The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewEric Margolis Archive
What Craziness Is Going on in Saudi Arabia?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
shutterstock_752485963

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

What’s going on in Saudi Arabia? Over 200 bigwigs detained and ‘illegal profits’ of some $800 billion confiscated.

The kingdom is in an uproar. The Saudi regime of King Salman and his ambitious 32-year old son, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, claim it was all part of an ‘anti-corruption’ drive that has Washington’s full backing.

Utter nonsense. I’ve done business in Saudi Arabia since 1976 and can attest that the entire kingdom, with its thousands of pampered princes and princesses, is one vast swamp of corruption. In Saudi, the entire nation and its vast oil revenues are considered property of the extended Saudi royal family and its hangers-on. A giant piggy bank.

The late Libyan leader Muammar Khadaffi told me the Saudis are ‘an incredibly rich bunch of Bedouins living behind high walls and scared to death of their poorer neighbors.’

We have just witnessed a palace coup in Riyadh caused by the violation of the traditional desert ruling system which was based on compromise and sharing the nation’s riches.

Young Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s appointment as heir apparent by his ailing father, King Salman, who is reportedly suffering from cognitive issues, upset the time-proven Saudi collegial system and provoked the current crisis. Among the people arrested so far were 11 princes and 38 senior officials and businessmen, including the nation’s best-known and richest businessman, Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, who owns important chunks of Apple, Citigroup and Twitter. He’s being detained at Riyadh’s swanky Ritz Carlton Hotel.

Also arrested was Bakr bin Laden, chairman of the largest Saudi construction firm, The Binladen Group, and former Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef, a bitter rival to the new Crown Prince Mohammed.

Interestingly, there are no reports of senior Saudi military figures being arrested. The Saudi military has always been kept weak and marginalized for fear it could one day stage a military coup like the one led by Colonel Khadaffi who overthrew Libya’s old British stooge ruler, King Idris. For decades the Saudi army was denied ammunition. Mercenary troops from Pakistan were hired to protect the Saudi royals.

The Saudis still shudder at the memory of British puppets King Feisal of Iraq and his strongman, Nuri as-Said, who were overthrown and murdered by mobs after an Iraqi army colonel, Abd al-Karim Qasim, staged a coup in 1958. Nuri ended up hanging from a Baghdad lamppost, leading Egypt’s fiery strongmen, Abdel Nasser, to aptly call the new Iraqi military junta, ‘the wild men of Baghdad.’

ORDER IT NOW

More mysteries arose this tumultuous week. One of Saudi’s most influential princes, Mansour bin Muqrin, died in a mysterious crash of his helicopter, an ‘accident’ that has the smell of sabotage. Another key prince, Miteb, was ousted. He was commander of the famed ‘White Guard,’ the Saudi Bedouin tribal army designed to protect the monarchy and a former contender for the throne. Meanwhile, three or four other Saudi princes were reportedly kidnapped from Europe and sent home, leading to rumors that Saudi’s new ally, Israel, was involved.

It appears that Prince Mohammed and his men have so far grabbed at least $800 billion from those arrested to refill the war-depleted Saudi coffers. Call this a traditional Arab tribal raid – except that no women or horses were seized.

But behind all this lies the stalemated Saudi war against wretched Yemen, the Arab world’s poorest, most backwards nation. Saudi Arabia has been heavily bombing Yemen for over two years, using US-supplied warplanes, munitions, including cluster bombs and white phosphorus, and US Air Force management. A Saudi blockade of Yemen, aided by the US, has caused mass starvation and epidemics such as cholera.

When I first explored Yemen, in the mid 1970’s, it was just creeping out of the 12th century AD. Today, it’s been bombed back into the 6th Century.

In spite of spending over $200 million daily (not including payoffs to `coalition’ members like Egypt) the Saudis are stuck in a stalemated conflict against Yemen’s Shia Houthi people. The US and Britain are cheerfully selling bombs and weapons to the Saudis. President Donald Trump has been lauding the destruction of Yemen because he mistakenly believes Iran is the mainstay of the anti-Saudi resistance.

Yemen is a horrible human rights disaster and scene of widespread war crimes. It reminds me of the savagery inflicted on Afghanistan by the Soviets in the 1970’s.

The Saudis were fools to become involved in Yemen. Prince Mohammed was going to show the tough Yemeni tribes who was boss. Now he knows, and it’s not the Saudis.

The Saudis appear to be planning military provocations against bad neighbour Iran. These may include attacks in Lebanon against Hezbollah – which might open the way for US attacks on Iran and its allies. The Saudis are enraged over their defeat in Syria and want revenge.

Is this the beginning of the collapse of the House of Saud? Or a Saudi renaissance led by Prince Mohammed as he claims? Stay tuned.

(Republished from EricMargolis.com by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Mohammed bin Salman, Saudi Arabia 
Hide 121 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Randal says:

    Is this the beginning of the collapse of the House of Saud? Or a Saudi renaissance led by Prince Mohammed as he claims? Stay tuned.

    This is the key question, of huge import to the longer term future of the ME.

    In the meantime, the issue is what the collateral damage inflicted upon the region by the rivals for Saudi power is likely to be, with Lebanon and Iran the likely next targets.

    Can the Saudis really get away with so openly admitting what everyone has known to be true for decades – that they are firm allies of Israel? Are the Arabs really that beaten and cowed?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rosamond Vincy
    If Israel thinks the Saudis are firm allies of ANYBODY, Israel is crazy too--and vice versa. They even eat each other; witness the latest "purge of corruption." It's like Renaissance Italian city-states over there. Just pity all the poor people caught between all these modern-day Borgias, Sforzas, de la Scalas, and Medicis.
    , @Talha
    Hey Randal,

    Are the Arabs really that beaten and cowed?
     
    The Muslim ME has barely had time to breathe. It has been rolling from one disaster to another. The only ones that have been able to avoid this (to a large extent) have been the Gulf Arabs. So, yes, those other populations are pretty exhausted - even if they haven't been trashed directly, they have had an influx of refugees. A visitor to Egypt recently told me he was surprised at how many Syrians he had seen in Egypt (which is not a very rich country). And it probably has some Libyans there too.

    The Saudis can fight wars (often by proxy) that decimate other populations, like Yemen or Syria, without worrying about consequences. But they know they couldn't take on someone as big as Iran or Turkey or Egypt.

    But I think this revelation is actually a good thing. When this is all out in the open, and especially if the state-allied Salafi-Wahhabi preachers say nothing against it, they will lose a heck of a lot of credibility in the eyes of your average Muslim.

    Saudis can get away with it for now - this is likely their death-knell in the eventual future.

    Peace.
    , @TruthtellerAryan
    Good question. Beaten, cowed, no pride, no dignity. Simply put , they are " a sorry bunch". The "good Arabs " are either poor or dead. They're their own worst enemy. With all the wealth, population, and territory they have, they've never won a "war" against any outsider and never will. The money and effort spent on military is to keep their population or their poorer neighbors in check, as has been demonstrated time after time.
    If the Saudis and their Zionists half brothers want a war with Iran, then those sand *****rs should remember their last adventure, when the gang included a much bigger crowd. Europe, Russia, China and a few fellow Arabs are missing this time around. Maybe MBS is speeding up the end of what would go down in history as one of the shortest lived kingdoms. And one of the most
    despotic and corrupt
    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.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /emargolis/what-craziness-is-going-on-in-saudi-arabia/#comment-2073815
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. WHAT IS REALLY GOING ON IN SAUDI ARABIA?

    John Chuckman

    “Trump Says Saudi Elites Caught In Anti-Corruption Probe Were ‘Milking’ Kingdom For Years”

    This is just nonsense from Trump.

    Corruption is and has been everywhere in Saudi Arabia. How else could it be with all the countless billions changing hands in a fairly closed society?

    So, it is easy for a guy like the new Crown Prince to glance around and conveniently find some corruption among people he wants to discredit anyway.

    It may go beyond merely discrediting them to having hundreds of billions seized by the Crown Prince. Not a bad day’s work.

    What is going on is a kind of coup against the old order by the new usurper Crown Prince. His recent appointment was by a King well known for his senility, and it suddenly and surprisingly upset the established order of succession and all kinds of extended family compacts.

    We likely will never know what truly happened in this secretive kingdom. But we do know the abrupt changes created lots of enemies who needed attending to, and that seems to be what is happening.

    And the enemies have no friends in Washington to whom they can appeal. The old order in Saudi Arabia suffered terribly in the wake of 9/11, and despite great efforts to pacify the US with new levels of cooperation, it is now being swept out.

    Now, whatever is considered good for a hyper-aggressive United States is coincidentally good for its de facto colony in the Middle East.

    Trump himself has already proved to be one of Israel’s best-ever American friends. Israel has long had great influence, but it possibly never had it so good as it does now, as with a UN Ambassador who speaks as though she were a joint appointment of Trump and Netanyahu. Trump’s only competitor in this regard would be Lyndon Johnson.

    The US and Israel closely embrace the usurper because he has proven his dependability with bloody projects like making illegal war on Yemen. That war is exactly like the proxy war waged by mercenaries – ISIS and Al-Nusra et al – in Syria except that in this case it is the open work of a nation-state. And now he joins Israel in making threats on Lebanon.

    In all the Neocon Wars in the Mideast, great effort has been made, one way or another, not to have Israel at center stage, to avoid having Israel appear as aggressor. But, in fact, without the influence of Israel, none of these terrible wars would have happened.

    Yes, the Crown Prince will be a dependable component in the years-long American-Israeli project of creating a new Middle East. The Crown Prince is essentially Israel’s man in Saudi Arabia, just as President el-Sisi is in Egypt. Israel is comfortable being surrounded by absolute governments, so long as they are absolute governments beholden to its patron, the United States.

    Right now, the new Crown Prince is doing another bloody service for Israeli interests. The Prime Minister of Lebanon, Saad Hariri, was called to come to Riyadh in the King’s name for some business, as it turned out on false pretenses. Hariri had his plane surrounded and he was effectively arrested upon landing. Just pure modern piracy. Later, and who knows after what threats, he announced his sudden and unexpected resignation as prime minister, and he remains in Saudi Arabia.

    It just so happens, in very recent time, Netanyahu and some of his officials have made some very ugly noises against Lebanon and even staged a large-scale set of war games, including calling up reservists, clearly threatening the country.

    Israel just cannot stand the idea of Hezbollah being part of the Lebanese government whereas a reasonable observer would say Lebanon had achieved a peaceful balance in governing a land of many diverse political and religious groups.

    After all, it hasn’t been that long ago since Israel helped catapult Lebanon into a terrible, bloody civil war, and it did so with its own bloody and unwarranted invasion of the country. Hezbollah, an organization which has never been a true terrorist group no matter what Israel goes on about, came into its own by opposing Israel’s long-term, illegal occupation of Southern Lebanon.

    They were only defending what is theirs, but they made Israel look very bad, and that is an unforgivable offence. So, here we have the new Saudi Crown Prince doing more dirty work on Israel’s behalf, much as with his war in Yemen where he bombs civilians regularly, saving Israel from having to act on its own to get what it wants in someone else’s country.

    You see, if Israel itself actually had to do all the ugly deeds it wants done in the region, the world would see it with blinding clarity for the pariah state that it truly is, starting wars incessantly. Proxies – whether mercenary gangs like ISIS and Al-Nusra in Syria or tyrants like the new Saudi Crown Prince in Yemen and Lebanon – are the latest fashion statement from Tel Aviv.

    Read More
    • Agree: druid
    • Replies: @Anon
    "In all the Neocon Wars in the Mideast, great effort has been made, one way or another, not to have Israel at center stage, to avoid having Israel appear as aggressor. But, in fact, without the influence of Israel, none of these terrible wars would have happened."

    Nonsense. Sunnis and Shiites have been slaughtering fighting each for centuries without the influence of Israel. Sunni and Shiite hatred for each other and rivalry with each other has a basis that is independent of what they feel about Israel. You don't know their religious history well enough if you're making that claim.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    I would still like an article by Mr. Margolis on this interesting topic – if there is a benign explanation for it, why not share it with us. It would be fascinating to hear a description of what the place is like…
    Eric Margolis’s name is in Jeffrey Epstein’s little black book.
    A journalist, Mr. Margolis certainly knows what an interesting story it would be to write about his visits to Lolita Island. Why no comment, no article? See for yourself:

    https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/1508273/jeffrey-epsteins-little-black-book-redacted.pdf

    Read More
    • Replies: @my2cents
    If this is an attempt to impugn Mr. Margolis' character it certainly reeks like a Zionist attempt to shut up a highly respected journalist. Your M.O no longer works.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. So much corruption and so much goes unreported. And most people don’t care since they are hooked to Pop Culture and other nonsense.

    Maybe this is what all societies need: An ongoing TV series about the most powerful peoples, institutions, and industries in America.

    So, imagine a TV show called the FED. It has to be based on facts than fiction. Since it takes time to ascertain facts, these shows will feature events from a month ago. Always a month-time-lag to verify facts.
    And it will show what kind of decisions took place within the FED.

    And a TV show called SUPREME COURT. A dramatization of key things that happened in SC. Again, a month-lag on the programming.

    And the PRESIDENCY

    And the CIA.

    And the FBI.

    And the NYT and other elite media.

    And IVY LEAGUES. A show on the major decisions made by university presidents and deans.

    And the Pentagon.

    And Goldman Sachs.

    And Amazon.

    And Microsoft.

    And Google.

    And Apple.

    This stuff can be made entertaining with a bit of dramatization. Outright fictionalization will not be allowed as everything has to be according to verified facts. However, narrative will of course be tightened and streamlined and dramatized with colorful personalities.

    This will be a great public service.

    And maybe every city can have a Play Production about City Hall. A never-ending series based on what happens among politicians, big time folks, and etc in the seats of power.

    That way, entertainment won’t always be about escapism but about focusing on what is happening among the powerful.

    Now, there are shows like HOUSE OF CARDS that offer a vague inkling of what happens in DC. But with fictionalized characters and exaggerated situations, it’s more escapism than enterism.

    We need Enterism in culture. We need to enter into the way of power.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
    The 1967 movie "The President's Analyst" mentioned the CIA and FBI by name and then the movie was stricken of those references.

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

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwM4Solrzes
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. The Saudis appear to be planning military provocations against bad neighbour Iran. These may include attacks in Lebanon against Hezbollah

    Iran should support Hezbollah with materials and aid but not directly get involved.

    Iran should just watch Saudis get mired in ANOTHER mess. It will be two-front war for Saudis.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MEexpert

    Iran should support Hezbollah with materials and aid but not directly get involved.
     
    Iran will not get involved. It is not practical. One side benefit of the Syrian war has been rearming of Hezbollah in preparation for the next Israeli attack. This time it might come from Saudi Arabia but Israel will not be a bystander. After the first wave of bombing by the Saudis the response by Hezbollah will be directed against Israel.
    , @pyrrhus
    Israel will not get directly involved, because its armed forces are weak and poorly trained. It will try, as usual to get other countries (US) to do its dirty work.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. @Randal

    Is this the beginning of the collapse of the House of Saud? Or a Saudi renaissance led by Prince Mohammed as he claims? Stay tuned.
     
    This is the key question, of huge import to the longer term future of the ME.

    In the meantime, the issue is what the collateral damage inflicted upon the region by the rivals for Saudi power is likely to be, with Lebanon and Iran the likely next targets.

    Can the Saudis really get away with so openly admitting what everyone has known to be true for decades - that they are firm allies of Israel? Are the Arabs really that beaten and cowed?

    If Israel thinks the Saudis are firm allies of ANYBODY, Israel is crazy too–and vice versa. They even eat each other; witness the latest “purge of corruption.” It’s like Renaissance Italian city-states over there. Just pity all the poor people caught between all these modern-day Borgias, Sforzas, de la Scalas, and Medicis.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. I read somewhere that a lot of ordinary Saudis were gleeful upon hearing the news of the arrests. I guess most people don’t like it so much when some of them continue to live in luxury despite things going south for the rest of the population. There might be a similar dynamic to how Russians reacted to the arrests of some of their oligarchs. The crown prince might actually try to be populist here. I’m not sure it will work in such a clannish society, or that a backlash (possibly a violent backlash) from the other princely clans is not coming soon. But the crown prince doesn’t have to be cunning like a fox. He just has to be smarter than his dumb cousins.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mohammed Cohen
    When you have the indoctrinators friends of the Prince like the Mossad, the CIA, the MI6 and the entire banking/financial system of the world behind you, why give a damn to the little worthless skirmishes between his rivals? He is totally brainwashed and a perfect Manchurian candidate of Israel-US master Plan! Nothing all the bickering would make any difference today in Saudi Arabia! All is in control by the inner circle of Mossad Agents in the House of Saud!
    , @Seamus Padraig
    I'm thinking along similar lines, Tor. What if MbS is really trying to turn over a new leaf here? Back during the campaign, Trump made it eminently clear that he knew that KSA was the world's leading financier of terrorism, and he criticized them harshly for it. So a lot of us were puzzled--even outraged--when, after becoming president, he travelled to Riyadh and did the sword dance with the Saudi king. What the hell is he doing? we all wondered. But now it's starting to look like Trump may have cut a secret deal with MbS. Something along the lines of: drop all support for terrorism, and we pledge to defend you against Iran. Along as this does not entail our country getting sucked into any sectarian wars in the ME, I say it would all be for the best.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. Renoman says:

    Saudi Arabia is the toilet of the Middle east, the sooner someone flushes it the better.

    Read More
    • Agree: jim jones
    • Replies: @druid
    Israel and Saudi Arabia both!
    , @Bill Jones
    Second only to Israel in terms of concentration of Turds.
    , @anonymous
    [Saudi Arabia is the toilet of the Middle east, the sooner someone flushes it the better.]



    It is true, but both criminal American regime and Apartheid regime drink out of this toilet for $$$$$$$$$, to wage more wars. Saudi Arabia is a colony that wage war on behalf of the criminal zionists and imperialists. Why does Saudis should kill Yemeni children. They do it because the American regime wants them to do for geopolitical gain. Only stupid people repeat the lies of the criminal zionist/imperialist regime that there is a rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia. This is not the case. These crimes against humanity takes place because the zionist and imperialist regimes using DIVIDE AND RULE. Whoever repeats these nonsense to deceive people should receive a slap on the face to wake the stooge up.

    Soon Saudi Arabia will be broken financially, then the criminal west turns around and label them with terrorism that they are using on behalf of Trump and Netanyahu, like Al Qaeda. But the world knows that Washington and criminals in occupied Palestine are the MAIN TERRORISTS ON EARTH. Their demise is coming.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Epstein Lolita Express contact list leads to many questions.
    Who visited, not just who was on a list.
    Who paid. If Epstein, who paid him to fund trips.
    What favors were exchanged at venues, in air.
    Who has gone on record about their experience.
    Where is William Jefferson Clinton.
    Is any of that credible.

    Read More
    • Replies: @druid
    Baie goed, dankie!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. @reiner Tor
    I read somewhere that a lot of ordinary Saudis were gleeful upon hearing the news of the arrests. I guess most people don’t like it so much when some of them continue to live in luxury despite things going south for the rest of the population. There might be a similar dynamic to how Russians reacted to the arrests of some of their oligarchs. The crown prince might actually try to be populist here. I’m not sure it will work in such a clannish society, or that a backlash (possibly a violent backlash) from the other princely clans is not coming soon. But the crown prince doesn’t have to be cunning like a fox. He just has to be smarter than his dumb cousins.

    When you have the indoctrinators friends of the Prince like the Mossad, the CIA, the MI6 and the entire banking/financial system of the world behind you, why give a damn to the little worthless skirmishes between his rivals? He is totally brainwashed and a perfect Manchurian candidate of Israel-US master Plan! Nothing all the bickering would make any difference today in Saudi Arabia! All is in control by the inner circle of Mossad Agents in the House of Saud!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. @reiner Tor
    I read somewhere that a lot of ordinary Saudis were gleeful upon hearing the news of the arrests. I guess most people don’t like it so much when some of them continue to live in luxury despite things going south for the rest of the population. There might be a similar dynamic to how Russians reacted to the arrests of some of their oligarchs. The crown prince might actually try to be populist here. I’m not sure it will work in such a clannish society, or that a backlash (possibly a violent backlash) from the other princely clans is not coming soon. But the crown prince doesn’t have to be cunning like a fox. He just has to be smarter than his dumb cousins.

    I’m thinking along similar lines, Tor. What if MbS is really trying to turn over a new leaf here? Back during the campaign, Trump made it eminently clear that he knew that KSA was the world’s leading financier of terrorism, and he criticized them harshly for it. So a lot of us were puzzled–even outraged–when, after becoming president, he travelled to Riyadh and did the sword dance with the Saudi king. What the hell is he doing? we all wondered. But now it’s starting to look like Trump may have cut a secret deal with MbS. Something along the lines of: drop all support for terrorism, and we pledge to defend you against Iran. Along as this does not entail our country getting sucked into any sectarian wars in the ME, I say it would all be for the best.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MEexpert
    You guys are either brain dead or have bought the Kool-Aid from Netanyahu. When will you guys come to the realization that Iran has neither any reason nor any desire to attack Saudi Arabia. Iran doesn't even have any plans to attack Israel. Netanyahu is paranoid and does not want anyone threatening Israel's hegemony in the Middle East. Trump and MbS are two useful idiots that Israel is exploiting. The presumed threat from Iran is going to bankrupt both the US and the Saudi Arabia while Israel will be smiling on the sidelines.
    , @the late Idi Amin
    thats alongs the lines my thinking too, that the salafist fighters have their funding cut from the numerous branches of the Royal family.
    That could work and all those fighters could retire back to 3rd shift at Uncle Abdul"s kabab shop however I can also can see those fighters being turned to by the relatives of the imprisoned princes against the MBS faction. and how that would go in DC.
    You see Afghanistan, imagine that in Arabia
    , @KA
    Not at all. Not by any measure of the understandings of what continue to happen in Afghanistan , Yemen, parts of Syria .
    The Salafist are still being recruited and are being airlifted or sent by ground to conflicts zones .
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. @Priss Factor
    So much corruption and so much goes unreported. And most people don't care since they are hooked to Pop Culture and other nonsense.

    Maybe this is what all societies need: An ongoing TV series about the most powerful peoples, institutions, and industries in America.

    So, imagine a TV show called the FED. It has to be based on facts than fiction. Since it takes time to ascertain facts, these shows will feature events from a month ago. Always a month-time-lag to verify facts.
    And it will show what kind of decisions took place within the FED.

    And a TV show called SUPREME COURT. A dramatization of key things that happened in SC. Again, a month-lag on the programming.

    And the PRESIDENCY

    And the CIA.

    And the FBI.

    And the NYT and other elite media.

    And IVY LEAGUES. A show on the major decisions made by university presidents and deans.

    And the Pentagon.

    And Goldman Sachs.

    And Amazon.

    And Microsoft.

    And Google.

    And Apple.

    This stuff can be made entertaining with a bit of dramatization. Outright fictionalization will not be allowed as everything has to be according to verified facts. However, narrative will of course be tightened and streamlined and dramatized with colorful personalities.

    This will be a great public service.

    And maybe every city can have a Play Production about City Hall. A never-ending series based on what happens among politicians, big time folks, and etc in the seats of power.

    That way, entertainment won't always be about escapism but about focusing on what is happening among the powerful.

    Now, there are shows like HOUSE OF CARDS that offer a vague inkling of what happens in DC. But with fictionalized characters and exaggerated situations, it's more escapism than enterism.

    We need Enterism in culture. We need to enter into the way of power.

