||“I am surrounded, they are outside, I don’t want them to take me and parade me, conduct the airstrike, they will make a mockery of me and this uniform. I want to die with dignity and take all these bastards with me. Please my last wish, conduct the airstrike, they will kill me either way. This is the end commander, thank you, tell my family and my country I love them. Tell them I was brave and I fought until I could no longer. Please take care of my family, avenge my death, goodbye commander, tell my family I love them“
||“This is for our guys”
[This analysis was written for the Unz Review]
We are currently living the most dangerous days in human history. You think that this is hyperbole?
We are risking a nuclear Armageddon
The first thing to realize is that this is not, repeat, not about Syria or chemical weapons, not in Salsbury, not in Douma. That kind of nonsense is just “mental prolefeed” for the mentally deficient, politically blinded or otherwise zombified ideological drones who, from the Maine, to the Gulf of Tonkin, to NATO’s Gladio bombing of the Bologna train-station, to the best and greatest of them all – 9/11 of course – will just believe anything “their” (as they believe) side tells them. The truth is that the AngloZionists are the prime proliferators of chemical weapons in history (and the prime murderers of Arabs and Muslims too!). So their crocodile tears are just that – crocodile tears, even if their propaganda machine says otherwise.
Does anybody seriously believe that Trump, May, Macron or Netanyahu would be willing to risk an apocalyptic thermonuclear war which could kill several hundred million people in just a few hours because Assad has used chemical weapons on tens, hundreds or even thousands of innocent Syrian civilians (assuming, just for argument’s sake, that this accusation is founded)? Since when do the AngloZionist care about Arabs?! This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever!
For those who would say that speaking of “several hundred million people” killed is hyperbole, I would recommend looking up past western plans to “solve the Russian problem” including:
- Plan Totality (1945): earmarked 20 Soviet cities for obliteration in a first strike: Moscow, Gorki, Kuybyshev, Sverdlovsk, Novosibirsk, Omsk, Saratov, Kazan, Leningrad, Baku, Tashkent, Chelyabinsk, Nizhny Tagil, Magnitogorsk, Molotov, Tbilisi, Stalinsk, Grozny, Irkutsk, and Yaroslavl.
- Operation Unthinkable (1945) assumed a surprise attack by up to 47 British and American divisions in the area of Dresden, in the middle of Soviet lines. This represented almost a half of roughly 100 divisions (ca. 2.5 million men) available to the British, American and Canadian headquarters at that time. (…) The majority of any offensive operation would have been undertaken by American and British forces, as well as Polish forces and up to 100,000 German Wehrmacht soldiers.
- Operation Dropshot (1949): included mission profiles that would have used 300 nuclear bombs and 29,000 high-explosive bombs on 200 targets in 100 cities and towns to wipe out 85% of the Soviet Union’s industrial potential at a single stroke. Between 75 and 100 of the 300 nuclear weapons were targeted to destroy Soviet combat aircraft on the ground.
Articles like this one, this one, and this one are also good pointers (these are all estimates, of course, nobody knows for sure; all that matters is an approximate orders of magnitude).
By the way, I am not suggesting that at this point in time the AngloZionists would want to deliberately start a thermonuclear war with Russia. What I am suggesting is that there is a very simple and basic asymmetry between the Russian and AngloZionist forces in the Middle-East which could lead to such an outcome regardless of original intentions. Here is how:
How are we risking a nuclear Armageddon?
Step one: the AngloZionists strike Syria hard enough to force the Russians to retaliate.
Step two: now outraged by the Russian response, the AngloZionists retaliate against the Russian forces in Syria.
At this point it is crucial to remember that while the Russians have better equipment and far better soldiers than their “western” opponents (the examples of Alexander Prokhorenko or Roman Filipov will tell you all you need to know about how Russians in Syria fight, especially compared to the kind of personnel deployed by the US and NATO), the CENTCOM+NATO+Israel+KSA have an immense numerical advantage. It does not matter how effective the Russian air defenses or (tiny) air superiority aircraft force is when it can simply be overwhelmed by numbers. All the Empire needs to do is first fire a large number of dumb old Tomahawk cruise missiles, let the Russian use their stores of air defense missiles and then follow-up with their more advanced weapons. The truth is that if the Empire wanted to, it could even establish a no-fly zone over Syria and completely wipe-out the Russian task force. Sure, there would be losses on both sides, the Russians would fight heroically, but they would lose. Unless, of course, they got help from the Motherland, specifically in the form of cruise missile attacks from the Black Sea Fleet, the Caspian Flotilla, the aircraft stationed in southern Russia (Crimea) or even in Iran. Russia also strike with land and sea based missiles. So Russia does have the capability to strike at numerous lucrative (and more or less defenseless) US and “coalition” targets throughout the Middle-East. But what would be the consequences of that?
