The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Russian Reaction BlogTeasers
This Fishy Smell of Sarin, or Was It Chlorine?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

haley-un-versus-assad

There are so many problems with the propaganda campaign against Assad getting unrolled now.

partisangirl-fake-sarin(1) You can’t treat exposure to sarin with your bare hands without falling ill/dead yourself, as the White Helmets were apparently doing in the aftermath of the Idlib attack.

(2) As Syrian war reporter @Partisangirl noticed, some journalists were apparently discussing a chlorine sarin attack before it actually happened.

(3) It is eerily reminescent of the aftermath of the 2013 Gouta attacks, in which the Western media and neocon and neocon-in-all-but-name politicians and punditry parroted the official line that Assad’s troops were responsible even though consequent journalistic work by Sermour Hersh and MIT raised serious doubts over the veracity of that allegation.

(4) The “moderate rebels” have themselves resorted to poison gas on various occasions.

(5) Unlike in 2013, Assad is now winning. Why on Earth now, of all times, would he resort to poison gas – one of the few things he can do to that is capable of provoking a strong Western reaction – just to kill all of 75 civilians?

this-makes-sense

It just makes no sense.

So one can’t help but treat Nikky Haley’s melodramatic performance at the UN with skepticism. The idea that the poisoning was due to a bomb hitting a chemical weapons manufactory seems more plausible.

Trump’s initial non-interventionist rhetoric on assuming the Presidency was encouraging, as was his promotion of other anti-war figures such as Tulsi Gabbard. However, the latest response of the US administration, including Trump himself, is not giving any cause for optimism:

I will tell you that attack on children yesterday had a big impact on me, big impact. That was a horrible, horrible thing. And I’ve been watching it, and seeing it, and it doesn’t get any worse than that… And I will tell you it’s already happened, that my attitude toward Syria and Assad has changed very much.

To be sure, one might view this as a merely ritualistic expression of outrage, but also coming on as it does on the eve of Steve Bannon’s dismissal from the National Security Council… one can’t help but start having dark thoughts on whether the deep state might be triumphing after all.

 
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. On Trump – the less he intends to do, the more strongly he positions himself.
    So one way to interpret his remarks is that he is occupying a position that fully takes advantage of anti-Assad sentiment, but with no intent to act on it at all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Joe Wong
    The only guy used chemical weapons in wars against civilians on record is the USA during the Vietnam War; Agent Orange, Agent White and Agent Rainbow are still wrecking havoc in Vietnam. The only guy conduct false flag ops to blame the victims for violating human rights via its NED sponsored NGOs then wage reckless wars against the victims on the moral high ground is the USA and its NATO partners.

    This poisonous gas attack on Syria civilians bears too many similarities to the past records of the USA and its NATO partners’ behaviour.
    , @Hibernian
    He's already acted.
    , @Milford Mechem
    Opinion
    , @pdf
    Opinion
    , @opportunitiesforafricans.com
    Opinion
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /akarlin/this-fishy-smell-of-sarin-or-was-it-chlorine/#comment-1825412
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Chuck says:

    So Trump the hard-headed America Firster morphs into weepy bleeding heart interventionist?

    The Empire needs better writers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    I've been pretty solid in my Trump support, despite occasional "zradas" (defeats/betrayals).

    This is the first time however that I am genuinely questioning his intentions and goodwill.

    If Trump in the end does goes down the path of corporatist neocon warmongering, he will lose and the vision he outlined at his inauguration speech will die as well. Very sad!
    , @L
    I surprised they were not shouting that Assad used Zyklon-B
    That was the big fake news that worked so well 70 years ago for 70 years
    and this is the same story....made up by the same networks!
  3. @Chuck
    So Trump the hard-headed America Firster morphs into weepy bleeding heart interventionist?

    The Empire needs better writers.

    I’ve been pretty solid in my Trump support, despite occasional “zradas” (defeats/betrayals).

    This is the first time however that I am genuinely questioning his intentions and goodwill.

    If Trump in the end does goes down the path of corporatist neocon warmongering, he will lose and the vision he outlined at his inauguration speech will die as well. Very sad!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Backwoods Bob
    I have become disheartened.

    Hillary was the end of America as we knew it. But Trump is far too much of an Empire First, not America First president at the moment.
    , @Yevardian
    As I thought at the time, and Ron Unz also noted here, Trump was either an utter moron or completely indifferent to actual policy to promote a facelesss POS like Mike Pence to VP.
    I think it should be increasingly obvious that he's a gauche blowhard who's merely a weathervein for whomever advised him last.
    , @utu
    This betrayal is for real and final. Stop projecting your wishful thinking on Trump. He never was the man many of us were imagining. This were just our projections. Projections of people who wanted to have some hope. The most important is that Bannon is out or on his way out. W/o Bannon there is nobody else. Just your usual dumb and vile republicans are all what is left plus some soft hearted libs in Ivanka faction. That's all. It's over!

    Besides what a great opportunity for Trump. Just do the Syria and everything will be forgiven and forgotten. Including Susan Rice, OK? We will not have to impeach you and replace with Pence.

    Not sure about this guy but he claimed 2 days ago:

    Published on Apr 3, 2017

    Is the US Preparing to Invade Damascus?
    As absurd as this may sound the evidence seems to stack up in favor of this scenario of a US led invasion of Damascus, Syria. The movement of US desert Camo military equipment was done in a way to avoid detection by Russia. First to Germany to make it appear as a buildup on Russia’s border, then to Poland final to a port in Romania, then reloaded at set sail to Beirut Lebanon where Damascus comes into view. All the while Israeli US Italian and UAE military work in Greece to overcome Russia s300 air defense system. Israel moves their forces into the Golan for supposed drills. All troops in position Damascus to be hit next.
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pjEdHH0Jys

    If so, the staged gas attack is just a part of a much bigger scheme that was planned months ago with Trump knowledge. No more talking about hat the Deep Sate is boxing Trump in. No, Trump is on it.
    , @Seraphim
    Not everyone was fooled by the supposed intentions and goodwill of Trump.

    F. William Engdahl, “The Dangerous Deception Called The Trump Presidency”
    http://journal-neo.org/2016/11/25/the-dangerous-deception-called-the-trump-presidency/

    The exact repetition of Colin Powell's vial of anthrax performance shows that nobody gives a hoot about 'making sense'. Assad must go! Nah, hang. And those who 'back' him and 'would not escape responsibility for this'. Be concerned, very concerned. The Petersburg attack just missed the 'real culprit'.

    , @Sergey Krieger
    He had vision? Doubtfully. Just wanted to win elections and thus was pressing all right buttons.
    I had no doubt for a second it was all for show.
    American history starting with Indian treaties is one of broken promises and lies.
    , @The Scalpel
    Trump is losing the plot
    , @nickels
    It appears to be all over.

    Time to diminish and go into the west, leave the humans to their bloodbath and corruption.
    , @reiner Tor
    To be honest, I can't even imagine how this apparent complete U-turn could happen without him being blackmailed.
    , @Stephen R. Diamond
    Personal impressions of good will are not a sound basis for building a political movement.
    , @Fran Macadam
    I'd guess he saw the handwriting on the wall that his Presidency couldn't survive unless he went full neocon. Being victimized by the Deep State can do that to a President, six ways to Sunday.

    It's jaw,jaw, jaw and war, war, war.

    America on Deep State autopilot.
    , @anon
    The prospects of a conflagration between the United States and Russia are increasing by the day."

    Or is there a deal between Russia and US? Israel will be allowed to have total control in Syria Lebanon and later Iran US would allow Russia to have total say in Eastern Europe and Ukraine.
    , @BB753
    It's nearly impossible to get rid of the neocons. They're deeply entrenched in the permanent government and in the deep state. It would take a real internal coup to neutralize them. And I'm afraid Trump is too old for the job and Ivanka, daddy's little girl and his only weakness, and his son-in-law are the neocon Trojan horse inside the WH.
    , @Anon
    The mainstream media was pushing Trump to take action against Syria, perhaps to embarrass him if he did not take action.

    I also suspect Israel and Jared Kushner are happy about Trump's cruise missile attack. They prefer ISIS to Assad and Iran/Hezbollah.

    I think Trump was disposed to be non-interventionist, but he does not have the philosophical and political background necessary to resist the mainstream media and US State Department. He should consult with Senator Rand Paul more.

    Frankly, until the US gets over its obsession with Israel and stops being bullied by the Jewish lobby, nothing is going to change. Trump and members of Congress can expose that issue but they would probably be committing political suicide.

    But is not America worth it?
  4. El Dato says:

    Gee, I wonder who could be behind this offensively low-brow and loud theater performance to give a “casus belli” and a “reason for responsibility to protect”.

    100% repeat of Obama’s “redline” performance. Maybe it will go through now, it depends on the levels of sellout.

    The always-reliable yuropeans are onboard, same as with the Lybian “Ghadaffi is distributing Viagra to rape his own people” somewhat-liberating free-for-all. Clearly the cheques have arrived.

    Meanwhile, the bombing of Yemen on behalf of the Saudis, which in a sane world would result in US military personnel and politicians getting acquainted with the wrong end of firing squads, is merrily ongoing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    Gee, I wonder who could be behind this offensively low-brow and loud theater performance...
     
    Offensively low-brow and loud theater performance, indeed...

    If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks (loudly and incessantly) like a duck...

  5. Well, let’s see: Tillerson makes a statement that overthrowing Assad is no longer a priority. Neocons disagree. And within days this “chemical attack” happens, the biggest chemical attack in Syria – we are told – since 2013.

    Coincidence? I don’t think so.

    I think it’s possible that chemical attack did happen, and it was the CIA or its terrorist buddies that arranged to poison these children. Unlike Assad, these actually have a plausible motive – manipulating Trump and influencing his policy.

    Read More
    • Agree: Mao Cheng Ji
    • Replies: @Ram
    Reminiscent of the bombing of Deir Az Zohr by the US in support of ISIS when Kerry stepped out of the path laid out for him by the NeoCons.
    , @DanFromCt
    The timing is more than suspicious so I tuned in Fox News for straight up false flag narrative, and sure enough there was Sen. Bob Corker saying Assad was a monster gassing his people and cutting off their genitals, with Corker calling for Putin to repudiate Assad to the thanks of Bill Hemmer--end of script. Incidentally, has anyone else noticed that Corker more resembles that stuttering, court-appointed lawyer in My Cousin Vinny than any statesman?

    The entire history of the development of the rules of evidence in law, science, and politics, a signature achievement of Western Civilization, is being thrown away and hardly anyone notices or cares. Today a canned, identical, and obviously pre-scripted narrative available within minutes of these events goes unquestioned, even when, as in this latest theater, at least one announcement was made before the event.

    I'm also sickened by the concurrent Wounded Warriors theater at the White House because this empty jingoistic stunt may signal that our military may become active on the ground over there and therefore Trump's neo handlers are already selling the inevitable loss of limbs as a sign of our righteousness instead of the reality, which is that our soldiers lose their lives and limbs so good Isrseli boys need not.
    , @Joe Wong
    Tillerson has just made a statement that Assad must go. Sorry to break the news for you. Trump is losing ground to the warmonger deep state fast or sinking into swamp faster than sinking into quick sand.
  6. @Anatoly Karlin
    I've been pretty solid in my Trump support, despite occasional "zradas" (defeats/betrayals).

    This is the first time however that I am genuinely questioning his intentions and goodwill.

    If Trump in the end does goes down the path of corporatist neocon warmongering, he will lose and the vision he outlined at his inauguration speech will die as well. Very sad!

    I have become disheartened.

    Hillary was the end of America as we knew it. But Trump is far too much of an Empire First, not America First president at the moment.

    Read More
  7. So many possible heavies behind this deed and those who are accused the most are the least likely to be guilty.

    A very tired and worn out script.

    Read More
  8. It’s WMD and false flag attacks all over again. How short is the public’s memory? I suppose Trump is caught in a pincer movement here, false flag or provocation carried out by the ‘deep state’ or parts of the so-called ‘intelligence community’ on the one hand, coordinated with the mass media on the other who publicize it and beat the drums demanding that something must be done, it’s a crisis, etc. They’re trying to force his hand. It’ll be interesting to see how he handles this. On the face of it, for a person who’s shown a healthy level of skepticism he’s coming across as a bit too credulous. The UN ambassador Haley is a really embarrassing idiot who is undermining the very person that gave her this wonderful platform for her to be a star of. People gave her adulating coverage in the past as an up-and-coming talent but has been revealed to be merely a blabbering airhead. The pool of talent for Trump to pick from is apparently quite thin so finding some good people is looking to shape up as a major challenge.

    Read More
  9. Dan Hayes says:

    Anatoly:

    Until now I had thought that no one could exceed Samantha Power’s putritude rating, but it looks like Nikky Haley will win the grand prize hands down.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Fuzzy
    Where do they get these bloodthirsty women? Is it political ambition that drives them? Make them join the army and fight the wars they are so eager to start.
  10. Yevardian says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    I've been pretty solid in my Trump support, despite occasional "zradas" (defeats/betrayals).

    This is the first time however that I am genuinely questioning his intentions and goodwill.

    If Trump in the end does goes down the path of corporatist neocon warmongering, he will lose and the vision he outlined at his inauguration speech will die as well. Very sad!

    As I thought at the time, and Ron Unz also noted here, Trump was either an utter moron or completely indifferent to actual policy to promote a facelesss POS like Mike Pence to VP.
    I think it should be increasingly obvious that he’s a gauche blowhard who’s merely a weathervein for whomever advised him last.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    A reminder that the commenteriat of unz.com represents 0% of the US population.

    Pence was a fantastic choice as VP. I don't agree with him on much but he reassured traditional republican voters which is what won Trump the election. No Pence, no Trump.
  11. Trump should watch out. He was voted in exactly because people were profoundly disgusted by the Obama/Clinton Libyan monstrosity, and because people wanted Washington to stop funding terrorists to topple the legitimate government of Syria.

    Assad didn’t gas civilians. The very idea is moronic. He has won the war. Trump can use Assad as an ally in the fight against everybody’s common enemy ISIS. Or Trump can betray his electorate and ruin his presidency by doing something stupid in Syria.

    The choice is his.

    Read More
    • Replies: @animalogic
    Will this be the final test of trump. ? If he follows the neo-con's into this minefield can anyone doubt -- WHATEVER the EXACT reasons why -- that his independence from the deep state is basically neglible ?
    I feel sorry for those who "believed"...(they did have good reason to believe, given the putrid alternative....)
    If my fears are realized, I just hope that the millions who supported him reject BOTH of the major (sides of the same business) party.
    SOMETHING has to push Americans out of the unholy rut they have been in for decades now....
    , @Ruiner
    Jimbo you know we are ISIS
  12. It’s a false flag attack. Just like before. Assad didn’t do it. But the victims died in earnest. The evil accrues to Imperial Washington.

    If Trump thinks Assad did this he is a fool. Somebody needs to tell Trump the deplorables are drifting away.

    Read More
    • Replies: @BenKenobi
    Kek bless the God-Emperor, but if He will not rally the troops, His successor will.
  13. KA says:

    Media is diverting attention to a lie when it should be digging deeper into Susan Rice’s behaviors .
    They could lie again and again because no one was jailed for lying on Iraq,Iran nuclear activities and on Sarin gas attack of 2013 . Now one stone two birds- kill Assad and save Rice’s ass . NYT is the new neocon . MSNBC brought Max Boot today to finesse the lies .

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye
    Susan Rice was the designated liar for Team "Obama" (individual's real name unknown).
  14. utu says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    I've been pretty solid in my Trump support, despite occasional "zradas" (defeats/betrayals).

    This is the first time however that I am genuinely questioning his intentions and goodwill.

    If Trump in the end does goes down the path of corporatist neocon warmongering, he will lose and the vision he outlined at his inauguration speech will die as well. Very sad!

    This betrayal is for real and final. Stop projecting your wishful thinking on Trump. He never was the man many of us were imagining. This were just our projections. Projections of people who wanted to have some hope. The most important is that Bannon is out or on his way out. W/o Bannon there is nobody else. Just your usual dumb and vile republicans are all what is left plus some soft hearted libs in Ivanka faction. That’s all. It’s over!

    Besides what a great opportunity for Trump. Just do the Syria and everything will be forgiven and forgotten. Including Susan Rice, OK? We will not have to impeach you and replace with Pence.

    Not sure about this guy but he claimed 2 days ago:

    Published on Apr 3, 2017

    Is the US Preparing to Invade Damascus?
    As absurd as this may sound the evidence seems to stack up in favor of this scenario of a US led invasion of Damascus, Syria. The movement of US desert Camo military equipment was done in a way to avoid detection by Russia. First to Germany to make it appear as a buildup on Russia’s border, then to Poland final to a port in Romania, then reloaded at set sail to Beirut Lebanon where Damascus comes into view. All the while Israeli US Italian and UAE military work in Greece to overcome Russia s300 air defense system. Israel moves their forces into the Golan for supposed drills. All troops in position Damascus to be hit next.

    If so, the staged gas attack is just a part of a much bigger scheme that was planned months ago with Trump knowledge. No more talking about hat the Deep Sate is boxing Trump in. No, Trump is on it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    The movement of US desert Camo military equipment was done in a way to avoid detection by Russia. First to Germany to make it appear as a buildup on Russia’s border, then to Poland final to a port in Romania, then reloaded at set sail to Beirut Lebanon where Damascus comes into view.
     
    Yeah, sure--you know, those stupid Russians who are still using spyglasses and arithmometers in their intelligence efforts, how can they possibly notice the movement of a brigade size units.
  15. Cyrano says:

    If there were 3 million parallel universes out there, then I guess maybe in one of them Assad would have been responsible for the chemical attack on the Syrian civilians, but even then I doubt it. For the sake of argument, let’s say he did it and as a result almost a hundred people died. So then I guess it’s justifiable to go in and kill thousands and thousands of civilians to punish Assad for killing less than a hundred of them.

    When “dictator” like Assad kills people, he does it in an undemocratic way – with chemical weapons, which is inhumane. When the greatest democracy does it – it’s ok, because it’s for a just cause and with weapons approved by the Geneva Convention. And if at the end of the carnage awaits the prospect of democracy – then no price in civilian lives is too high. Something that Madeleine Albright would call a price worth paying.

    When a democracy kills people – it doesn’t use chemical weapons, it uses bombs, bullets and rockets and that’s what really makes a difference. I think most people would find it very objectionable to be killed by chemical weapons, but with bullets – it’s almost a breeze, and then when you factor in that you are possibly dying in order to bring democracy to your country, I am surprised that they actually don’t volunteer for such an honor.

    Read More
    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @RobinG
    The Unz moderators must be asleep on the job. This is a post worthy of a gold border.
    , @animalogic
    Excellent response. Don't forget though, depleted uranium, cluster bombs, napham & Daisy cutters are also symbols of our humanity & love of democracy.
    It just makes you feel so warm, even gooey, inside, doesn't it ?
  16. Prediction:Very soon…a USAF-USN air strike on the Syrian Military….Will the Syrian Military defend itself this time?

    LARGER BACKGROUND ISSUE driving war with Syria and Christian Russia:the demographic consequences of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act which c0mpletely favored the Democratic Party and the post-1960′s anti-war movement-counter culture which morphed into the narcissistic-me generation-liberal “humanitarian” interventionism” to homo-pedophile norm the world(the culture of the Greedy Cheating Mega-CEOS)….

    The US had devolved into two race-based Nations:One nonwhite…one Native Born White American….The post-1965 nonwhite Nation doesn’t want to be governed by the White Republican Party Nation…..The Black Congressional Caucus wants war with Christian Russia…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Contraviews
    ...and napalm, white phosphorous, DU, cluster bombs are all acceptable. And not to forget a nuclear device of course they are the civilised ways of killing human beings.
  17. Have you noticed how ferocious the sheboons on MSNBC and the sheboons in the US Congress have been in calling for war with Christian Russia…..

    The passage of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act +post-1965 immigration policy has created a large population of economically redundant Working Class Native Born White American Teenage Males who are now Goldman Sachs POTUS Trump’s-Jared-Ivanka Kushner’s canon fodder for Greater Israel. This is a monumentally evil situation….

    Donald Trump had the moral spine of a jelley fish….and his allegiance is to Jared and Ivanka Trump’s precious Israel…

    Donald Trump=Chickenhawk-Warhawk shyster businessman with orange hair…this is all he has ever been…

    Read More
  18. Seraphim says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    I've been pretty solid in my Trump support, despite occasional "zradas" (defeats/betrayals).

    This is the first time however that I am genuinely questioning his intentions and goodwill.

    If Trump in the end does goes down the path of corporatist neocon warmongering, he will lose and the vision he outlined at his inauguration speech will die as well. Very sad!

    Not everyone was fooled by the supposed intentions and goodwill of Trump.

    F. William Engdahl, “The Dangerous Deception Called The Trump Presidency”

    http://journal-neo.org/2016/11/25/the-dangerous-deception-called-the-trump-presidency/

    The exact repetition of Colin Powell’s vial of anthrax performance shows that nobody gives a hoot about ‘making sense’. Assad must go! Nah, hang. And those who ‘back’ him and ‘would not escape responsibility for this’. Be concerned, very concerned. The Petersburg attack just missed the ‘real culprit’.

    Read More
  19. Well, people, it’s all over. I had a bad feeling back when Trump let go of Gen. Flynn. Now my worst suspicions have been confirmed: the deep state has won. The Trump we elected is no more ..

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Christian
    Either that, or there's "real estate" at Arlington Trump has been offered, say a 6'LX4'WX6'D up there on that hill above the Shining City in Arlington Cemetery. Up there next to Jack and Bob Kennedy who, whatever ELSE you think of them were the last two to say No to a bullshit war.

    Real estate in Arlington is what those who oppose wars earn for themselves. You may have silver and gold or you may have lead. Pick one. And so he has.

    Rule #1 is, war for profit goes on. Or else.
    Rule #2 is, Presidents (or candidates as we saw with RFK) will never change Rule #1 and survive the attempt. This is our country for the past century and a half. I'm sure the armorers made themselves a pretty penny during the civil war. Ok, ok, so half a million died, millions maimed, all White Americans (don't want to hear about the Black squads, sorry). but cannon balls and black powder makes good money. Nothing has changed since. And they'll risk lots of casualties toying with a nuclear confrontation without blinking an eye. Lots of money in rebuilding cities, too.

    I really hate our ruling classes these days. If they do this with Syria, start in on Russia with skirmishes and outright war, we'll know we're ruled by evil. There's no need for any of it. We "won". We leveled the Middle East in response to 9/11. You'd think it's enough from looking at the carnage and destruction we've wrought on them. But it's never enough, not anymore.
  20. wayfarer says:

    We can commit an ‘elite’ U.S. fireteam to Syria, and see if they draw enemy fire. I’ll advise a fireteam composed of Gary D. Cohn, Nikki Haley, Jared Kushner, and Ivanka Trump.

    If they get shot to shit, we can always mobilize more ‘elite’ fireteams and commit them. Whatever it takes.

    I’m open to suggestions from any armchair generals, on who to send in next.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Christian
    Hammer them with carrier-borne TacAir from the Med. Of course, Vlad might have a little something to say about THAT with submarines and destroyers. Or all of it. Assad is Putin's (and especially, Iran's) bro, Putin did NOT do what he did last year so the CIA can initiate the fall of Assad. We're very, VERY close to a World War. All the carriers look to be in Norfolk as I rode through Hampton Roads two weeks ago, however. Perhaps they'd rather not get a hole poked in a carrier's hull?
  21. How monumentally evil is the Trump Family?

    Answer:Working Class Native Born White American Teenage Males…bodies stuffed in body bags flown back to crying Working Class Native Born White American Mothers…

    While….Donald Trump’s sons…do $$$$$illion business deals in Dubai…jet back to Palm Springs for afternoon tennis….caviar….massages…….over the Palm Springs Blue Sky……stuffed body bags from Syria…Iraq…Afghanistan….flown back to the economically distressed Native Born White American Heartland…..This is POTUS Trump’s MAGA!!! jobs program…..

    Read More
    • Replies: @War for Blair Mountain
    WAR IS A FUCKING GD RACKET!!!...for the Trump-Kushner Family.....

    Richard Spencer

    Do you still have fantasies about a future Barron Trump?...you fucking turd!!!
  22. @War for Blair Mountain
    How monumentally evil is the Trump Family?


    Answer:Working Class Native Born White American Teenage Males...bodies stuffed in body bags flown back to crying Working Class Native Born White American Mothers...


    While....Donald Trump's sons...do $$$$$illion business deals in Dubai...jet back to Palm Springs for afternoon tennis....caviar....massages.......over the Palm Springs Blue Sky......stuffed body bags from Syria...Iraq...Afghanistan....flown back to the economically distressed Native Born White American Heartland.....This is POTUS Trump's MAGA!!! jobs program.....

    WAR IS A FUCKING GD RACKET!!!…for the Trump-Kushner Family…..

    Richard Spencer

    Do you still have fantasies about a future Barron Trump?…you fucking turd!!!

    Read More
    • Replies: @War for Blair Mountain
    Pull all US Troops out of Syria...Iraq...Afghanistan....off of Christian Russia's borders....out of South Korea.....out of Western Europe....

    Cut the US Military budget by 3/4....
  23. Eagle Eye says:
    @KA
    Media is diverting attention to a lie when it should be digging deeper into Susan Rice's behaviors .
    They could lie again and again because no one was jailed for lying on Iraq,Iran nuclear activities and on Sarin gas attack of 2013 . Now one stone two birds- kill Assad and save Rice's ass . NYT is the new neocon . MSNBC brought Max Boot today to finesse the lies .

    Susan Rice was the designated liar for Team “Obama” (individual’s real name unknown).

    Read More
  24. @War for Blair Mountain
    WAR IS A FUCKING GD RACKET!!!...for the Trump-Kushner Family.....

    Richard Spencer

    Do you still have fantasies about a future Barron Trump?...you fucking turd!!!

    Pull all US Troops out of Syria…Iraq…Afghanistan….off of Christian Russia’s borders….out of South Korea…..out of Western Europe….

    Cut the US Military budget by 3/4….

    Read More
  25. Susan Rice=another Sheeboon declaring war on Christian Russia….to honor the memory of the fornicating Baptist Preacher….the late Dr. Martin Luther King……

    Like I always say:The 1950′s anti-commie crusade=the integration of the US Military….followed by 60 seconds to nuclear war by JFK….followed by the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act for Blacks……..which immediately resulted in the passage of the 1965 Nonwhite Legal Immigrant Increase Act=Barack Obama’s highly racialized-high fertility Democratic Party Voting Bloc 2008
    +2012=midget sheboon Susan Rice declaring war on Christian Russia in 2017….to honor the memory of the fornicating Black Baptist Pastor….Dr. Martin Luther King….

    Read More
  26. RobinG says:
    @Cyrano
    If there were 3 million parallel universes out there, then I guess maybe in one of them Assad would have been responsible for the chemical attack on the Syrian civilians, but even then I doubt it. For the sake of argument, let’s say he did it and as a result almost a hundred people died. So then I guess it’s justifiable to go in and kill thousands and thousands of civilians to punish Assad for killing less than a hundred of them.

    When “dictator” like Assad kills people, he does it in an undemocratic way – with chemical weapons, which is inhumane. When the greatest democracy does it – it’s ok, because it’s for a just cause and with weapons approved by the Geneva Convention. And if at the end of the carnage awaits the prospect of democracy – then no price in civilian lives is too high. Something that Madeleine Albright would call a price worth paying.

    When a democracy kills people – it doesn’t use chemical weapons, it uses bombs, bullets and rockets and that’s what really makes a difference. I think most people would find it very objectionable to be killed by chemical weapons, but with bullets – it’s almost a breeze, and then when you factor in that you are possibly dying in order to bring democracy to your country, I am surprised that they actually don’t volunteer for such an honor.

    The Unz moderators must be asleep on the job. This is a post worthy of a gold border.

    Read More
  27. This dismal business has all the hallmarks of made for TV drama. You cover many of the same points as I did in may last two blogposts. There are many aspects that simply do not add up, even as reported in the mainstream press like the NYT.

    Read More
  28. anon says: • Disclaimer

    Trump got burned on the Yemen raid.

    Why is the military going along with this one? The last one didn’t happen because no one wanted to sign off on it. That is, Obama drew the line (stupidly). But then decided to make Congress vote for it. Everyone wanted someone else to be the designated ‘leader’.

    Syria is no less a loser today. Does Congress want to vote for this? The only thing that is utterly predictable about Trump is he doesn’t want to lose. But even more so, he doesn’t want to be blamed.

    He was quite convincing today as the sucker.

    But really?

    The military and public mostly seem OK with bombing. So maybe we bomb some stuff. It’s disgusting but its just killing military on one side or another along with a lot of collateral damage, dead women and children, etc. But no boots on the ground.

    I’d like to think that he won’t do it. Like how could he be so stupid? But it hasn’t stopped anyone sine the 2000 election.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Christian
    Nor since the 1860 election. Bullshit wars are a thing. Every bomb dropped, another 5000 dollars. Of course, there's fuel, wear and tear, parts, feed bags for the troops, beds, gear, all billable. This is our industry now. A clever conversion of our manufacturing capabilities, no? Evil, but clever..
    , @El Dato

    So maybe we bomb some stuff.
     
    That's going to be quite interesting.

    - Nusra Front will rebound.
    - ISIS will be back (remember them?)
    - USA will lose a few planes to S-300 anti-air.
    - There will be dead Russians. This won't go down well.
    - There will be dead Iranian cleaner teams, and thus angry Iranians. Hardcore Mullahs will be happy (sounds like feature because a War on Iran is exactly what the satanic union of Saudi-Arabia and you-know-who wants.)
    - Turkey will flow into the "bombed stuff" area to attack Kurds.

    God knows where that will all end up.

    Remember little Serbia and August 1914.
  29. wayfarer says:

    Word is being passed down, that the ‘elite’ U.S. AIPAC division is currently on standby, and ready to be deployed to Syria. Apparently the strategy is to have this ‘elite’ unit of fifth-column sectarian lawyers infiltrate Syrian politics, in an effort begin closing real estate deals in the war torn region.

    Read More
  30. JL says:

    The difference between now and 2013 is that Russia is in Syria. So, attacking the Assad regime now would be tantamount to war with Russia. Similarly, going after North Korea, where the US has also been saber rattling recently, would be very bloody and could very well go nuclear. I think the first comment on this thread maybe had it right, this is the opposite of “talk soft and carry a big stick”. If I’m wrong, well, it’s been a good run for humanity and sorry to everyone with children and hopes and plans for the future.

    AK, maybe it’s time to dust off and update your nuclear war post?

    Read More
    • Replies: @karl1haushofer
    "The difference between now and 2013 is that Russia is in Syria. So, attacking the Assad regime now would be tantamount to war with Russia. "

    The problem is that there have been too many cases where Russia has not responded accordingly to an aggression against it. Many people think - whether justified or unjustified - that if Russian military, or a close Russian ally, is attacked Russia will not respond.

    Hopefully there are people in deciding roles in the Russian military and political circles who have the guts to act if it ever gets to this. I mean, those US bases in the Middle East are within the distance of Russian cruise missiles from Caspian and Black Sea...
    , @Anatoly Karlin
    Heh.

    I had an outline of a post in my drafts on how a US-Russian clash in Syria might escalate, which I expected to write if HRC won. I might brush that off.

    I disagree that attacking Syria automatically means war, at least so long as the Russian military isn't directly targetted. Russia doesn't have any formal military alliances with Syria, so a lack of retaliation in Syria proper will be justifiable - and well-advised, considering massive American aeronaval dominance in the region.

    Of course this would be a humiliation for Putin on at least the order of Euromaidan if not greater, so he will probably be forced to respond somehow, somewhere.
  31. Contraviews says: • Website
    @War for Blair Mountain
    Prediction:Very soon...a USAF-USN air strike on the Syrian Military....Will the Syrian Military defend itself this time?


    LARGER BACKGROUND ISSUE driving war with Syria and Christian Russia:the demographic consequences of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act which c0mpletely favored the Democratic Party and the post-1960's anti-war movement-counter culture which morphed into the narcissistic-me generation-liberal "humanitarian" interventionism" to homo-pedophile norm the world(the culture of the Greedy Cheating Mega-CEOS)....


    The US had devolved into two race-based Nations:One nonwhite...one Native Born White American....The post-1965 nonwhite Nation doesn't want to be governed by the White Republican Party Nation.....The Black Congressional Caucus wants war with Christian Russia...

    …and napalm, white phosphorous, DU, cluster bombs are all acceptable. And not to forget a nuclear device of course they are the civilised ways of killing human beings.

    Read More
  32. Seraphim says:

    It is known that the apparition of Haley’s Comet presage wars. Do we have it? No, but we have Nikki Haley.

    U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley, Feb. 16, 2017:
    ““I just put out to the members of the Seucrity Council to help me understand: When we have so much going on in the world, why is it that every single month we’re going to sit down and have a hearing where all they do is obsess over Israel?…
    The Security Council is supposed to discuss how to maintain international peace and security. But at our meeting on the Middle East, the discussion was not about Hizballah’s illegal build-up of rockets in Lebanon. It was not about the money and weapons Iran provides to terrorists. It was not about how we defeat ISIS. It was not about how we hold Bashar al-Assad accountable for the slaughter of hundreds and thousands of civilians. No, instead, the meeting focused on criticizing Israel, the one true democracy in the Middle East. I am new around here, but I understand that’s how the Council has operated, month after month, for decades.
    I’m here to say the United States will not turn a blind eye to this anymore. I am here to underscore the ironclad support of the United States for Israel. I’m here to emphasize the United States is determined to stand up to the UN’s anti-Israel bias. We will never repeat the terrible mistake of Resolution 2334 and allow one-sided Security Council resolutions to condemn Israel. Instead, we will push for action on the real threats we face in the Middle East…
    It is the UN’s anti-Israel bias that is long overdue for change. The United States will not hesitate to speak out against these biases in defense of our friend and ally, Israel”.

    What are the ‘real threats’? Assad, Russia, Iran, Sarin gas. Understood?

    Read More
    • Replies: @jconsley
    Poor Nikki -- what about Resolution 242? Is it now 69 U.N. Resolutions that Israel has ignored along with all international law? Does the United States recognize international law Nikki?

    Thus far, your comments and representation display you total lack of knowledge. At least consider the pros and cons of situations before forming an opinion. It seems you are regurgitating whatever lies you are told.

    Perhaps Trump selected you because you only watch TV and never read books, magazines, etc. You no doubt make Trump feel comfortable with your TV knowledge. It may help to read some State Department cables and emails to learn about United States' policies. Try not to be discouraged by the fact that most policies are hypocritical where Israel is involved.
  33. Always check the timing. Now Globalists did realize that they cannot impeach Trump.
    So?????????????????
    They decided with this false flag to reeducate him.
    Some people claim that US wars in Levant are for israel.
    I am not sure of anything.
    But I do think that real power is hiding behind of the curtain.

    Read More
  34. On every occasion like this when a chemical weapons atrocity causes a stir, discussion always neglects the question I find most interesting, which is: we all know that traditional methods, like bullets that make heads explode like overripe melons, and shrapnel that flings entrails into picturesque sausage-like festoons are licit and acceptable to enlightened humanity, but use of chemicals is outside the pale of decency. But why is that? I think this article contains clues to the answer, but I can’t seem to follow the exact line of reasoning:
    J.B.S. Haldane on chemical warfare

    Read More
  35. I don’t know, maybe Assad/his government felt they could now get away with it and could use chemical weapons to terrorize and punish the opposition. But even if Assad’s military is responsible, how does this incident really change anything? Tbh I don’t care if Assad’s military gasses a few dozen children, and no remotely sane person would regard this as legitimate reason for intervention. And the outrage is absurdly hypocritical given what’s going on in Yemen with direct US support.
    Really disappointing how Trump seems to be preparing an intervention, total madness.

    Read More
  36. BenKenobi says:
    @WorkingClass
    It's a false flag attack. Just like before. Assad didn't do it. But the victims died in earnest. The evil accrues to Imperial Washington.

    If Trump thinks Assad did this he is a fool. Somebody needs to tell Trump the deplorables are drifting away.

    Kek bless the God-Emperor, but if He will not rally the troops, His successor will.

    Read More
  37. @Anatoly Karlin
    I've been pretty solid in my Trump support, despite occasional "zradas" (defeats/betrayals).

    This is the first time however that I am genuinely questioning his intentions and goodwill.

    If Trump in the end does goes down the path of corporatist neocon warmongering, he will lose and the vision he outlined at his inauguration speech will die as well. Very sad!

    He had vision? Doubtfully. Just wanted to win elections and thus was pressing all right buttons.
    I had no doubt for a second it was all for show.
    American history starting with Indian treaties is one of broken promises and lies.

    Read More
  38. Parsifal says:

    Reading all the black pill nonsense from cowardly panikeri I can only lament the fact that you can not have an NKVD blocking detachment to deal with them. So I’m stuck with repeating what I wrote in Steve Sailer’s thread:

    Trump doesn’t believe what he said about Assad yesterday! How do I know? Simple: HE HASN’T TWEETED ABOUT IT! IF HE DOES TWEET ABOUT IT, THEN, AND ONLY THEN, BE WORRIED!

    I am not joking! He tweets only what’s on his heart, if it’s not in the tweets it’s just rhetoric!

    And if you are still not convinced, watch his body language when he spoke of Syria. It’s clearly of someone who is BS-ing his way through.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous Nephew
    I sure hope you're right.
    , @Sergey Krieger
    You are hopeless romantic.
    , @Hunsdon
    I am rather of the opinion you hold, Parsifal. If it was any other Republican, hell, any other politician I can think of, I would be terrified by Trump's words. With Trump, I am just concerned. How many times have I seen the crowds throw their hands up and wail, "Trump has betrayed us! It's all over!"

