INTO THE BLAST FURNACE: THE WAR AGAINST IDLIB’S TERRORISTS AND THE KURDISH DILEMMA – By Ziad Fadel

fcce9-1g7eof1yictunofsukq1flq

All eyes are on Idlib today and the American fall-back position in the northeast.  The Syrian government’s strategy of making truces with terrorists and offering them safe passage to Idlib where they were heaped up has paid dividends.  What is amazing is that so many of the terrorist commanders could not see this coming.  Today, even with Turkish collusion, terrorist jihadists are bracing for their apocalypse.  As terrorist propagandists describe it, “it’s the most violent air campaign we have ever seen in Syria!”  Gee.  Surprise!  That they could not imagine this happening is a good sign of the enemy’s naivete.  It was obvious to all my readers that this was going to happen.

Turkey is conflicted about this largely Syrian-Russian-Iranian stratagem.  While valuing their relationship with Russia and Iran, the Turks are unwilling to break away from their Assado-phobia.  It might be that they feel a sense of shame for promoting the war so openly, but, now seeing no path out but to cling to the tired mantras that have justified their own involvement in the dissemination of terror throughout the Fertile Crescent, they persist in prolonging the war against Damascus  The Turks and their foreign policy are adrift in a sea of contradictions.

Erdoghan is reportedly enraged by the Zionist moves on Jerusalem inspired by Trump’s lunacy.

Erdoghan is reportedly enraged by the U.S.A.’s unwillingness to extradite Fethullah Gulen to Turkey to face charges of seditiion and treason – not to mention his involvement in an attempt to overthrow the government in Ankara.

Erdoghan is enraged by the U.S.A.’s support for the Kurdish SDF, a group the Turks equate with the PKK with whom they have fought an endless insurgency which aims to establish a Kurdish state in Turkey.  He has punished the U.S. and NATO by purchasing an S-400 anti-aircraft system from Russia.

Erdoghan is enraged by Saudi Arabia’s efforts to chastise Qatar for its cuddling up to Iran.  He has sent troops to Qatar to help defend that nation if KSA decides to repeat another blunder on its own borders.

Erdoghan is enraged by KSA’s and Egypt’s hostility to the Muslim Brotherhood, a group it is said to which Erdoghan either belongs or is supporting wholeheartedly.  He is even more enraged by Egypt’s mistreatment of Hamas officials and troops – Cairo’s efforts to blunt Hamas’s military capabilities – destroying tunnels, seizing weapons and killing fishermen.  Hamas is, of course, a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Erdoghan is miffed at everybody.  He’s even enraged by Dr. Assad’s durability.

Erdoghan has also expressed rage at the massive military operation aimed at exterminating the entire structure of Alqaeda in Idlib.  He has railed against the Syrian Air Force’s bombardment of Alqaeda bases, labeling the air attacks as “murder of civilians”.  It has been reported that the Turkish military gave aid to Alqaeda terrorists in their counter-offensive to halt the Syrian Army’s advance on the Abu Dhuhoor Air Base.  That advance has recommenced and the SAA has recaptured all villages lost to the terrorist/Turk counter-attack.

Well, that’s just too bad.  And it makes no sense for him to involve his country in a losing effort to keep the terrorist groups in Idlib on life support while cutting his ties to the Americans and Europeans.  I don’t know what Macron is thinking now, but it must be something along the lines of cursing the world for imposing crackpot Trump and even loonier Erdoghan upon what should have been a more rational world. Erdoghan doesn’t sense it, but, his options lessen with each gambit he makes.  He has now threatened to invade northeastern Syria to tamp down the moves toward solidifying the American plan to establish a state for the Kurds (remember my post on that subject). If he does do that, he will be ordering his forces to fire on a fellow NATO member, the United States, which has over 10,000 troops on the ground helping the Kurds to set up the requirements of statehood.  A mess is in the making.  Whenever the United States develops  very clever plans, you can already figure its going to get mired in a new overseas war.

I have received information that the plan to establish a Kurdish rump state in the northeast was initially suggested by the Zionist entity.  According to my source, Mossad developed the plan on orders from Mileikowski (a/k/a Netanyahu) to give the Americans a fighting chance at blunting the rapid proliferation of Iranian influence in the region.  We now know, that the new Kurdistan in the north and the endless training in the south at Al-Tanf are meant to squeeze any efforts by Iran to project its economic power by extending a natural gas pipeline across Syria to the Mediterranean and its military power by roadways across Iraq and Syria to South Lebanon, Hizbollah’s home territory.

There can be no more screw-brained a plan than this one.  And if the U.S. is counting on Turkey to keep up its end by continually aiding and abetting the terrorists of Hay’`at Ahraar Al-Shaam (read: Alqaeda), it appears that kind of expectation is the stuff of delusion. The Turks are increasingly moving away from NATO and have little respect for the United States, as I wrote earlier.  They have, since 2015, closed their borders to Syrians coming from Idlib.  They have tightened controls over supplies to the Alqaeda terrorists.  The one thing they have not done completely is block smugglers from delivering much-needed material to the thugs who populate Idlib.  This is how the terrorists were able to manufacture the drones that attacked the Russian base at Humaymeem.  The state which gave them the basic design is clearly the Zionist Settler State.

Russia quickly retaliated against the terrorists by striking their factory and killing most of those who were responsible for the manufacture and design of the drones.  The intelligence they received identifying the location of the factory was, reportedly, from Turkey.  And Russian vengeance was most sweet.

Syrian Air Force bombing of Idlib is intensifying exponentially, as the terrorist propagandists admit.  The Syrian Air Force has been 100% revamped and modernized.  The army is much stronger.  Even with the American-made TOW anti-tank system, the terrorists have no chance because Syrian engineers developed the Saraab 1 and 2 which have effectively neutralized the efficacity of the TOWs.  With no new technology to help them, the terrorists are simply flipping their hour glasses until the final moments.

Saudi Arabia has ceased all funding to the Alqaeda led by Muhaysini.  There are no smugglers with briefcases full of money to pay salaries to the terrorists whose families have now become sorrowful characters in a Greek tragedy eerily unfolding every day.  With a Europe unwilling to accept them, the smuggling business is seeing a brisk upturn as families spend every item of jewelry on a passage to Greece and, hopefully, to Europe. I cannot envision a scenario more deprived of hope than what these wretches are facing.  It is only a matter of time.

The Americans have given the PKK MANPADs.  That’s going to make Erdoghan real happy.  There is already talk that the Turkish offensive at Afrin will begin today, Wednesday, January 17, 2018.  I hope the Kurds and the Turks blow each other up.  I pray for a bloody encounter that will teach the Turks about supporting terrorism and the Kurds about overreaching and treason.