Step three: Russian strikes on CENTCOM targets would force the Empire to fight back and strike at Russian Navy ships and, even worse, at military installations in Russia proper.
Step four: US/NATO attacks on Russian territory would inevitably trigger a Russian response on the USA itself.
That response would be initially conventional, but as the losses on both sides would mount, the use of nuclear weapons would be almost inevitable.
Yes, in theory, at any time during this escalatory cycle both sides could decide to de-escalate. In theory. But in the real world, I don’t see that happening nor have I ever seen any model which would convincingly explain how such a de-escalation could happen (especially with the exceptionally low-quality type of narcissistic and psychopathic individuals in command in the USA – think Trump or Bolton here – and all their “we are the best and biggest and greatest” pseudo-patriotic nonsense).
I am not predicting that this is what will actually happen, but I am saying that this is the risk the AngloZionist Empire is willing to take in order to achieve.. what exactly? What is worth taking such a risk?
I think that the UK Minister of Defense put it best: the AngloZionists want Russia to “go away and shut up”.
Why we are risking a nuclear Armageddon (go away and shut up!)
“Go away and shut up” has been the dream of all western leaders since at least a millennium (interspersed and strengthened by regular (and failed) attempts at conquering and/or converting the Russians). Just think how frustrating it has been for a civilization which has established colonies worldwide, including in the farthest regions of our planet, to have this unconquerable nation right next door which was not only refusing to submit, but which would regularly defeat them on the battlefield even when they all joined forces lead by their “best and brightest” leaders (Napoleon, Hitler and… Trump?). Just imagine how a civilization centered on, and run by, bankers would go crazy realizing that immense riches were literally “right next door” but that those who lived on that land would, for some unfathomable reason, refuse to let them exploit it! The very existence of a “Russian Russia” is an affront to all the real (as opposed to official) western values and that is simply not something the leaders of the Empire are willing to tolerate. Hence Syria, hence the Ukraine, hence all the silly accusations of “novichok” cum buckwheat attacks. These are all expressions of the same policy
- Paint Russia as some kind of Mordor and create yet another “grand coalition” against her
- Force Russia to submit to the AngloZionist Hegemony
- Defeat Russia politically, economically or militarily
These are objectives for which it is worth risking it all, especially when your own Empire is collapsing and time is not on your side. What we are witnessing since at least 2015 is yet another western Crusade against Russia, a kind of holy war waged in the name of everything the West holds sacred (money, power, hegemonic world domination, secularism, etc.) against everything it abhors (sovereignty, independence, spirituality, traditions).
The simple truth is this: were it not for the Russian military capabilities, the West would have wiped Russia “off the map” long ago, and replaced it with something like a number of “mini-Poland’s” ruled by a liberal comprador elite just like the one currently in charge of the EU. The desperate scream “go away and shut up” is just the expression of having this “western dream” frustrated by the power of the Russian armed forces and the unity of the Russian people behind their current leader. But even the admittedly frustrating existence of Russia is not a sufficient reason to risk it all; there is much more at stake here.
Russia as the tip of a much larger iceberg
Due to geographical, historical, cultural, religious and military factors, Russia is today the objective leader of the worldwide resistance to Empire, at least in moral, psychological and political terms. But that does not mean that she is “anti-USA”, not at all. For one thing, Russia does absolutely not run or control the worldwide resistance to Empire. In fact, to a superficial analysis, Russia often looks pretty much alone in her stance (as shown by the recent Chinese behavior at the UN Security Council). The truth is that other countries who want an end to the AngloZionist hegemony have absolutely no incentive to join Russia on top of the US “shit list” and expose themselves to the wrath of the Hegemon, especially not when Russia seems to be more than willing to bear the brunt of the Empire’s hatred. Besides, like all large and powerful countries, Russia lacks real friends and most countries are more than happy to demand that Russia fix all their problems (as shown by the constant stream of accusations that Russia has not done enough in this or that part of the planet). And yet all these countries are not exactly standing in line to show solidarity with Russia when she might need it. So when I say that Russia leads the resistance I am not suggesting that she does that the way the USA runs NATO or some “coalition of the willing”. Russia simply leads by the fact that she does not “go away” or, even more so, does not “shut up”.