    . . . and then, somehow, it's not all over, and Trump hasn't betrayed us.

    He could, of course. He could roll over for the Deep State. But he hasn't yet.

    Despair is a sin.

    And if Trump does end up stabbing us in the back, are we any worse off than if Lady MacBeth was in the White House?
  39. @Parsifal
    Reading all the black pill nonsense from cowardly panikeri I can only lament the fact that you can not have an NKVD blocking detachment to deal with them. So I'm stuck with repeating what I wrote in Steve Sailer's thread:

    Trump doesn't believe what he said about Assad yesterday! How do I know? Simple: HE HASN'T TWEETED ABOUT IT! IF HE DOES TWEET ABOUT IT, THEN, AND ONLY THEN, BE WORRIED!

    I am not joking! He tweets only what's on his heart, if it's not in the tweets it's just rhetoric!

    And if you are still not convinced, watch his body language when he spoke of Syria. It's clearly of someone who is BS-ing his way through.

    I sure hope you’re right.

    Read More
  40. Ram says:
    @Felix Keverich
    Well, let's see: Tillerson makes a statement that overthrowing Assad is no longer a priority. Neocons disagree. And within days this "chemical attack" happens, the biggest chemical attack in Syria - we are told - since 2013.

    Coincidence? I don't think so.

    I think it's possible that chemical attack did happen, and it was the CIA or its terrorist buddies that arranged to poison these children. Unlike Assad, these actually have a plausible motive - manipulating Trump and influencing his policy.

    Reminiscent of the bombing of Deir Az Zohr by the US in support of ISIS when Kerry stepped out of the path laid out for him by the NeoCons.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    "...the path laid out for him by the NeoCons."
    Agree.

    Paul Craig Roberts' invective against ziocons: "The entire history of the 21st century is the history of Washington’s wars instigated by Zionist neoconservatives and the state of Israel against Muslim countries. So far Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Afghanistan, Yemen, and parts of Syria and Pakistan, have been destroyed by gratuitous military attacks that are, without any doubt, war crimes under the Nuremberg Standard established by the United States. The hoax “war on terror” has not only murdered and dislocated millions of peoples, producing waves of Muslim immigration over the Western World, but also destroyed Western civil liberty." http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/04/05/germany-rip/

    Mrs. Haley and other non-Jewish warriors like McCain and Lindsey Graham are indeed the whores in service of the "chosen" and mega war profiteers, from weaponry peddlers to the financial "great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity:"

  41. @JL
    The difference between now and 2013 is that Russia is in Syria. So, attacking the Assad regime now would be tantamount to war with Russia. Similarly, going after North Korea, where the US has also been saber rattling recently, would be very bloody and could very well go nuclear. I think the first comment on this thread maybe had it right, this is the opposite of "talk soft and carry a big stick". If I'm wrong, well, it's been a good run for humanity and sorry to everyone with children and hopes and plans for the future.

    AK, maybe it's time to dust off and update your nuclear war post?

    “The difference between now and 2013 is that Russia is in Syria. So, attacking the Assad regime now would be tantamount to war with Russia. ”

    The problem is that there have been too many cases where Russia has not responded accordingly to an aggression against it. Many people think – whether justified or unjustified – that if Russian military, or a close Russian ally, is attacked Russia will not respond.

    Hopefully there are people in deciding roles in the Russian military and political circles who have the guts to act if it ever gets to this. I mean, those US bases in the Middle East are within the distance of Russian cruise missiles from Caspian and Black Sea…

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    Russian federation has been trying to avoid a full-blown military conflict that the ziocons have been provoking with the vicious audacity. The lying, thieving, criminal congress, run by the CIA /Mossad, is not an honest partner. Russia is cornered.
    , @JL
    You realize you're talking about nuclear war, right? Why any rational person would hope for that truly escapes me. No, the only thing we can hope for is that there are people in deciding roles in the American military and political circles who still remember about the concept of MAD.
  42. @jimbojones
    Trump should watch out. He was voted in exactly because people were profoundly disgusted by the Obama/Clinton Libyan monstrosity, and because people wanted Washington to stop funding terrorists to topple the legitimate government of Syria.

    Assad didn't gas civilians. The very idea is moronic. He has won the war. Trump can use Assad as an ally in the fight against everybody's common enemy ISIS. Or Trump can betray his electorate and ruin his presidency by doing something stupid in Syria.

    The choice is his.

    Will this be the final test of trump. ? If he follows the neo-con’s into this minefield can anyone doubt — WHATEVER the EXACT reasons why — that his independence from the deep state is basically neglible ?
    I feel sorry for those who “believed”…(they did have good reason to believe, given the putrid alternative….)
    If my fears are realized, I just hope that the millions who supported him reject BOTH of the major (sides of the same business) party.
    SOMETHING has to push Americans out of the unholy rut they have been in for decades now….

    Read More
  43. @Cyrano
    If there were 3 million parallel universes out there, then I guess maybe in one of them Assad would have been responsible for the chemical attack on the Syrian civilians, but even then I doubt it. For the sake of argument, let’s say he did it and as a result almost a hundred people died. So then I guess it’s justifiable to go in and kill thousands and thousands of civilians to punish Assad for killing less than a hundred of them.

    When “dictator” like Assad kills people, he does it in an undemocratic way – with chemical weapons, which is inhumane. When the greatest democracy does it – it’s ok, because it’s for a just cause and with weapons approved by the Geneva Convention. And if at the end of the carnage awaits the prospect of democracy – then no price in civilian lives is too high. Something that Madeleine Albright would call a price worth paying.

    When a democracy kills people – it doesn’t use chemical weapons, it uses bombs, bullets and rockets and that’s what really makes a difference. I think most people would find it very objectionable to be killed by chemical weapons, but with bullets – it’s almost a breeze, and then when you factor in that you are possibly dying in order to bring democracy to your country, I am surprised that they actually don’t volunteer for such an honor.

    Excellent response. Don’t forget though, depleted uranium, cluster bombs, napham & Daisy cutters are also symbols of our humanity & love of democracy.
    It just makes you feel so warm, even gooey, inside, doesn’t it ?

    Read More
  44. @War for Blair Mountain
    Pull all US Troops out of Syria...Iraq...Afghanistan....off of Christian Russia's borders....out of South Korea.....out of Western Europe....

    Cut the US Military budget by 3/4....

    YES
    YES
    YES, &
    YES.

    Read More
  45. Whether or not the attack was a false flag, that picture of Nikki Haley with the photo of the dead child ought to be very high on the list of “Why Women Should Not Be Allowed Anywhere Near Diplomacy.” First, Angela Merkel consents to the massive invasion of her country because of a dead Syrian child. Now Nikki Haley wants Americans to be put at risk to kill more Syrians because of another dead Syrian child. Otto von Bismarck was right, women’s roles should be confined to children (their own), the church and the kitchen.

    Read More
    • Replies: @daniel le mouche
    while i may agree with you, to be fair it's not just women. remember bush senior's 'babies in the incubators'?
    but yes, this woman is extremely vile, though her speech was obviously written by her betters/handlers. we have now just pseudo-attractive, completely vacant, talking heads. she's on a par with sara palin. but, for men, there's john mccain, and hosts of others.
    women's proper place is a religious question, i think, and we basically have none now in the west--we're doomed.
  46. annamaria says:
    @Ram
    Reminiscent of the bombing of Deir Az Zohr by the US in support of ISIS when Kerry stepped out of the path laid out for him by the NeoCons.

    “…the path laid out for him by the NeoCons.”
    Agree.

    Paul Craig Roberts’ invective against ziocons: “The entire history of the 21st century is the history of Washington’s wars instigated by Zionist neoconservatives and the state of Israel against Muslim countries. So far Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Afghanistan, Yemen, and parts of Syria and Pakistan, have been destroyed by gratuitous military attacks that are, without any doubt, war crimes under the Nuremberg Standard established by the United States. The hoax “war on terror” has not only murdered and dislocated millions of peoples, producing waves of Muslim immigration over the Western World, but also destroyed Western civil liberty.” http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/04/05/germany-rip/

    Mrs. Haley and other non-Jewish warriors like McCain and Lindsey Graham are indeed the whores in service of the “chosen” and mega war profiteers, from weaponry peddlers to the financial “great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity:”

    Read More
  47. annamaria says:
    @karl1haushofer
    "The difference between now and 2013 is that Russia is in Syria. So, attacking the Assad regime now would be tantamount to war with Russia. "

    The problem is that there have been too many cases where Russia has not responded accordingly to an aggression against it. Many people think - whether justified or unjustified - that if Russian military, or a close Russian ally, is attacked Russia will not respond.

    Hopefully there are people in deciding roles in the Russian military and political circles who have the guts to act if it ever gets to this. I mean, those US bases in the Middle East are within the distance of Russian cruise missiles from Caspian and Black Sea...

    Russian federation has been trying to avoid a full-blown military conflict that the ziocons have been provoking with the vicious audacity. The lying, thieving, criminal congress, run by the CIA /Mossad, is not an honest partner. Russia is cornered.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    Russia is cornered.
     
    I think it is exactly the other way around. Russia has options, US doesn't, apart from the fact that it lost all international subjectivity and is now nothing more than Israel's "subsidiary". Russia is not desperate, US establishment is and that is why it is so desperate to start "war" with Russia, whatever that means. Russia will always avoid war--it is her MO for decades. US desperation for this "war" with Russia has very logical explanations, granted that some of the factors in all this US insanity are, indeed, irrational (and hysterical) and metaphysical in nature.
  48. Joe Wong says:
    @michael dr
    On Trump - the less he intends to do, the more strongly he positions himself.
    So one way to interpret his remarks is that he is occupying a position that fully takes advantage of anti-Assad sentiment, but with no intent to act on it at all.

    The only guy used chemical weapons in wars against civilians on record is the USA during the Vietnam War; Agent Orange, Agent White and Agent Rainbow are still wrecking havoc in Vietnam. The only guy conduct false flag ops to blame the victims for violating human rights via its NED sponsored NGOs then wage reckless wars against the victims on the moral high ground is the USA and its NATO partners.

    This poisonous gas attack on Syria civilians bears too many similarities to the past records of the USA and its NATO partners’ behaviour.

    Read More
  49. JL says:
    @karl1haushofer
    "The difference between now and 2013 is that Russia is in Syria. So, attacking the Assad regime now would be tantamount to war with Russia. "

    The problem is that there have been too many cases where Russia has not responded accordingly to an aggression against it. Many people think - whether justified or unjustified - that if Russian military, or a close Russian ally, is attacked Russia will not respond.

    Hopefully there are people in deciding roles in the Russian military and political circles who have the guts to act if it ever gets to this. I mean, those US bases in the Middle East are within the distance of Russian cruise missiles from Caspian and Black Sea...

    You realize you’re talking about nuclear war, right? Why any rational person would hope for that truly escapes me. No, the only thing we can hope for is that there are people in deciding roles in the American military and political circles who still remember about the concept of MAD.

    Read More
    • Replies: @karl1haushofer
    Are you saying that Russia should allow its forces in Syria to be attacked or bombed without retribution?
  50. @Parsifal
    Reading all the black pill nonsense from cowardly panikeri I can only lament the fact that you can not have an NKVD blocking detachment to deal with them. So I'm stuck with repeating what I wrote in Steve Sailer's thread:

    Trump doesn't believe what he said about Assad yesterday! How do I know? Simple: HE HASN'T TWEETED ABOUT IT! IF HE DOES TWEET ABOUT IT, THEN, AND ONLY THEN, BE WORRIED!

    I am not joking! He tweets only what's on his heart, if it's not in the tweets it's just rhetoric!

    And if you are still not convinced, watch his body language when he spoke of Syria. It's clearly of someone who is BS-ing his way through.

    You are hopeless romantic.

    Read More
  51. @JL
    The difference between now and 2013 is that Russia is in Syria. So, attacking the Assad regime now would be tantamount to war with Russia. Similarly, going after North Korea, where the US has also been saber rattling recently, would be very bloody and could very well go nuclear. I think the first comment on this thread maybe had it right, this is the opposite of "talk soft and carry a big stick". If I'm wrong, well, it's been a good run for humanity and sorry to everyone with children and hopes and plans for the future.

    AK, maybe it's time to dust off and update your nuclear war post?

    Heh.

    I had an outline of a post in my drafts on how a US-Russian clash in Syria might escalate, which I expected to write if HRC won. I might brush that off.

    I disagree that attacking Syria automatically means war, at least so long as the Russian military isn’t directly targetted. Russia doesn’t have any formal military alliances with Syria, so a lack of retaliation in Syria proper will be justifiable – and well-advised, considering massive American aeronaval dominance in the region.

    Of course this would be a humiliation for Putin on at least the order of Euromaidan if not greater, so he will probably be forced to respond somehow, somewhere.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hunsdon
    Please bear in mind, O our host, that Gen. Dunford, chairman of the JCS, said (in October?) that for the US to set up no fly zones in Syria would mean that we are at war with Syria and Russia. The next day in a NBC radio interview Lady MacBeth once more advocated for such no fly zones.

    Unlike the Obama administration, I somehow think the Trump administration will actually listen to military men like Dunford, Kelly and Mattis. For the last generation, the US has stalked more or less unopposed on the world stage, throwing its weight around as it pleases. No one, we think, can oppose us! Well, that's nice and all, but I haven't forgotten the Cold War and the threat of nuclear confrontation with the USSR/Russia, and I'll bet you a meal of shashlik, lepeshki and vodka that Mattis, Dunford and Kelly haven't either.

    Maybe my faith is naive, we'll have to wait and see.
    , @anon

    I disagree that attacking Syria automatically means war, at least so long as the Russian military isn’t directly targetted. Russia doesn’t have any formal military alliances with Syria, so a lack of retaliation in Syria proper will be justifiable – and well-advised, considering massive American aeronaval dominance in the region.
     
    Israel gets away with attacking Syria all the time. As long as russian interests aren't harmed, ie: killing russians, or causing Syria to be overrun by Jihadis, it's hard to see why they should respond at all.

    I'm optimistic that the US does symbolic bombing in Syria, or Bashar steps down and Maher or some other deputy takes over
    , @donnyess
    "Of course this would be a humiliation for Putin on at least the order of Euromaidan if not greater, so he will probably be forced to respond somehow, somewhere."

    Putin will be seen as a little more than a petty monument builder and surrender monkey...as Russian interests are destroyed in Syria... with Assad winding up dead or in the Hague awaiting trial for war crimes. Do you remember when Rogozin visited the US? He flatly stated that the rise to power of a republican admin in Wash. DC would spell big trouble for Russian foreign interests. He was right, although you can dress up military aggression in either liberal or conservative colors...wasn't going to matter who got elected president.
  52. Hunsdon says:
    @Parsifal
    Reading all the black pill nonsense from cowardly panikeri I can only lament the fact that you can not have an NKVD blocking detachment to deal with them. So I'm stuck with repeating what I wrote in Steve Sailer's thread:

    Trump doesn't believe what he said about Assad yesterday! How do I know? Simple: HE HASN'T TWEETED ABOUT IT! IF HE DOES TWEET ABOUT IT, THEN, AND ONLY THEN, BE WORRIED!

    I am not joking! He tweets only what's on his heart, if it's not in the tweets it's just rhetoric!

    And if you are still not convinced, watch his body language when he spoke of Syria. It's clearly of someone who is BS-ing his way through.

    I am rather of the opinion you hold, Parsifal. If it was any other Republican, hell, any other politician I can think of, I would be terrified by Trump’s words. With Trump, I am just concerned. How many times have I seen the crowds throw their hands up and wail, “Trump has betrayed us! It’s all over!”

    . . . and then, somehow, it’s not all over, and Trump hasn’t betrayed us.

    He could, of course. He could roll over for the Deep State. But he hasn’t yet.

    Despair is a sin.

    And if Trump does end up stabbing us in the back, are we any worse off than if Lady MacBeth was in the White House?

    Read More
  53. Brabantian says: • Website

    Key items showing false-flag nature of the Syrian gas attack absurdly attributed to Assad

    (1) Anti-Assad “reporter” Feras Karam tweeted about the gas attack in Syria 24 hours before it happened – Tweet says: “Tomorrow a media campaign will begin to cover intense air raids on the Hama countryside & use of chlorine against civilians”

    (2) Gas masks were distributed 2 days before the attack

    (3) Rescue workers are not wearing protective gear as they would if severely-toxic gas attack had occurred, as Anatoly Karlin notes above

    (4) Pakistani British doctor promoting Syria gas attack story, “who at the time of attack was taking interview requests instead of helping injured flooding in” is Dr Shajul Islam, “used as source by US & UK media, despite facing terror charges for kidnapping & torturing two British journalists in Syria & being struck off the medical register”

    (5) Videos previously exposed as fraudulent are being recycled “A chemical weapons shipment run by Saudi mercenaries [is blown up] before it can be offloaded & used to attack the Syrian army in Hama … [this story] has turned into Syrian aircraft dropping sarin gas on orphanages … videos shot in Egypt with the smoke machines are dragged out again.”

    (6) Gas attack story is supported by known Soros-funded frauds ‘White Helmets’ who had previously celebrated alongside Israeli-Saudi backed ‘Al Qaeda’ extremists after seizing Idlib from Syrian Army forces. White Helmets “have been caught filming their fake videos in places like Egypt & Morocco, using actors, smoke machines & fake blood”.

    Very regrettably, Russia & its potentially powerful media, are playing their traditional Israeli-serving role of being inexcusably timid in denouncing blatant false-flag deception & fraud … Just as Russia signed off on killing Qaddafi & hurling Libya into mass death & chaos

    Destruction of Syria & Assad serves long-being-implemented 1980s Israeli Oded Yinon Plan to destroy & dismember all major countries surrounding mafia state Israel

    Also, major US-backed economics behind the campaign to destroy Syria -
    Map of pipeline alternatives thru Syria:
    (a) Russia-supported pipeline from Iran thru Iraq & Syria
    (b) US-supported pipeline from Qatar thru Saudi Arabia, Jordan & Syria

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon

    (1) Anti-Assad “reporter” Feras Karam tweeted about the gas attack in Syria 24 hours before it happened – Tweet says: “Tomorrow a media campaign will begin to cover intense air raids on the Hama countryside & use of chlorine against civilians”
     
    There were alleged chemical (chlorine) attacks occurring for the past week. Also, Hama is not the same as Idlib, where these attacks took place.


    (2) Gas masks were distributed 2 days before the attack

    (3) Rescue workers are not wearing protective gear as they would if severely-toxic gas attack had occurred, as Anatoly Karlin notes above

     

    So which is it? (2) suggests a false flag (3) suggests a complete fake

    (4) Pakistani British doctor promoting Syria gas attack story, “who at the time of attack was taking interview requests instead of helping injured flooding in” is Dr Shajul Islam, “used as source by US & UK media, despite facing terror charges for kidnapping & torturing two British journalists in Syria & being struck off the medical register”
     
    Yeah, reality is pretty complicated. Opposition and regime are evil.
  54. Hunsdon says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    Heh.

    I had an outline of a post in my drafts on how a US-Russian clash in Syria might escalate, which I expected to write if HRC won. I might brush that off.

    I disagree that attacking Syria automatically means war, at least so long as the Russian military isn't directly targetted. Russia doesn't have any formal military alliances with Syria, so a lack of retaliation in Syria proper will be justifiable - and well-advised, considering massive American aeronaval dominance in the region.

    Of course this would be a humiliation for Putin on at least the order of Euromaidan if not greater, so he will probably be forced to respond somehow, somewhere.

    Please bear in mind, O our host, that Gen. Dunford, chairman of the JCS, said (in October?) that for the US to set up no fly zones in Syria would mean that we are at war with Syria and Russia. The next day in a NBC radio interview Lady MacBeth once more advocated for such no fly zones.

    Unlike the Obama administration, I somehow think the Trump administration will actually listen to military men like Dunford, Kelly and Mattis. For the last generation, the US has stalked more or less unopposed on the world stage, throwing its weight around as it pleases. No one, we think, can oppose us! Well, that’s nice and all, but I haven’t forgotten the Cold War and the threat of nuclear confrontation with the USSR/Russia, and I’ll bet you a meal of shashlik, lepeshki and vodka that Mattis, Dunford and Kelly haven’t either.

    Maybe my faith is naive, we’ll have to wait and see.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    Unlike the Obama administration, I somehow think the Trump administration will actually listen to military men like Dunford, Kelly and Mattis.
     
    Being military is certainly no guarantee against making misjudgements of this kind.

    Here's what Lang at SST has to say and he has both directly relevant experience and contacts:

    "Some of the retired military people whom McMaster inherited on the NSC staff think that of the US intervenes against the Syrian government, Russia will back away from, us. I do not agree with this. "

    This moment is where Trump succeeds or fails, imo.
  55. Fuzzy says:
    @Dan Hayes
    Anatoly:

    Until now I had thought that no one could exceed Samantha Power's putritude rating, but it looks like Nikky Haley will win the grand prize hands down.

    Where do they get these bloodthirsty women? Is it political ambition that drives them? Make them join the army and fight the wars they are so eager to start.

    Read More
    • Replies: @daniel le mouche
    What do you mean? They're everywhere in the culture. People will do, say, or fuck anyone or anything to get that sweet corporate gig. Corporate culture of whores, spineless godless chickens... Not that I can think of an answer, an out. But it seems: We Need Religion! (Not phony Billy Graham, Pat Robertson swill---true belief. But I don't believe myself, much as I respect Catholicism pre-1960s)
    For one day to day example, who stands up during the Thanksgiving, New Years, etc. football game and rants on about what a moronic waste of time and life it is?
  56. berserker says:

    Every time someone needs to hold up a photograph of a dead child to make a case for war (that ends up killing hundreds of thousands of people), I simply ignore it.

    - Check Nassim Taleb’s Twitter feed for some interesting photographs.

    Read More
  57. The Scalpel says: • Website
    @Anatoly Karlin
    I've been pretty solid in my Trump support, despite occasional "zradas" (defeats/betrayals).

    This is the first time however that I am genuinely questioning his intentions and goodwill.

    If Trump in the end does goes down the path of corporatist neocon warmongering, he will lose and the vision he outlined at his inauguration speech will die as well. Very sad!

    Trump is losing the plot

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Scalpel
    It is quite possible that this ENTIRE incident is a staged production. Film and special effects people are certainly capable of it. Assuming any of this is credible before seeing objective evidence only reinforces the narrative. On the surface of things, it seems illogical and obviously self-defeating and unnecessary for the Syrian government to have done this. One should withold any judgement until the facts are in
  58. Gordian Knot time. I don’t know for sure what it is about politics that turns knowledgeable people of different stripes into Revusky’s Hi IQ Idiots. They have done controlled tests on this phenomena with brain wiring and visual stimuli to show that an emotional element interferes with (or dominates) logical thinking when political themes or visuals are invoked. The big boys must have known this through other wisdom when they allowed for universal suffrage but that is an argument for another day.

    Just as the leftist intellectuals were urinating with glee onto their Birkenstocks when Buckwheat won in 2008, so did the intellectual right over their Red Wings when Drumpf prevailed. Emotions.

    I hold ALL politicians in extreme contempt and thereby reflexively limit my exposure to the reality show charade of elections. Needless to say, no emotions invoked. Then inevitably I get to roll my eyes when real and honest intellectuals on the left gnashed their teeth when the Nobel Peace prize laureate doubled up on foreign wars and reneged on domestic issues and likewise get do so when otherwise intelligent writers such as Mr. Karlin reveal surprise and disappointment with Trump.

    It is all so painfully obvious that a system which has been hijacked and has steadily degenerated for over 200 years cannot be fixed through the same (but negatively expanded) rules by simply producing new personality. Einstein’s definition of insanity fully displayed.

    When asked what I think of Trump from election day +1 until the present, my answer remains the same. The upside is that his success did a monumental job in exposing ‘professional’ politicians of all stripes as being corrupt and worthless beyond words and that he exposed the media as being bought and paid for whores who walk in lockstep from the highest perch of the ‘gray lady’
    right down to the local community papers even in foreign countries.

    The downside is that he will inevitably deflate and disappoint those people who arguably might have made a difference. Apathy and cynicism will ensue, resulting in a reversion to the status quo. It has always been the mob’s destiny when the mob supposedly gets to decide. So after some possibly honest Trumpian burps it will be business as usual (Syria as just one example).

    Leviathan will not be dislodged by a mere mortal.

    Cheers-

    Read More
  59. @JL
    You realize you're talking about nuclear war, right? Why any rational person would hope for that truly escapes me. No, the only thing we can hope for is that there are people in deciding roles in the American military and political circles who still remember about the concept of MAD.

    Are you saying that Russia should allow its forces in Syria to be attacked or bombed without retribution?

    Read More
    • Replies: @JL
    What I'm saying is that I can't envision a scenario whereby an American attack on Russian forces in Syria doesn't lead to all out nuclear war and I sincerely hope it doesn't come to that. Otherwise, we can continue this discussion in the afterlife. Mr. Karlin seems to have different ideas and I would very much like to read the post on various escalation scenarios that he had worked up in case of a Clinton victory. As it is and even before any escalations, US and Russian forces operating in such close vicinity seems to me extremely dangerous.
  60. The Scalpel says: • Website
    @The Scalpel
    Trump is losing the plot

    It is quite possible that this ENTIRE incident is a staged production. Film and special effects people are certainly capable of it. Assuming any of this is credible before seeing objective evidence only reinforces the narrative. On the surface of things, it seems illogical and obviously self-defeating and unnecessary for the Syrian government to have done this. One should withold any judgement until the facts are in

    Read More
  61. @Seamus Padraig
    Well, people, it's all over. I had a bad feeling back when Trump let go of Gen. Flynn. Now my worst suspicions have been confirmed: the deep state has won. The Trump we elected is no more ..

    Either that, or there’s “real estate” at Arlington Trump has been offered, say a 6′LX4′WX6′D up there on that hill above the Shining City in Arlington Cemetery. Up there next to Jack and Bob Kennedy who, whatever ELSE you think of them were the last two to say No to a bullshit war.

    Real estate in Arlington is what those who oppose wars earn for themselves. You may have silver and gold or you may have lead. Pick one. And so he has.

    Rule #1 is, war for profit goes on. Or else.
    Rule #2 is, Presidents (or candidates as we saw with RFK) will never change Rule #1 and survive the attempt. This is our country for the past century and a half. I’m sure the armorers made themselves a pretty penny during the civil war. Ok, ok, so half a million died, millions maimed, all White Americans (don’t want to hear about the Black squads, sorry). but cannon balls and black powder makes good money. Nothing has changed since. And they’ll risk lots of casualties toying with a nuclear confrontation without blinking an eye. Lots of money in rebuilding cities, too.

    I really hate our ruling classes these days. If they do this with Syria, start in on Russia with skirmishes and outright war, we’ll know we’re ruled by evil. There’s no need for any of it. We “won”. We leveled the Middle East in response to 9/11. You’d think it’s enough from looking at the carnage and destruction we’ve wrought on them. But it’s never enough, not anymore.

    Read More
  62. @wayfarer
    We can commit an 'elite' U.S. fireteam to Syria, and see if they draw enemy fire. I'll advise a fireteam composed of Gary D. Cohn, Nikki Haley, Jared Kushner, and Ivanka Trump.

    If they get shot to shit, we can always mobilize more 'elite' fireteams and commit them. Whatever it takes.

    I'm open to suggestions from any armchair generals, on who to send in next.

    Hammer them with carrier-borne TacAir from the Med. Of course, Vlad might have a little something to say about THAT with submarines and destroyers. Or all of it. Assad is Putin’s (and especially, Iran’s) bro, Putin did NOT do what he did last year so the CIA can initiate the fall of Assad. We’re very, VERY close to a World War. All the carriers look to be in Norfolk as I rode through Hampton Roads two weeks ago, however. Perhaps they’d rather not get a hole poked in a carrier’s hull?

    Read More
  63. This turn of events is the biggest challenge ever to my support of Trump. If he really goes the way he is indicating, he will lose the support of people like me — and there may be millions like me. We have no alternative candidate, but we will never again be led down this road.

    If Trump turns, that is the end of everything.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    " we will never again be led down this road." You will, you will because you like most losers are driven by your own projections. You projected your hopes and wishful thinking on Trump and it worked perfectly for him. He got elected. But now after firing Bannon there is nothing left. He was the last and the only guarantor of your hopes. That's why MSM hated Bannon so much. The only pre-election promises that actually will be retained are torture, Guantanamo and stealing their oil. Did you vote for these items? Anyway, that is all you are left with. Get used to it:


    torture, Guantanamo and stealing their oil
     


    And enjoy your Trump as president.
  64. JL says:
    @karl1haushofer
    Are you saying that Russia should allow its forces in Syria to be attacked or bombed without retribution?

    What I’m saying is that I can’t envision a scenario whereby an American attack on Russian forces in Syria doesn’t lead to all out nuclear war and I sincerely hope it doesn’t come to that. Otherwise, we can continue this discussion in the afterlife. Mr. Karlin seems to have different ideas and I would very much like to read the post on various escalation scenarios that he had worked up in case of a Clinton victory. As it is and even before any escalations, US and Russian forces operating in such close vicinity seems to me extremely dangerous.

    Read More
    • Replies: @karl1haushofer
    But don't you realize that this type of thinking gives America a leeway to attack Russia whenever it pleases?

    Your way of thinking goes something like this: "America can attack Russia because it knows that Russia cannot retaliate because it would start WW3".

    May I ask that why shouldn't America worry about starting WW3 if it attacks Russia?

  65. @JL
    What I'm saying is that I can't envision a scenario whereby an American attack on Russian forces in Syria doesn't lead to all out nuclear war and I sincerely hope it doesn't come to that. Otherwise, we can continue this discussion in the afterlife. Mr. Karlin seems to have different ideas and I would very much like to read the post on various escalation scenarios that he had worked up in case of a Clinton victory. As it is and even before any escalations, US and Russian forces operating in such close vicinity seems to me extremely dangerous.

    But don’t you realize that this type of thinking gives America a leeway to attack Russia whenever it pleases?

    Your way of thinking goes something like this: “America can attack Russia because it knows that Russia cannot retaliate because it would start WW3″.

    May I ask that why shouldn’t America worry about starting WW3 if it attacks Russia?

    Read More
    • Replies: @JL
    Ah, I see the misunderstanding here. My point was simply that any discussion of how Russia would respond to an attack on its forces by the US is moot because it will respond in kind, and the whole thing will go nuclear in 3,2,1. Specifically, it very much is the US that should be worrying about starting WW3 in this case, not Russia.

    During the Cold War, both sides realized the ramifications of direct military conflict and acted accordingly. The US is behaving as if something has changed in that respect and I find it terrifying. What is different now is that there is a huge asymmetry in forces that perhaps has instilled unwarranted confidence in the Americans that they can win a war with Russia.

    I think you maybe overestimate Russia's strength, in somewhat the same way as the US may be underestimating it. I noticed in another conversation you thought that Russia should have vetoed the UN resolution allowing the US to go into Afghanistan. To me, this is a complete misjudgment of Russia's situation at that moment in time, while ignoring, or forgetting, the resolve of the US immediately following September 11. Not to mention, there was probably a geopolitical calculation that having the US bogged down in Afghanistan, something the Russians could envision all too well, would allow Russia some breathing room to get back on its feet and claw back some influence in the near abroad.

    Look, I'm all for Russia's resistance to the empire, I'd just like it to happen without WW3.
  66. It just makes no sense.

    It rarely does, and almost never has to. Unfortunately.

    Read More
  67. Tom Welsh says:

    That tweet certainly is a classic.

    “Persons with knowledge believe…”

    You could write a book about deception based on those four words alone. “Persons with knowledge” is a phrase calculated to inspire envy and respect in the great unwashed, who of course have no knowledge. But wait a moment! Who are those “persons with knowledge”? They seem to be unnamed and undefined – could that be deliberate?

    And then we learn that those “persons with knowledge” *believe* something. But wait a moment! If they have knowledge, why would they be reduced to “believing”? Wouldn’t they actually, well, *know*?

    So the tweet tells us that some undefined people, who may or may not exist, know something and believe… presumably, something else that they don’t know about.

    And I would care about this why?

    Read More
  68. annamaria says:

    When ignoramuses like Morell (a pampered villain) get power over resources of an empire like the US, the whole humanity becomes endangered. The greatest danger is a rule of the opportunistic incompetent. It is doubtful that the all-powerful CIA has any knowledgeable and principled persons left among its rank anymore, after the years of careful selection for opportunists/profiteers. At least there is no way the ziocons, war profiteers and their families will be able to survive the next world war.
    Psychopaths are anti-life by definition.

    Read More
  69. JL says:
    @karl1haushofer
    But don't you realize that this type of thinking gives America a leeway to attack Russia whenever it pleases?

    Your way of thinking goes something like this: "America can attack Russia because it knows that Russia cannot retaliate because it would start WW3".

    May I ask that why shouldn't America worry about starting WW3 if it attacks Russia?

    Ah, I see the misunderstanding here. My point was simply that any discussion of how Russia would respond to an attack on its forces by the US is moot because it will respond in kind, and the whole thing will go nuclear in 3,2,1. Specifically, it very much is the US that should be worrying about starting WW3 in this case, not Russia.

    During the Cold War, both sides realized the ramifications of direct military conflict and acted accordingly. The US is behaving as if something has changed in that respect and I find it terrifying. What is different now is that there is a huge asymmetry in forces that perhaps has instilled unwarranted confidence in the Americans that they can win a war with Russia.

    I think you maybe overestimate Russia’s strength, in somewhat the same way as the US may be underestimating it. I noticed in another conversation you thought that Russia should have vetoed the UN resolution allowing the US to go into Afghanistan. To me, this is a complete misjudgment of Russia’s situation at that moment in time, while ignoring, or forgetting, the resolve of the US immediately following September 11. Not to mention, there was probably a geopolitical calculation that having the US bogged down in Afghanistan, something the Russians could envision all too well, would allow Russia some breathing room to get back on its feet and claw back some influence in the near abroad.

    Look, I’m all for Russia’s resistance to the empire, I’d just like it to happen without WW3.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    What is different now is that there is a huge asymmetry in forces that perhaps has instilled unwarranted confidence in the Americans that they can win a war with Russia.
     
    It is not as huge as you might think. In fact, one of the reasons for a hysteria is precisely a sense (and very rarely--a rational understanding) of the fact of a complete failure in forecasting what Russia is both economically and militarily. Considering an atrocious incompetence of American so called "Russia expertdom" there is nothing surprising here.

    I think you maybe overestimate Russia’s strength, in somewhat the same way as the US may be underestimating it. I noticed in another conversation you thought that Russia should have vetoed the UN resolution allowing the US to go into Afghanistan.
     
    1. Russia of early 2000s and Russia of 2017 are two very different countries in every single respect.

    2. Some people in US military are beginning to understand that US can not win conventional conflict with Russia in Russia's immediate vicinity, it will be defeated and will sustain casualties which will make Vietnam look like a week at the spa.
    , @Randal

    I noticed in another conversation you thought that Russia should have vetoed the UN resolution allowing the US to go into Afghanistan.
     
    There was no UN resolution allowing the US attack on Afghanistan, which was another deliberately lawless act by the US regime.

    The Bush regime probably could have got one if it had felt it needed it, given the almost universally supportive climate immediately after 9/11. Instead it chose to rely on a shamelessly spurious and wilfully dishonest mis-application of the supposed right of self defence after 9/11, knowing that nobody important was going to question it. That produced a much more useful precedent for the US regime than meekly complying with the law and the US's treaty obligations would have.

    Likewise, the Bush regime probably could have had Bin laden produced for trial somewhere by the Taliban if it had wanted that, but the political and brute power needs of the moment required the US regime to be seen to be kicking some foreign butt aggressively and promptly.
    , @AP

    My point was simply that any discussion of how Russia would respond to an attack on its forces by the US is moot because it will respond in kind, and the whole thing will go nuclear in 3,2,1.
     
    I doubt either country will directly attack the other. In the extremely unlikelihood of such an attack, an escalation to nuclear would be even more unlikely, given that this will result in the end of both civilizations and annihilation of both peoples. It is silly to think that it's even possible.

    Let's look at (remotely) plausible scenarios. Would Russia want to wipe its own civilization off the face of the Earth over getting its troops killed in Syria? Would America do the same because a few thousand of its troops were killed in the Baltics, or Poland? Not going to happen. In fact, I would put the odds of a nuclear response to American troops installing a puppet government and occupying Moscow at below 50%. Because as in the case of Napoleon's or the Polish occupation, Russia can come back from that. It's never coming back from a nuclear war.

    I agree with Karlin that the USA taking out Russian troops in Syria (really doubt this would happen) will result in a high likelihood of Russia occupying the Baltics (taking out American troops in the process) and parts of Ukraine. Russia likes to reciprocate. That's not going to lead to nuclear war, though I imagine Russia would be out of swift and total sanctions would be imposed.
  70. @anon
    Trump got burned on the Yemen raid.

    Why is the military going along with this one? The last one didn't happen because no one wanted to sign off on it. That is, Obama drew the line (stupidly). But then decided to make Congress vote for it. Everyone wanted someone else to be the designated 'leader'.

    Syria is no less a loser today. Does Congress want to vote for this? The only thing that is utterly predictable about Trump is he doesn't want to lose. But even more so, he doesn't want to be blamed.

    He was quite convincing today as the sucker.

    But really?

    The military and public mostly seem OK with bombing. So maybe we bomb some stuff. It's disgusting but its just killing military on one side or another along with a lot of collateral damage, dead women and children, etc. But no boots on the ground.

    I'd like to think that he won't do it. Like how could he be so stupid? But it hasn't stopped anyone sine the 2000 election.