In the meantime, another drama is taking place in the Eastern Ghouta.  The Army of Islam is still receiving its salaries from KSA.  But, as I understand it, the Saudis have given the ‘Alloosh brothers a limit.  They have been told to negotiate at Geneva or Sochi or get left out.  Don’t believe the nonsense spewed out by fake-news organizations about how popular the terrorists are in the Ghouta.  They are not popular.  They are only tolerated by a population of drudges. The decision has been made to beat the terrorists into the ground with air power.  Watch carefully the position taken by ‘Alloosh at Sochi – we predict a sudden abandonment of entrenched positions and an acceptance of Dr. Assad’s leadership.  They have no other choice.  And so little time.  ZAF

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

___________________________________________
NEWS AND COMMENT:
Petri Krohn shares this with us. The premise is simple, FSA = Alqaeda. Share with friends:

https://www.libertarianinstitute.org/foreign-policy/no-fsa-al-qaeda/https://www.libertarianinstitute.org/foreign-policy/no-fsa-al-qaeda/

Chris sends this article explaining why imbecile Trump reneged on his promise to leave Afghanistan when in office.  This article pushes the thesis that the U.S. is terrified of the Chinese-led Belt Road project.  Just as afraid of Iran’s natural gas pipeline.  And you wonder why North Korea will not give up its nuclear arsenal!

https://journal-neo.org/2018/01/12/is-trump-afghan-policy-aimed-at-taliban-or-at-china/

Germany’s Yuan Move ‘One More Step in Its Geopolitical Divorce From Washington’ © REUTERS/ Michael Kappele ‘ – By Sputnik

 German Chancellor Angela Merkel meets U.S. President Donald Trump on the eve of the G-20 summit in Hamburg, Germany, July 6, 2017
r/POOL

Opinion

Get short URL
10552

Journalist and financial observer Ivan Danilov outlines why Berlin’s recent decision on the currency front has to be viewed in the broader context of a slowly but steady reformatting of the global financial system.

On Monday, Bloomberg confirmed that the Bundesbank plans to add the Chinese yuan to its currency reserves.

Commenting on the decision in a piece for RIA Novosti, Danilov noted that Berlin’s move, set against the background of a Yuan riding high against the dollar in currency markets, is obviously politically charged, “especially when one considers that the entire Western world is now waiting with a sinking feeling for a diplomatic showdown between Donald Trump and Angela Merkel during the World Economic Forum” in Switzerland later this month.

In fact, the observer suggested, the actions of the Bundesbank, which follow up on the repatriation of at least part of Germany’s gold reserves from the US, “indicate that Europe is ready to show in practice its ability to do without Washington’s  ‘valuable guidance’ and ‘patronage’.”

While the German Central Bank is formally independent, its political ties with the Merkel government aren’t really a secret to anyone, according to Danilov. The yuan decision is particularly intriguing given the fact that the Bundesbank usually refrains from announcing its intention to make currency purchases ahead of time.What’s more, the journalist wrote, recent developments on the other side of the world indicate that “Berlin’s actions on the currency front need to be analyzed in the context of the broader trend of a slow reformatting of the global monetary system.”

“Two weeks ago,” he recalled, “US and Japanese media carried out an informational attack against the yuan, releasing a series of analytical materials claiming that all attempts by China to internationalize its currency had failed, even after the IMF had added the yuan to its basket of currencies.” On January 7, for example, Bloomberg reported that “Beijing’s Yuan Ambitions Look Dashed,” following up an earlier Nikkei article headlined “Internationalization of Yuan Loses Momentum.”

The goal of this campaign was obvious, Danilov stressed, with the basic message by US and Japanese financial pundits being that the yuan had failed, both at the IMF and in its petro-yuan efforts, and that essentially, ‘the petrodollar is here to stay forever.’

But with its Monday decision, “the German Central Bank quite unceremoniously spoiled the party,” the journalist added. While the bank initially did not specify the amounts or timeframes for its yuan purchases, Bundesbank board member Joachim Wuermeling soon offered more details about the move, telling Reuters that “the decision to accept the yuan is part of a long-term strategy of diversification and reflects the increased role of the Chinese currency in the global financial system.”Washington cannot but be upset with this line of reasoning, according to Danilov, since ‘long-term diversification’ inevitably means a weakening role of the dollar and the subsequent decline in demand, particularly if other countries follow Germany’s lead.

“This is especially important in light of America’s huge budget deficits, which will grow by at least another trillion dollars due to Donald Trump’s recent tax reform. After all, the convenient printing press used to plug gaps in the US budget is possible only thanks to the enormous demand for dollars outside the US. If such demand ceases to exist, or is greatly reduced, the country will either have to learn to live within its means (something they have long-since forgotten how to do), or take Zimbabwe’s hyperinflationary route.”

In that sense, policymakers in Washington can view the Bundesbank’s decision in one of only two ways, according to Danilov: as a threat to the US’s financial stability, or an unfriendly gesture on Berlin’s part.

“It’s absolutely obvious that no actions by the Bundesbank, or the European Central Bank, which also recently reported the purchase of yuan, will on their own lead to serious problems for the dollar system,” the expert stressed. “But neither is this necessary. No one is eager to repeat the experiment of Muamar Gaddafi, who tried in one stroke to pull the whole of Africa out of the dollar system and create a Pan African currency based on gold and oil.”

“Moreover, the dollar system cannot be destroyed in one blow without catastrophic consequences for the global financial mechanism. Therefore, those seeking to liquidate it have obviously switched over to the tactics of what can conditionally be called ‘death by a thousand cuts’ – i.e., dismantling the system with the help of hundreds of small steps, each time slightly reducing demand for and area of use for the US currency.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Foreign Minister Sergei Larvov during a visit with Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in 2008
© Sputnik/ Michael Klimentyev
Russian President Vladimir Putin and Foreign Minister Sergei Larvov during a visit with Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in 2008

And until that happens, countries will continue to use the dollar system, and even try to take advantage of it. For example, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, the recently created China-led development bank expected to be a future competitor to the World Bank, recently announced plans to release dollar bonds to finance projects in Asia and the BRICS countries.

According to Danilov, this step and others like it serve to indicate “that China considers it important to use the existing world financial system until the point where the alternative structure becomes fully operational.”

From left: Russian President Vladimir Putin, South African republic President jacob Zuma, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Brazilian President Michel Temer seen at the BRICS leaders' meeting with BRICS Business Council members, September 4, 2017
© Sputnik/ Grigoriy Sisoev
From left: Russian President Vladimir Putin, South African republic President jacob Zuma, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Brazilian President Michel Temer seen at the BRICS leaders’ meeting with BRICS Business Council members, September 4, 2017

As for Russia, it too benefits from Berlin’s ‘yuan demarche,’ the observer argued, since it weakens the ‘collective West’s’ hostile political campaign against Moscow, while facilitating Russian economic interests.

Specifically, Wuermeling’s statement that the Bundesbank is also “looking to invest in other currencies as well” is significant, Danilov stressed. “It would be worthwhile for Moscow to set for itself the task of making sure that in 10-15 years’ time, the Bundesbank will want to replenish its coffers with a Russian petro-ruble, as well,” the journalist concluded.

France gives kiss of death to free speech ‘ By Finian Cunningham ‘Sputnik

Emmanual Macron

© Reuters Christian Hartmann/File Photo

This year French President Emmanuel Macron has declared he will crack down on “fake news” with new laws banning publication of “offending” information.

The question is: who decides what “fake news” is? It is the French government. That means any article or viewpoint published across various media platforms is liable to be deleted – if French authorities judge the content to be “fake”.