    The 1967 movie “The President’s Analyst” mentioned the CIA and FBI by name and then the movie was stricken of those references.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. Dr. Doom says:

    Its not about corruption or “renewal”. Certainly no Renaissance will come from this. That’s a European thing. What is it? The Economy died. America is the source of the credit petrodollars that these Arabian Hillbillies used to make that fake prosperity and now they are way over their credit limits and the funny money has run out. The Whole World has been propped up with worthless fiat petrodollars. The Death of Babylon the Great is causing them to crash back to their previous forms. These “Saudis” used to be Bedouin bandits. They are now falling down to that level. They are throwing the lower levels of their “House of Saud” off the dole, now that their cheap credit has run out.

    This Whole Fake World of nWo is now FALLING DOWN.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  14. MEexpert says:
    @Priss Factor
    The Saudis appear to be planning military provocations against bad neighbour Iran. These may include attacks in Lebanon against Hezbollah

    Iran should support Hezbollah with materials and aid but not directly get involved.

    Iran should just watch Saudis get mired in ANOTHER mess. It will be two-front war for Saudis.

    Iran should support Hezbollah with materials and aid but not directly get involved.

    Iran will not get involved. It is not practical. One side benefit of the Syrian war has been rearming of Hezbollah in preparation for the next Israeli attack. This time it might come from Saudi Arabia but Israel will not be a bystander. After the first wave of bombing by the Saudis the response by Hezbollah will be directed against Israel.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. MEexpert says:
    @Seamus Padraig
    I'm thinking along similar lines, Tor. What if MbS is really trying to turn over a new leaf here? Back during the campaign, Trump made it eminently clear that he knew that KSA was the world's leading financier of terrorism, and he criticized them harshly for it. So a lot of us were puzzled--even outraged--when, after becoming president, he travelled to Riyadh and did the sword dance with the Saudi king. What the hell is he doing? we all wondered. But now it's starting to look like Trump may have cut a secret deal with MbS. Something along the lines of: drop all support for terrorism, and we pledge to defend you against Iran. Along as this does not entail our country getting sucked into any sectarian wars in the ME, I say it would all be for the best.

    You guys are either brain dead or have bought the Kool-Aid from Netanyahu. When will you guys come to the realization that Iran has neither any reason nor any desire to attack Saudi Arabia. Iran doesn’t even have any plans to attack Israel. Netanyahu is paranoid and does not want anyone threatening Israel’s hegemony in the Middle East. Trump and MbS are two useful idiots that Israel is exploiting. The presumed threat from Iran is going to bankrupt both the US and the Saudi Arabia while Israel will be smiling on the sidelines.

    Read More
    • Agree: Z-man
    • Replies: @druid
    I don't think Netanyahoo is p[paranoid! I think Israel wants no country in it's vicinity to be able to compete, financially, economically and militarily. Militarily because the very long ter,m plan of these fascist is Greater Israel!!!!
    , @JoaoAlfaiate
    Equally Israel will never attack Iran unless Bibi is 100% sure Uncle Sam will join the party.
    , @Seamus Padraig
    Go back and read my post again. I never said Iran was going to attack the KSA. But the US is going to need an excuse to keep CentCom going--they're not pulling out of the ME completely. The Russians and the Chinese realize that, of course; they're just looking for a balance of power in the Persian Gulf that will be more conducive to stability than instability. They're not expecting a total US pullout.

    As far as Bibi's concerned, I'm definitely no fan of Israel. They're just going to have to learn how to share the ME with other countries.
    , @Z-man

    Trump and MbS are two useful idiots that Israel is exploiting.
     
    I'm still holding out hope for Donald. I think he's trying to fake out the Jew press and Adelson & Co. by having his weird, Zionist son in law involved in the 'Arab-Israeli Dispute' and at the last minute pull him aside and have more even handed (competent) people take over. As far as the 'Clown Prince', he looks like an idiot savant.
    But yes the problem is The Zionist Entity, always has been.
    , @Another Realist

    Trump and MbS are two useful idiots that Israel is exploiting. The presumed threat from Iran is going to bankrupt both the US and the Saudi Arabia while Israel will be smiling on the sidelines.
     
    Word. The Crown Prince of SA and the Crown Prince of USA (Jared Kushner) definitely have something in common, both are still wet behind the ears, punching way above their weight, easily manipulated by the snakes of Israel. Trump will get brought down by his stupid nepotism.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. “We have just witnessed a palace coup in Riyadh caused by the violation of the traditional desert ruling system which was based on compromise and sharing the nation’s riches.”

    Maybe if you looked at it in the context of The Godfather the import and character would be clearer to you. MBS is simply establishing himself as Capo di tutti capi of what has always been little more than a vast criminal syndicate family.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  17. No mention of Trump’s son-in-law’s numerous visits to Saudi Arabia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Excellent point! That guy is always flying under the radar and talking to very important people and nobody knows what's going on because it is all off the record and unofficial.

    Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. handala says:

    the sauds need to be overthrown…Now.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    Then the Alirezas would take their place.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. @Seamus Padraig
    I'm thinking along similar lines, Tor. What if MbS is really trying to turn over a new leaf here? Back during the campaign, Trump made it eminently clear that he knew that KSA was the world's leading financier of terrorism, and he criticized them harshly for it. So a lot of us were puzzled--even outraged--when, after becoming president, he travelled to Riyadh and did the sword dance with the Saudi king. What the hell is he doing? we all wondered. But now it's starting to look like Trump may have cut a secret deal with MbS. Something along the lines of: drop all support for terrorism, and we pledge to defend you against Iran. Along as this does not entail our country getting sucked into any sectarian wars in the ME, I say it would all be for the best.

    thats alongs the lines my thinking too, that the salafist fighters have their funding cut from the numerous branches of the Royal family.
    That could work and all those fighters could retire back to 3rd shift at Uncle Abdul”s kabab shop however I can also can see those fighters being turned to by the relatives of the imprisoned princes against the MBS faction. and how that would go in DC.
    You see Afghanistan, imagine that in Arabia

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. KA says:
    @Seamus Padraig
    I'm thinking along similar lines, Tor. What if MbS is really trying to turn over a new leaf here? Back during the campaign, Trump made it eminently clear that he knew that KSA was the world's leading financier of terrorism, and he criticized them harshly for it. So a lot of us were puzzled--even outraged--when, after becoming president, he travelled to Riyadh and did the sword dance with the Saudi king. What the hell is he doing? we all wondered. But now it's starting to look like Trump may have cut a secret deal with MbS. Something along the lines of: drop all support for terrorism, and we pledge to defend you against Iran. Along as this does not entail our country getting sucked into any sectarian wars in the ME, I say it would all be for the best.

    Not at all. Not by any measure of the understandings of what continue to happen in Afghanistan , Yemen, parts of Syria .
    The Salafist are still being recruited and are being airlifted or sent by ground to conflicts zones .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Prince Andrew of the UK was one of the Lolita Island set as well.
    The Palace asked for leniency for Epstein, so he got 2 years in a luxury soft prison instead of the standard 20 years in a small cell with Big Mary that was the going rate for his offences.
    Prince Andrew continued to associate with Epstein when he was released.
    Who knows what bugged film footage they have on him.
    Other members of the royal family thought he was so crazy they refused to talk to him for a while.

    Read More
    • Replies: @druid
    The Ziofascist Dershowitz got off scott free!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. So after a half century or more of relative stability, the Saudi’s ally themselves with the Israelis and the next week the place is in chaos.

    Funny dat.

    Read More
    • Agree: Alden
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  23. druid says:
    @Renoman
    Saudi Arabia is the toilet of the Middle east, the sooner someone flushes it the better.

    Israel and Saudi Arabia both!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. druid says:
    @Voortrekker
    Epstein Lolita Express contact list leads to many questions.
    Who visited, not just who was on a list.
    Who paid. If Epstein, who paid him to fund trips.
    What favors were exchanged at venues, in air.
    Who has gone on record about their experience.
    Where is William Jefferson Clinton.
    Is any of that credible.

    Baie goed, dankie!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. druid says:
    @MEexpert
    You guys are either brain dead or have bought the Kool-Aid from Netanyahu. When will you guys come to the realization that Iran has neither any reason nor any desire to attack Saudi Arabia. Iran doesn't even have any plans to attack Israel. Netanyahu is paranoid and does not want anyone threatening Israel's hegemony in the Middle East. Trump and MbS are two useful idiots that Israel is exploiting. The presumed threat from Iran is going to bankrupt both the US and the Saudi Arabia while Israel will be smiling on the sidelines.

    I don’t think Netanyahoo is p[paranoid! I think Israel wants no country in it’s vicinity to be able to compete, financially, economically and militarily. Militarily because the very long ter,m plan of these fascist is Greater Israel!!!!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. druid says:
    @anonymous
    Prince Andrew of the UK was one of the Lolita Island set as well.
    The Palace asked for leniency for Epstein, so he got 2 years in a luxury soft prison instead of the standard 20 years in a small cell with Big Mary that was the going rate for his offences.
    Prince Andrew continued to associate with Epstein when he was released.
    Who knows what bugged film footage they have on him.
    Other members of the royal family thought he was so crazy they refused to talk to him for a while.

    The Ziofascist Dershowitz got off scott free!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Watcher
    So every is searching for reasonable explanation of MBS actions these last weeks. The answer is MBS Has Gone Crackers. Gone around the twist after Syria project crashes and burns. He wants to lash out at Hezbollah but there's no real purchase for him to attain any satisfaction from them. So he has chosen Saad to unleash his venom upon... There is a real news blackout on this facinting story in huge segments of the MSM.... NPR did both Sat. & Sun.'s Weekend Edition without nary a sylable of this prome story.... It just does not exist as an extremely curious event... The E.U. a parent released a condemnation as did Toot Toot Tillerson demanding that no country interfere to destabilize the patsy state.

    And speaking of such, Hirari apparently made an interview, or wrote somewhere that he is willing to rescind
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. @Renoman
    Saudi Arabia is the toilet of the Middle east, the sooner someone flushes it the better.

    Second only to Israel in terms of concentration of Turds.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. Talha says:
    @Carroll Price
    No mention of Trump's son-in-law's numerous visits to Saudi Arabia.

    Excellent point! That guy is always flying under the radar and talking to very important people and nobody knows what’s going on because it is all off the record and unofficial.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art

    Excellent point! That guy is always flying under the radar and talking to very important people and nobody knows what’s going on because it is all off the record and unofficial.
     
    Talha,

    Kushner should have to disclose his business dealings with Saudi and Israel - PERIOD.

    Think Peace --- Art

    p.s. Daddy loves Ivanka more then anything else - this is dangerous.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. Hitler couldn’t defeat the UK so he decided to invade the USSR.

    The Saudis couldn’t defeat Yemen so they decided to attack Iran.

    Can’t wait to see how this ends.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    said:
    "Hitler couldn’t defeat the UK so he decided to invade the USSR."

    Nonsense that even many in the mainstream are now refuting.

    Hitler wanted no war with Britain, he offered peace terms to the UK when he had the upper hand, he let the those utterly trapped at Dunkirk 'escape'.

    Hitler attacked the USSR because he had to, the USSR was planning an attack on Germany.

    Put down the Zionist playbook.

    Operation Barbarossa Was A Preventive Attack
    https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7999

    the rest at:
    https://forum.codoh.com/viewforum.php?f=20

    , @Delinquent Snail
    "Hitler couldn’t defeat the UK so he decided to invade the USSR."


    Wow. That might be the most idiot thing I've seen on UR, and "truth" told me he was a flat earther.

    Hitler invaded russia either because he saw the massing of soviet troops on the border and preemtively attacked the invasion, or he wanted living space for his 1000 year empire. Both are plausible, and both could be true. But Hitler *did not* invade the USSR because he couldn't win against the uk. He reached out several times to make peace (while he had the overwhelming advantage) but the british (well, Churchill) would have rather tempted oblivion then give up their empire. Which they lost any way. Churchill is easily, one of the worst people that ever lived.
    , @Anon
    The Saudis aren't finished with Yemen. Their blockade is projected to cause mass famine in that country. We need to wait and see before we can declare the Saudis defeated. Besides, the purge and complete consolidation of power is only getting started in Saudi Arabia.
    , @my2cents
    ""Hitler couldn’t defeat the UK so he decided to invade the USSR.""

    What history book does that hail from?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. @MEexpert
    You guys are either brain dead or have bought the Kool-Aid from Netanyahu. When will you guys come to the realization that Iran has neither any reason nor any desire to attack Saudi Arabia. Iran doesn't even have any plans to attack Israel. Netanyahu is paranoid and does not want anyone threatening Israel's hegemony in the Middle East. Trump and MbS are two useful idiots that Israel is exploiting. The presumed threat from Iran is going to bankrupt both the US and the Saudi Arabia while Israel will be smiling on the sidelines.

    Equally Israel will never attack Iran unless Bibi is 100% sure Uncle Sam will join the party.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. Watcher says: • Website
    @druid
    The Ziofascist Dershowitz got off scott free!

    So every is searching for reasonable explanation of MBS actions these last weeks. The answer is MBS Has Gone Crackers. Gone around the twist after Syria project crashes and burns. He wants to lash out at Hezbollah but there’s no real purchase for him to attain any satisfaction from them. So he has chosen Saad to unleash his venom upon… There is a real news blackout on this facinting story in huge segments of the MSM…. NPR did both Sat. & Sun.’s Weekend Edition without nary a sylable of this prome story…. It just does not exist as an extremely curious event… The E.U. a parent released a condemnation as did Toot Toot Tillerson demanding that no country interfere to destabilize the patsy state.

    And speaking of such, Hirari apparently made an interview, or wrote somewhere that he is willing to rescind

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. El Dato says:

    Excellent commentary on RT:

    https://www.rt.com/op-edge/409740-hariri-lebanon-saudi-arabia/

    When not about the “fascism-defeated-in-WWII” fetish, RT commentary generally is good. I understand why Kerry doesn’t want people to click.

    While Lebanese academics like Dr Jamal Wakim stake their reputations on saying that Israel will invade Lebanon in the next 12 months, the Saudis believe an economic blockade of Lebanon would have much more effective results on destabilizing the country and causing chaos which could then weaken Hezbollah internally, thus providing the perfect moment for Israel to strike, if Hezbollah is forced to take control of Lebanon. It’s a hell of a gamble though. And already looking like it can’t work as, historically, the Lebanese have always supported Hezbollah when the country is threatened. They are not stupid and can already see that imposing a financial crisis – by trying to starve the economy of trade and remittances from outside – is an act of war in itself. But the Middle East is a region consumed by fake news and checkbook journalists and those in the West who only give the crisis a cursory look might be fooled in believing the planted narrative that “Hezbollah has declared war on Saudi Arabia,” which many newspapers dutifully and shamefully published (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/09/world/middleeast/saudi-arabia-lebanon-war.html). Hezbollah’s mere presence, let alone military strength is enough to spook the Saudis. This is clear. The smartest thing MbS and Kushner could do now is to deflate the balloon on Hariri becoming an iconic bedroom poster like Che Guevara before it’s too late and send him back to Lebanon to negotiate a deal, as surely he will achieve much more in Beirut than he can ever in Riyadh. But Tillerson also needs to intervene, rather than merely warn against the Saudis creating a proxy war in Lebanon before it’s too late, and the Saudis pull the entire region into a new war which can never be won, and Saudi Arabia and its new ally certainly can’t afford to lose. Who knows? One day we may start even believing the click bait masterpieces of the New York Times. But don’t hold your breath.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  33. WATCHER says: • Website

    his resignation if Hesbollah will stay out of regional conflicts… Good Luck with that, lol…

    What does this really mean and why is Saad saying that. Hesbollah is the villian of this madness.

    Let me get this straight, Hariri wants Hesbolllah to Stand Down to give SaudI another shot at defeating Assad sans Hesbollah….What are they putting in their hookahs theez days over there..???
    & what would Russia do, just sit on their hands?

    If Saad’s proposed scenario of Hesbollah staying out of regional conflicts were to cum to fruition. The biggest winner would be ISIS, AL Nursa & depending whether another Israeli invasion of Lebanon would constitute a regional conflict, Israel would get two wins.. Their Suni Proxy ISIS, ISL DAESH would be free to attack assad without fear of Hesbollah rooting them out of their rat holes to an unhappy ending, and their ISIS ISL & DASH rats can again give Saudis & Israelis a good return 4 their money, support & encouragemen!!

    I don’T see Saad’s dream being a reality when he awakes from whatever drug, hypnosis or whatever mix the devil gave to Saad to paralyzethe his reason & mind…. Maybe we will know someday just as we now Know how Yassir Arafat. C was ushered off the Palestinian bully pulpit…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  34. anon says: • Disclaimer

    The Saudis can’t attack anyone, they have nothing but money to pay others to act on their behalf. Their supposed army is composed of Yemenis recruited from friendly tribes and others from the Muslim world. Who knows who is really piloting their planes. The Houthis are a handful and caused the British to leave in the early 60′s. The Yemen and Syrian projects are failures that have cost them many billions. Now it may be payback time for the Saudis at the hands of the Syrians and Iranians as well as other aggrieved parties in the region. The place is probably crawling with Iranian and Syrian spies and agents so who knows how safe the current Saudi leaders are at present. They may be looking for the US to be their protector since they were in league with the US in the Syrian atrocity. The Iran-Syrian-Hezbollah-Shiite axis has emerged strengthened and now looks to be the new reality. Perhaps they’ll be able to coax the US to do something on their behalf.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ted Nuisance
    The Iran-Syrian-Hezbollah-Shiite axis has emerged strengthened and now looks to be the new reality.??????????? ahahahahahahahahahahaaaaa

    nice 2013 "analysis"

    sheesh it's tough to be that wrong. everything you said is garbage.

    https://twitter.com/ThomasWictor/status/926960414218268673

    https://twitter.com/thomaswictor/status/927052304498298885

    , @Philip Owen
    The Houthis were in fact, the only group to force the British out at gunpoint. Most end of Empire insurrections were local grabs for power as the British left rather than revolutions. The USA is the other major exception.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. @MEexpert
    You guys are either brain dead or have bought the Kool-Aid from Netanyahu. When will you guys come to the realization that Iran has neither any reason nor any desire to attack Saudi Arabia. Iran doesn't even have any plans to attack Israel. Netanyahu is paranoid and does not want anyone threatening Israel's hegemony in the Middle East. Trump and MbS are two useful idiots that Israel is exploiting. The presumed threat from Iran is going to bankrupt both the US and the Saudi Arabia while Israel will be smiling on the sidelines.

    Go back and read my post again. I never said Iran was going to attack the KSA. But the US is going to need an excuse to keep CentCom going–they’re not pulling out of the ME completely. The Russians and the Chinese realize that, of course; they’re just looking for a balance of power in the Persian Gulf that will be more conducive to stability than instability. They’re not expecting a total US pullout.

    As far as Bibi’s concerned, I’m definitely no fan of Israel. They’re just going to have to learn how to share the ME with other countries.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. Finally, someone is starting to go off the deep state approved script.

    This is a purge. By a fellow putting millions at risk of starvation. His solution to having squandered a fortune in Yemen and Syria yet achieved nothing is to cannibalize his own people and double down with bigger and more catastrophic wars.

    What could go wrong?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  37. Wally says: • Website
    @JoaoAlfaiate
    Hitler couldn't defeat the UK so he decided to invade the USSR.

    The Saudis couldn't defeat Yemen so they decided to attack Iran.

    Can't wait to see how this ends.

    said:
    “Hitler couldn’t defeat the UK so he decided to invade the USSR.”

    Nonsense that even many in the mainstream are now refuting.

    Hitler wanted no war with Britain, he offered peace terms to the UK when he had the upper hand, he let the those utterly trapped at Dunkirk ‘escape’.

    Hitler attacked the USSR because he had to, the USSR was planning an attack on Germany.

    Put down the Zionist playbook.

    Operation Barbarossa Was A Preventive Attack

    https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7999

    the rest at:

    https://forum.codoh.com/viewforum.php?f=20

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Stalin was taken completely by surprise, and Soviet resistance fell apart. The Nazis walked right into Russia for hundreds of miles. Stalin had to put together whole armies behind the Urals before he could fight back in any realistic way. This doesn't sound like a guy who was planning a surprise attack on Germany. Stalin was caught completely unprepared.

    Stalin was happy to grab chunks of weaker neighboring countries, but he wasn't a fool, either. He was extremely paranoid about losing his own head--hence his mass slaughter and suspicion of his own citizens--and men like that don't take on a genuinely dangerous foe like an armed, aggressive Germany which has just conquered half of Europe. Men like Stalin only attack obviously weak counties like Poland when they see a clear advantage on their own side and little risk in the attempt. Stalin was too shrewd and calculating to stick his hand into a bear trap like Germany when he saw no easy or clear way to get out of it intact and end up on top of the situation. You misunderstand men like Stalin.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. According to political analysts at Russia Today just a high level power struggle.
    Just like Trump and Deep State, with the difference that in the USA until now there are no arrests and accidents.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    Another totally ignorant comment from one who knows nothing about either Saudi or the United States.

    Or perhaps you didn't notice that Trump was elected by an uprising of the Whites who have been abused and beaten by democrat blacks, and prevented from making a living by Jewish affirmative action and subject to 60 years of verbal and written propaganda that we are the most evil group of humans that ever existed.

    We, the deplorable, despised untouchables elected Trump against the billionaires and the entire written and spoken media.

    Trump will be able to do nothing to help Whites unless he puts every Judge and college professor and 90 percent of the journalists in detention centers, but he ran against the anti White deep state and won.

    You are not only White, but fairskinned maybe blue eyes and brown haired N. European. Instead of making snarky ignorant comments against American Whites, why don't you come over here and live?

    You are a White man. In America you are not one of the liberal idiot intellectual aristocrats. As a white man you will be totally despised by the idiot intellectual media and academia you so ardently admire.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. Z-man says:
    @MEexpert
    You guys are either brain dead or have bought the Kool-Aid from Netanyahu. When will you guys come to the realization that Iran has neither any reason nor any desire to attack Saudi Arabia. Iran doesn't even have any plans to attack Israel. Netanyahu is paranoid and does not want anyone threatening Israel's hegemony in the Middle East. Trump and MbS are two useful idiots that Israel is exploiting. The presumed threat from Iran is going to bankrupt both the US and the Saudi Arabia while Israel will be smiling on the sidelines.

    Trump and MbS are two useful idiots that Israel is exploiting.

    I’m still holding out hope for Donald. I think he’s trying to fake out the Jew press and Adelson & Co. by having his weird, Zionist son in law involved in the ‘Arab-Israeli Dispute’ and at the last minute pull him aside and have more even handed (competent) people take over. As far as the ‘Clown Prince’, he looks like an idiot savant.
    But yes the problem is The Zionist Entity, always has been.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. @JoaoAlfaiate
    Hitler couldn't defeat the UK so he decided to invade the USSR.

    The Saudis couldn't defeat Yemen so they decided to attack Iran.

    Can't wait to see how this ends.

    “Hitler couldn’t defeat the UK so he decided to invade the USSR.”

    Wow. That might be the most idiot thing I’ve seen on UR, and “truth” told me he was a flat earther.

    Hitler invaded russia either because he saw the massing of soviet troops on the border and preemtively attacked the invasion, or he wanted living space for his 1000 year empire. Both are plausible, and both could be true. But Hitler *did not* invade the USSR because he couldn’t win against the uk. He reached out several times to make peace (while he had the overwhelming advantage) but the british (well, Churchill) would have rather tempted oblivion then give up their empire. Which they lost any way. Churchill is easily, one of the worst people that ever lived.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Hitler attacked Russia because he thought he could get away with it and win. That's all it was. At the time he lunged into Russia, he had one foe left standing--the UK. Hitler was in the unique situation of understanding that the UK--alone--was no danger to him at this point because they could not pull off a large-scale, mass amphibious invasion of the European mainland by themselves.

