; Dozens of Cruise Missiles Launched at Government Targets

    The United States launched a military strike on Syrian government targets in retaliation for their chemical weapon attack on civilians earlier in the week, CNN is told.

    On President Donald Trump's orders, US warships launched 50 Tomahawk cruise missiles.

    The strikes are the first direct military action the US has taken against the leadership of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in the country's six-year civil war and represent a substantial escalation of the US' military campaign in the region, which could be interpreted by the Syrian government as an act of war. The US began launching airstrikes in Syria in September 2014 under President Barack Obama as part of its coalition campaign against ISIS, but has only targeted the terrorist group and not Syrian government forces.

    dh | Apr 6, 2017 10:22:24 PM | 150
    This cruise missile attack isn't totally pointless. It makes Trump look tough and shuts the war party up temporarily. Syria loses a few planes and runways.

    The question is will Assad retaliate? If he lets it pass it's just a question of time until the next 'gas attack'.

    psychohistorian | Apr 6, 2017 10:25:21 PM | 151
    It is interesting that Trump et. al. executed an attack on Syria within hours of the Xi/Trump meeting.

    If we don't go the nuclear extinction route out of this I suspect the China and Russia can take the US to the UN and see what happens. If nothing else it may build a coalition to stop funding further war crimes by buying more US Treasuries.

    That is the high road that I think that China/Russia and ??? will take.

    Sigh! May you live in interesting times. Call it a curse or a blessing, either way, live this interesting time honorably.

    [Apr 06, 2017] Where are canisters and where are bomblets.

    Notable quotes:
    "... I find revealing is that the United States Ambassador to the UN should decide in effect to dictate to the UN. Diplomacy and belligerency differ, Ambassador Haley does not appear to care. ..."
    Apr 06, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
    ilsm -> pgl..., April 05, 2017 at 03:11 PM
    bomblet debris is missing. need pictures. sarin is volatile. cannot be exploded. must be canister dropped.

    where are canisters and where are bomblets.

    about 40% duds on average if they are bad as US CBU's

    anne -> anne... , April 05, 2017 at 02:13 PM
    What the outcome may be I have no idea, but what I find revealing is that the United States Ambassador to the UN should decide in effect to dictate to the UN. Diplomacy and belligerency differ, Ambassador Haley does not appear to care.

    [Apr 04, 2017] The pursuit of Trump may have caught the Obama White House

    Notable quotes:
    "... And what Earth-shattering insights were revealed as a result of the hacks? That the DNC was in the tank for Hillary Clinton and had been lying to Bernie Sanders. Everybody in Washington already knew that, and it didn't make any difference to Trump. In fact, the revelations gave the Clinton camp a pretext to get rid of DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz - something it wanted to do anyway. Next, Clinton campaign chairman Podesta's emails did not reveal anything beyond Beltway gossip that was only of interest to political junkies. Nothing was revealed that drove any votes. If Russian hackers wanted to harass Podesta, what is the crime that the Trump campaign might have committed? ..."
    "... The cacophony of accusations, deflections and distractions has led us to the latest revelation that is causing a "holy cow" double-take, plot-thickening moment in Washington: President Obama's national security adviser, Susan Rice, sought to unmask the identities of Trump aides whose conversations had been collected through routine electronic intercepts of foreign officials' communications. ..."
    "... And there are more suspicious reasons for Obama's national security adviser to have sought to unmask the identities of Trump campaign aides than there are valid reasons. Rice has a history of a strained relationship with the truth, and for a national security adviser, she has, at times, flown close to the partisan political flame. ..."
    "... Multiple senators are now demanding her testimony . There could have been crimes committed and a real scandal could develop, so you can bet the full story will be slow to emerge. It appears that Rice has issued the standard denials. And her defenders on Capitol Hill and in the media will do all they can to distract and demand that there is nothing to see here. Democrats and their media allies will continue to make baseless allegations, hoping that the Russia investigations will somehow deliver for them and become this president's Watergate. ..."
    "... The result so far? Competing outrage. Just as Democrats are pursuing L-TACs (links, ties, associations or contacts) in search of a crime, the Obama White House's national security adviser has now landed as one of the ones who will have to answer for her actions under oath. ..."
    "... How did Ed slip this article past the Wapo /DNC/Loony Left /Bezos Puppet editors? ..."
    "... Ms. Rice kept a 'spreadsheet' of phone calls taking place within the Trump campaign. Will that be in the next installment of this ongoing drama? ..."
    Apr 04, 2017 | www.washingtonpost.com

    It is said that Watergate wasn't about the crime, but about the coverup. Well, at least in the Watergate scandal, there was a proper crime - specifically, the break-in and wiretapping. The media hasn't even settled on what to call its quest for a potentially nefarious Russia-Trump link. The whole pursuit is vaguely referred to as looking at President Trump's "links," "ties," "associations" or "contacts" with Russia. Since this is Washington, let's give it an acronym: L-TACs. With no end in sight, the manic pursuit of L-TACs has produced a basket of denials, lies, half-baked plots, evasions, one-off non sequiturs, side tracks, conspiracies and suspicions between the Trump administration, Democrats and the media. The frenzy has created a scandal without perpetrators or a crime. There is a sense that Washington is on the brink, but no one can say on the brink of what.

    When they have to be specific, some Democrats have settled on the idea that the Trump campaign may have collaborated with Russia on the hacking of the Democratic National Committee and the John Podesta emails. There is no evidence of this, but it is worth remembering a few things. First, the FBI was aware of the DNC hacking when it occurred. This was confirmed again yesterday in Politico's interview with Lisa Monaco , who served as assistant to the president for homeland security and counterterrorism in the Obama White House. She said the hacking was handled as a law enforcement matter. I assume she was referring to when the FBI called the dolts at the DNC, but the DNC took no action.

    Then-national security adviser Susan Rice is seen last year on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington. (Carolyn Kaster/Associated Press)

    And what Earth-shattering insights were revealed as a result of the hacks? That the DNC was in the tank for Hillary Clinton and had been lying to Bernie Sanders. Everybody in Washington already knew that, and it didn't make any difference to Trump. In fact, the revelations gave the Clinton camp a pretext to get rid of DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz - something it wanted to do anyway. Next, Clinton campaign chairman Podesta's emails did not reveal anything beyond Beltway gossip that was only of interest to political junkies. Nothing was revealed that drove any votes. If Russian hackers wanted to harass Podesta, what is the crime that the Trump campaign might have committed?

    The cacophony of accusations, deflections and distractions has led us to the latest revelation that is causing a "holy cow" double-take, plot-thickening moment in Washington: President Obama's national security adviser, Susan Rice, sought to unmask the identities of Trump aides whose conversations had been collected through routine electronic intercepts of foreign officials' communications. To unmask, or reveal, the identities of U.S. citizens whose names and conversations were gathered through incidental collection is unusual.

    And there are more suspicious reasons for Obama's national security adviser to have sought to unmask the identities of Trump campaign aides than there are valid reasons. Rice has a history of a strained relationship with the truth, and for a national security adviser, she has, at times, flown close to the partisan political flame.

    So, what was going on? Why did she do it? And with whom, in the government and the media, did she share the information?

    Multiple senators are now demanding her testimony . There could have been crimes committed and a real scandal could develop, so you can bet the full story will be slow to emerge. It appears that Rice has issued the standard denials. And her defenders on Capitol Hill and in the media will do all they can to distract and demand that there is nothing to see here. Democrats and their media allies will continue to make baseless allegations, hoping that the Russia investigations will somehow deliver for them and become this president's Watergate.

    The result so far? Competing outrage. Just as Democrats are pursuing L-TACs (links, ties, associations or contacts) in search of a crime, the Obama White House's national security adviser has now landed as one of the ones who will have to answer for her actions under oath.

    Washington is as scandal-primed as I've ever seen it - there is a lot of smoke right now, but no clear fire. So the noise and finger-pointing will continue. And I have no idea who is winning. The pursuit of Trump may have caught the Obama White House

    Ed Rogers is a contributor to the PostPartisan blog, a political consultant and a veteran of the Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush White Houses and several national campaigns. He is the chairman of the lobbying and communications firm BGR Group, which he founded with former Mississippi governor Haley Barbour in 1991. Follow @EdRogersDC

    Bigly Fan 5:38 PM EDT
    How did Ed slip this article past the Wapo /DNC/Loony Left /Bezos Puppet editors?
    theworm1 5:37 PM EDT
    "The whole pursuit [ of Trump's Russian engagement] is vaguely referred to as looking at President Trump's "links', 'ties', 'associations' or 'contacts'" . These are the same nouns the media uses to describe the alleged "connections" between al Qaeda and Saddam and between ISIS and whoever we don't like today. They carry meaning or they don't. I think most people think they do.
    Io fifty 5:37 PM EDT
    I just read in Breitbart, sure you have too Mr. Rogers ...... that Ms. Rice kept a 'spreadsheet' of phone calls taking place within the Trump campaign. Will that be in the next installment of this ongoing drama?

    [Apr 04, 2017] Drones, special operations, CIA arms supplies, military advisers, aerial bombings - the whole nine yards.

    Apr 04, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
    RGC , April 04, 2017 at 07:42 AM
    US Military Should Get Out of the Middle East Jeffrey Sachs, Boston Globe

    It's time to end US military engagements in the Middle East.

    Drones, special operations, CIA arms supplies, military advisers, aerial bombings - the whole nine yards. Over and done with.

    That might seem impossible in the face of ISIS, terrorism, Iranian ballistic missiles, and other US security interests, but a military withdrawal from the Middle East is by far the safest path for the United States and the region. That approach has instructive historical precedents.

    America has been no different from other imperial powers in finding itself ensnared repeatedly in costly, bloody, and eventually futile overseas wars. From the Roman empire till today, the issue is not whether an imperial army can defeat a local one. It usually can, just as the United States did quickly in Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003.

    The issue is whether it gains anything by doing so. Following such a "victory," the imperial power faces unending heavy costs in terms of policing, political instability, guerilla war, and terrorist blowback.

    http://www.commondreams.org/views/2017/04/03/us-military-should-get-out-middle-east

    anne -> RGC... , April 04, 2017 at 08:42 AM
    http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/27/magazine/the-empire-slinks-back.html

    April 27, 2003

    The Empire Slinks Back
    By NIALL FERGUSON

    Wheresoever the Roman conquers, he inhabits. -- Seneca

    Iraq has fallen. Saddam's statues are face down in the dust. His evil tyranny is at an end.

    So -- can we, like, go home now?

    You didn't have to wait long for a perfect symbol of the fundamental weakness at the heart of the new American imperialism -- sorry, humanitarianism. I'm talking about its chronically short time frame. I wasn't counting, but the Stars and Stripes must have been up there on the head of that statue of Saddam for less than a minute. You have to wonder what his commanding officer said to the marine responsible, Cpl. Edward Chin, when he saw Old Glory up there. ''Son, get that thing down on the double, or we'll have every TV station from here to Bangladesh denouncing us as Yankee imperialists!''

    An echo of Corporal Chin's imperial impulse can be heard in the last letter Cpl. Kemaphoom Chanawongse sent home before he and his Marine unit entered Iraq. Chanawongse joked that his camp in Kuwait was like something out of ''M*A*S*H'' -- except that it would need to be called ''M*A*H*T*S*F'': ''marines are here to stay forever.''

    But the question raised by Corporal Chanawongse's poignant final joke -- he was killed a week later, when his amphibious assault vehicle was blown up in Nasiriya -- is, Are the marines in Iraq ''to stay forever''? No doubt it is true, as President Bush said, that the America will ''honor forever'' Corporal Chanawongse and the more than 120 other service personnel so far killed in the conflict. Honored forever, yes. But there forever? In many ways the biggest mystery about the American occupation of Iraq is its probable duration. Recent statements by members of the Bush administration bespeak a time frame a lot closer to ephemeral than eternal. As the president himself told the Iraqi people in a television broadcast shortly after the fall of Baghdad: ''The government of Iraq and the future of your country will soon belong to you. . . . We will respect your great religious traditions, whose principles of equality and compassion are essential to Iraq's future. We will help you build a peaceful and representative government that protects the rights of all citizens. And then our military forces will leave.''

    What the president didn't make entirely clear was whether the departing troops would be accompanied by the retired Lt. Gen. Jay Garner and his ''Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance,'' newspeak for what would once have been called Omgus -- the Office of Military Government (United States). Nor was he very specific about when exactly he expected to see the handover of power to the ''peaceful and representative government'' of Iraqis.

    But we know the kind of time frame the president has in mind. In a prewar speech to the American Enterprise Institute, Bush declared, ''We will remain in Iraq as long as necessary and not a day more.'' It is striking that the unit of measure he used was days. Speaking less than a week before the fall of Baghdad, Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of defense, suggested that Garner would be running Iraq for at least six months. Other administration spokesmen have mentioned two years as the maximum transition period. When Garner himself was asked how long he expected to be in charge, he talked about just three months.

    If -- as more and more commentators claim -- America has embarked on a new age of empire, it may turn out to be the most evanescent empire in all history. Other empire builders have fantasized about ruling subject peoples for a thousand years. This is shaping up to be history's first thousand-day empire. Make that a thousand hours.

    Let me come clean. I am a fully paid-up member of the neoimperialist gang. Two years ago -- when it was not at all fashionable to say so -- I was already arguing that it would be ''desirable for the United States to depose'' tyrants like Saddam Hussein. ''Capitalism and democracy,'' I wrote, ''are not naturally occurring, but require strong institutional foundations of law and order. The proper role of an imperial America is to establish these institutions where they are lacking, if necessary . . . by military force.'' ...

    [Apr 04, 2017] No Evidence That Khan Sheikhoun Gas Attack Resulted From Aerial Bombardment

    Notable quotes:
    "... The Israeli Minister of Internal Affairs, Aryeh Deri, also responded to the rumours of the jihadists and the associated images, by saying "Israel, the only superpower and democracy in the region, must lead the world to put an end to the horrible massacres in Syria. " ..."
    Apr 04, 2017 | www.therussophile.org
    This post was originally published on this site
    April 4th, 2017 – Fort Russ News – – Breakingnews.sy – – translated by Samer Hussein –

    According to the unverified rumours, spreading in the corporate press, a a poisonous gas attack was carried out in the Syrian village of Khan Sheikhoun, located in Idleb province. Dozens of civilians are said to be killed, with Syrian and Russian air force units being named as the main suspects, despite no evidence. The affected area is otherwise under complete control of the terrorist groups whose positions are occasionally being targeted by the Russian and Syrian Air Force.

    The news of the incident were allegedly forwarded by the controversial White Helmets and the Syrian Observatory for Human Right.

    Both NGOs are notorious for their association with the terrorist groups. Meanwhile, the unconfirmed reports have already triggered international response. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, commented on the news, peddled by representatives of the jihadist groups on Twitter, by saying "the shocking images that are being shared on social networks must shake the conscience of every human being", adding that "Israel strongly condemns the use of chemical weapons, especially against civilians."

    The Israeli Minister of Internal Affairs, Aryeh Deri, also responded to the rumours of the jihadists and the associated images, by saying "Israel, the only superpower and democracy in the region, must lead the world to put an end to the horrible massacres in Syria. "

    The correspondent of the TV channel Orient News, known for being associated with the terrorist groups, Al Nusra Front including, yesterday announced on this Twitter page that "Tomorrow is the start of a new media campaign to cover the intensified number of air strikes, launched in the northern countryside of Hama, and the use of poisonous chlorine gas against civilians. "

    The village of Khan Shaikhoun itself is located on the administrative border between the provinces of Hama and Idlib.

    The notorious organisation White Helmets published photo and video material, claiming that gas attack caused deaths of more than 50 civilians, mostly adolescents due to suffocation from chemical substances that were "fired from the air", while blaming the Russian and Syrian Air Force. However, it failed to provide evidence that the gas attack was the result of an aerial bombardment. In the meantime, the Turkish government closed the Bab Al Hama border crossing, thus refusing ambulances, coming from the direction of Khan Sheikhoun, to enter Turkish territory.

    The Russian government has since denied the accusations of being involved in Khan Sheikhoun gas attack, saying no Russian fighter jets, carrying chemical agents, participated in assaults on Khan Sheikoun.

    The controversial rumours, surrounding the events in Khan Sheikhoun, come right in time when the Syrian Army is achieving significant victories against the terrorists in the Northern countryside of Hama, namely Al Nusra Front which started its large-scale offensive right after the beginning of the fifth round of talks in Geneva on settlement of the Syrian crisis in the last week of March.

    >

    [Apr 03, 2017] Clinton-Morell Make Russia Pay a Price

    Apr 03, 2017 | www.youtube.com
    Aug 10, 2016

    "Former CIA deputy director Michael Morell, who supports Hillary Clinton and insists that Donald Trump is being manipulated by Russian President Vladimir Putin, said that Russians and Iranians in Syria should be killed covertly to "pay the price."

    The top CIA official, who twice served as the acting director of the agency, and worked with Clinton while she was secretary of state, told PBS host Charlie Rose that Iran and Russia should "pay a big price" in Syria – and by that he meant killing them.

    "I ran the CIA now I'm endorsing Hillary Clinton and I want Hillary to kill lots of Russians and Iranians in Syria"

    Referring to the US-backed rebels in Syria, Morell said he wanted Washington to support them in more aggressive actions, not only against Bashar Assad's government, but against Iranians and Russians.

    Morrell then went on a diatribe about how the US should "scare" Assad, including going after his national guard and "bombing his offices in the middle of the night."

    After he retired from the CIA in August 2013, Morrell took a job at Beacon Global Strategies, a Washington, DC consultancy founded by Clinton aides Philippe Reines and Andrew Shapiro. There he worked with Leon Panetta, another Clinton aide and his predecessor at the helm of the CIA, who also spoke in support of Clinton at the Democratic convention in Philadelphia last month.

    Last year, Morrell apologized to "every American" and finally owned up to the "mistakes" made by the CIA in Iraq, where over 4,000 US soldiers and at least 250,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed since the 2003 US invasion." - RT News

    https://www.rt.com/usa/355291-morrell...

    [Apr 02, 2017] How Obama White House Weaponized Media Against Trump

    Notable quotes:
    "... From Nunes's statements, it's clear that he suspects that this information came from NSA intercepts of Kislyak's phone . An Obama official, probably in the White House, "unmasked" Flynn's name and passed it on to Ignatius. ..."
    "... Regardless of how the government collected on Flynn, the leak was a felony and a violation of his civil rights. ..."
    "... The leaking of Flynn's name was part of what can only be described as a White House campaign to hype the Russian threat and, at the same time, to depict Trump as Vladimir Putin's Manchurian candidate. ..."
    "... On Dec. 29, Obama announced sanctions against Russia as retribution for its hacking activities. From that date until Trump's inauguration, the White House aggressively pumped into the media two streams of information: one about Russian hacking; the other about Trump's Russia connection. In the hands of sympathetic reporters, the two streams blended into one. ..."
    "... On Dec. 30, the Washington Post reported on a Russian effort to penetrate the electricity grid by hacking into a Vermont utility, Burlington Electric Department. After noting the breach, the reporters offered a senior administration official to speculate on the Russians' motives. Did they seek to crash the system, or just to probe it? ..."
    "... This infrastructure hack, the story continued, was part of a broader hacking campaign that included intervention in the election. The story then moved to Trump: "He has spoken highly of Russian President Vladimir Putin, despite President Obama's suggestion that the approval for hacking came from the highest levels of the Kremlin." ..."
    "... Especially damaging were the hundreds of Internet addresses, supposedly linked to Russian hacking, that the report contained. The FBI and DHS urged network administrators to load the addresses into their system defenses. Some of the addresses, however, belong to platforms that are widely used by the public, including Yahoo servers. At Burlington Electric, an unsuspecting network administrator dutifully loaded the addresses into the monitoring system of the utility's network. When an employee checked his email, it registered on the system as if Russian hackers were trying to break in. ..."
    "... While the White House was hyping the Russia threat, elements of the press showed a sudden interest in the infamous Steele dossier, which claimed that Russian intelligence services had caught Trump in Moscow in highly compromising situations. The dossier was opposition research paid for by Trump's political opponents, and it had circulated for months among reporters covering the election. Because it was based on anonymous sources and entirely unverifiable, however, no reputable news organization had dared to touch it. ..."
    "... With a little help from the Obama White House, the dossier became fair game for reporters. A government leak let it be known that the intelligence community had briefed Trump on the dossier. If the president-elect was discussing it with his intelligence briefers, so the reasoning went, perhaps there was something to it after all. ..."
    Apr 02, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
    Authored op-ed by Michael Doran via The Hill,

    Senator Chuck Schumer and Congressman Adam Schiff have both castigated Devin Nunes, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, for his handling of the inquiry into Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential election. They should think twice. The issue that has recently seized Nunes is of vital importance to anyone who cares about fundamental civil liberties.

    The trail that Nunes is following will inevitably lead back to a particularly significant leak . On Jan. 12, Washington Post columnist David Ignatius reported that "according to a senior U.S. government official, (General Mike) Flynn phoned Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak several times on Dec. 29."

    From Nunes's statements, it's clear that he suspects that this information came from NSA intercepts of Kislyak's phone . An Obama official, probably in the White House, "unmasked" Flynn's name and passed it on to Ignatius.

    Regardless of how the government collected on Flynn, the leak was a felony and a violation of his civil rights. But it was also a severe breach of the public trust. When I worked as an NSC staffer in the White House, 2005-2007, I read dozens of NSA surveillance reports every day. On the basis of my familiarity with this system, I strongly suspect that someone in the Obama White House blew a hole in the thin wall that prevents the government from using information collected from surveillance to destroy the lives of the citizens whose privacy it is pledged to protect.

    The leaking of Flynn's name was part of what can only be described as a White House campaign to hype the Russian threat and, at the same time, to depict Trump as Vladimir Putin's Manchurian candidate.

    On Dec. 29, Obama announced sanctions against Russia as retribution for its hacking activities. From that date until Trump's inauguration, the White House aggressively pumped into the media two streams of information: one about Russian hacking; the other about Trump's Russia connection. In the hands of sympathetic reporters, the two streams blended into one.

    A report that appeared the day after Obama announced the sanctions shows how. On Dec. 30, the Washington Post reported on a Russian effort to penetrate the electricity grid by hacking into a Vermont utility, Burlington Electric Department. After noting the breach, the reporters offered a senior administration official to speculate on the Russians' motives. Did they seek to crash the system, or just to probe it?

    This infrastructure hack, the story continued, was part of a broader hacking campaign that included intervention in the election. The story then moved to Trump: "He has spoken highly of Russian President Vladimir Putin, despite President Obama's suggestion that the approval for hacking came from the highest levels of the Kremlin."

    The national media mimicked the Post's reporting. But there was a problem: the hack never happened . It was a false alarm - triggered, it eventually became clear, by Obama's hype.

    On Dec. 29, the DHS and FBI published a report on Russian hacking, which showed the telltale signs of having been rushed to publication. "At every level this report is a failure," said cyber security expert Robert M. Lee. "It didn't do what it set out to do, and it didn't provide useful data. They're handing out bad information."

    Especially damaging were the hundreds of Internet addresses, supposedly linked to Russian hacking, that the report contained. The FBI and DHS urged network administrators to load the addresses into their system defenses. Some of the addresses, however, belong to platforms that are widely used by the public, including Yahoo servers. At Burlington Electric, an unsuspecting network administrator dutifully loaded the addresses into the monitoring system of the utility's network. When an employee checked his email, it registered on the system as if Russian hackers were trying to break in.

    While the White House was hyping the Russia threat, elements of the press showed a sudden interest in the infamous Steele dossier, which claimed that Russian intelligence services had caught Trump in Moscow in highly compromising situations. The dossier was opposition research paid for by Trump's political opponents, and it had circulated for months among reporters covering the election. Because it was based on anonymous sources and entirely unverifiable, however, no reputable news organization had dared to touch it.

    With a little help from the Obama White House, the dossier became fair game for reporters. A government leak let it be known that the intelligence community had briefed Trump on the dossier. If the president-elect was discussing it with his intelligence briefers, so the reasoning went, perhaps there was something to it after all.

    By turning the dossier into hard news, that leak weaponized malicious gossip. The same is true of the Flynn-Kislyak leak. Ignatius used the leak to deepen speculation about collusion between Putin and Trump: "What did Flynn say (to Kislyak)," Ignatius asked, "and did it undercut the U.S. sanctions?" The mere fact that Flynn's conversations were being monitored deepened his appearance of guilt. If he was innocent, why was the government monitoring him?

    It should not have been. He had the right to talk to in private - even to a Russian ambassador. Regardless of what one thinks about him or Trump or Putin, this leak should concern anyone who believes that we must erect a firewall between the national security state and our domestic politics. The system that allowed it to happen must be reformed. At stake is a core principle of our democracy: that elected representatives control the government, and not vice versa.

    [Apr 01, 2017] What Devin Nunes Knows

    Notable quotes:
    "... Unmasking could be legitimate as well – we don't know right now. But to continue to put forward the proposition that Trump associates were not surveilled (by the Obama ADMINISTRATION) is simply preposterous. ..."
    "... And the trust in the honor and integrity of CIA and intelligence agency officials assumed by the MSM when there are so many instances of documented lying is hard to reconcile with an objective press. ..."
    "... I pretty much suspect there were some standard Washington scams/influence peddling going on – more so because this is Trump – and someone in the Obama administration was over anxious to leak this information, developed from classified information to hurt Trump. The only problem is that intelligence gathered information is not to be used for common criminal law. So we have the common law breaking on the Trump side and we have constitutional law breaking from the Obama side. Unfortunately, this country seems to have lost all desire to restrain the government from access to ALL communications of US citizens. And the MSM seems entirely unconcerned about unlimited government snooping. ..."
    Apr 01, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
    fresno dan, March 31, 2017 at 3:50 pm

    "What Devin Nunes Knows" [Kimberly Strassel, Wall Street Journal]. Why Nunes left his cab:

    Around the same time, Mr. Nunes's own intelligence sources informed him that documents showed further collection of information about, and unmasking of, Trump transition officials. These documents aren't easily obtainable, since they aren't the "finished" intelligence products that Congress gets to see. Nonetheless, for weeks Mr. Nunes has been demanding intelligence agencies turn over said documents-with no luck, so far.

    Mr. Nunes earlier this week got his own source to show him a treasure trove of documents at a secure facility. Here are the relevant details:

    First, there were dozens of documents with information about Trump officials. Second, the information these documents contained was not related to Russia. Third, while many reports did "mask" identities (referring, for instance, to "U.S. Person 1 or 2") they were written in ways that made clear which Trump officials were being discussed. Fourth, in at least one instance, a Trump official other than Mr. Flynn was outright unmasked. Finally, these documents were circulated at the highest levels of government.

    =============================================================
    Other than right wing sites, this is the first instance of the argument I have seen of the repubs that has been put forward coherently and the issue stated cogently. That does not mean its true, but at least it is put forward.

    I was watching CNN last night and the blonde commentator woman (Kirsten ???) put forward the proposition that the intelligence agencies "collecting" information on Trump associates does not mean Trump associates were surveilled – now this was in the context that the discussion was about the fact that Trump individuals were supposedly illegally "unmasked" by the intelligence agencies because the information was ..collected because they were under surveillance. Parsing "collection: vs "surveilling" was disingenuous beyond reality. One can put forward the idea that Trump personnel had conversations because of "incidental collection" or that Trump personnel are lawbreakers or treasonous as a reason for the surveillance (if surveillance happened – it seems obvious that it did happen) and the surveillance was legitimate.

    Unmasking could be legitimate as well – we don't know right now. But to continue to put forward the proposition that Trump associates were not surveilled (by the Obama ADMINISTRATION) is simply preposterous.

    Again, I just see purposeful obtuseness. And the trust in the honor and integrity of CIA and intelligence agency officials assumed by the MSM when there are so many instances of documented lying is hard to reconcile with an objective press.

    I pretty much suspect there were some standard Washington scams/influence peddling going on – more so because this is Trump – and someone in the Obama administration was over anxious to leak this information, developed from classified information to hurt Trump. The only problem is that intelligence gathered information is not to be used for common criminal law. So we have the common law breaking on the Trump side and we have constitutional law breaking from the Obama side. Unfortunately, this country seems to have lost all desire to restrain the government from access to ALL communications of US citizens. And the MSM seems entirely unconcerned about unlimited government snooping.