It’s not hard to imagine how these new laws will be used to target Russian news media in particular. Macron has already made tendentious claims that Russian media outlets, Sputnik and RT, interfered in the French presidential elections last year by allegedly spreading “fake news” about his campaign.

Sputnik and RT both rejected the allegations made by Macron. When Sputnik ran a couple of articles during the French elections they were based on critical comments issued by Macron’s opponents. Nothing more sinister than that.

During an official visit to Paris three weeks after Macron’s election last May, Russian President Vladimir Putin told a press conference that the French leader did not delve into allegations of Russian media interference during their private conversations.

If Macron had a case, why didn’t he raise it during his high-level meeting with Putin? The fact that he didn’t suggests that the French president is grandstanding with baseless claims of “Russian meddling” – in the same way that American and British politicians have been doing over the past year.

Comment: Macron is no statesman, but a placeholder chosen and funded by the banking cabal.

Candidate Macron: An insider disguised as an outsider, wrapped in opportunism

He chose to raise the topic publicly, right in front of Putin at a joint press conference. Putin, of course, behaved like a true leader, saving his comments for a private meeting.

Macron accuses RT and Sputnik of ‘behaving like deceitful propaganda’ right in front of Putin

Macron’s campaign repeatedly accused Russia of interference in the election, claiming that Russian hackers attempted to gain access to its data, and impede the work of its website. A trove of communication purportedly from Macron’s staff was leaked on the internet a day before the run-off election. Moscow has staunchly denied any interference.

Despite an anticipated coolness in relations, the Russian president is one of the first world leaders to travel to Paris since Macron’s convincing election win.

On Monday, the pair spent three hours in what the French leader called a “frank exchange of views,” which Putin said would lead to a “qualitative” improvement in relations between the two countries.

Let’s get back to the issue of forthcoming French media laws and the danger they pose to free speech. So, if the French authorities deem any published content to be “fake”, they are arrogating the power to ban it.

The bitter irony of this development comes on the third anniversary this week of the Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris.

Recall that three years ago on January 7, 2015, a pair of Al Qaeda-linked gunmen stormed the offices of the satirical magazine and shot dead 11 people. The atrocity prompted millions of people on to the streets of Paris declaring, “Je Suis Charlie”. It was supposed to be a rally in defiant support of the right to free speech and freedom of expression.

Three years on, Macron’s government is proposing to shut down freedom of expression with its new laws purportedly targeting “fake news” – or any viewpoint designated by French authorities as “not established in facts”. As already noted, Macron has made the provocative assertions that Russian media outlets are purveyors of “fake news” – a claim that he makes without credible evidence or facts.

The danger of this development to free speech is illustrated by a survey published this week which alleges that the French public are susceptible to believing in “conspiracy theories”.

State-owned channel France 24 reported that nearly 80 per cent of French people believe in one or more “conspiracy theories”, according to the cited recent survey.

From the France 24 report:

“The poll by the Ifop Group on behalf of the Fondation Jean Jaures think-tank and the Conspiracy Watch organization found that large sections of French society believed in theories with no grounding in established fact.”

Fair enough, some of the expressed beliefs among the 1,200 people sampled do seem a bit whacky. For example, some 10 per cent of respondents reportedly said they believe that the “Earth is flat”; and another 16 per cent apparently think that the American moon landings were faked.

However, the report carried by France 24, as well as by Agence France-Presse (AFP), goes on to conflate those dubious concepts with other “conspiracy theories” which are in fact, very arguably, valid alternative points of view.

It was reported that “54 per cent of respondents” believe that the American CIA were involved in the assassination of President John F Kennedy in 1963; and that “31 per cent agreed” with the viewpoint that Western state secret services have manipulated jihadist terror groups like Islamic State.

Here is how France 24 describes the JFK question: “One of the best-known conspiracy theories – that the CIA was involved in the assassination of John F Kennedy in 1963 – was believed by 54 per cent of respondents.”

On the jihadist terror topic, it reports: “Other theories tested in the survey… included that jihadist groups Al Qaeda and the Islamic State were manipulated by Western secret services (31 per cent agreed).”

Note how the established, government-aligned French media are making pejorative judgments about the assassination of JFK and the nature of jihadist terror groups. Any viewpoint that does not conform to the “official” one on either of these topics is denigrated as “a conspiracy theory not based on established fact” – or, in short, “fake news”.

Under President Macron’s new media laws, articles or opinions which contend an alternative version of either the JFK assassination or jihadist terror groups are liable to be banned from public platforms. Moreover, those media outlets that do carry such alternative views could be sanctioned for publishing “fake news”.

We do not have the space here to go into depth on the two subjects cited above. But suffice to say that there is abundant, credible research and literature to support alternative explanations to the “official narratives”.

On the assassination of President Kennedy in Dallas in November 1963, the official story that he was murdered by a lone gunman Lee Harvey Oswald has been debunked by several reliable sources. The elaborate nature of the shooting in Dealey Plaza and the subsequent cover-up had to involve a high-level covert state operation, including the CIA. The fatal headshot from the front is paramount proof that Oswald was not the assassin. Former American President Richard Nixon, as well as the late French President Charles De Gaulle, are both on record dismissing the official explanation about JFK’s murder as absurd (see JFK: An American Coup, by John Wilson-Hughes).

As for Al Qaeda and their offshoot jihadist terror groups, it has been scrupulously documented by Peter Dale Scott (The Road to 9/11), Michel Chossudovsky (America’s ‘War on Terrorism’), among other respected authors, that these groups were first created by American and British military intelligence as proxies to fight against Soviet troops in Afghanistan during the 1980s.

More recently, during the war in Syria, there is hard evidence showing that US, British and French intelligence agencies, along with Turkish counterparts and Saudi funding, instrumented Al Qaeda-linked terror proxies to wage a covert war for regime change. This contradicts the official Western government and media claims that Western states are “fighting against terrorism”. The evidence in fact shows Western government agencies colluding with terror groups to advance their geopolitical objectives, such as regime change.

Therefore, it is the official versions on JFK and terror groups that are arguably “fake news”. They are the “conspiracy theories not based on established fact”.

Yet, under Macron’s new laws, French authorities will be able to suppress valid, critical thinking and freedom of expression simply on the basis of assigning the label “fake news”.

This is a grave assault on democratic rights and the power of citizens to hold their governments to account, especially when those governments are up to their necks in criminality.

Comment: Macron is only attempting to complete an agenda that has been at work in France for years.

See Also:

Israel’s Ongoing Bombing of Syria Threatens Dangerous Escalation – By Darius Shahtahmasebi

Damaged buildings wrecked by an Israeli airstrike are seen in Damascus, Syria, May 5, 2013. (AP/SANA)

The Syrian Army is alleging that Israeli jets struck positions dozens of times within Syria early Tuesday morning in the al-Qutayfa area east of Damascus.

 

According to a statement by Syria’s General Command, the Syrian government’s air defenses not only intercepted all of the missiles Israel fired, but it even managed to counter strike one of the Israeli jets, the Jerusalem Post reports.