    How did Hitler know this? Because he'd studied that very same problem from the opposite direction for months. That's what Operation Sea Lion was. Hitler put in hundreds of hours planning and studying to invade the UK, then gave up because he decided it was too difficult to pull off. But he also realized that it was also too difficult for the UK to pull it off by themselves from the opposite direction, for the very same logistical reasons. At that particular moment in time, the UK was a weaker military power than Germany, and Hitler knew that if he couldn't do it, he also knew the UK couldn't do it either. The British didn't have the necessary manpower or resources.

    Hitler knew the problems inherent in such an operation extremely well because he'd studied it for so long, and people posting here on the Unz do not grasp this point. Hitler definitely took this into his calculations in his war against Russia. With his rear protected and the rest of the European continent conquered, Hitler felt with an absolute certainty that he was free to attack Russia, and he did. He'd always been planning to seize all those huge Russian land masses anyway for German settlers. He wasn't just planning to conquer Russia militarily, he was planning to turn it into a German country via expansion and settlement with German peoples akin to what the British did with settlements in North America in the 1600s and 1700s.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. Chiron says:

    The alliance between the Saudis and Israel is not talked about in the mainstream media but is the center of what’s is happening in the Middle-East, of the 19 terrorists from 9/11 15 were Saudi citizens but the US targets have been Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Iran, Lebanon, Yemen,.. and Al-Qaeda and other Sunni terrorists became allies of the US in Syria.

    Who runs American foreign policy?

    Read More
    • Replies: @MEexpert

    Who runs American foreign policy?
     
    Netanyahu through AIPAC/neocons/MSM and the congress.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. nothing about the reforms of islam (HUGE) or the other reforms?? just a bunch of frightened speculation from people so far removed from reality it’s actually funny. try not to take this the wrong way but, you’re all retarded.

    if you want to view it as Machiavellian then it’s brilliant… he has public support, saudi arabia has a very young population… young people have iphones, the reforms make the young people love him. he purged his enemies and consolidated power WITH public support. He knows what time it is, unlike you all. He basically just turned his line into british royals forever…

    you guys and your cartoonish understanding of things is funny.

    he WILL bring stability to an ARAB led middle east. he will sort out Iran too.

    he has the miliary. he has the public. he has financing. he has the iron will to reform. he has israel onside

    you guys have irrational anger and stupidity.

    plus who even cares? y’all ought to worry about more pressing issues at home. that’s legitimately worrisome

    TRUMP2020 bitches!

    Read More
    • Troll: L.K
    • Replies: @anonymous

    he will sort out Iran too.
    he has the miliary. he has the public. he has financing. he has the iron will to reform. he has israel onside
     
    Yeah, sure. Commenter is in fantasy land. Problem with public discussion is that various crackpots chime in who are long on invective but provide no information or anything of value. This Saudi prince, greatest man in history and yada yada. Explain to us retards, then, Mr know-it-all.
    , @renfro
    '' if you want to view it as Machiavellian then it’s brilliant… he has public support, saudi arabia has a very young population… young people have iphones, the reforms make the young people love him. he purged his enemies and consolidated power WITH public support. He knows what time it is, unlike you all. He basically just turned his line into british royals forever…''>>>>


    LOL...you sound like a friend of mine who thought Egypt's 'second revolution ' was just the ticket to get rid of the Muslim brotherhood Pres who was elected after the first revolution.
    He would not admit that it was a coup by Gen Sisi..and when I told him that Sisi would make himself president and 'purge/execute ' all political dissenters without trials he didn't believe that either ...Until it happened.

    Some people see what they want to see....despite all clues to the contrary.
    , @Seamus Padraig
    I'm not closed off to the idea that this could end well--in fact, I do hope it ends well. But like the author of the piece said, time will tell.
    , @renfro
    '' he has public support, saudi arabia has a very young population… young people have iphones, the reforms make the young people love him. he purged his enemies and consolidated power WITH public support. He knows what time it is, unlike you all. He basically just turned his line into british royals forever… ''>>>>

    Say hello to reality bitch.

    '' Prince Mohammad bin Salman slashed the state budget, freezing government contracts and reducing the pay of civil employees as part of drastic austerity measures. Within hours of doing so, he bought the Serene, a billion dollar yacht ''

    Those young people with their iphones aren't going to wait until 2030--bin Salam's announced time table for his new Saudi to come into being. They will be seething with disappointment with a year or two when they see no improvement in their futures.
    bin Salam will be deposed or assassinated with 2 to 4 years....count on it.

    , @sarz
    Ted Nuisance has half the story. That shows you what's in it for Saudi Arabia. But what's in it for the American nation-state with its brain-parasite Judaia?

    Half of the Machiavellian move by Trump would be to help and use MBS in remaking the whole Muslim world in line with Khomeini's Islamic -- not Shia -- revolution (where no Shia would hesitate to pray behind a Sunni imam) or the Ba'ath secular Muslim solution. That's on the cards with MBS's "moderate Islam" or just simple Islam in place of its metastasized variant, Wahhabism.

    But how to undo the Judaic grip on America and the West? The critcal player is Kushner. Interesting that the Jews closest to Putin are also Chabad. Maybe Netanyahu and the Neocons are being suckered into pushing for a war against Iran or its ally Hezbollah. Looks like the Rothschilds are aware of this if you read the editorials in the Economist damning Trump's moves against the Iran nuclear deal. And you also have Bernard-Henri Levy pointing at Trump's betrayal of the Iraqi Kurds.

    Maybe Trump sees the endgame where Russia and the SCO take a page out of the NATO playbook. America has parked its nukes in Belgium, Netherlands, Germany, Italy and Turkey. These are "shared" with the host country, at its disposal without, apparently, violating the Non-Proliferation Treaty. So, in a serious war scenario, Russia might do the same for Syria and Iran.

    That would be the end of troubles with the Jewish state as the focus and ligature of Judaic globalist power.

    Undoing the Fed and the rules that govern the media might follow, on the way to making America America again.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. @anon
    The Saudis can't attack anyone, they have nothing but money to pay others to act on their behalf. Their supposed army is composed of Yemenis recruited from friendly tribes and others from the Muslim world. Who knows who is really piloting their planes. The Houthis are a handful and caused the British to leave in the early 60's. The Yemen and Syrian projects are failures that have cost them many billions. Now it may be payback time for the Saudis at the hands of the Syrians and Iranians as well as other aggrieved parties in the region. The place is probably crawling with Iranian and Syrian spies and agents so who knows how safe the current Saudi leaders are at present. They may be looking for the US to be their protector since they were in league with the US in the Syrian atrocity. The Iran-Syrian-Hezbollah-Shiite axis has emerged strengthened and now looks to be the new reality. Perhaps they'll be able to coax the US to do something on their behalf.

    The Iran-Syrian-Hezbollah-Shiite axis has emerged strengthened and now looks to be the new reality.??????????? ahahahahahahahahahahaaaaa

    nice 2013 “analysis”

    sheesh it’s tough to be that wrong. everything you said is garbage.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. Saudi Arabia is going broke , their oil reserves are being depleted and their money reserves have been pissed away and so they started a war in Yemen to steal their oil and they are what they are a bunch of thieves and cutthroats who are reaping what they have sown.

    Saudi Arabia has always been the British and Americans puppet and they were their helper in creating and funding AL CIADA aka ISIS along with ISRAEL and so they can rot in hell.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  45. Joe Hide says:

    Information + disinformation + misinformation = intentional + unintentional + both???

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  46. wayfarer says:

    Israel’s Mossad, “For by evil greedy guidance you can wage your war.”
    source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mossad

    Zionism’s “Profitable Global War of Terror!”

    “Greater Israel”: Zionist Plan for the Middle East
    source: https://www.globalresearch.ca/greater-israel-the-zionist-plan-for-the-middle-east/5324815

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  47. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Renoman
    Saudi Arabia is the toilet of the Middle east, the sooner someone flushes it the better.

    [Saudi Arabia is the toilet of the Middle east, the sooner someone flushes it the better.]

    It is true, but both criminal American regime and Apartheid regime drink out of this toilet for $$$$$$$$$, to wage more wars. Saudi Arabia is a colony that wage war on behalf of the criminal zionists and imperialists. Why does Saudis should kill Yemeni children. They do it because the American regime wants them to do for geopolitical gain. Only stupid people repeat the lies of the criminal zionist/imperialist regime that there is a rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia. This is not the case. These crimes against humanity takes place because the zionist and imperialist regimes using DIVIDE AND RULE. Whoever repeats these nonsense to deceive people should receive a slap on the face to wake the stooge up.

    Soon Saudi Arabia will be broken financially, then the criminal west turns around and label them with terrorism that they are using on behalf of Trump and Netanyahu, like Al Qaeda. But the world knows that Washington and criminals in occupied Palestine are the MAIN TERRORISTS ON EARTH. Their demise is coming.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Ted Nuisance
    nothing about the reforms of islam (HUGE) or the other reforms?? just a bunch of frightened speculation from people so far removed from reality it's actually funny. try not to take this the wrong way but, you're all retarded.

    if you want to view it as Machiavellian then it's brilliant... he has public support, saudi arabia has a very young population... young people have iphones, the reforms make the young people love him. he purged his enemies and consolidated power WITH public support. He knows what time it is, unlike you all. He basically just turned his line into british royals forever...

    you guys and your cartoonish understanding of things is funny.

    he WILL bring stability to an ARAB led middle east. he will sort out Iran too.

    he has the miliary. he has the public. he has financing. he has the iron will to reform. he has israel onside

    you guys have irrational anger and stupidity.

    plus who even cares? y'all ought to worry about more pressing issues at home. that's legitimately worrisome

    TRUMP2020 bitches!

    he will sort out Iran too.
    he has the miliary. he has the public. he has financing. he has the iron will to reform. he has israel onside

    Yeah, sure. Commenter is in fantasy land. Problem with public discussion is that various crackpots chime in who are long on invective but provide no information or anything of value. This Saudi prince, greatest man in history and yada yada. Explain to us retards, then, Mr know-it-all.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. Moi says:

    Muslims around the world should reject the Saudi “royals” as kafirs and remove their control of Mecca/Medina.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  50. Art says:

    It appears that Prince Mohammed and his men have so far grabbed at least $800 billion from those arrested to refill the war-depleted Saudi coffers.

    How do you steal 800,000,000,000 dollars – there can be only on answer – Jew banks!

    How much of that money will end up in Jew hands?

    Do not sell term life insurance to the Prince.

    Think Peace — Art

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  51. Art says:
    @Talha
    Excellent point! That guy is always flying under the radar and talking to very important people and nobody knows what's going on because it is all off the record and unofficial.

    Peace.

    Excellent point! That guy is always flying under the radar and talking to very important people and nobody knows what’s going on because it is all off the record and unofficial.

    Talha,

    Kushner should have to disclose his business dealings with Saudi and Israel – PERIOD.

    Think Peace — Art

    p.s. Daddy loves Ivanka more then anything else – this is dangerous.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey Art,

    Kushner should have to disclose his business dealings with Saudi and Israel – PERIOD.
     
    Absolutely! If the Democrats were really an opposition party they would be going after Trump for this! He is allowing private family connections to set up foreign policy without disclosure to the American people. This should be completely unacceptable!

    But instead we get nonsense about Russians in our closets and stealing elections.

    At least the Brits are better than us. Their secretary of state for foreign development met secretly with Israelis to - get this - give UK aid money to Israeli military:
    "Patel admitted that after the 13-day visit, she had wanted to give British aid money to the Israeli army in the Golan Heights."
    http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/11/uk-minister-priti-patel-resigns-secret-israel-trip-171108192036982.html

    And had to resign:
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/08/europe/uk-israel-priti-patel-row/index.html

    On this side of the pond, barely a peep about this stuff and definitely no political scandal. Who knows, maybe Kushner is promising Israel to cover the lost aid funds from the UK scandal.

    Peace.
    , @Sherman
    Hey Genius

    "Daddy loves Ivanka more then" s/b "daddy likes Ivanka more than".

    Peace
    Sherm

    P.S. How are the PORK and beans?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. Talha says:
    @Randal

    Is this the beginning of the collapse of the House of Saud? Or a Saudi renaissance led by Prince Mohammed as he claims? Stay tuned.
     
    This is the key question, of huge import to the longer term future of the ME.

    In the meantime, the issue is what the collateral damage inflicted upon the region by the rivals for Saudi power is likely to be, with Lebanon and Iran the likely next targets.

    Can the Saudis really get away with so openly admitting what everyone has known to be true for decades - that they are firm allies of Israel? Are the Arabs really that beaten and cowed?

    Hey Randal,

    Are the Arabs really that beaten and cowed?

    The Muslim ME has barely had time to breathe. It has been rolling from one disaster to another. The only ones that have been able to avoid this (to a large extent) have been the Gulf Arabs. So, yes, those other populations are pretty exhausted – even if they haven’t been trashed directly, they have had an influx of refugees. A visitor to Egypt recently told me he was surprised at how many Syrians he had seen in Egypt (which is not a very rich country). And it probably has some Libyans there too.

    The Saudis can fight wars (often by proxy) that decimate other populations, like Yemen or Syria, without worrying about consequences. But they know they couldn’t take on someone as big as Iran or Turkey or Egypt.

    But I think this revelation is actually a good thing. When this is all out in the open, and especially if the state-allied Salafi-Wahhabi preachers say nothing against it, they will lose a heck of a lot of credibility in the eyes of your average Muslim.

    Saudis can get away with it for now – this is likely their death-knell in the eventual future.

    Peace.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Talha says:
    @Art

    Excellent point! That guy is always flying under the radar and talking to very important people and nobody knows what’s going on because it is all off the record and unofficial.
     
    Talha,

    Kushner should have to disclose his business dealings with Saudi and Israel - PERIOD.

    Think Peace --- Art

    p.s. Daddy loves Ivanka more then anything else - this is dangerous.

    Hey Art,

    Kushner should have to disclose his business dealings with Saudi and Israel – PERIOD.

    Absolutely! If the Democrats were really an opposition party they would be going after Trump for this! He is allowing private family connections to set up foreign policy without disclosure to the American people. This should be completely unacceptable!

    But instead we get nonsense about Russians in our closets and stealing elections.

    At least the Brits are better than us. Their secretary of state for foreign development met secretly with Israelis to – get this – give UK aid money to Israeli military:
    “Patel admitted that after the 13-day visit, she had wanted to give British aid money to the Israeli army in the Golan Heights.”

    http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/11/uk-minister-priti-patel-resigns-secret-israel-trip-171108192036982.html

    And had to resign:

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/08/europe/uk-israel-priti-patel-row/index.html

    On this side of the pond, barely a peep about this stuff and definitely no political scandal. Who knows, maybe Kushner is promising Israel to cover the lost aid funds from the UK scandal.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Another Realist
    The UK managed to find an Indian woman even dumber than the one Trump sent to the UN. Would be funny if it weren't so scary. Both of those dingbats must be sleeping with Netanyahu, he's got them both eating out of the palm of his hands.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. Sherman says:
    @Art

    Excellent point! That guy is always flying under the radar and talking to very important people and nobody knows what’s going on because it is all off the record and unofficial.
     
    Talha,

    Kushner should have to disclose his business dealings with Saudi and Israel - PERIOD.

    Think Peace --- Art

    p.s. Daddy loves Ivanka more then anything else - this is dangerous.

    Hey Genius

    “Daddy loves Ivanka more then” s/b “daddy likes Ivanka more than”.

    Peace
    Sherm

    P.S. How are the PORK and beans?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @JOHN CHUCKMAN
    WHAT IS REALLY GOING ON IN SAUDI ARABIA?

    John Chuckman

    “Trump Says Saudi Elites Caught In Anti-Corruption Probe Were ‘Milking’ Kingdom For Years”

    This is just nonsense from Trump.

    Corruption is and has been everywhere in Saudi Arabia. How else could it be with all the countless billions changing hands in a fairly closed society?

    So, it is easy for a guy like the new Crown Prince to glance around and conveniently find some corruption among people he wants to discredit anyway.

    It may go beyond merely discrediting them to having hundreds of billions seized by the Crown Prince. Not a bad day’s work.

    What is going on is a kind of coup against the old order by the new usurper Crown Prince. His recent appointment was by a King well known for his senility, and it suddenly and surprisingly upset the established order of succession and all kinds of extended family compacts.

    We likely will never know what truly happened in this secretive kingdom. But we do know the abrupt changes created lots of enemies who needed attending to, and that seems to be what is happening.

    And the enemies have no friends in Washington to whom they can appeal. The old order in Saudi Arabia suffered terribly in the wake of 9/11, and despite great efforts to pacify the US with new levels of cooperation, it is now being swept out.

    Now, whatever is considered good for a hyper-aggressive United States is coincidentally good for its de facto colony in the Middle East.

    Trump himself has already proved to be one of Israel’s best-ever American friends. Israel has long had great influence, but it possibly never had it so good as it does now, as with a UN Ambassador who speaks as though she were a joint appointment of Trump and Netanyahu. Trump’s only competitor in this regard would be Lyndon Johnson.

    The US and Israel closely embrace the usurper because he has proven his dependability with bloody projects like making illegal war on Yemen. That war is exactly like the proxy war waged by mercenaries – ISIS and Al-Nusra et al - in Syria except that in this case it is the open work of a nation-state. And now he joins Israel in making threats on Lebanon.

    In all the Neocon Wars in the Mideast, great effort has been made, one way or another, not to have Israel at center stage, to avoid having Israel appear as aggressor. But, in fact, without the influence of Israel, none of these terrible wars would have happened.

    Yes, the Crown Prince will be a dependable component in the years-long American-Israeli project of creating a new Middle East. The Crown Prince is essentially Israel's man in Saudi Arabia, just as President el-Sisi is in Egypt. Israel is comfortable being surrounded by absolute governments, so long as they are absolute governments beholden to its patron, the United States.

    Right now, the new Crown Prince is doing another bloody service for Israeli interests. The Prime Minister of Lebanon, Saad Hariri, was called to come to Riyadh in the King’s name for some business, as it turned out on false pretenses. Hariri had his plane surrounded and he was effectively arrested upon landing. Just pure modern piracy. Later, and who knows after what threats, he announced his sudden and unexpected resignation as prime minister, and he remains in Saudi Arabia.

    It just so happens, in very recent time, Netanyahu and some of his officials have made some very ugly noises against Lebanon and even staged a large-scale set of war games, including calling up reservists, clearly threatening the country.

    Israel just cannot stand the idea of Hezbollah being part of the Lebanese government whereas a reasonable observer would say Lebanon had achieved a peaceful balance in governing a land of many diverse political and religious groups.

    After all, it hasn’t been that long ago since Israel helped catapult Lebanon into a terrible, bloody civil war, and it did so with its own bloody and unwarranted invasion of the country. Hezbollah, an organization which has never been a true terrorist group no matter what Israel goes on about, came into its own by opposing Israel’s long-term, illegal occupation of Southern Lebanon.

    They were only defending what is theirs, but they made Israel look very bad, and that is an unforgivable offence. So, here we have the new Saudi Crown Prince doing more dirty work on Israel’s behalf, much as with his war in Yemen where he bombs civilians regularly, saving Israel from having to act on its own to get what it wants in someone else’s country.

    You see, if Israel itself actually had to do all the ugly deeds it wants done in the region, the world would see it with blinding clarity for the pariah state that it truly is, starting wars incessantly. Proxies – whether mercenary gangs like ISIS and Al-Nusra in Syria or tyrants like the new Saudi Crown Prince in Yemen and Lebanon - are the latest fashion statement from Tel Aviv.

    “In all the Neocon Wars in the Mideast, great effort has been made, one way or another, not to have Israel at center stage, to avoid having Israel appear as aggressor. But, in fact, without the influence of Israel, none of these terrible wars would have happened.”

    Nonsense. Sunnis and Shiites have been slaughtering fighting each for centuries without the influence of Israel. Sunni and Shiite hatred for each other and rivalry with each other has a basis that is independent of what they feel about Israel. You don’t know their religious history well enough if you’re making that claim.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    when were Sunis and Shias fighting with each other on religious baisis?
    , @Aren Haich
    In the modern era, religious loyalties are no match for nationalist aspirations. The Sunni enmity against the Shia has proved to be a convenient and valuable tool for the Western powers and Israel to sow division among Muslims.
    In the 1980s, millions of Iraqi Shia fought millions of Iranian Shia. It was Iraqi nationalism which had fueled the war and kept Iraqi Shia persevere against the Shia Iran for 8 long years.
    The present conflict of interest between Iran and the Saudis has also its roots in nationalist aspirations and very little to do with which is Sunni and Which Shia.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @JoaoAlfaiate
    Hitler couldn't defeat the UK so he decided to invade the USSR.

    The Saudis couldn't defeat Yemen so they decided to attack Iran.

    Can't wait to see how this ends.

    The Saudis aren’t finished with Yemen. Their blockade is projected to cause mass famine in that country. We need to wait and see before we can declare the Saudis defeated. Besides, the purge and complete consolidation of power is only getting started in Saudi Arabia.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Wally
    said:
    "Hitler couldn’t defeat the UK so he decided to invade the USSR."

    Nonsense that even many in the mainstream are now refuting.

    Hitler wanted no war with Britain, he offered peace terms to the UK when he had the upper hand, he let the those utterly trapped at Dunkirk 'escape'.

    Hitler attacked the USSR because he had to, the USSR was planning an attack on Germany.

    Put down the Zionist playbook.

    Operation Barbarossa Was A Preventive Attack
    https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7999

    the rest at:
    https://forum.codoh.com/viewforum.php?f=20

    Stalin was taken completely by surprise, and Soviet resistance fell apart. The Nazis walked right into Russia for hundreds of miles. Stalin had to put together whole armies behind the Urals before he could fight back in any realistic way. This doesn’t sound like a guy who was planning a surprise attack on Germany. Stalin was caught completely unprepared.

    Stalin was happy to grab chunks of weaker neighboring countries, but he wasn’t a fool, either. He was extremely paranoid about losing his own head–hence his mass slaughter and suspicion of his own citizens–and men like that don’t take on a genuinely dangerous foe like an armed, aggressive Germany which has just conquered half of Europe. Men like Stalin only attack obviously weak counties like Poland when they see a clear advantage on their own side and little risk in the attempt. Stalin was too shrewd and calculating to stick his hand into a bear trap like Germany when he saw no easy or clear way to get out of it intact and end up on top of the situation. You misunderstand men like Stalin.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mulegino1
    Stalin and his generals were taken by surprise, indeed, but only because of the Wehrmacht preempting (possibly within a few weeks) the gigantic invasion forces deploying in offensive formations in the vulnerable Bialystok and Lvov salients, as well as the most powerful army in the world, the 9th Rifle Corps deploying along the Romanian border within easy striking distance of the Romanian oil fields. None of this would make any sense in a defensive context and is the only factor that can explain the vast encirclements and netting of hundreds of thousands of prisoners within the first few weeks of Barbarossa.

    Hitler admitted to Marshal Mannerheim that he knew that Fall Barbarossa was a desperate gamble and that the Wehrmacht was not equipped to fight a long war of attrition or in freezing cold winters. Nevertheless, he decided to act anyway. If the Soviet forces had succeeded in seizing the Romanian oil fields, cutting them off from Germany, then the mechanized bulk of the Wehrmacht would have ground to a halt and the entire Continent of Europe would have been submerged in the Soviet tsunami:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClR9tcpKZec
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Delinquent Snail
    "Hitler couldn’t defeat the UK so he decided to invade the USSR."


    Wow. That might be the most idiot thing I've seen on UR, and "truth" told me he was a flat earther.

    Hitler invaded russia either because he saw the massing of soviet troops on the border and preemtively attacked the invasion, or he wanted living space for his 1000 year empire. Both are plausible, and both could be true. But Hitler *did not* invade the USSR because he couldn't win against the uk. He reached out several times to make peace (while he had the overwhelming advantage) but the british (well, Churchill) would have rather tempted oblivion then give up their empire. Which they lost any way. Churchill is easily, one of the worst people that ever lived.