    Nor since the 1860 election. Bullshit wars are a thing. Every bomb dropped, another 5000 dollars. Of course, there’s fuel, wear and tear, parts, feed bags for the troops, beds, gear, all billable. This is our industry now. A clever conversion of our manufacturing capabilities, no? Evil, but clever..

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    A clever conversion of our manufacturing capabilities, no?
     
    No.
    , @Anonymous
    It is disgusting that anyone would view war as a way to make money.
  71. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @annamaria
    Russian federation has been trying to avoid a full-blown military conflict that the ziocons have been provoking with the vicious audacity. The lying, thieving, criminal congress, run by the CIA /Mossad, is not an honest partner. Russia is cornered.

    Russia is cornered.

    I think it is exactly the other way around. Russia has options, US doesn’t, apart from the fact that it lost all international subjectivity and is now nothing more than Israel’s “subsidiary”. Russia is not desperate, US establishment is and that is why it is so desperate to start “war” with Russia, whatever that means. Russia will always avoid war–it is her MO for decades. US desperation for this “war” with Russia has very logical explanations, granted that some of the factors in all this US insanity are, indeed, irrational (and hysterical) and metaphysical in nature.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    "Russia is not desperate, US establishment is and that is why it is so desperate to start “war” with Russia, whatever that means. Russia will always avoid war–it is her MO for decades. "

    Agree. You are right. Russia will always try to avoid the war. But the US needs desperately a war, both to patch the enormous holes in economy (the $20 trillion debt and counting, crumbling welfare system, loss of manufacture and such), and create new sources of mineral riches from newly subdued countries. Instead of revamping the internal system (a painful and highly strenuous process for a society), the US wants to solve the problem by the old ways, externally. Since the US is unable to reform (do you see any signs, any hope for the internal reforms? - I do not), the deciders will go, most likely, for the jugular against Russia. Only in this respect Russia is cornered.
    The RF government has a task of politely (but painfully) reminding the "deciders" that Russia will not capitulate to the "chosen," fed reserve, and mega-war profiteers (all of them are most likely under a total surveillance and "guidance" by the CIA). In the absence of the painful aspect of reminding, the deciders are not able to come to their senses. Barring an internal coup d'etat led by American patriots, the US is rolling towards US-made global catastrophe.

  72. Ruiner says:
    @jimbojones
    Trump should watch out. He was voted in exactly because people were profoundly disgusted by the Obama/Clinton Libyan monstrosity, and because people wanted Washington to stop funding terrorists to topple the legitimate government of Syria.

    Assad didn't gas civilians. The very idea is moronic. He has won the war. Trump can use Assad as an ally in the fight against everybody's common enemy ISIS. Or Trump can betray his electorate and ruin his presidency by doing something stupid in Syria.

    The choice is his.

    Jimbo you know we are ISIS

    Read More
  73. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    “the deep state might be triumphing after all.”

    Deep state… Shallow state… *spit*

    Don’t you dimwits know that as far as Amerika is concerned, they are all the same.

    Read More
  74. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @JL
    Ah, I see the misunderstanding here. My point was simply that any discussion of how Russia would respond to an attack on its forces by the US is moot because it will respond in kind, and the whole thing will go nuclear in 3,2,1. Specifically, it very much is the US that should be worrying about starting WW3 in this case, not Russia.

    During the Cold War, both sides realized the ramifications of direct military conflict and acted accordingly. The US is behaving as if something has changed in that respect and I find it terrifying. What is different now is that there is a huge asymmetry in forces that perhaps has instilled unwarranted confidence in the Americans that they can win a war with Russia.

    I think you maybe overestimate Russia's strength, in somewhat the same way as the US may be underestimating it. I noticed in another conversation you thought that Russia should have vetoed the UN resolution allowing the US to go into Afghanistan. To me, this is a complete misjudgment of Russia's situation at that moment in time, while ignoring, or forgetting, the resolve of the US immediately following September 11. Not to mention, there was probably a geopolitical calculation that having the US bogged down in Afghanistan, something the Russians could envision all too well, would allow Russia some breathing room to get back on its feet and claw back some influence in the near abroad.

    Look, I'm all for Russia's resistance to the empire, I'd just like it to happen without WW3.

    What is different now is that there is a huge asymmetry in forces that perhaps has instilled unwarranted confidence in the Americans that they can win a war with Russia.

    It is not as huge as you might think. In fact, one of the reasons for a hysteria is precisely a sense (and very rarely–a rational understanding) of the fact of a complete failure in forecasting what Russia is both economically and militarily. Considering an atrocious incompetence of American so called “Russia expertdom” there is nothing surprising here.

    I think you maybe overestimate Russia’s strength, in somewhat the same way as the US may be underestimating it. I noticed in another conversation you thought that Russia should have vetoed the UN resolution allowing the US to go into Afghanistan.

    1. Russia of early 2000s and Russia of 2017 are two very different countries in every single respect.

    2. Some people in US military are beginning to understand that US can not win conventional conflict with Russia in Russia’s immediate vicinity, it will be defeated and will sustain casualties which will make Vietnam look like a week at the spa.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    My view on things is informed by two key assumptions/observations:

    (1) The US can wipe the floor with Russia in Syria or anywhere in the Middle East.

    (2) Russia can wipe the floor with NATO east and north of the Suwalki gap.

    If things really go south in Syria - as in, actual Russian forces coming under sustained attack from the USAF - I would expect either:

    (a) If they decide on a military response --> it will be either in Ukraine (e.g. ranging from recognition of the LDNR to resurrection of the Novorossiya project) or even the Baltics;

    (b) If they decide on a negotiated surrender-in-all-but-name in Syria with the US allowing Russia its forces intact in exchange for abandoning Assad --> a domestic clampdown to contain the mass outrage that this humiliation will doubtless elicit.
  75. DanFromCt says:
    @Felix Keverich
    Well, let's see: Tillerson makes a statement that overthrowing Assad is no longer a priority. Neocons disagree. And within days this "chemical attack" happens, the biggest chemical attack in Syria - we are told - since 2013.

    Coincidence? I don't think so.

    I think it's possible that chemical attack did happen, and it was the CIA or its terrorist buddies that arranged to poison these children. Unlike Assad, these actually have a plausible motive - manipulating Trump and influencing his policy.

    The timing is more than suspicious so I tuned in Fox News for straight up false flag narrative, and sure enough there was Sen. Bob Corker saying Assad was a monster gassing his people and cutting off their genitals, with Corker calling for Putin to repudiate Assad to the thanks of Bill Hemmer–end of script. Incidentally, has anyone else noticed that Corker more resembles that stuttering, court-appointed lawyer in My Cousin Vinny than any statesman?

    The entire history of the development of the rules of evidence in law, science, and politics, a signature achievement of Western Civilization, is being thrown away and hardly anyone notices or cares. Today a canned, identical, and obviously pre-scripted narrative available within minutes of these events goes unquestioned, even when, as in this latest theater, at least one announcement was made before the event.

    I’m also sickened by the concurrent Wounded Warriors theater at the White House because this empty jingoistic stunt may signal that our military may become active on the ground over there and therefore Trump’s neo handlers are already selling the inevitable loss of limbs as a sign of our righteousness instead of the reality, which is that our soldiers lose their lives and limbs so good Isrseli boys need not.

    Read More
  76. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @utu
    This betrayal is for real and final. Stop projecting your wishful thinking on Trump. He never was the man many of us were imagining. This were just our projections. Projections of people who wanted to have some hope. The most important is that Bannon is out or on his way out. W/o Bannon there is nobody else. Just your usual dumb and vile republicans are all what is left plus some soft hearted libs in Ivanka faction. That's all. It's over!

    Besides what a great opportunity for Trump. Just do the Syria and everything will be forgiven and forgotten. Including Susan Rice, OK? We will not have to impeach you and replace with Pence.

    Not sure about this guy but he claimed 2 days ago:

    Published on Apr 3, 2017

    Is the US Preparing to Invade Damascus?
    As absurd as this may sound the evidence seems to stack up in favor of this scenario of a US led invasion of Damascus, Syria. The movement of US desert Camo military equipment was done in a way to avoid detection by Russia. First to Germany to make it appear as a buildup on Russia’s border, then to Poland final to a port in Romania, then reloaded at set sail to Beirut Lebanon where Damascus comes into view. All the while Israeli US Italian and UAE military work in Greece to overcome Russia s300 air defense system. Israel moves their forces into the Golan for supposed drills. All troops in position Damascus to be hit next.
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pjEdHH0Jys

    If so, the staged gas attack is just a part of a much bigger scheme that was planned months ago with Trump knowledge. No more talking about hat the Deep Sate is boxing Trump in. No, Trump is on it.

    The movement of US desert Camo military equipment was done in a way to avoid detection by Russia. First to Germany to make it appear as a buildup on Russia’s border, then to Poland final to a port in Romania, then reloaded at set sail to Beirut Lebanon where Damascus comes into view.

    Yeah, sure–you know, those stupid Russians who are still using spyglasses and arithmometers in their intelligence efforts, how can they possibly notice the movement of a brigade size units.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    "Yeah, sure–you know, those stupid Russians who are still using spyglasses and arithmometers in their intelligence efforts, how can they possibly notice the movement of a brigade size units."
     
    I do not know how is the mighty Russia military intelligence after the major shakeups by Putin and Shoygu in 2010/11 doing? Where is your mighty all knowing GRU? They did not not know that something is being cooked up and the chemical weapon provocation was being prepared? Just few years in proper places few days ago could avert it. But nothing happened. Did bombing in St. Petersburg divert their attention?

    At least in 2013 there was a leak that apparently stopped Obama from going all the way:

    Remember WHY Obama Didn’t Act on the Red Line Violation? Leaked Document Suggested Obama Greenlighted Chemical Weapon False Flag Attack
    https://willyloman.wordpress.com/2017/04/06/remember-why-obama-didnt-act-on-the-red-line-violation-leaked-document-suggested-obama-greenlighted-chemical-weapon-false-flag-attack/

    However you spin it does not look good. Russia is outplayed on every turn.
  77. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @Jim Christian
    Nor since the 1860 election. Bullshit wars are a thing. Every bomb dropped, another 5000 dollars. Of course, there's fuel, wear and tear, parts, feed bags for the troops, beds, gear, all billable. This is our industry now. A clever conversion of our manufacturing capabilities, no? Evil, but clever..

    A clever conversion of our manufacturing capabilities, no?

    No.

    Read More
  78. cali says:

    Clearly the false flag committed by none other than the Deep State not only against Assad but also against the boogeyman for all that is wrong – the Putin government – continues.
    Here are a couple of facts unknown to many since the US Pravda the outlet for the Deep State to report only approved ‘news’ is hard at work to frame Assad.
    During HRC term as SOS she licensed Marc Turi the arms dealer to funnel weapons into Syria via Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Marc Turi also stated that she funneled Sarin gas from the Ghaddafi arsenal after his assassination to the US sponsored rebels Al Nusra and others making up ISIS into Syria as a means to overthrow, accuse and frame Assad as the culprit using Sarin gas against his own people to stay in power.
    HRC and Obama et al attempted to railroad Marc Turi after his services ended as a means to silence him. The out-of-the-blue charges against him via the Loretta Lynch DOJ accusing him of being an arms smuggler without license nearly put him in prison ergo Turi threaten Hillary and Obama to expose their treacherous actions in Benghazi that was used to set up the overthrow of Assad in Syria. His threats of exposure of the arming of ISIS in Syria as well as the Sarin gas provided to ISIS murdering Syrian civilians while plasing the blame on Assad ended the prosecution and charges against him by the DOJ who suddenly and without explanation dropped all charges against him.
    The saber rattling against Assad and Putin continues unabated as we see here.
    Nicki Haley – member of the #NeverTrump ‘performs’ her role as planned namely to continue the anti-Assad and anti-Putin agenda. I’m sure traitor McCain the Soros and CFR stooge is whispering into her ear.
    Trump made a big mistake when appointing her into this position simply because her agenda as part of Trump’s republican enemies within while placing trust in her she has not earned and is contrary to the DT agenda.
    On a sidenote: In October 2016 the UK Parliament published their final investigative report of Hillary and her actions in Libya/Benghazi accusing her of war crimes. The US Pravda did not inform American voters about this investigation.
    Shortly after that the Syrian president Assad and Vladimir Putin submitted a dossier to the ICC that described the Deep State and its agents Obama and HRC about their war crimes in Syria detailing all the findings including the use of Sarin gas provided to ISIS to be used on innocent civilians while blaming it on Assad. The ICC studied this dossier and accepted said dossier for a future trial against HRC and Obama et al among others having participated in the attempt to overthrow his government and the slaughter of over 250,000+ Syrians as a means to justify their coup.
    Lastly – the recent report of the Russian government spokesperson with reporters in regard to Tillerson’s planned visit to Russia included this statement: “If the disinformation, accusations and lies in the US via the Deep State propaganda media continues accusing Russia having hacked the election etc the Russian president may expose Obama about various issues and actions that her begged Vladimir Putin to keep secret. All bets are off!”

    Assad was not the one ordering the use of Sarin gas to attack his own citizens but the Deep State and it’s agents like Qatar, Saudi Arabia, McCain, HRC and Obama et al using Ghaddafi’s chemical weapons after his assassination.

    Read More
  79. @Andrei Martyanov

    What is different now is that there is a huge asymmetry in forces that perhaps has instilled unwarranted confidence in the Americans that they can win a war with Russia.
     
    It is not as huge as you might think. In fact, one of the reasons for a hysteria is precisely a sense (and very rarely--a rational understanding) of the fact of a complete failure in forecasting what Russia is both economically and militarily. Considering an atrocious incompetence of American so called "Russia expertdom" there is nothing surprising here.

    I think you maybe overestimate Russia’s strength, in somewhat the same way as the US may be underestimating it. I noticed in another conversation you thought that Russia should have vetoed the UN resolution allowing the US to go into Afghanistan.
     
    1. Russia of early 2000s and Russia of 2017 are two very different countries in every single respect.

    2. Some people in US military are beginning to understand that US can not win conventional conflict with Russia in Russia's immediate vicinity, it will be defeated and will sustain casualties which will make Vietnam look like a week at the spa.

    My view on things is informed by two key assumptions/observations:

    (1) The US can wipe the floor with Russia in Syria or anywhere in the Middle East.

    (2) Russia can wipe the floor with NATO east and north of the Suwalki gap.

    If things really go south in Syria – as in, actual Russian forces coming under sustained attack from the USAF – I would expect either:

    (a) If they decide on a military response –> it will be either in Ukraine (e.g. ranging from recognition of the LDNR to resurrection of the Novorossiya project) or even the Baltics;

    (b) If they decide on a negotiated surrender-in-all-but-name in Syria with the US allowing Russia its forces intact in exchange for abandoning Assad –> a domestic clampdown to contain the mass outrage that this humiliation will doubtless elicit.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Verymuchalive
    The safest way to defang America lies in any future economic collapse. Faced with an imploding economy and a choice between minimal social welfare measures or a grotesquely expanded military, the choice is obvious. I still think it will happen later this decade, if there is any humanity left to witness it.
    The Neocons and the other warmongers seem to realise this, too, hence their increasing recklessness in seeking ever more dangerous wars. As if one more country to loot will somehow stave off the inevitable.
    I have felt for some years now that other major powers ( Russia, China ) should have precipitated this collapse, since the longer they remain in power - and both Houses are still overwhelmingly Neocon - the more dangerous they become.
    Philip Giraldi occasionally mentions a choke point near Dhahran where over 60% of Saudi Arabia's oil is processed. He regards it as the World's biggest engineering weak spot. I suggest Mr Putin arranges a nasty accident there ASAP, thereby preventing production for months and months. The panic alone should be enough to trigger the collapse.
    , @bjondo
    (1) The US can wipe the floor with Russia in Syria or anywhere in the Middle East.

    (2) Russia can wipe the floor with NATO east and north of the Suwalki gap.


    #2 yes
    #1 maybe short term outside syria. past short term russia wins.
    , @BB753
    I had to look up Suwalki Gap, Anatoly!
    Why do you believe that the US will prevail in the Middle East? Logistics?
    In what scenario a Russia - USA conflict does not go nuclear?
  80. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website

    (1) The US can wipe the floor with Russia in Syria or anywhere in the Middle East.

    Theoretically, yes. But there is a contingency to be seriously considered. Russia can reach US forces staging areas in case of any thought of doing stupid things on US part. Russia can also disrupt US forces’ C4 element. These are not conditions under which US forces ever fought or know how to fight. It is also possible to reinforce Syria’s contingent by Russia’s Quick Reaction Forces, which are same ol’ paratroop divisions. A lot will depend on the Iranian position but, it is my gut feeling, if the deal goes “hot” in Syria, Iran will be attacked. But again, this is a long discussion.

    (a) If they decide on a military response –> it will be either in Ukraine (e.g. ranging from recognition of the LDNR to resurrection of the Novorossiya project) or even the Baltics;

    Possible, and even highly likely. But, again, a lot of contingencies–US bases (Anti-missile installations, f.e.) will be annihilated, Russia does have no a very heavy “first” salvo–this si nothing what US ever encountered. First salvo by X-101 and 3M14 may range anywhere from 600 to 1000 missiles.

    (b) If they decide on a negotiated surrender-in-all-but-name in Syria with the US allowing Russia its forces intact in exchange for abandoning Assad –> a domestic clampdown to contain the mass outrage that this humiliation will doubtless elicit.

    This scenario alone–possible. But again, there are factors, which must be considered here and format of discussion board (otherwise my posts will be colossal) is not a convenient format to do so. To put it mildly–Russia does have means for maneuver with forces and means (Sily i Sredstva)–all within conventional scenario.

    Read More
  81. annamaria says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Russia is cornered.
     
    I think it is exactly the other way around. Russia has options, US doesn't, apart from the fact that it lost all international subjectivity and is now nothing more than Israel's "subsidiary". Russia is not desperate, US establishment is and that is why it is so desperate to start "war" with Russia, whatever that means. Russia will always avoid war--it is her MO for decades. US desperation for this "war" with Russia has very logical explanations, granted that some of the factors in all this US insanity are, indeed, irrational (and hysterical) and metaphysical in nature.

    “Russia is not desperate, US establishment is and that is why it is so desperate to start “war” with Russia, whatever that means. Russia will always avoid war–it is her MO for decades. ”

    Agree. You are right. Russia will always try to avoid the war. But the US needs desperately a war, both to patch the enormous holes in economy (the $20 trillion debt and counting, crumbling welfare system, loss of manufacture and such), and create new sources of mineral riches from newly subdued countries. Instead of revamping the internal system (a painful and highly strenuous process for a society), the US wants to solve the problem by the old ways, externally. Since the US is unable to reform (do you see any signs, any hope for the internal reforms? – I do not), the deciders will go, most likely, for the jugular against Russia. Only in this respect Russia is cornered.
    The RF government has a task of politely (but painfully) reminding the “deciders” that Russia will not capitulate to the “chosen,” fed reserve, and mega-war profiteers (all of them are most likely under a total surveillance and “guidance” by the CIA). In the absence of the painful aspect of reminding, the deciders are not able to come to their senses. Barring an internal coup d’etat led by American patriots, the US is rolling towards US-made global catastrophe.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    The RF government has a task of politely (but painfully) reminding the “deciders” that Russia will not capitulate to the “chosen,” fed reserve, and mega-war profiteers (all of them are most likely under a total surveillance and “guidance” by the CIA). In the absence of the painful aspect of reminding, the deciders are not able to come to their senses.
     
    Russia is keenly aware of this and that is precisely what she is doing now.
    , @Andrei Martyanov

    Instead of revamping the internal system (a painful and highly strenuous process for a society), the US wants to solve the problem by the old ways, externally. Since the US is unable to reform (do you see any signs, any hope for the internal reforms? – I do not), the deciders will go, most likely, for the jugular against Russia. Only in this respect Russia is cornered.
     
    Current US "elites" across the whole spectrum of state's activity--from economic, to military, to intelligence, to diplomacy are simply not competent to deal with global realities. In terms of statesmen--US does not produce statesmen anymore, times of FDR, Ike or even Nixon are long gone. US "elite" production are mostly Ivy League boys and girls who are only conditioned for navigating system, which gets out only politicians who only know how to get elected.
  82. Randal says:
    @Hunsdon
    Please bear in mind, O our host, that Gen. Dunford, chairman of the JCS, said (in October?) that for the US to set up no fly zones in Syria would mean that we are at war with Syria and Russia. The next day in a NBC radio interview Lady MacBeth once more advocated for such no fly zones.

    Unlike the Obama administration, I somehow think the Trump administration will actually listen to military men like Dunford, Kelly and Mattis. For the last generation, the US has stalked more or less unopposed on the world stage, throwing its weight around as it pleases. No one, we think, can oppose us! Well, that's nice and all, but I haven't forgotten the Cold War and the threat of nuclear confrontation with the USSR/Russia, and I'll bet you a meal of shashlik, lepeshki and vodka that Mattis, Dunford and Kelly haven't either.

    Maybe my faith is naive, we'll have to wait and see.

    Unlike the Obama administration, I somehow think the Trump administration will actually listen to military men like Dunford, Kelly and Mattis.

    Being military is certainly no guarantee against making misjudgements of this kind.

    Here’s what Lang at SST has to say and he has both directly relevant experience and contacts:

    Some of the retired military people whom McMaster inherited on the NSC staff think that of the US intervenes against the Syrian government, Russia will back away from, us. I do not agree with this.

    This moment is where Trump succeeds or fails, imo.

    Read More
  83. KA says:

    Tell me how this works , how it happens. Carl Bidt says same thing NYT says before any investigation . So does Hailey at UN . Max Boot on MSNBC ,and GOP Representative from Oklhaoma on FOX . Is there an universal subsonic dog whistle that brings the howling out of the rabid mad poisonous vipers from the hidden pit ? How do they start slithering out of the rock together?

    I guess I should include Bob Corker as well .
    How does the other wailing from Israel that Iran is more dangerous than ISIS synch with this dog whistle ?

    Read More
    • Replies: @daniel le mouche
    If you're a corporate employee, it's a pyramidal power structure. You wouldn't dare stick your neck out for any 'truth', or you wouldn't have a job. Fox, NYT, MSNBC have the same interests, and I haven't checked but may have the same owners. Easy to see how they control talking heads and 'programming'. A dingbat chickie appointed to read speeches at the UN, written either at the White House or State Department... it's not so hard to see how that one might be 'on message' too. As is all corporate advertising garbage everywhere always. Etc.
  84. Randal says:
    @JL
    Ah, I see the misunderstanding here. My point was simply that any discussion of how Russia would respond to an attack on its forces by the US is moot because it will respond in kind, and the whole thing will go nuclear in 3,2,1. Specifically, it very much is the US that should be worrying about starting WW3 in this case, not Russia.

    During the Cold War, both sides realized the ramifications of direct military conflict and acted accordingly. The US is behaving as if something has changed in that respect and I find it terrifying. What is different now is that there is a huge asymmetry in forces that perhaps has instilled unwarranted confidence in the Americans that they can win a war with Russia.

    I think you maybe overestimate Russia's strength, in somewhat the same way as the US may be underestimating it. I noticed in another conversation you thought that Russia should have vetoed the UN resolution allowing the US to go into Afghanistan. To me, this is a complete misjudgment of Russia's situation at that moment in time, while ignoring, or forgetting, the resolve of the US immediately following September 11. Not to mention, there was probably a geopolitical calculation that having the US bogged down in Afghanistan, something the Russians could envision all too well, would allow Russia some breathing room to get back on its feet and claw back some influence in the near abroad.

    Look, I'm all for Russia's resistance to the empire, I'd just like it to happen without WW3.

    I noticed in another conversation you thought that Russia should have vetoed the UN resolution allowing the US to go into Afghanistan.

    There was no UN resolution allowing the US attack on Afghanistan, which was another deliberately lawless act by the US regime.

    The Bush regime probably could have got one if it had felt it needed it, given the almost universally supportive climate immediately after 9/11. Instead it chose to rely on a shamelessly spurious and wilfully dishonest mis-application of the supposed right of self defence after 9/11, knowing that nobody important was going to question it. That produced a much more useful precedent for the US regime than meekly complying with the law and the US’s treaty obligations would have.

    Likewise, the Bush regime probably could have had Bin laden produced for trial somewhere by the Taliban if it had wanted that, but the political and brute power needs of the moment required the US regime to be seen to be kicking some foreign butt aggressively and promptly.

    Read More
    • Replies: @unseated
    My recollection on bin Laden and the Taliban is that they offered to deliver him if Bush provided evidence of his complicity in 9/11. But of course that was not what Bush wanted.
  85. @Anatoly Karlin
    My view on things is informed by two key assumptions/observations:

    (1) The US can wipe the floor with Russia in Syria or anywhere in the Middle East.

    (2) Russia can wipe the floor with NATO east and north of the Suwalki gap.

    If things really go south in Syria - as in, actual Russian forces coming under sustained attack from the USAF - I would expect either:

    (a) If they decide on a military response --> it will be either in Ukraine (e.g. ranging from recognition of the LDNR to resurrection of the Novorossiya project) or even the Baltics;

    (b) If they decide on a negotiated surrender-in-all-but-name in Syria with the US allowing Russia its forces intact in exchange for abandoning Assad --> a domestic clampdown to contain the mass outrage that this humiliation will doubtless elicit.

    The safest way to defang America lies in any future economic collapse. Faced with an imploding economy and a choice between minimal social welfare measures or a grotesquely expanded military, the choice is obvious. I still think it will happen later this decade, if there is any humanity left to witness it.
    The Neocons and the other warmongers seem to realise this, too, hence their increasing recklessness in seeking ever more dangerous wars. As if one more country to loot will somehow stave off the inevitable.
    I have felt for some years now that other major powers ( Russia, China ) should have precipitated this collapse, since the longer they remain in power – and both Houses are still overwhelmingly Neocon – the more dangerous they become.
    Philip Giraldi occasionally mentions a choke point near Dhahran where over 60% of Saudi Arabia’s oil is processed. He regards it as the World’s biggest engineering weak spot. I suggest Mr Putin arranges a nasty accident there ASAP, thereby preventing production for months and months. The panic alone should be enough to trigger the collapse.

    Read More
  86. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @annamaria
    "Russia is not desperate, US establishment is and that is why it is so desperate to start “war” with Russia, whatever that means. Russia will always avoid war–it is her MO for decades. "

    Agree. You are right. Russia will always try to avoid the war. But the US needs desperately a war, both to patch the enormous holes in economy (the $20 trillion debt and counting, crumbling welfare system, loss of manufacture and such), and create new sources of mineral riches from newly subdued countries. Instead of revamping the internal system (a painful and highly strenuous process for a society), the US wants to solve the problem by the old ways, externally. Since the US is unable to reform (do you see any signs, any hope for the internal reforms? - I do not), the deciders will go, most likely, for the jugular against Russia. Only in this respect Russia is cornered.
    The RF government has a task of politely (but painfully) reminding the "deciders" that Russia will not capitulate to the "chosen," fed reserve, and mega-war profiteers (all of them are most likely under a total surveillance and "guidance" by the CIA). In the absence of the painful aspect of reminding, the deciders are not able to come to their senses. Barring an internal coup d'etat led by American patriots, the US is rolling towards US-made global catastrophe.

    The RF government has a task of politely (but painfully) reminding the “deciders” that Russia will not capitulate to the “chosen,” fed reserve, and mega-war profiteers (all of them are most likely under a total surveillance and “guidance” by the CIA). In the absence of the painful aspect of reminding, the deciders are not able to come to their senses.

    Russia is keenly aware of this and that is precisely what she is doing now.

    Read More
  87. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Does anyone know if parathion (E-605) and other similar organophosphate pesticides are still being used in Syrian agriculture or are still present in some form there? This class of chemicals are typically incredibly toxic to people and they used to be widespread in Africa and the Middle East up until very recently, and there were reports of tons of annual deaths from accidental exposure in for example Syria.

    The reason I’m asking is because according to some of the geolocation efforts, the alleged bomb impacts occured in and around an old agricultural facility with large buildings and rows of silos, and several of the reported properties of the alleged chemical match those of parathion and similar pesticides.

    Parathion smells horrible, like steaming sewage slush, and it causes acute respiratory difficulties, constricted pupils, horrifying convulsions and ultimately death. Many symptoms are somewhat similar to those of weaponized nerve agents such as Sarin and VX (they’re also organophosphates) but unlike the pesticides these lack any noticeable odor and they don’t form visible clouds.

    Now, from what I can see Damascus decided to get rid of these things after a parliamentary decision in 1999. This basically meant just burying it in the ground or in some locked basement somewhere. Later on, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) set off to help Syria actually destroy these giant stashes and a program to this end was initiated about ten years ago. They dug up close to a thousand tons of it from all over the country, but it seems like the civil war got in the way before they were finished, and who knows what the jihadist “authorities” are up to in regards to that.

    Just one possible theory among many, I suppose. I do think it’s a tad far fetched myself, but it was just something that popped into my head immediately upon reading about this.

    Read More
  88. nickels says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    I've been pretty solid in my Trump support, despite occasional "zradas" (defeats/betrayals).

    This is the first time however that I am genuinely questioning his intentions and goodwill.

    If Trump in the end does goes down the path of corporatist neocon warmongering, he will lose and the vision he outlined at his inauguration speech will die as well. Very sad!

    It appears to be all over.

    Time to diminish and go into the west, leave the humans to their bloodbath and corruption.

    Read More
  89. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @annamaria
    "Russia is not desperate, US establishment is and that is why it is so desperate to start “war” with Russia, whatever that means. Russia will always avoid war–it is her MO for decades. "

    Agree. You are right. Russia will always try to avoid the war. But the US needs desperately a war, both to patch the enormous holes in economy (the $20 trillion debt and counting, crumbling welfare system, loss of manufacture and such), and create new sources of mineral riches from newly subdued countries. Instead of revamping the internal system (a painful and highly strenuous process for a society), the US wants to solve the problem by the old ways, externally. Since the US is unable to reform (do you see any signs, any hope for the internal reforms? - I do not), the deciders will go, most likely, for the jugular against Russia. Only in this respect Russia is cornered.
    The RF government has a task of politely (but painfully) reminding the "deciders" that Russia will not capitulate to the "chosen," fed reserve, and mega-war profiteers (all of them are most likely under a total surveillance and "guidance" by the CIA). In the absence of the painful aspect of reminding, the deciders are not able to come to their senses. Barring an internal coup d'etat led by American patriots, the US is rolling towards US-made global catastrophe.

    Instead of revamping the internal system (a painful and highly strenuous process for a society), the US wants to solve the problem by the old ways, externally. Since the US is unable to reform (do you see any signs, any hope for the internal reforms? – I do not), the deciders will go, most likely, for the jugular against Russia. Only in this respect Russia is cornered.

    Current US “elites” across the whole spectrum of state’s activity–from economic, to military, to intelligence, to diplomacy are simply not competent to deal with global realities. In terms of statesmen–US does not produce statesmen anymore, times of FDR, Ike or even Nixon are long gone. US “elite” production are mostly Ivy League boys and girls who are only conditioned for navigating system, which gets out only politicians who only know how to get elected.

    Read More
  90. AP says:
    @JL
    Ah, I see the misunderstanding here. My point was simply that any discussion of how Russia would respond to an attack on its forces by the US is moot because it will respond in kind, and the whole thing will go nuclear in 3,2,1. Specifically, it very much is the US that should be worrying about starting WW3 in this case, not Russia.

    During the Cold War, both sides realized the ramifications of direct military conflict and acted accordingly. The US is behaving as if something has changed in that respect and I find it terrifying. What is different now is that there is a huge asymmetry in forces that perhaps has instilled unwarranted confidence in the Americans that they can win a war with Russia.

    I think you maybe overestimate Russia's strength, in somewhat the same way as the US may be underestimating it. I noticed in another conversation you thought that Russia should have vetoed the UN resolution allowing the US to go into Afghanistan. To me, this is a complete misjudgment of Russia's situation at that moment in time, while ignoring, or forgetting, the resolve of the US immediately following September 11. Not to mention, there was probably a geopolitical calculation that having the US bogged down in Afghanistan, something the Russians could envision all too well, would allow Russia some breathing room to get back on its feet and claw back some influence in the near abroad.

    Look, I'm all for Russia's resistance to the empire, I'd just like it to happen without WW3.

    My point was simply that any discussion of how Russia would respond to an attack on its forces by the US is moot because it will respond in kind, and the whole thing will go nuclear in 3,2,1.

    I doubt either country will directly attack the other. In the extremely unlikelihood of such an attack, an escalation to nuclear would be even more unlikely, given that this will result in the end of both civilizations and annihilation of both peoples. It is silly to think that it’s even possible.

    Let’s look at (remotely) plausible scenarios. Would Russia want to wipe its own civilization off the face of the Earth over getting its troops killed in Syria? Would America do the same because a few thousand of its troops were killed in the Baltics, or Poland? Not going to happen. In fact, I would put the odds of a nuclear response to American troops installing a puppet government and occupying Moscow at below 50%. Because as in the case of Napoleon’s or the Polish occupation, Russia can come back from that. It’s never coming back from a nuclear war.

    I agree with Karlin that the USA taking out Russian troops in Syria (really doubt this would happen) will result in a high likelihood of Russia occupying the Baltics (taking out American troops in the process) and parts of Ukraine. Russia likes to reciprocate. That’s not going to lead to nuclear war, though I imagine Russia would be out of swift and total sanctions would be imposed.

    Read More
    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    I doubt either country will directly attack the other. In the extremely unlikelihood of such an attack, an escalation to nuclear would be even more unlikely, given that this will result in the end of both civilizations and annihilation of both peoples. It is silly to think that it’s even possible.
     
    US "needs" any kind of military success after de facto lost wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. US military record of the last 70 years is rather unimpressive--not a single war with first rate opponent, only extolled ad nauseam "victory" over third rate Saddam forces. A lot of psychology comes into this. Not only many US generals sleep and dream how to fight Russia, they desperately crave it. In conventional war with Russia this will be US, not Russia, who will initiate nuclear exchange. The reasons for that are numerous, including massive reputational military losses--from losing one or two aircraft carriers, to sustaining (which is highly likely) massive casualties which will lead to impossibility of attaining any political objectives. Russia is also completely capable of conventionally striking US proper. By about 2021-2023 this capability will grow exponentially, including the ability (which US currently doesn't have and most likely will not have) to field missile and other technologies which completely zero-down US military potential. Pentagon knows this.
    , @Mr. Hack

    I agree with Karlin that the USA taking out Russian troops in Syria (really doubt this would happen) will result in a high likelihood of Russia occupying the Baltics (taking out American troops in the process) and parts of Ukraine.
     
    I could definitely foresee more involvement in Ukrainian affairs, but Baltic aggression seems over the top to me. By invading any of the Baltic countries, Russia will provoke the ire of European countries, especially those within NATO, and a likely counterattack. A war against the US in Syria and one against NATO in the Balts is way too much to envision. Things in Ukraine would undoubtedly unwind too. Wars on three fronts for Russia would be suicide. I think that what Karlin states here makes sense, and would preempt this sort of a scenario from occuring:

    I disagree that attacking Syria automatically means war, at least so long as the Russian military isn’t directly targetted. Russia doesn’t have any formal military alliances with Syria, so a lack of retaliation in Syria proper will be justifiable – and well-advised, considering massive American aeronaval dominance in the region
     
    , @Randal

    I doubt either country will directly attack the other. In the extremely unlikelihood of such an attack, an escalation to nuclear would be even more unlikely, given that this will result in the end of both civilizations and annihilation of both peoples. It is silly to think that it’s even possible.....In fact, I would put the odds of a nuclear response to American troops installing a puppet government and occupying Moscow at below 50%. Because as in the case of Napoleon’s or the Polish occupation, Russia can come back from that. It’s never coming back from a nuclear war.
     
    That's not how anybody really expects a superpower confrontation to lead to nuclear war, though.

    Most escalation scenarios since mutually assured destruction became generally accepted involve a repeated series of escalations, each assuming the other side will step back from the brink in response, or a loss of command and control giving rise to uncontrolled or mistaken releases, until at some point one side is faced, or thinks it is faced, with a stark "use it or lose it" choice with only a few minutes to decide.

    It's not that likely that even open war would lead to an uncontrolled nuclear exchange. but how much risk are you prepared to accept when the consequences are that serious?

    The real concern today, though, is that there might be American politicians and military men who actually believe that their first strike counterforce capabilities combined with missile defences to mop up surviving attacks actually could limit damage to the continental US to acceptable levels.
  91. utu says:
    @Buzz Mohawk
    This turn of events is the biggest challenge ever to my support of Trump. If he really goes the way he is indicating, he will lose the support of people like me -- and there may be millions like me. We have no alternative candidate, but we will never again be led down this road.

    If Trump turns, that is the end of everything.

    ” we will never again be led down this road.” You will, you will because you like most losers are driven by your own projections. You projected your hopes and wishful thinking on Trump and it worked perfectly for him. He got elected. But now after firing Bannon there is nothing left. He was the last and the only guarantor of your hopes. That’s why MSM hated Bannon so much. The only pre-election promises that actually will be retained are torture, Guantanamo and stealing their oil. Did you vote for these items? Anyway, that is all you are left with. Get used to it:

    torture, Guantanamo and stealing their oil

    And enjoy your Trump as president.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    And what was the alternative, Mr. utu? To have done nothing? To write screeds on the internet as you do? Tell us, please, what would you have had us do? Vote for Hillary? Vote for Bernie? Vote for a fill-in-the-blank Republicrat or Democratican? Put on face masks and break windows?

    I don't see you doing anything to fix things.

    Loser? Who is the one claiming to have an answer without providing one? Who does nothing but pretend to know what is right? Who sat back and refused to support the only candidate who at least held some of our views? (Sorry, no, but he indeed has proof going back three decades that his views on trade and his general opinion of politicians are consistent. I won't buy the predictable response you would have here.)