While the strike is unconfirmed on the Israeli side, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu referred to the recent assault during a lunch with NATO ambassadors in Jerusalem, according to the Post.

“We have a long-standing policy to prevent the transfer of game-changing weapons to Hezbollah from Syrian territory. This policy has not changed. We back it up as necessary with action,” he said.

Israel has hit Syrian territory over 100 times since the conflict began in 2011. It has also openly talked recently about bombing Lebanon. Each of these conflict theaters is aimed at containing Iran’s expanding influence.

All of this begs the question: Why haven’t Iran, Syria, and/or Hezbollah in Lebanon responded directly?

Striking the territory of a sovereign nation is not only an act of war, it is completely illegal without authorization from the U.N. unless it has been done in self-defense.


Related


Is it because Israel reportedly has well over 200 nukes all “pointed at Iran,” and there is little Iran and its allies can do to take on such a threat?

According to the Guardian, Russian President Vladimir Putin reportedly instructed both Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Hezbollah not to retaliate against Israeli strikes in Syria. The Guardian also notes that Israeli media has claimed Putin even proposed a deal that would prevent foreign powers from using Syria as a base for attacking a neighboring state, a blatant reference to Iran.

While much of Syria’s air defenses are Russian-supplied, the Jerusalem Post notes that the far more advanced Russian S-300 and S-400 have not been used against Israeli jets, but Syrian air defenses have. This includes an incident in March where three anti-aircraft missiles with a 200-kilogram warhead targeted several Israeli jets.

Clearly, Russia has no interest in getting involved in a spat between Israel and Iran. In fact, it can most likely use the impending conflict to further pursue its goals in the Middle East and successfully emerge as the major power broker, wedging the United States out of the area completely. Even now, Russia is continuing its support for the Syrian government to retake the remaining parts of Syria currently up for grabs, particularly in the Idlib province. Much of the media’s attention is focused elsewhere, like the protests in Iran.

Make no mistake, the looming conflict between Iran and Israel via its proxy states could easily break out unless something drastic is done to diffuse it.

On Tuesday, the head of the Mossad, Yossi Cohen, warned of the proliferation of accurate Iranian missiles in the Middle East.

“The Iranians are coasting into the Middle East undisturbed and with very large forces, in a way that virtually creates an air and land corridor that pours fighters into the region in order to actualize the Iranian vision,”Cohen warned at a Finance Ministry event in Jerusalem on Tuesday, adding that “we hear the concerns from Sunni leaders about Iran are growing, just as they are in Israel. We are hearing it from everywhere.”

Speaking to Politico in December, Ambassador to the United States Ron Dermer also warned:

“If Iran is not rolled back in Syria, then the chances of military confrontation are growing. I don’t want to tell you by the year or by the month. I’d say even by the week,” he said.

Because the more they push, we have to enforce our redlines, and you always have the prospects of an escalation, even when parties don’t want an escalation. So in taking action to defend ourselves, you don’t know what could happen. But I think it’s higher than people think.”

In the meantime, it is unclear how much Russia might tolerate a blatant attack on Iran if it extends past the disputed border area with Israel. Regardless, Iran and Russia will remain key allies in the years to come until Washington’s influence and control over the Middle East have all but completely eroded.

Top Photo | Damaged buildings wrecked by an Israeli airstrike are seen in Damascus, Syria, May 5, 2013. (AP/SANA)

Stories published in our Daily Digests section are chosen based on the interest of our readers. They are republished from a number of sources, and are not produced by MintPress News. The views expressed in these articles are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect MintPress News editorial policy.

 

The good news about the Trump Presidency: stupid can be good! – By The Saker

January 11, 2018

The good news about the Trump Presidency: stupid can be good!

[Note: This column was written for the Unz Review]

Just a few days shy of the one year since the inauguration of Donalt Trump as President of the United States I think that it would be reasonable to say that pretty much everybody, besides the Neocons and a few unconditional supporters, is now feeling quite appalled at what the past year brought to the USA and the planet. Those who hated Trump don’t hate him any less, while those who had hopes for Trump, such as myself, now have to accept that these hopes never materialized. I think that if we imagine a Hillary Presidency then the word “evil” would be a good way to describe what such a Presidency would most likely have been like. Likewise, if I had to chose a single word to describe the Trump Presidency, at least so far, I think that this word should be “stupid”. I won’t even bother, as I had initially planned, to list all the stupid things Trump has said and done since his inauguration (those who think otherwise might as well stop reading here). I will say that it gives me no pleasure writing this because I also had hopes that Trump would fulfill at least some of his campaign promises (even though most of my support for him was based on the fact that he was not Hillary who, I still believe, would have brought the USA and Russia to war against each other). Furthermore, each time I recall Trump’s inauguration speech I have this painful sense of a most important and totally missed opportunity: to finally restore the sovereignty of the USA to the the people of the USA and to return to a civilized and rational international policy. Alas, this did not happen and that is a reality we have to accept and deal with.

I also want to clarify that when I say that the Trump Presidency can be best summed up with the word “stupid” I don’t just mean The Donald himself. I mean the entire Administration (I don’t mention Congress, as Congress as been about stupid for as long as I can recall it). If you wonder how I can call an entire administration “stupid” even though it is composed of often brilliant civil servants, lawyers, academic, technical specialists, etc I will simply reply that I don’t judge an administration by the resumes of those working for it, but simply by its output, what it actually does. If what this administration produces is a lot of stupid, then this is a stupid administration.

Stupid can mean a lot of different things. For example, it can mean stupid threats against North Korea. That is a very frightening kind of stupid. But there is also a very good kind of stupid. For example, I think that the decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel is a wonderful kind of stupid which I warmly welcome.

Why?

Because it is the kind of stupid which tremendously weakens the AngloZionist Empire!

Think of the damage this truly stupid move did to not only the US international reputation (which indeed was already pretty close to zero even before this latest move) but also to the US capability to get anything done at all the the Middle-East. The military defeat of the USA in Iraq and Afghanistan and the political defeat of the USA in Syria just needed a little something to truly make the USA irrelevant in the Middle-East and now, thanks to Donald Trump, this has now happened! Furthermore, there was a dirty little secret which everybody new about which has now become a public fact:

USA= ISRAEL & ISRAEL=USA

Again this is all very good. Even better is the fact that the only ones disagreeing with this would be Honduras, Guatemala, Palau, Marshall Islands, Kiribati, Togo, Nauru and southern Sudan and, of course, Israel.

The US foreign policy has become so outlandishly stupid that even the most subservient US puppet regimes (say, the UK, Norway, ROK or Japan) or are now forced to condemn it, at least publicly. A lot of credit here goes to Nikki Haley who, following this catastrophic vote, decided to make things even worse by blackmailign the UN and all its member states. Finally, President Trump himself sealed it all by giving Nikki Haley’s speech a very public endorsement.

So stupid as this may have been, and stupid it really was, in this instance the results of this stupid were nothing short of a blessing for the Middle-East: even Hamas is now finally talking again with Hezbollah and Iran!

Just as we can sincerely thank President Obama for pushing Russia and China into each other’s arms, we can now all thank Nikki Haley and Trump for uniting the resistance to the state of Israel and the entire AngloZionist Empire. I can just about imagine the jubilation in Tehran when the Iranians heard the good news!