    Hitler attacked Russia because he thought he could get away with it and win. That’s all it was. At the time he lunged into Russia, he had one foe left standing–the UK. Hitler was in the unique situation of understanding that the UK–alone–was no danger to him at this point because they could not pull off a large-scale, mass amphibious invasion of the European mainland by themselves.

    How did Hitler know this? Because he’d studied that very same problem from the opposite direction for months. That’s what Operation Sea Lion was. Hitler put in hundreds of hours planning and studying to invade the UK, then gave up because he decided it was too difficult to pull off. But he also realized that it was also too difficult for the UK to pull it off by themselves from the opposite direction, for the very same logistical reasons. At that particular moment in time, the UK was a weaker military power than Germany, and Hitler knew that if he couldn’t do it, he also knew the UK couldn’t do it either. The British didn’t have the necessary manpower or resources.

    Hitler knew the problems inherent in such an operation extremely well because he’d studied it for so long, and people posting here on the Unz do not grasp this point. Hitler definitely took this into his calculations in his war against Russia. With his rear protected and the rest of the European continent conquered, Hitler felt with an absolute certainty that he was free to attack Russia, and he did. He’d always been planning to seize all those huge Russian land masses anyway for German settlers. He wasn’t just planning to conquer Russia militarily, he was planning to turn it into a German country via expansion and settlement with German peoples akin to what the British did with settlements in North America in the 1600s and 1700s.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Miro23

    Hitler attacked Russia because he thought he could get away with it and win.
     
    “You have only to kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will come crashing down.” Hitler, June 22nd 1941.
    , @Delinquent Snail
    So Hitler's attack on russia had nothing to do with stopping the communists from launching a surprise attack on eastern europe? The massing of troops on the border werent a precursor to an invasion?

    I know he planned to expand into the east for his countries "living space", but i was under the impression his hand was forced and he made the attack early, to stop the Russians from blitzkrieging everything east of germany. Werent communism and Nazi-ism conflicting ideologies that wanted to stomp the other out? It just seems out of character for hitler to make such a foolish mistake like invading russia while he wasnt prepared for the long war with them.

    I agree with your point about hitler knowing an invasion across the english channel was a shot in the dark for both germany and england. England was on its last leg, but a cornered dog fights hardest and hitler realized it wasnt worth the effort, plus he still held out hope that the english would come to their senses and join Germany.
    , @my2cents
    WOW - And all this wisdom came to you how?. By way of the usual propaganda? or a mind reader?

    The Netherlands/Belgium/ France/Denmark were invaded because German intelligence discovered that the UK would invade Germany via one of these country.
    Imagine Germany's surprise to find UK troops at Dunkirk in May 1940.....which were surrounded by the Germans and were evacuated by Britain, so German intelligence was pretty much spot on.

    I survived German occupation....I was there. The opinions expressed here about WW2/Hitler border on amusing in their ignorance and absurdity. 8-)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. renfro says:
    @Ted Nuisance
    nothing about the reforms of islam (HUGE) or the other reforms?? just a bunch of frightened speculation from people so far removed from reality it's actually funny. try not to take this the wrong way but, you're all retarded.

    if you want to view it as Machiavellian then it's brilliant... he has public support, saudi arabia has a very young population... young people have iphones, the reforms make the young people love him. he purged his enemies and consolidated power WITH public support. He knows what time it is, unlike you all. He basically just turned his line into british royals forever...

    you guys and your cartoonish understanding of things is funny.

    he WILL bring stability to an ARAB led middle east. he will sort out Iran too.

    he has the miliary. he has the public. he has financing. he has the iron will to reform. he has israel onside

    you guys have irrational anger and stupidity.

    plus who even cares? y'all ought to worry about more pressing issues at home. that's legitimately worrisome

    TRUMP2020 bitches!

    ” if you want to view it as Machiavellian then it’s brilliant… he has public support, saudi arabia has a very young population… young people have iphones, the reforms make the young people love him. he purged his enemies and consolidated power WITH public support. He knows what time it is, unlike you all. He basically just turned his line into british royals forever…”>>>>

    LOL…you sound like a friend of mine who thought Egypt’s ‘second revolution ‘ was just the ticket to get rid of the Muslim brotherhood Pres who was elected after the first revolution.
    He would not admit that it was a coup by Gen Sisi..and when I told him that Sisi would make himself president and ‘purge/execute ‘ all political dissenters without trials he didn’t believe that either …Until it happened.

    Some people see what they want to see….despite all clues to the contrary.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. Mulegino1 says:
    @Anon
    Stalin was taken completely by surprise, and Soviet resistance fell apart. The Nazis walked right into Russia for hundreds of miles. Stalin had to put together whole armies behind the Urals before he could fight back in any realistic way. This doesn't sound like a guy who was planning a surprise attack on Germany. Stalin was caught completely unprepared.

    Stalin was happy to grab chunks of weaker neighboring countries, but he wasn't a fool, either. He was extremely paranoid about losing his own head--hence his mass slaughter and suspicion of his own citizens--and men like that don't take on a genuinely dangerous foe like an armed, aggressive Germany which has just conquered half of Europe. Men like Stalin only attack obviously weak counties like Poland when they see a clear advantage on their own side and little risk in the attempt. Stalin was too shrewd and calculating to stick his hand into a bear trap like Germany when he saw no easy or clear way to get out of it intact and end up on top of the situation. You misunderstand men like Stalin.

    Stalin and his generals were taken by surprise, indeed, but only because of the Wehrmacht preempting (possibly within a few weeks) the gigantic invasion forces deploying in offensive formations in the vulnerable Bialystok and Lvov salients, as well as the most powerful army in the world, the 9th Rifle Corps deploying along the Romanian border within easy striking distance of the Romanian oil fields. None of this would make any sense in a defensive context and is the only factor that can explain the vast encirclements and netting of hundreds of thousands of prisoners within the first few weeks of Barbarossa.

    Hitler admitted to Marshal Mannerheim that he knew that Fall Barbarossa was a desperate gamble and that the Wehrmacht was not equipped to fight a long war of attrition or in freezing cold winters. Nevertheless, he decided to act anyway. If the Soviet forces had succeeded in seizing the Romanian oil fields, cutting them off from Germany, then the mechanized bulk of the Wehrmacht would have ground to a halt and the entire Continent of Europe would have been submerged in the Soviet tsunami:

    Read More
    • Agree: Delinquent Snail
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    Yes. As well, the Soviet Air Force was destroyed on the first day of the war, being conveniently lined up wingtip-to-wingtip in forward deployed positions. Not something you’d do if you’re planning for a defensive war. The common myth that the Soviets were unprepared because Stalin had purged his best generals is untenable; putting your lackeys in positions of power doesn’t mean you organize offensively for a defensive war.
    , @Alden
    "the entire Continent of Europe would have been submerged in the Soviet tsunami:"

    And because of the war Hitler involved himself in and lost, only half of Europe was engulfed in the Soviet tsunami. By 1945 there were enough communists and fellow travelers in Britain, France, Italy, Greece and the Scandinavian countries that it was only American intervention that prevented all of Europe from being taken over by the soviets.

    I know a lot of people admire Hitler, but face reality. He lost. He lost badly. Because he lost half of Europe suffered under soviet domination. Because of him, the state of Israel exists. His losing gave the soviets the cachet to impose themselves all over the world as brave heroic Hitler fighters.

    Because he lost China became communist.

    Face it, Hitler lost and there were terrible consequences. A conspiracy theorist might think he was an agent of the soviet union snd the zionists, so successful did they become because Hitler lost a war he should have avoided.

    , @my2cents
    I don't believe for ONE second that this is Hitler OR Mannerheim.
    I survived German occupation and am quite familiar with Hitler's voice.

    Everyone has a nonsense video. I speak German and the only videos I believe are those in which I hear and SEE Hitler speak.
    Hitler attacked the USSR solely because the U.S besides funding Hitler was also arming the USSR and military hardware was growing along German borders and German intelligence showed that a Soviet attack was imminent.
    War was declared on Germany by the UK and France after Germany entered Poland to get a freeway to Danzig (Gdansk) 3 week later the USSR invaded Poland. No one on the West declared war on the USSR, which is carefully removed from the original narrative. Poland did not exist until 1917 and consists of the former German speaking Kingdom of Prussia.

    http://ihr.org/other/what-the-world-rejected.html
    http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v20/v20n6p59_Michaels.html

    The facts are that Hitler did not want any war.....but those interested in breaking up Germany ever since its unification in 1870 DID. 39 independent/sovereign German speaking Kingdoms/Princedoms and Duchies were no threat to the UK or France but ONE German Reich was. It is still the reason why ever since 1945 Germany has been occupied by the U.S.
    Learn some history. Nothing happens in a vacuum.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. Miro23 says:
    @Anon
    Hitler attacked Russia because he thought he could get away with it and win. That's all it was. At the time he lunged into Russia, he had one foe left standing--the UK. Hitler was in the unique situation of understanding that the UK--alone--was no danger to him at this point because they could not pull off a large-scale, mass amphibious invasion of the European mainland by themselves.

    How did Hitler know this? Because he'd studied that very same problem from the opposite direction for months. That's what Operation Sea Lion was. Hitler put in hundreds of hours planning and studying to invade the UK, then gave up because he decided it was too difficult to pull off. But he also realized that it was also too difficult for the UK to pull it off by themselves from the opposite direction, for the very same logistical reasons. At that particular moment in time, the UK was a weaker military power than Germany, and Hitler knew that if he couldn't do it, he also knew the UK couldn't do it either. The British didn't have the necessary manpower or resources.

    Hitler knew the problems inherent in such an operation extremely well because he'd studied it for so long, and people posting here on the Unz do not grasp this point. Hitler definitely took this into his calculations in his war against Russia. With his rear protected and the rest of the European continent conquered, Hitler felt with an absolute certainty that he was free to attack Russia, and he did. He'd always been planning to seize all those huge Russian land masses anyway for German settlers. He wasn't just planning to conquer Russia militarily, he was planning to turn it into a German country via expansion and settlement with German peoples akin to what the British did with settlements in North America in the 1600s and 1700s.

    Hitler attacked Russia because he thought he could get away with it and win.

    “You have only to kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will come crashing down.” Hitler, June 22nd 1941.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. @Anon
    Hitler attacked Russia because he thought he could get away with it and win. That's all it was. At the time he lunged into Russia, he had one foe left standing--the UK. Hitler was in the unique situation of understanding that the UK--alone--was no danger to him at this point because they could not pull off a large-scale, mass amphibious invasion of the European mainland by themselves.

    How did Hitler know this? Because he'd studied that very same problem from the opposite direction for months. That's what Operation Sea Lion was. Hitler put in hundreds of hours planning and studying to invade the UK, then gave up because he decided it was too difficult to pull off. But he also realized that it was also too difficult for the UK to pull it off by themselves from the opposite direction, for the very same logistical reasons. At that particular moment in time, the UK was a weaker military power than Germany, and Hitler knew that if he couldn't do it, he also knew the UK couldn't do it either. The British didn't have the necessary manpower or resources.

    Hitler knew the problems inherent in such an operation extremely well because he'd studied it for so long, and people posting here on the Unz do not grasp this point. Hitler definitely took this into his calculations in his war against Russia. With his rear protected and the rest of the European continent conquered, Hitler felt with an absolute certainty that he was free to attack Russia, and he did. He'd always been planning to seize all those huge Russian land masses anyway for German settlers. He wasn't just planning to conquer Russia militarily, he was planning to turn it into a German country via expansion and settlement with German peoples akin to what the British did with settlements in North America in the 1600s and 1700s.

    So Hitler’s attack on russia had nothing to do with stopping the communists from launching a surprise attack on eastern europe? The massing of troops on the border werent a precursor to an invasion?

    I know he planned to expand into the east for his countries “living space”, but i was under the impression his hand was forced and he made the attack early, to stop the Russians from blitzkrieging everything east of germany. Werent communism and Nazi-ism conflicting ideologies that wanted to stomp the other out? It just seems out of character for hitler to make such a foolish mistake like invading russia while he wasnt prepared for the long war with them.

    I agree with your point about hitler knowing an invasion across the english channel was a shot in the dark for both germany and england. England was on its last leg, but a cornered dog fights hardest and hitler realized it wasnt worth the effort, plus he still held out hope that the english would come to their senses and join Germany.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    Agreed, Hitler was a gambler (to his and his nation’s detriment), but the idea that he attacked the SU just for the hell of it is ridiculous.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Anon
    "In all the Neocon Wars in the Mideast, great effort has been made, one way or another, not to have Israel at center stage, to avoid having Israel appear as aggressor. But, in fact, without the influence of Israel, none of these terrible wars would have happened."

    Nonsense. Sunnis and Shiites have been slaughtering fighting each for centuries without the influence of Israel. Sunni and Shiite hatred for each other and rivalry with each other has a basis that is independent of what they feel about Israel. You don't know their religious history well enough if you're making that claim.

    when were Sunis and Shias fighting with each other on religious baisis?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    when were Sunis and Shias fighting with each other on religious baisis?
     
    I keep asking myself the same question. Sure the theological divide is likely not bridgeable, but when were we slaughtering each other like sheep in the past?:
    "Therefore, in the history of Sunni-Shia relations, there are no parallels to the Thirty Years War between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism. The only events that come somewhat close were the Ottoman–Saffavid wars. However, those wars were more about competition between an established empire, that of the Ottomans, and a newly formed empire, that of the Saffavids, and not about religion, as such, even though the Saffavids were Shia. By the end of the 17th century, Ottoman –Saffavids rivalry had subsided and, since the early 18th century, with a few brief periods when internal turmoil in Iran invited Ottoman intervention, relations between the two empires and, later, between the Republic of Turkey and Iran have been peaceful and even friendly."
    https://acmcu.georgetown.edu/sunni-shia-tensions

    When the Ayyubids kicked out the Fatimids from Egypt, where was the mass slaughter of Shias? Some evidence beyond simple assertions would be nice.

    Just a few decades ago, even Saudi and Irani kings got along just fine:
    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/01/04/article-urn:publicid:ap.org:38c9395b67764ee589e73356cd2ef68d-5DJCXdVJbafedc464c8355c1edc3-847_634x462.jpg

    Not to mention the Sunni-Shia royals intermarried:
    https://i.pinimg.com/736x/8f/85/b7/8f85b7f6763e5b28723be3a45ef27a09--the-shah-of-iran-iranian.jpg

    Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. @Mulegino1
    Stalin and his generals were taken by surprise, indeed, but only because of the Wehrmacht preempting (possibly within a few weeks) the gigantic invasion forces deploying in offensive formations in the vulnerable Bialystok and Lvov salients, as well as the most powerful army in the world, the 9th Rifle Corps deploying along the Romanian border within easy striking distance of the Romanian oil fields. None of this would make any sense in a defensive context and is the only factor that can explain the vast encirclements and netting of hundreds of thousands of prisoners within the first few weeks of Barbarossa.

    Hitler admitted to Marshal Mannerheim that he knew that Fall Barbarossa was a desperate gamble and that the Wehrmacht was not equipped to fight a long war of attrition or in freezing cold winters. Nevertheless, he decided to act anyway. If the Soviet forces had succeeded in seizing the Romanian oil fields, cutting them off from Germany, then the mechanized bulk of the Wehrmacht would have ground to a halt and the entire Continent of Europe would have been submerged in the Soviet tsunami:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClR9tcpKZec

    Yes. As well, the Soviet Air Force was destroyed on the first day of the war, being conveniently lined up wingtip-to-wingtip in forward deployed positions. Not something you’d do if you’re planning for a defensive war. The common myth that the Soviets were unprepared because Stalin had purged his best generals is untenable; putting your lackeys in positions of power doesn’t mean you organize offensively for a defensive war.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. @Ted Nuisance
    nothing about the reforms of islam (HUGE) or the other reforms?? just a bunch of frightened speculation from people so far removed from reality it's actually funny. try not to take this the wrong way but, you're all retarded.

    if you want to view it as Machiavellian then it's brilliant... he has public support, saudi arabia has a very young population... young people have iphones, the reforms make the young people love him. he purged his enemies and consolidated power WITH public support. He knows what time it is, unlike you all. He basically just turned his line into british royals forever...

    you guys and your cartoonish understanding of things is funny.

    he WILL bring stability to an ARAB led middle east. he will sort out Iran too.

    he has the miliary. he has the public. he has financing. he has the iron will to reform. he has israel onside

    you guys have irrational anger and stupidity.

    plus who even cares? y'all ought to worry about more pressing issues at home. that's legitimately worrisome

    TRUMP2020 bitches!

    I’m not closed off to the idea that this could end well–in fact, I do hope it ends well. But like the author of the piece said, time will tell.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. Alden says:
    @handala
    the sauds need to be overthrown...Now.

    Then the Alirezas would take their place.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Fredrik
    No, it would be al-Qaeda or ISIS. The House of Saud is benign compared to public opinion there...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. Talha says:
    @anon
    when were Sunis and Shias fighting with each other on religious baisis?

    when were Sunis and Shias fighting with each other on religious baisis?

    I keep asking myself the same question. Sure the theological divide is likely not bridgeable, but when were we slaughtering each other like sheep in the past?:
    “Therefore, in the history of Sunni-Shia relations, there are no parallels to the Thirty Years War between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism. The only events that come somewhat close were the Ottoman–Saffavid wars. However, those wars were more about competition between an established empire, that of the Ottomans, and a newly formed empire, that of the Saffavids, and not about religion, as such, even though the Saffavids were Shia. By the end of the 17th century, Ottoman –Saffavids rivalry had subsided and, since the early 18th century, with a few brief periods when internal turmoil in Iran invited Ottoman intervention, relations between the two empires and, later, between the Republic of Turkey and Iran have been peaceful and even friendly.”

    https://acmcu.georgetown.edu/sunni-shia-tensions

    When the Ayyubids kicked out the Fatimids from Egypt, where was the mass slaughter of Shias? Some evidence beyond simple assertions would be nice.

    Just a few decades ago, even Saudi and Irani kings got along just fine:

    Not to mention the Sunni-Shia royals intermarried:

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Another Realist

    Sure the theological divide is likely not bridgeable, but when were we slaughtering each other like sheep in the past?:
     
    How about in Iraq(after the fall of Saddam Hussein), Syria and now Yemen? All are Sunni vs. Shia. Even in Pakistan crimes are often committed by Sunnis against Shias.
    , @anonymous
    There's photos of Obama shaking Ghaddafi's hand. Obama later had him murdered. Those photos may be charming but don't tell the whole story.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. @Delinquent Snail
    So Hitler's attack on russia had nothing to do with stopping the communists from launching a surprise attack on eastern europe? The massing of troops on the border werent a precursor to an invasion?

    I know he planned to expand into the east for his countries "living space", but i was under the impression his hand was forced and he made the attack early, to stop the Russians from blitzkrieging everything east of germany. Werent communism and Nazi-ism conflicting ideologies that wanted to stomp the other out? It just seems out of character for hitler to make such a foolish mistake like invading russia while he wasnt prepared for the long war with them.

    I agree with your point about hitler knowing an invasion across the english channel was a shot in the dark for both germany and england. England was on its last leg, but a cornered dog fights hardest and hitler realized it wasnt worth the effort, plus he still held out hope that the english would come to their senses and join Germany.

    Agreed, Hitler was a gambler (to his and his nation’s detriment), but the idea that he attacked the SU just for the hell of it is ridiculous.

    Read More
    • Replies: @L.K
    Gambler or not, Hitler did not order the invasion of the S.U out of a desire for conquest/ acquiring Lebensraum.

    Such idiotic, moronic notion is floated about again and again by propagandists and their useful idiots, who more often than not, have absolutely no idea what the hell they are talking about & have never studied the issue in any depth.
    There are quite a few fanatics too, people who simply cannot be reasoned with & are impervious to facts... such nutjobs don't want to even look into it, if it dispels the myths that provide them emotional satisfaction.

    At Nuremberg, Chief of the Operations Staff of the Armed Forces High Command, General Alfred Jodl testified: "The Fuehrer has never named in my presence even just one hint of a reason other than the purely strategic." For months on end Hitler continuously repeated to Jodl's face:

    "There is no doubt now that England puts her hopes in this last mainland proxy; otherwise she would have already called off the war after Dunkirk.... Agreements have certainly already been made. The Russian deployment is unmistakable. One day suddenly we shall be either coldly blackmailed or attacked."
    , @Alden
    Who cares why, he attacked the soviet union and lost.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. Alden says:
    @jilles dykstra
    According to political analysts at Russia Today just a high level power struggle.
    Just like Trump and Deep State, with the difference that in the USA until now there are no arrests and accidents.

    Another totally ignorant comment from one who knows nothing about either Saudi or the United States.

    Or perhaps you didn’t notice that Trump was elected by an uprising of the Whites who have been abused and beaten by democrat blacks, and prevented from making a living by Jewish affirmative action and subject to 60 years of verbal and written propaganda that we are the most evil group of humans that ever existed.

    We, the deplorable, despised untouchables elected Trump against the billionaires and the entire written and spoken media.

    Trump will be able to do nothing to help Whites unless he puts every Judge and college professor and 90 percent of the journalists in detention centers, but he ran against the anti White deep state and won.

    You are not only White, but fairskinned maybe blue eyes and brown haired N. European. Instead of making snarky ignorant comments against American Whites, why don’t you come over here and live?

    You are a White man. In America you are not one of the liberal idiot intellectual aristocrats. As a white man you will be totally despised by the idiot intellectual media and academia you so ardently admire.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. pyrrhus says:
    @Priss Factor
    The Saudis appear to be planning military provocations against bad neighbour Iran. These may include attacks in Lebanon against Hezbollah

    Iran should support Hezbollah with materials and aid but not directly get involved.

    Iran should just watch Saudis get mired in ANOTHER mess. It will be two-front war for Saudis.

    Israel will not get directly involved, because its armed forces are weak and poorly trained. It will try, as usual to get other countries (US) to do its dirty work.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. MEexpert says:
    @Chiron
    The alliance between the Saudis and Israel is not talked about in the mainstream media but is the center of what’s is happening in the Middle-East, of the 19 terrorists from 9/11 15 were Saudi citizens but the US targets have been Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Iran, Lebanon, Yemen,.. and Al-Qaeda and other Sunni terrorists became allies of the US in Syria.

    Who runs American foreign policy?

    Who runs American foreign policy?

    Netanyahu through AIPAC/neocons/MSM and the congress.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. wayfarer says:

    This unusual odd-man-out educates a bread-and-circus public on how Rothschild Zionists have been applying the theory of divide-and-conquer, within the U.S.

    As for Muslims within and soon to be without the Middle East, the Rothschild Zionists are now applying a much more devastating theory of fragment-and-conquer.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  73. renfro says:
    @Ted Nuisance
    nothing about the reforms of islam (HUGE) or the other reforms?? just a bunch of frightened speculation from people so far removed from reality it's actually funny. try not to take this the wrong way but, you're all retarded.

    if you want to view it as Machiavellian then it's brilliant... he has public support, saudi arabia has a very young population... young people have iphones, the reforms make the young people love him. he purged his enemies and consolidated power WITH public support. He knows what time it is, unlike you all. He basically just turned his line into british royals forever...

    you guys and your cartoonish understanding of things is funny.

    he WILL bring stability to an ARAB led middle east. he will sort out Iran too.

    he has the miliary. he has the public. he has financing. he has the iron will to reform. he has israel onside

    you guys have irrational anger and stupidity.

    plus who even cares? y'all ought to worry about more pressing issues at home. that's legitimately worrisome

    TRUMP2020 bitches!

    ” he has public support, saudi arabia has a very young population… young people have iphones, the reforms make the young people love him. he purged his enemies and consolidated power WITH public support. He knows what time it is, unlike you all. He basically just turned his line into british royals forever… ”>>>>

    Say hello to reality bitch.