    [Apr 01, 2017] Sean Spicer Repeats Trump s Unproven Wiretapping Allegation

    Notable quotes:
    "... "The question is why? Who else did it? Was it ordered? By whom?" Mr. Spicer said. "But I think more and more the substance that continues to come out on the record by individuals continues to point to exactly what the president was talking about that day." ..."
    "... TheGatewayPundit.com, a right-wing site, called it a "notorious" interview and said it proved Obama administration officials had disseminated "intel gathered on the Trump team." Reince Priebus, the White House chief of staff, said on the Hugh Hewitt radio show that Ms. Farkas had made "just an incredible statement." Breitbart News reported on Mr. Priebus's comments. ..."
    "... The comments by Ms. Farkas, Mr. Spicer said, were evidence that Mr. Trump or his associates "were surveilled, had their information unmasked, made it available, was politically spread." He said that such stories were proof that Obama administration officials had "misused, mishandled and potentially did some very, very bad things with classified information." ..."
    Apr 01, 2017 | www.nytimes.com

    The White House on Friday revived President Trump's unproven wiretapping allegations against the Obama administration, insisting that there is new evidence that it conducted "politically motivated" surveillance of Mr. Trump's presidential campaign.

    Senior government officials, including James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director, and lawmakers from both parties have repeatedly and forcefully rejected the president's claim, saying they have seen no evidence of direct surveillance. A spokesman for former President Barack Obama has denied that Mr. Obama ever ordered surveillance of Mr. Trump or his associates.

    But Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, asserted to reporters during his daily news briefing that members of Mr. Obama's administration had done "very, very bad things," just as Mr. Trump alleged without proof on March 4 when he posted messages on Twitter accusing Mr. Obama of "wire tapping" his phones at Trump Tower.

    "The question is why? Who else did it? Was it ordered? By whom?" Mr. Spicer said. "But I think more and more the substance that continues to come out on the record by individuals continues to point to exactly what the president was talking about that day."

    ... ... ...

    Mr. Spicer's remarks on Friday seemed designed to give new life to the allegations against Mr. Obama after weeks of trying to focus attention on the damage that Mr. Spicer said had been caused by leaks from the investigations into Russia's involvement in the 2016 presidential campaign.

    TheGatewayPundit.com, a right-wing site, called it a "notorious" interview and said it proved Obama administration officials had disseminated "intel gathered on the Trump team." Reince Priebus, the White House chief of staff, said on the Hugh Hewitt radio show that Ms. Farkas had made "just an incredible statement." Breitbart News reported on Mr. Priebus's comments.

    In fact, the reports do not back up the allegations that Mr. Trump or any officials in his campaign were ever under surveillance. In the March 2 interview on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" program, Ms. Farkas said she had expressed concern to her former colleagues about the need to secure intelligence related to the Russian hacking of the American election.

    Ms. Farkas was commenting on a New York Times article a day earlier that documented how in the days before Mr. Trump's inauguration, Obama administration officials had sought to ensure the preservation of those documents in order to leave a clear trail for government investigators after Mr. Trump took office.

    In a statement she gave to the American Spectator, a conservative publication, Ms. Farkas said the furor over her remarks was "a wild misinterpretation of comments I made on the air in March." She added, "I was out of government, I didn't have any classified information, or any knowledge of 'tapping' or leaking or the N.Y.T. article before it came out." White House officials also confronted on Friday the disclosure that Mr. Flynn, who resigned in February over his contacts with Russian officials, has offered to testify before the two congressional committees investigating the Trump campaign's ties to Russia about those contacts in exchange for immunity from prosecution.

    Mr. Trump said on Twitter on Friday morning that he agreed with Mr. Flynn's proposal.

    "Mike Flynn should ask for immunity in that this is a witch hunt (excuse for big election loss), by media & Dems, of historic proportion!" Mr. Trump wrote.

    The comments by Ms. Farkas, Mr. Spicer said, were evidence that Mr. Trump or his associates "were surveilled, had their information unmasked, made it available, was politically spread." He said that such stories were proof that Obama administration officials had "misused, mishandled and potentially did some very, very bad things with classified information."

    [Apr 01, 2017] US neocons have a hard time coming to terms with a multi-lateral world. Still detente offered to Russia is likely to be conditioned on pulling Russia out of Chinas orbit and accepting Us terms in Syria

    Apr 01, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
    Posted by: Jackrabbit | Mar 31, 2017 3:08:38 PM | 17

    b's quote from Obama is from January 2016. I don't think Obama was EVER serious about fighting ISIS. He helped to create ISIS when he ignored their rise, calling them al Queda's "JV team". He confirmed his support for ISIS with his "leading from behind" policy.

    In January 2016, the US was starting the charade of separating moderate rebels. We know how that farce turned out.

    Even after the San Bernardino (Dec. 2015) and Orlando (Jun. 2016) terror attacks - attributed to ISIS - nothing really changed. For Obama it was business as usual.

    Trump initiated talks between US military command and Russians for the first time since 2014. Gen. Dunford met with Gen. Gerasimov in Feb. 2017. We now see Israel stepping up operations in Syria as a result of US pulling back from the failed 'Assad must go!' policy.

    <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>

    Has there been any real change or just a hiatus? I don't think we'll know until Trump meets with Putin.

    Many in the US (esp. neocons) will have a hard time coming to terms with a multi-lateral world. Whatever peace is offered to Russia is likely to be conditioned on pulling Russia out of China's orbit.

    Hayder | Mar 31, 2017 1:17:42 PM | 1
    I'm sorry about this long contribution, but as I was writing this, more information and ideas came to hand.


    Iraqi situation:


    Recently, Iraqi PM Al-Abadi met with President Trump in the White House.

    As well as the usual niceties of a meeting between two heads of state in Washington, the meeting centred around three main areas where the US has objectives that need to be address by their Iraqi counterparts:​


    1) The Popular Mobilisation Units (PMU): These forces must be disbanded, and are seen as a stumbling block in the face of US objectives in Iraq and the wider region. There has been some indications that PM Al-Abadi will disband them after the elimination of Daesh/ISIS, allowing those that wish to remain to be integrated into the Iraqi security apparatus and disbanding those that do not. This is the "objective", but whether Al-Abadi can deliver is an entirely different matter. Already, Iraqi members of parliament have come out in protest at there mere possibility of the disbandment of the PMU, stating that the PM does not have the legal authority to disband them, and it needs parliamentary approval, where any MP voting for this will be committing political suicide due to the popularity the the PMU among ordinary Iraqis.


    2) Permanent american Bases in Iraq and increasing the number of troops in the country: This is a big issue for President Trump. During his presidential campaign, he repeatedly stated the need to control Iraqi oil, and stated that leaving Iraq was a mistake. He even said this IN FRONT OF PM Al-Abadi several times.There is also widespread concern amongst Iraqis that the US is on its way back to Iraq, and in large numbers- some report a figure of up to fifty thousand troops, in permanent bases. There is also a very large US military base being build in Al Qayyarah area in Northern Iraq (about half way between Beiji and Mosul), that reports say will equal the size of Incirlik. This is another very "hot" topic in Iraq, and has widespread rejection by the Iraqi people. Once again, Iraqi MPs state that Al-Abadi DOES NOT have legal authority to allow permanent bases or keep foreign troops permanently in Iraq, and that such a step would need approval by parliament. Again, any MP voting for this will be committing political suicide. There is genuine fear amongst Iraqis about the situation "after" Daesh/ISIS. The concern is, that in the event the Government DOES NOT cede to the will of the US, and approve bases and troops etc.. there will be a dramatic political change, either in the form of a coup, or declaration of a state of emergency, through which special measures will take place. There is also talk of appointing a military governor for the mainly Sunni provinces of Nainawa, Salahuldeen (Saladin) and Anbar- a de facto state within a state- this could link up with Eastern Syria (see bellow).


    3) Moving Iraq away from Iran and closer to the Saudi "camp". The recent visit to Iraq by the Saudi Foreign Minister has been well covered. There was also a meeting between the Iraqi PM and the Saudi King on the 29th on March. Al-Abadi's speech at the Heads of State of the Arab League in Jordan (29th March) was notable in that it was close to the Saudi position on several topics: a) His statement did not mention Syria, b) It stated that Iraq will "expel ISIS outside Iraq" { ?into Syria as per the objectives of others wishing to topple the Syrian state}, c) Is stressed the need for a unified Arab front against threats to Iraqi sovereignty, or the sovereignty of any Arab nation {reference to alleged Iranian interference in the region}. On the face of it, it seems that Iraq is moving away from Iran and edging closer to the Saudi camp, albeit slowly, but this is purely at the level of the current Iraqi government. I think efforts to distance Iraq from Iran and closer to Saudi Arabia will ultimately fail, for two reasons:


    Firstly, The vast majority of Iraqi people view Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Gulf Monarchies very negatively. Unlike Iraqi politicians, who will certainly have some personal gains from closer ties with Saudi Arabia, Iraqi people are unwilling to just "forgive and forget" how the Saudis and others persistently conspired against the Iraqi people over the years. It was the Saudis and other Gulf States who supported Saddam Hussein and his regime, which oppressed Iraqis terribly, they supported him to the tune of over 200 billion dollars for the war against Iran and persistently opposed the political process since 2003 (and Democracy was NOT the reason!). More recently, the Saudis have been supporting Daesh/ISIS both financially and ideologically. This support has carried on unabated to this day.


    Secondly: the links between Iraq and Iran are much closer and deeper than others realise, and including at a cultural, religious and tribal level, and no government can alter that. The only exception to this would be a harsh dictatorial regime, such as that of Saddam Hussein, whereby government policy had absolutely no relation to Iraqi public opinion, and was simply a tool for carrying out the wishes of the "Dear Leader".


    Other Iraq developments:


    A) PMU still barred from entering Tel Afar. The Iraqi government has succumbed to pressure from Turkey to prevent Tal Afar from being liberated, with a threat of invasion by a Turkish force stationed at the boarder town of Silopi should the PMUs enter Tel Afar.


    B) Rumours that Daesh/ISIS evacuating injured/ getting supplies from through a corridor to the North of Mosul, via Masoud Barzani controlled territory / Turkey, and plans are to slow down the Iraqi advance long enough for the majority of Daesh/ISIS forces to evacuate into Syria. The route takes them through Tell Kayf and Batnay (see Southfront mosul situation update map 31 March https://southfront.org/military-situation-in-mosul-on-march-31-2017-iraqi-map-update/ ).

    Syria situation:


    With the ongoing advance towards Raqqa by US/SDF forces, the bid event recently was the surprise Tabqa operation. It is notable that the airborne landings in Tabqa by a small US/SDF force occurred with relatively little resistance from Daesh/ISIS, with few casualties. Some have concluded that the majority of ISIS had already withdrawn. Contrast this with the Ithriyah-Raqqa offensive carried out by the Syrian Arab Army in 2016, whereby the SAA suffered heavy casualties and resulted in Daesh/ISIS gains. There are also reports of a rapid withdraw on ISIS from East As-Suwayda to reinforce strength in Raqqa, Deir Ezzor and As-Sukhnah.


    The US/SDF landings in Tabqa aimed at achieving several objectives. The most important is blocking the path of the Syrian army and allies from Reqqa.

    If/when US/SDF forces defeat Daesh/ISIS in Reqqa , they will have virtual control of the whole of Eastern Syria, save for three pockets of SAA control in Qamishli, Hasakah and Deir Ezzur, as well as some areas where Daesh/ISIS will remain.

    The Eastern part of Syria is where the baulk of the oil and gas is located as well as being the agricultural heartland of the country. The US secretary of State, Tillerson stated that the the US longer sees toppling President Assad as a primary objective. This may be the case (for now), but on the ground, events are such that Syria is being divided into regions of influence whereby the Damascus Government no longer has authority over large swathes of it. We are witnessing a de facto federalisation of Syria, with the Eastern part no longer under the rule of Damascus, and in effect a US protectorate, with troops on the ground. The creation of this "region" also serves another critical US objective in the region - it acts as a "wall" separating Iran & "Shia" Iraq from the Government of Syria and Lebanon. There are whispers that parts of Western Iraq will be added to this new entity in a "redrawing" of the political maps in the region. As stated in a previous post of mine, I believe that Daesh/ISIS will concentrate its forces in Deir Ezzor after its defeat in Raqqa, for a final "showdown" with other forces. It will likely face both US/SDF and Syrian/Russian forces there, but time will tell.


    Turkey announced the Euphrates Shield has concluded. Turkey has managed to split the two areas of Kurdish influence in Syria, but I believe the operation was concluded as there was no more room for Turkey to move, rather than by choice. Erdogan has finally got a foothold in Norther Syria. Could this area now be used to house refugees as per "safe zones" advocated by Turkey, Saudi and now the new US administration?

    Arab Summit:

    Some are sating that the recent summit of the Arabs Heads of State held in Jordan on March 29th marked the unofficial start of the "Arab NATO" to face Iran. There was the usual anti-Iran rhetoric from the "usual suspects" but Iraq was usually cold towards Iran. The question of Palestine was high on the agenda at the summit, but it is thought that this is merely being used as a tool to provide "political cover" for the upcoming Sunni NATO, with an expected summit to be held sometime down the line in Washington that will bring together these Arab leaders together with their Israeli counterparts in a public display of a new type alliance between Arabs and Israelis to face the "Iranian threat".


    War in Yemen:

    There are signs that the US is about to enter the war in Yemen, against the government in Sana'a (Houthi-Saleh alliance). This is seen as a war against Iran in Yemen. There are currently three US destroyers with support vessels in the Red Sea. The is a media storm from the Saudi side regarding the port of Hodeida, and that it is used to smuggle weapons into Yemen, stressing the importance of "taking it out". The next large operation could well be the battle for the West coast of Yemen (on the Red Sea). The Sana'a forces have stated that they will NOT tolerate an attack on Hodeida, and any such action will mean a major escalation on their part. At present, the Sana'a forces have refrained from going deep into Saudi territory- but this could change and their forces may receive the political green light to proceed if Hodeida is attacked.


    End in sight in Syria .....?


    Things seem to be clearing up in Syria.. Daesh/ISIS is on the ropes, US/SDF making steady progress in the East, and the Syrian army, backed by the Russians is in control of most of the major population areas, and the fact that the US publicly states that removal of Assad is no longer a priority have lead some to argued that it is the beginning of the end.. that the players are making their final touches before a political settlement is reached.. they argue that at the start, the US and its allies wanted regime change by supporting the rebels, and aimed at taking the whole of Syria- this has failed. Now, the US and its allies are involved directly and will settle for a different model, whereby there are regions of influence, a division between the US and Russian Axis. I disagree with this. I think it is still too early, and the US, Turkey, Saudi and other will still relish the overthrow of the Syrian government- and as things stand, they cant do it, but are still open to seizing any opportunity that may present itself in the future to achieve this. That is the only explanation for the lack of full co-ordination between the US and Russia to bring a devastating defeat to Daesh/ISIS, Al-Nusra and groups allied to them. If the US and its allies were serious in accepting what gains they have made, then they would start the full co-ordination of efforts to defeat the extremists with a view of working out a final political settlement. We have to remember that Daesh/ISIS and other groups are only a tool, a means to an end. they are weapons on mass destruction- some may have outlived their usefulness and will need to be exterminated, others still have a role to play.


    Its not over yet,. it is not clear what the final outcome for both Iraq and Syria will be after Daesh/ISIS. As regards Syria, I think there is a false sense of security, and the danger to the Syrian government will stem from the South- contrary to expectations.

    Hayder, the Iraqi abroad

    WorldBLee | Mar 31, 2017 3:12:54 PM | 18
    I used to use the term "Obusha" for the hybrid nature of the last two administrations where the Coke/Pepsi branding masked the fact that the core policies were the same. Perhaps "Trama" is the term for the current state where the Washington-Wall Street consensus types scream about how Trump is an abomination while in reality business as usual goes in most areas. Certainly Trama describes the impact on the rest of the world, particularly in Syria, Yemen, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Ukraine.

    Temporarily Sane | Mar 31, 2017 3:14:17 PM | 19
    @1 Hayder

    Excellent analysis. I wonder what the Iranian, Syrian, Hezbollah reaction will be. Part of Trump's goal, I suspect, is moving Russia away from Iran. There are already points of contention between Russia and Syria/Iran namely that the former has not made the continued unity of Syrian territory a non-negotiable condition. Which begs the question what Russia's actual goals in Syria are.

    james | Mar 31, 2017 3:33:23 PM | 20
    b - thank you... the only dupes who are going to swallow the change in the words, are the same dupes who believed all the previous lies... meanwhile, until an actual change happens, it will be the same biz as usual from the same group of liars... they must think folks are complete idiots to believe any of their bs!! change my ass... hopey changey, lol...

    dh | Mar 31, 2017 1:45:47 PM | 6
    Good point b about this being Obama policy but

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2017/03/31/team-trump-doubles-down-on-obamas-horrendous-betrayal-of-syria

    likklemore | Mar 31, 2017 2:00:02 PM | 8
    yes b, Haley also said "Assad regime, Iran and Russia committed war crimes"

    No, never mind "war crimes" Assad may stay because we failed the regime change thingy after Mr. Putin entered in support of Syria..Bad Putin who hijacked our elections they are no match for us. So, our new focus is North Korea, third world dictator Kim Jung-Un, piece of cake we can readily beat just like we did the Taliban in Afghanistan. Kim Jung's half brother was offed - we will continue to send a message. This time around we really do intend to teach NK people a lesson in democracy and vassalship. See..the USA Sec. of War

    In London, Mad-Dog Mattis: "North Korea 'Has Got to Be Stopped"

    http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/defense-sec-james-mattis-north-korea-has-got-be-stopped-n740966

    Mad-Dog is an apt descriptor MAD --setting up the final event for total collapse.
    I gotta go buy some supplies: plastic sheeting, duct tape, water and food. Can't afford a luxury underground bunker.

    likklemore | Mar 31, 2017 3:02:23 PM | 14
    hopehely @ 10

    Guess, I should have included the /S tag


    Dh @ 12

    John McCain loves his friends, ISIS. Here he is outing himself on Hannity Show saying:
    "ISIS! not true" "I know these people intimately, I know these people I am in contact with them all the time."

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHtS3c5olMY

    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
    You think?
    All doubts of McCain ISIS connection now debunked.

    Peter AU | Mar 31, 2017 4:19:29 PM | 22
    Temporarily Sane 19 "There are already points of contention between Russia and Syria/Iran namely that the former has not made the continued unity of Syrian territory a non-negotiable condition. Which begs the question what Russia's actual goals in Syria are."

    There is the matter of the UNSC resolution, that Russia put up and US agreed to, that Syria retains its territorial integrity.
    US may occupy part of Syria for awhile. Nothing Russia can do about that in the short term, short of going to war with the US. Russia is looking at the long term.

    Louis Proyect | Mar 31, 2017 5:16:50 PM | 23
    Okay, it is now six years and counting. How many years will it take for you to figure out that the USA prefers Assad to the religiously conservative rural poor? Maybe both Obama and Trump took the advice of the RAND corporation:: "Regime collapse, while not considered a likely outcome, was perceived to be the worst possible outcome for U.S. strategic interests"

    Yonatan | Mar 31, 2017 5:23:00 PM | 24
    Temporarily Sane @19

    Russia's primary goal in Syria is to destroy the Islamic terrorists so they can't be sent on to Russia. They have already taken out around 4500 terrorists whose passports show they were from RF states. The Russia media is littered with details of small scale takfiri terrorist acts around the RF southern borders - the biggest most recent was 6 or so taken out on the border to Chechnya.

    Secondary goals include the support for primacy of international law relating to national integrity, support for an ally, testing military systems in real conditions and increasing the strength of the multipolar opposition to Anglo-Zionist hegemony.

    Harry | Mar 31, 2017 5:38:31 PM | 25
    @ Peter AU | 22

    There is the matter of the UNSC resolution, that Russia put up and US agreed to, that Syria retains its territorial integrity.

    If Kurds get de-facto independence within Syria (according to their manifesto) a la Barzanistan, resolution of "territorial integrity" technically remains intact. Russia could make such concessions (even blasted Assad for desiring to return all of Syria's territory) if only US would agree to barter, so far they didnt (or maybe Trump/Putin already did, who knows). While for Syria/Iran its as bad as it gets.

    US may occupy part of Syria for awhile. Nothing Russia can do about that in the short term, short of going to war with the US. Russia is looking at the long term.

    US wont be the one occupying, Kurds will (US will just rule them). Do you think Syria will start a war with Kurds (especially under US protection)? Of course not. Kurds expanded their territory 10x (now finishing off ethnic cleansing that ISIS started), occupied as many oilfields as they could.

    Kurds themselves are divided, but US will make sure their puppets have the power, while pro-Syrian Kurds will be marginalized or simply killed. The idea that Kurds will come to their senses is slim and most likely wont happen, just look at Barzanistan. Independence US dangling in front of them is powerful motivator, not to speak of how much influence and money US, Israel, monarchies, etc. have.

    As for Russia, both short and long term its looking after its own interests, which may or may not be whats the best for Syria. Hence the clashes.

    telescope | Mar 31, 2017 10:31:53 PM | 30
    The more US soldiers are stuck in Islamic badlands (Syria, Afghanistan, Yemen, Iraq) - without any chances of even remotely favorable outcome - the better it's for America's foes. The US will keep bleeding financially, emotionally, spiritually and literally, until its military machine simply unravels and disappears into a memory hole. The Russians and the Chinese must be watching US moves with utter amazement. America's inability to perform even the simplest geopolitical calculations may very well be unprecedented in world's history.

    Alaric | Mar 31, 2017 10:36:32 PM | 31
    While i agree that the goal remains one of dividing Syria, I doubt it will work out as planned by the US/Saudis/Israelis etc. Raqqa is not Kurd territory and I'm skeptical that the various arab tribes there are going to accept governance by a Kurd/US alliance. I also wonder why Kurds are liberating Raqqa. The main advantage to them beyond killing ISIS is really leverage in negotiations with Assad. Do you want Raqqa back? Well here is what we want. I have a hard time believing the Kurds really expect to occupy Arab territories under the nose of Assad, Russia and Turkey for any extended period of time?

    Net: capturing Raqqa gives the kurds bargaining power against the Asaad government towards Kurd autonomy.

    [Mar 09, 2017] Wiretarring scandal is a sign of empire in decay

    They can't win hearts and minds of people with discredited neoliberal ideology. So they need to spy on them.
    Notable quotes:
    "... I find this Real News Network interview with Colin Powell's former chief of staff, Lawrence Wilkerson, to be astonishing. He effectively says that Trump may not be wrong in his claims that he was spied on. ..."
    "... Trump used the word "wiretapping," which gave his opponents a huge out, since that means a judge gave a warrant to allow for monitoring. ..."
    "... What is therefore striking about this report is that Wilkerson, who is no fan of Trump, nevertheless is defending him in this matter. That is a sign that he regards the campaign against Trump as dangerous from an institutional perspective. ..."
    "... three Trump associates were the subject of surveillance and "wiretapping" and that the information was shared with Obama. ..."
    "... I am SURE Trump is being advised not to tip over the apple cart and let everybody know who was RIGHT – we're all monitored all the time. And that's the rub. ..."
    "... which legalized warrantless surveillance on domestic soil so long as the target is a foreigner abroad, even when the target is communicating with an American ..."
    "... The way I understand it, any conversation with the Russian ambassador in it is monitored (and stored) – Flynn talks to the ambassador, he is being monitored. Supposedly, Flynn should know this. ..."
    "... My theory is that Flynn was talking policy – albeit SENSITIVE policy – and PERHAPS the intelligence community didn't like the change in policy and decided by leaking to make Flynn look like a dirty commie – Or Flynn is a turncoat (so why isn't he being prosecuted???) ..."
    "... Getting "stuff" on people so that they can be manipulated is par for the course. Have we forgotten about J. Edgar Hoover. Does anybody really believe that the Democrats and the "deep state" don't already have enough "on Trump" to remove him from office given his mafia connections, not to mention Roy Cohn? ..."
    "... Could Trump's use of "Obama" just have been a metonym for the previous administration? I mean that's how the names of presidents and other leaders are frequently used. Journalists, historians, and people in general will often say "Bush did this" or "Thatcher did that" or "Stalin did something else" when it's clear that the named individuals didn't and couldn't have personally performed the action, rather functionaries of the regimes they headed did the action. ..."
    "... Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism! Is it legal for a sitting President to be "wire tapping" a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW! I'd bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election! How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy! ..."
    "... Whoa. Wilkerson looks on edge, usually very cool in these pieces. ..."
    "... I have the impression he can't contain himself on the subject of Brennan. Is that your take? ..."
    "... Introduction page viii ..."
    Mar 08, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
    Posted on March 8, 2017 by Yves Smith Yves here.

    I find this Real News Network interview with Colin Powell's former chief of staff, Lawrence Wilkerson, to be astonishing. He effectively says that Trump may not be wrong in his claims that he was spied on.

    At the 50,000 foot level, Trump's claim is trivial. Anyone who paid attention to the Edward Snowden revelations knows that the NSA is in a total data acquisition mode, hoovering up information from smart devices and able to use computers and tablets as monitoring devices. But Trump used the word "wiretapping," which gave his opponents a huge out, since that means a judge gave a warrant to allow for monitoring. And pinning surveillance on Obama personally was another huge stretch. In other words, Trump took what could have been an almost certain statement of fact, and by larding it up with dodgy particulars, pushed it well into crazypants terrain.

    What made Trump look bad was the FBI making clear it was not snooping on Trump, when the FBI would have been involved in a wiretap. Lambert and I discussed that it wasn't hard to come up with scenarios that weren't wiretaps by which Trump could have been spied upon while keeping Obama Administration hands clean. The most obvious was to have another member of the Five Eyes do the dirty work.

    What is therefore striking about this report is that Wilkerson, who is no fan of Trump, nevertheless is defending him in this matter. That is a sign that he regards the campaign against Trump as dangerous from an institutional perspective. And he states that the idea that Lambert and I had casually bandied about, that a foreign spy organization like the GCHQ, did Trump dirty work for the US government, is seen as a real possibility in the intelligence community.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/Fgd4WDMG4mQ

    PAUL JAY: Welcome to The Real News Network. I'm Paul Jay. Welcome to another edition of the Wilkerson Report.

    Of course the accusations are flying in every direction in D.C.. The latest Donald Trump saying that President Obama spied on him, ordered the listening of his telephone conversations. Now joining us to talk about these allegations is Larry Wilkerson.

    Larry joins us from Falls Church, Virginia. Larry was the former Chief of Staff for U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell. Currently an Adjunct Professor of Goverment at the College of Willam and Mary and a regular contributor to The Real News Network.

    (discussion)

    PAUL JAY: So, Larry what do you make of these allegations? Most of the media seems to be saying Trump is alleging this in order to distract from the real controversy, which they say his and his administration's connections to Putin and Russia. What do you make of Trump's allegations?

    LARRY WILKERSON: Well, I'm certainly not one, Paul, to defend HMS Trump and that whole entourage of people, but I will paint you a hypothetical here. There are a number of events that have occurred in the last 96 hours or so that lead me to believe that maybe even the Democratic party, whatever element of it, approached John Brennan at the CIA, maybe even the former president of the United States. And John Brennan, not wanting his fingerprints to be on anything, went to his colleague in London GCHQ, MI6 and essentially said, "Give me anything you've got." And he got something and he turned it over to the DNC or to someone like that. And what he got was GHCQ MI6's tapes of conversations of the Trump administration perhaps, even the President himself. It's really kind of strange, at least to me, they let the head of that organization go, fired him about the same time this was brewing up. So I'm not one to defend Trump, but in this case he might be right. It's just that it wasn't the FBI. Comey's right, he wasn't wire-tapping anybody, it was John Brennan, at the CIA And you say, "What would be John Brennan's motivation?" Well, clearly he wanted to remain Director of the CIA for Hillary Clinton when she was elected President of the United States, which he had every reason to believe, as did lots of us, that she would be.

    PAUL JAY: Now, Larry, do we have any evidence of this? Is this like a theory or is there some evidence?