But good stupid does not stop here. The fact that the US elites are all involved in a giant shootout against each other by means of investigations, scandals, accusations, talks of impeachment, etc. is also a blessing because while they are busy fighting each other they are much less capable of focusing on their real opponents and enemies. For months now President Trump has mostly ruled the USA by means of “tweets” which, of course, and by definition, amounts to exactly nothing and there is nothing which could be seriously called a “US foreign policy” (with the exception of the neverending stream of accusations, threats and grandstanding, which don’t qualify). There are real risks and opportunities resulting from this situation

  1. Risks: when nobody is really in charge, each agency does pretty much what it wants. We saw that during the 2ndhalf of the Obama Presidency when State did one thing, the Pentagon another and the CIA yet another. This resulted in outright goofy situation with US allies attacking each other in Syria and Iraq because they all reported to different agencies. The risk here is obvious: for example, when US diplomats made an agreement with Russia in Syria, the Pentagon torpedoed the very next day by attacking Syrian forces. The recent attacks on the Russian Aerospace Forces base in Khmeimim (and the latest drone attack on that same base) would exactly fit that pattern. The Russians have been complaining for months now that the USA are “non-agreement capable” and this can clearly be a problem and a risk.
  2. Opportunities: when nobody is in charge then the AngloZionist Empire cannot really bring its full force against one specific target. This of a car or bus in which all the passengers are fighting each other for the control of the steering wheel. This is bad for them, but good for everybody else as the only place this car or bus is headed for is the ditch. Furthermore, since currently the US is, at various degrees, threatening no less than 9 countries (Afghanistan, Syria, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, Turkey, Pakistan, China) these threats sound rather hollow. Not only that, but should the USA get seriously involved in any type of conflict with any one of these countries, this would open great opportunities for the others to take action. Considering how the US elites are busy fighting each other there and threatening everybody else there is very little change that the USA could focus enough to seriously threaten any of its opponents. But this goes much further than the countries I mentioned here. There is a French expression which goes “when the cat’s away, the mice will play” and this is what we might see next: more countries following the example of the Philippines, which used to be a subservient US colony and which now is ruled my a man who has no problems publicly insulting the US President, at least when Obama was President (Duterte seems to like Trump more than Obama). There have already been signs that the South Koreans are taking their first timid steps towards telling “no” to Uncle Sam.

I am not trying to paint a rosy picture of the situation which is bad, no doubt about that. Having ignorant fools in charge of nuclear weapons is not good, by definition. But I do want to suggest two things: first, that no matter stupid Trump is, Hillary would have been infinitely worse and, second, that there are also some good aspects to the current vacuum of power in Washington, DC.

If we can agree that anything that weakens the AngloZionist Empire is a good thing (including for the American people!), as is anything which brings its eventual demise closer, then there is a lot to be grateful for the past year. The Empire really began to crumble under George W. Bush (thanks Neocons!), and that process most definitely continued under Obama. However, Donald Trump is the one who truly given this process a tremendous acceleration which has, I think, brought it to a qualitatively new level. The risks ahead are still tremendous, but so far the Empire is losing and the Resistance to it is still winning. And that is a very good thing.

The Saker

As Syria cleans up Idlib, the US goes for broke against Russia – By Tom Luongo Halsey News

USA drones

The U.S. foreign policy establishment will not go gently into that good night in Syria. For weeks I’ve been keeping only half an eye on the situation there waiting for confirmation of U.S. intentions now that the bulk of the country has been returned to government control.

And with the attack on the Khmeimim air base at in Latakia we now have our answer. On January 6th the so-called moderate rebels – who have been getting routed by the Syrian Arab Army – launched a major offensive on the air base using more than a dozen drones dropping mortar shells.

The Russian air defense systems thwarted the attack with damage to a couple of planes. The Russians are convinced (and said publicly) that this attack could only have been pulled off with assistance from a technologically-advanced state.

This is the Russian way of saying that the U.S. was behind the attack. This report from Southfront has one of our Boeing P-8 Spy planes in the area during the attack.

The U.S., of course, denies this saying that the technology is available on the open market. Yes, but so what? It takes a little more than buying these drones to put them in the air and coordinate an attack with them.

In effect, this was not a denial.

Morevoer, over the weekend, it was reported that U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis promised to send U.S. diplomats to the Kurdish controlled area east of the Euphrates River. If true then the U.S. is putting paid its intentions to balkanize Syria and create an open wound in the region with which everyone there will have to contend with.

The goal of that will be to create another false propaganda campaign at home for the U.S. electorate to get on board with supporting Kurdish independence.

While at the same time SDF leaders have already met with Syrian government officials about the state of their autonomy post-political process. Facts on the ground are that there are thousands of U.S. troops in eastern Syria having built anywhere from seven to thirteen bases.

Even if the Kurds wanted to settle things with President Bashar al-Assad the U.S. presence there is making it very difficult for them to do so. And this will only delay any final political resolution to the Syrian War.

The neoconservative leadership of the U.S. Deep State will not leave Syria without being dragged out. President Trump is still in enough of a precarious position politically at home that he needs the support of military leaders like Mattis and Kelly to, in my opinion, stay alive.

With everything that’s happening at home and the noose tightening around the Russia-gate conspiracy to overthrow Trump orchestrated by the Clinton Campaign, Never-Trumpers like John McCain in the GOP and the intelligence agencies, Trump has to tread very lightly and keep the Israeli Firsters and uber Iran hawks in D.C. placated.

So, nothing it going to change in Syria until the last ISIS and al-Qaeda cells are ousted and then there will still be the Kurdish issue.

So, attacks like these should be expected. They are designed to make it expensive both financially and politically for Russian President Vladimir Putin during his re-election campaign. The U.S. is pushing him on every front right now. From Syria to Iran, Ukraine to North Korea, the goal continues to be bind Putin down with distractions and derail the Russian economic recovery for as long as possible.

And Trump will use this pressure as best as he can to craft the best deal possible for both the U.S. and Israel in the Middle East, knowing that the position is a fundamentally weak one in the long run.

But for now, the intentions of the U.S. establishment is clear, delay and distract the reunification of Syria for as long as possible to stop an overland route from Iran to Lebanon. And if these provocations can get Putin to over-commit and retaliate all the better.

It will then tie Trump’s hands and force him to go to war in Syria which will be both wholly unpopular at home and continue the chaos there through the end of the decade. But it won’t work. This is the same basic miscalculation that Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State and Barack Obama made originally.

They continue to underestimate Putin’s patience and grasp of both strategy and tactics. He doesn’t react emotionally to these events. He simply acts. And if the Russians have evidence of the U.S. assisting in the attack in Latakia then it will be used as a bludgeon during the Geneva talks on Syria’s future as well as at the U.N. Security Council.

Comment: See also:

See Also:

Russia knows who staged attacks on Syrian base & it’s not Turkey – Putin – By RT

Russia knows who staged attacks on Syrian base & it’s not Turkey – Putin
Recent attacks on Russia’s Khmeimim Airbase in Syria were a provocation aimed at undermining the country’s relations with its partners Turkey and Iran and the peaceful settlement of the Syrian crisis, Vladimir Putin said.