Russia is the only country on the planet, with the possible exception of Iran, which openly and unapologetically dares to denounce the Empire’s hypocrisy and which is willing to back her words with military power if needed. The DPRK is a unique and local case. As for the various Bolivarian countries and movements in Latin America, they are currently being defeated by the Empire. In theory, the Muslim world definitely has the potential to play a bigger role in the resistance to the Empire, but the Wahabi-virus injected into the Muslim world by the USA+KSA+Israel has, at least so far, prevented the emergence of a successful and truly Islamic model besides the one of the Islamic Republic of Iran (hence the demonization of the latter by the AngloZionists).
And yet …
The Empire is in the process of losing the entire Middle-East. Not so much because of some brilliant and Machiavellian Russian or Iranian policies, but more as a courtesy of its own infinitely arrogant, stupid and self-defeating policies. The overthrow of Saddam Hussein will probably go down in history as one of the dumbest political decisions ever (Bolton was behind that one too, by the way). That was an entirely self-inflicted catastrophe. As was the almost equally disastrous invasion of Afghanistan. Another self-inflicted disaster for the AngloZionists was their support for the US/EU led coup in the Ukraine, which not only resulted in a calamity which the Europeans will have to pay for for many decades to come (think of it as a big Somalia on the EU’s doorstep) but also did an amazing job uniting the Russian people behind their leaders and reduced the pro-Western feelings in the Russian public opinion to something in the range of 2-5 percent at the most. “Getting” the Ukraine sure would not have been worth “losing” Russia.
Then there is China which the USA has grossly mismanaged since the so-called Third Taiwan Strait Crisis in 1996 when Clinton militarily threatened China (see here for details) and with whom Trump has now launched a trade war in order to MAGA (good luck with that!).
In contrast, all the real “action” is now centered around the OBOR project in which China and Russia play the main role and in which the Anglosphere will play no role at all. Add the Petro-Yuan to the equation and you have the emergence of a new Eurasian model which threatens to make the entire Empire simply irrelevant.
And then there is Turkey (2nd most powerful NATO member state). And Pakistan for that matter. Or Afghanistan. Or Iraq. Or Yemen. Everywhere the Empire is in full retreat leaving only chaos behind.
The truth is that Russia would never be a credible threat to the AngloZionist Hegemony if it was not for the innumerable self-inflicted disasters the Empire has been absorbing year after year after year. In reality, Russia is no threat to anybody at all. And even China would not be a threat to the Empire if the latter was not so arrogant, so over-stretched, so ignorant, reckless and incompetent in its actions. Let me just give one simple, but stark, example: not only does the USA not have anything remotely resembling a consistent foreign policy, it does not even have any ministry of foreign affairs. The Department of State does not deal with diplomacy simply because the US leaders don’t believe in diplomacy as a concept. All the DoS does is issue threats, sanctions, ultimatums, make demands, deliver score-cards (on human rights and the like, of all things!) and explain to the public why the USA is almost constantly at war with somebody. That is not “diplomacy” and the likes of Nikki Haley are not diplomats. In fact, the USA has no use for International Law either, hence the self-same Nikki Haley openly declaring at a UNSC meeting that the USA is willing to ignore the decisions of the UNSC and act in complete violation of the UN Charter. Simply put: thugs have no need for any diplomacy. They don’t understand the concept.
Just like their Israeli masters and mentors, the US Americans have convinced themselves that all they need to be successful on the international scene is to either threaten the use of force or actually use force. Which works great (or so it seems) in Gaza or Grenada, but when dealing with China, Russia or Iran, this monomaniacal approach rapidly shows its limitations, especially when your force is really limited to shooting missiles from afar or murdering civilians (neither the USA nor Israel nor, for that matter, the KSA has a credible “boots on the ground” capability, hence their reliance on proxies).
The Empire is failing, fast, and for all the talk about “Animal Assad” or “Rocket Man” being in need of AngloZionist punishment, the stakes are the survival of Hegemony imposed upon mankind at the end of WWII and, again, at the end of the Cold War, and the future of our planet. There cannot be one World Hegemon and a multipolar world order regulated by international law. It’s an either-or situation. And in that sense, this is all much bigger than Syria or even Russia.
From Douma to Donetsk?
There is still a chance that the AngloZionists will decide to strike Syria symbolically, as they did last year following the previous chemical false flag in Khan Sheikhoun (Trump has now probably tweeted himself into a corner which makes some kind of attack almost inevitable). Should that happen though, we should not celebrate too soon as this will just be a minor course change, the 21st-century anti-Russia Crusade will continue, most likely in the form of a Ukronazi attack on the Donbass.
Quick reminder: the purpose of such an attack will not be to reconquer and then ethnically cleanse the Donbass, but to force the Russian Federation to prevent such an outcome by openly intervening. Such a Russian intervention will, of course, quickly stop the war and crush the Ukronazi forces, but at that point the tensions in Europe will go through the roof, meaning that NATO will (finally!) find a halfway credible mission for itself, the Germans will have to give up on North Stream II, Poland and the Baltic statelets will make money by becoming the East European version of Okinawa and the Anglo powers (US/UK) will firmly reestablish control over the EU, Brexit notwithstanding. Furthermore, Russia will become the target of a total economic war, including an energy blockade (the US will be more than happy to impose its overpriced gas on the Europeans), a disconnection from SWIFT, a seizure of Russian assets, a ban on Russian financial operations in the EU, etc. That could be risky, of course, especially with a trade war with China also taking place, but these are just options. What is certain is that as long as Putin or anybody like him remains in power in Russia, the Congress will continue to slap sanctions after sanctions after sanctions on Russia. In fact, during most of her history, even before the Revolution, Russia was under one type of western sanctions or another. There is absolutely nothing new here and, as I like to remind people these days, the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, especially with maniacal regimes and leaders.
Besides, as I have already mentioned in the past, and unlike the current confrontation in Syria, a war in the Ukraine is a very safe bet for the Empire. First, when the goal is the defeat of “your” side, almost any military adventure is pretty safe. Second, once the Russians are in Novorussia, they will “own it”, meaning that they will have to carry the huge financial burden of rebuilding it. Third, such a Russian presence would consolidate and even boost the Ukie nationalists who, by the way, will have a golden opportunity to blame everything they did wrong over the past 4 years on the Russians. Fourth, any such operation will get a lot of the worst and most rabid Ukronazi killed and that will remove a potential problem from the Poroshenko-types the US much prefers to deal with. Finally, as I said, this will give NATO a sacred mission to “defend Europe against a revanchist Russian rogue state” thereby crushing any European hopes for even a modest degree of independence from the Anglosphere. And the worst case? The worst case would be if the Novorussians can stop the Ukronazi attack without overt Russian intervention. But even if that happens and even if the Novorussians launch some kind of counter-offensive liberating Mariupol or Slaviansk, these are irrelevant losses from the point of view of the Empire which sees both Russians and Ukrainians as cannon fodder. Just as the Empire wants Arabs and Muslims to kill each other on Israel’s behalf in the Middle-East, so does the Empire want nothing more than to see Ukrainians and Russians kill each other in maximal numbers and for as long as possible.
[Sidebar: Some might suggest here that the Novorussians could not only defeat the Ukronazi forces but also liberate the rest of the Ukraine, including Kiev. I find that exceedingly unlikely. Here is why: First, all the hurrah-patriotic nonsense notwithstanding, there are very good and objective reasons why the Novorussians could not liberate Mariupol the first time around (there was a major risk of Ukrainian envelopment for the Novorussian force) or why it took them so long to retake control of the Donetsk airport: during most of their existence, Novorussian forces were composed of a mix of different types of units which, for all their personal courage, were simply not capable of operational-level offensives. They were limited to tactical-level engagements which, even when successful, do not necessarily lead to operational-level developments. There seems to have been major changes made in the command structure of the Novorussian forces. The liberation of the Donetsk airport and, even more so, the Debaltsevo “cauldron” were joint DNR-LNR efforts, but even if, as I suspect, the Novorussians are now capable of operational-level counter-offensives, this is still not what it would take to liberate Kiev. Furthermore, as one Novorussian officer commented, “the further West we go, the less we are seen as liberators and the more as occupiers”. Last but not least, Russia will not allow the Novorussians to liberate most of the Ukraine even if they could do so, because then Russia would have to pay for the staggering costs of trying to fix this massive “European Somalia”, and that is a task far beyond her current means. For all the East-European hallucinations about some Russian invasion, Russia has neither the desire nor even the means to invade anybody. The painful reality is this: the Ukrainians will pay a dear price for their Russophobic delusions and most of the bill to fix that mess will have to be paid by the rest of Europe. They created that nightmare, let them fix it now.]