    LARRY WILKERSON: Well, it's a theory that's making its way around some in the intelligence community right now because they know about the relationship between the CIA and the same sort of capabilities, maybe not quite as vast as the NSA has, but still good capabilities that exist in London. I mean, otherwise the president just came out and said something was patently false. Generally speaking, you know, I would agree with that, with regard to this particular individual, but not in this case.

    PAUL JAY: Now why would the British go along with this?

    LARRY WILKERSON: Well, you have to understand this is a real problem, Paul, it's been a problem for a long time. Only certain governments have national technical means that feature $5 billion satellites orbiting the United States and the rest of the globe and providing intricate national means of looking at other people 24/7. Even streaming video and so forth. There are only so many people who can afford that. We're the biggest guy on the block so when we sidle up to France or we sidle up to Germany or Japan or anybody else, they have two choices, either cooperate with us and share in that treasure trove from time to time or they don't cooperate with us and I'll tell you what we do, we cut them off. So this is a very incestuous relationship. I saw this up close and personal when we were saying there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and we had Paris and Tel Aviv and Berlin and London and everybody agreeing with us. I now know why they agreed with us, more recetively(?) (sound difficulties – 00:04:45 – 00:05:05) You still there?

    PAUL JAY: Yeah.

    LARRY WILKERSON: Well, they agree with us because they don't have any choice. Their choices are stark. They agree with us and hope it doesn't rebound to their discredit or hurt them or they don't agree with us and we cut them off.

    PAUL JAY: Okay, now let's go back to Trump's allegations. Trump does not seem to be shy about just making stuff up from whole cloth without any basis at all. Why would one thing this isn't just another fabrication?

    LARRY WILKERSON: Paul, I'm no fan of Donald Trump, but I'm not so sure you're right in that–

    PAUL JAY: I'm not saying it is. I'm just asking, is there any reason to think that we know that he's not making this up?

    LARRY WILKERSON: No, except that the series of events that occurred lead me to believe that John Brennan was, in fact, working with London and perhaps something came out of that, that might have assured John Brennan of a continuation of his role at the CIA with a new administration headed by Hillary Clinton. That makes every bit of sense to me when I think about it. And remember, I've been there and I've seen this stuff.

    PAUL JAY: Okay. We'll have to wait over the next few days or hours and see if more hard evidence follows out. But let's go look a little further, if you're right, Brennan's helping Clinton, you have different sections of the intelligence community helping various players. Some of them seem to be turning on Trump, some are feeding Trump, some are supporting him, it's like you got little fiefdoms in the intelligence community all with their own agendas here.

    LARRY WILKERSON: This is very disturbing. It's happened in the past, of course, when we politicized intelligence. It happened when Bill Casey and Ronald Reagan when Bill Casey made the case for a Soviet buildup so Reagan could justify his arms buildup in the U.S.. The Soviets were not involved in a buildup at all. That was all fabricated intelligence. It's happened with Henry Kissinger and Richard Nixon from time to time. But this is a new level of 17 different heavily funded intelligence agencies and groups, headed by the DNI and the CIA all apparently playing their own little games within various segments of a political community in this country and leaking accordingly. And I don't eliminate the FBI from that either. Why else would Comey come out, for example, just prior to the elections and say he had other e-mails and imply that they might be damning of one of the candidates? It's everyone playing in this game and it's an extremely dangerous game.

    PAUL JAY: Is part of what's going on here, is that all of these institutions whether it's CIA or FBI or NSA and on and on with all the alphabet, that their first priority, their deepest interest is their own agency. Their existence, their funding, their own jobs, that this is really - it's not about some supposed national interest to start with it starts with just who these guys are and they become entities unto themselves.

    LARRY WILKERSON: Absolutely. Hoover, take Hoover at the FBI, during World War II, it can be proven, it can be analytically demonstrated that Hoover spent more man hours and more money trying to look at his own administration, trying to gain power over elements of that administration than he did looking at the Nazis. I mean, this is not anything new, it's just come to a depth and a profundity of action that is scary and dangerous.

    When you have your entire intelligence community more interested in its own survival and its own power, and therefore, playing in politics to the degree that we have it doing so today, you've got a real problem. And I'm not talking about the people beavering away in the trenches who are trying their best to do a good job, I'm talking about these leaders, these people at the top and the second tier level, who are participating in this political game in a way that they should not be, but they've been doing for some time and now they've brought it to a crescendo.

    PAUL JAY: Is part of what's happening here an overall decay, if you will, of the state itself, of the American government? Which is a reflection of what's going on in the economy. You have so much of Wall Street is about pure parasitical investment. There's more money being invested in derivative gambling and billionaires gambling against billionaires and shorting, kind of manupulating commodity markets and so on, more money in the parasitical activity than there is investment in productive activity. And these are the guys that are financing political campaigns even electing presidents, in the case of Robert Mercer, who 's the billionaire who backed Trump and Bannon. Bannon worked for Mercer. The whole state and the upper echelons in the economy they seem to be into such practically mafioso short-sightedness. Like, "What can we do today for ourselves and damn what happens later?"

    LARRY WILKERSON: The decay of (sound difficulties) empire hat on and I will tell you, yes. You're right. This empire is decaying at a rapid rate. And it is not just reflected in the fact that we can't govern ourselves, the fact that we have a congress that can't even see the nation for the trees. My political party, Paul, right now thinks that it's going to achieve its full agenda or at least a good portion of it while this buffoon in the White House twiddles his thumbs. They don't see the country. They don't care about the country. All they want to do is achieve their agenda; social, economic and otherwise. This country, in all of its components, whether it's government or it's finance, economics or whatever, is falling apart.

    PAUL JAY: Thanks very much for joining us, Larry.

    LARRY WILKERSON: Thanks for having me, Paul.

    PAUL JAY: Thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.

    sleepy , March 8, 2017 at 6:33 am

    I took a glance at the article and read one of its links to the NYTimes article which confirms that three Trump associates were the subject of surveillance and "wiretapping" and that the information was shared with Obama.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/19/us/politics/trump-russia-associates-investigation.html?_r=1

    Even without digging into the story, the fact that Trump's claim is viewed with such disdain by the MSM has always struck me as incredulous. I have generally assumed that most communications among people in power is monitored whether legally or not.

    fresno dan , March 8, 2017 at 8:15 am

    none
    March 8, 2017 at 4:44 am

    I've read most of those. The problem is that the important thing – was a FISA warrant issued – not been confirmed by the government to my knowledge. Apparently it is secret by law so it is one of those things that the government will neither confirm nor deny – and I am SURE Trump is being advised not to tip over the apple cart and let everybody know who was RIGHT – we're all monitored all the time. And that's the rub.

    The other thing about the articles is the incredible amount of contradiction (assuming the government officials aren't being misquoted there are a LOT of things that just don't square).

    I think comes down to this – very simply the government/intelligence community (IC) does not really want to admit how many people's conversations it actually listens to or CAN listen to. Nobody can look at this and say that the 4th amendment is meaningful .

    In this case, a U.S. general, working on behalf of the president elect (or was this before Trump was elected?), was monitored by the IC and removed from office because of illegal leaks. We don't REALLY know why – but the idea that the IC has a veto over the president's appointees should give everyone pause.

    Bill Smith , March 8, 2017 at 9:06 am

    Would a warrant actually be needed? In the New York Time article on January 12, 2017 they say:

    After Congress enacted the FISA Amendments Act - which legalized warrantless surveillance on domestic soil so long as the target is a foreigner abroad, even when the target is communicating with an American - the court permitted raw sharing of emails acquired under that program, too.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/12/us/politics/nsa-gets-more-latitude-to-share-intercepted-communications.html

    So any of Trump's associates talking to a 'Russian' from the Trump Tower which was his campaign headquarters would qualify according to his tweet.

    fresno dan , March 8, 2017 at 10:24 am

    Bill Smith
    March 8, 2017 at 9:06 am

    The way I understand it (gleaned from a National Review article written by a former justice department lawyer Andrew McCarthy – I excerpted quite a bit of it, but it is now in skynet heaven )

    is that Russki subjects of interest (or any nationality) are always monitored. This means that Americans will occasionally get MONITORED if in communication with such individuals as well and those communications are STORED (monitored and stored ARE NOT THE SAME AS LISTENED TO). Now, to actually listen to the Americans in these conversation is what supposedly requires the FISA warrant – it is suppose to be based on something that the person is acting as an AGENT of a foreign power.

    Or the FBI could have been doing just a regular financial fraud investigation between Trump companies and Russia found nothing (OR found something and IS still investigation), and than passed it over as an intelligence matter. I can't do justice to the article without being skynetted, so you will have to read the article for yourself if interested.

    Bill Smith , March 8, 2017 at 1:13 pm

    If that is true then what was the basis for Flynn's phone calls being listened to?

    So I'm not sure the point about monitored / stored / listened to is the case anymore. The NYT article I referenced is all about the old privacy rules being removed.

    In addition the part of the article I quoted seems to say that isn't the case anymore.

    Flynn did a lot of work during the transition from Trump Tower. We know some of his calls where intercepted and not just the one from the beach.

    Evidently Paul Manafort lived in Trump Tower for a while. From the news articles his phone calls where also intercepted.

    I did look up a bunch of McCarthy's articles in National Review. Thanks for the pointer.

    fresno dan , March 8, 2017 at 2:14 pm

    Bill Smith
    March 8, 2017 at 1:13 pm

    "If that is true then what was the basis for Flynn's phone calls being listened to?"

    The way I understand it, any conversation with the Russian ambassador in it is monitored (and stored) – Flynn talks to the ambassador, he is being monitored. Supposedly, Flynn should know this.

    My theory is that Flynn was talking policy – albeit SENSITIVE policy – and PERHAPS the intelligence community didn't like the change in policy and decided by leaking to make Flynn look like a dirty commie – Or Flynn is a turncoat (so why isn't he being prosecuted???)

    The issue from the NR article is, as I understand it, is that Flynn should not be listened to unless there was some REAL suspicion that he was an agent and there was a FISA warrant (a former US general is really suspected of being a Russian agent???). So one can know that Flynn had a conversation with the ambassador (from monitoring) but not the substance unless there was a FISA warrant – if I am understanding this correctly.

    If he wasn't proven to be an agent than that conversation is suppose to go into the "vault" and never be released or acknowledged. So there are just a lot of things that don't add up. I'm thinking like the meme "fake news" that the people who started this whole think may regret looking into whether Trump was improperly monitored after all. BUT I DON"T KNOW – maybe Trump is guilty of something

    Ptolemy Philopater , March 8, 2017 at 4:46 pm

    Does anybody really believe that these people feel bound by law? This is raw power politics. Getting "stuff" on people so that they can be manipulated is par for the course. Have we forgotten about J. Edgar Hoover. Does anybody really believe that the Democrats and the "deep state" don't already have enough "on Trump" to remove him from office given his mafia connections, not to mention Roy Cohn?

    It's not about removing anyone from office but to get them to do your bidding. Likewise it is a big distraction from the ongoing fraud and corruption consuming this nation. Men like Wilkerson are finally realizing how far along our Mafia culture has come to complete and utter collapse. Next time the music stops will there be any chairs left?

    Kukulkan , March 8, 2017 at 4:45 am

    Could Trump's use of "Obama" just have been a metonym for the previous administration? I mean that's how the names of presidents and other leaders are frequently used. Journalists, historians, and people in general will often say "Bush did this" or "Thatcher did that" or "Stalin did something else" when it's clear that the named individuals didn't and couldn't have personally performed the action, rather functionaries of the regimes they headed did the action.

    As an example, I've seen a number news articles saying Kim Jong-un killed Kim Jong-nam, even though, as far as I can tell, Kim Jong-un has an airtight alibi, having been in a different country at the time. Most people understand such claims to mean that functionaries of the North Korean government headed by Kim Jong-un are responsible for the killing and Kim Jong-un is just used as a metonym for that government.

    Same thing with "wiretap". Trump is of a generation where wiretap was a generic term used to refer to any sort of bugging.

    Reading them as specific references comes across as a particularly pedantic and uncharitable interpretation.

    Kukulkan , March 8, 2017 at 4:52 am

    Actually, checking the tweet, I see Trump wrote "tapp", an even more generic term for using electronic devices to listen in on other people's private conversations.

    Yves Smith Post author , March 8, 2017 at 7:01 am

    Wow, that is an important catch! Shame on me for missing it and way bigger shame on the MSM for misrepresenting it.

    Bill Smith , March 8, 2017 at 8:56 am

    Actually it was "wires tapped" with Trump having put the quotes in. So yeah, very generic term. And it says Trump Tower. Doesn't he own Trump Tower? All that stuff in the Trump Tower is 'his'. So the claim is even more generic.

    There were numerous reports that people associated with the campaign (headquarters in Trump Tower) had their phone conversations intercepted. I assume it was when they were talking to a 'Russian'.

    The first thing I thought when I heard this was "Hey, Trump finally attended an intelligence briefing."

    jrs , March 8, 2017 at 12:10 pm

    If the NSA really is listening to everything, can anyone answer why the powers that be would even bother with an actual wiretap anymore? Isn't it something anachronistic, like owning a beeper or something?

    Katniss Everdeen , March 8, 2017 at 8:02 am

    This is exactly the way I took it–with "obama" and "wiretap" being generic terms. Funnily enough, it made all the furor over the tweet initially hard to understand. Now it makes the literal parsing look desperate and deliberately obfuscatory.

    fresno dan , March 8, 2017 at 8:26 am

    Katniss Everdeen
    March 8, 2017 at 8:02 am

    I find it impossible to believe that the MSM does not know that wiretap = any kind of monitoring/surveillance and that "Obama" = white house, and/or Obama administration. There is nothing wrong about doing a story about the nuances of surveillance, but to go on and on and ON about there is no wiretapping is absurd. And the MSM professes to wonder why people find them unreliable

    It is deliberate obtuseness to advance an agenda.

    Katniss Everdeen , March 8, 2017 at 9:28 am

    I may be "mis-remembering" here, but it reminded me of a time when ben bernanke was testifying in front of some congressional committee or other. A member of the panel referenced the fed "printing" money. Bernanke replied that the fed doesn't "print" money. They enter it onto a computer. A textbook distinction without a difference.

    fresno dan , March 8, 2017 at 10:32 am

    Katniss Everdeen
    March 8, 2017 at 9:28 am

    OH EXACTLY RIGHT!!! To go off on a tangent – to not say that money is "loaned" into existence and as much as you need can be obtained from the either, just would beg the question of why Goldman Sachs, somebody who managed to lose trillions is deserving of more loans, but a borrower who was scammed into some mortgage with some skyrocketing interest rate proviso is not. And the unpalatable answer – the FED is to protect the rich and f*ck the poor .

    nobody , March 8, 2017 at 9:14 am

    Trump's language was very clear (at least to my ear) in attributing personal involvement to Obama (calling him a "bad (or sick) guy"). But with "wiretap" note the use of quotation marks. When I first heard about these tweets the morning after, the first thing I did was to go to Trump's twitter feed to have a look for myself. For me the quotation marks scanned as scare quotes and I instinctively interpreted "wiretap" in its generic sense.

    Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!

    Is it legal for a sitting President to be "wire tapping" a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW!

    I'd bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election!

    How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!

    Michael Fiorillo , March 8, 2017 at 6:23 am

    In his autobiography "Memoirs of a Revolutionist," Peter Kropotkin describes being interrogated by a member of the Okhrana, the Tsar's secret police, after his arrest.

    In the course of the interview, Kropotkin expresses amazement that the secret police had so deeply infiltrated his revolutionary cell. His interrogator expressed smug satisfaction, and then informed him that such surveillance was commonplace, and that in fact no one in the entire empire was more closely surveilled than the Tsar himself.

    I've always operated under the assumption that the intelligence agencies devote ample resources to keeping the Executive under close observation, and that he likely has no more secrets than the rest of us.

    The difference now is that the agencies are not just monitoring executive goings-on, but becoming active political players. Needless to say, clueless, hopeless Democrats are cheering them on.

    Colonel Smithers , March 8, 2017 at 6:32 am

    Thank you, Michael. It's not just Democrats cheering. There are cheerleaders overseas, too, vide the UK MSM.

    p7b , March 8, 2017 at 6:42 am

    Whoa. Wilkerson looks on edge, usually very cool in these pieces.

    Yves Smith Post author , March 8, 2017 at 6:58 am

    I have the impression he can't contain himself on the subject of Brennan. Is that your take?

    Colonel Smithers , March 8, 2017 at 6:50 am

    Thank you, Yves, for posting.

    Your title of "Empire In Decay" reminded me of my last two years at school (late 1980s) and the emphasis on Tudors and Stuarts, Bourbons and Habsburgs in history classes. The school organised lectures from history professors like Henry Kamen and Paul Kennedy. Kennedy had just written the book on the rise and fall of empires and been on the airwaves. Kamen is an expert on imperial Spain. One rarely sees that sort of expertise in the MSM. We get the likes of McCain, Miss Lindsey, David Brooks, Bernard-Henri Levy, Simon Schama (sic) et al masquerading as experts.

    Disturbed Voter , March 8, 2017 at 6:55 am

    Paul Kennedy knew his stuff. Read his book back in the day, cover to cover. That is the level of state-craft these people are thinking about. One dinky national election is mere detail. I am sure all the agencies have read the Club of Rome report and what came after it. It isn't just Global Warming time. Chess end games, all the way down, until checkmate.

    Colonel Smithers , March 8, 2017 at 8:07 am

    Thank you, DV. Me, too. I still have the book.

    It's appalling, isn't. Just the same talking heads going around studios and obsessing over trivia and sound bites.

    I remember the Sunday lunchtime and evening shows in the UK thirty years ago, featuring academics and journalists who had been in a country for years and got to know the country well. The advent of 24 hour and international news seems to have destroyed what was good coverage / analysis.

    FWIW, one of my friends and also son of immigrants from a former French and British colony works at the UK mission to the EU. He is a professional historian and studied at LSE and Cambridge. He hopes to return to Cambridge by the end of the decade and teach, but will also write about how Brexit panned out from a ring side seat.

    It would be great if Yves could get historians of the calibre of Kamen, Kennedy, Howard, Scarisbrick and Sauvigny to contribute.

    skippy , March 8, 2017 at 7:02 am

    Rational self interest meets its inevitable outcome .

    PH , March 8, 2017 at 7:14 am

    Do we assume that Trump expected to be surveiled?

    And acted cautiously as a result?

    What are the motives of the various players?

    who are the most important and somewhat important players?

    In the fog, everyone seems to see the shapes that they expect to see

    PH , March 8, 2017 at 7:15 am

    Do we assume that Trump expected to be surveiled?

    And acted cautiously as a result?

    What are the motives of the various players?

    who are the most important and somewhat important players?

    In the fog, everyone seems to see the shapes that they expect to see

    AbateMagicThinking but Not money , March 8, 2017 at 7:54 am

    Gore Vidal was telling the world about the National Security State years ago seemingly without any impact on the wider public mindset.

    Only when the legitimacy of leaders is seriously in question does this stuff pique the public interest. Isn't there something called positive vetting? But then, there are no qualifications required for becoming a politician – seemingly every other job nowadays needs a certificate but not that.

    I'm just hoping that when I accidentally delete something important I can type a cry for help into Firefox and GCHQ will get it all back for me.

    AbateMagicThinking but Not money , March 8, 2017 at 8:19 am

    Dan Rather! It must be really serious. Ooo eee!

    Campaign in fantasy, govern in paranoia. Am I paraphrasing Mario Cuomo or someone else?

    Eureka Springs , March 8, 2017 at 8:28 am

    If these things are true then there is little reason to think we aren't far, far beyond decay.. we are the festering maggot laden puss spreading more toxic virulent dangers far and wide.

    Little can explain those who circle the wagon in deference to, even in favor of the surveillance state unless they are afraid, blackmailed etc.

    Chaotic unpredictable Trump (who must be clean as a whistle to survive this long) may have grabbed this Shock Doctoring chaotic beast by the tail. Will he be willing or able to bring it down? If so, he may be the greatest thing that's ever happened to this country. He's already survived more than I ever dared imagine an individual could. I mean we have long been way past stay out of any and all airplanes territory here.

    The irony is just too rich a man in favor of ever increasing military, more torture, more drones just isn't enough for the intel state.

    dontknowitall , March 8, 2017 at 8:32 am

    A long while back a post Snowden revelation was that there exists a rule and mechanisms in the NSA to make sure that politicians are put on a list that specifically excludes their communications from being vacuumed with everyone else's. To bypass the list requires authorization at the highest levels in the agencies involved (and maybe even presidential authority). That is how Congress protects itself and why it so easily gives all kinds of spying authorities to the agencies. This is not czarist Russia in other words.

    On whose authorities were the protections bypassed in the Trump case ? Comey has already come out to say he didn't do it. Devin Nunes, the Chairman the House Intelligence committee seems to not have been informed of any surveillance op involving Trump so the committees maybe out of the loop. This implies either CIA/NSA or GCHQ as I don't see Canada getting involved in it or NZ. Was the flimflam Russian bs crapped out by GCHQ and CIA to gain such legal authorities and dredge opposition on Trump to prevent his election or to soft coup him out ? That the Russian 'intel' came from an ex British spy seems suspicious.

    Michael Fiorillo , March 8, 2017 at 10:22 am

    The history of the FBI under Hoover makes me question your claim that members of Congress are exempt from surveillance. Are we really supposed to believe that, the technology being what it is, the intelligence agencies would show such admirable self-restraint? That's a bet I wouldn't take.

    Eureka Springs , March 8, 2017 at 10:45 am

    If Obama would "approve" the following and intels would do it, why wouldn't he/they go after Trump?

    https://shadowproof.com/2015/01/16/white-house-approved-cia-hacking-of-senate-computers/

    dontknowitall , March 8, 2017 at 10:55 am

    Yes I know and agree it would be foolish to rely on it. In practical terms they might do it anyway specially if safe in Obama's approval, tacit or otherwise, but the rule exists anyway, if only to be a cudgel if the congress is feeling ornery. If I remember correctly, it was discussed in Emptywheel's website in the context of the hacking of Angela Merkel.

    Eureka Springs below mentions the senate hack. The hacking of the senate computers was a CIA screwup and the agencies don't like to be in the spotlight that way but CIA seems to mind it less than the others. This is another reason I think CIA may be behind the Trump tapp.

    jefemt , March 8, 2017 at 8:53 am

    What strikes me is that this is NOT astounding, and should really come as no surprise. Think of the subterfuge and intrigue back in the ancient empires of China, Greece, Rome. It's part of our human DNA. What cracks me up is the strength of the kool-aid the innocence and starry-eyed conviction that we are exceptional. The concept of America spun in elementary school is indeed exceptional- even exceptionally virtuous. But in fact, with our convenient lives, preoccupation with debt service and preoccupation with Dancing with the Master Chefs, misdirection has kept us from the ugly reality that we are right in there amongst the best, if not the most aggressive, in our dominant empire phase.
    Think about the outrage when it was determined we were monitoring Merkle's phone. Empire in decline, indeed! Seems to me Homo sapiens is really heading out toward the end of their dead branch on the tree of life: RIP Too much head, not enough heart.

    Steve , March 8, 2017 at 9:20 am

    A reason that I don't completely ignore Trump's claim (I do not like Trump!) is that it is beginning to look as if the entire Obama Presidency had a few real primary objectives. Firstly was to protect Wall Street from any prosecution but one of the other primary longterm goals was the TTP. Obama's desire to get the TTP through at any cost makes the act of listening in on Trump (who said he would kill it) very plausible.

    jrs , March 8, 2017 at 12:18 pm

    your forgot one: bail out the insurance companies (ACA) – not that I even imagine the average person benefiting from the new Republican plans.

    DJG , March 8, 2017 at 9:36 am

    I believe that Cocomaan asked about a new Church committee in yesterday's comments. And the entire post above gives the reasons why not. There is no one in Congress of the caliber of Frank Church. (Even if McCain has fantasies ) No one will take on a multinational intelligence system, deliberately interlocked to avoid accountability. And when was the last congressional investigation that produced results and legal proceedings?

    The "Five Eyes" always remind me of V for Vendetta. (Which is not just a great graphic novel, but an unfolding prophecy.)

    White-collar America, triumphant: Love means never having to say you're sorry.

    cm , March 8, 2017 at 10:14 am

    I agree. Ron Wyden is perhaps the only one possible, but the fact that Clapper was never humiliated for lying to Congress shows that we don't have anyone up to the task.

    ChrisFromGeorgia , March 8, 2017 at 9:44 am

    A nice interview and a good example of why I keep coming back to this blog. You don't get this kind of analysis anywhere else.

    While all this infighting and spy vs. spy skulduggery goes on, one thing is for certain – the neo-cons and "deep state" are too distracted by operation "take down the Donald" to pay much attention to their usual work.

    The creation of failed states appears to be badly behind schedule now; Syria may actually be restored by the Russians and Iran back to a functional state, and there appears to be a gutting of the State Department in progress which will make future "color revolutions" difficult.

    Is it any wonder there are so many powerful interests screaming that Russia "hacked" the election?

    "methinks the lady doth protest too much."

    Hamlet

    McWatt , March 8, 2017 at 10:25 am

    Having just read "Sleepwalkers" and the new Rasputin biography and reading how everyone of any note
    in political circles was monitored in Europe and Russia over 100 years ago these modern revelations come as no surprise. In those days they did it by opening mail, intercepting telegrams and having people followed 24 hours a day.

    It reminded me of when the Chaplain was arrested by the CID men because Yossarian signed the chaplain's name or Washington Irving's or Irving Washington's name as he censored soldiers letters home while staying in the hospital.

    RUKidding , March 8, 2017 at 10:32 am

    Thanks for this very important post. Nothing that Wilkerson said is a surprise – at all – to me. In fact, it's what I've figured has been happening since well, at least since Hoover, as Wilkerson indicates.

    As others have pointed out, though, this type of spying has gone on in many forms over the eons of time. None of it is new. The only sort of newsworthy aspect of it is that people in positions of some power and knowledge of behind the scenes stuff, like Wilkerson, are coming out and saying it.

    I always figured, esp since the Snowden reveal, that ALL politicians of any major impact/level would be spied on – or at least the data is gathered and available to be perused on an as needed basis.

    I read somewhere that Trump allegedly was steamingly angry about this. I want to say: SO? What did you expect? THIS is the way things work. Sometimes you're going like that Intel and sometimes you won't.

    I'm not that convinced whether it makes a difference if there was an actual wire tap or the info was gathered by spy satellite or some other method. But I could be wrong in that regard.

    So it seems to me that Trump is naive, albeit I also get it that he's hitting out at his enemies and using his tool of choice: twitter. So he makes his short tweets and expresses his anger against his enemies to shore up the defences of his supporters. I can only hope that Trump was NOT naive enough to not realize that he wouldn't be spied on. Trump can hate Obama all he wants – and I don't like Obama much either – but this kind of spying has be de rigueur for a long long time and no doubt, will continue to be so for a long long time.

    Will Trump be able to "tame" the Spooks? Good luck. JFK tried that, and we all witnessed how that turned out.

    flora , March 8, 2017 at 11:29 am

    Thanks for this post. My guess is Wilkerson is right that intel agencies care most about their own turf and budgets. What's interesting is, judging by the Chicken Little flailing after the election, imo the CIA and other agencies never saw a Trump win coming, or really even possible. So, what are these agencies doing with all their big data? Did they simply use Google/Ada for their election probabilities intel? /s

    Pookah Harvey , March 8, 2017 at 11:59 am

    Sorry about length but I think this puts together some interesting info.

    According to the BBC (from a Jan 13 report) FISA warrants were issued:

    On 15 October, the US secret intelligence court issued a warrant to investigate two Russian banks. This news was given to me by several sources and corroborated by someone I will identify only as a senior member of the US intelligence community. He would never volunteer anything – giving up classified information would be illegal – but he would confirm or deny what I had heard from other sources.

    "I'm going to write a story that says " I would say. "I don't have a problem with that," he would reply, if my information was accurate. He confirmed the sequence of events below.

    Last April, the CIA director was shown intelligence that worried him. It was – allegedly – a tape recording of a conversation about money from the Kremlin going into the US presidential campaign.

    It was passed to the US by an intelligence agency of one of the Baltic States. The CIA cannot act domestically against American citizens so a joint counter-intelligence taskforce was created.

    The taskforce included six agencies or departments of government. Dealing with the domestic, US, side of the inquiry, were the FBI, the Department of the Treasury, and the Department of Justice. For the foreign and intelligence aspects of the investigation, there were another three agencies: the CIA, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the National Security Agency, responsible for electronic spying.