    No matter what happens to my president or to my country, I will be sitting here on my wooded land, drinking single barrel bourbon and smoking cigars, grilling tenderloin, while people like you pretend to be somebody on the internet.

    And no, I will not project myself into a candidate and vote for him. I will refrain from voting and enjoy the life I won in the cosmic lottery -- while you and everyone like you drowns in the rising brown tide of filth that will cover the Earth.

    But thanks for the informative opinion.

  92. AP says:

    If we are going to make wild speculations, perhaps it’s a Russian operation designed to get America sucked into a Syrian quagmire as Russia exits, so Russia can do more in its backyard while the USA is preoccupied in the Middle East. Georgia happened while the USA was in Iraq.

    I think there is basically a zero chance of Assad having ordered this. It may be a US false-flag operation, Which would be stupid and unlikely. Given how heavily Russia is involved there, this could be probably uncovered rather easily given the competence of Russian intelligence.

    Most likely – some local commander acting for who knows what reason or local resistence doing a false flag operation withot American orders. Assad’s forces are apparently not very centralized. Incompetence by Assad’s forces or desperation by resistence makes more sense than does a conspiracy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin

    Incompetence by Assad’s forces or desperation by resistence makes more sense than does a conspiracy.
     
    That's one /pol/ack's idea: http://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/119714121

    >implying Arabs are competent enough to keep strict tabs on all their chemical warfare agents
    >implying they can tell the difference between a regular bomb and a gas bomb when they load them up in their planes
    >implying Arabs haven't used nerve agents as recently as 1988 in warfare
    >implying there is a strategic ammo dump full of sarin that they bombed despite literally no evidence pointing to any such thing
    >implying even if they did bomb this imaginary depot full of sarin agents that the agents don't dissipate quickly enough due to sarin's high evaporation rate which is sped up intensely by the dry Syrian desert
     
    It certainly could have also been a rogue element within the Syrian military. It's not exactly a secret there are too many Islamist sympathizers within it, which partly explains why it has such low effectiveness.

    I agree that one or the other of these is probably likelier than a specifically American inspired false flag, which in turn is likelier than Assad having ordered it directly.
  93. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @AP

    My point was simply that any discussion of how Russia would respond to an attack on its forces by the US is moot because it will respond in kind, and the whole thing will go nuclear in 3,2,1.
     
    I doubt either country will directly attack the other. In the extremely unlikelihood of such an attack, an escalation to nuclear would be even more unlikely, given that this will result in the end of both civilizations and annihilation of both peoples. It is silly to think that it's even possible.

    Let's look at (remotely) plausible scenarios. Would Russia want to wipe its own civilization off the face of the Earth over getting its troops killed in Syria? Would America do the same because a few thousand of its troops were killed in the Baltics, or Poland? Not going to happen. In fact, I would put the odds of a nuclear response to American troops installing a puppet government and occupying Moscow at below 50%. Because as in the case of Napoleon's or the Polish occupation, Russia can come back from that. It's never coming back from a nuclear war.

    I agree with Karlin that the USA taking out Russian troops in Syria (really doubt this would happen) will result in a high likelihood of Russia occupying the Baltics (taking out American troops in the process) and parts of Ukraine. Russia likes to reciprocate. That's not going to lead to nuclear war, though I imagine Russia would be out of swift and total sanctions would be imposed.

    I doubt either country will directly attack the other. In the extremely unlikelihood of such an attack, an escalation to nuclear would be even more unlikely, given that this will result in the end of both civilizations and annihilation of both peoples. It is silly to think that it’s even possible.

    US “needs” any kind of military success after de facto lost wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. US military record of the last 70 years is rather unimpressive–not a single war with first rate opponent, only extolled ad nauseam “victory” over third rate Saddam forces. A lot of psychology comes into this. Not only many US generals sleep and dream how to fight Russia, they desperately crave it. In conventional war with Russia this will be US, not Russia, who will initiate nuclear exchange. The reasons for that are numerous, including massive reputational military losses–from losing one or two aircraft carriers, to sustaining (which is highly likely) massive casualties which will lead to impossibility of attaining any political objectives. Russia is also completely capable of conventionally striking US proper. By about 2021-2023 this capability will grow exponentially, including the ability (which US currently doesn’t have and most likely will not have) to field missile and other technologies which completely zero-down US military potential. Pentagon knows this.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    "Russia is also completely capable of conventionally striking US proper."

    You are an ex military man and why do say such a nonsense. Everybody has a capability of conventional strike agains US. Even Lichtenstein. But who could get away with it? And why anybody would want to do such a pointless thing?
    , @AP
    I agree with most of what you say, and can't dispute your military assessment because it is beyond my expertise. But -

    In conventional war with Russia this will be US, not Russia, who will initiate nuclear exchange. The reasons for that are numerous, including massive reputational military losses–from losing one or two aircraft carriers, to sustaining (which is highly likely) massive casualties which will lead to impossibility of attaining any political objectives.
     
    I find the idea of America's military/political leaders choosing to commit national suicide under such a scenario (Russia destroying America's military capability and ability to project power outside the USA through conventional means) to be extremely unlikely. Leader may be foolish or short-sighted, but I really doubt they have a Nazi-like or Islamic-like mentality of preferring total national destruction if they don't have their way. I doubt even the fanatic neocons would feel this way.
    , @iffen
    US military record of the last 70 years is rather unimpressive

    Right, no way that they match Soviet/Russia's impressive list of successes like ripping those Afghans a new one for example.
  94. utu says:

    Just few years ago:

    BBC News Caught Staging FAKE Chemical Attack In Syria

    Look at hilarious acting straight from The Walking Dead at 2:37 min.

    Read More
  95. hyperbola says:

    Maybe all this is about putting Obama and Trump through exactly the same “do as we say or else” deep state scenario? Remember that Obama knew that the case for blaming Assad for Ghouta was at best not certain.

    Seymour M. Hersh · Whose sarin? · LRB 19 December 2013

    https://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n24/seymour-m-hersh/whose-sarin

    …. In the months before the attack, the American intelligence agencies produced a series of highly classified reports, culminating in a formal Operations Order – a planning document that precedes a ground invasion – citing evidence that the al-Nusra Front, a jihadi group affiliated with al-Qaida, had mastered the mechanics of creating sarin and was capable of manufacturing it in quantity. When the attack occurred al-Nusra should have been a suspect, but the administration cherry-picked intelligence to justify a strike against Assad….

    There was a lot of very loud rhetoric from Obama, but no direct attack in response. One might almost say that Obama and Putin “cooperated” to allow the situation to defuse. That was heavily criticized by the strongest ZionCon fanatics in the US government and media.

    Now we have an almost identical repeat of the very same scenario and Trump must know that real intelligence suggests the same situation Obama faced. Trump´s choices seem to be three-fold: (1) denounce the deep state treason in the US government, (2) kowtow to the deep state and have the US military directly attack Syria, or (3) do the same as Obama and let the situation defuse with time (w/wo help from Putin).

    I would guess Trump will choose option (3) just like Obama. The real question is whether the ZionCon control of the US government includes both the Pentagon and the CIA or whether the US military still resists the country being ruled by a foreign sect. The media is clearly 100% ZionCon and this restricts Trump’s freedom to choose option (1).

    Read More
  96. utu says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    The movement of US desert Camo military equipment was done in a way to avoid detection by Russia. First to Germany to make it appear as a buildup on Russia’s border, then to Poland final to a port in Romania, then reloaded at set sail to Beirut Lebanon where Damascus comes into view.
     
    Yeah, sure--you know, those stupid Russians who are still using spyglasses and arithmometers in their intelligence efforts, how can they possibly notice the movement of a brigade size units.

    “Yeah, sure–you know, those stupid Russians who are still using spyglasses and arithmometers in their intelligence efforts, how can they possibly notice the movement of a brigade size units.”

    I do not know how is the mighty Russia military intelligence after the major shakeups by Putin and Shoygu in 2010/11 doing? Where is your mighty all knowing GRU? They did not not know that something is being cooked up and the chemical weapon provocation was being prepared? Just few years in proper places few days ago could avert it. But nothing happened. Did bombing in St. Petersburg divert their attention?

    At least in 2013 there was a leak that apparently stopped Obama from going all the way:

    Remember WHY Obama Didn’t Act on the Red Line Violation? Leaked Document Suggested Obama Greenlighted Chemical Weapon False Flag Attack

    https://willyloman.wordpress.com/2017/04/06/remember-why-obama-didnt-act-on-the-red-line-violation-leaked-document-suggested-obama-greenlighted-chemical-weapon-false-flag-attack/

    However you spin it does not look good. Russia is outplayed on every turn.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    However you spin it does not look good.
     
    My spin on it is for you to take some kind of calming medicine (try Valerian Root) and start learning about real world outside. Stopping projecting your (very wrong) perceptions of how complex military-intelligence machines work onto something which needs more than just reading a bunch of media outlets, may also help.

    Russia is outplayed on every turn.
     
    May be yes, may be no. However you try to spin it, but it is US which is hysterical, not Russia.
  97. Mr. Hack says:
    @AP

    My point was simply that any discussion of how Russia would respond to an attack on its forces by the US is moot because it will respond in kind, and the whole thing will go nuclear in 3,2,1.
     
    I doubt either country will directly attack the other. In the extremely unlikelihood of such an attack, an escalation to nuclear would be even more unlikely, given that this will result in the end of both civilizations and annihilation of both peoples. It is silly to think that it's even possible.

    Let's look at (remotely) plausible scenarios. Would Russia want to wipe its own civilization off the face of the Earth over getting its troops killed in Syria? Would America do the same because a few thousand of its troops were killed in the Baltics, or Poland? Not going to happen. In fact, I would put the odds of a nuclear response to American troops installing a puppet government and occupying Moscow at below 50%. Because as in the case of Napoleon's or the Polish occupation, Russia can come back from that. It's never coming back from a nuclear war.

    I agree with Karlin that the USA taking out Russian troops in Syria (really doubt this would happen) will result in a high likelihood of Russia occupying the Baltics (taking out American troops in the process) and parts of Ukraine. Russia likes to reciprocate. That's not going to lead to nuclear war, though I imagine Russia would be out of swift and total sanctions would be imposed.

    I agree with Karlin that the USA taking out Russian troops in Syria (really doubt this would happen) will result in a high likelihood of Russia occupying the Baltics (taking out American troops in the process) and parts of Ukraine.

    I could definitely foresee more involvement in Ukrainian affairs, but Baltic aggression seems over the top to me. By invading any of the Baltic countries, Russia will provoke the ire of European countries, especially those within NATO, and a likely counterattack. A war against the US in Syria and one against NATO in the Balts is way too much to envision. Things in Ukraine would undoubtedly unwind too. Wars on three fronts for Russia would be suicide. I think that what Karlin states here makes sense, and would preempt this sort of a scenario from occuring:

    I disagree that attacking Syria automatically means war, at least so long as the Russian military isn’t directly targetted. Russia doesn’t have any formal military alliances with Syria, so a lack of retaliation in Syria proper will be justifiable – and well-advised, considering massive American aeronaval dominance in the region

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    "I agree with Karlin that the USA taking out Russian troops in Syria (really doubt this would happen) will result in a high likelihood of Russia occupying the Baltics (taking out American troops in the process) and parts of Ukraine. "

    I could definitely foresee more involvement in Ukrainian affairs, but Baltic aggression seems over the top to me. By invading any of the Baltic countries, Russia will provoke the ire of European countries, especially those within NATO, and a likely counterattack.
     
    In my comment I assumed not some Russians killed as collateral damage by the USA assaulting Assad, but a US direct attack on and destruction of Russian military forces in Syria such as the naval base at Tartus. I think the odds of this happening are basically zero, but if the USA did this I suspect Russia would retaliate by taking out the nearest and most convenient American bases, which would be in the Baltics (Russia couldn't really retaliate in the Middle East). This would save face at home, demonstrate to the world that Russia does retaliate and that attacks on Russia have consequences, and perhaps end NATO, because the Western powers, as in 1939, would probably not want to really fight for the sake of some eastern European countries.
  98. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @utu

    "Yeah, sure–you know, those stupid Russians who are still using spyglasses and arithmometers in their intelligence efforts, how can they possibly notice the movement of a brigade size units."
     
    I do not know how is the mighty Russia military intelligence after the major shakeups by Putin and Shoygu in 2010/11 doing? Where is your mighty all knowing GRU? They did not not know that something is being cooked up and the chemical weapon provocation was being prepared? Just few years in proper places few days ago could avert it. But nothing happened. Did bombing in St. Petersburg divert their attention?

    At least in 2013 there was a leak that apparently stopped Obama from going all the way:

    Remember WHY Obama Didn’t Act on the Red Line Violation? Leaked Document Suggested Obama Greenlighted Chemical Weapon False Flag Attack
    https://willyloman.wordpress.com/2017/04/06/remember-why-obama-didnt-act-on-the-red-line-violation-leaked-document-suggested-obama-greenlighted-chemical-weapon-false-flag-attack/

    However you spin it does not look good. Russia is outplayed on every turn.

    However you spin it does not look good.

    My spin on it is for you to take some kind of calming medicine (try Valerian Root) and start learning about real world outside. Stopping projecting your (very wrong) perceptions of how complex military-intelligence machines work onto something which needs more than just reading a bunch of media outlets, may also help.

    Russia is outplayed on every turn.

    May be yes, may be no. However you try to spin it, but it is US which is hysterical, not Russia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    "it is US which is hysterical" - It is just their normal state of mind. It is really a tactical MO. You have to convince people. Somebody said that it is tribute to American people that they have to be lied dot but it is not that they can be deceived so easily. Hysteria does the job.

    Russia appears to be calm and stoic only because people there are passive because they know that the decisions will be made for them as usual and they have no say in it since times immemorial while in the US there is still a presence that the people rule.

  99. US most enjoyable hobby always was to beat up small South American countries.
    Jooz only redirected this valuable US passion to Middle East.
    There is nothing wrong with that.

    Read More
  100. utu says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    I doubt either country will directly attack the other. In the extremely unlikelihood of such an attack, an escalation to nuclear would be even more unlikely, given that this will result in the end of both civilizations and annihilation of both peoples. It is silly to think that it’s even possible.
     
    US "needs" any kind of military success after de facto lost wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. US military record of the last 70 years is rather unimpressive--not a single war with first rate opponent, only extolled ad nauseam "victory" over third rate Saddam forces. A lot of psychology comes into this. Not only many US generals sleep and dream how to fight Russia, they desperately crave it. In conventional war with Russia this will be US, not Russia, who will initiate nuclear exchange. The reasons for that are numerous, including massive reputational military losses--from losing one or two aircraft carriers, to sustaining (which is highly likely) massive casualties which will lead to impossibility of attaining any political objectives. Russia is also completely capable of conventionally striking US proper. By about 2021-2023 this capability will grow exponentially, including the ability (which US currently doesn't have and most likely will not have) to field missile and other technologies which completely zero-down US military potential. Pentagon knows this.

    “Russia is also completely capable of conventionally striking US proper.”

    You are an ex military man and why do say such a nonsense. Everybody has a capability of conventional strike agains US. Even Lichtenstein. But who could get away with it? And why anybody would want to do such a pointless thing?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    Everybody has a capability of conventional strike agains US. Even Lichtenstein
     
    So, Lichtenstein has a stock-pile of X-101 and 3M14 counting in thousands. Well, live and learn. I also never heard of Lichtenstein having strategic aviation, but what do I really know.

    But who could get away with it?
     
    Russia can. Precisely for the reason that she can respond "in kind" conventionally. I am not going to go with you here into details of possible escalation(s) to a nuclear threshold, but Russia's military doctrine is explicit (article #26) in what is preferred method of "non-nuclear power (kinetic) containment"--written in the most clear Russian language. The same goes to (article #27) criteria for nuclear response. And it is "Russia can", which drives D.C. completely mad. This is the only nation in the world which can wipe US off the maps, while, if necessary and criteria are met, respond conventionally. Are you going to tell me that this doesn't matter?
  101. Randal says:
    @AP

    My point was simply that any discussion of how Russia would respond to an attack on its forces by the US is moot because it will respond in kind, and the whole thing will go nuclear in 3,2,1.
     
    I doubt either country will directly attack the other. In the extremely unlikelihood of such an attack, an escalation to nuclear would be even more unlikely, given that this will result in the end of both civilizations and annihilation of both peoples. It is silly to think that it's even possible.

    Let's look at (remotely) plausible scenarios. Would Russia want to wipe its own civilization off the face of the Earth over getting its troops killed in Syria? Would America do the same because a few thousand of its troops were killed in the Baltics, or Poland? Not going to happen. In fact, I would put the odds of a nuclear response to American troops installing a puppet government and occupying Moscow at below 50%. Because as in the case of Napoleon's or the Polish occupation, Russia can come back from that. It's never coming back from a nuclear war.

    I agree with Karlin that the USA taking out Russian troops in Syria (really doubt this would happen) will result in a high likelihood of Russia occupying the Baltics (taking out American troops in the process) and parts of Ukraine. Russia likes to reciprocate. That's not going to lead to nuclear war, though I imagine Russia would be out of swift and total sanctions would be imposed.

    I doubt either country will directly attack the other. In the extremely unlikelihood of such an attack, an escalation to nuclear would be even more unlikely, given that this will result in the end of both civilizations and annihilation of both peoples. It is silly to think that it’s even possible…..In fact, I would put the odds of a nuclear response to American troops installing a puppet government and occupying Moscow at below 50%. Because as in the case of Napoleon’s or the Polish occupation, Russia can come back from that. It’s never coming back from a nuclear war.

    That’s not how anybody really expects a superpower confrontation to lead to nuclear war, though.

    Most escalation scenarios since mutually assured destruction became generally accepted involve a repeated series of escalations, each assuming the other side will step back from the brink in response, or a loss of command and control giving rise to uncontrolled or mistaken releases, until at some point one side is faced, or thinks it is faced, with a stark “use it or lose it” choice with only a few minutes to decide.

    It’s not that likely that even open war would lead to an uncontrolled nuclear exchange. but how much risk are you prepared to accept when the consequences are that serious?

    The real concern today, though, is that there might be American politicians and military men who actually believe that their first strike counterforce capabilities combined with missile defences to mop up surviving attacks actually could limit damage to the continental US to acceptable levels.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Yes.

    I wrote already on Twitter that if Trump does start a war (which could immediately lead to WW3), then I'm With Her.
  102. @AP
    If we are going to make wild speculations, perhaps it's a Russian operation designed to get America sucked into a Syrian quagmire as Russia exits, so Russia can do more in its backyard while the USA is preoccupied in the Middle East. Georgia happened while the USA was in Iraq.

    I think there is basically a zero chance of Assad having ordered this. It may be a US false-flag operation, Which would be stupid and unlikely. Given how heavily Russia is involved there, this could be probably uncovered rather easily given the competence of Russian intelligence.

    Most likely - some local commander acting for who knows what reason or local resistence doing a false flag operation withot American orders. Assad's forces are apparently not very centralized. Incompetence by Assad's forces or desperation by resistence makes more sense than does a conspiracy.

    Incompetence by Assad’s forces or desperation by resistence makes more sense than does a conspiracy.

    That’s one /pol/ack’s idea: http://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/119714121

    >implying Arabs are competent enough to keep strict tabs on all their chemical warfare agents
    >implying they can tell the difference between a regular bomb and a gas bomb when they load them up in their planes
    >implying Arabs haven’t used nerve agents as recently as 1988 in warfare
    >implying there is a strategic ammo dump full of sarin that they bombed despite literally no evidence pointing to any such thing
    >implying even if they did bomb this imaginary depot full of sarin agents that the agents don’t dissipate quickly enough due to sarin’s high evaporation rate which is sped up intensely by the dry Syrian desert

    It certainly could have also been a rogue element within the Syrian military. It’s not exactly a secret there are too many Islamist sympathizers within it, which partly explains why it has such low effectiveness.

    I agree that one or the other of these is probably likelier than a specifically American inspired false flag, which in turn is likelier than Assad having ordered it directly.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Scalpel
    This needs to be said: chemical weapons ARE NOT weapons of mass destruction. Nuclear -definitely, biological-possibly, chemical - no. Chemical weapons are distasteful, tragic, indicriminate -yes, mass destruction - no, not any more than "bombs".
  103. utu says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    However you spin it does not look good.
     
    My spin on it is for you to take some kind of calming medicine (try Valerian Root) and start learning about real world outside. Stopping projecting your (very wrong) perceptions of how complex military-intelligence machines work onto something which needs more than just reading a bunch of media outlets, may also help.

    Russia is outplayed on every turn.
     
    May be yes, may be no. However you try to spin it, but it is US which is hysterical, not Russia.

    “it is US which is hysterical” – It is just their normal state of mind. It is really a tactical MO. You have to convince people. Somebody said that it is tribute to American people that they have to be lied dot but it is not that they can be deceived so easily. Hysteria does the job.

    Russia appears to be calm and stoic only because people there are passive because they know that the decisions will be made for them as usual and they have no say in it since times immemorial while in the US there is still a presence that the people rule.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    "...while in the US there is still a presence that the people rule."
    Not even funny. Kindergarden.
  104. Tulip says:

    Why would Assad do it, assuming he is winning the civil war?

    First, Assad requires political backers to stay in power, and if his backers dessert, he will fall.

    Second, during the civil war, his political backers have no choice but to back Assad, or otherwise their faction could fall from power.

    Third, after the civil war, his political backers could very well consider new leadership.

    Fourth, by using poison gas, a clear violation of the Geneva Conventions, Assad and his backers are now international war criminals.

    Fifth, if his backers move against Assad, they could all end up in front of the Hague.

    Sixth, its a nice FU to Donald Trump and America, as Assad doesn’t need their support.

    Seventh, it either brings the Donald into an unwinnable quagmire, weakening America, or Donald looks more like Ronald (McDonald).

    If it looks like he is going to win the war, and Russia and Iran have his back (in terms of money and arms), gassing these people helps cement the support of his backers, at the expense of pissing off some nations he neither needs nor likes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @John Gruskos
    This theory doesn't hold up. Assad and his backers already have blood on their hands. He doesn't need a new atrocity to cement their loyalty.
  105. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @utu
    "Russia is also completely capable of conventionally striking US proper."

    You are an ex military man and why do say such a nonsense. Everybody has a capability of conventional strike agains US. Even Lichtenstein. But who could get away with it? And why anybody would want to do such a pointless thing?

    Everybody has a capability of conventional strike agains US. Even Lichtenstein

    So, Lichtenstein has a stock-pile of X-101 and 3M14 counting in thousands. Well, live and learn. I also never heard of Lichtenstein having strategic aviation, but what do I really know.

    But who could get away with it?

    Russia can. Precisely for the reason that she can respond “in kind” conventionally. I am not going to go with you here into details of possible escalation(s) to a nuclear threshold, but Russia’s military doctrine is explicit (article #26) in what is preferred method of “non-nuclear power (kinetic) containment”–written in the most clear Russian language. The same goes to (article #27) criteria for nuclear response. And it is “Russia can”, which drives D.C. completely mad. This is the only nation in the world which can wipe US off the maps, while, if necessary and criteria are met, respond conventionally. Are you going to tell me that this doesn’t matter?

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    "This is the only nation in the world which can wipe US off the maps"

    You should have started there. Conventional strike capability is besides the point because its pointless, Mr. Latter Day Kutuzov.

    The only country that can strike the US by conventional means (and nuclear too) and get away with it is Israel because it would be blamed on somebody else.
  106. Many decades now have passed by when the last time I did hear the theme song from Verdi’s Nabukko.
    Things change!

    Read More
  107. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    The purpose of this False Flag chemical attack by the CIA trained terrorists who are called ‘rebel’ by the illiterate zionist salesman, is to create No Fly Zone, modified a ‘save zone’ by the illiterate ‘president’ to partition Syria and Iraq to erect kurdistan. Kurds are trained CIA terrorists spying for Israel and US. The axis of evil US – Israel- Britain CANNOT topple Assad, so the illiterate ‘president’ is trying the false flag operation to establish NFZ, the US/Hillary project with the help of the YOUNG zionist Kushner in the business of illegal settlements.

    The illiterate zionist salesman in the business of escort and hotel with a help of his escort at the UN is trying to fool the ignorant American people AGAIN to commit more crimes against humanity to help his son in law. Shame on America that goes sooooooooooo low to implement Zionist policy.

    The people of the region NEVER allow a second Israel in Syria or Iraq. YOU, the criminal mass murderers must get lost from Syria and the region NOW.

    Down with China and Russia if they sell another country to mass murderers, like Libya, for two bones called concessions. Shame on China if betrays humanity AGAIN.

    Read More
  108. utu says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Everybody has a capability of conventional strike agains US. Even Lichtenstein
     
    So, Lichtenstein has a stock-pile of X-101 and 3M14 counting in thousands. Well, live and learn. I also never heard of Lichtenstein having strategic aviation, but what do I really know.

    But who could get away with it?
     
    Russia can. Precisely for the reason that she can respond "in kind" conventionally. I am not going to go with you here into details of possible escalation(s) to a nuclear threshold, but Russia's military doctrine is explicit (article #26) in what is preferred method of "non-nuclear power (kinetic) containment"--written in the most clear Russian language. The same goes to (article #27) criteria for nuclear response. And it is "Russia can", which drives D.C. completely mad. This is the only nation in the world which can wipe US off the maps, while, if necessary and criteria are met, respond conventionally. Are you going to tell me that this doesn't matter?

    “This is the only nation in the world which can wipe US off the maps”

    You should have started there. Conventional strike capability is besides the point because its pointless, Mr. Latter Day Kutuzov.

    The only country that can strike the US by conventional means (and nuclear too) and get away with it is Israel because it would be blamed on somebody else.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    The only country that can strike the US by conventional means (and nuclear too) and get away with it is Israel because it would be blamed on somebody else.
     
    Have you tried seeing psychiatrist? May help.
  109. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @utu
    "This is the only nation in the world which can wipe US off the maps"

    You should have started there. Conventional strike capability is besides the point because its pointless, Mr. Latter Day Kutuzov.

    The only country that can strike the US by conventional means (and nuclear too) and get away with it is Israel because it would be blamed on somebody else.

    The only country that can strike the US by conventional means (and nuclear too) and get away with it is Israel because it would be blamed on somebody else.

    Have you tried seeing psychiatrist? May help.

    Read More
  110. I will tell you that attack on children yesterday had a big impact on me, big impact. That was a horrible, horrible thing. And I’ve been watching it, and seeing it, and it doesn’t get any worse than that… And I will tell you it’s already happened, that my attitude toward Syria and Assad has changed very much.

    Marcus Crassus had a similar reaction to an attack on children; specifically, his son, Publius, who, at the battle at Carrhae in 54 BC, was captured by the Parthians and returned to his father in pieces, his head on a pike as the Parthians counterattacked General Crassus’s depleted and demoralized forces. https://deadliestblogpage.wordpress.com/2013/06/09/disaster-in-the-desert-parthians-destroy-crassus-army-at-carrhae/

    Father Marcus was old and bold and wealthy; hubris led him to ignore sound advice and to reject the Parthian’s offers of a settlement. A member of the Roman triumvirate Caesar – Pompey – Crassus, he felt compelled to match Caesar’s military feats in Gaul; understood the economic constraints Pompey was attempting to resolve — the Roman populace had become accustomed to being provided with bread, and the Empire needed to conquer and secure sufficient grain to satisfy that need. Finally, agitator Cato had just arrived in Rome with a sizable fortune in booty, challenging the greedy Crassus to match-or-fold.

    The situations the US involves itself in today are not unique in human history because human nature retains many of the same character traits.

    Donald Trump should think again, of Marcus Crassus, and imagine ISIS presenting to him the head of his child, Barron Trump on a pike.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    It is not Trump who needs a lesson - it is a set of proverbial Cheneys in the deep state/CIA
  111. Art says:

    It’s official – the King has consented, Salome has beheaded Steve the Baptist.

    Steve Bannon has been removed from the National Security Council. He has been replaced by an operative friend of Ivanka.

    The man who had the populist strategy that elected Trump has had his head handed to him by the Jew couple – Ivanka and Jared Kushner.

    Trump is surrounded by Jews – we can forget peace in the middle east. We can expect Big Jew economics. We can expect the loss of internet freedom.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sherman
    Hey Genius

    "Big Jew economics".

    Is this the reason you're unemployed?

    Peace
    Sherm
  112. @Anatoly Karlin
    I've been pretty solid in my Trump support, despite occasional "zradas" (defeats/betrayals).

    This is the first time however that I am genuinely questioning his intentions and goodwill.

    If Trump in the end does goes down the path of corporatist neocon warmongering, he will lose and the vision he outlined at his inauguration speech will die as well. Very sad!

    To be honest, I can’t even imagine how this apparent complete U-turn could happen without him being blackmailed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    "without him being blackmailed" - One resorts to blackmail with people who have integrity and stand for some higher principles. Trump is an opportunist. He will do whatever. He is not the man of your own projections that you casted on him. This commenter I think got him right

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/video-bannon-tries-to-advise-trump-on-getting-involved-in-syria/#comment-1825893

    Trump has balls but he’s no political philosopher. He’s not coherent on anything.

    “I love Wikileaks! I’m being surveilled!/Edward Snowden is a traitor!”

    “Iraq was a mistake. Libya was a mistake. America First!/We’re gonna get rid of Isis! Assad’s gas attack changes things.”

    “Drain the swamp!/ Get behind the establishment’s healthcare bill!”

    “Build the wall and have Mexico pay for it/Mitt Romney lost because his self deportation comment was mean and it lost him the Latino vote”

    The guy watches Fox and Friends and Judge Jeanine-two of the most mind numbingly stupid shows on cable news and seems to genuinely enjoy them. The guy has a few good instincts but he doesn’t have a coherent worldview and you can bet the people whispering in his ear who can actually get stuff done in Washington do. Problem is, they tend to be Bill Kristol. Rand “hey let’s actually talk about this before we commit ourselves to more wars” Paul is a lonely “wacko bird.” Trump is beyond ideology. He wants results. He want accomplishments. He wants his ego flattered. And there are plenty of rats ready to exploit that situation and play Iago to his Othello.
     
    Who has access to his ear now counts. It ain't Bannon anymore who helped to save his campaign by doubling down on the original Trump message that Trump was ready to dilute or even discard. It will be Ivanka, Kushner and many Iagos. Art at #114 above put it really well in terms of Steve the Baptist metaphor. W/o Bannon it's over.
  113. AP says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    I doubt either country will directly attack the other. In the extremely unlikelihood of such an attack, an escalation to nuclear would be even more unlikely, given that this will result in the end of both civilizations and annihilation of both peoples. It is silly to think that it’s even possible.
     
    US "needs" any kind of military success after de facto lost wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. US military record of the last 70 years is rather unimpressive--not a single war with first rate opponent, only extolled ad nauseam "victory" over third rate Saddam forces. A lot of psychology comes into this. Not only many US generals sleep and dream how to fight Russia, they desperately crave it. In conventional war with Russia this will be US, not Russia, who will initiate nuclear exchange. The reasons for that are numerous, including massive reputational military losses--from losing one or two aircraft carriers, to sustaining (which is highly likely) massive casualties which will lead to impossibility of attaining any political objectives. Russia is also completely capable of conventionally striking US proper. By about 2021-2023 this capability will grow exponentially, including the ability (which US currently doesn't have and most likely will not have) to field missile and other technologies which completely zero-down US military potential. Pentagon knows this.

    I agree with most of what you say, and can’t dispute your military assessment because it is beyond my expertise. But –

    In conventional war with Russia this will be US, not Russia, who will initiate nuclear exchange. The reasons for that are numerous, including massive reputational military losses–from losing one or two aircraft carriers, to sustaining (which is highly likely) massive casualties which will lead to impossibility of attaining any political objectives.

    I find the idea of America’s military/political leaders choosing to commit national suicide under such a scenario (Russia destroying America’s military capability and ability to project power outside the USA through conventional means) to be extremely unlikely. Leader may be foolish or short-sighted, but I really doubt they have a Nazi-like or Islamic-like mentality of preferring total national destruction if they don’t have their way. I doubt even the fanatic neocons would feel this way.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    I find the idea of America’s military/political leaders choosing to commit national suicide under such a scenario (Russia destroying America’s military capability and ability to project power outside the USA through conventional means) to be extremely unlikely.
     
    I don't. Without going deep into, now firmly established, dysfunctionality of the US State, which is horrendously dangerous in itself, the war, and I am not being original here, has the mind of its own once it starts. The war with Russia, if it happens either in Syria or, let alone, in and around Ukraine, will have a very different military and political logic.

    1. Casualties sustained will be massive in a very short period of time.
    2. US will have a major political crisis at home.
    3. Reputational losses will be huge.
    4. Geopolitical dynamics will change drastically and in a very short time
    5. This point is for US further internal US contingencies and here one can only imagine what it may be and what political forces may emerge. Military-intelligence coup? Easily.
    6. ...

    So,

    Leader may be foolish or short-sighted, but I really doubt they have a Nazi-like or Islamic-like mentality of preferring total national destruction if they don’t have their way.
     
    But this is a defining feature of, at least, most neocon cabal. But let's forget about Korea, where MacArthur was forced by Truman out of his position because he wanted to use nukes, same goes for Vietnam, where nuking it was considered. US is a no stranger to this kind of military thinking. What happens if Russia destroys a single Carrier Battle Group, and probability of this is not a zero at all? Do you know what the loss of even single carrier means for US as a whole, forget US Navy. Do not listen to me, read what Admiral Elmo Zumwalt thought about it during and after his tenure as CNO. We can only imagine what pressures will arise. While it is true that neocons are cowards, it is also true that we really do not know what is their threshold of rationality. You have to understand, for decades now US political and military "elite" was formed by this ad nauseam mantra of American exceptionalism in everything. Are you ready to predict the results of this "parting syndrome"? I am not. I can only discuss contingencies and one of them, and I guarantee you--it is being considered in Russia, is precisely of US "top" going completely rogue and insane, not that it is not happening as I type this. This contingency can not and must not be excluded from serious elaborations.

    P.S. Lowlife Albright's desire to sacrifice 500,000 Iraqi children for "democracy" was not an accidental misspeak--this is how many in D.C. think and live. In the end, if not for courageous British General Sir. Jackson, Wesley Clark would start killing Russian paratroopers at Slatina airfield. He issued the orders. Since then things only got worse.
  114. bjondo says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    My view on things is informed by two key assumptions/observations:

    (1) The US can wipe the floor with Russia in Syria or anywhere in the Middle East.

    (2) Russia can wipe the floor with NATO east and north of the Suwalki gap.

    If things really go south in Syria - as in, actual Russian forces coming under sustained attack from the USAF - I would expect either:

    (a) If they decide on a military response --> it will be either in Ukraine (e.g. ranging from recognition of the LDNR to resurrection of the Novorossiya project) or even the Baltics;

    (b) If they decide on a negotiated surrender-in-all-but-name in Syria with the US allowing Russia its forces intact in exchange for abandoning Assad --> a domestic clampdown to contain the mass outrage that this humiliation will doubtless elicit.

    (1) The US can wipe the floor with Russia in Syria or anywhere in the Middle East.

    (2) Russia can wipe the floor with NATO east and north of the Suwalki gap.

    #2 yes
    #1 maybe short term outside syria. past short term russia wins.

    Read More
  115. > (1) You can’t treat exposure to sarin with your bare hands without falling ill/dead yourself…

    That’s not true in many circumstances.
    Certainly treating someone with liquid sarin on them will get you killed. But why would you treat them? They are dead before they reach medical care. If you are treating someone who has reached medical care alive, they have absorbed a tiny dose, for example by breathing a free droplet of mist in the air, and you are not going to get poisoned secondarily from the sarin that is in their body. It is also usually the case that someone has brought this sick person to the hospital by carrying them. The fact that the person doing the carrying is not dying is some indication that contact with the victim isn’t exposing people to sarin. Also, sarin evaporates from clothing in 30 minutes, so you are at much lower risk when treating someone after that time.

    Certainly it’s a brave doctor or soldier who treats people with his bare hands after a chemical weapons attack. Just like the doctors and soldiers who run toward the scenes of car bombings. That’s the kind you find in war zones.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    "Certainly it’s a brave doctor or soldier who treats people with his bare hands after a chemical weapons attack. Just like the doctors and soldiers who run toward the scenes of car bombings. "
     
    You mean like the brave medics who arrived at this scene of car bombing?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8m_ZfRAtuM
  116. AP says:
    @Mr. Hack

    I agree with Karlin that the USA taking out Russian troops in Syria (really doubt this would happen) will result in a high likelihood of Russia occupying the Baltics (taking out American troops in the process) and parts of Ukraine.
     
    I could definitely foresee more involvement in Ukrainian affairs, but Baltic aggression seems over the top to me. By invading any of the Baltic countries, Russia will provoke the ire of European countries, especially those within NATO, and a likely counterattack. A war against the US in Syria and one against NATO in the Balts is way too much to envision. Things in Ukraine would undoubtedly unwind too. Wars on three fronts for Russia would be suicide. I think that what Karlin states here makes sense, and would preempt this sort of a scenario from occuring:

    I disagree that attacking Syria automatically means war, at least so long as the Russian military isn’t directly targetted. Russia doesn’t have any formal military alliances with Syria, so a lack of retaliation in Syria proper will be justifiable – and well-advised, considering massive American aeronaval dominance in the region
     

    “I agree with Karlin that the USA taking out Russian troops in Syria (really doubt this would happen) will result in a high likelihood of Russia occupying the Baltics (taking out American troops in the process) and parts of Ukraine. ”

    I could definitely foresee more involvement in Ukrainian affairs, but Baltic aggression seems over the top to me. By invading any of the Baltic countries, Russia will provoke the ire of European countries, especially those within NATO, and a likely counterattack.