Conclusion: back to Syria
None of the above should distract us from what is by far the biggest danger currently facing us all – the risks of a US-Russian war in Syria. In fact, this reality seems to be slowly dawning even on the most obtuse of presstitutes who are now worrying about a spill-over effect. No, not in Europe or the USA, but on Israel, of course. Still, the fact that there are folks who understand that Israel might not survive a superpower clash on its doorstep is a good thing. Maybe the Israel lobby in the USA, or a least the part of it which cares for Israel (many/most only pretend to), will be more vocal than all the silent Anglo shabbos-goyim who don’t seem to be able to muster even a minimal amount of self-preservation instinct? Bibi Netanyahu felt the need to call Putin after the Israeli ambassador to Russia was read the riot act by Russian officials following the (admittedly rather lame) Israeli airstrike on the T-4 Syrian air force base. Not much of a hope, I admit..
This is not about good guys versus bad guys anymore. It’s about sane versus insane. I think that we can safely place Trump, Bolton, Haley and the rest of them in the “terminally delusional” camp. But what about the top US generals? I asked two well-informed friends, and they both told me that there is probably nobody above the rank of Colonel with enough courage left to object to the Neocon’s insanity, even if that means WWIII. Again, not much hope here either…
There is a sura (Al-Anfal 8:30) of the Qur’an which Sheikh Imran Hosein often mentions which I want to quote here: And [remember, O Muhammad], when those who disbelieved plotted against you to restrain you or kill you or evict you [from Makkah]. But they plan, and Allah plans. And Allah is the best of planners. And since we are talking about Syria where Iran and Hezbollah are targets as much (or more) as the Russians, it is also fitting here to quote a very popular Shia slogan which calls to remember that the battle against oppression must be fought ceaselessly and everywhere: “Every Day Is Ashura and Every Land Is Karbala”. And, of course, there are the words of Christ Himself: “And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” (Matt 10:28).
Such religious references will, no doubt, irritate the many “enlightened” westerners for whom such language reeks of obscurantism, fanaticism, and bigotry. But in Russia or the Middle-East, such references are very much part of the national or religious ethos. To illustrate my point I want to quote from Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s “Divine Victory Speech” spoken in 2006 following the crushing victory by a relatively small Hezbollah force of the combined might of the Israeli ground, air and naval forces:
We are today celebrating a big strategic, historic, and divine victory. How can the human mind imagine that a few thousand of your Lebanese resistance sons – if I wanted, I would give the exact number – held out for 23 days in a land exposed to the skies against the strongest air force in the Middle East, which had an air bridge transporting smart bombs from America, through Britain, to Israel; against 40,000 officers and soldiers – four brigades of elite forces, three reserve army divisions; against the strongest tank in the world; and against the strongest army in the region? How could only a few thousand people hold out and fight under such harsh conditions, and [how could] their fighting force the naval warships out of our territorial waters? By the way, the army and the resistance are capable of protecting the territorial waters from being desecrated by any Zionist. [Applause] [And how could their fighting] also lead to the destruction of the Mirkava tanks, which are an object of pride for the Israeli industry; damage Israeli helicopters day and night; and turn the elite brigades – I am not exaggerating, and you can watch and read the Israeli media – into rats frightened by your sons? [How did this happen] while you were relinquished by the Arabs and the world and in light of the political (human solidarity was profound though) division around you? How could this group of mujahidin defeat this army without the support and assistance of Almighty God? This resistance experience, which should be conveyed to the world, depends – on the moral and spiritual level – on faith, certainty, reliance [on God], and readiness to make sacrifices. It also depends on reason, planning, organization, armament, and, as is said, on taking all possible protective procedures. We are neither a disorganized and sophistic resistance, nor a resistance pulled to the ground that sees before it nothing but soil, nor a resistance of chaos. The pious, God-reliant, loving, and knowledgeable resistance is also the conscious, wise, trained, and equipped resistance that has plans. This is the secret of the victory we are today celebrating, brothers and sisters.
These words could also be used to describe the relatively small Russian task force in Syria. In fact, there are numerous parallels which could be made between Hezbollah’s role and position in the Middle-East and Russia’s role and position in the world. And while both are well-trained, well-armed and well-commanded, it is their spiritual power which will decide the outcome of the wars waged against them by the Hegemony. AngloZionist secularists will never understand that – they just can’t – and that will bring their inevitable downfall. The only question is the price mankind will have to pay to have that last Empire finally bite the dust.