    ” Prince Mohammad bin Salman slashed the state budget, freezing government contracts and reducing the pay of civil employees as part of drastic austerity measures. Within hours of doing so, he bought the Serene, a billion dollar yacht ”

    Those young people with their iphones aren’t going to wait until 2030–bin Salam’s announced time table for his new Saudi to come into being. They will be seething with disappointment with a year or two when they see no improvement in their futures.
    bin Salam will be deposed or assassinated with 2 to 4 years….count on it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @sarz

    Say hello to reality bitch.

    ” Prince Mohammad bin Salman slashed the state budget, freezing government contracts and reducing the pay of civil employees as part of drastic austerity measures. Within hours of doing so, he bought the Serene, a billion dollar yacht ”
     
    Looking back, I think maybe this was deliberate, to put fellow princes to sleep. Maybe it will be sold in the near future, when it would be helpful. I know that the webmaster at Moon of Alabama persists in calling MSB "the clown prince" -- but who knows.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. L.K says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    Agreed, Hitler was a gambler (to his and his nation’s detriment), but the idea that he attacked the SU just for the hell of it is ridiculous.

    Gambler or not, Hitler did not order the invasion of the S.U out of a desire for conquest/ acquiring Lebensraum.

    Such idiotic, moronic notion is floated about again and again by propagandists and their useful idiots, who more often than not, have absolutely no idea what the hell they are talking about & have never studied the issue in any depth.
    There are quite a few fanatics too, people who simply cannot be reasoned with & are impervious to facts… such nutjobs don’t want to even look into it, if it dispels the myths that provide them emotional satisfaction.

    At Nuremberg, Chief of the Operations Staff of the Armed Forces High Command, General Alfred Jodl testified: “The Fuehrer has never named in my presence even just one hint of a reason other than the purely strategic.” For months on end Hitler continuously repeated to Jodl’s face:

    “There is no doubt now that England puts her hopes in this last mainland proxy; otherwise she would have already called off the war after Dunkirk…. Agreements have certainly already been made. The Russian deployment is unmistakable. One day suddenly we shall be either coldly blackmailed or attacked.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    What's your problem about accepting that quite a few considerations came together in Hitler's mind?

    Stalin knew that Hitler planned to invade the USSR both to defeat communism and, especially, to acquire territory (Lebensraum is a pretty good way of puttung it) but he was convinced that it wouldn't happen while Britain was undefeated. That is why Operation Barbarossa caught Stalin unprepared despite the hundres of thousands of troops within a day or so of the new borders with Germany. We know Lebensraum was important to Hitler because he wrote and said so.

    I am not familiar with the evidence of any Soviet plans or policies directed to an attack by the USSR on Germany. Are you? And what did Hitler's Intelligence teĺl him about that?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. Alden says:
    @Mulegino1
    Stalin and his generals were taken by surprise, indeed, but only because of the Wehrmacht preempting (possibly within a few weeks) the gigantic invasion forces deploying in offensive formations in the vulnerable Bialystok and Lvov salients, as well as the most powerful army in the world, the 9th Rifle Corps deploying along the Romanian border within easy striking distance of the Romanian oil fields. None of this would make any sense in a defensive context and is the only factor that can explain the vast encirclements and netting of hundreds of thousands of prisoners within the first few weeks of Barbarossa.

    Hitler admitted to Marshal Mannerheim that he knew that Fall Barbarossa was a desperate gamble and that the Wehrmacht was not equipped to fight a long war of attrition or in freezing cold winters. Nevertheless, he decided to act anyway. If the Soviet forces had succeeded in seizing the Romanian oil fields, cutting them off from Germany, then the mechanized bulk of the Wehrmacht would have ground to a halt and the entire Continent of Europe would have been submerged in the Soviet tsunami:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClR9tcpKZec

    “the entire Continent of Europe would have been submerged in the Soviet tsunami:”

    And because of the war Hitler involved himself in and lost, only half of Europe was engulfed in the Soviet tsunami. By 1945 there were enough communists and fellow travelers in Britain, France, Italy, Greece and the Scandinavian countries that it was only American intervention that prevented all of Europe from being taken over by the soviets.

    I know a lot of people admire Hitler, but face reality. He lost. He lost badly. Because he lost half of Europe suffered under soviet domination. Because of him, the state of Israel exists. His losing gave the soviets the cachet to impose themselves all over the world as brave heroic Hitler fighters.

    Because he lost China became communist.

    Face it, Hitler lost and there were terrible consequences. A conspiracy theorist might think he was an agent of the soviet union snd the zionists, so successful did they become because Hitler lost a war he should have avoided.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mulegino1
    These historical events happened in spite of, not because of, Hitler's desire to reestablish Germany as the dominant power on the Continent and to dismantle the terrible injustices of the Versailles "Peace" regime.

    If the reckless English - and feet dragging French - guarantees had not been given to come to Poland's defense in the event of a conflict with Germany (and only with Germany- surprisingly not with the Soviet Union) at the behest of the British War Party, international Jewry and Zionism, the warmongers in the FDR administration, and, of course, the bellicose regime of the revanchist and chauvinist Poles- there would have been no Second World War. There would have been no shared border between the USSR and the German Reich. There would have been no destruction of the Europe of nations and European culture brought about by the Allied saturation bombing of European cities and towns. There would have been no Soviet occupation of Eastern and Central Europe. There would have been no Cold War. There would have been no EU (in its present state). There would have been no third world invasion and Islamization of Europe. In short, the Europe of nations and true diversity would most likely still exist, under a dominant, but sane "New Order" as opposed to the insane and culturally suicidal EU.

    Christian Europa lost the Second World War as badly as Carthage lost the final Punic War - only the defeat was in slower motion.
    , @Malla
    Nope, the Soviets wanted to conquer all of Europe

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Clv-c6QdBs

    Watch what ex GRU officer Victor Suvorov says and you will see it matches exactly with Adolf Hitler's speech before Operation Barbarossa.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6o84NU9Ees
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. L.K says:

    With all due respect, a much better article on the issue is the one by Alastair Crooke, a former British diplomat who was a senior figure in British intelligence.
    Saudi Arabia’s Desperate Gamble

    https://consortiumnews.com/2017/11/10/saudi-arabias-desperate-gamble/

    …Netanyahu’s Coup

    …This U.S.-Israeli-Saudi-UAE project is, at bottom, an attempt to overturn reality, no less – it is rooted in a denial of the setback suffered by these states by their multiple failures to shape a New Middle East in the Western mode. Now, in the wake of their failure in Syria – in which they went to the limits in search of victory – they seek another spin of the roulette wheel – in the hope of recouping all their earlier losses. It is, to say the least, a capricious hope. [...]

    Israel’s military and security echelon, in the wake of the 2006 war on Lebanon, is likely only to contemplate a war (with anyone other than Palestinians), that is short (six days or less); does not result in heavy Israeli civilian or military casualties; and can be won at a low cost. Ideally, Israel would also expect full American buy-in (unlike in 2006). The Pentagon has little appetite for putting boots on the ground again in the Middle East, and Israelis are aware of this. And Saudi Arabia alone, cannot threaten anyone militarily (as Yemen has amply demonstrated).

    Can Saudi Arabia squeeze Lebanon economically and impose political pressure on any Lebanese government? Of course: but economic pressure likely will hurt the Sunni, middle and business classes, harder than the 44 percent of the Lebanese population who are Shi’a. Generally, the Lebanese have an aversion to external interference, and American sanctions and pressures will be more likely to unite Lebanon than divide it. [...]

    So what may be the outcome? At a guess, Saudi Arabia, already a society with many repressed tensions, may simply implode under the new repression (or MbS might somehow be “removed” before the tensions combust). America and Israel will not emerge strengthened, but rather will be viewed as less relevant to the Middle East.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  77. Alden says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    Agreed, Hitler was a gambler (to his and his nation’s detriment), but the idea that he attacked the SU just for the hell of it is ridiculous.

    Who cares why, he attacked the soviet union and lost.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mulegino1
    Absolutely. Not to mention the enormous amount of glider borne paratroopers and the light infantry divisions deployed in the Carpathians. None of it makes any sense at all in a defensive context.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. @MEexpert
    You guys are either brain dead or have bought the Kool-Aid from Netanyahu. When will you guys come to the realization that Iran has neither any reason nor any desire to attack Saudi Arabia. Iran doesn't even have any plans to attack Israel. Netanyahu is paranoid and does not want anyone threatening Israel's hegemony in the Middle East. Trump and MbS are two useful idiots that Israel is exploiting. The presumed threat from Iran is going to bankrupt both the US and the Saudi Arabia while Israel will be smiling on the sidelines.

    Trump and MbS are two useful idiots that Israel is exploiting. The presumed threat from Iran is going to bankrupt both the US and the Saudi Arabia while Israel will be smiling on the sidelines.

    Word. The Crown Prince of SA and the Crown Prince of USA (Jared Kushner) definitely have something in common, both are still wet behind the ears, punching way above their weight, easily manipulated by the snakes of Israel. Trump will get brought down by his stupid nepotism.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. Mulegino1 says:
    @Alden
    "the entire Continent of Europe would have been submerged in the Soviet tsunami:"

    And because of the war Hitler involved himself in and lost, only half of Europe was engulfed in the Soviet tsunami. By 1945 there were enough communists and fellow travelers in Britain, France, Italy, Greece and the Scandinavian countries that it was only American intervention that prevented all of Europe from being taken over by the soviets.

    I know a lot of people admire Hitler, but face reality. He lost. He lost badly. Because he lost half of Europe suffered under soviet domination. Because of him, the state of Israel exists. His losing gave the soviets the cachet to impose themselves all over the world as brave heroic Hitler fighters.

    Because he lost China became communist.

    Face it, Hitler lost and there were terrible consequences. A conspiracy theorist might think he was an agent of the soviet union snd the zionists, so successful did they become because Hitler lost a war he should have avoided.

    These historical events happened in spite of, not because of, Hitler’s desire to reestablish Germany as the dominant power on the Continent and to dismantle the terrible injustices of the Versailles “Peace” regime.

    If the reckless English – and feet dragging French – guarantees had not been given to come to Poland’s defense in the event of a conflict with Germany (and only with Germany- surprisingly not with the Soviet Union) at the behest of the British War Party, international Jewry and Zionism, the warmongers in the FDR administration, and, of course, the bellicose regime of the revanchist and chauvinist Poles- there would have been no Second World War. There would have been no shared border between the USSR and the German Reich. There would have been no destruction of the Europe of nations and European culture brought about by the Allied saturation bombing of European cities and towns. There would have been no Soviet occupation of Eastern and Central Europe. There would have been no Cold War. There would have been no EU (in its present state). There would have been no third world invasion and Islamization of Europe. In short, the Europe of nations and true diversity would most likely still exist, under a dominant, but sane “New Order” as opposed to the insane and culturally suicidal EU.

    Christian Europa lost the Second World War as badly as Carthage lost the final Punic War – only the defeat was in slower motion.

    Read More
    • Agree: Beefcake the Mighty
    • Replies: @Malla
    If the British, Americans and French had attacked Soviet Russia immediately during the October revolution and if possible put the Tzar back in power (he was their ally in WW1 and a relative of the British Monarch after all), all this would not have happened. But wait, the Bolshevik revolution was funded by Jewish Wall Street bankers like Jacob Schiff.
    Also since Britain and France gave guarantees to Poland and Poland was invaded by two countries Germany and the USSR, why did the British and French not declare war on the USSR??? That is the million dollar question of the 20th century.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. Mulegino1 says:
    @Alden
    Who cares why, he attacked the soviet union and lost.

    Absolutely. Not to mention the enormous amount of glider borne paratroopers and the light infantry divisions deployed in the Carpathians. None of it makes any sense at all in a defensive context.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. @Talha
    Hey Art,

    Kushner should have to disclose his business dealings with Saudi and Israel – PERIOD.
     
    Absolutely! If the Democrats were really an opposition party they would be going after Trump for this! He is allowing private family connections to set up foreign policy without disclosure to the American people. This should be completely unacceptable!

    But instead we get nonsense about Russians in our closets and stealing elections.

    At least the Brits are better than us. Their secretary of state for foreign development met secretly with Israelis to - get this - give UK aid money to Israeli military:
    "Patel admitted that after the 13-day visit, she had wanted to give British aid money to the Israeli army in the Golan Heights."
    http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/11/uk-minister-priti-patel-resigns-secret-israel-trip-171108192036982.html

    And had to resign:
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/08/europe/uk-israel-priti-patel-row/index.html

    On this side of the pond, barely a peep about this stuff and definitely no political scandal. Who knows, maybe Kushner is promising Israel to cover the lost aid funds from the UK scandal.

    Peace.

    The UK managed to find an Indian woman even dumber than the one Trump sent to the UN. Would be funny if it weren’t so scary. Both of those dingbats must be sleeping with Netanyahu, he’s got them both eating out of the palm of his hands.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. @Talha

    when were Sunis and Shias fighting with each other on religious baisis?
     
    I keep asking myself the same question. Sure the theological divide is likely not bridgeable, but when were we slaughtering each other like sheep in the past?:
    "Therefore, in the history of Sunni-Shia relations, there are no parallels to the Thirty Years War between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism. The only events that come somewhat close were the Ottoman–Saffavid wars. However, those wars were more about competition between an established empire, that of the Ottomans, and a newly formed empire, that of the Saffavids, and not about religion, as such, even though the Saffavids were Shia. By the end of the 17th century, Ottoman –Saffavids rivalry had subsided and, since the early 18th century, with a few brief periods when internal turmoil in Iran invited Ottoman intervention, relations between the two empires and, later, between the Republic of Turkey and Iran have been peaceful and even friendly."
    https://acmcu.georgetown.edu/sunni-shia-tensions

    When the Ayyubids kicked out the Fatimids from Egypt, where was the mass slaughter of Shias? Some evidence beyond simple assertions would be nice.

    Just a few decades ago, even Saudi and Irani kings got along just fine:
    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/01/04/article-urn:publicid:ap.org:38c9395b67764ee589e73356cd2ef68d-5DJCXdVJbafedc464c8355c1edc3-847_634x462.jpg

    Not to mention the Sunni-Shia royals intermarried:
    https://i.pinimg.com/736x/8f/85/b7/8f85b7f6763e5b28723be3a45ef27a09--the-shah-of-iran-iranian.jpg

    Peace.

    Sure the theological divide is likely not bridgeable, but when were we slaughtering each other like sheep in the past?:

    How about in Iraq(after the fall of Saddam Hussein), Syria and now Yemen? All are Sunni vs. Shia. Even in Pakistan crimes are often committed by Sunnis against Shias.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Correct - this a relatively recent phenomenon- not some ancient intractable blood feud. And frankly - a lot of those extremists have no problems going after normal Sunnis as well - for instance, all sanguinary madness in Libya and Somalia. It’s no surprise they particularly target Shias.

    The Yemeni thing is hyped up as a Sunni-Shi’a war but anyone who knows about Zaidi creedal points knows they are closer to Sunnis than Twelver Shias.

    Peace.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. No word of the mysterious missile that the Saudis claimed they had deflected from Riyadh, on the same day all those princes and super rich were arrested. Saudis claimed it was fired from Yemen, then the US claimed it was from Iran.

    It was probably from Israel.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  84. Talha says:
    @Another Realist

    Sure the theological divide is likely not bridgeable, but when were we slaughtering each other like sheep in the past?:
     
    How about in Iraq(after the fall of Saddam Hussein), Syria and now Yemen? All are Sunni vs. Shia. Even in Pakistan crimes are often committed by Sunnis against Shias.

    Correct – this a relatively recent phenomenon- not some ancient intractable blood feud. And frankly – a lot of those extremists have no problems going after normal Sunnis as well – for instance, all sanguinary madness in Libya and Somalia. It’s no surprise they particularly target Shias.

    The Yemeni thing is hyped up as a Sunni-Shi’a war but anyone who knows about Zaidi creedal points knows they are closer to Sunnis than Twelver Shias.

    Peace.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Talha

    when were Sunis and Shias fighting with each other on religious baisis?
     
    I keep asking myself the same question. Sure the theological divide is likely not bridgeable, but when were we slaughtering each other like sheep in the past?:
    "Therefore, in the history of Sunni-Shia relations, there are no parallels to the Thirty Years War between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism. The only events that come somewhat close were the Ottoman–Saffavid wars. However, those wars were more about competition between an established empire, that of the Ottomans, and a newly formed empire, that of the Saffavids, and not about religion, as such, even though the Saffavids were Shia. By the end of the 17th century, Ottoman –Saffavids rivalry had subsided and, since the early 18th century, with a few brief periods when internal turmoil in Iran invited Ottoman intervention, relations between the two empires and, later, between the Republic of Turkey and Iran have been peaceful and even friendly."
    https://acmcu.georgetown.edu/sunni-shia-tensions

    When the Ayyubids kicked out the Fatimids from Egypt, where was the mass slaughter of Shias? Some evidence beyond simple assertions would be nice.

    Just a few decades ago, even Saudi and Irani kings got along just fine:
    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/01/04/article-urn:publicid:ap.org:38c9395b67764ee589e73356cd2ef68d-5DJCXdVJbafedc464c8355c1edc3-847_634x462.jpg

    Not to mention the Sunni-Shia royals intermarried:
    https://i.pinimg.com/736x/8f/85/b7/8f85b7f6763e5b28723be3a45ef27a09--the-shah-of-iran-iranian.jpg

    Peace.

    There’s photos of Obama shaking Ghaddafi’s hand. Obama later had him murdered. Those photos may be charming but don’t tell the whole story.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    No, they don't. But there's a reason why the Shah is buried in Egypt instead of Iran.

    If you have a different narrative of when exactly Shias and Sunnis used to clear each other out of their villages or randomly waylay them and massacre each others' women and children, I'd be open to that. But really, the bloody infighting at this levelis simply unprecedented in our history. It started when the takfiri ideology first raised its head in the Najd with the first Wahhabi revolts and will likely stay that way until our extremist strains are further marginalized - which can't come too soon.

    Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. sarz says:
    @Ted Nuisance
    nothing about the reforms of islam (HUGE) or the other reforms?? just a bunch of frightened speculation from people so far removed from reality it's actually funny. try not to take this the wrong way but, you're all retarded.

    if you want to view it as Machiavellian then it's brilliant... he has public support, saudi arabia has a very young population... young people have iphones, the reforms make the young people love him. he purged his enemies and consolidated power WITH public support. He knows what time it is, unlike you all. He basically just turned his line into british royals forever...

    you guys and your cartoonish understanding of things is funny.

    he WILL bring stability to an ARAB led middle east. he will sort out Iran too.

    he has the miliary. he has the public. he has financing. he has the iron will to reform. he has israel onside

    you guys have irrational anger and stupidity.

    plus who even cares? y'all ought to worry about more pressing issues at home. that's legitimately worrisome

    TRUMP2020 bitches!

    Ted Nuisance has half the story. That shows you what’s in it for Saudi Arabia. But what’s in it for the American nation-state with its brain-parasite Judaia?

    Half of the Machiavellian move by Trump would be to help and use MBS in remaking the whole Muslim world in line with Khomeini’s Islamic — not Shia — revolution (where no Shia would hesitate to pray behind a Sunni imam) or the Ba’ath secular Muslim solution. That’s on the cards with MBS’s “moderate Islam” or just simple Islam in place of its metastasized variant, Wahhabism.

    But how to undo the Judaic grip on America and the West? The critcal player is Kushner. Interesting that the Jews closest to Putin are also Chabad. Maybe Netanyahu and the Neocons are being suckered into pushing for a war against Iran or its ally Hezbollah. Looks like the Rothschilds are aware of this if you read the editorials in the Economist damning Trump’s moves against the Iran nuclear deal. And you also have Bernard-Henri Levy pointing at Trump’s betrayal of the Iraqi Kurds.

    Maybe Trump sees the endgame where Russia and the SCO take a page out of the NATO playbook. America has parked its nukes in Belgium, Netherlands, Germany, Italy and Turkey. These are “shared” with the host country, at its disposal without, apparently, violating the Non-Proliferation Treaty. So, in a serious war scenario, Russia might do the same for Syria and Iran.

    That would be the end of troubles with the Jewish state as the focus and ligature of Judaic globalist power.

    Undoing the Fed and the rules that govern the media might follow, on the way to making America America again.

    Read More
    • Replies: @renfro
    '' But how to undo the Judaic grip on America and the West?"???


    I suggest a Patriot Assassination team. They would only have to take out about 150 Uber Zio Jews in gov, media and WS. That is doable and is quick, inexpensive and involves no collateral damage.
    If that message isnt enough to send any others in their Fifth Column to catch a plane to Israel then rinse and repeat.

    Of course the assassins would also have to carry stakes to drive through their hearts to make sure they don't rise again....lol.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. Fredrik says:
    @Alden
    Then the Alirezas would take their place.

    No, it would be al-Qaeda or ISIS. The House of Saud is benign compared to public opinion there…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. Talha says:
    @anonymous
    There's photos of Obama shaking Ghaddafi's hand. Obama later had him murdered. Those photos may be charming but don't tell the whole story.

    No, they don’t. But there’s a reason why the Shah is buried in Egypt instead of Iran.

    If you have a different narrative of when exactly Shias and Sunnis used to clear each other out of their villages or randomly waylay them and massacre each others’ women and children, I’d be open to that. But really, the bloody infighting at this levelis simply unprecedented in our history. It started when the takfiri ideology first raised its head in the Najd with the first Wahhabi revolts and will likely stay that way until our extremist strains are further marginalized – which can’t come too soon.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous

    If you have a different narrative of when exactly Shias and Sunnis used to clear each other out of their villages or randomly waylay
     
    That's difficult to pin down because of the vast complexity of the different factions and ethnicities that have gone back and forth in the history of Islam. Sometimes the sect allegiance was just a marker of other allegiances making things even harder to figure out. Christian infighting really wasn't about theological nuances, most participants having only foggy ideas about such things, but about what belongs to who. There's also been various strains of thought within each sect causing divisions. Off the top of my head I seem to recall that whether Alawites were really Shia or not was on the table at one time. Even Saladin had some mixed interactions and was nearly assassinated a couple times and was famously warned off by the Assassins. Since Shia are a relatively small percent of those calling themselves Muslim they tend to be clustered geographically which provides them protection. There's been periods of friction and also cooperation. You are right that the utter viciousness of current Shia-Sunni conflict is rather a recent development. The differences were there but it took the zealots to set the fire. Of course Muslim treatment of Christians and others is not part of this particular question. One doesn't get 99% Islamic population by being tolerant.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. sarz says:
    @renfro
    '' he has public support, saudi arabia has a very young population… young people have iphones, the reforms make the young people love him. he purged his enemies and consolidated power WITH public support. He knows what time it is, unlike you all. He basically just turned his line into british royals forever… ''>>>>

    Say hello to reality bitch.

    '' Prince Mohammad bin Salman slashed the state budget, freezing government contracts and reducing the pay of civil employees as part of drastic austerity measures. Within hours of doing so, he bought the Serene, a billion dollar yacht ''

    Those young people with their iphones aren't going to wait until 2030--bin Salam's announced time table for his new Saudi to come into being. They will be seething with disappointment with a year or two when they see no improvement in their futures.
    bin Salam will be deposed or assassinated with 2 to 4 years....count on it.

    Say hello to reality bitch.