    Lawyers from the National Security Division in the Department of Justice then drew up an application. They took it to the secret US court that deals with intelligence, the Fisa court, named after the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. They wanted permission to intercept the electronic records from two Russian banks.

    Their first application, in June, was rejected outright by the judge. They returned with a more narrowly drawn order in July and were rejected again. Finally, before a new judge, the order was granted, on 15 October, three weeks before election day.

    Neither Mr Trump nor his associates are named in the Fisa order, which would only cover foreign citizens or foreign entities – in this case the Russian banks. But ultimately, the investigation is looking for transfers of money from Russia to the United States, each one, if proved, a felony offence.

    A lawyer- outside the Department of Justice but familiar with the case – told me that three of Mr Trump's associates were the subject of the inquiry. "But it's clear this is about Trump," he said.

    I spoke to all three of those identified by this source. All of them emphatically denied any wrongdoing. "Hogwash," said one. "Bullshit," said another. Of the two Russian banks, one denied any wrongdoing, while the other did not respond to a request for comment.

    The investigation was active going into the election. During that period, the leader of the Democrats in the Senate, Harry Reid, wrote to the director of the FBI, accusing him of holding back "explosive information" about Mr Trump.

    Mr Reid sent his letter after getting an intelligence briefing, along with other senior figures in Congress. Only eight people were present: the chairs and ranking minority members of the House and Senate intelligence committees, and the leaders of the Democratic and Republican parties in Congress, the "gang of eight" as they are sometimes called. Normally, senior staff attend "gang of eight" intelligence briefings, but not this time. The Congressional leaders were not even allowed to take notes.

    Wilkerson's supposition was pre-dated by ex-CIA Larry Johnson in A RT interview

    RT: What do you make of the accusations made by Donald Trump? How big of a deal is this?

    Larry Johnson: I think it's a huge deal. The problem is Trump probably should not have done this via Twitter because to call it a "wiretap" is technically inaccurate. And the denials by the Obama people – like Bill Clinton asking what the meaning of "is" is with respect to "was oral sex a sexual act."

    In this case I understand from very good friends that what happened was both Jim Clapper and John Brennan at CIA were intimately involved in trying to derail the candidacy of Donald Trump. That there was some collusion overseas with Britain's own GHCQ [Government Communications Headquarters]. That information that was gathered from GHCQ was actually passed to John Brennan and it was disseminated within the US government. This dissemination was illegal.

    Donald Trump is in essence correct that the intelligence agencies, and some in the law enforcement community on the side of the FBI, were in fact illegally trying to access, monitor his communications with his aides and with other people. All of this with an end to try and destroy and discredit his presidency. I don't think there can be any doubt of that. I think it's worth noting that the head of the National Security Agency, an Admiral [Michael] Rogers, made a journey to the Trump Tower shortly after Trump had won. And in the immediate aftermath of his visit, Jim Clapper and others in the intelligence community called for him to be fired . Why did Rodgers go to Trump Tower? My understanding is that it was to cover himself, because he was aware that the NSA authorities had been misused and abused with respect to Donald Trump.

    Another piece of evidence that Wikerson alludes to ( March 1, 2017 ) :

    The American media is ignoring a story from London about the abrupt resignation of Robert Hannigan, the head of Britain's highly secretive Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), which is the code breaking equivalent of the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). Hannigan's resignation on January 23 surprised everyone, with only a few hours' notice provided to his staff. He claimed in a press release that he wanted to spend more time with his family, which reportedly includes a sick wife and elderly parents. Given the abruptness of the decision, it seems likely to be a cover story.

    Putting it altogether and there seems like a lot of smoke, will the MSM look for the fire?

    wild west , March 8, 2017 at 1:14 pm

    If we ignore the noise that comes from all sides 24/7 we should ask ourselves what is the worst consequence of this election cycle. I think that the fact that hatred became acceptable and normal is by far the worst. Will take a long time, if ever, to heal that.
    From the book The Damned Yard by Ivo Andric

    The success with which the politicians were able to pursue their campaign of division and mutual antagonism depended to a very large extend on the power of language to create a reality people are ready to believe in without reference to fact. Introduction page viii

    "It can happen, as you know," wrote Brother Mato, "that some of our people watching the Vizier destroy the Turks and their "prominent people" would comment on how some good would come of it for the rayah, for our fools think that another's trouble must do them good. You can tell them straight, so that they know now at least what they refused to see before: that nothing will come of it. Page 11

    Such was their capacity for hatred! And when the hatred of the bazaar attaches itself to an object, it never lets go, but focuses increasingly on it, gradually altering its shape and meaning, superseding it completely and becoming an end in itself. Then the object becomes secondary, only its name remains, and the hatred crystallizes, grows out of itself, according to its own laws and needs, and becomes powerful, inventive and enthralling, like a kind of inverted love; it finds new fuel and impetus, and itself creates motives for ever greater hatred. Page 19

    susan the other , March 8, 2017 at 1:14 pm

    Well this time Wilkerson did look upset. Just last week he looked tired but not so upset in his RNN interview. The topic this time is of course Trump being tapped and Wilkerson clearly doesn't like it. But did anybody else notice that Wilkerson is wearing the exact same clothes as in the most previous interview? And the time of day is very similar by the lighting behind him on the ceiling and on his face as he speaks down into his computer. So that's odd. Because it indicates to me that they were getting ready to debunk "Trump is crazy" talk even before Trump's claim hit the news. Or at least as soon as it did; they were ready with this interview. I get the feeling they waited a few days to make it look spontaneous. Makes me think there is almost a civil war going on. But regardless of these tactics, it's annoying that the DNC pulled this clumsy crap via the UK.

    [Mar 06, 2017] Victim of Obama Administration Surveillance Order, James Rosen, Discusses His Experiences, says Trump Wiretape Plausible

    Notable quotes:
    "... With Holden's explicit direction, the DOJ secretly accessed all of Rosen's gmails, contacts, and surveilled of more than 20 phone lines connected to him, including his mother's phone in Staten Island, NY. ..."
    "... Here is Rosen recounting his affair and opining on the plausibility of Trump being a target of the Obama administration too -- which he affirmed in the positive, 'in the age of Snowden.' ..."
    Mar 06, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
    Back in 2013, Fox News journalist, James Rosen, was named a 'criminal co-conspirator' and 'flight risk' by then AG Holder -- which led to a series of events that made Holden later regret doing it . With Holden's explicit direction, the DOJ secretly accessed all of Rosen's gmails, contacts, and surveilled of more than 20 phone lines connected to him, including his mother's phone in Staten Island, NY.

    The Washington Post's Dana Milbank wrote a piece on the ordeal, saying "The Rosen affair is as flagrant an assault on civil liberties as anything done by George W. Bush's administration, and it uses technology to silence critics in a way Richard Nixon could only have dreamed of. To treat a reporter as a criminal for doing his job - seeking out information the government doesn't want made public - deprives Americans of the First Amendment freedom on which all other constitutional rights are based."

    Here is Rosen recounting his affair and opining on the plausibility of Trump being a target of the Obama administration too -- which he affirmed in the positive, 'in the age of Snowden.'

    [Mar 05, 2017] Senator Sasse Issues Statement On Trumps Very Serious Wiretapping Allegations

    Notable quotes:
    "... Sasse raises several key points: if the wiretap was authorized by a FISA Court, Trump should demand to see the application, find out on what grounds it was granted, and then present it to the US public at best, or at least the Senate. In case there was no FISA court, it is possible that Trump was illegally tapped. Finally, there is the possibility that Trump was not wiretapped at all, although for the president to make such a public allegation one would hope that there is at least some factual basis to the charge. ..."
    "... "We are in the midst of a civilization-warping crisis of public trust, and the President's allegations today demand the thorough and dispassionate attention of serious patriots. A quest for the full truth, rather than knee-jerk partisanship, must be our guide if we are going to rebuild civic trust and health." ..."
    Mar 04, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
    Senator Ben Sasse, a Republican member of the Senate Judiciary and Armed Services Committees, has issued the following statement after President Trump accused former President Obama of wiretapping his phones in 2016 and Obama's spokesman said that was false.

    Sasse raises several key points: if the wiretap was authorized by a FISA Court, Trump should demand to see the application, find out on what grounds it was granted, and then present it to the US public at best, or at least the Senate. In case there was no FISA court, it is possible that Trump was illegally tapped. Finally, there is the possibility that Trump was not wiretapped at all, although for the president to make such a public allegation one would hope that there is at least some factual basis to the charge.

    my statement on wiretapping... pic.twitter.com/OzYkOCXeEh

    - Ben Sasse (@BenSasse) March 4, 2017

    Here is Sasse's full statement.

    Sasse Statement On Wiretapping

    "The President today made some very serious allegations, and the informed citizens that a republic requires deserve more information.

    If there were wiretaps of then-candidate Trump's organization or campaign, then it was either with FISA Court authorization or without such authorization.

    If without, the President should explain what sort of wiretap it was and how he knows this. It is possible that he was illegally tapped.

    On the other hand , if it was with a legal FISA Court order, then an application for surveillance exists that the Court found credible.

    The President should ask that this full application regarding surveillance of foreign operatives or operations be made available, ideally to the full public, and at a bare minimum to the U.S. Senate.

    Sasses then concludes:

    "We are in the midst of a civilization-warping crisis of public trust, and the President's allegations today demand the thorough and dispassionate attention of serious patriots. A quest for the full truth, rather than knee-jerk partisanship, must be our guide if we are going to rebuild civic trust and health."

    It appears that the Trump admin may already be working on Sasse's recommendations: as the NYT reports ,

    " a senior White House official said that Donald F. McGahn II, the president's chief counsel, was working on Saturday to secure access to what the official described as a document issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court authorizing surveillance of Mr. Trump and his associates. The official offered no evidence to support the notion that such a document exists; any such move by a White House counsel would be viewed at the Justice Department as a stunning case of interference ."

    Alternatively, it would be viewed as a case president seeking to determine if his predecessor was actively plotting to interfere with the election via wiretapping, also a quite "stunning" case.

    [Mar 05, 2017] Obama Advisor Rhodes Is Wrong: The President Can Order A Wiretap, And Why Trump May Have The Last Laugh

    Funny now Obama and Clinton need to be afraid the Trump will wiretap them ;-)
    Notable quotes:
    "... Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath ..."
    "... The Guardian has learned that the FBI applied for a warrant from the foreign intelligence surveillance (Fisa) court over the summer in order to monitor four members of the Trump team suspected of irregular contacts with Russian officials. The Fisa court turned down the application asking FBI counter-intelligence investigators to narrow its focus. According to one report, the FBI was finally granted a warrant in October, but that has not been confirmed, and it is not clear whether any warrant led to a full investigation. ..."
    "... I'd be careful about reporting that Obama said there was no wiretapping. Statement just said that neither he nor the WH ordered it. ..."
    "... Additionally, Philip Rucker, the WaPo's White House bureau chief echoed Favreau's caveat, namely that the Obama spokesman's statement does not deny the existence of wiretaps on Trump Tower ..."
    Mar 04, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
    Following Trump's stunning allegation that Obama wiretapped the Trump Tower in October of 2016, prior to the presidential election, which may or may not have been sourced from a Breitbart story , numerous Democrats and media pundits have come out with scathing accusations that Trump is either mentally disturbed, or simply has no idea what he is talking about.

    The best example of this came from Ben Rhodes, a former senior adviser to President Obama in his role as deputy National Security Advisor, who slammed Trump's accusation, insisting that " No President can order a wiretap. Those restrictions were put in place to protect citizens from people like you." He also said "only a liar" could make the case, as Trump suggested, that Obama wire tapped Trump Tower ahead of the election.

    No President can order a wiretap. Those restrictions were put in place to protect citizens from people like you. https://t.co/lEVscjkzSw

    - Ben Rhodes (@brhodes) March 4, 2017

    It would appear, however, that Rhodes is wrong, especially as pertains to matters of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance, and its associated FISA court, under which the alleged wiretap of Donald Trump would have been granted, as it pertained specifically to Trump's alleged illicit interactions with Russian entities.

    In Chapter 36 of Title 50 of the US Code *War and National Defense", Subchapter 1, Section 1802 , we read the following:

    (1) Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath that

    (A) the electronic surveillance is solely directed at- (i) the acquisition of the contents of communications transmitted by means of communications used exclusively between or among foreign powers, as defined in section 1801(a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title; or (ii) the acquisition of technical intelligence, other than the spoken communications of individuals, from property or premises under the open and exclusive control of a foreign power, as defined in section 1801(a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title;

    (B) there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party; and

    (C) the proposed minimization procedures with respect to such surveillance meet the definition of minimization procedures under section 1801(h) of this title; and if the Attorney General reports such minimization procedures and any changes thereto to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence at least thirty days prior to their effective date, unless the Attorney General determines immediate action is required and notifies the committees immediately of such minimization procedures and the reason for their becoming effective immediately.

    While (B) seems to contradict the underlying permissive nature of Section 1802 as it involves a United States person, what the Snowden affair has demonstrated all too clearly, is how frequently the NSA and FISA court would make US citizens collateral damage. To be sure, many pointed out the fact that Fox News correspondent James Rosen was notoriously wiretapped in 2013 when the DOJ was investigating government leaks. The Associated Press was also infamously wiretapped in relation to the same investigation.

    As pertains to Trump, the Guardian reported as much in early January, when news of the alleged anti-Trump dossier by former UK spy Chris Steele broke in January:

    The Guardian has learned that the FBI applied for a warrant from the foreign intelligence surveillance (Fisa) court over the summer in order to monitor four members of the Trump team suspected of irregular contacts with Russian officials. The Fisa court turned down the application asking FBI counter-intelligence investigators to narrow its focus. According to one report, the FBI was finally granted a warrant in October, but that has not been confirmed, and it is not clear whether any warrant led to a full investigation.

    Furthermore, while most Democrats - not to mention former president Obama himself - have been harshly critical of Trump's comments, some such as former Obama speechwriter Jon Favreau was quite clear in his warning to reporters that Obama did not say there was no wiretapping, effectively confirming it:

    I'd be careful about reporting that Obama said there was no wiretapping. Statement just said that neither he nor the WH ordered it.

    - Jon Favreau (@jonfavs) March 4, 2017

    Favreau also urged his twitter followers to read a thread that explicitly suggested the prior existence of FISA-endorsed wiretaps:

    Ok you definitely need to read this thread https://t.co/W7CkXjV40f

    - Jon Favreau (@jonfavs) March 4, 2017

    Additionally, Philip Rucker, the WaPo's White House bureau chief echoed Favreau's caveat, namely that the Obama spokesman's statement does not deny the existence of wiretaps on Trump Tower, only that Obama himself and the Obama White House did not approve them if they did exist.

    The Obama statement does not say there was no federal wire tapping of Trump Tower. It only says Obama and White House didn't order it.

    - Philip Rucker (@PhilipRucker) March 4, 2017

    Further implying the existence of such a wiretap was David Axelrod, who tweeted today that that such a wiretap could exist but would have "been OK'ed only for a a reason."

    If there were the wiretap @realDonaldTrump loudly alleges, such an extraordinary warrant would only have been OKed by a court for a reason.

    - David Axelrod (@davidaxelrod) March 4, 2017

    Yet ironically, it was none other than the Trump administration which just earlier this week announced it supports the renewal of spy law which incorporates the FISA court, without reforms :

    "the Trump administration does not want to reform an internet surveillance law to address privacy concerns, a White House official told Reuters on Wednesday, saying it is needed to protect national security. The announcement could put President Donald Trump on a collision course with Congress, where some Republicans and Democrats have advocated curtailing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, parts of which are due to expire at the end of the year."

    "We support the clean reauthorization and the administration believes it's necessary to protect the security of the nation," the official said on condition of anonymity.

    The FISA law has been criticized by privacy and civil liberties advocates as allowing broad, intrusive spying. It gained renewed attention following the 2013 disclosures by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden that the agency carried out widespread monitoring of emails and other electronic communications.

    In any event, the bottom line here appears to be that with his tweet, Trump has opened a can of worms with two possible outcomes: either the wiretaps exist as Trump has suggested, and the president will use them to attack both the Obama administration and the media for political overreach; or, there were no wiretaps, which as Matthew Boyle writes , would suggest the previous administration had no reason to suspect Trump colluded with a foreign government.

    Senator Ben Sasse said as much in his statement issued earlier today:

    The President today made some very serious allegations, and the informed citizens that a republic requires deserve more information. If there were wiretaps of then-candidate Trump's organization or campaign, then it was either with FISA Court authorization or without such authorization. If without, the President should explain what sort of wiretap it was and how he knows this. It is possible that he was illegally tapped. On the other hand, if it was with a legal FISA Court order, then an application for surveillance exists that the Court found credible.

    But what is perhaps most important, is that we may know soon enough. As the NYT reported on Saturday afternoon , a senior White House official said that Donald F. McGahn II, the president's chief counsel, was working on Saturday to secure access to what the official described as a document issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court authorizing surveillance of Mr. Trump and his associates.

    If and when such a document is made public - assuming it exists of course - it would be Trump, once again, that gets the last laugh.

    [Mar 04, 2017] Obama Slams False Trump Accusation, Says Never Ordered Wiretapping

    Notable quotes:
    "... Moments ago, Barack Obama through his spokesman Kevin Lewis denied Trump's accusation that he had ordered the Trump Tower wiretapped, saying neither he nor any member of the Obama White House, " ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen. Any suggestion otherwise is simply false ." ..."
    "... Yet while the carefully-worded statement, an exercise in semantics, claims Obama did not himself, or through members of his White House team, order a potential wiretapping, it does not deny an actual wiretapping of Trump (or Trump Tower), which as some have speculated in the past , did in fact take place after a FISA Court granted surveillance of Trump over accusations of Russian interference. It also does not preclude the FBI - which is the entity that would most likely have implemented such a wiretap - from having given the order. ..."
    "... The Guardian has learned that the FBI applied for a warrant from the foreign intelligence surveillance (Fisa) court over the summer in order to monitor four members of the Trump team suspected of irregular contacts with Russian officials. ..."
    "... For the definitive answer, we suggest Trump ask Comey whether or not his building was being tapped in the days prior to the election. ..."
    "... Analyzing Obama's own statements over the years on the illegal wiretappings, one does not come to the conclusion that he can be trusted ..."
    "... Of course Obama himself did not give the order It's someone in his administration that would have ordered it, which he commanded over. His wordsmithing is so tiresome. ..."
    "... Obama, "The Russians did it" ..."
    "... He says of course: "I am not a crook " R. Nixon. Give me a break the dickhead even tapped Angela Merkel's phone and half of Europe. ..."
    Mar 04, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
    Moments ago, Barack Obama through his spokesman Kevin Lewis denied Trump's accusation that he had ordered the Trump Tower wiretapped, saying neither he nor any member of the Obama White House, " ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen. Any suggestion otherwise is simply false ."

    Follows the statement from Kevin Lewis, spokesman to former president Barack Obama

    "A cardinal rule of the Obama Administration was that no White House official ever interfered with any independent investigation led by the Department of Justice. As part of that practice, neither President Obama nor any White House official ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen. Any suggestion otherwise is simply false."

    MORE: Spokesperson for former Pres. Obama responds to Trump wiretap allegation, calls it "simply false." https://t.co/cXyQHeSvNy pic.twitter.com/se2gno6wxz

    - ABC News (@ABC) March 4, 2017

    Yet while the carefully-worded statement, an exercise in semantics, claims Obama did not himself, or through members of his White House team, order a potential wiretapping, it does not deny an actual wiretapping of Trump (or Trump Tower), which as some have speculated in the past , did in fact take place after a FISA Court granted surveillance of Trump over accusations of Russian interference. It also does not preclude the FBI - which is the entity that would most likely have implemented such a wiretap - from having given the order.

    As a reminder, here is what the Guardian reported in early January :

    The Guardian has learned that the FBI applied for a warrant from the foreign intelligence surveillance (Fisa) court over the summer in order to monitor four members of the Trump team suspected of irregular contacts with Russian officials. The Fisa court turned down the application asking FBI counter-intelligence investigators to narrow its focus. According to one report, the FBI was finally granted a warrant in October, but that has not been confirmed, and it is not clear whether any warrant led to a full investigation.

    For the definitive answer, we suggest Trump ask Comey whether or not his building was being tapped in the days prior to the election.

    Belrev , Mar 4, 2017 1:13 PM

    Analyzing Obama's own statements over the years on the illegal wiretappings, one does not come to the conclusion that he can be trusted

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fap41cMdhcc

    wildbad -> Belrev , Mar 4, 2017 1:13 PM

    end the tsa bs https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/limit-and-reduce-invasive-and-...

    Chris Dakota -> wildbad , Mar 4, 2017 1:15 PM

    Yeah you did you community agitator, fire starter, treasonous snake.

    thesonandheir -> Chris Dakota , Mar 4, 2017 1:20 PM

    Just investigate Pizzagate fully and we'll see if O'birdbath is lying or not.

    The_Juggernaut -> thesonandheir , Mar 4, 2017 1:23 PM

    You have to appreciate the way he puts things out there that cause them to issue carefully worded denials that sound more like confessions than anything else.

    auricle -> The_Juggernaut , Mar 4, 2017 1:29 PM

    Of course Obama himself did not give the order It's someone in his administration that would have ordered it, which he commanded over. His wordsmithing is so tiresome.

    eatthebanksters -> auricle , Mar 4, 2017 1:34 PM

    We're goin to find out soon...who asked for the FISA warrant?

    BaBaBouy -> eatthebanksters , Mar 4, 2017 1:36 PM

    "NEVER Ordered It" So that means It Was Done, under Obama Regime???

    BaBaBouy -> BaBaBouy , Mar 4, 2017 1:43 PM

    How about that "Meeting" Between Billy and the Lorretta, on the tarmac??? The "How are the kidz, Lorretta" Meeting??? LOL...

    remain calm -> BaBaBouy , Mar 4, 2017 1:51 PM

    Obama, "The Russians did it"

    Billy the Poet -> remain calm , Mar 4, 2017 1:54 PM

    neither he nor any member of the Obama White House, "ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen. Any suggestion otherwise is simply false."

    Obama has taken credit for ordering the drone strike which killed US citizen Anwar al-Awlaki. Now we are being told that no surveillance preceded that strike. Obama apparently ordered the strike and a drone was launched blindly into the heavens but it still managed to find and destroy al-Awlaki entirely by chance.

    Sounds like very fake news to me.

    Winston Churchill -> Billy the Poet , Mar 4, 2017 2:01 PM

    Only a smidgeon of a lie.

    FreddieX -> Winston Churchill , Mar 4, 2017 2:51 PM

    Stay sane: clear logic:

    http://theduran.com/obama-replies-trumps-wiretap-charge/ " This statement is classic Obama. It appears on its face to be clear and complete, but in reality it is nothing of the sort. .. We are at a very early stage in this matter. There are multiple investigations underway, some launched by the outgoing Obama administration against the incoming Trump administration, and some launched by the current Trump administration against the preceding Obama administration. ... Obama's highly legalistic statement today – which reads very much like a defence statement – however gives a good flavour of the direction some of these inquiries are taking. " ...

    " The statement hints than any order to wiretap ... was the work of officials in the Justice Department ... This too is almost certainly true. However it neglects to say that some of these officials were people whom Obama himself appointed, and who were therefore part of his administration. "

    Perhaps Mr. Kadzik http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-31/doj-tells-congress-it-will-work...

    Jim in MN -> FreddieX , Mar 4, 2017 4:27 PM

    Simpler even then that: If he didn't ORDER then he must have APPROVED. If he didn't APPROVE what does that say? And if he did?

    monad -> Jim in MN , Mar 4, 2017 5:36 PM

    Or he found out about it when his owners told him to make a statement & provide the msm more distraction from the great things Trump is already accomplishing in this his 7th week on the job , despite the backstabbing congress, senate, spooks, crisis actors, paid protestors and moochers.

    The fanatics who did this are the the same fanatics who bombed London mass transit during a drill, and conducted the 911 heist and mass execution during a drill.

    cowdiddly -> Jim in MN , Mar 4, 2017 5:54 PM

    He says of course: "I am not a crook " R. Nixon. Give me a break the dickhead even tapped Angela Merkel's phone and half of Europe.

    fockewulf190 -> FreddieX , Mar 4, 2017 4:54 PM

    If that would have been a statement straight from Obama, he would have sounded like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poz6W0znOfk

    A bit old, but true nonetheless.

    eatthebanksters -> FreddieX , Mar 4, 2017 6:06 PM

    Is anyone naive enough to think that Loretta Lynch and Obama were unaware that the Republican candidate for POTUS was being wiretapped the month before the actual election?

    This is Hillary like legal speak where Obozo is trying to keep his neck out of a legal sling. Sorry...Nixon tried that.

    SWRichmond -> Winston Churchill , Mar 4, 2017 2:54 PM

    "A cardinal rule of the Obama Administration was that no White House official ever interfered with any independent investigation led by the Department of Justice. As part of that practice, neither President Obama nor any White House official ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen. Any suggestion otherwise is simply false

    Taqqiya

    fleur de lis -> SWRichmond , Mar 4, 2017 3:56 PM

    When Obama says he did not order the wiretapping, he is probably telling the truth. Obama had no power at all -- he took the position knowing that he was only a cat's paw. He was content to be a facade and he knew it, and so did his wife. He was not smart enough to be a President, but he was egotistical enough to take the position and all the bennies in exchange for taking orders from his handlers without question.

    • Does anyone really think he was smart enough to plan all the Middle East attacks for 8 years? Of course not -- the logistical planning for those events were far beyond his intelligence.
    • For that matter, has anyone seen his Columbia and Harvard transcripts? Of course not -- he was a dummy and a fake and the records would show that.
    • He was editor of the HLR but has anyone seen a sample of his writing? Of course not -- if it exists at all it is unimpressive.
    • It is doubtful that the Deep State would allow Obama access to such critical wiretapping. That sort of power is reserved for our tax funded, invisible slavemasters.
    xythras -> fleur de lis , Mar 4, 2017 4:24 PM

    Meanwhile the hypocritical left dares to compare the two email situations Photo of Clinton Reading about Pence's Email Scandal Goes Viral

    http://dailywesterner.com/news/2017-03-04/photo-of-clinton-reading-about...

    [Feb 26, 2017] Israel attack on Syrian forces might be a provocative effort and if its jets have been attacked by Syrian or Russian forces, which would allow Israel to use this as a causus belli to attempt to seize more land from Syria and Lebanon in the name of national security

    Notable quotes:
    "... Russia isn't in Syria to solve the world's problems. It is there to destroy the takfiris before they can be unleashed on Russian territory. It is also there to aid an ally. It is doing this with minimal forces. The S-400 systems are there to defend Russian assets, no more. Shooting down an Israeli aircraft, which caused minimal damage, would lead to unpredictable consequences and distractions from the prime task. ..."
    "... Let's be clear that "islamic" means UK spookie. Muslim Brotherhood, the house of Saud, and the rest of it are Anglo-Zionist creatures. Never forget. ..."
    "... If Assad "welcomes US troops to fight ISIS" (they're already there...illegally...and ISIS is a US creation as he well knows) he is a fool or someone is putting words in his mouth or, possibly, he was misquoted. ..."
    "... One needs only look at Libya's fate to see what happens to naive leaders who trust the US and assume its leaders and corporate "partners" are acting in good faith. Rule #1 Never EVER trust the USG and its mouthpieces. ..."
    "... These kind of provocative operations have a very long history; they're been continually used by various actors in the Deep State to sabotage diplomatic peace efforts - from the Eisenhower era (the U2 flights taking place without Eisenhower's approval) to Ashton Carter's attack on Syrian government forces in Deir-Ezzor, the signature is pretty obvious. ..."
    Feb 26, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Julian | Feb 22, 2017 2:12:18 AM | 10

    Here we go yet again........