    In my comment I assumed not some Russians killed as collateral damage by the USA assaulting Assad, but a US direct attack on and destruction of Russian military forces in Syria such as the naval base at Tartus. I think the odds of this happening are basically zero, but if the USA did this I suspect Russia would retaliate by taking out the nearest and most convenient American bases, which would be in the Baltics (Russia couldn’t really retaliate in the Middle East). This would save face at home, demonstrate to the world that Russia does retaliate and that attacks on Russia have consequences, and perhaps end NATO, because the Western powers, as in 1939, would probably not want to really fight for the sake of some eastern European countries.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    "I suspect Russia would retaliate by taking out the nearest and most convenient American bases, which would be in the Baltics (Russia couldn’t really retaliate in the Middle East). "
     
    Russia has no conventional means of retaliating in the Middle East. All Russian forces in Middle East can be swarmed and overwhelmed by USA, Turkey and Israel within few hours. Russia will not go nuclear for the sake of Syria. In the end it is all about saving face. Funny, isn't it? There is nothing tangible there. Saving face for Russian people sake only because beyond Russia nobody really cares about Russia's face which in the West they think is beyond salvaging anyway. The end of it will be a coup d'etat in Russia by those who think that Russia's face was not saved enough or by those who think that saving Russia's face may lead to Russia's destruction. It will be the latter who pretend to be the former for the people's sake.
  117. utu says:
    @reiner Tor
    To be honest, I can't even imagine how this apparent complete U-turn could happen without him being blackmailed.

    “without him being blackmailed” – One resorts to blackmail with people who have integrity and stand for some higher principles. Trump is an opportunist. He will do whatever. He is not the man of your own projections that you casted on him. This commenter I think got him right

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/video-bannon-tries-to-advise-trump-on-getting-involved-in-syria/#comment-1825893

    Trump has balls but he’s no political philosopher. He’s not coherent on anything.

    “I love Wikileaks! I’m being surveilled!/Edward Snowden is a traitor!”

    “Iraq was a mistake. Libya was a mistake. America First!/We’re gonna get rid of Isis! Assad’s gas attack changes things.”

    “Drain the swamp!/ Get behind the establishment’s healthcare bill!”

    “Build the wall and have Mexico pay for it/Mitt Romney lost because his self deportation comment was mean and it lost him the Latino vote”

    The guy watches Fox and Friends and Judge Jeanine-two of the most mind numbingly stupid shows on cable news and seems to genuinely enjoy them. The guy has a few good instincts but he doesn’t have a coherent worldview and you can bet the people whispering in his ear who can actually get stuff done in Washington do. Problem is, they tend to be Bill Kristol. Rand “hey let’s actually talk about this before we commit ourselves to more wars” Paul is a lonely “wacko bird.” Trump is beyond ideology. He wants results. He want accomplishments. He wants his ego flattered. And there are plenty of rats ready to exploit that situation and play Iago to his Othello.

    Who has access to his ear now counts. It ain’t Bannon anymore who helped to save his campaign by doubling down on the original Trump message that Trump was ready to dilute or even discard. It will be Ivanka, Kushner and many Iagos. Art at #114 above put it really well in terms of Steve the Baptist metaphor. W/o Bannon it’s over.

    Read More
  118. utu says:
    @oddsbodkins
    > (1) You can’t treat exposure to sarin with your bare hands without falling ill/dead yourself...

    That's not true in many circumstances.
    Certainly treating someone with liquid sarin on them will get you killed. But why would you treat them? They are dead before they reach medical care. If you are treating someone who has reached medical care alive, they have absorbed a tiny dose, for example by breathing a free droplet of mist in the air, and you are not going to get poisoned secondarily from the sarin that is in their body. It is also usually the case that someone has brought this sick person to the hospital by carrying them. The fact that the person doing the carrying is not dying is some indication that contact with the victim isn't exposing people to sarin. Also, sarin evaporates from clothing in 30 minutes, so you are at much lower risk when treating someone after that time.

    Certainly it's a brave doctor or soldier who treats people with his bare hands after a chemical weapons attack. Just like the doctors and soldiers who run toward the scenes of car bombings. That's the kind you find in war zones.

    “Certainly it’s a brave doctor or soldier who treats people with his bare hands after a chemical weapons attack. Just like the doctors and soldiers who run toward the scenes of car bombings. “

    You mean like the brave medics who arrived at this scene of car bombing?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8m_ZfRAtuM

    Read More
    • Replies: @oddsbodkins
    Yes that looks like car bomb theatre. I stopped watching when the video said "Boston wasn't a real explosion." Just because one thing is fake doesn't mean everything is.
  119. utu says:
    @AP

    "I agree with Karlin that the USA taking out Russian troops in Syria (really doubt this would happen) will result in a high likelihood of Russia occupying the Baltics (taking out American troops in the process) and parts of Ukraine. "

    I could definitely foresee more involvement in Ukrainian affairs, but Baltic aggression seems over the top to me. By invading any of the Baltic countries, Russia will provoke the ire of European countries, especially those within NATO, and a likely counterattack.
     
    In my comment I assumed not some Russians killed as collateral damage by the USA assaulting Assad, but a US direct attack on and destruction of Russian military forces in Syria such as the naval base at Tartus. I think the odds of this happening are basically zero, but if the USA did this I suspect Russia would retaliate by taking out the nearest and most convenient American bases, which would be in the Baltics (Russia couldn't really retaliate in the Middle East). This would save face at home, demonstrate to the world that Russia does retaliate and that attacks on Russia have consequences, and perhaps end NATO, because the Western powers, as in 1939, would probably not want to really fight for the sake of some eastern European countries.

    “I suspect Russia would retaliate by taking out the nearest and most convenient American bases, which would be in the Baltics (Russia couldn’t really retaliate in the Middle East). “

    Russia has no conventional means of retaliating in the Middle East. All Russian forces in Middle East can be swarmed and overwhelmed by USA, Turkey and Israel within few hours. Russia will not go nuclear for the sake of Syria. In the end it is all about saving face. Funny, isn’t it? There is nothing tangible there. Saving face for Russian people sake only because beyond Russia nobody really cares about Russia’s face which in the West they think is beyond salvaging anyway. The end of it will be a coup d’etat in Russia by those who think that Russia’s face was not saved enough or by those who think that saving Russia’s face may lead to Russia’s destruction. It will be the latter who pretend to be the former for the people’s sake.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    Russia has no conventional means of retaliating in the Middle East.
     
    Stop writing crap on the subject you have no idea about.

    https://tools.wmflabs.org/geohack/geohack.php?pagename=Engels-2_%28air_base%29&params=51_28_52_N_046_12_38_E_
    , @RadicalCenter
    Most people outside Russia may not care about Russia's fate, but I am an American and I do.

    Moreover, Russia's reluctance to back down in Syria is not just about saving face. Putin et al. may have concluded, wisely, that any sign of weakness in any theater will embolden the US and NATO to become even more belligerent and station even more troops and weapons to encircle Russia on its borders. "We" are not giving Russia many palatable choices.
  120. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @AP
    I agree with most of what you say, and can't dispute your military assessment because it is beyond my expertise. But -

    In conventional war with Russia this will be US, not Russia, who will initiate nuclear exchange. The reasons for that are numerous, including massive reputational military losses–from losing one or two aircraft carriers, to sustaining (which is highly likely) massive casualties which will lead to impossibility of attaining any political objectives.
     
    I find the idea of America's military/political leaders choosing to commit national suicide under such a scenario (Russia destroying America's military capability and ability to project power outside the USA through conventional means) to be extremely unlikely. Leader may be foolish or short-sighted, but I really doubt they have a Nazi-like or Islamic-like mentality of preferring total national destruction if they don't have their way. I doubt even the fanatic neocons would feel this way.

    I find the idea of America’s military/political leaders choosing to commit national suicide under such a scenario (Russia destroying America’s military capability and ability to project power outside the USA through conventional means) to be extremely unlikely.

    I don’t. Without going deep into, now firmly established, dysfunctionality of the US State, which is horrendously dangerous in itself, the war, and I am not being original here, has the mind of its own once it starts. The war with Russia, if it happens either in Syria or, let alone, in and around Ukraine, will have a very different military and political logic.

    1. Casualties sustained will be massive in a very short period of time.
    2. US will have a major political crisis at home.
    3. Reputational losses will be huge.
    4. Geopolitical dynamics will change drastically and in a very short time
    5. This point is for US further internal US contingencies and here one can only imagine what it may be and what political forces may emerge. Military-intelligence coup? Easily.
    6. …

    So,

    Leader may be foolish or short-sighted, but I really doubt they have a Nazi-like or Islamic-like mentality of preferring total national destruction if they don’t have their way.

    But this is a defining feature of, at least, most neocon cabal. But let’s forget about Korea, where MacArthur was forced by Truman out of his position because he wanted to use nukes, same goes for Vietnam, where nuking it was considered. US is a no stranger to this kind of military thinking. What happens if Russia destroys a single Carrier Battle Group, and probability of this is not a zero at all? Do you know what the loss of even single carrier means for US as a whole, forget US Navy. Do not listen to me, read what Admiral Elmo Zumwalt thought about it during and after his tenure as CNO. We can only imagine what pressures will arise. While it is true that neocons are cowards, it is also true that we really do not know what is their threshold of rationality. You have to understand, for decades now US political and military “elite” was formed by this ad nauseam mantra of American exceptionalism in everything. Are you ready to predict the results of this “parting syndrome”? I am not. I can only discuss contingencies and one of them, and I guarantee you–it is being considered in Russia, is precisely of US “top” going completely rogue and insane, not that it is not happening as I type this. This contingency can not and must not be excluded from serious elaborations.

    P.S. Lowlife Albright’s desire to sacrifice 500,000 Iraqi children for “democracy” was not an accidental misspeak–this is how many in D.C. think and live. In the end, if not for courageous British General Sir. Jackson, Wesley Clark would start killing Russian paratroopers at Slatina airfield. He issued the orders. Since then things only got worse.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    1. Casualties sustained will be massive in a very short period of time.
    2. US will have a major political crisis at home.
    3. Reputational losses will be huge.
    4. Geopolitical dynamics will change drastically and in a very short time
    5. This point is for US further internal US contingencies and here one can only imagine what it may be and what political forces may emerge. Military-intelligence coup? Easily.
     
    Agree with points 1-4. Point 5 is questionable, at best. More likely impeachment or other political solution.

    "Leader may be foolish or short-sighted, but I really doubt they have a Nazi-like or Islamic-like mentality of preferring total national destruction if they don’t have their way."

    But this is a defining feature of, at least, most neocon cabal.
     
    For a nuclear war to be triggered you would have both the military bosses and the political elite (neocons) to be on board. I doubt that either group would want to see the USA disappear from the Earth just because its conventional military has been wrecked by Russia. Both is even less likely. Neocons are troublesome but they aren't suicidal fanatics. Homicidal ones, sure.

    But let’s forget about Korea, where MacArthur was forced by Truman out of his position because he wanted to use nukes, same goes for Vietnam, where nuking it was considered.
     
    Neither North Korea/China in the 1950s, nor Vietnam would have been in a position to remove the USA from existence in retaliation for a nuke strike against them. So the situation is completely different from potentially nuking Russia if Russia destroys the US conventional military.

    I do see your point, and agree that there is a very high chance of the USA going nuclear if its army was demolished by a country without massive nuclear response capability. Russia is just a different ballgame.

    Lowlife Albright’s desire to sacrifice 500,000 Iraqi children for “democracy” was not an accidental misspeak–this is how many in D.C. think and live.
     
    Sacrificing 500,000 Iraqi children is not the same thing as sacrificing 300+ million Americans.
  121. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @utu

    "I suspect Russia would retaliate by taking out the nearest and most convenient American bases, which would be in the Baltics (Russia couldn’t really retaliate in the Middle East). "
     
    Russia has no conventional means of retaliating in the Middle East. All Russian forces in Middle East can be swarmed and overwhelmed by USA, Turkey and Israel within few hours. Russia will not go nuclear for the sake of Syria. In the end it is all about saving face. Funny, isn't it? There is nothing tangible there. Saving face for Russian people sake only because beyond Russia nobody really cares about Russia's face which in the West they think is beyond salvaging anyway. The end of it will be a coup d'etat in Russia by those who think that Russia's face was not saved enough or by those who think that saving Russia's face may lead to Russia's destruction. It will be the latter who pretend to be the former for the people's sake.

    Russia has no conventional means of retaliating in the Middle East.

    Stop writing crap on the subject you have no idea about.

    https://tools.wmflabs.org/geohack/geohack.php?pagename=Engels-2_%28air_base%29&params=51_28_52_N_046_12_38_E_

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill
    I'm curious if you could recommend a book sketching out what the "order of battle" would be like in a conventional conflict between NATO and Russia.
  122. @utu
    " we will never again be led down this road." You will, you will because you like most losers are driven by your own projections. You projected your hopes and wishful thinking on Trump and it worked perfectly for him. He got elected. But now after firing Bannon there is nothing left. He was the last and the only guarantor of your hopes. That's why MSM hated Bannon so much. The only pre-election promises that actually will be retained are torture, Guantanamo and stealing their oil. Did you vote for these items? Anyway, that is all you are left with. Get used to it:


    torture, Guantanamo and stealing their oil
     


    And enjoy your Trump as president.

    And what was the alternative, Mr. utu? To have done nothing? To write screeds on the internet as you do? Tell us, please, what would you have had us do? Vote for Hillary? Vote for Bernie? Vote for a fill-in-the-blank Republicrat or Democratican? Put on face masks and break windows?

    I don’t see you doing anything to fix things.

    Loser? Who is the one claiming to have an answer without providing one? Who does nothing but pretend to know what is right? Who sat back and refused to support the only candidate who at least held some of our views? (Sorry, no, but he indeed has proof going back three decades that his views on trade and his general opinion of politicians are consistent. I won’t buy the predictable response you would have here.)

    No matter what happens to my president or to my country, I will be sitting here on my wooded land, drinking single barrel bourbon and smoking cigars, grilling tenderloin, while people like you pretend to be somebody on the internet.

    And no, I will not project myself into a candidate and vote for him. I will refrain from voting and enjoy the life I won in the cosmic lottery — while you and everyone like you drowns in the rising brown tide of filth that will cover the Earth.

    But thanks for the informative opinion.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    You are unduly optimistic to be so confident that you will be safe for long.

    Those hordes of which you speak have things called automobiles, and many of them will leave the collapsing, starving cities looking for water, food, and just plain victims.

    Having said that, you are wise to at least be as far away from the big hostile cities as you can, and you'll have a far better chance in the short term than we will.

    God bless you and good luck to all of us in the balkanized violent future we seem to face....

  123. El Dato says:
    @anon
    Trump got burned on the Yemen raid.

    Why is the military going along with this one? The last one didn't happen because no one wanted to sign off on it. That is, Obama drew the line (stupidly). But then decided to make Congress vote for it. Everyone wanted someone else to be the designated 'leader'.

    Syria is no less a loser today. Does Congress want to vote for this? The only thing that is utterly predictable about Trump is he doesn't want to lose. But even more so, he doesn't want to be blamed.

    He was quite convincing today as the sucker.

    But really?

    The military and public mostly seem OK with bombing. So maybe we bomb some stuff. It's disgusting but its just killing military on one side or another along with a lot of collateral damage, dead women and children, etc. But no boots on the ground.

    I'd like to think that he won't do it. Like how could he be so stupid? But it hasn't stopped anyone sine the 2000 election.

    So maybe we bomb some stuff.

    That’s going to be quite interesting.

    - Nusra Front will rebound.
    - ISIS will be back (remember them?)
    - USA will lose a few planes to S-300 anti-air.
    - There will be dead Russians. This won’t go down well.
    - There will be dead Iranian cleaner teams, and thus angry Iranians. Hardcore Mullahs will be happy (sounds like feature because a War on Iran is exactly what the satanic union of Saudi-Arabia and you-know-who wants.)
    - Turkey will flow into the “bombed stuff” area to attack Kurds.

    God knows where that will all end up.

    Remember little Serbia and August 1914.

    Read More
    • Replies: @cali
    Absolutely correct!
    That was the Deep State agenda all along and DT being goaded into it successfully! The actual target was Russia all along with it's GAZPROM providing energy for Europe while the Deep State needed the pipeline built from Qatar all the way into Europe needing Syria to accomplish that goal ergo the framing of Assad using Sarin when it was the Deep State providing their rebels said chemical weapons.
    The Deep State accomplished their goal via false flag and DT helped that agenda along.
  124. utu says:

    “while you and everyone like you drowns in the rising brown tide of filth that will cover the Earth.” – I see that Mr. Deplorable showed his bonafides.

    Read More
  125. iffen says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    I doubt either country will directly attack the other. In the extremely unlikelihood of such an attack, an escalation to nuclear would be even more unlikely, given that this will result in the end of both civilizations and annihilation of both peoples. It is silly to think that it’s even possible.
     
    US "needs" any kind of military success after de facto lost wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. US military record of the last 70 years is rather unimpressive--not a single war with first rate opponent, only extolled ad nauseam "victory" over third rate Saddam forces. A lot of psychology comes into this. Not only many US generals sleep and dream how to fight Russia, they desperately crave it. In conventional war with Russia this will be US, not Russia, who will initiate nuclear exchange. The reasons for that are numerous, including massive reputational military losses--from losing one or two aircraft carriers, to sustaining (which is highly likely) massive casualties which will lead to impossibility of attaining any political objectives. Russia is also completely capable of conventionally striking US proper. By about 2021-2023 this capability will grow exponentially, including the ability (which US currently doesn't have and most likely will not have) to field missile and other technologies which completely zero-down US military potential. Pentagon knows this.

    US military record of the last 70 years is rather unimpressive

    Right, no way that they match Soviet/Russia’s impressive list of successes like ripping those Afghans a new one for example.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    "There is a literature and a common perception that the Soviets were defeated and driven from Afghanistan. This is not true. When the Soviets left Afghanistan in 1989, they did so in a coordinated, deliberate, professional manner, leaving behind a functioning government, an improved military and an advisory and economic effort insuring the continued viability of the government. The withdrawal was based on a coordinated diplomatic, economic and military plan permitting Soviet forces to withdraw in good order and the Afghan government to survive. The Democratic Republic of Afghanistan (DRA)managed to hold on despite the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Only then, with the loss of Soviet support and the increased efforts by the Mujahideen (holy warriors) and Pakistan, did the DRA slide toward defeat in April 1992. The Soviet effort to withdraw in good order was well executed and can serve as a model for other disengagements from similar nations."

    http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/documents/Withdrawal.pdf

    All questions to US Army Command And General Staff College in Leavenworth, KS.
    , @El Dato
    This ain't some kind of pissing contest (arbitrated by the Galactic Fraternity of the Orion Arm, maybe?)
    , @German_reader
    Compared to Vietnam, the Soviet record in Afghanistan wasn't really that bad (and at least the Soviets realized early on that they needed to get out and left behind a friendly regime that lasted some time, and might have lasted longer if not for the dissolution of the Soviet Union - what has NATO achieved so far in Afghanistan, after 15 years?).
    And I'd actually go farther than Smoothie, US triumphalism is way overdone even in regard to the 2nd world war, at least concerning the European theatre.
    , @annamaria
    Your former Soviet Jewish mom forgot to tell you that when Soviets came to Afghanistan, they had built a university in Kabul (still exists) and provided education for the first ever cohort of university-trained Afghan women, including medical doctors. Compare this to a sky-rocketing production of heroin in Afghanistan upon the US "victory" there. Other amazing US achievements include the rise of Al Qaeda and Taliban and the pitiful state of education and health care there.
    , @NoseytheDuke
    The preceding commenters have put you well in your place, if only you'd stay there. You could spend some time reading The Art of War. The very best military leaders are so good they never have to fight.

    The Russians certainly were effective when it came the Chechens and to Georgia. Ukraine has not fared well either. All of those conflicts were provoked by the ZUSA and what have the American people gained from it?

    "American hero, Zbignew B, came up with the idea of the plan to aid in giving the Soviets a bloody nose in Afghanistan, but it hasn't worked out very well has it? Some fine young American lives were just wasted in Afghanistan and Iraq, along with masses of expensive equipment and trillions of dollars that would have been put to better use in the US.

    Your attempt at chest thumping is better suited to an ape.
  126. utu says:

    “while you and everyone like you drowns in the rising brown tide of filth that will cover the Earth.” – I see that Mr. Deplorable showed his bonafides.

    You are way to emotional for a person who has a good life and enjoys his bourbon in solitude. Perhaps this is just another of your projections of what to means to have a good life. Separate reality form your projections.

    Read More
  127. @Jim Christian
    Either that, or there's "real estate" at Arlington Trump has been offered, say a 6'LX4'WX6'D up there on that hill above the Shining City in Arlington Cemetery. Up there next to Jack and Bob Kennedy who, whatever ELSE you think of them were the last two to say No to a bullshit war.

    Real estate in Arlington is what those who oppose wars earn for themselves. You may have silver and gold or you may have lead. Pick one. And so he has.

    Rule #1 is, war for profit goes on. Or else.
    Rule #2 is, Presidents (or candidates as we saw with RFK) will never change Rule #1 and survive the attempt. This is our country for the past century and a half. I'm sure the armorers made themselves a pretty penny during the civil war. Ok, ok, so half a million died, millions maimed, all White Americans (don't want to hear about the Black squads, sorry). but cannon balls and black powder makes good money. Nothing has changed since. And they'll risk lots of casualties toying with a nuclear confrontation without blinking an eye. Lots of money in rebuilding cities, too.

    I really hate our ruling classes these days. If they do this with Syria, start in on Russia with skirmishes and outright war, we'll know we're ruled by evil. There's no need for any of it. We "won". We leveled the Middle East in response to 9/11. You'd think it's enough from looking at the carnage and destruction we've wrought on them. But it's never enough, not anymore.

    I feel the same way. What evil clods rule over us!

    Read More
  128. Art says:

    Just cannot believe that Assad is that stupid as to do a gas attack at this time. It is beyond comprehension, after staying in power for five years of vicious civil war, and about ready to declare victory, he would never knowingly do this.

    This was either a tragic unintended error or a false flag by another party – most likely Israel.

    Whatever, the globalist Jews are going to use this tragedy to achieve their long-held goal of breaking up Syria.

    Jared and Ivanka Kushner will lead the way.

    Read More
  129. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @iffen
    US military record of the last 70 years is rather unimpressive

    Right, no way that they match Soviet/Russia's impressive list of successes like ripping those Afghans a new one for example.

    “There is a literature and a common perception that the Soviets were defeated and driven from Afghanistan. This is not true. When the Soviets left Afghanistan in 1989, they did so in a coordinated, deliberate, professional manner, leaving behind a functioning government, an improved military and an advisory and economic effort insuring the continued viability of the government. The withdrawal was based on a coordinated diplomatic, economic and military plan permitting Soviet forces to withdraw in good order and the Afghan government to survive. The Democratic Republic of Afghanistan (DRA)managed to hold on despite the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Only then, with the loss of Soviet support and the increased efforts by the Mujahideen (holy warriors) and Pakistan, did the DRA slide toward defeat in April 1992. The Soviet effort to withdraw in good order was well executed and can serve as a model for other disengagements from similar nations.”

    http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/documents/Withdrawal.pdf

    All questions to US Army Command And General Staff College in Leavenworth, KS.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Verymuchalive
    Actually, when the US left Vietnam, they left a functioning government and an improving military situation. It was the removal of US air cover and shipments of military equipment at the behest of the Democratic dominated Congress that led to the fall of South Vietnam in 1975. With massive amounts of material shipped in by the Soviets and with air superiority, North Vietnam was able to defeat the quickly depleted South.
    So, less than 20 years later, things rather repeated themselves in Afghanistan, although political collapse of the Soviet Union precipitated the latter, not Legislative action.
    , @RadicalCenter
    I was ignorant of this assessment, as are almost all Westerners, I'm sure.
  130. @utu

    "Certainly it’s a brave doctor or soldier who treats people with his bare hands after a chemical weapons attack. Just like the doctors and soldiers who run toward the scenes of car bombings. "
     
    You mean like the brave medics who arrived at this scene of car bombing?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8m_ZfRAtuM

    Yes that looks like car bomb theatre. I stopped watching when the video said “Boston wasn’t a real explosion.” Just because one thing is fake doesn’t mean everything is.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    "Just because one thing is fake doesn’t mean everything is." Correct. And vice versa. And because we have fave events, false flag events and real organic events we must be very careful how we react to any of them, right? We do not want to be played.
  131. El Dato says:
    @iffen
    US military record of the last 70 years is rather unimpressive

    Right, no way that they match Soviet/Russia's impressive list of successes like ripping those Afghans a new one for example.

    This ain’t some kind of pissing contest (arbitrated by the Galactic Fraternity of the Orion Arm, maybe?)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    This ain’t some kind of pissing contest (arbitrated by the Galactic Fraternity of the Orion Arm, maybe?)
     
    But it is, it always was and always will be. Anyone who tells you otherwise is full o' shit. Another matter, that even in this pissing contest there is a place for professional courtesy and objectivity.
  132. @iffen
    US military record of the last 70 years is rather unimpressive

    Right, no way that they match Soviet/Russia's impressive list of successes like ripping those Afghans a new one for example.

    Compared to Vietnam, the Soviet record in Afghanistan wasn’t really that bad (and at least the Soviets realized early on that they needed to get out and left behind a friendly regime that lasted some time, and might have lasted longer if not for the dissolution of the Soviet Union – what has NATO achieved so far in Afghanistan, after 15 years?).
    And I’d actually go farther than Smoothie, US triumphalism is way overdone even in regard to the 2nd world war, at least concerning the European theatre.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    US triumphalism is way overdone even in regard to the 2nd world war,
     
    Because a lot of it (not all) is myth. Each time I hear this ad nauseam talk about US soldier "being the best in the world", my argument is simple--look at Wehrmacht circa 1941-43, then we'll talk.
    , @iffen
    If we have never won any wars how did Pax Americana come into being and why are we just now going into the Decline and Fall?
    , @RadicalCenter
    Your last comment is certainly sound. If Germany weren't fighting on two very major fronts, it could have fought the USA and its European allies to a stalemate at the least, and probably prevailed.

    I'm not sure that Americans or Europeans would have been any worse off if that had happened instead of the horror that did happen.
  133. utu says:
    @oddsbodkins
    Yes that looks like car bomb theatre. I stopped watching when the video said "Boston wasn't a real explosion." Just because one thing is fake doesn't mean everything is.

    “Just because one thing is fake doesn’t mean everything is.” Correct. And vice versa. And because we have fave events, false flag events and real organic events we must be very careful how we react to any of them, right? We do not want to be played.

    Read More
  134. Sean says:

    When there is a balance of power it’s a very simple zero sum game, whereby (to come to cases) Russia cannot succeed without the US suffering a defeat. Or vice versa. If there is a seeming slide in one power’s prestige, it will start to toy with the idea of applying a bit of military pressure.

    Read More
  135. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @El Dato
    This ain't some kind of pissing contest (arbitrated by the Galactic Fraternity of the Orion Arm, maybe?)

    This ain’t some kind of pissing contest (arbitrated by the Galactic Fraternity of the Orion Arm, maybe?)

    But it is, it always was and always will be. Anyone who tells you otherwise is full o’ shit. Another matter, that even in this pissing contest there is a place for professional courtesy and objectivity.

    Read More
  136. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @German_reader
    Compared to Vietnam, the Soviet record in Afghanistan wasn't really that bad (and at least the Soviets realized early on that they needed to get out and left behind a friendly regime that lasted some time, and might have lasted longer if not for the dissolution of the Soviet Union - what has NATO achieved so far in Afghanistan, after 15 years?).
    And I'd actually go farther than Smoothie, US triumphalism is way overdone even in regard to the 2nd world war, at least concerning the European theatre.

    US triumphalism is way overdone even in regard to the 2nd world war,

    Because a lot of it (not all) is myth. Each time I hear this ad nauseam talk about US soldier “being the best in the world”, my argument is simple–look at Wehrmacht circa 1941-43, then we’ll talk.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    Yes, but that's not even what I was getting at...while undoubtedly the American contribution in the 2nd world war was important, there's no doubt in my mind that the Eastern front was decisive (and I'm just old enough to have talked to people who lived through that war, there was never the slightest doubt about that). The way WW2 is commemorated in the US is really strange to me (also odd how the Pacific war seems to have been deemphasized...I suppose because it isn't sufficiently politically correct nowadays).
  137. iffen says:
    @German_reader
    Compared to Vietnam, the Soviet record in Afghanistan wasn't really that bad (and at least the Soviets realized early on that they needed to get out and left behind a friendly regime that lasted some time, and might have lasted longer if not for the dissolution of the Soviet Union - what has NATO achieved so far in Afghanistan, after 15 years?).
    And I'd actually go farther than Smoothie, US triumphalism is way overdone even in regard to the 2nd world war, at least concerning the European theatre.

    If we have never won any wars how did Pax Americana come into being and why are we just now going into the Decline and Fall?

    Read More
    • Replies: @neutral
    The same reason why the earliest Islamic armies were able to conquer so much land so fast, the Byzantines and the Persians fought a costly war that so badly depleted both sides that it was easy pickings for another force that came along.
    , @Art
    If we have never won any wars how did Pax Americana come into being and why are we just now going into the Decline and Fall?

    Oh my - another diversion hasbara comment away from the current evil created by Israel in the ME.

    All of Stockholm DC is abuzz with the Jew Russia big lie and we are picking the bones of WWII - shame.

    What matters is the evil of today - not yesterday.

    Peace --- Art
  138. @Anatoly Karlin
    I've been pretty solid in my Trump support, despite occasional "zradas" (defeats/betrayals).

    This is the first time however that I am genuinely questioning his intentions and goodwill.

    If Trump in the end does goes down the path of corporatist neocon warmongering, he will lose and the vision he outlined at his inauguration speech will die as well. Very sad!

    Personal impressions of good will are not a sound basis for building a political movement.

    Read More
  139. @Andrei Martyanov

    US triumphalism is way overdone even in regard to the 2nd world war,
     
    Because a lot of it (not all) is myth. Each time I hear this ad nauseam talk about US soldier "being the best in the world", my argument is simple--look at Wehrmacht circa 1941-43, then we'll talk.

    Yes, but that’s not even what I was getting at…while undoubtedly the American contribution in the 2nd world war was important, there’s no doubt in my mind that the Eastern front was decisive (and I’m just old enough to have talked to people who lived through that war, there was never the slightest doubt about that). The way WW2 is commemorated in the US is really strange to me (also odd how the Pacific war seems to have been deemphasized…I suppose because it isn’t sufficiently politically correct nowadays).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    also odd how the Pacific war seems to have been deemphasized…I suppose because it isn’t sufficiently politically correct nowadays
     
    Very well could be. But European Theater in WW II, of course, is key in US mythology of exceptionalism.
    , @utu

    " is really strange to me (also odd how the Pacific war seems to have been deemphasized…I suppose because it isn’t sufficiently politically correct nowadays)."
     
    Absolutely. There is no Jewish angle. Pacific theatre does not forwards the Holocaust narrative. American racism is too exposed when dealing with Pacific Campaign. Many, many atrocities. Practically zero Japanese POWs. Towards the end American soldiers were incentivized with ice cream for desert offer for bringing live Japanese for a change to improve statistics.
    , @neutral

    Pacific war seems to have been deemphasized
     
    Because it was not important, with the Europe theater won, the Soviet Union rapidly swept through Manchuria with no great setbacks, with enough time the complete invasion of Japan would have been completely feasible. Even with zero US involvement, they would have pushed out Japan completely from China, and even with its full strength navy, it would have eventually overcome by Soviet air power and industrial base that could not be answered by Japan due to its lack of industry and resources.

    Even in Europe, the only front that really mattered was the eastern front, all other win/failures of the other fronts were largely determined on what was happening on the eastern front.

    , @anonymous
    The entire war in North America is: Hitler wanting to kill Jews and the need to stop this -- and to stop right wing 'Hitler-like' behaviour and thinking once and for all.

    That's it.

    It's just a simple-minded morality play to help make people behave in the way jewish power wants them to. Beyond that it serves no purpose to understand or remember it at all.
  140. jconsley says:
    @Seraphim
    It is known that the apparition of Haley's Comet presage wars. Do we have it? No, but we have Nikki Haley.

    U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley, Feb. 16, 2017:
    "“I just put out to the members of the Seucrity Council to help me understand: When we have so much going on in the world, why is it that every single month we’re going to sit down and have a hearing where all they do is obsess over Israel?...
    The Security Council is supposed to discuss how to maintain international peace and security. But at our meeting on the Middle East, the discussion was not about Hizballah’s illegal build-up of rockets in Lebanon. It was not about the money and weapons Iran provides to terrorists. It was not about how we defeat ISIS. It was not about how we hold Bashar al-Assad accountable for the slaughter of hundreds and thousands of civilians. No, instead, the meeting focused on criticizing Israel, the one true democracy in the Middle East. I am new around here, but I understand that’s how the Council has operated, month after month, for decades.
    I’m here to say the United States will not turn a blind eye to this anymore. I am here to underscore the ironclad support of the United States for Israel. I’m here to emphasize the United States is determined to stand up to the UN’s anti-Israel bias. We will never repeat the terrible mistake of Resolution 2334 and allow one-sided Security Council resolutions to condemn Israel. Instead, we will push for action on the real threats we face in the Middle East...
    It is the UN’s anti-Israel bias that is long overdue for change. The United States will not hesitate to speak out against these biases in defense of our friend and ally, Israel".

    What are the 'real threats'? Assad, Russia, Iran, Sarin gas. Understood?

    Poor Nikki — what about Resolution 242? Is it now 69 U.N. Resolutions that Israel has ignored along with all international law? Does the United States recognize international law Nikki?

    Thus far, your comments and representation display you total lack of knowledge. At least consider the pros and cons of situations before forming an opinion. It seems you are regurgitating whatever lies you are told.

    Perhaps Trump selected you because you only watch TV and never read books, magazines, etc. You no doubt make Trump feel comfortable with your TV knowledge. It may help to read some State Department cables and emails to learn about United States’ policies. Try not to be discouraged by the fact that most policies are hypocritical where Israel is involved.

    Read More
  141. @Tulip
    Why would Assad do it, assuming he is winning the civil war?

    First, Assad requires political backers to stay in power, and if his backers dessert, he will fall.

    Second, during the civil war, his political backers have no choice but to back Assad, or otherwise their faction could fall from power.

    Third, after the civil war, his political backers could very well consider new leadership.

    Fourth, by using poison gas, a clear violation of the Geneva Conventions, Assad and his backers are now international war criminals.

    Fifth, if his backers move against Assad, they could all end up in front of the Hague.

    Sixth, its a nice FU to Donald Trump and America, as Assad doesn't need their support.

    Seventh, it either brings the Donald into an unwinnable quagmire, weakening America, or Donald looks more like Ronald (McDonald).

    If it looks like he is going to win the war, and Russia and Iran have his back (in terms of money and arms), gassing these people helps cement the support of his backers, at the expense of pissing off some nations he neither needs nor likes.

    This theory doesn’t hold up. Assad and his backers already have blood on their hands. He doesn’t need a new atrocity to cement their loyalty.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tulip
    I disagree. If we assume he has previously gassed his own people (which Mr. Karlin seems to believe is in question), there was the international deal where he gave up all his chemical weapons, so maybe there was some flexibility. This attack seals his backers fate: if Assad goes down, all his supporters will go down with him also. All the old fires of hatred have been rekindled, with only Assad to protect the Alawites from being the next Assyrians. A pretty cheap life insurance policy for a NFG leader like Assad!
  142. Rurik says:
    Read More
    • Replies: @El Dato

    Tillerson Warns Russia "Coalition Steps Are Underway To Remove Assad"
     
    Who the hell is that "Coalition"?

    USA + Israel + Saudi Arabia/Qatar + France/Germany/UK + stuff like Micronesia?

    All of RAPO, I mean NATO, too?
    , @Andrei Martyanov
    Evidently Trump debunked earlier CNN reports about mulling military options and that he spoke about some lawmakers about it. In Russian, but Google Translate will do fine:

    http://tass.ru/mezhdunarodnaya-panorama/4161375

    Tillerson's words are too early to interpret without full context.
  143. AP says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    I find the idea of America’s military/political leaders choosing to commit national suicide under such a scenario (Russia destroying America’s military capability and ability to project power outside the USA through conventional means) to be extremely unlikely.
     
    I don't. Without going deep into, now firmly established, dysfunctionality of the US State, which is horrendously dangerous in itself, the war, and I am not being original here, has the mind of its own once it starts. The war with Russia, if it happens either in Syria or, let alone, in and around Ukraine, will have a very different military and political logic.

    1. Casualties sustained will be massive in a very short period of time.
    2. US will have a major political crisis at home.
    3. Reputational losses will be huge.
    4. Geopolitical dynamics will change drastically and in a very short time
    5. This point is for US further internal US contingencies and here one can only imagine what it may be and what political forces may emerge. Military-intelligence coup? Easily.
    6. ...

    So,

    Leader may be foolish or short-sighted, but I really doubt they have a Nazi-like or Islamic-like mentality of preferring total national destruction if they don’t have their way.
     
    But this is a defining feature of, at least, most neocon cabal. But let's forget about Korea, where MacArthur was forced by Truman out of his position because he wanted to use nukes, same goes for Vietnam, where nuking it was considered. US is a no stranger to this kind of military thinking. What happens if Russia destroys a single Carrier Battle Group, and probability of this is not a zero at all? Do you know what the loss of even single carrier means for US as a whole, forget US Navy. Do not listen to me, read what Admiral Elmo Zumwalt thought about it during and after his tenure as CNO. We can only imagine what pressures will arise. While it is true that neocons are cowards, it is also true that we really do not know what is their threshold of rationality. You have to understand, for decades now US political and military "elite" was formed by this ad nauseam mantra of American exceptionalism in everything. Are you ready to predict the results of this "parting syndrome"? I am not. I can only discuss contingencies and one of them, and I guarantee you--it is being considered in Russia, is precisely of US "top" going completely rogue and insane, not that it is not happening as I type this. This contingency can not and must not be excluded from serious elaborations.

    P.S. Lowlife Albright's desire to sacrifice 500,000 Iraqi children for "democracy" was not an accidental misspeak--this is how many in D.C. think and live. In the end, if not for courageous British General Sir. Jackson, Wesley Clark would start killing Russian paratroopers at Slatina airfield. He issued the orders. Since then things only got worse.

    1. Casualties sustained will be massive in a very short period of time.
    2. US will have a major political crisis at home.
    3. Reputational losses will be huge.
    4. Geopolitical dynamics will change drastically and in a very short time
    5. This point is for US further internal US contingencies and here one can only imagine what it may be and what political forces may emerge. Military-intelligence coup? Easily.

    Agree with points 1-4. Point 5 is questionable, at best. More likely impeachment or other political solution.

    “Leader may be foolish or short-sighted, but I really doubt they have a Nazi-like or Islamic-like mentality of preferring total national destruction if they don’t have their way.”

    But this is a defining feature of, at least, most neocon cabal.

    For a nuclear war to be triggered you would have both the military bosses and the political elite (neocons) to be on board. I doubt that either group would want to see the USA disappear from the Earth just because its conventional military has been wrecked by Russia. Both is even less likely. Neocons are troublesome but they aren’t suicidal fanatics. Homicidal ones, sure.

    But let’s forget about Korea, where MacArthur was forced by Truman out of his position because he wanted to use nukes, same goes for Vietnam, where nuking it was considered.

    Neither North Korea/China in the 1950s, nor Vietnam would have been in a position to remove the USA from existence in retaliation for a nuke strike against them. So the situation is completely different from potentially nuking Russia if Russia destroys the US conventional military.

    I do see your point, and agree that there is a very high chance of the USA going nuclear if its army was demolished by a country without massive nuclear response capability. Russia is just a different ballgame.

    Lowlife Albright’s desire to sacrifice 500,000 Iraqi children for “democracy” was not an accidental misspeak–this is how many in D.C. think and live.

    Sacrificing 500,000 Iraqi children is not the same thing as sacrificing 300+ million Americans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    Russia is just a different ballgame.
     
    She is, but I am talking about contingency. Albeit you do make valid points and we are not in disagreement in principle. But that what contingency planning is all about--preparing for different scenarios. Is scenario with going nuclear possible? Absolutely! How probable it is? That's what General Staffs exist for--to give assessments and give probabilities.

    Sacrificing 500,000 Iraqi children is not the same thing as sacrificing 300+ million Americans.
     
    Maybe not, but there are many people who would first consider counter-force. first. Counter-value, that is a different game altogether.
  144. neutral says:
    @iffen
    If we have never won any wars how did Pax Americana come into being and why are we just now going into the Decline and Fall?

    The same reason why the earliest Islamic armies were able to conquer so much land so fast, the Byzantines and the Persians fought a costly war that so badly depleted both sides that it was easy pickings for another force that came along.

    Read More
  145. annamaria says:
    @utu
    "it is US which is hysterical" - It is just their normal state of mind. It is really a tactical MO. You have to convince people. Somebody said that it is tribute to American people that they have to be lied dot but it is not that they can be deceived so easily. Hysteria does the job.

    Russia appears to be calm and stoic only because people there are passive because they know that the decisions will be made for them as usual and they have no say in it since times immemorial while in the US there is still a presence that the people rule.

    “…while in the US there is still a presence that the people rule.”
    Not even funny. Kindergarden.

    Read More
  146. annamaria says:
    @SolontoCroesus

    I will tell you that attack on children yesterday had a big impact on me, big impact. That was a horrible, horrible thing. And I’ve been watching it, and seeing it, and it doesn’t get any worse than that… And I will tell you it’s already happened, that my attitude toward Syria and Assad has changed very much.
     
    Marcus Crassus had a similar reaction to an attack on children; specifically, his son, Publius, who, at the battle at Carrhae in 54 BC, was captured by the Parthians and returned to his father in pieces, his head on a pike as the Parthians counterattacked General Crassus's depleted and demoralized forces. https://deadliestblogpage.wordpress.com/2013/06/09/disaster-in-the-desert-parthians-destroy-crassus-army-at-carrhae/

    Father Marcus was old and bold and wealthy; hubris led him to ignore sound advice and to reject the Parthian's offers of a settlement. A member of the Roman triumvirate Caesar - Pompey - Crassus, he felt compelled to match Caesar's military feats in Gaul; understood the economic constraints Pompey was attempting to resolve -- the Roman populace had become accustomed to being provided with bread, and the Empire needed to conquer and secure sufficient grain to satisfy that need. Finally, agitator Cato had just arrived in Rome with a sizable fortune in booty, challenging the greedy Crassus to match-or-fold.

    The situations the US involves itself in today are not unique in human history because human nature retains many of the same character traits.

    Donald Trump should think again, of Marcus Crassus, and imagine ISIS presenting to him the head of his child, Barron Trump on a pike.

    It is not Trump who needs a lesson – it is a set of proverbial Cheneys in the deep state/CIA

    Read More
  147. @Andrei Martyanov
    "There is a literature and a common perception that the Soviets were defeated and driven from Afghanistan. This is not true. When the Soviets left Afghanistan in 1989, they did so in a coordinated, deliberate, professional manner, leaving behind a functioning government, an improved military and an advisory and economic effort insuring the continued viability of the government. The withdrawal was based on a coordinated diplomatic, economic and military plan permitting Soviet forces to withdraw in good order and the Afghan government to survive. The Democratic Republic of Afghanistan (DRA)managed to hold on despite the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Only then, with the loss of Soviet support and the increased efforts by the Mujahideen (holy warriors) and Pakistan, did the DRA slide toward defeat in April 1992. The Soviet effort to withdraw in good order was well executed and can serve as a model for other disengagements from similar nations."

    http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/documents/Withdrawal.pdf

    All questions to US Army Command And General Staff College in Leavenworth, KS.

    Actually, when the US left Vietnam, they left a functioning government and an improving military situation. It was the removal of US air cover and shipments of military equipment at the behest of the Democratic dominated Congress that led to the fall of South Vietnam in 1975. With massive amounts of material shipped in by the Soviets and with air superiority, North Vietnam was able to defeat the quickly depleted South.
    So, less than 20 years later, things rather repeated themselves in Afghanistan, although political collapse of the Soviet Union precipitated the latter, not Legislative action.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    True, but by that time US already lost the will to fight while for Vietnamese it was a matter of national unification. Political and (geo)political dynamics in Afghanistan was very different, not to mention Afghanistan's ethnic fragmentation. In the end, Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, reasons for it, were dramatically different from Vietnam. Islamization of Fergana Valley by mid-1970s was a grave threat, as today's events demonstrate fully and Russia will one way or another deal with this threat, with which she started dealing since 1979. While "domino" principle was a contrived ideological construct, security of Russian geopolitical belly is not. As General Gromov stated in NYT:

    "In fact, we were the first to defend Western civilization against the attacks of Muslim fanatics. No one thanked us. On the contrary, everyone was impeding our actions: The United States, NATO, Iran, Pakistan, even China."

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/12/opinion/12iht-edrogozin.html?_r=0

    The difference between two wars is rather startling.
  148. annamaria says:
    @iffen
    US military record of the last 70 years is rather unimpressive

    Right, no way that they match Soviet/Russia's impressive list of successes like ripping those Afghans a new one for example.

    Your former Soviet Jewish mom forgot to tell you that when Soviets came to Afghanistan, they had built a university in Kabul (still exists) and provided education for the first ever cohort of university-trained Afghan women, including medical doctors. Compare this to a sky-rocketing production of heroin in Afghanistan upon the US “victory” there. Other amazing US achievements include the rise of Al Qaeda and Taliban and the pitiful state of education and health care there.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    Well, that just tells us what fools the Ukrainians, the Baltic peoples and East Europeans are.
  149. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @AP

    1. Casualties sustained will be massive in a very short period of time.
    2. US will have a major political crisis at home.
    3. Reputational losses will be huge.
    4. Geopolitical dynamics will change drastically and in a very short time
    5. This point is for US further internal US contingencies and here one can only imagine what it may be and what political forces may emerge. Military-intelligence coup? Easily.
     
    Agree with points 1-4. Point 5 is questionable, at best. More likely impeachment or other political solution.

    "Leader may be foolish or short-sighted, but I really doubt they have a Nazi-like or Islamic-like mentality of preferring total national destruction if they don’t have their way."

    But this is a defining feature of, at least, most neocon cabal.
     
    For a nuclear war to be triggered you would have both the military bosses and the political elite (neocons) to be on board. I doubt that either group would want to see the USA disappear from the Earth just because its conventional military has been wrecked by Russia. Both is even less likely. Neocons are troublesome but they aren't suicidal fanatics. Homicidal ones, sure.

    But let’s forget about Korea, where MacArthur was forced by Truman out of his position because he wanted to use nukes, same goes for Vietnam, where nuking it was considered.
     
    Neither North Korea/China in the 1950s, nor Vietnam would have been in a position to remove the USA from existence in retaliation for a nuke strike against them. So the situation is completely different from potentially nuking Russia if Russia destroys the US conventional military.

    I do see your point, and agree that there is a very high chance of the USA going nuclear if its army was demolished by a country without massive nuclear response capability. Russia is just a different ballgame.

    Lowlife Albright’s desire to sacrifice 500,000 Iraqi children for “democracy” was not an accidental misspeak–this is how many in D.C. think and live.
     
    Sacrificing 500,000 Iraqi children is not the same thing as sacrificing 300+ million Americans.

    Russia is just a different ballgame.

    She is, but I am talking about contingency. Albeit you do make valid points and we are not in disagreement in principle. But that what contingency planning is all about–preparing for different scenarios. Is scenario with going nuclear possible? Absolutely! How probable it is? That’s what General Staffs exist for–to give assessments and give probabilities.

    Sacrificing 500,000 Iraqi children is not the same thing as sacrificing 300+ million Americans.

    Maybe not, but there are many people who would first consider counter-force. first. Counter-value, that is a different game altogether.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    Agree option didn't work, but - I agree with this.
  150. @Randal

    I doubt either country will directly attack the other. In the extremely unlikelihood of such an attack, an escalation to nuclear would be even more unlikely, given that this will result in the end of both civilizations and annihilation of both peoples. It is silly to think that it’s even possible.....In fact, I would put the odds of a nuclear response to American troops installing a puppet government and occupying Moscow at below 50%. Because as in the case of Napoleon’s or the Polish occupation, Russia can come back from that. It’s never coming back from a nuclear war.
     
    That's not how anybody really expects a superpower confrontation to lead to nuclear war, though.

    Most escalation scenarios since mutually assured destruction became generally accepted involve a repeated series of escalations, each assuming the other side will step back from the brink in response, or a loss of command and control giving rise to uncontrolled or mistaken releases, until at some point one side is faced, or thinks it is faced, with a stark "use it or lose it" choice with only a few minutes to decide.

    It's not that likely that even open war would lead to an uncontrolled nuclear exchange. but how much risk are you prepared to accept when the consequences are that serious?

    The real concern today, though, is that there might be American politicians and military men who actually believe that their first strike counterforce capabilities combined with missile defences to mop up surviving attacks actually could limit damage to the continental US to acceptable levels.

    Yes.

    I wrote already on Twitter that if Trump does start a war (which could immediately lead to WW3), then I’m With Her.

    Read More
  151. anon says: • Disclaimer

    obvious false flag with clear media collusion

    Trump hasn’t done anything

    stop being hysterical

    I find the idea of America’s military/political leaders choosing to commit national suicide under such a scenario…

    National?

    The key here is the people deciding don’t see America as their nation.

    1) US politics is even more dominated by the banking mafia then the neocons and the banking mafia are preparing to finish off the US and move to China.

    2) The banking mafia like to have a single global power they can use as their debt collector and the move to China leaves both US and Russia so from their point of view Russia/US destroying each other is in their interest – apart from the nuke risk.

    3) The banking mafia are psychopaths so they judge risk differently.

    If Putin wants to react he should go for the banks – an escalating pissing contest with the US is what they want – or more likely what their psycho half wants.

    In particular get some tame economists to make the economic case against usury – everyone hates the banks already so all it needs is accredited people making the case against the usury poisoned central banking mafia business model to undermine the current hegemony.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill
    You would think this would be fairly easy in the US. Several Founding Fathers were not fans of the banks. Patrick Henry, in particular, was not a fan.

    Can't you see Ted Cruz 'splainin to Lucy that Patrick Henry was a big socialist whom we should ignore?
  152. The Internet is in an uproar over the Syrian issue. “The_Donald” on Reddit is full of dedicated Trump supporters asking Trump to be careful about false flags and to stick to his comments from 2013 – when Trump said that Obama should abstain from interfering in Syria.

    Read More
  153. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @German_reader
    Yes, but that's not even what I was getting at...while undoubtedly the American contribution in the 2nd world war was important, there's no doubt in my mind that the Eastern front was decisive (and I'm just old enough to have talked to people who lived through that war, there was never the slightest doubt about that). The way WW2 is commemorated in the US is really strange to me (also odd how the Pacific war seems to have been deemphasized...I suppose because it isn't sufficiently politically correct nowadays).

    also odd how the Pacific war seems to have been deemphasized…I suppose because it isn’t sufficiently politically correct nowadays

    Very well could be. But European Theater in WW II, of course, is key in US mythology of exceptionalism.

    Read More
  154. Sherman says:
    @Art
    It’s official – the King has consented, Salome has beheaded Steve the Baptist.

    Steve Bannon has been removed from the National Security Council. He has been replaced by an operative friend of Ivanka.

    The man who had the populist strategy that elected Trump has had his head handed to him by the Jew couple - Ivanka and Jared Kushner.

    Trump is surrounded by Jews – we can forget peace in the middle east. We can expect Big Jew economics. We can expect the loss of internet freedom.

    Hey Genius

    “Big Jew economics”.

    Is this the reason you’re unemployed?

    Peace
    Sherm

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art
    Hey Sherm,

    Rush over to the Golan - the US government is killing Arabs for you.

    Fresh Arab blood man - hurry hurry!

    p.s. What pride you must have in your US Jew cousins.
  155. utu says:
    @German_reader
    Yes, but that's not even what I was getting at...while undoubtedly the American contribution in the 2nd world war was important, there's no doubt in my mind that the Eastern front was decisive (and I'm just old enough to have talked to people who lived through that war, there was never the slightest doubt about that). The way WW2 is commemorated in the US is really strange to me (also odd how the Pacific war seems to have been deemphasized...I suppose because it isn't sufficiently politically correct nowadays).

    ” is really strange to me (also odd how the Pacific war seems to have been deemphasized…I suppose because it isn’t sufficiently politically correct nowadays).”

    Absolutely. There is no Jewish angle. Pacific theatre does not forwards the Holocaust narrative. American racism is too exposed when dealing with Pacific Campaign. Many, many atrocities. Practically zero Japanese POWs. Towards the end American soldiers were incentivized with ice cream for desert offer for bringing live Japanese for a change to improve statistics.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    Absolutely. There is no Jewish angle. Pacific theatre does not forwards the Holocaust narrative
     
    you were spot on until this idiocy

    . American racism is too exposed when dealing with Pacific Campaign.
     
    and the Japanese weren't racists?

    what about the Nazis? was there any racism there? Or is all racism American racism?

    Jesus fucking Christ

    ask the Koreans or the Chinese if they ever saw a Japanese racist utu
  156. Art says:
    @iffen
    If we have never won any wars how did Pax Americana come into being and why are we just now going into the Decline and Fall?

    If we have never won any wars how did Pax Americana come into being and why are we just now going into the Decline and Fall?

    Oh my – another diversion hasbara comment away from the current evil created by Israel in the ME.

    All of Stockholm DC is abuzz with the Jew Russia big lie and we are picking the bones of WWII – shame.

    What matters is the evil of today – not yesterday.

    Peace — Art

    Read More
  157. iffen says:
    @annamaria
    Your former Soviet Jewish mom forgot to tell you that when Soviets came to Afghanistan, they had built a university in Kabul (still exists) and provided education for the first ever cohort of university-trained Afghan women, including medical doctors. Compare this to a sky-rocketing production of heroin in Afghanistan upon the US "victory" there. Other amazing US achievements include the rise of Al Qaeda and Taliban and the pitiful state of education and health care there.

    Well, that just tells us what fools the Ukrainians, the Baltic peoples and East Europeans are.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill
    Why, are they inviting the Afghans to settle in their countries?
  158. Bill says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Russia has no conventional means of retaliating in the Middle East.
     
    Stop writing crap on the subject you have no idea about.

    https://tools.wmflabs.org/geohack/geohack.php?pagename=Engels-2_%28air_base%29&params=51_28_52_N_046_12_38_E_

    I’m curious if you could recommend a book sketching out what the “order of battle” would be like in a conventional conflict between NATO and Russia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    I’m curious if you could recommend a book sketching out what the “order of battle” would be like in a conventional conflict between NATO and Russia.
     
    Not from the top of my head. If we are to speak about real war, not some kind of Clanciesque BS such as Friedman's of STRATFOR fame delusions immediately following Crimea's return to Russia, in which he described how NATO will be destroying Russian Armed Forces. Let me think about it, I am not ready to suggest yet anything in English worthy of serious considerations. Some information, however, you may find on internet and put together a little bit. I may address this issue eventually in my blog.
    , @Randal

    I’m curious if you could recommend a book sketching out what the “order of battle” would be like in a conventional conflict between NATO and Russia.
     
    The trouble with this is that nobody knows what a world war will look like until it happens (or perhaps a tiny minority get it right, but there's no way to tell in advance which of the multitudinous minority viewpoints will turn out to have been correct). Consider how the first two world wars were expected to go, contrasted with how they actually went. Then consider that even when things seem to have worked spectacularly well (eg Germany in France in 1940), it turns out they only went that well because a few generals in the field disobeyed orders.

    The problem is even greater today with so much untried technology on both sides and no way to predict how these systems will interact in large scale fighting, or what will work and what won't.

    You can go with the manipulative mainstream fairy tales promoted say by the likes of RAND to further establishment or lobby political goals (consider for instance their reassuringly confident speculations as to how safe it will be for the US to go to war with China as long as it does so soon, or their conveniently alarmist speculations about the supposed Russian menace in eastern Europe). Or you can go with anti-establishment views emphasizing how unreliable the military industrial lobby's claims are and highlighting all the possible wonder weapons the opposition might field. Or you can do the same for the other side's experts.

    But in the end, the only honest truth is that nobody really knows. And while we are all entitled to speculate, it's sheer dishonesty to claim to have any detailed idea how it will turn out, beyond the general truth that bigger gdp usually wins in the long run (now become rather dubious in the age of the nuclear peace and mutually assured destruction).

    Even bare orders of battle tell you little or nothing really useful, because nobody really knows which bits of each force will prove decisively important and which will prove to be irrelevant.

    So the only rational answer to the question "should we go to war?" with a rival great power should always be: if you have any choice at all, then no, it's just too risky.
  159. El Dato says:
    @Rurik
    shit

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-06/stocks-tank-after-tillerson-warns-russia-coalition-steps-underway-remove-assad

    Tillerson Warns Russia “Coalition Steps Are Underway To Remove Assad”

    Who the hell is that “Coalition”?

    USA + Israel + Saudi Arabia/Qatar + France/Germany/UK + stuff like Micronesia?

    All of RAPO, I mean NATO, too?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    Who the hell is that “Coalition”?
     
    every nation with a Rothschild central bank
  160. neutral says:
    @German_reader
    Yes, but that's not even what I was getting at...while undoubtedly the American contribution in the 2nd world war was important, there's no doubt in my mind that the Eastern front was decisive (and I'm just old enough to have talked to people who lived through that war, there was never the slightest doubt about that). The way WW2 is commemorated in the US is really strange to me (also odd how the Pacific war seems to have been deemphasized...I suppose because it isn't sufficiently politically correct nowadays).

    Pacific war seems to have been deemphasized

    Because it was not important, with the Europe theater won, the Soviet Union rapidly swept through Manchuria with no great setbacks, with enough time the complete invasion of Japan would have been completely feasible. Even with zero US involvement, they would have pushed out Japan completely from China, and even with its full strength navy, it would have eventually overcome by Soviet air power and industrial base that could not be answered by Japan due to its lack of industry and resources.

    Even in Europe, the only front that really mattered was the eastern front, all other win/failures of the other fronts were largely determined on what was happening on the eastern front.

    Read More
  161. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @Rurik
    shit

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-06/stocks-tank-after-tillerson-warns-russia-coalition-steps-underway-remove-assad

    Evidently Trump debunked earlier CNN reports about mulling military options and that he spoke about some lawmakers about it. In Russian, but Google Translate will do fine:

    http://tass.ru/mezhdunarodnaya-panorama/4161375

    Tillerson’s words are too early to interpret without full context.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    Tillerson’s words are too early to interpret without full context.
     
    God I hope you're right

    I was planning on leaving these shores if the war hag won, and now I fear Trump too may have been a ruse

    if he goes into Syria, then all bets are off, he's just another Zionist bitch
  162. joe webb says:

    right. and…

    Subject: Fw: NYTimes.com: Assad’s History of Chemical Attacks, and Other Atrocities (maybe)

    Check out the last photo in this jewyorktimes piece, the one which is claimed to be a crater from a Scud Missile, an old Russian missile, not accurate, but deadly of course. A wiki search got this…”Other countries used the imprecise Scud as a crude device for lobbing a ton or two of high explosives somewhere into an opponent’s cities.”

    Read more: http://www.airspacemag.com/history-of-flight/whats-a-scud-4510864/#lVtSJwJWoWD44QMK.99
    Save 47% when you subscribe to Air & Space magazine http://bit.ly/NaSX4X
    Follow us: @AirSpaceMag on Twitter

    The only way that crater and surrounding proximate area could be the impact spot of a Scud, would be if it was a dud. ” a ton or two of high explosives ” would have leveled a couple square blocks of everything, especially inasmuch as the picture shows low density of lousy buildings.

    My expertise is based on training in the army on 105 Howitzers, what people call artillery. Also, normal reasoning comes into play. The article also states that locals said it was a Scud missile. Where are the experts?,

    So more fakery in images and text, from the jewspaper of record….all the news that fits the narrative of Bad Assad, Bad Russian, etc.

    It is All for Israel, by any means necessary. Let us be clear, Assad and Hizbollah, and Iran, and Hamas, etc….oppose the state of Israel. That is why Assad must be killed. And Trump told us that he was going to be a neutral arbiter in Israel/Palestine. Trump caving in to the jews.

    Now Trump is talking about going into Syria. 100 people are killed and we send in the marines. Gas is bad, but so are bullets, and shrapnel, etc. Hysteria over Gas. Sort of like Knives, not guns. Knives are seen as scarier, but they are not as effective as bullets.

    Assad would be foolish to gas anybody at this time, when , 1, he is winning, 2, it is bad PR, 3. Trump earlier a few months ago, said No More Invasions, etc..

    Sarin, from reading up a bit on wiki, is a liquid and can be delivered by small things like mortars or artillery shells. I watched Tucker Carlson on Fox last night…rolled over by a square-jawed Republican tough guy who declared that “fixed-wing” aircraft were observed at the same time. And Isis etc. who Obongo funded couple years ago for attacks on Syria,. does not have fixed-wing aircraft….Sounds authoritative. Good liar is all this guy is.

    Liar in the sense that there is no, even close to 100%, certainty that Assad dun it. We get endless jewstories on the atrocities of Assad, but close to zero stories on the atrocities of Isis and the dozens of jihadist groups, who , if for no other reason than that they are somewhat limited to smaller weapons, wind up killing civilians more, Probably, than Assad.

    Plus, to get the emotional brain all charged up….what is worse than Sarin gas?….ooooyeah…getting your head chopped off , and what is worse than that? doing it while you are alive. Now there is some great propaganda material. And, there is some good evidence that the wild and crazy jihadists like to do this, like our closer to home savages…the mexicans.

    Assad beheads kids! Sort of like the Incubator Babies of Iraq, the story ginned-jewed up by Tom Lantos, the Jew Congressman from my neck of the woods in SF area. If memory serves. Babies snatched from their incubators and left on the floor to die. What were Saddam’s soldiers going to use the incubators for?

    Incubating nerve gas of course. (I always tell you when I am making things up, the last so qualifying )

    Trump seems to have rolled over to the jews. Well, I have been saying that Trump is only the first phase of the counter-revolution.

    Joe Webb

    Forwarded Message —–
    From: webfoote41
    To: webfoote41@yahoo.com
    Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2017 11:56 AM
    Subject: NYTimes.com: Assad’s History of Chemical Attacks, and Other Atrocities

    Sent by webfoote41@yahoo.com:

    Assad’s History of Chemical Attacks, and Other Atrocities
    BY RUSSELL GOLDMAN

    In six years of war, President Bashar al-Assad of Syria has overseen a campaign of carnage, using both the most modern means and ancient tactics against his people.
    Or, copy

    Read More
  163. Rurik says:
    @utu

    " is really strange to me (also odd how the Pacific war seems to have been deemphasized…I suppose because it isn’t sufficiently politically correct nowadays)."
     
    Absolutely. There is no Jewish angle. Pacific theatre does not forwards the Holocaust narrative. American racism is too exposed when dealing with Pacific Campaign. Many, many atrocities. Practically zero Japanese POWs. Towards the end American soldiers were incentivized with ice cream for desert offer for bringing live Japanese for a change to improve statistics.

    Absolutely. There is no Jewish angle. Pacific theatre does not forwards the Holocaust narrative

    you were spot on until this idiocy

    . American racism is too exposed when dealing with Pacific Campaign.

    and the Japanese weren’t racists?

    what about the Nazis? was there any racism there? Or is all racism American racism?

    Jesus fucking Christ

    ask the Koreans or the Chinese if they ever saw a Japanese racist utu

    Read More
  164. Rurik says:
    @El Dato

    Tillerson Warns Russia "Coalition Steps Are Underway To Remove Assad"
     
    Who the hell is that "Coalition"?

    USA + Israel + Saudi Arabia/Qatar + France/Germany/UK + stuff like Micronesia?

    All of RAPO, I mean NATO, too?

    Who the hell is that “Coalition”?

    every nation with a Rothschild central bank

    Read More
  165. @Anatoly Karlin
    I've been pretty solid in my Trump support, despite occasional "zradas" (defeats/betrayals).

    This is the first time however that I am genuinely questioning his intentions and goodwill.

    If Trump in the end does goes down the path of corporatist neocon warmongering, he will lose and the vision he outlined at his inauguration speech will die as well. Very sad!

    I’d guess he saw the handwriting on the wall that his Presidency couldn’t survive unless he went full neocon. Being victimized by the Deep State can do that to a President, six ways to Sunday.

    It’s jaw,jaw, jaw and war, war, war.

    America on Deep State autopilot.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Being victimized by the Deep State can do that to a President, six ways to Sunday.

    True. It's just sad, though and very disappointing and quite scary. The Deep State is very strong and very powerful.

  166. Bill says:
    @iffen
    Well, that just tells us what fools the Ukrainians, the Baltic peoples and East Europeans are.

    Why, are they inviting the Afghans to settle in their countries?

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    when Soviets came to Afghanistan, they had built a university in Kabul

    Well, that just tells us what fools the Ukrainians, the Baltic peoples and East Europeans are.

    Why, are they inviting the Afghans

    No, they are forgoing having the Russians build MIT on the Baltic and CALTECHSKI in Warsaw.

  167. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @Verymuchalive
    Actually, when the US left Vietnam, they left a functioning government and an improving military situation. It was the removal of US air cover and shipments of military equipment at the behest of the Democratic dominated Congress that led to the fall of South Vietnam in 1975. With massive amounts of material shipped in by the Soviets and with air superiority, North Vietnam was able to defeat the quickly depleted South.
    So, less than 20 years later, things rather repeated themselves in Afghanistan, although political collapse of the Soviet Union precipitated the latter, not Legislative action.

    True, but by that time US already lost the will to fight while for Vietnamese it was a matter of national unification. Political and (geo)political dynamics in Afghanistan was very different, not to mention Afghanistan’s ethnic fragmentation. In the end, Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, reasons for it, were dramatically different from Vietnam. Islamization of Fergana Valley by mid-1970s was a grave threat, as today’s events demonstrate fully and Russia will one way or another deal with this threat, with which she started dealing since 1979. While “domino” principle was a contrived ideological construct, security of Russian geopolitical belly is not. As General Gromov stated in NYT:

    “In fact, we were the first to defend Western civilization against the attacks of Muslim fanatics. No one thanked us. On the contrary, everyone was impeding our actions: The United States, NATO, Iran, Pakistan, even China.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/12/opinion/12iht-edrogozin.html?_r=0

    The difference between two wars is rather startling.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    “In fact, we were the first to defend Western civilization against the attacks of Muslim fanatics. No one thanked us. On the contrary, everyone was impeding our actions..."
    These are the striking words.
    Next time the alleged American patriots Graham and McCain open their mouths to pontificate about "war on terror" and "support the troops," they should be hit back with Gromov's words. Wonder what Sarkozy, Holland, Merkel and other EU warriors would say about the quote, considering that the US/Israel' vassals in Europe have opened wide the doors to Europe for Muslim fanatics. But before that, the US/Israel & vassals made it sure that enough innocent victims were slaughtered and enough cities and villages were destroyed in the Middle East to generate a sizable army of the fanatics.
    Eretz Israel promises to be the most expensive project for the humanity.
  168. Rurik says:
    @Andrei Martyanov
    Evidently Trump debunked earlier CNN reports about mulling military options and that he spoke about some lawmakers about it. In Russian, but Google Translate will do fine:

    http://tass.ru/mezhdunarodnaya-panorama/4161375

    Tillerson's words are too early to interpret without full context.

    Tillerson’s words are too early to interpret without full context.

    God I hope you’re right

    I was planning on leaving these shores if the war hag won, and now I fear Trump too may have been a ruse

    if he goes into Syria, then all bets are off, he’s just another Zionist bitch

    Read More
    • Replies: @alexander
    Hey Rurik,

    Maybe its up to us.

    I think its incumbent upon every single American, who doesn't want our troops coming home in body bags because of ANOTHER bogus LIE, like the one that created the IRAQ CATASTROPHE ........OR,...... to find themselves paying ELEVEN DOLLARS A GALLON at the pump for the next five years.....OR.....to watch our National Debt skyrocket to THIRTY TRILLION DOLLARS....to CALL their representatives and let em know...that we want 100% certainty that the Syrian regime....not ISIS....is responsible for having chemical weapons this time....and USING THEM.....and this event was ,in fact, precipitated by the Syrian Regime..not ISIS ,who was LOSING...and desperate to pull a rabbit out of their hat....We want certainty of this before ONE U.S. BOOT goes on the ground over there....

    No more SIX TRILLION DOLLAR WARS based on FRAUD....Like IRAQ !

    NEVER AGAIN !!


    Until we, the American People get ALL the facts straight..and are SATISFIED...we do not want to GO IN.

    Let there be a thorough and copious INDEPENDENT investigation.....when the results are complete....and they pass the SMELL TEST.....then maybe we can see what next steps should be taken.


    After all, only FOOLS rush into war.

    And we won't be fooled AGAIN.


    Americans should call their representatives and let them know.

    After all, there ARE 320 million of US.

    ...and its OUR blood and treasure !
  169. Tulip says:
    @John Gruskos
    This theory doesn't hold up. Assad and his backers already have blood on their hands. He doesn't need a new atrocity to cement their loyalty.

    I disagree. If we assume he has previously gassed his own people (which Mr. Karlin seems to believe is in question), there was the international deal where he gave up all his chemical weapons, so maybe there was some flexibility. This attack seals his backers fate: if Assad goes down, all his supporters will go down with him also. All the old fires of hatred have been rekindled, with only Assad to protect the Alawites from being the next Assyrians. A pretty cheap life insurance policy for a NFG leader like Assad!

    Read More
  170. Bill says:
    @anon
    obvious false flag with clear media collusion

    Trump hasn't done anything

    stop being hysterical

    I find the idea of America’s military/political leaders choosing to commit national suicide under such a scenario...
     
    National?

    The key here is the people deciding don't see America as their nation.

    1) US politics is even more dominated by the banking mafia then the neocons and the banking mafia are preparing to finish off the US and move to China.

    2) The banking mafia like to have a single global power they can use as their debt collector and the move to China leaves both US and Russia so from their point of view Russia/US destroying each other is in their interest - apart from the nuke risk.

    3) The banking mafia are psychopaths so they judge risk differently.

    If Putin wants to react he should go for the banks - an escalating pissing contest with the US is what they want - or more likely what their psycho half wants.

    In particular get some tame economists to make the economic case against usury - everyone hates the banks already so all it needs is accredited people making the case against the usury poisoned central banking mafia business model to undermine the current hegemony.

    You would think this would be fairly easy in the US. Several Founding Fathers were not fans of the banks. Patrick Henry, in particular, was not a fan.

    Can’t you see Ted Cruz ‘splainin to Lucy that Patrick Henry was a big socialist whom we should ignore?

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    yes - hence Ron Paul's prominence (relatively speaking)

    and it needs that analysis from the Right - Leftists going on about the banks won't work on conservatives
  171. Art says:

    Here we go again — it is Libya all over again. The lie that Gaddafi was going to massacre Benghazi was all ablaze in Stockholm DC – with the result that Libya was destroyed.

    Expect that the same thing is going to happen to Syria over this gas attack business.

    The evil of the Jew and their MSM is endless.

    Peace — Art

    Read More
  172. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @Bill
    I'm curious if you could recommend a book sketching out what the "order of battle" would be like in a conventional conflict between NATO and Russia.

    I’m curious if you could recommend a book sketching out what the “order of battle” would be like in a conventional conflict between NATO and Russia.

    Not from the top of my head. If we are to speak about real war, not some kind of Clanciesque BS such as Friedman’s of STRATFOR fame delusions immediately following Crimea’s return to Russia, in which he described how NATO will be destroying Russian Armed Forces. Let me think about it, I am not ready to suggest yet anything in English worthy of serious considerations. Some information, however, you may find on internet and put together a little bit. I may address this issue eventually in my blog.

    Read More
  173. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Yevardian
    As I thought at the time, and Ron Unz also noted here, Trump was either an utter moron or completely indifferent to actual policy to promote a facelesss POS like Mike Pence to VP.
    I think it should be increasingly obvious that he's a gauche blowhard who's merely a weathervein for whomever advised him last.

    A reminder that the commenteriat of unz.com represents 0% of the US population.

    Pence was a fantastic choice as VP. I don’t agree with him on much but he reassured traditional republican voters which is what won Trump the election. No Pence, no Trump.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Agreed. Objectively I might like someone like, you know, Ron Unz as VP. But that ain't happening last year.
  174. Bill says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    I’m curious if you could recommend a book sketching out what the “order of battle” would be like in a conventional conflict between NATO and Russia.
     
    Not from the top of my head. If we are to speak about real war, not some kind of Clanciesque BS such as Friedman's of STRATFOR fame delusions immediately following Crimea's return to Russia, in which he described how NATO will be destroying Russian Armed Forces. Let me think about it, I am not ready to suggest yet anything in English worthy of serious considerations. Some information, however, you may find on internet and put together a little bit. I may address this issue eventually in my blog.

    Thanks. Will look forward to it!

    Read More
  175. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Bill
    You would think this would be fairly easy in the US. Several Founding Fathers were not fans of the banks. Patrick Henry, in particular, was not a fan.

    Can't you see Ted Cruz 'splainin to Lucy that Patrick Henry was a big socialist whom we should ignore?

    yes – hence Ron Paul’s prominence (relatively speaking)

    and it needs that analysis from the Right – Leftists going on about the banks won’t work on conservatives

    Read More
  176. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Anatoly Karlin
    Heh.

    I had an outline of a post in my drafts on how a US-Russian clash in Syria might escalate, which I expected to write if HRC won. I might brush that off.

    I disagree that attacking Syria automatically means war, at least so long as the Russian military isn't directly targetted. Russia doesn't have any formal military alliances with Syria, so a lack of retaliation in Syria proper will be justifiable - and well-advised, considering massive American aeronaval dominance in the region.

    Of course this would be a humiliation for Putin on at least the order of Euromaidan if not greater, so he will probably be forced to respond somehow, somewhere.

    I disagree that attacking Syria automatically means war, at least so long as the Russian military isn’t directly targetted. Russia doesn’t have any formal military alliances with Syria, so a lack of retaliation in Syria proper will be justifiable – and well-advised, considering massive American aeronaval dominance in the region.

    Israel gets away with attacking Syria all the time. As long as russian interests aren’t harmed, ie: killing russians, or causing Syria to be overrun by Jihadis, it’s hard to see why they should respond at all.

    I’m optimistic that the US does symbolic bombing in Syria, or Bashar steps down and Maher or some other deputy takes over

    Read More
  177. @Diversity Heretic
    Whether or not the attack was a false flag, that picture of Nikki Haley with the photo of the dead child ought to be very high on the list of "Why Women Should Not Be Allowed Anywhere Near Diplomacy." First, Angela Merkel consents to the massive invasion of her country because of a dead Syrian child. Now Nikki Haley wants Americans to be put at risk to kill more Syrians because of another dead Syrian child. Otto von Bismarck was right, women's roles should be confined to children (their own), the church and the kitchen.

    while i may agree with you, to be fair it’s not just women. remember bush senior’s ‘babies in the incubators’?
    but yes, this woman is extremely vile, though her speech was obviously written by her betters/handlers. we have now just pseudo-attractive, completely vacant, talking heads. she’s on a par with sara palin. but, for men, there’s john mccain, and hosts of others.
    women’s proper place is a religious question, i think, and we basically have none now in the west–we’re doomed.

    Read More
  178. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Brabantian
    Key items showing false-flag nature of the Syrian gas attack absurdly attributed to Assad

    (1) Anti-Assad "reporter" Feras Karam tweeted about the gas attack in Syria 24 hours before it happened - Tweet says: "Tomorrow a media campaign will begin to cover intense air raids on the Hama countryside & use of chlorine against civilians"

    (2) Gas masks were distributed 2 days before the attack

    (3) Rescue workers are not wearing protective gear as they would if severely-toxic gas attack had occurred, as Anatoly Karlin notes above

    (4) Pakistani British doctor promoting Syria gas attack story, "who at the time of attack was taking interview requests instead of helping injured flooding in" is Dr Shajul Islam, "used as source by US & UK media, despite facing terror charges for kidnapping & torturing two British journalists in Syria & being struck off the medical register"

    (5) Videos previously exposed as fraudulent are being recycled "A chemical weapons shipment run by Saudi mercenaries [is blown up] before it can be offloaded & used to attack the Syrian army in Hama ... [this story] has turned into Syrian aircraft dropping sarin gas on orphanages ... videos shot in Egypt with the smoke machines are dragged out again."

    (6) Gas attack story is supported by known Soros-funded frauds 'White Helmets' who had previously celebrated alongside Israeli-Saudi backed 'Al Qaeda' extremists after seizing Idlib from Syrian Army forces. White Helmets "have been caught filming their fake videos in places like Egypt & Morocco, using actors, smoke machines & fake blood".

    --

    Very regrettably, Russia & its potentially powerful media, are playing their traditional Israeli-serving role of being inexcusably timid in denouncing blatant false-flag deception & fraud ... Just as Russia signed off on killing Qaddafi & hurling Libya into mass death & chaos

    Destruction of Syria & Assad serves long-being-implemented 1980s Israeli Oded Yinon Plan to destroy & dismember all major countries surrounding mafia state Israel

    Also, major US-backed economics behind the campaign to destroy Syria -
    Map of pipeline alternatives thru Syria:
    (a) Russia-supported pipeline from Iran thru Iraq & Syria
    (b) US-supported pipeline from Qatar thru Saudi Arabia, Jordan & Syria
    http://oil-price.net/cartoons/iran-iraq-syria-pipeline.jpg

    (1) Anti-Assad “reporter” Feras Karam tweeted about the gas attack in Syria 24 hours before it happened – Tweet says: “Tomorrow a media campaign will begin to cover intense air raids on the Hama countryside & use of chlorine against civilians”

    There were alleged chemical (chlorine) attacks occurring for the past week. Also, Hama is not the same as Idlib, where these attacks took place.

    (2) Gas masks were distributed 2 days before the attack

    (3) Rescue workers are not wearing protective gear as they would if severely-toxic gas attack had occurred, as Anatoly Karlin notes above

    So which is it? (2) suggests a false flag (3) suggests a complete fake

    (4) Pakistani British doctor promoting Syria gas attack story, “who at the time of attack was taking interview requests instead of helping injured flooding in” is Dr Shajul Islam, “used as source by US & UK media, despite facing terror charges for kidnapping & torturing two British journalists in Syria & being struck off the medical register”

    Yeah, reality is pretty complicated. Opposition and regime are evil.

    Read More
  179. ……From this dogshit speech:

    “There is an obvious truth here, that must be spoken. The TRUTH is, that Assad, Russia and Iran have NO INTEREST IN PEACE. The illigitimate Syrian govt., led by a man with NO CONSCIENCE, has committed untold atrocities against his people…
    How many more children HAVE TO DIE before Russia cares? The United States sees yesterday’s attack as a disgrace at the highest level [as an aside, a country 'sees' something?]; an assurance, that humanity means NOTHING to the Syrian govt.”
    ————-AMBASSADOR TO U.N. Nikki Haley, former South Carolina governor and genocidal maniac
    (all emphases are hers)

    Read More
    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus

    The United States sees yesterday’s attack as a disgrace at the highest level
     
    UNSC is taking a more measured approach: it is evaluating the evidence.

    Dan Joyner's Arms Control Law blog
    https://armscontrollaw.com/2017/04/06/cw-attack-in-khan-sheikhoun-documents-from-the-unsc-debate-on-responsibility/

    cross-posted an entry from Dr. J P Zanders's blog, The Trench.
    http://www.the-trench.org

    The postings include links to documents being considered by the UNSC and by World Health Organization (WHO).

    On 5 April, the UN Security Council (UNSC) held an emergency debate after the chemical weapon attack against Khan Sheikhoun, Idlib Province, Syria that killed scores of civilians – the death toll is now approaching 100 – and hundreds of other casualties.

    . . .
    In a statement also issued on 5 April, the WHO gave credence to the hypothesis that the agent or one of the agents used might have been sarin
    . . .

    The UNSC emergency session began with a report by Mr Kim Won-soo, High Representative for Disarmament Affairs. The UN Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA) has published his statement.

     

    Nikki Haley is beyond an embarrassment.

    She must go.

    She is a bloodthirsty monster.

    The other day Haley boasted of her success in disrupting a UN conference whose goal is total nuclear disarmament. Haley said she's "realistic;" pointing to the fact that "North Korea and Iran" are among those calling for total denuclearization, she shrieked, "Of course they want nuclear disarmament, they don't abide by the rules anyway."

    IN FACT, Iran has been a signatory to the NPT for many years, and is currently under the "most intense scrutiny of any nuclear state ever," and has been found to be in compliance with its obligations under the NPT and the JCPOA.

    Furthermore, Iran was among those states that, in 1995, agreed to an extension of the NonProliferation Treaty in exchange for the promise of a region-wide conference to urge that the Middle East be a Nuclear Weapons Free Zone.

    Israel was NOT a party to that agreement, but was most definitely the target of the promised conference.

    To date, that conference has not been convened: the USA and Israel object.

    The American people have got to rise up and demand that she be replaced with someone of suitable gravitas.
  180. @Fuzzy
    Where do they get these bloodthirsty women? Is it political ambition that drives them? Make them join the army and fight the wars they are so eager to start.

    What do you mean? They’re everywhere in the culture. People will do, say, or fuck anyone or anything to get that sweet corporate gig. Corporate culture of whores, spineless godless chickens… Not that I can think of an answer, an out. But it seems: We Need Religion! (Not phony Billy Graham, Pat Robertson swill—true belief. But I don’t believe myself, much as I respect Catholicism pre-1960s)
    For one day to day example, who stands up during the Thanksgiving, New Years, etc. football game and rants on about what a moronic waste of time and life it is?

    Read More
    • Replies: @BB753
    Women in the workplace, particularly in the higher rungs of the ladder of power, turn into prostitutes. Because they have nothing else to offer.
  181. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Anatoly Karlin
    I've been pretty solid in my Trump support, despite occasional "zradas" (defeats/betrayals).

    This is the first time however that I am genuinely questioning his intentions and goodwill.

    If Trump in the end does goes down the path of corporatist neocon warmongering, he will lose and the vision he outlined at his inauguration speech will die as well. Very sad!

    The prospects of a conflagration between the United States and Russia are increasing by the day.”

    Or is there a deal between Russia and US? Israel will be allowed to have total control in Syria Lebanon and later Iran US would allow Russia to have total say in Eastern Europe and Ukraine.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon

    Or is there a deal between Russia and US? Israel will be allowed to have total control in Syria Lebanon and later Iran US would allow Russia to have total say in Eastern Europe and Ukraine.
     
    That's not a deal; that's just a delay until the eventual neocon attack on Russia.
  182. @daniel le mouche
    ......From this dogshit speech:

    "There is an obvious truth here, that must be spoken. The TRUTH is, that Assad, Russia and Iran have NO INTEREST IN PEACE. The illigitimate Syrian govt., led by a man with NO CONSCIENCE, has committed untold atrocities against his people...
    How many more children HAVE TO DIE before Russia cares? The United States sees yesterday's attack as a disgrace at the highest level [as an aside, a country 'sees' something?]; an assurance, that humanity means NOTHING to the Syrian govt."
    -------------AMBASSADOR TO U.N. Nikki Haley, former South Carolina governor and genocidal maniac
    (all emphases are hers)

    The United States sees yesterday’s attack as a disgrace at the highest level

    UNSC is taking a more measured approach: it is evaluating the evidence.

    Dan Joyner’s Arms Control Law blog

    https://armscontrollaw.com/2017/04/06/cw-attack-in-khan-sheikhoun-documents-from-the-unsc-debate-on-responsibility/

    cross-posted an entry from Dr. J P Zanders’s blog, The Trench.

    http://www.the-trench.org

    The postings include links to documents being considered by the UNSC and by World Health Organization (WHO).

    On 5 April, the UN Security Council (UNSC) held an emergency debate after the chemical weapon attack against Khan Sheikhoun, Idlib Province, Syria that killed scores of civilians – the death toll is now approaching 100 – and hundreds of other casualties.

    . . .
    In a statement also issued on 5 April, the WHO gave credence to the hypothesis that the agent or one of the agents used might have been sarin
    . . .

    The UNSC emergency session began with a report by Mr Kim Won-soo, High Representative for Disarmament Affairs. The UN Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA) has published his statement.

    Nikki Haley is beyond an embarrassment.

    She must go.

    She is a bloodthirsty monster.

    The other day Haley boasted of her success in disrupting a UN conference whose goal is total nuclear disarmament. Haley said she’s “realistic;” pointing to the fact that “North Korea and Iran” are among those calling for total denuclearization, she shrieked, “Of course they want nuclear disarmament, they don’t abide by the rules anyway.”

    IN FACT, Iran has been a signatory to the NPT for many years, and is currently under the “most intense scrutiny of any nuclear state ever,” and has been found to be in compliance with its obligations under the NPT and the JCPOA.

    Furthermore, Iran was among those states that, in 1995, agreed to an extension of the NonProliferation Treaty in exchange for the promise of a region-wide conference to urge that the Middle East be a Nuclear Weapons Free Zone.

    Israel was NOT a party to that agreement, but was most definitely the target of the promised conference.

    To date, that conference has not been convened: the USA and Israel object.

    The American people have got to rise up and demand that she be replaced with someone of suitable gravitas.

    Read More
  183. alexander says:
    @Rurik

    Tillerson’s words are too early to interpret without full context.
     
    God I hope you're right

    I was planning on leaving these shores if the war hag won, and now I fear Trump too may have been a ruse

    if he goes into Syria, then all bets are off, he's just another Zionist bitch

    Hey Rurik,

    Maybe its up to us.

    I think its incumbent upon every single American, who doesn’t want our troops coming home in body bags because of ANOTHER bogus LIE, like the one that created the IRAQ CATASTROPHE ……..OR,…… to find themselves paying ELEVEN DOLLARS A GALLON at the pump for the next five years…..OR…..to watch our National Debt skyrocket to THIRTY TRILLION DOLLARS….to CALL their representatives and let em know…that we want 100% certainty that the Syrian regime….not ISIS….is responsible for having chemical weapons this time….and USING THEM…..and this event was ,in fact, precipitated by the Syrian Regime..not ISIS ,who was LOSING…and desperate to pull a rabbit out of their hat….We want certainty of this before ONE U.S. BOOT goes on the ground over there….

    No more SIX TRILLION DOLLAR WARS based on FRAUD….Like IRAQ !

    NEVER AGAIN !!

    Until we, the American People get ALL the facts straight..and are SATISFIED…we do not want to GO IN.

    Let there be a thorough and copious INDEPENDENT investigation…..when the results are complete….and they pass the SMELL TEST…..then maybe we can see what next steps should be taken.

    After all, only FOOLS rush into war.

    And we won’t be fooled AGAIN.

    Americans should call their representatives and let them know.

    After all, there ARE 320 million of US.

    …and its OUR blood and treasure !

    Read More
    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
    I wonder ---


    WHERE ARE THE WOMEN?

    Will the Women take to the streets in their thousands and millions and demand NO MORE WAR?


    Will the Women gaze upon the member of their fair sex who represents the American people to the international community and demand that NIKKI HALEY has to go?

    [Does any other nation have the same tragic record of women in power as the USA?

    Are American women proud of Madeleine Albright? Samantha Power? Susan Rice? Condoleeza Rice? Hillary Clinton? ]

    , @RobinG

    Americans should call their representatives and let them know.
     
    Indeed. As it happens, I live in DC, so I have no Senator and my Rep. has no vote, but I can call the White House, and I encourage anyone who has representation to get busy. And after that, we may need to do more, like in 2013.

    White House: 202-456-1414
    Congress members House and Senate: 202- 224-3121

    Here's a call to action:

    US PEACE COUNCIL
    P. O. Box 3105, New Haven, Connecticut 06515
    Telephone: 203-387-0370; Fax: 203-397-2539; Email: amistadmarder@gmail.com

    April 6, 2017 
    EMERGENCY!
    Act Now to Prevent a Trump Attack on Syria! Phone the White House and Congress Now!

     
    Yesterday President Trump — who during the campaign expressed a desire for a new, more restrained approach to the war in Syria — publicly accepted the claim that the Syrian government is using chemical weapons against its own people, including children. He declared: “Lines have been crossed.” He threatened to take some sort of action. The photos are horrific. The media has for several days gone into full hysteria mode, repeating unproven allegations, attributing blame, and relying on biased sources. Is this another Gulf of Tonkin?
     
    This is more than a dangerous moment. It is a full-blown war crisis. It is no secret that President Trump is an impulsive and often ill-informed individual. His Administration in its first months has been buffeted by missteps, defeats, and embarrassments. He may think he “needs a win.” We must make sure his Administration does not think an attack on Syria would be "a win." We have hours, at most a few days to do so.
     
    We have been down this road before. Sophisticated observers have already noted this alleged attack has all the earmarks of a false flag operation. The Syrian government has absolutely no motive for mounting such an attack. (See: Gerry Condon; Patrick Henningsen; and Phyllis Bennis)
     
    As a leader of Veterans for Peace, Gerry Condon, has wisely observed, the sources for the gas attack reports are the rebel forces themselves, their own media, and the "White Helmets" and other Western-funded NGOs who are notorious for creating "regime change" propaganda against the Assad government.  Famed investigative reporter Seymour Hersh has documented that the last large Sarin attack blamed on the Syrian government was carried out by terrorist groups with the support of Turkey and Saudi Arabia.  Hersh also documented that chemical weapons were transported from Libya to U.S.-backed rebel groups in Syria by the CIA and Hillary Clinton's State Department. 

    Yet the mainstream media do not mention any of this. They ask no tough questions. They entertain no doubts. They repeat previous lies that have already been debunked. They unashamedly interview sources which have long been cheerleaders for military intervention in Syria.

    We can stop an attack. In 2013, an immense surge of phone calls to the White House and Congress stayed the hand of President Obama under similar pressure to “do something.” We successfully prevented Obama from attacking Syria in 2013. 

    We can do it again. Pick up that phone! 

    · Call the White House at 202-456-1414
    · Call your Congress members House and Senate at 202- 224-3121

    Yours in peace,

    Alfred L. Marder, President
     
  184. @KA
    Tell me how this works , how it happens. Carl Bidt says same thing NYT says before any investigation . So does Hailey at UN . Max Boot on MSNBC ,and GOP Representative from Oklhaoma on FOX . Is there an universal subsonic dog whistle that brings the howling out of the rabid mad poisonous vipers from the hidden pit ? How do they start slithering out of the rock together?


    I guess I should include Bob Corker as well .
    How does the other wailing from Israel that Iran is more dangerous than ISIS synch with this dog whistle ?

    If you’re a corporate employee, it’s a pyramidal power structure. You wouldn’t dare stick your neck out for any ‘truth’, or you wouldn’t have a job. Fox, NYT, MSNBC have the same interests, and I haven’t checked but may have the same owners. Easy to see how they control talking heads and ‘programming’. A dingbat chickie appointed to read speeches at the UN, written either at the White House or State Department… it’s not so hard to see how that one might be ‘on message’ too. As is all corporate advertising garbage everywhere always. Etc.

    Read More
  185. Randal says:
    @Bill
    I'm curious if you could recommend a book sketching out what the "order of battle" would be like in a conventional conflict between NATO and Russia.

    I’m curious if you could recommend a book sketching out what the “order of battle” would be like in a conventional conflict between NATO and Russia.

    The trouble with this is that nobody knows what a world war will look like until it happens (or perhaps a tiny minority get it right, but there’s no way to tell in advance which of the multitudinous minority viewpoints will turn out to have been correct). Consider how the first two world wars were expected to go, contrasted with how they actually went. Then consider that even when things seem to have worked spectacularly well (eg Germany in France in 1940), it turns out they only went that well because a few generals in the field disobeyed orders.

    The problem is even greater today with so much untried technology on both sides and no way to predict how these systems will interact in large scale fighting, or what will work and what won’t.

    You can go with the manipulative mainstream fairy tales promoted say by the likes of RAND to further establishment or lobby political goals (consider for instance their reassuringly confident speculations as to how safe it will be for the US to go to war with China as long as it does so soon, or their conveniently alarmist speculations about the supposed Russian menace in eastern Europe). Or you can go with anti-establishment views emphasizing how unreliable the military industrial lobby’s claims are and highlighting all the possible wonder weapons the opposition might field. Or you can do the same for the other side’s experts.

    But in the end, the only honest truth is that nobody really knows. And while we are all entitled to speculate, it’s sheer dishonesty to claim to have any detailed idea how it will turn out, beyond the general truth that bigger gdp usually wins in the long run (now become rather dubious in the age of the nuclear peace and mutually assured destruction).

    Even bare orders of battle tell you little or nothing really useful, because nobody really knows which bits of each force will prove decisively important and which will prove to be irrelevant.

    So the only rational answer to the question “should we go to war?” with a rival great power should always be: if you have any choice at all, then no, it’s just too risky.

    Read More
    • Replies: @El Dato
    This just happens to be the 100y anniversary of the US entry into the European War (aka. falsly labeled "WWI").

    A nice reminder that things can go wrong:

    https://youtu.be/FTupV8o3mW4?t=3143
  186. iffen says:
    @Bill
    Why, are they inviting the Afghans to settle in their countries?

    when Soviets came to Afghanistan, they had built a university in Kabul

    Well, that just tells us what fools the Ukrainians, the Baltic peoples and East Europeans are.

    Why, are they inviting the Afghans

    No, they are forgoing having the Russians build MIT on the Baltic and CALTECHSKI in Warsaw.

    Read More
  187. El Dato says:
    @Randal

    I’m curious if you could recommend a book sketching out what the “order of battle” would be like in a conventional conflict between NATO and Russia.
     
    The trouble with this is that nobody knows what a world war will look like until it happens (or perhaps a tiny minority get it right, but there's no way to tell in advance which of the multitudinous minority viewpoints will turn out to have been correct). Consider how the first two world wars were expected to go, contrasted with how they actually went. Then consider that even when things seem to have worked spectacularly well (eg Germany in France in 1940), it turns out they only went that well because a few generals in the field disobeyed orders.

    The problem is even greater today with so much untried technology on both sides and no way to predict how these systems will interact in large scale fighting, or what will work and what won't.

    You can go with the manipulative mainstream fairy tales promoted say by the likes of RAND to further establishment or lobby political goals (consider for instance their reassuringly confident speculations as to how safe it will be for the US to go to war with China as long as it does so soon, or their conveniently alarmist speculations about the supposed Russian menace in eastern Europe). Or you can go with anti-establishment views emphasizing how unreliable the military industrial lobby's claims are and highlighting all the possible wonder weapons the opposition might field. Or you can do the same for the other side's experts.

    But in the end, the only honest truth is that nobody really knows. And while we are all entitled to speculate, it's sheer dishonesty to claim to have any detailed idea how it will turn out, beyond the general truth that bigger gdp usually wins in the long run (now become rather dubious in the age of the nuclear peace and mutually assured destruction).

    Even bare orders of battle tell you little or nothing really useful, because nobody really knows which bits of each force will prove decisively important and which will prove to be irrelevant.

    So the only rational answer to the question "should we go to war?" with a rival great power should always be: if you have any choice at all, then no, it's just too risky.

    This just happens to be the 100y anniversary of the US entry into the European War (aka. falsly labeled “WWI”).

    A nice reminder that things can go wrong:

    https://youtu.be/FTupV8o3mW4?t=3143

    Read More
  188. AP says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Russia is just a different ballgame.
     
    She is, but I am talking about contingency. Albeit you do make valid points and we are not in disagreement in principle. But that what contingency planning is all about--preparing for different scenarios. Is scenario with going nuclear possible? Absolutely! How probable it is? That's what General Staffs exist for--to give assessments and give probabilities.

    Sacrificing 500,000 Iraqi children is not the same thing as sacrificing 300+ million Americans.
     
    Maybe not, but there are many people who would first consider counter-force. first. Counter-value, that is a different game altogether.

    Agree option didn’t work, but – I agree with this.

    Read More
  189. Joe Wong says:
    @Felix Keverich
    Well, let's see: Tillerson makes a statement that overthrowing Assad is no longer a priority. Neocons disagree. And within days this "chemical attack" happens, the biggest chemical attack in Syria - we are told - since 2013.

    Coincidence? I don't think so.

    I think it's possible that chemical attack did happen, and it was the CIA or its terrorist buddies that arranged to poison these children. Unlike Assad, these actually have a plausible motive - manipulating Trump and influencing his policy.

    Tillerson has just made a statement that Assad must go. Sorry to break the news for you. Trump is losing ground to the warmonger deep state fast or sinking into swamp faster than sinking into quick sand.

    Read More
    • Replies: @El Dato
    Saker puts its best:

    This is why so many Americans voted for Trump and his promise “to drain the swamp”.

    Alas, the swamp drained Trump and all is back to “normal”.

    2018 will be a very tough year. I don’t think that there is any hope left for a real change in US policies and I am afraid that we are going to have to learn how to live with some kind of Obama 2.0 or some other form of “neo-neoconism”.

    It felt really good to hope for a while. Now we have to accept that our hopes never materialized and resume the struggle.

    Commentary Mag is already celebrating: https://www.commentarymagazine.com/politics-ideas/step-toward-rational-national-security-council/ like it’s Purim all over again.

     

    It's over, lube up, hunker down.
    , @Felix Keverich
    Trump is losing ground so fast, Tillerson was forced to make a complete U-turn in 48 hours! That being said, scores of Western politicians told president Assad he "must go". Simply repeating this mantra yet again will not make him go away.
  190. El Dato says:
    @Joe Wong
    Tillerson has just made a statement that Assad must go. Sorry to break the news for you. Trump is losing ground to the warmonger deep state fast or sinking into swamp faster than sinking into quick sand.

    Saker puts its best:

    This is why so many Americans voted for Trump and his promise “to drain the swamp”.

    Alas, the swamp drained Trump and all is back to “normal”.

    2018 will be a very tough year. I don’t think that there is any hope left for a real change in US policies and I am afraid that we are going to have to learn how to live with some kind of Obama 2.0 or some other form of “neo-neoconism”.

    It felt really good to hope for a while. Now we have to accept that our hopes never materialized and resume the struggle.

    Commentary Mag is already celebrating: https://www.commentarymagazine.com/politics-ideas/step-toward-rational-national-security-council/ like it’s Purim all over again.

    It’s over, lube up, hunker down.

    Read More
  191. @El Dato
    Gee, I wonder who could be behind this offensively low-brow and loud theater performance to give a "casus belli" and a "reason for responsibility to protect".

    100% repeat of Obama's "redline" performance. Maybe it will go through now, it depends on the levels of sellout.

    The always-reliable yuropeans are onboard, same as with the Lybian "Ghadaffi is distributing Viagra to rape his own people" somewhat-liberating free-for-all. Clearly the cheques have arrived.

    Meanwhile, the bombing of Yemen on behalf of the Saudis, which in a sane world would result in US military personnel and politicians getting acquainted with the wrong end of firing squads, is merrily ongoing.

    Gee, I wonder who could be behind this offensively low-brow and loud theater performance…

    Offensively low-brow and loud theater performance, indeed…

    If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks (loudly and incessantly) like a duck…

    Read More
  192. @alexander
    Hey Rurik,

    Maybe its up to us.

    I think its incumbent upon every single American, who doesn't want our troops coming home in body bags because of ANOTHER bogus LIE, like the one that created the IRAQ CATASTROPHE ........OR,...... to find themselves paying ELEVEN DOLLARS A GALLON at the pump for the next five years.....OR.....to watch our National Debt skyrocket to THIRTY TRILLION DOLLARS....to CALL their representatives and let em know...that we want 100% certainty that the Syrian regime....not ISIS....is responsible for having chemical weapons this time....and USING THEM.....and this event was ,in fact, precipitated by the Syrian Regime..not ISIS ,who was LOSING...and desperate to pull a rabbit out of their hat....We want certainty of this before ONE U.S. BOOT goes on the ground over there....

    No more SIX TRILLION DOLLAR WARS based on FRAUD....Like IRAQ !

    NEVER AGAIN !!


    Until we, the American People get ALL the facts straight..and are SATISFIED...we do not want to GO IN.

    Let there be a thorough and copious INDEPENDENT investigation.....when the results are complete....and they pass the SMELL TEST.....then maybe we can see what next steps should be taken.


    After all, only FOOLS rush into war.

    And we won't be fooled AGAIN.


    Americans should call their representatives and let them know.

    After all, there ARE 320 million of US.

    ...and its OUR blood and treasure !

    I wonder —

    WHERE ARE THE WOMEN?

    Will the Women take to the streets in their thousands and millions and demand NO MORE WAR?

    Will the Women gaze upon the member of their fair sex who represents the American people to the international community and demand that NIKKI HALEY has to go?

    [Does any other nation have the same tragic record of women in power as the USA?

    Are American women proud of Madeleine Albright? Samantha Power? Susan Rice? Condoleeza Rice? Hillary Clinton? ]

    Read More
  193. annamaria says:
    @Andrei Martyanov
    True, but by that time US already lost the will to fight while for Vietnamese it was a matter of national unification. Political and (geo)political dynamics in Afghanistan was very different, not to mention Afghanistan's ethnic fragmentation. In the end, Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, reasons for it, were dramatically different from Vietnam. Islamization of Fergana Valley by mid-1970s was a grave threat, as today's events demonstrate fully and Russia will one way or another deal with this threat, with which she started dealing since 1979. While "domino" principle was a contrived ideological construct, security of Russian geopolitical belly is not. As General Gromov stated in NYT:

    "In fact, we were the first to defend Western civilization against the attacks of Muslim fanatics. No one thanked us. On the contrary, everyone was impeding our actions: The United States, NATO, Iran, Pakistan, even China."

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/12/opinion/12iht-edrogozin.html?_r=0

    The difference between two wars is rather startling.

    “In fact, we were the first to defend Western civilization against the attacks of Muslim fanatics. No one thanked us. On the contrary, everyone was impeding our actions…”
    These are the striking words.
    Next time the alleged American patriots Graham and McCain open their mouths to pontificate about “war on terror” and “support the troops,” they should be hit back with Gromov’s words. Wonder what Sarkozy, Holland, Merkel and other EU warriors would say about the quote, considering that the US/Israel’ vassals in Europe have opened wide the doors to Europe for Muslim fanatics. But before that, the US/Israel & vassals made it sure that enough innocent victims were slaughtered and enough cities and villages were destroyed in the Middle East to generate a sizable army of the fanatics.
    Eretz Israel promises to be the most expensive project for the humanity.

    Read More
  194. @utu

    "I suspect Russia would retaliate by taking out the nearest and most convenient American bases, which would be in the Baltics (Russia couldn’t really retaliate in the Middle East). "
     
    Russia has no conventional means of retaliating in the Middle East. All Russian forces in Middle East can be swarmed and overwhelmed by USA, Turkey and Israel within few hours. Russia will not go nuclear for the sake of Syria. In the end it is all about saving face. Funny, isn't it? There is nothing tangible there. Saving face for Russian people sake only because beyond Russia nobody really cares about Russia's face which in the West they think is beyond salvaging anyway. The end of it will be a coup d'etat in Russia by those who think that Russia's face was not saved enough or by those who think that saving Russia's face may lead to Russia's destruction. It will be the latter who pretend to be the former for the people's sake.

    Most people outside Russia may not care about Russia’s fate, but I am an American and I do.

    Moreover, Russia’s reluctance to back down in Syria is not just about saving face. Putin et al. may have concluded, wisely, that any sign of weakness in any theater will embolden the US and NATO to become even more belligerent and station even more troops and weapons to encircle Russia on its borders. “We” are not giving Russia many palatable choices.

    Read More
  195. @Buzz Mohawk
    And what was the alternative, Mr. utu? To have done nothing? To write screeds on the internet as you do? Tell us, please, what would you have had us do? Vote for Hillary? Vote for Bernie? Vote for a fill-in-the-blank Republicrat or Democratican? Put on face masks and break windows?

    I don't see you doing anything to fix things.

    Loser? Who is the one claiming to have an answer without providing one? Who does nothing but pretend to know what is right? Who sat back and refused to support the only candidate who at least held some of our views? (Sorry, no, but he indeed has proof going back three decades that his views on trade and his general opinion of politicians are consistent. I won't buy the predictable response you would have here.)

    No matter what happens to my president or to my country, I will be sitting here on my wooded land, drinking single barrel bourbon and smoking cigars, grilling tenderloin, while people like you pretend to be somebody on the internet.

    And no, I will not project myself into a candidate and vote for him. I will refrain from voting and enjoy the life I won in the cosmic lottery -- while you and everyone like you drowns in the rising brown tide of filth that will cover the Earth.

    But thanks for the informative opinion.

    You are unduly optimistic to be so confident that you will be safe for long.

    Those hordes of which you speak have things called automobiles, and many of them will leave the collapsing, starving cities looking for water, food, and just plain victims.

    Having said that, you are wise to at least be as far away from the big hostile cities as you can, and you’ll have a far better chance in the short term than we will.

    God bless you and good luck to all of us in the balkanized violent future we seem to face….

    Read More
  196. @Andrei Martyanov
    "There is a literature and a common perception that the Soviets were defeated and driven from Afghanistan. This is not true. When the Soviets left Afghanistan in 1989, they did so in a coordinated, deliberate, professional manner, leaving behind a functioning government, an improved military and an advisory and economic effort insuring the continued viability of the government. The withdrawal was based on a coordinated diplomatic, economic and military plan permitting Soviet forces to withdraw in good order and the Afghan government to survive. The Democratic Republic of Afghanistan (DRA)managed to hold on despite the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Only then, with the loss of Soviet support and the increased efforts by the Mujahideen (holy warriors) and Pakistan, did the DRA slide toward defeat in April 1992. The Soviet effort to withdraw in good order was well executed and can serve as a model for other disengagements from similar nations."

    http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/documents/Withdrawal.pdf

    All questions to US Army Command And General Staff College in Leavenworth, KS.

    I was ignorant of this assessment, as are almost all Westerners, I’m sure.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    If you want to read a popular treatment of the Soviet experience in Afghanistan, look up "Afgantsy. The Russians in Afghanistan 1979-1989" by Rodric Braithwaite (former British ambassador to Russia and somewhat of a Russophile). It's an illuminating contrast to the Rambo interpretation of that war.
  197. @German_reader
    Compared to Vietnam, the Soviet record in Afghanistan wasn't really that bad (and at least the Soviets realized early on that they needed to get out and left behind a friendly regime that lasted some time, and might have lasted longer if not for the dissolution of the Soviet Union - what has NATO achieved so far in Afghanistan, after 15 years?).
    And I'd actually go farther than Smoothie, US triumphalism is way overdone even in regard to the 2nd world war, at least concerning the European theatre.

    Your last comment is certainly sound. If Germany weren’t fighting on two very major fronts, it could have fought the USA and its European allies to a stalemate at the least, and probably prevailed.

    I’m not sure that Americans or Europeans would have been any worse off if that had happened instead of the horror that did happen.

    Read More
  198. RobinG says:
    @alexander
    Hey Rurik,

    Maybe its up to us.

    I think its incumbent upon every single American, who doesn't want our troops coming home in body bags because of ANOTHER bogus LIE, like the one that created the IRAQ CATASTROPHE ........OR,...... to find themselves paying ELEVEN DOLLARS A GALLON at the pump for the next five years.....OR.....to watch our National Debt skyrocket to THIRTY TRILLION DOLLARS....to CALL their representatives and let em know...that we want 100% certainty that the Syrian regime....not ISIS....is responsible for having chemical weapons this time....and USING THEM.....and this event was ,in fact, precipitated by the Syrian Regime..not ISIS ,who was LOSING...and desperate to pull a rabbit out of their hat....We want certainty of this before ONE U.S. BOOT goes on the ground over there....

    No more SIX TRILLION DOLLAR WARS based on FRAUD....Like IRAQ !

    NEVER AGAIN !!


    Until we, the American People get ALL the facts straight..and are SATISFIED...we do not want to GO IN.

    Let there be a thorough and copious INDEPENDENT investigation.....when the results are complete....and they pass the SMELL TEST.....then maybe we can see what next steps should be taken.


    After all, only FOOLS rush into war.

    And we won't be fooled AGAIN.


    Americans should call their representatives and let them know.

    After all, there ARE 320 million of US.

    ...and its OUR blood and treasure !

    Americans should call their representatives and let them know.

    Indeed. As it happens, I live in DC, so I have no Senator and my Rep. has no vote, but I can call the White House, and I encourage anyone who has representation to get busy. And after that, we may need to do more, like in 2013.

    White House: 202-456-1414
    Congress members House and Senate: 202- 224-3121

    Here’s a call to action:

    US PEACE COUNCIL
    P. O. Box 3105, New Haven, Connecticut 06515
    Telephone: 203-387-0370; Fax: 203-397-2539; Email: amistadmarder@gmail.com

    April 6, 2017 
    EMERGENCY!
    Act Now to Prevent a Trump Attack on Syria! Phone the White House and Congress Now!

     
    Yesterday President Trump — who during the campaign expressed a desire for a new, more restrained approach to the war in Syria — publicly accepted the claim that the Syrian government is using chemical weapons against its own people, including children. He declared: “Lines have been crossed.” He threatened to take some sort of action. The photos are horrific. The media has for several days gone into full hysteria mode, repeating unproven allegations, attributing blame, and relying on biased sources. Is this another Gulf of Tonkin?
     
    This is more than a dangerous moment. It is a full-blown war crisis. It is no secret that President Trump is an impulsive and often ill-informed individual. His Administration in its first months has been buffeted by missteps, defeats, and embarrassments. He may think he “needs a win.” We must make sure his Administration does not think an attack on Syria would be “a win.” We have hours, at most a few days to do so.
     
    We have been down this road before. Sophisticated observers have already noted this alleged attack has all the earmarks of a false flag operation. The Syrian government has absolutely no motive for mounting such an attack. (See: Gerry Condon; Patrick Henningsen; and Phyllis Bennis)
     
    As a leader of Veterans for Peace, Gerry Condon, has wisely observed, the sources for the gas attack reports are the rebel forces themselves, their own media, and the “White Helmets” and other Western-funded NGOs who are notorious for creating “regime change” propaganda against the Assad government.  Famed investigative reporter Seymour Hersh has documented that the last large Sarin attack blamed on the Syrian government was carried out by terrorist groups with the support of Turkey and Saudi Arabia.  Hersh also documented that chemical weapons were transported from Libya to U.S.-backed rebel groups in Syria by the CIA and Hillary Clinton’s State Department. 

    Yet the mainstream media do not mention any of this. They ask no tough questions. They entertain no doubts. They repeat previous lies that have already been debunked. They unashamedly interview sources which have long been cheerleaders for military intervention in Syria.

    We can stop an attack. In 2013, an immense surge of phone calls to the White House and Congress stayed the hand of President Obama under similar pressure to “do something.” We successfully prevented Obama from attacking Syria in 2013. 

    We can do it again. Pick up that phone! 

    · Call the White House at 202-456-1414
    · Call your Congress members House and Senate at 202- 224-3121

    Yours in peace,

    Alfred L. Marder, President

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    The bombing of Syria has already began. Ziocons are victorious. It is impossible to reason with likes of Graham and McCain - they are cognitively deficient.
    , @RadicalCenter
    As an aside, I'm very glad that DC residents have no voting members of the Senate or House. All the more so given that I lived in DC and know the selfish, whiny, and often lazy pricks who live there, both fed "workers" and people perpetually on the dole.

    All federal employees and welfare recipients should lose their right to vote during their period of fed employment or welfare dependency.

    DC never should have been given electoral votes.
  199. MoonofAlabama has an intriguing theory:

    Based on the knowledge that Russia formulated a statement whereby West Jerusalem is recognized as the Jewish capital, MoA asks what Netanyahoo must have traded for that huge Get.

    In the same conversation,

    Mr Putin underscored, in particular, that it is unacceptable to make groundless accusations against any party until a thorough and objective international investigation has been conducted.

    MoA’s speculation:

    The mighty Zionist lobby in the U.S. (AIPAC & Co) is pushing for an immediate war on Syria. (It did so in 2013 but Obama called the war off at that time after the British parliament and later Congress rejected it.)

    Netanyahoo could let it known that he prefers no war on Syria. The Zionist lobby in the U.S. would then shut up, pressure on Trump would be much relieved, a new war on Syria could be avoided.

    In 2013 Putin arranged for a deal to destroy Syria’s chemical arsenal. The elimination of Syria’s strategic weapons was a huge gift to Israel. It also allowed Obama to keep face and keep away from war despite all pressure.