“Those were provocations aimed at disrupting the earlier agreements, in the first place. Secondly, it was about our relations with our partners – Turkey and Iran. It was also an attempt to destroy those relations,” the Russian President said during a meeting with the editors-in-chief of Russian papers and news agencies in Moscow. “We have a perfect understanding of that and will act in solidarity.”

“There were provocateurs there, but they were not Turks,” Putin said, refuting earlier reports saying the attacks on the Russian airbase were carried out by Turkoman units backed by Ankara. “We know who they are. We know whom and how much they paid for these provocations,” Putin said, without naming the organizers of the attacks. 

Russian military sites in Syria were targeted in two major attacks in the past two weeks, one on New Year’s Eve and another on January 6. The first assault, reportedly carried out by an infiltration squad armed with mortars, resulted in two Russian servicemen being killed and damage to warplanes at Khmeimim Airbase. The second involved 13 drones armed with bomblets, which were all either shot down or forced to land via means of electronic warfare by Russian forces.

According to the head of state, the attacks on Khmeimim Airbase were “well-prepared.” 
“We know when and where those unmanned aerial vehicles were handed over and how many there were,” he said. 

“Those aircraft were only camouflaged – I want to emphasize this – to look like handicraft production. In fact, it is quite obvious that there were elements of high-tech nature there,” Putin said. 

Before his Thursday meeting with Russian media chiefs, Putin held a phone conversation with his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan, during which the Khmeimim attacks were discussed. During the conversation, Putin and Erdogan agreed to “intensify the coordination of efforts by the military and special services of the two countries in order to effectively combat terrorist groups in Syria.”

Relations between Moscow and Ankara have gone through a rough patch after the Turkish Air Force downed a Russian Su-24 bomber, which was involved in anti-terrorist operations in Syria, in November 2014. One Russian pilot was killed in the incident. Turkey said the jet had violated its airspace, but Russia denies the claim. 

READ MORE: 2 Russian military personnel killed in shelling of Khmeimim air base in Syria

Russia and Turkey were able to restore ties since then and, together with Iran, are currently the guarantors of the peace process in Syria in accordance with the so-called Astana format. The talks in the Kazakh capital in May led to the creation of four de-escalation zones in Syria, which led to a major in reduction in violence in the war-torn country.

 
 

Trump to punish Palestinians as example for rest of world – By Ali Abunimah Rights and Accountability

A Palestinian child takes part in a protest against Donald Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, in front of UNRWA headquarters in Gaza City, 19 December 2017. The US president is threatening to cut funds to the refugee agency in retaliation for Palestinian opposition to his move.

Ashraf Amra APA images

The State Department has denied a report that the US missed a deadline to transfer $125 million to UNRWA, the UN agency for Palestine refugees.

But there are indications of a fierce struggle within the Trump administration about whether to cut funding to the organization that provides health, education and humanitarian services to five million Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and Gaza, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria.

Asked Tuesday about a report from last Friday that the US had missed the payment, US Undersecretary of State Steven Goldstein said, “there are still deliberations taking place. We have not missed the deadline, and we have not halted funding, and the decision is under review.”

“I wouldn’t anticipate a decision this week,” Goldstein added.

Earlier this week, UNRWA spokesperson Chris Gunness told The Electronic intifada that the agency had not been informed one way or the other about any change in US funding.

A State Department official told the Palestinian newspaper Al Quds that it was unknown if funding to UNRWA would continue, but that there had been a “technical” meeting at the White House last Friday to examine all the US aid given to Palestinians, including UNRWA, to see where cuts could be made.

The US is UNRWA’s largest single donor. It contributed $380 million of the overstretched and cash-strapped agency’s $1.1 billion budget in 2015.

“Showdown”

A Washington Post column by pro-Israel journalist Josh Rogin this week asserts that the Trump administration “is headed for a showdown over whether to follow through on threats by President Trump and UN Ambassador Nikki Haley to cut off US funding for Palestinian refugees.”

Trump and Haley made the threats as retaliation for the Palestinian Authority’s rejection of the president’s December recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

According to Rogin, the White House has decided to hold an as yet unscheduled meeting of top officials to decide whether or not to release the $125 million that Rogin asserts is “on hold.”

Rogin says that he has been told by several administration officials that Haley as been “pushing for a total cut in US funding for UNRWA.”

Top officials reportedly backing Haley’s position include Trump’s chief of staff John Kelly, national security adviser H.R. McMaster and Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner who has been tasked with reviving the so-called peace process.

Rogin also cites “sources close to Haley” telling him the ambassador does “not advocate abolishing UNRWA altogether.”

Eliminating the agency has been long advocated by the pro-Israel far-right, and openly by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in the hope of permanently removing the right of return for Palestinian refugees from the international agenda.

Harming refugees

Rogin says that some administration officials are warning that cutting funding to UNRWA would have potentially disastrous humanitarian consequences, including on US allies.

“Haley is well-intentioned, but the practical effects of the position she has taken will do harm to the refugees, our ally in Jordan, and will leave the Israelis holding the bag when the s–t hits the fan,” Rogin quotes a State Department official telling him.

Options being considered include a partial scaling back of US funding to UNRWA or asking others, such as Saudi Arabia, to foot the bill, according to Rogin.

Some officials believe cuts in US aid will fail to force countries that have been threatened – including the Palestinians and Pakistan – to bow to the Trump administration’s line. But, according to Rogin, by implementing the cuts, “Trump will be able to claim that money was saved and a campaign promise fulfilled.”

Systematic smears

Separately, Norway and the European Union announced an “extraordinary” meeting later this month of a group of donors to the Palestinians which includes representatives from the United States and various international bodies.

The so-called Ad Hoc Liaison Committee has long served as a way for international donors, especially the US, to impose their political demands on the Palestinians under the guise of offering aid.

The ostensible goal of the meeting is to discuss ways to “speed up efforts that can underpin a negotiated two-state solution,” but its timing in the wake of American threats to funding is likely no coincidence.

Palestinian human rights defenders are adding their voices to those warning of the dire humanitarian consequences of major cuts to UNRWA’s resources.

For decades, “UNRWA has faced systematic campaigns aimed at shutting it down and smearing its reputation,” the Gaza-based human rights group Al Mezan said Wednesday.

Al Mezan pointed to the “unprecedented deterioration of the humanitarian situation” in the occupied West Bank and especially Gaza, which has been under a tight Israeli blockade for a decade.

It notes that UNRWA has already been forced to cut services because of shortfalls in its funding amid soaring needs.

But according to Rogin, the Palestinians are to serve as a “major test of Trump’s new approach of using aid to punish foreign governments for bad behavior.”

There could be no clearer – or more cruel – example of the strong taking out their anger and vengeance against some of the most vulnerable people in the world.