    An Israeli military plane carried out an airstrike on the Syrian government forces stationed in the western countryside of Damascus near the Lebanese border.

    https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201702221050928975-israeli-plane-attacks-syrian-army/

    jfl | Feb 22, 2017 7:55:13 AM | 31
    Israeli warplanes bombard military positions outside Damascus: Reports

    A Syrian military source, speaking on condition of anonymity, said an Israeli fighter jet crossed into Syria's airspace at around 3 a.m. local time (0100 GMT) on Wednesday after circling the skies of Lebanon's Beqaa Valley and flying above the eastern city of Baalbek, al-Masdar News reported.

    i wonder if there really are 's-400' anti-aircraft defensees in syria. and if there are, i wonder if they really work.

    i remember paveway explaining to me, the last time the israelis bombed syria, that in fact the airplane responsible was flying over israel and had fired a cruise missile, or someother type of 'standoff' weapon, across the border at that time.

    the reasoning for not responding to that attack was said to be that the defensive weapon was much too expensive to waste on the missile, and that shooting down the plane over israel that actually launched the attack ... just couldn't be done.

    that's obviously so emboldened the israelis that they now fly right into syrian airspace, like they own it. in fact they do.

    the russian airforce is so busy acting as the turkish airforce over the portion of syria that erdogan has laid claim to that they cannot be bothered to defend hezbollah .., who've been doing a lot of the heavy lifting on the ground in syria.

    i wonder if russia and tee-rump are coming to an understanding ... Trump Makes Good On Promise, Tells CIA To Stop Arming So-Called "Moderate" Rebels And Other Terrorists Groups In Syria -- .

    tee-rump begins to end cia support of al-cia-duh in syria in return for russia's looking the other way when israel kills syria's allies and destroys their armory?

    Yonatan | Feb 22, 2017 8:19:32 AM | 32
    jfl @31

    Russia isn't in Syria to solve the world's problems. It is there to destroy the takfiris before they can be unleashed on Russian territory. It is also there to aid an ally. It is doing this with minimal forces. The S-400 systems are there to defend Russian assets, no more. Shooting down an Israeli aircraft, which caused minimal damage, would lead to unpredictable consequences and distractions from the prime task.

    Circe | Feb 22, 2017 1:46:11 PM | 71
    Apparently, Defense is still seriously considering sending troops into Syria on the pretext of fighting ISIS. When asked about this at the press briefing today, Spicer, immediately brought up the fact that everyone knows Trump is considering "safe harbors" (he expressed it that way first) or safe zones in the context of this troop deployment issue. So was this a slip up? He then said he would get back to report further on the issue.

    So, what happened to Syrian sovereignty and International Law? What's Trump up to? So now that Israel again bombed a Syrian base, is the U.S. going to join in this breach of sovereignty as well?

    There's only one country that got permission to operate inside Syria militarily; that's Russia. So now that Putin has remained silent on Israel bombing Syrian bases, will he remain silent when the U.S. joins in on the action?

    I believe the last time Israel and the U.S. breached the sovereignty of a country together to conduct military agression was in Lebanon, and look what happened there!

    SmoothieX12 | Feb 22, 2017 2:11:27 PM | 73
    @71
    So, what happened to Syrian sovereignty and International Law? What's Trump up to?

    He is up to claiming (at least some) credit for defeating ISIS. Considering US' track record of the last 16+ years in military (and geopolitical) affairs this is not an unreasonable thing to do from American point of view.

    nobody | Feb 22, 2017 2:22:34 PM | 76

    Let's be clear that "islamic" means UK spookie. Muslim Brotherhood, the house of Saud, and the rest of it are Anglo-Zionist creatures. Never forget.
    Temporarily Sane | Feb 22, 2017 3:01:22 PM | 81
    @75 nobody

    Assad also made a point a few weeks ago to single out Iran, not Russia, as Syria's closest partner in its ongoing fight against Salafist/Wahhabi mercenaries.

    Assad and Iran have always said dividing Syria is not an option; Russia has stated otherwise. Putin has allowed Turkish troops into Syria. Why? How does this sit with Iran and the Syrian government?

    If Assad "welcomes US troops to fight ISIS" (they're already there...illegally...and ISIS is a US creation as he well knows) he is a fool or someone is putting words in his mouth or, possibly, he was misquoted.

    One needs only look at Libya's fate to see what happens to naive leaders who trust the US and assume its leaders and corporate "partners" are acting in good faith. Rule #1 Never EVER trust the USG and its mouthpieces.

    nonsense factory | Feb 22, 2017 5:43:00 PM | 98
    Note on the Israeli attacks on Syrian government forces and the lack of response from Syria or Russia:

    This is called a provocative effort; what Israel desires above all else is to have its jets attacked by Syrian or Russian forces, which would allow Israel to use this as a causus belli to attempt to seize more land from Syria and Lebanon in the name of national security.

    Turkey's shoot-down of a Russian jet was a very similiar operation, aimed at drawing in NATO to attack Syria (this was pre-coup effort, however, before Russia hit the economic sanctions button on Turkey).

    These kind of provocative operations have a very long history; they're been continually used by various actors in the Deep State to sabotage diplomatic peace efforts - from the Eisenhower era (the U2 flights taking place without Eisenhower's approval) to Ashton Carter's attack on Syrian government forces in Deir-Ezzor, the signature is pretty obvious.

    Another point: Clinton would have had a far easier time carrying out this agenda than anyone in the Trump administration will. And this is really all about one thing: preserving that massive $600 billion a year military-industrial budget and preventing a much-needed 50% cut, with the other $300 billion directed mainly to domestic infrastructure problems, i.e. roads, bridges, dams, public buildings, water supply systems, etc. etc. etc. Until that's done, the United States will continue to look more and more like the corrupt bloated Soviet Union of the Brezhnev era, regardless of who sits in the Oval Office.

    [Feb 26, 2017] The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity: US Ambassador to UN Nikki Haley We Must Sanction Assad Over Chemical Weapons by Daniel McAdams

    Feb 24, 2017 | ronpaulinstitute.org
    US Ambassador to UN Nikki Haley: We Must Sanction Assad Over Chemical Weapons!

    undefined

    Recently, we had a look at the ways President Trump's Ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, is making her predecessor, "humanitarian bomber" Samantha Power, look like a model diplomat by comparison. It turns out Haley's ghastly performance at the UN thus far is no fluke. Each time she opens her mouth she spews not the kind of foreign policy that President Trump campaigned on, but rather the boot-in-the-face know-nothingness that we have grown accustomed to in recent years.

    In the latest "Haley Alert," the Ambassador is furious over a Russia-threatened veto of a UN Security Council resolution offered by the US, UK, and France to impose new sanctions on the Syrian government over unproven allegations that Syria used chemical weapons against its own population.

    Yes, under Ambassador Haley we have entered a time machine back to 2013, where the US is ready to deploy its entire diplomatic (and perhaps military) arsenal against the one government in the Middle East actually fighting President Trump's sworn enemies: ISIS and al-Qaeda.

    President Trump, in one of his first interviews after the November election, starkly contrasted his position with those both of the outgoing Obama Administration and his defeated opponent, Hillary Clinton:

    I've had an opposite view of many people regarding Syria. ...My attitude was you're fighting Syria, Syria is fighting ISIS, and you have to get rid of ISIS. Russia is now totally aligned with Syria, and now you have Iran, which is becoming powerful, because of us, is aligned with Syria... Now we're backing rebels against Syria, and we have no idea who these people are.
    His employee, the US Ambassador to the UN, clearly does not share her boss's "opposite view" on Syria. And she is not afraid to contradict her boss's position on a regular basis. Today the US Mission to the UN released Ambassador Haley's remarks condemning the threatened Russian veto of new sanctions against Syria, and her comments do not in any way suggest a diplomat remotely well-informed about the complex matters at hand:
    I think what we saw in there was pretty amazing, because you had unity in the fact that we needed to be concerned about chemical weapons being used in Syria. You had an overwhelming vote to say we need an investigative mechanism that would prove that these chemical weapons were being done by the Syrian regime. Now you've got the results that have come out, and people don't like what the results are. It is ridiculous. How much longer is Russia going to continue to babysit and make excuses for the Syrian regime? People have died by being suffocated to death. That's barbaric.

    So what we're going to do is – we were given all these reasons on why we shouldn't propose the resolution. We were given all these reasons on why the timing was wrong. That is exactly why the timing is right. That is exactly why this resolution needs to happen. Whether people are going to veto it or not, you are either for chemical weapons or you're against it. People died because of this, and the United States isn't going to be quiet. Thank you.

    Let's unpack this head-scratcher of a statement. First off, "we need an investigative mechanism that would prove that these chemical weapons were being done by the Syrian regime." So she is stating that there must be an investigation to prove what she has pre-determined to be true before the investigation took place? Does that sound like "innocent until proven guilty"? Or does it sound like Hoxha-era revolutionary justice? "We must have a trial to prove comrade X guilty so we can execute him!"

    And this from Haley: "How much longer is Russia going to continue to babysit and make excuses for the Syrian regime?"

    Ms. Ambassador: Do you mean the regime that just liberated Aleppo from its murderous occupation by al-Qaeda? You know, those guys who attacked the US on 9/11?

    If Assad is using chemical weapons against his own people (Why? Presumably for fun?) then why once Aleppo was cleansed of the al-Qaeda occupiers have former residents flocked to return to an Aleppo under Assad's control? Do they enjoy being gassed?

    US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley is an absolute train wreck. She embodies the worst traits of her predecessors with a much lower level of understanding of foreign affairs or diplomacy. Will President Trump recognize his mistake in appointing her to represent the US at the UN and replace her with someone who will actually carry out his foreign policy? Or was he simply lying when he said he had an "opposite view" from the conventional Washington wisdom on Syria (and Russia as well)?


    Copyright © 2017 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.
    Please donate to the Ron Paul Institute

    [Feb 20, 2017] Trump Chooses General McMaster as National Security Adviser

    Feb 20, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
    Fred C. Dobbs : , February 20, 2017 at 12:28 PM
    Trump Chooses H.R. McMaster as National
    Security Adviser https://nyti.ms/2lo3mNK
    NYT - PETER BAKER - February 20, 2017

    WASHINGTON - President Trump picked Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, a widely respected military strategist, as his new national security adviser on Monday, calling him "a man of tremendous talent and tremendous experience."

    Mr. Trump made the announcement at his Mar-a-Lago getaway in Palm Beach, Fla., where he has been interviewing candidates to replace Michael T. Flynn, who was forced out after withholding information from Vice President Mike Pence about a call with Russia's ambassador.

    The choice continued Mr. Trump's reliance on high-ranking military officers to advise him on national security. Mr. Flynn was a retired three-star general and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis is a retired four-star general. His first choice to replace Mr. Flynn, who turned the job down, and two other finalists were current or former senior officers as well.

    Shortly before announcing his appointment, Mr. Trump wrote on Twitter: "Meeting with Generals at Mar-a-Lago in Florida. Very interesting!"

    General McMaster is seen as one of the Army's leading intellectuals, first making a name for himself with a searing critique of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for their performance during the Vietnam War and later criticizing the way President George W. Bush's administration went to war in Iraq.

    As a commander, he was credited with demonstrating how a different counterterrorism strategy could defeat insurgents in Iraq, providing the basis for the change in approach that Gen. David H. Petraeus adopted to shift momentum in a war that the United States was on the verge of losing.

    ilsm -> Fred C. Dobbs... , February 20, 2017 at 01:38 PM
    He is an armor guy with a Ranger tab!

    Passed over for Brigadier twice but made it by the board run by Petraeus who looked for "combat leaders".

    [Feb 19, 2017] The swamp fights back

    The "neoliberal establishment" (aka Washington Swamp) is deeply unpopular with American people. Trump is not that popular, but he definitely less unpopular. Such statements s of "the national media is the enemy" would be unthinkable a decade or two ago.
    Notable quotes:
    "... The National Media is the enemy. They are minor birds, repeaters of what the establishment wants parroted. They can no longer be considered American citizen friendly. They are indeed part of the Swamp to be drained. ..."
    Feb 19, 2017 | www.youtube.com
    Barbara waters 2 days ago (edited)

    The National Media is the enemy. They are minor birds, repeaters of what the establishment wants parroted. They can no longer be considered American citizen friendly. They are indeed part of the Swamp to be drained.

    Like former, despise current president matters not. We are still a nation of laws. The people have spoken. We want the laws followed period. CNN, MSNBC, and others who continue to go after our president will be met with an unbridled wave of conservative determination to restore law and order.

    [Jan 29, 2017] How Obama Framed Trump with Faux Mortgage Insurance Rate Decrease

    Notable quotes:
    "... By Naked Capitalism reader aliteralmind, aka Jeff Epstein. Jeff, a progressive activist and journalist, was one of only around forty candidates in the county to be personally endorsed by Bernie Sanders, and was a pledged delegate for him at the DNC. Jeff is also currently starring in Feel The Bern-The Musical , which will very soon be performed in New York. Originally posted on Citizens' Media TV ..."
    "... "to be in the tank is to be "lovingly enthralled; foolishly enraptured; passionately bedazzled"" ..."
    "... Today, the President announced a major new step that his Administration is taking to make mortgages more affordable and accessible for creditworthy families. ..."
    Jan 29, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
    Posted on January 28, 2017 by Yves Smith By Naked Capitalism reader aliteralmind, aka Jeff Epstein. Jeff, a progressive activist and journalist, was one of only around forty candidates in the county to be personally endorsed by Bernie Sanders, and was a pledged delegate for him at the DNC. Jeff is also currently starring in Feel The Bern-The Musical , which will very soon be performed in New York. Originally posted on Citizens' Media TV

    (This is my first issue-opinion video. With thanks especially to Adryenn Ashley and Jimmy Dore for the inspiration. All sources and supporting evidence is below.) Within hours of becoming the 45th President of the United States , one of Donald Trump's first orders of business was to sign an executive order to " raise mortgage insurance rates " on millions of homeowners , by around $500 a year.

    But while it is technically true that Trump did sign the order reversing the decrease, it is a misleading picture. This story is more a negative reflection on President Obama than it is on Trump.

    A Brief Tutorial From Someone Who Is Learning the Subject Right Along With You

    Generally speaking, if you are a first time homebuyer and purchase a house with a down payment of less than 20% of the home's worth, you are required to purchase mortgage insurance. This insurance is to protect the the lender in case you default on your payments.

    Let's use the example of a $200,000 home with a $10,000 (5%) down payment. So you need to borrow $190,000.

    $200,000 * .05 = $10,000
    
    $200,000 - $10,000 = $190,000
    

    Since January 2015 , the upfront MIP ( mortgage insurance premium ) has been 1.75%, with the annual premium at .8%. So when you sign the mortgage, you pay the upfront premium of $3,325.

    $190,000 * .0175 = $3,325
    

    And then every year, you pay the annual premium of $1,520.

    $190,000 * .008 = $1,520
    

    As you pay off your principal, this number goes down.

    The Obama administration's reduction of the annual premium rate is .25 points (the upfront premium remains unchanged). So with the same loan above, your annual premium would instead be $1,045.

    .008 - .0025 = .0055
    
    $190,000 * .0055 = $1,045
    

    That's a savings of $475 a year, or about $40 a month.

    $1,520 - $1,045 = $475
    
    $475 / 12 months = $39.59
    

    Backlash Against Trump

    The criticism of Trump for this move has been unrelenting and, at least in my internet bubble, unanimous. I have not seen any criticism of the Obama administration at all; including by, disappointingly, one of my primary sources of news, The Young Turks. (Can't find the video at the moment, but they briefly criticized Trump for the move, without looking further into the issue.)

    As reported by USA Today :

    Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said Friday that Trump's words in his inaugural speech "ring hollow" following the mortgage premium action.

    "In one of his first acts as president, President Trump made it harder for Americans to afford a mortgage," he said. "What a terrible thing to do to homeowners. Actions speak louder than words."

    As reported by Bloomberg :

    "This action is completely out of alignment with President Trump's words about having the government work for the people," said John Taylor, president of the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, through a spokesman. "Exactly how does raising the cost of buying a home help average people?"

    Sarah Edelman, director of housing policy for the left-leaning Center for American Progress, in an e-mail wrote, "On Day 1, the president has turned his back on middle-class families - this decision effectively takes $500 out of the pocketbooks of families that were planning to buy a home in 2017. This is not the way to build a strong economy."

    And one of the many strong criticisms as documented by Common Dreams :

    "Donald Trump's inaugural speech proclaimed he will govern for the people, instead of the political elite," [Liz Ryan Murray, policy director for national grassroots advocacy group People's Action] said. "But minutes after giving this speech, he gave Wall Street a big gift at the expense of everyday people. Trump may talk a populist game, but policies like this make life better for hedge fund managers and big bankers like his nominee for Treasury, Steven Mnuchin, not for everyday people."

    The Full Picture

    To say that Trump took savings away from the neediest of homebuyers is not true, because homebuyers never had the savings to begin with. The rate reduction was not announced until January 9 of this year–11 days before the end of Obama's eight year term–and was not set to take effect until January 27, a full week after Trump was sworn in.

    (Here's the PDF from the FHA, of Trump's suspension announcement .)

    In addition, Obama's reduction decision seems to have been made without any advance notice or even a projection document justifying the decrease. As I understand it , both of these things are unusual with a change of this magnitude.

    Finally, with the announcement made little more than a week before the new administration was to be sworn in, and despite Trump being entirely responsible for implementing this change, the incoming administration was not consulted.

    Now that the timing is clear, Time Magazine's coverage is particularly misleading:

    Trump, who claimed a populist mantle in his first speech as a president, signed the executive order less than an hour after leaving the inaugural stage. It reverses an Obama-era policy.

    "Obama-era policy" implies the reduction was made long ago, and has been in force for much of that time.


    (Rates can't be raised if they were never lowered.)

    Conclusion: It Was a Set Up

    Finally. After eight years of hard work and multiple requests, your boss approaches you on a Monday morning and says, "Good news! Starting in two weeks, I'm giving you a raise. Congratulations."

    Two days later, you find out that he decided to leave the company months ago, and his final day is Friday. Your raise doesn't start until a week after that.

    You ask him about your new boss. "Well, he's a pretty strict guy." He leans in, puts the back of his hand to the side of his mouth, lowers his voice, and continues, "Honesty, I hear he is a bit difficult to work with. Real penny pincher." He sits up, his voice back to its normal cadence, "But don't worry. I'm leaving a note on his desk telling him just how important this raise is to you and your family." He stands up and slaps you on the back as he walks away. "I'm sure he'll keep my word."

    If that were me, I would be upset at my new boss, but I would be furious at my old one. He had eight years to do something.

    This was nothing more than an opportunistic political maneuver by the outgoing president, to set the incoming president up for failure. All while pretending to care about American homeowners. If the President Obama really wanted to help Americans, he would've considered this move–or something similar–long ago. Instead, he told them he was giving them a gift and promised that it would be delivered by Trump, knowing full well that he would never follow through. Lower-income Americans were used as pawns in a cheap political game.

    Further confirming my theory, here is what was said when the reduction was originally announced :

    "The Trump administration would be accused on day one of raising mortgage costs for average Americans if it reverses the FHA move," analyst Jaret Seiberg, managing director at Cowen Group Inc., wrote in a note to clients. "Trump's career has been real estate. It would seem out of character for him to be aggressively negative on real estate in his first week in office." [ ]

    "I have no reason to believe this will be scaled back," [HUD Secretary Julian] Castro told reporters. The premium cut "offers a good benefit to hardworking American families out there at a time when interest rates might well continue to go up."

    It is not Trump's responsibility to keep the promises that Obama makes on his way out the door. It is Obama's responsibility to not promise what is not promiseable.

    There are so many things for progressives to criticize Trump about. This is not one of them.

    So Who Are We Fighting Anyway?

    To paraphrase Jimmy Dore , "The way to oppose Trump is to agree with him when he's right, and to fight him when he's wrong. Anything else delegitimizes you, especially in the eyes of his supporters."

    And again in another of his videos : "We don't need to unite against Trump. We need to unite against corruption and corporatism."

    If Democrats do something wrong, we need to fight them. If Trump does something wrong, we need to fight him. If Trump does something right, we need to stand with him.

    If we can't win with the truth, we don't deserve to win.

    39 0 10 0 1 This entry was posted in Banana republic , Banking industry , Credit markets , Dubious statistics , Guest Post , Media watch , Real estate , Regulations and regulators on January 28, 2017 by Yves Smith . Subscribe to Post Comments 93 comments Lambert Strether , January 28, 2017 at 6:06 am

    "If we can't win with the truth, we don't deserve to win."

    Let's get that tatooed on our foreheads.

    UserFriendly , January 28, 2017 at 7:21 am

    I agree with the sentiment but after watching the D party protest war under Bush, never talk about it under Obama, and then cheerlead for it with Hillary I don't think they actually stand for anything except identity politics.

    jgordon , January 28, 2017 at 7:47 am

    Right, they traded support for real issues for identity politics. Identity politics which is lovingly celebrated on TYT every day by the way. I'm not sure how or why anyone would go to that rancid cesspool of biased disinformation for news, but ok.

    Here is a litmus test: anyone who gave a pro forma endorsement of Hillary OK, understandable, and I can kind of tolerate that. But for the others who were in the tank for Hillary like TYT–all except for Jimmy Dore–those people are persona non grata from here out.

    aliteralmind , January 28, 2017 at 8:35 am

    Totally disagree that TYT was in the tank for Hillary. Have watched these guys every day since around May. They're all pro-Bernie. They clearly wanted Hillary over Trump during the general (and I did too, but that's waaaaaay not to say I'm pro-Hillary), but I don't think "in the tank for Hillary" is a fair characterization for any of them.

    To me, the best evidence is that I have not witnessed Jimmy Dore being forced to tone his admittedly louder and more vehement anti-Hillary ranting down on any show, including the main show. They even gave him his own show around the end of the primaries where he gleefully goes off (Aggressive Progressives).

    As an aside, The Jimmy Dore Show seems fresher than Aggressive Progressives, I believe because he rehearses the bits on own show first. On TJDS, he is frequently good, and consistently on fire.

    Naked Cap, the entire TYT network, Glenn Greenwald, Le Show, and of course, Bernie Sanders, are among my most important truth tellers.

    Jerry Denim , January 28, 2017 at 2:00 pm

    Sorry for being so clueless, but "TYT", "TJDS" ?

    Anyone care to fill me in on this nomenclature?

    Thanks!

    oh , January 28, 2017 at 2:26 pm

    TYT – The Young Turks
    TJDS – The Jimmy Dore Show

    aliteralmind , January 28, 2017 at 2:27 pm

    The Young Turks and The Jimmy Dore Show. YouTube shows.

    oh , January 28, 2017 at 2:27 pm

    If you voted for Hillary then you were in the tank for her. There's no such thing as the lesser of the two evils. Sorry! Same goes for TYT.

    dcrane , January 28, 2017 at 3:04 pm

    A relevant definition of "in the tank" from this NY Times Magazine article:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/magazine/20wwln-safire-t.html

    "to be in the tank is to be "lovingly enthralled; foolishly enraptured; passionately bedazzled""

    Yves Smith Post author , January 28, 2017 at 4:59 pm

    It's not that clear cut. For instance, if you are a person of color, there was good reason to be plenty worried about Trump. Violence against immigrants picked up big time in the UK after Brexit, so there's a close parallel. And his appointment of Jeff Sessions as AG is hardly encouraging.

    Brian Daly , January 28, 2017 at 7:43 pm

    But if you're White, you have no good reason to be worried about Trump? That's a rather shabby way to think about folks of all colors.

    Sorry to be snarky. It's just exasperating reading these attempts to define and claim moral purity. In a complex and compromised world.

    integer , January 28, 2017 at 10:17 pm

    Did you see their election day coverage? Here are the highlights: TYT meltdown .
    My favorite part starts at 14m50s, when Kasparian rants about how she has no respect for women who didn't vote for Clinton and calls them "f@#king dumb". Solidarity!

    skippy , January 28, 2017 at 3:30 pm

    What the – ????? – like the right wing is not all about Identity Politics from an ethnic and religious foundations .. errrrrrr .

    Now that the Democrats embraced free market neoliberalism and went off the reservation with non traditional views wrt whom could join the club, being the only thing separating the two, its a bit wobbly to make out like there is some massive schism between the two.

    Disheveled . you can't have a "dominate" economic purview running the ship for 50ish years and then devolve into polemic political warfare ..

    Teejay , January 28, 2017 at 4:42 pm

    jgordon– Identity politics lovingly celebrated on that rancid cesspool of biased disinformation every day. Wow, takes my breath away. I've watched the TYT evening news for ~10 months virtually ever day and I'd guesstimate that I viewed 60 of their You Tube clips. Seems to me you're projecting. Given your strident certitude you should have no trouble provide any links that convinced you of your opinion, buttress your argument. The daily recurrences of "identity politics" put it out there. What convinced you they were "in the tank for Hillary"? It'd be hard to come up with a more inaccurate phrase. They full throatedly endorsed Sanders in the primaries. Cenk announced on the Monday (IIRC) before that he would be voting for HRC so how do you arrive at using "in the tank"? I found your remarks a "rancid cesspool of biased disinformation" long on emotion and very short on facts and evidence. That's why it seems like projection.

    Donald , January 28, 2017 at 10:00 am

    The US support for the Saudi war in Yemen is the most clearcut example of the moral worthlessness of many liberals. Actually, to their credit many Democrats and a few Republicans in Congress have opposed it, but it isn't a big cause because Obama was the one doing it. I imagine Trump will continue the policy, but don't expect anything to change– Trump can be opposed on other issues, so there will be no incentive to criticize him on an issue when the Trump people can say they are just continuing what Obama started.

    It is infuriating to hear liberals mindlessly repeating how disgraceful it is to see Trump cozying up with a dictator who has blood on his hands. It is the eternal sunshine of the spotless mind with these people.

    integer , January 28, 2017 at 10:33 pm

    This tweet (which I found @ActualFlatticus ) sums up the dynamic you are referring to perfectly imo.

    Jen , January 28, 2017 at 7:31 am

    Hear, hear! Thanks to NC that Common Dreams piece set off my bs detector immediately. There's a larger framing question we can add as well: who benefits from PMI?

    Using the example above, the home buyer pays an upfront premium of $3,300 which gives them no additional equity in their home, and somewhere between $1400 and $1500 a year for their premium, which also doesn't increase their equity. And, they continue to pay PMI until they achieve a loan to value ratio of 80%.

    So you buy your 200K house and dutifully pay your mortgage and PMI, which, btw, is also not tax deductible. You finally get to the point where through a combination of paying down your mortgage and increasing home prices, you have 80% equity in your home. Then the housing market tanks, and your 200K home is worth 170K. Your house is worth less than you paid for it and you're stuck paying $1500 a year in fees that don't reduce the amount of your mortgage, that you can't deduct from your taxes, and that you can't get rid of until you have 80% equity in your house.

    Sign me up!

    So who benefits? Certainly not the middle class would be homeowner, who not only gets screwed on the finances, but thanks to inflation of home prices, is getting screwed on the finances so that they can spend 200K on a crappy little ranch that's a 40 minute commute to their job one way on a good day.

    jgordon , January 28, 2017 at 7:56 am

    I also read about this on the Neocon/Neolib pro-war propaganda and general disinformation site for women and manginas Huffington Post, and I have to say that they were spinning really hard to make this look like something horrible Trump had done. But even in the extremely biased article I read they surreptitiously had to admit that this was a rule the Obama regime had put in place the midnight before Obama departed and that Trump was just reversing it. I read this before I knew anything else about t he subject and already had a pretty good idea of what was going on. But the above post helped a lot.

    Baby Gerald , January 28, 2017 at 8:45 am

    'the Neocon/Neolib pro-war propaganda and general disinformation site for women and manginas '

    Thank you, jgordon, for my first hearty laugh of the morning. I'm going to bookmark HuffPo just so I can re-title it this.

    Thanks again to NC for giving me a good link to use against the uninformed masses with whom I frequently have to deal.

    lyman alpha blob , January 28, 2017 at 1:12 pm

    Finance benefits – they get to keep promoting unaffordable mortgages.

    We refused to pay this BS insurance when purchasing our house, since it wan't insuring us against anything but rather we'd be paying for the bank's insurance against ourselves. Seems a lot more like a scam when you frame it that way, considering that the bank is lending you money they just created in the first place.

    Instead we saved up for another year or two until we had the whole 20% down required to avoid the insurance. I do understand that not everyone can afford 20% down depending on their job and where they live however if enough people refused both PMI and to purchase because they couldn't afford 20% down on an overpriced house (and we are in another bubble already, at least in my area), prices would drop until people could really afford them.

    Finance pretends they are just trying to make the American Dream available to everybody and too many have taken the bait to the point where finance as a percentage of GDP is near or at an all time high. The reality is that it's mostly just a scam to benefit finance and turn the population into debt slaves.

    Marcer69 , January 28, 2017 at 2:03 pm

    The home owner was able to purchase a home with less than 20% down. The PMI protects the lender during default, which is considerably higher when borrower has no skin in the game. Also, there are other options such as lender paid mi.

    Marcer69 , January 28, 2017 at 2:11 pm

    Additionally, most of you are confusing PMI – Private Mortgage Insurance- with FHA Upfront and MIP. With the latter being required regardless of the down payment. Secondly, the author was wrong on his facts. MIP is .85 @ 96.5% and .80 @ 30 years. 15 YR.terns offer reduced

    koki , January 28, 2017 at 10:50 pm

    PMI is another insurance company rip-off. Requiring people to escrow taxes with no interest paid to them by the banks using those funds is another rip-off.

    Roger Smith , January 28, 2017 at 10:40 am

    Agreed! Great article Jeff!

    aliteralmind , January 28, 2017 at 1:24 pm

    Thank you, Roger.

    nonsense factory , January 28, 2017 at 3:12 pm

    Trying to condense this whole article into a tweet is a challenge. . .

    "Obama cuts mortg. ins. rate for <20% down by 25 pts ($500 on $200k home) 11days prior to exit in con artist act sure to be dropped by Trump resulting in bogus media claims about Dem support for working class homeowners."

    Sondra , January 28, 2017 at 4:35 pm

    I agree. If we Progressives are to make any fwd movement, we can't beat up on DJT on any and everything. I am also cautioning friends & family to do so too. If cry "foul" everyou time he acts, that delegitimizes us.

    One recent example is the Trumps' arrivall @ wh b4 the inauguration. A snapshot shows DJT entering WH before the Obamas and Mrs. DJT. Once posted, goes viral and the talk is how ill-mannered, selfish is and how gracious the Obamas are for escorting the Mrs. after her "oafish" husband

    What is not shown is that DJT stops, comes back, and ushers the trio ahead of him. (which you can see on CSPAN ).
    When I saw the truth of what happened, after reading the negative comments, that worried me.

    We REALLY need to be more dis corning and employ critical thinking.

    Have to be careful not to be swayed by bullshit, no matter where it comes from.

    Quiet , January 28, 2017 at 7:01 am

    This explanation, while nice, only serves to make Trump look dumb. He jumped into an obvious trap. Rather than focus on how Obama tricked him, I'm a bit more concerned with what this portends for the future. See, if the president is unable, either for political or personal reasons, to avoid easy pitfalls like this, the odds of his success aren't very high.

    By the way, this reads like one more zing at Obama after he's already left the building. He earned most of the criticism he got, definitely from this site, but I feel like this is overdoing it. Criticizing him for not doing it sooner? Totally valid. Criticizing him for tripping up his successor? Petty.

    Pointing out the hypocrisy of Schumer and Kaine isn't part of that pettiness, though. That will be useful to remember as they cozy up to the Don and claim they're doing it to "help working families."

    aliteralmind , January 28, 2017 at 8:13 am

    I am admittedly a political newbie (Bernie woke me up never did anything before him but vote), and perhaps I am missing something, but I would be much less upset about it if he didn't screw middle class Americans in the process.

    That this is considered petty, by which I believe you mean normal politics, is exactly the problem.

    JTMcPhee , January 28, 2017 at 11:37 am

    "Screw middle class Americans" exactly how?

    The article makes it pretty clear, if I am reading it and the links and background right, that the screwing is principally in the form of requiring mortgage insurance to insure THE LENDER (or note holder or whoever MERS says gets paid on default). And that the "benefit" you may feel was (according to the spin) "taken away," was not even an "entitlement" because it would not have even been in effect until three weeks AFTER Obama (who has screwed the middle class and everyone else not in the Elite, nine ways from nowhere, for 8 years), and would not change the abuse that is PMI. And would not have "put dollars in the pockets of consumers" anyway for long after that. And how many homeowners are in the category?

    And banksters and mortgage brokers and the rest, gee whiz, we mopes are supposed to be concerned about THEM? About people whose paydays come from commissions on the dollar amount of the loans they write? Where all the "incentives," backed by the Real Economy that undergirds the ability of the US Government to do its fiat money forkovers to lenders that connived to change the policies against prudential lending to inflate the bubble that crashed and burned so many, are all once again being pointed in the direction of making Realtors ™(c)(BS) and lenders even richer on flips and flops and dumb transactions and churning?

    aliteralmind , January 28, 2017 at 12:08 pm

    He screwed the middle class by teasing them with a rate reduction, knowing that Trump was going to never let it happen.

    JTMcPhee , January 28, 2017 at 3:39 pm

    Just to clarify, and please anyone correct me, this was not any kind of "rate reduction." Rate reductions are what is supposed to happen under the various homeowner "they let you live in their house as long as you pay the rent mortgage" relief programs that never happened except to transfer more money to the Banksters. As in "reduce the unaffordable interest rate on oppressive mortgages." And "mark to market." And PRINCIPAL reductions as a result. And I do know the nominal difference between "title" states and "equitable interest" states - in either, the note holder effectively owns the house and property until the last nickel is paid, and as seen in the foreclosure racket, often not even the. And the "homeowner" gets to pay the taxes and maintain and maybe improve the place, to protect the note holder's equity "Fee simple absolute" is a comforting myth.

    As the article points out, the only potential reduction in money from borrower to lender/loan servicer (since the PMI underwriters seem to have such close financial ties to the insured note holder, there's but slim difference between the parts of the racket) might have been that tiny reduction in the insurance PREMIUM.

    Niggling over terms, maybe, but that's what "the law" is made up of.

    And apologies if I mistook the referent of "he" to be "Trump" rather than Obama and his clan - but nonetheless

    hemeantwell , January 28, 2017 at 8:54 am

    This excellent analytic walkthrough is a model for what must be done to ward off any form of "Obama 2!" as a political battle cry. It must be done relentlessly and without any consideration of being fair to that neoliberal schemer. The Clintonites will claw their way back from the edge of their political grave if they can draw on such sentiments.

    nonsense factory , January 28, 2017 at 3:20 pm

    Exactly, what we need is an FDR approach, which Bernie Sanders Democrats are far more likely to deliver. Instead of bailing out AIG and Goldman Sachs, FDR would have set up a Homeonwers Loan Corporation to buy up all the adjustable rate mortgages and convert them to fixed-rate mortgages, and instead of the zero-interest loans going to Wall Street from the Fed, they'd have gone to homeowners facing foreclosure, who could then stay in their homes and pay them off over time.

    But when Obama came in, he brought in Larry Summers and Tim Geithner, who preached about "not returning to the failed policied of FDR." What a pack of con artists. I prefer your honest hustlers to those guys (i.e. Team Trump, American Hustle 2.0 at least you know what to expect.)

    a different chris , January 28, 2017 at 2:20 pm

    >See, if the president is unable, either for political or personal reasons, to avoid easy pitfalls like this

    How is this a pitfall? Trump puts a hold on a "last minute Obama change", lets it sit for awhile, and then reinstates it or maybe even makes it better. Then Trump owns the reduction, not Obama.

    This isn't even one-dimensional chess.

    Jim Haygood , January 28, 2017 at 7:59 am

    This essay focuses on timing and tactics. Not analyzed is the essential question of What is the appropriate premium for mortgage insurance?

    It's an actuarial question based on prior loss experience. Real estate moves in long cycles. Each trough is different in depth.

    Such questions aside, HUD's annual mortgage insurance premium of 0.8% was in the middle of the typical range of 0.5% to 1.0% charged by private mortgage insurers. Obama's short-lived cut to 0.55% would have put HUD's premium at the low end, on what probably are higher-risk loans.

    Obama's action mirrors what's seen in other gov-sponsored insurance programs, such as pension benefit guarantee schemes which are chronically under-reserved. Cheap premiums look like a free benefit, until the guarantee fund goes bust in a down cycle, and taxpayers get hit with a bailout.

    What's so stupendously silly about Obama's diktat is that it was too late to provide any electoral benefit. Whereas if HUD's mortgage insurance pool later went bust, it could have been blamed on Obama for cutting premiums without any actuarial analysis.

    Perhaps HUD secretary Ben Carson will ask a more fundamental question: what is HUD doing in the mortgage insurance business, anyway? Obama's ham-handed tampering with premiums for political purposes shows why government is not well placed to be in the insurance business - it has skewed incentives. Ditch it, Ben!

    aliteralmind , January 28, 2017 at 8:49 am

    In researching this story (I have no financial background, and have never owned anything beyond a car), I had a theory that the reduction made no fiscal sense because the Feds raised rates for the first time in 2016, after hovering above near zero for eight years, to .5%. My thinking was that the move was to discourage new borrowers by making loans more expensive, therefore increasing the cost of mortgages and ultimately threatening the solvency of the FHA. I was wrong, which is disappointing because it would have made for a more dramatic ending, in that Trump's revoking the decrease would have been the "correct" thing to do.

    Brian Lindholm , January 28, 2017 at 9:23 am

    Jim,

    Aye. You make an excellent point that essentially everybody in media has ignored. What should the mortgage insurance rate actually be? And the answer is simple: It should be high enough to cover losses incurred by mortgage defaults (plus operating expenses), but no higher.

    I don't know what that rate should have actually been, but if it was 0.55%, then Obama and the FHA should have lowered the rate years ago to avoid overcharging people. And if 0.80% was the right rate, then Obama should never have lowered it at all, given that it would ultimately require a taxpayer bailout. Either way , Obama is incompetent.

    If the only consideration is cost to customers, then the proper rate is 0%. Offer it for free!! But if you want to the program to actually be self-sustaining, so that it doesn't require continuous injection of taxpayer dollars and be a perpetual target for cancellation by Congress, then you have to charge enough to cover losses. Whether the average mortgage rate is 3.5% or 4.0% or 6.2% matters not a whit in this calculation.

    Net conclusion: Obama is either a flaming incompetent who flat-out doesn't understand the concept of insurance, or this was a deliberate attempt to impose a political headache on Trump.

    Jim Haygood , January 28, 2017 at 9:53 am

    An analogy could be made to municipal bond insurance, which like mortgage insurance is intended to protect the lender against loss of principal:

    Municipal bond insurance adds a layer of protection in the rare case of default. However, that protection is dependent on the insurance companies' credit quality.

    Municipal bond insurance used to be commonplace; now it's quite rare. Why is that? As of 2008, nearly half of all newly issued municipal bonds carried some form of insurance. Today, the share is less than 7%.

    The number of municipal bond insurers has also declined and their credit ratings have fallen.

    A number of bond insurers went bust during the Great Recession. Plus, a large default by Puerto Rico has caused many municipal market participants to question the ability of insurance companies to pay on the bonds they insure.

    http://www.schwab.com/public/schwab/nn/articles/How-the-Municipal-Bond-Insurance-Market-Has-Changed-Since-the-Great-Recession

    Muni bond insurers were publicly traded, profit seeking companies. But they underpriced their insurance, probably because no one expected a 1930s-style crisis like 2008.

    Obama had no more concept about how to price mortgage insurance than I do about how to perform brain surgery. He was just mindlessly handing out bennies at public expense in the dark of night, before skulking away into well-deserved obscurity.

    shinola , January 28, 2017 at 1:35 pm

    I dunno Jim – perhaps Obama DID know (or was advised) that the rate cut was actuarially unsound thus setting up his successor for problems down the road or bad optics upfront if the cut was reversed.

    Cleverly devious?

    Brian Lindholm , January 28, 2017 at 2:01 pm

    Yep. To quote the White House press release, " Today, the President announced a major new step that his Administration is taking to make mortgages more affordable and accessible for creditworthy families. "

    That's not a valid reason to lower PMI rates. PMI rates must cover losses, and higher interest rates on mortgages may very well mean higher default rates. If so, PMI rates would need to go up as well.

    Now if the press release had talked about PMI overcharges by the FHA, then I might have have bought it. But they didn't. There was no mention of actuarial soundness at all .

    Jack , January 28, 2017 at 10:12 am

    For a good explanation of how mortgage insurance works and the impact of the discussed premium increase/decrease, check out David Dayen's (a frequent contributor to NC) article on the Intercept here . David goes more in depth on the actual numbers and what they mean.

    Optic7 , January 28, 2017 at 12:26 pm

    I did briefly hear some discussion in the news about the FHA mortgage insurance program having been underfunded in the recent past. This could have given an additional reason for Trump to block the lower rate until the numbers could be analyzed. I did a search and found a couple of articles from before either of these decisions that illustrate different perspectives on this issue:

    http://thehill.com/policy/finance/232492-castro-grilled-over-lowering-mortgage-insurance-premiums

    http://www.fhaloanpros.com/2009/01/is-the-fha-under-funded/

    The latter article is from 2009 but includes some interesting details about significant amounts of money being transferred from the fund to the treasury department.

    Oregoncharles , January 28, 2017 at 2:13 pm

    From the first link, as of 2015: " his recent decision to lower mortgage insurance premiums despite the FHA falling short of its capital reserve requirement." So the fund was out of compliance with the law, and this was a long-running point of contention between the administration and the Republicans in Congress.

    What we don't know yet is whether the fund reached its goal, which would justify lowing the premium. The Congress members were complaining about being lied to.

    DarkMatters , January 28, 2017 at 12:38 pm

    "What is the appropriate premium for mortgage insurance?"

    "Such questions aside, HUD's annual mortgage insurance premium of 0.8% was in the middle of the typical range of 0.5% to 1.0% charged by private mortgage insurers. Obama's short-lived cut to 0.55% would have put HUD's premium at the low end, on what probably are higher-risk loans."

    The argument here seems to be that what is typical is appropriate. By that argument, 0.55% which falls in that range would be ok. The argument that it's too low assumes that the range as it stands is somehow rationally defined, which is another assumption that itself bears scrutiny. To say that 0.5-1.0% is ok is an assumption, and should be examined in detail right along with the 0.55 and 0.8 HUD figures before firmer conclusions could be drawn. The results would give an informed answer to the rhetorical question " what is HUD doing in the mortgage insurance business, anyway?" Absent that, we're reduced to arguments, tainted on both sides by political inclinations. Jeff Epstein's clarification is exemplary.

    oh , January 28, 2017 at 2:51 pm

    " Whereas if HUD's mortgage insurance pool later went bust, it could have been blamed on Obama for cutting premiums without any actuarial analysis."

    Oh Boy! That would really hurt Obama, when he'd be long gone and dancing with the stars!

    Remember, whatever he did during his term he weighed and measured a thousand times.

    flora , January 28, 2017 at 3:33 pm

    "Cheap premiums look like a free benefit, until the guarantee fund goes bust in a down cycle, and taxpayers get hit with a bailout."

    +1.

    Domofdoom , January 28, 2017 at 8:18 am

    Well said. What do you think would be more effective: trying to change the dems or giving up on them and setting up another party?

    WheresOurTeddy , January 28, 2017 at 3:33 pm

    option 2

    Vatch , January 28, 2017 at 4:37 pm

    One may be more effective, but if it's not feasible, it doesn't matter how effective it would be in theory. See this comment by Martin from Canada a few days ago:

    http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2017/01/bernie-sanders-nails-trumps-pick-health-human-services-directly-wall.html#comment-2747290

    Here's the link that Martin pointed to:

    https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/11/bernie-sanders-democratic-labor-party-ackerman/

    Maybe a viable new progressive party can be created. But it sure won't be easy. If it weren't extremely difficult, don't you think that the Greens would have done it by now? For now, I think that people need to be actively looking for candidates to run in the 2018 Democratic primaries. In a few places, at the state level, this will be happening in 2017. See:

    https://ballotpedia.org/State_legislative_elections,_2017

    "Louisiana, Mississippi, New Jersey and Virginia hold elections in odd-numbered years."

    rjs , January 28, 2017 at 8:36 am

    Obama came in off the golf course after Trump was elected and issued dozens of similar diktats i recall wondering at the time that if all those moves were so important, why didn't he make them in the 8 years he had

    oho , January 28, 2017 at 9:39 am

    EZ real issue for Democrats to embrace. Stop the sales tax of food at the state/muni level. Shift that burden (or as much as reasonably possible) to the top income brackets.

    Oh wait, the places where Democrats can do this, always solidly vote D and there's no incentive.

    J.P. Steele , January 28, 2017 at 9:51 am

    There is an art to politics. As anyone who studies the subject knows, one has to be both "Lion & Fox." Lion .for the strength to drive policies, but also a Fox in order to avoid "Snares and Traps." Bannon, who actually has been writing these executive orders, stepped right into this Trap. Rookie mistake. This is what happens when you have ideologues attempting to actually govern. They "step in it." I believe that Jeff is a bit naive and thin skinned here as to "The Game." Obama did indeed set a snare ..but I am a bit more concerned by Steve's arrogance for boldly stepping in it and allowing the opposition a fine platform to grandstand on the issue. Rookie mistake. Arrogance & Stupidity.

    integer , January 28, 2017 at 11:13 pm

    Afaics there are two ways in which this game can be played:

    A)
    1: 0bama sets the trap.
    2: Trump nullifies the reduction in rates while simultaneously denouncing 0bama for setting the trap.
    3: MSMedia circus.

    B)
    1: 0bama sets the trap.
    2: Trump nullifies the reduction in rates.
    3: D-party denounces Trump.
    4: MSMedia circus.
    5: Trump/Bannon denounces 0bama for setting the trap.
    6: MSMedia once again loses credibility, at least in the eyes of Trump supporters.

    Why is option A better than B? Am I missing something here?

    Yves Smith Post author , January 29, 2017 at 12:02 am

    Trump and Bannon will never do 5 and 6. They never fight on the level of detail and timetables.

    Horatio Parker , January 28, 2017 at 10:14 am

    Simple question: why did Trump reverse the cut?

    Craig , January 28, 2017 at 10:53 am

    Excellent question, it has not been answered yet:). Lotsa words tho.

    cm , January 28, 2017 at 2:39 pm

    1. It raised financial risk to the govt.
    2. As the article pointed out many times, it was a sleazy move on Obama's part

    WheresOurTeddy , January 28, 2017 at 3:41 pm

    Same reason Bush 43 reversed the last-minute reductions to water regulations that Bill Clinton passed, and Obama had to deal with

    Clinton to Bush : President Clinton Signs Midnight Regulations

    Bush to Obama : Bush's Final FU: Last-Minute Regulations That Will Screw America for Years to Come

    Obama to Trump: Mortgage rate (non-)"reduction", likely more to come

    Wiki on "Midnight Regulations": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midnight_regulations

    WheresOurTeddy , January 28, 2017 at 4:07 pm

    Not a lot of archived stuff from 2001 and before on the nets, oddly. I regret posting the CNN link up there.

    I washed my hands twice afterward.

    ScottW , January 28, 2017 at 10:17 am

    If everyone with less than 20% equity has PMI, why didn't it pay off after the crash and lessen the need for a bailout? Logic would dictate most of the foreclosures were on homes people bought most recently with less than 20% down. Did PMI pay any money during the crash and to whom and for what?

    If it didn't do any good during the last crash to lessen the public bailout, what's the point of requiring it?

    lyman alpha blob , January 28, 2017 at 1:00 pm

    That is a very good question and I don't remember hearing anything about PMI paying out during the crash (but that could just be my memory). In fact it never even crossed my mind but yeah you'd think that should have mitigated some of the losses. Maybe any payout would only benefit the mortgage holder directly and wouldn't carry through to the mortgage-based securities? That seems odd though and if true would be a strong case for severely curtailing if not eliminating at least the more exotic bets.

    Anybody know anything about this?

    oh , January 28, 2017 at 2:55 pm

    I often wondered about the same thing/

    WheresOurTeddy , January 28, 2017 at 4:01 pm

    Because it's another BS fee they tack on for no good reason other than greed.

    I was in the mortgage game in 2006-2008. Now matter how many showers I take I still don't feel clean.

    bob , January 28, 2017 at 4:03 pm

    "Logic would dictate most of the foreclosures were on homes people bought most recently with less than 20% down."

    Not banker logic. They were foreclosing on houses with equity to steal. Those houses that were valued above what was mortgaged.

    Jim F , January 28, 2017 at 10:29 am

    What gets me is people who think "shame on Trump" for not recognizing and avoiding the trap. Every single one of those people I avoid like the plague.

    Joel , January 28, 2017 at 10:42 am

    Re: The Young Turks

    I watched a few times until what's his name, the main turk, interrupted and talked over the female co-host too many times for my stomach. There are too many good choices to give clicks to that type of behavior. Hey this is the 21st century.

    Oregoncharles , January 28, 2017 at 2:03 pm

    Cenk Uygur – the only actual Turk on the show. It IS his show and network, but I see your point.

    jake , January 28, 2017 at 10:42 am

    I don't know . Obama made many policy changes after the election results came.

    It's not as if government is a fast moving engine. This could have been in the works for years and got expedited for obvious reasons. It took years for Obama to start commuting drug sentences, also Chelsea Manning, and there was no political gain in it for him.

    Unless the policy was itself a fraud, it's impossible to know whether it was implemented cynically.

    Oregoncharles , January 28, 2017 at 2:01 pm

    I made this point below, once it escapes moderation, but basically: 1) the article fails to tell us whether the new rate made sense; and 2) Clinton did the same thing – a bunch of last-minute progressive moves, designed to stroke his legacy and punk his Republican successor. Let's hope the clemency actions are less reversible than the policy moves.

    WheresOurTeddy , January 28, 2017 at 4:04 pm

    "It took years for Obama to start commuting drug sentences, also Chelsea Manning, and there was no political gain in it for him."

    It took years for Obama to start commuting drug sentences, also Chelsea Manning,*** BECAUSE*** there was no political gain in it for him.

    There, I fixed it for you.

    John , January 28, 2017 at 11:00 am

    So Trump/Bannon got punked by Obama the first week in office. Looks like to me th e Repubs are realizing Obamacare may be a similar punkjob.

    JamesG , January 28, 2017 at 11:02 am

    "Simple question: why did Trump reverse the cut?"

    To gain time.

    To evaluate the numbers and come up with an accurate rate?

    My simple question: Why did the Ds presume it was simply "to hurt the middle class?"

    Horatio Parker , January 28, 2017 at 12:06 pm

    Because it makes buying a house more expensive.

    It seems that Obama's motives may safely assumed to be deceitful and petty, but we can conclude nothing at all about Trump or his motives.

    I don't see how this "truth" advances any agenda.

    DarkMatters , January 28, 2017 at 12:41 pm

    Maybe Mnuchin protecting his faction? Just another hypothesis.

    NotClairVoyant , January 28, 2017 at 12:12 pm

    The MIP rate reduction was either an ill-advised reaction to the recent spike in mortgage rates or a simple set-up for the incoming administration. I suspect is was a combination of both, and likely designed more for political gain than anything.

    It's hard to take a guy seriously when he professes to be concerned about home affordability when he spent the last 8 years "foaming the runway" for banks as millions of people were foreclosed on their homes, only to watch many of those same homes get gobbled up by Wall Street and rented back out to them.

    Fewer underwater borrowers will at least curtail the path to feudalism in this new echo housing bubble.

    winstonsmith , January 28, 2017 at 12:21 pm

    Another issue is who would have actually benefited from the Obama rate cut. We are supposed to believe it would have been home buyers, but a uniform increase in the spending power of home buyers as a group is to a large extent offset by a corresponding increase in home prices. To that extent it would be sellers (including private equity) and not low income buyers who would benefit.

    yan , January 28, 2017 at 1:14 pm

    Also, as far as I'm concerned, if Obamamometer was serious about helping homeowners there are many more better ways to do it than "foaming the runway" for banks, or preempting any meaningful action through his statewide get out of jail free card settlement, or actually trying to stop his buddies from blowing asset bubble after asset bubble.
    Moreover, if you can´t put up more than 20% up front to buy a house maybe the problem is that wages are shit compared to property prices and people can´t afford anything more than cheap meth or oxycontin to cope with their sorry lives.

    WheresOurTeddy , January 28, 2017 at 4:06 pm

    +1

    Oregoncharles , January 28, 2017 at 1:55 pm

    Pardon if this is a duplication, but: Isn't there a very large omission here? Was the premium decrease justified, or not? It's supposed to be government insurance, so the premium should cover the costs. Did it? Would the proposed lower premium cover them? (Yeah, I know, MMT. But apparently the idea here was to have a self-supporting program, so it should be self-supporting unless you announce otherwise.)

    That said: this is part of a pattern. Obama made a number of progressive policy moves at the very last minute, most of them reversible. This is nothing but legacy-stroking, as well as setting a trap for the next Pres. Clinton did the same thing, along with some questionable pardons.

    "So why'd you wait so long?"

    Oregoncharles , January 28, 2017 at 2:30 pm

    Well, Haygood was the only one to beat me to it.

    oh , January 28, 2017 at 2:21 pm

    I noticed the false headlines on yahoo news (the bastion of fake and worthless news) and I immediately checked it to find that O'Liar had planted this landmine so that it could blow up in Trump's face. Sure enough, when Trump canceled it, he was the bad guy (even though it had never had gone into effect as this article points out). What a cynical move by O'Liar and how cynical can his sycophants be?

    flora , January 28, 2017 at 3:11 pm

    Great post! I saw the headlines when the story came out and instantly thought there was something "off", something a little too pat about the stories. But I wasn't sure what was wrong with the stories, and was left confused. This post of investigative reporting and facts informs me what was actually happening. Thank you.

    aliteralmind , January 28, 2017 at 4:48 pm

    Nice to hear this. Thanks.

    jake , January 28, 2017 at 4:29 pm

    The reaction here puzzles me to the point of confusion. Absent any argument that the policy didn't offer it's claimed benefits (cost savings for the middle-class), is the left so virtuous that it will reject and refuse to fight for any advance which isn't selflessly arrived at?

    Compare this to "conservatives" who successfully campaigned in 2010 against supposed Medicare cuts related to Obamacare implementation, when they'd love nothing more than to kill the program outright.

    We, by contrast, we won't even fight for what we claim to believe in, if it isn't wrapped in virtue.

    Yves Smith Post author , January 28, 2017 at 5:06 pm

    You are missing that this is insurance, and the cost of losses must be paid for somehow. From Bruce's comment above:

    What should the mortgage insurance rate actually be? And the answer is simple: It should be high enough to cover losses incurred by mortgage defaults (plus operating expenses), but no higher.

    I don't know what that rate should have actually been, but if it was 0.55%, then Obama and the FHA should have lowered the rate years ago to avoid overcharging people. And if 0.80% was the right rate, then Obama should never have lowered it at all, given that it would ultimately require a taxpayer bailout. Either way, Obama is incompetent.

    If the only consideration is cost to customers, then the proper rate is 0%. Offer it for free!! But if you want to the program to actually be self-sustaining, so that it doesn't require continuous injection of taxpayer dollars and be a perpetual target for cancellation by Congress, then you have to charge enough to cover losses. Whether the average mortgage rate is 3.5% or 4.0% or 6.2% matters not a whit in this calculation.

    Net conclusion: Obama is either a flaming incompetent who flat-out doesn't understand the concept of insurance, or this was a deliberate attempt to impose a political headache on Trump.

    jake , January 28, 2017 at 6:56 pm

    Granted, but nobody knows the facts. Bruce wants to damn Obama for not doing it before, or damn him now for doing it. But nothing he either did or didn't do will be deemed acceptable at this point, even if the reduction is fully warranted.

    Have we never heard politics? Process? Delay? Your net conclusion may still prove to be the correct one, though I'm not sure that failure to implement change earlier, assuming it was warranted, could be justly laid at the feet of Obama. But we do know?

    flora , January 28, 2017 at 7:55 pm

    I'm not sure that failure to implement change earlier, assuming it was warranted, could be justly laid at the feet of Obama. But we do know?"

    A Presidential Directive, aka an executive order or executive action, can be laid at the feet of the President. So, yes, we do know. He could have taken the action anytime in the past 8 years. Note the date on this action – Jan 7th, 2017.
    http://www.housingwire.com/articles/32533-its-official-obama-to-direct-fha-to-cut-mortgage-insurance-premiums

    centaur , January 28, 2017 at 5:03 pm

    +1000, jake

    witters , January 28, 2017 at 6:10 pm

    So Obama almost nearly did something that might, maybe, have been a tiny bit useful, but then the US Constitution

    [Jan 27, 2017] The Syrian People Desperately Want Peace

    Jan 27, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
    anne : January 26, 2017 at 11:29 AM , 2017 at 11:29 AM
    https://medium.com/@TulsiGabbard/the-syrian-people-desperately-want-peace-e308f1777a34#.7f55b27yb

    January 24, 2017

    The Syrian People Desperately Want Peace
    By Tulsi Gabbard

    As much of Washington prepared for the inauguration of President Donald Trump, I spent last week on a fact-finding mission in Syria and Lebanon to see and hear directly from the Syrian people. Their lives have been consumed by a horrific war that has killed hundreds of thousands of Syrians and forced millions to flee their homeland in search of peace.

    It is clear now more than ever: this regime change war does not serve America's interest, and it certainly isn't in the interest of the Syrian people.

    We met these children at a shelter in Aleppo, whose families fled the eastern part of the city. The only thing these kids want, the only thing everyone I came across wants, is peace. Many of these children have only known war. Their families want nothing more than to go home, and get back to the way things were before the war to overthrow the government started. This is all they want.

    I traveled throughout Damascus and Aleppo, listening to Syrians from different parts of the country. I met with displaced families from the eastern part of Aleppo, Raqqah, Zabadani, Latakia, and the outskirts of Damascus. I met Syrian opposition leaders who led protests in 2011, widows and children of men fighting for the government and widows of those fighting against the government. I met Lebanon's newly-elected President Aoun and Prime Minister Hariri, U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon Elizabeth Richard, Syrian President Assad, Grand Mufti Hassoun, Archbishop Denys Antoine Chahda of Syrian Catholic Church of Aleppo, Muslim and Christian religious leaders, humanitarian workers, academics, college students, small business owners, and more.

    Their message to the American people was powerful and consistent: There is no difference between "moderate" rebels and al-Qaeda (al-Nusra) or ISIS - they are all the same. This is a war between terrorists under the command of groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda and the Syrian government. They cry out for the U.S. and other countries to stop supporting those who are destroying Syria and her people.

    I heard this message over and over again from those who have suffered and survived unspeakable horrors. They asked that I share their voice with the world; frustrated voices which have not been heard due to the false, one-sided biased reports pushing a narrative that supports this regime change war at the expense of Syrian lives.

    I heard testimony about how peaceful protests against the government that began in 2011 were quickly overtaken by Wahhabi jihadist groups like al-Qaeda (al-Nusra) who were funded and supported by Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar, the United States, and others. They exploited the peaceful protesters, occupied their communities, and killed and tortured Syrians who would not cooperate with them in their fight to overthrow the government.

    I met a Muslim girl from Zabadani who was kidnapped, beaten repeatedly, and raped in 2012, when she was just 14 years old, by "rebel groups" who were angry that her father, a sheep herder, would not give them his money. She watched in horror as masked men murdered her father in their living room, emptying their entire magazine of bullets into him.

    I met a boy who was kidnapped while walking down the street to buy bread for his family. He was tortured, waterboarded, electrocuted, placed on a cross and whipped, all because he refused to help the "rebels" - he told them he just wanted to go to school. This is how the "rebels" are treating the Syrian people who do not cooperate with them, or whose religion is not acceptable to them.

    Although opposed to the Assad government, the political opposition spoke strongly about their adamant rejection of the use of violence to bring about reforms. They argue that if the Wahhabi jihadists, fueled by foreign governments, are successful in overthrowing the Syrian state, it would destroy Syria and its long history of a secular, pluralist society where people of all religions have lived peacefully side by side. Although this political opposition continues to seek reforms, they are adamant that as long as foreign governments wage a proxy regime change war against Syria using jihadist terrorist groups, they will stand with the Syrian state as they work peacefully toward a stronger Syria for all Syrians.

    Originally, I had no intention of meeting with Assad, but when given the opportunity, I felt it was important to take it. I think we should be ready to meet with anyone if there's a chance it can help bring about an end to this war, which is causing the Syrian people so much suffering.

    I met these amazing women from Barzi, many of whom have husbands or family members who are fighting with al-Nusra/al-Qaeda, or with the Syrian army. When they come to this community center, all of that is left behind, as they spend time with new friends, learning different skills like sewing, making plans for their future. They were strangers before coming to this community center whose mission is empowering these women, and now they are " sisters" sharing laughter and tears together.

    I return to Washington, DC with even greater resolve to end our illegal war to overthrow the Syrian government. From Iraq to Libya and now in Syria, the U.S. has waged wars of regime change, each resulting in unimaginable suffering, devastating loss of life, and the strengthening of groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS.

    I call upon Congress and the new Administration to answer the pleas of the Syrian people immediately and support the Stop Arming Terrorists Act. We must stop directly and indirectly supporting terrorists - directly by providing weapons, training and logistical support to rebel groups affiliated with al-Qaeda and ISIS; and indirectly through Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, and Turkey, who, in turn, support these terrorist groups. We must end our war to overthrow the Syrian government and focus our attention on defeating al-Qaeda and ISIS.

    The U.S. must stop supporting terrorists who are destroying Syria and her people. The U.S. and other countries fueling this war must stop immediately. We must allow the Syrian people to try to recover from this terrible war.

    Thank you,

    Tulsi

    [Jan 27, 2017] Just Back From Syria, Rep. Gabbard Brings Message There Are No Moderate Rebels

    Notable quotes:
    "... Regardless of the name of these groups, the strongest fighting force on the ground in Syria is al Nusra, or al Qaida and ISIS. That is a fact," Gabbard said. ..."
    "... "The Syrian people recognize and they know that if President Assad is overthrown, then al Qaida -- or a group like al Qaida, that has been killing Christians, killing people simply because of their religion, or because they won't support their terror activities, they will take charge of all of Syria. ..."
    "... Although opposed to the Assad government, the political opposition spoke strongly about their adamant rejection of the use of violence to bring about reforms. They argue that if the Wahhabi jihadists, fueled by foreign governments, are successful in overthrowing the Syrian state, it would destroy Syria and its long history of a secular, pluralist society where people of all religions have lived peacefully side by side. Although this political opposition continues to seek reforms, they are adamant that as long as foreign governments wage a proxy regime change war against Syria using jihadist terrorist groups, they will stand with the Syrian state as they work peacefully toward a stronger Syria for all Syrians. ..."
    "... I return to Washington, DC with even greater resolve to end our illegal war to overthrow the Syrian government. From Iraq to Libya and now in Syria, the U.S. has waged wars of regime change, each resulting in unimaginable suffering, devastating loss of life, and the strengthening of groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS. ..."
    Jan 27, 2017 | www.informationclearinghouse.info
    "They asked me, why is the United States and its allies supporting these terrorist groups who are destroying Syria when it was al Qaida who attacked the United States on 9/11, not Syria. I didn't have an answer for them," Gabbard said.

    "The reality is... every place that I went, every person that I spoke to, I asked this question to them, and without hesitation, they said, there are no moderate rebels. Who are these moderate rebels that people keep speaking of?

    Regardless of the name of these groups, the strongest fighting force on the ground in Syria is al Nusra, or al Qaida and ISIS. That is a fact," Gabbard said.

    "There is a number of different, other groups -- all of them essentially are fighting alongside, with, or under the command of the strongest group on the ground that's trying to overthrow Assad.

    "The Syrian people recognize and they know that if President Assad is overthrown, then al Qaida -- or a group like al Qaida, that has been killing Christians, killing people simply because of their religion, or because they won't support their terror activities, they will take charge of all of Syria.

    "This is the reality that the people of Syria are facing on the ground, and why they are pleading with us here in the United States to stop supporting these terrorist groups. Let the Syrian people themselves determine their future, not the United States, not some foreign country."

    ... ... ...

    I heard testimony about how peaceful protests against the government that began in 2011 were quickly overtaken by Wahhabi jihadist groups like al-Qaeda (al-Nusra) who were funded and supported by Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar, the United States, and others. They exploited the peaceful protesters, occupied their communities, and killed and tortured Syrians who would not cooperate with them in their fight to overthrow the government.

    I met a Muslim girl from Zabadani who was kidnapped, beaten repeatedly, and raped in 2012, when she was just 14 years old, by "rebel groups" who were angry that her father, a sheep herder, would not give them his money. She watched in horror as masked men murdered her father in their living room, emptying their entire magazine of bullets into him.

    I met a boy who was kidnapped while walking down the street to buy bread for his family. He was tortured, waterboarded, electrocuted, placed on a cross and whipped, all because he refused to help the "rebels" - he told them he just wanted to go to school. This is how the "rebels" are treating the Syrian people who do not cooperate with them, or whose religion is not acceptable to them.

    Although opposed to the Assad government, the political opposition spoke strongly about their adamant rejection of the use of violence to bring about reforms. They argue that if the Wahhabi jihadists, fueled by foreign governments, are successful in overthrowing the Syrian state, it would destroy Syria and its long history of a secular, pluralist society where people of all religions have lived peacefully side by side. Although this political opposition continues to seek reforms, they are adamant that as long as foreign governments wage a proxy regime change war against Syria using jihadist terrorist groups, they will stand with the Syrian state as they work peacefully toward a stronger Syria for all Syrians.

    ... ... ...

    I return to Washington, DC with even greater resolve to end our illegal war to overthrow the Syrian government. From Iraq to Libya and now in Syria, the U.S. has waged wars of regime change, each resulting in unimaginable suffering, devastating loss of life, and the strengthening of groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS.

    I call upon Congress and the new Administration to answer the pleas of the Syrian people immediately and support the Stop Arming Terrorists Act. We must stop directly and indirectly supporting terrorists - directly by providing weapons, training and logistical support to rebel groups affiliated with al-Qaeda and ISIS; and indirectly through Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, and Turkey, who, in turn, support these terrorist groups. We must end our war to overthrow the Syrian government and focus our attention on defeating al-Qaeda and ISIS.

    The U.S. must stop supporting terrorists who are destroying Syria and her people. The U.S. and other countries fueling this war must stop immediately. We must allow the Syrian people to try to recover from this terrible war.

    Thank you,

    Tulsi

    [Jan 24, 2017] The Definitive Demise of the Debunked Dodgy Dossier on The Donald

    Notable quotes:
    "... of Corrente . ..."
    "... Do you see the name of an actual business, owned by Trump? ..."
    "... For Donald Trump, all attempts to gain a foothold in the USSR and then in Russia in 30 years of travel and negotiations failed. Moscow did not have a Trump Tower of its own, although Trump boasted every time that he had met the most important people and was just about to invest hundreds of millions in a project that would undoubtedly be successful. ..."
    "... Trumps' largest business success in Russia was the presentation of a Trump Vodka at the Millionaire Fair 2007 in Moscow. This project was also a cleansing; In 2009 the sale of Trump Vodka was discontinued. ..."
    "... puts his name on stuff ..."
    "... transition ..."
    Jan 23, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
    by Lambert Strether of Corrente .

    In the midst of the hysteria about Russian interference in the 2016 election - 52% of Democrat voters believe it's definitely or probably true that "Russia tampered with vote tallies" , a view for which there is no evidence whatever, and which is a depressing testimony to the power of propaganda to produce epistemic closure in liberals as well as conservatives - came Buzzfeed's 35-page "dodgy dossier" on Donald Trump, oppo that the researcher, Christopher Steele , peddled during the election proper, but was unable to sell, not even to an easy mark like Jebbie. (There's a useful debunking of Steele's report in the New York Review of Books , of all places.) Remember the piss jokes? So two-weeks ago Amazingly, or not, a two-page summary to Steele's product had been included in a briefing given to Trump (and Obama). A weary Obama was no doubt well accustomed to the intelligence community's little ways, but the briefing must have been quite a revelation to Trump. I mean, Trump is a man who knows shoddy when he sees it, right?

    In any case, a link to the following story in Hamburg's ridiculously sober-sided Die Zeit came over the transom: So schockiert von Trump wie alle anderen ("So shocked by Trump like everyone else"). The reporter is Alexej Kowaljow , a Russian journalist based in Moscow. Before anyone goes "ZOMG! The dude is Russian !", everything Kowaljow writes is based on open sources or common-sense information presumably available to citizens of any nation. The bottom line for me is that if the world is coming to believe that Americans are idiots, it's not necessarily because Americans elected Trump as President.

    I'm going to lay out two claims and two questions from Kowaljow's piece. In each case, I'll quote the conventional, Steele and intelligence community-derived wisdom in our famously free press, and then I'll quote Kowaljow. I think Kowaljow wins each time. Easily. I don't think Google Translate handles irony well, but I sense that Kowaljow is deploying it freely.

    (1) Trump's Supposed Business Dealings in Russia Are Commercial Puffery

    Here's the section on Russia in Time's article on Trump's business dealings; it's representative. I'm going to quote it all so you can savor it. Read it carefully.

    Donald Trump's Many, Many Business Dealings in 1 Map

    Russia

    "For the record, I have ZERO investments in Russia," Trump tweeted in July, one day before he called on the country to "find" a batch of emails deleted from Hillary Clinton's private server. Nonetheless, Russia's extraordinary meddling in the 2016 U.S. election-a declassified report released by U.S. intelligence agencies in January disclosed that intercepted conversations captured senior Russian officials celebrating Trump's win-as well as Trump's complimentary remarks about Russian President have stirred widespread questions about the President-elect's pursuit of closer ties with Moscow. Several members of Trump's inner circle have business links to Russia, including former campaign manager Paul Manafort, who consulted for pro-Russia politicians in the Ukraine. Former foreign policy adviser Carter Page worked in Russia and maintains ties there.

    Retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, Trump's incoming national security adviser, has been a regular guest on Russia's English-language propaganda network, RT , and even dined with Putin at a banquet.

    During the presidential transition, former Georgia Congressman and Trump campaign surrogate Jack Kingston told a gathering of businessmen in Moscow that the President-elect could lift U.S. sanctions.

    According to his own son, Trump has long relied on Russian customers as a source of income. "Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets," Donald Trump Jr. told a Manhattan real estate conference in 2008 , according to an account posted on the website of trade publication eTurboNews. "We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia." Back to map .

    Read that again, if you can stand it. Do you see the name of an actual business, owned by Trump? Do you see the name of any businessperson who closed a deal with Trump? Do you, in fact, see any reporting at all? At most, you see commercial puffery by Trump the Younger: "Russians [in Russia?] make up a pretty [qualifier] disproportionate [whatever that means] cross-section [whatever that means] of a lot of [qualifier] our assets."

    Now Kowaljow (via Google Translate, so forgive any solecisms):

    For Donald Trump, all attempts to gain a foothold in the USSR and then in Russia in 30 years of travel and negotiations failed. Moscow did not have a Trump Tower of its own, although Trump boasted every time that he had met the most important people and was just about to invest hundreds of millions in a project that would undoubtedly be successful.

    Trumps' largest business success in Russia was the presentation of a Trump Vodka at the Millionaire Fair 2007 in Moscow. This project was also a cleansing; In 2009 the sale of Trump Vodka was discontinued.

    Because think about it: Trump puts his name on stuff . Towers in Manhattan, hotels, casinos, golf courses, steaks. Anything in Russia with Trump's name on it? Besides the failed vodka venture? No? Case closed, then.

    (2) Zhirinovsky Is The Very Last Person Putin Would Use For A Proxy

    From The Hill's summary of Russian "interference" in the 2016 election:

    Five reasons intel community believes Russia interfered in election

    The attacks dovetailed with other Russian disinformation campaigns

    The report covers more than just the hacking effort. It also contains a detailed list account of information warfare against the United States from Russia through other means.

    Political party leader Vladimir Zhirinovsky, who the report lists as a "pro-Kremlin proxy," said before the election that, if Trump won, Russia would 'drink champagne' to celebrate their new ability to advance in Syria and Ukraine.

    Now Kowaljow:

    The report of the American intelligence services on the Russian interference in the US elections, published at the beginning of January, was notoriously neglected by Russians, because the name of Vladimir Zhirinovsky was mentioned among the "propaganda activities of Russia", which had announced that in the event of an election victory of Trump champagne to want to drink.

    Such a delicate plan – to reach the election of a President of the US by means of Zhirinovsky – ensures a skeptical smile for every Russian at best. He is already seventy and has been at the head of a party with a misleading name for nearly thirty years. The Liberal Democratic Party is neither liberal nor democratic. If their policies are somehow characterized, then as right-wing populism. Zhirinovsky is known for shrill statements; He threatened, for example, to destroy the US by means of "gravitational weapons".

    If, therefore, the Kremlin had indeed had the treacherous plan of helping Trump to power, it would scarcely have been made known about Zhirinovsky.

    The American equivalent would be . Give me a moment to think of an American politician who's both so delusional and such a laughingstock that no American President could possibly consider using them as a proxy in a devilishly complex informational warfare campaign Sara Palin? Anthony Weiner? Debbie Wasserman Schultz? Na ga happen.

    And now to the two questions.

    (3) Why Would Russian Intelligence Agencies Sources Have Talked to Steele?

    Kowaljow:

    But the report, published on the BuzzFeed Internet portal, is full of inconsistencies and contradictions. The problem is not even that there are a lot of false facts. Even the assumption that agents of the Russian secret services are discussing the details with a former secretary of a hostile secret service in the midst of a highly secret operation by which a future President of the US is to be discredited appears strange.

    Exactly. For the intelligence community and Democrat reliance on Steele's dossier to be plausible, you have to assume 10-foot tall Russkis (1) with incredibly sophisticated strategic, operational, and technical capabilities, who have (2) performed the greatest intelligence feat of the 21st and 20th centuries, suborning the President of the United States, and whose intelligence agencies are (3) leakly like a sieve. Does that make sense? (Of course, the devilish Russkis could have fed Steele bad data, knowing he'd then feed it to the American intelligence agencies, who would lap it up, but that's another narrative.)

    (4) How Do You Compromise the Uncompromisable?

    Funny how suddenly the word kompromat was everywhere, wasn't it? So sophisticated. Everybody loves to learn a new word! Regarding the "Golden Showers" - more sophistication! - Kowaljow writes:

    But even if such a compromise should exist, what sense should it have, since the most piquant details have long been publicly discussed in public, and had no effect on the votes of the elected president? Like all the other scandals trumps, which passed through the election campaign, they also remained unresolved, including those who were concerned about sex.

    This also includes what is known as a compromise, compromising material, that is, video shots of the unsightly nature, which can destroy both the political career and the life of a person. The word Kompromat shines today – as in the past Perestroika – in all headlines; It was not invented in Russia, of course. But in Russia in the Yeltsin era, when the great clans in the power gave bitter fights and intensively used the media, works of this kind have ended more than just a brilliant career. General Prosecutor Jurij Skuratov was dismissed after a video had been shown in the country-wide television channels: There, a person "who looks like the prosecutor's office" had sex with two prostitutes.

    Donald Trump went on Howard Stern for, like, decades. The stuff that's right out there for whoever wants to roll those tapes is just as "compromising" as anything in the dodgy dossier, or the "grab her by the pussy" tape, for that matter. As Kowaljow points out, none of it was mortally wounding to Trump; after all, if you're a volatility voter who wants to kick over the table in a rigged game, you don't care about the niceties.

    Conclusion

    It would be nice, wouldn't it, if our famously free press was actually covering the Trump transition , instead of acting like their newsrooms are mountain redoubts for an irrendentist Clinton campaign. It would be nice, for example, to know:

    1) The content and impact of Trump's Executive Orders.

    2) Ditto, regulations.

    3) Personnel decisions below the Cabinet level. Who are the Flexians?

    4) Obama policies that will remain in place, because both party establishments support them. Charters, for example.

    5) Republican inroads in Silicon Valley.

    6) The future of the IRS, since Republicans have an axe to grind with it.

    7) Mismatch between State expectations for infrastructure and Trump's implementation

    And that's before we get to ObamaCare, financial regulation, gutting or owning the CIA (which Trump needs to do, and fast), trade policy, NATO, China, and a myriad of other stories, all rich with human interest, powerful narratives, and plenty of potential for scandal. Any one of them worthy of A1 coverage, just like the Inaugural crowd size dogpile that's been going on for days.

    Instead, the press seems to be reproducing the last gasps of the Clinton campaign, which were all about the evils of Trump, the man. That tactic failed the Clinton campaign, again because volatility voters weren't concerned with the niceties. And the same tactic is failing the press now. Failing unless, of course, you're the sort of sleaze merchant who downsizes the newsroom because, hey, it's all about the clicks.

    [Jan 21, 2017] James Mattis confirmed as secretary of defense

    Jan 20, 2017 | www.theguardian.com

    The Senate confirmed the appointment of retired general James Mattis as secretary of defense on Friday, making him the first member of Donald Trump's cabinet cleared to take office.

    The Senate vote was passed by 98-1 after Trump signed a waiver making Mattis exempt from a law that blocks senior officers from taking the defense secretary job within seven years of retirement. Mattis has been out of uniform for three years.

    The single vote against his confirmation was from Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, a Democrat who argued the bar should remain in place on the grounds that civilian control of the military was a fundamental principle of US democracy.

    [Jan 21, 2017] Donald Trump Introduced To The Audience At Swearing In Ceremony - YouTube

    Jan 21, 2017 | www.youtube.com
    David B 3 hours ago (edited) Alright Trump, you're in office now, drain the Swamp, you can start with the federal Reserve, and CIA, oh and the justice department as well.

    [Jan 03, 2017] Propaganda and Disinformation on Syria

    Notable quotes:
    "... "Aleppo, a city of about 3 million people, was once the financial heart of Syria. As it continues to deteriorate, many civilians here are losing patience with the increasingly violent and unrecognizable opposition - one that is hampered by infighting and a lack of structure, and deeply infiltrated by both foreign fighters and terrorist groups. The rebels in Aleppo are predominantly from the countryside, further alienating them from the urban crowd that once lived here peacefully, in relative economic comfort and with little interference from the authoritarian government of President Bashar al-Assad." ..."
    "... The Snopes' investigation criticizing Bartlett was superficial and ignored the broader issues of accuracy and integrity in the Western media's depiction of the Syrian conflict. Instead the article appeared to be an effort to discredit the eyewitness observations and analysis of a journalist who dared challenge the mainstream narrative. ..."
    "... The enactment of HR5181, "Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation," suggests that the ruling powers seek to escalate suppression of news and analyses that run counter to the official narrative. Backed by a new infusion of $160 million, the plan is to further squelch skeptical voices with operation for "countering" and "refuting" what the U.S. government deems to be propaganda and disinformation. ..."
    Jan 03, 2017 | consortiumnews.com

    Syria is a good case study in the modern application of information warfare. In her memoir Hard Choices , former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton wrote that the U.S. provided "support for (Syrian) civilian opposition groups, including satellite-linked computers, telephones, cameras, and training for more than a thousand activists, students and independent journalists."

    A heart-rending propaganda image designed to justify a major U.S. military operation inside Syria against the Syrian military.

    Indeed, a huge amount of money has gone to "activists" and "civil society" groups in Syria and other countries that have been targeted for "regime change." A lot of the money also goes to parent organizations that are based in the United States and Europe, so these efforts do not only support on-the-ground efforts to undermine the targeted countries, but perhaps even more importantly, the money influences and manipulates public opinion in the West.

    In North America, representatives from the Syrian "Local Coordination Committees" (LCC) were frequent guests on popular media programs such as "DemocracyNow." The message was clear: there is a "revolution" in Syria against a "brutal regime" personified in Bashar al-Assad. It was not mentioned that the "Local Coordination Committees" have been primarily funded by the West, specifically the Office for Syrian Opposition Support, which was founded by the U.S. State Department and the U.K. Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

    More recently, news and analysis about Syria has been conveyed through the filter of the White Helmets, also known as Syrian Civil Defense. In the Western news media, the White Helmets are described as neutral, non-partisan, civilian volunteers courageously carrying out rescue work in the war zone. In fact, the group is none of the above. It was initiated by the U.S. and U.K. using a British military contractor and Brooklyn-based marketing company.

    While they may have performed some genuine rescue operations, the White Helmets are primarily a media organization with a political goal: to promote NATO intervention in Syria. (The manipulation of public opinion using the White Helmets and promoted by the New York Times and Avaaz petition for a "No Fly Zone" in Syria is documented here. )

    The White Helmets hoax continues to be widely believed and receives uncritical promotion though it has increasingly been exposed at alternative media outlets as the creation of a "shady PR firm ." During critical times in the conflict in Aleppo, White Helmet individuals have been used as the source for important news stories despite a track record of deception.

    Recent Propaganda: Blatant Lies?

    As the armed groups in east Aleppo recently lost ground and then collapsed, Western governments and allied media went into a frenzy of accusations against Syria and Russia based on reports from sources connected with the armed opposition. CNN host Wolf Blitzer described Aleppo as "falling" in a "slaughter of these women and children" while CNN host Jake Tapper referred to "genocide by another name."

    War damage in the once-thriving Syrian city of Aleppo.

    The Daily Beast published the claims of the Aleppo Siege Media Center under the title "Doomsday is held in Aleppo" and amid accusations that the Syrian army was executing civilians, burning them alive and "20 women committed suicide in order not to be raped." These sensational claims were widely broadcast without verification. However, this "news" on CNN and throughout Western media came from highly biased sources and many of the claims – lacking anything approaching independent corroboration – could be accurately described as propaganda and disinformation.

    Ironically, some of the supposedly "Russian propaganda" sites, such as RT, have provided first-hand on-the-ground reporting from the war zones with verifiable information that contradicts the Western narrative and thus has received almost no attention in the U.S. news media. For instance, some of these non-Western outlets have shown videos of popular celebrations over the "liberation of Aleppo."

    There has been further corroboration of these realities from peace activists, such as Jan Oberg of Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research who published a photo essay of his eyewitness observations in Aleppo including the happiness of civilians from east Aleppo reaching the government-controlled areas of west Aleppo, finally freed from areas that had been controlled by Al Qaeda's Syrian affiliate and its jihadist allies in Ahrar al-Sham.

    Dr. Nabil Antaki, a medical doctor from Aleppo, described the liberation of Aleppo in an interview titled "Aleppo is Celebrating, Free from Terrorists, the Western Media Misinformed." The first Christmas celebrations in Aleppo in four years are shown here, replete with marching band members in Santa Claus outfits. Journalist Vanessa Beeley has published testimonies of civilians from east Aleppo. The happiness of civilians at their liberation is clear.

    Whether or not you wish to accept these depictions of the reality in Aleppo, at a minimum, they reflect another side of the story that you have been denied while being persistently force-fed the version favored by the U.S. State Department. The goal of the new Global Engagement Center to counter "foreign propaganda" is to ensure that you never get to hear this alternative narrative to the Western propaganda line.

    Even much earlier, contrary to the Western mythology of rebel "liberated zones," there was strong evidence that the armed groups were never popular in Aleppo. American journalist James Foley described the situation in 2012 like this :

    Journalist James Foley shortly before he was executed by an Islamic State operative.

    "Aleppo, a city of about 3 million people, was once the financial heart of Syria. As it continues to deteriorate, many civilians here are losing patience with the increasingly violent and unrecognizable opposition - one that is hampered by infighting and a lack of structure, and deeply infiltrated by both foreign fighters and terrorist groups. The rebels in Aleppo are predominantly from the countryside, further alienating them from the urban crowd that once lived here peacefully, in relative economic comfort and with little interference from the authoritarian government of President Bashar al-Assad."

    On Nov. 22, 2012, Foley was kidnapped in northwestern Syria and held by Islamic State terrorists before his beheading in August 2014.

    The Overall Narrative on Syria

    Analysis of the Syrian conflict boils down to two competing narratives. One narrative is that the conflict is a fight for freedom and democracy against a brutal regime, a storyline promoted in the West and the Gulf states, which have been fueling the conflict from the start . This narrative is also favored by some self-styled "anti-imperialists" who want a "Syrian revolution."

    The other narrative is that the conflict is essentially a war of aggression against a sovereign state, with the aggressors including NATO countries, Gulf monarchies, Israel and Jordan. Domination of the Western media by these powerful interests is so thorough that one almost never gets access to this second narrative, which is essentially banned from not only the mainstream but also much of the liberal and progressive media.