    ” Prince Mohammad bin Salman slashed the state budget, freezing government contracts and reducing the pay of civil employees as part of drastic austerity measures. Within hours of doing so, he bought the Serene, a billion dollar yacht ”

    Looking back, I think maybe this was deliberate, to put fellow princes to sleep. Maybe it will be sold in the near future, when it would be helpful. I know that the webmaster at Moon of Alabama persists in calling MSB “the clown prince” — but who knows.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. Talha says:

    And here we go – it begins:
    “An Israeli minister on Monday welcomed remarks by a mufti of Saudi Arabia that Palestinian resistance group Hamas is a terror organization.”

    https://www.dailysabah.com/mideast/2017/11/14/israel-welcomes-saudi-muftis-pro-israel-remarks-invites-him-to-visit-the-country

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  91. @anon
    The Saudis can't attack anyone, they have nothing but money to pay others to act on their behalf. Their supposed army is composed of Yemenis recruited from friendly tribes and others from the Muslim world. Who knows who is really piloting their planes. The Houthis are a handful and caused the British to leave in the early 60's. The Yemen and Syrian projects are failures that have cost them many billions. Now it may be payback time for the Saudis at the hands of the Syrians and Iranians as well as other aggrieved parties in the region. The place is probably crawling with Iranian and Syrian spies and agents so who knows how safe the current Saudi leaders are at present. They may be looking for the US to be their protector since they were in league with the US in the Syrian atrocity. The Iran-Syrian-Hezbollah-Shiite axis has emerged strengthened and now looks to be the new reality. Perhaps they'll be able to coax the US to do something on their behalf.

    The Houthis were in fact, the only group to force the British out at gunpoint. Most end of Empire insurrections were local grabs for power as the British left rather than revolutions. The USA is the other major exception.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Talha
    No, they don't. But there's a reason why the Shah is buried in Egypt instead of Iran.

    If you have a different narrative of when exactly Shias and Sunnis used to clear each other out of their villages or randomly waylay them and massacre each others' women and children, I'd be open to that. But really, the bloody infighting at this levelis simply unprecedented in our history. It started when the takfiri ideology first raised its head in the Najd with the first Wahhabi revolts and will likely stay that way until our extremist strains are further marginalized - which can't come too soon.

    Peace.

    If you have a different narrative of when exactly Shias and Sunnis used to clear each other out of their villages or randomly waylay

    That’s difficult to pin down because of the vast complexity of the different factions and ethnicities that have gone back and forth in the history of Islam. Sometimes the sect allegiance was just a marker of other allegiances making things even harder to figure out. Christian infighting really wasn’t about theological nuances, most participants having only foggy ideas about such things, but about what belongs to who. There’s also been various strains of thought within each sect causing divisions. Off the top of my head I seem to recall that whether Alawites were really Shia or not was on the table at one time. Even Saladin had some mixed interactions and was nearly assassinated a couple times and was famously warned off by the Assassins. Since Shia are a relatively small percent of those calling themselves Muslim they tend to be clustered geographically which provides them protection. There’s been periods of friction and also cooperation. You are right that the utter viciousness of current Shia-Sunni conflict is rather a recent development. The differences were there but it took the zealots to set the fire. Of course Muslim treatment of Christians and others is not part of this particular question. One doesn’t get 99% Islamic population by being tolerant.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    One doesn’t get 99% Islamic population by being tolerant.
     
    Depends on one's definition of tolerance. For Late Antiquity and Medeival standards, Muslim lands were pretty tolerant. Why do you think heterodox Christians (and Jews) moved into Muslim territory so often. And even during the 30 Years War, different Christian groups fled into the Ottoman lands for safety.

    By secular-liberal standards, no - Islam is probably not tolerant. The famous statistician wrote a nice article on how this was fairly easily accomplished over the course of successive centuries by crunching numbers. From "The One-Way Street of Religions" section of his article:
    "The two asymmetric rules were are as follows. First, if a non Muslim man under the rule of Islam marries a Muslim woman, he needs to convert to Islam –and if either parents of a child happens to be Muslim, the child will be Muslim. Second, becoming Muslim is irreversible, as apostasy is the heaviest crime under the religion, sanctioned by the death penalty...Under these two asymmetric rules, one can do simple simulations and see how a small Islamic group occupying Christian (Coptic) Egypt can lead, over the centuries, to the Copts becoming a tiny minority. All one needs is a small rate of interfaith marriages."
    https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15

    One also doesn't get to a 99% Christian population by being tolerant all the time. Charles Martel is mostly known for fighting the Muslims, but much more fighting was done to bring pagan Saxony to heel.

    Peace.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. Talha says:
    @anonymous

    If you have a different narrative of when exactly Shias and Sunnis used to clear each other out of their villages or randomly waylay
     
    That's difficult to pin down because of the vast complexity of the different factions and ethnicities that have gone back and forth in the history of Islam. Sometimes the sect allegiance was just a marker of other allegiances making things even harder to figure out. Christian infighting really wasn't about theological nuances, most participants having only foggy ideas about such things, but about what belongs to who. There's also been various strains of thought within each sect causing divisions. Off the top of my head I seem to recall that whether Alawites were really Shia or not was on the table at one time. Even Saladin had some mixed interactions and was nearly assassinated a couple times and was famously warned off by the Assassins. Since Shia are a relatively small percent of those calling themselves Muslim they tend to be clustered geographically which provides them protection. There's been periods of friction and also cooperation. You are right that the utter viciousness of current Shia-Sunni conflict is rather a recent development. The differences were there but it took the zealots to set the fire. Of course Muslim treatment of Christians and others is not part of this particular question. One doesn't get 99% Islamic population by being tolerant.

    One doesn’t get 99% Islamic population by being tolerant.

    Depends on one’s definition of tolerance. For Late Antiquity and Medeival standards, Muslim lands were pretty tolerant. Why do you think heterodox Christians (and Jews) moved into Muslim territory so often. And even during the 30 Years War, different Christian groups fled into the Ottoman lands for safety.

    By secular-liberal standards, no – Islam is probably not tolerant. The famous statistician wrote a nice article on how this was fairly easily accomplished over the course of successive centuries by crunching numbers. From “The One-Way Street of Religions” section of his article:
    “The two asymmetric rules were are as follows. First, if a non Muslim man under the rule of Islam marries a Muslim woman, he needs to convert to Islam –and if either parents of a child happens to be Muslim, the child will be Muslim. Second, becoming Muslim is irreversible, as apostasy is the heaviest crime under the religion, sanctioned by the death penalty…Under these two asymmetric rules, one can do simple simulations and see how a small Islamic group occupying Christian (Coptic) Egypt can lead, over the centuries, to the Copts becoming a tiny minority. All one needs is a small rate of interfaith marriages.”

    https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15

    One also doesn’t get to a 99% Christian population by being tolerant all the time. Charles Martel is mostly known for fighting the Muslims, but much more fighting was done to bring pagan Saxony to heel.

    Peace.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. @Anon
    "In all the Neocon Wars in the Mideast, great effort has been made, one way or another, not to have Israel at center stage, to avoid having Israel appear as aggressor. But, in fact, without the influence of Israel, none of these terrible wars would have happened."

    Nonsense. Sunnis and Shiites have been slaughtering fighting each for centuries without the influence of Israel. Sunni and Shiite hatred for each other and rivalry with each other has a basis that is independent of what they feel about Israel. You don't know their religious history well enough if you're making that claim.

    In the modern era, religious loyalties are no match for nationalist aspirations. The Sunni enmity against the Shia has proved to be a convenient and valuable tool for the Western powers and Israel to sow division among Muslims.
    In the 1980s, millions of Iraqi Shia fought millions of Iranian Shia. It was Iraqi nationalism which had fueled the war and kept Iraqi Shia persevere against the Shia Iran for 8 long years.
    The present conflict of interest between Iran and the Saudis has also its roots in nationalist aspirations and very little to do with which is Sunni and Which Shia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MEexpert
    In the Sunni-Shia conflict only the Shias have been on the receiving end. During the Umayyad rule Shias were killed on a regular basis. Muawiyah, Yazid, and later Hajjaj bin Yusuf slaughtered Shias by droves. Imam Hussain and his family was slaughtered by Yazid's forces in the city of Kerbala. Although, Abbasids claimed to be related to the Prophet, they too were quite free in killing members of his family and other Shias. Halaku Khan's massacre of Shias in Iraq and the destruction of the greatest collection of Islamic literature is quite well known. In India, among the Mogul kings who were busy eliminating Shias are Jehangir and Aurangzaib.

    In the 1980s, millions of Iraqi Shia fought millions of Iranian Shia. It was Iraqi nationalism which had fueled the war and kept Iraqi Shia persevere against the Shia Iran for 8 long years.
     
    The Shias had no choice but to fight because they made up the majority of Iraqi army that was fighting on the front. Saddam kept his elite Sunni soldier close to him. He also had threatened to destroy the holy shrines in the cities of Najaf and Karbala by placing tanks near the shrines during the war.

    The present conflict of interest between Iran and the Saudis has also its roots in nationalist aspirations and very little to do with which is Sunni and Which Shia.
     
    Yes, unfortunately Israel and the West has found a weakness and they exploit it to sow discord among the Muslims. The Saud family has always been on a shaky grounds. They have maintained their rule by bribing the clerics and local tribes and suppressing all opposition. Now that their money is running out they are running scared hence the alliance with Israel. By blaming everything on Iran they can be assured of help from the US and Israel.

    The targeted killing of Shia professionals in Pakistan is a good example. Before 1980 Shias and Sunnis lived peacefully in Pakistan. Sunnis even participated in the Muharram processions. Then General Zia went to Saudi Arabia and brought the Wahhabi doctrine to Pakistan and the targeted killing started and is continuing till this day. Scores of Shias have been killed in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. @L.K
    Gambler or not, Hitler did not order the invasion of the S.U out of a desire for conquest/ acquiring Lebensraum.

    Such idiotic, moronic notion is floated about again and again by propagandists and their useful idiots, who more often than not, have absolutely no idea what the hell they are talking about & have never studied the issue in any depth.
    There are quite a few fanatics too, people who simply cannot be reasoned with & are impervious to facts... such nutjobs don't want to even look into it, if it dispels the myths that provide them emotional satisfaction.

    At Nuremberg, Chief of the Operations Staff of the Armed Forces High Command, General Alfred Jodl testified: "The Fuehrer has never named in my presence even just one hint of a reason other than the purely strategic." For months on end Hitler continuously repeated to Jodl's face:

    "There is no doubt now that England puts her hopes in this last mainland proxy; otherwise she would have already called off the war after Dunkirk.... Agreements have certainly already been made. The Russian deployment is unmistakable. One day suddenly we shall be either coldly blackmailed or attacked."

    What’s your problem about accepting that quite a few considerations came together in Hitler’s mind?

    Stalin knew that Hitler planned to invade the USSR both to defeat communism and, especially, to acquire territory (Lebensraum is a pretty good way of puttung it) but he was convinced that it wouldn’t happen while Britain was undefeated. That is why Operation Barbarossa caught Stalin unprepared despite the hundres of thousands of troops within a day or so of the new borders with Germany. We know Lebensraum was important to Hitler because he wrote and said so.

    I am not familiar with the evidence of any Soviet plans or policies directed to an attack by the USSR on Germany. Are you? And what did Hitler’s Intelligence teĺl him about that?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    Hitler spoke about Lebensraum in the 20’s (i.e. before he came to power) and in the explicit context of post-revolutionary SU, which he regarded as inherently unstable and bound for collapse, which he based on the fact that the early Soviet leadership was 80% Jewish. He (like other Germans at the time) saw opportunities for expansion in a future void there. The situation obviously had changed completely by 1941, Stalin’s regime was in no danger of collapse, and there is no evidence that Lebensraum played any role in the German decision to attack. (Hitler admitted to Marshall Mannerheim that Barbarossa was, in effect, a gamble directed in the hopes of a knockout punch.) Again, saying the Soviets were unprepared for war (they weren’t BTW) does not mean they would have arrayed their forces in highly vulnerable offensive positions. At any rate they had more than enough capacity to seize the Romanian oilfields and put a stranglehold on the Wehrmacht without any actual engagement. The Germans at a minimum faced a use-or-lose it screnario.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. renfro says:
    @sarz
    Ted Nuisance has half the story. That shows you what's in it for Saudi Arabia. But what's in it for the American nation-state with its brain-parasite Judaia?

    Half of the Machiavellian move by Trump would be to help and use MBS in remaking the whole Muslim world in line with Khomeini's Islamic -- not Shia -- revolution (where no Shia would hesitate to pray behind a Sunni imam) or the Ba'ath secular Muslim solution. That's on the cards with MBS's "moderate Islam" or just simple Islam in place of its metastasized variant, Wahhabism.

    But how to undo the Judaic grip on America and the West? The critcal player is Kushner. Interesting that the Jews closest to Putin are also Chabad. Maybe Netanyahu and the Neocons are being suckered into pushing for a war against Iran or its ally Hezbollah. Looks like the Rothschilds are aware of this if you read the editorials in the Economist damning Trump's moves against the Iran nuclear deal. And you also have Bernard-Henri Levy pointing at Trump's betrayal of the Iraqi Kurds.

    Maybe Trump sees the endgame where Russia and the SCO take a page out of the NATO playbook. America has parked its nukes in Belgium, Netherlands, Germany, Italy and Turkey. These are "shared" with the host country, at its disposal without, apparently, violating the Non-Proliferation Treaty. So, in a serious war scenario, Russia might do the same for Syria and Iran.

    That would be the end of troubles with the Jewish state as the focus and ligature of Judaic globalist power.

    Undoing the Fed and the rules that govern the media might follow, on the way to making America America again.

    ” But how to undo the Judaic grip on America and the West?”???

    I suggest a Patriot Assassination team. They would only have to take out about 150 Uber Zio Jews in gov, media and WS. That is doable and is quick, inexpensive and involves no collateral damage.
    If that message isnt enough to send any others in their Fifth Column to catch a plane to Israel then rinse and repeat.

    Of course the assassins would also have to carry stakes to drive through their hearts to make sure they don’t rise again….lol.

    Read More
    • Replies: @sarz
    My question was "How to undo the Judaic grip on America and the West?"

    renfro makes the modest proposal to assassinate the top 150 "Uber Zio Jews" and more along that line. But he then tries to cancel his own proposal by reference to wooden stakes and use of the word "lol". It was all a joke.

    When renfro quotes from his holy book the commandment to kill the best among the goyim, does he follow that up with a "lol"? And when it is carried out, does it merit a "rofl"? Just asking.

    There is a lot America can do to recover its essence without violating its core values.

    Cancel the citizenship of all dual citizens. This will be a reversion to an earlier position. The Supreme Court had specifically upheld the denial of dual citizenship to Mexican citizens. The whole thing was turned upside-down under Jewish pressure. A former student of mine, a Jew from Mexico now an associate of Kissinger, holds American and Israeli citizenship as well as Mexican.

    Recognize that Judaism is not a religion under any serious interpretation of that word, lacking as it does an ethical core. It is a satanic cult pretending to be a religion. Far from being entitled to protection under freedom of religion statutes, its propagation should be legally deemed a serious offense.

    The sort of Judaic collusion that led to the takeover of CNN and of the Ivy League universities (see Ron Unz's piece on the admissions policy at Harvard) should be guarded against with tools such as RICO.

    All media properties should by law be not-for-profit. Corporate ownership of media should be banned. Only cooperatives.

    Go back to state-issued debt-free money. Abolish the Federal Reserve.

    Expose the antisemitism game. Expose the Holocaust lie.

    Recognize that Judaia is a quasi-state with greater powers and organization than most states. It is parasitic on nation states (expect Israel) to the point of their destruction. Just as America is to a large degree a rightful object of hate that exists at ease with appreciation of Americans, so should Judaia be treated as an object of rightful hate while at ease with one's Jewish friends and relatives.

    Recognize and honor anti-Judaic normative Jewishness.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. MEexpert says:
    @Aren Haich
    In the modern era, religious loyalties are no match for nationalist aspirations. The Sunni enmity against the Shia has proved to be a convenient and valuable tool for the Western powers and Israel to sow division among Muslims.
    In the 1980s, millions of Iraqi Shia fought millions of Iranian Shia. It was Iraqi nationalism which had fueled the war and kept Iraqi Shia persevere against the Shia Iran for 8 long years.
    The present conflict of interest between Iran and the Saudis has also its roots in nationalist aspirations and very little to do with which is Sunni and Which Shia.

    In the Sunni-Shia conflict only the Shias have been on the receiving end. During the Umayyad rule Shias were killed on a regular basis. Muawiyah, Yazid, and later Hajjaj bin Yusuf slaughtered Shias by droves. Imam Hussain and his family was slaughtered by Yazid’s forces in the city of Kerbala. Although, Abbasids claimed to be related to the Prophet, they too were quite free in killing members of his family and other Shias. Halaku Khan’s massacre of Shias in Iraq and the destruction of the greatest collection of Islamic literature is quite well known. In India, among the Mogul kings who were busy eliminating Shias are Jehangir and Aurangzaib.

    In the 1980s, millions of Iraqi Shia fought millions of Iranian Shia. It was Iraqi nationalism which had fueled the war and kept Iraqi Shia persevere against the Shia Iran for 8 long years.

    The Shias had no choice but to fight because they made up the majority of Iraqi army that was fighting on the front. Saddam kept his elite Sunni soldier close to him. He also had threatened to destroy the holy shrines in the cities of Najaf and Karbala by placing tanks near the shrines during the war.

    The present conflict of interest between Iran and the Saudis has also its roots in nationalist aspirations and very little to do with which is Sunni and Which Shia.

    Yes, unfortunately Israel and the West has found a weakness and they exploit it to sow discord among the Muslims. The Saud family has always been on a shaky grounds. They have maintained their rule by bribing the clerics and local tribes and suppressing all opposition. Now that their money is running out they are running scared hence the alliance with Israel. By blaming everything on Iran they can be assured of help from the US and Israel.

    The targeted killing of Shia professionals in Pakistan is a good example. Before 1980 Shias and Sunnis lived peacefully in Pakistan. Sunnis even participated in the Muharram processions. Then General Zia went to Saudi Arabia and brought the Wahhabi doctrine to Pakistan and the targeted killing started and is continuing till this day. Scores of Shias have been killed in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Aren Haich
    Thanks for your reply.
    Your post is very informative and timely in pointing out that the Shia religious order is now and has mostly in earlier times been the most victimized in Islam; particularly by the majority Sunnis. It is excellent that you enlighten many UNS readers with your historical facts about Shia's place in Islam.

    Nevertheless, I am convinced that in our era of science and technology which truly undermines religious dogmas and beliefs, people's loyalties and political aspirations are increasingly shifting and are being based on nationalism rather than religion.

    I mentioned the Iran-Iraq war to indicate what is coming: that nationalism will inevitably trump religion in all countries and on all continents.

    , @Talha
    Hey MEExpert,

    While I don't disagree with the overall picture - no doubt Shia have been on receiving end because that's what usually happens when you are a 10-15% minority - there are a few details that should be clarified.


    Muawiyah
     
    No slaughtering of Shias done that I can think of - that was a civil war. Damascus wanted to break with Kufa; Kufa was right and should have won, but the idiot Khawarij ruined it.

    Yazid, and later Hajjaj bin Yusuf slaughtered Shias by droves
     
    True, but they slaughtered everyone by the droves - which is why I don't think one can claim it was specifically an anti-Shia sentiment from a theological viewpoint. They crushed any opposition with a sledgehammer; remember how Hajjaj dealt with the revolt of Abdullah bin Zubair (ra) - he didn't even worry about using catapults against Makkah and damaging the Kaaba. Hajjaj also had many Sunni scholars executed as well.

    they too were quite free in killing members of his family and other Shias
     
    Shia support helped the Abbasids get into power and then they cynically turned around and did what you mention - again, hardly seems to do with theological differences - much more with power-politics.

    Halaku Khan
     
    Wasn't a Muslim; either a Nestorian Christian (due to influence of his wife) or Buddhist - I think the jury is still out on that one. His destruction of Baghdad is one of the reasons that kicked off the civil war among the Mongols - with the head of the Golden Horde, Berke (who was Muslim) allying with the Mamluks to fight him.

    In India, among the Mogul kings who were busy eliminating Shias are Jehangir and Aurangzaib.
     
    Again, I don't know of any mass slaughter, but - I agree - his attacks against the Shia sultanates of Decca and Golkunda can't merely be written off as simply political gambles. Their is no doubt that was motivated by religious differences.

    Otherwise though, yeah - it's a shame that we have people still getting killed over the divide and that Shia are usually at the receiving end- and I hope the sentiments of the worldwide Sunni and Shia scholars in signing the Amman Message will percolate down to the masses.

    Wa salaam.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. sarz says:
    @renfro
    '' But how to undo the Judaic grip on America and the West?"???


    I suggest a Patriot Assassination team. They would only have to take out about 150 Uber Zio Jews in gov, media and WS. That is doable and is quick, inexpensive and involves no collateral damage.
    If that message isnt enough to send any others in their Fifth Column to catch a plane to Israel then rinse and repeat.

    Of course the assassins would also have to carry stakes to drive through their hearts to make sure they don't rise again....lol.

    My question was “How to undo the Judaic grip on America and the West?”

    renfro makes the modest proposal to assassinate the top 150 “Uber Zio Jews” and more along that line. But he then tries to cancel his own proposal by reference to wooden stakes and use of the word “lol”. It was all a joke.

    When renfro quotes from his holy book the commandment to kill the best among the goyim, does he follow that up with a “lol”? And when it is carried out, does it merit a “rofl”? Just asking.

    There is a lot America can do to recover its essence without violating its core values.

    Cancel the citizenship of all dual citizens. This will be a reversion to an earlier position. The Supreme Court had specifically upheld the denial of dual citizenship to Mexican citizens. The whole thing was turned upside-down under Jewish pressure. A former student of mine, a Jew from Mexico now an associate of Kissinger, holds American and Israeli citizenship as well as Mexican.

    Recognize that Judaism is not a religion under any serious interpretation of that word, lacking as it does an ethical core. It is a satanic cult pretending to be a religion. Far from being entitled to protection under freedom of religion statutes, its propagation should be legally deemed a serious offense.

    The sort of Judaic collusion that led to the takeover of CNN and of the Ivy League universities (see Ron Unz’s piece on the admissions policy at Harvard) should be guarded against with tools such as RICO.

    All media properties should by law be not-for-profit. Corporate ownership of media should be banned. Only cooperatives.

    Go back to state-issued debt-free money. Abolish the Federal Reserve.

    Expose the antisemitism game. Expose the Holocaust lie.

    Recognize that Judaia is a quasi-state with greater powers and organization than most states. It is parasitic on nation states (expect Israel) to the point of their destruction. Just as America is to a large degree a rightful object of hate that exists at ease with appreciation of Americans, so should Judaia be treated as an object of rightful hate while at ease with one’s Jewish friends and relatives.

    Recognize and honor anti-Judaic normative Jewishness.

    Read More
    • Replies: @renfro
    '' renfro makes the modest proposal to assassinate the top 150 “Uber Zio Jews” and more along that line. But he then tries to cancel his own proposal by reference to wooden stakes and use of the word “lol”. It was all a joke.'>>>>

    Ah, but it wasn't a joke. I highly recommend assassinations as a substitute for wars. Every time a rouge raises his head against mankind or a group of others, assassinate him. Don't wait for him or they to formulate chaos or wars or kill thousands or millions of people and destroy nations. It is 20 centuries past time for the innocent to stop dying for the guilty.

    As far as your suggestion that we...''Cancel the citizenship of all dual citizens'...as away to recover our essence---do you realize how naïve that is? That would have no impact on anyone dedicated to another country.

    And as for the rest of your suggestions....RICO, the media, exposing the antisemitism game, making Judaism an offense, etc. etc.......HOW do you propose to do that? WHO in our zionist controlled government or leadership or courts will implement those things? As it stands now No One.

    I am more than tired of the moral posturing about 'values'.....about 'thats not who we are'....about not becoming ' like the monster we fight'.....go tell that claptrap to all the dead the Monster has killed....I am sure they will rise up from their graves to praise your values and morality.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. @MEexpert
    In the Sunni-Shia conflict only the Shias have been on the receiving end. During the Umayyad rule Shias were killed on a regular basis. Muawiyah, Yazid, and later Hajjaj bin Yusuf slaughtered Shias by droves. Imam Hussain and his family was slaughtered by Yazid's forces in the city of Kerbala. Although, Abbasids claimed to be related to the Prophet, they too were quite free in killing members of his family and other Shias. Halaku Khan's massacre of Shias in Iraq and the destruction of the greatest collection of Islamic literature is quite well known. In India, among the Mogul kings who were busy eliminating Shias are Jehangir and Aurangzaib.

    In the 1980s, millions of Iraqi Shia fought millions of Iranian Shia. It was Iraqi nationalism which had fueled the war and kept Iraqi Shia persevere against the Shia Iran for 8 long years.
     
    The Shias had no choice but to fight because they made up the majority of Iraqi army that was fighting on the front. Saddam kept his elite Sunni soldier close to him. He also had threatened to destroy the holy shrines in the cities of Najaf and Karbala by placing tanks near the shrines during the war.

    The present conflict of interest between Iran and the Saudis has also its roots in nationalist aspirations and very little to do with which is Sunni and Which Shia.
     
    Yes, unfortunately Israel and the West has found a weakness and they exploit it to sow discord among the Muslims. The Saud family has always been on a shaky grounds. They have maintained their rule by bribing the clerics and local tribes and suppressing all opposition. Now that their money is running out they are running scared hence the alliance with Israel. By blaming everything on Iran they can be assured of help from the US and Israel.

    The targeted killing of Shia professionals in Pakistan is a good example. Before 1980 Shias and Sunnis lived peacefully in Pakistan. Sunnis even participated in the Muharram processions. Then General Zia went to Saudi Arabia and brought the Wahhabi doctrine to Pakistan and the targeted killing started and is continuing till this day. Scores of Shias have been killed in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

    Thanks for your reply.
    Your post is very informative and timely in pointing out that the Shia religious order is now and has mostly in earlier times been the most victimized in Islam; particularly by the majority Sunnis. It is excellent that you enlighten many UNS readers with your historical facts about Shia’s place in Islam.

    Nevertheless, I am convinced that in our era of science and technology which truly undermines religious dogmas and beliefs, people’s loyalties and political aspirations are increasingly shifting and are being based on nationalism rather than religion.

    I mentioned the Iran-Iraq war to indicate what is coming: that nationalism will inevitably trump religion in all countries and on all continents.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. @Wizard of Oz
    What's your problem about accepting that quite a few considerations came together in Hitler's mind?

    Stalin knew that Hitler planned to invade the USSR both to defeat communism and, especially, to acquire territory (Lebensraum is a pretty good way of puttung it) but he was convinced that it wouldn't happen while Britain was undefeated. That is why Operation Barbarossa caught Stalin unprepared despite the hundres of thousands of troops within a day or so of the new borders with Germany. We know Lebensraum was important to Hitler because he wrote and said so.

    I am not familiar with the evidence of any Soviet plans or policies directed to an attack by the USSR on Germany. Are you? And what did Hitler's Intelligence teĺl him about that?

    Hitler spoke about Lebensraum in the 20’s (i.e. before he came to power) and in the explicit context of post-revolutionary SU, which he regarded as inherently unstable and bound for collapse, which he based on the fact that the early Soviet leadership was 80% Jewish. He (like other Germans at the time) saw opportunities for expansion in a future void there. The situation obviously had changed completely by 1941, Stalin’s regime was in no danger of collapse, and there is no evidence that Lebensraum played any role in the German decision to attack. (Hitler admitted to Marshall Mannerheim that Barbarossa was, in effect, a gamble directed in the hopes of a knockout punch.) Again, saying the Soviets were unprepared for war (they weren’t BTW) does not mean they would have arrayed their forces in highly vulnerable offensive positions. At any rate they had more than enough capacity to seize the Romanian oilfields and put a stranglehold on the Wehrmacht without any actual engagement. The Germans at a minimum faced a use-or-lose it screnario.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Incitatus

    “Hitler spoke about Lebensraum in the 20’s (i.e. before he came to power) and in the explicit context of post-revolutionary SU, which he regarded as inherently unstable and bound for collapse…there is no evidence that Lebensraum played any role in the German decision to attack.”
     
    Really? How about in ’37, four years into illegal rearmament?

    “The Fuhrer then continued: The aim of German policy was to make secure and to preserve the racial community (Volksmasse) and to enlarge it. It was therefore a question of space.

    “The German racial community comprised over 85 million people and, because of their number and the narrow limits of habitable space in Europe, constituted a tightly packed racial core such as was not to be met in any other country, and such as implied the right to a greater living space than in the case of other peoples.”

    “If, territorially speaking, there existed no political result corresponding to its German racial core, that was a consequence of centuries of historical development, and in the continuance of these political conditions lay the greatest danger to the preservation of the German race at its present peak. To arrest the decline of Germanism (Deutschtum) in Austria and Czechoslovakia was as little possible as to maintain the present level in Germany itself. Instead of increase, sterility was setting in, and in its train disorders of a social character must arise in course of time, since political and ideological ideas remain effective only so long as they furnish the basis for the realization of the essential vital demands of a people. Germany’s future was therefore wholly conditional upon the solving of the need for space, and such a solution could be sought, of course, only for a foreseeable future about one to three generations…”

    “The only remedy, and one which might appear to us as visionary, lay in the acquisition of greater living space - a quest which has at all times been the origin of the formation of states and of the migration of peoples. That this quest met with no interest at Geneva or among the satiated nations was understandable. If, then, we accept the security of our food situation as the principle question, the space necessary to insure it can only be sought in Europe, not, as in the liberal - capitalist view, in the exploitation of colonies. It is not a matter of acquiring population, but of gaining space for agricultural use…the German people with its strong racial core would find the most favourable prerequisites for such achievement in the heart of the continent of Europe.

    “Germany’s problem could only be solved by means of force and this was never without attendant risk. The campaigns of Frederick the Great for Silesia and Bismarck’s wars against Austria and France had involved unheard - of risk, and the swiftness of the Prussian action in 1870 had kept Austria from entering the war. If one accepts as the basis of the following disposition the resort to force with its attendant risks, then there remain still to be answered the questions “when” and “how".

    -Friedrich Hoßbach: Notes of Führer conference with service chiefs 5 Nov 1937 (emphasis added)
    http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~mkinnear/Hossbach%20memorandum.pdf
     
    Guess you forgot? Think the “space”, “risk”, “force” and “swiftness” Dolf talks about in ’37 figured in ’38, ’39, ’40, and ’41? Extra credit question: does Dolf’s ’23 Putsch-mate Ludendorff bear any blame for Bolshevism after giving Lenin 40 million gold marks ($100 million) and transporting him to Russia in 1917?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. anarchyst says:

    The Saudi royalty is running out of money and needs to “cull the herd”. Great job!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  102. renfro says:
    @sarz
    My question was "How to undo the Judaic grip on America and the West?"

    renfro makes the modest proposal to assassinate the top 150 "Uber Zio Jews" and more along that line. But he then tries to cancel his own proposal by reference to wooden stakes and use of the word "lol". It was all a joke.

    When renfro quotes from his holy book the commandment to kill the best among the goyim, does he follow that up with a "lol"? And when it is carried out, does it merit a "rofl"? Just asking.

    There is a lot America can do to recover its essence without violating its core values.

    Cancel the citizenship of all dual citizens. This will be a reversion to an earlier position. The Supreme Court had specifically upheld the denial of dual citizenship to Mexican citizens. The whole thing was turned upside-down under Jewish pressure. A former student of mine, a Jew from Mexico now an associate of Kissinger, holds American and Israeli citizenship as well as Mexican.

    Recognize that Judaism is not a religion under any serious interpretation of that word, lacking as it does an ethical core. It is a satanic cult pretending to be a religion. Far from being entitled to protection under freedom of religion statutes, its propagation should be legally deemed a serious offense.

    The sort of Judaic collusion that led to the takeover of CNN and of the Ivy League universities (see Ron Unz's piece on the admissions policy at Harvard) should be guarded against with tools such as RICO.

    All media properties should by law be not-for-profit. Corporate ownership of media should be banned. Only cooperatives.

    Go back to state-issued debt-free money. Abolish the Federal Reserve.

    Expose the antisemitism game. Expose the Holocaust lie.

    Recognize that Judaia is a quasi-state with greater powers and organization than most states. It is parasitic on nation states (expect Israel) to the point of their destruction. Just as America is to a large degree a rightful object of hate that exists at ease with appreciation of Americans, so should Judaia be treated as an object of rightful hate while at ease with one's Jewish friends and relatives.

    Recognize and honor anti-Judaic normative Jewishness.

    ” renfro makes the modest proposal to assassinate the top 150 “Uber Zio Jews” and more along that line. But he then tries to cancel his own proposal by reference to wooden stakes and use of the word “lol”. It was all a joke.’>>>>

    Ah, but it wasn’t a joke. I highly recommend assassinations as a substitute for wars. Every time a rouge raises his head against mankind or a group of others, assassinate him. Don’t wait for him or they to formulate chaos or wars or kill thousands or millions of people and destroy nations. It is 20 centuries past time for the innocent to stop dying for the guilty.

    As far as your suggestion that we…”Cancel the citizenship of all dual citizens’…as away to recover our essence—do you realize how naïve that is? That would have no impact on anyone dedicated to another country.

    And as for the rest of your suggestions….RICO, the media, exposing the antisemitism game, making Judaism an offense, etc. etc…….HOW do you propose to do that? WHO in our zionist controlled government or leadership or courts will implement those things? As it stands now No One.

    I am more than tired of the moral posturing about ‘values’…..about ‘thats not who we are’….about not becoming ‘ like the monster we fight’…..go tell that claptrap to all the dead the Monster has killed….I am sure they will rise up from their graves to praise your values and morality.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. Talha says:
    @MEexpert
    In the Sunni-Shia conflict only the Shias have been on the receiving end. During the Umayyad rule Shias were killed on a regular basis. Muawiyah, Yazid, and later Hajjaj bin Yusuf slaughtered Shias by droves. Imam Hussain and his family was slaughtered by Yazid's forces in the city of Kerbala. Although, Abbasids claimed to be related to the Prophet, they too were quite free in killing members of his family and other Shias. Halaku Khan's massacre of Shias in Iraq and the destruction of the greatest collection of Islamic literature is quite well known. In India, among the Mogul kings who were busy eliminating Shias are Jehangir and Aurangzaib.

    In the 1980s, millions of Iraqi Shia fought millions of Iranian Shia. It was Iraqi nationalism which had fueled the war and kept Iraqi Shia persevere against the Shia Iran for 8 long years.
     
    The Shias had no choice but to fight because they made up the majority of Iraqi army that was fighting on the front. Saddam kept his elite Sunni soldier close to him. He also had threatened to destroy the holy shrines in the cities of Najaf and Karbala by placing tanks near the shrines during the war.

    The present conflict of interest between Iran and the Saudis has also its roots in nationalist aspirations and very little to do with which is Sunni and Which Shia.
     
    Yes, unfortunately Israel and the West has found a weakness and they exploit it to sow discord among the Muslims. The Saud family has always been on a shaky grounds. They have maintained their rule by bribing the clerics and local tribes and suppressing all opposition. Now that their money is running out they are running scared hence the alliance with Israel. By blaming everything on Iran they can be assured of help from the US and Israel.

    The targeted killing of Shia professionals in Pakistan is a good example. Before 1980 Shias and Sunnis lived peacefully in Pakistan. Sunnis even participated in the Muharram processions. Then General Zia went to Saudi Arabia and brought the Wahhabi doctrine to Pakistan and the targeted killing started and is continuing till this day. Scores of Shias have been killed in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

    Hey MEExpert,

    While I don’t disagree with the overall picture – no doubt Shia have been on receiving end because that’s what usually happens when you are a 10-15% minority – there are a few details that should be clarified.

    Muawiyah

    No slaughtering of Shias done that I can think of – that was a civil war. Damascus wanted to break with Kufa; Kufa was right and should have won, but the idiot Khawarij ruined it.

    Yazid, and later Hajjaj bin Yusuf slaughtered Shias by droves

    True, but they slaughtered everyone by the droves – which is why I don’t think one can claim it was specifically an anti-Shia sentiment from a theological viewpoint. They crushed any opposition with a sledgehammer; remember how Hajjaj dealt with the revolt of Abdullah bin Zubair (ra) – he didn’t even worry about using catapults against Makkah and damaging the Kaaba. Hajjaj also had many Sunni scholars executed as well.

    they too were quite free in killing members of his family and other Shias

    Shia support helped the Abbasids get into power and then they cynically turned around and did what you mention – again, hardly seems to do with theological differences – much more with power-politics.

    Halaku Khan

    Wasn’t a Muslim; either a Nestorian Christian (due to influence of his wife) or Buddhist – I think the jury is still out on that one. His destruction of Baghdad is one of the reasons that kicked off the civil war among the Mongols – with the head of the Golden Horde, Berke (who was Muslim) allying with the Mamluks to fight him.

    In India, among the Mogul kings who were busy eliminating Shias are Jehangir and Aurangzaib.

    Again, I don’t know of any mass slaughter, but – I agree – his attacks against the Shia sultanates of Decca and Golkunda can’t merely be written off as simply political gambles. Their is no doubt that was motivated by religious differences.

    Otherwise though, yeah – it’s a shame that we have people still getting killed over the divide and that Shia are usually at the receiving end- and I hope the sentiments of the worldwide Sunni and Shia scholars in signing the Amman Message will percolate down to the masses.

    Wa salaam.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. Malla says:
    @Alden
    "the entire Continent of Europe would have been submerged in the Soviet tsunami:"

    And because of the war Hitler involved himself in and lost, only half of Europe was engulfed in the Soviet tsunami. By 1945 there were enough communists and fellow travelers in Britain, France, Italy, Greece and the Scandinavian countries that it was only American intervention that prevented all of Europe from being taken over by the soviets.

    I know a lot of people admire Hitler, but face reality. He lost. He lost badly. Because he lost half of Europe suffered under soviet domination. Because of him, the state of Israel exists. His losing gave the soviets the cachet to impose themselves all over the world as brave heroic Hitler fighters.

    Because he lost China became communist.

    Face it, Hitler lost and there were terrible consequences. A conspiracy theorist might think he was an agent of the soviet union snd the zionists, so successful did they become because Hitler lost a war he should have avoided.

    Nope, the Soviets wanted to conquer all of Europe

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Clv-c6QdBs

    Watch what ex GRU officer Victor Suvorov says and you will see it matches exactly with Adolf Hitler’s speech before Operation Barbarossa.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. Malla says:
    @Mulegino1
    These historical events happened in spite of, not because of, Hitler's desire to reestablish Germany as the dominant power on the Continent and to dismantle the terrible injustices of the Versailles "Peace" regime.

    If the reckless English - and feet dragging French - guarantees had not been given to come to Poland's defense in the event of a conflict with Germany (and only with Germany- surprisingly not with the Soviet Union) at the behest of the British War Party, international Jewry and Zionism, the warmongers in the FDR administration, and, of course, the bellicose regime of the revanchist and chauvinist Poles- there would have been no Second World War. There would have been no shared border between the USSR and the German Reich. There would have been no destruction of the Europe of nations and European culture brought about by the Allied saturation bombing of European cities and towns. There would have been no Soviet occupation of Eastern and Central Europe. There would have been no Cold War. There would have been no EU (in its present state). There would have been no third world invasion and Islamization of Europe. In short, the Europe of nations and true diversity would most likely still exist, under a dominant, but sane "New Order" as opposed to the insane and culturally suicidal EU.

    Christian Europa lost the Second World War as badly as Carthage lost the final Punic War - only the defeat was in slower motion.

    If the British, Americans and French had attacked Soviet Russia immediately during the October revolution and if possible put the Tzar back in power (he was their ally in WW1 and a relative of the British Monarch after all), all this would not have happened. But wait, the Bolshevik revolution was funded by Jewish Wall Street bankers like Jacob Schiff.
    Also since Britain and France gave guarantees to Poland and Poland was invaded by two countries Germany and the USSR, why did the British and French not declare war on the USSR??? That is the million dollar question of the 20th century.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. my2cents says:
    @Anonymous
    I would still like an article by Mr. Margolis on this interesting topic - if there is a benign explanation for it, why not share it with us. It would be fascinating to hear a description of what the place is like...
    Eric Margolis’s name is in Jeffrey Epstein’s little black book.
    A journalist, Mr. Margolis certainly knows what an interesting story it would be to write about his visits to Lolita Island. Why no comment, no article? See for yourself:

    https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/1508273/jeffrey-epsteins-little-black-book-redacted.pdf

    If this is an attempt to impugn Mr. Margolis’ character it certainly reeks like a Zionist attempt to shut up a highly respected journalist. Your M.O no longer works.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. my2cents says:
    @Mulegino1
    Stalin and his generals were taken by surprise, indeed, but only because of the Wehrmacht preempting (possibly within a few weeks) the gigantic invasion forces deploying in offensive formations in the vulnerable Bialystok and Lvov salients, as well as the most powerful army in the world, the 9th Rifle Corps deploying along the Romanian border within easy striking distance of the Romanian oil fields. None of this would make any sense in a defensive context and is the only factor that can explain the vast encirclements and netting of hundreds of thousands of prisoners within the first few weeks of Barbarossa.

    Hitler admitted to Marshal Mannerheim that he knew that Fall Barbarossa was a desperate gamble and that the Wehrmacht was not equipped to fight a long war of attrition or in freezing cold winters. Nevertheless, he decided to act anyway. If the Soviet forces had succeeded in seizing the Romanian oil fields, cutting them off from Germany, then the mechanized bulk of the Wehrmacht would have ground to a halt and the entire Continent of Europe would have been submerged in the Soviet tsunami:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClR9tcpKZec

    I don’t believe for ONE second that this is Hitler OR Mannerheim.
    I survived German occupation and am quite familiar with Hitler’s voice.

    Everyone has a nonsense video. I speak German and the only videos I believe are those in which I hear and SEE Hitler speak.
    Hitler attacked the USSR solely because the U.S besides funding Hitler was also arming the USSR and military hardware was growing along German borders and German intelligence showed that a Soviet attack was imminent.
    War was declared on Germany by the UK and France after Germany entered Poland to get a freeway to Danzig (Gdansk) 3 week later the USSR invaded Poland. No one on the West declared war on the USSR, which is carefully removed from the original narrative. Poland did not exist until 1917 and consists of the former German speaking Kingdom of Prussia.

    http://ihr.org/other/what-the-world-rejected.html

    http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v20/v20n6p59_Michaels.html

    The facts are that Hitler did not want any war…..but those interested in breaking up Germany ever since its unification in 1870 DID. 39 independent/sovereign German speaking Kingdoms/Princedoms and Duchies were no threat to the UK or France but ONE German Reich was. It is still the reason why ever since 1945 Germany has been occupied by the U.S.
    Learn some history. Nothing happens in a vacuum.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    Aren’t you supporting Mulegino1’s point, that Hitler would not have attacked a foe far better equipped for a long war, unless he had a very good reason to do so, and was in essence taking a desperate gamble?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. my2cents says:
    @JoaoAlfaiate
    Hitler couldn't defeat the UK so he decided to invade the USSR.

    The Saudis couldn't defeat Yemen so they decided to attack Iran.

    Can't wait to see how this ends.

    “”Hitler couldn’t defeat the UK so he decided to invade the USSR.””

    What history book does that hail from?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. my2cents says:
    @Anon
    Hitler attacked Russia because he thought he could get away with it and win. That's all it was. At the time he lunged into Russia, he had one foe left standing--the UK. Hitler was in the unique situation of understanding that the UK--alone--was no danger to him at this point because they could not pull off a large-scale, mass amphibious invasion of the European mainland by themselves.

    How did Hitler know this? Because he'd studied that very same problem from the opposite direction for months. That's what Operation Sea Lion was. Hitler put in hundreds of hours planning and studying to invade the UK, then gave up because he decided it was too difficult to pull off. But he also realized that it was also too difficult for the UK to pull it off by themselves from the opposite direction, for the very same logistical reasons. At that particular moment in time, the UK was a weaker military power than Germany, and Hitler knew that if he couldn't do it, he also knew the UK couldn't do it either. The British didn't have the necessary manpower or resources.

    Hitler knew the problems inherent in such an operation extremely well because he'd studied it for so long, and people posting here on the Unz do not grasp this point. Hitler definitely took this into his calculations in his war against Russia. With his rear protected and the rest of the European continent conquered, Hitler felt with an absolute certainty that he was free to attack Russia, and he did. He'd always been planning to seize all those huge Russian land masses anyway for German settlers. He wasn't just planning to conquer Russia militarily, he was planning to turn it into a German country via expansion and settlement with German peoples akin to what the British did with settlements in North America in the 1600s and 1700s.

    WOW – And all this wisdom came to you how?. By way of the usual propaganda? or a mind reader?

    The Netherlands/Belgium/ France/Denmark were invaded because German intelligence discovered that the UK would invade Germany via one of these country.
    Imagine Germany’s surprise to find UK troops at Dunkirk in May 1940…..which were surrounded by the Germans and were evacuated by Britain, so German intelligence was pretty much spot on.

    I survived German occupation….I was there. The opinions expressed here about WW2/Hitler border on amusing in their ignorance and absurdity. 8-)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. @my2cents
    I don't believe for ONE second that this is Hitler OR Mannerheim.
    I survived German occupation and am quite familiar with Hitler's voice.

    Everyone has a nonsense video. I speak German and the only videos I believe are those in which I hear and SEE Hitler speak.
    Hitler attacked the USSR solely because the U.S besides funding Hitler was also arming the USSR and military hardware was growing along German borders and German intelligence showed that a Soviet attack was imminent.
    War was declared on Germany by the UK and France after Germany entered Poland to get a freeway to Danzig (Gdansk) 3 week later the USSR invaded Poland. No one on the West declared war on the USSR, which is carefully removed from the original narrative. Poland did not exist until 1917 and consists of the former German speaking Kingdom of Prussia.

    http://ihr.org/other/what-the-world-rejected.html
    http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v20/v20n6p59_Michaels.html

    The facts are that Hitler did not want any war.....but those interested in breaking up Germany ever since its unification in 1870 DID. 39 independent/sovereign German speaking Kingdoms/Princedoms and Duchies were no threat to the UK or France but ONE German Reich was. It is still the reason why ever since 1945 Germany has been occupied by the U.S.
    Learn some history. Nothing happens in a vacuum.

    Aren’t you supporting Mulegino1’s point, that Hitler would not have attacked a foe far better equipped for a long war, unless he had a very good reason to do so, and was in essence taking a desperate gamble?

    Read More
    • Agree: Mulegino1
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. Incitatus says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    Hitler spoke about Lebensraum in the 20’s (i.e. before he came to power) and in the explicit context of post-revolutionary SU, which he regarded as inherently unstable and bound for collapse, which he based on the fact that the early Soviet leadership was 80% Jewish. He (like other Germans at the time) saw opportunities for expansion in a future void there. The situation obviously had changed completely by 1941, Stalin’s regime was in no danger of collapse, and there is no evidence that Lebensraum played any role in the German decision to attack. (Hitler admitted to Marshall Mannerheim that Barbarossa was, in effect, a gamble directed in the hopes of a knockout punch.) Again, saying the Soviets were unprepared for war (they weren’t BTW) does not mean they would have arrayed their forces in highly vulnerable offensive positions. At any rate they had more than enough capacity to seize the Romanian oilfields and put a stranglehold on the Wehrmacht without any actual engagement. The Germans at a minimum faced a use-or-lose it screnario.