 

Insane Demand: America wants Assad to pay $250+ billion reconstruction cost in Syria – By Eric Zuesse (The Duran)

The United States Government says that Syria’s Government caused the U.N.-estimated “at least $250 billion” cost to restore Syria from the destruction that Syria’s war produced, and so Syria’s Government should pay those reconstruction costs.

syria before and after war

© Unknown

That link is to a New York Times article, which explicitly blames Syrian “President Bashar al-Assad’s ruthless triumph” – which was won against all of the jihadist groups (which the U.S. and its allies had brought into Syria to overthrow and replace Assad’s Government) – for having caused the devastation in Syria; the U.S. and its allies say they aren’t to blame for it, at all, by their having organized and armed and trained and manned that 6-year invasion of Syria; and, so (they say, and the NYT article implicitly assumes it to be true), if the invaders-occupiers of Syria might ultimately agree to pay some portion of these $250B+ reconstruction costs, then this would be sheer generosity by the U.S. and its allies – nothing that these governments are obligated to pay to the surviving residents in Syria.

It would be charity – not restitution – according to them. The way that this NYT news-report presents this case is, first, to ask rhetorically, regarding the U.S. and its allies in the invasion of Syria, “Can they afford to pour money into a regime that has starved, bombed and occasionally gassed its own people?” and then promptly to proceed by ignoring this very question that they have asked, and instead to provide a case (relying heavily on innuendos) for the immorality of the U.S. and its allies to provide restitution to Syria’s Government to restore Syria. That’s how this Times‘s news-report argues for the U.S. Government, against Syria’s Government, regarding Syria’s postwar reconstruction:

The Times news-report repeatedly simply assumes that Syria’s Government is evil and corrupt, and is to blame for the destruction of Syria, and thus shouldn’t receive any money from good and honest governments such as ours. It implicitly accepts the viewpoint of the U.S. Government – a viewpoint which blatantly contradicts the actual history of the case, as will here be documented by the facts:

America’s Government (including its press, such as the NYT) simply refuses to recognize the legitimacy of Syria’s Government (even after the first internationally monitored democratic election in all of Syria’s history, which was held in 2014, and which the incumbent candidate Bashar al-Assad (whom the U.S. alliance has been trying to overthrow) won, by 89%), and the U.S. Government has, itself, evilly been trying to conquer Syria (a country that never threatened the U.S.), ever since at least 1949, when the CIA perpetrated a coup there (the new CIA’s 2nd coup, the first one having been 1948 in Thailand – and here is the rest of that shocking history) and ousted Syria’s democratically elected President; but, then, in 1955, Syria’s army threw out the U.S.-imposed dictator, and restored to power that democratically elected Syrian President, who in 1958 accepted Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser’s offer to unify the two countries (Syria and Egypt) into the United Arab Republic (UAR), in order to protect Syria against a then-imminent invasion and attempted take-over by NATO member Turkey (which has traditionally been hostile toward Syria). It was a peaceful and voluntary transfer of power, to Nasser.

However, Nasser became an unpopular President in Syria, as the nation’s economy performed poorly during the UAR; and, so, on 28 September 1961, Syria’s army declared Syria’s secession from the UAR; and it then installed-and-replaced seven Presidents over the next decade, until 22 February 1971, when General Hafez al-Assad resigned from Syria’s military and was promptly endorsed by the Army for the Presidency; and, soon thereafter, on 12 March 1971, a yes-no national referendum on whether Assad should become President won a 99.2%”Yes” vote of the Syrian people. President Assad initiated today’s Syria, by assigning a majority of political posts to secular Sunnis, and a majority of military posts to secular Shiites. All of the Sunnis that he allowed into the Government were seculars, so as to prevent fundamentalist-Sunni foreign governments – mainly the Sauds – from being able to work successfully with America’s CIA to again take over Syria’s Government.

Assad’s Ba’athist democratic socialist Party chose his son Bashar, to succeed Hafez as President, upon Hafez’s death on 10 June 2000; and, when Barack Obama became U.S. President in 2009, Obama carried forward the CIA’s plan to overthrow Bashar al-Assad and to install a Saud-allied fundamentalist-Sunni Syrian government to replace the existing non-secular, but Iran-allied, Ba’athist Government. However, since Bashar had built upon Hafez’s secular, non-sectarian, governmental system, the old CIA plan, to apply fundamentalist Sunnis to destroy the basically non-sectarian state (which is the basis of the Assads’ political support), ultimately failed; and, so, America’s Government and media are trying to deal with the consequences of their own evil, as best they can, so as to have only Syria and its allies suffer the Syrian war’s aftermath. U.S. President Donald Trump has been continuing President Obama’s policy, and he loaded his Administration with rabidly anti-Syrian and anti-Iranian people.

In the American Government’s view, the least that Syria’s Government should now do is to pay all the costs for the consequences of America’s lengthiest-ever effort against Syria – or, if Syria’s Government won’t do that, then the U.S. Government will continue its occupation of Syria, and won’t help the Syrian people at all, to recover from the devastation, which they blame entirely on Assad (who never threatened the U.S.).

Comment: Syria is a independent country and it didn’t invite US or its proxies to its country. US lost the war in Syria, but it demands $250 billion dollars to leave the country. It is US and its proxies should be paying reconstruction amount to Syria for creating ISIS and destroying the country. Insanity prevails in Washington.

However, the Syrian Government says that the countries which invaded it with their weapons and their jihadists and their organization – not only the United States and its weapons-supplies to the jihadists, but also Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Turkey, UK, France, and other U.S. allies, the entire U.S. coalition who organized and supplied the six-year international jihadist invasion against Syria – are to blame for the destruction of Syria; and, “If you break it, you own it, and need to replace it.” So, Syrians think that the invaders – and not the people of Syria – must pay the reconstruction cost.

The U.S. Government blames Syrian President Bashar Assad for everything. That charge is, however, quite problematic, given the facts in the case. The U.S. CIA was behind the “Arab Spring” movements to overthrow and replace Assad and other Arab leaders who dissatisfied the U.S. regime, and it then fed into Syria the ‘rebels’ until now. Few of them are still remaining under U.S. protection – which is mostly east of the Euphrates River, where America’s Kurdish proxy-forces are in control, after having finally defeated, with American air power, Syria’s ISIS.

That NYT article used the word “rebel” six times to refer to the jihadists who were fighting against Syria’s Government, and didn’t even once use the word “jihadist” or “terrorist” or anything like that, to refer to even a single one of them. However, almost all of the anti-Assad fighters were, in fact, jihadists (or, some people call them, instead, “radical Islamic terrorists”).

Western-sponsored opinion polls have been taken of the residents of Syria, throughout the war, and they have consistently shown that Bashar al-Assad would easily win re-election there in any free and internationally monitored election, and that the Syrian people overwhelmingly (by 82%) blame the United States for having brought the tens of thousands of foreign fighters into Syria to overthrow and replace their nation’s Government.

Consequently, if Syrians will end up bearing the estimated $250B+ reconstruction cost of a war that 82% of them blame on the U.S., then the Syrian people will become even angrier against the U.S. Government than they are now. But, of course, the U.S. Government doesn’t care about the people of Syria, and won’t even allow in any of them as refugees to America; so, Syrians know whom their friends and enemies are. America’s absconding on its $250+B reparations-debt to them wouldn’t surprise them, at all. It’s probably what they’re expecting.