    For example, listeners and viewers of the generally progressive TV and radio program "DemocracyNow" have rarely if ever heard the second narrative described in any detail. Instead, the program frequently broadcasts the statements of Hillary Clinton, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power and others associated with the U.S. position. Rarely do you hear the viewpoint of the Syrian Ambassador to the United Nations, the Syrian Foreign Minister or analysts inside Syria and around the world who have written about and follow events there closely.

    "DemocracyNow" also has done repeated interviews with proponents of the "Syrian revolution" while ignoring analysts who call the conflict a war of aggression sponsored by the West and the Gulf monarchies. This blackout of the second narrative continues despite the fact that many prominent international figures see it as such. For example, the former Foreign Minister of Nicaragua and former President of the UN General Assembly, Father Miguel D'Escoto, has said, "What the U.S. government is doing in Syria is tantamount to a war of aggression, which, according to the Nuremberg Tribunal, is the worst possible crime a State can commit against another State."

    In many areas of politics, "DemocracyNow" is excellent and challenges mainstream media. However in this area, coverage of the Syrian conflict, the broadcast is biased, one-sided and echoes the news and analysis of mainstream Western corporate media, showing the extent of control over foreign policy news that already exists in the United States and Europe.

    Suppressing and Censoring Challenges

    Despite the widespread censorship of alternative analyses on Syria and other foreign hotspots that already exists in the West, the U.S. government's new "Global Engagement Center" will seek to ensure that the censorship is even more complete with its goal to "counter foreign state and non-state propaganda and disinformation." We can expect even more aggressive and better-financed assaults on the few voices daring to challenge the West's "group thinks" – smear campaigns that are already quite extensive.

    The "White Helmets" symbol, expropriating the name of "Syria Civil Defense."

    In an article titled "Controlling the Narrative on Syria" , Louis Allday describes the criticisms and attacks on journalists Rania Khalek and Max Blumenthal for straying from the "approved" Western narrative on Syria. Some of the bullying and abuse has come from precisely those people, such as Robin Yassin-Kassab, who have been frequent guests in liberal Western media.

    Reporters who have returned from Syria with accounts that challenge the propaganda themes that have permeated the Western media also have come under attack. For instance, Canadian journalist Eva Bartlett recently returned to North America after being in Syria and Aleppo, conveying a very different image and critical of the West's biased media coverage. Bartlett appeared at a United Nations press conference and then did numerous interviews across the country during a speaking tour. During the course of her talks and presentation, Bartlett criticized the White Helmets and questioned whether it was true that Al Quds Hospital in opposition-held East Aleppo was attacked and destroyed as claimed.

    Bartlett's recounting of this information made her a target of Snopes, which has been a mostly useful website exposing urban legends and false rumors but has come under criticism itself for some internal challenges and has been inconsistent in its investigations. In one report entitled " White Helmet Hearsay," Snopes' writer Bethania Palmer says claims the White Helmets are "linked to terrorists" is "unproven," but she overlooks numerous videos , photos, and other reports showing White Helmet members celebrating a Nusra/Al Qaeda battle victory, picking up the bodies of civilians executed by a Nusra executioner, and having a member who alternatively appears as a rebel/terrorist fighter with a weapon and later wearing a White Helmet uniform. The "fact check" barely scrapes the surface of public evidence.

    The same writer did another shallow "investigation" titled "victim blaming" regarding Bartlett's critique of White Helmet videos and what happened at the Al Quds Hospital in Aleppo. Bartlett suggests that some White Helmet videos may be fabricated and may feature the same child at different times, i.e., photographs that appear to show the same girl being rescued by White Helmet workers at different places and times. While it is uncertain whether this is the same girl, the similarity is clear.

    The Snopes writer goes on to criticize Bartlett for her comments about the reported bombing of Al Quds Hospital in east Aleppo in April 2016. A statement at the website of Doctors Without Borders says the building was "destroyed and reduced to rubble," but this was clearly false since photos show the building with unclear damage. Five months later, the September 2016 report by Doctors Without Borders says the top two floors of the building were destroyed and the ground floor Emergency Room damaged yet they re-opened in two weeks.

    The many inconsistencies and contradictions in the statements of Doctors Without Borders resulted in an open letter to them. In their last report, Doctors Without Borders (known by its French initials, MSF) acknowledges that "MSF staff did not directly witness the attack and has not visited Al Quds Hospital since 2014."

    Bartlett referenced satellite images taken before and after the reported attack on the hospital. The images do not show severe damage and it is unclear whether or not there is any damage to the roof, the basis for Bartlett's statement. In the past week, independent journalists have visited the scene of Al Quds Hospital and report that that the top floors of the building are still there and damage is unclear.

    The Snopes' investigation criticizing Bartlett was superficial and ignored the broader issues of accuracy and integrity in the Western media's depiction of the Syrian conflict. Instead the article appeared to be an effort to discredit the eyewitness observations and analysis of a journalist who dared challenge the mainstream narrative.

    U.S. propaganda and disinformation on Syria has been extremely effective in misleading much of the American population. Thus, most Americans are unaware how many billions of taxpayer dollars have been spent on yet another "regime change" project. The propaganda campaign – having learned from the successful demonizations of Iraq's Saddam Hussein, Libya's Muammar Gaddafi and other targeted leaders – has been so masterful regarding Syria that many liberal and progressive news outlets were pulled in. It has been left to RT and some Internet outlets to challenge the U.S. government and the mainstream media.

    But the U.S. government's near total control of the message doesn't appear to be enough. Apparently even a few voices of dissent are a few voices too many.

    The enactment of HR5181, "Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation," suggests that the ruling powers seek to escalate suppression of news and analyses that run counter to the official narrative. Backed by a new infusion of $160 million, the plan is to further squelch skeptical voices with operation for "countering" and "refuting" what the U.S. government deems to be propaganda and disinformation.

    As part of the $160 million package, funds can be used to hire or reward "civil society groups, media content providers, nongovernmental organizations, federally funded research and development centers, private companies, or academic institutions."

    Among the tasks that these private entities can be hired to perform is to identify and investigate both print and online sources of news that are deemed to be distributing "disinformation, misinformation, and propaganda directed at the United States and its allies and partners."

    In other words, we are about to see an escalation of the information war.

    Rick Sterling is an independent investigative journalist. He lives in the San Francisco Bay Area and can be reached at [email protected]

    [Jan 01, 2017] Two views on Syrian war

    Jan 01, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/i-am-a-syrian-living-in-syria-it-was-never-a-revolution-nor-a-civil-war-the-terrorists-are-sent-by-your-government/5544450

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/syria-elections-2016-us-natos-failed-attempt-to-deny-the-will-of-the-syrian-people/5520087

    [Jan 01, 2017] NHS surgeon David Nott recounts harrowing story from a Syrian field hospital

    Notable quotes:
    "... Its a shame our government supported al Nusra and other anti Assad organisations in this region, even ISIL were present (the capture of the Turkish soldiers from E Aleppo who were subsequently murdered). ..."
    "... If we had not supported these anti Assad groups many not even Syrian, there would have been many less murdered children. ..."
    "... Its like when we air lifted poor Ali Abbas from Iraq who had him arms blown off and other children then we gave ourselves a pat on the back, yet we were responsible for Ali's injuries and thousands others. ..."
    dailymail.co.uk

    I have made numerous trips to Syria to treat the casualties of this war, but none was as sorrowful as the week I spent with Aleppo's children.

    Bone-weary and drained emotionally, I returned to London on Christmas Eve and couldn't wait to hold my 17-month-old daughter and see my wife and family. Christmas was a joy.

    Yet Maram was never far from my mind's eye: a haunting, residual memory that I could not have shaken even if I had wished; I find myself waking in the early hours worrying about her.

    I first saw Maram on December 20, a few days after she was evacuated from Aleppo in an ambulance.

    Her legs and left arm had been shattered in a bomb attack that killed her parents and injured her brother and sister.

    Pieces of ordnance shell were embedded in her infected wounds but, because the Aleppo doctors had run out of dressings, disinfectant and saline, they had no choice but to operate on her dirty body tissue.

    John, Auckland, New Zealand, about 12 hours ago

    Fake news

    Scotsgrey, Hong Kong, about 12 hours ago

    Didn't a canadian journalist said in U.N. conference with video evidence, they recycle victims for their photoshoot?

    Emmaz, wild west, United States, about 20 hours ago

    I wonder how all these families- knowing they are in a war Torn country are deciding to have babies now. I don't think i could bring a new baby into the world knowing what immediate impact it could have on them. So sad. Poor babies.

    janiceK, manchester, United Kingdom, about 23 hours ago

    Its a shame our government supported al Nusra and other anti Assad organisations in this region, even ISIL were present (the capture of the Turkish soldiers from E Aleppo who were subsequently murdered).

    If we had not supported these anti Assad groups many not even Syrian, there would have been many less murdered children.

    Its like when we air lifted poor Ali Abbas from Iraq who had him arms blown off and other children then we gave ourselves a pat on the back, yet we were responsible for Ali's injuries and thousands others.


    Recommended Links

    Google matched content

    Softpanorama Recommended

    Top articles

    [Dec 28, 2017] On your surmise that Putin prefers Trump to Hillary and would thus have incentive to influence the election, I beg to differ. Putin is one smart statesman; he knows very well it makes no difference which candidates gets elected in US elections. Published on Dec 28, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Dec 21, 2017] The RussiaGate Witch-Hunt Stockman Names Names In The Deep State's Insurance Policy by David Stockman Published on Dec 18, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Dec 15, 2017] Rise and Decline of the Welfare State, by James Petras Published on Dec 13, 2017 | www.unz.com

    [Dec 14, 2017] Was Peter Strzok the principal FBI liaison to CIA Director John Brennan? Published on consortiumnews.com

    [Dec 14, 2017] The Foundering Russia-gate 'Scandal' Consortiumnews Published on Dec 14, 2017 | consortiumnews.com

    [Dec 14, 2017] The 1970's was in many ways the watershed decade for the neoliberal transformation of the American economy and society Published on Dec 14, 2017 | www.unz.com

    [Dec 13, 2017] All the signs in the Russia probe point to Jared Kushner. Who next? Published on Dec 13, 2017 | www.theguardian.com

    [Dec 12, 2017] We are all just hapless passengers on the Neocon Titanic, unable to influence what is playing out on the bridge Published on Dec 12, 2017 | www.unz.com

    [Dec 10, 2017] When Washington Cheered the Jihadists Consortiumnews Published on Dec 10, 2017 | consortiumnews.com

    [Dec 09, 2017] Hyping the Russian Threat to Undermine Free Speech by Max Blumenthal Published on Nov 13, 2017 | www.truthdig.com

    [Dec 03, 2017] Stephen Kotkin How Vladimir Putin Rules Published on Mar 28, 2015 | Foreign Affairs

    [Dec 01, 2017] Neocon Chaos Promotion in the Mideast Published on Apr 15, 2015 | antiwar.com

    [Nov 30, 2017] Heritage Foundation + the War Industry What a Pair by Paul Gottfried Published on Nov 30, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    [Nov 30, 2017] Money Imperialism by Michael Hudson Published on Nov 30, 2017 | www.unz.com

    [Nov 29, 2017] The Russian Question by Niall Ferguson Published on foreignpolicy.com

    [Nov 28, 2017] The Duplicitous Superpower by Ted Galen Carpenter Published on Nov 28, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    [Oct 29, 2017] Whose Bright Idea Was RussiaGate by Paul Craig Roberts Published on Oct 03, 2017 | ronpaulinstitute.org

    [Oct 29, 2017] In Shocking, Viral Interview, Qatar Confesses Secrets Behind Syrian War Published on Oct 29, 2017 | ronpaulinstitute.org

    [Oct 25, 2017] Tomorrow Belongs to the Corporatocracy by C.J. Hopkins Published on Oct 20, 2017 | www.unz.com

    [Oct 09, 2017] After Nine Months, Only Stale Crumbs in Russia Inquiry by Scott Ritter Published on Oct 09, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    [Oct 09, 2017] Autopilot Wars by Andrew J. Bacevich Published on Oct 08, 2017 | www.unz.com

    [Oct 03, 2017] The Vietnam Nightmare -- Again by Eric Margolis Published on Sep 30, 2017 | www.unz.com

    [Sep 27, 2017] Come You Masters of War by Matthew Harwood Published on Sep 26, 2017 | www.fff.org

    [Sep 26, 2017] US-Saudi Alliance Fragments the Middle East (2-2) by RANIA KHALEK Published on Sep 26, 2017 | therealnews.com

    [Sep 24, 2017] Mark Ames When Mother Jones Was Investigated for Spreading Kremlin Disinformation by Mark Ames Published on Jun 03, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    [Sep 23, 2017] The Exit Strategy of Empire by Wendy McElro Published on Sep 23, 2017 | ronpaulinstitute.org

    [Sep 20, 2017] The Politics of Military Ascendancy by James Petras Published on Sep 15, 2017 | www.unz.com

    [Sep 18, 2017] How The Military Defeated Trumps Insurgency Published on Sep 18, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Sep 18, 2017] Looks like Trump initially has a four point platform that was anti-neoliberal in its essence: non-interventionism, no to neoliberal globalization, no to outsourcing of jobs, and no to multiculturism. All were betrayed very soon Published on Jun 02, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com

    [Sep 13, 2017] A despot in disguise: one mans mission to rip up democracy by George Monbiot Published on Sep 13, 2017 | www.theguardian.com

    [Aug 09, 2017] Force Multipliers and 21st Century Imperial Warfare Practice and Propaganda by Maximilian C. Forte Published on Nov 08, 2015 | zeroanthropology.net

    [Jun 26, 2017] The Soft Coup Under Way In Washington by David Stockman Published on Jun 22, 2017 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

    [Jun 24, 2017] The Saudi-Qatar spat - the reconciliation offer to be refused>. Qater will move closer to Turkey Published on Jun 23, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Jun 17, 2017] The Collapsing Social Contract by Gaius Publius Published on Jun 16, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    [May 23, 2017] Are they really out to get Trump by Philip Girald Published on May 16, 2017 | www.unz.com

    [May 21, 2017] What Obsessing About Trump Causes Us To Miss by Andrew Bacevich Published on May 08, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    [May 21, 2017] WhateverGate -- The Crazed Quest To Find Some Reason (Any Reason!) To Dump Trump by John Derbyshire Published on May 21, 2017 | www.unz.com

    [May 21, 2017] Speech of Lavrov at the Military Academy of the General Staff Published on Apr 02, 2017 | thesaker.is

    [May 04, 2017] Jared Kushner fired me over Israel ten years ago by Philip Weiss Published on www.unz.com

    [Jan 11, 2020] Atomization of workforce as a part of atomization of society under neoliberalism Published on Apr 18, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    Oldies But Goodies

    [Dec 28, 2017] On your surmise that Putin prefers Trump to Hillary and would thus have incentive to influence the election, I beg to differ. Putin is one smart statesman; he knows very well it makes no difference which candidates gets elected in US elections.

    [Dec 21, 2017] The RussiaGate Witch-Hunt Stockman Names Names In The Deep State's Insurance Policy by David Stockman

    [Dec 15, 2017] Rise and Decline of the Welfare State, by James Petras

    [Dec 14, 2017] Was Peter Strzok the principal FBI liaison to CIA Director John Brennan?

    [Dec 14, 2017] The Foundering Russia-gate 'Scandal' Consortiumnews

    [Dec 14, 2017] The 1970's was in many ways the watershed decade for the neoliberal transformation of the American economy and society

    [Dec 13, 2017] All the signs in the Russia probe point to Jared Kushner. Who next?

    [Dec 12, 2017] We are all just hapless passengers on the Neocon Titanic, unable to influence what is playing out on the bridge

    [Dec 10, 2017] When Washington Cheered the Jihadists Consortiumnews

    [Dec 09, 2017] Hyping the Russian Threat to Undermine Free Speech by Max Blumenthal

    [Dec 03, 2017] Stephen Kotkin How Vladimir Putin Rules

    [Dec 01, 2017] Neocon Chaos Promotion in the Mideast

    [Nov 30, 2017] Heritage Foundation + the War Industry What a Pair by Paul Gottfried

    [Nov 30, 2017] Money Imperialism by Michael Hudson

    [Nov 29, 2017] The Russian Question by Niall Ferguson

    [Nov 28, 2017] The Duplicitous Superpower by Ted Galen Carpenter

    [Oct 29, 2017] Whose Bright Idea Was RussiaGate by Paul Craig Roberts

    [Oct 29, 2017] In Shocking, Viral Interview, Qatar Confesses Secrets Behind Syrian War

    [Oct 25, 2017] Tomorrow Belongs to the Corporatocracy by C.J. Hopkins

    [Oct 09, 2017] After Nine Months, Only Stale Crumbs in Russia Inquiry by Scott Ritter

    [Oct 09, 2017] Autopilot Wars by Andrew J. Bacevich

    [Oct 03, 2017] The Vietnam Nightmare -- Again by Eric Margolis

    [Sep 27, 2017] Come You Masters of War by Matthew Harwood

    [Sep 26, 2017] US-Saudi Alliance Fragments the Middle East (2-2) by RANIA KHALEK

    [Sep 24, 2017] Mark Ames When Mother Jones Was Investigated for Spreading Kremlin Disinformation by Mark Ames

    [Sep 23, 2017] The Exit Strategy of Empire by Wendy McElro

    [Sep 20, 2017] The Politics of Military Ascendancy by James Petras

    [Sep 18, 2017] How The Military Defeated Trumps Insurgency

    [Sep 18, 2017] Looks like Trump initially has a four point platform that was anti-neoliberal in its essence: non-interventionism, no to neoliberal globalization, no to outsourcing of jobs, and no to multiculturism. All were betrayed very soon

    [Sep 13, 2017] A despot in disguise: one mans mission to rip up democracy by George Monbiot

    [Aug 09, 2017] Force Multipliers and 21st Century Imperial Warfare Practice and Propaganda by Maximilian C. Forte

    [Jun 26, 2017] The Soft Coup Under Way In Washington by David Stockman

    [Jun 24, 2017] The Saudi-Qatar spat - the reconciliation offer to be refused>. Qater will move closer to Turkey

    [Jun 17, 2017] The Collapsing Social Contract by Gaius Publius

    [May 23, 2017] Are they really out to get Trump by Philip Girald

    [May 21, 2017] What Obsessing About Trump Causes Us To Miss by Andrew Bacevich

    [May 21, 2017] WhateverGate -- The Crazed Quest To Find Some Reason (Any Reason!) To Dump Trump by John Derbyshire

    [May 21, 2017] Speech of Lavrov at the Military Academy of the General Staff

    [May 04, 2017] Jared Kushner fired me over Israel ten years ago by Philip Weiss

    [Apr 18, 2017] Atomization of workforce as a part of atomization of society under neoliberalism

    [Dec 21, 2018] Trump End the Syria War Now by Eric Margolis

    [Nov 11, 2018] Trump's Iran Policy Cannot Succeed Without Allies The National Interest by James Clapper & Thomas Pickering

    [Nov 10, 2018] The Reasons for Netanyahu's Panic by Alastair Crooke

    [Sep 11, 2018] Is Donald Trump Going to Do the Syria Backflip by Publius Tacitus

    [Aug 08, 2018] Ten Bombshell Revelations From Seymour Hersh's New Autobiography

    [Jun 13, 2018] How False Flag Operations Are Carried Out Today by Philip M. GIRALDI

    [May 31, 2018] Journalists and academics expose UK's criminal actions in the Middle East by Julie Hyland

    [May 09, 2018] Trotskyist Delusions, by Diana Johnstone

    [Apr 22, 2018] The Crisis Is Only In Its Beginning Stages by Paul Craig Roberts

    [Apr 21, 2018] Amazingly BBC newsnight just started preparing viewers for the possibility that there was no sarin attack, and the missile strikes might just have been for show

    [Apr 21, 2018] It s a tough old world and we are certainly capable of a Salisbury set-up and god knows what else in Syria.

    [Apr 20, 2018] Stench of hypocrisy British 'war on terror' strategic ties with radical Islam by John Wight

    [Apr 19, 2018] The Neocons Are Selling Koolaid Again! by W. Patrick Lang

    [Apr 17, 2018] Probable sequence of event in Douma false flag operation

    [Apr 11, 2018] It is long passed the time when any thinking person took Trump tweets seriously

    [Mar 23, 2018] Inglorious end of career of neocon McMaster

    [Feb 20, 2018] Russophobia is a futile bid to conceal US, European demise by Finian Cunningham

    [Feb 10, 2018] The generals are not Borgists. They are something worse ...

    [Jan 30, 2018] The Unseen Wars of America the Empire The American Conservative

    [Jan 29, 2018] It is OK for an empire to be hated and feared, it doesn t work so good when Glory slowly fades and he empire instead becomes hated and despised

    [Jan 22, 2018] Trump s Illegal War in Syria by Daniel Larison

    [Jan 21, 2018] America Sleepwalks Towards a Clash With the Turks in Syria by Patrick J. Buchanan

    [Jan 02, 2018] Neocon warmongers should be treated as rapists by Andrew J. Bacevich

    [Jan 02, 2018] American exceptionalism extracts a price from common citizens

    [Dec 28, 2019] Senior OPCW Official Busted Leaked Email Exposes Orders To Delete All Traces Of Dissent On Douma

    [Dec 21, 2019] Trump comes clean from world s policeman to thug running a global protection racket by Finian Cunningham

    [Dec 21, 2019] The ruthless neo-colonialists of 21st century

    [Dec 21, 2019] The goal of any war is the redistribution of taxpayer money into the bank accounts of MIC shareholders and executives

    [Dec 19, 2019] MIC lobbyism (which often is presented as patriotism) is the last refuge of scoundrels

    [Dec 02, 2019] Ghouta is Arabic for Reichstag Fire by Publius Tacitus

    [Nov 03, 2019] How Controlling Syria s Oil Serves Washington s Strategic Objectives by Nauman Sadiq

    [Oct 28, 2019] Expert Panel Finds Gaping Plot-Holes In OPCW Report On Alleged Syrian Chemical Attack by Caitlin Johnstone

    [Oct 24, 2019] Joltin' Jack Keane wants your kids to fight Russia and Syria over Syrian oil by Colonel Patrick Lang

    [Oct 24, 2019] Trump is now proven war criminal: WikiLeaks Releases New Documents Questioning Syria Chemical Attack Narrative

    [Sep 22, 2019] US reconnaissance plane operated drones that attacked Hmeymim

    [Sep 17, 2019] The Devolution of US-Russia Relations by Tony Kevin

    [Jun 27, 2019] 'The Ugly Americans' From Kermit Roosevelt to John Bolton Iran Al Jazeera

    [Jun 19, 2019] Bias bias the inclination to accuse people of bias by James Thompson

    [May 14, 2019] The Propaganda Multiplier How Global News Agencies and Western Media Report on Geopolitics

    [May 11, 2019] Leaked USA s Feb 2018 Plan For A Coup In Venezuela

    [May 07, 2019] Chris Hedges: The Demonization of Russia is Driven by Defense Contractors

    [Mar 20, 2019] In a remarkable report by British Channel 4, former CIA officials and a Reuters correspondent spoke candidly about the systematic dissemination of propaganda and misinformation in reporting on geopolitical conflicts

    [Mar 18, 2019] The Why are the media playing lapdog and not watchdog – again – on war in Iraq?

    [Mar 15, 2019] Will Democrats Go Full Hawk by Jack Hunter

    [Feb 19, 2019] Tulsi Gabbard kills New World Order bloodbath in thirty seconds

    [Feb 19, 2019] Warmongers in their ivory towers - YouTube

    [Feb 17, 2019] The goal of any war is the redistribution of taxpayer money into the bank accounts of MIC shareholders and executives

    Sites



    Etc

    Society

    Groupthink : Two Party System as Polyarchy : Corruption of Regulators : Bureaucracies : Understanding Micromanagers and Control Freaks : Toxic Managers :   Harvard Mafia : Diplomatic Communication : Surviving a Bad Performance Review : Insufficient Retirement Funds as Immanent Problem of Neoliberal Regime : PseudoScience : Who Rules America : Neoliberalism  : The Iron Law of Oligarchy : Libertarian Philosophy

    Quotes

    War and Peace : Skeptical Finance : John Kenneth Galbraith :Talleyrand : Oscar Wilde : Otto Von Bismarck : Keynes : George Carlin : Skeptics : Propaganda  : SE quotes : Language Design and Programming Quotes : Random IT-related quotesSomerset Maugham : Marcus Aurelius : Kurt Vonnegut : Eric Hoffer : Winston Churchill : Napoleon Bonaparte : Ambrose BierceBernard Shaw : Mark Twain Quotes

    Bulletin:

    Vol 25, No.12 (December, 2013) Rational Fools vs. Efficient Crooks The efficient markets hypothesis : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2013 : Unemployment Bulletin, 2010 :  Vol 23, No.10 (October, 2011) An observation about corporate security departments : Slightly Skeptical Euromaydan Chronicles, June 2014 : Greenspan legacy bulletin, 2008 : Vol 25, No.10 (October, 2013) Cryptolocker Trojan (Win32/Crilock.A) : Vol 25, No.08 (August, 2013) Cloud providers as intelligence collection hubs : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : Inequality Bulletin, 2009 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Copyleft Problems Bulletin, 2004 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Energy Bulletin, 2010 : Malware Protection Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 26, No.1 (January, 2013) Object-Oriented Cult : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2011 : Vol 23, No.11 (November, 2011) Softpanorama classification of sysadmin horror stories : Vol 25, No.05 (May, 2013) Corporate bullshit as a communication method  : Vol 25, No.06 (June, 2013) A Note on the Relationship of Brooks Law and Conway Law

    History:

    Fifty glorious years (1950-2000): the triumph of the US computer engineering : Donald Knuth : TAoCP and its Influence of Computer Science : Richard Stallman : Linus Torvalds  : Larry Wall  : John K. Ousterhout : CTSS : Multix OS Unix History : Unix shell history : VI editor : History of pipes concept : Solaris : MS DOSProgramming Languages History : PL/1 : Simula 67 : C : History of GCC developmentScripting Languages : Perl history   : OS History : Mail : DNS : SSH : CPU Instruction Sets : SPARC systems 1987-2006 : Norton Commander : Norton Utilities : Norton Ghost : Frontpage history : Malware Defense History : GNU Screen : OSS early history

    Classic books:

    The Peter Principle : Parkinson Law : 1984 : The Mythical Man-MonthHow to Solve It by George Polya : The Art of Computer Programming : The Elements of Programming Style : The Unix Hater’s Handbook : The Jargon file : The True Believer : Programming Pearls : The Good Soldier Svejk : The Power Elite

    Most popular humor pages:

    Manifest of the Softpanorama IT Slacker Society : Ten Commandments of the IT Slackers Society : Computer Humor Collection : BSD Logo Story : The Cuckoo's Egg : IT Slang : C++ Humor : ARE YOU A BBS ADDICT? : The Perl Purity Test : Object oriented programmers of all nations : Financial Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : The Most Comprehensive Collection of Editor-related Humor : Programming Language Humor : Goldman Sachs related humor : Greenspan humor : C Humor : Scripting Humor : Real Programmers Humor : Web Humor : GPL-related Humor : OFM Humor : Politically Incorrect Humor : IDS Humor : "Linux Sucks" Humor : Russian Musical Humor : Best Russian Programmer Humor : Microsoft plans to buy Catholic Church : Richard Stallman Related Humor : Admin Humor : Perl-related Humor : Linus Torvalds Related humor : PseudoScience Related Humor : Networking Humor : Shell Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2012 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2013 : Java Humor : Software Engineering Humor : Sun Solaris Related Humor : Education Humor : IBM Humor : Assembler-related Humor : VIM Humor : Computer Viruses Humor : Bright tomorrow is rescheduled to a day after tomorrow : Classic Computer Humor

    The Last but not Least Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt. Ph.D


    Copyright © 1996-2021 by Softpanorama Society. www.softpanorama.org was initially created as a service to the (now defunct) UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP) without any remuneration. This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively for educational use and is distributed under the Softpanorama Content License. Original materials copyright belong to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only in compliance with the fair use doctrine.

    FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.

    This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free) site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...

    You can use PayPal to to buy a cup of coffee for authors of this site

    Disclaimer:

    The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or referenced source) and are not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society. We do not warrant the correctness of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without Javascript.

    Last modified: January, 06, 2020