    Now Putin is making another huge offer. Will Israel take this gift? Will Netanyahoo call off its AIPAC dogs of war?

    If so, what posture will Trump take; what will he get in the bargain, and how will the US Congress be made to get in line? Bob Corker and of course Mr. & Mrs. Lindsay G. McCain have already beat war drums.

    re Calling the White House: Pat Lang’s blog urged readers to call their representatives & the White House.
    Congress is leaving town for a two week break.
    I called the White House at ~ 4:20 EST.
    A recorded message informed me the White House was closed for the day, call back tomorrow. There was no opportunity to record a message.

    Read More
  200. wayfarer says:

    Israel, the privileged nation.

    One very real reason why American kids may once again be thrown under a bus in the Middle East, this time Syria, is to ensure that Israeli kids continue to be born with silver spoons in their mouths.

    FTW.

    Read More
  201. I voted for Trump. Not because I believed he was going to change things, but because I wanted to help repudiate the mainstream media’s control over Americans. And we did.
    Did I think Trump’s election was a change of regime? No, Like Linh Dinh I believe the neocons (and we know who they are) would never let a real outsider be elected.

    It’s my belief that the same people who did 911 are still running things. These folks know that like the long serving governments of banana republics they can never let go of the reins of power. For if they actually lost control of government their lives would be in danger by a new regime accessing their secret criminal deeds. As many folks before me have said we have not had a real change of regime since Kennedy was murdered.

    I think that the only way a new regime will come into power in the US is when we get a massive bloody nose at the hands of a powerful adversary. Maybe it will take a nuclear war and if that is the case, so be it. At that point the mindless lumps that make up so much of America will either get rid of these traitors or they will perish. And then again maybe that won’t work either.

    Therefore, I hope that the US at the demand of the neocons attacks Syria and that Russia responds by going to war with the US. That may be unlikely but I see that as best chance of the US getting that bloody nose that will make Americans pay attention to the traitorous course their government is on.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    i'm leaning that way.

    if the neocons / banking mafia are going to start ww3 eventually anyway then might as well get it over with.
  202. BB753 says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    My view on things is informed by two key assumptions/observations:

    (1) The US can wipe the floor with Russia in Syria or anywhere in the Middle East.

    (2) Russia can wipe the floor with NATO east and north of the Suwalki gap.

    If things really go south in Syria - as in, actual Russian forces coming under sustained attack from the USAF - I would expect either:

    (a) If they decide on a military response --> it will be either in Ukraine (e.g. ranging from recognition of the LDNR to resurrection of the Novorossiya project) or even the Baltics;

    (b) If they decide on a negotiated surrender-in-all-but-name in Syria with the US allowing Russia its forces intact in exchange for abandoning Assad --> a domestic clampdown to contain the mass outrage that this humiliation will doubtless elicit.

    I had to look up Suwalki Gap, Anatoly!
    Why do you believe that the US will prevail in the Middle East? Logistics?
    In what scenario a Russia – USA conflict does not go nuclear?

    Read More
  203. Rurik says:
    Read More
    • Replies: @KenH
    You stole my thunder.

    It's official. Trump has now been baptized into neoconservative fundamentalism. Oh, and I'm now a former Trump supporter.
    , @alexander
    OMG,

    Is Trump working for ISIS Now ?

    Is it possible that "Trump the Great" has become a lowly ISIS stooge ?

    Has Trump the Great become "Trump the Stooge" ?

    Not the reason we elected him.....to become a stooge for ISIS .

    No sir, ..........Not by long shot .

    Shameful !

    Our President has become an ISIS stooge.....Sad day for the USA !

    Very sad.

    May God help us all.
  204. KenH says:
    @Rurik
    fuck

    http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/06/us-military-has-launched-more-50-than-missiles-aimed-at-syria-nbc-news.html

    You stole my thunder.

    It’s official. Trump has now been baptized into neoconservative fundamentalism. Oh, and I’m now a former Trump supporter.

    Read More
  205. BB753 says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    I've been pretty solid in my Trump support, despite occasional "zradas" (defeats/betrayals).

    This is the first time however that I am genuinely questioning his intentions and goodwill.

    If Trump in the end does goes down the path of corporatist neocon warmongering, he will lose and the vision he outlined at his inauguration speech will die as well. Very sad!

    It’s nearly impossible to get rid of the neocons. They’re deeply entrenched in the permanent government and in the deep state. It would take a real internal coup to neutralize them. And I’m afraid Trump is too old for the job and Ivanka, daddy’s little girl and his only weakness, and his son-in-law are the neocon Trojan horse inside the WH.

    Read More
  206. @RadicalCenter
    I was ignorant of this assessment, as are almost all Westerners, I'm sure.

    If you want to read a popular treatment of the Soviet experience in Afghanistan, look up “Afgantsy. The Russians in Afghanistan 1979-1989″ by Rodric Braithwaite (former British ambassador to Russia and somewhat of a Russophile). It’s an illuminating contrast to the Rambo interpretation of that war.

    Read More
  207. Art says:
    @Sherman
    Hey Genius

    "Big Jew economics".

    Is this the reason you're unemployed?

    Peace
    Sherm

    Hey Sherm,

    Rush over to the Golan – the US government is killing Arabs for you.

    Fresh Arab blood man – hurry hurry!

    p.s. What pride you must have in your US Jew cousins.

    Read More
  208. Oh great, America’s psychopathic elite starts another Mideast war.
    F*ck Trump…just as bad as Clinton.

    Read More
    • Agree: Dan Hayes
    • Replies: @iffen
    America’s psychopathic elite

    I have come to expect a little more than this in your comments.
  209. BB753 says:
    @daniel le mouche
    What do you mean? They're everywhere in the culture. People will do, say, or fuck anyone or anything to get that sweet corporate gig. Corporate culture of whores, spineless godless chickens... Not that I can think of an answer, an out. But it seems: We Need Religion! (Not phony Billy Graham, Pat Robertson swill---true belief. But I don't believe myself, much as I respect Catholicism pre-1960s)
    For one day to day example, who stands up during the Thanksgiving, New Years, etc. football game and rants on about what a moronic waste of time and life it is?

    Women in the workplace, particularly in the higher rungs of the ladder of power, turn into prostitutes. Because they have nothing else to offer.

    Read More
  210. Rurik says:
    @KenH
    You stole my thunder.

    It's official. Trump has now been baptized into neoconservative fundamentalism. Oh, and I'm now a former Trump supporter.

    I’m now a former Trump supporter.

    me too

    Read More
  211. Taras77 says:

    To state the obvious, it does not appear that Putin is rolling over on this murderous charade-first, the call with netenyahoo (chill) and now this report: “95% of terrorist acts are orchestrated by the cia.” One could argue with his percentage but hard to argue with the overall thrust of his comment:

    http://novorossia.today/putin-95-of-world-terrorist-attacks-are-orchestrated-by-the-cia/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    One could argue with his percentage but hard to argue with the overall thrust of his comment:
     
    Putin couldn't have said that, especially for some media.
  212. It is 9:49pm and Trump has just attacked Syria—-Screw YOU Trump. I was a diehard supporter. You were pro-Russian and against intervention. SCREW YOU. I’m not voting for you ever again. You are an idiot. Screw YOU Trump. You are a retard. You are only a puppet of the CIA/Soros Globalist crowd. Screw you. Go to Hell Trump.

    Read More
  213. Veritatis says:

    People all over the world need regular Americans to call the White House and Congress. Unz is full of bright men and women who can influence their neighbors. “Be not afraid”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous

    People all over the world need regular Americans to call the White House and Congress.
     
    why bother?
    that's not where the power lies.

    call Jewish community centers.
  214. Bill says:
    @iffen
    when Soviets came to Afghanistan, they had built a university in Kabul

    Well, that just tells us what fools the Ukrainians, the Baltic peoples and East Europeans are.

    Why, are they inviting the Afghans

    No, they are forgoing having the Russians build MIT on the Baltic and CALTECHSKI in Warsaw.

    Yes, I understood what you meant.

    Read More
  215. alexander says:
    @Rurik
    fuck

    http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/06/us-military-has-launched-more-50-than-missiles-aimed-at-syria-nbc-news.html

    OMG,

    Is Trump working for ISIS Now ?

    Is it possible that “Trump the Great” has become a lowly ISIS stooge ?

    Has Trump the Great become “Trump the Stooge” ?

    Not the reason we elected him…..to become a stooge for ISIS .

    No sir, ……….Not by long shot .

    Shameful !

    Our President has become an ISIS stooge…..Sad day for the USA !

    Very sad.

    May God help us all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    May God help us all.
     
    I couldn't agree more Alex

    I'm feeling very dejected right now

    a lot of people are gloating at me saying 'seeeeeeee?"

    and I guess they have that right, but I'm just sort of numb
    , @annamaria
    Trump is a toy of ziocons.
  216. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @Taras77
    To state the obvious, it does not appear that Putin is rolling over on this murderous charade-first, the call with netenyahoo (chill) and now this report: "95% of terrorist acts are orchestrated by the cia." One could argue with his percentage but hard to argue with the overall thrust of his comment:

    http://novorossia.today/putin-95-of-world-terrorist-attacks-are-orchestrated-by-the-cia/

    One could argue with his percentage but hard to argue with the overall thrust of his comment:

    Putin couldn’t have said that, especially for some media.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Taras77
    From the article:

    Speaking at a behind closed doors forum for the highest echelons of government and staff in his home city of St. Petersburg, Putin responded to questions about the metro blast by pointing out who is responsible for the vast majority of world terror attacks: the U.S. deep state, and the radical Islamic groups they sponsor to destabilize key regions in the world.

    Well, it is coming from a site favorable, maybe even controlled, by Russia. So, the common conclusion , which I do not buy, is that it is fake news or simply propaganda.
  217. Bill says:
    @Rurik

    I’m now a former Trump supporter.
     
    me too

    And me.

    Read More
  218. Was Trump a neo-con all along or does he think starting WW3 over a false flag will save his faltering presidency?

    F*ck him. He obviously doesn’t understand or care why we voted for him.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    It could have been a con or it could be they got to him via Ivanka - she's clearly his weak spot.
  219. Rurik says:
    @alexander
    OMG,

    Is Trump working for ISIS Now ?

    Is it possible that "Trump the Great" has become a lowly ISIS stooge ?

    Has Trump the Great become "Trump the Stooge" ?

    Not the reason we elected him.....to become a stooge for ISIS .

    No sir, ..........Not by long shot .

    Shameful !

    Our President has become an ISIS stooge.....Sad day for the USA !

    Very sad.

    May God help us all.

    May God help us all.

    I couldn’t agree more Alex

    I’m feeling very dejected right now

    a lot of people are gloating at me saying ‘seeeeeeee?”

    and I guess they have that right, but I’m just sort of numb

    Read More
    • Replies: @neprof
    "But evil people and impostors will go from bad to worse as they deceive others and are themselves deceived. But as for you, continue in what you have learned and found to be true, because you know from whom you learned it." Timothy 3:13-14

    Such a sad day...same as it ever was. Time to set sights on things closer.

    Trump will find the days ahead lonely; he needs to get a pet dog, ASAP.
    , @Veritatis
    It's a sad night, Rurik, granted.

    But now it seems to me it was not Trump who won the election. The deplorables did. He was the occasion, you see, of bringing you all together. And there have not been better fighters in the recent history of the West. Can you doubt that?

    And it is now a time to come together and flood the Trump admin with your opposition to war. That will give him pause, and arm those (Bannon?) that do not agree with this murderous path.

    Ron Unz is good at organizing signature drives. Will he help? Can other sites such as this be used?
    , @anon
    I'm not really dejected. European civilization (and the people who built it) are only going to survive the current chapter if enough of them are red-pilled in time and that hasn't changed. It was always going to be difficult. The main thing about the Trump candidacy was the media's anti-Trump hysteria made that process a little easier.

    C'est la vie.
  220. annamaria says:
    @RobinG

    Americans should call their representatives and let them know.
     
    Indeed. As it happens, I live in DC, so I have no Senator and my Rep. has no vote, but I can call the White House, and I encourage anyone who has representation to get busy. And after that, we may need to do more, like in 2013.

    White House: 202-456-1414
    Congress members House and Senate: 202- 224-3121

    Here's a call to action:

    US PEACE COUNCIL
    P. O. Box 3105, New Haven, Connecticut 06515
    Telephone: 203-387-0370; Fax: 203-397-2539; Email: amistadmarder@gmail.com

    April 6, 2017 
    EMERGENCY!
    Act Now to Prevent a Trump Attack on Syria! Phone the White House and Congress Now!

     
    Yesterday President Trump — who during the campaign expressed a desire for a new, more restrained approach to the war in Syria — publicly accepted the claim that the Syrian government is using chemical weapons against its own people, including children. He declared: “Lines have been crossed.” He threatened to take some sort of action. The photos are horrific. The media has for several days gone into full hysteria mode, repeating unproven allegations, attributing blame, and relying on biased sources. Is this another Gulf of Tonkin?
     
    This is more than a dangerous moment. It is a full-blown war crisis. It is no secret that President Trump is an impulsive and often ill-informed individual. His Administration in its first months has been buffeted by missteps, defeats, and embarrassments. He may think he “needs a win.” We must make sure his Administration does not think an attack on Syria would be "a win." We have hours, at most a few days to do so.
     
    We have been down this road before. Sophisticated observers have already noted this alleged attack has all the earmarks of a false flag operation. The Syrian government has absolutely no motive for mounting such an attack. (See: Gerry Condon; Patrick Henningsen; and Phyllis Bennis)
     
    As a leader of Veterans for Peace, Gerry Condon, has wisely observed, the sources for the gas attack reports are the rebel forces themselves, their own media, and the "White Helmets" and other Western-funded NGOs who are notorious for creating "regime change" propaganda against the Assad government.  Famed investigative reporter Seymour Hersh has documented that the last large Sarin attack blamed on the Syrian government was carried out by terrorist groups with the support of Turkey and Saudi Arabia.  Hersh also documented that chemical weapons were transported from Libya to U.S.-backed rebel groups in Syria by the CIA and Hillary Clinton's State Department. 

    Yet the mainstream media do not mention any of this. They ask no tough questions. They entertain no doubts. They repeat previous lies that have already been debunked. They unashamedly interview sources which have long been cheerleaders for military intervention in Syria.

    We can stop an attack. In 2013, an immense surge of phone calls to the White House and Congress stayed the hand of President Obama under similar pressure to “do something.” We successfully prevented Obama from attacking Syria in 2013. 

    We can do it again. Pick up that phone! 

    · Call the White House at 202-456-1414
    · Call your Congress members House and Senate at 202- 224-3121

    Yours in peace,

    Alfred L. Marder, President
     

    The bombing of Syria has already began. Ziocons are victorious. It is impossible to reason with likes of Graham and McCain – they are cognitively deficient.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    There are more to it than just Graham and McCain: Mattis and McMaster are the ones who "advised" Trump on "military options". Well, they advised him, alright.
  221. Cagey Beast says: • Website

    Fuck Trump. Fuck America. I’m so sick of Washington’s addiction to war.

    Read More
  222. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @annamaria
    The bombing of Syria has already began. Ziocons are victorious. It is impossible to reason with likes of Graham and McCain - they are cognitively deficient.

    There are more to it than just Graham and McCain: Mattis and McMaster are the ones who “advised” Trump on “military options”. Well, they advised him, alright.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    Yes, Mattis and McMaster are Cheney clones.
    Most likely, the Russians will try to contain themselves to the utmost. Not only because they do not want to enter the US-initiated WWIII, but also because they do not want to show their new gadgets too early.
    , @Paul C.
    America is fully controlled by the folks who control our money supply. Wars (for Zionism) will continue as long as this does not change. Graham, McCain, and now Trump exposed, all puppets of a greater power.


    http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/SMALL_assadhoax2.jpg
  223. annamaria says:
    @alexander
    OMG,

    Is Trump working for ISIS Now ?

    Is it possible that "Trump the Great" has become a lowly ISIS stooge ?

    Has Trump the Great become "Trump the Stooge" ?

    Not the reason we elected him.....to become a stooge for ISIS .

    No sir, ..........Not by long shot .

    Shameful !

    Our President has become an ISIS stooge.....Sad day for the USA !

    Very sad.

    May God help us all.

    Trump is a toy of ziocons.

    Read More
  224. Randal says:

    A Pentagon official said about 50 Tomahawk cruise missiles were fired from Navy destroyers in the eastern Mediterranean at a Syrian air base.

    And no, I checked, it’s not April 1st. The buffoon in the White House actually murdered members of the Syrian armed forces in an open act of illegal aggression, with the pretext mere (at best) unproven allegations of a few people having been killed by unfashionable methods in the midst of a civil war.

    Shame on the US, shame on Trump, and shame on Republicans. And let’s hear no more Republican shite talked against Obama, whom Trump has now demonstrated to have been ten times the president Trump is. And I say that as someone who would have voted for Trump if I were American and who celebrated his election.

    Looks like the world is faced with Bush II (the village idiot President) all over again.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    It is feasible that the attack will spell the end of Israel in a sense that the stench from the moral cadaver Eretz Israel will eventually make the whole project utterly repulsive to the majority of civilized human beings.
    ... same could be said about the US.
    , @KenH
    Trump was not given authority by Congress to use military force against the Assad regime so he is now a war criminal. Worse, there's been no formal investigation of the chemical attack and it's all based on allegations and photos of dead children. Our intelligence agencies and Israel said Assad was guilty and we know they don't have any private agendas (yeah right).

    It pains me to say this, but I almost wish Obama was back in office as much as I hated him since his skin color insulated him from a lot of criticism and attacks if he chose to keep us out of war which he largely did the last two years.
  225. utu says:

    I have an important question I think. Was Bannon sidelined before the news of the chemical weapon attack in Syria or after?

    Bannon obviously would be against any shenanigans they are doing in Syria now. Bannon arranged a meeting of Tulsi Gabbard (who has a very strong anti intervention and anti meddling in Syria position) with Trump. Bannon loves Tulsi Gabbard, so he tried. But Trump opted for individual of Nikki Haley ilk instead. What a shame!

    http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/307106-bannon-set-up-trump-gabbard-meeting

    So my thinking is that if they took Bannon out of the loop before the gas attack they knew of the gas attack ahead of time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    Ziocons & oilmen have united to get their way. On a cue from Fed reserve.
    , @Talha
    Hey utu,

    I didn't put those pieces together, so thanks for the excellent analysis.

    Peace.
    , @anon

    So my thinking is that if they took Bannon out of the loop before the gas attack they knew of the gas attack ahead of time.
     
    good point
  226. Cagey Beast says: • Website

    Hillary Clinton would have done the same thing. In other words, Trump is no different from her or the rest of the Swamp.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    Hillary Clinton would have done the same thing. In other words, Trump is no different from her or the rest of the Swamp.
     
    But Obama didn't, and he was under the same pressure to "do something". We now know beyond reasonable doubt that Obama was a better president and a better man than Trump is.

    What's almost the worst part of it is that it genuinely looks as though Trump actually changed his mind (or had it changed for him) over the "chemical attack". Alleged or not, that's not the kind of trivial emotive fluff that leaders should be making decisions on war and peace over. It looks like Trump really is the airhead he was always portrayed as, but some of us hoped he wasn't. And please don't bother trying to claim that his gratuitous overnight double reversal of policy was some kind of masterful deception to make the Syrians lower their guard.
    , @daniel le mouche
    'Hillary Clinton would have done the same thing. In other words, Trump is no different from her or the rest of the Swamp.'

    Exactly. And...
    Newsflash--Trump is VERY GOOD FRIENDS with the Clintons.
    Another newsflash--It's all FAKE (oh shock, oh horror, oh no!)
    Anyone who ever thought otherwise may, one hopes against hope, once and for all STOP BEING SO FUCKING STUPID-----EVERY SINGLE FUCKING FOUR YEARS!!!!!!
  227. neprof says:
    @Rurik

    May God help us all.
     
    I couldn't agree more Alex

    I'm feeling very dejected right now

    a lot of people are gloating at me saying 'seeeeeeee?"

    and I guess they have that right, but I'm just sort of numb

    “But evil people and impostors will go from bad to worse as they deceive others and are themselves deceived. But as for you, continue in what you have learned and found to be true, because you know from whom you learned it.” Timothy 3:13-14

    Such a sad day…same as it ever was. Time to set sights on things closer.

    Trump will find the days ahead lonely; he needs to get a pet dog, ASAP.

    Read More
  228. annamaria says:
    @Andrei Martyanov
    There are more to it than just Graham and McCain: Mattis and McMaster are the ones who "advised" Trump on "military options". Well, they advised him, alright.

    Yes, Mattis and McMaster are Cheney clones.
    Most likely, the Russians will try to contain themselves to the utmost. Not only because they do not want to enter the US-initiated WWIII, but also because they do not want to show their new gadgets too early.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    What about Russians? What Putin is going to do? I presume that his electorate expects him to do something as well as his allies or will Russia accept American narrative that Assad did it and he has only himself to blame and next they will withdraw from Syria?

    Russia has no conventional force striking capability to match the US in the Middle East. Would he go nuclear?

    IMHO, I am afraid that Putin is finished. He will be out of power within six months.


    BTW, I was hoping that it would not come to that that soon on account of the China's President visit with Trump.
  229. annamaria says:
    @utu
    I have an important question I think. Was Bannon sidelined before the news of the chemical weapon attack in Syria or after?

    Bannon obviously would be against any shenanigans they are doing in Syria now. Bannon arranged a meeting of Tulsi Gabbard (who has a very strong anti intervention and anti meddling in Syria position) with Trump. Bannon loves Tulsi Gabbard, so he tried. But Trump opted for individual of Nikki Haley ilk instead. What a shame!

    http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/307106-bannon-set-up-trump-gabbard-meeting

    So my thinking is that if they took Bannon out of the loop before the gas attack they knew of the gas attack ahead of time.

    Ziocons & oilmen have united to get their way. On a cue from Fed reserve.

    Read More
  230. anon says: • Disclaimer

    Fuck is right.

    However, this isn’t going to go well and I predict Trump starts blaming other people early and often.

    Instead of a lot of bullshit oratory, Trump says something like …

    “We gotta do something”

    This was the least convincing argument for War I have ever heard. Oh yea … he already started blaming Obama as a ‘Pussy’ for not doing it earlier.

    Plus, consistency isn’t a strong suit either.

    And this won’t be popular. Another thing that Trump craves.

    Yet. Yet …

    I am just grasping at straws here. Just saying that Trump screwed the pooch. Yes.

    But the future? I dunno.

    Read More
  231. Randal says:
    @Cagey Beast
    Hillary Clinton would have done the same thing. In other words, Trump is no different from her or the rest of the Swamp.

    Hillary Clinton would have done the same thing. In other words, Trump is no different from her or the rest of the Swamp.

    But Obama didn’t, and he was under the same pressure to “do something”. We now know beyond reasonable doubt that Obama was a better president and a better man than Trump is.

    What’s almost the worst part of it is that it genuinely looks as though Trump actually changed his mind (or had it changed for him) over the “chemical attack”. Alleged or not, that’s not the kind of trivial emotive fluff that leaders should be making decisions on war and peace over. It looks like Trump really is the airhead he was always portrayed as, but some of us hoped he wasn’t. And please don’t bother trying to claim that his gratuitous overnight double reversal of policy was some kind of masterful deception to make the Syrians lower their guard.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon

    We now know beyond reasonable doubt that Obama was a better president and a better man than Trump is.
     
    Only over Syria, everything else he did was bad. And if it had been Serbia instead of Syria, white and christian, would he have held back then? I doubt it.
  232. Paul C. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov
    There are more to it than just Graham and McCain: Mattis and McMaster are the ones who "advised" Trump on "military options". Well, they advised him, alright.

    America is fully controlled by the folks who control our money supply. Wars (for Zionism) will continue as long as this does not change. Graham, McCain, and now Trump exposed, all puppets of a greater power.

    Read More
  233. annamaria says:
    @Randal
    A Pentagon official said about 50 Tomahawk cruise missiles were fired from Navy destroyers in the eastern Mediterranean at a Syrian air base.

    And no, I checked, it’s not April 1st. The buffoon in the White House actually murdered members of the Syrian armed forces in an open act of illegal aggression, with the pretext mere (at best) unproven allegations of a few people having been killed by unfashionable methods in the midst of a civil war.

    Shame on the US, shame on Trump, and shame on Republicans. And let’s hear no more Republican shite talked against Obama, whom Trump has now demonstrated to have been ten times the president Trump is. And I say that as someone who would have voted for Trump if I were American and who celebrated his election.

    Looks like the world is faced with Bush II (the village idiot President) all over again.

    It is feasible that the attack will spell the end of Israel in a sense that the stench from the moral cadaver Eretz Israel will eventually make the whole project utterly repulsive to the majority of civilized human beings.
    … same could be said about the US.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal
    I doubt it - not just over this. Israel has very, very effective stench hiders in the form of near infinite amounts of dollars and very, very well placed "sympathisers" throughout the US sphere media and political high ground.
  234. KenH says:
    @Randal
    A Pentagon official said about 50 Tomahawk cruise missiles were fired from Navy destroyers in the eastern Mediterranean at a Syrian air base.

    And no, I checked, it’s not April 1st. The buffoon in the White House actually murdered members of the Syrian armed forces in an open act of illegal aggression, with the pretext mere (at best) unproven allegations of a few people having been killed by unfashionable methods in the midst of a civil war.

    Shame on the US, shame on Trump, and shame on Republicans. And let’s hear no more Republican shite talked against Obama, whom Trump has now demonstrated to have been ten times the president Trump is. And I say that as someone who would have voted for Trump if I were American and who celebrated his election.

    Looks like the world is faced with Bush II (the village idiot President) all over again.

    Trump was not given authority by Congress to use military force against the Assad regime so he is now a war criminal. Worse, there’s been no formal investigation of the chemical attack and it’s all based on allegations and photos of dead children. Our intelligence agencies and Israel said Assad was guilty and we know they don’t have any private agendas (yeah right).

    It pains me to say this, but I almost wish Obama was back in office as much as I hated him since his skin color insulated him from a lot of criticism and attacks if he chose to keep us out of war which he largely did the last two years.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal
    He should be impeached. He won't be for this, but he will get no sympathy from me, for one, when the neocons and Israel lobbyists who whispered warmongering words into his ears hang him out to dry, in due course.
    , @utu
    Trump's twin from 2013

    https://willyloman.files.wordpress.com/2017/04/trump.jpg
    , @Hail

    Trump was not given authority by Congress to use military force against the Assad regime so he is now a war criminal. Worse, there’s been no formal investigation of the chemical attack
     
    Bayoneted Belgian Babies strike again.

    100th Anniversary of U.S. Declaration of War Against Germany, April 6, 1917.
  235. @iffen
    US military record of the last 70 years is rather unimpressive

    Right, no way that they match Soviet/Russia's impressive list of successes like ripping those Afghans a new one for example.

    The preceding commenters have put you well in your place, if only you’d stay there. You could spend some time reading The Art of War. The very best military leaders are so good they never have to fight.

    The Russians certainly were effective when it came the Chechens and to Georgia. Ukraine has not fared well either. All of those conflicts were provoked by the ZUSA and what have the American people gained from it?

    “American hero, Zbignew B, came up with the idea of the plan to aid in giving the Soviets a bloody nose in Afghanistan, but it hasn’t worked out very well has it? Some fine young American lives were just wasted in Afghanistan and Iraq, along with masses of expensive equipment and trillions of dollars that would have been put to better use in the US.

    Your attempt at chest thumping is better suited to an ape.

    Read More
  236. Randal says:
    @KenH
    Trump was not given authority by Congress to use military force against the Assad regime so he is now a war criminal. Worse, there's been no formal investigation of the chemical attack and it's all based on allegations and photos of dead children. Our intelligence agencies and Israel said Assad was guilty and we know they don't have any private agendas (yeah right).

    It pains me to say this, but I almost wish Obama was back in office as much as I hated him since his skin color insulated him from a lot of criticism and attacks if he chose to keep us out of war which he largely did the last two years.

    He should be impeached. He won’t be for this, but he will get no sympathy from me, for one, when the neocons and Israel lobbyists who whispered warmongering words into his ears hang him out to dry, in due course.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art
    Israel lobbyists who whispered warmongering words into his ears hang him out to dry

    Spell that Ivanka and Jared Kushner!
    , @KenH
    You are correct that the Israel lobby and neocons will hang him out to dry at some point like they did GW Bush when things start going South. Trump will then hold his stupid rallies to get back in the good graces of his supporters hoping they have short memories, but it will be too little, too late.
  237. Art says:

    Terrorized Stockholm DC is overjoyed – he has joined – Trump is now one of them – he is now a globalist! All hail the globalist president of the world.

    The Jew globalist Deep State rules. Happy days, no more “America First.”

    Art

    p.s. Fox Jews is having a circle jerk – they are ecstatic – WAR WAR WAR – ratings ratings ratings!

    Read More
    • Replies: @KenH
    Yes. It appeared Shepherd Smith was stroking himself on camera he was so excited that tomahawk missiles were fired at Syria. Homosexuals are sure a strange lot. They're supposed to be effeminate and peaceful but many are full of hatred and love to see people suffer.
  238. utu says:
    @KenH
    Trump was not given authority by Congress to use military force against the Assad regime so he is now a war criminal. Worse, there's been no formal investigation of the chemical attack and it's all based on allegations and photos of dead children. Our intelligence agencies and Israel said Assad was guilty and we know they don't have any private agendas (yeah right).

    It pains me to say this, but I almost wish Obama was back in office as much as I hated him since his skin color insulated him from a lot of criticism and attacks if he chose to keep us out of war which he largely did the last two years.

    Trump’s twin from 2013

    Read More
    • Replies: @KenH
    If that was the good twin the bad Trump twin killed him and hid the body. Or Trump just underwent a major lobotomy within the last 48 hours.
  239. Randal says:
    @annamaria
    It is feasible that the attack will spell the end of Israel in a sense that the stench from the moral cadaver Eretz Israel will eventually make the whole project utterly repulsive to the majority of civilized human beings.
    ... same could be said about the US.

    I doubt it – not just over this. Israel has very, very effective stench hiders in the form of near infinite amounts of dollars and very, very well placed “sympathisers” throughout the US sphere media and political high ground.

    Read More
  240. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Fran Macadam
    I'd guess he saw the handwriting on the wall that his Presidency couldn't survive unless he went full neocon. Being victimized by the Deep State can do that to a President, six ways to Sunday.

    It's jaw,jaw, jaw and war, war, war.

    America on Deep State autopilot.

    Being victimized by the Deep State can do that to a President, six ways to Sunday.

    True. It’s just sad, though and very disappointing and quite scary. The Deep State is very strong and very powerful.

    Read More
  241. Art says:
    @Randal
    He should be impeached. He won't be for this, but he will get no sympathy from me, for one, when the neocons and Israel lobbyists who whispered warmongering words into his ears hang him out to dry, in due course.

    Israel lobbyists who whispered warmongering words into his ears hang him out to dry

    Spell that Ivanka and Jared Kushner!

    Read More
  242. Cagey Beast says: • Website

    All respectable people in America adore war. Trump is quickly becoming respectable too:

    Trump made all sorts of Christian noises as he explained his decision.

    Read More
  243. utu says:
    @annamaria
    Yes, Mattis and McMaster are Cheney clones.
    Most likely, the Russians will try to contain themselves to the utmost. Not only because they do not want to enter the US-initiated WWIII, but also because they do not want to show their new gadgets too early.

    What about Russians? What Putin is going to do? I presume that his electorate expects him to do something as well as his allies or will Russia accept American narrative that Assad did it and he has only himself to blame and next they will withdraw from Syria?

    Russia has no conventional force striking capability to match the US in the Middle East. Would he go nuclear?

    IMHO, I am afraid that Putin is finished. He will be out of power within six months.

    BTW, I was hoping that it would not come to that that soon on account of the China’s President visit with Trump.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    I am not an expert, but I doubt that Putin would initiate a nuclear strike. He is patient and prudent enough to wait for a less bloody solution. As for regime change in Russia - not likely. How to explain it in a delicate manner... Russian federation is not infested with zionists in the high places (Russia is not a host for the parasitoid, thanks to the massive Jewish emigration to Israel, Germany, and the US). The impatient and ambitious Jews like Khodorkovsky, Kasparov, Nemtsov have never been particularly popular among the general population; for instance, Nemtsov had 2% approval rating (margin of error) at the time of his demise. Also, apart from the obvious moral malformations like Anna Nemtsova and Michael Weiss, many Russian Jews are decent and wonderfully educated people who understand the behavior of the arch of justice.
    For the world at large the greatest problem today is the ZUSA's disregards for the laws - all of them. The empire of Fed Reserve is a dangerous predator that is not interested in such trifles as human dignity, justice, and the future of humanity. Something is deadly wrong with the ziocons. As if the nature, while freely experimenting, has created a group of humanoids devoid of humanness. They are a deadly danger for all of us. They are vicious parasitoids.
    , @anon

    I am afraid that Putin is finished. He will be out of power within six months.
     
    The more America acts like it's ruled by a cabal of mad dogs the more Russians will cling to Putin.

    Wouldn't you?
  244. KenH says:
    @Art
    Terrorized Stockholm DC is overjoyed – he has joined - Trump is now one of them – he is now a globalist! All hail the globalist president of the world.

    The Jew globalist Deep State rules. Happy days, no more “America First.”

    Art

    p.s. Fox Jews is having a circle jerk - they are ecstatic - WAR WAR WAR – ratings ratings ratings!

    Yes. It appeared Shepherd Smith was stroking himself on camera he was so excited that tomahawk missiles were fired at Syria. Homosexuals are sure a strange lot. They’re supposed to be effeminate and peaceful but many are full of hatred and love to see people suffer.

    Read More
  245. Talha says:
    @utu
    I have an important question I think. Was Bannon sidelined before the news of the chemical weapon attack in Syria or after?

    Bannon obviously would be against any shenanigans they are doing in Syria now. Bannon arranged a meeting of Tulsi Gabbard (who has a very strong anti intervention and anti meddling in Syria position) with Trump. Bannon loves Tulsi Gabbard, so he tried. But Trump opted for individual of Nikki Haley ilk instead. What a shame!

    http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/307106-bannon-set-up-trump-gabbard-meeting

    So my thinking is that if they took Bannon out of the loop before the gas attack they knew of the gas attack ahead of time.

    Hey utu,

    I didn’t put those pieces together, so thanks for the excellent analysis.

    Peace.

    Read More
  246. KenH says:
    @utu
    Trump's twin from 2013

    https://willyloman.files.wordpress.com/2017/04/trump.jpg

    If that was the good twin the bad Trump twin killed him and hid the body. Or Trump just underwent a major lobotomy within the last 48 hours.

    Read More
    • Replies: @El Dato
    So is it like in that Philip K. Dick story, "The Father Thing"?

    http://sickmyduck.narod.ru/pkd081-0.html

    Charles led him to the garage and showed him the trash barrel. Peretti reached his long tanned arms down and carefully pulled up the dry, flaking remains. They spread out, unfolded, until the whole figure of his father was outlined. Peretti laid the remains on the floor and pieced broken parts back into place. The remains were colorless. Almost transparent. An amber yellow, thin as paper. Dry and utterly lifeless.

    "That's all," Charles said. Tears welled up in his eyes. "That's all that's left of him. The thing has the insides."
     
  247. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Jim Christian
    Nor since the 1860 election. Bullshit wars are a thing. Every bomb dropped, another 5000 dollars. Of course, there's fuel, wear and tear, parts, feed bags for the troops, beds, gear, all billable. This is our industry now. A clever conversion of our manufacturing capabilities, no? Evil, but clever..

    It is disgusting that anyone would view war as a way to make money.

    Read More
  248. KenH says:
    @Randal
    He should be impeached. He won't be for this, but he will get no sympathy from me, for one, when the neocons and Israel lobbyists who whispered warmongering words into his ears hang him out to dry, in due course.

    You are correct that the Israel lobby and neocons will hang him out to dry at some point like they did GW Bush when things start going South. Trump will then hold his stupid rallies to get back in the good graces of his supporters hoping they have short memories, but it will be too little, too late.

    Read More
  249. Veritatis says:
    @Rurik

    May God help us all.
     
    I couldn't agree more Alex

    I'm feeling very dejected right now

    a lot of people are gloating at me saying 'seeeeeeee?"

    and I guess they have that right, but I'm just sort of numb

    It’s a sad night, Rurik, granted.

    But now it seems to me it was not Trump who won the election. The deplorables did. He was the occasion, you see, of bringing you all together. And there have not been better fighters in the recent history of the West. Can you doubt that?

    And it is now a time to come together and flood the Trump admin with your opposition to war. That will give him pause, and arm those (Bannon?) that do not agree with this murderous path.

    Ron Unz is good at organizing signature drives. Will he help? Can other sites such as this be used?

    Read More
  250. Svigor says:

    (1) You can’t treat exposure to sarin with your bare hands without falling ill/dead yourself, as the White Helmets were apparently doing in the aftermath of the Idlib attack.

    Hey, sorta like corpses gassed with Zyklon B! Wait, wait, I can’t say that.

    (2) As Syrian war reporter @Partisangirl noticed, some journalists were apparently discussing a chlorine sarin attack before it actually happened.

    Can’t we do better than a link to a Tweet?

    So one can’t help but treat Nikky Haley’s melodramatic performance at the UN with skepticism.

    Irrelevant, really. Haley’s performance was probably genuine. If it was a FF, why would anyone tell her? That would be stupid. (Though I can sorta see it, if the regime is just pointing fingers, sans evidence)

    Look, this is part of why I don’t go around screaming “false flag! false flag!” all the time; because when something comes along that might actually be an important false flag, I haven’t burned