    “Hitler spoke about Lebensraum in the 20’s (i.e. before he came to power) and in the explicit context of post-revolutionary SU, which he regarded as inherently unstable and bound for collapse…there is no evidence that Lebensraum played any role in the German decision to attack.”

    Really? How about in ’37, four years into illegal rearmament?

    “The Fuhrer then continued: The aim of German policy was to make secure and to preserve the racial community (Volksmasse) and to enlarge it. It was therefore a question of space.

    “The German racial community comprised over 85 million people and, because of their number and the narrow limits of habitable space in Europe, constituted a tightly packed racial core such as was not to be met in any other country, and such as implied the right to a greater living space than in the case of other peoples.”

    “If, territorially speaking, there existed no political result corresponding to its German racial core, that was a consequence of centuries of historical development, and in the continuance of these political conditions lay the greatest danger to the preservation of the German race at its present peak. To arrest the decline of Germanism (Deutschtum) in Austria and Czechoslovakia was as little possible as to maintain the present level in Germany itself. Instead of increase, sterility was setting in, and in its train disorders of a social character must arise in course of time, since political and ideological ideas remain effective only so long as they furnish the basis for the realization of the essential vital demands of a people. Germany’s future was therefore wholly conditional upon the solving of the need for space, and such a solution could be sought, of course, only for a foreseeable future about one to three generations…”

    “The only remedy, and one which might appear to us as visionary, lay in the acquisition of greater living space – a quest which has at all times been the origin of the formation of states and of the migration of peoples. That this quest met with no interest at Geneva or among the satiated nations was understandable. If, then, we accept the security of our food situation as the principle question, the space necessary to insure it can only be sought in Europe, not, as in the liberal – capitalist view, in the exploitation of colonies. It is not a matter of acquiring population, but of gaining space for agricultural use…the German people with its strong racial core would find the most favourable prerequisites for such achievement in the heart of the continent of Europe.

    “Germany’s problem could only be solved by means of force and this was never without attendant risk. The campaigns of Frederick the Great for Silesia and Bismarck’s wars against Austria and France had involved unheard – of risk, and the swiftness of the Prussian action in 1870 had kept Austria from entering the war. If one accepts as the basis of the following disposition the resort to force with its attendant risks, then there remain still to be answered the questions “when” and “how”.

    -Friedrich Hoßbach: Notes of Führer conference with service chiefs 5 Nov 1937 (emphasis added)
    http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~mkinnear/Hossbach%20memorandum.pdf

    Guess you forgot? Think the “space”, “risk”, “force” and “swiftness” Dolf talks about in ’37 figured in ’38, ’39, ’40, and ’41? Extra credit question: does Dolf’s ’23 Putsch-mate Ludendorff bear any blame for Bolshevism after giving Lenin 40 million gold marks ($100 million) and transporting him to Russia in 1917?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    Obviously the claim is not that Hitler literally never spoke of Lebensraum after the 20’s, only that the term referred to a specific context which had nothing to do with continental (much less global) domination (as it’s commonly but incorrectly understood), you are just being pedantic and dishonest. True that 1937 is not the 20’s, but it’s not 1941 either, the point of discussion (please try to pay attention). It’s also not late 1940, when Soviet ultimatums put the Germans in an untenable position.

    Taylor rightly disputed the significance of the Hossbach Memorandum, pointing out (questions of authenticity aside) that it had little bearing on or connection to actual policy and was little more than musings on how Germany would attain its proper role as a continental power (something it should have admittedly pursued with Russia, but Bolshevism aside this historical alliance would always be opposed by Britain anyway, and in different guises is opposed by the ZUSA now).

    http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v04/v04p372_weber.html
    , @L.K
    This type of post by you only shows just how depravedly dishonest you are, inZitatus! I humilliated you before when you tried to push this forgery, but you merely post it again & again... I know, that is how propaganda works, we get it.

    But listen, imbecile, this 'memorandum' has long been shown to be a FORGERY. This has been known for decades!!
    In 1968, Victor von Martin*, said of the memorandum:

    "The protocol presented at the Nuremberg court was put together in such a way as to totally change the meaning [of the original] and can therefore be characterized only as a crude forgery."
     
    * von Martin was given Kirchbach's copy of the original by Hossbach, & after the end of the war, von Martin turned over this copy to the Allied occupation authorities.
    Hossbach, BTW, was a bitter enemy of Hitler and the NS regime, and had conspired with others to overthrow Hitler even before the war. Nevertheless, in his memoirs, this traitor(Hossbach) admitted that in any case, Hitler had not outlined any kind of "war plan" at the meeting.
    Renowned British historian, A.J.P. Taylor, who initially was fooled by this forgery, later revised his position and wrote:

    "No evidence that Hitler planned aggressive war has ever been produced … [This] revision upsets the entire verdict of the Nuremberg Tribunal, which is still solemnly quoted as justification of the Allied war against Germany."
     
    and added that

    "those who believe in political trials may go on quoting the Hossbach memorandum."
     
    It's as if Taylor wrote these words especially for our zionist shill, inZitatus.
    source: Taylor's classic "The Origins of the Second World War", edition containing the added 'Second Thoughts' chapter, which comes right after the preface. Pgs.XXIII, XXIV.
    After the aforementioned quote Taylor adds;

    "They should also warn their readers[....] that the memorandum, far from being an 'official record', is a very hot potato."[1]

     

    Buhahahah... BTw, There is at least one full book dedicated to taking this farce to pieces.
    Das Hossbach-'Protokoll': Die Zerstörung einer Legende.
    https://www.amazon.de/Das-Hossbach-Protokoll-Zerst%C3%B6rung-einer-Legende/dp/B001E5PW9O

    keep them coming, inZi, you are good for a laugh!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. @Incitatus

    “Hitler spoke about Lebensraum in the 20’s (i.e. before he came to power) and in the explicit context of post-revolutionary SU, which he regarded as inherently unstable and bound for collapse…there is no evidence that Lebensraum played any role in the German decision to attack.”
     
    Really? How about in ’37, four years into illegal rearmament?

    “The Fuhrer then continued: The aim of German policy was to make secure and to preserve the racial community (Volksmasse) and to enlarge it. It was therefore a question of space.

    “The German racial community comprised over 85 million people and, because of their number and the narrow limits of habitable space in Europe, constituted a tightly packed racial core such as was not to be met in any other country, and such as implied the right to a greater living space than in the case of other peoples.”

    “If, territorially speaking, there existed no political result corresponding to its German racial core, that was a consequence of centuries of historical development, and in the continuance of these political conditions lay the greatest danger to the preservation of the German race at its present peak. To arrest the decline of Germanism (Deutschtum) in Austria and Czechoslovakia was as little possible as to maintain the present level in Germany itself. Instead of increase, sterility was setting in, and in its train disorders of a social character must arise in course of time, since political and ideological ideas remain effective only so long as they furnish the basis for the realization of the essential vital demands of a people. Germany’s future was therefore wholly conditional upon the solving of the need for space, and such a solution could be sought, of course, only for a foreseeable future about one to three generations…”

    “The only remedy, and one which might appear to us as visionary, lay in the acquisition of greater living space - a quest which has at all times been the origin of the formation of states and of the migration of peoples. That this quest met with no interest at Geneva or among the satiated nations was understandable. If, then, we accept the security of our food situation as the principle question, the space necessary to insure it can only be sought in Europe, not, as in the liberal - capitalist view, in the exploitation of colonies. It is not a matter of acquiring population, but of gaining space for agricultural use…the German people with its strong racial core would find the most favourable prerequisites for such achievement in the heart of the continent of Europe.

    “Germany’s problem could only be solved by means of force and this was never without attendant risk. The campaigns of Frederick the Great for Silesia and Bismarck’s wars against Austria and France had involved unheard - of risk, and the swiftness of the Prussian action in 1870 had kept Austria from entering the war. If one accepts as the basis of the following disposition the resort to force with its attendant risks, then there remain still to be answered the questions “when” and “how".

    -Friedrich Hoßbach: Notes of Führer conference with service chiefs 5 Nov 1937 (emphasis added)
    http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~mkinnear/Hossbach%20memorandum.pdf
     
    Guess you forgot? Think the “space”, “risk”, “force” and “swiftness” Dolf talks about in ’37 figured in ’38, ’39, ’40, and ’41? Extra credit question: does Dolf’s ’23 Putsch-mate Ludendorff bear any blame for Bolshevism after giving Lenin 40 million gold marks ($100 million) and transporting him to Russia in 1917?

    Obviously the claim is not that Hitler literally never spoke of Lebensraum after the 20’s, only that the term referred to a specific context which had nothing to do with continental (much less global) domination (as it’s commonly but incorrectly understood), you are just being pedantic and dishonest. True that 1937 is not the 20’s, but it’s not 1941 either, the point of discussion (please try to pay attention). It’s also not late 1940, when Soviet ultimatums put the Germans in an untenable position.

    Taylor rightly disputed the significance of the Hossbach Memorandum, pointing out (questions of authenticity aside) that it had little bearing on or connection to actual policy and was little more than musings on how Germany would attain its proper role as a continental power (something it should have admittedly pursued with Russia, but Bolshevism aside this historical alliance would always be opposed by Britain anyway, and in different guises is opposed by the ZUSA now).

    http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v04/v04p372_weber.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @L.K
    The Hossbach Memorandum has absolutely NO value whatsoever.

    It cannot be called a document at all. It is what an anti N.S conspirator said that Hitler said... oh wait, it ain't even that, bc what it is is an allied forgery based upon a copy of said memorandum.
    Obviously, even the Hossbach original could hardly be considered a serious document.

    I know you know all this, just writing for others too lazy to even click a few links, such as yours.
    , @Incitatus
    Beefcake,

    Mentioning Hoßbach was “pedantic and dishonest”? Why? Contradicts your “Lebensraum in the 20’s (i.e. before he came to power)” epistle? Hitler’s pretty specific, and he’s talking to service chiefs, not boring tablemates. “Germany’s problem could only be solved by means of force” seems pretty straightforward. “Musings”? Maybe. Hitler says “there remain still to be answered the questions ‘when’ and ‘how’”. Answered months later with the Anschluß and Müncher Abkommen (1938). Rump Czechoslovakia and Poland 1939. Denmark, Norway, Luxembourg, Belgium, Netherlands, France 1940. North Africa, Yugoslavia, Greece, Crete, Eastern Poland, USSR 1941, etc. Are those adequate “connection[s] to actual policy”?

    Ever read Ernst Jünger’s ‘In Stahlgewittern’ (Storm of Steel)? Front line WW1 service made gamblers out of many veterans. Surviving daily mortal risk can be addictive. Not dissimilar to invading countries.

    “Ich gehe mit traumwandlerischer Sicherheit den Weg, den mich die Vorsehung gehen heißt” (“I go the way that Providence dictates with the assurance of a sleepwalker”)
    -Adolf Hitler 15 Mar 1936 München
     
    Still waiting on does ’23 Putsch-mate Ludendorff bear any blame for Bolshevism after giving Lenin 40 million gold marks ($100 million) and transporting him to Russia in 1917?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. L.K says:
    @Incitatus

    “Hitler spoke about Lebensraum in the 20’s (i.e. before he came to power) and in the explicit context of post-revolutionary SU, which he regarded as inherently unstable and bound for collapse…there is no evidence that Lebensraum played any role in the German decision to attack.”
     
    Really? How about in ’37, four years into illegal rearmament?

    “The Fuhrer then continued: The aim of German policy was to make secure and to preserve the racial community (Volksmasse) and to enlarge it. It was therefore a question of space.

    “The German racial community comprised over 85 million people and, because of their number and the narrow limits of habitable space in Europe, constituted a tightly packed racial core such as was not to be met in any other country, and such as implied the right to a greater living space than in the case of other peoples.”

    “If, territorially speaking, there existed no political result corresponding to its German racial core, that was a consequence of centuries of historical development, and in the continuance of these political conditions lay the greatest danger to the preservation of the German race at its present peak. To arrest the decline of Germanism (Deutschtum) in Austria and Czechoslovakia was as little possible as to maintain the present level in Germany itself. Instead of increase, sterility was setting in, and in its train disorders of a social character must arise in course of time, since political and ideological ideas remain effective only so long as they furnish the basis for the realization of the essential vital demands of a people. Germany’s future was therefore wholly conditional upon the solving of the need for space, and such a solution could be sought, of course, only for a foreseeable future about one to three generations…”

    “The only remedy, and one which might appear to us as visionary, lay in the acquisition of greater living space - a quest which has at all times been the origin of the formation of states and of the migration of peoples. That this quest met with no interest at Geneva or among the satiated nations was understandable. If, then, we accept the security of our food situation as the principle question, the space necessary to insure it can only be sought in Europe, not, as in the liberal - capitalist view, in the exploitation of colonies. It is not a matter of acquiring population, but of gaining space for agricultural use…the German people with its strong racial core would find the most favourable prerequisites for such achievement in the heart of the continent of Europe.

    “Germany’s problem could only be solved by means of force and this was never without attendant risk. The campaigns of Frederick the Great for Silesia and Bismarck’s wars against Austria and France had involved unheard - of risk, and the swiftness of the Prussian action in 1870 had kept Austria from entering the war. If one accepts as the basis of the following disposition the resort to force with its attendant risks, then there remain still to be answered the questions “when” and “how".

    -Friedrich Hoßbach: Notes of Führer conference with service chiefs 5 Nov 1937 (emphasis added)
    http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~mkinnear/Hossbach%20memorandum.pdf
     
    Guess you forgot? Think the “space”, “risk”, “force” and “swiftness” Dolf talks about in ’37 figured in ’38, ’39, ’40, and ’41? Extra credit question: does Dolf’s ’23 Putsch-mate Ludendorff bear any blame for Bolshevism after giving Lenin 40 million gold marks ($100 million) and transporting him to Russia in 1917?

    This type of post by you only shows just how depravedly dishonest you are, inZitatus! I humilliated you before when you tried to push this forgery, but you merely post it again & again… I know, that is how propaganda works, we get it.

    But listen, imbecile, this ‘memorandum’ has long been shown to be a FORGERY. This has been known for decades!!
    In 1968, Victor von Martin*, said of the memorandum:

    The protocol presented at the Nuremberg court was put together in such a way as to totally change the meaning [of the original] and can therefore be characterized only as a crude forgery.”

    * von Martin was given Kirchbach’s copy of the original by Hossbach, & after the end of the war, von Martin turned over this copy to the Allied occupation authorities.
    Hossbach, BTW, was a bitter enemy of Hitler and the NS regime, and had conspired with others to overthrow Hitler even before the war. Nevertheless, in his memoirs, this traitor(Hossbach) admitted that in any case, Hitler had not outlined any kind of “war plan” at the meeting.
    Renowned British historian, A.J.P. Taylor, who initially was fooled by this forgery, later revised his position and wrote:

    No evidence that Hitler planned aggressive war has ever been produced … [This] revision upsets the entire verdict of the Nuremberg Tribunal, which is still solemnly quoted as justification of the Allied war against Germany.”

    and added that

    “those who believe in political trials may go on quoting the Hossbach memorandum.”

    It’s as if Taylor wrote these words especially for our zionist shill, inZitatus.
    source: Taylor’s classic “The Origins of the Second World War”, edition containing the added ‘Second Thoughts’ chapter, which comes right after the preface. Pgs.XXIII, XXIV.
    After the aforementioned quote Taylor adds;

    “They should also warn their readers[....] that the memorandum, far from being an ‘official record’, is a very hot potato.”[1]

    Buhahahah… BTw, There is at least one full book dedicated to taking this farce to pieces.
    Das Hossbach-’Protokoll’: Die Zerstörung einer Legende.

    https://www.amazon.de/Das-Hossbach-Protokoll-Zerst%C3%B6rung-einer-Legende/dp/B001E5PW9O

    keep them coming, inZi, you are good for a laugh!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. L.K says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    Obviously the claim is not that Hitler literally never spoke of Lebensraum after the 20’s, only that the term referred to a specific context which had nothing to do with continental (much less global) domination (as it’s commonly but incorrectly understood), you are just being pedantic and dishonest. True that 1937 is not the 20’s, but it’s not 1941 either, the point of discussion (please try to pay attention). It’s also not late 1940, when Soviet ultimatums put the Germans in an untenable position.

    Taylor rightly disputed the significance of the Hossbach Memorandum, pointing out (questions of authenticity aside) that it had little bearing on or connection to actual policy and was little more than musings on how Germany would attain its proper role as a continental power (something it should have admittedly pursued with Russia, but Bolshevism aside this historical alliance would always be opposed by Britain anyway, and in different guises is opposed by the ZUSA now).

    http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v04/v04p372_weber.html

    The Hossbach Memorandum has absolutely NO value whatsoever.

    It cannot be called a document at all. It is what an anti N.S conspirator said that Hitler said… oh wait, it ain’t even that, bc what it is is an allied forgery based upon a copy of said memorandum.
    Obviously, even the Hossbach original could hardly be considered a serious document.

    I know you know all this, just writing for others too lazy to even click a few links, such as yours.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. @Randal

    Is this the beginning of the collapse of the House of Saud? Or a Saudi renaissance led by Prince Mohammed as he claims? Stay tuned.
     
    This is the key question, of huge import to the longer term future of the ME.

    In the meantime, the issue is what the collateral damage inflicted upon the region by the rivals for Saudi power is likely to be, with Lebanon and Iran the likely next targets.

    Can the Saudis really get away with so openly admitting what everyone has known to be true for decades - that they are firm allies of Israel? Are the Arabs really that beaten and cowed?

    Good question. Beaten, cowed, no pride, no dignity. Simply put , they are ” a sorry bunch”. The “good Arabs ” are either poor or dead. They’re their own worst enemy. With all the wealth, population, and territory they have, they’ve never won a “war” against any outsider and never will. The money and effort spent on military is to keep their population or their poorer neighbors in check, as has been demonstrated time after time.
    If the Saudis and their Zionists half brothers want a war with Iran, then those sand *****rs should remember their last adventure, when the gang included a much bigger crowd. Europe, Russia, China and a few fellow Arabs are missing this time around. Maybe MBS is speeding up the end of what would go down in history as one of the shortest lived kingdoms. And one of the most
    despotic and corrupt

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. Incitatus says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    Obviously the claim is not that Hitler literally never spoke of Lebensraum after the 20’s, only that the term referred to a specific context which had nothing to do with continental (much less global) domination (as it’s commonly but incorrectly understood), you are just being pedantic and dishonest. True that 1937 is not the 20’s, but it’s not 1941 either, the point of discussion (please try to pay attention). It’s also not late 1940, when Soviet ultimatums put the Germans in an untenable position.

    Taylor rightly disputed the significance of the Hossbach Memorandum, pointing out (questions of authenticity aside) that it had little bearing on or connection to actual policy and was little more than musings on how Germany would attain its proper role as a continental power (something it should have admittedly pursued with Russia, but Bolshevism aside this historical alliance would always be opposed by Britain anyway, and in different guises is opposed by the ZUSA now).

    http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v04/v04p372_weber.html

    Beefcake,

    Mentioning Hoßbach was “pedantic and dishonest”? Why? Contradicts your “Lebensraum in the 20’s (i.e. before he came to power)” epistle? Hitler’s pretty specific, and he’s talking to service chiefs, not boring tablemates. “Germany’s problem could only be solved by means of force” seems pretty straightforward. “Musings”? Maybe. Hitler says “there remain still to be answered the questions ‘when’ and ‘how’”. Answered months later with the Anschluß and Müncher Abkommen (1938). Rump Czechoslovakia and Poland 1939. Denmark, Norway, Luxembourg, Belgium, Netherlands, France 1940. North Africa, Yugoslavia, Greece, Crete, Eastern Poland, USSR 1941, etc. Are those adequate “connection[s] to actual policy”?

    Ever read Ernst Jünger’s ‘In Stahlgewittern’ (Storm of Steel)? Front line WW1 service made gamblers out of many veterans. Surviving daily mortal risk can be addictive. Not dissimilar to invading countries.

    “Ich gehe mit traumwandlerischer Sicherheit den Weg, den mich die Vorsehung gehen heißt” (“I go the way that Providence dictates with the assurance of a sleepwalker”)
    -Adolf Hitler 15 Mar 1936 München

    Still waiting on does ’23 Putsch-mate Ludendorff bear any blame for Bolshevism after giving Lenin 40 million gold marks ($100 million) and transporting him to Russia in 1917?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    What are you waiting on?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. @Incitatus
    Beefcake,

    Mentioning Hoßbach was “pedantic and dishonest”? Why? Contradicts your “Lebensraum in the 20’s (i.e. before he came to power)” epistle? Hitler’s pretty specific, and he’s talking to service chiefs, not boring tablemates. “Germany’s problem could only be solved by means of force” seems pretty straightforward. “Musings”? Maybe. Hitler says “there remain still to be answered the questions ‘when’ and ‘how’”. Answered months later with the Anschluß and Müncher Abkommen (1938). Rump Czechoslovakia and Poland 1939. Denmark, Norway, Luxembourg, Belgium, Netherlands, France 1940. North Africa, Yugoslavia, Greece, Crete, Eastern Poland, USSR 1941, etc. Are those adequate “connection[s] to actual policy”?

    Ever read Ernst Jünger’s ‘In Stahlgewittern’ (Storm of Steel)? Front line WW1 service made gamblers out of many veterans. Surviving daily mortal risk can be addictive. Not dissimilar to invading countries.

    “Ich gehe mit traumwandlerischer Sicherheit den Weg, den mich die Vorsehung gehen heißt” (“I go the way that Providence dictates with the assurance of a sleepwalker”)
    -Adolf Hitler 15 Mar 1936 München
     
    Still waiting on does ’23 Putsch-mate Ludendorff bear any blame for Bolshevism after giving Lenin 40 million gold marks ($100 million) and transporting him to Russia in 1917?

    What are you waiting on?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Incitatus
    Does ’23 Putsch-mate Ludendorff bear any blame for Bolshevism after giving Lenin 40 million gold marks ($100 million) and transporting him to Russia in 1917?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. Incitatus says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    What are you waiting on?

    Does ’23 Putsch-mate Ludendorff bear any blame for Bolshevism after giving Lenin 40 million gold marks ($100 million) and transporting him to Russia in 1917?

    Read More
    • Troll: L.K
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    Ah, ok. Well, it’s a stupid and irrelevant question, so I’m afraid you’ll have to wait a bit longer. I’m sure you can find something to do.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. @Incitatus
    Does ’23 Putsch-mate Ludendorff bear any blame for Bolshevism after giving Lenin 40 million gold marks ($100 million) and transporting him to Russia in 1917?

    Ah, ok. Well, it’s a stupid and irrelevant question, so I’m afraid you’ll have to wait a bit longer. I’m sure you can find something to do.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. Incitatus says:

    “Ah, ok. Well, it’s a stupid and irrelevant question…”

    Translation: ‘Ludendorff was responsible but, lacking integrity, I can’t admit it.’

    “…so I’m afraid you’ll have to wait a bit longer…”

    Don’t worry BM. You answered the real question.

    A very tiny world indeed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    Yawn.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. @Incitatus

    “Ah, ok. Well, it’s a stupid and irrelevant question…”
     
    Translation: ‘Ludendorff was responsible but, lacking integrity, I can’t admit it.’

    “…so I’m afraid you’ll have to wait a bit longer…”
     
    Don’t worry BM. You answered the real question.

    A very tiny world indeed.

    Yawn.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Eric Margolis Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
Bin Laden is dead, but his strategy still bleeds the United States.
Egyptians revolted against American rule as well as Mubarak’s.
“America’s strategic and economic interests in the Mideast and Muslim world are being threatened by the agony in Palestine, which inevitably invites terrorist attacks against US citizens and property.”
A menace grows from Bush’s Korean blind spot.
Far from being a model for a “liberated” Iraq, Afghanistan shows how the U.S. can get bogged down Soviet-style.