Some U.S. propaganda-media, such as Britain’s Financial Times, have field-tested an alternative, a blame-Russia approach, in case the U.S. team can’t get the blame-Syria story-line to gain sufficient international acceptance. For example, that newspaper’s Roula Khalaf headlined on 1 March 2017, “The west to Russia: you broke Syria, now you fix it”, but most of the reader-comments were extremely hostile to that designation of villain in the case. Here were the most-popular comments:

Russia defeated ISIS in Syria so what was the US doing? – By David William Pear Op – Ed News

Russia army military

Who defeated the Islamic State In Syria?

With a $1 trillion annual military budget why did it take the US six years to ‘beat’ a ragtag militia?

Before answering that question. What is the ISIS? Can the public overcome its chronic amnesia and think back to the sudden appearance of ISIS dressed in brand new black uniforms, gleaming white NIKE’s and driving Toyota trunks? They seemed to appear out of nowhere in 2014. ISIS looked as if it were a mirage when it appeared, or more likely a CIA staged scene from Hollywood.

No sooner had ISIS appeared than it went on a head chopping binge that repulsed and frightened the US public. Washington officials, including Secretary of State John Kerry rang the alarm that this hoard of Islamic crazies wanted to invade the US and “kill us all”. A well-compliant mainstream media swallowed Washington’s script and regurgitated it to frighten a US public. The public gave its silent consent for more war really aimed at Bashar al-Assad.

The next question is who created ISIS? ISIS “can trace its roots back to the late Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a Jordanian. In 2004, a year after the US-led invasion of Iraq, Zarqawi pledged allegiance to Osama Bin Laden and formed al-Qaeda in Iraq” [BBC News December 2, 2016]. Al-Qaeda in Iraq did not exist until after the US invasion by the Bush-Cheney administration.

The US invasion of Iraq was based on pure unadulterated lies that Saddam Hussein supported al-Qaeda, was involved in the September 11, 2001 attacks on the US and had weapons of mass destruction. Al-Qaeda in Iraq was predictable blowback, resistance against a US illegal invasion. Bush who admitted that he creates his own reality, had hallucinations of a grateful Iraqi people, who had just been bombed back to the Stone Age with Shock and Awe, throwing kisses and flowers at the US expeditionary force as liberators.

Then came the failed Surge in 2007 [The Nation], when the US allied with Sunnis to defeat the remnants of the Iraqi Ba’ath Party, which was an Arab Nationalist Party neither Sunni nor Shia. The cynical sponsoring and siding with radical Islam goes back to the British “Great Game” of the early 1900’s. It was the British double-dealing with both Sunnis and Shias to supplant the Ottoman Empire, and turn Sunni against Shia to divide and conquer Southwest Asia. It is the story of Lawrence of Arabia, Winston Churchill and World War One.

One could then pick up the story after World War Two when the US was opposing Arab anti-colonial nationalism and communism during the Cold War. It was the “Grand Chessboard” strategist Zbigniew Brzezinski who convinced Jimmy Carter in 1980’s to back the Islamic radical mujahideen mercenaries and destroy Afghanistan in order to lure the Soviet Union into a Vietnam-type trap. Brzezinski was so proud of his success that he would later rhetorically ask to his shame, which is more important “Some stirred-up Moslems” or winning the Cold War.

If Brzezinski was so clever he would have learned from the British early 1900’s Southwest Asia super spy Gertrude Bell. As she would later say, the British Empire encouraging and sponsoring of radical Islam backfired into a big failure. But the US does not know history, even its own history of repeated blunders of encouraging and sponsoring radical Islam against Arab anti-colonial nationalism.

So instead the US enlisted the most radical right-wing fascist regime in the history of the world, the Absolute Monarchy of Saudi Arabia to bankroll Sunnis against Arab nationalism. They gladly funded US regime change projects against secular Arab states. The US flush with cash from the Saudis went about encouraging, training and paying mercenaries from all over Southwest Asia to overthrow Bashar al-Assad. Assad did not share the US role as the world leader of capitalist globalization. Instead Assad was using Syria’s wealth for the benefit of the Syrian people, just as Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi. “Assad must go”, chanted Obama, Clinton, Kerry and Saudi Wahhabis. To the US it did not matter how many Syrians, Libyan or Iraqis died. As Madeleine Albright had said, “500,000 dead Iraqi children are worth it”.

It was the US and its allies the Absolute Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States that created ISIS. Mercenaries from all over the Muslim world were recruited and even supported with their own air force, the United States Airforce. The mainstream media gave the US the cover story the US was backing “well-vetted moderate [‘Jeffersonian democrats’ really] Islamists”. The mainstream media are criminal coconspirators for spreading war propaganda, the Guardian being one of the worst offenders, with a few rare exceptions, such as Trevor Timm’s reporting.

Now with the ringing in of the 2018 New Year, we can expect the US to be patting itself on the back for defeating ISIS in 2017 . The real story is that it was Assad, Russia, Hezbollah and Iran that defeated ISIS (so far). For those without amnesia they may remember back to when Russia released videos of endless convoys of black-market ISIS oil tankers heading into Turkey. ISIS was partially funding itself with stolen oil and enriching black marketeers of Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Somehow, the US with all of its technology and thousands of bombing missions in Syria never saw all those tankers. Nor could they find ISIS fighters, so instead they bombed the Syrian army. The US only saw what it wanted to see and what it wanted to bomb. It was not ISIS. Here are the videos of Russian jets taking out ISIS oil tankers:

Some of the mainstream media grudgingly acknowledges that Russia had a hand in rolling back ISIS. Even then the mainstream media downplays the Russian contribution to a support roll, rather than the primary force. Instead the US mainstream media gives the credit to ” the US and 67 other nations from around the world”. It was, they say the US that “trained, supported and provided air support” to local Syrian rebel good-guys, the mythical democratic moderates, that the US was supporting that defeated ISIS. City after city, and village after village were destroyed by ISIS, US bombing and an invisible US moderate rebel force as it created hundreds of thousands of Syrian casualties and refugees.

According to the mainstream media, the Russians stepped in late “to provide air support for the Syrian government” backing the regime of President Bashar al-Assad against rebels threatening his rule, but also targeting some ISIS territory”. Unmentioned is that Russia was legally “invited” by the legitimate government of Syria, while the US and its coalition are committing a war crime of aggression against a fellow member country of the United Nations.

Now we are going to be hearing that one year of Trump did what 8 years of Obama could not do. We are going to be hearing more of how in just one year “ISIS went from attracting thousands of foreign fighters to its anti-Western cause and plotting devastating terror attacks all over the world, to surrendering en masse”. It was the “US-led bombing campaign and US-backed and trained forces” that defeated ISIS, supposedly.

Yes, after six plus years of the most powerful military force in the history of the world, with the most technologically advanced weapons ever invented, and an annual military budget of $1 Trillion the US finally defeated a rag-tag mercenary paramilitary of about 30,000 fighters.

The whole story of the US war on terrorism is an incredible and unbelievable tale of pabulum that Washington and its mainstream repeaters have been feeding to the US public since 9-11. It stinks.

See Also:

%d bloggers like this: